Lucky7Strikes

Anyone who receives direct introduction (to the nature of mind,) who stabilizes their experience of instant presence (regardless if there is still a sense of an apprehender and apprehended framework on a conscious/subconscious/unconscious level); and who seriously studys and applies the teachings of dzogchen will (eventually) fully come to recognize their own face (as Dzogpa Chenpo.) In the end dzogchenpa's (to use a convenient label) don't have anything to worry about, IMO.

I've been to two retreats with Chogyal Namkai Norbu and have been reading his works inside the community for a while now, and I must say I am very underwhelmed. His practice is mainly dream practice and much of his knowledge comes down from his lineage through dreams. He seems to simply rest in the state of what is deemed primordial nature as his karmic fruits just fall off, which is great in my opinion, but nothing of what I'd consider masterful knowledge. I've seen him answer questions and deal with daily problems other people come with, and there is nothing that indicates in depth wisdom. I'd consider him more of a scholar than anything else.

To me, being in the primordial state or Thusness' spontaneous presence are just paths to untangle karmic ties. They're both mere paths. To take what they say as some ultimate characterization of reality would be faulty since neither has full mastery over their existences, only a glimpse into a pure way of experience. For instance, ask either teacher about karma, or the essences of the human body, or the after-life. Either the answers will be out of a book or they won't know too much besides how to enter into pure and immediate experience. Chogyal Namkai Norbu doesn't even seem that happy to be carrying on and seems to look at this whole affair as a burden laid upon him.

But I guess it really depends on what the seeker is looking for.

What is the precise factor which determines if what one practices will lead to liberation?

 

There is no way to determine for certain.

 

I feel deeply that only as death approaches one knows in confidence whether one's cultivation, all the effort of one's spiritual life, will carry one forward with ease, or with apprehension. It is like anticipating the sunrise, some look forward to it, while some tend to shun it. And yet, those who shun daylight, they are also catered for, for the night brings mystery, and shadows, and is full of spaciousness and potential for the next phase, the next period.

 

As of now, there is really no benefit to say who is right, or which view is the correct one.

 

Better off directing one's thoughts to those things that soothes one's mind.

IMO, this isn't a very good attitude. You're gambling on what might come at death. What if nothing comes?

There needs to be an urgency about liberation. A now or never stance, a great intensity to it, as the Buddha did under the Bodhi tree when he decided never to leave until he was enlightened. Then it just becomes a question of when, not if.

True,

 

But I don't have to show you anything because I'm not obligated to. I have expressed my opinions based on my experiences. If you have had similar experiences, you will nod your head in agreement and say to yourself "Ah yes I know what he means" or you will say "he's delusional, that's not what I experienced".

Spirituality isn't an opinion about an experience. That's exactly what I was getting at. It shouldn't be an interpretation. It should be reality. And reality must be easily communicable and practically usable or you fall into endless delusional interpretations. Deepening you spirituality should be as tangible as learning to use a new organ you never knew you had before, not cryptic interpretation of had experiences with abstract language. And that's what's been going on in a lot of these debates.

And I can't excuse myself from pushing this type of "practice" in the past either, but thetaobums used to be much more about techniques (I think it's gradually shifting back to that) and ways to extend your being rather than deciphering how reality is and is not.

Sometimes it just makes sense without knowing how. It is called "Knowing" (directly). Sometimes we just know...without any intellectual mechanism actually firing.

There's another part to this. Intuitive knowing can be a delusional. Your direct knowing and another person's direct knowing can be very different.

What is important is, what are you capable of? What are you able to do with what you know? For instance if you tell me that you are this awareness beyond the body, show me or tell me of your life outside of the body. Or if you say that the world is an illusion, show me how so you have shown yourself that, instead of just saying, "I directly know it is." Because that may just be self-hypnosis.

I suspect Vajrahidaya would be quite surprised at this turn-about by one of his guiding light teachers. It sounds as though Malcolm/Namdrol has sided with Dwai now.

 

 

 

speaking only for myself:

 

I've been pondering lately if the emphasis on whether this-or-that teaching is Right or Wrong view is maybe the wrong way to go about things.

 

The thing that makes the most sense to me is what does this or that particular individual actually KNOW directly. As in...not a belief...not bought into some story or explanation - whether spiritual OR scientific.

 

Side Note: the latter -without investigation into how beliefs are formed within one's self - leads to unconscious belief in the "Truthness" of Materialism aka Physicalism aka Scientific Atheism but no matter how you spin it - it's still a belief...nobody to my knowledge has ever "directly experienced" a proton, electron, quark...etc.

 

 

It doesn't really matter what you believe...the training should always focus on exactly what does this-or-that-individual Directly KNOW. If I don't Know the Tao for myself then what good has it done me to say I'm a Taoist of any kind?! Ditto Buddhism? Dzogchen? Muslim? Christian? Etc?

 

Whether I wanna call a Realization True Self or No Self does it really matter? I can only think of one reason where it would. If either actually got in the way of me KNOWING. Even someone else telling me "you're wrong" doesn't do me a whole lot of good. Why? Cause I don't KNOW HOW I was "wrong" in the first place. So them telling me - even if I buy into it is - A belief! The very thing VMarco keeps stridently arguing on these boards is the enemy of one actually KNOWING (er....or as he would say: GNOWING).

Very true. But for me it's been a good way to become initiated into ideas, no matter how crazy they may be, into how the world could be. D.O, Self, the mindstreams from eon to eon, life being a dream, everything being energy etc.

I mean, since preschool we are educated to believe that there is certainty to the world, a routine to it, until we begin to slowly see more and more that not many people really know what the hell is going on or what they're doing and suddenly you want to hold on to new grounds, building another phantom structure. It's comforting to have a new ground, a new teacher, a new religion. But at a point you get tired of bullshitting since what you know is so completely abstract and limited, and you have nothing to show for it. Just abstractions, feelings, and beliefs (that may result in psychological shifts, but not necessary what's true).

So until then I guess we just have to keep exploring through meditation and experimenting with our awareness and the world while being very honest with what we know and what we are capable of.

Btw, I've been watching a lot of Sadhguru's stuff lately and find his teachings very refreshing. I hope you check him out someday.

@ Simple Jack

I think you misunderstood my post. I said Dzogchen does not emphasize dependent origination. I guess it was a bit confusing since I wrote Emptiness/Dependent origination. Dependent origination as a teaching is primarily within the sutrayana traditions. There's no need in Dzogchen to say appearances are dependently originated or distinguish between afflicted dependent origination vs. non-afflicted dependent origination. In fact, it just adds unnecessary complication since one can use the understanding of dependent origination to come to the understanding of emptiness, but become entrapped in a limited view of causation, i.e. causation of the material world. So it's said in Mahayana that dependent origination and causation themselves are empty which can be needlessly confusing since logically it doesn't make sense.

In Dzogchen the terms used put it as just the non-duality of emptiness and infinite potential.

Btw, all that cosmology stuff is bullshit. It's just from a book. No one knows their reality.

This is a sign of "growing up"...it is bound to happen if we are honest in our spiritual practice...go beyond syntax.

 

So then, how come you think dependent origination is a fallacy?

The absolutist stance that it is the only way to describe reality is the fallacy.

Dependent Origination/Emptiness is primarily emphasized in Mahayana. It is so that the relative view is seen through in order to attain the ultimate view.

The Vajryana and Dzogchen view stress the state of primordial purity in which emptiness (voice) is understood in unity with infinite potential for manifestation (body). Awareness of this and abiding in that state is rig pa (mind).

Cool. Where's Vajrahridaya?

Bump.

I've been watching a lot of Sadhguru videos lately and have found them very refreshing. I like his sincerity and humor. I was thinking of trying the online program and since I have seen some of his videos on here (I think from Old Green mostly), I was wondering whether anyone has given it a go or has met Sadhguru.

Care to share? Thanks.

Life is meanigless, and I mean that in the most positive sense possible. The meaning you put in it, is the meaning you get out of it.

...I meant efforts at communication and discussion. Not life. You should try to cut back on grandiose statements.

I'm pretty sure by now you are just another new age hack spouting fortune cookie aphorisms.

Haha! "enjoy the ride and flow with it!" Come on, man. What's next "seize the day!!" People like you are abound in so many spiritual circles today so eager to put a concluding stamp on any experience of bliss...ayee

agree to disagree

Now we are merely talking about opinions. Spirituality isn't an opinion. It's a science, in that it should be verifiable. There should be some truths to it.

Else, all this discussion and efforts are completely meaningless. And I don't mean that in a good way.

Im not clear on what the 'dangerous' aspect of that attitude is either.

I know plenty of Christians who might also fall into that category of mindset.

They seem OK

Stosh

It's dangerous because it limits your potential for true knowledge of reality because you are content in mere faith based vision of the world. But the danger part is that it spreads beliefs as if they are facts. People who come upon it, only seeing the structure valid, believe it is also real without investigating how that knowledge has come about. In this case, Everything admits its intuitive guess work. Well someone else may have a different intuitive guess work. So we have opposing beliefs with no foundation in reality besides, "I believe."

This is basically why we have conflict in the world. What you think vs. what I think. So it's dangerous.

Christians are not doing ok. They believe and other religions believe something else. So Christians create a lot of unnecessary conflict just as well as any other religious beliefs.

What I know, I believe. What I believe, I know.

This is usually the response of fanatics, new-agers, and blind worshippers. I just know. It's a dangerous attitude to have.

That when it happens is extremely ambiguous. And also, those who focus too tight on getting healthy and staying healthy are the ones who get hit hardest when they realize time's up. Just recently, my sis-in-law was admitted to hospital for some condition undiagnosable by her GP. She is 27. Then, 2 days ago, a good friend, perfectly healthy 22-yr old law student, suddenly had an epileptic seizure. Talk about perspective.

 

What do you precisely know about life?

 

Do you practice it?

In the post beforehand, you said people should drop trying to figure things out. That all this progressive ways are nonsense. Then you said to visit the ill and hold hands with them to understand death so you learn about priorities. And then somehow you become free.

And now what you wrote here is not about death, but the conditions that lead to death. And that death is in fact ambiguous. And about people who experience death. I don't see any understanding here or freedom. It appears you know nothing about death (and not that I know anything either) itself to say the right way is to drop everything and stop figuring things out.

Life? Death? According to you, what should we even know about it, since figuring things out is nonsense and only the dropping of everything is praiseworthy. It seems like you are glorifying ignorance.

How many buddhist texts and writings have you read? How long have we been practicing? Yet when it comes to direct knowledge, we both know nothing. We rely on beliefs and scriptures and conjectures. To say drop everything, IMO, isn't much of a way to knowledge at all.

We must be honest. Brutally honest as to what is belief and what is knowledge. I'm clearing my plate. There is way too much dust everywhere I've accumulated from years and years of others' words for me to see anything clearly.

Hmm, the direct experience that everything is made up of unconditional love. The experience of being in love with everything around me, as love and being loved by everything. Everything radiating love. Me, becoming unconditional love and loving everything without reason. Just because that is who I am. Which lead to the conclusion that 1+1=1 so I see how I might seem a bit "rebelious" in my ability to choose my own believes, etc.

 

There is no "progress" in the egotistical sense when you live from a place of unconditional love. We are free to be free. Free to be more of who we really are. Not "trying to change" that little which we allow at the moment. Rather, allow yourself to become more of yourself as your true progress.

Experiencing unconditional love does not mean you are the subconscious creator of reality...or any of what you wrote in the first post.

Especially synchronistic experiences that most people call "manifestations" and personality shifts that most people call "multiple personality disorder." I'd say, based on my experience, it was an experience of synchronistic perception, coupled with a multiple personality order, and a re-membering of subconscious parts of all that I am and the multi dimensionality of who I truely am. In a sense, the result of inclusion and not exclusion. The experiences of expansion and not contraction. Also downloads of information from higher sources. I got imaginary friends in high places

So unrelated manifestations and experiencing multiple personalities and experiencing expansiveness means you are the witnessing of an effortless creator of your reality or that you were made in the image of the creator and yada yada?

Downloads from imaginary people....ok...

Sorry, you're not really helping your case here. I think you are not being honest with yourself as to what you know vs. what you believe.

There is no "shortcut" to true enlightenment. Enlightenment is a very misunderstood concept these days. In my opinion, it's impossible to achieve it in this society. People believe books/courses can make them enlighten, really they're wrong. True ways to gain enlightenment does not involve money, at all. You have to give everything up, you have to be serious, and realize the role you're playing in society is a lie. You need to kill the ego, and let go all of your attachments/desires, even the people around you. This is the true preparation towards enlightenment. Then meditate.

 

A lot of people wouldn't be able to accept this.

How do you know that doing these things will make you enlightened? That they are a necessary precondition for enlightenment? If we believe in old tales, many people who led ordinary lives have become very spiritual. Actually I'd say that only after the enlightening experience they led hermetic lives.

IMO, these conditions are just by products when someone really wants to become enlightened. He really wants it so he quits his job, leaves his family, lives in a hut so he can devote all his energies to it. But that's not what gets him enlightenment, it's just what happens when someone says, "hey I really want to be enlightened" a chooses a way to go about it. If you want to really do well on the LSAT test you can do the same thing. But you can also be in society and say, "hey I really want to be enlightened." But this man takes a slightly different way to exercise his efforts. One way is neither better than the other. It's just a matter of sincerity and dedication, not living in huts.

Problem is exactly this: people think there's so so (sooo) much to figure out. Actually, what 'things' are there to be figured out? In the process of dismantling and re-assembling one's head-mind so much precious time is lost. Just drop it, drop everything, a little each time, especially those ideas that lead one to believe that one is making progressive inroads and getting somewhere finally, a destination perhaps worthy of note, but its all nonsense. Go visit the terminally ill, speak with them, look into their eyes, hold hands with them, listen to how they breathe, and see what life is all about. Puts a lot of things into perspective. Then, if we are wise enough, we might learn a little about priorities, as well as how to sensitize oneself to face one's deepest fears, and then keep going at it, again and again and again, until death is finally understood. This is the only key to freedom -- not those ideas and concepts that need figuring out.

What do you precisely know about death?

Problem is exactly this: people think there's so so (sooo) much to figure out. Actually, what 'things' are there to be figured out? In the process of dismantling and re-assembling one's head-mind so much precious time is lost. Just drop it, drop everything, a little each time, especially those ideas that lead one to believe that one is making progressive inroads and getting somewhere finally, a destination perhaps worthy of note, but its all nonsense. Go visit the terminally ill, speak with them, look into their eyes, hold hands with them, listen to how they breathe, and see what life is all about. Puts a lot of things into perspective. Then, if we are wise enough, we might learn a little about priorities, as well as how to sensitize oneself to face one's deepest fears, and then keep going at it, again and again and again, until death is finally understood. This is the only key to freedom -- not those ideas and concepts that need figuring out.

What do you precisely know about death?

New guy here. Been reading the forums for years but always too busy to join and start contributing to the threads.

 

So my question is, what is your guys' takes on what the best & fastest method to Enlightenment, Buddhahood, sumpreme realization, etc etc.

 

I've done some research on Kunlun & Spring Forest though havent tried them myself. I have practiced off and on for years the Falun Gong exercises and have tons of experiences from studying Advaita Nonduality teachings.

 

So far the best teachings I have found to have high caliber stuff is Bill Bodri's meditationexpert site, A.H. Almaas, Anadi, and the damoqigong website has lots of high end stuff as well.

 

Anyway so what's your take? I ask because I have a friend who has all types of health problems, leukemia, and immune system issues, and has always been sick for years and he recently asked me this question (as someone who has limited time here)

 

While personally, I would like to add that for myself, I long to be United with the Absolute. To be "home" or go "home" if that makes sense. I've been told by some that I need to completely open the Heart, others say the navel, while still others say the center of awareness has to be activated first.

 

Anyway, lets see what you guys have to say

IMO, no one on this forum has this information because everyone is still figuring things out, as in I don't think anyone on this forum believes they are enlightened. People practice because they believe its the best way for them or the occasion has introduced them to that system. For instance, I practice Kunlun, but I can't tell you this is the quickest way. It's like asking a hiker whose never been to the peak or know truly the way there what the fastest way up is.

If your friend is struggling from health problems maybe you can look into practices that focus on bodily health rather than knowledge. But that's a bit obvious. To know which body system best works your friend should just try qi gong, yoga, ayurveda, TCM, and so on. Lol, but this is also a bit obvious...haha I say obvious things!

I base it on the experience of my entire life. The words I use are indeed an intuitive guess or creative guidance of the imagination. I do use analogies, because I don't care about reality. It is meaningless to me, such as the words you read in my post. It is the message that I am offering. Not the words.

 

I can even disproove and discredit all that I wrote in my post. I like it better this way. I like to think of it as code language. The words are pretty damn fake.

 

Just like dreams are pretty damn fake, because the conscious mind tries to make the best of the nighttime experiences with what its got. This results in what appears to be dreams full of "nonsense." this is like unto such a dream.

 

You do not doubt my post, just like you do not doubt a nonsensical dream. You just disregard it or interpret the meaning of it.

Are you saying the words are intuitive guesses but the message is not? Then how are we supposed to know what your message is when there is this discord between your message and your words....

Otherwise, are you admitting that your ideas are indeed intuitive guesses and "creative guidance of the imagination?" Then you are caught up in fascination. Your vision of the world is then there merely as a support for why ever you chose that vision.

You don't care about reality? Then what do you care about? Your imagination about reality? Because then it seems like you are justifying delusion. This type of approach to spirituality is detrimental to any true progress and inquiry and at the core of new-age movements, where one's desired fascinations triumph over reality and free fall interpretations become bloated as truths.

If this isn't the case, please narrate to us certain experiences and/or rationality that have given rise to these observations.

And...how do you know this?

Anyone can draw up a picturesque version and sound structure of existence. There are hundreds of these drawing out there. When you've gone through many, at least for me, the question isn't really what you believe and know, but the process that led you there.

If you have no foundational basis in experience or abilities that are in accordance with what you wrote, and say it's just "intuition" or whatever, none of this is grounded in reality but conjecture. So be honest with yourself and attempt to do things that are consequently possible by this view of the universe.

So if you say the world is your creation, devise an experiment to see whether this is true or not. If you say it's automatic and effortless, what makes it "your" creation anyway?

Another thing is, I find it a bit suspicious that you seem too inspired by this view, which shows that you want this to be true, rather than focusing on whether it is true or not in the first place.

Interesting. What have your experiences taught you since the buddhabum wars? Im asking in all sincerity...

Well, back then I was trying to really understand and re-understand the varying frameworks of Buddhism, Hinduism, Anatta, Emptiness, etc. etc. And then see if my experiences and practices were in line with them or observe how they were changed when these teachings were implemented.

Since, there have been multiple bodily and mind experiences I went through that really truly showed me that these understandings, as cliched as it sounds, are absolutely just pointers to let you discard absolutist frameworks and find more direct experiences and to go from there, and not have an established framework from which you build experiences from. Looking back I felt like I was trying to make out the truth or whatever with such limited perceptive abilities. If you are colorblind and you want to understand color, the best way is to find a way to unblind yourself not conclude that there is no such thing as color or make final statements about colors from your limited vision alone (this isn't a literal example).

I still like the Buddhist teachings because it doesn't let you settle, it doesn't allow you to be glued to constructs or experiences. Just when you think you've "got it" you realize you've fallen into another of mind's entanglements.

But really, I'm at a stage where I'm very uncertain about many things. I think life is very mysterious. I have a hard time today telling myself I can prove some position I take. One thing that has improved is I can see why a person does so and on what basis he declares his beliefs, because I can remember myself falling in similar steps before and easily empathize.

There's really no benefit to declare absolutist positions based on scripture, but being very honest about what you know and what you don't know, what you are capable and not is very important. I feel that so many of us easily fool ourselves due to our affiliations to ideologies. In a way I really respect the way some members on this forum go about it. It's a very personal journey and you really have yourself to trust.

Also anatta does not mean "non-existence." It is not establishing any extremes, since there is no "self/Self " within, apart from or seperate from the

5 aggregates for there to be established as "existent" or "non-existent."

 

Sorry, I couldn't resist lol. I...CAN'T...HELP...IT...

It's incorrect imo to see the self as merely 5 aggregates. The 5 aggregates is a mere categorization of experiences we label the self. It's there to deconstruct the idea of an entity. They are just as unestablished as the "self."

I...COULDN"T..HELP IT...

It's clear that your motivation is for hedonistic pleasures of experience.

Bliss is not the goal one should strive for, it is just one of its effects when one becomes clearer in wisdom and awareness. You strive to liberation not to attain greater bliss but to understand and liberate from suffering and to understand one's existence.

In other words, I think you are asking the wrong questions and they reveal more about your own attachments and inner conflicts.