Two paths to cultivation. Consciousness path(dhyana-samadhi) and esoteric path(energy,qi channels)

[Vajra Fist]

"Virtuous world honoured one, I have no doubt in my belief about the sutras of tathagata. My reason for this belief is that the karma of tathagatas, formed through deeds, words and thoughts, is perfectly pure. World-honoured, the disc of this sun and moon may be torn down, the inconceivable high Sumeru mountain may be shaken, but the words of the buddhas will never change."

 

Just because a sutra is not easily understood by people in this age, that should probably tell you more about the condition of the modern mind than the validity of the teachings. 

[Creation]

4 hours ago, skyblue said:

 

In my opinion, self or no self can be a matter of perspectives.

 

However, as a counter to this, it can be said that something that is a matter of perspectives is unreal. So, the self is unreal.

 

What do you think?

The central question is "Is there grasping?"  One can ask the question "is there a self or not" in a kind of ontological way, like one could ask, is the universe finite or infinite, temporary or eternal, etc.  Or one could look into one's direct experience and ask, "What is it that I am calling 'myself' in my experience, what is it that I am calling 'not myself'?  Is there suffering or delusion associated to this division within experience?" That has a very different feel to it, takes it out of the realm of speculation and objectification. 

 

This investigation complicated by the fact that, just like desire, sense of self plays a function in experience, and trying to stop the division into self or other through effort is as counterproductive as trying to stop desire by effort. 

[forestofclarity]

People give up on anatta/anatman too quickly. It is like a splinter that goes deep into the mind, wiggling out resistance, clinging and attachment. 

 

If learned over time with a proper teacher, it is clear and unmistakable. 

 

 

[Maddie]

7 hours ago, XianGong said:

As far I have read, Buddhist texts only cover the part to the beginning of the path.

 

Which text did you read that gave you that impression? 

[skyblue]

13 hours ago, XianGong said:

As far I have read, Buddhist texts only cover the part to the beginning of the path.
What are you gonna do NEXT, after you reached the beginning? IF all one can do is follow instructions written that don't have details about the path past getting to its start.

 

What, in your opinion, would be the end of this path if not Buddhahood?

[XianGong]

2 hours ago, skyblue said:

What, in your opinion, would be the end of this path if not Buddhahood?

 

Buddhahood is the beginning of the path, not the end of it.

The real path of cultivation has no end.

[C T]

3 hours ago, XianGong said:

 

Buddhahood is the beginning of the path, not the end of it.

The real path of cultivation has no end.

Rather curious.

 

How logical is it that an endless something has a beginning? 

[Maddie]

10 hours ago, XianGong said:

 

Buddhahood is the beginning of the path, not the end of it.

The real path of cultivation has no end.

 

Endlessness is the characteristic of Samsara which is a characteristic of the unenlightened mind.

 

In the Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta where the Buddha becomes awakened he says it is the end there is no more rebirth he has completed the path.

 

The Buddha definitely described his path as the end, and he described endlessness as a type of suffering and as a characteristic of being unenlightened.

[XianGong]

I would not want to invest my time in students, who will drop out after they achieve 'Buddhahood'.
That's like investing in someone to graduate from university, only to learn that they don't have plans to actually do any useful work.

You guys should try imagining yourself becoming a buddha, and ask yourself what you gonna do next. Everyone wants to get freedom from reincarnation, but you can't even answer a simple question of what are you gonna do if you don't reincarnate anymore. It all gives vibes of delusional fantasy to me nothing more.

 

30 minutes ago, dmattwads said:

Endlessness is the characteristic of Samsara which is a characteristic of the unenlightened mind.

Samsara is far from endless, it's a radio on repeat, happens with weak minds trapped into mundane reality.

[Maddie]

34 minutes ago, XianGong said:

You guys should try imagining yourself becoming a buddha, and ask yourself what you gonna do next. Everyone wants to get freedom from reincarnation, but you can't even answer a simple question of what are you gonna do if you don't reincarnate anymore. 

 

The reason to become enlightened is to end suffering. The idea that one must be doing something to be happy is grasping and grasping leads to suffering. The whole point is to end suffering.

[Indiken]

12 minutes ago, dmattwads said:

 

The reason to become enlightened is to end suffering. The idea that one must be doing something to be happy is grasping and grasping leads to suffering. The whole point is to end suffering.

 

What if i do not suffer?

[Maddie]

17 minutes ago, Indiken said:

 

What if i do not suffer?

 

To one that claims to not suffer I would have one of two responses.

 

1. They are fully enlightened and I would like to become their student.

 

2. They do not fully understand suffering or dukkha, which is understandable since "suffering" is not a perfect translation of dukkha. Dukkha can mean obvious acute suffering for sure, but it also means the unsatisfactoriness of life. To one who claims to never suffer I would ask, do you ever get bored, do you ever feel lonely, do you ever feel not totally satisfied at all times in all situations? 

[forestofclarity]

1 hour ago, XianGong said:

You guys should try imagining yourself becoming a buddha, and ask yourself what you gonna do next.

 

The point of becoming a Buddha from a Mahayana POV is to help all sentient beings become free from suffering. 

[Maddie]

13 minutes ago, forestofemptiness said:

 

The point of becoming a Buddha from a Mahayana POV is to help all sentient beings become free from suffering. 

 

That would answer the question of what to do next then. ;-)

[C T]

1 hour ago, XianGong said:

I would not want to invest my time in students, who will drop out after they achieve 'Buddhahood'.
That's like investing in someone to graduate from university, only to learn that they don't have plans to actually do any useful work.

You guys should try imagining yourself becoming a buddha, and ask yourself what you gonna do next. Everyone wants to get freedom from reincarnation, but you can't even answer a simple question of what are you gonna do if you don't reincarnate anymore. It all gives vibes of delusional fantasy to me nothing more.

 

Samsara is far from endless, it's a radio on repeat, happens with weak minds trapped into mundane reality.

 

There may be some who'd not like to invest their time on a teacher whose attitude and views are similarly inclined, in such a manner as to suggest self-aggrandizement, even tones nearing condescension. Perhaps its just me and my burden of aversion towards boastful tones. Apologies for the lack of courtesy in my words.

[freeform]

2 hours ago, XianGong said:

freedom from reincarnation

In Daoist thinking there’s several different attainments that grant you relative freedom from reincarnation… But these are not ‘the end’. An incarnation will eventually be required… (though they would not come back as a ‘regular’ person.)

 

Achieving Buddhahood is considered the final ‘return’ to the Dao - the attainment of ‘Heavenly Immortal’.

 

Whether this is what the historical Buddha achieved, I don’t know - I’ve heard different perspectives. 
 

Jesus didn’t achieve this stage for example - that’s why they talk of ‘the second coming’ in the bible - it means that an incarnation will eventually be required.

 

Are there mentions of a second coming for the historical Buddha? Does anyone know?

[Maddie]

3 minutes ago, freeform said:

Are there mentions of a second coming for the historical Buddha? Does anyone know?

 

Not a "second coming". It is said that after the teachings from a Buddha fade out of the world that another Buddha eventual comes to reintroduce the dharma again, but its a new Buddha, not the same one. 

[Maddie]

13 minutes ago, freeform said:

Jesus didn’t achieve this stage for example - that’s why they talk of ‘the second coming’ in the bible - it means that an incarnation will eventually be required.

 

Jesus is someone I have been trying to make sense of from a cultivation pov for a while now. He seemed to have obtained some degree of cultivation.  

[Earl Grey]

46 minutes ago, dmattwads said:

 

Not a "second coming". It is said that after the teachings from a Buddha fade out of the world that another Buddha eventual comes to reintroduce the dharma again, but its a new Buddha, not the same one. 

Maitreya.

[forestofclarity]

1 hour ago, dmattwads said:

 

That would answer the question of what to do next then. ;-)

 

As I recall from my Zen days: Sentient beings are numberless, so there is likely no next. And if all beings are both finite and liberated, then time, as a product of ignorance would have no meaning. There is no next. 

 

Or maybe it all starts again, who knows? 

 

But becoming a Buddha for the sake of sentient beings is one of the key ingredients (from a Mahayana POV) to actually becoming a Buddha, so it is an important point of clarification. 

 

This reminds me of questions about the higher bhumis. Why not reach the first bhumi before worrying about the 7th? 

[XianGong]

1 hour ago, freeform said:

Achieving Buddhahood is considered the final ‘return’ to the Dao - the attainment of ‘Heavenly Immortal’.

 

Whether this is what the historical Buddha achieved, I don’t know - I’ve heard different perspectives. 

It does not really matter what we call it or which term is used, also we cannot verify Buddha achievements and level of attainment.

My point is different, once someone gets to "any stage" of immortality their path does not end. There are a lot of things to do in this world or other worlds, that actually require one to be immortal in the first place. There is just no "endpoint" and no cultivator would want for it to exist...

People who wish for a path to end and reach an endpoint and cease their suffering don't have a cultivators mindset.

[Maddie]

19 minutes ago, XianGong said:

People who wish for a path to end and reach an endpoint and cease their suffering don't have a cultivators mindset.

 

What if it is for and "end" that they are cultivating for?

[Piyadasi]

1 hour ago, freeform said:

Are there mentions of a second coming for the historical Buddha? Does anyone know?

As far as the texts I know, chiefly the Pali Canon, one of the most central themes is that the Buddha will definitely not come back. In fact one of the core ideas is that, as you say, there are many high levels of achievement where you gain relative freedom from Samsara, even for extremely long times but eventually you'll have to come back - but the historical Buddha is someone who found a total release from even that(and he teaches that total release). There is some debate, especially in later texts, whether his disciples, who are usually called Arahants as opposed to Buddhas, and are also depicted as gaining total release on attaining that level - whether they have to come back in the future and become Buddhas.

This is just from my past readings of these texts, could be wrong.

[Maddie]

1 minute ago, Piyadasi said:

As far as the texts I know, chiefly the Pali Canon, one of the most central themes is that the Buddha will definitely not come back. In fact one of the core ideas is that, as you say, there are many high levels of achievement where you gain relative freedom from Samsara, even for extremely long times but eventually you'll have to come back - but the historical Buddha is someone who found a total release from even that(and he teaches that total release). There is some debate, especially in later texts, whether his disciples, who are usually called Arahants as opposed to Buddhas, and are also depicted as gaining total release on attaining that level - whether they have to come back in the future and become Buddhas.

This is just from my past readings of these texts, could be wrong.

 

My understanding from the Pali Suttas is that Arahants also are completely liberated from Samsara and do not come back. The difference being that Arahants accomplish this under the instruction of a Buddha after he has already brought the Dharma to the world, where as a Buddha is the one that initially rediscovers the Dharma in a time and place where there is no Buddha Dharma. Buddhas also tend to have more wisdom and powers than Arahants. 

[freeform]

30 minutes ago, Piyadasi said:

one of the most central themes is that the Buddha will definitely not come back.

Thanks - that was my understanding - but not based on scripture.