Comments on “Enlightenments beyond the Enlightenment”

Hello Mr. Chapman,

I have been reading your how to make Kangling.
I will be in need of a kangling relatively soon, as I will be engaging in practice connected with it.

Thank you for writing that page! Incredibly illuminating for how to make one yourself!
I am taking in different angles on how to acquire a kangling, from making one to buying one.
But I am not good with my hands, and I am trying to weigh the pros-and-cons of both.

If I decide to buy a human femur,
would you have any interest in being hired to make a kangling for me?

Thank you, kindly /\
Troy

Dear Chap-bo,

Excellent to see new posts from you in this strange 2019 post-truth era. I’d love to translate your texts on naturalizing Tantra into Portuguese.

Radical Dzogchen exponents such as Dowman, Wilkinson and Peterson are doing what even the liberal Lamas couldn’t do, but many people that have not run in some way a more classical Vajra path seem to be misunderstanding it in 2 ways: (1) by confusing Maha Ati with Advaita and/or Zen; (2) by rejecting “lower” practices completely as dualistic poisons.

Forget about moving the hearts of any other teachers into your view. You’re the mind emanation for this and you need to find the speech and body emanations in order for such a Buddhist Tantrik “lineage” you envision to take root.

Even the most skeptic Radical Dzogchen teachers still have some hocus-pocus mentality

What might be killing Buddhism and other religions is the lack of inspirational figures: someone that really embodies the whole thing and is not just a theorist that, when put to test, is much like everyone else. I’ve found no teacher that really embodies completely what we need.

Maybe the next Tantric teacher won’t resemble anything Tibetan or even Asian and might even be a cyborg with an extra AI-powered brain.

Maybe we’d need and extraterrestrial Tantrika to really inspire us…

Oh, BTW, today I read a word you might like for this era that is coming: POST-NATURAL. (wink-wink)

Gleig’s treatment of the Speculative Non-Buddhism project is not evenhanded. It’s outright polemical, but in a deceitful academic manner that places what I suspect are HER misgivings about the project in the mouths of others. She offers a lazy and superficial treatment of what she herself labels “The most theoretically sophisticated and sustained interrogation of Western Buddhism,” namely the SNB project. My response to her is here: https://speculativenonbuddhism.com/2019/03/08/ann-gleig-on-snb/