Taoism Vs Buddhism

[Apech]

 

But, with your understanding as it is, you will also be re-absorbed at prayala (crunch) time into this infinite consciousness samadhi. I will not. Liberation really is in the details.

 

Oh gee Vaj are we all damned? I'm not sure that our salvation or enlightenment depends that much on our philosophical view. You are right, in my view, to distinguish between the Buddhist view and the Vedanta view - they are different - well if they were the same why would we have two systems and not one? But I am not sure that the consequences of either view are as you suggest. You sound a little, if I may say, like a born again Xstian at this point ... "Only I will be saved!" etc.

[Vajrahridaya]

talk of the mark = missing the mark

 

This is exactly the anti-investigatory attitude of the "oneness" people I avoid.

 

You go ahead with it!

 

The Buddha didn't preach for 40 years for his own sake, he did it for ours, you can know it or not. Your choice.

[Vajrahridaya]

Oh gee Vaj are we all damned? I'm not sure that our salvation or enlightenment depends that much on our philosophical view. You are right, in my view, to distinguish between the Buddhist view and the Vedanta view - they are different - well if they were the same why would we have two systems and not one? But I am not sure that the consequences of either view are as you suggest. You sound a little, if I may say, like a born again Xstian at this point ... "Only I will be saved!" etc.

 

Yeah, basically... the vast majority are damned to be re-absorbed during the cosmic pralaya, even if they do make it to a high heaven, and yes, it has everything to do with the view expressed based upon experiential investigation into the nature of things.

 

 

No, I do not sound like a Christian because I'm not saying you are all damned to hell for eternity to get poked by the devil in the butt by a pitch fork for what sins you've committed in this lifetime, no... What I'm saying is far more complex and not nearly as black and white as that, so please don't associate me with that.

 

You can agree to disagree, but to get your panties in a bunch and start associating me with the most violent religion on the planet is just wrong.

 

I'm not sure that our salvation or enlightenment depends that much on our philosophical view.

 

According to the Buddha, it's "view" that is the first thing to get "right" which means philosophically first, then through experiential self experimentation into direct insight, all based upon the basis of "right view."

 

So yes, philosophy is very important. Otherwise one might think that not thinking is enlightenment.

Edited November 17, 2010 by Vajrahridaya

[C T]

 

As far as misunderstanding goes it often doesn't matter much if we write one sentence or volumes does it? (or even one word for that matter) Om...

 

Okay... got that edited verse, 3Bob.

 

It may not matter to others who can intuit your thoughts, but i cannot, hence the request. I do not possess no gift/siddhi that will allow me to assume what is on your mind. Dig? Cheerio!

[Vajrahridaya]

I'm not sure that our salvation or enlightenment depends that much on our philosophical view. You are right, in my view, to distinguish between the Buddhist view and the Vedanta view - they are different - well if they were the same why would we have two systems and not one?

 

The view originates the insight. This is what the Buddha taught.

 

Now I will say for your own sake that it does seem that many Taoists do hold to the "right view" which will originate the right experiential insights... it seems.

 

It does seem that you do have some "right view" flowing through your synaptic fire works.

[Apech]

Yeah, basically... the vast majority are damned to be re-absorbed during the cosmic pralaya, even if they do make it to a high heaven, and yes, it has everything to do with the view expressed based upon experiential investigation into the nature of things.

 

 

No, I do not sound like a Christian because I'm not saying you are all damned to hell for eternity to get poked by the devil in the butt by a pitch fork for what sins you've committed in this lifetime, no... What I'm saying is far more complex and not nearly as black and white as that, so please don't associate me with that.

 

You can agree to disagree, but to get your panties in a bunch and start associating me with the most violent religion on the planet is just wrong.

 

 

 

According to the Buddha, it's "view" that is the first thing to get "right" which means philosophically first, then through experiential self experimentation into direct insight, all based upon the basis of "right view."

 

So yes, philosophy is very important. Otherwise one might think that not thinking is enlightenment.

 

 

[Apech]

The view originates the insight. This is what the Buddha taught.

 

Now I will say for your own sake that it does seem that many Taoists do hold to the "right view" which will originate the right experiential insights... it seems.

 

It does seem that you do have some "right view" flowing through your synaptic fire works.

 

Gee thanks.

[Vajrahridaya]

(argumentive) talk of the mark = missing the mark

 

The Buddha argued, did he miss the mark?

 

So did Buddhas after him argue and debate, sometimes for months with one person, even years. Debate is important otherwise the right view won't proliferate the masses.

[TheSongsofDistantEarth]

The Buddha argued, did he miss the mark?

 

So did Buddhas after him argue and debate, sometimes for months with one person, even years. Debate is important otherwise the right view won't proliferate the masses.

[RyanO]

Hi Vaj, Two questions:

 

1) First, I agree with Apech. Something that troubles me about your belief system is the possibility of being stuck for eternity in Samsara. It seems to me like this instills needless fear and serves as a conversion point for Buddhism, as in, you need to try for liberation now (adopt this religion) or else you will keep putting it off in future lifetimes as well and be stuck forever. So, according to you, does Samsara last forever, and if so, are there beings that will be forever trapped?

 

2) In your view, why is there creation? What is the purpose of existence? Is it a mistake or random accident or something else?

 

Thanks.

Edited November 18, 2010 by RyanO

[TzuJanLi]

Greetings..

 

You, are the person that is the body/mind reading this post.. You are experiencing your own existence, both as the Individuality and as the Whole through itself as the Individuality.. There is Oneness/Wholeness AND there is Individuality, and You are both at the same time.. There is no 'Truth', it's a conceptual nightmare that births the conflicts of duality/nonduality.. There is "ISness", it is the experience itself.. experience is the relationship YOU have with YOUR 'SELF' manifested as Individualitiy..

 

There is just You... You will experience you as Oneness, whole and complete, this searing realization strips away all belief and reveals ISness.. which IS 'You', yourself, having the realization.. THIS is the movement that never stops, it is the 'process' of Life.. discard Truth, it creates False and births lies and deception.. See what IS, Life is just You experiencing your own self-discovery.. even in the still and silent intervals of direct experiencing, you are present for your own existence, it is not an illusion, it just IS.. it doesn't matter if 'you' are present as oneness or as individuality, it's still 'you'..

 

Trying to categorize what is True/False, is what separates you from the experience of you.. the distance between thinking "True or False" about what just happened, and what is actually happening while you are thinking, distorts the experience of what IS happening by requiring you recall it rather that being present for it.. this is the vicious circle we call 'lost in thought', it is difficult to 'catch-up' to Now..

 

In the stillness, there is no True or False.. there is only Life happening, and You are present as Life itself, whole and complete, and.. Simultaneously, You are necessarily individualized so there is a relationship through which Life is experienced.. and, when all of this begins to seem like it makes sense..

 

'You' are neither Oneness nor Individuality.. 'You' are not 'ISness' nor awareness.. 'You' are not True or False..

 

'You' are prior to and pre-existing all that IS.. and you will exist when all else IS NOT..

 

Be well..

[Vajrahridaya]

Greetings..

 

You, are the person that is the body/mind reading this post.. You are experiencing your own existence, both as the Individuality and as the Whole through itself as the Individuality.. There is Oneness/Wholeness AND there is Individuality, and You are both at the same time.. There is no 'Truth', it's a conceptual nightmare that births the conflicts of duality/nonduality.. There is "ISness", it is the experience itself.. experience is the relationship YOU have with YOUR 'SELF' manifested as Individualitiy..

 

There is just You... You will experience you as Oneness, whole and complete, this searing realization strips away all belief and reveals ISness.. which IS 'You', yourself, having the realization.. THIS is the movement that never stops, it is the 'process' of Life.. discard Truth, it creates False and births lies and deception.. See what IS, Life is just You experiencing your own self-discovery.. even in the still and silent intervals of direct experiencing, you are present for your own existence, it is not an illusion, it just IS.. it doesn't matter if 'you' are present as oneness or as individuality, it's still 'you'..

 

Trying to categorize what is True/False, is what separates you from the experience of you.. the distance between thinking "True or False" about what just happened, and what is actually happening while you are thinking, distorts the experience of what IS happening by requiring you recall it rather that being present for it.. this is the vicious circle we call 'lost in thought', it is difficult to 'catch-up' to Now..

 

In the stillness, there is no True or False.. there is only Life happening, and You are present as Life itself, whole and complete, and.. Simultaneously, You are necessarily individualized so there is a relationship through which Life is experienced.. and, when all of this begins to seem like it makes sense..

 

'You' are neither Oneness nor Individuality.. 'You' are not 'ISness' nor awareness.. 'You' are not True or False..

 

'You' are prior to and pre-existing all that IS.. and you will exist when all else IS NOT..

 

Be well..

 

Nice,

 

This is about the 4th Jhana though and not liberation. There are both conceptual and non-conceptual differences between Buddhahood and Samsarins.

 

"[Fourth jhana]

 

"And furthermore, with the abandoning of pleasure and stress — as with the earlier disappearance of elation and distress — he enters and remains in the fourth jhana: purity of equanimity and mindfulness, neither-pleasure-nor-pain. He sits, permeating the body with a pure, bright awareness, so that there is nothing of his entire body unpervaded by pure, bright awareness.

 

"Just as if a man were sitting wrapped from head to foot with a white cloth so that there would be no part of his body to which the white cloth did not extend; even so, the monk sits, permeating his body with a pure, bright awareness. There is nothing of his entire body unpervaded by pure, bright awareness."

 

The transition to the Fourth Jhana from the third takes a bit more effort and bit more letting go than any of the previous transitions. The contentment of the Third Jhana is still a positive state of mind. This contentment is refined into a very equanimous, quiet, stillness. There is no positive or negative feeling in either mind or body. There is just an all pervading, deep peacefulness, with of course, one-pointedness.

 

The first four Jhanas are called the Fine Material Jhanas. Intense pleasure, joy, contentment and stillness are all states we are familiar with in our normal, everyday lives. But the quality and intensity of these factors as experienced in the Jhanas is more sublime than we normally experience, thus they are called the Fine Material Jhanas. The next four Jhanas are called the Immaterial Jhanas because they are not like anything we normally experience. Each of these Jhanas has two factors -- the first factor serves as the name of the Jhana, the second factor is one-pointedness."

 

So... keep going!

Edited November 18, 2010 by Vajrahridaya

[Vajrahridaya]

Hi Vaj, Two questions:

 

1) First, I agree with Apech. Something that troubles me about your belief system is the possibility of being stuck for eternity in Samsara. It seems to me like this instills needless fear and serves as a conversion point for Buddhism, as in, you need to try for liberation now (adopt this religion) or else you will keep putting it off in future lifetimes as well and be stuck forever. So, according to you, does Samsara last forever, and if so, are there beings that will be forever trapped?

 

Yes, according to the Buddha and Buddhas, it never began and will never end. There are endless beings, and endless ways endless beings can go. So, I suppose that as well is a possibility.

 

Fear can serve as a tool for conversion into a better way of life. It's not my intention to instill fear, but sometimes when you become acutely aware of a certain fact, directly, fear is the first reaction, then you start changing and expanding in order to not fear the result of an action. For instance, it's good that a convicted killer starts to experience fear for the results of his or her actions, thus they find a deep necessity to change their ways. This kind of fear is a heightened awareness and should not be feared. Don't fear the fear of expanded awareness and a deepened understanding of karma.

 

2) In your view, why is there creation? What is the purpose of existence? Is it a mistake or random accident or something else?

 

Thanks.

 

It's just manifest karmas of endless beings. If it is to be a tool for your individual liberation, than you must cultivate that awareness, otherwise, it's just a karmic playground, nothing more, nothing less.

Edited November 18, 2010 by Vajrahridaya

[Vajrahridaya]

Gee thanks.

 

No problem!

 

Hey... my wife loves the looks of your cat, she wants to steel it. Where do you live again?

[Vajrahridaya]

Basically RyanO,

 

It's purpose is what you make it. The cosmos has no inherent purpose to it other than what the beings that make it up choose of it themselves, and that is what we are dealing with, infinite possibility.

[RyanO]

Basically RyanO,

 

It's purpose is what you make it. The cosmos has no inherent purpose to it other than what the beings that make it up choose of it themselves, and that is what we are dealing with, infinite possibility.

 

We're dealing with some heavy stuff here, though I like you don't mind engaging in heavy metaphysical debates.

 

I also would like to say that while I don't agree with you I admire your passion and knowledge.

 

My difficulty is how absolutely sure you are about what it is you believe. I'm guessing this is both from personal insight as well as things you have been taught.

 

And while this response of yours sounds nice, underneath it is your belief that any purpose we make will lead to suffering and we will have been better off without having made that purpose and instead have focused our efforts on attaining liberation.

 

Despite your arguments to the contrary, it still seems nihilistic to me.

[Vajrahridaya]

Despite your arguments to the contrary, it still seems nihilistic to me.

 

Buddhism always will seem nihilistic to Eternalists who think that there is an eternal soul and will behind everything that is one with while transcending everything.

 

Nihilism is defined as the philosophy that thinks there is no meaning, also a philosophy that thinks that you don't carry the effects of your actions after death and that death really is the end of your mind stream. So... though Buddhism may seem nihilistic if you think there is a godhead who governs, or if you think there is one supreme will behind everything, a cosmic consciousness. It actually is not at all nihilistic, it's just not Eternalistic, it's the middle way.

 

But yes, there are different types of Masters and not all types are masters of the whole of Samsara like a Buddha is. Even in Buddhism, there are different types of Buddhas, all essentially Buddhas but within different capacities.

 

The universe is just so rich and multifarious in it's paths and beings.

 

I do appreciate your appreciation even if you don't agree with me. I'm fine with that... just don't hate!

 

p.s. See the idea that all paths lead to the same destination comes from those that think all beings come from the same source. But, in Buddhism, there is no source in that "oneness" sense so we also don't believe that all paths lead to the same destination. Of course your individual mind is the source of your own bondage or freedom, but that's not saying that it's the source of absolutely everything in the universe.

Edited November 18, 2010 by Vajrahridaya

[RyanO]

Buddhism always will seem nihilistic to Eternalists who think that there is an eternal soul and will behind everything that is one with while transcending everything.

 

Nihilism is defined as the philosophy that thinks there is no meaning, also a philosophy that thinks that you don't carry the effects of your actions after death and that death really is the end of your mind stream. So... though Buddhism may seem nihilistic if you think there is a godhead who governs, or if you think there is one supreme will behind everything, a cosmic consciousness. It actually is not at all nihilistic, it's just not Eternalistic, it's the middle way.

 

But yes, there are different types of Masters and not all types are masters of the whole of Samsara like a Buddha is. Even in Buddhism, there are different types of Buddhas, all essentially Buddhas but within different capacities.

 

The universe is just so rich and multifarious in it's paths and beings.

 

I do appreciate your appreciation even if you don't agree with me. I'm fine with that... just don't hate!

 

No hatin' here bro

 

I like your answer, especially the rich multifarious part, sounds fun!

 

Though maybe I need a lesson in Buddhist cosmology. Taoism's beginning begins in Wuji, what about Buddhism? The previous universe? What about that universe?

 

If it's beginingless cycles of dependent origination, how did that get started? It seems dizzyingly impossible. How did karma come about?

 

The only thing that makes sense to me is a Primal Fire in the Wuji that's purpose is to create and explore the possibilities of reality. To me, the reality of this Fire is compatible with the Buddhist insights of DO and impermanence.

 

My way of understanding the First Cause dilemma, anyway.

 

OK, gotta get off computer

[Vajrahridaya]

 

 

Though maybe I need a lesson in Buddhist cosmology. Taoism's beginning begins in Wuji, what about Buddhism? The previous universe? What about that universe?

 

Beginningless means beginningless. As in... endless universes. In some of the first Buddhist texts, they talk about the Buddha knowing his past lives in 100's of thousands of previous universes, not just the ones of this universe. I myself have experienced directly some very amazing memories, and some only became more lucid when I finally accepted the Buddhas teaching on Dependent Origination instead of giving into Independent Origination which most religions do.

 

It's natural to want to find a beginning, a supreme identity. But, that's Samsara.

 

If it's beginingless cycles of dependent origination, how did that get started? It seems dizzyingly impossible. How did karma come about?

 

No start, no end. No uncaused cause, no super identity to everything and everyone, and no final destination either, just awareness or non-awareness, it's either rigpa or ma-rigpa, insight or ignorance.

 

The only thing that makes sense to me is a Primal Fire in the Wuji that's purpose is to create and explore the possibilities of reality. To me, the reality of this Fire is compatible with the Buddhist insights of DO and impermanence.

 

My way of understanding the First Cause dilemma, anyway.

 

OK, gotta get off computer

 

I don't really know what to say about that. It's interesting, and there are similar things in Shaivite philosophy about the fires or "rudras". They are always personified in Shaivism though.

 

Anyway... talk with you later!

Edited November 18, 2010 by Vajrahridaya

[Marblehead]

Bob, the insight of the Buddha far and away transcends any sort of mere grasping at intellectual differences.

 

 

As does the insight attained while in the state of 'wu'. Same thing, different words.

[Apech]

No problem!

 

Hey... my wife loves the looks of your cat, she wants to steel it. Where do you live again?

 

Hands off my pussy!

[TheSongsofDistantEarth]

Hands off my pussy!

 

 

+1

[SeriesOfTubes]

So why is DO/E important (and/or how is it relevant) to someone practicing chi gong, standing meditation or MCO, who does not so much concern themselves about an ontological essence underlying reality or crunching into smithereens at the end of the pralaya, or worry about a first cause of everything, but is content to feel the mystery of reality/ the universe and develop competency in moving the energy around for wellness and healing themselves and others?

Edited November 18, 2010 by SeriesOfTubes

[Vajrahridaya]

So why is DO/E important (and/or how is it relevant) to someone practicing chi gong, standing meditation or MCO, who does not so much concern themselves about an ontological essence underlying reality or crunching into smithereens at the end of the pralaya, or worry about a first cause of everything, but is content to feel the mystery of reality/ the universe and develop competency in moving the energy around for wellness and healing themselves and others?

 

It frees you more clearly from ego and self in you and others. It also helps one to understand more deeply the chain of inter-weaving causation and allow you to be a more clear channel of healing and selfless service.

 

[Stigweard]

We can see here why Buddhism has won inter-religious debates before.

 

Taoists say what needs to be said and then they go find a local bar for a drink, while Buddhists just keep talking, and talking, and talking, and think they have won because they are the only ones left on the floor.