Theos-Talk Archives (March 2004 Message tt00055)

--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "Ali Hassan" <ananda_hotai@h...> 
wrote:
> I think it's more a description of your personal awareness, rather 
than 
> 'getting' it. One of buddhism's prime tenets is "things 
aren't". "It is" 
> also would follow as a false notion, since "It" would refer to 
samsara.

What Buddhism denies is self-nature. Nobody denies consiousness, 
only that consciousness is a phenomenon which is evidence of a 
noumenal self. To the Buddhist consciousness is evidence only of 
itself.

> This is one of the roots of Dzogchen, no?

There are numerous systems which are indebted to majamudra.

> When did Naropa come to this, at 
> the beginning of his sadhana or the end?

Since time had no beginning and the sadhana has no end the question 
is meaningless.

> Same with the Buddha. They, the Chan Masters, etc. all came up with 
those 
> seemingly effortless DON'T DO ANYTHING slogans after decades and 
lifetimes 
> of strenuous effort.

So? All we ever said is that it is simple. Nobody ever said it is 
easy.

Besides, Theosophists do not seek enlightemnet anyway. All they do 
is read magazines.