﻿Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 12th, 2015 at 5:49 PM
Title: Re: European refugee crisis
Content:
dreambow said:
It seems  the Canadian economy is very rocky and the USA  have over 90 million people jobless...its staggering!

Malcolm wrote:
Well, this figure includes retirees and teenagers...it is not really like that


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 12th, 2015 at 5:08 PM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:
Boomerang said:
I just finished listening to the webcast from Singapore. Am I allowed to start practicing guru yoga and the Song of Vajra now? I'm not a member of the Dzogchen Community as of yet (registering today), but want to be on the list ASAP. I always thought you had to be a member first, but is that not even necessary as long as you tune in to one of Rinpoche's public webcasts?

Malcolm wrote:
Yes.

Yes, but you won't have access to replay.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 12th, 2015 at 11:18 AM
Title: Re: a former student of aroter seeks help!
Content:
inbetween said:
Then I found this! I am glad you saved this...I won't dare to think of...
I apology the whole sangha and Buddha for my sins and beg for help!  I cannot do this on my own.
respectfully inbetween

Malcolm wrote:
You should make a connection with Chogyal Namkhai Norbu. He is running webcast retreat today actually, it starts in four hours roughly.

http://webcast.dzogchen.net/index.php?id=live-webcast

Boomerang said:
Is it okay to just drop in and watch the webcast without having any idea what's going on?

Malcolm wrote:
yup


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 12th, 2015 at 10:42 AM
Title: Re: Analysis or Nothing
Content:


Malcolm wrote:
The reality, my friend, is that you cannot tell which of the two moons are true, because in fact neither are.

LastLegend said:
I know you have faith in your experience and guru. That's why Pure Land is superior my friend. FAITH.

Malcolm wrote:
Certainty is better than faith.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 12th, 2015 at 9:49 AM
Title: Re: Analysis or Nothing
Content:
smcj said:
"you are like a man holding a book in a language he does not understand, sagaciously informing everyone else that they do not understand it either."
Actually that was precisely my position in the consort practice discussion.


Malcolm wrote:
Yes, I understood that you did not understand it.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 12th, 2015 at 9:42 AM
Title: Re: Analysis or Nothing
Content:


Malcolm wrote:
I guess you feel you are speaking from a position of definitive authority. In other words, you must yourself be a master of sūtra. Otherwise you are like a man holding a book in a language he does not understand, sagaciously informing everyone else that they do not understand it either.

LastLegend said:
No sir. I have no such arrogance right now, and I am not that ignorant to make judgment about other Paths without knowing what they really understand. But here is my view:

The language in Sutra is hard to understand. This is the reason why people get caught up with the teachings/tools more than what's the teachings are pointing to. Language of Zen Patriarchs are to understand as well.

Malcolm wrote:
So I guess it is the latter: "you are like a man holding a book in a language he does not understand, sagaciously informing everyone else that they do not understand it either."

The reality, my friend, is that you cannot tell which of the two moons are true, because in fact neither are.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 12th, 2015 at 6:09 AM
Title: Re: a former student of aroter seeks help!
Content:
inbetween said:
Then I found this! I am glad you saved this...I won't dare to think of...
I apology the whole sangha and Buddha for my sins and beg for help!  I cannot do this on my own.
respectfully inbetween

Malcolm wrote:
You should make a connection with Chogyal Namkhai Norbu. He is running webcast retreat today actually, it starts in four hours roughly.

http://webcast.dzogchen.net/index.php?id=live-webcast


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 12th, 2015 at 6:04 AM
Title: Re: CNN Odzer Chenma retreat sept 11-13
Content:
Tigersnest said:
I was unable to listen to the retreat, was the invocation different then the Practice which DC usually uses?

Malcolm wrote:
No.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 12th, 2015 at 5:36 AM
Title: Re: Practicing in the midst of relationship problems
Content:
Monlam Tharchin said:
Many difficulties regarding relationships in my life lately.

Marital problems possibly leading to divorce or separation soon.
One very important friendship dissolving into fights and negativity. We are temporarily not speaking.
Another heading in the wrong direction that makes it difficult for me to know how to proceed.
Still another with a sudden "change of heart" that makes me very nervous.

Outside of that, there is only one person I see regularly, as I'm a very private person.
So nearly all of the important relationships in my life are, to put it bluntly, in the shitter in some form or another.
I've never had insomnia or such strong feelings of aloneness as right now.
I'm not sure how to bring them to the dharma path.
It's made shamatha very difficult, to say the least.

Of course this brings home the samsaric qualities of every relationship. But how bittersweet to see it in your own life, and in such a large amount at one time. My instinct isn't towards cultivating insight but just some way to not feel so bad.
For now, I just say some mantras, manis mostly.

Thanks for anyone's advice, who has maybe been in a similar situation.

Malcolm wrote:
At the end of the day, Dharma is our only companion.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 12th, 2015 at 5:24 AM
Title: Re: Analysis or Nothing
Content:


Malcolm wrote:
Sūtra does not contain all teachings. If it did, there would be no need for Vajrayāna and so on.

LastLegend said:
Very few understand Sutras, they think they really do but they don't.

Malcolm wrote:
I guess you feel you are speaking from a position of definitive authority. In other words, you must yourself be a master of sūtra. Otherwise you are like a man holding a book in a language he does not understand, sagaciously informing everyone else that they do not understand it either.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 12th, 2015 at 5:23 AM
Title: Re: Analysis or Nothing
Content:
LastLegend said:
Zen...

Malcolm wrote:
If everything were in sūtras, there would be no need for Zen either, a path, like Dzogchen, famous for saying it is outside of the scriptures.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 12th, 2015 at 5:02 AM
Title: Re: Analysis or Nothing
Content:
LastLegend said:
People keep downplaying Sutra path as a conceptual path but actually Sutra contain all teachings for all capacities.

Malcolm wrote:
Sūtra does not contain all teachings. If it did, there would be no need for Vajrayāna and so on.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 12th, 2015 at 4:34 AM
Title: Re: Analysis or Nothing
Content:
Astus said:
Kamalashila's Bhavanakramas are instructions for meditation. I dare say that even the Middle Treatise of Nagarjuna is good for meditation, not to mention the many prajnaparamita sutras. Just as Vajrayana texts can be taken for purely philosophical writings, so can the teachings of the Buddha can and often are mistaken as theoretical matters. Analysis is not meant for achieving an objective statement but to attain insight. I'm not even sure why it happens that while it is obvious that the Dharma is for liberation, teachings are regularly dismissed as if they were products of a bored academic. It is another thing that philosophy is viewed with contempt, calling it idle talk. But once we rename it as ideology, it becomes more apparent how thoughts govern action.

For instance, when there is a teaching about the aggregates, it is not about abstract ideas with no relevance to one's personal life and experience, but instructions on what and how to investigate in order to see the true nature of reality and gain liberation. It is always about direct seeing, that's what vipasyana is. Reducing the words of the Buddha and numerous teachers to mere theorising is not just insulting but inconsiderate and ignorant. (And I'm not saying here, Cone, that you are like that, these are just my general observations.)

It is not a question of conceptuality but how those concepts are understood. Keeping a distance between oneself and some ideas is when it is mere theorising, fantasising about things that have no weight. On the other hand, when a concept is taken seriously, when it is reflected on and connected to one's experience, that is heeding the advice and following the teachings. It becomes a personal matter. Just like when one can listen to any teacher and not find anything noteworthy in his words, if that teacher is seen as one's guru, even the most innocent movements become Dharma instructions.

Malcolm wrote:
Here is your original question:
How can it be argued that the popular methods lacking the conceptual methods of discerning appearances are valid?
Mañjuśrimitra in the Meditation of Bodhicitta would have replied to Kamalaśila in the following way:
When analyzing the extremes of deconstruction and proofs for entities by the reason of direct perception and so on,
after that domain of those who follow the stream of concepts is defined as authoritative,
because the conceptualized extreme does not exist, there is no extreme to analyze, and if there is no core, what can be defined as an authority?
Therefore, the conventions of mundane analysis are not necessary in this yoga.
Keep in mind, the Meditation of Bodhicitta is a text aimed Mahāyānis just like Kamalaśila, oriented towards showing that this kind of analysis is just not necessary at all in Mahāyāna.   That in fact, it is an obstacle to understanding the real meaning of Mahāyāna.

The point is that the methods of conceptual analysis are invalid for ultimate analysis, as Mipham points out in his commentary on this text:
...a mundane authority is not valid for an ultimate analysis,
Why is this important? Because in general, the whole notion of direct perceptions, inferences, and so on are defined on the basis of of the conceptual cognitions of ordinary people. Therefore:
Therefore, the conventions of mundane analysis are not necessary in this yoga.
Which yoga? Mahāyāna yoga.

So the question must be turned around:
How can it be argued that conceptual methods of discerning appearances are valid?
Incidentally, Mañjuśrimitra never once uses the term "Ati yoga" or "Dzogchen" in this text, though he does make reference to Vajrasattva, Mahāyoga concepts and Samantabhadri. He also on the other hand uses Prajñāpāramitā references, even working the name "Arhat Subhuti" into the text to represent a principle of the teachings.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 12th, 2015 at 2:23 AM
Title: Re: How important is shamatha, and practices before shamatha
Content:
Clarence said:
Okay. Thanks.

Anything in your book about the difference?

Malcolm wrote:
There is a brief discussion of śamatha and vipaśyāna in section on the method of practice, chapter eight, specifically in the transcendent state of the sugatas section.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 12th, 2015 at 2:15 AM
Title: Re: How important is shamatha, and practices before shamatha
Content:


Malcolm wrote:
This Dzogchen style. Very supple, produces flexible wood, very green, hard to break. In Dzogchen style śamatha you actually engage all six sense objects with your six senses, there is nothing to accept and nothing to reject, nothing to follow, nothing to ignore.

Clarence said:
Sounds very much like regular Trekchod, no?


Malcolm wrote:
A little, but really it has to do with the definition of one pointed. In sūtra style one pointedness, one is focusing one's mind on one point, in a very concentrated way, while ignoring everything else. Also in Dzogchen, sometimes we use this experience as well.

But there is also another meaning of one pointedness, meaning that all sense contact all their objects.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 12th, 2015 at 2:02 AM
Title: Re: How important is shamatha, and practices before shamatha
Content:
Boomerang said:
Wallace for example, in teaching shamatha without a sign, says ignore all thought, feelings, body sense and just focus on the awareness of awareness.

Malcolm wrote:
Thus is sūtra style. Very rigid, produces brittle wood, very dry, easy to break.


Boomerang said:
Tsoknyi R, in teaching the same practice (he calls it shamatha without support- they are both mikpa mepe shine ) gives a much more relaxed approach, where all the senses are open and you are not particularly ignoring anything, just not getting involved with it.

Malcolm wrote:
This Dzogchen style. Very supple, produces flexible wood, very green, hard to break. In Dzogchen style śamatha you actually engage all six sense objects with your six senses, there is nothing to accept and nothing to reject, nothing to follow, nothing to ignore.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 12th, 2015 at 1:28 AM
Title: Re: Analysis or Nothing
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Here, what is being recommended is the intimate instructions of the guru

Astus said:
There is little difference between someone orally giving the instructions or handing over a book containing the same instructions.

Malcolm wrote:
Who said the instructions were the same? Certainly not Kengyur Rinpoche.

Sword of Wisdom is a Madhyamaka text. Not a Dzogchen text. It is best not to confuse one with the other.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 12th, 2015 at 12:40 AM
Title: Re: Analysis or Nothing
Content:
smcj said:
There really isn't any other kind...the name "Sūtra Mahāmudra" is like calling a donkey an Arabian stallion.
I've used "Sutra Mahamudra" to mean the type that approaches it through shamatha, vipassana, then Mahamudra. "Tantric Mahamudra" I've used for completion stage practice and the 6 yogas. Is that not correct?

Malcolm wrote:
Kongtrul clearly states that "Sūtra" Mahāmudra is for people who do not have the capacity for the two stages. It is a style of mixing sūtra practice and the view expressed in the dohas. But it is a slow and gradual path, since it is sūtrayāna.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 12th, 2015 at 12:39 AM
Title: Re: Analysis or Nothing
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
What page are you thinking of?

Astus said:
The practice of those who perceive appearances in the manner of sense objects, p 269-274.
That is within the section of "An explanation of the key points of the practice", within the chapter "The Extraordinary Path of Practice of the Great Perfection".

Malcolm wrote:
Pg. 271:
"The shamatha and vipashyāna deriving from oral instructions do not depend on the reading and analysis of the texts.
Here, what is being recommended is the intimate instructions of the guru over and above the sūtrayāna style analysis mentioned in the previous paragraph, and which you were claiming above was critically necessary, without which no progress could be made at all.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 11th, 2015 at 11:55 PM
Title: Re: Analysis or Nothing
Content:
Astus said:
..."not in Tantric Mahamudra".

Malcolm wrote:
There really isn't any other kind...the name "Sūtra Mahāmudra" is like calling a donkey an Arabian stallion. Sure, they both have four legs, sure they both belong to the Genus equis, sure one can mate with the other, but the latter will always be a much superior steed to ride.


Astus said:
Also, in vol 2 of Jigme Lingpa's Treasury of Precious Qualities at the end of the discussion of the path of Dzogchen he gives not only a direct but also an analytical method. So, even if there are other methods, it is considered quite efficient if Vajrayana masters have no problem including it in their teachings on the highest levels.]

Malcolm wrote:
What page are you thinking of?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 11th, 2015 at 11:33 PM
Title: Re: How important is shamatha, and practices before shamatha
Content:
Boomerang said:
What are other approaches?

Malcolm wrote:
As mentioned, mantra practice is considered to be one of the best methods of training in Shamatha.

It very much depends on your proclivities.

My advice is that you be like a bee and seek out a few different teachers and approaches before settling on one.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 11th, 2015 at 11:22 PM
Title: Re: How important is shamatha, and practices before shamatha
Content:
Boomerang said:
My understanding is that traditionally, you need to master shamatha before you do most practices, such as secret mantras and tonglen, with ngondro being the only exception. But if a part of ngondro is Vajrasattva, how can you effectively do that if you haven't already mastered shamatha?

Have most people who do yidam practice and highest yoga tantra completed long shamatha retreats? It's supposed to take 6 months in retreat to master shamatha, isn't it?

Is there a definitive list of practices that are considered A-okay before one has done a shamatha retreat? Is it effective to do non-ngondro prostrations, like the 3 heaps sutra, before mastering shamatha?

Malcolm wrote:
This is only one approach, very much based on the Lam Rim approach. It is not the only approach.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 11th, 2015 at 10:38 PM
Title: Re: Analysis or Nothing
Content:
Wayfarer said:
So, analysis serves no purpose, we are to seek a guru? Is that the point?

Malcolm wrote:
It all depends on how fast you wish to wake up.

Wayfarer said:
Kind of makes having the need for an internet forum moot, doesn't it?

Malcolm wrote:
Internet forums are breeding grounds for conceptuality, some of them however are worse than others.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 11th, 2015 at 10:36 PM
Title: Re: Analysis or Nothing
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Is the consciousness that engages in analysis deluded or undeluded? Is the object of analysis delusive or non-delusive?
If either the consciousness or the object are respectively deluded or delusive, there is no means by which the analysis can result in non-delusion.
If on other other hand the consciousness or the object is respectively non-deluded or non-delusive, the analysis is unnecessary.

Astus said:
That's some nice analysis you present.


Malcolm wrote:
You have to speak to the analytical in language they understand.


Astus said:
...supposing a separate realm is a mistake.

Malcolm wrote:
Hence the deviation of Madhyamakas two truths.


Astus said:
The reason analysis works is because it removes wrong views and eventually attachment to any view. Analysis is a means, not an end. And analysis is required because the wrong views that generate all the problems are conceptual.

Malcolm wrote:
Madhyamaka analysis is not required, it is merely the approach of sūtra. It also does not produce the real view free of conceptuality.

Astus said:
But let's not stop there. Is there a consciousness to be deluded or undeluded? Is there an object to be deluded or undeluded? Since neither a consciousness nor an object can be established, talking about their state of ignorance and enlightenment is like describing the graceful stance of the son of a barren woman.

Malcolm wrote:
Correct. Therefore, since there is no consciousness nor object to be established discussing their analysis is like discussing the horns on a rabbit.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 11th, 2015 at 9:26 AM
Title: Re: Analysis or Nothing
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Analysis merely substitutes one conceptual attachment for another, thus blocking the seeing of the truth; which one already sees anyway without knowing that one is seeing it.
The question is really, "what does one hope to find in analysis?" Is there something to find? If there is nothing to find, than the analysis itself is a deviation from reality.

Astus said:
Analysis results in the elimination of attachment...

Malcolm wrote:
Is the consciousness that engages in analysis deluded or undeluded? Is the object of analysis delusive or non-delusive?

If either the consciousness or the object are respectively deluded or delusive, there is no means by which the analysis can result in non-delusion.

If on other other hand the consciousness or the object is respectively non-deluded or non-delusive, the analysis is unnecessary.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 11th, 2015 at 6:05 AM
Title: Re: Analysis or Nothing
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Yes, actually I did.

Astus said:
I don't see how "the intimate instructions of the guru are important" is an explanation for it, but it seems there is nothing more than that.

Malcolm wrote:
You have to receive them from a guru. Then you will understand. Until that point, there is nothing more to say.




Astus said:
Everyone is already experiencing suchness directly. It simply needs to be pointed out through experience. It is not discernible through analysis. The analysis itself is the obstacle.
Pointing out through experience - since one cannot directly transfer experience to another, there are only teachings one can follow to confirm reality for oneself.

Malcolm wrote:
A direct introduction is an introduction done through your own experience; it is not a transfer of experience.

Astus said:
What blocks the vision of reality is conceptual attachment. Analysis removes that attachment, thus allows the experience of insight.

Malcolm wrote:
Analysis merely substitutes one conceptual attachment for another, thus blocking the seeing of the truth; which one already sees anyway without knowing that one is seeing it.

The question is really, "what does one hope to find in analysis?" Is there something to find? If there is nothing to find, than the analysis itself is a deviation from reality.

As chapter thirty-eight of the Kun byed rgyal po states:
The sūtras of bodhisattvas
assert the stage of Samantaprabhaḥ,
and assert dharmatā as empty space
through the investigation and analysis of the two truths. 
The great bliss of Ati Yoga
is awakened mind beyond investigation and analysis,
that which is beyond investigation and analysis is obscured by the sūtras. 
The Great Perfection explains that investigation and analysis
are error in the sūtras.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 11th, 2015 at 3:54 AM
Title: Re: Analysis or Nothing
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
If you want those instructions, you will have to go and get them.

Astus said:
You said that Vajrayana is exempt from analysis, but then did not support that with an explanation of how could that be.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, actually I did.


Astus said:
How so? The direct experience of suchness is what Vajrayana teaches, isn't it?

Malcolm wrote:
Everyone is already experiencing suchness directly. It simply needs to be pointed out through experience. It is not discernible through analysis. The analysis itself is the obstacle.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 11th, 2015 at 3:12 AM
Title: Re: Shenphen Dawa Rinpoche on Reading Dzogchen Books
Content:
smcj said:
I think it's 100% true. People can make the most amazing ornate cages out of dharma.
I'm going to go out on a limb and say that none of my teachers would agree with that statement. The issue never arose, so I can't say for sure, but none have ever shown the slightest sympathy to that kind of idea.

Malcolm wrote:
None of your teachers are teachers of Dzogchen.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 11th, 2015 at 3:09 AM
Title: Re: Analysis or Nothing
Content:


Astus said:
As for directly accessing the view of suchness, Kamalashila writes,


Malcolm wrote:
Kamalashila's citation is completely irrelevant.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 11th, 2015 at 3:08 AM
Title: Re: Analysis or Nothing
Content:
Astus said:
The question is about those instructions, that you say do not involve analysis.

Malcolm wrote:
If you want those instructions, you will have to go and get them.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 11th, 2015 at 2:43 AM
Title: Re: Analysis or Nothing
Content:
asunthatneversets said:
...I suppose Malcolm would have to clarify there, being that it's his translation.

Malcolm wrote:
Phenomena is chos, dharmin; nonphenomena is chos min, i.e., dharmatā; the former is the relative, the latter is the ultimate. Since they are merged, there is no such thing as an ultimate phenomena, don dam chos, paramārthadharma.

In other words, the two truths of Madhyamaka are a deviation.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 11th, 2015 at 12:55 AM
Title: Re: Analysis or Nothing
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
The limitation of Madhyamaka vipaśyāna is that it is an intellectual analysis.

Astus said:
What does it limit? Unless it is argued that vipasyana does not result in wisdom, it works.

Malcolm wrote:
Vipaśyāna is conceptual. That is its limitation. Plus, Madhyamaka analysis is ultimately dualistic.


Astus said:
You say Vajrayana is different, and that's fine, but it has not yet been clarified how and in what way.

Malcolm wrote:
It has been clarified, you just refuse to listen:
As such, in order to recognize that concepts are dharmatā, the intimate instructions of the guru are important.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 11th, 2015 at 12:53 AM
Title: Re: Shenphen Dawa Rinpoche on Reading Dzogchen Books
Content:
smcj said:
Dzogchen teachings are secret because their meaning is obscure to those who still are involved with the vehicles of cause and result.
That's worded a little strangely. It implies that someone who is not involved with the first 8 yanas, such as a secular person, will have an advantage over a Dharma practitioner in understanding Dzogchen. I'm going to guess that is not what you meant.

Malcolm wrote:
That can in fact be the case.

smcj said:
Of all the teachings of the Buddha, Dzogchen/Mahamudra is most prone to misunderstanding because of the ease with which it can be reduced to something pedestrian. It is the perfect example of the ChNN's quote:
A human being has his limits. And thus in every conceivable way, with every possible means, he tries to make the teaching enter into his own limits.

Malcolm wrote:
Actually, what ChNN here is saying is that vehicles of cause and result place limitations on the possibility of liberation because of their limitations.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 10th, 2015 at 11:50 PM
Title: Re: Analysis or Nothing
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Yes, there is no special object to be apprehended.

Your question was, "Is analysis necessary." In sūtra yes; in Varjayāna, no. As Vimalamitra states in his Buddhahood in This Life:
If it is objected, “If afflictions are liberated into dharmatā without antidotes, there is no need for purification on the path. Otherwise, liberation would require no effort,” for what reason would those who do not understand be liberated? Asserting that those who understand are liberated merely by recognizing concepts as dharmatā is the fruit of one’s wishes. As such, in order to recognize that concepts are dharmatā, the intimate instructions of the guru are important.

Astus said:
There is still no explanation given what kind of experience it is that can take one to realising suchness.

Malcolm wrote:
That is correct. I did not provide the entire chapter for you.

Astus said:
Also, that quote is basically asserting the supremacy of Vajrayana and the ineffectiveness of analysis without giving a reason. And it misrepresents vipasyana as if it were mere intellectual exercise.

Malcolm wrote:
The limitation of Madhyamaka vipaśyāna is that it is an intellectual analysis. But in reality, as it is said in the Soaring Garuda, one of the five early Dzogchen extracts translated by Vairocana, addresses the deviation of Madhyamaka analysis which should be addressed the following way:
Since phenomena and nonphenomena have always been merged and are inseparable,
there is no further need to explain an “ultimate phenomenon”.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 10th, 2015 at 11:33 PM
Title: Re: Shenphen Dawa Rinpoche on Reading Dzogchen Books
Content:


Adamantine said:
So it seems we are both agreeing with Shenphen Rinpoche's points, only one or two people here ridiculed them and you weren't one of them. . .

Malcolm wrote:
I agree that Dzogchen can be misunderstood, but refusing to discuss it does not lend to clarity.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 10th, 2015 at 11:32 PM
Title: Re: Shenphen Dawa Rinpoche on Reading Dzogchen Books
Content:


Adamantine said:
I'm sure you're right about the intent of that story but my intent in mentioning it was just as one example that throughout the history of Dzogchen transmission there's been many reasons for it to be kept more undercover, whether it is to avoid jealousy, orthodoxy, ridicule or misunderstanding, or all of the above, or a plethora of other potential reasons.

Malcolm wrote:
Dzogchen teachings are not secret, they are for everyone, if they are interested. The way you demonstrated your interest is by seeking out transmission.

When we say Dzogchen teachings are "secret", it does mean they are secret in the sense of a classified document which only people with proper clearance can read — though certainly this is a prevailing attitude evinced by the plethora of "restricted books." Dzogchen teachings are secret because their meaning is obscure to those who still are involved with the vehicles of cause and result. This is the real sense of secrecy in Dzogchen teachings.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 10th, 2015 at 9:58 PM
Title: Re: POTUS 2016
Content:
tomamundsen said:
I voted for http://www.jill2016.com/ in 2012 and I'll vote for her again next year. Although I'm probably just throwing away a vote for Bernie.

Malcolm wrote:
My plan is to vote for Bernie in the primaries, and if he does not win, to vote for Stein.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 10th, 2015 at 9:19 PM
Title: Re: Analysis or Nothing
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
The face of prajñāpāramitā is not different than all appearances [this is fundamental tenet of Ati yoga, one of things that differentiates it from Chan/Zen, etc.], hence it is an object of mind, an experience. Therefore, it is viewed correctly and incorrectly. Hence, introduction is necessary. Without introduction, buddhahood is not possible. Buddhahood is not a result of effort or analysis. The difference between a buddha and sentient being is just the difference recognition and nonrecognition.

Astus said:
All appearances are such. Are you saying that there is an appearance that is more such? If not, and what matters is recognising the suchness of any appearance, there are no special objects to be apprehended. As Kamalashila http://www.preciousteaching.org/sutra/kamalasilas-bhavana-krama-the-middle-meditation-stage/: "With the knowledge that the mind is without an end and a centre, no identity of the mind is perceived. What is thoroughly realised by the mind too is realised as being empty. By realising that, the very identity which is established as the aspect of the mind, like the identity of physical form, etc., is also not ultimately perceived."

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, there is no special object to be apprehended.

Your question was, "Is analysis necessary." In sūtra yes; in Varjayāna, no. As Vimalamitra states in his Buddhahood in This Life:
If it is objected, “If afflictions are liberated into dharmatā without antidotes, there is no need for purification on the path. Otherwise, liberation would require no effort,” for what reason would those who do not understand be liberated? Asserting that those who understand are liberated merely by recognizing concepts as dharmatā is the fruit of one’s wishes. As such, in order to recognize that concepts are dharmatā, the intimate instructions of the guru are important.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 10th, 2015 at 10:15 AM
Title: Re: Analysis or Nothing
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Hence, the purpose of introduction. For example, one may seen faces in a crowd everyday and never recognize them; but when they are introduced to you, you will never fail to recognize them again.

Astus said:
If the face of prajnaparamita could be pointed at, it would have to be an object of mind, an experience, and as such it could be viewed both correctly and incorrectly. It wouldn't be the end of conceptualisation, but rather an opportunity for further proliferation. How is that avoided?

Malcolm wrote:
The face of prajñāpāramitā is not different than all appearances [this is fundamental tenet of Ati yoga, one of things that differentiates it from Chan/Zen, etc.], hence it is an object of mind, an experience. Therefore, it is viewed correctly and incorrectly. Hence, introduction is necessary. Without introduction, buddhahood is not possible. Buddhahood is not a result of effort or analysis. The difference between a buddha and sentient being is just the difference recognition and nonrecognition.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 10th, 2015 at 6:07 AM
Title: Re: Analysis or Nothing
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
There is no experience outside of suchness. Therefore, experiences can be used to introduce suchness.

Astus said:
Experiences are already such, but not everyone sees in such a way. What occludes such seeing are not experiences in general but the identification with some of them, thus establishing a self, and the habitual substantialisation of appearances, that is, attachment to concepts. If even temporary cessation of ideation cannot overcome that fundamental ignorance, what kind of experience is it that can?

Malcolm wrote:
Hence, the purpose of introduction. For example, one may seen faces in a crowd everyday and never recognize them; but when they are introduced to you, you will never fail to recognize them again.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 10th, 2015 at 5:51 AM
Title: Re: POTUS 2016
Content:
Saoshun said:
You know that US will fall anyway and there will be a war in 20-50 years from now? US have so much debt that only war can help with it, like hitler did.

DGA said:
Are you saying that Hitler's response to the conditions of Weimar Germany after the Treaty of Versailles was justified?

put differently:  Are you defending Nazi aggression on a Buddhist discussion board?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 10th, 2015 at 4:54 AM
Title: Re: Shenphen Dawa Rinpoche on Reading Dzogchen Books
Content:
Adamantine said:
With regards to the OP quote, it is no secret that many Lamas have different styles of transmission based on their own understanding and how they feel the teachings will root the most deeply and effectively in their students hearts.
Malcolm,

I remember you explaining something quite similar to us on e-sangha. The word I remember you using at that time was "fiefdom" though. How in old tibet, each lama had their own fiefdom. This stayed with me because I often thought about how much of a transition they all had to make, coming out of Tibet as they did. Lama Chime often said that he went directly from living in the eighth century to living in the twentieth century.

There are many approaches to practices. Why? Because everyone is different and the fact that everyone is different is not a trivial matter.

Malcolm wrote:
No doubt, but that was not the point I was addressing. It is however its own point. Glad I belong the kingdom of ChNN.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 10th, 2015 at 4:03 AM
Title: Re: Shenphen Dawa Rinpoche on Reading Dzogchen Books
Content:
Adamantine said:
And we are off topic again sort of-- the point isn't keeping things secret it's about authentic transmission. Shri Singha didn't just write it down and publish it widely in Tibet-- he gave an oral transmission to Vairotsana until both of them were satisfied with his understanding, then he left to return to Tibet to bring the teachings there, and transmit them from master to disciple. You can read the different lineages of Dzogchen and how they were transmitted to whom and how they were carried forth in the History of the Nyingma book of HH Dudjom Rinpoche. Nowhere does it say "and then this disciple never met a human master but found a text in a bookstore and achieved full realization after reading it over and over again". It is through the master disciple relationship that the teaching has always been transmitted- not through books - and this is what ChNN teaches and what you yourself affirmed at the beginning of the thread.

Malcolm wrote:
I was addressing the intent of the story you raised. The purpose of Śrī Siṃha's teaching Dzogchen in such a ridiculous fashion had nothing to do with generally keeping Dzogchen teachings secret, it had to do with fooling the Indian King and Panditas so Vairocana could return with Dzogchen teachings Tibet.

Everything in Buddhadharma needs to transmitted from master to disciple, no exceptions, even sūtra knowledge.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 10th, 2015 at 3:18 AM
Title: Re: Shenphen Dawa Rinpoche on Reading Dzogchen Books
Content:
Adamantine said:
Even in the time of Majusrimitra these Dzogchen teachings were kept quite secret to avoid both misunderstanding and persecution from the orthodox establishments, so I am not sure why the idea that it's important to receive transmission and/or authorization to read certain texts is suddenly a controversial idea.

Malcolm wrote:
Garab Dorje said if there is no interest, one student is too many; but if there is interest, 100 is too few.

Garab Dorje himself had hundreds of human students, not only one.

Adamantine said:
Not sure how that is relevant to anything I said, number of students is not really a part of the question is it? Anyway Shri Singha was whispering the Great Perfection teachings through a long copper pipe to Vairotsana in the middle of the night, only teaching the cause and result teachings to him openly during the light of day.

Malcolm wrote:
This is because, as we know, that Indians were jealous and did not want to the Tibetans to receive the teachings. Therefore, to confuse the their diviners, in the earliest account we have [from the Bairo rgyud 'bum ], Śrī Simha devised a ridiculous method of granting the teachings:
On the surface of three large boulders he placed an iron jar inside of a net. After the ācarya sat inside of it, he had the top filled with water and closed. Having run a clay pipe through a hole in the wall, those two monks where on the outside of the wall. As a precaution, they put their boots on backwards, they put long hoods on their heads, and listened.
When the Indian King tried to find out who had given the teachings to the Tibetans:
Since it was asked which person bestowed them, also no one wished to reply, it was said “It is necessary to examine the mirror”. The mirror diviner said “The abbot who is explaining the Great Perfection, the Dharma of transcendent intimate instructions, is sitting on a rock, his body is filled with eyes. He is seated on the surface of three large rocks. A lake has arisen over his head. He is giving the explanation with a long beak. Two with long deerskin hoods are listening from outside.”

Since the Dharma protecting king and all the pandits said “This is incredible, are they emanations of an asura? They cannot be clearly identified from the mirror. It must be no other than the two Tibetans. It is clear from the water divination that a swift runner must be sent.”
This indicates that the Great Perfection was quite well known to the Indians at that time, not such a huge secret.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 10th, 2015 at 2:29 AM
Title: Re: POTUS 2016
Content:
BrianG said:
The military industrial complex isn't written in stone.  It can always be dismantled, if people have the desire to.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, hence the reason for supporting Bernie Sanders.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 10th, 2015 at 2:21 AM
Title: Re: Shenphen Dawa Rinpoche on Reading Dzogchen Books
Content:
Adamantine said:
Even in the time of Majusrimitra these Dzogchen teachings were kept quite secret to avoid both misunderstanding and persecution from the orthodox establishments, so I am not sure why the idea that it's important to receive transmission and/or authorization to read certain texts is suddenly a controversial idea.

Malcolm wrote:
Garab Dorje said if there is no interest, one student is too many; but if there is interest, 100 is too few.

Garab Dorje himself had hundreds of human students, not only one.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 10th, 2015 at 2:18 AM
Title: Re: POTUS 2016
Content:
Saoshun said:
You know that US will fall anyway and there will be a war in 20-50 years from now? US have so much debt that only war can help with it, like hitler did.

BrianG said:
The US has roughly 20 trillion in debt vs 200 trillion in assets.  If you have 200 dollars, and you owe 20, you are in pretty good shape.

Also, the US is already at war.

Malcolm wrote:
Not really, though it may seem that way.

This is why we need to bring a guy like Sanders in. He will put an end to this once and for all, so I believe.

We put Obama in office to end the war in Iraq and Afghanistan. He did, but not very well.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 10th, 2015 at 12:50 AM
Title: Re: Analysis or Nothing
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Sūtra works with analysis, Vajrayāna works with experiences.

Astus said:
How can experience make one understand suchness, when the error lies not in what is experienced but in how that experienced thing is viewed?

Malcolm wrote:
There is no experience outside of suchness. Therefore, experiences can be used to introduce suchness.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 10th, 2015 at 12:25 AM
Title: Re: European refugee crisis
Content:
dreambow said:
Yes Germany is doing more then its fair share.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, they need the influx of population to bolster their labor force.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 10th, 2015 at 12:01 AM
Title: Re: POTUS 2016
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
And that is a good thing for the world, especially Asia.

BrianG said:
Business in arms is wrong livelihood, and isn't good for anybody.

Malcolm wrote:
Agreed, but these people are not Dharma practitioners, none of them. They are worldly people. So we work with circumstances. The Eisenhower speech is very nice. Day late and a dollar short to trot that one out.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 9th, 2015 at 11:53 PM
Title: Re: Analysis or Nothing
Content:


Astus said:
What other tool is there but correct analysis?

Malcolm wrote:
In Sūtra? None.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 9th, 2015 at 11:33 PM
Title: Re: Analysis or Nothing
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
He is talking about sutra. It does not apply to Vajrayāna. Apples and oranges.

Astus said:
How so? Vajrayana doesn't aim at a different emptiness, does it?

Malcolm wrote:
Sūtra works with analysis, Vajrayāna works with experiences.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 9th, 2015 at 11:22 PM
Title: Re: Shenphen Dawa Rinpoche on Reading Dzogchen Books
Content:
smcj said:
Lol, like what is the success rate for ChNN's students? Who is doing the counting?.

Malcolm wrote:
He is, and it is high. He is very satisfied with his students in general, or so he has said.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 9th, 2015 at 10:40 PM
Title: Re: Analysis or Nothing
Content:
Astus said:
If, as Kamalashila states, analysis is a necessary element of the path, it excludes all other options to reach insight into the nature of reality. Consequently, there can be no direct methods (pointing to the nature of mind, empowerment, direct introduction, etc.) that avoid using analysis. How can it be argued that the popular methods lacking the conceptual methods of discerning appearances are valid?

"Those who do not meditate with wisdom by analysing individually the entity of things, but merely meditate on elimination of mental activity, cannot avert conceptual thoughts and also cannot realise identitylessness because one lacks the light of wisdom. If the fire of consciousness knowing phenomena as they are is produced from individual analysis of suchness, then like the fire produced by rubbing wood it will burn the wood of conceptual thought."
( http://www.preciousteaching.org/sutra/kamalasilas-bhavana-krama-the-middle-meditation-stage/ )

"Thus it is on the basis of obtaining unobscured knowledge that one understands every single teaching of the Buddha. Hence without the discernment of reality there is no arising of perfect knowledge, nor also the abandonment of the afflictive obscurations."
(Necessity of Bhutapratyaveksa, Bhavanakrama 3, in Martin T. Adams: Meditation and The Concept of Insight in Kamalasila's Bhavanakramas (thesis), p 247)

Malcolm wrote:
He is talking about sutra. It does not apply to Vajrayāna. Apples and oranges.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 9th, 2015 at 10:25 PM
Title: Re: Shenphen Dawa Rinpoche on Reading Dzogchen Books
Content:
Norwegian said:
Ivo,

The master that practically demanded that ChNN started teaching Dzogchen, was His Holiness the 16th Karmapa.

Malcolm wrote:
Actually, this is not true.

Karmapa asked ChNN to teach his students in Italy. ChNN replied, I will teach your students, but I will not run a Kagyu Center [which is what the Karmapa was after]. I will teach them according to what I understand. I heard ChNN himself explain it this way.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 9th, 2015 at 10:20 PM
Title: Re: POTUS 2016
Content:


Dan74 said:
So while I think you make many good points about the candidates, Malcolm, I don't quite see what you base this on:

Malcolm wrote:
But the reality of the situation is this — Britain and the EU, the Saudis and so on are using the US as a proxy to to control terrorist organizations that are harmful to them. Basically the capitalist European North, while making disapproving noises in some sectors, tacitly, and in many cases explicitly, approve of US military actions. that is just how it is.

Dan74 said:
As far as I can tell, the EU is largely at America's beck and call as many recent events have demonstrated (for instance the Bolivian presidential plane incident https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evo_Morales_grounding_incident ).

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, that is my point. The so called "civililzed" countries that KD is referring to depend on the American Hegemony, and even though they squawk Anti-American sentiments on occasion, their security has been dependent on US power since the end of WWII.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 9th, 2015 at 10:17 PM
Title: Re: POTUS 2016
Content:
BrianG said:
The U.S. has nineteen aircraft carriers, compared to China's single used Russian aircraft carrier.  China can not project power on anywhere near the scale the US can.  No matter where someone is reading this in the world - the US has warships nearby, and can land Marines on your countries soil within 24 hours.  The same can not be said for China.

Malcolm wrote:
And that is a good thing for the world, especially Asia.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 9th, 2015 at 10:09 PM
Title: Re: Buddhism loses all purpose if you don't believe in reinc
Content:
lostitude said:
Besides the remarks I've already made, I really can't see how it would make a practical difference whether you believe in rebirth or not. At the end of a day, in either case you are practising NOW, in THIS life and you are trying to end suffering starting here and now. Not in a million lifetimes from now.  Some even want to reach liberation in one lifetime. And that's one more reason why I think the quote was misused.
If someone doesn't believe in rebirth, he could well be inclined to seek nirvana in this very life even if it is the only one. If it's not ok to go through samsara for eons, then it's not ok to go through it even for a lifetime, and as little as I have read so far, I know this is something the Buddha has said himself. Even a second of samsara is not worth living. So I really don't see why such a perpective of practice should be frowned upon or disparaged in such a way. The goal is the same and the mens to achieve it are the same.

Malcolm wrote:
You need to read the entire teachings:
If you have attachment to this life, you are not a Dharma practitioner. 
If you have attachment to samsara, you do not have renunciation. 
If you have attachment to your own purpose, you do not have bodhicitta.
If you have grasping, you do not have the view.
This means if you are only working for this life's happiness and freedom from suffering, you are not a Dharma practitioner. If you are practicing Dharma for higher rebirth only, you do not have renunciation. If you are only interested in your own liberation, you do not have bodhicitta, the motivation to become Buddha for the benefit of everyone. If you have grasping [to the view of self, etc.], you do not have the view.

The fact is that someone who does not accept rebirth automatically has wrong views and thus will not even be capable of stream entry. They will not understand why they are suffering and therefore, will not be capable of removing the cause of their suffering, just as a doctor who does not properly diagnose the cause of an illness will not be able to apply the proper treatment for that illness.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 9th, 2015 at 9:41 AM
Title: Re: POTUS 2016
Content:


BrianG said:
China is not bombing Tibetan women and children with robots, and I already stated that it's domestic policy is disgusting.  I'm not sure which part of this strikes you as false.


Malcolm wrote:
Well, one, the US is not bombing "countries" anymore. It is using drones [of which I disapprove incidentally] to target non-State actors who are targeting US assets in terrorist plots.

Karma Dorje said:
Yes, like he said: Bombing women and children with robots. You guys may not have invented English, but you sure are good at euphemisms!

Malcolm wrote:
Ummm....they are also killing women and children with bombs — it really doesn't matter whether your delivery system is a drone or a suicide bomber, the result is identical. I don't approve of either. These terrorists, aka non-State actors, are not in a position of moral superiority to the US.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 9th, 2015 at 5:29 AM
Title: Re: Buddhism loses all purpose if you don't believe in reinc
Content:
lostitude said:
Anders was talking about solving the issue of suffering, which is very different from being 'only focused on happiness for this life' which in turn is quite different from 'being attached to this life' as I understand it in English.

Malcolm wrote:
No, more or less it is the same thing. Absence of suffering is happiness — you may wish to contest this definition, but this is pretty much how happiness is defined by Buddhadharma.

lostitude said:
Sure but you just wrote something completely different when you compared absence of suffering to 'being only focused on happiness in this life' and 'being attached to this life'.
For starters I can't see how you can be truly happy if you are attached to this life which you know is bound to end. There can't be true happiness without detachment in this regard. So your quote can't possibly apply to someone who wants to end suffering, even in this life...
I'm saying this because of that quote you mentioned, which, as you are using it,  is supposed to disqualify those who strive to eliminate suffering in this life from being true dharma practitioners. It may be the case at the end of the day that they are not true dharma practitioners as you say, who am I to judge, but that's not what your quote says, as I read it at least, so I wonder why you came up with it there.


Malcolm wrote:
If you are attached to this life, you try to eliminate problems, suffering, in your life thinking of only this life.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 9th, 2015 at 5:00 AM
Title: Re: Buddhism loses all purpose if you don't believe in reinc
Content:
lostitude said:
Anders was talking about solving the issue of suffering, which is very different from being 'only focused on happiness for this life' which in turn is quite different from 'being attached to this life' as I understand it in English.

Malcolm wrote:
No, more or less it is the same thing. Absence of suffering is happiness — you may wish to contest this definition, but this is pretty much how happiness is defined by Buddhadharma.

Eliminating suffering in this life is palliative, it does not address the root issue, the three afflictions that cause rebirth in the three realms along with their cause, self-grasping.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 9th, 2015 at 4:06 AM
Title: Re: Buddhism loses all purpose if you don't believe in reinc
Content:


Malcolm wrote:
"If one is attached to this life, one is not a Dharma practitioner."

If your goal is to simply end suffering in this lifetime, you are not a Dharma practitioner.

lostitude said:
But why do you assume that trying to solve the issue of suffering in this life implies being attached to this life? To me it's like saying, trying to become a boddhisatva in this life is being attached to it...

Malcolm wrote:
Meaning, if you are only focused on happiness for this life, you are not a Dharma practitioner.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 9th, 2015 at 4:03 AM
Title: Re: Questions about Dzogchen Teachings
Content:
Karma Dondrup Tashi said:
It's a little disheartening sometimes when gurus jet in for the empowerment then jet out to the next one.

Malcolm wrote:
One of the things that ChNN said in the first retreat I ever attended with him is that a Dzogchen Guru's job is to make you independent from them. This is a very different message from the standard guru idea in Tibetan Buddhism.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 9th, 2015 at 4:01 AM
Title: Re: POTUS 2016
Content:


BrianG said:
China is not bombing Tibetan women and children with robots, and I already stated that it's domestic policy is disgusting.  I'm not sure which part of this strikes you as false.


Malcolm wrote:
Well, one, the US is not bombing "countries" anymore. It is using drones [of which I disapprove incidentally] to target non-State actors who are targeting US assets in terrorist plots.

There are problems with US policy, such as the idea that we are at war with terrorists, and such policies need to be changed. It is insane to be at war against an enemy that is so poorly defined, and there is too much room for abuse.

But the reality of the situation is this — Britain and the EU, the Saudis and so on are using the US as a proxy to to control terrorist organizations that are harmful to them. Basically the capitalist European North, while making disapproving noises in some sectors, tacitly, and in many cases explicitly, approve of US military actions. that is just how it is.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 9th, 2015 at 3:18 AM
Title: Re: Questions about Dzogchen Teachings
Content:


chimechodra said:
I guess my real question is, what's the difference between a person simply watching a DC webcast, buying some books and trying to do these really advanced practices in their home, and say some rank beginner buying a restricted text and trying to do some of the complex practices on their own, outside of the fact that the former person received khrid-lungs and DI in order to properly be empowered to work through these practices? Lots of masters and traditional texts say that you should have a close personal relationship with a guru, proper guidance and personal instruction, and whatnot, but since ChNN is constantly travelling it seems very difficult to receive these, so all you're left is with a bunch of books with complex practices to try on your own. They say you can never learn Dzogchen from books, but working with the materials from that retreat, it basically feels like I'm trying to learn Dzogchen from books... It's rather overwhelming.

Malcolm wrote:
I suggest you contact an SMS teacher through Tsegyalgar.

ChNN teaches in such a way that the "personal guidance" thing is not really so necessary. However, if you have a pressing practice question, you can always email him.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 9th, 2015 at 2:01 AM
Title: Re: ChNN practice from a dream
Content:


passel said:
I doubt ChNN teaches anything like this, but just curious if it resembles anything he teaches?

Malcolm wrote:
Nope.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 9th, 2015 at 12:38 AM
Title: Re: POTUS 2016
Content:
Clarence said:
Well, if America collapses the vacuum will be filled by either Russia or China. I know I still prefer the US over those two.

BrianG said:
Chinese domestic policy is disgusting, but it's "soft power" foreign policy, of buying countries instead of bombing them, is humane relative to America's "hard power" foreign policy.  Of course, China exploits and screws over the countries it buys, but that's better than being bombed by robots.

Malcolm wrote:
Dude, this is completely false, it is just that China at this point has confined itself to bombing nations "within" its borders. You know, like Tibet.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, September 8th, 2015 at 11:18 PM
Title: Re: POTUS 2016
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Brian:

Sanders has consistently voted against the war in Iraq.

He is not in favor of the US unilaterally warring against ISIS. He feels that they are threat, certainly, but that the Saudis need to step up and that the US should play more of supporting role, while Turkey and the Saudis deal with this. Iran is already involved.

BrianG said:
I would prefer it if America quit its' war addiction cold turkey, however, I suppose that is not possible.

I am extremely skeptical that an anti-plutocrat is going to be very effective, even if he wins.  How would he get the support of a completely bought congress?

The fact that he is not suffering from Ron Paul style media snubbing however, is very promising, and unexpected. A self-proclaimed socialist doing as well as him in the polls is also unprecedented as far as I know, and he is starting to move ahead of Hillary.

An ineffective socialist in the presidency is the best option available, and I agree with most of Sanders views, so the least hypocritical option would be to vote for him. But I think America requires much more than a change in the presidency.

Malcolm wrote:
Bernie is not an ineffective "socialist." He is not a "socialist," he is actually a Keynesian. All of the so-called called social democracies that he admires run on more or less Keynesian lines. Just like FDR's New Deal.

He is a very effective legislator, actually. Bernie actually gets stuff done.

You have to understand that the history of American Politics since the New Deal involves a concerted effort by the business class in America to destroy it. Most people have forgotten that America's economy was strongest when taxes on personal income over 250,000 was at its highest. This forced CEO's to shovel profits back into their businesses. $250,000 in 1955 is $2,226,250 in today's dollars. If someone cannot be content on a 2 million dollar a year salary, they have a greed problem.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, September 8th, 2015 at 11:03 PM
Title: Re: Shenphen Dawa Rinpoche on Reading Dzogchen Books
Content:
MalaBeads said:
Do you think SDR is talking about Crystal and the Way of Light? I have no idea what he is referring to. In any case, i am re-reading that one, im sure I didn't understand it when I first read it. But that was a long time ago. Maybe I'll understand more this time.

Malcolm wrote:
Most Nyingmapas were super offended by Crystal when it came out.

DGA said:
By "most Nyingmapas," do you mean lamas? ordinary folk?  anyone go on the record about it?  Has the mood changed since then?

Malcolm wrote:
Lamas.

Not really.  As for on the record, well, it is all hearsay at this point.

Now that ChNN has many students, well, Tibetans are hesitant to criticize success, but there is still of lot of discomfort with his approach.

Basically, the difference between a real teacher of Dzogchen and someone who only teaches Dzogchen as a theory is that real teachers of Dzogchen teach Dzogchen as the basis. Others teach it as a result of a path, like Mahāmudra. In a real sense, when Dzogchen is taught as the apex of the nine yānas for example, this is merely to contrast Dzogchen with the eight vehicles of cause and result.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, September 8th, 2015 at 10:18 PM
Title: Re: The Future of World Religions: Population Growth Project
Content:
seeker242 said:
Do you think the fact that there is essentially no religious freedom in China has some type of effect on this?

Indrajala said:
You can openly practice religion in China provided it doesn't antagonize or threaten the state. I think a lot of westerners have a distorted image of China still being something similar to what existed under Mao, but it really isn't like that at all.

Malcolm wrote:
Unless you are a Tibetan. In which case you have no passport, and are not allowed to travel.

Indrajala said:
Religious activities and organizations deemed threatening to the state or society are restricted, but the average Buddhist temple or Christian church is of no consequence and in fact the local government might even pay for it.

Malcolm wrote:
This is not true.

Indrajala said:
For the Beijing pastor, this anti-Christian campaign is part of a stated objective by the new leadership to promote Chinese cultural traditions such as Confucianism and Buddhism. It is no coincidence that much media attention was devoted to Xi's visit to Confucius's birthplace in February. On that occasion, according to the Chinese news agency Xinhua, Xi called for the propagation of a nationwide "ethical doctrine" with "fundamental socialist values" based on "traditional Chinese culture". According to pastor Joy, among themselves party members often use the pejorative expression yang jiao to designate Christianity. It translates as "foreign teaching".

Malcolm wrote:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jul/05/china-christianity-wenzhou-zhejiang-churches


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, September 8th, 2015 at 9:35 PM
Title: Re: Questions about Dzogchen Teachings
Content:
fckw said:
I'm actually contemplating of giving it a try for some time already. Not that I strictly need more instructions (well, there's always room left for learning more though...). But I'd love to hear the same teachings I already got from a different angle. I often judge a teacher by the number of high-quality students s/he produces. And from what I've observed so far ChNN is quite extraordinary.

Just one more question: In another thread it was mentioned that ChNN on the last day of a retreat gave out https://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=48&t=4052&start=3480#p285843. How do I have to interpret this? Reading through this list it'd be impossible to practice all these things. At the same time, there are for example individual mantras listed, which in my eyes are quite useless without having a complete instruction set. So, how do I have to understand this? What if someone would like to have a complete instruction set for something like, let's say, Simhamukha and not just a single mantra?

Malcolm wrote:
Right,these are all secondary practices — so if there is something that you find interesting, you can purchase the book and if need be the, the cd/dvd whatever.

He gives all these transmissions in case one needs them at some time.

In the beginning though, learning the thuns and the Ganapujas are quite enough for secondary practices.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, September 8th, 2015 at 9:31 PM
Title: Re: POTUS 2016
Content:
BrianG said:
America is in it's 14th year of continuous warfare, which both Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump supports.  They are both in favor of combating ISIS, both in favor of continued bombing in the middle east, the differences are very minor.

Malcolm wrote:
Brian:

Sanders has consistently voted against the war in Iraq.

He is not in favor of the US unilaterally warring against ISIS. He feels that they are threat, certainly, but that the Saudis need to step up and that the US should play more of supporting role, while Turkey and the Saudis deal with this. Iran is already involved.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, September 8th, 2015 at 9:16 PM
Title: Re: POTUS 2016
Content:


mossy said:
i have alwase been a conservative. i like small government/ personal responsibility

Malcolm wrote:
Under Republican administrations, the size of the Gvt. always increases. The only time the size of the Gvt. decreased in recent history was under Bill Clinton, who also balanced the budget. The Bush II ruined all of that, along with the economy, stripped us of our civil liberties, used 9/11 as a pretext to punish Hussein, etc.

Nevertheless, small government does not necessarily equal good government, nor to a large government necessarily equal bad government. These categories are too simplistic.

mossy said:
and liberty over the larger more controlling government supported by the democratic party.

Malcolm wrote:
Both parties are parties of "big government."


mossy said:
this new popularity serge of non-politicians in the republican party is the result of our disappointment in the republican politicians.  we are sick of voting in people who say what we want to hear but never act on their words.

Malcolm wrote:
Well, frequently, Republicans run on an irresponsible platform of unrealistic tax cuts and promises to "reduce the Gvt.", but when they get into office they have to deal with the Gvt. as it actually is, not with how they fantasize if should be run.


mossy said:
trump is educated and runs has done business all over the world and he is not taking bribes from special interest groups. voting for trump (or other non politicians) sends a powerful message to the republican establishment that they cant keep running the same game on us.

Malcolm wrote:
Trump is educated, even though he talks and behaves like a dumbass — but he thinks nothing of letting his companies go bankrupt. He has filed bankruptcy four times in eighteen years, that is an average of one bankruptcy every 4.5 years. How is this good business? If anything, this just proves that wealthy people in this country are treated differently than the little guy, just as white kids are treated differently than black kids when it comes to be being busted for possession of marijuana:
But Trump’s multiple spells in bankruptcy court, and the little effect they have played on his abundant wealth, highlights the stiff gap between how businesses and consumers are treated amid financial strife. The Trump businesses, as with many companies, were afforded significant leeway in the hope they could recoup those massive debts.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/what-trump-didnt-say-about-his-four-big-business-bankruptcies/2015/08/07/bc054e64-3d12-11e5-9c2d-ed991d848c48_story.html

Also, Trump is not a "conservative". He was a registered Democrat from 2001 to 2008. He said to CNN:
Before Donald Trump was a front-running Republican presidential candidate, the real estate mogul believed that the nation's economy ran better when Democrats were in control and that Hillary Clinton would be a strong negotiator with foreign nations.

"In many cases, I probably identify more as Democrat," Trump told CNN's Wolf Blitzer in a 2004 interview. "It just seems that the economy does better under the Democrats than the Republicans. Now, it shouldn't be that way. But if you go back, I mean it just seems that the economy does better under the Democrats. ...But certainly we had some very good economies under Democrats, as well as Republicans. But we've had some pretty bad disaster under the Republicans."
http://www.cnn.com/2015/07/21/politics/donald-trump-election-democrat/

But because he is a racist dipshit, as soon as Obama got elected, he seized on the birther conspiracy — which automatically proves he is insane.

mossy said:
as for the democrats voting in this election, please don't vote for Hillary. she is the most dangerous candidate running. even though i don't agree with Bernie sanders and would not vote for him myself, i will admit he is a lot better than  Hillary.

Malcolm wrote:
I am not a Democrat — I am voting for Sanders because he is the only honest guy in the race who has a chance.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, September 8th, 2015 at 11:34 AM
Title: Re: POTUS 2016
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
It is because people give into cynicism that racist demagogues like Trump get elected to begin with. But hey,  if war is what you like, voting for a guy like Trump is just going to get you a war.

Karma Dorje said:
Firstly, I never *give in* to cynicism. It takes a good deal of work and constant vigilance. In case you haven't noticed, voting for *anyone* in the US gets you a war. It's what you guys do. Other countries may make stuff or deliver services, you guys bomb brown people. Didn't Carlin establish that a decade ago?

Malcolm wrote:
I can understand your antipathy towards US foreign policy, but what I cannot understand is your apparent hatred for Americans which causes you to say things like, "If you really believe that countries get the leaders they deserve, there is simply no other choice."

And apparently, you are satisfied with what you perceive to be the status quo and so you sit on the sidelines and jeer, apparently hoping for more destructive policies and actions, even when such sentiments are counterproductive to the ends that you want. Or are you so cynical that you do not believe that the US can evolve from its present destructive courses of action? Basically, having a reasonable leadership in the US is in everyone's best interest, I would hope that you would not be encouraging the international rise of political demagoguery, and I would imagine that you do not fail to see that having a person like Trump in power will inevitably lead to further chaos and destruction, mostly of other countries. In this case, it seems, if the US is getting the leaders it deserves, those leaders just keep wreaking havoc on others. Unfortunately, we did not get it right with Obama. Hopefully, with someone like Sanders we would get it right, because the Democrats and Republicans are deeply out of touch with reality and the rest of the world, for the most part.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, September 8th, 2015 at 9:58 AM
Title: Re: POTUS 2016
Content:
Karma Dorje said:
I am totally voting for Trump if he makes it to the general election. If you really believe that countries get the leaders they deserve, there is simply no other choice.

Malcolm wrote:
Well, the only problem with that is when you vote for the US Prez, you are voting for the a person who can really render harm to the world at large, so somehow your cynical policy leaves a lot to be desired.

Karma Dorje said:
Come on Malcolm, get over yourself.  If voting could change the system it would have been made illegal a long time ago.

It's not cynical, I am merely voting for the greater entertainment value. Four more great years of the Daily Show and Last Week Tonight. Besides, I am long razor wire and chain link fence.

Malcolm wrote:
It is because people give into cynicism that racist demagogues like Trump get elected to begin with. But hey,  if war is what you like, voting for a guy like Trump is just going to get you a war.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, September 8th, 2015 at 9:47 AM
Title: Re: Questions about Dzogchen Teachings
Content:
fckw said:
Ok, thanks for answering. Does this essentially mean that there exists a recommended practice path, but no mandatory one, and it is my own responsibility to not jump ahead of what I'm actually capable to do, although I might have received the teachings already during a retreat?

Malcolm wrote:
The practice path begins with receiving direct introduction, and then working to stabilize that recognition within oneself. There are many different approaches to this from learning Vajra Dance to Yantra Yoga, doing the special Dzogchen preliminaries and so on — no single approach suits everyone, but in general everyone tries a bit of all of it until they figure out what is working for them.

But at base, the main emphasis is on Ati Guru Yoga.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, September 8th, 2015 at 9:44 AM
Title: Re: Questions about Dzogchen Teachings
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
1.b Norbu Rinpoche recommends that people do the special Dzogchen preliminaries after receiving transmission. Whether you do or not is up to you.

swooping said:
Are these the Rushen?

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, and semzin.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, September 8th, 2015 at 9:43 AM
Title: Re: POTUS 2016
Content:
Karma Dorje said:
I am totally voting for Trump if he makes it to the general election. If you really believe that countries get the leaders they deserve, there is simply no other choice.

Malcolm wrote:
Well, the only problem with that is when you vote for the US Prez, you are voting for the a person who can really render harm to the world at large, so somehow your cynical policy leaves a lot to be desired.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, September 8th, 2015 at 5:03 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:
swooping said:
Right, but the the long thun has a lot of work with the guardians that I have not learned yet. Can it be done without the longer guardian work?

Malcolm wrote:
You can the guru yoga of the long thun without the extensive invocations.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, September 8th, 2015 at 3:31 AM
Title: Re: Direct Introduction
Content:
fckw said:
If I may add a one or two questions here: I still don't really understand how the organization works.
1. Assuming I'd like to receive Dzogchen teaching.

a. Are these given in retreat or through webcast or both?

b. What are the preliminaries (besides becoming member of the organization)? None, specific Dzogchen rushen, ngöndro or others?

2. Assuming I'd like to receive tantric teachings.

a. Are these given also in webcasts or only in retreat?

b. What are the preliminaries? Nöndro?


Malcolm wrote:
1.a Teachings are given during retreats, most retreats are webcast.

1.b Norbu Rinpoche recommends that people do the special Dzogchen preliminaries after receiving transmission. Whether you do or not is up to you.

2.a Depends on what you mean by tantric, but in general, yes, many tantric teachings are giving during retreats, creation, completion and so on. There are many books and and so on you can obtain for the various cycles that ChNN teaches.

2.b None, apart from a sincere interest in the teachings. If you want to Ngondro, fine, if not, also fine. It is up to you and your understanding of what you need. ChNN only gives one "mandatory" practice: Ati Guru Yoga,  mindfulness and working with circumstances.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, September 8th, 2015 at 2:16 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:


swooping said:
The more general question (group of questions) has to to do with semde,longde and upadesha and the rushens and semdzins. I understand that the four yogas of semde are associated with the first statement of Garab Dorje and the Longde series refers to the second statement; I believe that means that trekchod and thogal are related to the third.

Malcolm wrote:
The first statement refers to the basis, the second statement refers to the path and the third statement refers to the result.

swooping said:
How do the Rushens and Semdzins fit into the above, if at all? Are the Rushens for experiencing and the semdzins for not remaining in doubt? Also, are the rushens, semdzins, four yogas and longde something that is generally continued for a lifetime, or until liberation, or are they practiced until getting to a certain place (I know that doesn't sound "non-gradual," but I hope you know what I mean) and then left behind?

Malcolm wrote:
Rushan, Semzin, four yogas, Longde, etc., are all connected with the second statement.


swooping said:
For example would it be inappropriate to do the seven line prayer to Padmasambhava followed by his guru yoga in the short thum,

Malcolm wrote:
This is the long thun yoga.

swooping said:
or is only using Garab Dorja and the three A's appropriate?

Malcolm wrote:
This is the short thun guru yoga. There is also a medium thun Guru Yoga. There is also Ati Guru Yoga.

swooping said:
Is the a place in the short then where it would be appropriate to practice a rushed or semdzin meditation?

Malcolm wrote:
After the Dogpa, and before the mantra of authentication.

Or, do Ati Guru Yoga and directly enter those practices.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, September 8th, 2015 at 1:57 AM
Title: Re: POTUS 2016
Content:
Unknown said:
Bernie Sanders has jumped out to a nine-point lead over front-runner Hillary Clinton in New Hampshire, and he's gained ground on her among Iowa voters in the Democratic presidential race, according to a pair of brand-new NBC News/Marist polls.

Malcolm wrote:
http://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/bernie-sanders-leads-hillary-clinton-9-n-h-gains-iowa-n422111


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, September 7th, 2015 at 10:21 PM
Title: Re: POTUS 2016
Content:
Dan74 said:
Regarding media and internet exposure of Sanders vs Trump, just snapped these now:

I wonder what it's like on the tellie?

Malcolm wrote:
No idea, but this is instructive:

http://publiceditor.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/09/04/looking-ahead-evaluating-bernie-sanders-coverage-in-the-times/


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, September 7th, 2015 at 1:55 AM
Title: Re: Direct Introduction
Content:
Pinus said:
@Malcolm:
for technical reasons alone?

Malcolm wrote:
Because in order to receive direct introduction you must participate in the introduction with a live master, so you are both in that same state together. A recording is not a living being. It has no mind, therefore, you cannot share the state of the master.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, September 6th, 2015 at 10:53 PM
Title: Re: Direct Introduction
Content:
Pinus said:
@Malcolm: thank you. What would we do without youtube?!

Malcolm wrote:
Webcast must be attended live...


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, September 6th, 2015 at 10:42 PM
Title: Re: POTUS 2016
Content:


Dan74 said:
Yeah, I find it extremely hard to talk to progressives and Democrats now, online is even worse. Everyone alwase jumps to racism, guess what......I am black.......well half black half Italian.....still I am a healthy tan complexion and no way look white. So not a racist old white guy here.
............
Mossy, I don't know if you'd be willing to do this, but I'd be really interested to know what attracts you to Trump over the other candidates.

_/|\_


Malcolm wrote:
Not replying for our friend Mossy here, but black voters are likely to respond positively to xenophobia aimed at Latinos:
African Americans have long been receptive to the anti-immigrant concepts behind Trump’s campaign. Simply put, the jobs, housing and other opportunities that immigrants take come largely at the expense of blacks who were born in the United States.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/donald-trump-doesnt-need-latino-voters-to-win-the-nomination/2015/09/04/9fd2e40c-524f-11e5-933e-7d06c647a395_story.html

According to this writer, Trump needs to convince a majority of black voters to abandon the Democratic Party for him. Not likely, considering the history of the Republican Party since the majority of Southern Democrats abandoned the Democratic party over abortion and other issues...

The other thing, which is really clear, is that we do not have an "immigration problem." This is just a fantasy concocted by Trump to create media hysteria and whip up the Tea Party folks into a xenophobic frenzy.

Required reading:

http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2015/09/03/is-immigration-really-a-problem-in-the-us/as-an-undocumented-alien-first-generation-college-grad-i-am-a-problem

The so-called illegal immigration problem was entirely caused by US interference in Latin American countries, the war on drugs, NAFTA, etc.

Illegal immigrants are not here to steal your job, rape your wife or daughter, etc. Illegal immigrants are not responsible for the heroin epidemic sweeping the US. Why? Well, the junkies are right here, they are your neighbors, US citizens with a drug problem, often created by prescriptions for painkillers.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, September 6th, 2015 at 10:23 PM
Title: Re: POTUS 2016
Content:
Nicholas Weeks said:
And if Trump should get the nomination, which he will not, then yes - any Republican over any Democrat.

Malcolm wrote:
That is very flexible thinking...


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, September 6th, 2015 at 10:17 PM
Title: Re: POTUS 2016
Content:


mossy said:
Yeah, I find it extremely hard to talk to progressives and Democrats now, online is even worse. Everyone alwase jumps to racism, guess what......I am black.......well half black half Italian.....still I am a healthy tan complexion and no way look white. So not a racist old white guy here.
............

Malcolm wrote:
Racism isn't owned by white people — there are plenty of Blacks, Latinos, Jews, Asians and so on who are racists.

And I did not say that anyone who voted for Trump was a racist; I said he was a racist and that anyone who voted for him was a fool. I still stand by that assessment, as harsh as it seems.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, September 6th, 2015 at 5:48 AM
Title: Re: POTUS 2016
Content:
Nicholas Weeks said:
You will almost never find a major political poll sample bigger than 1500 folks... so deal with it.

Malcolm wrote:
You voting for Trump, NW? If so, well you know what I think of people who would vote for him.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, September 6th, 2015 at 5:18 AM
Title: Re: Early survey usa poll
Content:
Nicholas Weeks said:
http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=d950cadf-05ce-4148-a125-35c0cdab26c6

Malcolm wrote:
Pretty narrow sample...


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, September 6th, 2015 at 4:25 AM
Title: Re: Direct Introduction
Content:
Pinus said:
Thanks for sharing, Malcolm.

Both teachers have my respect and gratitude for bringing their teaching to the West. I read some of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu's works a while ago, from his remarkably extensive bibliography. Too bad Kunzang Dechen Lingpa passed on already. Luckily Norbu is still around, isn't he? Norbu spoke quite freely about the teachings as far as I remember, which I found very refreshing, although learning from books is not really all too instructive - especially for a Dzogchen newb like me. Maybe I get a chance to meet him sometime.

Did you get a chance to receive a direct introduction from him? Or how does he work?

Malcolm wrote:
Well, there are many web casts, free. He always gives transmission during these. Depending on your circumstances however, it is good to go see him in person and meet with many fellow students. Practicing with others in the beginning is important. So contacting your local gar is an important first step.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, September 6th, 2015 at 3:07 AM
Title: Re: Direct Introduction
Content:


Malcolm wrote:
Find a Dzogchen master.

Pinus said:
Thanks for your recommendation. I'm not sure if I am at that point yet. But anyway, do you mind me asking who your Dzogchen master is?

Malcolm wrote:
Several, but principally Chogyal Namkhai Norbu and the late Kunzang Dechen Lingpa.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, September 6th, 2015 at 1:34 AM
Title: Re: Shenphen Dawa Rinpoche on Reading Dzogchen Books
Content:
dzogchungpa said:
What advice do you wish you had been given, if you don't mind my asking?

Malcolm wrote:
I wish someone had said to me in 1987, "You should go meet Norbu."

Instead I heard lots of negative things from Vajradhātu people, etc.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, September 6th, 2015 at 1:30 AM
Title: Re: POTUS 2016
Content:
Dan74 said:
The messages are no good, but I suspect a great many people who like him, are not david dukes, but pretty ordinary folks who see a self-made successful man, a political outsider, a straight-shooter, etc.

David N. Snyder said:
He's not entirely a self-made man. He worked in his father's real estate development company, later working on his own. Bad business decisions left him bankrupt. He received some money from his father, I think around $2 million and then made that into about the $5 billion he has now. He referred to the $2 million from his father as something "small". Perhaps small compared to what he has now, but certainly an amount 99% of us never have seen or received.


Malcolm wrote:
Yes, he was totally born with a silver spoon in his mouth. Not a self-made man, by any stretch of the imagination.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, September 6th, 2015 at 1:23 AM
Title: Re: Turiiya
Content:
Matt J said:
But as for the first, I think it is hard to correlate "being" with "emptiness" since they are opposites.

monktastic said:
Just to stir the pot a little: "form" and "emptiness" are also seeming opposites.

Malcolm wrote:
Having totally abandoned matter, signs and aspirations, 
and also meditating on the three doors of liberation is the activity of Māra — matter is empty.
-- Mañjuśrīmitra


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, September 6th, 2015 at 1:19 AM
Title: Re: Shenphen Dawa Rinpoche on Reading Dzogchen Books
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
... but in the meantime somehow I was bullied into thinking I had to do ngondro and so on by the local Kagyus and Sakyas ...

dzogchungpa said:
It's kind of hard to imagine someone bullying you into thinking something.

Malcolm wrote:
I was young, and had no contacts with Buddhists outside Vajradhātu and the local Sakya center, until I met HHST.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, September 6th, 2015 at 1:17 AM
Title: Re: Shenphen Dawa Rinpoche on Reading Dzogchen Books
Content:
MalaBeads said:
Most likely, everyone will agree that dzogchen is not found in books. And also that dzogchen is not discovered by studying. That is not to say that studying is not useful, it is useful, but it is not dzogchen.

I for one am quite glad that my first introduction to dzogchen was before I had ever read anything at all about it. Perhaps the time for a complete novice to be introduced to dzogchen is passed, I dont know. I would hope not though. It is quite helpful to know nothing at all about dzogchen before you encounter it. Quite difficult nowadays but maybe not impossible.

Anyhow, just thought i would throw my two cents into the discussion.

Bye.

Malcolm wrote:
I read Crystal and the Way of Light when I was 25: it is amusing that I was really puzzled by the idea of self-liberation because I had been reading Mahāyāna, which I thought meant that one was to attain buddhahood for everyone. I thought it was a super interesting book though, but in the meantime somehow I was bullied into thinking I had to do ngondro and so on by the local Kagyus and Sakyas, so I started out in a traditional way. When I was 26, before meeting Sakya Trizin, I had a very interesting dream about ChNN. Still, I wound up in Sakya because I was interested in Hevajra. Then in 1992, I met ChNN.

Really glad I read Crystal though even though I had not a clue what it meant at the time.

MalaBeads said:
Do you think SDR is talking about Crystal and the Way of Light? I have no idea what he is referring to. In any case, i am re-reading that one, im sure I didn't understand it when I first read it. But that was a long time ago. Maybe I'll understand more this time.

Malcolm wrote:
Most Nyingmapas were super offended by Crystal when it came out.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 5th, 2015 at 11:07 PM
Title: Re: Shenphen Dawa Rinpoche on Reading Dzogchen Books
Content:
MalaBeads said:
Most likely, everyone will agree that dzogchen is not found in books. And also that dzogchen is not discovered by studying. That is not to say that studying is not useful, it is useful, but it is not dzogchen.

I for one am quite glad that my first introduction to dzogchen was before I had ever read anything at all about it. Perhaps the time for a complete novice to be introduced to dzogchen is passed, I dont know. I would hope not though. It is quite helpful to know nothing at all about dzogchen before you encounter it. Quite difficult nowadays but maybe not impossible.

Anyhow, just thought i would throw my two cents into the discussion.

Bye.

Malcolm wrote:
I read Crystal and the Way of Light when I was 25: it is amusing that I was really puzzled by the idea of self-liberation because I had been reading Mahāyāna, which I thought meant that one was to attain buddhahood for everyone. I thought it was a super interesting book though, but in the meantime somehow I was bullied into thinking I had to do ngondro and so on by the local Kagyus and Sakyas, so I started out in a traditional way. When I was 26, before meeting Sakya Trizin, I had a very interesting dream about ChNN. Still, I wound up in Sakya because I was interested in Hevajra. Then in 1992, I met ChNN.

Really glad I read Crystal though even though I had not a clue what it meant at the time.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 5th, 2015 at 10:58 PM
Title: Re: POTUS 2016
Content:
Dan74 said:
Appeasement? Are we already at the reductio ad Hitelrum stage?

Yes, I'd be very sorry if he was elected and like you I am really happy Bernie Sanders's ideas are getting some serious exposure. I hope he goes further than anybody expects.

But one of the matters that is profoundly wrong in the political discourse in the US, the way I see it, is actual absence of such. People get hot under the collar if you even mention the candidate they don't like, it is so black-and-white (no pun intended this time). There is a wide-spread inability to even try to even countenance the other point of view and this dogmatism and polarisation is a very serious issue, IMO.

Malcolm wrote:
Australia is a Parliamentary system, like Canada, no? So you don't vote directly for your prime minister. For us, the stakes are a bit higher.

Dan74 said:
I mean here we are preaching to the choir. But out there on the streets, in your neighbourhood, there are probably some decent folk who look at what you and I look at and see a very different picture. They should be reached. Otherwise the progressives are repeating the mistake that is going to consign them to irrelevance - elitism.

Malcolm wrote:
As I pointed out above, in general also the Republicans are pretty horrified by Trump.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 5th, 2015 at 10:03 PM
Title: Re: POTUS 2016
Content:
Dan74 said:
The messages are no good, but I suspect a great many people who like him, see a self-made successful man, a political outsider, a straight-shooter, etc. None of this may be accurate, and they are glossing over very serious issues with him, I agree, but that's not my point.

I am seeing the loathing and scorn across partisan divides in the US which is neither healthy, nor something we, as aspiring bodhisattvas, should promote, IMO.

Just like you reach out to folks who misunderstand the Dharma and explain matters for the umpteenth time, with the same spirit I think it's good to reach out to people on the other side of the political divide and discuss in good faith, in a language they understand, in order to bridge the gulf and to educate.

Don't you think so?

_/|\_

Malcolm wrote:
Explaining to someone they are a fool for supporting a loudmouth racist hate monger is pretty understandable language, no? Or is Neville Chamberlain someone we should regard as a role model in such discussions?

I can understand your desire for harmony, but if Trump were elected, you and everyone else in the world will be really sorry.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 5th, 2015 at 9:41 PM
Title: Re: POTUS 2016
Content:
mossy said:
Can't stump the trump.

Malcolm wrote:
Honestly, Trump is a racist loudmouth who will actually cause the world at large more harm than good. Anyone who votes for Trump is an ignorant fool.

Dan74 said:
Do you think this last comment helps the situation? The US already appears to be so polarised, throwing grenades at the other side, you just further erode a chance of understanding, a chance of reaching people who for whatever reason are attracted to Trump.

Malcolm wrote:
You mean people like David Duke?:



People who support Trump are an embarrassment. Trump represents the worst qualities of American culture, not the best. People attracted to his message of hatred and xenophobia are fools.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 5th, 2015 at 9:39 PM
Title: Re: Shenphen Dawa Rinpoche on Reading Dzogchen Books
Content:


tingdzin said:
A sidelight: as a sometime translator, I can affirm that it is really difficult to put Dzogchen into English without distorting it.

Malcolm wrote:
It is not that hard. What is hard is that young translators rely too much on older translations, many of which are unduly contaminated by outside influences.



tingdzin said:
Janet Gyatso said in one of her books that Chatral Rinpoche even thought it was a waste of time to try.

Malcolm wrote:
Good thing ChNN does not feel this way.


tingdzin said:
...books alone just won't do.

Malcolm wrote:
Agreed.

tingdzin said:
Another sidelight: so-called "Dzogchen" is now unfortunately very trendy, but if it is not a part of your own main practice tradition, there is no real reason you should try to study it in depth.

Malcolm wrote:
I don't agree. Everyone should learn Dzogchen. Dzogchen is for anyone who is interested in it, not just Nyingmapas. Nyingmapas do not own Dzogchen.


tingdzin said:
In the end, though, there's nobody looking over your shoulder. As with all Buddhism, you have to be an adult -- you make your own choices and take the karmic consequences. But you might examine the purity of your motives VERY DEEPLY before you discard the traditional guidelines and ignore the traditional warnings.

Malcolm wrote:
If your motive is to wake up as fast as possible, then study Dzogchen.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 5th, 2015 at 9:09 PM
Title: Re: POTUS 2016
Content:
mossy said:
Can't stump the trump.

Malcolm wrote:
Honestly, Trump is a racist loudmouth who will actually cause the world at large more harm than good. Anyone who votes for Trump is an ignorant fool.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 5th, 2015 at 4:04 AM
Title: Re: POTUS 2016
Content:
Monlam Tharchin said:
Malcolm, I was surprised when I did an in-depth political questionnaire to find I actually align almost 100% with Green Party policies. I had just assumed I was a Dem, when according to said website I was only some 60% on board with them. I wonder if part of this stupid two-party nonsense in the US is people not really knowing what all the different parties actually support.

Malcolm wrote:
It is a question of getting one of the two major parties to move towards the platform you like.

The cultural conservatives have been very successful at moving the Republicans to the right, now the left is beginning to have some success moving the Democrats back to where they were 40 years ago after the civil rights movement.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 5th, 2015 at 3:47 AM
Title: Re: POTUS 2016
Content:
Dan74 said:
Trump with Palin as Vice-Pres! Lets drive the meme to its absurd (but hopefully not inevitable) conclusion.

PS This wouldn't be my actual vote, in case the humour doesn't come across, not that I am eligible to vote in the US.

Malcolm wrote:
There is no way Trump will ever win the election.

Kunzang said:
Sure there is.  He could run third party/independent splitting the Republican vote thus winning the election for the Dems.

Malcolm wrote:
Well, if Bernie does not win the primary, then I will vote for the Green Party again. So the Dems better well feel the Berne.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 5th, 2015 at 1:44 AM
Title: Re: Poll - Meditation with western worldview?
Content:
pael said:
Sogyal Rinpoche writes in his book (Tibetan book of living and dying) that you can have vision of rigpa when you see lightning.

Malcolm wrote:
Hahahaha.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 4th, 2015 at 11:45 PM
Title: Re: POTUS 2016
Content:
conebeckham said:
Pardon my French, but who the frak voted for Carson?


Srsly?


Malcolm wrote:
The single platform right to life person.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 4th, 2015 at 11:36 PM
Title: Re: Anarchist Buddhist teachers, present and past?
Content:
Caodemarte said:
If you are looking that way, check out the Buddhist priests executed by the Japanese for opposing the Empire. There are several anarchist leaning Buddhist thinkers in pre- and post-war Japan.

Going west, Korean monks led the anti-Japanese/anti-Korean gov't uprisings before annexation, but I am not sure if that counts here. The 1980s saw the development of Masses' Buddhism (Minjung Bulkyo) in Korea and there are a couple of English language books  about it. It is definitely anti-state, but was so incoherent and poorly thought out that there is little intellectual engagement possible, except as a historical study of  the more wide ranging shift of Korean Buddhism to more enagement with civilians.

If memory serves, there are some early 20th Century Chinese Buddhist thinkers who at least flirted with serious  engagement with anarchist thought.

This should be enough  for you to look these people up if they are of interest to you.


Malcolm wrote:
Anti-state =  incoherent and poorly thought out.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 4th, 2015 at 11:35 PM
Title: Re: POTUS 2016
Content:
David N. Snyder said:
It looks like landslide DW support (so far) for Bernie Sanders. He is too socialist for me, but I do like him on several important things:


Malcolm wrote:
Bernie is about as socialist as FDR. The main difference? FDR was part of the NYC aristocracy, Bernie Sanders dad was a Jewish plumber who emigrated from Poland.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 4th, 2015 at 10:23 PM
Title: Re: Direct Introduction
Content:


Pinus said:
The other thing is, that Buddhism has found a way to teach about 'emptiness beyond concepts'. That's quite an attainment! Anyone that spontaneously experiences emptiness or 'shunyata' is typically too perplexed to let it turn into 'direct understanding' (isn't that what you call 'rigpa' in Dzogchen?).

Malcolm wrote:
No.


Pinus said:
But by it's conceptualization it becomes more difficult to elicit. On the other hand, the right knowledge may bring the direct experience about in the recipient if the conditions are good (isn't that what you call 'direct introduction' in Dzogchen?).

Malcolm wrote:
No.


Pinus said:
Do you understand the word Dzogchen more as a generic name of a path, like yoga is a generic term (both of which happen to be about self-liberation, respectively the realization of our true nature or self)?

Malcolm wrote:
No. Dzogchen is not a generic name, it is a specific term that refers both to one's state and a specific path to reach it. Yoga is very far away from the meaning of Dzogchen, and is a path of renunciation, not self-liberation.


Pinus said:
- Do you also take the study into practice ?
Yes, although there doesn't seem to be an essential difference between theory and practice. My experience is, that it's more like two sides of one coin. At least for me, since it were spontaneous experiences that lead me to study emptiness in the first place.

Malcolm wrote:
Find a Dzogchen master.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 4th, 2015 at 9:47 PM
Title: Re: POTUS 2016
Content:
Dan74 said:
Trump with Palin as Vice-Pres! Lets drive the meme to its absurd (but hopefully not inevitable) conclusion.

PS This wouldn't be my actual vote, in case the humour doesn't come across, not that I am eligible to vote in the US.

Malcolm wrote:
There is no way Trump will ever win the election.

Dan74 said:
This has been said before, no?

Malcolm wrote:
Let's put it this way — my dad is a conservative albeit moderate Republican. He hates Trump and will never vote for him. Trump is completely alienating the moderate Republicans. They won't vote for him. Trump is appealing to the crazy right wing of American Politics. No one has ever won a Presidency by appealing to the unhinged in the US, contrary to world opinion, they just don't have enough votes compared to blacks, latinos and white women.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 4th, 2015 at 9:34 PM
Title: Re: POTUS 2016
Content:
Dan74 said:
Trump with Palin as Vice-Pres! Lets drive the meme to its absurd (but hopefully not inevitable) conclusion.

PS This wouldn't be my actual vote, in case the humour doesn't come across, not that I am eligible to vote in the US.

Malcolm wrote:
There is no way Trump will ever win the election.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 4th, 2015 at 9:10 PM
Title: Re: POTUS 2016
Content:
Tenso said:
Trump. He's got the cajones to make a good prez.

Malcolm wrote:
He certainly has more balls than brains.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 4th, 2015 at 9:09 PM
Title: Re: Anarchist Buddhist teachers, present and past?
Content:
frankc said:
Looking for an introduction to some teachers, present and past, who shine a sort of anti-state, anti-government, anti-authoritarian mind set. Not anti-guru, but more of a political and social rebellious sort of thing. Thanks.

Malcolm wrote:
Real teachers work with circumstances, not ideologies.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 4th, 2015 at 10:38 AM
Title: Re: POTUS 2016
Content:



Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 4th, 2015 at 5:25 AM
Title: Re: The Mahayana idea of karma and vegetarianism
Content:
Sara H said:
Uh, no, not really most people do not consider it the same. Including large numbers of Vajrayana practitioners

Malcolm wrote:
Uh huh, yes, really, we do. What other people think is of little import to our identity. We consider ourselves Mahāyanīs.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 4th, 2015 at 4:39 AM
Title: Re: The Mahayana idea of karma and vegetarianism
Content:
Sara H said:
Yeah, no, this sub-board is not talking about Vajrayana Malcolm.

Malcolm wrote:
Vajrayāna is a part of Mahāyāna, whether you like it or not.

The board and title of the thread does not say, "The Mahāyāna Sūtra idea of karma and vegetarianism."

Unless of course you want to discriminate against those follow Mahāyāna Dharma  who also happen to be practitioners of Secret Mantra.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 4th, 2015 at 4:15 AM
Title: Re: The Mahayana idea of karma and vegetarianism
Content:
Sara H said:
The Hevajra Tantra is a Vajrayana text.

Vajrayana Buddhism has it's entirely own take on both the Pali cannon, and the Mahayana texts.

It is a third vehicle of Buddhism, entirely in it's own right.

Malcolm wrote:
It refers to itself as "Uncommon Mahāyāna." In other words, the motivation is the same, the outline of the path is the same, the five paths and ten stages, and the result is the same, the three kāyas — only the means are different, and therefore, the conduct.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 4th, 2015 at 1:24 AM
Title: Re: The Mahayana idea of karma and vegetarianism
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
The Hevajra Tantra, a Mahāyāna Scripture, the teaching of the Buddha, is also very clear:
"Those with compassion eat meat."

Astus said:
Couldn't find that in either the Snellgrove or the Farrow-Menon translation. Could you give its location please?


Malcolm wrote:
It's there, but concealed.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 3rd, 2015 at 9:19 PM
Title: Re: The Mahayana idea of karma and vegetarianism
Content:
Sara H said:
The Mahayana Sutras are very clear on vegetarianism.

Malcolm wrote:
The Hevajra Tantra, a Mahāyāna Scripture, the teaching of the Buddha, is also very clear:

"Those with compassion eat meat."


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 3rd, 2015 at 9:17 PM
Title: Re: Poll - Meditation with western worldview?
Content:
Pinus said:
spontaneous rig pa

Malcolm wrote:
This does not exist.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 3rd, 2015 at 8:58 PM
Title: Re: Does Zen result in Buddhahood as described in sutras?
Content:
MiphamFan said:
Buddhas can display all the 6 abhijnas, different powers etc.

Astus said:
"You say, ‘A buddha has six supernatural powers. This is miraculous!’ All the gods, immortals, asuras, and mighty pretas also have supernatural powers—must they be considered buddhas? Followers of the Way, make no mistake! For instance, when Asura fought against Indra and was routed in battle he led his entire throng, to the number of eighty-four thousand, into the tube in a fiber of a lotus root to hide. Wasn’t he then a sage? Such supernatural powers as these I have just mentioned are all reward powers or dependent powers.
Those are not the six supernatural powers of a buddha, which are entering the world of color yet not being deluded by color; entering the world of sound yet not being deluded by sound; entering the world of odor yet not being deluded by odor; entering the world of taste yet not being deluded by taste; entering the world of touch yet not being deluded by touch; entering the world of dharmas yet not being deluded by dharmas. Therefore, when it is realized that these six—color, sound, odor, taste, touch, and dharmas— are all empty forms, they cannot bind the man of the Way, dependent upon nothing. Constituted though he is of the seepage of the five skandhas, he has the supernatural power of walking upon the earth."
(Record of Linji, p 20, tr Sasaki)

Malcolm wrote:
The sixth abhijñā is the one that exhausts contaminants. That is unique to āryas.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 3rd, 2015 at 5:42 AM
Title: Re: Shenphen Dawa Rinpoche on Reading Dzogchen Books
Content:


Johnny Dangerous said:
Longchenpa Finding Ease and Comfort trilogy (does that even count as a Dzogchen text?

Malcolm wrote:
Definitely a Dzogchen text, kind of a Lamrim based on Dzogchen Sem sde.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 3rd, 2015 at 4:51 AM
Title: Re: Shenphen Dawa Rinpoche on Reading Dzogchen Books
Content:


Malcolm wrote:
The caveat is, that it really is better to have the transmission for texts you want to read...

Johnny Dangerous said:
Sure, that's sensible. I've mainly just read general books on Dzogchen view, and basic Trekcho advice, since it seems to     be so relevant to Mahamudra meditation. I assume you mean things like practice texts, tantra commentaries, etc?

Malcolm wrote:
It is better to have the transmission for what you want to read. Of course, you can always get the transmission later.

There is little point is buying books on Ngondro and sadhanas apart from the ones you are doing [glances over shoulder at huge library of unused books...]


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 3rd, 2015 at 4:26 AM
Title: Re: Shenphen Dawa Rinpoche on Reading Dzogchen Books
Content:
Johnny Dangerous said:
That's interesting, and makes sense. On the other hand, how do you know what and what not to read? I've taken a DI, but feel lost in Dzogchen practices, have other Vajrayana commitments, but find myself relating to the view of Dzogchen. How would I even know what I am supposed to read? Is he talking about reading in general, about seeking out practices one is not qualified for,  reading Tantras one isn't supposed to?

Malcolm wrote:
Read what you want, but avoid reading about tögal until you have received tögal instructions.

Johnny Dangerous said:
Ah, OK no problem then.

Malcolm wrote:
The caveat is, that it really is better to have the transmission for texts you want to read...


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 3rd, 2015 at 4:12 AM
Title: Re: Shenphen Dawa Rinpoche on Reading Dzogchen Books
Content:
Johnny Dangerous said:
That's interesting, and makes sense. On the other hand, how do you know what and what not to read? I've taken a DI, but feel lost in Dzogchen practices, have other Vajrayana commitments, but find myself relating to the view of Dzogchen. How would I even know what I am supposed to read? Is he talking about reading in general, about seeking out practices one is not qualified for,  reading Tantras one isn't supposed to?

Malcolm wrote:
Read what you want, but avoid reading about tögal until you have received tögal instructions.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 3rd, 2015 at 3:17 AM
Title: Re: Shenphen Dawa Rinpoche on Reading Dzogchen Books
Content:
dzogchungpa said:
I almost posted this myself, but I was afraid I would get in trouble.

Malcolm wrote:
Well, I guess it is up to each person to decide for themselves what they will read and what they will not read. Having said that, I concur that there are many people who get themselves into trouble by reading books for which they do not have the transmission.

There are certain forums where this is blatantly obvious.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 3rd, 2015 at 2:25 AM
Title: Re: knowledge of a bodhisattva and/or stream enterer
Content:
DGA said:
Does it follow, then, that someone who does not "get it" with regard to dependent origination / rebirth lacks the characteristics of a first-bhumi bodhisattva or stream enterer?

Malcolm wrote:
Absolutely.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 3rd, 2015 at 12:47 AM
Title: Re: knowledge of a bodhisattva and/or stream enterer
Content:
DGA said:
Would a stream enterer or  bodhisattva necessarily have direct knowledge of how rebirth works?  (as distinct from accepting karma/rebirth as a doctrine, or understanding it doctrinally)

Astus said:
Direct knowledge of how it works on what level? Seeing one's own past lives and the process of rebirth of others' is a matter of possessing the super-knowledges (abhijna) of past lives and the divine eye. Those abilities are not necessarily possessed even by an arhat, while non-buddhists may also have them. On the other hand, because of gaining insight into how the mind works, they know clearly how dependent origination works.

DGA said:
What is the difference between knowing, directly, how dependent origination works as opposed to how rebirth works?  (bracketing the siddhi of seeing one's own or any one else's past or future lives)

Malcolm wrote:
None.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 3rd, 2015 at 12:33 AM
Title: Re: knowledge of a bodhisattva and/or stream enterer
Content:
DGA said:
Would a stream enterer or  bodhisattva necessarily have direct knowledge of how rebirth works?  (as distinct from accepting karma/rebirth as a doctrine, or understanding it doctrinally)

Malcolm wrote:
Yes.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 2nd, 2015 at 2:02 AM
Title: Re: Why Buddhism over Vedanta?
Content:
rachmiel said:
I'm surprised no one mentioned what I (and others) consider to be the most off-putting aspect of (Advaita) Vedanta: that it asserts (incontrovertibly!) Brahman is the one true absolute reality.

For me, this is a show-stopper. To believe it, thus to be enlightened, requires imo a leap of faith. And, having grown up Catholic, belief/faith are pretty much no-no's for me.

lostitude said:
Don't you believe there are devas you can't see, boddhisattvas you can't see, ghosts you can't see, hell and heavens you can't see, etc. ? Isn't that the same as believing in God and angels and demons and the like? Doesn't it require a leap of faith? In my opinion, as a newcomer, it definitey does. Buddhism comes with such a huge mythological pantheon that could make catholicism blush...

Malcolm wrote:
The difference is — and it is fundamental — from a [Mahāyāna] Buddhist point of view, all of this is predicated on the common and deluded perceptions of sentient beings — in other words, though it seems real, none of it is at all real. It is all just dreams and illusions.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, September 1st, 2015 at 10:37 PM
Title: Re: Universal Atman in Buddhism
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Yes, I understand this is the theory — from a Buddhist point of view, it is wrong.

lostitude said:
Fair enough, but even from a buddhist POV wouldn't a buddhist have to accept that this kind of view can actually make sense, from a logical/mathematical perspective, which I assume is the same kind of logic used by buddhists to accept basic buddhist tenets. The theory might well be wrong, but given that it's based on logic, doesn't it go to show that causation might not be universal after all?

Malcolm wrote:
Logic is very limited. In any case, among the reasons we accept beginningless multiple repeating universes is that this is the experience of many yogis, not just the Buddha, which comes from recalling their past lives.




lostitude said:
Oops sorry then I guess I just didn't understand. You're saying you're not talking about physical space, maybe that's the part that threw me. What kind of space then are you talking about?

I know that matter obstructs, space does not. But space can be obstructed by matter. In fact all the space we know about and commonly experience is obstructed by matter.

Malcolm wrote:
I clarified for you already, there are two kinds of space discussed in Buddhadharma: unconditioned space and conditioned space. The former is absence of obstruction, the latter is volume.



lostitude said:
The earth is actually the characteristic of matter we call solidity, and so on.
The earth is a specific object. Solidity is a concept that can describe many different things. I can touch something solid but i can't touch solidity... I can only ascribe it to other concrete objects such as earth.

Malcolm wrote:
As I said, since you do not understand the basic terms of the conversation, it is hard to have this conversation with you. In Buddhadharma in general, but also in Indian cosmology in general, earth = solidity, water = liquidity, fire = heat, air = motility: these are the four basic characteristics of matter, from a Higgs boson up to a super nova and everything in between. Unconditioned space is considered a fifth "element", and consciousness is considered the sixth. The universe is made up, from a Buddhist point of view, only of these six elements. When we say these things are elements, it does not mean they are single substances. When we say consciousness is an element, we mean the aggregates of all consciousness taken together is a component or element of the universe, since the universe contains sentient beings.


lostitude said:
Unconditioned space is not a characteristic of matter, but because of space, matter can form and perish.
So do you mean, maybe, space as a conceptual dimension? Just like time basically?

Malcolm wrote:
Space is not treated as a conceptual dimension.

lostitude said:
Which logic are you referring to? Certainly not the logic of Aristotelian propositions and so forth.
I'm referring to the logic that leads you to say, for example, that it makes no sense to have a causeless cause, or that you can't be one thing and its opposite at the same time. The basic logic you have probably used to start out in buddhism deciding that it made more sense than other paths.

Malcolm wrote:
A, so you are referring to propositional logic. Buddhist logic is anti-Aristotelian, which is why, among other things, it categorically rejects first causation, Aristotle's unmoved mover and so forth, upon which Christian, Islamic and Jewish theology is erected.

lostitude said:
BTW thanks for taking the time to reply. I realise you have nothing to gain from this and I'm the only one learning new stuff here.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, I understand you are trying to get your intellectual bearings in a new field of study, no problem.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, September 1st, 2015 at 10:12 PM
Title: Re: Universal Atman in Buddhism
Content:


Malcolm wrote:
What makes you think there was no time prior to the big bang? The big bang happened in time. In any case, Buddhist thinking about these issues is predicated on serial expansions and contractions of the physical universe.

lostitude said:
Actually according to the theory, time started with the big bang, as time is just one of several dimensions along with spatial ones. There was no time before the expansion, according to the theory. This does not mean that the theory is right, but at least it points to the fact that logic and mathematics allow the possibility of time having a beginning and being caused by something apparently uncaused.

Stephen Hawking said:
At this time, the Big Bang, all the matter in the universe, would have been on top of itself. The density would have been infinite. It would have been what is called, a singularity. At a singularity, all the laws of physics would have broken down. This means that the state of the universe, after the Big Bang, will not depend on anything that may have happened before, because the deterministic laws that govern the universe will break down in the Big Bang. The universe will evolve from the Big Bang, completely independently of what it was like before. Even the amount of matter in the universe, can be different to what it was before the Big Bang, as the Law of Conservation of Matter, will break down at the Big Bang.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, I understand this is the theory — from a Buddhist point of view, it is wrong.

Stephen Hawking said:
Where does it exist? The universe we know is not empty, so it's bound to have its emptiness obstructed here and there, even if there was more emptiness than matter in it.
You may have 'absence of obstruction' on a local level, but then it would be limited, hence conditioned if I got you right.

Malcolm wrote:
I told you already, space is everywhere. Matter obstructs, space does not.


Stephen Hawking said:
Also, can a 'characteristic' really be considered as a phenomenon? it looks more like a purely conceptual thing to me.

Malcolm wrote:
The earth is actually the characteristic of matter we call solidity, and so on. Unconditioned space is not a characteristic of matter, but because of space, matter can form and perish.

This space is not the same kind of space referred to in physics. They do not have a math for this.

Stephen Hawking said:
Because similarly one could then say that logic is unconditioned, since it is (supposedly) always the same and not influenced by anything (you can't change logic). And yet of course logic pervades our conditioned world.

Malcolm wrote:
Which logic are you referring to? Certainly not the logic of Aristotelian propositions and so forth.

In any case, even space is not something which is ultimate, according to Madhyamaka reasonings. It is still unconditioned though.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, September 1st, 2015 at 12:34 PM
Title: Re: Universal Atman in Buddhism
Content:
lostitude said:
(By the way, is the big bang singularity unconditioned? it seems to meet the criteria of being uncaused, doesn't it?)

Malcolm wrote:
No, since it produces effects, it [the big bang] itself must have a cause.

Dan74 said:
A kind of a timeless cause, maybe, because there was no time prior to the Big Bang and causation generally implies time?? Not sure how that would work, but...

Malcolm wrote:
What makes you think there was no time prior to the big bang? The big bang happened in time. In any case, Buddhist thinking about these issues is predicated on serial expansions and contractions of the physical universe.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, September 1st, 2015 at 9:42 AM
Title: Re: Universal Atman in Buddhism
Content:
lostitude said:
(By the way, is the big bang singularity unconditioned? it seems to meet the criteria of being uncaused, doesn't it?)

Malcolm wrote:
No, since it produces effects, it [the big bang] itself must have a cause.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, September 1st, 2015 at 9:41 AM
Title: Re: Universal Atman in Buddhism
Content:


Malcolm wrote:
No, unconditioned space is not affected in anyway by the presence or absence of anything.

lostitude said:
Then does unconditioned space even exist? If so, where?

Malcolm wrote:
It exists as the characteristic of absence of obstruction. It exists everywhere.


lostitude said:
If you want to understand Buddhadharma coherently, I suggest you start with Abhidharma, Vasuabandhu's critical presentation, then work your way through Yogacara and Madhyamaka.
Sure, but that will take me about, how many lifetimes exactly?

Malcolm wrote:
Seven years.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, September 1st, 2015 at 6:17 AM
Title: Re: Universal Atman in Buddhism
Content:


Malcolm wrote:
The only other unconditioned phenomena which exist, according to Buddhadharma, are two the kinds of cessation: simple cessation, which is the mere absence of causes; and analytical cessation, which is a result of insight a.k.a., nirvana. .

lostitude said:
How would he know that? how can one assert that one knows everything that exists?

Malcolm wrote:
A buddha is omniscient.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, September 1st, 2015 at 6:15 AM
Title: Re: Universal Atman in Buddhism
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
The invoked principle is the homogeneity of cause and effect. Unconditioned phenomena are uncaused, and being uncaused, are incapable of acting as causes. For example, unconditioned space, defined as the simple absence of obstruction, can neither affect nor be affected by conditioned elements such as earth, water, fire or air. Why? Because the latter four elements are conditioned or compounded, and the former element, space, is unconditioned or uncompounded. "

lostitude said:
I'm not quite sure I get it: when you bring an element such as earth into 'absence of obstruction', it is affected in that it is reduced by the presence of earth... Just like the emptiness in an empty room diminishes as I enter it.

Malcolm wrote:
No, unconditioned space is not affected in anyway by the presence or absence of anything.

The space your are referring to is conditioned space or volume.

If you want to understand Buddhadharma coherently, I suggest you start with Abhidharma, Vasuabandhu's critical presentation, then work your way through Yogacara and Madhyamaka.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, September 1st, 2015 at 5:54 AM
Title: Re: Universal Atman in Buddhism
Content:


lostitude said:
Also, about conditioned and unconditioned phenomena being mutually exlusive, this also makes me think about ember that sometimes emits a flame, sometimes doesn't. The fact that the flames come and go indicates nothing about the ember changing or being the same.

Malcolm wrote:
This indicate that the ember changes state, with a resulting fluctuation in flames — hence an ember is conditioned.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, September 1st, 2015 at 5:52 AM
Title: Re: Universal Atman in Buddhism
Content:
lostitude said:
What I don't understand, is the transition from this : First you have to identify the characteristics of unconditioned phenomena. They do not arise, abide or cease — further, they are uncaused. Conditioned phenomena arise, abide and cease — further, they are caused.
To this : Since there is radical difference in kind, there is no point of contact between the former and the latter
I don't see how the conclusion follows so naturally from the premise. There's no obvious logic here that I can identify. It looks more like an intuitive statement than a logical one. Unless there's a missing step in the reasoning, which you didn't include because you thought it was obvious.

Malcolm wrote:
The invoked principle is the homogeneity of cause and effect. Unconditioned phenomena are uncaused, and being uncaused, are incapable of acting as causes. For example, unconditioned space, defined as the simple absence of obstruction, can neither affect nor be affected by conditioned elements such as earth, water, fire or air. Why? Because the latter four elements are conditioned or compounded, and the former element, space, is unconditioned or uncompounded. Unconditioned/uncompounded [ asaṃkṛta ] means "that which has not been assembled out of parts."

The only other unconditioned phenomena which exist, according to Buddhadharma, are two the kinds of cessation: simple cessation, which is the mere absence of causes; and analytical cessation, which is a result of insight a.k.a., nirvana.

Emptiness is also unconditioned, but it is not included among the dharmas.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, September 1st, 2015 at 3:12 AM
Title: Re: Why Buddhism over Vedanta?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Liberation, in Buddhadharma, is strictly the elimination of afflictions that cause rebirth in the three realms. It really does not matter what school one belongs to.

Indrajala said:
Chan and Zen can often be nebulous with respect to what liberation is and what happens afterwards (the laundry?). There's also Pure Land which is based on the belief that liberation will come postmortem. Mahāyāna's traditional understanding of 'liberation' is not what you describe strictly speaking: you are only liberated from involuntary rebirth after a certain point way down the path, but until then you're committed to engaging in beneficial activities, though ideally your wisdom prevents suffering while your compassion enables continued countless rebirths rather than seeking arhatship.

Malcolm wrote:
All this is beside the point — but address your rebuttal — Chan/Zen do not offer some special model of liberation separate and unique. It is based on common Mahāyāna. Pure Land Buddhism may hold that one is liberated after one passes away from here in Sukhavati, but nevertheless that liberation is still a result of eradication of afflictions that cause rebirth in the three realms. And this is merely a variation on the never-returner.

It may be the case that in the common Mahāyāna path one does not eradicate afflictions that cause rebirth in the desire realm until the eighth bhumi, nevertheless, this is because the bhumis of Mahāyāna stream entry are 1-6, once returner is the seventh bhumi, never-returner is eighth bhumi and so on.

Still, the model is all based on the afflictive obscurations that cause rebirth in the three realms. Liberation is not omniscience.

Stream entrants up to Arhats are all liberated, will never take rebirth in the three lowers realms, and their final liberation is guaranteed.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, September 1st, 2015 at 2:52 AM
Title: Re: Why Buddhism over Vedanta?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
A more realistic position is that what Hindus and Buddhists means by "liberation" is only superficially similar.

Indrajala said:
Either side led to people having consistent and enriching experiences of some kind, which may or may not be mutually comparable depending on who you talk to. Perhaps the Buddhists had different versions of liberation too. In fact, this very much seems to be the case. What liberation means to a Pure Land practitioner (perhaps a vision of Amitabha near death) is different from what it would be to a Vajrayana or Zen practitioner.

Basically I'm just saying don't be so dogmatic.

Malcolm wrote:
Liberation, in Buddhadharma, is strictly the elimination of afflictions that cause rebirth in the three realms. It really does not matter what school one belongs to.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, September 1st, 2015 at 2:44 AM
Title: Re: Universal Atman in Buddhism
Content:



Malcolm wrote:
There can never be any point of contact between conditioned and unconditioned phenomena.

lostitude said:
Ok but on what basis can you make such a statement? It's far from self-evident... so what's the rationale behind it?

Malcolm wrote:
First you have to identify the characteristics of unconditioned phenomena. They do not arise, abide or cease — further, they are uncaused. Conditioned phenomena arise, abide and cease — further, they are caused.

Since there is radical difference in kind, there is no point of contact between the former and the latter.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 31st, 2015 at 11:46 PM
Title: Re: Why Buddhism over Vedanta?
Content:


Indrajala said:
A more tolerant position would suggest they achieved different but for them equally enriching experiences.

Malcolm wrote:
A more realistic position is that what Hindus and Buddhists means by "liberation" is only superficially similar.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 31st, 2015 at 11:33 PM
Title: Re: Universal Atman in Buddhism
Content:
smcj said:
There can never be any point of contact between conditioned and unconditioned phenomena.
Isn't that why all things are correctly seen as primordially pure?



Malcolm wrote:
This just means that all things are empty.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 31st, 2015 at 11:16 PM
Title: Re: Why Buddhism over Vedanta?
Content:
Indrajala said:
At the end of the day, there's actually no such thing as Buddhism in the singular.
...
Perhaps all my experience with Buddhist traditions has resulted in me becoming a crypto-Hindu or pseudo-Stoic.



dzogchungpa said:
IJ, I totally understand where you are coming from. For me the key was finding the right teacher.

Malcolm wrote:
Which means your answer to the question:
What persuaded you that Buddhism has got it right over Vedanta?
Is probably "nothing".


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 31st, 2015 at 10:25 PM
Title: Re: Why Buddhism over Vedanta?
Content:
Indrajala said:
Malcolm cites Nāgārjuna

Malcolm wrote:
The question was:
What persuaded you that Buddhism has got it right over Vedanta?
My answer was Nāgārjuna.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 31st, 2015 at 10:13 PM
Title: Re: Towards a Buddhist Fundamentalism: Part II
Content:
Urgyen Dorje said:
Christ.  I guess I can't make anybody pleased.  I have people on DW upset with my disrespect of the dharma because of my posts.  I have people elsewhere upset with my disrespect of DW and of the dharma because of my posts.  Then when you try to settle up, people are annoyed at that.

Screw it.  This is toxic.

I've more than taken everyone seriously and at face value.

/eyes looking for the nearest exit/

Malcolm wrote:
You unleashed this by posting someone else's hate speech here. Not everyone should be taken seriously or at face value. If some crazy people are needling you on another forum for posts you make here, screw them. If your friends on that forum are too dense to delete this kind of hateful speech, are they really your friends? There is nothing but nonvirtue in the speech of the people who authored the posts that you crossposted here. The only real question I have for you is why can't you see their words as hate speech? And why would you want to spread that hate speech here?

And since the people who authored those words apparently read posts here: I have some advice for you. You need to start over. Start at the beginning. You have not understood one thing about Buddhadharma. You are like stones in the bottom of the ocean.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 31st, 2015 at 9:59 PM
Title: Re: Universal Atman in Buddhism
Content:
Kaccāni said:
Time appears in Brahman yet Brahman does not know what time is.

Best wishes
Kc


Malcolm wrote:
Something conditioned cannot appear in something unconditioned because there can never be a relationship between the conditioned and the unconditioned without the unconditioned becoming conditioned.

lostitude said:
Would it be possible to develop this idea? what is this impossibility based on?

Thanks


Malcolm wrote:
There can never be any point of contact between conditioned and unconditioned phenomena.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 31st, 2015 at 9:55 PM
Title: Re: Towards a Buddhist Fundamentalism: Part II
Content:
Urgyen Dorje said:
Dude.  It's not my content.  It's a response to content I post here and on my mate's blog.

I've been told to make myself accountable to DW.  I'm doing it.

Malcolm wrote:
I don't have a problem with you. I have a problem with the vile content of the posts you are are crossposting from elsewhere.
And why do you feel you have to take this seriously? Why do you feel that you need to crosspost this drek? What useful purpose can it possibly serve? Honestly, on Vajracakra I would never allow this kind of posting. I would delete it immediately. We just don't need this kind of hate speech in Buddhist forums and people who author it should be shut down.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 31st, 2015 at 9:53 PM
Title: Re: Towards a Buddhist Fundamentalism: Part II
Content:
Urgyen Dorje said:
I guess I have a problem.

Malcolm wrote:
Please just stop crossposting the vile nonsense that is being written by that "Lama." Is that really too much to ask?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 31st, 2015 at 9:52 PM
Title: Re: Towards a Buddhist Fundamentalism: Part II
Content:


Urgyen Dorje said:
So I start taking this lama at face value, and adjust my posts here, adjust my posts on the blog, and eventually take him to task, and similarly accordingly adjust my posts here, and my posts on the blog.  In the process I learn it's not Malcolm...

Malcolm wrote:
And, I am not a "Lama", important or otherwise.


Urgyen Dorje said:
so that still leaves me with somebody my DW veteran mates describe as an "important DW lama" who should be taken seriously.

Malcolm wrote:
Why? Why should this absolutely vile individual be taken seriously?


Urgyen Dorje said:
Then I'm moderated for attacking and misrepresenting this lama, so obviously this lama is a seriously important person around here, so I go back to trying to understand how all of these personal criticisms are legit.

Malcolm wrote:
No one knows who this Konchok Namdrol is.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 31st, 2015 at 9:49 PM
Title: Re: Towards a Buddhist Fundamentalism: Part II
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Please do not post anymore of this poison here!!!

Urgyen Dorje said:
I have absolutely no idea what your problem with me is.  If you notice, I'm the one that was instructed to take this guy seriously and to adjust according to his criticisms, and after determining he was a little off, tried to take his ranting in a meta-direction instead of just discarding it completely.  I am not the one saying he's crazy.  I'm trying to mold something of a silk purse out of a sow's ear.  So it's not clear to me what I'm poisoning.  According to this lama, all of my posts on DW have been poisonous, and in retrospect, maybe that's true.  I don't really know.  I'm not accustomed to dharma brothers talking to each other like this.

Malcolm wrote:
I don't have a problem with you. I have a problem with the vile content of the posts you are are crossposting from elsewhere.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 31st, 2015 at 11:23 AM
Title: Re: Why Buddhism over Vedanta?
Content:
coldmountains said:
What persuaded you that Buddhism has got it right over Vedanta?

Malcolm wrote:
Nāgārjuna.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 31st, 2015 at 11:14 AM
Title: Re: Towards a Buddhist Fundamentalism: Part II
Content:
Urgyen Dorje said:
Given that the person making these claims is a) a lama and b) a member of this forum,

Malcolm wrote:
What qualifies this person as a "Lama"? Why should we take their title seriously since they are anonymous?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 31st, 2015 at 12:43 AM
Title: Re: Cosmological questions
Content:
Johnny Dangerous said:
If mind streams are without beginning, how can individual mind streams carry on with the creation and dissolution of universes? What I mean is, when karmic winds etc. stir duality, and eventually lead to different classes of beings and samsara, doesn't this mean that mind streams last one universe, and no more? How is this explained in the various versions of Buddhist cosmology?

Malcolm wrote:
Generally, all the levels of the world that perish are below the third and fourth rupadhātu heavens. All sentient beings are either born there or they are formless realm beings.

Johnny Dangerous said:
Ah right, I'd forgotten this.

Aren't there two kinds of destructions though, doesn't the one 'by water’' wipe out everything, or nearly?

Malcolm wrote:
Everything below the third and fourth rūpadhātu.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 31st, 2015 at 12:35 AM
Title: Re: Towards a Buddhist Fundamentalism: Part II
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
What I feel you need to understand is that there is only one valid interpretation of the dharma.
Crazy. The very idea that there is a valid interpretation of Dharma is bullshit. There is realization of the Dharma, and that is not an interpretation.
This must be the case as there is only one realitly that this the object of the Buddha's valid cognition.
This is also nonsense. Why? Because such things as valid cognition and so on do not apply to Buddhas. They are beyond all such categories. This person is obviously a wingnut in the Drikung school who has choked on Gongchig.
Anything other than this one valid interpretation of the dharma is actually an attack on the dharma.  It is a war against the liberation of beings.  It is a war to inflict suffering on beings.
Craziness.
Yes, there is a war being fought for the integrity of the dharma.  The dharma is being polluted by Western democratic and post-modern ideas.
Buddhadharma can't be polluted by anything  — more craziness.
It is being polluted by ideas such as tolerance, quality, and freedom.  It is only the dharma that gives these things.  Attempting to afford these things from outside the dharma is an attack on the dharma, an attack on the libereation of beings, and a war to inflict suffering on beings.  But the dharma is also attacking the dharma with a proliferation of views and paths.  If we tolerate this by encouraging and tolerating Buddhist diversity, then we are paving the world with roads to hell.
More craziness.
You seem to feel compelled to defend the democratic values of your society, claiming that they create the freedom and the space to practice the dharma.  You also seem to feel compelled to have tolerance for people of other faiths.  If you understand causality, this is a systematic deconstruction of the dharma.  It is an attack on the Three Jewels.  What we need now to support the dharma is compassionate intolerance, compassionate bigotry.  To relieve the suffering of beings we need to invoke our protectors and pray to our lineage  masters to destroy people of all non-Buddhist faiths.  We need to pray to destroy every fragment of non-Buddhist philosophy.  Yes, we should destroy books.  Yes, we should destroy temples and churches and mosques.  This is the only road to freedom for all beings. I would say yes, we should even destroy beings, the right beings.  People are better off dead than doing anything other than practicing Buddhism.
Sheer lunacy, absolute nihilism. They should understand that they have violated all of their samayas by encouraging this kind of violence, they have abandoned all compassion and bodhicitta.  This person clearly does not understand Dharma.
When I read your posts on DW, I feel you are the most disgusting type of person.  Somebody who rationalizes the sins of others, encouraging this bad karma.  You are also the type of person who leads beings astray by teaching secular subjects.  People don't need to understand science and philosophy.  People need to understand dharma.  You are a degenerate lapsed practitioner.  You have no right or place integrating any of these things into your practice or encouraging others to do the same.
Same as above.They should read Mahāyāna Sūtralaṃkāra with regards to sciences., etc.
You need to just shut the frak up.  And die.
Sheer and utter crazy lunacy.

Please do not post anymore of this poison here!!!


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 31st, 2015 at 12:15 AM
Title: Re: Turiiya
Content:
Matt J said:
I think one could make a credible argument roughly correlating the last two features, and I think this is where people get the idea that they are the same. But as for the first, I think it is hard to correlate "being" with "emptiness" since they are opposites.

Malcolm wrote:
Lhun grub and thugs rje are, in Dzogchen, the basis of error. When people become confused about the basis, they become confused about is appearance. What appears is lhun grub. That can be a ground for deviation.

And yes, Ka dag, the essence, can never be "being."


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 31st, 2015 at 12:12 AM
Title: Re: Rebirth and picking up where one left off
Content:
lostitude said:
Thank you.
So when a stream-enterer in a previous life is born again, he is garanteed to reach at least stream-entry in this new life, and probably reach a further level as well? Just to make sure I understood it well.


Malcolm wrote:
In the Hinayāna system, a stream entrant is guaranteed to reach the stage of an arhat within seven lifetimes.

There is no such guarantee in Mahāyāna because the path is necessarily longer. It takes two incalculable eons to reach the eighth bhumi, and another incalculable eon to reach buddhahood after that. So, one does not necessarily progress beyond the level one reached in the past life, but eventually one will. Once one has reached the first bodhisattva stage, one no longer returns to samsara, so to speak, meaning that one's progress to buddhahood is a certainty.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 30th, 2015 at 11:53 PM
Title: Re: Towards a Buddhist Fundamentalism: Part II
Content:
Urgyen Dorje said:
I've stripped all identifying information according to the DW ToS...
What I feel you need to understand is that there is only one valid interpretation of the dharma.  This must be the case as there is only one realitly that this the object of the Buddha's valid cognition.  Anything other than this one valid interpretation of the dharma is actually an attack on the dharma.  It is a war against the liberation of beings.  It is a war to inflict suffering on beings.

My friend was less than eloquent in describing the problem.  Yes, there is a war being fought for the integrity of the dharma.  The dharma is being polluted by Western democratic and post-modern ideas.  It is being polluted by ideas such as tolerance, quality, and freedom.  It is only the dharma that gives these things.  Attempting to afford these things from outside the dharma is an attack on the dharma, an attack on the libereation of beings, and a war to inflict suffering on beings.  But the dharma is also attacking the dharma with a proliferation of views and paths.  If we tolerate this by encouraging and tolerating Buddhist diversity, then we are paving the world with roads to hell.

You seem to feel compelled to defend the democratic values of your society, claiming that they create the freedom and the space to practice the dharma.  You also seem to feel compelled to have tolerance for people of other faiths.  If you understand causality, this is a systematic deconstruction of the dharma.  It is an attack on the Three Jewels.  What we need now to support the dharma is compassionate intolerance, compassionate bigotry.  To relieve the suffering of beings we need to invoke our protectors and pray to our lineage  masters to destroy people of all non-Buddhist faiths.  We need to pray to destroy every fragment of non-Buddhist philosophy.  Yes, we should destroy books.  Yes, we should destroy temples and churches and mosques.  This is the only road to freedom for all beings.

I would say yes, we should even destroy beings, the right beings.  People are better off dead than doing anything other than practicing Buddhism.  When I read your posts on DW, I feel you are the most disgusting type of person.  Somebody who rationalizes the sins of others, encouraging this bad karma.  You are also the type of person who leads beings astray by teaching secular subjects.  People don't need to understand science and philosophy.  People need to understand dharma.  You are a degenerate lapsed practitioner.  You have no right or place integrating any of these things into your practice or encouraging others to do the same.

You need to just shut the frak up.  And die.

Malcolm wrote:
The person who wrote the above is a crazy person.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 30th, 2015 at 11:50 PM
Title: Re: Rebirth and picking up where one left off
Content:
lostitude said:
Hello,

One thing that's not explained in what I have been reading about karma and rebirth, is how exactly the benefits in the previous life of a buddhist are carried over to the next lives. For example, at what point does the reincarnation of a great master reconnect with the spiritual level reached previously? Is the same level still present at birth (like, if he died a stream-enterer he is reborn with the same spiritual characteristics as a stream-enterer and instinctively perceives what any stream-enterer should perceive about dharma), or does he have to undergo the same type of training as any other child, except that the whole process goes much faster for him?

Thanks

Malcolm wrote:
The latter is generally held to be the case until one becomes an eighth stage bodhisattva.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 30th, 2015 at 10:47 PM
Title: Re: Turiiya
Content:


Karma Dorje said:
The funny thing is, Buddhism is never more like Christianity than when Budhist scholastics make ever more emphatic distinctions to prove how they are the only ones who are right.

Malcolm wrote:
Did you ever hear of a little thing called the Nine Yānas? Or do you think the teachings of Dzogchen tantras are somehow irrelevant to the conversation?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 30th, 2015 at 10:00 PM
Title: Re: Riwo Sang Cho of Namkha Jigme
Content:
Urgyen Dorje said:
So, doing the Riwo Sang Cho of Namkha Jigme, it got me wondering about all these spirit provocations and uprisings and the like discussed on DW in various threads.

My instructions on this practice is that Riwo Sang Cho is good for these things, but talking to a couple mates who are students of //, they insist this isn't the case, and that I'm probably just pissing off Gyalpos, Nagas, Don and the like.

They said the same about other Sang offerings.

I am not familiar enough with the bestiaries of beasties to really know what to think.

Opines?

Malcolm wrote:
Sometimes Sang offerings can cause provocations rather than prevent them. But generally speaking, they are beneficial.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 30th, 2015 at 9:58 PM
Title: Re: Cosmological questions
Content:
Johnny Dangerous said:
If mind streams are without beginning, how can individual mind streams carry on with the creation and dissolution of universes? What I mean is, when karmic winds etc. stir duality, and eventually lead to different classes of beings and samsara, doesn't this mean that mind streams last one universe, and no more? How is this explained in the various versions of Buddhist cosmology?

Malcolm wrote:
Generally, all the levels of the world that perish are below the third and fourth rupadhātu heavens. All sentient beings are either born there or they are formless realm beings.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 30th, 2015 at 9:48 PM
Title: Re: Compassion vs. non-proselytism
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Engaging in proselytization means you are trying to condition someone. This is not the way of Buddhadharma.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 30th, 2015 at 5:23 AM
Title: Re: Compassion vs. non-proselytism
Content:
Paul said:
Historically Buddhism has been spread by missionaries. The best adverts for dharma that I've seen has been just how impressive certain practitioners/teachers have been. They have been powerfully magnetic as a result of their practice & people are naturally impressed.

Malcolm wrote:
Not really. This is a Western Historical misconception.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 30th, 2015 at 4:07 AM
Title: Re: Compassion vs. non-proselytism
Content:
lostitude said:
Thanks.
But I don't really understand how you can benefit them if you never take the initiative to explain to them how dharma works.

Malcolm wrote:
If they ask, you explain. If they don't, you mind your own business.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 30th, 2015 at 2:06 AM
Title: Re: Can the Buddha become angry?
Content:
Kaccāni said:
Can the Buddha become angry?

What do you think

Best wishes
Kc

Malcolm wrote:
As in suffering from the affliction of dvesha or krodha? Absolutely not.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 30th, 2015 at 1:07 AM
Title: Re: Tibetan Lives Matter
Content:


Malcolm wrote:
http://www.dalailama.com/messages/dolgyal-shugden

Boomerang said:
Thanks. I thought the problem was more gyalpos than just that one.

Malcolm wrote:
There are many gyalpos. They are a class of being, some of the more powerful ones are controlled through entities like that one, or Pehar and so on.

But the Tibetan Gvt. got into trouble because they relied on this Gyalpo and entered into intense sectarianism at the top.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 30th, 2015 at 12:54 AM
Title: Re: Tibetan Lives Matter
Content:
lostitude said:
Oh, probably just gyalpo worship. Tibetans probably have horrible karma and now they're paying for it, right Malcolm?

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, The Tibetan Nation was brought down by gyalpo worship. If you understood anything at all about Tibetan History, you would understand that HH Dalai Lama has even admitted this.

The Tibetan Govt. had terrible karma for many reasons, also the HHDL has admitted this.

Boomerang said:
I would like to know more about this. Could you direct me to any sources?

Malcolm wrote:
http://www.dalailama.com/messages/dolgyal-shugden


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 30th, 2015 at 12:39 AM
Title: Re: Tibetan Lives Matter
Content:
lostitude said:
Oh, probably just gyalpo worship. Tibetans probably have horrible karma and now they're paying for it, right Malcolm?

Malcolm wrote:
Any suffering one experiences in this life is the result of negative karma from past lives.

The Tibetan Nation was in fact brought down by gyalpo worship. If you understood anything at all about Tibetan History, you would understand that HH Dalai Lama has even admitted this.

The Tibetan Govt. had terrible karma for many reasons, also the HHDL has admitted this.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 30th, 2015 at 12:33 AM
Title: Re: Myanmar monk's Islamophobia
Content:
lostitude said:
This is how karma works. You don't believe me? Read Vasubandhu.
What I don't believe is that Eidhul-Adha is the cause of strife and misery in the Muslim world. Again, this is very reminiscent of witch-hunting, with undertones that I find myself very uneasy with.

Malcolm wrote:
Look, there is Hindu animal sacrifice, Muslim animal sacrifice, Animist animal sacrifice — it is all the same to me. Everywhere in the world where this is allowed to continue in a large way is fraught with all kinds of problems.

It is all evil, more evil that merely slaughtering animals for food. That too is evil, but not as evil as animal sacrifice. Slaughtering animals for food is motivated mainly by desire. Slaughtering animals for religious reasons is done mainly out of ignorance.

Of course war is even more evil because always involves killing people for religious or political reasons.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 30th, 2015 at 12:27 AM
Title: Re: CNN Odzer Chenma retreat sept 11-13
Content:
Fa Dao said:
Will this retreat be webcast?


Malcolm wrote:
Yes.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 30th, 2015 at 12:26 AM
Title: Re: Myanmar monk's Islamophobia
Content:
lostitude said:
Again, the vast majority or Muslims don't send any animal to be sacrificed, simply because they don't own one. Eidul-Adha sacrifices are usually done by wealthy families that go buy a few dozen sheep, have them slaughtered, keep one for the head of the family to slaughter, and then give the meat to the local mosque where it is then given out to the needy. In the Muslim countries where I have lived, that would represent about one family out of ten, or less.

Malcolm wrote:
Do they support it? For example, let us say you are soldier in a unit of 100 soldiers. This group kills one man. If everyone in that group soldiers approves of the action, they bear the karma of killing that one man times the number of people in the group, thus each soldier now bears the karma of killing one hundred men.

For example, all the Americans who approved of the killing of Iraqis and rejoiced in it each bear the amount of karma times the millions of Americans who approved of that killing. The same is true of any war and all soldiers in it. This is why the Buddha clearly explains that soldiers _Never_ take higher rebirth.

In the case of sacrifice it is the same. If you approve of the killing of animals for sacrifice, or even for consumption of meat, you bear the responsibility of all of the animals whose deaths you are knowingly involved in. If you approve in general of Eidul-Adha then you are culpable for all those deaths times the number of people who approve and rejoice.

This is how karma works. You don't believe me? Read Vasubandhu.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 29th, 2015 at 11:58 PM
Title: Re: Myanmar monk's Islamophobia
Content:


Malcolm wrote:
The point is the sacrifice of animals, not the eating of meat. It is the same with Jews in Israel. If anyone wonders why there is so much violence in these regions of the world, Africa, Middle East, South America, Mexico and so on, it is largely due to the practice of sacrificing animals.

lostitude said:
Especially when you consider the fact that most Muslims have never touched a knife to slaughter a sheep. If only for the fact that they can't even afford to buy one in the first place.

Malcolm wrote:
There is no difference between doing the sacrifice and sending an animal to be sacrificed.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 29th, 2015 at 11:33 PM
Title: Re: Myanmar monk's Islamophobia
Content:
lostitude said:
@Malcom, again that strange theory about evil befalling meat eaters... what did the Dalai Lama eat to find himself in exile, what did Tibetans in general do to be afflicted by such misery? That really sounds like the arguments used by witch hunters in the Middle Ages when they had a bad crop.

Malcolm wrote:
Which theory are you referring to?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 29th, 2015 at 2:50 AM
Title: Re: Daniel P Brown - Pointing Out Way?
Content:
zenman said:
Pointing unaware or semi-aware fields of one's mind is also something that I am familiar with when working with a teacher. Invaluable pointing! I'd say. FCKW, did that particular dull state have a specific name? Is that mentioned in Brown's book? The reason I am asking is because I have also received this pointing (not from Brown). I didn't avoid it though but pierced it.

fckw said:
Sorry, I don't want to go into details here, because I am not a qualified teacher.

Edit: Malcolm's comment actually explains it nicely.

Malcolm wrote:
I did mean to say coarse and subtle expressions. The subtle expression of lethargy is much harder to notice.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 29th, 2015 at 2:49 AM
Title: Re: Daniel P Brown - Pointing Out Way?
Content:
fckw said:
Maybe Bon lamas are more open with giving out Dzogchen teachings in general? I have no idea. Does any of you guys know more about this? Maybe there is generally no Ngöndro requirement for the A-Khrid system, could that be?

Malcolm wrote:
There is a separate ngondro for all Bonpo systems of Dzogchen.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 28th, 2015 at 11:24 PM
Title: Re: Daniel P Brown - Pointing Out Way?
Content:
frank123 said:
Dullness in Samatha leads to rebirth as an animal? Really?

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, really.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 28th, 2015 at 10:10 PM
Title: Re: Tibetan Zen
Content:
Urgyen Dorje said:
That actually wasn't my point.

Since the man knows all the differences between these traditions and approaches and views, his statement, which reflects a larger unity, is not made out of ignorance.  He's giving an instruction and I'm wanting to learn.

Malcolm wrote:
You presented it as a religious statement, "For me, I just have faith in the one who holds the throne of Jigten Sumgon, in particular, the present Drikung Kyabgon, who is an ocean of teachings, transmissions, and qualities..."

Urgyen Dorje said:
I guess I don't understand.  I'm out of line for expressing faith in Drikung Kyabgon?

Malcolm wrote:
No, but since you framed your confidence in religious terms, no one can disagree with him without offending your religious sensibility.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 28th, 2015 at 9:42 PM
Title: Re: Tibetan Zen
Content:
Urgyen Dorje said:
For me, I just have faith in the one who holds the throne of Jigten Sumgon, in particular, the present Drikung Kyabgon, who is an ocean of teachings, transmissions, and qualities.  Obviously His Holiness is aware and well educated on all the points discussed here, given that he is a scholar and researcher in early Tibetan history, as well as a holder of mahamudra and dzogchen lineages.

Malcolm wrote:
Once the holiness of one's authority is invoked, conversation over.

Urgyen Dorje said:
That actually wasn't my point.

Since the man knows all the differences between these traditions and approaches and views, his statement, which reflects a larger unity, is not made out of ignorance.  He's giving an instruction and I'm wanting to learn.

Malcolm wrote:
You presented it as a religious statement, "For me, I just have faith in the one who holds the throne of Jigten Sumgon, in particular, the present Drikung Kyabgon, who is an ocean of teachings, transmissions, and qualities..."


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 28th, 2015 at 8:56 PM
Title: Re: Tibetan Zen
Content:


Malcolm wrote:
Chogyal Namkhai Norbu stresses that the Chan examined by Nubchen is not the same as Zen. He asserts that modern Zen has been deeply influenced by Esoteric Buddhism.

DGA said:
This is interesting, but potentially complicated.  What does ChNN mean by "esoteric Buddhism" in this context?  Different writers mean different things by the term.  It can mean, for instance, the mantrayana lineages transmitted through China to Japan that are Indic in origin.  Or it can mean something else...

Some might argue that the "transmission outside the scriptures" upheld by contemporary Zen schools may correspond to a kind of direct introduction and transmission.  I'm to ignorant to make a claim on this, or to rule it out categorically.  Here is one description of what I'm alluding to:

http://dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=69&t=20488&start=40#p298602

Malcolm wrote:
He means Vajrayāna, Shingon/Tendai. I have even heard him claim that Dzogchen influenced Chan, not the other way around. Certainly, Chinese monks received teachings from Vairocana, Vimalamitra and so on, they did not all clear out in one day.

Of course, I don't on what authority he is making that claim, just that he has made it on occasion.

Also, China is not so far from Tibet, and there were a number of Chan masters who in fact were Tibetans from far-eastern Tibet, or so I read in some academic book somewhere.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 28th, 2015 at 8:54 PM
Title: Re: Tibetan Zen
Content:
Urgyen Dorje said:
For me, I just have faith in the one who holds the throne of Jigten Sumgon, in particular, the present Drikung Kyabgon, who is an ocean of teachings, transmissions, and qualities.  Obviously His Holiness is aware and well educated on all the points discussed here, given that he is a scholar and researcher in early Tibetan history, as well as a holder of mahamudra and dzogchen lineages.

Malcolm wrote:
Once the holiness of one's authority is invoked, conversation over.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 28th, 2015 at 8:11 PM
Title: Re: Tibetan Zen
Content:
Dan74 said:
The trouble with this question is that only someone who is trained in both Dzogchen and Zen can even begin to properly address it. And then the rest of us will still be none the wiser really.

Sure I believe that Zen training can lead to complete liberation and so can Dzogchen, but this is just a belief. Those who believe that one can and the other one can't will similarly hold beliefs. Basically they are of no value outside supporting one's practice, ie of no objective value.

Or so it seems to me.

_/|\_

Malcolm wrote:
The the question of the similarities and differences between Chan and Dzogchen arose because some early Tibetologists erroneously asserted that Dzogchen derived from what we call Early Northern Chan.

There is a book by a 9th century Tibetan master, Nubchen Sangye Yeshe, which extensively examines the differences in the positions of Kamalashila and Hashang Mahāyāna, favors Hashang in terms of sūtrayāna presentations, but nevertheless asserts that Mahāyoga, even though gradual, is more efficacious than EN Chan because Mahāyoga has direct introduction, something lacking in EN Chan as it was practiced in 8th century in Tibet. Needless to say, it presents Atiyoga, Dzogchen as the pinnacle of vehicles.

Chogyal Namkhai Norbu stresses that the Chan examined by Nubchen is not the same as Zen. He asserts that modern Zen has been deeply influenced by Esoteric Buddhism.

The upshot is that when we have discussions of the relationship between Chan and Dzogchen, this has virtually no bearing on what people now a days practice as Zen, Chan or Son. For example, the Koan system did not even exist during this period of time, there was no Rinzai, no Soto, etc. The Chan under question is Early Northern Chan, and its sources and influence in Tibetan Buddhism all but ended in the 790's when the Tibetans chose Indian Buddhism as the gold standard.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 28th, 2015 at 7:42 PM
Title: Re: Daniel P Brown - Pointing Out Way?
Content:


zenman said:
Is this method widely or at all used by other teachers/lamas?

fckw said:
I'm not sure if this question is directed to me. Personally, I don't know any other Buddhist teacher who teaches this way. Mr. Brown a few times told the story when he attended teachings given by a Tibetan yogi. Apparently he had received an invitation by H. H. Dalai Lama (?) who had announced these teachings to be somewhat special. Now, the special thing about the teachings were that said yogi actually performed the practice while teaching it. This left a deep impression.

One notable exception of someone also teaching in this style (but having made up his own meditation system for better or worse) is http://anaditeaching.com/, whose eclectic teachings I personally find quite interesting.. However, it's nothing I personally practice or have practiced. (Brown and him are in no way affiliated.)

One of the most important meditation instructions I ever received from any teacher to me was given by Brown. He pointed out to me a state of mind in meditation which is quiet and calm and relatively free of thoughts - but it's not bright and clear. It's fundamentally a state of dullness that leads nowhere. I immediately knew what he meant and from then on completely avoided this state. I had gone already much further in my meditation, but sporadically got stuck during meditation in that state without understanding it. None of my former teachers had ever pointed this out to me before.

zenman said:
I am familiar with this way of teaching, that is, the teacher doing the practice at the same time when giving students instructions. I don't know a better way to pass meditation teachings than this.

I also know Anadi. Somehow interesting fellow. However I haven't been able to make any sense of what he actually says. He keeps on repeating his terminology (while his students in the vids keep asking him the same questions again and again) but manages not to explain what he actually means. I like untraditional and creative approach but unfortunately I just cannot follow what this man means, despite of having listened to him for couple of hours.

Pointing unaware or semi-aware fields of one's mind is also something that I am familiar with when working with a teacher. Invaluable pointing! I'd say. FCKW, did that particular dull state have a specific name? Is that mentioned in Brown's book? The reason I am asking is because I have also received this pointing (not from Brown). I didn't avoid it though but pierced it.

Malcolm wrote:
It is called bying in Tibetan, means torpor, lethargy etc. It has both a coarse and a dull expression. Often time in śamatha, people get involved in a sort of dull clarity that they imagine is śamatha, but instead is a state of dullness. This is commonly mistaken for śamatha, but it leads to rebirth as an animal.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 28th, 2015 at 6:50 AM
Title: Re: Universal Atman in Buddhism
Content:
Kaccāni said:
Hasn't the Brahman / Jiva effectively been handled like an absolute and relative truth, or what do you consider the difference?

Best wishes
Kc


Malcolm wrote:
In Madhyamaka, ultimate truth is nothing more nor less than the absence of inherent existence of relative entities due to their dependent origination.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 28th, 2015 at 4:29 AM
Title: Re: Universal Atman in Buddhism
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
For whom is this an illusion? Certainly cannot be an illusion for this universal consciousness, because then consciousness would possess delusion and thus liberation would be impossible. If this universal consciousness cannot be deluded, māya is impossible and also liberation is impossible.

Kaccāni said:
But don't you then end up at the same point as Madhyamaka, when emptiness is empty, and there is nothing to be liberated?

Best wishes
Kc


Malcolm wrote:
No, because there is no two truths theory in Advaita. Madhyamaka is based on the two truths.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 28th, 2015 at 4:08 AM
Title: Re: Crypto-Buddhism, Crypto-Taoism, Crypto-Dzogchen...
Content:
DGA said:
IHow much Mahayana Buddhist music is Persian in origin, by the way?

Malcolm wrote:
\

Just Tibetan Monastic Music.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 28th, 2015 at 4:07 AM
Title: Re: Universal Atman in Buddhism
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
This is incoherent. How can such universal consciousness have parts?

Kaccāni said:
Yes, that's the main criticism at the doctrine and as I understand Advaita says they're one, the twofoldness is an illusion (the Advaita-version of "maya").

Malcolm wrote:
For whom is this an illusion? Certainly cannot be an illusion for this universal consciousness, because then consciousness would possess delusion and thus liberation would be impossible. If this universal consciousness cannot be deluded, māya is impossible and also liberation is impossible.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 28th, 2015 at 2:20 AM
Title: Re: Universal Atman in Buddhism
Content:


Kaccāni said:
Vedanta would now say: Yes, but everything expresses itself as consciousness, which appears to be the common denominator of it. As plant-consciousness cannot be argued, because the questions are arising in human-consciusness as subject, only the question of "what is human consciousness?" has to be dealt with. The Vedic answer would be "part of a bigger consciousness called Brahman that encompasses everything. The Universe as one living being where some parts of it are fallen to the illusion that they are really separate entities.

Malcolm wrote:
This is incoherent. How can such universal consciousness have parts?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 27th, 2015 at 10:40 PM
Title: Re: Universal Atman in Buddhism
Content:
Matt J said:
Others made a similar objection to Shankara in his day. His reply:
For as between the illustration and the thing illustrated, nobody can show equality in every respect over and above some point of similarity in some way, which is sought to be represented. For if such an all-round similarity exists, the very relation between the illustration and the thing illustrated will fall through.
--- Brahma Sutra Bhasya: III.ii.19, 20

Usually when Advaitins focus on the unconditioned, they use analogies related to space.
No, that is a logical error. The pot depends on the clay, but the clay does not depend on the pot. The clay would still exist whether or not anyone ever made a pot out of it.

Malcolm wrote:
The clay itself also depends on causes and conditions and is composed of the four elements whether or not it is ever made into a pot.

In other words the analogy fails because clay is conditioned, thus it cannot be used an an example of an unconditioned entity forming the substrate for conditioned entity.
Space, being unconditioned, does not form anything at all, since it is a simple absence of obstruction.

Shankara's reply to objections is sheer sophistry.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 27th, 2015 at 10:37 PM
Title: Re: Tibetan Zen
Content:
Urgyen Dorje said:
Therefore, there is no essential difference between Zen, Mahamudra, and Dzogchen teachings.

Malcolm wrote:
Of course there is an essential difference. It is described in detail by Nubchen.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 27th, 2015 at 10:22 AM
Title: Re: Turiiya
Content:
Kaccāni said:
Hello all,

Vedanta, beyond the "3 normative states of consciousness" (here: waking, dream and (in early texts) deep sleep), knows a fourth state: turiiya. It is characterized as "permanent insight into reality, but without the distraction of an inner our an outter world".

Would you say that this "turiiya" corresponds to what dzogchen knows as "rigpa", or would you rather classify it as what ChNN calls "Shine", i.e. the calm, non-conceptual state of mind of Sutrayana?

Best wishes
Kc


Malcolm wrote:
First, I have never seen such a definition of Turiya, but in any case, Turiya is not rig pa.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 27th, 2015 at 2:33 AM
Title: Re: Universal Atman in Buddhism
Content:
Matt J said:
No, that is a logical error. The pot depends on the clay, but the clay does not depend on the pot. The clay would still exist whether or not anyone ever made a pot out of it.

Malcolm wrote:
The clay itself also depends on causes and conditions and is composed of the four elements whether or not it is ever made into a pot.

In other words the analogy fails because clay is conditioned, thus it cannot be used an an example of an unconditioned entity forming the substrate for conditioned entity.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 26th, 2015 at 11:06 PM
Title: Re: Semen
Content:
Tigersnest said:
Yes that is what happens thank you for your answer: I have read so much about seminal loss from different points of view, I remember a text saying when a practioner loses their semen the mamos become furious- maybe a more experienced practitioner could elaborate on that. Anyhow thank you- I am still not clear how it can be considered purely a waste product after all it is the purified essence of the body even if it is the "impure" aspect - it is the most pure of the impurities if that makes sense

Malcolm wrote:
It is a a snyigs ma, a waste tissue. In the process of the development of the tissues of the body, the final waste tissue is semen, and the final constituent tissues is ojas, the most refined aspect of the five elements in your body. . If you lose your ojas, this is very bad. If you lose your semen, this is not a problem providing you are not also losing ojas with it [and this can only happen if you are living on a very restricted diet with no meat or animal fat of any kind, for example a vegan diet.]

For example, hair, teeth, and so on are also waste tissues.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 26th, 2015 at 10:30 PM
Title: Re: Universal Atman in Buddhism
Content:
Matt J said:
Per Madhyamaka reasoning, but not according to Vedanta.

Vedanta disagrees with the "not from itself" causation. The primary example is the clay-pot. The pot depends on the clay, but the clay does not depend on the pot.

Where Vedanta gets fuzzy how it explains the mechanism of maya. But there is a famous story about an Advaitin yogi who had everything figured out except for maya. He was told not to worry about it. I think Vedanta runs into trouble because it has to square its findings with the Vedas.

Malcolm wrote:
Time cannot depend on Brahman; if it did, Brahman would be conditioned.
The clay depends on the four elements. It is also conditioned, which is why it can form another conditioned entity.

Vedanta's roots are Samkhya. It never really manages to escape those roots, which is why is never really manages to overcome the Madhyamaka refutation of satkaryavāda — even though this point of view was rejected by Gaudapada in favor of ajativāda, which he borrowed from Madhyamaka.

By contrast the roots of Madhyamaka view and all Buddhist teaching in general is dependent origination. The Buddhist concept of nonarising found in the Prajñāpāramitā comes out of this insight.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 26th, 2015 at 9:51 PM
Title: Re: Pechafying Things
Content:
Urgyen Dorje said:
I have the need, well, desire, to typeset some practices as pechas.  One of my teachers says it's more respectful to the dharma to have them as pechas, and to carry and wrap the pechas in the traditional sense, as opposed to 8.5x11 sheets in a binder.  I also find it immanently practical, as pechas fit on a puja table nicely.  I also find it immanently practical as I can easily drop in accessory prayers from a second pecha if I need to.  With book sized texts, it's a pain.

So, I am looking for recommendations on pecha formatting texts.  I can read Tibetan Uchen just fine, convert it to Wylie.  I've typeset Uchen in different world processing programs using Wylie.  I'm really open to any solution, including commercial options.

If people have some practical advice in terms of what works best re printing, type setting, formatting, etc., that would be great.

Malcolm wrote:
talk to the esukia people.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 26th, 2015 at 9:02 PM
Title: Re: How do we work with our bodies, our identities?
Content:
Urgyen Dorje said:
No Buddhist would suggest that grasping at self is something that needs to be transcended.

Malcolm wrote:
Huh? Of course they would. That is exactly what needs to be transcended. Grasping at self is the cause of samsara.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 26th, 2015 at 9:44 AM
Title: Re: Universal Atman in Buddhism
Content:
Matt J said:
That's why time depends on Brahman and not the other way around. If one wants to get technical, one can say that time and space are an illusory appearance of Brahman. In fact, Advaitins teachers often argue that time is change, and that change is only known against a backdrop of changelessness (the atman).

The Advaita view I am familiar with has at least three levels of reality: 1) the really real (sat), or Brahman, which is beyond time, space, etc. 2) the really unreal (asat), such as the horns of a rabbit or the son of a barren woman, and 3) the real/unreal, or "mithya" which has both qualities. Time would be "mithya", and therefore dependent on Brahman. This "mithya" is compared to a dream which is both dependent on and at the same time non-different from the dreamer. However, while the dream depends on the dreamer, the dreamer does not depend on the dream.

Malcolm wrote:
Time cannot depend on Brahman, time is conditioned, Brahman is not.
Time cannot depend on Brahman; if it did, Brahman would be conditioned.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 26th, 2015 at 5:48 AM
Title: Re: Universal Atman in Buddhism
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Thus if time, something conditioned, appears in "knowing", that knowing is conditioned.

Kaccāni said:
Ah. So then. In the moment that "time" appears in the knowing, it must be conditioned. If nothing conditioned appears, it gets a taste of Brahman.

Best wishes
Kc


Malcolm wrote:
If something can appear in knowing, knowing is already conditioned.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 26th, 2015 at 5:27 AM
Title: Re: Universal Atman in Buddhism
Content:
Kaccāni said:
Not even  a knowing in between?

Ok. It appears in the knowing then


Malcolm wrote:
There is nothing in between the unconditioned and conditioned. Things are either conditioned or unconditioned. Something conditioned cannot  become unconditioned and vice versa.

Thus if time, something conditioned, appears in "knowing", that knowing is conditioned.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 26th, 2015 at 5:17 AM
Title: Re: Universal Atman in Buddhism
Content:
Kaccāni said:
Time appears in Brahman yet Brahman does not know what time is.

Best wishes
Kc


Malcolm wrote:
Something conditioned cannot appear in something unconditioned because there can never be a relationship between the conditioned and the unconditioned without the unconditioned becoming conditioned.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 26th, 2015 at 4:21 AM
Title: Re: Universal Atman in Buddhism
Content:
Matt J said:
The Vedantin answer is that Brahman is beyond time. Time depends on Brahman.

muni said:
God created everything, but who created God?


Malcolm wrote:
Time cannot depend on Brahman, time is conditioned, Brahman is not.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 26th, 2015 at 3:24 AM
Title: Re: Towards A Buddhist Fundamentalism?
Content:
Urgyen Dorje said:
JD...

The thing is... a person can express a point like a maniac, and still have something to say.  The UniBomber is a good example.  So this [Edit name] might express himself like a nutter, but I think he's trying to say something many of us on DW have tried to articulate, though not in a coherent and unified fashion.  While lama KN is trying to assert a vajrayana fundamentalism, I think many of us would identify ourselves as something of vajrayana conservatives.  I consider myself in that crowd, even though it appears I have convinced people the contrary.

UD


Malcolm wrote:
Nah, he is just being an asshole.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 26th, 2015 at 2:26 AM
Title: Re: Universal Atman in Buddhism
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
You could have said Brahman is beyond time.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 26th, 2015 at 1:28 AM
Title: Re: How do we work with our bodies, our identities?
Content:
Johnny Dangerous said:
Which is a more conducive identity for making merit, thinking of yourself as a mexican tranny, or as a Buddha?
You're still missing the point, and the major question of the thread. The question is more how does one think of oneself as a Buddha if one IS a mexican tranny?

Malcolm wrote:
Simple, Mexican transvestites, Donald Trump and Samantabhadra all have the same state.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 26th, 2015 at 12:19 AM
Title: Re: Daniel P Brown - Pointing Out Way?
Content:
smcj said:
He clearly states that he is picking and adapting teachings for what he views as Western culture.
Having just watched the video twice, at the end of the video what I hear him say is that he is picking the teachings that are appropriate for the West. I didn't hear him say he was 'adapting' them. That's still taking an editorial position, but it falls short of the insinuation that by adapting them he is corrupting them.

Big difference.

Malcolm wrote:
It remains to be seen who attains rainbow body and in what traditions in the West.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 25th, 2015 at 11:59 PM
Title: Re: Daniel P Brown - Pointing Out Way?
Content:
fckw said:
You are looking for something to criticize without having met the guy at all. Am I right?

Malcolm wrote:
No. People are free. If he wants to be a guru, that is his business. If people want to study with him that is their business.

fckw said:
But to nevertheless diligently answer your question: No. The level 2 courses he taught so far were, to the best of my knowledge, always together with Rahob Rinpoche. The idea of "adapting Dzogchen to the West", I don't know where you have this one from.

Malcolm wrote:
From a video of his where he is discussing his translation efforts:

http://www.pointingoutway.org/stories

He clearly states that he is picking and adapting teachings for what he views as Western culture.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 25th, 2015 at 11:47 PM
Title: Re: Universal Atman in Buddhism
Content:
Matt J said:
The Vedantin answer is that Brahman is prior to space and time

Kaccāni said:
I particularly like the word "prior" in that sentence

Best wishes
Kc


Malcolm wrote:
Sure, since it is a contradiction in terms. Brahman cannot be prior to time. It is impossible, prior is a time.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 25th, 2015 at 11:25 PM
Title: Re: Towards A Buddhist Fundamentalism?
Content:
smcj said:
The person who wrote that post is a total nutjob. Real Buddhist Taliban, not a follower of Buddhadharma.
I'll second that. For the record, I could care less if someone has formal refuge. My main guru is Chogyal Namkhai Norbu, and he makes it very clear that things like refuge, bodhisattva vow ceremonies and so on are of no consequence. If you are a real practitioner, then you don't have rules and you don't need rules. Rules are something relative, as ChNN says, even Dzogchen rules are relative. If you try to strictly follow Dzogchen rules, you will be arrested.
While fully acknowledging that this is valid Dharma, just for the record it is too high a teaching for me and my practice. Early on I established a Gelug Lam Rim type perspective and that isn't just going to go away in this lifetime. That's ok, Dharma is a multi-lifetime project.


Malcolm wrote:
I am not against these things, they are just not essential. I see too many times people saying things like, "Oh, you have to take refuge before you take this empowerment..." and so on. This is nonsense. Every empowerments has refuge built right into it.

This is just a method used to control and condition others. If you show up at a teaching, this is refuge.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 25th, 2015 at 9:59 PM
Title: Re: Towards A Buddhist Fundamentalism?
Content:
Urgyen Dorje said:
I wish it were that simple.  Maybe it is.

I'm a little shaken.

Dan74 said:
UMI = undiagnosed mental illness, it's more common that we think.

Malcolm wrote:
Oh, now I get it — you thought I was this guy because of part of my refuge name, Namdrol. I am KUNGA Namdrol, not Edit name. Also I am a Loppön, and this is a higher title than "Lama". Sheesh.

I was wondering why you thought I had asked you to pick a text method, and other statements you made that I though were from left field about my point of view.

For the record, I could care less if someone has formal refuge. My main guru is Chogyal Namkhai Norbu, and he makes it very clear that things like refuge, bodhisattva vow ceremonies and so on are of no consequence. If you are a real practitioner, then you don't have rules and you don't need rules. Rules are something relative, as ChNN says, even Dzogchen rules are relative. If you try to strictly follow Dzogchen rules, you will be arrested.

The person who wrote that post is a total nutjob. Real Buddhist Taliban, not a follower of Buddhadharma. He makes me look nice.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 25th, 2015 at 9:52 PM
Title: Re: Towards A Buddhist Fundamentalism?
Content:
Urgyen Dorje said:
From comments to my dharma bro's blog.
From an extended conversation elsewhere on the internet.  It makes me ponder the formation of a Buddhist fundamentalism.  I had thought the author was also active here, but I doubt that at this point.

Malcolm wrote:
On what forum is this?
Is it public?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 25th, 2015 at 9:46 PM
Title: Re: Towards A Buddhist Fundamentalism?
Content:
Urgyen Dorje said:
From an extended conversation elsewhere on the internet.  It makes me ponder the formation of a Buddhist fundamentalism.  I had thought the author was also active here, but I doubt that at this point.

Malcolm wrote:
On what forum is this?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 25th, 2015 at 9:41 PM
Title: Re: Universal Atman in Buddhism
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Since everything is included in emptiness, emptiness is the ultimate, supreme truth.

Wayfarer said:
Perhaps you can explain to us how that can be reconciled with the statement that  'śūnyatā is taught only as a remedy for dṛṣṭi, but those who cling to śūnyatā are incurable'.

Malcolm wrote:
This is why the Vimuktasena states that Prajñāpāramita teaches the emptiness of emptiness. For example, he says:
Since all phenomena are empty of emptiness, that is the emptiness of emptiness. In other words, the recognition that all phenomena are empty here is the emptiness of all phenomena. Further, the reason for the emptiness of that emptiness is to avoid conceptually grasping to it [emptiness].


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 25th, 2015 at 8:08 AM
Title: Re: Daniel P Brown - Pointing Out Way?
Content:
Bakmoon said:
I've looked online and I can't find that kind of information about his lineage yet.

DGA said:
Any takers on this one?  I'm interested to know who has authorized him to teach trekchod & thogal.  Or anything for that matter.

Malcolm wrote:
I think the point is that he hires Tibetan co-teachers to get around that issue.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 25th, 2015 at 8:06 AM
Title: Re: Universal Atman in Buddhism
Content:
anjali said:
Since everything is included in X, X is the ultimate, supreme truth.
The reason why one regards reality as different from oneself is that one has not known, through enquiry, the true nature of X.
As it is X that appears as everything, those who have known the truth of X have known the truth of everything.


Malcolm wrote:
Since everything is included in emptiness, emptiness is the ultimate, supreme truth.
The reason why one regards reality as different from oneself is that one has not known, through enquiry, the true nature of emptiness.
As it is emptiness that appears as everything, those who have known the truth of emptiness have known the truth of everything.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 25th, 2015 at 7:58 AM
Title: Re: Forbidden Archeology
Content:
Urgyen Dorje said:
Malcolm...

All I'm saying is that the meaning of dharma has a lot less to do with black marks on a paper and everything to do with an unbroken oral tradition.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, but this has never been a point of contention.


Urgyen Dorje said:
You said to pick a textual methodolgy.

Malcolm wrote:
I don't think I said this.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 25th, 2015 at 7:36 AM
Title: Re: Forbidden Archeology
Content:


Urgyen Dorje said:
A teacher who was understood the meaning of Dzogchen texts would not teach them as theistic cosmology.

Malcolm wrote:
Which means you agree that Dzogchen texts have a specific meaning, and that it is invariable.

Urgyen Dorje said:
But he or she might teach the bodhisattva precepts from the vantage point of Mind Only versus Middle Way dependent upon the students needs.

Malcolm wrote:
It is fine to teach either, it is not fine to mix them up. Why? Because they have different intentions.
The words and meanings of these texts are set in tradition, and whole correspondence theories between words and meanings are not popular in the West, that is precisely how the texts themselves unpack themselves. And teachers must teach according to the intention of the text, without adding or subtracting a word.
And it is only a realized being or somebody who understands the intention according to the oral tradition who is able to do this.
But the meaning is in either case not arbitrary nor adaptable to students. Instead, it is the student who must adapt to the meaning. We do not adapt the meaning to the student.
I don't own Derrida stock.  I'm looking at ways of looking at texts that point back to the guru, the oral tradition, the lineage of blessings, and not just the texts themselves so we can get beyond an endless debate as to what texts really mean.  Have realization? Hold oral tradition?  Lineage holder?  Then you know.  Otherwise not.
But this has nothing to do with "post structuralism" and everything to do with the fact that Buddhadharma is an oral tradition, in essence.
If we decide that there is a life to Buddhist texts beyond marks on paper, and if we recognize the oral tradition of the lineage to be what unlocks the meaning of those marks on a piece of paper-- then we examine a teacher, his or her qualifications, and his or her qualities, and study those texts with that person.
Again, this has nothing to do with some post-structuralist vanity. Words in Dharma texts have invariable meanings. They are not arbitrary nor are they infinite.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 25th, 2015 at 6:03 AM
Title: Re: Nudity
Content:
tomschwarz said:
Of course you can discuss buddhist nudist ideas online )))).  Don't forget that you will die soon.  When you die, according to my dear dead father who was a very compassionate doctor, the first thing that happens is that you pee on yourself, deficate on yourself, stick your tongue out and turn blue.  Now want to practice the 4 steps of dissolution )))) like his holiness the dalai lama does every day?  Ok.

Malcolm wrote:
I was discussing practices, specifically — these things should not be discussed online.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 25th, 2015 at 6:01 AM
Title: Re: Daniel P Brown - Pointing Out Way?
Content:
fckw said:
His teaching style is very traditional actually.

Malcolm wrote:
His stated goals are to cherry pick Tibetan traditions for practices he deems suitable for western culture and to rework scholarly translations into practice oriented language.

This may appeal to some, but not to me.

For one, if you are a practitioner translator, you are already doing this. The idea of adapting Dzogchen to the West is more than a little hubristic.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 25th, 2015 at 5:59 AM
Title: Re: Forbidden Archeology
Content:


Urgyen Dorje said:
The space of possible textual interpretations in infinite.  In terms of dharma texts, what makes a textual interpretation valid is the valid cognition of a realized being who can pick specific textual interpretations from many according to his or her realization and the needs of his or her students.

Malcolm wrote:
No, they cannot not. For example, you cannot interpret Dzogchen texts as theistic cosmology merely because you might have some people who come from a strong theistic background as students.

The words and meanings of these texts are set in tradition, and whole correspondence theories between words and meanings are not popular in the West, that is precisely how the texts themselves unpack themselves. And teachers must teach according to the intention of the text, without adding or subtracting a word.

Urgyen Dorje said:
The idea I'm playing with is Derrida's basic one liner that everything is context.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, I know, and I think Derrida is an intellectual dilettante — but hey, that's just me.

Urgyen Dorje said:
I think with dharma texts that context is the valid cognition of realized beings and the oral tradition of lineage masters that continues that valid cognition.  Without that context those texts can be anything.  And people do make them anything.  So for me, there are dharma texts, marks on pages, and the unbroken lineage of realization that unlocks those texts.  The marks on the page make no sense without the unbroken lineage of realization to unlock them.  This is why it's absurd, from my side as a practitioner, when academics study texts without any reference to the living tradition, and when students attempt to study texts without any guidance from the living tradition.  I think an approach like this shuts down academic chauvinism, false lamas, teacher-less students, modernists, all in one swoop.

Malcolm wrote:
What you desire is the opposite of your method. And in any case, this notion of "valid cognition of realized beings" is highly problematic. How does anyone know who is realized and who is not? This is why texts have words, and those words have invariable meanings. Even if you are not realized, as long as you understand and convey the the meaning, there is always a possibility someone can wake up from the meaning you have communicated as long as you have a valid lineage.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 25th, 2015 at 5:48 AM
Title: Re: Daniel P Brown - Pointing Out Way?
Content:
DGA said:
OK, I'll put it my question differently.  You've said that you've attended his teachings.  What does he teach when he teaches?

fckw said:
Meditation mainly. Sutra-Mahamudra in level 1, Dzogchen in level 3 (Trek Chöd) and 4 (Tögel), and a mix in level 2. His teaching style is very traditional actually.

Malcolm wrote:
So, he is giving direct introduction in level 2?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 25th, 2015 at 5:08 AM
Title: Re: Nudity
Content:
tellyontellyon said:
There seems to be some Buddhist practices that may involve nudity? Does anybody have any knowledge or experience of this? What is the purpose?

Ayu said:
Seems there isn't anybody yet who knows about it or likes to tell anything. Where did you hear from such practices?

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, and they should not be discussed online...


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 25th, 2015 at 4:01 AM
Title: Re: Forbidden Archeology
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
None of what you are saying gives teachers an infinite license to interpret texts however they like.


Urgyen Dorje said:
I'm really not trying to bust chops.  This is something I've pondered for a while.  It's also not something I'm overly committed to.  It's something I'm exploring.  It' snot something I have a profound intellectual commitment to.

If it's against the view of dharma, please red pill me on that.

From my vantage point, this approach immediately derails the views of many who feel that they can study the dharma on their own by reading texts without resorting to a teacher.  It also derials the views of many who feel that they can just buy books and complete a shedra without relying on teachers for clarification of the difficult points in the source materials.  It also derails the view that many have that they can expound on tantric materials, dzogchen, mahamudra, after simply receiving instructions.

From my vantage point this puts everything back on the valid cogintion of a buddha.  Might be a realized teacher, might be a holder of the oral tradition and lineage of blessings of a realized teacher.

But definitely something trans-textual.

Without this, the texts are just marks on paper.  Or we're as good as blind.
As such a post structural approach to texts gives the dharma texts an infinite space of interpretation according to the realization of the teacher and the needs of the students.

Malcolm wrote:
I really don't agree with this idea.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 25th, 2015 at 3:50 AM
Title: Re: Daniel P Brown - Pointing Out Way?
Content:



Johnny Dangerous said:
I'm pretty sure i've read a book by Traleg Kyabgon Rinpoche with a forward by Wilbur.

Malcolm wrote:
They way that works is that Publisher X agrees to publish Author Y's book, and then the Publisher goes out and asks someone they think is influential in the target audience to write a forward. It does not mean that the author necessarily condones the person who wrote the forward, or vice versa, as crazy as that sounds.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 25th, 2015 at 2:06 AM
Title: Re: Forbidden Archeology
Content:
Urgyen Dorje said:
As such a post structural approach to texts gives the dharma texts an infinite space of interpretation according to the realization of the teacher and the needs of the students.

Malcolm wrote:
I really don't agree with this idea.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 25th, 2015 at 1:08 AM
Title: Re: Daniel P Brown - Pointing Out Way?
Content:
fckw said:
He knows enough Sanskrit and Tibetan to read and translate the relevant root texts he teaches himself. He's involved in some translation project for important Bön root texts he received directly from H.H. Menri Trizin that, to my knowledge, so far have not yet been translated.

Malcolm wrote:
All the Bonpo texts he is working on have already been translated at least once. [A Khrid, Six Lamps]


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 25th, 2015 at 12:32 AM
Title: Re: Forbidden Archeology
Content:
Urgyen Dorje said:
Just things can exist or manifest simply because they have no fixed nature, similarly texts can have meaning, in particular liberative substance, because they have no fixed textual meaning.


Malcolm wrote:
'When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, 'it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.'

'The question is,' said Alice, 'whether you can make words mean so many different things.'

'The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, 'which is to be master — that's all.'

Alice was too much puzzled to say anything; so after a minute Humpty Dumpty began again. 'They've a temper, some of them — particularly verbs: they're the proudest — adjectives you can do anything with, but not verbs — however, I can manage the whole lot of them! Impenetrability! That's what I say!'

'Would you tell me please,' said Alice, 'what that means?'

'Now you talk like a reasonable child,' said Humpty Dumpty, looking very much pleased. 'I meant by "impenetrability" that we've had enough of that subject, and it would be just as well if you'd mention what you mean to do next, as I suppose you don't mean to stop here all the rest of your life.'

'That's a great deal to make one word mean,' Alice said in a thoughtful tone.

'When I make a word do a lot of work like that,' said Humpty Dumpty, 'I always pay it extra.'


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 25th, 2015 at 12:14 AM
Title: Re: Forbidden Archeology
Content:
Urgyen Dorje said:
I agree which is why I'm curious why my post structural view of text/context renders my Buddhist view faulty.

Malcolm wrote:
I don't think I ever said that.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 24th, 2015 at 11:09 PM
Title: Re: Forbidden Archeology
Content:
rory said:
Malcolm's religious take on philology reminds me of the 19th century Christian angst over Biblical Criticism.

Malcolm wrote:
I have no angst about Western scholarship on Buddhist History, I just don't think any of it is definitive since it consists of shifting fads of opinions and methods and means very little to practitioners.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 24th, 2015 at 9:37 PM
Title: Re: The courage of no convictions
Content:
Dan74 said:
Malcolm, I think the simile of the physician, ie skilful means, is exactly the right one for this topic, thank you for your example. In my day job (maths) I deal with certainties (and certain uncertainties - statistics) but in matters of the heart it is different, isn't it? To diagnose the persons illness is hard, especially over the web, but to know the right medicine for that person is practically impossible, IMO. What certainty can there be in such an uncertain endeavour? Skilful means are not about certainty but about skill. So the question then becomes whether certainty is skilful, ie helpful. What do people think about that?

Malcolm wrote:
Dharma is not really a matter of the heart. It is a certainty that we are all suffering from the three or five poisons. People like to make a big story about the 84,000 different Dharmas, but in reality these are just three groups divided among the three poisons. The kind of Dharma one practices depends on inclination and fortune.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 24th, 2015 at 9:01 AM
Title: Re: New schools in early buddhism
Content:
lostitude said:
]Let me give you an example that particularly caught my attention, and I quote from the book I'm reading on early buddhism:
'The Vibhajyavadins argued against the view, held by the Sarvastivadins and Pudgalavadins, that some Arahats could regress from their state after temporarily attaining it'.
First, I wonder how such a debate can help me attain liberation. Second, it would logically follow from such a question, that none of those who debated it were Arahats themselves, otherwise the answer would be obvious to them. Unless of course I completely missed the point, which is perfectly possible too.

Malcolm wrote:
You completely missed the point of the argument. And the argument was debated by Arhats. Arhats can have different opinions.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 24th, 2015 at 3:27 AM
Title: Re: traditions in transition
Content:


Malcolm wrote:
Not if I can help it.

Johnny Dangerous said:
Yes, i'm sure your online polemics will have a huge effect on mainstream Buddhism in the west.

Malcolm wrote:
Absolutely, haven't you noticed a massive decline in subscriptions to the big three mags? No? (Damn!).


Johnny Dangerous said:
Dharma-lite™ is not even Dharma. It is imitation Dharma. All this was predicted by Guru Rinpoche and in the tantras.
Yep, and IIRC he also talked about how people would act towards one another in this age, including Dharma practitioners.

Malcolm wrote:
[/quote]

Yes, including the outrageous supposition that most of this behavior was motivated by provocations of various kinds.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 24th, 2015 at 3:22 AM
Title: Re: traditions in transition
Content:
dzogchungpa said:
BTW, it seems that Osel Tendzin, aka Thomas Rich, may have achieved a clear thugdam.


Malcolm wrote:
That is what some say, I have my doubts though...


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 24th, 2015 at 3:01 AM
Title: Re: traditions in transition
Content:
Johnny Dangerous said:
Until people can get past that hurdle, surface-level "Dharma-lite" is going to be the mainstream version of Buddhism.

Malcolm wrote:
Not if I can help it.

Johnny Dangerous said:
Unlike some folks I don't think "Dharma-lite" practice should be an object of derision, or an excuse to mock and vilify the people practicing it, but I do think, and do hope that people come to see that it is incomplete compared to what's available.

Malcolm wrote:
Dharma-lite™ is not even Dharma. It is imitation Dharma. All this was predicted by Guru Rinpoche and in the tantras.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 24th, 2015 at 2:59 AM
Title: Re: traditions in transition
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
What are the solutions?
We need some realized westerners to emerge.

dzogchungpa said:
I think there are one or two somewhere or other.

Malcolm wrote:
While I have met some Westerners who understand the meaning in a concrete sense, I have yet to meet anyone I would call "realized."

But since ChNN denies he is realized, that sets the bar pretty damn high. So we will just have to wait and see if there anyone in our generation achieves something like rainbow body or has a clear thugdam or has relics.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 24th, 2015 at 1:36 AM
Title: Re: traditions in transition
Content:


Urgyen Dorje said:
What exactly are the concerns?  For example, is it that the quality of teachers is declining?

Malcolm wrote:
Yes.

Urgyen Dorje said:
Is it that the traditional course of study in compromised?

Malcolm wrote:
Yes.


Urgyen Dorje said:
Is it that the fundamental concepts of theory and practice are being eroded?

Malcolm wrote:
Yes.

Urgyen Dorje said:
Are Western philosophical and religion notions being transferred into the tradition?

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, like translating gzhi, which simple means basis, as ground of being.

Urgyen Dorje said:
What are the solutions?

Malcolm wrote:
We need some realized westerners to emerge.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 23rd, 2015 at 10:56 PM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
Urgyen Dorje said:
Ya.  And I think it's the same with people I'm describing.  One never knows until one explores the common ground.

Malcolm wrote:
They will find the Dharma with you or without you. It is inevitable.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 23rd, 2015 at 10:44 PM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
Urgyen Dorje said:
Well, this is how I became a Buddhist 25 years ago.  I reached out in an interfaith dialog and found some common ground with a Buddhist, and then sought out formal Buddhist training with the same lama.


Malcolm wrote:
Yes, because you had a strong karmic connection with Dharma from a past life, specifically Dzogchen teachings, so you reconnected with the Dharma in this life. That, my friend, is the only way it works.

This is why I have the six syllables in my sig, because anyone who sees them creates a positive cause to connect with the Dharma in a future life, specifically Dzogchen teachings.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 23rd, 2015 at 10:35 PM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:


Urgyen Dorje said:
These are people who have done enough research, generally as Christians, to come to a Buddhist center to learn about these things, or to reach out to a Buddhist in the community like myself, to ask about these things.

Malcolm wrote:
I generally tell them what HHDL says, they should stay Christians. They should explore their own tradition more deeply.

Urgyen Dorje said:
Calming the mind and generating love and compassion is a natural common groud between Christianity and Buddhism.

Malcolm wrote:
Right, but Christians don't need Buddhism to be calm and generate love and compassion, nor do Muslims, or Hindus and so on.

If your mind is calm because you have taken Jesus as your personal savior and you generate compassion and love out of Christian exercises, fantastic. We can all agree that being calm, loving and compassionate is a good thing.

Interfaith gatherings, like peace conferences, don't change anything.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 23rd, 2015 at 10:23 PM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
Urgyen Dorje said:
Well, this instruction seems to work.

The common ground obviously isn't vajrayana.  The point of contact is generally shamatha and the four immeasurables.
]


Malcolm wrote:
These things are not Buddhist. They are shared in common with Hinduism already.

If people want to meditate, and they are theistically inclined, I send them to Yoga. I have no interest in converting, modifying or conditioning anyone.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 23rd, 2015 at 10:15 PM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
Urgyen Dorje said:
This is their instruction for bringing people to the dharma when people express interest.  That's all.  Nothing more, nothing less.  Start with common ground, cultivate that, introduce some related practices-- move on from there.  People generally pick up a Buddhist practice, or take some useful things back to their own religion.

Malcolm wrote:
If someone wants to learn Buddhist practice, they have to become a Buddhist. Giving Tara mantras to Christians is useless.

There is no such thing as a Hindu/Buddhist; Muslim/Buddhist; Christian/Buddhist. etc. You either take refuge in the Three Jewels or you don't. It is really simple. And I don't mean getting a groovy Tibetan/Chinese/Pali/Japanese name and so on. If you want to follow the Buddha's path, this means you have understood something is lacking in the path you follow. If you think the path you follow is perfect and complete, then there is no need for you to follow Buddha's path, or borrow anything from it.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 23rd, 2015 at 10:11 PM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
MiphamFan said:
So if I became a nomad, farmer or something who has to kill animals at least occasionally, I should just feel bad about it?

I remember reading in Perfect Conduct that killing animals doesn't break the vow to avoid killing completely, although it should be confessed.

Malcolm wrote:
Correct, you feel bad about it. For example, one of the reasons for dgu gtor is to apologize and confess all negativities done during the past year, especially killing cattle and sheep or hunting.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 23rd, 2015 at 10:07 PM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
Urgyen Dorje said:
I've watced my teachers do interfaith dialog, some of them for decades.

Malcolm wrote:
"Interfaith" assumes we are just trying to communicate with others to live in a harmonious way. Then we say nice things and complement each other on our mutual qualities.

Its all bullshit of course, because everyone just goes back to criticizing each other and thinking the other is deluded once everyone returns to their temple, mosque, church or synagogue. This is how samsara is.

Educating is different. If someone wants to be educated, then they have to listen. If people have the karmic fortune to meet Buddhadharma, they will. This is why we do not convert, or bother to evangelize. We don't have a mission. People are responsible for themselves. No one is going to save them. The universe does not care and there is no all-powerful god who cares either.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 23rd, 2015 at 9:46 PM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
Urgyen Dorje said:
I'm just going to throw myself on the fire here...

When having an interfaith dialog, one can either focus on the differences between the paths or the similarities.  If one focuses on the differences, the conversation will be about nothing but differences, and that's fine.  But if one focuses on similarities, and those similarities may only be "similar" in that they reflect the other persons interests, one has a point of connection.  A point of connection is more important than an ocean of differences if one wants to acknowledge and nurture some one's interest in dharma.  Not every difference and confusion needs to be addressed at once.  So generally the approach to real interfaith dialog is to find common ground on a couple points and share there.

So here we have a Muslim with a serious interest in Buddhism.

Malcolm wrote:
If a non-Buddhist person is interested in the Dharma, that is great. But in order to understand what Dharma is they have to understand first the differences between the Dharma and the religion they are currently following.

Otherwise, as the Dalai Lama said of Christians interested in emptiness in Tucson in 2005, "It is none of their business."


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 23rd, 2015 at 9:44 PM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
MiphamFan said:
Malcolm, BTW what about offerings to Indo-European gods? Ancient Greeks and Indians both sacrificed animals before eating them. Still Indra/Zeus is a deva, not a preta.

Malcolm wrote:
One, are you quite sure that Indra and Zeus are the same entity? Two, are you sure Zeus is a deva?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 23rd, 2015 at 8:59 PM
Title: Re: Helen Tworkov, Tricycle Magazine: Anti-Vajrayana Bias?
Content:
tingdzin said:
I pretty much agree with Urgyen Dorje. She definitely has an agenda, and while a good part of it may well be down to trying to keep a periodical alive and in mass circulation (not an easy task) by making Buddhism "approachable" , that is not the whole story.  Teachers and teachings from any tradition (including Zen and TB, which are, as Rory notes, the favorites) which ignore a modernist approach,  which seriously challenge the comfortable cultural and ethical assumptions of educated middle-class Americans and Europeans, or which in general dispense with a touchy-feely, ego-nurturing approach seem pretty thin on the ground in that mag. Once in a while, there are gems, it's true, but usually it's the same old safe teachers and teachings, "the usual suspects", from an obviously vetted list, that get the most ink.

Malcolm wrote:
Barnes and Nobles Buddhism.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 23rd, 2015 at 8:25 PM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
Devin666 said:
So basically every institution (or in many cases) has some spirit that feels that the whole thing is its property and supports it or whatever? I am also wondering why the dkor bdag would keep one poor as long as one has debt, what is the connection there? Should it not try to help or is dkor bdag more like a group energy or so? Is it an individual thinking spirit?

Malcolm wrote:
Because you have a debt, it depletes your prosperity. A dkor bdag is a kind of individual entity associated with public institutions like monasteries, sometimes they even have names. Generally however, they do not.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 23rd, 2015 at 7:39 PM
Title: Re: New schools in early buddhism
Content:
lostitude said:
Hello,

I have been reading about early buddhism and the multiplication of different schools of thought following a number of schisms. Some of them seem to be quite divergent from each other, sometimes even opposed (like sarvastivada and theravada) in their theories about reality, existence and so on, which makes me wonder if all those treatises and theories were really written and developped by 'attained' people or rather by simple philosophers who tried to rationalise the universe using the brain instead of through direct knowledge, like western philosophers did with Christianity?
Also, are these developments still seen as useful and exploitable in terms of spiritual development today, or simply as a phase in buddhist history?

Thanks

Malcolm wrote:
Arhats are not omniscient. They are not Buddhas. They are free of samsara, they will not take rebirth in samsara, but they do not have the same level of knowledge as a Buddha. Therefore, in explaining the Buddha's teachings, they gave rise to the 18 different schools, as the Buddha predicted. This has nothing to do with Mahāyāna, which is separate thing.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 23rd, 2015 at 7:36 PM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
Devin666 said:
Malcom, did you see my question?

Malcolm wrote:
The idea is applied to institutions in general. It is not written down somewhere in a book.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 23rd, 2015 at 7:24 PM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:


lostitude said:
Stupas have no magic power of their own.

Malcolm wrote:
''Once, a dog was chasing a pig, and as the pig was running away, it circumambulated the stupa. The pig did not have any kind of virtuous motivation. It had no idea that the stupa was a holy object and that it could be purified and liberated by circumambulating it. The pig had never registered for a meditation course! Because of the kindness of the dog that chased it, the pig did one circumambulation of the stupa, and after the pig died, it was born in the higher realm of Tushita.'' http://www.lamayeshe.com/article/chapter/chapter-34-march-2-b
Why pig benefitted? Where stupa magic come from? I'm curious.

pael said:
This story cannot be taken literally.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 23rd, 2015 at 7:15 PM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
lostitude said:
So at the end of the day, the differences you mention seem to be of a purely theoretical nature,at least I can't see what their concrete implications would be, if I were to seriously embark on the buddhist path?

Malcolm wrote:
It really depends on which school you are interested in. Zen, Son and Theravadin schools [for different reasons] do not seem to have much problem accommodating theists. Most expressions of Tibetan Buddhism however would require you to take refuge in Buddha, Dharma and Sangha, and that means you would have to relinquish your former religious affiliations and beliefs. They would maintain one cannot find refuge in non-Buddhist deities if one has found refuge in the Buddha. So there is a difference in refuge.

There is a difference of view — Buddhadharma utterly rejects the notion of an efficient creator god, or even a formal one. It instead proposes there is no absolute beginning, and relies in the notion of dependent origination and emptiness to explain everything. The Buddha maintained that views other than the view of dependent origination were false.

There is a difference in path — since Buddhadharma rejects God in toto because of the view of dependent origination, liberation depends solely on one's own efforts and there is no external moral agency that one has to satisfy or worship. Liberation depends solely on recognizing one's own nature. There is nothing with which to unify, no transcendent principle binding all beings together, etc.

There is a difference in conduct -- we will leave this aside for now.

There is a difference in result — the result of practicing Buddhadharma is Buddhahood. Buddhahood cannot be attained in non-Buddhist paths.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 23rd, 2015 at 9:28 AM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
Urgyen Dorje said:
You and I might be.  A bunch of people in Ferguson aren't... or parts of Camden... Detroit... LA... Chicago... or on some of the Indian Reservations... just saying.

Malcolm wrote:
I don't think Americans live in constant fear.... We are pretty comfortable.
Compared to people in India or even in most of Mexico, people in Camden, Fergusson, Detroit, Chicago and so on are miles higher in their standard of living and opportunities, just saying...even with racist cops...


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 23rd, 2015 at 9:21 AM
Title: Re: Cutting Hair
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
There is calculation for this from what is called 'bras rtsi, the calculation of results. It is a part of Tibetan "astrology."


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 23rd, 2015 at 9:18 AM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Incidentally, I will leave you with a summary of a Buddhist refutation of theism:
The critique  of puru.sa centers on the dilemma  posed by puru.sa's (a) motives (if he is motivated by another, he is not  self-sufficient;  if he  is  motivated  by
compassion, he must create a perfect  world, while if he cannot create a perfect world, he is not powerful; and  if  he is motivated  by "amusement," then  he is both  cruel  and  dependent  on  the  instrument   of amusement, namely, the cosmos)(120) and (b) potency (if he is able to create all things, he  must  do  so
immediately,   for    potency    entails    immediate generation).(121)
http://ccbs.ntu.edu.tw/FULLTEXT/JR-PHIL/jackson.htm


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 23rd, 2015 at 9:05 AM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
lostitude said:
What would the Buddha have eaten and commanded people to eat, in the absence of any crops in the middle of a desert? Let's be realistic.

Malcolm wrote:
Buddha, so far as we know, ate what was offered to him, and did not command anyone to do anything, apart from to avoid killing. I think you deeply do not understand the world view of Buddhadharma, leaving aside my own views about other religions.


lostitude said:
And it is just as prevalent in South-East Asia and Central Asia as well as many other parts of the world. So no, you didn't address this association you're making...

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, and had you read more carefully, you would have noticed that I included India, Mexico and S. America. etc. All these places have deep problems.

lostitude said:
They live in constant fear and paranoia.
Just like the US and right now, Europe. Or South Korea. You clearly *want* this belief of yours to be true...

Malcolm wrote:
I don't think Americans live in constant fear, not Europeans. We are pretty comfortable.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 23rd, 2015 at 9:02 AM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
lostitude said:
You can also admit that you have not attained any significant level of insight granting you sufficient direct knowledge of what a Buddha would perceive if he was talking to a sufi 'qutb' (one of the highest spiritual levels in sufism). And that you're disparaging other religions based on your readings and deluded perceptions of what you think they are.

Malcolm wrote:
I know what a Buddha would perceive. He would perceive someone with a mistaken view.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 23rd, 2015 at 8:23 AM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
lostitude said:
So have you attained stream entry, Malcolm, or not yet?

Malcolm wrote:
The issues is not what I have attained or not attained.

lostitude said:
Of course it is. How could you be passing such judgements without a certain level of attainment allowing you clear and direct insight into those religions you denounce? That would be quite unreasonable.

Malcolm wrote:
The reason it is not an issue is that I can claim anything and how could you judge my claims? So the issue is moot and irrelevant.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 23rd, 2015 at 8:21 AM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
The philosophical revolution in Islam happened after Muslims converted Central Asia and came into contact with the [Hellenized] Central Asian Civilizations.

lostitude said:
That's very inaccurate. Among the best known sufis is Hassan al-Basri for example, who died long before the conquests of Central Asia.

Malcolm wrote:
I was not talking about Sufism.


lostitude said:
What you seem to forget is that islam first appeared in a country where the main staple is meat. Arabia is mainly desert, with no possibility of cultivating crops (except in the far South). Back then, slaughtering your own camel for a guest was a huge thing, a tremendous mark of esteem and generosity. Now slaughtering it for the sake of Allah and distributing the meat to the poor who barely have anything to eat was probably one of the most praiseworthy acts that could be performed in such a situation.

Malcolm wrote:
If you are a Muslim, perhaps. I don't think the Buddha would agree.


lostitude said:
In Abrahamic religions just like in buddhism, any act is religious insofar as it is motivated by a specific intention with 'karmic' results.

Malcolm wrote:
No, you don't really get my point.

lostitude said:
You can point out all the exceptions and nuances you want. They don't matter. What matters is that in these places that I mentioned, millions of animals a year are ritually sacrificed or killed according to religious rules, and the karmic results are exponentially worse than Tysons and Hormel.
That's a pretty wild association to make. Over half of the African continent does not practice religious slaughters as seen in Abrahamic religions, yet subsaharan Africa is in a much more dire situation than many Muslim countries...

Malcolm wrote:
Animism is very prevalent in sub-Saharan Africa. I addressed this.

lostitude said:
As for Israel, aside from being *officially* at war, I hardly see how Israelis have a miserable life in Tel Aviv.

Malcolm wrote:
They live in constant fear and paranoia.

lostitude said:
Animal sacrifice is the rule in Islam, not the exception. It is a duty, actually, one many Muslims may find distasteful, but a duty nevertheless.
Again, it is a duty because it is rich people's duty to feed the poor, on those special occasions. If islam had appeared in Asia, maybe it would have consisted in soybeans. The whole idea is that of a sacrifice = renouncing something dear to you. The fact that it's an animal is secondary.

Malcolm wrote:
No, it is primary, from a Buddhist POV.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 23rd, 2015 at 7:44 AM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
lostitude said:
So have you attained stream entry, Malcolm, or not yet?

Malcolm wrote:
The issues is not what I have attained or not attained.

In any case, I do not practice according to that Hinayāna system, so the question also does not apply.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 23rd, 2015 at 7:02 AM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
lostitude said:
Uh huh, and that makes it eternal, which is why Buddhists are in the lowest Islamic hell.
How could you possibly tell? You have no idea what Allah as the matrix of existence could mean, because you have neither attained nirvana, nor attained the state attained by the sufi saints who expounded this notion.

Malcolm wrote:
There is no matrix of existence, no ground of being.


lostitude said:
So you're simply rejecting something you don't even understand.

Malcolm wrote:
Ok, if you say so.


lostitude said:
Where did I say that? I said that they were places where you can get loads of good karma. Just like the tombs of some Muslim saints. What is the difference?

Malcolm wrote:
You can't get loads of good karma from anything external. You can only get "loads of good karma" by having positive intentions and then carrying them out.


lostitude said:
You can taste it before you get there. This is called "stream entry."
So basically it's like getting to the top of the Empire State Building on a rainy and cloudy day with 1/2mile visibility, and comparing it with the view on a clear day with unlimited visibility like in nirvana.

Malcolm wrote:
No, it is more like getting on the elevator.


lostitude said:
Theistic religions do not make any sense
To you, which is fine. If you have trouble understanding them though, you can either look for explanations or say that you don't understand them. Any other attitude is just equivalent to mere rejection, which I don't think would be conducive to stream-entry... it really sounds like the kind of grasping that Nagarjuna warned against, the idea that you can understand the true nature of reality in a neat set of concepts and reject all other systems that seem to be contradictory.

Malcolm wrote:
They are well refuted by Vasubandhu, Nāgārjuna and so on.


lostitude said:
they contradict direct perception
They don't contradict the perceptions of those who have reached an advanced stage in those traditions. Which is not your case... so obviously they will contradict your own direct perception.

Malcolm wrote:
Creationism is contradicted in direct perception. There is no such thing as an unmoved mover, etc. Everything that arises, arises from a conditioned cause. An uncaused cause is impossible. This is demonstrable both through direct perception and inference.


lostitude said:
You are the one making the argument from direct perception. In this case, what can be more foolish than believing a creator god no one has ever seen?
Because you have seen nirvana maybe?

Malcolm wrote:
Nirvana and God are not commensurable concepts on any level.


lostitude said:
What if God was not something to see, but maybe something to experience? What is truly foolish is to judge something you haven't even begun to understand. Can you really attain stream-entry with such a mindset? I must say I'm quite surprised.

Malcolm wrote:
If it can be experienced, it is relative. A relative mind cannot experience anything unconditioned. It is simply impossible. Also, in Buddhadharma there are only three unconditioned things, generally, space and the two kinds of cessation. [In Mahāyāna we add emptiness, but that is beyond discussion here].

Nirvana has two meanings but it is not an experience. It is a kind of knowledge that you will no longer take rebirth in samsara because you have exhausted afflictions, and second, when you die, your continuum ceases with regard to afflictive rebirth in the three realms. Beyond this, we move in the Mahāyāna Buddhology, which is a little more complex.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 23rd, 2015 at 6:18 AM
Title: Re: the unconscious, the shadow, and buddhism?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Well, the idea that there are subconsciousness processes in the mind is rejected out of hand in Buddhadharma. And not every school of Buddhism subscribes to this idea of traces.

For the most part, dreams are held to be pretty meaningless. Just another bardo of illusion.

jorden said:
So then I might not be understanding the difference between being ignorant of karmic conditioning and the effect is has on people (if you can put it that way) and subconsciousness processes that influence your life without you knowing it. I might even be misunderstanding subconsciousness in this context... Is subconsciousness rejected because it is defined as something that cannot ever become known/brought in awaress? Or is it that I'm comparing the seemingly similar effects (i.e. stuff you are unaware of affects what you do in both Buddhadharma and analytical psychology) but missing the very different view on the structure of consciousness?

Malcolm wrote:
Consciousness is unitary and momentary, only one at a time. There are mental factors that accompany it, but you really need to study Abhidharma to fully understand the differences.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 23rd, 2015 at 6:06 AM
Title: Re: Helen Tworkov, Tricycle Magazine: Anti-Vajrayana Bias?
Content:
Urgyen Dorje said:
They each have their own nuances, but the intention is to prevent the view of a modern western Buddhism- - whatever that is.

Malcolm wrote:
Hey, I thought that was my job!


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 23rd, 2015 at 6:04 AM
Title: Re: the unconscious, the shadow, and buddhism?
Content:
jorden said:
So am I correct in understanding that there is at least a superficial similarity between the concept of unconscious processes and habitual tendencies/patterns (in that both in their respective views cause us to do (and dream) all kinds of crazy stuff without us really having any control), but a big difference in the way meaning is (or is not) attached to them?

Malcolm wrote:
Well, the idea that there are subconsciousness processes in the mind is rejected out of hand in Buddhadharma. And not every school of Buddhism subscribes to this idea of traces.

For the most part, dreams are held to be pretty meaningless. Just another bardo of illusion.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 23rd, 2015 at 5:58 AM
Title: Re: Natural State and Nature
Content:
steve_bakr said:
The text of "The Supreme Source" cuts through all provisional teachings and what remains is "Pure and Total Consciousness" only. It cuts through every practice and belief dearly held.

Malcolm wrote:
Kun byed rgyal po is a sems sde text. It is principally concerned with the first statement of Garab Dorje, "Direct Introduction." It does not address the second two statements, "Remain without doubt" and "Continue in that state." [The three statements of Garab Dorje may actually be found in the ultimate root tantra of all Dzogchen, the origin of all Dharma teachings and specifically, all Dzogchen teachings, the sGra thal 'gyur Tantra.]

steve_bakr said:
I have been given to believe that the Direct Introduction to the Nature of Mind, which is Intrinsic Awareness (Rigpa), the Primordial State, is sufficient for all three statements.

Malcolm wrote:
Rig pa is not the primordial state. Chogyal Namkhai Norbu states this again and again and again. If you choose not to listen to him, what can I say?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 23rd, 2015 at 5:43 AM
Title: Re: the unconscious, the shadow, and buddhism?
Content:
jorden said:
If
Malcolm wrote:
IN general, dreams come from activated traces.

jorden said:
I am confused now. What am I missing then in trying to compare these karmic traces in Buddhism and unconscious processes as in analytical psychology? They seem pretty much the same to me. They even produce dreams!

Jorden


Malcolm wrote:
In general dreams are the exhaustion of "junk" karma, and do not have any meaning.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 23rd, 2015 at 5:21 AM
Title: Re: the unconscious, the shadow, and buddhism?
Content:
jorden said:
Thanks Malcolm. I looked up vasana and saw that the Wikipedia article also mentioned Bīja (seeds) and alaya (storehouse). Do you have a reading suggestion for an introduction to these concepts? I have heard alaya mentioned once in connection to a teaching on karma. The context of my question is that I'm doing contemplation on the four thoughts and I am not very well versed in the Buddhist thinking on karma. I have more experience with Jungian thought, so I have tried approaching karma from that direction. And do you know if there is a connection between vasanas and dreams?

Malcolm wrote:
IN general, dreams come from activated traces.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 23rd, 2015 at 4:56 AM
Title: Re: the unconscious, the shadow, and buddhism?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
There is no shadow concept in Buddhadharma, nor is there a concept of a conscious and unconscious mind in Buddhadharma.

jorden said:
And habitual patterns/tendencies we are ignorant of? Don't they form a structure in our mind?

Malcolm wrote:
You are talking about traces [vasanas], these are imprints of actions that remain latent our mindstream until activated by specific causes, according to one theory.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 23rd, 2015 at 4:41 AM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Islam = heaven and hell are eternal

lostitude said:
Not exactly.
First, hell is presented as 'eternal' (in Western languages) only for those who do not believe in Allah as being the matrix of existence.

Malcolm wrote:
Uh huh, and that makes it eternal, which is why Buddhists are in the lowest Islamic hell.



For others, hell is just a transitory existence that goes upward as 'bad karma' ripens, through skin-burning among other niceties
Same as heaven, which has several stages and from what I remember there is a possibility to move up from one stage to another.

Second, the word translated as 'eternal' (usually khalid) has been very much debated among Muslim scholars as to what it really means. Is it really absolute eternity, or is it ond of those semitic exaggerations to signify 'a very long period of time'. Many have favored the second option, on the basis of some evidence which I don't remember, with this same word being used for obviously non-eternal events.

lostitude said:
There is no concept of everything is one in Buddhadharma. That is Advaita, one without a second and so on.
Yet that's what Kaccani took about 3 pages to try to explain to me: I'm no different from the object I perceive, all is the same and at the end of the day, since everything is conditioned, nothing exists for real. But maybe I got that wrong.

Malcolm wrote:
Umm no, you really have it wrong here.

lostitude said:
Karma comes from one's own intentions, not places.
Well if it's a bone of contention within buddhism, it's not my problem All I know for certain is that stupas is a very buddhist thing, and that the belief that worshipping around them and circumambulating around them gets you huge amounts of good karma, is a very buddhist belief.

Malcolm wrote:
This is not a bone of contention within Buddhism. Everyone accepts this definition since the Buddha stated it, Nāgārjuna repeated it, and so on.

Stupas have no magic power of their own.

[/quote]Fortunately I don't live in a so-called 'islamic' country.[/quote]

Fortunately.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 23rd, 2015 at 4:36 AM
Title: Re: the unconscious, the shadow, and buddhism?
Content:
jorden said:
I have two questions, I hope this is the appropriate forum (if not perhaps one of the mods can suggest a better place?):

Is there a Buddhist concept resembling the psychological shadow a la Jung (an unconscious aspect of the personality which the conscious ego does not identify in itself. Because one tends to reject or remain ignorant of the least desirable aspects of one's personality, the shadow is largely negative. (Wikipedia))?

And can somebody point me in the direction of Buddhist thoughts on the relation between our conscious and unconscious mind. If there is such a thing? What terms would I be looking for?

Thanks in advance for any thoughts on this,
Jorden

Malcolm wrote:
There is no shadow concept in Buddhadharma, nor is there a concept of a conscious and unconscious mind in Buddhadharma.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 23rd, 2015 at 4:30 AM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
lostitude said:
You're missing the point. Yes you can be certain that nirvana exists. But you can't know what the view is like from there, until you reach it.

Malcolm wrote:
You can taste it before you get there. This is called "stream entry."

lostitude said:
So wait until you reach it before judging other religions, because that's the only valid vantage point, as I was saying.

Malcolm wrote:
Theistic religions do not make any sense and they contradict direct perception. You are the one making the argument from direct perception. In this case, what can be more foolish than believing a creator god no one has ever seen?


lostitude said:
As long as you haven't reached nirvana, you are still deluded,

Malcolm wrote:
No, this is not the case. You need to understand something more about the path structure of Buddhadharma that you do. In Buddharma, one wakes up long before one achieves Nirvana. Once one has woken up, one is not longer deluded. That initial awakening is called "stream entry." In Mahāyāna is the first bhumi. But even before the first bhumi there is the second stage of the path of application, where one's samadhi so closely resembles the actual experience of awakening is it called "peak."


lostitude said:
and you see the world and other religions in a deluded way. Just because you can see nirvana looming in the distance doesn't help you know what perspective you will enjoy once you get there.

Malcolm wrote:
You think this, because you have not properly studied the Dharma.

lostitude said:
Now if you have got reports from people who have reached nirvana unequivocally saying that all other religions are bad, I'd be interested to read that.

Malcolm wrote:
It is not a question of bad — it is a question of not attaining liberation. And the Buddha most certainly commented on this point in several sutras, for example, the Mahāparibinnana sutta which was already cited in this thread:
"In any doctrine & discipline where the noble eightfold path is not found, no contemplative of the first... second... third... fourth order [stream-winner, once-returner, non-returner, or arahant] is found. But in any doctrine & discipline where the noble eightfold path is found, contemplatives of the first... second... third... fourth order are found. The noble eightfold path is found in this doctrine & discipline, and right here there are contemplatives of the first... second... third... fourth order. Other teachings are empty of knowledgeable contemplatives.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/dn/dn.16.5-6.than.html


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 23rd, 2015 at 4:19 AM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:


lostitude said:
I'm giving those details because now that I'm reading up on general buddhism (not just zen), I keep bumping into strikingly similar themes in both religions.
I thought satan/shaytan was purely abrahamic, we have mara in buddhism.

Malcolm wrote:
Mara /= Satan.

lostitude said:
Same for heaven and hell.

Malcolm wrote:
Islam = heaven and hell are eternal

Buddhadharma = heaven and hells are just part of the six realms of existence, impermanent.


lostitude said:
I was especially surprised by this story about one of the buddhist hells in which beings are constantly burned and when the skin is completely burnt, it is replaced by a new one for more burning. This is word-for-word a verse in the Quran. It would almost seem as if Muhammad went on a road trip to India in his hippie years.

Malcolm wrote:
Western hells are clearly based on Buddhist hells, doubtless via Mani.

lostitude said:
Then there are other apparent similarities (I'm saying apparent because I'm already out of my depth there, it gets too conceptual for me), such as the sufi view of 'unity of existence/being' (wahdat al wujud) which basically says that everything that 'is', is one. Which includes Allah. But at the same time you have this verse in the Qur'an that says that Allah is not comparable to anything (which implies that for all ends and purposes, Allah/God does not exist in this universe, since nothing within this universe is like Him).

Malcolm wrote:
There is no concept of everything is one in Buddhadharma. That is Advaita, one without a second and so on.

lostitude said:
Then of course you have karma in buddhism, and good deeds and bad deeds in islam and their consequences.
You also have 'baraka' in islam, which would be the equivalent of good karma, and baraka is especially available around tombs of saints and of course the tomb of the Prophet, and the Kaaba and some holy mosques. Just like buddhist stupas.

Malcolm wrote:
Karma comes from one's own intentions, not places.

lostitude said:
You have many different planes of existence beyond the wordly plane in buddhism, in islam what is commonly referred to as 'Heaven' is actually subdivided into many planes too, the very last one being some kind of fusion with Allah and disappearance into Him. Something that sounds just as un-conceptualizable as nirvana.

Malcolm wrote:
All planes of existence in Buddhadharma are worldly, from Avici hell to Bhavagra.

lostitude said:
What mainstream islam lacks for me is a clear path for spiritual progression. Sufi schools could have offered me that maybe, but I just haven't had a chance to join one. And I feel this very strong resonance about islam and buddhism as you put it, which is why I really feel like at least trying some buddhist practices and see where they get me. If it can't hurt me, why not just try.

Malcolm wrote:
[/quote][/quote]

Nope, it cannot hurt you to try. Though I would be cautious about sharing your apostasy with other Muslims. In some places it can get you instantly killed.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 23rd, 2015 at 4:11 AM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:


Malcolm wrote:
You see the skyline of New York City long before you arrive there. You don't need to have arrived at the Empire State Building to know it is there. You can see it from a distance.

lostitude said:
But you have no idea what the view from the Empire State Building is like until you reach the top. Same goes with other religions you're trying to look at without even having reached the top of the mountain that is nirvana, the only clear vantage point. Inference and testimony will never equate direct knowledge. Especially when they are flawed, which is very often the case, as the disagreements within historic buddhist schools have shown, according to my modest readings on this topic so far.

Malcolm wrote:
We don't need to see the view of the Empire State Building for ourselves. Since we are certain it exists, we can trust the reports of others who have ridden the elevator to the top. Of course, seeing for oneself is always better, but it certainly does not mean we need to disbelieve the reports of others who have been to the top of a building we can plainly see for ourselves.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 23rd, 2015 at 3:30 AM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
lostitude said:
If you are not yourself free from samsara already, there is no way you can know that... because you don't know what exactly leads to liberation since you haven't trodden that path yet. All you know is a few vague descriptions of it, but that's very far from knowledge.

Malcolm wrote:
This argument is incorrect. It presumes there is only one form of correct knowledge, direct perception. But in fact, Buddhadharma accepts three forms of valid knowledge: direct perception, inference and testimony.

lostitude said:
That's the problem I was alluding to earlier. Some people seem to believe that they know as much as boddhisattvas or buddhas, simply from reading or hearing stuff about what they said or did, and having a few years of practice behind them. I think it would be much wiser to keep one's judgements on hold until one reaches liberation. Then you can see with your own eyes. Until then, why not just say 'I don't know', and be content with saying 'buddhism is what works for ME' ?

Malcolm wrote:
Some of us have been practicing Dharma long enough to have sufficient experience to be quite certain that what Buddha and other masters of Buddhadharma before him and after him have stated is true. Arriving at that confidence requires putting Buddhadharma into practice in one's own life. That starts with beginning to cultivate mundane correct view. What is that?:

This is the suffering, this is the cause, this is its cessation, this is the path.

You see the skyline of New York City long before you arrive there. You don't need to have arrived at the Empire State Building to know it is there. You can see it from a distance.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 23rd, 2015 at 2:50 AM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
lostitude said:
I forgot to respond to your post: I certainly wasn't talking about the Buddhist sangha in particular. When I praised Urgyen Dorje's attitude and hoped more people were like him/her, I meant the human community in general. So far it seems to me that the buddhist community is actually a million times more open minded than some of the Muslim communities I have been involved in.

Malcolm wrote:
Of course followers of Buddharma are open minded. We understand that everyone is afflicted by the three poisons, since this is the direct cause of samsara and rebirth. We understand that every thing that everyone does, even if it is positive, even if we are followers of Buddhadharma, is tainted with the three poisons unless or until we cut the three poisons off at the root because we have woken up. And awakened people have nothing but compassion for everyone. However, as far as I know, there are no awakened people posting on this board.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 23rd, 2015 at 2:40 AM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
smcj said:
I've heard the basic idea about nagas is that there is one wherever there is a nice spot. So a nice beach or a nice meadow would have one. I guess that means Yosemite and Yellowstone have really big ones.

I'm not subscribing to that theory, but I do find it esthetically pleasing. So now when I go into nature to a really nice spot I mentally make an offering and give thanks to the local naga. Whether or not there actually is a naga doesn't matter to me. I find it a beautiful way to enhance my enjoyment of the spot. And if there actually is a naga, well then there's nothing wrong with being a polite guest.

Just as long as they don't ask me to take sides with the whole garuda/naga conflict.

Malcolm wrote:
Better make sure it is a nāgā positive day, or you are just going to piss them off.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 23rd, 2015 at 2:23 AM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
dzogchungpa said:
Maybe, but I still don't see how you know that the IRS, say, has nonhuman protectors.

Malcolm wrote:
Maybe you should reflect on that...


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 23rd, 2015 at 12:20 AM
Title: Re: Helen Tworkov, Tricycle Magazine: Anti-Vajrayana Bias?
Content:
Urgyen Dorje said:
I don't read Tricycle or Shambhala Sun because I feel they have ideological and sectarian biases.  Sometimes they drop a great article or interview.


Malcolm wrote:
What is Shambhala Sun's ideological and sectarian bias?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 22nd, 2015 at 11:10 PM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
Urgyen Dorje said:
what do I do differently with that information?

Malcolm wrote:
Practice Drollo.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 22nd, 2015 at 10:00 PM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
BTW, there is no reason not be tolerant of other religions, for the same reason that we are tolerant of afflicted people, including ourselves.

The general motivation for all religions, even religions which advocate harming others, is to promote happiness and well-being. However, other religions arise out of ignorance of how things actually are and propose ineffective solutions for the problems they intend to address.

We have to recognize that the beliefs and and practices of other religions do not lead to liberation, are at best palliatives for human problems, and at worst, cause rebirth in lower realms.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 22nd, 2015 at 9:50 PM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
Urgyen Dorje said:
I'm down with that now.  Like our own Sonam Dragpa turned gyalpo.  Yes.  Martyrdom could be seen as a gyalpo factory.  iMO especially crusaders and jihadis.


Malcolm wrote:
Definitely.

Anyway, for example, we have the example of Muhammed — from whom did he receive the Koran? An entity called Gabriel, who presented himself as a conveyor of the word of God. How is this any different at all from Tibetan oracles, New Age channelers and so on? Nothing, in my view.

We have constant information from the OT Prophets that they communicated directly with a being they gave various names, and they report this entity took and takes a generational interest in their people from a very early time.

The "chosen people" meme has been one of the most destructive in human history because it gives a certain population a teleological claim to primacy and favor. The Israelites used it to wipe out enemy tribes, the Christians used to to forge their hegemony, causing massive genocides in the Americas, both north and south, the Muslims used it and are using it today, even the Communists used it with the myth of the proletariat [Communist eschatology is strictly Abrahamic in nature].

Monotheisms, as a class of religion, are entirely imperialistic in their ambitions, and this is one of the chief reasons I think they are all gyalpo driven, regardless of what individual Christians, Jews and Muslims [and Communists] may believe and whatever concept of God they may hold.
M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 22nd, 2015 at 9:37 PM
Title: Re: Sequence of the elements
Content:
kashmir said:
Why is it that during the purification of the elements E Ho. etc, the sequence is space, wind, water, fire, earth. While most depictions of Thigles using the simple five colors, the sequence seems to be Blue, Green, Red, Yellow, Surrounded by white  (Space, Wind, Fire, Earth, Water? )

Malcolm wrote:
The sequence in the thigle has a specific meaning that can be found in the Dzogchen tantras. It is not arbitrary. But I am not going to discuss it here.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 22nd, 2015 at 9:31 PM
Title: Re: Earth Termas - real objects?
Content:
Nosta said:
Chokgyur was the name, sorry for my mistake.

Earth Termas being real is something extraordinary, and something that shows that reality is illusory. If not, how could it be possible to take out objects from air or rocks?

I suppose that in the present times there are not tertons able to do such things.

Malcolm wrote:
Sure there are. I have met two of them, now deceased, but they both revealed earth termas.


Khenpo Jigme Phunstok



Kunzang Dechen Lingpa


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 22nd, 2015 at 9:24 PM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
Urgyen Dorje said:
When people walk away from this thing, they universally use the language of "I don't believe in this any more".

I guess spirits could simply be draw to people on different forms of that trip depending upon their intensity and negativity.  As you've said in another post, I can see spirits being drawn to the crucifixion, and I could see them being worked up about the idols being removed from the Kaaba.

Malcolm wrote:
I was making a different point when discussing the crucifixion — I was saying that such kind of executions of religious people are precisely the kind of thing that causes creates gyalpos.

gDon do not depend on our beliefs. Saying that we do not believe in other kinds of sentient beings that are formless is like two ants on a leaf arguing about whether humans exist or not, to borrow an image from Sakya Pandita.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 22nd, 2015 at 9:21 PM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
jnanasutra said:
Provocations do not just govern humans, they also govern strange diseases like SARS, HIV, MERS, etc., all of these things are governed by nonhuman beings such as mamos, tsen, nāgas, gyalpos, etc.
Where is the proof? I would like to hear arguments other than "my lama said so" and "such-and-such buddhist text says so"...these are too self-referential.

Malcolm wrote:
One either accepts the authority of texts and persons or not. It's up to you.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 22nd, 2015 at 9:20 PM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
In reality, even secular institutions have their nonhuman protectors, whether they recognize them or not.

dzogchungpa said:
May I ask how you know this?

Malcolm wrote:
There are non-human beings — you can call them elementals or bhūtas — everywhere. Some are harmful, some are not, but all are possessive. They don't just inhabit churches, mosques, synagogues and temples. They inhabit houses, etc. They are also not unintelligent, they know where they are and why they are there — being formless, they have seven times more clarity than embodied beings in the desire realm possess in general.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 22nd, 2015 at 8:56 PM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
lostitude said:
Besides, the way animals are sacrificed and the method used in Islam were described by Muhammad himself, and in his time it was by far the most merciful and painless way to kill.

Malcolm wrote:
Tibetan nomads certainly would not agree. They think suffocation is kinder.

Still, from the point of view of Buddhadharma, killing of any kind is a nonvirtuous act, and is motivated by either the poisons of desire, hatred or ignorance.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 22nd, 2015 at 8:53 PM
Title: Re: Water Bowl Offerings
Content:
Terma said:
How do you guys dispose of your water bowl offerings?  I have no house plants to nourish with water, so what should I do? Pour it on the lawn outside?


Malcolm wrote:
Yes.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 22nd, 2015 at 8:52 PM
Title: Re: Earth Termas - real objects?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Chogyal Namkhai Norbu also witnessed earth treasure being revealed by his uncle.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 22nd, 2015 at 8:51 PM
Title: Re: The courage of no convictions
Content:
Dan74 said:
Often a poster with strong convictions and the stamina to argue them come what may earns kudos, while putting forward something other than a firm position is seen as being a fence-sitter, PC, wishy-washy and weak. I want to argue a position of no position, as a good position to have quite often.

...

What do you think?

_/|\_

Malcolm wrote:
When one is a doctor, one has to diagnose illness. Illnesses come complete with symptoms. When you understand the cause of a disease, you can eliminate it. This approach has nothing to do with "taking positions." Making excuses for the symptoms or the cause merely leads to more illnesses.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 22nd, 2015 at 6:10 AM
Title: Re: Helen Tworkov, Tricycle Magazine: Anti-Vajrayana Bias?
Content:
DGA said:
I recall reading some time back that there was a sense among some that Tricycle Magazine, back when it still mattered, had an anti-Vajrayana, pro-Zen bias to it.  Further, this reflected the shift of the editor, Helen Tworkov, from a disciple of Trungpa to a Zen practitioner.

Wherever I read this has been sucked away into the ether.

Anyway, can anyone corroborate this idea?  It's useful to have these things available to a google search for future reference.

Malcolm wrote:
It was more of an Anti Trungpa Bias.

Anyway, like most Buddhist controversies, it was a tempest in a teapot.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 22nd, 2015 at 5:57 AM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
Urgyen Dorje said:
Malcolm...

I think we agree on the major points.

That the Abrahamic traditions aren't dharma paths, no matter how contemplative and mystical they might be.

That gyalpo provocations are real and have causes and solutions as indicated in the tradition.

Red pill me though on why the Abrahamic god actually exists?  In that case I would probably interpret many things differently...

Malcolm wrote:
Religions do not form without cause. As far as I am concerned the actual "god" of the OT, NT and Koran is a rgyal po, more than one. rGyal pos delight on conflict and causing people to break samaya.

And it seems to me that whatever adaptions of Greek Philosophy and so on Christians, Jews and Muslims may have made, again and again all three religions traditions become involved in paranoia, dominance and political power [the Jews, post Temple, much less so because of their long history of persecution, but these days, Israel?"]. For this reason I personally think that backbone of these traditions is sustained by a rgyal po/rgyal pos, and it can be more than one.

You kept asking the question, are all these people rgyal po worshippers — of course not. I never said they were. If your philosophical definition of the divine is drawn from Aristotle or Plotinus, of course not.

But it does not mean that you are not in the company of people whose concept of god feeds right into and feeds the egos of this kind of dregs pa.

There can be many kinds of gdon associated with a religion. There gdon associated with the US Government, dkor bdags [owners of donations, literally] and so on.

One reason why it is so hard for people to get off of the dole is that when one gets into debt with the government or the banks, and so on, the influence of the dkor bdags who rule your debt, Gvt. property and so on, keep you poor until you get free of the debt by paying it off.

Some people never get free, and this kind of provocation can be passed on in families for generations. This is why it best not to carry much debt. And if you have debt you cannot pay, it is better to declare bankruptcy.

I am sure some of you reading this think I am insane, thinking "What? Spirits who have an interest in Bank and Welfar debt? What a crazy idea!" In reality, even secular institutions have their nonhuman protectors, whether they recognize them or not.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 22nd, 2015 at 12:53 AM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
Urgyen Dorje said:
But I have my own experience.  People who have a vision of their deity as being wrathful and punishing and angry, well, they tend to have issues.  They tend to dislike a lot of people.  People who have a vision of their deity as an embodiment of love, are, well, generally loving people.

Malcolm wrote:
I don't know, I have met some really angry Tara and Chenrezi practitioners, and conversely, I have met some Drollo practitioners who are as loving and gentle as can be.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 21st, 2015 at 10:28 PM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
Urgyen Dorje said:
I'm not a Jungian by any stretch of the imagination.  Jungians have certainly mucked up people's interpretation of Tibetan Buddhism.  However, I do think his general trend in seeing theological constructs as reflections of the individual psyche as pretty reasonable.
Jung

Malcolm wrote:
I have never had any use for this quack.
You will not be surprised to learn I have zero use for Psychology in general. It is a complete psuedo-science, at least, the Freudian, Jungian and streams stemming from them are. They are more like literary fantasy than anything else, as far as I can tell. YMMV


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 21st, 2015 at 9:31 PM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
Urgyen Dorje said:
So while I totally believe in gyalpo uprisings as I've witnessed some weird stuff first hand, I have always thought it pointless, as a Buddhist, to fuss too much about theistic systems given that deity is a projection.

Malcolm wrote:
Or, a deceiving entity like Brahma in the Kevaddha sutta that I referenced. I think the latter is more likely then the former.



Urgyen Dorje said:
Jung

Malcolm wrote:
I have never had any use for this quack.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 21st, 2015 at 9:26 PM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
Caodemarte said:
...metaphor (including "ground of being," "existence")  since finite beings are incapable of understanding infinite being.

Malcolm wrote:
Being is being. Finite or not, it is an extreme.

Karma Dorje said:
And yet, when we look at Kabbalah in any depth, "being" only reaches as far as Kether, with the three veils of ain, ain soph and ain soph aur serving as greater and greater scope of understanding of the non-arising of being.

Buddhist dharma is undoubtedly more explicit about emptiness and has a much larger collection of methods to demonstrate it, but it is not really true that it is the only place we find this understanding.

In any case, it is enough to say that Buddhadharma accomplishes what it sets out to do.

Malcolm wrote:
This kabbalistic doctrine is an attempt to provide an alternate explanation to Christian ex -nihilo creationism. It is in no sense an exercise in exploring the non-arising of being. In fact, ein, according to the Zohar, here just means that God is too subtle to describe, whereas ein sopf is God prior to his self-manifestion. This resembles nothing at all in Buddhadharma, and is wholly predicated on Plotinus's emanationism.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 21st, 2015 at 9:16 PM
Title: Re: Forbidden Archeology
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
That is, unless you somehow believe [against all evidence, archaeological and otherwise] that Tibet was empty of humans until it was "discovered" by China.

Indrajala said:
No, I'm just saying a self-identifying Tibetan nation doesn't seem to exist until at least the sixth century. People lived there, but whether they thought of themselves as having a common identity and being a unique nation, is questionable.

Malcolm wrote:
As I said, the core Tibetan identity is based on the four clans [ rus bzhi ]. These four clans rallied around a single dynastic family, from approximately the late 2nd century BCE. It is not clear when Tibetans began to call themselves Tibetans, but it was not early. This dynastic family in turn were vassals of the Zhang Zhung kings until the 7the century, when Srongtsam Gampo had their ruler, Ligmincha, assassinated.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 21st, 2015 at 9:33 AM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
Wayfarer said:
I thought, likewise, the teaching on 'the emptiness of emptiness', was that emptiness teachings are themselves only expedient means, and a remedy for clinging to things that 'the worldly take to be important'.

Malcolm wrote:
Umm, no, not according to Madhyamaka and Yogacara. According to Madhyamaka, the emptiness of emptiness is, strictly speaking, the emptiness of the emptiness of phenomena, meant to counter clinging to the idea that emptiness is itself an entity.

According to Yogacara, however, it is somewhat more complicated. But it is not as you have summarized it.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 21st, 2015 at 9:25 AM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
Caodemarte said:
...metaphor (including "ground of being," "existence")  since finite beings are incapable of understanding infinite being.

Malcolm wrote:
Being is being. Finite or not, it is an extreme.

Caodemarte said:
My larger point here is that before we all, including me, criticize the simplistic beliefs of others we first check to see if the problem is that we have a simplistic understanding of those beliefs. We often assume that we understand when we don't. I think we all agree that a good Buddhist POV would be to always check your assumptions.

Malcolm wrote:
All samsaric vehicles are either eternalist or annihilationist. There really is no third alternative.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 21st, 2015 at 2:37 AM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
Caodemarte said:
"We can have a thread about texts, and doctrine, and how it can be variously interpreted." This applies to other religions is only if you know what texts, and doctrine, and how it has been and is variously interpreted.  This requires some study of reputable sources.

Malcolm wrote:
Sure.

Caodemarte said:
Assuming that  Abrahamic religions, for example, believe there is magical being living in the sky  (as the Pope recently criticized the naive view of Christianity among Christians) demonstrates that one has not made that effort.

Malcolm wrote:
Obviously there are many people who subscribe to this belief, if the Pope had to criticize it. So how have the Catholic Theologians defined God then?

Caodemarte said:
The one absolutely and infinitely perfect spirit who is the Creator of all. In the definition of the First Vatican Council, fifteen internal attributes of God are affirmed, besides his role as Creator of the universe: "The holy, Catholic, apostolic Roman Church believes and professes that there is one true, living God, the Creator and Lord of heaven and earth. He is almighty, eternal, beyond measure, incomprehensible, and infinite in intellect, will and in every perfection. Since He is one unique spiritual substance, entirely simple and unchangeable, He must be declared really and essentially distinct from the world, perfectly happy in Himself and by his very nature, and inexpressibly exalted over all things that exist or can be conceived other than Himself" (Denzinger 3001).

Reflecting on the nature of God, theology has variously identified what may be called his metaphysical essence, i.e., what is God. It is commonly said to be his self-subsistence. God is Being Itself. In God essence and existence coincide. He is the Being who cannot not exist. God alone must be. All other beings exist only because of the will of God.

Malcolm wrote:
There are fifteen problems with this definition. So this is the definition of God, it is a nice tidy philosopher's definition and just as sterile. It is also perfectly Aristotelian in nature [as are similar Islamic definitions]:
[Et vita autem] And life also belongs to God; for the actuality of thought is life, and God is that actuality; and God’s self-dependent actuality is life most good and eternal. We say therefore that God is a living being, eternal, most good, so that life and duration continuous and eternal belong to God; for this is God.
Yes, the doctrine of the Rapture is a Scottish innovation.

Theologians like Tillich were pretty clear that God existed, this is why he uses the term "ground of being" to describe God. A term, sadly, that has been misappropriated by some translators of Dzogchen texts [without any reasoned basis at all].


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 21st, 2015 at 2:09 AM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
Johnny Dangerous said:
Kabbalah has doctrines specifically about the inability of the thinking human mind to comprehend ain-soph, no-thingness.

The difference is, it has this weird theistic underpinning that seems to butt up against that, and it also believes in something from nothing. In other ways though, it;s surprisingly non-theistic. Same with some of the Sufi literature I have read.

Malcolm wrote:
It might surprise you to learn that I have read quite a bit in Kabbala. But in the end, it is more neo-platonist than anything else.



Johnny Dangerous said:
There are a lot of shades of even 'exoteric monotheism' that aren't bible-thumpers or Jihadis, and seem quite reasonable, including in their ability to acknowledge these sorts of experiences. Granted, their acknowledgement wouldn't square with our view..but that is precisely the "tolerance" part, we don't need our views to agree with others to respect them.

Malcolm wrote:
A lot of Christians are "cultural" Christians. They don't believe Jesus is going to save them, they don't believe in heaven. In many respects they are like "Secular" Buddhists.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 21st, 2015 at 1:35 AM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
Johnny Dangerous said:
Since by definition, outside Dharma, there are no transcendent religions, I think the world is a place where there are a lot of deep forces of a nonhuman variety shaping human actions on many levels. This is pretty standard point of view for a Tibetan Dharma Practitioner.
I don't think this is the part anyone was objecting to. For my part, I share some of these beliefs, and think that some practitioners of monotheism are engaging in something that will, and does lead to something bad, and are spurred on by some conflict-gobbling big ugly. That said, I know plenty of other practitioners of those faiths who are very far from being in that category, despite sharing a common religion, who I do not think are engaged in anything like this at all. Additionally, when one looks at different parts of these religions, one does find practitioners who seem to be doing something meritorious. Maybe you could say they are practicing well in spite of the religion, but even so, they are.

Worldly, yeah, probably, but plenty not worthy of condemnation in the least. To me, that is tolerance..viewing them all with suspicion is not.

Malcolm wrote:
I never condemned anyone, though there was some pretty hysterical assertions that I was. Of course, I wasn't so, damn the torpedoes and full speed ahead.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 21st, 2015 at 1:33 AM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:


DGA said:
When you disagree with someone and it matters--I disagree with Boko Haram, for example--then address one's criticisms to the harmful actions, and leave the business of reflecting on the doctrinal basis for Boko Haram's (or ISIS's, or the Klan's, or whomever else's) horrible deeds to those who hold those views.

Malcolm wrote:
ISIS, Boko Haram, definitely under the influence of a provocation.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 21st, 2015 at 1:26 AM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
Johnny Dangerous said:
If you were making some other point than a general demonization of monotheists, it was lost on me. Can you explain what you actually meant?

Malcolm wrote:
Specifically, I was talking about animal sacrifice and its negative consequences. Secondly, I voiced my opinion that the Abrahamic God bears the attributes of what we would call in Tibetan Buddhism, a rgyal po, keeping in mind that in reality such entities are in fact formless pretas.



It is very clear in the OT and the Koran that this god demands blood sacrifices. So they are offered up.

We generally accept that the pantheon of Hindu devas are real, albeit worldly entities. For example, Shiva, often portrayed as a transcendent deva in Hindu sources, is a worldly protector in Buddhist sources.

I take Orishas seriously because I have relatives from Haiti, and their experience with Voudou practitioners, and because of my experience with the Sangoma I mentioned and my experienced in SA in general.

I take Japanese Kami seriously, because I have been in Japan.

I take the whole range of provocation illness [ gdon nad ] quite seriously because I work in Tibetan Medicine. Not only that, one of my main gurus was the chief exorcist/weather controller for the Tibetan Gvt.

So, I don't think that religions form around nonentities, apart from the Flying Spaghetti Monster:



Since by definition, outside Dharma, there are no transcendent religions, I think the world is a place where there are a lot of deep forces of a nonhuman variety shaping human actions on many levels. This is pretty standard point of view for a Tibetan Dharma Practitioner.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 21st, 2015 at 12:56 AM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
Johnny Dangerous said:
I would hope so, but apparently the answer is no, we cannot tolerate other religions and must view their practitioners in an exclusively negative light, even when we do not actually have a grasp of their full range of practices..  if i'm reading the discussion right from some quarters.

Malcolm wrote:
You are reading someone's gloss of my position. That is not my position. But people keep insisting it is so...


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 21st, 2015 at 12:43 AM
Title: Re: Forbidden Archeology
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
BTW, I now have a very good reason why the Chinese did not know anything about Tibetans prior to the Tang.

Indrajala said:
Or there were no self-identifying Tibetans in the Han dynasty.

I think you need to reevaluate your wishful ideas.

Malcolm wrote:
There were clans of people who spoke Tibetan dialects, who later adopted the name "Bod pa." These people referred to themselves as the The dMu,gDong, sGra, etc., different clans, but they were all related by a common culture, language, religion and fealty to Zhang Zhung, with however their own king.

That is, unless you somehow believe [against all evidence, archaeological and otherwise] that Tibet was empty of humans until it was "discovered" by China.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 21st, 2015 at 12:28 AM
Title: Re: Forbidden Archeology
Content:
Indrajala said:
[

There is also the fact that we live in age where materialist conventions are the norm and you must operate within that paradigm to be taken seriously.

Malcolm wrote:
What, to get a job? Maybe, maybe not.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 21st, 2015 at 12:27 AM
Title: Re: Forbidden Archeology
Content:


Malcolm wrote:
Ergo, whether you intend it to be or not, your methodology is rooted in the western tradition of logical positivism, it is therefore materialist, even if you are not in terms of your personal beliefs a materialist or a physicalist.

Indrajala said:
I accept that western materialism as a methodology produces valid knowledge. It has its flaws and limits, but it works quite well when attempting to explain the conventional world which we experience. It won't explain or account for most immaterial causal factors, but as a tool it does a good job in specific areas of investigation.

That being said, you don't use a screwdriver where you need a hammer. I'm quite comfortable with using different intellectual tools to address different issues.

There is also the fact that we live in age where materialist conventions are the norm and you must operate within that paradigm to be taken seriously. If I was writing in medieval India or China it would be different, but this is the early 21st century in the Anglosphere.
It is much the same when you used the term "evidence-based" approach to Buddhist studies, or any historical inquiry. How wide or narrow is the evidence? This is where bias comes in, yours, mine, everyones.
Sure, but I operate within the norms of the secular academy when working from an academic context. I have to use certain intellectual tools which are calibrated according to prevailing conventions and expectations. I personally tend to work from a perspective of philology, which you call myopic, and I am aware of its limitations which is why I try not to introduce too much speculation on my part. The outcome, hopefully, is a better perspective on historical realities and developments, which can answer some of the questions I proposed above.

There's also the fact I enjoy what I do and the way I do it. It propels me to read many texts in Chinese, Japanese and Sanskrit, which are transferable skills to non-academic endeavors.

Malcolm wrote:
BTW, I now have a very good reason why the Chinese did not know anything about Tibetans prior to the Tang.

Indrajala said:
Zhang Qian had been very lucky to escape twice from Xiongnu captivity, and he was not anxious to enter their territory again. On the basis of the bamboo and cloth he had seen in Bactria, he thought that there must be an alternate route to the west. If those southwestern Chinese goods had reached Bactria from India, there had to be a more direct route connecting India and China. He suggested to Wudi that he send expeditions to explore other ways to get to India that circumvented the Xiongnu. Wudi took his advice and did so, but without success. In order to get from Sichuan to India, the only possible land route was to cut through the mountainous regions of Yunnan, which was then outside the bounds of China. People living in that area saw no benefit to themselves from any encroachment of Han trade routes into their territory. They resisted or killed any intruders. As a result, dangerous though it might be, the steppe route remained the most viable thoroughfare to Central Asia and parts further west.

Malcolm wrote:
Liu, Xinru (2010-06-10). The Silk Road in World History (New Oxford World History) (Kindle Locations 215-220). Oxford University Press. Kindle Edition.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 20th, 2015 at 11:13 PM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
Urgyen Dorje said:
My apologies then.

I don't know you so it's not clear whether this is a "discussion" or a "lesson".

Malcolm wrote:
People are free to believe what they want. I have my specific point of view. It does not mean other people are wrong. They have their point of view also. It is possible for two people to have a disagreement over the same set of facts, and for both people to be right — at least that is my experience. Points of view are relative, and they change.
It's a conversation. But there are some, like our invertebrate friend, who invoke academic exceptionalism when it comes to discussing Western Religions on any level.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 20th, 2015 at 10:32 PM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
Urgyen Dorje said:
Malcolm...

If you look just at texts, I'd agree with you.  The Abrahamic texts are pretty grotesque for the most part.   My only point of departure is that there is an extra-textual aspect to all religion, and as Tibetan Buddhists we should be pretty aware of that as our texts are grotesque separated from the living tradition.

Malcolm wrote:
Sure, the anuttarayoga tantras can be seen as pretty gross and repellent. This is why they are supposed to be secret. But we don't do a very good job of that as a tradition, for example, Buddhadharma Quarterly this month has a picture of Vajrayogini on the cover drinking from a skull cup.

Urgyen Dorje said:
In this case you just make a choice to not examine the extra-textual dimensions of the Abrahamic tradition because your mind is made up on the texts.  That's a very academic approach.

Malcolm wrote:
Texts inform people's choices. For example, do you really think Israel would be as intense about eliminating Palestinians from Israel if they did not have a convenient narrative derived from their textual tradition? I don't. Would there even be an Israel at all unless this narrative existed to inform European guilt about permitting the holocaust? I don't think so.

Much has been said about mystics. Mystics and mysticism can be perverse, look at Himmler, etc.

I am convinced, seriously, that human beings do not act negatively the way they do without nonhuman provocations, especially when it comes to large scale events like the holocaust, the cultural revolution, the 1918 Influenza epidemic and so on. Human beings are basically decent, over all. But they can be twisted pretty easily.

Provocations do not just govern humans, they also govern strange diseases like SARS, HIV, MERS, etc., all of these things are governed by nonhuman beings such as mamos, tsen, nāgas, gyalpos, etc.


Urgyen Dorje said:
That said.  I don't believe you one bit.  I've seen you assert your version of Buddhist orthodoxy in many threads.  If one disagrees one's view and practice is at fault.  Period.  You've not said it in such clear terms, but that's the implication.

Malcolm wrote:
I see, so you are equipped with the hermeneutical manual you need to read my posts? You can read my hidden intent?

People are free to believe what they want. I have my specific point of view. It does not mean other people are wrong. They have their point of view also. It is possible for two people to have a disagreement over the same set of facts, and for both people to be right — at least that is my experience. Points of view are relative, and they change.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 20th, 2015 at 10:09 PM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
Urgyen Dorje said:
Why can't you accept the fact that there is a Christianity, Judaism, Islam, etc. that exists outside the texts?

Malcolm wrote:
When did I ever say there wasn't? I should have thought my story about my experience with Sangoma would have been enough to let you know that I make a distinction between people and whatever it is they think they believe.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 20th, 2015 at 10:08 PM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:


Urgyen Dorje said:
What's frustrating to me is that this whole argument against the Abrahamic tradition was based on approaches to their texts which Buddhists struggle against with academics.

Malcolm wrote:
This is not my approach.

Urgyen Dorje said:
The straight up gloss was that Abrahamic practitioners were all gyalpo worshipers, and thus responsible for a whole spectrum of problems in the world because of gyalpo provocations and uprisings.

Malcolm wrote:
I think there is plenty of indications in the Old and New Testament and so on to indicate that the God of Abraham, Moses, Jesus and Mohammed is a mundane worldly entity, capricious, jealous, often homicidal, and definitely biased —— whose whole relationship with his followers is based on a covenant predicated on the passover sacrifice.

Urgyen Dorje said:
It's an assertion that one is not a proper Buddhist unless one embraces a certain narrative about the Abrahamic tradition.

Malcolm wrote:
Again, you are indulging in projections. I never once stated you were not a "proper" Buddhist if you did not agree with me. You can have any narrative you like about Abrahamic religions. Hell, you can go to Church, Synagogue or Mosque for all I care. You can go hang about with Tibetan Gyalpo worshippers, please be my guest. Do pujas with them. The hilarious thing is that most faithful and loyal followers of HHDL will sooner go to Muslim festival of sacrifice than spend on minute with the Gyalpo folks.

You just vehemently object to my point of view. That's ok. I don't post things in order to get people to agree with me.

Urgyen Dorje said:
Say anything good about members of the Abrahamic path, and one is embracing gyalpo worship and everything comes along with that.

Malcolm wrote:
More projection. I never made such a statement. But carry on with your hyperbole.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 20th, 2015 at 9:48 PM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:


treehuggingoctopus said:
Only for those unwilling to investigate such things in the framework they belong to.

Malcolm wrote:
I am pretty well acquainted with the framework

treehuggingoctopus said:
I beg to differ.

EOT for me.

Malcolm wrote:
You underestimate my education, and don't seem to be able to accept I don't subscribe to the idea that we can excuse some tale of genocide on the basis that we are not equipped with the proper "hermeneutical framework" to understand this. This at best cultural relativism.

The fact is that these books, the OT, are not read solely by academicians. They are read mostly by ordinary people. Unlike Islam, which has a sophisticated tradition of jurisprudence, there is no such tradition for the OT in the West. Yes, the Talmud is such a text, but that is not read by your average Christian. Your average Christian will read this and take it face value.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 20th, 2015 at 9:42 PM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
Tsongkhapafan said:
Whatever goodness or value there is in the world is the result of Buddha's activity.

Malcolm wrote:
I don't think this point of view will go over very well with the Taliban.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 20th, 2015 at 9:38 PM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
Dan74 said:
This reminded me of an old talk by the late patriarch of the (Korean) Jogye Order, Seongcheol Sunim where he says that to compare the teachings of Christianity to Buddhism is like throwing egg at a boulder but in practice here in Korea, it is the other way around, meaning that Christians do a great deal with their faith and Buddhists so little.

To extend his simile, one can easily fry the egg and feed people, but in order to carve a beautiful Buddha out of the boulder, a great deal of work and skill are required. In the absence of such, the boulder just sits there and takes space.

It just comes across as so much unnecessary hubris lambasting other religions, whatever for? The Dharma makes us no better than the best camera lens would make me a world-class photographer. It's what we do with it that matters.

_/|\_

Malcolm wrote:
The point of the topic is "tolerance for other religions" in the context of the issue of animal sacrifice. See the OP.

Dan74 said:
Come on, Malcolm, we've moved past that, haven't we?

Malcolm wrote:
Not really. Look, you are the mod. If you don't like the topic, you can close it, delete it, etc. It is up to you. I won't be offended.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 20th, 2015 at 9:36 PM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:


treehuggingoctopus said:
Only for those unwilling to investigate such things in the framework they belong to.

Malcolm wrote:
I am pretty well acquainted with the framework, I just don't make excuses for stories about "divinely-inspired" tribal genocide and try diffuse them by claiming that there is some hermeneutic needed with which we are not acquainted in order to understand such tales.

It is like claiming that there is some deeper meaning to Buddha's watching the Śākyas being carried off into slavery. There is no deeper meaning — he watched his cousins being slaughtered and enslaved.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 20th, 2015 at 9:24 PM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
Urgyen Dorje said:
I have to red pill you on the fact that Christians dont necessarily embrace every aspect of their scriptures.  I know plenty of Christians who have never even read the Old Testament.  I know plenty of Christians who only work with the New Testament, and many who just work with the Synoptic gospels.  There are plenty and dont even work with the source texts and work with catechisms and other extracanonical texts.  Others dont even touch the textual tradition.

treehuggingoctopus said:
To even start analyzing such passages as the one Malcolm cited bona fide requires an extensive training in Biblical hermeneutics.

Malcolm wrote:
Not really. It is a pretty straight forward account of an exhortation to go butcher another tribe, and a subsequent rebuke for failing to follow orders precisely.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 20th, 2015 at 8:55 PM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
Dan74 said:
This reminded me of an old talk by the late patriarch of the (Korean) Jogye Order, Seongcheol Sunim where he says that to compare the teachings of Christianity to Buddhism is like throwing egg at a boulder but in practice here in Korea, it is the other way around, meaning that Christians do a great deal with their faith and Buddhists so little.

To extend his simile, one can easily fry the egg and feed people, but in order to carve a beautiful Buddha out of the boulder, a great deal of work and skill are required. In the absence of such, the boulder just sits there and takes space.

It just comes across as so much unnecessary hubris lambasting other religions, whatever for? The Dharma makes us no better than the best camera lens would make me a world-class photographer. It's what we do with it that matters.

_/|\_

Malcolm wrote:
The point of the topic is "tolerance for other religions" in the context of the issue of animal sacrifice. See the OP.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 20th, 2015 at 8:52 PM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:


treehuggingoctopus said:
c) belongs to a body of totally different cultural, historical, linguistic and conceptual contexts than the ones which make up the framework of Buddhadharma. To interpret and judge a concept coming from such a far removed milieu in Buddhist terms is to miss the point totally. Apples to oranges.

Malcolm wrote:
This is just an excuse. A creator deity is a creator deity. You can gussy it up in all the Hellenistic Philosophy you want, but at the end of the day, what you have in the Abrahamic tradition is a Henotheism modified by monotheism from the Persians [elevating their rather blood thirsty, genocidal tribal deity into a supreme principle], and philosophy from the Greeks, with a dash of the mystery cults thrown in for good measure.


treehuggingoctopus said:
*Btw, you do realize that the majority of monotheist theologians would see both options you gave as totally unacceptable? Nor would they argue that God exists in the way that a table can be said to exist.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, all thanks to Plato. They have a great debt to Plato.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 20th, 2015 at 8:46 PM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:


Urgyen Dorje said:
Buddhist textual tradition makes no mention of the Abrahamic traditions...

Malcolm wrote:
Actually, Kalacakra makes mention of the Abrahamic tradition, and the reference is not flattering.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 20th, 2015 at 8:40 PM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
MiphamFan said:
THO, Malcolm is just giving the Buddhist perspective. Sure the Abrahamics have all kinds of gradations among themselves, but none of them are supramundane from a Buddhist view.

If you have some kind of ecumenical PoV fine, but this is not supported by any Buddhist texts.

treehuggingoctopus said:
There is nothing in our scriptures that would establish it for a fact that what Abrahamics worship is an evil spirit.

Malcolm wrote:
I did not use the word evil, spirits, being mundane creatures, are nice to their followers and not so nice to their enemies, for example, 1 Samuel 15:
1 Samuel also said unto Saul, The LORD sent me to anoint thee to be king over his people, over Israel: now therefore hearken thou unto the voice of the words of the LORD.

2 Thus saith the LORD of hosts, I remember that which Amalek did to Israel, how he laid wait for him in the way, when he came up from Egypt.

3 Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.

4 And Saul gathered the people together, and numbered them in Telaim, two hundred thousand footmen, and ten thousand men of Judah.

5 And Saul came to a city of Amalek, and laid wait in the valley.

6 And Saul said unto the Kenites, Go, depart, get you down from among the Amalekites, lest I destroy you with them: for ye shewed kindness to all the children of Israel, when they came up out of Egypt. So the Kenites departed from among the Amalekites.

7 And Saul smote the Amalekites from Havilah until thou comest to Shur, that is over against Egypt.

8 And he took Agag the king of the Amalekites alive, and utterly destroyed all the people with the edge of the sword.

9 But Saul and the people spared Agag, and the best of the sheep, and of the oxen, and of the fatlings, and the lambs, and all that was good, and would not utterly destroy them: but every thing that was vile and refuse, that they destroyed utterly.

10 Then came the word of the LORD unto Samuel, saying,

11 It repenteth me that I have set up Saul to be king: for he is turned back from following me, and hath not performed my commandments. And it grieved Samuel; and he cried unto the LORD all night.

12 And when Samuel rose early to meet Saul in the morning, it was told Samuel, saying, Saul came to Carmel, and, behold, he set him up a place, and is gone about, and passed on, and gone down to Gilgal.

13 And Samuel came to Saul: and Saul said unto him, Blessed be thou of the LORD: I have performed the commandment of the LORD.

14 And Samuel said, What meaneth then this bleating of the sheep in mine ears, and the lowing of the oxen which I hear?

15 And Saul said, They have brought them from the Amalekites: for the people spared the best of the sheep and of the oxen, to sacrifice unto the LORD thy God; and the rest we have utterly destroyed.

16 Then Samuel said unto Saul, Stay, and I will tell thee what the LORD hath said to me this night. And he said unto him, Say on.

17 And Samuel said, When thou wast little in thine own sight, wast thou not made the head of the tribes of Israel, and the LORD anointed thee king over Israel?

18 And the LORD sent thee on a journey, and said, Go and utterly destroy the sinners the Amalekites, and fight against them until they be consumed.

19 Wherefore then didst thou not obey the voice of the LORD, but didst fly upon the spoil, and didst evil in the sight of the LORD?

20 And Saul said unto Samuel, Yea, I have obeyed the voice of the LORD, and have gone the way which the LORD sent me, and have brought Agag the king of Amalek, and have utterly destroyed the Amalekites.

21 But the people took of the spoil, sheep and oxen, the chief of the things which should have been utterly destroyed, to sacrifice unto the LORD thy God in Gilgal.

22 And Samuel said, Hath the LORD as great delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices, as in obeying the voice of the LORD? Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, and to hearken than the fat of rams.

23 For rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft, and stubbornness is as iniquity and idolatry. Because thou hast rejected the word of the LORD, he hath also rejected thee from being king.

24 And Saul said unto Samuel, I have sinned: for I have transgressed the commandment of the LORD, and thy words: because I feared the people, and obeyed their voice.

25 Now therefore, I pray thee, pardon my sin, and turn again with me, that I may worship the LORD.

26 And Samuel said unto Saul, I will not return with thee: for thou hast rejected the word of the LORD, and the LORD hath rejected thee from being king over Israel.

27 And as Samuel turned about to go away, he laid hold upon the skirt of his mantle, and it rent.

28 And Samuel said unto him, The LORD hath rent the kingdom of Israel from thee this day, and hath given it to a neighbour of thine, that is better than thou.

29 And also the Strength of Israel will not lie nor repent: for he is not a man, that he should repent.

30 Then he said, I have sinned: yet honour me now, I pray thee, before the elders of my people, and before Israel, and turn again with me, that I may worship the LORD thy God.

31 So Samuel turned again after Saul; and Saul worshipped the LORD.

32 Then said Samuel, Bring ye hither to me Agag the king of the Amalekites. And Agag came unto him delicately. And Agag said, Surely the bitterness of death is past.

33 And Samuel said, As thy sword hath made women childless, so shall thy mother be childless among women. And Samuel hewed Agag in pieces before the LORD in Gilgal.

34 Then Samuel went to Ramah; and Saul went up to his house to Gibeah of Saul.

35 And Samuel came no more to see Saul until the day of his death: nevertheless Samuel mourned for Saul: and the LORD repented that he had made Saul king over Israel.
So here we have a channeler [prophet], who shows up at Saul's door, and informs him that the LORD has told him to annihilate another tribe. Samuel castigates Saul for taking plunder, rather than following the scorched earth policy the LORD has ordained. Then Samuel, just to make a point, slays Agag, a duty in which Saul has failed. And apparently, the LORD regretted his decision to make Saul the king of the Israelites.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 20th, 2015 at 7:43 PM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
Urgyen Dorje said:
I'm going to drop a pro tip on ya here:

It's one thing to say that Buddhism is the only path that leads from samsara.... and asserting that the Abrahamic religions all worship a demon Gyalpo.

It's subtle.  Just try to catch it if you can.

This back pedaling is BS.  That Malcolm "just said that these were samsaric" is nonsense.


Malcolm wrote:
The God of Abraham, Moses, Jesus and Mohammed

a) Does not exist

b) Is a mundane entity [i.e. does not exist in the way the adherents of the Abrahamic religions imagine]

There is no third choice.

Given that Judaism, Islam and Christianity are a revealed religions, [through the angel Gabriel no less, in the case if Islam], I am inclined towards b.

In Buddhadharma, we have always been comfortable with the idea that a mundane entity deceives others into believe they are the creator of the universe and so. For example:
"So the monk approached the Great Brahma and, on arrival, said, 'Friend, where do these four great elements — the earth property, the liquid property, the fire property, and the wind property — cease without remainder?'

"When this was said, the Great Brahma said to the monk, 'I, monk, am Brahma, the Great Brahma, the Conqueror, the Unconquered, the All-Seeing, All-Powerful, the Sovereign Lord, the Maker, Creator, Chief, Appointer and Ruler, Father of All That Have Been and Shall Be.'

A second time, the monk said to the Great Brahma, 'Friend, I didn't ask you if you were Brahma, the Great Brahma, the Conqueror, the Unconquered, the All-Seeing, All-Powerful, the Sovereign Lord, the Maker, Creator, Chief, Appointer and Ruler, Father of All That Have Been and Shall Be. I asked you where these four great elements — the earth property, the liquid property, the fire property, and the wind property — cease without remainder.'

"A second time, the Great Brahma said to the monk, 'I, monk, am Brahma, the Great Brahma, the Conqueror, the Unconquered, the All-Seeing, All-Powerful, the Sovereign Lord, the Maker, Creator, Chief, Appointer and Ruler, Father of All That Have Been and Shall Be.'

"A third time, the monk said to the Great Brahma, 'Friend, I didn't ask you if you were Brahma, the Great Brahma, the Conqueror, the Unconquered, the All-Seeing, All-Powerful, the Sovereign Lord, the Maker, Creator, Chief, Appointer and Ruler, Father of All That Have Been and Shall Be. I asked you where these four great elements — the earth property, the liquid property, the fire property, and the wind property — cease without remainder.'

"Then the Great Brahma, taking the monk by the arm and leading him off to one side, said to him, 'These gods of the retinue of Brahma believe, "There is nothing that the Great Brahma does not know. There is nothing that the Great Brahma does not see. There is nothing of which the Great Brahma is unaware. There is nothing that the Great Brahma has not realized." That is why I did not say in their presence that I, too, don't know where the four great elements... cease without remainder. So you have acted wrongly, acted incorrectly, in bypassing the Blessed One in search of an answer to this question elsewhere. Go right back to the Blessed One and, on arrival, ask him this question. However he answers it, you should take it to heart.'
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/dn/dn.11.0.than.html


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 20th, 2015 at 9:51 AM
Title: Re: 'What are you saying'?
Content:
Wayfarer said:
A Zen story about the importance of holy books.
----------------

The Zen master Mu-nan had only one successor. His name was Shoju. After Shoju had completed his study of Zen, Mu-nan called him into his room. “I am getting old,” he said, “and as far as I know, Shoju, you are the only one who will carry on this teaching. Here is a book. It has been passed down from master to master for seven generations. I also have added many points according to my understanding. The book is very valuable, and I am giving it to you to represent your successorship.”

“If the book is such an important thing, you had better keep it,” Shoju replied. “I received your Zen without writing and am satisfied with it as it is.”

“I know that,” said Mu-nan. “Even so, this work has been carried from master to master for seven generations, so you may keep it as a symbol of having received the teaching. Here.”

The two happened to be talking before a brazier. The instant Shoju felt the book in his hands he thrust it into the flaming coals. He had no lust for possessions.

Mu-nan, who never had been angry before, yelled: “What are you doing!”

Shoju shouted back: “What are you saying!”



Malcolm wrote:
What an idiot.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 20th, 2015 at 9:49 AM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:


Johnny Dangerous said:
I would venture to say yes..but I also don't think everyone who is a practicing Muslim has the same set of beliefs at all, so it is not possible to say what  "Muslims" as a whole believe or are doing, and unless you are now omniscient, you don't know that either.

Malcolm wrote:
The five pillars of Islam are pretty universal for Muslims.


Johnny Dangerous said:
On the larger subject, it looks like you have backed yourself into a corner with your earlier words and now are getting defensive...

Malcolm wrote:
I didn't back myself into any corner at all. I stand by what I said earlier.

Johnny Dangerous said:
the fact that this is a Buddhist forum in no way gives you the right to determine the content or direction of a talk like this, nor to toss your accusations of 'non Buddhistness" out there simply because you are catching flack, IMO that's bad form.

Malcolm wrote:
Really, did I actually say that someone was being "Non-Buddhist"? No. Flack? This is nothing. Try E-Sangha, that was flack.

Johnny Dangerous said:
please let me know so I can vacate my membership.
Up to you, I respect and you and like having you around, but times like this you get quite defensive when being put on the spot about controversial positions and freak out when others don't agree.

Malcolm wrote:
This is not me on the spot. This is me enjoying a lively discussion.

Johnny Dangerous said:
Perhaps it's for YOU to examine you membership if that's the case, unless you think your status in the Tibetan Buddhist community should confer some special right of not being criticized.

Malcolm wrote:
Oh please —  I am the single MOST CRITICIZED DHARMA PERSON ON THE WEB!!! This is nothing.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 20th, 2015 at 9:36 AM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
Dan74 said:
Palliative? Is virtue palliative? Are other paths entirely lacking in wisdom? I don't think it is me who is misunderstanding or propagating PC bullshit, rather it is you who once again is stuck defending an unnecessarily extreme position.

Malcolm wrote:
Virtue does not lead to liberation. Nor does compassion. So yes, without correct view, these things, even wisdom, are palliatives, not cures.


Johnny Dangerous said:
I agree with this, but I don't understand how it's relevant to the earlier statements about all Abrahamic practitioners being reducible to gyalpo worshipers. How did that shift?  Even palliatives can be treated with some degree of respect, without needing to be confused with liberating paths.

Malcolm wrote:
Are there are any Muslims here? Please stand up if you are Muslim.

The last I checked this was a board that was devoted to Buddhadharma and exploring issues in Buddhadharma. If this has changed, please let me know so I can vacate my membership.

I think Allah is a Gyalpo [translation: mundane, impermanent, formless samsaric entity], based on my understanding of how such entities are described in Dharma texts. Do you agree or do you disagree?

If you agree, why? If you disagree, why?

This is my point of view. It is really fine with me if you have a different point of view. But what I experience here is a lot of people trying to condition others into some really bland "everyone is groovy" perspective [unless of course, it concerns America, the Great Satan].


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 20th, 2015 at 9:34 AM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
Dan74 said:
Palliative? Is virtue palliative? Are other paths entirely lacking in wisdom? I don't think it is me who is misunderstanding or propagating PC bullshit, rather it is you who once again is stuck defending an unnecessarily extreme position.

Malcolm wrote:
Virtue does not lead to liberation. Nor does compassion. So yes, without correct view, these things, even wisdom, are palliatives, not cures.

Dan74 said:
They are not sufficient for liberation but they lead towards it rather than away from it.

Malcolm wrote:
Not necessarily. This is why samsara is likened to a pot of boiling water. Bubbles reach the top, but as soon as they do, they are sucked down again into the roiling water.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 20th, 2015 at 9:33 AM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:


Dan74 said:
And if we say that it is only palliative, does palliative not have value? Is it not likely to lead to better rebirths than paths lacking in virtue, the 'non-palliative' ones?

Malcolm wrote:
The practice of virtue leads to higher rebirths, indeed. But higher rebirths are still in samsara. When one's merit is exhausted in heaven, to hell one will inexorably fall.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 20th, 2015 at 9:29 AM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
Dan74 said:
Palliative? Is virtue palliative? Are other paths entirely lacking in wisdom? I don't think it is me who is misunderstanding or propagating PC bullshit, rather it is you who once again is stuck defending an unnecessarily extreme position.

Malcolm wrote:
Virtue does not lead to liberation. Nor does compassion. So yes, without correct view, these things, even wisdom, are palliatives, not cures.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 20th, 2015 at 9:27 AM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
Urgyen Dorje said:
Nonsense.  You were quite clear in indicating that the entire Abrahamic path amounted to gyalpo worship and that gyalpo worship was the cause of nothing but a spectrum of spiritual faults.  If you had said what you just said days ago, none of us would be calling you out.


Malcolm wrote:
Even my Sangoma friends can cultivate the four Brahmaviharas and the ten virtues, to a point [the killing thing is a bit of an issue], but their practice causes all kinds of problems for themselves and for others.

And it is true that, in my opinion, the massive amounts of yearly ritual slaughter in Islam causes very big problems for Islamic regions and indeed for the rest of the world. The fact that there is a tiny minority of dissenting vegetarian Muslims amounts to very little in the face of the 3.5 billion spent on animals in Pakistan last year, for example, for the festival of sacrifice.

And the entire Abhrahamic path is worldly, samsaric, not conducive to liberation. Even Buddha would have said so.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 20th, 2015 at 9:23 AM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
Dan74 said:
I was saying nothing of the sort. I was asking how you can be sure that a person's nonBuddhist practice is not aiding liberation and how can you know that another persons Buddhist practice is. How can you really know what is best for one, given their karma, let alone what's actually going them good and what is a waste of their human birth?

Maybe better expressed by HH the Dalai Lama:
Dalai Lama: I always say that people should not rush to change religions. There is real value in finding the spiritual resources you need in your home religion. Even secular humanism has great spiritual resources; it is almost like a religion to me. All religions try to benefit people, with the same basic message of the need for love and compassion, for justice and honesty, for contentment. So merely changing formal religious affiliations will often not help much.

Malcolm wrote:
Right, as I said, you really do not understand what he is saying here. He is not talking about the liberative value of this and that path, he is talking about the palliative value of this and that path.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 20th, 2015 at 9:21 AM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
Urgyen Dorje said:
This is what I have been calling you out on, as I know plenty of Buddhists who have turned their pressure human births and their streams of blessings into a cause to become miserable human beings, and I know plenty of these gyalpo worshippers who are outstanding people.

Malcolm wrote:
Still, the former have precious human births, and the rest do not. You know, it is part of the teaching on the eight freedoms and ten endowments.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 20th, 2015 at 9:16 AM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
Wayfarer said:
Sectarianism is one of the reasons I had stopped posting at this forum.

Malcolm wrote:
I guess you don't like very much what the Buddha said, repeated in many suttas:
"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: Thursday, August 20th, 2015 at 9:11 AM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
Urgyen Dorje said:
Don't back pedal.  You've made it very clear that practitioners in the Abrahamic tradition, as a whole, are... incapable of cultivating spiritual qualities.

Malcolm wrote:
I never said this, this is really your projection.

Anyone can cultivate the ten virtues. This is why it, along with the four bhramaviharas, is called the vehicle of devas and humans. But this is still a worldly path, not a transcendent one. Though honestly, these are not really spiritual qualities [what are those BTW?}, just basic human decency.

Everyone is capable of that, even American Imperialists.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 20th, 2015 at 9:10 AM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:


Dan74 said:
HH the Dalai Lama was saying the same thing, IMO, when he discouraged people from changing religions.

Malcolm wrote:
You don't understand why HHDL was discouraging people from changing religions. It is not because he thinks that being a Christian is a liberative path. It is because Buddhadharma is non-evangelical.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 20th, 2015 at 9:09 AM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:


Dan74 said:
It just sounds like you didn't understand what I was saying, Malcolm. There was nothing PC about it.

Malcolm wrote:
I understood perfectly well. Being born in a country where there is no Buddhadharma, or being born without interest in Buddhadharma means that one does not have a precious human birth. Such people are objects of compassion because who knows when they will be free from samsara.

But don't try and snow me with this idea that their karma requires them to be born outside of Buddhadharma in order that they be liberated. This is really nonsensical.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 20th, 2015 at 9:04 AM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
Urgyen Dorje said:
and come up with that they are gyalpo worshippers and have no qualities.

Malcolm wrote:
I never said that, this is your projection. Everyone has the same state. Even the most pathetic hell being has the same qualities as Samantabhadra.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 20th, 2015 at 8:59 AM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
The late Brother Wayne Teasdale once warned a friend of mine, a nephew of Thomas Keating, that I was not a spiritual person. I am quite sure he was right, I don't have much use for spirituality.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wayne_Teasdale




Wayfarer said:
I think a broad distinction can be drawn between 'exclusive' and 'inclusive' attitudes towards this question. And I think it's especially important in the context of the 'global village' that we now inhabit that we understand it accordingly.

I have sympathy with the idea of 'perennial philosophy' - that there is a broad current or stream of wisdom which finds expression in different traditions and different times and places throughout history. But I have noticed that this view gets pretty short shrift on Dharma Wheel. That's fair enough, it is a forum that is dedicated to Buddhist dharma, and it's certainly not a place to proselytize other religions (as it says in the ToS). On the other hand the kind of attitude, that there is only one 'true way', or even that there is only one type of view within Buddhism itself, which is the 'one true way', , and the deprecation of other faiths, is a mirror-image of what you would read on a Christian forum about Buddhism. 'Our way is better than their's', is what they would be saying there. And so on.

I went to a Catholic funeral for a respected family friend who was a devout Catholic some years back. I find that through my Buddhist practice I actually have a much better and more sympathetic insight for the spiritual meaning of the Catholic liturgy and ritual and I also sympathize with a good many Catholic writers and teachers. I don't feel I need to join up; I don't think that 'converting' to their religion is necessary. But I can feel the spirituality of that faith and admire it, without having to either embrace it or push it away.

None of that rationalises animal sacrifice, by the way. I think that ought to be opposed on all counts, but that doesn't apply to Christianity.

Actually I have been reading a bit of Thich Nath Hahn's 'Living Buddha Living Christ' and finding it very moving. I've been read a Franciscan monastic called Father Richard Rohr. I don't think he's worlds apart from the Buddhist attitude.

But the world is global village nowadays, we have to accept a plurality of views - it doesn't mean going along with every one of them, or agreeing with everyone, but I am not very fond of the 'my way or the highway' attitude either.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 20th, 2015 at 8:55 AM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
The point is not to castigate people who follow those views, the point is to understand that those views exist and that they are not conducive to liberation.

Dan74 said:
How can we be sure that given that person's karma, them earnestly following their religion isn't in fact the best thing they could do in order to be liberated? How can we be sure that given another persons karma, the Dharma is not just going to be misinterpreted and they will not be led astray only to be reborn to practice the first person's religion until many lifetimes later they are ready to really practice the Dharma?

Malcolm wrote:
Sorry, this is some PC bullshit, excuse me for being blunt.

Someone whose karma is to be born outside of Buddhadharma, meaning that they will not meet it, does not have a precious human birth. It does not matter how nice they are, how kind they are, how compassionate they are, how spiritual they are — they do not have a precious human birth.

For them, there is no guarantee of where they will find themselves in the next world.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 20th, 2015 at 8:49 AM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
DGA said:
.

Nagasaki really was a civilian target.  In fairness, it wasn't the first choice for the Fat Man bomb; the weather was too poor over Kokura that day.  A worthy meditation...

http://www.newyorker.com/tech/elements/nagasaki-the-last-bomb

Malcolm wrote:
it is also nice to present all facts:
The day after Nagasaki, Truman issued his first affirmative command regarding the bomb: no more strikes without his express authorization. He never issued the order to drop the bombs, but he did issue the order to stop dropping them.
http://www.newyorker.com/tech/elements/nagasaki-the-last-bomb

Folly, yes. Terrorism as an official policy of the US Gvt.? No.


DGA said:
1. Malcolm's position is that the deities propitiated by practitioners of Islam, Santeria, some traditional African and Indian religions, &c are worldly spirits:  they are real, and classified as gyalpo.

Malcolm wrote:
Not necessarily gyalpos, can be klu bdud, such as one entity I encountered in South Africa through a young Sangoma couple I met there through my host [who posts here on Dharmawheel].

Really super lovely people, you would never meet any one sweeter.

But they worship this pretty bloody klu bdud entity, very ferocious. Did they kill some chickens in the course of our meeting. Yes. Did they feed those chickens to the river to satisfy this spirit? Yes. Did we try to create a positive connection with the Dharma for everyone there? Yes. Did we succeed? I hope so.

So do they, as Sangoma, regularly sacrifice cows, goats, etc.? Yes. It is all part of their tradition, it is how they do things there. It is, in my opinion, one of the things that makes Africa so screwed up. Not because the people are bad, evil and so on, but because the practice of sacrificing animals feeds very powerful worldly spirits through life force and intention, and those spirits are angry, jealous, competitive, etc.

To their credit, the Sangoma couple were super interested in learning Song of the Vajra. I think eventually they got a hold of a CD. I don't know anything more than that. I hope someday we here something like a Sounds of Soweto version — that would be awesome.

We were the first white people they ever met who took them seriously as people. They were completely thrilled to host us, and we took everything in stride. I really liked them. They are fantastic people.

A footnote, when it came time for them to sacrifice the chickens, the lead Sangoma, dressed in his finest, tried to show me respect by offering to have me kill the first chicken. I politely refused, saying, this is not part of my tradition. He did not mind, and dispatched those chickens efficiently, tossing them into the river. They were a little sad we could not hang around and cook them and eat them, that is why they tossed the chickens in the river. Some people might say, "How horrible! How come you did not try to save the chickens?" Those chickens were destined to die, if not that day, the next, or the next. Nothing we could do would have saved them.

So you folks have the wrong idea about my point of view. I have seen first hand experience with these kinds of traditions. I don't judge the people who engage in them, I judge the practices themselves.

For example, when I first met ChNN in 1992, he was making fun of people who want to become Shamans, because in reality, to become a Real Shaman™, you have to sacrifice some animals as part of the initiation [in this case, three sheep], based on his experience in Mongolia, visiting Real Shaman™. He was pointing out that if you want to become a shaman, this is what you have to do, and that this contradicted the principles of Dzogchen teachings.

DGA said:
He sees hypocrisy in those Buddhists who denounce gyalpo worship among some other Buddhists, but tend not to do so with regard to those who are, from his perspective, gyalpo worshippers--Muslims particularly but not exclusively.

Malcolm wrote:
If you are going to criticize Shugden people for the reasons HH Dalai Lama gives, you should be consistent and extend that criticism universally. You should not castigate them for mistaking a worldly entity for a Buddha, but in the next breath, defend worldly religions.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 20th, 2015 at 8:20 AM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
Urgyen Dorje said:
This is something my own Tibetan Buddhist teachers have articulated as well.  While they would not suggest that Abrahamic practitioners were on dharma paths, they have also said not to disparage them.  As one of my teachers said, and this is a quote, "some of them are on a path close to yours, closer than you know."   This may sound strange, but the term for "buddhist", nangpa, simply means "insider", one directed towards inner process, inner spirituality, as opposed to outer forms-- such as worshipping gods and the like.  We're not the only one's turned inwards.  We may not be turned to the same place, and thus not all on dharma paths, but others are turned inwards as well.

Malcolm wrote:
Pointing out that the deities of other religions are samsaric is not disparaging them. It is stating simply that those paths do not lead to nirvana [cessation of afflictions]. They have a different goal in mind, if they even have a goal [there are plenty of religious expressions, such as Purva Mimamsa, that do not even believe in the concept of liberation, mukti.]

People who are not fortunate, those who have not met the teachings, are objects of compassion. This does not prevent us, however, from analyzing and understanding their mistakes and how the views they espouse shroud them in darkness.

For example, the Rig pa rang shar tantra runs through 60 incorrect views. The Brahmajala sutta runs through a different set of 62 incorrect views.

The point is not to castigate people who follow those views, the point is to understand that those views exist and that they are not conducive to liberation.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 20th, 2015 at 4:38 AM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
Urgyen Dorje said:
Malcolm...

Thanks for the clarifications of your points.  It's not clear what people's intentions are sometimes in the "fog of the internet forum", especially when people are debating multiple points asynchronously.

Points where I agree with you...

I would agree that there is much about the Abrahamic religions that would lead to the provocation of gyalpos, such as the murder of Christ and Ali ibn Abi Talib and various martyred saints.  I would agree that these gyalpo uprisings lead to any number of problems for these cultural areas over time.  History seems to illustrate that.  And seeing ChNNR as one of my own teachers, though by webcast only, I respect thoughts on relating gyalpo uprisings to problems in the middle east.   I would agree that it is problematic that we're not engaged in practices to pacify these influences.   I would also agree that any number of practices in the Abrahamic traditions would lead to various disturbances, such as animal sacrifices.  I would agree that these are scourges to our world and that there is no way Buddhists should engage in them, encourage them, or defend them.  And I would agree that none of these Abrahamic religions are dharma paths, and should not be defended as such as by Buddhists.

Points where I disagree with you...

While I would disagree that none of these Abrahamic religions are dharma paths, I do not accept that they are necessarily "worldly religions".  As I have been taught uniformly by my teachers, the non-Buddhist paths include "non-worldly" and "worldly" paths. The "worldly paths" are those that are not based on love and compassion for beings, which rationalize harming beings as virtue, and which rejoice in negative qualities.  I would assert that the Abrahamic religions have produced both worldly and non-worldly non-dharma paths. Note: I am not sure that you and I are using the terms "worldly" and "non-worldly" the same way.  You seem to use it in the context of any path that is non-Buddhist.  For a lack of other terms, I am following my teachers (or their translators rather) and using the terms as I have indicated here.

I would disagree that we can make broad generalizations about the theology and worldview of the Abrahamic traditions.  Given the geographical and historical context of the Abrahamic religions, there are too many spiritual and intellectual influences, too many local ideosyncratic expressions, and too many radical changes in theory and practice to summarize them as you have.  I would agree that there are people in the Abrahamic tradition who are certainly propitiating a gyalpo as they slit animals throats or kill and/or mutilate people.  I disagree that can be generalized.  Several examples such as Kabbalah, Druze, Sufism, etc. can be made, and while we can argue that these traditions actually have their roots in Buddhism or Neoplatonism-- these people certainly identify as being part of the Abrahamic tradition. There are people who embrace a "theology" that is hardly theological at all.  In those cases deity is more an ethical impulse than something of a master or lord.

So...

To reiterate my own position... I don't consider people who embrace a "worldly path" (as I've defined above) as practitioners of any religion.  So when I "defend Islam" what I'm defending are people who are on a non-worldly path.  I defend and support anyone on a non-worldly path.  I don't think there's anything in the dharma that prohibits associating with and supporting people on positive non-worldly non-Buddhist paths-- though there are certainly prohibitions against associating with and supporting those who follow worldly paths.

I guess the question is how do you know?  That is the question, and I don't think it's answered by gross generalizations, but by experience.  We know by people's qualities and actions.  It's madness to me to attempt to equate the spirituality of a snake handling church pastor in the Appalachians with Julian of Norwich, just as it is to equate a Talibani ordering a woman stoned with Ra'abia.

Yes.  That narrows the pool down.  But I'd much rather associate with Christian contemplatives and Sufis who have really amazing qualities that really unkind and self-absorbed Buddhists and similarly narcissistic materialists.

Malcolm wrote:
It is very simple.

There are basically two paths: samsaric and nirvanic.

Samsaric paths have a number different kinds of paths: eternalist, annihilationist, incorrect conduct [like impaling yourself with weapons], wrong paths and so on.

Nirvanic paths refer to the nine yānas beginning with the śravakayāna.

When I say worldly, I mean samsaric.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 20th, 2015 at 4:09 AM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
Karma Dorje said:
Thanks Malcolm, but I can parse my own posts. I did not label the US government a "terrorist organization". I said it has committed terrorist acts with examples which satisfy the commonly accepted definition of terrorism:
Violent acts (or the threat of violent acts) intended to create fear (terror), perpetrated for an economic, religious, political, or ideological goal, and which deliberately target or disregard the safety of non-combatants (e.g., neutral military personnel or civilians).

Malcolm wrote:
Then the US Government military actions in general do not correspond with this. The whole point of US Military policy since Vietnam has been to avoid as much as possible harming noncombatants. Successfully? No. But US Military has very strict rules of engagement, and the consequences of breaking them as landed many soldiers in jail for murder.

Are those rules always effective? Hell no, just look at that video of those poor journalists who were shot in Iraq, the video that landed Manning in jail. Do people get hurt unnecessarily in war? Always. War is hell and should always be avoided. But that is not the world we are living in.

As for Dresden, it was a legitimate target. The Dresden bombing as to serve two main purposes: to eliminate the very many factories in that city supporting the German war effort, including a chemical weapons plant, and to show the Russians the full power of the Allied forces.

The problem with Dresden is that they bombed the city center, rather than the suburbs [more than half of the bombers sent bombed other cities by mistake, including Prague], where most of the targeted factories were located. A journalist labelled it a terror bombing, and then the political spin began...

A tragedy, yes, a deliberate act of terror on the part of the Allies? No.

Hiroshima and Nagasaki, again tragic, but not terrorism. Folly, yes. Terrorism, no.

Karma Dorje said:
It's not hyperbolic to those of us who weren't indoctrinated by American exceptionalism from kindergarten on up. It's simply factual.

Malcolm wrote:
[/quote]

I am not someone who is convinced of the exceptionalism of any nation, including Tibet. But hyperbole is hyperbole and it is easily recognized.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 20th, 2015 at 3:19 AM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
Karma Dorje said:
I said Muslim terrorists are small-time compared to professionals like American imperialists...

Malcolm wrote:
Say what you like about Americans, but we are not terrorists.

We do not [presently] use terror on civilian populations as a matter of course or policy.

Our military forces may be large and clumsy, our military policies often idiotic and short sighted, our military methods reprehensible [drones, cluster bombs, etc.], but we are not terrorists. We do not deliberately target civilians in order to instill fear.

DGA said:
OK, couple of points here.

The KKK is/was a terrorist organization.  So was Posse Comitatus.  So were the thugs who killed Mulugeta Seraw on the streets of my hometown:  "East Side White Pride."  There's a longstanding tradition of terrorism in the US--terrorism specifically against blacks and Native Americans, but not exclusively.  Lynchings are terrorist acts, and were at one time a regular spectacle across much of the country (and not only in the South...).  So while it's true that the federal government does not endorse or mobilize terrorism against any US population, it's still in the repertoire, so to speak.  And that's not even counting terrorists of the Tim McVeigh variety.

Some Americans now are sympathetic to acts of terror against other Americans.  You can take my word for it, or you can go spend a minute at Stormfront, if you can last that long before puking on your machine.  Some Americans act on those sympathies and impulses.  I present Dylann Roof, terrorist, as an example here.

I don't bring this up because I'm ashamed of American history or culture.  I really like living here; there's a lot to love about the United States.  There's also a lot to be repelled by and to seek to change and heal.  That's the side I prefer to take.  But to do that, it's important to face the ugly truth and to view the present moment with a gimlet eye from time to time.  Jameson was right:  "history is what hurts"  it's another word for "samsara"

Malcolm wrote:
Of course there are right wing terrorists in the US, there are also left wing terrorists, and so on.

But what does that have to do with labeling the US Gvt. a terrorist organization? It is nothing of the kind. Geoff labeled the US Gvt. a terrorist organization. It is just political hyperbole and cannot be taken seriously.

Meanwhile, the world sits on its ass as another real terrorist organization sets its sights on Turkey.

Anyway, this thread has spun way off topic, from "Tolerance of other religions" to "Demonizing America as the Great Satan."


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 20th, 2015 at 3:18 AM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
DGA said:
PS KD is correct about Nagasaki and Dresden.  There are other examples; the historian Howard Zinn, among others, have done fine work teasing them out, which makes them first-rate patriots in my book.

Malcolm wrote:
Howard Zinn is a great author. But he certainly does not engage in the kind of hyperbole that Geoff does.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 20th, 2015 at 3:15 AM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:


Karma Dorje said:
I don't have the same Pavlovian reaction to the word "terrorist" that you have south of the 49th parallel. What else do you call the utter destruction of Dresden, Nagasaki and Hiroshima?

Malcolm wrote:
All war is hell. That does not make all war terrorism.

Karma Dorje said:
Or what was done to Vietnam during the war from the bombing of Hanoi to the tons of napalm and agent orange dumped on the civilian population?

Malcolm wrote:
Misguided, bad tactics, but no terrorism.

Karma Dorje said:
Or support for Israel's genocidal policy wrt the Palestinians with billions of dollars of military aid and Security Council vetos?

Malcolm wrote:
The Israelis and the Palestinians are involved in a mutual terror war. We support the Israeli's mainly out of guilt, as well as a very strong Jewish lobby.

Karma Dorje said:
How about the deaths of over 100,000 Iraqis in the past decade?

Malcolm wrote:
Terrible, but not a result of a policy of deliberate terrorism.

Karma Dorje said:
The constant drone attacks in Yemen and Pakistan...

Malcolm wrote:
Drone attacks on proven terrorists...again, probably not the best use of our resources...

Karma Dorje said:
...the list goes on and on. The number of violent deaths as a result of either direct US military action or their proxies dwarf those from so-called terrorism.

Malcolm wrote:
Terrorism has a larger effect because it is violence meant to provoke, well, terror. The US is not used to dealing with terrorists. Europeans are better at it than we are.

Karma Dorje said:
What on earth is "shock and awe" but the very definition of terrifying the population?

Malcolm wrote:
Shock and awe was aimed at the regime.

Karma Dorje said:
It's incomprehensible to me that you think it matters whether the label "terrorist" is applied.

Malcolm wrote:
It matters because intent matters.

Karma Dorje said:
The US has caused tremendous harm on a vast scale, not even counting the cruelty in food production. It's no wonder there is such widespread drought currently. These actions of theirs clearly cut the prosperity of the nation.


Malcolm wrote:
When you compare the US with the big three dictators we were talking about, in reality, the US is pretty minor, at least in the 20th century. From a secular POV, the second Gulf War happened largely because the presidency was hijacked by the same group of folks that presented a plan to Clinton in the late 1990's to invade Iraq [Wolfson, etc.].


Karma Dorje said:
However, when we speak of it at the level of a country it is hard for me to see it as anything but a venal and belligerent rogue nation that can't even provide a modicum of food, housing and healthcare to its most vulnerable citizens.

Malcolm wrote:
That very much depends on what state you live in. If you live in a red state, you are pretty much screwed. If you live in a blue state you will get by just fine. Anyway, yes, the US is the modern Rome, and like Rome, it is constantly being derided by its detractors. No doubt eventually the Visigoths with be at the gate, but who knows when and how.


Karma Dorje said:
That's why you will probably get...

Malcolm wrote:
There is zero chance that Trump will win.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 20th, 2015 at 12:54 AM
Title: Re: RuShi ?
Content:


heart said:
What I say might sound strange but only if you think it is such fantastic thing to be a Dzogchen master. But, is it really such a fantastic thing? Very qualified disciples might prefer to attain a rainbow body rather than listen to students and others endless doubts and problems.

Malcolm wrote:
Recently, ChNN said that being over focused on attaining rainbow body was a bit egoistic.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 20th, 2015 at 12:44 AM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
Karma Dorje said:
I said Muslim terrorists are small-time compared to professionals like American imperialists...

Malcolm wrote:
Say what you like about Americans, but we are not terrorists.

We do not [presently] use terror on civilian populations as a matter of course or policy.

Our military forces may be large and clumsy, our military policies often idiotic and short sighted, our military methods reprehensible [drones, cluster bombs, etc.], but we are not terrorists. We do not deliberately target civilians in order to instill fear.

I don't have the same aversion to my birth country that you do. I think Americans are mostly pretty good people. Our Gvt. on the other hand...that's why I am voting for...


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 20th, 2015 at 12:30 AM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
...and unicorns appearing in the sky over Oslo caused gay marriage to be legalized in the U.S.A.  Obviously.
It is not incumbent upon you to believe Chogyal Namkhai Norbu's assessment of the second Gulf war, but that is his assessment.

Karma Dorje said:
It's not a question of what I believe. It's a question of making unfalsifiable claims on a public forum that depend solely on your devotion to a guru. Whatever the instrumental cause of the Iraq War, the efficient cause was the greed and aggression of the American people. If the American people were not habituated to afflictive emotions, they could not be provoked. Provocation does not somehow imply that the responsibility for the actions lies with provoking entity. The responsibility lies with the agents of those actions.

Malcolm wrote:
Most Americans I know, such as myself, were against the second Gulf War from the beginning. From a more secular point of view, if the Bush family had not successfully suborned the Supreme Court into installing Bush, it never would have happened, 9/11 or not.

If the greed and aggression of the Iraqi Regime, and before it, the Kuwaiti oil thefts had not happened, there would have been no first Gulf War. If the Russians had not invaded Afghanistan, provoking Shiite resentment against the West, and leading to the Iranian Revolution, etc., etc., etc., we can trace the sequence of external causes endlessly.

Nevertheless, for those people who are willing to understand, much of what happens in the world happens because people's minds are influenced and taken over by gdon.

Karma Dorje said:
It is risible that a bunch of animal sacrifices are somehow worse than the constant appetite for cruelty of American agriculture, America's destabilization of countries around the world, constant warfare, torture, etc.

Malcolm wrote:
But, in fact it is, for the reasons I have already outlined.

Karma Dorje said:
...but what there indicates this particular time now that one couldn't equally apply to the 1300s?

Malcolm wrote:
No one could climb the Himalayas until the 20th century. FYI, the dKon mchog spyi 'dus, the source of this prediction, was revealed by Rigzin Jatson Nyingpo in the 17th century.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 20th, 2015 at 12:00 AM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
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: Wednesday, August 19th, 2015 at 11:29 PM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:


DGA said:
This provoked some Mamos.  In turn, they provoked... who exactly?

In 2002-03, the Bush junta in the US was dead set on invading Iraq for their own reasons.  They needed an international ally.  Tony B. Liar was that guy.  Blair could have stopped the invasion, stopped the war, but he did not.  Rather, he enabled it.  Some number of Britons were behind this.  Is this the provocation in question according to the idea advanced above, or am I thinking this through too literally?

Malcolm wrote:
The minds of humans in the world became inflamed with hatred, incited by angered Mamos, leading to the second Gulf war.

For example, angered Nagas punish us with cancers and skin diseases. Angered Nyan punish us with jungle illnesses like HIV, Ebola, and so on. Gyalpos infect our minds and encourage people to break commitments and to lust for power. Devas possess humans and cause them to start cults, the list goes on and on.

Like UD pointed out, this is why we do Serkhyem, Sang, practice deities like Drollo, Dragphur, Vajrapani, etc., because we need bring the eight classes under control.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 19th, 2015 at 11:14 PM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
Urgyen Dorje said:
Malcolm...

I find your approach to this a little confusing, and I suspect it reflects more of a personal bias on your part, than your methodology.

For example, over in the Forbidden Archaeology thread, you're asserting that we can't approach texts in a materialistic context, while ignoring the living tradition.  As such, the academic's assertion that the abhidharmic cosmology is flawed and represents a flaw world-view really does not apply, as there are many meanings to those texts and many meanings of cosmology itself.  And thus, if we approach these texts through the living tradition, we understand that there is cosmology re locations of mountains and oceans and cosmology re representations of merit.

Malcolm wrote:
I am not asserting that. I am asserting that Indrajala's method is materialistic in nature. I have not made any claims at all there apart from pointing out that there are several Buddhist cosmologies and that therefore, they are not definitive.

Urgyen Dorje said:
Yet, when it comes to these Abrahamic traditions, your approach is just that materialistic and structuralist approach.

Malcolm wrote:
Not at all.

Urgyen Dorje said:
The whole lot of them are just gyalpo worshippers because the texts say that.

Malcolm wrote:
The Old Testament/Torah etc., nowhere says that the God of the old Testament is a rgyal po spirit. This is my analysis.

Urgyen Dorje said:
And when people like myself try to bring in counter examples to show that it's really not as clear cut as that, we're defending gyalpo worshiping and enabling everything that goes along with that.

Malcolm wrote:
No, I am merely pointing out that you are very quick to defend Muslims, etc., but you are not so quick to defend Tibetan Gyalpo worshippers.

Urgyen Dorje said:
It seems if we're going to use post-structuralist approaches to Buddhist texts to appreciate their polyvalency and pliancy in the context of their cultural and historical expressions, along with the living traditions that go along with them-- then we need to afford the Abrahamic texts the same method.

Malcolm wrote:
I am not using post or pre anything. That is your trip. I am a Tibetan doctor, and a someone who studies Tibetan texts. I don't have any particular western methodology that I use to analyze texts. When I look at Hindu texts, I consider them "outsider" texts, their gods, worldly, period. When I look at Christian texts, Jewish texts, Muslim texts, they are outsider eternalist texts, their god, such as it is, worldly.

Urgyen Dorje said:
Quite honestly, I appreciate that your methodological error comes from your strong feelings on this.

Malcolm wrote:
I don't have a methodological error, unless you want to consider assigning all non-Buddhist religions to the categories of the vehicle of gods and humans an error.


Urgyen Dorje said:
If you want to say that a bunch of dark shit associated with the Abrahamic tradition was either caused by gyalpos or evoked gyalpos-- I'm with you.  I mean, really, we do these practices like Riwo Sang Cho to mitigate these problems, right?  Ritual animal slaughter.  Female genital mutilation.  Burrying people and throwing rocks at their heads.  ISIS.  Strapping a vest of C4 on your body and blowing yourself up in a market.  Flying  planes into buildings.  Witch trials.  Killing gay people.   I'm on board.  Some dark shit.  I say this because I've been places where these types of bad things have happened, and the dark vibe is palpable.  I've had lamas say this as well.

Malcolm wrote:
Then?

Urgyen Dorje said:
My personal relationships with people of these traditions aside, I find it laughable to suggest an apophatic Christian worships a gyalpo, or that a sufi or Kabalistic mystic does the same.

Malcolm wrote:
Why? Gyalpos don't have a form.

Not only that, I already addressed this issue by pointing out that Kabbalah is basically neo-Platonism, etc. There is a strong tradition of Hellenistic philosophy that runs through all Western and Near-Eastern Philosophy and mysticism. As far as Sufism goes, there are arguments on both sides of the issues — some scholars contend that due to the rise of Sufism in the Persian world, there is a strong element of Buddhist undercurrent within it; others reject this and site the rise of Sufism in the Islamic experience itself. But these things do not matter very much. They are not germaine to the main point I am making. Every religion has its Pālas, its protectors. In Tibet for example, bTsan, Gyalpos, and the like, such as Thang lha, Ma chen Pomra, etc. were moved from the position of being the object of worship to being bound into oath as protectors.

The central god of the Abrahamic tradition, by definition a worldly being, has never been bound to an oath. He is part of the eight classes, one of the dregs pa sde brgyad.

Urgyen Dorje said:
Personally, I think we can avoid all the confusion that comes from having these convesations without minding methodological nuances by just looking at what "religion" and is not.  For me personally, I don't consider people who harm beings or justify, magnify, or rejoice in their negative qualities as "religious practitioners".  If we want to suggest these are the people who are under the sway of gyalpos or mamos or who propitiate them-- go for it.  But they're not religious practitioners.


Malcolm wrote:
Sure they are "religious practitioners", every bit as much as followers of Shiva or Santeria who engage in animal sacrifice are religious practitioners. Their religion may be a Mithyadharma, a false Dharma, from our point of view, but it is nevertheless a Dharma.

Gyalpos, etc., cause people to behave in ways contrary to their basic human decency. The vast atrocities of Cortez, Genghis Khan, etc., the unknown millions who died in the An Lushan Rebellion in the mid 8th century, all of these things can be laid at the feet of human beings whose minds are deranged by provocations.

Most people do not give the eight classes the kind of credit they deserve for causing havoc among humans.

Urgyen Dorje said:
So let's apply our analysis and methods uniformly, and let's be clear what are and are not religious paths.

Malcolm wrote:
There are three kinds of religious paths: Saddharma, Lokadharma and Mithyadharma. Buddha's Dharma is Saddharma. Everything else is either a Lokadharma or a Mithyadharma, and is usually a mixture of both.

For example, you might ask, well, what about Jesus? Jesus was a human being, a man. He was not a spirit, or some kind of provocation. But in reality, it is exactly the kind of death he suffered that gives rise to Gyalpos. Gyalpos arise when people with powerful spiritual charisma, etc. are murdered.

The Christian pantheon is filled with martyrs who also can have exactly that kind of rebirth, as powerful avenging spirits. Then there are more benevolent protectors, we like to call them "saints."

Gyalpos, etc. function best when they are not recognized as such.

Since no one believes in them any more, very little is done to quell their actions, and as a result we live in the kind of world we do.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 19th, 2015 at 9:53 PM
Title: Re: "V"s in Sanskrit
Content:
mañjughoṣamaṇi said:
Khams is also quite diverse. Some linguists are arguing the different khampa dialects aren't necessarily any more closely related to each other than they are to other dialect groups.


Malcolm wrote:
Sure, When ChNN was traveling to Lhasa when he was a teenager, he and his band managed get papers from Nangchen, because Derge was already under Chinese control, but they were always worried that if there was a translator among any Chinese soldiers they encountered, that person might recognize their deception because Nangchen skad and Derge skad are different not only in terms of accent, but also actual language.

Hence the old Tibetan adage, "Every valley has its own language, every Lama has his own Dharma."


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 19th, 2015 at 8:55 PM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Well, for example, Mamos were the cause of the war in Iraq, believe it or not. That arose from effects of burning millions of cows in the mad cow epidemic in Britain. That in turn was a result of those Tibetan gyalpo fanatics having a stronghold in northern England.

Karma Dorje said:
Yes, and unicorns appearing in the sky over Oslo caused gay marriage to be legalized in the U.S.A.  Obviously.

Malcolm wrote:
It is not incumbent upon you to believe Chogyal Namkhai Norbu's assessment of the second Gulf war, but that is his assessment.


Karma Dorje said:
I am pretty sure that Hitler, Stalin and Mao weren't Muslim.

Malcolm wrote:
I am just putting into perspective your claim to the evils of the Great American Satan.


Samsara has been a mess since forever. It's not all or even mostly caused by gyalpos. The beings that are born into areas of strife quite obviously are habituated strongly to afflictive emotions.
Yes, and that includes being born into areas of strife where that strife is largely a result of non-human provocation. For example, Padmasambava explains our times perfectly to Nyang Tingzing Zangpo:
Taking life, deceptive trade practices, are each poisonous supports. Competing in skill at theft and plunder, teachers who take the life of virtue are made into one’s mother. “Father” is not heard by children, “master” is not heard by servants, “lord” is not heard by subjects. The wicked are in full bloom. Ornaments are made into weapons. Dharma activities shorten one’s life, but misdeeds raise one’s spirits. The temples fall into disrepair. Since the negative local spirits spread, there is much frost and hail. Mamos and dākinīs spread contagious diseases among children, adult diseases for adults, cattle diseases for cattle, and blights on harvests, etc., will appear suddenly like dust devils. Tree wither above the roots, generations are destroyed by famine. Rats invade the land.

At that time, there are no Dharma activities, and since misdeeds increase, cause and result is ignored. Because of the power of the ten misdeeds, etc., the merit of Tibet sinks lower and lower.

Pehar possess monks, only a few men possess vows. Since demons and spirits possess mantra practitioners, commitments do not exist and illness increase. Since Gyalpos possess men, they start civil wars. Since Srinmo possess women, they commit adultery, administer poisons and are deceptive. Since The'u rang possess children, they steal, have fevers, and are badly behaved. There are many madmen and rabid dogs. Since the food portions of sentient beings diminish, the essence of their elements is harmed. Efforts will be made to reach the top of the Himalayas and there will be farming on the mountains.
This is a description of our era.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 19th, 2015 at 8:44 PM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
Tsongkhapafan said:
Buddha taught that all problems come from delusions, not from spirits. IMHO it's unhealthy to be overly concerned about these things. The only thing we need to do is to destroy our own delusions through practising Dharma. We don't need to judge other people's spiritual paths or blame spirits for everything that goes wrong.

Malcolm wrote:
Spirits, gdon, come from delusion, just like everything else. Spirits, rgyalpos, etc., are not ultimate, they are something relative. They don't affect anything directly, but they rule diseases, they affect people's minds and so on. If they were ultimate, we could not have various oracles, such as Nechung, Tseringma, Setrab, Shugden and so on. The reason we have these oracles is because these are worldly entities that are able to take control of trained mediums [sku brten] and communicate with us directly.

But conventionally, spirits, non-humans beings, like nāgas, devas, pretas [this is actually what "spirits" are], gandharvas, yakṣas, dakas, dakinīs, unmadas, apasmaras, kumbhadhas etc., all exist. Some of them are on our side, some are not, as this sutta points out:
"If any monk or nun, layman or laywoman learns by heart this Atanata protection, and be word-perfect in repeating it, and if any non-human male or female Yakkha, youth or maiden Yakkha, Yakkha Minister or any Yakkha, or Yakkha attendant; male or female Gandhabba... (as before); male or female Kumbhanda... male or female Naga... were to walk with him or her, or stand or sit or lie down with him or her with malevolent intent, such a non-human, Happy One, will not obtain hospitality from any town or township, will not obtain a place to dwell, nor could live in the Kingdom of Alakamanda. He will not be able to attend the meetings of the Yakkhas. Further he would not be accepted or given in marriage, he would be reproached (by casting remarks on his deformed teeth or eyes or any part of the body), and the non-humans would put an empty bowl over his head and split it (head) in seven pieces.

"Happy One, there are non-humans who are fierce, violent, given to retaliation; those non-humans heed neither the (four) great kings, nor their ministers nor their attendants. They are called rebels against the (four) great kings. Even as in the kingdom of Magadha, the thieves heed neither the king of Magadha, nor the ministers, nor their attendants, and are called rebels against the king of Magadha, so there are non-humans who are fierce... (as before). They are called rebels against the (four) great kings.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/dn/dn.32.0.piya.html


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 19th, 2015 at 1:50 PM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:


Karma Dorje said:
The one thing that concerns me that is causing huge provocations and destruction in the world that we live in today is the American empire.

Malcolm wrote:
Well, for example, Mamos were the cause of the war in Iraq, believe it or not. That arose from effects of burning millions of cows in the mad cow epidemic in Britain. That in turn was a result of those Tibetan gyalpo fanatics having a stronghold in northern England.

Karma Dorje said:
The Muslims are bush league compared to them.

Malcolm wrote:
Really? I am pretty sure that Hitler, Stalin and Mao make American atrocities, such as they are, rather tepid in comparison.

Karma Dorje said:
...it {the US] has had a profoundly negative impact on the world compared to relatively little good.

Malcolm wrote:
We are not in agreement on this point.

Karma Dorje said:
The Middle East would not have been such a mess were it not for American and British meddling. Don't blame a gyalpo for what is adequately explained by human spite and stupidity.

Malcolm wrote:
[/quote][/quote]

The Middle East has been a mess for millennia.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 19th, 2015 at 12:58 PM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:


Johnny Dangerous said:
I understand exactly what you are saying, and believe it or not, I partially agree. There are some people practicing Abrahamic religions that seem to be doing something quite dark, however, there are plenty that are not. Do they worship the "same guy"...I have no idea, all I know is that the fruit of their practice is visibly different from what comes from the people you are talking about.

Malcolm wrote:
Some day you should play the Game of Liberation by Chogyal Namkhai Norbu.

It's very instructive.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 19th, 2015 at 12:56 PM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
Karma Dorje said:
What is the point of slagging other religions other than to feel smug? Everybody loves to think they have exclusive access to the truth. Everybody loves to say the other guy is wrong, particularly when the other guy isn't around to argue the point. This conversation here convinces none of the people who are actually performing these sacrifices. It's just picking a fight for the sake of entertainment.

Malcolm wrote:
Well, we are all pretty sure that Allah/Jehovah/Brahma/Vishu etc. did not create the universe, nor anything in it.

We are all pretty sure that we think that animal sacrifice is wrong.

The only thing we are squabbling about now is that I think that the god worshipped by Muslims and so on, causes huge provocations in the world and has done for the better part of three millennia. By comparison, that Tibetan gyalpo is a pipsqueak.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 19th, 2015 at 12:42 PM
Title: Re: Universal Atman in Buddhism
Content:
Matt J said:
Not to start anything, but I think that Shaivism has more in common with Buddhism than Advaita.

Malcolm wrote:
Trika? How so? They believe everything is real.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 19th, 2015 at 12:40 PM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
Urgyen Dorje said:
of Eid al-Adha are really cool.  I think they deserve to be recognized and not folded into a generalization of being gyalpo worshippers.

Malcolm wrote:
Oh, you completely misunderstand. I am not saying that the god of the old Testament and the Koran is a gyalpo because there is animal sacrifice in Islam, etc.

I am saying he is a gyalpo based on his described actions in the old Testament and in the Koran.

There are some people, for example, who think that a certain Tibetan Gyalpo is a Buddha. They do not, as far as I know, engage in any kind of animal sacrifice. But they are still venerate a gyalpo as an awakened being. Are you going to defend them on the principle that what their texts say may not be representative of the finest exponents of their tradition?

There are all kinds of worldly spirits out there with different characteristics and different kinds of actions.

Some are readily identifiable in Indian and Tibetan terms as this or that kind of entity, some are not.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 19th, 2015 at 5:51 AM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:


Urgyen Dorje said:
But animal sacrifice is not integral to such practices as Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism, or Islam.  It can't be said to be integral as there are those who abhor it.  And thus, I tolerate those paths and those contexts where there is no animal sacrifice.  It was a Muslim who introduced me to vegetarianism.

Malcolm wrote:
It does not exist in Christianity. In Judaism, well, it is undergoing a small revival. To say it is not essential in Islam is to wear blinders. In Hinduism, it is widespread, but not universal.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 19th, 2015 at 5:31 AM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
Johnny Dangerous said:
Honestly, it is amazing that we, who are so intolerant of the Gyalpo, make excuses for Muslims, etc.
I'm not making excuses for anything, I personally think it's abhorrent for people calling themselves 'religious" to believe that killing beings can confer blessings, rather than the opposite.


Malcolm wrote:
And yet, so many of them do...


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 19th, 2015 at 5:22 AM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
Johnny Dangerous said:
It is the same with Kosher, to me Kashrut practices are pretty much morally no worse than other forms of food production, since they do not involve an expectation of receiving blessings for killing - which to me is abhorrent part.

Malcolm wrote:
In this case a blessing is recited, seeking sanction for the correct procedure of the acts of a Kosher butcher. It is not 100 percent necessary to begin with a blessing, but it is normal to do so. Halal killing on the other hand is done in the name of Allah, and it is a requirement.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 19th, 2015 at 5:15 AM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
Urgyen Dorje said:
For somebody who is taking exception to "practices", you certainly make huge generalizations about "people".

Native American practices are even more diverse than those of Muslims and Jews, simply because of the diversity of the population.

Malcolm wrote:
I was speaking to JD's assertion that NA hunting practices involved a grey area. He was not specific, so neither was I.

Any way, if you wish to "respect" those religions which actively encourage animal sacrifice, please be my guest.

Honestly, it is amazing that we, who are so intolerant of the Gyalpo, make excuses for Muslims, etc.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 19th, 2015 at 5:05 AM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:


Johnny Dangerous said:
Dude, save the paternalistic tone.

Malcolm wrote:
My tone is not smarmy. Factual, but not smarmy.

Johnny Dangerous said:
I don't have any romantic ideas,

Malcolm wrote:
I never said you did.

Johnny Dangerous said:
...but as an example of the grey area of what constitutes "ritual killing" versus simply food acquisition and preparation in the context of a certain culture.

Malcolm wrote:
A common theme among NA myths is the idea of key food animals agreeing to offer themselves as food if the people act correctly. This part of a myth structure, a just so story.

Johnny Dangerous said:
Also comparing something like the culture of the Aztecs to say, Anasazi-derived culture of the Pueblo indians, or that of the plains tribes are pretending they are greatly similar is silly.

Malcolm wrote:
I wasn't — I was merely pointing out that part of the reason why Mexico is so screwed has to do with this history. Don't ge me wrong, I like Mexico. I think it is a great place. But there is a kind of ingrained bloody mindedness in that country that comes from its history.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 19th, 2015 at 4:53 AM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
Urgyen Dorje said:
It's not clear to me whether you're talking about people or practices.  Just saying.
You have to sort of *try* to be accurate in your target...

Malcolm wrote:
I am not talking about people. I am talking about practices. Until these practices are ended in these places, the people living there will experience no real prosperity and so on.
Practices, just so you are clear.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 19th, 2015 at 4:53 AM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:


Malcolm wrote:
And I was talking about the general practice of religious killing in all religions.


Johnny Dangerous said:
The issue here as I see it is that the line gets quite grey.

Native Americans for instance have plenty of "ritual killing" under this definition, but it is also simply a part (or was, still is for some who choose) a part of obtaining food. It is the same with Kosher laws, unless you believe everyone would be vegetarian (and actually, it is easy to argue that Kosher laws actually encourage vegetarianism) without following kosher laws, then there is little difference between eating Kosher foods or non-Kosher..since it is not something done to obtain a favorable result.

Malcolm wrote:
Many people have this romantic idea that Native Americans give thanks to their prey, and "respect" their prey. They may, but this ignores the fact that Native Americans were the leading cause of the extinction of large animals in North America such as Wooly Mammoths and so on.

Also such Native Americans as Aztecs, Mayans and so on, had really brutal cultures where blood spilled in oceans. Mexico is still screwed up because of it. Mexico needs to build 108 Stupas, all together, then many of its problems with be reversed.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 19th, 2015 at 4:42 AM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
Johnny Dangerous said:
Actaully it's you pointing to exceptions and painting them as the rule.

Malcolm wrote:
Animal sacrifice is the rule in Islam, not the exception. It is a duty, actually, one many Muslims may find distasteful, but a duty nevertheless.

Johnny Dangerous said:
I wasn't talking about Muslims, I was talking specifically about the attempt to put Jews and Muslims in the same boat with animal sacrifice, which is impossible if you know even a small bit about modern Judaism, and the Talmudic deabtes surrounding animal sacrifice.

Malcolm wrote:
And I was talking about the general practice of religious killing in all religions.

it is not even an issue about tolerance. There is nothing we can do about other people's religious ideas except voice our disapproval of them, if warranted. Here it is fine, it is not like I would wander into some Muslim community and tell them they are all worshipping a rgyal po, even though that is basically what I think.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 19th, 2015 at 4:39 AM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
Johnny Dangerous said:
Actaully it's you pointing to exceptions and painting them as the rule.

Malcolm wrote:
Animal sacrifice is the rule in Islam, not the exception. It is a duty, actually, one many Muslims may find distasteful, but a duty nevertheless.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 19th, 2015 at 4:32 AM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
Urgyen Dorje said:
You have to sort of *try* to be accurate in your target...


Malcolm wrote:
I am not talking about people. I am talking about practices. Until these practices are ended in these places, the people living there will experience no real prosperity and so on.


Johnny Dangerous said:
Right, and then you posted a couple links, one not even about Jews, another about fringe groups in Israel, as if it indicates that Animal sacrifice is some widespread thing in Judaism. The original thing that got us on this was sacrifice in Abrahamic relgions...not just the practice itself. AFAIK there really ain't many Christians or Jews doing animal sacrifice beyond some very fringe-y groups.

I imagine India has to be up there in terms of numbers.

Malcolm wrote:
When a Kosher butcher slaughters an animal, he generally does so in the context of reciting a blessing. This makes it a ritual activity. When a Halal butcher slaughters an animal, he does so in the name of Allah. And quite frankly, I really do not see any difference between the God of the Torah and the God of the Koran.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 19th, 2015 at 4:23 AM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
Johnny Dangerous said:
Man, apparently the critical thinking used when evaluating Tantra, Sutra, and Dialectics goes out the window entirely when having a realistic view of other relgions comes into play, or even being able to properly read a wikipedia entry.

Malcolm wrote:
You can point out all the exceptions and nuances you want. They don't matter. What matters is that in these places that I mentioned, millions of animals a year are ritually sacrificed or killed according to religious rules, and the karmic results are exponentially worse than Tysons and Hormel.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 19th, 2015 at 4:21 AM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
Urgyen Dorje said:
You have to sort of *try* to be accurate in your target...


Malcolm wrote:
I am not talking about people. I am talking about practices. Until these practices are ended in these places, the people living there will experience no real prosperity and so on.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 19th, 2015 at 4:18 AM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
Johnny Dangerous said:
It isn't, and only someone who knows no Jews could ever make the mistake of thinking that animal sacrifice is a common thing within Judaism, it's nearly unheard of, and these are very rare. Again, there are writings from prominent Jewish thinker before the modern age who argued against it IIRC, such as Rambam.
Also Kosher slaughter is by definition a religious act. Sorry, but that is also a fact.
Oh yeah, it is, but it has nothing to do with any kind of sacrifice at all.

Malcolm wrote:
My overall criteria was religious killing, killing done in accordance with religious rules or out of obligation, or to seek favors from gods or demons. In those places where this kind of activity is regularly carried out, we see the results — Africa, India, Mexico and South America, the Middle East etc.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 19th, 2015 at 4:14 AM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Right, this is what we would call a ransom rite, or as it is known in the west, a scapegoat.


Norwegian said:
Random trivia:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kapparot

"[...] Jewish atonement ritual practiced by some Jews on the eve of Yom Kippur. "

" On the afternoon before Yom Kippur, the Day of Atonement of the world, one prepares an item to be donated to the poor for consumption at the pre-Yom Kippur meal.,[2] recites the two biblical passages of Psalms 107:17-20 and Job 33:23-24, and then swings the prepared charitable donation over one's head three times while reciting a short prayer three times.

the prayer recited translates as:

This is my exchange, this is my substitute, this is my atonement. This rooster (hen) will go to its death, while I will enter and proceed to a good long life and to peace. "

" The ritual appealed especially to Kabbalists "
In the United States, the Kapparot ritual would seem to be constitutionally protected as an exercise of freedom of religion, based upon a 1993 U.S. Supreme Court decision in the case of Church of Lukumi Babalu Aye v. City of Hialeah. In that case, the court upheld the right of Santeria adherents to practice ritual animal sacrifice, with Justice Anthony Kennedy stating in the decision, "religious beliefs need not be acceptable, logical, consistent or comprehensible to others in order to merit First Amendment protection". (quoted by Justice Kennedy from the opinion by Justice Warren E. Burger in Thomas v. Review Board of the Indiana Employment Security Division 450 U.S. 707 (1981))
The mass-slaughter of chickens on the day of high demand by a Shochet (licensed and trained "butcher"), repeatedly results in a certain percentage of chicken not slaughtered according to shechita due to haste, fatigue, imperfection and non-reviewed uncertainty. Furthermore, chicken of kapparot may not be accepted even by the poor, because they are commonly perceived as being quasi-accurst (cursed) after the ritual.
Sad.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 19th, 2015 at 4:09 AM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:


DGA said:
Some of this kind of reminds me of arguments in favor of meat eating I've read among Buddhists on boards like this one.


Malcolm wrote:
No one "favors" eating meat. But as long as animals are going to be killed in food production, you need a method to make a positive connection for them, otherwise you are remaining indifferent.

Also Kosher slaughter is by definition a religious act. Sorry, but that is also a fact.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 19th, 2015 at 4:07 AM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
Johnny Dangerous said:
Samaritans actually are not Jews, dude.


Malcolm wrote:
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4643453,00.html


http://destination-yisrael.biblesearchers.com/destination-yisrael/2010/04/orthodox-jewish-patriots-prevented-from-sacrificing-sheep-or-goats-near-the-temple-mount-at-pesach.html


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 19th, 2015 at 4:05 AM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:



Malcolm wrote:
Really, are you quite sure? You might want to check on that.


Johnny Dangerous said:
How about you point out an example instead, so I can see it, since you seem sure of it.

I could certainly be wrong, but animal sacrifice has not been part of  mainstream Judaism for a very long time (second temple AFAIK), and finds argument against it even in Babylonian talmud I believe.

Malcolm wrote:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3066352/Members-Samaritan-sect-Israel-skewer-sheep-traditional-Passover-ceremony-West-Bank-city-Nablus.html


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 19th, 2015 at 4:02 AM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
Johnny Dangerous said:
So some practitioners might be worshipping a big 'ol war god..but others aren't doing anything like that at all.

Malcolm wrote:
When they sacrifice sheep and goats, they are worshipping a big old war god, whatever else they may be doing.
What are you talking about? Jews haven't done ritual sacrifice for a long time.

Johnny Dangerous said:
Really, are you quite sure? You might want to check on that.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 19th, 2015 at 4:02 AM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
Urgyen Dorje said:
This is just Buddhist chauvinism.


Malcolm wrote:
No, it is just a fact that Muslim ritual sacrifices every year in the billions of dollars is gyalpo worship, plain and simple. Jewish ritual sacrifices also amount to a very large income for Australian sheep farmers. I am not making this stuff up folks.

I could care less, in this instance, about the finer points of Muslim/Jewish/Hindu mysticism.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 19th, 2015 at 3:48 AM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
Johnny Dangerous said:
So some practitioners might be worshipping a big 'ol war god..but others aren't doing anything like that at all.

Malcolm wrote:
When they sacrifice sheep and goats, they are worshipping a big old war god, whatever else they may be doing.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 19th, 2015 at 3:47 AM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:


Johnny Dangerous said:
Can you substantiate that please?

Malcolm wrote:
Just read the Old Testament. Just read the Koran.

Johnny Dangerous said:
Reading the works of Kabbalists and Sufis often bears more resemblance to any form of mysticism than they do to their parent religions.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, and I qualified my remarks above. Kabbala is heavily influenced by Neo-platonism, for example. The philosophical revolution in Islam happened after Muslims converted Central Asia and came into contact with the [Hellenized] Central Asian Civilizations. All the greatest Islamic scholars and philosophers are from Central Asia.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 19th, 2015 at 3:19 AM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
amanitamusc said:
Since Judaism, Islam,and Christianity stem from the same soarce,Abraham.
They worship the same being dominated by anger and jealousy.
We can see the fruit of this.


Johnny Dangerous said:
Really? So Kabbalists were doing the same thing as modern Ultra-Orthodox? Rumi was basically the same as The Taliban? Please, nonsense in the extreme, Abrahamic religions have nearly as wide a spectrum of practices as Dharmic ones.


Malcolm wrote:
The core of it, however, is Gyalpo worship, no matter to what extent Hellenism influenced some thinkers in the Abrahamic faiths to more profound philosophical thinking.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 19th, 2015 at 1:03 AM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
DGA said:
Let's assume for the sake of argument that Malcolm's correct, and that I have a hypothetical neighbor who participates in rites involving animal sacrifices to a spirit or spirits.  So what?  Does that spirit grow more powerful from the energy of this person's devotion, say, or from the life force of the poor animals bleeding on the altar?  At what point does that become a problem for anyone other than the dead chickens and those propitiating this spirit or spirits?

Malcolm wrote:
These spirits are feeding on the life force of the animals, represented by blood.

These kinds of entities can create many problems for us.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 18th, 2015 at 9:55 PM
Title: Re: Pure Land & Tibetan Buddhism
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
My favorite Amitabha statue at Eikando in Kyoto.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 18th, 2015 at 9:46 PM
Title: Re: Universal Atman in Buddhism
Content:
smcj said:
At this point I think it worth noting that Malcolm considers Shentong to be a "Universal Atman" in drag. And, quite frankly, I'm not entirely sure he's wrong about that.

Bakmoon said:
I don't know if Malcom would say that about all forms of Shentong. Shentong comes in many different flavors, and personally I, a Theravadin, find some of the more qualified interpretations to be rather nice.

Malcolm wrote:
As I said many times, my main problem with gzhan stong is the way gzhan stong deforms the three natures theory.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 18th, 2015 at 9:20 PM
Title: Re: Djang Chub Dorje and Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche
Content:
kashmir said:
Who was the teacher of Rigdzin Chanchub Dorje?


Malcolm wrote:
Pema Dudul, Rangrig Dorje, Adzom Drugpa, mainly. He took teachings from Shardza, but I am not sure to what extent.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 18th, 2015 at 9:19 PM
Title: Re: Universal Atman in Buddhism
Content:
Dan74 said:
At the end of the day, True Self or no true self, are all skillful means, the way I see it.
_/|\_

Malcolm wrote:
"True self" is not a skillful means in the Dharma.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 18th, 2015 at 9:18 PM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
MiphamFan said:
Malcolm, so is it your persepctive that outright animal sacrifice like in Santeria or Abrahamic religions feeds negative spirits more than just killing animals?

It is interesting that these sacrifices seem to mainly involve draining the animal of its blood.

Malcolm wrote:
Absolutely.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 18th, 2015 at 9:16 PM
Title: Re: Forbidden Archeology
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
It is necessarily materialistic.

Indrajala said:
So I suppose you believe the earth is flat because scripture says so despite materialist science proposing otherwise? How about evolution? One might easily imagine you deny this too because it stems from a materialist tradition.

Malcolm wrote:
I have never made any kind of claim that resembles this. You are tilting windmills. I have only referred to different cosmologies in order to point out that they are not fixed frames of reference in pan-Buddhist doctrine. The cosmology of the Avatamsaka or the Realms and Transformations of Sound Tantra [ sgra thal gyur ] in no way resembles the cosmology of the Kosha.

One of the key features of the Carvaka school is that they reject all authorities other than direct perception.

The consequence of the methodology advocated by you is largely the same. Ergo, whether you intend it to be or not, your methodology is rooted in the western tradition of logical positivism, it is therefore materialist, even if you are not in terms of your personal beliefs a materialist or a physicalist.

"Evidence-based" is a nice catch phrase, for example, it is used in medicine quite a bit these days too, given that medicine is the origin of the term. To give you an example of the problem:
Evidence-based medicine is controversial not because people disagree about whether medical decisions ought to incorporate the best available evidence, but because they disagree about how narrowly evidence should be defined.14 Neither advocates nor opponents of evidence-based medicine consistently differentiate between the everyday meaning of evidence and the evidence of evidence-based medicine that refers only to the results of particular types of research.12,15 This persistent confusion makes the label evidence-based medicine divisive, and authors on both sides of the debate have suggested that it be discarded or replaced.
http://journals.lww.com/academicmedicine/Fulltext/2007/03000/Viewpoint__Moving_Beyond_Evidence_Based_Medicine.15.aspx


It is much the same when you used the term "evidence-based" approach to Buddhist studies, or any historical inquiry. How wide or narrow is the evidence? This is where bias comes in, yours, mine, everyones.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 18th, 2015 at 10:14 AM
Title: Re: Forbidden Archeology
Content:


Indrajala said:
The evidence based approach is not necessarily materialistic.

Malcolm wrote:
It is necessarily materialistic.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 18th, 2015 at 9:55 AM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:


tingdzin said:
In Tibet, schools that were the most concerned with doctrinal orthodoxy (and political power) tended to frown upon it more strongly while those schools which tended rely more on spiritually accomplished masters didn't seem to have had too much of a problem with it. .

Malcolm wrote:
Ummm, this does not make any sense considering the role of oracles in the Ganden Phodrang.

And show me one Tibetan school that does not rely on  "spiritually accomplished masters", at least in theory.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 18th, 2015 at 9:54 AM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
tingdzin said:
Everybody trying to push their own beliefs on others is FAR more a cause of suffering in the modern world than animal sacrifice, which by the way, is not only a traditional part of currently unpopular religions like Islam and Santeria, but also Judaism.
.


Malcolm wrote:
Notice that all those places in the world where animal sacrifice is practiced as a religious custom have a great deal more strife, violence, and problems. Coincidence? I think not.

There is no difference between Halal and Kosher. And yes, animal sacrifice in Judaism is horrible and widespread also.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 18th, 2015 at 9:48 AM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
DGA said:
Malcolm, is it your position that the spirits propitiated by these persons are real--more specifically, that they are real in the way that their advocates say they are?


Malcolm wrote:
Sure.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 18th, 2015 at 3:21 AM
Title: Re: Tibetan Lives Matter
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Witnessing. Not allowing it to be swept under the rug.

Luke said:
A few years ago, you seemed totally hopeless about Tibet and basically said that nothing could be done.

What gave you a change of heart and renewed your optimism?

Malcolm wrote:
I never said anything could be done. But I never said we should remain indifferent.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 18th, 2015 at 2:19 AM
Title: Re: Tibetan Lives Matter
Content:
Luke said:
Yes, indeed Tibetan lives matter!   It's terrible that the Tibetans are still so harshly repressed by the PRC government.

But, Malcolm, what do you think should be done about this?  What is a possible way to resolve these on-going problems in Tibet?

Malcolm wrote:
Witnessing. Not allowing it to be swept under the rug.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 18th, 2015 at 2:10 AM
Title: Re: the psychedelic community: pros and cons
Content:
Luke said:
^Those are some cool paintings, Malcolm!   Could you tell us the names of the artists who did them, please?

Malcolm wrote:
just run a search on google, modern tibetan painting

Luke said:
I searched "modern tibetan painting" on Google Images, but none of the paintings you posted came up.

It would be nice if you could type the artists' names since you posted their paintings.

Malcolm wrote:
https://www.google.com/search?q=modern+tibetan+painting&client=safari&rls=en&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0CAgQ_AUoAmoVChMIlabWqtuwxwIVSY8-Ch1SmQUB&biw=1373&bih=791

I did not notice the names. But you can find them from this search.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 18th, 2015 at 1:19 AM
Title: Re: the psychedelic community: pros and cons
Content:
Luke said:
^Those are some cool paintings, Malcolm!   Could you tell us the names of the artists who did them, please?

Malcolm wrote:
just run a search on google, modern tibetan painting


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 18th, 2015 at 12:44 AM
Title: Re: Question Zilnon Namkha Dorje & Terma
Content:
Nosta said:
I am reading a book where they mention the name of Zilnon Namkha Dorje, saying that it was a terton with termas regarding the future. I wonder about such prophecies and the time they are about to happen. While searching on google I dont find information about that. Anyone here could give me some help?

Thanks


Malcolm wrote:
http://www.rigpawiki.org/index.php?title=Chime_Soktik


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 18th, 2015 at 12:31 AM
Title: Re: the psychedelic community: pros and cons
Content:
Luke said:
Another "pro" of the psychedelic community is the quality of art that it produces.

Are any modern Buddhist painters as skilled or as interesting as Alex Grey?








Malcolm wrote:
Etc.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 17th, 2015 at 11:16 PM
Title: Re: Forbidden Archeology
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
First of all, the Meru cosmology is fundamentally a moral cosmology.

Indrajala said:
No, it isn't. It was clearly believed by Buddhist writers in India to be a physical world atop which the sun and moon as discs circuited around. Did you read my blog post?

Malcolm wrote:
That does not matter.

It is clearly a moral cosmology in so far as lower births are below the surface, humans [along with some animals] live on the surface of the four continents, whilst devas live above the surface in various palaces on the slopes of Meru.



Indrajala said:
As you are probably aware, E. Henning disputes the notion for example, that the authors of the Kalacakra root tantra could have believed in a flat earth cosmology, because their calculations alone contradict this notion — thus the modified Meru cosmology found in the Kalacakra is there for symbolic purposes, but is not taken literally.
I haven't looked at the Kalacakra in any great detail, but I've read his work on the matter.

I think the simplest explanation is that mathematical astronomy or something based on it, all originally meant for a spherical earth, had to be accounted for given its universal applicability and accuracy, in a flat earth Mt. Meru cosmology. By the 11th century presumably such knowledge was readily accessible and thus anyone with an interest in astrology and astronomy would have been aware of the requisite math involved.

Malcolm wrote:
And that math would have been known where and by whom? Nalanda scholars among others. If you read Henning carefully, he points out that two cosmological accounts are given.


Indrajala said:
The Meru cosmology presents an Indo-centric view of the ancient world, embellished with Indian aesthetics. While some, like Vasubandhu, may have taken it literally, there is sufficient evidence to suggest that not everyone in ancient India did.
Plenty of non-Buddhist astronomers in India were quite clear that the earth is in fact spherical, but as far as I can tell, Buddhist writers did not display much awareness of a spherical earth.

Malcolm wrote:
Textual myopia once again. If it is not in a text, it does not exist for you.

Indrajala said:
To suggest otherwise is just wishful thinking. Few Buddhists want to admit their Buddhist predecessors in India were somewhat scientifically handicapped.

Malcolm wrote:
No, it is an inference. But the problem with your method, once again, is that it is essential Carvaka in its point of view, you only accept direct perception as an authority.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 17th, 2015 at 10:39 PM
Title: Re: Top 5 Dzogchen books
Content:
ngodrup said:
Cho Ying Dzod
Rigpai Chertong
Nang Jang

What else do you need?

Malcolm wrote:
Original Dzogchen texts, like kun byed rgyal po, sgra thal 'gyur, rig pa rang shar, etc.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 17th, 2015 at 10:37 PM
Title: Re: Djang Chub Dorje and Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche
Content:
kalden yungdrung said:
Tashi delek DW members,

Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche assisted in Tibet some time ago Djang Chub Dorje, who was a direct disciple of Shardza Tashi Gyaltsen Rinpoche (Rainbow Body in 1936)
Djang Chub Dorje received from Shardza Rinpoche New Bon or Bon gsar teachings. In Bon gsar are many Vajrayana deities venerated and Guru Rinpoche is here welcomed.

- Is there something known about the time from Namkha Norbu Rinpoche and  Djang Chub Dorje ? Interesting to know if Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche got some teachings from
Djang Chub Dorje or in what way he did assist Djang Chub Dorje.


Mutsug Marro
KY


Malcolm wrote:
ChNN received most of Chanchub Dorje's termas from Chanchub Dorje's son. What he received directly from Chanchub Dorje was the empowerment of Zhitro, as well as direct introduction. This story is pretty famous.

IN terms of assisting Chanchub Dorje, Norbu Rinpoche helped in Chanchub Dorje's clinic for roughly six months.


kalden yungdrung said:
Tashi delek N,

Thanks for the replies.

The world of Dzogchen is small, despite the teachings are great.
It is amazing how Bon and Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche are connected.
He is a Tibetan, who has a positive opinion about Bon.

_ Can you mention some more terma's which Namkhai Nrobu Rinpoche did receive ?


Mutsug Marro
KY

Malcolm wrote:
I am pretty sure that Norbu Rinpoche received all of Changchub Dorje's termas from Changchub Dorje's son. I don't know if any Bon termas are included there, I am not sure, but I don't think so.

However, there is no real difference between Dzogchen in Bon and Chos apart from lineage. Meaning is the same.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 17th, 2015 at 9:24 PM
Title: Re: Djang Chub Dorje and Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche
Content:
kalden yungdrung said:
Tashi delek DW members,

Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche assisted in Tibet some time ago Djang Chub Dorje, who was a direct disciple of Shardza Tashi Gyaltsen Rinpoche (Rainbow Body in 1936)
Djang Chub Dorje received from Shardza Rinpoche New Bon or Bon gsar teachings. In Bon gsar are many Vajrayana deities venerated and Guru Rinpoche is here welcomed.

- Is there something known about the time from Namkha Norbu Rinpoche and  Djang Chub Dorje ? Interesting to know if Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche got some teachings from
Djang Chub Dorje or in what way he did assist Djang Chub Dorje.


Mutsug Marro
KY


Malcolm wrote:
ChNN received most of Chanchub Dorje's termas from Chanchub Dorje's son. What he received directly from Chanchub Dorje was the empowerment of Zhitro, as well as direct introduction. This story is pretty famous.

IN terms of assisting Chanchub Dorje, Norbu Rinpoche helped in Chanchub Dorje's clinic for roughly six months.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 17th, 2015 at 9:15 PM
Title: Re: Forbidden Archeology
Content:
Indrajala said:
Having logical proofs and evidence (satellite photos) of a spherical earth disproves Buddhism's flat earth cosmology.

Malcolm wrote:
This is a straw man. First of all, the Meru cosmology is fundamentally a moral cosmology. Second, it is not the only cosmology in Buddhist texts, merely the most referenced because of its axial nature.

As you are probably aware, E. Henning disputes the notion for example, that the authors of the Kalacakra root tantra could have believed in a flat earth cosmology, because their calculations alone contradict this notion — thus the modified Meru cosmology found in the Kalacakra is there for symbolic purposes, but is not taken literally.

The Meru cosmology presents an Indo-centric view of the ancient world, embellished with Indian aesthetics. While some, like Vasubandhu, may have taken it literally, there is sufficient evidence to suggest that not everyone in ancient India did.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 17th, 2015 at 8:40 PM
Title: Re: Manjushrimitra and Garab Dorje
Content:
kalden yungdrung said:
- Is this debate noted somewhere?

KY

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, it is recounted in the lo rgyus chen mo, the Great Chronicle of the Vima Nything and elsewhere.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 17th, 2015 at 9:14 AM
Title: Re: Forbidden Archeology
Content:
Indrajala said:
It is much simpler to just make a distinction between the emic and etic.

Malcolm wrote:
It's a biased distinction, and also misplaced. The so-called "etic" approach arrogates to itself a scientific veneer when it fact it is nothing of the kind. It merely replaces the biases of the researcher/research community for the lore and traditions of the person/group under study.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 17th, 2015 at 4:38 AM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
Unknown said:
tol·er·ance
ˈtäl(ə)rəns/Submit
noun
1.
the ability or willingness to tolerate something, in particular the existence of opinions or behavior that one does not necessarily agree with.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 17th, 2015 at 4:31 AM
Title: Re: 4 Buddhaactivities
Content:
cck123 said:
Hi,

how can you perform buddha activities to help others? Can only
a realized master do this? Or do the protectors perform activities
for you until you can this yourself? Should we only make wishes
or mantras or should we train in the activities as best as we can?

I would be glad for your answers...

Best wishes
Chris

Malcolm wrote:
When your practice bears fruit, the four activities will be taken care of automatically. No need for a specific rite or ritual.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 17th, 2015 at 4:27 AM
Title: Re: what was first?
Content:
amanitamusc said:
Has the Lilavajra version been translated into Tibetan,English or other?
How long of text is it?
Do you believe all other versions were influenced by it?

Malcolm wrote:
It is very short, and I don't think it has been transalted, and it si very much a mahayoga approach.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 17th, 2015 at 3:59 AM
Title: Re: what was first?
Content:
amanitamusc said:
What arrived in Tibet first Mahyoga or. Ati  Yoga?

Malcolm wrote:
They arrived at the same time.

amanitamusc said:
OK thanks,now what version of Guhyagarbha  commentary came first?Did the Zur Mahayoga influence the
Ati  versions or vice versa or not.

Malcolm wrote:
The one by the Indian Lilavajra [its very short].

Ati, BTW, was already in Tibet via Zhang Zhung sNyan rGyud. You could argue that other Bon cycles analogous to Mahayoga also existed in Tibet prior to the arrival of Chos.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 17th, 2015 at 3:56 AM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
Caodemarte said:
There are at least 108 trillion dharma doors.

Malcolm wrote:
Santeria is not a Dharma gate at all, unless you consider rebirth in the three lower realms an ideal place to go.


Caodemarte said:
I don't necessarily believe that Tibetan oracles or Evangelicals or Santeria priestesses  are, in fact, possessed by outside spirits (If that is, in fact, what is claimed) so I don't worry too much about the dangers, especially as I am unaware of any threat or ill will directed to me.

Malcolm wrote:
By definition, oracles are possessed by mundane spirits, for example, Gyalpo Pehar in the case of the Nechung oracle, or Tseringma in the case of the Tseringma oracle, etc.

It is height of ignorance to believe that mundane spirits are satisfied with blood, as described here:
The orishas or ancestors eat the blood, and the people eat the meat. It is an act of communion with the spirits.
http://santeriachurch.org/our-services/ritual-and-sacrifice/


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 17th, 2015 at 3:37 AM
Title: Re: RuShi ?
Content:


heart said:
Keeping the lineage in Vajrayana means to first have the realization and then by your teacher being forced to expound the teachings through empowerment's, commentaries and instructions .

/magnus[/quote/]

Oh dear magnus. A true teacher would never force a student to do anything.

I remember specifically being on retreat with Chnn in 1986 and he specfically teaching his students to not force themselves to do anything. With utmost respect, I disagree with this.


Malcolm wrote:
He is talking about the teacher being forced, not the students.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 17th, 2015 at 3:18 AM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
Caodemarte said:
I find that kind of neat!

Malcolm wrote:
You find the possession of people by powerful worldly spirits "neat"?

I would say it is very dangerous.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 17th, 2015 at 3:06 AM
Title: Re: what was first?
Content:
amanitamusc said:
What arrived in Tibet first Mahyoga or. Ati  Yoga?

Malcolm wrote:
They arrived at the same time.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 17th, 2015 at 2:02 AM
Title: Re: Forbidden Archeology
Content:
Urgyen Dorje said:
As a science educator and a Buddhist, I think there's a fork in the road and we have to make a choice.  What MiphamFan says is exactly what Ganden Tri Rinpoche told us when he taught us mandala offerings and the abhidharmic cosmology that goes along with that-- these are all just representations of reality, so there is no contradiction.  Kongtrul's Myriad World presents that perspective as well.  No need to reconcile scientific cosmology with abhidharmic, or abhidharmic with Kalachakra, and so on.

Malcolm wrote:
The Meru Cosmology we use in Mandala offerings, for example, is not the universe developed from the shared karma of sentient beings, it is instead a representation of merit. This is not a modern explanation.



Urgyen Dorje said:
I think it's important to bring this up here, as I think our compulsion to locate things in history is a reflection of this same materialist confusion.  Malcolm has done a great job pointing this out.  There is no absolute representation of history, but rather, a space full of possible representations of history from different perspectives.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, for example, we have the official Buddhist history of Tibet [as favored by Bob Thurman], where Tibetans were ignorant savages prior to the 7th century, with no knowledge of writing and so on. But we can clearly see that this official Tibetan history was constructed to obliterate Tibetan cultural debts to Zhang Zhung.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 17th, 2015 at 1:37 AM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
Urgyen Dorje said:
I'm pretty sure there are no variants of Santeria that don't rely on animal sacrifice...
]

Malcolm wrote:
Nope, none. It's chickens all the way down...


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 17th, 2015 at 12:34 AM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
steveb1 said:
We now know that the earth and the star systems are ancient and vast in a way incomprehensible to the pre-scientific cultures...

Malcolm wrote:
Huh? Have you read the Mahābharata, or even the Pali Canon?

14 billion years is nothing compared to an Asamkhya kalpa.

To give you a picture, just check this wikipedia entry on kalpas:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalpa_%28aeon%29


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 17th, 2015 at 12:34 AM
Title: Re: Tolerance for other religions
Content:
steveb1 said:
We now know that the earth and the star systems are ancient and vast in a way incomprehensible to the pre-scientific cultures...

Malcolm wrote:
Huh? Have you read the Mahābharata, or even the Pali Canon?

14 billion years is nothing compared to an Asamkhya kalpa.

To give you a picture, just check this wikipedia entry on kalpas:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalpa_%28aeon%29


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 16th, 2015 at 11:50 PM
Title: Re: Forbidden Archeology
Content:
Urgyen Dorje said:
I find it interesting to see Buddhists do the same.

Malcolm wrote:
Whose writhing?

This idea takes the base line that plastic artifacts are the defining feature of determining the past. However, there is an old adage in Anthropology, "pots are not people."

The paucity of the text critical approach is that it cannot perceive anything outside its horizon of texts. Everything beyond the text is cognitively closed to the text critical method.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 16th, 2015 at 10:33 PM
Title: Re: More Propaganda - China's Panchen Lama gets high profile
Content:
Urgyen Dorje said:
Malcolm...

Malcolm wrote:
It was a joke...


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 16th, 2015 at 10:31 PM
Title: Re: Bodhichitta - What Is It?
Content:
Khalil Bodhi said:
Namo Buddhaya!

As a result of my renewed interest in tonglen practice and lojong I find myself puzzling again over the ideas of absolute and relative bodhichitta. Am I wrong to see bodhichitta as more or less karuna paramita? When I read the lojong commentaries it really isn't made any clearer which makes sense as they seem to be explaining it on its own terms without reference to the Pali Canon. Thanks in advance. Sukhitaa hontu!

Mettaya,

KB


Malcolm wrote:
Yes, bodhicitta is not karuna pāramitā.

Relative bodhicitta is first, the motivation to attain buddhahood based on love and compassion for all sentient beings, and then engaging in the perfections to achieve that buddhahood, practicing the six pāramitās: generosity, discipline, patience and diligence, concentration (of which tonglen is the core), and prajñāpāramita. Prajñāpāramita is ultimate bodhicitta.

Ultimate bodhicitta is Mahāyāna emptiness free from all proliferation and the means to realize it, śamatha and vipaśyāna.

M

Tonglen is strictly part of relative bodhicitta and is a means to rouse the courage to


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 16th, 2015 at 10:12 PM
Title: Re: More Propaganda - China's Panchen Lama gets high profile
Content:
Urgyen Dorje said:
I'm throwing myself in the fire here... but here it goes...

The reality of the situation is that new forms of Tibetan Buddhism are forming within PRC from a combination of Beijing's policies against traditional Tibetan Buddhism and the rise of a Chinese middle class with an interest and need for spiritual things, and money to spend on it, not to mention Tibetans floating in cultural and religious limbo as China destroys their culture.  Of course these "new forms" aren't related to the "old forms" that traditional Tibetan Buddhists would relate to and consider legitimate, but from an anthropological vantage point, they're every bit as legitimate as the old forms that have unbroken lineages.

From my side, this is sort of important to keep in mind.  Of course China identifying and promoting a fake Panchen Lama is a political stunt and a tactic to destabilize the seat of the Dalai Lama, and thus Tibetan Buddhism as a whole.  And of course people are intimidated into recognizing this fake Panchen Lama.  And of course it is an illegitimate lineage.  At the same time, there are certainly people who relate to him in a way that they would consider genuine.

This goes for a whole spectrum of other nontraditional forms of Buddhism created by opportunists, some of them more spiritually genuine than others, some more predatory than others.

The only reason I bring this up is that it's a difficult set of fault lines.  As one directly attacks Beijing's fake Panchen lama, one is fighting for the legitimacy of his lineage and indirectly of that of the Dalai Lama, and thus for all of traditional Tibetan Buddhism.  At the same time, one is fighting against what at least some people consider to be legitimate.

This might seem like a moot point, but look at all the fake lamas that people have legitimized in the West.  NKT.  Geshe Michael Roach.  People are willing to go down with the ship for these things, and I suspect that's the ase in China as well.  At least that's what I'm told by people who did Buddhist ethnography over there.   Out the destruction of '59 alot of very strange things have been created.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 16th, 2015 at 10:10 PM
Title: Re: Forbidden Archeology
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
We know quite well that Buddhist monks are forbidden from engaging in prognostic disciplines (which are not confined to astrology), but for what reason can we believe that the laity would refrain from their exercise? Doesn't make sense.

Indrajala said:
Evidence suggests they did, which is why it is prohibited in early Buddhist literature, but the extent of it among laity is ambiguous and can only be guessed at.

Malcolm wrote:
Every prohibition points to popular engagement, for example, drinking alcohol in its various forms. Prohibitions point to criticism of existing practices.


Indrajala said:
The problem with your text critical approach is that it ignores subaltern culture and tradition. It is myopic in so far that it declares that, without a contemporary artifact, third country report and so on, this or that thing did not happen.
No, it doesn't work like this. It simply says if there is no evidence, then you cannot make anything more than speculative claims. Even if evidence is available, one has to ask how credible and reliable it is. If you took Taranatha's history at face value you would be led to believe that thousands of arhats once went flying through the sky literally. This doesn't sound like real life to me, but then other historical details can be discerned from these narratives, like names and events.


Malcolm wrote:
Even if you read the Pali Canon you can get this idea. "This doesn't sound like real life to me..." is merely an expression of your positivist bias.


Indrajala said:
It is an approach very much in line with logical positivism, which is why I constantly criticize it as materialist.
I once met an older monk in Bodhgaya who said he was meditating out in the mountains one day and encountered goddesses who had been present when the Buddha walked the earth. I'm quite willing to accept he had this experience (meeting spirits or gods in the wilderness is a common experience around the world), but if he reported details of what the Buddha said based on the testimonies of these goddesses he encountered, how would I be able to gauge or evaluate these new accounts? I couldn't reasonably do this, nor attempt to enter it into the objective historical record. This is not how the study of history works. It is evidence based and all evidence must be evaluated through various means.

Malcolm wrote:
He could have written down what these devis said, and then they would become part of our tradition. That is very much how the treasure tradition works.


Indrajala said:
But if we accept your methodology, we can say nothing of this culture prior to its being noticed by Tang Chinese bureaucrats and Arab generals. But obviously there was a culture there, and a people, and so on.
At best we can say that such and such was believed about pre-Buddhist Tibet by Tibetans in the X century and perhaps some of the details are in fact correct, but we cannot definitively say so.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, exactly, this is about as interesting as a wet rag. This is one approach to history. Thankfully, it is not the only one.


Indrajala said:
It isn't so black and white like you paint it. I'm sure you understand this and instead you're just playing your role as a religious teacher, but like I said you change your opinions every few years so maybe in five or six years this discussion will look very different from your side.

Malcolm wrote:
I am not playing religious teacher. I just finally came to see how crippled the western narrative about Buddhist history really is.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 16th, 2015 at 7:16 AM
Title: Re: Forbidden Archeology
Content:
Indrajala said:
However, natal predictions and electional astrology is another matter which early Buddhists rejected.

Malcolm wrote:
Buddhist laity in the 4th -- 1st century BCE? Why would they?

We know quite well that Buddhist monks are forbidden from engaging in prognostic disciplines (which are not confined to astrology), but for what reason can we believe that the laity would refrain from their exercise? Doesn't make sense.

The problem with your text critical approach is that it ignores subaltern culture and tradition. It is myopic in so far that it declares that, without a contemporary artifact, third country report and so on, this or that thing did not happen. It is an approach very much in line with logical positivism, which is why I constantly criticize it as materialist. This is why I criticized Daverupa's approach to the Pali canon.

For example, the problem we have in studying pre-Buddhist Tibet is that the reliable textual record can go no further back than 7th century CE, based on criteria with your methodology will accept.

Our attempts to understand the pre-7th century culture of Tibet and Zhang Zhung can only be mined from Bon and Buddhist sources that are quite late, and pretty much everyone agrees that we can only make broad conjectures based on systematic themes found [mainly] in Bon literature [which is very understudied and poorly understood in the West] which clearly differentiates native Tibetan cultural patterns and practices from imported Indian, as well as Chinese, patterns.

But if we accept your methodology, we can say nothing of this culture prior to its being noticed by Tang Chinese bureaucrats and Arab generals. But obviously there was a culture there, and a people, and so on.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 16th, 2015 at 1:00 AM
Title: Re: Pure Land Buddhism and the Pali Canon
Content:
PorkChop said:
There is no proof that the Agamas are any later than the Pali. The oldest existing copies of Pali suttas are actually quite late.

Malcolm wrote:
There is no proof that the Hinayana canon is earlier than Mahāyāna sutras at all.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 16th, 2015 at 12:58 AM
Title: Re: Pure Land Buddhism and the Pali Canon
Content:
Serenity509 said:
Walpola Rahula demonstrated that the Pali scriptures, rather than being of a lesser vehicle, contain the Bodhisattva path:

PorkChop said:
No, he didn't. There is no bodhicitta in the Pali scriptures. The Theravadan idea of the bodhisattva path is almost completely undeveloped. In modern times, these articles from Rahula are not used in the sense of ecumenicism, they are mostly used as an attempt to show how unnecessary Mahayana sutras are.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 16th, 2015 at 12:58 AM
Title: Re: Pure Land Buddhism and the Pali Canon
Content:
Serenity509 said:
Walpola Rahula demonstrated that the Pali scriptures, rather than being of a lesser vehicle, contain the Bodhisattva path:


Malcolm wrote:
No, he did not demonstrate this. The Hinayāna canon does not contain the bodhisattva path by any stretch of the imagination.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 16th, 2015 at 12:54 AM
Title: Re: Q re Mind Transmission of Nyingma Kama
Content:
Urgyen Dorje said:
That's sort of what I figured.  Thanks.

Malcolm wrote:
Oh, I see the problem you are having — this should understood in terms of sound, lights and rays. The speech manifestation is sound manifesting as rays.

The principle of sound, light and rays is more clearly explained in Bon Dzogchen like ZZNG, it but it is an important principle in all Dzogchen teachings.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 15th, 2015 at 11:17 PM
Title: Re: Q re Mind Transmission of Nyingma Kama
Content:
Urgyen Dorje said:
Treasury of Precious Qualities v2 appendix 1
So, I'm reading about the mind transmission of the Nyingma Kama, and the text is discussing the three manifestations of the mind transmission of the Buddhas.  Regarding the "manifestation appearing in the matter of speech emanations", the text describes a syllable AH manifesting.  I'm trying to get my mind around whether the intention of the text is that a sound appears or an actual symbolic syllable, and if later, why this isn't a symbolic transmission as opposed to a mind transmission?

Malcolm wrote:
What book are you reading.

Oh, I see the problem you are having — this should understood in terms of sound, lights and rays. The speech manifestation is sound manifesting as rays.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 15th, 2015 at 11:15 PM
Title: Re: Forbidden Archeology
Content:
Dan74 said:
That's always been the sticking point for me - what use are the secular academic findings (regarding Buddhism) to my practice? Maybe Jeff and other people who are interested in the academic studies of Buddhism can share their perspectives.

Indrajala said:
If your goal is liberation from saṃsāra, then maybe not so much, but then you might have to ask the question what did saṃsāra originally mean and how did it change over time, and what did it come to mean to different Buddhist thinkers?

As one example, what is the relationship of saṃsāra to astrology? Originally Buddhists rejected astrology and said it was basically inappropriate nonsense, but that changed over time (a parallel development can be traced in India), and by the sixth century you see the suggestion that astrology is in fact quite important and knowledge of it is necessary for liberation. This is even more evident in Tantric traditions in which rites have to be performed according to an astrological schedule.


Malcolm wrote:
Buddhist monks may have rejected astrology as a way of making a living, but Buddhist lay people never did — why would they? It's too important scheduling rituals, calendars and so on.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 15th, 2015 at 11:06 PM
Title: Re: Q re Mind Transmission of Nyingma Kama
Content:
Urgyen Dorje said:
So, I'm reading about the mind transmission of the Nyingma Kama, and the text is discussing the three manifestations of the mind transmission of the Buddhas.  Regarding the "manifestation appearing in the matter of speech emanations", the text describes a syllable AH manifesting.  I'm trying to get my mind around whether the intention of the text is that a sound appears or an actual symbolic syllable, and if later, why this isn't a symbolic transmission as opposed to a mind transmission?

Malcolm wrote:
What book are you reading.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 15th, 2015 at 11:04 PM
Title: Re: Forbidden Archeology
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Yes, Jeff. Conventional reality is fuzzy, shaped by deluded perceptions and definitions constructed on the basis of those deluded perceptions.

Those conventional realities are by definition rooted in subjective delusions. You are making the basic error of assuming that conventional = real.

Indrajala said:
Where did I say anything of the sort? Conventional reality is how ordinary beings perceive it, which by definition means a biased and distorted perspective, but nevertheless that's why we call it conventional and not absolute or ultimate. Most people do not have access to any other perspective and hence we work within a perspective useful to most people, not a select few.

Malcolm wrote:
My point, simply, is that there are multiple conventional perspectives, even among human beings.


Indrajala said:
It wasn't so long ago you were expounding a secular line on the historicity of Buddhist scriptures. You might change your opinions yet again in a few years or sooner!

Malcolm wrote:
I came to the conclusion that such lines of thinking were useless for practitioners.

As for my opinions, maybe, in this case, I doubt it.



Indrajala said:
My own view is one of "it depends on what perspective you take". I'm not a materialist as I believe in the causal efficacy of immaterial forces like language, logic and spiritual experiences. However, these points have little bearing on an evidence-based analysis of history run through the gauntlet of precise philology. Buddhist history can be charted out according to a chronology that corresponds well with other parallel developments in the world, like rise and fall of the Mauryas and Kushanas, or the introduction of Hellenistic elements into Indian civilization. That means linear time and cause followed by effect. This analysis has its limits, but it works and yields good results.

Malcolm wrote:
All of this is just chasing shadows...


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 15th, 2015 at 9:49 PM
Title: Re: Forbidden Archeology
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
As I said, "a conventional reality shared by a certain segment of western educated men and women who agree to a certain number of facts [which often shift or are revised]."

All you did was restate my basic statement.

Indrajala said:
No, Malcolm, the conventional reality as we understand it is generally shared with people from other cultures as well.

I'm not sympathetic to people who want to believe the world really is flat because scripture says it is and want to find a way to rationalize that despite their experience and knowledge showing otherwise, or that all the miracles attributed to certain holy figures really must have happened because it is in a book. Such literalism is silly.


Malcolm wrote:
Yes, Jeff. Conventional reality is fuzzy, shaped by deluded perceptions and definitions constructed on the basis of those deluded perceptions.

Those conventional realities are by definition rooted in subjective delusions. You are making the basic error of assuming that conventional = real.

It would be better for you to just make a western materialist claim than trying to predicate your argument on Madhyamaka truth claim categories. You are making truth claims about events in time and space from a western physicalist perspective because that is what you believe.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 15th, 2015 at 9:31 PM
Title: Re: Forbidden Archeology
Content:
Urgyen Dorje said:
That said, it's never been clear to me why the study of Buddhist texts is limited to approaches that seem primarily historical and linguistic.

Malcolm wrote:
Whose history? Certainly not mine.

There are gaping holes in this approach to Buddhadharma, oh wait, it has nothing to with Buddhadharma...

There is of course no problem with people who wish to spend their time engaged in such activities, but it really does have very little to do with Buddhadharma.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 15th, 2015 at 8:31 PM
Title: Re: Forbidden Archeology
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
What you really mean is the conventional reality shared by a certain segment of western educated men and women who agree to a certain number of facts and proceed to offer analysis of past events based on those agreed upon facts [which often shift or are revised].



Indrajala said:
No, it is actually a lot more definite and reasoned than that. It is the evidence based approach to history and philology which assumes a chronology or linear historical development. This sort of perspective allows for the study of multiple religions without accepting their epistemologies and ontologies. The evidence based approach demands criticism and revision when new evidence or good conclusions are presented.

Malcolm wrote:
As I said, "a conventional reality shared by a certain segment of western educated men and women who agree to a certain number of facts [which often shift or are revised]."

All you did was restate my basic statement.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 15th, 2015 at 6:35 PM
Title: Re: Forbidden Archeology
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
In other words, the mere fact that a sutra or a tantra starts with evam maya śrutam ekasmin is sufficient for us to know that we are now in Buddhatime. We don't have worry about anything else.

Indrajala said:
Okay, but let's just be clear that the academy works from a secular perspective, which is basically conventional reality, i.e., how ordinary beings perceive time and causality.

Malcolm wrote:
Which ordinary beings? For example, animals and devas, while ordinary beings, have totally different perspectives about time and causality. What you really mean is the conventional reality shared by a certain segment of western educated men and women who agree to a certain number of facts and proceed to offer analysis of past events based on those agreed upon facts [which often shift or are revised].

Indrajala said:
I'm aware that there's other perspectives which yield their unique fruits, but the academy has a working model based on conventional perspective.

Malcolm wrote:
A conventional perspective, not THE conventional perspective.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 15th, 2015 at 3:42 AM
Title: Re: Direct introduction. What is it?
Content:
Karma Dondrup Tashi said:
That's certainly the finitive view.

In the seen there is only the seen ; in the heard, there is only the heard ; in the sensed, there is only the sensed ; in the mentally perceived, there is only the mentally perceived.
Buddha Shâkyamuni : Ksudrakâgama (Khuddaka-nikâya), I.10.

However:

Monks, I do not say that final knowledge is achieved all at once. On the contrary, final knowledge is achieved by gradual training, by gradual practice, by gradual progress.
Buddha Shâkyamuni : Madhyamâgama (Kîtâgiri Sûtra, 22).

Malcolm wrote:
Both of these sūtras are Hinayāna and should be understood accordingly.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 14th, 2015 at 11:33 PM
Title: Re: Forbidden Archeology
Content:
Urgyen Dorje said:
I think the more fundamental question is why attempt to demonstrate the historicity of any dharma?  For academics, perhaps, but why for practitioners?

The project of locating things in history of validate them doesn't exist in a vacuum.  In modern concepts of history are implicit a whole spectrum of ideas about progress, the nature of man, causality, etc.  It's tricky business.

Serenity509 said:
How would a Mahayana Buddhist seeking to demonstrate the historicity of the Mahayana sutras...

Malcolm wrote:
What does historicity mean to you?
Yes, our concept is based on the idea of chronicle [lo rgyus], at this time, when beings live this long, there was this teacher, who had this name, who gave this teachings to this retinue and so on. This is sufficient.

In other words, the mere fact that a sutra or a tantra starts with evam maya śrutam ekasmin is sufficient for us to know that we are now in Buddhatime. We don't have worry about anything else.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 14th, 2015 at 11:24 PM
Title: Re: Direct introduction. What is it?
Content:
Astus said:
It could be said that in the end various teachings lead to the same realisation of suchness. The difference lies in the method, however. Dzogchen has guru yoga, Zen does not. Zen teaches sudden enlightenment, Dzogchen does not. Dzogchen is based on tantras, Zen is not. Zen has nothing to transmit, Dzogchen does. Etc.

Malcolm wrote:
You are suffering from a misconception about the relationship between texts and Dzogchen. Vairocana writes in The Final Utterly Secret Unsurpassed Mind Tantra of Vairocana:
The Pellucid Transcendent State of Samantabhadra asserts that buddhahood cannot be obtained through gathering accumulations and purifying obscurations caused by samsaric impediments. 

If one wishes to attain buddhahood, three recognitions are necessary. Those are: the result does not arise from a cause, buddhahood does not arise from the mind and the intimate instruction does not arise from scripture. 

Furthermore, all buddhas do not attain buddhahood gradually, but attain buddhahood instantly. If recognized in the morning, there is buddhahood in the morning. If recognized in the evening, there is buddhahood in the evening. Vajrasattva said:

Buddhahood is not attained through purification [sangs].
Through recognizing the three kinds of self-origination,
pristine consciousness expands [rgyas] from vidyā.
Manifest Buddhahood is in three instants.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 14th, 2015 at 11:07 PM
Title: Re: Forbidden Archeology
Content:
Serenity509 said:
How would a Mahayana Buddhist seeking to demonstrate the historicity of the Mahayana sutras...

Malcolm wrote:
What does historicity mean to you?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 14th, 2015 at 8:47 AM
Title: Re: Forbidden Archeology
Content:
Urgyen Dorje said:
Which is why Thinley Norbu differentiates between knowledge that comes from karmic mind knowledge that comes from primordial wisdom.

dzogchungpa said:
OK, but how do you know which knowledge comes from primordial wisdom?

BTW, this is the academic discussion subforum.

Malcolm wrote:
Oh, right, which means it must by definition be confined to the materialistic myopia that infects Buddhist studies.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 14th, 2015 at 8:46 AM
Title: Re: Forbidden Archeology
Content:
Indrajala said:
This is how they were intended to be used.

Malcolm wrote:
This notion of "intent" is very problematical.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 13th, 2015 at 7:51 PM
Title: Re: Question about Sakya Pandita and Sutra Mahamudra
Content:
Bakmoon said:
...would they be able to attain ordinary Sutric Shamatha and Vipashyana

Malcolm wrote:
Yes.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 13th, 2015 at 8:16 AM
Title: Re: Tibetan Lives Matter
Content:
Urgyen Dorje said:
Tibetan self immolator Sonam Tobgyal slams Chinese policy of oppression in final letter.

http://www.rfa.org/english/news/tibet/message-07172015165543.html

Malcolm wrote:
Worth repeating so that some people who do not understand may understand:
"And Tibetans who petition for the welfare of their people are met with repression and arrest,” the document says.

“The Chinese have never shown any consideration of the [Tibetan] people’s welfare or wishes by addressing their concerns."

“I had to sacrifice my life to bear testimony to the world, and particularly to the Chinese government and people, that we have no freedom to express our grievances or tell the truth,” Topgyal wrote.

“I appeal to my Tibetan brothers and sisters, who have the same lineage and blood, to muster the power of unity and harmony by working toward resolving Tibetan issues in a concerted effort.”


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 13th, 2015 at 7:56 AM
Title: Re: Tibetan Lives Matter
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Chinese forces open fire on Tibetan prayer gathering:
Tibetan monk shot in the head

A Tibetan monk was shot in the head and at least six others received gunshot wounds when Chinese security forces opened fire on a crowd in Tawu county, Eastern Tibet on 6 July.

Several hundred Tibetans, including monks and nuns, were gathered at the sacred Machen Pomra mountain to offer prayers to mark the 78th birthday of the Dalai Lama.

Security forces prevented the Tibetans from reaching the top. A number of them went to another part of the mountain to offer prayers.
http://freetibet.org/news-media/na/chinese-forces-open-fire-tibetan-prayer-gathering


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 13th, 2015 at 5:53 AM
Title: Re: The Very Idea of Buddhist History
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
This ignores that in practice that Mahāyāna practitioners in India often memorized large portions of Mahāyāna sutra.

Indrajala said:
That may have been the case as it often is today, but the scriptures are organized in chapters and read like they were systematized, which indicates editorial revision and organization. Now, granted, the Vedas were and still are memorized in chapters, but they're not prose. They also were formulated at a time before writing. Buddhists rapidly took to writing and encouraged it.

Malcolm wrote:
The two are not necessarily in contradiction with one another.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 13th, 2015 at 2:20 AM
Title: Tibetan Lives Matter
Content:
Unknown said:
Authorities in Nangchen County, Yushu Prefecture, ordered 10 Tibetan townships to prepare for a summer cultural show, wearing “traditional expensive costumes” to show economic prosperity.

Police threaten Tibetans

The preparations were to take place between 1 and 3 August.

On the third day four police vehicles arrived with armed police, who threatened the people organising the event.

After the event took place, for unknown reasons police started to violently beat the Tibetans, injuring over 30 people.

Malcolm wrote:
And:
Officials brought the animal pelt costumes with them and forced Tibetans to wear them during their performances on stage.

Many Tibetans stopped wearing animal pelts after an appeal by the Dalai Lama in 2006; Tibetans inside Tibet burnt their furs. Since then there has been a marked decrease in Tibetans wearing animal skins.
http://freetibet.org/news-media/na/police-beat-tibetans-after-cultural-show#.VctzaNbfRcA.facebook


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 12th, 2015 at 10:32 PM
Title: Re: The Very Idea of Buddhist History
Content:
Indrajala said:
Mahayana scriptures often speak of copying scriptures, which indicates an awareness and encouragement of writing, not memorization and transmission through oral recitation.

Malcolm wrote:
This ignores that in practice that Mahāyāna practitioners in India often memorized large portions of Mahāyāna sutra. For example, the first version of the large Prajñāpāramita was translated into Tibetan by a translator who had committed the whole thing to memory. Eventually his translation was superseded, but for a least half a century it was the main text Tibetans used.

People are too quick to dismiss memorization and oral transmission in the presence of writing. Writing in India was used to support oral transmission, not supplant it.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 12th, 2015 at 10:25 PM
Title: Re: New forum: Dharma Paths Practice Community
Content:
Khalil Bodhi said:
I see you're not interested in joining Malcolm.

We would be happy to change the name to paramitas and we chose the name Dharma Paths rather than Dhamma Paths in order to be more inclusive.

There is no end to fault finding but consider this: in our own imperfect way we are trying to support the practice of the Dharma. If our mission doesn't speak to you or seems flat out wrong then who are we to deny your opinion? All are welcome if they come in good faith, take refuge in the Triple Gem and try to live their lives according to the five precepts.


Malcolm wrote:
I am point these things out to you because it is very difficult to create a so called "Pan-Buddhist" forum. E-Sangha was such an attempt and it suffered because people who follow various streams of Dharma often have little to share with each other because their views about the path are so radically different.

For example, you are coming at this from a Thervada POV, so naturally you language everything in that manner. Changing the name from Dhamma to Dharma wont change anything, no more than if I change my name from Malcolm to Phuntsok or Ananda Metteya, etc.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 12th, 2015 at 10:10 PM
Title: Re: New forum: Dharma Paths Practice Community
Content:
Khalil Bodhi said:
We have a section devoted to the paramis

Malcolm wrote:
Pāramitās. Mahayānīs practice pāramitās, not paramis. If you want to be inclusive, you have to be inclusive.

Khalil Bodhi said:
The one requirement is that we asknow all members to have taken refuge and try their best to follow the five precepts.

Malcolm wrote:
As defined by whom? What does refuge mean? This is a very loaded term. Does it mean you have a groovy Tibetan or Chinese name? Does it simply mean you are interested in Buddhadharma?

As for the five precepts, whose interpretation?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 12th, 2015 at 10:07 PM
Title: Re: New forum: Dharma Paths Practice Community
Content:
Urgyen Dorje said:
As I was taught, ultimate bodhicitta relates to the higher training of wisdom, and thus the right view of wisdom and intention, and relative bodhicitta realtes to all parts of the eight fold path as one is practicing them with a different view and a different motivation.

And as I was taught, empowerment and direct introduction relate to the higher training of wisdom.

Malcolm wrote:
Please explain to me where bodhicitta, etc., are explained in texts dealing with the eight-fold path.

You are conflating the three trainings, śīla, samadhi and prajñā, with the eight-fold path.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 12th, 2015 at 9:53 PM
Title: Re: New forum: Dharma Paths Practice Community
Content:
Urgyen Dorje said:
Sure.  Different paths have different schema, but they can all be understood in the context of the original eight-fold path of the historical Buddha.

Malcolm wrote:
Which Historical Buddha? Sikhin, Vipassi, Kashyapa?

The eightfold path is a Hinayāna path structure. We don't really practice that way in Mahāyāna, Vajrayāna and Dzogchen.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 12th, 2015 at 9:50 PM
Title: Re: New forum: Dharma Paths Practice Community
Content:
Urgyen Dorje said:
I've been a vajrayana practitioner for 25 years, and situating my practice in the context of the three higher trainings (ethics, concentration, wisdom) that span the eight fold path, is a standard part of shedra, and a standard part of Tibetan mahayana and vajrayana exegesis.  For me personally, if one does't understand this, it's hard to really understand how one is a *Buddhist* if one's main practice, like mine, is some vajrayana sadhana that was discovered in the wall of a cave as a terma.  Every aspect of vajrayana practice is easily understandable in the context of the eightfold path-- though with a vajrayana view.


Malcolm wrote:
The eight-fold path does not have bodhicitta. It does not contain the practice of the perfections. It does not begin with empowerment. It does not have direct introduction.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 12th, 2015 at 9:42 PM
Title: Re: New forum: Dharma Paths Practice Community
Content:
David N. Snyder said:
The current structure follows the practice related to the 8 fold path. As far as I know, all Buddhist traditions, all schools honor and value the 8 fold path, but as noted in posts previously, the best way to ensure that all schools are represented is for us to have membership from all the schools and the format and structure could still be tweaked as needed.

http://www.dhammawiki.com/index.php?title=9_points_unifying_Theravada_and_Mahayana

Malcolm wrote:
The path of Mahāyāna is not the eight-fold path. The path of the Mahāyāna is the path of the six perfections. The path of Vajrayāna in general is not the eightfold path, it is the path of creation and completion stages. The path of the Dzogchen is none of these.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 12th, 2015 at 6:19 AM
Title: Re: More Propaganda - China's Panchen Lama gets high profile
Content:


Serenity509 said:
Without starting World War III, China cannot and will not be forced out of Tibet. One thing we can do, though, is support China's liberalization, which has in recent years included a more positive stance toward Buddhism in general.

Malcolm wrote:
I don't care about Buddhism in general. I care about Tibetans, Tibetan culture and Tibetan Buddhism.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 12th, 2015 at 5:18 AM
Title: Re: More Propaganda - China's Panchen Lama gets high profile
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
The situation is a little more complex than just calling the Chinese Gvt. "enemies of Buddhism." China wishes to control Buddhism within its borders, and it cannot control Tibetans, so it exercises deadly force against Tibetans and Tibetan Buddhist establishments, while making a show of the fake Panchen for decorum and, it seems, to delude themselves into thinking they have a liberal policy towards Tibetan Buddhism, when in fact their policies are anything but liberal.

Serenity509 said:
I am not going to claim that China has always been a blessing for Tibet, but I will give China some credit for improving the living conditions of average Tibetans:

...

I am not going to apologize for bringing these things to our attention. Ideological or partisan thinking that ignores real world facts and the thoughts and feelings of all people involved is not helpful to Buddhism.

Malcolm wrote:
Fact 1) the Chinese refuse to educated Tibetans in Tibetan. This alone undermines Tibetan Buddhism, not to mention the rest of Tibetan culture.

Fact 2) Tibetans have the highest rates of unemployment in China

Fact 3) Tibetan women are routinely forcibly sterilized

Fact 4) Mortality rates for Tibetans are higher than for average Chinese citizens

Fact 5) Nomads are forced into resettlement towns, places they do not want to live.

Fact 6) The infrastructure investments China made in Tibet were not for the purpose of benefitting Tibetans.

I could go on and on.

The fact is that China should get out of Tibet.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 12th, 2015 at 4:51 AM
Title: Re: More Propaganda - China's Panchen Lama gets high profile
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
There is no point to that. Most of the participants are not Tibetan Buddhist anyway. We know the reason for this.

Serenity509 said:
If the Chinese government is an enemy of Buddhism, then we should please demand that Buddhist leaders from our own traditions not participate in the World Buddhist Forum, which is sponsored by the Chinese government. People call for boycotts all the time over far more trivial matters.

Malcolm wrote:
The situation is a little more complex than just calling the Chinese Gvt. "enemies of Buddhism." China wishes to control Buddhism within its borders, and it cannot control Tibetans, so it exercises deadly force against Tibetans and Tibetan Buddhist establishments, while making a show of the fake Panchen for decorum and, it seems, to delude themselves into thinking they have a liberal policy towards Tibetan Buddhism, when in fact their policies are anything but liberal.


Serenity509 said:
It would seem a little naive to insist that the government of India has no political motives whatsoever in providing refuge for the Dalai Lama and the Tibetans in exile

Malcolm wrote:
India and its relationship to the tiny Tibetan exile community is not on the table for discussion right now.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 12th, 2015 at 4:31 AM
Title: Re: More Propaganda - China's Panchen Lama gets high profile
Content:
Serenity509 said:
I think we should take the thoughts and feelings of these Tibetans into account.

Malcolm wrote:
These Tibetans are just ordinary folks doing what they are told, putting on a show for western reporters at the behest of the Gvt.

Really, S509, you have no idea what you are talking about.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 12th, 2015 at 4:25 AM
Title: Re: More Propaganda - China's Panchen Lama gets high profile
Content:
Serenity509 said:
What I recommend doing, then, is staging a boycott of the next World Buddhist Forum, and calling out any Buddhist leaders outside China who participate in it. I'm sorry if I'm wrong for making this suggestion.

Malcolm wrote:
There is no point to that. Most of the participants are not Tibetan Buddhist anyway. We know the reason for this.


Serenity509 said:
Is the China of today the China of Chairman Mao? Should it be supported in its liberalization or should it be feared? In recent years, the Chinese government has taken a supportive stance on Buddhism, and I think that should be encouraged.

Malcolm wrote:
China is suppressing Tibetan Buddhism along with Tibetans very harshly. In fact, virtually all Tibetans have all had their passports rescinded and are not allowed to travel out the PRC bloc, or even from province to province. Also China is interfering with the traditional nomadic culture of Tibet through resettlements. Lhasa is being dismantled house by house., etc.


Serenity509 said:
The United Nations is set to receive evidence that Chinese People’s Armed Police troops have repeatedly opened fire on unarmed Tibetan protesters calling for religious freedom over the past seven years.

Evidence of deadly attacks by the Chinese paramilitary on Buddhist demonstrators across the Tibetan Plateau – provided by witnesses, whistleblowers, and a secret government document smuggled out of Tibet – will be presented to the UN’s Committee against Torture later this year.

“The usage of live ammunition against peaceful Tibetan protestors does exist and it is also disproportionate,” Prime Minister Lobsang Sangay, the head of Tibet’s government-in-exile, told The Diplomat. “This is clearly in violation of international law,” said the prime minister, a former research fellow at prestigious Harvard Law School who wrote his graduate thesis on Buddhism and Human Rights.

Malcolm wrote:
http://thediplomat.com/2015/04/chinas-crackdowns-in-tibet/


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 12th, 2015 at 3:54 AM
Title: Re: More Propaganda - China's Panchen Lama gets high profile
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
I can tell you for a fact that no Tibetans inside the PRC have any faith in the Panchen puppet, not matter what photos you may see.

Serenity509 said:
How can one be certain of this, without conducting some sort of survey or poll?


Malcolm wrote:
Because I know Tibetans and have travelled to Tibet and China. I bear no ill towards China or the Chinese, but I think the attempt of the Chinese Gvt. to manipulate Tibetans through Dharma is as pathetic as it is transparent. No one takes this Panchen Lama seriously. Add this to the fact that he has been associated by his PRC handlers with the Shugden Cult, and you can really understand why no one pays him any heed.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 12th, 2015 at 2:46 AM
Title: Re: More Propaganda - China's Panchen Lama gets high profile
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
This not the issue.

Serenity509 said:
Unless the Tibetan Buddhists who come to the disputed Panchen Lama for blessings are just paid actors of the CPC, and unless the Tibetan Buddhist teachers and leaders living in Tibet who express support for him are paid actors of the CPC, then I think their perspective matters.



Malcolm wrote:
I can tell you for a fact that no Tibetans inside the PRC have any faith in the Panchen puppet, not matter what photos you may see.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 12th, 2015 at 2:16 AM
Title: Re: More Propaganda - China's Panchen Lama gets high profile
Content:


Serenity509 said:
I'm not going to further comment on the average living conditions of Tibet before the Chinese invasion,

Malcolm wrote:
They were much happier.

Serenity509 said:
When it comes to the disputed Panchen Lama, I know about the circumstances that led to his ordination. All I'm trying to do is look at him as a fellow human being, and see whether or not he honestly tries to fulfill his role, a role he did not choose, in a way that is helpful to others.

Malcolm wrote:
He is a puppet, a tool.

Serenity509 said:
Buddhism teaches that it's unfair to judge people without taking into consideration their causes and conditions, if you even judge others at all.

Malcolm wrote:
I am not judging him personally. I am judging his role and how he is being used.

Serenity509 said:
Who is going to show sympathy, though, for Chinese Buddhists and for Tibetan Buddhists who choose to stay in Tibet?

Malcolm wrote:
This not the issue.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 12th, 2015 at 1:09 AM
Title: Re: Global Warming / Climate Change: Caused by human activi
Content:
joy&peace said:
the 1 idea


of trying to constantly fight -


is that it makes people stronger



very inferior to the understanding that when we work together we get much more done.


Malcolm wrote:
Everybody on this planet needs to understand the real situation. The real situation is dire.

If, internationally, everyone insists on their "right" to drive their economies on fossil fuels to reach an imagined prosperity enjoyed in the US, for example, this dire situation will get much worse.

Cooperation is nice, but people can only cooperate if they share common values and goals. If people insist on their own country first rather than this planet first, your much valued cooperation is never going to happen.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 12th, 2015 at 12:39 AM
Title: Re: Global Warming / Climate Change: Caused by human activi
Content:
joy&peace said:
Disparaging others never helps.

True story.

And smiles - do a lot of good.  Disparaging others leads to a quicksand of disparagement; it is very true.


You and I may be very strong, non-attached to self - unable to be injured ; but others may be injured,


so it is not good to say things like this, ' we can't do it, ' etc.

Malcolm wrote:
Coddling others doesn't help either.

Smiles are fine when they are appropriate. It is not a time to be smiling about the state of the planet.

And we wont be able to do it if people continue to make excuses.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 12th, 2015 at 12:24 AM
Title: Re: Global Warming / Climate Change: Caused by human activi
Content:
joy&peace said:
Yet it is never of any use to say ' it is too late for them, '

and makes no sense, not to me at least.

Malcolm wrote:
Well, it will be too late for many of the creatures and plants that are going to become and are becoming extinct in Tibet and Western China if China continues its present course.

It is going to be too late for creatures and plants in the sea if we do not get our collective global shit together and stop our present course.

It is going to be too late for any cultural diversity if we do not halt the juggernaut of global consumerist expansion.

Nice emoticons and lovely sentiments will not adequately address the present crisis we are facing as a globe.

It is a question of priorities.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 11th, 2015 at 11:56 PM
Title: Re: Global Warming / Climate Change: Caused by human activi
Content:
joy&peace said:
' Eliminating fossil fuels is putting the needs of third world peoples first. Why should they wish to repeat the errors of the first world? Doesn't make sense. ' - Malcolm

The issue, dear friend, that I have is not that you are wrong - we have learned better, so to speak, you are correct.

Malcolm wrote:
The issue is that people in the third world should be educating themselves so as not to take the disastrous turn second world countries like China and the former Soviet bloc have taken, polluting themselves into oblivion. It is too late for China, they have already moved down that road. Their economy is in shambles from the bursting of the housing bubble, the credit bubble is going to collapse soon, all because of a mad rush to "expand" their economy. They have wantonly destroyed not only their own environment, but they are destroying the environment of Tibetans and so on, all in the name of providing a western lifestyle to their elites.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 11th, 2015 at 10:49 PM
Title: Re: Virupa's Mahamudra Doha
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Since this is my translation, I will answer. Until you are realized, you are deluded.

Astus said:
The poem seems to advocate entering Mahamudra directly and not through various stages, so the question if this is interpreted in a different way.

Malcolm wrote:
It is not about that, it is about being attached to methods.

It also says:
“Mahamudra” is a mental imputation of the childish.
It also clarifies that a guru is indispensable:
Having been connected with a sublime Guru,
The main verse cited from this by Sakyapas is the following:
All sentient beings are emanations of mahamudra,
the essence of those emanations is the forever non-arising dharmadhatu,
also all characteristics of dualistic appearances, happiness, suffering and so on,
are the play of mahamudra, the original dharmata.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 11th, 2015 at 10:34 PM
Title: Re: Virupa's Mahamudra Doha
Content:
Astus said:
Is https://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2014/02/virupa-treasury-of-doha.html known among Sakyapas? If so, how do they explain it, especially the following stanza:

"Some are completely tortured with empowerment rites, 
some always count their rosary saying hum phat!
some consume shit, piss, blood, semen and meat, 
some meditate the yoga of nadi and vayu, but all are deluded."

Malcolm wrote:
Since this is my translation, I will answer. Until you are realized, you are deluded.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 11th, 2015 at 8:29 PM
Title: Re: Global Warming / Climate Change: Caused by human activi
Content:


Serenity509 said:
Before rejecting the above sources as somehow right-wing or corporately controlled, please consider the actual poverty reduction that's taken place in China, and how it could have been accomplished without fossil fuels.

Malcolm wrote:
China is horribly polluted, and there is still widespread poverty, poverty with toys.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 11th, 2015 at 8:27 PM
Title: Re: Global Warming / Climate Change: Caused by human activi
Content:
Serenity509 said:
Could you please explain how forcing third world countries to cease the use of fossil fuels and nuclear energy would not disrupt their economic well-being?

Malcolm wrote:
Can you please explain to me how rapidly increased global warming caused by third world development is not going to destroy their economic well being?

Serenity509 said:
My point is that we should put the needs of third world peoples first, and we should listen to their leaders before making demands on them.

Malcolm wrote:
Eliminating fossil fuels is putting the needs of third world peoples first. Why should they wish to repeat the errors of the first world? Doesn't make sense.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 10th, 2015 at 9:59 PM
Title: Re: Global Warming / Climate Change: Caused by human activi
Content:
Serenity509 said:
It just seems to me very unsettling that the proposals made by people who support the idea of anthropogenic climate change would so negatively impact third world peoples. I wish that global warming advocates didn't have any ulterior motives that could potentially harm others.

Malcolm wrote:
If climate change is not halted and we do not globally change our patterns of consumption of energy and means of producing it, there won't be any world worth living in at all.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 10th, 2015 at 9:57 PM
Title: Re: Global Warming / Climate Change: Caused by human activi
Content:


Serenity509 said:
Patrick Moore, one of the original founders of Green Peace:

Malcolm wrote:
This man was never one of the original founders of Greenpeace and he is a shill for the Nuke Industry.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 10th, 2015 at 9:52 PM
Title: Re: The Point of No Return: Climate Change Nightmares Are Al
Content:


WeiHan said:
Keynesian theory failed also because it failed to recognise this and also its failed attempted.

Malcolm wrote:
Are you kidding? The US Economy has proven the validity of Keynesian Economics through the vast wealth disparity that has appeared in the US as a result of abandoning Keynesian policies.

WeiHan said:
Governments have never prove to do right thing. Mostly is done for self interest. The proof is in the way they manage economy. Hoping that they will manage climate change is like handling them another excuse to manipulate society for self interest again. So, even if global warming is true, this is not the solution.

Malcolm wrote:
What sort of libertarian koolaid are you drinking?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 9th, 2015 at 3:34 AM
Title: Re: Lamdre how many participant each session?
Content:
tobias said:
Hello,
in a text on lamde I read that you practice in groups of maximum 25 participants. It was said that even Verupa was not able to transmit lamde to more than 25 participants at the same time,  Thats why the maste has to repeat teachings several times to teach all the participant.

Now I found a picture that shows lots of people receiving Lamdre in Malaysia. The article says that there are 600 participants.

http://www.sakya.com.au/news/lamdre-malaysia

How does that fit together?

Greetings
tobias


Malcolm wrote:
Refers to the empowerments, not the instructions.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 9th, 2015 at 3:33 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen & Vipashyana on thoughts
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Śakyamuni Buddha demonstrated control over the elements many times, for example, levitating to the height of 14 palm trees. If we assume an average height of 30 feet, this is roughly 500 feet in the air, roughly the equivalent of a 50 story building.

zenman said:
Is levitation always considered a sign of full realisation?

Malcolm wrote:
No, of course not, but control over the elements is a good place to start indicating one's realization.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 8th, 2015 at 11:49 PM
Title: Re: Natural State and Nature
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Rig pa self originates from the basis because rig pa is just the recognition of the basis as one's own state itself.

Paul said:
Fantastic post.

Stupid question time, though. The term 'state' is used often in English language Dzogchen literature, especially in the DC. However there seems to me to be several meanings and interpretations of the word (same with 'condition') that have divergent consequences as to how the sentence should be understood. So how, precisely, are you using it here?
Bumping my question - answering it will be a massive help for me. This has always confused me...

Malcolm wrote:
In Tibetan, the word generally translated as "state" is ngang. This in turn has three interrelated meanings: 1) continuum [ rgyud ] or native place [ gshis ka ]; 2) nature [ rang bzhin ] or modality [rnam tshul]; 3) intrinsic power or effortless natural perfection ['bad med lhun sgrub].

Here I mean nature or modality.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 8th, 2015 at 10:26 PM
Title: Re: Dzogchen & Vipashyana on thoughts
Content:


zenman said:
I have also read him carefully. He is familiar with madhyamaka view but he hasn't realised it. There is no question about this because he keeps on saying very inmature things. I am not talking about his persona here, only what he teaches.

Malcolm wrote:
Someone who has realized Madhyamaka view is a first stage bodhisattva.

zenman said:
What is your point?


Malcolm wrote:
That such a person is by every definition an awakened person. Someone who has not realized Madhyamaka view is by every definition not an awakened person.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 8th, 2015 at 9:58 PM
Title: Re: Dzogchen & Vipashyana on thoughts
Content:


zenman said:
I have also read him carefully. He is familiar with madhyamaka view but he hasn't realised it. There is no question about this because he keeps on saying very inmature things. I am not talking about his persona here, only what he teaches.

Malcolm wrote:
Someone who has realized Madhyamaka view is a first stage bodhisattva.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 8th, 2015 at 4:05 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen & Vipashyana on thoughts
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
I have read of two kinds of rainbow bodies: the one where the body shrinks and the second where the body disappears entirely.

The first is partial rainbow body.

tomamundsen said:
Is partial rainbow body the 16th bhumi, buddhahood without remainder?

Malcolm wrote:
No. It is Buddhahood with signs.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 8th, 2015 at 4:03 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen & Vipashyana on thoughts
Content:


zenman said:
Awareness, primordial state, consciousness, rigpa, wakefulness... There is no fixed common system for translating these words is there...

Malcolm wrote:
Well, every translator tends to have a fixed jargon, though, they do evolve. The reason there is no fixed system is that earlier translations [1995 and before], whether by Tibetans or Westerners, tend to be pretty inaccurate. Things are getting more accurate simply because there is more commentarial literature available than there was prior to this time.



zenman said:
Tulku Urgyen's quote btw wonderfully has lead us back to the original topic! I bet that doesn't happen very often after over 120 messages He says that when thoughtfree wakefulness grows longer and longer and all the way up to 24/7 then one has attained great perfection.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, when one's increases one's ability to remain in nonconceptual wisdom [aka thoughtfree wakefulness, mi rtog pa'i ye she s], then one is Buddha. One's state is already "the great perfection." But one's ability to be in that knowledge [ rig pa ] or not is the difference between a sentient being who wanders the six realms [never], a practitioner on the path [sometimes] or a Buddha [always].

zenman said:
That is precisely Jackson Peterson's message as well, though he is not an authorised dzogchen teacher.

Malcolm wrote:
Being a parrot is relatively easy. Living that knowledge is not so easy. There are a lot of Dzogchen parrots, not so many Dzogchen garudas. The difference is this:



And this:


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 8th, 2015 at 3:18 AM
Title: Re: Chime Sog Thig Teachings from Shenphen Dawa Rinpoche
Content:
dzogchungpa said:
I always seem to get into trouble when I post something from SDR.

Malcolm wrote:
Revise to...

dzogchungpa said:
I always seem to get into trouble when I post something.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 8th, 2015 at 3:14 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen & Vipashyana on thoughts
Content:


Malcolm wrote:
Why don't you study a little bit?

zenman said:
Perhaps I should yes. There are so many books on Dozgchen though that I don't know where to begin with. And even if I did I am en extremely lousy reader...

dzogchungpa said:
I'm not a scholar, but here's a quote from Tulku Urgyen Rinpoche's "As It Is, Vol. I": By training thoroughly in this way, discursive thinking will gradually grow less and less, and moments of thoughtfree wakefulness will grow longer and longer. When this nonconceptual wakefulness lasts one hour, you have attained the level of an arhat. When it lasts throughout the day, you have attained the level of a bodhisattva. When it is uninterrupted day and night, you have become a fully enlightened buddha. There is nothing more precious than this.

zenman said:
Interesting quote, especially because it mentions the requirement of an arhat which is hinayana directly compared to mahayana- and vajrayana-attainments. I understand Tulku Urgyen was a great master but I wonder if this is actually so. This is in fact what I was after with my former question reg. 24/7 awareness vs. fully enlightened buddhahood. I have come across a few people who say that their awareness is uninterrupted day and night and has been for many years. And it seemed to me that it might actually be so without any "specialty" or egoism to them. I thought 24/7 was what arhats are in. I think this is a wonderful degree of attainment but surely anyone I have met saying this can't stick their hand into fire without getting hurt. That's why I was asking Malcolm for the quote, to get a reliable source or sources on this exact issue.

Malcolm wrote:
Everyone's awareness is 24/7/365 for eons and eons. But not everyone's knowledge of their primordial state is 24/7/365. Those whose knowledge of their primordial state is 24/7/365 are Buddhas.

Wakefulness, btw is Eric Pema Kunzangs translation du jour for wisdom, primordial wisdom, pristine awareness aka ye shes.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 8th, 2015 at 1:02 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen & Vipashyana on thoughts
Content:


zenman said:
Is not total realisation and 24/7 rigpa two different things?

Malcolm wrote:
No.

zenman said:
Can you come up with a quote to back this up?

Malcolm wrote:
Why don't you study a little bit?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 8th, 2015 at 12:25 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen & Vipashyana on thoughts
Content:


zenman said:
Is not total realisation and 24/7 rigpa two different things?

Malcolm wrote:
No.


zenman said:
I have read of two kinds of rainbow bodies: the one where the body shrinks and the second where the body disappears entirely.


Malcolm wrote:
The first is partial rainbow body.


zenman said:
Didn't know that about Shakyamuni. What is the source of this levitation story?

Malcolm wrote:
Pali Canon, forget exactly which sutta. But there are also many examples in Mahāyāna sūtras.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 8th, 2015 at 12:12 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen & Vipashyana on thoughts
Content:
pael said:
In some sutras Arhats dissolves their body by fire. Is this rainbow body?

Malcolm wrote:
No, this is not rainbow body.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 7th, 2015 at 11:57 PM
Title: Re: Dzogchen & Vipashyana on thoughts
Content:


Malcolm wrote:
NN says he is not there. This is why when students come to him and tell him that they are in a state of rigpa 24/7, he suggests that in order to prove it, they put their hand in the fire. So far as I know, there have been no takers.

If you are totally realized, you have total control over the elements.

zenman said:
Okey. This is a bit confusing for me. I thought 24/7 rigpa concerns mind (exhaustion of karmic winds) and awareness only. Is this not so? Why? Did Shakyamuni ever demonstrate control over the five elements in any physically astounding manner?

Malcolm wrote:
Total realization in Dzogchen means exhausting all mental and physical karma in this life — this is what is meant by achieving the body of great transference, like Garab Dorje, Vimalamitra and Padmasambhava. Some people say that Khenpo Ngawang Palzang had this realization too.

Even if you do not have total realization in this life, you can still manifest what is called rainbow body, where your body shrinks and disappears in seven days.

Śakyamuni Buddha demonstrated control over the elements many times, for example, levitating to the height of 14 palm trees. If we assume an average height of 30 feet, this is roughly 500 feet in the air, roughly the equivalent of a 50 story building.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 7th, 2015 at 9:31 PM
Title: Re: Natural State and Nature
Content:
steve_bakr said:
The Practice of Dzogchen, by Longchenpa, translator: Tulku Thondup, editor: Harold Talbott. "The main emphasis of Dzogpa Chenpo is to attain and perfect the realization of the true nature of mind, Intrinsic Awareness (Rigpa), which is the Buddha Mind or Buddha-Essence."

Malcolm wrote:
Is this Tulku Thundup's point of view, or someone else's?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 7th, 2015 at 9:24 PM
Title: Re: Dzogchen & Vipashyana on thoughts
Content:
zenman said:
Okey. Egoistic claiming is surely delusional. By sitting in fire I meant being exposed to fire.


Malcolm wrote:
He means sitting in a fire, like Padmasambhava.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 7th, 2015 at 9:24 PM
Title: Re: Dzogchen & Vipashyana on thoughts
Content:
zenman said:
Well, I doubt if he did. I think statements like this that you are enlightened only when you sit in fire can be very misleading and discouraging, although I assume this is not all what NN has said on this. How many of those who hear this statement made by an authority such as NN actualy get there? Zip, like one in a billion, if even that many.

Malcolm wrote:
NN says he is not there. This is why when students come to him and tell him that they are in a state of rigpa 24/7, he suggests that in order to prove it, they put their hand in the fire. So far as I know, there have been no takers.

If you are totally realized, you have total control over the elements.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 7th, 2015 at 9:18 PM
Title: Re: Natural State and Nature
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
You cannot achieve rainbow body by practicing according to the Kun byed rGyal po or the five sems sde lungs. Kun byed rgyal po does not provide a path, because it is a teaching on the basis [ gzhi ], called byang chub sems in Tibetan.

alpha said:
Volume 6 of the commentaries on Kunjed Gyalpo is on meditation. Prajna through meditation.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, of course, Kun byed rgyal po talks about view, meditation, behavior and the result. But in general, there is no practice of sems sde independent from mahā and anuyoga.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 7th, 2015 at 5:59 AM
Title: Re: Natural State and Nature
Content:
steve_bakr said:
The text of "The Supreme Source" cuts through all provisional teachings and what remains is "Pure and Total Consciousness" only. It cuts through every practice and belief dearly held.

Malcolm wrote:
Kun byed rgyal po is a sems sde text. It is principally concerned with the first statement of Garab Dorje, "Direct Introduction." It does not address the second two statements, "Remain without doubt" and "Continue in that state." [The three statements of Garab Dorje may actually be found in the ultimate root tantra of all Dzogchen, the origin of all Dharma teachings and specifically, all Dzogchen teachings, the sGra thal 'gyur Tantra.]

You cannot achieve rainbow body by practicing according to the Kun byed rGyal po or the five sems sde lungs. Kun byed rgyal po does not provide a path, because it is a teaching on the basis [ gzhi ], called byang chub sems in Tibetan.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 7th, 2015 at 1:51 AM
Title: Re: Natural State and Nature
Content:
dzogchungpa said:
Hint: maybe you don't understand the "context" being referred to and therefore you can't understand how they could be identical.

Malcolm wrote:
Rig pa and the gzhi are not identical. Why? Because if they were, the gzhi would never mistaken for an external object. It is because one is ignorant [ma rig pa] of the gzhi that samsara happens.

When you read my forthcoming book, you will then understand how it is that rig pa neither the nature of the mind, nor the gzhi.

steve_bakr said:
Keep us posted on your forthcoming book. I hope it is available in Kindle format.

Malcolm wrote:
At this point, we are not doing an electronic edition.

The very short explanation is, according to the upadesha class tantras such as the root tantra of Dzogchen, sgra thal gyur, that there is a neutral awareness [ shes pa ] that arises out of the basis because of a stirring of vāyu [ rlung ], sometimes mistranslated as prāṇa ( prāṇa is a vāyu ). Because there is a movement, accompanied by sound [ sgra ], lights [ 'od ] and rays [ zer ]*, there are appearances that arise out of the basis. When these appearances are recognized as one's own state, this recognition is what is called " rig pa ", it is also given the name " shes rab " or prājña. When these appearances are not recognized as one's own state, this is called " ma rig pa ", avidyā.

It is for this reason, for example, that the famous Aspiration of Buddha Samantabhadra begins:
All of the universe and beings, samsara and nirvana
have one basis. The two paths and two results
are the enchantments of knowledge [rig pa] and ignorance [ma rig pa].
The two paths are the path to buddhahood, which is based on rig pa; and the path of the six realms which is based on ma rig pa.

Futher, we can see that vidyā, rig pa comes from the basis, but it is not the basis:
Vidyā self-originates from that basis itself
without bearing the faults of external and internal reification,
free from the tainted darkness of amnesia,
therefore, it self-appears unaffected by faults.
Rig pa self originates from the basis because rig pa is just the recognition of the basis as one's own state itself. It self-originates because you did not receive this knowledge from someone else, you must recognize it in a direct perception called the direct perception of dharmatā, your real nature. The so-called "direct introduction" is mere a method to introduce you to "your own face." This is one reason why the metaphor of the mirror is so important in Dzogchen teachings. This rig pa, this true knowledge of one's own state, is therefore unaffected by subject and object dualism; is free from non-recollection, because once you have this unmistaken knowledge, i.e., vidyā, you will never forget it, and therefore, vidyā is unaffected by any faults whatsoever.

However western translators may translate these terms, what they mean in Tibetan is very precise, and between Chos and Bon, have exactly the same meaning.

You can see again in this following passage that shes pa, awareness, and knowledge, rig pa, vidyā, are used in two different ways:
One’s vidyā [rig pa, knowledge of the basis] abides in a pristine state,
not terrified by the terrors of the three realms,
not attached to sensuous qualities. 
Physical form and color do not exist
in self-originated nonconceptual awareness [shes pa].
One's vidya, rigpa, knowledge, abides in a pristine state because there are no physical forms and colors in consciousness; rig pa is the knowledge that the appearances of the five lights and so on in one's fundamental unfabricated consciousness are not substantial or real. They are merely the energy of the basis, from which that awareness is inseparable.

When this knowledge does not arise, then as the Aspiration of Samantbhadra states:
First, since vidyā/rig pa did not arise in the basis 
deluded sentient beings
cannot recall anything and are confused.
The cause of that is the delusion of ignorance.
Within that is a sudden unconsciousness
in which a fearful awareness stirs without clarity, 
Within that self and other are perceived as enemies. 
From the gradual buildup of traces, 
entry into the process of samsara happens.
If vidyā is the basis, then there is no way anyone could ever be deluded, samsara would never have happened. Indeed, there is popular strand of misconception in Dzogchen that claims that samsara never did happen. While this is true from the point of view of Samantabhadra [and hence the rhetoric of the sems sde literature], this is not true from our point of view, since we are continuing in samsara and gather karma and building up traces. If we are in the state of knowledge that is the state of Samantabhadra, then for us samsara will gave never happened. But until we are in that knowledge 24/7/365 and therefore totally beyond time, then we are still in samsara.

Since vidyā is not the basis, by mistaking the nature of the sounds, lights and rays that come from the basis for being dualistic phenomena, one is trapped by avidyā, ma rig pa and one cycles endlessly in the three realms. Dzogchen practice is the means the reverse this error because the basis of knowledge and ignorance is the same, and knowledge and ignorance arise on the basis of an awareness [shes pa] that exists as part of the basis.

My book expends a little energy in explaining these critical points in an introduction, but my explanation is not novel nor is it my own. I merely follow an outline that is common in both Chos and Bon Dzogchen teachings, and I use many citations from untranslated commentaries of Vimalamitra on the 17 Dzogchen tantras to illustrate my points. The only novel thing in my explanation is that I show the link between the initial shes pa, awareness or fundamental consciousness that arises from the basis, how that becomes pristine consciousness [ ye shes ] when in the presence of rig pa or knowledge of its own state; and how it becomes yid kyi rnam shes or "mental consciousness" and mind [ sems ] when it does not recognize its own state and engages in the dualistic imputations of because of ignorance [ ma rig pa ]. But even here, I do so on the basis of citations and reasonings drawn from classic commentaries, and I cannot claim any of these ideas as novel or as being my own.

M

* The principle of sounds, lights and rays is more fully explained in the Zhang Zhung sNyan brGyud of Bon; in Chos, it is mainly confined to describing the experience of the bardo of dharmatā.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 6th, 2015 at 11:05 PM
Title: The Point of No Return: Climate Change Nightmares Are Alread
Content:
Unknown said:
Evidence for the above scenario comes in large part from our best understanding of what happened 250 million years ago, during the "Great Dying," when more than 90 percent of all oceanic species perished after a pulse of carbon dioxide and methane from land-based sources began a period of profound climate change. The conditions that triggered "Great Dying" took hundreds of thousands of years to develop. But humans have been emitting carbon dioxide at a much quicker rate, so the current mass extinction only took 100 years or so to kick-start.

With all these stressors working against it, a hypoxic feedback loop could wind up destroying some of the oceans' most species-rich ecosystems within our lifetime. A recent study by Sarah Moffitt of the University of California-Davis said it could take the ocean thousands of years to recover. "Looking forward for my kid, people in the future are not going to have the same ocean that I have today," Moffitt said.



Malcolm wrote:
Read more: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the-point-of-no-return-climate-change-nightmares-are-already-here-20150805#ixzz3i314rN8i
Follow us: @rollingstone on Twitter | RollingStone on Facebook


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 6th, 2015 at 10:43 PM
Title: Re: Natural State and Nature
Content:
kalden yungdrung said:
If you can see above, the statement of Lopon Tenzin Namdak Rinpoche regarding Awareness, then i can agree easy with this explanation. Awareness is more "understandable" for me whereas knowledge not so well...... Cant' help it.

KY

Malcolm wrote:
There is no different interpretation. Please consult JLA. Knowledge is the more correct word.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 6th, 2015 at 9:50 PM
Title: Re: Natural State and Nature
Content:


kalden yungdrung said:
Tashi delek M,

Please, don't forget that the interpretations of Rigpa can be:
According Lopon Tenzin Namdak Rinpoche: "Awareness". So in Bon it seems to be that we have a different interpretation of Rigpa.

Malcolm wrote:
We have discussed this before, and this state of affairs is mainly due to the influence of western translators on Tibetan Lamas, not the other way around.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 6th, 2015 at 10:13 AM
Title: Re: Natural State and Nature
Content:
dzogchungpa said:
Hint: maybe you don't understand the "context" being referred to and therefore you can't understand how they could be identical.

Malcolm wrote:
Rig pa and the gzhi are not identical. Why? Because if they were, the gzhi would never mistaken for an external object. It is because one is ignorant [ma rig pa] of the gzhi that samsara happens.

When you read my forthcoming book, you will then understand how it is that rig pa neither the nature of the mind, nor the gzhi.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 6th, 2015 at 10:02 AM
Title: Re: Natural State and Nature
Content:
steve_bakr said:
I would say that the description of Rigpa as "knowledge" is too narrow and limited as applied to Dzogchen. It might be more accurate to describe Rigpa as "cognizance" but there is much more to it. It is not enough to go with a definition from a Tibetan dictionary. You must draw from original Dzogchen texts to appreciate the depth of Rigpa in Dzogchen.

Malcolm wrote:
Do you know Tibetan? If not, how can you say you are drawing on original Dzogchen texts?



steve_bakr said:
A translator cannot rely on a dictionary meaning for Rigpa.

Malcolm wrote:
Indeed, they must able to read actual original Dzogchen texts, there are but a handful of people who can do that, and they do not all do it well.

steve_bakr said:
One must be intimately familiar with original Dzogchen texts and the quintessential masters. I would be very dubious of a teacher who described Rigpa merely as "knowledge," and who did not give to Rigpa its quintessential and pivitol place in his Dzogchen teachings.

Malcolm wrote:
Rig pa fundamentally means "knowledge of the basis." Rig pa is not the nature of the mind. The basis is the nature of the mind. This is a point that Chogyal Namkhai Norbu stresses again and again. Of course, if you are a follower of Jaxchen, well, then...


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 6th, 2015 at 9:53 AM
Title: Re: Natural State and Nature
Content:
steve_bakr said:
I am correct, by the way, in reporting that Dzogchen masters such as Longchenpa define Rigpa as the nature of mind.

Malcolm wrote:
Citation please?

steve_bakr said:
The description of Rigpa as nature of mind occurs in the works, "Natural Perfection: Longchenpa's Radical Dzogchen," "Original Perfection: Vairotsana's Five Early Transmissions," "Self-Liberation Through Seeing With Naked Awareness" (Padmasambhava), and elsewhere.

Malcolm wrote:
The term rig pa is not used in the five early lungs translated by Vairocana, anywhere.

You have not cited a text, you have merely mentioned some texts. A citation means producing the passage in question.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 5th, 2015 at 9:05 PM
Title: Re: Issues in the History of Indian Buddhism
Content:
tingdzin said:
Malcolm: The "Old Tibetan Chronicles" is a fairly mythic account of the founding of the Tibetan Empire. What you seem to be referring to are the "Old Tibetan Annals", a year-by-year, fairly bare-bones account of what the court was up to. And, by the way, there is lots of external evidence against which Chinese testimony for the period can be and has been checked. Again, we cannot say that Buddhism was mostly Chinese until 780, and leave it at that, because (among other reasons)much of the remaining temple art from the very earliest temples reflects Central Asian and Kashmiri rather than Chinese styles.

Malcolm wrote:
http://otdo.aa.tufs.ac.jp/index.cgi?page=History.

Buddhism went through three phases in Tibet: the earliest period which began in the reign of Srongtsan Gampo. Buddhism was suppressed following his death; and revived again during the reign of Me Agtsom, with largely Chinese influences at the court.

A contingent of Khotanese monks indeed fled to Tibet in 740, but shortly thereafter left for Gandhara following a small pox epidemic.

Later, during the reign of Trisong Detsen, Tibet dominated all of Central Asia, Kashimir, Gilgit and so on. It is not surprising then that Tibetans have art and stylistic influences from Khotan, also they invaded it and controlled it, and we know that the monastic hierarchy of Tibetan monasteries was derived form Central Asia.

Still, epigraphically, there is very little mention of an intellectual presence of Central Asian monks. It seems, when you read Tibetan historical works on the period, the dominant external Buddhist influences were Chinese and Indian, with Indian Buddhism eventually supplanting Chinese Buddhism.

tingdzin said:
IMO, it is also already a major mistaken assumption to believe that whatever Buddhism did exist on the plateau from 600 - 900 was the same as that which arose after the period of fragmentation, although this is a topic too big for chat rooms.

Malcolm wrote:
Agreed.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 5th, 2015 at 5:46 AM
Title: Re: Issues in the History of Indian Buddhism
Content:


Indrajala said:
I think you mean 'Tibetan Buddhism' here?

Malcolm wrote:
No, I mean Tibetans.

Look, the Old Tibetan Chronicles are contemporary court records of the kind of you find in China, with corroboration of the kind you invoked from non-court sources.


Indrajala said:
No, it wasn't so simplistic as this. I'm not really convinced one could argue that Tibetan Buddhism in the Yarlung period was ignored simply because the Chinese were at odds with the Yarlung Empre.

Malcolm wrote:
Everyone knows that during the time of Trisong Desten, there were only 7 ordained Buddhist monks of Tibetan origin in Tibet. But there were Chinese Monks, Khotanese Monks etc., there as well. We also know that the court Buddhism of Tibet was largely Chinese until the 1780's, when, for various reasons, the winds changed and Tibetans decided to throw in their lot with the Indians.



Indrajala said:
Koguryo, you will remember, was an enemy state and conquered by the Chinese-Silla alliance in the 660s, yet they recognized the fact they had a big Buddhist institution there.

Malcolm wrote:
You are forgetting that Buddhism spread into that region by sea, mainly.

There was not much in Tibet that anyone wanted, and what they wanted [gold and salt] was brought down by Tibetans to trade for things in China [tea, silk] and India [spices].


Indrajala said:
As for Tibetan Ministers, well, they were soldiers; and even in the time of the 5th Dalai Lama, there were certain kinds of animal sacrifices done in Lhasa. This does not mean that the population as a whole were not interested in Dharma.
Okay, but it still understandably raises doubts about how deep the Buddhism went in the period in question.

Malcolm wrote:
It apparently went really deep...just look at Tibet today...what more evidence do you need


Indrajala said:
I'd like to look further into this in the future. I want to translate the Tang accounts of Tibet (there's two primary ones) and whatever other relevant texts I can find. I don't know when I'll do this though.

Malcolm wrote:
That would be very helpful.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 5th, 2015 at 4:26 AM
Title: Re: Natural State and Nature
Content:
steve_bakr said:
Dzogchen is the most direct (24/7) of all paths. It is nonconceptual Intrinsic Awareness. .

Malcolm wrote:
To what is this awareness intrinsic?

The term rang gi rig pa means "own's own vidyā", one's own knowledge."

It is used this way again and again in hundreds of Dzogchen texts written in Tibetan. Some western translators got a hold of the term, and with no justification whatsoever, decided that the " rang gi " meant "intrinsic", and " rig pa " meant "awareness." Now, rig pa can, in certain contexts, be translated as awareness, but not universally, and not in this context.

Rig pa, vidyā, knowledge, is paired against ma rig pa, avidyā, ignorance. Knowledge or ignorance of what? One's own nature, the basis, essence, nature and compassion/energy.


