2 edits
Originally posted by black beetleYou bow to someone out of respect for the person ,not because they are a buddha, not as some think that they are masters over them).
I pay homage to all the sentient beings with Perfected Nature.
All human beings are potentially perfect but incidentally obscured; when this obscuration is cleared, they are in oneness with their Perfected Nature.
Thus I have heard: faith is having a pure mind, without turbidity or filth. So, when you know yourself you know everything. The Pureland is ...[text shortened]... Unmistaken Knowledge And Full Attainment of the Perfected Nature.
May All Beings Be Happy!
😵
The term "master" means mastering ones own dharma. There is no master for the students unless the students themselves wish to call him/her that.
edit:there is no master except for the " 'master' within".
Originally posted by black beetleThere are different states of mind.
I pay homage to all the sentient beings with Perfected Nature.
All human beings are potentially perfect but incidentally obscured; when this obscuration is cleared, they are in oneness with their Perfected Nature.
Thus I have heard: faith is having a pure mind, without turbidity or filth. So, when you know yourself you know everything. The Pureland is ...[text shortened]... Unmistaken Knowledge And Full Attainment of the Perfected Nature.
May All Beings Be Happy!
😵
You have claimed clear mind is the highest attainment
Clear mind is a mind that has realized emptiness.
Realizing this emptiness one has now achieved the Buddha nature.
The Buddha nature is then the non-conceptual pure empty mind.
Is this correct?
1 edit
Originally posted by DasaAs a basic buddhist theory,more or less correct FROM ONE POINT OF VIEW/APPROACH.
There are different states of mind.
You have claimed clear mind is the highest attainment
Clear mind is a mind that has realized emptiness.
Realizing this emptiness one has now achieved the Buddha nature.
The Buddha nature is then the non-conceptual pure empty mind.
Is this correct?
but I will let black beetle answer, and say nothing furthur for now,
Originally posted by whodeySite isn't arguementative, whodey. Chess provides a functional alternative. The RHP 'Spirituality Forum' is 'arguementative' and has been since its inception. Please refrain for concluding my post conveys a value judgement. This forum is the most active on the site because guys (and gals) enjoy strutting their stuff and asserting themselves, subtlely nuanced and/or sandpaper abraisive, in public. Allies and kindred spirits as well as detractors and arch rivalries inevitably cross paths, enhancing the interest and drama.
Arguementative? Since when is this site arguementative? 😲
.
Originally posted by DasaNo😵
There are different states of mind.
You have claimed clear mind is the highest attainment
Clear mind is a mind that has realized emptiness.
Realizing this emptiness one has now achieved the Buddha nature.
The Buddha nature is then the non-conceptual pure empty mind.
Is this correct?
Originally posted by DasaIn the Buddhist tradition, the overcoming of Avidya, Dvesa and Kama is considered crucial. Because, from Avidya arise the main cause of Dukkha (1. by means of the fears -projected by the ego- that they end up at the Five Skanda; 2. by means of attachment that ends up either as desire, or as repulsion or both simultaneously). Repulsion ends up either as hatred and/ or arrogance (Ahamkara), or as desire and jealousy (Irsya). In the Human realm of existence, these 5 Samsaric Poisons are manifested mainly through arrogance and desire.
Where have I misunderstood.
I would think the Buddha nature IS the non-conceptual empty mind (from online reading)
“Clear mind” is not the mind that has realized emptiness (because emptiness arises when a self is wrongly attributed to an observer. Therefore emptiness does not arise on its own and therefore it is not some kind of a metaphysic absolute truth, for it is just a corrective view upon a false approach about the nature of the observers. Our nature is mind, self is mind, mind is empty. Dissolving the self into no-self one creates the self from no-self; then the self reveals its true nature as no-self, and the no-self reveals its true nature as self, pointing towards the Nature -self and no-self in oneness). Realizing emptiness, one just goes a step towards Buddhahood, and Buddhahood is nothing but true principle. Therefore the “Buddha nature” (of course when one has overcome the 5 Samsaric poisons and has, thus, establish a mind without turbidity and filth) is not separated from one’s nature, it is simply one’s own nature unobstructed.
Since the experience of no-self cannot be described by any form of language, once one attempts to make a description the transcendental is denied. Thus, in the Buddhist tradition, it is simply experienced as an occurrence, as an event: Kasyapa smiled. The experience of his transformation means that the point of his attention was shifted, breaking the barriers of the patriarchs. After satori (pure experience and pure understanding in oneness), all things and "selves" are presented and realized in a state of uninterrupted continuity. To a Buddha, this continuity is presented and manifested within Trikaya, the three dimensions of existence (dharmakaya, samboghakaya, nirmanakaya)
😵
Originally posted by black beetleThis is a bunch of nonsense.
In the Buddhist tradition, the overcoming of Avidya, Dvesa and Kama is considered crucial. Because, from Avidya arise the main cause of Dukkha (1. by means of the fears -projected by the ego- that they end up at the Five Skanda; 2. by means of attachment that ends up either as desire, or as repulsion or both simultaneously). Repulsion ends up either as ...[text shortened]... within Trikaya, the three dimensions of existence (dharmakaya, samboghakaya, nirmanakaya)
😵
1 edit
Originally posted by black beetleClearing ones mind merely lets the next vice/obstacle to "asrise" and be dealt with OR put aside to be dealt with later. But it will have to be dealt with, the order doesn't seem to matter.
In the Buddhist tradition, the overcoming of Avidya, Dvesa and Kama is considered crucial. Because, from Avidya arise the main cause of Dukkha (1. by means of the fears -projected by the ego- that they end up at the Five Skanda; 2. by means of attachment that ends up either as desire, or as repulsion or both simultaneously). Repulsion ends up either as within Trikaya, the three dimensions of existence (dharmakaya, samboghakaya, nirmanakaya)
😵
BB may correct me on this point.
Actually he may refute my whole post 🙂
Originally posted by Rajk999Is this a valid entry?
FIRST ENTRY BY JESUS CHRIST :
Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Blessed are they that mourn: for they shall be comforted. Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth. Blessed are they which do hunger and thirst after righteousness: for they shall be filled. Blessed are the merciful: for they shall obtain mercy ...[text shortened]... ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.
(Matthew 5:3-48)
Originally posted by karoly aczelI think he was talking about the bardo of Dharmata and the way mind appears to perceive Buddha's dharmakaya. If he actually tried to describe one's connection to Amithaba at the fourth bardo in a condition where death and birth do not arise permanently, he is right -however this very condition (known as "First Clear Light" in the Dzogchen tradition) is the product of a nirmanakaya boddhisatva's process. Since at first one establishes clear mind, and then one meditates on the bardo of Dharmata, our Dasa's string of thought is irrelevant to the process towards the establishment (in our current realm of existence) of nirmanakaya boddhisatva's clear mind I described at my entry at this thread
No? Sounds he started with the right sort of premise but then got it wrong on the fourth line. ? .
😵
Originally posted by karoly aczelTo a clear mind, desire does not arise; so clear mind does not taste Karma😵
Clearing ones mind merely lets the next vice/obstacle to "asrise" and be dealt with OR put aside to be dealt with later. But it will have to be dealt with, the order doesn't seem to matter.
BB may correct me on this point.
Actually he may refute my whole post 🙂