﻿Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 30th, 2017 at 9:12 PM
Title: Re: Why Secular Buddhism is Not True
Content:
Dan74 said:
I confess to be puzzled on many levels by this attack on SB. From where I stand, he offers a brand of Dharmic teachings that are easily palatable to many of those folks who are put off by various forms and beliefs of more traditional settings. Thanks to him, these folks have an access to Dharmic teachings and this is a wonderful thing. Tony Packer was another such teacher, though with a much lower profile.

Malcolm wrote:
There is no Buddhadharma without rebirth in samsara as its context. Buddhadharma is specifically a solution to the existential problem of rebirth, and therefore, samsara. If one removes the doctrine of karma and rebirth, one removes the very reason for Buddhadharma's existence. People who do not accept rebirth and karma are not interested in Dharma.

What Batchelor does is try to force some so called "early Buddhist text" into a tortured reading in order to justify his denatured "Buddhism." But as we known, "Buddhism" is one thing, and Buddhadharma, quite another.


Dan74 said:
A few months ago, in the wake of the recent Rigpa scandal, I was pretty shocked to find out how much confusion exists in the TB community about the key practice of pure perception, even among long-term practitioners. So why do folks keep hammering this old Right View chestnut when they are clueless about their basic practice? I don't know, it just seems wrong-headed on so many levels.

Malcolm wrote:
What makes you think Tibetan Buddhists are confused about the practice of pure perception?

With respect to right view, it applies to all followers of Buddhadharma, even if they might be a little confused about Vajrayāna practices such as pure perception. Right view is fundamental to Buddhadharma and all liberation proceeds from cultivating right view and eschewing wrong view.


Dan74 said:
The title of this thread offers a clue, perhaps. "Why Secular Buddhist is Not True". Is Buddhism really about being true?

Malcolm wrote:
I can't speak to "Buddhism," there being so many kinds today. I can speak to Buddhadharma however, and yes, Buddhadharma is about truth: the truth of suffering, its origin, its cessation, and the path (which begins with right view, of course).

Dan74 said:
I thought it was medicine to cure the delusion. It either works for a practitioner, or it doesn't, or (a third possibility) it works up to a point but then brings him or her to a dead end because of the assumptions built into it, like the Buddha's own teachers prior to his enlightenment did. True, per se, got nothing to do with it.

Malcolm wrote:
Truth, per se, has everything to do with it. The reason why Udraka Ramaputra and Alara Kamala's path were incomplete is because they did not understand the four truths that are the bedrock upon which Buddhadharma is based.


Dan74 said:
Whether in this life or next, these folks will have still benefitted from receiving and practicing some Dharmic teachings even if they were somewhat flawed and incomplete, as opposed to receiving none.

Malcolm wrote:
It is questionable how "Dharmic" Batchelor's teachings in fact are. I think the opposite, actually, because his own understanding of the Buddhadharma is so deeply adulterated with his intellectual contrivances.

Secular Buddhism is defective from birth.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 28th, 2017 at 12:40 AM
Title: Re: Shakyamuni as the Eternal Buddha
Content:
Queequeg said:
Maybe its a distinction without real significance, but with the exception of certain interpretations within the Japanese Single Practice schools, holding one sutra or another as primary does not equate to holding one sutra or another exclusively. Rather, the primary text is the basis of the school's view through which other texts are interpreted and understood.

Malcolm wrote:
There is no evidence of such a trend in India.

Queequeg said:
It may not be the case that schools in India were organized around particular texts, but there certainly were schools advocating various distinct views.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, in general, divided into the four siddhanta.

Queequeg said:
And I'm not quite sure that Indian schools were not organized around particular texts, or bodies of texts - aren't the respective collections of texts and commentaries the basis by which schools of Buddhism in India were defined? Hinayana was based on the Agama/Nikaya, Mahayana based on the Mahayana sutras, and within these broad divisions were other sectarian divisions.

Malcolm wrote:
Certainly schools were organized around canons, but it really does not appear that there were systematic schools based around individual sūtras per se. The closest you can come to this is the broad divisions of Indian Mahāyāna sūtras into three categories: Prajñāpāramitā, Yogacāra and Tathāgatagarbha Sūtras.


Queequeg said:
Maybe distinguishing East Asian schools because of their foundation on particular texts is a distinction without real significance.

Malcolm wrote:
I think it is one of the hall marks of East Asian Buddhism, actually.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 27th, 2017 at 1:13 PM
Title: Re: Shakyamuni as the Eternal Buddha
Content:
DGA said:
The Lotus Sutra makes particular claims on those persons who are said to uphold the sutra.  In Japanese Buddhism especially, it is not unusual to find persons who describe themselves as "upholders of the Lotus Sutra" or similar.  In contrast, from the perspective of classical Indian Mahayana, would the meaning of an "upholder" of this sutra differ significantly?  Specifically, if the Lotus Sutra is seen as part of a continuous canon of teachings and not as a singular event, then what could it mean to "uphold" the sutra?

Malcolm wrote:
All claims have a context. No substantial evidence has ever been put forward suggest Indians formed schools around individual sūtras, suggesting that the context of such claims found in Saddhamrmapundarika Sūtra are extremely different in India than they grew to be in China and later, Japan. So yes, the meaning of an "upholder" of this sutra differs in significant ways.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 23rd, 2017 at 4:04 AM
Title: Re: Why Secular Buddhism is Not True
Content:
Vasana said:
Secular-Buddhism can also be a gateway to traditional forms of Buddhism for some.

Malcolm wrote:
Never seen it happen yet.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 23rd, 2017 at 4:01 AM
Title: Re: enlightment in one life
Content:
ilaria said:
i am a very practical person, i don't like doctrin...so i was asking you (and myself) HOW we can reach enlightment...
i know the theory ...etc etc but which is the way?

Malcolm wrote:
Relying on a realized master is in fact the only way to attain awakening in a single lifetime.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 23rd, 2017 at 1:13 AM
Title: Re: Shakyamuni as the Eternal Buddha
Content:


Minobu said:
I apologize Malcolm for deciding something about you...that being you don't believe in Mahayana.
.


Malcolm wrote:
No worries.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 22nd, 2017 at 5:22 AM
Title: Re: Shakyamuni as the Eternal Buddha
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
The nirmanakāya, being an emanation (hence the appellation, nirmana) can come,  go or stay forever — it has nothing to do with durability. If there is no Sahaloka, for example, Buddha can hang out in space, but if there are no sentient beings there to teach, what is the point?

Queequeg said:
And in the Lotus, the Buddha says, I stay forever, always have been here and and always will. All of this goes without saying that there are sentient beings. To posit a circumstance in which there are no living beings is... moot.

Malcolm wrote:
The rūpakāyas are basically illusions. They are not substantial entities.

Queequeg said:
"The trikaya teaching appeared after the Lotus appeared." If you accept the three kāyas, such a statement makes no sense.
Sure it does - Buddha taught different teachings in different contexts, which is why he appears to contradict himself. Such as when he says, "Tomorrow I enter parinirvana." "I don't really enter parinirvana." As you admit, you have to take into account context.

Malcolm wrote:
According to your own tradition, the Saddharmapundarika was taught towards the end of the Buddha's life. How can it possibly make sense that the trikāya and five certainties "appear later?"

It is one thing to reconcile seemingly contradictory statements, it is another thing to compound an already complicated situation by introducing such Western historical notions into your understanding such as Lotus appears in 100 BCE; but trikāya starts with Maitreyanath , and so on.


Queequeg said:
My conclusion is not in contradiction to the text of the sūtra itself. Buddha's words are not just simple exhortations to be taken literally. For example, in some places the Buddha says we should kill, lie, cheat, and steal. But one cannot take such pronouncements literally. The Buddha's words must be taken as a whole, not in isolation from one another.
Your point is that Shakyamuni attributes aspects of Sambhogakaya to himself, but that this is just upaya to generate faith.

Malcolm wrote:
I did not say that. I said that Prithvibandu made this assessment. This is how Indians understood the passage in question. We are unfortunately stuck with only a single subcontinental commentary. However, the influence of the Saddharmapundarika was very great, and was a key sūtra in Indian and post Indian Mahāyāna everywhere. Indians read these sūtras together, as a whole, and unlike the Chinese and Japanese, did not elaborate schools based on this or that sūtra.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 22nd, 2017 at 4:12 AM
Title: Re: Shakyamuni as the Eternal Buddha
Content:


Queequeg said:
The only point I disagree with is the distinction drawn between nirmanakaya and sambhogakaya in the Lotus. The whole point of the life span chapter is to explain to the assembly that their perception that the Buddha is born and enters parinirvana is upaya. He is talking about himself as the Buddha that ordinary beings see - the nirmanakaya. He says that he is constantly dwelling in the Saha world leading beings, whether as Shakyamuni or in some other appearance. The point is that the nirmanakaya is durable.

Malcolm wrote:
The point is that ordinary beings can only see a nirmanakāya, if they are lucky.

Queequeg said:
What you are claiming as the Indian view can only prevail if all that business about constantly abiding in the Saha world is upaya - and indeed that is your claim. This is our impasse.

Malcolm wrote:
The nirmanakāya, being an emanation (hence the appellation, nirmana) can come,  go or stay forever — it has nothing to do with durability. If there is no Sahaloka, for example, Buddha can hang out in space, but if there are no sentient beings there to teach, what is the point?


Queequeg said:
The trikaya teaching appeared after the Lotus appeared. To the extent that later Lotus proponents labored to find the trikaya in the Lotus, its because they were resolving distinctions that came up later and were then used to analyze the sutras. We use more words to resolve the breaches that words created in the first place.
This apparently means you do not accept the teachings of the three kāyas as the Buddha's teaching.
Where do you get that I do not accept trikaya teaching?

Malcolm wrote:
"The trikaya teaching appeared after the Lotus appeared." If you accept the three kāyas, such a statement makes no sense.

Queequeg said:
Trikaya and 5 Certainties are teachings that emerged at a time later than the Lotus.

Malcolm wrote:
This is a Western text critical claim.

Queequeg said:
Perhaps if Trikaya and 5 certainties were part of the vocabulary at the time that the Lotus emerged, the teaching would have taken a slightly different appearance. But they weren't. This does not mean Trikaya and 5 certainties are to be rejected. However, care is necessary to apply them in other contexts.

Malcolm wrote:
Again, this way of looking at things is rooted in Western text criticism.


Queequeg said:
Why? It appears in many sūtras. This is why I chided you for relying on text critical scholarship when it suits you, and ignoring it when it doesn't.
That is one way to look at it. Another is to take into account the nature of upaya and understand that context matters - that a teaching which is illuminating in one context may create confusion in another. I don't think that this is a controversial statement.

Malcolm wrote:
You are dressing up your devotion to Western text criticism in "upayic clothing." If you try to mix text critical scholarship with Buddhadharma, you get a very strange result.

Queequeg said:
I am always grateful to discuss Dharma matters with you, Malcolm. I treasure you as a good (virtual) dharma friend, and no doubt you have given me plenty to think about. You can insist that you are right as much as you want, but unless you address the actual text of the sutra where the Buddha makes statements that are incompatible with your conclusion, I'm at a loss as to where we can go from here.

Malcolm wrote:
My conclusion is not in contradiction to the text of the sūtra itself. Buddha's words are not just simple exhortations to be taken literally. For example, in some places the Buddha says we should kill, lie, cheat, and steal. But one cannot take such pronouncements literally. The Buddha's words must be taken as a whole, not in isolation from one another.

Queequeg said:
At this point, it would be very interesting to me to see this commentary myself. Do you have a citation for the French translation that I've seen referenced online?

Malcolm wrote:
Sorry, I read the text directly in Tibetan, so do not have a handy reference.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 22nd, 2017 at 1:23 AM
Title: Re: Shakyamuni as the Eternal Buddha
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Akaniṣṭha Gandavyuha is outside of the three realms completely. It can only be accessed by bodhisattvas of the eighth bhumi and beyond.

Coëmgenu said:
I must be confused. I'm not really exposed to discourses or teachings surrounding Akaniṣṭha Gandavyuha, since that mode of expression of the dharma isn't really a part of anything I practice, so its likely that I have some misconceptions as a result of not educating myself on the matter.

I had (mis)understood Akaniṣṭha Gandavyuha as the Pure Land of Vairocana, and I had thought that in, at least some(?) Buddhist cosmologies "we" (within a 'smaller' Pure Land) are (mis?)understood to be 'within' this Akaniṣṭha Gandavyuha, whatever that spatialized language means in this context. How absurd is it to have thought that?

Malcolm wrote:
The Ghanavyūha Sūtra states:
The buddhas abiding in that place
praise Ghanavyūha.
Ghanavyūha has existed from beginningless time.
A self-originated emanation is there,
the stainless Buddha. 
Dwelling beyond the three elements (fire, air, and water),
that place is without grasping to bliss,
it is free from the experience of I and mine,
it is unchanging, ultimately permanent, and stable. 
Ghanavyūha is unconditioned. 
The perfect buddhas awaken [there]
but without buddhahood in the supreme place, Akaniṣṭha,
the deeds of the buddha will not be performed in the desire realm. 
Once they depart Ghanavyūha 
ten million emanations of the Buddha
will always remain in yogic equipoise.
And:
The Ghanavyūha buddhafield exists beyond the subtle particle nature of the other buddhafields. The Ghanavyūha buddhafield is without the sun, planets, and the moon. Because it’s nature is unconditioned, it does not appear as the most subtle of subtle particles.
Thus the Buddha teaches that all buddhas attain buddhahood in Ghanavyūha.

And, it is really not a place within time or space:
When consciousness transforms,
it is Ghanavyūha free from mind. 
It is not the domain of those with concepts.
The palace of the Tathāgata, Ghanavyūha,
did not arise in the past and has no end;
it is arises from the power of natural perfection;
without a cause, does not arise from karma;
it is not created by Iśvara;
it exists truly beyond
the desire, form, and formless realms. 
As it is beyond the desire realm,
beyond the form realm, the formless realm,
the unconscious beings, and the cause of darkness—
this beautiful Ghanavyūha buddhafield
formed from space,
is not the domain of those with causes,
free from existence and nonexistence,
free from sameness and difference.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 22nd, 2017 at 12:20 AM
Title: Re: The Tantric Age: A comparison of Shaiva and Buddhist Tantra
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
In Dzogchen, the tathāgatagarbha is not the ālayavijñāna. The ālayavijñāna is a product of the delusion of the imputing ignorance. Tathāgatagarbha is the gzhi. When it is recognized, there is nirvana, when it is not recognized, there is samsara. Tathāgatagarbha does not prevent delusion nor does it stimulate awakening.

Grigoris said:
This is the Dzogchen view then.  Fair enough. The basis of liberation is right view.
I get your point now.  Thank you.

Malcolm wrote:
Phew!


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 21st, 2017 at 11:26 PM
Title: Re: Shakyamuni as the Eternal Buddha
Content:


Queequeg said:
I quote the Buddha's words from the sutra without caveat. It is the Buddha's teaching. How it came to be written, some time in the 1st c. BCE ~ 1st c. CE, I have no idea.

Malcolm wrote:
It's good that you have no idea. You also have no idea when it was committed to writing. So why waste your time assuming that things like the five certainties are "younger" than the Saddharmapundarika Sūtra? If we follow your text based logic, also the sambhogakāya is "younger" than the Saddharmapundarika Sūtra.


Queequeg said:
Cut the games.

Malcolm wrote:
Even when it seems like I am playing games, the purpose is serious.

illarraza said:
Hello Old Pal Malcolm. Here is my take:

Malcolm wrote:
Thanks for your input.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 21st, 2017 at 11:25 PM
Title: Re: Shakyamuni as the Eternal Buddha
Content:
Coëmgenu said:
[...]

One might consider akaniṣṭha in light of the Buddha's Pure Land in specifically described in Chapter 16.

[...]

Queequeg said:
This analysis can certainly be applied. What is poignant is that Shakyamuni's Pure Land is the Saha World. Ordinary beings see it aflame, but is actually tranquil.

Coëmgenu said:
But is akaniṣṭha, the Pure Land of Mahāvairocana, not also understood in exactly the same way?
.

Malcolm wrote:
Akaniṣṭha Gandavyuha is outside of the three realms completely. It can only be accessed by bodhisattvas of the eighth bhumi and beyond.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 21st, 2017 at 11:14 PM
Title: Re: The Tantric Age: A comparison of Shaiva and Buddhist Tantra
Content:


Malcolm wrote:
Madhyamaka categorically rejects the Yogacara doctrine of icchantikas, still they admit that there are some sentient beings who may never attain buddhahood.

pael said:
Such as?


Malcolm wrote:
Such as some beings who are so contaminated by afflictions they will never get out of samsara even though everyone has the potential to become awakened.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 21st, 2017 at 9:24 PM
Title: Re: Did the 84 mahasiddhas practice Ngöndro?
Content:
Grigoris said:
You hear that?

That's the sound of a Bodhisattva vow breaking...

Malcolm wrote:
No, a bodhisattva has to understand whom they can help, and whom they do not have the capacity to help. Just because I may leave you to your misconceptions does not mean I cease wishing you to be free of them.

Grigoris said:
Chill out dude, I am joking!

These Bodhisattvas are just too serious for their own good!

Malcolm wrote:
I understood that you were joking, but it is also a serious point as well.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 21st, 2017 at 8:23 PM
Title: Re: Shakyamuni as the Eternal Buddha
Content:


Queequeg said:
What do you mean by 'text based logic'?...

I do have a bias in favor of the sutra. If that is 'text based logic', then that is an accurate characterization.

Malcolm wrote:
Your hermeneutical criteria has been overdetermined by Western text critical scholarship.

Can you imagine any traditional scholar arguing about the five certainties in the Saddharmapundarika Sūtra based on some idea that it was written down between 100 BCE —— 100 CE? I can't.

Queequeg said:
Now you're just dancing.

Our exchange is published above. The outstanding issues are there.

It would not be outrageous for someone to conclude you don't want to deal with the sutra.

Malcolm wrote:
You reject the five certainties because according to you they are a later Mahāyāna teaching. But it is not actually the case that they are a later Mahāyāna teaching. All sūtras present the five perfections: a perfect place, perfect teacher, perfect retinue, perfect teaching, and a perfect time, including Hinayāna sūtras. The distinction between the nirmanakāya and the sambhogakāya is that the five perfections are constant in the case of the latter, but in the case of the former, the place is different, the teacher may be different, a different retinue, a different teaching, or a different time.

For the sambhogakāya, the place is always Akaniṣṭha, the teacher is always the sambhogakāya of the Buddha, the retinue is always not-retrogressing bodhisattvas as well as buddha-emanations, the teaching is always Mahāyāna, or Ekayāna, whichever term you like, and the time is always.

Further you claim:
The trikaya teaching appeared after the Lotus appeared. To the extent that later Lotus proponents labored to find the trikaya in the Lotus, its because they were resolving distinctions that came up later and were then used to analyze the sutras. We use more words to resolve the breaches that words created in the first place.
This apparently means you do not accept the teachings of the three kāyas as the Buddha's teaching. Why? It appears in many sūtras. This is why I chided you for relying on text critical scholarship when it suits you, and ignoring it when it doesn't.

The Buddha is quite clearly stating that Rajagriha is a sambhogakāya buddhafield since it will not perish when the Sahaloka perishes. He states he will always be present there. He states the Dharma he will teach there, etc. He states that its continuous presence cannot be observed by everyone. It is really quite clear.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 21st, 2017 at 8:08 PM
Title: Re: The Tantric Age: A comparison of Shaiva and Buddhist Tantra
Content:
Grigoris said:
It seems to me that the Tathagatagarbha is the "cause" of Nirvana and samsara in the same way that the Dharmata or the gzhi is the cause of...

Malcolm wrote:
In Dzogchen, the tathāgatagarbha is not the ālayavijñāna. The ālayavijñāna is a product of the delusion of the imputing ignorance. Tathāgatagarbha is the gzhi. When it is recognized, there is nirvana, when it is not recognized, there is samsara. Tathāgatagarbha does not prevent delusion nor does it stimulate awakening.


Grigoris said:
If the Tathagatagarbha is not the basis of liberation, then what is?  Are you implying that not all sentient beings possess Tathagatagarbha?  Only Buddhists?  Only Buddhists have the ever-present potential for enlightenment?

Malcolm wrote:
The basis of liberation is right view. We have covered this already. The rest of your questions are inapplicable.


Grigoris said:
Well, all I can say then is you seem not to understand the difference between following the Vajrayāna path and the common sūtra path.
I didn't know they were separate, I thought they were complimentary.

Malcolm wrote:
They have the same goal. But the common sūtra path is for those of less capacity and intelligence who imagine it is necessary to practice in a very external way to gather the two accumulations. The Vajrayāna path is for those who are intelligent and highly motivated to attain buddhahood.


Grigoris said:
Is there a sentient being out there that will not achieve Buddhahood?


Malcolm wrote:
Madhyamaka categorically rejects the Yogacara doctrine of icchantikas, still they admit that there are some sentient beings who may never attain buddhahood.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 21st, 2017 at 7:55 PM
Title: Re: Vegetarian and Tibetan Buddhism
Content:
thomaslaw said:
Hi everyone,

Are Tibetan monks vegetarian? If not, any meats they are not allowed to eat, or they are allowed to any meats?


Malcolm wrote:
No. The standard meats classes (humans, carnivores) that Buddha forbad monks apply.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 21st, 2017 at 7:53 PM
Title: Re: Did the 84 mahasiddhas practice Ngöndro?
Content:
amanitamusc said:
Sad.

Grigoris said:
You hear that?

That's the sound of a Bodhisattva vow breaking...

Malcolm wrote:
No, a bodhisattva has to understand whom they can help, and whom they do not have the capacity to help. Just because I may leave you to your misconceptions does not mean I cease wishing you to be free of them.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 21st, 2017 at 11:18 AM
Title: Re: Shakyamuni as the Eternal Buddha
Content:


Queequeg said:
What do you mean by 'text based logic'?...

I do have a bias in favor of the sutra. If that is 'text based logic', then that is an accurate characterization.

Malcolm wrote:
Your hermeneutical criteria has been overdetermined by Western text critical scholarship.

Can you imagine any traditional scholar arguing about the five certainties in the Saddharmapundarika Sūtra based on some idea that it was written down between 100 BCE —— 100 CE? I can't.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 21st, 2017 at 11:13 AM
Title: Re: Did the 84 mahasiddhas practice Ngöndro?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
...People like Magnus were quite proper to correct him...


yagmort said:
unlike you he didn't present any support to his arrogant remarks...

Malcolm wrote:
The last thing in the world that Magnus is, is arrogant.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 21st, 2017 at 9:33 AM
Title: Re: Shakyamuni as the Eternal Buddha
Content:


Malcolm wrote:
The Buddha's parinivana dates to roughly around 407 BCE if you follow the dates put forward by Cousins, etc, much earlier if you follow more traditional dates. Yet you claim that Lotus itself dates to a period 300——500 years later. So, is it 1) the Buddha's teaching or 2) merely the work of an inspired Mahāyani, or 3) do you accept the tradition that the Mahāyāna sūtras were kept hidden for hundreds of years by bodhisattvas and slowly revealed?

Queequeg said:
I quote the Buddha's words from the sutra without caveat. It is the Buddha's teaching. How it came to be written, some time in the 1st c. BCE ~ 1st c. CE, I have no idea.

Malcolm wrote:
It's good that you have no idea. You also have no idea when it was committed to writing. So why waste your time assuming that things like the five certainties are "younger" than the Saddharmapundarika Sūtra? If we follow your text based logic, also the sambhogakāya is "younger" than the Saddharmapundarika Sūtra.

Queequeg said:
Cut the games.

Malcolm wrote:
Even when it seems like I am playing games, the purpose is serious.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 21st, 2017 at 8:41 AM
Title: Re: The Tantric Age: A comparison of Shaiva and Buddhist Tantra
Content:


smcj said:
But basically, yeah. Indications of Buddha Nature are expressed in normal life too, although in immature, incomplete, stunted ways--at least as per the Vajra Master of Sherab Ling Monastery.

Malcolm wrote:
I prefer what the Buddha says. Your mileage may vary.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 21st, 2017 at 5:55 AM
Title: Re: Shakyamuni as the Eternal Buddha
Content:


Queequeg said:
The Lotus dates from First c. BCE ~ First c. CE.

Malcolm wrote:
So, it is not even the Buddha's teaching. Make it all rather moot then.

Queequeg said:
That's ridiculous. Thanks for the drive by.

Malcolm wrote:
The Buddha's parinivana dates to roughly around 407 BCE if you follow the dates put forward by Cousins, etc, much earlier if you follow more traditional dates. Yet you claim that Lotus itself dates to a period 300——500 years later. So, is it 1) the Buddha's teaching or 2) merely the work of an inspired Mahāyani, or 3) do you accept the tradition that the Mahāyāna sūtras were kept hidden for hundreds of years by bodhisattvas and slowly revealed?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 21st, 2017 at 5:48 AM
Title: Re: The Tantric Age: A comparison of Shaiva and Buddhist Tantra
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
The Buddha never taught anything that remotely resembles this.

Grigoris said:
(On the basis of the Buddha's teaching in the Lankavatara Sutra)

Some schools equate the Tathagatagarbha with the Alayavijnana (which they claim is intrinsically pure) and thus the basis, or cause, of all wholesome actions.

Malcolm wrote:
Some schools? Which schools? Can you name some for me?

In fact it is the Lankāvatara which equates tathāgatagarbha with the ālayavijñāna, but not for the reason you present here.

According to this sūtra, tathāgatagarbha was taught in order to convert to Buddhadharma those immature people who were afraid of the teaching of selflessness. It also teaches that the tathāgatagarbha/ālayavijñāna is the cause of both kusala and akulsala, postive and negative actions. The sūtra says that while the tathāgatagarbha/ālayavijñāna is intrinsically pure, since it is afflicted with adventitious afflictions it appears as if it is impure. Finally, the Buddha's last statement about the tathāgatagarbha in the Lanka is that the tathāgatagarbha is the cause of both samsara and nirvana, as well as both happiness and suffering.

It really does not correspond with the picture you paint of the tathāgatagarbha being this engine of bodhi driving everyone to awakening regardless of their religious affiliation.

Grigoris said:
In Vajrayāna it is clearly explained that such bodhisattvas are not fortunate.
Well, from my personal standpoint, caught in the joyful blender known as Samsara (and with no real exit in sight), I consider 8th level Bodhisattvas fortunate.

Malcolm wrote:
Well, all I can say then is you seem not to understand the difference between following the Vajrayāna path and the common sūtra path.

Grigoris said:
And let's clear up an assumption of yours:  Do you really believe that all Buddhists are motivated by Bodhicitta?  I'm not convinced (again, based on my limited experience).

Malcolm wrote:
Not all Buddhists are followers of Buddhadharma. Many millions of "Buddhists" are culturally "Buddhist" with no understanding of Buddhadharma. Only some so-called "Buddhists" are followers of Buddhadharma.

Those who have taken the bodhisattva vow are motivated by Mahāyāna bodhicitta. Otherwise they would not have not taken the vow. And lest, for example you complain that some people may take it without meaning it, the Surangama Samadhi Sūtra teaches that Māra tried to the deceive the Buddha by taking the bodhisattva vow; but guess what— even if one takes the bodhisattva vow with the intent to deceive, it still has such force that even Papayin Māra received a prediction for full buddhahood.

There are many people who practice Hinayāna who have no interest in Mahāyāna. But they too are generally motivated by love and compassion.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 21st, 2017 at 2:45 AM
Title: Re: The Tantric Age: A comparison of Shaiva and Buddhist Tantra
Content:
smcj said:
I think my pro-Christian postings probably need a disclaimer. I see Christianity as effectively unworkable--for me at least. (For me), being a practicing Christian would be like trying to put on a production of "Hamlet" when the only script you've got has mostly been put through a paper shredder. I'd know it's all still there, but only bits and pieces are still intelligible.

So I can appreciate those bits and pieces without any intention of investing myself whole heartedly in it. Thus I can have a positive attitude and not feel as if I am in any way taking from my practice of Dharma. I feel no need to be defensive or threatened by a positive attitude towards it. My Refuge in the 3 Jewels is not at risk by doing so.

Not a big deal.


Malcolm wrote:
Recognizing what is good in nonBuddhist religions is easy: love, compassion, and encouragement to behave kindly and virtuous.

But that's it. And of course there is no harm in it.

Otherwise, as the Buddha said:
All tīrthikas are crazy, 
proclaiming extremes of existence and nonexistence, 
therefore, they will not be liberated.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 21st, 2017 at 2:44 AM
Title: Re: Shakyamuni as the Eternal Buddha
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Exactly.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 21st, 2017 at 2:30 AM
Title: Re: Shakyamuni as the Eternal Buddha
Content:


Queequeg said:
The Lotus dates from First c. BCE ~ First c. CE.

Malcolm wrote:
So, it is not even the Buddha's teaching. Make it all rather moot then.

Minobu said:
all Mahayana sutras as you know start with thus i heard.

Malcolm wrote:
My point was, what is the point of all this arguing about what the Saddharmapundarika Sūtra means if one does not even believe it was taught by the Buddha? If it was not taught by the Buddha, what is the point?

Our friend is trying to reconcile the findings of Buddhologists with traditional Chinese and Japanese doxography. It will never work.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 21st, 2017 at 1:59 AM
Title: Re: Shakyamuni as the Eternal Buddha
Content:


Queequeg said:
The Lotus dates from First c. BCE ~ First c. CE.

Malcolm wrote:
So, it is not even the Buddha's teaching. Make it all rather moot then.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 21st, 2017 at 1:02 AM
Title: Re: Did the 84 mahasiddhas practice Ngöndro?
Content:


yagmort said:
Malcolm, being incorrect is not a problem.

Malcolm wrote:
It is, if like Lay-Man, you hastily proclaim things as fact when you actually do not have all the facts before you. Lay-Man participated actively in spreading his ill-sourced info. He is responsible for that. People like Magnus were quite proper to correct him.


yagmort said:
You did come up with your example of Jatson Nyingpo just recently.

Malcolm wrote:
If I spent all my time doing research to dispel all the misconceptions I see on DW, I would never get any work done. As it is I spend too much time on here anyway.

I suppose it would be better to leave you all to your misconceptions, whatever they may be.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 21st, 2017 at 12:40 AM
Title: Re: The Tantric Age: A comparison of Shaiva and Buddhist Tantra
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Yes, had you bothered to read the tathāgatagarbha sūtras (try Shri Māla Devi sūtra, for example) or even the Uttaratantra, you would have understood only Buddhas can seen tathāgatagarbha, not even 10th stage bodisattvas can seen it. For common people like ourselves, tathāgatagarbha is only something to have faith in, according to sūtra presentation. Dzogchen, of course, is different.

Grigoris said:
I have read them.  My understanding is that one's enlightened nature shines through the haze of ignorance constantly and can be seen in all those small acts of generosity, etc... that we engage in on a day-to-day level, since it is the source of all "wholesomeness"

Malcolm wrote:
The Buddha never taught anything that remotely resembles this.

There are two kinds of gotra, the natural capacity that any sentient being has to awaken, and activated gotra, which comes from taking the bodhisattva vow. Without the latter, full buddhahood is not possible. It is not even possible to be a bodhisattva, much less a bodhisattva on the stages. This is all clearly explained by Maitreyanatha.

Grigoris said:
Eighth stage bodhisattvas are still one incalculable eon away from buddhahood. Again, this is very clearly explained in sūtra.
Yeah, but the Bodhisattvas, so it's not like they are tapping their foot waiting for time to pass so they can reach enlightenment.  They willingly signed up for the job.

Malcolm wrote:
In Vajrayāna it is clearly explained that such bodhisattvas are not fortunate. You supposedly are a ngakpa, so you should understand things from a Vajrayāna point of view, and not reject it. Otherwise, you are just a guy engaged in cosplay.

Grigoris said:
Luckily my early exposure to ideas like that has inoculated me to them.  See, there are benefits to being an ex-Christian too!

Malcolm wrote:
Your ex-Christian background has inoculated you against understanding very basic principles of the Dharma.

You can argue with the Buddha if you choose. These things are very clearly explained in sūtra, the Abhisamayālaṃkara and elsewhere.

The Buddha states in the Lankāvatra Sūtra:
Though indeed tīrthikas conceive of liberation. 
they will not be liberated.
And:
All tīrthikas are crazy, 
proclaiming extremes of existence and nonexistence, 
therefore, they will not be liberated.
But you seem to be like many people in the West, basically making up your own religion as you go along.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 21st, 2017 at 12:21 AM
Title: Re: The Tantric Age: A comparison of Shaiva and Buddhist Tantra
Content:
Grigoris said:
I, in my daily life, see plenty of examples of other (non-Buddhist) people that seem to be doing a much better job of this, so I am in no position to condemn their path.

Malcolm wrote:
Pointing out to someone who imagines they are going to New York when they are actually headed to LA is not condemning someone's choice of path. One is simply informing them they have picked the wrong road. They may even make it to LA, but they will still have to turn around if they really want to go to New York.

Other paths do not lead to Buddhahood. It is really that simple. The Buddha stated this in unequivocal terms in many places. If you don't believe him, why even call yourself a follower of the Buddha?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 21st, 2017 at 12:19 AM
Title: Re: The Tantric Age: A comparison of Shaiva and Buddhist Tantra
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Vipaśyāna is dependent on right view. There is no Dzogchen tantra that states otherwise, much less any other teaching of the Buddha. Moreover, in Dzogchen, awakening is dependent on a guru's direct introduction.

Grigoris said:
And all those Sutra Mahayanis staring at their Tathagatagarbha, confused as hell, waiting for a Dzogchen guru to point it out to them...

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, had you bothered to read the tathāgatagarbha sūtras (try Shri Māla Devi sūtra, for example) or even the Uttaratantra, you would have understood only Buddhas can seen tathāgatagarbha, not even 10th stage bodisattvas can seen it. For common people like ourselves, tathāgatagarbha is only something to have faith in, according to sūtra presentation. Dzogchen, of course, is different.


Grigoris said:
Eighth stage bodhisattvas who have not had the good fortune to enter into Vajrayāna do not experience things in a "completely Vajrayāna way."
I find it hard to imagine that an 8th stage Bodhisattva would be in need of "good fortune"  whether of the Vajrayana variety or not...

Malcolm wrote:
Eighth stage bodhisattvas are still one incalculable eon away from buddhahood. Again, this is very clearly explained in sūtra.


Grigoris said:
PS, all this devil's advocate stuff is really quite boring and wasteful of other people's time.
I am not playing Devil's advocate, I actually disagree with you.  I do not think that Buddhism has a monopoly on liberation.  I believe that Tirthika can gain insight and achieve liberation because of the innate capacity which exists in all sentient beings: the Tathagatagarbha.

Malcolm wrote:
They can, but they have to take refuge in Buddhadharma first. Then they are no longer tīrthikas.

Grigoris said:
I think all paths (well, not all, not Satanism for example) contain teachings which can lead to the two accumulations.

Malcolm wrote:
This is a mistaken belief. There is no possibility tīrthikas (who are specifically what we term Hindus, actually), much less other nonBuddhists faiths gather the so called merit and wisdom accumulations.

If they practice the four immeasurables, love, compassion, etc., as well as avoid non-virtue, they will remain in higher realms, depending on their past karma.

However, the merit accumulation depends on having developed bodhicitta (the motivation to become a buddha for the benefit of all sentient beings). When one dedicates one's merit free from the three wheels, it becomes inexhaustible. This is the only way to gather the merit accumulation. Otherwise, one always spends whatever merit one has, eventually, and winds up in lower realms. There is no need to even discuss the wisdom accumulation.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 20th, 2017 at 11:59 PM
Title: Re: The Tantric Age: A comparison of Shaiva and Buddhist Tantra
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
CTR was trying to help people with no experience of Vajrayāna during the seminaries from 1973-1980 gain a (very) gross approximation of Vajrayāna view by using examples from European intellectual history. Taking him literally on this point is mistaken. When reading CTR's books, all edited from f-bombs filled transcripts into smooth prose, we have to understand too that he was doing acid and smoking pot with his students because he was trying to relate to them at their level.

dzogchungpa said:
Wait, he used the f-word when he was teaching at the seminaries? Well, now I don't know what to think.


Malcolm wrote:
Yes, little one. Indeed he did. Shocking, no?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 20th, 2017 at 10:02 PM
Title: Re: The Tantric Age: A comparison of Shaiva and Buddhist Tantra
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Ask yourself how is it possible that a German man with no experience at all of Buddhadharma, let alone Vajrayāna, can understand and experience things in a completely Vajrayāna way?

Grigoris said:
Because true insight is not dependent on "-isms and schisms", but on one's enlightened nature.  You, as a Dzogchenpa, should be well aware of that.

Malcolm wrote:
Vipaśyāna is dependent on right view. There is no Dzogchen tantra that states otherwise, much less any other teaching of the Buddha. Moreover, in Dzogchen, awakening is dependent on a guru's direct introduction.

One's "enlightened nature," by which I assume you mean the nature of the mind, is something that one discovers through it being pointed out. Dzogchen teachings make it very clear that without a guru one will never have confidence in the nature of the mind if one discovers it oneself. So as someone who aspires to practice Dzogchen, I understand that a Dzogchen guru is the one thing indispensable for practicing Dzogchen. This is clearly stated in Dzogchen tantras. Not only that, but the need to follow a guru is clearly explained in Buddhadharma in general, including sūtra.


Grigoris said:
How can you know whose student this  "german man'" was in previous lives?  How do you know if that he was not a non-regressing Bodhisattva that trained at the feet of any number of Buddhas before incarnating here to lead Christians to the Dharma?

Malcolm wrote:
Eighth stage bodhisattvas who have not had the good fortune to enter into Vajrayāna do not experience things in a "completely Vajrayāna way."

And there is no evidence whatsoever that Meister Eckhardt led anyone to the Dharma, much less Christians.

PS, all this devil's advocate stuff is really quite boring and wasteful of other people's time.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 20th, 2017 at 9:26 PM
Title: Re: Did the 84 mahasiddhas practice Ngöndro?
Content:


yagmort said:
In that regard i am thankful to Lay-Man as he stated both names and dates by naming 18th century and Khyentse, Kongtrul and Wangpo right away in his first reply. .

Malcolm wrote:
And he was incorrect. I am quite certain if one keeps poking at the pile of texts which survived we will find even earlier examples of the five bums. I am quite certain that Rigzin Jatson Nyingpo was not the first person to recommend this.

Text criticism involves a kind of myopia in which if one could not find a tradition in a book somewhere, it must have not existed.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 20th, 2017 at 9:21 PM
Title: Re: The Tantric Age: A comparison of Shaiva and Buddhist Tantra
Content:
dzogchungpa said:
I'd like to think it could open a few minds here and there.

Malcolm wrote:
Before people's minds are "open," they actually ought to first understand the subject matter.

Grigoris said:
And CTR definitely did not know what he was talking about!


Malcolm wrote:
Ask yourself how is it possible that a German man with no experience at all of Buddhadharma, let alone Vajrayāna, can understand and experience things in a completely Vajrayāna way? If you think that it is possible, you have fallen from someone who follows Dharma to someone who has become an all-oner, an advocate of a foolish perrenialism.

As far as the comment goes to which you are responding, I was referring to dzogchung's opinion that reading CTR's book might "open minds."

CTR was trying to help people with no experience of Vajrayāna during the seminaries from 1973-1980 gain a (very) gross approximation of Vajrayāna view by using examples from European intellectual history. Taking him literally on this point is mistaken. When reading CTR's books, all edited from f-bombs filled transcripts into smooth prose, we have to understand too that he was doing acid and smoking pot with his students because he was trying to relate to them at their level.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 20th, 2017 at 8:48 PM
Title: Re: Shakyamuni as the Eternal Buddha
Content:


Queequeg said:
I made two points here that are not contradictory.

1. The sutra itself does not support your contention that Shakyamuni's life span is mere upaya to inspire faith. To arrive at that position one must introduce assumptions not found in or supported by the text.

Malcolm wrote:
Everything is interpretable. Your notion that the text must be taken literally is an assumption you are introducing to the text, which is not supported by the text itself and is directly contradicted by the text:
The Buddhas teach the Dharma
With myriads of uncountable skillful means,
According to the capacities of sentient beings;
The inexperienced cannot understand this.

Queequeg said:
2. To the extent that the Five Certainties stand for the eternity of Sambhogakaya, but not Nirmanakaya, it is inapplicable here. Again, because the text itself resists conformity.

Malcolm wrote:
My comment is based on Prthvibandhu's commentary. This is how the sūtra was commonly understood by Indian exegetes. In other words, Śakyamuni, in this sūtra, is attributing to himself the qualities of a sambhogakāya which are commonly understood to the audience of bodhisattvas. Since only eighth through tenth stage bodhisattva are privileged to see the Sambhogakāya in Akaniṣṭha, he is in this passage making a statement about the inseparability of the three kāyas. Further, to understand this passage in question, one must also understand it in reference to the statement about the purity of the Sahaloka in the Vimalakirti-nirdesa sūtra.

There are many ways to unpack a sūtra's meaning — the literal meaning of the words is generally the least useful and interesting.

The text does not "resist" conformity, as you put it. The idea of the three wheels, for example, or that sūtras are to be understood in light of when in Buddha's career he supposedly taught them is actually the basis for your entire exegesis of this sūtra — but that idea is also not supported in the sūtra. Where did the Buddha say, "You can disregard everything I have said in the past?"


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 20th, 2017 at 11:13 AM
Title: Re: Shakyamuni as the Eternal Buddha
Content:
Queequeg said:
As a follow up note:

C, you seem to have interpreted the "Word games" comment as directed at you personally. That is not the case.

I do think your prose is difficult to understand, but the "Word games" comment was directed at the substance of your comment. In your comment you  appear to describe what amounts a a verbal shell game where meanings are variously ascribed to the particular names of buddhas, or aspects of buddhas, ostensibly to conform to one particular view or another.

As the rest of my comment tries to point out, Shakyamuni as eternal is not an intellectual somersault but the import of the Lotus Sutra text itself. I pointed out that Malcolm suggesting that this message in the Lotus is another upaya in the manner he suggests it is, is not compelling as it is not supported by the text of the sutra, and instead is a complete contradiction.

The Five Certainties, as I can gather, seem to have been a much later development in Indian Buddhist thought. It is, in the very least, awkward to use it to analyze a text that long predates it.

Malcolm wrote:
You are contradicting yourself here. You assume that you can apply someone's traditional exegesis to a text, and discard someone else's traditional exegesis based on some text critical criterion which you merely accept arbitrarily so it won't contradict your prejudices. The five certainties are found within Sūtra.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 20th, 2017 at 10:21 AM
Title: Re: The Tantric Age: A comparison of Shaiva and Buddhist Tantra
Content:
dzogchungpa said:
I'd like to think it could open a few minds here and there.

Malcolm wrote:
Before people's minds are "open," they actually ought to first understand the subject matter.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 20th, 2017 at 10:19 AM
Title: Re: Did the 84 mahasiddhas practice Ngöndro?
Content:
yagmort said:
Malcolm, thank you for the new info on Jatson Nyingpo.

Malcolm wrote:
Ya'll need to understand that more than 80% of all Tibetan literature was destroyed in the cultural revolution. This is why modern Tibetan text critical scholarship is basically bullshit.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 20th, 2017 at 7:10 AM
Title: Re: The Tantric Age: A comparison of Shaiva and Buddhist Tantra
Content:
smcj said:
Back in the early '60s Shenpen Hookam asked CTR what she should read to better understand Buddhism and he told her to read Meister Eckhardt. I guess CTR came across him at Oxford.

Malcolm wrote:
No wonder her view of gzhan stong is so strange.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 20th, 2017 at 4:53 AM
Title: Re: Did the 84 mahasiddhas practice Ngöndro?
Content:
Lay-Man said:
If indeed this source stems from the 16th C...

Malcolm wrote:
If indeed? Are you completely bereft of your senses?

Lay-Man said:
Ha Ha. Point taken.


Malcolm wrote:
Also, your point about the Sakya Ngondro book is pointless. Ngondro is Ngondro, whether it is part of a sadhana or part of a guru yoga.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 20th, 2017 at 4:18 AM
Title: Re: Did the 84 mahasiddhas practice Ngöndro?
Content:
Lay-Man said:
If indeed this source stems from the 16th C...

Malcolm wrote:
If indeed? Are you completely bereft of your senses?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 20th, 2017 at 4:17 AM
Title: Re: The Tantric Age: A comparison of Shaiva and Buddhist Tantra
Content:
CTR said:
So although Meister Eckhardt understood and experienced things in a completely vajrayana way...

Malcolm wrote:
Oh really? Absolutely not.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, September 19th, 2017 at 10:04 PM
Title: Re: The Tantric Age: A comparison of Shaiva and Buddhist Tantra
Content:
Grigoris said:
Take the language used in early translations of the Kungyed Gyalpo as an example.

Malcolm wrote:
What makes you think Neumaier-Dargyay had any experience at all?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, September 19th, 2017 at 9:54 PM
Title: Re: Did the 84 mahasiddhas practice Ngöndro?
Content:


Lay-Man said:
Sakya is perhaps the easiest. Dezhung Rinpoche' wrote the first Sakya Ngondro that I know of that is codified as an independent or stand-alone practice. Accumulations are there as it was written in the 20th C.

Malcolm wrote:
The first Sakya Ngondro is actually part of the Triple Continuum literature, specficially, the section of meditating the inseparability if samsara and nirvana. One is supposed to practice the preliminaries until one achieves signs.

The first formal text focusing on Sakya Ngondro was inpsired by Kun bzang bla ma'i zhal lung, and composed by Nalendra Khenpo Ngalo in the 1940's or there abouts. I have translated this text. It covers Ngondro for Hevajra, Vajrayogini, Yamantaka, and Tsembupa Chenrezi.

Rigzin Jatson Nyingpo (1585-1656) writes:
From that outer, inner secret and ultimate practice with the final action practice, in brief, no matter what kind of creation or completion practice one is doing, the preliminary of the best is one hundred thousand refuges, intents to awaken and prostrations; one hundred thousand Vajrasattvas. One hundred thousand mandalas, and one hundred thousand supplications. If this done before, in the main practice, the obstacles to practice will naturally non-exist, and the signs will quickly appear, and the result will be able to appear according to what is stated in the sadhanas. That is the instruction of the Guru Rinpoche. I, Jatson, have definitely experienced this
Therefore, you will have to revise this statement:

However, in practice, the codification of Ngondro as practiced today by the most promulgated cycles derive from Longchen Nyingthik. There are no source commentaries of these ngondro practicer, or ANY other that I can find from other Terma tradition which predate Jamyang Khyentse Wangpo's works from the 19th century, specifically Illuminating the Path of Omniscience, which denote the 100,000 accumulation requirement.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, September 19th, 2017 at 12:22 PM
Title: Re: The Tantric Age: A comparison of Shaiva and Buddhist Tantra
Content:
Unknown said:
It central to all dharma traditions however you label them to give up dharma when the time is right.

Malcolm wrote:
That is not what "the emptiness of all phenomena" means.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, September 18th, 2017 at 11:54 PM
Title: Re: The Tantric Age: A comparison of Shaiva and Buddhist Tantra
Content:
Sherab said:
That was why I asked whether non-Buddhist system of practices actually teach the abandonment of all views (which logically should be at the end of the path).  As I mentioned before, I don't think they do.

Grigoris said:
I don't think it matters.  If one has true insight into the nature of phenomena then somehow I don't think they will be wasting their time with theories, whether Buddhist or non-Buddhist.

Malcolm wrote:
If someone has true insight into the nature of phenomena, they will waste their time with the view to the extent that they are trying to communicate the view to others.

The reason for "wasting one's time" with theories is to eliminate concepts which one may not recognize as being a wrong view or a lower view.

Buddhadharma, despite some people's knownothingism, is not an anti-intellectual tradition. This should be obvious.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, September 18th, 2017 at 7:26 PM
Title: Re: The Tantric Age: A comparison of Shaiva and Buddhist Tantra
Content:
Grigoris said:
I think you may be misunderstanding what I am saying:  I am saying that an intellectual understanding of Right View is not enough.  Taking Right View as a mental object means that, like all mental objects, it can become yet another means of self identification:  I have Right View, YOU do not have Right View.  You see it happening all the time.  For me, an intellectual understanding is not enough.  Realisation through insight is essential.

Malcolm wrote:
Without an intellectual understanding of right view, realization through insight is impossible.

Grigoris said:
I did not say an intellectual understanding is not necessary, I said it is not sufficient.

Malcolm wrote:
No one said it was sufficient. All that was said is that it was necessary. Thus, you agree with the statement, "liberation is impossible without right view." The next point is, "In what Dharma can one find right view?" Only in Buddhadharma.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, September 18th, 2017 at 10:46 AM
Title: Re: The Tantric Age: A comparison of Shaiva and Buddhist Tantra
Content:
Grigoris said:
I think you may be misunderstanding what I am saying:  I am saying that an intellectual understanding of Right View is not enough.  Taking Right View as a mental object means that, like all mental objects, it can become yet another means of self identification:  I have Right View, YOU do not have Right View.  You see it happening all the time.  For me, an intellectual understanding is not enough.  Realisation through insight is essential.

Malcolm wrote:
Without an intellectual understanding of right view, realization through insight is impossible.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, September 18th, 2017 at 2:22 AM
Title: Re: The Tantric Age: A comparison of Shaiva and Buddhist Tantra
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Right view cannot become an object of grasping to a self. It is automatically the recognition of the absence of the self of the person, at minimum.

Someone who has right view is automatically liberated, in comparison to someone who has wrong view. A person with wrong view will never achieve liberation for as long as they hold wrong views.

Grigoris said:
Any idea can be an object of grasping and identification.  An intellectual grasp of Right View is not a guarantee of liberation or freedom from attachment and aversion.  Realisation though, that's a different story.


Malcolm wrote:
It states in sūtra:
They abide on this path
though right view.
And:
Having fully understood wrong view, 
whoever conceives of right view
they possess the Dharma.
And:
Those who possess right view, 
those people go to higher realms.
And:
Entering onto the plain of right view,
the qualities of the buddhas will be increased with water,
an excellent rain of flowers of buddhadharmas will fall...
The Prajñāpāramita states:
Whoever wishes to be established in right view, should train in the perfection of wisdom.
Ratnakuta states:
Right view is the abandonment of the view of that the aggregates are a self (satkāyadṛṣti).
Dharmakīrti states very clearly:
Well cultivated right view
destroys craving and its companions.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, September 18th, 2017 at 12:22 AM
Title: Re: The Tantric Age: A comparison of Shaiva and Buddhist Tantra
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
...

Losal Samten said:
Do supreme nirmanakayas always teach both Hinayana and Mahayana dharma? Or sometimes one and not the other?

Malcolm wrote:
They always teach the three yānas.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, September 18th, 2017 at 12:03 AM
Title: Re: Prayers for my Aunt Gail
Content:
KrisW said:
My Aunt Gail passed away yesterday after a battle with breast cancer.
I am not really quite sure what to do as a practitioner except do Shitro.
So I am doing Shitro practice for my Aunt, but if anyone can do any additional practices or know a way to connect her to the dharma in some way, I beg of you to please do.


Malcolm wrote:
My condolences.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, September 17th, 2017 at 11:47 PM
Title: Re: The Tantric Age: A comparison of Shaiva and Buddhist Tantra
Content:
Sherab said:
Also, if liberation is possible in non-Buddhist Dharma, then in a kalpa where the Buddha Dharma is not present and a Buddha has yet to turn the wheel of Dharma, then liberation would be possible in such a kalpa.  That would contradict what the Buddha taught.

Grigoris said:
It is possible.  Pratyeka Buddhas do it.

Malcolm wrote:
Pratyekabuddhas are those who achieved the āryamarga in a past life under the teaching of a samyaksambuddha, and then in a future life, awaken on their own when there is no samyaksambuddha in the world.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, September 17th, 2017 at 11:44 PM
Title: Re: The Tantric Age: A comparison of Shaiva and Buddhist Tantra
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
If liberation is not connected with right view, then even people with wrong view (such as believing that killing sentient beings is a path of liberation) will attain liberation. I.e. liberation will have no cause, it will be random, and can arise in anyone at anytime.

Grigoris said:
Anyone can be liberated, because they all possess the "cause" for liberation:  Tathagatagarbha.

Anyway, what I meant is that having (especially an intellectual grasp of) Right View doesn't not mean that one is liberated.  Especially ifRight View becomes an object of grasping and identification (with a self).

Malcolm wrote:
The very fact that you put tathāgatagarbha in scare quotes shows that you recognize that it is merely a formal cause, not an efficient cause.

Mundane right view is necessary for realizing supramundane right view. This is the difference, for example, between the paths of accumulation and application (mundane right view) and the path of seeing (supramundane right view).

Right view cannot become an object of grasping to a self. It is automatically the recognition of the absence of the self of the person, at minimum.

Someone who has right view is automatically liberated, in comparison to someone who has wrong view. A person with wrong view will never achieve liberation for as long as they hold wrong views.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, September 17th, 2017 at 10:40 AM
Title: Re: Buddhahood in This Life Transmission Webcast: 09/15/17
Content:


KrisW said:
Excellent, is the Guruyoga included in those text or is it something that still has to be translated, inquiring minds want to know.

Norwegian said:
Malcolm said on Vajracakra that the Guru Yoga practices referred to in yesterday's event, are not found in these two books, but that they are specific to the Gongpa Zangthal, and that he and Tulku Dakpa Rinpoche will translate them.

heart said:
The five nails is a part of the Gonpa Zangtal and TDR also gave "lung" for this text yesterday. The guru yogas are, if I understood correctly, not a part of the "five nails" Ngöndro practice. So it seems he gave "lung" for four texts yesterday.

/magnus


Malcolm wrote:
What Tulku Dakpa explained to me was that in Northen Treasures, there are several different guru yoga for different cycles that get swapped in and out of the five nails depending on what cycle you are practicing.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, September 17th, 2017 at 5:58 AM
Title: Re: The Tantric Age: A comparison of Shaiva and Buddhist Tantra
Content:
Grigoris said:
The other thing that discussions like this make crystal clear, is the fact that having a conceptual grasp of right view does not necessarily lead to any sort of liberation.  Mainly due to the grasping to (right) view.

Actually, I dare somebody to show me how this logic:

Without Buddhist Right View you cannot be liberated.

Differs from the Evangelical Baptist idea:

Without Baptism one is condemned to Hell.

Because to me there seems to be no discernible difference between these two attitudes, nor in the "reasoning" behind them.

Malcolm wrote:
If liberation is not connected with right view, then even people with wrong view (such as believing that killing sentient beings is a path of liberation) will attain liberation. I.e. liberation will have no cause, it will be random, and can arise in anyone at anytime.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 16th, 2017 at 5:16 AM
Title: Re: Buddhahood in This Life Transmission Webcast: 09/15/17
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Working on it


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 14th, 2017 at 7:29 PM
Title: Re: Did the 84 mahasiddhas practice Ngöndro?
Content:


Lay-Man said:
Understood. I guess from my POV, Tantra is indeed itself an evolution of Buddhism.

Malcolm wrote:
And from our POV, Vajrayāna is a revelation of the profound methods of Buddhadharma. The source of all teachings is the Realms and Transformations of Sound Tantra, which was taught in the first eon by Nangba Dampa.

Lay-Man said:
My statement was in response to Heart's remark that there is no substantiation that Ngondro had evolved over time, which simply is not true.

Malcolm wrote:
Ngondro is means of purification and gathering the two accumulations. It is the path all buddhas have trod. Therefore, it is absolutely false to call it some kind of Tibetan innovation.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 14th, 2017 at 4:49 AM
Title: Re: The Tantric Age: A comparison of Shaiva and Buddhist Tantra
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
What is the point? Of doing practices for which one has no lineage?

Grigoris said:
For worldly purposes.

For example:  Hanuman is considered the protector of Nak Muay (Muay Thai fighters/practitioners), so every Saturday morning I do some offering practices to garner favour.  I know that it is not going to lead me to ultimate liberation, but I do lots of other things on a daily basis that do not lead to liberation, but make my day-to-day life easier.  Paying taxes, for example.

Malcolm wrote:
You missed "...for which one has no lineage."


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 14th, 2017 at 4:42 AM
Title: Re: Buddha nature vs Soul
Content:
Sherab said:
I allow for the possibility of the unmanifest.

Malcolm wrote:
The Buddha himself never spoke of such a thing.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 14th, 2017 at 4:13 AM
Title: Re: Did the 84 mahasiddhas practice Ngöndro?
Content:
Lay-Man said:
With regards to your position that there is no clear evidence of the "evolution of Ngondro" I would only offer this simple point. Buddha Shakyamuni did not teach on the 4 extra-ordinary practices of Ngondro. In-fact there is no Sutric source for the 4 extra-ordinary practices themselves.

Malcolm wrote:
Why would there be a sūtra source for practices such as Vajrasattva, Maṇḍala and Guru Yoga? The first comes from Yoga Tantra, and the second two sre found in the Guhyasamaja Tantra.

The klong gsal 'bar ma nyi ma nyi ma rgyud, revealed by Nyang Ral Nyima Odzer in the late 12th century, explicitly lists the four common foundations, impermanence, death, karma, and suffering of samsara, as well as refuge, bodhicitta, mandala, Vajrasattva, and Guru Yoga. It is almost certain that this pattern of preliminaries dates from this tantra. This tantra itself set the pattern for Nyingma practice up until today.

With respect to Vajrasattva, it explicitly states it should be recited "Recite this one hundred, one thousand, one hundred thousand or countless times."


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 14th, 2017 at 3:39 AM
Title: Re: The Tantric Age: A comparison of Shaiva and Buddhist Tantra
Content:
Javierfv1212 said:
It's not a big deal but I wonder what the tradition would say of it

Malcolm wrote:
What is the point? Of doing practices for which one has no lineage? We are not Sikhs, we are not Hindus. Chanting Namaḥ Shivaya is not wrong, but why bother?

If one wants to do Shiva protector practice one should receive the transmission of Shiva from a qualified Lama so that one's practice actually has blessings of the lineage, and so that Shiva obeys the oaths to protect the Dharma to which he was bound by Guru Padmasambhava.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 13th, 2017 at 9:09 PM
Title: Re: The Tantric Age: A comparison of Shaiva and Buddhist Tantra
Content:
DharmaChakra said:
eternalism ( whatever that is supposed to mean) its a coined phrase by western academics and philosophers.

Malcolm wrote:
No, the term, sāśvata-dṛṣṭi, is a Buddhist term used to for tīrthikas.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 13th, 2017 at 9:05 PM
Title: Re: Buddhahood in This Life Transmission: 09/15/17
Content:


Aryjna said:
A general question about reading transmissions. If you are getting the lung in Tibetan, should you be able to understand it more or less, e.g. by following the original text along with a translation, or is it not necessary?

Malcolm wrote:
Just pay attention to the stream of words.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 13th, 2017 at 9:05 PM
Title: Re: Buddhahood in This Life Transmission: 09/15/17
Content:
Aryjna said:
Is there also going to be a facebook stream? Just asking because a few days ago there was an event with the Dalai Lama on livestream and it was not possible to watch it there, while it was working normally on facebook, apparently this happened to several people.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, there will be a Facebook stream as well.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 13th, 2017 at 4:18 AM
Title: Re: Peeling the onion
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Brahman is not śūnyatā.

rachmiel said:
Nor is it anything else. Hence: attributeless = free from reference/focal points. (Though not as it is often taught.)


Malcolm wrote:
Yes, nirguna Brahman is indeed without qualities. But it is held to be a pure consciousness. Without understanding the three gunas it is impossible to understand the context of what nirguna means. Purusha is also nirguna. Both Brahman and purusha are held to be permanent and true, the main difference beteeen Samkhya and Advaita is whether there are multiple purushas or only one.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, September 12th, 2017 at 10:29 AM
Title: Re: Did the 84 mahasiddhas practice Ngöndro?
Content:



Lay-Man said:
Well its been an interesting process of trying to explore these other sources that Malcom and Heart have offered.

Related to the texts referred to by Heart, I have not been able to dive into the cited texts without ordering them as I have found no versions online. Both texts are from much earlier time periods than I have found for other texts which is encouraging, however in looking at the index of each, they seem to address preliminary practices associated with the Mahasandhi approach, and I can see no mention of actual numerical accumulations \!

Malcolm wrote:
Cyrus Sterns is of the opinion it is rather late. I am not as certain. For example, Taratnatha mentions doing 100,000 prostastions combined with refuge in this text.

tA ra nA tha ,  thub bstan dge legs rgya mtsho ,  tshogs gnyis rgya mtsho ,  'jam dbyangs mkhyen rab rgya mtsho . "kha 1) thun mong gi sngon 'gro/." In jo nang mdo sngags rig pa'i dpe tshogs/ . TBRC W1PD95746. 20: 35 - 91. khreng tu'u: si khron dpe skrun tshogs pa / si khron mi rigs dpe skrun khang , 2009. http://tbrc.org/link?RID=O1PD95746%7CO1PD957461KG63441$W1PD95746

Taranatha is the late 16th-early 17th century, and he certainly did not invent the idea. I did not investigate whether other prelims had similar numbers assigned.

Lay-Man said:
Thanks Malcom. This is certainly a good lead for sure. I will look more thoroughly. Thanks for the link.
I also explored much of the Drikung Kagyu texts I could find, including Gong Chik, and I didn't seem to find anything codified until around the 17th Century?

Dunno. I don't know why I get on these neurotic tangents, but any how the info is great!

Malcolm wrote:
Looks like I erred -- this text was written in the fifteenth rab 'buying, sometime in the nineteenth century.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, September 12th, 2017 at 7:53 AM
Title: Re: Did the 84 mahasiddhas practice Ngöndro?
Content:
yagmort said:
so does anybody know when did the ngondro the way it is practiced today - that is accumulating 111000 of each -
first appear?


Lay-Man said:
Well its been an interesting process of trying to explore these other sources that Malcom and Heart have offered.

Related to the texts referred to by Heart, I have not been able to dive into the cited texts without ordering them as I have found no versions online. Both texts are from much earlier time periods than I have found for other texts which is encouraging, however in looking at the index of each, they seem to address preliminary practices associated with the Mahasandhi approach, and I can see no mention of actual numerical accumulations \!

Malcolm wrote:
Cyrus Sterns is of the opinion it is rather late. I am not as certain. For example, Taratnatha mentions doing 100,000 prostastions combined with refuge in this text.

tA ra nA tha ,  thub bstan dge legs rgya mtsho ,  tshogs gnyis rgya mtsho ,  'jam dbyangs mkhyen rab rgya mtsho . "kha 1) thun mong gi sngon 'gro/." In jo nang mdo sngags rig pa'i dpe tshogs/ . TBRC W1PD95746. 20: 35 - 91. khreng tu'u: si khron dpe skrun tshogs pa / si khron mi rigs dpe skrun khang , 2009. http://tbrc.org/link?RID=O1PD95746%7CO1PD957461KG63441$W1PD95746

Taranatha is the late 16th-early 17th century, and he certainly did not invent the idea. I did not investigate whether other prelims had similar numbers assigned.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, September 12th, 2017 at 6:54 AM
Title: Re: Buddha nature vs Soul
Content:
Sherab said:
I surmised therefore that was why the Buddha never explicitly answer the question of whether a self exists or not.

Malcolm wrote:
Nonesense, even in Vinaya it clearly states:
All conditioned entities are impermenant. All phenomena are without self. Nirvana is peace.
These three statements are repeated by the Buddha in countless sūtras.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, September 12th, 2017 at 2:23 AM
Title: Re: Thodgal
Content:
Virgo said:
At the moment, since you are a complete beginner, thogal shouldn't even really be on your radar.  If it is applied before trechko has been stabilized it can be useless, or even harmful.

tomamundsen said:
I've heard that the Palyul tradition teaches Thogal before Trekcho. Any thoughts on that?

Malcolm wrote:
It's not exactly what you might think.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, September 12th, 2017 at 12:10 AM
Title: Re: Peeling the onion
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Because the dharmadhātu is free from all reference/focal points.

rachmiel said:
So is brahman.

Malcolm wrote:
Brahman is not śūnyatā. Śūnyatā is not a self. "Dharmadhātu" is a name for the collective śunyatā of all things. Dharmatā is the name for the śunyatā of a given thing.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, September 11th, 2017 at 10:28 PM
Title: Re: Peeling the onion
Content:
White Lotus said:
Malcolm, why is view wrong to assert a single focus in sunyata sunyata that is the heart of non cognitive awareness/Mind?


Malcolm wrote:
Because the dharmadhātu is free from all reference/focal points. If one's meditation has a reference/focal point, it is limited, extreme, and a proliferation. It will not be space-like and free from extremes. One will not be a yogi of space.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, September 11th, 2017 at 9:16 PM
Title: Re: Peeling the onion
Content:


MiphamFan said:
OK so this is one of the key differences between samkhya and Dzogchen?

From a Dzogchen PoV, samkhya basically:
- takes conditioned mind to be permanent and the origin of all things
- does not recognise primordial consciousness (yeshe) as the basis
- just rests in conditioned mind

Is this right?

So from a Buddhist PoV, is this a cause for rebirth in the arupadhatu?


Malcolm wrote:
The purusha is a passive knower, deluded into thinking the transformations of the three gunas of pradhana/prakriti— sattva, tamas, and rajas— are distinct as the 24 tattvas — from mahat/buddhi down to the earth element. When a purusha recognizes all of this is nonself, it withdraws from all of it and abides in its own permanent, unique effulgence. There are infinite purushas.

The criticism of the Saṃkhya system of other yogis, is that not recognizing purusha, they mistake the most subtle form of sattva, i.e., mahat, as the self and rest in that state. But prakriti is not sentient, its sentient appearance is a reflection of the effulgence of purusha. So basically, they assert the nirvana of the Buddhists, for example, is simply resting in unmanifest prakriti, in a state where the three gunas are in stasis.

Of course we know the Buddhist criticisms of Samkhya are: they assert a permanent self, they assert identity of cause and effect, and they assert prakriti and purusha as real.

It is important to understand Saṃkhya well, since it is the foundation for all Hindu thought.

So called Neo-Advaita does not go beyond Saṃkhya in many respects. The reason why many people think that Advaita and Dzogchen, etc., are the same is that they do not understand Saṃkhya. All this business about the pure knower, the witness, etc., has its roots in Saṃkhya tenets.

The main difference between standard Advaita and Saṃkhya is that Advaita asserts that when purusha does not recognize its own state, it is saguna Brahman, and that purusha is itself brahman, and there is only one, and third, that the transformations of the three gunas are not real, but are Māya.Therefore, when one recognizes that all the appearances of the 24 tattvas are notself, one recognizes brahman as oneself and one rests in that state.

MiphamFan said:
OK, so in Samkhya:
-In samsara, purusha, pure consciousness, passively "knows" prakriti, which includes all the various physical and mental phenomena (the tattvas).

Malcolm wrote:
Yes.


MiphamFan said:
-To achieve liberation, one must distinguish purusha from prakriti in one's lifetime.
-In the process of achieving liberation, one makes use of intellect (buddhi) to distinguish the lower tattvas from the purusha

Malcolm wrote:
The process actually is balancing the three gunas so that sattva becomes predominant. When one is thoroughly sattvic, then one notices also that buddhi is not the self either, and the jñā aka purusha, becomes embarrassed and turns away from prakriti altogether.

MiphamFan said:
-Upon death, the purusha permanently separates from prakriti, knows itself and is liberated forever.
-Both purusha and prakriti are real and eternal.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes.



MiphamFan said:
So I guess where people confuse samkhya with Dzogchen is that they:

- get tripped up by the similarity in expression of "distinguishing mind from nature of mind" in Dzogchen and "distinguishing purusha from prakriti"
- confuse rigpa as being a permanent purusha that "knows itself"

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, since rigpa is not a purusha, it is knowledge.

Interestingly enough, however, Saṃkhya also uses the terms vidyā and avidyā in a way very similar to Dzogchen. But the meaning is totally different.


MiphamFan said:
However, they forget the part where samkhya asserts purusha is permanent and separate from prakriti. Whereas in Dzogchen, what samkhya calls "prakriti" is simply the display of five lights, not separate from your own state. So what samkhya calls "prakriti" and "purusha" are both part of your own state. And rang gi rig pa is not something that "knows itself" like (A) knows (A) but simply knowledge that arises from oneself about one's state.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes.
MiphamFan said:
Also, I guess the methods involved in both are quite different.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes.

MiphamFan said:
So in base, path and fruit they are all different. The only similarities are some expressions in translated English texts. If anything, samkhya seems more similar to realist Hinayana schools to me?

Malcolm wrote:
Yes.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, September 11th, 2017 at 8:48 PM
Title: Re: Buddha nature vs Soul
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
The PP in 100,000 Lines, it is said:
If it asked what is the samadhi known as the lamp of pristine consciousness, abiding in that samadhi is clearly explained as the absence of self in phenomena and persons.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, September 11th, 2017 at 7:26 PM
Title: Re: Buddha nature vs Soul
Content:
Wayfarer said:
Behoves us all to remember that when the Buddha was asked 'does the self exist, or not' that he didn't answer.



Malcolm wrote:
Sure he did.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, September 11th, 2017 at 3:22 AM
Title: Re: Peeling the onion
Content:
White Lotus said:
The nature of Mind is emptiness, inseparable clarity, but within that clarity is found emptiness of emptiness and within that appears a point of focus.

Malcolm wrote:
If there is a point of focus, your view is wrong, and your meditation will fall into limitation.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, September 11th, 2017 at 1:00 AM
Title: Re: Tögal for dzogchen beginners?
Content:


Bubbles said:
Am I missing something?  Is webcast worldwide transmission on guru yoga sufficient to start the Togal practice on our own?  Thanks.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes. You are missing a teacher who can guide you. No, WWT is not sufficient.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, September 10th, 2017 at 10:36 PM
Title: Re: Peeling the onion
Content:
Losal Samten said:
Do you know if in Samkhya when the purusha turns back on itself and rests as the Jna it takes itself as an object?

Also do you know if as the result the Perfected Nature takes itself as an object according to Yogacara?

Malcolm wrote:
No, in Samkhya, one simply rests in one's own effulgence, the state known as "kaivalya."

In Yogacara, due to the transformation of the basis, the four mental aggregates express themselves as the four buddha families.

MiphamFan said:
OK so this is one of the key differences between samkhya and Dzogchen?

From a Dzogchen PoV, samkhya basically:
- takes conditioned mind to be permanent and the origin of all things
- does not recognise primordial consciousness (yeshe) as the basis
- just rests in conditioned mind

Is this right?

So from a Buddhist PoV, is this a cause for rebirth in the arupadhatu?


Malcolm wrote:
The purusha is a passive knower, deluded into thinking the transformations of the three gunas of pradhana/prakriti— sattva, tamas, and rajas— are distinct as the 24 tattvas — from mahat/buddhi down to the earth element. When a purusha recognizes all of this is nonself, it withdraws from all of it and abides in its own permanent, unique effulgence. There are infinite purushas.

The criticism of the Saṃkhya system of other yogis, is that not recognizing purusha, they mistake the most subtle form of sattva, i.e., mahat, as the self and rest in that state. But prakriti is not sentient, its sentient appearance is a reflection of the effulgence of purusha. So basically, they assert the nirvana of the Buddhists, for example, is simply resting in unmanifest prakriti, in a state where the three gunas are in stasis.

Of course we know the Buddhist criticisms of Samkhya are: they assert a permanent self, they assert identity of cause and effect, and they assert prakriti and purusha as real.

It is important to understand Saṃkhya well, since it is the foundation for all Hindu thought.

So called Neo-Advaita does not go beyond Saṃkhya in many respects. The reason why many people think that Advaita and Dzogchen, etc., are the same is that they do not understand Saṃkhya. All this business about the pure knower, the witness, etc., has its roots in Saṃkhya tenets.

The main difference between standard Advaita and Saṃkhya is that Advaita asserts that when purusha does not recognize its own state, it is saguna Brahman, and that purusha is itself brahman, and there is only one, and third, that the transformations of the three gunas are not real, but are Māya.Therefore, when one recognizes that all the appearances of the 24 tattvas are notself, one recognizes brahman as oneself and one rests in that state.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, September 10th, 2017 at 8:54 PM
Title: Re: Buddhahood in This Life Transmission: 09/15/17
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Bump

https://livestream.com/wisdompublications/buddhahoodinthislifetransmission


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, September 10th, 2017 at 8:03 PM
Title: Re: Thodgal
Content:


chimechodra said:
I'm assuming this is the same as Phakchok Rinpoche? Haven't seen that variation of spelling his name before. I'm wondering, does he teach Dzogchen much actively? I know he is a Nyingma lineage holder, but from the teachings I've seen him give, he seems more focused on Mahamudra/Taklung Kagyu with sometimes dipping into the Barchey Kunsel terma. I've met him a few times and he is quite wonderful, but I've never seen him offer any teachings related to Dzogchen before. Hopefully this is just my karma and that will change soon.

Malcolm wrote:
He is a Dzogchenpa. Barchey Kunsel is based on the three inner tantras. It contains complete Dzogchen teachings.

dharmafootsteps said:
From my experience he is a wonderful teacher. However, from what I know, he is also quite critical of the idea of introducing students to Dzogchen from the beginning, as it "leads to unstable practitioners". Don't take that as gospel, as I'm by no means expert in his approach, but I wouldn't necessarily expect Dzogchen teachings/direct introduction until one has put in a lot of serious study and practice with him.

Malcolm wrote:
A qualified teacher will teach a qualified student, as I said above.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, September 10th, 2017 at 7:54 PM
Title: Re: Questions on the Mulamadyamaka Karika
Content:
ItsRaining said:
So in the first chapter of the Mulamadyamaka Karika nagarjuna seems to have refuted the idea that fruits will arise from causes, how fruits are already in the cause, etc. But what are  the implications of this? All phenomenon are empty? But if no fruits can arise from causes why do we see a world that's constantly changing? How is it different to the arrow paradox where while it seems to suggest something can never happen but will happen if you test it out?

Malcolm wrote:
The implication of this is that arising from conditions is merely a convention what does not stand up to analysis.

ItsRaining said:
Thank you! So even dependent origination which the Savakayana would consider an 'ultimate truth' is just an convention in the Mahayana.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, September 10th, 2017 at 7:48 PM
Title: Re: Buddha nature vs Soul
Content:
Wayfarer said:
But I wasn't actually trying to make an arcane philosophical point. All I had said was 'buddha nature was not found in the early Buddhist texts'. And it wasn't.

Malcolm wrote:
This is quite arguable. For example, Asanga claims that the bhavanga citta (which is pure, according to Buddhaghosha) is the ālayavijñāna, and the Lankāvatara Sūtra maintains that tathāgatagarbha is a name for the ālayavijñāna. Now, it may be argued that the bhavanga citta is not that early, but in any case, it is pretty clear that Mahāyānists understand the luminous citta to be what we are terming buddhadhātu.


Wayfarer said:
So, you can say that actually it was, that was what the 'luminous mind' sutta actually meant, which I guess is true, but it then drags the whole question into arcane interpretive issues.

Malcolm wrote:
What we can say is that Theravadins do not have interpretive authority over the Pali Canon, as much as they may wish to convince everyone this is the case.


Wayfarer said:
I was trying to keep it simple, although experience should tell me that this kind of question always ends up being anything but, on Dharma Wheel. :

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, you should definitely know better.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, September 10th, 2017 at 10:30 AM
Title: Re: Thodgal
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Qualified teachers like... Pachog Rinpoche...

chimechodra said:
I'm assuming this is the same as Phakchok Rinpoche? Haven't seen that variation of spelling his name before. I'm wondering, does he teach Dzogchen much actively? I know he is a Nyingma lineage holder, but from the teachings I've seen him give, he seems more focused on Mahamudra/Taklung Kagyu with sometimes dipping into the Barchey Kunsel terma. I've met him a few times and he is quite wonderful, but I've never seen him offer any teachings related to Dzogchen before. Hopefully this is just my karma and that will change soon.

Malcolm wrote:
He is a Dzogchenpa. Barchey Kunsel is based on the three inner tantras. It contains complete Dzogchen teachings.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, September 10th, 2017 at 10:28 AM
Title: Re: Buddha nature vs Soul
Content:
Malcolm in 2017 said:
If you assume that the basis of Advaita and gzhan stong are similar, you have really erred in your view.

Malcolm in 2010 said:
I once forced Khenpo Tsultrim Gyatso to admit.....that there was no substantial difference between Advaita Vedanta and Gzhan stong in terms of how they presented their view

smcj said:
Do you think that post of yours from 2010 was written in disappearing ink? I don't get how you think you can now put forward a different narrative.

Malcolm wrote:
You really don't understand the context of the conversation I had with KTG, nor why I asked the question. I have tried to explain this to you many times, but you refuse to listen.

I will explain it one more time. I noticed a similarity in structure between Advaita and gzhan stong arguments, not a similarity in content. I asked him about this, and while he allowed there was a structural similarity, there was no similarity in content.

In other words, the basis is different, the path is different, the result is different.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, September 10th, 2017 at 10:24 AM
Title: Re: Ethics and Morality as Objects of Compassion
Content:
Punya said:
Ok. I'd have to go back to my previous notes, but I thought the second kind of suffering had to do with the impermanent condition nature of all phenomena and the third kind of suffering related to basic dualism.

Malcolm wrote:
No, the second kind of suffering has to do with the unreliable nature of mundane happiness, it is called the suffering of change because even higher realms are impermanent. Kings can be come beggars and so forth.

The third kind of suffering is the mere perishability of phenomena. This suffering is not even a feeling.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, September 10th, 2017 at 6:07 AM
Title: Re: Sampa Lhundrupma
Content:
CicadaCanto said:
Q: I am familiar with the Le'u Dünma and it's 7th Chapter, the Sampa Lhundrupma. One of my teachers, doesn't matter who, it's irrelevant, recently suggested we chant Sampa Lhundrupma in advance of this large hurricane. Makes sense. This seems to be common too. I am curious if there is a long history of this recitation for such disturbances of the elements, or if this is a recent development, and so on. There are the teachings and prayers themselves, but I often don't know the backstories and that takes scholarship and experience far outside my pay grade.

Thanks for your attention.

Malcolm wrote:
We are in the time of the five degenerations. One of those is time, which includes elements being out of balance.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, September 10th, 2017 at 6:06 AM
Title: Re: Ethics and Morality as Objects of Compassion
Content:
Punya said:
I think DJKR is saying that morality and ethics fall into the lowest class of compassion.

Malcolm wrote:
He very clearly says it is an object of compassion, included in compassion for sentient beings.

If I were to speculate, I would speculate that what he meant is that moral conduct may be a cause of suffering for sentient beings.

Punya said:
Agreed. Morality generally involves the good-bad dichotomy, which is dualistic thinking. This can also be accompanied by an inflexibility, rather than looking at each situation on its merits.

Rinpoche also makes reference to the three kinds of suffering, which I was taught in the Gelugpa tradition are: suffering of suffering, suffering of change and all pervasive suffering.

Is it correct, Malcolm, to understand that the three kinds of compassion are directed at the three kinds of suffering?

Malcolm wrote:
No, because the second kind of compassion is oriented towards the third suffering, which has to do with the impermanent condition nature of all phenomena.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, September 10th, 2017 at 6:04 AM
Title: Re: Buddha nature vs Soul
Content:
smcj said:
There is no similarity in terms of the basis, path, and result, that was the essence of Khenpo Tsultrim's reply, and I agree with him. There is no buddhahood in Advaita.
I'm a Buddhist, not an Advaita Vedantan. We haven't been talking about the similarities in the Path per se. That's a whole other subject which I don't think is very interesting.

Malcolm wrote:
If you assume that the basis of Advaita and gzhan stong are similar, you have really erred in your view.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, September 10th, 2017 at 4:59 AM
Title: Re: Ethics and Morality as Objects of Compassion
Content:
Punya said:
I think DJKR is saying that morality and ethics fall into the lowest class of compassion.

Malcolm wrote:
He very clearly says it is an object of compassion, included in compassion for sentient beings.

If I were to speculate, I would speculate that what he meant is that moral conduct may be a cause of suffering for sentient beings. For example, there are many types of religious vows people take which just make them miserable and lead to no result.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, September 10th, 2017 at 4:44 AM
Title: Re: Ethics and Morality as Objects of Compassion
Content:
Vasana said:
I imagine this may be related to 'the compassion which takes dharma practice as its object' / cho la migpai nyinje. It's not to be confused with taking a concept as an object of compassion since concepts don't experience suffering.


Malcolm wrote:
Actually, he said it was related to the first compassion, compassion with reference to sentient beings. It is a strange statement. It is not worth trying to guess what he meant. I am sure he has a reason for his statement, but he did not articulate it particularly well.

In sum, there are three kinds of compassion: compassion with reference to sentient beings, compassion with reference to phenomena, and nonreferential compassion. The first is compassion for the suffering of sentient beings; the second is for the impermanence of all phenomena (which of course is the basis of suffering), and the third is meditating on emptiness.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, September 10th, 2017 at 4:02 AM
Title: Re: Buddha nature vs Soul
Content:
smcj said:
You know that Shentong posits a universal ground. You know it. I know you know it. You know I know you know it. I know you know I know you know it. Then why do you insist on playing ignorant about it?

Malcolm in [u]2017[/u] said:
I know no such thing.

Malcolm in [u]2010[/u] said:
I once forced Khenpo Tsultrim Gyatso to admit (I have a witness, incidentally) that there was no substantial difference between Advaita Vedanta and Gzhan stong in terms of how they presented their view

smcj said:
Ok, well in that case...


Malcolm wrote:
Yes, there are structural similarities, but a similarity does not mean an absolute equivalence. For example, both a pot and cup are structurally similar in that they both have a bottom, a mouth, and are containers, but pots and cups are not the same thing.

You are taking this notion of no "substantial difference" the wrong way. What I mean is that in Advaita, nirguna brahman is empty of saguna brahmin, it is empty of anything you might call a relative entity. Likewise, in gzhan stong, it is argued that the perfected nature is empty of the two relatives natures. In this way there is a structural similarity between the two systems. But it does not mean, nor did I ever assert that Advaita and gzhan stong were equivalent in every respect. After all, it was my question and I assume I have a better memory of asking it than you do.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, September 10th, 2017 at 1:00 AM
Title: Re: Buddha nature vs Soul
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
I once forced Khenpo Tsultrim Gyatso to admit (I have a witness, incidentally) that there was no substantial difference between Advaita Vedanta and Gzhan stong in terms of how they presented their view.

smcj said:
https://dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=48&t=8318&p=102251&hilit=advaita%20greg#p102251

Malcolm wrote:
Correct, there is a structural similarity with respect to how their arguments are framed. There is no similarity in terms of the basis, path, and result, that was the essence of Khenpo Tsultrim's reply, and I agree with him. There is no buddhahood in Advaita.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, September 10th, 2017 at 12:57 AM
Title: Re: Buddha nature vs Soul
Content:
smcj said:
[You know that Shentong posits a universal ground. You know it.

Malcolm wrote:
I know no such thing. You are completely wrong in your understanding of gzhan stong. Dolbupa is laughing at you right now from whatever Buddhafield he is in.

Honestly, you should just stop playing at philosophy and do another Ngondro to repair the traces of wrong view you have allowed to infect your mind.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, September 10th, 2017 at 12:54 AM
Title: Re: Illuminating Quotes by Malcolm Namdrol-la
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
I once forced Khenpo Tsultrim Gyatso to admit (I have a witness, incidentally) that there was no substantial difference between Advaita Vedanta and Gzhan stong in terms of how they presented their view. His only response was a sectarian polemic "But there is no buddhahood in Vedanta!" Now, mind you, I am not saying that there is such a thing. But when you study these texts, you come to realize, even as Bhavaviveka and Shantaraksita both observed, that language of Advaita and the language of Madhyamaka are more or less identical. Shantaraksita complains in his Tattvasiddhi to the effect "If you accept the nature of things is non-arising, why do you not become Buddhist!?"

Now, again, I am not saying that if you practice Advaita you will become a buddha -- I honestly do not know. But I am saying that when you study these things, philosophically, at any rate, it is very hard to show the difference between Advaita and Madhyamaka. The main difference between them is that Hindus accept the Vedas as self-originated and Buddhists do not.
All conditioned phenomena are impermanent.
All afflicted phenomena are suffering
All phenomena lack identity
Nirvana is bliss.

You can find these four seals in Advaita Vedanta as well. Just substitute brahman for nirvana and you have a perfect match. It is very hard to differentiate brahman from nirvana. Really, go ahead and try.

rachmiel said:
Hold the presses! Did Malcolm *really* say/write these? They sound very un-Malcolm ... Maybe his views have changed since 2010?

Malcolm wrote:
Nope, the distinctions between Advaita and and Madhyamaka are very subtle, which is understandable since Advaita philosophers cribbed Madhyamaka, causing no end of confusion for modern students who are unaware of the history of Indian philosophy in general. Nevertheless, the differences are important, and that fact that Advaitans had to resort to Madhyamaka, in essence, to Buddhists to refute their co-religionists is just one more proof of the superiority of Buddhadharma. (cue: lion's roar).


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 9th, 2017 at 11:09 PM
Title: Re: Buddha nature vs Soul
Content:
smcj said:
Ok, then in English I'll say that the 3 natures are imaginary, dependent, and ultimate, with the ultimate as being empty of anything other than its own innate pure qualities and Buddha Nature.

Pretty standard Shentong view and terminology.

Malcolm wrote:
No, the three natures are the imputed (parikalpita kun brtags), the dependent ( paratantra, gzhan dbang ),  and the perfected nature ( paraniṣpanna, yongs grub ) .

The way the Tibetans who follow gzhan stong understand things such as Kongtrul, Khyentse Wangpo, and so on understand things — the perfected nature refers to the luminosity of the mind, which is considered to have infinite, ultimate qualities. It does not however refer something apart from the mind.

Khyentse Wangpo states:
From among the three natures, both the imputed and dependent nature are temporary phenomena, i.e., the intrinsically empty relative. The two aspects of perfected nature are the pristine consciousness of the dharmadhātu, the extrinsically empty ultimate meaning. 

Among the outer, inner, and alternate; the external container universe and the inhabiting sentient beings are the mutable, temporary dharmin, i.e., the intrinsically empty relative. The alternate is the sugatagarbha, the unchanging fundamental dharmatā, i.e., extrinsically empty ultimate meaning. 

In general, among the basis, path, and result, the basis is the sugatagarbha, the pristine consciousness of the all-basis, the basis of the transformation of all samsara and nirvana— 1) the basis of purification of the aspect of faults and 2) the basis of manifesting the aspect of qualities. 

The path is the method of exhausting the aspect of faults in that basis, and the method of manifesting the aspect of qualities, accompanied by the two accumulations. The accumulation of pristine consciousness removes the covering obscuration of the qualities of the dharmakāya that have always existed as naturally perfected from the beginning. The accumulation of merit gradually develops the qualities of the rūpakāya which did not previously exist.

The result is 1) the result of separation, the dharmakaȳa, the ultimate meaning, the suchness kāya, and 2) the generated result, the rūpakāya, the symbolic, relative kāya, which exist as the abundance of one's own benefit and other's benefit.
This is all a discussion of one's own dharmatā, not a soul, nor an overarching universal pleroma.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 9th, 2017 at 9:19 PM
Title: Re: Questions on the Mulamadyamaka Karika
Content:
Vasana said:
Emptiness refutes existents but doesn't claim complete non-existence. Emptiness and dependently originated appearances are not mutually exclusive.

ItsRaining said:
I mean I know that emptiness isn't non existence, I was wondering more specifically about the first chapter of the Mulmadhyamaka Karika where he says things do not arise from causes and conditions however in reality we see that things do arise from conditions. I thought emptiness meant things are empty of inherent existence as they are only causes and conditiond (which themselves are empty) but if no dharma arises from causes then how can they be empty if emptiness means things arise from conditions?

Thanks

Malcolm wrote:
Nāgārjuna states later:
If there were something subtle that was not empty, there would be something subtle to be empty. 
As there is nothing that is not empty, where is there something to be empty?
It means that the analysis of emptiness has no limit. Whatever you perceive is found on analysis to be empty.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 9th, 2017 at 9:16 PM
Title: Re: Questions on the Mulamadyamaka Karika
Content:
ItsRaining said:
So in the first chapter of the Mulamadyamaka Karika nagarjuna seems to have refuted the idea that fruits will arise from causes, how fruits are already in the cause, etc. But what are  the implications of this? All phenomenon are empty? But if no fruits can arise from causes why do we see a world that's constantly changing? How is it different to the arrow paradox where while it seems to suggest something can never happen but will happen if you test it out?

Malcolm wrote:
The implication of this is that arising from conditions is merely a convention what does not stand up to analysis.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 9th, 2017 at 9:11 PM
Title: Re: Buddha nature vs Soul
Content:
smcj said:
The point is that there is no point to eternalism if there is no eternal agent or object.
Defining terms:

I'm using "eternalism" to refer to an Ultimate Reality that is unborn or non-manifest.

My understanding of "soul" is an identity or something manifest that is unchanging.

For instance, Kalu R gave the example of a being that is born successively as an elephant, then fish, then bird. Can you say that the true identity of the fish is really that of the elephant? Or say that the bird's identity is really as a fish? No. There is nothing essential and unchanging about any of those successive identities. Nothing about the continuity that goes between lifetimes limits the metamorphosis between lives. Thus there is no essential unchanging identity, no "soul", involved in the continuity. Part of its nature is limitless freedom to be expressed as anything whatsoever.

Malcolm wrote:
The term "ultimate reality" does not exist in Buddhist texts. This is a very misleading English gloss. The terms we have for an "ultimate" are 1) ultimate truth, i.e, paramārtha or don dam, which means "ultimate meaning" or "ultimate sense"; suchness, i.e. tatāta or de bzhin nyid; dharmatā or chos nyid refer to the ultimate essence of relative phenomena. Indeed, these terms, and others like them, are all pointing out something definitive about relative phenomena or beings.

There are terms in Buddhism that mean "reality," like gnas lugs, bhutatā, but there is no need to add the adjective "ultimate" to such terms because what is real is real. There is no relative reality as opposed to an ultimate reality. The first would be contradiction in terms, since the relative is not real, not constant, not unchanging, etc. The second is redundant since the real is constant, unchanging, etc.

There is no separate unmanifest reality which stands apart from manifest phenomena. This "nonarising" you seek is precisely the nonarising nature of dependently originated phenomena, their emptiness of arising, ceasing, and abiding.

Emptiness is the quality of things that allows them to undergo change and transformation.

Nonarising, aka, emptiness is ultimate truth and reality. Emptiness and nonarising are ultimate truths, veridical cognitions arrived at through an analysis of dependently originated phenomena. Emptiness and non-arising are real because they withstand analysis, i.e., they are the result that one finds upon analysis, they are the content of āryan cognition in equipoise.

But emptiness and nonarising are not ultimate realities because if they were, there would be nothing other than a blank void.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 9th, 2017 at 11:08 AM
Title: Re: Thodgal
Content:



Bubbles said:
Thank you Malcolm.  Have you heard of Geshe Chaphur?

Malcolm wrote:
Yes. I know Chapur Rinpoche and received the transmission of the main Bonpo Dzogchen teaching, the Zhang Zhung Nyangyu from him.

He is a very nice person, and is quite generous with his students.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 9th, 2017 at 10:08 AM
Title: Re: Buddha nature vs Soul
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
What is the point of eternalism if isn't something to be eternal?

smcj said:
As Shakespeare said, "The play's the thing". Even so, every play needs a stage. No need for an actor to get stuck in a role just because the stage stays the same.

Malcolm wrote:
The point is that there is no point to eternalism if there is no eternal agent or object.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 9th, 2017 at 8:17 AM
Title: Re: Buddha nature vs Soul
Content:
smcj said:
Of course the alayavijnana, the 8th consciousness which goes from life to life, has bee accused of being akin to a soul.

krodha said:
You really like souls and Jesus.

smcj said:
And eternalism. You forgot eternalism. Actually souls not so much.

Malcolm wrote:
What is the point of eternalism if isn't something to be eternal?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 9th, 2017 at 8:16 AM
Title: Re: Do Boddhisatvas experience a continuity of identity?
Content:
M.G. said:
Something I've wondered.

How much continuity of identity, if any, do Boddhisattvas experience as between incarnations?

It's hard for me to imagine that almost all of the components of identity - memory, personality, cognition - arent devastated or obliterated by death, but then again, I'm not any kind of a yogi.


Malcolm wrote:
Depends on how high. 8th stage on up, yes.

Temicco said:
Source?

Malcolm wrote:
This is the stage in which bodhisattvas attain power over birth. Source, Abhisamayalaṃkāra, etc.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 9th, 2017 at 7:38 AM
Title: Re: Do Boddhisatvas experience a continuity of identity?
Content:
M.G. said:
Something I've wondered.

How much continuity of identity, if any, do Boddhisattvas experience as between incarnations?

It's hard for me to imagine that almost all of the components of identity - memory, personality, cognition - arent devastated or obliterated by death, but then again, I'm not any kind of a yogi.


Malcolm wrote:
Depends on how high. 8th stage on up, yes.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 9th, 2017 at 5:48 AM
Title: Re: Nyingma/Sarma rabbit hole
Content:
smcj said:
the formation of Nyingma was not so much a response to as an extension of the Sarma Renaissance
Sounds like the Nyingma recovery from persecution is being conflated either the introduction of the Sarma to me.

Malcolm wrote:
Nyingma was persecuted? Just when did that happen?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 9th, 2017 at 5:23 AM
Title: Re: Counting mantras
Content:
HandsomeMonkeyking said:
I have not yet understood why the counting is important at all.

Malcolm wrote:
There are three ways to do a deity retreat, the best is to practice until you achieve a sign; the medium is doing some practice for a set period. The inferior is counting. Most people are inferior.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 9th, 2017 at 4:39 AM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
smcj said:
In book 1 of Kongtrul's T.o.K. titled "Mryiad Worlds" he goes through different cosmologies. The last cosmology is based on the Dzogchen view. He prefaces the chapter by saying he is discussing what Ultimate Reality is like before there are either sentient beings or buddhas. I don't have the page number handy.

Malcolm wrote:
Kongtrul is talking about the so called spyi gzhi, the generic basis, which is original purity, which is emptiness free from all extremes, which in turn is just talking about the nature of the mind, not some separate ultimate reality.


smcj said:
I've gone through these arguments before. I do not enjoy them. I'm not doing it again.

Malcolm wrote:
That's good, because you have made it clear you do not understand Dolbupa, nor Kongtrul, let alone Dzogchen.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 9th, 2017 at 3:34 AM
Title: Re: Did the 84 mahasiddhas practice Ngöndro?
Content:
Lay-Man said:
Again, this is a relatively newer invention, to my knowledge. Likely 200-300 years old.

heart said:
Yes, and your sources for this statement is?

/magnus

Lay-Man said:
Well, I guess I am my own source!
I have yet to see Ngondro Commentary or manual written prior to the 17th/18th century which prescribes the 100,000 recitations as an accumulation requirement for preliminary practices.

If you have something, I would love to see it.

Malcolm wrote:
Look in Drikung Kagyu. This is merely one example.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 9th, 2017 at 3:32 AM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
smcj said:
Ultimate reality is rejected in Buddhadharma, unity is rejected in Buddhadharma, etc.
It used to be rejected before Dolpopa. Now in some quarters it's ok. It depends on who you talk to.

Just sayin'...


Malcolm wrote:
It is also rejected by Dolpopa.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 9th, 2017 at 12:47 AM
Title: Re: Did the 84 mahasiddhas practice Ngöndro?
Content:
yagmort said:
well i am not questioning benefits of ngöndro, i already done 90k prostrations and doing ~900 each day. my question is about history research of ngöndro.

Malcolm wrote:
Prostrations in the early history of Tibetan Buddhism seem to have been combined with purification practices. Sakya Pandita writes about this. He also points out that their yogic benefit is extraordinary.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 9th, 2017 at 12:34 AM
Title: Re: Buddha nature vs Soul
Content:
Dan74 said:
On the other hand folks over at the other Wheel argued that this luminosity is simply an aspect of contact, and anything else is overreaching. You can have a look at the thread I linked.

_/|\_


Malcolm wrote:
Mahāyāna forum, Mahāyāna rules.

Dan74 said:
Sure thing, but the sutta in question is a Pali sutta, hence the relevance of Theravada view on it. But OK, happy to let this rest.

_/|\_


Malcolm wrote:
Nagārjuna uses Hinayāna sūtras to illustrate points in Mahāyāna where Hinayāna practitioners have not understood the import of their own sūtras. This is an example of that.

Mahāyāna accepts both Hinayāna and Mahāyāna sutras, but considers Mahāyāna sūtras to reveal the true meaning of statements found in Hinayāna sūtras, like this Prabhasvara Sūtra, known in the Pali canon as the Pabbhsara Sutta.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 9th, 2017 at 12:31 AM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:


Soma999 said:
Is he a human ? A "god" ? The ultimate reality ? The unity from which everything originates ? The cause of the seed of unity ? What can't be aprehended ? The first visible form of the non manifested ?

Malcolm wrote:
Ultimate reality is rejected in Buddhadharma, unity is rejected in Buddhadharma, etc.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 9th, 2017 at 12:29 AM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:


Malcolm wrote:
When one reads the sūtras and tantras taught by the Buddha, one can see very clearly that all these schools are refuted either directly or indirectly as wrong views.

pael said:
Could you say how existence of evil all-mighty god is refuted in texts? Or all-mighty god twins of Zoroastrianism (Ahura Mazda and Ahriman)?


Malcolm wrote:
Ahura Mazda is a creator god. Therefore, axiomatically rejected in Buddhadharma.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 8th, 2017 at 11:23 PM
Title: Re: Buddha nature vs Soul
Content:
Dan74 said:
On the other hand folks over at the other Wheel argued that this luminosity is simply an aspect of contact, and anything else is overreaching. You can have a look at the thread I linked.

_/|\_


Malcolm wrote:
Mahāyāna forum, Mahāyāna rules.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 8th, 2017 at 11:03 PM
Title: Re: Teacher & Root Guru
Content:
dechenpa said:
In that spirit it would be better to drop the highly dubious Bhavideva/Ashvagosa identification as a historical fact.

Malcolm wrote:
Indeed, it is an attribution error.

There are many such errors and as you note, Tibetans were aware of them and took pains to clean them up. However, being conservative, Tibetans also like to keep things as they are. I heard a famous Tibetan recently at a conference assert that we should keep old translation terms, even if they are inaccurate, because they simply have gained the respect of time and usage. It is too soon for such conservatism in my book.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 8th, 2017 at 10:58 PM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
Soma999 said:
Hi Malcolm,

I am quiet surprised by your answer.

In the Bhagavad Gita - quiet a major scripture - for exemple, the liberation presented, and which is quiet strongly adopted by many schools, is a freedom from the circle of birth and death.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, of course, all Indian schools who propose liberation propose that liberation means freedom from the cycles of birth and death.

Buddha disagreed with all of these schools completely, and taught it was only through adopting right view, i.e., the four truths of nobles, that one could attain freedom from the cycle of birth and death.

He taught that they mistook various types of mental states for liberation, mental states which in some cases last millions and millions of years.

The Bhgavada Gita for example, is an example of an eternalist scripture, and it proposes the best way to achieve liberation is through pure devotion to Krishna as embodiment of Godhead, though it lists other paths as well.

Saṃkhya is described as an incorrect view because it proposes that causes and effects are merely transformations of one substance. Yoga also suffers from this view.

Jainism is clearly refuted by the Buddha. This is a no brainer. The Buddha thought that Mahathera was a complete fool.

Nyaya and Vaishesika did not exist during the time of the Buddha, but their eternalist atomism was soundly negated by later Buddhist scholars such as Bhavaviveka and so on.

The Mimamsas do not believe in liberation at all, but rather believe in appeasing the gods through rites in order to assure mundane good fortune.

Advaita also did not exist by name during the time of the Buddha, but it is refuted for proposing that all reality is ultimately one undifferentiated consciousness.

When one reads the sūtras and tantras taught by the Buddha, one can see very clearly that all these schools are refuted either directly or indirectly as wrong views.

Wrong view cannot be lead to liberation.

There is only one right view, and that is the view of dependent origination.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 8th, 2017 at 10:32 PM
Title: Re: Thodgal
Content:
Bubbles said:
Dear Friends

I would like to learn Thodgal.  I read there are gazing visual and breathing exercises.  Which are best books to get instruction?  Are there illustrations for the exercises?

Thank you

Kathy


Malcolm wrote:
Dear Kathy:

You need a teacher. There are many qualified Nyingma masters who will teach qualified students the highest teaching of the Buddha, the complete path of Dzogchen, including Thogal.

I suggest you make a connection with such a teacher. Qualified teachers like Chogyal Namkhai Norbu, Chokyi Nyima, Tsoknyi Rinpoche, Pachog Rinpoche, Tulku Sangngag, HH Shenphen Dawa Rinpoche, Tulku Dakpa, and so on can be easily met and studied with. If you want to really practice Dzogchen, true devotion to a qualified guru is a necessary precondition. Following their instructions carefully is the next step. If you do this, you will undoubtedly receive such teachings.

If you like Bonpo teachings, you can study with a number of Bonpo Lamas as well. They also teach a complete path of Dzogchen, and guru devotion is no less important in their school.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 8th, 2017 at 10:27 PM
Title: Re: Buddha nature vs Soul
Content:


Dan74 said:
Yes, one can argue that, but one can also argue that this is not about Buddha-nature at  but a characteristic of the mind. After all, can Buddhanature, or enlightened mind be defiled?

Malcolm wrote:
Buddhanature (buddhadhātu) can be covered with obscurations. This is the purpose for the discussion in the Uttaratantra of the nine examples of how the buddhadhātu is covered with obscurations, which come from the ten tathātagarbha sūtras.

Buddhanature is nothing other than dharmakāya covered with afflictions (Luminous, monks, is the mind.[1] And it is defiled by incoming defilements); dharmakāya is nothing other than one's mind when it is freed from all obscurations (Luminous, monks, is the mind. And it is freed from incoming defilements.).

Wayfarer said:
I'm sure that, from the Mahayana perspective, that verse can be taken to refer to Buddha Nature, but does the actual term 'tathāgatagarbha' appear in the Pali? And do you think a Theravadin would agree that that is what is meant by it?

Malcolm wrote:
The meaning is what is important. I used the Pali canon for convenience. But this sutta also exists in the Agamas. Statements like it exist in Mahāyāna sūtras as well.

Thus, your question, will a Hinayāna practitioner recognize that this as a reference to tathāgatagarbha, no. But that is not important since we in Mahāyāna understand the meaning of Agamas, etc., from the point of view of Mahāyāna, not from the point of view of Hinayāna.

I cited the Pali text to show a continuity in Buddha's teaching about the luminosity of the mind, which is an important connecting thread between Buddha's Hinayāna teachings and his Mahāyāna teachings.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 8th, 2017 at 10:16 PM
Title: Re: Buddha nature vs Soul
Content:


takso said:
Awareness is a ground condition that ‘supports’ consciousness.  The nature of awareness is effulgence and it is in a not-knowing state before the appearance of object.  Consciousness, on the other hand, is appearance of objects in the mind.  When awareness touches on objects, consciousness would arise simultaneously.  Consciousness is naturally looking outward to objects and it is flitting all the time.

Malcolm wrote:
No, in fact it is rather the reverse. Awareness is a quality of consciousness.

There is no term for "awareness" the way you are using the word in any Buddhist sūtra, The Buddhist term for "awareness" is samprajana. It accompanies mindfulness.

takso said:
It can be either way.  Firstly there is the arising of preliminary awareness, then there is the arising of consciousness cum intermediary awareness, thereafter the arising of consciousness cum advanced awareness, and lastly the arising of ultimate/full awareness - samprajana.

Just like the emptiness of phenomena is both the cause and consequence of the dependent nature of phenomena.

Malcolm wrote:
No, it cannot be either way. There is no word in Sanskrit Buddhist texts, or in Tibetan texts, that corresponds to the way you are using the word "awareness."

Awareness is a mental factor which belong the to the samskara skandha.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 8th, 2017 at 9:59 PM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
Soma999 said:
Moksha is not liberation ? Just wondering...


Malcolm wrote:
Moksha is a word that means liberation. Most Indian schools— of six orthodox darshanas Mimamsa being the only exception— propose a theory of liberation.

Buddhadharma however rejects all of these as leading to true liberation, asserting the result of these schools is rebirth in a deva realm (at best), rather than the ending of birth in samsara.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 8th, 2017 at 9:02 PM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
If I were in the business of evangelizing Buddhism to nonBuddhists it might, but since I am not, and since I have no interest in doing so, it is no benefit to me at all to raise here arguments I might raise with a nonbuddhist.

Grigoris said:
That is a pretty poor excuse my friend.  I am a Buddhist and I still find the intellectual laziness/sloppiness off-putting.  If you cannot be bothered making a well thought out point, it may be more useful not to make a point at all.  I know:  pot, kettle, black... Just sayin'...

Malcolm wrote:
You actually want me to run through the list of anti-theist and anti-nihilist arguments you know perfectly well. What is the point?

The point I am making is that we can see over and over again the Buddhas stating unequivocally that outside his Dharmavinaya there is no liberation. It is not like the Buddha made coherent arguments for his case. He merely stated it was so. One either accepts his statements or not.

The principle reason of course is that the Buddha's view is dependent origination, and it is by seeing the cause of suffering and so on with respect to the three realms he attained buddhahood.

The thing is, we have, most of us, been talking about these same issues for years. I assume, perhaps wrongly, we are for the most part familiar with the Dharma to a sufficient extent that it is not necessary to fully litigate every statement which asserts liberation from samsara is the exclusive domain of Buddhadharma.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 8th, 2017 at 8:54 PM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:


Malcolm wrote:
The precondition for meeting the Dharma is a human birth with the eight freedoms and ten endowments, nothing else.

pael said:
One of them is freedom from incomplete faculties. What it means? Someone with incomplete faculties can listen Dharma talks. Is it meeting the Dharma for them? I think I have incomplete faculties.


Malcolm wrote:
Generally it means being blind or deaf.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 8th, 2017 at 8:53 PM
Title: Re: Did the 84 mahasiddhas practice Ngöndro?
Content:
yagmort said:
but did accumulation of prostrations exist along the practices of guru-yoga, Dorje Sempa and mandala offerings?

Malcolm wrote:
Not in India.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 8th, 2017 at 10:10 AM
Title: Re: Buddha nature vs Soul
Content:


takso said:
Awareness is a ground condition that ‘supports’ consciousness.  The nature of awareness is effulgence and it is in a not-knowing state before the appearance of object.  Consciousness, on the other hand, is appearance of objects in the mind.  When awareness touches on objects, consciousness would arise simultaneously.  Consciousness is naturally looking outward to objects and it is flitting all the time.

Malcolm wrote:
No, in fact it is rather the reverse. Awareness is a quality of consciousness.

There is no term for "awareness" the way you are using the word in any Buddhist sūtra, The Buddhist term for "awareness" is samprajana. It accompanies mindfulness.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 8th, 2017 at 10:07 AM
Title: Re: Buddha nature vs Soul
Content:


Wayfarer said:
The Buddha Nature teachings developed in much later forms of Buddhism, they are not found in the Pali scriptures.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, in fact they are:
"Luminous, monks, is the mind.[1] And it is defiled by incoming defilements." {I,v,9}

"Luminous, monks, is the mind. And it is freed from incoming defilements." {I,v,10}

"Luminous, monks, is the mind. And it is defiled by incoming defilements. The uninstructed run-of-the-mill person doesn't discern that as it actually is present, which is why I tell you that — for the uninstructed run-of-the-mill person — there is no development of the mind." {I,vi,1}

"Luminous, monks, is the mind. And it is freed from incoming defilements. The well-instructed disciple of the noble ones discerns that as it actually is present, which is why I tell you that — for the well-instructed disciple of the noble ones — there is development of the mind." {I,vi,2}
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an01/an01.049.than.html

The above sutta is precisely a teaching on tathāgatagarbha.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 8th, 2017 at 10:03 AM
Title: Re: Buddha nature vs Soul
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Thus, buddhas remain in the world for as long as there are sentient beings who require their assistance, manifesting when needed. When there are no more sentient beings, there is no further need for buddhas in the world.

RobbyS said:
If there ever is an end to sentient beings, does that mean there will be nothing left in the world? No earth, no planets? Just a black void?

Malcolm wrote:
There will be only buddhas and buddhafields.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 8th, 2017 at 10:02 AM
Title: Re: Buddha nature vs Soul
Content:
Queequeg said:
Malcolm,
As I understand, Buddha-nature is a translation of Buddha dhatu.

Could you give some color on what "dhatu" means or refers to in the context of Buddha-nature? What is it's scope here?

Malcolm wrote:
=

Dhātu means "source." The nature of the mind is the source of buddhahood. There is no buddhahood apart from realizing the nature of one's mind.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 8th, 2017 at 6:19 AM
Title: Re: DC Ödzer Chenma practice
Content:
Karinos said:
There is Sutra of Odzer Chienma (Marici) which you can easily practice without any permissions.
There are also Kriya Tantra empowerments for Marici.
Personally never heard of higher yoga tantra practices but probably there are some.
Not sure how NNR practice is categorized.

Malcolm wrote:
There is also a rdzog chen man ngag sde tantra of Marici.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 8th, 2017 at 5:07 AM
Title: Re: Image of Buddha?
Content:
Grigoris said:
but to say they did not bring their philosophy etc... is 100% untrue, especially when you look at the Hellenic influences on the art.

Malcolm wrote:
Not to mention Hellenistic influence on Astrology, logic, and so on.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 8th, 2017 at 3:56 AM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
Jeff H said:
I have found my vehicle and I’m implementing it to the best of my ability. But a path implies stages of development. I believe that having the causes and conditions to receive buddhadharma implies lifetimes of prior preparation, just as progressing in buddhadharma implies gradual, step-wise changes over time. This position is based on the fact that the practical presentation of Buddhism that convinced me initially was lam rim. My path is evolving. Believing that I have found, what is for me, the exclusive path is quite a different thing than flatly concluding that every other path is utterly futile.

Malcolm wrote:
That really depends on how much confidence one has in sūtra and tantra about the distinction between paths of samsara and paths of nirvana. There is a reason we use the term "tīrthika."

And need I remind everyone again that the Buddha is quite firm about the impossibility of liberation outside of Buddha's Dharmavinaya.

Jeff H said:
I agree that liberation requires buddhadharma. But I believe there are paths that constitute a prelude to Buddha's path.

Malcolm wrote:
But I still think I needed Christianity to bring me to Buddhism.
No, you came to Buddhadharma because of past life accumulations and aspirations to meet the Dharma again in future lives. In other words, you had already met the Dharma.

Jeff H said:
Does this mean there are no conditions for meeting the Dharma initially?

Malcolm wrote:
The precondition for meeting the Dharma is a human birth with the eight freedoms and ten endowments, nothing else. The precondition for that is avoiding the ten nonvirtues and practicing the ten virtues. Other religions have nothing do with it, beyond the extent to which they encourage virtuous behavior.


Jeff H said:
Do you mean that everyone, in all six realms, who is not liberated now has previously met Dharma, fallen from it, and needs to re-enter by means of aspirations and accumulations? Or are some beings excluded from liberation?

Malcolm wrote:
I don't think implied that.

Jeff H said:
With what I've learned so far, I extrapolate that in previous lives we experience things that are not buddhadharma but nevertheless help prepare the causes and conditions to meet it and accept it.

Malcolm wrote:
See above. If faith in Jesus, Allah, Krishna, and so on help one to be a virtuous and kind person, one might indeed experience the result of a human birth with the eight freedoms and ten endowments. But it has nothing to do with faith in these nonBuddhist teachers and everything to do with practicing the ten virtues. But the practice of the ten virtues and compassion will not by themselves lead to liberation. Liberation requires insight into the nature of reality, emptiness.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 8th, 2017 at 3:44 AM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
Grigoris said:
it would benefit you to deal with these flaws.

Malcolm wrote:
If I were in the business of evangelizing Buddhism to nonBuddhists it might, but since I am not, and since I have no interest in doing so, it is no benefit to me at all to raise here arguments I might raise with a nonbuddhist.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 8th, 2017 at 3:42 AM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Would you like me to be less "fundamentalist?"

I have said for many, many, many, years, over and over again that there is no liberation outside the Dharma of the Buddha. Not sure why this surprises you.

Grigoris said:
Well, for starters you went through an anti-Buddhist phase for quite a while, but we'll leave that aside for now...


Malcolm wrote:
I was never anti-Buddhist, and I still don't necessarily identify as a Buddhist, since that means too many things to too many different people. I am however and have always claimed to be a follower of Buddhadharma.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 8th, 2017 at 3:04 AM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
climb-up said:
I suspect that you are not particularly upset, but I do apologize.

Malcolm wrote:
No apology necessary. And no, the ramblings of people in the internet don't upset me.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 8th, 2017 at 3:03 AM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
Grigoris said:
Would it surprise you to know that Christians et al say the exact same thing about all other competing religions?

Malcolm wrote:
Indeed, therefore, pick your view — and thus your realization and liberation— carefully. If you are interested in liberation in this lifetime, you would not want to make an error in your choice.

If you are an all-oner, you are lost before you have even begun on a path.

Grigoris said:
I am going to ignore your red herrings and draw attention tot he fact that you seem to be avoiding answering to my point that the arguments you make for, and the "logic" you use to support, the validity of your position are no different to the arguments made by fundamentalists of any religion.  As such they are not all that convincing and hardly befitting a person with your level of (Buddhist) education.

Malcolm wrote:
Would you like me to be less "fundamentalist?"

I have said for many, many, many, years, over and over again that there is no liberation outside the Dharma of the Buddha. Not sure why this surprises you.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 8th, 2017 at 1:40 AM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
joy&peace said:
By the way -- yesterday. . . on this thread -- I know it may seem people are disagreeing and such. . . but reading it. . . I felt a deep sense of peace and bliss.. And a tremendous amount of metta between everyone.. I mean, people are expressing in a kind and heart felt way.. It was really wonderful. Anyway -- just wanted to say.

So, while one person said please close it -- my reaction was quite opposite, quite literally,.... Feeling metta in that discussion.. Quite wonderful.

dzogchungpa said:
It is indeed a marvelous thread. So much joy and passive-aggression on display.

Malcolm wrote:
Not very passive:
And in my own, incredibly witty and hilarious way, I am pointing out some issues I have with some of what he says.
Malcolm has, as always, made many wonderful points and clarifications. He has also been rude, dismissive and (in my humble opinion) very rigid and dogmatic.
I have no problem with his point of view, I have some issues with his style.
I assume it is being presented in good faith. I also assume that (most) fundamentalists deliver their hellfire rhetoric in good faith.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 8th, 2017 at 1:17 AM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:


Malcolm wrote:
Oh, this is old. Krodha trotted this out https://dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?t=17401&start=60#p251929...


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 8th, 2017 at 12:24 AM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:



Malcolm wrote:
Of course, when there is no supreme nirmanakāya in the world, pratyekabuddhas can arise, but pratyekabuddhas do not teach.

liuzg150181 said:
One question I have in mind,do pratyekabuddhas have refuge before attaining nirvana?

Malcolm wrote:
Pratyekabuddhas are those who have trained under a buddha in a past life, but attain awakening independently on their own in a future lifetime. So yes, at one point, they went for refuge to the Three Jewels.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 8th, 2017 at 12:06 AM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
Grigoris said:
Would it surprise you to know that Christians et al say the exact same thing about all other competing religions?

Malcolm wrote:
Indeed, therefore, pick your view — and thus your realization and liberation— carefully. If you are interested in liberation in this lifetime, you would not want to make an error in your choice.

If you are an all-oner, you are lost before you have even begun on a path.

Jeff H said:
I have found my vehicle and I’m implementing it to the best of my ability. But a path implies stages of development. I believe that having the causes and conditions to receive buddhadharma implies lifetimes of prior preparation, just as progressing in buddhadharma implies gradual, step-wise changes over time. This position is based on the fact that the practical presentation of Buddhism that convinced me initially was lam rim. My path is evolving. Believing that I have found, what is for me, the exclusive path is quite a different thing than flatly concluding that every other path is utterly futile.

Malcolm wrote:
That really depends on how much confidence one has in sūtra and tantra about the distinction between paths of samsara and paths of nirvana. There is a reason we use the term "tīrthika."

And need I remind everyone again that the Buddha is quite firm about the impossibility of liberation outside of Buddha's Dharmavinaya.


Jeff H said:
But I still think I needed Christianity to bring me to Buddhism.

Malcolm wrote:
No, you came to Buddhadharma because of past life accumulations and aspirations to meet the Dharma again in future lives. In other words, you had already met the Dharma.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 7th, 2017 at 11:15 PM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Axiomatically, Christians, etc., have wrong view, thus wrong realization, etc.

Grigoris said:
Would it surprise you to know that Christians et al say the exact same thing about all other competing religions?

Malcolm wrote:
Indeed, therefore, pick your view — and thus your realization and liberation— carefully. If you are interested in liberation in this lifetime, you would not want to make an error in your choice.

If you are an all-oner, you are lost before you have even begun on a path.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 7th, 2017 at 11:14 PM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:


joy&peace said:
Yet there are similarities as well. Seeing a Buddhist / Bodhisattva is said to remove  great amount of karma, and so many other benefits.

So this would apply for a guru -- but, it wouldn't have to be under any circumstances..

Malcolm wrote:
And this is what the Buddha said:
Misdeeds cannot be washed away with water,
suffering cannot be taken out with the hand,
I cannot give you liberation in the palm of my hand
but I can teach you the path to liberation.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 7th, 2017 at 10:11 PM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
There is no wish to become a buddha in Christianity.

Grigoris said:
I am sure Evangelists consider themselves enlightened...  Buddhists are not the only religious nutters that think they have a monopoly on liberation.

Malcolm wrote:
As I said above, liberation in Buddhadharma is something quite specific. If you have abandoned that definition, how can you even consider yourself a follower of Buddhadharma? Whatever liberation might be in the eyes of Christians, it certainly is not the liberation understood by those who follow Buddhadharma.

Realization comes from view. Liberation comes from realization. If your view is wrong, your realization is wrong, and liberation is out of the question for you.

Axiomatically, Christians, etc., have wrong view, thus wrong realization, etc.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 7th, 2017 at 10:08 PM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
Jeff H said:
I believe universal loving compassion can be attained by many means. And, while recognizing true enlightenment is a topic that’s way over my head, I think that exclusivity could only be verified by a fully realized being.

Malcolm wrote:
Compassion is not a means to liberation. It is also not bodhicitta. Many people are confused about this point.

The definition and requirements for liberation are set out very clearly in sūtra, tantra, and śastra. Maybe people should spend more time studying these than wasting their time on Dharmawheel.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 7th, 2017 at 9:25 PM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Bodhicitta, the wish to become a Buddha in order to benefit all sentient beings, does not even exist in Hinayāna, much less nonBuddhist traditions.

Grigoris said:
What about Evangelism then?  I am sure Evangelists and Baptists believe they are trying to benefit sentient beings.

Malcolm wrote:
Bodhicitta is the wish to become a buddha in order to benefit all sentient beings.

There is no wish to become a buddha in Christianity.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 7th, 2017 at 9:24 PM
Title: Re: Buddha nature vs Soul
Content:
doublerepukken said:
Hey all,

I have been reading more into the concept of Buddha-nature and honestly I am very lost. I was under the impression that in Buddhism all things are subject to change and are impermanent, yet here is a concept of something eternal that is present in all beings... I don't understand how this is different from atman. Also apparently from the Lotus sutra, Buddhas are actually also eternal and everlasting? This is all very confusing lol. If anyone is able to clear this up for me I would greatly appreciate it


Malcolm wrote:
"Buddhanature" is a name for the nature of the mind. It means since the nature of the mind, clarity and emptiness, can be found in all minds, that nature of the mind can be realized by all beings, given the proper causes and conditions.

As to the permanence of Buddhas — when someone frees their mind from the afflictions that cause rebirth in samsara, and attains omniscience, that person is a buddha. Buddhas are permanent in so far as there are no conditions which can inhibit their continuums. Thus, buddhas remain in the world for as long as there are sentient beings who require their assistance, manifesting when needed. When there are no more sentient beings, there is no further need for buddhas in the world.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 7th, 2017 at 8:57 PM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:


Soma999 said:
Taking refuge is taking the teaching of the Buddha to heart. It has nothing to do with honouring - or not - other traditions. Wake up ! There are enlighted people in every tradition, and in no tradition also, in every place, at all kind of moments !

Malcolm wrote:
Depends on what you mean by "enlightened." If by "enlightened" ones means having overcome basic ignorance into the nature of reality, then no, there are no enlightened people outside of Buddhadharma.


Soma999 said:
If Buddha can manifest only in the context of a "buddhist tradition", it's really nothing. So little.

Malcolm wrote:
Buddhas and high bodhisattvas can manifest in all kinds of ways, but the extent to which they can teach the path of liberation is dependent on whether or not conducive conditions exist for such teachings. When a supreme nirmanakāya has not manifested in the world, than those conditions do not exist. When such a supreme nirmanakāya has manifested in the world, such as Śākyamuni Buddha, only within that supreme nirmanakāya's dispensation can the path of liberation be found.

Of course, when there is no supreme nirmanakāya in the world, pratyekabuddhas can arise, but pratyekabuddhas do not teach.

Soma999 said:
If the spirit of awakening cannot be touched in other context than "buddhist tradition", it's  very little...

Malcolm wrote:
Bodhicitta, the wish to become a Buddha in order to benefit all sentient beings, does not even exist in Hinayāna, much less nonBuddhist traditions.

Soma999 said:
Buddha never "took refuge".

Malcolm wrote:
Of course he did. That is how he became a Buddha in the first place. The Buddha, Śakyamuni Buddha, followed many Buddhas in past lives by his own account.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 7th, 2017 at 8:50 PM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
Vasana said:
What is the escence of the experience in both cases? I'm not sure it's been properly defined here yet.

Grigoris said:
What is the essence of any experience?...many people treat visits by famous Lamas like they're darshans.
This is exactly why it is wrong to say that there is no darshan in Buddhism, when there quite clearly is.  Maybe there is no darshan in Buddhdharma, but there certainly is in Buddhism.

Malcolm wrote:
In Hinduism, darshan is a systematic religious phenomena. For example, in Tibetan Buddhism, while indeed there is the term mthong lam, darśana marga, there is no religious term which corresponds to the Hindu term darśana, in the sense used with respect to Ama and so on.

The same term has very different meanings in different schools from India. If they are conflated, nothing other than confusion results.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 7th, 2017 at 6:22 AM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:


Tolya M said:
but there is no place for any religion with the text of Padmasambhava in the beginning.

Malcolm wrote:
???

Tolya M said:
Did I say something wrong?


Malcolm wrote:
I don't understand what this part of your sentence means.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 7th, 2017 at 5:47 AM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:


Tolya M said:
I did not say anything bad about him. He himself teaches according to the canon and adds his terma to it. I have not read anything above the basic level, but there is no place for any religion with the text of Padmasambhava in the beginning.

Malcolm wrote:
???


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 7th, 2017 at 4:28 AM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:


Malcolm wrote:
In general, Māra appears in visions and dreams. When one has such visions and dreams, there are ways to test whether or not that vision or dream is a Māra. The point of course is that one needs to be careful about trusting visions and dreams. This is discussed in both the sūtras and the tantras.

Dorje Shedrub said:
In what ways may we test if a dream is a Mara?

Malcolm wrote:
For people who have received secret names, it is a little easier. In your dream, you ask the teacher, etc., who is teaching you to tell you your secret name. If they know, then you can understand this is a trustworthy experience.

I am not sure how people in sūtra deal with visions and ascertain whether they are true or not.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 7th, 2017 at 4:07 AM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Basically, if you going to practice Dzogchen, you are practicing Buddhadharma. Just deal with it.

dzogchungpa said:
Well, I'm just trying to deal with my boredom here.

Malcolm wrote:
Well, this is what DW is here for.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 7th, 2017 at 3:59 AM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:


dzogchungpa said:
Huh, so would, say, being a Christian be a contravention of bodhisattva vows?


Malcolm wrote:
One cannot be a Christian and hold bodhisattva vows because taking bodhisattva vows requires holding pratimokśa vows, and those are obtained by going for refuge to the Three Jewels. One of the precepts of going for refuge to the Buddha is not going for refuge in other teachers and their paths. So it is axiomatic that one who holds bodhisattva vows cannot be a Christian, a Hindu, and so on.

dzogchungpa said:
OK, but one can be a Christian and practice Dzogchen, right?

Malcolm wrote:
If you really believe Jesus is going to save you, no, if you really believe the whole Jesus trip. It won't work because your view is wrong right from the beginning. You can try though, and perhaps in your next life you will be reborn in a Dharma family.

If however you are a "cultural" Christian, someone who observes Christian holidays, goes to church now and again, etc., without any really faith in the Church or its teachings, other than the standard nice Jesus things everyone likes to repeat, then it might work.

Basically, if you going to practice Dzogchen, you are practicing Buddhadharma. Just deal with it.


if (typeof bbmedia == 'undefined') { bbmedia = true; var e = document.createElement('script'); e.async = true; e.src = 'bbmedia.js'; var s = document.getElementsByTagName('script')[0]; s.parentNode.insertBefore(e, s); }
https://phpbbex.com/ [video]


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 7th, 2017 at 3:45 AM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:


dzogchungpa said:
Huh, how exactly is "too much" defined here?

Malcolm wrote:
To study them at the expense of studying Buddhist teachings. Indeed, the same goes for Hinayāna sūtras; spending too much time with Hinayāna teachings is a contravention of bodhisattva vows as well. It is the principle reason the Hinayāna canon was not translated into Tibetan, apart from representative sūtras.

dzogchungpa said:
Huh, so would, say, being a Christian be a contravention of bodhisattva vows?


Malcolm wrote:
One cannot be a Christian and hold bodhisattva vows because taking bodhisattva vows requires holding pratimokśa vows, and those are obtained by going for refuge to the Three Jewels. One of the precepts of going for refuge to the Buddha is not going for refuge in other teachers and their paths. So it is axiomatic that one who holds bodhisattva vows cannot be a Christian, a Hindu, and so on.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 7th, 2017 at 3:37 AM
Title: Re: Perplexity
Content:
madhusudan said:
“My father is wisdom and my mother is voidness.
My country is the country of Dharma.
I am of no caste and no creed.
I am sustained by perplexity;
and I am here to destroy lust, anger and sloth.”
~Padmasambhava

I would appreciate any comments or explanation on the line, "I am sustained by perplexity."

Is that in reference to the state of being in the Middle Way free from extremes? Or something else...

Thanks


Malcolm wrote:
It is a bad translation. Look at page 34 of the Lotus Born were you will see the same passage as translated by Eric Pema Kunsang.

Erik Pema Kunsang said:
My father is the wisdom of spontaneous awareness.
My mother is the Ever-Excellent Lady, the space of all things.
I belong to the caste of indivisible space and awareness.
I have taken the unborn dharmadhatu as my homeland.
I sustain myself by consuming the concepts of duality.
My purpose is the act of killing disturbing emotions."

Malcolm wrote:
Welcome to the mosh pit, Erik!


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 7th, 2017 at 3:20 AM
Title: Re: Peeling the onion
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Yup, that kind of awareness is just a story

Losal Samten said:
Do you know if in Samkhya when the purusha turns back on itself and rests as the Jna it takes itself as an object?

Also do you know if as the result the Perfected Nature takes itself as an object according to Yogacara?

Malcolm wrote:
No, in Samkhya, one simply rests in one's own effulgence, the state known as "kaivalya."

In Yogacara, due to the transformation of the basis, the four mental aggregates express themselves as the four buddha families.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 7th, 2017 at 3:07 AM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
Mantrik said:
I see a lot of this in Vajrayana, whatever name it goes by. Given a statue, treated as an actual Buddha, I see little difference in the actual practice, however the purists may dress it up - for most people it is worship with a hope of gaining blessings.

Malcolm wrote:
Any image of the Buddha is a nirmanakāya and should be treated with respect.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 7th, 2017 at 3:06 AM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
Mantrik said:
When I was in India and went to 'Hindu' temples, people called their visit to the deity and 'eye to eye' contact 'Darshan(a)'.  The worshipper gains blessing through such contact. I have never heard anyone refer to it in the context of a living teacher.

Malcolm wrote:
Oh, this practice is huge with living teachers.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 7th, 2017 at 2:45 AM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
smcj said:
Trusting the deluded vision of Ole Nyadhal is a bit too much, quite frankly.
Back in the day he was authorized by HHK 16 to talk about Dharma and give Refuge.

Malcolm wrote:
Big deal.


smcj said:
At the time much of what he spoke about were those shaktipat type blessings.

Malcolm wrote:
So he is spread his confusion around as widely as possible. This is normal.

smcj said:
Also in that time period there was a woman in LA that received such a blessing.

Malcolm wrote:
Uh huh, and so now she is a Buddha in some buddhafield who manifested high realization in one lifetime?

Shaktipat is total bullshit. Jeez, I wish I was a con artist. You people are easy marks.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 7th, 2017 at 2:42 AM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
You don't understand, Māra can appear in the form of the Buddha, Karmapa, etc.

dzogchungpa said:
Huh, so how do we know that all of our teachers, and all the masters of the lineage etc, even you, Acharya, are not Māran apparitions?

Malcolm wrote:
In general, Māra appears in visions and dreams. When one has such visions and dreams, there are ways to test whether or not that vision or dream is a Māra. The point of course is that one needs to be careful about trusting visions and dreams. This is discussed in both the sūtras and the tantras.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 7th, 2017 at 2:40 AM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
smcj said:
"liberation through seeing".

Malcolm wrote:
Liberation through seeing is a very specific Dzogchen idea, part of the six liberations: sight, hearing, smell, taste, touch, and thought.

It simply means that some positive cause for meeting the teachings is instilled in the continuum of the sentient being who sees this or that. It certainly does not mean that seeing the Karmapa's black hat causes one to be liberated in this life.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 7th, 2017 at 1:34 AM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
smcj said:
Ole Nydahl used to get blasts from HHK 16 where he would have a vision of HHK filling the sky, among other transmissions.

Malcolm wrote:
This is convincing just how? Māra also can appear in the form of a buddha, give Dharma teachings, etc.

smcj said:
Evidently it was convincing to Ole. I don't think accusing HHK of being Mara incarnate is a very good idea.

Malcolm wrote:
You don't understand, Māra can appear in the form of the Buddha, Karmapa, etc.

Trusting the deluded vision of Ole Nyadhal is a bit too much, quite frankly.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 7th, 2017 at 1:28 AM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
smcj said:
Ole Nydahl used to get blasts from HHK 16 where he would have a vision of HHK filling the sky, among other transmissions.

Malcolm wrote:
This is convincing just how? Māra also can appear in the form of a buddha, give Dharma teachings, etc.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 7th, 2017 at 1:28 AM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
No.

Grigoris said:
Now that is a convincing argument, I must say.

I guess next you will say:  "Because I said so."  and send me to bed without dessert?

Malcolm wrote:
Greg, direct introduction does not resemble shaktipat because shaktipat is a form of grace. Direct introduction is not a form of grace. It is a way of imparting knowledge.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 7th, 2017 at 1:26 AM
Title: Re: Very Serious in Myanmar
Content:
Grigoris said:
I think people are dropping a little too much blame on Aung San Suu Kyi for what is happening.  While it is true that she is not really standing up against what is happening, it is still the military that controls Burma and she could be back under arrest quicker than you could say "Buddhist inspired genocide".


Malcolm wrote:
She denies there is ethnic cleansing in Burma. What else do we need to know?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 7th, 2017 at 1:24 AM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:


Grigoris said:
On the significance of darśana in Mahayana thought, Paul Harrison writes: "By the second century CE... the vision of the Buddha (buddha-darśana) and the accompanying hearing of the Dharma (dharma-śravaṇa) are represented as a transformation experience of decisive importance for practitioners, be they who have renounced (mundane life) "ascetics" or householders."


Malcolm wrote:
Having a vision of the Buddha and hearing his accompanying teaching is hardly what is meant by "darshana," and you know it.


Grigoris said:
Indian Mahayana philosophers Vasubandhu and Asanga acknowledged five paths to liberation, of which the third is darśana-marga, the "path of seeing".

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, the path of seeing is called darshana marga. However, you know this is not what I am talking about.

Grigoris said:
Even going by that definition, if one correctly ascribes/recognises the source of the insight, we find something VERY similar to the pointing-out experience.

Malcolm wrote:
No. It is not at all similar. Not on any level.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 7th, 2017 at 1:08 AM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
Grigoris said:
You are joking, right???

Malcolm wrote:
Nope.

Grigoris said:
What is Dudjom Lingpa's "Buddhahood Without Meditation" i f not a darshan frenzy?

Malcolm wrote:
A collection of transcribed meetings Dudjom Lingpa has with various masters of the past, guardians, and so on. But it certainly does not resemble this:



When I say "darshana," I am referring the Hindu custom of organized meetings where one goes specifically only to see a holy person, with the belief that the mere sight of them, someone like Sadhu Baba Shri Shri Shri Shri Mangala Trailokya Vijaya Shivarati Bhairava Lakshmi will remove your samskaras.


Grigoris said:
What is the experience of successful pointing out if not a type of (correctly ascribed) shaktipat?

Malcolm wrote:
Shaktipat is a Shaiva practice that has a very specific meaning. This is a good summary of the subject: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shaktipat. This kind of system does not exist in Buddhadharma.

Grigoris said:
I'm sure you will come back with some pedantic nuance-based hair-splitting statement to counter what I am saying.

Malcolm wrote:
Nuance is terrible, isn't It? But it is not necessary here. Darshana and Shaktipat do not exist in our school.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 7th, 2017 at 12:43 AM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
You do realize it is a contravention of bodhisattva vows to take too much interest in NonBuddhist schools?

dzogchungpa said:
Huh, how exactly is "too much" defined here?

Malcolm wrote:
To study them at the expense of studying Buddhist teachings. Indeed, the same goes for Hinayāna sūtras; spending too much time with Hinayāna teachings is a contravention of bodhisattva vows as well. It is the principle reason the Hinayāna canon was not translated into Tibetan, apart from representative sūtras.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 7th, 2017 at 12:22 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:
jbaumannmontilla said:
I had a question. I participated in a retreat with Rinpoche where he gave formal empowerment of Medicine Buddha and Orgyen Menla. As part of the empowerment we were given pictures of Medicine Buddha and Padmasambhava that had been empowered with mantra. I wasn't sure how you are supposed to treat these. I framed them and put them on my altar, but not sure if that is the right thing. Also, I'm not focused on that practice right now. I don't keep an elaborate altar with offerings, just a framed A and a picture of Rinpoche. What is the proper respectful way to keep and treat these? many thanks in advance.

Malcolm wrote:
If you do not want to have them up. Keep them properly in a drawer.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 6th, 2017 at 11:35 PM
Title: Re: What attracted you to Dzogchen?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Past life traces.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 6th, 2017 at 11:34 PM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:


treehuggingoctopus said:
No Buddha is. You can entirely disregard what Chogyal Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche says if he is not your teacher -- and even if he is, you obviously can disagree with him.



It is not. He has made such statements more than once (I have heard him say such things at least thrice). And the Mirror interview is authorised.


Malcolm wrote:
ChNN also said that when he goes to nonBuddhist religious places, he sings SOV mentally to transform them into places of the Dharma...

treehuggingoctopus said:
"In order to make it possible for the church-goers to develop a connection with Dzogchen teachings," he says.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, and to transform the place itself he also has said...anywhere SOV is sung becomes a sacred place.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 6th, 2017 at 11:27 PM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
Tolya M said:
ChNN is not Buddhist canon.

treehuggingoctopus said:
No Buddha is. You can entirely disregard what Chogyal Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche says if he is not your teacher -- and even if he is, you obviously can disagree with him.

Tolya M said:
PS In general it is doubtful that NNR said that.

treehuggingoctopus said:
It is not. He has made such statements more than once (I have heard him say such things at least thrice). And the Mirror interview is authorised.


Malcolm wrote:
ChNN also said that when he goes to nonBuddhist religious places, he sings SOV mentally to transform them into places of the Dharma...


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 6th, 2017 at 11:23 PM
Title: Re: Peeling the onion
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Right, this kind of awareness that you mention does not exist. It is just someone's conceptual fantasy.

rachmiel said:
Just sharin' stories around the campfire ...

Malcolm wrote:
Yup, that kind of awareness is just a story...oft told in internet nonduality forums.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 6th, 2017 at 11:20 PM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
smcj said:
So you see a difference between "an enlightened being" and "an emanation of a bodhisattva"?

Malcolm wrote:
Yes. Emanations can be worldly in nature. For example, Dorje Yudronma is a worldly protector, while at the same time being an emanation of Vajrayogini.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 6th, 2017 at 11:19 PM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
smcj said:
And if our practice of Dharma has been poisoned by importing negative attitudes as preconditions and a premise for how we will practice, that is central to everything that follows.

Malcolm wrote:
You do realize it is a contravention of bodhisattva vows to take too much interest in NonBuddhist schools? By the same token, we do not harshly criticize them because they do encourage their followers to generally adopt a path where they cultivate the ten virtues, and hopefully, develop the limited compassion such paths encourage their followers to cultivate.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 6th, 2017 at 11:07 PM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
smcj said:
So people either have to open their minds and let go of their negative attachments, or else they have to rationalize what he says away.

Malcolm wrote:
Such opinions by Buddhist masters for centuries have always been contextualized with the notion of emanations of bodhisattvas that appear to nonBuddhists in order to encourage them to follow virtuous paths so they can take birth in higher realms, and hopefully, eventually meet the true Dharma.

I don't happen to agree with ChNN that Jesus was an enlightened being, but I can understand why he would say so and the context in which it was said.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 6th, 2017 at 11:00 PM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:


climb-up said:
I have some issues with his style.

Malcolm wrote:
Get over it.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 6th, 2017 at 10:58 PM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
Dorje Shedrub said:
Loppon Malcolm, have you changed your position since you made these comments in 2012 or am I misunderstanding?

Malcolm wrote:
As ChNN says, if you regard god a symbol of your primodial potentiality, then there is no problem. In any event, you can just keep assuming that your point of view is right util you decide differently. For example, last night I had a discussion with an SMS teacher, and he felt there was no problem at all in including Jesus in your refuge tree.
I was reporting someone else's opinion, not my own.

With respect to symbols, if we called Dzogchen "George" and by "George" we understand we are referring to the original basis — essence, nature, and compassion — than there is no problem. The point is understanding essence, nature, and compassion.

In general, what one does in one's own cave is one's own business. But we have to understand the difference between what is a reliable refuge and what is not.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 6th, 2017 at 10:40 PM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Nope, this isn't Hinduism and we don't do shaktipat or darshans.

Grigoris said:
You are joking, right???

Malcolm wrote:
Nope.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 6th, 2017 at 11:33 AM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
climb-up said:
[
Generally speaking, I think because it's true. Although, I'm not sure it's accurate to say that all Buddhist teachers have taught precisely the same view for the past 2500 years, and especially not in regard to non-Buddhist paths.

Malcolm wrote:
The view of all teachers of Buddhadharma is dependent origination. The view of all teachers of Buddhadharma is that there is no liberation outside the Buddha's Dharmavinaya since only Buddhadharma teaches dependent origination.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 6th, 2017 at 8:12 AM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
Dorje Shedrub said:
Years ago during a retreat I remember ChNN saying that you could use Jesus in guru yoga if you understood him to represent the guru that unifies all, but he also commented that he didn't know why someone would do this since Jesus had no connection to Dzogchen.

Malcolm wrote:
I have heard him say on many occasions that you would not do this under any circumstances. Guru Yoga is a teaching which is absolutely restricted to the three inner tantras; it does not exist in the three lowers tantras, much less Mahāyāna or Hinayāna teachings, let alone in nonBuddhist traditions.

Dorje Shedrub said:
I also remember him saying something to the effect that Dzogchen is not necessarily Buddhist as it is beyond concepts and limitations, and was taught in other worlds, but in our world it has been taught in connection with Buddhism.

Malcolm wrote:
Buddhas are beyond concepts and limitations, but strangely enough, only Buddhas teach Dzogchen.

There are many Buddhist schools that do not teach Dzogchen (most in fact) or Vajrayāna in general, but Dzogchen (and Vajrayāna) is only taught by Buddhas and those in their lineage. Dzogchen and Vajrayāna in general are Buddhadharma, and do not exist in other traditions, either on this planet or any other.

The fact that ChNN has said that anyone can come to him and receive Dzogchen teachings has inadvertently lead to a kind of false ecumenicalism on the part of some people who really seem to have neglected important parts of their training in Dharma.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 6th, 2017 at 7:58 AM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
ChNN can certainly believe that Jesus was an awakened person (an emanation of a bodhisattva since there was no Dharma for him to study — this is the only way.

dzogchungpa said:
I wonder why ChNN would believe that the founder of a tradition that was rubbish from top to bottom was an emanation of a bodhisattva?


Malcolm wrote:
For the same reason many Indian Buddhists believed that Śiva, the founder of a system they thought was rubbish from top to bottom, was an emanation.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 6th, 2017 at 7:03 AM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
climb-up said:
I'm confused about the part that you're saying I have misunderstood.
I think you're saying that I am trying to go for refuge in Jesus. Is that what your saying?
I am certainly not.

Malcolm wrote:
I am saying the question of Jesus being enlightened or not is completely irrelevant and should be of no interest to those who follow the Dharma.

The only way Jesus could be an awakened person is if Jesus was an bodhisattva emanation for nonBuddhists (if they have them in hell, why not Israel?). Even then, there would nothing in his teachings of interest to those who follow Buddhadharma.

Jesus can't even have been a pratyekabuddha, since the latter can only exist when there is no formal Dharma dispensation in the world.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 6th, 2017 at 6:57 AM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
tiagolps said:
Lama Jampa thaye speaks about it beautifully in his book "Wisdom in exile". But to explain a bit, both atheist and christians have the same view on time, that it has a beginning and an end, that it is a straight line. Buddhadharma sees it has a circle, with no ending and no beginning.


Malcolm wrote:
Buddhadharma does not picture time as a circle. Time is considered a convention, and as such, is illusory.

tiagolps said:
Samsara in envisioned as an illusory circle right? so time would be an illusory circle, no?

Malcolm wrote:
Samsara is envisioned as this:


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 6th, 2017 at 5:59 AM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
tiagolps said:
Lama Jampa thaye speaks about it beautifully in his book "Wisdom in exile". But to explain a bit, both atheist and christians have the same view on time, that it has a beginning and an end, that it is a straight line. Buddhadharma sees it has a circle, with no ending and no beginning.


Malcolm wrote:
Buddhadharma does not picture time as a circle. Time is considered a convention, and as such, is illusory.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 6th, 2017 at 5:58 AM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
climb-up said:
My hopes from this thread were solely to see if ChNN had stated his views on Jesus. These hopes were fulfilled in the very first response.

Malcolm wrote:
What you seem not to have understood is that Buddhists claim, generally, that anything good in nonBudddhist paths is in reality the work of some emanation who emanates in a nonBuddhist form because those beings are too dull and or barbaric to appreciate the Dharma, for which they are not ready.

For example, Ṡiva, in the Buddhist sūtras (Karandavyuha), is stated to be someone who was tamed by Avalokiteśvara and brought into the Dharma, and attained realization. But Ṡiva remains a worldly refuge and not one in whom we take refuge. To do so would be to completely misunderstand the meaning of refuge. ChNN can certainly believe that Jesus was an awakened person (an emanation of a bodhisattva since there was no Dharma for him to study — this is the only way.  While the dispensation of a Buddha is in the world, there can be no pratyekabuddhas, thus ruling out Ramana Maharshi as an awakened person as well), but his opinion about Jesus as a refuge is clear — not a proper object for guru yoga. Then we have fools like  Michael Roach who compose Jesus Sadhanas.

But I see people get all hopeful all the time, and think that when someone like HHDL, TNH, etc., proclaim their notion that Jesus might have been an "enlightened person," this someone means Jesus is on the same level as the Buddha, or even Avalokiteṡvara.

This kind of thinking has its roots in the bane of all reason, the source of the New Age movement, and a great deal of racist ideas about history, the Theosophical Society.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 6th, 2017 at 2:15 AM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
climb-up said:
But back to Malcolm's clear point from the quote: why not Confucius?
I have no connection whatsoever to Confucius and don't really have any interest.

Malcolm wrote:
I see, so the one's opinion of whether or not someone is an awakened being is reduced to our personal interest in them. Interesting criteria.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 6th, 2017 at 1:01 AM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
pael said:
How about thinking Avalokiteshvara Bodhisattva (Guanshiyin Bodhisattva) comes to save?
The Wonderful Dharma Lotus Flower Sutra Ch25 The Buddha told Inexhaustible Intention Bodhisattva, “Good man, if any of the limitless hundreds of thousands of myriads of kotis of living beings who are undergoing all kinds of sufferings hear of Guanshiyin Bodhisattva and recite his name single-mindedly, Guanshiyin Bodhisattva will immediately hear their voices and rescue them.”
http://www.cttbusa.org/lotus/lotus25.asp

Malcolm wrote:
This assumes you are taking refuge in the Three Jewels.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 6th, 2017 at 12:58 AM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:


dzogchungpa said:
Umm, I was asking about what the game says, since it is apparently an authoritative source regarding ChNN's views on these matters.

Malcolm wrote:
The game says there is no direct route for a Christian to Dzogchen heaven. The only people with sure bets on liberation are āryas on any of the Buddhist pathways. When you hit an āryan pathway (arhat, bodhisattva in the stages, etc.) in the game of liberation, you never return to any of the nonBuddhist rebirths, hells, heavens, etc.

It is a very interesting game. I recommend it.

dzogchungpa said:
So it doesn't explicitly describe the possible destinies of the Christian Dzogchenpas. Is there anything about Dharmawheel in that game?

Malcolm wrote:
If you are an unawakened human being, the Game of Liberation treats you as equally liable to fall into lower realms, move into higher realms (from which you eventually fall) or enter into a Buddhist path of liberation (the only kind the game permits since there are no nonBuddhist paths of liberation). The only direct access to paths of liberation is through the human realm, if I recall correctly.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 6th, 2017 at 12:49 AM
Title: Re: Peeling the onion
Content:
rachMiel said:
Essence of mind sounds like pure awareness, no felt subject/object division.

Malcolm wrote:
"Awareness" requires an object. No object, no awareness.

The essence of the mind, the mind essence, sometimes referred to as "the nature of the mind," is inseparable clarity and emptiness. Clarity is beyond awareness, it does not require an object.

rachmiel said:
When I say 'pure awareness' I'm using it in a Direct Path sense: to point to nonduality. Pure awareness has no subject, no object, and clarity doesn't even come up, because it implies an entity which possesses an attribute of being clear.

Awareness is one of those terms that has non-trivial, sometimes even dramatically different meanings in different traditions. I should be really careful how I use it here in a Buddhist forum!

Malcolm wrote:
Right, this kind of awareness that you mention does not exist. It is just someone's conceptual fantasy.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 6th, 2017 at 12:45 AM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:


dzogchungpa said:
Hmm, so, if a Christian practices Dzogchen, what does the game say happens to them?

Malcolm wrote:
If a Christian practices Dzogchen, they necessarily must abandon eternalist and annihilationist views, understand the meaning of refuge, etc. I am pretty sure such a person remains a Christian in name only. If they still think Jesus is going to save them, then they are not Dzogchen practitioners at all no matter how many teachings on thogal they may have had.

dzogchungpa said:
Umm, I was asking about what the game says, since it is apparently an authoritative source regarding ChNN's views on these matters.

Malcolm wrote:
The game says there is no direct route for a Christian to Dzogchen heaven. The only people with sure bets on liberation are āryas on any of the Buddhist pathways. When you hit an āryan pathway (arhat, bodhisattva in the stages, etc.) in the game of liberation, you never return to any of the nonBuddhist rebirths, hells, heavens, etc.

It is a very interesting game. I recommend it.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 6th, 2017 at 12:39 AM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
smcj said:
From the OP.


Is this a widely known position of ChNN? Is it being disputed here?

Malcolm wrote:
It is a widely known position and no, it is not being disputed here. Of course, it is also a widely known position that ChNN insists you cannot do Dzogchen Guru yoga with Jesus because Dzogchen does not exist in Christianity.

dzogchungpa said:
Hmm, so, if a Christian practices Dzogchen, what does the game say happens to them?

Malcolm wrote:
If a Christian practices Dzogchen, they necessarily must abandon eternalist and annihilationist views, understand the meaning of refuge, etc. I am pretty sure such a person remains a Christian in name only. If they still think Jesus is going to save them, then they are not Dzogchen practitioners at all no matter how many teachings on thogal they may have had.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 6th, 2017 at 12:35 AM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
Dan74 said:
I can't speak for smcj, but for me this isn't about "going to Jesus for refuge." It's about respect for a remarkable spiritual figure and also about skilful means - use whatever helps you unseat bad habits and delusion.

Early on in Dharma practice it can be useful to forcefully reject every other path, to focus 100% on the one you picked. Then, once faith has taken root, I think it can be useful sometimes to delve into other teachings. Not to say 'necessary'. Whatever works.

We all suffer from blinkered narrow views and hubris. But we also know that the heart/mind does not open to the essence with such an approach. At some point, the right point, all this needs to be shed. Hopefully, our precious teachers will encourage us to do that, and that we heed their advice.


_/|\_

Malcolm wrote:
The only thing one needs is right view. The rest follows from there. Realization follows the view, not meditation. This critical point is not well understood by many Western Buddhists.

Dan74 said:
Not sure how your post relates to mine you quoted. Malcolm.

I am not one to diss study and the Right View. It can indeed be very helpful, but it's not anywhere near sufficient. To say it's the only thing one needs is either wrong or a very strange mental contortion (to include everything else under it) That's why it's an Eightfold Noble Path, not a One Fold.

Meditative insight informs the Right View, just as the Right View, the Right Conduct,  the Right Resolve and Effort prepare the ground for meditation that leads to insight.

_/|\_


Malcolm wrote:
Right view is the foundation of the Buddhist path:
When a person has right view, right resolve, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, right concentration, right knowledge, & right release, whatever bodily deeds he undertakes in line with that view, whatever verbal deeds... whatever mental deeds he undertakes in line with that view, whatever intentions, whatever vows, whatever determinations, whatever fabrications, all lead to what is agreeable, pleasing, charming, profitable, & easeful. Why is that? Because the view is auspicious.

"Just as when a sugar cane seed, a rice grain, or a grape seed is placed in moist soil, whatever nutriment it takes from the soil & the water, all conduces to its sweetness, tastiness, & unalloyed delectability. Why is that? Because the seed is auspicious. In the same way, when a person has right view... right release, whatever bodily deeds he undertakes in line with that view, whatever verbal deeds... whatever mental deeds he undertakes in line with that view, whatever intentions, whatever vows, whatever determinations, whatever fabrications, all lead to what is agreeable, pleasing, charming, profitable, & easeful. Why is that? Because the view is auspicious."


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 6th, 2017 at 12:30 AM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
smcj said:
From the OP.

climb-up said:
We all know that ChNN says you can be a Christian and practice Dzogchen

smcj said:
Is this a widely known position of ChNN? Is it being disputed here?

Malcolm wrote:
It is a widely known position and no, it is not being disputed here. Of course, it is also a widely known position that ChNN insists you cannot do Dzogchen Guru yoga with Jesus because Dzogchen does not exist in Christianity.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, September 5th, 2017 at 10:48 PM
Title: Re: Peeling the onion
Content:
Virgo said:
Making stories is the function of mind.  In Dzogchen we learn to separate mind from the essence of mind, if you will (rigpa and marigpa).  This is the key in the Dzogchen teaching.

rachmiel said:
Essence of mind sounds like pure awareness, no felt subject/object division.

Malcolm wrote:
"Awareness" requires an object. No object, no awareness.

The essence of the mind, the mind essence, sometimes referred to as "the nature of the mind," is inseparable clarity and emptiness. Clarity is beyond awareness, it does not require an object.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, September 5th, 2017 at 10:41 PM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
The living tradition of what? Another mistaken path in Samsara?

In ChNN's game of liberation, landing in the Christian Heaven sends you right back to the deva realm, asura realm, or into the human realm, where, if you are lucky, you have to pick up a Buddhist path based on achieving the precious human birth with the eight freedoms and ten endowments if you want achieve liberation. This illustrates ChNN's actual take on Christianity — i.e. it does not lead out of Samsara.

Jyotish said:
Basic buddha dharma,  guys. Thanks Malcolm! My understanding was from the heaven you could drop down to even lower realms right? It's not like Christian heaven is a rupa brahma Loka for sure.

Malcolm wrote:
In CNN's game of liberation, from Christian Heaven you go to deva, asura, or human realm, from there you can go anywhere.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, September 5th, 2017 at 10:23 PM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
Dan74 said:
I can't speak for smcj, but for me this isn't about "going to Jesus for refuge." It's about respect for a remarkable spiritual figure and also about skilful means - use whatever helps you unseat bad habits and delusion.

Early on in Dharma practice it can be useful to forcefully reject every other path, to focus 100% on the one you picked. Then, once faith has taken root, I think it can be useful sometimes to delve into other teachings. Not to say 'necessary'. Whatever works.

We all suffer from blinkered narrow views and hubris. But we also know that the heart/mind does not open to the essence with such an approach. At some point, the right point, all this needs to be shed. Hopefully, our precious teachers will encourage us to do that, and that we heed their advice.


_/|\_

Malcolm wrote:
The only thing one needs is right view. The rest follows from there. Realization follows the view, not meditation. This critical point is not well understood by many Western Buddhists.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, September 5th, 2017 at 6:26 AM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:


Dan74 said:
Ok, dude. I won't presume. I will take your word that he didn't get any Dzogchen. Merely being in the presence of a great master for someone receptive, would not count as a Dzogchen teaching?


Malcolm wrote:
Nope, this isn't Hinduism and we don't do shaktipat or darshans.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, September 5th, 2017 at 5:42 AM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
Dan74 said:
Did he not spend time with Chatral Rinpoche and another teacher too? Granted he may not have received many teachings, but it is not always the length of time one spends with a teacher that matters. For one who is ripe, even a day may suffice. But I may have overstated it. Still he is a good contemporary source on contemplative Christianity.

Malcolm wrote:
Dude, I won't presume to inform you about Zen, don't presume to inform me about what it takes to receive Dzogchen teachings.

Chatral Rinpoche never gave Dzogchen teachings to anyone who had not finished their preliminary practices first.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, September 5th, 2017 at 5:33 AM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:


smcj said:
Many people here were surprised and/or offended by DKR's rant against post modern political correctness in his FB post about Sogyual R.

Malcolm wrote:
No, I just thought his trip about blaming naive students was wrongheaded.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, September 5th, 2017 at 5:32 AM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
smcj said:
We had a drink the other night over a pizza, and boy does he think these Christians are a weird bunch.
I could see how He would not approve. The whole "indulgences" thing was really out there.
*****
The gist of all this is that we are (mostly) 1st generation Buddhists.

Malcolm wrote:
No such thing. I have been a Buddhist for many lifetimes. Maybe you are a Buddhist for the first time in this life, but not me.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, September 5th, 2017 at 5:07 AM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
Dan74 said:
Apart from ChNN, a Dzogchen practitioner whose take on Jesus I find of some interest is (Brother) Thomas Merton. In case anyone is interested in the living tradition.

Malcolm wrote:
The living tradition of what? Another mistaken path in Samsara?

In ChNN's game of liberation, landing in the Christian Heaven sends you right back to the deva realm, asura realm, or into the human realm, where, if you are lucky, you have to pick up a Buddhist path based on achieving the precious human birth with the eight freedoms and ten endowments if you want achieve liberation. This illustrates ChNN's actual take on Christianity — i.e. it does not lead out of Samsara.

Merton never practiced Dzogchen and he never received Dzogchen teachings. He did not know Tibetan and Chatral Rinpoche refused to teach through a translator.

Harold Talbot, who was with Merton during this time in India, recounts his memoirs here:
Talbott: The fact is that he told the Dalai Lama that wanted to study Dzogchen so the Dalai Lama spent hours preparing him to find a Dzogchen guru. And he found him in the Chatral Rinpoche. He went down to Sri Lanka where he convinced himself that he had the experience of dhamakaya (emptiness), seeing the status of the Shakyamuni statues and Ananda.

Then he was electrocuted and died and we are left to sit here and talk about how Dzogchen was the final bestowal on Merton by a divinely compassionate savior.
http://welcomingbuddhist.org/archives/115

Merton never had time to study or practice Dzogchen. He just heard about it, found someone willing to teach him, and then died.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, September 5th, 2017 at 4:24 AM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
Soma999 said:
Did someone here met Jesus and have personal experience to relate ?

Malcolm wrote:
We had a drink the other night over a pizza, and boy does he think these Christians are a weird bunch.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, September 5th, 2017 at 3:55 AM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
smcj said:
But hey, I'm a Karma Kagyupa. We have issues like Ösel Tendzin and the Karmapa controversy. And I live at Lama Norlha's. So from inside my glass house maybe it is understandable why I'm not going to throw stones at Christianity.

Malcolm wrote:
I could not be bothered to throw stones of Xtianity. Too much effort.

I might shoot spitballs at them now and again, out of boredom.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, September 5th, 2017 at 3:54 AM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
smcj said:
This means his companions heard a voice but did not see anyone. It does not mean that Paul did not see Jesus.
Uh huh.

Malcolm wrote:
Hearing a voice, but seeing no man.—We are told by St. Paul himself (Acts 22:9) that they “did not hear the voice.” What is meant is clearly that they did not hear the words—could attach no meaning to the sounds which for Saul himself had so profound a significance. So, in like manner, they saw the light, but did not see the form. In Acts 26:14, they also are said to have fallen on the ground in terror.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, September 5th, 2017 at 3:36 AM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
smcj said:
We can see ChNN as the ultimate refuge of the anti-religious, and here not only is he being pro-religious, but he isn't even willing to support our anti-Christianity.

Malcolm wrote:
Whose anti-Christan? In order to be anti-Christian, you have to think Christianity is relevant or important.

dzogchungpa said:
If you don't think Christianity is important, with all due respect, you are tripping.

Malcolm wrote:
Depends on what you mean by "important."


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, September 5th, 2017 at 3:29 AM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
smcj said:
...and a disembodied voice that others heard also. I posted the passage already.

Malcolm wrote:
Not disembodied, sure why you insist on this...

smcj said:
The full quotation is at the top of this page.
ibid:...I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting. But rise and enter the city, and you will be told what you are to do." The men who were traveling with him (Paul) stood speechless, hearing the voice but seeing no one.
Not sure why you insist on this...

Malcolm wrote:
"The men who were traveling with him (Paul) stood speechless, hearing the voice but seeing no one."
This means his companions heard a voice but did not see anyone. It does not mean that Paul did not see Jesus.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, September 5th, 2017 at 3:28 AM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
smcj said:
We can see ChNN as the ultimate refuge of the anti-religious, and here not only is he being pro-religious, but he isn't even willing to support our anti-Christianity.

Malcolm wrote:
Whose anti-Christan? In order to be anti-Christian, you have to think Christianity is relevant or important.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, September 5th, 2017 at 3:25 AM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
smcj said:
There are a few people here that have deep antipathy for Christianity.

Malcolm wrote:
In order to have antipathy, you have to have strong feelings.

smcj said:
And so we come here with huge preconditions, that Dharma not have any of the elements that we find offensive in Christianity. So we downplay or dismiss any religiosity in our approach and understanding of Dharma. Deities, hell realms, faith and the like are either discounted or sidestepped. If someone is adamant about practicing Dharma and keeping all their attachments to their anti-religious attitudes intact, it is likely that they will end up at Dzogchen without a Vajrayana context.

Malcolm wrote:
No, it is more likely they will wind up in Zen or Vipassana.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, September 5th, 2017 at 3:04 AM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Yes, which he understood as an actual, physical encounter.

Grigoris said:
A physical encounter with a light...

smcj said:
...and a disembodied voice that others heard also. I posted the passage already.

Malcolm wrote:
Not disembodied, sure why you insist on this...


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, September 5th, 2017 at 1:53 AM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Yes, in fact he was, according to his own account:
"For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Peter, and then to the Twelve. After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles, and last of all he appeared to me also, as to one abnormally born."
1 Corinthians 15:3-8

Grigoris said:
His is referring to his "encounter" on the road to Damascus.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, which he understood as an actual, physical encounter.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, September 5th, 2017 at 1:52 AM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
I don't agree to anything. I don't care about Christianity at all, since I think it is rubbish from top to bottom.

dzogchungpa said:
Well, you could still agree to something about Christianity, even if you don't care about it at all. For example, if someone were to say "Christianity is rubbish from top to bottom." presumably you would agree with that, right?

climb-up said:
As stated, thinking something is rubbish top to bottom says nothing about wether or not you can agree on something. Certainly not wether or not you can agree on the account of something. You could just say: "yes, I agree, that is the account...    ...and it's rubbish!"

Of course, if thinking something was rubbish did mean that you couldn't agree on the accounts, then why did the whole discussion of the resurrection, wether it was physical or spiritual (complete with bible verse citations) even come up?

Malcolm wrote:
Boredom.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, September 4th, 2017 at 11:46 PM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
"...Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Peter, and then to the Twelve. After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles...

smcj said:
So we agree on the account of a physical resurrection....and last of all he appeared to me also, as to one abnormally born."
My English Standard Version translates this as, "...as to one untimely born...". I read that as meaning "...too late to have seen Him in the flesh...".

Elsewhere Paul does speak as if he has had conversations with Jesus, but I don't remember it being implied that Jesus was physically present.

Malcolm wrote:
I don't agree to anything. I don't care about Christianity at all, since I think it is rubbish from top to bottom.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, September 4th, 2017 at 10:01 PM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
Grigoris said:
You need new reading glasses.  PHYSICAL, not personal.

Malcolm wrote:
We have already established that Jesus's post resurrection appearance was physical, flesh and bone.

Grigoris said:
Paul was not amongst the disciples that saw Jesus post-resurrection.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, in fact he was, according to his own account:
"For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Peter, and then to the Twelve. After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles, and last of all he appeared to me also, as to one abnormally born."
1 Corinthians 15:3-8


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, September 4th, 2017 at 9:24 PM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Since when is a revelation not personal? Also, Paul makes it very clear that he was the last person Jesus met with after the resurrection, prior to the ascension. Jesus and Paul may have never met prior to Jesus's crucifixion, but they were contemporaries. Paul was five years younger than Jesus.

Grigoris said:
You need new reading glasses.  PHYSICAL, not personal.

Malcolm wrote:
We have already established that Jesus's post resurrection appearance was physical, flesh and bone.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, September 4th, 2017 at 8:54 PM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
smcj said:
Paul was a post ascension convert. He had no personal contact with Jusus as a physical being, either pre or post crucufixion

Malcolm wrote:
Man, you need to relearn your Christian history. Paul claimed direct revelation from Christ, not from any human intermediary.

For I want you to know, brothers and sisters, that the gospel that was proclaimed by me is not of human origin; for I did not receive it from a human source, nor was I taught it, but I received it through a revelation of Jesus Christ.

Grigoris said:
smcj did say:  "Jusus(sic) as a physical being..."


Malcolm wrote:
Since when is a revelation not personal? Also, Paul makes it very clear that he was the last person Jesus met with after the resurrection, prior to the ascension. Jesus and Paul may have never met prior to Jesus's crucifixion, but they were contemporaries. Paul was five years younger than Jesus.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, September 4th, 2017 at 8:28 PM
Title: Re: Peeling the onion
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Cue:

Since there is no onion, there are no peels.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, September 4th, 2017 at 8:26 PM
Title: Re: Surangama Five Great Hearts . Sanskrit
Content:


jmlee369 said:
Interestingly, the Tibetan parallel for the Shurangama mantra has opted to translate the majority of the dharani, leaving only small sections in Sanskrit.

Malcolm wrote:
The Tibetan translation of this sūtra was made from Chinese in the 18th century on the order of the Kunlun Emperor. It never existed in Tibetan prior to this time.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, September 4th, 2017 at 8:24 PM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
smcj said:
Paul was a post ascension convert. He had no personal contact with Jusus as a physical being, either pre or post crucufixion

Malcolm wrote:
Man, you need to relearn your Christian history. Paul claimed direct revelation from Christ, not from any human intermediary.

For I want you to know, brothers and sisters, that the gospel that was proclaimed by me is not of human origin; for I did not receive it from a human source, nor was I taught it, but I received it through a revelation of Jesus Christ.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, September 4th, 2017 at 10:46 AM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
Dan74 said:
As for whether he was enlightened or not, there is no point arguing.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, indeed. The Buddha stated quite clearly:
"In whatsoever Dhamma and Discipline, Subhadda, there is not found the Noble Eightfold Path, neither is there found a true ascetic of the first, second, third, or fourth degree of saintliness. But in whatsoever Dhamma and Discipline there is found the Noble Eightfold Path, there is found a true ascetic of the first, second, third, and fourth degrees of saintliness.[54] Now in this Dhamma and Discipline, Subhadda, is found the Noble Eightfold Path; and in it alone are also found true ascetics of the first, second, third, and fourth degrees of saintliness. Devoid of true ascetics are the systems of other teachers.

Sherab said:
Contradiction of what the Buddha clearly stated with your assertion here:
https://dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=102&t=25902&p=395964#p395964???

Malcolm wrote:
In order to make sure that people actually understand what they are saying, it is necessary sometimes to take an opposing position.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, September 4th, 2017 at 6:41 AM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
smcj said:
So also is the resurrection of the dead. The body is sown in corruption, it is raised in incorruption. t It is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory. It is sown in weakness, it is raised in power. It is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.
Here Paul is speaking of normal death, not about Jesus.

Malcolm wrote:
You should read the whole passage. Your error will be quite apparent when you do.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, September 4th, 2017 at 3:14 AM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
climb-up said:
Gospel evidence for the bodily resurrection includes the empty tomb. It also includes the words of Jesus, which presumably trump the words o Paul, "“Look at My hands and My feet. It is I Myself! Touch Me and see; a ghost does not have flesh and bones, as you see I have”

Malcolm wrote:
So much for Jesus having rainbow body.

climb-up said:
If he were to have achieved rainbow body it would have been at the ascension, not the resurrection.

Malcolm wrote:
That was sarcasm...


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, September 4th, 2017 at 2:34 AM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
tiagolps said:
Are we talking about Jesus from the bible or Jesus from the Quran ?


Malcolm wrote:
Good point, no resurrection at all then, just retirement and a quite family life.

Of course the Nestorians rejected the divinity of Jesus altogether.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, September 4th, 2017 at 2:27 AM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
Grigoris said:
The teaching to the Corinthians was not given by Christ.

Malcolm wrote:
Paul's epistles are the among the earliest texts in the New Testament. The recorded sayings of Jesus in the gospels are all post-Pauline records.

Grigoris said:
Well...  I would say that they are post-Pauline interpretations, not post-Pauline records.  .

Malcolm wrote:
They are post-Pauline texts, codified from oral traditions after Paul's death in 67 CE.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, September 4th, 2017 at 2:26 AM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
climb-up said:
Gospel evidence for the bodily resurrection includes the empty tomb. It also includes the words of Jesus, which presumably trump the words o Paul, "“Look at My hands and My feet. It is I Myself! Touch Me and see; a ghost does not have flesh and bones, as you see I have”

Malcolm wrote:
So much for Jesus having rainbow body.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, September 4th, 2017 at 2:15 AM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
1 Corinthians 15:
So also is the resurrection of the dead. The body is sown in corruption, it is raised in incorruption. t It is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory. It is sown in weakness, it is raised in power. It is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.
And:
Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; nor does corruption inherit incorruption.

Grigoris said:
The teaching to the Corinthians was not given by Christ.

Malcolm wrote:
Paul's epistles are the among the earliest texts in the New Testament. The recorded sayings of Jesus in the gospels are all post-Pauline records.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, September 3rd, 2017 at 11:40 PM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
smcj said:
This is contradicted in the New Testament itself. Paul clearly states that Jesus's resurrection was spiritual, not physical.
Citation?


Malcolm wrote:
1 Corinthians 15:
So also is the resurrection of the dead. The body is sown in corruption, it is raised in incorruption. t It is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory. It is sown in weakness, it is raised in power. It is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.
And:
Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; nor does corruption inherit incorruption.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, September 3rd, 2017 at 11:34 PM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:


climb-up said:
You should absolutely get in touch with ChNN and the Dalai Lama explain the flaws in their view and refuge.

odysseus said:
Hm, the Dalai Lama clearly says that Christ was a bodhisattva. You may disagree, but thread carefully because this is a grey area and Christ means a lot to billions of people. He must be more enlightened than what we say, just because we are not god-believers.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, and Trump must be making America great again, because millions of Americans voted for him...


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, September 3rd, 2017 at 11:33 PM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
Grigoris said:
After Stream Entry a person has at most seven more rebirths before Arhatship.  The Layperson that is about to attain Arhatship would logically have been a vow-holding monastic up to seven lifetimes before this event.


Malcolm wrote:
There is also Mahāyāna stream entry, i.e., attaining the first bhumi.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, September 3rd, 2017 at 6:05 AM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:


Dan74 said:
Malcolm, you said there were no stream entrants, once-returners, never-returners or arhats outside of his Dharma and Vinaya
, now you seem to be prevaricating. "even attain merely though following" ain't the same as "no [...] outside of".

Malcolm wrote:
No, "Dharma and Vinaya" is one term in Sanskrit, Dharmavinaya. The point is that there were arhats who attained arhatship merely through following their monastic vows and achieved sufficient insight through this alone to end the ten fetters.


Dan74 said:
And as for the second para, sorry, I won't play.

Malcolm wrote:
I will take this as an admission of ignorance on your part.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, September 3rd, 2017 at 6:03 AM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Why do we have to imagine Jesus had any realization, probably or otherwise, at all? Bhumi? Are you kidding?

climb-up said:
Why do you think ChNN considers him enlightened?

Malcolm wrote:
That is not something which I am qualified to speculate upon.


climb-up said:
Any thoughts on Mary and Tara?

Malcolm wrote:
People like mother goddesses that are nurturing, warm, and quick to respond to prayers.

climb-up said:
Any thoughts on Jesus rising bodily to heaven?

Malcolm wrote:
This is contradicted in the New Testament itself. Paul clearly states that Jesus's resurrection was spiritual, not physical.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, September 3rd, 2017 at 5:51 AM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
Dan74 said:
Vinaya? Really?? Could you parse that for me, please? So you have to follow the Vinaya to attain stream-entry?

Malcolm wrote:
One can attain even arhatship merely through following Vinaya.


Dan74 said:
Malcolm, there's little doubt in my mind that folks all over the world and in places which have never heard of the Buddha, the Dharma and Vinaya, have attained stream-entry, and it boggles my mind how you can think otherwise, but I will leave it there. No point arguing this.

Malcolm wrote:
Dan, can you tell me what "stream entry" is? How is it defined, who attains it, and why? Based on your comment, I am not all sure you understand the concept.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, September 3rd, 2017 at 5:23 AM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:


Dan74 said:
As for your first point, I was thinking of arahats, not Buddhas...


Malcolm wrote:
The Buddha said there were no stream entrants, once-returners, never-returners or arhats outside of his Dharma and Vinaya, in many sūtras, not only the one I cited.




Dan74 said:
...folks like Bahiya or Huineng or many many others, who heard a profound teaching and were enlightened.

Malcolm wrote:
Bahiya heard teachings directly from the mouth of the Buddha. Huineng heard a Buddhist reciting the Vajracchedika Sūtra. It is said he had an "initial awakening" as a result, but this is so vague as to be useless.


Dan74 said:
In such a way, even a teaching by Jesus could lead one to enlightenment.

Malcolm wrote:
According to this standard, hearing something from the late Louise Haye might have the same result...but somehow, I don't think so.


Dan74 said:
But I don't claim that he was a Buddha, but probably a remarkable human being with a deep realisation (which bhumi? I haven't the faintest).

Malcolm wrote:
Why do we have to imagine Jesus had any realization, probably or otherwise, at all? Bhumi? Are you kidding?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, September 3rd, 2017 at 5:01 AM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
Dan74 said:
I never claimed that Jesus taught Buddhadharma complete as we know it. Mind you over the course of millennia, folks wereawakened without every aspect of the Noble Eightfold Path spelled out to them, at least in their last rebirth.

Malcolm wrote:
Ummm, every Buddha recalled all of their pasts lives. You think they left out the one's where they were given teachings by the Buddhas of the past? Not likely.



Dan74 said:
And Jesus taught many wonderful teachings. So without even stretching as far as to say that what he taught could have led to awakening, what he taught could have led to a lessening of the vexations and cultivation of Paramitas. And this is already wonderful. If you fail to see such an obvious point, I don't think I could make it any more accessible.

Malcolm wrote:
Confucius also taught many wonderful things that might have led to a lessening of vexation and a cultivation of the perfections — but I don't see many people piling on to claim that Confucius was an "enlightened being." We can say the same thing about Marcus Aurelius and so on.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, September 3rd, 2017 at 3:35 AM
Title: Re: Aung San Suu Kyi denies ethnic cleansing
Content:
Grigoris said:
It is not that complicated:  The Burmese are engaging in the ethnic cleansing of Rohingya.  It is that simple.

Malcolm wrote:
Yup.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, September 3rd, 2017 at 3:34 AM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
Dan74 said:
As for whether he was enlightened or not, there is no point arguing.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, indeed. The Buddha stated quite clearly:
"In whatsoever Dhamma and Discipline, Subhadda, there is not found the Noble Eightfold Path, neither is there found a true ascetic of the first, second, third, or fourth degree of saintliness. But in whatsoever Dhamma and Discipline there is found the Noble Eightfold Path, there is found a true ascetic of the first, second, third, and fourth degrees of saintliness.[54] Now in this Dhamma and Discipline, Subhadda, is found the Noble Eightfold Path; and in it alone are also found true ascetics of the first, second, third, and fourth degrees of saintliness. Devoid of true ascetics are the systems of other teachers.


Dan74 said:
It's all very clear to those it is clear to, Malcolm. Circular reasoning is the best justification of our current beliefs.

What is precisely this Dharma and Discipline? There's more than one definition, more than one understanding of it. Just as there's more than one take on what Jesus had taught.

_/|\_


Malcolm wrote:
The Dharma and Vinaya of the Buddha, of course, where the 8-fold path exists. That begins with right view, and continues with the rest.

You claim there is more than one understanding of right view? No. "Right view," according to the Buddha, means understanding the four noble truths: suffering, its cause, its cessation, and knowledge of the path leading to the end of suffering. People who do not understand this and accept it as fundamental are not followers of Buddhadharma.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, September 3rd, 2017 at 3:03 AM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
Dan74 said:
As for whether he was enlightened or not, there is no point arguing.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, indeed. The Buddha stated quite clearly:
"In whatsoever Dhamma and Discipline, Subhadda, there is not found the Noble Eightfold Path, neither is there found a true ascetic of the first, second, third, or fourth degree of saintliness. But in whatsoever Dhamma and Discipline there is found the Noble Eightfold Path, there is found a true ascetic of the first, second, third, and fourth degrees of saintliness.[54] Now in this Dhamma and Discipline, Subhadda, is found the Noble Eightfold Path; and in it alone are also found true ascetics of the first, second, third, and fourth degrees of saintliness. Devoid of true ascetics are the systems of other teachers.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, September 3rd, 2017 at 2:44 AM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
By whom are they not listed as mahāsiddhas? They certainly are listed as mahāsiddhas in the empowerment text of the 84 mahāsiddhas. This is why they are called the grub chen brgyad bcu rtsa bshi, i.e. 84 Mahāsiddhas.

For example, it is clearly explained in the commentary of the song I quoted that Goraksha attained awakening.

Grigoris said:
In Dowman's book some are listed as Mahasiddha (Nagarjuna, for example), while others are listed as Siddha.

Malcolm wrote:
Does he give a criteria for listing them as such?


Grigoris said:
Just that, for me, it seems that even the attainment of mundane siddhi is something well beyond my capacity so I applaud those that have the tenacity and one-pointed purpose to attain even the most mundane siddhi.

Malcolm wrote:
People with "powers" who are not on the path of Dharma are going nowhere other than lower realms. They do not have precious human births, and as such, are nothing other than objects of compassion.

I would rather obtain one line of Dharma teachings than attain all the mundane siddhis in the universe.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, September 3rd, 2017 at 2:04 AM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:


Grigoris said:
They are not listed as Mahasiddhas, just Siddhas.

Malcolm wrote:
By whom are they not listed as mahāsiddhas? They certainly are listed as mahāsiddhas in the empowerment text of the 84 mahāsiddhas. This is why they are called the grub chen brgyad bcu rtsa bshi, i.e. 84 Mahāsiddhas.

For example, it is clearly explained in the commentary of the song I quoted that Goraksha attained awakening.

And, sorry, I simply don't believe Jesus was an awakened person, just as I don't think Krishna was an awakened person, nor Mohammed, Appolloneous of Tyana, etc.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, September 3rd, 2017 at 1:49 AM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Mahā siddhas are characterized by their attainment of the first bhumi (aka supreme siddhi), not through their attainment of mundane siddhis.

Grigoris said:
Goraksha? Caurangipa? (both of whom were Nath) Kankaripa?  Vinapa?  Camaripa? etc...  They are included in the list but they are not Mahasiddhas, just plain old Siddhas.  They are also not good enough for you either?  Do you set the bar that high for yourself too or are you happy enough just to criticise other's attainments?

Malcolm wrote:
As I said, I really see no reason whatsoever to believe that Jesus had any attainments at all.


Gorakshanātha was a mahāsiddha:
Gorakṣa sees nondual suchness,
The cowherd king of the three realms is amazing!
As was Caurangi:
Long ago, Caurangi cut down
that great tree of ignorance
with the axe of the intimate instruction of the sublime guru
and the three discerning wisdoms.
And Vinapa:
Viṇāpa realized selflessness
by practicing nonarising sound.
And Camaripa
The one who makes the boot of the effortless dharmakāya
is Camaripa, the supreme bootmaker.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, September 3rd, 2017 at 1:30 AM
Title: Re: Sentience & Insentience
Content:
CedarTree said:
Subject is more definitely that That is what the headline and subject matter of the post was.

odysseus said:
OK. I take another shot: Sentient beings have volition to distinct themselves from non-sentient properties like trees, plants, rocks which have no consciousness. Hm. Inanimate objects do not have the 5 skandhas.

Malcolm wrote:
Nor do all sentient beings. For example, formless realm beings have no material aggregate.

In any case, the dividing line between sentient and nonsentient is not very precise.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, September 3rd, 2017 at 1:19 AM
Title: Re: Buddhahood in This Life Transmission Webcast: 09/15/17
Content:
pael said:
1.Is webcast free? 2.Do I need account?


Malcolm wrote:
1.Yes.

2. No


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, September 3rd, 2017 at 12:36 AM
Title: Buddhahood in This Life Transmission Webcast: 09/15/17
Content:



Malcolm wrote:
Buddhahood in This Life Transmission with Tulku Dakpa
Fri, Sep 15 from 5:00 - 9:30pm EDT

Discover a profound text that has influenced Tibetan teachers for generations. Buddhahood in This Life is a complete translation of the earliest Tibetan commentary on the Dzogchen secret instructions. Zangthal Editions and Wisdom Publications present a conversation between Tulku Dakpa Rinpoche and Daniel Aitken (Publisher, Wisdom Publications) from 5:00-6:00, immediately followed by the Reading Transmission for Buddhahood in This Life ( https://tinyurl.com/yd2xrogd ) from 6:30-9:30.

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

Webcast URL:

https://livestream.com/wisdompublications/buddhahoodinthislifetransmission


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 2nd, 2017 at 11:06 PM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
I think the Little Prince's world is actually larger than mine.

odysseus said:
Try not to upset the Christians with calling him that. You are entitled to your scepticism, but they keep a keen eye on Buddhists.

Malcolm wrote:
Oh dude, I was talking about this:


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 2nd, 2017 at 10:35 PM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Siddhis are not representative of the attainment of realization (in the Buddhist sense of the term). The corollary is that those who are realized (in the Buddhist sense of the term) do not necessarily attain siddhis.

Grigoris said:
So the Mahasiddhas were not realised?

Malcolm wrote:
Mahā siddhas are characterized by their attainment of the first bhumi (aka supreme siddhi), not through their attainment of mundane siddhis.


Grigoris said:
So why should we care whether Jesus walked on water or not. There is not one thing we have a record of him saying which would indicate that he was anything other than a charismatic rabbi and a political threat to the Roman occupation of Judea.
Is the idea of Jesus having some degree of realisation so much of a threat to your little world?

Malcolm wrote:
Should it be? After all, my world is really very, very tiny. I think the Little Prince's world is actually larger than mine.

In any case, I see no evidence for Jesus being an awakened person.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 2nd, 2017 at 10:07 PM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
This statement assumes Jesus had any attainment at all. Why should we assume this?

Grigoris said:
Siddhi are a consequence of attainment.

Malcolm wrote:
Siddhis are not representative of the attainment of realization (in the Buddhist sense of the term). The corollary is that those who are realized (in the Buddhist sense of the term) do not necessarily attain siddhis.

So why should we care whether Jesus walked on water or not. There is not one thing we have a record of him saying which would indicate that he was anything other than a charismatic rabbi and a political threat to the Roman occupation of Judea.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 2nd, 2017 at 10:00 PM
Title: Re: Timothy Morton Wants Philosophers to Face Their “Buddhaphobia”
Content:
jkarlins said:
He's trying to mix Western philosophy and the dharma.

Are you interested in this kind of project or direction, Malcolm?


Jake


Malcolm wrote:
It sounds to me like the guy has no understanding of Dharma at all.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 2nd, 2017 at 9:37 PM
Title: Re: ChNN on Jesus?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
This statement assumes Jesus had any attainment at all. Why should we assume this?

Grigoris said:
Dude, I imagine that if we take the combined attainments of all the critics of Jesus in this thread they would not amount to 1% of those of Jesus.  If the accounts are anything to go by, he was quite clearly a siddha.

And as for the simplicity of Jesus's message, one do well to remind oneself of the simplicity of Garchen Rinpoche's message.  An essential message is not necessarily a simple message.

How many here can live up to the teaching:

"The second is this: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.' There is no commandment greater than these." Mark 12:31

The question that arises in my mind is:  Do any of the detractors here know the context of this statement?  I bet they don't.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 2nd, 2017 at 1:55 PM
Title: Re: Timothy Morton Wants Philosophers to Face Their “Buddhaphobia”
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
This guy is a dilettante.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 1st, 2017 at 11:12 AM
Title: Re: Why plants don't have citta?
Content:
mutsuk said:
You mean the passage about bem (inert whatever) and rig (awareness) are seen as dual, constituting a wrong view? If yes, it's clear bem is referring here to the body. If not, can you give the quote (in tibetan)?

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, that is the quote. But I do not think bem here strictly refers to only the body. I would have to look at the Tibetan again. It basically states that it seems like like they are different, but that this is not to be believed.

M

mutsuk said:
This is the passage from the KNT I think :

'o na sku dang ye shes ni stong gsal ci'i ngo bor yang ma grub cing skye shi dang bral la rgyus bskyed pa'i phung po 'di 'jig pa: gong gi mtshan nyid dang 'gal lo snyam na de ni ma go ba yin te rig pa stong nyid gsal ba'i gnad de ma shes pas der 'dzin 'byung ba lnga byung zhing de'i dangs ma la rgyu'i thig le: de la lus byung de la ye shes kyi rtsal dbang po sgo lnga byung : de la yul lnga byung de la 'dzin pa lngas nyon mongs pa lnga: de thog ma'i ye shes kyi rtsal gyis bskyed nas: bar du 'byung ba 'dus pa'i dangs ma'i lus kyang ye shes lnga dngos su yod pa ma shes: yid dpyod kyi lta ba las ma rtogs pas bem rig gnyis su snang ste: yid ma ches so: 'dir thog ma yang ye shes lnga dngos: bar du yang ma rig pa der 'dzin gyis 'byung ba 'dus nas lus grub pa'i dus na'ang ye shes lnga dngos: phung po: dbang po: nyon mongs lnga yang ye shes lnga dngos: tha ma yang de nyid dngos su rtogs pas spang blang dgag sgrub kyi mtha' las 'das pas de ltar bla ma'i man ngag gi shes pas bem rig gnyis su med de gcig pa'i gnad kyis zag bcas med par ye shes su yal 'gro ba ni gnyis su med pa'i rtags so:

I will try to translate that back to English from JL's french translation, although I think there is already the version by Erik Fry-Miller which must be readily available (that would same me time!)

Malcolm wrote:
Not necessary, this is passage in question and you are right. On the other hand padmasambhava also makes the point earlier with respect to the conditioned rgyu thig le that all perception of the five elements comes from misperceptions of the five lights.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 1st, 2017 at 1:16 AM
Title: Re: FLOODS
Content:
Dan74 said:
What many of us on the Left do, namely label people and speech racist too hastily, in the hope that if we name and shame enough, the problem will just go away, is a wrong approach, I feel. It will just foster resentment and feed these attitudes with people expressing them away from the public eye in increasingly worse ways. It drives the problem underground where it becomes even harder to tackle it. Racism and its much more mildmannered cousin tribalism, are deep human characteristics and have to be dealt with not with violence (whether in act or speech) but in an atmosphere of openness and acceptance, where people can speak out loud about their concerns, share stories, hear each other out and build bridges.

Malcolm wrote:
Sorry, not really into giving White Nationalists, Fascists, Nazis, the KKK, and other right wing creeps an opportunity to speak out loud about their concerns, share their stories, build bridges and so on.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 1st, 2017 at 1:03 AM
Title: Re: Election advice from Lama Zopa Rinpoche
Content:
Nicholas Weeks said:
https://www.lamayeshe.com/advice/advice-after-us-election?utm_source=August+2017&utm_campaign=Eletter+August+2017&utm_medium=email

Malcolm wrote:
In the meantime, it is necessary to stem the rising tide of Fascism and environmental devastation ushered in by the Trump Administration.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 1st, 2017 at 12:14 AM
Title: Re: Dharma Fellowship
Content:
Lingpupa said:
Web sources say "at Siling", but I have no idea where that is.

Malcolm wrote:
Xining, in Qinghai Province. The Tibetan pronunciation is roughly Siling.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 31st, 2017 at 11:44 PM
Title: Re: Why plants don't have citta?
Content:
mutsuk said:
Insentients having a Buddha Nature is already gone way too far. Far outside Buddhism actually.

Malcolm wrote:
There is however the inconvenient statement by Padmasambhava in the Khandro Nyinthig rgyab chos where he declares that the distinction between the sentient and the insentient is not to be believed, and that it in fact disappears when one attains rainbow body. FWIIW.

mutsuk said:
You mean the passage about bem (inert whatever) and rig (awareness) are seen as dual, constituting a wrong view? If yes, it's clear bem is referring here to the body. If not, can you give the quote (in tibetan)?

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, that is the quote. But I do not think bem here strictly refers to only the body. I would have to look at the Tibetan again. It basically states that it seems like like they are different, but that this is not to be believed.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 31st, 2017 at 8:35 AM
Title: Re: FLOODS
Content:
Kim O'Hara said:
Here in Oz we're seeing at least four times as much coverage of the US flooding as of the Asian flooding, and it's really hard to see any good reason for that.

Malcolm wrote:
Racism. Who cares what happens to brown people?

Strive said:
smh

if u ever went to houston u will find out it is mostly mexican and black ppl that live there

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, and they are the most impacted by the flooding. I wonder why?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 31st, 2017 at 8:27 AM
Title: Re: Why plants don't have citta?
Content:


Queequeg said:
Hongaku is usually translated into English as "Original Enlightenment" and is a strain of thought that emerged in Japanese Buddhism where it was believed no effort on the path is necessary because we are already enlightened.


Malcolm wrote:
Definitely a wrong view, even in Dzogchen.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 31st, 2017 at 8:25 AM
Title: Re: FLOODS
Content:
Punya said:
... I don't think it only happens in the USA.

Kim O'Hara said:
Here in Oz we're seeing at least four times as much coverage of the US flooding as of the Asian flooding, and it's really hard to see any good reason for that.

Malcolm wrote:
Racism. Who cares what happens to brown people?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 31st, 2017 at 8:24 AM
Title: Re: Why plants don't have citta?
Content:
mutsuk said:
Insentients having a Buddha Nature is already gone way too far. Far outside Buddhism actually.

Malcolm wrote:
There is however the inconvenient statement by Padmasambhava in the Khandro Nyinthig rgyab chos where he declares that the distinction between the sentient and the insentient is not to be believed, and that it in fact disappears when one attains rainbow body. FWIIW.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 30th, 2017 at 5:14 AM
Title: Re: Tibetan Zen
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
It is so sad you do not know what this passage really means.

Anonymous X said:
BUDDHAHOOD IS NOT ATTAINED BY PURPOSEFUL ACTION

If secret rigpa, the actual buddha-dynamic, eludes us,
to attain release by any purposeful action is no option.
“Everything is impermanent and bound to perish”—
how can a tight mesh of body, speech, and mind
reach out to touch its indestructible core?
In the event of failure to intuit intrinsic rigpa, which is pure being there is
no chance that we can attain release in this lifetime by any deliberate physical,
verbal, or mental act. Religious practice becomes a tense constraining
mesh constricting and veiling rigpa, and although some small satisfaction
may follow, the product is conditioned and thus certain to fade away, perishing
like an earthen pot. Such practice can never attain to the indestructible
reality of pure being. Whatever is deliberately created is conditioned and transient, whereas its opposite, the uncreated, is imperishable. Since it
is indestructible, pure being can only be seen by nondeliberate, unintended
relaxation into the natural state; goal-oriented action is a mesh of constraint
leading us closer to buddhahood by not so much as a hair’s breadth.
Such ambition may well be regarded as a futile samsaric trap.

Longchenpa's words seem pretty clear to me.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 29th, 2017 at 1:38 PM
Title: Re: The Tantric Age: A comparison of Shaiva and Buddhist Tantra
Content:


treehuggingoctopus said:
But of course they are not, how could they? Buddhadharma is a religious endeavour which implies an ethical, epistemological and existential commitment, the kind of commitment that leaves little room for anything else in your life: we are religious freaks.

Malcolm wrote:
That means that they are like people who study medicinal plants without any confidence in their curative properties.

treehuggingoctopus said:
Not really. Some of them are as confident as it gets. To belabour your metaphor a bit: they study medicinal plants without necessarily making use of them.

Malcolm wrote:
.

The Buddha had a thing or two to say about such tog ge ba rnams.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 29th, 2017 at 12:07 AM
Title: Re: The Tantric Age: A comparison of Shaiva and Buddhist Tantra
Content:


treehuggingoctopus said:
I would say that amongst buddhologists and tibetologists practitioners are just about as numerous as non-practitioners. In Europe, at the very least.

Malcolm wrote:
My objection is to how Buddhist studies in the West are generally being conducted in Academia, not individuals within Academia, with some notable exceptions who will not be mentioned here.

People are not learning the Dharma in these Universities

treehuggingoctopus said:
But of course they are not, how could they? Buddhadharma is a religious endeavour which implies an ethical, epistemological and existential commitment, the kind of commitment that leaves little room for anything else in your life: we are religious freaks.

Malcolm wrote:
That means that they are like people who study medicinal plants without any confidence in their curative properties.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 29th, 2017 at 12:00 AM
Title: Re: The Tantric Age: A comparison of Shaiva and Buddhist Tantra
Content:
mutsuk said:
Seriously ? Not good indeed...

Malcolm wrote:
Seriously. Sangye was calling him on his lack of respect, not his capacity in Tibetan.

mutsuk said:
I see, I had misunderstood your previous statement.

Malcolm wrote:
No worries. I should emphasize that fewer and fewer highly trained khenpos are willing to work with western scholars, primarily due to a lack of care and respect many western scholars exhibit for the subjects of their study. There are not many people like JLA in the Western Academy.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 28th, 2017 at 1:05 PM
Title: Re: The Tantric Age: A comparison of Shaiva and Buddhist Tantra
Content:
mutsuk said:
Germano .

Malcolm wrote:
BTW, he declared publicly that samaya, something we all think is important, did not apply to him in anyway whatsoever. This really is the essence of the problem.

mutsuk said:
Seriously ? Not good indeed...

Malcolm wrote:
Seriously. Sangye was calling him on his lack of respect, not his capacity in Tibetan.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 28th, 2017 at 11:57 AM
Title: Re: Tibetan Zen
Content:


Anonymous X said:
I think there is a fundamental misinterpretation of what you think enlightenment entails. You are interpreting words with no real experiential change in the way you function.

Malcolm wrote:
And I think you are equally full of shit. So what? You have no idea what I am talking about.

Anonymous X said:
Please don't tell my mom.

Malcolm wrote:
Ok.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 28th, 2017 at 11:52 AM
Title: Re: Tibetan Zen
Content:
Anonymous X said:
I'm not arguing that a Buddha is not in possession of knowledge of his own state. It's just that this kind of information has really nothing to do with our own state.

Malcolm wrote:
Of course it does. It allows one who is in possession of knowledge of their own state to understand that it is possible to be possession of the knowledge of one's own state 24/7/365, and that the only difference between a buddha and oneself is whether that knowledge is continuous or interrupted.

Anonymous X said:
I think there is a fundamental misinterpretation of what you think enlightenment entails. You are interpreting words with no real experiential change in the way you function.

Malcolm wrote:
And I think you are equally full of shit. So what? You have no idea what I am talking about.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 28th, 2017 at 11:35 AM
Title: Re: The Tantric Age: A comparison of Shaiva and Buddhist Tantra
Content:
mutsuk said:
Germano .

Malcolm wrote:
BTW, he declared publicly that samaya, something we all think is important, did not apply to him in anyway whatsoever. This really is the essence of the problem.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 28th, 2017 at 11:33 AM
Title: Re: Tibetan Zen
Content:
Anonymous X said:
There really is no way to know this. This statement seems metaphysical to me.

Malcolm wrote:
It isn't. It is pragmatic. Sentient beings are not always in possession of knowledge of their own state. Buddhas are always in possession of knowledge of their own state.

Anonymous X said:
I'm not arguing that a Buddha is not in possession of knowledge of his own state. It's just that this kind of information has really nothing to do with our own state.

Malcolm wrote:
Of course it does. It allows one who is in possession of knowledge of their own state to understand that it is possible to be possession of the knowledge of one's own state 24/7/365, and that the only difference between a buddha and oneself is whether that knowledge is continuous or interrupted.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 28th, 2017 at 8:08 AM
Title: Re: Weather
Content:
Strive said:
very big claims u making there Malcolm. if all buddhas have that ability why still so much death and destruction from natural disasters?

Malcolm wrote:
Buddhas are omniscient, not omnipotent.

Strive said:
you just said your teachers who i assume are buddhas have the ability to stop hurricanes and tsunamis. how is that not omnipotence? lol


Malcolm wrote:
Buddhas are not omnipotent. Just trust me on that.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 28th, 2017 at 7:24 AM
Title: Re: Weather
Content:
Strive said:
were they able to stop hurricanes, tsunamis, tornadoes etc?

Malcolm wrote:
Kunzang Dechen Lingpa had this ability. Ngagpa Rinpoche was able to stop monsoon rains, droughts, and so on.

Strive said:
very big claims u making there Malcolm. if all buddhas have that ability why still so much death and destruction from natural disasters?

Malcolm wrote:
Buddhas are omniscient, not omnipotent.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 28th, 2017 at 7:12 AM
Title: Re: Weather
Content:
Strive said:
Do buddhas have the ability to control the weather?

Malcolm wrote:
My teacher, Kunzang Dechen Lingpa, had this ability, as did my other teacher, Ngakpa Yeshe Dorje, who was the official weather controller for the Tibetan Government in Exile until the mid-1980's.

Strive said:
were they able to stop hurricanes, tsunamis, tornadoes etc?

Malcolm wrote:
Kunzang Dechen Lingpa had this ability. Ngagpa Rinpoche was able to stop monsoon rains, droughts, and so on.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 28th, 2017 at 7:01 AM
Title: Re: Weather
Content:
Strive said:
Do buddhas have the ability to control the weather?

Malcolm wrote:
My teacher, Kunzang Dechen Lingpa, had this ability, as did my other teacher, Ngakpa Yeshe Dorje, who was the official weather controller for the Tibetan Government in Exile until the mid-1980's.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 28th, 2017 at 6:21 AM
Title: Re: Tibetan Zen
Content:
Sherab said:
As I have mentioned before, it is because you have assumed that dependent arising is identical to temporal causality.  I have explained previously that dependent arising is very broad and can encompass more than mere temporal causality.


Malcolm wrote:
There are only three kinds of dependent origination: serial, momentary, and simultaneous. But all three operate within temporal causality. Dependent origination is presented after cause and condition and before karma for this reason.

Sherab said:
Presented by the Buddha himself?  If so, where?


Malcolm wrote:
You can understand this from the Ahidharmakosha and its commentaries, especially the one which contains extensive citations from the agamas.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 28th, 2017 at 6:19 AM
Title: Re: Successful empowerment and conferral of samaya?
Content:
Powerful bliss said:
Hi there,

To Malcolm: you know that HHDL doesn’t have authority in all the sects and some affirm that his teachings are an evolution and not the tradition. Of course for my part I bowe to whatever word he pronounces.
You seem very well learned, can you give some classical sources about my first post:
“I read the whole thread but I can't still figure out whether an inauthentic (or non-qualified) teacher like Sogyal Rinpoche could confer empowerments. The idea here would be that if he has broken completely his samayas, the chain is broken.
So for his students there would be no samaya at all from all his empowerments. A solid text of reference other than Shamar Rinpoche on "the meaning of samaya" (quoting the 8th Karmapa) would be very useful”.

Malcolm wrote:
I have already given this source, the Rigpa Rangshar tantra.

Powerful bliss said:
Malcolm, sorry to be so ignorant

If I understood well, you are currently translating the Rigpa Rangshar tantra and Norwegian gave an abstract?
Wouldn't it possible to get a translation of the full chapter about samaya? Or did Norwegian produce the whole thing? What is the relation with Longchenpa?


Malcolm wrote:
The text will be published next year by wisdom. But i have also cited the relevant portions here in a number of threads.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 28th, 2017 at 2:44 AM
Title: Re: Successful empowerment and conferral of samaya?
Content:
Powerful bliss said:
Hi there,

To Malcolm: you know that HHDL doesn’t have authority in all the sects and some affirm that his teachings are an evolution and not the tradition. Of course for my part I bowe to whatever word he pronounces.
You seem very well learned, can you give some classical sources about my first post:
“I read the whole thread but I can't still figure out whether an inauthentic (or non-qualified) teacher like Sogyal Rinpoche could confer empowerments. The idea here would be that if he has broken completely his samayas, the chain is broken.
So for his students there would be no samaya at all from all his empowerments. A solid text of reference other than Shamar Rinpoche on "the meaning of samaya" (quoting the 8th Karmapa) would be very useful”.

Malcolm wrote:
I have already given this source, the Rigpa Rangshar tantra.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 28th, 2017 at 12:58 AM
Title: Re: Successful empowerment and conferral of samaya?
Content:


Mantrik said:
Having established that samaya can be regarded by the student as not bonding if the Guru goes against the Dharma, my initial question was what creates the 'qualified Vajra Master' in the first place?

Malcolm wrote:
Minimum qualifications are that one has received the empowerment for the mandala or deity which one intends to transmit, and has either done the retreat in a perfect way or has the permission from one's guru to give the empowerment. This is the absolute bare minimum to be a "vajramaster."


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 28th, 2017 at 12:56 AM
Title: Re: Tibetan Zen
Content:
Anonymous X said:
If vidya/jnana, which is the cessation of ignorance, and supposedly that realization of Buddha, were effected in equipoise, one instant of it would end all circular thinking which it does not as we can see in our own lives. .

Malcolm wrote:
The rigpa of sentient beings is fragmented. The rigpa of buddhas is unfragmented. This is the sole difference between sentient beings and buddhas.

Anonymous X said:
There really is no way to know this. This statement seems metaphysical to me.

Malcolm wrote:
It isn't. It is pragmatic. Sentient beings are not always in possession of knowledge of their own state. Buddhas are always in possession of knowledge of their own state.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 28th, 2017 at 12:15 AM
Title: Re: Successful empowerment and conferral of samaya?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
HHDL, to quote an unimpeachable authority, is on record stating over and over again that if there is a person posing as a Dharma teacher or even a Vajrayāna guru who is behaving in a manner which is not in accordance with the Dharma, and continues to persist in such behavior after being rebuked by his or her students, the students have no choice but to expose the conduct of that teacher. What else do you want? Some opinion from the Talmud?

dzogchungpa said:
An opinion from the Talmud would be nice.

In all seriousness, there is a passage in Khenpo Ngachung's commentary on WoMPT that makes me wonder if HHDL's view is actually all that traditional. Anyway, it's not so much for me that I am asking but it seems that this is the kind of thing Powerful bliss is after.

Malcolm wrote:
There are plenty of examples in Tibetan history of people driving away fake lamas.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 28th, 2017 at 12:06 AM
Title: Re: Successful empowerment and conferral of samaya?
Content:
dzogchungpa said:
OK, I think the following question should be answered definitively, if possible:

Assume a fully qualified guru gives an empowerment in such a way that samaya with a given student is definitely established. Is it possible that such a guru eventually goes off the rails? If that happens, is the student still bound by samaya?

Perhaps the key terms involved, such as "qualified guru", "samaya" and "going off the rails", need to be clarified, but I think this is an important question.

Malcolm wrote:
If the guru in question merely goes insane, harmlessly, yes, the student is still bound by samay. If the guru begins to break his own samaya by harming others, going against the Dharma, repudiating the Dharma, etc., then the student is free of samaya. For example if some guru starts claiming they have a teaching more profound than the Buddhadharma, this would be a clear sign that it is ok to exit.

dzogchungpa said:
OK, can you provide sources for this? "Harming others" is kind of vague. Just to give a well-known, possibly stupid, example, there is the story of Do Khyentse hunting and so on.

Malcolm wrote:
Do Khyentse, according to legend, was capable to reviving animals he hunted from their butchered remains, so he does not count. In any case killing animals is not grounds for the expulsion of a monk from monastic Sangha, neither is drinking for that matter. But killing a human being constitutes such grounds. I don't think there are any stories of Do Khyentse killing anyone.




dzogchungpa said:
It seems to me one could easily conclude that a guru is harming others, but actually be mistaken in that assessment. In that case would one break one's samaya by denouncing them, say? Note, I am not saying this with the Sogyal people in mind.

Malcolm wrote:
HHDL, to quote an unimpeachable authority, is on record stating over and over again that if there is a person posing as a Dharma teacher or even a Vajrayāna guru who is behaving in a manner which is not in accordance with the Dharma, and continues to persist in such behavior after being rebuked by his or her students, the students have no choice but to expose the conduct of that teacher. What else do you want? Some opinion from the Talmud?

It is absolutely clear what "Not in accordance with the Dharma" means — taking the life of human beings (including abortions), stealing, sexual misconduct, lying and other verbal non-virtues out of malice, greed, or ignorance. In other words, if a guru has a pattern of behavior which is based on the ten nonvirtues, it is pretty clear that such a guru should be abandoned, and if their behavior warrants it, they should be exposed.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 27th, 2017 at 11:51 PM
Title: Re: Tibetan Zen
Content:
Anonymous X said:
If vidya/jnana, which is the cessation of ignorance, and supposedly that realization of Buddha, were effected in equipoise, one instant of it would end all circular thinking which it does not as we can see in our own lives. .

Malcolm wrote:
The rigpa of sentient beings is fragmented. The rigpa of buddhas is unfragmented. This is the sole difference between sentient beings and buddhas.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 27th, 2017 at 11:37 PM
Title: Re: The Tantric Age: A comparison of Shaiva and Buddhist Tantra
Content:
Arnoud said:
[

Malcolm, you have translated either of these texts?

Malcolm wrote:
Buddhahood in This Life covers exactly the same topics as the Tshig Don mDzod.

My job right now is to work on the 17 tantras and their commentaries, so I am devoting my attention to those. I think JLA has translated the whole lot in French, and more. Mutsuk will have more information on that score.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 27th, 2017 at 11:22 PM
Title: Re: The Tantric Age: A comparison of Shaiva and Buddhist Tantra
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
I cannot tell you the number of obvious errors I see in PhD dissertations on a regular basis, particularly with respect to Vajrayāna topics.

mutsuk said:
And I could say the same of all those "dharmic" translations of Vajrayana and Dzogchen texts. For instance, there is not a single translation of the Ye-shes bla-ma available in published form that is worth the price it costs. They are all flawed. And Sangye Khandro "putting Germano in his place" should first start to learn a little bit of classical tibetan before she starts criticzing others. Her Tshig-don mdzod is replete with mistakes, imprecise renderings, misidentifications of the grammatical subject in sentences, incapacities of contextualizing quotations (and therefore, again, misidentifying the grammatical subject) and so forth. On the other hand, with the exception of the lexicon (and I guess everyone has his/her own lexicon), I haven't found any such mistakes in Germano's works so far.

Malcolm wrote:
Whatever one may think of Lama Chonam and Sangye's translations, she would never be so arrogant as to present togal topics in a public setting in which many people had no transmission of Dzogchen. People will be able to listen to the recording of the conference and judge for themselves.

It is a question of respect for the Dharma here that is at issue, not translations. The errors to which I refer are not translations errors per se, but errors in basic knowledge of Dharma which one cannot learn properly in present day academic settings, a point with which I am sure you will agree.

Naturally, those people who have first received a traditional shedra education or some approximation of the same before going into western degree programs are not as likely to make those basic errors.


M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 27th, 2017 at 11:18 PM
Title: Re: Successful empowerment and conferral of samaya?
Content:
dzogchungpa said:
OK, I think the following question should be answered definitively, if possible:

Assume a fully qualified guru gives an empowerment in such a way that samaya with a given student is definitely established. Is it possible that such a guru eventually goes off the rails? If that happens, is the student still bound by samaya?

Perhaps the key terms involved, such as "qualified guru", "samaya" and "going off the rails", need to be clarified, but I think this is an important question.

Malcolm wrote:
If the guru in question merely goes insane, harmlessly, yes, the student is still bound by samay. If the guru begins to break his own samaya by harming others, going against the Dharma, repudiating the Dharma, etc., then the student is free of samaya. For example if some guru starts claiming they have a teaching more profound than the Buddhadharma, this would be a clear sign that it is ok to exit.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 27th, 2017 at 10:32 AM
Title: Re: The Tantric Age: A comparison of Shaiva and Buddhist Tantra
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
...People are not learning the Dharma in these Universities....

Quay said:
Yup. It all depends on one's priorities and what any one person desires in this life. For me, as a former member of academe, this expresses my thoughts and view clearly:

Knowledge is as infinite as the stars in the sky;
There is no end to all the subjects one could study.
It is better to grasp straight away their very essence--
The unchanging fortress of the Dharmakaya.
--Longchenpa


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 27th, 2017 at 9:56 AM
Title: Re: The Tantric Age: A comparison of Shaiva and Buddhist Tantra
Content:


treehuggingoctopus said:
I would say that amongst buddhologists and tibetologists practitioners are just about as numerous as non-practitioners. In Europe, at the very least.


Malcolm wrote:
My objection is to how Buddhist studies in the West are generally being conducted in Academia, not individuals within Academia, with some notable exceptions who will not be mentioned here.

People are not learning the Dharma in these Universities. I cannot tell you the number of obvious errors I see in PhD dissertations on a regular basis, particularly with respect to Vajrayāna topics.

The situation with Madhyamaka, and so on is a bit better, but not much.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 27th, 2017 at 7:38 AM
Title: Re: Can someone explain the False Aspectarian View vs the True Aspectarian View?
Content:
Losal Samten said:
Therefore, the authentic Chittamatra is the system of the True Aspectarians (who are authors of excellent treatises). On the other hand, in saying that the outer object is not even truly existent as the mind, the False Aspectarians are a little closer to the understanding that things are empty of true existence and thus provide, in a manner of speaking, a bridge to the Madhyamaka. Although in the correct ordering of things the False Aspectarians are, as a result, placed higher on the scale of views, nevertheless, because the system exhibits many inconsistencies on the level of the conventional truth, the conventional should be expounded according to the system of the True Aspectarians.

Malcolm wrote:
This is Mipham following Rongston Sheja Kunrig.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 27th, 2017 at 7:32 AM
Title: Re: The Tantric Age: A comparison of Shaiva and Buddhist Tantra
Content:
dzogchungpa said:
[

I especially appreciate that they usually don't say outrageous things and then three months later say the opposite.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, they just say outrageous things and refuse to change at all.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 27th, 2017 at 7:18 AM
Title: Re: Tibetan Zen
Content:
Sherab said:
I repeat, you are stating something that I have addressed early in this discussion.

Astus said:
The only place you seem to have addressed this was on https://dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?p=401570#p401570. There you state that the ultimate is both functional and impermanent. Such a statement actually turns the ultimate into the relative.

Sherab said:
As I have mentioned before, it is because you have assumed that dependent arising is identical to temporal causality.  I have explained previously that dependent arising is very broad and can encompass more than mere temporal causality.


Malcolm wrote:
There are only three kinds of dependent origination: serial, momentary, and simultaneous. But all three operate within temporal causality. Dependent origination is presented after cause and condition and before karma for this reason.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 27th, 2017 at 6:53 AM
Title: Re: The Tantric Age: A comparison of Shaiva and Buddhist Tantra
Content:


Mantrik said:
Perhaps you mean US academia.  Martin Boord, Robert Mayer and Cathy Cantwell appear friends to Buddhadharma in my experience.


Malcolm wrote:
Exceptions prove the rule, though Robert Mayer, who seems a very nice person, has no personal interest in Tibetan Buddhism apart from intellectual curiosity.

treehuggingoctopus said:
Duckworth? Pettit? Wallace? Dahl? Koppl?

I would say that amongst buddhologists and tibetologists practitioners are just about as numerous as non-practitioners. In Europe, at the very least.


Malcolm wrote:
You really have no idea how much the Western Academy has alienated their former informants. It has gotten to the point where many very respected khenpos refuse to admit "researchers" to their teachings at all.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 27th, 2017 at 3:27 AM
Title: Re: The Tantric Age: A comparison of Shaiva and Buddhist Tantra
Content:


Karma Dorje said:
Yup.



Malcolm wrote:
Ditto. Western academia is no friend to Buddhadharma. At the last Tsadra translation conference, Sangye Khandro very firmly put David Germano in his place. It was truly a sight to behold.

tiagolps said:
That sounds interesting, is there a video of that?


Malcolm wrote:
There will be an online recording. It is was during the contemplative language plenary.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 27th, 2017 at 3:16 AM
Title: Re: The Tantric Age: A comparison of Shaiva and Buddhist Tantra
Content:


Karma Dorje said:
Yup.



Malcolm wrote:
Ditto. Western academia is no friend to Buddhadharma. At the last Tsadra translation conference, Sangye Khandro very firmly put David Germano in his place. It was truly a sight to behold.

Mantrik said:
Perhaps you mean US academia.  Martin Boord, Robert Mayer and Cathy Cantwell appear friends to Buddhadharma in my experience.


Malcolm wrote:
Exceptions prove the rule, though Robert Mayer, who seems a very nice person, has no personal interest in Tibetan Buddhism apart from intellectual curiosity.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 27th, 2017 at 12:45 AM
Title: Re: The Tantric Age: A comparison of Shaiva and Buddhist Tantra
Content:
dzogchungpa said:
So, to sum up, yup.

Karma Dorje said:
Yup.



Malcolm wrote:
Ditto. Western academia is no friend to Buddhadharma. At the last Tsadra translation conference, Sangye Khandro very firmly put David Germano in his place. It was truly a sight to behold.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 26th, 2017 at 11:38 PM
Title: Re: General questions on getting started
Content:


Varis said:
And again, building off the last question, how does one actually begin in the Sakya sect? I know, for example, Gelugpas start first with the Lam Rim, but what do Sakyapas start with? Some centers public classes seem to focus on teaching Shantideva's Bodhicaryavatara, others seem to only hold lessons on basic meditation publically.


Malcolm wrote:
Sakyapas usually start with Vajrayāna practice right away and fill in the graded path as one goes along.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 26th, 2017 at 1:46 PM
Title: Re: Major hurricane hitting Texas
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
From the Effortless Accomplishment of Wishes:
SA CHU ME LUNG JUNG WEY BAR CHEY KYI/  
When fearful times come and there is danger for the illusory body

GYU LUS NYEN CHING JIG PEY DU JUNG TSE 
because of obstacles of the elements of earth, water, fire and air; 

YID NI THE TSOM MEY PAR SOL BA DEB
by offering a supplication without second thoughts or doubt

ORGYEN JUNG WA ZHI YI LHA MOR CHEY
to Padmasambhava with the goddesses of the four elements

JUNG BA RANG SAR ZHI WAR THE TSOM MEY
without doubt the elements will be naturally pacified:

ORGYEN PADMA JUNG NEY LA SOL WA DEB
I supplicate Padmasambhava of Oddiyāna

SAM PA LHUN GYI DRUB PAR JIN GYI LOB
bless us that our wishes be effortlessly accomplished!

Tenma said:
I'm in Texas, so I would like to recite this prayer.  However, which form of Padmasmabhava is this to and a mantra for this?  I'm reciting the Nagesvararaja as the hurricane seems to be more of angry nagas, so I'm using that instead.  Though Padmasambhava seems better, so what can I use?

Malcolm wrote:
You just recite this prayer.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 26th, 2017 at 12:12 PM
Title: Re: Major hurricane hitting Texas
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
From the Effortless Accomplishment of Wishes:
SA CHU ME LUNG JUNG WEY BAR CHEY KYI/  
When fearful times come and there is danger for the illusory body

GYU LUS NYEN CHING JIG PEY DU JUNG TSE 
because of obstacles of the elements of earth, water, fire and air; 

YID NI THE TSOM MEY PAR SOL BA DEB
by offering a supplication without second thoughts or doubt

ORGYEN JUNG WA ZHI YI LHA MOR CHEY
to Padmasambhava with the goddesses of the four elements

JUNG BA RANG SAR ZHI WAR THE TSOM MEY
without doubt the elements will be naturally pacified:

ORGYEN PADMA JUNG NEY LA SOL WA DEB
I supplicate Padmasambhava of Oddiyāna

SAM PA LHUN GYI DRUB PAR JIN GYI LOB
bless us that our wishes be effortlessly accomplished!


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 26th, 2017 at 6:41 AM
Title: Re: The Tantric Age: A comparison of Shaiva and Buddhist Tantra
Content:
tingdzin said:
I haven't had time to read the whole paper yet (if it's worth it, and if the discussion is still continuing next week,I may have more to say), but the "main thesis" in the quote by Grigoris that started the ball, to wit:

Grigoris said:
The main thesis of this paper is that in the medieval period, Tantric Buddhism (mantranaya, vajrayāna) and Tantric Śaivism (mantramārga) were conterminous, coeval, and co-functional.

tingdzin said:
...is wrong right off the bat.

Malcolm wrote:
Yup.




tingdzin said:
Even if one accepts the dependence on certain so-called Yogini tantras were influenced by or even derived from Shaiva tantras (an assertion which is still being refined  -- and bitterly contested -- by those scholars who have the most in-depth knowledge of these two subjects), the author is (to begin with) completely ignoring the whole esoteric tradition within Buddhism that had already been developing in Central and East Asia during the period in question ("medieval" is a loaded word better not used unless defined), relying on, traditionally the Mahavairocana and Vajrasekhara scriptures, but also including a lot of practices and lines that have since died out.  These Vajrayana practices were not transgressive (mostly), and were in no way dependent on either the Yogini tantras or Shaiva stuff.

Malcolm wrote:
Yup.


tingdzin said:
This tendency to equate Vajrayana Buddhism with late Indian-tantra-based Buddhism is common among narrow-minded Indic specialists, but it ignores a lot of factual information about the development of what is called Vajrayana. But even if the author had added the qualifier "in India" to the above quote, it still is biased towards those scriptures which happened to make their way into Tibet and provided the main esoteric scriptural authority for the surviving New Transmission schools in Tibet, and is thus still incomplete.

Malcolm wrote:
Yup.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 26th, 2017 at 3:32 AM
Title: Re: We are a Kali Yuga culture
Content:
Strive said:
too much whining going on here. if maybe u ppl spent some time in 3rd world countries then u would feel more grateful. maybe this is one of the reason why theres so much depression and drugs in the west. it is because of ungratefulness


Malcolm wrote:
Yes, we should be grateful to the third world for providing those who live in the West the lifestyle to which we have become accustomed at the expense of the world's environment.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 26th, 2017 at 1:19 AM
Title: Re: We are a Kali Yuga culture
Content:
Nyedrag Yeshe said:
But we can't deny that huge social and cultural advancements do exist!

Malcolm wrote:
Global pollution, cancers, mass extinction, environmental destruction, and global warming hardly deserve to be called "huge social and cultural advancement."

Nyedrag Yeshe said:
Sarcasm, rhetorics and typical Malcolm arrogance! Point out when I said that these things are advancements!? I was very clear in pointing out which things have some positive changes regarding today's world and the ancient one!

You like putting out your expertise, but can you interpret a text proeprly?

Malcolm wrote:
In general, we live in the age of the five degenerations. One can try to paint things in a better light, but I don't think things are better at all.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 25th, 2017 at 11:55 PM
Title: Re: We are a Kali Yuga culture
Content:
Nyedrag Yeshe said:
But we can't deny that huge social and cultural advancements do exist!

Malcolm wrote:
Global pollution, cancers, mass extinction, environmental destruction, and global warming hardly deserve to be called "huge social and cultural advancement."


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 25th, 2017 at 1:32 PM
Title: Re: Semen
Content:
Jyotish said:
Clearly the tibetan medicine treats semen as a waste product.

tingdzin said:
This does not follow from the quote you cite.

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

tingdzin said:
One reason the teachings on thigle are (or were formerly) kept secret is because of reductionist understandings of the relevant vocabulary that can lead to serious errors in practice.

Malcolm wrote:
Since semen, the reproductive fluid, is instrumental in male bliss, it is supposed to be conserved if one is doing completion stage practice. It is however still a waste product of digestion. Ojas, mdangs, is more important than semen.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 23rd, 2017 at 9:04 AM
Title: Re: Empowerment question Krodha Kali / Dudjom Tersar
Content:
Lhasa said:
Does khrid need to be live in person, or if the Lama says read this book, it's good enough?


Malcolm wrote:
If the guru says read this book it is enough.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 22nd, 2017 at 11:15 PM
Title: Re: Rigpa and mindfulness
Content:
CedarTree said:
I am no Dzogchen student or master, but do you think Rigpa is somewhere?

Malcolm wrote:
Rigpa has a location. Ditto about what said above.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 22nd, 2017 at 11:14 PM
Title: Re: Rigpa and mindfulness
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
If you want to understand what this means you need to find a Dzogchen master and dedicate yourself to the teachings. Your speculations are way off base. But I cannot correct them because this is not a proper forum fir doing so.

Aryjna said:
This quote seems to relate to a question I have had recently but have not had an answer for yet:
da khyed rang rnams rig pa mdun gyi nam mkha' la/ bzo med du ce re/ yengs med du hrig ge/ dmigs med du gsal le ba/ 'od ka'i ngang du zhog cig bya

"Now, you all [meaning the students] should look without artifice at [your] vidyā in the sky in front [of you]; vividly without distraction; clearly without support; resting in the state of radiance.
It is from this thread: https://dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=66&t=23461&start=380#p353991

Unless it is a figure of speech, it implies that rigpa (at least in the case of someone who is still a beginner) may be found specifically where one applies mindfulness at a given moment. If you are focusing on the eye consciousness for example, you may be able to integrate that and be in rigpa in your eye consciousness. With this idea in mind, one may consider the various methods for recognizing rigpa to work on the same assumption. Then again, the above quote perhaps would be more correctly read as an instruction not to focus on vision but on nothing in particular. But the question still stands.

As I understand, it is not possible to be mindful of everything simultaneously. For example, you may be mindful of your vision, but doesn't that mean that at that moment you are not really mindful of your hearing?

Is there a connection between rigpa and mindfulness in this regard, where rigpa is found in the specific experience only, or is rigpa all-encompassing? I have never seen this discussed before.

I am inclined to think that rigpa is not tied to mindfulness in this way, but that would probably mean that it is possible to fall in a ditch because you did not notice it while being in rigpa.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 22nd, 2017 at 11:09 PM
Title: Re: Empowerment question Krodha Kali / Dudjom Tersar
Content:
Grigoris said:
This I can understand.  So since the mandala is different one would need to initiated into the specific mandala. Okay.

As for the practice and mantra, it makes sense that one would need a lung.

But I am talking more from the angle of the essential nature of the Yidam.

Malcolm wrote:
The Nyingma view is that if you receive a Shitro empowerments, then all you really need for any deity is the lung and khrid. Sakya, Kagyu (there is a lot a variation depending on Nyingma influenced), and Gelug will generally maintain that to practice two different lineage of same deity, you need two empowerments.

KrisW said:
Is the tonwang of the namcho shitro sufficient, or are you mentioning a specific shitro empowerment?

Malcolm wrote:
In ChNN's system Dzogchen transmission is all you need, and then the lung and khrid for a given deity.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 22nd, 2017 at 12:33 PM
Title: Re: We are a Kali Yuga culture
Content:
Strive said:
Kali yuga is nonsense. we live in more peaceful time than ever before in human history. and average human age is increasing too.

Malcolm wrote:
Uh huh, sure.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 22nd, 2017 at 8:52 AM
Title: Re: Tibetan Zen
Content:
Sherab said:
I could not find your quotation in Sutta Nipata.


Malcolm wrote:
It is in the sutta where someone asks the Buddha what happened to a given arhat who had died.

Sherab said:
The closest I could find is this "For when a person is inwardly quiet, there is no where a self can be found; where then could a non-self be found?"  Tuvataka Sutta. It is likely that you made a mistake.


Malcolm wrote:
No, I did not make a mistake.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 22nd, 2017 at 12:07 AM
Title: Re: Successful empowerment and conferral of samaya?
Content:


Minobu said:
actually there are three questions.

1)why cannot  can one make Buddha Mahavairocana  their guru , even though you cannot meet them in person.
2)
so one can never make a Buddha their Guru, or just Buddha Mahavairocana  as your guru ?

3)
I heard different Tibetans Lamas met with Buddha goddess Tara, Buddha Manjushri, Buddha Avalokiteshvara and received teachings from Them...so is this myth?


Malcolm wrote:
No, because you cannot meet them in person. There is no way they can give you transmission.

You also cannot make the Buddha your guru, since he passed 2500 years ago.

as to three, these lamas were highly realized, but even they began with human lamas.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 21st, 2017 at 11:36 PM
Title: Re: Wangdu prayer flags, and new vs old termas
Content:
pemachophel said:
Loppon,

When you say your teacher (H.H. Kunzang Dechen Dorje?) told you it's better to practice newer terma because there is less chance the lineage has been damaged by broken samaya, are we talking about one's own particular lineage or all existent lineages of a terma cycle?

Malcolm wrote:
He named Longchen Nyinthig, Chetsun Nyinthig, and so on as examples of older termas where the lineage has been weakened by broken samaya.

pemachophel said:
IOW, if one lineage of a particular cycle has been damaged, does that affect all lineages of that cycle?

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, I am pretty certain that is what he meant.

pemachophel said:
Or, if one knows their particular lineage of a particular terma cycle has not been damaged by broken samaya, is one "good to go?" For instance, one's particular lineage of Lonchen Nyingthig since you (or your Teacher) used that as an example.

I ask this because one frequently hears Tibetans say that their particular lineage of this or that terma is "special," "pure," "unbroken," etc.

Malcolm wrote:
He was pretty clear that the shorter the lineage the better.

Of course, this does not mean that these older teachings are worthless, of course not. But if you can receive teachings from an authentic terton, directly or from someone like Thrinley Norbu, Dzongsar, Chatral Rinpoche, Garab Doje, Khenpo Lodo Tsultrim, Khenpo Namdrol, etc., who received them directly, it is better.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 21st, 2017 at 11:27 PM
Title: Re: Successful empowerment and conferral of samaya?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
You can't meet Mahavairocana in person.

Losal Samten said:
As an aside, can 8th bhumi bodhisattvas meet the mahasambhogakaya, or only regular sambhogakayas?

Malcolm wrote:
They meet whoever is in Akanistha


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 21st, 2017 at 11:12 PM
Title: Re: Empowerment question Krodha Kali / Dudjom Tersar
Content:


heart said:
I never heard anyone, except you, say this. Do you have a source for this?

/magnus


Malcolm wrote:
Well, Ayang Rinpoche mentioned this in a retreat. Bakha Tulku reaffirmed it when he gave us the Guhyagarbha empowerment, since I asked him about it.

heart said:
Maybe I don't understand but are you saying that if you have the Shitro empowerment you don't need a Khrodha Kali empowerment to practice Khrodha Kali, for example in the Dudjom tradition?

/magnus

Malcolm wrote:
According to my understanding, if you have a major Shitro empowerment, it covers all deities because all yidams are included in the 100 peaceful and wrathful deities. Of course it is better to have the wang, but it is not completely necessary.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 21st, 2017 at 11:07 PM
Title: Re: Successful empowerment and conferral of samaya?
Content:
Minobu said:
how does one go about making Buddha Mahavairocana one's guru without any human contact, or human guru?
It would seem like the best option , if it is available.

Malcolm wrote:
You can't.

Minobu said:
why?

Malcolm wrote:
You can't meet Mahavairocana in person.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 21st, 2017 at 11:06 PM
Title: Re: Wrathful Black Hayagriva
Content:
Toenail said:
Lung is a tibetan invention.


Malcolm wrote:
No, in fact it is grounded in how Vedic texts were passed on.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 21st, 2017 at 11:54 AM
Title: Re: New Longchenpa translations from Eric Fry-Miller
Content:
antbird said:
Hello Friends, have some one ordered here recently successfully?
No respond, no book so far...

heart said:
I also ordered and got nothing. Pretty bad.

/magnus

Malcolm wrote:
Some people when through this before with eric.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 21st, 2017 at 7:17 AM
Title: Re: Empowerment question Krodha Kali / Dudjom Tersar
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
The Nyingma view is that if you receive a Shitro empowerments, then all you really need for any deity is the lung and khrid.

heart said:
I never heard anyone, except you, say this. Do you have a source for this?

/magnus


Malcolm wrote:
Well, Ayang Rinpoche mentioned this in a retreat. Bakha Tulku reaffirmed it when he gave us the Guhyagarbha empowerment, since I asked him about it.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 21st, 2017 at 7:09 AM
Title: Re: Tibetan Zen
Content:
Sherab said:
I see.  You are speaking from ultimate truth perspective.  That is fine.  But it still does not mean that once cessation occurs, there is nothing left.  From Cula-sunnata Sutta:

"Thus he regards it as empty of whatever is not there. Whatever remains, he discerns as present: 'There is this.' And so this, his entry into emptiness, accords with actuality, is undistorted in meaning, pure — superior & unsurpassed."


Malcolm wrote:
There is "no existence in a cessation of which we can describe its nonexistence" (Sutta Nipatta). Thus there is nothing left over, positive or negative.

Sherab said:
I could not find your quotation in Sutta Nipata.


Malcolm wrote:
It is in the sutta where someone asks the Buddha what happened to a given arhat who had died.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 21st, 2017 at 6:30 AM
Title: Re: New Longchenpa translations from Eric Fry-Miller
Content:
antbird said:
Hello Friends, have some one ordered here recently successfully?
No respond, no book so far...


Malcolm wrote:
As far as I know he has been at Tara Mandala translating for their Drupchen.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 21st, 2017 at 6:28 AM
Title: Re: Successful empowerment and conferral of samaya?
Content:


Malcolm wrote:
Everything is included in the guru — this is why one's choice of guru is so crucial, and why the importance of choosing a qualified one is paramount.

Minobu said:
how does one go about making Buddha Mahavairocana one's guru without any human contact, or human guru?
It would seem like the best option , if it is available.

Malcolm wrote:
You can't.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 21st, 2017 at 1:56 AM
Title: Re: Empowerment question Krodha Kali / Dudjom Tersar
Content:
michaelb said:
The two main Dudjom Tersar Drolo practices discovered by Dudjom Rinpoche have the same lineage, the same mandala (pretty much), and the same mantra, but require different empowerments. Always wondered why but if it's like that with one Dudjom Tersar yidam, I imagine it would be the same for others. The two tersar Vajrakilaya practices also require separate empowerments, but they are more different than the two Drolo practices.


Malcolm wrote:
With respect to those two Drollo wangs, one is more related to mahāyoga and the other is more related to anuyoga.

When I received this from Ngagoa Yeshe Dorje, however, he combined the two empowerments together.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 21st, 2017 at 12:46 AM
Title: Re: Empowerment question Krodha Kali / Dudjom Tersar
Content:
Grigoris said:
This I can understand.  So since the mandala is different one would need to initiated into the specific mandala. Okay.

As for the practice and mantra, it makes sense that one would need a lung.

But I am talking more from the angle of the essential nature of the Yidam.

Malcolm wrote:
The Nyingma view is that if you receive a Shitro empowerments, then all you really need for any deity is the lung and khrid. Sakya, Kagyu (there is a lot a variation depending on Nyingma influenced), and Gelug will generally maintain that to practice two different lineage of same deity, you need two empowerments.

Grigoris said:
Thank you for this clarification.

Malcolm wrote:
Norbu Rinpoche and Kunzang Dechen Lingpa's view (and other Dzogchen masters) is that if you have received Dzogchen transmission, all you need is the lung and khrid, you do not even need a formal wang. Since Dzogchen transmission is the essence of all empowerments.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 21st, 2017 at 12:30 AM
Title: Re: Wangdu prayer flags, and new vs old termas
Content:


Malcolm wrote:
With respect to older termas, and traditions, the problem is mainly that accumulation of broken samaya in the lineage overtime. On the other hand, if you receive an older terma or teaching on Lamdre for example, from a highly realized person, then it is the same as receiving a fresh terma. However, it is axiomatic that a terton is a highly realized person.

pael said:
How to know who is terton? Is The 41st Sakya Trizin terton?

Malcolm wrote:
HH Sakya Trizin, I have heard, has revealed some termas. But I have no confirmation of this for sure. He is the reincarnation of Apam Terton.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 21st, 2017 at 12:15 AM
Title: Re: Empowerment question Krodha Kali / Dudjom Tersar
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
The mantras are different, the mandalas are different, the lineage is different, and the teaching is different.

Grigoris said:
This I can understand.  So since the mandala is different one would need to initiated into the specific mandala. Okay.

As for the practice and mantra, it makes sense that one would need a lung.

But I am talking more from the angle of the essential nature of the Yidam.

Malcolm wrote:
The Nyingma view is that if you receive a Shitro empowerments, then all you really need for any deity is the lung and khrid. Sakya, Kagyu (there is a lot a variation depending on Nyingma influenced), and Gelug will generally maintain that to practice two different lineage of same deity, you need two empowerments.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 20th, 2017 at 11:39 PM
Title: Re: Wangdu prayer flags, and new vs old termas
Content:
michaelb said:
I was thinking about this in relation to practising a yidam like Vajrakilaya. So, supposing one's yidam is Vajrakilaya, would it be better to practice a recent terma Phurba practice like that of Khenpo Jigme Phuntsok rather than Dudjom Tersar, Putri Regphung, and better to practice Putri Regphung rather than Namchak Pudri, and better to practice Namchak Pudri rather than Longchen Nyingthig's Vajrakilaya, and better to practice Longchen Nyingthig's Vajrakilaya rather than Jigme Lingpa's Phurba Gyu lug or Khon lug Phurba?

Surely, age isn't the only deciding factor? Khenpo Jigme Phuntsok's Phurba Gurkukma is quite short and unelaborate compared to, say, Namchak Pudri. Maybe that would be better as a main practice as it includes lots of other stuff?

Any thoughts would be gratefully received.

Malcolm wrote:
Any teaching you can receive directly from an authentic terton will have the most blessings, especially if they are still living. Any recent terma which has as short alineage as possible will have more blessings than a longer one. For example, these days people practice Putri Repung as the sadhana, on the basis of Namchag Putri, which has many instructions.

With respect to older termas, and traditions, the problem is mainly that accumulation of broken samaya in the lineage overtime. On the other hand, if you receive an older terma or teaching on Lamdre for example, from a highly realized person, then it is the same as receiving a fresh terma. However, it is axiomatic that a terton is a highly realized person.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 20th, 2017 at 11:33 PM
Title: Re: Empowerment question Krodha Kali / Dudjom Tersar
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
No. It does not. The lineage is completely different.

Grigoris said:
Since when are Yidam and their activities lineage specific?  Is the Dudjom Tersar Thorma Nagmo a different Throma Nagmo to the one Pepijn received?  Does this hold true just for Throma Nagmo or for every Yidam empowerment that is not "shared"?

Seems sort of weird to me...

Malcolm wrote:
The mantras are different, the mandalas are different, the lineage is different, and the teaching is different.

For example, on the basis of receiving Hevajra in Sakya, one cannot practice the Ngok lugs tradition from Marpa and vice versa. Same with Vajrayogini. Receiving Vajrayogini in Kagyu, does not qualify you to practice Naro Khachö in Sakya, even though the mantra is identical.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 20th, 2017 at 10:52 PM
Title: Re: Empowerment question Krodha Kali / Dudjom Tersar
Content:
Bodhi Bhadra said:
Hi there,

I got a question: I received the empowerment of Krodha Kali / Troma Nagmo during the Dam NGAG DZO empowerments (CHOD-Zhije) that I received from DKR. Now I am mostly practicing Dudjom Tersar and was thinking does this empowerment also service as a basis for the practice of Troma Nakmo of Dudjom Lingpa?

Thank you,

Pepijn

Malcolm wrote:
No. It does not. The lineage is completely different.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 20th, 2017 at 1:30 AM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:
Norwegian said:
Greg, it's really stupid behavior to post a spoiler from an episode that hasn't officially aired yet on HBO. The episode in question was a leak.

Virgo said:
Honestly, you don't have him on ignore? What the FRACK!????!!!  Tht is SO CRAZY FRACKIN' BULLSHIT that you don't/ end of the world.

Kevin



Malcolm wrote:
Well it looks like this thread has truly run its course.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 20th, 2017 at 1:26 AM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Norbu rinpoche is the most criticized teacher in all of Tibetan Buddhism, and his students also. We are used to it.

Calling someone a bore is not an attack, btw, it is an opinion.

Grigoris said:
I am sure you can justify it to yourself in any number of ways, but your "opinion" is a personal attack on Rinpoche's character and personality and, as such, serves no positive purpose.  Like I said:  if somebody else did the same thing to Norbu Rinpoche...



Malcolm wrote:
You are definitely entitled to your opinion.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 20th, 2017 at 12:44 AM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:


tiagolps said:
Of course, I'm not disagreeing, but DJKR likes to provoke..

Malcolm wrote:
He is not provocative, he is a tiresome bore, yada yada yada, always going off on the same point, like a scratched cd.

Grigoris said:
Dude, relax, you are talking about the teacher of a number of people here.  If somebody launched personal attacks about your teacher's personality and style, you would have a hissy fit.  So chill out.

Malcolm wrote:
Norbu rinpoche is the most criticized teacher in all of Tibetan Buddhism, and his students also. We are used to it.

Calling someone a bore is not an attack, btw, it is an opinion.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 19th, 2017 at 11:56 PM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:
dzogchungpa said:
BTW, where is your teacher Namkhai's response?

Malcolm wrote:
Does he need to have one?

dzogchungpa said:
Well, he's kind of a member of the Tibetan Buddhist stratosphere. His guidance would be quite helpful at this time, don't you think?

Malcolm wrote:
Maybe for someone else, I don't need it though. I have my own mind and do not depend on my gurus for my political and social convictions.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 19th, 2017 at 11:23 PM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
And what about Dzongsar's own preconceived ideas? Or are we to assume he doesn't have any? It's all pure compassion untainted with any ignorance at all?

dzogchungpa said:
Well, you have to admit, he did a little better than:
Malcolm wrote:
Sogyal's realization is a nonissue. All that matters is whether he has any civil or criminal liability. The rest of it is irrelevant.

dzogchungpa said:
BTW, where is your teacher Namkhai's response?

Malcolm wrote:
Does he need to have one? Basically, Dzongsar's students need to understand that if their guru is going to criticize others, he is opening himself up for criticism in return.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 19th, 2017 at 11:22 PM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:
heart said:
I find this relevant: http://levekunst.com/club-nondualite/

EPK said:
There is no need for someone else to cut down your ego, since there never was an ego to find anywhere.


Malcolm wrote:
Indeed.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 19th, 2017 at 11:06 PM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:


tiagolps said:
Of course, I'm not disagreeing, but DJKR likes to provoke..

Malcolm wrote:
He is not provocative, he is a tiresome bore, yada yada yada, always going off on the same point, like a scratched cd.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 19th, 2017 at 10:51 PM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:


tiagolps said:
I don't think DJKR's text was as bad as this makes it out to seem:


I mean, was her faith in the dharma really only dependent on one Rinpoche's words?

Grigoris said:
On the misunderstanding of one Rinpoche's words?

tiagolps said:
Exactly, the way he wrote that text is no different than the way he writes everywhere else. He evens speaks like that, all one has to do is hear one of his free online dharma talks, so it's not like he made the text confusing or long on purpose.

And the funny thing is, he warned that "readers of the New Yorks Times" would "pick and choose the bits and pieces that fit in with their own preconceived ideas". And thats exacly what she did in that one.

Malcolm wrote:
Really, just readers of the NYT? You mean there aren't tons of folks lining up behind Dzongsar, picking and choosing the bits that fit in with their own preconceived ideas. And what about Dzongsar's own preconceived ideas? Or are we to assume he doesn't have any? It's all pure compassion untainted with any ignorance at all?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 19th, 2017 at 9:35 PM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Vajrayāna fundamentalism is a real problem when people are being physically, sexually, and emotionally abused by their teachers. Fortunately, Migyur Rinpoche and HH Dalai Lama have shown that not everyone in the Tibetan Buddhist stratosphere is more concerned with maintaining appearances than student welfare.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 19th, 2017 at 9:10 AM
Title: Re: Tibetan Zen
Content:



CedarTree said:
How does an Arahant come out of this to continue to Buddhahood?

or

What comes out of this to continue to Buddhahood?

Malcolm wrote:
Let's not conflate Hinayāna with Mahāyāna. I was responding to Sherab using a Hinayāna text to rebut a point he made using a Hinayāna text.

CedarTree said:
Thanks for that clarification Malcolm, I thought you were coming from a Mahayana context.

I would still be interested to know what of an Arahant or how the Arahant comes back from Nirvana in a Mahayana context?  I have never seen this discussed much only that it happens on the development towards Buddhahood to which Tibetan Buddhism in particular usually has a great corpus of understanding developed versus Zen (Zen I believe simply has not developed this area of development to nearly the degree of Tibetan understanding).

Malcolm wrote:
Arhats mistaken an absorption of cessation, nirodhasamapati, for nirvana. They remain in this forever unless they aroused by a buddha. This is found in the Lankasūtra, etc.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 19th, 2017 at 7:44 AM
Title: Re: Tibetan Zen
Content:
Sherab said:
I see.  You are speaking from ultimate truth perspective.  That is fine.  But it still does not mean that once cessation occurs, there is nothing left.  From Cula-sunnata Sutta:

"Thus he regards it as empty of whatever is not there. Whatever remains, he discerns as present: 'There is this.' And so this, his entry into emptiness, accords with actuality, is undistorted in meaning, pure — superior & unsurpassed."


Malcolm wrote:
There is "no existence in a cessation of which we can describe its nonexistence" (Sutta Nipatta). Thus there is nothing left over, positive or negative.


CedarTree said:
How does an Arahant come out of this to continue to Buddhahood?

or

What comes out of this to continue to Buddhahood?

Malcolm wrote:
Let's not conflate Hinayāna with Mahāyāna. I was responding to Sherab using a Hinayāna text to rebut a point he made using a Hinayāna text.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 19th, 2017 at 7:09 AM
Title: Re: Tibetan Zen
Content:
Sherab said:
Are you saying that there is no annihilation of the causes for the arising of afflictions?  That there is no reason whatsoever for the absence of a cause for arising?  And that cessation being a mere absence of <whatever> just happens to be?

Malcolm wrote:
Correct. Otherwise cessations would be conditioned, but they are not. When emptiness is truly seen the causes for samsara just disappear. That is the point.

Sherab said:
I see.  You are speaking from ultimate truth perspective.  That is fine.  But it still does not mean that once cessation occurs, there is nothing left.  From Cula-sunnata Sutta:

"Thus he regards it as empty of whatever is not there. Whatever remains, he discerns as present: 'There is this.' And so this, his entry into emptiness, accords with actuality, is undistorted in meaning, pure — superior & unsurpassed."


Malcolm wrote:
There is "no existence in a cessation of which we can describe its nonexistence" (Sutta Nipatta). Thus there is nothing left over, positive or negative.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 19th, 2017 at 4:32 AM
Title: Re: Individuality, Nonduality, Anatta, Nirvana
Content:


Wayfarer said:
As far as there being 'agents' - clearly there are agents, otherwise, there would be no Dharmawheel, as all the entries are written by people. It's the agent's 'wishing to experience enlightenment' which is the issue. So long as there is the thought of 'something to attain', then that is not realising emptiness.

Malcolm wrote:
There are no agents. There are only actions. This is covered in the refutation of moving movers in chapter two of the MMK.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 19th, 2017 at 12:23 AM
Title: Re: Non-Duality in Dzogchen vs Advaita Vedanta
Content:
Anonymous X said:
I'm not trying to be rude to you, but you haven't had either realization of Avaita or Dzogchen yet you speak as if you know them intimately. You cannot judge anything using conceptual imagery. Read the poems again, please. There is a message there for you, and all of us!

Malcolm wrote:
Neither have you, as far as I know.

Anonymous X said:
That was the message.


Malcolm wrote:
Ezcellent. So we are all this:


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 18th, 2017 at 11:34 PM
Title: Re: Newly-translated Patrul Rinpoche Chod text
Content:



Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 18th, 2017 at 11:29 PM
Title: Re: Successful empowerment and conferral of samaya?
Content:
dzogchungpa said:
Within the Buddhist Vajrayana context, how can there be a samaya bond to a root guru, if you haven’t yet found the true nature of mind?


Malcolm wrote:
This is definitely a Dzogtchen point of view. Dzongsar's point of view seems more informed by Sakya, which means that any major empowerment you take creates that sort of bond.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 18th, 2017 at 11:20 PM
Title: Re: Non-Duality in Dzogchen vs Advaita Vedanta
Content:
Anonymous X said:
I'm not trying to be rude to you, but you haven't had either realization of Avaita or Dzogchen yet you speak as if you know them intimately. You cannot judge anything using conceptual imagery. Read the poems again, please. There is a message there for you, and all of us!

Malcolm wrote:
Neither have you, as far as I know.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 18th, 2017 at 11:13 PM
Title: Re: Successful empowerment and conferral of samaya?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
My remark assumes you are following a qualified guru.

Grigoris said:
Need I point out that people believe all sorts of nutcases are qualified gurus because there is n't like a guru university with a guru degree and postgrad that you can check on.  A person that is qualified in one lineage may not be considered qualified in another. Etc...

Malcolm wrote:
The qualifications of the guru are mentioned in many tantras.

And in fact there are guru universities, called shedras. Graduates of them are called loppons, khenpos, and geshes.

My advice to beginners is to always seek teachings from lineage heads, and then work out from there.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 18th, 2017 at 10:57 PM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Oh, and BTW, bringing up Naropa and Tilopa, etc. is bullshit. Please stop doing it. The twelves trials are just stories, didactic stories to show what a huge egotist Naropa was. They doubtless have some basis, but they are exaggerated way beyond anything anyone can reasonably accept as anything other than Indian/Tibetan dramatic hyperbole.

tiagolps said:
BTW, aside from his relationship with Naropa, how do you feel about Tilopa's famous stories about him eating live fish and frogs and his ability to liberate the consciousness of each animal?

Malcolm wrote:
This is a common trope about Mahāsiddhas. Is it literal or a didactic story? Don't know, I wasn't there. But I think it can be better understood as a symbol.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 18th, 2017 at 10:07 PM
Title: Re: Dharma Fellowship
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
This is bold:
For centuries this simple and direct mode of meditation has been taught within the formal context of traditional Buddhism. Natural Mind Meditation is also known as Mahamudra or Dzogchen. Certain forms of Chinese Ch'an or Japanese Zen are the same as Natural Mind Meditation.
http://www.naturalmindmeditation.com/school

At this point, there is also no direct link to Connie Mitchell's profile anywhere in the site. No direct link to Devenish either.

tiagolps said:
hum Nevertheless, it has been our ambition to extract, repackage and present the essence of these precious teachings in a manner completely f ree of religious belief or dogma. The religiously unaffiliated and affiliated, alike, benefit equally from this curriculum.

Malcolm wrote:
Yup, new age bullshit.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 18th, 2017 at 9:59 PM
Title: Re: Dharma Fellowship
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
This is bold:
For centuries this simple and direct mode of meditation has been taught within the formal context of traditional Buddhism. Natural Mind Meditation is also known as Mahamudra or Dzogchen. Certain forms of Chinese Ch'an or Japanese Zen are the same as Natural Mind Meditation.
http://www.naturalmindmeditation.com/school

At this point, there is also no direct link to Connie Mitchell's profile anywhere in the site. No direct link to Devenish either. You have to dig a bit through past http://www.naturalmindmeditation.com/who-we-are.

Seems very new agey, all this talk of octaves,

BTW, you can the first three octaves today for the low, low, price $999 (Canadian I hope).

Has the best marketing for westerners too, "A Natural Mind Meditation teacher doesn't just decide to teach. She or he is "installed" to teach," the promise of a career path always works for westerners.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 18th, 2017 at 9:46 PM
Title: Re: Successful empowerment and conferral of samaya?
Content:
Vasana said:
I really think it's as simple as Malcolm said earlier which was roughly something like  'If you have confidence you've received it, then you did.'

Grigoris said:
I don't think it is that easy:  what if the lama did not have the training to give the empowerment?  The realisation?  What if the empowerment procedure/text was not followed correctly?  What if it was not an actual empowerment but something made up by some charlatan?  Etc...

Not simple at all.

Malcolm wrote:
My remark assumes you are following a qualified guru.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 18th, 2017 at 9:43 PM
Title: Re: Successful empowerment and conferral of samaya?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Lamas are not deity impresarios.

smcj said:
Impresarios? No.
Conduit? Eh, maybe.
Embodiment? Supposedly.
Sambogakaya Service Provider? Too cutesy.

How would you put it?

Malcolm wrote:
Everything is included in the guru — this is why one's choice of guru is so crucial, and why the importance of choosing a qualified one is paramount.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 18th, 2017 at 9:16 PM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:
buddhagirl said:
Thanks i'll look at it tonight/ over the weekend. Though if it's just more preaching, shoving his peculiar, partly medieval world view down our throats, I shan't be impressed.

Punya said:
Entirely up to you. You said you were searching for information. If you start a new thread we can discuss "the peculiar, partly medieval world view" thingy too.

buddhagirl said:
This is off topic, i know.  The funny thing is that, while everyone's telling me to start a new thread, I was already entertaining an idea today for a General Dharma subject, 'Dharma Parenting, it's not as easy as you think'. Having recently stumbled across the Instagram posts of the son of a certain lama, today he's posted some rather surprising pics. Think wads of money, a splif (i believe that's the stoner terminology). Ok, i just felt like sharing that -- sometimes the apple does fall quite far from the tree, it seems.

Malcolm wrote:
Link?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 18th, 2017 at 9:16 PM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:


buddhagirl said:
Hey Norwegian, i don't "completely misunderstand"!!! Please at least follow the genesis of this sub-topic so that you understand - Malcolm has, quite rightly, mentioned patriarchy a number of times in this thread, while i made a passing reference to feminism and was told i was off topic. And please stop telling me what to do! No wonder there aren't many women around here! Phew!

Malcolm wrote:
I think you misunderstood my point. I was suggesting that a wide ranging discussion of patriarchy was beyond the scope of this thread. I was not suggesting that a focused discussion of how patriarchal tendencies in our global culture are relevant to the Sogyal debacle is off topic.

buddhagirl said:
Yep. OK. For the record, what i wrote re DKR "...and has put down feminists in earlier talks/writings." OK, end of story.

Malcolm wrote:
Yup, he sure has.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 18th, 2017 at 10:15 AM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:


buddhagirl said:
In a discussion largely triggered by Sogyal's misogynistic treatment of women there is nothing off topic about raising the topics of patriarchy/sexism/feminism, as your own frequent mentions of patriarchy in this thread attest.  And i barely touched on 'feminism' in any case. So the need to shoo me off seems pretty sexist. Irony much?

Norwegian said:
No, you completely misunderstand.

The creation of a specific dedicated thread to that particular topic can allow one to explore more thoroughly (and in depth) that subject matter, where the space for that issue is 100% dedicated to it, instead of the primary subject matter discussed here, and some of the related ones.

The question then is, if you're really interested in an extended discussion on that topic, why are you not making such a thread? You've had plenty of time to do so, but so far nothing.

Just make a thread with a good title and opening post where you present the issue you want to discuss, and your thoughts on it, and I'm sure it'll gain traction.

buddhagirl said:
Hey Norwegian, i don't "completely misunderstand"!!! Please at least follow the genesis of this sub-topic so that you understand - Malcolm has, quite rightly, mentioned patriarchy a number of times in this thread, while i made a passing reference to feminism and was told i was off topic. And please stop telling me what to do! No wonder there aren't many women around here! Phew!

Malcolm wrote:
I think you misunderstood my point. I was suggesting that a wide ranging discussion of patriarchy was beyond the scope of this thread. I was not suggesting that a focused discussion of how patriarchal tendencies in our global culture are relevant to the Sogyal debacle is off topic.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 18th, 2017 at 10:03 AM
Title: Re: Successful empowerment and conferral of samaya?
Content:
Inge said:
What is the english word for samaya?

Malcolm wrote:
"Samaya" basically means "coming to a mutual understanding , agreement , compact , covenant , treaty , contract , arrangement , engagement , stipulation , conditions of agreement, terms."

It is rooted in a notion of contractual obligation which results when two people agree on something. In this case, before a guru offers an empowerment, the disciple has to agree to some terms in order to enter the mandala for which the teacher is giving an empowerment. The teacher also has obligations which he or she must fulfill in order to be able to offer than empowerment.

This is the base level definition of samaya. There are much deeper understandings, like the four unbreakable samayas of the Great Perfection.

Lhasa said:
Is refuge with that Lama necessary for truly receiving an empowerment?

Malcolm wrote:
Lamas are not deity impresarios.  When one takes any empowerment refuge in the guru comes before refuge in the Three Jewels.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 18th, 2017 at 9:51 AM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:
dzogchungpa said:
Yes, any more examples? Two instances is not enough to justify the use of 'often'. If you come up with a few more I will downgrade my bullshit rating.

Malcolm wrote:
No one is more blind than a person in love.

dzogchungpa said:
Still waiting for more examples, friend.

Malcolm wrote:
Two are sufficient.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 18th, 2017 at 9:28 AM
Title: Re: Tibetan Zen
Content:
Sherab said:
Cessation is an annihilation.  It is an annihilation of the drivers/causes of samsara in an individual.  And only what belongs to the relative can be annihilated.

Malcolm wrote:
Cessation is not annihilation. Analytical cessation is the absence of the arising of afflictions which continued birth in samsara due supermundane insight on the path of seeing and meditation. Nonanalytical cessation is is simple absence of a cause for arising, like a burnt seed.

Neither are annihilation.

Sherab said:
Are you saying that there is no annihilation of the causes for the arising of afflictions?  That there is no reason whatsoever for the absence of a cause for arising?  And that cessation being a mere absence of <whatever> just happens to be?

Malcolm wrote:
Correct. Otherwise cessations would be conditioned, but they are not. When emptiness is truly seen the causes for samsara just disappear. That is the point.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 18th, 2017 at 7:56 AM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:


dzogchungpa said:
Is that actually true? I've listened to and heard a fair amount of his stuff and I don't recall him using that word very often, or even at all. He's certainly not afraid to use 'shit' and its derivatives but I honestly don't think he says "Such and such is bullshit." very often. So, I daresay, this comment of yours is 100% bullshit.

Norwegian said:
Some random Dzongsar Khyentse: [...]If it is an interfaith religious conference, again I have to be hypocritical and I have to sort be careful, oh ya ya all religion are same. You know like everything leads to the heaven and all of that. But that’s actually a bullshit. Because it is not.
I’m also very wary of the way too many teachers (even those belonging to Krishnamurti’s organization) extract just one aspect of Buddha’s teachings, bury the Buddhist jargon, then claim that everything they say is their own revelation. It’s complete bullshit! Every word they say can be traced back to the sutras and tantras. So never forget that these ‘new age’ teachers merely focus on a single point that already exists in Buddhadharma, then present it as their own.

dzogchungpa said:
Yes, any more examples? Two instances is not enough to justify the use of 'often'. If you come up with a few more I will downgrade my bullshit rating.

Malcolm wrote:
No one is more blind than a person in love.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 18th, 2017 at 7:51 AM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Dzongsar likes using the word "bullshit," he does so often to describe this and that.

dzogchungpa said:
Is that actually true? I've listened to and heard a fair amount of his stuff and I don't recall him using that word very often, or even at all. He's certainly not afraid to use 'shit' and its derivatives but I honestly don't think he says "Such and such is bullshit." very often. So, I daresay, this comment of yours is 100% bullshit.

Malcolm wrote:
Google.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 18th, 2017 at 7:44 AM
Title: Re: sex with prostitute
Content:
Strive said:
that is horrible. the hookers here where i live charge lots of money and live expensive lifestyle. it seems they would rather have sex for quick cash rather then make honest living for themselves. maybe u want to paint those women as victims cuz of patriarchy or whatever lol but it would seem like an insult to the successful women who thru strong work ethics live honest lives. i feel like most women are smart to be responsible human beings to make their own choices. it is same thing with me as a man. do i want to work hard in construction or factory for 12 hour shifts or take the easy way and start to sell drugs to make cash quickly? the choice and responsibility is mine

Malcolm wrote:
The lack of empathy is palpable.

Strive said:
stop your sexist view telling the women they are all helpless victims

Malcolm wrote:
As I said, the lack of empathy is more than palpable.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 18th, 2017 at 5:30 AM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:


Malcolm wrote:
If you have to make an effort to have pure vision, you are already screwed.

Adamantine said:
Well DJKR's explanation in his FB post re: pure vision of the Guru as you might see them in his examples "appear to be" drowning or forgetting something
seems to require a good amount of effort, and possibly cognitive dissonance. . although that seems standard practice in Vajrayana pre-Atiyoga view.

Malcolm wrote:
It is a misapplication of the principle.

For example, if I am a very mature student, deeply devoted to my teacher, I will see everything that happens to me as the kindness of my guru. I will understand everything he or she does, whether fart, shit, belch, rant, rave, die, and so on, as a Dharma teaching for me personally.

But it is not realistic to expect that anyone is going to develop that kind of devotion to anyone in a day, a year, a decade, or even many lifetimes.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 18th, 2017 at 5:21 AM
Title: Re: Successful empowerment and conferral of samaya?
Content:
Inge said:
What is the english word for samaya?

Malcolm wrote:
"Samaya" basically means "coming to a mutual understanding , agreement , compact , covenant , treaty , contract , arrangement , engagement , stipulation , conditions of agreement, terms."

It is rooted in a notion of contractual obligation which results when two people agree on something. In this case, before a guru offers an empowerment, the disciple has to agree to some terms in order to enter the mandala for which the teacher is giving an empowerment. The teacher also has obligations which he or she must fulfill in order to be able to offer than empowerment.

This is the base level definition of samaya. There are much deeper understandings, like the four unbreakable samayas of the Great Perfection.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 18th, 2017 at 5:12 AM
Title: Re: sex with prostitute
Content:
shaunc said:
But I've made a living and supported a family working as a labourer and my wife has helped me working as a shop assistant and cleaner. It's basically just people that won't/cant accept responsibility for their own poor choices.

Malcolm wrote:
This is incredibly wrong-headed, worthy of being repeated by Fox News.

Most prostitutes are forced into prostitution while young teenagers, this is why it is referred to as "human trafficking." The average age of entry into prostitution in the United States is between 12-14.

Strive said:
that is horrible. the hookers here where i live charge lots of money and live expensive lifestyle. it seems they would rather have sex for quick cash rather then make honest living for themselves. maybe u want to paint those women as victims cuz of patriarchy or whatever lol but it would seem like an insult to the successful women who thru strong work ethics live honest lives. i feel like most women are smart to be responsible human beings to make their own choices. it is same thing with me as a man. do i want to work hard in construction or factory for 12 hour shifts or take the easy way and start to sell drugs to make cash quickly? the choice and responsibility is mine

Malcolm wrote:
The lack of empathy is palpable.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 18th, 2017 at 5:06 AM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:
Johnny Dangerous said:
Pure/Impure Vision is a Vajrayana thing, and it strikes me as an incongruent model as far as the Dzogchen view goes as taught by ChNN.

tomamundsen said:
That would be interesting. I hadn't thought about it that way before, but I guess perhaps it makes sense.

Malcolm wrote:
Impure vision is trekchö; pure vision is thögal. However, with the latter there is nothing you have to transform. You just have to get really, really, good at integrating with impure vision (trekchö) before you are generally given instructions (thögal) on how to allow pure vision to naturally unfold right before your very eyes without making any effort to transform anything or even entertaining thoughts such as "this is pure."

If you have to make an effort to have pure vision, you are already screwed.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 18th, 2017 at 4:14 AM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:
Punya said:
Everyone is deserving of respect, regardless of who they are or where they come from. Being a Buddhist teacher certainly does not entitle one to more respect than anyone else.
Yes and no. I guess we'll have to disagree on this one. If I was standing somewhere and a bomb went off I know who I would be protecting first.

Malcolm wrote:
Small children.



Punya said:
So, in my view, Buddhist teachers are more precious than the rest of us (because they carry the thread) and therefore should be treated as such.

Malcolm wrote:
No one is more precious than anyone else. Either we are all precious, or no one is.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 18th, 2017 at 3:20 AM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:
Punya said:
If you read Aryadeva's 400 verses you will discover there the Madyamaka refutation of family lineages.
Are you making a distinction between lineage and family lineage, Malcolm?

HHDL has said:
Within the context of Tibetan Buddhism, the importance of lineage extends far beyond the ordinary sense of a particular line of inheritance or descent. Lineage is a sacred trust through which the integrity of Buddha's teachings is preserved intact as it is transmitted from one generation to the next. The vital link through which the spiritual tradition is nourished and maintained is the profound connection between an enlightened master and perfectly devoted disciple.
Are you disagreeing with this?

Malcolm wrote:
I think Āryadeva's rebuttal of lineage can apply to Buddhist lineages as well, especially Vajrayāna lineages. The longer the lineage, the more chance that someone in the lineage broke samaya. This is akin to a king being unsure of who fathered his son and heir, which is the example Āryadeva used.

This is why my guru counseled me that is was best to practice new termas, and discouraged me from practicing older termas like Longchen Nyinthig, etc.

As for HHDL's comment, I don't think there are very many awakened masters or perfectly devoted students at all in this age of the five degenerations.

Punya said:
Some might view it is free speech, but to me describing someone's argument as 'bullshit" is disrespectful regardless of who it's directed to.

Malcolm wrote:
Some people are a little more sensitive than others. Dzongsar likes using the word "bullshit," he does so often to describe this and that.

Punya said:
Personally I think all genuine Buddhist teachers, tulkus or otherwise, and regardless of tradition, should be respected. There are precious few of them.

Malcolm wrote:
Everyone is deserving of respect, regardless of who they are or where they come from. Being a Buddhist teacher certainly does not entitle one to more respect than anyone else.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 18th, 2017 at 1:46 AM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:


Vasana said:
Cultural artifact or not, it has also become an artiact of dharma since it refelcted the dharmic aspirations of the first Karmapa when he decided it was the right thing to do to further establish the Kagyu. For genuine tulkus it's just Skillull means, imo.

Malcolm wrote:
We will agree to disagree. I could give a shit about the tulku system, and I think it has nothing to do with the Dharma.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 18th, 2017 at 1:44 AM
Title: Re: Semen
Content:
pael said:
It says in Sky Dancer: The Secret Life and Songs of Lady Yeshe Tsogyel, page [42]: I think it speaks semen. In which initiation this is related? Which of 9 yanas? Is this so hopeless?

Malcolm wrote:
No, it refers to the refined essence, which is called "ojas."

Semen is something that is a waste product.

pael said:
What is ojas? How to know have I losed/leaked it?

Malcolm wrote:
You would only leak/lose it you had a very poor diet.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 18th, 2017 at 1:24 AM
Title: Re: Successful empowerment and conferral of samaya?
Content:
conebeckham said:
Malcolm previously made a comment regarding "samaya blooming" or "blossoming," or something

Malcolm wrote:
Samaya deepens as one continues on the path. Even if one has a perfect understanding of the empowerment, one gets it, and so on, when one is a beginner one's samaya is weak. One needs to marinade in samaya so it permeates you.

As it is said, if you leave ordinary wood in a sandalwood forest, eventually the wood absorbs the scent of sandalwood.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 18th, 2017 at 1:16 AM
Title: Re: Semen
Content:
pael said:
It says in Sky Dancer: The Secret Life and Songs of Lady Yeshe Tsogyel, page [42]: If there is leakage of bodhichitta, the Buddha Unchanging Light is slain, and since there is no superior presence to whom such a crime can be acknowledged and thus atoned, such karma as that of the Avichi Hell results.
I think it speaks semen. In which initiation this is related? Which of 9 yanas? Is this so hopeless?

Malcolm wrote:
No, it refers to the refined essence, which is called "ojas."

Semen is something that is a waste product.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 18th, 2017 at 1:14 AM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:
Pero said:
Right. However you have somewhat muddied the waters for me in this discussion. Am I getting you - you think that unless one has understood 100% what's going on during the empowerment one has not received the empowerment?

Malcolm wrote:
Pretty much. If you did not understand 100 percent, you did not receive the whole thing.

Vasana said:
What about if you understood it but an hour later...or 5 day later...or a month?  But still practiced it in the mean time ? I think intention and level of sincerity must  play a part in the cases where it may have only been understood superficially or not as in depth. I'm sure if those who are worried if they receive past empowerments or not would recieve positive answers most of the time if they asked those who gave them.

Malcolm wrote:
If you have doubt you received it, you didn't. If you are sure you did, you did.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 18th, 2017 at 12:56 AM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:
liuzg150181 said:
So how does one know whether there is samaya and reception of empowerment? And why does it becomes poison?

Malcolm wrote:
One cannot practice Secret Mantra without empowerment.

Pero said:
Right. However you have somewhat muddied the waters for me in this discussion. Am I getting you - you think that unless one has understood 100% what's going on during the empowerment one has not received the empowerment?

Malcolm wrote:
Pretty much. If you did not understand 100 percent, you did not receive the whole thing.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 18th, 2017 at 12:25 AM
Title: Re: We are a Kali Yuga culture
Content:
Queequeg said:
Is Kali Yuga an event brought about by collective karma or is there a distinct cause such that we are all more or less just along for the ride?


Malcolm wrote:
It is a measure of degeneration of human culture.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 18th, 2017 at 12:23 AM
Title: Re: Chagdud Gonpa's "Feasts of Chöd"
Content:
makewhisper said:
Hello friends,

A vajra sister gifted me the Feasts of Chöd from Dudjom Lingpa's Throma Nagmo cycle. This is the text I received: http://www.tibetantreasures.com/T_hroma-Feasts_of_Chod_Text.html

This practitioner told me that I could practice this text as no empowerment is required. The website for Tibetan Treasures itself lists the practice under texts not requiring empowerment.

Still I wanted second and third and fourth opinions before undertaking this practice. Is any kind of transmission or permission required before practices the Feasts of Chöd?

Thanks, and blessings,

Eric


Malcolm wrote:
At the very minimum you need the lung from a lama in the lineage. Best to have the empowerment though.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 17th, 2017 at 10:15 PM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:
Vasana said:
Surely if even just 1 out of 5 tulkus are authentic rebirths, this is enough to justify the tulku system, no? If a genuine tulku will be able to fast track their education and inherit various resources to further the teachings and continue where they left off, this is surely a good thing regardless of whether a lot of them are just regular beings.

Expressing lack of faith in the tulku system is one thing but how to avoid throwing the baby out with the bath water in the case of genuine Tulkus who are in an advantageous and more qualified position for dharma activity?

I'm not sure how easy it is to quantify the benefit to harm ratio.

tiagolps said:
In the words of DJKR, "In the end of the day, buddhism is more important than tulku system. Who cares about tulku? what happens to them..."

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, this is one area I unreservedly applaud DJK's cynicism, i.e., his cynicism about the tulku system. He even said that he fears the tulku system will destroy Buddhism.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 17th, 2017 at 10:14 PM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:


Vasana said:
Surely if even just 1 out of 5 tulkus are authentic rebirths, this is enough to justify the tulku system, no?  If a genuine tulku will be able to fast track their education and inherit various resources to further the teachings and continue where they left off, this is surely a good thing regardless of whether a lot of them are just regular beings.

Expressing lack of faith in the tulku system is one thing but how to avoid throwing the baby out with the bath water in the case of genuine Tulkus who are in an advantageous and more qualified position for dharma activity?

I'm not sure how easy it is to quantify the benefit to harm ratio.

Malcolm wrote:
Genuine reincarnations of awakened people figured out how to benefit sentient beings in India, China, Korea, Japan, etc., for 1700 years without the tulku system and are still doing so,

The tulku system is a Tibetan cultural artifact. Vajrayāna existed for 800 years before the tulku system got off the ground.

The tulku system is a Tibetan cultural artifact. But it is not needed for the furtherance of the Dharma.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 17th, 2017 at 10:11 PM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Buddhism identifies 7 different gender orientations. These are a combination of biological and afflictive patterning.

Losal Samten said:
Male/Female/Hermaphrodite and the other 4 pandaka types?

Malcolm wrote:
Yup


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 17th, 2017 at 10:07 PM
Title: Re: sex with prostitute
Content:
shaunc said:
But I've made a living and supported a family working as a labourer and my wife has helped me working as a shop assistant and cleaner. It's basically just people that won't/cant accept responsibility for their own poor choices.

Malcolm wrote:
This is incredibly wrong-headed, worthy of being repeated by Fox News.

Most prostitutes are forced into prostitution while young teenagers, this is why it is referred to as "human trafficking." The average age of entry into prostitution in the United States is between 12-14.

Educate yourself:
Journalist Victor Malarek describes prostitution as “the experience of being hunted, dominated, harassed, assaulted and battered … it is sexual terrorism against women at the hands of men.”
http://www.soroptimist.org/trafficking/prostitution_faq.html

shaunc said:
It is a problem in Canada, where 2,000 to 3,000 of these young women are brought in every year. Or it's a problem in the United States, where 20,000 to 40,000 women are trafficked every year. It's a huge problem throughout the European Union, particularly in Germany, the Netherlands, even Great Britain, even Spain, Italy, Turkey, Greece. You find these women everywhere. You find them in Japan, in Hong Kong. You find them in the strangest of places, like Costa Rica and Dominican Republic.

Malcolm wrote:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/slaves/needs/malarek.html


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 17th, 2017 at 10:02 PM
Title: Re: sex with prostitute
Content:


Karma Dorje said:
How is having consensual sex exploitative?!

Malcolm wrote:
If we are talking about prostitution, it is very questionable whether this can be considered "consensual." There are a whole host of labor issues to be taken into consideration when we discuss sex workers of various kinds. Sex workers are among the most exploited workers there are.

In the case of a young woman marrying an older man for position, money, or comfort -- this is between them.

Strive said:
does this look ok?

Malcolm wrote:
If someone wants to marry Charles Manson, that is their trip. I think it is deluded, but it is pretty clear she had to go to him deliberately.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 17th, 2017 at 9:46 PM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:


Sonam Wangchug said:
Though I am sure opinions vary, I have heard from one lineage holder of the Kagyu that for an authentic Nirmanakaya, it is impossible to act out of self interest. Now whether one considers someone an authentic nirmanakaya or not is also another issue.


Malcolm wrote:
I addressed this issue above. Only a buddha is free from error.

Sonam Wangchug said:
For me, the fact that HH Dilgo khyentse rinpoche immediately identified rinpoche the first time seeing him, but kept it on the low, as HH Sakya trizin rinpoche was the agreed one and the only one to do the recognition yet said " If Sakya trizin is omniscient he will say the same thing." And then later owing to a Dakini dream 7 years later (from JKCLR's passing) in fact said the same exact thing, is sufficient for me.

Malcolm wrote:
I have no faith in the tulku system whatsoever. That said, there are a number of tulkus I do llike, and I understand that in its best expression the tulku system can be a means of preserving the continuity of a lineage. But to me it seems mostly a source of corruption in Tibetan Buddhism — just look at the Karmapa debacle.

Sonam Wangchug said:
Anyway, tulku system aside,

Malcolm wrote:
The tulku system is the real sacred cow in Tibet. The tulku system is an artifact of Tibetan culture. Culture is not Dharma. This is not to say that there are no authentic reincarnations, because we are all reincarnated and some of us are reincarnations of realized people. But the system of recognizing tulkus is corrupt, utterly so, and Sogyal proves it.

Sonam Wangchug said:
I have good reason to believe for example, that Sogyal R did not go through this process and never went deep into Tsa lung teachings, ( ruling out peoples fantasies of him practicing union practice.) DJKR clearly mentions that Sogyal R was not properly trained, something which for one Rinpoche to say of another is really a huge diss in fact, yet most seem honed in on other parts of the article.

Malcolm wrote:
It was noted. On the other hand, it was embedded in such a huge amount of equivocation...the reason I considered the piece self-indulgent is that it was poorly edited, and could have said succinctly in a thousand words words or less what it took DKR 10,000 words to say.

Sonam Wangchug said:
While I am sure the refutations of family lineage are found in the Madhyamaka, As far as at least the Nyingmapa's are concerned, the Bone lineage from the fathers side is considered quite important.

Malcolm wrote:
Another patriarchal idea from Tibetan culture, and not Dharma. Why is the bone lineage more important than the blood lineage? It takes both semen and an ovum to make a human being. Our fathers did not carry us in their bodies, suckle us on their breasts, change our shitty diapers and so on.

Sonam Wangchug said:
While I am sure this idea might also meet some resistance, but it's also said that for example in the case of the Mindroling and Sakya family lineages previous members made aspiration prayers that may bodhisattvas take birth through their family, which is one reason why people from those families are revered. The Dudjom family has incarnated as an auspicious mandala, and if one goes into deeper detail one can reveal how the members are all connected from their previous lives.



Malcolm wrote:
There are a lot of ideas like this among Tibetan families. They are very nice ideas, and they are even possible. Even in the Pali canon Buddha mentions that people who love each other can aspire to be born near each other in the next life.

Sonam Wangchug said:
The problem with Sogyal Rinpoche, is that I do not believe him to be an authentic Trulku of Terton Sogyal.  For me, it's clear that in that regard it is H.H Khenpo jigme phuntsok. Sogyal R has brought shame through association to the name of Terton sogyal, and the many great masters that he has hid behind.

Malcolm wrote:
You will not find me disagreeing with you here. Khenpo Jigphun is one of my important root gurus. Sogyal proves that the tulku system is corrupt and not to be trusted. But it is something ordinary Tibetans find important so they insist that monasteries continue to find and enthrone reincarnations. But it is not Dharma, it is culture.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 17th, 2017 at 9:08 PM
Title: Re: Non-Duality in Dzogchen vs Advaita Vedanta
Content:


Vasana said:
I'm still not fully understanding this point. Surely if a commoner developed samadhi it would naturally burn away the afflictions in the same way it would for an Arya if the samadhi was exactly the same?

Malcolm wrote:
A commoner is afflicted. An ārya who abides in Vajraopama samadhi is, in Mahāyāna, already on the 10th bhumi. In the Hinayāna, they are on the supermundane path of meditation.

You need to study the samapattis as they are discussed in the Abhidharmakosha, chapter 8.

aflatun said:
Is there a reliable English translation of the Abhidharmakosha available?

Malcolm wrote:
There are two.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 17th, 2017 at 9:06 PM
Title: Re: Successful empowerment and conferral of samaya?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
And he is just as culpable, really. Without DJK visiting places like Rigpa, knowing what is going on, Sogyal would never have been so successful.

kirtu said:
Ah, no, he addressed exactly this in his statement as well.

Kirt


Malcolm wrote:
He addressed it by equivocating about it.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 17th, 2017 at 9:05 PM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:


Malcolm wrote:
Gender is determined by afflictive patterning, genetics, but mostly by the mother's conduct in the first three weeks of pregnancy when there is a chance the gender of the fetus can be changed during week three.

liuzg150181 said:
Afaik that totally contradicts how modern science understand the determination of gender,since it is fixed in stone the moment the egg is fertilized by the sperm. Though I prefer to keep my mind open with regards to this.

buddhagirl said:
Some confusion above on terminology - Gender is a construct, a person's sex is biological - that's straight from my psych textbook. When doing research on people, it's sex-male, or sex-female. Of course now there's a lot more permutations but that's another story!

Malcolm wrote:
Buddhism identifies 7 different gender orientations. These are a combination of biological and afflictive patterning.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 17th, 2017 at 9:03 PM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:
buddhagirl said:
DKR...has put down feminists in earlier talks/writings.
.

Malcolm wrote:
The Tibetan establishment, being for the most part patriarchal, takes a dim view of feminist discourse since it threatens their patriarchy. It is really just that simple. The truly delightful https://tricycle.org/trikedaily/gender-revisited-are-we-there-yet/ wrote:
Also, in both Asia and the West, many Buddhist women work very hard for their male teachers. They give their lives. Men are generally the lineage holders and heads of organizations, and often their success is because of the work of women. Should we ignore contributions by women? As liberated as Western Buddhists may be, we may also be influenced by lingering sexist preconceptions. Sad to say, women have been trained to respect the accomplishments of men, but not always the accomplishments of women. It’s important to recognize our own internalized sexism. Women support unbalanced institutions. And as we take our places at the table, we must use our power wisely. For example, if there are four speakers on a panel, we can make sure that half are women, and if we give material support, we can make sure it goes to men and women equally.
but this is rather off topic and would be better served discussed elsewhere.

buddhagirl said:
Malcolm you've mentioned the patriarchy a number of times in this thread - so how come when a woman (me) brings up feminism, it's "off topic"? Less off topic than suddenly deviating into a discussion of when one's sex is determined. And by the way, today where i am it's nyichu tsenga - so respect, please!

Malcolm wrote:
The larger topic of patriarchy and Buddhism is off topic in this thread, and if we go down that road it will be split into a different thread anyway.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 17th, 2017 at 12:47 PM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:
TRC said:
Which one was that? There have been many.

Malcolm wrote:
Jane Doe in Connecticut, with whom Sogyal settled out of court for a handsome sum in return for a nondisclosure agreement.

TRC said:
Well I guess it was not just speaking out publicly in that case, but actually taking it to court. I do recall, that although she received significant compensation she was also wanted acknowledgement of the abuse and an apology as part of the settlement.

Malcolm wrote:
It was likely part of the nondisclosure agreement.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 17th, 2017 at 12:37 PM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:


Lhasa said:
And without samaya, whatever that is, we are trying to go up a creek without a paddle?

Malcolm wrote:
If you do not have samaya, you did not receive the empowerment, you are not qualified to practice Vajrayāna, and so whatever effort you make in practicing Secret Mantra will become poison rather than medicine.

liuzg150181 said:
So how does one know whether there is samaya and reception of empowerment? And why does it becomes poison?

Malcolm wrote:
One cannot practice Secret Mantra without empowerment.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 17th, 2017 at 12:27 PM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:
buddhagirl said:
DKR...has put down feminists in earlier talks/writings.
.

Malcolm wrote:
The Tibetan establishment, being for the most part patriarchal, takes a dim view of feminist discourse since it threatens their patriarchy. It is really just that simple. The truly delightful https://tricycle.org/trikedaily/gender-revisited-are-we-there-yet/ wrote:
Also, in both Asia and the West, many Buddhist women work very hard for their male teachers. They give their lives. Men are generally the lineage holders and heads of organizations, and often their success is because of the work of women. Should we ignore contributions by women? As liberated as Western Buddhists may be, we may also be influenced by lingering sexist preconceptions. Sad to say, women have been trained to respect the accomplishments of men, but not always the accomplishments of women. It’s important to recognize our own internalized sexism. Women support unbalanced institutions. And as we take our places at the table, we must use our power wisely. For example, if there are four speakers on a panel, we can make sure that half are women, and if we give material support, we can make sure it goes to men and women equally.
but this is rather off topic and would be better served discussed elsewhere.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 17th, 2017 at 12:25 PM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:


Malcolm wrote:
As to upholding the idea of genderlessness— it is true that the mind has no gender. It is equally true that our physical gender is an expression of a) our afflictive patterning and b) our mother's conduct in the womb. The point is not be gender blind, this is like the fantasy that the USA is racially blind. It isn't. We still have deal with the fact that after forty years of the women's movement, women still earn on average $0.78 to every $1.00 than a man earns. We live in a society with deep issues with both gender and race. Hoping to smooth it alway with gender blindness is just not going to work.

liuzg150181 said:
Our physical gender is an expression of a) our afflictive patterning and b) our mother's conduct in the womb? Point a i understand from Buddhist perspective, but point b seems to contradict modern understanding that gender is determined by father sperm,which contributes the sexual chorosomes that determines gender(X or Y,whereas mother is always X under normal circumstances). Unless you mean by point b during sexual intercourse.

Malcolm wrote:
Gender is determined by afflictive patterning, genetics, but mostly by the mother's conduct in the first three weeks of pregnancy when there is a chance the gender of the fetus can be changed during week three.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 17th, 2017 at 12:22 PM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:
TRC said:
Justin Whitaker does an excellent job of methodically breaking it down and pointing out all the fallacies, inconsistencies and ambiguity in DJKR's "arguments".

smcj said:
For me it boils down to this:
DJKR said:
I’m sorry, but we can’t bend the rules on this point. When both the giver and receiver of a Vajrayana initiation are fully aware and clear about what has happened, they must then both accept that pure perception is the main view and practice on the Vajrayana path. There is no room whatsoever for even a glimmer of an impure perception.

smcj said:
Contrary to Malcolm's protestations, this is standard Vajrayana orthodoxy. I don't get that all you knowledgeable guys are either surprised or offended.

Malcolm wrote:
The point I addressed was that it is not clear there is any samaya here broken at all since it is not clear there is any samaya to break. Secondly, there is the question of who is qualified to act as a guru. Is it just anyone who knows how to read Tibetan, has done retreat, received permission, and so on? Or is something more required? If one follows what Dzongsar writes above, it seems to be a mere transaction. Well, to me that is a very shallow view of samaya.

Also, conceptual pure vision is impure vision.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 17th, 2017 at 12:19 PM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:
PeterC said:
Finally - I'm still waiting for Rigpa as an organisation to apologize to the lady who, years ago, publicly spoke out against Sogyal for abuse and was roundly condemned for it. They rallied around their teacher at the time; when they're done with their introspection, they owe her a sincere apology.

TRC said:
Which one was that? There have been many.

Malcolm wrote:
Jane Doe in Connecticut, with whom Sogyal settled out of court for a handsome sum in return for a nondisclosure agreement.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 17th, 2017 at 12:11 PM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:


Sonam Wangchug said:
Again Malcolm's bias against DJKR becomes painfully clear here.

Malcolm wrote:
I am not biased against Dzongsar. I think he is a highly qualified teacher. I have encouraged people to study with him, if they are interested to, and I still would.

Sonam Wangchug said:
Right .. A "Highly qualified teacher." of the Vajrayana, who composes something that is "96 percent bullshit." and acts "Self indulgent." ..

Last time I checked, Highly qualified teachers in the Vajrayana posses wisdom, and therefore their compositions are not delusional.

Malcolm wrote:
We perhaps means different things by "highly qualified." What I means is that he has received valid transmissions from authentic masters, has understood what he has received, has practiced it I expect, has been entrusted to transmit those teachings to those who have faith in him, and over all has had a very good education in Sakya.

I do not however equate "highly qualified" with "highly realized," and I honestly don't at all care what other high lamas have said about his realization. One of the things I have come to learn about Tibetan culture is the gross amount of public hyperbole said about teachers. Dzongsar himself alludes to this when he points out that a) Tibetans do not seek out Sogyal as a teacher and b) that what they say in public is very different from what they say in private. Thus, I don't believe the hype.

Sonam Wangchug said:
Furthermore, genuine teachers of the Buddhadharma do not act from self indulgent motives, but rather to benefit sentient beings.

Malcolm wrote:
This is exactly the kind of hero worship that gets both students as well as teachers into trouble. Unless you are in fact a buddha you can makes errors, even if you are a genuine teacher of the Buddhadharma. Even bodhisattvas on the lower stages can act out of pride ( nga rgyal, māna ). This fetter is not eradicated entirely until one is a bodhisattva on the eighth bhumi. To repeat, even highly realized teachers on the seven impure bhumis can act out of pride and conceit.

Sonam Wangchug said:
I don't know if you are being diplomatic, or what, however, it appears to be a contradiction.

Malcolm wrote:
Diplomacy, as you may have noticed, is not my strong suit. Being straight forward and direct however, is.

Sonam Wangchug said:
But, I guess .. (according to the perceptions of some here.) The guy is a bit of a dull-whit, as some people think he doesn't even know what Samaya is, despite the fact of having by very high likelihood received more teachings, then anyone here in their lifetime has or ever will on the topic.

Malcolm wrote:
I think he expresses a rather mechanical view about the subject of samaya, as if samaya is something received from a ritual because you have recited a few words after someone in an empowerment. I think a catechistic approach to three vows is a very limited view. It may not be his real view, but it is a view he has expressed in a number of pieces he has authored.

Sonam Wangchug said:
It's not about absolute authority based on worldly ambitions, it's a matter of respect and devotion for lineage masters.

Malcolm wrote:
I respect Dzongsar, but if he says something I think is poorly spoken, a.k.a. "bullshit," then I will call it as I see it. I do not respect authority for the sake of authority. One has to earn my respect. I don't just hand it out because a bunch of people say, "Oh, this is a really important lama," etc. This is one huge difference I see between Americans and Tibetans. We threw off the shackles of hereditary aristocracies more than 200 hundred years ago (though to be fair, we replaced it with the class inequalities produced by Capitalism), so we do not automatically respect someone merely because they have 1) a good family, 2) a good teacher, and last and least, 3) good personal qualities. If you read Aryadeva's 400 Verse you will discover there the Madhyamaka refutation of family lineages. And if anything, for us, good personal qualities are far more important than family lineage or teacher.

Sonam Wangchug said:
Some people seem to think Rinpoche has nothing better to do with his time then benefit from his position, (Despite the fact that for example at one of his last major events he urged people not to keep offering many things, due to his concern about them being properly used, to not create waste, and to instead donate towards Translating the words of The Buddha, if they were to want to donate.)

You can also find at the back of his most recent book The Guru drinks Bourbon that all the Proceeds were being donated by rinpoche to charity. Enough is enough of unfounded and unsubstantiated claims. Rinpoche is an authentic teacher of the dharma, and while he can have a bewildering air about him at times, if one truly observes, they will see how far reaching his vision is, and how much concern he has for the Dharma, ( not just the tibetan tradition either. )

Malcolm wrote:
You are raising objections to sentiments that have not been voiced by me.

You know, it is funny, but just the other day (Saturday) I was talking with some friends about the Sogyal thing, and I pointed out to them that there is a great difference between the activity of Trungpa and Dzongsar when one compares Sogyal to them. In other words, Sogyal's activities are rather paltry by comparison. Just because I voice a criticism of Dzongsar's statement published on Facebook, does not mean I do not recognize or support his other contributions to the Dharma.

But if I see bullshit, I will call it bullshit, even it if was said by the Buddha himself. We do not have sacred cows in Buddhadharma.

I will always reserve my right to speak out whenever I feel the need. As an American, I always reserve the right of free speech. And you can just pity me for my impure vision and wrong-headed insistence on my liberal, individualistic, Western values.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 17th, 2017 at 6:21 AM
Title: Re: Tibetan Zen
Content:
Sherab said:
If you subscribe to the emptiness of emptiness, you will have to conclude that emptiness is conditioned.

Malcolm wrote:
No, you just have to conclude that emptiness also has no nature. This is why I told you, and still tell you, your qualm is a nonissue.

Otherwise, the pervasion follows that the unconditioned is conditioned because of the emptiness of the unconditioned.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 17th, 2017 at 6:14 AM
Title: Re: Successful empowerment and conferral of samaya?
Content:




dzogchungpa said:
which says nothing about students going to hell.

Malcolm wrote:
I pointed this out already.

dzogchungpa said:
" and as a result an immature student breaks the most fundamental root samayas. "

Malcolm wrote:
The point is that the student in question has no samaya to break. The student faces only the consequence of having had a fraud as a teacher. That can be truly devastating, as I have personally observed in the fallout resulting from the unethical financial and sexual conduct of the one unqualified teacher I had the displeasure of knowing. And no, I am not going to say who this teacher is.

dzogchungpa said:
I do not claim to really understand samaya, and I also like your POV here. I think that the passages I quote are not so clear, at least to me. My only point is that DJKR nowhere implies that any of Sogyal's students "had broken samaya and were likely hell bound" as far as I can tell.

Malcolm wrote:
No, but he included enough of the standard Vajrayāna machismo warnings to make it pretty clear he does not approve of the student's actions either. And Orgyan Tobgyal was absolutely clear, all those people are samaya breakers with one way tickets to lower realms.

And he is just as culpable, really. Without DJK visiting places like Rigpa, knowing what is going on, Sogyal would never have been so successful. Yes, I understand a valid argument can be made that there are earnest and sincere people in this place who deserve to receive teachings, etc. Much of the Tibetan Buddhist establishment in exile is somewhat culpable in the Sogyal Frankenstein. They permitted and abetted this situation, and did not shut him down in the 90's when he should have been shut down. But the attraction of devoted students, incense, beautiful statues, nice donations which can be used for your monastery and shedra back in India, and so on are powerful fumes which overcome one easily, even if you do not take a penny for yourself.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 17th, 2017 at 6:02 AM
Title: Re: Tibetan Zen
Content:
Sherab said:
This does not mean that it is not there to be directly known...

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, actually it does. This is why it is said in diverse sutras and tantras that there is nothing to see in the middle.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 17th, 2017 at 6:01 AM
Title: Re: Tibetan Zen
Content:
Sherab said:
Most physicists would argue that space is not fundamental and that it is an emergent.

Malcolm wrote:
Do not conflate the conditioned space of physics with ākāśa. They do not refer at all to the same thing.

Sherab said:
Yes, they have to be different if you wish to say that ākāśa is unconditioned.
This is another reason why you adopted the position that there is no ultimate.

Malcolm wrote:
I said there was no ultimate reality. Such a thing cannot be found on analysis.

Sherab said:
Yes, the ultimate cannot be found analysis.  That is why in relation to the ultimate, it is said to be ineffable because any form of analysis and communication among deluded beings must necessarily involve languages and languages are referenced only to the relative and imputed rightly or wrongly on the ultimate but can never describe it.

Malcolm wrote:
Cessation is considered an extreme in Mahāyāna, an extreme to be avoided.

A cessation is not an annihilation however. A cessation is not annihilation since an annihilation requires an existent to be destroyed. A cessation is simply the absence of a cause for arising.

Sherab said:
Cessation is an annihilation.  It is an annihilation of the drivers/causes of samsara in an individual.  And only what belongs to the relative can be annihilated.

Malcolm wrote:
Cessation is not annihilation. Analytical cessation is the absence of the arising of afflictions which continued birth in samsara due supermundane insight on the path of seeing and meditation. Nonanalytical cessation is is simple absence of a cause for arising, like a burnt seed.

Neither are annihilation.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 17th, 2017 at 5:54 AM
Title: Re: Successful empowerment and conferral of samaya?
Content:
dzogchungpa said:
In fact, if the teacher hasn’t laid the proper foundations, if the teacher takes advantage of a student physically, emotionally or financially, and if the teacher gives the highest yoga tantric teachings to those who have not established a proper foundation and as a result an immature student breaks the most fundamental root samayas, then the teacher will also suffer extremely grave consequences – consequences even more serious and terrible than those faced by the student.
which says nothing about students going to hell.

Malcolm wrote:
I pointed this out already.

dzogchungpa said:
" and as a result an immature student breaks the most fundamental root samayas. "

Malcolm wrote:
The point is that the student in question has no samaya to break. The student faces only the consequence of having had a fraud as a teacher. That can be truly devastating, as I have personally observed in the fallout resulting from the unethical financial and sexual conduct of the one unqualified teacher I had the displeasure of knowing. And no, I am not going to say who this teacher is.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 17th, 2017 at 5:49 AM
Title: Re: sex with prostitute
Content:
rory said:
It's amazing in all the millennia of prostitution, with horny men buying women's bodies it's only about now that the widespread idea of making the buyer, the man, get punished is taking hold.

The better answer finally, criminalizing the men who buy prostitutes services:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/aug/08/criminsalise-buying-not-selling-sex

If you think it's okay to buy a prostitute for sex is it okay for a man to buy your daughter for sex. How about your mother selling herself to buy some food for you? Does that make you happy?

As a woman, maybe the only one in this thread, I can tell you the majority of women worldwide want respect, love, intimacy, companionship from men.

They do not want to sell themselves as a hole for men to deposit their sperm.

gassho
Rory

Malcolm wrote:
Exactly.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 17th, 2017 at 5:48 AM
Title: Re: sex with prostitute
Content:
Anders said:
Yes.

It's not a straightforward topic, there are evidently people here who seem to have the straight of it. I'd like to see it properly argued.

Malcolm wrote:
The difference is that when I buy a homeless person's newsletter, I am not exploiting them. When I use the services of a prostitute, I am. This is why, generally speaking, in Buddhist writings, especially in East Asia, it is held that buying the services of prostitutes is a kind of sexual misconduct, but the selling of the same service is not.

Anders said:
I am really not being wilfully stupid here, but assuming no pimping, can you explain in which way it is exploitative? What's the obvious better alternative for the desperate would-be prostitute?

Malcolm wrote:
She does not have an alternative. This is why buying her services is exploitation. She is selling her body, placing herself at risk of pregnancy, beatings, sexually transmitted diseases, and even murder. If you want to give a prostitute her fee without using her services, this is dāna. It may not be the most intelligent dāna, but at least you are not using her to masturbate.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 17th, 2017 at 5:43 AM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Another glaring hole in his presentation was there was no mention of patriarchy, the unequal status of woman in the Dharma, sexist attitudes towards woman that is rampant in Vajrayāna circles (the dakini/whore complex), Tibetan privilege (yes, it is a problem), and so on.

M

dzoki said:
I don´t mean to say that those issues are unimportant, they are important, but as it is, the text by DJKR is quite long, it would be much longer if he were to address everything, so cut him a bit of slack, would you?

Malcolm wrote:
Why? He never cuts anyone any slack.

dzoki said:
I agree that sexist BS is rampant within Tibetan community, but it also partly lies with women, who are too often willing to suppress their sisters in Dharma and prevent them from taking more prominent role.

Malcolm wrote:
This is called patriarchy. Patriarchy has always had female backing. Mothers currying favor for their sons, husbands, etc. There are women who derive a lot of power from patriarchy indirectly.

dzoki said:
Some male teachers are even actively working to aleviate this situation, so while it is far from being satisfactory, there is some improvement, especially if we compare it to the situation say a 100 years ago.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, there is some improvement. But it seems that this improvement is considered a degeneration of the Dharma by many Tibetans, and their western students.

dzoki said:
As for Tibetan privilege, to be honest I am in no way surprised that it exists...

Malcolm wrote:
"Tibetan privilege" means you can be completely ignorant doofus, and yet you will still have far more students than the western teacher, who is ten times more educated than you.

dzoki said:
for I have not seen many Westerners who have completed a whole "khenpo" course in shedra, or who have completed a retreat longer than 7 years. There are very few, and I would be surprised if there is a single one, who has done both. At least 90% of Western Dharma teachers that I met or heard their teaching, had somewhat if not completely faulty presentation of Dharma, that even I, a person who has not done a great deal of study or practice, could discern. One problem with most of such teachers is that they do not teach from the texts (I strongly doubt that they would have capacity to teach from experience), but they only have a loose lecture based on whatever comes to their mind regarding given topic.

Malcolm wrote:
This is not fair. You have not heard even a fraction of all the Western Dharma teachers out there. Be honest, you are grossly exaggerating.

dzoki said:
Basicaly many Western teachers (self proclaimed lamas and tulkus, "approved" lamas and tulkus, instructors, "resident teachers", you name it) suck hard - at least most of whom I have seen - from Nyingma and Karma Kagyu, can´t speak for Sakya or Gelug, or other traditions.

Malcolm wrote:
If these western teachers "suck hard," it is because they have managed to make a deal, gain recognition, students, aided and abetted by the Tibetan establishment.

dzoki said:
But don´t you worry, if we, Westerners, spend our time doing practice and studying Dharma at least as much as we hang out on the internet and write things on forums such as this one, there will be more and more high quality practitioners and eventual teachers.

Malcolm wrote:
I am not worried at all. There are already fine western teachers out there, like Lama Tsultrim Allione, and so on.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 17th, 2017 at 5:35 AM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:


Malcolm wrote:
Another glaring hole in his presentation was there was no mention of patriarchy, the unequal status of woman in the Dharma, sexist attitudes towards woman that is rampant in Vajrayāna circles (the dakini/whore complex), Tibetan privilege (yes, it is a problem), and so on.

M

Adamantine said:
One positive development in this regard involves DJKR's own uncle, Dungse Shenphen Dawa Norbu Rinpoche, who a few years ago enthroned four female senior disciples as Lamas out of seven Lamas total. So the numbers swayed to the female in that expression of the Dudjom Tersar lineage. Perhaps this was a way of addressing these inequalities through action instead of words. I'm sure it's also because they were the most qualified however, so perhaps there was zero consideration about gender...which would also be significant.

Malcolm wrote:
Buddhadharma generally expresses itself by adapting to the needs of the people who are to be befitted by it. This does not mean there are not fractious and difficult challenges ahead, especially for Tibetan reactionary conservatives who imagine that the Dharma is going to be destroyed as it slowly adjusts itself to the needs of western liberals, whom it primarily serves in the West.

The question that must be raised is whether a Dharma culture that includes liberal, anti-patriarchal, democratic values is truly all that bad. To read some of DKJ's posts, this seems to be worse than have boiling gold poured down one's throat. How is it that the Dharma is so inflexible, so intellectually moribund, that it cannot meet the needs of a given client population? Well, I do not believe for one second that Dharma is that inflexible and intellectually moribund.

The fact is that there are more women in the Dharma in the West than there are men. This is undoubtedly one reason why Shenphen Rinpoche raised four women to be lamas. He has more female students than male students.

As to upholding the idea of genderlessness— it is true that the mind has no gender. It is equally true that our physical gender is an expression of a) our afflictive patterning and b) our mother's conduct in the womb. The point is not be gender blind, this is like the fantasy that the USA is racially blind. It isn't. We still have deal with the fact that after forty years of the women's movement, women still earn on average $0.78 to every $1.00 than a man earns. We live in a society with deep issues with both gender and race. Hoping to smooth it alway with gender blindness is just not going to work.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 17th, 2017 at 5:18 AM
Title: Re: sex with prostitute
Content:
Anders said:
He described sexual misconduct as immoral.

Malcolm wrote:
As far as I am concerned, exploiting women through buying their services is sexual misconduct. It generally falls under the category of having sex with those who are not independent.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 17th, 2017 at 5:14 AM
Title: Re: sex with prostitute
Content:


Anders said:
I think it needs to be shown here how selling sex out of desperation is morally different from selling a homeless' newsletter out of despeation.

Malcolm wrote:
Seriously?

Anders said:
Yes.

It's not a straightforward topic, there are evidently people here who seem to have the straight of it. I'd like to see it properly argued.

Malcolm wrote:
The difference is that when I buy a homeless person's newsletter, I am not exploiting them. When I use the services of a prostitute, I am. This is why, generally speaking, in Buddhist writings, especially in East Asia, it is held that buying the services of prostitutes is a kind of sexual misconduct, but the selling of the same service is not.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 17th, 2017 at 5:12 AM
Title: Re: sex with prostitute
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Since prostitution is rooted in patriarchy,

The Cicada said:
No it isn't. Nothing is rooted in patriarchy. It's a fiction.

Malcolm wrote:
You poor, deluded man. You probably believe there were some good people among the Nazis in Charlottesville too.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 17th, 2017 at 3:07 AM
Title: Re: sex with prostitute
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Since prostitution is rooted in patriarchy, it is probable that it will never be nonexploitative, since the economy that produces prostitutes is inherently exploitative. In a nonpatriarchal economy prostitution will not exist even though there may be sex workers of various kinds.

Karma Dorje said:
Why the assumption that prostitutes/sex workers are women? The economy is exploitative regardless of your job. We can't escape it at that level. Anyway, I don't think we really disagree.

Malcolm wrote:
Most are. And yes, patriarchy is exploitative of men and women. It's just more exploitive of women.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 17th, 2017 at 2:04 AM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:
Grigoris said:
I gave up on pretending to be holy a while ago and just decided to be real.  Unfortunately my "real" is not as "nice" as my feigned saintliness.

Malcolm wrote:
I don;'t know, you might try feigning saintliness again — practice makes perfect, fake it 'till you make it, etc.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 17th, 2017 at 2:02 AM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:


MalaBeads said:
In days ago...the only way to see a lama was to take an empowerment. They would come into town, give an empowerment and then leave without a word. So much for checking them out...let alone for up to 12 years!

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, so one cannot really take any samayas they handed out very seriously, can one?

Seems a very risky thing to give empowerments to a bunch of students you do not know, considering all the rhetoric about it.


MalaBeads said:
Fortunately or not, I never did take the empowerments all that seriously. Certainly not as seriously as is warranted by all discussion. I knew why I was there and also knew that I did not understand a whit of what was happening. I can't say that I still really understand it. That is certainly why I appreciated dzongsar khyentse's long albeit rambling "explanation". If only something like that had been available then! But what can we really say? We are among the first, the pioneers if you will, of dharma coming to the west. So of course there will be things we did not understand. The hazards of the first generation. And the dumb! But then, I shouldn't be quite so hard on myself. I was there for the experience, not for "enlightenment". Live and learn I guess.

Malcolm wrote:
Basically, what happens when unethical teachers breach their commitments with their students is that the establishment resorts to tribal punishment memes. This is what Orgyen Tobgyal did when he accused the students at Rigpa of breaking their samaya.

It is understandable, albeit wrong-headed. It is like claiming, "Well, you took Ramsey Bolton as your guru, and now you are just screwed— your bad."

Tantric commitments are for encouraging harmony in a Vajrayāna Sangha, and the guru is the head of that Sangha. But when a guru's unethical actions threaten that Sangha itself, there is really something for the students to to say and something for them to, and they should resist misguided traditionalists who go all Tilopa on them.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 17th, 2017 at 1:53 AM
Title: Re: sex with prostitute
Content:


Karma Dorje said:
How is having consensual sex exploitative?!

Malcolm wrote:
If we are talking about prostitution, it is very questionable whether this can be considered "consensual." There are a whole host of labor issues to be taken into consideration when we discuss sex workers of various kinds. Sex workers are among the most exploited workers there are.

In the case of a young woman marrying an older man for position, money, or comfort -- this is between them.

Karma Dorje said:
Yes, I agree that the sex industry has a horrible record of exploitation, from trafficking to physical and sexual abuse, stealing of money, etc. What I am saying is that it ain't necessarily so. It's not the selling of sex for money that is exploitative, it's the current industry practice.

Malcolm wrote:
Since prostitution is rooted in patriarchy, it is probable that it will never be nonexploitative, since the economy that produces prostitutes is inherently exploitative. In a nonpatriarchal economy prostitution will not exist even though there may be sex workers of various kinds.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 17th, 2017 at 1:44 AM
Title: Re: Non-Duality in Dzogchen vs Advaita Vedanta
Content:


Vasana said:
Ok. That follows if you already subscribe to Buddhist thought but some Advaitans also say that Atman is false/illusory in the sense that only Brahman is true -i.e there is only Brahman. Atman was never Atman and the thought of atman is subsumed within the realization of being Brahman and so on. Some advaitans even use 'unborn' when describing Brahman which muddies the waters even further.  I suppose at this point it circles back to discussion from earlier in the thread in that believing in the final realization of Brahman also constitutes a belief in some kind of transcendental super-self.

Malcolm wrote:
It constitutes belief in an ultimate, all pervading, truly existing essence. To say brahman is unborn is to say it is eternal.



Vasana said:
I was hoping to avoid epistemology and ontology and focus on meditation alone but I suppose it's impossible to speak about them when the meditation follows the view.

Malcolm wrote:
Meditation follows view. If your view is wrong, your meditation will be wrong.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 17th, 2017 at 1:42 AM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
...my karma does not propel another to act non-virtuously.

Grigoris said:
I didn't say it did.  But "why?" their shitty non-virtuous actions come your way and not your neighbours (for example) has to do either with a karmic debt of yours being repaid OR, of course, a new karma debt of theirs being formed.  Either way... It is karma all the way down.

Malcolm wrote:
Afflcitions generate karma; karma generates suffering, rinse, repeat.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 17th, 2017 at 1:40 AM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:



Malcolm wrote:
The student has to actually know what they are doing — this is the main criteria.

MalaBeads said:
In days ago...the only way to see a lama was to take an empowerment. They would come into town, give an empowerment and then leave without a word. So much for checking them out...let alone for up to 12 years!

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, so one cannot really take any samayas they handed out very seriously, can one?

Seems a very risky thing to give empowerments to a bunch of students you do not know, considering all the rhetoric about it.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 17th, 2017 at 1:30 AM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:


Grigoris said:
Karma is not about allocating blame.  It is not about punishment and reward.  It is not about simple dualistic ideas of victim and perpetrator, it is a little more subtle and complex than that.  But I imagine, as a Buddhist, you know this, right?

Malcolm wrote:
Karma is about how our nonvirtuous actions result in physical suffering, and how our virtuous actions result in mental happiness.

Mature practitioners know that most harmers which manifest in their vision are the result of lan chags (literally "attachment to repayment"). With respect to being beaten, raped, and so on, my karma does not propel another to act non-virtuously.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 17th, 2017 at 1:21 AM
Title: Re: sex with prostitute
Content:


Karma Dorje said:
How is having consensual sex exploitative?!

Malcolm wrote:
If we are talking about prostitution, it is very questionable whether this can be considered "consensual." There are a whole host of labor issues to be taken into consideration when we discuss sex workers of various kinds. Sex workers are among the most exploited workers there are.

In the case of a young woman marrying an older man for position, money, or comfort -- this is between them.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 17th, 2017 at 1:18 AM
Title: Re: sex with prostitute
Content:


Anders said:
I think it needs to be shown here how selling sex out of desperation is morally different from selling a homeless' newsletter out of despeation.

Malcolm wrote:
Seriously?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 17th, 2017 at 1:14 AM
Title: Re: Non-Duality in Dzogchen vs Advaita Vedanta
Content:


Vasana said:
So then by that token, An advaitan developing a stable nirvikalpa samadhi is progressing in the same manner as a Dzogchenpa developing a stable vajropama samadhi ? Don't such samadhi's serve to 'scratch the surface' of the obscurations at least?


Malcolm wrote:
Nope. The result of a nonaryan's nirvikalpa samadhi is rebirth in the realm of unconscious devas. Nonbuddhist samadhis merely suppress afflictions, they do not even scratch their surface.

Vajropama samadhi will only come at the end of the path, even if one is a Dzogchen practitioner. In order for Vajropama samadhi to function, one has to be on the verge of buddhahood.

Vasana said:
Right, I suspected this would lead to meditation devas. It still doesn't explain some Advaitan's insistence that the realization of a Jivanmukti is synonomous with the erradication of any more karma coming to fruition in the future.

Swami Sivananda on Nirbija Samadhi:

"Without seeds or Samskaras [...] All the seeds or impressions are burnt by the fire of knowledge [...] all the Samskaras and Vasanas which bring on rebirths are totally freed up. All Vrittis or mental modifications that arise from the mind-lake come under restraint. The five afflictions, viz., Avidya (ignorance), Asmita (egoism), Raga-dvesha (love and hatred) and Abhinivesha (clinging to life) are destroyed and the bonds of Karma are annihilated [...] It gives Moksha (deliverance from the wheel of births and deaths). With the advent of the knowledge of the Self, ignorance vanishes. With the disappearance of the root-cause, viz., ignorance, egoism, etc., also disappear."

Is this assertion correct or are they just hanging out in the meditation realms for eons taking it to be full realization?

Malcolm wrote:
This is assertion is not correct since atman is an inherently wrong view. Since their view is wrong, they are mistaken in their meditation, and their conduct and result is also false and samsaric.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 17th, 2017 at 1:07 AM
Title: Re: Successful empowerment and conferral of samaya?
Content:


conebeckham said:
You are still of the opinion that watching a previously-recorded video doesn't confer empowerment, I assume?

Malcolm wrote:
Of course.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 17th, 2017 at 1:05 AM
Title: Re: Non-Duality in Dzogchen vs Advaita Vedanta
Content:


Vasana said:
I'm still not fully understanding this point. Surely if a commoner developed samadhi it would naturally burn away the afflictions in the same way it would for an Arya if the samadhi was exactly the same?

Malcolm wrote:
A commoner is afflicted. An ārya who abides in Vajraopama samadhi is, in Mahāyāna, already on the 10th bhumi. In the Hinayāna, they are on the supermundane path of meditation.

You need to study the samapattis as they are discussed in the Abhidharmakosha, chapter 8.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 17th, 2017 at 1:03 AM
Title: Re: Non-Duality in Dzogchen vs Advaita Vedanta
Content:
Anonymous X said:
Yes, there must be. Nirvikalpa Samadhi is not a final resting place, so to speak, per Ramana Maharshi and others.

Malcolm wrote:
There is no difference between nirvikalpa samadhi and vajropama samadhi apart from the person who is experiencing them: an ordinary afflicted being or someone about enter buddhahood. In the case of the former, such a person has not even scratched the surface of the two obscurations; in the case of the latter, vajropama samadhi eradicates the last vestige of the two obscurations.

Vasana said:
So then by that token, An advaitan developing a stable nirvikalpa samadhi is progressing in the same manner as a Dzogchenpa developing a stable vajropama samadhi ? Don't such samadhi's serve to 'scratch the surface' of the obscurations at least?


Malcolm wrote:
Nope. The result of a nonaryan's nirvikalpa samadhi is rebirth in the realm of unconscious devas. Nonbuddhist samadhis merely suppress afflictions, they do not even scratch their surface.

Vajropama samadhi will only come at the end of the path, even if one is a Dzogchen practitioner. In order for Vajropama samadhi to function, one has to be on the verge of buddhahood.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 17th, 2017 at 12:56 AM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Another glaring hole in his presentation was there was no mention of patriarchy, the unequal status of woman in the Dharma, sexist attitudes towards woman that is rampant in Vajrayāna circles (the dakini/whore complex), Tibetan privilege (yes, it is a problem), and so on.

tiagolps said:
In DJKRs Defence, he does glance at that problem some times...just maybe not about buddhist circles exactly.


A Celebrity Falls Sick by Dzongsar Khyentse Rinpoche said:
“So, where is your female form now?” asked the goddess.
“It is no more,” replied Śāriputra, and they discuss what is meant by ‘no
more’. As there is no such thing as truly existing gender, they said, how can
it change once, let alone twice.
This conversation about gender equality took place near the beautiful
and remote north Indian city of Vaiśālī, in the presence of perhaps the most
significant and consequential spiritual practitioners alive at that time. And
it happened more than two thousand five hundred years ago, centuries
before the Christian and Islamic religions were founded, and more than
two millennia before the French writer Olympe de Gouges published her
Declaration of the Rights of Woman and the Female Citizen in 1791 and the
English philosopher Mary Wollstonecraft added her feminist voice with A
Vindication of the Rights of Woman in 1792.

Malcolm wrote:
In fact, this is a dodge. It shows how much sexism there is in Buddhism. When you have a story about how a goddess has to call an arhat correct on sexism, this shows there is a deep problem with sexism in Buddhism and there has been since its inception. This is what that story means.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 17th, 2017 at 12:51 AM
Title: Re: Successful empowerment and conferral of samaya?
Content:


conebeckham said:
On reflection, I will agree with this position, Malcolm.

Malcolm wrote:
Come on, cone, if you agree with me there is nothing to discuss!


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 17th, 2017 at 12:47 AM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:
conebeckham said:
I will note the DKR calls attention to the "poor preparation" of students by the Rigpa organization, and I think that's right.

heart said:
No to mention his attention to the training of the teacher.

Malcolm wrote:
I addressed this explicitly.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 17th, 2017 at 12:45 AM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:
MalaBeads said:
One thing emerges as clear: that orthodox Tibetan teachers and orthodox western practioners differ in their interpretations of the events surrounding Sogyal Rinpoche.

Malcolm wrote:
There is no such thing as orthodoxy in Tibetan Buddhism. Position? Power? Money? Yes. Orthodoxy, nope that does not exist.

MalaBeads said:
No orthodoxy, eh? How so?

Malcolm wrote:
It is summed up in this old Tibetan saying, "Every valley has a different language; every lama has a different Dharma."

Kirt thinks that broad commonalties, largely based in the Kadampa tradition, between the four schools counts for an orthodoxy, or that the goal of all schools is to liberated sentient beings (it is true they all give lip service to this idea).

But we all know that Tibetan culture is extremely brutal to animals (hence Patrul's' long diatribes about meat eating, agriculture practices, shearing of sheep and so on), and we also know that Tibetans were extremely brutal to each other. The aristocrats in Tibet oppressed the shit out of their subjects, all the while mouthing pretty mores about compassion, bodhicitta, and so on. I certainly do not mean to suggest, by the way that Western Capitalist culture is a vast improvement. In 1850 there were 3,204,313 slaves in bondage in the USA.

Quite frankly, so called "orthodoxy" in Tibetan Buddhism merely serves the class interests of the religious caste in Tibetan society.

This is not to say that Tibetan Buddhism has not produced thousands of awakened people, because it has — but as far as I can tell, most of these people were on the margins, like Milarepa, not connected with institutional Buddhism in Tibet, for the most part.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 17th, 2017 at 12:33 AM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:
Grigoris said:
I actually think he clarified a lot of issues.

Malcolm wrote:
For example?

Grigoris said:
He talked at length of the Teacher's job to prepare the students.  This, to me, does not look like a condemnation of students.  Then he talked about how students should assess their teacher before entrusting themselves to them.  This, to me, does not look like a condemnation of teachers.

Actually, what this makes clear to me, is that that the relation between student and teacher is not a one way affair, in either direction.  It shows me that the relationship is one of mutual dependence, that both sides have to have an intelligent and informed attitude to the teacher-student relationship, otherwise it'll end up as a disaster (or will just be pointless).  I fail to see why this is controversial.

Malcolm wrote:
He did indeed discuss this, which I took pains to point out.

However, he still lays blame on the students who have picked a faulty guru and he still insists that if such students criticize that guru or perceives the guru as disqualified or at fault, they have broken samaya with that guru, even if in the end it is the guru's own damn fault because that guru himself broke samaya with his or students, subjecting those students to abuse — physical, sexual, financial, or emotional.

I can understand why people like Dzongsar, who have literally thousands of vajra disciples, might be anxious about the issue of samayas. You have to have a titanium stomach to bear all that broken samaya.

There are a lot of samaya heroes out there who arrogantly proclaim that that "Vajrayāna isn't for pussies." Vajrayāna machismo primarily injures woman—   it really does need to end.

Another glaring hole in his presentation was there was no mention of patriarchy, the unequal status of woman in the Dharma, sexist attitudes towards woman that is rampant in Vajrayāna circles (the dakini/whore complex), Tibetan privilege (yes, it is a problem), and so on.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 16th, 2017 at 11:02 PM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
These are all good suggestions, but they need to take it step further and completely disassociate with Sogyal, as in the Kripalu example I mentioned before.

M


Lucas Oliveira said:
Sogyal Rinpoche Resigns from Rigpa

Rigpa also announced an independent investigation into the abuse allegations, and the creation of a new code of conduct and spiritual advisory group to guide the Rigpa organization:

 “The governing boards and management teams of Rigpa, having sought professional and spiritual advice, will assure that the following steps are taken:

1. Set up an independent investigation by a neutral third party into the various allegations that have been made.

2. Launch an international consultation process to establish both a code of conduct and a grievance process for Rigpa.

3. Establish a new spiritual advisory group to guide the Rigpa organization.

These steps are being taken by the boards and management teams of Rigpa worldwide, in a true spirit of collaboration. Channels will be established so that any member of our community has the opportunity to express their wishes, views and concerns.” (Rigpa International)

https://www.buddhistdoor.net/news/sogyal-rinpoche-resigns-from-rigpa-


Even in Kali Yuga justice is present. Because the truth is immortal.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 16th, 2017 at 10:43 PM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:
Grigoris said:
I actually think he clarified a lot of issues.

Malcolm wrote:
For example?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 16th, 2017 at 10:06 PM
Title: Re: Non-Duality in Dzogchen vs Advaita Vedanta
Content:
Vasana said:
I'm trying to understand the difference between these two states in terms of practice rather than the usual dialect of Brahman being taken as an absolute existent . The extinction of subject and object seems to be common to both traditions as does the burning away of Samskaras/vasanas and mental activity as a result of such samādhi/jñāna. So what is the experiential difference between the jñāna In Advaita that results in the extinguishing of karmic traces and conceptualization and the jñāna in Dzogchen that results in the karmic extinguishing of traces and conceptualization?

Is there still some subtle knowledge-obscuration [jneyavarana] that Advaita's Nirvikalpa Samadhi fails to make obsolete?

Anonymous X said:
Yes, there must be. Nirvikalpa Samadhi is not a final resting place, so to speak, per Ramana Maharshi and others.

Malcolm wrote:
There is no difference between nirvikalpa samadhi and vajropama samadhi apart from the person who is experiencing them: an ordinary afflicted being or someone about enter buddhahood. In the case of the former, such a person has not even scratched the surface of the two obscurations; in the case of the latter, vajropama samadhi eradicates the last vestige of the two obscurations.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 16th, 2017 at 9:52 PM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:


Malcolm wrote:
A lot of bullshit, not 100%, but a very high percentage of bullshit.

Punya said:
Oh really. You disagree with DJKR? What a surprise!

(Sorry to be late with these comments, but some of us only have time for work, practice and household matters during the week and the other thread got closed down.)

Sonam Wangchug said:
Again Malcolm's bias against DJKR becomes painfully clear here.

Malcolm wrote:
I am not biased against Dzongsar. I think he is a highly qualified teacher. I have encouraged people to study with him, if they are interested to, and I still would.

Nevertheless, I thought much of his spiel on Facebook with respect to the Sogyal debacle was bullshit. It was long winded, repetitive, rambling, self-indulgent and overly blaming of students. That is my opinion of the piece he wrote. I am sure that you, like others, have a different opinion.

Sonam Wangchug said:
Just because you disagree with a Rinpoche doesn't mean you have to be disrespectful, "A lot of bullshit." "Self indulgent babble" .. who are YOU to say such a thing?

Malcolm wrote:
Why should I have to be any particular kind of person at all? Not only that, I do not find that Dzongsar is especially respectful of those who are the object of his oft-voiced criticisms.

Do you maintain a double standard? It's ok for Dzongsar to be rude and cutting because he is a "rinpoche" while ordinary people who do not bear hereditary titles, peons such as myself, need to take a respectful tone with their superiors? Sorry, that is exactly why we Americans kicked out the British. I am not going to bend a knee to anyone merely because they possess a title.

Sonam Wangchug said:
I may not agree with everything CHNN does, but realizing people like YOU and others are his students and have faith in him, I find it pretty arrogant and rude to insult teachers.

Malcolm wrote:
I did not insult him, I found his piece to be wanting, imprecise, and largely unfair and unbalanced.

Sonam Wangchug said:
As a Sakya loppen, there is a bit more weight on you to act with some decency, especially when the head of Sakya says Rinpoche is one of the most learned and realized rinpoche's of our times .. somehow doesn't really equate with "self indulgent babble."

Malcolm wrote:
Dzongsar takes a lot of opportunity to be a social critic. He delights in it. No one says, "Hey Dzongsar, that's bullshit." Instead everyone just applauds him and tells him how wonderful his words are — as if he is a prince and we are in his court.

If you can dish it out, you have to be able to take it, especially when you dish it out in public. The court of public opinion is a rather different kind of court than a royal court.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 16th, 2017 at 12:42 PM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:
Konchog1 said:
Do this mean the Three Heaps Sutra or something else?

Malcolm wrote:
the footnotes on the tantra refer to a different text.

Konchog1 said:
Any chance of finding this in English?

Malcolm wrote:
In 2018 when my translation of the Rigpa Rangshar will be published by Wisdom.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 16th, 2017 at 12:40 PM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:
smcj said:
There is no such thing as orthodoxy in Tibetan Buddhism. Position? Power? Money? Yes. Orthodoxy, nope that does not exist.
Although on one level correct, I think I'm going to say this how things look when you completely lack pure view.

Malcolm wrote:
"Pure view" is simply a measure of how much delusion you can stand without getting sucked into it. Buddhas have an infinite capacity to not be sucked in by delusion. Us, not so much. Even our so called "pure vision" is just a conceptual delusion.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 16th, 2017 at 12:38 PM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:
MalaBeads said:
One thing emerges as clear: that orthodox Tibetan teachers and orthodox western practioners differ in their interpretations of the events surrounding Sogyal Rinpoche.

Malcolm wrote:
There is no such thing as orthodoxy in Tibetan Buddhism. Position? Power? Money? Yes. Orthodoxy, nope that does not exist.

kirtu said:
You are being unnecessarily provocative on this point.  There is definitely an orthodoxy and it is reflected in what people and esp. gurus consider normative.  In that sense it is a potentially fluid orthodoxy.

Kirt

Malcolm wrote:
There is no orthodoxy. Sakyapa? Gelugs, Kagyus, and Nyingmas disagree with you. Gelug? Kagyus, Nyingmas, and Sakyapas disagree with you and so it goes.

The establishment of orthodoxy is just about when the dry rot of religion sets in.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 16th, 2017 at 12:21 PM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:
MalaBeads said:
One thing emerges as clear: that orthodox Tibetan teachers and orthodox western practioners differ in their interpretations of the events surrounding Sogyal Rinpoche.

Malcolm wrote:
There is no such thing as orthodoxy in Tibetan Buddhism. Position? Power? Money? Yes. Orthodoxy, nope that does not exist.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 16th, 2017 at 12:20 PM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:
TRC said:
So, perhaps a clarification of this samaya aspect and how it directly relates to Sogyal Rinpoche would be good, to get this topic back to focus and relevancy?

Malcolm wrote:
I think the assumption that needs to be tested is the assumption that these students have any samaya at all with Sogyal as a teacher.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 16th, 2017 at 12:17 PM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:


Malcolm wrote:
It also gives warning signs that one has broken samaya:
These are the warning signs of broken samaya:
various misfortunes arise,
diseases are rampant and harmful, 
various contagious diseases occur, 
and there are also provocations and misguiders. 
If one is killed, one becomes a hell being. 
One’s eyes cannot see form. 
One cannot hear and one’s work cannot be done.
Leprosy and blistering diseases arise. 
Thieves and royal punishments occur. 
One contracts contagious diseases others do not get. 
One’s sons and daughters die. 
The whole country arises as one’s enemy.
One’s activities become completely pointless. 
When such warning signs arise, 
recite a confession as previously explained. 
If confessions are recited, then these signs will be successfully averted.

Konchog1 said:
Do this mean the Three Heaps Sutra or something else?

Malcolm wrote:
the footnotes on the tantra refer to a different text.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 16th, 2017 at 12:14 PM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
If you do not have samaya, you did not receive the empowerment, you are not qualified to practice Vajrayāna, and so whatever effort you make in practicing Secret Mantra will become poison rather than medicine.

smcj said:
Malcolm, would you have enough confidence in an online initiation to do a retreat on that specific practice without having had the initiation duplicated elsewhere?

Malcolm wrote:
If I had confidence in the guru, I would absolutely have that confidence.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 16th, 2017 at 11:08 AM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:
conebeckham said:
[Some content edited out.]

Just to be clear--Garchen Rinpoche is not wasting anyone's time.  That is an extreme interpretation of my words.  Connections are established, we just perhaps differ on the extent of those connections.

Malcolm wrote:
It is a logical consequence of asserting that online transmissions do not transmit samaya.

Lhasa said:
And without samaya, whatever that is, we are trying to go up a creek without a paddle?

Malcolm wrote:
If you do not have samaya, you did not receive the empowerment, you are not qualified to practice Vajrayāna, and so whatever effort you make in practicing Secret Mantra will become poison rather than medicine.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 16th, 2017 at 11:04 AM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:
conebeckham said:
[Some content edited out.]

Just to be clear--Garchen Rinpoche is not wasting anyone's time.  That is an extreme interpretation of my words.  Connections are established, we just perhaps differ on the extent of those connections.

Malcolm wrote:
It is a logical consequence of asserting that online transmissions do not transmit samaya.



conebeckham said:
Is it your opinion that all on-line transmissions transmit Samaya?   For that matter, do Jenangs and Jinlabs transmit the same samayas as Wangkurs and Wangchens?  If so, is it not a requirement that such samayas are elucidated, or is merely "maintaining bodhicitta in one's heart" sufficient?

Malcolm wrote:
It is my opinion that if a qualified guru wishes to create samaya bonds with people who are a) tuning in over the internet or b) are present in the room, that is their prerogative. I see no reason at all why refuge ceremonies, monastic ordinations, bodhisattva vow rites, and so on as well as full abhishekas cannot be conferred online. The only difference I see is whether or not some guru feels comfortable with doing so or not. If they feel comfortable with it, that is fine with me and I will respect that their students received the transmission they say they received. Obviously gurus who are not comfortable with giving transmissions and empowerments online will not be online for that reason.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 16th, 2017 at 10:57 AM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:



conebeckham said:
Alright.

I am going to say something that may make me unpopular, but if you've only taken teachings or "empowerments" on-line, I think there are no "classic" samayas.

Malcolm wrote:
It is not going to make you unpopular, it just makes you wrong. Samayas in an empowerment come from reciting the vidyādhara vows, etc, after the Guru during the preliminary phase. If you think that the samayas did not take because you did not have a sip of samaya water after that recitation, well...

conebeckham said:
I did not make that argument.  Nor do I intend to.

I do, however, not mind being wrong.  I do not believe there have been full wangkurs given on-line, where the vidhyadhara vows are recited.  If I am wrong, so be it.  Someone can correct me with specific examples, and I will eat my proverbial hat.  If such full wangkur were in fact given, live via the internet, it would follow that, as is traditional, the explanation regarding the various samayas would also be given, in detail, just as it is, in full wangkurs, in "meat space."

Malcolm wrote:
What is the difference between the internet and sitting in a room watching the whole thing on a big screen with the lama hundreds of feet away being listened too on a local fm radio channel, and the samaya substances just being handed out to 4,000 people at the end? The samaya substances? Is that all? Geographical proximity?  As far as I can tell, the only difference between an empowerment given live online and one being given locally is the preference of the lama.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 16th, 2017 at 10:37 AM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:
conebeckham said:
[Some content edited out.]

Just to be clear--Garchen Rinpoche is not wasting anyone's time.  That is an extreme interpretation of my words.  Connections are established, we just perhaps differ on the extent of those connections.

Malcolm wrote:
It is a logical consequence of asserting that online transmissions do not transmit samaya.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 16th, 2017 at 10:33 AM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:
Adamantine said:
actual samaya being able or not being able to be conferred by unqualified or unrealized Gurus? It appeared you had indicated there were passages that covered that territory.

Malcolm wrote:
From chapter nine of the same text:

A master lacking a connection with a lineage of scholars, 
who is self-important, 
stupid, literal-minded, 
who does not understand the meaning of Secret Mantra, 
has harsh words for others, is boastful, 
has entered false paths, has not seen the mandala of the empowerment, disregards samaya,
is unable to answer questions,
has little learning, and great pride —
such an unexamined master is a māra for the disciple.
He is not a master who can teach Secret Mantra
and is unable to teach the Great Perfection, Ati.

Adamantine said:
Thank you Malcolm. That's a lot of conditions to meet. The translation has the list end with an AND great pride.. so was the intent of the source text to imply only if a master fulfills all of these negative descriptions they can not teach Secret Mantra? Or is just one or two potentially enough to disqualify them?

Malcolm wrote:
I think a number of different kinds of gurus are included in this list. I do not take it to mean that someone must possess all of these faults in full; but if they have enough of these faults then this passage applies to them.  "Enough" means enough of these faults which demonstrate through their conduct that these faults exist in them.

Adamantine said:
It's not clear in this excerpt as it's not addressed: in the case of an unqualified master granting Empowerment that a samaya link is not made in some way, or if a samaya link is made through the temdrel of mutual intent and the ritual enactment of the source tantric texts etc.  so I'll assume you have concluded that samaya is not transmitted from your own logical inference?

Malcolm wrote:
It is made very clear: "He is not a master who can teach Secret Mantra and is unable to teach the Great Perfection, Ati." It is an unequivocal statement.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 16th, 2017 at 10:25 AM
Title: Re: Individuality, Nonduality, Anatta, Nirvana
Content:
Queequeg said:
The confusion, it seems to me, arises with the attempt to directly "experience" emptiness, or alternatively anatta - these are more or less similar insights.

Wayfarer said:
'Experience' always implies 'an experiencer'. So you can't 'experience emptiness' - if you have an experience of it, then it's not empty, it contains something, namely 'the experiencer'.

Malcolm wrote:
There is no "experiencer" since there is no agent. There is merely experience, and all experience is empty.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 16th, 2017 at 7:29 AM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
It is not going to make you unpopular, it just makes you wrong. Samayas in an empowerment come from reciting the vidyādhara vows, etc, after the Guru during the preliminary phase. If you think that the samayas did not take because you did not have a sip of samaya water after that recitation, well...

Grigoris said:
Wait a second there Malcolm...  You yourself, in another thread, said that one cannot receive the Vase Empowerment without getting knocked on the head, which means the empowerment would be incomplete.  Now you are saying that the samaya water is not necessary to complete the empowerment?

Seems contradictory to me.

Malcolm wrote:
The consequence of maintain our friend Cone's POV is that Garchen is wasting his time.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 16th, 2017 at 7:24 AM
Title: Re: Tibetan Zen
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Just how many unconditioned (saṃskrita) dharmas do you think there are? By my count, there are only three: space and the two cessations. Space has no function at all, and neither do the two cessations. Space never changes, it is permanent. Cessations never change, they are permanent.

Emptiness also has no "function." Emptiness is also permanent and changeless.

Space, cessation, and emptiness also are not real so their permanence is merely a formal statement.

Only conditioned dharmas have "functions."

Sherab said:
Most physicists would argue that space is not fundamental and that it is an emergent.

Malcolm wrote:
Do not conflate the conditioned space of physics with ākāśa. They do not refer at all to the same thing.


Sherab said:
Space, cessation and emptiness are not real to you because as far as you are concerned, they are merely concepts and nothing else.  They have no correspondence to reality.

Malcolm wrote:
Space, cessation, and emptiness do not arise. Space is a description of absence of obstruction. Cessation is a description of absence of a cause for arising. Emptiness is a description of the absence of nature. These terms describe absences.

Sherab said:
This is another reason why you adopted the position that there is no ultimate.

Malcolm wrote:
I said there was no ultimate reality. Such a thing cannot be found on analysis.

Sherab said:
Correct me if I am wrong.  If I am right, then cessation for you is the same as annihilation because nothing is left after cessation.  That is an extreme position in my view.

Malcolm wrote:
Cessation is considered an extreme in Mahāyāna, an extreme to be avoided.

A cessation is not an annihilation however. A cessation is not annihilation since an annihilation requires an existent to be destroyed. A cessation is simply the absence of a cause for arising.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 16th, 2017 at 3:49 AM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:
Adamantine said:
actual samaya being able or not being able to be conferred by unqualified or unrealized Gurus? It appeared you had indicated there were passages that covered that territory.

Malcolm wrote:
From chapter nine of the same text:

A master lacking a connection with a lineage of scholars, 
who is self-important, 
stupid, literal-minded, 
who does not understand the meaning of Secret Mantra, 
has harsh words for others, is boastful, 
has entered false paths, has not seen the mandala of the empowerment, disregards samaya,
is unable to answer questions,
has little learning, and great pride —
such an unexamined master is a māra for the disciple.
He is not a master who can teach Secret Mantra
and is unable to teach the Great Perfection, Ati.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 16th, 2017 at 3:37 AM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:


conebeckham said:
Honestly? You cannot address this question on an internet forum.

Lhasa said:
Yes, honestly, some of us only have online teachers and no where to ask questions.  All I've heard is Garchen Rinpoche say to keep your mind full of love, bodhicitta.


conebeckham said:
Alright.

I am going to say something that may make me unpopular, but if you've only taken teachings or "empowerments" on-line, I think there are no "classic" samayas.

Malcolm wrote:
It is not going to make you unpopular, it just makes you wrong. Samayas in an empowerment come from reciting the vidyādhara vows, etc, after the Guru during the preliminary phase. If you think that the samayas did not take because you did not have a sip of samaya water after that recitation, well...


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 16th, 2017 at 3:35 AM
Title: Re: Tantric Vows after Death
Content:
Minobu said:
I was taught that tantric vows after we die become null in void so to speak.
If this is the case it seems much more compassionate than the hell fire and brimstone that is going on in other threads concerning Tantric vows.
It produces a fear instead of joy..

maybe it's just some sects. it does not make sense that the stopping of a Buddhist practice should cause any harm to the sentient being.


Malcolm wrote:
Yes, they do. They are connected with the physical body. When that perished, so do the samayas.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 16th, 2017 at 2:48 AM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:
tiagolps said:
Right don't disagree with ye there. where you getting at?

Grigoris said:
That not all Western cultures are purely Kali Yuga cultures.
.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes they are. Why? Because the humans in them are all 100% grade A kali yuga people. All of the people of the world are 100%  Kali Yugins.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 16th, 2017 at 2:31 AM
Title: Re: The Mahamudra of Sakya Pandita, paper by Julia Stenzel
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
This short text has been translated, more than once.


kirtu said:
On Academia.edu, you will have to register to download it.

http://www.academia.edu/10145199/The_Mah%C4%81mudr%C4%81_of_Sakya_Pa%E1%B9%87%E1%B8%8Dita, Julia Stenzel, Indian International
Journal of Buddhist Studies Volume 15 (2014)
Sakya Pandita Kunga Gyaltsen (Sa skya paˆ∂ita kun dga‘
rgyal mtshan, 1182–1251) of the Sakya school of Tibetan
Buddhism viewed Mahåmudrå practice as being solely a part of the
Tantric practice path—a path to which disciples may be introduced
only after having passed through the initiations and required stages
of the Niruttarayogatantra. He criticised the non-Tantric
Mahåmudrå approaches of Kagyü (Bka‘ brgyud) masters such as
Gampopa (Sgam po pa, 1079-1153) and Lama Zhang Tsalpa (Bla ma
Zhang tshal pa, 1123-93). The controversy between representatives
of the two schools has been discussed by Roger Jackson (1982) ,
David Jackson (1990, 1994) , and others. Western scholarship has
been less concerned, however, with the positive statements of
Sakya Pandita on Mahåmudrå, i.e. with the question of what a
correct understanding of Mahåmudrå would be in his eyes. This
fact is partly due to the secrecy with which the Sakya School
handles Tantric texts. However, in a dialogue (dris lan) text in the
collected works of the Sakya masters (Sa skya bka’’bum), Sakya
Pandita gives a short account of the topic in response to questions
posed by Tokden Gyan (Rtogs ldan rgyan). 1 This text, available
from the Tibetan Buddhist Resource Center and as yet
untranslated, 2 will serve as the basis for an analysis of Sakya
Pandita‘s Mahåmudrå. His presentation will be supplemented by
explanations drawn from A Clear Differentiations of the Three
Codes, 3 and Taking the Result as the Path (Stearns 2006) . Since
controversies and debates have the advantage of clarifying
divergent viewpoints by highlighting crucial differences, I will
include a discussion of the Kagyü Mahåmudrå approaches that
Sapan criticizes wherever it seems helpful in illuminating Sakya
Pandita‘s standpoint. For this part of the research, I will rely on the
Western scholarship mentioned previously. My analysis does not
aim at justifying either side of the controversy. Both Sakya and
Kagyü Schools have continuously taught their respective
meditation systems for nearly a millennium, which I like to see as a
proof that a significant number of individuals have found meaning
in their divergent approaches. As Western scholars and
practitioners explore Tibetan Buddhism, it is important to
understand controversial positions as thoroughly as the secret
content of the debated material allows, so as not to perpetuate a
thousand year-old debate on the basis of partial information. It is
my hope that this paper contributes to clarifying the position of
Sakya Pandita in the Mahåmudrå controversy.
Kirt


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 16th, 2017 at 2:22 AM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:
Grigoris said:
Uuuuuummm...  I think you are talking about US culture here, coz Greek society, for example, predates the beginning of the Kali Yuga (3012 BCE) and also happens to be Western culture.  Greek Neolithic society is kicked off about 7000BC, highly developed Helladic, Minoan and Cycladic societies existed about 100+ years before the beginning of the Kali Yuga.

Malcolm wrote:
Every culture in the world is a kali yuga culture. Your view is excessively synchronic.

Grigoris said:
Ever culture in the world is CURRENTLY a Kali Yuga culture.  Pre-3012BCE Indian culture can not be considered Kali Yuga culture.

Malcolm wrote:
Right, I am talking about now, not 3012BCE.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 16th, 2017 at 2:12 AM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:
tiagolps said:
Completely out of the blue question, you mentioned on a facebook post that "Tibetans were a violent culture, and their ritual preferences reflect this" and "Indians were a more erotic culture, and their ritual preferences reflect this too".
Out of curiosity, what do we westerners reflect?

Malcolm wrote:
We are a Kali Yuga culture, so it is a little too soon to say.

Grigoris said:
Uuuuuummm...  I think you are talking about US culture here, coz Greek society, for example, predates the beginning of the Kali Yuga (3012 BCE) and also happens to be Western culture.  Greek Neolithic society is kicked off about 7000BC, highly developed Helladic, Minoan and Cycladic societies existed about 100+ years before the beginning of the Kali Yuga.

Malcolm wrote:
Every culture in the world is a kali yuga culture. Your view is excessively synchronic.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 16th, 2017 at 1:55 AM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
...

tiagolps said:
Completely out of the blue question, you mentioned on a facebook post that "Tibetans were a violent culture, and their ritual preferences reflect this" and "Indians were a more erotic culture, and their ritual preferences reflect this too".
Out of curiosity, what do we westerners reflect?

Malcolm wrote:
We are a Kali Yuga culture, so it is a little too soon to say.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 16th, 2017 at 1:32 AM
Title: Re: DJKR on Rigpa Scandal
Content:
Crazywisdom said:
I 100% agree with this,

https://www.buddhistdoor.net/news/dzongsar-khyentse-rinpoche-issues-public-statement-on-recent-criticism-of-sogyal-rinpoche


Malcolm wrote:
I don't, for many reasons. Mostly self-indulgent bullshit. There are a few things in it with which I agree. Mostly it is a bunch of irrelevant silliness and posturing.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 16th, 2017 at 1:24 AM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
In short, people should consult the Rigpa Rangshar's chapter on samaya and cease laying blame on blameless students who have the misfortune of choosing mad guides.

Adamantine said:
Is there an existing English rendition of this chapter? If not, could you give a summary and at least a couple of relevant lines translated for us to consider? Otherwise it is simply not possible for non-lotsawas to consult with the text in a timely way regarding this issue. Thank you.
Not sure if you missed this Malcolm, as you've been since active in the thread.. hope you'll consider helping us look into your reference. Thanks!


Malcolm wrote:
This is with respect to breaking the samayas of the body, from chapter 10 of the Rig pa rang shar:
If the master breaks samaya, there is no method of purification.
Both master and disciple are born in the hell of great wailing.

If the disciple breaks samaya, there is a method of purification.
recite the vast discourses
and turn the vast wheel of the ganacakra.
It is also said that one should completely purify the three wheels.
It also gives warning signs that one has broken samaya:
These are the warning signs of broken samaya:
various misfortunes arise,
diseases are rampant and harmful, 
various contagious diseases occur, 
and there are also provocations and misguiders. 
If one is killed, one becomes a hell being. 
One’s eyes cannot see form. 
One cannot hear and one’s work cannot be done.
Leprosy and blistering diseases arise. 
Thieves and royal punishments occur. 
One contracts contagious diseases others do not get. 
One’s sons and daughters die. 
The whole country arises as one’s enemy.
One’s activities become completely pointless. 
When such warning signs arise, 
recite a confession as previously explained. 
If confessions are recited, then these signs will be successfully averted.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 16th, 2017 at 12:49 AM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:
pael said:
I want to know how deep I am in samaya. ChNN manifested sickness after I sent questions to him with e-mail on 11th of May 2017. Is this my fault?


Malcolm wrote:
Oh lord, no. You should not think that way at all.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 16th, 2017 at 12:30 AM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:
makewhisper said:
Based on your study and practice, what conditions are necessary for a successful empowerment and conferral of samaya?


Malcolm wrote:
The student has to actually know what they are doing — this is the main criteria.

makewhisper said:
As a neophyte, I'm not quite sure what this means.

Malcolm wrote:
It means you have to know what you are doing. You have to understand the Dharma. You have to examine the teacher. You have to understand the commitments you are taking on. For example, if you do not understand the commitments you are taking, you don't have samaya at all. It is really that simple.

If you do understand the commitments, you do know what you are doing, and so on, a teacher's conduct has to be pretty outrageously abusive before you can legitimately say, this teacher has broken samaya and now my commitment to him or her is null and void. If he or she likes fancy cars, too bad; if they like expensive food and wine; too bad. If they have a penchant for gold and silver, and insist that their students pay outrageous fees for teachings, too bad. If they like having multiple partners and are up front about it, too bad. If they are gay, too bad. If they are trans, too bad.

But if they systematically abuse their power, or are dishonest, or are physically and/or sexually abusive, well, then one might have a case that this teacher is bad news. Even here, it is best to just leave their company and move on. However, sometimes it is bad enough to warrant a public outing. In this case, don't worry about your samaya, your obligation to sentient beings is more important.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 16th, 2017 at 12:14 AM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
These days, empowerments are handed out as a means of attracting followers to people who no idea what they are doing, even though sometimes they have been "following" Tibetan Buddhism for decades. How can one even imagine that any of these people have actually received samaya? It is only possible to believe this if one thinks that merely attending a ritual and repeating some words has the power to confer samaya. I don't believe this, but you are free to disagree.

makewhisper said:
Based on your study and practice, what conditions are necessary for a successful empowerment and conferral of samaya?


Malcolm wrote:
The student has to actually know what they are doing — this is the main criteria.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 16th, 2017 at 12:11 AM
Title: Re: Guru Yoga thought experiment
Content:
Grigoris said:
I agree, and I also think that his point of people entering Vajrayana without a grasp of Buddhist basics, is also very important.

MalaBeads said:
Yes.

Miroku said:
Yes exactly. Few days ago my friend and I had a discussion about informing people about samayas when preparing them for di from ChNN. Nobody ever tells them anything about some samayas and preparation is usually done in a matter of few minutes. No wonder Rinpoche's helath is bad.


Malcolm wrote:
ChNN never mentions samaya when discussing Direct Introduction, or when he does, he says it is too much to remember and quite relative anyway. He does recommend that if someone is unhappy with someone they discover is an unqualified teacher, they are free to leave. But that they should not slander that teacher in anyway. In this respect, he is quite traditional.

For him, samaya means doing guru yoga, and not causing problems in his boat.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 16th, 2017 at 12:08 AM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:
pael said:
Can samaya be received, if receiver has incomplete faculties (being cripple or something else)?

Malcolm wrote:
Yes.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 15th, 2017 at 11:45 PM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:
pael said:
Can seed be nonviable, if receiver has incomplete faculties (being cripple or something else)?

Do you need to know exact translation of recited words? Teachers often just say: ''repeat these samaya words'' Is this enough?

Malcolm wrote:
You need to know what you are doing so that you have no doubt about what you are doing. Repeating "samaya" words you don't understand is not sufficient.

All of these problems come about for three reasons: power, money, and sex.

pael said:
Does this mean knowing how many root vows there is or content of few of them?
All I know is basically from Berzin Archives.

Malcolm wrote:
The problem of course is that, traditionally, one is not allowed to know the contents of samaya prior to receiving it, and after one's receives it, it is held it is too late to give it back or refuse it.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 15th, 2017 at 11:33 PM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Samaya is a seed that slowly grows into a tree. Sometimes that seed is nonviable, because of 1) the soil in which it is planted is not properly prepared,

pael said:
Can seed be nonviable, if receiver has incomplete faculties (being cripple or something else)?
Malcolm wrote:
One receives by them by reciting some words after a teacher at the beginning of the empowerment, and then at the end saying, "Ok boss, I'll do whatever you say" (btso bo ji ltar bka' bstsal pa, de dag thams cad bdag gi bgyis."

pael said:
Do you need to know exact translation of recited words? Teachers often just say: ''repeat these samaya words'' Is this enough?

Malcolm wrote:
You need to know what you are doing so that you have no doubt about what you are doing. Repeating "samaya" words you don't understand is not sufficient.

All of these problems come about for three reasons: power, money, and sex.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 15th, 2017 at 11:29 PM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:
tiagolps said:
DJKR does mention the same thing:

Grigoris said:
I know he does, I was talking about the participants in this thread...

tiagolps said:
In the end our fear of Abrahamic judgement is always projected onto karma, as if both had the same basis, nobody likes to be "blamed". It's very easy to misunderstand karma when talking about abuser-abused situations.

For example I remember DJKR giving the example of how "it's the victims karma to have a human body at that time and place", of course, it's the abusers karma to feel uncontrollable sexual urges.

Malcolm wrote:
This is rather like saying that a raped woman is culpable for being raped because she has a vagina, and just maybe she was wearing a dress that made her look attractive.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 15th, 2017 at 10:30 PM
Title: Re: Tibetan Zen
Content:
Sherab said:
Here is why 'unconditioned' is not a suitable term to describe emptiness and therefore the ultimate:

https://dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=40&t=26142&start=100#p399627

Malcolm wrote:
Defining emptiness as unconditioned is axiomatic; for example, Abhisamayālaṃkāravṛtti kīrtikalā:
The conditioned depends on cause and conditions, for example, the desire realm and so on. The unconditioned does not depend on cause and condition, for example, emptiness and so on.

Sherab said:
Yes, the unconditioned does not depend on cause and condition.  But that does not automatically mean that the unconditioned cannot function.  The unconditioned is only non-functional only if it is taken to be the same as permanent, totally incapable of any change.

Malcolm wrote:
Just how many unconditioned (saṃskrita) dharmas do you think there are? By my count, there are only three: space and the two cessations. Space has no function at all, and neither do the two cessations. Space never changes, it is permanent. Cessations never change, they are permanent.

Emptiness also has no "function." Emptiness is also permanent and changeless.

Space, cessation, and emptiness also are not real so their permanence is merely a formal statement.

Only conditioned dharmas have "functions."


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 15th, 2017 at 10:28 PM
Title: Re: Tibetan Zen
Content:
Sherab said:
@Malcolm,

I argued previously that: (see https://dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=40&t=26142&start=100#p399627 )

When something is dependently arisen, it implies that the something is not unconditioned. If you assert that emptiness is dependent arising or dependent co-arising, and if you also assert that emptiness is empty as well, then you would be implying that emptiness is not unconditioned. Your reply did not address the logical problem raised.

So far, you have avoided addressing this issue.  If you want to resolve the logical conundrum, you have to look more closely at what dependent arising is.  If you take dependent arising as strictly a temporal causal chain, you cannot get out of this conundrum.  If you cannot get out of this conundrum, you will have to take the view that there cannot be an ultimate because of dependent arising and merely asset that emptiness is unconditioned even when the emptiness of emptiness implies otherwise, which is exactly what you have done.  So I am not surprised by your position.

Anyway, I think I have already stated my position and the relevant supporting arguments.  Until the above is addressed, the debate will not end.  So I am going to leave this discussion until such time you address the logical conundrum that I posed.

Malcolm wrote:
I have not addressed the issue because it is a nonissue. Whatever arises in dependence (relative truth) is empty (ultimate truth).  The two truths are inseparable.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 15th, 2017 at 10:23 PM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:
narraboth said:
They are two contradictory statements. Does 'not preparing students properly' automatically make empowerment invalid? If yes, there is no 'so much broken samaya today'. If not, people in Rigpa who have received full empowerments from SR have samaya with SR.

Malcolm wrote:
Only if you believe that attending an any empowerment ritual at all withy any teacher at all creates magic vajra dust that you carry around with you forever because of the magic power of a ritual. HHDL has said on more than one occasion that when he gives these large Kalacakras, he does not feel that most people in attendance have even received the empowerment at all, much less samaya.

narraboth said:
You will need to draw a line on what do you mean for sufficiently preparing students and what is not, thus who is qualified and who is not. There are rules in tradition about the qualification of giving empowerment/ being vajra masters, I don't think 'preparing students properly' is one.

Malcolm wrote:
Dzongsar Khyentse clearly thinks that preparing students is the responsibility of the teacher.

Where I disagree with him is the notion that improperly prepared vessels have any samaya at all to break.

I also think it is quite questionable to believe that reciting words after a teacher in a language one does not understand qualifies as "receiving vows." After all, how does one receive a vow in Vajrayāna. One receives by them by reciting some words after a teacher at the beginning of the empowerment, and then at the end saying, "Ok boss, I'll do whatever you say" ( btso bo ji ltar bka' bstsal pa, de dag thams cad bdag gi bgyis."

narraboth said:
'Knowing how to prepare students properly' might be one; if the teacher did not do what they supposed to do, there're consequences, but that doesn't make students have 'no samaya' with him.

Malcolm wrote:
Sure it does, unless you similarly take the position that attending an ordination with an unqualified upādhyāyaḥ confers ordination vows or that someone who is in debt, etc., can take ordination.

These days, empowerments are handed out as a means of attracting followers to people who no idea what they are doing, even though sometimes they have been "following" Tibetan Buddhism for decades. How can one even imagine that any of these people have actually received samaya? It is only possible to believe this if one thinks that merely attending a ritual and repeating some words has the power to confer samaya. I don't believe this, but you are free to disagree.

narraboth said:
Not sure what the Rigpa Rangshar says, I will have a read if you can qoute the full tibetan title. But from the common three-vows commentaries, which translation are available, I don't see Malcom's definition in it.

Malcolm wrote:
Honestly, the three vows literature is filled with nonsense. It is principally polemical in nature, thanks to Sakya Pandita, and there are so many contradictory opinions as to render this whole class of polemical literature basically useless as a guide for what one is to accept and reject unless one should stay in the narrow silo of a particular interpretation. It is a technical literatures for scholars with too much time on their hands and who do not practice enough. It is not a literature which will clearly explain to one how one is to practice the three vows. For example, Sapan claims it is ridiculous to expect that someone who has not received full ordination should nevertheless follow all the vows of a fully ordained monk or nun, and at the same time, we see other famous presentations of this literature which insists that this is the case. Sapan claims the three vows do not have one intention; but in Drigung it is clearly held that they do. Thus, there is no common three vows literature. Sapan claims it is absurd to dedicate merit to the dharmadhātu, etc. There are so many points of disagreement and the whole of the three vows literature was spawned by Sapan's polemics.

narraboth said:
I also don't think a person needs to be ''realised" (to what degree??) to perform a valid empowerment ritual (pointing out teaching is another issue). At least not in Sakya's view from what I heard. We need to be extremely careful here. If I have chance to meet HHST again I will try to ask.

Malcolm wrote:
If a person who is not realized performs a qualified rite, with all the bells and whistles, in a proper way, that empowerment is valid as far as it goes. It can serve as a basis for someone's practice of this or that sadhana. But the unrealized person giving that empowerment cannot expect that he or she has bestowed much in the way of samaya, especially if their own samaya is not really in perfect order. In any case, the notion of the 22 common samayas is a scholastic construct. There is no tantra that gives a defined list of 14 root and 8 branch samayas.

narraboth said:
To push further, I have been in Rigpa centre limited time listening to other masters' teaching. I don't think the consequences of samaya breakage were not mentioned; I heard Kyabje Trulshik Rinpoche talked about it and it was translated, emphasized and repeated again. If it was mentioned too late or not I don't know. People were already there, bought tickets, paid for the meals and beds.... like almost every major event in other places. You can of course say it was too loose, but again, that doesn't make students free from samaya.

Malcolm wrote:
Were we talking about Trulshik Rinpoche? I don't think so. We were talking about what happens when unrealized teachers give empowerments to poorly prepared students — which has unfortunately become the rule, rather than the exception.

I know of at least one example where a teacher accused his student of completely breaking samaya, telling others this person was going to hell. This student, understandably upset, went to Tulku Nyima Gyaltsen and explained the situation. Tulku Nyima Gyaltsen's reply was that the Tibetan teacher granting the empowerment was not qualified to give empowerments at all (despite having done three year retreat, being a recognized tulku, etc.) and the student in question had no samaya to break despite being the sponsor for the empowerment in question.

Thus, the picture painted by some within the tradition of an inviolable bond with absolutely strict and mechanical outcomes (the old snake in a tube example) seems to be rather not as hard and fast as some teachers and students imagine.

narraboth said:
The only way I find to get around is, I don't think SR gave full empowerment often.

Malcolm wrote:
I think this class of statement betrays an attachment to rules and rituals. This is a fetter, no matter what level of Buddhadharma we practice. As I mentioned above, attachment to rules and rituals is a huge problem in Vajrayāna in general. It makes people very superstitious, which is why the Buddha identified attachment to rules and rituals as one of the ten fetters to begin with.

narraboth said:
Most of time he invited other lama to do so, or because it's me only go there when my own guru visiting. Actually, when did SR last time gave a full empowerment??  That makes a big difference on the guru-students relationship. Indeed, dzogchen pointing out teaching also counts, but I think that's a different requirement for qualification and that might actually more suit Malcom's definition.

Malcolm wrote:
Thinking the mechanical attendance of an empowerment creates samaya is just superstition. Samaya is a seed that slowly grows into a tree. Sometimes that seed is nonviable, because of 1) the soil in which it is planted is not properly prepared, or 2) because the gardener is inept.

However, promising infernal consequences if someone busts a teacher purporting to teach Vajrayāna and give Vajrayāna teachings when they behave in a manner which proves they are not at all qualified to care for students is fundamentalism of the worst kind. I don't accept that, it does not make common sense, it is not just, it is not right, and should be protested vigorously.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 15th, 2017 at 9:44 AM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:


Malcolm wrote:
A lot of bullshit, not 100%, but a very high percentage of bullshit.

tiagolps said:
What parts did you find bullshit?

Quay said:
I'd rather hear about the non-bullshit parts myself.

Malcolm wrote:
Most of the piece was self-indulgent babble. The essence of the bullshit in this piece is that Dzongsar blames students for rejecting and abandoning deluded gurus when those students find out about the delusion of their deluded guru. It is not fair, it is not rational, and it is pure superstition to imagine that attending a ritual, no matter how profound and meaningful when administered by a realized person to a group of well prepared students, creates an irreversible bond when administered by foolish and deluded teachers. No one imagines that attending a monastic ordination lead by a madman would have any force at all. Such thinking represents the worst example of the fetter of attachment to rules and rituals. Indeed, this whole idea comes from such fettered thinking.

Why should we imagine that empowerments administered to poorly educated Western Dharma students by deluded fools who imagine themselves gurus, whether Tibetan or any other ethnicity, would have any binding power via samaya other than through accepting an irrational interpretation of how rites that impart Vajrayāna vows actually function? Most people have no idea what is happening when they attend empowerments. They do not understand the visualizations as they happen, and so on. Even if the gurus in question are realized, if the student does not understand what is going on, no samaya is transmitted.

I would suggest, honestly, that there are probably few people who actually have samaya at all among so called Vajrayāna students—— by and large because they have no idea what is happening during empowerments, direct introductions, and so on. There is no magic bond created by an empowerment, none whatsoever. The only true bond or samaya we have is our understanding of Dharma, how deep it goes, and our appreciation of the teacher and community within which this blossoms.

The other samayas are relative. But it is the relative ones that receive all the attention. Even in terms of relative samaya, samaya is something that gradually builds, matures, and becomes deeper as the student matures in their understanding of profound Secret Mantra.

I would suggest also that there are very few gurus alive today who can actually impart samayas, since they have not realized the meaning of the teachings they are imparting. I will discuss this in the conclusion.

When we think about debacles like Rikpa (as it presently exists), we should not even be discussing the issue of breaking samaya. First of all it is bad for the students. It demoralizes them. Secondly, we are not sure that they have samaya from Sogyal. It has yet to be determined that he ever was a qualified teacher. If he was never a qualified teacher, they never received samaya. When we read comments such as the one below it is seem very questionable whether Sogyal is a qualified teacher, (the part of the article which is not bullshit, apart from just a little):
I know a little about Sogyal Rinpoche because I have visited several Rigpa centres and have witnessed the Rigpa set-up first hand. To be frank, I didn’t see enough evidence to convince me that the appropriate warnings had been given, or that adequate foundations had been laid, or that the fundamental teachings were properly given. On several occasions it seemed to me that some of the students had been Christians until perhaps the day before they attended the teaching, then suddenly, 24-hours later, they were hearing about guru devotion, receiving pointing out instructions and practising Guru Yoga – it was as extreme as that.

If that’s how it happened – if no proper warnings and no fundamental training were given prior to the Vajrayana teachings¬ ¬– then Sogyal Rinpoche is even more in the wrong than his critical students. Why? Because it is his responsibility to prepare the ground in accordance with the Vajrayana’s prescribed and well-established foundation teachings and practice. There is no question that the person with the greater knowledge, power and therefore responsibility is also more culpable when those obligations are not fulfilled.
If Sogyal is in the wrong, and did not prepare his students properly, this automatically means he is an unqualified teacher and his students have no samaya with him at all, apart from as a Vajra brother. If Sogyal is in the wrong, it is axiomatic that his critical students are not in the wrong at all, from a samaya point of view, and thus this line is bullshit because they have no samaya with him.

Dzongsar also says this, which is 2% bullshit, 96% ok, and 2% requires a little more comment. Ok part in green; bullshit part in red, other part in orange:
If the teacher and student have reached a genuine understanding about the path being practised, and if all the necessary and appropriate foundations have been laid and a clear idea of possible consequences conveyed, but the student still has a wrong view and acts on it by slandering and criticizing the teacher, then, according to tantra, that student will face grave and unimaginable consequences. 

But the same also applies to the teacher. In fact, if the teacher hasn’t laid the proper foundations, if the teacher takes advantage of a student physically, emotionally or financially, and if the teacher gives the highest yoga tantric teachings to those who have not established a proper foundation and as a result an immature student breaks the most fundamental root samayas, then the teacher will also suffer extremely grave consequences – consequences even more serious and terrible than those faced by the student.
With respect to the section marked in orange: the serious and terrible consequences to a student that has been taken advantage of by a guru or teacher is that their trust in Dharma might be damaged for some time in this life or even multiple lifetimes, and they may suffering secret obstacles which prevent them from applying the Dharma. This is what renders the broken samaya of a teacher irreparable.

In short, people should consult the Rigpa Rangshar's chapter on samaya and cease laying blame on blameless students who have the misfortune of choosing mad guides. It not fair, it is not just, it is not right, it is not rational, and should not be accepted regardless of what the traditions seems to say on the matter because to take all this literally is merely an expression of the fetter of attachment to rules and rituals. What do I mean by "literally?" By "literal" I mean that empowerments given by gurus who are not truly realized have very little force. They have very little force to produce realization in their disciples, for many, many reasons. Likewise, they also have very little power to impart any real samaya.

The reasons why we see so much broken samaya today is not the fault of students, it is the fault of too many unrealized teachers giving empowerments which they are not qualified to give in the first place.

Oh, and BTW, bringing up Naropa and Tilopa, etc. is bullshit. Please stop doing it. The twelves trials are just stories, didactic stories to show what a huge egotist Naropa was. They doubtless have some basis, but they are exaggerated way beyond anything anyone can reasonably accept as anything other than Indian/Tibetan dramatic hyperbole.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 15th, 2017 at 6:57 AM
Title: Re: Tibetan Zen
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Whatever is unconditioned is permanent; there are no impermanent unconditioned entities. Whatever is conditioned is impermanent; there are no permanent conditioned entities.

Sherab said:
Here is why 'unconditioned' is not a suitable term to describe emptiness and therefore the ultimate:

https://dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=40&t=26142&start=100#p399627

Malcolm wrote:
Defining emptiness as unconditioned is axiomatic; for example, Abhisamayālaṃkāravṛtti kīrtikalā:
The conditioned depends on cause and conditions, for example, the desire realm and so on. The unconditioned does not depend on cause and condition, for example, emptiness and so on.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 15th, 2017 at 6:09 AM
Title: Re: Tibetan Zen
Content:
Sherab said:
Of course the Hindus will claim freedom from the two extremes.  They have been assimilating whatever they can assimilate of Buddhism into their religion and philosophy so as to render Buddhism irrelevant.  But the ultimate reality of Hinduism is monistic.  That contradicts their claim of freedom from the two extremes.

Malcolm wrote:
Any claim at all that there is an ultimate reality is an extreme.

Sherab said:
Try to understand why freedom from the two extremes precludes monistic claim first.

Malcolm wrote:
First, try to understand why dependent origination precludes any possibility of an ultimate reality.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 15th, 2017 at 5:53 AM
Title: Re: Tibetan Zen
Content:
krodha said:
How is your own view different than a non-Buddhist "Hindu" ultimate?

Malcolm wrote:
It isn't. Hindus also claim that Brahmin is free from the four extremes, etc.

The basic difference between Hindu traditions and Madhyamaka on up is that Hindus state there is an ultimate reality. The Buddhist position, Madhyamaka on up, is that there is no ultimate reality.

Sherab said:
Of course the Hindus will claim freedom from the two extremes.  They have been assimilating whatever they can assimilate of Buddhism into their religion and philosophy so as to render Buddhism irrelevant.  But the ultimate reality of Hinduism is monistic.  That contradicts their claim of freedom from the two extremes.

Malcolm wrote:
Any claim at all that there is an ultimate reality is an extreme.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 15th, 2017 at 5:47 AM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:
tiagolps said:
DJKR take on it:
https://www.facebook.com/djkhyentse/posts/2007833325908805

Malcolm wrote:
A lot of bullshit, not 100%, but a very high percentage of bullshit.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 15th, 2017 at 3:53 AM
Title: Re: Tibetan Zen
Content:
CedarTree said:
Malcolm, I have been thinking of two things you said and I think it would benefit the community here to have you elaborate on them a bit.

You mentioned "Nirvana being an "undesirable extreme in Mahāyāna"

This for me and I am sure others needs some further explaining.

You also mentioned that in Dzogchen the highest realized masters (Rainbow Body) have the material elements transform into the five pristine lights?  Can you elaborate what these Pristine Lights are and how Noumenal World can change like that without destroying casualty for all things?

Thank you.


Malcolm wrote:
Nirvana is the cessation of afflictions, and parinirvana is cessation of birth. The latter is an extreme because if buddhas cease in fact they cannot directly benefit anyone. Mahāyāna nirvana is called "non-abiding." This means though in one's continuum afflictions for rebirth in samsara has ceased, upon attaining buddhahood one continues to benefit sentient beings directly until samsara is emptied.

On the other hand, the Dzogchen view is stated succinctly by Mañjuśrīmitra:
Since the awakening of the sugata does not exist, his magical apparitions appear to the deluded, similar to an illusion.
Mipham comments on this line:
Since the awakening of the sugata does not exist, his magical apparition, while a false appearance, appears to the deluded, similar to an illusion.
As for your second question, it is exactly the same as the example of a liquid substance that appears differently for the being of the six realms.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 15th, 2017 at 1:16 AM
Title: Re: Tibetan Zen
Content:
Sherab said:
It is also easy to understand why many are confused between the Buddhist ultimate and the non-Buddhist ultimate, especially Hindu ultimate.

krodha said:
How is your own view different than a non-Buddhist "Hindu" ultimate?

Malcolm wrote:
It isn't. Hindus also claim that Brahmin is free from the four extremes, etc.

The basic difference between Hindu traditions and Madhyamaka on up is that Hindus state there is an ultimate reality. The Buddhist position, Madhyamaka on up, is that there is no ultimate reality.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 14th, 2017 at 11:05 PM
Title: Re: Tibetan Zen
Content:
Sherab said:
I have explained a few times previously that 'unconditioned' is not a suitable word to describe the ultimate.  You have conflated 'unconditioned' with 'permanence'.

Malcolm wrote:
Whatever is unconditioned is permanent, whatever is permanent is unconditioned.

Sherab said:
The consequence is the same.  When there is no ultimate reality, there is then only the relative reality.  If there is only the relative reality, then it is its own ultimate reality.

Malcolm wrote:
Only dependently originated entities are "real" (nondependent entities like space and cessations are not "real," i.e. they have no putative state of being at all), either perceived falsely (relative truth), or correctly (ultimate truth).

The reason why, in Mahāyana, dependently originated entities are likened to space is that they are not actually real; they only appear to be real when essences are imputed to them. The reason that in Mahāyāna it is said that all phenomena are in the state of nirvana from the start is because as Mañjuṥrī points out, whatever arises in dependence does not truly arise. Nirvana is a cessation. Nirvana does not arise.

Sherab said:
The ultimate, like the relative, is free from the two extremes.  They are functional.  That is why when the word 'unconditioned' is applied to the ultimate, one must not assumed immediately that 'unconditioned' means 'permanence'.

Malcolm wrote:
Whatever is unconditioned is permanent; there are no impermanent unconditioned entities. Whatever is conditioned is impermanent; there are no permanent conditioned entities.

Sherab said:
The relative is but an emergent thingy of the ultimate.  That is why the relative can be argued as being an illusion.  It is also why the relative can never be separated from the ultimate because without the ultimate, there is no possibility of an illusory relative.

Malcolm wrote:
There are no categories in Buddhadharma of relative and ultimate entities (dharmas). There are only conditioned entities (everything belonging to nama and rūpa) and unconditioned entities (space and the two cessations.)

[/quote]It is also easy to understand why many are confused between the Buddhist ultimate and the non-Buddhist ultimate, especially Hindu ultimate.[/quote]

The Buddhist ultimate truth is strictly a veridical perception (either analytical or nonanalytical) of any entity (whether conditioned or unconditioned). The Buddhist relative truth is a nonveridical perception (either analytical or nonanalytical) of any entity (whether conditioned or unconditioned).


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 14th, 2017 at 2:38 AM
Title: Re: Tibetan Zen
Content:


aflatun said:
When you say "below" do you mean Sautrantika is considered "highest" of the non Mahayana tenet systems? Is this hierarchy based on views of Nibbana specifically?


Malcolm wrote:
Yes, it is the highest tenet system in Hinayana, but this is it specifically related to nirvana.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 13th, 2017 at 8:02 PM
Title: Re: Tibetan Zen
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
In short, there is no independent ultimate, or nirvana, etc., other than in the mistaken view of Hinayāna tenets.

aflatun said:
Don't be silly, everyone knows that in Hinayana, Nirvana=atheist death I wish there wasn't some truth in that actually...

(Are you referring to Vaibhasika, Buddhaghosa, all of the above? The sautrantika were kind of nihilistic as I recall, not really eternalist...)

Malcolm wrote:
There is a range, but in general, everything below Sautrantika has a rather eternalist viewpoint of nirvana. Sautrantikas argue that nirvana is simply nonexistence.

All of these views about nirvana are mistaken. Also, one must understand that nirvana is regarded as an undesirable extreme in Mahāyāna.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 13th, 2017 at 7:59 PM
Title: Re: Tibetan Zen
Content:
Bakmoon said:
it is clearly presented in the Pali Suttas as well where the Kotthita Sutta teaches that to say that there is or isn't something in Nibbana is a mistake because it http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an04/an04.174.than.html

Malcolm wrote:
This does not mean that. It is similar to a  suuta in the Sutta Nipata where it is pointed out by the Buddha that one cannot speak of the nonexistence of an arhat who has passed away because there is no existence by which his nonexistence may be described.

Similarly, one cannot speak of the nonexistence of a given thing which has ceased because there is no given thing there to talk about. Fundamentaly, cessation is the absence of a cause, either through insight, or naturally, like a burnt seed. We cannot speak properly of the nonexistence of a shoot from a burnt seed because such a thing never existed from the start. All we can say is "That seed will not germinate." Likewise, of an arhat one can only say, "He or she will not be born."


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 13th, 2017 at 8:24 AM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:
heart said:
Mexican food was treated in USA in places like Taco Bell, it has all the right names but totally lack the taste.


Malcolm wrote:
Mexican food isn't necessarily all that great in Mexico. It can be, but it can also be awesome in the USA.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 13th, 2017 at 8:21 AM
Title: Re: Tibetan Zen
Content:
Sherab said:
What is atemporal, unsupported, unfabricated, unmanifest, ineffable and self-arising, that is the ultimate, the state of buddhahood.

Malcolm wrote:
And the difference between this and Brahmin is? As we have seen, this kind of buddhahood is refuted by Nāgārjuna right at the outset.

Sherab said:
What distinguished a Buddhist ultimate from a non-Buddhist ultimate is freedom from the two extremes of eternalism and annihilation, the two dead zones that I mentioned in an earlier post.
What springs from the ultimate and therefore not separable from the ultimate is the supported, the fabricated, the manifest, the communicable, the causal, i.e., the relative, the realm of both pure and impure phenomena.

Malcolm wrote:
False, a conditioned entity cannot have an unconditioned cause.


Sherab said:
The consequence of saying that there is no ultimate is that the relative becomes the ultimate: the atemporal, the unsupported, the unfabricated, unmanifest, ineffable and self-arising.  The relative no longer makes any sense.

Malcolm wrote:
I did not say there was no ultimate truth — there is an ultimate truth. What I said was that there is no ultimate reality. Two entirely different statements altogether.

Sherab said:
Extremes are non-functional.  It looks like there is a new extreme, a dysfunctional one, namely, the relative is its own ultimate.

Malcolm wrote:
By declaring there is an ultimate, atemporal, unsupported, unfabricated, unmanifest, ineffable and self-arising, you have already slipped off the other side of the horse into eternalism.

Neither the atemporal, unsupported, unfabricated, unmanifest, ineffable and self-arising nor the temporal, supported, fabricated, manifest, effable and arising from another can be established in any way. When one understands that nothing can be established in any of the four extremes in anyway whatsoever outside of conventions, then one has a slight glimpse of the wisdom of the Buddha. As long as one insists there is an  atemporal, unsupported, unfabricated, unmanifest, ineffable and self-arising in contrast to the the temporal, supported, fabricated, manifest, effable and arising from another one has not escaped from any extreme at all. One is still trapped in the two extremes of permanence (the atemporal, unsupported, unfabricated, unmanifest, ineffable and self-arising) and annihilation (the temporal, supported, fabricated, manifest, effable and arising from another). I am surprised that do not easily see the flaw in your reasoning.

In short, there is no independent ultimate, or nirvana, etc., other than in the mistaken view of Hinayāna tenets.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 13th, 2017 at 12:04 AM
Title: Re: Socialism & Communism
Content:
treehuggingoctopus said:
the challenge of finding a means of controlling population that would be at the same time feasible, effective and ethically sound...

Malcolm wrote:
Birth control, deciding not to procreate, etc. For example, I have no children.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 12th, 2017 at 11:36 PM
Title: Re: Socialism & Communism
Content:


treehuggingoctopus said:
with DG ideas slowly but steadily seeping into left-wing institutions, including those on the left-wing mainstream. Which the article I liked shows.


Malcolm wrote:
Not nearly rapidly enough.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 12th, 2017 at 10:00 PM
Title: Re: Consciousness turns back upon itself; it does not extend beyond name-and-form
Content:


Dan74 said:
Many interesting points. Glad to see some practice focused posts here.


Malcolm wrote:
I don't know about that —— I observe a lot of griping and disrespect of Buddhadharma, for example:
This is what the Buddha stepped out of. And now, it is being re-created in his name. Just like the rest of the religions of the world attempt to do in the name of their own 'saviours'. A simple study of Madhayamaka should end all this, but that is not what has happened. It is turned into a 'system' which misses the whole point.
Anonx's posts are full of this kind of shite.

Anonymous X said:
tsk, tsk, tsk, Malcolm. And what you have just said is not shite? You misunderstand much of what I say because you are so invested in your studies and memorization of Buddhist teachings that become your filter for judging the world around you. It's your way or the highway. Your dismissive attitude has been criticized by many on this board and I fail to see how this is instructive or even compassionate, to use a Buddhist term, that gets bandied about so often. You sound like a spiritual elitist and a snob. This is the Open Dharma thread. If you can't be open, then just stick to your Dzogchen world and receive the praises of those who think like you do.

Malcolm wrote:
It is up to you to clearly express yourself. Blaming others because you are not clear is a copout.

Buddhadharma is something very specific, very precise. Much of what you say does not correspond to Buddhadharma on any level.

There have been 125 generations of awakened masters who have followed in the Buddha's footsteps in Hināyāna, Mahāyāna and Vajrayāna. I am not sure how it is you think you have exceeded their realization. As a consequence, you wind up saying many disrespectful things about Buddhadharma and its various expressions. The corollary of that is that I and others find your stated understanding wanting.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 12th, 2017 at 9:08 PM
Title: Re: Socialism & Communism
Content:
treehuggingoctopus said:
The green turn I had in mind:

https://www.counterpunch.org/2017/08/11/capitalism-and-its-discontents-what-are-we-living-for/

The piece's conclusion is as follows:

William Hawes said:
The only democracy possible is an ecological democracy, with a long-term planning, and rational, sustainably-oriented national constitutions, a 90-95% reduction in fossil fuel use within a few decades at most, and an international consensus which will guarantee safeguards against habitat destruction, even in the face of democratic majority opposition. If we don’t face up to these facts, and collectively and courageously organize, we may in fact be due for the Kali Yuga, as the Hindus prophesied.

treehuggingoctopus said:
and it is Counterpunch, not the Trumpeter...

Malcolm wrote:
And none of it is possible without a massive reduction in human population to pre-18th century levels. This global need for population reduction is what freaks out the materialist left more than anything else. Present levels of human population can only be sustained with a petroleum based industrial economy, exactly the same economy that got us into the present mess to begin with. That is why socialism is reactionary and not progressive with respect to ecological issues. He points this out very clearly:
Most mainstream socialists (important exceptions being Ian Angus, Paul Burkett, and John Bellamy Foster) have so far been too committed to a flailing, abstract ideology; specifically, wrongly committed to a Eurocentric, technocratic, anthropocentric worldview; to capture people’s imaginations. Developing an ecological worldview, one that acknowledges our interdependence and interconnectedness with all species, is crucial.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 12th, 2017 at 11:27 AM
Title: Re: Tibetan Zen
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Since the conditioned is never established, how can the unconditioned ever be established?[/i][/list]
M

Sherab said:
Just because the unconditioned cannot be established does not mean that it is not there.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, that is what it means. Otherwise, the consequence is that the conditioned is also there, even though it cannot be established. This is a pervasion you must accept oi you insist on your point of view. Such a point of view is utterly outside Mahāyāna.

Sherab said:
It simply means that the unconditioned can never be established through conventional reasoning.

Malcolm wrote:
See above, the pervasion of your statement is that conditioned also cannot be established though conventional reasoning.

Sherab said:
Like I argued before, if the unconditioned is not there, statements like there is no arising and ceasing ultimately makes no sense because the statements will end up being circular.  In the end, if even the state of buddhahood is not even real, striving for liberation and omniscience also makes no sense.  It is a denial of the validity of Udana 8.3.

Malcolm wrote:
You did not make an argument, you made an unproven assertion. I showed that this assertion is unfounded.

Udana 8.3 merely shows that liberation is also a convention, bound up in the dualism of samsara and nirvana, etc. I imagine you also have quite a bit of difficulty with Nāgārjuna's assertion that nirvana and samsara are not even slightly different.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 12th, 2017 at 6:54 AM
Title: Re: Tibetan Zen
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
There is no self to cease. Nothing ever arose at any time, any where.

Sherab said:
This only makes sense if there is an ultimate reality.  Why?  Because if otherwise, the statement has no basis at all.  In other words, even "there is no self to cease" is an illusion.   "Nothing ever arose at any time, any where" is also an illusion.  It is not possible to say that the statements are true because what the statements point to is an illusion and therefore untrue.  This is the result of circular reasoning.

Malcolm wrote:
You claim that when statement points to an illusion, if there is no ultimate basis with which to contrast an illusion the statement is rendered false? This is poor reasoning.

Statements are conventions and do not require any ultimate basis in order to accepted conventionally, i.e., nonanalytically. Not does analysis of conventions such as arising require some ultimate basis in order to ascertain they are false. Conventions can be examined and found false without any reference at all to any ultimate basis. To suggest otherwise is fall prey to the kind of pathological, realist substantialism the Buddha's Dharma is meant to cure.

I repeat, conventions require no ultimate basis in order to be conventionally true.

In worldly conventional perception things appear to arise from causes and conditions. MMK 1:1
No thing arises at any time, anywhere
from itself, from other than itself, or without a cause.
When analyzed it is found there are no causes and no conditions — this analysis forms the entire body of the rest of the MMK -- arising from conditions is merely a convention and when investigated no arising can be found at all (and thus no abiding or perishing either).

You must have real difficulties reading Nāgārjuna:
Since arising, abiding, and perishing are not established, the conditioned is not established. 
Since the conditioned is never established, how can the unconditioned ever be established?
In light of the above, I think you may wish to retract your hasty and erroneous critique,

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 12th, 2017 at 2:52 AM
Title: Re: Justification of killing in Buddhism
Content:


CedarTree said:
Malcolm is there a good site that has English translations available of the Tantric writings for people to view.

Malcolm wrote:
You can read The Taming of the Demons: Violence and Liberation in Tibetan Buddhism.

CedarTree said:
I am guessing a lot of Tantric literature is only for those initiated?


Malcolm wrote:
Yes.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 12th, 2017 at 2:50 AM
Title: Re: Lama Norlha
Content:


Minobu said:
It is also does not have anything to do with what i am talking about.

and saying no one ever taught us that tulkus are living buddhas is just propaganda.

Malcolm wrote:
You may have been taught that. I question the quality of the people who taught you that. They are thieves of the teachings.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 12th, 2017 at 2:25 AM
Title: Re: Lama Norlha
Content:
Minobu said:
But i did not pluck this out of thin air and i know my understanding of Tulku has nothing to do with Chinese anything.

Malcolm wrote:
It is also does not have anything to do with the Tibetan thing either.

For example, there is a famous traditional story. Jamyang Khyentse Wangpo, one of the few famous Tibetan who really attained buddhahood, was pestered by some monks who were unhappy with the newly recognized tulku for their monastery, so they pestered him with their doubts.

After growing a little impatient with them, he said, "Let's go see your lama."

He led to them to the cattle yard, and called out the recently deceased lama's name. A young bull calf trotted over. "There" Khyentse said, "This is your lama."

The Tibetan penchant for devotional hyperbole is hard for westerners to deal with. We tend to take everything so literally.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 12th, 2017 at 1:46 AM
Title: Re: Lama Norlha
Content:
Minobu said:
i atteneded many a medicine buddha initiation with cancer patients hoping and nothing except death from cancer.
i never really saw anything except in Lotus Buddhism..sorry ...thats my eyes...

Malcolm wrote:
You do realize Medicine Buddha has a section in the Lotus Sutra?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 12th, 2017 at 1:30 AM
Title: Re: Justification of killing in Buddhism
Content:


Seeker12 said:
Is there a scriptural basis for this that I can read? I'm not disagreeing, just interested.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, in the tantras, in fact.

CedarTree said:
Malcolm is there a good site that has English translations available of the Tantric writings for people to view.

Malcolm wrote:
You can read The Taming of the Demons: Violence and Liberation in Tibetan Buddhism.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 12th, 2017 at 1:27 AM
Title: Re: Lama Norlha
Content:


Minobu said:
too many let downs in the Tibetan thing..the one biggy was when i asked a tulku Rinpoche if as a householder i could attain enlightenment through Tantra and the various teachings ...he said no...he was honest.

Malcolm wrote:
He was totally mistaken.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 11th, 2017 at 11:19 PM
Title: Re: Lama Norlha
Content:
Minobu said:
a tulku is not a catholic priest or anything near a gakki anything.
A tulku is supposed to be a living Buddha.

Malcolm wrote:
This is a huge misconception that has arisen from a mistaken Chinese translation of the term "sprul sku" as "living buddha."

There are several kinds of tulkus. The kind of tulku we mostly encounter are "blessed" tulkus. The process of enthroning them is virtually identical with consecrating a buddha statue. We find a small boy, with proper signs, maybe they even correctly pick out some of the items of their predecessor. With this done, they are blessed as the incarnation of their predecessor and the rest is history. The process of identifying candidates is an art, not a science, and sometimes great political turmoil arises because of disagreements among senior monastics over who is the "right" choice.

The kind of tulku who is a living buddha is generally a self-proclaimed incarnation, not a recognized incarnation.

Also, the modern Tibetan Buddhist establishment, recognizing the kind of misunderstandings that arise from the use of the term tulku for reincarnations has taken to calling them yang srid, rebirths, rather than tulkus.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 11th, 2017 at 10:04 PM
Title: Re: Consciousness turns back upon itself; it does not extend beyond name-and-form
Content:


Dan74 said:
Many interesting points. Glad to see some practice focused posts here.


Malcolm wrote:
I don't know about that —— I observe a lot of griping and disrespect of Buddhadharma, for example:
This is what the Buddha stepped out of. And now, it is being re-created in his name. Just like the rest of the religions of the world attempt to do in the name of their own 'saviours'. A simple study of Madhayamaka should end all this, but that is not what has happened. It is turned into a 'system' which misses the whole point.
Anonx's posts are full of this kind of shite.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 11th, 2017 at 9:36 PM
Title: Re: Tibetan Zen
Content:
Anonymous X said:
[
I can understand your investment in Dzogchen and your continued beliefs that you will achieve realization of something.

Malcolm wrote:
You really don't understand what I am talking about.

Anonymous X said:
It is this very grasping/training that I question deeply. It doesn't seem compatible with what the Buddha and other masters taught about the cessation of self on every level and what I witnessed in my own teacher.

Malcolm wrote:
There is no self to cease. Nothing ever arose at any time, any where.

In any case, attaining buddhahood has two benefits, one's own and others. Of these two benefits, the benefit of others is more important.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 11th, 2017 at 4:53 AM
Title: Re: Assisted Suicide/ euthanasia
Content:
Grigoris said:
I remember, in another thread, that you said that nothing can obscure the experience of Clear Light at the time of death, so it was okay for people that are terminally ill to take sedation to dull their pain, as it will not effect the experience and their chances of liberation.

Is my memory unclear on the subject?

Malcolm wrote:
If someone is not buddhist, and has no instructions, then they should be comfortable. But if you are a practitioner, you need to have a clear mind at the time of death.

Grigoris said:
But surely it is not the coarse mind that recognises the Clear Light?  So what difference does it make?

Malcolm wrote:
Sedatives obscure the clarity of the mind in toto because of they way the affect the body.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 11th, 2017 at 12:51 AM
Title: Re: Justification of killing in Buddhism
Content:


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

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


Seeker12 said:
Is there a scriptural basis for this that I can read? I'm not disagreeing, just interested.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, in the tantras, in fact.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 10th, 2017 at 11:32 PM
Title: Re: Tibetan Zen
Content:
liuzg150181 said:
One question that lingers in my mind,how do we tell whether a master is realized? During empowerment?

Malcolm wrote:
Good question.

No, one can tell a master is realized by observing them for a long while and seeing how their qualities manifest.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 10th, 2017 at 10:18 PM
Title: Re: Tibetan Zen
Content:
Anonymous X said:
I agree, but I don't agree about your assertion that only through a Dzogchen teacher can someone have this 'intro'. That's a very hard sell, sir.

Malcolm wrote:
Though one can find descriptions of the nature of mind in sūtras, the methods of introducing it do not exist in sūtras. One must find a teacher who has the intimate instructions.

Further, introduction to the nature of the mind is not confined to Dzogchen masters, but it is confined to Vajrayāna. Even here, such introductions as they may be found in Vajrayāna empowerments tend to be overly brief, ritualized, cryptic and obscure.

Though you may find methods of introduction described in some books, for example, some lengthy Mahāmudra manuals come to mind, they must be received from a teacher who has realized the meaning of such instructions in themselves because such methods are experiential, not intellectual.

If someone wishes experiential training in the nature of the mind, one should find an old master who has done many years of retreat and who has also guided many students personally. One must do whatever it is he or she might command. In general, one will not be able to receive such teachings from famous teachers, with a very, very, short list of exceptions.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 10th, 2017 at 10:04 PM
Title: Re: Tibetan Zen
Content:


Anonymous X said:
Knowing how rare true realization is, I remain skeptical of your statement.

Malcolm wrote:
You have not met the teachers to whom I refer. If you had, you would not be skeptical.

Anonymous X said:
Perhaps I have met some, and perhaps I would remain skeptical.

Malcolm wrote:
I don't think so. But even the Buddha had his doubters, like Sunakṣatra.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 10th, 2017 at 9:45 PM
Title: Re: Tibetan Zen
Content:
Anonymous X said:
You do understand that most gurus ARE unrealized.

Malcolm wrote:
I don't know about most gurus, but I have had the fortune of being in the presence of several realized teachers in my lifetime, one of whom is still alive.

Anonymous X said:
Knowing how rare true realization is, I remain skeptical of your statement.

Malcolm wrote:
You have not met the teachers to whom I refer. If you had, you would not be skeptical.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 10th, 2017 at 9:34 PM
Title: Re: Tibetan Zen
Content:
Anonymous X said:
As per ultimate truth or ultimate reality, no one can show you this. An ultimate truth is only measured by the conventional which cannot know ultimate anything, just knows it's own appearance.

Malcolm wrote:
An ultimate truth is a) an analytical cognition of the nature of phenomena b) a nonanalytical direct perception of the nature of phenomena. The former is conceptual, and therefore, conventional. The latter is nonconceptual, and burns away misconceptions about how things are.

One can certainly be lead to an understanding of the analytical ultimate truth. The nonanalytical ultimate is your responsibility to discover.

However, neither of these has much bearing on being introduced to the nature of the mind.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 10th, 2017 at 9:15 PM
Title: Re: Assisted Suicide/ euthanasia
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
The problem is that one should be aware when they die.

Grigoris said:
I remember, in another thread, that you said that nothing can obscure the experience of Clear Light at the time of death, so it was okay for people that are terminally ill to take sedation to dull their pain, as it will not effect the experience and their chances of liberation.

Is my memory unclear on the subject?

Malcolm wrote:
If someone is not buddhist, and has no instructions, then they should be comfortable. But if you are a practitioner, you need to have a clear mind at the time of death.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 10th, 2017 at 7:37 PM
Title: Re: Tibetan Zen
Content:
Anonymous X said:
You do understand that most gurus ARE unrealized.

Malcolm wrote:
I don't know about most gurus, but I have had the fortune of being in the presence of several realized teachers in my lifetime, one of whom is still alive.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 10th, 2017 at 7:35 PM
Title: Re: Tibetan Zen
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
If the nature of one's own mind were truly a sufficient teacher, we would have all actualized rainbow body by now and there would be no more samsara. So obviously, something a little more is needed in the teacher department.

Anonymous X said:
A truly realized guru can only show you your own illusions, your own grasping, your own mistakes. They do not show you practices of 'how to realize ultimate truth'. As you noted before in an inspired moment of intellectual understanding, there is no ultimate truth. This is the most difficult thing to understand for a seeker, that what you think you're after, simply doesn't exist.

Malcolm wrote:
I said there is no ultimate reality. There is however an ultimate truth. Truths, in Buddhadharma, are cognitions. Emptiness, for example, is not an ultimate reality, but it is an ultimate truth. Even ultimate truths represent limits to cognition and analysis, and are nothing other than measures of them.

On the other hand, helping one discover the nature of one's own mind is a the role of a Buddhist guru, and this is not merely a process of being shown one's illusions, grasping, and mistakes.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 10th, 2017 at 10:13 AM
Title: Re: Assisted Suicide/ euthanasia
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
However, if people used drugs like sublimaze (a curare derivative), which merely stops the heart, painlessly, one can be fully present during the death process.
Fentanyl is not a good way to die.

Meido said:
Malcolm, I read your reference to sublimaze with interest. But then the follow-up confused me: I'm seeing sublimaze described as a brand name for fentanyl, itself described as an opioid (no reference to curare).

Did I miss something?

~ Meido

Malcolm wrote:
Nope, I missed something. Anyway, my primary point is that practitioners need to die as clear as possible. If one is not afflicted, one is clear about why one is choosing to die, and has no regrets, then no problem.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 10th, 2017 at 5:31 AM
Title: Re: Tibetan Zen
Content:
Sahajaya said:
The key words are "should one choose to inquire". Sadly, the more common condition is external inquiry into the external world for answers only, where the inner world is ignored,  is it not. Thus outer, inner, and non-dual realization is implied in realizing the nature of mind; while ignorance (marigpa) is the semi-static condition where the inquiry has failed. For example, meditation.

Malcolm wrote:
People do not even know they should inquire.

Many people seek inwardly for answers too, but not recognizing the right questions to ask, they come up with many incorrect answers.

If you want to know the secret guru, first you must discover the inner guru; and to discover that inner guru, a realized outer guru is indispensable.

People have a very huge misconception about gurus, particularly in Dzogchen teachings. No guru is going to hand you awakening in their hand, or pick out the perfect yidam for you to practice, or give you a tailor made path to buddhahood. But they can transmit their own knowledge of the teachings, and help you encounter your own state directly. A realized guru is indispensable in this case. In Dzogchen and Mahāmūdra, an unrealized guru, however, is a serial killer of disciples. An unrealized guru can set one back many lifetimes. An unrealized guru breaks their own samaya the minute they open their mouths.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 10th, 2017 at 5:03 AM
Title: Re: Assisted Suicide/ euthanasia
Content:
TharpaChodron said:
Assisted suicide has been legal in California since 2016 and it looks like it will be staying.  111 people died with assisted suicide in the fist 6 months of it being legal in the state.

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

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

TharpaChodron said:
That's the problem I was concerned about.  It would be great to be given the option of taking fentanyl, but I have no idea how that works.  consciousness at the time of death is important, yet there's many times when I'm sure people die unconscious due to various reasons.

As I have a hard time with all or nothing thinking, the Arhat story is nice. Okay, maybe not "nice," but you get what I'm saying.

Malcolm wrote:
Fentanyl is not a good way to die.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 10th, 2017 at 3:47 AM
Title: Re: Her Eminence Mindrolling Jetsün Khandro Rinpoche
Content:
Toenail said:
What I always wondered: If she is so realized, why does she never give something like Vajrakilaya etc? I know this is wrong view and so on, but I wonder why these female teachers are obviously not green-lighted to give wrathful or major empowerments and every small tulku gives whatever he pleases. It is all chenrezig and talks about karma. Patriarchy?

Malcolm wrote:
Khandro Rinpoche gives all kinds of major empowerments to her students. But you have to be her student and go to places like Lotus Garden if you want to receive such things from her. She follows more of the old Vajradhātu model.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 10th, 2017 at 3:45 AM
Title: Re: Is Maya/Mara becoming stronger?
Content:
Supramundane said:
Is Maya becoming more and more powerful?

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

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

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

Strive said:
lifespan is increasing


Malcolm wrote:
You think "lifespan" only refers to the lifespan of human beings?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 10th, 2017 at 3:37 AM
Title: Re: Question re Nagas
Content:
Grigoris said:
From what I hear https://www.amazon.com/Naga-Indian-Iconography-R-K-Sharma/dp/8173055157 has a lot of info (and great pictures) but is somewhat expensive...


Malcolm wrote:
It is a good book, but the Tibetan indigenous cultural understanding of Nagas ( klu ) expands considerably on the Indian one, and needs to considered in its own right as well.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 10th, 2017 at 2:38 AM
Title: Re: Tibetan Zen
Content:
Anonymous X said:
Inner wisdom teacher? You mean breath? Heartbeat? The flow of blood? Is there someone inside?

Sahajaya said:
It's the nature of your own mind, should one choose to inquire. The physical parts, are just that, fragments that reflect primordial presence. You know that already.


Malcolm wrote:
If the nature of one's own mind were truly a sufficient teacher, we would have all actualized rainbow body by now and there would be no more samsara. So obviously, something a little more is needed in the teacher department.


