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.

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.
>


Reply via email to