﻿Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, September 11th, 2011 at 7:39 AM
Title: Re: why did you 'guess' buddhism?
Content:
Matt J said:
....Also, I don't accept the idea that Buddhist teachers are more realized than other traditions.  How do you measure realization?  With a cup?

Namdrol said:
That is because you don't understand what Buddha meant by realization.

N

Kyosan said:
You are probably right that he doesn't understand. In fact, I doubt that any of us know precisely what Buddha meant by realization. For sure I don't.

Malcolm wrote:
Then you are are like a man shooting arrows in the dark.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, September 11th, 2011 at 7:37 AM
Title: Re: The Rainbow Body, Tibetan Kings, dmu-thag, Agganna Sutta
Content:
AilurusFulgens said:
....


Malcolm wrote:
The actual name of the result described in Dzogchen tantras is "body of light" -- the term rainbow body is a Tibetan popular term that is at best very imprecise.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, September 11th, 2011 at 7:35 AM
Title: Re: the ever-changing Western view of Madhyamaka
Content:


Namdrol said:
Basically the rang stong/gzhan stong controversy is bullshit, and so is the prasangika/svatantrika controversy.

If you want to understand Madhyamaka, don't read Tibetan accounts of Madhyamaka dating after the 13th century. And here, it is better still just to rely on Indian masters. The sole exception to this is Khenpa Shenga's treatises, which are just Indian commentaries turned into footnoted annotations of root texts.

N

Virgo said:
Keeping the above in mind, what would you recommend in English?

Kevin


Malcolm wrote:
The Yogic Deeds of Bodhisattvas
INTRODUCTION TO THE MIDDLE WAY: Chandrakirti's Madhyamakavatara with Commentary by Jamgon Mipham
THE ORNAMENT OF REASON: The Great Commentary to Nagarjuna's Root of the Middle Way
NAGARJUNA'S REASON SIXTY (Yuktisastika) with CANDRAKIRTI'S COMMENTARY (Yuktisastikavrtti)

This is my shortlist.

Mab


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, September 11th, 2011 at 7:31 AM
Title: Re: "On White Women and Buddhism"
Content:
Jikan said:
he'll know if he's white or black when it's night and he needs a cab.

kirtu said:
So you are agreeing with the statement that race is a social construct that others use to define you (or impose  their view of you on you) and then to execute social rules or prejudices about you?

Kirt


Malcolm wrote:
Of course "race" is a social construct, it has no genetic basis.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, September 11th, 2011 at 6:07 AM
Title: Re: Difference between recognizing rigpa & realizing emptiness?
Content:
xabir said:
http://www.heartofnow.com/files/emptiness.html " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


alwayson said:
Namdrol,

Is this a good link or is it garbage?


Malcolm wrote:
Better to rely on traditional sources.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, September 11th, 2011 at 6:00 AM
Title: Re: "On White Women and Buddhism"
Content:
kirtu said:
And what of my non-white relatives and ancestors from my mother's family?  Are they just wiped away?

Malcolm wrote:
No.



kirtu said:
Look if we assert racial silliness (and unfortunately our history does) we get in trouble.  The classic examples: Barak Obama : is he black or white?

Malcolm wrote:
Black. Yes, I know he has a white mother. I know black people with white mothers and white people with black mothers and some people of mixed parentage who don't identify with either.



kirtu said:
Wentworth Miller: is he black or white? wmiller.jpeg


Malcolm wrote:
I don't know. He could be either, that is up to him.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, September 11th, 2011 at 12:36 AM
Title: Re: "On White Women and Buddhism"
Content:
xylem said:
in Washington DC I find many African-American people decide upon seeing me that I am what they call "white".

Malcolm wrote:
I have met you. In this country, you are white.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, September 11th, 2011 at 12:33 AM
Title: Re: Difference between recognizing rigpa & realizing emptiness?
Content:
White Lotus said:
no need to see emptiness.

Malcolm wrote:
You are just deluding yourself further.

You should actually study Dzogchen, learn from qualified masters for some number of years and practice it rather than belaboring others with poorly digested intellectual snippets from a febrile imagination.

In other words, you should be asking questions, not providing answers.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, September 11th, 2011 at 12:30 AM
Title: Re: Difference between recognizing rigpa & realizing emptiness?
Content:
White Lotus said:
...however awareness is the point within the circle. it is not empty, it resides within emptiness.

Malcolm wrote:
rigpa is also empty.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 10th, 2011 at 11:39 PM
Title: Re: Delusion
Content:
Namdrol said:
Cessation occurs when, through awakened insight, one removes a cause of further arising. Without awakening, first, there is no analytical cessation.

devilyoudont said:
Thanks, but why and how are you so certain that awakening is instantaneous?


Malcolm wrote:
It states it to be the case in the Abhisamayaalaṃkara, and other Mahāyāna texts, as opposed to a sixteen moment path of seeing proposed in Abhidharma kosha.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 10th, 2011 at 11:36 PM
Title: Re: 100 Syllable Mantra SUPO KAYO ME BHAVA
Content:
dakini_boi said:
Why don't we have ཝཛྲ for example?

Malcolm wrote:
[/quote]

Sometimes you see this, actually.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 10th, 2011 at 11:36 PM
Title: Re: 100 Syllable Mantra SUPO KAYO ME BHAVA
Content:
dakini_boi said:
By the way, interesting to note that when ChNN was transmitting a medicine buddha mantra at one of his recent retreats, he pronounced "bhekhandze" and even mentioned that he was doing so because this was how it was transmitted to him!


Malcolm wrote:
Yes, that is correct. That is how ChNN likes to do things.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 10th, 2011 at 11:35 PM
Title: Re: 100 Syllable Mantra SUPO KAYO ME BHAVA
Content:
dakini_boi said:
And while we're still on the subject. . .

Namdrol, do you have any idea why in most cases བ is used for both Sanskrit ब and व?  Why don't we have ཝཛྲ for example?

Namdrol said:
There is a recognized regular shift from f -- > v --> b in Indo European langauges. For example, the Roman word for preist, "flamen", by phonetic shift becomes brahmin in Sanskrit. These shifts are regular and predictable.

In Kashmir and among Newars Sanskrit "va" often takes on a "ba" sound. Most Newars say Bajrayogini, not Vajrayogini.

dakini_boi said:
Thanks, Namdrol.  I understand that the pronunciation changes - but pronunciation aside, I don't understand why written mantras wouldn't be consistent with the original.  After all, the Tibetans came up with the written syllable ཝ specifically for that purpose.

So, when you come across the seed syllable BAM in a mantra, do you always pronounce it as VAM, Namdrol?

Malcolm wrote:
Depends on my mood.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 10th, 2011 at 10:49 PM
Title: Re: Delusion
Content:
devilyoudont said:
Serious, serious question about which I have no preconceived ideas, I swear: What is the relationship between cessation and awakening? If cessation cannot be instantaneous or gradual, temporal or atemporal, how can awakening be instantaneous?

Malcolm wrote:
Cessation occurs when, through awakened insight, one removes a cause of further arising. Without awakening, first, there is no analytical cessation.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 10th, 2011 at 10:47 PM
Title: Re: Delusion
Content:
devilyoudont said:
Are you awake?

Malcolm wrote:
Nope.

Half asleep.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 10th, 2011 at 10:30 PM
Title: Re: Difference between recognizing rigpa & realizing emptiness?
Content:
alwayson said:
Then are there two levels of realizing emptiness?

One for conceptual appearances?

And one for actual physical matter?


Malcolm wrote:
There are two levels of realizing emptiness, the emptiness of persons and the emptiness of phenomena (that includes all material and mental phenomena).


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 10th, 2011 at 10:21 PM
Title: Re: Difference between recognizing rigpa & realizing emptiness?
Content:
alwayson said:
You mean even the physical?

Usually appearances just refers to the designation of conceptual constructs

Malcolm wrote:
Appearances are both conceptual and non-conceptual.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 10th, 2011 at 10:16 PM
Title: Re: Difference between recognizing rigpa & realizing emptiness?
Content:
alwayson said:
Then emptiness must be the insight into appearances.

That would make sense that it is sort of separate.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, appearances as defined by all of one's experience.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 10th, 2011 at 10:12 PM
Title: Re: I am the director of the documentary TULKU. Ask me anything.
Content:
GesarMukpo said:
I don't think my future has going to study ... Buddhism at an institution involved.

Malcolm wrote:
What a pity.

Formal education results in disciplined thinking and expression. Not necessary for making films and music videos perhaps, but useful for communicating and teaching things like Dharma. It [Dharma] is also something best learned by adults, and not by children. Learning Dharma requires a degree of emotional maturity. Otherwise, it is just rote religion. Rote religion is not Dharma.

Edit: I don't meant you have to get a master's in Buddhism. However, studying things formally like Madhyamaka, Abhidharma, and so on in a rigorous place is very beneficial.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 10th, 2011 at 10:07 PM
Title: Re: Annoyance :P
Content:
Namdrol said:
Awakening is not spontaneous since it does not arise without a cause. It is not gradual since it occurs in one instant.

devilyoudont said:
Is enlightenment conditioned? Is it instantaneous and not non-instantaneous?

Malcolm wrote:
I don't use the term enlightement. Awakening however is a permanent state, from which one cannot regress.

I also don't answer pointless questions. If something occurs in an instant, it occurs in an instant, not two, three, four or sixteen instants.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 10th, 2011 at 9:14 PM
Title: Re: Silliness
Content:
devilyoudont said:
If enlightenment is spontaneous, what practice can bring you cessation?

If enlightenment is gradual, what practice can't bring you cessation?

Malcolm wrote:
Awakening is not spontaneous since it does not arise without a cause. It is not gradual since it occurs in one instant.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 10th, 2011 at 8:41 PM
Title: Re: Delusion
Content:
devilyoudont said:
Are non-spontaneity and non-gradation the temporal properties of a non-event?

Malcolm wrote:
A non event has no temporal properties of which one can speak.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 10th, 2011 at 8:09 PM
Title: Re: Delusion
Content:
devilyoudont said:
If cessation is spontaneous, what practice can bring you enlightenment?

If cessation is gradual, what practice CAN'T bring you enlightenment?

Malcolm wrote:
Cessation is not spontaneous since it is the absence of a cause.

Cessation is not gradual since it is the absence of a cause.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 10th, 2011 at 7:55 PM
Title: Re: 100 Syllable Mantra SUPO KAYO ME BHAVA
Content:
dakini_boi said:
And while we're still on the subject. . .

Namdrol, do you have any idea why in most cases བ is used for both Sanskrit ब and व?  Why don't we have ཝཛྲ for example?

Malcolm wrote:
There is a recognized regular shift from f -- > v --> b in Indo European langauges. For example, the Roman word for preist, "flamen", by phonetic shift becomes brahmin in Sanskrit. These shifts are regular and predictable.

In Kashmir and among Newars Sanskrit "va" often takes on a "ba" sound. Most Newars say Bajrayogini, not Vajrayogini.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 10th, 2011 at 9:53 AM
Title: Re: Difference between recognizing rigpa & realizing emptiness?
Content:


Namdrol said:
recognizing rigpa and realizing emptiness are different.

N


alwayson said:
What is the difference?


Malcolm wrote:
The first means you are a practitioner; the second means you are an awakened person.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 10th, 2011 at 7:19 AM
Title: Re: Do "dzogchen practices" help or hinder your thinking ability
Content:
padma norbu said:
??

I typically read stuff about mediation that it helps you to deal with stress and clears your head, allowing you to think much better.

Well, non-meditation might be different. How does it affect you?

I personally seem to find that my brain doesn't want to think about stuff, which is difficult when I am trying to figure out some programming stuff and my brain just seems to put on its brakes.

I don't know what's going on or if it related to my practices, but my brain is on vacation and doesn't look like it ever wants to come back.


Malcolm wrote:
Given that the practice of Dzogchen ultimately results in omniscience, it should help.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 9th, 2011 at 10:00 PM
Title: Re: 100 Syllable Mantra SUPO KAYO ME BHAVA
Content:
dakini_boi said:
According to traditional Sanskrit pronunciation, are seed syllables such as HUM and HRIM ever pronounced with the final sound nasalized, as in HUNG or HRING?

Namdrol said:
Yes. Ṃ and ṅg are nasilized.

dakini_boi said:
What I meant to ask was, if you are trying to pronounce mantras according to Sanskrit pronunciation, would you ever use NG, as in HUNG/HRING, or would you always use M sound at the end?

Malcolm wrote:
As I hear it, sort of a mng...In the Western yoga world they seem to default to a hard mmm, but I think this is not quite correct.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 9th, 2011 at 8:58 PM
Title: Re: Dzogchen and other traditions
Content:


kalden yungdrung said:
- How do we call here the paths of those people who are dwelling below the path of seeing? Tib / Sanskr.
- How do you call the path of seeing? Tib / Sanskr.

Namdrol said:
Worldly paths:
Sambhara mārga; tshogs lam; path of accumulation.
Prayoga mārga; sbyor lam; path of application/preparation.

Transcendent paths:
Darśana mārga; mthong lam; path of seeing
Bhavana mārga; sgom lam; path of cultivation
Aśaikṣa marga; mi slop pa'i lam; path of no further training (buddhahood)

Hayagriva said:
There are various schemes -- for the mahamudra scheme you can look in the mahamudra threads here. For Dzogchen, third vision of thögal = path of seeing.



How do the Dzogchen and Mahamudra path(s) fit with these framework?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 9th, 2011 at 8:28 PM
Title: Re: Dzogchen and other traditions
Content:


kalden yungdrung said:
- How do we call here the paths of those people who are dwelling below the path of seeing? Tib / Sanskr.
- How do you call the path of seeing? Tib / Sanskr.

Malcolm wrote:
Worldly paths:
Sambhara mārga; tshogs lam; path of accumulation.
Prayoga mārga; sbyor lam; path of application/preparation.

Transcendent paths:
Darśana mārga; mthong lam; path of seeing
Bhavana mārga; sgom lam; path of cultivation
Aśaikṣa marga; mi slop pa'i lam; path of no further training (buddhahood)


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 9th, 2011 at 8:15 PM
Title: Re: How to know a teachers level of realization?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
The Rig pa rang sharTantra states:

Without understanding, very proud, 
foolish, confused, following the words, 
not understanding the meaning of secret mantra, 
hurting others’ feelings with arrogant words, 
entering incorrect paths, 
not seeing the face of the mandala of the empowerment, 
corrupting his commitments, 
unable to respond to questions, 
little education, very proud,
the unqualified master is a student’s demon,
not being a master who can teach secret mantra,
he cannot teach dzogchen Ati.

Longchenpa adds:

"If one associates with such a Guru, one impairs all temporary good, and ultimately one falls into samsara and lower realms."

At least your prospective Guru must have a good education in secret mantra; that implies he has a good education in sutra. Sometimes, even a realized person is not necessarily a good teacher, more like pratyekabuddhas than bodhisattvas.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 9th, 2011 at 8:01 PM
Title: Re: Evolution of humans and Mahayana Buddhism
Content:
Aemilius said:
creationism is still a false view

Malcolm wrote:
That is sufficient.

He knows nothing of value to any Buddhist. His books are all speculative nonsense.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 9th, 2011 at 7:58 PM
Title: Re: Benefits of Nagarjuna / Dangers of Existence & Non-Existence
Content:
retrofuturist said:
How does belief in Existence or Non-Existence bring suffering or put roadblocks in the way of one's spiritual progress?

Malcolm wrote:
Not escaping higher realms because one engages in spiritual practice in the context of a real self (existence); negating the effects of karma and therefore, falling into lower realms (non-existence).

It is really that simple.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 9th, 2011 at 7:55 PM
Title: Re: 100 Syllable Mantra SUPO KAYO ME BHAVA
Content:


Namdrol said:
ཅ་ཆ་ཇ are tonal, in descending order. Sanskrit ca cha ja are not tonal, since Sanskrit is not a tonal language (a point Sapan makes very clear). Thonmi Sambhota wanted to make sure that Tibetans who were reading mantras were not to prounce ca cha ja the same way they were pronouncing ཅ་ཆ་ཇ. This lead to other problems, of course, later on.

dakini_boi said:
This is quite ironic.  So this leads me to wonder - when Tibetans say "tsitta" or "dza," is this because they are unable to say "citta" and "ja," or is it simply because of a misunderstanding of a writing convention. . . which has become so widespread it's become a convention in itself?

Malcolm wrote:
Tbey can say citta, and is yes, it is because of misunderstanding a writing convention.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 9th, 2011 at 7:54 PM
Title: Re: 100 Syllable Mantra SUPO KAYO ME BHAVA
Content:
dakini_boi said:
According to traditional Sanskrit pronunciation, are seed syllables such as HUM and HRIM ever pronounced with the final sound nasalized, as in HUNG or HRING?

Malcolm wrote:
Yes. Ṃ and ṅg are nasilized.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 9th, 2011 at 9:57 AM
Title: Re: How to know a teachers level of realization?
Content:
Matt J said:
Whack him/her with a stick.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 9th, 2011 at 9:56 AM
Title: Re: why did you 'guess' buddhism?
Content:
Matt J said:
I don't know any realized Platonist masters.  When I first started to meditate, there wasn't a single Platonist master in the area.

Also, I don't accept the idea that Buddhist teachers are more realized than other traditions.  How do you measure realization?  With a cup?

Malcolm wrote:
That is because you don't understand what Buddha meant by realization.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 9th, 2011 at 3:35 AM
Title: Re: 100 Syllable Mantra SUPO KAYO ME BHAVA
Content:
padma norbu said:
lol, well my credit counselor said I didn't qualify for bankruptcy. She volunteered this info without me asking.

Malcolm wrote:
Tax debts (as long as you filed properly) and credit card debts can be discharged through bankruptcy. School loans cannot.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 9th, 2011 at 3:27 AM
Title: Re: 100 Syllable Mantra SUPO KAYO ME BHAVA
Content:
padma norbu said:
Namdrol,

Could you tell me if the practice I described is basically Namkhai Norbu's Vajrasattva practice? I know there are at least 2 versions (one with mandala offering and one with Purification of Six Lokas). Trying to save as much $$ as I can since I just signed up for credit counseling and canceled all my cards and am in debt up to my ancestor's eyeballs, otherwise i would just go ahead and buy the book and cds and dvds or whatever.


Malcolm wrote:
Just file for bankruptcy. Practice Vajrasattva according to any ngondro text you have. Don't make things complicated.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 9th, 2011 at 3:00 AM
Title: Re: 100 Syllable Mantra SUPO KAYO ME BHAVA
Content:
heart said:
I think someone told me a long time ago that Sanskrit probably never was a spoken language, is that not true?
/magnus

Clarence said:
It is still spoken in some monasteries in India.

heart said:
Where?

/magnus


Malcolm wrote:
There are 3000 families that speak Sanskrit in Varanasi.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 9th, 2011 at 12:59 AM
Title: Re: 100 Syllable Mantra SUPO KAYO ME BHAVA
Content:
Namdrol said:
awesome

padma norbu said:
Is that pretty much Namkhai Norbu's Vajrasattva practice or is there a bunch of other stuff to it?

In the medium ganapuja there is an additional last line for the last repetition. Is that just for ganapuja or should I include it at the end of my Vajrasattva practice?

It's funny but all of a sudden I really like this mantra... even though it takes 15 minutes just to say 21x.

(LOL, I think I'm going to burn some guggulu for good measure! I gots lotsa problems!)

Malcolm wrote:
just for ganapuja


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 9th, 2011 at 12:25 AM
Title: Re: Trigeminal Neuralgia
Content:
bjf77 said:
Thank you for your time and response.  We hope to find a 'root-cause' with the MRI.

B


Malcolm wrote:
If it turns out that there is no phyisical cause for this neuralgia, let me know.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 9th, 2011 at 12:14 AM
Title: Re: Trigeminal Neuralgia
Content:
bjf77 said:
My wife has been recently diagnosed with trigeminal neuralgia.  She has been experiencing episodes off and on for almost a year now.  Recently the pain has not subsided and she is scheduled for an Brain MRI in the near future to help determine a cause.  I would like to find out if there is anything we can do in the meantime to either cure this condition, or at the least treat the pain with Tibetan Medicine.  Any information, suggestions, help, would be greatly appreciated.

I will put in a link to the wikipedia website that has detailed information about Trigeminal neuralgia, and hope that this will be useful and helpful.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trigeminal_neuralgia " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Thank you!
Om ah hung
B


Malcolm wrote:
Considering whatI can see about this condition there is probably little Tibetan Medicine can do more than offer minor palliative relief since this condition seems to involve an artery that presses against the trigeminal nerve. I am guessing for permanent releif, surgery is probably your most effective solution.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 8th, 2011 at 11:56 PM
Title: Re: 100 Syllable Mantra SUPO KAYO ME BHAVA
Content:
padma norbu said:
Namdrol,

You advised me to do Vajrasattva before and so I'm trying to do it. I am going to combine this in a Short Tun style of practice. After breathings, guru yoga, 5 elements purification and refuge, I will visualize Vajrasattva on my head in typical way and chant 100-syllable mantra many times, imagining myself filling with white light (nectar) and all negativities draining out. After the Vajrasattva portion, I will sing the Song of Vajra and after that perhaps Six Lokas practice and then dedicate merits.

Does that sound like a good practice to you?

Vajrasattva mantra is shown on page 123 of the newer Tun and Ganapuja book. Note the last line. Is that last line just for ganapuja or do you end all Vajrasattva mantras with this on the very last repetition?  I also have an audio of this from downloading the mandarava ganapuja, so I know how to say the mantra the correct way.


Malcolm wrote:
awesome


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 8th, 2011 at 11:47 PM
Title: Re: Spirit possession and/or harrassment
Content:
uslic001 said:
Lama Dawa has suspended divination's per his website except in emergencies.


Bryan

Malcolm wrote:
Good to know. Thanks.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 8th, 2011 at 11:28 PM
Title: Re: Dzogchen and other traditions
Content:
kalden yungdrung said:
Namdrol wrote:
Because ordinary people can see a nirmankāya, but cannot see a Sambhogakāya, much less the Dharmakāya.
N.
Tashi delek,

- What are here ordinary and then following not ordinary people?

Mutsog Marro
KY


Malcolm wrote:
People below the path of seeing. Regular people.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 8th, 2011 at 11:15 PM
Title: Re: 100 Syllable Mantra SUPO KAYO ME BHAVA
Content:
username said:
]then there would be numerous versions even in a single generation as different people would pick different sets of Tibetan words

Malcolm wrote:
That is the present state of things, since Tibetan U, Tshan, Kham, Golog and Amdo all pronounce mantras completelty differently. Add to this western mispronunciations of already incorrectly transscribed mantras (in order to follow Tibetanized pronunciations) and in the end one will wind up with mantras and dharanis as garbled if not more garbled than Chinese mantras and dharanis. So wa ka! (svāhā as pronounced in Japan).


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 8th, 2011 at 10:33 PM
Title: Re: Ālaya in Sakya
Content:
Kai said:
So ultimate alaya = Tathāgatagarbha?

I just want to make sure...........

Namdrol said:
According to the Sakya masters, ālaya has two aspects -- its ultimate truth aspect is the dharmadhātu; its relative truth aspect is the  ālayavijñāna. Because the ultimate nature of the ālaya is the dharmadhātu, nirvana is possible. Because the relative truth aspect of the ālaya is ālayavijñāna, samsara is possible. Since the two truths are inseparable, samsara and nirvana are inseparable.

N

Huifeng said:
Hi Namdrol,

Is this like the Mahayanasamgraha position?  (Assuming that the Samgraha exists in Tibetan.)


~~ Huifeng

Malcolm wrote:
I don't think so. Asanga is a realist, at least in his presentation in this text. (yes, btw).


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 8th, 2011 at 9:55 PM
Title: Re: Evolution of humans and Mahayana Buddhism
Content:
Aemilius said:
Michael Cremo...

Malcolm wrote:
...is an avowed Vedic creationist and nothing he says about archaeology and human origins can be taken seriously.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 8th, 2011 at 9:45 PM
Title: Re: 100 Syllable Mantra SUPO KAYO ME BHAVA
Content:
Pero said:
I still have some issues though... Like, didn't Sapan then receive the transmission of chili as well? Why would he bother to receive the alternate transmission and then pass it on if it doesn't matter?

Malcolm wrote:
While ChNN says the Sakyapas passed on the chili tradition, I have never seen such an iniation text or seen any mention of it in Khon Kilaya commentaries. Of course, what exists is not confined to what I have or have not seen.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 8th, 2011 at 9:42 PM
Title: Re: 100 Syllable Mantra SUPO KAYO ME BHAVA
Content:
username said:
Sassure, Levi Strauss & Chomsky, though great, are basically limited in being synchronic...

Malcolm wrote:
No, Sausurre was the one who pointed out the difference between synchrony and diachroncy and elaborated the rules which govern diachronic phonetic shifts.


username said:
Also the story of how Sakya Pandita was a Sanskrit expert, overheard the guy and went to correct him. The guy said OK, you are Sakya Pandita. Did the correct Kili mantra and touched his phurba to a stone and finished and SP was happy but he was not. Then he redid it in his own way with chili and touched the phurba and it went right through the rock and said I do it my old way. SP realized this was a mahasiddha and  had him transmit it to others too.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, this story is famous. But I suspect it is just a didatic story.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 8th, 2011 at 5:56 PM
Title: Re: 100 Syllable Mantra SUPO KAYO ME BHAVA
Content:
GesarMukpo said:
I always use the Sanskrit pronunciation where I know the Tibetan take is very different. They way you pronounce the mantra doesn't really make a difference, feeling bad about it does though......

heart said:
Good point! Fear, doubt and uncertainty is what destroys all kind of Vajrayana practice. Personally I don't care about Sanskrit or Tibetan and I am not even sure the power of mantra is in the particular combination of vowels and consonants.
I think someone told me a long time ago that Sanskrit probably never was a spoken language, is that not true?

/magnus


Malcolm wrote:
Sanskrit was the lingua franca of educated people. Saying that Sanskrit was never spoken is like saying that Latin was never spoken.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 8th, 2011 at 5:43 PM
Title: Re: 100 Syllable Mantra SUPO KAYO ME BHAVA
Content:
Pema Rigdzin said:
And why would they universally pick "kh" of all sounds to substitute for "sh"? It doesn't even sound remotely similar.

Namdrol said:
They did not "pick" it, anymore than Chinese decided they could not say "r" or Japanese, "l". It is a linguistic limitation inherent in their speech patterns. I am sure a professional linguist can explain this phenomena.

Pema Rigdzin said:
Haha, I don't get the Chinese difficulty with pronouncing the "r" sound in English words either. Well, I do when it comes to speakers of Chinese dialects that don't feature the sound.. But some prominent Chinese dialects have a definite "ar" sound, yet I've heard speakers of those dialects say "lice" instead of rice. At least with Japanese, I don't believe any dialect has an "L" sound. I guess a linguist expert in Tibetan would be necessary to help me understand why Tibetans naturally pronounce "kh" in this instance instead of "sh". I mean, for instance, Spanish doesn't contain a "sh" sound, generally speaking, so when native speakers who don't know how to pronounce "sh" say English words with that sound, they generally opt for the closest sound to it that they do know - "ch". Now THAT makes sense to me.

Malcolm wrote:
I have tested this Tibetans, btw. It is only with very conscious effort that they can pronounce a sibilant correctly in the middle of a Sanskrit word. This issue is not as prevalent among Tibeans that are bilingual in Hindi. In this case, their preference for fricatives is learned, rather than innate.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 8th, 2011 at 5:39 PM
Title: Re: 100 Syllable Mantra SUPO KAYO ME BHAVA
Content:
Pema Rigdzin said:
And why would they universally pick "kh" of all sounds to substitute for "sh"? It doesn't even sound remotely similar.

Namdrol said:
They did not "pick" it, anymore than Chinese decided they could not say "r" or Japanese, "l". It is a linguistic limitation inherent in their speech patterns. I am sure a professional linguist can explain this phenomena.

Pema Rigdzin said:
Haha, I don't get the Chinese difficulty with pronouncing the "r" sound in English words either. Well, I do when it comes to speakers of Chinese dialects that don't feature the sound.. But some prominent Chinese dialects have a definite "ar" sound, yet I've heard speakers of those dialects say "lice" instead of rice. At least with Japanese, I don't believe any dialect has an "L" sound. I guess a linguist expert in Tibetan would be necessary to help me understand why Tibetans naturally pronounce "kh" in this instance instead of "sh". I mean, for instance, Spanish doesn't contain a "sh" sound, generally speaking, so when native speakers who don't know how to pronounce "sh" say English words with that sound, they generally opt for the closest sound to it that they do know - "ch". Now THAT makes sense to me.

Malcolm wrote:
Another thing Tibetans cannot pronounce is "hri" without a sibilant. They always say "shri".

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 8th, 2011 at 5:26 PM
Title: Re: Chulen
Content:
Virgo said:
http://www.siddhienergetics.com/products/chulen

I know these pills are connected with specific practices.  Can people take these pills for health/energy reasons alone, without doing them in conjunction with any specific practice or initiation?

Kavin


Malcolm wrote:
You can, but that is missing the point, a bit.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 8th, 2011 at 5:06 PM
Title: Re: Spirit possession and/or harrassment
Content:
himalayanspirit said:
I lack attention and my will power is quite weak. I am usually not able to sustain interest in worldly affairs - job, study etc.

Am I being possessed by a spirit?
Will reciting the Amitabha name ward off the spirits?

Thank you.

Malcolm wrote:
You should go to a Tibetan astrologer or have a divination done for example, by Lama Dawa.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 8th, 2011 at 5:03 PM
Title: Re: 100 Syllable Mantra SUPO KAYO ME BHAVA
Content:


Pema Rigdzin said:
If Tibetans have no difficulty pronouncing Tibetan words like "tashi" or "geshe", how is it they have trouble saying "kosha" or "Bhaisahjye"? And why would they universally pick "kh" of all sounds to substitute for "sh"? It doesn't even sound remotely similar.

Namdrol said:
bkra shis is two words. So is dge shes.

We pronounce them as a two syllable word, Tibetans pronounce them as two one syllable words, which in fact they are.

Pema Rigdzin said:
I'm not sure I understand. I've heard Tibetans say these words millions of times and both syllables run together as if they were one two syllable word.

Malcolm wrote:
You are not hearing these words as a native Tibetan speaker would.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 8th, 2011 at 5:02 PM
Title: Re: 100 Syllable Mantra SUPO KAYO ME BHAVA
Content:
Pema Rigdzin said:
And why would they universally pick "kh" of all sounds to substitute for "sh"? It doesn't even sound remotely similar.

Malcolm wrote:
They did not "pick" it, anymore than Chinese decided they could not say "r" or Japanese, "l". It is a linguistic limitation inherent in their speech patterns. I am sure a professional linguist can explain this phenomena.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 8th, 2011 at 4:59 PM
Title: Re: 100 Syllable Mantra SUPO KAYO ME BHAVA
Content:
dakini_boi said:
This doesn't seem logical - if they had just transliterated directly (using Tibetan ca cha ja for the same syllables in Sanskrit), it would have been just as effective in differentiating Sanskrit text since tsa tsha dza don't exist in Sanskrit.  Why would the early transliterators deliberately complicate things?

Malcolm wrote:
Because the Tibetan ca and Sanskrit ca sound different.

ཅ་ཆ་ཇ are tonal, in descending order. Sanskrit ca cha ja are not tonal, since Sanskrit is not a tonal language (a point Sapan makes very clear). Thonmi Sambhota wanted to make sure that Tibetans who were reading mantras were not to prounce ca cha ja the same way they were pronouncing ཅ་ཆ་ཇ. This lead to other problems, of course, later on.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 8th, 2011 at 4:51 PM
Title: Re: 100 Syllable Mantra SUPO KAYO ME BHAVA
Content:


Pema Rigdzin said:
If Tibetans have no difficulty pronouncing Tibetan words like "tashi" or "geshe", how is it they have trouble saying "kosha" or "Bhaisahjye"? And why would they universally pick "kh" of all sounds to substitute for "sh"? It doesn't even sound remotely similar.

Malcolm wrote:
bkra shis is two words. So is dge shes.

We pronounce them as a two syllable word, Tibetans pronounce them as two one syllable words, which in fact they are.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 8th, 2011 at 9:25 AM
Title: Re: 100 Syllable Mantra SUPO KAYO ME BHAVA
Content:


dakini_boi said:
Kevin - I'm curious what your opinion is then, for mantras found in earth terma - for example, the sanskrit syllable "ca" will be found in Tibetan as "tsa", so you actually have "tsitta" vs. "citta."  should we go back to sanskrit pronunciation in such cases, even though the written terma appeared with Tibetan misspelling of sanskrit words?  This is confusing!

Namdrol said:
It is not a Tibetan mispelling.

The Tibetans deliberately employed tsa tsha dza to represent the Sanskrit ca cha and ja to differentiate Sanskrit words from Tibetan words. Thus, we are to understand that tsa tsha dza are to be pronounced ca cha and ja hence ཙིཏཏ་ should never be transliterated tsitta into English, it should only be transliterated "citta" since that is what is intended.

N

dakini_boi said:
How would using tsa tsha dza serve to differentiate Sanskrit words from Tibetan?  After all, the Tibetan language uses these syllables as well.

If the Sakyapa tradition is to pronounce everything according to Sanskrit, then take the Vajrakilaya mantra - there are three words which in normal transliteration (both Tibetan and Roman) start with B.  Do Sakyapas then pronounce these all with V?

Thank you, Namdrol.  As usual, your expertise is most appreciated.

Malcolm wrote:
Because ཅ་ཆ་ཇ་are never used in Tibetanizations of Sanskrit words -- never, ever, ever.

Vajra, vighnan bandha. And properly, "v" as in Latin. Wajra wighnan, bandha.

IN pratice, HHST generally uses the Tshang version of Tibetan pronunciation of mantras i.e. Badzra, bighnan, etc.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 8th, 2011 at 9:10 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen and other traditions
Content:


AilurusFulgens said:
Why am I bringing this up? Because of the following central questions:

a.) Where does Dzogchen practised by a person who is neither Buddhist, nor accepts the doctrine of anatman or pratityasamutpada (dependent origination) lead to according to traditional textual sources and living oral tradition? Do such people simply get stuck in formless blissful realms or are they simply wasting their time or do they go to Vajra hells....?

Namdrol said:
At best, rebirth in a nirmanakāya buddhafield.

N

dakini_boi said:
Why in this case, a nirmanakaya buddhafield as opposed to dharmakaya or sambhogakaya?

Malcolm wrote:
Because ordinary people can see a nirmankāya, but cannot see a Sambhogakāya, much less the Dharmakāya.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 8th, 2011 at 8:13 AM
Title: Re: why did you 'guess' buddhism?
Content:
coldmountain said:
What convinces you that realized Buddhist masters are correct?

Malcolm wrote:
1) Dependent origination.
2) Emptiness.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 8th, 2011 at 7:48 AM
Title: Re: 100 Syllable Mantra SUPO KAYO ME BHAVA
Content:


Chaz said:
You may very well be right, but the anthropologist in me is a bit skeptical of that asertion.  Sorry.

Namdrol said:
It's a linguistic certainty.

Chaz said:
Care to cite a study?  To assert that a certain group of people over a period of time spanning many centuries said things a certain way, is without some study to back it up, is a bit of reach.  So, if you don't mind .....

Malcolm wrote:
Well, we have a lot of evidence.

One, there is a text by Sakya Pandita that describes very well how Indians in different regions of India such as central India and Kashmir pronounced Sanskrit -- and he was personally acquainted with 30 panditas.

Two, Indians in the described regions still pronounce Sanskrit in the manner in which Sapan says they did 800 years ago.

Three, pronunciation of Sanskrit is a major obsession with Brahmins since the proper pronunciation of the Vedas and vedic rites is considered crucial for their effectiveness. The similarities and (minor) differences in Sanskrit pronunciation between different brahmin traditions in India is well understood and mapped.

Four, changes in pronunciation can be accurately mapped mathematically (and are). I am sure you have encountered structural linguistics. I am not arguing that everything Sausurre said is true, but there are regular rules to phonetic shifts in Indo-europoean lanaguages and nothing in the Indian subcontinent that makes a sibilant ṣ or ś shift to a fricative kh possible.

The regularity with which Tibetans mispronounce both ṣ and ś when they are present in the middle of Sanskrit words indicates this is a pronunciation that is not an Indo-European language issue and instread is a Tibetan linguistic issue -- for example, I have heard Tibetans mispronounce kośa (kosha, mispronounced "kokha") with the same regularity as they mispronounce aṣṭa (saying "akha") or say Bhekhenze for Bhaiṣajye. In other words, mono-lingual Tibetans have a hard time pronouncing sibilants present in the middle of words since in Tibetan there are no sibilants present in the middle of a word. A Tibetan who has no problem pronouncing "bud shing" (firewood, and two separate words) will mispronounce kośa everytime unless they have received specific Sanskrit training.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 8th, 2011 at 7:39 AM
Title: Re: Evolution of humans and Mahayana Buddhism
Content:


Kai said:
There is a scholar who almost claimed that China discovered America way before Columbus but we all know that he is not to be taken seriously.

Malcolm wrote:
It is certain, however, that Vikings were present in North America. There is some reason to believe that Irish fisher folks also found their way to the East Coast, and some reason to suppose that Phoenecians may have found their way to S. America.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 8th, 2011 at 7:17 AM
Title: Re: ORMUS ?
Content:
Tarpa said:
Thanks, was just curious, I was checking out your link to vimala at siddhi energetics from your medicine blog and then checked out a link from there and stumbled upon this stuff somewhere, never heard of it.
Thank you


Malcolm wrote:
Joeseph is very electic, but his Tibetan formulas are well made.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 8th, 2011 at 7:16 AM
Title: Re: ORMUS ?
Content:
Tarpa said:
Thanks, was just curious, I was checking out your link to vimala at siddhi energetics from your medicine blog and then checked out a link from there and stumbled upon this stuff somewhere, never heard of it. I was put off by them referring to it as the philosophers stone wich I new was mercury, set off my new age b.s. alarm although the site seems to be based on scientific curiosity as to what this stuff is.

Incidentally Namdrol-la what would you suggest for someone that came down with extreme panic attacks and dissociation all of a sudden, no mental aspect such as fear or worry, purely physiological, and also has digestive probs and lower body heat ?
Would agar-35 or vimala be better or something else ? The anxiety/ dissociation started 3 months ago and have almost gone completely other than very occasional mild dissociation/ anxiety  wich I credit to increased practice and herbal supplements such as choline / inositol, valerian, and passion flower, and exercise ( swimming ) and drinking lots of dutsi water, but I have had digestive probs for years and lots of heat in my abdomen area, when I first started practicing meditation I used to get lots of heat in my abdomen area, I developed stomach/ digestive probs a few years later, I don't know if they are connected, I don't experience that when meditating anymore, I only had that problem when meditating for like the first year.

Thank you

Malcolm wrote:
Contact me offline.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 8th, 2011 at 6:24 AM
Title: Re: 100 Syllable Mantra SUPO KAYO ME BHAVA
Content:


Chaz said:
You may very well be right, but the anthropologist in me is a bit skeptical of that asertion.  Sorry.

Malcolm wrote:
It's a linguistic certainty.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 8th, 2011 at 5:59 AM
Title: Re: 100 Syllable Mantra SUPO KAYO ME BHAVA
Content:


Chaz said:
Well, that's certainly possible, but by no means a certainty.

Malcolm wrote:
It is a certainty that no Indian master ever recited Bhaiṣajya as Bhekenze or supoṣyo as Supo kayo. This leaves only Tibetans to mispronounce these mantras and transmit them in that fashion. Which means if the mantra is effective for them in this mispronounced fashion, it is certain that if one receives the transmission and then corrects the pronunciation, it will be as effective.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 8th, 2011 at 5:54 AM
Title: Re: 100 Syllable Mantra SUPO KAYO ME BHAVA
Content:
Pero said:
Do they just simply all work if they're in Sanskrit original or something?


Malcolm wrote:
Basically, the reason why your argument is fallacious is because if you argue that a Tibetan pronunciation of a mantra is effective even though it is incorrect, then there is no fault in reciting mantras properly. Why, because presumably the mantra was communicated to a Tibeten who pronounced kili as chili, there is no logical reason why a mantra transmitted by a Tibetan as chili pronounced kili will not be equally as effective (especially since it is the original pronunciation). You are arguing that it only one way i.e. Tibetans can mispronounce mantras and gain siddhi. But we cannot. This is foolish.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 8th, 2011 at 4:58 AM
Title: Re: Who are the tulkus in the documentary "TULKU"
Content:
GesarMukpo said:
Namdrol...when we talked on the phone

Malcolm wrote:
We never talked on the phone. Ever.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 8th, 2011 at 4:48 AM
Title: Re: ORMUS ?
Content:
Tarpa said:
What's up with ormus ?

http://www.futurealchemy.com/wetr.html " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://www.subtleenergies.com/ " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Malcolm wrote:
No clue -- they have nothing to with Tibetan Medicine or Ayurveda. The so called philosopher's stone is mercury. Ofen, the so called "gold transformation elixir" (gser gyur rtsi) is improperly understood. What it really is, is an early process of gold plating, applying gold to copper by mixing that gold with mercury and then evaporating the mercury leaving a very smooth painted gold appearance on the copper.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 8th, 2011 at 4:40 AM
Title: Re: 100 Syllable Mantra SUPO KAYO ME BHAVA
Content:
Namdrol said:
In general, the Sakyapa approach is as Kevin suggested ie. Sanskrit pronunciation of Sanskrit mantras, according to all the Sakya masters I have studied with. No Benzar, Bazar, and so on.

Pero said:
Irrelevant for people who don't have the Sanskrit transmission. Supokayo is supokayo, not suposhyo.

Malcolm wrote:
I don't agree. Why? Originally the mantra was mispronounced by some Tibetan who got it from an Indian teacher. His teacher said supoṣyo, he said Supo kaya. There is absolutely no fault in restoring the proper pronunciation. No blessings are lost, no sacred "power" is lost. In this respect I completely disagree with anyone who says one must recite mantras according to manner in which one's teacher pronounces them if that manner is not consistent with the rules of Sanskrit pronunciation. It is illogical to maintain this position. It is basically an argument for blind faith. In this respect, in my opinion, Sakya Paṇḍita's position is best. Of course people are free to choose what they wish to do.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 8th, 2011 at 3:51 AM
Title: Re: 100 Syllable Mantra SUPO KAYO ME BHAVA
Content:


Chaz said:
Really?  I know several Tibetans personally and they all have the same speech faulties I have.  IOW, they can repeat any sound that that I can.

Malcolm wrote:
Tibetans have a very hard time with "sh" in the middle of words. Hence Bekhandze for Bhaiṣajya. Supoṣyo is another example.  Other common errors come from Tibetans who have not studied Sanskrit pronouncing Tibeteanized mantras incorrectly compared to the Sanskrit original. Pemey (as opposed to Padme) comes from the fact that in Tibetan, a consonant following a vowel often modifies "a" to "e".

Chaz said:
It's not a question of the right or wrong way to do it.  It's a question of devotion.

Malcolm wrote:
In general, the Sakyapa approach is as Kevin suggested ie. Sanskrit pronunciation of Sanskrit mantras, according to all the Sakya masters I have studied with. No Benzar, Bazar, and so on.

I presonally recite things as best I can according to how Sanskrit is pronounced by Varanasi brahmins. I fail of course, but I try.

Not all mantras are in Sanskrit, there are some in Tibetan, and other languages, BTW.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 8th, 2011 at 3:22 AM
Title: Re: 100 Syllable Mantra SUPO KAYO ME BHAVA
Content:


dakini_boi said:
Kevin - I'm curious what your opinion is then, for mantras found in earth terma - for example, the sanskrit syllable "ca" will be found in Tibetan as "tsa", so you actually have "tsitta" vs. "citta."  should we go back to sanskrit pronunciation in such cases, even though the written terma appeared with Tibetan misspelling of sanskrit words?  This is confusing!

Malcolm wrote:
It is not a Tibetan mispelling.

The Tibetans deliberately employed tsa tsha dza to represent the Sanskrit ca cha and ja to differentiate Sanskrit words from Tibetan words. Thus, we are to understand that tsa tsha dza are to be pronounced ca cha and ja hence ཙིཏཏ་ should never be transliterated tsitta into English, it should only be transliterated "citta" since that is what is intended.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 8th, 2011 at 2:05 AM
Title: Re: Spirit possession and/or harrassment
Content:
pemachophel said:
From the POV of chod, the best way to ward off attacks from spirits is to remain free from hope and fear..

Namdrol said:
Yes and no -- virtually all illnesses have a accompanying demonic component.

gnegirl said:
srsly?


Malcolm wrote:
Seriously.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 8th, 2011 at 12:53 AM
Title: Re: Awareness.
Content:
White Lotus said:
ha! ha! ha!  and yes, i do like to read a lot.

in Rigpa there are no requirements.  if the guru says that one must see ones own nature. i tell him...
why are you talking crap.

''spontaneously'' complete. ordinary mind is enlightenment.

best wishes, Tom.

Sönam said:
Ordinary mind is sems, not rigpa ... at best your view is a yogacara view.

Sönam

Malcolm wrote:
I think he means "tha mal gyi shes pa".

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 8th, 2011 at 12:41 AM
Title: Re: Spirit possession and/or harrassment
Content:
pemachophel said:
From the POV of chod, the best way to ward off attacks from spirits is to remain free from hope and fear..

Malcolm wrote:
Yes and no -- virtually all illnesses have a accompanying demonic component.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 7th, 2011 at 10:49 PM
Title: Re: Spirit possession and/or harrassment
Content:
Jotham said:
I came across this episode in the book "A Saint in Seattle" where the late Dezheng Rinpoche recognized that a girl was possessed and harrassed by a spirit.  My questions are:

(a)  How do we recognize that a person is possessed and/or harrassed by spirits and not mental problem (like hallucination)?

(b)  What should or can we do to ward off or chase off these spirits?

Malcolm wrote:
As for (a), (a) can be both. People who have mental illness are more liable to spirit attacks; people suffering from spirit attacks are more liable to have mental illness as a result.

Second, for ordinary people, Tibetan astrology is the best method for recognizing what type of spirit and the required rite for driving it off.

One simple thing one can do is burn guggulu in one's house. One can do a so called "gegs tor" rite usually found in the beginning of a sadhana, especially nyingma sadhanas.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 7th, 2011 at 10:45 PM
Title: Re: Why combine Dzogchen and Mahamudra?
Content:


Pema Rigdzin said:
I was actually thinking of what is commonly referred to as "essence Mahamudra" and which is pretty widely considered more or less equivalent to Dzogchen's tregchod.

Malcolm wrote:
No, Four yogas = four samadhis (sems sde) = tregchö (man ngag sde).

Essence mahāmudra is completely different. It is basically a cig car method of sudden awakening. It is equivalent to direct introduction.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 7th, 2011 at 4:29 AM
Title: Re: God speaks about Rick Perry
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
God needs a little remedial grammar.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 7th, 2011 at 1:59 AM
Title: Re: Why combine Dzogchen and Mahamudra?
Content:
padma norbu said:
Nobody responded to me, so you probably don't care, but, I went ahead and got that Practice of Mahamudra book. $6.50. I guess I'll do the practices if I feel like it without any connection to the lineage.

Malcolm wrote:
That would be a mistake. In order to practice this system of mahāmudra (five fold mahāmudra) you need to have the initiation of Cakrasamvara. And thsi system really stresses guru devotion.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 7th, 2011 at 1:30 AM
Title: Re: Vatta and depression?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
When treating any disease one must treat all three doshas. If one is out of balance, by necessity so too will the others.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 7th, 2011 at 12:39 AM
Title: Re: Vatta and depression?
Content:
Virgo said:
Hi, I've suffered from vatta imbalances for most of my life.  I've taken a number of  measures to help balance it including massage oil, which was an excellent recommendation.  My question is my vatta has usually manifested as nervousness, agitation, lethargy and fatigue when I expend too much energy and physical problems such as stiffness, dryness, aches, headaches, spinal discomfort, and very brittle bones, also irregularity of breathing.  Sadness and depression have never really been an issue with me, save for a few months when I was about 15 or 16.  Sometimes my outlook can be a little negative or dismal, at times.  Sometimes I don't have a lot of "get up and go" and lack some enthusiasm for making money and stuff like that.  I could be totally wrong but I usually right it off as a lack of ojas because of constitution, diet and lifestyle.  Is this is what is meant by sadness or depression in vatta imbalances because I am sure I have had vatta, but do not experience "depression" per say?   What I am asking is, if I have vatta how come I am not depressed, or does my slight lack of get up and go, nervousness and so forth, sometimes slightly dismal attitude, count as "depression"?  I mean, I do smile a lot.

Thank you,

Kevin

Malcolm wrote:
From a Tibetan medical point of view there are many reasons for depression, not just vata.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 7th, 2011 at 12:33 AM
Title: Re: "Mahamudra and Related Instructions," Peter Roberts
Content:
conebeckham said:
The "Lac Liquid" is, I think, a special sort of liquid, which is not really something available to us.....some Tantras talk of creating this special "salve" or substance.......I believe that's what's being discussed, though I don't have the book in front of me.  I'd bet Namdrol could clarify this further.


Malcolm wrote:
Lac is the secretion of an insect that lives on the bark of Kerria lacca tree that is used in making red lacquer.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 7th, 2011 at 12:02 AM
Title: Re: Site validation ...
Content:
Sönam said:
I receive to day Rinchen Mangjor pills ... is there any counter-indications regarding age and previous embolism manifestation ... and others heart fragilities.

thank you in advance
Sönam


Malcolm wrote:
Only use them twice a month at most.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, September 6th, 2011 at 11:32 PM
Title: Re: Awareness.
Content:
White Lotus said:
nothing needed, naturally spontaneously complete... merits? you are too kind Sonam.
rigpa may be entered with the mind seal already attained. no need for a mind seal. the mahamudra is not needed.

Kalden, it is not a matter of awareness... awareness is cool, but completly unecessary when it is absent, eg in deep sleep, or day dreaming. the natural state is sometimes aware, sometimes not aware. just naturally as you are.

no need for talk of no mind, no self, nothingness or emptiness. you may have the seal of emptiness, you may know your own nature. these things are not necessary. the natural state is spontaneously complete.

when you taste the natural state it radiates, no need to taste the natural state. naturally complete just as you are naturally so.  so when you worry, then you worry. when you are sad you are sad, suffering you naturally suffer. all complete.

best wishes, Tom.

Malcolm wrote:
When you are full of crap, you are naturally full of crap...


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, September 6th, 2011 at 8:18 AM
Title: Re: Prayer to be a good kind doctor.
Content:
Calahand said:
Hi , I am going to be a doctor in a few months, I am applying to internal medicine programs, but I don't know if I will get a good residency program that will make me a competent physician... i want to ask people here to please pray for me and my situation, hopefully i can get a good residency and become a competent physician that heals and not just someone who goes through the motions to do a job for the heck of it.


Malcolm wrote:
You should do Medicine Buddha practice.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, September 6th, 2011 at 3:07 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen and other traditions
Content:
AilurusFulgens said:
How would this be okay? i guess seeing the essential shakti as empty?

but how is that possible to practice SriVidya sadhana seeing shiva and shakti as empty?
This was exactly my point. The questions you raised are exactly those that I have. You took the words out of my mouth. You see, I am trying to put myself in the shoes of a Buddhist and then switch the view and put myself in the shoes of a practitioner of Sanatana Dharma (commonly known in the West as Hinduism).

I want to examine things from all possible angles - or at least as many of them as possible - in order to reach deeper understanding.

Of course, this has its limits. You cannot go on examining till you are old and on the verge of dying. My aim is to do things correctly. I would not like to become some confused, half-baked New Age Buddhist, if I do fully commit to Buddhadharma. Things simply have to fit.

goldenlotus said:
There is something about buddhadharma meditation that attracts me to, i used to practice khadgamala stotram with all the visualisations, nysas, mudras etc. it's a beautiful tradition( with good visions too ) but something about buddhist yoga im interested in.

good luck

Malcolm wrote:
The Buddha never told brahmins to cease practicing vedic rituals. In fact he encouraged it. But what he said was that vedic ritual was not liberative. he never denied however that is was a mundane benefit.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, September 6th, 2011 at 1:58 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen and other traditions
Content:
AilurusFulgens said:
What fascinates me is also Tibetan Medicine and it was really remarkable to see that Choegyal Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche is presenting it through the lens of Dzogchen.


Malcolm wrote:
Tibetan Medicine is a Nyingma system, so it is not suprising that it is related to Dzogchen since it contains Dzogchen.

Tibetan Medicine is the only medical system integrated with Vajrayāna.

AilurusFulgens said:
Now, I accomplished the 10,000 recitations in 10 days. And then all these things with Buddhism started

Malcolm wrote:
As I said, your merit ripened.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, September 6th, 2011 at 1:49 AM
Title: Re: Tulku Thondup explains about tulkus
Content:
kirtu said:
From the https://blazing-splendor.blogspot.com/2011/08/what-is-tulku.html


Malcolm wrote:
You can put your faith in tulks. I will put my faith in practitioners.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, September 6th, 2011 at 1:45 AM
Title: Re: The Vajra Guru Mantra of Guru Rinpoche
Content:
narraboth said:
Actually there's no rule saying that you can not chant mantra without initiation, except some special mantra.

Namdrol said:
yes, actually there are.

Dharanis from sutras, however are different.

narraboth said:
depends on what you mean for 'sutras'. I think we call Tara tantra 'sutra' in China... no matter what we still chant tare mantra.
Amoghapasa is a tantra, Manjusri root tantra is a tantra, they are all huge texts, and many other 'tantras'...
People, especially chinese buddhists, chant many of them without even LUNG, and there are many signs of 'siddhis'.

Yes, there is a line saying 'without initiation, getting siddhi is like pressing oil from sands'. but I don't think it can be understood as you won't be benefited by simply reciting mani, tare tu tare, vajra guru, arapachana.... at least i haven't heard any tibetan lama suggested that. (Tibetan themselves don't worry this)
Most of lama indicate that so-called practice in that saying is strictly tantric practice such as two stages. A senior Gelug-Nyingma master said as long as you don't do self generation, you can visualise dieties in front and chant mantra, it's not a problem that you haven't got initiation. There are also many similar teachings.

Malcolm wrote:
The mani is a dharani, so here is a sutra system for chanting it. Arapacana is also from sutra.

The tantras you are mentioning are so called "kalpa" tantras, sections of sutra that are also classfied as kriya tantra, so again, no contradiction. Most of the mantras that Chinese people are chanting are from sutra or dharani texts. Many of these were also translated from Chinese into Tibetan.

But this will not work with Vajrakilaya, etc. You must have the transmission.

Medicine Buddha, Tara, etc., kriya deities from the Buddha and Lotus families may not require intiation (but that depends too), but mantras from the Vajra family of Kriya tantra definitely require initiation since they are connected with controlling Guhyakas.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, September 6th, 2011 at 12:49 AM
Title: Re: The Vajra Guru Mantra of Guru Rinpoche
Content:
narraboth said:
Actually there's no rule saying that you can not chant mantra without initiation, except some special mantra.

Malcolm wrote:
yes, actually there are.

Dharanis from sutras, however are different.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, September 6th, 2011 at 12:31 AM
Title: Re: Ālaya in Sakya
Content:
Kai said:
Sūtra inseparability of samsara and nirvana may be found in the Heart Sūtra. The tantric view of inseparability of samsara and nirvana may be found in the Hevajra tantra.
What does you mean? There is a distinctive difference between the tantric view of inseparability and the Sutric view of inseparability?

Malcolm wrote:
The difference is one of method, not view.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, September 6th, 2011 at 12:05 AM
Title: Re: Ālaya in Sakya
Content:
Kai said:
So ultimate alaya = Tathāgatagarbha?

I just want to make sure...........

Malcolm wrote:
Inseparability = tathāgatatagarbha.

According to the Sakya masters, ālaya has two aspects -- its ultimate truth aspect is the dharmadhātu; its relative truth aspect is the  ālayavijñāna. Because the ultimate nature of the ālaya is the dharmadhātu, nirvana is possible. Because the relative truth aspect of the ālaya is ālayavijñāna, samsara is possible. Since the two truths are inseparable, samsara and nirvana are inseparable.

Hence the special Sakya view is well known as 'khor 'das dbyer med, the inseparability of samsara and nirvana. Sūtra inseparability of samsara and nirvana may be found in the Heart Sūtra. The tantric view of inseparability of samsara and nirvana may be found in the Hevajra tantra.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, September 5th, 2011 at 11:24 PM
Title: Re: Dzogchen and other traditions
Content:


AilurusFulgens said:
Initially I was not drawn to Buddhism at all. But what draws me to Buddhism now?


Malcolm wrote:
From our point of view, the ripening of merit.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, September 5th, 2011 at 10:39 PM
Title: Ālaya in Sakya
Content:
Kai said:
Alaya being the neutral ground of both Samara and Nirvana while Buddha nature, the clarity aspect of Alaya, hold the potential for sentinel beings to reach Nirvana while the alaya consciousness, dull aspect of Alaya, traps all beings within the grasp of Samara.

Malcolm wrote:
This is not how the Sakya master formulate their idea of the ālaya.

Following Sakya Pandita, Gorampa, in the first section of his three vows commentary, very clearly shows that clarity cannot be tathāgatagarbha since it is conditioned; and emptiness cannot be tathāgatagarbha, since it is the extreme of cessation.

Tathāgatagarbha, according to the standard, orthodox Sakya view is the inseparabilty of clarity and emptiness.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, September 5th, 2011 at 10:26 PM
Title: Re: The Vajra Guru Mantra of Guru Rinpoche
Content:


AilurusFulgens said:
Would this merely lead the practitioner to a qualified teacher...?

Malcolm wrote:
Yes.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, September 5th, 2011 at 10:26 PM
Title: Re: Dzogchen and other traditions
Content:
AilurusFulgens said:
Very interesting.

I am asking all this, because of a particular interest in some Shaiva tantric teachings connected with kayasadhana.

Still in one of these Tantras it is mentioned that without having bhakti towards Shiva his Grace cannot descend and grant the siddhi in these particular sadhanas.

Is bhakti towards Shiva incompatible with simultaneously taking refuge in the Buddha as a practitioner of Vajrayana? Keeping again in my mind the adherence also to all other elements of Buddhadharma i.e. the anatman-doctrine, dependent origination, etc.

A. Fulgens

Malcolm wrote:
It is all about refuge. If your refuge is Buddha Dharma and SAngha, worldy deities like Shiva can assist one, but they cannot be refuges.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, September 5th, 2011 at 10:10 PM
Title: Re: Dzogchen and other traditions
Content:


AilurusFulgens said:
This is highly interesting. Could you please tell me more about Shiva being converted to Dharma by Avalokiteshvara?

Malcolm wrote:
The account is given in the Karandavyuha sūtra.


AilurusFulgens said:
What would Shiva now be from the viewpoint of Vajrayana? A Boddhisattva? Or something like the converted Tibetan deities turned dharmapalas by Padmasambhava?


Malcolm wrote:
Shiva is a Nyingma dharmapāla.

AilurusFulgens said:
I do not want to appear as obnoxious or pedantic, but if a Vajrayana practitioner (sic!) decides to receive a formal initation or diksha (including bahiryaga in the form of worshipping a yantra, reciting a mantra, etc. as well as antaryaga in the form of inner kriyas involving breath, chakras, visualizations, etc.) into a complex of Tantric teachings such as the Sri Vidya cult from an orthodox Brahmin Guru from south India, while adhering strictly to the notions of anatman, dependent origination, 4 noble truths, etc., then this would be perfectly O.K.?

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, IMO. Don't much see the point, but on the other hand, I am very interested to learn Yoga from a guy named Shrivatsa Ramaswami, and part of his program involves vedic chanting, etc. Don't know if I will ever have time or money, but he is someone I have a lot of natural confidence in.

AilurusFulgens said:
Would this be valid even in the case of a Dzogchenpa (given that he belongs to the highest yana)?

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, IMO.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, September 5th, 2011 at 10:03 PM
Title: Re: The Vajra Guru Mantra of Guru Rinpoche
Content:
AlexanderS said:
Would it be pointless for me to recite the vajra guru mantra without initiation? Pointless as in little benefit.


Malcolm wrote:
If you have faith in Guru Rinpoche, you can recite it without intitiation.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, September 5th, 2011 at 9:57 PM
Title: Re: The Vajra Guru Mantra of Guru Rinpoche
Content:
AilurusFulgens said:
Your help is much appreciated, Namdrol, thank you. Please forgive me, if my questions appear somewhat odd, but I would have one additional query.

I do not want to descend into any miracle mongering or anything similar, but I do have a genuine interest in clarifying certain things.

Do in Tibetan Vajrayana exist teachings, which would make it possible to cause Padmasambhava to appear to a sufficiently accomplished practitioner not only in dreams or a meditative vision, but physically and materially in his svarupa (i.e. not under any disguise such as an old farmer, etc.)?

A. Fulgens


Malcolm wrote:
Padmsambhava made a commitment to physically visit anyone who recited his mantra or prayer every tenth day of the waxing moon. Whether you can see him or not depends on your level of obscuration.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, September 5th, 2011 at 9:52 PM
Title: Re: Dzogchen and other traditions
Content:


AilurusFulgens said:
Please forgive me my ignorance, but is a nirmanakaya buddhafield something like a terrestrial pure land i.e. Shambhala, Copper Mountain, etc.? How is a nirmanakaya buddhafield defined?

Malcolm wrote:
More like Amitabha's Sukhavati.


AilurusFulgens said:
I would have a further question and this time the situation is reversed. What would happen to a Buddhist who would study Hindu Tantric teachings? Would this even be possible?

Providing of course that he stays Buddhist (this is the situation I am speaking about), how would the practice of Hindu Tantric teachings influence his meditation, inner practice, samayas, etc.?

A. Fulgens

Malcolm wrote:
Buddhist can study and practice Hindu tantra (or vedas, etc., as long as it is not at expense of Buddhist training). They may not take refuge on Hindu deities however. In other words there is nothing wrong with chanting Namo Shivaya at a kirtan as long as you are not going for refuge. On the other hand, Shiva was converted to Dharma by Avalokiteshvara.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, September 5th, 2011 at 9:41 PM
Title: Re: The Vajra Guru Mantra of Guru Rinpoche
Content:
AilurusFulgens said:
Thank you, Namdrol for the clarification. Still at least partially the question remains i.e. let us say that your average Joe Sixpack decides one morning to sit down and commit to reciting the Vajra Guru Mantra, that he simply got from the internet and without being initiated into it, 600 million times with as much devotion as he can muster.

Malcolm wrote:
Well, if he did this, it would be certain that in the due course of time he would meet a qualified teacher.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, September 5th, 2011 at 9:36 PM
Title: Re: The Vajra Guru Mantra of Guru Rinpoche
Content:
AilurusFulgens said:
[Now, this would then presuppose that the above mentioned Bhutanese adept received an initiation in the Vajra Guru Mantra from someone qualified somewhere at sometime in his life.

Malcolm wrote:
From your website:
Finally, he listened to some masters’ advice and decided to start reciting the Vajra Guru mantra (OM AH HUNG BENZA GURU PADMA SIDDHI HUNG)
Yes. And it is impossible that this would not happen in a country such as Bhutan where Guru Rinoche is taught to children when they are infants.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, September 5th, 2011 at 9:34 PM
Title: Re: Padmasambhava as the incarnation of Amitabha?
Content:
Nosta said:
Accordingly to buddhism, after Shakyamuni the next Buddha will be Maytreya, so i dint understand how Padmasambhava could be a incarnation of Amitabha. Can someone explain me this paradox?

Malcolm wrote:
In Mahāhyāna, there is a distinction between supreme nirmankāyas, such as Śakyamuni, and so called "variegated" nirmanakāyas such as Padmasambhava, Garab Dorje and so on.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, September 5th, 2011 at 9:32 PM
Title: Re: Padmasambhava as the incarnation of Amitabha?
Content:
Ryoto said:
Is this the view of all Tibetan schools? How was he come to thought of as that incarnation?

Malcolm wrote:
As to question one: yes.

As to question two, Amitabha is the master of the family of the lotus family. Padmasambhava is regarded as an emanation, a nirmanakāya. Therefore, his Sambhogakāya manifestation is Avaokiteshvara and his Dharmakāya manifestation is Amitabha, just as for example, S̄akyamuni's family is the tathāgata family, his dharmakāya manifestation is Samantabhadra and his Sambhogakāya manifestation is Vairocana.

As for Padmasambhava, this is an idea that comes from the treasure tradition. I don't think I have seen an early pre-treasure tradition text that makes this claim.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, September 5th, 2011 at 9:07 PM
Title: Re: Dzogchen and other traditions
Content:


AilurusFulgens said:
Why am I bringing this up? Because of the following central questions:

a.) Where does Dzogchen practised by a person who is neither Buddhist, nor accepts the doctrine of anatman or pratityasamutpada (dependent origination) lead to according to traditional textual sources and living oral tradition? Do such people simply get stuck in formless blissful realms or are they simply wasting their time or do they go to Vajra hells....?

Malcolm wrote:
At best, rebirth in a nirmanakāya buddhafield.

AilurusFulgens said:
Now, do the Bonpos have the notions of anatman, pratityasamutpada (dependent origination), etc.? I mean the core notions, without which Buddhadharma is not Buddhadharma. If so, then there is no contradiction.

Malcolm wrote:
The Bonpos have Madhyamaka, a version of dependent origination and so on.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, September 5th, 2011 at 9:03 PM
Title: Re: The Vajra Guru Mantra of Guru Rinpoche
Content:
AilurusFulgens said:
a nityasiddha mantra i.e. "eternally or inherently perfect" and can yield the highest mantrasiddhi even to a person, who has not been initiated into it, but chants it devoutly?

Malcolm wrote:
This concept does not exist in Vajrayāna.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, September 5th, 2011 at 3:03 AM
Title: Re: Evolution of humans and Mahayana Buddhism
Content:
Astus said:
I'd argue that "small beings" and microorganisms are not the same thing. Tiny insects are one thing, bacteria are another, and the second type of beings are not filtered by a simple cloth. It's also problematic to call bacteria "sentient beings" from a Buddhist point of view.

Malcolm wrote:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microorganism " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Small animals, so called "micro-animals, are included within the category of microorganism.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, September 4th, 2011 at 7:32 PM
Title: Re: Evolution of humans and Mahayana Buddhism
Content:
devilyoudont said:
Thanks. Was it the Buddha himself who instituted this practice? While it's unquestionably hygienic for the drinker, I'm not sure how effectively this would save the lives of even those microorganisms that can be filtered out with a cloth strainer. Was the cloth washed in a lake or stream before drying out in order to release these animalcules back into their native environment?

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, it was the Buddha himself who instituted the practice. It was also a practice followed by other ascetics at the time. I am sure you can read about in a Vinaya commentary.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, September 4th, 2011 at 8:55 AM
Title: Re: Studying Nyingma
Content:
sangyey said:
How about Abhidharma study/texts/books?  Does anyone have any recommendations for Abhidharma study within the Nyingma Lineage?

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, you can take my abhidharma course online here:

http://rsl-ne.com/abhidharma1.html " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, September 4th, 2011 at 8:06 AM
Title: Re: Awareness.
Content:
White Lotus said:
just be in the natural state, no worries about theories and concepts. nothing to worry about.

Malcolm wrote:
The problem with sentient beings is that their natural state is afflicted.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, September 4th, 2011 at 8:04 AM
Title: Re: Evolution of humans and Mahayana Buddhism
Content:


devilyoudont said:
Also, when he was talking about sentient beings in the water, wasn't the Buddha referring to the perspective of interdependence in which phenomena are reflected in each other?

Malcolm wrote:
No, he was talking about microorganisms -- which is why part of the gear issued to Buddhist monks back in the day was a special fine cloth which acted as a water filter.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, September 4th, 2011 at 5:06 AM
Title: Re: ChNN's Vajra Armour teaching
Content:
Fa Dao said:
My book from DC came today!!!  woo hoo!!  I have a question though...the part of the mantra that has "Tadyatha", the book says this may be omitted due to the mantra only supposed to have 30 syllables, but is somewhat ambiguous on this point...any suggestions from those who have heard and practiced the teaching directly from ChNNR?


Malcolm wrote:
just say tadyatha...


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, September 4th, 2011 at 3:19 AM
Title: Re: Digital Tibetan Buddhist Altar
Content:
padma norbu said:
when I read in the paper that he made death threats during a murder trial

Malcolm wrote:
You believe everything you read in newspapers?

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, September 4th, 2011 at 12:34 AM
Title: Re: Why combine Dzogchen and Mahamudra?
Content:


deepbluehum said:
Ok sorry. I was intending it to be a serious post. Its one of those situations where I'm trying to be serious and it draws laughter. That makes me feel a little stupid. Please tell me what is so funny so I can laugh too.

Malcolm wrote:
I imagine it was this:
Because Togal has its own stages and explanations so if you practice Mahamudra like I have described and then go practice Togal it is like going backwards.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, September 4th, 2011 at 12:31 AM
Title: Re: Digital Tibetan Buddhist Altar
Content:


padma norbu said:
The rumor mills aren't exaggerating news items and arrest reports, his actual book titles and claims, etc.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, the way I see it, they actually are exaggerating the news items, the arrest reports and so on, trying to show those records in the worst possible light, and going to a lot of effort to dig up trash about one guy and publishing a lot of hearsay about him, some of which may actually be libelous.

We only really have their story here. We do not have Cassidy's side of the story, do we? That is why I am saying that you are taking a side since you are only taking one source for your information.

As I see it, there is nothing particularly wrong with writing a book about knife-fighting techniques. Not to my taste, but not illegal. Certainly I know a lot of Buddhists (including famous contemporary teachers) that are totally into weapons -- guns, knives, swords, you name it.

Basically, how Buddhist is it to put someone in jail? Bodhisattvas are supposed to free people from shackles, not place them in shackles. Bodhisattvas should exercise patience and restraint, not engage in systematic group smear campaigns.

In other words, I said he has some interesting things to say on his blog -- you come back with all this heavy stuff about why this is terrible. If Cassidy was just some schmuck claming to be a tulku and writing a blog, we wouldn't give any of this a second thought -- it would be at best a minor disagreement. But because he has a record, and he tangled with a wealthy religious organization, he is being screwed to the wall, and this is taking on much more of a life than it really deserves. Hell, G Gordon Liddy has interesting things to say sometimes (not often these days), and he makes Cassidy look like a cub scout.

And this is a free speech issue, that is why the EFF has gotten involved.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 3rd, 2011 at 10:39 PM
Title: Re: Digital Tibetan Buddhist Altar
Content:
padma norbu said:
My responses about Cassidy's character have been purely related to the notion that his blog is worth reading. He has a violent, criminal history...

Malcolm wrote:
I don't think the situation between him and his ex-wife is nearly as cut and dry as you claim. He was convicted of a crime for which he did not plead guilty. He entered an Alford plea.

Whether you like it or not, you are taking a side.

As far as E-Sangha goes, there are numerous people I know who used sock puppets for various reasons on E-Sangha who post here on Dharma Wheel. The only thing I can say about Cassidy is that when his ip was banned, he did not push it. He let it go with only minor complaints on his blog.

I have a dispassionate view about this. No one is better than anyone else. Everyone has done something frak up, either in this life or another. Cassidy has an army of people who hate him and talk shit about him. So, his karma sucks, he has pissed off a lot of people, seems to have a talent for it, and nevertheless, his blog is still of interest and has he interesting things to say, also boring things to say too. It is not like everything he ever wrote is fantastic.

He is a Buddhist outlaw, perhaps that is why I have a bit sympathy for him. He is also in poor health, in jail, and has a bad ticker.

And having been on the recieving end of quite a bit of vicious gossip myself, I know how easily rumor mongers stir up shit on the internet and how much of the rumor is complete fantasy.


N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 3rd, 2011 at 8:16 PM
Title: Re: Why combine Dzogchen and Mahamudra?
Content:
deepbluehum said:
...because combining them necessarily mean one has to view Mahamudra as semde or as tregcho. This view is based on incomplete knowledge of Mahamudra.

Malcolm wrote:
No, this is not the case.

Gampopa's Mahamudra system can be regarded as an adaptation of sems sde, but that does not include all possible variations on Mahāmudra.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 3rd, 2011 at 8:12 PM
Title: Re: Tibetan Buddhism (Vajrayana) : Will it stick ?
Content:


Tsongkhapafan said:
But the tradition in the Kalachakra across lineages is that the Kalachakra can be given to masses of people at once.

Kirt

Malcolm wrote:
This is a recent tradition, begun by the ninth Panchen Lama.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 3rd, 2011 at 7:42 PM
Title: We are/are not what we eat.
Content:
Karma Yeshe said:
So in most ways what we eat is not all that important. With the exeption of calorie restriction which may have some inpact the whole concept of "we are what we eat" is nonsense.

Malcolm wrote:
Thinking like this is responsible for many diseases that people have, which they could easily avoid.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 3rd, 2011 at 7:37 PM
Title: Re: Digital Tibetan Buddhist Altar
Content:
padma norbu said:
Anyone embroiled in this kind of nonsense is a person whose opinion is not worth a fart in a whirlwind, imo.

Malcolm wrote:
That does not mean it is proper that someone is locked up for a flame war.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 3rd, 2011 at 7:36 PM
Title: Re: Digital Tibetan Buddhist Altar
Content:
deepbluehum said:
So the tulku system is nonsense except for the case of Norbu Rinpoche? So there must be real reincarnated masters aside from him too. Or he is lying.

Namdrol said:
The only tulkus I take seriously are self-recognized tulkus. The rest is just a politics and money game.

N

Dhondrub said:
I am sorry?! The internet is full of self recognized Tulkus and most of them are just frauds. N Norbu Rinpoche was recognized as a Tulku and later empirically as you say convinced himself that he is actually that Tulku. So if he is right the Lama who recognized him in the first place was also right, or am i missing anything?

Malcolm wrote:
The lama who first recognized him as the incarnation of Adzom Drugpa was his uncle, who acheived rainbow body. As I pointed out, he was also recognized as the reincarnation of a Sakya Lama. My point was that NNR did not accept it until he had some proof for himself. That makes him a self-recognized tulku because he is the recincarnation of Adzom Drugpa and not the reincarnation of a Sakya Lama.

Dhondrub said:
But to say only self proclaimed is real is putting things upside down.

Malcolm wrote:
The first official tulku in Tibetan history was self-recognized i.e. the Second Karmapa, although a case could be also made for Guru Chowang, or even a little earlier, Yuthog Yontan Gonpo who stated in the early 13th century to his main disciple, Sumton Yeshe Zung, that he was the reincarnation of Padmasambhava,Virupa, Srongtsen Gampo and Gampopa, among others.

But my famous opinion of the tulku system is off topic here.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 3rd, 2011 at 9:22 AM
Title: Re: Digital Tibetan Buddhist Altar
Content:
padma norbu said:
Apparently the FBI and the local police feel differently.

Malcolm wrote:
Good thing the issue of who has and who has not committed a crime is not up the FBI or the police.

Whether someone has or has not committed a crime is something that is up to the courts to decide. However, sometimes, for reasons inpenetrable to others, people plead guilty to crimes they did not commit. Often, in the US, they are convicted for crimes they did not commit, while others, who are comitting crimes, go unpunished, due to reasons of status, money, power, or race.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 3rd, 2011 at 9:11 AM
Title: Re: Digital Tibetan Buddhist Altar
Content:



kirtu said:
It's the recognition and institutionalization that you don't accept.

Malcolm wrote:
It's the politics and money game I don't accept. That is the part of the dry rot that is infesting Tibetan Buddhism.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 3rd, 2011 at 9:09 AM
Title: Re: Digital Tibetan Buddhist Altar
Content:
deepbluehum said:
So the tulku system is nonsense except for the case of Norbu Rinpoche? So there must be real reincarnated masters aside from him too. Or he is lying.

Malcolm wrote:
The only tulkus I take seriously are self-recognized tulkus. The rest is just a politics and money game.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 3rd, 2011 at 9:07 AM
Title: Re: Digital Tibetan Buddhist Altar
Content:
padma norbu said:
I'm pretty sure it was more than a mere flame war.

Malcolm wrote:
Then you should feel confident in your superior knowledge of the situation.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 3rd, 2011 at 7:23 AM
Title: Re: Digital Tibetan Buddhist Altar
Content:


padma norbu said:
Cassidy should totally use the defense of "that was my little sister! sorry about that!" just like the rest of the demented trolls say when they get caught.


Malcolm wrote:
The fact is that is was a stupid flame war. Not worth prosecuting, not worth investigating, not worth the bits the NYT spend on posting the article. Not even worth discussing here.

People say stupid shit in flamewars all the time. The protecting nyingma people embarassed the shit out of themselves for aggressively pursuing the idea that dried shit zen was cassidy. He wasn't. He was some poor bastard in Oregon that got caught in the crossfire when the KPC people aggressivley targeted him for being cassidy.

The basic point is that nobody in this story was very nice to one another. And I don't really take the claims of the protecting nyingma folks at face value as being completely credible. The difference is however that one person has spent six months in jail without commiting any crime I can perceive.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 3rd, 2011 at 6:56 AM
Title: Re: Digital Tibetan Buddhist Altar
Content:
padma norbu said:
Namdrol, I was wondering if your apparent siding with Cassidy on this might have something to do with the global ire you've received in the past. Apparently people were so pissed off with the way you and the other mods ran E-Sangha that it was hacked beyond repair and there are still plenty of places where you can read people bitching about your censorship and your attitude in general. That must kinda suck. (edit: I'm not criticizing you, in case that sounds like I am; I was just brief in describing the charges they bring against you in the "court of public opinion.")

Malcolm wrote:
They bitched, they then created their own forums, and then proceeded to ban everybody we banned. Lesson learned.

padma norbu said:
Sorry to hear that you have no faith in the tulku system at all, apparently (?).
Is it wrong for me to interpret thusly (?): anyone who doesn't believe that tulkus are reincarnations is basically saying a lot of great lamas are lying. ???

Malcolm wrote:
They are satisfying the requirments of a cultural instution. Then there is the dog tooth relic story.

padma norbu said:
Namkhai Norbu is recognized as a tulku and in his relationship with his son/former uncle, he doesn't suggest otherwise. I have heard him laugh about how he recognized objects as a child or whatever and says "I don't know," but imo this is skillful means.

Malcolm wrote:
I would take Norbu Rinpoche seriously. He did not beleive he was the reincarnation of Adzom Drugpa for many years. He only accepted it when he had something like empirical proof -- i.e. he wrote a text. When he read Adzom Drugpa's collected works, he found the same text,more or less the same, for over a hundred pages in length. Then he decided he was actually the reincarnation of Adzom Drugpa. He is also recognized as the reincarnation of a completely different Sakya Lama.

I don't take tulku recognitions seriously, at all.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 3rd, 2011 at 4:57 AM
Title: Re: Digital Tibetan Buddhist Altar
Content:
Namdrol said:
http://volokh.com/2011/08/27/federal-government-prosecuting-man-for-writing-many-insulting-tweets-and-blog-posts-about-religious-leader/
Considering that the supreme court recently ruled that a man making death threats against Obama could not be jailed because the threats were not credible, and therefore covered under free speech protections, I don't think the prosecution in Maryland has a chance of landing this, especialy since the EFF is involved. And they have deep pockets.
N

padma norbu said:
I am genuinely surprised that you:

1. seem to be happy about the idea that this man, whom police have already traced a HUGE amount of harassment from as (directly to his computer), will likely get off and get back to his blog, which you will then be pleased as punch to read again.

Malcolm wrote:
It seems to me that the parties involved were mutually harrassing one another. As far as I am concerened it was just a twitter flame war. In my  17 years on the internet, I have seen far worse from Buddhists.

padma norbu said:
Is not going to jail the yardstick by which you're measuring behavior? Because I'm pretty sure the writers at Protecting Nyingma will never even get arrested.

Malcolm wrote:
Arrests do not equal guilt in our judicial system.

padma norbu said:
I'm sure if I pressed you on this, you'd say that you believe tulkus are genuine reincarnations...

Malcolm wrote:
You'd be wrong...


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 3rd, 2011 at 3:56 AM
Title: Re: Sakya POV on the origin of the Cakrasamvara Tantras
Content:
conebeckham said:
Is this Shavaripa the same as "Shawaripa," the Mahasiddha, the author of the famous prayer to Six Armed Mahakala?


Malcolm wrote:
Hard to know.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 3rd, 2011 at 2:19 AM
Title: Re: Mind of Definite Emergence
Content:
Namdrol said:
What you wish to give up is suffering. Wishing to give up suffering and being free from desire, hatred and confusion are two different things entirely.
N

wayland said:
I think I see what you mean Namdrol, if you mean that 'wishing to give up suffering' is aspirational and 'being free from the three poisons' is the result. They certainly are two entirely different things.

Regarding the aspirational aspect of "nges 'byung", you wrote earlier: It is necessary to have a mind that has given up attachment to samsara in order to practice tantra, otherwise, there is no point.
To what extent would this mind have needed to give up attachment?

I'm thinking that if it's not given up enough, then it's going to slide right back into the trap it wishes to escape from. On the other hand, if it has deeply ascertained suffering within the three poisons and has developed a revulsion towards them it could pass a point where it no longer wishes (or is able) to employ tantric means. Dechen Norbu describes it as "a fight fire with fire situation", which implies that nges 'byung relies on attachment to samsara, to some extent at least.

Is this a fair conclusion?

Malcolm wrote:
Giving up attachment to samsara means that you do not want to take afflictive rebirth here anymore. If you practice tantra, it is because you realize that afflictions are too strong to make the path of renunciation of sense objects feasible, since instead you work with sense objects on the path.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 3rd, 2011 at 12:52 AM
Title: Re: Appearances and mind
Content:
Namdrol said:
First of all "mind" here is short for "awakened mind" i.e. bodhicitta or the nature of the mind. It does pervade all of your own appearances. It is an all=creating king because all appearances are constructed by your mind and come from your mind, thus it is a king since it is the dominates all of this constructive activity. It's nature is inexpressible since it is empty from the very beginning and not established as something ultimately real in its own right.

Acchantika said:
What I am asking is: Is this conclusion a phenomenological or ontological one? Does it concern the plethora of reality as it appears, or "as it is" in non-apparent reality and apparent reality alike?

Because in both cases, the above statement would be true, but mean entirely different things. You seem to express the former, while others express the latter.

It's difficult to express myself without the trappings of dualistic language.

Malcolm wrote:
It is both.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 3rd, 2011 at 12:12 AM
Title: Re: Why combine Dzogchen and Mahamudra?
Content:
mindyourmind said:
Why would you need both?

Malcolm wrote:
They are complementary practices.

A similar question is why practice creation and completion stage and Dzogchen?

Again, it is because they are complimentary practices.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 3rd, 2011 at 12:09 AM
Title: Re: Forgiveness?
Content:
Epistemes said:
But what do Buddhists do?  Is there no reconciliation, just arising and falling?

Malcolm wrote:
Exchange of self and others.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 2nd, 2011 at 8:54 PM
Title: Re: Appearances and mind
Content:
padma norbu said:
Anyone who wants to get a better understanding should buy The Supreme Source and read page 95 (of course, reading everything before that would be a good idea, too, as well as everything after it).

Acchantika said:
Partly what I am trying to understand is how to read that book as not positing that there is an ineffable, non-graspable primordial basis of all existence that is spontaneously self-luminous and the source of dharmakaya, inlcuding the mountain and the mind, not simply as concepts, but in the literal sense of sourcing and pervading the entire dimension of reality, hence "The Supreme Source".

Can you suggest anything that would help me put that book in context?


Malcolm wrote:
First of all "mind" here is short for "awakened mind" i.e. bodhicitta or the nature of the mind. It does pervade all of your own appearances. It is an all=creating king because all appearances are constructed by your mind and come from your mind, thus it is a king since it is the dominates all of this constructive activity. It's nature is inexpressible since it is empty from the very beginning and not established as something ultimately real in its own right.

Also this book is sems sde class, which means it is commentary on the completion stage of Mahāyoga and does not really stand as an independent tradition. No one attains rainbow body through sems sde alone.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 2nd, 2011 at 8:50 PM
Title: Re: Appearances and mind
Content:
Namdrol said:
There are two answers to this question in Dzogchen.

a) external phenomena are projections of minds. A mind is capable of projecting an appearance for another mind: classical example, the woman who meditates on herself as a tigresss and terrifies her village.

b) external phenomena are a result of causes and conditions; their appearance is a result of traces -- for example, the liquid that has six different appearances according to how it is perceived by beings of the six realms.

Pero said:
Are these two not connected?


Malcolm wrote:
Not necessarily. Actually Dzogchen does not really provide an answer for this question that is not found also in Madhyamaka. The first example is a Yogacara Madhyamaka response. The second is a Sautrantilka Madhyamaka type response.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 2nd, 2011 at 8:47 PM
Title: Re: Painful muscle cramps
Content:
meiji1 said:
How does Tibetan medicine treat sudden painful muscle seizures in the legs (specifically in the adductors)?


Malcolm wrote:
That would depend on your age, condition, consitution, fitness level and so on. You can email me with further details if you like.

In general, massage is probably indicated, and perhaps moxabustion or acupuncture.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 2nd, 2011 at 8:39 PM
Title: Re: Mind of Definite Emergence
Content:
wayland said:
Thanks Dechen,
I was coming at it from a slightly different angle. Let me give an example - say food, there's stuff we like and stuff we don't. If we have a choice we choose the stuff we like. The 'not wanting' the other food must be similar to a renounced mind which does not want desire - perhaps has already seen the drawbacks involved.

How do you get such a mind to start working with something it no longer has any wish for at all? If, on the other hand, it still had some desire, then it would not be the right mind for tantra, as Namdrol has pointed out.


Malcolm wrote:
What you wish to give up is suffering. Wishing to give up suffering and being free from desire, hatred and confusion are two different things entirely.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 2nd, 2011 at 8:54 AM
Title: Re: Appearances and mind
Content:


Acchantika said:
Then the premise of Dzogchen is just the observation that all you ever 'know' is a projection of your mind. But everyone knows this, no? Its perceptual theory. It's called the "epistemological problem" in Western philosophy, i.e, its a problem, not a solution. And conceding as a result of this that nothing can be known beyond the originator of this internal structure (the mind) is called 'solipsism'. Conceding instead that things can be known beyond the mind is called realism, and the only thing I understand about Dzogchen is that it is neither. So what am I missing?

I want to know how the mountain got there. The texts say, "the mountain originates from the mind". Either I read this as a kind of idealist idea, or I read it as a merely perceptual idea. Apparently neither is correct.


Malcolm wrote:
There are two answers to this question in Dzogchen.

a) external phenomena are projections of minds. A mind is capable of projecting an appearance for another mind: classical example, the woman who meditates on herself as a tigresss and terrifies her village.

b) external phenomena are a result of causes and conditions; their appearance is a result of traces -- for example, the liquid that has six different appearances according to how it is perceived by beings of the six realms.

As far as the latter is concerned, Longchenpa observes that phenomena are not mental factors, as in yogacara.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 2nd, 2011 at 5:12 AM
Title: Re: Appearances and mind
Content:
Hayagriva said:
The difference between the Dzogchen view(s) and solipsism is something I'm very interested in understanding.

Acchantika said:
I second this.


Malcolm wrote:
Dzogchen does not suggest a) that external objects do not conventionally exist b) that external minds do not conventionally exist. All that it suggests is that appearances are mind.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 2nd, 2011 at 4:22 AM
Title: Re: Mind of Definite Emergence
Content:
Namdrol said:
both.

wayland said:
Thanks Namdrol. I've also heard that this mind is one of five requisite conditions for a successful outcome within tantra. Would this be correct in your opinion?


Malcolm wrote:
It is necessary to have a mind that has given up attachment to samsara in order to practice tantra, otherwise, there is no point.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 2nd, 2011 at 2:45 AM
Title: Re: Mind of Definite Emergence
Content:
Namdrol said:
No. It is an overly literal translation of the Tibetan term "nges 'byung", which is a translation of Sanskrit niḥsaraṇa, which in turn means "riddance".
N

wayland said:
Thanks Namdrol. Does it refer to one who is rid of the poisons or one who genuinely aspires to be?


Malcolm wrote:
both.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 2nd, 2011 at 1:38 AM
Title: Re: Infinite lives - How so prior to life on Earth?
Content:
Epistemes said:
Perhaps this should be in another thread - if so, have at it.

I'm confused by the notion that we all have had infinite lives.  So, I take this to mean that prior to the existence of life on Earth, we all lived lives as devas and all of those other transcendental, metaphysical beings that I don't know the Buddhist terminology for.  Are there categories that I'm missing?


Malcolm wrote:
And bugs, snakes, dogs. frogs. etc. As well as on other planets, and so on.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 2nd, 2011 at 12:40 AM
Title: Re: Six Yogas of Naropa
Content:
Pero said:
at that time he told me he doesn't give pointing out at the beginning because many people get confused, like thinking every religion is the same or that everything is one, so he prefers to give it when people have some foundation (in that program it was at level 3).

Adamantine said:
Well he may be right.. I do know of at least one regular devoted student of ChNN who is pretty much a Hindu and thinks this way. . .


Malcolm wrote:
Hell I know devoted students of HHDL that are for all intents and purposes Hindus. Naropa had many Hindu disciples. Sometimes, religion does not matter than much when it comes to Guru devotion.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 1st, 2011 at 8:31 PM
Title: Re: Mind of Definite Emergence
Content:
wayland said:
I'm just looking for definitions of the above. I have an idea that it's about renunciation but is there more to it?


Malcolm wrote:
No. It is an overly literal translation of the Tibetan term "nges 'byung", which is a translation of Sanskrit niḥsaraṇa, which in turn means "riddance".

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 1st, 2011 at 8:22 PM
Title: Re: Evolution of humans and Mahayana Buddhism
Content:
Namdrol said:
But Huifeng, you have to admit that the sutras read as if these gazillions of eons ago all happen in the context of this Jambudvipa (the sub-continent of India).

Huifeng said:
Not necessarily.  It depends on which sutras one is referring to.  And even then, only some make such references to specific locations (such as Jambudvipa) while others do not.  eg. the story of Dharmakara, who became Amitabha.

~~ Huifeng


Malcolm wrote:
Nevertheless, many do. And there is no need to restrict ourselves to Mahayana sutras in this respect. Your response therefore does not really adress the OP's question. It is a rather religious response -- to wit, "don't worry about the fact that narratives in Mahāyāna sutras contradict empirical scientific data about planet earth and evolution because we can explain our way around it with reference to other world systems...."

A better reply would be "The Indian imagination is prone to exaggeration of cosmic time periods..."

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 1st, 2011 at 8:06 PM
Title: Re: Digital Tibetan Buddhist Altar
Content:
Namdrol said:
I know perfectly well that this is an awesome example of why the whole tulku game ought to be completely abandoned.

kirtu said:
Throwing the baby out with the bathwater.  This is, IMHO, not a solution.

Kirt

heart said:
Also, Tibetans will continue to recognize Tulku's no matter what we think about it.

/magnus

Malcolm wrote:
And they (Tibetans) will continue to admit privately it is all a game of political bullshit.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 1st, 2011 at 8:04 PM
Title: Re: Evolution of humans and Mahayana Buddhism
Content:
himalayanspirit said:
There appears to be some inconsistency between theory of evolution of humans from primates and Mahayana Buddhism. Basically, in Buddhism it takes minimum three 'countless' kalpas to reach Buddhahood. Every sentient requires at least that period of time to reach Buddhahood including our very Buddha Shakyamuni. But did we even exist so long ago?

There are stories of Buddhas and Bodhisattvas of many eons ago, but weren't we primates at that time?

What is the explanation of this inconsistency? Is it that when these sutras talk about civilizations many many kalpas ago, they are actually referring to another 'world-cycle' where sentient beings rose and then destroyed?

Huifeng said:
It is not an inconsistency, the problem is one of understanding what Buddhism (Mahayana or otherwise) teaches on the subject.
Add to your formulations that there are multiple worlds, and that there are multiple forms of existence in which living beings can be reborn, some of which entailing lifespans of millions of years.

So, "did we even exist so long ago?" - Yes.  Just not necessarily as human beings.  Or even on planet earth.
For "weren't we primates at that time?" - Who is this "we"?  Maybe some were, but others may have been humans or devas elsewhere.

~~ Huifeng


Malcolm wrote:
But Huifeng, you have to admit that the sutras read as if these gazillions of eons ago all happen in the context of this Jambudvipa (the sub-continent of India).


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 1st, 2011 at 5:50 AM
Title: Re: Offerings and prayers: Authentic Buddhism?
Content:
Epistemes said:
I don't find many of the practices of Mahayana and Vajrayana apparent in my readings of early Buddhism, which is where I'm at right now in my so-called "random reading" and "wild guesses."

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, they are not there in what we in the West like to call "early Buddhism". They came later. This is even acknowldeged in the tradition via the hermeneutical device of situating these practices as practices the Buddha taught, which where then kept concealed until later.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 1st, 2011 at 5:45 AM
Title: Re: Digital Tibetan Buddhist Altar
Content:


Namdrol said:
All I know is that his blog often has things of interest, and her blog is super boring and pretentious.

I also know that after he outed their finances on his blog, they went to war with him, his other sock-puppetry aside.

N

Greg said:
Did he really do that though (out her finances)?

Malcolm wrote:
Yup, I saw the spreadsheet myself.


Greg said:
I wish the Times would do some follow up reporting. They don't know what they have with this one - you couldn't make it up.

Malcolm wrote:
Indeed.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 1st, 2011 at 5:05 AM
Title: Re: Digital Tibetan Buddhist Altar
Content:


daelm said:
i just don't think that it's a zero-sum game, in which if he is a douche, then she is virtuous. it is entirely possible that they can both be douches, for example. and i don't think that arguing for clarity about him somehow exonerates her and the shenanigans that have been conducted either in her name or with her blessing. for the amount of stuff that's since come to light, she's made some pretty serious mistakes. and that was a gift to him, one he's wielded with exemplary persistence for years now, until the recent discovery of all his cast-of-thousands sock puppets, all clustered around one angry man's keyboard.

Malcolm wrote:
All I know is that his blog often has things of interest, and her blog is super boring and pretentious.

I also know that after he outed their finances on his blog, they went to war with him, his other sock-puppetry aside.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 1st, 2011 at 2:39 AM
Title: Re: Digital Tibetan Buddhist Altar
Content:
Adamantine said:
...making anonymous death threats via twitter...

Malcolm wrote:
He didn't do that -- no "I am going to kill you" stuff.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 1st, 2011 at 1:18 AM
Title: Re: Empty Mind
Content:
Acchantika said:
This is not the same as saying they do not exist. The sutras also say that both 'they exist' (eternalism) and 'they do not exist' (nihilism) are wrong views.

Malcolm wrote:
Buddhapalita puts it nicely "It's not that we make a claim for the non-existence [of existents], we merely remove claims that existents exist".


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 1st, 2011 at 1:06 AM
Title: Re: Digital Tibetan Buddhist Altar
Content:
Greg said:
And that account sounds a lot like what Bill Schwartz aka "Ryder Japhy" describes happened to him:

http://www.elephantjournal.com/2010/02/welcome-to-twitter-hell-bill-schwartz/

Malcolm wrote:
Worth reproducing:
I had just finished reading Tyler Dewar’s (@tylerdewar on Twitter) recent interview in Bodhi Magazine with the 17th Karmapa. There was a graph in which His Holiness discussed the importance of sangha [community] as a harmonious coming together. Nalanda West, Seattle, Washington (@NalandaWest), had tweeted a link to the interview, and I re-tweeted it to share with the people who follow my Twitter stream.


Then I asked the question, “What does His Holiness mean?” and people began to chime in to discuss what they thought. Much to my surprise Jetsuma chimed in with “Consistency.” I tweeted back “What do you mean?”…

…and the sh*t storm began. Maybe I missed something, but she called me an asshole and made a snide remark about my heart, which gave her devoted Kunzang Palyul Ling followers the green light to begin attacking me.

I laughed it off and mentioned it in my last Elephant Journal article—“I’m an asshole, but that’s beside the point”—and returned to my daily routine of practice and tweeting Dharma quotes and music during session breaks without giving it a second thought. I had no idea of the Twitter hell I was about to catch.

From the point of my initial exchange with Jetsuma, the attacks escalated from strangers ridiculing the fact that I’m dying of congestive heart failure to a personal threat—“I know people in Chicago”—from one of her devoted followers. I’ve always known that the Nyingma have had issues surrounding Penor Rinpoche recognizing the “actor” Steven Seagal as a tulku, but I had no idea what a pile of sh*t I had stepped into.

Thankfully, Twitter isn’t a message board, and I can block Jetsuma’s followers from seeing my Twitter stream. I’ve had to block only one person who created a shell account to spam my @Replies (Twitter inbox) with threatening messages. Why would a Dharma teacher on Twitter allow her or his followers to behave in such a shameful manner? Perhaps she didn’t know. I haven’t a clue.

Ending on a positive note…Dzogchen Ponlop Rinpoche (@ponlop) has followed me back; he wasn’t following anyone on Twitter when I wrote my last article. We’ve been exchanging direct messages (private tweets); he enjoyed “Bite Me, Boulder Buddhists” and mentoring me through the process of dying.

Also, Yongey Mingyur Rinpoche (@yongeymingyurrinpoche) is on Twitter now, but has yet to tweet.

What about Twitter hell? My bad; it ended in a tweet. “Founding member Chicago KTC, well regarded over 28 years, will not hesitate to take legal action against anyone stating otherwise here.” And so while we can “drive all blames into ourselves,” as the Lojong slogan goes—and while I remember to be grateful to my “enemies,” who are my greatest teacher—well, Twitter hell turned out to be for those deluded enough to think they could push Bill Schwartz around. Later.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 1st, 2011 at 1:00 AM
Title: Re: Digital Tibetan Buddhist Altar
Content:


Greg said:
from the guy who signs off "Andrew Wilson," who claims to be an innocent bystander who got mistaken for Cassidy and ended up with a gun in face in the middle of the night.

Malcolm wrote:
Crimes & Tulkus: Poisonous Snakes in Buddhist Robes
Some people have asked me if I’m the “man named Andrew Wilson” that a certain tulku is mentioning on her Web site as having had his house searched by the FBI for evidence relating to the purported crimes of another man named “William Cassidy,” aka "Tenpa Rinpoche." I am that Andrew Wilson. But I don’t know anything about any cyberstalking crimes by a William Cassidy.

I do know something about being criminally cyberstalked, however, because for almost a whole year two saffron-robed psychopaths stalked me (although I’d blocked them and all their ilk) through various both official and anonymous Twitter accounts and through anonymous hate blogs on which they posted many of my Zen/Taoist “tweets” accompanied by the most outrageously foolish, not to mention slanderous, commentary.

According to these two "Buddhist" stalkers -- a crazy looking lady wearing a crown and too much make-up and a mousy little man in monk's robes -- my Twitter page was actually authored by William Cassidy, and the various different handles and avatars I went through to try to get clear of their relentlessly negative attentions were all William Cassidy’s “sock puppets,” and my insistence on remaining anonymous behind names like “Akebonojishi” and “Mujinkyo” was all by itself absolute and conclusive proof that I must really be Tenpa Rinpoche trying to pull a fast one on the whole world. It seems not to have occurred to these racketeering co-frauds that my insistence on anonymity was precisely a way of trying to keep the emphasis off my "self" and on what I have to say (about Zen). But logic has never been the strong suit of religious fanatics.

So incensed were the two bizarre and unwholesome Bogus-sattvas by my continued presence on Twitter that last spring and summer they resorted to harassing almost every single Twitter user who RTd or even spoke to me. Many of the people they harassed got quite spooked by it, so it became almost impossible at times for me to reach anyone with my notes and comments on Zen/Haragei. (A pity, since the techniques I show people how to do actually work, and nobody even has to pay to support my lavish Guru lifestyle.) They particularly swarmed, attacked and mocked anyone who dared to call me "Sensei" or thanked me for helping out with a specific problem. Their paranoia rose to an obsessive crescendo of mean-spirited ridicule and tiresome victim-babble that was endlessly echoed and amplified by a beggar's chorus of the organization's so-called nuns, each with her own Twitter page devoted to singing the Guru's praises and savaging the Guru's purported enemies.

I've never experienced any Internet madness quite like it. The threatening rage and vituperation on open display from a rural Maryland rattler's nest of "Vajrayana Buddhists" was surreal, David Lynch-esque even. Many of the tweets were disturbing, threatening messages hinting obscurely at magical attacks, promising the most extreme karmic retribution, and prophesying a long stay in Vajra Hell. But there were also more routine threats of the "we-know-where-you-live" and "we-have-people-on-the-payroll-who-take-care-of-people-like-you" variety. (The "Mafia" style tweets felt especially dissonant coming from smiling nuns.) Naturally, I've already downloaded hundreds of pages of this stupefying horse-shit from Twitter and Google caches, and will be making it available to the right people as and when needed.

Those same two unbelievably sad, bewildered and angry co-conspirators now claim that even though it has been proven beyond any possible doubt that I was not, as they swore up down and sideways to everyone who would listen (including the FBI), William Cassidy himself, still I must somehow be connected to the man, who is sitting in jail right now -- and they publish their ignorant, libelous opinion about a person unknown to them along with my name on the official blog of their purported Sangha. Psychopath that she is, the tulku in question still often mentions me and sometimes RTs my tweets mockingly on her Twitter page, never mind that she is now and always has been "blocked," and uses the same type of inflammatory language about me she did all last year. Neither the mentally deranged tulku nor the emotionally and intellectually stunted monk capo have yet acknowledged any error in judgement, nor offered the barest hint of an apology. However, at some point they did quietly remove every last scrap of the "hard evidence" supposedly proving that I am William Cassidy they'd posted on their anonymous "Protecting Nyingma" attack blog. Huh! I wonder why they would do that!

“Purify your mind! Do no evil, do only good. That is the whole teaching of the Buddha.”

-ANDREW WILSON

https://diamondsutrazen.blogspot.com/2011/06/crimes-and-tulkus.html " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 1st, 2011 at 12:55 AM
Title: Re: Digital Tibetan Buddhist Altar
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
The Deadly Viper Assassination Cult Buddhists
I've been posting Zen notes, poems and aphorisms on Twitter since the summer of 2009. In December of that year, two very strange people began cyberstalking and harassing me through multiple Web sites and multiple (mostly anonymous) Twitter accounts. Their names are Alyce Zeoli -- aka "Jetsunma Ahkon Lhamo," the controversial "founder and spiritual director" of an organization called the Kunzang Palyul Choling -- and David Williams, a so-called monk in that same purportedly Buddhist organization.

The reason for these two weird people cyberstalking me, and relentlessly harassing anybody with whom I interacted on Twitter, is still mysterious. Although they often claimed that since my Twitter account was anonymous (as it was at the time, though clearly not anymore) I must have something to hide, and therefore was beyond any possible doubt an enemy of theirs named "William Cassidy" aka Tenpa Rinpoche, they also spent an inordinate amount of time and energy trying to argue with, contradict and debunk me on matters of Zen and "Buddhism." (Note: even now that they must know I'm not him, they still regularly mention and "retweet" my postings with mocking and derisory comments attached. Strange!)

Unfortunately, I did not take their many threats seriously enough, and failed to contact the police.

However, these two mentally disturbed people did not fail to collect any and every annoyed or exasperated counter-tweet of mine, some of them containing what might be considered by drawing room standards moderately rough language, though not so much so for the Internet, and these tweets they forwarded to the FBI with a complaint that I was cyberstalking Alyce Zeoli -– a person I'd never even heard about until the first of her childish insults appeared on my Twitter stream, and a person I truly wish I’d never had the displeasure of hearing about.

Naturally, the two bizarre individuals in question neglected to inform the FBI about their own incessantly negative and provocative, often quite creepy, online activities against me and a few unlucky others. However, I've since downloaded hundreds of pages from Twitter and Google caches documenting just this. I expect to soon be making all of this puerile, repugnant cult material available for easy perusal by anyone with the patience and the stomach for it.

The FBI's research department must be slacking off, because as a result of Alyce Zeoli's complaint a team of FBI agents in dark clothing broke into my Oregon home before dawn on the morning of February 15th, 2011 and handcuffed my girlfriend and I at gunpoint. This was rather traumatic for my girlfriend, who had no idea what was going on. Actually, I didn't either. The agents then read out a search warrant for our computer equipment and cell phones and questioned us both on the cheerful joint topic of "Jetsunma Ahkon Lhamo" and "William Cassidy." They also spent an inordinate amount of time searching the basement and greenhouse, as if they hoped to find explosives or a maybe a cache of Tommy guns. I told them they were raiding the wrong compound; they must have taken a wrong turn at Albequerque, because where they really belonged was the Kunzang Palyul Choling enclave in Maryland. They informed me that the FBI agent who filed the affidavit leading to the armed invasion of my home is based, surprise, in Baltimore.

I later learned that on that very same morning William Cassidy was arrested in California and transported to Baltimore. He has apparently been sitting in the federal wing of a maximum security prison ever since, with motions for a trial on charges of "cyberstalking" Alyce Zeoli, who -- ironically -- out of her many absurd aliases and honorifics will perhaps become best known as the "Victim 1" of court documents, scheduled for this fall. (See U.S. vs. Cassidy.)

Leaving aside notable constitutional issues, the government's whole case seems to hinge on the wild claim that Alyce Zeoli is a "victim" of cyberstalking and harassment via Twitter and various Websites run by William Cassidy. But if Alyce Zeoli and David Williams did online to William Cassidy and to others (me, just for example) precisely what they claim he did to her, the case falls apart like a gin-soaked cocktail napkin. "No crime, with no victim;/no jury will convict him."

And the truth is that these two Kunzang Palyul Choling players at one time or another mocked, stalked, harassed, or insulted every single one my friends on Twitter. Alyce Zeoli is renowned both on- and offline for her tantrums and high handed arrogance, as well as for her belittling response to the merest criticisms; while David Williams is infamous for rude, persistent, laughably obtuse attacks on all who don't fall in line with his Guru's bizarre pronouncements. If William Cassidy deserves to be sitting in a jail in Maryland awaiting trial, then clearly Alyce Zeoli and David Williams deserve to be sitting in jail in Oregon awaiting trial also. Since when does the federal government arbitrarily take sides in Internet flame wars?

I never saw William Cassidy cyberstalk anybody so I can't pronounce on that subject, but I can say this: Alyce Zeoli and David Williams are cyberstalkers extraordinaire –- and by deliberately misleading the federal government in their wildly successful attempt to put my life in danger and to deprive me of all civil, political and human rights, they’ve downgraded their profile to felonious liars and co-conspiring domestic terrorists. Eventually, one can hope, the federal government will wake up to their vicious act, soon after which cell doors will clang shut on these two smiling, saffron-robed vipers.

https://diamondsutrazen.blogspot.com/2011/07/deadly-viper-assassination-buddhists.html " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 1st, 2011 at 12:51 AM
Title: Re: Buddhahood in Chan
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
"...Heraclitus' river, the foot never truly stands on the same ground twice."

Actually, one's foot never steps in the same river once.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 1st, 2011 at 12:36 AM
Title: Re: Digital Tibetan Buddhist Altar
Content:
Namdrol said:
It is obvious that anyone criticizing Cassidy for claiming to be a tulku is incorrect. Here, in an early post, he clearly claims that he is not a tulku.

kirtu said:
You know perfectly well that numerous western TB's are going to tend to react as if he were a tulku and esp. the group in Poolesville who in many cases are naive and uncritical.  In many cases they are tulku worshippers.

Malcolm wrote:
I know perfectly well that this is an awesome example of why the whole tulku game ought to be completely abandoned.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 31st, 2011 at 10:13 PM
Title: Re: Digital Tibetan Buddhist Altar
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
"Despite the "Tibetan" name by which I am occasionally known -- which is actually more of a nom-de-plume, and guess what... I might be making a literary point about blind credulity -- and which is just one of several names by which I am known, you should be very clear that I don't consider myself a "tulku," and I really don't think you should either. I have tried to make that exquisitely clear in my various books, but for some reason, people want to create something that isn't there. Also, please don't offer to send me things, because there isn't anything I need. I particularly don't need donations, students, or the adoration of syncophants. If you enjoy reading this weblog, then just enjoy reading this weblog. Please don't drag me into your fantasies."

--- William L. Cassidy, SATURDAY, OCTOBER 21, 2006


It is obvious that anyone criticizing Cassidy for claiming to be a tulku is incorrect. Here, in an early post, he clearly claims that he is not a tulku.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 31st, 2011 at 10:09 PM
Title: Re: Digital Tibetan Buddhist Altar
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
http://volokh.com/2011/08/27/federal-government-prosecuting-man-for-writing-many-insulting-tweets-and-blog-posts-about-religious-leader/ " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Considering that the supreme court recently ruled that a man making death threats against Obama could not be jailed because the threats were not credible, and therefore covered under free speech protections, I don't think the prosecution in Maryland has a chance of landing this, especialy since the EFF is involved. And they have deep pockets.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 31st, 2011 at 9:55 PM
Title: Re: Digital Tibetan Buddhist Altar
Content:
padma norbu said:
wow, this is quite a neat little tale he tells prior to launching into his rehearsal chants (which sound kind of real and kind of like he's just muttering rambling syllables intentionally slurredly)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x9QF2ILirOQ " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Namdrol said:
He is reciting the seven line prayer.

Adamantine said:
Only in the very beginning, he goes on to do what seems to be a patchwork of mudras and offerings without any offering substances, but it doesn't seem at all coherent to me. . . it does appear he is just fronting. . . . unless someone actually recognizes a complete practice in there from their specific lineage

Malcolm wrote:
Well, the summoning and binding mudras are clearly there, then argham, padyam, etc. then he recites a mantra. He is following  a text, towards the end he is doing a mahakala torma offering, and so on.

And there are two kinds of offerings, mentally emanated and physical, the former are more important than the latter; the former are indispensible, the latter are dispensible (yes, you read it here, mentally generated offerings are more important).

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 31st, 2011 at 9:49 PM
Title: Re: Digital Tibetan Buddhist Altar
Content:


kirtu said:
Clearly using such a nom-de-plume in western TB circles has certain intended consequences and shouldn't be done; it's deceptive if you are not a recognized person.

Malcolm wrote:
"Orgyen Tenpa Rinpoche", if anyone had bothered to parse the words, is not the name of a person: it means "The Precious Teaching of the One From Oḍḍiyāna".

Anyway, it remains to be seen that Cassidy committed a crime here: it raises interesting issues around free speech; as does the "Protecting Nyingma" blog, which goes out of its way to slander Cassidy in no uncertain terms, pouring fuel on the fire.

One thing remains true -- Cassidy's blog was one of the more interesting blogs in the Buddhist blogosphere, and he writes well. I for one shall enjoy reading it again when Cassidy gets out.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 30th, 2011 at 9:52 AM
Title: Re: Offerings and prayers: Authentic Buddhism?
Content:
Namdrol said:
Mahāyāna's earliest texts are reliably dated through archaeology and text criticism from the First Century BCE, if not earlier. So, that's not it. Mahāyāna was a fully articulated movement by 100 CE.

Epistemes said:
What are these earliest texts?  I have been under the presumption that the Heart and Diamond Sutras were the earliest.

Namdrol said:
Not only that, but the cultivation of love and compassion was strongly recommended by the Buddha was a very important practice in all strands of Buddhist schools.

Epistemes said:
I am aware of the Buddha advocating metta and karuna - but there is an insistence in the Mahayana school upon all actions benefitting all sentient beings that I'm not aware of in the Hinayana school.


Malcolm wrote:
Even in so called Hināyāna schools, there is the recognition that the motivation to become a buddha is predicated upon the desire to benefit all sentient beings.

Texts like the Ugraparipriccha, the Samcayagathas, parts of the Lotus sutra, and so on. Certainly, the Perfection of Wisdom sutras were in their initial form by 100 CE, and probably earlier.

Heart and Diamond sutras are quite late. The Heart sutra probably originated in China. The Perfection of Wisdom in 8000 lines is probably the earliest of the PP sutras, as I understand things.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 30th, 2011 at 8:41 AM
Title: Re: Offerings and prayers: Authentic Buddhism?
Content:
Epistemes said:
The Mahayana emphasis upon compassion and loving-kindness resemble Byzantine Christianity so much in their intent that I am forced to reckon that this must be in response to missionaries and traveling Christian ascetics.

Malcolm wrote:
Mahāyāna's earliest texts are reliably dated through archaeology and text criticism from the First Century BCE, if not earlier. So, that's not it. Mahāyāna was a fully articulated movement by 100 CE.

It's most famous exponent, Nāgārjuna, dates to the middle of the 2nd century CE.

If anything, the influence is the other way around.

Not only that, but the cultivation of love and compassion was strongly recommended by the Buddha was a very important practice in all strands of Buddhist schools.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 30th, 2011 at 8:32 AM
Title: Re: Technical Point in Ascertaining the Three Vows
Content:
xylem said:
I have been studying Perfect Conduct, Dudjom Rinpoche's commentary on Ngari Panchen Pema Wangyal's Ascertaining the Three Vows.  There is one section that has always perplexed me.  In the section on the pratimoksha-vinaya, on p. 26, the last full paragraph, section 2.b.1(a.3.3) section (2) the root text says:

An upholder of lay ordination who is also a pure-awareness holder must, except for the signs and rituals of complete ordination, practice all that remains.

Dudjom Rinpoche follows:

An upholder of lay Buddhist ordination who has entered mantra becomes known as a pure-awareness holder, or a vidyadhara.  Although it is not necessary for such an individual to display the outer signs of full ordination such as robes, begging bowl, or shaved hair-- which are the result of receiving a specific ritual-- all remaining precepts in the vinyaya system must be upheld and practiced.

This has always perplexed me because at first it has seemed in resonance with Guru Rinpoche's teaching to rise with the view while descending with the conduct.  On the other hand I have yet to find a context where the vinaya and it's particular forms of discipline and purification ( e.g. sojong) have been encouraged for lay tantrikas.  At the same time, looking at the lives of great lay masters, such as Chatral Rinpoche, they certainly do seem to embrace the whole scope of the vinaya, even as lay practitioners.

Thoughts?

Malcolm wrote:
This is not definite. First of all, there are is no rite by which an upasaka receives all these vows of a bhikṣu. Therefore, there is no onus to guard vows which has not taken, as Dudjom Rinpoche readily admits.

Instead we can regard this as an instruction that lay practitioners ought, in an ideal world, to emulate the discplined behavior of a buddhist monk.

Incidentally, this instruction is rejected in the earlier Three Vows of Sapan.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 29th, 2011 at 7:45 PM
Title: Re: Buddhahood in Chan
Content:
Namdrol said:
What I do know is that certain Chan claims have no basis in Mahāyāna sutra.



Astus said:
So indeed, Chan is not based on sutras, shastras, or any doctrine.

Malcolm wrote:
[/quote]

You missed my point -- certain Chan claims seem to be based on nothing more than the personal fabrications of those who make those claims.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 28th, 2011 at 10:11 PM
Title: Re: Permanence and Enlightenment
Content:
AdmiralJim said:
Thank you for answering my questions although it doesn't address my last point of whether that contradicts voidness.


Malcolm wrote:
It does. Because of the realization of emptiness, the seeds of affliction are scorched.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 28th, 2011 at 8:15 PM
Title: Re: Costly Situations
Content:
TheWay said:
have you personally seen there racism towards blacks ?


Malcolm wrote:
Yes, I have. I have also seen Tibetan racism towards white people as well, though it is less intense. I am not saying that it should daunt you, just that Tibetans, like other people, have flaws, and since Tibetans have very little experience with black people, to some extent black people are often suprised when they receive a cool reception or rude reception from Tibetans. Of course, not all Tibetans are racists. But many are.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 28th, 2011 at 7:57 PM
Title: Re: Digital Tibetan Buddhist Altar
Content:
padma norbu said:
wow, this is quite a neat little tale he tells prior to launching into his rehearsal chants (which sound kind of real and kind of like he's just muttering rambling syllables intentionally slurredly)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x9QF2ILirOQ " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Malcolm wrote:
He is reciting the seven line prayer.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 28th, 2011 at 9:50 AM
Title: Re: Costly Situations
Content:
Jikan said:
what's the South Asian attitude toward nonwhite Westerners vis a vis cash expectations?  or mixed race people?

Malcolm wrote:
Tibetans are often pretty racist when it comes to black people (i.e. those of African descent)

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 28th, 2011 at 7:21 AM
Title: Re: Buddhahood in Chan
Content:
Namdrol said:
Your non-sequitors about Vajrayāna are a distracting waste of time.

Jnana said:
And FTR, I wasn't criticizing the vajrayāna, nor even Tibetan Buddhism per se. I was criticizing this modern internet phenomenon of "Tibetan Buddhists" who have convinced themselves that they know non-Tibetan traditions better than everyone who practices those traditions, and run around shooting their mouths off all the time.

Malcolm wrote:
I don't pretend to know Chan better than Chan Buddhists.

What I do know is that certain Chan claims have no basis in Mahāyāna sutra.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 28th, 2011 at 6:14 AM
Title: Re: Buddhahood in Chan
Content:
Namdrol said:
Anyway, it is pretty clear you are not someone who is speaking from personal experience of the tenets which you espouse, otherwise you would not be wasting your time here.

Jnana said:
Which tenets would those be?

Malcolm wrote:
mere recognition = buddhahood.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 28th, 2011 at 6:13 AM
Title: Re: Buddhahood in Chan
Content:
Namdrol said:
This does not refute the path of seeing in anyway.

Jnana said:
There's no need to refute the path of seeing. It's simply a question of emphasis. Chan emphasizes effortless recognition. The same emphasis can be found in numerous sutras, tantras, dohas, and so on.

Malcolm wrote:
Effortless recognition /= buddhahood. It just doesn't. Otherwise, Arhats are also Buddhas. Now, you might think that is true, and certainly tilt billings does,  but that is not a Mahāyāna perspective on the issue.




Namdrol said:
But it certainly has nothing to do with Indian Mahāyāna nor how Chan deviates from it.
Not all Chanists denied the paths and stages.

Malcolm wrote:
I know, we are concerned here with those that do, primarily.

Namdrol said:
It's a basic tathāgatagarbha view,

Malcolm wrote:
There is no one basic tathagarbha view, there are a couple.

Even here tathagatagabins in India never imagined that tathagatagarbha alleviated the need for a long, grueling, mahāyāna path.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 28th, 2011 at 5:41 AM
Title: Re: Buddhahood in Chan
Content:
Namdrol said:
There is no such thing as an early, pristine Dzogchen.

Jnana said:
LOL.... Too funny.


Malcolm wrote:
There isn't.

This idea of a "pristine Dzogchen"(aka mind series) is a fantasy invented by some western translators. In reality, the mind series was a commentary on completion stage of Mahāyoga, as Rongzom makes very clear in his theg chen tshul 'jug, when he describes Dzogchen as a commentary on the tantra division.

Anyway, it is pretty clear you are not someone who is speaking from personal experience of the tenets which you espouse, otherwise you would not be wasting your time here. You might consider that unfair or ad hominem (which it is) -- but unless it is the case that you or Astus claim to persons realized in these tenets which you espouse, it really is just so much tarka.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 28th, 2011 at 5:39 AM
Title: Re: Buddhahood in Chan
Content:
Namdrol said:
These don't say anything, absent contextualized reasoning and explanation.

Jnana said:
Reasoning and explanation are just word play. Saraha:
Others run around in the Great Way,
where scripture turns to sophistry and word play.

Malcolm wrote:
You are mistaking songs of realization as substituting for the path that got them there.


Jnana said:
Lama Shang:
The three kāyas are primordially, naturally present
in the nature of the mind, which is like space;
the Jewel of the Buddha is completely within it...

The superior realization of your own mind as
nondual luminosity is the path of seeing,
its unbroken continuity is the path of meditation,
its effortlessness is the path of complete attainment.

Malcolm wrote:
[/quote]

This does not refute the path of seeing in anyway.

When you do not have unbroken continuity of equipoise, what then? In this respect, there can be no discussion of complete attainment.

So, this is another example of poetic rhetoric.

But it certainly has nothing to do with Indian Mahāyāna nor how Chan deviates from it.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 28th, 2011 at 5:33 AM
Title: Re: Buddhahood in Chan
Content:
deepbluehum said:
It might occur to you that this instruction is a method to cause the student to give up grasping at methods when the case is that the method has been given too much focus.

Jnana said:
Chan is all about giving up grasping at methods. The same as early, pristine dzogchen:
Seeing that everything is self-perfected from the very beginning,
the disease of striving for any achievement is surrendered,
and just remaining in the natural state as it is,
the presence of non-dual contemplation continuously spontaneously arises.


Malcolm wrote:
There is no such thing as an early, pristine Dzogchen.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 28th, 2011 at 5:10 AM
Title: Re: Buddhahood in Chan
Content:
deepbluehum said:
Let's just say Chan's method of introducing is equivalent to this. I don't think so. I think such an introduction is special to Vajrayana

Jnana said:
With Chan, everything is a direct introduction. Every moment of every experience.

deepbluehum said:
That's very poetic. But I'm talking in pragmatics.

Malcolm wrote:
Geoff seems to think that giving a blizzard of citations from some post 12th century mahamudra text is sufficient for proving the path of seeing is buddhahood.

But i doubt very much whether Gampopa himself holds this view.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 28th, 2011 at 5:01 AM
Title: Re: Buddhahood in Chan
Content:
Jnana said:
With Chan, everything is a direct introduction. Every moment of every experience.

Malcolm wrote:
People place too much importance on this word "direct introduction", so much so they have no idea what it means anymore.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 28th, 2011 at 4:59 AM
Title: Re: Buddhahood in Chan
Content:
Jnana said:
Snip citation blizzard

Malcolm wrote:
These don't say anything, absent contextualized reasoning and explanation. They certainly don't mean that the path of seeing is buddhahood.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 28th, 2011 at 4:21 AM
Title: Re: Permanence and Enlightenment
Content:
AdmiralJim said:
Upon becoming enlightened what stops ignorance from re-asserting itself?

Malcolm wrote:
Having realized emptiness, it is impossible to forget that realization.



AdmiralJim said:
If that is not possible then does that make enlightenment permanent?

Malcolm wrote:
When a seed is scorched, it is permanently incapable of giving rise to a sprout, likewise, when the seed of ignorance is scorched, it can never give rise to the result, affliction, again


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 28th, 2011 at 4:05 AM
Title: Re: Buddhahood in Chan
Content:
Namdrol said:
As I pointed out, if insight into the nature of the mind was sufficient for full buddhahood, then first stage bodhisattvas would be buddhas. But they are not.

Jnana said:
This is just another lame gradualist argument.

Malcolm wrote:
And this is just another petulant complaint lacking substance and reasoning.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 28th, 2011 at 2:49 AM
Title: Re: Buddhahood in Chan
Content:
deepbluehum said:
This is a very interesting discussion. It is a very important discussion. Please allow a possibility that there actually is buddhahood in one life. Please consider that the powers gained on the bhumis as described in sutras are inspirational. The actual realizations and samadhis that happen on the bhumis or that a buddha has are completely beyond description and can only be referenced metaphorically. The realization of nonconceptual wisdom is possible even in a day or a week. Chan does not possess this method. Vajrayana does.

Then the matter of attaining omniscience is a gradual process. Because the obstacles to omniscience are in one's elements, one has to remain in nonconceptual wisdom 24/7 for a long time, then sometime around death wisdom throws off the veil of the elements. Vajrayana has methods that make this certain. Chan does this potentially but without the specific method, it won't be as certain.

Jnana said:
You've re-emphasized my previous point: Every Mahāyāna tradition is faith based. One of the glaring shortcomings of Tibetan Buddhism is in taking a faith based, visionary tradition, and trying to interpret it literally. Of course, this began in India, with proofs of omniscience and so on. But that doesn't legitimize it. Here the Tibetans could learn a thing or two from the Chinese and Japanese masters. But this likely won't happen any time soon, since virtually every Tibetan Buddhist has already been thoroughly convinced by their tradition's self-proclaimed superiority.

Malcolm wrote:
We are are not really talking Tibetan Buddhism here. We are talking about Chan Buddhism and Indian Mahāyāna. Your non-sequitors about Vajrayāna are a distracting waste of time.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 28th, 2011 at 12:49 AM
Title: Re: Buddhahood in Chan
Content:
Astus said:
In content it teaches the sudden enlightenment that accomplishes buddhahood directly.

Malcolm wrote:
One can say whatever one likes For example, consider the statement "Jesus teaches a method of direct buddhahood, far superior to anything taught by any other Buddha or tradition". Who can refute this if all statements about Buddhism are to be considered valid? In other words, such claims are just so much hot air without reasons.

As we have seen, there is no precedent in Indian Buddhism from the 1st century BCE to the time supposedly Bodhidharma visited China the the kind of claims some Chan masters make.


Astus said:
In method it uses immediate insight into the true nature of mind.

Malcolm wrote:
As I pointed out, if insight into the nature of the mind was sufficient for full buddhahood, then first stage bodhisattvas would be buddhas. But they are not.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 27th, 2011 at 11:55 PM
Title: Re: Buddhahood in Chan
Content:


Astus said:
The realisation happened on the 11th level, the first level of dwelling, and the 1st bhumi is the 41st level.

Malcolm wrote:
If that is so, it is plainly wrong.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 27th, 2011 at 9:53 PM
Title: Re: Costly Situations
Content:
Namdrol said:
Maybe in Chinese and Thervada Buddhism, it is possible, but not for westerners in TB. On the other side of that however, you lose a lot a freedom by ordaining in monastic scene where you are completely supported.

Huseng said:
I think it depends largely on your connections and where you are. I know one westerner in Nepal who has the option of going into permanent lifelong retreat if he wants to, but then that's because of his connections and service. Very few would ever have that option, and I think you'd have to be in India or Nepal for it to ever happen.

Maybe there is also the unspoken expectation, too, that westerners are all wealthy, so they should pay more. In India even at government tourist sites you pay 100 rupees, the locals pay 5 rupees. The cost of tuition at the Rangjung Yeshe Institute is also much more than what locals pay, and as a foreigner you pay your tuition in US dollars, too.

Tell me if I'm wrong, but in TB in Asia, I think the cost of everything increases if you're a westerner? Perhaps speaking Tibetan puts you on the cost scale of a local because they don't need to use extra services to support you (like English speaking staff and so on).

Malcolm wrote:
Americans, Canadians, and Western Europeans have more money than locals, so they should pay more. Speaking Tibetan does not bring the costs down. AFAIK.

I know a lot of broke western Tibetan Buddhist ordained folks. Some of them are quite pathetic, like hungary ghosts.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 27th, 2011 at 9:45 PM
Title: Re: Sunyata and dependent origination
Content:
PadmaVonSamba said:
Don't confuse "characteristics' with "defining characteristics".
Since mind is infinite, it has no de fining characteristics. Only " infining " characteristics.
The nature of mind, it's characteristics (space & luminosity) are infinite, not finite.

(Define:
de= "of"
fine= "end"
in other words, the end of something, it's boundaries of limitation)

Malcolm wrote:
Making up your own dharma language now?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 27th, 2011 at 9:40 PM
Title: Re: Sunyata and dependent origination
Content:
PadmaVonSamba said:
isn't the lack of characteristics a characteristic?

Namdrol said:
Is a "lack of money" money?

PadmaVonSamba said:
Yes...it's money that you don't have!

Malcolm wrote:
Can you spend a lack of money?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 27th, 2011 at 9:38 PM
Title: Re: Costly Situations
Content:
TheWay said:
...and not have to worry about finances etc...

Namdrol said:
That is not going to happen.

Huseng said:
It is possible if you ordain, though maybe this isn't the case in TB.

Malcolm wrote:
Maybe in Chinese and Thervada Buddhism, it is possible, but not for westerners in TB. On the other side of that however, you lose a lot a freedom by ordaining in monastic scene where you are completely supported. And it is not necessarily fanatastic for practicing Dharma.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 27th, 2011 at 9:26 PM
Title: Re: Costly Situations
Content:
TheWay said:
...and not have to worry about finances etc...

Malcolm wrote:
That is not going to happen.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 27th, 2011 at 9:21 PM
Title: Re: 10 Questions for His Holiness Sakya Trizin
Content:
Kunga said:
... after the Dalai Lama, the throne holder of Sakya is the next senior figure.

J-Bird said:
Well this isn't exactly true. In the Central TIbetan political system pre-1959, the Panchen Lama was the closest in succession to retaining the political role of the executive of the central TIbetan Government. This being said however, from a religious point of view, the Karmapa incarnations, were held the 2nd highest religious throne in Tibet, aside from the Dalai Lamas.

It is an itheresting discusison though, and my understanding may be somewhat misguided. If anyone has any other info, I would be interested to better understand the heriarcy between the Glug, Sakya, Kagyu-pa and Nyigma lamas in relation to political power.

Malcolm wrote:
Traditionally speaking, in terms of the height of the seat to which a given high Tibetan lama is entitled, the throne holder of Sakya is lower only than the Dalai Lama. All other Lamas have seats lower than the throne holder of Sakya.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 27th, 2011 at 9:14 PM
Title: Re: Buddhahood in Chan
Content:
Namdrol said:
No, we just have the usual philosophical sleight of hand I mentioned above.

Jnana said:
The sleight of hand is using a 9th century polemical argument to criticize a 2nd century conception of the bodhisattva path.

Malcolm wrote:
I am not criticizing a second century concept of the bodhisattva path.



Jnana said:
As I mentioned previously on another thread, if we were to show up in 2nd century India with our basket of tantras and claim that it's possible to attain buddhahood in one lifetime, we'd be laughed out of every vihāra on the sub-continent.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, I have acknowledged this several times. The point I am making is that later Vajrayānists took this limitation seriously and proposed that early Mahāyāna was by definition a slow path, requiring incalculable eons to complete because there were no unique methods in sutrayāna to hasten progress on the path.

Since Chan, Huayen, and so on do not add any new insights into the nature of reality, nor do they add any revolutionary new methods, any claims they make to sudden buddhahood are merely rhetoric and philosophical trickery.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 27th, 2011 at 9:08 PM
Title: Re: Buddhahood in Chan
Content:
Astus said:
No, it is a Huayen view of the initial production of bodhicitta, which is the entrance to the path of accumulation.
It says first bhumi and it means the first bhumi.

Malcolm wrote:
Which first bhumi? The traditional dasabhumi are bhumis 40-50 in in the 52 stages scheme which is a result of taking chapter 15, 21, 22, 25, 26 of the Avatamska to be descriptions or levels on the bodhisattva path. Chapter 26 however,or the ten stages is the Dasabhumika sūtra and that is what is under discussion.



Astus said:
No, since the ten stages are treated the same way. In Chinese Buddhism they are merely encased within an alternate scheme, but when I say first bhumi, I mean the first bodhisattva bhumi as described in the Dasabhumika sutra.
That's the point, it is not treated the same way. Here's Buswell's summary based on Tongxuan's work:
"The ten bhumis are the original foundation of all dharmas. Here the bodhisattva pervades all dharmas, all directions, and all positions simultaneously. Development before this stage involved some measure of effort and entailed as well the progressive development of meritorious practices. By the time the bodhisattva has reached the ten bhumis, however, he has nothing left to practice and nothing left to achieve. It is a kind of "firming-up" stage at which all the qualities and achievements attained throughout the previous levels are matured and allowed to infuse his entire being. He merges with all dharmas without, however, losing his own identity in the process. This is the stage of the unimpeded interpenetration of all phenomena- the highest expression of spiritual attainment in the Avatamsaka Sutra and, by implication, in all the Buddhist scriptures."

Malcolm wrote:
As I said, it is treated in the same way. When a bodhisattva realizes the first bhumi, there is no more emptiness to realize, all that is left to do is to complete the two accumulations, as I told you, the ten stages only map qualities, not realization.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 27th, 2011 at 7:38 AM
Title: Re: Buddhahood in Chan
Content:
Astus said:
Yes, so is the whole stages system.

Malcolm wrote:
No, the bhumis are measures of qualities, the paths are measures of realization. This is why the āryan path has only three phases: the path of seeing, the path of cultivation and the path of no more training. The ten bodhisattva stages are included within both the path of seeing (first bhumi) and the path of cultivation (first bhumi to tenth bhumi). The path of no more training is Buddhahood.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 27th, 2011 at 7:34 AM
Title: Re: Buddhahood in Chan
Content:


kirtu said:
It seems to me to be a bit of hyperbole - Tibetan teachings do address awakening but it's all inferential and usually seems glossed as far as the Path of Preparation and bhumis are concerned (unless one takes it literally that a 1st bhumi Bodhisattva can physically emanate 100 bodies, etc.).

Namdrol said:
These are manomāyakāyas, not physical bodies.

N

kirtu said:
Tibetan teaching on the lower paths and the first bhumi can be summarized as "where there's smoke there's fire."   But it's extraordinary smoke ....

Manomayakayas: mental bodies?  For the purpose of teaching through visions or can they appear as physical bodies to aid beings directly?

Kirt

Malcolm wrote:
The one hundred bodies emanated by a first stage bodhisattva are for the purpose of visiting buddhas in other nirmankāya buddhafields.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 27th, 2011 at 7:32 AM
Title: Re: Buddhahood in Chan
Content:
Astus said:
"This is just intellectual contrivance."

Yes, so is the whole stages system. No, it is a summary of the Huayan view of the first bhumi.

Malcolm wrote:
No, it is a Huayen view of the initial production of bodhicitta, which is the entrance to the path of accumulation.


Astus said:
"The first of the 52 bhumis is not anywhere near the path of seeing, so there is no immediate experience of the ultimate that can even be discussed."

You make the mistake of identifying one interpretation of the bodhisattva stages with another.

Malcolm wrote:
No, since the first bodhisattva stage of the dasabhumika follows the path of seeing. It is not an issue of "mistakes" or "interpretations".

Astus said:
What I showed is that both "first stage" and "buddhahood" are relative terms that depend on interpretation. Unless you give a definition you want to base the comparison on your question can't be answered, or it can be answered in any way.

Malcolm wrote:
No, since the ten stages are treated the same way. In Chinese Buddhism they are merely encased within an alternate scheme, but when I say first bhumi, I mean the first bodhisattva bhumi as described in the Dasabhumika sutra. If you wish to be a sophist, and pretend that you do not understand this, that is your problem, but it reveals sophistry on your part and an inability to maintain a coherent argument.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 27th, 2011 at 6:16 AM
Title: Re: Buddhahood in Chan
Content:
kirtu said:
So it's in this vein.

Malcolm wrote:
Which contradicts what the Buddha said about there being no persons of the four ranks of āryas outside of his dharma and vinaya.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 27th, 2011 at 6:14 AM
Title: Re: Buddhahood in Chan
Content:


kirtu said:
It seems to me to be a bit of hyperbole - Tibetan teachings do address awakening but it's all inferential and usually seems glossed as far as the Path of Preparation and bhumis are concerned (unless one takes it literally that a 1st bhumi Bodhisattva can physically emanate 100 bodies, etc.).

Malcolm wrote:
These are manomāyakāyas, not physical bodies.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 27th, 2011 at 6:12 AM
Title: Re: Buddhahood in Chan
Content:
Astus said:
"What then is the difference between a Buddha and first stage bodhisattva?"

It depends on how the first stage and how a buddha is interpreted. Here's one interpretation from Wonhyo's commentary to the Vajrasamadhi Sutra that is based on the Huayan view,

"the first bhûmi in fact encompasses all ten bhûmis, for in one moment one may suddenly access the ten types of dharmadhOEtus. The ten bhûmis are in fact the first bhûmi, for all [ten] may instantly be completely fulfilled at this initial gate [of the first bhûmi]. Owing to the fact that the ten bhûmis are in fact the first bhûmi, [the first bhûmi] is called the “one.” But because the first bhûmi is in factthe ten bhûmis, it is also “many.” Consequently, [the first bhûmi] is called the “one-and-many bhûmi.”"

Malcolm wrote:
This is just intellectual contrivance.




Astus said:
In a similar fashion it is discussed by those who few (Zongmi, Jinul) who attempted to connect Chan with the doctrinal teachings, mainly Huayan. So it is not much different from what you say, however, they called sudden enlightenment not the entry to the first bhumi but the entry to the level of faith which is the first of the 52 levels. That makes your interpretation of Chan's sudden enlightenment a lot more positive than theirs. On the other hand, their interpretation is a bit more complex, as it is briefly explained by Buswell in a footnote:

Malcolm wrote:
That makes the term 'sudden buddhahood" meaningless since it is far below the path of seeing, this so called "buddha" has not even recognized emptiness. No wonder people are confused.




Astus said:
So, even if it sounds lot of "sophistry" and "sleight of hand", Chan focuses on immediate experience of the ultimate

Malcolm wrote:
The first of the 52 bhumis is not anywhere near the path of seeing, so there is no immediate experience of the ultimate that can even be discussed.

Astus said:
and so there aren't many discussions on bodhisattva stages, because having "stages", "levels" and "grades" of enlightenment are all ideas of "how it could be", while directly attaining no-thought and maintaining it in all situations - that's why I protested against the distinction of equipoise and post-equipoise - is the essential teaching and realisation.

Malcolm wrote:
You protested, but did not answer my observation concerning the idenity of the content of a first bodhisattvas realization and a buddha's realization.

In the end, all you have succeeded in showing is that Chan is systematically incoherent.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 27th, 2011 at 4:50 AM
Title: Re: Buddhahood in Chan
Content:


kirtu said:
Right but Chan and Zen doctrine and teachers do address it and the result is a kind of continuum of awakening.

Malcolm wrote:
All teachingsa address how one can tell if one is awakened, and to a limited extent, how others can tell. It is still very difficult.



kirtu said:
Fundamentally are people naturally engaged in reducing suffering would be one response.

Malcolm wrote:
That is not a good criteria. Christians will say their faith lessens their suffering. Would you then say that Christian faith is comparable to Buddhist awakening?


kirtu said:
As you have noted with Astus much of what Chan or Zen says is really about the 1st bhumi in the bhumi and paths classification.

Malcolm wrote:
That was what I said, but Astus does not accept this.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 27th, 2011 at 4:31 AM
Title: Re: Buddhahood in Chan
Content:
Namdrol said:
The point is to distinguish rhetoric from what is actual.

kirtu said:
Well - how do you determine if someone has attained some degree of awakening?

Malcolm wrote:
It is very difficult, virtually impossible, really.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 27th, 2011 at 4:09 AM
Title: Re: Buddhahood in Chan
Content:


kirtu said:
I'll have to look up the Chan explanations on this point but it comes in part from assertions in the Lanka and other sutras teaching that the whole world is mind.  A lot seems to come from the Lanka + the Flower Ornament Sutra but I don't want to interject what may be more a Zen bias.

Malcolm wrote:
What the Lanka discusses is sudden or gradual entry in suchness, not sudden or gradual buddhahood.

kirtu said:
Anyway, Buddhas not being able to experience delusion: even in the Tibetan schools this can be parsed out.  HHST states that this is a difference between Gelug and Sakya in that Gelug asserts that Buddhas can see suffering.

Malcolm wrote:
This does not mean that buddhas experience delusion, merely that their omniscience, itself illusory, is capable of apprehending illuory objects of knowledge, re: Haribhadra.

kirtu said:
In Zen at least (and In am well aware that Astus set the context in Chan - but my reading of Sheng Yen seems to conform to the following as well) enlightenment is not actually the undeluded enlightenment of Shakyamuni because even after kensho and even satori people still can deepen their enlightenment and can be influenced by habit patterns.  Thus the rhetoric says that one's enlightenment is that of Shakyamuni's but the experience is not quite there ranging as I mentioned from higher up the Path of Accumulation to the lower bhumis.

Malcolm wrote:
The point is to distinguish rhetoric from what is actual.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 27th, 2011 at 4:00 AM
Title: Re: Buddhahood in Chan
Content:
Astus said:
Regarding the dana-paramita (although the quoted MPPS section does not mentioned it) here is a little explanation from Dazhu Huihai:

Q: Where can one enter the doorway to this understanding?
A: Through the perfection of charity (dana-paramita).
Q: Buddha has said that the six paramitas are the action of the Bodhisattva path, so how can we enter the doorway to this understanding by practicing, as you have said, only the dana-paramita?
A: People who are confused or deluded do not understand that the other five paramitas all evolve from the dana-paramita. Therefore, in practicing the dana-paramita, one also fulfills the practice of the other five paramitas.
Q: For what reason is it called the dana-paramita?
A: "Dana" means the perfection of charity.
Q: What things can be given up in the name of charity?
A: Clinging to thoughts of duality can be given up.
Q: Just what does this mean?
A: It means to give up clinging, in the name of charity, to thoughts of good and evil, existence and non-existence, love and hate, emptiness and fullness, concentration and non-concentration, pure and impure, etc. In the name of charity, give up all of them. Then, and only then, can you attain the stage of the voidness of duality, while, at the same time, letting neither a thought about the voidness of opposites nor about charity arise. This is the genuine practice of the dana-paramita, which is also known as absolute detachment from all phenomena. This is only the voidness of all dharma-nature, which means that always and everywhere is just no-mind. If one can attain the stage of no-mind everywhere, no form will be perceived, because our self-nature is void, containing no form. This, then, is true Reality, which is also called the wonderful form or body of the Tathagata. The Diamond Sutra says: "Those who have abandoned all forms are called Buddhas."

Malcolm wrote:
It has already been pointed how the realization of emptiness of a first stage bodhisattva is identical in content to the realization of emptiness of a Buddha. But surely you admit that there is a difference between a first stage bodhisasattva and Buddha. If there is no difference in terms of the nature of reality, what then do you think the difference is?


Astus said:
The two accumulations of merit and wisdom are present in the mind. Emptiness is wisdom, function is compassion. Zen affirms that the trikaya is present in the nature of mind, so it is not that one has to develop wisdom for the dharmakaya and merit for rupakaya, but the buddha-mind is already perfect in all aspects. Still, that doesn't deny that there is also a gradual path of the bodhisattva, however, the gradual path doesn't deny the existence of a sudden path. Thrangu Rinpoche says that on the sutrayana it takes a long time to achieve buddhahood because they use analytical-conceptual meditation but Mahamudra uses an experiential method of directly looking at the nature of mind. A similar argument could be made in the case of Zen too.

Malcolm wrote:
Mahāmudra is part of secret mantra. Since the methods of mahāmudra do not exist in Zen, a similar argument cannot be made.


Astus said:
This might help better understanding, here is Zongmi's differentiation between the five dhyanas, that is, the levels of practice:
5. Direct (sudden) realization of the essential purity of ones own mind, originally without defilements, itself endowed with the influx-free (non-afflicted) gnosis - this mind is Buddha, ultimate with nothing else beyond - cultivating in this manner, is the Supreme Vehicle Dhyana. It is also known as the Pure Dhyana of the Tathagatas.

Malcolm wrote:
This is no different than the realization of a first stage bodhisattva. What then is the difference between a Buddha and first stage bodhisattva? You have still failed to answer this point.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 27th, 2011 at 3:20 AM
Title: Re: Buddhahood in Chan
Content:
Namdrol said:
Again, this is just philosophical slight of hand, using the teaching of the emptiness of phenomena (shown above) to try and demonstrate that conventional phenomena are not effective borders on nihilism.

kirtu said:
It is because conventional phenomena are effective that Chan doctrine is centered in the view of realization in this moment.  One can attain this realization directly and suddenly because one's mind is actually a Buddha.

Malcolm wrote:
As I said, buddhas that experience delusion are buddhas only by name.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 27th, 2011 at 3:18 AM
Title: Re: Buddhahood in Chan
Content:


kirtu said:
No - Chan ideas about Buddhahood are largely a development of Yogacara influence and yogic experience.

Malcolm wrote:
I have read a lot of yogachara. In what Yogachara text is there anything remotely like the citations Astus as provided?




kirtu said:
They hinge the argument on the notion that the mind is a radiant Buddha and that this can be experienced directly.  This view in turn is a strong influence of Yogacara.

Malcolm wrote:
This is obviously false since buddhas cannot experience delusion. The Yogachara masters such as Asanga were actually strongly critical of tathagāgarbha theory.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 27th, 2011 at 1:00 AM
Title: Re: Buddhahood in Chan
Content:
Astus said:
I see. So the problem is the lack of the two accumulations. But even in the Prajnaparamita teachings we find that one paramita includes all the other paramitas.

In the Mahaprajnaparamitasastra (30.5.3; vol. 2, p. 859, tr. Lamotte-Migme) we find even the concept of abstaining for all kinds of practices, "Furthermore, the bodhisattva acquires the Prajñāpāramitā without practicing any dharma and without acquiring any dharma. Why? All practices (caryā) are erroneous and futile: from near or far, they present faults. In fact, bad dharmas (akuśaladharma) are faulty from close up; as for good dharmas, they are transformed and modified from far away; those who become attached to them will end up by experiencing pain and sorrow; thus they show defects from far off. [Good and bad practices] are like an appetizing food and a disgusting food both of which have been poisoned."

There is also the story of Prasannendriya and Agramati (MPPS, vol. 1, p. 323ff) where the first only taught insight into the true nature of reality without renouncing the world and the other all the many practices and ascetic methods. Prasannendriya became a buddha eventually and Agramati had to undergo lot of suffering later on.

Adding the buddha-mind teachings, the nature of mind has perfect function, the functioning of a buddha, and this is the display of all the qualities. What is there to accumulate for it?

Malcolm wrote:
Again, this is just philosophical slight of hand, using the teaching of the emptiness of phenomena (shown above) to try and demonstrate that conventional phenomena are not effective borders on nihilism.

Further, this supposes that practicing dana paramita and realizing dana paramita is sufficient for full buddhahood. It is not. It is sufficient for realizing the first bodhisattva bhumi, and that is all. As I mentioned above, the emptiness realized on the path of seeing and the emptiness that a Buddha realizes is the same emptiness. There is no difference at all in the realization of emptiness of a first stage bodhisattva and a Buddha. But there is a difference in affliction and omniscience.

You might try and will it away with philosophical sophistries, but this is not the intention of Mahāyāna.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 26th, 2011 at 10:08 PM
Title: Re: Buddhahood in Chan
Content:
Namdrol said:
Because India is the source of the Dharma, the place where Mahāyāna developed, etc., and the site of Vajrāsana.

Astus said:
Do you deny the possibility that authentic Buddhism is not bound by geographical location? You defined a "mainstream Buddhism" as all Indian Buddhists while we both know that Buddhism there was neither unified nor static. Vajrayana claims buddhahood within one lifetime, so it is not exactly true that all agreed on the time it has to take to achieve it.

Malcolm wrote:
No, you are missing the point -- Vajrayānists in India accepted the lenghty time period for achieveing buddhahood based on the accumulating the two collections.



Astus said:
The concept of sudden enlightenment was first taught by Daosheng (360?-434), a disciple of Kumarajiva. Because he was a Chinese master and not Indian, his view of Buddhism must be wrong?

Malcolm wrote:
Please precise with your terms -- does sudden enlightenment mean sudden buddhahood, or sudden awakening on one of the bhumis?

The doctrine here under question is the idea promulgated by some Chan masters that Buddhahood does not require the two collections. This is unprecedented in Indian Buddhism, including Vajrayāna (as well as Dzogchen).


Astus said:
Saying that Indian Buddhism is the definitive because that's where it first appeared is very much an argument based on an irrelevant fact.

Malcolm wrote:
Indian Buddhism is definitive because Buddhism developed in India. All the texts and teachings upon which all other Buddhist doctrines, whether in line or in contrast with Indian Buddhism, depend on Indian Buddhism.

Astus said:
Buddhism developed pretty much independently in China after Buddhism established itself. Why would then it be inferior only because of geographical reasons?

Malcolm wrote:
It is not a question of inferiority - it is a question of continuity.

It is clear that certain Chan ideas about "Buddhahood" have no precedent in the Buddhism promulgated in India, including the Buddhism of Vajrayāna.


Astus said:
Just as in India so it was in China that there were different traditions and interpretations of the Buddhadharma. Sudden enlightenment might be inconceivable for the Theravada and early Mahayana followers, but not so for the Vajrayana.

Malcolm wrote:
There is no such thing as a "sudden enlightenment" in Vajrayāna which is free from the two collections. The rapid awakening in Vajrayāna is predicated on gathering the two accumulations extremely rapidly -- not, as in some Chan formulations, dismissing their importance all together.


Astus said:
Vajrayana developed in India and Chan developed in China. Neither of them are something you could find in such mainstream schools as the Sarvastivadins or the Dharmaguptakas.

Malcolm wrote:
What Vajrayāna shares with Sarvastivadins or the Dharmaguptakas is that by normal means, buddhahood requires a minimum of three asaṃkhyakalpas to acheive. In order to bypass that requirement, Vajrayāna proposes the adoption of a specfic methodology by which these two collections may be gathered in a single lifetimes, and progress through the paths and stages, including all the visionary indicators of such progress that may be measured through yoga specific indications in the experience of the meditator on both a mental and physical level.

Chan masters that promulgate the extreme notions of sudden buddhahood, by contrast, hinge their argumemts solely on the notion that paths, practice, merit, virtue, are part of relative truth and therefore are a waste of time even to consider as having anything to do with attaining buddhahood -- that in fact, buddhahood is not attainable by any relative means whatsoever. The consequence of course is that these extreme speculations of the part of certain Chan masters render their version of buddhahood unrecognizable as buddhahood. We can call it Buddhism since they insist they are Buddhist, but it resembles nothing at all like mainstream Buddhism.

Astus said:
But then it comes down to the spatial distance between India and China. Do you find that an important point? In my view, the source of Dharma is the Buddha and not a place, nationality, ethnicity, political system or climate.

Malcolm wrote:
What I find important is that there is a serious discontinuity between the idea of buddhahood promulgated by certain extreme Chan masters and the rest of the Buddhist world.

You seem to think the argument hinges on sudden verses slow. It does not. It hinges on whether buddhahood is accomplished by virtue of the two things all Mahāyāna sutras say it is accomplished by i.e. the practice of the perfections and the two accumulations. Vajrayāna differs solely from common Mahāyāna of India, in this respect, by virtue of the suggestion that there are means by which one can reduce the amount of time it takes to generate the complete two collections from the daunting three incalculable eons to one, seven or sixteen lifetimes.

These Chan speculations you have introduced, on the other hand, hinge on philosophical sleights of hand that I have already pointed out. My point is that these philosphical speculations have no precedent in Indian Buddhism.

Whether one accepts them or not is entirely a matter of personal choice. I don't accept them, since I think they represent a deviation from Indian Buddhism -- I do not believe that there was any person who became a Buddha without gathering the two accumulations in their entirety.

In the end it is not a question of valid or invalid, it is a question of definitions. For me, a Buddhahood divorced from the two accumulations is impossible.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 26th, 2011 at 8:43 PM
Title: Re: The virgin birth of Gautama.
Content:
Will said:
The Lalitavistara Sutra (among others) said conception occurred after a dream of a 6-tusked white elephant.  Birth was not from the womb, but from her side.


Namdrol said:
C-section, which explains why his mother died shortly after he was born.

catmoon said:
Lol. Get a copy of Gray's Anatomy and it should be pretty apparent how impossible that would be.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, if you take "from her side" quite literally. But I understand "from her side" to mean that she did not give birth in the usual way -- not literally as in through or above her pelvic bone. Which is even more impossible, according to human anatomy.

Or perhaps, they cut open the side of her abdomen rather than the front of her belly.

C-sections were known in India at that time:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bindusara " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 26th, 2011 at 8:29 PM
Title: Re: Sunyata and dependent origination
Content:
PadmaVonSamba said:
isn't the lack of characteristics a characteristic?

Malcolm wrote:
Is a "lack of money" money?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 26th, 2011 at 8:28 PM
Title: Re: Sunyata and dependent origination
Content:
Namdrol said:
What type of empty space are you referring, be specific. Do you mean the sky, do you mean the empty space in a box? Conditioned space and unconditioned space are different.

5heaps said:
i mean the unconditioned mere absence of physical obstruction. i dont think anyone except vaibhashika accepts that as a functioning thing, but they dont know how to posit mental labelling so its only natural that they would say something like that

Malcolm wrote:
Oh well, that type of space is merely a mental abstraction, it is unreal, no one sees it or perceives it since it lacks characteristics. So your thesis is rejected.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 26th, 2011 at 8:14 PM
Title: Re: Buddhahood in Chan
Content:
Astus said:
Why only India...?


Malcolm wrote:
Because India is the source of the Dharma, the place where Mahāyāna developed, etc., and the site of Vajrāsana.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 26th, 2011 at 8:11 PM
Title: Re: Buddhahood in Chan
Content:


Astus said:
Hm, the current Buddhism in India or sometimes in the past? And what time? Why only India and why that time? Among the Indian schools which is mainstream and which is marginal? This is getting messy...

Malcolm wrote:
Now you are just being deliberately obtuse.

All Indian Buddhist schools until the destruction of Indian Buddhism had a similar view of the length of time of the career of a bodhisattva -- based on the Chan quotes you cited, they must have thought that Sakyamuni Buddha, Avalokiteshvara, Manjushri, Samantbhadra and so on were very stupid.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 26th, 2011 at 8:06 PM
Title: Re: Question re: Asanga and the Bodhisattvabhumi
Content:
Sunyatavadin said:
Hi all,

I've been trying for a while to find information on Asanga's Bodhisattvabhumi.  Unfortunately, both my Sanskrit and Tibetan are not so good.  I can't even figure out how long it is or whether it's the same as the "Bodhisattvabhummi" contained within the "Yogacarabhumi."  There seems to be no English translation except for one chapter (Tattvartha) translated by Janice Dean Willis.  Are there any Tibetan-language versions of the Tengyur online in which I might find the entire text, albeit in Tibetan?

Thanks in advance.


Malcolm wrote:
The Bodhisattvabhumi is a section of the Yogacharabhumi.

It may be found online here:

http://www.aciparchive.org/ace/#lyt%28vol%29col%28tendg%29title%282972%29

Enjoy


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 26th, 2011 at 7:52 PM
Title: Re: Buddhahood in Chan
Content:
Namdrol said:
"Mainstream" means "rest of the Buddhist world..."

Astus said:
That means a few of millions in Tibet, Mongolia and Bhutan, and the many Theravadins. In terms of the number of followers Vajrayana is not mainstream at all.

Malcolm wrote:
Mainstream means Buddhism in India.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 26th, 2011 at 10:02 AM
Title: Re: Appearances and mind
Content:
Namdrol said:
The difference is that the appearance and the apparent object are different, whereas in the Yogacara school, the apparent object itself is not held to exist apart from the mind, hence the sobriquet, "mind-only".

mzaur said:
What do you mean by 'apparent' object separate from appearance? Are you saying that an objective object, and thus an objective reality exists? And knowing this objective reality directly and not subjectively through the mind is 'wisdom'?


Malcolm wrote:
It's the old mode of appearance as opposed to mode of existence thing. For example, there is a glass of water -- it is perceived differently by beings of the six realms. If we say that the object, a glass of water is only a mental projection, there is no point is proposing that one object is perceived differently by different beings of the six realms.

Now then, we can dismiss the idea of an objective reality without dismissing the idea of objects per se.

Longchen rejects that idea that objects are mind because if they were, mountains should disappear when we cease to perceive them. But by the same token, objects, when analyzed, also cannot be found.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 26th, 2011 at 9:54 AM
Title: Re: Buddhahood in Chan
Content:
Namdrol said:
Yes, these are often trotted out, but they do not prove anything other than that Chan Buddhists had a view of buddhahood that does not correspond to mainstream Buddhist thinking on the subject.

Astus said:
What "mainstream" actually means is debatable since Chan has been the primary doctrine of elite Buddhism in East Asia for a thousand years now.

Proving that Chan, and particularly sudden enlightenment, is a valid Buddhist teaching is the real issue then. For that we would need a couple of terms defined, especially buddhahood and buddha-mind.


Malcolm wrote:
"Mainstream" means "rest of the Buddhist world..."


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 26th, 2011 at 6:12 AM
Title: Re: the great vegetarian debate
Content:


Pero said:
Ah. But how is killing one's mother or father connected with one's own and other's chances for attaining liberation?

Malcolm wrote:
Your father and mother gave you a precious human birth, your vehicle for liberation.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 26th, 2011 at 6:05 AM
Title: Re: Buddhahood in Chan
Content:
Astus said:
Some quotes on the view of Mahayana and the three kalpas long practice from different Chan works.


Malcolm wrote:
Yes, these are often trotted out, but they do not prove anything other than that Chan Buddhists had a view of buddhahood that does not correspond to mainstream Buddhist thinking on the subject.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 26th, 2011 at 4:44 AM
Title: Re: Buddhahood in Chan
Content:
Namdrol said:
So you basically doubt that Virupa, for example, traversed all the paths and stages in a single lifetime?

Jnana said:
I don't see any reason to take mahasiddha hagiographies literally.

I see, so for you, Virupa, Tilopa, Luipa, Ghanapāda are merely nominal "mahāsiddhas", and reports of their realization are not to be taken literally. How about reports of the Buddha's realization? Are they to be taken literally?

Look at the numbers Namdrol. Any direct equivalency is absurd on the face of it.

Malcolm wrote:
What do numbers have to do with it?

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 26th, 2011 at 4:41 AM
Title: Re: Buddhahood in Chan
Content:
Jnana said:
[/list]

Here we have the same argument of the qualities being present in the basis.

Malcolm wrote:
No, we just have the usual philosophical sleight of hand I mentioned above.

The point that I am really trying to make is that Indian Mahāyānists took their own tradition seriously. For example, Nāgārjuna in the Ratnavali lists in some detail how much merit is required for each of the major and minor marks, when encouraging the king to cultivate merit.

And three uncalculable eons is not even really a Mahāyāna number. It is a number which comes from the earliest ideas about the length of time it took the bodhisattva to acheive buddhahood.

So on the one hand, we have the Indian tradition (Mahāyāna, Vajrayāna and the śrāvaka traditions) insisting that in order to become a buddha one must practice the paramitas for an insanely long period of time. And on the other hand we have a tradition a tradition in China which asserts all this is so much unnecessary proliferation.

Saying that "qualities are present in the basis" is a meaningless statement. Butter is present in milk, but it does not come out all by itself, oil is present in sesame seeds but it does not extract itself. And which qualities exactly?

Of coure what we are dealing with here is a specfies of tathāgatagarbha thinking, but even hear, I don't think that the type of instant buddhahood you see some Chan masters proclaiming can be justified on the basis of any Indian sutras, tathāgatgarbha or otherwise.

Of course, this is the realm of religion, so no one can prove anything since it all boils down to belief.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 26th, 2011 at 3:35 AM
Title: Re: Buddhahood in Chan
Content:
Jnana said:
[
It's a flimsy argument. There is no reason to accept that the vajrayāna rhetoric of progressing from a common person to complete buddhahood in one lifetime is anything more than a provisional teaching.

Malcolm wrote:
So you basically doubt that Virupa, for example, traversed all the paths and stages in a single lifetime?

And what about this Vajrayāna tenet makes it "provisional"? That it seems too fantastic to you?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 26th, 2011 at 1:31 AM
Title: Re: Culture should't become a trap.
Content:
Jikan said:
The trouble is going the other way:  assuming that the psychologized Kornfield-Goldstein-Batchelor version *is* Buddhism or represents all or the best of what the Buddhist tradition has to offer.  That would be reductive in the highest.

Huseng said:
There are some whose Buddhism more or less is that version.

Worse is that they posit their opinions as legitimate and educated, meanwhile they don't even have a basic grasp of Buddhism 101.

Malcolm wrote:
And people argue with me about whether we live in degenerate times....


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 26th, 2011 at 1:06 AM
Title: Re: Hot and Cool Drinks?
Content:
sangyey said:
Are cold drinks ever recommended to help quiet wind disorders?


Malcolm wrote:
Never, unless you have a fever.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 26th, 2011 at 12:18 AM
Title: Re: Buddhahood in Chan
Content:
Namdrol said:
As I said, they tended to ignore Indian Mahāyāna masters, preferring their own interpretations. The only text of clear Indian origin in the short list given here is the first. The rest are native Chinese compositions.

Astus said:
Plus the Diamond Sutra. But yes, that is part of the difficulty of simply putting Chan under "sutrayana" and expecting it to conform with Tibetan views what it should be like. Therefore, if we don't count Indian Mahayana, perfect enlightenment in this life can be as valid a claim as in Vajrayana.

Malcolm wrote:
But we do count Indian Mahāyāna, since Vajrayāna is an extension of Indian Mahāyāna.

BTW, no one said it was impossible to become a buddha in this life. The notion is "is buddhahood in a single lifetime" a possibility? In India Mahāyāna, the answere is no-- Indian Mahayāna of whatever stripe requires three incalculable eons at minimumfor full awakening. In Vajrayāna, the answer is yes, since through special methods it is made possible.

It seems to me that rather than providing methods, certain Chan masters who try to prove full enlightment in the span of a single lifetime, engage in a philosphical feints to support their conception, in general resorting to arguments by means of ultimate truth to try and prove their point, basically arguing the doctrine of paths and stages is an unnecessary conceptual limitation. However, when challenged, I don't see a coherent defense being mounted, which has lead me to believe that much like pure land buddhism, Chan is in fact a faith oriented school.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 26th, 2011 at 12:10 AM
Title: Re: Appearances and mind
Content:
padma norbu said:
Where do all the sentient beings and perceived objects dependently originate from if not ultimately mind? Is there not a semantic distinction between Mind and mind, one referring to dharmakaya and one referring to discursive mind? Any such perception seems to be some sort of "mind stuff," confused or otherwise. Appearances arise and are perceived entirely by the mind, the root of the minds of sentient beings are ultimately all one thing, dharmakaya, which is called Absolute Mind (sems nyid). If discursive mind collapsed, the natural state still be left.

Malcolm wrote:
The difference is that the appearance and the apparent object are different, whereas in the Yogacara school, the apparent object itself is not held to exist apart from the mind, hence the sobriquet, "mind-only".


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 25th, 2011 at 11:07 PM
Title: Re: westerners living in india for many years
Content:


alpha said:
So they must have been americans all those who manged to live in india for many years....

Malcolm wrote:
Mostly Brits.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 25th, 2011 at 11:05 PM
Title: Re: Buddhahood in Chan
Content:
Astus said:
Flower Adornment Sutra, Awakening of Mahāyāna Faith, Sutra of the Heroic March Concentration, Sutra of Perfect Enlightenment, Platform Sutra, Diamond Sutra. They are all related to Chan/Seon and Huayan/Hwaeom in different ways. No Nagarjuna, no Vasubandhu, no Haribhadra.


Malcolm wrote:
As I said, they tended to ignore Indian Mahāyāna masters, preferring their own interpretations. The only text of clear Indian origin in the short list given here is the first. The rest are native Chinese compositions.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 25th, 2011 at 10:36 PM
Title: Re: Appearances and mind
Content:
Namdrol said:
Pero is telling you is that the literal translation of tha mal gyis shes pa is "ordinary mind". It is a yogi's term. It means wisdom. So, in translations tha mal gyis shes pa is generally given it's literal rendering; but one is to understand the term through its meaning i.e. wisdom.

padma norbu said:
I understand, but wanted to make sure we were all on the same page. Thanks. My question about why they didn't just translate it as "wisdom" was meant as a kind of frustrated rhetorical question, actually. They are writing for an English audience, so it would make a lot more sense to avoid a literal translation for one that makes more sense to the audience. Nobody but a scholar would understand that "ordinary mind" is a yogi's term for "wisdom." It's funny, too, because in the Translator's Introduction, he makes the point to say he has used translated ye shes as wisdom and goes on to explain how that translation is not entirely accurate and why, but he makes no mention of "ordinary mind" whatsoever.


Malcolm wrote:
Well, the reason why they continue to translate it literally is that there is an important explanation connected with tha mal gyi shes pa. In this context tha mal means something like original, or uncontrived, and shes pa means awareness. So it is really talking about being in the experience of the nature of the mind. But you won't get this from book which is why it is important also to have the oral instructions.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 25th, 2011 at 10:26 PM
Title: Re: Buddhahood in Chan
Content:
Astus said:
Therefore, to connect Chan to Indian Mahayana one has to go back in time a bit, to around the 4th century when things started to take shape. That means that the primary treatises of Chinese Buddhism are not those that are used in Tibet to understand Mahayana.

Malcolm wrote:
Well, this is definitely not so. Sutra studies in Tibetan Buddhism is based primarily, though not exclusively on treatise authored between the 2-6th century.

WHat is more accurate to say is that China, being an outpost of Buddhism, was in many respects out of the main stream of the development of Mahāyāna theory in India. What is also true, is that Chinese Buddhists tended to ignore Indian sastra literature, and prefer their own interpretations of Buddhist sutras to those of Indian masters. For example, Huayen masters really looked down on Asanga.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 25th, 2011 at 9:57 PM
Title: Re: Appearances and mind
Content:
padma norbu said:
Why wouldn't this be translated as "wisdom" rather than "ordinary mind?" I don't understand the way things are translated sometimes...

Pero said:
Tha mal gyi shes pa means ordinary mind and not wisdom.

Namdrol said:
Mind [sems] and ordinary mind [tha mal gyi shes pa] are two entirely different things. The latter is a yogi's term for wisdom [ye shes].

padma norbu said:
You appear to be contradicting each other. Namdrol clearly says here "that the latter is a yogi's term for wisdom."

Malcolm wrote:
Pero is telling you is that the literal translation of tha mal gyis shes pa is "ordinary mind". It is a yogi's term. It means wisdom. So, in translations tha mal gyis shes pa is generally given it's literal rendering; but one is to understand the term through its meaning i.e. wisdom.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 25th, 2011 at 9:47 PM
Title: Re: Cultural should't become a trap.
Content:


Chaz said:
Please explain what aspects of Buddhadharma are being cast off as "culture".  How are they wrong?

Isn't this road of trying to diffentiate between what is "culture" and what is Buddhadharma as a means of deciding what to keep and what to discard equally entangling?

Huseng said:
Some have suggested rebirth is just a cultural adornment from ancient Indian civilization, and hence proceed to craft a "Buddhism" without rebirth.

Chaz said:
Ok, that's one thing.  Anything else?

Malcolm wrote:
There are all kinds of things in Tibean Buddhism that are more culture than Buddhism. Even Samdhong Rinpoche brought this up at Garrison Institute -- warning western Buddhists that they needed to carefully distinguish between what things were Tibetan and what things were Buddhist in Tibetan Buddhism, and preferring the latter.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 25th, 2011 at 9:40 PM
Title: Re: Sunyata and dependent origination
Content:
5heaps said:
One cannot cognize that which lacks characteristics. It's impossible.

Namdrol said:
if by characteristics you mean shape, color, form, duration, etc, then its no problem to cognize it directly. for, just as empty space for example lacks all of these things and it can be cognized direcly without the use of a conceptual consciousness, so too can emptiness

Malcolm wrote:
What type of empty space are you referring, be specific. Do you mean the sky, do you mean the empty space in a box? Conditioned space and unconditioned space are different.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 25th, 2011 at 9:21 PM
Title: Re: Buddhahood in Chan
Content:


mindyourmind said:
... this entire discussion is one of comparison, bordering on sectarian dogma, thinly veiled as an academic discussion.

Malcolm wrote:
Actually, I am questioning the entire basis of certain Chan claims to buddhahood because they broadly contradict Indian Mahāyāna.

It is a doxological discussion and therefore, about dogma.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 25th, 2011 at 9:16 PM
Title: Re: Tantric sexual bliss vs. dhyanic bliss
Content:
Namdrol said:
Yes, the mind in the second dhyana is conceptual because it is maintaining equipoise on a conceptual object.

5heaps said:
consider that object, it cant be conceptual, because that object is being held by a nonconceptual mind (ie a mind free from mental images [dunchis are drachis])


Malcolm wrote:
All eight dhyanas are conceptual because their object is a concept, therefore, the mind that holds the object is conceptual. It may not be a diffuse conceptual mind, but it is conceptual a mind since it holds a concept, for example, "infinite space".

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 25th, 2011 at 8:54 PM
Title: Re: Cause, Effect, & Holocaust
Content:
Epistemes said:
Then, taking any ethical dimension out of it:

If the situations we encounter in life don't happen by accident but rather result from actions we have done in the past, are the Jews responsible for their own deaths in the Holocaust? Are the people killed during 9/11 responsible for their deaths?

In other words, if we reap what we sow, does it not follow that the people killed during 9/11 are somehow responsible for their own deaths?


Malcolm wrote:
Not necessarily. While in Tibetan Buddhism a hard theory of karma is often held out, in Theravada Buddhism it is considered that people can be caught up in negative situations without necessarily having done anything negative to get there. In other words, being in the wrong place at wrong time is possible without it being a karmic thing.

Being born as a human being is a result of good karma; but not necessarily everything that happends to one is a result of karma, some things are purely a result of blind causes and conditions that have nothing directly to do with one's karma.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 25th, 2011 at 8:32 PM
Title: Re: Tantric sexual bliss vs. dhyanic bliss
Content:
Astus said:
Vitarka and vicāra don't exist in the 2nd dhyāna already, how could then it be called conceptual? Nirvikalpa-jñāna also exists in common Mahayana.

Namdrol said:
Because it's one pointedness is a mental concept.

5heaps said:
what definition of mental concept are you using?
we cannot say there is a conceptual consciousness in the 2nd dhyana, because that mind is not using dunchis or drachis. so in what way will you explain that the single-pointedness is conceptual?

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, the mind in the second dhyana is conceptual because it is maintaining equipoise on a conceptual object.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 25th, 2011 at 7:49 PM
Title: Re: Appearances and mind
Content:
padma norbu said:
Who in the heck has ever put forth such a notion that it would actually need to be refuted?!

Malcolm wrote:
The Yogacara school in Ancient India. They reasoned that since everything was a mental projection, when that was recognized, dualistic appearances would collapse and so on.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 25th, 2011 at 7:45 PM
Title: Re: the methodology of Sakya
Content:
mzaur said:
Thank you. Is there ngondro in Sakya? How does Sakya differ from the other Sarma lineages?


Malcolm wrote:
Yes, there is ngondro.

The teaching lineage from India is unique. Lamdre is based mainly on the teachings of the Hevajra Tantra and Virupa.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 25th, 2011 at 9:47 AM
Title: Re: Appearances and mind
Content:


padma norbu said:
It says "ordinary mind" is the dharma expanse, the victor's essence... but it says "everything is not mind" on p.224...


Malcolm wrote:
Mind [sems] and ordinary mind [tha mal gyi shes pa] are two entirely different things. The latter is a yogi's term for wisdom [ye shes].

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 25th, 2011 at 4:10 AM
Title: Re: Buddhahood in Chan
Content:
Astus said:
the mind is buddha...

Namdrol said:
Nice, a conditioned, impermanent, afflicted buddha.

N

Astus said:
"Good sons, all hindrances are none other than ultimate enlightenment. Whether you attain mindfulness or lose mindfulness, there is no non-liberation. Establishing the Dharma and refuting the Dharma are both called nirvana; wisdom and folly are equally prajna; the method that is perfected by bodhisattvas and false teachers is the same bodhi; ignorance and suchness are not different realms; morality, concentration and wisdom, as well as desire, hatred and ignorance are all divine practices; sentient beings and lands share the same dharma nature; hell and heaven are both the Pure Land; those having Buddha-nature and those not having it equally accomplish the Buddha's enlightenment. All defilements are ultimately liberation. The reality-realms's ocean-like wisdom completely illumines all marks to be just like empty space. This is called 'the Tathāgata's accordance with the nature of enlightenment.' "
(Sutra of Perfect Enlightenment, ch. 6, tr. C. Muller)

Malcolm wrote:
Awesome, so fools are buddhas and there is no need for Buddhism at all. Nice.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 25th, 2011 at 1:59 AM
Title: Re: Love vs. Attachment
Content:
Namdrol said:
The Dharma, as I understand, begins with understanding our real state and acknowledging it, and not having fantasies about samsara or ourselves. Dharma is not an all or nothing venture. It is progressive, and one only has to practice as much if it as one understands.

Epistemes said:
So much of what you say is precisely what I need to be reading and understanding at this stage in my life.  While I'm sure that so much of what you say is based upon a synthesis of your experience, reading, learning and teaching, are there other resources available that explain the dharma as such?  Or is it all based on finding the gems among the pile?

As I've already said, Buddhism for Beginners seems to suggest "Thou shalt not be angry," "Thou shalt not be attached to people, places or thing," "Thou shalt love equitably and impartially," "Thou shalt...".  I, personally, am tired of all the precedents.  I want to continue the relationships that I have, cultivate them through my thirst for Buddhism, cultivate myself, and see where I get.  Buddhism for Beginners punches one's mind like clay, strangles it and makes it feel suffocated and threatened.

Other more advanced resources suffocate the mind with their deep experience and complexity.  It seems that there is no middle way in The Middle Way.

Malcolm wrote:
Well, this is the problem with sorting out the Dharma for oneself. There is a Dharma teaching for whatever stage of practice one is at. But that is the point, one has to work with where one is at.

So if you read a text that seems not to address your present state, well, put it aside. And that is a middle way.

Having a teacher helps, but in the end one must integrate these things into your own practice.

Rather then looking for a "beginners" Buddhism (since there really isn't such a thing), look for Dharma teachings that speak to you, and work for you in a practical manner. Take what you can absorb and leave the rest.

In the end, great compassion is the essence of Dharma. Great compassion comes from compassion. Cultivate that, and that is sufficient.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 25th, 2011 at 1:21 AM
Title: Re: Disposal
Content:
Jikan said:
So you're saying they R E S P E C T the word as a vehicle of the teachings of Christ?

Epistemes said:
R E S P E C T is a vast understatement.  Worship or veneration is more apt.

And, as explained above, I find cultivating any practice regarding the ceremonial dissipation of materials to be counterproductive, counterintuitive and simply superfluous.

Malcolm wrote:
In Buddhism, such care comes from a time when paper was rare and expensive, and books were hard to come by.

However these days you can see people releasing paper prayer flags by the thousands so that they literally cover the ground, and then walking all over them.

And, with millions of Buddhist fliers printed on colored paper with toxic ink, it is not really practical nor safe to burn this stuff outdoors. It is not like rice paper. Thus, in general, I recyle so called Dharma "garbage". And in fact everything is empty.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 25th, 2011 at 12:52 AM
Title: Re: Love vs. Attachment
Content:
Epistemes said:
I also appreciate your comment regarding acknowledging attachment and living with it, rather than denying it and feigning enlightenment.  Though I have much studying to do, nothing I've read yet has offered this type of unproscriptive advice.  Most authors - even in the so-called beginners books - intimate "Get off your ass and get enlightened," which is very intimidating.

Malcolm wrote:
The Dharma, as I understand, begins with understanding our real state and acknowledging it, and not having fantasies about samsara or ourselves. Dharma is not an all or nothing venture. It is progressive, and one only has to practice as much if it as one understands.

For example, you are not ready to drink the Buddhist koolaid and buy rebirth, karma, and so on hook line and sinker -- you may not even really beleive in awakening. But what you can believe is your own experience, and the painfulness of desire, hatred and ignorance, as well as the joyfulness that connection with other sentient beings can bring.

The Buddha's own advice for people who were not able to adopt his perspectives about rebirth and karma automatically is that they focus their attention on cultivating loving kindness, compassion, sympathetic joy and ultimately, equanimity.

Once, in response to a statement by Shariputra that friendship was half of the life of a Dharma practitioner, Buddha replied that was incorrect, friendship was the whole of the life of a Dharma practitioner. Thus, cultivating loving kindness, compassion, sympathetic joy, and equanimity are Dharma practice and relationships forged on these bases are deeply fulfilling and satisfying. Not only that, any relationship, positive or negative, one presently is in can be immensely transformed by these four cultivations. Positive relationships are enhanced and deepened, negative relationships will weaken their grasp and one will come to a place of evenness regarding other people's suffering afflictive behavior, an eveness suffused with genuine care for others along with a sharp recognition of one's own limitations around helping others. Equanimity is not indifference, it is recognizing what one is and is not able to accomplish.

In other words, we don't have to a) fix the world b) be emotional unavailable c) persist in unhealthy relationships -- instead we can slowly work at opening our hearts with love and compassion and work with where we are at the present moment without having to condition it with unattainable idealism.

Learning calm-abiding or shamatha meditation is very helpful, since this trains us in mental stability. Shamatha creates a container where we are able to see how the mind thrashes, bolts, revolts, jumps around and so on. It gives us a pillar through which to measure the rest of our experience. We do not have to begin with hour long sessions, we can sit for 5 minutes. Then 10. Then 15, and so on. Following the breath is an ideal practice for beginners as well.

Anyway, the main point is that Buddhist practice is not about waking up to some abstract "enlightenment". It is about knowing one's own state, right here and right now and working with that, along with various means to do so.

In short, understanding our present condition is Dharma practice, and it is the only Dharma practice we have.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 25th, 2011 at 12:27 AM
Title: Re: Can I do this without a teacher?
Content:
Epistemes said:
I don't believe I can.  Unfortunately, there are no teachers available in my area as per buddhanet.  The only resources I have are books and this forum.


Malcolm wrote:
Well, my approach was reading and studying for a few years.

Then, eventually I got a teacher.

If you can travel to some retreat, then this is beneficial. And if you can't, you can still read and think about what you are reading.

In other words, there is no need to get a teacher immediately.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 25th, 2011 at 12:25 AM
Title: Re: Devices Zen and the Direct Path
Content:
LastLegend said:
If the teachers are not enlightened, they cannot teach direct path.

Astus said:
Neither can they teach Zen.


Malcolm wrote:
Guess there are not many teachers of Zen, then.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 25th, 2011 at 12:21 AM
Title: Re: Buddhahood in Chan
Content:
Astus said:
the mind is buddha...

Malcolm wrote:
Nice, a conditioned, impermanent, afflicted buddha.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 25th, 2011 at 12:19 AM
Title: Re: Buddhahood in Chan
Content:


Astus said:
Equipoise and post-equipoise matters when there is a specific state of mind to cultivate. Zen is not about creating any mind. So it is called no-mind.

Malcolm wrote:
That is a false dichtomy. When in equipoise on reality, is is not like there is some mental focus that designates an object called "reality". Equipoise on reality is not a mental state. It is beyond mind.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 24th, 2011 at 10:47 PM
Title: Re: "Mahamudra and Related Instructions," Peter Roberts
Content:
Sönam said:
Being not english (as you may know ), can you help to decode the following ...
In The Quintessence of Nectar, page 343, within "3. Increasing the benefit of that attainment", into "a. Increasing the heat", it is said : In this "binding clasp of the knees," your legs form two triangles of "opposing hearths" ... what that "opposing hearths" means?

Thank you for helping
Sönam


Malcolm wrote:
It is sort of weird translation -- it just means that you sit with your knees up usually held with your hands or with a belt. This posture is often called "stove posture".


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 24th, 2011 at 10:43 PM
Title: Re: Love vs. Attachment
Content:
Epistemes said:
...If one person is trying to be non-afflictively attached but another person is afflictively attached then this creates the illusion of being non-afflictively attached for the person who thinks they are non-afflicitvely attached when, in fact, because of the emotional barriers created by the one who is afflictively attached, the non-afflictively attached person is actually afflictively attached as well.

Malcolm wrote:
No, if this were so then Buddhas would be afflictively attached to sentient beings, and they are not. The afflicitively-attached person owns their afflictions. There is no principle of samsaric co-dependence between Buddhas and sentient beings, which is what you are describing.

BTW, there is no such a thing as "trying" to be non-afflictively attached. One is either afflicted, not afflicted, or possess patience regarding the arising of one's own afflictions. If one possesses affliction, it is better to recognize that fact and not pretend one is above affliction.

Afflictions (desire, anger and ignorance) generally only function freely when one is not in possession of recognition of the operation of mental factors driven by affliction and b) when one's mind lacks stability. When one attains patience towards one's the arising of one's afflictions, they arise but lack force that propells one to act upon them.

In terms of parenting or caring for others, when one is purely under the infleunce of affliction, to some extent that care is blind and filled with self-interest. When one's afflicted relationship is characterized with patience, one is better able to make universal choices affecting all involved without falling under the fog of blind selfish interest. When one is free from affliction, one's caring for others comes from a place of pure altruism and equanimity.

Pretending that one is free of affliction is bullshit. That is not how afflictive attachment works. A realized bodhisattva possesses non-afflictive attachment towards all sentient beings. A non-realized bodhisattva possesses bias and attachment. If one is not realized, it is better to just recognize one's own state and work with it.

I.e. if you are attached to your kids, don't pretend not to be, don't pretend you are free from suffering around it, and work with it. Bodhisattvas can work with attachment and desire -- the one thing they cannot work with is anger and hatred. From a Mahāyāna perspective therefore, attachment is workable and it is fine. If you combine your afflicted relationships with altruistic motivation, you can even bring them onto the path, and make them part of your path.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 24th, 2011 at 10:26 PM
Title: Re: Buddhahood in Chan
Content:
mindyourmind said:
What possible purpose can a discussion like this have?

Namdrol said:
The purpose is to distinguish what is rhetorical from what is actual.

N

mindyourmind said:
And how exactly do we, who are not realized, tell the difference? By way of a war of quotes and a nice game of "my master says"?

How can anyone meaningfully address the question of what is rhetorical buddhahood and what is actual buddhahood, other than an effort to try and define and describe that which most traditions view as indescribable?

Malcolm wrote:
If we, who are not realized, have no way to infer what is correct and incorrect regarding Buddhist doctrine, than we are really screwed, aren't we?

Citations are not sufficient, of course, one must also use reasoning, and a whole host of other things.

There is no need to use citations in this respect, it is obvious to anyone who really thinks about it --1) realizing emptiness is not equivalent with becoming a Samyak Sambuddha, 2) realizing emptiness, period, is the emptiness realized by a Buddha.

The ancient Chan masters are making the argument than the realization of emptiness is sufficient and there is not much reason to place a lot of emphasis on the path of cultivation (bhumis 1-10). Once in possession of the Gnosis of the path, that is the main point, and that is Buddhahood.

There is a similar sentiment in Kagyu Mahāmudra -- which is why there are so many different presentations of the way four yogas (split into twelve) are mapped to the paths and stages. But in reality, the Mahāyāna paths and stages are irrelvent in Mahamudra, just as they are in Dzogchen. It is not the case however that there is no gradual progression in both mahamudra and dzogchen. The progression is not with respect to the ultimate, but rather, with respect to the person.

Now then, the question inevitably arises "Is it possible for someone to fully awaken suddenly?" The answer to this question from a Mahamudra, Dzogchen and Chan POV is yes (and from a Vajrayāna POV, one's yogic progress through the stages can be accomplished in a matter of days, theoretically (for example, Saraha was someone who acheived full buddhahood suddenly; Virupa acheived the sixth bhumi in six days)). The caveat to this is that it is so rare as to be merely an academic distinction. In other words, sudden awakeners are possible, but rarer than visible stars at noon.

The inexpressible realization of emptiness is the same in every respect from the moment of the path of seeing until full buddhahood. We can talk about afflcitive obscurations and knowledge obscurations and so on, but the real difference between buddhas and bodhisattvas on the stages is whether there is a difference in equipoise and post-equipoise. Buddhas are never not in a state of equipoise. Thus the notion of the two obscurations apply only in post-equipoise, not while in eqiupoise on the ultimate. However, this crucial difference is responsible also for the difference in qualities of a buddha and for example, a tenth stager.

Thus, it is important to distinguish rhetoric from reality so that people do not waste their time on fantasies. And it is indeed a fantasy for 99.999 percent of people that they will be able to suddenly awaken into full Buddhahood.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 24th, 2011 at 9:48 PM
Title: Re: Buddhahood in Chan
Content:
mindyourmind said:
What possible purpose can a discussion like this have?

Malcolm wrote:
The purpose is to distinguish what is rhetorical from what is actual.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 24th, 2011 at 9:46 PM
Title: Re: Love vs. Attachment
Content:


Epistemes said:
Call me ignorant and caught in the tides of samsara, but I don't think a strict non-attachment in human relationships is possible

Malcolm wrote:
One needs to make a distinction between afflictive attachment and non-afflictive attachment. Non-afflictive attachment comes from a place of concern and caring, valuing others more than oneself. Afflictive attachment is all about "I, me and mine".

From a Mahāyāna perspective, non-afflictive attachment is perfectly appropriate, indeed necessary. Afflictive attachment is just another cause of suffering.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 24th, 2011 at 9:30 PM
Title: Re: Buddhahood in Chan
Content:
Astus said:
Awakening in Chan means realising the nature of mind, i.e. the buddha-mind. Since the buddha-mind is perfect in qualities and omniscience, how could that awakening be limited? It is free from the emotional (klesa) and conceptual (jneya) obscurations, how could it be bound by anything at all? Teachers of Chan were well aware of the gradual stages and aeons of bodhisattva practice when they talked about buddhahood and claimed that Chan is a sudden path. Those who viewed it in a different way did say so.

Malcolm wrote:
The difference lies in equipoise and post-equipoise.

Frankly, it is obvious that realizing the nature of the mind does not make one a buddha. That is why I stated that "buddhahood" in Chan is a euphemism for awakening, but it does not mean that one who has awakened is a Samyaksambuddha, though I imagine there are some deluded Chan practitioners even today who think it is so.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 24th, 2011 at 10:26 AM
Title: Re: Buddhahood in Chan
Content:
Astus said:
The fourth principle of Chan is "see nature, become buddha" (jianxing chengfo / kensho jobutsu 見性成佛). As it's said in the Platform Sutra, "If you recognize your own mind and see the nature, you will definitely accomplish the enlightenment of buddhahood." (T48n2008, p351a, 12)


Malcolm wrote:
There is no difference between the awakening of a first stage bodhisattva and a buddhahood. There is a difference however in terms of qualities and omniscience.

My point still stands. "Sudden Awakening" in Chan does not mean full buddhahood.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 24th, 2011 at 10:24 AM
Title: Re: Renunciation Impossible?
Content:
Namdrol said:
So even here, Vajrayāna remain unique in asserting that one can attain full awakening 11 bhumi + in a single lifetime, soup to nuts.

Huseng said:
In your experience have you met a Vajrayāna practitioner who demonstrated that this was possible?


Malcolm wrote:
Yes, or so I believe.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 24th, 2011 at 4:46 AM
Title: Re: Renunciation not Impossible
Content:


Tsongkhapafan said:
No, because it's all a bit superficial and intellectual.

Malcolm wrote:
The whole title of this thread is wrong -- this thread was created by Huseng who split the thread off from another thread.

I never said that "renunciation" per se was impossible. The path of abandoning or renouncing sense objects what I identified as impossible in this day and age, based on many citations one can find, particularly in the tantras of Heruka and statements by Mahasiddhas such as Saraha.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 24th, 2011 at 4:02 AM
Title: Re: Renunciation Impossible?
Content:
Namdrol said:
Outside of Tibeta Buddhism/Vajrayāna, Chan alone proposes that it is possible to attain fullbuddhahood in a single lifetime. But it seems that in Chan, "buddhahood" is a generally a euphemism for attaining the bodhisattva stages, and no Indian Mahāyāna tradition denies that it is impossible for someone to attain the path of seeing and so on. However, they would have done so based on past accumulations. So even here, Vajrayāna remain unique in asserting that one can attain full awakening 11 bhumi + in a single lifetime, soup to nuts.

Astus said:
It is not only Chan but also Huayan and Tiantai teach sudden enlightenment - interestingly Huayan puts "sudden enlightenment" one level below its own "complete teaching of the one vehicle". As for the difference between the entry to the bodhisattva stages and full buddhahood, in Chan it is clarified with the distinction of gradual and sudden paths. Gradual means the bodhisattva stages, sudden means immediate buddhahood. Of course, not everyone among the Chan teachers agreed with this view.


Malcolm wrote:
No, I don't think that sudden enlightenment in Chan means sudden full buddhahood.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 24th, 2011 at 2:56 AM
Title: Re: Renunciation not Impossible
Content:


Tsongkhapafan said:
Renunciation is completely possible to achieve.  If you argue that the Vajrayana is the only path to abandon attachment, qualified Vajrayana practice depends upon sutra renunciation so without renunciation there is no Vajrayana.


Namdrol said:
You obviously have come late the thread -- renunciation and the path of renunciation are two distinct things, which has been clarified already.

N

Tsongkhapafan said:
Your definition of renunciation is still incorrect.

Malcolm wrote:
No, it isn't. I also clarified that the English word renunciation can be used to translate a number of terms. You are thinking that term renunciation is only appropriate for "nges 'byung". It may also be used for other Tibetans terms such as spong ba and so on.

But of course it is impossible to talk to anyone about these things because everybody on this website with just a little bit learning is convinced they are a pandita.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 24th, 2011 at 2:45 AM
Title: Re: Renunciation not Impossible
Content:


Tsongkhapafan said:
Renunciation is completely possible to achieve.  If you argue that the Vajrayana is the only path to abandon attachment, qualified Vajrayana practice depends upon sutra renunciation so without renunciation there is no Vajrayana.


Malcolm wrote:
You obviously have come late the thread -- renunciation and the path of renunciation are two distinct things, which has been clarified already.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 24th, 2011 at 2:43 AM
Title: Re: Modern Buddhist Monuments
Content:
Epistemes said:
Was it necessary to state that the monument is being built to stand for an actually indefinite period of time?


Malcolm wrote:
Don't ask me, ask the person who wrote the copy in the website.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 24th, 2011 at 2:37 AM
Title: Re: Modern Buddhist Monuments
Content:
Namdrol said:
"built to stand for 1000 years."

Epistemes said:
What does that mean?  Is there a chemical agent that will will gradually erode the statue so that the last erosion will be complete during the 1000th year?  do the plans for the statue indicate that it should be demolished in a 1000 years?  Or, is it a simple expression to indicate its abiding, durable composition?


Malcolm wrote:
Was it really necessary to ask such a question?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 24th, 2011 at 2:35 AM
Title: Re: Renunciation Impossible?
Content:
Astus said:
we have East Asian and South Asian Buddhism

Malcolm wrote:
Outside of Tibeta Buddhism/Vajrayāna, Chan alone proposes that it is possible to attain fullbuddhahood in a single lifetime. But it seems that in Chan, "buddhahood" is a generally a euphemism for attaining the bodhisattva stages, and no Indian Mahāyāna tradition denies that it is impossible for someone to attain the path of seeing and so on. However, they would have done so based on past accumulations. So even here, Vajrayāna remain unique in asserting that one can attain full awakening 11 bhumi + in a single lifetime, soup to nuts.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 24th, 2011 at 2:04 AM
Title: Re: Modern Buddhist Monuments
Content:



Malcolm wrote:
http://www.maitreyaproject.org " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"As the central feature of its activities, Maitreya Project is planning to build, in Kushinagar, Uttar Pradesh, India, a magnificent 500ft / 152m bronze statue of Maitreya Buddha, built to stand for 1000 years."


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 24th, 2011 at 1:00 AM
Title: Re: Renunciation Impossible?
Content:
Jnana said:
Sounds to me like you prefer a Tibetocentric bias.

Malcolm wrote:
Well, truthfully, only the Tibeans endeavored to preserve the successive layers of North Indian Buddhism in some semblance of how they may actually have been taught.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 24th, 2011 at 12:58 AM
Title: Re: Renunciation Impossible?
Content:
Astus said:
This is practically negating the validity of all the other Buddhist teachings

Malcolm wrote:
Not really, since if you examine things carefully, Mantrayāna is the only Indian Buddhist tradition that asserts full Buddhahood in one lifetime is actually a possibility.

All other Indian Buddhist traditions of which we have knowledge, Mahāyāna or not, assert that at minimum full awakening is impossible in less then three incalculable eons.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 23rd, 2011 at 10:25 AM
Title: Re: DMT
Content:
xylem said:
it's one thing to engaged in a variety of activities as a "seeker".  it's a different thing to engage in such activities after taking refuge and dedicating one's life to buddhist practice.

Malcolm wrote:
Oh, lighten up.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 22nd, 2011 at 9:15 PM
Title: Re: Saichō's Monastic Reforms
Content:
Namdrol said:
Within categories of peope holding prātimokṣa vows within Buddhism, however, there are only four types of vows (eight when split by gender), upāsakas, upāvasa (fast day vows), śramaṇa and bhikṣu. Mahāyāna vows do not have the force to ordain one a pravrajita of any kind (śramaṇa and bhikṣu). All this may be found in the Kośa.

Huseng said:
The primary precepts in the Brahma Net Sutra are called prātimokṣa.

In any case this is all legal terminology and intellectual wrangling. Regardless of how others saw them, many bodhisattva renunciates of the past were, at least within their own culture, qualified to receive offerings, wear the religious attire appropriate for a monk and were considered by their peers and society to be monks. This obviously is not applicable to the wider global Buddhist world where the ancient Indian legal terminology was and still is in effect.

Malcolm wrote:
In general, we can say that there is a Bodhisattva "prātimokṣa", but it depends on śrāvaka pratimokṣa. There is a sutra in that Ratnakuta (Chang, Treasury of Mahāyāna Sūtras pg. 262) that discusses and contrasts the prātimokṣa of a bodhisattva with that of a śrāvaka, but there is no suggestion in this text that bodhisattvas enjoy a seperate ordination from śrāvakas -- it merely distinguishes the parameters of conduct for bodhisattvas and non-bodhisattvas.

There really is no way to get around this. There is a separate ordination for bodhisattvas distinct from that of what we generally call "buddhist monks".

You are the one who is intellectually wrangling with this.

For me, it is very simple. If you have received an ordination based on one of the eighteen schools Vinaya, you are a monk or a nun. If not, then you are lay person. Added to this are bodhisattva vows, etc.

Huseng said:
The vinayas of India are all different, hence reflecting different aspirations and intentions at work in their formulation.

Malcolm wrote:
They reflect regional seperation, but not separation of difference in aspiration and intention. The vinayas of India are more similar than they are different from one another. The primary differences between them are in the number of minor rules, the cut and color of the robes, and the regional language of the school.

Bodhisattva vow systems on the other hand are quite different in terms of aspiration and intention. The Brahmajala system in China is clearly in keeping with the Yogachara model, rather than the Madhyamaka model (which is based on the Akashagarbha Sutra).

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 22nd, 2011 at 8:08 PM
Title: Re: Rinchen Terzod & Dudjom Tersar indexes
Content:


Adamantine said:
Namdrol I had a hard time locating the Dudjom tersar index in the tbrc website..


Malcolm wrote:
Dudjom Rinpoche's collected works including tersar (Dudjom III):
http://tbrc.org/link?RID=W20869 " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Dudjom Lingpa's collected termas (Dudjom II):
http://tbrc.org/link?RID=W28732 " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Rigzin Duddul Dorje's collected termas (Dudjom I)
http://www.tbrc.org/#library_work_Object-W22123 " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 22nd, 2011 at 7:56 PM
Title: Re: DMT
Content:
Heruka said:
what do we think?


Malcolm wrote:
It was fun, the one time I did it in 1978.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 22nd, 2011 at 7:55 PM
Title: Re: Renunciation Impossible?
Content:
mr. gordo said:
No one here holds the optimistic view of Kurzweil's Singularity?

Huseng said:
Computers becoming conscious means Skynet.


Malcolm wrote:
Second that.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 22nd, 2011 at 7:54 PM
Title: Re: Saichō's Monastic Reforms
Content:


Huseng said:
Your use of the term śramaṇa is not universal. The term śramaṇa was used to refer to renunciates in general in several Āgama sūtras in classical Chinese translation I've read. Moreover, some monks, at least in China, self-identified as śramaṇa (Chn. shamen 沙門), but that wasn't because they were novices.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, that is true, śramaṇa was a term applied to both Buddhist and non-Buddhsit mendicants. However, in the context of what constitutes a śramaṇa with the Buddhist order, it is a novice.

The appellation "buddha" was not reserved solely for The Buddha, but was a term many religious teachers applied to themselves during the time of The Buddha.

Within categories of peope holding prātimokṣa vows within Buddhism, however, there are only four types of vows (eight when split by gender), upāsakas, upāvasa (fast day vows), śramaṇa and bhikṣu. Mahāyāna vows do not have the force to ordain one a pravrajita of any kind (śramaṇa and bhikṣu). All this may be found in the Kośa.


Huseng said:
However, I know by the Song Dynasty they insisted all seng 僧 had certification of their vinaya ordination, which proved to be a problem for Dogen when he went to China.

Basically in Saichō's time in China the legal terminology determining what constituted a "monk" or seng 僧 was not based on Sanskrit definitions provided in the vinaya. I understand from an Indian or Tibetan perspective this appears odd, but that's just how it developed.

Malcolm wrote:
Which means that people knowledgable in Buddhism recognized loose definitions were a problem and fixed it. The legal terminology already existed in Vinaya, the Chinese were simply slow to adopt it.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 22nd, 2011 at 7:50 AM
Title: Re: Renunciation Impossible?
Content:


tobes said:
I don't disagree with this. But the question is: are the causes located in an ancient Indian cosmology of time or in human intentions and actions?

If the latter, then it is clearly possible to change them.

If the former, then there is a sense in which decline is inevitable and cannot be overcome.

Malcolm wrote:
The Indian cosmology of time is predicated on increasingly contaminated human intentions and actions. In other words, decline happens because people's moral caliber is increasingly degraded.



tobes said:
Many people would argue that the obvious cause for cheap energy and infinite growth is found in the logic of capital. There is nothing inevitable or permanent about that cause and its associated logic.


Malcolm wrote:
Logic didn't cause cheap energy. Drilling depth did.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 22nd, 2011 at 7:47 AM
Title: Re: Renunciation Impossible?
Content:
tobes said:
As well, people in Europe and America are currently living through extremely difficult economic and political times. It is not surprising to hear sentiments of "overarching global decline." People in China do not have the same sense of pessimism.

But remember that only a decade or two ago, the nineties (for Europe and America) was a golden era of cosmopolitanism, technological innovation, globalism and "overarching global progression."

Both narratives are bogus; the reality in both decades is/was filled in equal measure with good and bad stuff.

I do however, agree that we're in for a particularly bad decade, especially in Europe. Beyond that, little is certain.



Malcolm wrote:
Have you been to China? The place is a disaster. Crowded, polluted, etc. The place is a dump. They ruined their forests centuries ago, their western border is being desertified very quickly. They are busy destroying the enviroment of Tibet, etc.

They can be optimistic, but then people do like to gild shit.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 22nd, 2011 at 7:44 AM
Title: Re: Saichō's Monastic Reforms
Content:
Huseng said:
Also, let's just assume the Brahma Net Sūtra is legitimate buddhavacana...The Brahma Net Sūtra speaks of bodhisattva renunciates, which Saichō described as great monks. That's a śramaṇa in other words.

Malcolm wrote:
In order to be a śramaṇa or a bhiḳsu, one needs to ordain in one of the "eighteen" schools. Otherwise, you are an upāsikā.

Apart from these categories there are no other categories of Buddhist practitioners, Mahāyāna or otherwise.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 22nd, 2011 at 7:38 AM
Title: Re: Saichō's Monastic Reforms
Content:
Huseng said:
I would still think that they were not bhikṣus, nor even śramaṇeras, just lay people with shaved heads in robes.
Is a śramaṇa by necessity also a bhikṣu?

Malcolm wrote:
A śramaṇa is, by necessity, a novice ordained by a bhikṣu. One does not require a quorum to ordain novices. I suspect that what happened in China was that many Central Asia and Indian monks came to China and ordained novices (śramaṇas).

I don't think you can really argue for a huge difference between Central Asian Buddhism (define were, first of all) and Indian Buddhism because of the strong Influence of Indian culture from Bactria all the way to Java and Modern Day Vietnam.

How much do we know about the state fo monastic ordination in China prior to the 7th century?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 22nd, 2011 at 3:45 AM
Title: Re: Saichō's Monastic Reforms
Content:
Seishin said:
This may be a little off topic;... because of Saicho's reforms to ordanation and subsiquent other changes made to Japanese Buddhism over generations, would that mean it's better not to follow Japanese Buddhism?

Seishin.


Malcolm wrote:
Only if you want to be a fully ordained bhikṣu.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 22nd, 2011 at 3:22 AM
Title: Re: Saichō's Monastic Reforms
Content:
Huseng said:
The Buddha also gave permission for the vinaya to be reformed if need be.

Namdrol said:
I think this goes a little too far. He told Ananda that it was ok to ignore minor rules without speifying which rules were minor. One assumes he meant rules like making rude noises while chewing, slurping one's soup and so on.

But he certainly never said "If need be, revise Vinaya."

Huseng said:
In any case it was revised at some point in India. Hence we have more than one vinaya.

He also specified if his dharma was to go to foreign lands it could be modified as appropriate to the customs of those places.

Malcolm wrote:
He meant in terms of wearing wool and leather (that is the example).



Huseng said:
Like I said in the article the Brahma Net Sūtra might have been penned at a time when no Chinese translation of the vinaya existed. It is funny to think that even in the early fifth century when Kumārajīva was first stepping foot into China the monks there actually had no vinaya, or it was only then first being translated. They had monastic rules, and I imagine the monks from Central Asia and those few from India orally taught the vinaya and perhaps transmitted it to some, but there was no Chinese translation of even one vinaya system until the 5th century. Funny even Faxian in India had to write down an oral recitation of the vinaya as he couldn't get a hold of a written copy during his travels in India in the 5th century.

Malcolm wrote:
I did not know that. Interesting.


Huseng said:
Anyway, the Brahma Net Sūtra might have been written in such conditions, thus providing, at least for its time, a suitable substitute for the vinaya, but also in line with Mahāyāna ideals. Obviously later generations would not have had such ideas about the text, but they nevertheless took the text as the golden word of the Buddha. If those bodhisattva precepts are actually followed in their entirety one would be living a lifestyle in line with the vinaya. The problem is that in Japan some centuries later they decided it was optional to follow any of the prescriptions contained in any text. Even if they still transmitted the vinaya they would have had the same ideas about it, too. Everything became optional. The prescriptions in the Brahma Net Sūtra were no less sacred then those in the vinaya.


Malcolm wrote:
Even so, in India, it was necessarily the opinion of Mahāyāna Vinayadharas that Mahāyāna precepts were based on Hināyāna vows.


Huseng said:
But I do not think one can infer from this that innovations like Saicho's would be considered wise or valid.
If it wasn't for the developments in Japanese Buddhism in the last century and a half, would your opinion be different? I mean if Japanese priests were all still celibate, unmarried, etc... and living as monastics.

Malcolm wrote:
[/quote]

I would still think that they were not bhikṣus, nor even śramaṇeras, just lay people with shaved heads in robes.

The Indian approach to these things was always layered. Whereas, the Chinese, cut off from the Mainstream of Indian Buddhism for the most part developed along lines very difficult for Indo-Tibetan Buddhists to recognize. For example, the Chinese obsession with elaborating individual sutra systems and so on. As you know, Indians, in the end, relied more on sastras than the raw material of sutras. Sutras were for devotion, sashtras were for study.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 22nd, 2011 at 3:14 AM
Title: Re: Renunciation Impossible?
Content:
Huseng said:
I was discussing this with my friends today, most of whom are in sciences. They place their faith in technological development and science (and maybe the market) saving them from such a catastrophe.

Malcolm wrote:
They are dreaming. The reason we are changing to electric cars is not because they are more efficient and less polluting. We are changing to electric cars to take advantage of the 300 years or so of coal.


Huseng said:
This is rather common amongst professional scientists, and business oriented individuals. Their faith in the market or technology is really as dangerous as faith in god. Just throw all care to the wind and assume things will work out in the end no matter what.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, foolish.


Huseng said:
I've taken an interest in organic farming, and could actually study this in India under the great Shiva Vandana.

Malcolm wrote:
Vandana Shiva is great.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 22nd, 2011 at 2:34 AM
Title: Re: Saichō's Monastic Reforms
Content:
Huseng said:
The Buddha also gave permission for the vinaya to be reformed if need be.

Malcolm wrote:
I think this goes a little too far. He told Ananda that it was ok to ignore minor rules without speifying which rules were minor. One assumes he meant rules like making rude noises while chewing, slurping one's soup and so on.

But he certainly never said "If need be, revise Vinaya."

Now, given that that are different ceremonies for conferring Vinaya, and different procedures for confession and so on, obviously the Buddha left much up to regional vinayadharas discretion.

But I do not think one can infer from this that innovations like Saicho's would be considered wise or valid.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 22nd, 2011 at 2:24 AM
Title: Re: Saichō's Monastic Reforms
Content:
Huseng said:
Curiously Amoghavajra was a Central Asian from Samarkand, not India proper.
.

Malcolm wrote:
Vajrabodhi, his teacher, was educated in India.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 22nd, 2011 at 1:54 AM
Title: Re: Renunciation Impossible?
Content:
Namdrol said:
Air is ruined, soil is ruined, water is ruined, species going extinct at rates unprecedented for millions of years, more people killed in wars in the 20th century than in any century previous, and who knows what this century will bring.

We have had limited success in stemming cosmetic pollution, but we have merely offloaded it to other places.

Huseng said:
In addition to this the problem is accelerating and increasing in severity. The "rural poor" in nations like China and India are either moving to urban areas or just building cities in hopes of living a resource costly urban lifestyle. In China especially this is particularly noteworthy because of their growing middle class and emulation of anything western. The convenience stores in Shanghai are more or less identical to what you find in Japan (Japan is mostly western). Massive amounts of plastic wrapped in plastic. More and more people want their own private cars, too, even if it is really unnecessary. The whole Chinese economic miracle is built on industrial production and social stability a matter of keeping it going.

I also heard global carbon emissions are increasing significantly year by year instead of decreasing as scientists continually beg nations to do.


Malcolm wrote:
Basically, when we run out of energy, world population will collapse. Not catastrophically (well, may in some places), but what we take for granted today will be gone. Enjoy it, 'cause we live at the peak of technological civilization. Barring a game-changing breakthrough in clean energy production, world consciousness, and so on, prospects for the future of our present "level" of civilization look pretty bleak.

So my advice is: learning something useful that does not require high technology, farming, metal smithing, etc. In my case, I learned Tibetan Medicine, to practice yes, but also to preserve here as the only fully Buddhist system of medicine in the world.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 21st, 2011 at 11:10 PM
Title: Re: 'Non-duality' and 'neutrality'
Content:


muni said:
Integration.

Malcolm wrote:
Also easy to say, hard to do, as long as one is under the influence of afflictions.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 21st, 2011 at 10:27 PM
Title: Re: 'Non-duality' and 'neutrality'
Content:
muni said:
There is nothing to undo, nothing to transform in the nonseparation of samsara or nirvana; all arises, subsides in itself. There is no samsara to undo or nirvana to reach.


Malcolm wrote:
Easy to say...


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 21st, 2011 at 10:05 PM
Title: Re: Saichō's Monastic Reforms
Content:


Jikan said:
Where does the vinaya fall in the TienTai classification of the teachings?  One could argue that the Brahma Net Sutra precepts are embedded in or are more amenable to an Ekayana view than the vinaya.

Malcolm wrote:
Alternately, Saicho may have been reacting against the newly imported Indian Mantrayāna sense of listing teachings in terms of their hierarchy (just as Chan reacted to Mantrayāna by inventing a lineage of patriarchs going back to the Buddha). While Kukai did not resort to the Nine Yanas scheme (yet to be elaborated by the Nyingmapas) both masters (Saicho and Kukai) were clearly aware of the four tenet system in India and the subsequent need to classify Chinese innovations in a progressive scheme, albeit differently and for different reasons. And naturally Kukai selected a nice round number for his progressive ladder of Buddhist and non-Buddhist teachings in China and Japan, with Confucism and Taoism at the bottomg of the rungs.

Kukai's "mantrayāna as the conclusion of all dharma teachings" is one alternative; Saicho's attempting to contextualize all teachings in light of Tien Tai Lotus hermeneutics is another. Of these two, Kukai's approach is ultimately the more Indian Buddhist, and Saicho's more reflective of indegenous developments in Chinese Buddhism.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 21st, 2011 at 8:56 PM
Title: Re: Renunciation Impossible?
Content:
tobes said:
Yes, I suppose if I am to adopt a position on this, it is that I do not like the political implications of assuming (without good reason) that we're trapped in inevitable decline.

Malcolm wrote:
Well, this present civilization is definitely in decline. And I personally think that we are heading into a phase of global decline.

Air is ruined, soil is ruined, water is ruined, species going extinct at rates unprecedented for millions of years, more people killed in wars in the 20th century than in any century previous, and who knows what this century will bring.

We have had limited success in stemming cosmetic pollution, but we have merely offloaded it to other places.

Our civilization is predicated on two things: cheap energy and infinite growth. Both predicates, as I am sure you will agree, are fantasies.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 21st, 2011 at 8:51 PM
Title: Re: Renunciation Impossible?
Content:


tobes said:
If Buddhism does not teach us that we can change in a wholesome way, then....well.....really, what does it teach us?



Malcolm wrote:
That we live in shit and we need to get ourselves and everyone else out of the shit.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 21st, 2011 at 1:58 AM
Title: Re: Saichō's Monastic Reforms
Content:
Namdrol said:
Yes, but there is a clear distinction between lay and ordained lamas since lama means "guru". Not all lamas are bhikṣus (dge long) and not all bhikṣus are lamas.

N

Huseng said:
I was told that Tibetan "monks" are not necessarily all bhikṣus, and that, at least around Kathmandu, most of them are not fully ordained bhikṣus with the 250 vows.


Malcolm wrote:
These are dge tshuls, śramaṇeras. They are rab byungs i.e. pravrajitas, ordained persons. They are therefore part of the ordained Sangha and can participate in posadha. Pravrajitas consist of all śramaṇeras and śramaṇerikas, bhikṣus and bhikṣunis.

Thus the term "rab byung" refers to all ordained persons. The colloquial term is "Trapa" i.e. shaveling.

A pravrajita is someone who has undertaken formal ordination beyond lay pratimoksha. But there is no such a thing as a Mahāyāna pravrajita at least not in any Indian Buddhist tradition with which I am familiar. The reason is that Indian Buddhists held that Mahāyāna vows were held to supplement or transform one's pratimoksha vows, but not that they substituted for them, as it seems some Chinese Buddhists and later Saicho held.

The literature of vows became very important in India after the 8th century because with the proliferation of systems of ethics between various of the shravaka schools, then in the two strands of Mahāyāna vows and finally within the successive layers of tantra series, it all started to become contentious and confusing. Nevertheless, Mahāyāna and later Vajrayāna vows were considered to float on the platform of Hinayāna vows which were considered indispensible.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 21st, 2011 at 1:37 AM
Title: Re: Saichō's Monastic Reforms
Content:
Namdrol said:
Right, and this is source of confusion for many people.

N

Huseng said:
In Tibetan a Lama is not necessarily a celibate monk, right?

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, but there is a clear distinction between lay and ordained lamas since lama means "guru". Not all lamas are bhikṣus (dge long) and not all bhikṣus are lamas.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 21st, 2011 at 1:26 AM
Title: Re: Saichō's Monastic Reforms
Content:


Huseng said:
This is indeed because bhikṣu is equated to monk in English, but the language parameters are different in Chinese and Japanese. For example a Japanese priest, a Theravada bhikkhu and a Chinese bhikṣu are all called obou-san in Japanese and senglv in Chinese.


Malcolm wrote:
Right, and this is source of confusion for many people.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 21st, 2011 at 12:37 AM
Title: Re: Saichō's Monastic Reforms
Content:
Namdrol said:
Well, no. I think that he did not understand the importance of pratimoksha and did not understand that the consequences of his understanding was to relegate so called monastics to the level of lay people inadvertantly. Because of Saicho, we now have Japanese priests claiming equal status with bhikṣus in Buddhist assemblies just because they shave their heads and wear religious  costumes.

Huseng said:
At least in his time anyway he insisted on celibacy and abstaining from alcohol. The Brahm Net Sutra's precepts prescribe monastic regulations not so different from what a bhiksu would be expected to uphold. That was the case at least when he was alive.

Personally I think even if Japan still had the vinaya it would have went down the route it did. Up until the 19th century most priests were in practice monks, even by law, and it was influence from protestant Christianity that had them drop the whole celibacy thing in favour of hereditary priesthoods. For most Japanese Buddhists precepts are just suggestions, and unless you do something illegal there really are no consequences for deviating from monastic precepts (at least when outside a seminary). I mean technically if you get the Brahma Net Sutra precepts you're swearing yourself to celibacy, though they read it as "no sexual misconduct" which can mean anything really.

I guess it doesn't help that everyone is aware the said sutra was probably penned in China, meaning there is less perceived need to follow any of what it says, even if your whole tradition is founded on it.

Malcolm wrote:
The Brahmajala sutra is clearly based on the Yogacara bodhisattva vow tradition which is more formal and more heavily predicated on pratimoksha than the Madhyamaka bodhisattva vow tradition. According to Bhikshu Dharmamitra, in Chinese Buddhism one was not really permitted to take the bodhisattva ordination without being grounded in pratimoksha vows first, which is how the Yogacahara system works. The Madhyamaka system does not require a preliminary ordination. Lay pratimoksha vows are taken along with bodhisattva vows.

However, not drinking and remaining celibate does not make a one monk, nor does a shaved head. The only thing that makes a bhikṣu is receiving bhikṣu vows in a qualified way, as I am sure you agree.

Since there are no Mahāyāna bhikṣu vows, receiving a Mahāyāna ordination cannot make one a monk, in my opinion. Of course, this is a thoroughly Indo-Tibetan attitude.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 21st, 2011 at 12:26 AM
Title: Re: Love vs. Attachment
Content:
Epistemes said:
...you're required to walk, talk and think like a monk at all times.

Malcolm wrote:
No, you are just required to understand all that is born becomes ill, ages and dies. What you do with that fact makes the difference betwee samsara and nivana.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 21st, 2011 at 12:16 AM
Title: Re: Saichō's Monastic Reforms
Content:
Huseng said:
This is entirely shameless self-promotion, but I penned a brief essay on Saichō's unique monastic reforms. If you're interested please have a look:

https://sites.google.com/site/dharmadepository/writings/saichos-reforms " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;




Namdrol said:
Nice article.

Huseng said:
Namdrol, what do you think about his reforms? Do you think it wise to relegate the vinaya to a secondary position like he did?


Malcolm wrote:
Well, no. I think that he did not understand the importance of pratimoksha and did not understand that the consequences of his understanding was to relegate so called monastics to the level of lay people inadvertantly. Because of Saicho, we now have Japanese priests claiming equal status with bhikṣus in Buddhist assemblies just because they shave their heads and wear religious  costumes.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 20th, 2011 at 11:45 PM
Title: Re: Saichō's Monastic Reforms
Content:
Huseng said:
This is entirely shameless self-promotion, but I penned a brief essay on Saichō's unique monastic reforms. If you're interested please have a look:

https://sites.google.com/site/dharmadepository/writings/saichos-reforms " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;




Malcolm wrote:
Nice article.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 20th, 2011 at 12:08 PM
Title: Re: Introducing the practice of Daimoku to friends and relatives
Content:
Namdrol said:
Chanting Nam-myoho-renge-kyo during the physical union of man and woman is indeed what is called “earthly desires are enlightenment,” and “the sufferings of birth and death are nirvana.”

Tatsuo said:
I don't know if that is the answer to my question, but this quote is obviously not taken from the Lotus Sutra, as the daimoku (namu myoho renge kyo) is not explicitly mentioned in the text. From which text did you take the quote?

Malcolm wrote:
http://www.sgilibrary.org/view.php?page=317&m=1&q=desires " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 20th, 2011 at 10:54 AM
Title: Re: Mahāmudrā & bhūmis
Content:
Greg said:
Very helpful, thank you.

Incidentally, could Dzogchen be mapped in a similar fashion? I would have thought that recognizing rigpa would be the start of the darśanamārga?


Malcolm wrote:
Yes it can be mapped in a similar fashion. You will find such a scheme in "The Practice of Dzogchen" by Tulku Thundup in the end.

And no, recognizing rigpa and realizing emptiness are different.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 20th, 2011 at 10:02 AM
Title: Re: the methodology of Sakya
Content:
mzaur said:
Are you referring to generation stage and completion stage?


Malcolm wrote:
Yup.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 20th, 2011 at 9:37 AM
Title: Re: the methodology of Sakya
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Sakya is all about the two stages.


mzaur said:
Hello,

I'm trying to learn more about the Sakya tradition as I just found that there's a center near me run by Lama Pema Wangdak, who I might be interested in meeting.

I've been studying Vajrayana for several years and took refuge 2 years ago. Since then I've tried practicing Dzogchen through Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche, but I feel I really want a live connection with a teacher, so I am investing the centers around me. So far, I really like Mahamudra because it seems very similar to the view of Dzogchen but a more gradual approach, which makes me interested in Kagyu. I can't find much info about Sakya or Lamdre and its similarities/differences with Mahamudra/Dzogchen. Could someone familiar with both Mahamudra and the Sakya tradition share with me the differences? is Sakya a strictly tantric lineage with no 'direct' or 'essence' teachings?

Michael


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 20th, 2011 at 4:05 AM
Title: Re: Economics..yes,,they are this dim
Content:
Huseng said:
he whole promise before was get educated and get a good job, but it doesn't work like that anymore.

Malcolm wrote:
This is because conservatives do not seem to understand that higher wages result in broader prosperity for all, not more investment.

I like Robert Reich's idea of a negative income tax.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 20th, 2011 at 2:42 AM
Title: Re: 若提碎摩 = ????
Content:
cdpatton said:
The story tells of a brahmana discovering a Buddhist sutra on dependent origination, realizing the superior logic to it, and then arguing with his friends.  In the process he refutes the logical arguments found in the Samkhya and Vaisesika philosophies. But only those two are treated, not this third, during the narrative.  So we don't get any clues about the identity of 若提碎摩 through description of their arguments either.  These little mystery transliterations are quite time consuming sometimes.  I think I will settle on Nyaya and explain the obscurity in a footnote.

Malcolm wrote:
Nyāya and Vaiśeṣika are frequently lumped together as if they are one school.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 20th, 2011 at 1:13 AM
Title: Re: Rigpa a view ...
Content:
Sönam said:
While discussing with "knowledged" vajra practitionners, but not Dzogchenpa, they pretend, with many references, that rigpa is the view of Dzogchen ... maybe they are right, and I could (nor I wanted) to argue. But it seems evident, from my ignorance, that rigpa is "no more" a view as such, as others yanas use that term. Or at least rigpa is all views together ... can you help to dissipate my ignorance ?

Sönam


Namdrol said:
Rigpa is a view, in that sense they are correct. But rigpa is not some intellectual view (as Jigme Lingpa makes clear), instead it is the experience of contemplation, meditation as view, if you will.

Sönam said:
so it's also not wrong to pretend that it's no more a view, as such ... it's an experience.

Thank you
Sönam

Malcolm wrote:
The best way to put it is that for Dzogchen rigpa is the view, the meditation, the conduct, and the result. RIgpa is also the basis, the path, and the result. Rigpa is hearing, contemplation, and meditation. RIgpa is shila, samadhi and prajn̄ā. Rigpa is creation and completion. Rigpa is three series of Dzogchen. Nothing is outside rigpa.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 20th, 2011 at 12:03 AM
Title: Re: Rinchen Terzod & Dudjom Tersar indexes
Content:


Adamantine said:
It also occurred to me that Taklung Tsetrul Rinpoche would have the transmissions for some of the Dudjom tersar, perhaps not all.
.


Malcolm wrote:
He received the whole kit and kaboodle i.e. he is a DT lineage holder. He himself emphasizes the practice of Putri Repung as being important based on a personal communication.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 20th, 2011 at 12:00 AM
Title: Re: Mahāmudrā & bhūmis
Content:
Greg said:
Does Mahāmudrā realization line up with the traditional Mahāyāna model of mārgas & bhūmis?

It seems to me that from the perspective of the Mahāyāna model, even a brief glimpse/recognition of thamal gyi shepa would make one a first-bhūmi ārya. But I get a sense that this assertion is generally not made from the Mahāmudrā perspective.


Malcolm wrote:
Yes, and no. I have seen various schemes used.

As far as tha mal gyi shes pa being first bhumi, no.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 19th, 2011 at 11:36 PM
Title: Re: Conservation Efforts
Content:
Astus said:
rural does not equal fuedal, though perhaps for Europeans this is the only equation they are familiar with. You have to bear in mind that during the 19th century, literacy rates in the United States was the highest in the world
I don't find the perspective of a peasant civilisation that enticing, even if it's sustainable. And when you keep yourself busy on the farm and you are isolated from other areas, literacy disappears as it is useless. Also, don't forget that the 19th century was already the modern age with steam power and gun powder.


Malcolm wrote:
That is completely false. American literacy is based on the notion that an educated population is necessary for full civic participation in a democratic republic.

You seem to think farmers don't need to read.

As I said, perhaps rural literacy is hard for some Eurpoeans to grasp, given their history.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 19th, 2011 at 10:52 PM
Title: Re: Conservation Efforts
Content:
Astus said:
LastLegend,

"efficient and sustainable energy source" in my understanding - and I can be wrong of course - is the same as an infinite source of energy. Not realistic. But my knowledge is very limited here.

You may call it giving, compassion, enlightenment, etc. - these are ideas. You can't make people give - unless you start a so called "proletariat dictatorship". Since you can't make them give, can't convert them to new views either, the plan fails. That's what I was saying with the failure of religions and ideologies. Therefore, either we go medieval or new technologies. Both are mostly external (i.e. easier to recognise and accept by the majority) forces that make people follow new rules.

Malcolm wrote:
I don't think it is either or. We will continue to have a high educational culture -- rural does not equal fuedal, though perhaps for Europeans this is the only equation they are familiar with. You have to bear in mind that during the 19th century, literacy rates in the United States was the highest in the world, with 80 percent literacy for adults and among non-immigrants (apart from blacks) nearly 95 percent.

As long as people stay highly educated, whatever civilization we can imagine will likely be based on agriculture and biotechnologies that require low energy inputs. But the steel and electric civlization made possible by oil will die.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 19th, 2011 at 10:43 PM
Title: Re: Conservation Efforts
Content:
Astus said:
"Infinite source of energy" does not exist, especially not on Earth. Keeping population low (it's already too high) and living in a rural environment would mean a sustainable livelihood where small communities can live on locally produced food and move regularly to arable land until the used land regenerates. That's quite medieval and would require a global catastrophe to reduce humanity into such a culture.

Malcolm wrote:
I don't think so -- environmental systems and human cultures respond to inputs of energy in the same way. Slowely remove the inputs and the community falters and gradually dies back. Unless we find oil in Greenland and in the Artic poles that is easy to recover as it was in Texas in 1880, we have reached the limit of easily extractable oil. Since that is the case, we will see a gradual decline in human population because well, there won't be enough food to feed everyone. The oceans are becoming increasingly acidic due to higher amounts of CO2 in the atmosphere  and so on. We will see industrial civilization come to a shuddering halt over the next three hundred years. We lived through the high point of industrial civilization, and it is all downhill from here, unless you follow Ray Kurzweil's theories.

But one thing is a fact, persistent 4% growth a year is an economic fantasy.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 19th, 2011 at 10:41 PM
Title: Re: Rigpa a view ...
Content:
Sönam said:
While discussing with "knowledged" vajra practitionners, but not Dzogchenpa, they pretend, with many references, that rigpa is the view of Dzogchen ... maybe they are right, and I could (nor I wanted) to argue. But it seems evident, from my ignorance, that rigpa is "no more" a view as such, as others yanas use that term. Or at least rigpa is all views together ... can you help to dissipate my ignorance ?

Sönam


Malcolm wrote:
Rigpa is a view, in that sense they are correct. But rigpa is not some intellectual view (as Jigme Lingpa makes clear), instead it is the experience of contemplation, meditation as view, if you will.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 19th, 2011 at 10:06 PM
Title: Re: Limitations in TTM
Content:
kalden yungdrung said:
Namdrol wrote:
The second question is too vague.
Tashi delek,

Thanks for your reply.

I mean as a contra indication pregnent women in case of certain treatments, which would be allowed if the woman was not pregnent.
So there are /  must be also contra indications in the treatment of TTM. 

- How is this explained ?
- Where is it written ?
- Where are they different then in the western medicine and TCM ?

Best wishes

Mutsog Marro
KY

Malcolm wrote:
There are many contraindications summarizing them all would be difficult. But in short, moxa should not be be used on pitta conditions or hot diseases; blood-letting and needle should be used un vata conditions, cold treatments should not be used on kapha conditions and so forth.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 19th, 2011 at 2:15 PM
Title: Re: Hua Tou and Dzogchen
Content:


kalden yungdrung said:
Trekchod is mainly based on the emptiness aspect of the mind as well the realizing that the objects are also empty.


KY[/color]

Malcolm wrote:
That is one way to explain it, but not the best way.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 19th, 2011 at 2:11 PM
Title: Re: 若提碎摩 = ????
Content:
cdpatton said:
我昔
T04n0201_p0258c16║曾聞，有婆羅門名憍尸迦，善知僧佉論、衛
T04n0201_p0258c17║世師論、 若提碎摩 論，如是等論解了分別。

Translating a text by Kumarajiva, I've run into a transliteration of what I would assume is a school of ancient Indian philosophy, but none that I can match up with the Chinese pronunciations.  I was wondering if anyone has a better reference or knowledge than mine who could resolve the mystery.  The passage above mentions a brahmana learned in the Samkyha, Vaisesika, and [mystery school].   Chinese = 若提碎摩. 若提 often equals Jnati, but otherwise I'm stumped.

Charlie.


Malcolm wrote:
Maybe Nyāya?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 19th, 2011 at 1:58 PM
Title: Re: Conservation Efforts
Content:
KeithBC said:
All of a sudden, the capitalists and communists will be allying with each other to oppose that idea.

Malcolm wrote:
Of course, since communism is predicated on the capitalist mode of production.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 19th, 2011 at 1:14 PM
Title: Re: Limitations in TTM
Content:
kalden yungdrung said:
Tashi delek,

There arose some questions, namely

- In which cases is TTM limited in helping the patients?
- What are the contra indications, according TTM?

Mutsog Marro
KY


Malcolm wrote:
Anything requiring major surgery.

The second question is too vague.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 19th, 2011 at 12:22 PM
Title: Re: How to know a teachers level of realization?
Content:
Inge said:
Is it possible to deduce anything about a teachers level of realization just by knowing what type of instructions the teacher gives? For instance, when a Lama gives pointing out instructions and direct introductions, does this indicate anything particular about the teachers realization?

Namdrol said:
Not necessarily.

N

heart said:
To even teach Dzogchen you have to have some realization. Shakya Shri says at least third vision other say the second vision. But these days anyone seems to be giving Dzogchen teachings.

Why are you not in Italy Namdrol?

/magnus


Malcolm wrote:
MY father is ill and I needed to remain here in the US to care for him.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 19th, 2011 at 9:49 AM
Title: Re: Rinchen Terzod & Dudjom Tersar indexes
Content:
Adamantine said:
akin to doubting Guru Rinpoche himself and Yeshe Tsogyal herself since he was in a way an emanation of both together.

Malcolm wrote:
Dudjom Rinpoche's being a regent of Guru Rinpoche goes back to Rigdzin Duddul Dorje, who had a pure vision encounter in Zangdog Palri where he was predicted to be the regent of Guru Rinpoche on earth. This came after Duddul Dorje recited the seven line prayer 1 million times on the instruction of Rigzin Jatson Nyingpo.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 19th, 2011 at 9:39 AM
Title: Re: Rinchen Terzod & Dudjom Tersar indexes
Content:
username said:
The one clear head of DT lineage is the one Dudjom Jigdrel Yeshe determined so in his letter, ie: Chatral Rinpoche. And after him the lineage head will be the current mind emanation of Dudjom Lingpa, Dudjom's grandson, that Chatral Rinpoche has solely recognized and is training in his three year retreat currently, ie: Dudjom Sangye Pema (Osel).

Adamantine said:
This is a common misconception, because as far as I know that letter was written long before Shenpen Dawa Rinpoche was grown so yes, Chatral Rinpoche was declared his regent at a certain point, and would have been had HH passed away earlier in life. ( HH planned to pass on earlier but was kept around by the many methods of his Sangyum...)
However an old letter does not change that HH later declared S.D. Rinpoche his regent, as his health deteriorated towards the end. In fact, S.D. Rinpoche very humbly always remained by his fathers side, serving him and sometimes translating for him until the very end. He never publicly taught due to prophecies until he passed a certain age. Then, at one point HH was scheduled to give a wang and to everyone's surprise including S.D.Rinpoche he simply handed the implements to his son and told him to give the wang. This was a direct way of showing that there was no difference. This all happened in Europe, so I am sure there is doubt among elder Tibetans living in Asia who became accustomed to receiving wangs and teachings from T.N.Rinpoche years before according to HH's advice. And TNR already had quite a following and had established his own centers by the time HH passed on so perhaps he saw as Dudjom Lingpa foresaw with the Dudjom tersar in relation to the Rinchen Terdzod that there was no need to include it-- likewise no need to announce Thinley Norbu in any way as he already had his own recognition and following that had it's own vast momentum. This is my own understanding which may be at fault but I have learned details slowly over many years which are often glossed over for various reasons.


Malcolm wrote:
Shenphen Rinpoche, who is one of my important masters, is indeed the primary lineage holder of Dudjom Tersar, and the keeper of Dudjom Rinpoche's seat in North America where Dudjom Rinpoche concealed many precious teachings.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 19th, 2011 at 9:25 AM
Title: Re: Why is possible to achieve Buddhahood?
Content:
Tsondue Sangmo said:
I am trying to understand the possibility for a sentient being to achieve Buddhahood as is view, I think, in general Mahayana Buddhism. In this sense, I do not want to imagine what a Buddha can be, but just to take and understand Buddhist scriptures in the literal sense, if this is the correct approach.

Namdrol said:
A buddha is defined as someone who has removed the two obscurations, affliction and knowledge, and gathered the two accumulations, merit and wisdom.

Inge said:
Could you give definitions of the two obscurations, merit and wisdom, or maybe refer to an english text where I can find such definitions.

I also wonder if it is possible to say anything about the personal experience from the viewpoint of a Buddha, how it is like to be a Buddha?


Malcolm wrote:
The two obscurations are the obscuration of affliction i.e. desire, hatred and ignorance. These are responsible for rebirth in the three realms. The second obscuration is obscuration of knowledge that prevent omniscience, which prevent full buddhahood.

The merit accumulation is reponsible for realizing the material body of a buddha i.e. the sambhogakāya and nirmanakāy. The wisdom accumulation is responsible for realizing the dharmakāya of the buddha.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 19th, 2011 at 9:22 AM
Title: Re: Hua Tou and Dzogchen
Content:
ngodrup said:
The thing to appreciate, it seems to my mind, is that recognition
according to trekchod would be essentially equivalent to the seeing
of an Arya Being on the Path of Seeing or a first bhumi Bodhisattva.
I very much doubt that all these facile comparisons of Dzogchen to
Chan or Zen bear much resemblance to the actual seeing of an Arya.
... but I may be mistaken.


Malcolm wrote:
No, the reason is that one does not need to realize emptiness in order to properly practice tregchö, emptiness may remain an inference. But one must have experience of this unconditioned clarity in order to practice tregchö. Eventually, if you practice tregchö long enough you will realize emptiness because that insight will automatically arise within your meditation, and this is predicated on understanding the view of original purity .

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 19th, 2011 at 8:00 AM
Title: Re: How to know a teachers level of realization?
Content:
Inge said:
Is it possible to deduce anything about a teachers level of realization just by knowing what type of instructions the teacher gives? For instance, when a Lama gives pointing out instructions and direct introductions, does this indicate anything particular about the teachers realization?

Namdrol said:
Not necessarily.

N

Inge said:
If some of the students "gets it" then, does that give a more certain indication?

Malcolm wrote:
Perhaps, it is more likely.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 19th, 2011 at 7:47 AM
Title: Re: How to know a teachers level of realization?
Content:
Inge said:
Is it possible to deduce anything about a teachers level of realization just by knowing what type of instructions the teacher gives? For instance, when a Lama gives pointing out instructions and direct introductions, does this indicate anything particular about the teachers realization?

Malcolm wrote:
Not necessarily.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 19th, 2011 at 7:46 AM
Title: Re: Hua Tou and Dzogchen
Content:


Inge said:
And what does it mean to discover this clarity? Can this clarity be seen, or is it experienced like some kind of state, or something else entirely?

Namdrol said:
Clarity is the cognitive aspect of the mind that knows objects. So in sense, what one is trying to see is the knowing knower itself, apart from what it knows.

Inge said:
Ok, that is more easy to understand. To see the knowing knower itself, is this the same as knowing the knower? Or seeing the seer, experiencing the experiencor, being aware of awareness ...?

Malcolm wrote:
The difficulty is that a knower is conditioned. This clarity is unconditoned.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 19th, 2011 at 7:23 AM
Title: Re: Hua Tou and Dzogchen
Content:


Inge said:
And what does it mean to discover this clarity? Can this clarity be seen, or is it experienced like some kind of state, or something else entirely?

Malcolm wrote:
Clarity is the cognitive aspect of the mind that knows objects. So in sense, what one is trying to see is the knowing knower itself, apart from what it knows.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 19th, 2011 at 7:12 AM
Title: Re: Hua Tou and Dzogchen
Content:


Namdrol said:
This is referring to appearance and emptiness, object side.

N

Inge said:
I see. Could you explain a little what is meant by clarity?


Malcolm wrote:
"Clarity" means the fundamental aspect of the mind that illuminates objects for the mind separate from the content of the mind. That clarity is very difficult to discover.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 19th, 2011 at 6:56 AM
Title: Re: Hua Tou and Dzogchen
Content:
Fa Dao said:
From my limited understanding of chan realizing the nature of mind is realizing emtiness. So then in your estimation you would say it is similar to Tragcho?


Namdrol said:
The nature of the mind is not just emptiness, it is clarity and emptiness inseparable. The emphasis in tregchö is on this.

Inge said:
This reminds me of a quote attributed to Hsuan Hua:

"If you understand the Zero, you know it to be the True Emptiness, which contains Wonderful Existence, and the Wonderful Existence, which contains True Emptiness. True Emptiness does not obstruct Wonderful Existence and Wonderful Existence does not obstruct True Emptiness. True Emptiness is not empty and so it is called Wonderful Existence; Wonderful Existence is non-existent and is therefore called True Emptiness--empty and non-empty, existing and not existing."

Are you talking about the same thing?

Malcolm wrote:
This is referring to appearance and emptiness, object side.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 19th, 2011 at 6:37 AM
Title: Re: Conservation Efforts
Content:


LastLegend said:
If they don't want to save the earth, then we are screwed.

Malcolm wrote:
They don't and we are.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 19th, 2011 at 6:34 AM
Title: Re: Hua Tou and Dzogchen
Content:
Fa Dao said:
From my limited understanding of chan realizing the nature of mind is realizing emtiness. So then in your estimation you would say it is similar to Tragcho?


Malcolm wrote:
The nature of the mind is not just emptiness, it is clarity and emptiness inseparable. The emphasis in tregchö is on this.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 19th, 2011 at 5:00 AM
Title: Re: Hua Tou and Dzogchen
Content:
Fa Dao said:
In the hua tou method one is given a meditation topic/question. For example, "Who is dragging this corpse around?" or "Who is chanting Buddhas name?" You are instructed to continually ask this question until one pointedness is achieved. Great doubt is developed from asking a question that does not have an answer that the logical/rational/thinking mind can answer. One keeps pushing and pushing to come up with an answer nonetheless. Eventually one breaks through and the separateness of mind, body and world drops away leaving one with a deep understanding of shunyata.

Malcolm wrote:
Tregcho is based on recognizing the nature of mind directly, and staying in that state.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 19th, 2011 at 4:17 AM
Title: Re: Conservation Efforts
Content:


Astus said:
The idea of equal distribution is great. Communism, however, didn't work out so far.

Malcolm wrote:
Screw the proletariat, the consumers must seize the means of production, and create a dictatorship of consumption...!

(oh wait...that won't work...)


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 19th, 2011 at 2:09 AM
Title: the great vegetarian debate
Content:


LastLegend said:
Uh nobody said it is ok to kill insects...but the karma for killing an insect is different from killing a larger animal.

Namdrol said:
This is merely your imputation. I don't think the Buddha ever made such a statement, at least I have never read such a statement by him anywhere. The only possible argument one could make for this is that killing bugs requires very little intention, and so the force of intention propelling the action is generally weaker than the force of intention it takes to kill a larger animal. But there certainly is not inherently less karma in killing a bug than an animal. That is ridiculous.

Pero said:
Considering it is more severe to kill an Arhat than an ordinary human, more sever to kill one's parents than other people and so on and so on, it is hardly a ridiculous conclusion.


Malcolm wrote:
The reason for the five uninterrupted sins has to do with one's liberation. Harming a buddha, killing an arhat, killing one mother, or father and causing a schism in the Sangha are all sins connected with one's own and other's chances for attaining liberation. It has nothing to with the superiority or inferiority of humans in terms of some hierarchy of sentient beings based on intelligence or development. Please note that causing a schism in the Sangha is one of those five sins.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 19th, 2011 at 2:06 AM
Title: the great vegetarian debate
Content:


LastLegend said:
Uh nobody said it is ok to kill insects...but the karma for killing an insect is different from killing a larger animal.

Namdrol said:
This is merely your imputation. I don't think the Buddha ever made such a statement, at least I have never read such a statement by him anywhere. The only possible argument one could make for this is that killing bugs requires very little intention, and so the force of intention propelling the action is generally weaker than the force of intention it takes to kill a larger animal. But there certainly is not inherently less karma in killing a bug than an animal. That is ridiculous.

N

LastLegend said:
Do you agree that some animals are more intelligent than others?

Malcolm wrote:
I agree that some animals have more sophisticated sense organs than others. But minds are not sense organs, are they?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 19th, 2011 at 1:41 AM
Title: the great vegetarian debate
Content:


LastLegend said:
Uh nobody said it is ok to kill insects...but the karma for killing an insect is different from killing a larger animal.

Malcolm wrote:
This is merely your imputation. I don't think the Buddha ever made such a statement, at least I have never read such a statement by him anywhere. The only possible argument one could make for this is that killing bugs requires very little intention, and so the force of intention propelling the action is generally weaker than the force of intention it takes to kill a larger animal. But there certainly is not inherently less karma in killing a bug than an animal. That is ridiculous.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 19th, 2011 at 1:38 AM
Title: the great vegetarian debate
Content:
David N. Snyder said:
* Insects (building construction and farming allowed even though they may be killed indirectly)

Malcolm wrote:
You have to include small animals, birds, snakes, and so on in this. Monks however are prohibeted from farming. Lay people are not prohibited from eating "royal animals", only monks are.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 19th, 2011 at 1:35 AM
Title: the great vegetarian debate
Content:


LastLegend said:
I will have to disagree. I would say a cow is more developed than an insect. Something like killing an Arhat is different from killing a human being.

Malcolm wrote:
The only difference between a fly, a cow and a human being is that a human being can attain buddhahood. Therefore, killing a human being is considered a parakija, an offense punishable by losing one's monastic vows.

The difference between an arya and a human beings is that an arya can help other human beings awaken. Thus, harming a buddha or killing an Arhat is one of the five deeds that results in immediate rebirth in lower realms.

A cow and a fly are both the same in that neither can attain buddhahood in that body, both have minds. There is no qualitative difference between a vow and a fly, only a quantitative difference in terms of sense organ development. From an ethical point of view, this means that the life of a fly and the life of a cow are equal. Moreover, there is no difference in self-awareness. Cows and flies exhibit the same degree of self-awareness i.e. when you try to harm either, they react by protecting themselves.

There is no Buddhist teaching of which I am aware that states that preserving the life of mammals is more important than perserving the life of small creatures like flies and worms because mammals are "more developed".

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 19th, 2011 at 1:16 AM
Title: the great vegetarian debate
Content:


LastLegend said:
...the larger the animals, the more karma because they are more developed than insects.

Malcolm wrote:
Why? Because they have more developed sense organs, brains? That is nonsense. All creatures are equal. They all have minds and feelings. Killing a cow and killing a bug is equal in terms of the karma of killing.





LastLegend said:
The issue of meat-eating is at best a distraction from what is really important i.e. practice. Not eating meat does not make someone a better pracitioner, eating meat does not make one a worse practitioner. Not eating meat does not necessarily make someone more compassionate, eating meat does not necessarily make someone less compassionate.
Yes, but practice also means trying to step away from both sides of extreme. Not necessarily becoming a vegan or vegetarian, but at least we can be honest about what's going on.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, what is going on is that there isn't even a needle tip of happiness anywhere in samsara.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 19th, 2011 at 12:49 AM
Title: Re: Hua Tou and Dzogchen
Content:
Fa Dao said:
For those who have had experience in both Chan and Dzogchen:
When one shatters the "Great Doubt" as in Hua Tou practice from the Chan lineage how would the resultant state be viewed according to Dzogchen?

Malcolm wrote:
What does shattering great doubt mean?

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 19th, 2011 at 12:11 AM
Title: the great vegetarian debate
Content:
Namdrol said:
...
The issue of meat-eating is at best a distraction from what is really important i.e. practice. Not eating meat does not make someone a better pracitioner, eating meat does not make one a worse practitioner. Not eating meat does not necessarily make someone more compassionate, eating meat does not necessarily make someone less compassionate.

Sönam said:
I certainly understand these arguments ... also it does not make you better, still we are living in a world where there is so much BS and so much ignorance about necessary "basic" changes  (not to speak about fundamental ignorance) that every step one can make for a change is a constructive step. We are also acting for a better samsara. Therefore (most of the time) I do not eat meat, and (most of the time) I do not drink alcohol ... and I also (definitely) do not vote and few other behaviors, but that's other stories.

Sönam

Malcolm wrote:
Right, but this is a different issue than whether or not veganism is compatible with Buddhism in general (apart from some Chinese texts writen some time prior to the Tang dynasty stuck in the mouth of the Buddha).


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 19th, 2011 at 12:03 AM
Title: the great vegetarian debate
Content:
Namdrol said:
The answer to your question, then, is no.

David N. Snyder said:
Okay, thanks. Then I guess there is no real way one could be a 'devout' Jain and / or 100% ahimsa.

I suppose the only real way might be to have your own vegetable garden with subsistence farming, with no sprays of any kind, but of course, not too practical, especially for urban dwellers.


Malcolm wrote:
Avihimsa has to do with one's intention not to harm others, and very little to do with one's actions, apart from directly desisting in harming others.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 18th, 2011 at 11:49 PM
Title: Re: obstacles to the spread of Veganism + their solutions
Content:
Adamantine said:
The only thing that makes meat consumption worse in this regard is if the
livestock are eating industrially produced agriculture, then it's the bug deaths
on top of the animal deaths...

David N. Snyder said:
Which is where 74% of all meat comes from, so therefore, in most cases, meat does result in the bugs death plus the animal killings. Whereas a vegetarian diet results in just the bugs death.

What about organic? I am sure that there will never be no deaths of any kind, but wouldn't organic vegetarian farming result in even far fewer deaths? (compared to conventional vegetarian/vegan and conventional omnivore diets)

Malcolm wrote:
Not large scale organic farming. The primary difference is the type of pesticides:

ORGANIC PESTICIDES VERSUS SYNTHETIC PESTICIDES

Clearly, the less we impact our environment, the better off we all are. Organic farming practices have greatly advanced the use of non-chemical means to control pests, as mentioned earlier.
Unfortunately, these non-chemical methods do not always provide enough protection, and it's necessary to use chemical pesticides. How do organic pesticides compare with conventional pesticides?

A recent study compared the effectiveness of a rotenone-pyrethrin mixture versus a synthetic pesticide, imidan. Rotenone and pyrethrin are two common organic pesticides; imidan is considered a "soft" synthetic pesticide (i.e., designed to have a brief lifetime after application, and other traits that minimize unwanted effects). It was found that up to 7 applications of the rotenone- pyrethrin mixture were required to obtain the level of protection provided by 2 applications of imidan.

It seems unlikely that 7 applications of rotenone and pyrethrin are really better for the environment than 2 applications of imidan, especially when rotenone is extremely toxic to fish and other aquatic life.

It should be noted, however, that we don't know for certain which system is more harmful. This is because we do not look at organic pesticides the same way that we look at conventional pesticides. We don't know how long these organic pesticides persist in the environment, or the full extent of their effects.

When you look at lists of pesticides allowed in organic agriculture, you find warnings such as, "Use with caution. The toxicological effects of [organic pesticide X] are largely unknown," or "Its persistence in the soil is unknown." Again, researchers haven't bothered to study the effects of organic pesticides because it is assumed that "natural" chemicals are automatically safe.
http://www.ocf.berkeley.edu/~lhom/organictext.html " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


The answer to your question, then, is no.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 18th, 2011 at 11:10 PM
Title: Re: Introducing the practice of Daimoku to friends and relatives
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Chanting Nam-myoho-renge-kyo during the physical union of man and woman is indeed what is called “earthly desires are enlightenment,” and “the sufferings of birth and death are nirvana.”

I wonder if this applies to chanting Nam-myoho-renge-kyo while watching porn.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 18th, 2011 at 10:13 PM
Title: Re: The Rinpoche's Zen
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
The following is not Dzogchen.


Astus said:
"The awakening has nothing to do with our background. It has nothing to do with whether we have been meditating for a long time or not. It has nothing to do with meeting impressive teachers or gurus. It is simply dependent on whether or not we are open to it."
(No Self, No Problem, p. 4)

"In the same way, when we pay attention to our breath, body sensations, and to the awareness that arises, then all the illusions, suffering, confusion, sorrow, and personal issues, all of this begins to dissipate. We see that all of these experiences are born of delusion. This is the sense of “I.” “I am real. I am truly existent.” Everything is gone except this “I,” this sense of self. Then, when we continue meditating, the sense of self also goes away. When we just keep meditating, when we just remain in that present awareness and observe, then the self dissolves too. When the self dissolves there is just pure awareness. When the self completely collapses, there is this inexpressible, simple yet profound and ecstatic, compassionate awareness. Nobody is there. “I” is completely nonexistent in that place. There is no separation between samsara, bad circumstances, and nirvana, good circumstances, and there is nobody pursuing the path or chasing after enlightenment. In that moment we realize the essence of the Buddha’s teaching."
(p. 41)

"Suddenly, when we stop producing concepts and ideas, when we stop feeding that illusory reality, when we stop associating with ego, it is very simple. It is simple to stop associating with ego. However there are no twelve step programs in transcendent wisdom. There is only the one-step program and that is to not associate with the ego. The moment we stop associating with ego it just immediately ceases right there."
(p. 128)


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 18th, 2011 at 9:45 PM
Title: Re: obstacles to the spread of Veganism + their solutions
Content:


Sönam said:
does your answer includes my quote too ?

Sönam

Malcolm wrote:
Of course, since it refers to meat that is cornfed in feed lots.

So called grass-fed meat does not require these numbers. For example, there is a local beef farm near to me. They graze all of their cattle. They do not use corn. Since their cattle is all 100 percent grass fed, antibiotic and hormone free, numbers like the ones above do not apply. But these kinds of farms are

The water of use of cattle depends on the region and intensity of the production of meat. In dry regions, like the American West, what range land there is is so over grazed that the cattle need to be fattened for market. Large-scale cattle ranching is not only environmentally damaging in terms of grain inputs required to fatten cattle, in dry ranges it is very damaging to the environment such as soil, water, and so on in terms of erosion, etc., from cattle grazing.

Moreover as we know, cattle did not evolove to eat corn. It is bad for them.

And let's not even get started with hog farming -- that is an environmental nightmare, like chicken farming and so on.

Look, no one is arguing that there are no deep ethical and environmental issues with the production of meat. Of course there are. In an ideal world, no one would eat meat. But in an ideal world, no would suffer, experiencing birth, illness, aging and death either.

What is at issue is the assertion that just because one eats meat one necessarily has less compassion, one is taking on the karma of harming sentient beings, and so on. That assertion does not stand up to reasoning. The primary argument is that because someone purchases meat to eat that they are culpable in harming animals in the same manner as a butcher through economic participation on the meat industry. Well, from the viewpoint of how things are interconnected, since the meat industry is only possible because of oil and trucking and large supermarkets, if someone buys vegetables from a supermarket that sells meat, they are just as culpable as someone who buys meat. Why? Because there is no time that non-Buddhist people will voluntarily cease buying meat that is supplied to them. if someone participates in the economy of food production they are necessarily participating in the economy of meat production unless they have the option to eschew all contact with large supermarket chains for all their fruit and vegetable needs. The vast majority of people don't. People may even try to insulate themselves with a chain of vegan markets for example, but those markets will have to buy their food from suppliers, etc. So my point is that the economics of food production make it really impossible to say "This dollar that I am spending will not support animal husbandry in any way, shape or form".

Also, there is a lack of equanimity concerning suffering in the shrill arguments of radical vegan crew, frequent excuses about why it is permissible for pesticides to be used while slaughter is not permissable, and so on. Suffering is suffering, all of samsara is suffering down to the smallest atom.

The issue of meat-eating is at best a distraction from what is really important i.e. practice. Not eating meat does not make someone a better pracitioner, eating meat does not make one a worse practitioner. Not eating meat does not necessarily make someone more compassionate, eating meat does not necessarily make someone less compassionate.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 18th, 2011 at 8:25 PM
Title: Re: Rinchen Terzod & Dudjom Tersar indexes
Content:
username said:
The obvious reason behind the reply was that other major complimentary parts of Dudjom Tersar were yet to come.


Malcolm wrote:
No, that does not make sense. The RT only contains representative transmissions from all the major terma cycles. For example, there are texts in DL's collection of termas which come from the original Dudjom, Khathog Duddul Dorje which are present in the RT, but none of DL's own termas. But when the whole Dudjom tersar is given, and not merely Dudjom Tersar i.e. Dudjom Rinpoche's pure vision cycles, it also includes the transmissions from Duddul Dorje, Dudjom Lingpa, and Dudjom RInpoche.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 18th, 2011 at 8:15 PM
Title: Re: obstacles to the spread of Veganism + their solutions
Content:
LastLegend said:
But clearly there is a difference between directly killing animals for consumption and killing animals indirectly through farming and such.

Malcolm wrote:
Obviously the Buddha felt that both were on par since digging in the ground and killing animals are both in the list of vows to be confessed.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 18th, 2011 at 8:01 PM
Title: Re: obstacles to the spread of Veganism + their solutions
Content:
Sönam said:
Aside for sentimental or ethic reasons there is a good reason today not to eat meat ... it cost 100 times more water for 1kg meat than for 1kg cereals.
And lake of water is the coming disease.

Sönam

Huseng said:
About 14kg of grains to produce 1kg of beef.


Malcolm wrote:
This applies only to feedlot beef.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 18th, 2011 at 10:34 AM
Title: Re: obstacles to the spread of Veganism + their solutions
Content:
LastLegend said:
Animals are meant to be in the wild.

Malcolm wrote:
Not domesticated animals. Hence the term "domesticated".


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 18th, 2011 at 10:28 AM
Title: Re: Best academic studies on (tibetan) buddhism?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Most Interesting: Dan Martin
Most Brilliant: Matthew Kapstein


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 18th, 2011 at 4:41 AM
Title: Re: obstacles to the spread of Veganism + their solutions
Content:
LastLegend said:
I would add some more thoughts to the discussion of this topic.

In US, animals are institutionally raised in cages since they are young. Basically they stay in prison for the rest of their lives until the day they are killed. The 3 poisons on their minds also create poisons in their bodies. For larger animals such as cows and pigs, there are special ways to kill to get most if not all the blood out of their tissues so that we can have fresh meats. So I will not go into details of how they are killed. But you can do some research for yourself.


Malcolm wrote:
Yup. All suffering of suffering. Very sad. So is the sufferig of insects posioned with nerve agents in soyfields. Half a million tons of pesticides are used every year in the US alone.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 18th, 2011 at 4:29 AM
Title: Re: Rinchen Terzod & Dudjom Tersar indexes
Content:
ngodrup said:
...but it may
explain what DL meant when he said DT is there
when RTD is given.

Malcolm wrote:
Apparently Kongtrul and Khyentse extended in invitation to DL to include his termas in the RT -- he refused, but said that wherever the RT spread, DT wold spread there too.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 18th, 2011 at 3:55 AM
Title: Re: obstacles to the spread of Veganism + their solutions
Content:
Huseng said:
They also developed a tradition of releasing animals ( fang sheng 放生), where turtles, birds and other beings slated to become someone's dinner were purchased and released into the wild.

Malcolm wrote:
I am reminded of those people who made their living trapping fish for release by Buddhists in Japan.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 18th, 2011 at 3:50 AM
Title: Re: obstacles to the spread of Veganism + their solutions
Content:
Namdrol said:
I like all food as long as it is cooked well and prepared in a healthy fashion. Basically, food is medicine.

N

Huseng said:
If my memory serves me I recall on E Sangha you referred to meat eating as "sinful" without specifying any caveats. Have you changed your mind since then? I just recall you being somewhat forward in your former discussions concerning meat consumptions, where you called meat eating sinful.

Malcolm wrote:
What I said was that meat is slightly non-virtuous because in inevitably comes from the suffering of some animal, for example, like silk.

I have always found it a little hilarious that vegetarian Buddhists are busy swathing their statues in silk brocades while casting scathing glances at meat-eaters.

I never tried to convince you or anyone in this conversation that slaughtering animals was ok, and so on. It isn't. But we cannot have a narrow view that specifies this part of the economy is ok, and this part isn't. It is all tied together.

I think most of us recognize that the circumstances around the production of meast are rooted in non-virtue even if that karma does not necessarily transfer to everyone who eats meat.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 18th, 2011 at 3:33 AM
Title: Re: obstacles to the spread of Veganism + their solutions
Content:
LastLegend said:
Those who walk the path of Bodhisattva cannot eat meats. Bodhisattvas don't even tremble on green grass, why do they use meats of sentient beings for food? Monks are the ones who honor Bodhisattva precepts, and they should not eat meats. Vietnamese and Chinese monks are famous for being vegan.

We laymen can stick to 3 conditions of purity. But we can do better if we want to.


Namdrol said:
I never used the meat of sentient beings. I always make sure when I eat meat, that no sentient being inhabits the steak I am eating. Why? Because harming sentient beings is wrong. But meat is inert, like grass. It can't be harmed.

N

LastLegend said:
You like the taste of meats more than vegetarian food?


Malcolm wrote:
I like all food as long as it is cooked well and prepared in a healthy fashion. Basically, food is medicine.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 18th, 2011 at 3:23 AM
Title: Re: obstacles to the spread of Veganism + their solutions
Content:
LastLegend said:
Those who walk the path of Bodhisattva cannot eat meats. Bodhisattvas don't even tremble on green grass, why do they use meats of sentient beings for food? Monks are the ones who honor Bodhisattva precepts, and they should not eat meats. Vietnamese and Chinese monks are famous for being vegan.

We laymen can stick to 3 conditions of purity. But we can do better if we want to.


Malcolm wrote:
I never used the meat of sentient beings. I always make sure when I eat meat, that no sentient being inhabits the steak I am eating. Why? Because harming sentient beings is wrong. But meat is inert, like grass. It can't be harmed.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 18th, 2011 at 3:21 AM
Title: Re: obstacles to the spread of Veganism + their solutions
Content:


Huseng said:
I'll leave it to vegan parents to demonstrate otherwise. You can have healthy kids raised on a vegan diet.

Malcolm wrote:
I know many people who were raised on such diets -- they all have messed up teeth, had strange fevers when they hit puberty, and other developmental health issues.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 18th, 2011 at 3:19 AM
Title: Re: obstacles to the spread of Veganism + their solutions
Content:


Huseng said:
Um, no. I've proven that veganism existed in Buddhist cultures in East Asia. They still do. I can say this both as a scholar of Buddhism trained in Japan and with a real life perspective. I kid you not I have been to monasteries full of hundreds of nuns and a few dozen monks where no animal products are served up in the dining hall, and the arhat sandals on the feet of nuns and monks are not made of leather. I can also tell you that the issue of meat, eggs and dairy have been discussed in Chinese Buddhist literature both in ancient times and in present times, hence making it a Buddhist issue.

Malcolm wrote:
A Chinese Buddhist issue, apparently with no relevance to more universal sphere of Mahāyāna which existed in Central Asia, Tibet, India, Cambodia,Thailand, and so on. This effectively limits its relevance to Chinese and Japanese Buddhists. But in Japan, everyone now eats meat, more or less.

Don't get me wrong -- I am not against vegetrianism -- though as a doctor of Tibetan Medicine I have met lot of vegan people whose ailments were quickly eliminated  by a small amount of meat (incidentally, such a phenomena is regularly reported in Yoga magazines as well). Plus, there is the factor of milk intolerance. Then there is Chinese bias against Tibetans and other dairy-consuming people on the Western frontier of China, and so on. In the end the Chinese Buddhist prohibition against dairy and cheese is more likely to be a result of cultural bias than real concern for animals since they still used animal labor for agricultural production.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 18th, 2011 at 3:07 AM
Title: Re: obstacles to the spread of Veganism + their solutions
Content:


Huseng said:
Plenty of well known monks of the past lived to ripe old ages, and their communities weren't dying off due to malnutrition.

Malcolm wrote:
They were undoubtedly raised on meat. It is well know that animal protein is more important in the diets of growing children then it is in the diets of adults.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 18th, 2011 at 2:33 AM
Title: Re: obstacles to the spread of Veganism + their solutions
Content:


Huseng said:
You should reread our discussion -- I've proven that veganism existed in Buddhist cultures in East Asia. It is a Buddhist issue, at least in this corner of the continent.

Malcolm wrote:
What you did not prove is that Veganism was grounded in Indian Mahāyāna (whose sutras you originally cited). All you proved was that some Chinese Buddhist wrote texts to support their bias against Indian dietary preferences. But that does not constitute sutrayāna support for a vegan diet. And further, in terms of Indian Buddhism, all we learned is that there is no consensus about what the Mahāyāna prohibitions against meat eating meant amongst Mahāyāna authors. So in the end you have failed to prove anything. And this is a good thing, since there is no liberation through dietary choices.

But if you harm something directly, with intention to harm, then this might interfere with your liberation, and that we have no need to establish, because it is well known.

On the contrary, what I have proven is that your thesis "All consumers or users of meat or any other animal product are by definition harmers of sentient beings" is outright false, when considered from a Buddhist perspective.
N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 18th, 2011 at 1:50 AM
Title: Re: obstacles to the spread of Veganism + their solutions
Content:
Huseng said:
Indian Buddhism is not the be-all and end-all judge of what constitutes Buddhadharma.

Malcolm wrote:
Of course it is. It is the bellweather by which all must be judged. But that is just my opinion. It is the standard by which intra-buddhist communication must occur. I don't try to convince others of things that are particular to Vajrayāna or Tibetan schools. Likewise, it makes no sense to try to convince non-Sino-Japanese Buddhists of doctrines peculiar to Sino-Japanese Buddhism. For example, eschewing dairy.

Thus, Indian Buddhism is the basic standard.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 18th, 2011 at 1:47 AM
Title: Re: obstacles to the spread of Veganism + their solutions
Content:
Huseng said:
Since most of the sutras that teach strict vegetarianism are also tathagatagarbha sutras, this obviously means that strict proclamations made about meat eating need interpretation since you cannot have an unconditioned Buddhanature on the one hand, and one that can be destroyed on the other.
Again it is a figurative use of speech. Icchantikas are beings whose behaviour is contrary to the path and/or lack any aspirations for liberation.

Malcolm wrote:
According to you, eating meat "is contrary to the path", thus those who eat meat are icchanitkas. Good thing Madhyamaka rejects this Yogacara and Tathagatagarbha sutra idea completely.



Huseng said:
No, it is the same as for shravakas. Bodhisattvas should avoid harming sentient beings where possible.
Hence bodhisattvas should avoid eating meat and contributing to the economy behind slaughter.

Malcolm wrote:
Only if shravakas need to avoid eating meat, and they do not, apart from specific conditions we have discussed.



Huseng said:
I disagree. The emphasis is on the craving for meat and consumption of it. It is worse if you kill it and eat it rather than just purchasing it and consuming it of course.

Malcolm wrote:
The notion is that eating meat causes one be more liable to harm others. But the context of the sutra has to be considered as well as the audience. In this case, non-Buddhist lay people since Buddhist monks and lay people are already prohibeted from killing animals for food.

Huseng said:
Bhavya was an Indian master. He was certainly quite aware of the issues here since he address this in his Tarkajvala in detail. He obviously thought the reasoning of the advocates of an absolute prohibition of meat eating were mistaken and unreasonable, and that their arguments did not actually adress the true intent of the Mahāyāna sutras that seem to say meat eating is never acceptable.
And Daoxuan was a Chinese master with plenty of what was for him canonical citations and reasonings to encourage his peers and laypersons to refrain from eating meat.

Malcolm wrote:
An Indian master interpreting an Indian text or doctrine will always be preferable to the interpretation of Tibetans, Chinese, and so on. Of course, there are differing opinions. Shantideva was pretty firmly against eating meat. My point is that these texts are not slam dunks "Oh, this is our book, this is what it says, therefore, this is what we have to do".


Huseng said:
These can be safely considered apocryphal since Indians would never dream of not conusming milk products.
Is a Chinese "apocryphal" text of less value than an Indian "apocryphal" text? From an academic point of view any Mahāyāna text no matter where it was penned is apocryphal.

Malcolm wrote:
Chinese sutras reflected the concerns of Chinese authors. If you go down this route, all you will wind up with is the conclusion that different communities of monks in different places wrote different texts reflecting different concerns. You then are left with the conclusion that one can only rely on one's own reasoning to decide what is correct and not correct and that there is no solid basis in citing sutras since the authority of sutra is undermined. This is actually my point, if you want to be a Vegan, go ahead. But there is no Buddhist justification for this.


Huseng said:
If you drive a car you are supporting the economy of meat production which depends upon oil from top to bottom. No oil, no huge meat industry. And that is just a fact. In fact if you shop at any market, you are supporting the meat industry, if you buy grain, you are supporting producers of grain which is fed to animals in feedlots. It is impossible to truly tease the economy of food production apart and say "If I buy this, I am not supporting that". Even if you buy organic cotton, pesticides are used in the production of that cotton, pesticides which are less toxic to humans, but no less toxic to bugs. If you decide to buy only clothes made of artificial fibers, you are supporting the oil industry which is supporting the this industry and that industry.
Those are all secondary to the actual production of a meat. If a city was to reduce meat consumption, the shops within it would order less meat from producers who in turn would slaughter less animals because there would be less demand for their product.

Malcolm wrote:
No, it is primary. Where this exist, that exists, where this does not exist, that does not exist -- basic dependent origination. Anyway, you are dreaming -- we live in a supply side economy, not a demand economy. There is demand precisely because there is supply.


Huseng said:
If you want to be a Vegan, fine, no problem -- but there is little or no justification for it from a Buddhist point of view.
From your Buddhist point of view. Things are different in the East Asian realm of Buddhism. We have texts and traditions which clearly encourage practitioners to avoid meat, and beyond that eggs and dairy as well.

Malcolm wrote:
And Chinese people do not have a deeply ingrained culture of eating everything that moves? Japanese people have not lived off of fish and other seafood for millenia? Etc.




Huseng said:
In fact all the Indian sutras encourage use of dairy, the very same ones that reject the consumption of meat.
Personally I'm not staunchly against dairy provided it is taken from a well treated animal. However, given that in the modern day so much of our dairy is produced under horrific conditions I have all the reason to boycott such products. I avoid dairy because I don't care to directly support such industries. Japan does not have a good record when it comes to animal welfare. The farmer in rural Bihar on the other hand with his herd of cattle grazing in lush green fields is not a big deal, but industrial milk production is.

Malcolm wrote:
I don't consume industrial dairy, actually.


Huseng said:
So therefore, the Vegan diet, even by strict vegetarian standards, is not supported in Buddhist sutras of Indian provenance.
Like I said in East Asia it is different. Buddhas and Bodhisattvas were and do work in a different cultural environment. If the result has been less animals suffering, then such teachings encouraging what we would call veganism in English, then all the better. That is Saddharma.


Malcolm wrote:
The idea that East Asia was some Vegan paradise is utter bollocks, as per above.




Huseng said:
In the end, Veganism is merely a political salve for the consciences of granola-munching, yoga-studio going, petty bourgeois (as well as some Buddhists) in first-world countries that are completely out of touch with the realities of how things are in places like Haiti, Appalachia (where the poorest Americans live) and Golok, for example where every calory counts.
This is a bit harsh and inconsiderate of the many vegans in the world, many of whom do not fit into such a character type.

Malcolm wrote:
Yup, well, I think Vegans are harsh, unkind, shrill and elitist, as well as dietarily neurotic.




Huseng said:
In other words, without the abundant waste of first-world nations, a Vegan diet is not even possible.
Nonsense. It was possible in pre-modern times, it is possible now.

Malcolm wrote:
You have no evidence of any vast community of Vegan peoples living anywhere. The fact is that animal protein in some form or another has been a substantial portion of the diet every premodern society we can think of (and for good reason, it has more energy than grain).



Huseng said:
You might argue "The Chinese Buddhists have been doing this for centuries" well, my reply to that is that people in Chinese Buddhist monasteries are not paid to work in rice paddies (they are forbidden to) they are paid to pray and be vinayadharas.
First of all, it wasn't just China. Japan, Korea and Vietnam all had Buddhists living vegan lifestyles, both for religious convictions and economic reasons.

Malcolm wrote:
They could afford to support minority populations in elitist institutions.



Huseng said:
In pre-modern Japan for example there simply was no dairy. I don't know about eggs, but I imagine with the sentiments expressed in Buddhist texts it would have been minimal given that bodhisattva aspirants are forbidden from keeping both animals and slaves. Ruling all meat and fish, people would have been vegan. They lived just fine, both Buddhist layman and monk alike.

Malcolm wrote:
Sorry, but Japanese people ate fish and other sea food and have done so for millenia -- and prior to the introduction of Buddhism ate many other kinds of animals as witnessed by Buddhist imperial edicts. And for example, Jodo Sinshu permits meat eating and so on.



Huseng said:
They are a supported community and their fortunes and ability to maintain the life style you admire and emulate depends completely on the wealth of the supporting population.
Any monastic population, even the meat eating ones, rely on the generosity of a supporting population.

Malcolm wrote:
Not always, in Tibet, monasteries were landed estates that produced their own grain and so on. Monasteries as farms were also common in India, according to scandalized reports about Mahayana monks met by Chinese pilgrims. Basically, the Chinese "proto-vegans" were fanatic converts.


Huseng said:
Likewise, the Vegan lifestyle depends on the choices and abundance of the very industrial agricultural system you are criticizing. Without that system, without the ability to get fresh vegetables, etc. year round, the Vegan diet is impossible. The Vegan diet is primarily an urban diet for a wealthy elite (like monks in a monastery) who can afford fresh vegetables, fruit, nuts, and grain 365 days a year (and good medical care when their health crashes from a bad diet).
None of this is true. Even in pre-modern times vegetarian populations generally got by the winters without dying off from malnutrition. This was long before refrigeration and industrial food production. Pickles, grains, dried fruits, field vegetables, noodles, teas and various other food products provided sufficient nutrition then, just as they would now.

Malcolm wrote:
You really need to read ancient medical texts from India, China, and so on. Then you will understand that this is pretty much of a fantasy.


Huseng said:
Pre-modern Buddhist communities in East Asia were effectively vegan and they existed for many centuries before any industrial infrastructure was developed.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, who lived off of the labor of meat-eating laity.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 18th, 2011 at 12:58 AM
Title: Re: obstacles to the spread of Veganism + their solutions
Content:
Huseng said:
I've been using scriptural citations from canonical Buddhist texts. This is only appropriate and desirable on a Buddhist forum.

Malcolm wrote:
Reasoning is also required, and as we have seen, there are no Indian scriptures that will support a Vegan read since honey, milk, butter, cream and so on are all on the acceptable list of foods, even by strict vegetarian read of the sutras.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 17th, 2011 at 10:44 PM
Title: Re: Tibetan monk sets himself on fire in China
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Hòa thượng[a] Thích Quảng Đức ( /tɪtʃ kwɒŋ dʊk/ tich kwong duuk; Vietnamese pronunciation: [tʰɪ̌c kwãːŋ ɗɨ̌k]; Saigon: [tʰɪ̌t kwɐ̂ːŋ ɗɨ̌k] ( listen); Chữ Nôm:釋廣德; 1897 – 11 June 1963), born Lâm Văn Tức, was a Vietnamese Mahayana Buddhist monk who burned himself to death at a busy Saigon road intersection on 11 June 1963. Thích Quảng Đức was protesting against the persecution of Buddhists by South Vietnam's Ngô Đình Diệm administration. Photos of his self-immolation were circulated widely across the world and brought attention to the policies of the Diệm regime. Malcolm Browne won a Pulitzer Prize for his renowned photograph of the monk's death. After his death, his body was re-cremated, but his heart remained intact.[1][2] This was interpreted as a symbol of compassion and led Buddhists to revere him as a bodhisattva, heightening the impact of his death on the public psyche.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 17th, 2011 at 9:51 PM
Title: Re: Rinchen Terzod & Dudjom Tersar indexes
Content:
vajraheart said:
Hi,
Does anyone know if the Dudjom Tersar is contained in the Rinchen Terzod ?
Also looking for the complete indexes of both.

Thank you,
Sumir

Malcolm wrote:
No -- Dudjom Tersar is not in Rinchen Terzö. The complete indexs to both can be found at tbrc.org in the nyingma section

http://www.tbrc.org/#library_work-O3JW110253JW11050 " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 17th, 2011 at 9:50 PM
Title: Re: obstacles to the spread of Veganism + their solutions
Content:


rory said:
If you eat meat that's what you personally are causing.

Malcolm wrote:
No, that is a false equivalence, as I have already shown.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 17th, 2011 at 9:43 PM
Title: Re: obstacles to the spread of Veganism + their solutions
Content:
Namdrol said:
The crux of my arguments against eating meat were similar to Huseng's environmental, cruelty of treatment of animals, and so on. I still think those arguments are a valid reason for not supporting industrial agriculture in general -- which I endeavor not to do. I agree with Huseng that as Buddhists we need to be mindful of what is harmful. But I do not buy the argument that eating meat ipso facto makes on responsible for harming animals. That extreme was rejected by the Buddha and I also reject it based on reasoning.

Huseng said:
Such a teaching was given to the śrāvakas, not the bodhisattvas. As Daoxuan in the 7th century pointed out, the prohibitions against eating meat that is impure (having it killed for you, etc...), is an indication that the spirit of the teaching is to eventually forbid the consumption of meat when the disciples are suitable vessels to receive such a teaching.

Malcolm wrote:
Well, as we can see, there were Mahāyāna authors in India such as Bhavya who understood the Mahāyāna prohibitions against eating meat differently than the way you are portraying it. In his commentary he mentions by name these sutras:Hastikakṣya mahāyāna sūtra, Mahāmegha, Lanka, Āryāṅgulimālīya-mahāyāna-sūtra, etc.

To refute the literal interpretation of these sūtras, which he considers interpretable, he runs through the impurity argument advanced by some who assert that because the meat comes from semen and blood, it produces impurities of the body in greater excess. Bhavya points out that also milk and butter come from the bodies of animals, hence they too should produce more impurities.

He then addresses the argument consuming meat makes one a harmer of beings by necessity. As I said, he reduces the argument to whether one directly harms a being as follows "if one eats meat after creating suffering for a creature's body, it will possess a fault, but since there is no mind in the flesh of a creature's body at the time its meat is eaten, if no suffering arises where is the sin to be seen? Just as there is not the slightest suffering to a creature when one uses mother of pearl, bezoars of fish and oxen, peacock feathers, ox tails, teeth, bones, hide and so on, just as there is no harm what so ever when using fruit, water, and so on, in the same way there at the time of eating meat there is no fault because one is not engaging in harming. If there were harm, then also cremating a corpse would be sinful."


Huseng said:
The śrāvakas seek arhatship, in which case unconditional concern for all sentient beings is not a major concern. The whole point of such a spiritual pursuit is liberation for oneself, not to free all beings from suffering.

Malcolm wrote:
Minds cannot be harmed, only bodies. And Avihimsa is a concern for all Buddhists. But you cannot harm something that is not alive and has no feelings.



Huseng said:
According to numerous Mahāyāna texts meat eating was forbidden by a Buddha (not necessarily Śākyamuni) as it destroys the seed of buddhahood, among other issues.

Malcolm wrote:
If "the seed of Buddhahood" could be destroyed, then you are admitting there is a class of persons called icchantika. You don't really want to do that, do you? Not only that, you are admitting that Buddhanature is something conditioned, subject to impermanence. Since most of the sutras that teach strict vegetarianism are also tathagatagarbha sutras, this obviously means that strict proclamations made about meat eating need interpretation since you cannot have an unconditioned Buddhanature on the one hand, and one that can be destroyed on the other.


Huseng said:
This makes sense given that a bodhisattva should as much as possible avoid creating the causes and conditions for the intentional slaughter of animals.

Malcolm wrote:
No, it is the same as for shravakas. Bodhisattvas should avoid harming sentient beings where possible.


Huseng said:
If you purchase meat then you are supporting the causes and conditions for the intentional slaughter of animals. Agriculture harms living beings, too, but unless pesticides are specifically applied to the crop, this killing is usually not intentional.

Malcolm wrote:
Organic agriculture uses pesticides, they are simply less toxic to people than industrial pesticides -- but no less toxic to insects. And you just made an argument for the compassion of shravakas -- bhikṣus are probihited from a) digging in the ground since it harms animals and b) traveling during the rains seaons because of harming small creatures. But they are not prohibeted from eating meat as long as it is pure in three ways. Why? Because the criteria of what is permitted and what is not permitted is directly related to personally harming sentient beings.



Huseng said:
Just as driving a car one hopefully does not have the intention of driving into and over living beings like insects.




Malcolm wrote:
The following quote from the Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra merely reinforces Bhavya's point:

“Mahāmati! I see that because of the habits of sentient beings from the beginningless past to eat meat, they crave the flavour of meat and mutually kill and harm one another.

Clearly the intent is encourage lay people not to butcher meat personally.

Huseng said:
However, I'm sure you're well aware of these arguments. Whether you eat meat or not is up to you. I'm not commanding anyone here to give up meat, but providing my own opinion and citations of sūtra which I rely on.

Malcolm wrote:
Bhavya was an Indian master. He was certainly quite aware of the issues here since he address this in his Tarkajvala in detail. He obviously thought the reasoning of the advocates of an absolute prohibition of meat eating were mistaken and unreasonable, and that their arguments did not actually adress the true intent of the Mahāyāna sutras that seem to say meat eating is never acceptable.


Huseng said:
There are sūtra references in the Mahāyāna canon, at least in East Asia, which prohibit the consumption of even eggs and milk.

Malcolm wrote:
These can be safely considered apocryphal since Indians would never dream of not conusming milk products.

Huseng said:
Again, it is up to the individual. Even if you pay no karmic debt for consuming meat, by purchasing it you're supporting the economy of meat production, which requires animals to be slaughtered for profit.

Malcolm wrote:
If you drive a car you are supporting the economy of meat production which depends upon oil from top to bottom. No oil, no huge meat industry. And that is just a fact. In fact if you shop at any market, you are supporting the meat industry, if you buy grain, you are supporting producers of grain which is fed to animals in feedlots. It is impossible to truly tease the economy of food production apart and say "If I buy this, I am not supporting that". Even if you buy organic cotton, pesticides are used in the production of that cotton, pesticides which are less toxic to humans, but no less toxic to bugs. If you decide to buy only clothes made of artificial fibers, you are supporting the oil industry which is supporting the this industry and that industry.

If your criteria (and it is) is to cease using any product that harms any creature anywhere, this is impossible Even if you think there is precedent for this in a few Mahāyāna sutras, the sutras you have chosen are not sutras that are only to be read one way or can only be read one way, as Bhavya shows.

If you want to be a Vegan, fine, no problem -- but there is little or no justification for it from a Buddhist point of view. In fact all the Indian sutras encourage use of dairy, the very same ones that reject the consumption of meat. So therefore, the Vegan diet, even by strict vegetarian standards, is not supported in Buddhist sutras of Indian provenance. This being the case, if you try to justify it (a Vegan diet) on the basis of Buddhist sutras you will wind up trapping yourself in a morass of contradictions -- for example, excusing agriculture and travelling during the rains season when it is forbidden to Buddhist monks, but insisting that no one should eat meat even through it is permitted for shravakas and those who follow secret mantra.

If you want to be a Vegan, you can only "justify" it on purely secular grounds, and even then, not very adequately.

If there is no karmic debt connected with eating meat (that satisfies the criteria that one was not connected with inflicting harm on the animal), as you admit, then one can, as a Buddhist, eat meat and still engage in decisions and actions which limit one's personal participation in industrial agriculture without there being any contradiction at all.

In the end, Veganism is merely a political salve for the consciences of granola-munching, yoga-studio going, petty bourgeois (as well as some Buddhists) in first-world countries that are completely out of touch with the realities of how things are in places like Haiti, Appalachia (where the poorest Americans live) and Golok, for example where every calory counts. In other words, without the abundant waste of first-world nations, a Vegan diet is not even possible. You might argue "The Chinese Buddhists have been doing this for centuries" well, my reply to that is that people in Chinese Buddhist monasteries are not paid to work in rice paddies (they are forbidden to) they are paid to pray and be vinayadharas. They are a supported community and their fortunes and ability to maintain the life style you admire and emulate depends completely on the wealth of the supporting population.

Likewise, the Vegan lifestyle depends on the choices and abundance of the very industrial agricultural system you are criticizing. Without that system, without the ability to get fresh vegetables, etc. year round, the Vegan diet is impossible. The Vegan diet is primarily an urban diet for a wealthy elite (like monks in a monastery) who can afford fresh vegetables, fruit, nuts, and grain 365 days a year (and good medical care when their health crashes from a bad diet). If and when the industrial infrastructure that supportsthe present system of agricultural production collapses (and it will), there won't be any more Vegan diets.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 17th, 2011 at 9:16 AM
Title: Re: Rocky Zen
Content:
LastLegend said:
If Dozgchen teachings direct at seeing the nature of the mind, then it is Zen just like any other forms of Mahayana..

Namdrol said:
If it were just that, than yes.

LastLegend said:
Just that...and different methods.

Malcolm wrote:
No. But you should really visit with a Dzogchen master who can explain the differences to you.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 17th, 2011 at 9:03 AM
Title: Re: Rocky Zen
Content:
LastLegend said:
If Dozgchen teachings direct at seeing the nature of the mind, then it is Zen just like any other forms of Mahayana..

Malcolm wrote:
If it were just that, than yes.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 17th, 2011 at 6:10 AM
Title: Re: Renunciation Impossible?
Content:
Huseng said:
In 845 Wuzong ordered a massive repression against both Manichaeism and Buddhism. He even ordered all Manichaen priests in the empire executed. Countless Buddhist monks and nuns were defrocked and Buddhist assets appropriated by the state.

Malcolm wrote:
He was a Taoist.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 17th, 2011 at 5:44 AM
Title: Re: Rocky Zen
Content:
Namdrol said:
Mind is not jñ̄āna.

Astus said:
You may have noticed by now that terminology is not universal even within Buddhism. Mind (xin 心 - citta) in Zen is used not just for the deluded but the enlightened mind too, while other words like consciousness (shi 識 - vijnana) or intelligence (yi 意 - manas) are not used in both senses.

Malcolm wrote:
Nevertheless, Dzogchen and Zen are different and are in no way equivalent, even when one is confronted by very similar statements. The difference in these statements hinges on very subtle points. You need to seek out a teacher who can explain them to you.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 17th, 2011 at 5:15 AM
Title: Re: Rocky Zen
Content:
Namdrol said:
Don't mistake poetry and rhetoric, like the above, for what is actual.

It simply means that all objects of knowledge are the display of one's own jñāna. It does not mean that rocks, trees, and such are independently awakened.

Astus said:
That's the same point as in Zen, Huayan, etc., it's just that they might call it dharmadhatu or mind or something similar.

Malcolm wrote:
Mind is not jñ̄āna.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 17th, 2011 at 5:00 AM
Title: Re: obstacles to the spread of Veganism + their solutions
Content:
Namdrol said:
And ironically, I know many vegans who have no qualms about killing mosquitoes. I myself have not killed a mosquito, or anything else, deliberately since I became a Buddhist 25 years ago.

David N. Snyder said:
N,

Going back to e-sangha days, were you not an omnivore, then vegetarian, then vegan, and now are you back to omnivore? Not placing any value judgment, just curious.


Malcolm wrote:
Never a  vegan. Even on e-Sangha I clarified that I thought vegan diet was too extreme. For the record, I also clarified on E-Sangha that if I needed to eat for reasons of personal health, I would. As it happens, I had a sugery and since I refused to eat meat for a year, it did not heal well. When I started consuming meat again, it healed up just fine.

The crux of my arguments against eating meat were similar to Huseng's environmental, cruelty of treatment of animals, and so on. I still think those arguments are a valid reason for not supporting industrial agriculture in general -- which I endeavor not to do. I agree with Huseng that as Buddhists we need to be mindful of what is harmful. But I do not buy the argument that eating meat ipso facto makes on responsible for harming animals. That extreme was rejected by the Buddha and I also reject it based on reasoning.

In the end, I think the essential message of all the teachings in Sutras about meat-eating eat boils down to intention and to mindfulness.

But the Vegan diet is not Buddhist either in intent or in application. It is just politics.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 17th, 2011 at 3:56 AM
Title: Re: 'Non-duality' and 'neutrality'
Content:
alpha said:
can you actually see something?
because mind can only see things other than itself.


Namdrol said:
The Yogacara Madhyamakas like Santarakshita accept that mind is self-knowing (svasaṃvedana).

N

Sherab said:
Prasangika Madhyamakas do not accept that there is svasaṃvedana relatively, let alone absolutely.  Makes me wonder how they explain how a mind knows that it knows.  Could you throw some light on this Namdrol?


Malcolm wrote:
recollection.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 17th, 2011 at 3:55 AM
Title: Re: Rocky Zen
Content:
Astus said:
"When self dissolves, everything is already awakened. Trees are awakened, rocks are awakened, birds are enlightened, and the clouds in the sky are enlightened. When the Buddha had this moment of complete realization, he discovered that this whole universe is already enlightened. More than that, he realized that every particle on the ground is enlightened. He saw that every particle is a Buddha paradise. In each particle there are billions and trillions of Buddha paradises. In each of those particles there are billions of buddhas residing. This whole universe becomes suddenly enlightened and perfect just as it is."
(Anam Thubten: No Self, No Problem, p. 46)


Malcolm wrote:
Don't mistake poetry and rhetoric, like the above, for what is actual.

It simply means that all objects of knowledge are the display of one's own jñāna. It does not mean that rocks, trees, and such are independently awakened.



N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 17th, 2011 at 3:36 AM
Title: Re: obstacles to the spread of Veganism + their solutions
Content:
rory said:
Huseng;
as you see people will argue, split hairs, accuse you of being 'preachy' to avoid their behavior. It's consciousness of wrong. Notice they won't argue with me. What can they say: I'm sorry I won't eat vegan food no matter how tasty & healthful it is & compassionate

Malcolm wrote:
A vegan diet is not inherently compassionate nor does it inherently make people compassionate. It also is not inherently tasty (that depends on the cook), it is not necessarily healthful (and can be quite the opposite in fact), that depends on one's constitution, age, and so on.

And quite frankly, I don't see vegans refusing to drive in cars and refusing to use public transportation because they are upset by the all the insects that are crushed and splatted by moving vehicles.

Veganism is definitely more in tune with Jain POV. But we are not Jains, we are Buddhists, and as such, Buddha rejected the extreme asceticism of Jains as well as criticisms of Devadatta.

Now, I have no problem with people choosing to be vegan, that is their choice. But I do have a problem with people asserting a vegan diet is eo ispo "Buddhist", because it is not.

Eating meast is not wrong providing you niether saw it killed, heard of being killed on your indivdual behalf, or was directly involved in killing it personally.

Harming sentient beings is wrong. Meat does not have sensation, it is inert. By the time meat has arrived on your plate, there is no mind there.

If your argument revolves around the process of harm caused to sentient beings by meat production, you must eo ipso apply the same argument to the production of rice, soy, and so on.

And ironically, I know many vegans who have no qualms about killing mosquitoes. I myself have not killed a mosquito, or anything else, deliberately since I became a Buddhist 25 years ago.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 17th, 2011 at 12:46 AM
Title: Re: obstacles to the spread of Veganism + their solutions
Content:
Namdrol said:
There is no Buddhist teaching that advocates harming others as Dharma.

David N. Snyder said:
What point is that about? Who advocates harming in the name of Dharma?

Malcolm wrote:
it's obvious that a butcher must cease engaging in harming others, in other words.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 17th, 2011 at 12:33 AM
Title: Re: obstacles to the spread of Veganism + their solutions
Content:


Namdrol said:
If butchers can't attain awakening,how then could Angulimala attain awakening?

N

David N. Snyder said:
If they change their ways, as Angulimala did, I suppose they could. But you didn't specify a "reformed butcher" who changed his ways. If you mean that, then yes, I suppose they could achieve awakening.

Malcolm wrote:
There is no Buddhist teaching that advocates harming others as Dharma.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 17th, 2011 at 12:26 AM
Title: Re: obstacles to the spread of Veganism + their solutions
Content:


Namdrol said:
Even butchers can achieve awakening.

David N. Snyder said:
Not according to the Buddha.

" Here, friend, as I was coming down from Mount Vulture Peak, I saw a skeleton moving through
the air. Vultures, crows, and hawks, following it in hot pursuit, were pecking at it between the
ribs, stabbing it, and tearing it apart, while it uttered cries of pain. 
That being, bhikkhus, used to be a cattle butcher in this same Rajagaha. Having been tormented
in hell for many years, for many hundreds of years, for many thousands of years, for many
hundreds of thousands of years as a result of that karma, as a residual result of that same
karma he is experiencing such a form of individual existence."
Samyutta Nikaya 19.1


Malcolm wrote:
If butchers can't attain awakening,how then could Angulimala attain awakening?

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 17th, 2011 at 12:20 AM
Title: Re: Taoist Origin of Tantric Energy System
Content:
peteralanroberts said:
Also interesting is the specific inner anatomy of the Thogal practices in Nyingma and Bon, with a very distinctive arrangement of nadis and chakras, identical in both traditions, but as far as I know with a mysterious origin, though central asia is often posited.

Malcolm wrote:
These nadis (aka ba men rva ) are simply poetic descriptions of the optical sheath which houses the optic nerve. In Tibetan Medicine, the terms " dar skud ", silk thread, is a common alternate term for nerves ( rtsa dkar po ). The fact that so called " ka ti " is identified as possessing the nature of fire is merely a reflection of the fact that in Ayruveda and Tibetan Medicine the eye posseses the alocaka pitta ( mthong byed mkhris pa ) and so on.

There is no need to posit a mysterious central asian origin. Their origin is found in the seventeen tantras. The understanding of the seventeen tantras is wedded with a Tibetan (and perhaps earlier Indian) understanding of human anatomy based on Dissection. Tibetans not only inheritied descriptions of dissections from Hellenic Medicine; unlike Indians and Chinese culture, they did not have the same taboo around cutting up bodies. The Tibetan doctors therefore had a better grasp of anatomy in general than Indian and Chinese doctors from an early period in the history of Tibetan Medicine.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 16th, 2011 at 11:53 PM
Title: Re: Thoughts
Content:
Namdrol said:
One of our contributors, Sten Anspell, did a thesis on klong sde that is very interesting.

Pero said:
Do you know where it's possible to obtain this? I could only find a Norwegian library that you can borrow from which doesn't help me obviously hehe.
Also, who is Sten Anspel here if it's not a secret (and assuming you meant contributors on Dharma Wheel)?


Malcolm wrote:
ratna


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 16th, 2011 at 11:32 PM
Title: Re: obstacles to the spread of Veganism + their solutions
Content:


Huseng said:
This isn't pre-modern times. My opposition to meat consumption is also on the grounds that it is now industrially produced, and not just a yak in the mountains licking the moss. Industrial meat production is horrible for the environment, so I would oppose it just as much as I would oppose nuclear power and hacking down the rain forest.

Malcolm wrote:
I oppose all Industrial agriculture. Not just meat. I agree with you about this. Industrial meat production is horrible for the environment, and that is why, in general, I do not eat meat produced under those conditions.


Huseng said:
Eating meat is generally equivalent, at least in the countries we reside in, to directly supporting horrific damage to the global environment.

Malcolm wrote:
No, that depends on where you eat meat. Macdonald's yes. But not the resturants that I frequent that eschew industrially produced meat and produce.


Huseng said:
If you think that makes me preachy and fundamentalist, then that's your perception, not mine.

Malcolm wrote:
You are sounding preachy and fundamentalist because of the way you are talking about this issue as if it were a moral compaign, for example, against homosexuality, as if people who eat meat can never achieve awakening. That of couse is false. Even butchers can acheive awakening. And if they have the correct instruction, faster than a vegan Pandita.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 16th, 2011 at 11:26 PM
Title: Re: obstacles to the spread of Veganism + their solutions
Content:


Huseng said:
The Karmapa has banned consumption of meat in monasteries under him.

Malcolm wrote:
He did not tell Karma Kagyu monks that they may not eat meat. Only that KK monastery kitchens would not prepare it anymore. He clarified this in a following statement when people freaked out. He made it clear people were free to eat meat at resturants outside the monasteries, of which there are always many. In India, monasteries still order "on the hoof".


N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 16th, 2011 at 11:18 PM
Title: Re: obstacles to the spread of Veganism + their solutions
Content:
mr. gordo said:
What does "pure in three ways" mean?

Malcolm wrote:
It means meat that has not been killed for you (i.e. by a host knowing you are coming to banquet, for example); that you did not kill or ordered to be killed; or meat from an animal that you observed being killed.

Some people and even some masters think that meat in supermarkets is included in the second category.

As I already pointed out, the Mahāyāna master Bhavya points out in his Madhyamakahṛdayakārikā:

Therefore, permitted meat, and so on,
must be held to be faultless;
eating such meat possesses no fault
beause at that time no creature is harmed.

He has quite extensive reasoning for ascertaining this.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 16th, 2011 at 10:59 PM
Title: Re: obstacles to the spread of Veganism + their solutions
Content:
Namdrol said:
You may feel free from karma, but there will never be a time when animals are not slaughtered for food. This is just a fact. Get used to it. And as long as that is true, Buddhists may continue to eat meat understanding that it is pure in three ways.

Huseng said:
Buddhists may do a lot of things that are unwholesome. The lot of them are not enlightened and still subject to extreme cravings for foods like meat. However, as has been taught in countless scriptures and treatises it is best to avoid eating meat, not only for one's own sake, but for the sake of other persons and animals. This is the conduct of bodhisattvas. Eating meat with the assurances it is pure in three ways is conduct suitable for a śrāvaka, whose purpose is personal liberation, not the liberation of all sentient beings.

You may follow the śrāvaka conduct. You may also follow the path of the bodhisattva.

Malcolm wrote:
Or I can follow the conduct of tantric practitioner, where there are no restrictions concerning diet.

That being said, if your heart does not permit you to eat meat, than don't. But don't get all preachy and fundamentalist about it -- that is the path of Devadatta.

Even so, the fundamental feature of bodhisattva conduct is intention, not rules.

Bodhisattvas engage in a lot of different conduct, some of them eat meat. For example, if eating meat makes it easier to introduce someone to Mahāyāna, then I will eat meat. I will drink alchohol. Etc.

If I need to eat meat because I am healing from an injury, I will.

If normal people think we are Hari Krishnas, they will not be interested in Dharma.

Even Shabkar, who was famous for his detailed refutation of eating meat, did not try to force people not to eat meat. One of his main concerns was the example Tibetan monasteries set when they ordered animals on the hoof for the monasteries. He felt this was very wrong (it is) and this was one of his main targets. Not nomads who could not in any case read his texts and for whom being vegetarian is really not possible.

For such people, there are Mahāyāna fast day vows. They can be vegetarian once a day. And many Tibetans do follow the practice of Tibetan Lent i.e. avoiding meat during the fourth month, Vaisaka.

It is ok to to encourage people not to eat meat. But it will never work to try and prohibit it.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 16th, 2011 at 10:29 PM
Title: Re: obstacles to the spread of Veganism + their solutions
Content:
Adamantine said:
"One should not buy meat, nor should one offer animals in sacrifice to the gods and ancestral spirits. For the Buddha never allowed "marked meat" to be eaten. And by "marked meat" he meat the flesh of animals that have been killed and purchased for food, as well as animals marked for sacrifice.

Malcolm wrote:
What this means is when you go to a slaughterhouse and pick out Bessie and order her meat for yourself. These days it is called ordering beef "on the hoof". That is forbidden. It is also forbidden to sacrifice animals, as we know.

Meat found in a supermarket, however is not "marked meat" since one did not pick it out on a feedlot.

Adamantine said:
Kalachakra Tantra

IThe root tantra of Kalachakra says:

Wicked people, hard to train.
Kill harmless beasts
As sacrifice to gods and for their ancestors,
To gain protection, profit, and fulfil their aims.
To buy the meat, to wish to eat it, is indeed an evil act.

Malcolm wrote:
Same as above. Don't by meat on the hoof.

Adamantine said:
Shabkar says: This passage shows that if one wishes to eat meat and buys what one knows has come from animals that have been slaughtered for commercial purposes, one commits a negative action.

Malcolm wrote:
It does not show that, but I understand why Shabkar wishes that it showed that.



Adamantine said:
The Lotus Net, the root tantra of Lord Avalokita, says:

Stale offerings, garlic, soiled or discarded food, meat and food from the hands of butchers, and water containing insects--all these should be rejected.

Malcolm wrote:
Kriya tantra.

Adamantine said:
Akshobya Tantra | mi g.yo ba'i rgyud

Curd, milk, butter, sweet substances, sweet fried pancakes, bread, and rice should be consumed in moderation. All evil-smelling foods should be rejected, such as meat, alcohol, garlic, and so forth.

Malcolm wrote:
Kriya tantra. For anuttarayoga tantra practitioners there are no such restrictions.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 16th, 2011 at 10:22 PM
Title: Re: obstacles to the spread of Veganism + their solutions
Content:
Huseng said:
Then I had enough exposure to evidence that it is horrible for the global environment and how much suffering animals go through...

Malcolm wrote:
Yes.

Huseng said:
but it makes logical sense as a vegetarian to give up dairy and eggs too when you see how hens and dairy cattle are mistreated.

Malcolm wrote:
Unfortunately for cows bred by humans, they over produce milk as a matter of course. If they are not milked, they are miserable even if they have calves. If the whole world went vegan, that would be the end of cows and chickens.

There are solutions of course - buy local, only from farms where you can see the animals and how they are treated, etc.

Huseng said:
Giving up animal products is just as much about the producers as it is about the animals. Those butchers ply their trade (a wrong livelihood) because there is an economy for their product. Less demand, less of their product will be produced, meaning less animals raised and slaughtered. Good for the animals and good for the butchers.

Malcolm wrote:
You may feel free from karma, but there will never be a time when animals are not slaughtered for food. This is just a fact. Get used to it. And as long as that is true, Buddhists may continue to eat meat understanding that it is pure in three ways.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 16th, 2011 at 10:14 PM
Title: Re: obstacles to the spread of Veganism + their solutions
Content:


Huseng said:
As you're aware there is more than one Mahāyāna scripture forbidding the consumption of meat as per a Buddha's instructions.

Namdrol said:
Yes, I am aware that some Indian Mahāyānists composed some sutras forbidding the eating of meat, putting those words in a Buddha's mouth.

Huseng said:
Buddhavacana.

They were honouring their founder, not disparaging him. If you think the latter, then your advocacy of Vajrayāna is on shaky ground.

Malcolm wrote:
Bhavaviveka was a Mahāyānist. He analyzed the consumption of meat and concluded that as long as it was pure in three ways, eating meat was faultless.

He also did not accept the Yogacara sutras as "pure" (the primary source of the eating meat will send you to hell). So you see, in Indian Buddhism there was considerable latitude for for accepting and rejecting sutras based on whether you think they reasonable or not.

Buddhists in Tibet and China, etc., lacked the sort of "on the ground" perspective of India sutra text composition, and thus tended to accept everything that came out of India and tried in various ways to reconcile Buddhists sutras.

In India therefore, we can understand that there were Mahāyānists, Madhyamakas, who adhered to one group of sutras, who ate meat; and another group, Yogacāras, who did not eat meat, adhering to another group of sutras.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 16th, 2011 at 10:32 AM
Title: Re: obstacles to the spread of Veganism + their solutions
Content:


Huseng said:
As you're aware there is more than one Mahāyāna scripture forbidding the consumption of meat as per a Buddha's instructions.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, I am aware that some Indian Mahāyānists composed some sutras forbidding the eating of meat, putting those words in a Buddha's mouth.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 16th, 2011 at 10:29 AM
Title: Re: Renunciation Impossible?
Content:
Jnana said:
The Buddhadharma is far bigger than Tibetan Buddhism or the opinions of Tibetan Buddhists.

Malcolm wrote:
It's not that large -- it consists of Theravada, various Sino-Japanese traditions, and Tibetan Buddhism.

That's it.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 16th, 2011 at 8:12 AM
Title: Re: Renunciation Impossible?
Content:


Jnana said:
Your entire premise is not, and cannot, be supported in any way whatsoever. It's polemical bullshit. I'm tired of hearing it. It's lame.

Malcolm wrote:
We apparently do not agree on how afflicted people are in this period of time.

I think that the human history since the industrial revolution completely illustrates my point. I can bring many citations to bear from both sutra and tantra to verify that such millenial pessimism about the period of time 2500 years following the Buddha's passing is a well-established tradition, as you well know.

It is not polemics in the normal sense of the word i.e. "A polemic is a form of dispute, wherein the main efforts of the disputing parties are aimed at establishing the superiority of their own points of view regarding an issue."

Common Mahāyāna itself contains all of these pessemistic observations.



N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 16th, 2011 at 7:59 AM
Title: Re: Renunciation Impossible?
Content:
Jnana said:
By a Tibetan trained lopön can all too often result in Buddhists from non-Tibetan traditions dismissing Tibetan Buddhism as a lame joke.

Malcolm wrote:
You missed the point -- I was not criticizing these traditions. I was criticizing the people who aspire to follow them. Not because of their aspiration, but because human beings are more afflicted than they were even one hundred years ago. The whole premise of my statement is based on the over-whelmingly intense level of afflictions that modern people possess which renders the path of renunciation ineffective in the present day.

For example, it once was the case that many common antibiotics were very effective at removing illnesses caused by bacteria. Today those very same antibiotics are less effective to the point of uselessness because of the increasing resistence of these pathogens to older generations of antibiotics. The real problem is not the remedies, but the pathogens to which they are applied.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 16th, 2011 at 7:45 AM
Title: Re: Renunciation Impossible?
Content:
Jnana said:
Even when a world system is going through the bleakest age when the teaching has been destroyed and the Mahāyāna doctrine distorted, bodhsattvas are exhorted to cherish the Mahāyāna sūtras, to recite, study, and master them, and to promulgate the sūtras and explain them correctly.

Malcolm wrote:
And the common Mahāyāna explains that it is impossible to attain full awakening in less than three incalculable eons. Hence the need and reason for uncommon Mahāyāna Secret Mantra for those who wish to attain buddhahood a bit more rapidly.

So my response to this is that for study and learning, we need to preserve the textual traditions of common Mahāyāna, but when it comes to practice, we need to practice Secret Mantra.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 16th, 2011 at 4:03 AM
Title: Re: obstacles to the spread of Veganism + their solutions
Content:
Huseng said:
That's why I don't make such equations with ordinary people, but we're Buddhists here and I should hope we can hold ourselves to a higher level of morality than the average joe on the street whose morality is generally dictated by fear of punishment and pursuit of worldly pleasures rather than unconditional compassion.

Malcolm wrote:
But not all Buddhists think that eating meat is naturally non-virtuous. Killing is natually non-virtuous, but not what you put in your body. This is why some Buddhists continue to eat meat, and other Buddhists do not.

Ultimately, Devadatta tried to convince the Buddha to forbid all consumption of fish and meat, but the Buddha refused.

Do what your conscience tells you. But do not try to force this down the throats of others.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 15th, 2011 at 11:22 PM
Title: Re: Site validation ...
Content:
Namdrol said:
Agar 35 is extremely strong, should never be used by people who have edemas or who are over 70 in general.

N

Sönam said:
I am only 63... nevertheless, I'm incertain about "blood pressure" restrictions, I (recently) had a "lung embolysm" (don't know the real english designation) and I'm under a drug used to thin blood, I must regulary (at the time once each two weeks) make an blood analysis (IRN).
What are the restrictions? should I care? embolysm was not a strong one ... eventually what could be good for that?

thank you for your kind answer.
Sönam


Malcolm wrote:
Agar 35 is not a good match for you.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 15th, 2011 at 11:20 PM
Title: Re: Garlic
Content:
kalden yungdrung said:
I do not know further if garlic and onions are used in Tibetan medicine as a remedy........
This because if something can be used as medicine the product is allowed to use.

KY[/color]

Malcolm wrote:
Garlic is a very important medicine, used in suppression of rlung disorders.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 15th, 2011 at 7:59 AM
Title: Re: Site validation ...
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Agar 35 is extremely strong, should never be used by people who have edemas or who are over 70 in general.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 12th, 2011 at 8:13 PM
Title: Re: Renunciation Impossible?
Content:



mudra said:
It is basic to both Hinayāna and common Mahāyāna to regard conditioned phenomena (apart from the path) as contamnated and contaminating.

N

Malcolm wrote:
It is basic to Madhyamakans who practice the sutra/common paths to view all phenomena as lacking inherent existence, as Chandrakirti says in Clear Words: "Those are established through mutual dependence...., ...valid cognizers and objects of comprehension, are not established by way of their [own] entities" so in this system at least the subjective is at least equally important, so your generalization of the common Mahayana path is not pervasive. So they at least, when practicing the path of renunciation are not so much worrying so much about inherent contamination of objects as they would be concerned about the reifying of any aspect of phenomena (and of course this would be quite fundamental to the real practice of Tantra).

M[/quote]


You are conflating ultimate truth analysis with conventional truth. You cannot explain away the contaminated nature of phenomena on the basis of their emptiness.

Someone who is below the path of seeing would be extremely concerned, and should be extremely concerned with the contaminated nature of phenomena since they have no methods to deal with this apart from realizing emptiness. And further, on the impure stages, in post-equipoise, they still have to cope with the fact that phenomena appear contaminated and they have no specific practices for dealing with this.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 12th, 2011 at 6:56 AM
Title: Re: Renunciation Impossible?
Content:


Huseng said:
Right, but on the reverse one could say the same thing about Vajrayāna practitioners. Is it really possible to attain Buddhahood and skip past the Bodhisattva bhumis in one lifetime? There were many in the past who were sceptical about such claims.

Malcolm wrote:
Who said anything about skipping the bhumis. The bhumis are not skipped in Vajrayāna practice. They are just ascended in a single lifetime.


Huseng said:
I think there still are in the greater Mahāyāna community. If it is so easy to attain Buddhahood in one lifetime, then they have the right to ask for proof.

Malcolm wrote:
Dude, this is religion, we are talking about here. If there was proof of any of this Buddhism would be world dominating, not the dwindling fourth largest religion in the world.


Huseng said:
Well, let's see your proof for Buddhahood in a single lifetime. I don't personally deny this, but let's be fair here. If you're going to suggest that present day adepts in non-Vajrayāna traditions are just outwardly enlightened and that they're just kidding themselves, your opponents have just as much right to ask you for proof of the purported efficacy of Vajrayāna. Moreover, if there really are arhats in the world and you're claiming they're just kidding themselves, that's some wicked akusala karma.

Malcolm wrote:
You need to read more carefully and with less emotion. There can be no Mahāyāna awakening to full buddhahood in one lifetime based on what Mahāyāna sutras themselves say -- so in terms of Mahāyāna there is no argument to be had.

I said if there were people these days who thought they were going to become stream entrants by practicing Thervada, they are kidding themselves. This does not mean that I am claiming there are not a few Shravaka Aryas kicking about. There may well be, but they will be as rare as stays in the daytime.


Huseng said:
Okay, you're entitled to your opinion, but you're basically saying then that present day Theravada is full of it and any of their purported adepts are just jokers. You're saying that the likes of Ajahn Brahm and Ajahn Chah are just fooling themselves and everyone else.

Malcolm wrote:
Is Ajahn Brahm as arriya? He would be forbidden from declaring it were it so.

Huseng said:
Again, there are many living cases which would prove the contrary to what you're saying. You don't have much experience with Theravada, right? So, why should anyone take you seriously when you say Theravada practitioners are deeply kidding themselves?

Malcolm wrote:
Define experience. Do you mean experience as a meditator meditating on classical topics according to Abhidharma? Or do you mean training under a Theravadin teacher at say IMS?

Then please explain what the difference might be and why it matters?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 12th, 2011 at 6:41 AM
Title: Re: Renunciation Impossible?
Content:



mudra said:
Whoa there Namdrol-lags, are we shifting the goal posts? This thread started off on the premise that renunciation doesn't work these days. Renunciation has always been an ingredient of liberation from samsara, a preliminary if you like to moving on to Buddhahood, not the final cause for Buddhahood.

Malcolm wrote:
Path. Path. Path. Don't confuse renunciation, a necessary precondition for entering Buddhadharma, with the path of renunciation, which is characteristic of the causal vehicles.


mudra said:
The original premise was that renunciation doesn't work,

Malcolm wrote:
The origina premise was that the path of renunciation does not work.


mudra said:
In fact even the view that you present above that "and common Mahāyāna which involves regarding sense objects as inherently afflictive" is actually not completely correct. If one were to follow the consequence of Nagarjuna's presentation of Madhyamaka it's clear that the affliction is not inherent to the sense object - we are talking perfection/sutra/common Mahayana vehicle here.

Malcolm wrote:
It is basic to both Hinayāna and common Mahāyāna to regard conditioned phenomena (apart from the path) as contamnated and contaminating.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 11th, 2011 at 8:00 PM
Title: Re: Renunciation Impossible?
Content:


Huseng said:
Mahāyāna teaches the bodhisattva stages, which means Buddhahood will take many lifetimes. However, that being said, we need to take into account how many lifetimes of practice one already has had prior to the current one.

Malcolm wrote:
Two incalculable eons to reach the seventh bhumi or so....now where are you on that scale?

BTW, three incalculable eons is the number for the best practitioner of Mahāyāna, the average person requires 25...

BTW, Jeff Huseng, we Vajrayanists don't say these things in order to make other traditions inferior. We say these things because we want people to understand the difference between a rapid path and slow path since we are Mahāyānists and we want everyone to acheive Buddhahood as fast as possible. In the end, of course, everyone is free to make up their own mind.

Buddhahood requires two accumulations, whether one does that slowly or rapidly is up to oneself. I think that people who believe they are going to realize arhatship let alone stream entry by practicing Theravada or the first bhumi in this lifetime by practicing common Mahāyāna are deeply kidding themselves.

IN terms of Mahāyāna, outside of Vajrayāna methods there is no way to accumulate the necessary merit and wisdom heaps required for full awakening.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 11th, 2011 at 7:58 PM
Title: Re: Renunciation Impossible?
Content:
Namdrol said:
Nope, I accept that in this day and age people cannot give up attachment to sense objects, therefore, they require a different method, as Loppon Sonam Tsemo states: ...

Huseng said:
There are living examples that say otherwise, so your opinion is proven incorrect.

Malcolm wrote:
These monks, venerable though they may be, will not realize full awakening from a Mahāyāna perspective, as you will readily admit.

Many people can give up this or that thing. Ascetics in non-Buddhist religions make Buddhist monks look hedonists by comparison.

And you can't tell anything from outward appearances.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 11th, 2011 at 7:54 PM
Title: Re: Renunciation Impossible?
Content:


Huseng said:
So "common Mahāyāna" as it was practised by Nāgārjuna, who lived long before Vajrayāna appeared in the world, is just for accumulating good karma nowadays? What is it about the present day that makes it anymore difficult to realize emptiness using the methods as outlined by Nāgārjuna?

Malcolm wrote:
According to Nāgārjuna, one cannot attain Buddhahood at all by relying on the Sravaka canon, and it takes three incalculable eons attain awakening through common Mahāyāna. So even in his day, the idea of Buddhahood was merely a remote possibility for people and at most people could realisitically hope for was first or second bhumi.

Therefore, it seem obvious that anyone who wishes to attain full awakening in this lifetime must practice Vajrayāna, which is not a path of renunciation, because paths of renunciation are too difficult, too lengthy, and so on.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 10th, 2011 at 7:40 PM
Title: Re: Black magic, is it Vajrayana or Bon?
Content:


Adamantine said:
SO you are claiming there is no difference between a Vedic rite of destruction and a Vajrayana rite of liberation?

Namdrol said:
Oh, the rites of liberation are different than abhicāra.

N

Adamantine said:
So what were you saying before-- they are different but the difference doesn't really matter much?

Malcolm wrote:
The abhicārakarma is purely about destruction, not liberation. It is a common siddhi i.e. worldly.

The primary difference between Buddhist and Hindu abhicārakarma is bodhicitta.

But in terms of the actual function of the rite -assuming one has common siddhis, is the same.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 10th, 2011 at 7:32 PM
Title: Re: Renunciation not Impossible
Content:
Adamantine said:
So what is the dividing line then? You were quite critical of Roach for taking a consort while still appearing as a monk (among other things of course).. so was the criticism simply that he wasn't putting on a good show? I thought it was that he was clearly breaking his vows.

Malcolm wrote:
From the point of view of ordinary people, he broke his vows. That was the essence of my complaint.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 10th, 2011 at 10:17 AM
Title: Re: Black magic, is it Vajrayana or Bon?
Content:


Adamantine said:
SO you are claiming there is no difference between a Vedic rite of destruction and a Vajrayana rite of liberation?

Malcolm wrote:
Oh, the rites of liberation are different than abhicāra.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 10th, 2011 at 8:48 AM
Title: Re: Black magic, is it Vajrayana or Bon?
Content:
Adamantine said:
You can even find polemical arguments about why Buddhist fire pujas are "better" than Vedic fire pujas, when the Brahmins began to complain that Buddhists were horning in on their game.

Well they are, aren't they?

Malcolm wrote:
Since the four activities are all in realm of mundane siddhis, it does not really matter much. I am sure brahmin fire pujas are very effective.

When the Buddha was prepared for cremation he instructed Ananda to let the brahmins carry out the rites since they knew what they were doing. Obviouslhy the Buddha was quite happy in many instances to give brahmins credit for their valubale ritual expertise. And I am sure it continued that way for a thousand years. In fact, we know that it did because even today that are families of Thai brahmins connected with the Thai Court who have Vedic ritual reponsibilities to the Thai royal family.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 10th, 2011 at 8:43 AM
Title: Re: Akhyuk Rinpoche passed into parinibbana July 23 2011
Content:
Pema Rigdzin said:
pictures where the lama happened to have moved a bit on the throne when his picture was taken, so that the resulting picture looks like he's transparent, and then write under it "rainbow body!!!"
.

Malcolm wrote:
It is even worse when the Lamas in question say of their blurred photos that they were in the state of Dharmakāya at the time...charlatons.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 10th, 2011 at 8:38 AM
Title: Re: Renunciation not Impossible
Content:
mudra said:
it doesn't obliterate the spirit of renunciation.

Malcolm wrote:
Really people, why is this so hard to understand? There is a difference between renunciation, i.e., the motive to escape samsara, and the path of renunciation common to Hinayāna and common Mahāyāna which involves regarding sense objects as inherently afflictive, and therefore, necessary to abandon.

mudra said:
My point being that monks, whether they are Tibetans who practice Vajrayana or not, always get respect when they practice the vinaya well, and that respect is also something which helps them keep it.

Malcolm wrote:
That has nothing to do with what path they actually practice.

mudra said:
I don't buy that just because you practice Tantra you can just do what you like vis a vis the vinaya. If you transgress it consciously with the intent to uphold for example the Boddhisattva ethic (easy to find examples of this in the 46 secondary transgressions) then it is done in the spirit of humility. Not like some of the disgraceful examples that one sees nowadays who use the lame excuse of either being "tantric" monks or "adjusting to the times"

Malcolm wrote:
In Hinayāna and Mahāyāna one is never supposed to enjoy sense objects for one's own benefit. But in Vajrayāna, it is the complete opposite. Those who do not understand this simple point do not understand the profound meaning of the three vows.

mudra said:
I feel it would be completely presumptuous of me to even begin to speculate what HH the Karmapa's intentions are.

Malcolm wrote:
Well, I tend to take people at their word. When they say they play ultraviolent videogames to relax and blow off steam, I generally beleive them.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 10th, 2011 at 8:26 AM
Title: Re: Black magic, is it Vajrayana or Bon?
Content:


Namdrol said:
There are four activities. The fourth, abhicāra, mngon spyod or the activity of destruction will certainly seem like tantric sorcery to anyone but Vajrayāna Buddhists. Incidentally, the four activities come from Indian Vedic culture, and in that context, abhicāra is definitely black magic.

N

Adamantine said:
They may have commonalities with other cultural rituals shared in time and space but wouldn't you say they actually come from Buddhas?

Malcolm wrote:
Well, yes and no. Stupas comes from the Buddha, but they were adapted by the Buddha to fit a different context then their original context.

It is rather stupid to ignore the fact that Buddhism borrowed and repurposed many elements of a shared Indian cultural heritage or to try and explain it away with some complicated religious reasoning.

Sang offerings, Sur offerings and so on don't exist in Indian culture, so it would rather dull to refuse to acknowledge that many native Tibetan, as well as some Chinese rituals, were converted to Buddhist use under the general rubric of "tö" (gto) rites. There is a whole list of these things for example, in the Karling Shitro in the section on cheating death. Mipham has a book where he discloses many of these kinds of tö rites (in connection with elemental calculation) which formerly were closely guarded secrets because many of them indeed would be considered sorcery and given their worldly origin, were sorcerous at one time. Then there is the famous book of calculation called the Svarodaya tantra, a Shaivaite tantra preserved in the Tengyur, which is a work mainly concerned with military prediction, heavily used by the Fifth Dalai Lama, and extensively commented on by Mipham.

We have to recognize, if we are really being honest, that Buddhism makes use of many "cultural rituals" that do not ultimately come from Buddhas, but are adapted by Buddhas and other awakened beings to suit the needs and proclivities of sentient beings. Thus the four activities were borrowed into Buddhism when tantric Buddhism began to spread in India in the 7th century. You can even find polemical arguments about why Buddhist fire pujas are "better" than Vedic fire pujas, when the Brahmins began to complain that Buddhists were horning in on their game.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 10th, 2011 at 6:45 AM
Title: Re: Black magic, is it Vajrayana or Bon?
Content:
gregkavarnos said:
Back to this
Pema Rigdzin said:
...It just seemed like you were arguing that we should somehow conditionally, or provisionally, validate the way mistaken outsiders perceive esoteric material they come across solely because their perception seems true to them.

gregkavarnos said:
Not validate, just accept the fact that that is how it seems to them.  Where we go from there is a different story altogether. And I think that better than validating their ignorance, we should just try to remove it by giving them a proper explanation. No more, no less.
We can try to give them the proper explanation, there is no guarantee that they will accept it, they may even accuse us of trying to confound the true meaning of our statements!

The best thing would be to "re-secret" these practices, but this is currently impossible.


Malcolm wrote:
There are four activities. The fourth, abhicāra, mngon spyod or the activity of destruction will certainly seem like tantric sorcery to anyone but Vajrayāna Buddhists. Incidentally, the four activities come from Indian Vedic culture, and in that context, abhicāra is definitely black magic.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 9th, 2011 at 9:10 PM
Title: Re: Akhyuk Rinpoche passed into parinibbana July 23 2011
Content:
narraboth said:
The best way for some people probably is to drag out lama's corp out and put on an iron bed, and measure it every hour.

kirtu said:
This is what modern people want and it goes back to what Pema Ridgzin mentioned.

Kirt


Malcolm wrote:
Those crowns are about a foot high. Since the body has been set up crossed legged, and it is clearly slumped, we can some natural shrinkage from loss of fluid of the body, but the skull has not shrunk, otherwise, the crown would be in the lap of the body.

Further, the body is in a box that has a 12 inch border in front of it (the Buddha statue is 18 inch size) -- that edge is not the edge of a cushion, but is the backpeice of the alter in front of it. Using the Buddha staues as a measure, you can see that the seated body is somewhere betwee 30 to 36 inches high. When I am seated, butt to crown, I am 39 inches.

We don't need to drag the body out, we just need to see daily pictures....

I will have to consider this "...Akhyuk Lama's kudon has shrinked to one hand high" to be a pious exaggeration. One hand high on me is 8 inches. Clearly impossible based on the photographic evidence.

Anyway, Khenpoa Achö was great practitioner.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 9th, 2011 at 8:48 PM
Title: Re: Taoist Origin of Tantric Energy System
Content:
Astus said:
In the introduction of Peter Alan Roberts' new book "Mahamudra and Related Instructions" it says that the energy system as it appeared in India with the chakras and nadis originates from Central Asia and it has a Taoist source. Anyone to provide more information on this?

The text says,

"The candali practice also involves the physiology of sexuality, generally described from a male perspective. It corresponds with far more ancient Taoist practices, which have a greater number of pressure points in breath control, called jade locks, and a specific female morphology that has the retention of menstruation as the parallel to the male retention of ejaculation. Candali and the cakra system appeared in the Buddhist tradition subsequent to a period of Buddhist and Taoist coexistence in Central Asia. The cakras, literally "wheels," are the points where subsidiary channels branch off into the body, but they were unknown in India before the latter centuries of the first millennium, when they first appeared in both Saivism and Buddhism."

Malcolm wrote:
He is mistaken. Cakras and Nadis appear in pre-Buddhist upanishads. The famed number 72,000 nadis occurs in the Brihadaryanika, look up Hita. The early mentions of vāyus, cakras and nadis are all to be found in the twopre- Buddhist Upanishads, and perhaps other early Puranic literature I have not seen. There is no reason in this instance to assume an extra-Indian origin for these theories.

Candali Yoga is based again an Upanishadic verse from the Candoga which is frequently cited in Buddhist texts discussing the difference between Buddhist tantric practices and Hindu corrollaries. In actuality, Candali Yoga is based on the Indian concept of the burnt offering.

Moreover, Indian doctors were certainly aware of arteries and veins, the difference between them and so on. If anything, the notion of channels and cakras comes from Ayurveda.

Please near in mind I am not opposed to influences of this sort on genera principle -- for example, the Chinese certainly invented pulse diagnosis, which spread to Tibet and finally to India. The Greeks invered Urinalysis, which spread to Tibetan and India (via Unnani), and so on. Mercury preperation certainly originated in China, and only spread to India later, as David Gordon White shows, based on Needleman. But there is no valid reason to suppose that cakra and nadi theory is based on Taoism.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 9th, 2011 at 8:24 PM
Title: Re: Renunciation not Impossible
Content:


mudra said:
The teachings I received on uposotha vows emphasized that the motivation for taking these vows is to generate causes to attain Buddhahood (as distinct from Sravakayana 'attasila' day vows), but the means was very much involved with renunciation. In the formula with which one takes the vows says " just as the Buddhas etc.. in the past have practiced..". There is a reference to past arhats (Buddha arhats) but it was never said or implied that the reason that one takes the vows is to honor the conduct of the Arhats.

Malcolm wrote:
Of course, the Mahāyāna fast days vows also contain the intention that you mention -- but the reason for doing so is it emulate the conduct of an Arhat, at least one day a month.

But nevertheless, this is part of common Mahāyāna.

mudra said:
As to renunciation no longer being a viable method, well we better rush off and tell HHDL, HH Karmapa, and all the monks practicing in al the monasteries.

Malcolm wrote:
All of these monks are Vajrayāna monks. They may bear the external characteristics of bhikṣus, but the path of renunciation is not the path they have chose for themselves. You would have to be a monastic or a lay person in the Theravadin tradition or the Chinese tradition to follow the path of renunciation in a precise way.


mudra said:
Actually quite a few of them are doing fine as monks. Sure it is perhaps more distracting in modern settings, but then again that mostly serves to separate the goats from the sheep (or however the saying goes)...

Malcolm wrote:
We tend to think that the most important thing that monks do avoid sexual relations. Monks also are not supposed to lie, steal the slightest thing (which means paying all duty and so on when they cross borders) etc., not remain alone with women in rooms, etc. The reason why the conduct of a Tibetan monk is kep secret from lay people is so that lay people will not criticize monks. Part of the reason behind this is that all Tibetan monks are Mahāyāna monks, and thus, if they choose to break one of their vows for a reason, some one might misunderstand. Another part of the reason for this is that all Tibetan monks are Vajrayāna monks, and so if their conduct seems to be not in keeping with Hinayāna vows, they might get into trouble. Vajrayāna monks are not under the same restrictions as Hinayāna monks.

And the Karmapa is into playing first person shooter video games like Halo to relax.

When one understands the fundamental principle of Vajrayāna conduct is to engage sense objects and enjoy them for one's own pleasure (as a mandala of deities), it changes the game of how one understands a Vajrayāna monastic's conduct. The monastic thing is merely an outer show. It is not the essence of practice.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 9th, 2011 at 8:08 PM
Title: Re: the ever-changing Western view of Madhyamaka
Content:
tobes said:
It is odd that bodhicitta is so prevalent in the Ratnavali, but so conspicuously absent from the MMK and Vig.

Namdrol said:
Not at all. Ratnavali is a path oriented text while MMK and Vig are critical rebuttals.

Walser reviews Tillman Vetter's work, and concludes that Ratnavali is most likely an original Nāgārjuna composition.

N

tobes said:
Well, I can't find the Vetter article, and I'm not a philologist, so I couldn't enter into the debate anyway.

But surely you must acknowledge that there is absolutely **no** scholarly consensus about who Nagarjuna was, where he lived, what school he followed, and what works were an 'original composition' attributed to this historical figure. There are many theories, yours/Walser's is quite legitimate.....but no more legitimate than others. And all of them are theories. No one has any real knowledge about this.


Malcolm wrote:
We have attribution and the subject matter of the texts themselves.

For example, we can safely rule out Bodhicittavivarana as a work of Nāgārjuna I since it mentions both Vajrasattva and the ālayavijñāna.

There is good reason to exclude the dharmadhātustava, the trikāyastava and so on as well.

But concerning the Mahāyānavimsika, Ratnavali, Surhllekha, the collection of reasoning, the collection of praises, etc., we can have doubts, but in my opinion we can accept these as valid Nāḡarjuniana.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 9th, 2011 at 8:53 AM
Title: Re: Renunciation Impossible?
Content:
Namdrol said:
But that statement has nothing do with renunciation or abandonment of sense objects...

Fa Dao said:
I read Padmasambhavas statement to mean exactly that. While one tries to live/Realize the View of Ati one also takes into consideration the law of karma...in other words practicing what is wholesome and abandoning what is unwholesome i.e sense objects etc. If I have misunderstood this please explain, preferably without being condescending or dismissive.


Malcolm wrote:
Taking the consequence of one's actions into consideration does not entail abandoning sense objects. Quite the opposite. If one makes offerings to oneself as the deity with all sense objects, the negative consquences of karmic acts motivated by desire and so on are transformed into merit and so on.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 9th, 2011 at 5:44 AM
Title: Re: Renunciation not Impossible
Content:


kirtu said:
Nyungney is not a renunciative method?  The Eight Precepts, recommended by Dezhung Rinpoche, aren't renunciative?  Practice of the Three Heap Sutra isn't renunciative?  Now the later two it could be argued are strictly sutra rather than kind of bridges to tantra but Nyungney it totally tantra.

Malcolm wrote:
The reason one takes the Mahāyāna fast day vows is to honor the conduct of Arhats. It is a strictly common Mahāyāna practice. "Three Heaps Sutra" is a strictly common Mahāyāna practice, extracted from the Ratnakuta collection of the sutras. It is mentioned in the Shiksasammucaya.

"Nyungne" i.e "remaining in the fast". is a Carya tantra purification practice and like all tantra from carya on up, one creates oneself as a deity, engages in offerings of sense objects to oneself as well as the front created deity and so on. So it qualifies as part of the "path that does not abandon the basis" i.e. Mantrayāna.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 9th, 2011 at 2:33 AM
Title: Re: The virgin birth of Gautama.
Content:
Will said:
The Lalitavistara Sutra (among others) said conception occurred after a dream of a 6-tusked white elephant.  Birth was not from the womb, but from her side.


Malcolm wrote:
C-section, which explains why his mother died shortly after he was born.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 9th, 2011 at 2:31 AM
Title: Re: Renunciation Impossible?
Content:
Fa Dao said:
My realization is higher than the sky,

But my observance of karma is finer than grains of flour.

-- Padmasambhava


Malcolm wrote:
But that statement has nothing do with renunciation or abandonment of sense objects...


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 9th, 2011 at 1:20 AM
Title: Re: Renunciation not Impossible
Content:
Will said:
Am familiar with the intent of LRCM.  He taught it as a necessary foundation to tantric path, right?  When you wrote "impossible", then "not necessary", both these statements deny the needed basis of renouncing attachment to sense objects (among other renunciations) that the great Vajrayana bodhisattva Je Rinpoche taught.
.

Malcolm wrote:
See earlier post i.e.

Also for some people in whom general afflictions are strong, and in particular, cannot give up the tormenting attachment to desire, Secret Mantra was taught intending those of sharp faculties who wished unsurpassed awakening.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 9th, 2011 at 12:23 AM
Title: Re: Renunciation not Impossible
Content:
Nangwa said:
The monasteries were the economy.

Astus said:
You mean they served as manufactures, etc. to produce goods? Or they were commercial centres and stock markets? I thought Tibet had a very feudal economy.

Malcolm wrote:
There was and still is a huge amount of economic activity around monasteries. Monasteries provided services, markets, grain storage and so on.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 9th, 2011 at 12:22 AM
Title: Re: Renunciation not Impossible
Content:
Will said:
Why not? Since oodles of tantric Geluk adepts have followed the vajrayana (based in renunciation) with success up to the present, they would have dropped teaching renunciation by now if they agreed with Namdrol.

Astus said:
Indeed, why the huge monastic order in Tibet if it's pointless. They could have done better building economy and such.

Malcolm wrote:
men outnumbered women 3:1

Most monks in the large monasteries in Tibet were not fully ordained anyway. They were service workers, mostly.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 9th, 2011 at 12:19 AM
Title: Re: Renunciation Impossible?
Content:
Will said:
Namdrol:
You are confusing renunciation as in weariness for samsara, etc., for renunciation as a mode of practice i.e. giving up sense objects, etc. They are not the same thing.
Nope.

You are confusing renouncing sense objects with renouncing craving & attachment to same.

Malcolm wrote:
Nope, I accept that in this day and age people cannot give up attachment to sense objects, therefore, they require a different method, as Loppon Sonam Tsemo states:
Also in general, for those of little affliction, and in particular, since they can give up the tormenting attachment to desire, it is said that the Pāramitāyāna is intended
for those of dull faculties who wish awakening. Also for some people in general afflictions are strong, and in particular, they cannot give up the tormenting attachment to desire, Secret Mantra was taught intending those of sharp faculties who wished unsurpassed awakening.
And:

The Vajrapañjara-tantra states: Created by passion, the worldly
shall be liberated by the same passion


And the Śrī Guhyasamāja: The passionate desiring wisdom
always rely on the five desire objects.


And so on. There are many excellent explanations in the Sakya father and sons writings about the necessity of those who wish liberation in this epoch to enter into secret mantra teachings.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 9th, 2011 at 12:10 AM
Title: Re: Renunciation not Impossible
Content:


Will said:
No need to wonder, the Gelukpas of today have not dropped renunciation as the first fundamental of the Three Principles of the Path.

Nangwa said:
That doesnt really work for me.

Will said:
Why not? Since oodles of tantric Geluk adepts have followed the vajrayana (based in renunciation) with success up to the present, they would have dropped teaching renunciation by now if they agreed with Namdrol.

Malcolm wrote:
The practice of Gelug is 100 percent Vajrayāna.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 9th, 2011 at 12:10 AM
Title: Re: Renunciation not Impossible
Content:


Will said:
You are moving the goalposts again N. - as is your wont.

Malcolm wrote:
No, I am clarifying for you what the intent of studying Lamrim is. Please consult pages 363-365 of vol III of Lam Rim Chen Mo.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 9th, 2011 at 12:06 AM
Title: Re: Renunciation not Impossible
Content:
Will said:
Why would Je Rinpoche provide lam rim teachings (not to mention being a bhikshu himself) if such a path were without value?

Namdrol said:
Lamrim is simply a preliminary study for Vajrayāna. Tsongkhapa never states that Lamrim is sufficient unto itself for liberation. In fact, the majority of his collected works are devoted to Vajrayāna topics.

N

Will said:
You are moving the goalposts again N. - as is your wont.

The nut of it is - can vajrayana path produce bodhisattvas without the preliminary practice (not study) of renunciation etc.?  Buddhadharma says, IMHO, NO!


Malcolm wrote:
See previous post -- you are confusing renunciation as in weariness for samsara, etc., for renunciation as a mode of practice i.e. giving up sense objects, etc. They are not the same thing.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 9th, 2011 at 12:00 AM
Title: Re: Renunciation not Impossible
Content:
Will said:
I am too lazy to provide the many citations from tantric practioners saying that renunciation is not only necessary, but fundamental to success in vajrayana.  Why would Je Rinpoche provide lam rim teachings (not to mention being a bhikshu himself) if such a path were without value?

Malcolm wrote:
Do you know how to distinguish renunciation (weariness for samsara, and so on) from the path of renunication (abandoning the five aggregates)?

Renunciation in the first sense is nges 'byung aka nihsarana; the latter is spangs ba, to give up, avoid like giving sweets, etc. Same English translation, different context.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 8th, 2011 at 11:57 PM
Title: Re: Renunciation not Impossible
Content:
Will said:
Why would Je Rinpoche provide lam rim teachings (not to mention being a bhikshu himself) if such a path were without value?

Malcolm wrote:
Lamrim is simply a preliminary study for Vajrayāna. Tsongkhapa never states that Lamrim is sufficient unto itself for liberation. In fact, the majority of his collected works are devoted to Vajrayāna topics.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 8th, 2011 at 11:55 PM
Title: Re: Renunciation not Impossible
Content:


kirtu said:
Since one can be a renunciate to some degree on a rigorous retreat, then it is possible to do at least this level under the right circumstances continuously.
Kirt


Namdrol said:
You are utterly missing the point. It is not necessary to practice the path of renunciation at all anymore.

kirtu said:
Within the context of the lower tantra, some degree of mimicry of renunciation (for example following in the footsteps of Tsongkhapa and others) is an effective means of accumulation of merit and purification and can aid in accomplishment of the inner tantra.


Kirt


Malcolm wrote:
Lower Tantra is in no way shape or form a path of renunciation.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 8th, 2011 at 11:17 PM
Title: Re: Renunciation not Impossible
Content:


kirtu said:
Since one can be a renunciate to some degree on a rigorous retreat, then it is possible to do at least this level under the right circumstances continuously.
Kirt


Malcolm wrote:
You are utterly missing the point. It is not necessary to practice the path of renunciation at all anymore.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 8th, 2011 at 10:56 PM
Title: Re: Renunciation Impossible?
Content:
Namdrol said:
For example, even in Theravadin countries, most of the monks do not actually practice renunciation -- they have property, cars, money, debit cards, etc.

Astus said:
But that is not a new development. It's not that monks got lax in the last centuries only.

Malcolm wrote:
More evidence for my case -- did I say this was a 21st century problem? It has been true since the 8th century C.E.

For example, this is how Candragomin presents practice:
Objects and poisons are alike, pleasing just when first tasted.
Objects and poisons are alike, their result is unpleasant and
unbearable.
Objects and poisons are alike, causing one to be clouded by the
darkness of ignorance.
Objects and poisons are alike, their power is hard to reverse, and
deceptive...
In other words, the basis, the five aggregates, are considered something to be given up by the path of renunciation. I am asserting that practicing from this perspective is no longer possible nor does it bear fruit.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 8th, 2011 at 10:55 PM
Title: Re: Renunciation Impossible?
Content:
Astus said:
To say that these are the ending days of the Dharma and the only path to salvation is Vajrayana and the others are pointless is pretty radical.

Malcolm wrote:
Oh, that is the message of Vajrayāna, make no mistake. Even someone like Tsongkhapa, who by all accounts was a strict vinayadhara, maintains this fact.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 8th, 2011 at 10:53 PM
Title: Re: Renunciation Impossible?
Content:


Karma Dondrup Tashi said:
This view is either too pessimistic or is just more Vajrayana triumphalism.

Malcolm wrote:
All those here who actually follow the path of renunciation as laid out in Shravakayāna or common Mahayāna texts, including monks, please raise your hands.

For example, even in Theravadin countries, most of the monks do not actually practice renunciation -- they have property, cars, money, debit cards, etc.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 8th, 2011 at 10:02 PM
Title: Re: Renunciation Impossible?
Content:
Namdrol said:
The point is that the path of renunciation is no longer effective. There used to be hundreds of thousands of arhats, now there are none.

Huseng said:
That is a pretty bold statement to make.

There are people in the Theravada community who might disagree with your statement that there are no arhats anymore.

Malcolm wrote:
They can disagree, but they can't trot out an arhat, can they?

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 8th, 2011 at 9:21 PM
Title: Re: Renunciation not Impossible
Content:


kirtu said:
Namdrol - even I can give up sense objects for a long time relatively speaking and I am clearly tightly bound to sex.

Malcolm wrote:
You need to study Sonam Tsemo's treatise on General Tantra.

You also need to look at the internal contradiction in your sentence.

You cannot practice renunciation as a path, now can you?

No? I didn't think so.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 8th, 2011 at 9:01 PM
Title: Re: Renunciation Impossible?
Content:
mindyourmind said:
My only possible gripe would be with the "impossible" part.

Difficult, damn-near impossible yes, but (hopefully) not impossible.

Malcolm wrote:
The point is that the path of renunciation is no longer effective. There used to be hundreds of thousands of arhats, now there are none. There used to be hundreds of thousands of bodhisattvas on the stages, now there are very few.

The Hinayāna and Mahāyāna paths of renunciation is no longer effective in this degenerate age.

That does not mean we should not have renunciation in the more general sense of a sense of renunciation of samsara and so on -- but the path of renunciation is no longer effective overall.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 8th, 2011 at 8:28 PM
Title: Re: Renunciation not Impossible
Content:
Will said:
Namdrol, what a dopey notion that renunciation is impossible because of modern afflictions.  I must be missing something.

What exactly do you mean by renunciation?

Malcolm wrote:
Giving up sense objects.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 8th, 2011 at 8:16 PM
Title: Re: the ever-changing Western view of Madhyamaka
Content:
tobes said:
It is odd that bodhicitta is so prevalent in the Ratnavali, but so conspicuously absent from the MMK and Vig.

Malcolm wrote:
Not at all. Ratnavali is a path oriented text while MMK and Vig are critical rebuttals.

Walser reviews Tillman Vetter's work, and concludes that Ratnavali is most likely an original Nāgārjuna composition.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 8th, 2011 at 5:00 AM
Title: Re: Mahayana and Vajrayana
Content:
Tim said:
I'm exploring Tibetan Buddhism at present and would appreciate some clarity on the following aspects:

(1) If one intends to practice Tibetan Buddhism, does this automatically include vajrayana (tantric practices)? What I'm asking is - can one practice only the Mayahana aspects and still call it Tibetan Buddhism?

(2) In my part of the world (Durban, South Africa) there is only one Buddhist centre available, namely the "Mahasiddha Kadampa Buddhist Centre" which is a member of the New Kadampa Tradition. (EDIT: I'm thinking of going here for meditation practice). In which of the Tibetan subforums on this Forum will this lineage fall?

(Note: I posted here because I couldn't figure out the correct subforum - sorry if it is in the wrong place)

Malcolm wrote:
As for question 1) Yes.

as for 2) none, anymore. Formerly, Gelug.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 8th, 2011 at 4:00 AM
Title: Re: Worldwide Transmission in NYC, Sunday, August 7
Content:
Adamantine said:
Is there any added benefit of attending the WW webcast with
the group vs. at home on the computer? (assuming one doesn't need
the explanation)-- for instance, will the feed at the center be
higher bandwidth, less buggy, on a large screen, surround sound? All or any of the above?

Malcolm wrote:
no idea


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 8th, 2011 at 3:46 AM
Title: Re: Worldwide Transmission in NYC, Sunday, August 7
Content:
Pemako said:
I'm so confused.

I joined Dzogchen Community about a month and a half ago, but it's been impossible to get a logon ID.  I was told this transmission is open - does that mean at the time of the broadcast there won't be a log in page?  Anything else I need to worry about?

Thanks!


Malcolm wrote:
At time of WW transmission there will not be a log in the webcast page.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 8th, 2011 at 3:03 AM
Title: Re: English translation of Tibetan Shurangama Version
Content:
username said:
Several versions and file formats, just after halfway down the page: http://www.fodian.net/world/ " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

LastLegend said:
Thanks my friend.

But I don't think the Tibetan Version is there unless I am mistaken. All of them translated by Chinese.


Malcolm wrote:
This is the version that was translated into Tibetan:

https://books.google.com/books?id=z9xjaTG9Rm8C&lpg=PA99&ots=kejYqfQTQw&dq=lamotte%20surangama%20samadhi&pg=PA99#v=onepage&q=lamotte%20surangama%20samadhi&f=false " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 8th, 2011 at 1:17 AM
Title: Re: Buddhism & Guns?
Content:
Dexing said:
Didn't say I could, but I won't dare to skew the teachings to accommodate my Ego.

True protection is not in violence, but in sharing Dharma.

By the way, do you have a link to the MPNS quote you posted about taking up arms?


Malcolm wrote:
No one is skewing anything. And you cannot share Dharma with barbarians.

When someone is attacking you, you have a Mahāyāna obligation to protect yourself so you can continue to help others. Hīnayāna practitioners have no such obligation.

The citation is my translation from Tibetan, done this morning.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 8th, 2011 at 12:43 AM
Title: Re: Buddhism & Guns?
Content:


Dexing said:
In the Diamond Sutra the Buddha even talks about a time when he had his body parts cut away, but was able to keep his cool and didn't react violently. So he walked the walk, and expects anyone truly serious about awakening and the path to Buddhahood to do the same.

Malcolm wrote:
The Cakkavatti Sihanada Sutta gives this advice to the righteous king:

This, dear son, that you, leaning on the Dhamma, honoring, respecting and revering it, doing homage to it, hallowing it, being yourself a Dhamma-banner, a Dhamma-signal, having the Dhamma as your master, should provide the right watch, ward and protection for your own folk, for the army, for the nobles, for vassals and brahmans and householders, for town and country dwellers, for the religious world and for beasts and birds.[40]
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/harris/wheel392.html#ch2 " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


The buddha in the example you give was a bodhisattva on the stages. Ordinary people cannot be expected to make such sacrifices. And I doubt you could either.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 8th, 2011 at 12:25 AM
Title: Re: 'Non-duality' and 'neutrality'
Content:
alpha said:
can you actually see something?
because mind can only see things other than itself.


Malcolm wrote:
The Yogacara Madhyamakas like Santarakshita accept that mind is self-knowing (svasaṃvedana).

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 7th, 2011 at 11:08 PM
Title: Re: Buddhism & Guns?
Content:
gregkavarnos said:
I'll take it that this is the Mahayana version of the Mahaparinirvana Su**a?

Malcolm wrote:
I would not call it a version, it is completley different in content...


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 7th, 2011 at 10:52 PM
Title: Re: 'Non-duality' and 'neutrality'
Content:
White Lotus said:
you will have to excuse me, but in my experience non duality is a non conceptual seeing of reality, that has very little to do with dualistic opposites that we use in logic.

Malcolm wrote:
The dualistic opposites form the basis for conventional delusions, all conceptual thinking is linguistic thinking.







White Lotus said:
it is beyond existence or non existence, but saying that it exists is fine...

Malcolm wrote:
If you are a Hindu, sure. But not if you are a Buddhist.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 7th, 2011 at 9:17 PM
Title: Re: Buddhism & Guns?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Mahāyānaparinivana sūtra states:

"The Bhagavan replied to Kashyapa: "Protecting and upholding the sublime dharma, that is the cause and condition of acheiving the vajra body. Kashyapa, through the cause and condition of having protected the sublime dharma in the past, one will always possess the vajrabody and it will never perish. Son of a good family, when protecting the sublime dharma one does not protect the five disciplines (pañcaśila); one also does not guard conduct, but instead taking up arms such as  swords, bows and arrows, spears and so on is the completely pure discipline of a bhikṣu"

And:

"Son of a good family, lay persons who protect the dharma should take up arms, protecting and guarding the bhikṣus who guard the dharma. Just protecting the five disciplines does not make one a so-called "person of the Mahāyāna". Even if one does not protect the five disciplines but protects the sublime dharma, one is called a Mahāyāni. If one protects the sublime dharma, one should take up arms and protect dharma teachers."


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 7th, 2011 at 11:35 AM
Title: Re: the ever-changing Western view of Madhyamaka
Content:


tobes said:
There are good reasons for thinking that the Ratnavali was written quite a bit later than the MMK and the Vig...


Malcolm wrote:
What reasons are those?



tobes said:
It is, as you say, clearly a Mahayana text. It seems probable that the 'Nagarjuna' who wrote the MMK and the Vig was a Mahasangika.

Malcolm wrote:
More likely, a Sammitya monk, given that he provisionally accepts the avipranaśa theory, the one place in the whole of the MMK where he ventures an opinion

tobes said:
But one thing is for sure: there is a narrative about all of this which although clearly speculative, purports to have more coherence than it should.

Malcolm wrote:
However, it is undeniable that there is a verse in the PP in 25000 lines that is more or less identical with the mangalam at the beginning of the MMK.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 7th, 2011 at 10:39 AM
Title: Re: Buddhist temples vie to recruit Mongolians
Content:
username said:
Yes it's karmic too and education's best. But no one is suggesting any legislation, merely leveling the playing ground so the facts can be presented which is what we don't have in Lhasa or in the cocooned cult members abroad. Tibetans see them as collaborators and informers which they themselves don't deny any more and if TGE did any less, there will be blood in the opposite direction. They are not a real big problem as they did their damage about 60 years ago. In a way where it matters most, Tibet, they have self destructed. Even then it wasn't just them or Mao but other forces too. As far as Mongolia is concerned, things can change either for worse or the better rapidly with populist trends and the wrong/right figurehead. Lets see, I think it will be OK there in the end but it's not key like Tibet in so many ways.


Malcolm wrote:
The real issue facing Mongolia is Uranium mining.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 7th, 2011 at 9:58 AM
Title: Re: Buddhist temples vie to recruit Mongolians
Content:



username said:
The foreign office/state dept.s reps to US of certain strategic countries, like Mongolia, do have power within the country power elites.

Malcolm wrote:
Problem is, I beleive in freedom of religion (no matter now deluded), even for Dolgyal wallas. If they want to worships ghosts, well, they can. After all things like Macoumbe, Santeria, and so on are really much worse.

While I agree with HHDL's POV in principle, there are some ways in which his govt.'s handeling of the Dolgyal issue is less than skillful.

Thus my perspective is that education is the best option. Besides, if they tried to outlaw Dogyal, there would be blood running in the streets of UB, seriously.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 7th, 2011 at 9:43 AM
Title: Re: Buddhist temples vie to recruit Mongolians
Content:
Huseng said:
Interesting short video on Mongolia's religious revival.


Namdrol said:
Lots of Dolgyal in Mongolia. It's a huge issue. So large in fact the Consul General of the Mongolia talked with me for about an hour about it and possible solutions.

username said:
Lucky for him he bumped into you as one of the few who knows what he's talking about. Wonder whatever hapened to http://danzanravjaa.typepad.com/ " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Malcolm wrote:
Yes, well, I told him since Mongolia is a democracy, there wasn't anything legal they could do about it (freedom of religion and all that) but that they could encourage _education_ about it. He was not at all happy to learn that Dolgyal as Manjushri was a concept of Mongolian origin in the 19th century.

Basically, there are few Nyingmapas in Mongolia, and there is a tremendous bias against as well as interestin in Nyingma there.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 7th, 2011 at 8:09 AM
Title: Re: 'dze bo?
Content:
Jinzang said:
Through the help of Google, I found the term on http://www.rangwang.net/index.php?essayId=548. The context is not strong enough to suggest what the term means, but I do get the idea that it is some sort of typical suffering.


Malcolm wrote:
I also saw this.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 7th, 2011 at 7:58 AM
Title: Re: Pointing out instructions
Content:
adinatha said:
Sorry can't say more.

Malcolm wrote:
Actually, you should not say anything unless you had a student you wanted to teach.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 7th, 2011 at 7:53 AM
Title: Re: Why combine Dzogchen and Mahamudra?
Content:
adinatha said:
We have methods for realizing Mahamudra in half a day.

Malcolm wrote:
Then teach them, don't just brag about them and lock them away in some text that is too holy to look at.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 7th, 2011 at 7:51 AM
Title: Re: Why combine Dzogchen and Mahamudra?
Content:
username said:
And numerous others like mahasiddha Shakya Shri in recent history who had two large camps side by side, one on each, all the way back through history to Kumaradza who taught both Longchenpa and the 3rd Karmapa:
http://www.kagyu.org.nz/content/aspirationprayer.html " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

adinatha said:
Kumaradza did not teach Mahamudra.

Malcolm wrote:
Sure he did. There is an entire text devoted to Sahaja Mahamudra that cites Saraha's tradition explicitly in the Vima Nyinthig attributed to Vimalamitra.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 7th, 2011 at 7:49 AM
Title: Re: Pointing out instructions
Content:


username said:
Sam is really reasnoable and he changes his mind quickly on a hypothesis, like the little iffy one quoted, if someone says something sensible. Anyway we all can sort of smell dodgy texts. I always hoped, but never said to you, that you would translate some of the 17.

Malcolm wrote:
we'll see, I ain't dead yet.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 7th, 2011 at 7:35 AM
Title: Re: Pointing out instructions
Content:
username said:
Hi Namdrol, You have written some of these facts before for years as have Sam and Karmay and others. Also we know how texts are re-revealed sometimes often word for word. So we know what is important. However adinatha's main point you avoid is that Nubchen invented the whole Dzogchen lineage and vehicle status out of selfish ambition, as a fact.

Malcolm wrote:
Even that were SVS's POV, I would not be inclined to accept it.

As a practitioner, I accept the what the tradition says about itself understanding that there are spritiual reasons for the various accounts of the lineage.

As a scholar, I accept only what can be ascertained as a certainty according to the common perception of human beings. So for example, if I find a number of obscure tantras embeded in a terma cycle that are also found in the NGB, as I have, I have to assume the terton is borrowing them into his collection.

I don't have a problem with awakened humans borrowing old texts and repurposing them or reviving them.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 7th, 2011 at 7:13 AM
Title: Re: Pointing out instructions
Content:
username said:
This is an old article I read long before and magnus, whom I agree with here in his interpretation of Sam, posted it here before too if I remember correctly. Sam is not the type of person who would draw such radical conclusions based on almost nothing. He is very respectful and also conservative. While he hypothesizes sometimes, he never states things as fact without evidence and is always flexible. He states all the facts he deems relevant often contradictory. That's just not his style. People can post on his blog and he answers honestly, so I don't buy any of that interpretation. Also he has read widely, including Samten Karmay and others, who state the texts how Dzogchen was actually banned by local rulers in North India and never was properly established openly before it went North and lots lots more. This is a big field not just summed up in a few pages of an article. Attacking Ekajati's protected lineage merely after mis-reading a short article when someone just finished their PhD is going over the top for probably other personal reasons.

Malcolm wrote:
The seventeen tantras cannot be firmly dated earlier than their initial production by Dangma Lhungyal. Between him and Nyanban Tingzin Zangpo there is only a single master, Bey Lodro Wangchug (one Rinchen Bar is also sometimes added to the list). We can positively date the end of Chetsun Senge Wangchug's life to the early 12th century.

Supposedly, Lodro Wangchug concealed the Seventeen Tantras in Samye, and Dangma Lhungyal removed them from hiding at Samye and gave them to Chetsun.

The Vima Nyinthig is the earliest text to list the seventeen tantras and their subject matter. For the most part, the Vima Nyinthig is the terma of Chetsun. Thus, teachings like the Tshig gsum gnad rdeg, etc., also cannot be dated earlier than the late11th --early 12th century.

These are the kinds of facts that limit textual analysis. You can only go by when a text actually appears.

There are three masters between Vimala and Chestun, and since tradition holds that Nyingthig tradition was a single lineage until Chetsun, we would have to accept that these three or four masters passed on several thousand handwritten folios i.e. the several hundred pages of the seventeen tantras as well as their lenghty commentaries, between roughly 800 AD and the early 12th century when Chetsun passed on his lineage to Zhangton Tashi Dorje who lived between 1097 and 1167 around 1123 when they met. Thus, the latest date for the seventeen tantras is 1123. Obviously they were composed earlier, since the Vima Nyinthig is based on them.

Zhangton's son, Nima Bum, wrote the earliest independent commentary on the Vima Nyinthig. It is a very interesting text, and is dense with citations from the seventeen tantras, and is the model upon which Longchenpa based his own Tshig Don Mdzod. Nyibum was also a disciple of Jetsun Dragpa Gyaltsen and was closely connected with the Sakya school. The Nyinthig teachings were a family lineage for three generations i.e. Tashi Dorje, Nyibum and his nephew, Guru Jober.

The commentaries for the seventeen tantras are first mentioned by Longchenpa and so cannot date later than he. It seems unlikely they were actually authored by Vimalamitra, but who knows. They were mostly likely composed in the early 13th century since they must have been known to Kumararaja. Perhaps they were composed by Nyibum, since he was known to be a great scholar, his title was "Zhang mkhas pa" i.e. "Zhang Pandita". Or there were three masters between Nyibum and Kumararaja, Jober, Sangye Gyab and Melong Dorje, all thirteen century masters. Anyone of them too could have composed these commentaries.

Jober, was known to have many disciples. He passed away in 1258.

The Khandro Nyinthig was produced in the mid-to late thirteenth century after Jober started teachings Vima Nyinthig widely. We do not have good dates for Pema Ledretsal, the terton for the Khandro Nyinthig. All we know is that he was active in the mid to later thirteenth century and that he did not life a long life.

The Khandro Nyinthig presents itself as a commentary of one tantra specifically, i.e., the Longsal Tantra. Thus this tantra predates the Khandro Nything but is later than the Seventeen Tantras, it was probably composed in the early 13th century. The Khandro Nyinthig is the earliest text that mentions the Longsal Tantra. This tantra summarizes all the topics of the Vima Nyinthig and the seventeen tantras into 113 chapters, giving detailed instruction for practicing creation stage, completion stage as well as Dzogchen tregchö and thögal. Most later Nyingthig termas atrributed to Padmasambhava cite the Longsal tantra extensively. The Khandro Nyinthig also begins the tradition of six short tagdrol tantras. Notably, it has a concise version of the Single Son of the All the Buddhas, originally found in Ser Yig Can of the Vima Nyinthig.

We can trace the ideas and their spread pretty well after Chetsun. We cannot trace the origin of these texts at all well, and so have to rely on the history of the seventeen tantras and the Vima Nyinthig as presented in the Lo rgyus chen mo since this is our earliest source of information about this tradition. We have to admit that objectively, we really do not know anything about this tradition prior to Senge Wangchuk.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 6th, 2011 at 11:50 PM
Title: Re: Renunciation Impossible?
Content:
TMingyur said:
Harboring the idea of having said or saying anything that is of importance beyond one's own sphere would be a case of exemplifying the opposite of renunciation.

Malcolm wrote:
Truly, you are only talking to yourself.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 6th, 2011 at 11:48 PM
Title: Re: the ever-changing Western view of Madhyamaka
Content:
adinatha said:
Perhaps one does't need Madhyamaka either. Masters use tools when needed. The complete path can be traversed without ever studying Madhyamaka.

Namdrol said:
Rarely.

N

adinatha said:
Really the Madhyamaka view are shastras based on the Pali suttas. There is source material for almost all Nagarjuna's points in the suttas. The Buddha said not to embrace or reject views, spelled out DO is nonself, etc.

Malcolm wrote:
The reason Nagarjuna only cites from the Agamas in the MMK is that his audience are non-Mahayanists i.e. the person in the text with whom he is engaging in a dialogue  is a non-Mahayanist (many people do not realize that MMK is written in the form of an philosophical dialogue with the opponent's position being set forth as well).

His mangalam, however, is taken right from the PP sutras. Not only this, Nagarjuna came from the hearland of Mahayana, Andhra Pradesh. His praises are clearly Mahayana works. Then there is the Ratnavali, which is a Mahāyāna work for certain, and so on.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 6th, 2011 at 11:37 PM
Title: Re: Blue Dakini Vajravarahi (Vima Nyingthig)
Content:
Pero said:
Coming from and coming through Longchenpa are two different things. Vima Nyingthing is called "Vima" because it's a lineage from Vimalamitra. Lama, Zabmo and Khandro Yangtig are from Longchenpa. Also Longchen Nyingthig is called "Longchen" because Jigmed Lingpa received it from Longchenpa. Or am I mistaken?
So it's different saying Dudtsi Jonshing is from Vima Nyingthig or Longchenpa and though it's not really important (sorry for derailing your thread), now I'm really curious where it comes from (and not through whom hehe).


Malcolm wrote:
This text is from the bla ma yang thig, volume two, and details an outer, inner and secret guru yoga and utterly secret unsurpassed guru yoga. The blue vārāhi is the secret guru yoga.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 6th, 2011 at 10:46 PM
Title: Re: Do any ancient Tibetan Buddhist texts give practical advice?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
This is the form that worldly advice shows up in Tibetan texts, for example, this slice of advice from the explanatory tantra of Tibetan Medicine:

Keep one’s word. After giving one’s word, it is necessary to follow through. 
Even though one has promised to engage in negative actions, do the opposite. 
Begin positive actions even though delayed. 
Investigate in the beginning, then commit for future benefits. 
Do not accept advice as true; accept it after thorough investigation. 
Think about what is being said, then speak. 
Refrain from telling secrets. 
Do not listen to [petty] woman, and control one’s gossiping mouth. 
Speak freely to without deceit who view one with kindness without deceitful words. 
Be steady, and be happy with present company. 
Do not permit enemies to be free, tame them with skill. 
Support one’s relatives and employees, look for a long while at [those who have been] kind in the past. 
Respect one’s elders, i.e. one’s teacher, father, uncle and so on. 
One mind should be in accord with one’s countrymen, friends, and constant companions. 
In business be strict; when necessary, behave liberally. 
Accept defeat if mistaken; be measured if victorious. 
If one is an expert, diminish one’s arrogance, if one is wealthy, understand it is sufficient. 
Do not scorn inferiors, do not be jealous of superiors. 
Do not depend on evil men, do not make enemies of sorcerers or priests. 
Do not use the wealth of others, and avoid [causes for] retribution and taking oaths. 
Plant one’s feet to have no regrets. 
Do not give power to evil persons. 
One’s mind should be honest, improve the basis of patience and openness. 
It is important to accomplish most activities in a timely fashion.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 6th, 2011 at 10:37 PM
Title: Re: Renunciation Impossible?
Content:
TMingyur said:
How could I exemplify anything other than "postings"?

The case be yours, mine is none.

Malcolm wrote:
Right, the words you repeatedly say in this board have no meaning, no effect, no karma, no consequences....sure.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 6th, 2011 at 10:28 PM
Title: Re: Renunciation Impossible?
Content:
Namdrol said:
If the path of renunciation were still effective, there would be no need for Vajrayāna.

TMingyur said:
Actually the path of renunciation still is very effective ... hmh ... what does this tell us about Vajrayāna then (if your logic is right)?

Malcolm wrote:
If you exemplify the path of renunciation, I rest my case -- it is not effective anymore.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 6th, 2011 at 10:24 PM
Title: Re: Do any ancient Tibetan Buddhist texts give practical advice?
Content:
Astus said:
How about "Ordinary wisdom: Sakya Pandita's treasury of good advice"? .

Malcolm wrote:
That's true, but that is based on earlier Indian texts.

The two Nagarjuna texts you mention are mostly advice for kings, not commoners.

Three vows literature is not that practical.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 6th, 2011 at 10:22 PM
Title: Re: Buddhist temples vie to recruit Mongolians
Content:
Huseng said:
Interesting short video on Mongolia's religious revival.


Malcolm wrote:
Lots of Dolgyal in Mongolia. It's a huge issue. So large in fact the Consul General of the Mongolia talked with me for about an hour about it and possible solutions.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 6th, 2011 at 10:19 PM
Title: Re: Do any ancient Tibetan Buddhist texts give practical advice?
Content:


Luke said:
So are there any ancient Tibetan Buddhist texts which give practical advice for ordinary people?

Malcolm wrote:
Sure, but they are not of much interest to scholars and so they don't get translated.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 6th, 2011 at 10:06 PM
Title: Re: Pointing out instructions
Content:
adinatha said:
What about Sam Van Schaik's theory that Dzogchen's tantras were a Tibetan creation by folks like Nubchen who were ambitious to start their own lineage?

heart said:
I can't see him writing this anywhere on his blog, where did you find that?

/magnus


Malcolm wrote:
It would be in his book.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 6th, 2011 at 10:06 PM
Title: Re: Renunciation Impossible?
Content:
Huseng said:
The need to earn an income is tied to having to rent or upkeep a private residence, maybe drive a car, eat whatever you want rather than living on donated foods, etc... whereas a renunciate by definition is supposed to be free of such concerns.

Namdrol said:
Yes, but in this day and age the path of renunciation is impossible.

N

Caz said:
Im sure you know as well as I renunciation is a mind, Perhapes it maybe true that the lifestyle attached to one whom is a traditional renunciate may not be appropriate in the west but the mind is more then possible.

Malcolm wrote:
The path of renunciation is not effective anymore, that is the point. If the path of renuncitation were still effective, there would be no need for Vajrayāna.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 6th, 2011 at 10:04 PM
Title: Re: Lhundrup in Jodo Shinshu Buddhism?
Content:
mr. gordo said:
I was leaning towards that.  What do you think is the best translation for lhun grub?  Effortlessly naturally established? Spontaneous presence?


Malcolm wrote:
depending on context either "effortless" or "naturally formed".

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 6th, 2011 at 11:39 AM
Title: Re: From a Namdrol post: socialism/capitalism
Content:
adinatha said:
If a martial law is declared and the Army Reserve is ordered to fire on Americans, then you will see that, but only after a lot of civilians are killed. Actually, the US police forces, especially, have an "us versus them" mentality toward the general public. They don't really hesitate to kick Joe Six Pack's ass.

Malcolm wrote:
The police have become increasingly militarized since the 1970's. Especially these days when so many of these guys have seen tours of duty in Iraq, the police overall have an increasingly militaristic attitude and bearing. Swat teams are a large part of the problem, because of their paramilitary training.

They even send swast teams to raid milk parlors these days:

http://www.foodrenegade.com/rawsome-foods-raided-again-by-swat/ " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 6th, 2011 at 11:34 AM
Title: Re: From a Namdrol post: socialism/capitalism
Content:


adinatha said:
If a martial law is declared and the Army Reserve is ordered to fire on Americans, then you will see that, but only after a lot of civilians are killed. Actually, the US police forces, especially, have an "us versus them" mentality toward the general public. They don't really hesitate to kick Joe Six Pack's ass.

Malcolm wrote:
Forget the reserve:

The U.S. military expects to have 20,000 uniformed troops inside the United States by 2011 trained to help state and local officials respond to a nuclear terrorist attack or other domestic catastrophe, according to Pentagon officials.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/11/30/AR2008113002217.html " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Ceaser has crossed the Rubicon, the Republic is all but dead.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 6th, 2011 at 10:59 AM
Title: Re: From a Namdrol post: socialism/capitalism
Content:


Huseng said:
Ugly ugly situation.

Malcolm wrote:
Think Rome; think resource wars, think Gibbon's decline and fall...


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 6th, 2011 at 10:14 AM
Title: Re: 'dze bo?
Content:
Jinzang said:
It's a collection of inspiring quotes hand written in a notebook by Lama Phurbu Tashi. So, yes, it could be a transcription error, though there have only been a one or two errors so far, missing vowel signs. The quote is from Lama Zhang, a series of analogies on how to meditate.


Malcolm wrote:
You need to find the original.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 6th, 2011 at 9:31 AM
Title: Re: From a Namdrol post: socialism/capitalism
Content:
Enochian said:
Right but it hasn't been pushed down yet, and probably won't.  America is still AAA.

There is a reason why everyone in the world heavily invests in American stock exchanges.

Malcolm wrote:
Standard & Poor’s removed the United States government from its list of risk-free borrowers on Friday night, dropping the rating to AA+ on concerns about rising federal debt.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/06/business/us-debt-downgraded-by-sp.html " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 6th, 2011 at 9:25 AM
Title: Re: 'dze bo?
Content:
Jinzang said:
Does anyone know the translation of 'dze bo? Not in my dictionary. The complete sentence is:

'dod med 'dze bo lta bur bzhag/

Malcolm wrote:
What text is this? Seems like a misspelling to me.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 6th, 2011 at 8:52 AM
Title: Re: Buddhism & Guns?
Content:
Luke said:
so why did you...make it seem as though Tibetan Buddhism explicitly forbids ordinary laypeople from owning guns and from using them in self-defense situations?

Malcolm wrote:
I didn't. I merely pointed out some statistics around gun violence, what guns are for (killing), and the consequences of using them (death and injury), and that it is much harder to use a gun for self-defense, or even hunting, than most people seem to understand. I have a lot of experience with guns, compared to most Buddhists I know.

Incidentally, Padme -- if you want a gun for self-defense, that will really work when you need it to, don't mess around with a rifle or a pistol. Get a 12 guage shotgun. Learn how to shoot it i.e. pull it tight to your shoulder when firing it, or you will get a large bruise.

Shotguns intended for defensive use have barrels as short as 18 inches (46 cm) for private use (the minimum shotgun barrel length allowed by law in the United States without special permits; most manufactures use a minimum length of 18.5 inches, to give leeway in the case of a measuring dispute). Barrel lengths of less than 18 inches (46 cm) as measured from the breechface to the muzzle when the weapon is in battery with its action closed and ready to fire, or have an overall length of less than 26 inches (66 cm) are classified as short barreled shotguns ("sawn-off shotguns") under the 1934 National Firearms Act and are heavily regulated.
Shotguns used by military, police, and other government agencies are exempted from regulation under the National Firearms Act of 1934, and often have barrels as short as 12 to 14 inches (30 to 36 cm), so that they are easier to handle in confined spaces. Non-prohibited private citizens may own short-barreled shotguns by purchasing a $200 tax stamp from the Federal government and passing an extensive background check (state and local laws may be more restrictive). Defensive shotguns sometimes have no buttstock or will have a folding stock to reduce overall length even more when required.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shotgun " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

With a shotgun, accuracy is much less of an issue.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 6th, 2011 at 7:51 AM
Title: Re: Buddhism & Guns?
Content:
Padme said:
I have been tempted to get a gun and target practice in my yard for the SOLE purpose of being seen so word could spread that I now own a gun. It's rather disconcerting to know that I am known as "the one without a gun".


Malcolm wrote:
You need to do torma offerings to annie oakley:


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 6th, 2011 at 6:58 AM
Title: Re: Pointing out instructions
Content:


adinatha said:
What about Sam Van Schaik's theory that Dzogchen's tantras were a Tibetan creation by folks like Nubchen who were ambitious to start their own lineage?

Namdrol said:
Who can question the motivations of dead men?

The truth is that there are all kinds of traditions, often contradictory -- they are not that meaningful to practitioners.

adinatha said:
The Nyingthig is not meaningful to practitioners?

Malcolm wrote:
I meant the various stories and arguments around the origins of these traditions are not that meaningful. For example, for some it is meaningful if Shakyamuni Buddha taught something, for others it is more meaningful if the Buddha didbn't teach it but it somehow was communicated at the Sambhogakaya level, etc.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 6th, 2011 at 5:50 AM
Title: Re: Lhundrup in Jodo Shinshu Buddhism?
Content:
mr. gordo said:
I came across the following passage in the book "The Vision of Buddhism" by the late professor  Roger J. Corless:
When the shinjin has arisen, and the nembutsu says itself, it occurs jinen, spontaneously, naturally, or automatically. Jinen is the Japanese pronunciation of the Chinese tzu-jan, "selfly,"  which is a popular term in Taoism.  It came to be used by Buddhists for the manner in which Buddhas do without doing.   It is a more or less exact equivalent of the Tibetan lhundrup, the spontaneously activity of the Vajra Realm.  The difference between Jinen and lhundrup is not in the spontaneity, but in how one obtains it.  In Vajrayana, one must progress through the stages before spontaneous action takes over.  Shinran found that, in his experience, Amitabha picked him up and placed him directly in the spontaneous energy mode.
Is there any merit in what he says or is he reaching quite a bit here?

Malcolm wrote:
He does not understand lhun grub.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 6th, 2011 at 5:48 AM
Title: Re: Pointing out instructions
Content:


adinatha said:
What about Sam Van Schaik's theory that Dzogchen's tantras were a Tibetan creation by folks like Nubchen who were ambitious to start their own lineage?

Malcolm wrote:
Who can question the motivations of dead men?

The truth is that there are all kinds of traditions, often contradictory -- they are not that meaningful to practitioners.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 6th, 2011 at 5:27 AM
Title: Re: Pointing out instructions
Content:


adinatha said:
What about the PP sutras, not discovered in a lake by Nagarjuna?

Malcolm wrote:
It's a nice story. But unlikely since the PP sutras show clear textual development which can be traced in their Chinese and Tibetan translations.


adinatha said:
And the tantras? Direct contact with buddhas or no?

Malcolm wrote:
I have little issue with visionary production of texts.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 6th, 2011 at 5:12 AM
Title: Re: Pointing out instructions
Content:
adinatha said:
In some prev post you said you didn't think Maitreyanatha gave the five treatises to Asanga, that Asanga wrote them and attributed them.

Malcolm wrote:
I never said that. This is a common opinion but it is not mine. My opinion is that Maitreyanath was a human teacher, a Pandita, who wrote the five treatises. His identification with Bodhisattva Maitreya is really quite late as is the story of Asanga's retreat and encounter with Bodhisattva Maitreya.

My opinion is that after that Maitreya chapter was added to the Perfection of Wisdom sutra sometime after the 6th century (mostly likley as a polemical response to Madhyamaka commentaries on Abhisamaya-alamkara that were critical of Yogacara), the indentity of Bodhisattva Maitreya and Maitreyanatha were conflated because the Maitreya chapter adds Yogacara specific themese to the PP sutras. However, we can be sure that the Maitreya Chapter is a later interpolation because it is missing from earlier, pre-sixth century translations of the PP sutras.

Haribhadra (8th century) was the first author on record to assert the author of the Abhisamayalamkara, and by extension, the other four treatises to be Bodhisattva Maitrya.



N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 6th, 2011 at 4:55 AM
Title: Re: Pointing out instructions
Content:


adinatha said:
Who? What do they say?

Malcolm wrote:
Bhavabhata and Bhavyakirit both hold that "This teacher (i.e. Śakyamuni) having attained buddhahood in the beginningless past taught the Cakrasamvara tantras, but later, after becoming the son of Śuddodana, did not teach it. Their reasoning holds that since Cakrasamvara is continually practiced by the heros and yoginis of the twenty four countries, even when eon forms and perished (the twenty four countries) do not form and perish so [the Cakrasamvara] does not disappear. Even though other dharmas may have also been taught in the beginning, since they are destroyed by the formation and perishing of the eon, since they disappear during the interval, they must be taught again by Śākyamuni.

A special feature of Cakrasamvara is that unlike Guhyasamaja, Kalacakra, Hevajra, etc., the mandala of Cakrasamvara is never withdrawn it is not necessary for Śākyamuni to teach it again as it would redundant.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 6th, 2011 at 4:42 AM
Title: Re: Buddhism & Guns?
Content:
Luke said:
Here's a quote from the Dalai Lama which I quoted in one of my previous posts.  No one has responded to it yet.  What do you think are the Buddhist sources of this statement by HHDL?  It's clear that he talking about ordinary people and not just about mahasiddhas. On the other hand, the current Dalai Lama has frequently said that violent self-defense is justified when there is no other option:
“If someone has a gun and is trying to kill you, it would be reasonable to shoot back with your own gun.”
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/220530/dalai-lamas-army/dave-kopel?page=2 " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Malcolm wrote:
It is well established that Buddhists have a right to defend themselves. That is probably why no one responded.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 6th, 2011 at 4:12 AM
Title: Re: the ever-changing Western view of Madhyamaka
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
A very techincal article on the Indian and Tibetan usages of the Yogacara three natures scheme.

http://wordpress.tsadra.org/?p=1215#more-1215 " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 6th, 2011 at 3:26 AM
Title: Re: the ever-changing Western view of Madhyamaka
Content:


adinatha said:
Sure.

Namdrol said:
Then yes, from a Madhyamaka perspective, dharmakāya has (these) qualities.

N

adinatha said:
Where in the Madhyamaka literature are these qualities discussed?

Malcolm wrote:
The qualities of Buddhahood are discussed by Nagārjuna breifly in Ratnavali, Candrakirti has a brief discussion of them in Madhyamakaavatara, Arya Vimuktasena and Haribhadra extensively discusses these in their commentaries on the Abhisamaya-alamkara.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 6th, 2011 at 3:23 AM
Title: Re: Pointing out instructions
Content:
bulhaeng said:
Basically every buddhist school created a chart which clearly prooves that a) it's teaching are the best b) the author can trace his lineage back to Shakyamuni Buddha.

Namdrol said:
B is mistaken -- Dzogchen does not trace it teachings back to Shakyamuni; the Cakrasamvara cycle of tantras do not trace their lineage back to Sakyamuni and so on.

N

adinatha said:
Re: Chakrasamvara, Guhyasamaja, etc., There is room for disagreement on this point as you know.

Malcolm wrote:
No, there is no room for disagreement re: Cakrasamvara, mainly because this point is clearly commented upon by Indian masters.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 6th, 2011 at 3:21 AM
Title: Re: Pointing out instructions
Content:
booker said:
And where in the sudden approach there's place for the path of renunciation which always is said to be the basis for Sutra?

Malcolm wrote:
Sutra yāna, whether sudden or gradual, is still based on renunciation of sense objects.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 6th, 2011 at 1:14 AM
Title: Re: Buddhism & Guns?
Content:


Adamantine said:
Here is a link to the page in his autobiography where he discusses this, on googlebooks. He does own and use a gun, not to *kill* the hawks, but to inflict pain so that they learn their lesson. So it seems HH has a different view than some of the self-proclaimed pure Buddhists here who condemn the very possession of a gun, and who claim a gun can only be used for killing, since that's what it was designed for. In the Dalai Lama's view, he is clearly protecting life with the gun, not taking life. https://books.google.com/books?id=_3sq3rlvQuwC&pg=PA185&lpg=PA185&dq=dalai+lama+air+rifle&source=bl&ots=N9D_h53goH&sig=J_iWPtmv90mM4t8T_DajREMjLIY&hl=en&ei=mBU8Ttf_JYP4gAe1op3PBg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=8&ved=0CFoQ6AEwBw#v=onepage&q&f=false


Namdrol said:
Let me ask you something -- have you ever shot anything? I have, it is not fun. Nor is it amusing. Also, air guns can hurt hawks, injure them quite badly. In fact, we used to hunt birds with air rifles, because it is a little more challenging than using bird shot in a 20 guage shotgun. Trust me, you can easily kill a bird with an air rifle if you are a good shot.

N

N

Adamantine said:
In the book, if you read the section, HH points out that he is a good shot, as he grew up practicing on the 13th's rifle. So because he is a good shot, he can be confident he is only inflicting pain and not killing or seriously injuring. If you have an issue with this, take it up with HH. I have confidence in his grasp of the Dharma, I don't know about you.

Malcolm wrote:
I don't have an issue with it -- everyone's karma is their own.

I also understand that once a pellet or bullet leaves a barrel it is not under your control anymore.

I asked you whether you had ever shot at anything, etc. You did not answer.

See, coming from an "sportsman" family, I am "gun literate" -- my dad took me out and taught me how to shoot, handle and clean guns when I was seven, in 1969. When I was eight, I was allowed to go out hunting by myself with a 22. I have over the years shot bb guns, air rifles, 22's, 222 deer rifles, 30-06 bolt action rifles, 20 and 12 gauge shotuns, AR-15's, and even Kalishnakov semi-automatics. I have killed birds and other small animals. I also used to fish, also. Never shot a pistol, though, not that I can remember.

One generally speaking becomes good a shooting targers, so if it every comes up, you can hit what you aim at. You usually only aim at living things either to injure or kill.

Injuring sentient beings is not generally consistent with the bodhisattva vow, though there are of course exceptions.

You keep talking about swords -- well, at least with a sword, to use one you take a lot of personal risk -- you cannot harm or kill someone at a distance with a sword. And Golog is filled with bandits.

Saraha II was a fletcher, but I don't think he was a hunter.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 6th, 2011 at 12:29 AM
Title: Re: Book of Bodhisattva Precepts
Content:
Will said:
Rulu's latest translation, which is from the Bodhisattva-bhumi of Maitreya:

http://www.sutrasmantras.info/sutra31.html " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Malcolm wrote:
That would be Asanga, actually.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 6th, 2011 at 12:19 AM
Title: Re: Buddhism & Guns?
Content:
Adamantine said:
ANd for all you anti-gun Tibetan Buddhist fanatics, let's not forget that our lord of refuge, HH the Dalai Lama, himself has one and uses it regularly. From an interview:

RD: Do you have a favourite animal?
Dalai Lama: Birds maybe. I feed birds, peaceful birds. I'm a non-violent person, but if a hawk comes when I'm feeding birds, I lose my temper and get my air rifle.
RD: You have an air rifle?
Dalai Lama: Yes, although I shoot only to scare the hawks.

Sönam said:
Well, I would validate that (with complete sources) ... HHDL like to make jokes (fantasy?)

Sönam

Adamantine said:
Here is a link to the page in his autobiography where he discusses this, on googlebooks. He does own and use a gun, not to *kill* the hawks, but to inflict pain so that they learn their lesson. So it seems HH has a different view than some of the self-proclaimed pure Buddhists here who condemn the very possession of a gun, and who claim a gun can only be used for killing, since that's what it was designed for. In the Dalai Lama's view, he is clearly protecting life with the gun, not taking life. https://books.google.com/books?id=_3sq3rlvQuwC&pg=PA185&lpg=PA185&dq=dalai+lama+air+rifle&source=bl&ots=N9D_h53goH&sig=J_iWPtmv90mM4t8T_DajREMjLIY&hl=en&ei=mBU8Ttf_JYP4gAe1op3PBg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=8&ved=0CFoQ6AEwBw#v=onepage&q&f=false


Malcolm wrote:
Let me ask you something -- have you ever shot anything? I have, it is not fun. Nor is it amusing. Also, air guns can hurt hawks, injure them quite badly. In fact, we used to hunt birds with air rifles, because it is a little more challenging than using bird shot in a 20 guage shotgun. Trust me, you can easily kill a bird with an air rifle if you are a good shot.

N

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 6th, 2011 at 12:09 AM
Title: Re: Pointing out instructions
Content:
booker said:
]
Again this depends what is meant by Sutra.

Namdrol said:
Sutra means the method is taught. The method of Chan/Zen is ultimately grounded in the Lanka-avatara sutra's sudden approach.

N

booker said:
Hello Namdrol

Which method do you mean?

Malcolm wrote:
The Chan sudden approach to realizing dharmatā.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 6th, 2011 at 12:08 AM
Title: Re: Word Association Game
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
haze


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 5th, 2011 at 11:53 PM
Title: Re: Word Association Game
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
prince


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 5th, 2011 at 11:35 PM
Title: Re: Word Association Game
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
party


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 5th, 2011 at 10:18 PM
Title: Re: Pointing out instructions
Content:
bulhaeng said:
Basically every buddhist school created a chart which clearly prooves that a) it's teaching are the best b) the author can trace his lineage back to Shakyamuni Buddha.

Malcolm wrote:
B is mistaken -- Dzogchen does not trace it teachings back to Shakyamuni; the Cakrasamvara cycle of tantras do not trace their lineage back to Sakyamuni and so on.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 5th, 2011 at 9:31 PM
Title: Re: Renunciation Impossible?
Content:
Huseng said:
The need to earn an income is tied to having to rent or upkeep a private residence, maybe drive a car, eat whatever you want rather than living on donated foods, etc... whereas a renunciate by definition is supposed to be free of such concerns.

Namdrol said:
Yes, but in this day and age the path of renunciation is impossible.

N


Huseng said:
Why do you say that?

Malcolm wrote:
Because the power of afflictions is too strong.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 5th, 2011 at 12:46 PM
Title: Re: Buddhism & Guns?
Content:
gregkavarnos said:
\ and all the time you spent learning how to shoot straight and aim properly will assist even in the most miniscule way and guarantee you a positive rebirth in your next life?


Adamantine said:
WHy not? Certainly like Saraha, if you meditate while shooting targets and think of it as shooting holes through self-grasping or dualistic fixation then it could even bring liberation in this life and you can join the ranks of the mahasiddhas.

Malcolm wrote:
Maybe if your Guru sent you off to do such a thing....but otherwise it is just a fantasy.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 5th, 2011 at 6:18 AM
Title: Re: Economics..yes,,they are this dim
Content:


adinatha said:
tech breakthroughs two years back make shale oil much cheaper to extract.


Malcolm wrote:
Yes, it used to be 2:1 and higher.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 5th, 2011 at 6:13 AM
Title: Re: Buddhism & Guns?
Content:
David N. Snyder said:
Especially taser guns; with those there is definitely no intention of killing, they are not designed for killing at all -- just immobilizing the assailant until law enforcement can come to take him away.

The target with real guns in LE training is NOT the head or heart, but the center mass - torso since it is the largest area with the least movement, but for defense, the lower torso with a low caliber could be used. In such instances, a fatality is unlikely to occur.

Malcolm wrote:
Re tazers -- if you miss, you are screwed.

Police use tazers mostly on stationary persons who are resisting arrests.


David N. Snyder said:
the lower torso with a low caliber could be used. In such instances, a fatality is unlikely to occur.

Malcolm wrote:
A non-fatal abdomen shot with a low caliber bullet will not stop a determined attacker. And, given the poor accuracy of handguns, that person is likely to be close enough to harm you.

It is not easy to shoot someone who is attacking you, contrary to popular beleif.

Attacking animals are usually easier to shoot, because they generally engage in a display of aggression before attacking.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 5th, 2011 at 6:09 AM
Title: Re: Buddhism & Guns?
Content:


Padme said:
No, I have never hunted, shot an animal or killed anything intentionally.

Malcolm wrote:
Someine intent on harming you is unlikely to be stopped by a non-lethal round, and will be angered by it, actually.

If you are not prepared to kill someone with a handgun bought for self-defense, don't buy one.

If you think you can guarantee that you will be able to disable someone with a gunshot in self-defense, think again. Not only is it hard to shoot a stationary target with a handgun, it is even harder to shoot a moving target. Anyone who has handeled guns knows that I am telling the truth.

Generally speaking, the outside range of accuracy of a handgun is 50 yards.

A healthy man can cover this distance in under 10 seconds.


Padme said:
wouldn't it be interesting if there were also statistics on "events avoided by deterring with a gun". But of course no one keeps such statistics.

Malcolm wrote:
You can find such statistics at the NRA website, among others. They are not impressive.

All and all, you might get lucky or you might get killed when trying to use a handgun defensively. It really does boil down to whether or not you are ready to kill someone with a gun if your survival is at stake.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 5th, 2011 at 5:41 AM
Title: Re: Buddhism & Guns?
Content:
Padme said:
As I stated in reply to David, I imagine I would learn these things in training.

Malcolm wrote:
Shooting at a target is different than shooting a living, breathing person. And if you miss, well...

Good luck.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 5th, 2011 at 5:35 AM
Title: Re: Buddhism & Guns?
Content:
Padme said:
Good point. Even without the goggles I believe I would have an upper hand as far as darkness in the woods goes...


Namdrol said:
Wow, the fantasies about violence in this thread are really pretty amazing. Most ordinary people, when confronted with serious, life-threatening violence, freeze.

N

Padme said:
Are you implying that I am "fantasizing" about running and would just freeze? If so, let me enlighten you. In 1996 I lived in Brooklyn New York and was assaulted by a man on 4th Avenue when I got off a late night bus stop. He shoved me into an alley and assaulted me. I was able to poke him in the eyes, squeeze out from under him and escape. I ran like hell to the nearest Korean market where I called the police. Never occurred to me to freeze. How do you get this "most people" statistic? Plenty of people run from attacks, give me a break.


Malcolm wrote:
No. I am pointing out that all of this stuff about night goggles, etc., is all a fantasy.

When guns are involved, it is much harder to shoot at someone than you might imagine. We were talking about using guns to defend oneself.

Have you ever tried to shoot at an animal? Have you ever gone hunting? Killing is not so easy. I used to hunt when I was a boy. It is even harder to shoot a human being, without training that is. And what Buddhist wants training in how to kill?

Further, handguns are difficult to use. It is hard to shoot one accurately, even at close range. The larger a handgun is, the less accurate it is, without extensive, and regular training.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 5th, 2011 at 5:26 AM
Title: Re: Economics..yes,,they are this dim
Content:


adinatha said:
This hell on Earth situation of sudden depopulation is what the peak oil apocalypse promoters say must happen.That populations must return to the levels they were at pre-oil, which is between 500 mil and 1 bil, because oil is the energy that led to all these births and sustained the population explosion.

Malcolm wrote:
Not everyone in the peak oil community are predicting a catastrophe, the more balanced, like Greer, predict a long, halting, grinding stop with gradual population declines over the next four centuries.

Think Rome.

Shale oil, tar sands and so on is incredibly expensive to extract, like 4:1.

Also, as demand for oil drops because of a lack of demand from manufacturing because of oil scarcity (when oil become too scarce, industries that depend on it (plastics, chemicals, pharmaceuticals, industrial agriculture, etc.) will fail unilaterally, the price of oil will drop precipitously, and this drop in price will make these hard to access types of oil even less profitable.

Barring some amazing unforseen energy source, a long collapse is a reality, not a speculation.

N


