Can someone remove another person's karma?

[jonesboy]

Originally Posted by sky123

This is a Buddhist Thread.....
He called the writer of the Dhammapada a moron . His words....

' Whomever wrote that either lacks experience or is a moron caught into nonsense '

A being who is very advanced wrote those words.... very advanced... doesn't seem like it to me.

If you look at running's statement he was referring to the sharing of presence.

Originally Posted by running

whomever wrote that either lacks experience or is a moron caught up into nonsense. i can give you dozens upon dozens of evidence of individuals being swept into bliss and silence from presence.

perhaps over a hundred i personally seen in india. at least for or five dozen in the states. and that is a conservative number.

its not an experience of duality in any case. so just the way he brought it up doesnt even make any sense.

I think more one is talking apples while the other is talking oranges.

[jonesboy]

Originally Posted by shiningstars

Hi jonesboy

I should have clarified it - when those words are spoken by a Dzogchen Adept, I am humbled.

I am not disputing the words in the context of a Dzogchen system of teaching nor do I disagree with those words for one who understands their true meaning.

Slogans is meant to indicate using phrases but not showing their true meaning.
Even a Dzogchen Master can only help as he or she can - the practice and change comes from the student within, which is also the true Master.

shiningstars

I do not disagree with what you are saying.

All I have been saying is that a Master/Guru can help speed things along. The experience can be pretty darn amazing.

For some reason people are really against the idea that advanced beings can help others..

[shiningstars]

Originally Posted by running

whats scarier to me is people takimg statements like that literally. instead of considering its context. and contemplating ones own experience. the statement is ridiculious and counterproductive for many.

never said anyway was the way. i speak from my own experience and it happend to be about bliss.

i have a white russian about once every week or so. im not sure why you ask. but there you go.

never in my life claimed to be a Buddhist. my only claim is they lack a lot of transparency imo. And in doing so make for a lot of confusion.

There is no confusion - only confusion arises when people don't study it as a system of practice. Or pick up a quote and start ranting about it

Do you know how extensive and deep the study and practice of Buddhism is? You will probably find that for anyone who likes to quote that they can find some word that supports their argument. However that is missing the forest for the trees.

Despite its expansiveness, Buddhism is very simple at the end of the day - do good, avoid evil, and purify this mind.

The true teaching is not found in the words and this is why scholars are distinct in some cases to adepts.

Along the way sure there can be wow moments, miracles, insights - the treasure of the Dhamma Eye is not falsehood. But these are like scenery on a train ride - the cultivation of compassion and wisdom (wisdom of Dhamma - Truth) is significant to the profile of any practicing Buddhist.

As to your railing against the statement, even if a Master helps, it is part of ones karma, no Master can do the work of another no matter how attractive that sounds to the open market - or those that promote bliss as equating any sort of transcendent spiritual wisdom. In my eyes, it is not, with respect for your own path and preferences regardless.

shiningstars

[jonesboy]

Originally Posted by shiningstars

Hi jonesboy

That is your interpretation and not a fact. Not least in the Buddhist sense. There are many ways to bliss - including drugs and avoidance. At the first rub where is that bliss? No, true pacification is much deeper, more profound and significantly more substantial than an advertisement of 'bliss'. There are those on this forum who also imagine that altered consciousness is bliss is the pinnacle. That would be far from the Buddha away, for what it's worth.

shiningstars

It is a fact and not an interpretation.

I know what running is referring to. I experience it also. As a matter of fact not only is it a level of depth that one experiences but depending on the depth of others it is something that can be shared.

Also, instead of assuming it is something related to drugs, please provide a sutra or some teaching that says bliss is not one of the results of the path.

Nirvana





The most common of several names that the Buddha gave to the goal of his religion, some of the others being the Excellent (Pantam), Security (Khemam), Purity (Suddhi), the Island (Dipam) Freedom (Mutti) and the Culmination (Paryanam). The word Nirvana comes from the root meaning 'to blow out' and refers to the extinguishing of the fires of greed, hatred and delusion. When these emotional and psychological defilements are destroyed by wisdom, the mind becomes free, radiant and joyful and at death one is no longer subject to rebirth. Buddhist philosophers have long debated about whether Nirvana is absolute cessation or an ineffable transcendental state. During the Buddha's lifetime he was sometimes accused of being a nihilist, a charge he strongly denied, adding

"One thing and only one thing do I teach, suffering and the cessation of suffering". It would seem therefore that Nirvana is neither complete nothingness or existence being in the way that these words are usually used. One thing is certain though, it is not a heaven state and it is not the absorption of the individual soul into an Absolute, an idea that is more indicative of Hinduism. However, whichever way it is understood, the Buddha's saying that "Nirvana is the ultimate happiness" (nibbanam paramam sukham) makes it clear that it is a worthwhile goal. Several criticisms of the doctrine of Nirvana are sometimes expressed. If, it is asked, desire, wanting and craving causes rebirth then how could one ever attain Nirvana because in wanting to attain it one would be strengthening the very thing that prevents it from being attained? This comment fails to understand that Nirvana is not an object that one acquires by wanting and then pursuing, rather it is the state of being utterly without wanting.

http://www.buddhanet.net/e-learning/...data/fdd43.htm

[Jeremy Bong]

Originally Posted by sky123

If you come onto a Buddhist thread you expect to find Buddha's Sutras, if you don't agree with them then that's fine but you don't need to insult the Buddha..

The problem is they mess up the thread of Buddhism and Tibetan Buddhism. As I said, Tibetan Buddhism is not Buddhism because it's of their believes and doing or practice of dharma or practice YabYum as their final or highest dharma practice. But Buddhism is not mixed up with women. So how can their outlook be the same. Their scriptures or Sutra will vary from time to time as they wrote them.

[shiningstars]

Originally Posted by jonesboy

I do not disagree with what you are saying.

All I have been saying is that a Master/Guru can help speed things along. The experience can be pretty darn amazing.

For some reason people are really against the idea that advanced beings can help others..

Only a few here are against the idea of a teacher guru.

Of course a genuine adept can 'help' - but it's a factor of the good fortune if one can meet such a one in real life, two if one can identify one even if one saw one (remember Jesus was shunned by many and Lord Buddha had detractors) and three, ones kamma.

Whether people on this forum support it or not should be irrelevant. State your experience and let it go perhaps. Each person speaks their own truth including me - I have been fortunate to have been helped so would never deny the efficacy of a true Master's presence. But a Master also only helps one see oneself ... there is more to explain
... later..

Each person treads the path that is right for them. Trust is an important part of the progressive's path too, in my opinion.

shiningstars

[running]

Originally Posted by sky123

This is a Buddhist Thread.....
He called the writer of the Dhammapada a moron . His words....

' Whomever wrote that either lacks experience or is a moron caught into nonsense '

A being who is very advanced wrote those words.... very advanced... doesn't seem like it to me.

its that kinda mentality that attempts to keep people from having their own outlook. from questioning what some think as their authority. putting things on pedestals beyond their own experience where the real problem is imo. holding people back. gurus worth their salt dont do that. their students do however if they dont know any different.

go hang out with gurus from various parts. they all have different opinions. why? because everyone has a different past, background, and culture. what is vailid for one isnt for another. the idea that one is the way is very ignorant imo.

gurus typically teach to the individual. what they say is valid to the person not to everybody.

gurus dont walk on water but are human beings with many of the human characteristics that all humans have.

i have a different out look on many things i have heard gurus say. doesnt make them right or me wrong. but whats right for me is right for me. whats right for them is right for them. its not a problem cause they know that. so you can disagree and the energy doesnt care but lifts anyway.

what is the same for all is in bliss and silence. so you can mix with all sorts of gurus and all is good. that is what its all about anyways from what i have seen.

and let me make clear. i am not a buddhist anyway but sharing from my perspective and from my constitution. which i have just as much right to speak from as the Buddha does or anyone else for that matter.

[jonesboy]

Originally Posted by shiningstars

Only a few here are against the idea of a teacher guru.

Of course a genuine adept can 'help' - but it's a factor of the good fortune if one can meet such a one in real life, two if one can identify one even if one saw one (remember Jesus was shunned by many and Lord Buddha had detractors) and three, ones kamma.

Whether people on this forum support it or not should be irrelevant. State your experience and let it go perhaps. Each person speaks their own truth including me - I have been fortunate to have been helped so would never deny the efficacy of a true Master's presence. But a Master also only helps one see oneself ... there is more to explain
... later..

Each person treads the path that is right for them. Trust is an important part of the progressive's path too, in my opinion.

shiningstars

I agree but of the people posting in this section..

You, running and myself are the only ones that believe that.. Oh Miss Hepburn as well.

I have had many discussions with members about transmission.. which they think is fake, energy.. which is not the way I say it is.. just emotions to most people.. and guru's.. which most don't believe can do anything for you.. Is just someone with an ego trying to tell you how to do things..

These are old discussions.. I only came around because you are new and I thought it would be interesting :)

I am always more than willing to share my experience :)

[Jeremy Bong]

Originally Posted by shiningstars

Only a few here are against the idea of a teacher guru.

Of course a genuine adept can 'help' - but it's a factor of the good fortune if one can meet such a one in real life, two if one can identify one even if one saw one (remember Jesus was shunned by many and Lord Buddha had detractors) and three, ones kamma.

Whether people on this forum support it or not should be irrelevant. State your experience and let it go perhaps. Each person speaks their own truth including me - I have been fortunate to have been helped so would never deny the efficacy of a true Master's presence. But a Master also only helps one see oneself ... there is more to explain
... later..

Each person treads the path that is right for them. Trust is an important part of the progressive's path too, in my opinion.

shiningstars

I've many gurus: Jesus, Buddha, God Jehovah, ........ The gurus is not the issue here, the difference references of belief from different religions are messing up here to describe karma, as I know Tibetan Buddhism or Dzogchen care nothing about karma so they're not discussion of karma but talking about bliss and silence. That's not the same type of outlook from a not Buddhist point of view and it's not in the way of Buddha's teaching.

[naturesflow]

Originally Posted by running

well you could imagine being in a river that has a current flowing down stream. now imagine that river flowing through your body. every cell. now you can imagine as it does it excites the nervous system making every cell joyfully intoxocated.

OH I get it now.

Thanks, I just needed a better view of this feeling and experience you share often.