Wilhelm

On the nature and utility of 'goal posts' in meditative and energetic practice

On the nature and utility of 'goal posts' in meditative and energetic arts  

25 members have voted

  1. 1. How do you view the classical descriptions of accomplishment in the meditative and/or energetic arts that you practice? (i.e. Arhatship, Immortality, Rainbow Body etc. or even any of the Siddhi)

    • The classics give literal descriptions of the various attainments
      10
    • The classics give metaphorical or at least non-literal descriptions of the various attainments
      4
    • I don't know
      7
    • Other
      4


Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, forestofemptiness said:

A few issues

You've ragged on me about the importance of traditional verification methods before, and the reason I don't put as much faith in these as you in the context of sudden awakening methods is because people can be given authorization, for essentially social or political reasons, or refused it when they actually deserve it for the same. (This doesn't apply to the kind of practice where success gives physically verifiable transformations.)

 

You mentioned the traditional Buddhist criterion of decrease in negative mindstates as a sign of accomplishment which would be necessary to teach, I counter with the case of Trungpa Rinpoche.

 

Now, if all I had was the self reporting of people on the internet to select who I will learn from, I would be in a sorry place indeed. Traditional authorization and moral vehavior are things I do give weight to, as well of other types of evaluation :ph34r:.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Creation said:

 

Ahhhh nvm.  This topics gettin too serious and I don't really have anything new to add

Edited by Wilhelm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, dwai said:

Frank yang, imho, has had deep insights, but is unstable (or at least based on the video of his I saw which anshino had shared a few years back).

 

There is no insight here, as far as I can see that isn't

 

  • Being told to him by Daniel Ingram (who by all accounts is a liar, a proven one)
  • Available to read in a vast amount of books (apparently he knew he's awakened his kundalini because he googled it)
  • Available via a quick glance over at the psychonaut part of reddit

 

Anyone thinking he has anything other than a serious mental illness, should question their judgement faculties in this case I think, there is an oversight

 

Not only that, but to keep it on topic @Wilhelm

 

This isn't even a case of moving the goal posts, it is far beyond that.

 

This is imagining goalposts and kicking a pretend ball through them, and being told by spectators that actually yes, you are winning the game that in reality isn't taking place

 

Have people here no Idea how malleable and suggestible a bipolar mind is or something? 

 

Daniel Ingram's ethics are deep into the minus points for this.

 

Quote

It could very well be that he is bipolar, or it could also be because his realization has not stabilized.

 

He is bipolar, that's diagnosed, and evident to anyone with a basic knowledge of psychopathology

 

I think it is rather sad that anyone would entertain the idea this is anything else

 

And you know whats truly sad?

 

https://frankyang.wtf/mental-fitness-consultation

 

He'll coach you too...

Edited by Shadow_self

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Creation said:

You mentioned the traditional Buddhist criterion of decrease in negative mindstates as a sign of accomplishment which would be necessary to teach, I counter with the case of Trungpa Rinpoche.

 

Please keep in mind I am only sharing my limited opinion. 

 

I don't equate authorization to teach with realization. Again, familiarity with the traditional commentaries shows this is not a modern issue, but has been around all along. The tradition gives a base line by which you can see where people tend to deviate (in both directions, some like to raise the bar as well). 

 

However, if one rejects traditional Buddhist criteria, then it strikes me we are no longer talking about Buddhism. In this regard, a teacher can only lead you to what they have realized. To determine whether what they have realized is in line with the Buddhist tradition, the criteria must be the traditional criteria, which represents the combined knowledge of those who have come before in that tradition. In my case, I do think there are people who meet the criteria. They all happen to be within the tradition. 

 

Personally, I eventually found I had to choose whether I wanted cool phenomenon, or whether I wanted to pursue the end of suffering. For me, once my aim was clear, things started to fall into place. I'm not saying you are in that juncture, but some one else may be.

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Shadow_self said:

 

There is no insight here, as far as I can see that isn't

 

  • Being told to him by Daniel Ingram (who by all accounts is a liar, a proven one)
  • Available to read in a vast amount of books (apparently he knew he's awakened his kundalini because he googled it)
  • Available via a quick glance over at the psychonaut part of reddit

 

Anyone thinking he has anything other than a serious mental illness, should question their judgement faculties in this case I think, there is an oversight

as opposed to you who is a trained psychotherapist who has met this guy and diagnosed his condition? 
 

While I don’t know or care to know about frank yang or Daniel whatshisface, I don’t like your forceful exhortations which seems like flinging feces on someone just because he rubs you the wrong way. 
 

 

1 hour ago, Shadow_self said:

 

Not only that, but to keep it on topic @Wilhelm

 

This isn't even a case of moving the goal posts, it is far beyond that.

 

This is imagining goalposts and kicking a pretend ball through them, and being told by spectators that actually yes, you are winning the game that in reality isn't taking place

 

Have people here no Idea how malleable and suggestible a bipolar mind is or something? 

 

Daniel Ingram's ethics are deep into the minus points for this.

 

 

He is bipolar, that's diagnosed, and evident to anyone with a basic knowledge of psychopathology

 

I think it is rather sad that anyone would entertain the idea this is anything else

 

And you know whats truly sad?

 

https://frankyang.wtf/mental-fitness-consultation

 

He'll coach you too...

who diagnosed his condition? 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, dwai said:

as opposed to you who is a trained psychotherapist who has met this guy and diagnosed his condition? 
 

Hes already stated publicly he was diagnosed. 

 

I need not do anything,  It has already been done

 

Do you want the timestamp where he mentioned it? 

 

I agree with the diagnosis he was given. If you disagree, I think you may need to reconsider the evidence

 

Quote

While I don’t know or care to know about frank yang or Daniel whatshisface, I don’t like your forceful exhortations which seems like flinging feces on someone just because he rubs you the wrong way. 
 

 

Im honestly sorry you don't like me stating some of the facts here ,

 

I mean I can recap

  • He is sick (he spoke about this diagnoses)
  • He has a very publicly verifiable history of substance misuse (Dont take my word for it, go and see yourself)
  • He is calling himself an Arhat, and people are agreeing with him and telling him yes in fact you are (with zero evidence)
  • All evidence points to goalposts being moved beyond belief, the topic of the thread
  • Teachers are fair game for criticism, and I am pointing my finger at Daniel Ingram (Third time stating this)

I am rather curious where the feces slinging is? Since when is stating the facts feces slinging? 

 

Seems more like you are getting rubbed the wrong way to me.

 

Me?

 

I just don't like mentally vulnerable people being taken advantage of or lied to.

 

I'm happy to call that out where I see it

 

Quote

who diagnosed his condition? 

 

I think you'll need to you ask him?

Edited by Shadow_self

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Shadow_self said:

Hes already stated publicly he was diagnosed. 

 

I need not do anything,  It has already been done

 

Do you want the timestamp where he mentioned it? 
 

that’ll be helpful. For you to spout off about someone on a public forum, given that most of us don’t have either the patience or inclination to seek out evidence one way or another, a better way to make sense would be to share sources. You also prefaced your initial diatribe with “it’s just my opinion”, so naturally assumed your personal opinion and not professional. 

Quote

 

The appeal to authority card? Really?  that's unnecessary?

 

But ok

 

Well i can only give you my opinion. But my opinion is as someone who has

  • experience with psychometric testing and scoring
  • and neuropsychological testing,
  • and neuroimaging
  • and experimental psychology,
  • Supervised and overseen multiple research projects
  • Has lectured to thousands of people on topics such as psychopathology and various other related topics
  • Spent time being advised/overseen by two of the most esteemed Professors of Clinical psychology  in my country

Yes I can tell you he is sick. And I can tell you he is very sick

 

I agree with the diagnosis he was given. If you disagree, I think you may need to reconsider the evidence

 

So if someone is bipolar they can’t have insights? Is it your professional and trained observation? Obviously you are very highly credentialed as a psycho-pathologist (maybe some references to papers you’ve published would help).

Quote

 

Im honestly sorry you don't like me stating some of the facts here ,

 

I mean I can recap

  • He is sick (he spoke about this diagnoses)
  • He has a very publicly verifiable history of substance misuse (Dont take my word for it, go and see yourself)
  • He is calling himself an Arhat, and people are agreeing with him and telling him yes in fact you are (with zero evidence)
  • All evidence points to goalposts being moved beyond belief, the topic of the thread
  • Teachers are fair game for criticism, and I am pointing my finger at Daniel Ingram (Third time stating this)

 

I don’t know who Daniel Ingram is. Maybe it’s just me - never heard of him before. So why should your pointing him out mean anything to me (or others)? 

Quote


I am rather curious where the feces slinging is? Since when is stating the facts feces slinging? 
 

Your diatribes come across as flinging feces to me. 

Quote

 

Seems more like you are getting rubbed the wrong way to me.

yes I am. In reaction to your cocksure and combative attitude. I don’t think I’m alone in that assessment. 

Quote

 

Me?

 

I just don't like mentally vulnerable people being taken advantage of or lied to.

 

I'm happy to call that out where I see it

 

 

I think you'll need to you ask him?

Oh I see, so you are watching out for frank yang? What would you prefer he do? Seek treatment from you? 

Edited by dwai
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Shadow_self said:

 

I just don't like mentally vulnerable people being taken advantage of or lied to.

 

 

If I'm reading Shadow_self right, the above is the heart of his objection.  Correct?  It's also the part I think we can all agree on.  

Edited by liminal_luke
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Shadow_self said:

Being told to him by Daniel Ingram (who by all accounts is a liar, a proven one)

 

How is Ingram a proven liar?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yang admits he is bipolar, while also setting forth his meditation technique (liked from his webpage):

 

https://www.instagram.com/p/CLHr4AugTp3/?hl=en

 

Quote

Yes I was diagnosed with "bipolar". And I think it gave me an edge to meditation. I can dissolve and synch up sensations much quicker and more efficiently with more power.

 

I don't see any relevance of his practice to Buddhism, Dzogchen, etc. based on this quote. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, dwai said:

that’ll be helpful.

Sure

 

Guru Viking Podcast : 1:08:00

 

To quote him: The bipolar energy helps me access jhana states

 

Quote

For you to spout off about someone on a public forum, given that most of us don’t have either the patience or inclination to seek out evidence one way or another, a better way to make sense would be to share sources.

 

I've plenty of patience to do it,

 

What evidence would you like?

 

Quote

You also prefaced your initial diatribe with “it’s just my opinion”, so naturally assumed your personal opinion and not professional. 

First off I work in academia, and have been at the intersection of clinical psychology for a while.

 

On a  little break now. Tough year. Time for some less exhaustive stuff

 

I have no interest in bringing that into the discussion, apart from the fact that you decided to make an unnecessary comment 

Quote

So if someone is bipolar they can’t have insights?

 

I think if someone is bipolar, with a history of substance abuse, sex addiction and various other atypical traits, then we need to assess their claims based on the available evidence.

 

That is exactly what I did. Took what he said, and weighed it up against the facts

 

We also need to be extremely careful about what we tell them.

 

They are susceptible people, particularly where those are more inclined towards the mania side of it (and the videos should make this very clear).

 

Quote

Is it your professional and trained observation? Obviously you are very highly credentialed as a psycho-pathologist (maybe some references to papers you’ve published would help).

I never claimed to be a psychopathologist, that's not really a thing by the way.

 

I've just spent time this discipline, with  professionals,  people, patients and participants

 

Its very odd of you to expect me to waive my right to anonymity so a logical fallacy can be entertained.

 

I wont be going there with you. That's all you need to know.

 

You aren't exactly a friend of mine, so I feel no obligation to tell you anything other than that.

 

I wouldn't have even said that had you not felt the need to subtly hint at the fact I have no right to basically confirm a diagnosis he himself already confirmed.

 

I was just making the point I do have  a bit more knowledge than the average person here

 

Im not in the business of waving my work history about like that. Ill be deleting the post

 

Id ask you to do the same, that's on you though

 

But like I said, we are talking opinions here. Personally Id rather we spoke on equal footing.

Quote

I don’t know who Daniel Ingram is. Maybe it’s just me - never heard of him before. So why should your pointing him out mean anything to me (or others)? 

 

He is relevant to the topic that's why.

 

Quote

Your diatribes come across as flinging feces to me. 

 

Where exactly are the diatribes?

 

You've missed the point

 

But that's ok.

 

If you'd like to see what @liminal_lukesees, you might understand the point I made

 

However, if you've not seen someone in that position, maybe you'd mistake my disgust at someone doing what Daniel Ingram did for "diatribes". Its ok, I understand.

 

Quote

yes I am. In reaction to your cocksure and combative attitude. I don’t think I’m alone in that assessment. 

 

You are free to form any opinion you wish about me. I really do not mind

 

You might want to ask yourself why it bothers me so much. The posts ill be removing are an indication

Quote

Oh I see, so you are watching out for frank yang? What would you prefer he do? 

 

Id prefer someone didnt tell him he was an enlightened being with a mastery of the jhanas and fully awakened kundalini

 

Pity you've missed the moon for the stars as far as my posts are concerned

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, markern said:

 

How is Ingram a proven liar?

 

He stated he is an Arhat. He is lying and he knows he is lying

 

Whats worse is he is fooling other people into thinking they are the same

 

Its tiresome to keep saying this. These terms have meaning

 

Jhana, Kundalini, Meditation, Arhat, Awakening,

 

You cant just go changing the meaning of the words because you feel like it, and dismiss their actual meaning

 

That's really the whole topic here

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Shadow_self said:

 

He stated he is an Arhat. He is lying and he knows he is lying

 

Whats worse is he is fooling other people into thinking they are the same

 

Its tiresome to keep saying this. These terms have meaning

 

Jhana, Kundalini, Meditation, Arhat, Awakening,

 

You cant just go changing the meaning of the words because you feel like it, and dismiss their actual meaning

 

That's really the whole topic here

 

 

I agree he is not an Arhat but I disagree that he is lying. He is saying what he genuinely believes which makes it not lying even if it is wrong. I perceive him as very genuine when I have seen him in podcasts and debates. And also very open to investigating wether he is wrong in thinking he is an Arhat. For example when he encountered a lot of people who claimed the practice called Actualism lead them further than he described himself as having come, he took up the practice of Actualism in order to see if he could go further with it as well. 

While I disagree he is an Arhat I think it is quite reasonable for him to believe it and believe what he believes about awakening in general. If I recall correctly he was told by teachers in Burmese monasteries that he had achieved second path. That makes it quite reasonable to think that the various paths do not match up perfectly with traditional descriptions but has more to do with the changes he did see in himself, which where more perceptual.

 

Over the years he has had contact with an enormous network of people and teachers who have practiced for decades in traditional lineages, some of of which have been told they have achieved this or that path or studied with teachers that supposedly had. When he has met them or people he knows and trusts have met them and they don't perceive them as having overcome lust, anger, fear or whatever is supposed to have been overcome at that level, I find it reasonable to start to distrust that the traditional claims are right.

 

You also have a huge number of traditional teachers that where supposed to have gotten very far that have had scandals showing they certainly hadn't achieved the personal/emotional/ethical transformation that was supposed to have happened at their level but they did appear to still have achieved huge perceptual shifts of the self etc. I find it quite reasonable then to start to doubt the personal transformation that is supposed to come and believe what can be achieved is more things along the lines of the centerlessnes he describes. Which in itself is very profound and reduce suffering an enormous amount and help a lot in making people potentially better humans, just don't guarantee it. 


He is looking for reasonable proof that traditional claims are true and haven't found them despite enormous effort and an enormous network of dharma friends, many of which have years and years of practice in monasteries and under traditional teachers. I used to be very skeptical traditional claims of personal transformation was completely true as well until I eventually met a teacher that had clearly changed her operating system completely and was functioning differently then any other human I had met or listened to online. She clearly had achieved some sort of transformation none of the supposedly enlightened people I could find on YouTube seemed to have. And after interacting with her for years it still holds up. That gave me a GOOD reason to believe traditional claims had more to them than I used to believe. I didn't have a good reason to believe it before. I am also inclined to mostly believe what Freeform and Damo claim about their teachers as well based on my trust in them. But before that I don't think I had  much reason to believe enlightenment was more than what Ingram claims. 

You could also add that when some traditional classifications of stages of awakening, such as the Tibetan one, claim certain stages include the ability to change your body to the size of a giant, it is VERY reasonable to think that much of these claims are metaphorical or just plain bullshit. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Shadow_self said:

I think if someone is bipolar, with a history of substance abuse, sex addiction and various other atypical traits, then we need to assess their claims based on the available evidence.

 

Given that Chögyam Trungpa was an alcoholic and a sex addict and a rapists and still he was seen as highly attained by traditional Tibetan Buddhist systems as he was both the holder of two key lineages and some other prestigious stuff:

 "holder of both the Kagyu and Nyingma lineages of Tibetan Buddhism, the 11th of the Trungpa tülkus, a tertön, supreme abbot of the Surmang monasteries,"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chögyam_Trungpa

It seems clear you can both have deep insight and some deep attainment and still be completely messed up. I think it makes it reasonable to be quite open to the possibility that some have deep attainment despite being bipolar. And to be more open to discussions about wether deep realizations really do lead to moral perfection along the lines of what has traditionally been claimed or wether it just entails shifts that makes it potentially easier to become a really, really good person but do not guarantee it in the sense of having overcome lust, anger, etc. 

That said I agree that being bipolar and having the history that he does makes it much more likely he is deluded or just lying. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If anyone thinks there is a way to tell whether someone is “enlightened” by watching a video or even talking to them in person, they are way off base. You can get a sense of someone’s spiritual nature, but not whether they are “enlightened”. 
 

You see, i made the distinction between spiritual nature and “enlightenment”.  One could be very spiritual, very saintly and yet not have realization of their true nature.
 

They could do miracles even, but not necessarily have any more knowledge of their true nature than a pig rolling in mud and shit. 

 

On the other hand, you could have a “crazy” person who was “enlightened” but not recognize it. Why? Because you would not be looking at them with your wisdom eyes. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Shadow_self said:

He stated he is an Arhat. He is lying and he knows he is lying

 

I agree with markern, I don't think "he knows he is lying", I think he genuinely believes what he is sharing and teaches.

 

And to try to bring things back to the topic as opposed to heavily focusing on Frank Yang or Ingram.

 

This was from the article by Bhikku Analayo breaking down Ingram's claims/book:

 

Quote

The meditation teacher referred to by Daniel Ingram repeatedly in his book, apparently considered by him to be the central authority for his approach to insight meditation, refused to accept his claim to have reached the first level of awakening, as he “believed that I was completely delusional” (p. 478).

 

steve's criteria earlier for using these goal posts on one's journey I thought was quite solid (to paraphrase and butcher it here):

 

1. Confirm with a teacher or someone further along the path if you've actually realized whatever level you think you have realized

2. Reflect on your own experience up to that point in time

3. Use the classical texts to measure up your own experience and feedback received

 

So in Ingram's case he ignored his original teacher's feedback, and I guess went with the opinion of teachers he had from Mahasi Sayadaw's lineage (or elsewhere?). Then he reflected on his own experience, believing something had genuinely changed, however the second 'error' one could say is that he interpreted the classical texts in a way such as to fit his own interpretation and "water down" the definitions given in those texts.

 

So one could say the blind is now leading the blind (without genuine malice in mind - or at least I don't think so)

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, markern said:

 

I agree he is not an Arhat but I disagree that he is lying. He is saying what he genuinely believes which makes it not lying even if it is wrong. I perceive him as very genuine when I have seen him in podcasts and debates. And also very open to investigating wether he is wrong in thinking he is an Arhat.

 

I dont mean to misrepresent you hear, but it seems to me that you are saying he is delusional instead

 

I may be able to accept this compromise, as I am not suggesting pure malevolence on his part,

 

I am saying he is entirely removed from what that term means, and he knows very well, based on classical attainments he is removed form them

 

There are many types of lies though, they arent always Machiavellian

 

So, he either lied and deluded himself as to what his attainment was, and now believes the lie, and is deluded

 

Or he was/ is deluded and is lying about it but knows

 

I can agree that the first is more likely, but it is inexcusable imo 

 

36 minutes ago, markern said:


While I disagree he is an Arhat I think it is quite reasonable for him to believe it and believe what he believes about awakening in general.

If he really had an awakening in my opinion he would have some form of siddhi

 

36 minutes ago, markern said:

If I recall correctly he was told by teachers in Burmese monasteries that he had achieved second path. That makes it quite reasonable to think that the various paths do not match up perfectly with traditional descriptions but has more to do with the changes he did see in himself, which where more perceptual.

Freeform has often mentioned how he was convinced he knew what samhadi was, until he met his teacher.

 

I make a similar distinction regards certain things too

 

36 minutes ago, markern said:

Over the years he has had contact with an enormous network of people and teachers who have practiced for decades in traditional lineages, some of of which have been told they have achieved this or that path or studied with teachers that supposedly had. When he has met them or people he knows and trusts have met them and they don't perceive them as having overcome lust, anger, fear or whatever is supposed to have been overcome at that level,

This is the same mistake people make in terms of quality/quantity.

 

I would not be interested in how much or little someone practiced or for how long. I am interested in what they practiced

 

36 minutes ago, markern said:

I find it reasonable to start to distrust that the traditional claims are right.

 

He seems to find it reasonable to move the goalposts

 

I think he has done this because he is an over-analytical person, and by that very virtue, I think he is going to hit a blockade in his practice that he will never be able to pass unless he radically changes

 

36 minutes ago, markern said:

You also have a huge number of traditional teachers that where supposed to have gotten very far that have had scandals showing they certainly hadn't achieved the personal/emotional/ethical transformation that was supposed to have happened at their level but they did appear to still have achieved huge perceptual shifts of the self etc. I find it quite reasonable then to start to doubt the personal transformation that is supposed to come and believe what can be achieved is more things along the lines of the centerlessnes he describes. Which in itself is very profound and reduce suffering an enormous amount and help a lot in making people potentially better humans, just don't guarantee it. 

 

So you think that because he was unable to locate someone who could show him real transformation, he decided to lower the bar and this is reasonable?

 

Sorry I do not agree with that. In this day and age it is nigh on impossible to not be able to find someone who can show you something beyond "centerlessnes"

 

36 minutes ago, markern said:


He is looking for reasonable proof that traditional claims are true and haven't found them despite enormous effort and an enormous network of dharma friends, many of which have years and years of practice in monasteries and under traditional teachers.

 

He hasn't found them because he is not looking in the right places

 

36 minutes ago, markern said:

I used to be very skeptical traditional claims of personal transformation was completely true as well until I eventually met a teacher that had clearly changed her operating system completely and was functioning differently then any other human I had met or listened to online. She clearly had achieved some sort of transformation none of the supposedly enlightened people I could find on YouTube seemed to have. And after interacting with her for years it still holds up. That gave me a GOOD reason to believe traditional claims had more to them than I used to believe. I didn't have a good reason to believe it before. I am also inclined to mostly believe what Freeform and Damo claim about their teachers as well based on my trust in them.

 

The last person I know to claim an attainment, not even enlightenment, just awakening and I cannot name them, visibility emitted light

 

Not imaginary, not subtle.

 

Visible actual light. No trickery involved, and it was not subtle

 

 

My take on this is really really simple

 

if you aren't awakened, you aren't enlightened, and if you cant produce the visible results associated, you're either lying to everyone, yourself, or both

 

If others want to lower the bar, or make excuses about these things not being visible, so be it

 

They are clearly very visible

 

36 minutes ago, markern said:

But before that I don't think I had  much reason to believe enlightenment was more than what Ingram claims. 

 

 

And yet if you'd taken him at his word, you'd probably not have found the person you did

 

36 minutes ago, markern said:

You could also add that when some traditional classifications of stages of awakening, such as the Tibetan one, claim certain stages include the ability to change your body to the size of a giant, it is VERY reasonable to think that much of these claims are metaphorical or just plain bullshit. 

 

And yet they could just as easily be real

 

absence of evidence does not mean evidence of absence

 

The minute you go down that hole, you end up exactly where Daniel Ingram is

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, refugeindharma said:

 

I agree with markern, I don't think "he knows he is lying", I think he genuinely believes what he is sharing and teaches.

 

I addressed this above, he knows he has deviated from the classical definition.

 

As such, he knows he has not achieved the state of Arhat, because the state of Arhat is clearly defined already, and if he's changing that to suit his narrative, in my opinion at least, he knows he lied and is aware of it

 

Quote

And to try to bring things back to the topic as opposed to heavily focusing on Frank Yang or Ingram.

 

This was from the article by Bhikku Analayo breaking down Ingram's claims/book:

 

 

steve's criteria earlier for using these goal posts on one's journey I thought was quite solid (to paraphrase and butcher it here):

 

1. Confirm with a teacher or someone further along the path if you've actually realized whatever level you think you have realized

2. Reflect on your own experience up to that point in time

3. Use the classical texts to measure up your own experience and feedback received

 

So in Ingram's case he ignored his original teacher's feedback, and I guess went with the opinion of teachers he had from Mahasi Sayadaw's lineage (or elsewhere?). Then he reflected on his own experience, believing something had genuinely changed, however the second 'error' one could say is that he interpreted the classical texts in a way such as to fit his own interpretation and "water down" the definitions given in those texts.

 

So he just decided right, enough, im not playing this game. Im going to make a new game with different rules

 

Do you remember being a child and when kids would play they would do that?  They thought the game was unfair so they ran off and created a new game they believed to be fair?

 

This reminds me of this

 

Quote

So one could say the blind is now leading the blind (without genuine malice in mind - or at least I don't think so)

 

I did say it may not be malevolent thing. But he is lying imo. And based on what Ive heard him say, he seems aware of it to me, even if he believes all his own bu******, he has openly admitted to redefining the term based on his belief

 

So as far as I am concerned, he knows he is no Arhat, and instead tried to appropriate the word to fit his narrative

 

As for what he's doing to Frank? Disgusting, Deplorable and Unethical, both as a teacher and a doctor

 

Posting the videos below to show people what a person experiencing mania might experience

 

 

 

Edited by Shadow_self
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Shadow_self said:

I addressed this above, he knows he has deviated from the classical definition.

 

Yes, he SAYS he is deviating from the classical definition. So he isn't lying. He just has a different view of what an Arhat is because he doesn't believe in some of the criteria. As I understand it he deviates by keeping the parts that are conserved with a loss of a sense of self and similar kinds of criteria which are more experiential and removing criteria related to things like loosing all desire for sex, having your penis shrink and being able to turn yourself into a giant. He says he thinks what he thinks he has achieved is all there was ever to it not that he fits all the classical criteria. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, markern said:

 

Yes, he SAYS he is deviating from the classical definition. .

 

So then hes not an Arhat.

 

Quote

So he isn't lying

 

If he is calling himself an Arhat, he is

 

He should have just called himself and Ingramhat, and we wouldn't be having this discussion

 

The fact is he took a word that means something, claimed it was something else and claims to be it

 

That's a very deliberate lie

 

His beliefs, his viewpoints, and quite honestly, his nonsense doesn't factor into it

 

This is very black and white from where I am sitting at least.

 

Are you saying we should give credence to a lie based on delusion? 

 

20 minutes ago, markern said:

He just has a different view of what an Arhat is because he doesn't believe in some of the criteria. 

 

There is  no different view.

 

Thats the point really. An Arhat is one thing and one thing only

 

Either you are what the word denotes or you are not

 

He is not, clearly

 

20 minutes ago, markern said:

As I understand it he deviates by keeping the parts that are conserved with a loss of a sense of self and similar kinds of criteria which are more experiential and removing criteria

 

How either of us understand what he thinks is one is quite honestly, not important,

 

We both know that he's not an Arhat correct?

 

20 minutes ago, markern said:

related to things like loosing all desire for sex, having your penis shrink and being able to turn yourself into a giant.

 

You mean any of the actual things that would denote an element of physical proof?

 

Do you not find that all too convenient?

 

20 minutes ago, markern said:

He says he thinks what he thinks he has achieved is all there was ever to it not that he fits all the classical criteria. 

 

It looks more like he wanted to tick a few boxes that nobody else could refute upon physical examination and so he was able to maintain that web of delusion and lies he wrapped himself up in

 

Well and good, until he went and tangled others up in it too, especially vulnerable people :/ 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, markern said:

 

Given that Chögyam Trungpa was an alcoholic and a sex addict and a rapists and still he was seen as highly attained by traditional Tibetan Buddhist systems as he was both the holder of two key lineages and some other prestigious stuff:

 "holder of both the Kagyu and Nyingma lineages of Tibetan Buddhism, the 11th of the Trungpa tülkus, a tertön, supreme abbot of the Surmang monasteries,"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chögyam_Trungpa


 

 So in tibetan buddhism black is white and a rapist is a buddhist and an attainment is being messed up.     This proves that the Tibetan "Buddhism" is completely messed up.  I knew it was messed up, i just did not know by how much.

Quote

Trungpa coined the term crazy wisdom.[

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doublespeak

Edited by Taoist Texts

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Taoist Texts said:

 So in tibetan buddhism black is white and a rapist is a buddhist and an attainment is being messed up.     This proves that the Tibetan "Buddhism" is completely messed up.  I knew it was messed up, i just did not know by how much.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doublespeak

 

Such naivete 

 

If this is how you judge a tradition, it beggars belief that you're actually practicing Taoism. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Wilhelm said:

Thanks for going into so much detail.  Yes I believe this is the same as what was being talked about already in this thread - the lights that were achieved by the three people I had mentioned.

 

And I'm sorry to hear about those poor carrying method and transfer method practitioners.  I'm glad there's no one here claiming to use those methods!

 

You are really too polite, there are several people who practice carrying method here, but you say no.

The white light I mentioned, the two people I shielded should be impossible to achieve, but since you said so, I went to read the descriptions of the two of them.

They didn't say anything specific, one of them said there were four different white lights, but he didn't say what the difference was. The other only said two different kinds of white light, and the third was a brief ecstasy.

I assume that you are a person who can't see the light, so you can't tell the difference between what I said and what the two of them said. I don't think it's appropriate for you to draw the same conclusion hastily.

Light is not just white light. If a person can only see white light, it means that his third eye is immature and can only see black and white.

 

你真的太客氣了,這裡練搬運法的人好幾個,你卻說沒有。

我講的那些白光,那兩個被我屏蔽的人應該是不太可能達成的,不過既然你這樣說了,我就去看了一下他們兩個人的描述。

他們並沒有說出具體的內容,其中一個說出有四種不同的白光,但是有什麼不同,他卻沒有說。另外一個只有說兩種不同的白光,第三種是短暫的狂喜。

我假設你是看不到光的人,所以你無法分辨我講的內容和他們兩個人講的內容有何不同,你草率的下了一樣的結論,我是覺得不太妥當。

光也不是只有白光而已,如果一個人只能看到白光,那代表他的第三眼發育還不成熟,只能看到黑白而已。

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Arhats are the four fruits.
The characteristic of the first fruit is the clarity of the Dharma eye, in other words, the ability to see light, which is the first fruit.
Guowei doesn't know which word in English, so there are strange words.

The second result is to start to leave the desire realm.
The Desire Realm is the state that produces illusions and blinding sun rays.
The second fruit is to be able to leave the desire world and maintain the state of samadhi. This state is after the opening of the mind orifice.

But the second fruit is unstable, and it will still fall back to the desire realm.

The three fruits are solid samadhi and will not fall back to the desire realm.
Therefore, the three fruits will produce a variety of mandalas.

The four fruits are Arhats.
The above three fruits will also have the phenomenon of yin and yang recurring birth and death.
Arhats who have reached the state of four fruits are free from the repeated birth and death of yin and yang.
Therefore, a large full moon, immortality, and golden elixir will be produced at the beginning.

For a person to call himself an Arhat, he must be able to achieve the definition in the Buddhist scriptures, which is to escape from birth and death in practice.

Of course, he must first know what birth and death are, so that he can escape from birth and death in cultivation.
If his cultivation fails to achieve birth and death in cultivation, it is impossible for him to escape from birth and death in cultivation.

 

阿羅漢就是四果。
初果的特徵就是法眼淨,換言之就是能看見光,就是初果。
果位的英文不知道哪個字,所以出現奇怪的字。

二果就是開始脫離欲界。
欲界就是產生幻境和刺眼太陽光芒的狀態。
二果就是能夠脫離欲界還能維持在三摩地的狀態,這個狀態就是心竅開始打開之後。

但是二果是不穩定的,還是會掉回欲界。

三果則是穩固的三摩地,不會掉回欲界。
因此三果會產生各式各樣的曼陀羅。

四果就是阿羅漢。
前面的三果都還會有陰陽反覆的生滅現象。
而達到四果狀態的阿羅漢則脫離了陰陽反覆的生滅現象。
因此開始會產生大型圓月,不朽,金丹。

一個人要自稱阿羅漢,他必須能夠達到佛經的定義,也就是脫離修煉中的生滅。

當然他首先要知道什麼是生滅,才能脫離修煉中的生滅。
如果他的修煉沒有做到修煉中的生滅,他就不可能脫離修煉中的生滅。
 

The description of the state of samadhi I mentioned, I doubt how many people here can understand it.
Because the first fruit position is to see the light, not to mention the later part.

 

我說的這些三摩地狀態的描述,我懷疑這裡到底有幾個人看得懂。
因為第一個果位就是看見光,更別說後面的部分了。

 

If a person doesn't even have the most basic second fruit, then he wants to judge whether others are Arhats, which is impossible.
Because the second fruit is a major breakthrough, the opening of the mind opening at the beginning is the second fruit.

 

如果一個人連最基本的二果都沒有,那他就想要判斷別人有沒有阿羅漢,這樣是不可能的。
因為二果算是一個重大的突破,心竅剛開始的開啟就是二果。

 

https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Four stages of awakening

 

I found the English translation part

 

我找到英文翻譯的部分了

 

The term "fruit position" is not used at all.

 

完全沒有用到「果位」這個名詞

 

Stream-enterer is the first fruit.
The characteristic of people at this stage is that they can see light, but when they enter samadhi, they will fall into the desire realm, so they often see illusions. And there will be dazzling sun rays in the illusion. Sometimes it is not necessarily the glare of the sun, it may also be street lights, or car lights.

 

Stream-enterer就是初果。
這個階段的人的特徵就是能夠看見光,但是進入三摩地的時候會掉入欲界,因此經常看見幻境。而且幻境中會出現刺眼的太陽光芒。有時候不一定是刺眼的太陽光芒,也有可能是路燈,或是車燈之類的。

 

Once-returner is the second fruit.
People at this level can also see light, and also have illusions and suns in illusions.
But besides being the same as the first fruit, a person at this level can sometimes escape from the illusion of the desire realm after entering samadhi.
The characteristic of a person at this stage is that he thinks he is awake, but his body is actually asleep.
He sometimes has the first stage of Yang Sheng, that is, when he wakes up, he will see a more intense black liver light or rabbit marrow light.
And when he wakes up, for him, he is awakening from the awakening of samadhi to the conscious state of daily life.

 

Once-returner就是二果。
這個程度的人同樣都能看見光,同樣也會出現幻境和幻境中的太陽。
但是這個程度的人除了跟初果一樣之外,他在進入三摩地之後,有時候也能脫離欲界幻境。
這個階段的人的特徵就是以為自己醒著,但是其實他的身體已經睡著了。
他有時候會有第一階段的陽生,也就是在醒來的時候,他會看見更強烈的烏肝光或兔髓光。
而他醒來的時候,對他來說,他是從三摩地的醒轉移到日常生活意識狀態的醒。

 

 

Non-returner is the three fruits.
People at this stage can also see the light, anyway, they can see the light after the first fruition.
But people at this stage will not fall into the world of desire.
Therefore, people at this stage will no longer see the illusion of the desire realm and the sun of the desire realm.
This person's samadhi is the same as the two fruits, transferring from one awakening to the other.
However, people at this stage are more awake, so when they wake up again, mandala is easy to appear.
The appearance of the yang mandala can be said to characterize the third stage.

 

Non-returner就是三果。
這個階段的人同樣也會看見光,反正從初果以後都能看見光。
但是這個階段的人不會掉進欲界。
因此這個階段的人不會再看見欲界幻境和欲界太陽。
這個人的入定跟二果一樣,從一個醒轉移到另外一個醒。
但是這個階段的人因為清醒的程度比較高,所以再醒過來的時候,很容易出現曼陀羅。
陽生曼陀羅的出現可以說是第三階段的特徵。

 

Arahant is the four fruits.
The characteristic of people at this stage is that they are free from birth and death during cultivation.
The first three fruits all have birth and death. Especially the extinct part is very obvious.
Even if the second fruit and the third fruit are transferred from one awakening to another, there is still cessation.

But people at the stage of four fruits have not been eliminated at all.
His samadhi is to wake up from one wake up to another, complete awakening can achieve the conversion of consciousness.
The characteristic of people at this stage is that there will definitely be a super big full moon.
Needless to say the latter, Immortals and Jindan both appeared at this stage.

 

Arahant就是四果。
這個階段的人的特徵就是脫離修煉當中的生滅。
前三果都有生有滅。特別是滅的部分非常明顯。
即使是二果和三果是從一個醒轉移到另外一個醒,都還是有滅。

但是四果階段的人已經完全沒有滅了。
他的入定就是從一個醒到另外一個醒,完全的醒,就可以達成意識的轉換。
這個階段的人的特徵就是一定會出現超級大圓月。
後面的就不用說了,不朽真人和金丹都是在這個階段出現的。

 

So my teaching must be to teach students to recognize what is yin and yang, and what is birth and death. This is the correct way of cultivation. I'm not teaching students how to breathe, how to focus on the lower abdomen, which is a ridiculous way of teaching.

 

所以我的教學,一定是教學生認出什麼是陰陽,什麼是生滅。這才是修煉的正道。我沒在教學生如何呼吸,如何把注意力鎖定在下腹部,這真是非常可笑的教學方式。

Edited by awaken
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, C T said:

Such naivete . If this is how you judge a tradition, it beggars belief that you're actually practicing Taoism.

well i drink only on weekends and i am a master of my domain. ;) I think we are still  very much on topic. So please could you dwell a little bit on   how an alcoholic sex fiend can be a buddhist or a taoist, let alone some kind of a head honcho in the teaching? Thanks;)

Edited by Taoist Texts
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites