﻿Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, November 5th, 2017 at 4:47 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:
Miroku said:
Hello, I had some indications it might be a good idea to do vajrapani practice. Is it possible to do it the same way as it is done in thun with simhamukha and guru dragphur? Please pm me if this info is too sensitive.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes. In the old short thun, Vajrapani was main male deity practice.

Mantrik said:
Which was the main female deity?

Malcolm wrote:
Simhamukha.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, November 5th, 2017 at 4:26 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:
Miroku said:
Hello, I had some indications it might be a good idea to do vajrapani practice. Is it possible to do it the same way as it is done in thun with simhamukha and guru dragphur? Please pm me if this info is too sensitive.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes. In the old short thun, Vajrapani was main male deity practice.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, November 5th, 2017 at 3:56 AM
Title: Re: Destruction of Spirits?
Content:
Tenma said:
I would like to ask, how do exorcisms work?  Do they die and be reborn in hell or lower realms, they become part of a mandala, or what exactly?  I've been reading on "destroying" a spirit in Tibetan Buddhism and am curious on how it works(not the oath-bound thing nor warding off).

Malcolm wrote:
Their continuums are liberated into the dharmadhātu and the exorcist takes their lifeforce.

Tenma said:
Then how come an exorcism of destruction fail?  I've heard of one particular spirit who was destroyed by the 5th Dalai Lama, yet he still is worshiped today with his own oracle taking trance still.  Why would that be?

Malcolm wrote:
Rebirth.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, November 5th, 2017 at 3:37 AM
Title: Re: Destruction of Spirits?
Content:
Tenma said:
I would like to ask, how do exorcisms work?  Do they die and be reborn in hell or lower realms, they become part of a mandala, or what exactly?  I've been reading on "destroying" a spirit in Tibetan Buddhism and am curious on how it works(not the oath-bound thing nor warding off).

Malcolm wrote:
Their continuums are liberated into the dharmadhātu and the exorcist takes their lifeforce.

Mantrik said:
Please could you explain the 'lower activities' liberation process relating to spirits?

I'd have a bash but I really don't know enough and it seems  from recent threads people want to know more.

Malcolm wrote:
No, one should have this explained during the empowerment, and then when someone has done the approach mantra sufficiently of this or that wrathful deity, they can learn this from their teacher.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, November 5th, 2017 at 3:13 AM
Title: Re: Destruction of Spirits?
Content:
Tenma said:
I would like to ask, how do exorcisms work?  Do they die and be reborn in hell or lower realms, they become part of a mandala, or what exactly?  I've been reading on "destroying" a spirit in Tibetan Buddhism and am curious on how it works(not the oath-bound thing nor warding off).

Malcolm wrote:
Their continuums are liberated into the dharmadhātu and the exorcist takes their lifeforce.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, November 5th, 2017 at 2:53 AM
Title: Re: The concept of the teacher’s “blessings”
Content:


smcj said:
I'm going to take a vacation for a little while.


Malcolm wrote:
Good plan.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, November 5th, 2017 at 1:04 AM
Title: Re: Race in America
Content:


The Cicada said:
In the case of your brother, I imagine that he remembers the days when the ethic of civil democracy was strong and Americans identified themselves foremost as Americans rather than in terms of some partisan identity group or political allegiance.

Malcolm wrote:
Sure, if they were white, and not black or brown (or depending on the decade, Irish, Italian, Polish, Jewish. etc.)


The Cicada said:
This is what Trump represents. Whether you're a white American, male, black American, Native American, female, white nationalist, Semite, Aztec priest, former Zulu chieftan, Buddhist, Votary of Moloch, Sikh, Hindu, moderate Muslim, transgendered person, or Kekist neopagan, so long as you identify foremost as an American politically and are concerned with the interests of the nation as a whole rather than merely one's own faction at the expense of the whole or with globalism at the expense of the lower classes, Trump is appealing to you.

Malcolm wrote:
Trump is appealing to racist white people, that's about it, apart from some self-hating blacks and latinos.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, November 5th, 2017 at 12:06 AM
Title: Re: The concept of the teacher’s “blessings”
Content:
Losal Samten said:
Well, some Kagyupas, such as Jigten Sumgon, say that devotion is the ideal mindset for realising vidya (post-instruction, naturally). Whether this is agreed upon by other schools or not is irrelevant, insofar as that it's the orthodox teaching for Drigungpas.

Malcolm wrote:
I don't think that Jigten Sumgon was a Dzogchen practitioner, despite his other excellent qualities.

I assume when you use the term vidyā you are referring to the specific knowledge imparted by a Dzogchen master.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, November 4th, 2017 at 10:34 PM
Title: Re: The concept of the teacher’s “blessings”
Content:
Losal Samten said:
Whether one gets to vidya via a cold methodology, or via overwrought devotionality is pretty irrelevant at the end of the day imo.

Malcolm wrote:
One is never going to accomplish vidyā through overwrought devotion, or even devotion at all. One will only accomplish it based on the intimate instructions of a qualified guru. Faith in such a guru is required, in so far as one needs to trust this person actually can impart the instructions you desire.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, November 4th, 2017 at 10:24 PM
Title: Re: Socialism & Communism
Content:
MiphamFan said:
Smith's prose is excellent...

Malcolm wrote:
Those Scotsman knew how to write.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, November 4th, 2017 at 10:21 PM
Title: Re: Socialism & Communism
Content:
Grigoris said:
Personally I always liked the work of post-Marxist and neo-Marxists and also the theories of people like Guattari and Deleuze.

Malcolm wrote:
Nomadology is fun.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, November 4th, 2017 at 5:54 AM
Title: Re: The concept of the teacher’s “blessings”
Content:


conebeckham said:
Malcolm does not discount the teacher's "blessings," let's be clear about that.  Nor do I.   Nor should any Vajrayana practitioner.

Malcolm wrote:
In reality, what people should be focusing on is the five indriyas, the first set of components of the thirty-seven adjuncts to awakening.

This takes care of the whole issue.

But you know I am a DC person, and our teacher really has a very different take on these issues than many Tibetans. He does not teach devotional Buddhism at all.

conebeckham said:
That may be, but paradoxically he inspires a great deal of devotional activity.  That you cannot deny.

Malcolm wrote:
He is kind, so he does not discourage it; he also does not take it seriously. People, Tibetans included, are devoted one minute, and gone the next to the next "important guru."



conebeckham said:
I assume by "five Indriyas" you're actually referring to the "Five Spiritual Faculties?"

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, the first of the eight indriyas of nirvana. The rest of the indriyas drag one down into samsara.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, November 4th, 2017 at 5:34 AM
Title: Re: The concept of the teacher’s “blessings”
Content:


conebeckham said:
Malcolm does not discount the teacher's "blessings," let's be clear about that.  Nor do I.   Nor should any Vajrayana practitioner.

Malcolm wrote:
In reality, what people should be focusing on is the five indriyas, the first set of components of the thirty-seven adjuncts to awakening.

This takes care of the whole issue.

But you know I am a DC person, and our teacher really has a very different take on these issues than many Tibetans. He does not teach devotional Buddhism at all.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, November 4th, 2017 at 5:08 AM
Title: Re: Non-conceptual thoughts ... ?
Content:


anjali said:
So, in other words, are you saying the Dzogchen view of Zen is that that tradition can only have partial knowledge (vidya/rigpa) since it has no teachings that everything appears and manifests out of one's own cognizant nature?

Malcolm wrote:
The clarity connected with lhun grub is not cognitive clarity, rather, clarity here is zang thal, pellucidity. This is the clarity of the basis.

Cognitive clarity is connected with vidyā; vidyā is both empty and clear. But vidyā is not the basis. Vidyā is the name for a consciousness that has recognized the basis.

This distinction is often glossed over, leading to much confusion.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, November 4th, 2017 at 4:58 AM
Title: Re: The concept of the teacher’s “blessings”
Content:
smcj said:
The purpose of the Dharma is to know awakening directly for oneself...
True.
...not to depend on faith in others awakening, not even the Buddha's.
You've just negated the Vajrayana as a method to know awakening directly for oneself.

Malcolm wrote:
Nope. I can have all the faith in the world in this or that guru. But if I don't practice according to their instructions, I might has well leave the beer on the shelf unopened and just admire the label.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, November 4th, 2017 at 4:17 AM
Title: Re: The concept of the teacher’s “blessings”
Content:


smcj said:
That's not what I'm saying. What I'm saying is that somebody that insists on holding on to their unawareness, which in this case is cultural prejudice against devotions and faith. cannot easily become enlightened.

Malcolm wrote:
The purpose of the Dharma is to know awakening directly for oneself, not to depend on faith in others awakening, not even the Buddha's.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, November 4th, 2017 at 2:48 AM
Title: Re: Non-conceptual thoughts ... ?
Content:


Rick said:
Any chance for an old dude like me — with a decent heart and decent brain and 40 years of various spiritual forays behind me, but quite new to Dzogchen — to make it to the other shore? Or should I be content for however far my little raft happens to go (this time around)? Just trying to be realistic here. Thanks!

Malcolm wrote:
Your only hope is Dzogchen, actually.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, November 4th, 2017 at 2:48 AM
Title: Re: Non-conceptual thoughts ... ?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
With respect to Zen, of course there are awakened Zen masters. But since Zen and sūtra in general lack the teachings on lhundrup, they cannot not account for how delusion begins nor do they have the framework for attaining the body of light, etc. One might say they have partial rigpa, since they realize the emptiness side of phenomena, but not the apparent side of phenomena.

passel said:
With respect, the Samten Migdron is not the last word in zen.

Malcolm wrote:
My statement has nothing to do with Samten Migdron.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, November 4th, 2017 at 1:51 AM
Title: Re: The concept of the teacher’s “blessings”
Content:
MalaBeads said:
Malcolm,
In the "sakya" section you have posted the the upcoming (in April, 2018) HHST empowerment of yamantaka may be taken as a "blessing". What is this?

Malcolm wrote:
It means that HHST is allowing people to attend the empowerment without making a practice commitment.

MalaBeads said:
I understood that part. But if you don't make the commitment to practice, then what is being conferred?

Malcolm wrote:
The empowerment.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, November 4th, 2017 at 1:02 AM
Title: Re: The concept of the teacher’s “blessings”
Content:
MalaBeads said:
Malcolm,
In the "sakya" section you have posted the the upcoming (in April, 2018) HHST empowerment of yamantaka may be taken as a "blessing". What is this?

Malcolm wrote:
It means that HHST is allowing people to attend the empowerment without making a practice commitment.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, November 4th, 2017 at 12:25 AM
Title: Re: The concept of the teacher’s “blessings”
Content:


smcj said:
Hey, if the Buddhas and Bodhisattvas find the Mt. Meru symbolism appealing I'm ok with offering it that way.

Malcolm wrote:
I think they don't care.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, November 4th, 2017 at 12:12 AM
Title: Re: The concept of the teacher’s “blessings”
Content:
smcj said:
Anyway that just the crudest cosmology. In Kongtrul's book on cosmology, titled "Myriad Worlds" in English, he goes through various levels of cosmologies until he ends up with a Dzogchen cosmology. You don't like that either. You're kinda hard to please.

Malcolm wrote:
Dzogchen cosmology is simply a variant of the cosmology presented in Abhidharma.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, November 3rd, 2017 at 11:24 PM
Title: Re: The concept of the teacher’s “blessings”
Content:
smcj said:
And I'm not selling. What I'm doing is attacking DW sacred cows. It's your karma, and your practice. You can do as you please.

Malcolm wrote:
No, you are not doing any such thing. You are making a tempest in a thimble.

smcj said:
People can do as they please. I am simply not going along with the DW echo chamber that thinks that the teachings on faith, devotion, blessings and the like, can be dismissed or can be interpreted in a way so as to be acceptable to our culturally preconceived values.

Malcolm wrote:
Faith, devotion, and blessings should be based on what is actually taught in sūtra and tantra about faith, devotion, and blessings.

smcj said:
Entertain the possibility that Vajrayana and secular culture are not compatible. If so, which do you chose? (That's not aping a Tibetan.)


Malcolm wrote:
Many tantras state that Mt. Meru is the center of our world. Also many sūtras. But there is no basis for this cosmology in science. Which do you choose? Do you go the fundamentalist route and insist, while flying around the globe, that there is a huge Mt. Meru in the middle of it and the world is actually flat, surrounded by a massive ocean bordered by iron mountains high enough to keep the fatal stench of the intermediate hells away, or not?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, November 3rd, 2017 at 11:10 PM
Title: Re: The concept of the teacher’s “blessings”
Content:
smcj said:
What he said about Tibetans is that they need to be more so. If we are less so than Tibetans, we need to double our efforts to become devotional compared to a Tibetan.

Malcolm wrote:
Actually, his critique of Tibetans is mainly rooted in Tibetans mistaking their cultural traditions for the Dharma, just as you mistake Tibetan cultural traditions for the Dharma.

It is not that Tibetan cultural traditions are not intrinsically valuable for Tibetans, but that Tibetan culture is not American or European culture.

The Dharma is relevant irrespective of culture, but aping Tibetans is not going to bring us closer to Dharma.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, November 3rd, 2017 at 11:07 PM
Title: Re: The concept of the teacher’s “blessings”
Content:
smcj said:
And I'm not selling. What I'm doing is attacking DW sacred cows. It's your karma, and your practice. You can do as you please.


Malcolm wrote:
No, you are not doing any such thing. You are making a tempest in a thimble.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, November 3rd, 2017 at 11:05 PM
Title: Re: The concept of the teacher’s “blessings”
Content:
Karma Dorje said:
You are the one positing that blessing is fairy dust. I know quite well what blessing is in the context of my practice.

Malcolm wrote:
People have all kinds of ideas about all kinds of things. But it is pretty clear what Vajrayāna commentaries define blessings as, and it has nothing at all do with some kind of power that gurus possess and everything to with how interested one is practicing the Dharma.

In other words, even if your guru has the power to invert the earth, this won't help you at all.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, November 3rd, 2017 at 10:37 PM
Title: Re: The concept of the teacher’s “blessings”
Content:


smcj said:
When a westerner can do the things I've seen Tibetans do then fine. Until then, stick to the undiluted source.

Virgo said:
no offense but this comes accross as pretty racist.

Kevin

Malcolm wrote:
SMCJ is the very picture of a self-hating western Tibetan Buddhist.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, November 3rd, 2017 at 10:36 PM
Title: Re: The concept of the teacher’s “blessings”
Content:
smcj said:
"Blessings" are not some kind of magical fairy dust. The only external blessing one can receive is being shown the path. That's it. The rest is up to you.
That's a statement that belongs on DhammaWheel.

Malcolm wrote:
It is a statement that belongs on every Buddhist forum no matter what the stripe. The whole reason we in Tibetan Buddhism refer to ourselves as nang pas, insiders, is due to the fact that as insiders we understand that liberation comes about only through our own effort, not from appealing to external forces.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, November 3rd, 2017 at 10:27 PM
Title: Re: The concept of the teacher’s “blessings”
Content:


Karma Dorje said:
What do you think he would have to say about current practitioners from Europe and America? I doubt it would be very flattering.

Malcolm wrote:
You cannot know this. But we do know what he said about Tibetans.

Karma Dorje said:
I don't see any point in rejecting elements of Buddhist theory and praxis simply because of one's negative conditioning towards Christianity.

Malcolm wrote:
The issue is not whether one is rejecting "elements of Buddhist theory and praxis," but rather whether one is importing foreign ideas into elements of Buddhist theory and praxis, such as grace, and so on.


Karma Dorje said:
Blessings are simple and obvious.

Malcolm wrote:
"Blessings" are not some kind of magical fairy dust. The only external blessing one can receive is being shown the path. That's it. The rest is up to you.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, November 3rd, 2017 at 10:08 PM
Title: Re: Race in America
Content:
The Cicada said:
Not only do those who support Trump often represent the figurative backbone of the nation...

Malcolm wrote:
Not even close.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, November 3rd, 2017 at 10:06 PM
Title: Re: Race in America
Content:
The Cicada said:
The "SJW" phenomenon

Malcolm wrote:
Is wholly a fabrication of the Right.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, November 3rd, 2017 at 9:25 PM
Title: Re: The concept of the teacher’s “blessings”
Content:
smcj said:
Their culture imbues their approach with respect, reverence, and credibility.

Malcolm wrote:
You have a lot of fantasies about Tibetans. I suggest you reread Words of My Perfect Teacher, and pay careful attention to how Patrul exposes the deep hypocrisies in Tibetan culture, including finding Tibetans quite deficient in faith, respect, and reverence to the Dharma.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, November 3rd, 2017 at 9:21 PM
Title: Re: The concept of the teacher’s “blessings”
Content:


smcj said:
Not interested. Never liked it.

Malcolm wrote:
Wow, your devotion is very fickle.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, November 3rd, 2017 at 9:47 AM
Title: Re: The concept of the teacher’s “blessings”
Content:


smcj said:
When a westerner can do the things I've seen Tibetans do then fine.


Malcolm wrote:
You mean miracles? Magic? Siddhis?

Read the Diamond Sutra again.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, November 3rd, 2017 at 1:15 AM
Title: Re: Non-conceptual thoughts ... ?
Content:
rachmiel said:
Aha! Thanks. Makes sense. (Though I wonder: Is there an "enlightened" level of being/knowing that lotsa different spiritual traditions can get to? Yes each tradition's enlightenment might have a different flavor on account of the culture in which the teachings thrive and are administered. But do enlightened Zen Buddhists, Advaitins, Dzogchen'ers, Taoists, etc. all experience/know the same core stuff ... stand on the same "other" shore?)

Malcolm wrote:
Well, first of all, I don't think there are any awakened Advaitans, or Taoists, or Christians, or Muslims, or shamans, etc.

With respect to Zen, of course there are awakened Zen masters. But since Zen and sūtra in general lack the teachings on lhundrup, they cannot not account for how delusion begins nor do they have the framework for attaining the body of light, etc. One might say they have partial rigpa, since they realize the emptiness side of phenomena, but not the apparent side of phenomena.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, November 2nd, 2017 at 10:50 PM
Title: Re: Non-conceptual thoughts ... ?
Content:
rachmiel said:
I guess, crassly put, do Tibetan Buddhists *own* rigpa? In the sense of: You want rigpa? Study with a Tibetan master, period.

Malcolm wrote:
Not just any Tibetan master, but a Dzogchen master. The meaning of the term is intimately bound up with Dzogchen teachings of the upadesha class.

Those teachings do not exist anywhere else. Using the term rigpa with reference to Advaita or Zen is so out of context as to be meaningless. Advaitans, Zen folks, Vipassanistas don't practice Atiyoga, and do not even have any of the conceptual framework that defines rigpa as rigpa.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, November 2nd, 2017 at 10:14 PM
Title: Re: Guru Yoga & Lamanism: Speculations on Shingon and Nichiren Schools
Content:
illarraza said:
No Guru Yoga in Shingon???

"I take refuge in the Great Guru, the Vajra of all pervading spiritual radiance." -- Shingon prayer

Who is kidding whom?

Malcolm wrote:
Taking refuge in a guru is not guru yoga. Guru yoga is a specific kind of practice that does not exist in the lower/outer tantras practiced in Shingon and Tendai.

As for Avici hell, you know what they say, heaven for the climate, hell for the company.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, November 2nd, 2017 at 10:12 PM
Title: Re: Best political system for Dharma
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Nepal is a perfect example of the declining fortunes of kings injuring the Dharma.

Grigoris said:
Didn't the heir apparent to the Nepalese throne go batshit crazy with a sub machine gun and kill half his family, thus paving the way for democracy (at last)?

Malcolm wrote:
Nepal's Kin Birendra established a parliament. When he was assassinated by his nephew in 2001, (and not his son as is popularly alleged), his brother rook power, dissolved the government, and then was forced to step down, etc.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nepal#Kingdom_of_Nepal_.281768.E2.80.932008.29


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, November 2nd, 2017 at 10:04 PM
Title: Re: Best political system for Dharma
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Bhutan was founded on the overthrow of a religious monarch by a secular monarch.

Nepal is a perfect example of the declining fortunes of kings injuring the Dharma.

madhusudan said:
I'm happy to stand corrected as I'm confident you are more knowledgeable in this subject area. Can you inform me on how the Nepali royals injured the Dharma? I was impressed during my time there in the late 90s with people's devotion.

Malcolm wrote:
Well, the because of the instability causes by the assassination of the royal family, the Maoists gained a lot of control, and they exerted a lot of pressure on small monasteries in the countryside, etc., and Nepal has basically become a proxy for China, none of that is good for the Dharma.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, November 2nd, 2017 at 11:36 AM
Title: Re: Non-conceptual thoughts ... ?
Content:
passel said:
soon the core technical terms went untranslated

Malcolm wrote:
This is why I don't translate some of them, a short list of about twenty terms I think should remain either in Sanskrit or Tibetan.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, November 2nd, 2017 at 11:01 AM
Title: Re: Best political system for Dharma
Content:
madhusudan said:
I admit I was surprised to see monarchy as your proposed model, but when I thought about it, it seems true empirically if taking Bhutan and (formerly) Nepal as examples.

Malcolm wrote:
Bhutan was founded on the overthrow of a religious monarch by a secular monarch.

Nepal is a perfect example of the declining fortunes of kings injuring the Dharma.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, November 2nd, 2017 at 10:59 AM
Title: Re: Non-conceptual thoughts ... ?
Content:
rachmiel said:
This rigpa thingie is really quite mysterious to me.


Malcolm wrote:
It just means knowledge of the nature of your mind, among other things.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, November 2nd, 2017 at 10:58 AM
Title: Re: Non-conceptual thoughts ... ?
Content:


passel said:
I’m looking at the glossary in his Heart of the Great Perfection now- he’s got pristine awareness for rigpa.

Malcolm wrote:
That's too bad. It is not a very justified reading. Listen to my podcast to find out why.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, November 2nd, 2017 at 8:11 AM
Title: Re: How to say "Happy Birthday" to a tulku.
Content:
arturopablo said:
Hi, my name is Pablo and I am part of a little Buddhist community in Guayaquil, Ecuador. We are making a video for the birthday of the Venerable Namkhai Norbu. My knowledge of Tibetan is very basic, I can barely read and can only make smalltalk. Only recently I am beginning to study proper grammar. I'm using this as a opportunity to learn more about Tibetan language.

Malcolm wrote:
They don't say "happy birthday" in Tibetan at all.

They might say tashi deleks! though.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, November 2nd, 2017 at 8:09 AM
Title: Re: Socialism & Communism
Content:
PuerAzaelis said:
Loppon, if you feel inclined pls elaborate. Labor is not the only factor of production. But it may be that many or most entrepreneurs are motivated by jealousy, etc.  in which case capital is controlled by ... um, a-holes. Therefore labor surplus is really the only honest factor left.

Malcolm wrote:
Labor value does not account for the water/diamond paradox.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, November 2nd, 2017 at 4:47 AM
Title: Re: Best political system for Dharma
Content:
tiagolps said:
There are no Patrons of Buddhism in democracy.

boda said:
How much patronage does Buddhism require?

I think it has renunciate ethic that other religions may lack, so it may be somewhat antithetical to require lavish cathedrals or whatever.

tiagolps said:
Patronage isn't about building fancy temples only. Monarchs were also patrons of translation projects.

Malcolm wrote:
That only lasted a short time in Tibetan history. Virtually none of the new translations school translators had anything like royal patronage.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, November 2nd, 2017 at 4:34 AM
Title: Re: Best political system for Dharma
Content:


Nemo said:
"Freedom without socialism is privilege & injustice,
And socialism without freedom is slavery & brutality."
- Mikhail Bakunin

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, old Bookchin, the architect of Libertarian Municipalism. His critique of Socialism/communism is spot on.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, November 2nd, 2017 at 12:33 AM
Title: Re: BOUND. TORTURED. KILLED.
Content:
Minobu said:
how do you not want as a Buddhist universal health care...

Malcolm wrote:
Who said I didn't want Universal Health Care? I am a Berniecrat.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, November 2nd, 2017 at 12:21 AM
Title: Re: BOUND. TORTURED. KILLED.
Content:


Minobu said:
Venezuela seems like some kind of pariah as of late as is Cuba...to you guys anyway.

Malcolm wrote:
Venezuela is a perfect example of the failure of a classical Socialist planned economy.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 1st, 2017 at 11:20 PM
Title: Re: Best political system for Dharma
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Hahaha, really, man — listen to yourself, "We can't really know for sure in what form religious freedom would exist in Europe if it were less democratic," we can know for sure. There would be less religious freedom.

And the diversity of Buddhism in the West is not a product of immigration. It is a product of westerners going to Asia and returning with Buddhist traditions, sometimes with monks in tow.

tiagolps said:
Liechtenstein is an example of a less democratic country in Europe with religious freedom.


Malcolm wrote:
Lichtenstein is a state where they practice Direct Democracy.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 1st, 2017 at 11:06 PM
Title: Re: Non-conceptual thoughts ... ?
Content:
rachmiel said:
Which is jnana, not rigpa, yes?

Malcolm wrote:
Yes.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 1st, 2017 at 11:02 PM
Title: Re: Best political system for Dharma
Content:


tiagolps said:
But modern democracy really hasn't done much for Buddhism...

Malcolm wrote:
Seriously, are you kidding? In the US and Europe, one can experience more or less every form of Buddhism there is. This is a directly result of Democratic institutions.

tiagolps said:
Well it's more of a result of immigration... Like I said before, we can't really know for sure in what form religious freedom would exist in Europe if it were less democratic. The Russian Monarchy is a good example.

Malcolm wrote:
Hahaha, really, man — listen to yourself, "We can't really know for sure in what form religious freedom would exist in Europe if it were less democratic," we can know for sure. There would be less religious freedom.

And the diversity of Buddhism in the West is not a product of immigration. It is a product of westerners going to Asia and returning with Buddhist traditions, sometimes with monks in tow.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 1st, 2017 at 10:47 PM
Title: Re: Best political system for Dharma
Content:


tiagolps said:
But modern democracy really hasn't done much for Buddhism...

Malcolm wrote:
Seriously, are you kidding? In the US and Europe, one can experience more or less every form of Buddhism there is. This is a directly result of Democratic institutions.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 1st, 2017 at 10:18 PM
Title: Re: Best political system for Dharma
Content:
Diderot said:
Men will never be free until the last king is strangled with the guts of the last priest

DGA said:
Sure, call it hyperbole, but the principle is sound.

tiagolps said:
The question is, would that be true freedom?


Guys the question isn't "which political system is better?”
It's "which political system as been kinder to Buddhadharma throughout history?".

I'll continue to say that it has been Monarchy.

Malcolm wrote:
Your question actually is "Best political system for Dharma" with no qualifications.

And I still say that since the fortunes of Dharma when connected to the fortunes of kings decline when the fortune of this or that king declines, I'll pick modern Democracy, since it is predicated on separation of church and state.

For example, China, 843. The Taoist emperor of China, Wuzong ruthlessly destroyed 4600 Buddhist monasteries.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Anti-Buddhist_Persecution

Langdarma was doubtlessly influenced by this guys move to eliminate the tax free status of Monasteries in Tibet and was assassinated for his trouble.

Also, various kings in Southeast Asia suppressed Mahāyāna and Vajrayāna.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 1st, 2017 at 10:16 PM
Title: Re: Morality of stockholding
Content:
justsit said:
Employees are usually paid a wage to provide labor ... they are usually not "forced" to work at a particular company. It's what used to be called a social contract - I work for you, you pay me.

PuerAzaelis said:
Does one employee have the same bargaining power as a company?

How many jobs can the employee afford to lose, versus how many jobs can the company afford to lose?

Malcolm wrote:
See? it is better to be a company.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 1st, 2017 at 9:47 PM
Title: Re: Socialism & Communism
Content:



Nicholas Weeks said:
The CPUSA is not "expletive done", as their optimistic piece suggests.  When more of the thuggish Left discovers where most of their ideas & practices came from, they will embrace their malign forebears' movement eagerly.

http://www.cpusa.org/article/membership-surge-frames-upcoming-communist-conference/


Malcolm wrote:
They are a fringe group. Communism is done. It’s toast. Marx is for adolescents.

pothigai said:
I'd definitely agree that the 'Orthodox Marxism' of the 19th and 20th Centuries is done. A lot of what is thought of as 'Marxism' is pretty much Marx as he was interpreted by Engels and Lenin according to the conditions in which they lived. However, a lot of Marx's analysis of capitalism, both in Das Kapital and his earlier, more humanist work is definitely relevant in my opinion.

I think a lot of the failure of 20th Century Marxism is due to people reading a lot into rather undeveloped aspects of Marx's theory of capitalism, and also trying to read it through the lens of Hegel's Science of Logic.


Malcolm wrote:
Marx is not terribly original, IMO. His economics fall squarely in the Adam Smith school of the labor theory of value.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 1st, 2017 at 9:18 PM
Title: Re: Non-conceptual thoughts ... ?
Content:



passel said:
I think pristine awareness i

Malcolm wrote:
It is his translation of ye shes.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 1st, 2017 at 9:07 PM
Title: Re: BOUND. TORTURED. KILLED.
Content:


DGA said:
Really, Canada's national identity (and I'm speaking of hegemonic Canada here, which is English Canada) is based in anti-Americanism from the very start:

Malcolm wrote:
Yup, we kicked the Tory bastards right out..


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 1st, 2017 at 9:03 PM
Title: Re: Best political system for Dharma
Content:
DGA said:
I don't know if there exists an exact term for a political system that would meet these criteria.

Malcolm wrote:
Equal measures of Libertarian Municipalism and Deep Ecology.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 1st, 2017 at 11:16 AM
Title: Re: Best political system for Dharma
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
... democracy ...

PuerAzaelis said:
Like the statement about communism which has become a bad joke (and perhaps capitalism too), it has never been tried.

Malcolm wrote:
Sure it has, and I'll take what passes for it, with all its warts and blemishes, over any other system which has been tried so far.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 1st, 2017 at 10:39 AM
Title: Re: Best political system for Dharma
Content:
smcj said:
A political system that accommodates the Precious Human Rebirth.

Malcolm wrote:
At this point in time, I'd choose democracy then. The problem with tying the fortune of Dharma to kings is that history clearly shows when the fortune of kings suffer, so does the fortune of Dharma.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 1st, 2017 at 10:16 AM
Title: Re: Socialism & Communism
Content:


Malcolm wrote:
Dude, you give communism way, way too much power. It's [expletive to be supplied by your imagination] done. There is no more communism anymore, nor is it possible anymore. Corporations have amassed far too much wealth to ever permit anything like a communist revolution, save an absolute collapse of the world economy, in which they will be powerless to respond in any case.

Nicholas Weeks said:
The CPUSA is not "expletive done", as their optimistic piece suggests.  When more of the thuggish Left discovers where most of their ideas & practices came from, they will embrace their malign forebears' movement eagerly.

http://www.cpusa.org/article/membership-surge-frames-upcoming-communist-conference/


Malcolm wrote:
They are a fringe group. Communism is done. It’s toast. Marx is for adolescents.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 1st, 2017 at 9:45 AM
Title: Re: Best political system for Dharma
Content:
tiagolps said:
On the other hand what as Democracy done for Dharma...?

Malcolm wrote:
.

Allowed it to survive in age where we don’t much like kings.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 1st, 2017 at 6:54 AM
Title: Re: BOUND. TORTURED. KILLED.
Content:


Minobu said:
Canada is a socialist country and it works. free health care..

Malcolm wrote:
No, it isn't.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 1st, 2017 at 4:56 AM
Title: Re: Approaching political subjects from the wrong angle/Too much focus on politics(?)
Content:
Brunelleschi said:
Hi all,

It seems that lately(?), there's been a lot of debates regarding current events. Whether it's Trump and the rise of right-wing extremism in the US and Europe, DAESH/ISIS/ISIL, the terrible situation for Rohyingas in Burma/Myanmar or "local" events such as the Transgender-debate in the US.

Perhaps there could be a better way of approaching this, by having a more 'Dharmic' focus. I.e. rather than just having your run of the mill political debate, why not try and approach it from a perspective more in line with the goals and objectives of this forum (as I see it), a constructive debate about Buddha Dharma, its practices and (positive) impact.

Here are two examples of books using Buddhist teachings to ameliorate our relation with our environment and patterns of consumption:

https://www.amazon.com/How-Much-Enough-Consumerism-Environment/dp/086171685X

https://www.amazon.com/Interconnected-Embracing-Life-Global-Society/dp/1614294127

Just a suggestion.

Malcolm wrote:
This is a Buddhist discussion forum. That means things will be discussed by Buddhists of various persuasions and political leanings.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 1st, 2017 at 4:50 AM
Title: Re: BOUND. TORTURED. KILLED.
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Socialism entails centrally planned economies.

Grigoris said:
So what about socialist democracies of the Northern European ilk?  Are their markets incapable of providing goods and services?

Malcolm wrote:
They are capitalist economies with free markets.

The basic principle of a free market is that consumers need to able to make informed choices. One of the things (even conservative economists used to admit this) is that people cannot make informed choices about is health care, for example. Since people cannot make informed choices about some things, these kinds of things should be strictly regulated, as they are in those countries, and Canada.

But apart from things like healthcare and education, these countries you mention do not really have centrally planned economies. They are "socialist" only in so far as their governments provide social services to everyone. But in reality, they are no more socialist than the New Deal was socialist.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 1st, 2017 at 4:13 AM
Title: Re: Shakyamuni: A Narrative of Faith
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
What I am saying is that this issue of infinite regress has been addressed by Indian masters in the past, and they find it to be a nonissue. They accept it since it is consistent with the Buddhist doctrine of dependent origination.

Queequeg said:
There is no dispute from me. I'm addressing the distress of identifying the Eternal Buddha that has been playing out on these boards over the last few weeks/months.

On that note... do you have references to the Indian masters discussed these issues?

Malcolm wrote:
Nagarjuna addresses it in the MMK somewhere.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 1st, 2017 at 4:06 AM
Title: Re: BOUND. TORTURED. KILLED.
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Socialism's track record shows that it fails worse.

Grigoris said:
I disagree, I think it failed in a different way and for different reasons.

He was right about capitalism being progressive. He was wrong about socialism.
By socialism you mean what exactly?

Malcolm wrote:
Socialism entails centrally planned economies.

Grigoris said:
"Free market" capitalists are also fantasists, just like socialists. They do not understand the relationship between power and markets. Most people don't.
You think "socialists" (still waiting on your defintion) do not understand the relationship between power and market?

Malcolm wrote:
[/quote]

Yes, in fact I think they don't.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 1st, 2017 at 3:38 AM
Title: Re: Shakyamuni: A Narrative of Faith
Content:


Queequeg said:
The problem with this is that for Buddhahood to be attained, Buddhahood had to a priori be an option. Further, since the Lotus Sutra is always the gate to Buddhahood, it needed to be taught by an even more primordial buddha, and so really, that Buddha is the primordial buddha - and yet that buddha needed to hear the Lotus Sutra, also... you see here we end up in an infinite regression.

Malcolm wrote:
This specific infinite regress is not regarded as a fault. There is no beginning to buddhas nor sentient beings. So there is no problem.

Queequeg said:
It is a problem if you go down that infinite regression trying to hit something solid, looking for that one essential dharma that will catalyze reality into the solidity that our grasping mind thinks will lead to happiness. Its bound to end in disappointment. On the other hand, accepting it as the way things really are is (said to be) liberating...

Malcolm wrote:
What I am saying is that this issue of infinite regress has been addressed by Indian masters in the past, and they find it to be a nonissue. They accept it since it is consistent with the Buddhist doctrine of dependent origination.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 1st, 2017 at 3:27 AM
Title: Re: Shakyamuni: A Narrative of Faith
Content:


Queequeg said:
The problem with this is that for Buddhahood to be attained, Buddhahood had to a priori be an option. Further, since the Lotus Sutra is always the gate to Buddhahood, it needed to be taught by an even more primordial buddha, and so really, that Buddha is the primordial buddha - and yet that buddha needed to hear the Lotus Sutra, also... you see here we end up in an infinite regression.

Malcolm wrote:
This specific infinite regress is not regarded as a fault. There is no beginning to buddhas nor sentient beings. So there is no problem.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 1st, 2017 at 3:25 AM
Title: Re: BOUND. TORTURED. KILLED.
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
HHDL on Iraq, just wars, etc.:

The Dalai Lama said Wednesday that the U.S.-led war in Afghanistan may have been justified to win a larger peace, but that is it too soon to judge whether the Iraq war was warranted. "I think history will tell," he said in an interview with The Associated Press on Wednesday, just after he met with President Bush.

"In principle, I always believe nonviolence is the right thing, and nonviolent method is in the long run more effective," said the Dalai Lama, who after the Sept. 11 attacks had implored Bush to avoid a violent response by the United States.

The exile Tibetan leader, awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1989, said the Vietnam War increased suffering and was a "failure." But, he said, some wars, including the Korean War and World War II, helped "protect the rest of civilization, democracy." He said he saw a similar result in Afghanistan - "perhaps some kind of liberation."

"The people themselves, I think, suffer a lot under their previous regimes," he said. But he was adamant that the United States not lose sight of rebuilding Afghanistan.

The Dalai Lama urged Bush, in a letter on Sept. 12, 2001, to "think seriously whether a violent action is the right thing to do and in the greater interest of the nation and people in the long run." Asked whether the Iraq war was just, the Dalai Lama said the situation there is "more complicated" and will take more time before he can judge.

The Dalai Lama said he had briefly raised these concerns to Bush during their meeting in the White House residence. He declined to say what Bush's response was.

The Tibetan Buddhist leader, who is a five-city, 20-day tour of the United States that is timed to coincide with the Sept. 11 anniversary, called on Americans to channel their lingering grief "into a source of inner strength."

"Big, unthinkable tragedies happen," he said. "Now, instead of keeping that and developing hatred or sense of revenge, instead of that, think long-term. The negative event, try to transform into a source of inner strength."

He likened the terrorist attacks to Tibetans' struggle to reclaim their country from Chinese rule. Communist troops took over Tibet in 1951, and the Dalai Lama fled in 1959 during a failed uprising. He now lives in India.

"In my own case, many experiences of unthinkable situations have happened, but we never lose our hope. We never let negative emotions (rule), so that's immense benefit - including my own health," said the Dalai Lama, who was hospitalized last year with stomach ailments. "More peace (of) mind, more calm mind, more compassionate mind - very good for my health!" he said with a hearty laugh.

The White House meeting irritated Chinese authorities, who said in the official China Daily newspaper that the visit to the United States "constitutes a serious intervention into China's internal affairs." Nevertheless, the Dalai Lama got an audience with Bush; Secretary of State Colin Powell and his top aide on Tibet, Paula Dobriansky; Laura Bush; White House chief of staff Andy Card; and a deputy to Vice President Dick Cheney, Scooter Libby.

The Washington-based International Campaign for Tibet, however, said it was high time Bush received the Dalai Lama in the Oval Office, not in the White House residence - a symbolic step that would signal a stronger commitment to the Dalai Lama's teachings, said John Ackerly, ICT's president.

"Our war on terrorism should include embracing nonviolent leaders, and not ushering them in through the back door of the White House," Ackerly said.

The Dalai Lama, regarded by Tibetan Buddhists as the 14th incarnation of the Buddha of compassion, broke into laughter often during the interview, even when the conversation turned to serious topics.

He laughed when he described his political role as one of "semi-retirement," when he stumbled on a word, and again when he characterized Beijing's occasional "bullying" of Tibet.

He gestured continuously, the beads on his bracelet rattling at the end of his bare arms. The 68-year-old Dalai Lama had flecks of gray in his close-cropped hair, but looked decades younger than his age.

The Dalai Lama and his followers seek greater autonomy for Tibetans while keeping the region part of China. Beijing demands that the Dalai Lama publicly renounce any claim to Tibet's independence, and says he is welcome back as a religious leader, but may have no political role.

The Dalai Lama said he saw hopeful signs of an agreement. Direct contact between his envoys and Chinese officials resumed last year after an impasse of nearly a decade.

He called China's new president, Hu Jintao - a former top Chinese official in Tibet - "cautious," but said he hoped Hu will continue a process of liberalization. But he also said he was concerned about frustration among Tibetans after decades of Chinese rule, and amid an "overwhelming" influx of Chinese into Tibet. "Not necessarily intentionally, but unintentionally, the cultural genocide is taking place," he said.

Asked whether decades of frustration could lead to violence or even terrorism, he paused. "Oh, possible," the Dalai Lama said. "But up to now, Tibetans, in spite individual views or feelings, I think generally they listen to my approach. Strictly nonviolent."
https://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2003/09/277215.html


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 1st, 2017 at 3:11 AM
Title: Re: BOUND. TORTURED. KILLED.
Content:


Minobu said:
show me where He tells people to kill people as you have told people to kill people.


Malcolm wrote:
BTW, I did not tell anyone to kill anyone. I expressed my opinion that eliminating Daesh was a good thing.

Buddhists do not like to address these issues. But not everything can be addressed with nonviolence. Sometimes, in extreme situations, actions have to be taken which are regrettable.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 1st, 2017 at 3:02 AM
Title: Re: BOUND. TORTURED. KILLED.
Content:
Minobu said:
so in a thread on a Buddhist site where a Loppon is calling for the killing of humans...

Malcolm wrote:
We have a different point of view about what is permissible for a Mahāyānī to do. For example, the HH Dalai Lama maintains that when terrorists attack, countermeasures are needed. I also am of this point of view.

Minobu said:
does His countermeasures include killing human beings as well...

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, of course.

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/220530/dalai-lamas-army-dave-kopel


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 1st, 2017 at 2:52 AM
Title: Re: BOUND. TORTURED. KILLED.
Content:
Minobu said:
so in a thread on a Buddhist site where a Loppon is calling for the killing of humans...

Malcolm wrote:
We have a different point of view about what is permissible for a Mahāyānī believe. For example, the HH Dalai Lama maintains that when terrorists attack, countermeasures are needed. I also am of this point of view. If responding to terrorism involves the taking of human lives, always regrettable, so be it. In this case, I believe it is the right thing to do.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 1st, 2017 at 2:50 AM
Title: Re: BOUND. TORTURED. KILLED.
Content:


Minobu said:
Loppon are you calling for Buddhist to assist in this killing? [/size]

Malcolm wrote:
No, I am not saying that Buddhists should run out and join the army.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 1st, 2017 at 2:38 AM
Title: Re: BOUND. TORTURED. KILLED.
Content:
Grigoris said:
Capitalism always fails.

Malcolm wrote:
Socialism's track record shows that it fails worse.

Grigoris said:
Insofar as it is a necessary stepping stone to communism, not as an end in itself.

Malcolm wrote:
He was right about capitalism being progressive. He was wrong about socialism.

Grigoris said:
Somehow I think I can live quite happily without 99% of the goods and services offered by capitalism.

Malcolm wrote:
You would like to think so, but the collapse of capitalism will initiate a thousand years of barbarism.

"Free market" capitalists are also fantasists, just like socialists. They do not understand the relationship between power and markets. Most people don't.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 1st, 2017 at 2:01 AM
Title: Re: BOUND. TORTURED. KILLED.
Content:


Minobu said:
War is a machination of kings and governments.


Malcolm wrote:
Yup. And samsara is suffering from top to bottom, inside and out.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 31st, 2017 at 11:16 PM
Title: Re: BOUND. TORTURED. KILLED.
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
These companies were not allowed to business just as they wished. They were subordinated to the wishes of the regime.

Grigoris said:
And?  They didn't make profits?  They were not allowed to exploit their employees?

Malcolm wrote:
Profit does not equal capitalism.

Grigoris said:
During the 1920 and '30's, it is true that many people who were opposed to the workers movement thought they would benefit more from backing fascists, but they were quite wrong in every respect.
The Argentinian economic experiment was not during the 20's and 30's.

Malcolm wrote:
It failed.

Grigoris said:
Again, the economy of Greece is in shambles.
Of course it is, nobody is denying that.  Using neo-Nazis to push through monetarist and free market policies hasn't helped in the slightest either.  Quite the opposite.

Malcolm wrote:
Greece is one of the losers in the EU common market.


Grigoris said:
China is not a capitalist society (I've been there several times).
Yes it is.  It is a form of state capitalism.  There is more than one type of capitalism out there.  The "free-market" variety is not the only one.

Malcolm wrote:
This is a typical way to refer to states that want to compete in international capital markets, who themselves are not willing to allow their citizens to participate in those same markets. But in reality, China has a mercantile economy.

Grigoris said:
This is not a free market. True capitalism requires free markets and freedom of information. When one does not have these, markets become distorted and in the end, this causes economic collapse.
No it doesn't.  Capitalist economies collapse because of the inherent flaws in the capitalist system.  Please refer to Marx.

Malcolm wrote:
Marx regarded capitalism as progressive.


Grigoris said:
However, no one has come up with a better way to deliver goods and services to people...
And we all know how important goods and services are, don't we kiddies???!!!

Malcolm wrote:
Try living a for week without them.


Grigoris said:
In general, one of the main reasons for the failure of so many US attempts to open markets around the world is precisely due to the fact that "free markets" do not function well in authoritarian regimes.
Uuuuummmmm... No.  I think you will find that "foreign" resistance to the US "opening up their markets" has to do with the fact that not everybody wants to become a producer of cheap goods for overfed walmart addicts.  US imperialism includes economic, not just military, domination.

Malcolm wrote:
The standard of living for Chinese people has markedly increased under the Chinese policies that allow Chinese firms to manufacture goods for the US market. The same is true in Vietnam, etc. This has happened because these countries have embraced market economics, albeit, not fully.

At base, what we have are two functions related to the formation of states: power and markets. All states are created to protect markets. It is the only reason they have for existence. This is very clearly pointed out in Buddhists sūtras.

One can fantasize all one wants about stateless societies, and so on, but in fact as long as there are markets, there will be states. The only way to be rid of states is to be rid of markets. That will never happen.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 31st, 2017 at 10:55 PM
Title: Re: Interview with Malcolm on Wisdom Podcast
Content:
Jyotish said:
@Malcolm

1) what was the critique of 84000 translation, if it's possible to mention?

2) you were saying it's more important to study Sanskrit than Tibetan for being a scholarly teacher? Did I misinterpret the point? At least it seems you were saying it's important to know both languages in your understanding?

Malcolm wrote:
As for the first, I don't recall making a specific critique. As for the second, I think what I was saying is that Sapan stated it was important to know Sanskrit so one could understand where some Tibetan translations were a little wrong. I was making the point that it is important for modern teachers to know Tibetan for the same reason.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 31st, 2017 at 10:57 AM
Title: Re: BOUND. TORTURED. KILLED.
Content:


pothigai said:
The defining characteristic of capitalism is the structuring of society around production for market exchange. This form of economic life has manifested itself in many different ways; laissez faire, keynsianism, mercantilism, etc, but they are all capitalism, they all share this core of production for market exchange.

Malcolm wrote:
That rather depends on whose definition of capitalism one using. Adam Smith for example, was critical of mercantilism in toto. This is one of the reasons why he wrote Wealth of Nations. Capitalism ought not be confused with capital accumulation.

pothigai said:
Defining capitalism as a completely free market, free from any sort of government intervention, isn't an entirely useful definition, since no such economic system has ever really existed,

Malcolm wrote:
I never suggested this. What I suggested in repsponse to Cicada's observation, is that State power exists to protect markets. The disposition or type of this or that market depends largely on whether that state is committed to democracy or not.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 31st, 2017 at 6:04 AM
Title: Re: BOUND. TORTURED. KILLED.
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
However, the one thing the Nazis and the Left in those days shared was skepticism about capitalism. Why? Because true capitalism requires some level of democracy to preserve the autonomy of markets. Authoritarian governments on the right and the left always restrict markets as their first order of business. This is the main reason why capitalism does not function well in authoritarian countries. So again, follow the money.

Grigoris said:
The Nazi skepticism about capitalism did not last very long.  The socialist ewing of the Nazi party was purged pretty early in the piece.  Some of Germany's biggest and most powerful corporations came straight out the Reich:  IG Farben, VW, etc...

Malcolm wrote:
These companies were not allowed to business just as they wished. They were subordinated to the wishes of the regime.

Grigoris said:
Capitalism functions just fine under right wing regimes.  Refer to Argentina, for example.  Capitalists love Nazis because Nazis hate leftists and it is leftists that rile up the proletarian asking for wealth distribution, workers rights, etc...

Malcolm wrote:
During the 1920 and '30's, it is true that many people who were opposed to the workers movement thought they would benefit more from backing fascists, but they were quite wrong in every respect.

Grigoris said:
Here in Greece, for example, shipping tycoons use neo-Nazi goon squads to attack the leftists organising the dock workers.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, business using fascist thugs has a long history. It does not however mean they do terribly well under fascist regimes.


Grigoris said:
The Greek center-right New Democracy party used neo-Nazis (alongside the state police force) to put down the anti-monetarist movement protests so that they could push through the reforms that the IMF and Troika wanted to impose.

Malcolm wrote:
Again, the economy of Greece is in shambles.

Grigoris said:
Capitalists (and Capitalism) thrives under authoritarian regimes.  Refer also to China as a shining example.

Malcolm wrote:
China is not a capitalist society (I've been there several times). There are strict limitations on markets. The reason why China is pushing consumerism on its own citizens is that they are manufacturing more things than external markets can absorb.


Grigoris said:
Authoritarian governments restrict the production and sale of some goods, but open and protect other very lucrative markets.  Let us also not forget the extent of the black market (and the profit it produces) in authoritarian regimes.  Consider, for example, the amount of money made by criminal elements during the Prohibition.

Malcolm wrote:
This is not a free market. True capitalism requires free markets and freedom of information. When one does not have these, markets become distorted and in the end, this causes economic collapse.

Mind you, I am not suggesting that capitalism is the end all be all, it isn't. However, no one has come up with a better way to deliver goods and services to people yet that has worked out in practice on the broad international scale we see. In general, one of the main reasons for the failure of so many US attempts to open markets around the world is precisely due to the fact that "free markets" do not function well in authoritarian regimes. This is why the US always ties democracy to capitalism, and in those countries where democracy fails, capitalism demonstrably fails as well in favor of the kind of mercantile economies we see in China, etc.

Actually, one of the interesting things about Trumpism is its fundamentally anti-capitalist messaging. "Economic nationalism" cripples free-market capitalism.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 31st, 2017 at 3:11 AM
Title: Re: BOUND. TORTURED. KILLED.
Content:
The Cicada said:
[Mod note: some off-topic stuff edited out.]
...
Malcolm wrote:
All you have to do is follow the money

The Cicada said:
... I notice that you often reduce the motivation of this or that issue or trend to money.

Money is an abstraction of resources and a means for power where the rule of law exists. However,... money and power can be decoupled.

Malcolm wrote:
Not really.

The Cicada said:
Money is an abstraction of resources. Power is derived from violence. The two are often used to pursue each as an end in itself as a way of perpetuating and growing each, but ultimately they are used to shape life in the way we wish. They enable us to achieve our aims, but are not ultimately aims in themselves.

Malcolm wrote:
Money is how markets function, power is how markets are maintained, expanded, and protected.

The Cicada said:
The Nazis arose because someone was able to rouse the masses on an emotional level through their shared values at a time when collective hardship was impossible to avoid. The root cause was the underlying values of the German masses. The economic issues were just an excuse to finally act on them.

Malcolm wrote:
Well, I don't think this argument works. Most Germans in 1933 were not Nazis, and were not allied with Nazis. The Nazis took power because they were more belligerent, more violent, and more organized in the Catholic parts of Germany which were their stronghold. The majority of Germans at that time were either centrists or leftists, and were unable to collaborate with each other to prevent a Nazi takeover. The centrists were basically afraid of the street violence between the right and the left, and the left was distracted by their internationalist aims which were distrusted by centrists. So the centrists by default wound up backing the Nazis.

The same thing seems to happening in the USA.

However, the one thing the Nazis and the Left in those days shared was skepticism about capitalism. Why? Because true capitalism requires some level of democracy to preserve the autonomy of markets. Authoritarian governments on the right and the left always restrict markets as their first order of business. This is the main reason why capitalism does not function well in authoritarian countries. So again, follow the money.


The Cicada said:
The same is true for ISIS.

Malcolm wrote:
That is one point of view.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 31st, 2017 at 3:00 AM
Title: Re: BOUND. TORTURED. KILLED.
Content:


Minobu said:
unreal that you of all people are caught up in this worldly game

Malcolm wrote:
There are some things about which one should not remain passive and indifferent. One also goes to work, cooks food, etc.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, October 30th, 2017 at 11:57 PM
Title: Re: Purchasing Buddhahood In This Life? Criteria?
Content:
CicadaCanto said:
Is it possible to purchase the Buddhahood In This Life text if one received the on-line transmission?

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, of course.

https://www.wisdompubs.org/book/buddhahood-life

or, if you want it at discount:

https://www.amazon.com/Buddhahood-This-Life-Commentary-Vimalamitra/


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, October 30th, 2017 at 10:35 AM
Title: Re: Non-conceptual thoughts ... ?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
No, you can see a bird, but when you don't see a bird, you aren't still seeing a bird, and you know that. This is called mindful awareness, but it is not rig pa.

Losal Samten said:
If you see a blue vase, and recognise that vase as blue, this is conceptuality, no? If you see a blue vase, and can distinguish it from a red vase next to it, this is conceptuality, no?

Malcolm wrote:
The problem is not concepts. The problem is being distracted by them. In order to experience the nature of the mind, first one has to overcome being distracted by concepts.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, October 30th, 2017 at 10:19 AM
Title: Re: Non-conceptual thoughts ... ?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Noticing the bird and then thinking about how pretty it is, where it came from, where it is nesting, what its song is like, etc., this is getting involved in the content.

Losal Samten said:
Also even noticing that the appearance is itself a bird, yes?


Malcolm wrote:
No, you can see a bird, but when you don't see a bird, you aren't still seeing a bird, and you know that. This is called mindful awareness, but it is not rig pa.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, October 30th, 2017 at 9:21 AM
Title: Re: Science Based Mindfulness...
Content:



boda said:
This is on topic, as outlined in the OP. Modern knowledge vs traditional and their respective efficacy as it relates to practice, essentially. This is not a subject that anyone can approach with certainty, so it's open to debate.

Monlam Tharchin said:
The issue there for the ordinary person seeking to follow the Buddha is not certainty but where to put their faith since these things lie outside the purview of material sciences.

boda said:
You misunderstand me. I mean that no one can be certain which view is more efficacious, therefore the issue is open to debate. If the issue were certain then debating it would be useless.

Malcolm wrote:
Efficacy depends on having a goal in mind. One can easily ascertain which knowledge is more effective depending on that sort of parameters has for one's goal. In other words, different sorts of knowledge cover different sorts of domains, and conventionally at least, they often contradict one another since most knowledge is not born in transcendental knowledge of the path.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, October 30th, 2017 at 2:34 AM
Title: Re: Starring Grigoris at 1:39
Content:
Ayu said:
One of the finest accents I ever heard. Where I live, people's English is a good deal worse.

Dan74 said:
Of course it's a fine accent. It was minted in Melbourne, Australia.

Grigoris said:
There is a touch of Wellington, New Zealand in there too.


Malcolm wrote:
Yeah, I heard the Kiwi more than the Oz.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, October 30th, 2017 at 12:13 AM
Title: Re: The DJKR Topic
Content:
smcj said:
Of these three, it is only the third definition, enthusiasm, which is really indicated by the term in its Buddhist sense.
Thanks. Makes sense.

Malcolm wrote:
So, what does it mean to you to have enthusiastic interest in the Dharmakāya?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, October 29th, 2017 at 11:22 PM
Title: Re: Nothing further to seek...
Content:



seeker242 said:
Everywhere! If samsara is nirvana and nirvana is perfect, then it must follow that samsara is perfect also.


Malcolm wrote:
In which case eating meat is also perfect.

seeker242 said:
If you regard going to hell as no problem, then yea.


Malcolm wrote:
Buddha did not teach a diet-based liberation. That would be the Jain school.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, October 29th, 2017 at 11:17 PM
Title: Re: The DJKR Topic
Content:
smcj said:
Now all we need is an explanation of what “devotion to the Dharmakaya” means, ‘cause it’s not at all clear.

anjali said:
Not trying to be pedantic, but devotion means to be devoted, which in turn can mean "a feeling of strong love or loyalty", but also "an act of giving (as effort or time) to something." In this case, the way I look at devotion in a Buddhist context is as a steady flow of one's loving attention toward one's true nature (the Dharmakaya), which is inseparable from the true nature of the guru.

smcj said:
What about the Dharmakaya is worthy of devotion?

I’m assuming the connotation of adoration or love is a correct translation.


Malcolm wrote:
Depend on what Tibetan word. The Tibeten word most commonly translated as devotion is mos gus, or gus pa.

Mos gus is combined term that does not have a real Sanskrit term underneath it. It combined from mos pa and gus pa.

Mos pa only translates adhimokṣa and its various forms. It means confidence or interest. Gus pa translate two terms primarily, ādara and satkṛtya, both of which mean to pay respect.

Thus the terms we usually see translated as "devotion" really mean, "confident interest" and "respect".

Thus, when we see the term "devotion" in a Tibetan Buddhist book, we should understand that it really has nothing to do with the English history of the word, which really means "formal vow." Devotion means "love, loyalty, or enthusiasm for a person, activity, or cause:" Of these three, it is only the third definition, enthusiasm, which is really indicated by the term in its Buddhist sense. This does not bar us from having love for or loyalty to our gurus, teachers, etc. But just to be clear, we should expect love from our gurus, since the texts on the qualities of the guru all describe the guru as loving, and they in return should expect our interest and respect.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, October 29th, 2017 at 10:40 PM
Title: Re: Non-conceptual thoughts ... ?
Content:
rachmiel said:
Conceptual movement itself, divorced from its content ... fascinating. I have an intuitive sense of what this means, but my intuition is a very fallible tool when it comes to Buddhist thought and practice! So how can I learn more about what "conceptual movement free of content" means?

Malcolm wrote:
When one is in a state of shamatha, from a Mahamudra/Dzogchen perspective, thoughts are allowed to come and go; but what one must not get involved with is their content. So for example, noticing a pretty bird while you are meditating is part of the flow of concepts, leaving it alone is not getting involved. Noticing the bird and then thinking about how pretty it is, where it came from, where it is nesting, what its song is like, etc., this is getting involved in the content.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, October 29th, 2017 at 10:36 PM
Title: Starring Grigoris at 1:39
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2017/10/greek-refugee-camps-suffer-surge-migration-171028142719003.html

I will never be able to read your posts again without supplying your accent....


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, October 29th, 2017 at 10:25 PM
Title: Re: Non-conceptual thoughts ... ?
Content:
rachmiel said:
The mind-watching I've been doing for the Alan Wallace course on Dzogchen meditation has got me revisiting this old(ish) posting of mine.

The mental thingies I've been naming non-conceptual thoughts and yous guys have been re-naming vedana, or concepts, or subtle thoughts are back in the spotlight. I find them quite fascinating. They are very difficult to see in real time — generally I see them either partway through their lifespan or a moment after they are gone. And they manifest not so much as thoughts or feelings, rather: thoughts-feelings. (Hard to describe.) And when I become aware of them, it's as if they were zipped up into a very condensed zip file then unpacked. (Also hard to describe. Think of a seed suddenly revealing the entire tree.)

These subtle thought-feelings are only observable during a meditative mind state. In my normal waking state, they are hidden away beneath the threshold of my conscious awareness, i.e. in what is conventionally called my unconscious mind. During meditation, they become visible because that threshold moves, goes deeper, partway into the unconscious.

My intuitive sense is that it would be fruitful for me to dig deeper into that unconscious realm during meditation, that it will help me get closer to seeing/fathoming what's really goin' on (in) here. Sound about right?


Malcolm wrote:
There is no unconscious in Buddhadharma. What you are noticing in calm-abiding is conceptual movement itself, divorced from its content. When we are not in equipoise, we are usually involved with the content, so we do not see the overall movement of conceptuality.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, October 29th, 2017 at 10:22 PM
Title: Re: Non-conceptual thoughts ... ?
Content:
rachmiel said:
Right ... slow gorgeous haunting brass chorale that appears from nowhere in the second movement?

How about the breathtaking Ahhhhhh of looking out the window and seeing a ridiculously beautiful purple sunset? Concept?

Malcolm wrote:
It is now.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, October 29th, 2017 at 10:15 AM
Title: Re: Nothing further to seek...
Content:
Wayfarer said:
there remains a quality of perfection

Astus said:
Remains where?

seeker242 said:
Everywhere! If samsara is nirvana and nirvana is perfect, then it must follow that samsara is perfect also.


Malcolm wrote:
In which case eating meat is also perfect.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, October 29th, 2017 at 9:56 AM
Title: Re: Socialism & Communism
Content:
Nicholas Weeks said:
Xtian squabbles, bloody or otherwise has little to do with the modern Communist movement's annihilation of any sort of spiritual living.  The countless Xtian sects are still Xtian, even if critical of many of their brethren.

Communism kills & extinguishes the spirit in mankind more effectively & deliberately than any other movement.

Malcolm wrote:
Dude, you give communism way, way too much power. It's [expletive to be supplied by your imagination] done. There is no more communism anymore, nor is it possible anymore. Corporations have amassed far too much wealth to ever permit anything like a communist revolution, save an absolute collapse of the world economy, in which they will be powerless to respond in any case.

You really should be worried far more by Fascists. They're the one's who will kill the press, close government offices, restrict access to government...oh, wait, this is the [expletive to be supplied by your imagination] Trump administration where all of this is happening right now.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, October 29th, 2017 at 4:39 AM
Title: Re: Socialism & Communism
Content:



Nicholas Weeks said:
An exception that proves the general rule of Xtians being supportive of each other.

Malcolm wrote:
Oh sure, because that is why the Reformation happened. Albigensian crusade, and so on. Not to mention the suppression of every old world pagan religion from the time of Constantine on.

Nicholas Weeks said:
Talk about Red herrings - to coin a phrase.

Malcolm wrote:
You claimed that Christians did not oppress other Christians. This shows you have a misconception about the bloody, internecine struggles that have characterized Christianity since it emerged into dominance in the Roman Empire.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, October 29th, 2017 at 4:37 AM
Title: Re: BOUND. TORTURED. KILLED.
Content:
Dan74 said:
You appear to have resolved all this in one fell swoop with a  few lines of one dimensional dynamics.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes. All you have to do is follow the money.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, October 29th, 2017 at 4:13 AM
Title: Re: I use to think "inner winds" were silly... Now...
Content:



CedarTree said:
Name some places and teachers, in a personal context and really to delve into it I may be willing to go do that.

I have ventured other places to go to monasteries before and maybe this is a good way to go

Malcolm wrote:
There is a place in Oakland; Conway, Mass; NYC, these are three main places in the US.

CedarTree said:
It might have cut off your msg it only showed locations not names of organizations or teachers?


Malcolm wrote:
Dzogchen Community.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, October 29th, 2017 at 4:02 AM
Title: Re: I use to think "inner winds" were silly... Now...
Content:



CedarTree said:
Who and what places would you recommend?

Malcolm wrote:
Well, you can also go live near on the Gars of Dzogchen community and learn from folks there too, but in every case you will have to receive transmission, instructions, and so on.

CedarTree said:
Name some places and teachers, in a personal context and really to delve into it I may be willing to go do that.

I have ventured other places to go to monasteries before and maybe this is a good way to go

Malcolm wrote:
There is a place in Oakland; Conway, Mass; NYC, these are three main places in the US.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, October 29th, 2017 at 3:53 AM
Title: Re: I use to think "inner winds" were silly... Now...
Content:



CedarTree said:
I have no idea how it works as my practice history has been in monasteries were you are in very close proximity and delve in closely under a teachers guidance.

Malcolm wrote:
You can also do this. You would have to go live in India or Nepal.

CedarTree said:
Who and what places would you recommend?

Malcolm wrote:
Well, you can also go live near on the Gars of Dzogchen community and learn from folks there too, but in every case you will have to receive transmission, instructions, and so on.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, October 29th, 2017 at 3:41 AM
Title: Re: I use to think "inner winds" were silly... Now...
Content:



CedarTree said:
I have no idea how it works as my practice history has been in monasteries were you are in very close proximity and delve in closely under a teachers guidance.

Malcolm wrote:
You can also do this. You would have to go live in India or Nepal.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, October 29th, 2017 at 3:29 AM
Title: Re: I use to think "inner winds" were silly... Now...
Content:


CedarTree said:
How is that possible with the platform that some of these well known teachers have to do now because of said popularity?

Malcolm wrote:
You have to rely on their senior students. And that is traditional, BTW.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, October 29th, 2017 at 3:22 AM
Title: Re: Socialism & Communism
Content:


Nicholas Weeks said:
Neither Xtianity nor Islam were hostile to their own forms.

tiagolps said:
The 4th crusade was a crusade on other Christians.

Nicholas Weeks said:
An exception that proves the general rule of Xtians being supportive of each other.

Malcolm wrote:
Oh sure, because that is why the Reformation happened. Albigensian crusade, and so on. Not to mention the suppression of every old world pagan religion from the time of Constantine on.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, October 29th, 2017 at 3:22 AM
Title: Re: Socialism & Communism
Content:
Nicholas Weeks said:
Neither Xtianity nor Islam were hostile to their own forms.

Malcolm wrote:
Excuse me? Look again. Christians have actively persecuted other Christians for their beliefs and forms, just as Muslims have actively persecuted other Muslims for the same reasons.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, October 29th, 2017 at 2:54 AM
Title: Re: I use to think "inner winds" were silly... Now...
Content:


CedarTree said:
I feel I need to study these things and then put into practice.

Malcolm wrote:
Without empowerment, it is hopeless. You need to receive these things from a qualified teacher.

CedarTree said:
Malcolm can you detail a bit about why a qualified teacher is essential in this regard?

I can understand with practices such as Deity Yoga or Pointing out instruction but why in regards to something that should be objective like studying and practicing with these "body" aspects of practice.

As I've stated in various threads you know I respect your opinion a great deal in this school and so I would welcome your understanding.


Malcolm wrote:
Because in order to understand it properly you need proper instruction. That you can only get from a qualified teacher.

Otherwise, if you are not willing to study the Buddhist perspective on these issues in a proper way, you can always go and study Hathayoga.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, October 29th, 2017 at 2:43 AM
Title: Re: I use to think "inner winds" were silly... Now...
Content:
CedarTree said:
Questions coming up from practice:

Lately in my practice I have been doing more intensive meditation and I have noted some things.

Usually in the past when bliss states have arisen they seem more of a mental variety.  I have now been experiencing the random arising of what seem like body bliss states centralized around arms and legs.  They feel like intense pleasure in some form but can almost become "painful" in their intensity and length.

I have also noted various mental and physical phenomena that before I would just in my practice have assigned as "random" but now that my practice is more centralized and focused I don't really think so much about "random".

I am starting to feel in both regards that understanding and practicing the workings of tantric buddhism in particular in regards to the "inner winds" is very important.

Anyone have any suggestions on good books, internet resources? etc?

I feel I need to study these things and then put into practice.

Norwegian said:
If you want to study and practice these things, then you need to receive empowerment, transmission, and instruction on them from a qualified teacher. There's no other alternative.

CedarTree said:
I live in a place were that is not such a option or at least that I would have to look into it.

I also find that a lot of "teachers" don't seem so progressed in actual intensive meditation and practice.  I like reading and studying on my own and having some basis to understand by my own objective reasoning.

This isn't a criticism of teachers as I value many teachers greatly from various traditions but I think being able to read books, compare presentations, put into practice, etc.  That is paramount.  At least it has seemed to be in my life.

Malcolm wrote:
Study Hathayoga and Prāṇayāma, if you do not want to form a relationship with the qualified Vajrayāna master.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, October 29th, 2017 at 2:41 AM
Title: Re: I use to think "inner winds" were silly... Now...
Content:


CedarTree said:
I feel I need to study these things and then put into practice.

Malcolm wrote:
Without empowerment, it is hopeless. You need to receive these things from a qualified teacher.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, October 29th, 2017 at 2:06 AM
Title: Re: Socialism & Communism
Content:
Nicholas Weeks said:
No movement has been more hostile to all forms of spirituality than Communism. For a good one volume survey of it, this old classic was reissued recently - The Naked Communist by Skousen.


Malcolm wrote:
No true, Christianity is the most hostile, historically speaking. Then Islam.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, October 29th, 2017 at 12:41 AM
Title: Money, markets and power in different economic systems
Content:
Dan74 said:
No Great Depression, no Hitler.

No nascent jingoism, no Hitler.

No disarray among other parties, no Hitler.

Malcolm wrote:
Because of the Versailles Treaty, Germany was forced to pay reparations. This led to out of control inflation in Germany during the Weimar Republic. Germany reneged on its repayments, which in turn caused British and French banks to panic. Unable to meet their obligation to American Banks (from which they had borrowed heavily in the War), this caused the American stock market collapse in 1929. Emboldened by the incompetence of Weimar Republic, as well as the inability of the other parties to muster a solid response to the economic climate of Germany, in this fractured political and economic environment the Nazis skated into Parliament by the skin of their teeth. The rest is history, and the cause of it all is the humiliation Germans felt because of the Versailles Treaty. The Great Depression, in other words, was a direct consequence of the Versailles treaty. At least, this is what I learned at Harvard.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, October 28th, 2017 at 10:22 PM
Title: Re: BOUND. TORTURED. KILLED.
Content:


Grigoris said:
And, when it comes down to it, those that practice hate speech are normally those that would be the first to revoke the right to freedom of speech once they gain power.  They use (currently existing) democratic rights to undermine democracy.  History has shown this to be true a number of times.

Malcolm wrote:
Indeed, Karl Popper pointed this out:
“The so-called paradox of freedom is the argument that freedom in the sense of absence of any constraining control must lead to very great restraint, since it makes the bully free to enslave the meek. The idea is, in a slightly different form, and with very different tendency, clearly expressed in Plato.

Less well known is the paradox of tolerance: Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. — In this formulation, I do not imply, for instance, that we should always suppress the utterance of intolerant philosophies; as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would certainly be unwise. But we should claim the right to suppress them if necessary even by force; for it may easily turn out that they are not prepared to meet us on the level of rational argument, but begin by denouncing all argument; they may forbid their followers to listen to rational argument, because it is deceptive, and teach them to answer arguments by the use of their fists or pistols. We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant. We should claim that any movement preaching intolerance places itself outside the law, and we should consider incitement to intolerance and persecution as criminal, in the same way as we should consider incitement to murder, or to kidnapping, or to the revival of the slave trade, as criminal.”


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, October 28th, 2017 at 9:53 PM
Title: Re: The DJKR Topic
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
People's right to free from harassment and exploitation is absolute.

Grigoris said:
If it was absolute then we wouldn't be discussing incidences of harassment and exploitation.


Malcolm wrote:
Sure we would, it is the basis for the discussion, actually. If this right did not exist, there would be no basis for discussion at all.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, October 28th, 2017 at 9:39 PM
Title: Re: Tantric Liberation, Padmasambhava and Bonpos, etc.
Content:
Sherab said:
When jihadists fought the Europeans in the early history of Islam...

Malcolm wrote:
The Europeans were the aggressors in the Crusades.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, October 28th, 2017 at 9:29 PM
Title: Re: The DJKR Topic
Content:


smcj said:
...according to your perspective, which is based on your cultural values, which you seem to regard as definitive.

Malcolm wrote:
Again with cultural relativism.

Grigoris said:
Problem here Malcolm is that you are assuming that your position is an absolute, when in fact it is not.  It is a view too.  In the current situation it seems to be the correct view, but it is still a view nonetheless and a view based on your (personal) dominant cultural values.

The same applies to smcj, of course.

Malcolm wrote:
People's right to free from harassment and exploitation is absolute. The only question is how much that right is respected, or even recognized (for whatever reason) by this or that teacher.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, October 28th, 2017 at 7:58 AM
Title: Re: The DJKR Topic
Content:
smcj said:
So I am being the exact opposite of culturally relativistic. I am evaluating you beliefs, values and practices based on the criteria of Dharma, not western liberal values.

Malcolm wrote:
You have confused Tibetan culture with the Dharma. So in fact you are engaging in cultural relativism. Otherwise, according to you, abusing women is consistent with the Dharma.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, October 28th, 2017 at 5:38 AM
Title: Re: BOUND. TORTURED. KILLED.
Content:


Dan74 said:
Nazis were of course 'not caused by Versailles' though it certainly made it much easier for them to rise in prominence. There is an underlying ground that is fertile for such poisonous systems of thought and that is what needs to be addressed, IMO.

Malcolm wrote:
Sure they were; Versailles was the causal condition for Nazism in all kinds of ways.

Dan74 said:
As you often do, you are overstating your case, Malcolm. http://www.bbc.co.uk/schools/gcsebitesize/history/mwh/germany/hitlerpowerrev_print.shtml

Yes, many historians hold the constraints imposed by the treaty to be the crucial factors, but that's not my point. People were susceptible to the nazi memes of jingoism, enemies within and without, racial superiority  and purity and power concentrated in the hands of the Führer. Addressing these toxic notions is what I was talking about.

Malcolm wrote:
No Versailles Treaty, no Hitler. it's pretty clear.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, October 28th, 2017 at 4:12 AM
Title: Re: BOUND. TORTURED. KILLED.
Content:


Dan74 said:
Nazis were of course 'not caused by Versailles' though it certainly made it much easier for them to rise in prominence. There is an underlying ground that is fertile for such poisonous systems of thought and that is what needs to be addressed, IMO.

Malcolm wrote:
Sure they were; Versailles was the causal condition for Nazism in all kinds of ways.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, October 28th, 2017 at 3:21 AM
Title: Re: The DJKR Topic
Content:
smcj said:
Using the Tilopa/Naropa story to justify this is equally wrong.
...according to your perspective, which is based on your cultural values, which you seem to regard as definitive.

Malcolm wrote:
Again with cultural relativism.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, October 28th, 2017 at 2:55 AM
Title: Re: The DJKR Topic
Content:
smcj said:
I don't accept your premise of "the guru yoga,"
...or DJKR’s either evidently.

Malcolm wrote:
I don't accept that the abuse and exploitation of women can be justified. It does not correspond to the Dharma.

Sakya Pandita notes:
If he does not teach according to the words of the Buddha,
even if he is one’s guru, one should remain indifferent.
Arguing that students need to just "suck it up" when their teacher abuses them because it is a part of "guru yoga" is totally wrong.

Using the Tilopa/Naropa story to justify this is equally wrong.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, October 28th, 2017 at 2:39 AM
Title: Re: BOUND. TORTURED. KILLED.
Content:
Grigoris said:
Yes, I agree they are a somewhat special case.

Malcolm wrote:
Well, that is the whole point.


Grigoris said:
Thing is, it seems to me that they are just a point along a continuum, that has been developing and mutating since the U$ experiment with the Mujahedin.  The development of these types of movements has also been influenced by the destabilisation of authoritarian regimes in the region and the use of (previously non-existent) social media to spread their influence.

Malcolm wrote:
The Nazis were caused by the Versailles Treaty. They also used the latest new media technology in their day to broadcast a sick ideology.  Central Europe had been destabilized by the War, then by the depression, etc.


Grigoris said:
Barbarity in the treatment of captives and cruelty in torture is nothing new.  It is as old as human ignorance.

Malcolm wrote:
The Nazis and Daesh share special skills in this department. That is why they must be destroyed. Right now in the US there is a debate about whether hate speech really should be protected speech.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, October 28th, 2017 at 2:30 AM
Title: Re: The DJKR Topic
Content:


smcj said:
Obviously you do not accept the premise of the guru yoga.

Malcolm wrote:
I don't accept your premise of "the guru yoga," which obviously involves the slavish submission of women to the desires of their "teacher."

smcj said:
Again, see my signature below.

Malcolm wrote:
Your sig does not matter.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, October 28th, 2017 at 2:26 AM
Title: Re: The DJKR Topic
Content:


smcj said:
I was not invoking cultural relativism.

Malcolm wrote:
Yeah, you were.



smcj said:
Obviously you do not accept the premise of the guru yoga.

Malcolm wrote:
I don't accept your premise of "the guru yoga," which obviously involves the slavish submission of women to the desires of their "teacher."


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, October 28th, 2017 at 2:09 AM
Title: Re: BOUND. TORTURED. KILLED.
Content:
Dan74 said:
the good folks in the UK calling to indiscriminate murder of former Daesh recruits and the recruits themselves is blurring  fast...

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, the Gvt. in the UK is seems to be taking a zero tolerance policy — they don't want anyone to return at all.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, October 28th, 2017 at 2:07 AM
Title: Re: BOUND. TORTURED. KILLED.
Content:


Dan74 said:
Be all that as it may, we should not confuse Daesh, the organisation and individual recruits.

Malcolm wrote:
This is like saying we should not confuse the SS with camp guards in Dachau.

Dan74 said:
Yes. Even in that horrific war, people were held to the Geneva's Convention on the Rights of PoWs. People were tried for their crimes and not summarily executed.

Malcolm wrote:
I never called for summary executions, Dan.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, October 28th, 2017 at 2:01 AM
Title: Re: BOUND. TORTURED. KILLED.
Content:


Dan74 said:
Be all that as it may, we should not confuse Daesh, the organisation and individual recruits.

Malcolm wrote:
This is like saying we should not confuse the SS with camp guards in Dachau.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, October 28th, 2017 at 1:42 AM
Title: Re: The DJKR Topic
Content:
smcj said:
Suffice it here to say that DJKR was trying to make a point with his initial FB post regarding Sogyal R. It was not well understood or well received here. If someone wants to understand what DJKR was trying to say, I suggest a long conversation with a lama of Tibetan ancestry, as there are cultural assumptions in play here a western lama will probably miss.

Malcolm wrote:
The reason it was poorly received in many quarters is that is was poorly conceived. Ethnic moral relativism is nonsense. Just because someone is a Tibetan does not make their misapprehension about gender roles in the modern west any more palatable or acceptable. Your suggestion is akin to suggesting we have a long chat with an Somalian Imam to way the relative merits of FGM.

smcj said:
I submit to readers of this thread the above post as a classic example of a white lama whose cultural assumptions make the guru yoga objectionable. If you want to understand the guru yoga, try seeing past those assumptions and try to understand how a Tibetan sees it.

Malcolm wrote:
Wow, incredible. As if guru yoga means spreading your legs for someone from whom one has received an empowerment.  If a man sexually harasses women this means he sees women as objects to be used and discarded. This is about as disgusting and wrong headed as you can get. BTW, I am not a lama.

I mean, what is the point of this? Why should a women who has suffered sexual harassment from Tibetans who are acting in the role of spiritual guides care about their cultural perspective? It is obvious that the Tibetan cultural perspective devalues women. This is all we need to know. We all know what the cultural context is. Tibet is a culture where one of the commonly used names for women means "inferior birth" ( skye dman ).

You should be ashamed of yourself for even thinking to justify the abuse of women by invoking cultural relativism.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, October 28th, 2017 at 1:31 AM
Title: Re: The DJKR Topic
Content:
smcj said:
Suffice it here to say that DJKR was trying to make a point with his initial FB post regarding Sogyal R. It was not well understood or well received here. If someone wants to understand what DJKR was trying to say, I suggest a long conversation with a lama of Tibetan ancestry, as there are cultural assumptions in play here a western lama will probably miss.

Malcolm wrote:
The reason it was poorly received in many quarters is that is was poorly conceived. Ethnic moral relativism is nonsense. Just because someone is a Tibetan does not make their misapprehension about gender parity and sexual harassment any more palatable or acceptable. In other words, we don't care what his cultural assumptions are. He is not living in pre-1959 Tibet, he is living in Western Civilization, circa 2017.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, October 28th, 2017 at 12:58 AM
Title: Re: BOUND. TORTURED. KILLED.
Content:
Grigoris said:
But Daesh is a special case...
But that is where you are wrong.

Malcolm wrote:
Sorry, Greg, I am familiar with all the things you mention. Still, Daesh is a special case. They have international reach and support. They have a well-oiled propaganda machine which attracts sick people from around the world to join their cause.

It really is on a scale not seen since the Nazis. And incidentally, Daesh arose from the oppressor class in Iraq. One of the reasons for their success is that 1) a large percentage of their commanders are ex- Iraqi Revolutionary Guard, and 2) a lot of the most effective foreign fighters are/were Chechens. who now have a brutal state tolerated by the Russians.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, October 27th, 2017 at 10:44 PM
Title: Re: BOUND. TORTURED. KILLED.
Content:


Grigoris said:
Like I said elsewhere:  the problem is much-much more than ISIS.

Malcolm wrote:
Oh no doubt, there are problems in the Mideast that are larger than Daesh, but that is really beside the point here.

If we are to listen to you, the 65 nation coalition should just go home and let everyone in the middle east murder each other with abandon.

But I really do not believe this is a very reasonable solution to the problems in the region. Yes, of course we can blame the US and its allies (mainly Britain) for so totally destabilizing the region. But it is not reasonable to pretend it is someone else problem. We live in a single world. People who committed war crimes on all sides should be held to account. But Daesh is a special case. Feeding infants to their mothers, setting up slave markets, etc., this is beyond the even the worst crimes of the Syrians, and so on. There is the brutalism of the Baathists such as Assad and Hussein, but then there is the sheer insanity of Daesh. The latter is in a special class all its own, not seen since the Nazis. Not even Pol Pot comes close to this.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, October 27th, 2017 at 10:26 PM
Title: Re: Tantric Liberation, Padmasambhava and Bonpos, etc.
Content:


Sherab said:
Then your reply is out of point to my reply to Grigoris.

Malcolm wrote:
I am having my own conversation with Greg. You butted in.

Sherab said:
Members of this forum do take note:  you are not permitted to comment on any comments exchanged between Greg and Lopon Malcolm, and by inference, any comments exchanged between another member of the forum with the said Lopon.

Malcolm wrote:
No, you can — but don't expect that I am going to take you seriously if your objection to my post is that it didn't take your contribution into account, particularly when your objection is off the wall.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, October 27th, 2017 at 10:08 PM
Title: Re: BOUND. TORTURED. KILLED.
Content:
Grigoris said:
Let me enlighten you with an account from one of my patients that was captured by the Syrian State armed forces.

...

ISIS is very normal.

Malcolm wrote:
No, Daesh is not very normal. They are very abnormal. They have exhibited the kind of mass cruelty we have not seen since death camps in WWII.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, October 27th, 2017 at 9:35 PM
Title: Re: BOUND. TORTURED. KILLED.
Content:
Dan74 said:
I am trying to normalise ISIS.

Malcolm wrote:
ISIS is not normal. They are abnormal.

Grigoris said:
No, in the specific context they are VERY normal.

Malcolm wrote:
No, ISIS is still abnormal.

Tribal killings are common in Iraq. This kind of thing has been going on there for the past 60 years, and longer.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, October 27th, 2017 at 8:58 PM
Title: Re: Kill Daesh Jihadists from Britain says Government
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
In this country, 13 year olds can be tried as adults if the crime is sufficiently grave.

Nemo said:
Nope, illegal under the Geneva Convention to charge child soldiers.

Malcolm wrote:
I said in the US. For example, if an underage US citizen was caught in Iraq or Syria and returned to the US, they could be tried as an adult in this country, depending what they are charged with.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, October 27th, 2017 at 8:50 PM
Title: Re: BOUND. TORTURED. KILLED.
Content:
Dan74 said:
I am trying to normalise ISIS.

Malcolm wrote:
ISIS is not normal. They are abnormal.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, October 27th, 2017 at 10:38 AM
Title: Re: Tantric Liberation, Padmasambhava and Bonpos, etc.
Content:


Sherab said:
So, you think that the Tibetan fighters should suffer the same recommended fate as Daesh fighters?  The Chinese government would certainly love your proposal and might just even borrow your argument.

Malcolm wrote:
Of course not. How do you even get there from anything I have said?

Tibetans were fighting people every bit as bad as Daesh in those days. The Tibetans were fighting to defend the Dharma from extremely wicked people.

You really need to read better.

Sherab said:
Then your reply is out of point to my reply to Grigoris.

Malcolm wrote:
I am having my own conversation with Greg. You butted in.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, October 27th, 2017 at 10:37 AM
Title: Re: Grievances, real and fictional
Content:



The Cicada said:
I do see the Left, as currently being in a dominant position in our society...

Malcolm wrote:
Apparently, you need to pay more attention to the news, because that shit just ain't true anymore. More's the pity, too.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, October 27th, 2017 at 6:06 AM
Title: Re: Tantric Liberation, Padmasambhava and Bonpos, etc.
Content:


Sherab said:
So, you think that the Tibetan fighters should suffer the same recommended fate as Daesh fighters?  The Chinese government would certainly love your proposal and might just even borrow your argument.

Malcolm wrote:
Of course not. How do you even get there from anything I have said?

Tibetans were fighting people every bit as bad as Daesh in those days. The Tibetans were fighting to defend the Dharma from extremely wicked people.

You really need to read better.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, October 27th, 2017 at 6:04 AM
Title: Re: Tantric Liberation, Padmasambhava and Bonpos, etc.
Content:
smcj said:
You guys need to enlist then.

Malcolm wrote:
No, we just need to understand that common sense dictates that you cannot allow terrorists to act with impunity.

smcj said:
See my post above.

Malcolm wrote:
I saw it. You apparently think that retreating to caves is the way to deal with reality. Boy, would you have been shocked when Khenpo Gangshar came along and kicked you out of retreat to go doing something positive in the world.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, October 27th, 2017 at 5:44 AM
Title: Re: Tantric Liberation, Padmasambhava and Bonpos, etc.
Content:
smcj said:
You guys need to enlist then.

Malcolm wrote:
No, we just need to understand that common sense dictates that you cannot allow terrorists to act with impunity.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, October 27th, 2017 at 5:27 AM
Title: Re: Kill Daesh Jihadists from Britain says Government
Content:
Mkoll said:
You keep changing who you were referring to. You're getting more and more specific.

Malcolm wrote:
No, I have from the beginning been referring to Daesh fighters, people actively engaged in armed combat who refuse to put down their arms.

Mkoll said:
So if a 13 year old Daesh fighter engaged in armed combat was disarmed and captured (e.g. an airstrike knocked them out, his position was taken and he was captured), you'd be in favor of executing them?

Malcolm wrote:
That's not up for me to say. That would be up to a court to decide. People who are prisoners of war have rights accorded to them in the Geneva convention. We should observe them, even if fanatics like Daesh would not.

In this country, 13 year olds can be tried as adults if the crime is sufficiently grave.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, October 27th, 2017 at 5:24 AM
Title: Re: Tantric Liberation, Padmasambhava and Bonpos, etc.
Content:


smcj said:
Passivity is the Hinayāna attitude.
HHDL is both a pacifist and political leader.

Malcolm wrote:
He is not a pacifist.

smcj said:
The Dalai Lama, a winner of the Nobel Peace Prize and one of the world's most prominent advocates of nonviolence, said in an interview yesterday that it might be necessary to fight terrorists with violence, and that it was ''too early to say'' whether the war in Iraq was a mistake.

''I feel only history will tell,'' he said. '' Terrorism is the worst kind of violence, so we have to check it, we have to take countermeasures. ''

Malcolm wrote:
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/09/18/us/dalai-lama-says-terror-may-need-a-violent-reply.html


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, October 27th, 2017 at 5:13 AM
Title: Re: Tantric Liberation, Padmasambhava and Bonpos, etc.
Content:
PuerAzaelis said:
I think the point is according to Mahayana attitude, there is no outside the situation, we are all in the same boat.

smcj said:
There were wars and social problems in Sakyamuni’s time. Did he go and fight the righteous fight? There have been wars and social problems ever since. Did his teachings stop that karma from ripening?  There are wars and social problems now. And it is 100% certain that there will be wars and social problems going forward in time, even if we were to win at a crusade. People’s karma cannot be stopped by a military victory.

So if you feel compelled to be either directly involved or simply emotionally invested in the drama, go ahead. Somebody has to do it. But the best you can do is set the stage for the next set of problems that needs addressing. That’s the most you can accomplish in samsara. And there’s a good chance you will create a lot of negative karmic connections with a huge assortment of beings.

So if that’s your choice, fine. But my understanding is that the Teachings tell me to choose differently.


Malcolm wrote:
Passivity is the Hinayāna attitude. It is the opposite of HH Dalai Lama's message of universal responsibility:
I believe that to meet the challenge of our times, human beings will have to develop a greater sense of universal responsibility. Each of us must learn to work not just for his or her own self, family or nation, but for the benefit of all mankind. Universal responsibility is the real key to human survival. It is the best foundation for world peace, the equitable use of natural resources, and through concern for future generations, the proper care of the environment.
https://www.lamayeshe.com/article/global-community-and-need-universal-responsibility


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, October 27th, 2017 at 5:04 AM
Title: Re: Kill Daesh Jihadists from Britain says Government
Content:
Mkoll said:
You keep changing who you were referring to. You're getting more and more specific.

Malcolm wrote:
No, I have from the beginning been referring to Daesh fighters, people actively engaged in armed combat who refuse to put down their arms.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, October 27th, 2017 at 5:00 AM
Title: Re: Tantric Liberation, Padmasambhava and Bonpos, etc.
Content:
PuerAzaelis said:
I think the point is according to Mahayana attitude, there is no outside the situation, we are all in the same boat.

Malcolm wrote:
Exactly. We just have to decide who gets eaten first.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, October 27th, 2017 at 4:59 AM
Title: Re: Tantric Liberation, Padmasambhava and Bonpos, etc.
Content:
smcj said:
We cannot standout side this situation in the world as Buddhists. We have to involved.
You need to check in with one of your teachers about this attitude.

Malcolm wrote:
Yeah, I really don't.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, October 27th, 2017 at 4:34 AM
Title: Re: Tantric Liberation, Padmasambhava and Bonpos, etc.
Content:
smcj said:
As Buddhists we are supposed to be developing ourselves, not waging a crusade.

Malcolm wrote:
Part of self development, indeed, the main part of it is assisting others. Greg, for all our squabbling and disagreement, is actually doing admirable things in this respect, direct action, helping people who have been pushed into the worldwide stateless person crisis we are experiencing right now.

There are more stateless people in the world today than ever.

What the international community should be doing, and would be doing under other circumstances, is trying to address the issue. Instead, we have an irrational president, a sycophantic congress, and a growing Fascist movement in this country that is very bit as dangerous and bloody minded as Daesh.

We cannot standout side this situation in the world as Buddhists. We have to involved.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, October 27th, 2017 at 3:05 AM
Title: Re: Tantric Liberation, Padmasambhava and Bonpos, etc.
Content:
smcj said:
You don’t want to be part of that cycle if you can avoid it.
We are part of it, however.
We are part of cyclic existence. However we are not part of that specific negative feedback loop of killing and being killed within cyclic existence. Kalu R (previous) called that type of thing a “karmic cul-de-sac”.

Malcolm wrote:
We are inside that loop. We pay taxes to a government that prosecutes those wars. We can pretend that we are free of complicity, but really, we aren't.

Our very lifestyle in the first world caused this. Neoliberal ideology supposes that if we just spread capitalism (under the guise of Democracy) on a wide enough scale, fast enough, everyone will be pacified with commodities. Of course this is not going to happen.

So these wars result. Amongst the people fighting these wars are those on both sides who use toxic ideologies to promote their cause. Some are more toxic than others.

Sooner or later human beings as a whole are going to have to accept that we live on a planet with limited resources that need to be equitably distributed to all.

But I don't see this happening, what I see happening is that we are just moving deeper and deeper into the Kali Yuga, and that about the best we can do is all palliative.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, October 27th, 2017 at 2:29 AM
Title: Re: Tantric Liberation, Padmasambhava and Bonpos, etc.
Content:


Grigoris said:
The problem for the U$ was that these governments were not particularly U$ friendly.  So they (the ruling elites of the U$) preferred a chaos that they could then insert themselves into (to their monetary benefit) and they didn't care what the cost was.

Malcolm wrote:
No, that is really not how it went. Dick Cheney is a super paranoid person, and he really believed, and still believes against all evidence, that Hussein was months away from working suitcase nukes. Once Bush found out that Cheney lied, he iced him.

But I know there are a lot of people on the right and the left who like conspiracy theories.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, October 27th, 2017 at 2:25 AM
Title: Re: Tantric Liberation, Padmasambhava and Bonpos, etc.
Content:
Grigoris said:
You still haven't answered to the key question:  Who is going to do the Phowa?

Malcolm wrote:
You, Greg.

Mantrik said:
Malcolm, you described Liberation as a sort of wrathful Phowa.......and also referred to 'lower practices'.
Does this mean that, as with Phowa, it can be performed after the death of the body?
And does that mean the consciousness can be called to an effigy and liberated through that method?
Thanks.

Malcolm wrote:
In general, the object of such practices is generally provocations. But there are instances where people and indeed whole people, such as Mongolians, have been the objects of such rites as well.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, October 27th, 2017 at 2:19 AM
Title: Re: Tantric Liberation, Padmasambhava and Bonpos, etc.
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
No one ever said it was "tantric liberation."

What I said in the beginning was that Daesh fighters in general fit the criteria of the ten fields. That is all I said. Then people went crazy with all kinds of assumptions.

Grigoris said:
This idea was originally posted in a thread that started with a news article about the UK government seriously considering drone bombing retreating ISIS members returning to their country of origin.  It is not a crazy assumption at all given the context of the statements.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, this is what the UK Government has decided:
Nearly all Britons who join Islamic State should be killed, the government made clear yesterday in a significant toughening of its line.
And:
The defence secretary warned her fellow volunteers: “If you are a British national in Iraq or Syria and if you have chosen to fight for Daesh . . . then you have made yourself a legitimate target.”
I was pointing out that with Buddhadharma, there are provisions for dealing with absolutely wicked people and the kinds of criterion with which one decides how wicked they are.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, October 27th, 2017 at 2:06 AM
Title: Re: Tantric Liberation, Padmasambhava and Bonpos, etc.
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Other people take the point of view that Buddhists should under every circumstance take a pacifist position and argue that their respective governments should stay out of international affairs. I personally see that as an irresponsible point of view.

Grigoris said:
look son.jpg

Malcolm wrote:
Just pointing out that I think absolute pacifism is an erroneous position.


Grigoris said:
I have a pragmatic position. Until Daesh is out of the way, it is difficult to move forward in any thing like a lasting peace in the region. Just look at how the lack of de-Nazification is playing out in East Germany and Austria, as opposed to Western Germany.
look son 2.jpg

Malcolm wrote:
Just pointing out that Iraq, Syria and so on need to be de-Daeshified.

Look, Dick Cheney pretty much started this shit show single handedly. If there is anyone to ultimately blame, it is him. I did not vote for the bastards that started this whole mess, Cheney and co., and it has cost the US more than a trillion dollars, which is everything that Bin Ladin, and so on hoped for. It has been a tremendous waste of lives and resources. But the other sad fact is that the international community cannot simply sit idly by and watch those regions be ravaged by fanatics. We have an ethical obligation to support stable governments in the region who are able to come to some kind of internal balance, a problem that is still on going with the brewing four-way fight between Kurds, Iraqis, Turks, and Syrians, five, if one counts Iran.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, October 27th, 2017 at 2:02 AM
Title: Re: Grievances, real and fictional
Content:
steveb1 said:
Who support the functional equivalent of White genocide by mass replacement of White Europeans with Middle Easterners...

Malcolm wrote:
Dude, you are hallucinating. There is no white genocide apart from the one in Alex Jone's febrile imagination.

The Cicada said:
Alex Jones = Texas, USA. Muslim immigration = Europe.

Malcolm wrote:
The narrative of "a white genocide" is the problem here. There is no such genocide taking place.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, October 27th, 2017 at 1:52 AM
Title: Re: Tantric Liberation, Padmasambhava and Bonpos, etc.
Content:
Mantrik said:
I did answer, read back. It is exaclty the same people who can perform Phowa for any other being. You want their names or something?

Grigoris said:
NO, I am just showing all involved how ridiculous an idea it is to consider drone bombing retreating ISIS members as tantric liberation.  It is stupid, verging on brain dead retarded.

Malcolm wrote:
No one ever said it was "tantric liberation."

What I said in the beginning was that Daesh fighters in general fit the criteria of the ten fields. That is all I said. Then people went crazy with all kinds of assumptions.

Amitabha is not going to sort anyone out here, I am afraid. It will be Yamarāja who does the sorting into various lower realms.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, October 27th, 2017 at 1:21 AM
Title: Re: Tantric Liberation, Padmasambhava and Bonpos, etc.
Content:
Sherab said:
That would explain why the Tibetans did not turn themselves into suicide bombers or go on random killing spree after China invade Tibet ... Tibet did not have crude oil and China was not a capitalist economy then.

Malcolm wrote:
The Tibetans conducted a guerrilla war backed by the CIA until 1969.

Sherab said:
Few, however, know that thousands of Tibetans took up arms against the invading forces of Communist China and for more than a decade waged a bitter and bloody guerrilla war of resistance. From the mid-1950s until 1969 the Tibetans were aided in their efforts by an unlikely ally: the CIA.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, October 27th, 2017 at 12:59 AM
Title: Re: Tantric Liberation, Padmasambhava and Bonpos, etc.
Content:
smcj said:
You don’t want to be part of that cycle if you can avoid it.

Malcolm wrote:
We are part of it, however. It is not avoidable. So people take differing perspectives. Some people take the perspective that dealing with Daesh and other fanatic terrorist groups with military force is regrettable but unavoidable.

Other people take the point of view that Buddhists should under every circumstance take a pacifist position and argue that their respective governments should stay out of international affairs. I personally see that as an irresponsible point of view.

I have a pragmatic position. Until Daesh is out of the way, it is difficult to move forward in any thing like a lasting peace in the region. Just look at how the lack of de-Nazification is playing out in East Germany and Austria, as opposed to Western Germany.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, October 27th, 2017 at 12:10 AM
Title: Re: Tantric Liberation, Padmasambhava and Bonpos, etc.
Content:
Grigoris said:
You still haven't answered to the key question:  Who is going to do the Phowa?

Malcolm wrote:
You, Greg.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, October 26th, 2017 at 11:24 PM
Title: Re: Kill Daesh Jihadists from Britain says Government
Content:
Mkoll said:
I'm assuming you didn't know that some ISIS fighters were kids when making those statements. So are you still in favor of executing all ISIS fighters, now knowing that some are brainwashed minors?


Malcolm wrote:
You can't seriously think that the international community can allow Daesh to survive anywhere. Of course there are ethical issues and concerns, as there always when dealing with death cults, recruitment of child soldiers is one of them and how to reintegrate them after they have been captured is something the international community is going to have to deal with.

I was specifically referring to those people who refuse to surrender.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, October 26th, 2017 at 7:19 AM
Title: Re: Kill Daesh Jihadists from Britain says Government
Content:
PuerAzaelis said:
Um, before we go off to amputate gangrenous limbs or stop people upstream throwing the babies ... can we all agree that in the long run none of this will work? Giving causation a nudge isn’t going to stop people headed for an animal rebirth, or worse.

Malcolm wrote:
Of course.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, October 26th, 2017 at 7:09 AM
Title: Re: Grievances, real and fictional
Content:
steveb1 said:
Who support the functional equivalent of White genocide by mass replacement of White Europeans with Middle Easterners...

Malcolm wrote:
Dude, you are hallucinating. There is no white genocide apart from the one in Alex Jone's febrile imagination.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, October 26th, 2017 at 7:07 AM
Title: Re: Grievances, real and fictional
Content:
steveb1 said:
For example, Antifa - a terrorist Communist group, its only raison d'etre to violently disrupt legal, peaceful gatherings of Republicans, conservatives, and Alt Right groups.

Malcolm wrote:
Disrupting the "Alt-Right," aka, neo-Fascists, is the whole point of Antifa. Can't give the Fascist bastards an inch. We fought a world war to put those bastards down.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, October 26th, 2017 at 6:32 AM
Title: Re: Tantric Liberation, Padmasambhava and Bonpos, etc.
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
.... I was talking about, and am only talking about Daesh fighters. The rest of them need to be interviewed and observed, incarcerated if need be, depending on how committed to this perverted ideology they are.

Sherab said:
You are assuming that ALL Daesh fighters are hardcore supporters of Daesh ideology.  That is an unsafe assumption.  Even among fighters, there could be varying degree of commitment to Daesh ideology.

Malcolm wrote:
If they are there, they believe in what they are doing. Anyway, Daesh is on the way out.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, October 26th, 2017 at 6:10 AM
Title: Re: Tantric Liberation, Padmasambhava and Bonpos, etc.
Content:
Grigoris said:
Drone bombing does not deal with the root of the problem.

Malcolm wrote:
The only person who is talking about drone bombing is you.

The only way to deal with these kinds of people in a real sense is ground troops with close air support.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, October 26th, 2017 at 6:08 AM
Title: Re: Tantric Liberation, Padmasambhava and Bonpos, etc.
Content:
Grigoris said:
You get rid of ISIS and something else will grow to take it's place.  Guaranteed.  Unless you deal with the root of the problem.

Drone bombing does not deal with the root of the problem.

Thomas Amundsen said:
What is the root of the problem?

Malcolm wrote:
Some people do not understand that some infections, like gangrene, just need to be cut out. Then you treat rest of the patient's body with appropriate remedies.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, October 26th, 2017 at 4:32 AM
Title: Re: Grievances, real and fictional
Content:


Queequeg said:
We need to make a distinction here that in real life, hate is not limited by race - its just one of the categories that we pay more attention to.

Malcolm wrote:
We are talking about the Tea Party and the Trumpistas here. Racist as f&^k. BTW, you can keep NYC. Ugggh. Hate that place. Sea level rise might be the best thing that happens to it since it the Dutch cheated Indians for it.

Queequeg said:
Right, and what I'm saying is that the Tea Party did not start out as what it became.

Malcolm wrote:
We will agree to disagree. It was racist from the get go.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, October 26th, 2017 at 4:27 AM
Title: Re: Tantric Liberation, Padmasambhava and Bonpos, etc.
Content:
Mantrik said:
So, you include everyone in the organisation - the kid who makes their meals, a jihadi bride who is proudly supporting her spouse, a fool jihadi from the US who is ideological but totally unable to be a combatant?

In terms of suitability for liberation, just how close do we need to be to the ones who are plotting and executing the killings?

Grigoris said:
And who and how does one need to be doing the killing, in order for it to qualify as liberation?

Malcolm wrote:
In this case, if they are stopped, they are prevented from engaging in more nonvirtuous deeds and harming more sentient beings. That is liberation enough.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, October 26th, 2017 at 4:26 AM
Title: Re: Tantric Liberation, Padmasambhava and Bonpos, etc.
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
I did not fall into any trap. I am still referring Daesh and only Daesh.

Grigoris said:
It was not a trap, not intentional anyway...  The reality is that from a drone the closest you'll get to knowing if somebody is a member of ISIS is if you see somebody with an assault rifle, a beard and a turban.  In rural Syria that is about 80% of the adult male population.

AND I am not only doubting if all ISIS members are suitable objects for liberation, I am also doubting whether the subjects that are liberating are suitable too.  It seems to me that by agreeing to drone strikes you are setting up drone operators for rebirth in the three lower realms; since their motivation is unlikely to be bodhicitta and they will not be engaging in the correct practices when blowing people into tiny pieces.  They will just be commiting plain and ordinary murder.

So it is my opinion that your view is completely mistaken and lacking in compassion, as it is setting up the causes and conditions for both the subjects and objects of the actions, to experience horrendous future suffering.


Malcolm wrote:
My friend, you introduced all these elaborate conditions. I don't think the US or Europe needs to be involved in these operations directly. I think the Iraqis, Kurds, and Syrians are doing an adequate job of cleaning out Daesh from Iraq and Syria. But they are not going to be able to sit back. We will all have to be vigilant for the next 100 years to make sure this kind of poison does not spread again.

I have compassion for Daesh. But I don't think there is any else to do. They are like rabid dogs. They need to be put down, just like any other animal with rabies.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, October 26th, 2017 at 4:23 AM
Title: Re: Tantric Liberation, Padmasambhava and Bonpos, etc.
Content:


Malcolm wrote:
I did not fall into any trap. I am still referring Daesh and only Daesh.

Mantrik said:
So, you include everyone in the organisation - the kid who makes their meals, a jihadi bride who is proudly supporting her spouse, a fool jihadi from the US who is ideological but totally unable to be a combatant?

In terms of suitability for liberation, just how close do we need to be to the ones who are plotting and executing the killings?

Malcolm wrote:
Jesus, you are not paying attention. I was talking about, and am only talking about Daesh fighters. The rest of them need to be interviewed and observed, incarcerated if need be, depending on how committed to this perverted ideology they are.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, October 26th, 2017 at 4:12 AM
Title: Re: Grievances, real and fictional
Content:


Queequeg said:
We need to make a distinction here that in real life, hate is not limited by race - its just one of the categories that we pay more attention to.

Malcolm wrote:
We are talking about the Tea Party and the Trumpistas here. Racist as f&^k. BTW, you can keep NYC. Ugggh. Hate that place. Sea level rise might be the best thing that happens to it since it the Dutch cheated Indians for it.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, October 26th, 2017 at 3:56 AM
Title: Re: Tantric Liberation, Padmasambhava and Bonpos, etc.
Content:
Grigoris said:
I understand this my dear Malcolm, but what we are actually talking about ('ccept in the case of Guru Rinpoche, maybe) is Military personnel dropping bones from drones on unknown people that look like ISIS members.  Now if you consider that "liberation", well, then it seems you have strange ideas about tantric practice.  Now if it was Guru Rinpoche manning the drones I might say okay, it would still kind of freak me out, but...

Malcolm wrote:
I don't see any reason why they all shouldn't be executed.

Mantrik said:
Note Greg's phrases 'unknown' and  'look like'. Guess you fell into the trap he set.  (Originally you were referring to Daesh who were committed to killing, not random people fleeing a conflict zone. )

Malcolm wrote:
I did not fall into any trap. I am still referring Daesh and only Daesh.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, October 26th, 2017 at 3:47 AM
Title: Re: Tantric Liberation, Padmasambhava and Bonpos, etc.
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
No, liberation is a kind of wrathful phowa, actually.

Grigoris said:
I understand this my dear Malcolm, but what we are actually talking about ('ccept in the case of Guru Rinpoche, maybe) is Military personnel dropping bones from drones on unknown people that look like ISIS members.  Now if you consider that "liberation", well, then it seems you have strange ideas about tantric practice.  Now if it was Guru Rinpoche manning the drones I might say okay, it would still kind of freak me out, but...

Malcolm wrote:
I don't see any reason why they all shouldn't be executed. Why? Because they are actually wicked. There are not that many people in the world that I think of as being wicked through and through. Daesh fits the bill.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, October 26th, 2017 at 3:43 AM
Title: Re: Grievances, real and fictional
Content:
Queequeg said:
It started with finance guys who were screaming for the whole thing to collapse and reset
Now that I think about it, I wonder if this is part of the reason people are pissed.

They wanted to see a wholesale collapse of the present economic system - a reset based on what they consider tangible value - hard work, ingenuity, GOLD. When the complete collapse didn't happen, they focused their anger on Obama because he stood in the way, bailing out people who took more loan than they could afford, as well as the banks that set up the macro-architecture of the whole scheme - mortgage backed securities.

I suspect there is an intersection here of doomsday preppers, white nationalists, and zombie show fans.


Malcolm wrote:
It is plain old white privilege and racism. I don't understand why you resist this.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, October 26th, 2017 at 3:34 AM
Title: Re: Grievances, real and fictional
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Before Obama, no tea party. After Obama...you connect the dots.

Queequeg said:
I was there at the beginning - see my link above. It started because of the bailouts. They hated Bush, too, especially Paulson's midnight stick-up of the treasury.

It started with finance guys who were screaming for the whole thing to collapse and reset, or alternatively, if the government was going to pay out money, calling for infrastructure instead of bank bailouts. Relevant:

Then the hoi polloi joined with the Koch brothers seeding the astro-turf phase. And then all that birther crap came up, but that was later.

Now, I'm not saying that the gold bugs and bond traders who started it all are not racist. But race was not the motivating issue for them. Sentiment breaks right among that crowd, but there were just as many calling for a New Deal. It wasn't until the yahoos got involved that the New Deal faction bailed out. A lot of them, I suspect turned out for Bernie.


Malcolm wrote:
This is racist as f^%K:
Do we really want to subsidize the losers’ mortgages? This is America!
And we can see that his comments provoked immediate observations that his sentiments were racist.

Queequeg said:
Rick Santelli is heir to this legacy laced with racist overtones. Note the promo before the rant in the video link at CNBC. CNBC has an upcoming special entitled The Rise of America’s New Black Overclass. Fear mongering, it’s worked before so let’s try it again. It’s back to the 1970s for the GOP and their rabid white ethnics.

Malcolm wrote:
https://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/02/20/rick-santelli-tea-party-time/?_r=0

The tea party is racist as f&^k and always as been, including this rant by Santelli that started is all.

Queequeg said:
Santelli’s “rant” was not really aimed at Big Government or corporate cronyism or high tax levels or corruption or any of the targets soon claimed for the tea party. It was a rant at those shiftless poor people who took out mortgages they should have known they could not repay and then expected virtuous successful people like Santelli himself to rescue them with his tax dollars. Perhaps Santelli did not have a racist bone in his body — how should I know? — but he was pushing a narrative beloved of racists at all times and in all places. They resent those people who seek to escape their just desserts via force, whether it’s through street crime or the organized larceny of government redistribution.

Malcolm wrote:
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/09/from-tea-to-trump-not-that-long-a-journey.html


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, October 26th, 2017 at 3:27 AM
Title: Re: Grievances, real and fictional
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Samsara is a shitty place to try and raise a family.

Queequeg said:
Cop out.

Doesn't have to be this sort of shitty.

Malcolm wrote:
It could be much worse.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, October 26th, 2017 at 2:13 AM
Title: Re: Grievances, real and fictional
Content:



Queequeg said:
Sorry, need to clarify myself on this - not entirely manufactured. There is definitely exploitation of deep and real concerns that are whipped up and sublimated into the exaggerated fear and anger associated with Trumpism/Tea Party.

Malcolm wrote:
Nah, the Tea Party was always racist. Now they have their racist messiah.

Queequeg said:
That is an awfully essentialist way to look at it.


Malcolm wrote:
Before Obama, no tea party. After Obama...you connect the dots.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, October 26th, 2017 at 1:29 AM
Title: Re: The DJKR Topic
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
You've yet to establish that Guru Rinpoche was a tantric murderer or that there is such a thing as tantric murder. Liberation is not murder. It's liberation.

Grigoris said:
A rose by any other name... And since we are talking about my other comment referring to Daesh fighters, eliminating them prevents them from engaging in further nonvirtues.
Maybe in this lifetime, but the karmic imprint would...

Malcolm wrote:
The karma from their actions assures their birth in hell realms anyway.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, October 26th, 2017 at 1:27 AM
Title: Re: The DJKR Topic
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
You've yet to establish that Guru Rinpoche was a tantric murderer or that there is such a thing as tantric murder. Liberation is not murder. It's liberation.

Grigoris said:
A rose by any other name...

Malcolm wrote:
No, liberation is a kind of wrathful phowa, actually.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, October 26th, 2017 at 12:51 AM
Title: Re: The DJKR Topic
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
You are basically accusing Guru Rinpoche of being involved in a kind of ethnic cleansing. Do you really think that? Because if you do, I do not see how you can have faith in him.

Grigoris said:
You have faith in the fact that there can be a justified (tantric) murder and yet you cannot see how somebody can have faith in a (tantric) murderer?  That's pretty strange...

Malcolm wrote:
You've yet to establish that Guru Rinpoche was a tantric murderer or that there is such a thing as tantric murder. Liberation is not murder. It's liberation.

And since we are talking about my other comment referring to Daesh fighters, eliminating them prevents them from engaging in further nonvirtues. As it is, those people are going to spend eons in lower realms for their crimes against sentient beings. Just to be clear, Daesh is a special case, like SS soldiers. There really is only one thing to be done with them. In general, however, I don't support wars.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, October 26th, 2017 at 12:48 AM
Title: Re: The DJKR Topic
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
You are basically accusing Guru Rinpoche of being involved in a kind of ethnic cleansing. I am quoting the translation of the Barchey Lamsel text. The word they use is "destroyed".
You mean this line? It is the only mention of Bon:

10) Having done the accomplishment at Samye Chimphu,
repelled negative conditions and bestowed siddhi,
you placed the king and ministers on the path of liberation,
the teaching of the Bon’s demonic forms declined,
and the teaching of the precious immaculate dharmakāya
placed the fortunate on the stage of buddhahood.

gdon gzugs bon gyi bstan pa bsnubs.

The word in the text is bsnubs. It means either "med par gtong ba," "sent into nonexistence"  or "nub par byed pa", "caused to decline."

It does not have the strong connotations of other Tibetan words, such as 'joms, to conquer, brlag pa, to crush.

The commentary by Dilgo Khyentse on this line states that the Bonpos were defeated in debate by Padmsambhava and Shantarakshita through citation and reasoning. They were then exiled by royal decree, and their teaching disappeared.

If you look at the broader history, this refers to a faction in the Tibetan court of Trisong Detsen that maintained connections to the overthrown Zhang Zhung kingdom whose power over Tibet had been shrugged off a century before when Srong Tsan Gampo engineered the assassination of King Ligmincha. "Bonpos" then are not the Bonpos we have today. And in other Kathang literature, we have clear examples of Padmasambhava interceding on behalf of some Bonpos whose practices did not involve animal and human sacrifice, so called "good Bonpos." So here, the so called "Bonpos" who were exiled were a specific political faction of Tibetans.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, October 25th, 2017 at 11:47 PM
Title: Re: Grievances, real and fictional
Content:
Queequeg said:
I don't know if the grievances of people in "Trump Country" are fake or that their fears are manufactured.
Sorry, need to clarify myself on this - not entirely manufactured. There is definitely exploitation of deep and real concerns that are whipped up and sublimated into the exaggerated fear and anger associated with Trumpism/Tea Party.

Malcolm wrote:
Nah, the Tea Party was always racist. Now they have their racist messiah.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, October 25th, 2017 at 11:40 PM
Title: Re: Grievances, real and fictional
Content:



Queequeg said:
Not to toot my own horn... but...

https://dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=47&t=22958&p=343436&hilit=tea+party#p343436

When we talk about Tea Party, what exactly do we mean these days? I ask because the Tea Party movement seems to have evaporated, replaced by Trumpism.


Malcolm wrote:
Tea Party = Trumpism. Trump is the Tea Party Messiah.

Queequeg said:
If that is the case... and I don't want to be accused of trumpeting for Trumpism... I don't know if the grievances of people in "Trump Country" are fake or that their fears are manufactured. I think this view underestimates the circumstances across a lot of places being left behind in the present economy and the social problems that have followed.

Malcolm wrote:
Samsara is a shitty place to try and raise a family.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, October 25th, 2017 at 11:17 PM
Title: Re: Grievances, real and fictional
Content:
DGA said:
the tea party and its affiliates (living in a phantasmagoria of fake grievances and manufactured fears).

Queequeg said:
Not to toot my own horn... but...

https://dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=47&t=22958&p=343436&hilit=tea+party#p343436

When we talk about Tea Party, what exactly do we mean these days? I ask because the Tea Party movement seems to have evaporated, replaced by Trumpism.


Malcolm wrote:
Tea Party = Trumpism. Trump is the Tea Party Messiah.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, October 25th, 2017 at 10:56 PM
Title: Re: The DJKR Topic
Content:
Lhasa said:
Well if the king is subjugated to an extremely powerful siddha, and converts to that religion, how can you say that that siddha is not personally involved?


Malcolm wrote:
You are basically accusing Guru Rinpoche of being involved in a kind of ethnic cleansing. Do you really think that? Because if you do, I do not see how you can have faith in him.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, October 25th, 2017 at 11:40 AM
Title: Re: The DJKR Topic
Content:



Adamantine said:
Sort of like what's happening to Muslims in Myanmar?

Malcolm wrote:
The charge is niot that there was a power struggle in Tibet between Tibetans who wanted to adopt Buddhism and those who dudn’t, the charge is that Guru Rinpoche was personally involved.

Adamantine said:
Right. I've been under the impression from what I've read that Guru Rinpoche's activities in Tibet were mainly subduing obstructing invisible beings and binding them under oath as protectors, along with his vast beneficial teaching efforts including concealing terma. The power struggle against the bonpo was more the King's department. Is that your take away?

Malcolm wrote:
Pretty much.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, October 25th, 2017 at 10:30 AM
Title: Re: The DJKR Topic
Content:
Lhasa said:
In the 'Heart Essence of the Khandro' by Yongdzin Rinpoche, starting on page 148, you will find the Bonpo version of what happened.  Phrases like, "set out to destroy the doctrines of Yungdrung Bon,...a time of devastation,..  Bon lamas, ministers and powerful noble people as well as ordinary folk were put to death or banished...property confiscated,...  those who remained in Tibet were forcefully and sometimes brutally converted to the new religion, Indian Buddhism....gompas laid waste,... persecution of the Bonpos."

Good read.

Adamantine said:
Sort of like what's happening to Muslims in Myanmar?

Malcolm wrote:
The charge is niot that there was a power struggle in Tibet between Tibetans who wanted to adopt Buddhism and those who dudn’t, the charge is that Guru Rinpoche was personally involved.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, October 25th, 2017 at 4:37 AM
Title: Re: The DJKR Topic
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
One really must be more precise than "I seem to recall."

Grigoris said:
In the Barchey Lamsel it states that Guru Rinpoche in his incarnation as Dukyi Shechen while practicing in the Slate Mountain forest hurled his "phurba of recitation" and burnt the sandalwood forest and dried up the lake.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, because there were harmful nonbuddhists there, etc. This manifestation is called "Great Enemy of Māra."

Grigoris said:
In his incarnation as Kalden Drendze he destroyed the teachings of the Bonpo.  Give me some time and I'll find the bit about the tribe of Daka too...

Malcolm wrote:
What do you mean by destroy? In the supplication it pretty clear that Bon declined because the King, etc., where placed in the Dharma.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, October 25th, 2017 at 3:08 AM
Title: Re: What to do about Daesh? (ISIS, ISIL...)
Content:


Coëmgenu said:
It is Saudi Islam.

Malcolm wrote:
Not really. Daesh is comprised of madmen, whose minds have been possessed by demons.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, October 25th, 2017 at 1:37 AM
Title: Re: What to do about Daesh? (ISIS, ISIL...)
Content:
Minobu said:
well first up we need to know what exactly is Islamic Extremism ..what is it they read that turns them into human bombs.
No one tells you exactly what it is they are told and where it comes from...

we take this knowledge and go global with it...governments pay to have documentaries about it...teaching kids it's wrong..
unfortunately i do not know what it is so like maybe they cannot make documentaries about it for it could be politically incorrect and the world just has to live with this forever.

we might offend people ...it's very hard to understand.


Malcolm wrote:
It's not about Islam, not really. The minute people make Daesh about Islam, they lose sight of the real situation.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 24th, 2017 at 10:52 PM
Title: Re: HHST Yamantaka initiation 2018
Content:
zerwe said:
Hi all.
Was wondering if anyone had any specifics about the upcoming Yamantaka initiation in Boston this April.
What sort of commitments does HHST typically give? And sort of related to another recent thread; how reconcilable
is receiving this initiation from HHST if one is a Gelug FPMT practitioner? My Lama's suggestion is to seek this initiation
when my mind is ready. I imagine this may be a discussion I need to have with him directly, but I strongly believe that he would not object.

Big Love,
Shaun

Malcolm wrote:
All empowerments HHST is giving can be taken without receiving a specific practice commitment.

https://sakya.net/#HHST


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 24th, 2017 at 10:36 AM
Title: Re: The DJKR Topic
Content:
smcj said:
Isn’t that having an attachment to your views?


Malcolm wrote:
So is pure vision. This is why there is a completion stage.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 24th, 2017 at 10:02 AM
Title: Re: What would Buddha have thought of Mahayana?
Content:
PadmaVonSamba said:
Please determine the existence of nagas or of hungry ghost realms using logical deduction.

Malcolm wrote:
The Buddha spokes of them, therefore, we can deduce they exist.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 24th, 2017 at 9:17 AM
Title: Re: Kill Daesh Jihadists from Britain says Government
Content:


Johnny Dangerous said:
Yeah, because that's never been misused.

Malcolm wrote:
Unlike other countries, like China and Russia, the US and Western Europe are largely nations of laws. We really do maintain that. Can't say as much for the rest of the world.

Johnny Dangerous said:
Only because of civil institutions basically, increasingly militarism - including things like expanding approval extra judicial assassination, will put an end to what little restrains authoritarianism here, IMO.


Malcolm wrote:
I bet you will find out someday that Anwar Al Awlaki was tried in absentia in a FISA court before Obama ordered his death.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 24th, 2017 at 9:15 AM
Title: Re: Kill Daesh Jihadists from Britain says Government
Content:


Johnny Dangerous said:
Anyway, I don't really wanna continue this, I see where you're coming from on an ethical level, i am not bothered by people wanting to go to war with  Daesh, and I applaud groups like Rojava doing so..I just don't share your enthusiasm or trust for the Western world's "solutions".

Malcolm wrote:
I actually don't want to make war on anyone. But sometimes, when decent people are being deliberately murdered by savages, someone has to step up.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 24th, 2017 at 9:12 AM
Title: Re: Kill Daesh Jihadists from Britain says Government
Content:


Johnny Dangerous said:
Yeah, because that's never been misused.

Malcolm wrote:
Unlike other countries, like China and Russia, the US and Western Europe are largely nations of laws. We really do maintain that, not perfectly, but we try. Can't say as much for the rest of the world. And I have travelled a lot of it.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 24th, 2017 at 9:09 AM
Title: Re: Kill Daesh Jihadists from Britain says Government
Content:



Johnny Dangerous said:
Uh, the US killed Americans in Al Quaeda, it's already happened...

Malcolm wrote:
You mean Anwar Al Awlaki? He gave up his right to call himself an American the very first time he called for terrorist attacks on the United States.

Johnny Dangerous said:
You're welcome to believe that, it's certainly a common sentiment these days, but you're not going to convince me of the importance of extra-judicial assassination. I was simply mentioning it because it's relevant, as America has already killed it's own citizens sans due process int he War on Terror, though certainly it's been isolated.


Malcolm wrote:
He was a traitor to his nation.  He committed treason. This is how the treason law works:

United States Constitution. Article III said:
Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

Malcolm wrote:
and:

18 U.S. Code § 2381 - Treason said:
Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.

Malcolm wrote:
His broadcasts and videos were quite sufficient evidence. Under these statutes, any US citizen who went to fight for Daesh, can be subject to the same punishments.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 24th, 2017 at 9:05 AM
Title: Re: Kill Daesh Jihadists from Britain says Government
Content:



Johnny Dangerous said:
That will just involve more US installation of friendly regimes, as much as I could agree in theory, I don't think any help the US gives will be about stopping ISIS or helping the nascent half-ass Iraqi government.

Malcolm wrote:
The installation of friendly regimes works for me.


Johnny Dangerous said:
Our country has such a terrible history of "assisting" with such things, I don't really see the point, it will never be above board.

Malcolm wrote:
We have an obligation to assist — after all, Daesh is somewhat a problem of our own making. We do need to clean up the messes our country makes.

Johnny Dangerous said:
I don't think the US has ever cleaned up a mess it has made, usually it installs it's own business interests backed by military presence and finagles things to make markets friendly, I don't think on the whole policy makers care about cleaning up our messes, though again I can agree in theory.

Malcolm wrote:
I disagree. I think Obama, Clinton, and Carter were very motivated to clean up messes we made. Unfortunately, for Obama and Clinton, they had hostile congresses to contend with.

As a matter of real politik, however, I think that Trump's nativism, etc., has really cost us. Frankly, I would rather live in a world where US power was dominant than Russian or Chinese power. Just sayin...


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 24th, 2017 at 9:00 AM
Title: Re: Kill Daesh Jihadists from Britain says Government
Content:
Johnny Dangerous said:
Also worth mentioning, America has already done this with Al Qaeda.

Malcolm wrote:
Al Qaeda is not the same. They are enemies of the US certainly and perhaps, given the chance, they might be just as terrible as Daesh. But as it stands right now they are not. Daesh even disgusts them. Al Qaeda is the enemy of those western countries who happened to station troops in Saudi Arabia after the first Gulf War. They don't qualify.

Johnny Dangerous said:
Uh, the US killed Americans in Al Quaeda, it's already happened...

Malcolm wrote:
You mean Anwar Al Awlaki? He gave up his right to call himself an American the very first time he called for terrorist attacks on the United States.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 24th, 2017 at 8:57 AM
Title: Re: Kill Daesh Jihadists from Britain says Government
Content:
Johnny Dangerous said:
no one is interested in "eliminating" ISIS in any way that would realistically reduce the damage they are doing, or prevent them from morphing into something else.

Malcolm wrote:
Iraqis, Kurds and Syrians are pretty interested in this, as they should be, and we should assist them.

Johnny Dangerous said:
That will just involve more US installation of friendly regimes, as much as I could agree in theory, I don't think any help the US gives will be about stopping ISIS or helping the nascent half-ass Iraqi government.

Malcolm wrote:
The installation of friendly regimes works for me.


Johnny Dangerous said:
Niger and Nigeria is also interested in this, as well as what passes for a Somalian Gvt. We should assist them as well. We are already assisting Duterte in the Philippines, who of course is also another person who is extremely problematical.

This is not even a question of Islam, etc. These people are enemies of humanity (even their own) and this should be recognized. We should support those who oppose to the extent that we can.
Our country has such a terrible history of "assisting" with such things, I don't really see the point, it will never be above board.

Malcolm wrote:
We have an obligation to assist — after all, Daesh is somewhat a problem of our own making. We do need to clean up the messes our country makes.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 24th, 2017 at 8:54 AM
Title: Re: Kill Daesh Jihadists from Britain says Government
Content:
Johnny Dangerous said:
Also worth mentioning, America has already done this with Al Qaeda.

Malcolm wrote:
Al Qaeda is not the same. They are enemies of the US certainly and perhaps, given the chance, they might be just as terrible as Daesh. But as it stands right now they are not. Daesh even disgusts them. Al Qaeda is the enemy of those western countries who happened to station troops in Saudi Arabia after the first Gulf War. They don't qualify.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 24th, 2017 at 8:50 AM
Title: Re: Kill Daesh Jihadists from Britain says Government
Content:
Johnny Dangerous said:
no one is interested in "eliminating" ISIS in any way that would realistically reduce the damage they are doing, or prevent them from morphing into something else.

Malcolm wrote:
Iraqis, Kurds and Syrians are pretty interested in this, as they should be, and we should assist them.

Niger and Nigeria is also interested in this, as well as what passes for a Somalian Gvt. We should assist them as well. We are already assisting Duterte in the Philippines, who of course is also another person who is extremely problematical.

This is not even a question of Islam, etc. These people are enemies of humanity (even their own) and this should be recognized. We should support those who oppose to the extent that we can.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 24th, 2017 at 8:45 AM
Title: Re: Kill Daesh Jihadists from Britain says Government
Content:
DGA said:
I would assume that among Daesh all three categories of participants obtain.  Should all three be treated the same, i.e., "lead poisoning"?

Malcolm wrote:
I was talking about Daesh fighters, people who run the Daesh state and are committed to it's really insane vision of the world.

Fortunately, the Iraqis, Kurds and some Syrians seem to be in the process of sorting out Daesh in Iraq and Eastern Syria. They understand very clearly the toxicity of Daesh, even if some people in the West do not.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 24th, 2017 at 8:39 AM
Title: Re: Kill Daesh Jihadists from Britain says Government
Content:
Johnny Dangerous said:
This kind of requires one to ask the question behind the motivation of killing Daesh/Isis.

Malcolm wrote:
They are harmful beings. In a rather short time, they have wrecked a number of large cities in the Middle East, and literally kept 2 or 3 million people in abject slavery, terror, and poverty. Yes, I am quite aware that without the second Iraq war, etc., we would not discussing this at all.

But when you havea rabid dog, first you put it down before you wonder where it got bit.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 24th, 2017 at 8:35 AM
Title: Re: Kill Daesh Jihadists from Britain says Government
Content:
Jesse said:
Have I made the list yet?

Malcolm wrote:
No, you have not. You would literally have to be willing the harm the Dharma and all sentient beings as well (Like Daesh), and be utterly devoid of love and compassion to make it on the list,

I do suggest you get a handle on your anger, however.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 24th, 2017 at 7:37 AM
Title: Re: Kill Daesh Jihadists from Britain says Government
Content:


Jesse said:
Who get's to decide who lives, and who dies? Based on what criteria? Based on the views/welfare of which nation-state?

Malcolm wrote:
I gave the criteria.


Jesse said:
I find you pretty intolerable most of the time, I suppose my killing you would be a service to sentient beings then.

Malcolm wrote:
I think you would only be scratching a homicidal itch and not getting the root of your problems.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 24th, 2017 at 6:09 AM
Title: Re: Kill Daesh Jihadists from Britain says Government
Content:
Dan74 said:
It'll be a feat of serious sophistry to demonstrate that for each and every one of them, sight unseen. Seriously, Malcolm, you do a great deal of good. I hope you reconsider this. Look at what non-Buddhists do in Aarhus, Denmark, the success they've had in rehabilitating former Daesh people. And you would just give up on them and call for slaughter? Seems like a huge blind spot in compassion, let alone ethics and general sound policy.

Malcolm wrote:
I am talking about those who remain armed, who continue to fight and attempt to spread their evil creed. They have amply proven they will resort to genocide, etc. They would certainly harm any Buddhist they got their hands on.

And as far as those who have returned and have laid down arms, I would not trust them at all, and would make sure they were under constant surveillance. It is a crime in the US even to attempt to travel to join Daesh, as it should be in all civilized nations.

I am pretty liberal with respect to most things, but I have zero tolerance for Daesh.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 24th, 2017 at 6:02 AM
Title: Re: The DJKR Topic
Content:
Tenma said:
So killing a minister's son and having 5 consorts that include teens to practice with is a pure guru?

Malcolm wrote:
He was playing on the roof, and the staff slipped from his hands. It is not like Guru Rinpoche set out to murder the boy.

As for Yeshe Tsogyal, and the rest, when you were 16 in those days, you were a women, ready to be married.

Tenma said:
Explain 12 year old Yeshe Tsogyal.

Malcolm wrote:
Her biography clearly states she was 16 when she met Guru Padmasambhava. She was 12 when her parents forced her into an arranged marriage with King Trisong De'tsen. But the latter had many wives, not merely one or two.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 24th, 2017 at 5:38 AM
Title: Re: Kill Daesh Jihadists from Britain says Government
Content:
Dan74 said:
I think this view expressed by Malcolm here is so selfevidently repugnant on many levels, it doesn't require counterarguments.

Malcolm wrote:
There are some sentient beings who are so harmful to other sentient beings the only compassionate thing to do is to liberate the former so they will not continue to harm the latter.

Fortunately, this fact has been recognized by the governments of the world and they are eliminating Daesh and its analogues as best they can. I support them in this. It is for the best.

Within Vajrayāna, there are ten criteria which must be fully met for a sentient being to be considered eligible for such liberation: 1) they harm the doctrine, 2) they despise the Three Jewels, 3) they rob the Sangha 4) they despise Mahāyāna 5) they harm the body of the guru, 6) they destroy the vajra family, 7) they cause obsctacles to practice, 8) they utterly lack love and compassion, 9) they are utterly divorced from samaya vows, and 10) they have a false view of the result of karma.

Those who belong to Daesh, as far as I am concerned, satisfy all ten.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 24th, 2017 at 5:21 AM
Title: Re: The DJKR Topic
Content:
Grigoris said:
I seem to remember that some of his incarnations killed whole tribes of Daka, burnt forests, dried out lakes and other nastiness...

Malcolm wrote:
One really must be more precise than "I seem to recall."


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 24th, 2017 at 5:15 AM
Title: Re: Kill Daesh Jihadists from Britain says Government
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Daesh should be eliminated. They are exactly the kind of sentient beings that should be the object of the lower activity. It is the only compassionate way to deal with them.

Grigoris said:
I guess we should eliminate the Burmese government too.  And the US government, I mean they have killed more people and destroyed more countries than Daesh ever will, even in their wildest wet dreams.

Malcolm wrote:
I am sure if you think about it a little bit, you can really understand the difference.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 24th, 2017 at 5:12 AM
Title: Re: Huldufólk and Nagas
Content:


tiagolps said:
I might just be imagining any connection with Nagas. But hey, cute little curiosity anyways.

Malcolm wrote:
They are more like The'u rang...


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 24th, 2017 at 4:45 AM
Title: Re: Kill Daesh Jihadists from Britain says Government
Content:
Mantrik said:
I wonder at what point Buddhists would see killing as justified, if at all.

Malcolm wrote:
When someone is an enemy of the Dharma and sentient beings, like Daesh, then it is justified.

Mantrik said:
Do you mean if they are close to completing the karma of killing, specifically?

Malcolm wrote:
Daesh should be eliminated. They are exactly the kind of sentient beings that should be the object of the lower activity. It is the only compassionate way to deal with them.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 24th, 2017 at 2:51 AM
Title: Re: Everybody speaks about samaya, but nobody knows what it is.
Content:
MalaBeads said:
Gyatrul Rinpche made a somewhat cryptic comment about samaya once that I heard. He said "You don't even know what samaya is, let alone how to practice it." I thought to myself, "Ain't that the truth?"

All the rules surrounding samaya are not samaya. Rules. That shalt not. What about us rule-o-phobes? Can we not practice dharma? Certainly, the whole concept of samaya did not function in Shakyamuni's time. So when exactly did it enter the Buddhist pantheon? Does anyone know? Is it just a Tibetan thing? No other branches of dharma practice seem to have it. Wondering about the whole thing.

Malcolm wrote:
With Yoga tantra.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 24th, 2017 at 2:02 AM
Title: Re: Kill Daesh Jihadists from Britain says Government
Content:
Mantrik said:
I wonder at what point Buddhists would see killing as justified, if at all.

Malcolm wrote:
When someone is an enemy of the Dharma and sentient beings, like Daesh, then it is justified.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 24th, 2017 at 1:23 AM
Title: Re: The DJKR Topic
Content:
smcj said:
...in your opinion.
Not just in my opinion. As before.

Atisha states:
If one has an evil guru or an evil friend, one will be harmed by both.
Mokṣākaragupta mentions in the Dohakoṣapañjikā-nāma:
It is risky to consider evil gurus to be one's guru. Since one relies on such a one, the fault is that one begins to have evil views and evil behavior. One should avoid such gurus as one would a snake.

These are all admonitions to avoid evil gurus. No argument there. You need to have citations saying that it is ok to break samaya with a guru once you have made a commitment to him.

Malcolm wrote:
No, Moksakara's advice clearly means that once you have understood this or that person to be evil, you shun them. You cannot break samaya with someone who is not qualified to bestow samaya or who has broken their own samaya. As the Rig pa Ranshar states:
If the master breaks samaya, there is no method of purification.

If one has broken samaya, one has no samaya to give.


Khenchen Ngalo states:
Furthermore, as previously explained, after one has requested Dharma and empowerments from a reliable, qualified vajramaster guru, despising him with thoughts such as, “ this one’s discipline is corrupt,” “this one’s diligence is weak,” “he is confused” and so on is likened to despising all the buddhas.
If someone discovers their guru is not qualified, there is no obligation to continue to follow such a guru at all, or regard them as pure and so on.

What is a qualified guru? Again, Khenchen Ngalo comments:
it is definitely necessary that the guru has obtained the empowerment, possesses the lineage, is pure, all of his practices accord with the tantra division because he understands the meaning of the tantras, has completed the approach and accomplishment, guards the supreme samayas of the four empowerments like his life, is adorned with many intimate instructions [man ngag, upadeśa] of nāḍīs, vāyus, dreams, etc., which correspond with the tantras, whose continuum is moistened with love, compassion, and bodhicitta, and who knows many scriptures and treatises of sūtra and tantra.
This is a qualified guru.

smcj said:
He incited people to try to kill him, yet his students saw him as pure.

Malcolm wrote:
???


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 24th, 2017 at 1:12 AM
Title: Re: The DJKR Topic
Content:
Tenma said:
So killing a minister's son and having 5 consorts that include teens to practice with is a pure guru?

Malcolm wrote:
He was playing on the roof, and the staff slipped from his hands. It is not like Guru Rinpoche set out to murder the boy.

As for Yeshe Tsogyal, and the rest, when you were 16 in those days, you were a women, ready to be married.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 24th, 2017 at 12:47 AM
Title: Re: The DJKR Topic
Content:


Sonam Wangchug said:
Well, it kind of follows, if one has actual conviction in a lama being a "Khyentse." then one wouldn't be so inclined to view their actions through an ordinary lens.

It was you who mentioned a quote about Guru's being a mix of positive qualities and faults, which was obviously to undermine my post that surprise surprise enlightened activities could manifest even in ways not everyone understands!

Malcolm wrote:
It was a reality check sourced from an authoritative commentary on a major tantra. It is a citation which I stand by. There is no living person alive today, in this Kali Yuga, who is completely free of misdeeds. Therefore, when picking a guru, one must see whether their qualities far outweigh their faults. This is much more reliable method for choosing a guru than chasing tulku titles. Of course, having chosen a guru, one must endeavor to see their minor flaws as teaching methods.

Sonam Wangchug said:
In reality, when these conversations crop up, I think it bears reminder, the tremendous confidence in which these lama's who are MOST of our refuges have placed in Rinpoche.

Malcolm wrote:
There is no tantra or sūtra anywhere that mentions a system of tulku recognition through dreams, divinations, oracles or any other means.

Sonam Wangchug said:
Why it is relevant, has to do with actions coming either from realization or confusion. While of course, a lama can become realized in the course of that lifetime, if indeed we are convinced of their being recognized by someone with less cognitive veils as a nirmanakaya then that helps.

Malcolm wrote:
It involves a chain of authority, and is not immune to Āryadeva's critcism of relying on claims of royal paternity.

Furthermore, according to Guru Padmasambhava in the Transcendent State of Samantabhadra cycle of teachings, an actual nirmanakāya is fully conscious when conceived, throughout the term of gestation, and through their birth. Bodhisattvas on the stages are conscious of being conceived, and are conscious throughout gestation, but lose consciousness at the time of birth. Ordinary sentient beings are conscious of being conceived, but are not aware throughout their gestation, and do not recall being born.

Sonam Wangchug said:
I doubt that the hardliners against Rinpoche will change their stances no matter who says what, but in the sea of this trend of aversion I just seek to offer another angle which I know ( though not everyone publicly shares it) others feel.

Malcolm wrote:
You are confused. I am not a hardliner who has arrayed themselves against anyone, least of all Dzongsar Khyentse. He is a qualified teacher, well trained and educated. That's enough in itself without all the extra baggage of tulkuhood.

I am totally skeptical of the tulku recognition system, something I have never hidden, ever. I consider the system of tulku recognition to be a Tibetan cultural custom, and that as a cultural practice, it is often is carried out in ways that are inconsistent with the Dharma. This is not to say this social strategy on the part of Tibetans to manage inheritance and lineage transmission has always been unsuccessful. However, there is a within Tibetan literature much fun poked at tulkus, and not a little healthy skepticism. For example Paltrul Rinpoche ironically notes in the The Oral Advice of Guru Samantabhadra:
Although they have not even the slightest qualities of hearing, reflection, and meditation in their continuums, they think they are better than others— “I am a guru,” or similarly, “I am a reincarnation,” “I am a bodhisattva,” “I am a master,” and so on. Furthermore, they also consider “My family is like that,” guarding their family like brahmins. Alternately, even though they have modest qualities of hearing, reflection, and meditation, [8/a] they do not practice with pure motivation for the benefit of future lives but do so for this life fearing personal loss such as the residence of the guru and so on. Like a grindstone made of wood, they do not have the ability to tame the continuums of disciples.

Though their own continuums lack even the modest qualities that should make them better than common people, other fools have faith in them, according them status without examining them. Their continuums are bloated with acquisitions and respect....
It is the Sogyals, Segals, and Burroughs of the world that should give one pause about tulku recognitions in general, not to mention the Fifth Dalai Lama's autobiographical account of how he was fraudulently recognized as the reincarnation of the fourth Dalai Lama by the regent, Sonam Rabten (1595–1658).

I therefore claim that teachers and gurus need to be examined based on their own character and deeds, rather than their titles, no matter how lofty or awakened the person handing out such recognitions may seem to us.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, October 23rd, 2017 at 11:49 PM
Title: Re: The DJKR Topic
Content:
smcj said:
Before I go any further I think that I need to make it clear I'm an enthusiastic supporter of Minyur R. and HHDL's position on abuse by gurus. Nothing I say should be interpreted to mean that I think somebody should stay in an unhealthy situation. The current discussion I'm trying to have with Malcolm is about the theoretical framework for guru yoga. That framework is designed around the ideal scenario where you guru actually is an enlightened Buddha.

Evidently there was a time when that was reliably the case.

Malcolm wrote:
I do not think this is a wise assumption.



smcj said:
Obviously these days those kinds of gurus are few and far between, if they have continued to exist at all.



Malcolm wrote:
It is the case that, as the Hevajra commentary Padmini cites the Approach to the Utimate:
Because of the power of the Kaliyuga, gurus have mixed qualities and faults, 
there are none at all without misdeeds;
disciples should rely on those
whose qualities predominate, and who have been thoroughly investigated.





No need for a citation. If you think you should have pure perception of a criminal guru like the one I mentioned (i.e. murderer, rapist, pedophile, et al.) you are an idiot. Anyone who encourages you to think so is an idiot. Anyone who agrees with them is an idiot.
...in your opinion.
Not just in my opinion. As before.

Atisha states:
If one has an evil guru or an evil friend, one will be harmed by both.
Mokṣākaragupta mentions in the Dohakoṣapañjikā-nāma:
It is risky to consider evil gurus to be one's guru. Since one relies on such a one, the fault is that one begins to have evil views and evil behavior. One should avoid such gurus as one would a snake.

smcj said:
So in the case of Padmasambhava, if someone was his disciple, would it not be correct for them to see all his actions as pure, even though he behaved in ways that provoked criticism?

Malcolm wrote:
Sure, as long as he was not 1) murdering people, 2) molesting children, 3) raping women, 4) stealing and 5) lying.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, October 23rd, 2017 at 11:24 AM
Title: Re: The DJKR Topic
Content:
Sonam Wangchug said:
I do not believe that text is referring specifically to Nirmanakaya's who appear in "inconceivable variety, for the benefit of sentient beings." and actually do not take rebirth because of karma but because of compassion.

Malcolm wrote:
There is a difference between actual nirmanakāyas and recognized tulkus. The former need no recognition at all since their qualities are evident in their compassionate deeds which benefit sentient beings, for example, Dudjom Lingpa who was never recognized by anyone as a tulku of Duddul Dorje.

As for myself, I have met quite enough nominally recognized tulkus to be quite convinced that the tulku recognition system should be put out of business, a sentiment I believe Dzongsar Khyentse largely shares.

Sonam Wangchug said:
There are also recognized tulkus who are actual Nirmanakaya's ,you make it sound as though the two are mutually exclusive.

Malcolm wrote:
The point is that such beings would manifest their qualities whether they were recognized or not by some hierarchy.

I am sure too you are familiar with the story of Khyentse Wangpo becoming tired of the doubts of a recently deceased lama's disciples. Since they had doubts about the recognized tulku, Khyentse took them to a barn, called out the lamas name, and when a calf answered, he said, "This is your actual Lama."

BTW, I have no interest in debating the authenticity of Dzongsar's recognition. You brought that up. I have no idea why, actually. But it is your trip, not mine. I am quite happy for the positive things that he does, like the 84,000 project and so on.  I frankly don't care whether he is an "authentic" tulku or not. It would never enter my mind to select a teacher based on their tulku recognition status. It would never enter my mind to do so because such a criteria is just not important to me at all.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, October 23rd, 2017 at 11:12 AM
Title: Re: The DJKR Topic
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Mostly other people's, not so much his own.

MalaBeads said:
That's because he sees himself as the Vajrayana master.

In that sense he gets a free pass.

Malcolm wrote:
That is called "entitlement."  And perhaps, that is why he does not like western liberals like myself. We don't care much for authority, aristocrats, and entitled hierarchies, spiritual or otherwise.

MaybeTibetan Buddhism is in need of a "Protestant" reformation. Whatever the case, there is certainly a growing rift between traditional hierarchies and Western students over such as issues as sex, power, money, and authority. These things need to be discussed openly and without fear of repercussion.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, October 23rd, 2017 at 10:57 AM
Title: Re: The DJKR Topic
Content:
Sonam Wangchug said:
I do not believe that text is referring specifically to Nirmanakaya's who appear in "inconceivable variety, for the benefit of sentient beings." and actually do not take rebirth because of karma but because of compassion.

Malcolm wrote:
There is a difference between actual nirmanakāyas and recognized tulkus. The former need no recognition at all since their qualities are evident in their compassionate deeds which benefit sentient beings, for example, Dudjom Lingpa who was never recognized by anyone as a tulku of Duddul Dorje.

As for myself, I have met quite enough nominally recognized tulkus to be quite convinced that the tulku recognition system should be put out of business, a sentiment I believe Dzongsar Khyentse largely shares.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, October 23rd, 2017 at 10:18 AM
Title: Re: The DJKR Topic
Content:


Sonam Wangchug said:
Whatever a lama may do externally, we must be convinced of their integrity. I am absolutely certain in Rinpoche's integrity and I do not view him as the kind of lama who would deceive people what so ever. There are rinpoche's who act right, and say all the rights things in public, that i'm not so sure about.

Malcolm wrote:
In the Hevajra commentary Padmini, another text is cited called Approach to the Utimate. It says:
Because of the power of the Kaliyuga, gurus have mixed qualities and faults, 
there are none at all without misdeeds;
disciples should rely on those
whose qualities predominate, and who have been thoroughly investigated.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, October 23rd, 2017 at 9:34 AM
Title: Re: The DJKR Topic
Content:
smcj said:
If your guru engages in murder, pedophilia, rape, theft, or lying and you still see this as pure, you are an idiot and should have your head examined.
Citation plz.

Malcolm wrote:
No need for a citation. If you think you should have pure perception of a criminal guru like the one I mentioned (i.e. murderer, rapist, pedophile, et al.) you are an idiot. Anyone who encourages you to think so is an idiot. Anyone who agrees with them is an idiot.

If your guru engages in actions contrary to the Dharma, they are a false guru and should be abandoned immediately. And yes, I can find a citaton for that.

Atisha states:
If one has an evil guru or an evil friend, one will be harmed by both.
Mokṣākaragupta mentions in the Dohakoṣapañjikā-nāma:
It is risky to consider evil gurus to be one's guru. Since one relies on such a one, the fault is that one begins to have evil views and evil behavior. One should avoid such gurus as one would a snake.
The Dvikramatattvabhāvanā-nāma-mukhāgama:
If one does not rely on a perfect guru,
one will not realize the meaning of this.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, October 23rd, 2017 at 8:29 AM
Title: Re: The DJKR Topic
Content:


Tenma said:
How does the yogi find a real, human mudra? Normally, she is delivered by his pupil. This is also true for the Kalachakra Tantra. “If one gives the enlightened teacher the prajna [mudra] as a gift,” proclaims Naropa, “the yoga is bliss” (Grünwedel, 1933, p. 117). If a 12- or 16-year-old girl cannot be found, a 20-year-old will suffice, advises another text, and continues, “One should offer his sister, daughter or wife to the ‘guru’”, then the more valuable the mudra is to the pupil, the more she serves as a gift for his master (Wayman, 1977, p. 320).


Malcolm wrote:
These people have no idea what they are talking about.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, October 23rd, 2017 at 5:17 AM
Title: Re: Buddhism and Lust, is it ok, not ok, kind of ok?
Content:
Dan74 said:
Attachment, yes. But sensuality is singled out in the Sutra quote that no one, even DGA, who is trained in the EA tradition, I believe, is willing to address. Why is it singled out? Why does it get so much traction here and throughout history? Because folks, included the Buddha, were hung up on it? I don't think so.

Malcolm wrote:
The aggregate of sensation is a mental factor, isolated because it is the strongest thing binding us to samsara.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, October 23rd, 2017 at 5:15 AM
Title: Re: Buddhism and Lust, is it ok, not ok, kind of ok?
Content:
Dan74 said:
Attachment, yes. But sensuality is singled out in the Sutra quote that no one, even DGA, who is trained in the EA tradition, I believe, is willing to address. Why is it singled out? Why does it get so much traction here and throughout history? Because folks, included the Buddha, were hung up on it? I don't think so.

Monlam Tharchin said:
Isn't sensuality attachment to pleasurable sensations?

Malcolm wrote:
Yes. as well as aversion to unpleasant sensations. Both are included.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, October 23rd, 2017 at 5:07 AM
Title: Re: The DJKR Topic
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
As an addendum:

If your guru engages in murder, pedophilia, rape, theft, or lying and you still see this as pure, you are an idiot and should have your head examined. The four defeats for a monk are also four defeats for a guru. If one does not understand this, one does not understand the Dharma at all.



smcj said:
Do you accept that the guru yoga teachings say that, if you make the commitment, you are to see all the guru's actions as pure no matter how objectionable they seem?

Malcolm wrote:
They don't say that in fact. For example, of one of one's gurus decided to rain bullets down on a crowd of people listening to country western, one should not see that as pure because it isn't.

Only poorly educated and trained people believe they must accept all possible actions that could be done by their teachers as pure, when clearly some actions are beyond the pale. For example, if your guru kills sentient beings but lacks the ability to bring them back to life, there is no reason to regard this action as "pure."

smcj said:
That's basically what DJKR's FB post regarding Sogyal was about.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, the old Tilopa/Naropa trope, which is tired and overused precisely because in the annals of guru/disciple relationships it is an outlier, an extreme example exaggerated out of all proportion.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, October 23rd, 2017 at 4:51 AM
Title: Re: The DJKR Topic
Content:
heart said:
I made a joke and you can't believe how serious people took it" (not an exakt quote).

Malcolm wrote:
When one is a famous teacher, with a penchant for gab, one eventually learns that one needs to limit what one says, otherwise, one can risk one's reputation.

Buddha did not crack jokes, for example. Neither did Guru Rinpoche.

Of course, we like jokes, and many people found his joke very funny. I admit that I even found it mildly amusing in a rather sophomoric way, but I knew it was going to create a minor shitstorm.

I just don't buy his knockoff Trungpaesque Burlesque Show, if you will. Wrong era. Taunting western liberals in the age of Trump is not well considered. Especially given the rise of the racism and nationalism around the world.

But of course many people like him, because he is "outrageous." I don't find him especially outrageous. Just off-base sometimes.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, October 23rd, 2017 at 4:44 AM
Title: Re: The DJKR Topic
Content:
Monlam Tharchin said:
Is another way to look at it that in Mahayana, there are teachings of buddha-nature whereas in Hinayana, there are not? Unless I'm very mistaken.

Grigoris said:
I fail to see how my way of thinking and Tathagatagarbha are mutually exclusive.  Actually it would seem the complete opposite:  Because one has Tathagatagarbha that means they don't need to be born anywhere in particular to achieve enlightenment.

Malcolm wrote:
If one accepts Mahāyāna, one accepts that in order to attain buddhahood according to the common Mahāyāna path, one must traverse five paths and the ten bodhisattvas stages for a minimum of ten incalculable eons.

On the three pure stages, one no longer resides in the desire realm, but in various form realm heavens, as well as the buddhafield of Ghanavyuha.

A supreme nirmanakāya will, in their last birth prior to manifesting supreme buddhahood, reside as the bodhisattva Svetaketu (really a title more than a name) teaching the Tushita gods. They will then select a family from either the merchant, warrior, or priestly family and descend into the mother's womb and display the 12 deeds.

It may be objected that a tenth stage bodhisattva is not a buddha, but in fact Maitreyanath states, "that stage beyond the ninth stage is a stage of buddhahood." And even so, as the Lanka states, "The actual buddha (the samboghakāya) attains awakening in Akaniṣṭha, the nirmanakāya displays the attainment of buddha here."

All mandalas such as Vajrakīlaya, Kalacakra, etc., are in fact symbolic representations of Akaniṣṭha Ghanavyhua, which is why one can in this body attain buddhahood in this lifetime providing one is an extremely diligent practitioner. In other words when you perfect the creation stage as an ārya bodhisattva, you are abiding in the samadhi of Akaniṣṭha, and therefore, through the completion stage, one can attain buddhist in this life time in this very body.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, October 23rd, 2017 at 4:32 AM
Title: Re: The DJKR Topic
Content:
smcj said:
Do you accept that the guru yoga teachings say that, if you make the commitment, you are to see all the guru's actions as pure no matter how objectionable they seem?

Malcolm wrote:
They don't say that in fact. For example, of one of one's gurus decided to rain bullets down on a crowd of people listening to country western, one should not see that as pure because it isn't.

Only poorly educated and trained people believe they must accept all possible actions that could be done by their teachers as pure, when clearly some actions are beyond the pale. For example, if your guru kills sentient beings but lacks the ability to bring them back to life, there is no reason to regard this action as "pure."

smcj said:
That's basically what DJKR's FB post regarding Sogyal was about.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, the old Tilopa/Naropa trope, which is tired and overused precisely because in the annals of guru/disciple relationships it is an outlier, an extreme example exaggerated out of all proportion.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, October 23rd, 2017 at 4:25 AM
Title: Re: The DJKR Topic
Content:
smcj said:
Uh huh -- I don't see any "liberal western" Tibetan Buddhists around here rejecting this.

I do see a lot of pissing and moaning from you however, complaining about something no one here is rejecting.
Cool! So you accept that you are supposed to pray to your guru for blessings?

Malcolm wrote:
One supplicates ( gsol 'debs ) blessings (bad translation of byin rlabs, but what to do?) from one's guru/s. Nothing strange about it at all.

One should regard one's guru's actions as being teachings, how he or she walks, sits, sleeps, etc. And if one can't, one should move onto a guru in whom one can have more confidence.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, October 23rd, 2017 at 4:03 AM
Title: Re: The DJKR Topic
Content:
smcj said:
What is the theoretical framework of guru yoga? Citations please, not just opinion. Primary sources preferable.
Any NgonDro commentary on the guru-yoga will give an outline that is effectively being rejected here.

Malcolm wrote:
Not rejecting anything.



smcj said:
I'm traveling, so I don't have access to my books, but in the guru yoga chapter in "Foundations of Tibetan Buddhism" the previous Kalu R. highlighted the difference between a general Mahayana teacher and a Vajrayana teacher. The Mahayana teacher is worthy of our confidence and respect, but the Vajrayana teacher you are supposed to actually pray to for blessings. This of course is a complete non-starter for a liberal westerner. Not only is the idea of praying for blessings objectionable, but in particular having a living, breathing human being be the focus of such is completely repugnant.

Malcolm wrote:
You really have strange ideas. I know many extremely liberal Christians who pray for blessings all the time, both for themselves as well as others.

smcj said:
My understanding of the theoretical framework for how and why this is appropriate comes mostly from private conversations with my own teachers. I will start with a couple of credited quotes.

Lama Phuntsok (Kagyu/Toronto) gave me two separate analogies for guru yoga. The first was that the radiance of the Dharmakaya was like sunshine, and our practice was like a piece of paper that we are trying to light on fire. The sunshine will not be able to set the paper on fire without a magnifying glass. In this analogy the guru acts like a magnifying glass to focus the sun's rays.

Malcolm wrote:
Uh huh -- I don't see any "liberal western" Tibetan Buddhists around here rejecting this.

smcj said:
The second analogy starts with the understanding that what we are really devoted towards is the Dharmakaya. In that analogy the Dharmakaya is like snow on a mountain, and the student's devotion is like the sun. The sun melts the snow turning it into water, and the lama acts as a pipeline from the mountain to the student's practice.

Malcolm wrote:
Uh huh -- I don't see any "liberal western" Tibetan Buddhists around here rejecting this.

smcj said:
More later. Thats enough of a hornet's nest for now. The next step is about having devotion to the Dharmakaya. That's another non-starter for people.

Malcolm wrote:
Uh huh -- I don't see any "liberal western" Tibetan Buddhists around here rejecting this.

I do see a lot of pissing and moaning from you however, complaining about something no one here is rejecting.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, October 23rd, 2017 at 3:44 AM
Title: Re: The DJKR Topic
Content:
Johnny Dangerous said:
...about how "liberal" westerners and their neuroses can't get past this or that...

Grigoris said:
Is it really nonsense?  Coz it seems to me we "can't get past this or that".  Seems to me we have been discussing this in never ending circles since it happened but not really proposing anything intelligent apart from saying:  "Speak out about it!"

Johnny Dangerous said:
Oh sure there's some truth it. It was always one of my favorite things about DJKR that he would kind of poke at sacred cows like this.

Malcolm wrote:
Well, he seems to like to poke some sacred cows more than others. Mostly other people's, not so much his own.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, October 23rd, 2017 at 1:15 AM
Title: Re: The DJKR Topic
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Mandalas are just the Akaniṣṭha Ghanavyuha realm. So yes, if you are not a Vajrayāna practitioner, you are never going to attain Buddhahood in this life.
Hi Greg:
So we are humans on the periphery of Akanistha training to be Buddhas in order to manifest as beings, that are pretending to become enlightened, even though they are already enlightened???
Yes. This is the basis of the whole system of tulkus, actually. A genuine tulku seems to be an ordinary person who goes through the stages of the path, but in reality they fully woke up in their previous lives.
Shakyamuni Buddha was a human that achieved Buddhahood and thus humans are capable of achieving Buddhahood in this lifetime, is a MUCH easier concept for me to wrap my head around.
This is the Hinayāna view of buddhahood.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, October 23rd, 2017 at 1:05 AM
Title: Re: The DJKR Topic
Content:


smcj said:
I’m not a big fan of DJKR, but he does highlight some issues that need clarification.

Malcolm wrote:
For example?

smcj said:
Our attachment to our own cultural values versus our unwillingness to accept even the theoretical framework of the guru yoga.

Malcolm wrote:
What is the theoretical framework of guru yoga? Citations please, not just opinion. Primary sources preferable.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, October 23rd, 2017 at 12:47 AM
Title: Re: The DJKR Topic
Content:


smcj said:
I’m not a big fan of DJKR, but he does highlight some issues that need clarification.


Malcolm wrote:
For example?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, October 22nd, 2017 at 8:56 PM
Title: Re: The DJKR Topic
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
The Buddha displayed awakening under the bodhitree, but in actuality, buddhahood is achieved in Akaniṣṭha Ghanavyuha according to Mahāyāna sūtra. And in the case of Śākyamuni, eons and eons ago.

Grigoris said:
In which case we cannot achieve Buddhahood in this lifetime since we are  human beings and are not born in Akanistha.  Unless you are saying that we are all putting on a show?

Malcolm wrote:
Mandalas are just the Akaniṣṭha Ghanavyuha realm. So yes, if you are not a Vajrayāna practitioner, you are never going to attain Buddhahood in this life.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, October 22nd, 2017 at 8:55 PM
Title: Re: Buddhism and Lust, is it ok, not ok, kind of ok?
Content:
Dan74 said:
Regarding the 'I haven't heard it said" - well, whether in regard to the recent scandals or the Eido Shimano scandal in NY a few years back, there are always plenty of apologists.

Regarding 'the rudderless nature' of the thread, the Sutra quote was meant to be the rudder, but no one seems to want to engage with the content. Granted it is more of a East Asian Sutra, so I don't expect Tibetan Buddhists to take it as authoritative.

Malcolm wrote:
It does not exist in the Tibetan canon.

With respect to desire, in Mahāyāna in general, desire is seen as a workable affliction, whereas, anger is not.


Dan74 said:
Then also when Buddhist teachers have not yet mastered their lust, or come up with rationalisations and apologetics like some recent ones, is it a deal-breaker for potential students?

Malcolm wrote:
The requirement for engaging in karmamudra practices is that one is free from desire. Otherwise, there is what is known as the yoga of passion, where one's partner and oneself engage in lovemaking in the form of the one's chosen deity. However, this requires both partners have the same empowerments and practice.

Also, from a Dzogchen point of view, karmamudra and other practices which try to harness desire are generally viewed as being expedients for people with excessive desire in until they are ready for serious practice. Also, from a Dzogchen perspective, the benefit of karmamudra practice is only for men due to differences in male and female biology (i.e., female orgasm is not connected with ejaculation).


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, October 22nd, 2017 at 12:44 PM
Title: Re: Nichiren and Tantra
Content:



Tuybachau said:
- No, you don't know alaksana.. If you do, you see the tathagata and you do not seek buddhahood in this body.
- do not seek an experience in aryan equipoise, then it is accessible and there is no longer any ordinary person.

Malcolm wrote:
Words are very easy to say, aren't they? Parrots can say words too. But they don't understand them. In any case, none of your points are novel, or even that interesting. When you accumulate more merit, more people might be interested in hearing you out. But that would require admitting you're just a person on the internet spewing concepts like everyone else.

Tuybachau said:
- You were seeking some feelings of interest in the words.
- You  were seeking some novel meanings in the words.
- You were indicating that you are striving for sth outside/more than the words.
- You really attach to the eyes, ears.. consciousnesses in which there are persons on the internet and there are buddhas somewhere else.

Malcolm wrote:
All imputations with no basis in fact.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, October 22nd, 2017 at 12:01 PM
Title: Re: Nichiren and Tantra
Content:


Tuybachau said:
- There is nothing wrong with the words. It's you who is wrong to seek something in it.

Malcolm wrote:
You are being presumptuous.


Tuybachau said:
- There is nothing wrong with feelings, perceptions, intentions, consciousness. It's you who is wrong to seek sth in them.

Malcolm wrote:
Again, you are being presumptuous


Tuybachau said:
- Providing conditions for sentient beings to be mature.

Malcolm wrote:
Hahahaha, hoisted on your own petard. If you keep talking, you will just wrap yourself in more contradictions.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, October 22nd, 2017 at 11:29 AM
Title: Re: Nichiren and Tantra
Content:
Tuybachau said:
...you have a position.

Malcolm wrote:
So do you.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, October 22nd, 2017 at 11:28 AM
Title: Re: Nichiren and Tantra
Content:



Tuybachau said:
- No, you don't know alaksana.. If you do, you see the tathagata and you do not seek buddhahood in this body.
- do not seek an experience in aryan equipoise, then it is accessible and there is no longer any ordinary person.

Malcolm wrote:
Words are very easy to say, aren't they? Parrots can say words too. But they don't understand them. In any case, none of your points are novel, or even that interesting. When you accumulate more merit, more people might be interested in hearing you out. But that would require admitting you're just a person on the internet spewing concepts like everyone else.

Tuybachau said:
- There is nothing to realize in the words.

Malcolm wrote:
Then stop saying them.

Tuybachau said:
- There is also nothing to realize outside the words such as in feelings, perceptions, intentions, consciousness...

Malcolm wrote:
Then stop having them.

Tuybachau said:
- What are you trying to achieve?

Malcolm wrote:
Why do you care?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, October 22nd, 2017 at 11:09 AM
Title: Re: Nichiren and Tantra
Content:
Tuybachau said:
- But there is no way you can attain/realize.. it.

Malcolm wrote:
Your position is rather pyrrhic and pointless.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, October 22nd, 2017 at 10:34 AM
Title: Re: Nichiren and Tantra
Content:


Malcolm wrote:
We all know that the three gates of liberation are śunyatā, alakṣaṇa, and apraṇidhana.

But this is something one experiences in āryan equipoise. It is not accessible to ordinary people such as myself. I have no idea about you.

Tuybachau said:
- No, you don't know alaksana.. If you do, you see the tathagata and you do not seek buddhahood in this body.
- do not seek an experience in aryan equipoise, then it is accessible and there is no longer any ordinary person.

Malcolm wrote:
Words are very easy to say, aren't they? Parrots can say words too. But they don't understand them. In any case, none of your points are novel, or even that interesting. When you accumulate more merit, more people might be interested in hearing you out. But that would require admitting you're just a person on the internet spewing concepts like everyone else.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, October 22nd, 2017 at 6:00 AM
Title: Re: The DJKR Topic
Content:
smcj said:
The Buddha displayed awakening under the bodhitree, but in actuality, buddhahood is achieved in Akaniṣṭha Ghanavyuha according to Mahāyāna sūtra. And in the case of Śākyamuni, eons and eons ago.
So you're saying Sakyamuni was not human?


Malcolm wrote:
Correct, he was an emanation, not a human.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, October 22nd, 2017 at 4:31 AM
Title: Re: The DJKR Topic
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
No buddha is human. It is a contradiction in terms.

Grigoris said:
Not even up to the point of his Parinirvana?

Malcolm wrote:
The Buddha displayed awakening under the bodhitree, but in actuality, buddhahood is achieved in Akaniṣṭha Ghanavyuha according to Mahāyāna sūtra. And in the case of Śākyamuni, eons and eons ago.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, October 22nd, 2017 at 4:09 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:
TaTa said:
What are good dc practices to remove obstacles?

Malcolm wrote:
Ozer Chenma is the best for this purpose.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, October 22nd, 2017 at 4:07 AM
Title: Re: Buddhism and Lust, is it ok, not ok, kind of ok?
Content:


rachmiel said:
Dodrupchen Rinpoché states in Wonder Ocean that all treasure revealers
have consorts.

Malcolm wrote:
Most, not all. He mentions significant exceptions like Rigzin Jatson Nyingpo, etc.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, October 22nd, 2017 at 3:25 AM
Title: Re: The DJKR Topic
Content:


smcj said:
Didn't Padmasambhava say that after he passed away that people could pray to him and he would be there?

Malcolm wrote:
Padmasambhava never passed away.

smcj said:
Also buddhas are not human. Why? Buddhas are not sentient beings and are not subject to afflictions which cause birth as humans.
So you're saying that it is impossible to attain Buddhahood while still in human form?

Malcolm wrote:
I never implied such a thing. But if you become a buddha, you are a buddha, not a human.

smcj said:
Padmasambhava is not a god, he is not a human, he does not belong to the three realms.
He wasn't human?

Malcolm wrote:
No buddha is human. It is a contradiction in terms.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, October 22nd, 2017 at 2:31 AM
Title: Re: The DJKR Topic
Content:
smcj said:
I think we should backtrack a bit and consider a hypothetical situation where the lama in question really is a Buddha. Maybe we should take Padmasambhava as an example. In that scenario is it wrong to deify a human? He seems pretty deified to me in the Nyingma tradition.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, it is wrong to deify any human. Also buddhas are not human. Why? Buddhas are not sentient beings and are not subject to afflictions which cause birth as humans.

Padmasambhava is not a god, he is not a human, he does not belong to the three realms.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, October 22nd, 2017 at 2:14 AM
Title: Re: The DJKR Topic
Content:
PuerAzaelis said:
Maybe I can get people to bow to me too.

Malcolm wrote:
That depends on how good your line of bullshit is. It also depends on how much you really wish to cope with the neurosis and projections of your putative disciples, not to mention that you will have no time at all to deal with your own crap since you will be too busy engaged in a spiritual ponzi scheme.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, October 22nd, 2017 at 1:21 AM
Title: Re: The DJKR Topic
Content:
Matt J said:
I think the moral of the story is to choose your teacher very carefully.

Malcolm wrote:
nondualism.org seems to defunct.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, October 21st, 2017 at 11:21 PM
Title: Re: Nichiren and Tantra
Content:
Tuybachau said:
- suchness is not a state, so is its realization. That's why i told you confuse buddha nature with view.

Malcolm wrote:
I did not say a state of suchness, I said "a state of equipoise..." However, the term "state" is used for suchness in such sutras as the PP in 8000 lines and so on.

Buddhanature is a view. Ordinary people have to take it on faith since they cannot see the dharmakāya of the buddhas for themselves. Only buddhas can see the dharmakāya.

Tuybachau said:
若見諸相非相則見如來
Yavat Subhute laksana-sampat tavan mrsa, yavadalaksana-sampat tavan na mrseti hi laksana-alaksanatas Tathagato drastavyah.

'Wherever there is possession of marks, there is fraud, wherever there is no-possessionof no-marks there is no fraud. Hence the Tathagata is to be seen from no marks as marks.'

Malcolm wrote:
Yes. So what? This is not some amazing revelation you have produced for us. We all know that the three gates of liberation are śunyatā, alakṣaṇa, and apraṇidhana.

But this is something one experiences in āryan equipoise. It is not accessible to ordinary people such as myself. I have no idea about you.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, October 21st, 2017 at 10:49 PM
Title: Re: Nichiren and Tantra - Split from Shakyamuni as the Eternal Buddha
Content:



Malcolm wrote:
Buddhanature is a view. Ordinary people have to take it on faith since they cannot see the dharmakāya of the buddhas for themselves. Only buddhas can see the dharmakāya.



Minobu said:
Well i think the practice that Nichiren laid out is tantric in nature.

Malcolm wrote:
It is certainly true that Mantrayāna certainly deeply influenced all 13th century expressions of Japanese Buddhism stemming from the Tendai school.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, October 21st, 2017 at 10:46 PM
Title: Re: Nichiren and Tantra
Content:
Tuybachau said:
- suchness is not a state, so is its realization. That's why i told you confuse buddha nature with view.

Malcolm wrote:
I did not say a state of suchness, I said "a state of equipoise..." However, the term "state" is used for suchness in such sutras as the PP in 8000 lines and so on.

Buddhanature is a view. Ordinary people have to take it on faith since they cannot see the dharmakāya of the buddhas for themselves. Only buddhas can see the dharmakāya.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, October 21st, 2017 at 10:23 PM
Title: Re: The DJKR Topic
Content:
Grigoris said:
So should the teachers be seen as Buddhas or as fallible human beings?  If you say "a bit of both" then you have to clearly outline exactly how much of each in order to avoid future misunderstanding.  If you say "neither" then you need to come up with something new coz clearly the current situation is not working.

Malcolm wrote:
If you have to pretend to see your guru as a Buddha, you already have failed to see them as a Buddha. Therefore, you have no choice but to see them as an ordinary person, since in fact you do see them as an ordinary person. So let's not kid ourselves here. Most of us perceive our teachers to be no different than ourselves, other than the fact that they have knowledge and experience we may not possess at the moment, but to which we aspire.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, October 21st, 2017 at 9:33 PM
Title: Re: Nichiren and Tantra
Content:



Tuybachau said:
The true path is not really a "path" as it does not lead to anywhere in or out of the three spheres.


Coëmgenu said:
...like Tiantai is arbitrarily denied being?

Tuybachau said:
Well, he did not tell you that the sutra also teach

- incalculable eons are but as long as a single thought.
- trichiliocosm is but as large as a single pore.
- there is no gradualness, no suddenness as past, present, future are not established.
- there is no body, no mind, no bodhisattva, no bhumi, no buddha, no attainment.

I was reminding those who don't know not to seek anything such as "sudden attainment of buddhahood in this body" in or out of the three spheres.

Malcolm wrote:
All of this is true when in a state of equipoise on suchness. None of it is true from the conventional, deluded point of view. Now, ask yourself, are you a Buddha or are you a sentient being? There is no much difference between the two...but, the difference is a chasm.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, October 21st, 2017 at 11:26 AM
Title: Re: Faults of the teacher - what does and what doesn't contaminate the transmission?
Content:
passel said:
Huh. Then who modern day would represent the Nyima Drakpa folks? Anyone teaching the West?

Malcolm wrote:
I am not sure who transmits his termas, but his lineage of karling shitro is also widespread in Kathog and so on.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, October 21st, 2017 at 10:52 AM
Title: Re: What would Buddha have thought of Mahayana?
Content:


PadmaVonSamba said:
In referring to nagas, or ghosts or whatever, they cannot be determined by deduction.

Malcolm wrote:
Sure they can. Deductions always depend on what assumptions one holds.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, October 21st, 2017 at 10:51 AM
Title: Re: Faults of the teacher - what does and what doesn't contaminate the transmission?
Content:
Grigoris said:
In which case both sides were following mad guides?

Malcolm wrote:
No, Nyingmapas who have an opinion about this generally feel that Migyur Dorje was the problem.

You can read about about this conflict in Brian Cuevas's book on Karling Shitro.

Grigoris said:
Yes, well, I am sure the followers of Mingyur Dorje would have a different opinion...  But then that's the norm with religious schismatic conflicts.  Everybody thinks they are correct.

Malcolm wrote:
Migyur Dorje is commonly referred to even by his followers as "Ternyon (gter smyon)," i.e., "the mad terton." His capacity for displaying irrational behavior is legendary.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, October 21st, 2017 at 10:48 AM
Title: Re: Faults of the teacher - what does and what doesn't contaminate the transmission?
Content:
passel said:
Dumb question but I’m assuming you guys mean the Palyul Mingyur Dorje who was the prodigy teacher/student to Karma Chagme?

(And is there a connection to the current Mingyur Rinpoche, or is that just a coincidence of names?)

Malcolm wrote:
No, Yonge Migyur Dorje, a Karma Kagyu terton with close ties to the tenth Karmapa. Yes, there is a connection with the present Migyur Rinpoche.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, October 21st, 2017 at 5:48 AM
Title: Re: Advice need - pondering whether to receive Yamantaka empowerment
Content:
jmlee369 said:
I respect everyone's choice in not taking initiations within a certain lineage. But there's no reason to imply that the entire Gelug school, by virtue of its core lineages being transmitted through a samaya breaker, is now broken and impotent.

Ayu said:
I have to agree. And it might be good intended, but what is going on in this thread is "anti-gelug sentiment" nevertheless.

Malcolm wrote:
No, I was expressing my opinion about a person who happens to be a Gelugpa, who was engaged in intense sectarianism, not merely in his old age, but in his middle years through his old age, and the fact that I would never take any teaching in which that person was present as a lineage holder.

I would maintain the same attitude towards any Sakyapa, Nyingmapa, or Kagyupa who demonstrated the same behavior.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, October 21st, 2017 at 4:36 AM
Title: Re: Faults of the teacher - what does and what doesn't contaminate the transmission?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
For example, there was a conflict between the terton Nyima Drakpa and the Yonge Terton, Mingyur Dorje. To this day many Nyingmapas will not receive the transmission of any of Yonge Mingyur Dorje treasures. Likewise, many Kagyus avoid the transmission of Nyima Drakpa's transmission of the Karling Zhitro, etc.

Grigoris said:
In which case both sides were following mad guides?

Malcolm wrote:
No, Nyingmapas who have an opinion about this generally feel that Migyur Dorje was the problem.

You can read about about this conflict in Brian Cuevas's book on Karling Shitro.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, October 20th, 2017 at 9:37 PM
Title: Re: Shakyamuni as the Eternal Buddha
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
This is called "dissembling."

The Cicada said:
One day... when all of my child support obligations have been expiated, I might give up household life to pursue vigorous Buddhist study and argue with you in strenuously pedantic fine detail about seemingly abstruse vectors of Buddhist doctrine until, eventually, like the Mongols declaring war upon the world in a remote yurt on the steppes, a powerful sword of Dharmic wisdom will cut through the Gordian knot of seemingly disparate Buddhist doctrines down to the very atom, unleashing a light from the internet that will usher in a new age of awakening for the Earth in the interim until the next Buddha and transform the karma of the entire world-system.

Malcolm wrote:
You will be reborn as my disciple first.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, October 20th, 2017 at 9:31 PM
Title: Re: Faults of the teacher - what does and what doesn't contaminate the transmission?
Content:
emaho said:
Inspired by the discussion in https://dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=40&t=26765 thread:

Nobody's perfect. Suppose you're testing a teacher and notice certain faults in his behaviour. Which kinds of faults of a teacher are harmless and which are actually "contaminating" the transmissions he could possibly give, so that it is not advisable to take initiations from him?

Are there objective rules or is it all just wishy-washy as in "if you see the teacher as perfect anything goes"?

Malcolm wrote:
The rule is, if a teacher's faults outweigh their qualities by a large margin, then that is a teacher to avoid. If a teacher's qualities outweigh their faults by a large margin, then this is a teacher one might consider adopting. If a teacher's faults are in even proportion to their qualities, also this is a teacher to avoid.

If a teacher's activities are largely harmful to the Dharma, such a promulgating mistaken views and practices,  engaging in political violence to subdue religious enemies, harming disciples through inappropriate actions and so on, then one can consider this person a mad guide, someone whose very lineage must be avoided.

For example, there was a conflict between the terton Nyima Drakpa and the Yonge Terton, Mingyur Dorje. To this day many Nyingmapas will not receive the transmission of any of Yonge Mingyur Dorje treasures. Likewise, many Kagyus avoid the transmission of Nyima Drakpa's transmission of the Karling Zhitro, etc. For many centuries, Ngorpas avoided receiving the transmission of Lamdre and Naro Khacho from the Tshar subschool, and so on. There are in Tibetan history many examples of this kind of thing.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, October 20th, 2017 at 9:45 AM
Title: Re: Tendai and Gelugpa - from Nichiren and Tantra
Content:



Queequeg said:
I don't think its the same meaning. Might be something lost in my explanation, but the Threefold Separate Truth is distinguished from the Threefold Integrated Truth. It may be a subtle difference, but its considered very significant in Tientai.

Malcolm wrote:
The two truths are inseparable, no matter which way they are parsed.

Queequeg said:
Yeah, sorry, we're not on the same page. We are talking about different things.



Malcolm wrote:
Not really. Things can only be perceived in two wsys, as they seem or as they are. There is no third alternative.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, October 20th, 2017 at 5:37 AM
Title: Re: Tendai and Gelugpa - from Nichiren and Tantra
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Different words, same meaning —— that is exactly now the Gelugpas understand buddhanature. The Gelugpas would merely point out that relative and ultimate are isolates of one entity, but they are unified in that given entity.

Queequeg said:
I don't think its the same meaning. Might be something lost in my explanation, but the Threefold Separate Truth is distinguished from the Threefold Integrated Truth. It may be a subtle difference, but its considered very significant in Tientai.

Malcolm wrote:
The two truths are inseparable, no matter which way they are parsed.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, October 20th, 2017 at 5:08 AM
Title: Re: Tendai and Gelugpa - from Nichiren and Tantra
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Tendai is not skeptical towards the two truths, they simply reconcile them into a third truth, which is more or less the same as the widespread notion that the two truths are inseparable.

Queequeg said:
That is not wholly correct. That is Three Truths in the Separate Teaching. That is not Three Truths in the Perfect Teaching.

In the Perfect Teaching there is no reconciliation, but rather mutual identification [and intersubsumption - edit added], each with the other two. The Relative and Absolute are very much understood in the Madhyamika sense, but the Middle in the Perfect Teaching is Buddhanature.

Malcolm wrote:
Different words, same meaning —— that is exactly now the Gelugpas understand buddhanature. The Gelugpas would merely point out that relative and ultimate are isolates of one entity, but they are unified in that given entity.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, October 20th, 2017 at 5:01 AM
Title: Re: Advice need - pondering whether to receive Yamantaka empowerment
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
I would never take any teaching that has a lineage through Pabhongkha. But HHDL holds many non-Gelug lineages and I would happily receive any of those from him. Otherwise...

Fortyeightvows said:
Sounds pretty sectarian to me

Malcolm wrote:
It is not sectarian to wish to avoid receiving lineages from a teacher who openly advocated the destruction of Nyingma, Sakya, and Kagyu monasteries, statues of Guru Padmasambhava, as well as Dharma scriptures.

But if you think it is "nonsectarian" to receive lineages through such teachers, go right ahead.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, October 20th, 2017 at 4:57 AM
Title: Re: Advice need - pondering whether to receive Yamantaka empowerment
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
The only thing you really need to ascertain is whether his lineage goes through Pabhongkha or not. I personally would never receive any teaching that comes through this teacher, for obvious historical reasons. It is not good to have negative feelings about any lineage master.

Fortyeightvows said:
So that is really most geluk lamas. So by that you'd be including Lama Zopa, Zong Rinpoche, Khensur Rinpoche Lobsang Tsephel, His Holiness Dalai Lama (whose two teachers were students of pabonkha)......

Malcolm wrote:
I would never take any teaching that has a lineage through Pabhongkha. But HHDL holds many non-Gelug lineages and I would happily receive any of those from him. Otherwise...Pabhongkha aided and abetted the destruction of Dharma in schools he had philosophical differences with.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, October 20th, 2017 at 3:34 AM
Title: Re: Nichiren and Tantra
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Tientai is a gradual path, even its Perfect teaching is in fact a gradual path.

Queequeg said:
Why do you say so?

Malcolm wrote:
It is pretty clear from the descriptions of the perfect teaching path found in various places. In theory it is nongradual, but in practice it is gradual.

Queequeg said:
But it is like smelting iron: [in the process of smelting,] gross impurities first run off, even though that was not the original purpose of the task. The intent resides in becoming a vessel. Before the vessel is cast, the impurities must first be removed. Even though one sees them being removed, not even a moment of satisfaction is derived from this. Why not? Because he has not yet achieved his purpose. The practitioner of the Perfect Teaching is just like this. Even though [the removal of mental disturbances] is not his original aim, they are naturally removed first.

Malcolm wrote:
https://web.archive.org/web/20140221125844/http://www.acmuller.net/kor-bud/sagyoui.html


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, October 20th, 2017 at 2:43 AM
Title: Re: Nichiren and Tantra
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
It means in this body one transcends the all the paths and stages.

Queequeg said:
Your comment is short on detail, but this sounds like the Tientai Sudden and Perfect Teaching.

Malcolm wrote:
Tientai is a gradual path, even its Perfect teaching is in fact a gradual path.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, October 20th, 2017 at 1:43 AM
Title: Re: Nichiren and Tantra
Content:


Queequeg said:
Can you explain, briefly, what is meant by "Buddhahood in this body" and how this differs from the Mahayana view?

Malcolm wrote:
General Mahāyāna view holds that one needs to traverse the path for 3 incalculable eons. There is no "buddhahood in this body" doctrine in sūtra, any sūtra.

Queequeg said:
I get that. What I am asking is more substantive. What does it mean to attain "Buddhahood in this body"?

Malcolm wrote:
It means in this body one transcends the all the paths and stages.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, October 20th, 2017 at 1:42 AM
Title: Re: Tendai and Gelugpa - from Nichiren and Tantra
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
The point of view on the relationship of Sūtra and Mantrayāna in Tendai is a little similar to the Gelugpa school in that both schools subordinate Vajrayāna practices to a sūtrayāna view. Needless to say, there is much dissent from this perspective both in Japan and Tibet.

DGA said:
That's OK as far as it goes, but it seems to me (and I'm not 100% clear on what the Gelugpa party standard is) that the Gelug and Tendai views depart significantly.  The Tientai/Tendai skepticism toward the two truths* would likely be objectionable to both Gelugpas and Zhentongpas for exactly the opposite reasons.  But that's a topic for a separate thread in a different subforum.

Malcolm wrote:
Tendai is not skeptical towards the two truths, they simply reconcile them into a third truth, which is more or less the same as the widespread notion that the two truths are inseparable.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, October 20th, 2017 at 1:13 AM
Title: Re: Nichiren and Tantra
Content:


Queequeg said:
Can you explain, briefly, what is meant by "Buddhahood in this body" and how this differs from the Mahayana view?

Malcolm wrote:
General Mahāyāna view holds that one needs to traverse the path for 3 incalculable eons. There is no "buddhahood in this body" doctrine in sūtra, any sūtra.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, October 19th, 2017 at 11:40 PM
Title: Re: Nichiren and Tantra - Split from Shakyamuni as the Eternal Buddha
Content:
narhwal90 said:
Theres an article online about the role of "kaji-kito" rituals and talismans in the Nichiren tradition, generally centered around Nichiren Shu but relates some of Nichiren's as well.  Its unclear to me how much of that is cultural vs part of doctrine.  IIRC its written by Dolce.

Queequeg said:
Yes. Lucia Dolce's dissertation is on the esoteric aspects of Nichiren's teachings, as well as some articles available online. Still trying to get a hold of Dolce's dissertation.

Jacqueline Stone also writes about some of these aspects.

It just occurred to me, the two Western scholars working on Nichiren are both women. Hm.


Malcolm wrote:
Then there is Jan Nattier.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, October 19th, 2017 at 11:39 PM
Title: Re: Nichiren and Tantra
Content:


Queequeg said:
I think there are some different ideas at play to an extent.

Malcolm wrote:
Not in Mahāyana, really. Once one accepts the commonly held Mahāyāna ideal that Śākyamuni Buddha in fact attained buddhahood countless eons ago, any hope of maintaining the idea that he actually attained buddhahood under the bodhitree, rather than merely displayed such an attainment, flies out of the window.

Bodhisattvas on the pure stages dwell in Akaniṣṭha. When they are ready to mount the stage of buddhahood, they receive an abhisheka of light from all the tathāgatas in the ten directions.

Queequeg said:
There is on one hand the supreme buddhahood, and then there is buddhahood in this body. I defer to you on this subject.


Malcolm wrote:
"Buddhahood in this body" is a Mantrayāna slogan introduced to Japan by Kukai. The very notion of it is grounded in Mantrayāna. It is not a common Mahāyāna idea. The common Mahāyāna idea is the very opposite.

The point of view on the relationship of Sūtra and Mantrayāna in Tendai is a little similar to the Gelugpa school in that both schools subordinate Vajrayāna practices to a sūtrayāna view. Needless to say, there is much dissent from this perspective both in Japan and Tibet.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, October 19th, 2017 at 11:21 PM
Title: Re: Shakyamuni as the Eternal Buddha
Content:
Queequeg said:
This Saha World is the mandala in which the struggle for enlightenment plays out.

Malcolm wrote:
Buddhahood does not happen in this Sahaloka, though the nirmanakāya generates appearance of the attainment of buddhahood under the bodhitree as play to give people confidence that they can attain buddhahood. Actual buddhahood is attained in Akaniṣṭha.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, October 19th, 2017 at 11:10 PM
Title: Re: What would Buddha have thought of Mahayana?
Content:
PadmaVonSamba said:
It is not necessary to believe that nagas exist in order to realize the true nature of one's mind.

Malcolm wrote:
Who said you had to believe in Nāgās? I mean, if you don't you are more likely to disturb them and cause problems for yourself and others, but you are not required to believe in them.

As  a Dharma practitioner, however, you will never realize the true nature of your mind if you negate rebirth and karma.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, October 19th, 2017 at 11:08 PM
Title: Re: Advice need - pondering whether to receive Yamantaka empowerment
Content:
pael said:
How about reading  Pabhongkha's book  Liberation in the Palm of Your Hand? Should we avoid places where they talk about him?

Ayu said:
HHDL devides Phabongkha's life into two: the early and the older Phabongkha. He performed great work when he was younger and he was a great practicioner as well. Later in his life he became sectarian and very offending against Nyingmas. So, HHDL condemns this, but he says Phabongkha's whole life was more than only this sectarianism in his old age.

Malcolm wrote:
This is HHDL's cross to bear.

Pabhongkha acted harmfully against the Dharma because his intense sectarianism was clearly motivated by his relationship with the Gyalpo and inflamed by it. It was not a minor thing.

No one talks about the fact that Devadatta was a pure monk in the beginning, with devotion to the Buddha; we only discuss the fact that later he tried to harm the Buddha.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, October 19th, 2017 at 10:24 PM
Title: Re: Shakyamuni as the Eternal Buddha
Content:
illarraza said:
Here is what Nichiren teaches about men such as Malcolm...

Malcolm wrote:
These kinds of polemics are not only cheap, but excessively parochial, not to mention completely anachronistic.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, October 19th, 2017 at 10:22 PM
Title: Re: Shakyamuni as the Eternal Buddha
Content:


The Cicada said:
I don't remember what I ate for lunch the day before yesterday. In fact, after I started keeping a serious journal, I was amazed at how many very important details I'm apt to forget. Sometimes even major events I put behind me and move on without thinking about them in depth for quite some time. Sometimes we forget to visit our father in this life and more so Shakyamuni on Eagle Peak. Sometimes we forget the arrows we drove through solid rock. Sometimes we forget eternity. But I have it on good authority that, in a way, I never left, and there are times during my practice when I've genuinely felt like it, and times when the positive results of sincere practice were too concrete to deny.


Malcolm wrote:
This is called "dissembling."

But perhaps if you actually travel to India, and climb up Vulture Peak, you will have a pure vision. I sincerely hope so.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, October 19th, 2017 at 3:49 AM
Title: Re: Shakyamuni as the Eternal Buddha
Content:


The Cicada said:
Lord Buddha is the parent, teacher, and sovereign of sentient beings in this world. He is the Hero of the World who has proclaimed, "Only I can save sentient beings from suffering," and preaches forever above mount Eagle Peak as heavenly beings beat drums and sing songs of praise. Read the Lotus Sutra and Nichiren's venerable epistles.

Malcolm wrote:
Uh huh, and when is the last time you were at Vulture Peak Mountain and saw the Buddha teaching there?

Not in this lifetime, I wager.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, October 18th, 2017 at 9:16 PM
Title: Re: Shakyamuni as the Eternal Buddha
Content:
Queequeg said:
This discussion has long gone down a rabbit hole.

Malcolm wrote:
All discussions on Dharmawheel are rabbit holes.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, October 18th, 2017 at 11:32 AM
Title: Re: Shakyamuni as the Eternal Buddha
Content:
The Cicada said:
We should revere ours: Shakyamuni Buddha.

Malcolm wrote:
We should revere buddhahood itself, and not its various epithets.


The Cicada said:
Buddhas are not restricted by time and space. Buddhas also do not "reach out." Their compassion is spontaneous, like a wishfulfilling gem that satisfies all wishes.
Buddhas do not appear. Malcolm does not "speak" online, or "write," or "type," or "exist."

Buddhas do "reach out," in a way.

Malcolm wrote:
No, buddhas do not reach out in any way whatsoever. Buddhas never saved anyone from anything. That's not their job.

Once the Buddha sat above Kapilavastu and watched the Śākya Tribe, all of his relatives, be slaughtered and taken captive by the Kosalians.

The Cicada said:
This Sahaloka is an impure buddhafield because the experience of the various sufferings of this world system are unthinkable. Of course the Buddha was kind to prepare this buddhafield, but don't kid yourself into thinking there aren't better places to be.
Things only appear this way due to your ontological misapprehensions. There is no "place" beyond "here" and no "here." There is no other place and time and this place and time are shunyata.

Malcolm wrote:
You must think the Buddha had ontological misapprehensions, he constantly spoke of places, both here and beyond here, and in time as well. To deny this is foolish, and to try and explain it away, trite. The emptiness of things in no way contradicts their appearance and order.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, October 18th, 2017 at 4:48 AM
Title: Re: Advice need - pondering whether to receive Yamantaka empowerment
Content:
conebeckham said:
Well.....not meaning to but HHDL's lineage also comes through Pabhongkha, no?

Malcolm wrote:
For Vajrabhairava, yes. And for that reason I would not receive that empowerment from HHDL. I would not be able to recite the lineage prayer.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, October 18th, 2017 at 2:26 AM
Title: Re: Lotus Sutra: Buddha Prabhutaratna
Content:
narhwal90 said:
I have misplaced the reference, but IIRC the interplay between Sakyamuni and Prabhutaratna is foundational to the development of the eternal vs distant past vs present manifestation, related to the guest/host roles.

Malcolm wrote:
This discussion is beginning to sound like film school.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, October 18th, 2017 at 2:12 AM
Title: Re: Advice need - pondering whether to receive Yamantaka empowerment
Content:
Miroku said:
I just said what would be my first thing to do in case I considered taking teachings from him. You probably understand that it is a reasonable step for someone like me who has never heard of Jhado Rinpoche and only knows that he is from gelug school.

emaho said:
Ah, sorry, misunderstanding. I thought you were alluding to something. I've received teachings from Jhado Rinpoche in a local Gelug center that is highly critical in this regard, if there was the slightest doubt that Jhado Rinpoche might be involved in obscure practices they would have never invited him. And I think the same can be said about the FPMT. Also, Jhado is connected very closely to the Dalai Lama and the Namgyal Monastery.

https://fpmt.org/wp-content/uploads/teachers/touring/pdf/Jhado_Rinpoche.pdf

Miroku said:
I is okay, it is me who is sorry after all this is a sensitive topic. I looked up some info about Jhado Rinpoche and he seems to be a great master. You are very lucky.

Malcolm wrote:
The only thing you really need to ascertain is whether his lineage goes through Pabhongkha or not. I personally would never receive any teaching that comes through this teacher, for obvious historical reasons. It is not good to have negative feelings about any lineage master.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, October 18th, 2017 at 1:53 AM
Title: Re: Shakyamuni as the Eternal Buddha
Content:
Queequeg said:
MRK is not merely the title of the sutra - its the Lotus Sutra itself, as well as the Buddha of the Lotus Sutra. In the latter respect, its similar to chanting refuge in Amitabha - namuamidabutsu, or, Namo Buddhaya, and Nichiren says as much.

Malcolm wrote:
The idea that the title essentializes a text is not unknown in Indian exegesis. The idea however that the words of a title are the actual Buddha indicated in the sutra is a novelty.

There is nothing novel about a given sūtra or tantra existing in many forms, short to long, which are in essence the same text. But of course, are there really texts in Dharma? In fact what there are is artifacts representing the realization of the Buddha which exist in many forms throughout the eons.

Queequeg said:
True. True. Text are srarira. So in that sense, they are the Buddha... Anyway there's no argument from me about the precedent.

Malcolm wrote:
Basically, all sūtras and tantras are the reverberation of the intrinsic sound of dharmatā, heard differently according to differences in capacity and inclinations.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, October 18th, 2017 at 1:30 AM
Title: Re: Shakyamuni as the Eternal Buddha
Content:
Queequeg said:
MRK is not merely the title of the sutra - its the Lotus Sutra itself, as well as the Buddha of the Lotus Sutra. In the latter respect, its similar to chanting refuge in Amitabha - namuamidabutsu, or, Namo Buddhaya, and Nichiren says as much.

Malcolm wrote:
The idea that the title essentializes a text is not unknown in Indian exegesis. The idea however that the words of a title are the actual Buddha indicated in the sutra is a novelty.

There is nothing novel about a given sūtra or tantra existing in many forms, short to long, which are in essence the same text. But of course, are there really texts in Dharma? In fact what there are is artifacts representing the realization of the Buddha which exist in many forms throughout the eons.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, October 18th, 2017 at 1:03 AM
Title: Re: Shakyamuni as the Eternal Buddha
Content:
Minobu said:
also like to point out...my Teacher is this practice...it serves me well .

Malcolm wrote:
I have no problem with chanting the title of a sūtra. Classical textual exegesis indicates that people of very high caliber are able to understand the meaning of an entire text merely from the title.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, October 18th, 2017 at 12:45 AM
Title: Re: logic behind NMRK?
Content:


Queequeg said:
This is why Nichiren could refer to Sadaparibhuta's twenty-four character Lotus Sutra. Alternatively, he could entertain, somewhat skeptically, the notion that the Mahavairocana Sutra is the Lotus with mudras and mantras. That in some places, the Lotus Sutra is taught in fragrances. In other places it is billions of volumes long, and why for him, it was only 5 or 7 characters.

There is a collection of essays on the Lotus Sutra called "The Buddhist Kaleidoscope." The title itself invokes this idea that the Lotus is ever adaptive. In there is an essay suggesting that the structure of the text itself lends itself to the reader reading themselves into the text... I picture it something like the little boy in Never Ending Story getting to the point in the book where he is reading about himself reading the book. The text does not remain on the page, but pours forth, bleeding into the world in which it is found. And that's how the text actually describes itself.

From a literature perspective, its brilliant story telling. As a dharma text, its the embodiment of the very upaya it describes.


Malcolm wrote:
Again, very standard Mahāyāna.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, October 18th, 2017 at 12:33 AM
Title: Re: Shakyamuni as the Eternal Buddha
Content:


Minobu said:
I guess that first Nirmanakaya   is Samantabhadra Buddha ...who is not Lord Sakyamuni Buddha


Malcolm wrote:
In Dzogchen teachings it gets a little complicated with nine kāyas, dharma of dharma, sambhoga of dharma, and so on.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, October 18th, 2017 at 12:20 AM
Title: Re: Shakyamuni as the Eternal Buddha
Content:
Queequeg said:
I would say most East Asian Buddhists rely on commentaries also...

Malcolm wrote:
But not Indian commentaries, for the most part. For example, there is no precedent in Indian Buddhism for taking the title of a sūtra and turning it into a chanting practice in Indian Buddhism at all (actually, there is no precedent for it in Sino-Japanese Buddhism either).


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, October 18th, 2017 at 12:08 AM
Title: Re: Shakyamuni as the Eternal Buddha
Content:


Queequeg said:
It should be pointed out here, though, that Thubten is not reacting to a Chinese interpretation of the sutra, but the sutra itself. In fact he had to go back and check the Tibetan translation to be sure what he was reading in English, presumably translated from the Chinese, was accurate.

Malcolm wrote:
My point is that the later (post Yogacara) Indian tradition took a synthetic and systematic view where the sūtras were viewed as raw material out of which systemic approaches to the Dharma were elaborated, and sūtra exegesis became subordinate to these Indian philosophical schools. For example, take the disregard with which Madhyamaka would treat Yogacara sūtra sources, etc.

I have also observed Tibetans being quite surprised at what is actually stated in this or that tantra, because Tibetans in general depend on scholastic manuals for everything, rather than primary materials. It is only the expert senior scholars who work with primary materials.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 17th, 2017 at 9:53 PM
Title: Re: Shakyamuni as the Eternal Buddha
Content:


Malcolm wrote:
There is only one Teacher.

pael said:
Could you explain this, please?

Malcolm wrote:
The dharmakāya, the mind of all the buddhas, is the teacher.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 17th, 2017 at 9:52 PM
Title: Re: Shakyamuni as the Eternal Buddha
Content:
Queequeg said:
Might be relevant:

https://tricycle.org/magazine/greater-awakening/

Coëmgenu said:
Quite brilliant article! Although it certainly has it's 'angle' in how it frames the Tibetan monk and his tradition, I must say.

Malcolm wrote:
Thubten's lack of familiarity with the Lotus Sūtra is normal. However the assumptions of the one yāna teaching presented in the Lotus Sūtra is very much present in Tibetan Buddhism, explicitly based on that sūtra.

The reason why such a monk might be surprised by such a teaching has to do with the fact that for the most part Tibetan and Indian Buddhist scholars tended to rely on commentaries; whereas Chinese Buddhists preferred to rely on sūtras directly. Since the latter did so, various forms of Buddhism arose unique to China, with assumptions about Dharma Indians, and later Tibetans, apparently never would hold.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 17th, 2017 at 9:45 PM
Title: Re: Shakyamuni as the Eternal Buddha
Content:
Coëmgenu said:
I guess it all comes down to the belief that the LS is the definitive teaching of the Buddhas, who are all, in this framework, conceived of as identical to Śākyamuni Buddha.

Because of this differing perspective of Lotus Buddhism, all Buddhas (I still can't bring myself to type 'sarvabuddhāḥ' for some reason, I suppose there is a limit to even my own pretentiousness), and all Buddha-nature, are not only referred to as, but are also conceived of as, identical completely to Śākyamuni Buddha & Śākyamuni Buddha's respectively, who, in this context, is not a (normal Mahāyāna) nirmāṇakāya because of the constraints and limitations applied to such nirmāṇakāyāḥ. The LS differently presents the nirmāṇakāya. If one approaches Śākyamuni Buddha under the presumptions normative for a nirmāṇakāya in non-LS Buddhism, than one basically gets a huge Buddhist heresy.

Thoughts? Is this off the mark completely?

Malcolm wrote:
There is only one Teacher. This the normative Mahāyāna view. There is only one yāna, this is also the normative Mahāyāna view.

Śākyamuni Buddha is a normal supreme nirmanakāya, fourth in a sequence of 1001.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 17th, 2017 at 11:48 AM
Title: Re: Shakyamuni as the Eternal Buddha
Content:


The Cicada said:
You could also just call these Buddhas Vajrasattva, Vajradhara, Samantabhadra, Amitabha, Akshobhya, Adibuddha, our Lord Shakyamuni Buddha, since he actually appeared in this world to teach us. This takes us back to Nichiren's teaching: Why revere other Buddhas when this one is close by and reaching out to us?

Malcolm wrote:
Several buddhas have appeared in this world to teach us, and many more will appear (another 997).

Buddhas are not restricted by time and space. Buddhas also do not "reach out." Their compassion is spontaneous, like a wishfulfilling gem that satisfies all wishes.

This Sahaloka is an impure buddhafield because the experience of the various sufferings of this world system are unthinkable. Of course the Buddha was kind to prepare this buddhafield, but don't kid yourself into thinking there aren't better places to be.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 17th, 2017 at 4:48 AM
Title: Re: lotus sutra - lifespan of the tathagata..???
Content:


Queequeg said:
It cannot be a reference to the rūpakāya.

Malcolm wrote:
I misspoke, I meant nirmanakāya.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 17th, 2017 at 4:23 AM
Title: Re: lotus sutra - lifespan of the tathagata..???
Content:


Queequeg said:
It has to be rupakaya. Only rupakaya appear to living beings.

Malcolm wrote:
We have been over this before. There are two divisions in the rupakāya.


Queequeg said:
In any event, I assume you're referring to these lines?

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, and they way they are interpreted by some.


Queequeg said:
Śākyamuni Buddha was indeed kind to emanate in this world system. My guru however is even more kind.
Can there be kindness more kind than limitless kindness of the Buddha? Well, all I can say is, blessed.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, one's guru is even more kind than the buddhas of the three times all together.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 17th, 2017 at 4:20 AM
Title: Re: Shakyamuni as the Eternal Buddha
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
As Shakespeare said:
’Tis but thy name that is my enemy;
Thou art thyself though, not a Montague.
What’s Montague? it is nor hand, nor foot,
Nor arm, nor face, nor any other part
Belonging to a man. O! be some other name:
What’s in a name? that which we call a rose
By any other name would smell as sweet;

Queequeg said:
Some of my fellows may call me a slanderer for agreeing with this.

Malcolm wrote:
That's their problem, not yours.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 17th, 2017 at 3:56 AM
Title: Re: Shakyamuni as the Eternal Buddha
Content:
Queequeg said:
If there are living beings, then the Buddha in Three Bodies are arisen in perfect complement. Since there is no beginning to living beings, there is no beginning to Buddha. We call this timeless Buddha Shakyamuni. We also call this Buddha Myohorengekyo. We also call this Buddha the Original Buddha. We also call this Buddha the Eternal Buddha.

Malcolm wrote:
You can also call this buddha Vajrasattva, Vajradhara, Samantabhadra, Amitabha, Akshobhya, Adibuddha, etc.

However, "who obtained the three bodies more than numberless major world system dust particle kalpas ago" is standard Mahāyāna. The Buddha attained buddhahood at some point in the distant past and did not start out as an awakened being.

Queequeg said:
Yep, I just responded to this point in the thread in the Mahayana forum, along these lines. In this forum, I refer only to Shakyamuni or Myohorengekyo.

Malcolm wrote:
As Shakespeare said:
’Tis but thy name that is my enemy;
Thou art thyself though, not a Montague.
What’s Montague? it is nor hand, nor foot,
Nor arm, nor face, nor any other part
Belonging to a man. O! be some other name:
What’s in a name? that which we call a rose
By any other name would smell as sweet;


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 17th, 2017 at 3:48 AM
Title: Re: lotus sutra - lifespan of the tathagata..???
Content:


Queequeg said:
True, true, true. Zhiyi would agree with this, with caveats that are significant in his system.

Malcolm wrote:
...and only in his system.




Queequeg said:
When Shakyamuni in the Lotus says that he is "nitya", I understand it as speaking from the perspective of the waves in general, not the specific wave that rose and crashed on the Saha world 2500, nor exclusive of it.

Malcolm wrote:
It cannot be a reference to the rūpakāya. For example, it makes no sense whatever to take literally the statement that Vulture Peak will still be there after the world has been pulverized into smithereens during the death of thus universe, or the destroyed by some other conditions. I mean, you can take it literally if you choose to, but in my opinion that statement cannot be taken literally.


Queequeg said:
But we, deluded little beings of this world, refer to Shakyamuni because Shakyamuni takes up the entire visible field; when you surf, the only wave is the wave you're on - it dominates the entire sensual sphere. Other waves surely are out there, but they have no immediacy, and to the extent that those other waves can be conceived and even perceived, they are understood in the context of the present wave.

Malcolm wrote:
Śākyamuni Buddha was indeed kind to emanate in this world system. My guru however is even more kind.

But more importantly, Śākyamuni passed into parinirvana and is not physically present on this planet, other than some bones, ash, and teeth of questionable provenance, and the next Buddha will be Maitreya. So it is written, so shall it be.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 17th, 2017 at 3:39 AM
Title: Re: What would Buddha have thought of Mahayana?
Content:


Malcolm wrote:
Through this merit, may all living beings
perfect the accumulations of merit and wisdom,
and obtain the two sublime kāyas
that arise from merit and wisdom.

Minobu said:
thank you...
ok so what are the two sublime kaya bodies Lord Nagarjuna is talking about.

i'm guessing..the Dharmakaya and the Sambhogakaya .
Nirmanakaya being not sublime but conventional?

Malcolm wrote:
The sublime kāyas are the dharmakāya and the rūpakāya; the rūpakāya is further subdivided into the sambhogakāya, which is a permanent rūpakāya, and the nirmanakāya, whose instantiations are transient.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 17th, 2017 at 3:20 AM
Title: Re: Shakyamuni as the Eternal Buddha
Content:
Queequeg said:
If there are living beings, then the Buddha in Three Bodies are arisen in perfect complement. Since there is no beginning to living beings, there is no beginning to Buddha. We call this timeless Buddha Shakyamuni. We also call this Buddha Myohorengekyo. We also call this Buddha the Original Buddha. We also call this Buddha the Eternal Buddha.

Malcolm wrote:
You can also call this buddha Vajrasattva, Vajradhara, Samantabhadra, Amitabha, Akshobhya, Adibuddha, etc.

However, "who obtained the three bodies more than numberless major world system dust particle kalpas ago" is standard Mahāyāna. The Buddha attained buddhahood at some point in the distant past and did not start out as an awakened being.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 17th, 2017 at 2:59 AM
Title: Re: What would Buddha have thought of Mahayana?
Content:



Malcolm wrote:
Nirmanakāyas are like the waves one sees in the ocean. A wave is transient phenomena, but its nature is water. Likewise, nirmanakāyas are transient phenomena, but they arise and subside into the ocean of the dharmakāya and do not have a nature that is different than the dharmakāya.

Minobu said:
So was there a time when then the Nirmanakaya never was?

Malcolm wrote:
No, since the activity of buddhahood is ceaseless, and has no beginning. But it is the case that nirmanakāyas are not always present everywhere all the time, but they are always present somewhere all the time.And remember, nirmanakāyas are born out of the realization we call "dharmakāya." Without that realization there is no dharmakāya to speak of. This is why in the Ratnavali Nāgārjuna wrote:
Through this merit, may all living beings
perfect the accumulations of merit and wisdom,
and obtain the two sublime kāyas
that arise from merit and wisdom.
The nirmanakāya's principle function is to encourage sentient beings that they too can attain buddhahood and teach them the way to do so. The nirmanakāya serves no other purpose than that. When there are no more sentient beings, there will be no more nirmanakāyas.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 17th, 2017 at 2:01 AM
Title: Re: What would Buddha have thought of Mahayana?
Content:
DGA said:
The super long but still finite nirmanakaya is the form body he takes.

Queequeg said:
The Nirmanakaya in most cases is thought to be Gotama. In the Lotus, Shakyamuni explains that his birth, awakening, teaching, and parinirvana are expedients.

Malcolm wrote:
Not only in the Lotus Sūtra, in many Mahāyāna Sūtras.

Queequeg said:
This means that the Nirmanakaya is not what everyone thinks it is. He, Shakyamuni, also says in the Lotus that he is nitya - timeless. Its not clear that Shakyamuni is describing a finite lifespan.

Malcolm wrote:
Nirmanakāyas are like the waves one sees in the ocean. A wave is transient phenomena, but its nature is water. Likewise, nirmanakāyas are transient phenomena, but they arise and subside into the ocean of the dharmakāya and do not have a nature that is different than the dharmakāya.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 17th, 2017 at 1:29 AM
Title: Re: What would Buddha have thought of Mahayana?
Content:
thomaslaw said:
The origin of the essential Mahayana doctrines (such as the middle way of emptiness, conditioned arising) is found in Samyutta/Samyukta-Nikaya/Agama. See The Fundamental Teachings of Early Buddhism: A comparative study based on the Sutra-anga portion of the Pali Samyutta-Nikaya and the Chinese Samyukta-agama (by Choong Mun-keat, Harrassowitz Verlag, 2000).


Malcolm wrote:
No, the origin of the essential Mahāyāna doctrines is the Buddha's realization of the dependently originated nature, and therefore nonarising nature, of all conditioned phenomena.

It does not come from books. It comes from realization.

thomaslaw said:
It certainly first comes from the Buddha's 'realization' of 'conditioned arising' and also 'ceasing' nature, indicated in the books, Samyukta/Samyutta.


Malcolm wrote:
Why scare quotes?

And why site the Samyukta Agama as being particularly relevant to Mahāyāna Doctrines?

The record of Buddha's Mahāyāna teachings are found Mahāyāna Sūtras.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, October 16th, 2017 at 9:21 PM
Title: Re: Advice need - pondering whether to receive Yamantaka empowerment
Content:
Ayu said:
Doesn't Guru Yoga mean to connect oneself with this certain lineage? Shouldn't one be convinced to be part of this lineage before taking any such commitments?

Malcolm wrote:
The lineage is the line of masters of the deity which comes from India, not this or that Tibetan institution.

Guru Yoga means integrating with the state of knowledge of the teacher, it is not a political affiliation.

Ayu said:
Good to know. So, one can practice the six session Guru Yoga visualising the own root guru disregarding the lineage.
This is not self-evident. I mean: it has to be explained.


Malcolm wrote:
In Sakya and Gelug, any master from whom one receives a major empowerment is one of your root gurus.

When it comes to guru yoga, one unifies all gurus into one. Thus, one does not need to practice a separate guru yoga for each lineage one has received. One only needs to practice a single guru yoga, and this covers all.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, October 16th, 2017 at 8:42 PM
Title: Re: Advice need - pondering whether to receive Yamantaka empowerment
Content:
Ayu said:
Doesn't Guru Yoga mean to connect oneself with this certain lineage? Shouldn't one be convinced to be part of this lineage before taking any such commitments?

Malcolm wrote:
The lineage is the line of masters of the deity which comes from India, not this or that Tibetan institution.

Guru Yoga means integrating with the state of knowledge of the teacher, it is not a political affiliation.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, October 16th, 2017 at 8:28 PM
Title: Re: The Tantric Age: A comparison of Shaiva and Buddhist Tantra
Content:
pael said:
Such as?


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

kirtu said:
But to what extent is this valid in our time?  Almost everyone has seen a picture of a stupa or a Buddha and therefore a seed has been planted.

Kirt

Malcolm wrote:
Completely valid. Think ISIS.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, October 16th, 2017 at 11:07 AM
Title: Re: Shakyamuni as the Eternal Buddha
Content:



Coëmgenu said:
Dharmadhātu though is just emptiness is it not? Since that is the (only?) universal principle/characterization of the dharmāḥ in their totality? Yes? No? If so, what can "come from" or be arisen from emptiness?

EDIT: Malcom beat me to it. Either way, Ven Nāgārjuna's MMK addresses this.

Malcolm wrote:
The dharmakāya comes from the accumulation of jñana, that is, the cultivation of the nonconceptual equipoise of a yogic direct perception of emptiness.

Coëmgenu said:
Interestingly, it is specified that the teaching of the Lifespan chapter comes to us from abhijñā ("direct-knowing").

「汝等諦聽，如來祕密神通之力。
"You all listen carefully, to the Tathāgata's mysterious hidden abhijñāyāḥ ("direct-knowing's") power.

If my pretentious declension is correct.

Malcolm wrote:
The six abhijñā's are part of a buddha's qualities.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, October 16th, 2017 at 10:41 AM
Title: Re: Advice need - pondering whether to receive Yamantaka empowerment
Content:
Vasana said:
If you don't think you can keep the commitments, best not to get the empowerment imo...especially if you're still working out which path to take. If you havn't done much extensive sadhana already and worked out which schools and teachers you have an affinity for, a daily commitment could be a bit too much?

There will always be other opportunities to receive the Yidam if you want it enough. And if not, there will always be another Yidam capable of helping you realize the same accomplishments.

liuzg150181 said:
Keeping commitment from now to the very end is doable for me,and I dont mean i will give up my commitment should I opt for other school. Just that it narrows down as to what other commitments i could take in future given the time constraint,esp for non-Gelug commitments.
Apart form which Yidam to accomplish the same,the other issue is accessibility of teaching,since it can be quite frustrating to have empowerment and not much explanation of the practice. At least for Gelug,there are centre which gives such teachings every now and then.

Malcolm wrote:
Six session guru yoga in its shortest form is merely a few lines long, like 8 or 12.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, October 16th, 2017 at 10:35 AM
Title: Re: What would Buddha have thought of Mahayana?
Content:
PadmaVonSamba said:
Secular buddhism simply rejects what cannot be verified.

Malcolm wrote:
Their means of verification are faulty.

liuzg150181 said:
So how do one verify,through meditative equipoise?

Malcolm wrote:
One must verify the Buddha's teaching through one's own realization. Until that point, one must accept on faith the testimony of others who have realized those teachings. Hence the necessity for a qualified teacher in Buddhadharma in general.

The Buddha clearly discusses this, in among other places, the (inconvenient) Eastern Gatehouse Sutta.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, October 16th, 2017 at 10:04 AM
Title: Re: What would Buddha have thought of Mahayana?
Content:
thomaslaw said:
The origin of the essential Mahayana doctrines (such as the middle way of emptiness, conditioned arising) is found in Samyutta/Samyukta-Nikaya/Agama. See The Fundamental Teachings of Early Buddhism: A comparative study based on the Sutra-anga portion of the Pali Samyutta-Nikaya and the Chinese Samyukta-agama (by Choong Mun-keat, Harrassowitz Verlag, 2000).


Malcolm wrote:
No, the origin of the essential Mahāyāna doctrines is the Buddha's realization of the dependently originated nature, and therefore nonarising nature, of all conditioned phenomena.

It does not come from books. It comes from realization.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, October 16th, 2017 at 10:02 AM
Title: Re: What would Buddha have thought of Mahayana?
Content:
PadmaVonSamba said:
Secular buddhism simply rejects what cannot be verified.

Malcolm wrote:
Their means of verification are faulty.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, October 16th, 2017 at 10:01 AM
Title: Re: Shakyamuni as the Eternal Buddha
Content:


Coëmgenu said:
Here is a pedantic and overly cosmologically oriented question that I am sure will get no one anywhere.

Is dharmadhātu sufficient for dharmakāya or is 'contact' with a Buddha's realization required?

Oh the scholasticism.

I also think it might be a redundant and self-answering question, but this could suddenly turn interesting. Or not.

Minobu said:
i think the dharmakaya body is won when  one is awakened to the DharmaDhatu...or it just happens when one awakens.
i'm starting to think all comes from dharmadhatu ???

Coëmgenu said:
Dharmadhātu though is just emptiness is it not? Since that is the (only?) universal principle/characterization of the dharmāḥ in their totality? Yes? No? If so, what can "come from" or be arisen from emptiness?

EDIT: Malcom beat me to it. Either way, Ven Nāgārjuna's MMK addresses this.

Malcolm wrote:
The dharmakāya comes from the accumulation of jñana, that is, the cultivation of the nonconceptual equipoise of a yogic direct perception of emptiness.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, October 16th, 2017 at 9:29 AM
Title: Re: Shakyamuni as the Eternal Buddha
Content:
Minobu said:
i'm starting to think all comes from dharmadhatu ???

Malcolm wrote:
Dharmadhātu is a collective name for the emptiness of all phenomena.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, October 16th, 2017 at 9:28 AM
Title: Re: Shakyamuni as the Eternal Buddha
Content:


Coëmgenu said:
Is dharmadhātu sufficient for dharmakāya or is 'contact' with a Buddha's realization required?

Malcolm wrote:
Dharmakāya is the omniscience that comprehends the emptinesss of all phenomena (dharmadhātu).


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, October 16th, 2017 at 9:26 AM
Title: Re: Shakyamuni as the Eternal Buddha
Content:


Coëmgenu said:
pick Akṣobhya Buddha as a random choice, had delivered this sūtra, and said the exact same things, or said them differently, it wouldn't have made Śākyamuni Buddha any less the 'True Buddha'/dharmakāya and it wouldn't make Akṣobhya Buddha any more the 'True Buddha'/dharmakāya. That's how I see it at least.

Malcolm wrote:
Correct. There is only one teacher since the dharmakāya of all buddhas is the same. And it does not matter if you name that buddha Samantabhadra, Vajradhara, Śākyamuni, Amitabha, Mañjuśrī, Vajrasattva, Mahāvairocana, Akshobhya, Tāra, Vajravārāhī, etc.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, October 16th, 2017 at 4:14 AM
Title: Re: Shakyamuni as the Eternal Buddha
Content:


Minobu said:
No. The dharmakāya is the definitive buddha. The other kāyas are provisional, or conditional.
could be what i am trying to understand..
how can there be a buddha without first being a common mortal.?

Malcolm wrote:
There cannot be. All buddhas started out as ordinary sentient beings. Śākyamuni's career began in the hell realms, in fact.

The dharmakāya is the definitive buddha because dharmakāya is a buddha's realization of the dharmadhātu.

Buddhahood, in other word, is the realization that produces the qualities we associated with Buddhas.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, October 16th, 2017 at 1:41 AM
Title: Re: lotus sutra - lifespan of the tathagata..???
Content:


Coëmgenu said:
Is there such a time as when a Buddha does not have dharmakāya?

Malcolm wrote:
No. The dharmakāya is the definitive buddha. The other kāyas are provisional, or conditional.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, October 15th, 2017 at 10:24 PM
Title: Re: What would Buddha have thought of Mahayana?
Content:
PadmaVonSamba said:
It won't happen. One cannot practice with wrong view and expect anything other than error as a result.
That's simply didactic. If one can, then one can.

Why is it "wrong view" not to accept on faith alone, or simply  because someone has said it, or simply because someone told you that the Buddha taught it, concepts such as hell realms and nagas, certain concepts of rebirth, and other things one cannot verify through one's personal experience?


Malcolm wrote:
Simply put, it is wrong view to reject rebirth and karma because by doing so one rejects the dependent origination of the mind. Also, these things can be personally verified. You just have to do the work.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, October 15th, 2017 at 1:20 AM
Title: Re: Shakyamuni as the Eternal Buddha
Content:
Minobu said:
this is a finite number. It shows He did not first attain enlightenment under the Bodhi Tree.

Malcolm wrote:
The idea that Buddha first attained awakening under the Bodhitree is a Hinayāna idea. It is not shared by any Mahāyāna school. All Mahāyāna schools understand the Buddha attained buddhahood infinite eons ego.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, October 14th, 2017 at 10:10 PM
Title: Re: Can buddha nature be proved?
Content:
Monlam Tharchin said:
I'll ask a different way: why is "proper" a more correct term than "possible" in that verse? I'm hoping Malcolm, in the not-24/7/365 time he is on here, could explain some of his thinking behind that. Thanks

Malcolm wrote:
It has to do with the difference between the Tibetan translation and the Sanskrit original. The Tibetan term is rung ba, which means suitable, proper, but also possible, in the sense of one can do this or that. The Sanskrit term here is more restrictive. The first time I wrote down the quote, I wrote it down hastily based on my memory of the Tibetan verse; but Sherab is correcet, if everything were possible because of emptiness, then buddhahood could revert, etc., corn could become wheat, and that is not what the verse intends. So i went back to the Sanskrit and looked at Buddhapalita's commentary for clarification.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, October 14th, 2017 at 7:31 AM
Title: Re: Can buddha nature be proved?
Content:


Sherab said:
Monlam Tharchin asked what is the meaning of proper in this context.

Malcolm wrote:
I know it seems like all I do is sit in front of a computer 24/7/365...but it is not true.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, October 14th, 2017 at 3:12 AM
Title: Re: Lotus Sutra: Buddha Prabhutaratna
Content:


Queequeg said:
Personally, I think Prabhutaratna, Shakyamuni, and the emanation Buddhas are all mutually identified. We can distinguish them because they embody different upaya, but fundamentally, they are iterations of Dharmakaya in response to conditions, and that Dharmakaya can only appear to beings in response to their conditions. To try and identify them as distinct entities is frustrating because Buddhas are beyond those sorts of distinctions...

Malcolm wrote:
The dharmakāya cannot directly appear to beings at all. Only buddhas can see the dharmakāya. However, the dharmakāya manifests the rūpakāya to beings, and those rūpakāyas appear in various forms suited to the inclinations of various sentient beings in the six realms (hells through devas).

Coëmgenu said:
Perhaps this is some 'folksy Buddhism', but I swear that I had heard it explained that, since the dharmakāya does not 'appear', we 'see' saṃbhogakāya when 'looking at' dharmakāya, assuming attainment.

Is this right at all?


Malcolm wrote:
Not unless you are an eighth stage bodhisattva on up. Below that, beings can only perceived a nirmanakāya. Why? Because only nirmanakāyas appear in the three realms. The sambhogakāya cannot appear in the desire realm, but it can appear to the mind of bodhisattva in the pure stages in a samadhi on Akanishtha, for example.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, October 14th, 2017 at 2:14 AM
Title: Re: What does it mean, "All other Buddhas are followers of Shakyamuni Buddha?
Content:
Minobu said:
i would suggest you try doing what Lord Buddha Sakyamuni said is called for in this defiled age of degeneration..

Malcolm wrote:
The Buddha said many things. It is up to each of us to decide which thing he said is the most important. This is why I am a follower of Secret Mantra, then among Secret Mantra, Ati Yoga, since I think this is the most profound teaching the Buddha taught for sentient beings in this degenerate age. YMMV.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, October 14th, 2017 at 12:14 AM
Title: Re: Lotus Sutra: Buddha Prabhutaratna
Content:


Queequeg said:
Personally, I think Prabhutaratna, Shakyamuni, and the emanation Buddhas are all mutually identified. We can distinguish them because they embody different upaya, but fundamentally, they are iterations of Dharmakaya in response to conditions, and that Dharmakaya can only appear to beings in response to their conditions. To try and identify them as distinct entities is frustrating because Buddhas are beyond those sorts of distinctions...

Malcolm wrote:
The dharmakāya cannot directly appear to beings at all. Only buddhas can see the dharmakāya. However, the dharmakāya manifests the rūpakāya to beings, and those rūpakāyas appear in various forms suited to the inclinations of various sentient beings in the six realms (hells through devas).


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, October 13th, 2017 at 11:50 PM
Title: Re: What does it mean, "All other Buddhas are followers of Shakyamuni Buddha?
Content:


Minobu said:
so would you recommend putting your apples in which basket?

Malcolm wrote:
I prefer to hedge my bets, rather than placing all my apples in one basket.



Minobu said:
The best is attaining full buddhahood in this life.
so if you don;t do it here then why would the Bardo with all it's confusion multiplying every seven days be  a place to attain buddhahood.

Malcolm wrote:
One has seven times more clarity in the bardo than in this life because one is not encumbered with a physical body.


Minobu said:
in a buddhafield in the next life
am i wrong in assuming that this is really really hard to get to.

Malcolm wrote:
Yup.


Minobu said:
Do you believe some totally afflicted person with a daily practice that shows no fruition in their daily lives of the practitioner will instantly transport the person and the afflictions to a pure place such as a Pure Land .

Malcolm wrote:
It depends on what their daily practice is.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, October 13th, 2017 at 9:09 PM
Title: Re: Can buddha nature be proved?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Nāgārjuna again:

For those whom emptiness possible, everything is possible;
for those whom emptiness is impossible, everything is impossible.

Sherab said:
I think this cannot be taken as an absolutely true statement.  Why?  Because that would mean that it is possible for a Buddha to become a deluded sentient being again.  In other words, the recognition of things-as-they-are can unravel and be lost.


Malcolm wrote:
Yes, it really should reald:
For those whom emptiness proper, everything is proper;
for those whom emptiness is not proper, for them nothing is proper.
Buddhapalita comments on this:
Those for whom emptiness is proper as an intrinsic nature, everything mundane and supermundane is proper. Those for whom emptiness is not proper as an intrinsic nature, for them everything mundane and supermundane is improper.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, October 13th, 2017 at 10:28 AM
Title: Re: What would Buddha have thought of Mahayana?
Content:
PadmaVonSamba said:
If you can practice secular Buddhism and attain realization, then it's authentic.

Malcolm wrote:
It won't happen. One cannot practice with wrong view and expect anything other than error as a result.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, October 13th, 2017 at 10:26 AM
Title: Re: deadliest mass shooting in the U.S.
Content:


Mkoll said:
We're talking about the "American people" here...

Malcolm wrote:
No such thing, by design.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, October 13th, 2017 at 4:53 AM
Title: Re: No self (and no non-self)
Content:


rachMiel said:
When you say "it really should be" do you mean you have access to Nagarjuna's original text (in Pali? Sanskrit?) and you have the expertise to say, with certainty, that the "true and false" translation is more accurate than Garfield's?

Malcolm wrote:
Yes.

sarvaṁ tathyaṁ na vā tathyaṁ tathyaṁ cātathyam eva ca
naivātathyaṁ naiva tathyam etad buddhānuśāsanaṁ|

Tathya means "true."

rachmiel said:
On https://www.quora.com/What-is-difference-between-satya-and-tathya (the first answer especially) they say tathya means fact and satya means truth. Based on that and on the following quote from the linked page I can see why Garfield chose real/unreal instead of true/false:

"Etymologically, Satya has its roots in the sanskrit root 'sat' meaning the essence of. It also forms the basis of sattva, which is equivalent of existence or reality. Tathya has the equivalent base in tattva which means matter."

Malcolm wrote:
He was translating from Tibetan. Even so when looking at traditional Indian commentaries true and false are the correct readings.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, October 13th, 2017 at 3:11 AM
Title: Re: No self (and no non-self)
Content:
rachmiel said:
A bit of a tangent:

If the "actual ultimate" (as opposed to "approximate ultimate") truth is unfathomable, inconceivable, inexpressible, etc. ... how can one know it is not just a fairy tale?

Malcolm wrote:
The actual ultimate truth is a direct perception which is inexpressible since there is no entity within it that can be discussed in conventional terms.

It is approximated by Shantideva:
When neither an entity nor a nonentity remain before the mind,
since there is no other alternative, the mind is pacified.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, October 13th, 2017 at 3:06 AM
Title: Re: No self (and no non-self)
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
But this is quite a different use than what you originally advanced: self, no self, both, and neither.

rachmiel said:
Yes. I'm learning. Anyway, it really should be:

8. Everything is true, false,
both true and false,
and neither true nor false.
This is Lord Buddha’s teaching.
When you say "it really should be" do you mean you have access to Nagarjuna's original text (in Pali? Sanskrit?) and you have the expertise to say, with certainty, that the "true and false" translation is more accurate than Garfield's?

Malcolm wrote:
Yes.

sarvaṁ tathyaṁ na vā tathyaṁ tathyaṁ cātathyam eva ca
naivātathyaṁ naiva tathyam etad buddhānuśāsanaṁ|

Tathya means "true."


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, October 13th, 2017 at 2:36 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:



treehuggingoctopus said:
There is no retreat scheduled for November. I would not assume anybody can turn up there in person and be admitted. For all we know, there may be no WWT event with Rinpoche in person at all.

Malcolm wrote:
Any member of the DC can go to any gar any time.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, October 13th, 2017 at 2:23 AM
Title: Re: No self (and no non-self)
Content:
rachmiel said:
Just worked through Chapter 18 (in Garfield's Fundamental Wisdom of the Middle Way ). This verse seems to get at what I'm exploring here:

8. Everything is real and is not real,
Both real and not real.
Neither real nor not real.
This is Lord Buddha’s teaching.

Here is (part of) Garfield's commentary on the verse. I included it because, without understanding the two senses (Two Truths) that underlie the verse, it's easy to misunderstand what Nagarjuna meant.

This is the positive tetralemma regarding existence.
Everything is conventionally real. Everything is ultimately unreal.
Everything has both characteristics — that is, everything is both conventionally real and ultimately unreal.
Nothing is ultimately real or completely nonexistent. That is, everything is neither real in one sense nor not-real in another sense.
Applying this to self yields:
Self is conventionally real. Self is ultimately unreal.
Self is both conventionally real and ultimately unreal.
Self is neither ultimately real, nor conventionally unreal.
The same logic can be applied to all objects: aggregates, teachings (karma, dependent arising, rebirth), things (trees, rocks, ideas).

Malcolm wrote:
But this is quite a different use than what you originally advanced: self, no self, both, and neither.

Anyway, it really should be:

8. Everything is true, false,
both true and false,
and neither true nor false.
This is Lord Buddha’s teaching.

However, the traditional understanding is that the first term, "everything is true and false," means that the Buddha follows mundane convention and proclaims it to be true. If something is not true according to worldly convention, the Buddha proclaims it to be false. If the world says that something is both true and false, also the Buddha agrees. And if the world says something is neither true nor false, again Buddha agrees.

Buddhapalita then uses the example of pictures on a wall. Let's use the Buddha. There is a picture on the wall of Buddha, so we agree it is Buddha. But it is false if one says this is the real Buddha. It is both true and false in that it is true it is picture and it is false in that it is not the real Buddha. It is not a real buddha, hence not true,  but it is also not not a representation of someone other than Buddha, hence not false. This is the sense in which that statement should be understood.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, October 13th, 2017 at 1:58 AM
Title: Re: What does it mean, "All other Buddhas are followers of Shakyamuni Buddha?
Content:



Minobu said:
Do you really believe the best you can do is die and go to pure land...and do you really think it is that easy as some claim...and do you believe that when some totally affiliated being just does the required criteria and dies ...he gets all cleaned up and goes to pure land...
you do realize people are saying this is what Buddhism is all about...at the very least when you die you get to know...and live happy ever after ...

Malcolm wrote:
The best is attaining full buddhahood in this life. If not that, then attaining buddhahood in the bardo, and if not that, in a buddhafield in the next life.

There are plenty of options.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, October 13th, 2017 at 1:13 AM
Title: Re: What does it mean, "All other Buddhas are followers of Shakyamuni Buddha?
Content:
Minobu said:
Now now , play nice... i would not go that far as referring to people who believe Nichiren is an emanation of the Primordial Buddha as wack jobs.

Malcolm wrote:
It is one thing to claim Nichirin is an emanation of the Buddha, that claim I have no problem, though of course I do not believe it. I was referring to the claim of some Nicherinistas that Nicherin is really the supreme buddha. That claim, if made by an ordained monk, is a sanghabheda, a schism in the Sangha. If made by a lay person, it is simply ignorant foolishness.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, October 13th, 2017 at 12:52 AM
Title: Re: What does it mean, "All other Buddhas are followers of Shakyamuni Buddha?
Content:
Queequeg said:
Shakyamuni's Perfect teaching is suited for all beings in the Saha world now.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, and all Buddhists follow Śākyamuni Buddha's teachings now because this is his dispensational era. Who ever said otherwise?

Queequeg said:
Some have.

Malcolm wrote:
We are not referring to cultists and whack jobs like those idiots who think Nicherin is the "true buddha."

Queequeg said:
However, are you asserting that in all one billion worlds in the Sahaloka, that the present Buddha's teachings are spread there?
Yes, and no.

Yes, since dharmakaya is the same for all worlds. No, because upaya arise in response to causes and conditions and are therefore different.

Malcolm wrote:
So you mean some buddhas have five deeds, the others have 20? I don't think so.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, October 13th, 2017 at 12:49 AM
Title: Re: What does it mean, "All other Buddhas are followers of Shakyamuni Buddha?
Content:
Queequeg said:
I wrote "only imperfectly appeared in this Saha world".

Malcolm wrote:
What does this even mean? How does a buddha imperfectly appear? Do you mean he is lacking arms and legs, a head, is blind in one eye?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, October 13th, 2017 at 12:48 AM
Title: Re: What does it mean, "All other Buddhas are followers of Shakyamuni Buddha?
Content:


Queequeg said:
Shakyamuni appeared in this Saha world in perfect complement to the us beings here. He is the perfect upaya for us. Amitabha, Mahavairocana and other buddhas of the ten directions, all of which are emanation bodies of this same Buddha, have only imperfectly appeared in this Saha world, and most only when summoned to testify to the veracity of Shakyamuni's most profound teachngs.

Malcolm wrote:
Mahavairocana does not appear in this world at all, well, he does in a sense because Shakyamuni (nirmanakāya) is an emanation of Mahavairocana (sambhogakāya), and as stated in several sūtras, actual buddhahood is not attained here, but rather, in Akaniśtha. This also is course the reason eighth stage bodhisattvas and so in general do not take birth in the desire realm birth prior to manifesting the play of the twelve deeds of a supreme nirmanakaȳa buddha.

And as far as appearing in this world, Śakyamuni is but the fourth buddha who will appear on this Jambudvipa, there are another 997 to go, until the Bhadrakalpa runs its course.

Queequeg said:
In comparison, in this world, for the causes and conditions of the beings in this world, they can only offer incomplete or at best, mixed benefit..

Malcolm wrote:
You absolutely cannot assert this with a straight face. The idea that the teaching of any buddha offers inferior or incomplete benefits to any beings in any world system is absolutely ludicrous.

Queequeg said:
We honor Shakyamuni as the supreme buddha...

Malcolm wrote:
Correction, as the supreme nirmanakāya buddha...

Queequeg said:
he is our teacher in this world.

Malcolm wrote:
Correct, Śākyamuni is our teacher, and all Buddhists here on this Jambudvipa recognize this.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, October 13th, 2017 at 12:22 AM
Title: Re: What does it mean, "All other Buddhas are followers of Shakyamuni Buddha?
Content:
Queequeg said:
Shakyamuni's Perfect teaching is suited for all beings in the Saha world now.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, and all Buddhists follow Śākyamuni Buddha's teachings now because this is his dispensational era. Who ever said otherwise?

However, are you asserting that in all one billion worlds in the Sahaloka, that the present Buddha's teachings are spread there?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, October 13th, 2017 at 12:07 AM
Title: Re: Shakyamuni as the Eternal Buddha
Content:
narhwal90 said:
There may be several disjoint "3 Realms"- Tientai ichinen-sanzen proposes the 3 Realms of Existence;

The five components, a living being as their temporary combination, and that being’s environment all manifest the same one of the Ten Worlds at any given point in time.

http://www.nichirenlibrary.org/en/dic/Content/T/165

Malcolm wrote:
I am referring to the traidhātuka of classical Indian cosmology


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, October 12th, 2017 at 11:22 PM
Title: Re: deadliest mass shooting in the U.S.
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
...This is much more of a Mason/Dixon line issue than anyone is willing to admit.

Quay said:
Oh there are plenty of people especially in the South who not only admit this but also wish to talk about it. However in the current climate anyone trying to do so is shouted down, the idea being that if the opposition simply talks loud enough and long enough the "pansy," "libtard" people who want to "take away our guns" will just shut up. Or move to Massachusetts or some other "God-forsaken hellhole, like Sweden." Or even "get right with God and stock up on some good, traditional 1911's."

(Words in quotation marks directly overheard by this writer.)

Malcolm wrote:
Well, I for one definitely want to take away all of their semi-automatic weapons. They can keep their single shots, flintlocks, and even winchesters.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, October 12th, 2017 at 11:20 PM
Title: Re: Deity outside of sadhana
Content:
Miroku said:
Hello,

I would like to ask whether it is possible to practice a deity outside of sadhana, by which I mean just visualizing yourself as the deity (after refuge and bodhicita ofcourse) then doing mantra, then dissolve and dedicate, without having any specific sadhana.

For example today I received via webcast a white tara empowerment from Garchen rinpoche and would very much like to practice it, however I don't know if I can practice according to the sadhana called "refined drop of immortality" and there was no lung of any sadhana, so can I just visualize myself as white tara? Or was some sadhana transmitted with the empowerment?

Malcolm wrote:
usually the lung comes with the jenang.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, October 12th, 2017 at 10:42 PM
Title: Re: No self (and no non-self)
Content:
rachmiel said:
The Madhyamaka asserts that phenomena have neither self, nor non-self, nor both, nor neither.

Malcolm wrote:
This not a usage of the negation of self found in Madhyamaka texts.

rachmiel said:
According to Garfield ( https://jaygarfield.files.wordpress.com/2014/01/garfield_nihilism1.pdf ) Nagarjuna does just that (without using the term 'self' explicitly) in Verse 11 from Chapter 12 of the MMK (Examination of the Tathagata):

11. We do not assert “empty.”
We do not assert “nonempty.”
We neither assert both nor neither.
They are asserted only for the purpose of designation. [Ocean 447]


Malcolm wrote:
Correct. But a self is always posited on the basis of a composite entity, whereas existence, emptiness, and so forth are not necessarily posited on the basis of a composite entity. But don't you think it is better to look at chapter 18, the examination of self?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, October 12th, 2017 at 10:35 PM
Title: Re: Shakyamuni as the Eternal Buddha
Content:



Coëmgenu said:
If you will forgive me more questions, how is the above this contextualized in light of us being considered 'in the body' of Vairocana in some Buddhist discourses I am poorly exposed to? Is his body different than his Pure Land?

Having only bodhisattvāḥ of X attainment be able to see the "Akaniṣṭha Gandavyuha-ness" of Akaniṣṭha Gandavyuha makes sense, having it outside and apart from the three realms seems contrary to the entire framework of Tiāntāi, possibly Madhyamaka? Then again, these are only my own understandings likely producing these dissonances.

Malcolm wrote:
Sukhavati is also outside the three realms.

Coëmgenu said:
Hmmm. I am thinking of "the three realms" in a different way then. I will return a reform my question better, from a more informed perspective as to what I mean.

Malcolm wrote:
The three realms are the desire realm, the form realm, and the formless realm. They are all places of afflictive rebirth.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, October 12th, 2017 at 10:09 PM
Title: Re: Shakyamuni as the Eternal Buddha
Content:
Coëmgenu said:
But is akaniṣṭha, the Pure Land of Mahāvairocana, not also understood in exactly the same way?
.

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

Coëmgenu said:
If you will forgive me more questions, how is the above this contextualized in light of us being considered 'in the body' of Vairocana in some Buddhist discourses I am poorly exposed to? Is his body different than his Pure Land?

Having only bodhisattvāḥ of X attainment be able to see the "Akaniṣṭha Gandavyuha-ness" of Akaniṣṭha Gandavyuha makes sense, having it outside and apart from the three realms seems contrary to the entire framework of Tiāntāi, possibly Madhyamaka? Then again, these are only my own understandings likely producing these dissonances.

Malcolm wrote:
Sukhavati is also outside the three realms.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, October 12th, 2017 at 10:09 PM
Title: Re: Shakyamuni as the Eternal Buddha
Content:
Queequeg said:
The identification of Prthivibandhu with Kuiji -

Looking up Kuiji, I am finding that he was born in Chang'an. This does not mean he was ethnically Chinese, but, given his importance in Chinese Buddhism, would the compilers of the histories gotten this wrong?

If the Chinese and Tibetan texts can be identified with each other, whether the latter is an earlier version or an incomplete version, then why should we accept the assertion in colophon to the Tibetan version over the Chinese records regarding Kuiji?

Malcolm wrote:
Not a question I can answer. I know what the Tibetan colophon says and I see no reason to dispute it.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, October 12th, 2017 at 9:19 PM
Title: Re: No self (and no non-self)
Content:
rachmiel said:
The Madhyamaka asserts that phenomena have neither self, nor non-self, nor both, nor neither.

Malcolm wrote:
This not a usage of the negation of self found in Madhyamaka texts.


rachmiel said:
This goes much further than the non-Madhyamaka assertion that phenomena have no self, period.

Malcolm wrote:
Which non-Madhyamakas do you have in mind?

rachmiel said:
The Madhyamaka assertion seems to burn the entire concept of self -- in all of its guises -- to ashes. The non-Madhyamaka assertion leaves open the possibility that phenomena have non-self.

Malcolm wrote:
I am afraid you are not properly understanding the use and limits of the tetralemma.

A self is something designated on an composite existent; when such existents are examined, one cannot find that they exist, do not exist, both or neither. Therefore, there is no where to hang a self.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, October 12th, 2017 at 9:14 PM
Title: Re: deadliest mass shooting in the U.S.
Content:


Mkoll said:
Because guns are embedded deeply within our culture, like football and cheeseburgers and movies. People get very defensive about their culture and cherished traditions.

Malcolm wrote:
That does not answer why. If you want the answer, you have to look at pre-Civil war attitudes towards the 2nd amendment (militias) and post Civil war, when the NRA began actively encouraging an understanding of the 2nd Amendment as something for personal gun ownership.

Mkoll said:
Obviously it's not the whole story. Just the most significant and relevant part of it.

Malcolm wrote:
Well, as I pointed out already, we do not have a culture of guns in Massachusetts, and this is shown by the fact that we have among the lowest rates of gun violence in the country. Places where gun violence are highest are also the places in the country where people from South moved after the Civil War. This is much more of a Mason/Dixon line issue than anyone is willing to admit.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, October 12th, 2017 at 11:12 AM
Title: Re: deadliest mass shooting in the U.S.
Content:
kirtu said:
Come on Malcolm, that's not an answer.  Why is the NRA's lobbying amongst the American people so successful?

Mkoll said:
Because guns are embedded deeply within our culture, like football and cheeseburgers and movies. People get very defensive about their culture and cherished traditions.

Malcolm wrote:
That does not answer why. If you want the answer, you have to look at pre-Civil war attitudes towards the 2nd amendment (militias) and post Civil war, when the NRA began actively encouraging an understanding of the 2nd Amendment as something for personal gun ownership.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, October 12th, 2017 at 9:58 AM
Title: Re: What does it mean, "All other Buddhas are followers of Shakyamuni Buddha?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
There is ultimately no distinction between fecal matter and a Shinola watch, between one's backside and a hole in the ground. These distinctions are merely matters of utility based on what is most beneficial to us—and what we perceive to be.
But still, there is no buddha in a buddha, and we come by this knowledge via convention as well. The minute you start believing there is a buddha in a buddha, you begin to make ridiculous distinctions such as claiming this buddha is better than that buddha and so forth, that Śakyamuni is better than Amitabha or Mahāvairocana. Such distinctions are utterly false and deluded.

The Cicada said:
The effectiveness of a teaching is determined by its skillfulness. In the same manner, the best cure for hypochondria is the medicine of placebo, and the best cure for the ailments of sentient beings in the Saha realm during the degenerate age is the example of Shakyamuni Buddha and the teaching of the Lotus Sutra. This is the appropriate medicine that reveals the mystic cintamanti jewel hidden within the seams of our vestiges in accordance with our collective karma.

Malcolm wrote:
The Lotus Sūtra is a nice sūtra, like all sūtras. But your hermeneutic is excessively parochial.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, October 12th, 2017 at 9:28 AM
Title: Re: Can buddha nature be proved?
Content:


nichiren-123 said:
I'm gonna play devil's advocate and ask you how the "eternal Buddhic Essence (svabhava) of all sentient beings." i.e. the source of all phenomena can be emptiness?


Malcolm wrote:
Nāgārjuna again:
For those whom emptiness possible, everything is possible;
for those whom emptiness is impossible, everything is impossible.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, October 12th, 2017 at 8:23 AM
Title: Re: What does it mean, "All other Buddhas are followers of Shakyamuni Buddha?
Content:


The Cicada said:
To posit sentient beings which can make ontological errors and are distinct from other beings called "Buddhas" who are awakened is to admit conventionality...

Malcolm wrote:
Yes.

The Cicada said:
by using it to explain the point you aren't making. It is only our shared delusion that makes this exchange comprehensible—or incomprehensible, depending on the "delusions" "one" "has."

Malcolm wrote:
Yes.


The Cicada said:
There is ultimately no distinction between fecal matter and a Shinola watch, between one's backside and a hole in the ground. These distinctions are merely matters of utility based on what is most beneficial to us—and what we perceive to be.

Malcolm wrote:
But still, there is no buddha in a buddha, and we come by this knowledge via convention as well. The minute you start believing there is a buddha in a buddha, you begin to make ridiculous distinctions such as claiming this buddha is better than that buddha and so forth, that Śakyamuni is better than Amitabha or Mahāvairocana. Such distinctions are utterly false and deluded.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, October 12th, 2017 at 8:19 AM
Title: Re: deadliest mass shooting in the U.S.
Content:


kirtu said:
Why is the 2nd Amendment deified especially in light of the massive misuse of the right to bear arms?

Malcolm wrote:
NRA.

kirtu said:
Come on Malcolm, that's not an answer.  Why is the NRA's lobbying amongst the American people so successful?

Kirt

Malcolm wrote:
It is the congress they lobby, not the people, and they have been at it since right after the civil war.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, October 12th, 2017 at 3:45 AM
Title: Re: What does it mean, "All other Buddhas are followers of Shakyamuni Buddha?
Content:
Minobu said:
don't have to wait till tonight...so buddha's of a given eon denotes plural Buddhas.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, there will be 1001 buddhas, i.e., supreme nirmanakāyas in this Bhadrakalpa, or fortunate eon. They all have the same dharmakāya, or realization, however.

Apart from that, there are infinite buddhas manifesting all the time.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, October 12th, 2017 at 3:04 AM
Title: Re: What does it mean, "All other Buddhas are followers of Shakyamuni Buddha?
Content:



Minobu said:
you are talking plural entities and saying they do not follow or have followed other buddhas to be buddhas..

Malcolm wrote:
Do many buddhas appear or only one?


Minobu said:
for me it has always been ...what exactly is the Primordial Buddha ...for a Buddha is once a common mortal and then awakened.
the primordial buddha is just not fitting into an awakened being.

Malcolm wrote:
The adibuddha, the primordial buddha, has two meanings: one, it refers to the first buddha of a given great eon; two, it refers to the nature of reality which is what one must realized to become a buddha.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, October 12th, 2017 at 3:01 AM
Title: Re: Authentic?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Purification practices removes the conditions for the ripening of the traces of negative karma and improve the conditions for the ripening of traces of conducive karma. Why? Because confession of misdeeds blunts their ripening because the strength of a given misdeed is related to object, intention, the deed, and satisfaction. The expression of regret for negative actions committed in the past counters the strength of intent and satisfaction. If these two are sufficiently weakened, a negative karma may never ripen.

Losal Samten said:
So "this purification practice is superior to others" rhetoric has no basis then, no matter where it comes from, as the other three powers are in actuality mere supports for the power of regret.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, when we are talking about purification practices which involve the four powers. However, there are Ati purification practices which are based on samadhi, rather than concepts, and these are indeed more powerful, for example, the purification of the five elements, the 25 thigles, etc.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, October 12th, 2017 at 2:09 AM
Title: Re: No self (and no non-self)
Content:
rachmiel said:
Rather than asserting

The phenomena we perceive have no self.

doesn't the Madhyamaka assert:

The phenomena we perceive have no self and no non-self.

?

So when I look at these words popping up on this computer screen, the words (and the screen (and the looker = me)) have no self, no essence, no ultimate identity. But, that's only half the story. The rest: Neither do the words/screen/looker have non-self, no essence, no ultimate identity.

I'm asking this because "having no self" is a cornerstone of Buddhist teaching. But, again, per the Madhyamaka (and the Heart Sutra, if I'm reading it correctly) it seems like just a half-truth.


Malcolm wrote:
It is a half-truth — ordinary beings do not perceive absence of identity in persons and phenomena. This is called the relative. But when persons and things are perceived as they truly exist, no identity of persons and things can be perceived at all. Thus "self" is relative, and "no self" is ultimate. In other words, it is perfectly fine to denote composite things with names; but those names do not correspond to anything intrinsically real within that composite entity.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, October 12th, 2017 at 1:56 AM
Title: Re: Authentic?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Supplicating the three roots, etc., accumulates merit. When one's merit outweighs one's negative karma, it seems that one's obstacles diminish. But try supplicating a buddha to free one from death. I don't think it will work out for you very well.
Suffering is ripened karma, it cannot be removed, it must be experienced.

Losal Samten said:
Do you believe that relative purificatory practices can lessen the experience of a karma that has yet to ripen, or is in the process of ripening? Or are they just another slant of merit accumulation?

Malcolm wrote:
Purification practices removes the conditions for the ripening of the traces of negative karma and improve the conditions for the ripening of traces of conducive karma. Why? Because confession of misdeeds blunts their ripening because the strength of a given misdeed is related to object, intention, the deed, and satisfaction. The expression of regret for negative actions committed in the past counters the strength of intent and satisfaction. If these two are sufficiently weakened, a negative karma may never ripen.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, October 12th, 2017 at 1:46 AM
Title: Re: What does it mean, "All other Buddhas are followers of Shakyamuni Buddha?
Content:


Minobu said:
it completely contradicts the teaching you are laying out. I bolded out and underlined to show you are talking about  plural Buddhas.

Malcolm wrote:
So you think there is a person in a buddha and thus one buddha can be superior to another?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, October 11th, 2017 at 11:09 PM
Title: Re: Authentic?
Content:



Soma999 said:
It's like a spiritual guide : he will not by magic dissolve all your difficulty, but empower you so that you can navigate through them, transform them or dissolve them. And sometime, if he or she is skillful, this guide can even dissolve suffering for you, dissolve obstacles and create many positive circonstances, joy, and opportunities.

Malcolm wrote:
Suffering is ripened karma, it cannot be removed, it must be experienced.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, October 11th, 2017 at 10:38 PM
Title: Re: What does it mean, "All other Buddhas are followers of Shakyamuni Buddha?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
... there is only one dharmakāya, or state of realization, of the buddhas?

pael said:
Do buddhas share it? Is buddha same as dharmakaya?

Malcolm wrote:
All buddhas have the same realization. Hence, there is only one dharmakāya.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, October 11th, 2017 at 10:18 PM
Title: Re: Can buddha nature be proved?
Content:



Malcolm wrote:
That is our nature. Nāgārjuna said:


pael said:
What is nature?  What does it mean?

nichiren-123 said:
Nature means something unchanging within us. I think what malcolm means is that nothing has a nature, which, ipso facto, means that no-nature is the nature of all things.
However, in the nirvana sutra we hear that the buddha nature is an "uncreated, unbegotten, utterly pure, unconditioned, inviolate, indestructible, steadfast and unshakeable, eternal Buddhic Essence (svabhava) of all sentient beings." ( http://www.nirvanasutra.net/basicteachings.htm )
And this is seems directly opposed to the no-nature (i.e. emptiness) doctrine???

Malcolm wrote:
Emptiness is all of these things: uncreated, unbegotten, utterly pure, unconditioned, inviolate, indestructible, steadfast and unshakeable, eternal.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, October 11th, 2017 at 9:39 PM
Title: Re: Authentic?
Content:



Vasana said:
How do you interpret the very literal sounding vows and promises we read of various Buddhas and Bodhisattvas on the Bhumis?

Malcolm wrote:
I think these vows are part of aspirational bodhicitta. For example, Śantideva raises an objection about the perfection of generosity, wondering how the Buddha could have perfected generosity if in the world there is still poverty. The answer is that the Buddha could not remove all the poverty of the world, but he truly wished to, and thus be perfected the perfection of generosity.


Vasana said:
So then the question remains as to why do we bother supplicating the 3 roots to remove obstacles in the first place ?

Malcolm wrote:
Supplicating the three roots, etc., accumulates merit. When one's merit outweighs one's negative karma, it seems that one's obstacles diminish. But try supplicating a buddha to free one from death. I don't think it will work out for you very well.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, October 11th, 2017 at 9:12 PM
Title: Re: What does it mean, "All other Buddhas are followers of Shakyamuni Buddha?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
There is no person in buddhahood. So how could any buddha be a follower of any other buddha?

The Cicada said:
You don't exist, so how could "you" be making a point?

Malcolm wrote:
It is true there is no person in Malcolm. That does not prevent Malcolm from making a point. Buddhas however are unlike malcolm, they have all realized in a definitive sense that there is no person in the aggregates, separate from them, or in one of them alone. While malcolm might erroneously perceive a malcolm in malcolm, while cicada might erroneously percieve a cicada in cicada, buddhas are not subject to such error. So how can one follow another or be subordinate to another in anyway at all, especially since there is only one dharmakāya, or state of realization, of the buddhas?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, October 11th, 2017 at 9:06 PM
Title: Re: deadliest mass shooting in the U.S.
Content:


kirtu said:
Why is the 2nd Amendment deified especially in light of the massive misuse of the right to bear arms?

Malcolm wrote:
NRA.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, October 11th, 2017 at 9:05 PM
Title: Re: Can buddha nature be proved?
Content:


nichiren-123 said:
Now all of these concepts make sense to me except for buddha nature. After all, how can we have an essential nature if we are ultimately empty and impermanent, with no reality as any single thing?

Malcolm wrote:
That is our nature. Nāgārjuna said:
Whatever is the nature of the tathāgata, that is the nature of the world;
as the tathāgata has no nature, so too the world has no nature.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, October 11th, 2017 at 12:43 PM
Title: Re: What does it mean, "All other Buddhas are followers of Shakyamuni Buddha?
Content:


Minobu said:
so how does one live with oneself then..i mean like what is it like to live knowing you and nothing actually exists ...this is a bit extreme for me...where is the middle path...you seem to have none...you have annihilated everything..to the point it is either a blue pill or a red pill...no yellow pill.

Malcolm wrote:
There is no blue pill, actually, and further, there is no need for one.

Minobu said:
so total annihilation of everything leads to Buddhahood...where this state is totally unconcerned with anything due to being nihilistic by nature...not even nature...nothing...everything and nothing is annihilated...so there is total emptiness and nothing is left to be empty..

Malcolm wrote:
There is no person in buddhahood. Either one can accept this or one has a view of self.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, October 11th, 2017 at 11:03 AM
Title: Re: Jim Carey experiences no - self
Content:
TharpaChodron said:
Leonard Cohen, Lou Reed, probably a bunch of others have found that running away to a beach house in Malibu isnt going to solve anything.


dzogchungpa said:
Apparently what worked for Cohen was running away to Bombay. I don't know what worked for Lou though.

Malcolm wrote:
Smack, at least for a while.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, October 11th, 2017 at 11:02 AM
Title: Re: What does it mean, "All other Buddhas are followers of Shakyamuni Buddha?
Content:


Minobu said:
are you speaking from an emptiness point of view...?
all conventionalism is out the window for you?

Malcolm wrote:
There is no conventional persons in either buddhas or sentient beings. Why? Because conventions are themselves empty. For this, the whole identity question is a red pill/blue pill question. If one wants to get sucked into false identities, take the blue pill.

Minobu said:
so how does one live with oneself then..i mean like what is it like to live knowing you and nothing actually exists ...this is a bit extreme for me...where is the middle path...you seem to have none...you have annihilated everything..to the point it is either a blue pill or a red pill...no yellow pill.

Malcolm wrote:
There is no blue pill, actually, and further, there is no need for one.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, October 11th, 2017 at 10:54 AM
Title: Re: What does it mean, "All other Buddhas are followers of Shakyamuni Buddha?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
There is no person in sentient beinghood either.

Minobu said:
are you speaking from an emptiness point of view...?
all conventionalism is out the window for you?

Malcolm wrote:
There is no conventional persons in either buddhas or sentient beings. Why? Because conventions are themselves empty. For this, the whole identity question is a red pill/blue pill question. If one wants to get sucked into false identities, take the blue pill.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, October 11th, 2017 at 10:38 AM
Title: Re: What does it mean, "All other Buddhas are followers of Shakyamuni Buddha?
Content:
Minobu said:
what about you...like if you attain Buddhahood...malcolm disappears? there never was a malcolm anymore..

Malcolm wrote:
There is no person in sentient beinghood either.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, October 11th, 2017 at 10:37 AM
Title: Re: What does it mean, "All other Buddhas are followers of Shakyamuni Buddha?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
There is no person in buddhahood. So how could any buddha be a follower of any other buddha?

Minobu said:
what about the nirmana kaya ..historical Buddhas....different times....different planets....different big bangs ... different infinite kalpas...

what about you...like if you attain Buddhahood...malcolm disappears? there never was a malcolm anymore..

Malcolm wrote:
As I said, there is no person in buddhahood, so these kinds of identity questions are a total waste of time.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, October 11th, 2017 at 10:21 AM
Title: Re: Why Secular Buddhism is Not True
Content:
anjali said:
Hmm. How are you using the word understand here? I think most folks would accept that it is possible to understand what the law of moral causation is, and what Buddha's teachings on it are, but still reject it as a factual claim.

Malcolm wrote:
In fact, karma is more about aesthetics than morals — and this is something that people often do not understand about the Dharma in general.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, October 11th, 2017 at 10:18 AM
Title: Re: What does it mean, "All other Buddhas are followers of Shakyamuni Buddha?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
There is no person in buddhahood. So how could any buddha be a follower of any other buddha?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, October 11th, 2017 at 5:53 AM
Title: Re: About Alara Kalama
Content:


Malcolm wrote:
We do not in fact know that Alara was a Samkhya teacher. The only source that mentions this is the Buddhacarita, written more than half a millenia after he passed away.

Fortyeightvows said:
I think it is generally accepted that he was...even
mircea eliade calls him a teacher of "pre-classic” samkhya.
Also I take asvasagosa as a good source

Malcolm wrote:
There is no confirmation of this in any source that predates the Buddhacarita.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, October 11th, 2017 at 4:56 AM
Title: Re: About Alara Kalama
Content:


smcj said:
Which is a good reason to not dismiss out of hand non-Buddhist traditions.

Malcolm wrote:
We do not in fact know that Alara was a Samkhya teacher. The only source that mentions this is the Buddhacarita, written more than half a millenia after he passed away.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, October 11th, 2017 at 4:22 AM
Title: Re: Why Secular Buddhism is Not True
Content:
anjali said:
I think they understand it just fine.

Malcolm wrote:
If they understood the Dharma, they would just accept rebirth and karma. Their rejection of karma and rebirth is all the proof one needs that they do not understand the Dharma.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, October 11th, 2017 at 12:58 AM
Title: Re: What would Buddha have thought of Mahayana?
Content:
nichiren-123 said:
So I'm trying to understand how the different teachings relate to each other. I started with tientai's 5 periods but quickly realised that it wasn't historically accurate.
Realizing that the Mahayana doctrines aren't the words of the literal Buddha but later innovations, I wonder what the real Buddha, Sakyamuni would have thought about the Mahayana sutras?  Do they hold true to the Buddha's meaning or would he have thought of them as wrong? What do you guys think?

Malcolm wrote:
Of course Mahāyāna is the word of the Buddha.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, October 11th, 2017 at 12:47 AM
Title: Re: Authentic?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
But unless one is a very high bodhisattva one cannot encounter a sambhogakāya manifestation like Tāra, etc., so I really have to express my doubt about the so called visions of this or that buddha which ordinary people claim to have.

Losal Samten said:
They still send out nirmanakayas though, traditionally spoken of as bridges, books etc. Could not they arise in an individual's vision too? Or must nirmanakayas by necessity have to be apparent to multiple people?


Malcolm wrote:
Tāra might emanate nirmanakāyas, for example, but how, without clairvoyance, would you know you have encountered one? Same applies to bridges and other such emanations.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, October 11th, 2017 at 12:28 AM
Title: Re: Authentic?
Content:


Malcolm wrote:
What is a "blessing?"

Vasana said:
Differet people will say different things. Some will say it's essentially inspiration to practice, teachings and empowerment and some will say there are tangible blessings like swift recovery of an otherwise fatal illness, finding wealth, accomplishing certain activities etc

Malcolm wrote:
In other words, it is vague term that does not have a precise meaning. However, we can find a precise meaning. The Ratnāvaliṭīkā states:
A blessing (byin rlabs, adhiṣṭhāna) is any activity of buddhas that benefits either bodhisattvas or by which the latter benefit sentient beings.
Now the Buddha has, as we have seen, ruled out that he can wash away misdeeds, remove suffering with his hand, give someone liberation, and so on. So what remains? Teaching.

Of course, if your teacher comes to visit you in the hospital, gives you ten bucks, gives you an amulet, a mantra, a ride, and so on, all of these can be called "a blessing," albeit, very temporary. Buddha, having passed away centuries ago, cannot actively give you blessings, other than the teachings he has left behind which we may study and thus edify ourselves, and through the lineage of teachers whom he proclaims are to be understood as his emanations.

But unless one is a very high bodhisattva one cannot encounter a sambhogakāya manifestation like Tāra, etc., so I really have to express my doubt about the so called visions of this or that buddha which ordinary people claim to have.


Vasana said:
Ok, 'power beyond our own' wasn't the best way of phrasing. I meant in the sense that if you ask someone to help you lift a heavy item, when you move that item with them, part of it is being moved by a force which is not rooted in your own physical strenght even if your verbal request played a part in them helping. I mentioned the word 'combination' a few sentences before and have spoke on the coemergence of our actions,vows,invocations, merit, karma and their compassionate natures, samaya etc elsewhere in this thread already. The question still remains though;
If upon supplication, the Guardians and Dakinis can remove obstacles which have outstayed their karmic visit, then why would it be wrong to think the Buddhas can also do the same?

Malcolm wrote:
[/quote]

Obstacles that have outstayed their karmic potential dissipate without any help. Those that have karmic potential cannot be dissipated by anything, not even Buddha has the power to remove our karma.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, October 11th, 2017 at 12:00 AM
Title: Re: Authentic?
Content:


Vasana said:
You've seen the countless recorded experiences of how beings have percieved blessings from a Deity like Tara, Chenrezig or Medicine Buddha. Not all of them were direct teachings and some were more akin to 'miraculous' interventions. Some may be fanatsy but I doubt that can be said for all accounts of them.

Malcolm wrote:
What is a "blessing?"


Vasana said:
My point was that in this case, the obstacles are being removed in combination of what we do and what they do. The retinue may ultimately be non-dual but that activity is rooted in a power beyond your own. You supplicate and they respond.

Malcolm wrote:
Power beyond our own? What happened to dependent origination?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 10th, 2017 at 11:40 PM
Title: Re: Authentic?
Content:


Vasana said:
Yeah. I have never disagreed that the karma, merit and interest of beings is a factor involved nor do I think they can remove our Karma for us.

Malcolm wrote:
If they cannot remove our karma, they cannot remove the result of that karma, our suffering.


Vasana said:
If the result of our karma is suffering, the source of it is ignorance. If they can work with our minds, then they are by nature working with the basis of our karma and suffering although it's us who ultimately decide how to apply what we're presented with. I.e - If we have merit, they can appear,teach and provide skillfull means to purify or liberate that karma.

Why would Dakinis and Guardians be described as having the capacity for clearing away obstacles if at least a portion of the obstacles they're able to disperse have no enduring relation to our positive karma & merit etc.

Malcolm wrote:
And how would they work with our minds, if not through granting us teachings which we request?

Will Guardians remove obstacles if we do not supplicate them? Why should we have to beg them?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 10th, 2017 at 11:36 PM
Title: Re: Jim Carey experiences no - self
Content:
Johnny Dangerous said:
https://www.avclub.com/jim-carrey-explains-weird-metaphysical-fashion-week-in-1817066418

This got brought up at a teaching I went to, I hadn't heard about it because I don't read stuff like this.

Yeah, he says some funny stuff about tetrahedrons and other new age sounding stuff, but it seems that through acting, Jim Carey had an initial experience of Anatta. Amusingly, to most commentators, he appears to be "crazy", and almost every article I read just dismisses him as such.

For myself at least, it was just such an experience that solidified my interest in Dharma, mine came from working at weddings all the time, one day I just couldn't get over the "this is not real", "this is like a play" feeling when I was watching people dance, hobnob, put on airs, etc.

Anyway, despite being kind of disjointed, I felt like his words actually had some wisdom, and he says some things that are -exactly- what these people need to hear.. and the reaction to them says a lot about our society. Their reaction to his words really makes clear the vapidity of celebrity culture.

Later on someone asks him about the interview and he says:
‘Who’s Jim Carrey? Oh, he doesn’t exist actually.’ There’s just a relative manifestation of consciousness appearing, and someone gave him a name, a religion, a nationality, and he clustered those together into something that’s supposed to be a personality, and it doesn’t actually exist. None of that stuff, if you drill down, is real.”


Malcolm wrote:
Field of energy dancing for itself....hahahaha.

reminds me of that dumb billy idol (also famous circulating STDs) song:


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 10th, 2017 at 11:31 PM
Title: Re: Why Secular Buddhism is Not True
Content:
Vasana said:
There are some people who will say "I'm not religious, I'm spiritual!'. Saying, 'I'm not religious or spiritual, I follow the Buddha's Dharma!", might mean something clear for you, but it won't mean anything significant for those in the world who lump it all together.

Malcolm wrote:
Then they need further education.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 10th, 2017 at 11:19 PM
Title: Re: Authentic?
Content:


Vasana said:
Yeah. I have never disagreed that the karma, merit and interest of beings is a factor involved nor do I think they can remove our Karma for us.

Malcolm wrote:
If they cannot remove our karma, they cannot remove the result of that karma, our suffering.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 10th, 2017 at 11:04 PM
Title: Re: Why Secular Buddhism is Not True
Content:
Jeff H said:
I have used religion and spirituality for myself in what I consider useful, but non-academic, senses. Spirituality is the drive to plumb the depths of the experience of life, and religion is a structure intended to facilitate that drive. Unfortunately, religion can at times restrict that drive because it is too much a human creation of the superficial aspects of life. But seeking clarity in life without guidance is all but futile.

As a Christian I distinguished between being “christian” (one who acts like Christ) and being “a Christian” (one who belongs to a church). As a Buddhist my spirituality is seeking liberation, but my religion is the specific teachings and practices I used to enable that effort.

Malcolm wrote:
I just say I practice Dharma. Whose Dharma? Buddha's Dharma. I don't consider myself to be either a particularly religious or spiritual person.

In fact the last Bother Wayne Teasdale warned a friend of mine that I was not a spiritual person (we met at a teaching). He was quite right.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 10th, 2017 at 10:55 PM
Title: Re: Authentic?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Bodhisattvas like Tāra, etc., have continuums. But they really cannot do anything to help sentient beings. If they could, they would act without bias for all sentient beings, without respect to their beliefs or merit, and we would not be living in such trying conditions.

All they can do is teach. That is all Buddhas and bodhisattvas can really do to help sentient beings. It is well known that when one does wealth practice for example, one is using up ones own merit of wealth in the process unless one very carefully dedicates one's practice to make the merit of practice inexhaustible.

Vasana said:
So if they have continuums, they are spontaneously active for the benefit of beings. I doubt the continuum of the Bodhisattva Tara is inactive. If even Bodhisattvas on the first bhumi can emanate 100 emanations, then they're already 'doing' a lot to help sentient beings even without grasping at self-natures, persons,lifepsan, self etc.

Malcolm wrote:
Actually, they emanate 100 emanations to go visit buddhas to receive teachings.



Vasana said:
As for beliefs and merit, this is why I said that I personally think that Thugs rje and the blessings of Buddhas is a two way street. Our capacity for liberation, compassionate aspirations, merit,karma , invocations, vows and samayas along with their compassionate nature, previous vows and samayas all serve as necessary co-emergent factors for the ongoing appearance of dreamlike beneficial deeds. So long as beings have merit and interest, they appear.

Malcolm wrote:
So you are basically admitting the compassion of buddhas is obstructed by the lack of merit of hell beings, for example.


I am afraid I find your view very theistic, it seems to me you think of Tāra the same way Catholics think of saints.
Like I said, I can relate to Tara in more ways than one without it really being a problem for me or my practice just as the outer and inner tantras have more or less refined takes on deities and jnanasattvas without there being contradiction in the 9 yanas.
There are lots of contradictions in the nine yānas.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 10th, 2017 at 10:17 PM
Title: Re: Authentic?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
But they really cannot do anything to help sentient beings. If they could, they would act without bias for all sentient beings, without respect to their beliefs or merit, and we would not be living in such trying conditions.

All they can do is teach. That is all Buddhas and bodhisattvas can really do to help sentient beings. It is well known that when one does wealth practice for example, one is using up ones own merit of wealth in the process unless one very carefully dedicates one's practice to make the merit of practice inexhaustible.

I am afraid I find your view very theistic, it seems to me you think of Tāra the same way Catholics think of saints.

Losal Samten said:
Minds can influence other minds, as in the case of the lady who thought herself a tiger and terrified a village. If the villagers didn't have the karma to be afraid of a tiger or the traces to give rise to the impression of that tiger, they would have a different reaction.

Similarly, a buddha proffers help unconditionally, however it is dependent on an individual's karma etc. to be receptive to it.

Malcolm wrote:
You missed the point of that example. Shabkar, for example, uses it to point out that strong traces in other people's minds can generate perceptions in our own minds.

As to your second statement, this merely proves my point. Buddhas are powerless to help sentient beings in any kind of material way. What Buddhas can do is teach the Dharma. That is all they need to do.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 10th, 2017 at 10:05 PM
Title: Re: Authentic?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
The Buddha has said very clearly, one cannot wash away misdeeds, he cannot remove suffering with his hand, he cannot give one liberation, but he can teach.

So then, what is the use of praying to Buddhas and bodhisattvas, apart from accumulating merit?

Vasana said:
Merit, purification, blessings, inspiration, direct teachings apt for the individual,  assistance with magnetizing or dispersing secondary circumstances, clearing away obstacles, health, wealth, safety, longevity etc I'm sure you would get many different answers to that question based on who you ask. Don't many of the Mahayana sutras and teachings themselves explain the  benefits of recalling the Buddhas, their names etc?

Malcolm wrote:
Further, if Tāra represents the state of Dzogchen, whose state is that?

If, in a thogal vision, some master reveals a treasure, from where is that treasure revealed?

Vasana said:
Innermost Tara/Guru as your own state doesn't invalidate any timely intervention any 'outer' Tara may offer, even if her form and actions are llusory appearances governed by non dual wisdom. Until you're unwavering in your own state of Dzogchen/Tara, the outer Tara will still be there. Didn't you also once say that deities like Tara, Manjushri still possess their own mindstreams?  How does that tie in to it?

I'm sure you've also read the stories of how a given Deity has manifested very tangible benefit, assistance in people's lives etc.

Maybe my opinions and understanding on all of this may change in time but I personally find more benefit and it rings truer for me personally to relate to Deities like Tara in multiple ways without there needing to be conflict between them.

Malcolm wrote:
Bodhisattvas like Tāra, etc., have continuums. But they really cannot do anything to help sentient beings. If they could, they would act without bias for all sentient beings, without respect to their beliefs or merit, and we would not be living in such trying conditions.

All they can do is teach. That is all Buddhas and bodhisattvas can really do to help sentient beings. It is well known that when one does wealth practice for example, one is using up ones own merit of wealth in the process unless one very carefully dedicates one's practice to make the merit of practice inexhaustible.

I am afraid I find your view very theistic, it seems to me you think of Tāra the same way Catholics think of saints.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 10th, 2017 at 9:34 PM
Title: Re: Authentic?
Content:
Vasana said:
When great masters converse with Dakinis or Guardians etc,  I don't buy that they are having a conversation purely with themselves, with their own clarity and that these appearances are mere 'philosophical zombies'.

Malcolm wrote:
You should read the section on the uncommon nidāna in Buddhahood.

Vasana said:
I can't claim to have perfect understanding of that section but I also don't think that the teacher/retinue non-duality part 'explains away' the 10 powers as taught in common Mahayana and the 8 doors in Dzogchen. (notably thugs rje).

At this point, what I don't know and can't talk about eclipses whatever I do know and can talk about and these topics aren't something I've had much success in understanding their deeper extended contexts since even the commentaries need commentaries for some topics. The quotes I've read on thugs rje from you and elsewhere via the Dra Thalgyur still speak on the connection between beings and the kayas unceasing deeds and emanations etc.  I still don't think they're zombies but i get that their deeds are spontaneous and uncontrived.


Malcolm wrote:
The Buddha has said very clearly, one cannot wash away misdeeds, he cannot remove suffering with his hand, he cannot give one liberation, but he can teach.

So then, what is the use of praying to Buddhas and bodhisattvas, apart from accumulating merit?

Further, if Tāra represents the state of Dzogchen, whose state is that?

If, in a thogal vision, some master reveals a treasure, from where is that treasure revealed?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 10th, 2017 at 8:51 PM
Title: Re: Authentic?
Content:
Vasana said:
When great masters converse with Dakinis or Guardians etc,  I don't buy that they are having a conversation purely with themselves, with their own clarity and that these appearances are mere 'philosophical zombies'.

Malcolm wrote:
You should read the section on the uncommon nidāna in Buddhahood.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 10th, 2017 at 8:29 PM
Title: Re: deadliest mass shooting in the U.S.
Content:
kirtu said:
One of the most obvious solutions to eliminating mass shootings are to confiscate all guns and outlaw the sale of weapons.  The justification for this is that no one, or almost no one,  hunts for survival anymore.  And in the current situation the "well-regulated milita" (the National Guard) has their own weapons.

Kirt

Malcolm wrote:
The 2nd amendment is just an amendment, it can be repealed, but good luck with that.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 10th, 2017 at 8:10 PM
Title: Re: Why Secular Buddhism is Not True
Content:


anjali said:
I wasn't thinking of obligation in its root sense of a formal promise. I was thinking of "obligation" in terms of synonyms such as commitment, requirement, or necessity.  In Buddhism, there are many requirements on the path of practice.

Malcolm wrote:
There is only one real obligation if one wishes to be free of samsara — discover one's real state and live in that knowledge.

anjali said:
Indeed. Reverence is a deep respect for someone or something. I've never experienced fear in association with reverence for any of my teachers or their teachings. And time and again, my teachers and the Dharma they embody have shown themselves by their conduct and qualities to be worthy of my deepest respect and gratitude. I just don't see how fear enters into the picture.

Malcolm wrote:
The word reverence has come to mean admiration or deep respect, but it is rooted in a word which means fear.

anjali said:
Karma and rebirth being one. For another example, I doubt a secular Buddhist would commit to developing proficiency in the practice of transfer of consciousness at the time of death. And so on...

Malcolm wrote:
This is because they do not understand the Dharma. It has nothing to with religion or spirituality. One reason why I don't want to lump Dharma in with religion or spirituality is that Voodoo, for example, is a religion and spirituality, one that involves killing animals. For that matter, so is Islam, some forms of Hinduism, etc. These people also have faith, devotion, etc., but it is perverted.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 10th, 2017 at 8:04 PM
Title: Re: Authentic?
Content:



Vasana said:
I get that they're also ultimately only ever arising as appearances in one's experience [ rang-snang] mistaken for being soley external [gzhan snang], but like you said, until there is no delusion, those illusions are still present. They can still be instrumental expressions of compassion /vidya even while being perfectly empty. Otherwise, what connection can we say there is between Buddhas and beings if not the outer and innermost meanings of compassion?

No beings, no Buddhas so ultimately no activity and liberating instruction? That only works on the ultimate side.

Malcolm wrote:
You hung up on the two truths. There are is no "two truths" in Dzogchen.

Mantrik said:
Does that relate to Tsongkhapa's Eight Difficult Points, as an aswer?    Things are not real but they still exist, purely in MInd?  I always considered whatever MInd believes to be real, is real.


Malcolm wrote:
Everything is absolutely equivalent to an illusion.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 10th, 2017 at 8:03 PM
Title: Re: Authentic?
Content:



Vasana said:
I get that they're also ultimately only ever arising as appearances in one's experience [ rang-snang] mistaken for being soley external [gzhan snang], but like you said, until there is no delusion, those illusions are still present. They can still be instrumental expressions of compassion /vidya even while being perfectly empty. Otherwise, what connection can we say there is between Buddhas and beings if not the outer and innermost meanings of compassion?

No beings, no Buddhas so ultimately no activity and liberating instruction? That only works on the ultimate side.

Malcolm wrote:
You hung up on the two truths. There are is no "two truths" in Dzogchen.

Vasana said:
Yet there are still nominal designations used to communicate. Even you speak of escence, nature and compassion and the rupakayas ensuring benefit for beings for as long as samsara endures ( beyond these dharmas ever being established).

There's no two truths but there are still conventional expressions used to explain the open dynamic and resonance between those that who abide in a liberated modality and those whose wisdom is obscured.


Malcolm wrote:
Right, and according to conventional expression, 1) the awakening of the buddha does not exist 2) the illusory appearances of buddhas are false appearances for deluded sentient beings

Somehow you are committed to the idea of conventionally valid, external rūpakāyas hanging around to benefit beings. My point is that you are reifying buddhas and sentient beings as existents, rather that seeing them for what they are, illusions. Once one understands everything is absolutely equivalent to an illusion, one's anxiety about such matters begins to diminish.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 10th, 2017 at 10:05 AM
Title: Re: Why Secular Buddhism is Not True
Content:
smcj said:
In Dharma there are actual blessings, faith and devotion are well founded, etc.

Malcolm wrote:
You sound like a Christian. There are no external blessings, and faith and devotion to external things is the opposite of what it means to be a nang pa, an insider. Liberation is based on one's own realization, not on any external blessings,


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 10th, 2017 at 6:19 AM
Title: Re: Why Secular Buddhism is Not True
Content:
smcj said:
There is no formal promise, no contract, etc.
Uh, "samaya"?

Malcolm wrote:
Samaya is not a contract, though it can be interpreted as such and often is.

Some people think when they receive an empowerment that they are making a commitment in the sense of making a promise to another person. But that is a very catechistic and naive concept of samaya.

The real samaya of a practitioner is to discover their own state, and that is neither a religious nor a spiritual endeavor. It is however what one does if one is a Dharma practitioner. We really need to drop these western religious terms in our reception of Buddhadharma. This is why I seldom use such terms in my own translations.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 10th, 2017 at 5:40 AM
Title: Re: Why Secular Buddhism is Not True
Content:


anjali said:
It's worth nothing that "religious" comes from the Latin religiosus, from religio ‘reverence, obligation’.

Malcolm wrote:
Religare, the probable origin of the term religion, means "to bind," which is the opposite of what Dharma intends, which is to free.

anjali said:
Perhaps. There are http://www.etymonline.com/word/religion for religion. Even if we go with "to bind", I take it in the sense of "place an obligation on". If we wish be free, are we not obliged to practice the Buddhadharma?

Malcolm wrote:
The necessity of entering the Dharma in order to become free of afflictions, etc.,  is not an obligation in this sense. There is no formal promise, no contract, etc.


anjali said:
"To consecrate" something means to make or declare something sacred. We decide what is sacred by declaring it so in our hearts. From a practical point of view, what it means for me is that something is deserving of my reverence, and I feel and know it at a deep level. Of all paths, do we not declare the Buddhadharma to be deserving of utmost reverence, and, in a sense, sacred above all other paths--at least for us?

Malcolm wrote:
Not really into fear-based words either. Dharma is something to celebrate, not to be afraid of.

In any case, I personally do not relate to the words "religion" or "spirituality" — I am neither religious nor am I "spiritual." And I am definitely more irreverent than reverent.

Dharma simply means in this context, setting things straight. If one wants to be free of suffering, etc., one must get set straight on a few things.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 10th, 2017 at 4:29 AM
Title: Re: Why Secular Buddhism is Not True
Content:


anjali said:
It's worth nothing that "religious" comes from the Latin religiosus, from religio ‘reverence, obligation’.

Malcolm wrote:
Religare, the probable origin of the term religion, means "to bind," which is the opposite of what Dharma intends, which is to free.


anjali said:
The definition of "sacred" which I like is that which is deserving of reverence.

Malcolm wrote:
Really means something consecrated.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 10th, 2017 at 4:26 AM
Title: Re: Why Secular Buddhism is Not True
Content:
smcj said:
Maybe we should agree on definitions for “spiritual” and “religious”.

Malcolm wrote:
Dharma is beyond such things.

smcj said:
Depending on how those terms are defined, plus how “Dharma” is defined, I could either agree or disagree with that statement. Hence the need to clarify what we collectively understand those terms to mean within the context of this thread.

Malcolm wrote:
The two terms, "religion" and "spirituality," really do not have correlative terms in either Tibetan or Sanskrit. In Tibetan, the term chos is the imperative form another term, 'cos, which in one of its meanings, means "to correct." It can also mean a tradition ( lugs srol, defined as the continuation of a past custom).

The term "Dharma" in Sanskrit is well defined, but there is nothing in the ten definitions of dharma that corresponds to either terms "religion" or "spirituality."


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 10th, 2017 at 4:17 AM
Title: Re: deadliest mass shooting in the U.S.
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
There there was the Pop Group. I once hung out of Mark Stewart when I was living in Boston. Odd dude.


dzogchungpa said:
If you were hanging out of him, he must have been a very odd dude indeed...


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 10th, 2017 at 2:37 AM
Title: Re: Authentic?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Yes, in fact they are.

Vasana said:
I get that they're also ultimately only ever arising as appearances in one's experience [ rang-snang] mistaken for being soley external [gzhan snang], but like you said, until there is no delusion, those illusions are still present. They can still be instrumental expressions of compassion /vidya even while being perfectly empty. Otherwise, what connection can we say there is between Buddhas and beings if not the outer and innermost meanings of compassion?

No beings, no Buddhas so ultimately no activity and liberating instruction? That only works on the ultimate side.

Malcolm wrote:
You hung up on the two truths. There are is no "two truths" in Dzogchen.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 10th, 2017 at 2:35 AM
Title: Re: Why Secular Buddhism is Not True
Content:
smcj said:
Maybe we should agree on definitions for “spiritual” and “religious”.

Malcolm wrote:
Dharma is beyond such things.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 10th, 2017 at 2:34 AM
Title: Re: deadliest mass shooting in the U.S.
Content:
treehuggingoctopus said:
I happen to value Heidegger's thought a lot, flawed as it is (whose isn't?)

Malcolm wrote:
Nāgārjuna, etc.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 10th, 2017 at 2:33 AM
Title: Re: deadliest mass shooting in the U.S.
Content:



Malcolm wrote:
I don't know, I kind of favor Crass for politics, like this gem released in 1978:

https://crass.bandcamp.com/track/do-they-owe-us-a-living-6

TharpaChodron said:
bit too hard core for my delicate ears, but I hear their fold out album sleeves opened up into cool posters.

Malcolm wrote:
Oh sure, they are pretty dissonant. But they were fun.

There there was the Pop Group. I once hung out of Mark Stewart when I was living in Boston. Odd dude.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 10th, 2017 at 1:14 AM
Title: Re: Authentic?
Content:
Vasana said:
...but the point I've been trying to make was in response to Grigoris who said there was no external Sangye Menla and that any appearance of help or assistance from Deities/Buddhas/Dakinis/Guardians with associated mindstreams are purely sourced from the side of the practitioner, disconnected from the nominally designated continuum's and 10 powers of a Buddha , previous vows and the naturally arising rupakayas that ensure benefit for dream-like beings.

Malcolm wrote:
As long as we are deluded, there are external buddhas and so on. But they are false appearances. In removing delusion, one also removes external buddhas.

Vasana said:
Yeah I can accept that. But they are not just false in the same way a rope percieved as a snake is false.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, in fact they are.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 10th, 2017 at 12:56 AM
Title: Re: Authentic?
Content:
Vasana said:
...but the point I've been trying to make was in response to Grigoris who said there was no external Sangye Menla and that any appearance of help or assistance from Deities/Buddhas/Dakinis/Guardians with associated mindstreams are purely sourced from the side of the practitioner, disconnected from the nominally designated continuum's and 10 powers of a Buddha , previous vows and the naturally arising rupakayas that ensure benefit for dream-like beings.

Malcolm wrote:
As long as we are deluded, there are external buddhas and so on. But they are false appearances. In removing delusion, one also removes external buddhas.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 10th, 2017 at 12:42 AM
Title: Re: deadliest mass shooting in the U.S.
Content:
TharpaChodron said:
The Clash did it well.

Malcolm wrote:
I don't know, I kind of favor Crass for politics, like this gem released in 1978:

https://crass.bandcamp.com/track/do-they-owe-us-a-living-6


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, October 9th, 2017 at 11:59 PM
Title: Re: Soul fragmentation and defragmentation as Buddism teaching?
Content:
Matt J said:
I wonder how the multiple tulku phenomenon fits into the discussion.

Malcolm wrote:
There is no canonical basis for the idea of reincarnations of body, speech, mind, etc.

That said, there is canonical basis for bodhisattvas having exponentially more emanations from the first bhumi one ward which increase by powers of ten, thus a tenth stage bodhisattva can have 100,000,000,000,000,000,000, i.e. one hundred septillion emanations.

And every Buddha has an emanation in every world in a given billion-world universe (1000 to the third power).


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, October 9th, 2017 at 11:28 PM
Title: Re: Why Secular Buddhism is Not True
Content:
tiagolps said:
I can see that people have had the exact same discussion with boda in 2014, why repeat? Boredom?

Malcolm wrote:
For the same reason we keep taking rebirth —— afflictions.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, October 9th, 2017 at 11:17 PM
Title: Re: Authentic?
Content:
Vasana said:
I'm aware of Milarepas teachings. I still don't follow your reasoning for mentioning your preference for Milarepa in relation to the dialogue between Grigoris, Malcolm and myself...unless you came to that conclusion independently in this thread but replied to my post for some reason.

You can follow and attend teachings from more than one school you know.

Tenma said:
I thought you had to follow only your school!  Huh, looks like the Gelugs were wrong on the entire "destruction of other sects" thing and rivalry with the Nyingma and so on.


Malcolm wrote:
Strong adherence to historical schools in Tibet is anachronistic.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, October 9th, 2017 at 11:14 PM
Title: Re: deadliest mass shooting in the U.S.
Content:
Dan74 said:
Do you even boycott any little shop that supports Trump?

Malcolm wrote:
I do.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, October 9th, 2017 at 10:41 PM
Title: Re: Authentic?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
That is not what the passage means. Mipham clarifies:
Since the awakening of the sugata does not exist, his magical apparition, while a false appearance, appears to the deluded, similar to an illusion.

Vasana said:
I'm not seeing where what I said was in opposition to that?
The point me and Greg were converging on was whether  blessings, for lack of a more precise word, arise purely from the side of the enlightened nature of the individual or a combination of the compassionate nature and vows of certain Buddhas and Bodhisattvas and the practice, merit and karma of the being. Outer Tara, outer medicine Buddha , inner Tara/ medicine Buddha etc.

Does a Buddha still possess a mind stream? If so they are not passive and inactive but their illusory false appearances still bring benefit to beings.

Malcolm wrote:
"Since the awakening of the sugata does not exist," think about that.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, October 9th, 2017 at 10:22 PM
Title: Re: Authentic?
Content:


Malcolm wrote:
Mañjuśrīmitra wrote:
Since the awakening of the sugata does not exist, his magical apparitions appear to the deluded, similar to an illusion.
And:
Therefore, because awakening and nonawakening are the same in terms of absence of characteristics, there is nothing to accept or reject.
In accordance with that meaning, all those explanations
of the nominal ultimate, the absence of arising and ceasing, sameness,
nonduality, beyond thought, emptiness, the dharmadhātu,
freedom from expression and convention, and so on are neither ultimate nor relative.
If it is said, “This is the path in accordance with the ultimate,” that is relative.

Vasana said:
my point was that these illusion-like emanations spring forth from a liberated continuum that is free of grasping at signs and characteristics.

Malcolm wrote:
That is not what the passage means. Mipham clarifies:
Since the awakening of the sugata does not exist, his magical apparition, while a false appearance, appears to the deluded, similar to an illusion.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, October 9th, 2017 at 12:00 PM
Title: Re: Why Secular Buddhism is Not True
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Who gives a shit about religion or spirituality? We are supposed to be talking about Dharma which has nothing to do with either.

boda said:
Who gives a shit about talking about Dharma? We are supposed to be practicing the Dharma.


Malcolm wrote:
Discussing the Dharma is practicing the Dharma.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, October 9th, 2017 at 10:45 AM
Title: Re: deadliest mass shooting in the U.S.
Content:
treehuggingoctopus said:
I have never understood the cult status of Death in June. I mean, all controversies aside, they always sounded so mediocre...


Malcolm wrote:
They were in some respect copying stylistic trends from Psychick TV, though PTV was never fascist in nature. When PTV started the faux '60's folk thing, many people in the Industrial Music scene followed.

Death in June, Boyd Rice, and others, however, apparently did not get the message that Fascism, while worthy of exploration from which to mine themes, was not to be glorified nor taken seriously on its own merits.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, October 9th, 2017 at 10:30 AM
Title: Re: Authentic?
Content:



Tenma said:
...Tilopa who was a prostitute

Malcolm wrote:
??? What ever gave you this idea?


Tenma said:
and Virupa who ended up having excrement germs on him from a mala...

Malcolm wrote:
Excuse me?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, October 9th, 2017 at 10:28 AM
Title: Re: Why Secular Buddhism is Not True
Content:
Wayfarer said:
There was something I was taught when I studied Comparative Religion concerning the definition of the word 'religion'.

The first derivation is from the Latin word 'religio' meaning 'attitude of awe towards the Gods'.

The second derivation is from 'religare', which is rather less straightforward. The 'ligare' in that word is the same root as 'ligament', so 'religare' means 're-joining' or 'binding'.

boda said:
I think this binding is a defining characteristic. Bound in values, purpose, and ultimately meaning. This can be an incredibly powerful and good thing, or it can be an incredibly bad thing. Minus spirituality, it could be an ideology, political movement, or any sort of brand. That's basically how I see it anyway.


Malcolm wrote:
Who gives a shit about religion or spirituality? We are supposed to be talking about Dharma which has nothing to do with either.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, October 9th, 2017 at 4:26 AM
Title: Re: Why Secular Buddhism is Not True
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Yes. Those who reject rebirth usually reject it on the basis of sutrayāna Buddhists not being able to provide a clear medium of transference between this life and the next, and disagreements over what the Buddha meant with the term ghandharva.

jorden said:
And sutrayana is here used to differentiate from vajrayana? Does the vajrayana in a way by-step the whole question?



Malcolm wrote:
No, it provides a physical basis for the mind in the bardo, the mahāprāṇavāyu.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, October 9th, 2017 at 4:06 AM
Title: Re: Authentic?
Content:
Vasana said:
Greg, If you can believe that sentient beings have distinct mindstreams and distinct karmas then can you believe that Buddha's, Bodhisattvas etc have their own mental continuums distinct from our own? The mental continuums of beings are alike in escence and nature but when you encounter somebody else in the street, that person possesses their own continuum seperate from yours even if for you, that other person is an appearance wihin your mind. How is what you seem to be suggesting not a kind of mind-only take or solipsism?

If you say that the continuums of Buddhas and beings are not distinct, then why are beings not already Buddhas in anything other than unripened seed or potential? If you agree that they are distinguishable in terms of the prescence or absence of grasping at signs, then why would it be wrong to suggest that buddhas and emanations manifest in dependence with the needs of beings without having ever left the natural state of wisdom free of grasping?  How could we account for the various manifestations of the sambogakaya if there were not some discriminating faculty Buddha's possess in knowing which forms are best suited to guide or subdue particular beings?

Maybe this is all getting lost in translation and is really down to the trouble of balancing conventions with the ultimate?

Malcolm wrote:
Mañjuśrīmitra wrote:
Since the awakening of the sugata does not exist, his magical apparitions appear to the deluded, similar to an illusion.
And:
Therefore, because awakening and nonawakening are the same in terms of absence of characteristics, there is nothing to accept or reject.
In accordance with that meaning, all those explanations
of the nominal ultimate, the absence of arising and ceasing, sameness,
nonduality, beyond thought, emptiness, the dharmadhātu,
freedom from expression and convention, and so on are neither ultimate nor relative.
If it is said, “This is the path in accordance with the ultimate,” that is relative.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, October 9th, 2017 at 3:57 AM
Title: Re: Why Secular Buddhism is Not True
Content:
jorden said:
In the same debate Sujato offers a computer analogy (software/hardware) for rebirth:

https://youtu.be/NGhoKbzBbEg?t=2890


Malcolm wrote:
Abhidharmic accounts of rebirth are generally lack coherency. The software/hardware analogy is one such incoherent attempt to explain rebirth completely steeped in cartesian dualism.

jorden said:
What do you mean with 'abhidharmic accounts' in this context?

Malcolm wrote:
Only Abidharma tries to account for rebirth, at the sūtra level.

jorden said:
The fragment ends with Sujato and Batchelor agreeing the precise mechanism of rebirth is not explained very extensively in the sutras. Is this the reason the different abhidharmic solutions are lacking coherency, i.e. the lack of detailed mention in the sutras of the mechanism of rebirth?

Malcolm wrote:
Yes. Those who reject rebirth usually reject it on the basis of sutrayāna Buddhists not being able to provide a clear medium of transference between this life and the next, and disagreements over what the Buddha meant with the term ghandharva.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, October 9th, 2017 at 3:36 AM
Title: Re: Why Secular Buddhism is Not True
Content:
jorden said:
In the same debate Sujato offers a computer analogy (software/hardware) for rebirth:

https://youtu.be/NGhoKbzBbEg?t=2890


Malcolm wrote:
Abhidharmic accounts of rebirth are generally lack coherency. The software/hardware analogy is one such incoherent attempt to explain rebirth completely steeped in cartesian dualism.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, October 9th, 2017 at 3:12 AM
Title: Re: deadliest mass shooting in the U.S.
Content:


treehuggingoctopus said:
Not a bore, contrary to what Malcolm believes, but a brilliant mind

Malcolm wrote:
Being brilliant does not preclude being boring. For example, Herbert Guenther.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, October 9th, 2017 at 12:57 AM
Title: Re: Confrontation with Heidegger
Content:
emaho said:
I couldn't find the english translation of this passage online (and neither the German original, btw.) but since we're discussing a German philosopher here,  a German quote by one of his critics is hopefully not out of place:
Daß Heidegger am Wahrheitsbegriff, wenngleich in der angedeuteten schillernden Weise, immerhin festgehalten hat, kann als Indiz dafür gewertet werden, daß, wie ich vorhin behauptet habe, sogar Heideggers entrationalisierte Konzeption noch unbemerkt vom Vernunftbezug lebt. Wohin aber diese entrationalisierte Konzeption von Wahl und der entrationalisierte Wahrheitsbegriff führen kann, läßt sich an einer Rede sehen, die Heidegger im November 1933 zur Unterstützung von Hitler vor dem Volksreferendum zum Austritt aus dem Völkerbund gehalten hat. Sie beginnt so: "Das deutsche Volk ist vom Führer zur Wahl gerufen; der Führer aber erbittet nichts vom Volke, er gibt vielmehr dem Volke die unmittelbare Möglichkeit der höchsten freien Entscheidung, ob das ganze Volk sein Dasein will, oder ob es dieses nicht will. Das Volk wählt morgen nichts Geringeres als seine Zukunft." Und dann heißt es: "Was ist das also für ein Geschehen? Das Volk gewinnt die Wahrheit seines Daseinswillens zurück, denn Wahrheit ist die Offenbarkeit dessen, was ein Volk in seinem Handeln und Wissen sicher, hell und stark macht." [3]  Diese Zitate zeigen, daß Heideggers Nazismus keine zufällige Angelegenheit war, sondern daß ein direkter Weg von seiner Philosophie - von seinem entrationalisierten Wahrheitsbegriff und dem von diesem bestimmten Begriff der Selbstbestimmung - zum Nazismus führte. Und doch würden wir auf philosophische Einsichten verzichten, wenn wir deswegen nicht von Heidegger lernen wollten, was wir von ihm lernen können. Es kommt darauf an, die genaue Stelle zu sehen, die zum Irrationalismus führte und nicht das Kind mit dem Bade auszuschütten."
Ernst Tugendhat, Selbstbewußtsein und Selbstbestimmung, Seite 243 (Last paragraph of lecture no 10)

(Maybe somebody has the english edition, Self-consciousness and self-determination?)


Malcolm wrote:
I like Negative Dialectics by Adorno who proves that Heidegger's thought is through going philosophical fascism:
"Existential thinking crawls into a the cave of a long-past mimesis. In the process it is nevertheless accommodating the most fatal prejudice from the philosophical history which it has laid off like a superfluous employee: the Platonic prejudice that the imperishable must the good, which is to say no more than that in permanent warfare the stronger is always the right...Of the eternal idea in which the entity was to share, or by which it was to be conditioned, nothing remains but the naked affirmation of of what is anyway— the affirmation of power."


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, October 9th, 2017 at 12:02 AM
Title: Re: deadliest mass shooting in the U.S.
Content:
Dan74 said:
That's all cool and I don't excuse Wagner's anti-Semitism, Heidegger's Nazism and Adams' defense of Trump. But that doesn't stop me from giving them credit where credit is due. That's back to the issue of man as a monolith. 'Coz it's not.

emaho said:
I generally agree with you, if a philosophical work or a piece of art has no inherent connection with its authors views or his actions, if you can really isolate somebody's work from his personality, then there's no reason to throw the baby out with the bath water. One infamous example could also be Jean-Jacques Rousseau, who gave his own children to an orphanage and wrote books about love, compassion and education. But on a sidenote, in the case of Heidegger it is highly controversial among philosophers if his philosophical theory can or cannot be seen in isolation from his Nazism. (And that's about all I can say on that topic because I could never really digest Heidegger work because I'm appaled by the way he operates with language, sorry @treehuggingoctopus...)

treehuggingoctopus said:
Having spent quite a few years reading Heidegger, heideggerians, anti-heideggerians and post-heideggerians, I have arrived at the conclusion that poor Martin is no different from Jean-Jacques in this respect. But it is entirely and as the thread addresses pressing issues, perhaps we could all go


Malcolm wrote:
Heidegger was a colossal bore and his Greek, pitiful.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, October 9th, 2017 at 12:00 AM
Title: Re: deadliest mass shooting in the U.S.
Content:
Dan74 said:
We were talking about individuals with questionable beliefs, now you counter by talking about individuas who committed horrific actions. This is called Category Error , one of logical fallacies, I believe.

Grigoris said:
The Chicago School economic theorists didn't commit horrific actions.

Ayn Rand didn't commit any atrocities.

The members of the white power skinhead band Skrewdriver didn't kill anybody either.

All of them, in one way or another, contributed to the development of Western culture and society.  Credit where credit is due.

kirtu said:
No, two of them contributed to the American POV.  Their ideas are marginalized outside of the United States to varying degrees.  And we can test the degree of penetration of their ideas in other societies.  I doubt if the penetrated much outside of the English speaking world.  Ayn Rand and the Chicago School's views are mostly rejected worldwide.

BTW, is Skrewdriver an influential group?  I've never heard of the, myself.

Malcolm wrote:
They were a English punk band who had a single on Chiswick Records in 1977, I' Don't Like You, where the b-side had a cover of the Stones' 19th Nervous Breakdown off of the record, All Skewed Up.

At this point there were no white supremacy themes in their music.

They later become very involved in the international white supremacy movement. This became evident when they released their second album in 1984, Hail the New Dawn.


Interestingly, Death in June's founder, David P, was in another Chiswick band called Crisis — a hard left punk band. He then became a fellow traveler on the right.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, October 8th, 2017 at 11:41 PM
Title: Re: are all troma nagmo sadhana's chod sadhanas?
Content:
dzogchungpa said:
Well, http://www.tibetantreasures.com/Empowerment_Required-Concise_T_hroma.html isn't.

Grigoris said:
How can you tell?  I can't see shit!

The concise Throma sadhana from the Dudjom Lingpa tradition is a chod.

Malcolm wrote:
No, it the ye shes snying po, which is a creation stage practice. No chod. The four feasts of chod are a completely separate text.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, October 8th, 2017 at 10:43 PM
Title: Re: Confrontation with Heidegger
Content:



Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, October 8th, 2017 at 10:41 PM
Title: Re: deadliest mass shooting in the U.S.
Content:
emaho said:
One infamous example could also be Jean-Jacques Rousseau, who gave his own children to an orphanage and wrote books about love, compassion and education.

PuerAzaelis said:
Or Marx, who occasionally “worked” as an “independent” (cough) journalist but who basically mooched off Engels.


Malcolm wrote:
Well, know, it is more like careened through one meager inheritance after another because he was committed to raising his daughters in a petite bourgeois manner.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, October 8th, 2017 at 6:23 AM
Title: Re: deadliest mass shooting in the U.S.
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
You know, Scott Adams is a major Trumpista, so you might not really want Dilbert as your avatar.

Dan74 said:
This is very much off topic but perhaps an interesting tangent.

Scott Adams, the creator of Dilbert (my avatar is actually Wally, but from the same cartoon - look it up especially if you are a techie) is known as something of a defender of Trump. https://maxnewmanblog.wordpress.com/2017/07/21/scott-adams-and-sam-harris-on-trump/ though I wouldn't call him a "Trumpista" even remotely.

But suppose that we agree that his no matter how tepid, his defence of Trump is morally egregious, is it wrong to love his creative output such as Dilbert?

In maths, we've had some geniuses who were real arseholes, in chess, anyone remember Bobby Fischer? Not to mention the very dodgy Aleksandr Alekhine, etc etc. Wagner was a rabid anti-Semite. Heidegger, a Nazi. So should we avoid brilliant works done by unsavoury characters and even folks with questionable personality traits or unpalatable political views? Has the world become so partisan?


Malcolm wrote:
Sometimes.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, October 8th, 2017 at 2:45 AM
Title: Re: deadliest mass shooting in the U.S.
Content:


Fa Dao said:
Wow..you make so much sense...youre right...even though I have had extensive training in the past, both civilian and military, I should just let those homeless people that I see every night at work fend for themselves...what was I thinking??



Malcolm wrote:
how many people have you shot defending others?

Fa Dao said:
Fortunately..zero...
just producing it when the threat level allows for it is usually enough. Actually shooting someone is the absolute last resort when everything else has failed and your life or someone elses is in imminent danger. Only psychos like shooting people...

Malcolm wrote:
How many times have you pulled your gun?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, October 7th, 2017 at 11:50 AM
Title: Re: deadliest mass shooting in the U.S.
Content:



Fa Dao said:
Yes..and a lot of nice innocent people in the meantime will get caught in the crossfire. Which is why I am in the process of getting my concealed weapon permit...somebody has to protect those that cant protect themselves. Not all of us live in nice crime free areas. I really dont like conflict and violence and shy away from it whenever possible but somebody has to do it.

Grigoris said:
Yeah, you're right...  Somebody has to perpetuate violence and conflict and who better than a white man with a gun?

Fa Dao said:
Wow..you make so much sense...youre right...even though I have had extensive training in the past, both civilian and military, I should just let those homeless people that I see every night at work fend for themselves...what was I thinking??



Malcolm wrote:
how many people have you shot defending others?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, October 6th, 2017 at 11:16 AM
Title: Re: deadliest mass shooting in the U.S.
Content:
Wayfarer said:
I think the harsh reality is that American politicians have decided that the so-called 'second amendment freedoms' outweigh the fact of tens of thousands of innocents being killed every year. In other words, they are willing to tolerate a very high rate of murder, for what they think of as 'freedom'.  They give pious 'prayers and wishes' whenever it happens, but they won't lift a finger to stop it from happening.

Malcolm wrote:
Correct, and it is deeply misguided. But it is suicide they are willing to tolerate, since suicides are by far the highest numbers in gun violence in all countries apart from war zones. Supposedly the GOP is tough on crime.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, October 6th, 2017 at 11:14 AM
Title: Re: deadliest mass shooting in the U.S.
Content:
Dan74 said:
I get that and I know that the news tend to paints a caricature of any country (which inevitably contains multitudes), but whether gun homicide, polarisation in politics, waging wars in distant lands, rhetoric of the its leaders, the US consistently comes across as a bellicose bully at war with itself and half the world. It is an unfair portrayal, of course, but like all caricatures, perhaps there's a smidgeon of truth in it.

Malcolm wrote:
You know, Scott Adams is a major Trumpista, so you might not really want Dilbert as your avatar.

Right now, the US is at war with itself, and the entire world because our president is a bellicose, sociopathic bully.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, October 6th, 2017 at 7:03 AM
Title: Re: Bey-yuls or hidden lands? Is this real in Buddhism?
Content:
M.G. said:
I recently heard an acquaintance who is a fairly serious dharma practitioner made a reference about there being a notion of Bey-Yuls (transliterated, so spelling may not be correct) or hidden lands in Tibetan Buddhism.

Is this authentic or just Western fantasy?  And if the first, what can be publically said?

Malcolm wrote:
The idea of Hidden Lands first gained attention in Tibet through the revelations of Rigzin Godem in the 14th century, who among seven hidden lands, identified the upper valley of Sikkim as a hidden land, a safe place for practitioners to find refuge in times of war and strife.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, October 5th, 2017 at 9:51 PM
Title: Re: Soul fragmentation and defragmentation as Buddism teaching?
Content:
dzogchungpa said:
Not at all, I prefer to think of myself as something more like the conscience of DW. However, since this is all meta-discussion, perhaps we should leave it at that.

Malcolm wrote:
How modest of you.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, October 5th, 2017 at 9:51 PM
Title: Re: Soul fragmentation and defragmentation as Buddism teaching?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Also, sentient beings cannot be reborn as non-sentient beings such plants.

makewhisper said:
Malcolm, I'm approaching this question of mine from a place of genuine curiosity rather than a need to contradict or debate. I recall a recent(?) topic in which you appeared to argue the possibility of plant sentience with reference to a text that recounts an encounter with the deva "inhabiting" a tree. I believe that you or someone else made the argument that the deva could have even a personification of the tree's hypothetical mind. How does the discussion in that topic square with this statement of yours I'm quoting? Have your views evolved, or did you never hold the opinion that plants are sentient? Thanks for your time!

Dharma blessings,

Eric

Malcolm wrote:
Hi Eric:

Yes, I have entertained the idea of plant sentience because like any living thing, they have life force (prāṇa) and they breath. But I make a clear distinction between my speculative inquiry and what is actually taught in Buddhadharma,

Classical Buddhist doctrine, including Dzogchen does not admit to such an idea; apart from some trends of Sino-Japanese Buddhism.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, October 5th, 2017 at 9:48 PM
Title: Re: Soul fragmentation and defragmentation as Buddism teaching?
Content:




Malcolm wrote:
With respect to the idea of an awakened master transferring their "mind" (thugs) to a disciple, this is a form of blessing. It does not mean that now the student has all the teachers thoughts and knowledge, memories, experiences, and so on.

Adamantine said:
Well.. a funny claim of that happened here and is an obvious distortion, but they refer to it as an example of drong juk...
is that the official Tibetan term for transferring thugs to a disciple or it a related but different phenomenon they're referencing?

https://www.domogeshetruth.com

Malcolm wrote:
Drong juk (grong 'jug) refers to transferring one's consciousness into a recently deceased corpse.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, October 5th, 2017 at 9:39 PM
Title: Re: deadliest mass shooting in the U.S.
Content:



Dan74 said:
I take your point. It is sloppy to generalise about the US since it is a huge and a very diverse country. Nevertheless, it is still one Federal Government and so maybe even folks outside Nevada and those other states that sell assault rifles willy-nilly can do something to rein in the madness.

Malcolm wrote:
It is unlikely. Everytime there is a mass shooting like this, the GOP snowflake declare it is insensitive to bring the issue to congress.

Dan74 said:
And I totally get that Americans don't enjoy folks from other nations butting in and telling you what's wrong with your country. It is an incredible country, home of the best and the worst of humanity, as the cliché goes and we don't really know 'what's best for you' since it is a different place with a different history and mindset. Rules and customs can't just be transplanted. Speaking just for myself, I am simply sad for the loss of life and the continued suffering.

Malcolm wrote:
I have no problem with people from other countries making observations about the US, I am not some zealous patriot ala" USA is the only way!" type.

I just want you to understand that given the low density of population in the US, though it may seem on TV we are glutting ourselves on an orgy of violence, the reality is quite different.

Gun culture in this country is determined at the state level because that is where guns are regulated, apart from automatic weapons, which are illegal for civilians to own according to federal law.

To put it another way, people who really, really like guns are less likely to live in a state like Massachusetts or Hawaii where gun laws are very stringent. You are more likely to find them in Vermont or Nevada where rates of gun deaths are much higher.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, October 5th, 2017 at 4:11 AM
Title: Re: Soul fragmentation and defragmentation as Buddism teaching?
Content:
dzogchungpa said:
the Dharma.

Malcolm wrote:
Something it seems you have little interest in discussing, most of the time.



dzogchungpa said:
Actually, I have a great interest in discussing the Dharma and regularly do so but I came to the conclusion long ago that it is essentially impossible on internet forums.

Malcolm wrote:
Oh, so now you admit you are merely a troll.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, October 5th, 2017 at 4:09 AM
Title: Re: deadliest mass shooting in the U.S.
Content:
Grigoris said:
Dude:  Mexico is not counted as part of the Western World.  Just in case you didn't know.  That's why Trump wants to build a wall, to stop all the brown people, remember?

Malcolm wrote:
Talk to Mexicans about that. I think they will heartily disagree with you.

Now if Dan has simply said, between the US and the EU, the US has a much higher rate of murder, I would not argue the point because that is true.

But the US is a much larger place than the EU with a much less dense population. So the idea that there are gunfights on every street every day is a TV produced delusion.

I have lived in the US my entire life and apart from TV, I have never once ever seen someone shot, by police or otherwise.

Dan74 said:
Malcolm, I was in Chicago a year ago and had a great time. But like Mantrik, I do believe the stats. Call me naive, if you like.

Malcolm wrote:
Oh the stats are quite real, no question. They just do not apply everywhere in the US.

For example, I live in Massachusetts with among the strictest gun control laws in the country, and one of the lowest gun violence rates as well, comparable to Europe. The gun death rate for Massachusetts in 2015 was 3.13 per 100K, which is comparable with your country, which has an average gun death rate of about 3.01 per 100K per year, and lower than Finland, at 3.25 per 100k in 2013.

For example, it is very difficult to get a concealed carry license here, and in Boston, if you want to take your gun to the range to shoot it, you have to call the police and inform them that you are traveling with your weapon (this does not apply however to nonurban areas where the regulations are slightly looser, but not by much).

Another thing to keep in mind that is that half of the guns in the US are owned by just 3% of the population.

Gun ownership is also declining as hunting is becoming less popular.

So, understanding gun death rates in the US should be done on a state by state basis, not country wide. If you consider the whole country, you will be mislead by the stats and make incorrect inferences about the level of violence in one state as opposed to another state.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, October 5th, 2017 at 1:44 AM
Title: Re: Why Secular Buddhism is Not True
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
"appearance" covers both material appearances as well as mental appearances.

Monlam Tharchin said:
Would you say Secular Buddhism upholds material appearances while denying mental appearances, or at the very least subsumes them as a type of material appearance? Or is your view of what's amiss different?

Malcolm wrote:
The thing that most characterizes Secular Buddhism is its rejection of rebirth and karma.

There are too many different interpretations of consciousness to lock SB's into a specific theory of consciousness.

I am not even sure why they insist on the term Buddhism. They would be better off describing themselves as secular humanists with an interest in meditation. They certainly owe no allegiance to Buddhadharma since they rejects its very basis.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, October 5th, 2017 at 1:37 AM
Title: Re: Why Secular Buddhism is Not True
Content:


Monlam Tharchin said:
"Form" when I pair it with "emptiness" is appearance, luminosity, the seeming play of phenomena. The form/emptiness dialectic of the Diamond Sutra and deity teachings.

Malcolm wrote:
The form (rūpa) in the Heart Sutra passage refers to matter. It is properly translated as "matter is empty, emptiness is matter," etc. It then lists the other four aggregates, "So too are sensation, perception..."

Then there is form (rūpa) which is the object of the eye. Same word, totally different meaning.

Monlam Tharchin said:
Thanks, Malcolm! That's my bad. What's the technical term for the counterpart to sunyata, when e.g. discussing the nature of Chenrezig as simultaneously "appearance" and emptiness?


Malcolm wrote:
"appearance" covers both material appearances as well as mental appearances.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, October 5th, 2017 at 1:30 AM
Title: Re: deadliest mass shooting in the U.S.
Content:
Grigoris said:
Dude:  Mexico is not counted as part of the Western World.  Just in case you didn't know.  That's why Trump wants to build a wall, to stop all the brown people, remember?

Malcolm wrote:
Talk to Mexicans about that. I think they will heartily disagree with you.

Now if Dan has simply said, between the US and the EU, the US has a much higher rate of murder, I would not argue the point because that is true.

But the US is a much larger place than the EU with a much less dense population. So the idea that there are gunfights on every street every day is a TV produced delusion.

I have lived in the US my entire life and apart from TV, I have never once ever seen someone shot, by police or otherwise.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, October 5th, 2017 at 1:11 AM
Title: Re: Why Secular Buddhism is Not True
Content:


Monlam Tharchin said:
"Form" when I pair it with "emptiness" is appearance, luminosity, the seeming play of phenomena. The form/emptiness dialectic of the Diamond Sutra and deity teachings.

Malcolm wrote:
The form (rūpa) in the Heart Sutra passage refers to matter. It is properly translated as "matter is empty, emptiness is matter," etc. It then lists the other four aggregates, "So too are sensation, perception..."

Then there is form (rūpa) which is the object of the eye. Same word, totally different meaning.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, October 5th, 2017 at 1:04 AM
Title: Re: deadliest mass shooting in the U.S.
Content:
Dan74 said:
And maybe more importantly that the US culture is so saturated in violence

Malcolm wrote:
It isn't, actually. People watch too much TV.

Dan74 said:
So the highest rate of homicides in the western world is not indicative of the culture?


Malcolm wrote:
The idea that the US is saturated in violence is ridiculous. Mexico, for example, is a country saturated in violence. It is second to Syria only.

Also, the US does not have the highest murder rate in the Western World. That would be Mexico again.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, October 5th, 2017 at 12:46 AM
Title: Re: deadliest mass shooting in the U.S.
Content:
Dan74 said:
And maybe more importantly that the US culture is so saturated in violence

Malcolm wrote:
It isn't, actually. People watch too much TV.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, October 5th, 2017 at 12:34 AM
Title: Re: Soul fragmentation and defragmentation as Buddism teaching?
Content:
dzogchungpa said:
the Dharma.

Malcolm wrote:
Something it seems you have little interest in discussing, most of the time.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, October 5th, 2017 at 12:30 AM
Title: Re: deadliest mass shooting in the U.S.
Content:



Grigoris said:
And yet... this does not happen.

Malcolm wrote:
It does not happen in Switzerland either, which has a similar system.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, October 4th, 2017 at 11:43 PM
Title: Re: deadliest mass shooting in the U.S.
Content:
Grigoris said:
The honky on the motorcycle does half half a point though:  Gun control is not going to stop gun killings.

Not by itself, it isn't.

I made the following point in another thread following the Orlando massacre:

Here in rural Greece, the place is crawling with guns.  Apart from hunting weapons, the island I live on is full of assault rifles given out to National Guards.

Malcolm wrote:
I am quite sure though there must be precedent for people to pick up their weapons if they are guardsman. In other words, it is not like you can just take your gvt. issued weapon out for a lark.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, October 4th, 2017 at 10:57 PM
Title: Re: Soul fragmentation and defragmentation as Buddism teaching?
Content:


dzogchungpa said:
Well, I'm not sure. Next time perhaps you could try "was assimilated into" or something along those lines.

Malcolm wrote:
Maybe you could stop trying to modify other people's speech.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, October 4th, 2017 at 10:47 PM
Title: Re: deadliest mass shooting in the U.S.
Content:


Fa Dao said:
First off, the man had an automatic not semiautomatic assault weapon. For the average citizen a fully automatic weapon is very difficult to own.

Malcolm wrote:
As pointed out, he had no automatic weapons. Only semiautomatics with extended clips.


Fa Dao said:
For example, France has very strict gun control laws and yet a small group were able to shoot up the bataclan and kill numerous unarmed people.

Malcolm wrote:
And you think that if the French had looser gun control laws this incident would not have happened? Logic please?


Fa Dao said:
The 2nd amendment as envisioned by the founding fathers was not only about hunting or self protection it was also about the general populace being able to defend itself against a potentially tyrannical government.

Malcolm wrote:
No. This is completely wrong. The Second Amendment was conceived in very much the same way that the Swiss Army exists today. The idea was that communities had to maintain civilian militias in order to muster armies when there was a threat to the United States, either externally or internally.

Fa Dao said:
A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

Malcolm wrote:
The framers of the Constitution were not providing a right to bear arms so that the US Govt. itself could be overthrown. They were providing a right to bear arms so that citizens could defend the State. The reason why felons are denied the right to bear arms is that they are a risk to the State.

But now we have a professional Army, professional police. We have no need of militias anymore.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, October 4th, 2017 at 10:34 PM
Title: Re: deadliest mass shooting in the U.S.
Content:


Fa Dao said:
oh Malcolm..tell us all a story about the Buddha and the ship captain...come on, you know the one...

Malcolm wrote:
Oh, you mean the one where the bodhisattva ship captain with clairvoyance killed a thief to protect five hundred merchants, and then went briefly to hell for his action? You mean that one?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, October 4th, 2017 at 10:33 PM
Title: Re: deadliest mass shooting in the U.S.
Content:


Fa Dao said:
Very disingenuous article..Im surprised Malcolm. Did it ever occur to you that the states listed with the least amount are also some of the highest socio-economic areas in the US?

Malcolm wrote:
It is not disingenuous at all. It indicates that states that are not run by Republicans have the lowest rates of violence in the country.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, October 4th, 2017 at 10:31 PM
Title: Re: deadliest mass shooting in the U.S.
Content:
Fa Dao said:
And you think gun control laws and taking guns away from law abiding citizens is going to keep criminals from getting them and using them?

Malcolm wrote:
Most definitely, as England, Australia, etc., prove without doubt.

Crime has been steadily decreasing in the US for decades.

So yes, I definitely want to see gun ownership severely restricted in the US. But hey, I am from Massachusetts, with some of most stringent gun control laws in the country and the some of the lowest gun violence stats as well.

It is has become a public health issue. It must stop.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, October 4th, 2017 at 10:23 PM
Title: Re: deadliest mass shooting in the U.S.
Content:
Jeff H said:
Carrying a gun is not bad karma.

Malcolm wrote:
Carrying weapons predisposes one to violence with those weapons. One will not carry a gun or other deadly weapon unless one has some aggressive impulses or fear leading to such impulses.

Karma begins in the mind. Just the act of carrying a gun means that one has already engaged in one of the three mental nonvirtues. If someone is not prepared to kill a human being, they should never carry a gun. If someone is carrying a gun, this means they are prepared to kill another human being, or in the case of hunters, other sentient beings. I would therefore argue that owning and carrying guns and weapons is automatically bad karma.

Buddha taught very clearly that those who die fighting never experience any of the three higher states of rebirth in their next life, even if the war they are in is a so called "just war."


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, October 4th, 2017 at 10:12 PM
Title: Re: deadliest mass shooting in the U.S.
Content:
Fa Dao said:
Virtue signaling and righteous indignation are so satisfying to the ego...arent they?
Pull your heads out of the clouds..this is samsara..it cant be fixed. Face it..there are bad people in the world who dont care what you think about, well, basically anything...and simply cant be reasoned with and have no problem making you a victim in one way or another. If it is bad karma for me to carry a gun to protect those who cant (or wont) protect themselves, then so be it.



Malcolm wrote:
It is pretty clear, less guns = less deaths by guns.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, October 4th, 2017 at 10:10 PM
Title: Re: deadliest mass shooting in the U.S.
Content:
Queequeg said:
I'd rather face a psychopath wielding a knife rather than an AR-15.

Malcolm wrote:
It depends at what range. Seven feet or less, I would prefer the to face the guy with the gun.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, October 4th, 2017 at 9:31 PM
Title: Re: Why Secular Buddhism is Not True
Content:



boda said:
It’s cool that you read it before deciding which bin it belongs to.

Malcolm wrote:
The bin is determined by what the author says.

boda said:
Which bin does this belong to?


Malcolm wrote:
Politics.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, October 4th, 2017 at 9:12 PM
Title: Re: Soul fragmentation and defragmentation as Buddism teaching?
Content:



Fortyeightvows said:
1)I'm telling you bro, in alot of places, to alot of people, it is a buddhist thing in a buddhist context.
As two people pointed out even Master Hsuan Hua has taught about it.
It surprises me a bit that so many people here have never heard of it or disparage it (not that you have).

Malcolm wrote:
It is a completely wrong view.

The Buddhist teaching about such things is that every sentient being, mosquitos included, has a unique mind stream with its own set of causes and conditions, it's own accumulation of karma and ripening of karma.

With respect to the term bla, today it means more or less vitality. In ancient pre-buddhist traditions in Tibet, it is a rather complicated subject; commonly however today in the Buddhist context, bla is understood to be synonym for consciousness (Tibetan Medicine) or an alternate term for lifeforce. So called "soul retrieval" (bla 'gugs) rites are in reality little more than rites for summoning the vitality of the five elements to reinforce one's own five elements.

There is also a medical condition called bla 'khyams,  "wandering bla," which is diagnosed in people who exhibit dissociative disorders, especially from trauma. There is also the idea that provocations, spirits, can steal one's bla, which results in a kind of wasting disease.

With respect to the idea of an awakened master transferring their "mind" (thugs) to a disciple, this is a form of blessing. It does not mean that now the student has all the teachers thoughts and knowledge, memories, experiences, and so on.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, October 4th, 2017 at 4:16 AM
Title: Re: Why Secular Buddhism is Not True
Content:



boda said:
I’m currently reading Why Buddhism is True, the book that Ajahn Sujato classifies (without reading it) as SB. The author, Robert Wright, explicitly acknowledges the potential for anuttara samyak sambodhi.

Malcolm wrote:
On page 261 the author explicitly states he does not accept rebirth and karma. This automatically means he is subject to wrong view, and can rightly be cast into the bin of the Secular Buddhists.

boda said:
It’s cool that you read it before deciding which bin it belongs to.

Malcolm wrote:
The bin is determined by what the author says.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, October 4th, 2017 at 3:59 AM
Title: Re: Why Secular Buddhism is Not True
Content:
Monlam Tharchin said:
Secularists deny samsara so they deny nirvana as the Buddha meant it, full and complete, anuttara samyak sambodhi. Traditionalists also start as beings in samsara but they eventually become buddhas beyond it because they someday understand samsara is empty, not "all there is". With no beyond, there is no destination and therefore no path out of suffering.

boda said:
I’m currently reading Why Buddhism is True, the book that Ajahn Sujato classifies (without reading it) as SB. The author, Robert Wright, explicitly acknowledges the potential for anuttara samyak sambodhi.

Malcolm wrote:
On page 261 the author explicitly states he does not accept rebirth and karma. This automatically means he is subject to wrong view, and can rightly be cast into the bin of the Secular Buddhists.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, October 4th, 2017 at 3:30 AM
Title: Re: Soul fragmentation and defragmentation as Buddism teaching?
Content:
Dan74 said:
Some teachers give idiosyncratic teachings that don't square well with what we understand about the Dharma. I think we shouldn't get too hung up on it, unless it is a central element of their teachings. Maybe we don't understand correctly, maybe the translation is wrong, or maybe they were wrong. In any case, it's not necessarily a deal-breaker, or shouldn't be.

Malcolm wrote:
It represents a completely wrong view and should understood as a false teaching.

Dan74 said:
You're right. I've just interviewed several mosquitoes who happen to have past life recall, and all of them have attested to never having been 1/1000 of a human, though one remarked that after a good meal that's what it mostly is.

Malcolm wrote:
It is a teaching that violates the most basic tenets of karma-vipaka. It contradicts both scripture and reason. It is hard to understand how any properly trained Buddhist could come to believe such rubbish.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, October 4th, 2017 at 2:51 AM
Title: Re: Why Secular Buddhism is Not True
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
No, what happened was is that you encountered authentic teachings, and then abandoned the misconceptions you picked up Secular Buddhism is nothing other than a thicket of views.

DGA said:
Sure.  But would I have had the good fortune to encounter the good stuff...

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, of course, because of your past merit accumulations from studying authentic Dharma.

Basically, if someone accepts Secular Buddhism, it is more or less proof that they have followed a false Dharma in the past.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, October 4th, 2017 at 1:22 AM
Title: Re: Why Secular Buddhism is Not True
Content:
Vasana said:
Secular-Buddhism can also be a gateway to traditional forms of Buddhism for some.

Malcolm wrote:
Never seen it happen yet.

DGA said:
I went that way.  I assume I'm not the only one.

Malcolm wrote:
No, what happened was is that you encountered authentic teachings, and then abandoned the misconceptions you picked up Secular Buddhism is nothing other than a thicket of views.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, October 4th, 2017 at 1:20 AM
Title: Re: Soul fragmentation and defragmentation as Buddism teaching?
Content:
Dan74 said:
Some teachers give idiosyncratic teachings that don't square well with what we understand about the Dharma. I think we shouldn't get too hung up on it, unless it is a central element of their teachings. Maybe we don't understand correctly, maybe the translation is wrong, or maybe they were wrong. In any case, it's not necessarily a deal-breaker, or shouldn't be.

Malcolm wrote:
It represents a completely wrong view and should understood as a false teaching.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 3rd, 2017 at 11:31 PM
Title: Re: Soul fragmentation and defragmentation as Buddism teaching?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
This is a completely erroneous doctrine, unsupported by any authentic and valid sūtra. It also does not stand up to reasoning in any way at all.

The idea that one person can become millions of mosquitoes simultaneously in their next life is frankly ridiculous.

Mind streams are serial, one birth at a time.

Also, sentient beings cannot be reborn as non-sentient beings such plants.

ydnan321 said:
Well, when I read the article below I was quite bewildered - Master Hsuan Hua basically said that a person would go through rebirth as multiple animals or plants simultaneously due to his 'soul' being fragmented. In some other articles I read, he mentioned that these fragmented souls would need to join together again to take rebirth at a higher forms (e.g. multiple roosters' souls need to be integrated together to reborn as a horse, then multiple horse's souls then integrate to be a human.)

Controversial and contradictory as it sounds to me, I have not been able to convince myself to disregard this notion - being fragmented into multiple animals and even plants - and it's been bothering me. The fact that he mentioned this came from his "Five Eyes" capability. My search to invalidate this to convince and calm my mind has been to no avail. I sure hope someone who is knowledgeable enough could present accounts from the Buddha and/or other masters to help me with this matter. Much appreciated.

http://www.dharmasite.net/BuddhaRootFarm/
The Venerable Master Hsuan-Hua comments:
Question: "When you eat one bowl of rice, you take the life of all the grains of rice, whereas eating meat you take only one animal's life.
The Master: On the body of one single animal are a hundred thousand, in fact, sever million little organisms. These organisms are fragments of what was once an animal. The soul of a human being at death may split up to become many animals. One person can become about ten animals. That's why animals are so stupid. The soul of an animal can split up and become, in its smallest division, an organism or plant. The feelings which plants have, then, are what separated from the animals's soul when it split up at death. Although the life force of a large number of plants may appear sizeable, it is not as great as that of a single animal or a single mouthful of meat. Take, for example, rice: tens of billions of grains of rice do not contain as much life force as a single piece of meat. If you open your Five Eyes you can know this at a glance. If you haven't opened your eyes, no matter how one tries to explain it to you, you won't understand. No matter how it's explained, you won't believe it, because you haven't been a plant!
"Another example is the mosquitoes. The millions of mosquitoes on this mountain may be simply the soul of one person who has been transformed into all those bugs. It is not the case that a single human soul turns into a single mosquito. One person can turn into countless numbers of mosquitos.

"At death the nature changes, the soul scatters, and its smallest fragments become plants. Thus, there is a difference between eating plants and eating animals. What is more, plants have very short lifespans. The grass, for example, is born in the spring and dies within months. Animals live a long time. If you don't kill them, they will live for many years. Rice, regardless of conditions, will only live a short time. And so, if you really look into it, there are many factors to consider, and even science hasn't got it all straight." (Buddha Root Farm, 64)
Top
Post Reply


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 3rd, 2017 at 10:41 PM
Title: Re: deadliest mass shooting in the U.S.
Content:
justsit said:
Guns won the American West and are deeply ingrained in American culture.

Malcolm wrote:
Actually, they didn't, it was railroads. The gun culture in this country was largely a post-Civil War phenomena created by mail order catalogues such as Sears and Roebucks who helped Smith and Wesson, etc., maintain their wartime production quotas after the war by selling cheap mass produced guns into the civilian market. Prior to the Civil War, most guns were very expensive, handmade items. In 1835, however, Colt began to mass produce revolvers, etc.

The mass production of guns for the civilian market however ramped up under Winchester in 1873, with the repeating rifle.

Combined with penny novels, these catalogues romanticized gun ownership, and along with low prices, guns began to become a very predominant force in American society, in the South and West in particular. Here in the Northeast, we generally have a more civilized attitude towards guns, and for example, this kind of incident could never happen in Massachusetts because assault weapons are banned in this state, and second, all guns that one owns must be registered, and third there are laws about how they are stored and how they can be moved.

However, we clearly need a national gun control law in this country, the Second Amendment does not prohibit gun control laws and never has.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 3rd, 2017 at 10:07 PM
Title: Re: What is Bon?
Content:
Sādhaka said:
The first Dharma taught at the beginning of the 'universe' is Dzogchen.

Modern Bön (described on this forum by Mutsuk as a Sarma phenomenon; with similarities to Gelug, interestingly enough) may seem to have many teachings copied from Buddhism; but since ShangShung Nyengyud and the Twelve Small Tantras are original Bönpo Dzogchen Teaching...


Malcolm wrote:
You neglected the part where in repeating the opinion of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu, he states clearly that the twelve little tantras, which is the only part of Zhang Zhung Snyan rgyud he considers pre-buddhist, do not form a path. They are oral teachings about the basis.

His opinion is that modern Bon, so called Yungdrung Bon, is structured on the basis of Buddhism and is for the most part wholly derivative of Buddhism, apart from obviously autochthonic concepts and practice such as Sang, Lungta, etc. We can see this in Ye khrid mtha' sel, for example, which presents a Bon version of Naro Khachodma complete with a version of the triple OM mantra.

The original Bon, according to ChNN, was basically a state religion based on twelve lores (not connected in anyway with the twelve little tantras)


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 3rd, 2017 at 9:58 PM
Title: Re: Shakyamuni as the Eternal Buddha
Content:
jikai said:
To confirm, I  don't read Tibetan so I can't confirm it's the same as the Chinese. However, there is quite a lot of scholarship that suggests this. I have spoken to people who can read Tibetan and Chinese, and they largely agree it is Kuiji's text, not a Sinhalese work. Even if we don't accept that the evidence for the text being Kuiji's is conclusive, the fact that it is a translation from Chinese, and that even if it isn't a chinese text originally, Sinhalese doesn't necessarily equal Indian.

Malcolm wrote:
The colophon of the Tibetan is pretty clear, the commentary was written by a Sinhalese ācārya named Prthivibandhu, but this does not a) bar him from having written the commentary in China, b) does not bar him from having been a student of Xuanzang, and c) does not bar him from being privy to debates about Mahāyāna sūtras and their Indian interpretation because a) being Sinhalese does not bar one from traveling to India or China and b) does not bar one from having a Chinese Buddhist teacher.

Further, the fact that Tibetan text is shorter than its Chinese sister could very well mean that the Chinese commentary was amended with further chapters after the text was translated into Tibetan, either from Sanskrti or Chinese. There is no indication in the Tibetan colophon of the Dege edition as to whether it was translated from Sanskrit or Chinese.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 3rd, 2017 at 8:06 AM
Title: Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Content:
Nemo said:
Weird but didn't Jetsumna do all these things. Banging students half her age, excessive luxuries, smoking weed all the time, casting black magic rituals on her ex-husband, hiding child molesters in her Sangha,.....Maybe she is all better now.


Malcolm wrote:
ancient history...


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 3rd, 2017 at 8:03 AM
Title: Re: Why Secular Buddhism is Not True
Content:
jorden said:
So, steady retreat under pressure of the encounter with the modern world or drawing a line in the sand and proclaiming: nothing goes, this is the tradition as it is handed over to me by my teachers (i.e. nagas and all)? Or is there a third option I'm missing?


Malcolm wrote:
There is no steady retreat under an encounter with the modern world. We live in a degenerate age, proven by nuclear weapons, dying oceans, poisoned atmosphere, infertile soil, etc. In this age there is no wisdom, only materialism and self-interest.

Buddhadharma has no need to retreat from such conditions. If people would simply follow Buddhadharma, the world would not be as sad as it is now.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, October 2nd, 2017 at 10:17 PM
Title: Re: Why Secular Buddhism is Not True
Content:
PuerAzaelis said:
So, to sum up - we should affirm that rebirth and causation exist so then we can negate that they ultimately exist.

Otherwise we'd lose our balance on that raft trying to bow properly.

Makes about as much sense as usual.

Malcolm wrote:
Extreme 1: no rebirth
Extreme 2: permanent, autonomous entity undergoes rebirth

Resolution of extremes: there is rebirth, but there is no permanent, autonomous entity that passes from this life to the next.

Right view involves understanding that there is rebirth, karma, and so on, but that there is no ultimate agent which experiences rebirth, karma and so on.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, October 2nd, 2017 at 8:53 PM
Title: Re: Why Secular Buddhism is Not True
Content:



Dan74 said:
I think there's a difference between sticking to a hard-and-fast rule about what is needed for the Right View (doctrinaire) and adopting a flexible approach. The two aren't actually mutually exclusive - one can be firm on some aspects and flexible with others.

Malcolm wrote:
Right view is something very precise and specific. It is not something that can be adjusted to suit pedagogical needs.

Practicing without right view is like driving blindfolded.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, October 2nd, 2017 at 6:28 AM
Title: Re: Why Secular Buddhism is Not True
Content:



Wayfarer said:
So I find myself wondering about the literalistic vs symbolic interpretation of such texts.  I actually don't doubt the reality of re-birth. But I do wonder about the literal truth of such expressions as 'recalling a million previous lives' in all their details; I can't see how this could be literally true.

Malcolm wrote:
The knowledge of sentient beings is fragmented. The knowledge of buddhas is seamless and whole. Which one are you?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, October 1st, 2017 at 11:20 PM
Title: Re: Why Secular Buddhism is Not True
Content:



Dan74 said:
OK, I will translate a few key passages from it when I have a chance next.


Malcolm wrote:
It's ok, I google translated it.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, October 1st, 2017 at 10:18 PM
Title: Re: Why Secular Buddhism is Not True
Content:
Dan74 said:
That's cool, Malcolm, I think we are beginning to repeat ourselves. I don't think I can add anything to what I've said already. Thank you for contributing your view.

Malcolm wrote:
The basic problem here Dan, is that you seem to think right view is a) not important, b) not possible for ordinary people.

And you never did answer my question about what pure perception was, you merely claimed that it was a problem for some Tibetan Buddhists you knew without specifying anything further.

Dan74 said:
Not really. Never claimed that 'Right View is not important", just that there is a number of takes on what is essential (which anyway varies due to karmic predispositions), that it starts off inevitably tainted (mundane/with effluents - but is then refined through application of other factors in the path, which all feed into each other) and what is needed is different at different stages of practice.

Of course, the simplicity and certainty of a doctrinaire position is attractive but human beings are messy creatures and nothing ever works so smoothly and mechanically. This is why a teacher is paramount.

Malcolm wrote:
And my point is, that if you do not have right view, beginning with mundane right view, your path, such as it is, will not work at all. And I have seen this over and over again -- people who think they are going to start practicing meditation according to this or that Buddhadharma tradition, who either are not instructed in right view at first or reject it when they hear it.


Dan74 said:
As for the second - I did link a talk in German a few pages ago, did you not see it? There was a discussion about it elsewhere which made it clear that it was a widely misunderstood teaching. The teacher (in the talk) says so too.

Malcolm wrote:
I don't do German.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, October 1st, 2017 at 9:56 PM
Title: Re: Why Secular Buddhism is Not True
Content:
Dan74 said:
That's cool, Malcolm, I think we are beginning to repeat ourselves. I don't think I can add anything to what I've said already. Thank you for contributing your view.

Malcolm wrote:
The basic problem here Dan, is that you seem to think right view is a) not important, b) not possible for ordinary people.

And you never did answer my question about what pure perception was, you merely claimed that it was a problem for some Tibetan Buddhists you knew without specifying anything further.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, October 1st, 2017 at 9:40 PM
Title: Re: Why Secular Buddhism is Not True
Content:



Dan74 said:
I'm sorry, James, I didn't intend to cast any accusations. My aim was that we look closer, under the lupe of practice, to see what's really helped, and what's really needed right now. I find that these discussions tend to be scholastic and abstract and I am inclined to a more practical and detailed approach.

Malcolm wrote:
There is nothing scholastic or abstract about it. Right practice comes from right view. This is an entirely practical observation and it applies to everything we do, from cooking to laundry, from driving to sitting down to work at a computer.


Dan74 said:
It is the one of the teacher's roles to see what teachings and practices are right for the student and guide him or her on this path.

Malcolm wrote:
Right view is requisite for right practice.

Dan74 said:
Frankly, rebirth has not been a huge part of my practice, despite some little funny events here and there involving hints that it is in fact true. I just don't see it as such a central teaching and it seems that it wasn't a part of Right View in the early stages.

Malcolm wrote:
Nonsense. The four types of realized people are defined precisely by how many rebirths one undergoes before attaining nirvana.


Dan74 said:
However, I have no issue with folks for whom it is central. For me, this life and this very moment is where we practice (or fail to), nowhere else.

Malcolm wrote:
Rebirth is the central existential problem to Buddha set out to solve. It may not be central for you, but who cares about what is important to you in a discussion such as this? What is important for people to understand is that right view, from the beginning, was about not negating rebirth, karma, and so on.

Dan74 said:
As the Buddha said "knowledge of the arising of vexations and knowledge of the ceasing of vexations." This is the Right View. Not really beliefs and dogmas.



Malcolm wrote:
If one does not accept rebirth and karma, one cannot be said to have right view even of one has been awarded the title of Zen master, etc., one hundred times over.

Dan74 said:
As for the Secular Buddhist folk, well, they are just more sceptical than you and me. They think they Buddha may have been wrong about a thing or two (esp when it clashes with our modern scientific understanding or appears to). It's tougher for them, when they can't be 100% sure of the teachings, they've got to work it all out for themselves. But hey, there is no way of knowing where they'll end up in their practice and where you and I will. If indeed anywhere. All the best to them, I say. Let all flowers bloom.

Malcolm wrote:
Secular "Buddhists" are not practicing Buddhadharma, whatever else they might be practicing.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, October 1st, 2017 at 9:13 PM
Title: Re: Why Secular Buddhism is Not True
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
It refers to those materialists who assert nothing has a cause, that everything that arises, arises spontaneously.

Fortyeightvows said:
Am I correct that the only things that do not have a cause are the uncompounded (space and two types of cessation) and that everything else has a cause?

Malcolm wrote:
Correct. And space and cessations are not entities.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, October 1st, 2017 at 5:20 AM
Title: Re: Why Secular Buddhism is Not True
Content:
Dan74 said:
No, I am not conflating. I am putting forward that Right View is tainted by ignorance and delusion.

Malcolm wrote:
Then you are simply mistaken in your understanding of what right view entails.

Dan74 said:
The Noble Eightfold Path isn't a linear progression, but each part feeds into all others. As we progress in wisdom, so we progress in the Right View.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, actually it is a linear progression that starts with right view:

"And how is right view the forerunner? One discerns wrong view as wrong view, and right view as right view. This is one's right view. And what is wrong view? 'There is nothing given, nothing offered, nothing sacrificed. There is no fruit or result of good or bad actions. There is no this world, no next world, no mother, no father, no spontaneously reborn beings; no brahmans or contemplatives who, faring rightly & practicing rightly, proclaim this world & the next after having directly known & realized it for themselves.' This is wrong view...

Dan74 said:
No, Malcolm, it seems to me that you are mistaken. Firstly, what I called "taints" in the Pali literature is called "effluents". The Right View with effluents is a well-known teaching.

Malcolm wrote:
It is not right view that possesses āsravas, it means a person who has āsravas can also have right view. This is what mundane right view is. This simply means that possession mundane right view is not a sign that one has begun the processes of eradicating the afflictions. But this does not mean that right view is "tainted."


Dan74 said:
Secondly as Mahacattarisaka Sutta shows, Right View runs and circles around Right Resolve, Right Speech, Right Action, etc. Ven Dr Walpola Rahula writes in What the Buddha Taught (p46):
It should not be thought that the eight categories or divisions of the Path should be followed and practised one after the other in the numerical order as given in the usual list above. But they are to be developed more or less simultaneously, as far as possible according to the capacity of each individual. They are all linked together and each helps the cultivation of the others. These

Malcolm wrote:
None of the others can be developed in absence of right view.

Dan74 said:
Bhikkhu Bodhi writes (Ch II of http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/bodhi/waytoend.html
):
The eight factors of the Noble Eightfold Path are not steps to be followed in sequence, one after another. They can be more aptly described as components rather than as steps, comparable to the intertwining strands of a single cable that requires the contributions of all the strands for maximum strength.

Malcolm wrote:
[/quote]

It is very clear that the path begins with right view, and cannot begin otherwise. This, in essence, is why Batchelor's Secular Buddhism is impotent and fruitless —— it starts out with wrong view.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, October 1st, 2017 at 5:14 AM
Title: Re: Why Secular Buddhism is Not True
Content:
Monlam Tharchin said:
Malcolm, out of curiosity, could you explain what wrong view the Buddha is talking about with " no mother, no father "? I haven't seen that before. Thank you!

Malcolm wrote:
It refers to those materialists who assert nothing has a cause, that everything that arises, arises spontaneously.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, October 1st, 2017 at 4:55 AM
Title: Re: Why Secular Buddhism is Not True
Content:



Dan74 said:
Again, Right View is a great deal more than what your words seem to suggest.

Malcolm wrote:
Note the "etc." in my comment.


Dan74 said:
This is how we start off with some basics to get going with practice and probably a host of mistaken notions but in time refine them into something resembling the Right View.

Malcolm wrote:
It is better to start with view before one begins meditation. Then one's meditation is sure to move in the right direction, which is of course why right meditation follows after right view.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, October 1st, 2017 at 4:52 AM
Title: Re: Why Secular Buddhism is Not True
Content:
Dan74 said:
No, I am not conflating. I am putting forward that Right View is tainted by ignorance and delusion.

Malcolm wrote:
Then you are simply mistaken in your understanding of what right view entails.

Dan74 said:
The Noble Eightfold Path isn't a linear progression, but each part feeds into all others. As we progress in wisdom, so we progress in the Right View.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, actually it is a linear progression that starts with right view:

"And how is right view the forerunner? One discerns wrong view as wrong view, and right view as right view. This is one's right view. And what is wrong view? 'There is nothing given, nothing offered, nothing sacrificed. There is no fruit or result of good or bad actions. There is no this world, no next world, no mother, no father, no spontaneously reborn beings; no brahmans or contemplatives who, faring rightly & practicing rightly, proclaim this world & the next after having directly known & realized it for themselves.' This is wrong view...


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, October 1st, 2017 at 2:51 AM
Title: Re: Why Secular Buddhism is Not True
Content:


Dan74 said:
Of course people have tainted "right view", hence not really right. We see them all around Dharma centres, some of them even teachers, folks practicing for years while becoming even more of a selfish arsehole that before.

Malcolm wrote:
No, it is not possible to have "tainted right view." One either has right view — which means accepting karma, rebirth, and so on (even the Buddha has said so) or one does not.

Dan74 said:
I doubt that any of us capable of introspection and retrospection, would not admit to have held very mistaken notions of what Right View entails, though hopefully not as bad as that.

Malcolm wrote:
As long as one holds the proper understanding of cause and effect, karma and rebirth, etc., than one can be said to hold right view.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, October 1st, 2017 at 2:49 AM
Title: Re: Why Secular Buddhism is Not True
Content:


Dan74 said:
Right View as an absolute to be found nowhere.

Malcolm wrote:
You are here conflating ultimate truth with the relative truth. Relative truth does not stand up to ultimate analysis, but relative truth does stand up to conventional analysis, purely on the basis of mundane perception.

But you have created a situation in your own mind where you cannot even accept awakening since according to you all views are contaminated.

Dan74 said:
But... it IS very important to get some things right in order to really get started on that house. That said, we often have to return to the foundations and rebuild them, don't we?

Malcolm wrote:
How can one return to a foundation if one does not in principle accept right view, the first limb of the eightfold path? Right view leads to right realization. It is for this reason that Āryadeva stated that realization arises from the view.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, October 1st, 2017 at 1:54 AM
Title: Re: Why Secular Buddhism is Not True
Content:
Dan74 said:
I was not putting that forward as the Dharma. The scriptures are certainly clear and in agreement with you. I was replying to your saying that dependent origination doesn't make sense without rebirth.  Because i think it does just fine.

Malcolm wrote:
Not the pratityasamutpāda of the Buddha. The Buddha taught dependent origination in three ways: serial (multiple lives), momentary, and simultaneous. All three are complementary, and none may be excluded from one's understanding of the Buddha's teaching.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, October 1st, 2017 at 1:14 AM
Title: Re: Why Secular Buddhism is Not True
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
A few months ago, in the wake of the recent Rigpa scandal, I was pretty shocked to find out how much confusion exists in the TB community about the key practice of pure perception, even among long-term practitioners. So why do folks keep hammering this old Right View chestnut when they are clueless about their basic practice? I don't know, it just seems wrong-headed on so many levels.
What makes you think Tibetan Buddhists are confused about the practice of pure perception?


Dan74 said:
Conversations with Tibetan Buddhists.

Malcolm wrote:
What do you think pure perception entails?

Dan74 said:
Well, we had this conversation before. In order start building a house, you need concrete and some timber.

Malcolm wrote:
Right view is the ground upon which one's Dharma house is built.


Dan74 said:
My view aligns closer with the Lotus Sutra, ie fake gold leaves to entice the children out of the burning house. Truth is a very dangerous ground to pitch one's tent on. Better not abide, but use appropriately.

Malcolm wrote:
No, you are confusing the parable of the different kinds of carts used to lure children out of the burning house with the notion of right view. There is most certainly right view in Buddhadharma. The Buddha states in the Lalitavistara sūtra:
Right view is an illuminated door of Dharma, which may be entered without fault.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, October 1st, 2017 at 12:53 AM
Title: Re: Why Secular Buddhism is Not True
Content:


Dan74 said:
I think there is much more to delusion that what you describe, Malcolm. How we apprehend the meaning of Dharma, relate it to ourselves, others, grasp on to our understanding as something to possess and fetishise, delusion permeates every aspect of our being. The very way we perceive is imbued with the burdens and obscurations of delusions, so of course any "view" will be tainted. And it cannot, in and of itself, cure anything, it can only help guide us towards insight and release. So at a given time, mistaken views about rebirth may be the least of one's problem.

Malcolm wrote:
You do not distinguish the distinction between the relative and relative truth. When we begin to study Dharma, we first study relative truth, learning to distinguish what to reject and what to accept. For example, we learn to reject the ten nonvirtues, and adopt the ten virtues; we learn to accept a true refuge and reject a false refuge. We learn to accept the authority of āryas and reject the authority of worldlings where they contradict the words of āryas. We learn that we are not undertaking the practice of Dharma solely for our own benefit, but to becomes buddhas to benefit all sentient beings. Any person who chooses virtue, a true refuge, accepts the words of the Buddha, and is motivated to attain buddhahood for the benefit of all sentient beings cannot be called deluded, even if they are mistaken about this thing and that.

Right view cannot be tainted, because then it would not longer be right view. There is a mundane right view which is the way an ordinary person sees the four truths: suffering, the cause, cessation, and the path. But there is nothing tainted about maintaining mundane right view. In fact, right view is a path dharma, and among conditioned entities, only path dharmas are uncontaminated. So there is no chance one who has right view has a contaminated view.

Indeed, as Nāgārjuna points out it is by relying on conventional truth that one understands the ultimate. So your portrayal of the hopeless confusion of the common person applies only to those who have not entered the door of Dharma. That door is only entered by seeking refuge in the Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 30th, 2017 at 11:42 PM
Title: Re: Bonpos vs Gelugs?
Content:
Ayu said:
I neither ever heard of any "hate" against any tradition or religion by Gelugpas.

Malcolm wrote:
You need to study Tibetan Religious history. The Gelugpas have a long history of forcibly converting monasteries and suppressing the works of those they consider dangerous. This continued until the present Dalai Lama put a halt to it.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 30th, 2017 at 11:38 PM
Title: Re: Why Secular Buddhism is Not True
Content:
DharmaChakra said:
...

tiagolps said:
No disrespect but... were did you get all this from? just curious


DharmaChakra said:
From living and travelling in circle of sadhus in India from a fairly early age for almost 30 years and belonging and initiated into to oral traditions.

Malcolm wrote:
So basically, you are not a follower of Buddhadharma.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 30th, 2017 at 11:37 PM
Title: Re: Why Secular Buddhism is Not True
Content:


DharmaChakra  said:
Yes Siddharta when he realized Buddha, found Sanatana Dharma

tiagolps said:
That's Hinduism buddy.



DharmaChakra said:
Not exactly as I dont know of any isms in Dharma traditions, do you know the Pali, Sanskrit or Tibetan word for ism.  They are Sanskrit words, meaning that Dharma is eternal, or ever existing, and no it doesnt have anything to do with eternalism or is unique to any religious order.

Malcolm wrote:
Bauddhadharma is one thing, Sanatanadharma something else. The latter,  Sanatanadharma, has always attacked Bauddhadharma since the 10th century.


DharmaChakra said:
Sanatana Dharma and Buddha Dharma are one.

Malcolm wrote:
Not from the point of view of those who follow Buddhadharma and find many wrong views in the Vedas, Vedanta, the Puranas, and so on.


DharmaChakra said:
How did Buddha discover and continue traditions of Sanatana Dharma

Malcolm wrote:
He didn't.

DharmaChakra said:
He declared that His path is the Sanatan Dharm ("Eso Sanatanno Dhammo").

Malcolm wrote:
No, such a phrase does not exist in the sūtras.


DharmaChakra said:
I can understand why people in the Tibetan Traditions have some issues with Stephen Batchelor.

Malcolm wrote:
He rejects rebirth and karma, he therefore rejects Dharma.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 30th, 2017 at 10:57 PM
Title: Re: Bonpos vs Gelugs?
Content:
Miroku said:
Oh, are they? Didn't know that. Can you show us some more recent instances of this hate?


Malcolm wrote:
Well, when I was in Amdo, driving over this mountain pass, the Bonpos would paint out Om mani padme hum, and paint their own six syllable mantra, Om ma tri mu ye sa le du, over it. The Buddhists would do the same thing to the Bon mantra, and this was repeated over and over again in this part of Amdo.

If you talk to many Tibetan Lamas, their attitude towards Bon is that it is an imitation of Buddhism with a fake history.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 30th, 2017 at 10:51 PM
Title: Re: Why Secular Buddhism is Not True
Content:


Dan74 said:
Yeah sure, but what is really meant by "conceives of right view"? What is to "possess the Dharma"? I don't know. To me it seems that a deluded wordling is by definition incapable of "conceiving of right view". In his or her mind, even the words of the Buddha will be chopped down to his own size, beaten into his conceptual framework and twisted by his clinging and aversion. Aye, there's the rub...

Malcolm wrote:
There are two kinds of right view: mundane and supermundane.

You are overextending the notion of "deluded" to mean incapacitated.

When we use the term "deluded," we simply mean that someone is mistaken about whether or not there is a self that can be found, which is either the same as or different from the aggregates, or that someone is mistaken about the consequences of their actions, or os mistaken about what is a real source of refuge. It does not mean that such a person cannot distinguish between cars and chairs.

Mundane right view cures mistaken notions about the self, mistaken notions about causes and effects, as well as mistaken notions about sources of refuge.

It is possible to be an ordinary, unawakened person, and also be undeluded in a conventional sense. This is what the two paths below the path of seeing entail. These two paths are the path of accumulation and the path of application. People who have taken the bodhisattva vow, and are applying themselves to understanding emptiness are not deluded in a conventional sense even if they have not "seen the truth" one sees on the path of seeing.

Basically, when one rejects rebirth (which is a rejection of cause and effect), when one is mistaken about the sources of refuge, or when one is mistaken about the existence of the self, then we can say one is deluded.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 30th, 2017 at 9:14 PM
Title: Re: Bonpos vs Gelugs?
Content:


Miroku said:
Anyway the hate you talk about is long gone and was between shamanistic traditions and buddhism.

Malcolm wrote:
Are you kidding? Bonpos are still the redheaded stepchildren of Tibetan Buddhism.


