Similarly, when Dudjom Lingpa, et al., suggest that phenomena are mind, I find it useful to consider that a teaching, not Dudjom Lingpa's attempt to play Tibetan Stephen Hawking and explain the inner workings of the phenomenal world. 4/6
-
-
When you get on Twitter & tell people that they probably cannot stop their thinking, nor would that be desirable, you're trying to teach them something, are you not?
-
You're right. Let me rephrase that. I never proclaimed to teach Buddhism.
-
You're teaching something, and it's not right. Wake up first. Not in the Buddhist sense, just fucking wake up first.
-
Seems to me that your definition of waking up is coming to agreement with your own views. This is part of what is wrong with institutionalized Buddhism. If I don't agree with you, or have different ways of communicating to a specific audience, then I'm just not awake enough.
-
Maybe you're awake in a way that I'm not. Maybe I'm awake in a way that you're not. Maybe both. Maybe neither. I'm not interested in having a dick-measuring contest of enlightenment - that nonsense is a hobby for Buddhist politicians.
-
Until we invent an enlightenment meter, no one owns the dharma. I trust the useful things the dharma has taught me; I'm not gonna wait until I shapeshift into a rainbow to share what I've learned from my own experience.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.