deci belle

hahahhahahhahhahahhahaa!! ed note: dangs! I see I edited my post~ and I invariably say why… oh, maybe I pretended to edit just to be sly!! haha!!

Don't stop there! This is the best place to start. I didn't tell anybody anything for almost thirty years, grasshopper.

That there is no creator has never been dependent on buddhism. Awakened mind; whether one sees this or not is not created. What does this have to do with buddhism? Nice comments by the bums! And that is as far as he goes. This is the god made in man's image. hahahha!! As for the many buddhist permutations, these are recognized and established as provisional teachings set up for times and locales of human mental capacities (assuming that people are actually authentically practicing correct understanding of provisional teachings). What is being portrayed in Taiji Bum's comment as buddhism in these instances is something other than buddhist teaching implicit in an underlying cultural fabric. Atheism has no validity in buddhist practice as not believing that there is no original creator is the basis of theistic logic— being there is nothing posited in any mind-only teaching to require denial of an original creator, so there is no presupposition otherwise extent in the mind-only schools to require abrogation or upholding in terms of any form of creationism, much less monotheism. In other words, the subject of the OP is a non-issue in buddhist terms. The highest teaching is the self-realization of nonorigination, which is the basis of the mind-only schools in the first place. ed note: add quote and the following text.

It seems this the subject of the comments has gone far afield from the OP. Be that as it may… This is why maintaining an unbroken continuity of subtle concentration in the midst of ordinary affairs is the highest meditation practice. It is also the easiest to maintain, once one has reached a general clarity of mind. This is why formal meditation is considered a temporary expedient— i.e., one should not stick to solitary stillness and imagine this as arrival.

Hi❤ I will say that your thoughts have already created your reality. When you stop following the thoughts that subsequently create subjective reality, reality ceases to be causally subjective. There is no creator. Awareness is your own selfless identity. It is unattributable. The unattributable is uncreated. It has no origination. This is your essential nature. When you can begin to see that since your natural presence is the Causelessness of nonorigination by actually employing your innate capacity of nonpsychological awareness, and that your own essential awareness is the immovability inseparable from Reality as is, you will see that adapting impersonally to ordinary situations is the sublime expression of nonbeing within being. No longer creating yourself by habitual thought (which is another way of saying not going along with creation unawares), is entering into the inconceivable immortality and mystery of enlightening being, no different than your own mind right now. The inconceivability of this selfless function is what Bodhidharma referred to as "don't know", when the emperor asked him who was speaking. (This is a verrrry famous event in Chinese buddhist origins.) When you are secure in nonbeing within being, you don't have any idea who isn't knowing. When you don't know, "who" is the immovable inconceivability not creating itself in terms of karmic evolution. When Bodhidharma said "don't know", he means don't think yourself into existence. Why? Because it isn't true. That you exist is due to ideas. Banish the thought.❤ heehee!!

Accepting what is is proof of seeing reality as is. Disagreeing with this is being unable to see reality. Actually, there is no other reality, but the inability to see reality as is in the first place is oneself creating the basis of karmic illusion where there is none to begin with. The author of the book is not entertaining illusions. What is immovable is essence. Your own aware nature is the basis of the immovable and unchangeable. There is no other thing; and just this non-thing is formless. This is what Adyashanti is referring to as immovable. Since this inconceivability is not within the realm of understanding, anything you can think of falls into your own self-reflective machinations. It is not Adyashanti's fault that you do not see reality as is. If you could, you would savor the unchangeability and immovability of reality as the basis of your own unborn mind and become a partner of creation, not subject to it. I would not waste time disagreeing with an enlightening being such as this. Instead, endeavor to discover this unchangeable immovable thing which is not separate from your selfless aware identity without beginning. It is due to your inability to recognize your own nature that you cannot see reality as is as the immovable unchangeable thing no different than yourself right now.

hahaha!! It occurred to me someone might get ideas…❤ The real concern on my part is that the freewheeling careerism on the part of Ms Kicks Ass will come to nothing as this kind of shallow opportunism will only "attract" teachers harboring the same kind of careerism… yawn…

Inteview? How nice! And what of making this forum "attractive" to teachers? So it's really more of an "attraction" in the programming sense that you wish to make TTb more attractive to "teachers" that have an acceptable notariety… Phishing for advertisers are we? yawn…

The recognition of the absolute is by dropping-off the skin-bag and seeing your nature for the first time. Clairvoyance has nothing to do with seeing one's nature, essence, buddha-mind. Evidently these clairvoyant buddhists are mistaking their thieving mind for the source of enlightening being?

What might be this sudden interest in attracting quality teachers, hmmmmmm? Didn't Trunk leave a note (off-topic, actually) a few deci-threads ago about this forum being one steam-table away from being a cafeteria, but definitely NOT a place for teaching to occur? Trunk— Would you care to clarify your seemingly anti-teacher bias suddenly doing a 180? Perhaps is it now deemed a betterment in terms of TTB's perceived status as opposed to the benefit of the bums. And who might be determining what constitutes a teacher? Hahhahahhahahahhaa!!

Earlier I posted that real teachers have nothing to offer authentic students because it is one's own mind right now. I posed the question, "What need be taught?" It is not a rhetorical question. Who cannot answer that question will never be worthy of the potential a teacher can bring out in a worthy student. People cannot avail themselves of the taoist and buddhist canons as it is. Perhaps it is meditation instruction being sought? Observation of mind is older than sin. People just wanna have fun… I feel people are just looking for another external object to grasp. It is truly lamentable. People cannot even see what is before them as it is— not one of them has any business seeking a teacher. hahaha!! Both buddhism and taoism have the admonition to SEE ESSENCE ON YOUR OWN FIRST, then seek a teacher. What about that, hmmmmm?

"The Art of War" might be cool since martial arts worthy of the name are based on the functional utilization of patterns employed strategically without necessarily implicating outward expressions of influence in terms of the force of gross energy.

Not grasping is not entertaining views of self and other. Not grasping eventually becomes one's functional operative. It's not that it is hard to do, it is just difficult forgetting grasping in terms of one's lifelong entertainment of views of self and other. In terms of meditation states, this is smiling at the thought of meditation states and not lingering. Why? To consider meditation states as different than your own mind is your own mind minding mind as other than just mind~ That's grasping.

Ahahahahahhahaahhahahhahaa!!!

Not doing anything that is calculated to produce happiness produces harmony with the Way, what else would wu wei be?

um… wake up, for starters. As in WAKE UP. Bodhi, svaha. Become yourselves as students first in order to realize yourselves as awakened, period. Then you may hope to progress with the aid of teachers. This is the only way for people to approach study effectively. A perceived lack of teachers is not the problem. Teachers are not to be attracted; they are to be awaited with correctness and ongoing self-refinement. There is nothing whatsoever for teachers to offer you. It is your own mind. What need to be taught?

Thanks you guys…❤ I don't know what could possibly be termed a basis connoting rationalism with respect to buddhist teaching. What buddhism is, really, essentially… is a direct pointing to mind itself, as itself. There is no corollary, as mind itself is one's primal identity. A buddha is one who accomplishes this identity having no creation, beginning, self. Furthermore, since buddhism isn't a faith-based belief system but rather a teaching of the highest order to discover and (re)activate the innate inconceivable function in the individual and to awaken the inconceivable reality inherent in the beginningless present, it is hardly a candidate for logical treatment as atheism. It isn't a matter of belief, much less reification in a creator— those who see reality see the absence of anything created. Logically, it's all there is to see, as creation is empty of the absolute. There are only conditions. Sudden enlightenment is the experience of the absence of nothing. This is proof that emptiness isn't empty because ultimately nothing doesn't exist. Since one can actually experience the absence of nothing, who is this one, after all? Nothing, not even nothing created, oneself equal to the knowledge of no-thing~ who then is done with notions of theism? There is truly no thing. How wonderful. One needn't delve into sweeping rationalizations or even elegant analyses of conventional reality since anything brought up by the rational mind is intrinsically short-sighted, biased, skewed, self-reflective, lacking in objectivity. What is evidence of the absence of creation in the midst of objects is the ability of those who see emptiness in all things to prove it in ordinary affairs: i.e., adapting selflessly to ordinary affairs unbeknownst to anyone, thereby to take over creation, steal potential and enter the tao in reality. Overall this is just expressing nonbeing in the midst of being. This is the day-job of enlightening beings. It's not that ultimately there is no thing (in terms of the absolute)~ it is simply possible to abide in this no thing on the spot and never leave it right now. How else can the sage respond all day without responding? How else could Yunyan have said, "East Mountain walks on water"? Furthermore, why would he have ever uttered those words? Why have the houses of Chan revered these words ever since? Since there is no creator, no beginning, self or singularity attributable to "theism", the concept in and of itself is neither here nor there. How much less relevant is an a-theism in terms of discussing the nature of buddhism? That the authentic teachings of the world are spontaneous expressions of the source of religion has nothing to do with theism, but rather the impersonal intent of the selfless body of unborn awareness, which is an unattributability blazing in your skull since before your parents were born.

Just put it in the Contributed Article section with all the other non-taoist junk.

Activating mind without dwelling on its contents

Thank you, sun❤

Ocean Door Had sensuality's avaricious richness Ever found the door Beyond its own roaming Boneless impersonal craving There'd be Unity and openness The heart's desire~ Silent islands In a sea of jewels

As for reality, just this is it. Those with the mind of reality see it as is. Others may beg to differ, but theirs is the splitting of hairs they create themselves. Nobody knows it except to witness it slipping through their grasping mentality. As for the epiphany of cows, theirs is the realization of phantoms in a phantom world, not the power of buddhas to see through the shenanigans of sophists who have nothing invested in reality to know it when it appears. Of course their realization is as powerful as a pile of steaming…

This is not sophism. I will now direct you to the recreational philosopher's section. Please report to Marblehead. Thank you.

The epiphany is no joke, dear. Please rise to the occasion. maheosphet said: It doesn't seem empty. There is no direction— which would imply relativity. The unknowable is complete in and of itself. Void cannot imply distance because unity has no dimension. These are all speculations people.