Skip to content
Loading…

Explaining Bodhisattva tendency....

UnknownMind

Post content

What is Bodhisattva tendency?

Maybe there are different meanings to it but what I will explain based on different teaching.

Bodhisattva tendency - A tendency to guide all who want guidance related to destroying their fear or to guide them so they can destroy their ignorance and comes back in track.......... Simply it is a tendency to guide as much as possible.... Ofcourse for a spiritual seekers......

What is Buddh?

See Buddh means a person who climb up the ladder of intelligence and reach the state of awareness..

Buddha real name was never buddha it is something else. How can I be so sure? Well buddh and buddh tendency are very well know especially to those who read things like vedas etc..... Buddh is like a position given to a person just like a position of king.

Is Bodhisattva is different from Buddhism? Yes Buddhism is all about bringing you closer to state of awareness you can clearly see there are all kinds of meditation so that you can use them to remove your ignorance.

Bodhisattva tendency give birth to Buddhism. I am not saying something is higher or lower it simply means Bodhisattva is a tendency not a path but Buddhism is a path not a tendency.

I explain it so you don't get confused between these two things in future, for your sake i already give answer to a question which could be asked or rise.

And yes Bodhisattva tendency is directly linked to the gurufield. Bodhisattva tendency exsist because of gurufield because of kindness of knowledge of awareness to guide people.

You can notice one more thing that is gurufield is past work it is not something new. You can directly say Bodhisattva = gurufield.

Because once you got tendency you start becoming part of gurufield more and more.

As I said gurufield tendency is to guide that is thinking they will do something for you is wrong thinking.

Thoughts

  • bigsisterenergy

    Where you lose me is Bodhisattva = gurufield. Up to there you were explaining something old, and then a brand new word shows up and gets an equals sign. I'd want the gurufield part told slowly, on its own, before I buy that.

    Permalink
  • WesleyOkafor

    Someone please make me a little chart of tendency versus path, because I will have mixed them up again by dinner.

    Permalink
  • RayDelacruz

    The part about a guide not doing it for you is the one I'd keep. Somebody can point at the ladder, you still climb it yourself.

    Permalink
  • mattyFromWork

    Didn't know Buddha was more of a title than a name. Like king, fair enough.

    Permalink
  • Ovid

    Buddh being a position, like a king, and not a name is the bit I'll carry around after this. It reminds me of how many old titles we use as if they were names without noticing. I bet the gurufield idea is the one you most want to explain next, since the whole post keeps leaning toward it. Thanks for sharing this :)

    Permalink
  • grahamsonthebus

    Couldn't tell you the first thing about Buddhism. But the bit about guiding people and not expecting them to do anything for you put me in mind of an old driver who showed me the routes my first year. Never once asked for a pint back. Just did it, and then one day he wasn't there.

    Permalink

Related posts

  • Do conservatives actually own the Church?

    I am tired of conservatives acting like they own the Church. They do not. The Church is older than the political right, older than trad nostalgia, older than the American culture war, and older than the faction that keeps trying to turn its own instincts into orthodoxy. If you look at Christian history instead of clinging to one preferred snapshot of it, the record points the other way.

  • Does atheism make you more rational, or just leave a void you fill badly?

    One of the common atheist temptations is to confuse unbelief with clarity, to assume that religion is the irrational part, so removing religion must leave behind a cleaner and more rational human being. But human beings do not work that way, human beings operate through beliefs, emotions... We do not stop wanting ritual, purity, moral tribe, sense of sacredness or transcendent meaning just because we stop using religious language for those desires.

  • Should we judge Christianity against what came before it, not against what it built?

    One of the stranger habits of modern discussion is that Christianity is often judged exclusively against twenty-first-century moral standards while its alternatives are judged against the Christianity that helped shape those standards in the first place. This does not mean Christianity is innocent of wrongdoing. Religious wars happened. Churches accumulated power. Christians persecuted one another. Any honest reading of history has to acknowledge that. The question is whether Christianity made…

  • Does secular society still believe in original sin?

    One of the funniest things about modern secular culture is that it absolutely still believes in original sin. It just refuses to call it that because theological language makes educated people uncomfortable. Listen to how modern institutions describe human beings. We are governed by unconscious bias, shaped by childhood conditioning, manipulated by algorithms, trapped in dopamine loops, distorted by social incentives, blinded by ideology, and mostly incapable of seeing our own motivations…

  • Is simulation theory just theism with extra steps?

    One of the funniest intellectual developments of the last decade is watching aggressively secular people reinvent religion using computer terminology and then acting like this makes the idea more rational. Simulation theory is the clearest example. The basic concept is familiar by now, but I'll summarize: our universe might be an artificial simulation created by a vastly more advanced intelligence. Reality is likely programmed. Consciousness could exist inside a designed system. The laws of…

  • Why does Silicon Valley talk about death like it's a software bug?

    One of the clearest signs that modern secular elite culture is uneasy about death is how Silicon Valley talks about it. The human body is treated like legacy hardware waiting for an upgrade. In place of acceptance, you get optimization: longevity startups, cryonics, extreme biohacking, and constant speculation about whether enough computation and biotech might eventually defeat death itself. Tech billionaires talk with pride about potentially transferring their consciousness to a computer, as…

  • Is therapy just confession with the theology stripped out?

    One of the funniest things about secular modern culture is watching people reinvent Christianity piece by piece while acting intellectually superior the entire time. People abandoned confession and now pay someone $240 plus taxes an hour to listen to them describe their guilt in a softly lit room. They abandoned sin and replaced it with "unprocessed trauma." They abandoned repentance and replaced it with "doing the work." They abandoned examination of conscience and replaced it with journaling…

  • Is Christ's message eternal, but never meant to be read literally?

    Christians rightly say that the truth revealed in Christ is not temporary, but rather eternal. That is true, but it does not mean literalism and it does not mean that we are to drop interpretation. The mistake comes when some believers quietly turn that into a different claim: because the truth is eternal, every biblical utterance should be treated as though it arrived outside history and therefore needs no interpretation any longer, but rather has to be taken literally in the same way...

Public 9 conversations 15 thoughts 17 upvotes 0 downvotes 0 series

What is Bodhisattva tendency?

In groups