﻿Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 10th, 2017 at 2:36 AM
Title: Re: Mahāvairocana etymology?
Content:
Coëmgenu said:
I know that Mahāvairocana is 大日如來 in Chinese, "Great Sun Tathāgata".

However, the Sanskrit escapes me, due to my lack of familiarity with that language.

One etymology I read said it meant "Great Shining Sun Buddha". Another said it meant "Great One Who Comes from the Sun".

What is the etymology?

Malcolm wrote:
Vairocana: vi means aspects, here it means "to emanate"; rocana means the sun. So, the term is a word for the sun which means "to illuminate."


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 10th, 2017 at 12:15 AM
Title: Re: Assisted Suicide/ euthanasia
Content:
TharpaChodron said:
Assisted suicide has been legal in California since 2016 and it looks like it will be staying.  111 people died with assisted suicide in the fist 6 months of it being legal in the state.

I've personally wondered about this issue.  I'm for euthanasia being legal and available, but I've wondered how it's viewed from a Buddhist standpoint.  I'm pretty sure it's a no-no.  But, is this an issue which, as modern Buddhists, we need to balance modern day reality etc. with view?  How do end of life practices come into play when one is choosing to die?

Malcolm wrote:
The problem is that one should be aware when they die. These days, they use a sedative cocktail. However, if people used drugs like sublimaze (a curare derivative), which merely stops the heart, painlessly, one can be fully present during the death process. If one is a practitioner and is relatively free from afflictions, there is no problem with such a death. There are for example arhats of whom it is recorded that they ended their lives when faced with a lot of pain.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 10th, 2017 at 12:04 AM
Title: Re: Is Maya/Mara becoming stronger?
Content:
Supramundane said:
Is Maya becoming more and more powerful?

Malcolm wrote:
No, but we do live in the age of the five degenerations:

degeneration of lifespan, time, afflictions, views, and experience.

http://www.rigpawiki.org/index.php?title=Five_degenerations

pael said:
Why did we born in the age of the five degenerations?

Malcolm wrote:
1) Because this time is part of the Kali Yuga,
Why we live in the age of the five degenerations?
See number 1.

pael said:
Are beings born nowadays more defiled than former ages?

Malcolm wrote:
Yes.

pael said:
Or is this age more defiling than former ages?

Malcolm wrote:
Yes.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 9th, 2017 at 11:18 PM
Title: Re: Dharma Fellowship
Content:


methar said:
I could be wrong so please check "Vijayapath" with the headquarters of Namgyal Rinpoche at the Dharma Centre of Canada.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 9th, 2017 at 10:04 PM
Title: Update on Chögyal Namkhai Norbu’s Program
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Dear All,

Our dear Maestro Chögyal Namkhai Norbu is continuing his convalescence and his health is steadily improving.

He has decided not to undertake the journey planned for Asia and to remain at Merigar. This is for various reasons and various obstacles that are manifesting in connection with this journey.

The Gakyil of Merigar

http://melong.com/chogyal-namkhai-norbu-program-update/


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 9th, 2017 at 9:57 PM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:
crazy-man said:
Dans l’attente qu’une évolution heureuse soit établie, l’Union Bouddhiste de France suspend la qualité de membre de Rigpa Lérab Ling et Rigpa France.
http://www.bouddhisme-france.org/espace-presse/article/communique-suite-au-scandale-lie-a-sogyal-rinpoche.html


Malcolm wrote:
According to Google Translate, this means:

The master of Tibetan Nyingmapa Buddhism, Sogyal Rinpoche, is subject to concordant accusations, which, as we know it and as they are stated, do not in any way correspond to Buddhist ethics and prove unjustifiable at all points of views.

In anticipation of a successful outcome, the Union Bouddhiste de France suspends the membership of Rigpa Lérab Ling and Rigpa France.

The UBF expresses with sincerity and compassion all its spiritual support to the people concerned by this affair and to the international community of this school.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 9th, 2017 at 9:12 PM
Title: Re: Socialism & Communism
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
I am glad you are all in with Orton. Just drop your attachment to the word "socialism" and we won't have anything argue about, and much to discuss.

Grigoris said:
You would probably gain a lot from dropping your aversion to the word "socialism".  The McCarthy era is long gone, praise Stalin!


Malcolm wrote:
It is not an aversion, it just isn't the solution the present ecological crisis.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 9th, 2017 at 8:44 PM
Title: Re: Is Maya/Mara becoming stronger?
Content:
Supramundane said:
Is Maya becoming more and more powerful?

Malcolm wrote:
No, but we do live in the age of the five degenerations:

degeneration of lifespan, time, afflictions, views, and experience.

http://www.rigpawiki.org/index.php?title=Five_degenerations


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 9th, 2017 at 11:11 AM
Title: Re: Question re Nagas
Content:
jkarlins said:
Ok, thanks Malcolm.


Malcolm wrote:
This does not mean one remains passive, there are many remedial things one can do such as klu bsangs, sgrib bsangs, bsnol bsangs (sang offerings to nagas, for removing obscuration, and for removing contamination), certain kinds of chöd practices, prayer flags, treasure vases, stupas building, placing stones carved with the Guru Rinpoche mantra in the water, and so on. Also First Nations peoples have many methods, one can collaborate with them for this common purpose.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 9th, 2017 at 7:37 AM
Title: Re: Tibetan Zen
Content:
CedarTree said:
And thank you for sharing your understanding

Malcolm wrote:
\

There is no living tradition of the sTon mun (Chan) tradition which has survived in Tibet, though perhaps there is a vestigal remnant of it in the Kagyu Mahāmudra tradition.

However, the clearest explanation of these traditions as they existed in Tibet may be found in the The Lamp of the Eye of Dhyāna by Nubchen Sangye Yeshe. Here it is clearly explained with respect to sūtrayāna systems, the Chan tradition's view and practice is much superior to the Indian system of view and practice brought to Tibet as presented to the Tibetans by Kamalashila. Without this background, I am afraid Tibetan Zen will be rather obtuse.

As evidenced by the preservation of a debate in an 11th century text by Mañjusȓīkirti, there was a serious debate in the mid 8th century between Indian exponents of the tradition we now term "The Great Perfection" (Śrī Singha being mentioned by name) and a more gradualist style of Vajrayāna which came to be the normative position. However, echoes of the earlier Indian nongradual tradition may be found in some of the Mahāmudra dohas, especially those of Saraha. Klaus Dieter Mathis has done some remarkable work in this area.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 9th, 2017 at 7:22 AM
Title: Re: Question re Nagas
Content:
jkarlins said:
Anyone have suggestions for practical household issues relating to nagas and spirits?

I wonder about things like this, do folks run afoul of nagas by doing things like this, dumping the wrong stuff down the drain, and so on.

Jake

Sahajaya said:
According to my teachers, yes, avoid polluting your environment and angering nagas as much as possible. YMMV, of course.
sarva mangalam


Malcolm wrote:
Nāgas lash out indiscriminately. It might be your neighbor dumping toxic shit down the drain, but your family winds up with the horrible skin diseases, not his.

This merely points to the fact that apart from the clear stupidity of pissing in ponds and streams, problems with Nāgās and other nonhumans is systemic and pervasive, as the First Nations have been warning us for centuries.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 9th, 2017 at 7:17 AM
Title: Re: Socialism & Communism
Content:


treehuggingoctopus said:
Hear, hear, btw. The one and only problem here is exactly what I said: a very narrow definition of socialism. That aside, I am, and have been for years, all with Orton.

Malcolm wrote:
I am glad you are all in with Orton. Just drop your attachment to the word "socialism" and we won't have anything argue about, and much to discuss.

Unfortunately, like the swastika, it is too late to rehabilitate socialism. As Orton writes in his essay above (italics mine):

— The Declaration assumes that it is capitalism, not industrialism, which is the main problem. Left biocentrists see industrial society’s social and technological formation as the main problem, and it can have a capitalist or a socialist face...

— I feel that generally the Declaration underplays the primary contribution of the environmental and green movements, which have not, in the main, been driven by a socialist consciousness. Socialists have mainly been in the wings, not in the activist vanguard.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 9th, 2017 at 2:40 AM
Title: Re: Socialism & Communism
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Bookchin self-identified as an anarchist.

treehuggingoctopus said:
Anarchism is libertarian socialism.
No, socialism is too bound up with class hierarchy to even approach anarchism. Socialism is also a product of patriarchy, and bears the faults of it as well.

Again, depends on how you construe the label. Orton was right, in his time, to distance himself from the neoliberal atrocity that was then trying to pass for the socialist alternative.
I don't really agree with this assessment. Orton distanced himself from socialism for this reason, among others:
It seems to me that “socialism” or “ecosocialism”, as a description of a future deep ecology-inspired and socially just post-capitalist society, is not adequate or inspirational. The type of future ecocentric and socially just social formations is up for discussion. There are no worked out social models that can be simply adopted. Socialism is in many ways an expression of the industrial proletariat, and while its legacy of social justice remains valid, and indeed needed for a future ecocentric society, it is not correct to say that “ecosocialism” will describe the future post-industrial ecocentric society. The features of such a society are a work in progress for all of us to engage with.

Malcolm wrote:
http://climateandcapitalism.com/2011/06/23/deep-ecology-versus-ecosocialism-part-two/


more later.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 9th, 2017 at 1:07 AM
Title: Re: Tibetan Zen
Content:
Sahajaya said:
yet his methods of reproving could use polishing.

Malcolm wrote:
You ever heard of a mirror, buddy?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 9th, 2017 at 1:02 AM
Title: Re: Socialism & Communism
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Mélenchon is just an old school leftist. The old left is precisely what Orton is criticizing. Even Bookchin departed from his old left roots in the formation of his libertarian municipalism (with which I am sympathetic, but think it is too anthropocentric), despite his trenchant materialism. Frankly, I have not seen an ecosocialist analysis that goes beyond Saral Sarkar's ecological dictatorship of the proletariat.

treehuggingoctopus said:
I have seen quite a few. It seems to me that your definition of socialism is much narrower than mine. As far as I am concerned, Bookchin is a socialist -- a libertarian socialist, libertarian-municipalist socialist, to be exact, but socialist nonetheless.

Malcolm wrote:
Bookchin self-identified as an anarchist.

treehuggingoctopus said:
Orton was one as well -- and it was Orton who created late in the 90s the cornerstone of deep green socialism ("left biocentrism") that, as a living political platform, is still to come.

Malcolm wrote:
Left -biocentrism is also not socialist, from the http://home.ca.inter.net/greenweb/lbprimer.htm:
"Left" as used in left biocentrism, means anti-industrial and anti-capitalist, but not necessarily socialist.

treehuggingoctopus said:
There are few sets of eco-friendly political platforms in the West which might help foster a genuinely left movement that is also really and truly biocentric. One of them is obviously European Greens. Another is the broad array of socialist parties. Yet another is, however surprising it may be, the so-called Catholic Left, rallying around Francis (the green encyclical proves that the Catholic church is presently undergoing a sea-change in this respect: http://earthministry.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Laudato-Si.pdf ).

Malcolm wrote:
What most people do not understand about deep ecology is that it has room for many different level 1 principles —Buddhist, Taoist, Muslim, Hindu, Christian, Philosophical, Socialist, etc.— which will lead to a deep ecological view, which is level 2 (levels three and four, where social ecology finds it best expression, is pragmatic, as well as and policy/solution oriented, but also necessarily shallow).

What eco-socialists and the Bookchinites fail to grasp and constantly criticize is the diversity of level 1 principles that can lead to a deep ecological perspective. Sarkar, Bookchin, and other materialist thinkers in the ecology movement devote/waste an enormous amount of time criticizing the spiritual and philosophical underpinnings of the deep ecological view, because of traditional left wing dogmatism and intellectual rigidity that continues to infect the materialist left to this day. They completely miss the point that how one arrives at one's ecological view is far less important than the fact that one has arrived at it, and thus they persistently act and behave in ways counterproductive to the ecological movement as a whole — it is for this reason and this reason alone the Green Parties are so ineffective.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 9th, 2017 at 12:45 AM
Title: Re: Tibetan Zen
Content:


Sahajaya said:
Namdrol

Malcolm wrote:
Please cease from addressing me as Namdrol. Thanks. I do not use that name in my daily life, and have ceased using it as a nym on the internet for a number of years. I do not welcome the assumed familiarity of total strangers on the internet who pretend they know me, when they are not themselves forthcoming with their actual meat space identities.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 8th, 2017 at 11:09 PM
Title: Re: Justification of killing in Buddhism
Content:


CedarTree said:
Killing fellow living beings is not noble according to Buddhism.

Malcolm wrote:
There are exceptions to this rule. It is fine to kill specially pernicious beings, it is bodhisattva activity, in fact.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 8th, 2017 at 8:33 PM
Title: Re: Tibetan Zen
Content:
Sherab said:
I guess you would say that the "undifferentiated stage of Samantabhadra .... the meaning of Dzogchen", is an illusion.

Malcolm wrote:
Of course. You ought to read Rongzom's http://www.shambhala.com/entering-the-way-of-the-great-vehicle.html

You might also recall that Nāgārjuna points out that since the conditioned cannot be established, neither can the unconditioned.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 8th, 2017 at 10:17 AM
Title: Re: Socialism & Communism
Content:
Grigoris said:
But the fastest growing jobs sector in the US is in wind and solar installation.
Too little, too late and at too slow a rate...  China will continue to lead due to it's central planning.

Malcolm wrote:
In order the three largest carbon producers in the world today:

1. China
2. US
3. EU

The US however is the second largest carbon producer per capita, Saudi Arabia is the the largest.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 8th, 2017 at 10:09 AM
Title: Re: Tibetan Zen
Content:
Sahajaya said:
HHDL and others have said that present circumstances demand to unveil them and make them public. I agree.

Malcolm wrote:
Publishing books does not negate the need for proper transmissions of the teachings contained in those books from qualified teachers who actually understand those teachings and how to present them properly and to whom.

People who post wildly inaccurate translations on the internet, present their misunderstandings of the same, incapable of actually recognizing the content of the teachings they supposedly are presenting, and then defend their error under the mistaken belief they have been given a mandate to do so by HHDL, are more deluded than deluded.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 8th, 2017 at 10:03 AM
Title: Re: Tibetan Zen
Content:


Sahajaya said:
I thought the topic was Tibetan Zen. How did this get to the superiority of the dzogchen view?

Malcolm wrote:
You brought it up.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 8th, 2017 at 10:02 AM
Title: Re: Tibetan Zen
Content:


Sahajaya said:
It's sad that you refuse to get out of your shell a tiny bit...

Malcolm wrote:
It's sad that you have no idea what you are talking about.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 8th, 2017 at 10:00 AM
Title: Re: Tibetan Zen
Content:
Sahajaya said:
Asserting that Samantabhadra is real, while negating the Dharmakaya, is only conceivable (not inconceivable) only if one is hopelessly lost in delusion.

Malcolm wrote:
Someone asserted Samantabhadra was real? Not even Samantabhadra would assert that.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 8th, 2017 at 6:23 AM
Title: Re: Tibetan Zen
Content:
Sherab said:
Is that how you read "thams cad nas thams cad du sangs rgyas pa med pa'i che ba"?

Malcolm wrote:
You could read this rendition of the greatness as "the greatness of the nonexistence of buddhahood in toto" or "...in all ways every way."

"Total" however is simpler, and the "du" particle here means that it is the verb being modified and not the noun.

Sherab said:
I have no issue with "thams cad nas thams cad du".

Where I have a problem with is "sangs rgyas pa med pa".  It seems to me that treating that as a verb or verbal phrase makes more sense.  In other words, it is saying that there is totally no attainment of enlightenment.  .

Malcolm wrote:
Well, you can think whatever you like, but the commentarial tradition is pretty clear on what this greatness means. Rongzom states:
Even this demonstration of “buddhahood” is either a faultless quality which exists or does not exist as such a characteristic. Either everything is buddhahood or is everything free from even the nominal designation “buddhahood.”
And:
To determine the greatness of the total non-existence of buddhahood, if buddhahood and non-buddhahood are non-dual, why is one seeking? Determine there is nothing to seek. The yogins in whom such a meaning is present effortlessly abide on the undifferentiated stage of Samantabhadra. The undifferentiated stage of Samantabhadra is universal stage of all Buddhas. Whatever the meaning of Dzogchen might be, that is it.
The verb here is med pa, nonexistence; sangs rgyas is a noun.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 8th, 2017 at 5:28 AM
Title: Re: Tibetan Zen
Content:
Sahajaya said:
Although such comes from a premier Dzogchen master, it does appear to describe anu yoga dzogrim (completion stage).

Malcolm wrote:
No, it has nothing to do with anuyoga. It is 100% man ngag sde.

It requires transmission and explanation.

Sahajaya said:
Such Dharmakaya Buddha does 24/7 if you listen and follow.

Malcolm wrote:
Only buddhas can see and "hear" dharmakāya. If you have not understood this, you have understood nothing.

Sahajaya said:
A needless and may I suggest corrupt closeting of Mahasandhi teachings have become manufactured...Of course, I may be wrong.

Malcolm wrote:
You are definitely wrong. It is proven by your absolute misunderstanding which led you to post the corrupt translations above.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 8th, 2017 at 5:24 AM
Title: Re: Tibetan Zen
Content:
Sherab said:
Are you implying that the state of buddhahood is not real?

Malcolm wrote:
It is totally illusory just like everything else.

Sahajaya said:
In lieu of negating Buddhism, the four noble TRUTHS, the two TRUTHS free from extremes, and Buddhadharma, it is far better to act inclusive. Buddha taught freedom from ignorance and illusion. By contradicting Buddha's fundamental teachings, such teachings no longer become Buddhadharma.

Malcolm wrote:
It is better to rely directly on sutras like the Prajñāpāramita which states:
Even the unshared Dharmas of a buddha are like a dream, like an illusion.
Or for example, the Ārya-bhadramāyākāra-vyākaraṇa-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra states
Just as fire spreads outward
in a field with butter or oil,
likewise, Bhadra's illusions
definitely show the Buddha to be an illusion.
And the Ārya-caturdāraka-samādhi-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra states:
In the same way, all conditioned things
are likewise illusory, without essence; 
the buddhas and śrāvakas too
are not different, are just the same.
And since you like Mañjuśrimitra, he states in his Meditation on Bodhicitta:
Since the awakening of the sugata does not exist, his magical apparitions appear to the deluded, similar to an illusion.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 8th, 2017 at 4:14 AM
Title: Re: Socialism & Communism
Content:
Grigoris said:
Just to get things straight:  if you think that, for me, Social Ecology vs Deep Ecology is a competition of any interest at all, you are severely mistaken.  As far as I am concerned they both have their positive and negative qualities.

Malcolm wrote:
You so frequently deride deep ecology, it is hard to take you seriously on this.

Grigoris said:
If I lean more towards the side of Social Ecology it is for the following reason:

The fact that Burlington, VT runs on 100% renewable
electricity, for example, is a result of Vermonters taking Bookchin's ideas seriously and applying them to a small city.
That's great, but really it is a piss in the ocean.  Especially when one looks at the direction things are going at the Federal level in the US, it is quite clear that anti-ecology movement is winning.

Malcolm wrote:
The appointment of a few reactionary bureaucrats does not mean the anti-ecology movement is "winning."



Grigoris said:
And why is it winning?  For the very reason that you critique Bookchin:  because the power imbalances at the intra-human level do not allow for the expression of ecological consciousness.  Even if the majority of people developed a non-antrhopocentric view, if the majority that hold power do not agree with this view...  Of course the opposite can also occur, but not under a capitalist economic system.

Anyway, if we are going to talk about advances in ecologically (more) sound power production, then the example par excellence is China, not Burlington Va.  China, of course, is socialist and quite clearly China has not moved in this direction due to a sudden upsurge in ecological consciousness, but merely because:  1.  Solar energy is now the cheapest energy.  2.  It has gotten to the point, in China, where nobody living in an urban environment (rich or poor, powerful or powerless) can breath.

Malcolm wrote:
China basically has the advantage of possessing access to large stores of rare earth minerals that are not combined with radioactive isotopes. That is principally why they are leading in solar.

But the fastest growing jobs sector in the US is in wind and solar installation.

Grigoris said:
Like I said:  humans are generally self-centred and egotistical at this point in history, if you cannot appeal to this mindset, then essentially any philosophy, no matter how intelligent, is doomed to failure.

Malcolm wrote:
When people's children cannot survive, they will be motivated.

In any case, it is a consciousness raising effort.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 8th, 2017 at 3:59 AM
Title: Re: Yangzab Shitro
Content:
thogme19 said:
I wonder whether anyone here has English Yangzab Shitro text or not.


Malcolm wrote:
Contact Drikung Dzogchen Community in VT. If anyone has one, they will.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 8th, 2017 at 3:39 AM
Title: Re: Sapan Manjushri - Sajam Bagtuk?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Whichever one you can obtain the transmission for. They are all the same in intent and meaning. In general you want the Mañjuśrī/Sarasvati yab yum form.
Of course the Sapan Guru Yoga is fanastic too, but it is very specific, and if you are not a Sapan fanatic...

dzogchungpa said:
OK, I understand. I will keep an eye out for that practice.


Malcolm wrote:
As it is not given frequently, since it is not as popular as entrails-chewing demon destroyers, you will probably need to make a special request for it.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 8th, 2017 at 3:26 AM
Title: Re: Buddhist version of Mahavidya Bhairavi?
Content:
crazy-man said:
Bhairavi - Shri Devi (Palden Lhamo)

Malcolm wrote:
not even remotely


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 8th, 2017 at 3:10 AM
Title: Re: Sapan Manjushri - Sajam Bagtuk?
Content:
dzogchungpa said:
OK, thanks for the info. I've been wanting to have a Manjushri practice for a while now, so this sounds quite promising.

Malcolm wrote:
I rarely give advice, but what you really want is 'jam dpal smra ba'i seng ge.

dzogchungpa said:
I think there are several practices by this name. Do you mean the one from Dudjom Lingpa?

Malcolm wrote:
Whichever one you can obtain the transmission for. They are all the same in intent and meaning. In general you want the Mañjuśrī/Sarasvati yab yum form.
Of course the Sapan Guru Yoga is fanastic too, but it is very specific, and if you are not a Sapan fanatic...


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 8th, 2017 at 3:02 AM
Title: Re: Sapan Manjushri - Sajam Bagtuk?
Content:
dzogchungpa said:
OK, thanks for the info. I've been wanting to have a Manjushri practice for a while now, so this sounds quite promising.

Malcolm wrote:
I rarely give advice, but what you really want is 'jam dpal smra ba'i seng ge.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 8th, 2017 at 2:59 AM
Title: Re: Tibetan Zen
Content:
Sahajaya said:
Although such comes from a premier Dzogchen master, it does appear to describe anu yoga dzogrim (completion stage).

Malcolm wrote:
No, it has nothing to do with anuyoga. It is 100% man ngag sde.

It requires transmission and explanation.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 8th, 2017 at 2:57 AM
Title: Re: Sapan Manjushri - Sajam Bagtuk?
Content:
ratna said:
sa 'jam sbag sgrub.

dzogchungpa said:
OK, thanks. I don't see how "sbag sgrub" gets pronounced as "bagtuk" though. What does 'sbag' mean here?

Malcolm wrote:
Merged.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 8th, 2017 at 2:56 AM
Title: Re: Sapan Manjushri - Sajam Bagtuk?
Content:
dzogchungpa said:
Can anyone provide some information about http://www.ewamchoden.org/?p=4397? E.g. how is "Sajam Bagtuk" spelled, a link to a Tibetan text and/or a translation, history and significance of this practice etc. Thanks in advance.


Malcolm wrote:
It is a practice based on the pure vision of the famous Sakya scholar, Yagton (gyag ston). It is referred to as the ' jam dpal dang sa paṇ sbags te sgrub, i.e. Mañjuśri and Sakya Pan̄ḍita Merged and Accomplished.

http://www.tbrc.org/eBooks/W23681-2417-303-340-any.pdf

It is an extremely important practice in the Sakya School, one which I did for many years. If you do this practice seriously, you will realize the actual meaning of Mahāmudra.

It also has a supplement, a pure vision of Dilgo Khyentse's where the sbags sgrub serves as the outer sadhana, as well as an inner and secret sadhana as well. This is included in Dilgo Khyentse's collected works.

http://www.tbrc.org/eBooks/W21809-1847-585-596-any.pdf


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 8th, 2017 at 1:45 AM
Title: Re: Socialism & Communism
Content:


Grigoris said:
Deep Ecology fizzled socially/politically after a short burst mainly because of it's inability to speak to human suffering directly, given it's main audience was humans, it failed to convince.

Malcolm wrote:
Greg, you are a little isolated on the island of yours.

Deep Ecology is not dead, not even slightly. There is Bill McKibben and the https://350.org/2016-annual-report/ in the US. If you think they are not a significant force, they have emerged as much more effective than the monkey wrenchers following Edward Abbey's vision. When you read pro-oil blogs and books, they constantly freak out at deep ecologists like McKibben, not social ecologists like Bookchin. Since Bookchin passed, the social ecology movement has faltered. Nevertheless, despite the deep misunderstanding of deep ecology by the socialist left, it is actually THE principle ecological voice today.

Grigoris said:
Social Ecology died in the ass too (especially) after the failed Green Party experiment in Germany and some other parts of the Western world.

Malcolm wrote:
The Green Parties have largely failed in because in the end party politics are, as Bharo, pointed out, blackholes that destroy life. Liberation Municipalism, Bookchin's most valuable contribution, has actually taken off in many (liberal) parts of the US. The fact that Burlington, VT runs on 100% renewable
electricity, for example, is a result of Vermonters taking Bookchin's ideas seriously and applying them to a small city.

Grigoris said:
I might add: unfortunately, as they were the only two visions that would have stopped (or slowed) humanity burning itself to death in a hellish fireball.

Malcolm wrote:
Personally, I think what is needed is a broad merging of Deep Ecology and Social Ecology/Libertarian Municipalism. Deep ecology, or rather Naess' ecosophy model specifically, provides the necessary philosophical framework needed for sustaining a broad, intellectually diverse, radical ecology movement; Bookchin's writings show a way out of the patriarchal social systems that have landed us in this mess to begin with.

The difficulty with Naess's writing is that they are not obviously systematic, and really require a lot of thought. If I fault Bookchin for anything, it is his insistence that we first must create a nonhierarchical society, and then deal with the issue of the environment — if only we had so much time! However, I think we can create nonhierarchical communities in an effort to meet his challenge. At the same time however, we must support Al Gore, McKibben, David Graber, and so on. At this point I am a bit loathe to lend my support the Green Party in the US, because they run a top down ship, and there is virtually no room for new leadership. Jill Stein also began to sound like crazy person during the election, repeating Russian agitprop taken from pro-Russian "anti-Atlantacist" right wing nutjobs like Richard Spencer and other Alt-right lunatics.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 7th, 2017 at 11:14 PM
Title: Re: Tibetan Zen
Content:


Malcolm wrote:
It is totally illusory just like everything else.
For example, one of the five greatnesses of the Great Perfection is the total non existence of buddhahood.

Sherab said:
Is that how you read "thams cad nas thams cad du sangs rgyas pa med pa'i che ba"?

Malcolm wrote:
You could read this rendition of the greatness as "the greatness of the nonexistence of buddhahood in toto" or "...in all ways every way."

"Total" however is simpler, and the "du" particle here means that it is the verb being modified and not the noun.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 7th, 2017 at 11:08 PM
Title: Re: Socialism & Communism
Content:
treehuggingoctopus said:
Orton's piece was written a few years ago, and it seems to me that he is familiar mostly with the American scene. Also, he uses a very narrow definition of ecosocialism.

Lots and lots of people within European socialist movements of various stripes have been becoming more and more enthusiastic about degrowth. What might have initially seemed like a momentary "deviation" has turned out to be a steady and lasting tendency. In France for example it is already pretty much part of the mainstream left:

https://www.thenation.com/article/could-leftist-jean-luc-melenchon-win-the-french-presidency/

Malcolm wrote:
Mélenchon is just an old school leftist. The old left is precisely what Orton is criticizing. Even Bookchin departed from his old left roots in the formation of his libertarian municipalism (with which I am sympathetic, but think it is too anthropocentric), despite his trenchant materialism. Frankly, I have not seen an ecosocialist analysis that goes beyond Saral Sarkar's ecological dictatorship of the proletariat.

Greg brought up the issue of not romanticizing First Nations. This is a very good point. But he also misses something in the sturm and drung of people freaking out over the Deep Ecological observation that our planet has exceeded our carrying capacity. 1) Wild animal populations plummeted 58% between 1970 and 2002. Only 15% percent of the land mass of the planet has been set aside for reserves.

At population levels circa 1780, human beings still largely lived within nature. This is not to argue that the impact of human being has never been felt before in history. Obviously the desertification of North Africa, the Middle East, up into the Gobi Desert in Central Asia, and so on are a direct impact of human social and economic activity. It is speculated that the epidemics that wiped out indigenous people in the Americas led to a period of global cooling, because there was a marked decrease in slash and burn agriculture. But the point is that we were no where near exceeding the carrying capacity of the planet.

We should also take into consideration that humans have managed our environment for countless millennia. Is any of this inconsistent with Deep Ecology? Of course not. The most distressing fable I hear from its detractors is that ecological management is incompatible with the goals of Deep Ecology (by which I mean the discipline put forth by Arne Naess, and not the Primitivism mentioned by Greg— these two are frequently confused).

The fundamental expression of Naess's thought is the idea that ecological thinking fosters self-realization:
Self-preservation, or in our terminology, self-realization, cannot develop far without sharing joys and sorrows with others or, more fundamentally, without the development of the narrow ego of the small child into the comprehensive structure of a Self that comprises all human beings. The ecological movement—like many earlier philosophical movements—goes a step further and asks for a deep identification of individuals with all life.
Naess, Arne (2009-05-01). The Ecology of Wisdom: Writings by Arne Naess (pp. 172-173). Counterpoint. Kindle Edition.

Here, Naess is asking us to extend the boundaries of our self-identification from human beings, or our nation, or our state, neighborhood, or tribe, to all of life in all its diversity. This kind of thinking is completely absent from ecosocialist thought, indeed, Sarkar makes a sustained argument for anthropocentrism.

Bookchin's point of view is much better, he writes:
Thus, unlike most deep ecologists, social ecologists understand that until we undertake the project of liberating human beings from domination and hierarchy — not only economic exploitation and class rule, as orthodox socialists would have it — our chances of saving the wild areas of the planet and wildlife are remote at best.
http://climateandcapitalism.com/2012/02/15/anthropocentrism-versus-biocentrism-notes-on-a-false-dichotomy/

Nevertheless, Bookchin unfairly characterizes deep ecologists. Naess writes:
At the end of this century we see a convergence of three areas of self-destructiveness: the self-destructiveness of war, the self- destructiveness of exploitation and suppression among humans, the self-destructiveness of suppression of non-human beings, and of degradation of life conditions in general. The two first gave rise to the global peace movement and the global social justice movement, the third gave rise to the much younger global movement, that of deep ecology.
http://trumpeter.athabascau.ca/index.php/trumpet/article/view/431/706

We see that Naess explictly acknowledges Bookchin's point:
So far as I can understand, all-round maturity of humans facilitates acts of identification with every kind of living being. This again facilitates negative attitudes towards wanton limitation of the fulfilment of life potentialities of such beings. When manifest exploitation and suppression are performed a reason is demanded: are they necessary for the satisfaction of vital needs of humans? The deepening and widening of the human ecological self results in increasingly limiting its own realization, when exploitation and suppression are applied. Potentialities of self-realization are destroyed. In this sense the third movement seeks to reduce the self-destructiveness of present globally relevant human behavior.
http://trumpeter.athabascau.ca/index.php/trumpet/article/view/431/706

In this speech, Naess clearly acknowledges the need for social justice, and the elimination of dominance and hierarchy within human populations. He does not consider this to be to be main thrust of the radical ecology movement. But he considers the three movements he mentions— the anti-war movement, the social justice movement, and the radical ecology movement — to be moving in the same direction, ultimately with the same goal. He continues:
The self-destructiveness of present policies seems clear to a great many, and it has been adequately formulated,but 'to turn the tide' seems politically overwhelmingly difficult. The self- destructiveness of wars has been announced clearly since the atomic bomb changed 'everything'. The long range self- destructiveness of large scale exploitation and suppression based on race, sex, or dominant economy are by now gradually seen to undermine the exploiters or suppressors themselves. (The false masculinity has crippled the male sex.)
In short, I argue ecosocialists such as Sarkar have in no way transcended their Marxist roots, that they insist on an economic dictatorships which in the end will only escalate into the kind of situation we had in Soviet Union, where, as McLaughlin writes, "Ecology was also seen as reactionary because it cast doubt on the view that socialism could and should transform nature." (pg. 52, Regarding Nature).

Anotehr problem is that most people, like Greg for example, take Deep Ecology as interpreted by David Forman to truly representative of Deep Ecology in toto. It is not.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 7th, 2017 at 11:01 AM
Title: Re: Tibetan Zen
Content:



Malcolm wrote:
There is no ultimate reality.

Sherab said:
Are you implying that the state of buddhahood is not real?

Malcolm wrote:
It is totally illusory just like everything else.
For example, one of the five greatnesses of the Great Perfection is the total non existence of buddhahood.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 7th, 2017 at 10:29 AM
Title: Re: Socialism & Communism
Content:


Malcolm wrote:
Socialism, as presently framed in its intellectual history is inherently anthropocentric. It is based on a dialectic of class struggle, etc. It is also based on industrialism. Bookchin's Social Ecology is a case in point, actually.

treehuggingoctopus said:
The properly, genuinely (i.e., post-anthropocentric, de-growth) eco-socialist theory is already here.

Malcolm wrote:
I thought I was pretty current on ecosocialist thought, frankly I have not seen such a trend.

treehuggingoctopus said:
We do need ecological justice, obviously. We also need social justice. The two must go together, there is no other way.

Malcolm wrote:
The former is the latter, actually.
http://climateandcapitalism.com/2011/06/23/deep-ecology-versus-ecosocialism-part-two/


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 7th, 2017 at 8:51 AM
Title: Re: Socialism & Communism
Content:


treehuggingoctopus said:
It does not take much to reframe socialism in such a way that it accords with biocentrism. It can be done. It has been done. It is (relatively) easy because, ethically speaking, socialism is about one's responsibility for (and rejoicing in) the (human) Other. Its mythology is that of the collective. One needs only to purge it of its anthropocentrism, and lo and behold, you already have biocentric and degrowth-friendly ecosocialism.

Malcolm wrote:
Socialism, as presently framed in its intellectual history is inherently anthropocentric. It is based on a dialectic of class struggle, etc. It is also based on industrialism. Bookchin's Social Ecology is a case in point, actually.

treehuggingoctopus said:
The properly, genuinely (i.e., post-anthropocentric, de-growth) eco-socialist theory is already here.

Malcolm wrote:
I thought I was pretty current on ecosocialist thought, frankly I have not seen such a trend.

treehuggingoctopus said:
We do need ecological justice, obviously. We also need social justice. The two must go together, there is no other way.

Malcolm wrote:
The former is the latter, actually.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 7th, 2017 at 8:41 AM
Title: Re: Socialism & Communism
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
No. But it is a view grounded in a biocentric spiritual impulse, something that makes many Social Ecologists uneasy, and which they too easily conflate with romanticism.

Grigoris said:
Yawn!!! The main point is that we need to transition to a steady state world economy, i.e., a no growth economy. Neither Capitalism nor Socialism can accommodate this.
Hogwash.  This idealistic trend in the Deep Ecology movement is exactly why it has made no political progress for (at least) the past 30 years.

Malcolm wrote:
I wasn't"t aware this was about politics, I though this was about a paradigm shift in how modern humans relate to our world and all the living beings in it.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 7th, 2017 at 8:36 AM
Title: Re: Tibetan Zen
Content:
Sahajaya said:
Not to get hung on semantics; but "Body of light" appears to be a description of Dharmakaya Buddha, where vajrakaya may be an  aspect of the same. To realize such is noble, and certainly that is what paths are designed to do, more or less. Although the practice to attain the rainbowbody may be noble, is that pat and parcel of the same? That is why it is said; that *in essence* there is no difference, when referring to that which is devoid of any referent --- undifferentiated ultimate reality, which calls forth differentiated reality as its witness.  Only in the subsummation of empty space and rupa (svabhavikakaya), will such activation of Rainbow Light bodies be recognized in a trans-substantiated Rose Apple world where all sentient beings are welcomed.
Aye, more easily said, than done.


Malcolm wrote:
There is no ultimate reality.

Sherab said:
Are you implying that the state of buddhahood is not real?

Malcolm wrote:
It is totally illusory just like everything else.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 7th, 2017 at 5:19 AM
Title: Re: Socialism & Communism
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
One might think so, but the book Regarding Nature has a very good argument for why socialist systems subordinate the environment to the political dictates of providing commodities to their citizens.

Grigoris said:
Socialist systems, or socialist rulers/dictators wishing to maintain the status quo?

Socialism is a political system of distribution (as is capitalism) if it can be tethered to ecological politics, well...  It is not like capitalism which depends on profit, so it is much more malleable.

The other major problem with Deep Ecology is its romaticised view of an ecological society which does not differ from the ideal of Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden.

Malcolm wrote:
You've confused Deep Ecology with something else.


Grigoris said:
The Deep Ecological view is basically a Romanticist view.

Malcolm wrote:
No. But it is a view grounded in a biocentric spiritual impulse, something that makes many Social Ecologists uneasy, and which they too easily conflate with romanticism. Actually, Deep Ecology is very inclusive of other ecological movements, as Naess says, "The Front is long."

The main point is that we need to transition to a steady state world economy, i.e., a no growth economy. Neither Capitalism nor Socialism can accommodate this.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 7th, 2017 at 4:59 AM
Title: Re: Tibetan Zen
Content:
Sahajaya said:
Another Translation
The Six Meditation Techniques of Acarya Manjusrimitra

"O Noble One, should you wish to experience the Continuum of Awareness (vidya-santana) in all its unveiled nakedness, then:

(1) focus on absolute Awareness as the object [of Meditation];

(2) press the points of the body with the mudra;

(3) retain the coming and going of the breath;

(4) aim [the arrow] at the target [of the crown bindu];

(5) rely on the immovability (acala) of body, eyes, consciousness;

(6) and grasp the Vast Openness [of absolute Awareness].

Colophon

This is the last testament of Sri Manjusrimitra."

Malcolm wrote:
This translation is even worse than the last.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 7th, 2017 at 2:20 AM
Title: Re: Socialism & Communism
Content:
Grigoris said:
Yes, but neither one has to be.

Malcolm wrote:
Sorry, but this ecological irrationality is built into each system. In the market distribution of commodities (capitalism) and the social distribution of commodities (socialism), the environment always loses.

treehuggingoctopus said:
It does not take much to reframe socialism in such a way that it accords with biocentrism. It can be done. It has been done. It is (relatively) easy because, ethically speaking, socialism is about one's responsibility for (and rejoicing in) the (human) Other. Its mythology is that of the collective. One needs only to purge it of its anthropocentrism, and lo and behold, you already have biocentric and degrowth-friendly ecosocialism.

Malcolm wrote:
Socialism, as presently framed in its intellectual history is inherently anthropocentric. It is based on a dialectic of class struggle, etc. It is also based on industrialism. Bookchin's Social Ecology is a case in point, actually.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 7th, 2017 at 2:07 AM
Title: Re: Tibetan Zen
Content:
Sahajaya said:
Not to get hung on semantics; but "Body of light" appears to be a description of Dharmakaya Buddha, where vajrakaya may be an  aspect of the same. To realize such is noble, and certainly that is what paths are designed to do, more or less. Although the practice to attain the rainbowbody may be noble, is that pat and parcel of the same? That is why it is said; that *in essence* there is no difference, when referring to that which is devoid of any referent --- undifferentiated ultimate reality, which calls forth differentiated reality as its witness.  Only in the subsummation of empty space and rupa (svabhavikakaya), will such activation of Rainbow Light bodies be recognized in a trans-substantiated Rose Apple world where all sentient beings are welcomed.
Aye, more easily said, than done.


Malcolm wrote:
There is no ultimate reality.

Sahajaya said:
Malcolm, after a night's rest, here is my response going back to the OP, that in essence, there is no difference in result.

Wholeheartedly recognizing and being absorbed into our innate buddhanature, the nature of mind, mind’s essence, or ultimate bodhicitta, etc, is essentially the same, in essence.

Ultimate reality (no-thingness) is incomplete if viewed as *apart from* phenomena in the non-dual context of interdependence by definition. Svabhavikakaya is all inclusive where subsummation heals all apparent rends. Yes, it is through breaking through the veil of illusion that the noble truths are read.

Rainbow Light bodies, wisdom bodies, sambhogakayas, yidams, yogic illusory bodies, cannot manifest independent from Dharmakaya (Dharmabody), just as phenomena are not to be separated from Dharmadhatu (Dharmata) -- such act as buddha’s self-radiant vehicles.

It may be worthwhile to contemplate what Vairochana studied in Shang Shung and Khotan, why he was exiled to the region of the “great Chinese mountain”, and the lives of Sri Singha, Manjushrimitra, and Vimalamitra in this regard, or not. Perhaps, it seems that you have already done this work? Breaking apart and breaking through, my tea is waiting.

It seems to this ignorant reader that much of history is unclear and that the Dunhuang excavations have brought forward an undiluted syncretism that has been ignored or forgotten in traditional circles. Of course, I may be wrong to speculate.

“O son of good family
If you wish to see the continuity
Of naked awareness
Then focus on absolute awareness as the object
Press the points of the body
Close the way of going and coming
Focus on the target
Rely on the unmoving
And grasp the vast expanse.”

~ Manjushrimitra, “Six Experiences”

Malcolm wrote:
What I can tell you is that this translation is pretty bad. You should not rely on it.

The dharmakāya is a path experience— it does not exist in the result.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 7th, 2017 at 2:03 AM
Title: Re: Socialism & Communism
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Sorry, but this ecological irrationality is built into each system. In the market distribution of commodities (capitalism) and the social distribution of commodities (socialism), the environment always loses.

Grigoris said:
I disagree.  If one had a socialist system where the citizens have an ecological outlook/consciousness there is no reason for the environment to lose.

Malcolm wrote:
One might think so, but the book Regarding Nature has a very good argument for why socialist systems subordinate the environment to the political dictates of providing commodities to their citizens.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 7th, 2017 at 12:38 AM
Title: Re: Dharma Fellowship
Content:


Lingpupa said:
And does anyone know who the "Kunpal Rinpoche" might be, or what the "Vijaya Lineage of the Kagyu School" might be?

Malcolm wrote:
Vijaya is a reference to Namgyal ( rnam rgyal = vijaya ). Apparently Leslie George Dawson aka Namgyal Rimpoche, or his students, imagine that he spawned an independent Karma Kagyu Ladrang.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 6th, 2017 at 10:54 PM
Title: Re: Socialism & Communism
Content:
Dan74 said:
There's a lovely post on the short lived Spanish anarchy by Dan Mathews, WikiLeaks cofounder, research mathematician and former colleague:

http://danielmathews.info/blog/2017/01/eighty-years-ago-spanish-people-responded-to-the-far-right-with-social-revolution/

Incidentally, in some places the majority favour a return to Communism - don't assume that capitalism automatically means a better life for everybody. Especially a capitalism without proper safeguards.

_/|\_


Malcolm wrote:
Both capitalism and socialism are ecologically irrational systems.

Grigoris said:
Yes, but neither one has to be.

Malcolm wrote:
Sorry, but this ecological irrationality is built into each system. In the market distribution of commodities (capitalism) and the social distribution of commodities (socialism), the environment always loses.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 6th, 2017 at 10:01 PM
Title: Re: Socialism & Communism
Content:
Dan74 said:
There's a lovely post on the short lived Spanish anarchy by Dan Mathews, WikiLeaks cofounder, research mathematician and former colleague:

http://danielmathews.info/blog/2017/01/eighty-years-ago-spanish-people-responded-to-the-far-right-with-social-revolution/

Incidentally, in some places the majority favour a return to Communism - don't assume that capitalism automatically means a better life for everybody. Especially a capitalism without proper safeguards.

_/|\_


Malcolm wrote:
Both capitalism and socialism are ecologically irrational systems.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 6th, 2017 at 9:19 PM
Title: Re: How genetics is settling the Aryan migration debate
Content:
MiphamFan said:
It probably was a diffusion of culture with some genetic component and some conflicts between autochthons and Indo-Aryans.

The people of the Orkney Islands barely have any West Asian DNA, which is the key indicator of proto-Indo-European genetic descent, but they assimilated to PIE culture(s) millennia ago.
Same for various isolated European groups like Basques.


Malcolm wrote:
Genetics, language, and culture are not co-terminus.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 6th, 2017 at 9:20 AM
Title: Re: Tibetan Zen
Content:
Sahajaya said:
Not to get hung on semantics; but "Body of light" appears to be a description of Dharmakaya Buddha, where vajrakaya may be an  aspect of the same. To realize such is noble, and certainly that is what paths are designed to do, more or less. Although the practice to attain the rainbowbody may be noble, is that pat and parcel of the same? That is why it is said; that *in essence* there is no difference, when referring to that which is devoid of any referent --- undifferentiated ultimate reality, which calls forth differentiated reality as its witness.  Only in the subsummation of empty space and rupa (svabhavikakaya), will such activation of Rainbow Light bodies be recognized in a trans-substantiated Rose Apple world where all sentient beings are welcomed.
Aye, more easily said, than done.


Malcolm wrote:
There is no ultimate reality.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 6th, 2017 at 3:04 AM
Title: Re: Tibetan Zen
Content:
Sahajaya said:
Bodies are formations.

Malcolm wrote:
The body of light is free from conditions.

Sahajaya said:
There is no result, ultimately.

Malcolm wrote:
There is no basis, or path, ultimately. The ultimate represents a limit of analysis. It is not some thing out there.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 5th, 2017 at 11:31 PM
Title: Re: Tibetan Zen
Content:
Sahajaya said:
Thogal, trechod, rainbowbody, dis and dat are processes...

Malcolm wrote:
Not exactly. Trekcho is the basis, thogal is the path, rainbow body aka body of light is the result of the exhaustion of dharmata.

CedarTree said:
I may be wrong but as I have understood the Rainbow body it is the liberation of the body into a Sambhogakaya that the then deceased master can manifest by their enlightened compassion in numerous places.

Can you maybe broaden that understanding and explain how it ties into the "exhaustion of dharmata".

Thank you Malcolm, we are very appreciative of your understanding.

Malcolm wrote:
"Rainbow body" is the reversion of the physical elements of the body into their original form as the five lights of pristine consciousness. In Dzogchen, the three kāyas are path appearances, they do not exist in the result.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 5th, 2017 at 11:30 PM
Title: Re: How genetics is settling the Aryan migration debate
Content:
Crazywisdom said:
We are Punjabis are Aryans.

Malcolm wrote:
Part Indo-Iranian, you mean. It seems that the migration to India was not an "invasion," but a piecemeal migration by single men over some number of centuries. I imagine, given patrilineal inheritance in the Proto Indo-European community in general, these were young men whose older brothers stood in line of inheritance.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 5th, 2017 at 8:46 PM
Title: Re: How genetics is settling the Aryan migration debate
Content:
The Cicada said:
There's also tenuous evidence of pre-Buddhist Chinese influence on ancient Mesoamerican cultures.

http://www.ancient-origins.net/news-history-archaeology/scientist-explores-connection-between-china-and-peru-020153
http://mexicounexplained.com/chinese-contact-ancient-mexico/

Malcolm wrote:
There has been contact between the Americas, Asia, and Europe for millennia. Vikings are the first people who left definite archaeological remains confirming the presence of Europeans in the Americas.

While it is certainly reasonable to speculate that Chinese ships may have reached American shores prior to Columbus, there has yet to be any proof of this in either Chinese records or in the archaeological record.

However, Gavin Menzies is a https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gavin_Menzies.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 5th, 2017 at 6:22 PM
Title: Re: Tibetan Zen
Content:
Sahajaya said:
Thogal, trechod, rainbowbody, dis and dat are processes...

Malcolm wrote:
Not exactly. Trekcho is the basis, thogal is the path, rainbow body aka body of light is the result of the exhaustion of dharmata.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 5th, 2017 at 11:17 AM
Title: Re: How genetics is settling the Aryan migration debate
Content:
TharpaChodron said:
I was going to rename myself "Buddhist Barbi" maybe that would be more obvious.

The Cicada said:
Why not go with something très tubular like, "The Modest Matron?"

TharpaChodron said:
There's a minor controversy here with Native Americans who argue against the whole migration from Asia theory, as well.  Their legends say that they were born on this land, and didn't come from Asia.  it's pretty ridiculous.

The Cicada said:
There are some anatopistic ancient statues of corn and sunflowers that were found in India.

http://econ.ohio-state.edu/jhm/arch/maize.html

Pretty much proves that Indians are Mexicans, not the other way around.

Malcolm wrote:
Unlikely.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 5th, 2017 at 9:53 AM
Title: Re: What is your favorite Tantra, Sutra, Etc.
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
ཨ


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 5th, 2017 at 9:49 AM
Title: Re: Tibetan Zen
Content:
MalaBeads said:
There is no rainbow body, or thogrol instructions in zen. Is that what you are referring to Malcolm?
So the "realization of rainbow body" would be one difference in realization between the two methods.

Matylda said:
Yes there is nothing like that.. however there is an interesting story about ryokan.. when he died and was cremated his bones had sing of the 5 colors.. trekcho instructions seem to be very close to advanced zen instructions..

CedarTree said:
Matylda, Thank you for sharing that story of Ryokan.  He is a very interesting Soto Zen Monk to say the least If anyone may have achieved Rainbow body maybe it was him,



Malcolm wrote:
Relics are common to all traditions. Rainbow body is something very specific and not shared with traditions outside Tibetan Vajrayana.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 5th, 2017 at 12:24 AM
Title: Re: How genetics is settling the Aryan migration debate
Content:
TharpaChodron said:
Hold up a sec.  I'm not a dude, for one thing.  And another, this isn't about whether is was true, but you don't think people believed it?  Didn't people also believe that God created Adam and Eve and the world was created in 7 days (or something) until Darwin?  Even if my linguist was full of shite, there is apparently a Biblical linguistic theory that involves the Tower of Babel which is long debunked, but still persists in some Christian people's minds.

Grigoris said:
Sorry about the "dude" thing, it is hard to tell from the picture and the name, though that does not mean I should have assumed you are a "dude".  Malcolm is right though:  I don't get out much.  I find "out" incredibly boring, especially after a week of the tales I hear at work.

Anyway, I was more referring to the "Christian West" thing.  Greece was part of the "Christian West" (and East) and I am sure they knew that their language existed well before the "Tower of Babel" story.

Malcolm wrote:
Chodron is basically a women's name, dude. The first Chodron (Chos sgron) was the female arhat, Dhammadipa, a direct disciple of the Buddha. She teaches an entire sutta in the Majjhima Nikaya.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 4th, 2017 at 11:09 PM
Title: Re: How genetics is settling the Aryan migration debate
Content:


TharpaChodron said:
Hold up a sec.  I'm not a dude, for one thing.

Malcolm wrote:
Don't mind Greg, he doesn't get out much.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 4th, 2017 at 10:18 PM
Title: Re: Question re Nagas
Content:
tingdzin said:
The Tibetan naga literature comes from a variety of sources, there is a mass of lore, and there is no Naga Encyclopedia that has all the answers in a consistent way. Furthermore, naga mythology from India, etc. was overlaid onto the pre-existing Tibetan concepts of the klu (lu), which usually referred to ill-defined subterranean powers, not necessarily serpents. The two cannot be seen as simply the same, although they have been running in harness for so long it is difficult to separate the concepts derived from the two sources.

Malcolm wrote:
There is at least one encyclopedic source in Tibetan: the klu 'bum dkar nag khra gsum. Granted, these volumes, which belong to the Bon school, show considerable evidence of Indian overlay, but they also contain tons of native Tibetan lore.

According to Bon text, the klu 'bum dkar po (White Volume of the Nāgās), the nāgas are the offspring of the union of the king of the Gnyan, Gnyan spar ba Dung mgo g.yu’i thor tshugs (The gNyan Flying Conch Head with Turquoise Topknot) with the Sa bdag bstan ma, Gser mdog gser gyi bum pa can (The Golden One with a Vase of Gold). In this text, nāgās are held to live in springs.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 4th, 2017 at 11:33 AM
Title: Re: Satori at a Grateful Dead Show
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
For me it was Zeppelin --> 801 Live --> Pistols --> Throbbing Gristle --> PTV --> Tibetan Buddhism (That is sort of a very general outline). Dub Music in general, from Black Uhuru on. These days fond of Bonobo, etc.

Queequeg said:
Saw in the other thread dzogchungpa linked you confessed to being a skin head... interesting that you went the TB route. That crowd usually goes Zen.


Malcolm wrote:
One does not confess to being a skinhead. One proudly announces it to a properly-shocked audience. I was a skin because of Ska, Oi and because it was a clean-cut postmod style, not because I was a racist. It was also an excellent outfit for working in kitchens, warehouses, construction yards, and so on, which is what I did at the time.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 4th, 2017 at 6:38 AM
Title: Re: Question re Nagas
Content:
Grigoris said:
There are also two types of Naga:  black and white.

We (mainly) subjugate the black and appease the white.

Malcolm wrote:
There were five castes of nāgas: royal, brahmin, merchant, farmer, and outcasts. It is the outcasts that cause the problems.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 4th, 2017 at 6:35 AM
Title: Re: Tantra vs Sutra Emptiness
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
The mind and it's emptiness together are one entity, inseparable, just as space and the characteristic of space are not two separate entities, whereas clothe and its dye are not one entity and not inseparable. The Mahasiddha Virupa observed, the sole difference between space and the mind is that a mind has the capacity to know. But the emptiness of the mind is part of the entity of the mind and not something separate from the mind itself, just as the capacity for the mind to know is also inseparable from the entity of the mind itself. That empty knowing is the mind essence. That is Buddhahood. There is nothing to realize beyond that.

Bakmoon said:
I'm still confused. The mind and emptiness are a single entity, but that doesn't mean it is the mind's sole characteristic, or that emptiness is equivalent to everything else about the mind. For example, earlier you said that clarity and emptiness are isolates of the mind, so obviously they are a single entity. But emptiness and clarity aren't identical to one another because they refer to different aspects of the mind.

Malcolm wrote:
Clarity and emptiness cannot in truth be differentiated from one another. They are inseparable like fire and heat.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 4th, 2017 at 2:16 AM
Title: Re: Question re Nagas
Content:
Proclus said:
I have a question regarding Nagas. In some Sadhanas or apologies, it seems that we are befriending Nagas, but in other Sadhanas, it seems that we are subjugating Nagas, for example, visualizing a Garuda devouring a Naga.

I am confused as to how to maintain both positions - how can I befriend Nagas and also subjugate them.
Thank you


Malcolm wrote:
The Nāga kings are beneficial, in general, though easily angered. The lower class nāgas are the main problem.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 4th, 2017 at 1:27 AM
Title: Re: Tibetan Zen
Content:
Sahajaya said:
As a path, there are differences in method. The ultimate realization is the same (no essential difference).

Malcolm wrote:
No, there are differences.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 4th, 2017 at 1:27 AM
Title: Re: How genetics is settling the Aryan migration debate
Content:
Queequeg said:
I'm aware this is controversial, but can someone explain exactly why its controversial in contemporary India?

Malcolm wrote:
Indians do not like the way the Max Muller and other characterized the influx of Indo-European speakers into the India, so they pushed back and came up with alternate (and incorrect) counter theories.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 4th, 2017 at 1:20 AM
Title: Re: How “new atheism” slid into the alt-right
Content:


Grigoris said:
Are you a Nazi sympathiser by any chance?

Malcolm wrote:
Oh, he absolutely is.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 4th, 2017 at 1:19 AM
Title: Re: How “new atheism” slid into the alt-right
Content:


The Cicada said:
They often say that "liberals are the real racists." Think about it. They love environmentalism like Nazis,

Malcolm wrote:
No.

The Cicada said:
are vegetarians like Hitler,

Malcolm wrote:
No.

The Cicada said:
and are deeply authoritarian

Malcolm wrote:
No.


The Cicada said:
and concerned with population control.

Malcolm wrote:
No.

The Cicada said:
Modern liberals are basically the new Hitler.

Malcolm wrote:
Not even remotely.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 4th, 2017 at 12:55 AM
Title: How genetics is settling the Aryan migration debate
Content:
Unknown said:
The thorniest, most fought-over question in Indian history is slowly but surely getting answered: did Indo-European language speakers, who called themselves Aryans, stream into India sometime around 2,000 BC – 1,500 BC when the Indus Valley civilisation came to an end, bringing with them Sanskrit and a distinctive set of cultural practices? Genetic research based on an avalanche of new DNA evidence is making scientists around the world converge on an unambiguous answer: yes, they did.

Malcolm wrote:
http://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/science/how-genetics-is-settling-the-aryan-migration-debate/article19090301.ece

The only people who will doubt this are climate science deniers.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 3rd, 2017 at 9:48 PM
Title: Re: Tantra vs Sutra Emptiness
Content:
tomamundsen said:
Is the Nyingma view of that shastra closer to the Kagyu or Sakya view?

Malcolm wrote:
It depends on how close to a Sakya, Kagyu or even Gelugpa monastery a given Nyingma scholar was raised.

These days, via Mipham and Khenpo Zhenga, Nyingma view skews Sakya in formal academic studies. But a lot of Nyingmapas, nevertheless, adhere to Kongtrul's ideas. These rose to great prominence in the late nineteenth century in Eastern Tibet and have influenced many very famous masters such as Dudjom Rinpoche and Dilgo Khyentse Rinpoche, among others. On the other hand, we find masters like Jigme Lingpa, Shabkar, and the Drodrupchens whose outlook on formal academic studies are completely influenced by their proximity to Gelug institutions of higher learning.

Sherab said:
I find this disconcerting, if true. I'd rather they espouse an accurated view rather than a view of a school.  I won't be disconcerted if they espoused an accurate view but were strawed-men into one category of view or another.

Malcolm wrote:
Everyone thinks their own view is accurate, including you. Most of us are mistaken.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 3rd, 2017 at 9:13 PM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
It can be compassionate to toss someone in jail.

MalaBeads said:
Always good to know what you think, Malcolm.

Malcolm wrote:
Sometimes people need a serious time out. Jail can be good for that. However, do not read that as an endorsement for the penal justice system as its stands in the US today. It is way too racist.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 3rd, 2017 at 11:30 AM
Title: Re: Tantra vs Sutra Emptiness
Content:
smcj said:
On other threads you've expressed very, uh, 'interesting' interpretations of that chapter. Now I'll get a chance to run your ideas by a real Kagyu Khenpo.


Malcolm wrote:
He'll just tell you I am a Sakyapa. And it is true, my entire "undergraduate" training is in the Sakya School.

tomamundsen said:
Is the Nyingma view of that shastra closer to the Kagyu or Sakya view?

Malcolm wrote:
It depends on how close to a Sakya, Kagyu or even Gelugpa monastery a given Nyingma scholar was raised.

These days, via Mipham and Khenpo Zhenga, Nyingma view skews Sakya in formal academic studies. But a lot of Nyingmapas, nevertheless, adhere to Kongtrul's ideas. These rose to great prominence in the late nineteenth century in Eastern Tibet and have influenced many very famous masters such as Dudjom Rinpoche and Dilgo Khyentse Rinpoche, among others. On the other hand, we find masters like Jigme Lingpa, Shabkar, and the Drodrupchens whose outlook on formal academic studies are completely influenced by their proximity to Gelug institutions of higher learning.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 3rd, 2017 at 11:17 AM
Title: Re: Satori at a Grateful Dead Show
Content:
narhwal90 said:
I never "got" the Dead.  I partied with the deadheads for years, listened to the songs lots of times but all the concert tapes sounded pretty much the same to me even the famous ones with various events and solos that people traded recordings of.  I do like a few of their songs but the others.... lots of noodling around with no end in sight is mostly how it sounds to me.

lol, I might say the same about Rush and I went to one of their concerts a few years ago which goes on record as the most boring concert I've ever attended and I had a girlfriend drag me to see Journey back in the day.

Now put on some Zeppelin and we're getting somewhere...

TharpaChodron said:
I'd pretty much agree (especially the Rush part). but I admire the Greatful Dead, and the passionate following that they created.  Although I'm not old enough to really have ever been too into the Dead, my Buddhist roots do go back to the Beat era.  I think it was reading Kerouac that really got me started.  And then I had the pleasure as a teen to get in touch with Herbert Huncke while he was living in the Chelsea Hotel and talk to the old junky before he kicked the bucket.  Jazz, man, it's all about the Jazzzz.

Malcolm wrote:
For me it was Zeppelin --> 801 Live --> Pistols --> Throbbing Gristle --> PTV --> Tibetan Buddhism (That is sort of a very general outline). Dub Music in general, from Black Uhuru on. These days fond of Bonobo, etc.

Dead, I went to a show in 1979, dropped some acid, waved a glow stick around for a while, then hitched home at midnight after the show let out. Really, quite an unremarkable experience. However, I saw James White and the Blacks on peyote buttons at Max's Kansas City in 1978, and that was really quite an experience, as was the whole city of New York that night.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 3rd, 2017 at 11:04 AM
Title: Re: Tantra vs Sutra Emptiness
Content:
Bakmoon said:
I don't understand. From what I understand, Tsongkhapafan is saying that emptiness and appearance are two isolates of the same entity rather than being literally identical. I thought that was your position as well.

Malcolm wrote:
The emptiness aspect of the mind is its dharmatā, no more separate from the mind than wetness is from water.

Emptiness is not something separate from the mind.

Tsongkhapafan said:
Are you saying that mind and emptiness are the same then?
If you answer "no" then we agree.


Malcolm wrote:
The mind and it's emptiness together are one entity, inseparable, just as space and the characteristic of space are not two separate entities, whereas clothe and its dye are not one entity and not inseparable. The Mahasiddha Virupa observed, the sole difference between space and the mind is that a mind has the capacity to know. But the emptiness of the mind is part of the entity of the mind and not something separate from the mind itself, just as the capacity for the mind to know is also inseparable from the entity of the mind itself. That empty knowing is the mind essence. That is Buddhahood. There is nothing to realize beyond that.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 3rd, 2017 at 10:59 AM
Title: Re: Tantra vs Sutra Emptiness
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
???

smcj said:
On other threads you've expressed very, uh, 'interesting' interpretations of that chapter. Now I'll get a chance to run your ideas by a real Kagyu Khenpo.


Malcolm wrote:
He'll just tell you I am a Sakyapa. And it is true, my entire "undergraduate" training is in the Sakya School.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 3rd, 2017 at 10:44 AM
Title: Re: Lama Norha
Content:
Strive said:
so much sex abuse wierd who to trust these days? better to practice alone i think lol

yan kong said:
These I think are exceptions rather than norms. But then there's no reason to publish articles about all the Dharma centres that go about there day to day activities quietly, peacefully and ethically.

Headline: Vancouver Canada Dharma centre has its weekly Tara Puja. Everyone is civil and things go as expected.

Malcolm wrote:
Well, if all news were good news we'd all be completely depressed at how dreadful our lives are compared to everyone else.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 3rd, 2017 at 10:42 AM
Title: Re: How “new atheism” slid into the alt-right
Content:
TharpaChodron said:
A honey pot for fascists, ha.  I've met some people I'd lovingly call Buddhist nazis, but not like real fascist Nazi Buddhists.  It's a strange world.

The Cicada said:
They often say that "liberals are the real racists." Think about it. They love environmentalism like Nazis, are vegetarians like Hitler, and are deeply authoritarian and concerned with population control. It's almost as if you're looking at what Nazis would have become if they'd been subjected to prolonged exposure of low level intensity metta rays emanating from the Buddha's heart—which consequently has a giant swastika on it...

FB_IMG_1492198300933.jpg


TharpaChodron said:
As I said, you can't argue with crazy.

Malcolm wrote:
However, one can calmly repeat "No" in response to their insanity.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 3rd, 2017 at 10:38 AM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:
robh said:
Malcom,

You wrote: A lot of so called "guru abuse" is a co-created problem where students lose their perspective and feed a guru's ego, the latter in turn begin to feel invincible, and there is kind of snowball effect of ego inflation: the student feels their master is enlightened, the master begins to believe student mythology, and then the master loses perspective.
You refer to such a "guru" as a "master". What has such a "guru" truly mastered in regards to embodying the dharma if he acts in such a manner?

Malcolm wrote:
The term "master" has two connotations: 1) one who has mastered a subject or a body of knowledge and 2) someone who has been given or taken authority of some portion of another person's life choices.

One hopes that someone termed "a master" in Buddhadharma has actually mastered some portion of the Dharma.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 3rd, 2017 at 10:34 AM
Title: Re: Tantra vs Sutra Emptiness
Content:
smcj said:
(I'm sure the very idea of it gives Malcolm the chills.)

Malcolm wrote:
???


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 3rd, 2017 at 10:33 AM
Title: Re: How “new atheism” slid into the alt-right
Content:
TharpaChodron said:
A honey pot for fascists, ha.  I've met some people I'd lovingly call Buddhist nazis, but not like real fascist Nazi Buddhists.  It's a strange world.

The Cicada said:
They often say that "liberals are the real racists." Think about it. They love environmentalism like Nazis,

Malcolm wrote:
No.

The Cicada said:
are vegetarians like Hitler,

Malcolm wrote:
No.

The Cicada said:
and are deeply authoritarian

Malcolm wrote:
No.


The Cicada said:
and concerned with population control.

Malcolm wrote:
No.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 3rd, 2017 at 12:26 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:
Aryjna said:
Having followed the world wide transmission does one also have the transmission for the song of the vajra?


Malcolm wrote:
Yes.

Aryjna said:
Thanks. One more question: having the transmission, can one read and practice the 21 semdzins, the lojongs, rushens, and semdzins from the other book, and the precious vase? I think the answer is yes again, but I don't think I've seen it mentioned explicitly, for all these.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, you can.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 3rd, 2017 at 12:04 AM
Title: Re: How “new atheism” slid into the alt-right
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
The problem with Harris and his followers is that they apply double standards because they are blind to their Western privilege.

Dharma Flower said:
Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins, Bill Maher, and others on the left who are critical of Islamic extremism can and do condemn Christian extremism for what it is as well. They are also just as likely to point out violence in the Bible as they are to point out violence in the Koran.

Malcolm wrote:
No, in fact they do not. I watch Maher regularly.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 3rd, 2017 at 12:03 AM
Title: Re: How “new atheism” slid into the alt-right
Content:


Dharma Flower said:
Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins, Bill Maher, and others on the left

Malcolm wrote:
None of these guys are really on the left. Bill Maher may be a pot smoking Democrat, but he is certainly not a leftist. Harris, for all intents and purposes, is a neoconservative. Dawkins is a neoliberal, hardly a bastion of the left wing.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 2nd, 2017 at 10:49 PM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:
Aryjna said:
Having followed the world wide transmission does one also have the transmission for the song of the vajra?


Malcolm wrote:
Yes.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 2nd, 2017 at 10:34 PM
Title: Re: How “new atheism” slid into the alt-right
Content:


Dharma Flower said:
It's not racist or anti-Muslim to be honest about these atrocities, just as it's not anti-Christian to be honest about the witch trials, the Crusades, the Inquisition, etc. Someone like Sam Harris tries to be honest about the problems caused in the world by theistic belief and religious fundamentalism, rather than simply singling out Islam. He's said some very important things about Christian extremism and other forms of religious extremism too.

If we do not condemn Islamic extremism for what it is, then we risk allowing all Muslims, including moderate Muslims, being lumped in with the extremists. I fully support the rights and dignity of moderate Muslims, so I don't want them to be lumped in with the extremists. If we don't name Islamic extremism for what it is, we risk allowing moderate Muslims to be lumped in with the extremists.

Malcolm wrote:
We do not label terrorism perpetrated by Christians "Christian extremism," why should we do the same for terrorism perpetrated by Muslims?

We do not attack the Bible because it contains Leviticus and Deuteronomy, why should we attack the Q'uran?

The problem with Harris and his followers is that they apply double standards because they are blind to their Western privilege.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 2nd, 2017 at 9:18 PM
Title: Re: How “new atheism” slid into the alt-right
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
He was an inept fool, as well as a murderer.

The Cicada said:
He was trying to save a Buddhist country—and Buddhism itself—from the same force that demolished Tibet.

Malcolm wrote:
No, he wasn't. He was trying to set himself up in a Conradian novel.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 2nd, 2017 at 9:17 PM
Title: Re: Tantra vs Sutra Emptiness
Content:


Tsongkhapafan said:
Are you saying that mind and emptiness are the same then?
If you answer "no" then we agree.


conebeckham said:
Where is emptiness, aside from the mind?  Can you show me emptiness?

Tsongkhapafan said:
That's right, they are inseparable but not the same, like a cloth and the colour of the cloth.

Malcolm wrote:
The color of the cloth is extraneous to the cloth and can be changed. The emptiness of the mind cannot be changed because emptiness is inherent to the mind. Therefore to the say that the mind and emptiness are two different things is a basic category error.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 2nd, 2017 at 9:15 PM
Title: Re: Tantra vs Sutra Emptiness
Content:
Bakmoon said:
I don't understand. From what I understand, Tsongkhapafan is saying that emptiness and appearance are two isolates of the same entity rather than being literally identical. I thought that was your position as well.

Malcolm wrote:
The emptiness aspect of the mind is its dharmatā, no more separate from the mind than wetness is from water.

Emptiness is not something separate from the mind.

Tsongkhapafan said:
Are you saying that mind and emptiness are the same then?
If you answer "no" then we agree.


Malcolm wrote:
The mind is empty, emptiness is not a thing.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 2nd, 2017 at 9:53 AM
Title: Re: How “new atheism” slid into the alt-right
Content:
Strive said:
about alabama women that could be so lol but truth be told i wouldnt feel safe. maybe i read too much about klue klux klan and all the hatred that the black ppl have to go thru there. i dont want to judge tho. maybe i will go there someday n have better feelings about them.

The Cicada said:
I honestly believe that you might. I also get the impression that Muslims you meet in the West are, generally a bit more circumspect than their counterparts back home. The Baptist church lady might just be saying aloud what the Muslim is thinking, bless her heart. I would recommend visiting Alabama before Saudi Arabia—or putting yourself in a box like Nermal the cat and shipping yourself off to Abu Dhabi.

Regarding the OP... I find the source questionable, the author biased, and the remarks of the original poster to be hyperbolic. As Buddhists, we practice compassion. However, if a bunch of white dudes jump onto a movement and discover that, when 3 people are left in the sun, one will get a nice bronzy tan, another will shrug off the exposure with no change, and another will turn crisp and red and develop melanoma skin cancer, I can't see why anyone is rightfully outraged by this. If it angers liberal, rich white women... I can't say that this concerns me, either. There's no "other side of the planet" for innovative men to sail to anymore. If reason offends, society may just have to learn to deal.

All I know is that Baron Ungern-Sternberg is a great man.



Malcolm wrote:
He was an inept fool, as well as a murderer.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 2nd, 2017 at 5:03 AM
Title: Re: Tantra vs Sutra Emptiness
Content:
Tsongkhapafan said:
Emptiness is the very nature of the mind itself, but it is not mind, thus there is a non-deluded duality or nominal distinction between mind and emptiness. .

Malcolm wrote:
For as long time as you maintain this idea, you will be as far from Buddhahood as the earth is from the sky.

Bakmoon said:
I don't understand. From what I understand, Tsongkhapafan is saying that emptiness and appearance are two isolates of the same entity rather than being literally identical. I thought that was your position as well.

Malcolm wrote:
The emptiness aspect of the mind is its dharmatā, no more separate from the mind than wetness is from water.

Emptiness is not something separate from the mind.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 2nd, 2017 at 4:39 AM
Title: Re: Tantra vs Sutra Emptiness
Content:
Tsongkhapafan said:
Emptiness is the very nature of the mind itself, but it is not mind, thus there is a non-deluded duality or nominal distinction between mind and emptiness. .

Malcolm wrote:
For as long time as you maintain this idea, you will be as far from Buddhahood as the earth is from the sky.

Tsongkhapafan said:
The non-deluded duality of mind and emptiness is simply a fact. Anyone who thinks that emptiness can perceive objects has a wrong view because emptiness is not mind and is in fact unconditioned whereas mind is conditioned.

Malcolm wrote:
As I said...


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 2nd, 2017 at 4:05 AM
Title: Re: Tantra vs Sutra Emptiness
Content:
Tsongkhapafan said:
Emptiness is the very nature of the mind itself, but it is not mind, thus there is a non-deluded duality or nominal distinction between mind and emptiness. .

Malcolm wrote:
For as long time as you maintain this idea, you will be as far from Buddhahood as the earth is from the sky.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 2nd, 2017 at 3:05 AM
Title: Re: Tantra vs Sutra Emptiness
Content:
CedarTree said:
However I am of the personal view that the Pali Canon is an Authoritative text though I don't assert this on anyone else.

Malcolm wrote:
The Pali canon is the word of the Buddha. So is Mahāyāna. Mahāyāna supercedes the Pali Canon in many instances, where it does, I follow the former and not the latter. The same is true with respect to Vajrayāna and Mahāyāna.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 2nd, 2017 at 2:28 AM
Title: Re: Tantra vs Sutra Emptiness
Content:


Malcolm wrote:
A for the first, no, the unconditioned cannot be a direct object of the mind. Mind is conditioned. You are confusing conditioned space (space as a cavity) with unconditioned space (space as absence of obstruction). The latter space permeates the hand that is waving. The hands waves in conditioned space. It stops waving as soon as it hits a tree limb, for example.

Tsongkhapafan said:
Unproduced space is the nature of produced space. I experience lack of obstructive contact all the time when I walk around.

Malcolm wrote:
Until you walk into a wall. Unobstructed space, unlike you, is not impeded by the wall.

I thought you would make this error. The absence of inherent existence is not the nonexistence of something (an affirming negation). It is a total negation of essence (a nonaffirming negation).
It's not an error. Absence of inherent existence is the non-existence of inherent existence which is fine because inherent existence has never existed.
Then it cannot be perceived at all, like hair on a tortoise, horns on a rabbit, or the son of a barren woman.

No. At this point the mind, when in equipoise, is in a nondual absorption, completely free of subject and object.
No. the experience of being in equipoise is the apparent freedom from the duality of subject and object but that is not actually the case unless you are asserting that mind is emptiness. Emptiness is always an object of mind because it is not clarity and cognizing.
In equipoise on emptiness, there is no separate mind to find that is different from its emptiness at all. According to you, emptiness is something other than the mind. This is a very mistaken idea.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 2nd, 2017 at 2:20 AM
Title: Re: Tantra vs Sutra Emptiness
Content:


CedarTree said:
Minobu makes a great point sometimes when we really delve into the depth of certain aspects of practice we have to make sure we don't lose context within the broader dhamma as presented by the Buddhas.  Does it mean topics can't be explored and content explained of course not, that is literally what Mahayana is in contract to say the Pali canon which is systematic and extremely well presented but limited on some subjects where Mahayana expands but it has to find itself within the larger context of these authority of works

Malcolm wrote:
If you are saying that the authority of Mahāyāna must bow to that of the Pali Canon, I completely disagree. It is the other way around.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 2nd, 2017 at 2:18 AM
Title: Re: How “new atheism” slid into the alt-right
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
well, no, it is an alt-right honey pot, it draws people of fascist sympathies from far and wide.

Queequeg said:
Oh, jeez. Is that something to be encouraged?


Malcolm wrote:
It is useful to see who, on this board, has such sympathies.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 2nd, 2017 at 2:02 AM
Title: Re: How “new atheism” slid into the alt-right
Content:
The Cicada said:
There are many beautiful women in Alabama.

Queequeg said:
Had a girl from Alabama in one of my classes back in school. My heart skipped a beat when she'd answer a question in class... that debutante Southern accent...

Roll Tide!



Sorry off topic, but this thread is pretty much used up garbage anyway.

Malcolm wrote:
well, no, it is an alt-right honey pot, it draws people of fascist sympathies from far and wide.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 2nd, 2017 at 1:56 AM
Title: Re: How “new atheism” slid into the alt-right
Content:


The Cicada said:
But that's just me. I also think Roman von Ungern-Sternberg is an unsung Buddhist hero for protecting the Dharma from the communists—who are the cause of the occupation of Tibet, the Tibetan Exodus to India, and their global diaspora, after all.

Malcolm wrote:
Hahaha, seriously dude you are too funny, but it figures you would admire a murderous https://seanmunger.com/2016/03/13/the-mad-baron-of-mongolia-the-incredible-story-of-roman-von-ungern-sternberg/:

Ungern finally achieved his goal of power over Mongolia–but only briefly. After a long and complicated series of wars against various Chinese and Russian armies, he restored the Bogd Khan to the throne of Mongolia on February 22, 1921, but he was just a figurehead ruler. Ungern held power from March 13 until August 20. His short reign was pretty brutal. Ungern hated Jews and had what few Jews he could find in Mongolia rounded up and executed. ...Ungern’s number was up when the Reds counterattacked in summer 1921. As it turned out he wasn’t as brilliant a military commander as Genghis Khan. An ill-advised foray across the Russian border sapped Ungern’s forces, and under the pressure of another Bolshevik attack a revolt by his own men ultimately caused the collapse of his fragile dictatorship. The “Mad Baron” was captured by Soviet forces, interrogated, given the courtesy of a trial that lasted all of six hours, and then faced a firing squad on September 15, 1921.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 2nd, 2017 at 1:16 AM
Title: Re: Practicing dharma as a pair
Content:
gyamtsotrinle said:
Hello firends,

I would like to ask (or better to say if you can share) to the topic which I did not find on the DW,..maybe is there somewhere, but anyway. Are you practicing Dharma with your husband or wife? Are you invovlved both in the Dharma? Is it something which quite rare and precious when both together practising? Especially when you have the same lineage and teacher,...If you do not mind can you share your experiences or opinion? I hope I have asked right and clear way:-)
thank you
P

Malcolm wrote:
It is best to have the same teacher and same lineage.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 2nd, 2017 at 12:14 AM
Title: Re: Tantra vs Sutra Emptiness
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
The absence of inherent existence is not the nonexistence of something (an affirming negation). It is a total negation of essence (a nonaffirming negation).

aflatun said:
Could you illustrate the distinction with an example ?

Malcolm wrote:
An affirming negation is the negation of the presence of an existent, the example used by Asanga, for example, is a forest is empty of a city. The forest exists, but it is empty of something else, that is why we know it is a forest. It is a kind of apoha theory.

A nonaffirming negation is the direct negation of something that does not exist at all, in this case, essences. When we negate essence, we are not affirming the existence of anything else.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 1st, 2017 at 10:55 PM
Title: Re: Lama Norlha
Content:
Grigoris said:
While people are busily trying to deconstruct Tibetan feudal patriarchy (fat chance), I would recommend two easy applicable guidelines for simple solutions to the issue:

Malcolm wrote:
The point is that patriarchal power relations flow seamlessly from one patriarchy (Tibetan) into another (ours).

Adamantine said:
That's a fair point, but power alone should also be noted as a corrupting influence. And according to current studies, actually
a literal cause of brain damage:

"The historian Henry Adams was being metaphorical, not medical, when he described power as “a sort of tumor that ends by killing the victim’s sympathies.” But that’s not far from where Dacher Keltner, a psychology professor at UC Berkeley, ended up after years of lab and field experiments. Subjects under the influence of power, he found in studies spanning two decades, acted as if they had suffered a traumatic brain injury—becoming more impulsive, less risk-aware, and, crucially, less adept at seeing things from other people’s point of view." https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.theatlantic.com/amp/article/528711/

I would surmise that anyone in the Guru's seat—male or female (let's not gloss over "The Buddha from Brooklyn")—who hasn't truly been able to uproot or transform their afflictions is likely to be corrupted simply by the power the role affords.

Malcolm wrote:
Interesting, and indeed, Catherine Burroughs is a whole other kit and kaboodle.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 1st, 2017 at 10:00 PM
Title: Re: Tantra vs Sutra Emptiness
Content:


Tsongkhapafan said:
The unconditioned is a direct object of mind.
Absence of obstruction can be directly perceived (waves hand through empty space)

Malcolm wrote:
A for the first, no, the unconditioned cannot be a direct object of the mind. Mind is conditioned. You are confusing conditioned space (space as a cavity) with unconditioned space (space as absence of obstruction). The latter space permeates the hand that is waving. The hands waves in conditioned space. It stops waving as soon as it hits a tree limb, for example.

Tsongkhapafan said:
The absence of inherent existence can be directly perceived since it is mere absence of all the phenomena we normally see or perceive

Malcolm wrote:
I thought you would make this error. The absence of inherent existence is not the nonexistence of something (an affirming negation). It is a total negation of essence (a nonaffirming negation).


Tsongkhapafan said:
The emptiness that is meditated upon below the path of seeing is a generic image of emptiness that leads, through familiarity, to the direct non-conceptual experience of emptiness.

Malcolm wrote:
That is the theory.


Tsongkhapafan said:
That meditation from the path of seeing onwards is not a non-meditation but a direct experience of the object emptiness in which experientially  the perceiving subject does not appear, however there is still a subject/object relationship between emptiness and the mind realising emptiness.

Malcolm wrote:
No. At this point the mind, when in equipoise, is in a nondual absorption, completely free of subject and object.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 1st, 2017 at 9:54 PM
Title: Re: Lama Norlha
Content:
Grigoris said:
While people are busily trying to deconstruct Tibetan feudal patriarchy (fat chance), I would recommend two easy applicable guidelines for simple solutions to the issue:

Malcolm wrote:
The point is that patriarchal power relations flow seamlessly from one patriarchy (Tibetan) into another (ours).


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 1st, 2017 at 9:50 PM
Title: Re: Lama Norlha
Content:
MiphamFan said:
As I asked previously -- do Tibetan lamas actually do this kind of thing and get away with it in Tibetan cultural areas?

I'm not talking about just taking consorts. Talking about pressuring nuns into sex, and other forms of abuse.

heart said:
You tell us.

/magnus

MiphamFan said:
I don't know, that's why I am asking.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, this happens. Abuse of women is very high in the Tibetan community, both in Tibet and in India. Abuse of women is also high in the West.

MiphamFan said:
People keep blaming it on patriarchy in Tibetan culture. Yes for sure there is some patriarchy, but if it were completely due to that, then we would find the same behaviour amongst Tibetans themselves.

Malcolm wrote:
We do. It is a complex issue, and the Tibetan herstory is still being written.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 1st, 2017 at 4:45 AM
Title: Re: Lama Norlha
Content:
conebeckham said:
Feudal relations--

Malcolm wrote:
Power dynamics in Tibetan Dharma centers are nothing more nor less than vestiges of a particular kind of feudalism.


conebeckham said:
is that one one calls sexual blackmail, verbal and physical abuse,lust for wealth and status, unbridled hedonism?

Malcolm wrote:
The forms in which they are perpetuated in Tibetan Buddhist Dharma centers are feudal.


conebeckham said:
Or are those simply human failings, potential pitfalls of any human being, but certainly aided and abetted by hierarchical power structures?

Malcolm wrote:
They are human failings, but the extent to which we just suck up Tibetan social patterns without reflection means that a lot of unresolved Tibetan cultural bullshit gets pushed onto Westerners.


conebeckham said:
But I think the only clear way forward is for some sort of explicit discussion about boundaries and expectations.  Some folks will disagree.

Malcolm wrote:
First, let's identify the pathology.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 1st, 2017 at 3:58 AM
Title: Re: Lama Norlha
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Your words stand on their own.

Grigoris said:
...Your opinions though, well they don't.

Malcolm wrote:
Sure they do, Greg.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 1st, 2017 at 3:57 AM
Title: Re: Lama Norlha
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
It is my belief that Buddhadharma asserts an "absolute" equality of the sexes, but that relatively it notes wide disparity in power, opportunity, etc. between the sexes precisely because of "circumstances."

No, Buddhism traditionally has never promoted an absolute equality of the sexes. Buddhist sūtras are filled with references to the inferiority of women and so on. Sooner or later we are just going to have to deal with the fact that Buddhism arose in a very sexist, patriarchal culture, and deal with this unpleasant fact, and understand that this traditional background of Buddhism has negative consequences for Buddhadharma in the West, unless we openly acknowledge these issues and confront them honestly.

tiagolps said:
What about the Vimalakirti Sūtra?

Malcolm wrote:
It is one of those sūtras that is notable because it challenges the sexist status quo in India. But that message of gender irrelevance in terms of awakening may have been given lip service in Vajrayāna, but that is as far as it goes.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 1st, 2017 at 3:56 AM
Title: Re: Lama Norlha
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Yes, this is why karma works the way it does. Motivation for a negative action can ameliorate the action, but this is not something easy to ascertain.

There are ten natural nonvirtues in Buddhadharma: killing, stealing, sexual misconduct, lying, harsh speech, calumny, idle speech, greed, malice, and ignorance.

Grigoris said:
Karma is not an ethical force, there is no judge and nobody handing out punishment/reward.  We are the ones that project an ethical component onto karma.  Karma is a mechanical force whereby "this action" leads to "that outcome".

Malcolm wrote:
These ten nonvirtues and there opposite govern the karmic results of all sentient beings, not just human beings. This is why predators have a more difficult time escaping the animal realm than song birds, for example. All actions are either positive, meaning they correspond with ten virtues; neutral, meaning they have no positive or negative intention behind them, or negative. Negative actions are wholly attended by the six afflictive mental factors that all beings in the desire realm who have afflictive minds possess. This is not a "projection." This is how the Buddha taught the principles of karma and its retribution.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 1st, 2017 at 3:52 AM
Title: Re: Tantra vs Sutra Emptiness
Content:
Tsongkhapafan said:
Emptiness is unconditioned as well as being an object of mind and the true nature of all phenomena.

treehuggingoctopus said:
How could the unconditioned be an object of the mind?

Tsongkhapafan said:
How could it not? if it is not, it is unknowable and unrealisable.

Malcolm wrote:
The unconditioned cannot be a direct object of the mind. It can only be inferred by the mind. Unconditioned space is an absence of obstruction. It cannot be directly perceived. Cessation is the absence of a cause. It also cannot be perceived directly. Likewise, emptiness— the absence of inherent existenc in your preferred parlance— cannot be directly perceived. All three of these types of unconditioned phenomena (there are no others in Buddhadharma) can only be inferred.

Therefore, the emptiness meditated upon below the path of seeing is merely a conceptual stand in for actual emptiness. The emptiness meditated above the path of seeing is not an object of the mind, since it is actual emptiness. That meditation is a nonmeditation because it is completely free from all objectification.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 1st, 2017 at 3:30 AM
Title: Re: Lama Norlha
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Nope.  I never maintained that.
You did.

Grigoris said:
No I didn't, so unless you have somehow mastered omniscience, and know what I said, and my motivation for saying it, better than I do; I kindly request you keep your completely mistaken opinion to yourself.

Malcolm wrote:
Your words stand on their own.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 1st, 2017 at 2:15 AM
Title: Re: Lama Norlha
Content:
conebeckham said:
I agree with all of this, but wonder if these reflections of inequality are "Buddhist" or more "Tibetan."  Of course, pre-Tibetan Buddhism arose in Patriarchal India, and was transmitted to patriarchal Tibet, and now finds itself in all areas of the (almost entirely) patriarchal world.

In other words, does the quote about inferior merit mean that women are by nature inferior, or is it the recognition that, in this cultural situation, men have greater opportunity?

Malcolm wrote:
It means they are by nature inferior.


conebeckham said:
It is my belief that Buddhadharma asserts an "absolute" equality of the sexes, but that relatively it notes wide disparity in power, opportunity, etc. between the sexes precisely because of "circumstances."


Malcolm wrote:
No, Buddhism traditionally has never promoted an absolute equality of the sexes. Buddhist sūtras are filled with references to the inferiority of women and so on.

conebeckham said:
Yes, I know. But-are those references expedient?  From the POV of Sakyamuni, or Guru Rinpoche, etc., etc., of course woman have inferior position in the world.  From the POV of the Dharmakaya, there is no gender.

Malcolm wrote:
All gender expression is a result of afflictive patterning. It is questionable that the affliction of anger which leads to male gender expression is something superior to desire, which leads to female gender expression, or ignorance, which leads to intersexed gender expression, and so on.


conebeckham said:
It is more than patriarchy, unless you define patriarchy not merely as male dominance, but the "father figure" as authority over all, regardless of the subservient one's gender.  Which, come to think of it, may be a valid definition of "Patriarchy."

Malcolm wrote:
Patriarchy is a social system, spread throughout most of the world, that involves the economic and social subjugation by one gender of all other genders.

Merriam Webster states:

Patriarchy: 1) social organization marked by the supremacy of the father in the clan or family, the legal dependence of wives and children, and the reckoning of descent and inheritance in the male line; broadly: control by men of a disproportionately large share of power


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 1st, 2017 at 2:03 AM
Title: Re: Tantra vs Sutra Emptiness
Content:


treehuggingoctopus said:
Are you sure you are expressing a Mahayana view here?

Tolya M said:
Non abiding nirvana recognized in Mahayana is far more broad than that of Lesser vehicle. If the last is a mind object what to say about Mahayana? Buddha is aware of his awakening. How it can be otherwise? It can't.

treehuggingoctopus said:
A Buddha's knowing of their being awake is hardly mind, is it?

Malcolm wrote:
Depends on what you mean by "mind," actually.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 1st, 2017 at 1:56 AM
Title: Re: Lama Norlha
Content:


Malcolm wrote:
Frankly, the status of women is still very low in Tibetan Buddhism. Tibetan teachers, on the whole, are still very sexist and patriarchal. Patriarchy is not a good thing, and has very negative consequences for women around the world. I suggest you look into the work of Karma Lekshey Tsomo, etc. One of the main terms in Tibetan for women is skyes dman, lower birth. This view is so endemic that the chapters on women's health in the medicine tantras begin:
Because of inferior merit, one obtains the body of a women... female illness in the end become fourteen extra [diseases] for woman because their birth is lower.

conebeckham said:
I agree with all of this, but wonder if these reflections of inequality are "Buddhist" or more "Tibetan."  Of course, pre-Tibetan Buddhism arose in Patriarchal India, and was transmitted to patriarchal Tibet, and now finds itself in all areas of the (almost entirely) patriarchal world.

In other words, does the quote about inferior merit mean that women are by nature inferior, or is it the recognition that, in this cultural situation, men have greater opportunity?

Malcolm wrote:
It means they are by nature inferior.


conebeckham said:
It is my belief that Buddhadharma asserts an "absolute" equality of the sexes, but that relatively it notes wide disparity in power, opportunity, etc. between the sexes precisely because of "circumstances."


Malcolm wrote:
No, Buddhism traditionally has never promoted an absolute equality of the sexes. Buddhist sūtras are filled with references to the inferiority of women and so on. Sooner or later we are just going to have to deal with the fact that Buddhism arose in a very sexist, patriarchal culture, and deal with this unpleasant fact, and understand that this traditional background of Buddhism has negative consequences for Buddhadharma in the West, unless we openly acknowledge these issues and confront them honestly.


conebeckham said:
That's my personal opinion, obviously.  From my point of view, we should stand against inequality whenever we find it, and hold people accountable for their actions.  This is incredibly difficult, given the inherent inequality in the Guru/Disciple relationship.

Malcolm wrote:
The job of a guru is make their students free, not keep them bound in a set of basically feudal relations (as the present system does).


conebeckham said:
In the other high profile news story, it's not confined to gender and sex abuse issues, in fact.   Patriarchy is definitely an issue, but perhaps the issue is bigger.

Malcolm wrote:
It's patriarchy all the way down. This is why situations like the Rigpa affair can last for decades with nothing concrete ever being dealt with effectively.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 1st, 2017 at 1:52 AM
Title: Re: Lama Norlha
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
For example, here you claim there is no power imbalance in these situations:

Grigoris said:
I said nothing of the sort. Here you claim that abuse is culturally subjective:
Of course it is.  What is considered abuse in some countries/cultures is not considered abuse in others.  Are you saying there are moral/ethical absolutes?

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, this is why karma works the way it does. Motivation for a negative action can ameliorate the action, but this is not something easy to ascertain.

There are ten natural nonvirtues in Buddhadharma: killing, stealing, sexual misconduct, lying, harsh speech, calumny, idle speech, greed, malice, and ignorance.



Grigoris said:
1) There is no power differential involved in these incidents.
Nope.  I never maintained that.

Malcolm wrote:
You did.


Grigoris said:
2) The women involved were consenting adults
They were adults, I do not know if they consented, they were capable of consent though.

Malcolm wrote:
Consent in power differential situations is questionable.

Grigoris said:
3) That abuse is culturally malleable.
The IDEA of what is abuse is culturally malleable.  Something that you have not proven false.

Malcolm wrote:
Abuse is not a culturally malleable condition. Abuse is abuse. Abuse constitutes unwarranted harm inflicted on another. In situations where a more powerful person desires things from a less powerful person, this opens up all avenues of abuse.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 1st, 2017 at 12:23 AM
Title: Re: Lama Norlha
Content:
Sādhaka said:
Buddhist Patriarchy is a good thing.

Malcolm wrote:
All patriarchy is a bad thing.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 1st, 2017 at 12:23 AM
Title: Re: Lama Norha
Content:
Grigoris said:
No, I am not going to defend your straw men, I am more than happy to (and have been) defending what I have actually said though.  If you want to misrepresent what I say so that it makes an easier target for you, then go for it.  I am not playing your silly game though.

Malcolm wrote:
Greg, you have basically said that it these women bear all responsibility for their own conduct, and tough shit if they felt hurt — they are adults and should have known what they got themselves into. You have also excused womanizing by lamas as culturally acceptable since the status of women is low in Tibetan society, it's just their culture (it isn't actually).

I have responded that the issue is a great deal more complicated, that it has to do with patriarchy, power differentials, etc., all of which you reject as irrelevant.

Grigoris said:
No, I did not say that.  Maybe you should go back and actually read what I said.

Malcolm wrote:
For example, here you claim there is no power imbalance in these situations:
Now take the leader and put him in a Western nunnery. The girls there are not young and naieve, most of them are adults with life experience. They are not reliant on their practice in order to live. They do not have the social pressure to remain. They have been brought up in a culture where not only is sexual abuse not acceptable, but it is illegal. Etc...

Sounds like a recipe for disaster, right? A ticking bomb waiting to go off.

But this idea that somehow there is this massive power imbalance (like there is in the first example), well, quite clearly there is not. If it were a university or a school and one's future survival depended on getting through, getting high grades, etc... Well, yes, then there is some tangible pressure. A very real sense of dependence. But...

Still an unsavory state of affairs, of course...
Here you claim that abuse is culturally subjective:
Maybe in your WASP neck of the woods it is, but then again Lama Norlha is not a WASP is he? Neither is the majority of this planet.

What is "inappropriate", unfortunately, is culturally subjective/specific.
You say here:
I have played devil's advocate because I see a whoel heap of negativity being advocated, but at no point, if you read my statements, will you find that I support these actions. I don't know enough, I am not capable of solving the issue, I am not personally involved at any level.
You are continually making excuses for these kinds of actions, stating for example:
I disagree. If one is not in a monogamous relationship and the women one is womanising consent then there is no reason at all for it to be abusive. Not in the slightest.
So there are three things which you have maintained:

1) There is no power differential involved in these incidents.

2) The women involved were consenting adults

3) That abuse is culturally malleable.

As to the first point, there is clearly a power differential — an "abbot" holds a position of power. That power can be abused. In cases where an abbot preys on celibate(!) female students for his own pleasures, it is clearly a violation of ecclesiastical authority.

As to the second point, since the power differential is real, it compromises these women's freedom to consent.

As to the third point, sexual abuse, whether womanizing or human trafficking, is not culturally relative. It is part of a continuum of abusive patriarchal relations and power structures that renders women in this world second class citizens in most of the world, and vulnerable to predation by men. This is no less true in the West than it is in the East. It needs to be said that patriarchy injures men too, and is the fundamental set of social relations which has brought the climate to its knees under capitalism.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 31st, 2017 at 11:49 PM
Title: Re: Lama Norha
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
I imagine defending in the indefensible is not very much fun. No wonder you have lost your heart for it.

Grigoris said:
No, I am not going to defend your straw men, I am more than happy to (and have been) defending what I have actually said though.  If you want to misrepresent what I say so that it makes an easier target for you, then go for it.  I am not playing your silly game though.

Malcolm wrote:
Greg, you have basically said that it these women bear all responsibility for their own conduct, and tough shit if they felt hurt — they are adults and should have known what they got themselves into. You have also excused womanizing by lamas as culturally acceptable since the status of women is low in Tibetan society, it's just their culture (it isn't actually).

I have responded that the issue is a great deal more complicated, that it has to do with patriarchy, power differentials, etc., all of which you reject as irrelevant.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 31st, 2017 at 11:38 PM
Title: Re: Lama Norha
Content:
Grigoris said:
Well, I'm sick of your straw men, so I am not even going to bother any more.

Malcolm wrote:
I imagine defending in the indefensible is not very much fun. No wonder you have lost your heart for it.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 31st, 2017 at 10:20 PM
Title: Re: How “new atheism” slid into the alt-right
Content:
Dharma Flower said:
You seem to care more about liberal politics than Asian Buddhists being persecuted.


Malcolm wrote:
You are not being very specific. Which Asian Buddhists? Where?

Coëmgenu said:
I am detecting conspiracy theories about how Muslim men allegedly rape hundreds of Burmese women each year, because that is the standard anti-Muslim lie, wherever it pops up: Burma or Alabama.

Lets hope it doesn't descend to that.


Malcolm wrote:
What it will descend to is the myth that Buddhism fell to the Muslim sword. Buddhism indeed fell to the sword, but that was in the late fifth century, and the swords were those of Huns, not Muslims.

Buddhism and Islam lived side by side for centuries in Central Asia. And by 1200, Buddhists had only two major monasteries in India, the Hindus having taken over or destroyed the rest. The first person who projected Muslim power beyond the Punjab was Mohammed Ghuri (1162-1206), who sacked central India and destroyed 80 temples, all but two were Hindu temples.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 31st, 2017 at 10:06 PM
Title: Re: Lama Norha
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
The fact that you are writing from a position of privilege as a male person who will never be subject to sexual harassment by a Tibetan Lama in a Dharma center is glaringly obvious.

Grigoris said:
I imagine it would be.  You are in the same position too though...


Malcolm wrote:
The difference between us is that you are using that position to defend male privilege in this respect by placing all responsibility on the women involved in these sad incidents. I find this strange because you seem to think that these women in Dharma centers are in positions of equal privilege with the men who are assaulting them sexually, when normally, for example, I am pretty sure you would not be sympathetic with johns who exploit African women prostitutes in Italy, etc., and would clearly understand the power differentials involved and why the sex trade in these countries was grossly unfair and dangerous for the women.  However, these women in Dharma centers are not in positions of equal privilege, and I have personally witnessed an entire community unravel because the teacher involved was discovered to have been grossly hitting on women, some cases successfully, in every Dharma center he visited, with very negative consequences for everyone involved.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 31st, 2017 at 10:00 PM
Title: Re: Lama Norha
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
It means you have not taken into account that the onus of sexual misconduct in this case is traditionally held to fall on the person with power — that it why it is sexual misconduct to sleep with someone's else spouse, children, the ordained, etc.

Grigoris said:
I did not talk about misconduct, I said that when I take a vow I take it for myself, not for others.

Malcolm wrote:
And part of those vows are to refrain from pursuing sexual relations with those who are ordained, even they have just taken one day fast vows, even if they are your wife. For that day you just restrain yourself.



Grigoris said:
Frankly, the status of women is still very low in Tibetan Buddhism. Tibetan teachers, on the whole, are still very sexist and patriarchal. Patriarchy is not a good thing, and has very negative consequences for women around the world. I suggest you look into the work of Karma Lekshey Tsomo, etc. One of the main terms in Tibetan for women is skyes dman, lower birth. This view is so endemic that the chapters on women's health in the medicine tantras begin:
Because of inferior merit, one obtains the body of a women... female illness in the end become fourteen extra [diseases] for woman because their birth is lower.

Malcolm wrote:
I don't doubt it, and neither do I condone it.  I said that a teacher coming from this cultural mileu will have very different standards to those encountered in some Western countries and this inevitably will lead to conflict.  I fail to see what is so controversial about that.[/quote]

When in Rome, do as the Romans. The onus is on Tibetan teachers to discover what kind of culture they intend to spread Dharma in. If they are not up to changing their views, adapting their teachings to the situation they find in the West, they should just stay home. Most people do not realize that nunneries in India and Tibet are major refuges for women fleeing human trafficking and the sex trade. These women take up vows because they are tired of being sexually exploited. You need to read up on the very real inequality Tibetan and Himalayan women face under Buddhism (among other nations like Thailand).

When Lamas come to the West, and then begin having sexual relationships with women in their Sanghas, womanizing, getting them pregnant, forcing them to have abortions on the pain of self-exile back to India, refusing to speak with them after they have decided to end the affair, and so on, this is completely wrong and we should not stand for it.

I personally have no problem with Tibetan Lamas meeting a female student and then having a serious relationship with them where they are accorded personal respect as befits them as human beings. There are some good examples of such partnerships. But women are becoming increasingly suspicious of Tibetan Lamas, rightly so, and this is a problem for the flourishing of the Dharma in the West.

As to your oft repeated cultural relativism: Tibetan women do not enjoy and they do not like the sexism in their culture.

Tibetans in general do not like it when Lamas womanize. They consider it vulgar and unseemly. Such lamas do not attract large followings in Tibetan culture in general. The fact that some lamas come to the west and get away with this behavior has more to do with the fact that they were able to get away with it here where they could not possibly get away with this in the tight knit communities in Tibet and the Himalayas, as well as exile communities. Drukpa Kunley's are few in Tibetan culture. Most people cannot be Drukpa Kunley.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 31st, 2017 at 9:43 PM
Title: Re: Lama Norha
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
There is an awful lot of male privilege in Greg's opinions on this matter.

Grigoris said:
There is an awful lot of lack of substance in your flippant one line write-offs.


Malcolm wrote:
The fact that you are writing from a position of privilege as a male person who will never be subject to sexual harassment by a Tibetan Lama in a Dharma center is glaringly obvious.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 31st, 2017 at 9:42 PM
Title: Re: Lama Norha
Content:
Grigoris said:
I'm sorry, but when I take vows I take them for myself not others.  I do not expect others to respect, or even understand my vows.  My expectations are for myself, not for others.


Malcolm wrote:
Engaging in sexual activity with someone who has taken vows of celibacy is clearly defined as sexual misconduct in Buddhadharma.

Grigoris said:
Yes, but this does not render what I say irrelevant or untrue.

Malcolm wrote:
It means you have not taken into account that the onus of sexual misconduct in this case is traditionally held to fall on the person with power — that it why it is sexual misconduct to sleep with someone's else spouse, children, the ordained, etc.

Frankly, the status of women is still very low in Tibetan Buddhism. Tibetan teachers, on the whole, are still very sexist and patriarchal. Patriarchy is not a good thing, and has very negative consequences for women around the world. I suggest you look into the work of Karma Lekshey Tsomo, etc. One of the main terms in Tibetan for women is skyes dman, lower birth. This view is so endemic that the chapters on women's health in the medicine tantras begin:
Because of inferior merit, one obtains the body of a women... female illness in the end become fourteen extra [diseases] for woman because their birth is lower.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 31st, 2017 at 9:27 PM
Title: Re: Tantra vs Sutra Emptiness
Content:


Sherab said:
But this still does not resolve the dilemma of whether emptiness is conditioned or unconditioned.

Malcolm wrote:
Emptiness is the unconditioned nature of things. There are no appearances that are not conditioned and dependently arisen, therefore, there is no need to bracket appearance/emptiness as something distinct from dependent origination/emptiness, they are the same thing.

Why do we say emptiness is unconditioned? No one made emptiness, no one can increase emptiness, no one can decrease emptiness, no one can destroy emptiness. You might argue, well, what is the emptiness of a thing that has ceased to exist? Does that emptiness exist or not? If the emptiness of a given thing is conditioned, one should be able to describe how it arose. Merely stating that a thing's emptiness arose with the arising of thing itself is not adequate. When a thing perishes there is no need to discuss the nature of a nonexistent. When we examine the meaning of emptiness, we find that emptiness refers to the absence of four extremes of being in phenomena. Since all phenomena are free from four extremes, emptiness is therefore unconditioned.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 31st, 2017 at 9:20 PM
Title: Re: How “new atheism” slid into the alt-right
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
This is an extremely narrow view of Islam.

Dharma Flower said:
You are saying things that are very hurtful for someone who actually cares about the Asian Buddhists who've been persecuted under Islam.

Malcolm wrote:
What about the Muslims that have been persecuted under Buddhism such as the Rohingya?


Dharma Flower said:
You seem to care more about liberal politics than Asian Buddhists being persecuted.


Malcolm wrote:
You are not being very specific. Which Asian Buddhists? Where?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 31st, 2017 at 9:14 PM
Title: Re: Lama Norha
Content:
Grigoris said:
Yes, in the West people tend to see Buddhism as a type of psychotherapy, but it is not.

treehuggingoctopus said:
It is the ultimate therapy, of the one-to-rule-them-all sort.

Grigoris said:
This leads to all sorts of problems since people approach Buddhism (and Buddhist teachers) with a whole lot of misconceptions and expectations and suddenly they find out that *gasp*, their teacher is human and makes mistakes!  Shock, horror, swoon and faint...  If people were more realistic in their expectations, then they would not fall from the clouds so often...

treehuggingoctopus said:
You need not bring psychotherapy into it at all. As we all know, in Vajrayana we have to see our guru as a living Buddha and not as a human being -- reconciling this with "realistic expectations" is obviously quite a challenge.

Grigoris said:
Maybe those coming to Buddhism should be seeking psychotherapy instead, since that, it seems, is what they need?

treehuggingoctopus said:
They certainly need Buddhadharma. Most of them -- of us, that is -- seem to need psychotherapy very much as well. But my point was different, and still stands: our gurus need to be realistic about who we are as well. And we are, most or at least great many of us, deeply troubled persons. We are not Tibetans, and we do not fit the profile of who becomes a good Dharma practitioner in Tibet or India -- those who go into Buddhadharma there would probably strive to be good Christians here. Most of us "Western" Buddhists are broken people who are ill at home in our culture, very often in our family, and pretty much always with ourselves.

It does not mean we will make lousy disciples. It does mean our problems need to be taken into account.

Malcolm wrote:
There is an awful lot of male privilege in Greg's opinions on this matter.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 31st, 2017 at 9:13 PM
Title: Re: Lama Norha
Content:
smcj said:
I've got a recent update on the strictly traditional approach from the lama who is Situ R's representative in administrative matters. He said something to the effect of, "You are responsible for your own decisions. Think of all the things your lama tells you to do but you don't do them. But when he suggests having sex suddenly you think, 'I've got to do what the lama says.' It doesn't work that way."

Malcolm wrote:
Awesome way of passing the buck.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 31st, 2017 at 9:11 PM
Title: Re: Lama Norha
Content:
TharpaChodron said:
Leonard Cohen told someone who was critiquing the retreat center as a place where crazy people go by saying that is what it's partly there for, for people who are sick and need help, sometimes.

Malcolm wrote:
And lets not forgot that Cohen's teacher, Sasaki, hit on women so badly that the staff felt the need to entrance council women that they might be hit on, their breasts grabbed and so on.

They enabled the crap out of their teacher.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 31st, 2017 at 8:57 PM
Title: Re: Lama Norha
Content:


Grigoris said:
Sorry, but did I say the actions were karmically positive?  That still does not the fact that the person that takes the vow is the one that is responsible for holding it.  And, since when was rape (non-consensual penetration) a sexual act?  Rape is an act of violence.

Malcolm wrote:
I will repeat what I said: a part of sexual misconduct is engaging in sex with someone who holds vows of celibacy.

In patriarchy, "consent" is an afterthought in power relations between men and women, especially in those situations where men exclusively hold ecclesiastical authority.

Grigoris said:
Because a lama is not a health professional and is not obliged, by law, to avoid sexual contact with his "flock".

Malcolm wrote:
In the United States, it is a state by state case. There are in fact many states where religious professionals are legally bound to follow a code of ethics similar to psychologists and so on.


Grigoris said:
The other thing that is important to take into consideration here is that Buddhism is not therapy, when a patient comes to me it is assumed that they have mental health issues that effect their normal personal and social functioning, this is not the case with Buddhism.

Malcolm wrote:
Buddhadharma is not psychotherapy, but it is medicine for suffering. It was for this reason the Buddha was called "The Great Physician." I am not sure how you can hold lamas, responsible as they are for treating patients with the diseases of samsara to a lesser standard than you would a psychologist, etc. If anything, the standards should be much more rigorous.


Grigoris said:
Let me reiterate the point also that ALL social interactions involve power imbalances.

Malcolm wrote:
The power imbalance between two children playing with a ball and the power imbalance of a lama preying on his female students is rather different,  don't you think?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 31st, 2017 at 8:47 PM
Title: Re: Lama Norha
Content:
Grigoris said:
The other thing that is important to take into consideration here is that Buddhism is not therapy, when a patient comes to me it is assumed that they have mental health issues that effect their normal personal and social functioning, this is not the case with Buddhism.

treehuggingoctopus said:
I think it definitely should be, at least in the West. We all know what sort of people are drawn to the Dharma, do we not?

Also, does not being mired in marigpa and addicted to dukkha spell the greatest insanity of them all? Let us face it: we are all one sandwich short of a picnic here.

Grigoris said:
The suffering of Samsara is endemic, every sentient being suffers.  Psychological illness on the other hand is a specific type of suffering.

Yes, in the West people tend to see Buddhism as a type of psychotherapy, but it is not.  This leads to all sorts of problems since people approach Buddhism (and Buddhist teachers) with a whole lot of misconceptions and expectations and suddenly they find out that *gasp*, their teacher is human and makes mistakes!

Malcolm wrote:
Well, you just tossed pure vision of your guru right out the window.

Grigoris said:
Shock, horror, swoon and faint...  If people were more realistic in their expectations, then they would not fall from the clouds so often...

Malcolm wrote:
Perhaps the problem is the with teachers, and not the students. Did this occur to you?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 31st, 2017 at 8:46 PM
Title: Re: Lama Norha
Content:
CedarTree said:
Follow that line of thinking and create a "dream bubble".  Imagine you in a traditional setting in Tibet or some other place and you are sitting around a reverenced leader and then when you are alone he touches you.

Grigoris said:
I imagine it would be horrific.  Your family has put a whole heap of expectations on you.  You are probably young and poor without any other avenue of escape from your poverty.  You may have actually been informed that this will happen to you and you are dreading it. Etc...

Frackin' awful!

Now take the leader and put him in a Western nunnery.  The girls there are not young and naieve, most of them are adults with life experience.  They are not reliant on their practice in order to live.  They do not have the social pressure to remain.  They have been brought up in a culture where not only is sexual abuse not acceptable, but it is illegal. Etc...

Sounds like a recipe for disaster, right?  A ticking bomb waiting to go off.

But this idea that somehow there is this massive power imbalance (like there is in the first example), well, quite clearly there is not.  If it were a university or a school and one's future survival depended on getting through, getting high grades, etc...  Well, yes, then there is some tangible pressure. A very real sense of dependence.  But...

Still an unsavory state of affairs, of course...

Arnoud said:
Grigoris,

I know you are not victim blaming and shaming...

Malcolm wrote:
In fact, he is.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 31st, 2017 at 8:44 PM
Title: Re: Lama Norha
Content:
heart said:
If the retreat lama don't respect your vows, who will?

/magnus

Grigoris said:
I'm sorry, but when I take vows I take them for myself not others.  I do not expect others to respect, or even understand my vows.  My expectations are for myself, not for others.


Malcolm wrote:
Engaging in sexual activity with someone who has taken vows of celibacy is clearly defined as sexual misconduct in Buddhadharma.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 31st, 2017 at 3:56 AM
Title: Re: How “new atheism” slid into the alt-right
Content:
Sam Harris said:
We are at war with Islam. This is not to say that we are at war with all Muslims, but we are absolutely at war with the vision of life that is prescribed to all Muslims in the Koran.

Malcolm wrote:
This statement is blatantly ignorant.

Dharma Flower said:
He's saying that we're at war against international jihad, which is the drive to take over the world for Islam that has been part of Islam from the beginning. Millions of Asian Buddhists have died at the hands of Islamic conquest. Is there any Asian Muslim country that wasn't converted by the sword?

What Sam Harris is saying is that the Muslim world needs an enlightenment and a reformation, the same way that the West had an enlightenment and a reformation. Christianity had a very violent, brutal history too, but the West is different today because of the reformation and the enlightenment.

Malcolm wrote:
This is an extremely narrow view of Islam. You need to read:


Elverskog, Johan (2011-06-06). Buddhism and Islam on the Silk Road (Encounters with Asia) University of Pennsylvania Press.

Otherwise, you are just reciting the biased and flawed narrative of far-right radicals such as Alex Jones, and so on.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 31st, 2017 at 3:42 AM
Title: Re: Lama Norha
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
2.) Womanizing is abusive.

Grigoris said:
Maybe in your WASP neck of the woods it is, but then again Lama Norlha is not a WASP is he?  Neither is the majority of this planet.

What is "inappropriate", unfortunately, is culturally subjective/specific.

Malcolm wrote:
Womanizing is abusive and inappropriate no matter where in the world it happens and no matter in which culture. It is also inappropriate no matter who is doing it, tulku, lama, etc.

Strictly speaking, one should not be hitting on women who are in retreat, and who have adopted vows of celibacy.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 31st, 2017 at 3:32 AM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:
Minobu said:
=

Malcolm wrote:
this scandal Is merely a symptom of a much broader problem. Alas, we keep treating symptoms without addressing the cause.
The broader issue to which I was alluding is patriarchy.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 31st, 2017 at 2:20 AM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
As I said in the other thread, "This is not an issue of sex: this is an issue of patriarchy and power."


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 31st, 2017 at 2:19 AM
Title: Re: Lama Norha
Content:
Grigoris said:
Let's not freak out here:  not everyone that went into retreat was savaged sexually by Lama Norlha Rinpoche.

We are talking about 8 women having sex with him over a forty year period.  Six of which had bad sex with him!

Malcolm wrote:
I appears we are talking about someone who was not "having sex," but rather, apparently abusing his position of power to find sexual partners. This is a serious problem in Tibetan Buddhism. I have heard countless accounts of this kind of thing going on in numerous Sanghas such as the Sakya school, the Nyingma school, and the Kagyu school. Most American women I have discussed this with consider this a real problem, and all have been inappropriately approached on one occasion or another by lamas, monastic and and nonmonastic.

Woman do not expect to be hit on when they seek religious guidance. When they are, there are a variety of responses, most of them negative.

This is not an issue of sex: this is an issue of patriarchy and power.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 31st, 2017 at 2:13 AM
Title: Re: Lama Norha
Content:
Grigoris said:
Is Lama Norlha Rinpoche a monastic?

Malcolm wrote:
What matters here is that, "Most of the women (6) reported they felt the relationship to be detrimental to their psychological and personal wellbeing."

Grigoris said:
Yes, I agree, but it seems that people are up in arms because of his Buddhist religious status, rather than his actions.

I was looking to clarify if his sexual activity "in general" contravened his vows.If he is a lay teacher then there is no reason for him to abstain from having sex.

Malcolm wrote:
1.) He was womanizing, it does not matter if he was a monk or lay person.


Grigoris said:
If his sexual activity is abusive, well that is a completely different kettle of fish.


Malcolm wrote:
2.) Womanizing is abusive.


Grigoris said:
PS  In the article it states that a number of the women involved in the "scandal" felt that the sexual activity benefited them and were upset over the ensuing publicity.

Malcolm wrote:
It seems that the majority of women were upset.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 31st, 2017 at 1:45 AM
Title: Re: Lama Norha
Content:
Grigoris said:
Is Lama Norlha Rinpoche a monastic?

Malcolm wrote:
What matters here is that, "Most of the women (6) reported they felt the relationship to be detrimental to their psychological and personal wellbeing."

This is not new news, incidentally, even though the board of Wappingers Falls apparently only first heard about this in January. I myself have heard buzz about this for almost a decade.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 31st, 2017 at 12:51 AM
Title: Re: How “new atheism” slid into the alt-right
Content:
Strive said:
I think he has racist feelings against muslims...

Grigoris said:
Muslims are not a race, they are followers of a religion.  A religion that any member of the human race (of which there is one) can become members of.

Strive said:
most muslim ppl are arabic and have brown skin color. if muslims were white instead do u feel there would be all this hatred against them? i doubt it Grigoris


Malcolm wrote:
No, the majority of Muslims are non-Arabic, 80%. In other words, only 2 out of every 10 Muslims are Arabic.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, July 30th, 2017 at 11:14 PM
Title: Re: Lama Norha
Content:
kalden yungdrung said:
Tashi delek,

Lama-Norlha-Rinpoche.jpg

Is this fake news or not ?
https://tricycle.org/trikedaily/kagyu-thubten-choling-monastery-working-sex-impropriety/

Malcolm wrote:
No. It is real.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, July 30th, 2017 at 10:51 PM
Title: Re: How “new atheism” slid into the alt-right
Content:


Dharma Flower said:
It's sad when Sam Harris' words are taken out of context in order to discredit him. Harris' words were taken from an interview with a Muslim activist against religious extremism.


Malcolm wrote:
Pretty hard to take this out of http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2004/dec/1/20041201-090801-2582r/:


Sam Harris said:
We are at war with Islam. This is not to say that we are at war with all Muslims, but we are absolutely at war with the vision of life that is prescribed to all Muslims in the Koran.

Malcolm wrote:
This statement is blatantly ignorant.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, July 30th, 2017 at 10:34 PM
Title: Re: sem-ngo tropa ?
Content:
dzogchungpa said:
How about https://books.google.com/books?id=ILbWj-GRzUMC&pg=PA263&lpg=PA263&dq=%22sems+ngo%22?

kirtu said:
I had seen sems ngo 'phrod while I was researching the above and it looked promising but the Ranjung Yeshe Online Dharma Dictionary didn't have sems ngo 'phrod pa ( it just listed sems ngo 'phrod and sems ngo 'phrod song pas).  And then the tie-in with sems rtogs pa !

Thanks!

Kirt


Malcolm wrote:
What Eric PK meant was that the experience of Kensho and the experience of introducing the mind is the same experience. The difference of course is that the latter is a discovery, the former is an introduction.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, July 30th, 2017 at 10:49 AM
Title: Re: Semen
Content:
jkarlins said:
Thanks for this discussion! I wonder about this. I'd consider myself a very minimal sadhana practitioner, not a bigtime yogi. How important is it to retain semen? I don't want to get gross, but I do notice my practice gets diffuse and weak if I Less so when I spend time with my wife. Sorry for the euphemisms, I'm pretty direct in person, but I don't want to offend anyone or be gross online.

Just wondering how important it is to retain as a basic sort of meditator, not doing 6 yogas, Dzogchen, anything like that. And I know I should ask my teacher, but I'm a little uncomfortable asking him.

Malcolm wrote:
Not important at all if your diet is rich enough in fat and oil and you are not doing tummo, karmamudra, or chulen practice.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, July 30th, 2017 at 3:35 AM
Title: Re: How “new atheism” slid into the alt-right
Content:
TharpaChodron said:
Who would have thought that a philosophy created by all white, Western/European males could ever possibly be sexist, homophobic or racist?

A little diversity in their groupthink might go a long way.  But, the whole viewpoint of "New Atheism" is rather anti-diverse.  I've never been to a "Reason Rally" but I can certainly imagine what it's like.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, July 30th, 2017 at 3:31 AM
Title: Re: Semen
Content:
tingdzin said:
Why is this is the Dzogchen forum? IMO the general Tibetan Buddhist forum would be better.

climb-up said:
I can't remember where, but I thought that ChNN in one of his books said precisely what Malcolm said above, but said that it was specifically a dzogchen understanding.
...I can't remember which book. I'll try to check.

tingdzin said:
Well, the whole ojas thing is Indian rather than Dzogchen, and seminal retention is also practiced by Taoists, among others.

Malcolm wrote:
In Tibetan, ojas is translated a mdangs. This fluid is discussed in the four medicine tantras, specifically in the explanatory tantra, in the chapter on physiology, chapter 5:.
The metabolic heat of each individual tissue ripens the extract. The extract travels the path of the liver in nine channels that draw the extract from the stomach, changing into blood in the location of the liver; flesh from blood; from flesh changing into fat; from fat changing into bone; from bone changing into marrow; from marrow changing into semen (khu ba, śukra).

Their impure part is the stomach phlegm, bile, sebum, grease, teeth and nails, oil of the pores and the anus, reproductive fluid (sa bon). 

The final state of the semen tissue (khu ba khams, śukra dhātu) is the supreme life-sustaining fluid (mdangs, ojas), located in the heart, pervading the entire body, and causes longevity, radiance, and brilliance.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, July 30th, 2017 at 3:25 AM
Title: Re: Semen
Content:
tingdzin said:
Why is this is the Dzogchen forum? IMO the general Tibetan Buddhist forum would be better.

climb-up said:
I can't remember where, but I thought that ChNN in one of his books said precisely what Malcolm said above, but said that it was specifically a dzogchen understanding.
...I can't remember which book. I'll try to check.


Malcolm wrote:
Birth, Life, and Death.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, July 30th, 2017 at 1:10 AM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:
smcj said:
You're pushing what appears to be a glossed-over view
of Refuge that doesn't account for subtlety and the views
and vows of the subsequent Yanas.

If you hold all three sets of vows, the higher vows trump the lower ones if they appear to conflict. According to the Bodhisattva yana the crucial aspect of an action is the motivation. By responding to the suffering of others with compassionate action stemming from pure motivation, that does not indicate any failure of refuge vows, because it's keeping one's Bodhisattva vows. To imply otherwise will lead others astray on a Mahayana forum.
Even 10th level Bodhisattvas take Refuge from their own unawareness. if you hold all three sets of vows, the higher vows trump the lower ones if they appear to conflict.
Yes. And I've been taught that the Vajrayana Vows can be summarized as "Never criticize anything."

Malcolm wrote:
.

The person who told you this was an idiot.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, July 29th, 2017 at 10:04 PM
Title: How “new atheism” slid into the alt-right
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
From the Enlightenment to the Dark Ages: How “new atheism” slid into the alt-right:


http://www.salon.com/2017/07/29/from-the-enlightenment-to-the-dark-ages-how-new-atheism-slid-into-the-alt-right/


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, July 29th, 2017 at 9:53 PM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Dzogchen means understanding both how things are and how they appear, and then behaving accordingly.

smcj said:
Correct. And that Buddha Activity perfectly accords with the situation spontaneously, without deliberation of any kind, right? Therefore without condemnation also, right?

Malcolm wrote:
This isn't Christianity. No one is saying Sogyal is going to burn in an eternal lake of fire (though apparently some Tibetan Lamas think that is what is going to happen to his student who have recoiled at his alleged actions).

smcj said:
In seeing 'how things appear' enlightenment also sees a sentient being's mistaken understanding. Compassion is the motivation for helping, not condemnation. No judgment or criticism need be involved.

Malcolm wrote:
I don't see any enlightened people in this game, neither Sogyal, nor the students. It is useless to pretend to be enlightened. It can be compassionate to toss someone in jail.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, July 29th, 2017 at 9:50 PM
Title: Re: Tantra vs Sutra Emptiness
Content:
Sherab said:
It is possible to talk sensibly of emptiness as an object for a subject?  If so, what are we to make of the inseparability of clarity and emptiness?


Malcolm wrote:
Clarity and emptiness are isolates of the mind: when we experience the clarity of the mind, we seal it with emptiness; when we experience emptiness, we seal it with clarity.

Sherab said:
When the mind experience emptiness, does it have emptiness as its object?  That is the question which is not answer by your response above.

Malcolm wrote:
No, if it did that would be a concept of emptiness.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, July 29th, 2017 at 12:00 PM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:
dzogchungpa said:
If "In the Vajrayana there is no criticism." means "Vajrayana practitioners should not criticize anything or anyone." then, frankly, that is ridiculous.

smcj said:
Funny, I thought it was Dzogchen.


Malcolm wrote:
Dzogchen means understanding both how things are and how they appear, and then behaving accordingly. In this case it is pretty clear there is a big problem, and it does not seem to be the students, but rather the teacher. No amount of pious appeals to pure vision and so on are likely to remedy that situation.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, July 29th, 2017 at 7:45 AM
Title: Re: klesavarana and jneyavarana in Dzogchen
Content:
Temicco said:
How do klesavarana and jneyavarana work in Dzogchen? If Dzogchen is a single state, is it innately free from both, such that one is entirely free of all obscuration so long as one is in rigpa? If so, then how is there any state of being free of klesavarana but not yet jneyavarana? If not, then how does it work?

Malcolm wrote:
Dzogchen is a uniform state. When it is recognized that is vidyā, rigpa; when it is not, that is avidyā, ma rig pa. The two obscurations exist when we are in a state of ma rig pa, ignorance.

Ma rig pa itself is the basis knowledge obscuration from which the obscuration of afflictions arises.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, July 29th, 2017 at 7:43 AM
Title: Re: Tantra vs Sutra Emptiness
Content:


Malcolm wrote:
There is actually a difference in the object: sūtra emptiness is the coarse emptiness, realized by a coarse, analytical mind. Vajrayāna emptiness is a subtle emptiness, realized by a subtle, nonanalytical mind.

Tsongkhapafan said:
There is no difference in the object, what is different is the mind that is realising emptiness. The meaning of emptiness is the same whether it is being realised by a gross mind or by the mind of clear light.

Sherab said:
It is possible to talk sensibly of emptiness as an object for a subject?  If so, what are we to make of the inseparability of clarity and emptiness?


Malcolm wrote:
Clarity and emptiness are isolates of the mind: when we experience the clarity of the mind, we seal it with emptiness; when we experience emptiness, we seal it with clarity.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, July 29th, 2017 at 4:44 AM
Title: Re: Tantra vs Sutra Emptiness
Content:
Tolya M said:
There is the possibility of infinite voids even if this refers to a way of classifying phenomena. I do not know if it is written somewhere in the Mahayana sutras, but comparing the lists of prajnaparamita, yogachara and Patisambhidamagga, such a conclusion seems plausible. The practice of looking into the sky, by the way, is partly from the Prajnaparamita sutras.

CHRISTOPHER HATCHEIL Naked Seeing  said:
Then, Sakra, the lord of the gods, asked the venerable
Subhuti: “Noble Subhuti! When one practices yoga in this Perfection
of Wisdom, on what does one practice yoga?”
Subhuti replied: “Kausika! When one practices yoga in this
Perfection of Wisdom, one practices yoga in space.  Kaurika!
Someone wishing to train and practice yoga in this Perfection of
Wisdom should practice yoga in [a place] without cover.”


Malcolm wrote:
This passage is discussed in Kalacakra commentarial literature by Naropa among others, but there it is said that the meaning of this is to be learned from a guru.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, July 29th, 2017 at 3:39 AM
Title: Re: Tantra vs Sutra Emptiness
Content:


CedarTree said:
Are you able to speak about the pointing out practice or would this violate the practice?

Malcolm wrote:
Direct introduction needs to be received from a master.

CedarTree said:
Absolutely amazing.  Is there any origin on how this practice came to be?

Malcolm wrote:
Introduction is part of the three inner tantras of the nine yāna scheme. It does not really exist in lower tantras.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, July 29th, 2017 at 3:29 AM
Title: Re: Tantra vs Sutra Emptiness
Content:


CedarTree said:
Are you able to speak about the pointing out practice or would this violate the practice?

Malcolm wrote:
Direct introduction needs to be received from a master.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, July 29th, 2017 at 3:00 AM
Title: Re: Tantra vs Sutra Emptiness
Content:
Grigoris said:
So emptiness is conditioned?

Malcolm wrote:
Of course not, but the mind that realizes it is conditioned.

Grigoris said:
But if the experience of an object is dependent on the mind experiencing it, doesn't that make the object conditioned?

Malcolm wrote:
Emptiness is not really an object, it is the state of things. In sutra, emptiness is arrived at inferentially. The so called "direct perception of emptiness" is in every respect the absence of the perception of substantiality in/of things. This absence of perception is in fact an inference below the path of seeing in sūtra as well as Dzogchen, Mahāmudra, and so on.

The difference lies in whether or not the nature of the mind is directly pointed out. In sūtra it is not, and in Vajrayāna it is — gradually, in the case of Mahāmudra, or all at once, as in the case of Dzogchen.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, July 29th, 2017 at 12:38 AM
Title: Re: Tantra vs Sutra Emptiness
Content:
Bakmoon said:
Are they different emptinesses, or are they the same emptiness being perceived in a coarse way and a subtle way? ('perceived might not be the best word to use but I'm not sure other word to use).


Malcolm wrote:
Emptiness is not an objective thing. Therefore, its subtly or coarseness depends on the mind that realizes it.

conebeckham said:
The "mind" that realizes emptiness in Tantra is a different "mind" than that which realizes emptiness via the path of analysis--I think even the Geluk lineage asserts this, yes?


Malcolm wrote:
Yes.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, July 29th, 2017 at 12:06 AM
Title: Re: Tantra vs Sutra Emptiness
Content:
Bakmoon said:
Are they different emptinesses, or are they the same emptiness being perceived in a coarse way and a subtle way? ('perceived might not be the best word to use but I'm not sure other word to use).


Malcolm wrote:
Emptiness is not an objective thing. Therefore, its subtly or coarseness depends on the mind that realizes it.

Grigoris said:
So emptiness is conditioned?

Malcolm wrote:
Of course not, but the mind that realizes it is conditioned.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, July 29th, 2017 at 12:04 AM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:
smcj said:
A class action based on physical assault would be what I would advise.
With another reading of the letter something became obvious to me. Since it is all the top people in the organization that are making the complaint, then going to court would be ridiculous. They'd be suing themselves!

Malcolm wrote:
No, they would be suing the corporate entity of Rigpa, a legally separate person. In any case, the person who should be sued is Sogyal, right?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 28th, 2017 at 10:56 PM
Title: Re: Tantra vs Sutra Emptiness
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
There is actually a difference in the object: sūtra emptiness is the coarse emptiness, realized by a coarse, analytical mind. Vajrayāna emptiness is a subtle emptiness, realized by a subtle, nonanalytical mind.

Bakmoon said:
Are they different emptinesses, or are they the same emptiness being perceived in a coarse way and a subtle way? ('perceived might not be the best word to use but I'm not sure other word to use).


Malcolm wrote:
Emptiness is not an objective thing. Therefore, its subtly or coarseness depends on the mind that realizes it.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 28th, 2017 at 10:44 PM
Title: Re: Tantra vs Sutra Emptiness
Content:
Tsongkhapafan said:
There is no difference between the meaning of emptiness in Sutra and Tantra

Malcolm wrote:
There is however a great difference in how they are realized. If this were not the case, there would be no difference between Sutra and Vajrayāna.

Tsongkhapafan said:
Of course, but there's no difference in the object.

Malcolm wrote:
There is actually a difference in the object: sūtra emptiness is the coarse emptiness, realized by a coarse, analytical mind. Vajrayāna emptiness is a subtle emptiness, realized by a subtle, nonanalytical mind.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 28th, 2017 at 5:44 AM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:
TRC said:
I'll go by the eight senior signatories who composed the letter to Sogyal outlining the harm and abuse. I am going to trust their account, as they are the closest to him and have seen and witnessed his actions and the results of his actions. They are also long-term Dharma practitioners and are best placed to make a judgement.

Here is what they said to Sogyal in their reply to him. I've already quoted this, but it's worth quoting again. They actually deal directly with this point:

Grigoris said:
Like I said:  "I think our vision is too obscured to be able to make the necessary judgments without falling prey to aversion and attraction."

I am not going to deny that it SEEMS that there is abuse.

TRC said:
Ours might be, but not the eight senior signatories of the letter, or for that matter those who have been abused. They might actually know if they have suffered actual harm.


Malcolm wrote:
"Harm" is subjective, that's why we have courts. If Sogyal was a monk, the standard would be more clear. He isn't, he is a layperson, and since this is a religious organization rather than the professional one, professional standards that apply to physicians, etc., may not apply. Then there is the issue of EU law. This is why I council that the Rigpa students need to take matters into their own hands, ala Kripalu.

TRC said:
n 1994, revelations surfaced of sexual relationships between Desai and several female ashram residents. When these and other alleged abuses of power were confirmed, Kripalu’s Board of Trustees called for Desai’s immediate resignation. Since 1994, and continuing today, there is no formal relationship between Kripalu and Desai.

Malcolm wrote:
https://kripalu.org/about/kripalu/our-history

Of course, Amrit Desai is still actively teaching and has many students.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 28th, 2017 at 5:37 AM
Title: Re: Buddhahood in This Life Transmission: 09/15/17
Content:
Tolya M said:
Will the transmission by reading be given for the guru-yoga of Vimalamitra? Thank you!

Malcolm wrote:
It will be taken under advisement. we will see.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 28th, 2017 at 5:36 AM
Title: Re: Tantra vs Sutra Emptiness
Content:
Tsongkhapafan said:
There is no difference between the meaning of emptiness in Sutra and Tantra

Malcolm wrote:
There is however a great difference in how they are realized. If this were not the case, there would be no difference between Sutra and Vajrayāna.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, July 27th, 2017 at 10:17 PM
Title: Re: Tantra vs Sutra Emptiness
Content:
CedarTree said:
There has been some discussion that Tantra provides a deeper understanding of Emptiness than Sutra.

I thought it would be of benefit to contrast how Sutra and Tantra handle emptiness and broaden our understanding of Dharma.

To those that are knowledgeable about Mahamudra and Dzogchen please elaborate how emptiness is detailed/broadened in your tradition.

Malcolm wrote:
The mind that apprehends emptiness is held to be more subtle in Vajrayāna -- at least this is how the Gelugpas explain the difference.

The Nyingmapas, Sakyapas, and Kagyupas argue that the nature of the mind is introduced experientially and nonanalytically in Vajrayāna; whereas the analysis used in sutra is coarse and overly conceptual.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, July 27th, 2017 at 10:05 PM
Title: Re: Buddhahood in This Life Transmission: 09/15/17
Content:



Malcolm wrote:
On September 15, 2017 Zangthal Editions and Wisdom Publications present a conversation between Tulku Dakpa Rinpoche and Daniel Aitken (Publisher, Wisdom Publications) from 5:00-6:00

pael said:
Is hearing of this conversation necessary for receiving transmisson?


Malcolm wrote:
Nope.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, July 27th, 2017 at 5:38 AM
Title: Re: Very sad news
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Reting was a student of Chatral Rinpoche, and had deep experience in Dzogchen teachings. HHDL has never expressed anything other than admiration for Reting.

cloudburst said:
Reting hatched a plot to have Taktra murdered. The Dalai Lama explains that he saw the order in Reting's own handwriting. Let's not get carried away.

smcj said:
You guys got sources for your histories?


Malcolm wrote:
Melvin Goldstein, among others.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, July 27th, 2017 at 4:14 AM
Title: Re: Very sad news
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Reting was a student of Chatral Rinpoche, and had deep experience in Dzogchen teachings. HHDL has never expressed anything other than admiration for Reting.

cloudburst said:
Reting hatched a plot to have Taktra murdered. The Dalai Lama explains that he saw the order in Reting's own handwriting. Let's not get carried away.


Malcolm wrote:
There was indeed a plot by Reting's followers, but Reting maintained his innocence in the plot. In any case, political assassination is an old story in Tibet.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, July 27th, 2017 at 3:54 AM
Title: Re: Most Powerful Dharmapala?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
I would add that all Dharmapālas protect all Dharma practitioners, whether they are Vajrayāna practitioners or not —— that's their job.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, July 27th, 2017 at 2:28 AM
Title: Buddhahood in This Life Transmission: 09/15/17
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Who: Tulku Dakpa Rinpoche
Where: First Parish Unitarian Universalist, 3 Cambridge Street, Cambridge, Massachusetts
What: Buddhahood in This Life Reading Transmission
When: 5:00-9:30 PM


On September 15, 2017 Zangthal Editions and Wisdom Publications present a conversation between Tulku Dakpa Rinpoche and Daniel Aitken (Publisher, Wisdom Publications) from 5:00-6:00, immediately followed by the Reading Transmission for Buddhahood in This Life ( https://tinyurl.com/yd2xrogd ) from 6:30-9:30. This event is FREE. Please join us in person if you can or by webcast (URL forthcoming).

Tulku Dakpa Rinpoche was educated at Mindroling Monastery, the only tulku recognized by His Holiness the 11th Mindrolling Trichen. Tulku Dakpa Rinpoche is the founder and director of Dhanakosha Dharma Center in Finland ( http://www.danakosha.fi ). He speaks English fluently and has been teaching students in Europe and America for over 10 years.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, July 27th, 2017 at 2:20 AM
Title: Re: Very sad news
Content:


cky said:
Thank you!

Adamantine said:
Which regent did HHDL speak out about? Surely not the Reting Rinpoche, who was murdered?

Tenzin1 said:
I don't know that he specified which Regent.


Malcolm wrote:
HHDL indicated that it was Taktra Rinpoche, the regent appointed by the Shugden faction who had deposed Reting.

Reting was a student of Chatral Rinpoche, and had deep experience in Dzogchen teachings. HHDL has never expressed anything other than admiration for Reting.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, July 26th, 2017 at 2:48 AM
Title: Re: Very sad news
Content:


kirtu said:
People are not supposed to perform divination at all.  And in the West there is very little opportunity to avail oneself of Tibetan (or other) practices such as mirror gazing.  And we cannot expect people just coming to the Dharma to do so anyway.

Kirt

Malcolm wrote:
.

In Hinayana people are not supposed to resort divination, etc. Secret Mantra is different.

kirtu said:
I am not speaking from a Hinayana perspective at all (ironically divination is rife in Asian Theravada).

Malcolm - you know perfectly well that there is no emphasis or encouragement at all in doing divination in Vajrayana by students.  And few lamas I know encourage it at all.  Different students are in fact treated differently on this by the same lamas btw.

At any rate a Vajrayana students is not supposed to do Mo until, what, they have finished a long Manjushri retreat?  Yes, of course Mipham and probably Kongtrul wrote about divination (Mipham in detail).  These are generally not taught to students.  And mirror divination?  That is not a common practice at all amoungst students (or western monks).  Even mala divination is not taught, at least not openly.

Kirt


Malcolm wrote:
This is just not my experience, kirt. For example Longsal Yudron ma dice divination is given by ChNN all the time, and there are many other mo systems ordinary Tibetans use all the time like mala mos, etc.

But this off topic.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, July 26th, 2017 at 2:46 AM
Title: Re: Very sad news
Content:
Norwegian said:
And there are different kinds of divination practices. It's not just connected to Manjushri.

kirtu said:
Of course.  And most of those not connected to Manjushri are really esoteric and locked away.

Kirt

Malcolm wrote:
Not at all.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, July 26th, 2017 at 2:28 AM
Title: Re: Most Powerful Dharmapala?
Content:
Tenma said:
I've been a bit curious, who is the most powerful dharmapala?  Also, who would be the most fastest dharmapala with quick results and which dharmapala would be the most wisest?  Not only that, but which dharmapala would be the safest especially for a fourteen year old to practice and which would be the most violent and dangerous dharmapala to practice?


Malcolm wrote:
Lojong training.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, July 26th, 2017 at 1:32 AM
Title: Re: Very sad news
Content:


dzogchungpa said:
Khenpo Ngachung's commentary on the "Examining the Teacher" section of WoMPT begins as follows:
Examine the teacher from a distance by what you hear said about him, from close up by what you can see for yourself, and by such means as divination and mirror gazing.

kirtu said:
People are not supposed to perform divination at all.  And in the West there is very little opportunity to avail oneself of Tibetan (or other) practices such as mirror gazing.  And we cannot expect people just coming to the Dharma to do so anyway.

Kirt

Malcolm wrote:
.

In Hinayana people are not supposed to resort divination, etc. Secret Mantra is different.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 25th, 2017 at 2:52 AM
Title: Re: Very sad news
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Yes, this a major reason these discussions should be handled with care. Ultimately it his needs to handled by the Rigpa Sangha. Kripalu offers a possible model.

Minobu said:
this sense of entitlement that leads led this rinpoche to this...is this common among these men with rinpoche in their title.?

Malcolm wrote:
It is common in all partriarchal cultures, and ours is no exception.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 25th, 2017 at 2:51 AM
Title: Re: Very sad news
Content:


Minobu said:
my god man...this is not about whether it is a scandal or not...
this guy was supposed to be a Dzogchen master highly evolved..read my last post...



Malcolm wrote:
There is a great deal of hyperbole in Tibetan culture. Don't believe the hype.

Minobu said:
what about my Karma mudra post and the other stuff malcolm.

are you really just going to do this..

the post reminds me of Soygal's action..leave for retreat and prepare to die.

you know if this guy was really about all this have fun with wealth abuse the student women..it shows he is a fraud..actually never was what people claimed him to be.

end of.
have fun helping the guy out of this jam malcolm.

Malcolm wrote:
I have no interest in aiding or harming Sogyal. It is a broader issue, and this scandal Is merely a symptom of a much broader problem. Alas, we keep treating symptoms without addressing the cause.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 25th, 2017 at 2:47 AM
Title: Re: Very sad news
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Yes, this a major reason these discussions should be handled with care. Ultimately it his needs to handled by the Rigpa Sangha. Kripalu offers a possible model.

CedarTree said:
The really sad thing is that a lot of people are going to see the news about this, discussions like this and others and not want to be involved with Gurus and or teachers.

Does this mean we shouldn't talk about it of course not but we should all practice noble speech and stress repeatedly that there are excellent teachers.

I can't even imagine how horrible it would be if we didn't have teachers like Ajaan Thanissaro, Bhikkhu Bodhi, Bhikkhu Analayo, Ajahn Amaro, Shōhaku Okumura Roshi, Shoryu Bradley, Mahasi Sayadaw & Sayadaw U Pandita, or Luang Por Chah!

Without these heavy weights that have been supported solely by lay people and have been able to deeply explore, draw out content, develop teaching and practices, and help guide many of us in different situations the Dhamma may be very hard in some senses to develop and or get started on.

Though these teachers are also pretty amazing examples.  Usually live incredibly modestly (Some robes and a bowl) and in the Zen masters I mentioned one lives off the grid.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 25th, 2017 at 2:42 AM
Title: Re: Very sad news
Content:
Grigoris said:
Is the problem really so widespread?  Seems to me to be odd rotten apple here and there, but you seem to be implying that it is endemic.  Is it?


Malcolm wrote:
People like scandals. They find them enjoyable.

Minobu said:
my god man...this is not about whether it is a scandal or not...
this guy was supposed to be a Dzogchen master highly evolved..read my last post...



Malcolm wrote:
There is a great deal of hyperbole in Tibetan culture. Don't believe the hype.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 25th, 2017 at 1:49 AM
Title: Re: Very sad news
Content:
Karma Dorje said:
The more voices raised to declare that this behaviour is unacceptable, the more chance of real reform in our Buddhist organizations.

Grigoris said:
Is the problem really so widespread?  Seems to me to be odd rotten apple here and there, but you seem to be implying that it is endemic.  Is it?


Malcolm wrote:
People like scandals. They find them enjoyable.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 25th, 2017 at 1:48 AM
Title: Re: Very sad news
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Complain all you want (and you will), it will do nothing to prevent any harm you perceive being inflicted by Sogyal on others.

dzogchungpa said:
This is definitely false. I can say for a fact that some people will be deterred from getting involved with him due to such complaints.


Malcolm wrote:
And a lot people won't. In the end it is really not our business.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 25th, 2017 at 1:38 AM
Title: Re: Very sad news
Content:
Karma Dorje said:
I don't see how chasing pussy is anything other than a worldly activity.

justsit said:
How about we don't compound the problem by referring to women as pussy?

Malcolm wrote:
Thank you


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 25th, 2017 at 12:07 AM
Title: Re: Very sad news
Content:
Karma Dorje said:
I don't see how chasing pussy is anything other than a worldly activity.

justsit said:
How about we don't compound the problem by referring to women as pussy?

Karma Dorje said:
That's of course a fair point but I wasn't equating women with pussy. I meant that this guy is simply objectifying and using women without consideration for their needs, desires and autonomy. We have enough of that here in the West already (which is probably why he came here in the first place, come to think of it). I put it this way specifically because it doesn't look any different to me than frat houses on vacation in Cancun.

Malcolm wrote:
Well, that is your karmic vision. Other people have different visions of Sogyal. Why is yours true and theirs false?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 25th, 2017 at 12:02 AM
Title: Re: Very sad news
Content:


Karma Dorje said:
Of course bad actions by those acting from a position of authority can pose obstacles to the faithful. If we substitute Gilbert Gauthe for Sogyal, and the Catholic sexual abuse scandals for this current 20-year long Rigpa trainwreck, would you really say "Well that's just those boys' karma"?

Malcolm wrote:
We are not Catholics and no one yet has accused Sogyal of pedophilia. And yes, everything is a result of karma. That does not make it "correct," however, the relationship between harmer and harmed is karmic.

Karma Dorje said:
Of course we have all done worse things many times over in previous lives, but that's not the point.

Malcolm wrote:
It is the point from which we must analyze ourselves before criticizing others.

Karma Dorje said:
This is not a question of policing morality but of trying to prevent further harm. The more voices raised to declare that this behaviour is unacceptable, the more chance of real reform in our Buddhist organizations.

Malcolm wrote:
All I can say is that this is fantasy. Complain all you want (and you will), it will do nothing to prevent any harm you perceive being inflicted by Sogyal on others. Only a criminal or civil finding will put an end to it.

Karma Dorje said:
That is the democratic principle in operation.

Malcolm wrote:
The Democratic principle is that if one person feels injured by another, they file a complaint in court and seek redress through the legal system. The accused is presumed innocent until guilt is proven.

Karma Dorje said:
Threads like this can help inform vulnerable students that they can and should say no to unscrupulous teachers.

Malcolm wrote:
Threads like this mainly serve to rouse people's afflictions, hence my description of it as Mi kha.


Karma Dorje said:
I don't see how chasing pussy is anything other than a worldly activity. If Sogyal wants to do that, he at very least should not abuse the position of trust he is in to do so.

Malcolm wrote:
If it is just a matter of seeking sexual partners, everyone involved presumably is a consenting adult. Whether it is liberating activity or just sex is not something we actually have the capacity to perceive with our limited samsaric vision. If Sogyal was forcing his women student to have abortions after he impregnated them, for example, then this would be entirely different, of course.  Therefore, this is none of our business, in absence of other information.

Physical assualt is a criminal act, either a misdemeanor or a felony depending on how severe the resulting harm. A punch in the stomach is likely a misdemeanor unless there is some damage to an organ.  However, the proper forum adjudicating this is the courts, not DW. Hence my observation that Sogyal has become the OJ of Tibetan Buddhism.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 24th, 2017 at 10:56 PM
Title: Re: Very sad news
Content:


Karma Dorje said:
One ought not to use a term like "lynch" to describe criticism of an authority figure for hypocrisy and moral turpitude, particularly when you live in a not so open, not so democratic country that has actually lynched people of colour in the not-so-distant past.


Malcolm wrote:
In point of fact, he is being accused of far more than "hypocrisy and moral turpitude." Your have aversion to the country of your birth is irrelevant.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 24th, 2017 at 10:50 PM
Title: Re: Very sad news
Content:
TRC said:
Yes, all that matters is that Sogyal hasn’t done anything legally wrong in the regards to the law, not whether he has done anything ethically and morally wrong in regards to the Dharma.



Malcolm wrote:
Correct, we ought not lynch people in an open democratic society. The general principle is innocent until proven guilty.

This whole thread is Mi kha.

Karma Dorje said:
One ought not to use a term like "lynch" to describe criticism of an authority figure for hypocrisy and moral turpitude, particularly when you live in a not so open, not so democratic country that has actually lynched people of colour in the not-so-distant past.

This is not a court of law. You are free to choose not to speak out about the bad behaviour of your coreligionists. It is not the moral high ground you are presenting it as, however. I have first hand experience of the obstacles this kind of depravity can put in the way of new and potential Buddhists. While you choose not to speak of it, you have had the same experience with friends of yours (as you have shared). There have already been several out-of-court settlements for large sums of money made by Sogyal/Rigpa to his accusers. This is not mere rumour. or gossip.

After consideration and reflection I will continue to speak out about what I see as wrong. At least the conversation here is not devolving to talking about lizard creatures and Big Pharma poisoning the water and our food supply, or opining that the reason people have a problem with this fiasco is that they don't like Asian men sleeping with white women like that other Vajrayana forum.

Malcolm wrote:
I am not claiming any moral high ground at all. I am simple observing that no one here is in possession of facts. All we have is allegations of misconduct and one or more settlements out of court (which are not admissions of guilt). I would also observe that truly unethical teachers are rarely, if ever, "brought down" by "outing" them. I have no opposition to his students releasing their letter. However, the perseveration, speculations, moral indignation, and pointless gossip present in this thread serves no one.

No one can put obstacles in front of new Buddhists (are there any in truth?), including a bad teacher. If we make a connection with a bad teacher, that is on us. That is our karma. We learn from that experience and move on. We all have lived many lifetimes, and have done many worse things in our past lives than Sogyal's accusers allege against him. When criticizing others it is useful to maintain a multi-life perspective about oneself. And of course there is Angulimala.

The tone of this thread is rather WASPy, and not very Buddhist at all. I am not defending Sogyal, incidentally. My point is completely different. And if in the end Sogyal is actually guilty of all these alleged misdeeds, he will suffer the result of his own karma. Karma is unerring.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 24th, 2017 at 10:04 PM
Title: Re: Very sad news
Content:
TRC said:
Yes, all that matters is that Sogyal hasn’t done anything legally wrong in the regards to the law, not whether he has done anything ethically and morally wrong in regards to the Dharma.



Malcolm wrote:
Correct, we ought not lynch people in an open democratic society. The general principle is innocent until proven guilty.

This whole thread is Mi kha.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 24th, 2017 at 1:26 PM
Title: Re: Very sad news
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Sogyal's realization is a nonissue. All that matters is whether he has any civil or criminal liability. The rest of it is irrelevant.

Karma Dorje said:
With all due respect, if this fat, abusive Sogyal prick was a Mormon we would all be going on about how degenerate the Mormon religion is and not hemming and hawing about whether he "has realization".

I am sorry, but all of the equivocation on this is not good for Tibetan Buddhism in the West. The ridiculous level of sexism and misogyny in Tibetan culture has to stop, if not in Tibet and the diaspora, then certainly among western practitioners. This is not a case of he said/she said. There are years of reports from some of his closest students that substantiate Sogyal's abusive, predatory behaviour.

If we can't draw clear lines against behaviour like that, it is no wonder that western sanghas with a few exceptions are the domain of aging hippies and GenX'ers. Even if this alleged tulku has the realization to carry on like this without harm to himself, he is clearly harming others. I mean, Jesus H. Christ have we learned nothing from the Osel Tenzin fiasco? This is not a difficult topic.

What would we say about abusive Catholic priests molesting young boys? That it was OK because it brought the boys closer to God? Give me a break.

Whether you are Sogyal Lhakar, Younge Khachab or Osel Tenzin if you can't keep your pants on, don't call yourself a Dharma teacher.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 24th, 2017 at 11:18 AM
Title: Re: Very sad news
Content:


dzogchungpa said:
I am not trying to defend the notion that SR has realization but it is interesting to note the following passage from http://all-otr.org/public-talks/1-following-the-dzogchen-path:

dzoki said:
Statements like these mean nothing. Only buddha can see realization of others.

kirtu said:
Only a Buddha can accurately or possibly directly know the realization of others.  But Shantideva clearly says "where there is smoke, there is fire (in a positive way).  Although we are personally afflicted we can examine the good qualities of others and infer some level of realization (or not).  Secondly there are other guidelines and these were apparently used in the mid 1800's by Jamgon Kongtrul and Janmyang Khyentse Wangpo to evaluate each other's levels of realization (probably initiated on the part of JKW).

Kirt

Malcolm wrote:
Sometimes smoke is not smoke, but mist.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, July 23rd, 2017 at 9:44 PM
Title: Re: Very sad news
Content:
cky said:
Could someone with some knowledge on the topic of Samaya (Malcolm?) please be so kind and say a few words to clear up the following?

1) We're harming Samaya by exposing our Guru after we've have been sexually or physically abused by him

Malcolm wrote:
It is a delicate subject and should be treated with care. Simply finding that you do not like a guru after all, and feel he or she is not being super nice to oneself and meeting one's expectations is not a grounds for "outing" a guru. In our culture we are overly sensitive about being respected. If you wanted to sleep with your guru, and then found out they have other partners, that is your problem. If on the other hand you or someone you know are physically damaged by a teacher, sexually assaulted/raped, or subjected to clear psychological abuse, this may be sufficient grounds for exposing a teacher.

A lot of so called "guru abuse" is a co-created problem where students lose their perspective and feed a guru's ego, the latter in turn begin to feel invincible, and there is kind of snowball effect of ego inflation: the student feels their master is enlightened, the master begins to believe student mythology, and then the master loses perspective. In this case, students really need to reflect on their own role in their own "abuse" in terms of how much they were involved in inflating their master's ego in order to inflate their own. In short, it may be a practice to view our guru as enlightened, but we really should not keep telling them that over and over again. If our guru is truly realized, it will be evident when they die. Until then, it is best to maintain a balanced perspective and keep good boundaries.

If our guru is a truly harmful being, it is they who are breaking samaya and not we. They cannot repair samaya they break with their students. We can always repair our samaya with respect to all our teachers.

It is very perilous to be a guru. It is a great responsibility. And, it is the case that sometimes flawed gurus generate a great deal of benefit for the majority of their students, at the expense of a few.

With respect to the Sogyal affair, I have no personal opinion about the matter which I choose to share, apart from my comment about his letter. I was not there, I did not see what happened, and in this country, America, accusations are not sufficient proof to convict, despite movies, testimonies, and so on. I am afraid that Sogyal is now something like the OJ Simpson of Tibetan Buddhism, his letter is the white bronco, and one's opinion of his guilt or innocence depending on which side of the ethnic/traditionalist divide you stand.

One thing to bear in mind is that Sogyal has had a huge hand in introducing thousands of western students to luminaries like Dilgo Khyentse and so on, whom they otherwise may have never met or would have had great difficulty receiving teachings from. His book, whether personally authored or ghostwritten, has been a major introduction to Tibetan Buddhism for hundreds of thousands of people. Like any person living in a democracy, he deserves the right to a fair trial, not the incessant sniping on the internet to which he has been subjected for decades. If someone has a criminal or civil complaint, they should file it in the French Courts. Otherwise, this is all hearsay, and hearsay bears no legal weight whatsoever. If he is not doing anything for which he may held criminally or civilly liable, one may find his lifestyle and choices distasteful and disturbing, but it is also none of one's business. One is not obligated to participate in his Sangha.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, July 22nd, 2017 at 9:03 PM
Title: Re: Very sad news
Content:
Vasana said:
All sounds very messy. Let's just hope for all involved that samayas are repairable.


Malcolm wrote:
When a guru breaks samaya, it is irreparable.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, July 22nd, 2017 at 12:47 PM
Title: Re: Very sad news
Content:
Johnny Dangerous said:
I wish the best to the Rigpa community and pray for some serious healing to take place.

CedarTree said:
I second this.

I think we need to start creating ethical standards though were money and lifestyles are humble.  This is a spiritual path after all.

Malcolm wrote:
There is nothing wrong with wealthy teachers. How they derive their wealth however is of some concern.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, July 22nd, 2017 at 12:46 PM
Title: Re: Very sad news
Content:
dzogchungpa said:
FWIW, here's a response from SR:
https://whatnow727.wordpress.com/responses/

Malcolm wrote:
Doesn't seem to be worth very much: a lot of me, me, me, and not very much else.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, July 22nd, 2017 at 12:07 PM
Title: Re: Loppon Ogyan Tanzin Rinpoche European Teaching Tour 2017
Content:
Grigoris said:
No, according to the "strict" definition Rinpoche is not a Terton.  He is not even a Tulku so how can he be a Terton?  These teachings are Pure Visions.

Malcolm wrote:
Being a recognized tulku is not a precondition for being a terton.

Grigoris said:
A Terton has to be one of the 25 disciples of the Guru Rinpoche, correct?  So how can one be a Terton, without being a Tulku, given that they would have to be a rebirth of one of the 25 disciples?

Malcolm wrote:
One can be an emanation of Guru P, for example, Rigdzin Jatson Nyingpo.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 21st, 2017 at 10:01 PM
Title: Re: Emptiness: expedient or certain teaching?
Content:


Bakmoon said:
Also, I find this is an extremely useful proof-text to show that emptiness is a definitive teaching, especially against the hard line true-self Buddha-nature people who generally subscribe to the three turnings idea.

Malcolm wrote:
I have written on this subject here a lot, you should look up my posts on the subject.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 21st, 2017 at 9:57 PM
Title: Re: Transmission
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
You should receive transmission if you are interested in Dzogchen. Otherwise it is like looking at a coffee grinder and never plugging it in.


lee said:
Hi all,

I have only been reading about Dzogchen for the last 6 weeks and with the transmission coming up, i have doubts whether or not i'm ready to receive it.

I am nearly through the GuruYoga book and have the worldwide transmission dvd to practice with, but with such little time to develop the practice, i'm stuck wondering whether or not i should participate in the event.

As for understanding Dzogchen ( the basics ) i'm still very much in my infancy and for me i kind of feel like i should be focusing more on developing both the guru practice ( to receive correctly not to develop it in the same way as after the transmission ) and gain a little deeper into my understanding of the structure and basic theory of it.

Whats your thoughts on this, should i keep studying non restricted content and develop the mantras and movements of GuruYoga or do i go ahead with the upcoming transmission with very little understanding of it's structure and little practice of the event itself?

The reason why i ask is that im getting mixed signals on the topic, some people are saying get it done because his health is getting worse and from what im getting from the books iv read is, the student understands the theory of it and practices the event in order to be able to have the capacity to receive it.

Thank you


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 21st, 2017 at 9:48 PM
Title: Re: The Hundred-Syllable Mantra
Content:
mutsuk said:
BTW Lung tha and Kalden Yungdrung are one and the same person, right ? I thought having two accounts was prohibited and against the rules...


Malcolm wrote:
No, definitely not.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 21st, 2017 at 9:42 PM
Title: Re: Loppon Ogyan Tanzin Rinpoche European Teaching Tour 2017
Content:
Grigoris said:
No, according to the "strict" definition Rinpoche is not a Terton.  He is not even a Tulku so how can he be a Terton?  These teachings are Pure Visions.

Malcolm wrote:
Being a recognized tulku is not a precondition for being a terton.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 21st, 2017 at 12:16 PM
Title: Re: original buddhism
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
The basis of the bodhisattva path is renunciation, which is obvious even to beginners, let alone scholars.


Tuybachau said:
The basis of the bodhisattva path is the Buddha Nature which has nothing to do with renunciation or/and appropriation... That is what the definitive teaching is about and why it is to be relied on.


Malcolm wrote:
You seem to have a problem distinguishing view and path.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, July 20th, 2017 at 11:58 AM
Title: Re: original buddhism
Content:



Tuybachau said:
You keep on asserting that a bodhisattva's path is bounded by renunciation...

Malcolm wrote:
The basis of the bodhisattva path is renunciation, which is obvious even to beginners, let alone scholars.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, July 19th, 2017 at 11:27 PM
Title: Re: original buddhism
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Expedient means are also used by bodhisattvas for their own training, for example, śilapāramita, the perfection of discipline which necessarily involves renunciation such as abandoning killing, stealing, lying, sexual misconduct and intoxication.

A bodhisattva may engage in any of those five misdeeds for the benefit of others, but not for his or her own benefit. Therefore, the bodhisattva path is a renunciate path in general.

Tuybachau said:
- The monastic codes, vinaya, should not be confused with the definitive teaching on which the bodhisattvas rely. Bodhisattvas can choose to assume any role such as that of a fully ordained, a sramana, who keeps 250 precepts or an apprentice, a samanera, 10 precepts, or an upasaka 5, or someone like Devadata, or a prostitute. The path of a bodhisattva is not defined by one or more of the expedient means that bodhisattva employs but:

"
Wisdom is the bodhisattva's mother,
expedient means his father;
of those who guide and teach all beings,
there are none not born of these.
"
From Chapter 8 THE BUDDHA WAY of the Vimalakirti Sutra


Malcolm wrote:
Mahāyāna indeed has both provisional teachings and definitive teachings. For example, the Avatamska teaches the definitive teachings on practicing the path, which involve renunciation, etc., included in the seven limbs.

For their own practice of the path, bodhisattvas are obliged to abandon the ten nonvirtuous deeds, eating meat and so on. Therefore, the bodhisattva path is a renunciate path in general.

Tuybachau said:
- For his/her own practice of the path, a bodhisattva relies on the definitive teaching to employ one or more of the expedient means. In the definitive teaching:

"
Here, Sariputra, a Bodhisattva, a great being, having stood in the perfection of wisdom, by way of not taking his stand on it, should perfect the perfection of giving, by way of seeing that no renunciation has taken place, since gift, giver, and recipient have not been apprehended.  He should perfect himself in the perfection of morality, through not transgressing into either offence or non-offence.    He should perfect the perfection of patience and remain imperturbable.  He should perfect the perfection of vigour, and remain indefatigable in his physical and mental vigour.  He should perfect the perfection of meditation, and derive no enjoyment (from transic meditation).  He should perfect the perfection of wisdom, on account of the fact that he apprehends neither wisdom nor stupidity.
"
From Chapter 2 THE THOUGHT OF ENLIGHTENMENT of The Large Sutra on Perfect Wisdom

"
Subhuti : If, O Lord, form should be seen as empty of form, etc. to: enlightenment as empty of enlightenment, how can of a Bodhisattva who courses in perfect wisdom the coursing take place?
The Lord : A noncoursing is the bodhisattva’s coursing in perfect wisdom.
Subhuti : For what reason?
The Lord : Because no perfect wisdom can be apprehended, no Bodhisattva, no coursing, no one who courses, nor that whereby or wherein he courses.  It is thus that a Bodhisattva’s coursing in perfect wisdom is a noncoursing in which all these discoursings are not apprehended.
"
From Chapter 63 MANY QUESTIONS CONCERNING THE DUALITY OF DHARMAS of The Large Sutra on Perfect Wisdom


- As I said before, those who confuse worldly things with bodhisattvas' wisdom and practice do not know this path.

Malcolm wrote:
And I as said before, those who do not understand that bodhisattvas rely on the two truths, and not just one, do not understand Mahāyāna. You keep on asserting there is no use for the relative things of the path for a bodhisattva themselves.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, July 19th, 2017 at 7:53 AM
Title: Re: Sam Harris, Musk Deer Hunter?
Content:


Wayfarer said:
David Brazier's recent book 'Buddhism is a Religion' is a series of essays protesting the 'secularisation' of Buddhism.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, this trend will destroy the Dharma.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, July 19th, 2017 at 7:52 AM
Title: Re: original buddhism
Content:
Tuybachau said:
[

- The expedient are expedient as they are employed to lead sentient beings to the realization of the definitive teaching. Things are not expediently used when they are confused with the definitive.

Malcolm wrote:
Expedient means are also used by bodhisattvas for their own training, for example, śilapāramita, the perfection of discipline which necessarily involves renunciation such as abandoning killing, stealing, lying, sexual misconduct and intoxication. A bodhisattva may engage in any of those five misdeeds for the benefit of others, but not for his or her own benefit. Therefore, the bodhisattva path is a renunciate path in general.

Tuybachau said:
- Mahayana teaches the definitive meaning. Bodhisattvas who rely on the definitive meaning can use whatever expedient means they see fit: renunciation, appropriation, abandonment, attainment..

Malcolm wrote:
Mahāyāna indeed has both provisional teachings and definitive teachings. For example, the Avatamska teaches the definitive teachings on practicing the path, which involve renunciation, etc., included in the seven limbs.

For their own practice of the path, bodhisattvas are obliged to abandon the ten nonvirtuous deeds, eating meat and so on. Therefore, the bodhisattva path is a renunciate path in general.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 18th, 2017 at 1:36 PM
Title: Re: original buddhism
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
common Mahāyāna

Queequeg said:
Sorry to interrupt. I have not been following along except the last page.

Is this a technical term?


Malcolm wrote:
Yes. It refers to all non-Vajrayāna traditions including Chan/Zen.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 18th, 2017 at 1:15 PM
Title: Re: Emptiness: expedient or certain teaching?
Content:
Anonymous X said:
Being present...

Malcolm wrote:
... just means you know what you are doing when you are doing it.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 18th, 2017 at 7:02 AM
Title: Re: Sam Harris, Musk Deer Hunter?
Content:
michaelb said:
It's hardly fair to judge Harris by what people say on his forums.

Malcolm wrote:
Correct. But Harris has said enough to cast his understanding in doubt. (mic drop)

michaelb said:
The question wasn't his understanding but his attitude; whether he was being insincere and cynical,  "like a musk deer hunter." I don't think he was. He seems to have had an ongoing relationship with Tulku Urgyen over the last five years of TUR's life. He valued what Tulku Urgyen taught him as the most valuable thing he has ever been taught and, whilst not setting himself up as a dzogchen teacher, has done his best to convey what he understood from what TUR and others taught him.


Malcolm wrote:
Musk hunters also value musk glands for their scent, which is extremely valuable. One needs musk deer to obtain musk glands. The very fact he dismisses samaya as anachronistic demonstrates his attitude is incorrect.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 18th, 2017 at 6:58 AM
Title: Re: original buddhism
Content:
pael said:
Where to get Bodhisattvapitika Sūtra in English?

monktastic said:
From a brief search it seems to be a synonym for the Avatamsaka Sutra, which can be found in many places (e.g., http://www.cttbusa.org/avatamsaka/avatamsaka_contents.asp ).


Malcolm wrote:
It is not that sutra. It is an separate sūtra.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 18th, 2017 at 6:58 AM
Title: Re: original buddhism
Content:


Tuybachau said:
By claiming that mahayana, the path of bodhisattvas, is a path of renunciation, one slanders the dharma.

Malcolm wrote:
This suggests your understanding of the Mahāyāna is somewhat deficient You should perhaps read the Bodhisattvapitika Sūtra, Bodhicaryavatara, Siksasammucaya, and so on.

Tuybachau said:
If you aspire to the path of bodhisattvas, mahayana, you should learn to rely on the definitive meanings not the provisional 依了義、不依不了義.
See Mahaparinirvana sutra chapter 8 The Four Reliances/Dependables 四依止 and this sutra:
http://buddhism.lib.ntu.edu.tw/BDLM/sutra/chi_pdf/sutra8/T13n0420.pdf

Malcolm wrote:
Relying on the definitive meaning in no way contradicts the path of renunciation which is clearly taught as the principle expedient means in Mahāyāna. To insist that it does means abandoning the relative in favor of the ultimate. Buddha taught two truths; the one of worldly convention, and the ultimate truth. These two truths are not in contradiction. Someone who does not understand that common Mahāyāna is a path of renunciation does not understand the meaning of the two truths.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 17th, 2017 at 11:10 PM
Title: Re: Reliance on Rites and Rituals
Content:
Wayfarer said:
When I took my formal refuge ceremony, at Nan Tien Temple, in 2005, one of the points I particularly noticed in the vows, was to avoid 'reliance on rites and rituals.' It struck me as a little incongruent, as what I was engaged in was indeed 'a rite', namely, the rite of taking refuge. I read this again the other day while studying a Dharma text - that the bodhisattva is to avoid reliance on rites and rituals. But Buddhism has its rituals  - even a daily meditation is a ritual, or so it seems to me. And as I understand it, life in many Buddhist monasteries is a constant succession of recitations which I would have thought were 'rites'?

So, what do I make of this apparent discrepancy between principle and practice, if indeed it is? Is there a difference between chanting the Buddhist precepts, and what is considered a rite or ritual?

Thanks to all


Malcolm wrote:
It means believing that rites result in liberation.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 17th, 2017 at 11:07 PM
Title: Re: original buddhism
Content:


Tuybachau said:
That classification teaching is either provisional or dishonest.

Malcolm wrote:
Or your understanding itself is incomplete. Have you considered this possibility?

Tuybachau said:
By claiming that mahayana, the path of bodhisattvas, is a path of renunciation, one slanders the dharma.

Malcolm wrote:
This suggests your understanding of the Mahāyāna is somewhat deficient You should perhaps read the Bodhisattvapitika Sūtra, Bodhicaryavatara, Siksasammucaya, and so on.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 17th, 2017 at 1:48 PM
Title: Re: Sam Harris, Musk Deer Hunter?
Content:
Johnny Dangerous said:
I have to say I find it hilarious that there are people on his forums fretting because they can't find "secular" Dzogchen and Mahamudra teachers, i've actually read through some of those threads.

michaelb said:
It's hardly fair to judge Harris by what people say on his forums.

Malcolm wrote:
Correct. But Harris has said enough to cast his understanding in doubt. (mic drop)


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 17th, 2017 at 1:41 PM
Title: Re: original buddhism
Content:


Tuybachau said:
- Bodhisattvas practicing Prajnaparamita on the Mahayana path do not either renounce or appropriate either Samsara or Nirvana.
- Mahayana is not about renunciation and/or appropriation.

Anonymous X said:
From the Dzogchen point of view, Malcolm is repeating how the sutra system is classified, a path of renunciation, both Hinayana & Mahayana.

Lopon Tenzin Namdak: From Bonpo Dzogchen Teachings,

Both the Buddhist and the Bonpo teachings are divided into Sutra, Tantra, and Dzogchen. Each of these three systems has a different Base, a different Path, and thus they lead to a different Fruit or result. The method proper to the Sutra system is the path of renunciation (spong lam), the method proper to the Tantra system is the path of transformation, (sgyur lam), and the method proper to Dzogchen is the path of self-liberation, (grol lam).

Tuybachau said:
That classification teaching is either provisional or dishonest.

Malcolm wrote:
Or your understanding itself is incomplete. Have you considered this possibility?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, July 15th, 2017 at 11:18 PM
Title: Re: Where does the idea of the three paths come from?
Content:
heart said:
So this distinction is coming from the Bon tradition?

/magnus



Malcolm wrote:
Rangjung Dorje also discusses this.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 14th, 2017 at 7:52 PM
Title: Re: Dudjom Dzambala Practice
Content:
Karinos said:
this is nice, but many western "ngagpas" I met have little clue about Mahayana motivation and are just simply attracted to Tibetan shamanism. They look for exotic courses and empowerments for wealth, healing and power to get rich, healthy and powerful. Fortunately Lamas are smart to use this occasion to teach something about Mahayana, Tantra or Dzogchen, so there is still hope

Malcolm wrote:
The ngakpa ordination is connected with both Dzogchen view and great compassion for sentient beings, so you might be talking about ngakpa wannabes, people who like wearing the outer paraphernalia of ngakpas, but you are not talking about real ngakpas, western or otherwise.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, July 12th, 2017 at 2:00 PM
Title: Re: Dudjom Dzambala Practice
Content:


Miroku said:
However if we recieve teachings from an acomplished lama with whom we can be sure he has not broken his samaya, then the teching should be still as powerful as powerful as at the beginning if the lineage of that teaching is pure, right?

Isn't breaking samaya quite hard though?

Malcolm wrote:
The issue is not generally with the Lamas in a lineage, The issue is the students.

TharpaChodron said:
why should the students, who are by nature learning and imperfect, be an issue with the value of the teaching and the Lamas?

Malcolm wrote:
When students break samaya it affects their Guru's possibility of manifesting Rainbow body, among other things, and generally degrades the power of a given lineage. This is why in every generation there are tertons like Dudjom Rinpoche, and so on. But after some time broken samayas on the part of the students degrade the blessings of these teachings and they are not as effective, signaling the need for new termas.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, July 12th, 2017 at 8:05 AM
Title: Re: Practical Recognition of Ignorance
Content:
Sherab said:
I would argue that the lack of insight on the emptiness of all phenomena is what enable a grasping at a self.  If there is insight on emptiness, there will be no grasping at a self.

Malcolm wrote:
It is called connate ignorance in other teachings than Dzogchen because sentient beings do not recognize the nature of their own minds, inseparable clarity and emptiness. The way the Sakypas frame this, for example, is because the emptiness of the mind is not recognized, this causes nirvana. Because the clarity of the mind is not recognized, this causes samsara. Because their inseparability is not recognized, this is the source of the misperception of self. So, it is not simply a matter of lacking insight into emptiness alone. It is a matter of not recognizing the nature of the mind in its totality. The Dzogchen account, given above, is very different. The Sakya theory has another interesting twist— they identify tathāgatagarbha as the inseparability aspect of inseparable clarity and emptiness because clarity and emptiness are themselves extremes to be avoided.

Sherab said:
It looks as if you use "connate" here to mean "inherent" or inborn.  Whereas when you use "connate" in relation to Dzogchen, you appear to mean "co-emergent" or "arising simultaneously".  Am I understanding you correctly?

When one talks of extremes, one normally talks of polar opposite.  Therefore I find it strange that Sakya theory considers clarity and emptiness as polar opposites.  A combination of polar opposites i.e. extremes, if at all possible, simply gives rise to a third extreme.

Malcolm wrote:
Connate means connate, not innate.

It is not the case that clarity and emptiness are polar opposites, they are inseparable, but as I said, "the emptiness of the mind is not recognized, this causes nirvana. Because the clarity of the mind is not recognized, this causes samsara. Because their inseparability is not recognized, this is the source of the misperception of self."

These are three aspects to the nature of the mind, also termed the all-basis. You can consult any  text on Lamdre.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, July 12th, 2017 at 7:38 AM
Title: Re: Dudjom Dzambala Practice
Content:



Adamantine said:
Yes but what is the math happening in the minds of wisdom masters like ChNN, Dudjom Rinpoche, Garchen Rinpoche, HHDL,
Karmapa, etc. who decide that giving large public transmissions—even some globally webcast ones—have benefits that outweigh the pitfalls?

Malcolm wrote:
That is a good question, and one I am not prepared to answer for them. All I can tell you is what I have found in classical literature on the subject. For example, ChNN pointed out that Longde practitioners ceased attaining rainbow body at a certain point in time because of broken samayas in the lineage. And of course, I have no idea if any present day Longde practitioners are going to attain rainbow body either, even though ChNN's revival of Longde in Longsal is a very important development. All we can expect, as practitioners of recent terma cycles, is that the samayas in these lineages are pure and thus the teachings will be very, very effective for their practitioners.

Miroku said:
However if we recieve teachings from an acomplished lama with whom we can be sure he has not broken his samaya, then the teching should be still as powerful as powerful as at the beginning if the lineage of that teaching is pure, right?

Isn't breaking samaya quite hard though?

Malcolm wrote:
The issue is not generally with the Lamas in a lineage, The issue is the students.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, July 12th, 2017 at 6:53 AM
Title: Re: Practical Recognition of Ignorance
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
There is a third ignorance, which exists prior to these two, called "the ignorance identical with the cause." This simply means that prior to the potential of consciousness arising as a display, consciousness is unaware of itself.

Sherab said:
I prefer to think of this third consciousness as primary, basic or fundamental 'consciousness'.  Or perhaps, pre-consciousness may be more accurate.



Malcolm wrote:
It is actually termed "neutral consciousness" in Dzogchen teachings.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 11th, 2017 at 10:58 PM
Title: Re: Practical Recognition of Ignorance
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
There is a third ignorance, which exists prior to these two, called "the ignorance identical with the cause." This simply means that prior to the potential of consciousness arising as a display, consciousness is unaware of itself.

Anonymous X said:
Consciousness is unaware of itself. Is this the same as consciousness without an object? Is there consciousness without an object?
If the ignorance is identical with the cause, it would mean the end of consciousness and its display (8 consciousnesses) in full Buddhahood, no? Where do you put this reflexive awareness (svasamvedana)?

Please try to answer simply, if possible.


Malcolm wrote:
Svasamvedana is not part of Dzogchen teachings. It is a theory of Sautrantikas and Yogacara.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 11th, 2017 at 8:23 AM
Title: Re: Kalacakra Root Tantra
Content:
Nicholas Weeks said:
Another section of the mulatantra has been traced; see the July 9 blog entry:

http://prajnaquest.fr/blog/

Minobu said:
Nice to learn  madame Blavatsky had visited and studied in Tibet in the late 1800's.
i never knew this i always thought she was just someone who  Aleister Crowley studied and received knowledge from after she died.
I think they worked on the tarot deck Toth together.

Malcolm wrote:
No, Crowley worked on the Thoth Tarot with Lady Frieda Harris towards the end of his life. It was his magnum opus in many ways.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 11th, 2017 at 8:20 AM
Title: Re: original buddhism
Content:
David N. Snyder said:
And this is why we have the various sects in Buddhism and other religions. Sectarianism in Buddhism started around 285 BCE, shortly after the Second Council. The differences started out small and then through the polemics got exacerbated. The initial differences were small and usually were around Vinaya issues.

Malcolm wrote:
No, it started much earlier than that. It started during the time of the Buddha. Devadatta was the first sectarian. I am sure there were others.

David N. Snyder said:
Correct and the Devadatta schism was over Vinaya issues on how strenuous the rules should be for monks. The wide scale differences of other schools of Buddhism was after the Second Council.


Malcolm wrote:
I think it is highly unlikely that the disputes recorded during the third council originated only after the second council. But this merely my opinion.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 11th, 2017 at 8:10 AM
Title: Re: original buddhism
Content:
David N. Snyder said:
And this is why we have the various sects in Buddhism and other religions. Sectarianism in Buddhism started around 285 BCE, shortly after the Second Council. The differences started out small and then through the polemics got exacerbated. The initial differences were small and usually were around Vinaya issues.

Malcolm wrote:
No, it started much earlier than that. It started during the time of the Buddha. Devadatta was the first sectarian. I am sure there were others.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 11th, 2017 at 8:08 AM
Title: Re: Practical Recognition of Ignorance
Content:
Sherab said:
So why is there a grasping of a self?

Malcolm wrote:
Grasping at a self is the fundamental perceptual error plaguing sentient beings. It is connate. It has always been there.

Sherab said:
I would argue that the lack of insight on the emptiness of all phenomena is what enable a grasping at a self.  If there is insight on emptiness, there will be no grasping at a self.

Malcolm wrote:
It is called connate ignorance in other teachings than Dzogchen because sentient beings do not recognize the nature of their own minds, inseparable clarity and emptiness. The way the Sakypas frame this, for example, is because the emptiness of the mind is not recognized, this causes nirvana. Because the clarity of the mind is not recognized, this causes samsara. Because their inseparability is not recognized, this is the source of the misperception of self. So, it is not simply a matter of lacking insight into emptiness alone. It is a matter of not recognizing the nature of the mind in its totality. The Dzogchen account, given above, is very different. The Sakya theory has another interesting twist— they identify tathāgatagarbha as the inseparability aspect of inseparable clarity and emptiness because clarity and emptiness are themselves extremes to be avoided.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 11th, 2017 at 8:03 AM
Title: Re: Practical Recognition of Ignorance
Content:
Sherab said:
So why is there a grasping of a self?

Malcolm wrote:
Grasping at a self is the fundamental perceptual error plaguing sentient beings. It is connate. It has always been there.

While the answer to why there is a grasping at a self is answered in Dzogchen teachings, the rest of Buddhist teaching merely treat it as an ineluctable fact of being sentient.

Anonymous X said:
What is short answer for grasping at a self in Dzogchen teachings?

Malcolm wrote:
In Dzogchen teachings, when the potential of consciousness manifests as its own display, if that display is not recognized as its own state, this is called "the connate ignorance." It is called connate (lhan gcig skyes) because it arises in the presence of a similitude of subject and object perception, i.e. it is the the ignorance that arises with the display. Even Samantabhadra experiences this ignorance.

When the perceived display is reified as other, self-grasping ensues immediately. This reification following nonrecognition is called "the imputing ignorance." Following this the twelve limbs of dependent origination begin and there is a bifurcation between samsara and nirvana, often described as "samsara and nirvana turning their backs on one another."

There is a third ignorance, which exists prior to these two, called "the ignorance identical with the cause." This simply means that prior to the potential of consciousness arising as a display, consciousness is unaware of itself.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 11th, 2017 at 7:51 AM
Title: Re: original buddhism
Content:


David N. Snyder said:
Correct, however it was still anatta/emptiness, in their view, just their interpretation of it.

Malcolm wrote:
I don't see how you can say that. It certainly was not how their opponents saw it

Coëmgenu said:
I read a paper recently that claimed that the Pudgalaváda polemicized against "anátmanváda", or anátman-framed-as-Buddhist-heresy.

Malcolm wrote:
We have the detailed polemics with Pugdgalavadins recorded both in the Katthavatthu and the ninth chapter of the Koshabhashyam. It is very clear they thought the present "no self" orthodoxy of modern Buddhism was a complete misunderstanding of Buddha's teachings. In Tibetan texts this is frequently brought up as a caveat about defining Buddhist teachings in terms of the three or four seals of the doctrine.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 11th, 2017 at 7:41 AM
Title: Re: original buddhism
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
The most widespread school of Buddhism in ancient India were the Pudgalavadins, who insisted, based on the hinayana sutras. That there was an inexpressible self that was different than the aggregates

David N. Snyder said:
Correct, however it was still anatta/emptiness, in their view, just their interpretation of it.

Malcolm wrote:
I don't see how you can say that. It certainly was not how their opponents saw it


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 11th, 2017 at 7:25 AM
Title: Re: original buddhism
Content:
Nyedrag Yeshe said:
But as I pointed out to Lucas, other religions like Hinduism and Jainism, present something similar to 4NT, like the existence to Duhkha up to the path to cessation! While it does differ in many aspects with regards to Buddha's path, it does has many similarities like renunciation! While dependent arising and emptiness is a 100% Buddhist thing, as Malcolm pointed out.

David N. Snyder said:
However, they differ from Buddhism right at the outset with their insistence of Atman, diametrically opposed to the anatta of Buddhism.


Malcolm wrote:
The most widespread school of Buddhism in ancient India were the Pudgalavadins, who insisted, based on the hinayana sutras. That there was an inexpressible self that was different than the aggregates


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 11th, 2017 at 12:29 AM
Title: Re: Practical Recognition of Ignorance
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
The fundamental ignorance is grasping a self.

Sherab said:
So why is there a grasping of a self?

Malcolm wrote:
Grasping at a self is the fundamental perceptual error plaguing sentient beings. It is connate. It has always been there.

While the answer to why there is a grasping at a self is answered in Dzogchen teachings, the rest of Buddhist teaching merely treat it as an ineluctable fact of being sentient.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 11th, 2017 at 12:24 AM
Title: Re: original buddhism
Content:


Seeker12 said:
The bottom line is that it seems to me that all Buddhist teachings can fit under the 4 noble truths, but not all Buddhist teachings can fit under DO.

Malcolm wrote:
Give me an example of a "Buddhist" teaching that does not fit under DO, and I will show you it is a non-Buddhist teaching.

Seeker12 said:
Let me put it another way, actually, as I think that my last post was a bit questionable...

The relative manifestation of all Buddhist teachings falls under the umbrella of the 4 NT, properly understood, I think.

The relative manifestation of the teaching on DO would fall under the header of the 4 NT.

However, the relative manifestation of teachings on, say, the different realms, or teachings on the nature of nirvana, etc could be conceived of as distinct from that of DO, which has it's own relative manifestation.

Ultimately, as I said in the quote from the Avatamsaka Sutra, I think enlightened knowledge is unfragmented. But its relative manifestations are myriad. All of those relative manifestations fit under the 4 NT, conceptually.

Malcolm wrote:
Dependent origination is peace, freedom from proliferation, it is nirvana.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 10th, 2017 at 11:51 PM
Title: Re: original buddhism
Content:


Seeker12 said:
The bottom line is that it seems to me that all Buddhist teachings can fit under the 4 noble truths, but not all Buddhist teachings can fit under DO.

Malcolm wrote:
Give me an example of a "Buddhist" teaching that does not fit under DO, and I will show you it is a non-Buddhist teaching.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 10th, 2017 at 11:45 PM
Title: Re: Kalacakra Root Tantra
Content:
Nicholas Weeks said:
Another section of the mulatantra has been traced; see the July 9 blog entry:

http://prajnaquest.fr/blog/


Malcolm wrote:
Nice find. I would amend his translation of the cited verse as follows however:

sems can sems nyid ‘od gsal zhing |
gdod nas skye ‘gag gnas bral te |
thog ma med pa’i sngon rol nas |
dang po mchog gi sangs rgyas te |
rgyu med rkyen gyis ma bslad pa |
The mind essence of sentient beings is luminosity,
from the start free of arising, ceasing and abiding.
From the beginningless past
the adibuddha
lacks a cause and is uncontaminated by conditions.

Crazywisdom said:
So this does not square w the geluk view of Buddhahood arising by conditions, no?

Malcolm wrote:
The Gelugpa would argue the mind essence here, luminosity, is their mind of clear light, which they regard as a permanent continuum which has no first cause, thus it is without a cause; and is not altered by conditions.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 10th, 2017 at 11:42 PM
Title: Re: original buddhism
Content:
Seeker12 said:
some common conceptions of religions just basically don't want to feel suffering and, instead, they want to feel a 'good' state instead.

Malcolm wrote:
Buddhism is no different here. Buddhists wish to cease suffering. The absence of suffering is "feeling a good state." After all, the Buddha has only pleasant sensations, no painful ones.

Seeker12 said:
It seems to me that from the perspective of an enlightened one, everything in Buddhism fits within the 4NT.

Malcolm wrote:
Again, the first three truths are a diagnostic methodology. But they are not the essence of the teachings. What is the essence of the teachings?

ye dharmā hetu-prabhavā hetuṃ teṣāṃ tathāgato hy avadat, teṣāṃ ca yo nirodha evaṃ vādī mahāśramaṇa

Roughly, "The Tathāgata has spoken of the cause of the production of phenomena, and likewise the great mendicant has also spoken of their cessation."


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 10th, 2017 at 11:34 PM
Title: Re: Sources for yidam practices not requiring empowerment?
Content:
smcj said:
So the difference between levels of tantras is more a function of empowerments than deities.
So if I understand you correctly, it depends on the specific empowerment given. That means two people could be sitting side by side doing the same practice the same way, but if one had a more elaborate empowerment than the other they would effectively be practicing different levels of tantra. Is that right?


Malcolm wrote:
Yes, two people, sitting side by side, practicing Mahakarunika, the four armed form of Avalokiteśvara, could be practicing completely different teachings based on whether they received a carya tantra transmission or an anuyoga transmission.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 10th, 2017 at 11:32 PM
Title: Re: original buddhism
Content:
Seeker12 said:
some common conceptions of religions just basically don't want to feel suffering and, instead, they want to feel a 'good' state instead.

Malcolm wrote:
Buddhism is no different here. Buddhists wish to cease suffering. The absence of suffering is "feeling a good state." After all, the Buddha has only pleasant sensations, no painful ones.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 10th, 2017 at 11:28 PM
Title: Re: Where did buddha teach the tantra?
Content:
diamind said:
Where did buddha teach the tantra?  Any books explaining where he taught what?

Malcolm wrote:
Different tantras were taught in different places. Not in only one place.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 10th, 2017 at 11:20 PM
Title: Re: Sources for yidam practices not requiring empowerment?
Content:
smcj said:
So then the standard 4 arm Chenrezig is which level of tantra?

Grigoris said:
Every level, as far as I have been taught.

smcj said:
As in there are different versions for all 4 levels, or as in the standard Tongton Gyalpo version has elements of each level?

Malcolm wrote:
Thangton Gyalpo's sadhana is basically a kriya tantra sadhana. Kriya tantra sadhanas can be practices as self-generation practices form the point of view of Carya tantra.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 10th, 2017 at 11:19 PM
Title: Re: Sources for yidam practices not requiring empowerment?
Content:


smcj said:
If self-generation isn't the defining characteristic of HYT, what then defines a HYT practice? Yab Yum deities?

Malcolm wrote:
Kriya tantra through -yoga tantra has the vase empowerment.

Yoga tantra introduces the vajramaster empowerment, as well as the empowerments of the five families.

Hightest Yoga Tantra introduces the inner three empowerments, secret, Prajna's pristine consciousness and word empowerment.

So the difference between levels of tantras is more a function of empowerments than deities.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 10th, 2017 at 11:04 PM
Title: Re: original buddhism
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
There are more important principles deserving of consideration in Buddhadharma, notably, dependent origination.

Seeker12 said:
Is that not included in the 4NT?

In the Khenjuk, and I think likewise in the Abhidharmasamuccaya, within the 4th NT of the "Path" it says basically that "as a remedy for delusion, 'contemplation of interdependence' establishes the fact that all outer and inner phenomena originate in dependent connection, and thus arise free from eternalism or nihilism..." This quote is from the Khenjuk, and the AS says, basically the same: "For those whose character is dominated by delusion (bhuyomohacarita) the object is meditation on conditioned origination (pratityasamutpada) which concerns conditioned nature (idam pratyayata)..."

It seems to me that dependent origination is sort of a subset of the 4NT, in other words, and is included in the 4th NT (and perhaps in the 2nd as well in an explanatory role). Generally all knowledge of samsara would be included in the 1st, all knowledge of the cause of samsara would be included in the 2nd, all knowledge of the end of samara would be included in the 3rd, and all knowledge of the means to that end - including understanding DO - would be included in the 4th. This can absolutely be understood from a Mahayana point of view.

Malcolm wrote:
You are missing the point: all religions recognize that suffering exists, that is has a cause, and it can cease. They merely disagree about the means. In that case then, what is unique about Buddha's teachings? Certainly not the first three truths. Moreover, every religion has their idea of right view, etc. So the eightfold path, arguably, is not so unique either. So we are left with the question: what doctrine is absolutely unique to Buddhadharma? That, I would argue, and have for many years, is dependent origination and its corollary, emptiness free from extremes. Moreover, the Buddha did not invent this idea. This has been the consistent teaching of all the Buddhas of past, is the teaching of the Buddha of the presence, and will be the teaching of all Buddhas of the future.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 10th, 2017 at 10:22 PM
Title: Re: Kalacakra Root Tantra
Content:
Nicholas Weeks said:
Another section of the mulatantra has been traced; see the July 9 blog entry:

http://prajnaquest.fr/blog/


Malcolm wrote:
Nice find. I would amend his translation of the cited verse as follows however:

sems can sems nyid ‘od gsal zhing |
gdod nas skye ‘gag gnas bral te |
thog ma med pa’i sngon rol nas |
dang po mchog gi sangs rgyas te |
rgyu med rkyen gyis ma bslad pa |
The mind essence of sentient beings is luminosity,
from the start free of arising, ceasing and abiding.
From the beginningless past
the adibuddha
lacks a cause and is uncontaminated by conditions.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 10th, 2017 at 10:13 PM
Title: Re: original buddhism
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
I never questioned that the 4NT were part of Dharma, that would be stupid, I merely question whether a diagnostic protocol can really be considered the essence of Buddhist teaching.

Sherab said:
If one is not aware that one has a sickness, would one even bother to take the medicine?
How would one know if one has a sickness?  One needs a diagnostic tool.

A thorough understanding of the 4NT is what would establish one properly on a Dharmic path.  In that sense, I would argue that it is an essential Buddhist teaching.

Malcolm wrote:
This diagnostic idea is common to all religions: there is a problem, the problem has a cause, the problem can be resolved because there is a method to solve that problem. There is no need to enshrine common sense as a religious dogma.

There are more important principles deserving of consideration in Buddhadharma, notably, dependent origination. As the Buddha said, "Whoever sees dependent origination sees the Dharma. Whoever sees the Dharma sees me." When Nāgārjuna set out to correct Hinayāna deviations from the Buddha's true message, he did not focus on the 4NT, his refrain again and again was that one needed to understand what "arising from conditions" really meant and how understanding the Buddha's actual message undermined all substantialist misunderstandings of what the Buddha taught. Elevating the 4NT bears the error of promoting a prescriptive understanding of Buddhadharma when there are more important principles to understand.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 10th, 2017 at 12:04 PM
Title: Re: Emptiness: expedient or certain teaching?
Content:
rachmiel said:
Is emptiness -- like annica, dukkha, karma, rebirth, the two truths, dependent arising -- an expedient/provisional, rather than certain teaching?

In other words, upon enlightenment, does "emptiness" reveal itself to have been just another story, another log of the raft?

Malcolm wrote:
Emptiness is the definitive teaching of the Dharma.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 10th, 2017 at 12:02 PM
Title: Re: original buddhism
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
I never questioned that the 4NT were part of Dharma, that would be stupid, I merely question whether a diagnostic protocol can really be considered the essence of Buddhist teaching.


David N. Snyder said:
Here is what you wrote on page 4 of this thread:

Sherab said:
I would reiterate that the 4NT and the 8FP are foundational to any specific path.  Even if they are not taught in a specific path, they are unspoken assumptions.

Malcolm wrote:
The path offered by the 4NT are specific to Hinayāna teachings. It is not a path for Mahāyāna. In particular, they are not the path that is followed at all in Vajrayāna, since the 4NT offer a path of renunciation.
Correct, the path offered by the 4NT is specific to HInayāna teachings. Hinayāna teachings are part of the Dharma, but they are not its essence.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 10th, 2017 at 11:40 AM
Title: Re: original buddhism
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Since you like text critical methodology you might want to reconsider this point of view.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dhammacakkappavattana_Sutta

David N. Snyder said:
Some of the scholars suggest that they may not have been part of the first sermon and "are a matter of ongoing discussion and research.[12][13][14][15][note 5]" nothing conclusive yet (in their views). But they agree that the 4NT are part of the Dharma and other research on the topic has shown that the repetitiveness of the teachings found in the Tripitakas, demonstrate that it is central to the Dharma.

Malcolm wrote:
I never questioned that the 4NT were part of Dharma, that would be stupid, I merely question whether a diagnostic protocol can really be considered the essence of Buddhist teaching.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 10th, 2017 at 11:05 AM
Title: Re: original buddhism
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Since you like text critical methodology you might want to reconsider this point of view.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dhammacakkappavattana_Sutta

David N. Snyder said:
The Four Noble Truths were the first teachings of the Buddha, found in both the Theravada and Mahayana Canons (Pali Canon and Mahayana Tripitaka).

From an older thread here:
Sönam said:
What do you not understand? The 4 NT is the most important teaching of the Buddha, it's a Direct Introduction, it points directly to the essence ...
Sönam
(from Dzogchen view of 4 Noble Truths, thread here: https://dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?t=13390 )
How to Knowingly Practice
The Four Noble Truths of The Enlightened,
The First Teaching of Buddha Shakyamuni

Compiled, translated, and composed by
His Eminence Dzogchen Khenpo Choga Rinpoche
http://www.thebuddhapath.org/

Chogyal Namkhai Norbu said:
Even if we have different methods in the teaching, such as Tantra and Dzogchen, they are always based on the Four Noble Truths. There is a teaching that is universal to all Buddhists called the Four Noble Truths.
https://books.google.com/books?id=m4Oj1VGwj4cC&pg=PA14&lpg=PA14&dq=four+noble+truths+dzogchen&source=bl&ots=JaKbRnyW-O&sig=np0hPzNEXI0L0_Mkh832zSlDtCg&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjbgJu6yf3UAhVQ8mMKHR3WAlU4ChDoAQhGMAs#v=onepage&q=four%20noble%20truths%20dzogchen&f=false

14th Dalai Lama Tenzin Gyatso said:
When the great universal teacher Shakyamuni Buddha first spoke about the Dharma in the noble land of India, he taught the four noble truths: true sufferings, true origins or causes of sufferings, true stoppings or cessations of sufferings, and true pathway minds or paths leading to the stoppings of sufferings.

Thich Nhat Hanh said:
The first Dharma talk of the Buddha after his enlightenment was about the Four Noble Truths. They express the cream of his teachings and method of practice. The Buddha continued teaching the Four Noble Truths right up until his “great passing away” (mahaparinirvana). It is important for us to study and learn deeply the practice of the Four Noble Truths.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 10th, 2017 at 8:16 AM
Title: Re: original buddhism
Content:
Strive said:
there is no liberation without 4 noble truths and practicing 8fold path

Malcolm wrote:
Of course there is.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 10th, 2017 at 7:26 AM
Title: Re: Practical Recognition of Ignorance
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
.... there are two kinds of ignorance (āvidya): afflictive ignorance and non-afflictive ignorance.

Afflictive ignorance is the first segment of the twelve segments of dependent origination.

Within non-afflictive ignorance there are also two kinds: the the ignorance of the absence of omniscience, for example, in Arhats and Pratyekabuddhas, and the knowledge obscuration from which innate self-grasping arises, which in turn is the cause for the three poisons. This knowledge obscuration is only eradicated in full buddhahood.

Sherab said:
I prefer to see these "ignorances" as one level up from the more basic meaning of ignorance, namely the lack of insight.  These definitions of ignorances are definitions that incorporate their (direct?) consequences.

Malcolm wrote:
The fundamental ignorance is grasping a self.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 10th, 2017 at 4:30 AM
Title: Re: Practical Recognition of Ignorance
Content:
Jesse said:
I was thinking earlier, and I began to wonder.. what is ignorance really?


Malcolm wrote:
First one has to recognize there are two kinds of ignorance (āvidya): afflictive ignorance and non-afflictive ignorance.

Afflictive ignorance is the first segment of the twelve segments of dependent origination.

Within non-afflictive ignorance there are also two kinds: the the ignorance of the absence of omniscience, for example, in Arhats and Pratyekabuddhas, and the knowledge obscuration from which innate self-grasping arises, which in turn is the cause for the three poisons. This knowledge obscuration is only eradicated in full buddhahood.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 10th, 2017 at 1:46 AM
Title: Re: Sources for yidam practices not requiring empowerment?
Content:


fckw said:
Gandalf (what's his mantra in any case?)

Malcolm wrote:
Oṃ aḥ hūṃ vajraguru gandalf siddhi phala hūṃ


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, July 9th, 2017 at 11:19 PM
Title: Re: Sources for yidam practices not requiring empowerment?
Content:
smcj said:
A couple of questions for Cone:

In the standard Chenrezig practice one does visualize oneself as the deity while doing the mantra recitation.
A. Wouldn't that aspect require an initiation?
B. Also, doesn't that by definition make it a HYT practice?

Malcolm wrote:
Self-generation exists in Carya tantra on up through anuyoga.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, July 9th, 2017 at 10:43 PM
Title: Re: original buddhism
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
The one thing that Hinayāna and common Mahāyāna do share however is that they are both paths of renunciation.

Tuybachau said:
- Bodhisattvas practicing Prajnaparamita on the Mahayana path do not either renounce or appropriate either Samsara or Nirvana.
- Mahayana is not about renunciation and/or appropriation.

Malcolm wrote:
Common Mahāyāna is precisely about renunciation. This is so well known there is no point in even arguing about it. Like Hinayāna, common Mahāyāna regards the five aggregates and their sense objects as something poisonous to abandon.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, July 9th, 2017 at 10:41 PM
Title: Re: Dudjom Dzambala Practice
Content:


dzogchungpa said:
Well,-what about ChNN's authority? Presumably he doesn't think that making Dzogchen popular will weaken its benefit, does he?

Malcolm wrote:
He often mentions that if people do not keep their samaya, it will damage the teachings. When you make teachings more popular, more people with broken samaya come into contact with them, etc. You do the math.


Adamantine said:
Yes but what is the math happening in the minds of wisdom masters like ChNN, Dudjom Rinpoche, Garchen Rinpoche, HHDL,
Karmapa, etc. who decide that giving large public transmissions—even some globally webcast ones—have benefits that outweigh the pitfalls?

Malcolm wrote:
That is a good question, and one I am not prepared to answer for them. All I can tell you is what I have found in classical literature on the subject. For example, ChNN pointed out that Longde practitioners ceased attaining rainbow body at a certain point in time because of broken samayas in the lineage. And of course, I have no idea if any present day Longde practitioners are going to attain rainbow body either, even though ChNN's revival of Longde in Longsal is a very important development. All we can expect, as practitioners of recent terma cycles, is that the samayas in these lineages are pure and thus the teachings will be very, very effective for their practitioners.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, July 9th, 2017 at 5:45 AM
Title: Re: Dudjom Dzambala Practice
Content:


dzogchungpa said:
Well,-what about ChNN's authority? Presumably he doesn't think that making Dzogchen popular will weaken its benefit, does he?

Malcolm wrote:
He often mentions that if people do not keep their samaya, it will damage the teachings. When you make teachings more popular, more people with broken samaya come into contact with them, etc. You do the math.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, July 9th, 2017 at 5:16 AM
Title: Re: Best english translation of the bardo thodol?
Content:
odysseus said:
W Y Evans Wentz. The original Enligsh translation, nothing beats that one.

Malcolm wrote:
surely you are kidding,

odysseus said:
No, actually this is my first reading! It has a charming attitude of old English understanding. I don't even know if there is anything better.

Malcolm wrote:
It has the charming attitude of being completely wrong in so many ways.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, July 9th, 2017 at 5:14 AM
Title: Re: Dudjom Dzambala Practice
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Kunzang Dorje states. "All Dharmas are weakened through popularity," meaning the more popular a teaching is and the more widespread it becomes, the weaker its benefit.

dzogchungpa said:
Well, maybe, but I don't really see how that could be established.

Malcolm wrote:
It is established through the authority of many masters in all traditions, and in fact is the primary justification for the Terma tradition: i.e., that as termas are promulgated more widely, their blessings weaken correspondingly. It is for this reason that so many transmissions were "gcig brgyud" transmissions, transmissions restricted to one recipient.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, July 9th, 2017 at 5:11 AM
Title: Re: original buddhism
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
The path offered by the 4NT are specific to Hinayāna teachings. It is not a path for Mahāyāna. In particular, they are not the path that is followed at all in Vajrayāna, since the 4NT offer a path of renunciation.

Remember the nine yānas are each independent vehicles, with their own basis, path, and result.

Seeker12 said:
I don't think I understand this, as the 16 mind moments that comprise the path of seeing basically all consist of experiential realization of the 4 noble truths. This is taught clearly in the Mahayana and by Vajrayana masters such as Patrul Rinpoche.

Malcolm wrote:
The 16 moments of the HInayāna path of seeing are not shared with Mahāyāna at all. Though 16 moments with respect to the four truths are mentioned in the Abhisamayālaṃkara, they are completely different and have to do with recognizing, for example, that there is no truth in the truth of suffering at all, i.e. the truth of the suffering is the fact that suffering is not established, that suffering has the nature of the dharmadhātu, and so on. Moreover, the Abhisamayālaṃkara that for Mahāyanis the truth of the path is the six perfections and not the 8FP. The one thing that Hinayāna and common Mahāyāna do share however is that they are both paths of renunciation.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, July 9th, 2017 at 3:15 AM
Title: Re: original buddhism
Content:
Grigoris said:
Tell that one to all the Vajrayana nuns and monks (renunciates) and see what their response is.


Malcolm wrote:
If you are a Vajrayāna practitioner who happens to be ordained, your Vajrayāna practice is more important than your path of renunciation vows.

Grigoris said:
Uh-huh.

I noticed that you've been avoiding my other question, so I'll take it you have no better alternative to the Four Dharma Seals to judge teachings by then...

I guess I'll just stick to my naive insistence...

Malcolm wrote:
I do have a better alternative, it is found in the Akṣayamati-nirdeśha sūtra.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, July 9th, 2017 at 3:11 AM
Title: Re: original buddhism
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
If you read carefully, you will understand that the Buddha (Gautama) states very clearly that when he was under the bodhitree, he rediscovered the principle of dependent origination through recalling all of his past lives, which necessarily means he recalled teachings he had received from previous buddhas.

Wayfarer said:
I have never encountered that interpretation before. Does it say this explicitly that the Buddha learned the truth of dependent origination, in previous lives, from other Buddhas? The brief description of his recollection of earlier lives that I am familiar with is this one:
When the mind was thus concentrated, purified, bright, unblemished, rid of defilement, pliant, malleable, steady, & attained to imperturbability, I directed it to the knowledge of recollecting my past lives. I recollected my manifold past lives, i.e., one birth, two... five, ten... fifty, a hundred, a thousand, a hundred thousand, many eons of cosmic contraction, many eons of cosmic expansion, many eons of cosmic contraction & expansion: 'There I had such a name, belonged to such a clan, had such an appearance. Such was my food, such my experience of pleasure & pain, such the end of my life. Passing away from that state, I re-arose there. There too I had such a name, belonged to such a clan, had such an appearance. Such was my food, such my experience of pleasure & pain, such the end of my life. Passing away from that state, I re-arose here.' Thus I remembered my manifold past lives in their modes & details.
— MN 36

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, "Thus I remembered my manifold past lives in their modes & details..." How can one imagine he did not recall teachings he had received from the many buddhas he attended in the past? It is not thinkable.





Wayfarer said:
The canonical declaration of the Buddha as 'self-enlightened' is this:
I have heard that on one occasion, when the Blessed One was newly Self-awakened, he was staying at Uruvela on the bank of the Nerañjara River, at the foot of the Goatherd's Banyan Tree. Then, while he was alone and in seclusion, this line of thinking arose in his awareness: "One suffers if dwelling without reverence or deference. Now on what brahman or contemplative can I dwell in dependence, honoring and respecting him?"

Then the thought occurred to him: "It would be for the sake of perfecting an unperfected aggregate of virtue that I would dwell in dependence on another brahman or contemplative, honoring and respecting him. However, in this world with its devas, Maras, & Brahmas, in this generation with its brahmans and contemplatives, its royalty and common-folk, I do not see another brahman or contemplative more consummate in virtue than I, on whom I could dwell in dependence, honoring and respecting him.
— Iti 112

Malcolm wrote:
"self-awakened" is a translation gloss. It is not accurate. It is a result of interpretive license.

Wayfarer said:
So, these sources don't 'state clearly'  that the Buddha learned from earlier Buddhas in previous lives. Is that stated somewhere else in the Nikayas?

Malcolm wrote:
It is daft to ignore all the suttas where Buddha describes being a student of Buddhas in past lives, such as Dipamkara. Seriously.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, July 9th, 2017 at 3:07 AM
Title: Re: original buddhism
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
If you read the Majjihma Nikaya, there is a sutra there where the Buddha gives an account of his awakening, describing in some detail that he recalled the view of dependent origination in the recollection of his myriad past lives, with which he attained buddhahood.

David N. Snyder said:
So even if we use your view of past buddhas for determining the original Dharma (and not just Gautama's Dispensation), there is still this which you have quoted yourself and goes to show that buddhas review their myriad past lives, recall dependent origination and attain buddhahood. Using your own words, there is still an original Dharma there that is taught by all buddhas. This is the Dharma Gautama rediscovered and taught, the Path.
Avoid all evil, Cultivate the good, Purify your mind; this is the teaching of the Buddhas.
Dhammapada 183
This is an original Dharma too, taught by all buddhas.
" So too, monks, I saw the ancient path, the ancient road traveled by the Perfectly Enlightened Ones of the past. And what is that ancient path, that ancient road? It is just this Noble Eightfold Path; that is, right view, right intention, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, right concentration. I followed that path and by doing so I have directly known aging-and-death, its origin, its cessation, and the way leading to its cessation. I have directly known birth ... existence ... clinging ... craving ... feeling ... contact... the six sense bases ... name-and-form ... consciousness ... volitional formations, their origin, their cessation, and the way leading to their cessation. Having directly known them, I have explained them to the monks, the nuns, the male lay followers, and the female lay followers. This spiritual life, monks, has become successful and prosperous, extended, popular, widespread, well proclaimed among devas and humans. "
(SN 12:65; II104-7)

Malcolm wrote:
You said "original Buddhim," I said there was no such thing. It is impossible. These citations do not negate my point, they reinforce it. That is why I brought them up (thought the sutta reference I was referring to is more or less an identical passage in the Majjihma NIkaya).

But buddhas have also taught an even more direct path than the reversal of dependent origination.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, July 9th, 2017 at 3:01 AM
Title: Re: original buddhism
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
The path offered by the 4NT are specific to Hinayāna teachings. It is not a path for Mahāyāna. In particular, they are not the path that is followed at all in Vajrayāna, since the 4NT offer a path of renunciation.

Grigoris said:
Tell that one to all the Vajrayana nuns and monks (renunciates) and see what their response is.


Malcolm wrote:
If you are a Vajrayāna practitioner who happens to be ordained, your Vajrayāna practice is more important than your path of renunciation vows.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, July 9th, 2017 at 2:59 AM
Title: Re: Dudjom Dzambala Practice
Content:


pemachophel said:
The great Garchen Rinpoche, at a series of empowerments in L.A. a couple of years ago, also discussed this issue. He talked about the commitments and the dangers inherent in failing t keep those commitments. He said He had thought a lot about whether it is good to give empowerments to all-comers. At the end, He decided that the potential benefits out-weighed the potential dangers -- meaning Enlightenment in this, the next, within eight, or within a maximum of 16 lifetimes. However, at least one Lama I have studied with said that "guarantee" depended on at least the bare minimum of keeping samaya.

Malcolm wrote:
Correct, if you do not maintain samaya, the max 16 lifetime promise is a no go.

pemachophel said:
As a corollary of this, somewhere on line I once read something by a Lama who said that, if all people wanted was a no-strings-attached blessing, then that's what they should ask for, not an empowerment. Sorry I don't remember what Lama said that and where it is on line.

Malcolm wrote:
This is a comment made frequently by ChNN. He maintains there is no such thing as an empowerment "given as a blessing." All empowerments, he maintains, come with commitments. And since all empowerments contain refuge and bodhicitta ceremonies, it is impossible to give someone an empowerment who has not taken refuge.


pemachophel said:
I'm more talking about the bind we find ourselves in here in the Kaliyuga where everything, including the Dharma, is degenerating.

Malcolm wrote:
With respect to this, Kunzang Dorje (1130-?), the author of the Vajra Bridge Longed commentary, was relating the fact that his teacher, Dzeng Dharmabodhi (1052-1168) was a direct disciple of Phadampa Sanggye. Dzeng met Phadampa when he was eighteen, and spent a year and a half with him. With respect to the surprising amount of material in Zhi byed, Kunzang Dorje stated it was impossible for Padampa to have actually said that much since he primarily taught with symbols and did not chatter very much with people, or give teachings with many words. With respect to that, Kunzang Dorje states. "All Dharmas are weakened through popularity," meaning the more popular a teaching is and the more widespread it becomes, the weaker its benefit. Such observations should temper our evangelical zeal, especially with respect to Vajrayāna cycles.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, July 8th, 2017 at 12:52 PM
Title: Re: original buddhism
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
If you read the Majjihma Nikaya, there is a sutra there where the Buddha gives an account of his awakening, describing in some detail that he recalled the view of dependent origination in the recollection of his myriad past lives, with which he attained buddhahood.

David N. Snyder said:
Yes, I fully accept that. I think the whole issue is as LE noted, just semantics. You are taking a different notion of original Buddhism. I am fine with it just being the historical Gautama Buddha and his Dispensation beginning with his awakening around 528 BCE. I fully accept that there were other buddhas, in fact I like those teachings, it makes the Dharma universal, applicable to all places and all times, all worlds. It is just that for original Buddhism, I am using it in the historical sense of the historical Gautama from the 6th century BCE.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, and I am saying it is an entirely inaccurate way to look at the Dharma, one which privileges western text critical methodology even when it flies completely in the face of what the Buddha actually taught about buddhas.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, July 8th, 2017 at 12:41 PM
Title: Re: Best english translation of the bardo thodol?
Content:
WuMing said:
What about the new translation done by Elio Guarisco http://shop.shangshungfoundation.com/en/books/312-the-tibetan-book-of-the-dead-awakening-upon-dying-9781583945551.html?

Has anybody read it? Any thoughts about it?


Johnny Dangerous said:
I really loved it personally. I have no idea about the accuracy of translation or anything, but I thought this edition was wonderful...mainly for the act that it includes a sizeable chunk of commentary and explanatory material from ChNN, and is presented in a Dzogchen context. My only previous experience was with the Trungpa/Fremantle version.


Malcolm wrote:
The Bardo Thos grol is Dzogchen through and through


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, July 8th, 2017 at 12:40 PM
Title: Re: Best english translation of the bardo thodol?
Content:
odysseus said:
W Y Evans Wentz. The original Enligsh translation, nothing beats that one.

Malcolm wrote:
surely you are kidding,


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, July 8th, 2017 at 12:38 PM
Title: Re: original buddhism
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Not more semantics...it proves there is no original Buddhism.

David N. Snyder said:
Okay, we'll just have to agree to disagree on that then.

Malcolm wrote:
If you read the Majjihma Nikaya, there is a sutra there where the Buddha gives an account of his awakening, describing in some detail that he recalled the view of dependent origination in the recollection of his myriad past lives, with which he attained buddhahood.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, July 8th, 2017 at 12:35 PM
Title: Re: Dudjom Dzambala Practice
Content:
pemachophel said:
Sometimes it's almost as if Tibetan Buddhism is a business and empowerments are the product, with Lamas coming to the West mainly to raise money for their monasteries back home.

Malcolm wrote:
Tibetans made the same observation about Indians. Not much has changed in a thousand years.


Adamantine said:
Well that must be a good sign that the transmission lineage is intact!

Though the Indian masters must have been better businessmen,
since they managed to get bags of gold and modern Lamas maybe an envelope with $21 tops. . .

Malcolm wrote:
Depends on the lama, what he is selling, and where.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, July 8th, 2017 at 12:30 PM
Title: Re: original buddhism
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Not more semantics...it proves there is no original Buddhism.
No one is perfectly enlightened by themselves. If you read carefully, you will understand that the Buddha (Gautama) states very clearly that when he was under the bodhitree, he rediscovered the principle of dependent origination through recalling all of his past lives, which necessarily means he recalled teachings he had received from previous buddhas. We know this is the case from the sheer number of times he recounts anecdotes from when he was a disciple of other buddhas.

David N. Snyder said:
Again, more semantics. I could have said "perfectly enlightened by himself when he rediscovered the principle of dependent origination through recalling all of his past lives, which necessarily means he recalled teachings he had received from previous buddhas." It still doesn't change the fact that Gautama Buddha taught many things at Jeta Grove, Deer Park in Sarnath, Sravasti, Kushinagar, etc which means there was some Dharma taught at those places and monks, nuns and lay people listened and practiced what they were taught, i.e., some Path.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, July 8th, 2017 at 12:09 PM
Title: Re: original buddhism
Content:


Sherab said:
(2) Your post also appears to suggest that there is no distinction between Buddhism and certain Hindu schools because the latter also claim the four seals.  But one of the seal is on emptiness. .

Malcolm wrote:
No. None of the seals are on emptiness:
All conditioned/compounded entities/dharmas are impermanent.
All contaminated entities are suffering.
All entities are not self.
Nirvana is peaceful.
It is perfectly possible to read these four statements in a manner consistent with certain Hindu schools, such as classical Advaita Vedanta.

Sherab said:
Looks like there are different versions of the four seals.  Here's the one I am referring to:

‘Dus-byas-thams-cad-mi-rtag-pa-red,
“Everything that is conditioned is impermanent.”
Zag-bcas-thams-cad-sdug-bsnga-red,
“Everything that is stained brings suffering.”
Chos-thams-cad-stong-zhin-bdag-med-pa-red,
“All phenomena are empty and devoid of a self.”
Myan-‘das-ni-zhi-ba-red,
“Nirvana is peace.”

I think everyone here would agree that emptiness as taught by the Buddha is definitely something that distinguishes Buddhism from all other religions.

Malcolm wrote:
The source? It has to be non canonical because of the red particle.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, July 8th, 2017 at 11:38 AM
Title: Re: original buddhism
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Gautama is an emanation of Samantabbadra.

David N. Snyder said:
Okay, then we're still talking the Dispensation of Gautama. It's just that I see Gautama Buddha as a Samyaksambuddha, perfectly enlightened by himself and you see him as an emanation but in the end it is Gautama's Dispensation. I think this just confirms what LE wrote here:

Malcolm wrote:
No one is perfectly enlightened by themselves. If you read carefully, you will understand that the Buddha (Gautama) states very clearly that when he was under the bodhitree, he rediscovered the principle of dependent origination through recalling all of his past lives, which necessarily means he recalled teachings he had received from previous buddhas. We know this is the case from the sheer number of times he recounts anecdotes from when he was a disciple of other buddhas.

Now then, Samantabhadra, of whom Śākyamuni is an emanation, was also an ordinary person, who received teachings, became a buddha as a result, and manifested in this eon as the adibuddha, aka first buddha.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, July 8th, 2017 at 8:55 AM
Title: Re: Six Syllables of Samantabhadra
Content:
Tolya M said:
I read a short article about these syllables and I have two questions

1) Do syllables stand for certain words or roots (Sanskrit, Gandhari, Tibetan )? For example, the first "'A" is for anutpada, aprapancha\avikalpa, vaisAradya. The second "A" is for anabhoga, "Sha" is for ksetra for example... I am familiar with Sanskrit at the level of "saw" in the brackets, unfortunately. I would be very happy if someone responds according to the texts or commentaries.

2) How to write them correctly and in what language? Can I make two rows of three letters for an amulet? Something like the image in the picture, but from clay? I want to replace my Phra Somdej. It split at the corners when I was in the hospital and accidentally dropped it )))

Thank you!!!

Malcolm wrote:
'A (འ), according to Longchenpa, represents a sound found in the the Language of Oddiyāna.

'A corresponds to one of the six lokas, and represents its pure aspect. The same with the other five.

The six syllables are themselves the syllabic form of the nirmanakāyas of the six lokas.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, July 8th, 2017 at 8:53 AM
Title: Re: Dudjom Dzambala Practice
Content:
pemachophel said:
Sometimes it's almost as if Tibetan Buddhism is a business and empowerments are the product, with Lamas coming to the West mainly to raise money for their monasteries back home.

Malcolm wrote:
Tibetans made the same observation about Indians. Not much has changed in a thousand years.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, July 8th, 2017 at 8:48 AM
Title: Re: original buddhism
Content:
Sherab said:
I would reiterate that the 4NT and the 8FP are foundational to any specific path.  Even if they are not taught in a specific path, they are unspoken assumptions.

Malcolm wrote:
The path offered by the 4NT are specific to Hinayāna teachings. It is not a path for Mahāyāna. In particular, they are not the path that is followed at all in Vajrayāna, since the 4NT offer a path of renunciation.

Remember the nine yānas are each independent vehicles, with their own basis, path, and result.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, July 8th, 2017 at 8:38 AM
Title: Re: original buddhism
Content:


Malcolm wrote:
I just explained, there are Hindu schools which can also claim them.

Grigoris said:
Let's say there are, and let's say they actually conform to them, does the fact that they call themselves "Hindu"mean they are not Dharma?

And what is the alternative (more trustworthy) measure of Dharma-ness?
Bump.

Malcolm wrote:
It means that their basis, path, and result is different even though they will broadly agree with the four seals.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, July 8th, 2017 at 7:56 AM
Title: Re: original buddhism
Content:
Norwegian said:
You are referring to the Bodhisattva. Malcolm is referring to the Buddha.

David N. Snyder said:
Okay, no problema, different strokes for different folks. Then this thread is referring to the Dispensation of Gautama.

Malcolm wrote:
Gautama is an emanation of Samantabbadra.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, July 8th, 2017 at 5:22 AM
Title: Re: original buddhism
Content:


David N. Snyder said:
We are not in Dipankara's Dispensation; but rather the Dispensation of Gautama.


Malcolm wrote:
I am in the dispensation of Samantabhadra.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 7th, 2017 at 9:38 AM
Title: Re: original buddhism
Content:


Sherab said:
(1) Your post appears to suggest that there is no underlying view and principles to the Dharma taught by the Buddha.  .

Malcolm wrote:
If there was an underlying principal followed by the Buddha, it was solely to remedy ignorance and replace it with knowledge.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 7th, 2017 at 9:34 AM
Title: Re: original buddhism
Content:


Sherab said:
(2) Your post also appears to suggest that there is no distinction between Buddhism and certain Hindu schools because the latter also claim the four seals.  But one of the seal is on emptiness. .

Malcolm wrote:
No. None of the seals are on emptiness:
All conditioned/compounded entities/dharmas are impermanent.
All contaminated entities are suffering.
All entities are not self.
Nirvana is peaceful.
It is perfectly possible to read these four statements in a manner consistent with certain Hindu schools, such as classical Advaita Vedanta.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 7th, 2017 at 7:21 AM
Title: Re: Belief
Content:
climb-up said:
As I mentioned in a previous post, you have a tendency to be very concise.

Malcolm wrote:
After writing thousands of posts on the internet over the past 20 years, that happens.


climb-up said:
I figure that I your going to practice dzogchen (or try to, as I try to) then you do it and the tradition says you need a guru so you need a guru. That's enough for me.

Malcolm wrote:
Tradition says that if you wish to discover the mind essence, you need a guru to point it out. Why? Because the mind essence will not be discovered by ordinary people trapped in the thicket of concepts and views without the aid of a guru. For example, if someone does not understand the difference between pyrite and gold, they can be deceived because of a similarity in color if they do not have instruction in how to test them. Likewise, without having a way to test the difference between the mind essence and the mind, one can be easily deceived thinking that one is the other because their "color" is similar. Only a qualified guru can help one distinguish mind from the mind essence, just as only a skilled gemologist can help one distinguish between a fake diamond and a real one.


climb-up said:
Similarly, if someone doesn't want to they don't need to. If they feel another path is right for them,I hope they get what they are after and are happy.

Malcolm wrote:
This thread is the Dzogchen forum, last I looked.

climb-up said:
If they don't think they need a guru I certainly don't feel qualified to tell them they do, their just not doing dzogchen (or vajrayana, or anything else that explicitly requires a teacher).

Malcolm wrote:
If someone does not want a guru, then of course they will wind up wandering in samsara for a very long time.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 7th, 2017 at 7:16 AM
Title: Re: original buddhism
Content:
Sherab said:
While Buddhas teach according to sentient beings need, they still teach THE DHARMA.

Malcolm wrote:
What this Dharma is has not yet been quantified in this thread. For example, David thinks it is the 4NT and the 8FP. I don't.


The only thing that distinguishes the Buddha's teaching from that of non-Buddhists (excluding Bonpos) is emptiness— not just the simple absence of a self, but emptiness free from extremes.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 7th, 2017 at 5:43 AM
Title: Re: original buddhism
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Despite some people's naive insistence that Buddhadharma has to conform to three seals...

Grigoris said:
Why do you consider it naive to judge a teaching as Dharma based on it's conformance to the Four Dharma Seals?  What would you consider a better standard of comparison?

Malcolm wrote:
I just explained, there are Hindu schools which can also claim them.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 7th, 2017 at 4:12 AM
Title: Re: original buddhism
Content:


David N. Snyder said:
...all buddhas teach the same Dharma, same path.

Malcolm wrote:
But they clearly don't. They teach whatever Dharma sentient beings need. Some need one kind of Dharma, others other kinds of Dharma. Despite some people's naive insistence that Buddhadharma has to conform to three seals, we can even find nonBuddhist traditions that corresponds to the three seals inso far as they assert all conditioned phenomena are impermanent, all contaminated phenomena are suffering, and all phenomena are not self (brahmin being outside what can be considered "phenomena."

David N. Snyder said:
It is additionally moot, because even if we do accept that different buddhas teach different paths (not a view I hold), then original buddhism could still refer to the Path of this dispensation, that of Siddhartha Gautama.

Malcolm wrote:
No, it cannot because Gautama was not the first Buddha.

David N. Snyder said:
Yes, my approach is a historical one

Malcolm wrote:
One out of many possible historical approaches.

David N. Snyder said:
The historical and original is something some Buddhists aspire to, notably, yes, more so among Theravadins.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 7th, 2017 at 4:06 AM
Title: Re: Belief
Content:


climb-up said:
All I am pointing out is that you made an argument purporting to logically prove that you cannot discover the nature of mind without a guru.

Malcolm wrote:
I did not make any such argument. I made a declaration and used an example.

climb-up said:
Oh, well there you go.
To be fair, you did in fact present it as a logical proof, you made a statement and then declared that there was proof of it (see the quotation below with bolded lettering), and that's what I responded too.

Malcolm wrote:
No, I made a statement, declared it was a fact, and used an example to illustrate my point.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 7th, 2017 at 1:02 AM
Title: Re: original buddhism
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
What standard are you using? Mahāyāna? In this case the original teaching of Śākyamuni Buddha would be the Avatamska Sūtra. Vajrayāna? In this case there are any number of tantras that will claim this position. Dzogchen? The answer is as above.

Lazy_eye said:
Not a question of my standard, but rather David's. He's clearly using the historical approach, which you reject.

Malcolm wrote:
He is using one historical approach. There are others.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 7th, 2017 at 1:01 AM
Title: Re: Belief
Content:


Anonymous X said:
I sincerely hope your mind is open enough to allow non-Buddhists, non-Dzogchenistas, to awaken fully to their own nature.

Malcolm wrote:
Everyone will become a buddha eventually. First, however, they have to be in the stream of Buddhadharma.

Anonymous X said:
My own teacher was such a one

Malcolm wrote:
I can't speak to this. I do not know who your teacher is.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 7th, 2017 at 12:57 AM
Title: Re: Belief
Content:


climb-up said:
All I am pointing out is that you made an argument purporting to logically prove that you cannot discover the nature of mind without a guru.

Malcolm wrote:
I did not make any such argument. I made a declaration and used an example.


climb-up said:
If people could attain realization of their mind essence without a cause, it would just happen randomly. But it does not. That is the point.
Your saying that saying one can realize the nature of mind without a guru is the same as saying you can do it without a cause.

Malcolm wrote:
Correct.

climb-up said:
Why would those be the same thing?  That would be one example (speaking theoretically) of realization without a guru, but just as all pigeons are birds but not all birds are pigeons there are more things that would qualify under the heading of realization without a guru than spontaneous realization with no cause whatsoever.

Malcolm wrote:
Sentient beings do not realize the mind essence without a guru, they cannot see it just as they cannot see their own faces without a mirror. To see the mind essence, one needs the mirror of the guru. Even Samantabhadra has a back story as an ordinary sentient being who received teachings from a Buddha, and then attained buddhahood.

climb-up said:
Also, why would it be random?

Malcolm wrote:
What would some of these other putative causes be?



climb-up said:
If people who have legitimately experienced the nature of mind can still act our of affliction then you can use acting out of affliction as evidence that someone has not experienced the nature of mind.

Malcolm wrote:
When acting out of affliction, one is distracted. It is possible for people who have recognized the mind-essence to be distracted, especially if they spend little time cultivating that and remain content with just a small taste. When one is distracted, one is not maintaining the essence, so to speak.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, July 6th, 2017 at 10:02 PM
Title: Re: original buddhism
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
I still would not call this the original Buddhism. Buddhas do not teach according to some plan. Buddhas teach according to the needs of sentient beings. For example, the first buddha of this eon taught Dzogchen, not the 4NT and 8FP. But somehow, I do not think you are likely to accept this. Based on the latter fact, claiming there is some original Buddhism is basically just a faith-based claim, not grounded in facts.

Lazy_eye said:
There seems to be an issue of semantics.  When David uses the term "original Buddhism," does he actually mean "the core teachings of all Buddhas past and present, in all world systems that have ever existed"?

Or does he mean "the core teachings that can be attributed, with some certainty, to Siddartha Gautama" ?

I thought it was the latter, personally. David?

Malcolm wrote:
What standard are you using? Mahāyāna? In this case the original teaching of Śākyamuni Buddha would be the Avatamska Sūtra. Vajrayāna? In this case there are any number of tantras that will claim this position. Dzogchen? The answer is as above.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, July 6th, 2017 at 9:57 PM
Title: Re: Belief
Content:



climb-up said:
In this case, there is no cause by which one can discover one's own nature in a concrete sense such that one is without doubt in absence of a guru. The primary difference between the paths of Mahāyāna and Vajrayāna is introduction to one's real state.
That is a reason or why your statement would be true, based on theory and tradition, but I don't see how it is a logical proof.

Malcolm wrote:
One cannot see one's own face without a mirror. Likewise, can cannot see the mind essence without a guru.


climb-up said:
You said that the proof that something couldn't happen was that it didn't happen all the time, so I asked why that would prove anything.

Malcolm wrote:
You are suggesting that people can attain realization without a cause. This is rejected in Dzogchen teachings in general. If people could attain realization of their mind essence without a cause, it would just happen randomly. But it does not. That is the point.

Using the example of a crowd, if I tell you to go find John Doe in a large crowd, whom you have never met nor seen a picture of, it is unlikely you find him. Even if you meet a person claiming to be John Doe, you will still have a find someone who knows the John Doe for whom you are searching to confirm you have met the right John Doe. However, once you have met John Doe, and it is confirmed to be the correct John Doe, you will always been able to recognize him on your own. So it is with the mind essence.

climb-up said:
Still, I think that makes my point. Since we all (fully enlightened Buddhas excepted of course) act out of affliction, even those who have discovered the nature of their mind, then we can't look from the outside and consider out judgments of others afflicted actions as being proof of their not having discovered anything.

Malcolm wrote:
It is not the case that all apart from Buddhas act out of affliction. Where did you get this idea? It is not true. Even ordinary persons who have achieved patience on the Mahāyāna path of application no longer act out of affliction.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, July 5th, 2017 at 8:52 PM
Title: Re: Belief
Content:


Malcolm wrote:
For example, one can believe one has discovered the nature of the mind, but without a guru to confirm whether or not one has made this discovery, you will just be in a state of belief without knowledge.

Sure it can. Just look at yourself and ask, "Did I discover my own state on my own without resorting to a Guru?" The answer of course will be no.

climb-up said:
So can people believe that they have discovered the nature mind without a guru or not?

Malcolm wrote:
They can believe this.


climb-up said:
If you they can, as you say in the first quote above, then asking themselves if they have found it without a guru would not elicit the answer no, as you say in the second quote.

Malcolm wrote:
The second quote was directed to a person who by their own admission has a teacher, more than one.

climb-up said:
We can know for a fact that no one, ever, anywhere can discover their real nature because:
1)It doesn't happen 'all the time' and
2)people continue to act out of affliction.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, in other words, discovering our real nature has a cause.

climb-up said:
I am failing to see the logic here?
Why would the possibility of something happening mean that it necessarily would happen all the time?

Malcolm wrote:
In this case, there is no cause by which one can discover one's own nature in a concrete sense such that one is without doubt in absence of a guru. The primary difference between the paths of Mahāyāna and Vajrayāna is introduction to one's real state.

climb-up said:
If the proof that people don't find the nature of mind on their own is that they act out of affliction; firstly, in regards to the above, are you saying that you know the actions of EVERYONE? That would be quite impressive.

Malcolm wrote:
The actions of all sentient beings who are not on a path are afflicted. The actions of sentient beings on the path are also afflicted, though they are likely to be more mindful of afflictions as they arise and thus act with more restraint.

climb-up said:
Secondly, that would mean that everyone who has discovered the nature of mind does not act out of affliction. That would be similarly impressive.

Malcolm wrote:
People who are in true possession of the knowledge of their own state are less likely to act out of affliction.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, July 5th, 2017 at 3:06 AM
Title: Re: Belief
Content:


Malcolm wrote:
Having one's awakening confirmed is not an option, it is a necessity.

MalaBeads said:
I would think this is true only if one wants to teach or have a 'career' in Buddhism. Whatever happened to 'way-seeking' for the ordinary person? I am quite happy with just this.


Malcolm wrote:
A ordinary person should not remain in doubt.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, July 5th, 2017 at 2:59 AM
Title: Re: Mahamudra same as Shikantaza
Content:
Johnny Dangerous said:
A related issue I think:


The general iconoclasm of Zen has a completely different context within a Buddhist culture than it does in a secular one with protestant leanings.

You take something like "if you see the Buddha on the road kill him",.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, while forgetting the saying has its roots in the story of Angulimala, the mass murderer.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 4th, 2017 at 11:27 PM
Title: Re: Mahamudra same as Shikantaza
Content:
Anonymous X said:
Your statement can also apply to Japanese delusions. Certainly Ch'an changed when it was adapted in Japan.

Matylda said:
In a way yes in a way no... there was big difference in adopting zen in China, Japan and the West...

Anonymous X said:
How so? Please explain.

Malcolm wrote:
For one, in the case of Chan --> Zen, it was largely a monastic movement among highly educated Buddhists. Zen -->West, largely nonmonastic, poorly educated Buddhists.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 4th, 2017 at 11:24 PM
Title: Re: Belief
Content:
Anonymous X said:
Your real nature, your dharmatā, the jewel you lost eons ago.
This might be another fable.

Malcolm wrote:
It isn't. It is something which can be pointed out, but it is not something which can be discovered without a guru. If it were, everyone would discover it all the time. But they clearly don't. Why can we know this is a fact? Because people and other sentient beings continue to act out of affliction and with no natural restraint whatsoever.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 4th, 2017 at 11:13 PM
Title: Re: Belief
Content:


Malcolm wrote:
Sure it can. Just look at yourself and ask, "Did I discover my own state on my own without resorting to a Guru?" The answer of course will be no.

Anonymous X said:
This is one way of discovering, not the only way. Plus, I was actually referring to the confirmation part of your statement.
Going further, what do you mean 'discovering my own state'?

Malcolm wrote:
Your real nature, your dharmatā, the jewel you lost eons ago.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 4th, 2017 at 11:11 PM
Title: Re: Belief
Content:
Anonymous X said:
Plus, I was actually referring to the confirmation part of your statement.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, I know. Even Buddha has his awakening confirmed by someone else. Just read the traditional accounts. If you are fond of Zen fables, Buddha confirmed Kashyapa's awakening and so on. Having one's awakening confirmed is not an option, it is a necessity.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 4th, 2017 at 11:00 PM
Title: Re: Belief
Content:


Malcolm wrote:
For example, one can believe one has discovered the nature of the mind, but without a guru to confirm whether or not one has made this discovery, you will just be in a state of belief without knowledge.

Anonymous X said:
This is a statement that cannot possibly be proven to be true.

Malcolm wrote:
Sure it can. Just look at yourself and ask, "Did I discover my own state on my own without resorting to a Guru?" The answer of course will be no.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 4th, 2017 at 10:40 PM
Title: Re: Belief
Content:
smcj said:
I believe that negative actions ripen as suffering, so I make an effort to avoid them.

Isn't that useful?


Malcolm wrote:
It happens whether you believe it or not. Like gravity.

climb-up said:
But is that the point raised?
The ripening into suffering happens regardless of belief, but the effort to avoid the ripening happens because of it. So it's potentially useful, yes?

Malcolm wrote:
The effort to avoid the ripening of suffering does not need to be grounded in belief. It can be grounded in simple, empirical observation. The latter is more useful in the avoidance of suffering than the former.

For example, one can believe one has discovered the nature of the mind, but without a guru to confirm whether or not one has made this discovery, you will just be in a state of belief without knowledge.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 4th, 2017 at 10:37 PM
Title: Re: original buddhism
Content:


David N. Snyder said:
Original buddhism refers to this path; 4NT and 8FP.

Malcolm wrote:
I doubt you will find that all Buddhas teach 4NT and 8FP.

For example, there is a verse in the Vinaya that is more likely to be the core teaching of all Buddhas:
Abandon non-virtue. 
Cultivate virtue. 
Observe one's mind.
This is the teaching of the Buddhas.
I still would not call this the original Buddhism. Buddhas do not teach according to some plan. Buddhas teach according to the needs of sentient beings. For example, the first buddha of this eon taught Dzogchen, not the 4NT and 8FP. But somehow, I do not think you are likely to accept this. Based on the latter fact, claiming there is some original Buddhism is basically just a faith-based claim, not grounded in facts.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 4th, 2017 at 1:53 AM
Title: Re: All Sentient Beings will attain Buddhahood?
Content:
Nicholas Weeks said:
Perhaps Vasubandhu's comments (Thurman's version) will make clear, what does not seem so unclear.  First the root verse 60 of Maitreya, then Vasubandhu.  Verse 61 is skipped:
60. You have achieved the ultimate!
You have transcended all the stages!
You have become the chief of all beings!
You are the liberator of all beings!

The buddha character is explained here under headings: nature, cause,
result, activity...
The ultimate achieved is pure suchness, which is the natural reality body
of the buddhas. The transcending through all the bodhisattva stages is the cause.
The achievement of supremacy over all beings is the result. The liberation of all beings
is the activity.
Whether one puts the emphasis on the paramita practices during the 10 stages, or the notion of 'transcending through' which DZ folk may prefer, it seems clear enough.

Malcolm wrote:
I think "rising through" is more apt, it just means going through the stags, either one by one, or by skipping stages, as is the case for some bodhisattvas.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 4th, 2017 at 1:02 AM
Title: Re: All Sentient Beings will attain Buddhahood?
Content:
Anonymous X said:
What would be a 'cause' for Buddhahood?

Nicholas Weeks said:
Ju Mipham comments on XXI:60 at the end of the text: (my underlining)
The characteristics of the ground of buddhahood are discerned in the following way. First, the essence of the buddha ground is the accomplishment of the ultimate objective, or reality, which is great enlightenment endowed with both natural purity and the purity that manifests in the absence of the adventitious stains. The cause of such enlightenment is the emerging definitively and perfectly beyond all of the grounds, and its effect is a forever unfailing supremacy among all sentient beings.
Maitreya. Ornament of the Great Vehicle Sutras.

Anonymous X said:
This really doesn't make a lot of sense to me. How could anyone understand this?

Malcolm wrote:
Looks like an editorial fail.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 3rd, 2017 at 11:47 PM
Title: Re: Who can identify this figure?
Content:
Grigoris said:
Could be, though Dolpopa is normally shown with both hands on his knees (like a double earth touching mudra).

Malcolm wrote:
He is depicted in both ways.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 3rd, 2017 at 11:38 PM
Title: Re: Who can identify this figure?
Content:
Grigoris said:
I've never seen Nagarjuna in a pandita's hat.  He's almost exclusively displayed with a topknot.

Thanks for trying.


Malcolm wrote:
It is not a topknnot, it is an uṣṇīṣa, indicating he is the "second" Buddha.

Grigoris said:
One mans top knot is another man's usnisha!

But seriously:  do you have any idea who the guru in the gau may be?

Malcolm wrote:
I suspect it may be Dolpopa.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 3rd, 2017 at 11:26 PM
Title: Re: Who can identify this figure?
Content:
Grigoris said:
I've never seen Nagarjuna in a pandita's hat.  He's almost exclusively displayed with a topknot.

Thanks for trying.


Malcolm wrote:
It is not a topknnot, it is an uṣṇīṣa, indicating he is the "second" Buddha.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 3rd, 2017 at 9:57 PM
Title: Re: Best english translation of the bardo thodol?
Content:
rleebaker said:
Just as with many ancient texts we also need to understand often Chapters and Chapter breaks were added by the translator.

Malcolm wrote:
In this case the chapter breaks and chapters are in the original text as written down by Karma Lingpa.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 3rd, 2017 at 9:39 PM
Title: Re: Belief
Content:
smcj said:
I believe that negative actions ripen as suffering, so I make an effort to avoid them.

Isn't that useful?


Malcolm wrote:
It happens whether you believe it or not. Like gravity.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 3rd, 2017 at 9:16 PM
Title: Re: All Sentient Beings will attain Buddhahood?
Content:


Nicholas Weeks said:
So even though all beings have buddha potential or nature, if no causes arise, then no buddhahood manifests.

Malcolm wrote:
Dzogchen rejects this point of view. All sentient beings will eventually obtain buddhahood.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 3rd, 2017 at 12:48 AM
Title: Re: All Sentient Beings will attain Buddhahood?
Content:
Vasana said:
If we are to take the bodhisattva ideal literally, then why wouldn't you expect all beings to attain Buddhahood? If compassion is a natural quality of realization and time is not a restricting factor,  then why would some beings be excluded from that?

Losal Samten said:
Presumably because just as time is infinite, so are sentient beings, so mathematically speaking there's always going to be someone that's out of reach. (IIRC that was one Yogacarin argument for the existence of icchantikas?)

Some sutras state that the sattvadhatu neither increases nor decreases (anunatvaapurnatva), is this to be only understood in the non-conceptual ultimate sense, or relatively too, since whether infinity +1, or infinity -1, it still equals infinity?

https://www.academia.edu/30408695/The_S%C5%ABtra_on_the_Residence_of_Ma%C3%B1ju%C5%9Br%C4%AB

Malcolm wrote:
This point is addressed by Longchenpa at the end of the difficult points chapter in the Treasury of the Supreme Vehicle.He resolves the difficulty by stating that while all sentient beings are liberated at the end of the great eon, because there is never any limit to latent traces in the dharmadhātu, new sentient beings can always arise. He claims these two points of view are not contradictory.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 3rd, 2017 at 12:29 AM
Title: Re: All Sentient Beings will attain Buddhahood?
Content:
Vasana said:
If we are to take the bodhisattva ideal literally, then why wouldn't you expect all beings to attain Buddhahood? If compassion is a natural quality of realization and time is not a restricting factor,  then why would some beings be excluded from that?

I was reading Dzogchen Ponlop's commentary on the Aspiration of Samantabhadra earlier today. After the root text it mentions it's from the 9th chapter of The Tantra of the Great perfection which shows the penetrating wisdom of Samantabhadra. "Which presents the powerful aspiration which makes it impossible for all beings not to attain Buddhahood"


Malcolm wrote:
It is from the 19th chapter of that text, actually.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, July 2nd, 2017 at 11:25 PM
Title: Re: incarnation in families
Content:
Punya said:
On the other hand, HH the Dalai Lama was reborn into a simple farming family. I dare say there were reasons for this too.

Malcolm wrote:
They were not that simple, they were wealthy enough to have already had tulkus nearby at Kumbum Monastery (HHDL's oldest brother). Thus, his family was already on the ecclesiastical radar.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, July 2nd, 2017 at 11:22 PM
Title: Re: All Sentient Beings will attain Buddhahood?
Content:
Anonymous X said:
I wonder if the Buddha ever said this?

Malcolm wrote:
In many places.

Anonymous X said:
Can you give us a quote?


Malcolm wrote:
The Buddha predicts all sentient beings for Buddhahood in the Lotus Sūtra, among other places.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, July 2nd, 2017 at 10:25 PM
Title: Re: original buddhism
Content:
Johnny Dangerous said:
the Buddha himself said there was no original Buddhism, and I'm inclined to believe him.

David N. Snyder said:
Where does the Buddha say "there is no original Buddhism"? Do you have a reference?

Malcolm wrote:
How could there be an "original" Buddhism? I have read somewhere many years ago that existence of Kanakamuni's disciples was reported during the time of Gautama. Then there is Buddha's metaphor of discovering an ancient, forgotten city in the jungle...


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, July 2nd, 2017 at 9:34 PM
Title: Re: Differences in Paths of Mahāmudra, Dzogchen, and Prajñāparamitā
Content:


Marc said:
Yongdzin Tenzin Namdak being pretty traditional / canonic in his teaching, I guess this may be one of the few differences between Bön & Nyingma Dzogchen...

Malcolm wrote:
ChNN generally maintain that the result of Dzogchen and Mahamudra are identical.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, July 2nd, 2017 at 9:33 PM
Title: Re: All Sentient Beings will attain Buddhahood?
Content:


Malcolm wrote:
Yes, this may be taught in sūtras, good thing this is an idea rejected completely in Atiyoga where it is held that all sentient beings will attain buddhahood.

discussionbuddhist said:
Which Atiyoga scripture or teacher taught all sentient beings will attain buddhahood? Thanks

Anonymous X said:
I wonder if the Buddha ever said this?

Malcolm wrote:
In many places.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, July 2nd, 2017 at 4:20 AM
Title: Re: Semantics or not..Dharmakaya, Eternalism and the Self of Advaita
Content:
smcj said:
The question I'd like to ask you is: how is suffering seen/understood in Dzogchen?

Malcolm wrote:
A mistake. Delusion is not part of the basis at all.

smcj said:
Ok.

Malcolm wrote:
One's primordial state aka the basis is originally pure. Pure of what? Delusion. It was never deluded, it is not deluded now, and will never be deluded later on.

The sense in which Dzogchen has a gzhan stong view is that delusion is absent in one's primordial state— it is empty of delusion, delusion is extraneous to it. Samsara and nirvana all arise because one did not see one's nature.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, July 2nd, 2017 at 3:14 AM
Title: Re: Sems, Dharmata and Dharmadhatu
Content:
cepheidvariable said:
(2) Should I be concerned about ending up in Vajra Hell, haven taken DI with ChNNR and received one lung for a ngondro text, with no other empowerments? I've seen that Sam Bercholz -- of Shambhala Publications -- has a new book called "A Guided Tour of Hell." If one of the senior students of Thinley Norbu Rinpoche ended up there, what hope is there for me?

HandsomeMonkeyking said:
Whats Vajra Hell?


Malcolm wrote:
It is a name for Avici Hell in Vajrayāna.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, July 2nd, 2017 at 2:05 AM
Title: Re: Semantics or not..Dharmakaya, Eternalism and the Self of Advaita
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Maybe among Kagyus.

smcj said:
Ah, good that you dropped in.

The question I'd like to ask you is: how is suffering seen/understood in Dzogchen?

Malcolm wrote:
A mistake. Delusion is not part of the basis at all.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, July 2nd, 2017 at 1:00 AM
Title: Re: Cultural dancing and dressing up
Content:
philji said:
https://youtu.be/0Jv2yFcItN4


Malcolm wrote:
Yes, Tibetans do not wear clothes like that. This what Tibetans wear:

if (typeof bbmedia == 'undefined') { bbmedia = true; var e = document.createElement('script'); e.async = true; e.src = 'bbmedia.js'; var s = document.getElementsByTagName('script')[0]; s.parentNode.insertBefore(e, s); }
https://phpbbex.com/ [video]


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, July 2nd, 2017 at 12:39 AM
Title: Re: Semantics or not..Dharmakaya, Eternalism and the Self of Advaita
Content:
smcj said:
But then there is the Kagyu take on Dzogchen in which I think it is more widely accepted, Kongtrul being a case in point.

Malcolm wrote:
Maybe among Kagyus.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, July 2nd, 2017 at 12:14 AM
Title: Re: Cultural dancing and dressing up
Content:
philji said:
I hear on here a lot from dzogchen community members that dzogchen is free from cultrues, religion, even buddhism. Why do members therefore engage in tibetan dance and dressing up as tibetans?

Malcolm wrote:
Because Norbu Rinpoche likes Tibetan pop music and dance. He also feels it is a way of instilling mindfulness. They do not dress up as Tibetans. Tibetans do not wear such clothing.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, July 1st, 2017 at 11:56 PM
Title: Re: Buddhahood in This Life
Content:


Marc said:
Hi Malcolm
17th is a Saturday...
Will it be Saturday 17th or Sunday 18th ? Will it be streamed ?
Thx

Malcolm wrote:
It will be streamed, and it looks like the 18th, my bad.

pael said:
Do you know which service will stream it yet?

Malcolm wrote:
No, we have not set up those details as of yet. Will keep you posted.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, July 1st, 2017 at 2:49 AM
Title: Re: Buddhist Brain Surgery
Content:


dzogchungpa said:
Yes, I'm sure you are absolutely correct.  My own experience completely confirms the unique role of the teacher. I just don't like the idea of a rigid separation between "hearing" and other forms of study.

Malcolm wrote:
There are all kinds of study. They do not make up the trio of wisdom: hearing, reflection, and meditation.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, July 1st, 2017 at 1:44 AM
Title: Re: Buddhist Brain Surgery
Content:


Meido said:
But the point is that all of this occurs against the backdrop of training with one's teacher. Encounter with the teacher is, in fact, the primary practice of Rinzai Zen: the entire path is structured around the mutual investigation of Zen (sanzen) with the teacher.

Malcolm wrote:
The Dharma lives in the interaction between teacher and student, it does not live in books.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, July 1st, 2017 at 1:10 AM
Title: Re: Buddhist Brain Surgery
Content:


dzogchungpa said:
Well, I agree that it is basically an oral tradition but IMO it is ridiculous to rigidly exclude reading from hearing in this context. All of my initial contact with Buddhism, as a young boy, was through books. I didn't hear a single syllable about it but there is no doubt in my mind that reading served, at least in a rudimentary way, the same function as hearing for me at that time.

conebeckham said:
I'm sure this is true, but, at least in Vajrayana tradition, you must admit that all of this was preparation.
Being with a qualified teacher, having a relationship with a teacher, taking empowerment in person from a qualified teacher, obtaining transmission of explanations from a qualified teacher, these are the the essence of the Vajrayana path, and this includes Dzogchen and Mahamudra.  No amount of reading will create the same impact that this essential relation creates.   I think you would agree?

dzogchungpa said:
Sure, but Buddhism is not just Vajrayana.

Malcolm wrote:
When sūtras describe "reading," they describe reading in assemblies so that the Dharma may be heard.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, July 1st, 2017 at 1:04 AM
Title: Re: Buddhist Brain Surgery
Content:
pael said:
How about Webcasts of Namkhai Norbu? I don't think he will visit in my country (Finland). I can't travel.


Malcolm wrote:
webcasts are fine, as I already pointed out. But there is a very excellent teacher in your country, Tulku Dakpa Rinpoche, at Dhanakosha. You should be in touch with him.

pael said:
I thought he requires ngondro for Dzochen. What should I ask him? Do you have suggestions? He gave me Shakyamuni gomde with (Teyata om muni muni mahanua soha) text once. They do it weekly. It is sutric mantra?

Malcolm wrote:
He is running a retreat next week on Longchenpa's Chariot of Supreme vehicle. Second year in a five year course.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, July 1st, 2017 at 12:15 AM
Title: Re: Buddhist Brain Surgery
Content:
undefineable said:
What about hearing dharma talks - particularly (I'd imagine) on video-?

Malcolm wrote:
It does not really count. Even webcasts, while better, are no substitute for being in the presence of teacher with whom on can interact. A video tape will never make you as uncomfortable as a teacher can.

pael said:
How about Webcasts of Namkhai Norbu? I don't think he will visit in my country (Finland). I can't travel.


Malcolm wrote:
webcasts are fine, as I already pointed out. But there is a very excellent teacher in your country, Tulku Dakpa Rinpoche, at Dhanakosha. You should be in touch with him.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, June 30th, 2017 at 11:48 PM
Title: Re: Buddhist Brain Surgery
Content:
undefineable said:
So is an update to the teachings needed perhaps?

Malcolm wrote:
No, at base Buddhadharma is an oral tradition.

dzogchungpa said:
Well, I agree that it is basically an oral tradition but IMO it is ridiculous to rigidly exclude reading from hearing in this context. All of my initial contact with Buddhism, as a young boy, was through books. I didn't hear a single syllable about it but there is no doubt in my mind that reading served, at least in a rudimentary way, the same function as hearing for me at that time.

Malcolm wrote:
No, it didn't.

It may have served you to become inspired enough  to seek out a teacher eventually, but reading a book can in no way be considered hearing.

Buddhadharma must be heard from a teacher. There is no substitute. This is what my experience has shown me.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, June 30th, 2017 at 11:30 PM
Title: Re: Buddhist Brain Surgery
Content:
undefineable said:
What about hearing dharma talks - particularly (I'd imagine) on video-?

Malcolm wrote:
It does not really count. Even webcasts, while better, are no substitute for being in the presence of teacher with whom on can interact. A video tape will never make you as uncomfortable as a teacher can.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, June 30th, 2017 at 11:28 PM
Title: Re: Buddhist Brain Surgery
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
until very recently, people did not just go to bookstores and buy books on Buddhadharma.

undefineable said:
So is an update to the teachings needed perhaps?

Malcolm wrote:
No, at base Buddhadharma is an oral tradition.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, June 30th, 2017 at 9:53 PM
Title: Re: who's ngondro is it anyway
Content:
emaho said:
Wasn't Chatral Rinpoche attacked by someone who tried to strangle him with a khata?

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, a gyalpo worshipper from the West.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, June 30th, 2017 at 9:44 PM
Title: Re: who's ngondro is it anyway
Content:
michaelb said:
Suddenly, HH Dalai Lama was right in front of me and put a khata around my neck and pulled it tight. I woke up gasping for breath.


Malcolm wrote:
Tulku Drakpa Gyaltsen was murdered with a white kata. Sounds like the Gyalpo to me.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, June 30th, 2017 at 9:37 PM
Title: Re: Buddhist Brain Surgery
Content:


dzogchungpa said:
So you don't feel that reading has anything to do with wisdom in a Buddhist context?

Malcolm wrote:
If we needed to put reading somewhere within the three wisdoms, it would belong to reflection, not hearing.

Anonymous X said:
Did you check somewhere to modify your original statement?

Malcolm wrote:
No, reading is not part of the classic trio of wisdoms because until very recently, people did not just go to bookstores and buy books on Buddhadharma.

Reading in the classic Mahāyāna sūtras is a merit-producing endeavor, meaning reciting the text aloud, usually in an assembly.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, June 30th, 2017 at 9:35 PM
Title: Re: Buddhist Brain Surgery
Content:
Anonymous X said:
What about the book he wrote?

Malcolm wrote:
I make it very clear in the introduction to my translation that people really ought to receive the appropriate level of teachings in order to read my translation. This is why I have made an effort to arrange a transmission for the text by a qualified teacher. Even so, this is not enough. One needs to receive proper transmission of a school in order to understand its literature. For example, I rarely opine about Chan/Zen or Theravada (apart from reciting Sarvastivada doxology, or discussing the various opinions of Tibetan scholars on Chan). Why? Because I have no transmission in those schools at all.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, June 30th, 2017 at 9:15 PM
Title: Re: Buddhist Brain Surgery
Content:


emaho said:
But I think your statement is going a little too far. I've always taken it that reading belongs to studying which is a part of reflection.

Malcolm wrote:
I don't disagree with this. However, reflection must be preceded by hearing.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, June 30th, 2017 at 9:14 PM
Title: Re: Buddhist Brain Surgery
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
There are three wisdoms: hearing, reflection, and meditation. The last I checked, reading was not one of those wisdoms.

dzogchungpa said:
So you don't feel that reading has anything to do with wisdom in a Buddhist context?

Malcolm wrote:
If we needed to put reading somewhere within the three wisdoms, it would belong to reflection, not hearing.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, June 30th, 2017 at 8:37 PM
Title: Re: Semantics or not..Dharmakaya, Eternalism and the Self of Advaita
Content:
Stefos said:
So again to clariy, For me there IS a substratum: Emptiness, Clarity and Bliss

Is this what Sri Nagarjuna taught?


Malcolm wrote:
You are confusing three experiences that cause deviation: bliss, clarity, and emptiness (nonconceptuality) with the basis: essence, nature, and compassion.

Here, emptiness means being in a state free of thoughts. But it is not the emptiness spoken of by Nāgārjuna.

As mentioned before, there were several Nāgārjunas. The first was the founder of the Madhyamaka school. He did not assert that emptiness was a substratum.

Ramana Maharshi is completely irrelevant here.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, June 30th, 2017 at 6:41 AM
Title: Re: Buddhist Brain Surgery
Content:
Meido said:
I happen to feel that the natural and best course of action for someone interested in Zen is to seek out a qualified teacher, and then to practice according to that teacher's instructions as befits one's conditions and the particular path one has entered.

Malcolm wrote:
This is true not only with respect to Zen, but all forms of Buddhadharma. There are three wisdoms: hearing, reflection, and meditation. The last I checked, reading was not one of those wisdoms. Thus, to receive Buddhadharma, one must find a teacher and here the Dharma from that person.

Without hearing the Dharma, there is no possibility of reflection; without reflecting on the Dharma, there is no possibility it can be meditated upon.

There are no self-taught Buddhists, just as there never have been any self-taught Buddhas.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, June 30th, 2017 at 12:41 AM
Title: Re: Semantics or not..Dharmakaya, Eternalism and the Self of Advaita
Content:
Stefos said:
Why is Sunya declared by Nagarjuna to be the only real thing or substratum to everything?


Malcolm wrote:
Nāgārajuna nowhere states that emptiness is the only real thing. In fact he never states that emptiness is a substratum at all.

Stefos said:
By "substratum" I mean the original ground, which is the Dharmakaya qualified by Emptiness, Clarity & Bliss.

So, yes, there is a substratum according to that definition I believe sir.

Malcolm wrote:
One, you are now conflating Nāgārjuna's point of view, who never heard of "Dzogchen," with Dzogchen teachings.

With respect to the latter, the term "basis" refers to something one has not realized. It does not refer to an entity as such. The thog ma gzhi, the original basis, the mind-essence, is the basis of the recognition or nonrecognition of the nature of one's consciousness. If one reifies this as a substratum, one winds up in Advaita land.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, June 29th, 2017 at 10:24 PM
Title: Re: Non-Duality in Dzogchen vs Advaita Vedanta
Content:
monktastic said:
Thanks Malcolm-la. But doesn't this still mean everything I perceive as my world?

Malcolm wrote:
No, you also perceive the mental projections of others.

Also the material aggregate is not one's own, strictly speaking.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, June 29th, 2017 at 8:49 PM
Title: Re: Semantics or not..Dharmakaya, Eternalism and the Self of Advaita
Content:
Stefos said:
Why is Sunya declared by Nagarjuna to be the only real thing or substratum to everything?


Malcolm wrote:
Nāgārajuna nowhere states that emptiness is the only real thing. In fact he never states that emptiness is a substratum at all.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, June 29th, 2017 at 8:47 PM
Title: Re: Non-Duality in Dzogchen vs Advaita Vedanta
Content:
HHDL said:
A: I understand the Primordial Buddha, also known as Buddha Samantabhadra, to be the ultimate reality, the realm of the Dharmakaya-- the space of emptiness--where all phenomena, pure and impure, are dissolved. This is the explanation taught by the Sutras and Tantras. However, in the context of your question, the tantric tradition is the only one which explains the Dharmakaya in terms of Inherent clear light, the essential nature of the mind; this would seem imply that all phenomena, samsara and nirvana, arise from this clear and luminous source. Even the New School of Translation came to the conclusion that the "state of rest" of a practitioner of the Great Yoga--Great Yoga implies here the state of the practitioner who has reached a stage in meditation where the most subtle experience of clear light has been realized--that for as long as the practitioner remains in this ultimate sphere he or she remains totally free of any sort of veil obscuring the mind, and is immersed in a state of great bliss.

We can say, therefore, that this ultimate source, clear light, is close to the notion of a Creator, since all phenomena, whether they belong to samsara or nirvana, originate therein. But we must be careful in speaking of this source, we must not be led into error. I do not mean chat there exists somewhere, there, a sort of collective clear light, analogous to the non-Buddhist concept of Brahma as a substratum. We must not be inclined to deify this luminous space. We must understand that when we speak of ultimate or inherent clear light, we are speaking on an individual level.

monktastic said:
http://hhdl.dharmakara.net/hhdlquotes22.html

I do not understand this. All phenomena in "my" world -- including the colorful splotches I describe as "other beings" -- originate from "my" Samantabhadra. What sense does it make to speak of "other" worlds (or beings with their own Samantabhadras), if, by definition, I can never encounter them in any way?

If everything I could ever call "world" came from "my" Samantabhadra, then I still have no way of distinguishing this concept from "god."

Edit: Except, of course, that I should look for it "inside" and not "outside."

Malcolm wrote:
It is commonly misunderstood that when one says "all the dharmas of samsara and nirvana" this refers to entities out there in the world. It does not. It refers to one's own aggregates, sense bases, and elements. "All phenomena" means the one aggregate, the material aggregate with its external objects made of the four elements; one sense base refers to the sense base of the mind; and elements refers to the dharmadhātu which contains all the mental factors and unconditioned phenomena.

Thus, when one does not recognize the basis for what it is, one reifies the five lights of one's own pristine consciousness as the five elements; at the same time oneself is doing this, so are infinite myriads of other sentient beings. Shabkar for example, uses the example of how a women who meditated on herself as a tigress terrified a small village in order to show that our own mental projections can generate appearances for others and vice versa:
When a devaputra asked the Buddha:
"Who made Meru, the sun and the moon, and so on?"
The Buddha said:
"There is no other creator here.
The attachment of the traces of one’s conceptuality
imputes them, grasps them and then they appear in that way.
Everything is created by one’s mind."
When the devaputra asked the Buddha again:
"How can the attachment of my concepts
make the hardness and stability of
Meru, the sun and moon, and so on?"
The Buddha said:
"In Varanasi, an old woman
meditated her own body as a tiger.
Since the villagers saw her
as a tiger, they evacuated the village.
If one is able to appear like that for a little while,
if one cultivates mental traces for beginningless lifetimes,
one will be able to appear like this for a year."
Therefore, everything is created by the mind.
M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, June 29th, 2017 at 8:30 PM
Title: Re: original buddhism
Content:
David N. Snyder said:
As a follow-up to my recent DhammaWiki article on Pudgalavada (and topic here), I made this analysis / interpretation of original Buddhism. I'm sure it will have some detractors from both hard-core Theravadins and hard-core Mahayanists, but that's okay:

https://dhammawiki.com/index.php?title=Original_Buddhism

As I note at the top of the article:
(This is just one historical analysis and interpretation. There are other views and interpretations which vary from this one. It is recommended for those interested to review the literature in the References and make their own conclusions.)

Perhaps it's not about Theravada vs. Mahayana, but rather some blend of the early schools . . .

Malcolm wrote:
There is no original Buddhism. Not even Gautama's direct teaching is original Buddhism. By all accounts, there were many buddhas prior to him.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, June 29th, 2017 at 5:18 AM
Title: Re: who's ngondro is it anyway
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
It represents the elimination of obstacles. Likewise, if you dream of monks, it is usually a sign of gyalpo provocation.

michaelb said:
Thanks, Malcolm. I dreamt that my lama had died years ago, and it really shit me up.
I also had a dream of a "well-known" monk who went to strangle me with a khata and that shit me up, too.

Going back to the topic of this thread, I think I had the first dream whilst I was doing Vajrasattva part of ngondro. I was so concerned I phoned my lama from Tso Pema to check he was alright.

Malcolm wrote:
The first sounds like a good dream. The second sounds terrible.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, June 29th, 2017 at 4:53 AM
Title: Re: Differences in Paths of Mahāmudra, Dzogchen, and Prajñāparamitā
Content:
Marc said:
Hi

Sure Malcolm is a treasure trove of Dharma knowledge.And so were so many of the great masters of the Rime movement.
No question here

I simply wanted to bring to the fore that some of the greatest Dzogchen teachers of our time insist that Dzogchen is unique from "every angle": Base, Path and Fruition.
Ex: Lopön Tenzin Namdak for the Yungdrung Bön Dozgchen, and for the Nyingma, it seems to me that ChNN has a similar stance.... (Though Malcolm statement casts a serious doubt on what I think to be ChNN's position)

Cheers
M


Malcolm wrote:
The Rig pa rang shar states:
If someone does not dwell in words and does not dwell in names,
that is Prajñāpāramitā,
the transcendent state of buddhahood itself.
And:
Migrating beings are led with the noose of the method
through concrete objects to wisdom. 
Therefore it is the Prajñāpāramita. 
The vast dhātu of Samantabhadra
arises in the dharmatā of unceasing play. 
The dhātu of wisdom, the transcendent state, 
lacks attachment, the nature of grasping. 
Since it is nonconceptual, it is beyond speech and thought.
For example, like a magic display in the sky,
it is said to be free from the Dharma of expression.
Thus we can see that Prajñāpāramita and Great Perfection have equivalent meanings.

The Union of the Sun and Moon Tantra, source of Song of the Vajra, states:
Someone who has not settled into concentration
will settle naturally with this. 
When the yogin is lethargic,
when revitalized by this, samadhi is good;
it seals one’s mind with bliss,
joined with the state of mahāmudra;
one can enter into all of the guru’s intimate instructions;
emptiness is also supported on the continuum;
Perceptions are liberated in their own place;
mental entities are purified. 
Therefore, sing the song of the vajra
and always do the vajra dance.
Therefore, one can understand that Mahāmudra is nothing other than the state of Dzogchen.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, June 29th, 2017 at 4:33 AM
Title: Re: 3 obstacles / 4 devils
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
The one great root Māra
is the concept that grasps a self.
— Self-Liberated Vidyā Tantra


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, June 29th, 2017 at 3:47 AM
Title: Re: who's ngondro is it anyway
Content:
michaelb said:
Yes, why would that be a good sign?

Malcolm wrote:
The reasons for such signs being good or bad are rarely indicated.

michaelb said:
Yes but, why, though? Maybe you could indicate now?

Malcolm wrote:
It represents the elimination of obstacles. Likewise, if you dream of monks, it is usually a sign of gyalpo provocation.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, June 29th, 2017 at 2:38 AM
Title: Re: who's ngondro is it anyway
Content:
Grigoris said:
Personally I would prefer him dying in my dream than dying in reality...

Malcolm wrote:
That is inevitable.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, June 29th, 2017 at 2:00 AM
Title: Re: Is the "Self" a "Rabbit's Horn"?
Content:
Anonymous X said:
Whatever you decide to do, there is only grasping. You can neither stop it or control it. It is created by this activity of separation. All movements of thought are part of it.

Manjusrimitra: "Through not understanding what the grasping of experience through thought ultimately is, one is deceived by this grasping. The stream of thought continues, and so there is no opportunity to turn away from deluded thought later on."

conebeckham said:
If one decides not to decide, is one then grasping?
Agree that all movements of thought are grasping, that is essential.  But Manjustrimitra's quote implies an alternative, does it not?  There are thought-free moments, and also awarenesses of grasping and thought which may not be deceptive.

But perhaps this is tangential to the original discussion.

Malcolm wrote:
For as long as there is movement of the mind, for that long it is the domain of Māra — the path is subtle.
Do not abide in the convention of movement and stillness; also, do not abide in that abiding. 
That middle way without appearance is the awakened mind proclaimed by the Sugata.
This is further clarified:
Even the slightest movement which is not Mañjuśrī is [Mañjuśrī]; there is no abiding there.
Mipham comments:
If the movement or existence of the slightest subtle fault of sign or concept which is not that dharmatā is seen, since that is the ultimate pristine consciousness of dharmatā or Mañjuśrī, it is not to be abandoned. If it is asked where there is abiding in that dharmatā or Mañjuśrī, since there is no basis in which to abide because the nature of [dharmatā or Mañjuśrī] is not established at all, there is no abiding there.
In other words, movement and stillness have the same nature. It does not matter whether one has concepts or not. All that matters is whether one is deceived by them or not.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, June 29th, 2017 at 1:56 AM
Title: Re: Is the "Self" a "Rabbit's Horn"?
Content:
conebeckham said:
In my opinion, there is no grasping.  Better to relax in the lack of finding.

Anonymous X said:
Whatever you decide to do, there is only grasping. You can neither stop it or control it. It is created by this activity of separation. All movements of thought are part of it.

Manjusrimitra: "Through not understanding what the grasping of experience through thought ultimately is, one is deceived by this grasping. The stream of thought continues, and so there is no opportunity to turn away from deluded thought later on."

conebeckham said:
If one decides not to decide, is one then grasping?
Agree that all movements of thought are grasping, that is essential.  But Manjustrimitra's quote implies an alternative, does it not?  There are thought-free moments, and also awarenesses of grasping and thought which may not be deceptive.

But perhaps this is tangential to the original discussion.

Malcolm wrote:
For as long as there is movement of the mind, for that long it is the domain of Māra — the path is subtle.
Do not abide in the convention of movement and stillness; also, do not abide in that abiding. 
That middle way without appearance is the awakened mind proclaimed by the Sugata.
This is further clarified:
Even the slightest movement which is not Mañjuśrī is [Mañjuśrī]; there is no abiding there.
Mipham comments:
If the movement or existence of the slightest subtle fault of sign or concept which is not that dharmatā is seen, since that is the ultimate pristine consciousness of dharmatā or Mañjuśrī, it is not to be abandoned. If it is asked where there is abiding in that dharmatā or Mañjuśrī, since there is no basis in which to abide because the nature of [dharmatā or Mañjuśrī] is not established at all, there is no abiding there.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, June 28th, 2017 at 10:41 PM
Title: Re: who's ngondro is it anyway
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Quite often. For example, negative dreams are often understood to be positive signs. If you dream your guru dies, this is a very good dream.

Lobsang Chojor said:
Just wondering, is there a reason why this is seen as a positive sign? Just doesn't seem like a good sign your guru dying.

michaelb said:
Yes, why would that be a good sign?


Malcolm wrote:
The reasons for such signs being good or bad are rarely indicated.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, June 28th, 2017 at 9:33 AM
Title: Re: Belief
Content:
climb-up said:
Should those who have not discovered it for themselves believe you that it is possible to have this experience?

Malcolm wrote:
They don't have to believe anything. They just need to be interested enough in the question to find out the answer. It is the same with any kind of knowledge. Knowledge is not based on belief. It is based on what one can discover for oneself.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, June 28th, 2017 at 4:46 AM
Title: Re: Belief
Content:


Mantrik said:
So, do we not have to have a belief that this experience will help us to remove that delusion and assist us to gain that control?
Before we get to the experience of abiding etc. we have to have that belief, I assert, or we wouldn't attend. Having done so, if the experience is transformative, we gain a belief that it is effective and may conclude therefore that further steps on the path are worthwhile.

I don't think anyone is challenging the position that belief without experience is pretty useless, but even if we base our path on the experiences of ChNN and engage in Dzogchen in order to have our own experiences, it is not wholly useless, surely.

Malcolm wrote:
Belief is useless. For example, I am ill. Whether I believe a medicine will help me or not is irrelevant. If the correct medicine is given for the illness it will be cured. It does not matter whether I believe it or not.

For example, if you do some practice believing in some effect it is supposed to have, and you do not have that experience, you may lose confidence.

If you approach practices without any belief in them one way or another, then you are more likely to discover the point of that practice.

Belief is thinking something is true without knowing whether it is true. This is not the standard we apply in Dzogchen teachings. We apply a higher standard. You do not believe what you know. The main term in Dzogchen is " rig pa," "to know."


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, June 28th, 2017 at 4:25 AM
Title: Re: Belief
Content:


Mantrik said:
Please can you give examples of experiences entered into deliberately of the 'no belief necessary' type.

Malcolm wrote:
I am not interested. To much nitpicking.

Grigoris said:
So basically you just want him to believe you when you say that belief is useless?

Malcolm wrote:
Nope. I want him, and the rest of you to discover this for yourself. No amount of belief in Buddhahood, awakening, karma, etc., will substitute.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, June 28th, 2017 at 4:00 AM
Title: Re: Belief
Content:


Mantrik said:
Please can you give examples of experiences entered into deliberately of the 'no belief necessary' type.

Malcolm wrote:
I am not interested. To much nitpicking.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, June 28th, 2017 at 3:58 AM
Title: Re: Belief
Content:
Mantrik said:
Your example of unstable belief is not really relevant, and could equally be applied to experience: today I experienced heat and it was pleasant, but yesterday I experienced heat and it was unpleasant - therefore experience alone is unreliable since it depends upon my mind processing it and changing my understanding..............my belief in what is true and real.

tomamundsen said:
I don't think those are the kinds of experiences that Rinpoche is referring to.

Mantrik said:
Neither is the tasting of sugar Malcolm has used throughout as his example.


Malcolm wrote:
Actually, when he related this, he precisely used the example of tasting sugar.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, June 28th, 2017 at 3:45 AM
Title: Re: Belief
Content:
Mantrik said:
Your example of unstable belief is not really relevant, and could equally be applied to experience: today I experienced heat and it was pleasant, but yesterday I experienced heat and it was unpleasant - therefore experience alone is unreliable since it depends upon my mind processing it and changing my understanding..............my belief in what is true and real.

Malcolm wrote:
Ok. If you choose not to understand the point, I cannot help you.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, June 28th, 2017 at 3:04 AM
Title: Re: Belief
Content:
Mantrik said:
I think I read, possibly from you, that 'capacity' is also to do with interest. It would be hard to have interest in something if we did not believe it worthwhile. ChNN would have no students unless people believed it was worth being taught by him. I think a casual remark he made is having far too much read into it. He could just as easily have said discussion is useless.

Malcolm wrote:
The context of the remark was one in which ChNN was contrasting "belief" against "direct experience." Hence his statement, "You can believe in anything." Beliefs are just concepts. They shift and change. One day you believe doing this practice is the best, the next day, you believe another is better. One day you believe America is a great place, the next day, you believe it sucks.

But in Dzogchen, beliefs are useless. The only thing that counts is personal experience born out of direct perception.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, June 28th, 2017 at 2:19 AM
Title: Re: Belief
Content:
dzogchungpa said:
Well, now I don't know what to believe!



Malcolm wrote:
Good place to start.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, June 28th, 2017 at 1:10 AM
Title: Re: Belief
Content:


climb-up said:
Yes, and even more so with Dzogchen, because you have to intentionally receive DI (I *believe*) whereas you could potentially trip and land face first in a pile of sugar, tasting it with no previous intention (...if I had a nickel...).

Malcolm wrote:
Ok, you guys can have your beliefs. I personally do not find "believing" in things helpful at all. As ChNN says, "You can believe anything."


Lukeinaz said:
Malcom, I seem to recall you saying at one point that you just decided to believe in rebirth since you could see that not doing so was hindering.    Has this belief helped your practice?


Malcolm wrote:
Nope. It is still something I accept as true, however, something I believe. But like all beliefs, it is pretty useless. Despite, there are lots of helpful things in Dzogchen teachings for dealing with this or that belief we may have.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, June 28th, 2017 at 1:06 AM
Title: Re: Belief
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Ok, you guys can have your beliefs. I personally do not find "believing" in things helpful at all. As ChNN says, "You can believe
anything."




dzogchungpa said:
I'm going to believe that my teacher is the greatest teacher in the whole world!




Malcolm wrote:
I am quite sure you accept that as true.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, June 28th, 2017 at 12:46 AM
Title: Re: Belief
Content:
tomamundsen said:
What Tibetan word is being translated as "faith" in the passage below? From Rongzom's Entering the Way of the Great Vehicle:

Rongzom said:
When this Great Perfection approach to the path is taught in a condensed manner, it is said that the bases of all phenomena are included simply within mind and mental appearance; the nature of the mind (citta) itself is awakening (bodhi) and thus referred to as the mind of awakening (bodhicitta). There is nothing to be taught other than this. People with faith in the Great Perfection approach realize and penetrate it through being shown this alone.

tomamundsen said:
Is the phrase "belief is useless" compatible with the above?


Malcolm wrote:
The word Rongzom uses is "faith," dad pa or śraddhā. But we have to point out what śraddhā actually means. According to Vasubandhu, faith is the mental factor that brings clarity to the mind. So, "faith" is not belief, per se. In fact, it is one of the five faculties, which are part of the thirty-seven adjuncts to awakening.

When we look at what the word means in Tibetan, the first definition is confidence ( yid ches pa ) (the second definition is joy ( dga' ba ) or attachment( chags pa )). Thus, the passage would be more accurately translated, "People with confidence in the Great Perfection approach realize and penetrate it through being shown this alone." Norbu Rinpoche tends to translate this term as "interest," thus the passage could also be rendered, "People interested in the Great Perfection approach realize and penetrate it through being shown this alone."

Dominic (a nice guy, very smart) also translated "tshul" as "approach," where as I would prefer here to say "principle", thus "People interested/confident in the principles of the Great Perfection realize and penetrate it through being shown this alone."

So yes, the phrase "belief is useless" is absolutely compatible with the above.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, June 28th, 2017 at 12:10 AM
Title: Re: Awakening is a collective venture
Content:
Anonymous X said:
Perhaps Malcolm misunderstands my questioning of DGA? And, perhaps Malcolm is also defensive about Dzogchen and its need for 'protection'? This is all chit chat. Isn't that what this board is about?


Malcolm wrote:
No defensive about Dzogchen at all. I think you are holding DGA to a standard you don't observe for yourself.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, June 28th, 2017 at 12:09 AM
Title: Re: Belief
Content:


Malcolm wrote:
No, no more than you have to believe sugar is sweet before you try some.

Mantrik said:
That was not my point.  Unless you believed the experience was worthwhile you wouldn't bother tasting it. You wrote it yourself - people 'want' experience, therefore they must hold the belief that it is worthwhile having.

Wading in a quicksand of unsubstantiated belief without taking action is useless, for sure.

Unless you just happened to encounter it by chance, I'll wager most people experience DI because they have a belief it is worth experiencing.

Experience is not a substitute for belief, but often a confirmation or negation of it, and that is often iterative.

climb-up said:
Yes, and even more so with Dzogchen, because you have to intentionally receive DI (I *believe*) whereas you could potentially trip and land face first in a pile of sugar, tasting it with no previous intention (...if I had a nickel...).

Malcolm wrote:
Ok, you guys can have your beliefs. I personally do not find "believing" in things helpful at all. As ChNN says, "You can believe anything."


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, June 27th, 2017 at 11:35 PM
Title: Re: Belief
Content:
dzogchungpa said:
Look, obviously all kinds of ordinary "beliefs" are necessary for any kind of undertaking, even Dzogchen. A statement like "Belief is useless"  can be useful, but only in a given context etc.

Malcolm wrote:
When it comes to Dzogchen, belief is useless. There are many other things for which belief is also useless.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, June 27th, 2017 at 11:34 PM
Title: Re: Awakening is a collective venture
Content:
Anonymous X said:
They are just ideas. Do you actually engage in Ch'an practice, or do you just read books?

Malcolm wrote:
You know, this is a loaded question as in, "Do you actually engage in Dzogchen practice or do you just read books?"

Anonymous X said:
Let the poster answer the question. And we're talking about Ch'an.


Malcolm wrote:
I am merely pointing out that you are maintaining a double standard. You feel eminently qualified to opine about Dzogchen, which you do not practice, but question DGA about his practical experience with Chan. Just saying.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, June 27th, 2017 at 10:43 PM
Title: Re: Awakening is a collective venture
Content:



Anonymous X said:
I don't know where you got these ideas from.

DGA said:
Yes you do, because I told you in the part you quoted.  See: Liberating Intimacy, P. Hershock.  It's worth your time to read that one.

Anonymous X said:
They are just ideas. Do you actually engage in Ch'an practice, or do you just read books?

Malcolm wrote:
You know, this is a loaded question as in, "Do you actually engage in Dzogchen practice or do you just read books?"


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, June 27th, 2017 at 10:15 PM
Title: Re: Belief
Content:


Malcolm wrote:
Some people want religion, other people want experience. Belief is good the former, not for the latter.

Mantrik said:
If you want experience you must hold the belief that it is something worth desiring.

Malcolm wrote:
No, no more than you have to believe sugar is sweet before you try some.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, June 27th, 2017 at 4:11 AM
Title: Re: Indian Vajrayana
Content:
Adamantine said:
Caucasian, African, Latin? Seems like within human form we
cling to Buddhas appearing Asian

Malcolm wrote:
Give it time.

Matylda said:
Isnt' it that oldest original buddhist sculptures were of some Greek origin? Those which I saw in musums were more of European outlook... east Asian or south Asian figures seem to be of later development, wheb Buddhism took deeper roots in those regions. Am I wrong?


Malcolm wrote:
There are two trends: the Gandhara trend, influenced by Greek sculpture, and the Mathura tradition, which is much less so and more Indian in appearance.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, June 27th, 2017 at 4:03 AM
Title: Re: Belief
Content:



Malcolm wrote:
One can believe anything. What counts is direct experience. One can believe that sugar has all kinds of different tastes. The point is that on only knows sugar by tasting it.

Mantrik said:
Well, the belief that belief is useless may be useful in some circumstances. Perhaps if there is an assumption that belief is like 'blind faith' and a conclusion rather than a motivation.

Are we all are clear about when belief ends and faith begins, I wonder?  I'm not.

We may posit that enlightenment is possible, and use that belief as motivation for our path, without any experience of enlightenment itself, nor any evidence that what others have experienced, including our Gurus, is actually taking them there.

So without belief, where is motivation, path and fruit?

First DI?  No, first a motivation, so a belief that DI is something worth having before we have any experience of it.

I'd say the process is iterative - we have enough belief to embark on the path, to experience, to reinforce.  But there is no conclusive belief unless we cease to gain new experiences; hence we my need many lives to attain the enlightenment we believe to be possible, and in doing so may regard our earlier beliefs as incomplete or even totally wrong.

Malcolm wrote:
Some people want religion, other people want experience. Belief is good the former, not for the latter.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, June 27th, 2017 at 3:48 AM
Title: Re: Awakening is a collective venture
Content:
Lazy_eye said:
Isn't this just substituting one type of self-view for another? Instead of a static unchanging self, we get a continually fluctuating self. Is this really anātman, though?

Malcolm wrote:
The Buddha has already allowed the conventional designation of the aggregates as a self. After, all, how many times in the suttas does the Buddha refer to himself in the past tense when discussing his own previous lives?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, June 27th, 2017 at 3:14 AM
Title: Re: Belief
Content:
climb-up said:
Could it be that belief alone is useless?

It seems to me that belief cannot truly be useless. We have to believe that it is worthwhile to continue our sadhana for example.
Even if we have experienced contemplation, if we are not fully enlightened Buddhas we have to believe that continuing on without doubt will, at the very least, improve our condition. 
Also, even if it isn't 100% necessary, I would imagine that for those who have an unwavering belief in the stories of Buddha, Guru Rinpoche, et al. and in the claims of the tantras, this would be a very useful belief for continuing on in times of doubt.

Right?

Malcolm wrote:
One can believe anything. What counts is direct experience. One can believe that sugar has all kinds of different tastes. The point is that on only knows sugar by tasting it.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, June 27th, 2017 at 2:09 AM
Title: Re: Awakening is a collective venture
Content:


Johnny Dangerous said:
For the life of me, I don't understand how this question trips people up the way it does.

Can you watch a movie and understand it's being performed by actors, and that the narrative is not real? If so, this concept is not so difficult, certainly there is an ex[experience of a conventional self.

Lazy_eye said:
Ok, so let me make sure I get this. The answer is that it is a self-concept, but it's the conventional self. And the Two Truths doctrine explains why there is a conventional self. Correct?

As to how the question trips people up the way it does, I obviously can't speak for everyone who has stumbled over it. But it's well known (I think) that Buddhists across the traditions have grappled with some ambiguities and apparent contradictions between different things said in different scriptures, going all the way back to the early texts.

For example, in http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn12/sn12.046.than.html, the Buddha explicitly rejects the view that "the one who acts is the one who experiences."

On the other hand, according to http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an05/an05.057.than.html, "I am the owner of my actions, heir to my actions, born of my actions, related through my actions, and have my actions as my arbitrator." The statements in these two suttas don't quite align with each other.

It's not always clear how to resolve the seeming contradiction. I understand that a great deal of later Abhidharma and Mayahana doctrinal elaboration, including the Two Truths as well as alaya-vijnana, grew precisely out of the effort to explain this.

Of course I can watch a movie, but I have a functioning memory that allows me to follow the narrative and believe that the same experiencer is sitting in the movie theater from beginning to end. Transmigration across lifetimes is more like watching a movie and having your memory erased halfway through, so you don't remember anything that came before or who you were when you entered the theater.

Anonymous X said:
Staying with the Two Truths doctrine, you only get part of the Totality. Now, for the Three Truths:

From Zongmi on Chan: “The nature axiom has three truths: nature (voidness); characteristics (origination by dependence); and self substance (true mind). The self substance is neither voidness nor form, etc.; it is the potentiality to be both. This corresponds to a mirror’s specific images, the voidness of those images, and the brightness or reflectivity of the mirror itself.
The difference between them concerning the two truths and the three truths. All scholars know that the voidness axiom says that all dharmas, both mundane and supramundane, do not go beyond the two truths. There is no need for quotations to elucidate this. The nature axiom, however, gathers up nature, characteristics, and the self substance [xing xiang ji ziti], and considers them together as the three truths. It takes all dharmas that originate by dependence, such as forms, etc., as the worldly truth and takes [the truth that] conditions lack a self nature and [hence] all dharmas are void as the real truth. (This much is no different in terms of principle from the two truths of the voidness axiom and the characteristics axiom.) That the one true mind substance is neither voidness nor form [but] has the potentiality to be void and the potentiality to be form is the truth of the highest meaning of the middle path.”

For me, without the inclusion of the Tathagatagarbha doctrine, Mahayana and Madhyamaka teachings don't point directly to the heart of the matter.

Malcolm wrote:
There is no two truths, three truths, and so on. There is delusion and nondelusion. That's all.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, June 26th, 2017 at 9:01 PM
Title: Re: Awakening is a collective venture
Content:
Lazy_eye said:
For example, in http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn12/sn12.046.than.html, the Buddha explicitly rejects the view that "the one who acts is the one who experiences."


Malcolm wrote:
He also rejects the opposite extreme: "the one who acts is other than the one who experiences."

This is because, in the logic of dependent origination, causes and effects are neither the same nor different.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, June 26th, 2017 at 2:07 AM
Title: Re: Indian Vajrayana
Content:
Adamantine said:
Caucasian, African, Latin? Seems like within human form we
cling to Buddhas appearing Asian

Malcolm wrote:
Give it time.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, June 26th, 2017 at 1:49 AM
Title: Re: Indian Vajrayana
Content:
Crazywisdom said:
Ya but what you gonna emanate as a Buddha? There's a form body and it's symbolic

Malcolm wrote:
Form body emanations are determined by sentient beings, not buddhas.

KrisW said:
Since buddhas have no confused perception, and are inseparable from the dharmakaya then the benefit for beings to be guided is ensured through the rupakayas/compassion  and the ability of ordinary beings to perceive these emanations.


If this is so then buddhas see rupakayas as clearly apparent but not truly existing arising in response to other beings. And since there is no confused perception from the perspective of buddhabood, a Buddha perceives what arises for others and can be of benefit through omniscience.

But sentient beings only perceive these emanations depends on the purity of the karma of that individual?

Malcolm wrote:
Buddhas have no specific form kāya per se. What form would a Buddha want? Male, female, neutral? One head, one thousand?

If we were elephants, Samantabhadra would appear to be a blue elephant. Sentient beings perceive buddhas in their own image.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, June 26th, 2017 at 12:55 AM
Title: Re: Indian Vajrayana
Content:
Crazywisdom said:
We need a translation of the complete Kalachakra Tantra.

Malcolm wrote:
MIpham's entire commentary has been translated and can be found.

Crazywisdom said:
What's it's called please?


Malcolm wrote:
Sunshiner is how it is translated, by Ives Waldo. You can download it from the Kalacakra Network.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, June 26th, 2017 at 12:53 AM
Title: Re: Awakening is a collective venture
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Jay is glossing over the fact that while selves may be refuted, individual mindstreams are strongly defended in Mahāyāna. So, he is just deceptively waltzing down the Secularist path, i.e., "Buddhism" without rebirth.

Lazy_eye said:
Since this is a recurring area of confusion, perhaps you would be willing to take a moment and explain the difference between a "self" and an "individual mindstream"?  What is the the answer to the charge that "individual mindstream" is just a semantic ploy intended to allow a self-concept back into the Dharma?

One could argue also that the distinction being made is between two different kinds of self-concept -- a static one (maybe a pre-Buddhist "atman"), and a dynamic one that allows for change and impermanence. But as long as it's an "individual" mindstream, there is still this troublesome attribute of "individuality," which sounds like a synonym for selfhood.


Malcolm wrote:
Mindstreams are individuated and unique— they have to to be, otherwise my karma could ripen on you and vice versa.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, June 25th, 2017 at 11:59 PM
Title: Re: Indian Vajrayana
Content:


dzogchungpa said:
Well, some of it is kind of nice, don't you think?

Malcolm wrote:
Oh it is nice enough, but it is very conceptual.

Crazywisdom said:
Ya but what you gonna emanate as a Buddha? There's a form body and it's symbolic

Malcolm wrote:
Form body emanations are determined by sentient beings, not buddhas.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, June 25th, 2017 at 11:58 PM
Title: Re: Indian Vajrayana
Content:


dzogchungpa said:
Well, some of it is kind of nice, don't you think?

Malcolm wrote:
Oh it is nice enough, but it is very conceptual.

Crazywisdom said:
We need a translation of the complete Kalachakra Tantra.

Malcolm wrote:
MIpham's entire commentary has been translated and can be found.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, June 25th, 2017 at 11:09 PM
Title: Re: Indian Vajrayana
Content:


dzogchungpa said:
So you can't even relish it a little bit?


Malcolm wrote:
Honen said, "What is the use of visualizing leaves in Sukhavati, when I can hold the leaves of Mt. Hiei in my hand?"


dzogchungpa said:
Well, yes, but can the same be said of visualizing Vajrayogini?

Malcolm wrote:
Only if you want to get arrested for harassing sixteen year old woman.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, June 25th, 2017 at 10:41 PM
Title: Re: Awakening is a collective venture
Content:
rachmiel said:
Jay Garfield, in https://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/04/27/what-does-buddhism-require/:

"The project of full awakening is a collective, not an individual, venture."

I think it's really important to keep this in mind during the journey. And sometimes easy to forget ... for me at least.

Malcolm wrote:
Jay is glossing over the fact that while selves may be refuted, individual mindstreams are strongly defended in Mahāyāna. So, he is just deceptively waltzing down the Secularist path, i.e., "Buddhism" without rebirth.

Buddhadharma without rebirth makes no sense, likewise, there awakening is not a collective venture.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, June 25th, 2017 at 10:34 PM
Title: Re: Indian Vajrayana
Content:


dzogchungpa said:
Well, some of it is kind of nice, don't you think?

Malcolm wrote:
Oh it is nice enough, but it is very conceptual.

dzogchungpa said:
So you can't even relish it a little bit?


Malcolm wrote:
Honen said, "What is the use of visualizing leaves in Sukhavati, when I can hold the leaves of Mt. Hiei in my hand?"


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, June 25th, 2017 at 10:05 PM
Title: Re: Indian Vajrayana
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
I don't relish any more the complex symbolism of the two stages.

dzogchungpa said:
Well, some of it is kind of nice, don't you think?

Malcolm wrote:
Oh it is nice enough, but it is very conceptual.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, June 25th, 2017 at 9:20 PM
Title: Re: Is "Space" in Dharma the same as it is understood in modern physics?
Content:
Riju said:
I understand Buddhism as a practical science. For me space in buddhism and our physics is same. Separating is to complicate matters and make buddhism abstract.

Malcolm wrote:
No, in physics, space is conditioned. In Buddhism, space is unconditioned.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, June 25th, 2017 at 9:10 PM
Title: Re: Trumpcare is immoral
Content:
Dharma Flower said:
Trumpcare will result in the loss of healthcare coverage for millions of people, including children, the elderly, and the disabled, all so that the very wealthy can receive hundreds of billions of dollars in tax cuts. I fail to see how this fits with the Buddha's teachings, or with Trump's promises to improve healthcare in America.

Grigoris said:
You mean you believe him when he promised to improve healthcare in America?


Malcolm wrote:
At this point, the Senate bill is going to fail.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, June 25th, 2017 at 9:09 PM
Title: Re: Indian Vajrayana
Content:
Crazywisdom said:
Really So don't build war machines?


Malcolm wrote:
Yes, don't build the war machines presented in outer Kalacakra.

Crazywisdom said:
Low tech anyway. So where how does it explain a metaphor ?

Malcolm wrote:
The Kalacakra war as a metaphor is most fully explained in chapter 5 on the completion stage. In chapter 2, the inner Kalacakra chapter, it is clearly explained that in the war, Rudracakravartin will create an illusion for the Muslims that they are being slaughtered in battle to intimidate them, but that in reality no one is being harmed in anyway.

As for myself, I will just stick with Dzogchen. I don't relish any more the complex symbolism of the two stages.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, June 25th, 2017 at 8:58 PM
Title: Re: Indian Vajrayana
Content:
Crazywisdom said:
So close cousin doesn't work. It's married.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, ostensibly the message of the Kalacakra is that Buddhist and Hindus should unite to fend of Muslim encroachment. But this is metaphorical and should not be taken literally, as the text itself makes clear.

Crazywisdom said:
Really So don't build war machines?


Malcolm wrote:
Yes, don't build the war machines presented in outer Kalacakra.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, June 25th, 2017 at 8:55 PM
Title: Re: Indian Vajrayana
Content:



Crazywisdom said:
Kalacakra is only dealing with purusha and prakriti.

Malcolm wrote:
No, it presents the complete set of tattvas.

Crazywisdom said:
So close cousin doesn't work. It's married.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, ostensibly the message of the Kalacakra is that Buddhist and Hindus should unite to fend of Muslim encroachment. But this is metaphorical and should not be taken literally, as the text itself makes clear.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, June 25th, 2017 at 8:27 PM
Title: Re: Indian Vajrayana
Content:


Malcolm wrote:
Basically, Samkhya is of the "self is different from the aggregates" persuasion.

Manas is the Buddhist consciousness aggregate.

Mantrik said:
Ah, thanks, that makes sense.

There are also subtle elements, tanmatras, linked to sense organs, and also the five gross Elements.  It seems like a close cousin rather than a brother.


Crazywisdom said:
Kalacakra is only dealing with purusha and prakriti.

Malcolm wrote:
No, it presents the complete set of tattvas.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, June 25th, 2017 at 3:37 AM
Title: Re: Indian Vajrayana
Content:
pael said:
Even consciousness/mind? Five elements are earth, water, fire, air and space?

Malcolm wrote:
No, consciousness is a separate dhātu.

Mantrik said:
In the 24 Tattvas, how does 'Manas' relate to the Buddhist 'Consciousness' ?
From the little I've read it seems tied to the physical brain.

Malcolm wrote:
Basically, Samkhya is of the "self is different from the aggregates" persuasion.

Manas is the Buddhist consciousness aggregate.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, June 25th, 2017 at 3:09 AM
Title: Re: Indian Vajrayana
Content:
Crazywisdom said:
Ok so samkhya now is the wisdom of emptiness then purusha is luminous clarity emptiness and prakriti is the impermanent materials that flow from it as Maya, unreality. No problem.


Malcolm wrote:
... in Buddhism in general, the five elements are regarded as primary, from which everything springs, ...

pael said:
Even consciousness/mind? Five elements are earth, water, fire, air and space?

Malcolm wrote:
No, consciousness is a separate dhātu.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, June 25th, 2017 at 3:03 AM
Title: Re: Is "Space" in Dharma the same as it is understood in modern physics?
Content:
Matt J said:
I wasn't criticizing, I really don't know what it means.
What does that mean, space is nonobstruction? I hear "nonobstructi-"(-ive, -ing) as an adjective, but here you've made it into a noun.

Malcolm wrote:
At least it is the nouning of a verb rather than the verbing of mistranslated noun.

The Sanskrit word for space is defined through its quality of nonobstruction.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, June 24th, 2017 at 9:02 PM
Title: Re: "Chop wood, carry water." Why bother?
Content:


Jesse said:
"Chop wood, carry water" Insinuates still grasping on to our basic impulses. The impulses to eat, drink, shit, survive. No?

Isn't continuing to live still grasping on to life? What in a sense 'motivates' a totally free person?

Malcolm wrote:
Compassion, service to others.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, June 24th, 2017 at 12:41 AM
Title: Re: who's ngondro is it anyway
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
There is a strong tradition of light physical mortification in all Buddhist traditions, for example, the Dhutānga austerity practices of monks.

dzogchungpa said:
Forget about Dhutānga, how about shaving your head, no sex/masturbation and only eating before noon? I certainly don't consider those to be "light" austerities.

Malcolm wrote:
Well, the first is good for preventing lice, the second is good for not having children, and the third is good for maintaining a trim, monkly figure.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, June 24th, 2017 at 12:07 AM
Title: Re: Indian Vajrayana
Content:


Crazywisdom said:
But Buddhism also says samsara has no beginning or ending unless one ends it with prajna. What your describe sounds extremely close to the awakening of Samatabhadra that you've written about. So then how does the kalacskra fix this  Samkhya up?

Malcolm wrote:
Dzogchen Tantras like the Self-Arisen Vidyā take special pains to negate Saṃkhya, from the recognition that the two systems can be easily confused for one another.

I had meant to add that Patanjali, those who do not know the idea of purusha get lost in sattva, forever contemplating only on this most subtle aspect. Buddhists, I believe, were his main targets with this charge.

Kalacakra's Saṃkhya is modified because purusha in this system is replaced with emptiness.

Crazywisdom said:
Well Indians who call themselves Samkya prolly don't all agree on what the tenets are. It means reasoning. I can see being cinvinced of another rationale and it still Samkya. Maybe not Samkya if 400 BC. But updated. I think the central approach is that there is something to wrap
The mind around and that can be the samadhi and liberation. Like all you need is to be told the facts of life and the ship rights itself.

Malcolm wrote:
Saṃkhya is the something like the Abhidharma of Hinduism. Without understanding it, Hindu schools are difficult to understand.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, June 24th, 2017 at 12:05 AM
Title: Re: Indian Vajrayana
Content:
Crazywisdom said:
Ok so samkhya now is the wisdom of emptiness then purusha is luminous clarity emptiness and prakriti is the impermanent materials that flow from it as Maya, unreality. No problem.

Malcolm wrote:
Saṃkhya ideas also show up explicitly in other Indian Buddhist Tantras, such as the Samputa. It is very likely they penetrated Budddhist texts via Ayurveda.

Perhaps the earliest text treatment of Samkhya we have is presented in the Carakra Saṃhita, when Caraka provides proofs for rebirth by positing an atman, and then outlining the Saṃkhya system.

The other main place where Buddhism and Samkhya are mismatched, is that in Buddhism in general, the five elements are regarded as primary, from which everything springs, whereas in the Samkhya system the five elements are the grossest aspect of tamas and are the last things to evolve.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, June 23rd, 2017 at 11:36 PM
Title: Re: who's ngondro is it anyway
Content:
Nyedrag Yeshe said:
No, the notion of Tapasya, is that suffering and austerities in itself, purifies Karma and delusions, and can even lead to liberation. This is makes no sense in a buddhist POV!

dzogchungpa said:
Dude, tapas is an Indic word used by all the traditions.

Grigoris said:
I thought it was a Spanish food for yummy finger food!


Malcolm wrote:
Just as samsara is a perfume:


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, June 23rd, 2017 at 11:32 PM
Title: Re: who's ngondro is it anyway
Content:
Grigoris said:
Prostration are not penance.  It is not like you do them to suffer in order to ameliorate past negative actions.

Malcolm wrote:
One does prostrations to purify the body and traces of negative actions connected with the body.

Grigoris said:
Yes I agree, but not through suffering.  That was the main point I was trying to make.

Malcolm wrote:
I have definitely both read in traditional texts and heard from teachers that the pain of prostrations is part of the purification process. There is a strong tradition of light physical mortification in all Buddhist traditions, for example, the Dhutānga austerity practices of monks.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, June 23rd, 2017 at 11:20 PM
Title: Re: Indian Vajrayana
Content:
Crazywisdom said:
Permanent sense object? They say these are mutable, in combination, and changing. Prakriti is not the permanent side, purusha is. No?

Malcolm wrote:
Prakriti does not in fact change. It's evolutions are a product of purusha not recognizing itself, thus cause the three gunas to appear to transform. When meditating according to the Samkhya system, even getting the buddhi/mahat level, the most sattvic level is still a deviation. Patanjali speaks about yogis who get involved with the most subtle level of the three gunas, without realizing that even the most subtle aspect of sattva is still not the self, not the purusha. It is only when purusha turns back on itself, resting its own radiance, that the apparent, but unreal evolutions of a real prakriti cease. Prakriti is as real as Purusha, both are permanent, but samsara comes about from not knowing (āvidya) that the evolutes produced out from prakriti are not itself. When it is known (vidyā) that the display of prakriti is not the self, then the purusha turns away from prakriti and one reaches the state of kaivalya. Basically, what happens is that the radiance of purusha illuminates prakriti, because while purusha is sentient, prakriti is not sentient. Purusha mistakes its radiance reflected back to itself off of prakriti as other. Saṃkhya is a very interesting, rational system. But it is realist and eternalist in characteristic.

Crazywisdom said:
But Buddhism also says samsara has no beginning or ending unless one ends it with prajna. What your describe sounds extremely close to the awakening of Samatabhadra that you've written about. So then how does the kalacskra fix this  Samkhya up?

Malcolm wrote:
Dzogchen Tantras like the Self-Arisen Vidyā take special pains to negate Saṃkhya, from the recognition that the two systems can be easily confused for one another.

I had meant to add that Patanjali, those who do not know the idea of purusha get lost in sattva, forever contemplating only on this most subtle aspect. Buddhists, I believe, were his main targets with this charge.

Kalacakra's Saṃkhya is modified because purusha in this system is replaced with emptiness.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, June 23rd, 2017 at 11:04 PM
Title: Re: who's ngondro is it anyway
Content:
Grigoris said:
Prostration are not penance.  It is not like you do them to suffer in order to ameliorate past negative actions.

Malcolm wrote:
One does prostrations to purify the body and traces of negative actions connected with the body.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, June 23rd, 2017 at 10:38 PM
Title: Re: Indian Vajrayana
Content:
Crazywisdom said:
So I guess where sankhya is lacking is their theory of causation, where the effect is preexistent in the cause. Nagarjuna in a sense could have been seen as fixing that. Sankhya just means reasoning.

Malcolm wrote:
Saṃkhya has serious two flaws: 1) a permanent knower 2) permanent sense object.

Crazywisdom said:
Permanent sense object? They say these are mutable, in combination, and changing. Prakriti is not the permanent side, purusha is. No?

Malcolm wrote:
Prakriti does not in fact change. It's evolutions are a product of purusha not recognizing itself, thus cause the three gunas to appear to transform. When meditating according to the Samkhya system, even getting the buddhi/mahat level, the most sattvic level is still a deviation. Patanjali speaks about yogis who get involved with the most subtle level of the three gunas, without realizing that even the most subtle aspect of sattva is still not the self, not the purusha. It is only when purusha turns back on itself, resting its own radiance, that the apparent, but unreal evolutions of a real prakriti cease. Prakriti is as real as Purusha, both are permanent, but samsara comes about from not knowing (āvidya) that the evolutes produced out from prakriti are not itself. When it is known (vidyā) that the display of prakriti is not the self, then the purusha turns away from prakriti and one reaches the state of kaivalya. Basically, what happens is that the radiance of purusha illuminates prakriti, because while purusha is sentient, prakriti is not sentient. Purusha mistakes its radiance reflected back to itself off of prakriti as other. Saṃkhya is a very interesting, rational system. But it is realist and eternalist in characteristic.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, June 23rd, 2017 at 9:30 PM
Title: Re: Indian Vajrayana
Content:
Crazywisdom said:
So I guess where sankhya is lacking is their theory of causation, where the effect is preexistent in the cause. Nagarjuna in a sense could have been seen as fixing that. Sankhya just means reasoning.

Malcolm wrote:
Saṃkhya has serious two flaws: 1) a permanent knower 2) permanent sense object.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, June 23rd, 2017 at 12:25 PM
Title: Re: Is "Space" in Dharma the same as it is understood in modern physics?
Content:
Matt J said:
What does that mean, space is nonobstruction? I hear "nonobstructi-"(-ive, -ing) as an adjective, but here you've made it into a noun.

Malcolm wrote:
Nope. Space in Buddhism is nonobstruction and unconditioned. .
At least it is the nouning of a verb rather than the verbing of mistranslated noun.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, June 23rd, 2017 at 4:56 AM
Title: Re: Is "Space" in Dharma the same as it is understood in modern physics?
Content:
tomamundsen said:
Hi all,

Is "Space" in Dharma the same as it is understood in modern physics?

Thanks


Malcolm wrote:
Nope. Space in Buddhism is nonobstruction and unconditioned.

boda said:
What about air? or are you talking about the abstract concept of space?

Malcolm wrote:
I am talking about the Buddhist definition of ākāśadhātu. Air is the vāyudhātu, the principle of motility.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, June 23rd, 2017 at 4:53 AM
Title: Re: Indian Vajrayana
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Consciousness [shes rig] is the partless solitary knower [jñā] who is an enjoyer, is neither a nature nor an evolute, only this is conscious, the others held to be without consciousnesses [bem po].
Luminosity, the primal nature of the mind, is said to be consciousness [shes rig, i.e., puruśa]. As such, these phenomena of the body are said to exist in the manner prakṛti and purusha.

Losal Samten said:
Do you know if it takes its prakriti to be illusory a la trisvabhava's imputed nature/Advaita's prakriti or if it takes them to be existent a la Samkhya proper?


Malcolm wrote:
Illusory.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, June 23rd, 2017 at 3:42 AM
Title: Re: Is "Space" in Dharma the same as it is understood in modern physics?
Content:
tomamundsen said:
Hi all,

Is "Space" in Dharma the same as it is understood in modern physics?

Thanks


Malcolm wrote:
Nope. Space in Buddhism is nonobstruction and unconditioned. Space in physics is conditioned. There is also a kind of conditioned space in Buddhism, but again it is not the same. Conditioned space is holes and cavities.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, June 23rd, 2017 at 3:41 AM
Title: Re: Indian Vajrayana
Content:


dzogchungpa said:
According to CTR:


Malcolm wrote:
Well, it really only had Hindus in it until they were converted to Buddhism through receiving the Kalacakra initiation and made into a single vajra family.

dzogchungpa said:
Times change. Apparently CTR once quipped that he had so many Jewish students that they constituted a new sect: the “Oy Vey” school of Buddhism.


Malcolm wrote:
Yes, Shambhala is now exclusively inhabited by Muslims.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, June 23rd, 2017 at 3:33 AM
Title: Re: Indian Vajrayana
Content:
Losal Samten said:
Any other views present in Shambhala that we know of or is that it?

dzogchungpa said:
According to CTR: The Shambhala vision does not distinguish a Buddhist from a Catholic, a Protestant, a Jew, a Moslem, a Hindu. That's why we call it the Shambhala kingdom. A kingdom should have lots of different spiritual disciplines in it.


Malcolm wrote:
Well, it really only had Hindus in it until they were converted to Buddhism through receiving the Kalacakra initiation and made into a single vajra family.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, June 23rd, 2017 at 3:23 AM
Title: The Red Pill
Content:
Unknown said:
It started with Sam Harris, moved on to Milo Yiannopoulos and almost led to full-scale Islamophobia. If it can happen to a lifelong liberal, it could happen to anyone

Malcolm wrote:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/28/alt-right-online-poison-racist-bigot-sam-harris-milo-yiannopoulos-islamophobia


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, June 23rd, 2017 at 3:06 AM
Title: Re: Indian Vajrayana
Content:
Losal Samten said:
Is this seen as definitive?


Malcolm wrote:
Meaning is it accepted as Buddhadharma? Yes.

Losal Samten said:
Any other views present in Shambhala that we know of or is that it?

Malcolm wrote:
That is it, AFAIK.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, June 23rd, 2017 at 2:51 AM
Title: Re: Indian Vajrayana
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
There is a Saṃkhya of Shambhala.

Losal Samten said:
Is this seen as definitive?


Malcolm wrote:
Meaning is it accepted as Buddhadharma? Yes.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, June 23rd, 2017 at 2:16 AM
Title: Re: The Dharmakāya in Early Buddhist Texts
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
I guess what I am saying is that there is no original literature. There is no ur-text. There is no single canon and there never was. Buddhism has no GUT (Great Unified Teaching). Searching for one is an eminently Christian pastime.

Coëmgenu said:
And this is something that is readily acknowledged in EBT studies, in my experience, but only selectively so.

Proponents of EBTs and related scholastic ventures are very ready to point out that "schisms" in "Early Buddhism" do not follow the common mould the West expects from its Christian heritage: schisms over points of doctrine and doctrinal interpretation.

For context: almost all schisms in early Christian history are doctrinal schisms over the correct way to conceptualize the divine and human aspects of Jesus Christ. It began first with dehumanizing tendencies (Docetism,
 Eutychianism) which rejected Jesus Christ's humanity, and later heresies were produced from the opposite extreme:
 doubting the divinity of Jesus Christ and framing him as an "ascended master" or just a regular monotheistic prophet (Arianism, Psilanthropism, etc). These are all "conceptual" schisms, or schisms over Christology/Theology.

Instead we have schisms over Vinaya-adaption, monastic practice, and preservation of vinaya observance. It seems that having an "orthodoxy" ("one true teaching") was simply less of a concern. Serious wrong views, we can rest assure, would have been dealt with, but schisms in "Early Buddhism" do not occur over points of doctrine or even points of interpretation of doctrine until a much later period.

Why then do we assume that there was indeed "one true teaching" that served as the ur-teaching for all Buddhisms, and why do we assume the Buddhisms produced by the alleged ur-teaching are necessarily inferior?

It seem the notion of an early Buddhism that does not "schism" over points of doctrine and an early Buddhism that has "one true teaching" are not readily compatible with one-another, unless one wants to argue that Buddhism stayed unschismed with "one teaching" for an extremely unlikely long time (which would contradict much historical evidence for sectarianism).

Malcolm wrote:
Devadatta is a perfect example of schism that happens during the life of the Buddha.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, June 23rd, 2017 at 1:53 AM
Title: Re: The Dharmakāya in Early Buddhist Texts
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
I guess what I am saying is that there is no original literature. There is no ur-text. There is no single canon and there never was. Buddhism has no GUT (Great Unified Teaching). Searching for one is an eminently Christian pastime.

At a recent translators conference, Jan Nattier gave an excellent talk about the fact that everything we have, Pali canon included, is a translation and that this process of translation began during the Buddha's time. There are no original texts, everything we have is a translation from another language.

Coëmgenu said:
Indeed, all earliest extant Buddhist literature, Buddhavacana included, comes from transmissions of Buddhavacana preserved along sectarian lines with particular interpretations and orthodoxies in mind.

That being said, there is also a smaller body of literature (sūtrāṇi & āgamāḥ) from within the "sectarian literature" (as Buddhist history in EBT studies, it seems, for better for worse, is marked by the notion of a older theoretical "Great Unified Teaching" stage of Buddhadharma-history, which becomes hidden under sectarian misinterpretations over time) which does display a certain amount of convergence that is not as apparent certain other bodies of literature (such as different schools' Abhidharmāḥ).

I was discussing a similar matter to this, that is: how exactly we go about treating this body of apparent "EBTs", on SuttaCentral a while ago, and I hope I am not violating any forum policy of DharmaWheels by quoting something from over there that deals with some of the complicated "fuzzy edges" reconstructed EBT-based Dharma-orthodoxies may well have, contrary to public narratives about EBTs and "Early Buddhism": The EA actually preserves some āgamāḥ which clearly expound Mahāyāna teachings, from EA 27.5:
聞如是： 一時，佛在舍衛國祇樹給孤獨 園。
Heard thus truly: one time, Buddha dwelt [at] Śrāvastī [in] Jetavana.

爾時，彌勒菩薩至如來所，頭面禮足，在 一面坐。
At that-time, Maitreya Bodhisattva came [to the] Tathāgata's location, head facing [downward] bowing [from the] foot [i.e. prostrating or hiding his feet], [then] beside [the Buddha] [to] one side sat.

爾時，彌勒菩薩白世尊言：
At that-time, Maitreya Bodhisattva addressed [the] Bhagavān saying:

「菩薩摩訶薩成就幾法，而行檀波羅蜜，
"[Do] Bodhisattvāḥ Mahāsattvāḥ accomplish myriad dharmāḥ, and perform dānapāramitā,

具足六 波羅蜜，疾成無上正真之道？」
possess [the] path [of] six pāramitāḥ, swiftly accomplish nothing higher correctly [and] truly[,] [the] path?

[The passage in question then goes on to explore the other five pāramitāḥ and have the Buddha agree with Maitreya Bodhisattva's questioning of if the Buddha approves of practice of the six pāramitāḥ (dāna, śīla, kṣānti, vīrya, dhyāna, & prajñāpāramitā) as a path to awakening.]
If we take āgamāḥ like this at face value, it implies that Mahāyāna and Bodhisattvayāna are far older than believed to be. However, there is essentially unanimous consensus among those informed concerning Buddhist textual criticism that āgamāḥ like the one I just quoted above (although there are other more problematic and less clear-cut cases, such as the āgama-parallel of the Paccayasutta ) are Mahāyāna accruals, not original literature from the same layer as the rest of the āgama-material.

Because of this, there is a small deal of controversy within the EBT subcommunity of Buddhist textual criticism, as to if the āgamāḥ and nikāyā together constitute a coherent body of literature or if they are ultimately incoherent (i.e. sectarian) and cannot be used to reliably reconstruct a common Ur-tradition of "Early Buddhism".

A proponent of the alleged (partial, I am phrasing this far stronger than he would ever) incoherence between the āgamāḥ and the nikāyā is Ven Thích Minh Châu, his text The Chinese Madhyama Āgama and the Pāli Majjhima Nikāya is a good text for exploring this presented perspective.

This perspective is disagreed with by proponent of what we could call "EBT coherency", namely our own Ven Sujato and Ven Brahmali, whose text I will now quote, namely, The Authenticity of Early Buddhist Texts, from page 84:
4.3.5 Claiims of incoherence

Scholarship has not succeeded in finding consequential contradictions within the EBTs.

An important challenge to our contention that the EBTs are coherent comes from those who have argued that Buddhism contains fundamental teachings that are hard to reconcile. Probably the most important of these arguments is the claim that Buddhism, specifically the Buddhism of the Pali sources, gives contradictory accounts of the goal of the Buddhist practice, including contradictory accounts of the path of meditation that leads to these goals.

This is not the place to assess these claims in detail, but a few general remarks seem called for. A major problem with these claims, here exemplified by those of Griffiths, is that they often do not distinguish between EBT and non-EBT material. Griffiths says, “The canonical and commentarial literature will be treated here as a unity … because the thrust of this paper is structural and philosophical rather than historical, and for such purposes differentiation between canon and commentary is of small importance.”

This is assuming a point that needs to be proved. In the absence of such proof, it is not possible to ascertain the coherence of the EBTs, or the lack thereof, by relying on non-EBTs. The EBTs need to be considered on their own merits.

Another problem with Griffith’s proposition is his reliance on a very limited number of texts from the EBTs. His main reference is to the Satipaṭṭhāna Sutta. However, in establishing any point about the EBTs one needs to consider the literature as a whole. It is our contention that the problems identified by Griffiths and others fall away once this is done.
This addresses an academic named Griffiths, whose work I cannot access, and does not specifically address Ven Thích Minh Châu's work.

Another proponent EBT coherency, Ven Ānalayo, has however specifically addressed Ven Thích Minh Châu's work from a perspective informed by EBT coherency. His paper, in response to Ven Thích Minh Châu, is available freely online if one googles "The Chinese Madhyama-ågama and the Påli Majjhima-Nikåya – In the Footsteps of Thich Minh Chau Ānalayo".


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, June 23rd, 2017 at 1:46 AM
Title: Re: Indian Vajrayana
Content:
invisiblediamond said:
Also he mixes up Samkya with Vajrayana.

Malcolm wrote:
So does Kalacakra.

liuzg150181 said:
Referring to Jonang's Zhentong view?


Malcolm wrote:
No, referring to the contents of the Kalacakra itself. There is a Saṃkhya of Shambhala. In Kalacakra, according to Tagtsang Lotsawa:
Consciousness [shes rig] is the partless solitary knower [jñā] who is an enjoyer, is neither a nature nor an evolute, only this is conscious, the others held to be without consciousnesses [bem po].
Luminosity, the primal nature of the mind, is said to be consciousness [shes rig, i.e., puruśa]. As such, these phenomena of the body are said to exist in the manner prakṛti and purusha.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, June 23rd, 2017 at 1:38 AM
Title: Re: who's ngondro is it anyway
Content:
liuzg150181 said:
Apology for digging out a relatively old reply,but:
Malcolm wrote:
For example, in Sakya they have a system where one can visualize oneself as a Hevajra, and practice it as a yidam. One can also practice Hevajra Guru yoga where one visualizes the guru as the mandala of Hevajra. But theory behind each practice is completely different. They are separate paths. The latter bypasses creation and completion stage completely.

liuzg150181 said:
Does that mean the latter is cig car approach?


Malcolm wrote:
No, it is not really a cig car approach.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, June 23rd, 2017 at 1:37 AM
Title: Re: who's ngondro is it anyway
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
heart center

Losal Samten said:
As an aside, the SamkhyaYoga atman tattva is still considered as self-less as it's still part of the prakriti, correct? Or does it have a special relationship to the purusha?

Malcolm wrote:
You mean the ahamkara, the I-making principle that grasps Prakriti has a self. Yes, it is not part of purusha at all. Purusha stands alone.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, June 23rd, 2017 at 12:11 AM
Title: Re: The Dharmakāya in Early Buddhist Texts
Content:
Coëmgenu said:
pre-sectarian Buddhism

Malcolm wrote:
Pre-sectarian Buddhism is a myth, just like the unicorn, often mentioned, never found.

There were factions in the Sangha right from the beginning.

Coëmgenu said:
Indeed, but rather than challenging the entire premise of a lot of peoples' worldviews (and unnecessarily, perhaps, affecting their faith in Buddhism, if the argumentation is severe enough and well-executed enough), I am just trying to point out that many EBTs already speak of a dharmakāya, and it is clear that it is not always just "the collection of the teachings".

Like I said earlier though, this essay is addressed to a prodominantly non-Mahāyāna audience, so there will be some redundancies that wouldn't need mentioning to someone interested in and informed about what is reconstructable about the history of early Mahāyāna. I thought it might just interesting to have it here though anyways and as well, because I find that EBT-studies is so often used to point out anything not found in the Pāli Canon as "not an EBT", and any time that EBTs disagree, the Pāli or what "agrees most" with the Pāli is almost always given precedence (as evidenced by the SF hypothesis being used to edit Sarvāstivāda texts to conform with an "EBT orthodoxy"). This essay is mostly to challenge that tendency and to expose one particular misconception: that the dharmakāya is a Mahāyāna "innovation".

Malcolm wrote:
At a recent translators conference, Jan Nattier gave an excellent talk about the fact that everything we have, Pali canon included, is a translation and that this process of translation began during the Buddha's time. There are no original texts, everything we have is a translation from another language.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, June 23rd, 2017 at 12:06 AM
Title: Re: who's ngondro is it anyway
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Guru yoga is a very specific practice with a very specific theory related to the vajra body and the indestructible bindu.

rai said:
where could we find more about that theory? there is so much on Kyerim but on Guruyoga i don't know any sources, i mean about how and why it works etc. I have your book, is it somewhere there? thank you
anybody? please : )


Malcolm wrote:
You have an indestructible bindu in your heart center. When you do guru yoga, and meditate on the guru in the heart, this causes the vāyu to enter the central channel and dissolve. That indestructible bindu is your rigpa.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, June 22nd, 2017 at 11:36 PM
Title: Re: Sam Harris receives a (literal) pointing out instruction
Content:


PuerAzaelis said:
Your willingness to use it so casually and easily

Malcolm wrote:
I did not use it casually and easily. I used it deliberately. I don't often call people bigots. But when they are being bigots, then it is proper to refer to them as such.

PuerAzaelis said:
It is not "hysterical" to believe that this degradation of language itself, its descent into incoherence and double talk, is the primary issue.

Malcolm wrote:
In my opinion, you are getting worked up about nothing.


PuerAzaelis said:
You may say this is the cart leading the horse, but I completely disagree. The moral "valence" (to use the psychologists' word) of language precedes its use. An assessment of utility precedes objective description. As such, if the utility of a certain language is squandered, whether or not it objectively describes anything becomes irrelevant.

Malcolm wrote:
Harris needs to be called out on his bigotry. Bigots have bigotry by definition.

PuerAzaelis said:
bigot |ˈbiɡət|
noun
a person who is intolerant toward those holding different opinions

Malcolm wrote:
Bill Maher is another bigot.

So is Trump. And so, apparently, are you since you are expressing extreme intolerance of our difference of opinion.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, June 22nd, 2017 at 11:00 PM
Title: Re: The Dharmakāya in Early Buddhist Texts
Content:
Coëmgenu said:
pre-sectarian Buddhism

Malcolm wrote:
Pre-sectarian Buddhism is a myth, just like the unicorn, often mentioned, never found.

There were factions in the Sangha right from the beginning.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, June 22nd, 2017 at 10:42 PM
Title: Re: Ju Mipham's Mode of Being
Content:
Nicholas Weeks said:
No glossary, so what are "Drala and Werma deities"?

Malcolm wrote:
These ancient Bonpo entities, pre-Buddhist. IN this context, it is related more to the Gesar cycle of practice composed by Mipham in general.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, June 22nd, 2017 at 10:36 PM
Title: Re: Sam Harris receives a (literal) pointing out instruction
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
With respect to FGM:

Female circumcision in the USA

Clitoridectomy and other circumcision-like operation on girls and women had a longer career in United States, where doctors deplored Baker Brown’s disgrace and The Medical Record defended him with the question "What now will be the chance for recovery for the poor epileptic female with a clitoris?" [11] There was also a vigorous attempt to apply the theories of Lewis Sayre – that many nervous diseases were caused by a tight or non-retractable foreskin – to women, and a number of doctors urged that girls also should have their clitoral hoods excised if there was any suspicion of adhesions of the accumulation of "secretions". In 1892 another defender of Brown (he was "almost on the right track"), Dr Robert Morris, went so far as to suggest that, since 80 per cent of American women suffered from preputial adhesions, all schoolgirls should be inspected to ensure that proper separation between prepuce and clitoris had occurred. He was apparently confident that most of the girls would require surgery, and added: "The separation of adhesive prepuces in young unmarried women should be done by female physicians anyway, and such physicians can be abundantly occupied with this sort of work". [12] It was a valiant effort to expand the market for medical services, and he must have been disappointed that his suggestions were not more widely taken up.
http://www.historyofcircumcision.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=category&sectionid=13&id=76&Itemid=6

So it is not just a "Muslim" thing and predates Islam by millenia.

Unknown said:
The history of FGM is not well known but the practice dated back at least 2000 years. It is not known when or where the tradition of Female Genital Mutilation originated from. It was believed that it was practised in ancient Egypt as a sign of distinction amongst the aristocracy. Some believe it started during the slave trade when black slave women entered ancient Arab societies. Some believe FGM began with the arrival of Islam in some parts of sub-Saharan Africa. Some believe the practice developed independently among certain ethnic groups in sub-Saharan Africa as part of puberty rites. Overall, in the history, it was believed that FGM would ensure women’s virginity and reduction in the female desire.

Many commentators believe that the practice evolved from earliest times in primitive communities that wished to establish control over the sexual behaviour of women. The Romans performed a technique involving slipping of rings through the labia majora of female slaves to prevent them from becoming pregnant and the Scoptsi sect in Russia performed FGM to ensure virginity.

The practice is supported by traditional beliefs, values and attitudes. In some communities it is valued as a rite of passage to womanhood. (for example in Kenya and Sierra Leone) Others value it as a means of preserving a girl’s virginity until marriage, (for example in Sudan, Egypt, and Somalia) In most of these countries FGM is a pre-requisite to marriage and marriage is vital to a woman’s social and economic survival. It is believed by some African women that if their daughters are not circumcised would not get husband. This (FGM) harmful tradition has been guided by taboos from generation by generation.

FGM is rooted in culture and some believe it is done for religious reasons, but it has not been confined to a particular culture or religion. FGM has neither been mentioned in the Quran nor Sunnah.

It has been highlighted that FGM was practised in the United Kingdom and United States by the Gynaecologists to cure women of so-called “female weakness” The practice of FGM continues within some communities in various form and even in the 20th century girls and women are still subjected to this harmful tradition.

Malcolm wrote:
http://www.fgmnationalgroup.org/historical_and_cultural.htm




Johnny Dangerous said:
You seem to be shifting the conversation from the "PC" state of discourse on the left, and making it into simply being against FGM and its supporters - not exactly a controversial position, i'm guessing we will all agree it's abhorrent.

PuerAzaelis said:
So then it was a stupid example, never mind.

DGA said:
I think FGM specifically and the systematic abuse of children generally is a worthwhile discussion to have.  Maybe it's worth a separate topic? One thing I have observed:  with regard to FGM as it happens in some Islamic communities, the best advocates against it are typically the parents of children who have endured it and regret their own parents convincing them it was a good idea.  It's the maternal grandmother you have to watch out for in these situations.
You throw a stick in the air it'll come down on someone calling you a bigot.
1. Stop throwing sticks like that.  You could put someone's eye out.

2. I wonder why I don't have this problem.  Do you really experience life that way?  Does anyone else here?  Am I failing to notice a chorus of chides?  Or... alternatively... could it be that if you don't talk or act like a bigot to the best of your ability, you tend not to have this problem?  That's a rhetorical question.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, June 22nd, 2017 at 10:00 PM
Title: Re: Indian Vajrayana
Content:
invisiblediamond said:
Also he mixes up Samkya with Vajrayana.

Malcolm wrote:
So does Kalacakra.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, June 22nd, 2017 at 8:48 PM
Title: Re: Sam Harris receives a (literal) pointing out instruction
Content:
PuerAzaelis said:
And this is also dangerous. Because the inheritors of the language you just created will misuse it - perhaps against you.


Malcolm wrote:
You're being a little hysterical here. Our little discussion over whether Harris is a bigot (my opinion) or a righteous crusader for Western Liberal Values (michaelb's opinion) against the terrors of Wahhabism has little affect in the world. It merely shows that Buddhists have strong differences of opinion over the question of the intrinsic evil of Islam as an entity, divorced from its monotheistic ideology held in common with Christianity and Judaism. Arguably, Christianity is the most pernicious and aggressive religious movement in history, and continues to be so.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, June 22nd, 2017 at 8:42 PM
Title: Re: Sam Harris receives a (literal) pointing out instruction
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
The cause of terrorism from Muslim countries is Western economic imperialism.

Karma_Yeshe said:
If this were the case, then why are so many Muslims in Arabia victims of terrorism from Muslims?

Malcolm wrote:
Because the US and its allies have completely disrupted the major economies of this area, that should be obvious.

What is less obvious is the role climate change is playing in these conflicts. For example, the riots in Syria that led to the civil war were sparked by drought.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, June 22nd, 2017 at 8:39 PM
Title: Re: Sam Harris receives a (literal) pointing out instruction
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Muslims became radicalized when Western powers started attacking Muslims. Muslims did not start attacking the West.
[...]
The cause of terrorism from Muslim countries is Western economic imperialism. Harris does not understand, or refuses to understand the real causes of violence that is coming against the West from the Muslim world. And even here, that violence is minimal, compared to the violence that competing factions fighting resource wars against each other in the Middle East, etc. are inflicting upon one another.

michaelb said:
Absolute nonsense. Muslims became "radicalised" in the wake of the fall of the ottoman empire. The ottoman empire was every bit as aggressive and expansionist as its western counterparts and launched attacks against the west and against western interests - anything from the Barbary corsairs, armenian genocide,  to the continued occupation and illegal settlement building on Cyprus.

Malcolm wrote:
The Ottoman Empire perished a century ago. Were they expansionist? Yes. Was it for religious reasons? Largely not. Was it moribund and in decline for the last 100 of its rule? Definitely. Was the Ottoman Empire allied with any Western countries? Yes, France, for example, was a major ally of the Ottoman Empire.

michaelb said:
I see your perverse attempt to protray sunni jihadist violence against non-sunni people in the west as a response to "economic imperialism", but sunni jihadist violence against non-sunni people in other countries (Buddhists in SE Asia, Animists in S Sudan, Christians in Pakistan, etc.) as "resource wars."

Malcolm wrote:
All wars are resource wars.



michaelb said:
In fact, we know what the jihadists want and why they do what they are doing, because they tell us so. Now, the global sunni islamist movement has momentum and, no matter how much you and chomsky like to beat yourselves up over the evils of western imperialism, it won't stop them.

Malcolm wrote:
It does not really have that much momentum. And I am not beating myself up over Western Imperialism. I am observing that Western Imperialism caused this mess. That said, I would rather have US Imperialism than Russian, Chinese, or Saudi Imperialism. Just because I correctly identify the mistakes the West has made does not bear the correlation that I think the West should give up its armies and go home. But I do think we have a responsibility to understand the failures of our foreign policies. After all, most of this mess is Britain's fault, when you get right down to it. Followed up with American naivety in the postwar period.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, June 22nd, 2017 at 12:26 PM
Title: Re: Sam Harris receives a (literal) pointing out instruction
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
The cause of terrorism from Muslim countries is Western economic imperialism.

PuerAzaelis said:
Naturally. Well thank goodness Noam Chomsky isn't a bigot or anything like that. Like Sam Harris is a bigot. Thanks for clearing that up.
Malcolm wrote:
Harris' point of view is rooted in bigotry because it does not address the real issues and relies on scapegoats.

PuerAzaelis said:
Ah. Thank you for the reminder about irony. I was wondering when we were going to get to the irony.


Malcolm wrote:
Correct, Chomsky is not a bigot.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, June 22nd, 2017 at 9:37 AM
Title: Re: Sam Harris receives a (literal) pointing out instruction
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
The difference between what I am saying and what Harris says is that I am saying is that monotheism itself is the problem, not any of its particular expressions.

aflatun said:
Well that's news to me. Last I checked the problem was good old hatred, greed, and delusion.

Malcolm wrote:
[/quote]


The Buddha was fairly clear that some views are more pernicious than others.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, June 22nd, 2017 at 9:33 AM
Title: Re: Sam Harris receives a (literal) pointing out instruction
Content:
PuerAzaelis said:
PC police.

Malcolm wrote:
Red herring of all red herrings.

The problem with Harris is that he blames Muslims for not being sufficiently Western and liberal. This is why I think he is a bigot. He targets Islam, and Muslims for special venom in his writing, etc. This is amazingly clear evidence of his bigotry:

4. It is perfectly possible—and increasingly necessary—to speak about the ideological roots of Islamism and jihadism, and even about the unique need for reform within mainstream Islam itself, without lapsing into bigotry or disregarding the suffering of refugees. Indeed, when one understands the problem for what it is, one realizes that secular Muslims, liberal Muslims, and former Muslims are among the most desirable allies to have in the West—and, indeed, such people are the primary victims of Islamist intolerance and jihadist terror in Muslim-majority countries.
Muslims became radicalized when Western powers started attacking Muslims. Muslims did not start attacking the West.

He continues to talk about "reform within mainstream Islam itself," while having zero expertise in Islam, being completely ignorant of its history, tradition, language, and doctrines.

He then says:
6. The next acts of jihadist terrorism to take place on American soil will most likely be met with terrifyingly blunt (and even illegal) countermeasures by the Trump administration. If all that liberals can do in response is continue to lie about the causes of terrorism and lock arms with Islamists, we have some very rough times ahead.
The cause of terrorism from Muslim countries is Western economic imperialism. Harris does not understand, or refuses to understand the real causes of violence that is coming against the West from the Muslim world. And even here, that violence is minimal, compared to the violence that competing factions fighting resource wars against each other in the Middle East, etc. are inflicting upon one another. Harris' point of view is rooted in bigotry because it does not address the real issues and relies on scapegoats.

My intellectual distaste for monotheism as a socio-religious-economic system is distinct from my lack of sympathy for Harris' politics of scapegoating.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, June 22nd, 2017 at 6:31 AM
Title: Re: Sam Harris receives a (literal) pointing out instruction
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
I think that you are not properly distinguishing the power differential between ourselves, and those who live in muslim nations, most of which are second and third world nations.

For example, if a white person is biased against black people, this is a more powerful kind of bias than one group of black people having bias against another, for example, the frequent bias black people raised in American express against black people raised elsewhere, and vice versa.

One can expect bias against Muslims from Jeff Sessions. The fact that Harris so shamelessly promotes his bias against Islam is nothing short of appalling.

PuerAzaelis said:
Oh, for the Namdrol of old.

I suspect it is extremely aggravating for people (such as Sam Harris) to have their words proof-texted. But, well, c'est la vie, once that mud starts flying, things tend to spiral out of control. Hell, before you know it, you're living in some place called Moscow in 1934 and there's no court of appeal and that court officer with the jackboots and revolver is making you nervous.

But I forget myself. One man's bigotry is another man's subtle postmodernist critique. As we all know. Since we are all enlightened post-enlightenment whatever-we-ares-based-upon-our-present-whim. Indeed, one man's bigotry may be another man's championing of the downtrodden and the oppressed, who all, I have no doubt, would unhesitatingly appreciate all of his sentiments without question. And if they did question these sentiments, well, no need to take the noble savages at their word. They are oppressed, therefore delusional, so our words can be safely uttered in order to liberate them, after all. As long as you are preaching to the correct choir. Or talking about the perfectly appropriate topic, "power differential", as opposed to, I dunno, cultures, or books, or ideologies, or belief-systems or ... well whatever topic it is that makes your points valid and the other man's invalid.

Malcolm wrote:
Different day, different point. You will note that I do not spare Christianity nor Judaism from the charge that they are religions essentially founded on the basis of culture wars and ethnic cleansing.

What we are witnessing now is a fundamentally Christian exercise of power over the Muslim world. Terrorism against Western populations is a direct consequence of US wars of aggression the Middle East, and the failure of an anti-Commiunist foreign policy that made crucial policy errors in the 50's, not limited to the CIA's replacement of Mosedeq with the Pahlavi family in Iran.

I fully understand the anxiety of Europeans who are fearful. I also think that the Harris response, i.e., to try and blame Muslim terrorist behavior on books absurd.

The difference between what I am saying and what Harris says is that I am saying is that monotheism itself is the problem, not any of its particular expressions.

I am not apologizing for Islam, I saying that Harris is a bigot who has problems with Muslims based on their belonging to a religion. For example he claims:

"While the other major world religions have been fertile sources of intolerance, it is clear that the doctrine of Islam poses unique problems for the emergence of a global civilization...The only future devout Muslims can envisage—as Muslims—is one in which all infidels have been converted to Islam, politically subjugated, or killed."

This statement is such absolute bullshit coming from a person who lives among Fundie Christians in the US. His laughable defense of the Second Iraq war is equally pathetic.

He summarizes, "It is not at all clear how we should proceed in our dialogue with the Muslim world." Yes, it is not at all clear when one engages in dehumanizing and humiliating others based on what you imagine they believe.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, June 22nd, 2017 at 5:15 AM
Title: Re: who's ngondro is it anyway
Content:
Grigoris said:
Just to be clear:  I am not being contrary, just trying to flesh out the subject.  I am trying to understand here.  The reality is that I am quite thick at times:

I feel that the problem with this (having the text that explains the signs) is that one then does a practice, with a specific goal in sight , which may not be the actual goal of the practice.

For example:  If one is doing Guru Yoga (let's say) expecting certain signs (outcomes) wouldn't it be possible they would lose sight of the actual aim of the practice?  Or are the signs a guarantee that the aim of the practice has been achieved?  Somehow though I could see that knowing what to expect may actually take you further away from the outcome...  Like when you know what the "effects" of each jhana are BEFORE engaging in practice and you aim for the effects...  Do you get what I am asking?


Malcolm wrote:
I do, and you cannot fake the kinds of signs talked about in the texts. You can lie about them to others, but you cannot lie to yourself about them. For example, Virupa had some nightmares, or what he thought were nightmares. But Nairatmya explained to him these were signs of the winds doing this thing and that in his body as a result of doing the Yogini completion stage.

The signs don't guarantee anything other than that you are generating "heat."

florin said:
So violent dreams can sometime have a positive meaning ? Like things are progressing and moving in the right direction ?

Malcolm wrote:
Quite often. For example, negative dreams are often understood to be positive signs. If you dream your guru dies, this is a very good dream.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, June 22nd, 2017 at 3:59 AM
Title: Re: who's ngondro is it anyway
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
You just need a text that explains what the signs are.

Grigoris said:
Just to be clear:  I am not being contrary, just trying to flesh out the subject.  I am trying to understand here.  The reality is that I am quite thick at times:

I feel that the problem with this (having the text that explains the signs) is that one then does a practice, with a specific goal in sight , which may not be the actual goal of the practice.

For example:  If one is doing Guru Yoga (let's say) expecting certain signs (outcomes) wouldn't it be possible they would lose sight of the actual aim of the practice?  Or are the signs a guarantee that the aim of the practice has been achieved?  Somehow though I could see that knowing what to expect may actually take you further away from the outcome...  Like when you know what the "effects" of each jhana are BEFORE engaging in practice and you aim for the effects...  Do you get what I am asking?


Malcolm wrote:
I do, and you cannot fake the kinds of signs talked about in the texts. You can lie about them to others, but you cannot lie to yourself about them. For example, Virupa had some nightmares, or what he thought were nightmares. But Nairatmya explained to him these were signs of the winds doing this thing and that in his body as a result of doing the Yogini completion stage.

The signs don't guarantee anything other than that you are generating "heat."


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, June 22nd, 2017 at 3:11 AM
Title: Re: Sam Harris receives a (literal) pointing out instruction
Content:
PuerAzaelis said:
And so am I and so are you and so are all the Sunnis and Shiites themselves. So who gets to draw where the line should be. rhizzone? Who died and appointed them the dictatorship of the proletariat?

Malcolm wrote:
So you are defending bigotry against Muslims on the principle that one group of Muslims hates another? Wow.

PuerAzaelis said:
So from your own statement that there is a continuum of bigotry you conclude that someone who agrees with that, and points out that there are certain people who are themselves Muslim but who hate other Muslims, is "defending bigotry"? Wow.

Malcolm wrote:
I think that you are not properly distinguishing the power differential between ourselves, and those who live in muslim nations, most of which are second and third world nations.

For example, if a white person is biased against black people, this is a more powerful kind of bias than one group of black people having bias against another, for example, the frequent bias black people raised in American express against black people raised elsewhere, and vice versa.

One can expect bias against Muslims from Jeff Sessions. The fact that Harris so shamelessly promotes his bias against Islam is nothing short of appalling.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, June 22nd, 2017 at 2:53 AM
Title: Re: Sam Harris receives a (literal) pointing out instruction
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
https://www.rhizzone.net/articles/sam-harris-fraud/

michaelb said:
A puerile hatchet job that has no business being posted on a Dharma forum.

Malcolm wrote:
So then you are basically stating the author's claims are themselves false.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, June 22nd, 2017 at 2:51 AM
Title: Re: Sam Harris receives a (literal) pointing out instruction
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Sessions and Harris just shades in a continuum of bigotry against Muslims.

PuerAzaelis said:
And so am I and so are you and so are all the Sunnis and Shiites themselves. So who gets to draw where the line should be. rhizzone? Who died and appointed them the dictatorship of the proletariat?


Malcolm wrote:
So you are defending bigotry against Muslims on the principle that one group of Muslims hates another? Wow.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, June 22nd, 2017 at 1:55 AM
Title: Re: Sam Harris receives a (literal) pointing out instruction
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
No, I would say it was his irrational bias towards Muslims. Being a lightweight isn't a sin.

PuerAzaelis said:
Fine. But he hasn't exactly limited his biases. The Southern Baptist Convention and the Anti-Defamation League aren't exactly his groupies either.

This is why I have such a visceral reaction to a character assassination of someone who is basically an equal opportunity sh**t-thrower.

I mean good bloody God if the bloody rhizzone is seriously throwing Sam bloody Harris of all people into the same cesspool as (say) Jeff Sessions (who apparently btw just got a 60-year-old woman arrested simply because she laughed out loud at his recent testimony) ... this kind of approach is what is left of revolutionary socialism? Seriously, that's the conversation we need to have. Sam Harris is a legit target. I mean, are you kidding? That's really the position, we need less of that kind of person, not more?

Nothing to do with OP obviously ... I read "Waking Up". It was an definitely, absolutely, incredibly, utterly, completely, truly... lightweight book. I preferred The Power of Now.

Malcolm wrote:
Sessions and Harris just shades in a continuum of bigotry against Muslims.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, June 22nd, 2017 at 1:19 AM
Title: Re: who's ngondro is it anyway
Content:
Mantrik said:
it ends up becoming the 'Greg and Malcolm Show'. ]

Malcolm wrote:
Fine, I will cede the floor to Greg since it is so boring for you.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, June 22nd, 2017 at 12:54 AM
Title: Re: who's ngondro is it anyway
Content:


Grigoris said:
You yourself admit that signs are not so easy to recognise (shiiiiiiiit, not even the Mahasiddha Virupa could recognise them),

Malcolm wrote:
He wasn't a mahasiddhi, or even a siddhi then. He was an ordinary person just like you or I, and has I explained, had not received the instructions on how to recognize the signs of accomplishment.


Grigoris said:
so if you use them as a guide...  Numbers and time are also imperfect since signs can manifest well before the completion of the counting or time period (as you stated earlier).

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, this is why signs are the best indication, all texts agree on this point.

Grigoris said:
Or, if one is anal retentive about the measuring and cuts off the practice before signs manifest, then one may be selling themselves short (maybe even by a few days or a few hundred repititions).

Malcolm wrote:
This is why signs are the best indicator. You practice until you have them. Then numbers and time don't matter.

Grigoris said:
I guess that is why it is important to have a teacher (or a more experienced practitioner) oversee the process.

Malcolm wrote:
You just need a text that explains what the signs are.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, June 22nd, 2017 at 12:42 AM
Title: Re: Sam Harris receives a (literal) pointing out instruction
Content:
cky said:
... its a pretty decent book ...

PuerAzaelis said:
As far as I can tell Sam Harris' only sin is that he is a lightweight.


Malcolm wrote:
No, I would say it was his irrational bias towards Muslims. Being a lightweight isn't a sin.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, June 22nd, 2017 at 12:42 AM
Title: Re: who's ngondro is it anyway
Content:
Grigoris said:
If you think that my goal in this discussion, or any other, is just to oppose you, then you are sadly mistaken.

Malcolm wrote:
I was just pointing out that your responses are habitually contrarian.

Grigoris said:
No they are not! I think you are reading something into them which is not actually there.


Malcolm wrote:
Whatevs


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, June 22nd, 2017 at 12:41 AM
Title: Re: who's ngondro is it anyway
Content:
Grigoris said:
By not "hanging onto numbers" one runs the risk of drifting around aimlessly without a target or goal, spending too much or too little time on the activity, wasting one's time and energy wandering around in circles.

Malcolm wrote:
Numbers, time, or signs. The latter is best.

Mantrik said:
Tut tut... 'Former' and 'latter' are used when there are two alternatives.  For more than two, use 'first' and 'last'.

We dun things gooder when I were a profeshnal writter.
.

Malcolm wrote:
Really, you are actually twitting me on grammar?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, June 22nd, 2017 at 12:35 AM
Title: Re: who's ngondro is it anyway
Content:
Grigoris said:
It seems to me that no matter how you measure your progress, it can become a source of obstacles.

Malcolm wrote:
I say white, you say black. I say black, you say white.

Grigoris said:
If you think that my goal in this discussion, or any other, is just to oppose you, then you are sadly mistaken.

Malcolm wrote:
I was just pointing out that your responses are habitually contrarian.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, June 22nd, 2017 at 12:19 AM
Title: Re: who's ngondro is it anyway
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Personal experience indicates to me that signs are better, and that they often come before one has done a complete number or time.

Grigoris said:
It seems to me that no matter how you measure your progress, it can become a source of obstacles.

Malcolm wrote:
I say white, you say black. I say black, you say white.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, June 22nd, 2017 at 12:14 AM
Title: Re: Sam Harris receives a (literal) pointing out instruction
Content:
PuerAzaelis said:
I am just a delicate teacup, but I think I get the argument here ... Extremely well regarded social critic Ben Afflek says that Sam Harris says naughty things about Muslims, therefore Sam Harris is an imperialist crusader, therefore Sam Harris is bad and stupid.

Have I got that, roughly?

boda said:
More specifically, the article agrees with Afflek's characterization of Harris's views of regarding Muslims as "racist." I didn't know Muslims were a race. Learn something new everyday.


Malcolm wrote:
Hatred for Muslims is often racist in character, since what people are reacting to is ethnicity, not religion. Muslims are, by and large, not white people. Religion is just used as an excuse. For example,look at the way Catholics were treated in the US. Irish, Germans, and Italians were all represented with characteristics that were at best subhuman in the press of the day. Most of the so called "anarchists" who were tried in US courts were from Catholic countries, Saco and Vanzetti being just one famous example of Catholics being tried and convicted of crimes in which they had no involvement.

However, perhaps "racist" is the wrong word for Harris. I would settle for "bigot."


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, June 21st, 2017 at 11:45 PM
Title: Re: Sam Harris receives a (literal) pointing out instruction
Content:
dzogchungpa said:
He must have accumulated an incredible amount of merit in past lives to have access to so much wealth and leisure and to connect with a great master like TUR, don't you think?


Malcolm wrote:
People waste their precious human birth in the most amazing ways. And I don't mean connecting with TUR.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, June 21st, 2017 at 11:28 PM
Title: Re: who's ngondro is it anyway
Content:
Grigoris said:
By not "hanging onto numbers" one runs the risk of drifting around aimlessly without a target or goal, spending too much or too little time on the activity, wasting one's time and energy wandering around in circles.

Malcolm wrote:
Numbers, time, or signs. The latter is best.

Grigoris said:
They are not mutually exclusive.  One can achieve the signs within the numbers or time.  Sometimes signs may not manifest during the specific practice though, do you believe maintaining the practice is a good idea in that case or would it be better to move on and (possibly) gain the signs later, possibly during another practice?

Was it Maitripa that got sick of accumulating without experiencing signs, and so threw his mala into the latrine in frustration and then...?

Malcolm wrote:
Virupa. However, Virupa had many signs, but since he never received the intimate instructions connected with Vajrayogini from his gurus, he did not properly understand the signs he was having, and interpreted them as bad omens and signs of failure. Thus he became despondent, tossed his mala in the toilet, which led to his dream of Nairatmya, and his subsequent meeting with her in human form. She then sorted him out, and he achieved six bhumis in six days as a result of her teachings.

Personal experience indicates to me that signs are better, and that they often come before one has done a complete number or time. For me the worst practice was mandala, and it was the practice in which I had the best signs. Then the rest of my retreat was a breeze.

The Sakya approach to Ngondro has always been much less number oriented anyway — classically it was based on time periods, one month of this, then that, etc.. The number trip is a rather modern thing for Sakyapas. I did follow it, actually, but in retrospect, I would have done things a little differently. In any case, no matter, I finished my retreat. Another thing, the signs I had from mandala I did not recognize at the time as being specific to mandala, etc. But later on, some years later, I read a commentary that specified the signs of each of the ngondro practices and I can report that I had those experiences.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, June 21st, 2017 at 10:36 PM
Title: Re: Sam Harris receives a (literal) pointing out instruction
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
https://www.rhizzone.net/articles/sam-harris-fraud/

smcj said:
The article makes a big deal out of his trust fund financial status from his "Hollywood parents". His dad was a soap opera actor. That's small potatoes.


Malcolm wrote:
I think the dead salmon and claim to be a neuroscientist is more the issue here...


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, June 21st, 2017 at 10:02 PM
Title: Re: who's ngondro is it anyway
Content:
Grigoris said:
By not "hanging onto numbers" one runs the risk of drifting around aimlessly without a target or goal, spending too much or too little time on the activity, wasting one's time and energy wandering around in circles.

Malcolm wrote:
Numbers, time, or signs. The latter is best.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, June 21st, 2017 at 9:21 PM
Title: Re: Sam Harris receives a (literal) pointing out instruction
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
https://www.rhizzone.net/articles/sam-harris-fraud/


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, June 21st, 2017 at 8:59 PM
Title: Re: Do we have free will?
Content:
pael said:
Do we have free will?


Malcolm wrote:
Does not apply in Buddhadharma. The question only applies in theistic traditions.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, June 21st, 2017 at 3:41 AM
Title: Re: who's ngondro is it anyway
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
For example, in Sakya they have a system where one can visualize oneself as a Hevajra, and practice it as a yidam. One can also practice Hevajra Guru yoga where one visualizes the guru as the mandala of Hevajra. But theory behind each practice is completely different. They are separate paths. The latter bypasses creation and completion stage completely.

anjali said:
Is "bypass" the best choice of wording here?

Malcolm wrote:
Bypass is apt.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, June 21st, 2017 at 3:24 AM
Title: Re: who's ngondro is it anyway
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Since we live in Kali Yuga, if it says 100, you now have to do 400.

tomamundsen said:
No, people need to do however many their guru tells them...

Malcolm wrote:
I think you rather missed the point.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, June 21st, 2017 at 2:39 AM
Title: Re: who's ngondro is it anyway
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Yes, śamatha and vipaśyāna are not guru yoga. Nor is practicing the six perfections, nor do any of the three lower tantras have guru yoga. Guru yoga exists only in highest yoga tantra on up.

Meditating on the guru is held to be more effective than yidam practices, and so on.

Grigoris said:
Yes, but I want to go to my original point, which you did not answer too:  If the Yidam and the Guru are seen as inseparable, then surely the one practice is as effective as the other?

Malcolm wrote:
What I am saying is that the guru is the ultimate yidam which is peerless and beyond compare.

Grigoris said:
If the Six Perfections are seen as the qualities of the perfect teacher, etc...  Surely it is more a matter of view then it is a matter of specific practices?

Malcolm wrote:
There is no guru yoga in common Mahāyāna.

Grigoris said:
If the Guru is the source of all blessing (and no doubt the Guru is), then wouldn't any teaching bestowed by the Guru (including the "lowly" practices of śamatha and vipaśyāna) be on par with a "formal" Guru Yoga?

Malcolm wrote:
Why would they be? Guru yoga is a very specific practice with a very specific theory related to the vajra body and the indestructible bindu.



Grigoris said:
With the right view wouldn't all teachings be a Guru Yoga since the Guru is the source of those teachings?

Malcolm wrote:
For example, in Sakya they have a system where one can visualize oneself as a Hevajra, and practice it as a yidam. One can also practice Hevajra Guru yoga where one visualizes the guru as the mandala of Hevajra. But theory behind each practice is completely different. They are separate paths. The latter bypasses creation and completion stage completely.

In Nyingma they have many practices related to Guru Rinpoche. For example, in Dudjom Tersar it is common to practice Drollo as the Guru, Kilaya as the Yidam, and Troma as the Dakini, for blessings, siddhis, and activities respectively.

In Konchok Chidu, we have the outer, inner, and secret guru, Pema Obar, Guru Dragpo, and Simhamukha as guru deva and dakini.

But in the end, it is the practice of guru yoga that is most important in all schools.  All a Nyingma practitioner really needs is Shower of Blessings by Mipham, or something similar.

The long Dudjom Tersar Ngondro states that it itself is enough, and that there is no need to do other creation or completion stage practices. Taking this as a basis, then one is given teachings on the three spaces and the text on rushan, and thogal.

But since people's karma is different, there are many practices of the three roots for people of various dispositions and karmas.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, June 21st, 2017 at 2:09 AM
Title: Re: who's ngondro is it anyway
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Everything comes from the guru. This is why guru yoga is the most important practice of all. As Virupa states, "The profound path is the guru."

Grigoris said:
What I am asking is:  if practiced properly, is there a practice/path that is not guru yoga?

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, śamatha and vipaśyāna are not guru yoga. Nor is practicing the six perfections, nor do any of the three lower tantras have guru yoga. Guru yoga exists only in highest yoga tantra on up.

Meditating on the guru is held to be more effective than yidam practices, and so on.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, June 21st, 2017 at 12:17 AM
Title: Re: New Longchenpa translations from Eric Fry-Miller
Content:


dzogchungpa said:
Also, I don't know much German, and I know even less about Heidegger so I can't really answer questions relating to this term, at least, not yet.

Malcolm wrote:
So it is even worse, we have an absurd neologism based upon a questionable translation of a German word because someone is infatuated with Heidegger and Guenther.


Basically, Heidegger was the worst thing that ever happened to Dzogchen.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, June 21st, 2017 at 12:00 AM
Title: Re: who's ngondro is it anyway
Content:
Matylda said:
Anyway I wonder if in fact there is no some remote origin of Tibetan ngondro in India... somehow Tibetan masters had to come to conclusion with ngondro, and probably it was not out of the blue.

Malcolm wrote:
Indian ngondro consisted primarily of Vajrasattva, Mandala offerings and supplications to the guru. Refuge and Bodhicitta were added by Tibetans, as far as I can tell.

dzogchungpa said:
Was it typically numbers-based, i.e. you have to do (at least) a certain amount of each practice, and basically a prerequisite?

Malcolm wrote:
As far as I know, it was signs based. You did each practice until you have a sign. In SMS level 2 and beyond, it is all signs based, AFAIK.

The number thing comes from lower tantra. Since we live in Kali Yuga, if it says 100, you now have to do 400.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, June 20th, 2017 at 11:50 PM
Title: Re: New Longchenpa translations from Eric Fry-Miller
Content:
dzogchungpa said:
Um, for the record, I am not a fan of Guenther's stuff either. I just thought "absurd neologisms" was a bit too flip.

Malcolm wrote:
I said it, and I am sticking too it: "ground-presencing" is an absurd neologism. Incidentally, anwesen is also a noun in German meaning "property." Sure you didn't mean " anwesend," adj. "present?"


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, June 20th, 2017 at 11:19 PM
Title: Re: who's ngondro is it anyway
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Everything comes from the guru. This is why guru yoga is the most important practice of all. As Virupa states, "The profound path is the guru."

Grigoris said:
You won't see me disagreeing.  But why define guru yoga so narrowly?


Malcolm wrote:
I haven't defined it narrowly. I have defined it as the most important of all practices.
The guru is the Buddha, the guru is the  Dharma,
likewise the guru is the Sangha, 
the guru is Śrī Heruka, 
the guru creates everything.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, June 20th, 2017 at 10:07 PM
Title: Re: who's ngondro is it anyway
Content:
Matylda said:
Anyway I wonder if in fact there is no some remote origin of Tibetan ngondro in India... somehow Tibetan masters had to come to conclusion with ngondro, and probably it was not out of the blue.

Malcolm wrote:
Indian ngondro consisted primarily of Vajrasattva, Mandala offerings and supplications to the guru. Refuge and Bodhicitta were added by Tibetans, as far as I can tell.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, June 20th, 2017 at 10:04 PM
Title: Re: who's ngondro is it anyway
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
It is better that someone recall the guru for an instant
than meditate one hundred thousand deities
for ten million years.
— The Great Array Tantra

Grigoris said:
Sure, but if one sees the unity of guru, deva and dakini...  Well...  Killing three birds with one stone, really.


Malcolm wrote:
Everything comes from the guru. This is why guru yoga is the most important practice of all. As Virupa states, "The profound path is the guru."


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, June 20th, 2017 at 9:46 PM
Title: Re: who's ngondro is it anyway
Content:
Anonymous X said:
In Japan, as Matyida points out, the Shingon also incorporate this, but the influence in Shingon is derived from Tibet, not Japanese culture.

Malcolm wrote:
No, Japanese Shingon does not depend on Tibetan Buddhism at all for anything. It is a completely independent stream of Vajrayāna.

Anonymous X said:
Thanks for the correction. I had always assumed it came to Japan via China and Tibet.

Malcolm wrote:
No, India --> China --> Japan.

Shingon is a little older than the Vajrayāna that went to Tibet.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, June 20th, 2017 at 9:41 PM
Title: Re: who's ngondro is it anyway
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Guru yoga isn't a preliminary. It is the main practice, far more important than any deity yoga.

Grigoris said:
I didn't say it is a preliminary practice, I said it is normally part of the preliminaries.  And, excuse me if I am wrong, but isn't one meant to see the guru as the deity?  As the protector?  As the...  So I fail to see why you would delineate between Guru Yoga practice and Yidam practice...

Malcolm wrote:
It is better that someone recall the guru for an instant
than meditate one hundred thousand deities
for ten million years.
— The Great Array Tantra


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, June 20th, 2017 at 8:49 PM
Title: Re: New Longchenpa translations from Eric Fry-Miller
Content:


dzogchungpa said:
In this case I  believe 'presencing' originally comes from English translations of Heidegger's 'anwesen'.

Malcolm wrote:
Even worse. There is no use in mixing up Dzogchen language with the jargon of Western Philosophers.

Lingpupa said:
I agree with my whole heart!
But I reply because, although it is quite a few years since I read any significant amount of Guenther's work, I recall that one of the great difficulties was that he threw terminology from the phenomenological/existentialist tradition exemplified by Heidegger into his translations without explanation, almost as if to imply that the terminology had a clear, obvious, and usable meaning, or as if to  imply that it was necessary to have studied that continental philosophical thinking before being able to engage properly with Buddhism. Perhaps, in this case, he did explain it, but I would be surprised.

Malcolm wrote:
Guenther's works cannot be taken seriously as studies of Dzogchen texts. Despite his obvious kindness to the tradition and number of people like Steve Goodman and Jim Valby whom he encouraged to study it, his books are not about Dzogchen. They are about mapping Western philosophy onto an non-Western tradition. I predict Guenther studies will become a thing someday.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, June 20th, 2017 at 8:43 PM
Title: Re: who's ngondro is it anyway
Content:
Grigoris said:
The fact that all teachers give preliminary practices/exercises, of one type or another, is rather more telling than the opinions of internet experts.

To me, if anything, it underlines the extreme need for the guru yoga practice (which is normally part of the preliminaries for any serious Vajrayana practice).

Malcolm wrote:
Guru yoga isn't a preliminary. It is the main practice, far more important than any deity yoga.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, June 20th, 2017 at 8:42 PM
Title: Re: who's ngondro is it anyway
Content:
Anonymous X said:
In Japan, as Matyida points out, the Shingon also incorporate this, but the influence in Shingon is derived from Tibet, not Japanese culture.

Malcolm wrote:
No, Japanese Shingon does not depend on Tibetan Buddhism at all for anything. It is a completely independent stream of Vajrayāna.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, June 20th, 2017 at 10:36 AM
Title: Re: who's ngondro is it anyway
Content:
Arnoud said:
What is Dharma?

Malcolm wrote:
Knowledge of your own state.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, June 20th, 2017 at 8:08 AM
Title: Re: who's ngondro is it anyway
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Practicing Ngondro is nice, but practicing Dharma is better.

TaTa said:
Well i guess this could be apply to other practices scenarios and i agree

Malcolm wrote:
Indeed, practicing Dzogchen is nice, but practicing Dharma is better.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, June 20th, 2017 at 6:32 AM
Title: Re: who's ngondro is it anyway
Content:
Johnny Dangerous said:
So to my mind part of the issue is the assumption that ngondro is something everyone should be doing in the first place, not just in how it's done. I mean ultimately we listen to our teachers of course...

Malcolm wrote:
There are ngondros and then there are ngondros, for example, in Dzogchen, the Dzogchen preliminaries are indispensable. But prostrations, recitations of refuge verses and bodhicitta verses, etc., these are all dispensable in Dzogchen.

That said, I did a full ngondro, and it didn't hurt me none.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, June 20th, 2017 at 6:29 AM
Title: Re: who's ngondro is it anyway
Content:
Johnny Dangerous said:
I wonder how much of the argument is people ending up in the wrong place, especially after having been told that they should follow the "correct" approach, when in fact there does not appear to be such an animal.

dzogchungpa said:
It seems to me that very few people have the chance to get any truly personalized advice, based on real familiarity with their condition, so what you describe is probably quite common.

Malcolm wrote:
This is in part due to a somewhat corporate approach in Vajradhātu, that spread widely. I know people who did seminary in the '80s who still have not completed their ngondro, and thus never went any further in that system.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, June 20th, 2017 at 4:39 AM
Title: Re: who's ngondro is it anyway
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Practicing Ngondro is nice, but practicing Dharma is better.

conebeckham said:
LOL, as if the two are always mutually exclusive.


Malcolm wrote:
Well, I see a lot of people practicing Ngondro who don't seem to practice Dharma at all. On the other hand, I see a lot of people who never practice Ngondro who seem to have the Dharma in their hearts. Hence my observation.

Happy Dakini day, incidentally.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, June 20th, 2017 at 4:28 AM
Title: Re: who's ngondro is it anyway
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Practicing Ngondro is nice, but practicing Dharma is better.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, June 20th, 2017 at 12:54 AM
Title: Re: New Longchenpa translations from Eric Fry-Miller
Content:


dzogchungpa said:
In this case I  believe 'presencing' originally comes from English translations of Heidegger's 'anwesen'.

Malcolm wrote:
Even worse. There is no use in mixing up Dzogchen language with the jargon of Western Philosophers.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, June 20th, 2017 at 12:20 AM
Title: Re: New Longchenpa translations from Eric Fry-Miller
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
We all experience "instant presence" all the time. The reason we have no confidence in this is that we have not been clearly introduced to it. When one is clearly introduced to it, the words do not matter very much.

Anonymous X said:
I disagree with you that all of us experience 'instant presence' all the time. It is like saying we are already enlightened, but you just don't know it. On some level, it may be true, but on a practical level, an aware level, the experience of 'instant presence' is unforgettable and not limited to Dzogchen lineage.

Malcolm wrote:
We all experience moments of unfabricated consciousness at all times, but those moments are contaminated by cognitions. This is what is known in Dzogchen parlance as "unripened rigpa."

Unless our experience is confirmed by an experienced teacher, we, on our own, have no way of validating whether what we think we are experiencing is conceptual blather or moments of unfabricated consciousness.

As far as other lineages go, I don't practice them and I cannot comment on people's experience.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, June 19th, 2017 at 11:42 PM
Title: Re: New Longchenpa translations from Eric Fry-Miller
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Rongzom Pandita stated that the words of Dzogchen are very simple, but their meaning is profound. It seems the hardest task in the world for Dzogchen translators to put these texts into simple language. Much of this is Herbert Guenther's fault. Thus we wind up with absurd neologisms like "ground-presencing" which mean absolutely nothing in English.

dzogchungpa said:
Well, I'm not sure what you mean by 'absurd' here but if you leave terms untranslated they are essentially neologisms that mean nothing in English so I don't see really see what your objection is.


Malcolm wrote:
My objection is to absurd neologisms, not to neologisms in general. No one knows what "ground-presencing" means since it is not English at all. "Presence" is a noun. There is no verb "to presence" in English.

By contrast, a few simple Buddhist technical terms kept in Sanskrit (and a couple in Tibetan such as khregs chod and thod rgal ) will keep translations much cleaner and neater.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, June 19th, 2017 at 9:43 PM
Title: Re: New Longchenpa translations from Eric Fry-Miller
Content:
Anonymous X said:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but it would stand to reason that the actual experience of instant presence would be apparent to anyone who has had it. The problem might arise if that person described it in a way to someone else who used a different word or phrase to describe the same thing. Add a third person using yet another word or phrase and it becomes confusing to a listener who has not had it and it could be perplexing to someone who has had it, too.


Malcolm wrote:
We all experience "instant presence" all the time. The reason we have no confidence in this is that we have not been clearly introduced to it. When one is clearly introduced to it, the words do not matter very much.

Rongzom Pandita stated that the words of Dzogchen are very simple, but their meaning is profound. It seems the hardest task in the world for Dzogchen translators to put these texts into simple language. Much of this is Herbert Guenther's fault. Thus we wind up with absurd neologisms like "ground-presencing" which mean absolutely nothing in English.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, June 19th, 2017 at 9:36 PM
Title: Re: Lamas willing to teach from afar?
Content:
okay said:
Thanks so much, I'll check it out. Do you maybe know if there's also a way to ask personal practice questions?


Malcolm wrote:
Rinpoche answers all emails from all students. Though maybe not right now, since he had recently a very bad bout with arthritis that has probably made that not as possible.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, June 19th, 2017 at 12:23 AM
Title: Re: New Longchenpa translations from Eric Fry-Miller
Content:
Anonymous X said:
You make good points about the words. I would think that among the Tibetans, they would arrive at a word or phrase that most teachers could agree describes a term like rigpa.

Malcolm wrote:
Actually, these definitions are quite clearly made in Tibetan texts.

All that remains is for Westerners to stop conditioning Tibetan Lamas with mistranslations from their own naive misunderstandings of Dzogchen texts so that we can have good reliable translations of them based on native definitions of words. For example, with respect to the term dhātu, the actual Tibetan explanation is that a dhātu (dbyings) is a ' byung gnas," a source, hearkening back to the original Sanskrit meaning of dhātu as a "mine."

We must keep in mind that some of the most influential Dzogchen translations where made at a time when not only did the translators not understand Tibetan very well, let alone Dzogchen, but that the Tibetan Lamas involved knew almost no English.

This is not to fault anyone, but merely to point out that Dzogchen translation is still in its infancy. But when one talks about translations, people get all mad because they invest a lot in what they thought they understood through translations they like.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, June 19th, 2017 at 12:17 AM
Title: Re: New Longchenpa translations from Eric Fry-Miller
Content:
Anonymous X said:
What is ChNN's choice of translation now?

Malcolm wrote:
He gives two glosses, depending on context. One is "instant presence." This is more in reference to the state discovered in direct introduction.

The second is "knowledge of your primordial state [ ye thog gzhi ]." This is more global use of the term, when the term rigpa is used for the actual essence of Dzogchen.

His translators just generally phoneticize the term as rigpa these days, or use instant presence with rigpa in brackets. And his translators also understand that rang rig is not "self-knowing," but rather "one's knowledge."


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, June 18th, 2017 at 11:54 PM
Title: Re: New Longchenpa translations from Eric Fry-Miller
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
I see, so it is easy to get a taste of the "the basic space of phenomena?"

dzogchungpa said:
Well, at least it provides some food for thought.

Actually, I prefer that technical terms be left untranslated but if you have a somewhat general readership in mind it's problematic without extensive glossaries, contextualization etc. Some words would probably require short essays to explain. So, I can see both sides of the issue but I basically agree with you.


Malcolm wrote:
Dharma is like any science or area of specialized knowledge, it has some technical terms that must be learnt. And we do have dictionaries.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, June 18th, 2017 at 11:20 PM
Title: Re: New Longchenpa translations from Eric Fry-Miller
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Some people want to translate everything into English, whereas I want to make some terms English, like dharmadhātu, dharmatā, etc. After all, no one translates the word "gaucamole" or "puttanesca" into English? They have become English words in their own right.

dzogchungpa said:
That's true, but it's not so hard to get a taste of guacamole or puttanesca and the same can not be said for dharmadhātu, dharmatā, etc.

Malcolm wrote:
I see, so it is easy to get a taste of the "the basic space of phenomena?"

And the use of awareness for rigpa is like giving someone salt and telling them it is sugar.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, June 18th, 2017 at 10:09 PM
Title: Re: New Longchenpa translations from Eric Fry-Miller
Content:
RikudouSennin said:
Hmmm, so there are errors in the translations, bummer.
My copy of the Golden Garland seemed okay but then again I don't know the original language, so finding out about errors in the translation...glad my other order was refunded.

Malcolm wrote:
Translators are works in progress.

Anonymous X said:
Malcolm, which Longchenpa translations float your boat?

Malcolm wrote:
They are all transitional, first attempts to translate a difficult subject by a difficult writer into English. Longchenpa' prose style is considered very elegant in Tibetan, but in English it has been generally rendered very turgidly so far. His verse translates into English somewhat more elegantly, but without considerable intellectual contrivance on the part of the translator, his verse, like most Tibetan verse, winds up being rendered very prosaically.

But as with all first attempts, there can be errors, sometimes important ones, like the calque for dharmadhātu, "basic space of phenomena;" or the use of "ineffability" for nonexistence (med pa), which was the result of a translator/editorial team imposing a top down interpretation on a text, rather than reading the text itself, and more importantly, the tradition as a whole. Sometimes inertia just sets in, where people just follow what people before them did out of lack of certainty, clear research, or laziness.

Some people want to translate everything into English, whereas I want to make some terms English, like dharmadhātu, dharmatā, etc. After all, no one translates the word "gaucamole" or "puttanesca" into English? They have become English words in their own right.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, June 18th, 2017 at 9:11 PM
Title: Re: Lamas willing to teach from afar?
Content:
okay said:
Hi,

First: great forums, really impressed.

I have a question: I've been a practicing Buddhist for decades. Got some personal instruction and also direct introduction to the nature of the mind, and studied. My Teacher passed away, and I recently begun strongly wanting to deepen my practice again but where I live now there are absolutely no centers, no Lamas to talk to face to face. I guess a Tibetan might call the place where I live a barbaric land... sigh, anyway, I have no means of travel so that's that.

Do you maybe know qualified Lamas who would be willing to give instruction by skype or any way that's not face to face, but from afar?

Not ideal, not as good as meeting in person, but also not as bad as not having the karma to get any instruction at all. So I'm looking.

Thanks


Malcolm wrote:
Webcasts with Chogyal Namkhai Norbu.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, June 17th, 2017 at 11:36 AM
Title: Re: The Resistance goes live-fire... Really?
Content:
PuerAzaelis said:
In The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis...

Queequeg said:
Um. What language is that? Is that American? I couldn't understand.

Tl;dr please.

Malcolm wrote:
U can't be serious.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, June 17th, 2017 at 6:00 AM
Title: Re: The Resistance goes live-fire... Really?
Content:
boda said:
I coincidentally read another critique of the Resistance yesterday. This one coming from within the Buddhist circle. Brad Warner’s recent blog post titled “Resistance? What Resistance?”, expresses his deep thoughts

Malcolm wrote:
Brad Warner has deep thoughts?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, June 17th, 2017 at 3:56 AM
Title: Re: The Resistance goes live-fire... Really?
Content:


Grigoris said:
Anyway, this whole left/right thing is pretty arbitrary anyway.

Malcolm wrote:
See, you agree with me. I said it was a matter of perspective, you say it is arbitrary.


Grigoris said:
CNN propaganda tends to be economic-liberal and politically center-right, no matter which angle you view it from.

Malcolm wrote:
CNN is socially liberal, economically progressive, in line with the NYT, WaPo, etc. Politically, they are center left, no matter which angle you view it from.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, June 17th, 2017 at 3:53 AM
Title: Re: Some Dos and Don’ts of Mantric or Tantric Healing
Content:
naljor said:
Very interesting, thanks, is it from the point of view of lower tantras? For example it says Nettle soup diminishes mantra power for half a month – but wasn’t there a yogi who lived on nettle soup?

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, Milarepa.


naljor said:
What is most interesting for me is how successfully alternate periods of doing mantra with ordinary speech activities in daily life.

Malcolm wrote:
All speech is mantra.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, June 17th, 2017 at 3:34 AM
Title: Re: The Resistance goes live-fire... Really?
Content:
boda said:
This is so sad to watch I'm going to actually help you troll me, Grigoris. Out of social status, intelligence, morality, and I guThing is that I wasn't trolling.  You really do have to be on some serious drugs to consider CNN a liberal news service, unless, of course, you are talking about economic liberalism.

Malcolm wrote:
Or, you have to be an fairly left-wing person to consider CNN conservative or right wing. It's all a matter of perspective, no?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, June 16th, 2017 at 9:51 PM
Title: Re: The Resistance goes live-fire... Really?
Content:
The Cicada said:
If anything, as a Mexican-American, I'm highly dangerous. So dangerous​ I think I would be afraid of myself if I could feel fear.
I'm serious about this. Ask Queequeg. He's completely freaked out by me.

Jesse said:
Alas.. There is also much animosity, and anger coming from many left-wing groups, that is like dumping fuel on the Trump Nation fire.

The Cicada said:
No one envisioned an endpoint to the social grievances that were given voice in the civil rights era. There was no point envisioned where those deemed to have been oppressed, in whatever way, would stop and say, "This is sufficient. The society that wronged our parents has been fair to us, and we stand as equal to those who brought our ancestors into it, or upon them, as life and fate will allow." Subsequently, such grievances have become powerful levers for persuasion by the elites to create strategic divisions within the population and maintain their respective agendas.

Malcolm wrote:
Pretty much total nonsense.

The Cicada said:
One of the things that gets me the most about the negative media commentary on Trump is that, besides the deliberately bombastic statements he's made about his opponents, much of what he says and promises wouldn't have caused such a stir 20 years ago.


Malcolm wrote:
Yes, they would have. You seem to forget his ignorant and racist ads placed in the NYT.

The Cicada said:
Enforce immigration laws? Good idea—that's why we made the laws in the first place.

Malcolm wrote:
Tell that to the farmers that grow all that cheap food you eat. Worst thing for American food prices and fast food labor is cracking down on illegal immigrants.


The Cicada said:
Bring jobs back from overseas...

Malcolm wrote:
You're kidding, right?

The Cicada said:
Defeat ISIS? We broke the whole area with half-assed efforts over a war started on dubious pretexts, might as well clean up our mess.

Malcolm wrote:
Great, another 15 years in the Middle East.


The Cicada said:
But the media wants to point out his Twitter typos, take his statements out of context, and paint him as an avatar of Hitler.

Malcolm wrote:
Umm no, his mistakes are his, and he has left nothing to the imagination in terms of his intentions.


The Cicada said:
He asked whether the Civil War was necessary in our history or whether the differences that caused it could have been worked out peacefully, and somehow this implies everything but the obvious, peace-making and unifying message, he meant to communicate by sharing this thought.

Malcolm wrote:
Man, you really have drunk the kool-aid.



The Cicada said:
Meanwhile, the state of California signed an environmental deal with China—a foreign nation—adding to the precedents that will lead to some part of the US becoming autonomous by de facto, de jure, or postbellum within our lifetimes. A precedent different from the usual threats of secession by Cali and Texas after the odd and symbolic inter-state travel ban over transgender​ bathrooms a few years ago on the East Coast—a seemingly innocuous issue that historians will someday recognize as a prominent symptom of the growing ideological disagreement within the nation over what it means to be a part if it and the implications of that for the individual.


Malcolm wrote:
The Right-wing in this country seems to have always felt they have a right to dictate people's bodies.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, June 16th, 2017 at 10:28 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen and Vajrakila/Vajrakilaya
Content:
Mantrik said:
Is there a special relationship between the Dzogchen path and Vajrakilaya?

I seem to remember a reference in the 'Golden Letters' by John Myrdhin Reynolds but can't recall if Vajrakilaya was especially useful in following the teachings of Garab Dorje.


Malcolm wrote:
Dudjom Lingpa has an extensive terma called Namchag Putri, Razor of Meteoric Iron, a Vajrakilaya cycle that has an extensive presentation of the Dzogchen path within it.

M

Mantrik said:
How does this relate to the Putri Rekpung, please?

Malcolm wrote:
It is like father and son.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, June 16th, 2017 at 4:05 AM
Title: Re: "Near-vana"....?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Madhyamaka is just a means of enforcing correct view.

Astus said:
Do you not consider it a valid path for non-conceptual wisdom?

Malcolm wrote:
Madhyamaka is not a path. If you want a path, look at Mahāyāna.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, June 16th, 2017 at 3:53 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen and Vajrakila/Vajrakilaya
Content:
Mantrik said:
Is there a special relationship between the Dzogchen path and Vajrakilaya?

I seem to remember a reference in the 'Golden Letters' by John Myrdhin Reynolds but can't recall if Vajrakilaya was especially useful in following the teachings of Garab Dorje.


Malcolm wrote:
Dudjom Lingpa has an extensive terma called Namchag Putri, Razor of Meteoric Iron, a Vajrakilaya cycle that has an extensive presentation of the Dzogchen path within it.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, June 16th, 2017 at 3:45 AM
Title: Re: "Near-vana"....?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Madhyamaka does not establish a basis, a path, and result. No one said they did. They accept the basis, path, and result put forward by general Mahāyāna, as witnessed by the Madhyamaka commentaries (by Vimuktisena, Haribhadra, etc.) on the Abhisamayālaṃkara. You were the one who claimed that Madhyamaka was a complete and independent teaching, not me.

Astus said:
I wrote that Madhyamaka is a complete teaching, and not something that is meant simply to be used as a correction for other systems. But if it were used as an arbiter over others, then their methods would suffer from it. And before calling it a complete teaching, I also noted that it is not a doctrine establishing things on its own but relying on others, as a response to you stating that Madhyamaka not only negates but enforces rationality. So now when you write that they accept what others put forward, that is exactly what I meant by building on others, and not rationalising others.

Malcolm wrote:
Madhyamaka is just a means of enforcing correct view. That's all. In fact, the system of Bhavaviveka is used for refuting non-buddhists, while the system of Candrakīrti is used for refuting Buddhists. That's it. There are no other purpose for Madhyamaka. It is strictly a critical approach for correcting other systems. It has no system of its own, but it does enforce rationality by subjecting propositions to the test of whether or not they have hidden statements of essences within them. Why? Because assertions of essence are irrational.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, June 16th, 2017 at 2:24 AM
Title: Re: Rabbit's Horn and Bull's Horn (from Dzogchen the Self-Perfected State)
Content:
Seeker12 said:
First of all, I apologize as this is not necessarily specifically a Dzogchen question. However, it is from a Dzogchen book and I'm aware that a number of you are student's of ChNN, so I thought this was perhaps an appropriate place to ask.

Basically, in the book, when discussing voidness in the Prajnaparamita Sutras in Chapter 3, a footnote says, "To understand correctly the concept of voidness, the examples are given in the Sutras of the "rabbit's horn" and the "bull's horn". There has never been such a thing as a rabbit's horn, and so it would be useless to deny its existence. If we were to deny the existence of a bull's horn, on the other hand, we would be directly denying the existence of something whose existence we consider real and material. In the same way, the "void" is not an attribute of an "abstract condition" of things, but is the very nature of their materiality."

The only reference I can find to a rabbit's horn is from the Platform Sutra which basically says "To search for Bodhi apart from the world
Is like looking for a hare with horns". I see no reference to a bull's horn.

Can anyone elucidate what is meant by this reference or provide references?

Thanks. If it's appropriate I can post this in the Mahayana or Sutra section, but given the source I thought I'd start here.

Malcolm wrote:
It means we do not bother negating something that is impossible, like the horns on a rabbit, hair on a tortoise, the son of a barren woman, etc.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, June 16th, 2017 at 1:18 AM
Title: Re: "Near-vana"....?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
This passage does not negate the convention of going. It only negates the motion of nondependent entities.

Astus said:
As the Madhyamaka convention goes, conventions are not debated. But once conventions are analysed, there is nothing left to posit or rely on. That's why establishing things like basis, path, and result are not the Madhyamaka method.


Malcolm wrote:
Astus, you are debating conventions.

Madhyamaka does not establish a basis, a path, and result. No one said they did. They accept the basis, path, and result put forward by general Mahāyāna, as witnessed by the Madhyamaka commentaries (by Vimuktisena, Haribhadra, etc.) on the Abhisamayālaṃkara. You were the one who claimed that Madhyamaka was a complete and independent teaching, not me.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, June 15th, 2017 at 10:44 PM
Title: Re: "Near-vana"....?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Madhyamaka is strictly a critical school, and does not offer basis, path, and result that is in anyway distinct from Yogacāra.
The role of Madhyamaka is to make sure that Buddhist assertions remain in line with the Buddha's teaching of emptiness and dependent origination — that's all.

Astus said:
If one should apply the reasoning provided in Madhyamaka to all doctrines, there can be neither basis nor path, much less anything to attain as a result.

"One who is a real goer does not perform a going of any of the three kinds.
Neither does one who is not a real goer perform a going of any of the three kinds.
One who is a both-real-and-unreal goer does not perform a going of any of the three kinds.
Thus there is no going, no goer, and no destination."
(MMK 2.24-25, tr Siderits)

Malcolm wrote:
This passage does not negate the convention of going. It only negates the motion of nondependent entities.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, June 15th, 2017 at 8:40 PM
Title: Re: please help identify these two figures
Content:
heart said:
The second one is Padampa Sangye.

/magnus

dzoki said:
Actually it is Brahmanarupa Mahakala.

The first one appears to be Luipa, though usually Luipa is depicted with fish entrails in his left hand, sometimes he is depicted with kapala.

heart said:
Very cool Mahakala, I had no idea.

/magnus


Malcolm wrote:
Yes, this is the exoteric presentation of Caturmukha Mahakala, the main protector of the Sakya doctrine.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, June 15th, 2017 at 8:30 PM
Title: Re: Japanese Fascism
Content:


DGA said:
The first draft of Fascism, Mussolini's Italy, was not particularly concerned with race until after falling under the influence of its neighbor to the north.


Malcolm wrote:
Well, that is debatable, from the start Mussolini was concerned with "spazio vitale," which the Nazi's also adopted.

What is interesting is how much in common Trump's ideology has with Mussolini's. Like Mussolini, Trump is obsessed with the idea that other countries are interfering with American economic expansion. Like Mussolini, Trump ran on campaign targeting inferior outsiders (in Mussolini's case it was Slavs he was worried about.) Fortunately Trump is a rich old fart who avoided entering the service rather than a war veteran, like Hitler and Mussolini, so he cannot really command respect of disgruntled vets, though he tries lamely.


