ralis

How many bullets? Have you seen this done? ralis

I would like to learn more. ralis

Sri Gary Olsen is blond. http://www.masterpath.org/ ralis

The Buddhists call it the "precious human birth". It is a bit of a stretch to believe that humans are somehow the highest life form for spiritual evolution. ralis

I once went to see Sri Gary Olsen and he makes the same claims. He is supposedly the one and only third eye master on the planet. ralis

Vajraji's arguments are presented in the context of doctrine (propaganda). Rather than explain specific methodology in detail, the same untenable arguments are presented ad infinitum. His presentation is not unlike the fundamentalist preachers that use the same persuasive techniques to indoctrinate and convert masses of non believers to believers. Believe in the Buddha and you will be saved!! He did admit in an earlier post that he is a Buddhist fundamentalist. ralis

The Sant Mat masters claim the same thing. ralis

Vajraji, Do you have a job? I have been out all day managing a successful business and I see you have been posting the same old arguments all day. LOL!! ralis

Talk about a contradiction. ralis

You did not answer my questions. ralis

Are Vajraji's arguments nihilistic? If all experiences and phenomena are illusory, then life has no meaning? If karma is illusory and there is no permanent abiding self, who is carrying the karma? If Buddhists were really showing compassion, would we not see more outreach from Buddhist communities to care for the sick? Are Buddhists just self obsessed with there own self centered religious views? Does this contracted world view cause more suffering than necessary? ralis

Great discussion here! Thanks for the thoughts on grounding! I guess we all learn the hard way. BTW, through perseverance, I did get my health back. It was a lot of work and took many years. ralis

Why not speak in glossolalia or just plain gibberish! How about something profoundly incomprehensible? What point are you trying to make by refusing to communicate well? No matter how you try to frame it, your arguments are still based on conceptual ideology. ralis

At one time (16 yrs. ago) I was able to send healing energy (heat) at a distance. At the time I was involved with a group of Japanese healers from a tradition called Johrei. For 2 yrs. everything felt great. Then I became very sick from too much energy and nearly lost my life! The group was intent on convincing me that I was purifying some karmic baggage. Their arguments were BS!! Rather than elaborating on details, energy can cause a great deal of harm, even death! I am lucky to be alive today. Some of these master healers may pass on from too much energy being channeled through a body that ultimately can't handle the voltage. ralis

Thanks for some clarity on Guenther. About 20 yrs. ago, I read virtually everything Guenther wrote. Even with his difficult writing style, I was able to benefit from his writing. My point is, Guenther's style is easier to understand than Vajraji's. At least for me it is. ralis He did state in one post, that his mother and a few other exceptional intellects, understand everything he writes. ralis

Vajraji, If you want others to understand you, I suggest purchasing the following. http://www.amazon.com/Elements-Style-50th-...8797&sr=8-1 http://www.amazon.com/Writing-Well-30th-An...pd_bxgy_b_img_b http://www.amazon.com/Science-Sanity-Intro...mp;sr=1-2-spell Your writing style contains errors in logic, syntax and and lacks clarity. Well thought out statements are always precise and need not contain excess words. In the past, you have attempted to persuade your audience that your arguments are superior and only a few are able to comprehend. Somehow you believe that so called Buddhist logic will be perceived as a higher form of thought if written in a manner that is perceived as complex! Why not read the following and compare your style to his. http://www.amazon.com/Reductionism-Creativ...0374&sr=1-4 ralis

I assume you are using a Buddhist dictionary that is somehow different from what us mere mortals use? ralis

Vajraji, A so called superior doctrine is a conceptual view. Yet, you insist on framing the conceptual into a non conceptual point of view. Your argument does not follow (non sequitur). You also insist on some elusive subtlety beyond what anyone but an enlightened Buddha can perceive. Subtle is still a concept! ralis

Mount Sumeru and Jambudvipa? Are you referring to some mythological fantasy? ralis

Would you elaborate on the cultural reasons? ralis

Vajraji, When it comes to the atrocities in Tibet, you express much emotion! However, when I stated in a previous post about the slaughter in Iraq of approximately 1,000,000 (innocent women and children) by the Bush regime, you said, "those Iraqi's" are living out past karma. Are Tibetans somehow different to "those Iraqi's"? ralis

Vajraji, Where did you come up with "enlodged"? That word does not exist. Yet, you assert the claim that I don't read your posts objectively. How can we have a reasonable discourse when the syntax of your writing is not well organized? Are you using contradictory terms in order to teach us something? Are you claiming enlightened Buddhahood for yourself and feel some need to preach? If you expect me to read your posts objectively, then you must present factual evidence. Objectivity by it's very definition means presenting factual evidence while being unimpeded by emotion. Your arguments are based solely on assumption,innuendo and emotional reactivity. Please rewrite the last paragraph! ralis

Middle ages? Yes! I would also add Wilhelm Reich's term "little man". Also, Vajra seems more right wing religious Republican than one who lives a progressive ideology. This fits nicely with his authoritarian and conservative way of thinking. ralis

When you belittle others, is that your way of making yourself feel like a bigger more powerful Buddha? Some new master teacher? What about so called Buddhist compassion? Why not show it! I have been a student of Namkai Norbu for decades and his discourses are clear and precise. Sorry, yours are not! ralis

Stop using science (non-linear dynamics) to justify your untenable arguments. Why do you persist? Spiritual types like yourself, love to use fancy terms to justify a philosophical position! I guess in your mind 1+1=3 would be an example of non-linearity. LOL! Quantify your philosophical position within these parameters. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nonlinear_system BTW, which dinosaur species were you? Your claim of a dinosaur past life, implies a dinosaur consciousness i,e. self awareness. Dinosaurs are of the class Reptilia, are only instinctual and have no awareness except to survive at all costs. There is absolutely no upward spiritual mobility. ralis