GENIUS FORUMS

You are correct Sky. Give this man a cigar. To an enlightened man, all other beings he sees are already enlightened. His teaching is this: "You are already enlightened, why don't you notice it?" When Buddha became enlightened, he fulfilled his vow because with his own enlightenment all beings instantly were perceived as truly are - enlightened. And not only that, but he sees that there is only ONE person anyway, and when he NOTICED he was enlightened, there was no one else who remained unenlightened.

tharpa wrote:It is still worth considering: how can someone who takes the vow not to attain enlightenment until all beings are liberated attain enlightenment?

The vow is meant to indicate a lack of desire to take short-cuts, which would lead to a false nirvana.

Bodhicitta, and the bodhisattva vow, are what divide the Hinayana from the Mahayana path.

The person without bodhicitta thinks, "I want to shortest possible path to wisdom, peace and bliss." He strives headlong for the goal, but in doing so bypasses serious delusions which linger in crannies of his own mind. He achieves his "enlightenment" while there are still "beings" who are unenlightened within his own mind.

By contrast, the bodhisattva is not satisfied unless every element of his mind becomes fully enlightened. He will not become enlightened unless he is fully and properly enlightened. He wants no shortcut to peace and bliss. He will remain in hell if necessary until he has enlightened every corner of his own mind.

unwise wrote:To an enlightened man, all other beings he sees are already enlightened.

You are dreaming.

"Enlightened" means "awakened".

One who is not awakened is therefore not enlightened. That is why the Buddha gave teachings - to try to awaken people.

I use the word 'realized' or 'realization.' To a self realized man, everyone is wearing a watch wondering around asking what time it is. Every now and then a person REALIZES he is wearing a watch, but they all ought to know the time.

'Enlightenment' sounds pretentious. It is misdirection, the possession of the faker and priest. "Pay me and I will show you how to become awakened." Here you have it confused with another heavily ego-luscious concept: genius. Enlightenment is, according to you, for the super intelligent. But REALIZATION is for anybody. Even a dumb ass like myself can Realize his true nature. That is because realization is easy. What is easier than to know what you are? Books and priests and fake gurus make it sound impossible.

unwise wrote:

Even a dumb ass like myself can Realize his true nature. That is because realization is easy.

Self realization is not easy. If it were, then many would have attained it. In fact, virtually no one is even interested in such a subject, which makes self-realization for them impossible.

What is easier than to know what you are?

It is easier by far to remain ignorant. In fact it is extremely difficult to know oneself, because of built-in blinders, and the pain involved in removing them.

I say that you have it backwards. One will not look into self when one is happy in the dream world. It is natural to ignore the self for many many lives.

But all living over time becomes intolerable pain. This is why you never have to hate the rich and popular. All living, over many lives, becomes intolerable pain. At THIS point, one is driven to step out of the ego point of view. Once one is convinced that the ego must go, realization is quite easy and natural. Some gurus say, "When the baby is crying, Mother will come."

As long as one is quite thrilled bullshitting about philosophy and one's own brilliance, realization will not occur. Only through pain will it begin to take shape.

I don't see any free will about any of this. Just a computer program that clicks when the time is right.

Do you still split your basic nature into two distinct portions?

-

There is always the Tao which is empty and one who notices this.

But you reckon there are two distinct Taos, don't you - one that comprises the world and another that comprises a hidden realm beyond.

Is that two basic natures you have there, or just one?

-

unwise wrote:'Enlightenment' sounds pretentious.

It might do to you, but it really means waking up and no longer living in darkness. "Enlightenment" means living in the bright light of truth rather than the gloom and haze of delusion and dream.

"Pay me and I will show you how to become awakened."

Have you heard anyone on this forum asking to be paid for their teachings?

Is anyone on this forum trying to become some kind of celebrity?

Enlightenment is, according to you, for the super intelligent.

I don't know where you get that idea. Only an average intelligence is required. A person with below average intelligence will have a tough time of it, and a badly brain-damaged person will probably find it impossible.

Genius is mainly about courage and good fortune, not I.Q.

But you reckon there are two distinct Taos, don't you - one that comprises the world and another that comprises a hidden realm beyond.

Is that two basic natures you have there, or just one?

I consider the Tao to be all that is manifest and all that is hidden - even beyond detection by any means. It can utterly disappear in some embryonic state. All energy and mental states are within it. But this computer with all of its complexity cannot become aware of itself no more than any computer in this world or some future world will ever become aware of itself.

Pure, consciousness, therefore, lies outside of mental states and the Tao. It is not what is referred to as the Tao. To try to describe it brings one back into descriptions that make up the Tao.

tharpa: It is still worth considering: how can someone who takes the vow not to attain enlightenment until all beings are liberated attain enlightenment?

Peel off the overlay of linear time that you seem to be applying and ask your self the question again.

As is reincarnation. It doesn't really matter if time is an illusion or not, the fact still remains that 99.9999% of people will never experience enlightenment. The Buddha would have known this, so he was obviously refering to something deeper.

-

Unwise wrote:

DQ: But you reckon there are two distinct Taos, don't you - one that comprises the world and another that comprises a hidden realm beyond.

Is that two basic natures you have there, or just one?

U: I consider the Tao to be all that is manifest and all that is hidden - even beyond detection by any means. It can utterly disappear in some embryonic state. All energy and mental states are within it. But this computer with all of its complexity cannot become aware of itself no more than any computer in this world or some future world will ever become aware of itself.

Pure, consciousness, therefore, lies outside of mental states and the Tao. It is not what is referred to as the Tao. To try to describe it brings one back into descriptions that make up the Tao.

If the Tao is all that is manifest, then how is the manifestation of pure consciousness not a part of the Tao?

And if the Tao is all that is manifest, how can it disappear and leave behind the manifestation of an embryonic state?

Why do you make these arbitrary exemptions?

-

Consciousness is never itself manifest. The signs and effects of consciousness are manifest. The brain's use of consciousness is manifest. It is like the heat in an electrical wire. The heat is manifest, but the electricity is invisible.

All of the physical, mental and psychological effects of consciousness are within the Tao, but consciousness itself is NOT in the Tao. The Tao is ALL else. Consciousness as I understand it - pure consciousness - in not mentation, not thinking, not ego. It is the ONE thing that is not related, born from or an aspect of the Tao.

I make this distinction because it is the basis of my experience. It also jibes with ancient arguments among 'enlightened men' about the nature of reality. Even they disagreed with each other.

Unwise wrote:

Consciousness is never itself manifest. The signs and effects of consciousness are manifest. The brain's use of consciousness is manifest. It is like the heat in an electrical wire. The heat is manifest, but the electricity is invisible.

The electicity isn't invisible. It is perfectly detectable by our instruments and is clearly a manifested phenomenon.

Similarly, consciousness is also a manifested phenomenon and detectable by anyone who looks at it. If it wasn't a manifested phenomenon, we wouldn't be able to talk about it. It wouldn't be able to produce any signs or effects. We wouldn't even know of its existence.

At root, if something isn't manifested, it doesn't exist.

All of the physical, mental and psychological effects of consciousness are within the Tao, but consciousness itself is NOT in the Tao. The Tao is ALL else. Consciousness as I understand it - pure consciousness - in not mentation, not thinking, not ego. It is the ONE thing that is not related, born from or an aspect of the Tao.

You still haven't explained why you exclude consciousness from the Tao. From all appearances, it is purely arbitrary on your part, a product of selective thinking. The mere fact that consciousness possesses different characteristics to other things (i.e. that it manifests differently) isn't a good enough reason.

What is so wrong with slotting consciousness into the Tao? I guarantee it will help you understand the formlessness of the Totality much better if you do.

I make this distinction because it is the basis of my experience.

Hallucinations.

It also jibes with ancient arguments among 'enlightened men' about the nature of reality. Even they disagreed with each other.

Genuinely enlightened men can never disagree with each other, not when it comes to the fundamentals. So any disagreements that you've encountered must have either been between enlightened men and deluded men, or between deluded men themselves.

-

carl g

It is easier by far to remain ignorant. In fact it is extremely difficult to know oneself, because of built-in blinders, and the pain involved in removing them.

it is easier until you realize that you are suffering which is not really all that difficult i think many people realize that they are suffering

but few realize why they are suffering and that removing the shards of mirrored glass from their mind though temporarily painful in the end leads to freedom from suffering

christ said i can save you

buddha said you can save yourself

dg

As is reincarnation. It doesn't really matter if time is an illusion or not, the fact still remains that 99.9999% of people will never experience enlightenment. The Buddha would have known this, so he was obviously refering to something deeper.

and how do you know this and where did you get the statistics

do you have empirical proof if not then why should your words be truth when there are centuries of eastern masters whose words can still be read today who see reincarnation as a matter of course

ks

Genius is mainly about courage and good fortune.

good fortune now that is something new unless you mean accumulated fortuitous karma

please explain good fortune

sky wrote:

DQ: As is reincarnation. It doesn't really matter if time is an illusion or not, the fact still remains that 99.9999% of people will never experience enlightenment. The Buddha would have known this, so he was obviously refering to something deeper.

and how do you know this and where did you get the statistics

It's just a guestimate based on my own life-long experiences of the world. As far as spiritual wisdom is concerned, the world is a desert.

The 99.9999% figure is woefully conservative, of course. No way in the world are there over 6000 enlightened sages in the world. There wouldn't be more than a handful at most, if we're lucky.

do you have empirical proof if not then why should your words be truth when there are centuries of eastern masters whose words can still be read today who see reincarnation as a matter of course

Are you refering to the literal, populist view of reincarnation, or the deeper, esoteric view?

To illustrate the difference, consider a cloud in the sky. The literal, populist view of reincarnation says, in effect, that the cloud somehow continues to exist as a cloud even after it has been dispersed in the sky and reappears as that cloud in another part of the sky. The deeper, esoteric view says that the dispersed cloud continues to exert consequences via the movements of the individual water droplets and the subsequent effects they have on the temperature and pressure of the atmosphere, and so on. In this way, the cloud is continuing to "reincarnate".

If you're interested, here is an interesting dialogue which features the Buddha discussing the esoteric interpretation of reincarnation with Kutadanta, a Brahman leader. It's a good read.

-

sky wrote:ks

Genius is mainly about courage and good fortune.

good fortune now that is something new unless you mean accumulated fortuitous karma

please explain good fortune

How is good fortune something new? A child can see the difference between someone with good and bad fortune, and how the one with good fortune has a better chance at completing a task. It's the same deal with a person striving to attain a genius state of mind. He can dedicate every ounce of effort he can muster into becoming a genius, but if he experiences a moment of bad fortune such as getting killed in a car accident before he completes the task, rest assured he will not become a genius.

i meant new as in not included in

Truth, Courage, Honesty, Logic, Masculinity, Wisdom, Perfection

and i was asking kevin since he said it i wanted to know what he meant

obviously being killed or in a coma would be an impediment to enlightenment duh

i think he meant something else

sky wrote:i meant new as in not included in

Truth, Courage, Honesty, Logic, Masculinity, Wisdom, Perfection

and i was asking kevin since he said it i wanted to know what he meant

obviously being killed or in a coma would be an impediment to enlightenment duh

i think he meant something else

Things like Truth, Courage, Honesty, Logic, Masculinity, Wisdom, and Perfection are things that can only be attained through consciousness. Fortune is a matter of pure chance, making it unpredictable and impossible for it to plan for, consciousness is completely irrelevant as far as this goes. Now do you see the ridiculousness in putting good fortune and something like courage in the same category of phenomena? Since Kevin openly values what this forum was created for, which includes logic, I used logical means to understand what he meant, meaning the explanation I gave you is exactly what he meant.

If a person happens to value Truth, Courage, Honesty, Logic, Masculinity, Wisdom, Perfection, etc, then he is a recipient of good fortune. None of us had any say over what our genes, upbringing, and personalities would turn out to be like. It all boils down to chance.

-