|
@_awbery_ | |||||
|
Stuff looks different when you’re already uninvolved, maybe? Whereas encountering uninvolvement is really annoying from a manipulative standpoint.
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
Charlie El. Awbery a.k.a. Rin’dzin Pamo
@_awbery_
|
28. sij |
|
Sometimes Buddhist Tantra can seem frustrating, annoying and incomprehensible. It’s not unusual for people to want Tantra to be something it isn’t, like an extension of what they’re already doing, on steroids or something.
|
||
|
|
||
|
Charlie El. Awbery a.k.a. Rin’dzin Pamo
@_awbery_
|
28. sij |
|
Because everything that Buddhist Tantra does stems from its base in experience of emptiness, unless you are familiar with a state of mind that is relaxed and clutter-free, Tantra will refuse to be the thing that you want it to be.
|
||
|
|
||
|
Jared Janes
@JaredJanes
|
28. sij |
|
In this context... Do you see a valuable distinction between the emptiness of form &/or the form of emptiness?
|
||
|
|
||
|
Jared Janes
@JaredJanes
|
28. sij |
|
I think I'm tracking & that follows... just wondering if either of these entry points to emptiness is more foundational to tantra.
|
||
|
|
||
|
Charlie El. Awbery a.k.a. Rin’dzin Pamo
@_awbery_
|
28. sij |
|
Oh, I see. No, I don’t think so in principle. But it’s easy to kid yourself that you understand emptiness as the emptiness aspect of form in every day life or whatever, whereas familiarity with form as it arises from an empty mind state is kind of unmistakeable.
|
||
|
|
||