TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Empty, Since I've been somewhat critical of your posts in the past, I figured I should balance that with praise for this one. *Much* improved tone and intent. I also tend to agree with what you said.
Gee TurqB, you're rewarding me? But you're so lavish in applying your praise and blame to everyone that I have to temper my shouts of halleluyah. That also presents me with a quandry - in this case about your likes and dislikes. In fact it reminds me of a comment Norman Mailer made in an interview. I believe he wrote in longhand and used a typest to make copy. He pointed out when he hired her that he would be forced to fire her quickly if she showed any particular emotion while bringing him his copy. He said he realized that once he started detecting her subtle valuations of his written pieces he would be finished - within a week he would be writing exclusively for her. You get my meaning? Vaj and I took part of our dialogue offline so we can discuss a couple of issues. As far as tone and intent - don't take my stuff so seriously that you need to measure my intent. You analysis can only be inferential. Understand that I enjoy the artful insult because I know the joke is on me. "Dude", I trade lies with Death every day. It is a my main source for gossip and means that when I look in the mirror not even I can can believe what that other guy's make believe is about. Sorry I can't talk more at the moment but I have to get to work. I'm a slave to many women and you know ... I just can't be late. empty hillbilly My concern is not with the actual "tests" that some traditions use to "measure" enlightenment in those that claim it, but with the willingness of the claimants to undergo such tests. Those who are will- ing to examine their subjective experiences are IMO making a statement about who they are and how they relate to other people. Those who adamantly refuse to examine their subjective experiences -- much less when they make statements about the ignorance of those requesting that they do so, or who suggest that those requesters are less evolved than they are -- are making a statement of another kind. Neither "statement" says anything definitive about the state of consciousness of the claimant. But it does tend to trigger "preference reactions" in me. I prefer not to spend a lot of time with people who can only relate to others in terms of, "This is how things are; you either accept it or you don't." IMO that's a manifestation of trying to emulate the master-disciple relationship they've seen in their teachers, *expecting* their declar- ations to be treated *as* declarations the way they've tended to treate the declarations of their teachers. And while that's one way of addressing life, and making one's Way through it, I'd kinda prefer to spend my time with others who don't run that particular act. --- In [email protected], billy jim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Vaj, > > I'm wondering what criteria they used? Please see if you can find out or at least get a trackable reference. There is conflict at times among the Tibetans about the relationship between siddhis and jnana. Their term for siddhi ,"abhijna", reflects this. I'll ask YKR when he gets here tomorrow about it. He has talked a bit about the usual Tummo tests and you've seen the short version is on his website. But that is a test only of one siddhi. > > I'm thinking in terms of Kalu Rimpoche's statement about himself. Since the abhidharma texts state that at the first bhumi the bodhisattva can project multiple transformation bodies at will throughout the world, his conclusion was that he wasn't even at the first bhumi because he couldn't do that yet. This is from a monk who spent years meditating in a box. This is a sign to me of the catholic over-literalism of the Tibetans when they interpret the Sutras and Abhidharma texts. > > Thus I'm wondering if the DL's office was using the same kind of criteria with this claimant to enlightenment. > > Also, I don't know if you know YKR well enough (I saw your name on his web email list) but I can pass any type of message or greeting you want to him this weekend. And, by the way, my differences with you have to do with mmy's teaching and techniques. As far as YKR, I observe proper Sangha samaya. You can do this offline if you so prefer. He'll be at my house Friday so get me soon if you are interested. You can get me at emptybillatyahoodotcom. > > `Nough said. > > hep me jezuz > I'm just an > empty headed > hill billy > > > Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Jul 25, 2007, at 10:17 AM, new.morning wrote: > > Can you absolutely know that it's true? > > > > I hate to bring up what seems obvious to me, but there are objective ways to test states of enlightenment which have been used successfully for thousands of years. These are simple tests. If you claim to be enlightened thru an approach that used samadhi--nitya-samadhi (permanent samadhi, CC) as MMY called it, it is easy to test. Rather recently there was a rather famous western Tibetan Buddhist who claimed a high stage of enlightenment and it was interesting the type of verification they used. The person had to be capable of performing certain siddhis at will. When he did not meet any of the criteria, HHDL's office issued a statement essentially saying this person was not who he claimed to be. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------- > Park yourself in front of a world of choices in alternative vehicles. > Visit the Yahoo! Auto Green Center. > --------------------------------- Looking for a deal? Find great prices on flights and hotels with Yahoo! FareChase.
