Prerequisites for enlightenment (if any)

[3bob]

Sudhamma,  So in using an analogy are you in effect saying that the sun only has only one ray and that only the historic Buddha found and taught it, thus there are no other fully viable rays to or from the sun....?   Hinduism does not hold to such a limited single ray sun.  Good luck

[Spotless]

Obviously there is a 180 degree dichotomy between Buddhism and Hinduism on key doctrines of which one can not realistically embrace both... although common ground on certain things can be embraced but again not on the key or major aspects. and I think if "one" tries to do so it can or probably will blow the mind in a negative way.

 

Btw. It can not be said that Buddhism (per the historic Buddha's teachings) sees any other path besides itself (or what is in effect saying the same thing) as being fully viable and leading to enlightenment or whatever term we want to play around with; does anyone wonder about that while seeing that posts about other paths are often outnumbered by Buddhist based ones ?

I have found no problem in "embracing" both.

It can be seen that all paths are the same - there is no difference.

[Spotless]

Many paths can be said rightly that they are the only way - if by this it is pointing to the greater "Way" and not one identified with and possessed.

[cold]

" It can be seen that all paths are the same - there is no difference."

 

I agree whole heartedly, with one exception, the location, size, and timing of the bumps one encounters can vary from path to path. 

All paths have a few bumps, (at least as far as I can tell), but hopefully lead to the "way".

 

Like shoes one size, a single way isn't an appropriate fit to all. 

[SeekerOfHealing]

Not all paths are the same and definitely most of them will not bring the same results or even similar.

 

People who are naive enough to believe such things ends up without any progression in spiritual path and cultivation.

[s1va]

@Bob3, and @Michael Sternbach,  the Buddhist path, commonly known as The Path of Emancipation as laid down by the 'historical' Buddha is one straight path towards the destination, Nibbana. That route is Enlightenment, and does not 'see' any other path. The various sign-posts towards Nibbana are there and properly described. The moment, those sign-posts are 'played around', they lose their objectives and deviant practices emerge and adopted to be the real thing. Why take the chance and try to re-invent the wheel, unless one knows that here is more than enough time for experimentation. I don't think I have that leisure, as Death comes unannounced and uninvited. If there be spiritual cultivation, then there must and should be some earnestness otherwise, it is just a brain game of the philosophical kind. Hence, I can't comment on those traditions as mentioned in #76, 77 and 79. I'm ill-equipped to say anything on them. My apologies, Michael. When I first joined Dao Bums, my search is on the 'yin energy' as i was fascinated by Master John Chang's abilities, and then i was introduced to Daoism and Buddhism. You guys are fanastic!

 

I thought Buddha taught to question & challenge everything, including his own teachings  -- not accept anything, just because it is in scriptures or some one laid the path.  (This is the part that helped me personally many times).   I never knew he laid out a path with sign-posts towards Nirvana.  Wouldn't this go against the principle?  Anyway, my knowledge in Buddhism is basic.

[s1va]

Not all paths are the same and definitely most of them will not bring the same results or even similar. 

 

I can agree entirely  -- with some caveats. 

 

'Not all paths are the same'  - Agreed

'most of them will not bring the same results or even similar' - Agreed

 

But, I wouldn't advocate one path, as 'THE' path for every one.  What is the greatest path to you bringing results, may not be the right one for some others.  Not only there may be no results, it could even cause problems in some -- the same path that works great for you.

 

Similarly, there are paths that don't work for you.  For some others, it may work great.   It could even be  a starting point, that will bring to the path you are talking about.

 

So, I agree with your words entirely.  But, I think the path is different from person to person.  For the same person, the path is different from time to time.

[SeekerOfHealing]

yes. Buddha said to challenge everything but at the same his own teachings are called ehipassiko which means come nad see, experience by yourselves.

 

Lets say I know I'm cook and you do not know I'm perfect cook. I made great pie which you would love but you have no idea about this besides your own making-up stories, ideas and ways of thinking about this and that. Your mouth will be shut up with the first taste of this pie which can be eye opening. (in buddha teachings it's called akaliko)

 

So everybody who have results (akaliko) and knows this pie knows everything as this pie is everything. They know things to the extent of how much they eaten

Edited May 7, 2017 by SeekerOfHealing

[thelerner]

The cook who spends his time insulting other cooks, is not a perfect cook.  By definition they can't learn from others.  A great cook is one comfortable cooking and learning different things.  Certainly they've taken the time to master one, but to think that is all that exists is parochial. 

 

 

SeekerofHealer you keep throwing out, 'Only my way is the right way' in different threads.  We understand your view and you don't need to state it several times in other people's conversations.  Perhaps you can start a thread on TWIM, but beware there are people like you out there who might troll it.  It's sad but they're out there. 

[silent thunder]

For many, it seems they suffer when they encounter other teachings and paths that are different from those they are attached to, or that are unfamiliar or that they have an aversion to... 

 

I have compassion for this... suffered it myself for some time.  It's really a hard state to occupy... to look all around and see wrong and bad and useless everywhere, it induces much suffering.

[SeekerOfHealing]

The cook who spends his time insulting other cooks, is not a perfect cook. By definition they can't learn from others. A great cook is one comfortable cooking and learning different things. Certainly they've taken the time to master one, but to think that is all that exists is parochial.

This is what I said, you judge before putting things into your mouth so you will never know and basing judgement based on me about some meditation is also ignorant approach. Just try it and then we can talk about it - otherwise it's just smearing faces without any point behind but if you are aim is only aimlessly talk here - i'm fine with that too.

 

and yes, there is only one way and one method which is blessing for those who seek simplicity and curse for those who like playing with toys (and endlessly look for result even if they keep missing more and more into the point). I have no need to promote it. It's just a mention in contrastic way - you do whatever you want to do. If you think you are more experienced then me and knowledgeable to say "all paths are the same and everyone points to the same results" - you need to prove those claims otherwise it's just hypocrisy at it finest.

 

You need to practice all those paths to prove all those paths are the same. you have to need the same results etc. etc. etc.

 

so please do not speak aimlessly sameism doctrine without any substance behind.

Edited May 7, 2017 by SeekerOfHealing

[3bob]

I have found no problem in "embracing" both.

It can be seen that all paths are the same - there is no difference.

 

Buddhist Lama's or Buddhist authorities who embrace the teachings of "no-self" per related Buddhist doctrine do not embrace the teachings of the "Self" as pointed to by great Guru's who embrace Vedic related doctrine like the Upanishads.  And neither way teach's to combine such. 

Edited May 7, 2017 by 3bob

[silent thunder]

I wonder, how can one with any surety, assume to know what the ends of all, or any other school's teachings will be for those who follow them?

 

How can one know what another's path will or will not lead to?

 

smells like projective presumption to me... but that's my own stink, or ours... after all, where do I stop and you begin?

 

are we in trouble?  are we saved?

who saves whom, he wondered as he wandered...

[C T]

Instead of denying or indulging in intellectual debates over self v no self, the Buddha merely encouraged followers to ponder the following: 

 

"Is that which is impermanent, subject to change, subject to suffering fit to be considered thus: 'This I am, this is mine, this is my self'?"

 

He also encouraged followers to pragmatically discover the truth for themselves...

 

The question which the Buddha poses to his audience is whether compounded phenomena are fit to be considered as self, to which the audience agrees that it is unworthy to be considered so. And in relinquishing such an attachment to compounded phenomena, such a person gives up delight, desire and craving for compounded phenomena and is unbounded by its change. When completely free from attachments, craving or desire to the five aggregates, such a person experiences then transcends the very causes of suffering. In this way, the insight wisdom or prajñā of non-Self gives rise to cessation of suffering, and not an intellectual debate over whether a self exists or not. It is by realizing (not merely understanding intellectually, but making real in one's experience) the three marks of conditioned existence that one develops prajñā, which is the antidote to the ignorance that lies at the root of all suffering. 

quote extracted from Buddhaworld website.

[Michael Sternbach]

When will it finally be generally understood that, just like there is just one physical world, there is also ONE metaphysical reality? Humans are basically able to perceive that world and make correct statements about it. These become the cores which the various religions are built around.

 

Even the very symbolism used in different cultures is often remarkably similar; this is what C.G.Jung led to his conception of the 'collective unconscious'.

 

Apparent differences as far as fundamental teachings can generally be resolved more or less easily. For instance, the monotheistic Abrahamic religions introduced a multitude of angels of various orders that cover functions attributed to Gods elsewhere. Even the Christian belief in an eternal after-life in a spiritual dimension may be reconciled with the assumption of reincarnation, if we consider that the entity leaves space-time as we know it in between physical lives and experiences a state of timelessness ("eternity").

 

The psycho-spiritual constitution of people across cultures is largely the same. Therefore, the ways to enlightenment will also lead through similar stages and lead to essentially the same destination - union with the universe (or God, or whatever term you prefer) and actualization of one's divine potential.

 

Once the quasi-objective nature of metaphysical reality, just being seen from somewhat different angles through different windows becomes a fact embraced by a majority of people, there will be no more grounds for war and any kind of intolerance in the name of religion.

[Spotless]

In my last two posts I did not in any way mean to give the impression that all paths are the same.

Nor did I mean to imply that all religions are in any way shape or form necessarily related to "the Way".

 

But those that are teachings of "the Way - are all essentially the same - though from the outside looking in they appear to be considerably different and they are - Very different.

 

Trying to wake people up from their addiction to trance is a tough thing to do - and people come in many forms and cultures and colors.

 

All self invested religion is hogwash - (not calling it bad or good - but just more of the trance - perhaps even what could be termed Hyper Trance).

Edited May 7, 2017 by Spotless

[Michael Sternbach]

I guess that depends on the "just one metaphysical reality"....

 

You could cultivate in a tradition and become an immortal wandering the earth. You could cultivate in another tradition and reside in the heavenly realm of one of any countless number of heavenly beings. You could cultivate to a point where your own energy and resources become the substrate for a heavenly realm and you can take your place alongside the gods. You could cultivate without doing any of the godhood stuff and simply acquire a lot of merit as you go from one life to another.

 

There is a lot that can go on...

Agreed. Some of the possibilities you mentioned are actually identical with each other. And they all happen within the one metaphysical reality.

 

Focus on differences, and you will see differences. Focus on similarities, and you will see similarities.

Edited May 7, 2017 by Michael Sternbach

[silent thunder]

...

 

wow. 

 

that series of posts was the mental/spiritual equivalent to standing in the ring with my master for a few seconds...

 

heady stuff and deep waters.

 

so much treasure here... thanks again bums.

I am deeply grateful for you all and for this place.

 

and to think, 13.something billion years of elements spinning in awareness for this moment to congeal in this manner...

[Michael Sternbach]

In my last two posts I did not in any way mean to give the impression that all paths are the same.

Nor did I mean to imply that all religions are in any way shape or form necessarily related to "the Way".

 

But those that are teachings of "the Way - are all essentially the same - though from the outside looking in they appear to be considerably different and they are - Very different.

 

Trying to wake people up from their addiction to trance is a tough thing to do - and people come in many forms and cultures and colors.

 

All self invested religion is hogwash - (not calling it bad or good - but just more of the trance - perhaps even what could be termed Hyper Trance).

Off the top of my head, I can't think of any system aptly called a religion that isn't potentially linked to "the Way." It seems to be part of the very definition of a religion that there is a spiritual/mystical/esoteric aspect to it whose attainment is what "the Way" is all about.

 

There are differences as far as concrete practices, of course, but again, there are so many parallels as well.

[Spotless]

Off the top of my head, I can't think of any system aptly called a religion that isn't potentially linked to "the Way." It seems to be part of the very definition of a religion that there is a spiritual/mystical/esoteric aspect to it whose attainment is what "the Way" is all about.

 

There are differences as far as concrete practices, of course, but again, there are so many parallels as well.

 

What you are saying is understandable and I agree with the idea of a patina that they all share.

 

The "self possessed" aspect cuts a great number of them off from the Way and is in a very certain sense a quickening of grasping and gluing position - the antitheses of "the Way".

Edited May 7, 2017 by Spotless

[Spotless]

Many religions also teach "other" - they are entrenched in "other" and salvation from and by "other".

[Spotless]

Some religions appear to teach otherness in Deities - but upon deep inspection they are clearly touting these as aspects of a singular Presence which is our true nature.

[Michael Sternbach]

They are not identical. Some attainments will include others as possible intermediate steps or points where practitioners could drop-off or drop out. But they are not the same.

 

A key difference is the physical immortality. This only happens with one type of training. Falun gong is a system that can get people to the phase of godhood. But, to flesh out their training, they install energetic mechanisms to perform the alchemy required for physical immortality. They do that because it is their mission to reach as many people as possible and this form of alchemy is difficult and unique. Physical immortality doesn't happen on its own. It is helpful, though, in that it can provide a way to access all other attainments without having to undergo death and transmigration. But it takes a lot longer because resources are diverted into maintaining a body.

The attainment of physical immortality is by no means limited to Falun Gong, however. It is one of the most common goals in both Eastern (internal) and Western (external) Alchemy.

 

While it may not just manifest on its own, it is definitely the result of the actualization of one's immortal divine nature, expressed on the level of the physical body.

 

It is maintained in several cultures that, in time immemorial, there was a Golden Age where humans were, if not immortal, at least extremely long lived, which was no doubt a result of their general attunement to the Divine on all levels.

 

By the same token, in Western Alchemy, the Philosopher's Stone that has the power to prolong life indefinitely is also a means of curing every illness and opening up one's spiritual channels.

 

Heavenly realms are interesting. The Abrahamic religions could actually have their adherents reside there for eternity. The ability for god realms to persist depends upon the quality of virtue in the respective realms. If the realms fall into reverie or revelry, they will break with the consonance of the universe and undergo decline and death. This is not a matter of a-priori reasoning about eternity. If consonance is maintained, though, they can last forever; they will have attained the alchemy of immortality on a "universal" level. This is a feature of falun gong's "Zhen shan ren" teaching; the harmonic triad of constructive resonance.

 

If the realms are overseen by deities that have not attained that resonance, it will be as the Buddha described; even the devas and their subjects will undergo death and transmigration.

So this is again regarded as a matter of resonance with (attunement to) the Divine. Interesting!

 

The individual godhood is an a-typical buddhist attainment; it was affiliated with the Qimen school and early hindu ascetics. It is possible but, if attained, would get you to one of the prior states (consonance and immortality or dissonance and destruction). So, as an attainment, it changes the scope of your cultivation but not the nature of your cultivation.

Union with what can be seen as universal godhood (called emptiness) in the state of nirvana seems to be the desire of most Buddhists. The difference between this and individual godhood would no doubt make for an interesting topic of its own, but, as far as these things can even be understood abstractly on the level of human consciousness, the question seems to be more one of individual preference rather than of a basic incompatibility of teachings.

 

Some have no interest in the metaphysical stuff, though, and they just stick with good deeds. Good deeds yield good fruits. This can lead to higher spiritual things but that depends on the person.

"The smile you give out returns to you", as they say in Hinduism. Another universal truth...

[Starjumper]

No one has responded (yet) as requirement, what many books & teachers advocate as the methods, or process that sets the path:

 

1)  karma yoga (state of effortless action)

2)  raja yoga/energy work.  (opened up, cleansed the nervous system)

3)  jnana yoga/ inquiry into his nature with discipline and dispassion

4)  surrender, practise of devotion/ bhakti yoga diligently

 

For third post here, I agree with #2, energy work but that description is missing a big piece.

 

I agree with #3, a high level of internal self honesty, from my first post on this thread; 

 

I agree with #1, derived from arriving at a state of no mind or no thinking, from second post.

 

I disagree with #4 devotion is not required, surrender to something, anything, but not everything, maybe?

 

Concerning energy work, the specific type of energy work is that of directing energy up to your head, after you refine it a bit.  A person can get overly emotional doing that so it's only for people who are healthy and well grounded emotionally.  The increased emotionality, even for a well grounded person, is a test, like a playground for practicing restraint.  Having so much energy in your head can make you go a bit crazy, but with that you realize that you always were crazy anyway, you realize that almost everyone else is crazy, and you realize it's not all so bad.  You must get crazy before you can get really sane, it helps provide some perspective.

 

Having a bright ball of light around your head, used by artists to indicate a powerful aura and a lot of energy, is required for enlightenment, for the cultivation of psychic abilities (third eye) and spontaneous knowing (crown point).  The large and bright head aura is commonly used to depict saints and enlightened masters, for a good reason.

 

Synchronicity, navigating the spiritual realm, and knowing things without knowing why is how you see the mystery, which Lao Tzu spoke of in the Ch 1  TTC.

 

Head energy, and there are specific types of meditation used in all the Eastern traditions to achieve this, and they are all similar, they all have the same theme, so there really is only one way to achieve enlightenment, and it's used in all successful systems.

 

Can anyone guess or know what kind of meditation this is?

Edited May 7, 2017 by Starjumper

[s1va]

-

Edited June 18, 2017 by kāvēri