A spiritual person is...

[Ciel]

The bioterror attack entry in Wikipedia doesn't seem debatable to me, nor presumably to all the countries that refused him entry after deportation.

Snoopy old friend, sadly that was true. It's what happens when the hierarchy becomes more powerful than the master. After that the whole thing imploded on it's self....... for many reasons I had departed some time prior. Many stories could I tell, yet life has shown how better to be without regrets.

- c -

 

[luecy7]

When you see others as separate, you must act as you wish them to act towards you. When you see them as part of the whole as you are, this becomes meaningless. You are doing what is best for the whole at all times.

I would state that we attain individuality, for we find our true core.

I am seeing the dualistic mentality. In Christianity, one of the paths that you claimed to have taken, it is known as being a hypocrite. I believe some thought time on applying that golden rule, with humbleness, can help remedy that.

I would suggest that an avatar is more correctly the reincarnation of a being from the 12th level of existence or higher.

Can I get a listing of the levels of existence from anyone that claims to believe and know that there are levels of existence? How many levels of existence, degrees to enlightenment, and paths are there in the religions that claim to teach about them? I think some non-Koran texts in Islam teach about levels of existence. Is this from Buddhism too?

 

[Ciel]

Whether it is truth or fiction is irrelevant really, as I have said, it is Osho's liberating words which are the draw, his vast knowledge and insight. His actions are utterly irrelevant, he is dead. It is strange that the master is judged, for his whole teaching is about removing judgement as it is another function of mind. Zen masters have killed monks in monasteries and this is almost accepted within the school.
.

Lunitik, One thing I have learnt in this life is always to question the master and the source of the flow of intelligence. For many masters have I known. And it is enough to deal with ones own imperfections. It is gratitude to once more have clarity in the assurance of the inner life in direct communication of core of being of known self and connection and to live as truly as possible with compassion and love. Now if I am drawn to another it is as friend, for I understand the play of existence well, but have no wish to extend the game.

- c -

 

[Snoopy]

Snoopy old friend, sadly that was true. It's what happens when the hierarchy becomes more powerful than the master. After that the whole thing imploded on it's self....... for many reasons I had departed some time prior. Many stories could I tell, yet life has shown how better to be without regrets.

- c -

and life is for learning...

(minor note...put the wrong avatar in there)

have you come back then, ciel?

 

[Lunitik]

I am seeing the dualistic mentality. In Christianity, one of the paths that you claimed to have taken, it is known as being a hypocrite. I believe some thought time on applying that golden rule, with humbleness, can help remedy that.

Your conclusion is based on two factors, my poor explanation and your own perception - of me and my words. When you are no-mind, you do not contain those things which society has taught, you act entirely naturally. Your motivations are relating to the totality, but the expression is unfettered and natural to you.

As I have explained, we must all have our individual core, for otherwise we are redundant - this is termed as soul in many faiths. In reality, however, we each share a common consciousness which we individualize through mind resulting in ego - this is termed as spirit in many faiths. Most faiths agree there is a distinction although most don't seem to emphasize it as it doesn't appear most teachers even comprehend the difference.

I hope this clears things up for you.

Can I get a listing of the levels of existence from anyone that claims to believe and know that there are levels of existence? How many levels of existence, degrees to enlightenment, and paths are there in the religions that claim to teach about them? I think some non-Koran texts in Islam teach about levels of existence. Is this from Buddhism too?

VOLUME I - III - 0

This is the section in the writings of Hazrat Inayat Khan - a Sufi - which discusses his ideas of the plains of existence. They are strikingly different to Buddha's words and yet Buddha merely appears to segregate the plains which Hazrat discusses.

Sufism and Hinduism share similar descriptions of levels of enlightenment, but these are not to be confused with planes of existence. The latter are possible destinations after reincarnation, the former are states of consciousness in the here and now.

I hope this is helpful to you.

 

[Ciel]

have you come back then, ciel?

Back ??????????? From where ?????????

- c -

 

[Snoopy]

Zen masters have killed monks in monasteries and this is almost accepted within the school.

I would like to hear more about this.

 

[Lunitik]

One thing I have learnt in this life is always to question the master and the source of the flow of intelligence. For many masters have I known. And it is enough to deal with ones own imperfections. It is gratitude to once more have clarity in the assurance of the inner life in direct communication of core of being of known self and connection and to live as truly as possible with compassion and love. Now if I am drawn to another it is as friend, for I understand the play of existence well, but have no wish to extend the game.

I think, if you do not trust the master completely, you should seek a different master. I do not think I would have lasted with Osho long in person for this very reason, it is much easier to ignore the noise when it is in text form. Still, I consider him as enlightened, and there is much information about what he taught, so I have looked into him somewhat.

Luckily, I had reached satori prior to coming in contact with him, thus perhaps his nuances had less effect on me. If I had found him prior to this, I think he would have been quite damaging.

 

[Snoopy]

Back ??????????? From where ?????????

- c -

Your cyber-absence has been noted...

 

[Lunitik]

I would like to hear more about this.

Look into "Zen Master Ekido", there are a few stories of his brutality.

It is said that one day, a monk was ringing for dinner and became distracted by a woman so missed a chime. Ekido was standing behind the monk and hit him with a staff. The monk died, but Ekido claimed that death was coming for the monk anyway and that he had actually delivered the monk to enlightenment with this blow.

 

[Ciel]

Look into "Zen Master Ekido", there are a few stories of his brutality.

It is said that one day, a monk was ringing for dinner and became distracted by a woman so missed a chime. Ekido was standing behind the monk and hit him with a staff. The monk died, but Ekido claimed that death was coming for the monk anyway and that he had actually delivered the monk to enlightenment with this blow.

This is exactly the source of intelligence to be questioned.......
It is barbaric and serves no purpose other than to expose a barbaric culture.
Would you surrender to such?

- c -

 

[Snoopy]

Look into "Zen Master Ekido", there are a few stories of his brutality.

It is said that one day, a monk was ringing for dinner and became distracted by a woman so missed a chime. Ekido was standing behind the monk and hit him with a staff. The monk died, but Ekido claimed that death was coming for the monk anyway and that he had actually delivered the monk to enlightenment with this blow.

Yes, I know of this story. It was more your assertion that masters killing monks was almost accepted as a part of zen that I would be interested in.

 

[Nick the Pilot]

Lunitik,
　
You asked,
　
"…how much closer are you to finding your true self, to your inner core, your source?
　
--> It’s difficult to find words to use to measure my amount of progress along the path. All I can say is, I am closer.
　
"It is good that you feel it works for you, but to what end?"
　
--> To accelerate my progress along the path to enlightenment.
　
"What do you gain from such an intellectually oriented approach?
　
--> It accelerates my progress along the path to enlightenment.
　
"…theosophy is very much a mind oriented pursuit."
　
--> Our greatest asset is our mind, but it is only through silencing the mind that we can move up to a higher level. We have to use the mind in order to silence the mind.
　
"I just don't understand it personally."
　
--> There are different kinds of people, so we need different kinds of religions. Just because something works for you does not necessarily mean it will work for me.

 

[Lunitik]

This is exactly the source of intelligence to be questioned.......
It is barbaric and serves no purpose other than to expose a barbaric culture.
Would you surrender to such?

It would depend on how they are effecting my attainment, I do not see the standard behavior of Zen masters as particularly out of line - it is a test just as the military, punishment for lack of discipline... which is the sole purpose you join a monastic order, to practice discipline. To judge based on a bias is never correct, although I would agree that the death of the monk shows it was taken too far in this case.

 

[Lunitik]

Yes, I know of this story. It was more your assertion that masters killing monks was almost accepted as a part of zen that I would be interested in.

Oh, mostly I am referring to Zen monks being struck often, I have a bad habit of using extreme examples when making a point as it usually serves to clarify that point.

 

[Lunitik]

Lunitik,
　
You asked,
　
"…how much closer are you to finding your true self, to your inner core, your source?
　
--> It’s difficult to find words to use to measure my amount of progress along the path. All I can say is, I am closer.
　
"It is good that you feel it works for you, but to what end?"
　
--> To accelerate my progress along the path to enlightenment.
　
"What do you gain from such an intellectually oriented approach?
　
--> It accelerates my progress along the path to enlightenment.
　
"…theosophy is very much a mind oriented pursuit."
　
--> Our greatest asset is our mind, but it is only through silencing the mind that we can move up to a higher level. We have to use the mind in order to silence the mind.
　
"I just don't understand it personally."
　
--> There are different kinds of people, so we need different kinds of religions. Just because something works for you does not necessarily mean it will work for me.

I have already apologized for what you have replied to here, this apology was heartfelt. Replying to your defense of my mistake would be wrong, I am glad that you can see your own progression though, never doubt that which you personally have realized! Excited for you, and at the same time I feel like I may have drug you down with this questioning. I offer a gift to compensate:

I would suggest, as a contemplative exercise, that you consider the ramifications of especially "The Secret Doctrine", for instance, and consider what this means in light of utter oneness - work your way from the manifestations of variety all the way back. Consider also how this pertains to your own creation, inside the womb, how are these similar? Consider everything you've learned and wind them back, does this relate? What is left once everything is reduced to its first point? It will take you home

Love is the answer, but recall as Buddha says: all views are wrong, every single one, and so what is this love even? Know it, realize it, let it happen.

 

[Snoopy]

@luni and your striking...

Extreme comment to the point of misleading perhaps. If you are referring to the use of keisaku that is hardly indicative of a death cult.

 

[Lunitik]

@luni and your striking...

Extreme comment to the point of misleading perhaps. If you are referring to the use of keisaku that is hardly indicative of a death cult.

Yet it was in response to your statement of acceptance that Osho probably tried to poisons hundreds of people. Both are misleading because they miss the benefits of each.

Let us not get into a debate about this, for neither case is particularly relevant

 

[Lunitik]

Also, Nick, another exercise in contemplation:

Consider deeply that you are a series of atoms, consider how they are kept together, is it secure? Look within and see if they can come apart. Know deeply that they are individual particles, why do they remain together so you can be? Your lungs, heart, liver, stomach, brain, these are all made up of there own groups of particles, how?

Continue contemplating until they begin to feel like they are separating, what would it be like if they all fell to the floor? What remains if they did? Body is gone, brain is gone so mind is too, what remains?

This one scares a lot of people though, but it just occurred to me. Do not venture beyond what you are comfortable with, but if fear arises why has it arisen? Are you those atoms? What is special about these particles compared to those in the air or the furniture? Is this particular collection important to your own being? You can try again if you gain comfort.

I only recommend these because contemplation is the intellectual route, it is possible to arrive this way, but you will also see through these exercises if you commit to them that we are actually on the same route and that there is no difference in religions at all when you understand religion, when you understand what is involved with returning to the source.

 

[luecy7]

Your conclusion is based on two factors, my poor explanation and your own perception - of me and my words. When you are no-mind, you do not contain those things which society has taught, you act entirely naturally. Your motivations are relating to the totality, but the expression is unfettered and natural to you.

As I have explained, we must all have our individual core, for otherwise we are redundant - this is termed as soul in many faiths. In reality, however, we each share a common consciousness which we individualize through mind resulting in ego - this is termed as spirit in many faiths. Most faiths agree there is a distinction although most don't seem to emphasize it as it doesn't appear most teachers even comprehend the difference.

As you claim to comprehend your core self, ego, soul, spirit, and faith, or faiths, then good for you. By your words I don't see it. If fact, when you say we, I think it is a result of you projecting yourself and your experience upon others. I can see you doing that quite a bit in your words. I think perhaps by the pursuit of trying to see what you can't see, except through interaction with somone, you have a delusion. Sort of like a person who thinks that they know someone, but then later discovers that they did not really know them, or even themselves.

Regarding your words and understanding, I think the english words: soul, spirit, ego, and faith have a lot of variations in the world. In recognition and respect of the language or people that the word 'ego' comes from, which was not from India or China, or even the UK, ego is the core you, which you identify with a little as you use the english word, 'I', or in your case, 'we'.