If "everything is energy" then what does this mean?

[godnotgod]

Pathetic.

Typical Chopra clone.

Of course. Only YOU are the enlightened one, amidst the throngs of the ignorant.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Who said anything about God?

Better change your name then. "Chopra-mini-me" perhaps?

 

[atanu]

Many words are used and they mean different things for different people. But words such as Immutable, Absolute, Transcendental are used by Buddhist teachers of all varieties: Zen, Mahayana, and Theravada. A few samples.

http://selfdefinition.org/zen/Zen-and-Dzogchen--12-page-article.pdf
Thus, Absolute or Ultimate Truth—shunyata—is both origin and aim. While the gradualist path of the Hinayana and the Mahayana uses prajna, the Inner Tantras, and especially the Ati Yoga of Dzogchen, utilise the non-coneptual, nondual innate primordial wisdom (sahajajnana, yeshe, gnosis) the natural luminosity of essential mind nature. This blissful intuitive wisdom cannot be grasped by discursive, conceptual analytic meditation (prajna). It can only be directly realised (pratyaksa), suddenly, through transmission and empowerment by the master. It is then brought to fruition by nondual meditation under the guidance of the master. The primordial wisdom is the Buddha Nature, the tathagatagarbha,.......

http://buddhism.about.com/od/mahayanabuddhism/a/aboutmahayana.htm
Connected to sunyata is the teaching that Buddha Nature is the immutable nature of all beings....
Very simply, dharmakaya is the body of absolute truth,....

http://www.thezensite.com/ZenEssays/Philosophical/Absolute_in_Chan.htm
The Womb of Tathaagata spoken by the Buddha means aalayavij~naana; however, those of defective knowledge do not understand that the Womb is the aalayavij~naana. The relationship between the pure Womb of Tathaagata and the worldly aalayavij~naana resembles gold and its productions such as finger-rings; the characteristics might be different, yet [the substance] is not.(30)

http://www.budsas.org/ebud/ebdha135.htm
Buddhism has been a religion of practices than of grace. It changed from the radical pluralism of Hinayana to the absolutism of the Mahayana. There was felt the need for a mediating principle between the absolute and phenomenal being. Buddha is that mediator. In Prajnaparamita, as non-dual knowledge, it is equated with Tathagata and as prajna he is identical with the absolute; but as a human being subjecting himself to all limitations, he is at once phenomenal. Relation of the Tathagata to the Absolute (prajna-sunyata) is one sided; the former depends on the latter, and not vice verse.

The late Tibetan master Kalu Rinpoche said: "You live in illusion and the appearance of things. There is reality, you are that reality. When you understand this, you will see that you are nothing. And being nothing, you are everything. That is all."

Not a good example. We have direct evidence of the Big Bang. We have very indirect evidence of the other three. As to the last part, GodnotGod would say that you are an illusion, a trick of the light, smoke on the winds of time. I don't hold that view.

Ymir. Unless compelled by any exceptional reason, this will be my last post here, because ego arguments will not lead anywhere but will only waste our precious time, which must be better utilised for study and meditation.

IMO, you and Rick are propounding your personal experiences/beliefs. There is no problem there. But while you are a gentle and humorous soul, the same cannot be said of the latter, whose hallmark is rudeness and a total reluctance to accept that there are several Buddhist views.

If you experience and describe Prajnana as Prajnana1, 2, 3 ..., n or Sunyata as Sunyata 1, 2, 3 ..., n, I do not have a problem, till you do not abuse or troll me for disagreeing with you and agreeing to the citations above. In the citations shown (and there are numerous more), Prajnana, Sunyata and Nirvana are understood as absolute/immutable. See the highlights please.

If Nirvana is defined as unborn, unformed, uncreated then I do not see any changing form in it. In Sunyata, which uses Prajnana as the mode of discernment, there is no sense/mind and objects thereof. I do we see any changing form in it. And above cited texts do conform to what we say.

Bye. Regards. YMMV.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Only YOU are the enlightened one, amidst the throngs of the ignorant.

Again, pure projection on your part. You have no awareness of your own ego, which is enormous and all-pervasive, rather like Brahman.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

IMO, you and Rick are propounding your personal experiences/beliefs.

And so are you. The problem is that you are trying to view Buddhist teachings through a Hindu lens and therefore missing the point. It still seems odd that a Hindu is lecturing a Buddhist about a Buddhist teaching, and clearly you have an axe to grind here. How would you feel if I started lecturing you about Hindu stuff? Not very happy I'm sure. It's bad enough being lectured by a Chopra clone and a woolly syncretist, but you should really know better.

As The Heart Sutra explains, the Bodhisattva uses prajna wisdom to see the emptiness of the aggregates, and attains Nirvana, awakening. But Nirvana is empty. And emptiness is empty too. There are no absolutes here, and certainly no "The Absolute".

 

[godnotgod]

But while you are a gentle and humorous soul, the same cannot be said of the latter, whose hallmark is rudeness and a total reluctance to accept that there are several Buddhist views.

But now the mouse has come out as well with his violent aggression, wanting to 'kick the s**t out of two forum members because he does not know how to deal with problems. and spiney has the nerve to call others 'immature' when he also wants to do his violence to others out of his frustration that he cannot convince via his dogma.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

But now the mouse has come out as well with his violent aggression, wanting to 'kick the s**t out of two forum members because he does not know how to deal with problems. and spiney has the nerve to call others 'immature' when he also wants to do his violence to others out of his frustration that he cannot convince via his dogma.

The irony. You hijack a thread ( again ) and insult everyone who disagrees with you, then you whinge when people respond in kind. We weren't talking about violence to people ( as you well know ), we were talking about kicking the **** out of your Pretentious Proper Nouns, which is something they truly deserve.

So how about it? Can you throw your "Absolute" on the fire? Of course you can't, you are far too attached to your God-substitute comfort blanket.

Maybe you could start with throwing your "Cosmic Consciousness" on the fire, that might be easier because you haven't talked about it so much lately, maybe you're a bit bored with it?

 

[YmirGF]

Ymir. Unless compelled by any exceptional reason, this will be my last post here, because ego arguments will not lead anywhere but will only waste our precious time, which must be better utilised for study and meditation.

IMO, you and Rick are propounding your personal experiences/beliefs. There is no problem there. But while you are a gentle and humorous soul, the same cannot be said of the latter, whose hallmark is rudeness and a total reluctance to accept that there are several Buddhist views.

If you experience and describe Prajnana as Prajnana1, 2, 3 ..., n or Sunyata as Sunyata 1, 2, 3 ..., n, I do not have a problem, till you do not abuse or troll me for disagreeing with you and agreeing to the citations above. In the citations shown (and there are numerous more), Prajnana, Sunyata and Nirvana are understood as absolute/immutable. See the highlights please.

If Nirvana is defined as unborn, unformed, uncreated then I do not see any changing form in it. In Sunyata, which uses Prajnana as the mode of discernment, there is no sense/mind and objects thereof. I do we see any changing form in it. And above cited texts do conform to what we say.

Bye. Regards. YMMV.

I have no difficulty accepting what you have to say, Atanu. I might not agree, but I accept the authenticity of your approach. I know what you mean about the ego arguments as that is why I went and played in the garden for an hour. (It looks quite lovely now too for such a small amount of effort. The bush fuchsia is getting quite large now and was sorrily in need of copious amounts of water. It's about 5 square meters and about 3-4 high and is a riot of little magenta bell-like flowers.) I agree on the study and meditation too, but my meditations no longer really end and run seamlessly one into the next. It's all perspective. When one is seeing as things are all the time, there is no longer any coming or going - just the silent mirth of being.

 

[godnotgod]

The irony. You hijack a thread ( again ) and insult everyone who disagrees with you, then you whinge when people respond in kind. We weren't talking about violence to people ( as you well know ), we were talking about kicking the **** out of your Pretentious Proper Nouns, which is something they truly deserve.

Maybe they'll return the favor.

So how about it? Can you throw your "Absolute" on the fire? Of course you can't, you are far too attached to your God-substitute comfort blanket.

The Absolute is not my doing.

Maybe you could start with throwing your "Cosmic Consciousness" on the fire, that might be easier because you haven't talked about it so much lately, maybe you're a bit bored with it?

You seem to be pretty riled up about it. Does Chopra get your goat? Maybe you'd like to get him in the alley too. Or maybe he'll get you. Or maybe he already has you, since you continue to wriggle and squirm every time his name is mentioned. Is he your guru? Do you envy his success and stature because you have not yet attained the fruits of meditation?

Now return to your mat and count your breath. Slowly, your aggression will drop away a chunk at a time so you can finally arrive at 0. Then you can begin. Until then, your mind is squirming like a toad, even after 30 years of practice, you still cannot subdue it's Knee Jerk, Salivating Pavlovian Doggie Syndrome.

I am glad to see you finally agree that The Unconditioned is the same as The Absolute. Perhaps there is some hope for you after all, but I doubt it.

 

[godnotgod]

GodnotGod would say that you are an illusion, a trick of the light, smoke on the winds of time.

Not exactly. It is the conditioned self that is illusory; the one who was born to such and such parents; went to such and such schools; married so and so; worked at XYZ Corporation; grew old and died. That is the self of Identification, which attracted accretions to himself over the years and thinks of himself as all of those things; his beliefs, his titles, his accomplishments, his credentials. None of that is who he really is. His life is fictional. He only realizes this fact upon a spiritual awakening to his true, original nature, before his conditioning, what the Taoists call 'The Uncarved Block'. This authentic Self is unborn and unconditioned. It is in the state of mind Krishnamurti calls 'Innocency'. (no, not innocence, as in guilt and innocence). Innocency just sees things as they are, without judgement.

 

[godnotgod]

Then replace God with whatever you have in mind.

I don't need to replace anything with something else. What You and I exist within has always been the case, that something being The Universe, which supports you 100%, both inside and out.

 

[godnotgod]

Pathetic.

Typical Chopra clone.

The author is not saying it; Mahayana Buddhism is saying it!

 

[godnotgod]

Yes, they're all rubbish, let's burn the lot of them.

You should. They are a threat to you. Then you'll be safe in your cozy little cave with those nice, dancing cave wall shadows you think is reality. Nice'n square, to fit perfectly into those nice round holes, such as 'The Unconditioned'.

 

[godnotgod]

Perhaps, I'm just not used to trying to work with such august personalities who have their finger on the living pulse of reality, though if that were in fact true, I would expect them to be much, much more understanding. I just don't see much evidence of that greater understanding, though both talk a good game.

'Understanding' of what? Delusive thought? Can't speak for ben, but I don't understand delusion, but I can certainly point to it.

 

[godnotgod]

You are surgically attached to your "Absolute", which is really just a substitute for God, like your "Cosmic Consciousness".

There can be no attachment to The Absolute as there is nothing to grab hold of. If anything, it contains YOU.

 

[godnotgod]

In any case the references are mostly to absolute TRUTH, not to the "Absolute" you are so attached to.

from atanu's quote:

In Prajnaparamita, as non-dual knowledge, it is equated with Tathagata and as prajna he is identical with the absolute

Now go to your room!

 

[godnotgod]

So what experience have YOU had in the Theravada school? I don't think you've had any.....

It was the stagnation that drove me away.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

It was the stagnation that drove me away.

I don't believe you've had any real experience of the Theravada schools, your ignorance of it is glaringly obvious. You had a brief involvement with Zen and then converted to Choprism, all downhill from there.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

There can be no attachment to The Absolute as there is nothing to grab hold of. If anything, it contains YOU.

You are clearly obsessed with the IDEA of the "The Absolute", highly attached to it, it's your God substitute.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

You should. They are a threat to you.

No, they are just metaphysical straws that you grasp at. If you let them go you will see things more clearly. You can leave your bizarre DIY religion in the rabbit-hole with Alice and the Mad Hatter and return to the surface. It will be bright initially but you will soon get used to it. Free at last! Free from all those tiresome PPNs! Liberation!