Wake-Up Sermon by Bodhidharma

[Rain95]

Originally Posted by Imzadi

Is it possible that while the word "energy" did not existed in ancient times, the existence of energy itself and the conceptualization/understanding of it by those living in those times exists?

Here's some examples of that word in sentences:

#1. I just released your blocked energy, pay me $100.

#2. I just drank a Red Bull and a Coke, I am full of energy!

#3. Your energy sucks, I am out of here!

#4. I got 2 hours of sleep, I am low energy.

So you are asking if these ancient people who existed before the word energy came about, experienced or "understood" these same things.

Let's see....

#1. No. Probably not. I don't think people made a living in those days adjusting people's energy. The concept did not exist then.

#2. Yes. While they did not have Red Bull or Coke, they probably did have foods that would have led to more "awakeness" and less being tired or hungry. Like fruits high in sugar.

#3. Yes. They were aware of unpleasant people they did not like being around.

#4. Yes. They would have had the experience of being tired.

So yea depending on how you are using that word "energy," it could point to a universal experience or not.

[Imzadi]

Hi Rain95,

Here is another example of the word "energy“ that you yourself mentioned on another thread which I thought was very clever and eloquent as well:

Originally Posted by Rain95

All these words and subtle uses of language sure make something fairly simple complicated.

I am a perceiving energy being that has merged with a physical body and it's mind. Slowly over time and many incarnations, I figure out what I am in all of this, I increase in awareness, and though this increase in awareness, I begin to assert more and more of my true nature over this body and it's mind and it's created experience until eventually I am so aware it doesn't affect me or rule me or my experience anymore then I stop incarnating here and stay in the energy world and spend my time doing much funner stuff and experiencing more awesome things with more aware and loving companions.

So what exactly is "energy" to you in the context of what you stated above and how do you experience and understand it? Has this thing that you called "energy" always existed? Is it fluid or is it static?

[Rain95]

Originally Posted by sky123

I know because I teach his Qigong Form.

If there was a time machine and Bodhidharma could be here now, would he make a good modern teacher of Qigong where you teach it? What if you asked him to teach something to a class instead of a formal interview and he said the following to your class...

People who don’t understand and think they can do so without study are no different from those deluded souls who can’t tell white from black." Falsely proclaiming the Buddha-Dharma, such persons in fact blaspheme the Buddha and subvert the Dharma. They preach as if they were bringing rain. But theirs is the preaching of devils not of Buddhas. Their teacher is the King of Devils and their disciples are the Devil’s minions. Deluded people who follow such instruction unwittingly sink deeper in the Sea of Birth and Death. Unless they see their nature, how can people call themselves Buddhas they’re liars who deceive others into entering the realm of devils. Unless they see their nature, their preaching of the Twelvefold Canon is nothing but the preaching of devils. Their allegiance is to Mara, not to the Buddha. Unable to distinguish white from black, how can they escape birth and death? Bodhidharma

Would you hire him? Would his "energy" be right for your class?

[Imzadi]

Originally Posted by Rain95

If there was a time machine and Bodhidharma could be here now...

I imagine him to be sharing and enjoying a hearty loud booming laugh with me. LOL

[Rain95]

Originally Posted by Imzadi

I imagine him to be sharing and enjoying a hearty loud booming laugh with me. LOL

Yea I like Bodhidharma.

Originally Posted by Imzadi

So what exactly is "energy" to you in the context of what you stated above and how do you experience and understand it? Has this thing that you called "energy" always existed? Is it fluid or is it static?

I tried to answer this several times but it just turns into a wall of words. Too much info I guess.

I am referring to me there. Nothing external to me. It's just me. I can call myself conscious energy, the peciever or the soul or whatever. Don't really matter.

I guess somebody could say, I am energy, but it has to be in the sense of it is what I am, not something I have. So I would not say Bodhidharma works with people's energy, he works with them, the self. If one wants to use that word to represent self it has to represent self. Not something the self has.

As soon as you say, I am working with people's energies like Bodhidharma did, you have gone wrong. He did not work with "stuff' people had, he worked with what they were.

He taught for them to know themselves, to know their nature, to be aware of themselves as awareness. Not to be aware of themselves as "something" else, like "energy." He would have never had a practice to work with something they had. His only "practice" was to work with something you were.

If you wanted to know about where I got a bunch of my info it would be Journey of Souls by Michael Newton and The Awakening of Intelligence by Krishnamurti. That book by Krishnamurti is free online as a pdf.

https://www.holybooks.com/wp-content...telligence.pdf

It's good to read those books so they are added to you brains knowledge base, then you can forget about them as they will always be with you after you have read them.

[sentient]

What about the three ‘bodies’ of Buddha, the three Kayas?


Dharmakaya – emptiness

Sambhogakaya – energy

Nirmanakaya – form

http://www.rigpawiki.org/index.php?title=Three_kayas

[Rain95]

Originally Posted by sentient

What about the three ‘bodies’ of Buddha, the three Kayas?


Dharmakaya – emptiness

Sambhogakaya – energy

Nirmanakaya – form

http://www.rigpawiki.org/index.php?title=Three_kayas

I just googled the word "sambhogakaya" and the Merriam-Webster does not say energy, it says Quote:

Definition of sambhogakaya. plural -s. : the body of bliss worshiped as deity in the Buddhist doctrine of trikaya.

I'll check wikipedia:

Quote :The Saṃbhogakāya (Sanskrit: "body of enjoyment")

still does not say energy.

We must be in Tibetian Buddhism now. Yea yea Pure lands.....

more from wikipedia: A Buddha can appear in an "enjoyment-body" or Saṃbhogakāya to teach bodhisattvas through visionary experiences.

Tibetian Buddhism gets into weird stuff.

Tibetan Buddhism
There are numerous Sambhogakāya realms almost as numerous as deities in Tibetan Buddhism

In Chan or Zen they make the word a metaphor:

Think not of the past but of the future. Constantly maintain the future thoughts to be good. This is what we call the Sambhogakāya. The discriminative thinking arising from the Dharmakāya (法身↔fashen "Truth body") is called the Nirmanakāya (化身↔huashen "transformation body"). The successive thoughts that forever involve good are thus the Sambhogakāya.[4]

[Rain95]

Wikipedia - Trikaya

The doctrine says that a Buddha has three kāyas or bodies:

The Dharmakāya or Truth body which embodies the very principle of enlightenment and knows no limits or boundaries;
The Saṃbhogakāya or body of mutual enjoyment which is a body of bliss or clear light manifestation;
The Nirmāṇakāya or created body which manifests in time and space.[1]

Interpretation in Buddhist traditions
Schools have different ideas about what the three bodies are.[6][7]

Chinese Mahayana
Pure Land
The Three Bodies of the Buddha from the point of view of Pure Land Buddhist thought can be broken down like so:[8]

The Nirmaṇakāya is a physical/manifest body of a Buddha. An example would be Gautama Buddha's body.
The Sambhogakāya is the reward/enjoyment body, whereby a bodhisattva completes his vows and becomes a Buddha.
The Dharmakāya is the embodiment of the truth itself, and it is commonly seen as transcending the forms of physical and spiritual bodies.

Chan Buddhism
According to Schloegl, in the Zhenzhou Linji Huizhao Chansi Yulu, the Three Bodies of the Buddha are not taken as absolute. They would be "mental configurations" that "are merely names or props" and would only perform a role of light and shadow of the mind

****************************

So what they are depends on what school of Buddhism you are reading. I would guess somebody somewhere reduced them down to the modern words you quoted.

[sentient]

Originally Posted by Rain95

Tibetian Buddhism gets into weird stuff.

LOL!
Perhaps one could 'blame' Bön for it.

[Rain95]

If I was going to try to make some kind of sense out of these concepts, I would start with the definition from Zen or Chan Buddhism.

According to Schloegl, in the Zhenzhou Linji Huizhao Chansi Yulu, the Three Bodies of the Buddha are not taken as absolute. They would be "mental configurations" that "are merely names or props" and would only perform a role of "light" and "shadow" of the mind.

Light and Shadow here refer to enlightenment or delusion. Different possible states of the same consciousnesses. The mental configuration of the three, which I would list as awareness, consciousness, and thought, can take on various forms.

For example, consciousness can have low self awareness, be passive, and therefore manifest thought as experience and action and "self." So this is a normal person with a strong sense of ego. Me and my opinions and beliefs. A very reactionary person. See it's the same three components, (consciousness, awareness, thought) but here thought is the leader and cause of experience and action.

Another example would be the consciousnesses can have high self awareness, so experience then is not wholly based on thought or thinking. Such a person is less egotistical and less reactionary. There is a little space between them and their thinking.

Now these different relationships between these three components are not absolute degrees or numbers and their corresponding states of consciousness or awareness also are not set points on some imaginary scale. Everyone is an individual and unique. So these "relationships" are in a constant state of flux.

It is based on the relative self awareness that exists in any given moment and the degree of how much that awareness is aware of. Delusion can be partial, enlightenment can be gradual or incomplete.

So basically sometimes we can be very "enlightened" and moments later be very much in delusion. The path is basically to keep pursuing this thing until we spend more time "enlightened" or self aware and less time in "delusion" (ego states and emotional states). Then also (yea this is complicated stuff) how many incarnations we have been pursuing this stuff will determine how much " delusion" we are able to see through or be aware of in any given lifetime. And further complicating this (sorry the creator of this stuff is pretty dang smart) the amount of "consciousness" and it's corresponding potential "awareness" varies in different incarnations and physical bodies.

In other words, you could be one of the highest beings that exists and if you chose to only put 3% of your conscious energy into this incarnation, you are going to have a heck of a time overcoming your animal natures and thought even though if you had brought down 80% you would be crushing this life! It's all about the challenge as far as how much you can learn. The easier the life, the less there is to overcome and learn.

Now looking at Mahayana:

They break down the parts or components of "mind" in various ways:

Here is Pure Land Buddhism:

Nirmaṇakāya = physical body = thought and thinking/memory = thought
Sambhogakāya = desire for good or bad = desire is a result of awareness .so this is awareness
Dharmakāya = the embodiment of the truth itself, = there you go this is self/consciousness

Looking at this a little deeper, The Saṃbhogakāya (Sanskrit: "body of enjoyment) See one can seek enjoyment in the dharma, the Buddhist path, or in sense pleasures and egotism, money, greed etc. ...this body of enjoyment is wholly dependent on awareness and discernment. That's why one can reduce this simply down to the awareness component.