Shaktipat

[CarsonZi]

Hi Vajrahridaya and thanks for continuing this conversation in a civil manner. I don't do the "arguing" thing very often anymore, and as soon as the civility is gone, so am I, so....thank you for being civil

 

What anyone needs to awaken is right view.

 

To me, right view is a side effect of awakening....not the one and only cause.

 

As the Buddha taught, it's not just about the light you get in meditation. It's about how you work with it and how you understand how it manifests. Enlightenment is not the attainment of one grandiose light of all in Buddhism. Being a Buddha is something subtler than this.

 

Never said enlightenment was the "attainment of one grandiose light of all" nor do I think/believe that. I have said twice now what liberation/enlightenment is (to me). My use of the words "the light" did not indicate what you think it did. I was indicating something much subtler.

 

That's a side effect, yes... but if you remain an active Dharmapala at the pralaya.

 

Sorry dude. No clue what you are saying here. Plain English please. Some of us are not very well studied in Buddhism....specifically me

 

Then... There are plenty that will be blissful and seemingly free for a while, and go to high heavens and do great things. But, it all comes down to having truly burnt the seed of unconscious rebirth. So, there are stages to what you said and there is a deepening as well. There is clear cognition of how things work and how the cosmos cycles.

 

I agree.

 

Not just concept-less bliss.

 

Again, this is just a side-effect.

 

There is also clear cognition and understanding of the nature of everything, not just an experience.

 

Again, agreed. But one does not have to be Buddhist to have a clear cognition and understanding of the nature of everything.

 

Ok, then I've misinterpreted our debates that we had last year.

 

Yes, I think you may have misinterpreted. That or there has been some growth here since then hahaha.

 

Then you will agree that the light experienced in meditation arises dependently, does not have inherent existence and is not the source of everything?

 

Yes I totally agree with that.

 

Sorry... I was just going on what we've discussed last year.

 

No apologies necessary dude

 

Ok... that's a mark of Buddhadharma. Buddha did influence all traditions around the world anyway.

 

Reality influenced the Buddha. The Buddha does not have a monopoly on reality. Reality is each and every one of our birthright.

 

......continued below......

Edited June 23, 2010 by CarsonZi

[CarsonZi]

.....continued from above.....

 

It's more like the wisdom of Buddhahood. Please let go of your attachment to not understanding the Dharma as presented by Buddhas, not new age one-ists'.

 

I have no attachment to not understanding the Dharma. I am just not very drawn to all the "talk" in Buddhism. I just much prefer finding wisdom through Silence then through chatter.

 

The Buddha didn't teach that there are all sorts of paths to Buddhahood.

 

Well, the Buddha (as much as you would love to believe) does not have a monopoly on Buddhahood/liberation/enlightenment. Buddhahood is just a term. And a term can not BE reality.

 

He taught that Buddhadharma is the one universal vehicle and other Buddhas after him agreed because they understood the uniqueness of what he taught. So, either he was wrong or right... you can make the choice based upon your reference of influence. Don't call it free will, it's deeply conditioned.

 

There is no "right and wrong". Right and wrong are labels/concepts in the mind. Reality just IS....it isn't right or wrong.

 

They are not belief's, they are wisdoms and insights. Are you truly letting go?

 

Yes. I am truly letting go. I am open and free.

 

Buddhadharma is truly about letting go, but even on a formless non-conceptual level.

 

Sure. But again, Buddhadharma does not have a monopoly on letting go. Anyone can let go if they choose to.

 

Most paths take refuge in a non-conceptual experience and integrate that with everything calling everything one with "that."

 

I'm not much into "paths". I'm into being reality....being free.

 

This is where this idea of all paths lead to God come from, the idea that all creation comes from one self existing source.

 

Sure. Makes no difference to me where ideas come from. No idea is Truth.

Buddhadharma has a different teaching, it's deeply subtle, the meaning of inter-dependent origination as presented by Buddhas, as it's the deceptively profound insight into the cosmos that liberates.

 

I like the idea of inter-dependent origination. But again, ideas will not liberate you. Only letting go of ideas and resting in reality will liberate you.

 

Thanks for the conversation.

 

Love!

Edited June 23, 2010 by CarsonZi

[Vajrahridaya]

One will take responsibility for one's thoughts and actions only when they realize that They ARE IT...THEY ARE ONE...THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THEM AND OTHERS! That is the source of both infinite peace and infinite love.

 

Buddhas realize infinite peace, love and compassion without identifying with a one of all and without absorption into a formless totality.

 

So, your source for the same qualities seem to differ. Mine is realization of emptiness and inter-dependency, not oneness. Though, I know this experience very well and still have it, I just don't reify it as oneness anymore or as a substratum of the all. It's just expanded mind due to the friendly fact of empty phenomena.

 

Also the doctrine of Alaya Vijnana is based upon an earlier talk in the Suttas about "saṅkhāra-khandha" or "the fabricating power of consciousness".

 

So, it wasn't really a new teaching, just an elaboration on an old one.

 

According to the Buddha you are actually wrong about what the Buddha teaches.

 

"In contrast to the Self teachings of the Upaniṣads, the Buddha stated clearly that all ontological speculations regarding a Self are detrimental to spiritual progress. He stated that all thoughts about self are necessarily, whether the thinker is aware of it or not, thoughts about the five aggregates or one of them. As one scholar has written,

The mysticism found in the Pali discourses ... goes beyond any ideas of 'soul' in the sense of immortal 'self' and is better styled 'consciousness-mysticism.'

Furthermore, early Buddhism was not subjective idealistic. Some have misinterpreted the Yogācāra school of Mahayana Buddhism that developed the consciousness-only approach as a form of metaphysical idealism, but this is incorrect. Yogācāra thinkers did not focus on consciousness to assert it as ultimately real (Yogācāra claims consciousness is only conventionally real since it arises from moment to moment due to fluctuating causes and conditions), but rather because it is the cause of the karmic problem they are seeking to eliminate."

[Vajrahridaya]

Hi Vajrahridaya and thanks for continuing this conversation in a civil manner. I don't do the "arguing" thing very often anymore, and as soon as the civility is gone, so am I, so....thank you for being civil

 

Not a problem!

 

 

To me, right view is a side effect of awakening....not the one and only cause.

 

If one is not conditioned in right view first, which is the viewless view of interdependent origination and emptiness, revealing the emptiness of causes and conditions. Then one is conditioned by the blissful sensations of meditation and the visions and subconscious coming to light experiences.

 

So, for Buddhahood, right view is paramount, otherwise the Muni wouldn't have given it the first place in the 8 fold noble path. This is why there is great emphasis on refining the intellect and logic.

 

 

 

Never said enlightenment was the "attainment of one grandiose light of all" nor do I think/believe that. I have said twice now what liberation/enlightenment is (to me). My use of the words "the light" did not indicate what you think it did. I was indicating something much subtler.

 

Ok. My apologies of assumption.

 

 

Sorry dude. No clue what you are saying here. Plain English please. Some of us are not very well studied in Buddhism....specifically me

 

Sorry, if I don't understand a word in a discussion I google it. That's just me though. Dharmapala is a Dharma protector and the pralaya is the "big crunch" where all those that believe in oneness actually experience it directly without perceptual faculties and they experience it for a time, then conditions start loosening and a big bang happens again.

 

 

Again, agreed. But one does not have to be Buddhist to have a clear cognition and understanding of the nature of everything.

 

Of course not by label, but if you see directly inter-dependent origination/emptiness, then you see all of the teachings of all the Buddhas at the same time.

 

When the conditions are right for any individual, awakening happens! But, as far as organized religion goes, Buddhism does come the closest in expression, philosophy and methodology to the meaning of awakening here on Earth. From the Hinayana and Theravada to Mahayana to Vajrayana (which is super vast, technical and filled with amazing methods) to Dzogchen. So much clarity in writing, method, meaning, the yogas... etc. Even Buddhist martial arts was initially geared towards mind energy training through body activity. But, yes... enlightenment in and of the quality of the experience is as the Buddha said, "beyond, far beyond".

 

Yes, I think you may have misinterpreted. That or there has been some growth here since then hahaha.

 

Goodness I certainly hope so!

 

 

Reality influenced the Buddha. The Buddha does not have a monopoly on reality. Reality is each and every one of our birthright.

 

 

 

Yes, it's our birthright, but the path of Buddhadharma and it's influence had died out when the Buddha took birth to spin the wheel once again. It is a unique teaching in word and method form. He did say that beings realize a type of Buddhahood without there being the presence of Buddhadharma on a planet, but they generally get stuck in a cessation after death unless further influenced by Mahayana. Unless of course they are carrying these seeds of influence in their mind stream from past lives. Of course it's all so complicated and karmas are deeply individual, so yes... no monopoly in any absolute sense, just in a relative sense. In the sense that Buddhadharma is very, very clear from beginning to end, thus has lots of clear realizers without ambiguity. It is unique in this sense. You can't really mis-interpret the Buddhist scriptures into thinking you should conquer the planet and kill all non-Buddhists. Or wage war against Jews because they killed the messiah. Or whatever... You know?

[Vajrahridaya]

 

I have no attachment to not understanding the Dharma. I am just not very drawn to all the "talk" in Buddhism. I just much prefer finding wisdom through Silence then through chatter.

 

This attachment to silence could become an obstacle in later development. But... maybe not. If one takes refuge in silence and what arises from within.. there can be confusion. But... this is all relative of course.

 

 

Well, the Buddha (as much as you would love to believe) does not have a monopoly on Buddhahood/liberation/enlightenment. Buddhahood is just a term. And a term can not BE reality.

 

Buddhahood does mean awakeness only. If one realizes inter-dependent origination/emptiness directly and totally, then all the teachings of the Buddhas are realized as well.

 

 

 

There is no "right and wrong". Right and wrong are labels/concepts in the mind. Reality just IS....it isn't right or wrong.

 

Actually there is in a practical sense, there is a way to meditate that brings about enlightenment in a shorter time. There is a right way to view the meditative experiences that don't lead to outbursts like, "Allah came to me in a cave and now I'm going to conquer the world in the name of the Islam he showed me, and all those opposed will die." Do you know what I mean? You're clarity has to come from some influence or another as clarity is still a dependent arising, either carried over from past lives or in this life. Ultimately speaking of course, they are merely relative. But, they are important, "right and wrong view". Very important, otherwise one will be wrongly conditioned by subconscious experiences realized in meditation, taking one or the other up as a self or a Self of all.

 

 

Yes. I am truly letting go. I am open and free.

 

Ok... good. I didn't bring my measuring stick so I can't measure to what degree this is so today.

 

 

 

Sure. But again, Buddhadharma does not have a monopoly on letting go. Anyone can let go if they choose to.

 

This choosing is influenced from deep within. We all have a beginningless source of information to go upon, lifetime after lifetime, it's just what seed is taking blossom now is based upon secondary conditions for ripening. It's good that you do have these seeds and the ripening conditions to influence this choice of letting go, even of seeds of influencing this choice.

 

 

 

I'm not much into "paths". I'm into being reality....being free.

 

Yes, reality is inherently self-liberated having nothing to do with an inherent self, it is ever malleable.

 

 

 

Sure. Makes no difference to me where ideas come from. No idea is Truth.

 

 

 

I like the idea of inter-dependent origination. But again, ideas will not liberate you. Only letting go of ideas and resting in reality will liberate you.

 

inter-dependent origination is not an idea, only in words is it, but it's actually an intuitive realization of how things work, even liberation.

 

Thanks for the conversation.

 

Love!

 

Not a problem... of course! Blessings to you as well.

[C T]

Is it Buddhist humour?

Yes, i think i can see why you thought it was a bit robust.

 

I am a bit lost in the intricacies of choosing when to laugh and when not to, i guess.

 

Like when you quoted that genie thing in the other thread - was that meant to be humorous? There was a few 'laughter' emoticons inserted by a couple of posters... i wonder what kind of humor would you classify that under, if ever you thought that was funny?

 

Can i laugh at that too? Or is that out of bounds to those who practice the Buddhist path?

 

No worries, i am not looking to lock horns with anyone. Just thought i'd let you i have read this rather peculiar query, that's all.

[CarsonZi]

Hey Vajrahridaya and All (my apologies to everyone who thinks this thread has been hijacked [myself included ] as it most certainly has been. And my apologies for continuing this hijacking with my continued engagement with Vaj)

 

If one is not conditioned in right view first,

 

No conditions are necesary for liberation. In fact all conditions must be let go of for liberation.

 

which is the viewless view of interdependent origination and emptiness, revealing the emptiness of causes and conditions.

 

This "veiwless view" can be attained even when one does not follow a Buddhist path. I am a walking testament to this fact. I do not follow a Buddhist path yet I seem to have the same "viewless view" as you.

 

Then one is conditioned by the blissful sensations of meditation and the visions and subconscious coming to light experiences.

 

Again, all conditions must be dropped in order to be liberated.

 

So, for Buddhahood, right view is paramount, otherwise the Muni wouldn't have given it the first place in the 8 fold noble path. This is why there is great emphasis on refining the intellect and logic.

 

It is my personal experience that what you are calling "right view" came AFTER coming to live from a place free from concepts, ideas and beliefs. I had to let go of my intellect in order for it to be "refined".

 

Ok. My apologies of assumption.

 

Again, no apologies necessary.

 

Sorry, if I don't understand a word in a discussion I google it. That's just me though. Dharmapala is a Dharma protector and the pralaya is the "big crunch" where all those that believe in oneness actually experience it directly without perceptual faculties and they experience it for a time, then conditions start loosening and a big bang happens again.

 

So your original sentence was: "That's a side effect, yes... but if you remain an active Dharmapala at the pralaya." So, can you perhaps restate what you are saying in plain English as I do not understand what you mean when you say that "liberation (as I describe it) is a side effect, but if you remain an active Dharma protector at the big Oneness crunch." Not following you. Please forgive my ignorance.

 

Of course not by label, but if you see directly inter-dependent origination/emptiness, then you see all of the teachings of all the Buddhas at the same time.

 

Sure. But do you have to follow a Buddhist path to get to a point where you see all the teachings of the Buddhas at the same time? Nope. The Buddhas accessed Reality/Truth by going inward. We can each do the same.

 

When the conditions are right for any individual, awakening happens!

 

Yup, regardless of "tradition".

 

But, as far as organized religion goes, Buddhism does come the closest in expression, philosophy and methodology to the meaning of awakening here on Earth.

 

Personally I have no use for organized religion. I was soured on it as a child when I was forced to be part of one. I chose to find Truth within instead of without. To each their own.

 

.......continued below.......

[CarsonZi]

.....continued from above......

 

From the Hinayana and Theravada to Mahayana to Vajrayana (which is super vast, technical and filled with amazing methods) to Dzogchen. So much clarity in writing, method, meaning, the yogas... etc. Even Buddhist martial arts was initially geared towards mind energy training through body activity. But, yes... enlightenment in and of the quality of the experience is as the Buddha said, "beyond, far beyond".

 

Words can't touch the experience of Reality. It can only be lived in my opinion.

 

Goodness I certainly hope so!

 

Nothing but Grace. "I" did nothing to deserve this.

 

Yes, it's our birthright, but the path of Buddhadharma and it's influence had died out when the Buddha took birth to spin the wheel once again.

 

Doesn't change the fact that living as Reality is not contigent upon understanding Buddhism.

 

It is a unique teaching in word and method form.

 

I have no doubt that Buddhism is unique. What ISN'T unique! All I am saying is that knowing the in's and out's of Buddhism is not required to be liberated. In fact in a lot of ways "knowing" (small "k") itself is an obstacle to liberation.

 

He did say that beings realize a type of Buddhahood without there being the presence of Buddhadharma on a planet, but they generally get stuck in a cessation after death unless further influenced by Mahayana.

 

I don't know a lot about Buddhism, so correect me if I am misinformed here, but didn't the Buddha refuse to talk about the afterlife?

 

Unless of course they are carrying these seeds of influence in their mind stream from past lives. Of course it's all so complicated

 

Actually....it's (liberation/enlightenment) not very complicated at all. In fact it is very simple. Let go and be liberated. That's it. Simple. TOO simple for some perhaps

 

and karmas are deeply individual, so yes... no monopoly in any absolute sense, just in a relative sense. In the sense that Buddhadharma is very, very clear from beginning to end, thus has lots of clear realizers without ambiguity.

 

Inner Silence (the source of all knowledge) is even clearer. This I know from experience. I know little of Buddhadharma, but I know exactly what I need to about liberation.

 

It is unique in this sense. You can't really mis-interpret the Buddhist scriptures into thinking you should conquer the planet and kill all non-Buddhists. Or wage war against Jews because they killed the messiah. Or whatever... You know?

 

One can interpret things however they want according to their inclinations. I'm sure someone out there could find a way to interpret the Buddhist scriptures to encourage violence. Why someone would want to do this is beyond me though

 

Love!

[CarsonZi]

This attachment to silence could become an obstacle in later development. But... maybe not. If one takes refuge in silence and what arises from within.. there can be confusion. But... this is all relative of course.

 

No attachment to Silence. Silence just Is. Interdependent right?

 

Buddhahood does mean awakeness only. If one realizes inter-dependent origination/emptiness directly and totally, then all the teachings of the Buddhas are realized as well.

 

Sure. But one doesn't have to study the teachings of the Buddhas in order to directly and totally realize inter-dependent origination. One can merely go inward and let go of all concepts, ideas and beliefs, letting the mind rest in the reality of what Is.

 

Actually there is in a practical sense, there is a way to meditate that brings about enlightenment in a shorter time.

 

Time is not reality. It will take each person exactly as long as it takes them to reach liberation, and not a second less. And what brings one to this point of liberation will not always be the same for everyone.

 

There is a right way to view the meditative experiences that don't lead to outbursts like, "Allah came to me in a cave and now I'm going to conquer the world in the name of the Islam he showed me, and all those opposed will die." Do you know what I mean?

 

Sure, I know what you mean. Do I agree with the use of the word "right" in this sentence...no. I would correct your statement in saying "There are ways to view meditative experiences........" No right, no wrong. Just what works for you.

 

You're clarity has to come from some influence or another as clarity is still a dependent arising, either carried over from past lives or in this life.

 

The clarity that is here comes from a deep connection to Silence. And Silence has no beginning and no end.

 

Ultimately speaking of course, they are merely relative. But, they are important, "right and wrong view". Very important, otherwise one will be wrongly conditioned by subconscious experiences realized in meditation, taking one or the other up as a self or a Self of all.

 

All conditions must be dropped in order to be liberated. Right and wrong are relative not absolute like you imply.

 

This choosing is influenced from deep within. We all have a beginningless source of information to go upon, lifetime after lifetime, it's just what seed is taking blossom now is based upon secondary conditions for ripening. It's good that you do have these seeds and the ripening conditions to influence this choice of letting go, even of seeds of influencing this choice.

 

When there are no seeds left, what is left is the beginningless, endless Silence (and Silence is just a word, it is not reality...."Reality" can not be named or else it is not Reality....reality can only be lived).

 

Yes, reality is inherently self-liberated having nothing to do with an inherent self, it is ever malleable.

 

And this is what we each and all are once we have "let go".

 

inter-dependent origination is not an idea, only in words is it, but it's actually an intuitive realization of how things work, even liberation.

 

Yup.

 

Love!

[Vajrahridaya]

 

No conditions are necesary for liberation. In fact all conditions must be let go of for liberation.

 

Most people only think that they have freed themselves from conditions, due to the condition of one level of experience or another. Thus the view of inter-dependent origination is a necessary insight, no matter what as it truly reveals the inherent emptiness of all arisings, including liberation.

 

 

 

This "veiwless view" can be attained even when one does not follow a Buddhist path. I am a walking testament to this fact. I do not follow a Buddhist path yet I seem to have the same "viewless view" as you.

 

Maybe you do, maybe you don't. It's hard to tell sometimes through words alone as bondage is deeply formless.

 

 

Again, all conditions must be dropped in order to be liberated.

 

Liberation as well is a conditioned phenomena. So liberation must be emptied at it's basis as well to truly be liberation.

 

I know it sounds like splitting hairs, but it's important as the seed of bondage is deeply subtle.

 

 

 

It is my personal experience that what you are calling "right view" came AFTER coming to live from a place free from concepts, ideas and beliefs. I had to let go of my intellect in order for it to be "refined".

 

We do that through meditation and chanting with mudra, etc. For integration. Still... to know how to manifest enlightenment for the sake of all is also a conditioned phenomena. If you are a self awakened one, truly free from self completely. Then you have omniscience into your personal cosmic history as you've emptied your storehouse consciousness.

 

So your original sentence was: "That's a side effect, yes... but if you remain an active Dharmapala at the pralaya." So, can you perhaps restate what you are saying in plain English as I do not understand what you mean when you say that "liberation (as I describe it) is a side effect, but if you remain an active Dharma protector at the big Oneness crunch." Not following you. Please forgive my ignorance.

 

As in, if you haven't just pushed your seed of self grasping into a formless, concept-less light of bliss and you have transformed all your seeds of bondage into seeds of blessing, then you have realized the body, energy and mind of enlightenment and you will continuously manifest for beings the teachings of the great liberation. As Buddhahood is not just freedom from concepts.

 

 

Sure. But do you have to follow a Buddhist path to get to a point where you see all the teachings of the Buddhas at the same time? Nope. The Buddhas accessed Reality/Truth by going inward. We can each do the same.

 

Just going inwards leads merely to absorption. One has to have an integrated approach, the middle path, otherwise one just alters the consciousness without cutting through.

 

 

 

Yup, regardless of "tradition".

 

Hmmm... It's very rare, and generally if a being does attain the first type of cessation, they do come to the Buddhadharma eventually, in one name or another. I doubt those that say they are self awakened of their own accord, as they generally don't show real humility. Most of them are just stuck at a blissful pit stop. But, everyone is unique.

 

 

Personally I have no use for organized religion. I was soured on it as a child when I was forced to be part of one. I chose to find Truth within instead of without. To each their own.

 

.......continued below.......

 

Without guidance, it's very, very difficult and next to impossible as the roots of attachment are very deep and we are mostly blind. Generally one needs an objective opinion from someone without self grasping.

 

That's it for now... I have to give the computer over to my wife and finish cooking the mango curry and veggies.

[CarsonZi]

Ok....one more reply before I too have to attend to the mango curry and veggies (and a 1 month old)

 

Most people only think that they have freed themselves from conditions, due to the condition of one level of experience or another. Thus the view of inter-dependent origination is a necessary insight, no matter what as it truly reveals the inherent emptiness of all arisings, including liberation.

 

One who is liberated has dropped all conditions. "Thinking" you have dropped all conditions is not liberation. One actually has to LIVE from a place of no-conditioning in order to be liberated. And ou can't "think" yourself into a place of no-conditions. It is a matter of purification, which is where practices come in.

 

Maybe you do, maybe you don't. It's hard to tell sometimes through words alone as bondage is deeply formless.

 

Not trying to convince you of anything. Your opinion of my state of being is meaningless to me. What matters to me is the cessation of all suffering....aka liberation from conditions, attachments and beliefs.

 

Liberation as well is a conditioned phenomena.

 

Liberation is the absence of conditioned phenomena.

 

So liberation must be emptied at it's basis as well to truly be liberation.

 

ALL must be emptied to be truly liberated. Including the belief that one is liberated.

 

I know it sounds like splitting hairs, but it's important as the seed of bondage is deeply subtle.

 

Agreed that the seed of bondage is subtle. There is no "end" to liberation as it exists only right Now.

 

We do that through meditation and chanting with mudra, etc. For integration. Still... to know how to manifest enlightenment for the sake of all is also a conditioned phenomena.

 

One does not need to "know" anything. One merely needs to be open. One merely needs to be the uninhibited Divine Flow.

 

If you are a self awakened one, truly free from self completely. Then you have omniscience into your personal cosmic history as you've emptied your storehouse consciousness.

 

Essentially we all have the same cosmic history. We have all been, and all are, everything. There is nothing that you are not, or have not been before.

 

As in, if you haven't just pushed your seed of self grasping into a formless, concept-less light of bliss and you have transformed all your seeds of bondage into seeds of blessing, then you have realized the body, energy and mind of enlightenment and you will continuously manifest for beings the teachings of the great liberation. As Buddhahood is not just freedom from concepts.

 

I don't know how you define Buddhahood, nor does it matter to me. Whether you call liberation "Buddhahood", or you call it Enlightenment or Oneness or Wholeness or Unbound Awareness or whatever else one may call living as Reality, these are all still just words. Reality, and living as Reality, is so much more then words or definitions. And sharing Reality with others will always be paramount to one who fully lives in it.

 

 

.....continued below......

[CarsonZi]

.....continued from above.......

 

Just going inwards leads merely to absorption. One has to have an integrated approach, the middle path, otherwise one just alters the consciousness without cutting through.

 

All that exists outside also exists inside. Essentially there is no "inside" or "outside". Everything just Is. Losing the need to differentiate between the two is crucial to living a liberated existence. When I said that the Buddha(s) knew the truth of Reality by going inwards I meant that they did not have to look "outside" to Know.

 

Hmmm... It's very rare, and generally if a being does attain the first type of cessation, they do come to the Buddhadharma eventually, in one name or another.

 

In one name or another perhaps. What's in a name? Naming "reality" is not required to know the truth of it. You call it Buddhadharma, I choose not to name it definitively. One less attachment to drop (the attachment to the name).

 

I doubt those that say they are self awakened of their own accord, as they generally don't show real humility. Most of them are just stuck at a blissful pit stop. But, everyone is unique.

 

Most people who are awakened don't say they are. That would be (or at least lead to) an attachment.

 

Without guidance, it's very, very difficult and next to impossible as the roots of attachment are very deep and we are mostly blind.

 

As Yogani at AYP says: "The Guru is in You". All necessary guidance comes from within when you intimately Know Silence.

 

Generally one needs an objective opinion from someone without self grasping.

 

Generalizations are just that.....generalizations. Not Truth.

 

That's it for now... I have to give the computer over to my wife and finish cooking the mango curry and veggies.

 

It was a pleasure chatting with you today. Thank you for your civility and your willingness to discuss. I hope you enjoy your dinner as much as I will enjoy mine Namaste.

 

Love!

[Vajrahridaya]

.....continued from above......

 

 

 

Words can't touch the experience of Reality. It can only be lived in my opinion.

 

There is no inherent reality... only relative reality.

 

 

Nothing but Grace. "I" did nothing to deserve this.

 

What is this grace you speak of? In Buddhism the only grace known is the influence of enlightened beings. Otherwise there is only our effort and the blessings of enlightened beings. Relatively speaking, I do deserve this.

 

 

 

Doesn't change the fact that living as Reality is not contigent upon understanding Buddhism.

 

Living as Reality?

 

 

 

I have no doubt that Buddhism is unique. What ISN'T unique! All I am saying is that knowing the in's and out's of Buddhism is not required to be liberated. In fact in a lot of ways "knowing" (small "k") itself is an obstacle to liberation.

 

It can be.

 

I don't know a lot about Buddhism, so correect me if I am misinformed here, but didn't the Buddha refuse to talk about the afterlife?

 

Yes, you are mistaken. There are plenty of places in the Suttas and Sutras where he talks about the afterlife, past lives, different realms and dimensions one can go to and experience directly through meditation and insight. He wasn't limited to perception through the 5 senses.

 

 

Actually....it's (liberation/enlightenment) not very complicated at all. In fact it is very simple. Let go and be liberated. That's it. Simple. TOO simple for some perhaps

 

Simple is complex and complex is simple.

 

 

 

Inner Silence (the source of all knowledge) is even clearer. This I know from experience. I know little of Buddhadharma, but I know exactly what I need to about liberation.

 

One shouldn't take refuge in silence, as this could be an obstacle and a suppression of various important experiences that may need to arise. But, silence is necessary in practice, yes.

 

 

One can interpret things however they want according to their inclinations. I'm sure someone out there could find a way to interpret the Buddhist scriptures to encourage violence. Why someone would want to do this is beyond me though

 

Love!

 

One would be hard pressed, although there are examples where one who has the capacity to do something when ones family is being robbed but doesn't due to a concept of non-violence is actually performing a violence out of fear and/or attachment.

[Vajrahridaya]

One can merely go inward and let go of all concepts, ideas and beliefs, letting the mind rest in the reality of what Is.

You are taking the non-conceptual as a refuge here. What is the reality of what is?

 

Time is not reality. It will take each person exactly as long as it takes them to reach liberation, and not a second less. And what brings one to this point of liberation will not always be the same for everyone.

 

It will always be through the condition of seeing inter-dependent origination/emptiness directly. How is time not a relative reality?

 

 

 

Sure, I know what you mean. Do I agree with the use of the word "right" in this sentence...no. I would correct your statement in saying "There are ways to view meditative experiences........" No right, no wrong. Just what works for you.

 

This doesn't lead to liberation. Liberation is specific as Buddhahood. One must take up right view. You are taking up this non-dual experience as an absolute truth of things and not respecting how important the relative is. Non-dual in Buddhism means the non-separation of the non-dual and dual as well as the lack of inherent existence. Thus, not one, not two.

 

 

The clarity that is here comes from a deep connection to Silence. And Silence has no beginning and no end.

Neither does the flow of phenomena and concepts.

 

 

All conditions must be dropped in order to be liberated. Right and wrong are relative not absolute like you imply.

 

Yes, but there is no absolute reality either.

 

 

 

When there are no seeds left, what is left is the beginningless, endless Silence (and Silence is just a word, it is not reality...."Reality" can not be named or else it is not Reality....reality can only be lived).

 

It seems you are taking up a fundamental view here. You are taking refuge in the non-conceptual as the truth of things. Your experience of a formless peace is just a state where the aggregates are repressed or at rest for a while, thus the experience of no-sound and concepts arises due to this condition.

 

And this is what we each and all are once we have "let go".

 

Self liberated, but not liberation as a self. Unless one is speaking relatively.

 

Blessings...

[Kameel]

So I've compiled a brief list of quotes in an attempt to gently steer this thread back on track. This will certainly add to the confusion ...I mean clarity???

 

1) Swami Rama

 

Shaktipata is only possible with a disciple who has gone through a long period of discipline, austerity, and spiritual practices. Shaktipata on a mass scale seems suspicious to me. It is true when the disciple is ready, the master appears and gives the appropriate initiation. The experience of enlightment comes from the sincere effort of both master and disciple. Let us put it in different words. When you have done your duty skillfully and wholeheartedly, you reap the fruits gracefully. Grace dawns when activity ends. Shaktipata is the grace of God through the master.

 

2) Osho

 

...so the effect of Shaktipat is indirect, and therefore, you need it again and again. Once is not enough, a second flash of lightning will benefit you more, and a third, still more. What you may have missed the first time, will be seen with the second and third flashes...I would like shaktipat to happen with a large group, instead of just one or two individuals at a time. Why confine it to one or two people?

 

3) Strawberry Shortcake (pre Shaktipat)

 

Knock Knock, Who's there? Orange. Orange who?

Orange you glad this post is about shaktipat

 

Strawberry Shortcake (post Shaktipat)

 

Knock Knock, Who's there? Beats. Beats who?

Beats me I forget the joke.

 

4) Jerry Seinfield

 

So I went to a meditation intensive yesterday, but the Guru never showed up. You know what they say about these esoteric shaktipat masters...In one chakra out the other.

 

 

(OK so the last two are made up, but the first 2 are real quotes).

Will post more later.

[Vajrahridaya]

Ok....one more reply before I too have to attend to the mango curry and veggies (and a 1 month old)

 

Man it was good!

 

 

 

One who is liberated has dropped all conditions. "Thinking" you have dropped all conditions is not liberation. One actually has to LIVE from a place of no-conditioning in order to be liberated. And ou can't "think" yourself into a place of no-conditions. It is a matter of purification, which is where practices come in.

 

It really only take purifying the cognitive process, or intuition if you prefer. Yes a process of purification naturally occurs if one is working towards the constant liberation.

 

 

 

Liberation is the absence of conditioned phenomena.

 

No, it's the condition of correct cognition of conditioned phenomena, then awareness is free, arising due to the condition of insight... all empty of inherent reality due to arising dependently.

 

 

 

ALL must be emptied to be truly liberated. Including the belief that one is liberated.

 

Oh ok... yes.

 

 

Agreed that the seed of bondage is subtle. There is no "end" to liberation as it exists only right Now.

 

Past, present and future all are transparent and non-inherent. One finds liberation from the now as well, in the now of course.

 

 

One does not need to "know" anything. One merely needs to be open. One merely needs to be the uninhibited Divine Flow.

 

Ah language and metaphors.

 

 

Essentially we all have the same cosmic history. We have all been, and all are, everything. There is nothing that you are not, or have not been before.

 

No, this is where Buddhas view differs. We are not everything, our mind stream is individual and unique and we have all experienced a unique type of infinity and beginninglessness. In Buddhism, we are not one, we are only connected.

 

I don't know how you define Buddhahood, nor does it matter to me. Whether you call liberation "Buddhahood", or you call it Enlightenment or Oneness or Wholeness or Unbound Awareness or whatever else one may call living as Reality, these are all still just words. Reality, and living as Reality, is so much more then words or definitions. And sharing Reality with others will always be paramount to one who fully lives in it.

 

 

Right view is vastly important to realize Buddhahood. It doesn't seem that you have right view, just refuge in the non-conceptual.

[Sahaj Nath]

um...

 

this is an important topic. a lot of people are seeking information/discussion about shaktipat. however, the buddhist debaters are intent on overriding the intended subject of the thread.

 

can't SOMETHING be done? i mean, it's pages and pages of this buddhism thing now. can't a moderator step in? move the discussion to it's own thread? i know this has been done before.

 

i've gone to numberous threads and just stopped reading them because of the never ending string of comments from Vajrahridaya that have nothing to do with the supposed topic. this thread has now become one of those as well.

 

someone? anybody?

 

Bueller?

[Vajrahridaya]

All that exists outside also exists inside. Essentially there is no "inside" or "outside". Everything just Is. Losing the need to differentiate between the two is crucial to living a liberated existence. When I said that the Buddha(s) knew the truth of Reality by going inwards I meant that they did not have to look "outside" to Know.

 

He actually realized through samatha which is slightly open eyed for the sake of integration. Also through Vipassana which is a walking meditation where one consciously integrates the contemplation of right view, "dependent origination" with all processes of the body.

 

It still sounds like you take up silence as a oneness of all.

 

Most people who are awakened don't say they are. That would be (or at least lead to) an attachment.

 

The Buddha said, "I am awake" thus the name Buddha which means awake.

 

As Yogani at AYP says: "The Guru is in You". All necessary guidance comes from within when you intimately Know Silence.

 

The conditions for bondage are formless. It does sound like you take silence as a substratum and source of all.

 

 

Generalizations are just that.....generalizations. Not Truth.

 

All full blown Buddhas got guidance because this is what grounds the pristine cognition of dependently originated phenomena and not-self. One doesn't fully realize without transmission of some sort from realized lineage, either while in the physical or not. There is no self existing source of enlightenment. Even enlightenment arises dependently. There are stages of Buddhahood or types of Buddhahood where one realizes on ones own, but these beings don't teach properly as the conditions for this expression have not been accumulated. But, they still see directly the 4 marks.

 

Anicca (Sanskrit anitya) "inconstancy" or "impermanence". This refers to the fact that all conditioned things (sankhara) are in a constant state of flux. In reality there is no thing that ultimately ceases to exist; only the appearance of a thing ceases as it changes from one form to another. Imagine a leaf that falls to the ground and decomposes. While the appearance and relative existence of the leaf ceases, the components that formed the leaf become particulate material that may go on to form new plants. Buddhism teaches a middle way, avoiding the extreme views of eternalism and nihilism.[2]

 

Dukkha (Sanskrit duhkha) or dissatisfaction (or "dis-ease"; also often translated "suffering", though this is somewhat misleading). Nothing found in the physical world or even the psychological realm can bring lasting deep satisfaction.

 

Anatta (Sanskrit anatman) or "non-Self" is used in the suttas both as a noun and as a predicative adjective to denote that phenomena are not, or are without, a permanent self, to describe any and all composite, consubstantial, phenomenal and temporal things, from the macrocosmic to microcosmic, be it matter pertaining to the physical body or the cosmos at large, as well as any and all mental machinations, which are impermanent.

 

Nirvana is peace. Nirvana (blown out) is the "other shore" from samsara.

 

 

It was a pleasure chatting with you today. Thank you for your civility and your willingness to discuss. I hope you enjoy your dinner as much as I will enjoy mine Namaste.

 

Love!

 

Thank you CarsonZi... very much! I did enjoy the mango curry. It was delicious!

 

Blessings!

Edited June 23, 2010 by Vajrahridaya

[Vajrahridaya]

um...

 

this is an important topic. a lot of people are seeking information/discussion about shaktipat. however, the buddhist debaters are intent on overriding the intended subject of the thread.

 

can't SOMETHING be done? i mean, it's pages and pages of this buddhism thing now. can't a moderator step in? move the discussion to it's own thread? i know this has been done before.

 

i've gone to numberous threads and just stopped reading them because of the never ending string of comments from Vajrahridaya that have nothing to do with the supposed topic. this thread has now become one of those as well.

 

someone? anybody?

 

Bueller?

 

You are right... the questions should have been fielded outside. But... alas, mutability. I first posted here because someone posted a link that confused Buddhism entirely... so I was offering a correction of perspective. I didn't mean it to become an overblown debate. Actually my first post was on the subject directly. So my second post was an offering of a correct view on the Buddhist terms being used that were being abused.

Edited June 23, 2010 by Vajrahridaya

[ShaktiMama]

um...

 

this is an important topic. a lot of people are seeking information/discussion about shaktipat. however, the buddhist debaters are intent on overriding the intended subject of the thread.

 

can't SOMETHING be done? i mean, it's pages and pages of this buddhism thing now. can't a moderator step in? move the discussion to it's own thread? i know this has been done before.

 

i've gone to numberous threads and just stopped reading them because of the never ending string of comments from Vajrahridaya that have nothing to do with the supposed topic. this thread has now become one of those as well.

 

someone? anybody?

 

Bueller?

 

i posted on this page this morning for review. no one saw it.

 

http://www.thetaobums.com/index.php?/topic/7759-shaktipat/page__st__320

 

#388

[TheSongsofDistantEarth]

shaktiplop Edited June 24, 2010 by TheSongsofDistantEarth

[altiora]

i posted on this page this morning for review. no one saw it.

 

http://www.thetaobums.com/index.php?/topic/7759-shaktipat/page__st__320

 

#388

 

Three others including me have posted the same sentiments. I actually asked the Buddha boffins to start a new thread, but that promptly got buried amidst the deluge of disputation.

 

Funny how a sect devoted to surmounting the ego, seems to attract those who like to out do each other in massive posts.

[TheSongsofDistantEarth]

This behavior has always bothered me, but it seems to creep in every discussion when the Buddhist (Vaj) enters it. I don't think there's an off switch.

Edited June 24, 2010 by TheSongsofDistantEarth

[Dainin]

This behavior has always bothered me, but it seems to creep in every discussion when the Buddhist enters it. I don't think there's an off switch.

 

Let's not paint all Buddhists with the same brush. I have been a zen practitioner/student for many years, and from my personal perspective, the less being said about it the better! I think my long-winded scholarly brethren are well-meaning and sincere, but for me it's more about letting go of concepts and judgmental thinking, not accumulating more and more ideas, and debating their correctness (acknowledging that a modicum of concepts are both necessary and helpful!).

[yuanqi]

So I've compiled a brief list of quotes in an attempt to gently steer this thread back on track. This will certainly add to the confusion ...I mean clarity???

 

1) Swami Rama

 

Shaktipata is only possible with a disciple who has gone through a long period of discipline, austerity, and spiritual practices. Shaktipata on a mass scale seems suspicious to me. It is true when the disciple is ready, the master appears and gives the appropriate initiation. The experience of enlightment comes from the sincere effort of both master and disciple. Let us put it in different words. When you have done your duty skillfully and wholeheartedly, you reap the fruits gracefully. Grace dawns when activity ends. Shaktipata is the grace of God through the master.

 

2) Osho

 

...so the effect of Shaktipat is indirect, and therefore, you need it again and again. Once is not enough, a second flash of lightning will benefit you more, and a third, still more. What you may have missed the first time, will be seen with the second and third flashes...I would like shaktipat to happen with a large group, instead of just one or two individuals at a time. Why confine it to one or two people?

 

3) Strawberry Shortcake (pre Shaktipat)

 

Knock Knock, Who's there? Orange. Orange who?

Orange you glad this post is about shaktipat

 

Strawberry Shortcake (post Shaktipat)

 

Knock Knock, Who's there? Beats. Beats who?

Beats me I forget the joke.

 

4) Jerry Seinfield

 

So I went to a meditation intensive yesterday, but the Guru never showed up. You know what they say about these esoteric shaktipat masters...In one chakra out the other.

 

 

(OK so the last two are made up, but the first 2 are real quotes).

Will post more later.

actually i like the last two. LOL the others two have too much trash in their history. however, even with that said Osho was so far off the mark with A LOT that i wouldnt listen to what he said anyway. for new age folks he made sense in SOME ways. but i dont think he had a clue about shaktipat, he was one that ended up giving the real Gurus a bad name or i should say thought of in the same light i guess. He was a JOKE.

 

Swami Rama. Loved his books. Real deal in alot of ways. Fell from Grace as many do.(too much sex with devotees, DOCUMENTED) But what you wrote from Living with the Himalayan Masters (i think) is right in alot of ways. the only thing i disagree with even though i am a traditionalist LOLOLOL is you dont have to practice austerities a long time to receive it. will it help, Hell yes. LOL but i believe that if you are sincere and want to make an effort then you should be allowed to receive it. i mean my Guru wouldnt have allowed me if He followed what Swamiji said because i practiced a lot of stuff but i wasnt doing anything compared to what Swamiji did and his definition of austere,discipline and spiritual practices.

 

same thing from Muktanandas camp, the book Kundalini-The Secret of Life is a good book and has alot of truth in it. Dude had power from previous practice and his Master, Nityananda (not the dumbas* fake who was recently arrested in India, similar spelling) in todays terms would be considered the MACK DADDY but two dozen ashrams, limos and a jet among a BUNCH of other stuff aint good when you are a swami. LOL The book is right on though about Shaktipat in most everything and is right on in their tradition obviously.

 

 

i think it needs to be done the old ways as i said before because its a big deal in traditional lines. maybe husband and wife get it at the same time and then others one at a time with a group of 20 or less. but a mass shaktipat of hundreds or more. UH HUH sure. maybe in todays modern new age world but not in the old school ways. but then again it depends on what type of shaktipat you are doing, if you are using it as a term for straight up initiation and kundalini awakening then its what i wrote above, if you are doing it for other reasons then maybe not. but then are you REALLY doing it???????? this is the question. i would love to have it done by others just to feel the difference between my Gurus touch (and his foremost disciples) and those that claim to do it. Only problem is in my mind that shows a complete lack of commitment to my own Guru and well i just wont do it. i dont care who the hell it was that wanted to do it on me. LOL even for free. i know what i have

 

 

 

so its good to be back on topic eh?

Edited June 24, 2010 by yuanqi