The answer lies in the India/Nepal/Tibet Himalaya Regions afterall.. and definitely NOT in china/taiwan..

[steve]

I think the whole point is one of a visual/feeling experience while the analytical part liberates. Language creates separation.

If you're referring to the "inner work" I practice, it's not analytical in any way - it's totally about "feeling" ...sort of...

[steve]

Have you tried meditating on the five elements (water, fire, earth, wind, space?)

 

I know that Tibetan Buddhism has practices like these, though the Theravada tradition has a sutta that uses the elements in order to enter samadhi. Such as meditating on a body of water, etc. It also talks of the siddhis gained when someone transforms the elements in their own body, through these practices.

 

I can't remember the name right now, but I'll find it and post it later.

 

Also, a monk from Theravada Buddhism has a commentary on this sutta, on amazon.com. Can't remember his name though, lol. I'll look it up and post it.

 

I just thought since you're going to be surrounded by nature, you would be interested in trying out these techniques.

 

Also the link I posted before from meditationexpert.com, has instructions on techniques (one in which involves sky gazing) in order to enter the samadhi of infinite space.

No - I've never really meditated on the elements, other than what I described above.

Although, I've practiced Xingyiquan for several years and have worked extensively on the five element fists - standing meditations as well as moving practices. So I guess that qualifies to some degree.

I pretty much have one system I work with but on occasion dabble with other things just for a change of pace.

If you want to elaborate, I'm always interested in new ideas.

Thanks

[Simple_Jack]

.

Edited February 5, 2014 by Simple_Jack

[Aaron]

Perhaps, but appreciation is kind of irrelevant. Even if it weren't, ones appreciation of Buddhism doesn't have to come because other religions are present, that is, comparing it to other religions. It can come because of Buddhism itself.

 

I understand what you're saying. Essentially that Buddhism would still be the same. My point is that Buddhism is more than just a word, it's the assimilation of various ideas and experiences that have amassed throughout the centuries. These ideas are critical to our understanding of Buddhism today. The reason for this is because we have something to relate these ideas to and in relating to them, equate a value in regards to those ideas.

 

Yes Buddhism is Buddhism, that's the truth, but in the same way Buddhism is more than that, it's related to many other things and removing those relationships would change what Buddhism is (which means saying that it's the truth is a lie). Our appreciation of Buddhism does not stem solely from the tenets and ideology, but also our experiences in relation to those tenets and ideologies.

 

Remove suffering from the equation for instance, or remove Buddha, and what do you have? That is my point, that Buddhism is what it is because of how it is linked to everything else. It's the fact that we can relate to it that makes this construct recognizable and something that we can identify with.

 

Now as a Buddhist one must wonder, is Buddhism real at all? Well of course it's real, but it's not real either.

 

Aaron

Edited June 5, 2011 by Twinner

[goldisheavy]

Not necessarily. This is only an assumption. You mentioned that your teacher broke your chains. That was made possible not because your teacher was compassionate, but that you were ready to have your chains broken. If you were not ready, your teacher couldn't even have helped you untie your laces, let alone break your chains. Harm comes to those who are ready to be harmed. Freedom comes to those who are ready to be free. In summation, i would say that your guru didn't free you - you were solely responsible for your own emancipation. Yet there was a catalyst - Your teacher was it.

 

It seems you're trying to shift all the responsibility onto the student. Now the argument looks like this:

 

"Gurus exist because unready students demand them."

 

Of course I don't buy this at all.

 

Why not? Because in any interaction the responsibility is shared. The more powerful and more conscious person has a greater share of the responsibility, even if not dramatically greater, it's still at least slightly greater.

 

So for example, if I am strong and I go around beating people, I can say if those people just exercised and studied philosophy (as Musashi said, the way of the warrior is the way of the sword and pen, both), there is no way I could beat them. So the responsibility and the fault fall entirely on the victims themselves. I believe this would be an unbalanced view.

 

In all cases I always share responsibility around. I'm willing to skew the responsibility toward the more proximate agents, the more powerful ones, the more empowered ones, the more aware ones, etc.

 

We need to see that catalysts are not good or bad at the fundamental level, at the level of virtue... just like yeast is neither good or bad. Its relative. Virtue does not always have to mean moral excellence... it can mean simply understanding things and seeing functions for what they are. In this there is no need to cling or reject. Then the application of functions gets a chance to fulfill its highest potentiality. Yeast can be used here a good example - in baking, very essential... yet too much of it, or too little, and the results would be less than optimal. There are always more than one factor involved, for example, the quality of the yeast, and the deftness of the baker. Its a symbiotic relationship, so to say that devotion to a guru is not as equally compassionate or wise and can lead to harm is to fail to understand the basis of how things can work and should work. Ants instinctively know how to use the symbiotic process to great effect within their highly hierarchical set-up. Its us intelligent humans who often blame the socio/political/religious set-up for failing to effectively understand and blend this process to our advantage.

 

Well, I didn't expect you to come to my defense so quickly and so eloquently.

 

I disagree completely. A foundation of any good relationship is one of trust, such as between friends.

 

And i would disagree with your disagreement. Trust is very shallow. One day, trust can be present, next day, suspicions arise.

 

You just don't know how to trust, or where trust really resides. Trust is not put onto your idea of the person, nor is it put on a person. Trust is put on that which is in common between you and the person. Doing so results in a strong and stable trust.

 

But good trust isn't blind, that's true. That's a virtue of trust and not a drawback.

 

If you want to know what's more fundamental in a relationship then consider this:

 

• 
   
  
• A relationship with trust but no devotion.
  
• A relationship with devotion but no trust.
   
  

 

Contrast and compare.

Edited June 5, 2011 by goldisheavy

[steve]

Thanks for stating this. On many occasions, I have posted academic quotes as to why Buddhism is a religion. The Buddhists here have condemned me for that.

I doubt that any Buddhists from Cambodian, Tibet, India, Myanmar, Thailand, China, or Japan would be offended to hear that what they practice is religion. Although I am basing this on very few individuals I know personally and what I've seen in books and other media so I could be mistaken. I think it's reasonably apparent that Buddhism serves the purpose in the lives of Buddhists that Christianity serves for Christians, Islam for Muslims, and Judaism for Jews, Daoism for Daoists, etc... To say otherwise is a bit disingenuous. Buddhism informs the moral and ethical lives of Buddhists, provides cultural identity, rituals, traditions, and history, and addresses spiritual issues related to the nature of human existence. What more does it need to do to fit the bill? Perhaps some folks don't like the negative connotations associated with the R word. Also, as I alluded to above, many folks who practice Buddhism in the West really don't relate to many of the cultural aspects and I think that's an important part of religion.

 

Ultimately, Buddhism is what it is in all of its myriad manifestations. Whether we say it can be associated with the letters "r-e-l-i-g-i-o-n" or not isn't terribly important. Sometimes we get a little hung up on labels and definitions, I think. Myself included.

[Simple_Jack]

.

Edited February 5, 2014 by Simple_Jack

[Simple_Jack]

.

Edited February 5, 2014 by Simple_Jack

[JustARandomPanda]

...

Edited June 5, 2011 by SereneBlue

[goldisheavy]

And i would disagree with your disagreement. Trust is very shallow. One day, trust can be present, next day, suspicions arise. Even siblings and couples experience mistrust on an ever-increasing basis, which is why matrimonial and family law is a thriving business. Devotion only blossom as and when relationships have been thru the fire and emerge with all the wounds and scars, and still 2 people can forge an even stronger bond as a result of this. Trust is like agreeing to jump into a fire together, and devotion arises when stepping out of it.

 

I wanted to mention one other very important thing that just occurred to me while I was reflecting on your post. (surprised? that's right, I continue to reflect on many posts here after I am done replying)

 

Based on the quoted description it appears that you make devotion something that's good for its own sake. In other words devotion is good because it results in a more devoted relationship. Being together through thick and thin is good because it's good.

 

For me, trust is something that's in the service of a higher value. Trust is in the service of truth. So trust is not good because it's good to trust. Trust is good because it's an environment in which searching for truth is most optimal, in my view.

 

Sticking with a person as long as possible is not something I consider valuable for its own sake. It sounds a lot like an unhealthy attachment, in fact. I prefer to judge relationships based on quality and not based on a quantity of time. Of course if you can sustain a quality relationship longer, that's great. But length of time is never the primary consideration. Only quality is.

 

When I talk about quality, I don't talk about cheap things, like having the person flatter you all day long and other superficial sugar, so let's not try to debate against quality by equating it with something superficial. Instead think of quality as something that's connected to your highest and truest aspirations.

Edited June 5, 2011 by goldisheavy

[Simple_Jack]

.

Edited February 5, 2014 by Simple_Jack

[goldisheavy]

I kind of see myself in a middle ground between GiH's no-guru position and Vajra's gurus-can-be-vital-for-some-people position.

 

"Blessed are the peacemakers."

[Seth Ananda]

Very nice post Seth. I have a few questions/remarks.

 

"4. The 'supreme' state or 'God' state, has an [seemingly] Infinite organising 'Intelligence' but is still part and parcel of all other states."

 

What is the organizing intelligence? It sounds very close to me to the concept of Atman. I believe what you're referring to is specifically what Buddha was decrying. Not because he intended to state emphatically that it was not reality, but that it was a concept that one could cling to. I'm not disagreeing with you in any way (your words are pretty close to my personal experience), just teasing out detail.

 

Thanks and Hi

I can only describe this from my own point of view and experience. All the States are still there. Realising E&DO does not suddenly remove the various states mapped so well by the worlds mystical traditions, any more than your hand or the world cease to exist. Most of the worlds mystical traditions agree on the qualities of Divine, as experienced by Mystics. Now, from a mystical point of view, Brahman, or the Underlying reality is an eternal fact.

That 'God' state is always present as it is part of the actual structure of the universe.

The great mystics focus all their Love and attention on this 'energy' 'oneness' unifiying force' and 'Light' that some traditions call God. These mystics, Have displayed incredible powers and Knowledge. Described Omniscience [or a state in which all knowledge was available to them]

Going through this process is an Incredible path of transformation for any Human to undertake, and I despise seeing Buddhists Undervalue the great souls who have walked this Magnificent path.

There are too many 'experiences' within the theistic paths that do not neatly fit into the Buddhist Idea/map of the world. The Jhanas are a good map of the Internal yogic path stages, But In no way encapsulate or explain all the states of the Mystic.

 

The experience of the deepest Communion with the universe, where 'God' as an Intelligent and interactive Consciousness, makes love to every aspect of your being, gives you the deepest Insights, answers all the questions you ask, or even shows you how it creates the flow of events in the world and then expands your mind out into all knowingness, can not be easily encapsulated as just a Jhana state.

 

That said, These experiences are subjective as well. How we Interpret the experiences we have can lead to many difficult dilemmas.

 

I believe it may be possible that our beliefs and frameworks about the nature of consciousness may colour the way we experience it.

 

For Instance, some Taoists practice guarding the One, and following the Heavenly Mandate. They have no conception of God as an Intelligence, but rather Tao, as the way. And the Heavenly chi is the underlying Harmonising Light that holds together creation. their mystics do not report having Conversations with the Tao [as far as I know] but they do report that being in communion with the heavenly chi, gives them the sense of rightness and knowledge of how to act.

 

Both these two traditions despite slight differences in how they Interact with what they experience as being an 'Underlying Reality' are describing [imho] the same thing.

 

The wonders and miracles that spring from that Underlying reality are the same for Theists, Taoists, Shaman... the world over.

 

People can respond that they just do not believe in theistic traditions, and that is fine, but it does not get rid of the experiences had, nor strip Hindu or Sufi masters of their powers.

 

E&DO Is a most Fantastic realisation. In my experience By being able to see that what other traditions call the Absolute, [and I am contending that it is absolute] is also Empty and Dependently Originating, It frees one from 'State' bias and funnily enough makes it easier to experience any and every state.

 

Buddhism gives the Ultimate Realisation. Freedom from every state.

 

The Others give the attainment and communion with the Ultimate State.

 

But the path's there usually engender clinging and subtle grasping. The Mystic spends every minute learning to tie his whole being to the 'heavenly' realm, or to 'God' which yields great results. He Lives in a Blaze of communion and the heavenly powers and Insights flow through him. This Intense single focus which eventually consumes even itself, leave the subtle traces of Self that are left, very State Biased, or State Dependent.

 

So Buddhism is AMAZING as a Tool for Freedom, In its pure philosophy.

 

After having my minor realisation of E&DO I tried to be a Buddhist. But as a path that gives results I only really find its philosophy of value {for myself}.

I am at heart a Mystic. These are the practices I have spent the last 20 years pursuing, and maybe Its just carved too deeply Into my brain now, But I can not deny the feeling of Spirit/Heavenly chi nor the Interactive [two way] experiences I have day to day.

I corresponded with Traleg Rinpoche for a bit and he advised me to just continue in the Theistic path.

 

The Trouble is that I am No longer even really a Theist. I Experience the Underlying reality, But all experience seems 'Real' but subjective, and I no longer 'trust' any Interpretation of any experience.

Most people seem to experience things, then Rush to Interpret it in some way, which is really just the mind wanting answers and being Philosophically dishonest.

 

There are No easy answers.

No Tradition adequately can contain and describe 'all' other traditions experiences.

Like the Hydra, every answer makes 10 more questions.

 

 

"8. We are on the edge of a 'Golden Age' of Philosophy. For the first time ever, all systems of thought are available to us, as well as neurobiology, sociology, science, psychology... What emerges will surpass all previous revelations and understandings of the universe. And It will surpass all previous mystical methodology's, including the out dated Guru Model. "

 

Your ideas overall resonate with me a great deal. I do challenge this statement, however. I think that this feeling occurs in many ages. My real concern is this. Where is evidence of psychological maturity in the world? Of spiritual growth? Humanity has faced the exact same problems since time immemorial - hunger, violence, racism, greed, war. Show me any evidence that this is changing. All I see is more polarization, more tribalism, more conflict. I do believe that this maturity can occur and I believe that it can only occur at the individual level. Governments, religions, and their leaders can do nothing. They've done nothing in 40,000 years or so. It can only happen for each of us as individuals when we are ready. So then, how to take this into the large scale and make meaningful change such as you allude to?

 

I am not talking about the General public. I am talking about The Cutting edge thinkers from multidisciplinary fields, and people like us here at the bums, who have access to great resources and great minds...

We are on the Edge, not in the middle of. It will take generations to come into effect in the mainstream.

 

 

9. To bring about this 'Golden Age' will require the greatest Philosophical Courage and honesty, and Epic debates between people from multiple fields of research. So much Philosophical and religious dross will have to be sheared away. I personally believe Open Dialogue will be the golden heart of the new movement.

 

I share your optimism in the value of dialogue. One of the masters of this was Jiddu Krishnamurti. His dialogues with many masters, including David Bohm, are fascinating. The Dalai Lama has continued this by his openness to interacting with the scientific world, physicists in particular. But where has it gotten us? Unfortunately, I don't see much movement at the macro level. Nevertheless, I do see and feel a great deal of movement at the individual level (me) and that is all I can ask.

 

Blessings on your Journey

Edited June 5, 2011 by Seth Ananda

[Aaron]

Twinner:

 

I seriously want to thank you for typing this comment: "Because my cup is empty and I am willing to be filled." This is such a great comment. I'm going to tweek it and will definitely add it to my repertoire of dirty/sexy lines to say to women.

 

I'm going to use this tonight with my lady friend. I'm going to be like "You're an empty cup that I'm willing to fill, girl;" all smooth like and shit.

 

That line you typed is priceless. I really want to thank you for typing it.

 

Jack,

 

Laugh if you want, but it's true. I try to be open to other ideas, but in the same way I don't care to be told I'm wrong, you don't seem to care for that either. I don't care to have my experiences trivialized, you don't either. Since we began talking about a month ago I have a read more on Buddhism, Mahayana and Theravada than I have in the entire time I've studied Eastern Religions. I may be obstinate, but I try very hard to humble myself, to remind myself that I don't know everything. As Vaj commented earlier, I was saying the exact same thing you've been saying, except I wasn't saying it the same way. The more I learn about Buddhism, the more I understand that my beliefs aren't so far off from what Buddha taught.

 

I understand that my experiences have only touched the surface, that I have further to go, but my point is that when we share our experiences as ultimates, as the final truths, sometimes we cut people off from understanding. I think we could all use a dose of humility. I am finding humility on a daily basis. I had to sell my car in order to pay rent. I took out a loan that I can't pay back, just to try and make ends meet. I have no job and I am having to earn money each day just to eat. This state has made me appreciate those things I took for granted, but it's also reminded me of suffering in very real way. I would love to have an end to suffering, but I have yet to see any real proof that what Buddhism has to offer in the end will really free me from it, rather I think it will only allow me to understand it in a greater way. Regardless I am practicing Zen and trying to remember that it is only this moment that's important, that if I lose everything, my cats, my family, and my home, that it's not the end, that those things do not define who I am as a person.

 

My cup is not empty, but it's not full. I want to be open to new things. I think the worst thing a man can do is shut himself off to possibilities, because when he does that, he no longer has hope. I am finding an immense degree of peace knowing that it is more than just survival, that I am not the center of the universe, that I am not God, omniscient, that there is more to everything than I can ever dream of.

 

I don't hate Buddhism, or Buddha, but I do hate ignorance, or at least the inability to accept that things aren't perfect. Even if Buddha's teachings were perfect, that doesn't mean that those who practice them today are. That doesn't mean that there isn't more than just Buddha's teachings, that someone else doesn't have something else to teach us.

 

I love Vedanta, but I realize that it isn't the entirety of truth, that there is more. Buddha obviously did too. I loved Christianity, but I understand that it isn't the entirety of truth. My point is that I want to be open so I don't miss out on something that might come along and help me to understand who I am more clearly. I never want to get to the point where I say, "this is enough, I don't need anymore."

 

I should have been more open to your Buddhist ideas, but I am forty one years old and I'm just not willing to spend the next twenty years practicing Buddhism alone under the pretense that it may be right. I just don't have the time for that. I have an immense respect for the religion and I honestly think that if all people practiced the eightfold path, that the world would be a much better place.

 

These days I break that path down into one simple phrase, "treat all things as compassionately as possible." Will I always do this? No. I'm human and fallible, but if I commit to doing this, go into it with the idea that I will not try, but I will do, then I'm confident that I can make the world better for those around me, and that's what's really important, not easing my suffering but easing the suffering of others.

 

So I apologize to you and to Cowtao for not being patient and not explaining my misgivings as I should have. I would not discourage you from practicing Buddhism, it's a beautiful religion. I would only say don't close your heart to other things. Be open to possibilities so that if one does come along you don't miss it.

 

Aaron

Edited June 5, 2011 by Twinner

[steve]

Yeah the stuff has do with visualization also. I'll send you excerpts through PM, because I don't feel like typing it up right now. In William Bodri's book 25 Doors To Meditation,it talks of how you don't always need to be near a particular spot after you gain experience in this, since this is also based off of visualization.

 

The actual set of texts on the kasinas is from Hinayana Buddhism. Here's the book by Bhadantacariya Buddhaghosa: http://www.amazon.com/Path-Purification-Visuddhimagga-Bhadantacariya-Buddhaghosa/dp/1928706002

 

Keep in mind that in my last post that this stuff takes time. The transformation of the body/elements, takes years. Though I'm sure you already knew this.

Thanks Jack

[ralis]

 

E&DO Is a most Fantastic realisation. In my experience By being able to see that what other traditions call the Absolute, [and I am contending that it is absolute] is also Empty and Dependently Originating, It frees one from 'State' bias and funnily enough makes it easier to experience any and every state.

 

Proclaiming the totality of existence that can't be named or defined by assigning any philosophical or religious values is missing the direct experience of the infinite possibilities of existence. If one analyzed E&DO 24/7 with every activity, that would create mental problems.

 

 

Buddhism gives the Ultimate Realisation. Freedom from every state.

So Buddhism is AMAZING as a Tool for Freedom, In its pure philosophy.

 

 

No ism in and of itself that claims to quantify or understand existence using verbal arguments, will provide concrete answers. Verbal arguments are used to define existence in absolute terms i.e, isness, which is a human struggle to explain the unexplainable.

 

Daniel Matt's translation of the Zohar provides an excellent argument in regards to "Ein Sof" the undefinable and unnameable.

 

I am a little tired now and if the above is not well written, feel free to critique.

Edited June 5, 2011 by ralis

[Aaron]

Hello Seth,

 

When I experienced what you refer to as a deep union with the Godhead, I didn't actually recognize it as intelligent at all, but rather just a state of being. In other words my realization was that we were all one and I experienced this oneness with a flash of insight. For me it was the knowledge that I was not just connected to everything in existence, but that I was literally everything in existence. I am "It", as I am prone to say.

 

I think I would've liked the Godhead to be an intelligent being, to have a conscious impact on this world, but the best I can describe it as, is a consciousness without intention. In other words it isn't an intelligence in the context of what we consider intelligence to be, so far as it does not work along the presumptions of logic and reason, but rather it is the embodiment of being throughout everything that exists.

 

Again, if you could elaborate on this one aspect, I'd be greatly interested in hearing how you came to this understanding.

 

Aaron

 

edit- I should also add that the actual insight involved a metaphysical experience whereby everything seemed to fade away leaving only this "oneness" behind. When I reach(ed) this state there seems to be only light, but nothing material. (I didn't consider it to be the Godhead for a long time, but when I later came upon the definition of the Godhead, I realized that it may be what I experience.) It is immensely peaceful and serene, but I do not consider it to be blissful, but rather just a state of being whereby you have no desire for anything else, complete satisfaction may be a better way of explaining it.

Edited June 5, 2011 by Twinner

[steve]

 

 

Both these two traditions despite slight differences in how they Interact with what they experience as being an 'Underlying Reality' are describing [imho] the same thing.

 

The wonders and miracles that spring from that Underlying reality are the same for Theists, Taoists, Shaman... the world over.

Wonderful - I do appreciate the passion and honesty of your reply. It takes a fair amount of courage to open up like that.

I think the points I quote above are so critical to understand.

When we discuss and debate we are simply manipulating labels and conditioned perspectives, not reality.

In the end, we must abandon the method and the conditioning to encounter whatever it is that is beyond our concepts.

Like the saying goes, once I've crossed the river, I no longer need to carry the canoe on my shoulders to explore what's on the other side.

 

I am not talking about the General public. I am talking about The Cutting edge thinkers from multidisciplinary fields, and people like us here at the bums, who have access to great resources and great minds...

We are on the Edge, not in the middle of. It will take generations to come into effect in the mainstream.

Agreed - it would be a beautiful thing to live to see real awakening on a large scale.

But it's OK, it's a blessing to have an opportunity to try and live an awake life to whatever degree we can

 

 

Blessings on your Journey

Namaste

[steve]

 

 

 

No ism in and of itself that claims to quantify or understand existence using verbal arguments, will provide concrete answers. Verbal arguments are used to define existence in absolute terms i.e, isness, which is a human struggle to explain the unexplainable.

 

Daniel Matt's translation of the Zohar provides an excellent argument in regards to "Ein Sof" the undefinable and unnameable.

 

I agree with you completely, and I also think that it is within our grasp to experience the unexplainable, just not to capture it in words or concepts. After all, we are it.

 

I'll have to check out Matt's Zohar - thanks

[Vajrahridaya]

I lived down the road less than 1 mile away.

 

That's on Airport Road? I lived right over the fence from there in a warehouse there where all those rows of warehouses are and the martial arts trainer who teaches Jeet Kune Do. I lived there in 94'.

[rex]

It seems to me that Buddhists have no problem bullying, threatening, and insulting people on this forum. What I want to know is why they think this is allowable? They preach detachment, but they are attached to everything they say. They want tolerance, but they don't believe they need to be tolerant of others.

I get you about people riding roughshod over others Aaron. I move that harassment be added to the moderation guidelines (btw thank you for being gracious and not making an issue of my use of the report button, the mod squad cleared your post).

 

Looking at this thread's context and recalling the many excruciating similar ones that have gone before, it does get to the point when there is no longer a level playing field and posters and traditions of good will suffer from the excesses of others. Sadly and rather perilously it looks as if the excesses of a tiny minority are being extrapolated to apply to the many.

[steve]

I certainly count Buddhism as a religion. Speaking only for myself and my admittedly zero-attainment mind/body I also see it as a set of exercises or assorted recipes of how to eventually realize something. I guess maybe that something is Buddha Nature but personally I like saying "seeing the Tao" a lot too. I tend to use them both.

 

I kind of see myself in a middle ground between GiH's no-guru position and Vajra's gurus-can-be-vital-for-some-people position. It has to do with the stage I'm at. It also has to do with simple geographic and logistical considerations as well. At the moment I have zero insight to anything. Which is causing a lot of confusion and sometimes occasionally mental anguish because right now I flip from one minute where I doubt something, then believe the reasonableness of something based on examination to then finally being so exhausted I just drop it. But the just dropping it only lasts for a short while. Then once again around and around the merry-go-round goes. I repeat the whole cycle all over again.

 

Every which way I turn I doubt *and* believe. Then drop. The hamster wheel never ends. Debating all the arguments I read on these boards with myself (and that's exactly what I do in addition to cultivation - I don't even have to force it - the hamster wheel of debate starts up without me having to try) is having this mental/behavioral effect. That's why I've grown increasingly suspicious of GiH's and Vajra's advocacy of the superiority of debate as a tool on these boards. Yes for some people - maybe even most - I think such things are helpful. But in me personally all I see what it does is set the hamster wheel spinning all over again. Doubt - Believe - Exhaustion - Drop. Read some more debates. Doubt - Believe - Exhaustion - Drop. Doubt - Believe - Exhaustion - Drop. On and on it goes.

 

I'm searching but I don't know for what or even why.

 

And it's on occasion frustrating to hear people coming from so many different viewpoints. And each time I read what they say I can see how what they are saying makes sense to me. How is it that I can see the reasonableness of GiH's position on dogma and gurus *and* Vajra's too? And Ralis's too? And then there are the guys who post and say to debate it at all is all is a form of attachment. Then there are the *other* guys who say dropping it is attaching to dropping it!

 

I'm damned if I do and damned if I don't.

 

There is no way I turn that there isn't SOMEBODY out there preaching (quite intelligently, cogently and soundly) on these boards for why any one of those positions is not quite seeing things or acknowledging the validity of another position too.

 

I see every post professing a lot of beliefs and assessments that get thrown around. And I can think of all kinds of reasons why that could both be good for me, harmful for me or just be a complete wash. What I don't see participants doing in this thread is a lot of dropping. Wait. I take that back. It does when people no longer post to it. Anyone else notice Body of Light has been conspicuously absent from the thread he started?

 

I don't have any inner personal insight by which to assess what I read on these forums. I don't have any outside guidance from an actual enlightened person to help me out on occasion either. I'm in this weird no-man's-land.

 

I posted this so at least somebody out there who might be going through what I'm going through sees that someone else experiences it too. Debate helps. But debate can also make you exhausted. Sometimes it adds to the confusion, not clear it up no matter how fantastic the original debate argument put forward is.

 

OTH it's an internet forum so what the hell do I know. I guess debating goes with the territory.

SereneBlue -

Sorry to hear of your struggle and frustration.

I share it.

I'm not sure there are any questions in spiritual matters that have meaningful answers.

The question is what is really important. That is what drives our curiosity and ignites our passion.

It takes us places we wouldn't otherwise go. And along the way we learn wonderful things.

We face our fears and failures and frustrations. And there is nothing more important to question than ourselves.

 

Answers don't really help in this arena, they're dead. They stop the process.

If you think you know the answer, why bother to continue to search?

Why continue to study and debate?

And if you really think you have the answer - you're wrong!

Reality is beyond words and ideas and concepts (even E&DO ).

It can be experience but never explained.

 

But there are so many things to see and learn along the way.

So much opportunity for growth.

I think that if we are diligent and sincere and really look deeply into ourselves, we are eventually rewarded.

It's worth the candle.

 

 

And PS, Bodyoflight was suspended for violating the no-insult policy

[Vajrahridaya]

Vajra, stop.

 

Pay attention.

 

You are acting as if ChNNR is under attack. I don't recall reading a single post anywhere on this thread criticizing Chogyal Namkai Norbu. Not one.

 

 

 

If that's all you got from my post, you didn't read very well. Or maybe I didn't write very well.

 

Alas... What I'm saying is that there are positive hierarchies that naturally form around enlightened beings. I'd rather see a positive sphere of shared understanding, which happens around enlightened beings as well, but spiritual practice rituals are amazing, and key, and they do enlighten. You're welcome to think that's B.S. But, I won't live in your understanding, meanwhile I keep raising my vibration through enlightened ritual passed down from Guru to Disciple throughout the centuries. I like these traditions, these clothes, these mantras, they work, they enlighten! They've worked for countless others. I suppose plenty here don't have the karma to see or experience that, they just see what they want, a hierarchy to tare down and rebel against.

 

Peace.

 

I'm also a big fan of devotion to the Guru and Guru Yoga, it works!! Maybe not for you, or ralis, but it works for us that it works for... the impact is incredible. It's an interesting trick, as the more I love my Guru the more I love others, and the more I love myself too. I haven't been very good at loving my Guru as of late though, so much going on in my life, a bad excuse, but nonetheless. I need to get back to more Guru devotion!! More Guru Yoga!! YAY!! It's fabulous.

[Vajrahridaya]

Powerful transmissions mean nothing If your mind is not getting clear.

Many Norbu students have been having powerful transmissions for the past 30 years, practising the practices, but still just do not get it.

 

Seth.

 

Sure, I've met them, I've also met highly evolved, and highly enlightened Norbu students. The same in my SY practice. I met people who were around the Guru for years and doing the practices, but didn't change much and others, that felt like I was being around the Guru by being around them, so enlightened, liberated and deeply happy.

 

I guess I'm blessed to have met both types in the two lineages I've had a root Guru in.

 

For me personally, all that stuff people call traps and externals have actually worked to transform me on a fundamental level and no matter how hard I've tried to go back, for social reasons mostly, I can't get my old self back, it's gone, dead... cried out, loved out, hugged out. I've been utterly transformed by the traditional practices of Guru Yoga and meditation, mantra and rituals with mudra and bell and dorje, swinging it around... I feel it. Doing the mantra, I feel it. Swinging the prayer wheel, I feel it!

 

I like the decor, I like the monks, I experience joy and enlightenment around them... I feel their wisdom oozing out of their pores. I enjoy bowing to my Guru and releasing my sense of self attachment. I like releasing my ego and feeling the blessings of a great enlightened lineage raining down on me. It's enjoyable, enlightening, invigorating, inspiring. I feel whole!

 

I'm into bowing, pranaming, chanting in group... the energy doesn't just end there, it goes with me. The more I've done it over the years, the more it enlightened me. I also fizzle out when I'm not around a Sangha, I need it... I like it, I enjoy it. These people at the sangha seem enlightened to me. I don't judge them like so many I see doing here. I think this comes from self importance and a lack of humility.

 

This is my opinion, I feel that I am right... I think i'd be a great travesty if we gave up traditional practices for just conversation groups. Conversation groups are good, but they are nothing without the traditional practice rituals. Yes, that's my subjective opinion right now, but it works for me. I'm going for it!

[ralis]

 

 

 

I'm also a big fan of devotion to the Guru and Guru Yoga, it works!! Maybe not for you, or ralis, but it works for us that it works for... the impact is incredible.

 

 

It worked for me only in a different way.