Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
well, if no sutras, then we can quote our own experiences.
both Vajraheart and I have reported experiences of recollecting past lives. is that not valid? if not, then why? is that "un-buddhist" (as Dhamma Dhatu implies)? If so, why?
This is why they say Samsara is beginningless, but Nirvana is endless. This is why the Bodhisattva path is deeper, subtler, and revealing of true liberation, instead of mere disappearance into an ideation of emptiness which manifests as a blissful meditative sleep that can last eons for an Arhat.
Dude. You are beginning to talk to the birds again.
Nirvana is not a mental state. Nirvana is the perfect unconditional stillness that abides throughout the universe. It is an element. The asankhata dhatu. An enlightened mind experiences the Nirvana element as a sense object but Nirvana is not a mental state.
The Theravada teaches all five aggregates are themselves emptiness. Thus, when a Buddha acts, speaks & thinks, these actions are emptiness.
Your view again appears to be wrong view, stuck in existence & non-existence. It seems you are regarding emptiness as 'nothingness'. Emptiness simply means 'empty of self'. The five aggregates can function, empty of 'self'.
As for samsara, sure it is relatively beginningless because generation after generation of human beings have been fettered & hindered by ignorance & craving, passing on this ignorance & craving from generation to generation.
Allow my Bodhicitta to quote the Lord again for our benefit.
By & large, Kaccayana, this world is supported by (takes as its object) a polarity, that of existence & non-existence. But when one sees the origination of the world as it actually is with right discernment, 'non-existence' with reference to the world does not occur to one. When one sees the cessation of the world as it actually is with right discernment, 'existence' with reference to the world does not occur to one.
"'Everything exists': That is one extreme. 'Everything doesn't exist': That is a second extreme. Avoiding these two extremes, the Tathagata teaches the Dhamma via the middle:
One neither fabricates nor mentally fashions for the sake of becoming or un-becoming. This being the case, one is not sustained by anything in the world (does not cling to anything in the world). Unsustained, one is not agitated. Unagitated, one is totally unbound right within. One discerns that 'Birth is ended, the holy life fulfilled, the task done. There is nothing further for this world.'
This ideation as spoken above is what manifests body after body, from the deeply hidden clinging to "I" and "mine" since beginningless time as the alayavijnana or storehouse consciousness or storehouse mind. It is the "I" maker, this deeply formless clinging. This is why it's important to unravel the "I" clinging even on the formless levels of mind. This is how one flips these conditions of contraction that have been since beginningless time...
The Buddha did not teach about alayavijnana. The Buddha taught vinnana was mere sensory awareness. However, what alayavijnana is intended to represent is correct. The mind or citta has deep conditioning.
But to say this "I" making is beginningless is mere conjecture.
Talks about the source of the idea of Alayavijnana being from the Pali.
If Buddhism didn't make Buddhas, then the Buddhas words didn't work. Buddhas words worked, so Buddhas were made who expanded on the teachings and evolved them.
This is not conjecture, this is direct experience, because Buddhism does work, this can be known directly.
Dependent Origination as a personal continuum has no beginning, and is always empty, luminous and free, even if unrecognized, that too is it's freedom, not as an entity, but merely as a creative matrix, a play of energies.
well, if no sutras, then we can quote our own experiences.
both Vajraheart and I have reported experiences of recollecting past lives.
Can you prove it ? Where's the evidence that you can give to show that its not a fantasy of the mind?
I have an experience to report now.... I visited the planet Zog last week and met a relative from a past life as well as taking teachings from a Zog master. You don't believe me? Why not?
Ian Stevensons studies and my own experiences are enough...
There is plenty of proof out there for those with eyes to see it.
This is not conjecture, this is direct experience, because Buddhism does work, this can be known directly.
All that can be known directly are mental formations & mental objects in the mind.
That these mental formations & mental objects, experienced in the present, are regarded as 'from the beginningless past', is mere conjecture.
Dependent Origination as a personal continuum has no beginning, and is always empty, luminous and free, even if unrecognized, that too is it's freedom, not as an entity, but merely as a creative matrix, a play of energies.
Again, you are talking to the birds.
For the Buddha, Dependent Origination is a description of twelve conditions that manifest as suffering or dukkha.
The Buddha himself did not teach about a personal continuum or consciousness continuum. The Buddha himself advised any consciousness, be it gross or subtle, is impermanent & not-self (impersonal).
Lastly, your post is contradictory & illogical, even according to rebirth theories because what is empty, luminous & free, being synonymous with Nirvana, cannot be "reborn".
:coffee:
There is, bhikkhus, a not-born, a not-brought-to-being, a not-made, a not-conditioned. If, bhikkhus, there were no not-born, not-brought-to-being, not-made, not-conditioned, no escape would be discerned from what is born, brought-to-being, made, conditioned. But since there is a not-born, a not-brought-to-being, a not-made, a not-conditioned, therefore an escape is discerned from what is born, brought-to-being, made, conditioned.
Ian Stevensons studies and my own experiences are enough...
There is plenty of proof out there for those with eyes to see it.
Your own experience cannot serve as "proof" for others.
But what others can have proof of, within their minds & hearts, is the cessation of suffering.
For the supported there is instability, for the unsupported there is no instability; when there is no instability there is serenity; when there is serenity there is no inclination: when there is no inclination there is no coming-and-going; when there is no coming-and-going there is no decease-and-uprising; when there is no decease-and-uprising there is neither "here" nor "beyond" nor "in between the two." Just this is the end of suffering.
It was a nice topic, but now I'm off reading my heart again instead of this debate. Because four pages ago it should already have been clear to me that it obviously isn't going anywhere and isn't helping anyone.
Just make sure you never get attached to views about rebirth and also don't get attached to the suttas. The dhamma is inside ourselves and can not be accurately be spoken or written in words anyway. No matter what language or canon you read, interpretation by mental concepts will always I repeat, always be wrong. No matter what they are. I dare to say that every single word that was spoken in this topic is wrong somehow, including my own, because they are just words and how can you ever describe truth and insights in words?
Keep your mind sharp, keep your heart wide and open and keep your but on the meditation cushion. This is the 8-fold path. There's nothing more you need to know.
See you in another thread Bye and metta to you all!
Returning to the discussion again - a quote from Ajahn Amaro in "The Good Heart"....
"What is reborn ?
From the Theravada Buddhist perspective there is no fixed position.
The Buddha described the process of rebirth quite clearly, but he also said that all knowledge is based on personal experience. So when he talks about the idea of death and rebirth in a different realm of existence, this is like a map that he laid out. It is not handed out as something that we as individuals must believe, but more as a pattern that can help describe our experience of reality.
Generally speaking, what is reborn are our habits. That is the essence of it. Whatever the mind holds onto is reborn: what we love, hate, fear, adore, and have opinions about. Our identification with these aspects of the mind has a momentum behind it. Attachment is like a flywheel. Enlightenment is the ending of rebirth, enlightenment is really the natural condition of the mind when its not confused, identified, or caught up with any internal or external object."
This is not conjecture, this is direct experience, because Buddhism does work, this can be known directly.
All that can be known directly are mental formations & mental objects in the mind.
That these mental formations & mental objects, experienced in the present, are regarded as 'from the beginningless past', is mere conjecture.
Dependent Origination as a personal continuum has no beginning, and is always empty, luminous and free, even if unrecognized, that too is it's freedom, not as an entity, but merely as a creative matrix, a play of energies.
Again, you are talking to the birds.
For the Buddha, Dependent Origination is a description of twelve conditions that manifest as suffering or dukkha.
The Buddha himself did not teach about a personal continuum or consciousness continuum. The Buddha himself advised any consciousness, be it gross or subtle, is impermanent & not-self (impersonal).
Lastly, your post is contradictory & illogical, even according to rebirth theories because what is empty, luminous & free, being synonymous with Nirvana, cannot be "reborn".
:coffee:
There is, bhikkhus, a not-born, a not-brought-to-being, a not-made, a not-conditioned. If, bhikkhus, there were no not-born, not-brought-to-being, not-made, not-conditioned, no escape would be discerned from what is born, brought-to-being, made, conditioned. But since there is a not-born, a not-brought-to-being, a not-made, a not-conditioned, therefore an escape is discerned from what is born, brought-to-being, made, conditioned.
For those without the capacity to understand Mahayana, may they evolve through the Theravada until it is exhausted for them.
He did teach all these things you deny he taught, but... I wish you personal evolution.
The early Mahayana scriptures were written down at around the same time as the texts used in Theravada, even though these teachings existed from earlier times in the oral tradition, so everything you quote as absolute is mere conjecture. Due to the fact that you merely parrot. You don't come from experience, you come from coffee drinking, armchair reading. Not deep retreat experiential information, just mere interpretation of words referencing words in your mind. This is quite clear to me.
Because everything is already luminous and free, empty of inherent bondage, and is reborn in every new moment in a new condition based upon the previous of variant intentions and ideations, chaos has its order. Of course you are wrong, this is only due to a lack of insight though, not that you are inherently wrong. LOL!
We read the same words and reference a different paradigm of definition from within. Your Pali Sutta is not my Pali Sutta. My reading of the Pali Suttas clearly leads to the Mahayana when the bridge is made through experiential insight.
You're idea of Nirvana seems to co-relate with non-existence, and you say mine does? You say it's an element, then it's a true self existence? Your understanding is not clear, as mostly, you just quote scripture without illumination based upon direct experience. Any parrot can do this.
That these mental formations & mental objects, experienced in the present, are regarded as 'from the beginningless past', is mere conjecture.
Connected to a beginningless regress of connectivity within the spectrum of infinite regress of causes and conditions (karma). Not that the individual object perceived has an essence that is beginningless...
Where have you been? How could you interpret what I said in that way? This continual mis-defining of my words speaks.
DD said: The Buddha himself did not teach about a personal continuum or consciousness continuum. The Buddha himself advised any consciousness, be it gross or subtle, is impermanent & not-self (impersonal).
No, it is relative. Not ultimate. He also advised against taking anatta as an ultimate "self" existing truth. You don't realize how subtle Nagarjunas logic is.
The Buddha also said that dependent origination is the all. So, it has more to do than merely the 12 links, it's applicable to absolutely everything, even enlightenment.
"For those without the capacity to understand Mahayana, may they evolve through the Theravada until it is exhausted for them."
Thats nothing other than sectarian bullshit!
I spent 20 years offline in involvement with various Vajrayana practices,teachings, empowerments etc (and received very complementary and encouraging comments from 3 or 4 tulkus about my practice and understanding).... until I suddenly needed to move on and absorb myself in the Theravada Forest Tradition's teachings and practice, knowing from previous experience that this was without any doubt,very pure Dhamma without any additional baggage.
I dare to say that every single word that was spoken in this topic is wrong somehow, including my own, because they are just words and how can you ever describe truth and insights in words?
Hi Sabre,
I think it's hard, but not impossible. I find that Dzogchen is the best format of word expression reflective of direct insight, as it never deviates from non-substantialized non-dualism, even through the dualistic format of words.
"So stay here, you lucky people, Let go and be happy in the natural state. Let your complicated life and everyday confusion alone And out of quietude, doing nothing, watch the nature of mind. This piece of advice is from the bottom of my heart: Fully engage in contemplation and understanding is born; Cherish non-attachment and delusion dissolves; And forming no agenda at all reality dawns. Whatever occurs, whatever it may be, that itself is the key, And without stopping it or nourishing it, in an even flow, Freely resting, surrendering to ultimate contemplation, In naked pristine purity we reach consummation."
"For those without the capacity to understand Mahayana, may they evolve through the Theravada until it is exhausted for them."
Thats nothing other than sectarian bullshit!
I spent 20 years offline in involvement with Vajrayana practices,teachings, empowerments etc (and received very complementary and encouraging comments from 3 or 4 tulkus about my practice and understanding).... until I suddenly needed to move on and absorb myself in the purity of the Theravada Forest Tradition's teachings and practice, knowing from previous experience that this was true Dhamma.
Andrew Skilton summarizes a common prevailing view of the Mahāyāna sutras:[13] “ These texts are considered by Mahāyāna tradition to be buddhavacana, and therefore the legitimate word of the historical Buddha. The śrāvaka tradition, according to some Mahāyāna sutras themselves, rejected these texts as authentic buddhavacana, saying that they were merely inventions, the product of the religious imagination of the Mahāyānist monks who were their fellows. Western scholarship does not go so far as to impugn the religious authority of Mahāyāna sutras, but it tends to assume that they are not the literal word of the historical Śākyamuni Buddha. Unlike the śrāvaka critics just cited, we have no possibility of knowing just who composed and compiled these texts, and for us, removed from the time of their authors by up to two millenia, they are effectively an anonymous literature. It is widely accepted that Mahāyāna sutras constitute a body of literature that began to appear from as early as the 1st century BCE, although the evidence for this date is circumstantial. The concrete evidence for dating any part of this literature is to be found in dated Chinese translations, amongst which we find a body of ten Mahāyāna sutras translated by Lokaksema before 186 C.E. – and these constitute our earliest objectively dated Mahāyāna texts. This picture may be qualified by the analysis of very early manuscripts recently coming out of Afghanistan, but for the meantime this is speculation. In effect we have a vast body of anonymous but relatively coherent literature, of which individual items can only be dated firmly when they were translated into another language at a known date."
Most dating is conjecture, as most texts within Buddhism were oral prier to written. This was during a time before TV, cars, and many distractions... so, Oral history was most likely far more reliable back then due to a lack of distraction.
Your other comments are merely reflective of your capacity, and nothing more.
Do you see the timeline correctly? How the color demarcates the associated time? It's 100 C.E.
From the link provided by your timeline...
"Among the earliest and most important references to the term Mahāyāna are those that occur in the Lotus Sūtra (Skt. Saddharma Puṇḍarīka Sūtra) dating between the 1st century BCE and the 1st century CE.[6] Seishi Karashima has suggested that the term first used in an earlier Gandhāri Prakrit version of the Lotus Sūtra was not the term mahāyāna but the Prakrit word mahājāna in the sense of mahājñāna (great knowing).[7] At a later stage when the early Prakrit word was converted into Sanskrit, this mahājāna, being phonetically ambivalent, was mistakenly converted into mahāyāna, possibly due to what may have been a double meaning in the famous Parable of the Burning House, which talks of three vehicles or carts (Skt: yāna)."
Please be more thorough and less reactive.
So, as you can see, the earliest mahayana texts were written around the same time from 100 B.C. to 100 C.E. But, were oral long before that.
"You're other comments are merely reflective of your capacity, and nothing more."
Meaning what, O enlightened one ?
Please stop reacting. That's all. You weren't able to read your link properly because of this.
Dear boy, it is your continual misperception which sees me this way. If I misread my link its because of multitasking, not because of reacting and attempting to dominate as you do.
I simply don't have time to sit around arguing with you all day, because others need my assistance in the offline world...
until I suddenly needed to move on and absorb myself in the Theravada Forest Tradition's teachings and practice, knowing from previous experience that this was without any doubt,very pure Dhamma without any additional baggage.
Whatever serves your evolution is what you need of course.
Vajrayana is far older from India and didn't add much by coming to Tibet except a few clothes and political toys. The main internal practices utilizing yoga postures, mudra, visualization, understanding of energetic pathways, dream yoga... all these methods spring from India identified to be around the same time as Mahayanas emergence textually though not popularized until a few hundred years later. But the earliest written Tantric Sutras date to around the 3rd to 4th century. Even though these texts say that it was taught 16 years after the Buddhas enlightenment to certain select individuals as an oral tradition.
"You're other comments are merely reflective of your capacity, and nothing more."
Meaning what, O enlightened one ?
Please stop reacting. That's all. You weren't able to read your link properly because of this.
Dear boy
Statements like "O enlightened one" in the sarcastic sense and "dear boy" in the belittling sense, much like D.D.'s statements in the same tone are reflective of what state of mind then?
until I suddenly needed to move on and absorb myself in the Theravada Forest Tradition's teachings and practice, knowing from previous experience that this was without any doubt,very pure Dhamma without any additional baggage.
Whatever serves your evolution is what you need of course.
Vajrayana is far older from India and didn't add much by coming to Tibet except a few clothes and political toys. The main internal practices utilizing yoga postures, mudra, visualization, understanding of energetic pathways, dream yoga... all these methods spring from India identified to be around the same time as Mahayanas emergence textually though not popularized until a few hundred years later. But the earliest written Tantric Sutras date to around the 3rd to 4th century. Even though these texts say that it was taught 16 years after the Buddhas enlightenment to certain select individuals as an oral tradition.
Why are you telling me this stuff about Vajrayana ? I already said I was involved with it offline for 20 years.
I seem to remember you declared enlightenment or advanced realisation somewhere - was it someone else perhaps? There have been a few people making declarations in the last few months, lol !
"Dear boy " isn't belittling, I'm English, how about 'dear fellow' or 'dear chap' then?
Why are you telling me this stuff about Vajrayana ? I already said I was involved with it offline for 20 years.
This is not a pre-requisite for deep understanding of it's meaning. In fact, one successful transmission from a highly realized master to an open disciple can reveal more information in a timeless second than all time put together for one who is jaded... from a certain perspective.
I seem to remember you declared enlightenment or advanced realisation somewhere - was it someone else perhaps?
I merely have shared some of my experiences with the Dharma but have never declared "advanced" or "enlightenment"... anywhere at anytime. One would have to twist my words into a pretzel and re-define my intention for this to be the outcome.
"Dear boy " isn't belittling, I'm English, how about 'dear fellow' or 'dear chap' then?
I... have never declared "advanced" or "enlightenment"... anywhere at anytime. One would have to twist my words into a pretzel and re-define my intention for this to be the outcome.
When you make statements like
...one successful transmission from a highly realized master to an open disciple can reveal more information in a timeless second than all time put together for one who is jaded...
it's hard not to see that as a projection of an esoteric realization which is in some way superior to Dazzle's understanding.
(BTW, if you think the transmission had anything to do with revelation of "information," you probably missed the point or had a misleading teacher.)
(BTW, if you think the transmission had anything to do with revelation of "information," you probably missed the point or had a misleading teacher.)
...
From this statement I can only assume that you haven't experienced transmission from enlightened lineage?
In Tantra and/or Dzogchen, the Guru/Disciple relationship is paramount!
I'm just saying... don't speak about what you don't know directly. I will only quote scriptures that support my direct experiencing and comment on texts that I have heart felt understanding of.
I... have never declared "advanced" or "enlightenment"... anywhere at anytime. One would have to twist my words into a pretzel and re-define my intention for this to be the outcome.
When you make statements like
...one successful transmission from a highly realized master to an open disciple can reveal more information in a timeless second than all time put together for one who is jaded...
it's hard not to see that as a projection of an esoteric realization which is in some way superior to Dazzle's understanding.
A person makes this assumption true only if it is reflective of that understanding.
She could very well have the very same experience? Within her personal context.
Yet, from her comments I can only assume otherwise.
if you think the transmission had anything to do with revelation of "information,"
Now, how do you define "information?"
"Information" in the context of my usage in the statement quoted by you merely means experiential realization of scriptural connotation. Mind to mind osmosis, sort of speak. When ones state of self referencing is expanded or deepened by presence, or touch from one who has a far deeper, or subtler state of self reference as clarified by Buddhist scripture. Transmission is basically the passing on of experiential information. One moment of this level of transmission can illumine a paradigm of information that could be enough to fill many books in expanding word format.
I... have never declared "advanced" or "enlightenment"... anywhere at anytime. One would have to twist my words into a pretzel and re-define my intention for this to be the outcome.
When you make statements like
...one successful transmission from a highly realized master to an open disciple can reveal more information in a timeless second than all time put together for one who is jaded...
it's hard not to see that as a projection of an esoteric realization which is in some way superior to Dazzle's understanding.
A person makes this assumption true only if it is reflective of that understanding.
She could very well have the very same experience? Within her personal context.
Yet, from her comments I can only assume otherwise.
You know nothing about me, or my experiences, or my interaction with my Vajrayana teachers, so you assume a lot Vajraheart.
I choose not to trumpet my experiences to you in some kind of childish tit for tat exchange, ok ? The way you conduct yourself in this discussion does in fact suggest to me that you understand very little about transmission other that what you've read somewhere.
My exchange on these matters is concluded with you, and you can continue to put me down as much as you like - the error lies with you, it makes not the slightest difference to me whatever you think or say.
Transmission is basically the passing on of experiential information. One moment of this level of transmission can illumine a paradigm of information that could be enough to fill many books in expanding word format.
Well, we're clearly moving away from the thread topic, but this contradicts my understanding and experience of the fruits of Budddhist practice. It has led to a set of capabilities for ending suffering, not a body of knowledge. To the extent that it has led anywhere.
My understanding of this is reflected in my teacher's writings here ("Working with a Teacher and the Pointing-Out Instructions.") What he describes there fits well with my experience in practice.
To bring this back on topic, transmission as I understand it has nothing to do with knowledge about post-mortem rebirth.
We need to be carefulness with the word "beginningless". The Buddha said:
"This samsara is without discoverable beginning".
"A first beginning of ignorance cannot be conceived, (of which it can be said), 'Before that, there was no ignorance and it came to be after that.'
In other words, just because the beginning cannot be identified, just as the beginning of the universe cannot be identified, this does not necessary imply a "personal samsara" has existed since the beginning of time.
"And what is consciousness? These six are classes of consciousness: eye-consciousness, ear-consciousness, nose-consciousness, tongue-consciousness, body-consciousness, intellect-consciousness. This is called consciousness.
You're idea of Nirvana seems to co-relate with non-existence, and you say mine does? You say it's an element, then it's a true self existence? Your understanding is not clear, as mostly, you just quote scripture without illumination based upon direct experience. Any parrot can do this.
Dude
The scriptures themselves illuminate. The scriptures are the Buddha's illumination. They illuminate far more brightly than the next "Johnny Come Lately" guru.
Dude. The Buddha taught everything was an element, all mind, matter & Nirvana.
Nirvana is a permanment independent element (unlike the others).
OK. Let's all sing together: :clap:
Johnny come lately, the new kid in town Will she still love you when you're not around?
There's so many things you should have told her, but night after night you're willing to hold her, Just hold her, tears on your shoulder
There's a new kid in town just another new kid in town
Ooh, hoo
There's a new kid in town There's a new kid in town There's a new kid in town
Because everything is already luminous and free, empty of inherent bondage, and is reborn in every new moment in a new condition based upon the previous of variant intentions and ideations, chaos has its order.
Vajra
What you have said above makes no sense. The idea of "rebirth" or being "reborn" implies permanence.
Allow me to quote something for you, which explains why the Buddha himself used the word "birth" in his Dependent Origination rather than the word "rebirth".
Please note, quote comes from an Asian rather than a Westerner.
As for your opinion EVERYTHING is already luminous and free, empty of inherent bondage, this is just Mahayana evangelism. It is the same as the Christian evangelism of "we are all pure because Jesus loves & forgives us".
I suggest you work with human beings or minds that suffer to learn about reality.
However, be warned, even Christian organisations that provide suicide counselling services forbid evangelising to those human beings whose minds are suffering.
:-/
...the rebirth of the same person does not occur. But the birth of different things is happening all the time. It happens often and continuously, but there is no rebirth. There is no such thing, in reality, as rebirth or reincarnation.
That there is one person, one "I" or "you," getting reborn is what reincarnation is all about. If all is anattā, there is nothing to get reborn.
There is birth, birth, birth, of course. This is obvious. There is birth happening all the time, but it is never the same person being born a second time. Every birth is new. So there is birth, endlessly, constantly, but we will not call it "rebirth" or "reincarnation."
While we have the chance, let's spill all the beans– there isn't much time left – there's no "person" or "being" (satva). What we call a person is merely a momentary grouping that does not last. It does not have any independent reality and is merely a stream or process of cause and effect, which is called the "dependent origination of `no person.'
For those without the capacity to understand Mahayana, may they evolve through the Theravada until it is exhausted for them.
Vajraheart
This is mere propaganda. In reality, there was no 2nd or 3rd turning of the wheel. Nothing new about Buddha-Dhamma was taught by the Mahayana. The Theravada includes Dependent Origination & Emptiness.
Mahayana introduced Hinduism into Buddhism, such as the worship of Tara, Avalokitesvara, etc, which are simply re-packaging of pre-existent Hindu deities.
Mahayana emphasised very basic mundane realities, that the Buddha did not really bother with, such as the interdependence of all phenomena.
Worse, Mahayana regressed back to the idea of non-imputing or non-conceptualisation is the highest Nibbana (where as Buddha taught the end of greed, hatred & delusion is the highest Nibbana).
In the Theravada suttas, after enlightenment, the arahants radiated loving-kindness & compassion in every direction and walked around India, sharing the Dhamma, the same as the Mahayana Bodhisatva ideal.
Vajraheart.
As I previously advised you, the mind that penetrates Nirvana can still act with complete freedom. The mind that penetrates Nirvana still acts to help others.
It seems like your mind is lost in sectarian propaganda.
If your mind had only a tiny experience of mundane reality, it would understand most religious groups and many non-religious groups are acting to remedy human suffering in the world.
0
federicaSeeker of the clear blue sky...Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubtModerator
Jeesh, nothing goes anywhere in this forum without some smartass practising one-upmanship. Give it a rest!
Worse, Mahayana regressed back to the idea of non-imputing or non-conceptualisation is the highest Nibbana (where as Buddha taught the end of greed, hatred & delusion is the highest Nibbana).
Hi VajraHeart
I listened to a YouTube of a lama this week, who said on the highest level: "There is no suffering".
This same lama I once heard give a live talk about depression, where many people left the talk due to the apparent insensivity & naivity of the lama.
The lama goes too far when he states: "There is no suffering" but the lama believes such a view is emptiness.
The Buddha himself, who was fully enlightened, who was perfect in behaviour & wisdom, who understood conventionality & the ultimate perfectly, advised there is suffering.
But, unlike the lama, the Buddha did not identify suffering with "people" or "persons".
Unlike the lama, when the Buddha threw out "the person" to realise Emptiness, the Buddha did not throw out the suffering.
In the suttas, when we read how the Buddha himself interacted with human beings, he would say: "Your mind is derranged, your mind is suffering".
The Buddha, who was fully enlightened, understood it is "the mind" that suffers. The Buddha understood there is suffering, suffering exits but it is mind that suffers.
Your wrong views throughout this thread align with those of the lama I am referring to.
Both are unable to realise it is "the mind" that suffers and it is "the mind" that is enlighntened.
When "the mind" and "the body" are the reference point, this is "emptiness" because no "self" is imputed.
The Buddha was fully enlightened. The Buddha understood the primary imputation that needs to be extinguished is that of "self".
The Buddha understood when the mind attempts to not impute all things, this is freaky. This is not the middle way.
Like scientists, the fully enlightened Buddha understood the body is diseased and the mind is diseased rather than a "self" is diseased. In fact, the Buddha said "self" itself is a disease.
But you keep posting about the "true self" and other forms of "self".
Have you heard the saying about dragons? That they do not fool you with lies but snare you with the truth?
I think people construing a new filosofy by stripping buddhism of rebirth, karma, uncomfortable suttas and anything else that does not suite their fancy is like dragons snared in their own trap of truths.
IMO of course.
For me Buddhism is like a finely cut diamond where every small part makes the perfect whole. By cutting away a piece the whole gem falls apart. Take away rebirth and the Karma concept falls. Many suttas and parts of suttas must be disregarded or given wholly new meaning because they contradict the so called "Core Buddhism".
The Buddhas own obvious belief in rebirth must also be put aside with no rational explanation of why. Obviously he was only trying to gladen the hearts of laymen by telling them they would live forever and thereby depriving them of a chance to cultivate properly in this life. Yeah go figure the Buddha is a deceiver and lier. Never saw that one comming.
Even Nirvana is stripped to merely resemble death (yes I mean death in a rebirthless sense). So what is then the use of attaining Nirvana when a sufficient dose of Morfin or a fastjump in front of a train will get you there in no time? I just do not get it.
To be fair obviously many people have found inspiration without the concept of rebirth to cultivate. Which I find admireable because I could not do it. I'd go for the Yacht and the beachparties until death do us part...
Confusedly Victor
Ah to H with this I am hitting the sauna for some hedonistic pass time acting as if there is no rebirth.
Jeesh, nothing goes anywhere in this forum without some smartass practising one-upmanship. Give it a rest!
Let me know when you're done bickering.
It will never happen. You might as well shut down this thread right away so the different parties can withdraw and lick their wounds in antipication of the next unsuspecting bugger who asks some innocent question about rebirth.
What you have said above makes no sense. The idea of "rebirth" or being "reborn" implies permanence.
It really is amazing that you are so scrollwise and yet understands so little of what you read. And that you are so hard set in your own illusions while trying so hard to point out the error in other people.Maybe you need a dose of Christianity?
May the moderators have mercy on this comment. Now I am really going to hit the sauna
Also, I attended a talk by a certain lama last year on loving-kindness. I thought it was a wonderful talk, the lama was quite loving, except for one aspect. The lama said the difference between Mahayana & Theravada is Theravada teaches renunciation where as Mahayana teaches loving-kindness.
Ummm...there is no loving-kindness mentioned or practised in Theravada?
In fact, at the same dhamma-centre, the year before, a Theravadin monk provided a talk on loving-kindness, where, one man was so moved, he was in tears & offered a big donation.
Be careful about believing in the propaganda we may hear.
I... have never declared "advanced" or "enlightenment"... anywhere at anytime. One would have to twist my words into a pretzel and re-define my intention for this to be the outcome.
When you make statements like
...one successful transmission from a highly realized master to an open disciple can reveal more information in a timeless second than all time put together for one who is jaded...
it's hard not to see that as a projection of an esoteric realization which is in some way superior to Dazzle's understanding.
A person makes this assumption true only if it is reflective of that understanding.
She could very well have the very same experience? Within her personal context.
Yet, from her comments I can only assume otherwise.
You know nothing about me, or my experiences, or my interaction with my Vajrayana teachers, so you assume a lot Vajraheart.
I choose not to trumpet my experiences to you in some kind of childish tit for tat exchange, ok ? The way you conduct yourself in this discussion does in fact suggest to me that you understand very little about transmission other that what you've read somewhere.
My exchange on these matters is concluded with you, and you can continue to put me down as much as you like - the error lies with you, it makes not the slightest difference to me whatever you think or say.
Transmission is basically the passing on of experiential information. One moment of this level of transmission can illumine a paradigm of information that could be enough to fill many books in expanding word format.
Well, we're clearly moving away from the thread topic, but this contradicts my understanding and experience of the fruits of Budddhist practice. It has led to a set of capabilities for ending suffering, not a body of knowledge. To the extent that it has led anywhere.
My understanding of this is reflected in my teacher's writings here ("Working with a Teacher and the Pointing-Out Instructions.") What he describes there fits well with my experience in practice.
To bring this back on topic, transmission as I understand it has nothing to do with knowledge about post-mortem rebirth.
Knowledge as in insight, as in information concerning ones own causes of suffering and the causes of liberation and bliss.
Having visions reflective of the information of understanding is quite common in transmission.
For you was transmission nothing but a feeling without insight?
In other words, just because the beginning cannot be identified, just as the beginning of the universe cannot be identified, this does not necessary imply a "personal samsara" has existed since the beginning of time.
Comments
both Vajraheart and I have reported experiences of recollecting past lives.
is that not valid? if not, then why?
is that "un-buddhist" (as Dhamma Dhatu implies)? If so, why?
Nirvana is not a mental state. Nirvana is the perfect unconditional stillness that abides throughout the universe. It is an element. The asankhata dhatu. An enlightened mind experiences the Nirvana element as a sense object but Nirvana is not a mental state.
The Theravada teaches all five aggregates are themselves emptiness. Thus, when a Buddha acts, speaks & thinks, these actions are emptiness.
Your view again appears to be wrong view, stuck in existence & non-existence. It seems you are regarding emptiness as 'nothingness'. Emptiness simply means 'empty of self'. The five aggregates can function, empty of 'self'.
As for samsara, sure it is relatively beginningless because generation after generation of human beings have been fettered & hindered by ignorance & craving, passing on this ignorance & craving from generation to generation.
Allow my Bodhicitta to quote the Lord again for our benefit.
Talks about the source of the idea of Alayavijnana being from the Pali.
If Buddhism didn't make Buddhas, then the Buddhas words didn't work. Buddhas words worked, so Buddhas were made who expanded on the teachings and evolved them.
This is not conjecture, this is direct experience, because Buddhism does work, this can be known directly.
Dependent Origination as a personal continuum has no beginning, and is always empty, luminous and free, even if unrecognized, that too is it's freedom, not as an entity, but merely as a creative matrix, a play of energies.
I have an experience to report now.... I visited the planet Zog last week to receive teachings from a Zog master. You don't believe me? Why not?
There is plenty of proof out there for those with eyes to see it.
That these mental formations & mental objects, experienced in the present, are regarded as 'from the beginningless past', is mere conjecture. Again, you are talking to the birds.
For the Buddha, Dependent Origination is a description of twelve conditions that manifest as suffering or dukkha.
The Buddha himself did not teach about a personal continuum or consciousness continuum. The Buddha himself advised any consciousness, be it gross or subtle, is impermanent & not-self (impersonal).
Lastly, your post is contradictory & illogical, even according to rebirth theories because what is empty, luminous & free, being synonymous with Nirvana, cannot be "reborn".
:coffee:
But what others can have proof of, within their minds & hearts, is the cessation of suffering.
It was a nice topic, but now I'm off reading my heart again instead of this debate. Because four pages ago it should already have been clear to me that it obviously isn't going anywhere and isn't helping anyone.
Just make sure you never get attached to views about rebirth and also don't get attached to the suttas. The dhamma is inside ourselves and can not be accurately be spoken or written in words anyway. No matter what language or canon you read, interpretation by mental concepts will always I repeat, always be wrong. No matter what they are. I dare to say that every single word that was spoken in this topic is wrong somehow, including my own, because they are just words and how can you ever describe truth and insights in words?
Keep your mind sharp, keep your heart wide and open and keep your but on the meditation cushion. This is the 8-fold path. There's nothing more you need to know.
See you in another thread
Bye and metta to you all!
Sabre :vimp:
"What is reborn ?
From the Theravada Buddhist perspective there is no fixed position.
The Buddha described the process of rebirth quite clearly, but he also said that all knowledge is based on personal experience. So when he talks about the idea of death and rebirth in a different realm of existence, this is like a map that he laid out. It is not handed out as something that we as individuals must believe, but more as a pattern that can help describe our experience of reality.
Generally speaking, what is reborn are our habits. That is the essence of it. Whatever the mind holds onto is reborn: what we love, hate, fear, adore, and have opinions about. Our identification with these aspects of the mind has a momentum behind it. Attachment is like a flywheel. Enlightenment is the ending of rebirth, enlightenment is really the natural condition of the mind when its not confused, identified, or caught up with any internal or external object."
:om:
He did teach all these things you deny he taught, but... I wish you personal evolution.
The early Mahayana scriptures were written down at around the same time as the texts used in Theravada, even though these teachings existed from earlier times in the oral tradition, so everything you quote as absolute is mere conjecture. Due to the fact that you merely parrot. You don't come from experience, you come from coffee drinking, armchair reading. Not deep retreat experiential information, just mere interpretation of words referencing words in your mind. This is quite clear to me.
Because everything is already luminous and free, empty of inherent bondage, and is reborn in every new moment in a new condition based upon the previous of variant intentions and ideations, chaos has its order. Of course you are wrong, this is only due to a lack of insight though, not that you are inherently wrong. LOL!
We read the same words and reference a different paradigm of definition from within. Your Pali Sutta is not my Pali Sutta. My reading of the Pali Suttas clearly leads to the Mahayana when the bridge is made through experiential insight.
You're idea of Nirvana seems to co-relate with non-existence, and you say mine does? You say it's an element, then it's a true self existence? Your understanding is not clear, as mostly, you just quote scripture without illumination based upon direct experience. Any parrot can do this.
Where have you been? How could you interpret what I said in that way? This continual mis-defining of my words speaks.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhism#Timeline
Vajraheart said:
"For those without the capacity to understand Mahayana, may they evolve through the Theravada until it is exhausted for them."
Thats nothing other than sectarian bullshit!
I spent 20 years offline in involvement with various Vajrayana practices,teachings, empowerments etc (and received very complementary and encouraging comments from 3 or 4 tulkus about my practice and understanding).... until I suddenly needed to move on and absorb myself in the Theravada Forest Tradition's teachings and practice, knowing from previous experience that this was without any doubt,very pure Dhamma without any additional baggage.
I think it's hard, but not impossible. I find that Dzogchen is the best format of word expression reflective of direct insight, as it never deviates from non-substantialized non-dualism, even through the dualistic format of words.
"So stay here, you lucky people,
Let go and be happy in the natural state.
Let your complicated life and everyday confusion alone
And out of quietude, doing nothing, watch the nature of mind.
This piece of advice is from the bottom of my heart:
Fully engage in contemplation and understanding is born;
Cherish non-attachment and delusion dissolves;
And forming no agenda at all reality dawns.
Whatever occurs, whatever it may be, that itself is the key,
And without stopping it or nourishing it, in an even flow,
Freely resting, surrendering to ultimate contemplation,
In naked pristine purity we reach consummation."
“ These texts are considered by Mahāyāna tradition to be buddhavacana, and therefore the legitimate word of the historical Buddha. The śrāvaka tradition, according to some Mahāyāna sutras themselves, rejected these texts as authentic buddhavacana, saying that they were merely inventions, the product of the religious imagination of the Mahāyānist monks who were their fellows. Western scholarship does not go so far as to impugn the religious authority of Mahāyāna sutras, but it tends to assume that they are not the literal word of the historical Śākyamuni Buddha. Unlike the śrāvaka critics just cited, we have no possibility of knowing just who composed and compiled these texts, and for us, removed from the time of their authors by up to two millenia, they are effectively an anonymous literature. It is widely accepted that Mahāyāna sutras constitute a body of literature that began to appear from as early as the 1st century BCE, although the evidence for this date is circumstantial. The concrete evidence for dating any part of this literature is to be found in dated Chinese translations, amongst which we find a body of ten Mahāyāna sutras translated by Lokaksema before 186 C.E. – and these constitute our earliest objectively dated Mahāyāna texts. This picture may be qualified by the analysis of very early manuscripts recently coming out of Afghanistan, but for the meantime this is speculation. In effect we have a vast body of anonymous but relatively coherent literature, of which individual items can only be dated firmly when they were translated into another language at a known date."
Most dating is conjecture, as most texts within Buddhism were oral prier to written. This was during a time before TV, cars, and many distractions... so, Oral history was most likely far more reliable back then due to a lack of distraction.
Your other comments are merely reflective of your capacity, and nothing more.
From the link provided by your timeline...
"Among the earliest and most important references to the term Mahāyāna are those that occur in the Lotus Sūtra (Skt. Saddharma Puṇḍarīka Sūtra) dating between the 1st century BCE and the 1st century CE.[6] Seishi Karashima has suggested that the term first used in an earlier Gandhāri Prakrit version of the Lotus Sūtra was not the term mahāyāna but the Prakrit word mahājāna in the sense of mahājñāna (great knowing).[7] At a later stage when the early Prakrit word was converted into Sanskrit, this mahājāna, being phonetically ambivalent, was mistakenly converted into mahāyāna, possibly due to what may have been a double meaning in the famous Parable of the Burning House, which talks of three vehicles or carts (Skt: yāna)."
Please be more thorough and less reactive.
So, as you can see, the earliest mahayana texts were written around the same time from 100 B.C. to 100 C.E. But, were oral long before that.
Meaning what?
"Please be more thorough and less reactive."
That seems very, very ironic that you should choose those words to describe someone else dear boy !
Anyway, some of us have work to do, goodbye again, may you be well and happy and achieve realisation some day. Good luck with the practice.
.
Dear boy, it is your continual misperception which sees me this way. If I misread my link its because of multitasking, not because of reacting and attempting to dominate as you do.
I simply don't have time to sit around arguing with you all day, because others need my assistance in the offline world...
Vajrayana is far older from India and didn't add much by coming to Tibet except a few clothes and political toys. The main internal practices utilizing yoga postures, mudra, visualization, understanding of energetic pathways, dream yoga... all these methods spring from India identified to be around the same time as Mahayanas emergence textually though not popularized until a few hundred years later. But the earliest written Tantric Sutras date to around the 3rd to 4th century. Even though these texts say that it was taught 16 years after the Buddhas enlightenment to certain select individuals as an oral tradition.
Why are you telling me this stuff about Vajrayana ? I already said I was involved with it offline for 20 years.
I seem to remember you declared enlightenment or advanced realisation somewhere - was it someone else perhaps? There have been a few people making declarations in the last few months, lol !
"Dear boy " isn't belittling, I'm English, how about 'dear fellow' or 'dear chap' then?
Now I really must go.
Mahro Pranams..
(BTW, if you think the transmission had anything to do with revelation of "information," you probably missed the point or had a misleading teacher.)
From this statement I can only assume that you haven't experienced transmission from enlightened lineage?
In Tantra and/or Dzogchen, the Guru/Disciple relationship is paramount!
I'm just saying... don't speak about what you don't know directly. I will only quote scriptures that support my direct experiencing and comment on texts that I have heart felt understanding of.
She could very well have the very same experience? Within her personal context.
Yet, from her comments I can only assume otherwise.
"Information" in the context of my usage in the statement quoted by you merely means experiential realization of scriptural connotation. Mind to mind osmosis, sort of speak. When ones state of self referencing is expanded or deepened by presence, or touch from one who has a far deeper, or subtler state of self reference as clarified by Buddhist scripture. Transmission is basically the passing on of experiential information. One moment of this level of transmission can illumine a paradigm of information that could be enough to fill many books in expanding word format.
I choose not to trumpet my experiences to you in some kind of childish tit for tat exchange, ok ? The way you conduct yourself in this discussion does in fact suggest to me that you understand very little about transmission other that what you've read somewhere.
My exchange on these matters is concluded with you, and you can continue to put me down as much as you like - the error lies with you, it makes not the slightest difference to me whatever you think or say.
May you find happiness and peace of mind.
My understanding of this is reflected in my teacher's writings here ("Working with a Teacher and the Pointing-Out Instructions.") What he describes there fits well with my experience in practice.
To bring this back on topic, transmission as I understand it has nothing to do with knowledge about post-mortem rebirth.
"This samsara is without discoverable beginning".
"A first beginning of ignorance cannot be conceived, (of which it can be said), 'Before that, there was no ignorance and it came to be after that.'
In other words, just because the beginning cannot be identified, just as the beginning of the universe cannot be identified, this does not necessary imply a "personal samsara" has existed since the beginning of time.
Kind regards
As I previously said, the notion of "storehouse" is fine but it is not consciousness (awareness) that is the storehouse. The storehouse is the citta.
Plus, a storehouse does not imply rebirth or a past life.
The Buddha also taught about the anusaya or in-born tendencies.
Not all mental defilements are conditioned. Mental defilements are also in-born.
I have never seen any discourse where the Buddha said the anusaya or latent tendencies come from previous lives.
Regards
The scriptures themselves illuminate. The scriptures are the Buddha's illumination. They illuminate far more brightly than the next "Johnny Come Lately" guru.
Dude. The Buddha taught everything was an element, all mind, matter & Nirvana.
Nirvana is a permanment independent element (unlike the others).
OK. Let's all sing together: :clap: :clap: :clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap:
What you have said above makes no sense. The idea of "rebirth" or being "reborn" implies permanence.
Allow me to quote something for you, which explains why the Buddha himself used the word "birth" in his Dependent Origination rather than the word "rebirth".
Please note, quote comes from an Asian rather than a Westerner.
As for your opinion EVERYTHING is already luminous and free, empty of inherent bondage, this is just Mahayana evangelism. It is the same as the Christian evangelism of "we are all pure because Jesus loves & forgives us".
I suggest you work with human beings or minds that suffer to learn about reality.
However, be warned, even Christian organisations that provide suicide counselling services forbid evangelising to those human beings whose minds are suffering.
:-/
This is mere propaganda. In reality, there was no 2nd or 3rd turning of the wheel. Nothing new about Buddha-Dhamma was taught by the Mahayana. The Theravada includes Dependent Origination & Emptiness.
Mahayana introduced Hinduism into Buddhism, such as the worship of Tara, Avalokitesvara, etc, which are simply re-packaging of pre-existent Hindu deities.
Mahayana emphasised very basic mundane realities, that the Buddha did not really bother with, such as the interdependence of all phenomena.
Worse, Mahayana regressed back to the idea of non-imputing or non-conceptualisation is the highest Nibbana (where as Buddha taught the end of greed, hatred & delusion is the highest Nibbana).
In the Theravada suttas, after enlightenment, the arahants radiated loving-kindness & compassion in every direction and walked around India, sharing the Dhamma, the same as the Mahayana Bodhisatva ideal.
Vajraheart.
As I previously advised you, the mind that penetrates Nirvana can still act with complete freedom. The mind that penetrates Nirvana still acts to help others.
It seems like your mind is lost in sectarian propaganda.
If your mind had only a tiny experience of mundane reality, it would understand most religious groups and many non-religious groups are acting to remedy human suffering in the world.
Give it a rest!
Let me know when you're done bickering.
I listened to a YouTube of a lama this week, who said on the highest level: "There is no suffering".
This same lama I once heard give a live talk about depression, where many people left the talk due to the apparent insensivity & naivity of the lama.
The lama goes too far when he states: "There is no suffering" but the lama believes such a view is emptiness.
The Buddha himself, who was fully enlightened, who was perfect in behaviour & wisdom, who understood conventionality & the ultimate perfectly, advised there is suffering.
But, unlike the lama, the Buddha did not identify suffering with "people" or "persons".
Unlike the lama, when the Buddha threw out "the person" to realise Emptiness, the Buddha did not throw out the suffering.
In the suttas, when we read how the Buddha himself interacted with human beings, he would say: "Your mind is derranged, your mind is suffering".
The Buddha, who was fully enlightened, understood it is "the mind" that suffers. The Buddha understood there is suffering, suffering exits but it is mind that suffers.
Your wrong views throughout this thread align with those of the lama I am referring to.
Both are unable to realise it is "the mind" that suffers and it is "the mind" that is enlighntened.
When "the mind" and "the body" are the reference point, this is "emptiness" because no "self" is imputed.
The Buddha was fully enlightened. The Buddha understood the primary imputation that needs to be extinguished is that of "self".
The Buddha understood when the mind attempts to not impute all things, this is freaky. This is not the middle way.
Like scientists, the fully enlightened Buddha understood the body is diseased and the mind is diseased rather than a "self" is diseased. In fact, the Buddha said "self" itself is a disease.
But you keep posting about the "true self" and other forms of "self".
May your mind be free of disease.
All the best
DD
I think people construing a new filosofy by stripping buddhism of rebirth, karma, uncomfortable suttas and anything else that does not suite their fancy is like dragons snared in their own trap of truths.
IMO of course.
For me Buddhism is like a finely cut diamond where every small part makes the perfect whole. By cutting away a piece the whole gem falls apart. Take away rebirth and the Karma concept falls. Many suttas and parts of suttas must be disregarded or given wholly new meaning because they contradict the so called "Core Buddhism".
The Buddhas own obvious belief in rebirth must also be put aside with no rational explanation of why. Obviously he was only trying to gladen the hearts of laymen by telling them they would live forever and thereby depriving them of a chance to cultivate properly in this life. Yeah go figure the Buddha is a deceiver and lier. Never saw that one comming.
Even Nirvana is stripped to merely resemble death (yes I mean death in a rebirthless sense). So what is then the use of attaining Nirvana when a sufficient dose of Morfin or a fastjump in front of a train will get you there in no time? I just do not get it.
To be fair obviously many people have found inspiration without the concept of rebirth to cultivate. Which I find admireable because I could not do it. I'd go for the Yacht and the beachparties until death do us part...
Confusedly
Victor
Ah to H with this I am hitting the sauna for some hedonistic pass time acting as if there is no rebirth.
May the moderators have mercy on this comment. Now I am really going to hit the sauna
Cheers.
:coffee:
Ummm...there is no loving-kindness mentioned or practised in Theravada?
In fact, at the same dhamma-centre, the year before, a Theravadin monk provided a talk on loving-kindness, where, one man was so moved, he was in tears & offered a big donation.
Be careful about believing in the propaganda we may hear.
:buck:
It's no use trying to cheer me up. I just don't love you anymore.
:bawl:
Having visions reflective of the information of understanding is quite common in transmission.
For you was transmission nothing but a feeling without insight?