Originally posted by An Eternal Now:Sorry, I mean Buddha did not, not did. It would be a mistake to attribute all cases of enlightenment to kundalini as most people achieve enlightenment not through kundalini practice.
i am interested to know how you think Buddha achieved his enlightenment since we are on this topic now.
Personally i realise that each nomination will define enlightenment in different way. Mahayana will define as being able to go to Pureland with sariras to prove after cremation as the ultimate goal of enlightenment. Zen will define it in another way. Same goes for Theravanda and Taoism.
The Middle Way
The consciousness that give rise to forms? You mean comprehending the concept of 5 aggregates and the conditioned state of forms etc.?
By the way, do you think one can attain Jhana states if they still cannot follow the 5 precepts 100% daily?
1. Sense desire
2. Anger
3. Sloth and torpor;
4. Agitation and worry
5. Extreme skepticism
Listed above are the five hindrances to meditation. Each one or a combination of more than one can prevent a successful practice. If you have too much sense desire you will find your mind wandering in meditation toward those things which you crave. If you are full of anger, you will be agitated and it will be very difficult to stay concentrated on your meditation subject. Sloth and torpor refers to sluggish-ness. You may just be tired and in need of rest. After you are rested, you can return to your meditation practice. Agitation and worry will keep your mind occupied away from your subject the same way that anger works in that way. Extreme skepticism refers to your doubts in the Dhamma or your ability to practice. This is normal for any meditator, but as you learn more, the doubt will fade and you will proceed with your practice.
Very few people can eliminate all five hindrances all the time, except for enlightened ones. But there may be times when your concentration is strong and you can eliminate the five hindrances for at least a meditation session. When this happens there is the opportunity to enter some advanced states known as jhana.
Originally posted by An Eternal Now:Not all who attained realisation done so by kundalini practice. I did not, buddha did not as pointed to you earlier already. He practiced anapanasati.
Edited for typo
Awareness of breathing meditation right?
For the Vajrayana , Enlightenment is Rainbow Body.
It is impossible to count exactly how many students in Tibet received empowerment from Padmakara in person, but the most renowned are the original 25 disciples, the intermediate 25 disciples and the later 17 and 21 disciples. There were 80 of his students who attained rainbow body at Yerpa and also the 108 meditators at Chuwori, the 30 tantrikas at Yangdzong, the 55 realized ones at Sheldrag. Of female disciples there were the 25 dakini students and seven yoginis. Many of these close had bloodlines that have continued until the present day.
At present he dwells on the vidyadhara level of spontaneous presence in the form of the regent of Vajradhara, unshakable for as long as samsara remains. Full of compassion he sends out emanations to benefit beings. Even after the teachings of the Vinaya have perished he will appear among the tantric practitioners. There will be many destined disciples who attain rainbow body. In the future, when Buddha Maitreya appears in this world, Padmakara will emanate as Drowa Kundul and spread the teachings of Secret Mantra to all worthy people."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Padmasambhava
The similarity of Mahayana and Vajrayana is the prediction of Maitreya Buddha coming.
Originally posted by bikkhu:The consciousness that give rise to forms? You mean comprehending the concept of 5 aggregates and the conditioned state of forms etc.?
By the way, do you think one can attain Jhana states if they still cannot follow the 5 precepts 100% daily?
Hi AEN,
Thanks for your explanation.
Unchanging self? Do you mean complete self-acceptance? Like self-actualisation in Psy? How far is that from arahat stage?
It was said that when completely accepted that one has no identity, but just consists of 5 ever-changing aggregates, the idea of "self" will be "killed".
It is hard to imagine how do one function in daily life as a layperson with the belief of "self" destroyed?
What's your view on this?
No, it means one realises the luminous essence of consciousness. But then the aggregate of consciousness, being vivid, present and intimate as it is, is mistaken to be a true self. That is why other religions teach a true atman and not anatta. When self-view is destroyed, life goes on with much greater clarity, wisdom and liberation. Action is seen to arise via dependent origination and not an agent. There is no doer, but action is. No seer, but seeing happens.
As what Ven Buddhaghosa said:
"Mere suffering is, not any sufferer is found
The deeds exist, but no performer of the deeds:
Nibbana is, but not the man that enters it, The path is, but no wanderer is to be seen."
"Everywhere, in all the realms of existence, the noble disciple sees only mental and corporeal phenomena kept going through the concatenation of causes and effects.
No producer of the volitional act or kamma does he see apart from the kamma, no recipient of the kamma-result apart from the result. And he is well aware that wise men are using merely conventional language, when, with regard to a kammical act, they speak of a doer, or with regard to a kamma-result, they speak of the recipient of the result.
No doer of the deeds is found,
No one who ever reaps their fruits;
Empty phenomena roll on: This only is the correct view. And while the deeds and their results
Roll on and on, conditioned all, There is no first beginning found,
Just as it is with seed and tree.
... No god, no Brahma, can be called
The maker of this wheel of life:
Empty phenomena roll on,
Dependent on conditions all."
I am curious to know your opinion on this (lay devotee part):
http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Theravada
By the way, which school do you belong to or are you most influenced by?
Originally posted by An Eternal Now:Almond cookies, yes awareness of breathing
After the awareness of breathing, what is next ?
Awareness of breathing can lead to liberation. As for the steps see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anapanasati#Stages_of_.C4.80n.C4.81p.C4.81nasati
Hi AEN,
What you think of this? (lay devotee part):
http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Theravada
By the way, which school do you belong to or are you most influenced by?
Originally posted by Wiser:
After the awareness of breathing, what is next ?With awareness of breath, next is to note whatever that arises in the sense sphere. Do not cling on to or be moved by whatever arises, just simply note.
When pain arises, note pain, pain.
When desire to stand arises, note desire, desire.
Keep at this without any judgement of our abilities and feelings. When conditions are right, we will have initial realization of Nama and Rupa, mind and body.
This is the way of vipassana.
Originally posted by bikkhu:Hi AEN,
What you think of this? (lay devotee part):
http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Theravada
By the way, which school do you belong to or are you most influenced by?
I follow Mahayana but I have great appreciation of teachings from Theravada, Mahayana and Vajrayana.
Awareness of breathing is very good teachings. Personally though, i think it is only a very good solid foundation for meditation but there is more to come.
For example, you can't achieve the Rainbow Body with just awareness of breathing.
I guess individual's goal is different.
Originally posted by An Eternal Now:I follow Mahayana but I have great appreciation of teachings from Theravada, Mahayana and Vajrayana.
Haha reminds me of something i have read...
http://moonpointer.com/index.php?itemid=1728
Being the teacher of many teachings, the Buddha gave no fixed teaching,
though all teachings centre around compassion and wisdom. - Stonepeace
A Buddhist friend asked, “Which Buddhist tradition do you practise?” I always hesitate to give a direct answer - simply because there is really no direct answer that is fair. The usual answer I give is - I'm an “MTV Buddhist”. “M” stands for the Mahayana tradition, “T” for Theravada and “V” for Vajrayana. (Together, these are the three main living Buddhist traditions.) It's kind of an fitting answer because many of my generation lived at the advent of colourful MTV culture - a metaphor for the melting pot of multiple genres of mish-mash “stuff”. It was “traditional” to mix and match teachings of various traditions, though there is the danger of it being merely frivolous “window-shopping”. Usually, the next question asked is - “How is it possible not to choose one Buddhist tradition after years of studying and practising Buddhism?”
Yes, one should focus eventually, so as to cultivate deeper. I focus on “tradition X”. It's Pure Land Buddhism in my case, as my main practice - but with Theravada meditation foundations, some Vajrayana flavouring, a touch of Zen etc... That's what I meant by “mish-mash”! If you can synthesise various teachings comfortably, why not? But I would still hesitate to pronounce myself as an “X-practitioner” - because there are more to the Buddhist teachings I try to live up to, than only the teachings popularly ascribed specifically to “X Buddhism”. It is perfectly natural that after exploring various Buddhist traditions, one eventually settles on one that one has strong afinity with. But it is also perfectly natural that the more one explores that tradition, one eventually discovers how it is interlinked to aspects of the Dharma found emphasised in other traditions.
As in the Hua-yen (Avatamsaka) teachings of universal interconnectivity, the stucture of the Dharma is a case of intricate “all-in-one” and “one-in-all”. As such, it is difficult to pigeon-hole personal Buddhist practice in terms of one single tradition. As a monk I met once mentioned that though he is Theravadin in appearance, he considers himself not so much as “non-sectarian” in outlook, but “pre-sectarian” - adhering to Buddhism before segregation in terms of traditions. Me? “Multi-sectarian” sounds nicely inclusive. It would seem ridiculously small-minded to miss wonderfully useful teachings that are conventionally outside of the illusory boundaries of one's tradition. Why not keep an open heart and mind, and make the best of whatever you encounter? After all, as the Buddha put it, just as the sea is salty everywhere, the universal “taste” of all his teachings is that of spiritual freedom.
Originally posted by Wiser:
i am interested to know how you think Buddha achieved his enlightenment since we are on this topic now.Personally i realise that each nomination will define enlightenment in different way. Mahayana will define as being able to go to Pureland with sariras to prove after cremation as the ultimate goal of enlightenment. Zen will define it in another way. Same goes for Theravanda and Taoism.
first of all, zen is mahayana. mahayana is not a sect, anyone that wishes to attain buddhahood can be considered mahayana. the school that wishes to go pure land is pure land school, one of the sub schools of mahayana. secondly they all understand enlightenment in the same way. there is no different understandings in different school. hinayana path realises anatta, no self, this is their enlightenment. mahayana realise twofold emptiness, this is their enlightenment. zen aims to realise twofold emptiness through meditation and koan this life, this is their aim. pure land sch generally aims to obtain birth in pure land and then attain enlightenment there. what is their understanding of enlightenment? when the flower opens, the inhabitant of pure land sees the buddha and realises birthlessness. meaning at that time he realises emptiness and becomes enlightened. same thing, only that pure land people seek to attain it in afterlife.
anapanasati dont lead to rainbow body but it can lead to enlightenment. shakyamuni buddha did not manifest rainbow body anyway.
Hi AEN,
Sound advice.
Shakyamuni Buddha didn't manifest a rainbow body but his rebirth as Guru Padmasambhva did and taught the method too. ( from what i understand)