Let us rock the boat for a moment, in intellectual detached discourse, free of the emotions, if this is possible?

My question: Is this a group tailored and friendly only to Theravada /Pali Canon? Are Vajrayana / Mahayana (or any other paths) not accepted here as paths of Bhuddism? When I look at the link/title, I saw, and see "Bhuddism", not "Theravada"?

As an example, on a question about the possibility of the breath ceasing during meditation, I gave an affirmative answer to help increase the understanding of the OP (the person asking) based on my own personal experiences of observing my breath stopping for a while at some points during my meditation. In sharing, I mentioned (on the side) that I use breathing techniques (from Vajrayana?) (i.e. I control my breath) as an anchor to still my mind (I find it very effective and expedient in attaining 2nd - 4th Jhana if I do short sessions [anything less than an hour], and I prefer it to concentration or mantras as my anchor [I find them slower and not often effective]). Does it matter what means one uses to attain 4th Jhana? Is the attainment not the desired goal?

Someone said controlling my breath to deepen meditation is extreme? Let's us assume for a moment it is so. Which is more significant? To attain Jhana and all that it entails, or to stick to "accepted breathing"?

In answering or asking questions, I have been accused of magic (simply because I ask about some of the side effects of my meditations I do not fully understand (like swaying or complete awareness of surroundings from all directions in the same moment), of yoga (I do not consider myself a yogi - I am not young or flexible (is watching the breath or controlling the breath considered yoga?))

I talk about Sidhhis, which some find offensive as not part of Bhuddism. Let me then rephrase them as "side effects" of meditation or of exploring the nature of the mind. Do not all who meditate notice certain side effects at some point into their practice? Is this offensive to Theravada?

I mentioned "spirit" (i.e. the astral form), and people said, "this is not Bhuddism". What does Bhuddism call the state of being in meditation when one loses sense of the physical body, senses unfold, and one is no longer restricted to the physical body? Does such a word exist, and is the employment of it not within the scope of Bhuddism?

My practice is about compassion and love, my goal is enlightenment, and service to all beings. I embrace the four noble truths, and follow the eightfold path. Obviously my path passes through attaining direct insight into the nature of mind, emptiness, attachments, emotions etc.

Wikipedia As expressed in the Buddha's Four Noble Truths, the goal of Buddhism is to overcome suffering (duḥkha) caused by desire or craving (taṇhā), attachment to a static self, and ignorance (avidya) of the true nature of reality.[7] Most Buddhist traditions emphasize transcending the individual self through the attainment of Nirvana or by following the path of Buddhahood, ending the cycle of death and rebirth.[8][9][10] Buddhist schools vary in their interpretation of the path to liberation, The Eightfold Path consists of eight practices: right view, right resolve, right speech, right conduct, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, and right samadhi ('meditative absorption or union').

Judging from the down votes or antagonism that I'm very surprised to see, would I be wrong in forming the conclusion that people here down-vote on the basis of Theravada, or more specifically, on their own interpretation of their own path to liberation? Would this not make them no different from Islam which teaches that all others are infidels, or Christianity, which forcibly claims that all unbelievers will go to hell??? Or the Pharisees (Jews) (who stick to their own dogma i.e. their own interpretation of their own path, and persecute all who deviate?).

I thought Bhuddism embraces that there are many paths which lead to the same place? Am I wrong in saying that Buddha taught different paths to different people, each according to their measure, based on what sacrifices there were prepared to make to seek enlightenment? If one finally attains enlightenment, and forgoes nirvana to become a Bhudda, does it matter by what means/path one got there, whether one lengthened or shortened one's breath to meditate, or how long (or otherwise) it took one to get there (enlightenment)?

What are your thoughts?

  • Xxandra, I responded to the original comment thread that triggered this reaction. You are right and I fully support you. Everyone, let's try and not pour more oil in the flame by turning this into an argument of whose Buddhism is better. I recommend we freeze this question and let everyone cool down for a day or two. – Andrei Volkov Mar 9 at 17:58