Tantra...

[Pilgrim]

45 minutes ago, Jeff said:

 

I understand what you are saying, but we seem to be talking about different things. You are the server, you are the operating system, you are the entire environment in which you access the server or the operating system.  They are not separate things that you torch into slag.  It is not about overwriting some store or trying to erase it, as all of that is of the (universal) mind.  It is more like a quantum shift to “being”. Being all of it. Integrating it.  The data is not destroyed and is still all accessible, but there is no need or desire. It is more like the energy structures (or data processing) that keep the disk focused on certain data aspects is freed up. The TTC describes it well when taking about an immortal/sage.

 

If one is “being in the moment”, there is no worrying about issues and fears, there is no such thing as a separate mental state where you are in meditation or not. One is all of it.

I agree.

 

I also think we are all in the same page but describing it which is difficult to describe differently and within my describing you have brought it out very nicely indeed.

 

So this is the benefit of conversation 😁

[doc benway]

13 hours ago, Jeff said:

 

To me their is no real separation between questioner and question. There can be no question without a questioner.

There is most certainly a separation or there would be no need for any questions. 

 

Quote

Maybe it is a question of terms, as you seem to say that at a deep or clear enough level of meditation, the question of release does not even arise.  But, my point is that there is no real difference between such a deep level of meditation and normal daily life.

There is in my life. To say otherwise for me would be to assert a concept, not to describe the experience of my day to day. Certainly the objective of my tradition is to rest in the Nature of Mind in every waking, dreaming, sleeping, and dying moment. I’ve got a long way to go to claim that as my direct experience in each and every moment. I agree with the idea. Living it fully is a different matter altogether,  [edit] for me at least, if some of you are there _/\__/\__/\_, I only speak of my own limitations.

 

Quote

Such perceived differences are an artificial separation in mind.  

It may be artificial from an ideal, conceptual perspective but is that our moment to moment experience? The relative experience is every bit as real as the absolute for me, hence the two truths.

 

Quote

Effectively the difference between conscious and subconscious aspects of mind.

I don’t put as much emphasis on that difference from a practical point of view. The emphasis for me is more on the one who is engaging in this distinction. That is known as cutting the root.

 

Quote

 Hence, when as you say things “bubble up”, but do not disturb and then drift away, that can simply be... Bubbled up from your subconscious and dropped back down, with no actual underlying clarity.  Like a giant iceberg with the bulk of the issue/fear below the water line of conscious awareness. 

Yes, there are all sorts of karmic traces at different levels of consciousness. The practice is simply about how we deal with them when they present to our conscious awareness. And the way to deal with them is not to deal with them but to deal with the one who feels there’s something to deal with.

 

Quote

This last point is probably our biggest difference of view. My tradition/view more that one accepts it all. The “you” is everything. All of everything.  There is no separation, but “clarity” is the key.  And you only really know that it is “integrated” when it does not bubble up.

We’ll have to simply disagree on this point. Yes, the you is everything (and at the same time nothing) and clarity is one aspect. This is a conceptual view, not the Dzogchen view. In our tradition there are three aspects defined for convenience of communication - space, awareness, and warmth. That is not the view, just a description. When there is no separation, all three aspects are clearly present and inseparable in direct experience. That is the view. 

 

My perspective differs in that you only really know there is integration when whatever arises has no power to interrupt that experience, whether sitting on the cushion or fully engaged in life. Things always have and always will “bubble up” as long as we are human and alive. That is my experience and that of everyone I’ve encountered so far on the path. 

 

Sure there are times of perfect silence but what counts is the silence within that is undisturbed by noise when it arises, whether inner or outer. Integration is not the absence of the arising of mind for me, it is the stability of openness and restfulness that cannot be disturbed by the arising of mind.

 

Quote

 

In tradition terms, it would be like adding “Being Siva” from Kashmir Shaivism to your Bon tradition/view.

In Dzogchen there is simply Being, which is empty, clear, and full of infinite possibility. Any deity is simply a representation of that.

 

Edited to clarify that this is solely my experience, YMMV

Edited June 23, 2019 by steve

[Jeff]

5 hours ago, Pilgrim said:

Just catching up li post by post and really do not want to go searching old posts for anything.

 

May I ask you do me a favor and lay out your view in a linear fashion?  I for one think it would be helpful and help further conversation in this thread.

 

For example I remember years ago you had a system of 1 to 14 which was good.

 

For that matter would you consider starting a PPD so you retain control and spell out your self founded tradition? 

 

Just to be clear to others Self Founded is not meant to be derogatory lineages have to start somewhere do they not?

 

I do have a PPD and have a fair number of posts/threads in it. Just look for Jeff in the PPD section.

 

Not really sure what you mean by a linear fashion for my view. Things like my past level descriptions are not a system, but more my attempt to describe the relative layers of universal mind/consciousness.  More like exploration than any mapping to a tradition or system.

 

I don’t have a self founded tradition, more various practices and techniques that I share with those interested.  I tend to just directly show people rather than try to explain without the context.  This to me is much more useful as I can simply energetically directly demonstrate what I mean for the person. Was their some specific area of interest or questions?

[Pilgrim]

4 hours ago, Jeff said:

 

I do have a PPD and have a fair number of posts/threads in it. Just look for Jeff in the PPD section.

 

Not really sure what you mean by a linear fashion for my view. Things like my past level descriptions are not a system, but more my attempt to describe the relative layers of universal mind/consciousness.  More like exploration than any mapping to a tradition or system.

 

I don’t have a self founded tradition, more various practices and techniques that I share with those interested.  I tend to just directly show people rather than try to explain without the context.  This to me is much more useful as I can simply energetically directly demonstrate what I mean for the person. Was their some specific area of interest or questions?

Meant a new segment in your PPD.

 

As for the rest under advisement of my lady will address in private.

 

Will say this much time to step up to the plate and quit being humble!

 

[Jeff]

18 hours ago, steve said:

There is most certainly a separation or there would be no need for any questions. 

 

There is in my life. To say otherwise for me would be to assert a concept, not to describe the experience of my day to day. Certainly the objective of my tradition is to rest in the Nature of Mind in every waking, dreaming, sleeping, and dying moment. I’ve got a long way to go to claim that as my direct experience in each and every moment. I agree with the idea. Living it fully is a different matter altogether,  [edit] for me at least, if some of you are there _/\__/\__/\_, I only speak of my own limitations.

 

It may be artificial from an ideal, conceptual perspective but is that our moment to moment experience? The relative experience is every bit as real as the absolute for me, hence the two truths.

 

I don’t put as much emphasis on that difference from a practical point of view. The emphasis for me is more on the one who is engaging in this distinction. That is known as cutting the root.

 

Yes, there are all sorts of karmic traces at different levels of consciousness. The practice is simply about how we deal with them when they present to our conscious awareness. And the way to deal with them is not to deal with them but to deal with the one who feels there’s something to deal with.

 

We’ll have to simply disagree on this point. Yes, the you is everything (and at the same time nothing) and clarity is one aspect. This is a conceptual view, not the Dzogchen view. In our tradition there are three aspects defined for convenience of communication - space, awareness, and warmth. That is not the view, just a description. When there is no separation, all three aspects are clearly present and inseparable in direct experience. That is the view. 

 

My perspective differs in that you only really know there is integration when whatever arises has no power to interrupt that experience, whether sitting on the cushion or fully engaged in life. Things always have and always will “bubble up” as long as we are human and alive. That is my experience and that of everyone I’ve encountered so far on the path. 

 

Sure there are times of perfect silence but what counts is the silence within that is undisturbed by noise when it arises, whether inner or outer. Integration is not the absence of the arising of mind for me, it is the stability of openness and restfulness that cannot be disturbed by the arising of mind.

 

In Dzogchen there is simply Being, which is empty, clear, and full of infinite possibility. Any deity is simply a representation of that.

 

Edited to clarify that this is solely my experience, YMMV

 

Thanks for sharing.  I was sorry to see that you had edited your post as it had included some points that I thought were important and had wanted to respond to them. Oh well...

 

Rather than getting caught up in defining my meaning of clarity, and how that compares to what you defining as the three aspects, In Dzogchen terms I am saying it is possible to directly share Rigpa with others. It is like there is a fourth aspect in which a divine being is not simply an arising that you earlier described, but also equal to.  It is this additional aspect that Jesus referred to as “oneness in Christ” or at a dualistic level the ability to forgive/dissolve sins (issues and fears). The same spontaneous perfection is possible without the person themself being at the level of a Buddha.  Jesus described it like this...

 

John 14:10-17

10 Do you not believe that I am in the Father, and the Father in Me? The words that I speak to you I do not speak on My own authority; but the Father who dwells in Me does the works. 11 Believe Me that I am in the Father and the Father in Me, or else believe Me for the sake of the works themselves. 12 “Most assuredly, I say to you, he who believes in Me, the works that I do he will do also; and greater works than these he will do, because I go to My Father. 13 And whatever you ask in My name, that I will do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son. 14 If you askanything in My name, I will do it.15 “If you love Me, keepMy commandments. 16 And I will pray the Father, and He will give you another Helper, that He may abide with you forever— 17 the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees Him nor knows Him; but you know Him, for He dwells with you and will be in you.

 

That “helper” that dwells in you that has come is the additional aspect that I am trying to describe.

[Jeff]

10 hours ago, Pilgrim said:

Meant a new segment in your PPD.

 

As for the rest under advisement of my lady will address in private.

 

Will say this much time to step up to the plate and quit being humble!

 

 

Ok, happy to post more in the PPD if people are interested. On your “quit being humble”, many here at the bums would more say that I am too arrogant. But, to your point, I may have spent too much time trying to put new wine into old bottles.  

 

 

[ilumairen]

On 6/20/2019 at 12:01 PM, Jeff said:

Well said.  The girl is like the chalk upon the "emptiness" blackboard...

 

On 6/20/2019 at 12:10 PM, Apech said:

Is the chalk empty or not?

 

On 6/20/2019 at 12:16 PM, Jeff said:

It "appears" (or has form), but is easily erases (like with any blackboard).

 

On 6/20/2019 at 7:37 PM, ilumairen said:

 

The blackboard (as expressed in Heart Essence of the Khandro) is a reference to a particular type of consciousness called Kunzhi Namshe, and the drawings on the blackboard are like a storehouse of karmic traces. Sutra and Tantra are said to leave "traces" while in Dzogchen the Kunzhi Namthe liberates into empty nature, and the blackboard no longer exists. 

 

And in this opening exploration in the book I just cited, the traces on the blackboard are understood to be difficult to remove, although easy to explain. 

 

The only other reference to a chalkboard I'm presently recalling was something from Norbu, although at the moment I'm not 100% on which book it was in. Do you know?

 

: momentarily curious about the analogy :

 

On 6/20/2019 at 7:45 PM, Jeff said:

The blackboard is an analogy and not meant as a particular type of consciousness.  But, you point out the challenge with using words/books to try to discuss these topics. Your meaning easily becomes different than my meaning.  That is why I always advocate directly sharing, so that one “knows” what in mean. 

 

First: Words were used in a pith-like manner - presented as simile.

 

Second: The "deeper understanding" would be dependent upon it's reflection in the mind of the "perceiver" of the shared words.

 

Third: There is very little difference between having read and remembered the explanations for the present pith in posts and the words shared on a message board, or in a book. And this speaks to the challenge I personally experienced in the contemplation.

 

Fourth: Both Are dependent on words. Both are constructs and paradigms to express certain understandings. 

 

Fifth: For me "emptiness as a chalkboard" seems to be different than "emptiness as a dancing girl" only in soo much as the dancing girl expresses something dynamic, while a chalkboard seems static. 

 

And finally, this is meant as clarification and the sharing of consideration/contemplation, and not as personal attack.

 

:swimming in the lake, toes touching the cool depths while sunlight reflects and dances upon my shoulders and face:

[Fa Xin]

40 minutes ago, Jeff said:

In Dzogchen terms I am saying it is possible to directly share Rigpa with others.

 

Isn't this what a guru yoga practice does?  Guru Rinpoche, or whomever, would be sharing their clarity with the person.

 

I think it just comes down to conceptualizing it and how one understands the dynamics happening.  Either way, such a practice seems to bring forth clarity.

 

I don't see the "being" Steve talks about, as being much different than the "light" ? 

Edited June 23, 2019 by Fa Xin

[Jeff]

25 minutes ago, Fa Xin said:

 

Isn't this what a guru yoga practice does?  Guru Rinpoche, or whomever, would be sharing their clarity with the person.

 

The difference is between having a dive and a stable light level dive. In a dive there is energy flow and “extra space”, but that is not the same as a light level dive. 

 

25 minutes ago, Fa Xin said:

 

I think it just comes down to conceptualizing it and how one understands the dynamics happening.  Either way, such a practice seems to bring forth clarity.

 

I don't see the "being" Steve talks about, as being much different than the "light" ? 

 

You would have to as Steve about his “being” and what he means. But, the main difference is that I saying that it is possible to realize the benefits (spontaneous perfection capability) of being a buddha, without being a buddha.  It is not just about transmitting light, it is also about being able to receive light and then share and provide the support for it to others.

[C T]

Within the exclusive context of Vajrayana (not inferring or alluding or comparing with any other traditions in the hope of avoiding confusion), the idea of "Sharing Rigpa" is not a thing - In its proper setting,  and under the assumption that all the factors and conditions are in place, the guide/master/guru introducing the nature of mind to ripened receptacles (a more appropriate term than recipient) of such an intro is not doing anything in particular, as for example in the case of some traditions where some transference of energy is passed from master to initiate, but simply pointing out, at the precise moment, when the receptacle is resting in its pristine state beyond the three times, and then the student will have an unmistaken recognition of what the nature of mind is. But its easy to see how rigpa can be misconstrued as some kind of energetic force, like chi or kundalini. 

 

 

[Jeff]

4 minutes ago, C T said:

Within the exclusive context of Vajrayana (not inferring or alluding or comparing with any other traditions in the hope of avoiding confusion), the idea of "Sharing Rigpa" is not a thing - In its proper setting,  and under the assumption that all the factors and conditions are in place, the guide/master/guru introducing the nature of mind to ripened receptacles (a more appropriate term than recipient) of such an intro is not doing anything in particular, as for example in the case of some traditions where some transference of energy is passed from master to initiate, but simply pointing out, at the precise moment, when the receptacle is resting in its pristine state beyond the three times, and then the student will have an unmistaken recognition of what the nature of mind is. But its easy to see how rigpa can be misconstrued as some kind of energetic force, like chi or kundalini. 

 

 

 

Yes, exactly.  What I am attempting to describe would be the difference between direct introduction and direct immersion.

[ilumairen]

1 hour ago, Fa Xin said:

 

Isn't this what a guru yoga practice does?  Guru Rinpoche, or whomever, would be sharing their clarity with the person.

 

Eventually I'll address more in my ppd, but there are a variety of practices of guru yoga, and the guru yoga of Taphiritsa may feel different than the guru yoga of Sherap Chamma, although in all cases the "essence" is understood to be the same, and once practice is established it is "essence" one is "working with" and recognizing. Once stability starts to arise it is one's own essence as not different than the guru's or the yidam's one is resting in.

 

Prior to trust in what we call "the inner refuge" being established, we trust in the guru or the yidam as refuge. This outer trust in the qualities we perceive others (guru and yidam) to have (and ourselves to lack), through practice and experience become an inner trust, and essence of guru/yidam is more deeply undifferentiated from our own essence. 

 

It's more about recognizing and realizing (an opening to) than being "gifted" clarity, although blessings certainly manifest. 

 

Quote

I think it just comes down to conceptualizing it and how one understands the dynamics happening.  Either way, such a practice seems to bring forth clarity.

 

 

 

Edited June 23, 2019 by ilumairen
Forgot to add "in my experience" ;)

[Jonesboy]

1 hour ago, Fa Xin said:

 

Isn't this what a guru yoga practice does?  Guru Rinpoche, or whomever, would be sharing their clarity with the person.

 

I think it just comes down to conceptualizing it and how one understands the dynamics happening.  Either way, such a practice seems to bring forth clarity.

 

I don't see the "being" Steve talks about, as being much different than the "light" ? 

 

From my understanding of Buddhism and this has been discussed many times, no.

 

In Buddhism it is a pointing out of instructions, the transmission is by tradition done through the instructions. 

 

As you know a dive is taking a group of people and is to me more a merging of group consciousness into one. A sharing of oneness. As Jeff mentioned a true light level dive is like a direct immersion into Rigpa for as long as the dive lasts. A dive can be done daily where as the Buddhist don’t believe such a thing is possible or beneficial. At most it is a little energy that someone is feeling but that is it.

[Jonesboy]

39 minutes ago, ilumairen said:

 

Eventually I'll address more in my ppd, but there are a variety of practices of guru yoga, and the guru yoga of Taphiritsa may feel different than the guru yoga of Sherap Chamma, although in all cases the "essence" is understood to be the same, and once practice is established it is "essence" one is "working with" and recognizing. Once stability starts to arise it is one's own essence as not different than the guru's or the yidam's one is resting in.

 

Prior to trust in what we call "the inner refuge" being established, we trust in the guru or the yidam as refuge. This outer trust in the qualities we perceive others (guru and yidam) to have (and ourselves to lack), through practice and experience become an inner trust, and essence of guru/yidam is more deeply undifferentiated from our own essence. 

 

It's more about recognizing and realizing (an opening to) than being "gifted" clarity, although blessings certainly manifest. 

 

 

 

 

 

What does gifted clarity mean?

Edited June 23, 2019 by Jonesboy

[Pilgrim]

2 hours ago, Jeff said:

 

Ok, happy to post more in the PPD if people are interested. On your “quit being humble”, many here at the bums would more say that I am too arrogant. But, to your point, I may have spent too much time trying to put new wine into old bottles.  

 

 

Lol arrogant yeah well.... we all do that from time to time😉

 

As far as wine in old bottles hard to avoid disagreements when using other systems or traditions in comparison with original experiential knowing.

 

Very hard to come across as humble when one is trying to make a point when resistance to the point comes up due to the flavor of the original contents of the bottle. You are trying to serve water out of Rum Barrels.

 

Best methinks to start with fresh barrels IE: Framework And containment for ones realizations that can be shared.

 

I know you prefer the direct experiential approach sharing presence and such but there is a problem with this.

 

When the field is present for a congress of souls the minds of said souls, the emotions the stored samskaras blend.

 

For example I am still working out my issues over a long time marriage which I ended due to betrayal.

 

Of course as time goes on it is getting better.

 

my point is that entering into a congress of souls or sharing presence also allows these issues to wash over into others even as there’s so to me.

 

People can be deeply effected by this and not know why. It can manifest in conjunction with their own existing issues.

 

This is why I say just because people can does not mean they should. Just like with puberty human beings become capable of making children, does not mean they should.

 

It is better to wait for maturity. I think allot of people arrive at spiritual puberty and can before they should.:)

 

Therefore in my opinion when having a congress of souls it should be with known practitioners and more mature ones not just the capable.

 

I guess it can be argued if not through pain how does one grow an mature? 

 

The only answer I have to this is it can be done systematically but it should likely be between two souls at first one who is more mature and well versed and can disconnect others from a session and create a safe bubble of interaction.

 

Now that is allot of work.

 

You Jeff want to assist others. I know this is the case but in order to do so it is going to take letting go of comparisons and explaining from a position of fresh water barrels.

 

Those who can will learn, those who are not attracted well okay so what anyhow there are many time worn paths they can tread.

 

New does not mean invalid and old does  not mean the best way.

 

Those who are objective, those who can find value will. Those who can not where never yours to guide or assist anyway

Edited June 23, 2019 by Pilgrim

[ilumairen]

25 minutes ago, Jonesboy said:

 

What does gifted clarity mean?

 

Thanks for asking. 

 

The word was chosen to indicate "it" isn't "something" outside of oneself being given (as a gift) by "someone" outside of oneself, although perhaps at the outset it may appear (or be interpreted) as such.

 

The Guru Yoga prayer is a request to receive the blessings to  recognize one's "own true nature as a buddha."

 

From the crown of my head

   Palace of great bliss

I pray to you

   Benevolent root lama

O precious one 

   Grant me the blessings

That I may recognize 

   My own true nature

   As a Buddha

 

I believe "clarity" would be naturally present, although perhaps not recognized (due to karmic seeds, proclivities and traces which are also addressed in the practice).

 

And again, I'm only speaking from the experience and understanding of my own practice of guru yoga.

 

Edited June 23, 2019 by ilumairen

[Kar3n]

Seems to be some sort of underlying, for lack of a better term, conflict going on in this topic that makes it rather confusing and hard to follow.

 

Has me scratching my head wondering WFT is really being discussed here, because it seems to be more about Jeff and his "tradition" and tone than tantra.

 

 

[ilumairen]

11 minutes ago, Kar3n said:

Seems to be some sort of underlying, for lack of a better term, conflict going on in this topic that makes it rather confusing and hard to follow.

 

Has me scratching my head wondering WFT is really being discussed here, because it seems to be more about Jeff and his "tradition" and tone than tantra.

 

I think it's just the manner of interacting. With people who are part of a lineage or tradition, certain words are understood in certain ways.. there is "lingo", and a "cultural flavour" (although the "culture" may be cross-cultural which is really neither here nor there). When those words are used in a different manner, effort must be made to understand intent rather than what's become (for the individual) standard usage. 

 

As it is one individual who tends to use words in what I'll call "non-conventional" ways, and as a means of expressing a view presented (by the individual) as differing from traditional views where those words have agreed upon meanings and indicate a pointing to certain experience, it seems somewhat unavoidable that there will be some focus on this individual and the words being shared.

 

If it is any consolation, I'm finding this thread a bit confusing to, although there have been individuals who have shared some of their experience with, and understanding of, tantric practices. 

[Pilgrim]

48 minutes ago, Kar3n said:

Seems to be some sort of underlying, for lack of a better term, conflict going on in this topic that makes it rather confusing and hard to follow.

 

Has me scratching my head wondering WFT is really being discussed here, because it seems to be more about Jeff and his "tradition" and tone than tantra.

 

 

Sorry Kar3n that’s my fault. No conflict present trying my best to show my support for Jeff and encourage his unique offerings to be given from his own framework.

 

Sorry for taking it off topic.

[Apech]

1 hour ago, Jonesboy said:

 

From my understanding of Buddhism and this has been discussed many times, no.

 

In Buddhism it is a pointing out of instructions, the transmission is by tradition done through the instructions. 

 

As you know a dive is taking a group of people and is to me more a merging of group consciousness into one. A sharing of oneness. As Jeff mentioned a true light level dive is like a direct immersion into Rigpa for as long as the dive lasts. A dive can be done daily where as the Buddhist don’t believe such a thing is possible or beneficial. At most it is a little energy that someone is feeling but that is it.

 

 

Is this 'diving' Tantra?  And why is it Rigpa?

[Kar3n]

24 minutes ago, ilumairen said:

 

I think it's just the manner of interacting. With people who are part of a lineage or tradition, certain words are understood in certain ways.. there is "lingo", and a "cultural flavour" (although the "culture" may be cross-cultural which is really neither here nor there). When those words are used in a different manner, effort must be made to understand intent rather than what's become (for the individual) standard usage. 

 

As it is one individual who tends to use words in what I'll call "non-conventional" ways, and as a means of expressing a view presented (by the individual) as differing from traditional views where those words have agreed upon meanings and indicate a pointing to certain experience, it seems somewhat unavoidable that there will be some focus on this individual and the words being shared.

 

If it is any consolation, I'm finding this thread a bit confusing to, although there have been individuals who have shared some of their experience with, and understanding of, tantric practices. 

Thank you.

 

It just seems so odd coming from people who know Jeff and are no stranger to his "tradition".

 

It feels off to me, like there is something more than flavor, cultural or otherwise, and lineage at play.

 

2 minutes ago, Pilgrim said:

Sorry Kar3n that’s my fault. No conflict present trying my best to show my support for Jeff and encourage his unique offerings to be given from his own framework.

 

Sorry for taking it off topic.

Why the need to try to force him to define what he does as anything? As some kind of lineage or self-taught tradition?

 

Support does not tell a person with whom they should and should not share their practice, support does not tell another there is a problem with them sharing.

 

It feels like some kind of trap and anything but encouragement, but that's just me.

 

This wreaks of, "say this Jeff so I can go back and dig up quotes and call you out".

 

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

[Apech]

16 minutes ago, Kar3n said:

Thank you.

 

It just seems so odd coming from people who know Jeff and are no stranger to his "tradition".

 

It feels off to me, like there is something more than flavor, cultural or otherwise, and lineage at play.

 

Why the need to try to force him to define what he does as anything? As some kind of lineage or self-taught tradition?

 

Support does not tell a person with whom they should and should not share their practice, support does not tell another there is a problem with them sharing.

 

It feels like some kind of trap and anything but encouragement, but that's just me.

 

This wreaks of, "say this Jeff so I can go back and dig up quotes and call you out".

 

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

 

I thought it was a good thread so far.  Maybe we should go back to discussing Tantra and its relation to pleasure/desire - which was the original point as I recall.

[ilumairen]

2 minutes ago, Apech said:

 

I thought it was a good thread so far.  Maybe we should go back to discussing Tantra and its relation to pleasure/desire - which was the original point as I recall.

 

Yes please. 

[Jonesboy]

38 minutes ago, Apech said:

 

 

Is this 'diving' Tantra?  And why is it Rigpa?

 

Yes it’s tantra and it’s Rigpa because issues and fears are as people said spontaneously released. I would say even more, worked on so over time the issues are fully removed.

 

Because of the depth there is no fears of shared issues like has been mentioned earlier.

[Fa Xin]

What does everyone think Tantra means?

 

Energy practice? Or is it specific to a tradition?

 

i feel like there’s a lot of stuff that’s called Tantra. I’m guilty of it too. 

 

To me the word represents some kind of energetic connection, whether that’s with someone or a deity. 

 

I also think it means using the aspects of life that aren’t generally thought of as productive to benefitting us.