| hate to break it to you, but that guy is basically a scammer you should listen to the Buddha who that monk claims is his teacher. The Buddha was very clear that nobody except for himself actually sees things correctly. after all, everybody is already a Buddha, right? Well, one little problem with that is that that is not claimed anywhere by Buddha and quite the opposite actually. of course, the reaction of people like that monk is to doubt the Buddha and attempt to deceive ordinary people by getting out of such a categorical contradiction. This is how you can know that he doesn't have good intentions or sufficient humility yet.
The starting point of true learning is the realization that you're not aware of anything as it is. The only one who is aware of things is the one who is perfectly enlightened. That's the entire problem. it doesn't matter if you doubt it, because you will still be following the law laid out by Buddha, even if it means that he doesn't get the pleasure of your attendance to his lectures. just because you don't understand what it means that only a Tathagata sees things and neither you nor the monk understand how it could be true, it doesn't mean that it isn't true and that you should go around denying it because your doubt somehow qualifies you, or claiming that such a denial is somehow the teaching of Buddha just because you want it to be, it means that you don't understand it yet and it means that you're not ready yet. humanity tends to lionize the very same people that they had to murder or isolate just for loving them truly.
it makes me feel very bad for the likes of those philosophers meanwhile, your birthright is basically stolen from you by the trivialization of the reality of the abilities of an enlightened being to perceive the truth of everything, everywhere, on the spot.
for example, calling the Dalai Lama a living Buddha and his letting people do so is nothing short of a theft from humanity and a grave sin. if i were to guess, he will probably not be able to reborn as a human. not sure. The fact of the matter is, the eight fold path is not a path at all. It is a set of results that can be arrived at by some path, which is excluded. They are all results that only a person who has arrived at the result, can actually practice. This is just one example of one of the traps in Buddhism and you didn't even notice it. Neither had i until i met someone who wasn't asleep. The same goes for the precepts. only someone with a very high level can even distinguish between true and false, in order to prevent themselves from telling a lie. How on earth can it be the path to the result? and Buddha was not enlightened by meditation. That is a serious misunderstanding. it was when he came down from the mountain and allowed himself to calm down that he realized that he had already achieved perfect enlightenment a long time ago by his former practices. The four noble truth, do not state that you can end suffering while you are alive.
It states that you will suffer as long as you are alive. Suffering is part of being alive. it's only by your repression or by your being invaded by a dead soul, which doesn't experience those things that you can be convinced temporarily that your idea that you can finish your suffering was correct. The only way to do that is to end your rebirths forever.
which buddha never recommended. in fact, if you do some more reading of Buddha's own words as recorded in certain of the most advanced texts, you'll see very repeatedly, and very clearly that Buddha admits that he made up the idea of Nirvana or no more rebirths for people who wouldn't have been able to admit that he's actually reborn continuously. he made it up and he confirms that he did as a skillful device. the entire idea of his death was a fabrication of his own. he didn't tell people this initially, because it was quite clear that they were not at the level of cultivation where they could even understand what it means.
people are the blind with open eyes. And even if they once regain their eyesight through som method, it doesn't mean that they can then perceive everything, even though they suddenly think that they can.
is this starting to form any sort of cohesive picture yet? You've been lied to. |
Plus you seem over focused on enlightenment. This is the best description of enlightenment:
A man was on a quest for an enlightenment and one day he came upon an old man carrying a huge sack of potatoes on his back, struggling under the weight. For whatever, the Man felt that the Old Man had the answers that he sought and he asked him, "Do you know what it means to be enlightened?" The Old Man looked at him and without saying a word he set down the sack of potatoes and stood up straight. The Man looked at him and said, " I understand, I get it - so what happens after?" The Old Man looked at him again and without saying anything he again picked up the sack of potatoes and slowly walked away.
That's enlightenment.