﻿Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, March 2nd, 2017 at 2:24 AM
Title: Re: if we are Buddhas are we the 3 Kayas
Content:


Tsongkhapafan said:
Form is a manifestation of emptiness, but it is not emptiness. Emptiness appears as form but they are different.

Of course emptiness has a generic image - all experiences of emptiness on the paths of accumulation and preparation are conceptual experiences of emptiness; it's completely perceptible otherwise it could not be realised. It is impossible to go from no experience of emptiness to a direct, non-conceptual experience of emptiness.

Malcolm wrote:
The "emptiness" meditated on those paths is not emptiness. It is an intellectual fabrications of the mind. It is not in anyway a generic image of emptiness, unless of course you think the word "emptiness" that appears in our mind when we think of emptiness is its generic image. Otherwise, unlike a pot, for example, which has apprehensible characteristics, emptiness has no apprehensible characteristics. It is blindly ignorant to assert that it does.

Tsongkhapafan said:
So now you're telling me that the cause of the direct realisation of emptiness on the path of seeing is a meditation on something that is not emptiness? Go figure! Do you accept that through the generic image of table we can know table? Similarly, through the generic image of emptiness we can know emptiness, initially conceptually and later non-conceptually.

Malcolm wrote:
The difference between a table and "emptiness" is that the former has apprehensible characteristics, being conditioned, while the latter does not, being unconditioned.

Tsongkhapafan said:
Emptiness is a phenomenon that is realised through the explicit negation of inherent existence.

Malcolm wrote:
"Negation of inherent existence" is a concept. It does not render emptiness something with apprehensible characteristics, like a pot or a table.

Tsongkhapafan said:
The generic image that remains after this negation is emptiness and is the object of wisdom realising emptiness.

Malcolm wrote:
A non-implicative negation has nothing by which it can be apprehended. An implicative negation on the other hand, something like, "A forest is empty of a village," bears apprehensible characteristics.

Tsongkhapafan said:
The characteristic of emptiness is mere absence of inherent existence. It is ignorant to assert that emptiness has no definable characteristics - by what uncommon sign would it be known, then, and without an uncommon sign how could you distinguish emptiness from nothingness or from empty space?

Malcolm wrote:
The absence of inherent existence also has no apprehensible characteristic. What is its shape? What is its size? What is its number?

You keep on defining one inapprehensible thing by another. Space is used as a synonym for emptiness precisely because like space, emptiness has no apprehensible characteristics, since emptiness is unconditioned.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, March 2nd, 2017 at 1:17 AM
Title: Re: if we are Buddhas are we the 3 Kayas
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Actually, the text says quite literally, "matter is empty, emptiness is matter."  It is an identity proposition, just as Nāgārjuna famously states:
Samsara isn't the slightest bit different from nirvana;
nirvana isn't the slightest bit different from samsara;
whatever is the limit of nirvana,
that is the limit of samsara—
those two are not even slightest bit different.
BTW, emptiness has no generic image since it is not perceptible entity.

Tsongkhapafan said:
Form is a manifestation of emptiness, but it is not emptiness. Emptiness appears as form but they are different.

Of course emptiness has a generic image - all experiences of emptiness on the paths of accumulation and preparation are conceptual experiences of emptiness; it's completely perceptible otherwise it could not be realised. It is impossible to go from no experience of emptiness to a direct, non-conceptual experience of emptiness.

Malcolm wrote:
The "emptiness" meditated on those paths is not emptiness. It is an intellectual fabrications of the mind. It is not in anyway a generic image of emptiness, unless of course you think the word "emptiness" that appears in our mind when we think of emptiness is its generic image. Otherwise, unlike a pot, for example, which has apprehensible characteristics, emptiness has no apprehensible characteristics. It is blindly ignorant to assert that it does.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, March 2nd, 2017 at 12:39 AM
Title: Re: if we are Buddhas are we the 3 Kayas
Content:


Malcolm wrote:
What happened to "Matter is empty, emptiness is matter, there is no matter apart from emptiness, there is no emptiness apart from matter?"

Tsongkhapafan said:
It's still there - the four profundities from the Heart Sutra also has the meaning that although form and emptiness are the same entity or nature they also are nominally distinct, not identical phenomena. This is the implicit meaning of  'emptiness is not other than form, form also is not other than emptiness'.

If form and emptiness are identical, they would have the same generic image but they don't. There would be no need for two names, only one; To have a union of the two truths there needs to be two truths, not just one.

Malcolm wrote:
Actually, the text says quite literally, "matter is empty, emptiness is matter."  It is an identity proposition, just as Nāgārjuna famously states:

Samsara isn't the slightest bit different from nirvana;
nirvana isn't the slightest bit different from samsara;
whatever is the limit of nirvana,
that is the limit of samsara—
those two are not even slightest bit different.
BTW, emptiness has no generic image since it is not perceptible entity.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, March 1st, 2017 at 11:27 PM
Title: Re: if we are Buddhas are we the 3 Kayas
Content:


Malcolm wrote:
This is like claiming water and wetness are nominally distinct and therefore not identical. This is an error.

Tsongkhapafan said:
Water and wetness are not identical. Wetness is a characteristic of water but not water itself. Emptiness is a characteristic of the mind, not the mind itself and it is an error to think otherwise. Such subtle distinctions are important.

Malcolm wrote:
Nāgārjuna shows that distinguishing an entity from its characteristic is deluded, in fact he shows that there is no difference at all.

What happened to "Matter is empty, emptiness is matter, there is no matter apart from emptiness, there is no emptiness apart from matter?"


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, March 1st, 2017 at 9:49 PM
Title: Re: if we are Buddhas are we the 3 Kayas
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
This is because you do not consider emptiness and mind to be nondual. Therefore, you make false distinctions such as "emptiness is not aware of anything."

Tsongkhapafan said:
I do consider them non-dual but that doesn't mean they are identical because they are nominally distinct.

Malcolm wrote:
This is like claiming water and wetness are nominally distinct and therefore not identical. This is an error.


Tsongkhapafan said:
I think the difference is that you do not accept conventional truths so for you, anything ultimate has to be unconditioned whereas Tsongkhapa accepted the validity of conventional truths and taught the union of the two truths; although mind and emptiness are one entity the are not identical.


Malcolm wrote:
"although mind and emptiness are one entity the are not identical"

This is incoherent.



Tsongkhapafan said:
You are both talking about the same thing, ye shes/jñāna. Some people translate it as "primordial wisdom", others as "wisdom."
I don't think we are. You assert that Primordial Wisdom is permanent but because it is mind, it cannot be permanent. Emptiness is not wisdom, it is the object of wisdom. Wisdom is mind and its object is emptiness and as I said before, they are not the same.

Malcolm wrote:
You are getting attached to two English term meant to translate the same Tibetan word, ye shes.

Tsongkhapafan said:
He is talking about luminosity. When the mind is merged with its own luminosity, it becomes unconditioned. It becomes buddhahood.
Luminosity is just the conventional nature of the mind. Why would something that is impermanent (luminosity) which is the conventional nature of the mind (also impermanent) become permanent? It's impossible. A conditioned phenomenon can never become unconditioned. Furthermore an unconditioned phenomenon cannot function, so an unconditioned Buddhahood would be inert and pointless; it would lack the very ability to perform the function for which it was attained - the benefit all living beings.

Malcolm wrote:
[/quote]

Luminosity is not impermanent nor is it conditioned. Your statement contradicts the Buddha's own words from the Lalitavistara Sūtra:
The ambrosial Dharma I obtained is
profound, immaculate, luminous, and unconditioned. 
Even if I explain it, no one will understand.
I think I shall remain silent in the forest.
That which is free from words cannot be understood through words,
likewise, the nature of phenomena is like space, 
totally free of the movements of mind and intellect.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, March 1st, 2017 at 11:02 AM
Title: Re: if we are Buddhas are we the 3 Kayas
Content:
Tsongkhapafan said:
Firstly, thanks for the explanation.

conebeckham said:
There are two "gotras," or "elements," or "potentials."  There is the Naturally present potential, and the Developing potential. The Geluk position, stated simply, is that this naturally present potential is merely the emptiness of  each sentient being's mind.  In Nyingma and Kagyu presentations, the Naturally Present Potential is also emptiness, but it is the Wisdom that is the union of emptiness and primordial awareness.

Tsongkhapafan said:
It doesn't make any sense to assert that naturally abiding Buddha nature is anything other than emptiness, as increasing Buddha nature is the very subtle mind and because this is mind, it is aware; emptiness is not aware of anything.

Malcolm wrote:
This is because you do not consider emptiness and mind to be nondual. Therefore, you make false distinctions such as "emptiness is not aware of anything."



Tsongkhapafan said:
From the Gelugpa viewpoint there is no such thing as Primordial Wisdom, otherwise living beings would not be ignorant. Sentient beings are not cognitive errors any more than the pus and blood that appears to a hungry ghost is a cognitive error - it's a valid karmic appearance and it exists for a hungry ghost even though it is created by ignorance and karma. For Buddhas there are no sentient beings because they have completely pure minds.

Malcolm wrote:
You are both talking about the same thing, ye shes/jñāna. Some people translate it as "primordial wisdom", others as "wisdom."





Tsongkhapafan said:
It seems incorrect to me to assert that Primordial Wisdom is permanent, yet it is wisdom. Wisdom is only related to mind and mind is not permanent otherwise it could not function; thus Primordial Wisdom does not exist.

Malcolm wrote:
He is talking about luminosity. When the mind is merged with its own luminosity, it becomes unconditioned. It becomes buddhahood.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, March 1st, 2017 at 5:23 AM
Title: Re: if we are Buddhas are we the 3 Kayas
Content:
Johnny Dangerous said:
You seriously need to read the Uttaratantra or The Lankvatara section on the Dharmata Buddha. Buddhas, (and by extension Buddha Nature) don't have effort, nor "will" of the kind you describe. The final fruit of something like Bodhisattva aspiration prayers - which are a thing of effort, is a state which is beyond effort, and benefits beings without "will" or anything similar, as far as I understand it.

Minobu said:
yeah well i don;t have the time or the book today..
but i will say this...

There is a reason Lord Sakyamuni never spoke of God the Creator.
And make no mistake what i read here is a form of creationism when you refer to "THIS STATE" in the way you all so easily can...

and i now see why Malcolm and Tonskappafan has all this discourses about Lord Buddha Nagarjuna and Madyamika and the concept of emptiness from madyamika...it can't jive with this form of creationism...

and always be suspicious when someone won;t answer directly...tells you to go get a master on the subject and become their pupil or simply go read this book first....

as per the will ...go back and read the context in which i first used it...it's not about a discussion of will or the term i made up on the fly...

with Big Love
d

Malcolm wrote:
"The state" is talked about also in the Lotus Sūtra, just not extensively:

Tathāgata is suchness [tathāta]. Suchness is the limit of reality. The limit of reality is the dharmadhātu. Suchness, the limit of reality, and the dharmadhātu are names for Dharma of the Saddharmapuṇḍarika.
FYI, there is no creationism in Dzogchen.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, February 26th, 2017 at 4:27 AM
Title: Re: Indigenizing Dharma
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
The inability to discern a correct path from a wrong path and a higher path from a lower path is a form of ignorance.

Rakz said:
Since all paths in Buddhism lead to lead to enlightenment, it's a useless activity to label a path higher or lower. It benefits nobody and causes unnecessary division.

Malcolm wrote:
Some paths are more rapid than others. Some paths do not lead all the way to complete buddhahood.


Rakz said:
All Buddhist paths lead to some realization, but those realizations are surpassable until one reaches the apex of yānas.

Malcolm wrote:
There's no such thing as the "apex of yanas". This line of thinking does nothing but boost the ego which is why we often see Vajrayanists(not all) belittle other practices and think it is perfectly fine when they are just creating more bad karma for themselves.[/quote]

Of course there is an apex of yānas. For example, Śantideve points out that the ultimate of the lower is the relative of the higher in reference to tenet systems. Thus the view of Vaibhāṣika is lower than that of Sautrantika; the view of Sautrantika is lower than that of Yogacara, the view of Yogacara is lower than that of Madhyamaka and so on.

While indeed it is incorrect to needlessly belittle anyone's path, whether Buddhist or nonBuddhist, it is much worse karma to abandon a higher path for a lower path.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, February 26th, 2017 at 2:13 AM
Title: Re: Is Vajrayana really the fastest path?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
'khor lo.

Losal Samten said:
Huh, cheers. The Indians used dhatu, just to clarify, right?

Malcolm wrote:
Pretty sure they used the term cakra.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, February 26th, 2017 at 2:01 AM
Title: Re: Indigenizing Dharma
Content:
Rakz said:
Someone who is always knocking down "lesser" paths is a sign of low realization.

Malcolm wrote:
The inability to discern a correct path from a wrong path and a higher path from a lower path is a form of ignorance.

By your reasoning, it is also incorrect to state that nonBuddhist paths do not lead to any realization at all.

All Buddhist paths lead to some realization, but those realizations are surpassable until one reaches the apex of yānas.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, February 26th, 2017 at 1:58 AM
Title: Re: Is Vajrayana really the fastest path?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
the three wheels of the emptiness

Losal Samten said:
Any reason you choose 'wheels' as the translation as opposed to the usual 'spheres'?


Malcolm wrote:
'khor lo.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, February 25th, 2017 at 11:40 PM
Title: Re: Is Vajrayana really the fastest path?
Content:
AlexanderS said:
What is the short explanation on the difference between mundane and transcendent accumulations?

Grigoris said:
First thing that popped into my head too. I've never heard of merit being categorised in this manner.

Malcolm wrote:
Mundane merit is exhaustible. For example, this eon begins with a compliment of natural merit; but as latent afflictions become more and more prevalent in the sentient beings who inhabit it, that merit declines resulting the destruction of the billion world system aka the universe.

Transcendent merit is merit dedicated keeping in mind the three wheels of the emptiness of someone dedicating merit, someone to receive it, and the act of dedication. This merit is indestructible and ripens as the major and minor marks, etc.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, February 25th, 2017 at 11:04 PM
Title: Re: Is Vajrayana really the fastest path?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
The statement "Buddhahood in one lifetime" refers to a complete beginner with no accumulations.

Grigoris said:
Must have some pretty decent accumulations to have been born as a human with all the qualities, characteristics and endowments necessary for enlightenment.

Anyway, right now you are asking us to buy that there are beings that, during their infinite round of rebirths in samsara, have acquired no accumulations at all???

Malcolm wrote:
There are two kinds of accumulation of merit: mundane and transcendent — the accumulations I was referring to were the latter.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, February 25th, 2017 at 10:43 PM
Title: Re: Is Vajrayana really the fastest path?
Content:
smcj said:
I believe that only the vajrayana offers the posibility of Buddhahood within one lifetime.
So do I.

But then I've also been taught that since i can't see karma I can't tell how many lifetimes a person has already been practicing. So maybe somebody has been at it for a long time already and is ripe to the point where any little thing might tip be what it takes for them to become enlightened. Individual karma trumps general principle.

Grigoris said:
^^^This often overlooked (especially by western Buddhists) point!^^^

Malcolm wrote:
The statement "Buddhahood in one lifetime" refers to a complete beginner with no accumulations.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, February 25th, 2017 at 10:22 PM
Title: Re: Enthronement Ceremony of the 42nd Sakya Trizin
Content:
methar said:
Once their is a new 42nd Sakya Trizin what will happen to the 41st Sakya Trinzin.

Will he still have the title of the 41st or will he now have to change his name?

I look forward to the enthornement.


Malcolm wrote:
Sakya Trizin will becomes Sakya Trisur.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, February 25th, 2017 at 10:14 AM
Title: Re: Indigenizing Dharma
Content:
Tārāmitra said:
Similarly, many great Vajrayāna sages have taught Pure Land practices and accepted them as necessary elements for a complete and all-embracing Dharmic tradition in traditional Tibet.

Malcolm wrote:
The "pure land" tradition in Tibetan Buddhism is entered via empowerment. It is not a sūtrayāna tradition.

Tārāmitra said:
That is a nuance worth mentioning. I don't think it changes anything I've said regarding the relevance of inclusion of the Pure Land approach in general though. Did you read Tashi Nyima’s article, and if yes, what did you think?

Malcolm wrote:
I generally dismiss cultural arguments for the usefulness of this or that teaching. Such commentaries do not speak to the reality of the situation on the ground, in my opinion.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, February 25th, 2017 at 9:50 AM
Title: Re: Indigenizing Dharma
Content:
Tārāmitra said:
Similarly, many great Vajrayāna sages have taught Pure Land practices and accepted them as necessary elements for a complete and all-embracing Dharmic tradition in traditional Tibet.

Malcolm wrote:
The "pure land" tradition in Tibetan Buddhism is entered via empowerment. It is not a sūtrayāna tradition.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, February 25th, 2017 at 5:01 AM
Title: Re: Is Buddha the ultimate teacher
Content:
florin said:
I wouldn't consider Buddha,  an external being , as the ultimate teacher.
The ultimate teacher would have to transcend all limitations related to space, time and always be present, constantly teaching and displaying wisdom beyond any limited consideration of teacher-student relationship.

Malcolm wrote:
This corresponds to the sambhogakāyas five certainties.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, February 25th, 2017 at 5:00 AM
Title: Re: Indigenizing Dharma
Content:


Tārāmitra said:
As for the debate concerning the relevance of various Dharmic paths under these conditions, my own take on the matter is thus: accelerated paths like the Vajrayāna are complex and extremely elaborate and the strictly Tantric dimension is not the one suited to the largest number of people as far as the ultimate result is concerned.

Malcolm wrote:
This is not the perspective of the tantras themselves. Their perspective is quite the opposite.

Tārāmitra said:
Vajrayāna CAN lead to enlightenment in one lifetime for SOME people, and in these cases, concerning individuals of a highly yogic predisposition, Vajrayāna is certainly a more effective way.

Malcolm wrote:
Someone who received abhisheka and maintains their basic samaya, will, without any practice in this lifetime at all achieve buddhahood within at most 16 lifetimes, or so the tantras promise us.

Tārāmitra said:
But when it comes to MOST western seekers today, a more simple path like Pure Land can be just as beneficial, as in these cases rebirth in a Pure Land is present as the most realistic potential for immediate result of practice in one life.

Malcolm wrote:
It is nevertheless a slow path.

Tārāmitra said:
The vastness of Vajrayāna may simply seem overwhelming for many people and more intricate than it has to be in order to secure the best result most people can really expect in these degenerate times.

Malcolm wrote:
The essence of Vajrayāna practice is guru yoga, not practicing the Kalacakra or [insert yidam here] creation and completion stages.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, February 25th, 2017 at 4:52 AM
Title: Re: Indigenizing Dharma
Content:
Grigoris said:
I guess we are defining tension differently then.  Tension, as a psychological term (associated with the fight or flight reaction), is also linked to alertness and vigilance.  Which are also positive mental functions.

Malcolm wrote:
You are defining this from the point of maintaining an object, ala sutrayāna.

Grigoris said:
I'm defining it froma quasi behavioural science pseudo Abhidharmic position.

The fact of the matter is that saying that tension--->distraction is like saying relaxation--->dullness.  It is not 100% valid.  Excessive tension can lead to distraction and excessive relaxation can lead to dullness.    But realistically, both are necessary (or unnecessary) to a degree.

Malcolm wrote:
What you are describing is slackness, not relaxation.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, February 25th, 2017 at 1:41 AM
Title: Re: Integrating Dzogchen ect
Content:
Grigoris said:
WTF are you talking about?  Is there any activity that does not originate from the natural state?

Miroku said:
I do realize now that it sounds horrible, however what I meant is that he doesnt have to feel stressed out about visualisations like he (at least from my understanding of the op) kinda is. Although it can be all perfectly integrated it is still better not to feel stressed out about visualisations, right?

Lukeinaz said:
Yes, a bit stressed.

About that "soup" would it be advisable to have two separate practices then?

For instance start with ati guru yoga finish then start my traditional (secondary practices) including seven limb prayers, deity practice ect?


Malcolm wrote:
If you are doing some kind of Guru Yoga already, you do not have to change anything.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, February 25th, 2017 at 1:37 AM
Title: Re: Indigenizing Dharma
Content:
Grigoris said:
Tension (as opposed to relaxation) is not an aspect of the nature of mind?

Malcolm wrote:
If you are tense, you are distracted.

Grigoris said:
It doesn't answer what I asked, but I'll take the bait:

If you are too tense, yes.  But if you are too relaxed, also yes.

A degree of tension is also one of the ingredients of vigilance and attention.

Malcolm wrote:
No, tension interferes with mindfulness and attention.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, February 25th, 2017 at 1:14 AM
Title: Re: Indigenizing Dharma
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
If you wish to see the nature of your mind, you are not going to do so within a state of tension.

Grigoris said:
Tension (as opposed to relaxation) is not an aspect of the nature of mind?

Malcolm wrote:
If you are tense, you are distracted.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, February 24th, 2017 at 10:31 PM
Title: Re: Indigenizing Dharma
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
If you felt more relaxed, this is a good thing.

Grigoris said:
Taking benzodiazepenes also makes you feel more relaxed.  So does good sex.  So what?

Malcolm wrote:
If you wish to see the nature of your mind, you are not going to do so within a state of tension.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, February 23rd, 2017 at 10:27 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:
climb-up said:
When I got interested in receiving DI from ChNN I looked as hard as I could for any scandals, shady behaviors or anything related.
Nothing.

As for his approach. Have you read any of his publicly available books introducing Dzogchen?
The only reason I ask is that if you are sincerely interested in receiving his teachings (and obviously you are at least sincerely interested) then reading some of his books is not too much work AND all of the answers that you've got so far are given in his books, along with the context of explaining his understanding of Dzogchen.

"Dzogchen the self perfected state" is probably my favorite. It is very clear about non-denominational, but it very clearly explains everything.

"Crystal and the way of light" is a little thicker, goes a little deeper into technical stuff and is autobiographical. Really wonderful read!

"Dzogchen teachings" is one that I found in a bookstore early on and found useful even if I didn't understand it all at the time.

I came to Dzogchen from outside of Buddhism, with no interest in it whatsoever.
For me personally I have found it very useful to study more Buddhism, both to understand the culture that the dzogchen teachings come from and to help me in those times that I can't constantly rest in non-dual contemplation.
So, while "Buddhism" is not the main point (although Buddhism main point is the main point, and is contained within the beautiful dzogchen teachings), you could say that my learning dzogchen brought at least one person to the dharma (and I'm sure many others).


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, February 23rd, 2017 at 9:53 AM
Title: Re: Indigenizing Dharma
Content:
Rakz said:
i have a tough time believing dzogchen is superior above all other methods just because some texts from tibet say so...

Malcolm wrote:
You don't need to believe anything. Understanding is the point.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, February 23rd, 2017 at 5:25 AM
Title: Re: Indigenizing Dharma
Content:


Malcolm wrote:
That is not what I mean. Direct introduction always works. Anyone who receives it can then use Dzogchen methods to either discover that they have not discovered, or reinforce what they discovered.

Rakz said:
I received transmission in november 2015. Practiced it for a little while as well. Nothing really happened except for feeling a bit calmer. Doesn't seem different from any other meditation.

Malcolm wrote:
If you felt more relaxed, this is a good thing.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, February 23rd, 2017 at 4:13 AM
Title: Re: Indigenizing Dharma
Content:
smcj said:
That is not what I mean. Direct introduction always works. Anyone who receives it can then use Dzogchen methods to either discover that they have not discovered, or reinforce what they discovered.
Right.

So do you include Jax in that statement?

Malcolm wrote:
I include anyone who has received introduction in that statement. He too can use use the methods to discover what he has not discovered or reinforce what he has discovered. Jax's problem is that he rejected his teachers and has even rejected direct introduction. So in his case, he has impeded himself.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, February 23rd, 2017 at 3:55 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:
Tārāmitra said:
I don't think there's really much more to be said in this particular debate. But to answer one direct question:



Not for Buddhists, no. For people arriving straight from the street without any Buddhist practice, I am personally of the view that a basic grounding in Sutra is the safest approach rather than going straight onto Dzogchen and Dzogchen only, but I understand and accept that there are other views on the matter.


Johnny Dangerous said:
Are you interested in whether Rincpohes approach would fit you, or simply in trying to find fault with it through the lens of orthodoxy though? That's always an exercise you can engage in, but I don't know if it will get you anywhere.

Tārāmitra said:
Sir, if you have read all my posts in this discussion, I would be surprised if I was not able to clearly express my respectful and sincere motives. I have never questioned his orthodoxy, only trying to establish whether his approach will be compatible with the requirements of my own path. It started with my asking for testimonies as to the quality of Rinpoche’s conduct, in view of the fact that we are asked to carefully scrutinise prospective masters, a need reinforced by the bad examples that occasionally surface in this regard. Then someone said he places no emphasis at all on śīla (but personally behaves respectably), leading to the discussion on that.

Malcolm wrote:
I think you would have more difficulty with DC people. Many of them have no interest in Buddhadharma apart from ChNN's own teachings.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, February 23rd, 2017 at 3:52 AM
Title: Re: Indigenizing Dharma
Content:


smcj said:
Plus simply giving someone DI right off the bat only rarely works.

Malcolm wrote:
This means you do not understand that is meant in Dzogchen by direct introduction. It always works.

smcj said:
There is a perspective where all Dharma works all the time. The late Kalu Rinpoche once said that he saw all the monks as Arhats. From the ultimate perspective the vows they took also always worked and were fully accomplished upon taking them.

So yes, that type of perspective where Dharma always works is present in Vajrayana. That does not meant that the group of monks I was sitting behind were actually Arhats, but that from the ultimate perspective the simultaneous fruition of their practice could be seen--even in the lowly Pratimoksha Vows. There's no such thing as "a little bit pregnant", and on the ultimate perspective there no such thing as "a little bit enlightened". The presence of Dharma at all is the presence of "a little bit enlightened".

But effectively there is a difference.

Malcolm wrote:
That is not what I mean. Direct introduction always works. Anyone who receives it can then use Dzogchen methods to either discover that they have not discovered, or reinforce what they discovered.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, February 23rd, 2017 at 3:24 AM
Title: Direct Introduction Always Works
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
MOD NOTE: Split from topic "Indigenizing Dharma" in the Lounge.
-MOD QQ


smcj said:
Plus simply giving someone DI right off the bat only rarely works.

Malcolm wrote:
This means you do not understand that is meant in Dzogchen by direct introduction. It always works.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, February 23rd, 2017 at 3:10 AM
Title: Re: Indigenizing Dharma
Content:
Tārāmitra said:
The most suitable teaching for westerners is one that cuts through all their modernist conditioning and makes them detach from the zeitgeist dominating the modern world.

Malcolm wrote:
No, the most suitable teaching for Westerners is one that introduces them to their real nature as fast as possible.

smcj said:
Hypothetically, it is entirely possible that "cutting through modernist conditioning and the zeitgeist dominating the modern world" is the fastest route to successfully introduce them to their true nature. It depends on one's karma.

Malcolm wrote:
People do not really wish to live in a pre-modern era. If they think they do, they are kidding themselves.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, February 23rd, 2017 at 2:57 AM
Title: Re: Indigenizing Dharma
Content:
Tārāmitra said:
The most suitable teaching for westerners is one that cuts through all their modernist conditioning and makes them detach from the zeitgeist dominating the modern world.

Malcolm wrote:
No, the most suitable teaching for Westerners is one that introduces them to their real nature as fast as possible.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, February 23rd, 2017 at 2:56 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:
Tārāmitra said:
If one has to rely on a vow to be honest, one is not very honest.
Yes, one might say that. But the Lord Buddha nevertheless saw it as necessary, given the degenerate condition of mankind in his days. Today mankind has become even more spiritually reduced than in the Śākyamuni’s time. We are not primordial men. The perfect selflessness that would make one spontaneously act with perfect purity without guidance by any formal support may be awakened through long practice, it is not natural and actual in the beginning of the spiritual journey. So that is my own understanding of the matter, anyway. I am certainly not saying everyone must believe as I do.

Johnny Dangerous said:
That is actually an argument more in favor of Tantra or Dzogchen in this age, than in favor of sutra-style viewpoints on sila.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, February 23rd, 2017 at 2:16 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:
Tārāmitra said:
I get your meaning, Malcolm. Thank you for your patient explanations.

I am not so much saying that vows as such are required. What I do think is required is clear teachings on śīla, that to be understood in principal depth and interiorised. For example, the precept against theft is more subtle in essence than what is immediately evident, perhaps. It is rather straight forward to avoid shop lifting, for example, but there are far more subtle and hard to detective ways of taking from others, for example by (often impulsively and unconsciously) playing various games of manipulation in order to suck energy from other people.
This is not covered in the precepts. The five precepts only cover physical actions.

It would obviously depend on whether he was in a position to identify the deviation and attempt to correct it.

Malcolm wrote:
When he thinks people are going a wrong way, he lets them know.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, February 23rd, 2017 at 1:02 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Rinpoche places no emphasis at all on śīla.

dzogchungpa said:
This is not exactly true.

Malcolm wrote:
It is entirely true.

Rinpoche includes these things because they need to be understood, not because this is how one is to practice. He states in the same book:
However, those who follow Dzogchen teachings on the basis of clear understanding of the fundamental characteristics of the kinds of conduct in the diverse paths should apply themselves until they are able to unify or integrate their essential points in the dimension of the behavior of Samantabhadra of Ati.
And, having been his student for the past 25 years, I really do know his point of view concerning vows. If someone finds being a bhikşu helpful in their practice, then he is all for it. But it is not necessary. It is not even necessary for Dzogchen practitioners to take the five precepts or engage in a refuge ceremony. From his point of view, one begins with direct introduction first, not first taking pratimoksha vows, then bodhisattva vows, then vajrayāna vows and so on.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, February 23rd, 2017 at 12:46 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:
Tārāmitra said:
Let me clarify that I am not seeking controversy here, or disputation for its own sake, and I hope I am not, without intention, coming across as offensive or arrogant. I certainly accept that my approach to this question is not the only valid one in all cases, but I still hold that it is the safest approach for most contemporaries interested in Dzogchen. Maybe I am mistaken, but that seems to be an open question.

My thanks to Norwegian for his elaborate reply:
Sutra is the path of Renunciation. Tantra is the path of Transformation. Dzogchen is the path of Self-Liberation. All three paths are unique and complete on their own.
Malcolm just said Dzogchen is the essence of Mahayana, which seems somewhat dissonant with this view of three separate self-sufficient vehicles; but Mahayana is basically based on Sutra teachings. Of course, inasmuch as Dzogchen too aims at realising Buddhahood for the sake of all beings, they are the same in essence.

Malcolm wrote:
Dzogchen is the essence of Mahāyāna because it results in the anuttarasamyaksambodhi described in Mahāyāna sūtra.



Tārāmitra said:
How about pitfalls? Is it really impossible for a Dzogchen practitioner to have downfalls? Seems unrealistic to me that one is guaranteed success just by being a Dzogchen practitioner. Without any formal ethical supports the danger would seem to be greater.

Malcolm wrote:
One only needs a vow if one has a problem to curb. For example, of you are addicted to killing things, you can take a vow to stop. If you are addicted to stealing and so on, same deal. If you do not engage in taking life, taking what has not been given, lying, and so on, what possible use is a vow to refrain from those things?

A Dzogchen practitioner might observe a vow against drinking if they have a problem with alcohol that causes them to lose their mindfulness. Otherwise, there is no need for that.


Tārāmitra said:
Nobody replied to this question of mine:
To leave the question of śīla up to the disciples seems dangerous. Will not Rinpoche suffer certain consequences if some of his disciples go down wrong paths which they justify to themselves through Dzogchen, and end up in hell-states?

Malcolm wrote:
Of course not. Their misconceptions are not his.


Tārāmitra said:
I don't have any knowledge about how these dangers are viewed in Dzogchen, but I know that this danger is massively present in Tantra.


Malcolm wrote:
People have managed to turn the three vows into a kind of golden chain.

If you are a Dzogchen practitioner, you do not really need to worry about vows and so on. It is better to work with circumstances.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, February 23rd, 2017 at 12:10 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:
Tārāmitra said:
If one has to rely on a vow to be honest, one is not very honest.
Yes, one might say that. But the Lord Buddha nevertheless saw it as necessary, given the degenerate condition of mankind in his days.

Malcolm wrote:
So you think all nonbuddhists are liars?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, February 23rd, 2017 at 12:09 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:
Tārāmitra said:
Personally I am of the opinion that Dzogchen should be supported by a firm Buddhist platform and shouldn't be taught on its own to seekers not established in fundamental Dharma.

Malcolm wrote:
This is your limitation. It is not the limitation of Dzogchen. Dzogchen is an independent, self-contained vehicle that includes the meaning of all lower yānas.

Tārāmitra said:
How often did this isolation of Dzogchen actually occur in traditional Tibet, though? How many people entered Dzogchen without first being Buddhists?

Call it a limitation, but I'm not abandoning my commitment to the Mahayana in order to practice Dzogchen on its own. Would my approach be a problem?

Malcolm wrote:
Dzogchen is the essence of Mahāyāna.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, February 22nd, 2017 at 11:46 PM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:
Tārāmitra said:
Personally I am of the opinion that Dzogchen should be supported by a firm Buddhist platform and shouldn't be taught on its own to seekers not established in fundamental Dharma.

Malcolm wrote:
This is your limitation. It is not the limitation of Dzogchen. Dzogchen is an independent, self-contained vehicle that includes the meaning of all lower yānas.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, February 22nd, 2017 at 11:34 PM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:
Tārāmitra said:
Thank you for your helpful replies.
Rinpoche places no emphasis at all on śīla. He also is not a "crazy" wisdom kind of guy.
Very well. But as for śīla, does this mean Rinpoche instructs Western disciples in Dzogchen without first (or at the same time) making sure they are established in basic Sutra Buddhism?

Malcolm wrote:
What do you mean by established? When he begins a retreat, he always spends an hour or so discussing the essential differences between the paths of renunciation (Hinayāna and common Mahāyāna), the paths of transformation (Vajrayāna), and the path of self-liberation (Dzogchen/Mahāmudra).



Tārāmitra said:
I think it’s highly crucial that modern westerners interested in pursuing a profound esoteric path like Atiyoga first master basic śīla and the like. For example, can one who habitually lies to his fellow men ever become the Truth? Obviously not.

Malcolm wrote:
If one has to rely on a vow to be honest, one is not very honest.

Norbu Rinpoche does not require anyone to take vows, or undergo formal refuge, and so on.

You will just have to find out for yourself whether you can overcome your prejudices and find benefit from Rinpoche's teachings.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, February 22nd, 2017 at 10:37 PM
Title: Re: Fears mount over scale of Buddhist sect sexual abuse
Content:
Grigoris said:
'ccept that Sangharakshita was not a celibate AND there is no "natural order of things".

Malcolm wrote:
Well, what he did was argue that he had not broken any monastic vows because his original ordination was not valid.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, February 22nd, 2017 at 10:35 PM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:
Tārāmitra said:
So is Rinpoche’s conduct consistently and in easily recognizable essence and appearance in conformity to basic Buddhist Sila, or does he engage much in the profoundly paradoxical “grey zone” of the sort of “crazy wisdom” behaviour that may or may not be actual wisdom and often turns out not to have been demonstrably skilful, as in the case of good ol’ Trungpa Rinpoche (whose insights I still greatly appreciate)? What is Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche’s position?

Malcolm wrote:
Rinpoche places no emphasis at all on śīla. He also is not a "crazy" wisdom kind of guy.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, February 22nd, 2017 at 9:05 PM
Title: Re: Fears mount over scale of Buddhist sect sexual abuse
Content:
Queequeg said:
appeared to be one of the successful efforts to indigenize Buddhism in the West.

We need realized Western teachers, and a lot of them, sooner than later. IMO, our best bet is to establish the institutional support for them to appear and develop within. WBO seemed like a good start.

DGA said:
I agree 100% on the need for realized teachers everywhere, in all nations, speaking all languages.

kirtu said:
We're not going to get that.

Malcolm wrote:
Sure we are.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, February 22nd, 2017 at 6:27 AM
Title: Re: Quickie on the nature of "I"
Content:
Wayfarer said:
Wayfarer is wary of nihilist readings of Mahāyāna.

Malcolm wrote:
Asserting that a cessation is a nonexistent is incorrect. In Mahāyāna, a nonexistent requires an existent.

Wayfarer said:
I have heard that explanation before, and I am not convinced by it.

When it is declarded unequivocally, 'there is an unborn, an unmade, an unfabricated' and that, were there not an unborn, there would be no escape from the born and the made' - I interpret that verse literally.

Malcolm wrote:
This simply means that one's cessations, and birth driven by them can cease.


Wayfarer said:
But the unborn is not something that exists, it is never an object of cognition.

Malcolm wrote:
You need to review what Buddha says about those who claim transcendent principles that are unseen and can never be objects of cognition.


Wayfarer said:
That is why the Aspiration verse says 'it is not existent, even the Victorious ones don't see it.' But it is not non-existent, it is 'the basis of all samsara and Nirvāṇa.' That is what is beyond birth and death, but it is not an object of cognition - one cannot know it apart from the dissolution of the separate self into it.

Malcolm wrote:
Huh? What are you taking about? This is talking about the nature of mind which is empty (it is not existent, even the Victorious ones don't see it) and clear (But it is not non-existent, it is 'the basis of all samsara and Nirvāṇa.').


Wayfarer said:
That is the significance of the dhyana states, that one goes beyond the sense of 'self and other' within which all phenomena arise.

Malcolm wrote:
Dude, no. This Mahāmudra aspiration has nothing to do with dhyāna.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, February 22nd, 2017 at 6:13 AM
Title: Re: Quickie on the nature of "I"
Content:
Wayfarer said:
Wayfarer is wary of nihilist readings of Mahāyāna.

Malcolm wrote:
Asserting that a cessation is a nonexistent is incorrect. In Mahāyāna, a nonexistent requires an existent. In Mahāyāna, we say regularly all phenomena do not arise, are unconditioned, are in a state of nirvana from the beginning, etc. Is this nihilistic? No. Sūtra citations, voluminous ones, can be provided.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, February 22nd, 2017 at 5:58 AM
Title: Re: Quickie on the nature of "I"
Content:
Wayfarer said:
But there is 'the unconditioned, the unbornd, the unmade', which doesn't arise and cease. ...  the extinction of desire (rāgakkhayo) the extinction of hatred (dosakkhayo), the extinction of illusion (mohakkhayo)

Astus said:
It is the extinction of the three poisons that is called the unconditioned. It is not a new state or being, but simply the end of attachment. However, this ending, this absence is no different from other kinds of absences in being unconditioned, hence cessation without analysis (apratisaṃkhyā-nirodha) is counted among unconditioned dharmas.


Malcolm wrote:
Wayfarer keeps holding out for an positive unconditioned.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, February 22nd, 2017 at 5:46 AM
Title: Re: if we are Buddhas are we the 3 Kayas
Content:


Jeff said:
Then how would you respond to the Avatamsaka Sutra...

.

Malcolm wrote:
The Ārya-ghanavyūha-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra is the final section of the Avatamsaka Sutra.

Jeff said:
So then would Buddhahood be like hitting the eject button? Losing the ability to differentiate like Great bodhisattvas?  If so, what is the point of the Sambhogkaya?

Malcolm wrote:
To enjoy (bhoga) the Dharma together (sam) with buddhas and bodhisattvas who are his own embodied (kāya) emanations, as well as bodhisattvas who are reborn in Akaniṣṭha Ghanavyuha.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, February 22nd, 2017 at 5:44 AM
Title: Re: Quickie on the nature of "I"
Content:
Astus said:
Is there such a thing that does not arise and cease?

Wayfarer said:
No, there is no thing which doesn't arise and cease. That's why I wrote no thing =/= nothing. But there is 'the unconditioned, the unbornd, the unmade', which doesn't arise and cease.
O bhikkhus, what is the Absolute (Asaṃkhata, Unconditioned)? It is, O bhikkhus, the extinction of desire (rāgakkhayo) the extinction of hatred (dosakkhayo), the extinction of illusion (mohakkhayo). This, O bhikkhus, is called the Absolute.
SN1

As is made clear in many other passages, it is a mistake to reify the unconditioned. But it's also a mistake to discard the ladder before it's been climbed.

Malcolm wrote:
This just means that the unconditioned is cessation of afflictions, and nothing else. Apart from this cessation, there is no other unconditioned apart from space, which is also a nonentity.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, February 22nd, 2017 at 5:11 AM
Title: Re: The Secret Chö of the Khadro Chaphur Rinpoche
Content:
Lhasa said:
This will be live-streamed. Register on the link given, free or donation.

DGA said:
that's helpful. I clicked the link to register for the webcast but I don't know how to answer the question "Zoom?"

anyone have the decoder on that?


Malcolm wrote:
it is a video conferencing software


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, February 22nd, 2017 at 4:05 AM
Title: Re: Fears mount over scale of Buddhist sect sexual abuse
Content:


Queequeg said:
He explained to me that WBO (now Triratna) drew on all Buddhist traditions because it is not clear what path or paths will be productive for Westerners.
.

Malcolm wrote:
It has always been clear. Vajrayāna, because we like technology and methods.

Queequeg said:
Not Vajrayana because its too weird with all the demons and fornicating gods.

Malcolm wrote:
Definitely, Vajrayāna because it has fornication built right in. The demons are a bonus.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, February 22nd, 2017 at 3:57 AM
Title: Re: if we are Buddhas are we the 3 Kayas
Content:


Jeff said:
Then how would you respond to the Avatamsaka Sutra...

.

Malcolm wrote:
The Ārya-ghanavyūha-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra is the final section of the Avatamsaka Sutra.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, February 22nd, 2017 at 3:55 AM
Title: Re: Fears mount over scale of Buddhist sect sexual abuse
Content:


Queequeg said:
He explained to me that WBO (now Triratna) drew on all Buddhist traditions because it is not clear what path or paths will be productive for Westerners.
.

Malcolm wrote:
It has always been clear. Vajrayāna, because we like technology and methods.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, February 22nd, 2017 at 3:53 AM
Title: Re: Fears mount over scale of Buddhist sect sexual abuse
Content:
Queequeg said:
WBO seemed like a good start.

Malcolm wrote:
FWBO was deeply flawed from the start. Not only is Lingwood's understanding of Buddhadharma idiosyncratic and partial, he has been lying about himself for decades, since the 1950's.

Discomfort with him in normative Buddhist circles is the rule, rather than the exception, and has been since he returned to England from Asia.

His early career was also checkered with scandal in India as well.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, February 22nd, 2017 at 12:03 AM
Title: Re: Fears mount over scale of Buddhist sect sexual abuse
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Yes, senior order members were encouraged to have sexual relations with junior members. This is one reason this organization is so off. You had one predator at the top encouraging his underlings to emulate his predatory behavior.

Grigoris said:
I said "mainly" one person.  Do we know the real extent of this problem?

But, realistically speaking, encouraging gay sex between adults is hardly the same as raping little boys now, is it?  No, I'm not saying that you said that, but others here seem to be trying to make this exact point.

Malcolm wrote:
Some people were underage. Then there is the power differential issue -- you know, the one that forbids you as a therapist from sleeping with your patients. It goes a lot deeper than someone once pressuring another into a relationship. It was a rather systematic problem in that organization, which you can discern by looking into it.

Grigoris said:
The saddest part is how he used Buddhism (or pseudo-Buddhist theory) merely to satisfy his lust, rather than the fact that some guys felt that maybe they were pressured into having sex.

Malcolm wrote:
The saddest part is how once again a person in a position of power used that power to harm others.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, February 21st, 2017 at 11:36 PM
Title: Re: Quickie on the nature of "I"
Content:
Astus said:
And where is that heartwood, where is that self, if not in the five aggregates and six sensory realms?

Wayfarer said:
I don't think the heartwood is 'a self', but it is 'that which is not subject to arising and ceasing'.


Malcolm wrote:
Which is precisely what a self is, i.e. something that is not subject to arising and ceasing.

The view of the Buddha is that "self" is just a convention use to describe the five aggregates.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, February 21st, 2017 at 11:35 PM
Title: Re: Quickie on the nature of "I"
Content:
Wayfarer said:
What do you think the import of 'heartwood' is? Why is it part of the analogy?

Malcolm wrote:
A person, like a plantain/banana tree, lacks a core.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, February 21st, 2017 at 11:29 PM
Title: Re: Fears mount over scale of Buddhist sect sexual abuse
Content:
Grigoris said:
This was (apparently) a one off incident back in the 70's, perpetrated mainly by one person.

Malcolm wrote:
Definitely not.

DGA said:
So this went on for a long while, and was perpetrated by more than one individual?

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, senior order members were encouraged to have sexual relations with junior members. This is one reason this organization is so off. You had one predator at the top encouraging his underlings to emulate his predatory behavior.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, February 21st, 2017 at 10:23 PM
Title: Re: Fears mount over scale of Buddhist sect sexual abuse
Content:
Grigoris said:
This was (apparently) a one off incident back in the 70's, perpetrated mainly by one person.

Malcolm wrote:
Definitely not.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, February 21st, 2017 at 2:34 AM
Title: Re: Quickie on the nature of "I"
Content:
rachmiel said:
I don't understand what "clear" means in this context, and why grasping at it would result in the feeling of a self.

Malcolm wrote:
"Clear" means that your mind is obvious. It is the bedrock of all of one's experience.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, February 21st, 2017 at 12:06 AM
Title: Re: Fears mount over scale of Buddhist sect sexual abuse
Content:
DGA said:
It seems as though this is a new disclosure regarding actions taken many years ago.

Problems of this kind in the FWBO/Triratna org have been documented for a long time.  This story looks like another log on that fire.

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


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, February 20th, 2017 at 11:41 PM
Title: Re: Fears mount over scale of Buddhist sect sexual abuse
Content:
Grigoris said:
Been there, done that...

Again?


Malcolm wrote:
Current event.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, February 20th, 2017 at 10:29 PM
Title: Fears mount over scale of Buddhist sect sexual abuse
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
From the https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/feb/19/buddhist-sexual-abuse-triratna-dennis-lingwood:

One of the UK’s largest Buddhist orders has been forced to report allegations of sexual abuse after a former follower claimed he was coerced into sex with one of its elders. In a separate development, the group’s founder has apologised for having relationships with its members – some of which, he has previously acknowledged, may have been against their will.

Triratna, which has tens of thousands of followers, is battling to protect its reputation, both in the worldwide Buddhist community and among its own members who are questioning the extent to which the coercion was perpetrated and how long it continued...


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, February 20th, 2017 at 10:10 PM
Title: Re: Origin of mankind and animals according Buddhism.
Content:
Seishin said:
I have heard some scholars say that this sutta was not meant to be taken literally, but was a rebuttal, almost taking the mickey, of the Brahman creation story. What are your thoughts on this?

Malcolm wrote:
It is clear that it was taken seriously across a broad spectrum of Buddhist schools and still is. The Agañña Sūtta does not exist in a Tibetan recension, but the barebones of the story are preserved in Various Mahāyāna sūtras and some śāstras.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, February 20th, 2017 at 5:38 AM
Title: Re: Quickie on the nature of "I"
Content:
rachmiel said:
I know what you mean about grounded vs. starry-eyed. Thing is, both views speak unto me ... I find myself flip-flopping between them: I am Awareness, "I" is a mirage, I am Awareness, "I" is a mirage. Perhaps there's a way to bridge these seemingly mutually exclusive views of the I-construct ... though I'm guessing it would have to be way down at the level of tathata (and I ain't there yet!)

Malcolm wrote:
The nature of mind is clear and empty. When the clarity aspect is grasped onto, it is mistaken for a self. When the emptiness aspect is grasped onto, it is mistaken for a nonexistent.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, February 20th, 2017 at 3:45 AM
Title: Re: Please, do not share "secret teachings" online, with anyone.
Content:
Johnny Dangerous said:
Sigh..

Guys, depersonalize the language if you want this to keep going. Once things go in the direction "you do this", "you are this" etc., it tends to go downhill. Not trying to monitor you for thought crime or anything, just saying..the thread will go a predictable direction if you don't step back a bit.

It's also swerved greatly off topic so..can we return to the OP or start a new thread on whatever it is you are focusing in on?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, February 20th, 2017 at 3:27 AM
Title: Re: Please, do not share "secret teachings" online, with anyone.
Content:
binocular said:
It's not clear why that would be the case. If how things usually are for living beings (ie. beset by aging, illness, and death, in their various forms) has any bearing on how things really, ultimately are, then a dog-eat-dog Darwinist scenario (and thus a Christian) one seems most llikely

Coëmgenu said:
Darwinism and Christianity are not often thought of as synonymous. When are Christians taught that they should behave like dogs competing in the wild? I don't follow your characterization here.
“As man advances in civilization, and small tribes are united into larger communities, the simplest reason would tell each individual that he ought to extend his social instincts and sympathies to all members of the same nation, though personally unknown to him. This point being once reached, there is only an artificial barrier to prevent his sympathies extending to the men of all nations and races. [If they appear different] experience unfortunately shews us how long it is before we look at them as our fellow creatures. Sympathy beyond the confines of man, that is humanity to the lower animals, seems to be one of the latest moral acquisitions… This virtue [concern for lower animals], one of the noblest with which man is endowed, seems to arise incidentally from our sympathies becoming more tender and more widely diffused, until they extend to all sentient beings.”

Malcolm wrote:
— Descent of Man, Charles Darwin


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, February 20th, 2017 at 1:57 AM
Title: Re: Garchen rinpoche Yamantaka Empowerment Livestream
Content:
Miroku said:
I am not sure but I think it was about 3 hours with the lung of the sadhana. And about 1hour or 1hour and half with the empowerment, I think.

pael said:
Does it matter if you didn't watch whole lung?

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, it means you did not get the whole lung.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, February 20th, 2017 at 1:05 AM
Title: Re: Please, do not share "secret teachings" online, with anyone.
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
None of them. The only thing that counts is one's personal intuition of hows things are.

Minobu said:
thats so nice to say...and spot on ,on so many levels.

but how do we know if our intuition is spot on and being tweeked by all the right things or are we deluded.

Malcolm wrote:
Here, I am using the term intuition in its philosophical sense, i.e., direct knowledge.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, February 20th, 2017 at 12:20 AM
Title: Re: Garchen rinpoche Yamantaka Empowerment Livestream
Content:


Karma Jinpa said:
Once we've been given and actually received an empowerment, it is said we've been initiated into or entered into that deity's mandala.  That's a traditional way of speaking about it.  We've been let into the mandala of the deity and are part of the inner circle with our fellow vajra brothers and sisters, whereas the uninitiated are outside the boundaries of the mandala, and certain things shouldn't be shared with them for fear of breaking our samaya and/or being the cause of them giving rise to wrong views.

Malcolm wrote:
One can be initiated into a mandala without being given the subsequent empowerments. This is a holdover from lower tantra were indeed often disciples would oinly be gradually given empowerments over a number of days or months.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, February 20th, 2017 at 12:09 AM
Title: Re: Please, do not share "secret teachings" online, with anyone.
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Indeed, we all know that Dzogchen is the original Buddhadharma.

binocular said:
Maybe I am just too damaged from the way Catholics have treated me. Like when a tree falls over in a storm, but it is only partly uprooted, so that parts of it are still alive, but the rest is rotting, and it can never stand up straight again.

Malcolm wrote:
Dzogchen is not a religion. It is one's original state that can only be accessed through one's own personal intuition. There are however methods to assist one in doing so.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, February 19th, 2017 at 11:58 PM
Title: Re: Garchen rinpoche Yamantaka Empowerment Livestream
Content:


Lhasa said:
What does it mean to be initiated into the mandala of a deity?

Malcolm wrote:
Really?

dzogchungpa said:
Well, you said that, according to the Nyingma, a Shitro empowerment suffices for any deity while the Sarma schools do not accept this, so presumably it is not completely straightforward.

Malcolm wrote:
This statement has no relevance to the subject.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, February 19th, 2017 at 11:57 PM
Title: Re: Garchen rinpoche Yamantaka Empowerment Livestream
Content:


Lhasa said:
What does it mean to be initiated into the mandala of a deity?

Malcolm wrote:
Really?

Lhasa said:
Being an online-only practitioner definitely has a down side.  Most online teachers teach their old-timers, not new-comers, so some important points can get skipped now and then. This is one.

Malcolm wrote:
I explained this to you a long time ago when there was some discussion of what it means to take an empowerment.

In short, the guru generates himself as the mandala of the deity, and then generates the mandala of the deity in front of himself. The latter mandala is the one from which one takes the empowerment. The teacher guides one to the doors of the mandala, and one requests admission. Then, one is allowed inside the mandala and shown all of the details of the mandala. This happens before the vase, secret, prajña's pristine consciousness and word empowerments happen. When the empowerment is over, the guru dissolves both mandalas. (This is why it is impossible to receive empowerments from recordings).


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, February 19th, 2017 at 11:30 PM
Title: Re: Garchen rinpoche Yamantaka Empowerment Livestream
Content:


Lhasa said:
What does it mean to be initiated into the mandala of a deity?

Malcolm wrote:
Really?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, February 19th, 2017 at 10:58 PM
Title: Re: Please, do not share "secret teachings" online, with anyone.
Content:
binocular said:
The one question I have been consumed with for years is, "Which religion is the right one?" That has been my quest.

Malcolm wrote:
None of them. The only thing that counts is one's personal intuition of hows things are.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, February 19th, 2017 at 10:11 PM
Title: Re: Please, do not share "secret teachings" online, with anyone.
Content:


binocular said:
Do you experience me as "contesting everything you say"??

Malcolm wrote:
Nope. You are a secular humanist trying to find meaning in religions. You be better off reading a novel.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, February 19th, 2017 at 9:20 PM
Title: Re: Please, do not share "secret teachings" online, with anyone.
Content:
binocular said:
To a person searching for the truth, trying to figure out which religion is the right one, if any, this is all very confusing, and fills one with hopelessness.
How is one supposed to know which one is the right one, when they all make the claim to supremacy?

Malcolm wrote:
The Kalamas faced a similar quandary.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, February 19th, 2017 at 9:08 PM
Title: Re: Please, do not share "secret teachings" online, with anyone.
Content:
binocular said:
I don't contest that. The problem I see with it is that it is circular, self-referential, self-fulfilling, and that therefore, before one fully commits to that path, there is no way to even just have a hint as to whether it is worth it or not.

Malcolm wrote:
This is why Buddha said, "Come and see."

It isn't like there is a Consumer Reports for religion.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, February 19th, 2017 at 8:33 PM
Title: Re: Buddhahood in This Life
Content:
Marc said:
Hi Malcolm,

Pardon my asking again (I'm surprised no one else did):

Is there any update as regards to this possible Oral Transmission of Vimalamitra's Great Commentary ?

Many thanks in advance


Malcolm wrote:
It will happen in June.

PeterC said:
Thank you for the book - it's remarkable.

If there's anyway that the lung could be done online, those of us who can't be in the US for it would be eternally grateful - or at least, grateful for the remainder of this life.

Malcolm wrote:
Glad you enjoyed the book.

The lung will be given online. It will very likely take place on June 18th.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, February 19th, 2017 at 8:32 PM
Title: Re: primordial buddhism
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
If you limit yourself to the Pali Canon, you are like a person who decides they like walking with the chains on their feet when they could choose wings.

binocular said:
I haven't "decided to limit myself to the Pali Canon", the Pali Canon is just the body of scriptures I am familiar with to some extent by now and which I use as a reference point.

Malcolm wrote:
You need a better reference point.
No. Mahāyāna provides more means for discovering that, and Vajrayāna even more still. Also, bodhicitta is lacking in all the śrāvaka schools and canons. Since buddhahood is the through comprehension of how things are, one needs to develop bodhicitta to even be interested in the complete realization of how things are.

binocular said:
From where I am, this is still essentially the same as what one can hear from a Christian, only the names are different.

Malcolm wrote:
It is a question of content. The personal intuition that Buddha describes and the means to realize it are not discussed in the Pali Canon.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, February 19th, 2017 at 10:11 AM
Title: Re: Please, do not share "secret teachings" online, with anyone.
Content:
binocular said:
I wouldn't use "we" in your sentence above.
And I'm not sure about the patience part http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an04/an04.111.than.html.

Malcolm wrote:
There is no point engaging with people who are not interested in Dharma.

Tsongkhapafan said:
You would because of compassion. I'm sure we have Gurus in this life because in our previous lives we were people who were not interested in Dharma but our Guru connected with us in some mundane way, and he had in his heart a wish to give us Dharma and that later ripened in our meeting him in the capacity of a spiritual teacher. There is always a point in engaging with people if we have a good heart because we can maybe benefit them now and definitely in the future. You don't become a Buddha without wanting to connect with and benefit everyone.

Malcolm wrote:
You are not getting the context of my statement — it has to do with training: people who are easy to train; and people who are difficult to train. But some people are intractable. Santideva says of such people that we must smile at them and be polite, but avoid intimacy with them because they are childish beings.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, February 19th, 2017 at 5:12 AM
Title: Re: primordial buddhism
Content:
Coëmgenu said:
Plenty of people consider the teachings of the Pāli Canon to be highly efficacious, and not comparable at all to chains that bind progress.

Malcolm wrote:
Highly efficacious at what? Liberation from afflictions? Yes. Knowledge of the way things are? No. In the latter respect, they are extremely limited.

Coëmgenu said:
Aren't they just as limited as anyone else, given that
Malcolm wrote:
"How things are" is a personal intuition. The Buddha taught us that we could discover this for ourselves.

Coëmgenu said:
?


Malcolm wrote:
No. Mahāyāna provides more means for discovering that, and Vajrayāna even more still. Also, bodhicitta is lacking in all the śrāvaka schools and canons. Since buddhahood is the through comprehension of how things are, one needs to develop bodhicitta to even be interested in the complete realization of how things are.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, February 19th, 2017 at 5:08 AM
Title: Re: primordial buddhism
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
If you limit yourself to the Pali Canon, you are like a person who decides they like walking with the chains on their feet when they could choose wings.

Coëmgenu said:
Plenty of people consider the teachings of the Pāli Canon to be highly efficacious, and not comparable at all to chains that bind progress.

Malcolm wrote:
Highly efficacious at what? Liberation from afflictions? Yes. Knowledge of the way things are? No. In the latter respect, they are extremely limited.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, February 19th, 2017 at 2:59 AM
Title: Re: Please, do not share "secret teachings" online, with anyone.
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
It is not wrong to say that " Vajrayana practice continues on , or affects  the mind stream in future lives" because Vajrayāna guarantees buddhadhood with 16 lifetimes at worst.

pael said:
Even if you break vows?


Malcolm wrote:
No, you need to maintain your samaya well in this lifetime.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, February 19th, 2017 at 12:49 AM
Title: Re: Where does the Abrahamic God (יְהֹוָה) "fit" in Buddhist cosmology?
Content:


AlexanderS said:
Ok.  Do you put Jesus in the same class?

Malcolm wrote:
Jesus was just a guy. Nothing special.

AlexanderS said:
Is this based on your reading of the new testament?

Malcolm wrote:
That, and history.

But as I clarified before. I was not raised in a Christian household, so I do not have any residual traces that might cause me to think that Jesus was anything special.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, February 19th, 2017 at 12:40 AM
Title: Re: primordial buddhism
Content:
binocular said:
The Vimalakīrti Sutra is a Mahayana sutra. Do you know any references to this phenomenon in the Pali suttas?

You said: "Because how things really are is a personal intuition (in the philosophical sense) and cannot be communicated verbally to others."

I cannot imagine anyone seriously meaning that and stopping at that.
Usually, I have heard things to the effect of
"How things really are is a personal intuition (in the philosophical sense) and cannot be communicated verbally to others, but if you look into your heart and are truly honest, you will know that Jesus is your Lord and Savior."

Whenever I have heard people talk about how things really are, this was always followed by making clear their specific religious or political etc. affiliation.
I have never heard anyone actually stop at "It's deeply personal, it's not possible to talk about it."

Sometimes, there are people who seem to stop at that, but a closer look reveals they are actually refering to something that they don't want to talk about (with the person they're talking to), and that it isn't something that would be impossible to talk about.

Malcolm wrote:
"How things are" is a personal intuition. The Buddha taught us that we could discover this for ourselves.

If you limit yourself to the Pali Canon, you are like a person who decides they like walking with the chains on their feet when they could choose wings.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, February 19th, 2017 at 12:38 AM
Title: Re: Please, do not share "secret teachings" online, with anyone.
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
If we were worthless idiots, the Buddha would not have taught, and would have remained silent. Since we are not worthless idiots, he taught, quite patiently, since there is in fact no difference between his state and our state, other than personal recognition.

binocular said:
I wouldn't use "we" in your sentence above.
And I'm not sure about the patience part http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an04/an04.111.than.html.

Malcolm wrote:
There is no point engaging with people who are not interested in Dharma.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, February 19th, 2017 at 12:01 AM
Title: Re: Please, do not share "secret teachings" online, with anyone.
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
So you think he is looking down on you.

binocular said:
I don't think it's anything so personal. I really don't think I even register in his awareness.

What else would spiritually advanced people have for plebeians (such as myself), other than pity or contempt?

I mean, look at what Buddhist writings usually say about puttujanas -- that we're basically worthless idiots.

Malcolm wrote:
If we were worthless idiots, the Buddha would not have taught, and would have remained silent. Since we are not worthless idiots, he taught, quite patiently, since there is in fact no difference between his state and our state, other than personal recognition.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, February 18th, 2017 at 11:55 PM
Title: Re: primordial buddhism
Content:
binocular said:
Neither. To the best of my knowledge, I internalized it before my cognitive apparatus has developed any critical thinking powers.

PuerAzaelis said:
What's the difference between believing something as a result of "critical thinking powers" and believing something as a result of "making up your own mind" or being "up to the individual to decide" or "choosing a political party"?

binocular said:
The difference I was talking about is between
internalizing something so early in life that one has no memory of when it happened,
and
trying to internalize something deliberately.
This is immense.
?
Malcolm is presenting a view of Buddhism that I have never encountered before, and which, if true, has immense implications for how one approaches Buddhism.

Malcolm wrote:
well, for example, it is exemplified in Vimalakīrti's famed silence in response to Buddha questioning various members of his audience on their understanding of nonduality.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, February 18th, 2017 at 11:51 PM
Title: Re: Please, do not share "secret teachings" online, with anyone.
Content:
binocular said:
I think that those who are initiated into the "secret teachings" are looking down on us plebeans with, at best, pity, or otherwise, with contempt, and that this is pretty much all there is to it.

Malcolm wrote:
Really, you think HH Dalai Lama is looking down on you "plebeians" with contempt?

binocular said:
I his case, I think it's pity. I'd like to think he's merciful like that.

Malcolm wrote:
So you think he is looking down on you.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, February 18th, 2017 at 11:18 PM
Title: Re: Please, do not share "secret teachings" online, with anyone.
Content:


binocular said:
I think that those who are initiated into the "secret teachings" are looking down on us plebeans with, at best, pity, or otherwise, with contempt, and that this is pretty much all there is to it.

Malcolm wrote:
Really, you think HH Dalai Lama is looking down on you "plebeians" with contempt?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, February 18th, 2017 at 11:16 PM
Title: Re: Please, do not share "secret teachings" online, with anyone.
Content:
Grigoris said:
Maybe I am missing something....

Why would something we received/practiced in a past life not (possibly) ripen in this life?

Malcolm wrote:
The Vajrayāna vows, like Pratimoksha Vows, are taken primarily on the body. They do not survive death.

As for the question of ripening — if someone has received empowerment in a past life however, it is more likely they will meet Vajrayāna teachings again.

Minobu said:
I understand that when one dies all commitments are off the table.
If one breaks those commitments, is there any residual effect?

Also is it wrong to say that all growth from Vajrayana practice continues on , or affects  the mind stream in future lives.

Malcolm wrote:
Pratimokṣa and Vajrayāna vows perish at death. Bodhisattva vows on the other hand, never perish and are carried forward from life time to life time because unlike the former two, they are taken until one attains complete buddhahood.

It is not wrong to say that " Vajrayana practice continues on , or affects  the mind stream in future lives" because Vajrayāna guarantees buddhadhood with 16 lifetimes at worst.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, February 18th, 2017 at 10:57 PM
Title: Re: Where does the Abrahamic God (יְהֹוָה) "fit" in Buddhist cosmology?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Abrahamic god is a preta.
/.../ But based on the sort of things old Jehovah wanted his people to do, gyalpo is a better fit.

binocular said:
What do you think Abrahamists (would) think of their God being characterized in this way?

Doesn't characterizing the Abrahamic God as a preta or gyalpo amount to "Badmouthing of other spiritual paths" according to the TOS here, which is not allowed?

Malcolm wrote:
I don't much care what Abrahamists think of their god being characterized in this way. I am not talking to them and would not discuss this with them in any case since there is no common basis for a discussion at all.

Some gyalpos are tractable, others are not. In any case, I was responding to a question.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, February 18th, 2017 at 10:57 PM
Title: Re: Where does the Abrahamic God (יְהֹוָה) "fit" in Buddhist cosmology?
Content:


AlexanderS said:
I remember a reading a post by you many years ago where you reckoned that good old Yahweh was Indra.

Malcolm wrote:
This is what some comparative religionists think. But based on the sort of things old Jehovah wanted his people to do, gyalpo is a better fit.

AlexanderS said:
Ok.  Do you put Jesus in the same class?

Malcolm wrote:
Jesus was just a guy. Nothing special.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, February 18th, 2017 at 10:09 PM
Title: Re: Please, do not share "secret teachings" online, with anyone.
Content:
conebeckham said:
Pretty sure "empowerment" received in previous lives don't count in this one.....
Am I missing something?

Grigoris said:
Maybe I am missing something....

Why would something we received/practiced in a past life not (possibly) ripen in this life?

Malcolm wrote:
The Vajrayāna vows, like Pratimoksha Vows, are taken primarily on the body. They do not survive death.

As for the question of ripening — if someone has received empowerment in a past life however, it is more likely they will meet Vajrayāna teachings again.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, February 18th, 2017 at 9:02 PM
Title: Re: Where does the Abrahamic God (יְהֹוָה) "fit" in Buddhist cosmology?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Abrahamic god is a preta.

AlexanderS said:
I remember a reading a post by you many years ago where you reckoned that good old Yahweh was Indra.

Malcolm wrote:
This is what some comparative religionists think. But based on the sort of things old Jehovah wanted his people to do, gyalpo is a better fit.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, February 18th, 2017 at 4:50 AM
Title: Re: Where does the Abrahamic God (יְהֹוָה) "fit" in Buddhist cosmology?
Content:


DGA said:
What, then, is the metaphysical god of Greek culture that you posited earlier?

Malcolm wrote:
The god of Aristotle, http://www.logicmuseum.com/ontological/aristotleontological.htm.

DGA said:
And life also belongs to God; for the actuality of thought is life, and God is that actuality; and God’s self-dependent actuality is life most good and eternal. We say therefore that God is a living being, eternal, most good, so that life and duration continuous and eternal belong to God; for this is God.
what you're describing is a concept rather than a being, then?  Do Aristotle et al adhere to an abstraction, or to a spirit in your view?

Malcolm wrote:
He proposed a principle. This does not preclude gyalpo worship existing side by side in the case of those who wished add some philosophical sophistication.

Basically, most religions, with the exception of Buddhadharma, begin as some kind of spirit worship.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, February 18th, 2017 at 4:00 AM
Title: Re: Where does the Abrahamic God (יְהֹוָה) "fit" in Buddhist cosmology?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Hence, regressive.

Grigoris said:
Well... I wouldn't say that every aspect of the Roman Empire was progressive, thus I cannot judge Christianity as wholly regressive.

Malcolm wrote:
Nothing is wholly anything. Christianity was a symptom of its decline, and then carried with its all those traits which contributed to the decline of Rome in the form of the Church.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, February 18th, 2017 at 3:57 AM
Title: Re: Where does the Abrahamic God (יְהֹוָה) "fit" in Buddhist cosmology?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Oh, I disagree. Claiming that Christianity was too disorganized to be repressive until 500 CE means that for the past 16 hundred years Christianity has been a politically and culturally regressive force.

Grigoris said:
I don't know how politically regressive it was initially, it did manage to be a contributing factor to the destruction of the Roman Empire.

Malcolm wrote:
Hence, regressive.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, February 18th, 2017 at 3:28 AM
Title: Re: Where does the Abrahamic God (יְהֹוָה) "fit" in Buddhist cosmology?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
I don't think so. There is no reason to criticize Christianity etc., without cause or purpose. It is quite another thing to assert that we should respect a tradition that has been so deeply intolerant of others for millennia.

Grigoris said:
Actually, political based intolerance (ie expressed through the state) was quite a late development in for Christianity.  Although many would like to believe that the link between Christianity and the state started with the Byzantine Empire, the fact of the matter is that Constantine was a Apollonian (sun worshipper) up until he converted to Christianity on his death bed.

Far from being a Christian Empire the Byzantine emperors allowed for and funded the worship of all "pagan" religions up until the reign of Theodosius I (the last emperor to rule a unified Byzantine Empire) who issued edicts against "pagan" worship in 395AD.  But even with this development the basis for the legal system remained Roman civil law.

But it was Justinian I (482-565AD) that brought about the end, and began the active persecution, of "pagan" religions in the Empire.  It was during his reign that "pagan" temples were destroyed and Christian churches were built on their foundations (many times using materials from the destroyed temples).  Not only did Justinian persecute "pagans" but he also ran crusades against Christian "heresies" and Jews too.  He was the first to use the idea of a single empire be unified under a single (Christian) faith.  It was at this point in history that the pre-Christian European religions were completely wiped out (except for the bits that managed to be absorbed into the new "mainstream" and state sanctioned Christian practice).

Malcolm wrote:
Oh, I disagree. Claiming that Christianity was too disorganized to be repressive until 500 CE means that for the past 16 hundred years Christianity has been a politically and culturally regressive force.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, February 18th, 2017 at 2:41 AM
Title: Re: Where does the Abrahamic God (יְהֹוָה) "fit" in Buddhist cosmology?
Content:


Johnny Dangerous said:
Yeah, ok, but "hard" Monotheism doesn't really explain the nearly pantheist and panentheist ideas that eventually found their way into Judaism.

Coëmgenu said:
Do you mean Medieval Jewish mysticism? They also, some of them, started to believe in a form of soul-transmigration around that time.

Johnny Dangerous said:
Was Mamonides considered a mystic? All I know is that there is  distinct strain of Jewish thought about God being fairly non-personal for a "hard monotheism". I don't know all the scholarly stuff, but I know enough Jews to tell you this seems certainly true in practice.

Malcolm wrote:
Moses Maimonides is very, very late.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, February 18th, 2017 at 1:54 AM
Title: Re: primordial buddhism
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
It is really not the same. How things really are is not a "fact." Facts require empirical agreement. There is no way that "how things really are" can be subject to such empirical agreement. Why?
Because how things really are is a personal intuition (in the philosophical sense) and cannot be communicated verbally to others.

binocular said:
I hear this for the first time!
Could you direct me to some reading about this?
This is immense.

Malcolm wrote:
The Buddha stated this principle very clearly pretty much everywhere.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, February 18th, 2017 at 1:00 AM
Title: Re: primordial buddhism
Content:
binocular said:
It's the same pattern -- in both cases, it is proposed that there are absolute facts (especially in religious matters) which exist separately from how people cognize them.

Malcolm wrote:
It is really not the same. How things really are is not a "fact." Facts require empirical agreement. There is no way that "how things really are" can be subject to such empirical agreement. Why? Because how things really are is a personal intuition (in the philosophical sense) and cannot be communicated verbally to others. It is something that must be know for oneself. Thus the Buddha declared, "Ehipaśyika," "Come and see!"


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, February 18th, 2017 at 12:50 AM
Title: Re: Where does the Abrahamic God (יְהֹוָה) "fit" in Buddhist cosmology?
Content:


Coëmgenu said:
The notion that the Greeks "monotheized" Judaism used to be big in the 60s, back when they also thought Christian Gnosticism predated the Pauline Christianity. This theory, now though, is almost never taken seriously.

Malcolm wrote:
They did it to themselves. Most Jews around the time of Christ spoke Greek. They read Greek Science, Philosophy, etc. While it is true that Zoroastrianism is frequently given a candidate for the shift in Judaism from henotheism to monotheism, the formal articulation of these ideas in philosophical language was left to hellenistic Jews living outside of Judea.

You will recall the first major translation project we know of is the Septuagint.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, February 18th, 2017 at 12:24 AM
Title: Re: primordial buddhism
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Not at all. You are proceeding from the idea that there are absolute facts which exist separately from how people cognize them.

binocular said:
Indeed.

Malcolm wrote:
Then you are realist who proposes that things have independent existence.

binocular said:
Buddhism actually rejects this point of view without in turn making all of reality dependent upon just one person's perceptions.
I'm not sure I understand.

What do you see as an alternative to both solipsism as well as to authoritarian cognitive externalism (to call it somehow -- "absolute facts which exist separately from how people cognize them")?

One of the alternatives to that could be a kind of epistemic universalism coupled with an unquestioning regard for every human, regardless of the state the human is in. Ie. basically granting that every human is essentially sane and can know "how things really are" without an external party posing as an epistemic authority.

Malcolm wrote:
Buddhism proposes that all humans are basically deluded, but are equipped with the capacity to know "how things really are."


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, February 18th, 2017 at 12:08 AM
Title: Re: primordial buddhism
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
It's more like choosing a political party than solipsism.

binocular said:
In that case, such a chooser is trivializing the metaphysical/cosmological claims that the religion (he is choosing) makes.
I think it is cognitively and morally corrupt to demote religion to the level of a political party; although it's probably quite common, and perhaps even the only way in which one can actually choose a religion.

Malcolm wrote:
Not at all. You are proceeding from the idea that there are absolute facts which exist separately from how people cognize them. Buddhism actually rejects this point of view without in turn making all of reality dependent upon just one person's perceptions.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, February 17th, 2017 at 11:46 PM
Title: Re: Where does the Abrahamic God (יְהֹוָה) "fit" in Buddhist cosmology?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
The metaphysical god to which Christians devote themselves comes from Greek Philosophy. It is not part of the Abrahamic tradition until quite late. The legacy of Hellenistic culture was the transformation of Judaism from henotheism to the monotheism which now characterizes Christianity, Islam, and Judaism.

treehuggingoctopus said:
OK. Thank you for that post. Before it the thread had seemed to me to be yet another exercise in misrepresenting (and bashing) monotheism.

Malcolm wrote:
I was never raised a Christian, was never baptized, was never raised in a church. My father was a secular philosopher. I was raised in the tradition of Western Secular Philosophy. My roots lie in the secularism of Lucretius and Epicurus, not in the metaphysics of Plontinus or Aristotle.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, February 17th, 2017 at 11:40 PM
Title: Re: Where does the Abrahamic God (יְהֹוָה) "fit" in Buddhist cosmology?
Content:


DGA said:
I'm trying to probe this question of whether the author of Leviticus and the author of The Phenomenology of Spirit (to give two touchstones) were really committed to the same being, and if not, how to characterize those beings.

Malcolm wrote:
http://www.sunypress.edu/p-328-hegels-concept-of-god.aspx


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, February 17th, 2017 at 11:37 PM
Title: Re: Where does the Abrahamic God (יְהֹוָה) "fit" in Buddhist cosmology?
Content:


DGA said:
What, then, is the metaphysical god of Greek culture that you posited earlier?

Malcolm wrote:
The god of Aristotle, http://www.logicmuseum.com/ontological/aristotleontological.htm.

DGA said:
And life also belongs to God; for the actuality of thought is life, and God is that actuality; and God’s self-dependent actuality is life most good and eternal. We say therefore that God is a living being, eternal, most good, so that life and duration continuous and eternal belong to God; for this is God.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, February 17th, 2017 at 11:04 PM
Title: Re: Is there such a thing as beings that lack all 5 aggregates?
Content:
Coëmgenu said:
Are devāḥ considered, traditionally, to lack the 5 aggregates? Is there such a thing as a being with no aggregates?

Malcolm wrote:
No. Even formless realm devas have two of the four mental aggregates, formations and consciousness.

Coëmgenu said:
I am posting this question here as a general inquiry. My intent is not to "question/be skeptical" of the claim above, I seek only clarification.

In all Buddhist traditions, are devāḥ considered, universally, in the Buddhavacana, to only have 2 of the 5 "human/sentient?" aggregates?

If devāḥ lack the 5 aggregates, what are the five aggregates, are they only the aggregates of human/"human-realm" beings? Do hell-dwellers have all 5 aggregates?

Is there a level of karmic attainment where someone is not "burdened" with 5 aggregates? Does having "all 5" aggregates "help" someone realize the Buddhadharma? Is being born a "human" a "higher birth" than being born a deva, with "higher birth" meaning "a birth that is more conducive to practicing Buddhadharma"? Many Buddhist cosmologies count being "born human" as the most beneficent birth for pursuing Buddhadharma, are they wrong?

Malcolm wrote:
Most devas have five aggregates. Formless realm devas do not.

You would save yourself a lot of time if you would read the Abhidharmakośabhaṣyaṃ by Vasubandhu. It is like a map to the world of Dharma.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, February 17th, 2017 at 11:01 PM
Title: Re: Where does the Abrahamic God (יְהֹוָה) "fit" in Buddhist cosmology?
Content:
Vidyavajra said:
Since the dévas are at least partly comparable to the angelic hierarchies of the Abrahamic faiths, could māras, now in the special sense of a class of beings, possibly be considered as “fallen” dévas paralleling the “fallen angels”—dévas who become evil while retaining powers that give them a certain influence within our realm? Any opinions?

Malcolm wrote:
No, since they occupy the top rank of desire realm devas.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, February 17th, 2017 at 10:53 PM
Title: Re: Where does the Abrahamic God (יְהֹוָה) "fit" in Buddhist cosmology?
Content:


DGA said:
With that said, are you positing the metaphysical god of Plotinus as, also, a preta or something else?

Malcolm wrote:
Well, no, of course not, since Plotinus denied his "One" could be sentient or a self-aware creator God, etc. His disciple Porphyry was the first person to employ systematic literary criticism of the Bible in his [long destroyed] Adversus Christianos.

DGA said:
similarly, if one or more of the gods honored in the Abrahamic faiths are gyalpos, shouldn't a powerful enough yogin be able to collaborate with Pehar to bind them by oath to Dharma?

Malcolm wrote:
Not every spirit like Pehar can be tamed. Some need to be destroyed.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, February 17th, 2017 at 10:34 PM
Title: Re: Where does the Abrahamic God (יְהֹוָה) "fit" in Buddhist cosmology?
Content:
Konchog1 said:
Malcolm,

I recall you said that the Muslim god is a gyalpo, is the Jewish god a gyalpo then or a general preta? Is the Christian god the same being, or a different one?

As for devas not being interested in human affairs, what about mundane protectors like Indra, Brahma and the like? Do you mean that they answer prayers only, whereas pretas are always trying to involve themselves in human concerns?

Malcolm wrote:
Devas do not demand blood sacrifices. Pretas can and do.

The metaphysical god to which Christians devote themselves comes from Greek Philosophy. It is not part of the Abrahamic tradition until quite late. The legacy of Hellenistic culture was the transformation of Judaism from henotheism to the monotheism which now characterizes Christianity, Islam, and Judaism.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, February 17th, 2017 at 10:29 PM
Title: Re: Where does the Abrahamic God (יְהֹוָה) "fit" in Buddhist cosmology?
Content:


Vidyavajra said:
I share your position on this. Most of us are of Western ancestry, meaning that most of our ancestors over the last millennia lived and breathed a culture in which Christianity was the definition of truth and the meaning of spirituality. For that reason we should show some basic respect for that tradition and try to understand it in some depth, even though one may have decided to follow Buddhism due to a personal affinity for that vehicle.

Malcolm wrote:
I don't think so. There is no reason to criticize Christianity etc., without cause or purpose. It is quite another thing to assert that we should respect a tradition that has been so deeply intolerant of others for millennia.

Vidyavajra said:
Not to respect anything at all belonging to such a rich tradition and long history because of occurring elements that can be considered extremes of intolerance seems to me itself to be an extreme. It is not a subtle and nuanced approach at all.

Malcolm wrote:
Christianity does not encompass every aspect of Western Tradition. Indeed, in the West, Christianity has for the most part been an entirely regressive rather than progressive institution.

Fortunately, there is a rich non-Christan tradition of ethics and philosophy which the West can claim as an inheritance.


Vidyavajra said:
What is better for inter-religious peace, that Buddhists in general respect Christianity and work for mutual understanding while remaining true to their own tradition, following the eminent example of the Dalai Lama—or that Buddhists in general believe that all of Christianity is to be condemned and disrespected because of certain historical institutional actions or attitudes that are, in hindsight, blameworthy? I know which of these conforms to wisdom and compassion.

Malcolm wrote:
You clearly did not read my reply with care:
I don't think so. There is no reason to criticize Christianity etc., without cause or purpose. It is quite another thing to assert that we should respect a tradition that has been so deeply intolerant of others for millennia.
Most of that which is worth respecting in Christianity came from Greek philosophy.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, February 17th, 2017 at 10:20 PM
Title: Re: primordial buddhism
Content:
tingdzin said:
Everyone has his or her own opinion about "original Buddhism", and, not surprisingly, it's usually close to that of the school they personally prefer.If you really want a thorough answer to that question, you'll have to do a lot of research and make up your own mind.

Malcolm wrote:
That was the point of my reply. And it illustrates the second of tingzin's point, "you'll have to do a lot of research and make up your own mind."

binocular said:
And how does this differ from what is, for practical intents and purposes, solipsism?

To say that it is up to the individual to decide whether 2 + 2 = 4 -- that's just crazy.

Leaving it up to the individual to decide (in whatever way, whether through research or through gambling) which Buddhist school is the original one, that's like leaving it up to the individual to decide whether 2 + 2 = 4.

If everything everyone claims to be true is in fact true, then we're living in a chaotic universe in which human action is of no consequence, and suffering a constant.

Malcolm wrote:
It's more like choosing a political party than solipsism.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, February 17th, 2017 at 10:14 AM
Title: Re: Where does the Abrahamic God (יְהֹוָה) "fit" in Buddhist cosmology?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
There is no reason to criticize Christianity etc., without cause or purpose. It is quite another thing to assert that we should respect a tradition that has been so deeply intolerant of others for millennia.

Coëmgenu said:
Do you mean "a tradition that has been so deeply intolerant of others for millennia" like Buddhism has historically been?

Malcolm wrote:
Christianity has been far, far, worse in terms of its repressions and pogroms against others than even Islam.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, February 17th, 2017 at 10:11 AM
Title: Re: The body in Dzogchen
Content:
makewhisper said:
This is a broad topic. And I'm not sure what I'm asking. But I hope some knowledgable practitioners can discuss the place of the body and of the perception of sensation in the realization of instant presence.

I'm very new to Dzogchen, and the more I practice GY or semdzin, the more I feel limited by my own body. For example, when I  notice various sensations in specific parts of my body—the vibration of the sound in my head, the "contraction" in my experience after I've come to the end of my breath etc. But it seems that in automatically noticing these sensations I'm reinforcing the dualistic sense that I have a body that is experiencing a sensation. I feel trapped by my perception of sensation, and this instant presence of which I have no knowledge, seems further and further off the edges of my experience.

How does someone with no knowledge of
rigpa deal with the perception of sensation in practice? What practices are recommended?

Malcolm wrote:
One has to learn how to integrate them by not regarding them as other or distractions. If you experience any otherness your experience is automatically dualistic even though your state never is.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, February 17th, 2017 at 10:08 AM
Title: Re: Where does the Abrahamic God (יְהֹוָה) "fit" in Buddhist cosmology?
Content:


Vidyavajra said:
I share your position on this. Most of us are of Western ancestry, meaning that most of our ancestors over the last millennia lived and breathed a culture in which Christianity was the definition of truth and the meaning of spirituality. For that reason we should show some basic respect for that tradition and try to understand it in some depth, even though one may have decided to follow Buddhism due to a personal affinity for that vehicle.

Malcolm wrote:
I don't think so. There is no reason to criticize Christianity etc., without cause or purpose. It is quite another thing to assert that we should respect a tradition that has been so deeply intolerant of others for millennia.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, February 17th, 2017 at 5:46 AM
Title: Re: Is Māra a deva?
Content:
Admin_PC said:
That's my understanding, yes - with the caveat that he is also identified with the 5 Skandhas.

Coëmgenu said:
Are devāḥ considered, traditionally, to lack the 5 aggregates? Is there such a thing as a being with no aggregates?

Malcolm wrote:
No. Even formless realm devas have two of the four mental aggregates, formations and consciousness.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, February 17th, 2017 at 5:39 AM
Title: Re: Where does the Abrahamic God (יְהֹוָה) "fit" in Buddhist cosmology?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Papayin Māra is a Paranirmitavaśavartino deva, according to the Āryalaṅkāvatāra-nāma-mahāyānasūtravṛttitathāgatahṛdayālaṃkāra.

Coëmgenu said:
Is the Āryalaṅkāvatāra-nāma-mahāyānasūtravṛttitathāgatahṛdayālaṃkāra available in English translation? If not, what is the "Paranirmitavaśavartino deva"?

Malcolm wrote:
They are the highest class of devas in the desire realm, as you rightly mentioned earlier. No, it is not in translation.

Also, māras are frequently mentioned as a separate class of beings, along with devas, etc.

However, in general, in Tibetan Buddhist circles, we do not place much emphasis on Papayin Māra. He was there to torment the Buddha. He does not care about little people like us.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, February 17th, 2017 at 5:34 AM
Title: Re: Where does the Abrahamic God (יְהֹוָה) "fit" in Buddhist cosmology?
Content:
Coëmgenu said:
Yes, from a contemporary perspective, but many other Buddhists of the past, whose Buddhism was equally "authentic" as modern Buddhists' Buddhisms, have believe him to be a deva.


Malcolm wrote:
Devaputra māra is not a person, nor is kelśa māra and so on.

Papayin Māra on the other hand, is the character who plays a role in many sūtras, and he is a deva.

Coëmgenu said:
So "Paparin Māra" is a deva but Māra, in general, is not? Which figure appeared to torment the Buddha? This is the Māra that was referred to before. The anthropomorphic Māra that appears in ancient sūtrāṇi. This is the Māra that we are talking about, or that I was talking about at least, and was the Māra referred to in the DhammaWheel post that inspired this one.


Malcolm wrote:
Papayin Māra is a Paranirmitavaśavartino deva, according to the Āryalaṅkāvatāra-nāma-mahāyānasūtravṛttitathāgatahṛdayālaṃkāra.

This is the character which appears in Sūtra. Māra in general refers to various kinds of obstacles on path, death, afflictions, pride, and the aggregates. These were the four māras that were conquered by the Buddha.

Papayin Māra though is a sort of divine fool, who constantly tries to make trouble for the Buddha but always fails miserably.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, February 17th, 2017 at 5:26 AM
Title: Re: Where does the Abrahamic God (יְהֹוָה) "fit" in Buddhist cosmology?
Content:
Coëmgenu said:
Almost all of the Buddhist literature and Buddhist traditions I am familiar with consider Māra a deva, the Lord of the highst of the sense-pleasure heavens (kāmadhātavaḥ). Devaputramāra. On what grounds do you say he is not a deva?


Malcolm wrote:
Devaputra māra is not a person. It is pride. It is true that Papayin Māra is considered a deva.

Coëmgenu said:
Yes, from a contemporary perspective, but many other Buddhists of the past, whose Buddhism was equally "authentic" as modern Buddhists' Buddhisms, have believe him to be a deva.


Malcolm wrote:
Devaputra māra is not a person, nor is kelśa māra and so on.

Papayin Māra on the other hand, is the character who plays a role in many sūtras, and he is a deva.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, February 17th, 2017 at 5:19 AM
Title: Re: Where does the Abrahamic God (יְהֹוָה) "fit" in Buddhist cosmology?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Māra is not a deva.

Devas do not interact with humans much.

Coëmgenu said:
Almost all of the Buddhist literature and Buddhist traditions I am familiar with consider Māra a deva, the Lord of the highst of the sense-pleasure heavens (kāmadhātavaḥ). Devaputramāra. On what grounds do you say he is not a deva?


Malcolm wrote:
Devaputra māra is not a person. It is pride. It is true that Papayin Māra is considered a deva.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, February 17th, 2017 at 5:04 AM
Title: Re: Where does the Abrahamic God (יְהֹוָה) "fit" in Buddhist cosmology?
Content:
Coëmgenu said:
So why do you think the Abrahamic God might belong to the rank of preta rather than deva? This post was inspired by another post over at DhammaWheel that asserted that the Abrahamic God was Mára. Mára is a deva, yes? Or is Mára also a preta?

Malcolm wrote:
Devas have no interest in human beings. To them we smell bad. Pretas on the other hands are very interested in human beings.

Coëmgenu said:
But don't devāḥ in the lowest heavens enjoy exercising power over the human world? Aren't they worshipped by humans, to good or bad effect, and engage in relations with them, for good or ill? Is Māra a deva? In traditional Buddhist narratives, he certainly takes interest in us, regardless of how he thinks we smell.


Malcolm wrote:
Māra is not a deva.

Devas do not interact with humans much.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, February 17th, 2017 at 4:42 AM
Title: Re: Where does the Abrahamic God (יְהֹוָה) "fit" in Buddhist cosmology?
Content:
Coëmgenu said:
Are preta considered that powerful?

Malcolm wrote:
Some are.

Coëmgenu said:
So why do you think the Abrahamic God might belong to the rank of preta rather than deva? This post was inspired by another post over at DhammaWheel that asserted that the Abrahamic God was Mára. Mára is a deva, yes? Or is Mára also a preta?

Malcolm wrote:
Devas have no interest in human beings. To them we smell bad. Pretas on the other hands are very interested in human beings.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, February 17th, 2017 at 4:35 AM
Title: Re: Where does the Abrahamic God (יְהֹוָה) "fit" in Buddhist cosmology?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Abrahamic god is a preta.

Coëmgenu said:
Are preta considered that powerful?

Malcolm wrote:
Some are.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, February 17th, 2017 at 4:28 AM
Title: Re: Where does the Abrahamic God (יְהֹוָה) "fit" in Buddhist cosmology?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Abrahamic god is a preta.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, February 17th, 2017 at 1:27 AM
Title: Re: Garchen rinpoche Yamantaka Empowerment Livestream
Content:
Vidyavajra said:
Excuse my ignorance, but is the general consensus in Vajrayana nowadays that empowerments transmitted using the support of internet communications are fully effective? Perhaps there is a thread somewhere about this topic.

Malcolm wrote:
No, there is no consensus on this matter.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, February 17th, 2017 at 12:11 AM
Title: Re: The doctrine of no-self - teaching device or metaphysical truth?
Content:
fckw said:
According to my personal interpretation it is metaphysical claims (or call them truths, once you accepted them as factual) that actually make up a religion.


Malcolm wrote:
Buddhism is a variety of religions which adopt different metaphysical beliefs depending on school.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, February 16th, 2017 at 11:40 PM
Title: Re: if we are Buddhas are we the 3 Kayas
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
This not a Tibetan idea, this is throughout Mahāyāna in Indian texts.

Zhen Li said:
Can you please point me to those?

Malcolm wrote:
It is based on statements in the Lanka such as:
There is no buddhahood in the desire realm,
it is accomplished in Akaniṣṭha.
And:
In the divine palace of Akaniṣṭha
free from all misdeeds, 
always free of concepts,
free of mind and mental factors,
having obtained strengths and the faculties of clairvoyance,
after obtain the faculty of samadhi, 
the perfect Buddha attains buddhahood there,
the emanations obtain buddhahood here.
And:
In the form realm's Akaniṣṭha
free from desire, you obtained Buddhahood.
The Ārya-ghanavyūha-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra
The perfect buddhas attain awakening
in the supreme place, Akaniṣṭha,
there is no buddhahood in the desire realm,
the deeds of the buddhahood are not performed there...

You can easily find in many Madhyamaka and Yogacara treatises systematically elaborating upon these ideas about the five certainties which the nirmanakāya lacks. This is also taken up systematically in Indian Vajrayāna commentaries.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, February 16th, 2017 at 10:05 PM
Title: Re: The doctrine of no-self - teaching device or metaphysical truth?
Content:
Johnny Dangerous said:
Still unclear on what a "metaphysical truth" is in terms of this question.

boda said:
Is rebirth metaphysics or is it an actual process?

Malcolm wrote:
It is a metaphysical theory which some people, such as myself, think is an actual process.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, February 16th, 2017 at 10:00 AM
Title: Re: Role of Yidam in acquiring siddhis
Content:
Vidyavajra said:
Thanks for your reply, I concur with that.

But when Guru Rinpoche poses as a rhetoric question:

«If there is no yidam, where is the source of siddhis?»


Malcolm wrote:
In Tibetan, "yid dam" means "sublime mind." It represents a mind integrated with its own state. Therefore, siddhis are only possible if one's mind is so integrated.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, February 16th, 2017 at 9:58 AM
Title: Re: Role of Yidam in acquiring siddhis
Content:
Vidyavajra said:
why wouldn't it be possible to attain siddhis by the means of Atiyoga, for instance, without any reliance on deity yoga?

Malcolm wrote:
It is very possible, indeed, it is much easier. But the understanding which makes that possible is much harder to come by.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, February 16th, 2017 at 5:31 AM
Title: Re: Kālacakra Vajrayoga & Dzogchen comparison
Content:
smcj said:
[He] replied that members of the Rnying ma and Bka’brgyud traditions had to accept (“khas len dgos red) the gzhan stong because it was the view of Bdud ‘joms Rin po che, Dil mgo mkhyen brtse Rin po che and Ka lu Rin po che.
Notice when he was speaking about Nyingma he specified Dudjom R. and Dilgo Khyentse R.'s view. Evidently their position is not universally accepted within the Nyingma.

As a footnote, the first time I ever heard about Empty of Other/Shentong was from Deshung R. who was teaching at a Kagyu center in the early 1980s. So I guess he was pretty open minded about it.


Malcolm wrote:
Dezhung understood quite well that Madhyamaka is not the point for Vajrayāna practitioners.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, February 16th, 2017 at 5:22 AM
Title: Re: Kālacakra Vajrayoga & Dzogchen comparison
Content:
Vidyavajra said:
I get that it was an exaggeration. But still, wouldn't the view of someone like Dilgo Khyentse count as very acceptable for a Nyingmapa?


Malcolm wrote:
Sure, but you have to understand that Dzogchen supercedes Madhyamaka of any stripe for Nyingmapas and Longchenpa's own position was a) that Madhyamaka formulation of Candrakīrti represents the definitive intent of Madhyamaka and b) it corresponds with the view of Dzogchen.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, February 16th, 2017 at 5:09 AM
Title: Re: Kālacakra Vajrayoga & Dzogchen comparison
Content:
Vidyavajra said:
Cool, thanks for the recommendations, everyone.

By the way, Malcolm: What's your take on this footnote I came across in Cyrus’ ‘The Buddha from Dolpo’?

“In the late 1970s I once asked the late Sde gzhung Rin po che, Kun dga’ bstan pa’i nyi ma, about the view of the gzhan stong teachings in the different Tibetan traditions. [He] replied that members of the Rnying ma and Bka’brgyud traditions had to accept (“khas len dgos red) the gzhan stong because it was the view of Bdud ‘joms Rin po che, Dil mgo mkhyen brtse Rin po che and Ka lu Rin po che. When I asked about followers of the Sa skya tradition, [he] laughed and said they had to keep an open mind about the topic (“dag snang dgos red”). When I asked about the Dge lugs pa position, [he] exclaimed that they viewed the gzhan stong teachings as “the enemy of the Doctrine” (“bstan pa’i dgra bo red”).
(P.215, •138)

(Of course, it is true that zhentong as sometimes presented in non-Jonang contexts is not identical with the Omniscient Dolpopa’s.)

But anyway, was Rinpoche’s claims generally true at that time? Has the situation changed since then?

Malcolm wrote:
Dezhung was exaggerating. Most Nyingmapas now and then do not accept gzhan stong as the definitive Madhyamaka view. Some may.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, February 16th, 2017 at 1:48 AM
Title: Re: Uposatha
Content:
pael said:
Can you take 8 precepts, if you can't abstain from eating after noon for health issues?
Do you need to abstain from watching TV during 8 precept day?

Malcolm wrote:
1) Yes.

2) Yes.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, February 16th, 2017 at 12:53 AM
Title: Re: if we are Buddhas are we the 3 Kayas
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
You are forgetting the five certainties of the Sambhogakāya.

Zhen Li said:
Though I have not encountered them in sūtra literature in Sanskrit or Chinese, what I have said is not exclusive of them.

Malcolm wrote:
The Sambhogakāya has five certainties: time, teaching, teacher, place, retinue. The time is always. The teaching is Mahāyāna. The teacher is Vairocana. The place is Akaniṣṭha Ghandavyuha. The retinue is buddhas and bodhisattvas.

This not a Tibetan idea, this is throughout Mahāyāna in Indian texts.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, February 16th, 2017 at 12:31 AM
Title: Re: 5 precepts. Alcohol?
Content:
pael said:
Does all Tibetan schools agree on this? Should I take all 5 precepts? I know I will break them sooner or later.

Malcolm wrote:
There are various interpretations, but according to Kongtrul, in the end they all agree. If you have received refuge vows, you have taken the precepts. How many you follow (1-5) is up to you.

pael said:
Do you lose refuge vow if all five are broken?

Malcolm wrote:
No, since your vow of refuge is not dependent on the five precepts. The only way to lose your vow of refuge is to declare that you are no longer a disciple of the Buddha.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, February 15th, 2017 at 11:40 PM
Title: Re: 5 precepts. Alcohol?
Content:
pael said:
Does all Tibetan schools agree on this? Should I take all 5 precepts? I know I will break them sooner or later.

Malcolm wrote:
There are various interpretations, but according to Kongtrul, in the end they all agree. If you have received refuge vows, you have taken the precepts. How many you follow (1-5) is up to you.

pael said:
Does initiation without hair cutting ceremony contain refuge vows? I'm going to hair cutting ceremony. I want to feel i'm really buddhist. I don't really feel being buddhist even though I have taken initiations. Does it mean that I already have refuge vows? I want to make it more official and get refuge name.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, all initiations have refuge as well as bodhicitta built in. The haircutting ceremony is not necessary, nor is a name. But you are free.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, February 15th, 2017 at 11:24 PM
Title: Re: 5 precepts. Alcohol?
Content:
pael said:
May I ask does taking alcohol at ganachakra/ganapuja/tsog break precept against alcohol?

Malcolm wrote:
No, since in this case the higher vows (Vajrayāna) modify the lower vows (pratimoksha).

pael said:
Does all Tibetan schools agree on this? Should I take all 5 precepts? I know I will break them sooner or later.

Malcolm wrote:
There are various interpretations, but according to Kongtrul, in the end they all agree. If you have received refuge vows, you have taken the precepts. How many you follow (1-5) is up to you.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, February 15th, 2017 at 11:18 PM
Title: Re: 5 precepts. Alcohol?
Content:


smcj said:
I took a HYT initiation from a Gelug lama a while back. He said that if you break the samaya of the initiation and end up in Vajra Hell that it was still a great blessing. So yes, there is that kind of perspective.



Maybe you shouldn't quote someone if you think what they are saying is b.s.

Malcolm wrote:
Maybe you sholdn't confuse Vajrayāna vows with pratimoksha vows, since the latter is clearly what we are discussing here.

pael said:
May I ask does taking alcohol at ganachakra/ganapuja/tsog break precept against alcohol?

Malcolm wrote:
No, since in this case the higher vows (Vajrayāna) modify the lower vows (pratimoksha).


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, February 15th, 2017 at 10:44 PM
Title: Re: Need help from highly realised or very perceptive practitioner
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
You possibly have a provocation (spirit) related disorder. This is common with people who take ayahuasca in such situations. You should investigate so called soul-retreival practices ( bla 'gugs )


Lightseeking said:
Hi,

Sorry, this a lengthy message I hope some of you will take the time to read it, you might find it interesting. For me it is of great spiritual import so I hope you will persevere to get to the nub of the issue. Anyway, it needs some explaining and also some context to communicate a very painful experience I have had recently that has caused a lot of suffering to myself, and any advice for its treatment.

Now 46 years of age, I’m a male Buddhist that started practising back in 2002 upon reading "The Art of Happiness". Up until 9 months months ago I have been mostly very grounded, strongly intuitive man who has not suffered any mental health issues of any kind, except a few shortish periods of mild depression, not unusual. Having stated this, it should be noted that I suffered a deeper depressive period around 2009, a family breakdown and a few short but fairly extreme periods of alcoholic drinking, part of my past. Besides these periods I have always been engaged with continued spiritual practice although lost a bit of connection at times to my Buddhist roots.

Leading up to May last year I feel that I have suffered a loss of mental clarity and that the 3 Jewels were a bit distant which allowed me to make an uncharacteristically bad decision to join a "Shamanic" style retreat where participants take a psychotropic substance as part of the retreat practice. Without naming the substance I can say that it is a very powerful hallucinogen and has started to become popular with westerners not only visiting South America to attend these type of retreats but are now appearing in first world countries like mine, Australia.

During the retreat on the first night when I took the substance and it started to come on, I had a massive electric/energetic jolt that seemed to originate in my heart centre and knocked me out of my chair. At the same time I saw in my mind's eye/visualised a silver cord retreat up into a dark sky. Just prior to this I also visualised red clouds (blood?) in my mind's eye billowing and dark.  After this event I continued to meditate and notice a lot of feelings and energy releases moving up through the body mostly from my Solar Plexus energy centre.

The second night we took the substance again and not long after the effect started to come on I entered a highly anxious state and felt like this whole thing was an entrapment and that the leader of the retreat was a sorcerer. Understandably this could be thought of as a paranoid episode and the continuing experience that night was the most horrific thing that had happened to me in my life up to that point. I ran from the retreat for fear of my life and had this horrifying feeling that I had been permanently cut off from the Dharma and enlightenment. I was eventually picked up by an ambulance and spent the night in a hospital under surveillance. A lot more could be said of my experience that night but this is already a long read.

The next day I was ok and returned to the retreat to say goodbye and go home as the retreat was over. I was OK for about 1 week then the horrifying thoughts and feeling returned to my mind, they did abate though after talking at length with my Buddhist teacher. The thoughts returned again a few days later for a period of hours, then went again after talking to another friend. By 3 weeks after the retreat I was dealing with constant horrifying thoughts that I had been permanently cut off from the possibility of spiritual advancement. These thoughts were strengthened as my mind kept returning to the vision of the cord retreating into the sky and a sense that my Pineal Gland may have been damaged, this is said to be the seat of consciousness and ‘connection to the heavens’.

Only a week later, the thoughts in my head reached a crescendo and I went into a paranoid psychosis by definition, after arriving home from an intensely mentally stressful day I saw people chasing me and feared for my life, this began a psychotic bender over about 4 days. I say psychotic as this would be the definition, but the events I experienced were not just hallucinations and mental aberration of some type, some of the things I experienced were verifiably real.

I can share more specifics with anyone who is interested in private message/chat or even on Skype but that is enough for now.

My main aim here is to seek some advice about what my main fear is, which is this silver cord is real and it is how we receive spiritual nourishment or connect more with it, and that mine has been cut, since then I have had hellish experiences, cut off from the heavens, am I damned to some sort of hell? Is there something I can specifically do to repair/reconnect/develop/maintain the source connection. Recently I have been able to start reconnecting with some of my formal practices and can feel some light and lightness, but there are definitely differences in my mind since the event. My ability to visualise is now greatly impaired, short term memory is also impaired, my heart centre also seems to be ‘offline’. Also I have lots of dark thoughts and sometimes ones that don’t really feel like they are coming from me. I am aware of the obsessional and paranoid aspects, but this is alleviated somewhat by my Sangha connections and Vajrasattva practice.

Any helpful comments are welcomed.

Love.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, February 15th, 2017 at 10:20 PM
Title: Re: if we are Buddhas are we the 3 Kayas
Content:
smcj said:
As far as the 3 Kayas go, they are: 1.the non-manifest essential enlightenment of a Buddha (Dharmakaya), 2.the communication of a Buddha manifesting (Sambhogakaya), and 3.the physical presence of a Buddha manifesting (Nirmanakaya). So technically your "Kayas" are presently being expressed as your body, speech, and mind. Essentially they can be said to be present as Kayas. Some Tibetan authors (Dolpoba) see it that way. Effectively however that is at best a moot point. Their manifestations are limited by unawareness.

Zhen Li said:
I am not sure about the idea of a 'latent' sambhogakaya or nirmanakaya. As I understand it (coming from a non-tantric perspective), both sambhogakaya and nirmanakaya are illusory, like conditioned experience. They're devices employed by a fully awakened Buddha to help beings. The only buddhakaya that we have prior to attaining buddhahood, or the tenth bhumi as a bodhisattva, is the dharmakaya. In the end, that is the only kaya we have, but it has multiplicity from the perspective of deluded beings..

Malcolm wrote:
You are forgetting the five certainties of the Sambhogakāya.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, February 15th, 2017 at 10:18 PM
Title: Re: 5 precepts. Alcohol?
Content:
smcj said:
Is it better to take and break them than not to take them at all?
No.

Malcolm wrote:
Nonesense, Sakya Pandita says exactly the opposite.The merit of taking them outweighs the demerit of breaking them.

smcj said:
I took a HYT initiation from a Gelug lama a while back. He said that if you break the samaya of the initiation and end up in Vajra Hell that it was still a great blessing. So yes, there is that kind of perspective.

Sakya Pandita said:
The merit of taking them outweighs the demerit of breaking them.

Malcolm wrote:
The point I am addressing, and it is a very normative view in Buddhism, is that taking vows makes our virtue more virtuous. But this is actually quite silly if you really put on your thinking cap.

smcj said:
Maybe you shouldn't quote someone if you think what they are saying is b.s.

Malcolm wrote:
Maybe you sholdn't confuse Vajrayāna vows with pratimoksha vows, since the latter is clearly what we are discussing here.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, February 15th, 2017 at 6:06 AM
Title: Re: 5 precepts. Alcohol?
Content:
smcj said:
Is it better to take and break them than not to take them at all
No.


Malcolm wrote:
Nonesense, Sakya Pandita says exactly the opposite. The merit of taking them outweighs the demerit of breaking them.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, February 15th, 2017 at 4:41 AM
Title: Re: 5 precepts. Alcohol?
Content:
ChrisK said:
Okay, so in Tibetan Buddhism if I lie it does not take away from my good karma of abstaining from drugs or alcohol?  Basically each Precept are individualized?  Correct?

Malcolm wrote:
Yes.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, February 15th, 2017 at 4:40 AM
Title: Re: Shinran Shonin: "There is no Buddha apart from the mind."
Content:
Johnny Dangerous said:
In Vajrayana it is not as if there is an argument made that Samantabhadra or Vajradhara has some unique components not shared by other Buddhas that make him the primordial Buddha, well.not really.

Dharma Flower said:
That which is not shared between Amida and all other Buddhas is that, according to Shinran, Amida came first. In the words of Shinran, Amida "attained Buddhahood in the infinite past."


Malcolm wrote:
So did all the other buddhas, according to standard Mahāyāna doxology.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, February 15th, 2017 at 12:38 AM
Title: Re: 5 precepts. Alcohol?
Content:
ChrisK said:
For me, this topic raises another question.  Is the violation of one Precept equal to the the violation of another.  For example, is drinking alcohol equally wrong as sexual misconduct or harming living beings?  Is lying just as bad as having a drink or having one too many drinks?

Malcolm wrote:
In Theravada, yes. In Tibetan Buddhism, no.

ChrisK said:
Sorry to bother but could you explain the difference.  I'm sure it's a lengthy explanation but can you dumb it down for me.  Thank you.

Malcolm wrote:
In Tibetan Buddhism, it is generally held that vows are kept broken one by one. Thus, if you lie, you have not broken your vows against killing, and so you do not lose all your lay vows. In Theravada however, the approach is more like a monks defeat, you break one, you lose all. The difference is that you can take them again.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, February 15th, 2017 at 12:23 AM
Title: Re: 5 precepts. Alcohol?
Content:
ChrisK said:
For me, this topic raises another question.  Is the violation of one Precept equal to the the violation of another.  For example, is drinking alcohol equally wrong as sexual misconduct or harming living beings?  Is lying just as bad as having a drink or having one too many drinks?

Malcolm wrote:
In Theravada, yes. In Tibetan Buddhism, no.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, February 14th, 2017 at 10:18 PM
Title: Re: anything similar to Choying Dzo...
Content:


Stewart said:
...and "pixel" for Thigle!?

Malcolm wrote:
Which of course is wrong because thigles are round whereas pixels are square or rectangular. In general, in Dzogchen teachings, corners represent limitations.

Karma Dorje said:
There are many ways to represent pixels. They are only square in the case of things like LCD displays. Your limitation.


Malcolm wrote:
Geometry of color elements of various CRT and LCD displays; phosphor dots in a color CRTs display (top row) bear no relation to pixels or subpixels.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, February 14th, 2017 at 4:14 AM
Title: Re: anything similar to Choying Dzo...
Content:


Malcolm wrote:
Yes, complete with alpha-pure as a translation of ka dag.

Josef said:
That must be where Dowman picked that one up.

Stewart said:
...and "pixel" for Thigle!?

Malcolm wrote:
Which of course is wrong because thigles are round whereas pixels are square or rectangular. In general, in Dzogchen teachings, corners represent limitations.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, February 14th, 2017 at 1:16 AM
Title: Re: anything similar to Choying Dzo...
Content:


Malcolm wrote:
Yes, complete with alpha-pure as a translation of ka dag.

ratna said:
Indeed, unfortunately.

By the way, didn't you translate CYD back in the day? I seem to remember you quoting passages from the text on some forum (IIRC). Did you translate the whole thing?

R


Malcolm wrote:
I translated a large portion of it a long time ago. Now, I need to redo it from scratch.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, February 13th, 2017 at 11:47 AM
Title: Re: Engaged Buddhism comes in many political stripes
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
The people who voted for the incompetent boob who presently is using up precious oxygen in the white house were idiots to do so. This is just a factual assessment, for example, like observing that it is raining outside.

anjali said:
Why do you believe that? It's certainly a matter of fact that people voted for Trump. It seems to me that it is a matter of opinion whether people are idiots because of it.

Malcolm wrote:
Have you been paying attention to the news? The saddest thing about it is that they have convinced themselves that the media is evil while they consume Donald J Trump who himself has been generated by the media for their consumption.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, February 13th, 2017 at 3:55 AM
Title: Re: THL is a wonderful resource but...
Content:
Lobsang Chojor said:
Malcolm, is it better to do a solid half an hour or break it into sessions totalling to half an hour?

Malcolm wrote:
one half hour without break.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, February 13th, 2017 at 3:24 AM
Title: Re: THL is a wonderful resource but...
Content:
florin said:
How about correct  pronounciation and reading ?
Can they be learned without a teacher ?

Malcolm wrote:
There are any number of courses out there. However, in general, for most people, conversation is not the point.

florin said:
But if we want to be able to read and chant the texts of the various liturgies  we would need serious work on pronounciation and that can only be done with the help of a native.

Malcolm wrote:
Which dialect? Lhasa? Amdo? Khams?


florin said:
Also if one wants to listen to advice and dharma talks in tibetan one would need to know how everything is pronounced and  sounds,  in which case just the written  word found in books doesnt help much.

Malcolm wrote:
If you want to listen to to Dharma talks, you need much more than 1/2 hour a day. You need to be in a serious college level course for two years.

But to read a little bit and use a dictionary, etc., then my recommendation still stands.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, February 13th, 2017 at 3:22 AM
Title: Re: THL is a wonderful resource but...
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
If you spent one half an hour a day studying Tibetan, within a year you would be able to effectively use that dictionary.

Grigoris said:
Half an hour a day?  Challenge accepted!  Could you please recommend a resource?

Malcolm wrote:
For home study, Manual of Colloquial Tibetan is ideal.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, February 13th, 2017 at 2:03 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:
RikudouSennin said:
The Yoga of Prana for Clarity and Emptiness

http://shangshung.org/store/index.php?main_page=product_info&products_id=751

Does this text reguire a transmission or is it for general prana practice?
Is yantra yoga lung and instructions sufficient?

Malcolm wrote:
It requires transmission. Write to the boss.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, February 13th, 2017 at 2:02 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:
Lukeinaz said:
Hello all,

Where may I find Rinpoche teaching about the Three Roots?  I have started practising guru yoga and the words  Deva and Dakini dont really mean anything to me, as I know not of what they represent.

Thank you


Malcolm wrote:
One practices the guru for blessings. The Deva is practiced for siddhis (devas are all male meditational deities). The dakini is practiced for activities (these include Simhamukha. etc.).


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, February 13th, 2017 at 1:58 AM
Title: Re: anything similar to Choying Dzo...
Content:
Norwegian said:
I just struggle reading Richard Barron's translations of Longchenpa's Seven Treasuries (what is published so far). It's a kind of Dharma English that is a little different from what I'm used to and prefer, and that makes it harder for me.

tomamundsen said:
Is there another English translation of the commentary to Choying Dzod?

ratna said:
There's Ives Waldo's unpublished translation that was available upon request in the early 2000s on his now-defunct website.

R

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, complete with alpha-pure as a translation of ka dag.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, February 13th, 2017 at 12:52 AM
Title: Re: THL is a wonderful resource but...
Content:
florin said:
How about correct  pronounciation and reading ?
Can they be learned without a teacher ?

Malcolm wrote:
There are any number of courses out there. However, in general, for most people, conversation is not the point.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, February 12th, 2017 at 10:48 PM
Title: Re: THL is a wonderful resource but...
Content:
Fa Dao said:
half an hour? I could do that...although Im a little skeptical as I did Chinese language/literature/history for my undergrad and I seem to remember that it took considerably more time...but hey, youre the expert....cool thanks...what do you think of the TLI under Lama David Curtis for a learning resource?

Malcolm wrote:
It is fine.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, February 12th, 2017 at 9:00 PM
Title: Re: Engaged Buddhism comes in many political stripes
Content:
Dharma Flower said:
Calling people idiots simply for voting differently from you doesn't convey Buddhist compassion, wisdom, or loving-kindness, especially since it ignores the serious weaknesses and shortcomings of Hillary Clinton as a candidate.

Wikileaks revealed how mainstream media outlets unethically colluded with the DNC and the Clinton campaign against Bernie Sanders:
https://observer.com/2016/11/mainstream-media-recap-who-colluded-with-the-clinton-campaign/

If Clinton lost the election, perhaps it's because she deserved to lose. Perhaps losing was her karma. Who knows? Nonetheless, I voted for her anyway.

Malcolm wrote:
The people who voted for the incompetent boob who presently is using up precious oxygen in the white house were idiots to do so. This is just a factual assessment, for example, like observing that it is raining outside.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, February 12th, 2017 at 8:58 PM
Title: Re: Engaged Buddhism comes in many political stripes
Content:
Sādhaka said:
Political debates on a Dharma forum is an cesspit (well, all political discussions are an cesspit; and Buddhist ones are certainly no exception).


Malcolm wrote:
Then why are you contributing effluents to it?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, February 12th, 2017 at 8:57 PM
Title: Re: THL is a wonderful resource but...
Content:
Fa Dao said:
Dont have 3+ hours a day for the next 10 years...was just looking for a little help at making some of these things more understandable to aid my practice.

Malcolm wrote:
The problem with that dictionary is that it is a collection of translations. Without learning Tibetan to some degree, it will be of little use to you.

If you spent one half an hour a day studying Tibetan, within a year you would be able to effectively use that dictionary.

Fa Dao said:
Some of us have to work full time jobs and any extra hours are used for actual practice...thanks anyways...

Malcolm wrote:
Learning a primary Dharma language is part of actual practice.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, February 12th, 2017 at 10:05 AM
Title: Re: The doctrine of no-self - teaching device or metaphysical truth?
Content:
fckw said:
What status do (Vajrayana-) Buddhists give to the open, space-like quality of mind in relation to an epistemic or ontological position?

Malcolm wrote:
It is free from all those positions.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, February 12th, 2017 at 10:02 AM
Title: Re: primordial buddhism
Content:
Minobu said:
so Malcolm what about overself guiding us

Malcolm wrote:
You have to be kidding...


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, February 12th, 2017 at 9:58 AM
Title: Re: Is Amida Buddha a real buddha?
Content:


Dharma Flower said:
Shinran understood Amida himself, above all other Buddhas, to be the Dharma-body from which all other Buddhas emanate .

http://dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=60&t=24825

Shinan's understanding of Amida was similar to how esoteric Buddhists view Vairocana as the primordial Buddha. I am sorry if I am not explaining this very well.

Malcolm wrote:
The dharmakāya is beyond name. "Amitabha" is a name, as is Vairocana, Vajradhara, Samantabhadra, etc.

Dharma Flower said:
I recommend starting with the Essential Shinran by Alfred Bloom, which provides the essential teachings of Shinran in an easily digestible format, while providing very little of Bloom's own commentary.

Malcolm wrote:
I have read all of Shinran that has been translated into English. I like Shinran. Nevertheless, the dharmakāya is beyond any name, and any name you give to it is but a mere facet of its actuality.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, February 12th, 2017 at 6:24 AM
Title: Re: THL is a wonderful resource but...
Content:
Fa Dao said:
http://www.thlib.org/reference/dictionaries/tibetan-dictionary/translate.php

This is a great way to copy/paste Tibetan passages and get more than one dictionary giving a definition. The problem is that trying to put it into comprehensible English can be somewhat problematic. Any suggestions on a simple method one can use to do this so that one can have a deeper understanding of various passages and or sadhana?

Malcolm wrote:
Learn Tibetan.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, February 12th, 2017 at 6:19 AM
Title: Re: The Free Speech Wars Have Begun
Content:
kirtu said:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_Volunteer_Guard

So again, why has this not resulted in war crimes trials at The Hague? Vitalis also claimed that Greek volunteers travelled to the conflict area with the supposed knowledge of senior Greek politicians .[18] Michas focused on inaction : "No-one tried to stop them and the Greek legal authorities made no attempt to assist the work of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia at The Hague by pursuing inquiries about crimes the volunteers may have committed themselves or known about".[15]
One solution is to force compliance by removing them from NATO and the EU.

Kirt


Malcolm wrote:
Good that you now acknowledge truth in Greg's claim. See, it wasn't so hard.

kirtu said:
It is what Hellenes have long feared: the shattering of a conspiracy of silence that has surrounded the role of Greek volunteers who proudly flew their flag at Srebrenica, after participating in Europe's worst massacre since the Second World War, when 7,000 men, women and children died.

Next week, as Greece settles into the presidency of the European Union, Milan Milutinovic, Serbia's recently retired president, will be brought before the war crimes tribunal at The Hague. Greek involvement in the atrocity, as well as other secrets Athens would prefer buried, could be revealed when the 60-year-old testifies...


A Dutch documentary investigating Greek complicity in the Serb wars was aired on local television in which a director of the semi-official Athens News Agency, Nikolas Voulelis, admitted to widespread censorship. During the wars the Greek media was fanatically pro-Serb, portraying Yugoslav Muslims as 'infidel Turks' bent on destroying their Orthodox brethren. 'Editorial interference was a given,' he said.

Malcolm wrote:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2003/jan/05/balkans.warcrimes


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, February 12th, 2017 at 6:18 AM
Title: Re: The Free Speech Wars Have Begun
Content:
kirtu said:
To allege that Andreas Papandreou played a role in the recruitment of Greek volunteers for genocide in Bosnia and Serbia is incendiary.

Kirt


Malcolm wrote:
Greg never once made that allegation. However, from the above Reuter's article:
Greek Justice Minister Anastasios Papaligouras said in parliament on Friday Greek citizens may have taken part in the atrocity but ruled out that they were members of the country's armed forces.

kirtu said:
Greg didn't.  But you did:
Secondly, Mr Vitalis admits that the recruitment of Greek volunteers for the war against the legitimate government of Bosnia took place with the implicit approval of the leading Greek politicians Andreas Papandreou and (to a lesser extent) Constantine Mitsotakis. As he puts it:
“The whole of Greece knows that the Greek volunteers had the broad support of Greek society as a whole as well as the support of politicians, mainly belonging to PASOK, because of the warm friendship between Andreas Papandreou and Radovan Karadzic. They also enjoyed the support of New Democracy, through the friendly diplomatic initiatives of Constantine Mitsotakis.”
Kirt


Malcolm wrote:
I did not make that assertion, that was the author of the book quoted above who argues that Vitalis made this claim.  Further, it does not state Papandreou explicitly approved this, the author says that Vitalis claims that this recruitment took place with Papandreou's implict approval, and then quotes in full what Vitalis said, "As he puts it:“The whole of Greece knows that the Greek volunteers had the broad support of Greek society as a whole as well as the support of politicians, mainly belonging to PASOK, because of the warm friendship between Andreas Papandreou and Radovan Karadzic. They also enjoyed the support of New Democracy, through the friendly diplomatic initiatives of Constantine Mitsotakis.”"


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, February 12th, 2017 at 6:07 AM
Title: Re: The Free Speech Wars Have Begun
Content:
kirtu said:
To allege that Andreas Papandreou played a role in the recruitment of Greek volunteers for genocide in Bosnia and Serbia is incendiary.

Kirt


Malcolm wrote:
Greg never once made that allegation. However, from the above Reuter's article:
Greek Justice Minister Anastasios Papaligouras said in parliament on Friday Greek citizens may have taken part in the atrocity but ruled out that they were members of the country's armed forces.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, February 12th, 2017 at 6:04 AM
Title: Re: The Free Speech Wars Have Begun
Content:


kirtu said:
And where is the reliable reporting about this?

Kirt


Malcolm wrote:
You yourself could have spent five minutes looking this up.

kirtu said:
It is incumbent upon the accuser to present evidence.

Malcolm wrote:
Nonsense, in this day and age, it is incumbent upon us all to fact check for ourselves. These are not normal times.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, February 12th, 2017 at 5:42 AM
Title: Re: The Free Speech Wars Have Begun
Content:
kirtu said:
And where is this evidence?  And why are the participants not being pursued by the World Court for war crimes?  Why did this not come out in the various war crimes trials in The Hague?

Kirt

Grigoris said:
Thye evidence is all over Greek Fascist and anti-Fascist sites.  War crimes?  Hague?  International law?  WTF you talkin' about?

kirtu said:
And where is the reliable reporting about this?

Kirt


Malcolm wrote:
You yourself could have spent five minutes looking this up.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, February 12th, 2017 at 5:41 AM
Title: Re: The Free Speech Wars Have Begun
Content:


kirtu said:
What facts do you have that volunteer Greek fascist forces took part in the Yugoslavian Civil wars?

Kirt

Grigoris said:
Photo's and testimonies from the actual participants.  Don't forget that these bozo's are actually proud of what they did.  They consider it something positive:  helping defend our Serbian Orthodox brothers against Islamic influence (and other such nonsense).

I have even seen photo's and testimonies of Greek Fascist volunteers in Syria fighting alongside Assad's forces.  Again the photo's and testimonies are from the fighters themselves.

kirtu said:
And where is this evidence?  And why are the participants not being pursued by the World Court for war crimes?  Why did this not come out in the various war crimes trials in The Hague?

Kirt

Malcolm wrote:
Michas, Takis (2002). Unholy Alliance: Greece and Milosevic's Serbia in the Nineties. Texas A&M University Press. ISBN 1-58544-183-X.

kirtu said:
“Takis Michas’ The Unholy Alliance constitutes an insightful analysis and devastating critique of Greece’s reactive ethnonationalism. It should be essential reading not only for those in the West that are interested in Balkan politics but also for all those Greeks that take seriously the Socratic saying: ‘Know thyself.’”--Nicos Mouzelis, London School of Economics
Greece starts probe into Srebrenica massacre
27 Jun 2005 11:09:59 GMT

Source: Reuters

By Karolos Grohmann

ATHENS, June 27 (Reuters) - An Athens prosecutor launched a preliminary investigation on Monday to determine whether Greeks took part with Bosnian Serbs in the 1995 massacre of up to 8,000 Muslims in Srebrenica.

The slaughter of the unarmed men and boys taken by the Bosnian Serb army from the U.N. protected area at Srebrenica was Europe's worst atrocity since World War Two.

Greek Justice Minister Anastasios Papaligouras said in parliament on Friday Greek citizens may have taken part in the atrocity but ruled out that they were members of the country's armed forces.

An unspecified number of Greek citizens volunteered to join fellow Orthodox Christian Serb forces fighting in the Yugoslav wars of the 1990s, saying they volunteered to support their "Orthodox brothers" in battle.

"A preliminary investigation is already under way by the prosecutor ... to determine whether there were Greek nationals involved in this," a Justice Ministry official told Reuters.

"Obviously this will not be a short investigation. It will not take just a few weeks. It will be longer than that."

The investigation, coming before the massacre's 10-year anniversary on July 11, was triggered by a Greek deputy's question to the country's justice minister to probe the matter of Greek participation in the massacre.

At the time, several of the Greek volunteers openly talked about their missions in the Greek media, but there had never been any mention of involvement in the Srebrenica massacre.

Greece, which traditionally has had better ties with Serbia and formerly with Yugoslavia than any of its other Balkan neighbours, was one of the strongest opponents of the NATO-led bombing campaign against Serbia during the 1999 Kosovo war.

While Belgrade has yet to officially acknowledge its support of Bosnian Serb forces during the Bosnian war, compelled by unrelenting Western pressure, the Bosnian Serb parliament earlier this year admitted the scale of the Srebrenica atrocity and Bosnian Serb responsibility for it.

Malcolm wrote:
And:
TAKIS MICHAS: Yes. First of all Mr. Vitalis explicitly admits that Greeks (i.e. himself) took part in the planning and execution of the Serb “re-occupation” (as he calls it) of Srebrenica. As he says in his press statement “I was present with a group of senior Serb officers in all the operations for the re-occupation of Srebrenica by the Serbs”.

Secondly, Mr Vitalis admits that the recruitment of Greek volunteers for the war against the legitimate government of Bosnia took place with the implicit approval of the leading Greek politicians Andreas Papandreou and (to a lesser extent) Constantine Mitsotakis. As he puts it:
“The whole of Greece knows that the Greek volunteers had the broad support of Greek society as a whole as well as the support of politicians, mainly belonging to PASOK, because of the warm friendship between Andreas Papandreou and Radovan Karadzic. They also enjoyed the support of New Democracy, through the friendly diplomatic initiatives of Constantine Mitsotakis.”
http://www.bosniak.org/interview-greek-journalist-sued-for-writing-about-the-presence-of-greek-paramilitaries-in-bosnia/


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, February 12th, 2017 at 5:06 AM
Title: Re: (carefully) Broadcasting Dzogchen through music
Content:
climb-up said:
Speaking of iffy...
...what do folks think about this?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hXVNT1rTTPI


Malcolm wrote:
This guy is a student of Norbu Rinpoche's.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, February 12th, 2017 at 2:30 AM
Title: Re: Is Amida Buddha a real buddha?
Content:


Dharma Flower said:
Shinran understood Amida himself, above all other Buddhas, to be the Dharma-body from which all other Buddhas emanate .

http://dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=60&t=24825

Shinan's understanding of Amida was similar to how esoteric Buddhists view Vairocana as the primordial Buddha. I am sorry if I am not explaining this very well.

Malcolm wrote:
The dharmakāya is beyond name. "Amitabha" is a name, as is Vairocana, Vajradhara, Samantabhadra, etc.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, February 12th, 2017 at 1:23 AM
Title: Re: primordial buddhism
Content:
tingdzin said:
Everyone has his or her own opinion about "original Buddhism", and, not surprisingly, it's usually close to that of the school they personally prefer.If you really want a thorough answer to that question, you'll have to do a lot of research and make up your own mind.

Malcolm wrote:
Indeed, we all know that Dzogchen is the original Buddhadharma.

anjali said:
Tingdzin, Malcolm's reply is a good example of your first point.

Malcolm wrote:
That was the point of my reply. And it illustrates the second of tingzin's point, "you'll have to do a lot of research and make up your own mind."


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, February 11th, 2017 at 11:24 PM
Title: Re: Is Amida Buddha a real buddha?
Content:
DGA said:
In my opinion, that's their problem.  I think you are better off relying on the guidance of authentic masters such as Shinran.

Dharma Flower said:
If one reads the writings of Shinran, one can see that he understood Amida to be more than a literal flesh and blood Buddha, but instead Dharma-body itself, the ultimate source of all Buddhahood.

Malcolm wrote:
The dharmakāya of all buddhas is single. There is only one teacher, the dharmakāya. Amitabha, Śākyamuni, etc., are all emanations that come from the dharmakāya.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, February 11th, 2017 at 10:35 PM
Title: Re: The doctrine of no-self - teaching device or metaphysical truth?
Content:
fckw said:
Is the doctrine of "no-self" and/or "emptiness" merely meant to be merely a teaching device (i.e.: if you meditate on this you will gain certain specific insights) or is it meant to be a metaphysical truth?

Malcolm wrote:
It has both epistemic and ontological ramifications. Its epistemic ramification is that belief in a self is a false belief since there is no entity which can be taken as a self. Its ontological ramification is that questions of being and nonbeing are strictly conventional.

That being said, Buddhadharma certainly has a metaphysics, such doctrines as karma, rebirth, and so on are metaphysical in nature. Abdhidharma deals with many metaphysical issues, such as the nature of time, the nature of causality, and so on. The literature of the Prajñāpāramita deals with the metaphysics of the bodhisattva path and so on.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, February 11th, 2017 at 10:09 PM
Title: Re: Engaged Buddhism comes in many political stripes
Content:


boda said:
I've even started to visit breitbart and the like, to counter whatever cognitive bias I may be clinging to. It's not so bad once you get over the initial gag response.

Malcolm wrote:
Oh please. Brietbart is a cesspit. I look at it merely to observe the pathology of the far right.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, February 11th, 2017 at 10:07 PM
Title: Re: Karmapa launches new multilingual Dharma-Ebooks and resources website
Content:
Vasana said:
"Today [10.2.17], the Gyalwang Karmapa launched his new website, Dharma eBooks, which will be a growing collection of texts, practices and commentaries - some of which have been difficult to find.



http://www.dharmaebooks.org

Dharma Ebooks is a site featuring ebook editions primarily of the Buddhist canon in Tibetan, Buddhist philosophical texts from the Tibetan traditions, and practice texts.
Dharma Treasure has undertaken this project in accordance with the wishes of the Gyalwang Karmapa Ogyen Trinley Dorje.

Each text is translated into various languages and is available for download to iOS, Android, Kindle and others so that students can access Dharma books from wherever they are."

Malcolm wrote:
Too bad it is horribly slow.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, February 11th, 2017 at 9:59 PM
Title: Re: primordial buddhism
Content:
tingdzin said:
Everyone has his or her own opinion about "original Buddhism", and, not surprisingly, it's usually close to that of the school they personally prefer.If you really want a thorough answer to that question, you'll have to do a lot of research and make up your own mind.

Malcolm wrote:
Indeed, we all know that Dzogchen is the original Buddhadharma.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, February 11th, 2017 at 3:01 AM
Title: Re: Pedling Chökhor in France
Content:
Grigoris said:
Any idea what the cost will be?

Malcolm wrote:
http://pelingtreasures.com/registration/


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, February 11th, 2017 at 1:12 AM
Title: Re: lets talk The Buddha of Kuon Ganjo/Gakki view.
Content:


Queequeg said:
As far as I understand, Samantabhadra, who is the Primordial Buddha in Dzogchen, which is where Malcolm comes from, realized Buddhahood when this fundamental ignorance first arose. The rest of us, got tripped up by that fundamental ignorance and stumbled down into the muck of samsara.

I have never heard of this explanation of the first Buddha in the Lotus school.

The difference may be that Samantabhadra seems to be asserted as Dharmakaya only. I may be wrong. I don't know enough about it. I am only discussing this as way to illustrate what seems to be asserted in the Lotus schools.

Malcolm wrote:
The dharmakāya is the source of the rūpakāya. The nirmanakāya is not always manifest within time. This does not mean that there are no three kāyas. There are always three kāyas. But the nirmanakāya does not always manifest. For example, when the universe is in a pralaya state. At that point, only the sambhogakāya manifests. Specific conditions must be met for the manifestation of a supreme nirmanakāya. This is the subject of an elaborate buddhology in Dzogchen teachings.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, February 11th, 2017 at 12:44 AM
Title: Re: Help! I think I'm slipping into nihilism ...
Content:
rachmiel said:
There's NOTHING, no solace, no balm, no fairy tales to get me through, no sense of ground, of wisdom. Just: a kind of all-encompassing despair.

Malcolm wrote:
When you realize there is no solace, no balm, no fairy take to get you through, no sense of ground, then you are free. Why? Because there is no solace, balm, convenient fairy tale, and no ground.

Why? Because there is no ultimate meaning. Meaning is relative.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, February 10th, 2017 at 11:38 PM
Title: Re: Kālacakra Vajrayoga & Dzogchen comparison
Content:
Vidyavajra said:
All right, thanks for the explanation. I'll just accept that for now as I'm not sufficiently learned anyway.

What would be the best step to take in order to enter the Dzogchen path for one based in Northern Europe, not speaking Tibetan and who is not currently in a position to travel far and wide?

Grigoris said:
http://www.nyingma.com/ogyan-cho-khor-ling/tanzinrinpoche.htm%22 comes to Europe for teaching tours every summer.  He teaches in Germany and the UK if you do not want to, or cannot, travel further south.

treehuggingoctopus said:
Greg, the link will not open.


Malcolm wrote:
http://www.nyingma.com/ogyan-cho-khor-ling/tanzinrinpoche.htm


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, February 10th, 2017 at 10:43 AM
Title: Re: Engaged Buddhism comes in many political stripes
Content:
Monlam Tharchin said:
Recognizing that people's politics, including our own, are hugely influenced by our demographics and not some meticulously thought out platform, I don't see the point in equating ignorance with active malevolence.

Malcolm wrote:
At this point, if people do not understand what is happening, it is in my opinion willful ignorance on their part.

boda said:
Willful ignorance is not overcome by an assumption of active malevolence. I see Monlam's point.

Malcolm wrote:
Willful ignorance is beliigerant by nature.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, February 10th, 2017 at 10:37 AM
Title: Re: The Free Speech Wars Have Begun
Content:
Matt J said:
I agree. The left is conceding the high moral ground and choosing to mirror the tactics of the right. I'm not surprised, but I must confess I am quite disappointed at the views here. As Bodhisattvas dedicated to ending the suffering of all beings, it seems a bit inconsistent to grab immediately onto the tactics of violence and/or property destruction.

Malcolm wrote:
Wth respect to the environment, monkey wrenching is nothing new.


Matt J said:
If Buddhist practitioners of the Mahayana, who have profound teachings and practice for the sake of all beings are so eager to drop non-violence for violence and/or property destruction, then there is little hope for the world that has not accessed the teachings or availed themselves of the practices.

Malcolm wrote:
Ahimsa is deep, Evaluating harm to sentient beings and arriving at a rational response is not something which may be evaluated on the basis of superficial appearances. Also, it is not like we have not been here before.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, February 10th, 2017 at 4:53 AM
Title: Re: The Free Speech Wars Have Begun
Content:
Monlam Tharchin said:
Okay, you win Malcolm.


Malcolm wrote:
The point is in this time we need more direct action. Not violence against people, but I have no problem with monkey wrenching or anything else that impedes the wholesale destruction of the world.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, February 10th, 2017 at 4:09 AM
Title: Re: The Free Speech Wars Have Begun
Content:
Monlam Tharchin said:
If the only choices people see are to either yell louder or to inflict harm on our enemies, then things will only escalate, and have.

Grigoris said:
We only have one choice:  to stop those that are wanting to, or are causing, harm.

Have you ever been on the receiving end of fascist violence?

Monlam Tharchin said:
Let's please not make assumptions like this. I'm not comfortable talking in more depth on my own experiences as a minority on a public forum.
Also, the rest of my post I thought was clear enough on why I personally will not condone anger in my life.

Also, MLK still spoke to compassion and working to speak to the hearts of our enemies even in the circumstances he faced.
I find that inspiring and a personal goal.

Malcolm wrote:
He also excluded property damage from his definition of violence. And in fact, so does the law. Crimes against property (destruction, theft, etc.,) are all defined as nonviolent; crimes against people (assault, rape, murder, etc.) are all defined as violent.

He also said:
You deplore the demonstrations taking place in Birmingham. But your statement, I am sorry to say, fails to express a similar concern for the conditions that brought about the demonstrations. I am sure that none of you would want to rest content with the superficial kind of social analysis that deals merely with effects and does not grapple with underlying causes. It is unfortunate that demonstrations are taking place in Birmingham, but it is even more unfortunate that the city's white power structure left the Negro community with no alternative.
And:
I must make two honest confessions to you, my Christian and Jewish brothers. First, I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro’s great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen’s Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to ‘order’ than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: ‘I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action’; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man’s freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a ‘more convenient season.’ Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection.
And:
We know through painful experience that freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed. Frankly, I have yet to engage in a direct action campaign that was “well timed” in the view of those who have not suffered unduly from the disease of segregation. . . . We have waited more than 340 years for our constitutional and God-given rights.”
“Letter from a Birmingham Jail," April 16, 1963

Monlam Tharchin said:
And one day we must ask the question, ‘Why are there forty million poor people in America? And when you begin to ask that question, you are raising questions about the economic system, about a broader distribution of wealth.’ When you ask that question, you begin to question the capitalistic economy. And I’m simply saying that more and more, we’ve got to begin to ask questions about the whole society.”

Malcolm wrote:
Speech to SCLC, Atlanta, Georgia, Aug. 16, 1967

Monlam Tharchin said:
The evils of capitalism are as real as the evils of militarism and evils of racism.

Malcolm wrote:
Speech to SCLC Board, March 30, 1967

It is not a time for moderation.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, February 10th, 2017 at 3:03 AM
Title: Re: Engaged Buddhism comes in many political stripes
Content:
Monlam Tharchin said:
And there is a decided lack of mutual care and tact in nearly all political dialogue I've witnessed, including on DW.

Malcolm wrote:
Are you now claiming to be inside people's heads? We live in a time where the GOP, as a matter of policy, is encouraging fiscal, military, and environmental policies which are wholly irresponsible and will damage all life on the planet for centuries, if not millenia. Sorry, but I think that outweighs any concern for the feelings of the people contributing to this catastrophe. I simply do not care about their feelings. They are destroying the world.

Monlam Tharchin said:
Malcolm, this is an example of what I mean.
Accusations is a poor way to continue a conversation.
As I said in my post you quoted, I tend to end up as far left on the scale as a test can put me.
So I find any policy which harms people and the environment, often for the sake of a few extra dollars or a little more power, to be really detrimental both to society and to the people crippled by selfishness.
This to me seems to be common sense, and a basic empathy for others.

So I'm not at all arguing about the GOP or Dems but the way these things get talked about.

Malcolm wrote:
We have to talk about these things honestly. When we do, it will hurt their feelings and frighten them.


Monlam Tharchin said:
Recognizing that people's politics, including our own, are hugely influenced by our demographics and not some meticulously thought out platform, I don't see the point in equating ignorance with active malevolence.

Malcolm wrote:
At this point, if people do not understand what is happening, it is in my opinion willful ignorance on their part.

Monlam Tharchin said:
The moment we turn someone's harmful view into "bigot" or "people who actively want me to die" (as a friend said) then there is no grounds for reconciliation. Few things seem to conjure up Self and Others as quickly as politics, and suffering isn't far behind.

Malcolm wrote:
People who hold biased views against Muslims, Jews, Latinos, Blacks, etc., are bigots. There is no other word for it.

Monlam Tharchin said:
I'm not at all advocating inaction or passive martyrdom. Hatred/anger or inaction is a false dichotomy.

Malcolm wrote:
Not sure what you are advocating, other than you do not like the tone of the present political climate. Strap in, it will get worse before it gets better.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, February 10th, 2017 at 2:36 AM
Title: Re: The Free Speech Wars Have Begun
Content:
Matt J said:
Firebombing GOP headquarters in North Carolina?

treehuggingoctopus said:
I do not think that punching a Nazi can be compared to firebombing GOP headquarters.

Monlam Tharchin said:
Neither are excusable to begin with, are they?

Malcolm wrote:
Are you a pacifist?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, February 10th, 2017 at 2:17 AM
Title: Re: Engaged Buddhism comes in many political stripes
Content:
Monlam Tharchin said:
And there is a decided lack of mutual care and tact in nearly all political dialogue I've witnessed, including on DW.

Malcolm wrote:
Are you now claiming to be inside people's heads? We live in a time where the GOP, as a matter of policy, is encouraging fiscal, military, and environmental policies which are wholly irresponsible and will damage all life on the planet for centuries, if not millenia. Sorry, but I think that outweighs any concern for the feelings of the people contributing to this catastrophe. I simply do not care about their feelings. They are destroying the world.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, February 10th, 2017 at 1:44 AM
Title: Re: Engaged Buddhism comes in many political stripes
Content:
Monlam Tharchin said:
I think I mentioned it in another thread, but among my peers, being conservative or even not supporting X or Y position automatically makes you racist/sexist/bigoted/hateful.

Malcolm wrote:
The consequence of Republican politics is racist and sexist. This way, republicans get to support racist and sexist policies without having to individually cop to being personally racist or sexist.

Monlam Tharchin said:
I don't know, I feel the rest of my post already answered what you're saying.
Caring for all beings like a mother for her only child includes Republicans.
I find the rhetoric used on the Left (such as with my friends and sometimes here on DW) does not reflect this, and does not help the issue.

Malcolm wrote:
Caring for people does not preclude one from observing their faults.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, February 10th, 2017 at 1:29 AM
Title: Re: Engaged Buddhism comes in many political stripes
Content:
Monlam Tharchin said:
I think I mentioned it in another thread, but among my peers, being conservative or even not supporting X or Y position automatically makes you racist/sexist/bigoted/hateful.

Malcolm wrote:
The consequence of Republican politics is racist and sexist. This way, republicans get to support racist and sexist policies without having to individually cop to being personally racist or sexist.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, February 10th, 2017 at 1:25 AM
Title: Re: The Free Speech Wars Have Begun
Content:
Matt J said:
Firebombing GOP headquarters in North Carolina?

Malcolm wrote:
We do not know who did this. No one has been arrested. No one has taken credit.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, February 10th, 2017 at 12:30 AM
Title: Re: The Free Speech Wars Have Begun
Content:
Matt J said:
It seems to me that we may be witnessing an increased radicalization of the left, and the left deciding it may be more comfortable with the use of violence to secure political ends (in the USA anyway).

Malcolm wrote:
I don't see left wing people facing down the ATF and FBI, armed to the teeth, anywhere. But this happens on the lunatic fringe of the right with regularity. There exist no lunatics like Alex Jones on the left.

It has been two decades+ since the last left-wing terrorist attack happened in the USA.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, February 9th, 2017 at 11:40 PM
Title: Re: The Free Speech Wars Have Begun
Content:
Fa Dao said:
interesting commentary by Dave Rubin...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p_KUf_giuZo

Malcolm wrote:
The free speech wars really haven't begun.

This is just whinging from people like Sam Harris et al who want to able to say nasty, inaccurate things about religious groups without other people complaining about their bullshit in response. In a society based on free speech, you have to expect pushback when one says controversial things.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, February 9th, 2017 at 11:03 PM
Title: Re: Offering Mandala
Content:
alexprice said:
A practice I'd like to do requires making an offering mandala "the size of one's forearm." What does making an offering mandala entail? In its most basic essential form.

Also, there are instructions to sprinkle it with rakta. I know what this means but am wondering what is usually used for it in actual practice?

best

alex


Malcolm wrote:
You do not sprinkle your mandala with blood, symbolic or otherwise. You sprinkle it with saffron water.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, February 9th, 2017 at 10:12 AM
Title: Re: Illuminating Quotes by Malcolm Namdrol-la
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Attend all webcasts of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu you can and receive transmission, work with some Dzogchen methods, decide to go somewhere and meet him when you have the chance, and then continue to learn Dzogchen from him directly. He generally spends 6 months a year in Tenerife. He is there presently. He is the most interesting master alive today, without parallel.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, February 9th, 2017 at 10:05 AM
Title: Re: Kālacakra Vajrayoga & Dzogchen comparison
Content:
Vidyavajra said:
All right, thanks for the explanation. I'll just accept that for now as I'm not sufficiently learned anyway.

What would be the best step to take in order to enter the Dzogchen path for one based in Northern Europe, not speaking Tibetan and who is not currently in a position to travel far and wide?

Malcolm wrote:
Attend all webcast of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu you can, receive transmission, work with some Dzogchen methods, decide to go somewhere and meet him when you have the chance, and then continue to learn Dzogchen from him directly. He generally spends 6 months a year in Tenerife. He is there presently.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, February 9th, 2017 at 6:06 AM
Title: Re: Kālacakra Vajrayoga & Dzogchen comparison
Content:
Vidyavajra said:
Thanks for replying, but honestly that goes a bit over my head at the moment.

Do not many Dzogchenpas sympathise with the Zhentong view at least insofar as Madhyamaka is concerned? Likewise Dzogchen is a part of the Jonang instructions, though practice of Vajrayoga is more universal within that tradition.

Malcolm wrote:
Some Dzogchenpas may, but it is nowhere near universal. Longchenpa states quite clearly that the view of Dzogchen and the view of Prasanga Madhyamaka are compatible.

Vidyavajra said:
The eminent Dzogchen masters that were also the instigators of the Rimé movement were at least highly approving of zhentong (see ‘The Buddha from Dolpo’ for more information on this). Jonang ‘maha-madhyamaka’ embraces both zhentong and rangtong as sides of the same coin anyway.

Malcolm wrote:
There is no such thing as rang stong. This is a strawman position that gzhan stong pas invented with which to contrast their view.

In the 15th century, Gorampa Sonam Senge, a major Sakya critic of gzhan stong view, pointed out that in Vajrayāna it does not matter very much what sutrayāna view one holds because the actual view one practices is based upon the experience introduced in the fourth empowerment.

Khyentse Wangpo, in light of this fact, therefore treated all version of madhyamaka equally, presenting the freedom from extremes view, the other emptiness view, and the view of Tsongkhapa side by side without making ant preferential statements as to which he preferred.

Vidyavajra said:
For example, Chogyal Namkhai Norbu has, several times over the years, explained why gzhan stong view is incompatible with Dzogchen. It mainly has to do with the gzhan stong assertion that qualities are already fully formed within sentient beings, not as mere potentials which can manifest.
Just out of curiosity, have you studied any full-length works of Dolpopa yourself, or Taranatha’s elaborations on the matter?

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, and Śakya Chogden, Kongtrul, Tsongkhapa, Kedrupje, etc., etc.

Vidyavajra said:
I respect Chogyal Namkhai Norbu, but I don't take him as a final authority on this question when clearly other views on the matter are legitimate too.

Malcolm wrote:
In terms of masters both living and present, no one is in a position to argue with Norbu Rinpoche about whether or not gzhan stong view is ultimately compatible with Dzogchen practice. Suffice it to say that the Dzogchen view of the basis holds that it is utterly empty of all extremes and is not itself something real. The qualities of the buddha are not manifest in the basis, and as such, this is rejected in the first of the six faulty argument concerning the basis, which is a standard presentation in Dzogchen Man ngag sde.

It is sufficient to take Longchenpa as the final authority on the matter. Longchenpa proclaimed that Prasangika was the definitive madhyamaka view; he also proclaimed that the tathāgatagarbha sūtras were definitive. Doesn't this make him a gzhan stong pa? No. The primary reason is that he eschewed the gzhan stong attempt to reconcile the three natures with the two truths. The latter point in fact is the where gzhan stong position goes astray.

Vidyavajra said:
The distinction you point out does not seem to be if great consequence as far as actual realization is concerned. It's mainly petty bickering about how to verbalise and conceptualise the same truth in the most precise way.

Malcolm wrote:
No, there are serious flaws in the gdzhan stong presentation of the three natures which contradict the way they are explained by Maitreyanatha, Asanga, and Vasubandhu. You should read http://wordpress.tsadra.org/?p=1215. He is perhaps on the world's leading expert on gzhan stong and is Indian antecedents.

We can argue the relative merits of this sūtrayāna point of view or that one, but they are all the same in so far as they are intellectual analysis and in the end do not actually lead anywhere except to endless proliferation. At a certain point, they must be dropped and abandoned so that one can enter the experiential view gained in the fourth empowerment/direct introduction/pointing out.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, February 9th, 2017 at 1:03 AM
Title: Re: Retroactivity of Awakening
Content:
Minobu said:
Sometimes do Dzogchen views differ from other mahayana views conserning how Buddhas exist.



Malcolm wrote:
Not really so much. They are a little more elaborate perhaps, but not really different at all. Even though Dzogchen talks about an "adibuddha" for example, it is didactic, not actual.

Minobu said:
are Dzogchen teachings on things like how Buddhas perceive time and even more importantly exist in time or not exit time vastly different from other mahayana views .

Malcolm wrote:
Not at all.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, February 8th, 2017 at 11:42 PM
Title: Re: Retroactivity of Awakening
Content:


Coëmgenu said:
Basically, there are two (or more) notions: Buddhahood is without time, from the perspective of Buddhahood, there has never been delusion, because Awakening is retroactive:
Malcolm wrote:
As for obscurations, they are not real, substantial things that need to removed, like a stain from clothes. As the famous Haribhadra points out, when one achieves buddhahood, one understands one was never deluded all along. As Maitreyanath states, "Nothing here to add, nothing here to remove."
I think what is confusing is your use of the term "retroactive."

Buddhas do not live in time. They do no perceive time. Time is a relative cognition. Buddhas have no relative cognitions. Nevertheless, conventionally, buddhas arise in time, and at one time there was a moment when every buddha was not a buddha, including Buddha Samantabhadra, the so called "adi-buddha." This is why in Dzogchen teachings we talk generically about a time when buddhahood has not been realized and there were no deluded sentient beings.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, February 8th, 2017 at 11:23 PM
Title: Re: Retroactivity of Awakening
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Which Buddha? Śākyamuni?

Coëmgenu said:
All of them. The specific literature being dealt with specifically deals with Śākyamuni, but it doesn't not label him necessarily as a special Buddha who is significantly different that any other Buddha in regards to his Awakening/Lifespan/etc. I don't think, at least.

Malcolm wrote:
This idea then flies in the face of dependent origination. It means that aspirations for buddhahood, etc., are all meaningless.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, February 8th, 2017 at 11:01 PM
Title: Re: Retroactivity of Awakening
Content:
Coëmgenu said:
Greetings all,

A while ago, I proposed a thought-experiment based on a surface-level, or literalist, reading of the description of the Buddha's Awakening and Buddhic Lifespan based on Chapter 16 of the Lotus Sutra, which declares one (or both) of the following readings (or neither, to cover myself if my wrongness in these speculative interpretations is irreconcilable with any mainstream Buddhology).

1) the Awakening of the Buddha is retroactive, having never occurred once it has occurred, as much of a contradiction that may seem, speaking on terms of general conventionality. It is in this way that Buddhahood is beginningless.

2) the Awakening of the Buddha is non-retroactive, thus is temporal, and is fundamentally tied to the conditions and historical reality of a certain moment in time, perhaps even a certain specific and particular experienced dharma, most likely the particular asamskrta (unconditioned) dharma of nirvana itself. Chapter 16 merely labels the experience of the asamskrta-dharma as occurring "measureless" time before because the amount of time that has passed, since the asamskrta-dharma-experience, is uncountable by anyone or anything on account of the sheer size of the number, for no other reason. Since the beginning of this Buddhahood, as a date/time, is unknowable, it falls beyond the purview of the "All" as outlined in, say, the Sabbasutta of the Páli nikáya-literature, and thus cannot be said to exist. It is in this way that Buddhahood is beginningless.

Which one of these readings (or neither) seems more likely?

Malcolm wrote:
Which Buddha? Śākyamuni?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, February 8th, 2017 at 9:34 PM
Title: Re: Engaged Buddhism comes in many political stripes
Content:
Johnny Dangerous said:
Voting for Trump is not a moral failing, frankly, if anything it's probably an intellectual one.

Malcolm wrote:
It is both.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, February 8th, 2017 at 9:29 PM
Title: Re: Kālacakra Vajrayoga & Dzogchen comparison
Content:
Vidyavajra said:
Thanks for replying, but honestly that goes a bit over my head at the moment.

Do not many Dzogchenpas sympathise with the Zhentong view at least insofar as Madhyamaka is concerned? Likewise Dzogchen is a part of the Jonang instructions, though practice of Vajrayoga is more universal within that tradition.

Malcolm wrote:
Some Dzogchenpas may, but it is nowhere near universal. Longchenpa states quite clearly that the view of Dzogchen and the view of Prasanga Madhyamaka are compatible.

For example, Chogyal Namkhai Norbu has, several times over the years, explained why gzhan stong view is incompatible with Dzogchen. It mainly has to do with the gzhan stong assertion that qualities are already fully formed within sentient beings, not as mere potentials which can manifest.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, February 8th, 2017 at 4:26 AM
Title: Re: Lower Realms and Tathagata Gharba
Content:


Vidyavajra said:
But we have strayed from the original topic, have we not?

Malcolm wrote:
Always an ever present risk on DW.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, February 8th, 2017 at 4:01 AM
Title: Re: Lower Realms and Tathagata Gharba
Content:


Vidyavajra said:
It is exceptionally true.

Malcolm wrote:
No, it is just your opinion.

Vidyavajra said:
I don't think the view I expressed regarding Buddhahood is pessimistic. For the bodhisattva, it does not matter how long it will take to completely manifest Buddhahood, because he realizes that Samsara and Nirvana are just expressions of the same Reality. We are aware that we already live through Enlightenment, the entire long, hard quest is real only on the relative and illusory level, so we do not feel trapped in this quest or craving for immediate release. Completely manifested Buddhahood will come in its time, and meanwhile we do what we do in utter freedom.

But look, which masters alive today do actually claim to be total Buddhas? Which of these many Buddhas is the Buddha Maitreya? Perhaps this guy, who does claim to be a Buddha superior even to Shakyamuni?

Malcolm wrote:
There is no point to Vajrayāna if we take your view seriously.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, February 8th, 2017 at 3:40 AM
Title: Re: Lower Realms and Tathagata Gharba
Content:
Vidyavajra said:
Well, I'll have to do some deeper inquiries into this myself. It seems a strange classification to me, but I am not a master.

Malcolm wrote:
MIpham lists Nāgas at the head of his list of animals in Sanskrit/Tibetan glossary, followed by birds, etc.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, February 8th, 2017 at 3:28 AM
Title: Re: Lower Realms and Tathagata Gharba
Content:
Vidyavajra said:
Are there bodhisattvas alive today who have had high illuminating realizations? Yes, but not one single person who cannot still go much further. In other words, no Buddhas. So you see, even for humans this is an extremely difficult realization.

Malcolm wrote:
This is excessively pessimistic.

Vidyavajra said:
It is exceptionally true.

Malcolm wrote:
No, it is just your opinion.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, February 8th, 2017 at 3:25 AM
Title: Re: Lower Realms and Tathagata Gharba
Content:


Vidyavajra said:
Can the claim that animals may achieve Buddhahood be firmly established from traditional sources? I don't think so.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, it can. Nāgas, mahorāgas, kinnaras, etc., are kinds of animals and they are clearly depicted in Mahāyāna sources as capable of attaining awakening. This is an old argument, settled a long time ago.

Vidyavajra said:
Here I actually have to strongly disagree. ‘Animals’ is a large category of beings, but not one single natural animal on our Earth is comparable to how the Nagas are traditionally described in Indian traditions ranging from Hinduism to Buddhism. Nagas have an intellect that resembles humans rather than any animal on this planet. Why then consider the Naga an animal?! Of course,  moderns see humans as just another animal as well, but traditional Buddhadharma doesn't. Nagas are traditionally known for their intelligence.

Malcolm wrote:
Traditional Buddhism classifies nāgas as animals. As I said, this is an old argument, settled along ago.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, February 8th, 2017 at 3:12 AM
Title: Re: Lower Realms and Tathagata Gharba
Content:
Vidyavajra said:
Are there bodhisattvas alive today who have had high illuminating realizations? Yes, but not one single person who cannot still go much further. In other words, no Buddhas. So you see, even for humans this is an extremely difficult realization.

Malcolm wrote:
This is excessively pessimistic.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, February 8th, 2017 at 3:10 AM
Title: Re: Lower Realms and Tathagata Gharba
Content:
javier.espinoza.t said:
Animals can achieve buddhahood but in general not through teachings intended for other beings nor can be tamed in conventional way. First we need the capability of comunicate with them effectibly, second we need the right message according to their individual condition[...etc]

Vidyavajra said:
Can the claim that animals may achieve Buddhahood be firmly established from traditional sources? I don't think so.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, it can. Nāgas, mahorāgas, kinnaras, etc., are kinds of animals and they are clearly depicted in Mahāyāna sources as capable of attaining awakening. This is an old argument, settled a long time ago.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, February 8th, 2017 at 2:37 AM
Title: Re: Bodhisattvas and No self or others?
Content:


Monlam Tharchin said:
Thank goodness helping others is just a matter of projection and perception. Then I don't ever have to leave my house.
The person starving at my doorstep or my estranged family member will be equally helped as if I had heard their needs and tried to respond.

I'm bringing this up in a cantankerous way, but can someone please explain how this is a faulty interpretation?
Whenever I see "saving" or "helping" others explained as a kind of trick of perception I get very concerned and confused.

Malcolm wrote:
It is an established doctrine in several Tibetan Buddhists schools that buddhas only see buddhas, and that compassion for sentient beings is spontaneous and not intentional.

Monlam Tharchin said:
Greetings, Malcolm. How does this apply to the 99.9% of us who are not yet buddhas?

Malcolm wrote:
Compassion is an innate part of our nature. So one should feel free to let it express itself.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, February 8th, 2017 at 12:35 AM
Title: Re: Bodhisattvas and No self or others?
Content:
dzogchungpa said:
Here's a passage that seems relevant, from Thinley Norbu's "Echoes": In the Nyingma tradition, saving all sentient beings from suffering is described in terms of one’s own perception. This means that the field that we experience as “other” is based on the perception of a “self,” and social experience is based on individual experience. This does not make individual experience or the individual himself any more important, however, and individual perception remains erroneous. But if one can recognize fundamental awareness, the basis of one’s own perception, one can transform individual experience into wisdom and therefore attain realization. With the attainment of this freedom of wisdom, there is no longer any erroneous projection of an external world. Ceasing to project an erroneous external world is called “saving all sentient beings from suffering in terms of one’s own perception.”

Monlam Tharchin said:
Thank goodness helping others is just a matter of projection and perception. Then I don't ever have to leave my house.
The person starving at my doorstep or my estranged family member will be equally helped as if I had heard their needs and tried to respond.

I'm bringing this up in a cantankerous way, but can someone please explain how this is a faulty interpretation?
Whenever I see "saving" or "helping" others explained as a kind of trick of perception I get very concerned and confused.

Malcolm wrote:
It is an established doctrine in several Tibetan Buddhists schools that buddhas only see buddhas, and that compassion for sentient beings is spontaneous and not intentional.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, February 8th, 2017 at 12:25 AM
Title: Re: Engaged Buddhism comes in many political stripes
Content:
Wonderful Law-Flower said:
I didn't start this thread to promote Donald Trump. I didn't vote for the man and I find him to be distasteful, to say the least. My only point was to show tolerance and understanding for Buddhists who, for whatever reason, voted for him. For the sake of compassionate understanding, here are some testimonies of Buddhists who voted for Trump:

hardcorezen.info/buddhists-for-trump/4994

hardcorezen.info/buddhists-for-trump-part-2/5006

Malcolm wrote:
These people are idiots. They have no idea what they have done to the world.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, February 7th, 2017 at 11:01 PM
Title: Re: Shinnyo-en?
Content:
Karunamata said:
Both the Tibetan and the Shingon lineages are thoroughly focused on monks and nuns. At least Tibetan monks travel and teach. But when you go to a venue to receive teaching, you risk getting a cramp in your neck, looking up to the monk, seated in an elaborate throne, high above us mere mortals.

Malcolm wrote:
A completely false mischaracterization of Tibetan Buddhism.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, February 7th, 2017 at 10:21 PM
Title: Re: Kālacakra Vajrayoga & Dzogchen comparison
Content:
Vidyavajra said:
Thank you for your reply, Malcolm.

Are there other reasons also for your opinion that Dzogchen is more profound aside from its lack of the two stages anuttarayogatantra approach?

Regarding Mahamudra, I was of the impression that it still is more closely related to Kalacakra Vajrayoga than Dzogchen since it is anuttarayogatantra?

I get what you’re saying about the view, but even amongst Jonangpa practitioners an often recurring question seems to be about the exact difference in view between Dzogchen and the tradition of their own school, meaning that it is not always so obvious. See for example:

http://www.jonangfoundation.org/blog/dzogchen-zhentong

Malcolm wrote:
Kalacakra and other niruttara systems reply on relative nāḍīs and bindus; Dzogchen relies on ultimate nāḍīs and bindus.

Jonang errs in holding that the basis is only naturally perfect. They do not accept that the basis is intrinsically empty as well as naturally perfect. The Dzogchen view of the basis is is called "great original purity," in other words, the basis is both intrinsically empty and naturally perfected.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, February 7th, 2017 at 10:15 PM
Title: Re: Longchenpa - custom of study and practice for 145 days
Content:
hypa3000 said:
In HHDL's Book 'Meditation on the Nature of Mind'
By Dalai Lama, Khonton Peljor Lhundrub, Jose Ignacio Cabezon

and also as can be seen here
"Dalai Lama speaks on Nyingma Dzogchen (Nature of the Mind) 2009"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nWvY-05OA90

HHDL mentions:

Such an approach, where a vast body of literature is taken as individual instructions for practice, is also possible, for example, in regard to the Seven Treasuries of Longchenpa. I normally recommend that those who wish to practice Dzogchen proceed by first studying Longchenpa’s Treasury of Philosophical Tenets, to follow that with study of his Treasury of the Wish-Fulfilling Jewel, and then to move to his Mind at Ease, part of his so-called Trilogy on Being at Ease.

There is a custom of engaging in the study and practice of this latter text over a period of 145 days.

From that point one proceeds to Longchenpa’s Treasury of the Supreme Vehicle and then to his Treasury of the Ultimate Expanse. This represents a very systematic and holistic approach to the study of Dzogchen. My more general point here is that it is very important to have an overall understanding of the basic framework of the Buddhist path. Of course, some fortunate individuals with positive karmic imprints from previous lives may be able to generate spiritual realization spontaneously by way of a tailored instruction from an experienced master. Such individuals are called “exceptional.” But generally, for most practitioners, it is better to have this broad understanding of the structure of the whole Buddhist path and to engage in specific practices on the basis of that understanding.
Anyone know about this custom of study and practice for 145 days please?

I've had a quick look online and in some books but couldn't find anything specifically related

Thank you

Malcolm wrote:
There is a specific book in in the Trilogy referred to above that divides the topics of meditation into 145 sessions.

Tulku Dakpa is teaching the above text in Finland, and as part of the curriculum, he is having people practice in this way.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, February 7th, 2017 at 10:15 AM
Title: Re: Kālacakra Vajrayoga & Dzogchen comparison
Content:
Vidyavajra said:
How much does the approach of Dzogchen/Atiyoga and the Vajrayogas of the Kalacakra completion stage (primarily held by the Jonang Zhentong tradition) differ from one another?

Malcolm wrote:
Completely. The former is not based on the two stages; the latter is based on the two stages.

Vidyavajra said:
To what degree, if any, do they bring different results? For example, can the fruition of Vajrayoga manifest the rainbow body, or is this result exclusively linked to Dzogchen realization?

Malcolm wrote:
One can achieved rainbow body with either system. Dzogchen is more direct and efficient because its view and practice is more profound.

Vidyavajra said:
Would you say that Vajrayoga is closer related to Mahamudra than Atiyoga in terms of practice-approach?

Malcolm wrote:
Kagyu Mahāmudra is very similar to Dzogchen Mind Series in view and approach.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, February 7th, 2017 at 10:14 AM
Title: Re: The 3 Jewels in Vajrayana practice
Content:
smcj said:
Even ChNN, who eschews most of the Vajrayana ...

dzogchungpa said:
This is going to be good.

Malcolm wrote:
Fake news.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, February 7th, 2017 at 1:12 AM
Title: Re: The 3 Jewels in Vajrayana practice
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
The single jewel which includes all.

Coëmgenu said:
Would you characterize this as a common term in mainstream Tibetan Buddhism? Like if I said "one-jewel practice" or "single jewel practice" would people know I was talking about interpreting the 3 jewels as metaphorically subsumed within the teacher? If it is such a term, what is the Tibetan-language rendering?

Thank you for your time. I have little access to actual Vajrayāna in rural Ontario, being beholden to books and what I find on the internet.

Malcolm wrote:
Not necessarily. However, all will be acquainted with the idea that the three refuges are included in the Guru.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, February 7th, 2017 at 12:40 AM
Title: Re: The 3 Jewels in Vajrayana practice
Content:
Coëmgenu said:
I recently learned that "Lamaism" is a term coined by an Arian-supremacist Buddhologist, and carries all sorts of old British colonial weight to it, whereas before I had always assumed that name was employed because of the practice of interpreting the the 3 refuges as having an inner core of meaning that pertain to the role of the Guru/Lama (i.e. the mind, speech, and body of the guru).

Since Lamaism is an offensive term (and also apparently racially charged), what is the actual native Tibetan term for this interpretation of taking refuge in the three jewels?

Malcolm wrote:
The single jewel which includes all.

In fact, the Lotus Sūtra predicts that the Buddha will emanate as gurus in the future. The Lotus Sūtra is used in Tibetan Buddhism as a proof text for the practice of guru yoga.

Coëmgenu said:
Is the "single jewel" analogous to ekayāna?

Malcolm wrote:
No, it is a reference to the idea that the Guru includes the Three Jewels— his mind is the Buddha, his speech is the Dharma, and his body is the Sangha.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, February 7th, 2017 at 12:25 AM
Title: Re: The 3 Jewels in Vajrayana practice
Content:
Coëmgenu said:
I recently learned that "Lamaism" is a term coined by an Arian-supremacist Buddhologist, and carries all sorts of old British colonial weight to it, whereas before I had always assumed that name was employed because of the practice of interpreting the the 3 refuges as having an inner core of meaning that pertain to the role of the Guru/Lama (i.e. the mind, speech, and body of the guru).

Since Lamaism is an offensive term (and also apparently racially charged), what is the actual native Tibetan term for this interpretation of taking refuge in the three jewels?

Malcolm wrote:
The single jewel which includes all.

In fact, the Lotus Sūtra predicts that the Buddha will emanate as gurus in the future. The Lotus Sūtra is used in Tibetan Buddhism as a proof text for the practice of guru yoga.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, February 6th, 2017 at 11:19 PM
Title: Re: Guru Yoga & Lamanism: Speculations on Shingon and Nichiren Schools
Content:
Coëmgenu said:
No one made up "Lamaism" because they hated Tibetans.

Malcolm wrote:
False, the term was coined by Waddel, who hated Tibetans as much as he was fascinated by them.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, February 6th, 2017 at 11:17 PM
Title: Re: Maajid Nawaz's response to SPLC's list
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Oh come, get serious. This is about as likely to happen as Trump's wall being built. This is hysteria.

michaelb said:
Whether the aims of extremists are realisable or not is not the point. The point is they wish to subvert and undermine democracy and they can then act in various ways to do that. In some constituencies during the last UK election some Jihadists were reportedly telling Muslim constituents not to vote.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/generalelection/general-election-2015-posters-seen-in-cardiff-tell-muslims-not-to-vote-10186497.html
There are other more violent ways to subvert democracy, of course, and non-violent Islamist groups have been at the forefront in disseminating jihadist propaganda and encouraging Muslims to travel to Syria to join IS. Almost a thousand UK citizens have made that journey.
It is interesting that you view the impossibility of realising an aspiration as reason not to worry about it. So, we should not worry about Trump's wall?
Malcolm wrote:
No, there are not. Please consult this and stop spreading baseless rumors. http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/the-truth-about-muslims-and-sex-slavery-according-to-the-quran-rather-than-isis-or-islamophobes-a6875446.html

michaelb said:
As the article you link to makes clear, Islamist extremists are very happy to justify their rape of non-muslims using quotes from the Quran. Abu Bakr al Baghdadi, with his PhD in Islamic Studies focusing on Sharia Law (you will have to ask him which version), certainly uses the Quran to justify his actions, such as the repeated rape and murder of "Free Tibet" activist Kayla Mueller. Luckily for Kayler, it wasn't rape because she ended up married to the Caliph, though I can't say for sure that coercion was not involved. The point is, the rape of non-muslims can be justified with the Quran. You or any other person is 'free' to disagree with this interpretation, as I'm sure Maajid Nawaz would, but that does not mean that neither IS nor muslim rape gangs do not and cannot use the Quran to justify their behaviour.

Malcolm wrote:
Baghdadi is a pervert, and has been roundly condemned in http://www.lettertobaghdadi.com, notably:
The re-introduction of slavery is forbidden in Islam. It was abolished by universal consensus.
It is forbidden in Islam to force people to convert.
It is forbidden in Islam to deny women their rights.
It is forbidden in Islam to deny children their rights.

Germans had to invent the Jews as an evil force, because there were so few of them in Germany. It is similar today with Israel and its conflict with Muslims. There are not that many jews in the world, but they do a lot of heavy lifting in terms of being targets. But when you look at who engaging in antisemitic acts in Europe and England, it is indeed mainly people from North Africa, Pakistan, etc. And they are not exactly the topic of the social heap.
Yes, poor Lord Ahmed. If only I had the disadvantage to be an unelected representative receiving a generous pay and expenses package. What would I do?
???

Moreover, Islamic/Jewish relations have been punctuated with far more tolerance and openness that Christian/Jewish relations. The antisemitism of the Islamic world today was invented in Europe. Muslims have just adopted the themes (Rothschild, Elders of Zion). Why? Because the Muslim world itself had to borrow antisemitism from Europe.
That must be where Hamas gets its antisemitism for its charter from.
Yes, http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/hamas.asp:
For a long time, the enemies have been planning, skillfully and with precision, for the achievement of what they have attained. They took into consideration the causes affecting the current of events. They strived to amass great and substantive material wealth which they devoted to the realisation of their dream. With their money, they took control of the world media, news agencies, the press, publishing houses, broadcasting stations, and others. With their money they stirred revolutions in various parts of the world with the purpose of achieving their interests and reaping the fruit therein. They were behind the French Revolution, the Communist revolution and most of the revolutions we heard and hear about, here and there. With their money they formed secret societies, such as Freemasons, Rotary Clubs, the Lions and others in different parts of the world for the purpose of sabotaging societies and achieving Zionist interests. With their money they were able to control imperialistic countries and instigate them to colonize many countries in order to enable them to exploit their resources and spread corruption there.

Hadith from Sahih al Burkari said:
"The Day of Judgement will not come about until Muslims fight the Jews (killing the Jews), when the Jew will hide behind stones and trees. The stones and trees will say O Muslims, O Abdulla, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him. Only the Gharkad tree, (evidently a certain kind of tree) would not do that because it is one of the trees of the Jews."
Good job the Europeans wrote the most trusted collection of Hadith. Without it where would muslims get their antisemitism from?

Malcolm wrote:
Please see the above. It is quite clear Hamas learned their antisemitism from European antisemites.


Hadith from Sahih al Burkari said:
I agree, but South Africa (and 1950s America) was something very very much worse.

Malcolm wrote:
No, I think not.

You can thank European Antisemitism for that —— this is where present day anti-semitism comes from.
I think we both know that there are antisemitic verses in the quran and hadith and these verses are used to justify attacking jews by IS and other jihadist groups. I am not saying their interpretations are justified or correct but they are used by Islamic scholars who have an violent agenda to promote.
Antisemitism, as such, did not exist in the 7th century Arabia.


Quran 5.59 said:
Say: O followers of the Book! do you find fault with us (for aught) except that we believe in Allah and in what has been revealed to us and what was revealed before, and that most of you are transgressors?
[5.60] Say: Shall I inform you of (him who is) worse than this in retribution from Allah? (Worse is he) whom Allah has cursed and brought His wrath upon, and of whom He made apes and swine, and he who served the Shaitan; these are worse in place and more erring from the straight path.
[5.63] Why do not the learned men [rabbis] and the doctors of law prohibit them from their speaking of what is sinful and their eating of what is unlawfully acquired? Certainly evil is that which they work.
[5.64] And the Jews say: The hand of Allah is tied up! Their hands shall be shackled and they shall be cursed for what they say. Nay, both His hands are spread out, He expends as He pleases; and what has been revealed to you from your Lord will certainly make many of them increase in inordinacy and unbelief; and We have put enmity and hatred among them till the day of resurrection; whenever they kindle a fire for war Allah puts it out, and they strive to make mischief in the land; and Allah does not love the mischief-makers.

Malcolm wrote:
This is not antisemitic.


That all Muslims are being subjected to intolerance and hatred because of what a few people nominally referred to Muslims may have done or are planning to do is equally vile. And for this reason, we have to separate out terrorist criminals from Muslims in general, and not give them the satisfaction of giving them any religious credibility at all by allowing their acts to be tagged "Muslim."
I think this is disingenuous. Firstly, I don't think "all Muslims" are being subjected to anything.
You have your head in a canvas bag with no eye or ear holes then.

Also, I cannot agree that someone like Abu Bakr al Baghdadi is only nominally referred to as a Muslim. If he said the shahada, has been on Hajj, prays five times a day, attended Islamic university up to PhD level and heads a group many Muslims claim is the valid Caliphate how can a couple of Buddhists claim he is only nominally a Muslim?
Because a large consensus of leading Islamic scholars have proclaimed that it is so. In fact they have condemned him as http://www.christianpost.com/news/international-coalition-of-muslim-scholars-refute-isis-religious-arguments-in-open-letter-to-al-baghdadi-127032/#aloIfbuSoiLhg0zS.99:
"You have misinterpreted Islam into a religion of harshness, brutality, torture and murder," the letter states. "This is a great wrong and an offense to Islam, to Muslims and to the entire world."
Of course, you can say that he doesn't interpret the Quran the way that you would like him to, or that his actions contradict the teachings of Muhammed (if so, which ones?), but he seems to have pretty much given his life over to following a particular path. Not very fair of a non-muslim who, let's face it, doesn't even have a BA in Islamic studies, to come along and say he isn't a Muslim. The best we can say is that he doesn't represent the kind of Islam that we like. And who does? I reckon someone like Maajid Nawaz is close, and as such should be encouraged rather than demonised.
You are now drawing an equivalence — legitimizing both Baghdadi and Nawaz as equal voices in Islam. This is an error.
How many Muslims have died in the past year from political violence? Now ask yourself how many Jews. Do you see any difference in numbers?
Proportionately, given that the Muslim community of the UK is six times larger than the Jewish population, there are, per capita, more attacks on Jews in UK than Muslims.
I did not ask about attacks on Jews in England. I asked about fatalities of Jews compared to Muslims.

I would say at this point, while antisemitism is disturbing, Islamcphbia is a far greater threat to world security at this point and the people who even unintentionally lend to its spread need to be called out for it, people like Nawaz, Harris, Maher, as well as obvious people like Donald Trump.
World security is threatened by people not seeing where dangers lie. Those on the left seem to view the world as a lovely place were it not for US imperialism, the British empire and (shhh...) the jews.[/quote]

This is a ridiculous characterization of the left, completely false in every respect.

My suggestion would be to wake up and empower liberal muslim voices like Maajid Nawaz rather than put him on a stupid list.
My suggestion is that we start to see terrorism as a politically motivated crime, rather than a feature of a culture war. When we go down the latter road, we are just pouring kerosine on the fire.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, February 6th, 2017 at 10:32 PM
Title: Re: Guru Yoga & Lamanism: Speculations on Shingon and Nichiren Schools
Content:
Coëmgenu said:
Oh its a dated term for certain, like "Amidism" for Pure Land, like "Mohammedan" for Muslim, etc, but I had always thought that the reason why people made up that term in the first place was in reaction to the notion that when you take refuge in the Three Jewels, in traditions that were called "Lamaist" by old Buddhologists, you also take refuge in 3 aspects of the Guru/Lama, who is treated as the Buddha. That is the root of this term is it not?

Malcolm wrote:
No, it is was meant originally as a way of delegitimizing Tibetan Buddhism.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, February 6th, 2017 at 3:43 AM
Title: Re: Maajid Nawaz's response to SPLC's list
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Which Sharia Law? This a huge problem with these generalizations. Sharia law is a vast complicated subject with hundreds of schools, though five or six are now dominant. There is no monolithic Sharia legal code.

michaelb said:
Oh, a nice obscurantist attempt to deflect the simple charge by adding complexity. Point is, a number of Islamist groups (Hizb ut-Tahrir, etc.) seek to overturn western democracy in favour of an Islamic state in whatever mold they see fit.

Malcolm wrote:
Oh come, get serious. This is about as likely to happen as Trump's wall being built. This is hysteria.

There are no such thing as Muslim rape gangs. When you say "Muslim" rape gang you are implying that the group of men in England who engaged in thse crimes did so feeling they had religious justification for their actions. But obviously this is not the case. They were men of Pakistani origin who were engaged in a human trafficking ring.
Not all the perpetrators were of Pakistani heritage but all, as far as I am aware, were muslim. They may not have had it in mind but there definitely are Quranic religious justifications for raping non-muslim girls.
No, there are not. Please consult this and stop spreading baseless rumors. http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/the-truth-about-muslims-and-sex-slavery-according-to-the-quran-rather-than-isis-or-islamophobes-a6875446.html


It is not equivalent. Muslims in France, for example, are disadvantaged, alienated and heavily discriminated against in French society. You cannot make the same argument for rightwing nationalists in the 1930's. Yes, anti-semitism is today rampant in the Islamic world, but we all know why this is so —Israel.
I wouldn't say that the populations that bought into fascism during the great depression didn't also see themselves as disadvantaged, alienated and discriminated against. The antisemitic trope of jews being advantaged and in power was as alive then as it is now when you look at Islamic antisemitism. Islamic antisemitism stretches back to Khaybar, way before the modern state of Israel.

Also, looking at the lives of privilege of many Jihadists, enjoying wealth, education and opportunities that western democracies afford, I think the narrative of the poor disadvantaged Muslim killing jews because of poverty is a myth,
Germans had to invent the Jews as an evil force, because there were so few of them in Germany. It is similar today with Israel and its conflict with Muslims. There are not that many jews in the world, but they do a lot of heavy lifting in terms of being targets. But when you look at who engaging in antisemitic acts in Europe and England, it is indeed mainly people from North Africa, Pakistan, etc. And they are not exactly the topic of the social heap. Here in the US, most antisemitism is carried out by whites.

Moreover, Islamic/Jewish relations have been punctuated with far more tolerance and openness that Christian/Jewish relations. The antisemitism of the Islamic world today was invented in Europe. Muslims have just adopted the themes (Rothschild, Elders of Zion). Why? Because the Muslim world itself had to borrow antisemitism from Europe.

This is not happening. There is a myth that the academic community in the US is leftist. It is entirely false.
It is happening in UK universities and UK generally with people barred entry to the country whose views are seen as extremist, just as Maajid is seen as extremist.
Extremists are also barred from entering the US.
I am totally opposed to the way Israel has conducted itself in setting up an Apartheid state.
The idea of Israel as an Apartheid state is another myth.
Israel is an Apartheid state and Palestinians living there are second class citizens at best.

I'm not saying Israel is perfect. It is not. But its existence and the status of Palestinians are commonly used by Middle East dictators as a conspicuous enemy to focus attention away from what the Arab countries are doing.
Yes, the Arab states do manipulate the Palestinians as well. They are pawns.

The very idea that I would be opposed to a race of people (all Turks because of the Turkish govt's treatment of Kurds, or all Bhutanese because of the Bhutan govt's treatment of Nepalis, or all Egyptians because of the Egypt govt's blockade of the Gaza Strip and destruction of Palestinian homes) is obscene.
You can thank European Antisemitism for that —— this is where present day anti-semitism comes from.
That a person can seek to justify an armed attack on a jewish school in Paris because of what the Israeli govt is doing is vile.
That all Muslims are being subjected to intolerance and hatred because of what a few people nominally referred to Muslims may have done or are planning to do is equally vile. And for this reason, we have to separate out terrorist criminals from Muslims in general, and not give them the satisfaction of giving them any religious credibility at all by allowing their acts to be tagged "Muslim."

How many Muslims have died in the past year from political violence? Now ask yourself how many Jews. Do you see any difference in numbers? Lets take Israel. https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2016/country-chapters/israel/palestine:
Israel continued in 2015 to enforce severe and discriminatory restrictions on Palestinians’ human rights, and to build unlawful settlements in and facilitate the transfer of Israeli civilians to the occupied West Bank. Israeli authorities also arbitrarily detained peaceful Palestinian demonstrators, including children.

There was a sharp rise in killings and injuries related to Israeli-Palestinian hostilities beginning in October. Overall, Palestinians killed at least 17 Israeli civilians and 3 Israeli soldiers, and injured 87 Israeli civilians and 80 security officers in the West Bank and Israel as of November 27. Israeli security forces killed at least 120 and injured at least 11,953 Palestinian civilians in West Bank, Gaza, and Israel as of the same date, including bystanders, protesters, and suspected assailants.

...

Neither Israeli nor Hamas authorities have prosecuted anyone for alleged crimes committed during the 2014 Israel-Gaza war, which, according to the UN, killed 1,462 Palestinian civilians, including 551 children, and 6 civilians in Israel, including one child. Israel and Egypt have maintained their partial but highly damaging closure of Gaza’s borders, an unlawful act of collective punishment; they impeded the rebuilding of Gaza’s devastated economy by severely restricting exports from Gaza.

I would say at this point, while antisemitism is disturbing, Islamcphbia is a far greater threat to world security at this point and the people who even unintentionally lend to its spread need to be called out for it, people like Nawaz, Harris, Maher, as well as obvious people like Donald Trump.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, February 6th, 2017 at 3:00 AM
Title: Re: Maajid Nawaz's response to SPLC's list
Content:
michaelb said:
The left has turned a blind eye to violence and intolerance...

Grigoris said:
The institutional left, not "the left".

Malcolm wrote:
Not even the institutional left.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, February 6th, 2017 at 1:32 AM
Title: Re: Rudraksha mala
Content:
philji said:
What kind of mantras are chanted using rudraksha mala. I have a small very beautiful rudraksha mala, can one chant Guru Rinpoche mantras on it???

Malcolm wrote:
Vajrakilaya, Dorje Drollo, that sort of mantra.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, February 6th, 2017 at 1:17 AM
Title: Re: Hate speech is Free Speech?
Content:
Zhen Li said:
Last week you were willing to accept Grigoris' claim that killing Rohingya is done in the name of enforcing the five precepts (which is a false claim anyway)...


Malcolm wrote:
I made no such statement from which you can deduce this.

I supported his observation that nations nominally devoted to Buddhism can perpetrate horrible crimes of political violence against human beings.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, February 6th, 2017 at 1:15 AM
Title: Re: Maajid Nawaz's response to SPLC's list
Content:
michaelb said:
Ken Livingstone

Malcolm wrote:
We can assume you are not in the Labour Party, then. So our discussion about this is merely going reflect right/left disagreements about what is wrong with the world.

michaelb said:
I was a member of the Labour Party. I left due to the obvious antisemitism and double standards I saw both in the leadership and local members. It is deeply troubling that a party that projects itself as speaking out against racism and hate should harbour such hate and racism.
and if you are asking if I think gays should be executed and jews should be killed, as Qaradawi does, no, I don't.

Malcolm wrote:
I can't speak for the labour party, as an American I am presently registered a Green (if they would just get their shit together though, it would be nice.)

I am totally opposed to the way Israel has conducted itself in setting up an Apartheid state.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, February 6th, 2017 at 12:59 AM
Title: Re: Maajid Nawaz's response to SPLC's list
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Sorry, we simply disagree on the whether it is appropriate to target groups of people based upon their religious or political beliefs.
You apparently support the idea of surveilling people on the basis of what you imagine their beliefs to be. This is nothing more nor less than McCarthyism.

michaelb said:
If people's political and religious beliefs entail the overthrowing of the state, it would be idiotic for the state not to gather intelligence on these people. That's not to say that all people of one religion should be targeted, but those that have espoused Islamist views (the view that western democracy is wrong and should be replaced with an Islamic state under sharia law)  obviously should be targeted.

Malcolm wrote:
Which Sharia Law? This a huge problem with these generalizations. Sharia law is a vast complicated subject with hundreds of schools, though five or six are now dominant. There is no monolithic Sharia legal code.

Secondly, Sharia law only applies to Muslims, and the vast majority of Muslims think this is the way it should be.


michaelb said:
I'm sure, if you look into it you will see that nobody has argued for anything more than this obvious position. In the UK though, authorities have been very slow to react to some threats, whether Muslim rape gangs, Islamists infiltrating a local education authority, or the spreading of radicalising propaganda, for fear of being branded Islamophobes.

Malcolm wrote:
There are no such thing as Muslim rape gangs. When you say "Muslim" rape gang you are implying that the group of men in England who engaged in thse crimes did so feeling they had religious justification for their actions. But obviously this is not the case. They were men of Pakistani origin who were engaged in a human trafficking ring. When you call them "Muslims," the implication is that they engaged in these crimes because of the moral failings of Islam. You could have said Southasian rape gang, Pakistani rape gang, etc. But for you, the identifying feature of these men is that they are Muslims and therefore, Islam is to blame for their crimes.

The nationalist right in Europe, the UK and the US are doing to Muslims what they did to Jews in the 1930s.
The muslims of europe are doing to the jews what the nationalist right in europe did to the jews in the 1930s. Try and be jewish in Paris or Malmo right now. Proportionately, attacks on jews vastly outnumber attacks on muslims in the UK, and statistically, who are the main perpetrators? Guess.
It is not equivalent. Muslims in France, for example, are disadvantaged, alienated and heavily discriminated against in French society. You cannot make the same argument for rightwing nationalists in the 1930's. Yes, anti-semitism is today rampant in the Islamic world, but we all know why this is so —Israel.

So in France for example, we have a vicious cycle where there are French attacks against Muslims, Muslims then attack Jews, viewing them as privileged in French Society and so on. However, the Muslims are adopting fascist tropes for their https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/04/is-it-time-for-the-jews-to-leave-europe/386279/:

Yet the new anti-Semitism flourishing in corners of the European Muslim community would be impoverished without the incorporation of European fascist tropes. Dieudonné M’bala M’bala, a comedian of French Cameroonian descent who specializes in Holocaust revisionism and gas-chamber humor, is the inventor of the quenelle, widely understood as an inverted Nazi salute. His followers have taken to photographing themselves making the quenelle in front of synagogues, Holocaust memorials, and sites of past anti-Jewish terrorist attacks. Dieudonné has built an ideological partnership with Alain Soral, the anti-Jewish conspiracy theorist and 9/11 “truther” who was for several years a member of the National Front’s central committee. Soral was photographed not long ago making the quenelle in front of Berlin’s Holocaust memorial.

The union of Middle Eastern and European forms of anti-Semitic expression has led to bizarre moments. Dave Rich, an official of the Community Security Trust, a Jewish organization that monitors anti-Semitism in the United Kingdom, wrote recently: “Those British Muslims who verbally abuse British Jews on the street are more likely to shout ‘Heil Hitler’ than ‘Allahu akbar’ when they do so. This is despite the fact that their parents and grandparents were probably chased through the very same streets by gangs of neo-Nazi skinheads shouting similar slogans.”

The marriage of anti-Semitic narratives was consummated in January of last year, during a so-called Day of Rage march in Paris that was organized to protest the leadership of the French president, François Hollande. The rally drew roughly 17,000 people, mostly far-rightists but also many French Muslims.

As far as Malmo goes, that is the responsibility of Sweden to look after. If they do not protect their citizens, it is a fault of their government. And the situation is not helped buy the fact that Mayor of Malmo was an antisemite by the name of IImar Reepalu until 2013. I have met Swedes who are very anti-semitic as well.

Blaming the left for pointing out that Nawaz, Sam Harrid, Bill Maher, and so on feed into the right's Islamophobia is misguided.
Blaming Nawaz for feeding into the right's islamophbia is stupid.
I don't think so.

To date, no one's right to speak in the US has been shut down, not even Milo's.
Maybe not by law but with academic institutions "no platforming" people of contrary views we are looking at something more like the '50s.
This is not happening. There is a myth that the academic community in the US is leftist. It is entirely false.
No doubt the far right are on the rise. Many people feel disenfranchised and ignored by political leaders who are supposed to represent them but are too busy hosting their friends from Hamas and Hezbollah.
Israel policies towards Palestinians created and continue to exacerbate a very unstable situation.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, February 6th, 2017 at 12:05 AM
Title: Re: Maajid Nawaz's response to SPLC's list
Content:
Grigoris said:
...I have no problem disregarding and marginalizing people with these views.  There is no reason at all for me to take what they say seriously.  Even if they have a logical or factual basis for their view (ie the fact that Greek people are struggling against poverty) their solutions and the reasoning behind their solutions is not worth pissing on.  Why? Because we have already seen where giving legitimacy to these views take us.  Some of us are intelligent enough to learn from our past mistakes and sometimes we have to stop others (by force if need be) to not commit them again.  Like a mother violently pulls a child away from a burning object to stop it harming itself any further.

Malcolm wrote:
Agreed.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, February 5th, 2017 at 11:59 PM
Title: Re: Hate speech is Free Speech?
Content:
madhusudan said:
evil

treehuggingoctopus said:
Not my word. Metaphysical framing does not help.

madhusudan said:
aggressive violence is self-defense

treehuggingoctopus said:
Punching someone in their face is "aggressive violence"? How then would you describe leg-breaking, face-cutting, stabbings, GBH and murder, which is what Nazi thugs have always done in Europe -- and now are doing more openly than ever, with little fear of being caught and punished?

I hate violence. But passive resistance against boneheads will only get you into hospital (if you are not unlucky, that is). You could just as well try passive resistance on the Daesh.


Malcolm wrote:
Of course, these things are always described as "crimes" and never as politically motivated violence. This is the huge problem with identifying terrorism engaged in by people of Muslim backgrounds as Islamic Terrorism. It isn't. It is political violence through and through with nothing religious about it at all. Do people use religious themes to motivate political violence? Of course they do. But we must make a hard distinction between political violence and religions. One of the reasons why people in the Obama administration refuse to use the term Radical Islamic Terrorism is that to claim that this is our enemy violates the Constitution in a way that say identifying Communist Terrorism, etc., does not. This is why also there is such a strong push on the part of the Trump Administration and the right in general to redefine Islam as a political movement rather than a religious faith. Well, allowing the right to redefine Islam as a political movement is a very slippery slope.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, February 5th, 2017 at 11:56 PM
Title: Re: Dorje Dudulma in Sanskrit
Content:
tingdzin said:
Why would someone assume that a Tibetan name must be based on an "original" Sanskrit? Granted, there were narrow-minded pedants in the New Translation schools who thought that everything in Tibetan Buddhism must come from Indian sources or it was not valid, but there are plenty of examples of "back translations" from Tibetan into Sanskrit which are obviously made up, and never existed in Indic languages.

Malcolm wrote:
In general, a name like rdo rje bdud 'dul ma will be based on a list of names handed out during an initiation. Apart from this though, your point is well taken.

As to your second point, it is well taken. For example, the endless confusion about the proper translation of sgra thal gyur since it was erroneously back translated as śabdaprasanga in the Derge Edition of the Nyingma Gyudbum.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, February 5th, 2017 at 11:53 PM
Title: Re: what is Russia up to?
Content:


dzoki said:
Anyways Russia has huge problems, so it might collapse by itself before Putin´s grand plan is realized. Their economy sucks hard, there is a massive depopulation due to alcoholism, drug abuse and emigration. So unless they somehow solve these problems, Russia will slowly slide onto her knees.

Malcolm wrote:
This all depends on whether Trump lifts sanctions.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, February 5th, 2017 at 11:50 PM
Title: Re: Hate speech is Free Speech?
Content:
treehuggingoctopus said:
there are indeed human actions and social phenomena which one must not tolerate at any cost.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, this is the lesson the rise of Fascism taught us in the 1930's.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, February 5th, 2017 at 11:48 PM
Title: Re: Hate speech is Free Speech?
Content:
Monlam Tharchin said:
Malcolm, people with hateful views perhaps respond to shame if they can see the error of the views, but if the motivation to stop hate is also hate and anger, nothing gets done. The conversation is shut down.

Malcolm wrote:
Some conversations are not worth having. Conversations where people are allowed justify their bigotry and hatred are not worth having. In fact, people know that being racist and sexist is wrong, which is why the right spends so much time pretending that racism and sexism are old problems we do not face anymore. Then, they uses dog whistles like "crime",  "fraud," and so on to enact and continue the same racist policies, like voter id laws and so on.

Monlam Tharchin said:
It's not a matter of condoning hate speech but of putting our money where our mouth is as Buddhists and responding to ignorance and hatred with compassion.

Malcolm wrote:
Sometimes you have yell at children to prevent them from playing with fire.


Monlam Tharchin said:
Our mother beings locked in hate are bound for a hellish destination unless something changes.

Malcolm wrote:
We cannot change others, we can only change ourselves. This is the unfortunate limitation we have.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, February 5th, 2017 at 11:27 PM
Title: Re: Maajid Nawaz's response to SPLC's list
Content:
michaelb said:
Ken Livingstone

Malcolm wrote:
We can assume you are not in the Labour Party, then. So our discussion about this is merely going reflect right/left disagreements about what is wrong with the world.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, February 5th, 2017 at 11:22 PM
Title: Re: Maajid Nawaz's response to SPLC's list
Content:
michaelb said:
Three things are feeding into a fear of Islam. The actions of Islamist Jihadist groups, the reluctance of the left and liberals to tackle the issue for fear of being branded islamophobic, and the right jumping on this reluctance as some kind of proof of a grand conspiracy.
The only thing that will defuse both fear of Islam and radicalisation of Muslims is dialogue and discussion and not shutting down a person's right to speak by labelling them as a islamophobe, extremist or bigot.

Malcolm wrote:
Sorry, we simply disagree on the whether it is appropriate to target groups of people based upon their religious or political beliefs.

You apparently support the idea of surveilling people on the basis of what you imagine their beliefs to be. This is nothing more nor less than McCarthyism.

The nationalist right in Europe, the UK and the US are doing to Muslims what they did to Jews in the 1930s.

Blaming the left for pointing out that Nawaz, Sam Harrid, Bill Maher, and so on feed into the right's Islamophobia is misguided.

To date, no one's right to speak in the US has been shut down, not even Milo's.

We still have a free press and libel is much harder to prove here than in the UK.

And in the UK, as in the US, far more attention needs to be paid to http://www.newsweek.com/2016/02/12/right-wing-extremists-militants-bigger-threat-america-isis-jihadists-422743.html.  In an article for Huffpo last week, http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/waqar-ahmed/now-is-not-the-time-to-qu_b_14500532.html writes:
For over a decade communities have discussed and debated policies aimed at challenging the rise of international terrorism, often citing the need to win hearts and minds of impressionable young people, in the main this debate has focused on Muslim communities. Whilst such approaches have been discussed at length, terror attacks have continued and are constantly evolving in nature and methodology. Now we see far-right nationalist movements experiencing a steady but worrying increase in momentum, using the anxiety of people to spread fear and hate by attributing the rise in terrorism to ineffective domestic and foreign policies, particularly towards immigration and Muslims.

For practitioners working on policies to challenge radicalisation and extremism, these are developments that come as no surprise, The media focus, and community debate, on policies such as Prevent in the UK has focused on terrorism from a global violent jihadist perspective, but front-line workers up and down the country have always worked on all forms of extremism and have been dealing with a rise in referrals from far-right extremism, in fact in many parts of the country such referrals far outweigh those of an Islamist nature.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, February 5th, 2017 at 9:49 PM
Title: Re: Maajid Nawaz's response to SPLC's list
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
FIrst of all pairing Nawaz with Sam Harris hardly wins you points on the Islamopositive scale.

michaelb said:
That is exactly the type of lazy, stupid argumentation that has led to the death of the left and the rise of demagogues. It doesn't matter what someone thinks, the views they hold or the positions they put forward. The person they are talking to, who they are standing next to, who they are "sharing a platform with" tells you enough to totally disregard whatever they say, then go back to watching MSNBC or Fox News or Keith Olberman or Infowars, etc.

The article you posted was a turgid example of this kind of stupidity where the writer chose to slur as many people as possible as bigots and then extended that to anyone that ever had anything to do with them. Absolutely idiotic. Judge people's views according to logic and evidence not according to who they talk to.

If anyone had spent any time at all reading or listening to the views of Maajid Nawaz they would see that labelling him and anti-Islam extremist is totally stupid beyond belief. Utterly ignorant and worthy of derision.

Malcolm wrote:
I have both read and listened to Nawaz. You know, the guy who supported the idea of the British Gvt. spying on British Muslims back in 2009. The intolerance of the New Atheists with respect to Islam is a best troubling. I watch Bill Maher, but when it comes to Islam, he is a total jerk.

Nawaz has also used https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2010/aug/04/quilliam-foundation-list-alleged-extremism%22 in his work. Thus it is not surprising after all this time he would wind up on a list at SPLC. The fact is that Nawaz and the Quilliam Foundation are feeding into Islamophobic hysteria.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, February 5th, 2017 at 1:14 PM
Title: Re: Hate speech is Free Speech?
Content:
Monlam Tharchin said:
when one person calls another a bigot, the conversation is over between them.

Malcolm wrote:
Unfortunately, the right is demanding the privilege of being able to use hate speech with impunity.

Calling someone a bigot because they espouse bigoted views is not hate speech. Bigots generally only respond to shame, not to reason. It is the one thing that has kept them on the fringes of our society. But to give in to the right's demand for the privilege of being able to use hate speech with impunity simply goes too far. There are well established limits to free speech, and hate speech is not protected speech in this country nor should it ever be.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, February 5th, 2017 at 12:27 PM
Title: Re: Tri Ralpachen
Content:
Losal Samten said:
On this topic Minister Gar is also said to have had relations with Princess Wengchen whilst he was delivering her to Songtsan.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, it was why their journey was so long delayed. The Chinese have actually turned their side of the story into a national myth proving the Chinese claim to Tibet.

Lobsang Chojor said:
Not to go to far off topic but how have they done this?


Malcolm wrote:
State sponsored operas, movies, the whole 9 yards.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, February 5th, 2017 at 12:25 PM
Title: Re: Maajid Nawaz's response to SPLC's list
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
For this reason, I cannot understand why anyone should be complaining about the left in the west. The left for now is in defeat.

kirtu said:
Correction: the left in the United States can be seen as in defeat (although there was not a real left in the United States since at least the 1950's - the moderate conservative establishment Democrats are not a left).

Malcolm wrote:
The American Left ceased to resemble in any way the European Left after the war. The American Left, since the 1960's has not been entrenched in class issues, it has been mainly concerned with social justice and environmental issues. It is temporarily in a state of defeat and reorganization.

kirtu said:
However in Canada and much of Western Europe it is okay, still.  France?  Not so much, at least not for one election cycle.  Nonetheless practically no where will the social democratic state be rolled back.  Except backward, conservative UK perhaps.  And it *IS* possible that the Dutch will take a slight step back but I doubt it.

Malcolm wrote:
All of Europe is in revolt against the EU. I think it is only gives advantages to Russia.

kirtu said:
OTOH the commitment to the defense of civil liberties world wide has taken a beating because of the mishandling of the current world wide refugee crisis.  Basically only Canada, Germany, Belgium, Luxembourg and Switzerland are assisting people fleeing war zones and each of those countries has their own limits and the policies are variously under some fire there too.

Malcolm wrote:
The problem is so much worse that anyone is willing to admit. There were 60 million refugees or displaced people last year. Half the Syrian population, 10,000 million, have been displaced and are refugees. This is worse than the total number of refugees during WWII. Large populations of Europeans and Americans both have voiced outright Eurocentric Xenophobia, and the US has the worst case of the disease right now. Hands down, I admit that. We are heading down to the road to full scale fascism.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, February 5th, 2017 at 12:13 PM
Title: Re: Maajid Nawaz's response to SPLC's list
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
The left for now is in defeat.

tingdzin said:
And they will continue to remain so until they come up with real responses to the right's appeal, instead of just preaching to their own self-righteous choir. I despise the new fascists, but I'm also really sick of political correctness. Left-wing censorship is a reality, and to deny this only gives the fascists more ammunition.

Malcolm wrote:
Please —— the media, and public opinion has been shifted to the right for decades by well -organized and efficient conservative think tanks. It was they after all who gave us Obamacare, for which now the left bears the blame. Neat trick. I at least can remember Walter Cronkite and the high quality of journalism in this country. It still exists, though under assault from by the social conservatives for decades. If people are not discriminating they will come to an irrational distrust of the press, from whom ironically they gain all their information with which they distrust the press.

Insisting that minorities be granted the simple dignity of not being subjected to racist and discriminatory words and deeds is not politically correct. It is simply correct.

People become angry about what they term "political correctness" because they feel unfairly judged for their racist and sexist instincts. Too bad.

The left may be down and out for the time being, but this is not a permanent state of affairs.

But if we permit our capitalist culture to destroy world civilization due to our own greed and jealously, one hopes there will still be people left over to pick up the pieces and start again. If not, I hope that life on earth continues to evolve in all its beauty, even if no humans remain to enjoy it.

Finally, shouting down someone like Milo is hardly a sin. I suspect it is in fact a virtue.

P.S. Some asshole from Michigan yesterday suggested that the way to deal with the campus protests was to have another Kent State. Threatening to shoot students is really not an appropriate way to deal with political correctness on college campuses. A much more troubling phenomena than political correctness on campuses is allowing college campus deans to adjudicate rape cases to keep them out of the course system.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, February 5th, 2017 at 9:43 AM
Title: Re: Tri Ralpachen
Content:
Karma Jinpa said:
lso read that he wrongfully put one of his ministers to death, killing off a main ally for the Buddhist cause based one rumors of him sleeping with the queen.

tingdzin said:
The "sleeping with the queen" theme also appears in some Chospa accounts of Vairocana's life, as you are probably aware.

Losal Samten said:
On this topic Minister Gar is also said to have had relations with Princess Wengchen whilst he was delivering her to Songtsan.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, it was why their journey was so long delayed. The Chinese have actually turned their side of the story into a national myth proving the Chinese claim to Tibet.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, February 5th, 2017 at 9:40 AM
Title: Re: Maajid Nawaz's response to SPLC's list
Content:
michaelb said:
In this way the left is no longer liberal as it uses censorship every bit as much as dictatorships on the right.

Malcolm wrote:
FIrst of all pairing Nawaz with Sam Harris hardly wins you points on the Islamopositive scale.

Second of all, Islamophobia, homophobia and so on are social diseases, and like all diseases, they should be eradicated.

I submit to you that at present the West is far more in danger of falling victim to Fascism than it is in danger of being attacked by a few deluded people raised in Muslim families who are driven by a mistaken world view.

For this reason, I cannot understand why anyone should be complaining about the left in the west. The left for now is in defeat.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, February 5th, 2017 at 6:09 AM
Title: Re: Primordial Buddha: A Reprise
Content:


Tsongkhapafan said:
I don't think you've understood. That which people call Dharmakaya is the ultimate nature of a Buddha's mind. This is permanent.

Are you saying that Buddhas don't have mind? In which case they cannot be objects of refuge because they cannot emanate, cannot teach, cannot bless the minds of sentient beings because they cannot function.

Malcolm wrote:
You've just claimed that the dharmakāya is conditioned and relative. Even your terminology is strange. There are no terms in any Indian text that correspond to "Wisdom Truth Body and the Nature Truth Body." The term ye shes chos kyi sku is indeed a term found in Gelugpa exegesis. But it is not found outside your school. Therefore, you cannot expect anyone to accede to your presentation outside of your coreligionists.

Tsongkhapafan said:
Well, that's great then - we can agree to disagree. I'm not expecting anyone to accede to anything; in fact arguing about views is a bit pointless really.

Malcolm wrote:
The point is that you keep on presenting the path in your tradition as if it is somehow universal and more valid. For example, in Sakya, they do not use the terminology at all. For Sakyapas, as indeed for Nyingma and Kagyu as well,with respect to the "nature body" aka svabhākaya, in Vajrayāna practice is simply the fact that the three kāyas are an inseparable unity, while in the sūtra presentation it is generally understood to be synonym of the dharmakāya. Your presentation is an adaptation of Haribhadra's interpretation of the svabhāvakakāya to Vajrayāna, but I am not really certain it is appropriate to mix up sūtra and tantra in this way.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, February 5th, 2017 at 5:52 AM
Title: Re: Primordial Buddha: A Reprise
Content:


Tsongkhapafan said:
No, because an actual true cessation is the emptiness of a mind that has attained a final cessation of any fault. It's an emptiness not a mind so it is permanent and unconditioned.

The ultimate true cessation is the emptiness of a mind that has permanently abandoned the very subtle obstructions to omniscience. This emptiness is called the Nature Truth Body. Because the two truths are the same nature, the Wisdom Truth Body and the Nature Truth Body are one entity. the Wisdom Truth Body is a functioning thing and its emptiness is the Nature Truth Body.

Malcolm wrote:
This does not escape the inevitable consequence that you are claiming the dharmakāya is conditioned and relative. This contradicts both sūtra and tantra.

Tsongkhapafan said:
I don't think you've understood. That which people call Dharmakaya is the ultimate nature of a Buddha's mind. This is permanent.

Are you saying that Buddhas don't have mind? In which case they cannot be objects of refuge because they cannot emanate, cannot teach, cannot bless the minds of sentient beings because they cannot function.

Malcolm wrote:
You've just claimed that the dharmakāya is conditioned and relative. Even your terminology is strange. There are no terms in any Indian text that correspond to "Wisdom Truth Body and the Nature Truth Body." The term ye shes chos kyi sku is indeed a term found in Gelugpa exegesis. But it is not found outside your school. Therefore, you cannot expect anyone to accede to your presentation outside of your coreligionists.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, February 5th, 2017 at 5:08 AM
Title: Re: Primordial Buddha: A Reprise
Content:


Tsongkhapafan said:
Yes, it's a conventional truth and when it is completely purified it becomes the Wisdom Truth Body of a Buddha.

Malcolm wrote:
Which makes dharmakāya relative and conditioned, whoops!

Tsongkhapafan said:
No, because an actual true cessation is the emptiness of a mind that has attained a final cessation of any fault. It's an emptiness not a mind so it is permanent and unconditioned.

The ultimate true cessation is the emptiness of a mind that has permanently abandoned the very subtle obstructions to omniscience. This emptiness is called the Nature Truth Body. Because the two truths are the same nature, the Wisdom Truth Body and the Nature Truth Body are one entity. the Wisdom Truth Body is a functioning thing and its emptiness is the Nature Truth Body.

Malcolm wrote:
This does not escape the inevitable consequence that you are claiming the dharmakāya is conditioned and relative. This contradicts both sūtra and tantra.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, February 5th, 2017 at 4:21 AM
Title: Re: Primordial Buddha: A Reprise
Content:


Tsongkhapafan said:
Thanks

conebeckham said:
You're welcome.

So, is this subtle clear light mind a potential?  An existent?  A "conventional truth?"

Tsongkhapafan said:
Yes, it's a conventional truth and when it is completely purified it becomes the Wisdom Truth Body of a Buddha.

Malcolm wrote:
Which makes dharmakāya relative and conditioned, whoops!


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, February 5th, 2017 at 3:27 AM
Title: Re: Primordial Buddha: A Reprise
Content:
conebeckham said:
As Malcolm noted, Milarepa practiced Varahi and Samvara.  When asked by a disciple what his yidam was, his reply was that he relied on "the little red one."  That's not just a reference to Vajravarahi.

Mila's practice is hard to fathom, but he was a practitioner of the Six Yogas of Naropa, and especially of Tummo.  When we Kagyupas speak of Mahamudra, we mean something different, though our Mahamudra can, and ideally should, encompass the two stages as well.  My tradition includes the instructions of the Karma Kagyu, which includes Dzogchen and Mahamudra, and of the Shangpa Kagyu, which has its tradition of "Clear Light Mahamudra" that is quite different in some respects.  But I don't want to talk about techniques, etc., here or in public, in general.  My questions were directed at the nature of this "very subtle mind," and it's relationship to Buddha Nature, and to, perhaps, "primordial Buddha."  In a sense, all practice, including the Six Yogas practices of Clear Light, which are actually "night-time" practices, and the main yogas of Tummo and Illusory Body, are means to recognize the Nature of Mind, and not merely a direct cognition of emptiness, though that is one aspect of the experience as I understand it.

Tsongkhapafan said:
Thanks

conebeckham said:
You're welcome.

So, is this subtle clear light mind a potential?  An existent?  A "conventional truth?"

Malcolm wrote:
It is conventional and relative. It takes ultimate clear light as its object, according to the Gelug presentation.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, February 5th, 2017 at 1:58 AM
Title: Re: Hate speech is Free Speech?
Content:


Malcolm wrote:
This is what the right would like you to believe. They are wrong. Also, no jobs are coming back. This is a total fantasy. It's a bait and switch. Promise jobs, and when none are forthcoming, blame [x].

Queequeg said:
Infrastructure jobs are in play. It's short sighted, but it will win elections and that's what matters.

Malcolm wrote:
If you believe this, I have a bridge for sale. The point is that Trump is claiming to bring back manufacturing jobs, but the white working class (defined by absence of a college education) is not qualified for these jobs since they require college level education in STEM subjects.


Queequeg said:
Their followers are not the issue. The issue is working class who flipped for Trump. If they don't flip, Trump doesn't win.

Malcolm wrote:
This analysis is wrong. First, the working class did not "flip" for trump. Most Trump voters are in the $75,000+ salary range and white. The working class in this country is predominantly black and latino. They did not vote for Trump. Some white working class voters did,

Second, Trump lost the election not just by 2.8 million votes that went to Clinton. He also lost the 6 million votes that went for Johnson and Stein.

This means that while he won the electoral college, (by barely 300,000 votes) he very badly lost the popular vote.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, February 5th, 2017 at 1:45 AM
Title: Re: "Winds"
Content:
Karma Jinpa said:
"Winds" is a literal English translation of lüng (rlung), the Tibetan translation of Sanskrit prāna, which you're probably more familiar with through the equivalent Chinese term https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qi.
.

Malcolm wrote:
No. rlung is a translation of vāyu; srog 'dzin is a translation of prāṇa. Hence we have the prāṇavāyu or srog 'dzin rlung.


Coëmgenu said:
I hear Buddhists who I assume come from a Tibetan tradition talk about "wind/winds" a lot, generally in relation to the mind, I think.

What are "winds"?

Malcolm wrote:
Vāyu is a concept common to Ayurveda, Tibetan Medicine, and both Buddhist and Hindu yogic traditions. In Buddhist Tantra, vāyu is the material basis for the mind, its steed if you will, which carries the mind about the body. Further, various vāyus are responsible for all of the body's functions including digestion, movement, speaking, circulation, sense perception and so on. The nature of the the vāyus is the element of air.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, February 5th, 2017 at 12:39 AM
Title: Re: Hate speech is Free Speech?
Content:
Queequeg said:
Progressives and Dems don't seem to get this, and instead they're coalescing around identity issues, rather than the stuff that is going to make a difference politically in the coming interim elections - "the economy, stupid." Jobs in flyover country is what will resonate. Not lamenting over immigration - as problematic as the recent executive orders have been. That fight is a loser and will only reinforce the disconnect between the coasts and the middle of the country.

Identity politics plays into Trump/Bannon's playbook. Its Lucy pulling the football.

Malcolm wrote:
This is what the right would like you to believe. They are wrong. Also, no jobs are coming back. This is a total fantasy. It's a bait and switch. Promise jobs, and when none are forthcoming, blame [x].

Queequeg said:
Bannon is an economic nationalist. "America First" is him. He's fighting the fight that matters. He's building a coalition in part of the underemployed workers who used to make up the middle class. These are the people who voted for Obama in the past two elections, but flipped this time because Clinton never even bothered to try and speak to them. If Trump gets the infrastructure programs going and gets these people employed, the Dems are going to lose them for a generation.

Bannon also uses a modified Southern Strategy, appealing to voters in the South and other rural areas where whites feel like they're on the defensive. What is distressing about this is that the northern blue collar guys who flipped for Trump will start internalizing the Trump minority defamation.

Malcolm wrote:
Bannon and Trump are fascists. Fascism is always more popular after a major economic downturn. Their followers are fascists also. They would like it very much if Trump suspended the constitution. They are not even pretending anymore. Just go check the comments at Brietbart.

There is only one appropriate political response to fascism and fascists — opposition, resistance, organization.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, February 5th, 2017 at 12:16 AM
Title: Re: Primordial Buddha: A Reprise
Content:
Tsongkhapafan said:
Milarepa received his realisations through the practice of Hevajra as his Guru Marpa did.

Malcolm wrote:
No, Milarepa's main practice was Cakrasamvara/Vajrayogini.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, February 4th, 2017 at 10:29 PM
Title: Re: Primordial Buddha: A Reprise
Content:


Tsongkhapafan said:
The very subtle mind of clear light and its mounted wind that cannot be accessed by a gross mind and cannot be purified except through completion stage meditation, which depends upon generation stage meditation, which depends on the three principal aspects of the path as explained in Buddha's Sutra teachings.


Malcolm wrote:
Nice little box you have constructed for yourself.

Tsongkhapafan said:
Actually, Buddha constructed it. It's called a spiritual path.

Malcolm wrote:
The box is your dogmatism, your assertion that there is only your way or the highway and your negating the legitimacy of other paths, which you do constantly in a very uninformed manner, worthy of any fundamentalist.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, February 4th, 2017 at 9:53 PM
Title: Re: Primordial Buddha: A Reprise
Content:


Tsongkhapafan said:
Just understanding that you have natural purity is no method. There has to be a basis, a path and a result.

conebeckham said:
. What's the basis, then?

Tsongkhapafan said:
The very subtle mind of clear light and its mounted wind that cannot be accessed by a gross mind and cannot be purified except through completion stage meditation, which depends upon generation stage meditation, which depends on the three principal aspects of the path as explained in Buddha's Sutra teachings.


Malcolm wrote:
Nice little box you have constructed for yourself.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, February 4th, 2017 at 9:21 PM
Title: Re: Tri Ralpachen
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
The answer is that Ralpachan did not have much of a story with Guru Rinpoche. So he was important mainly for his activities in sponsoring translations for 21 years. A large number of texts were translated and edited during this period providing the basis for the Dharma in Tibet.

Karma Jinpa said:
A salient point.  It's not as exciting (especially to the Tibetan people) without the Second Buddha from Oddiyana, admittedly.

Songtsen Gampo didn't have contact with him either, but he had the acclaim of being the first Dharma King, with him seen as Tibet's patron deity Chenrezik and his two princess-brides being Tara and Bhrikuti Devi (which later became White Tara and Green Tara).

Would you agree, though, Malcolm, that Ralpachen's role was crucial in establishing the Dharma in Tibet?  Perhaps it isn't as sexy as building the Jokhang or inviting Guru Rinpoche, but he sure had a lot of temples built, and got some major portions of the canon translated from Sanskrit to Tibetan.

Do we have records of who he invited to do the translations, and what they translated?  That would be interesting to know, and any sources would be much appreciated.

Malcolm wrote:
Van Schaiks' book, Tibet, a History, paints a rather unfavorable picture of Ralpacan, describing him as weak, mentally unstable, and ineffective as a ruler.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, February 4th, 2017 at 10:27 AM
Title: Re: Non-Duality in Dzogchen vs Advaita Vedanta
Content:
Vidyavajra said:
Is it correct to say that it has not given any good results, though? How about Milarepa and countless others?


Malcolm wrote:
Milarepa did not abandon anything. He was already free. He realized that. The how doesn't matter much.

Vidyavajra said:
Milarepa’s songs...


Malcolm wrote:
...are quite often not by him at all.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, February 4th, 2017 at 10:14 AM
Title: Re: Tri Ralpachen
Content:
javier.espinoza.t said:
oh you are doing research mm

Karma Jinpa said:
Not really doing serious research in the academic sense.  It just struck me as odd is all, and I'm curious to find out the reasons behind it.  That said, I have seen mention of the Three (or sometimes Four) Great Dharma Kings of Tibet since starting this thread.

Still puzzles me why Ralpachen doesn't get more recognition and credit, though Tingdzin may have a lead on that it seems.

Malcolm wrote:
The answer is that Ralpachan did not have much of a story with Guru Rinpoche. So he was important mainly for his activities in sponsoring translations for 21 years. A large number of texts were translated and edited during this period providing the basis for the Dharma in Tibet.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, February 4th, 2017 at 10:06 AM
Title: Re: Non-Duality in Dzogchen vs Advaita Vedanta
Content:
Vidyavajra said:
Is it correct to say that it has not given any good results, though? How about Milarepa and countless others?


Malcolm wrote:
Milarepa did not abandon anything. He was already free. He realized that. The how doesn't matter much.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, February 4th, 2017 at 9:43 AM
Title: Re: Non-Duality in Dzogchen vs Advaita Vedanta
Content:
Vidyavajra said:
I haven't read through most of this thread, so might be missing something. But have there been any noteworthy records of dialogues between masters of Dzogchen and Advaita Vedanta that might be shared? I think that would be much more interesting than reading only the views of Buddhists, some of whom do not know Vedanta in any great depth.

dzogchungpa said:
Well, I think the expression "Advaita Vedanta" gets used carelessly here sometimes, but if you are willing to accept H. W. L. Poonja, AKA Papaji, as an example of a master of Advaita Vedanta then there there is a discussion between him and Chokyi Nyima Rinpoche in this book:
http://davidgodman.org/gen2/p/books/godman.papaji-interviews.html

I can't seem to remember if I have read it or not.

papaji said:
never advise anyone to renounce the world. This is not the way to get enlightenment. It has been tried both in the West and the East for thousands of years, but it has not given any good results. My advice is different. I simply say, ‘Keep quiet. Stay wherever you are. Don’t reject your worldly activities. Simply keep quiet for a single second and see what happens.’

Malcolm wrote:
This is good advice.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, February 4th, 2017 at 4:02 AM
Title: Re: Hate speech is Free Speech?
Content:
Grigoris said:
Consider the fact that you now consider CNN liberal

Malcolm wrote:
I don't consider them liberal. They are not. They are center-right.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, February 4th, 2017 at 3:32 AM
Title: Re: Hate speech is Free Speech?
Content:
madhusudan said:
The link in the OP was from CNN, far from a trusted news source.

Malcolm wrote:
Hahaha, CNN is awesome merely for the fact that they pissed off the Trump administration so much that the Trump admin has declared war on them.

Queequeg said:
When that is the standard of awesomeness, we're living in some pathetic times.


Malcolm wrote:
Anything that makes Trump angry is awesome.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, February 4th, 2017 at 3:21 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:
Pema Yolo said:
Have gave the lung in sections as he went throughout the retreat, but then gave the full lung yesterday as requested by some of the webcast attendees. If you watched all of the teachings you should have the full lung I believe.

Leif said:
Is lung necessary to practice rushen or parts of it, or will having transmission suffice.

I could only attend parts of teachings on most days, and only attended the last day completely, thus I'm sure I didn't receive the lung for rushen (just all the lungs transmitted on the last day).

Malcolm wrote:
In general the requirement for practicing rushan is just direct introduction, you don't need a lung to practice rushan.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, February 4th, 2017 at 2:48 AM
Title: Re: Hate speech is Free Speech?
Content:
madhusudan said:
The link in the OP was from CNN, far from a trusted news source.

Malcolm wrote:
Hahaha, CNN is awesome merely for the fact that they pissed off the Trump administration so much that the Trump admin has declared war on them.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, February 4th, 2017 at 12:09 AM
Title: Re: Primordial Buddha: A Reprise
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
No, this is an mistaken point of view. Water is always pure. This is why when it is allowed to be still, any turbidity settles naturally and all that remains is limpid water. This is the meaning of the Buddha's statement, "Monks, the mind is luminous and afflictions roll in; monks, the mind is luminous and afflictions roll out." Afflictions are not part of the nature of the mind. If they were, the mind could never be pure.

Tsongkhapafan said:
It's actually mistaken to say that muddy water is pure. Of course dirt is not the nature of water because then water could never be pure - yet water with dirt in it is dirty water; how can you say it is pure?

Malcolm wrote:
When you leave muddied water alone, the mud settles, having never affected the water.

Tsongkhapafan said:
Yet the mind is contaminated by afflictions and failing to uncontaminate it will not lead to Buddhahood. Simply believing in the 'natural purity' of water will not liberate it from its muddy state. You cannot be introduced to the natural purity of something that is adventitiously impure.

Malcolm wrote:
Even the afflictions of the mind are naturally pure.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, February 3rd, 2017 at 3:09 AM
Title: Re: Primordial Buddha: A Reprise
Content:


Tsongkhapafan said:
If you have dirty water, you have water that has the potential to be pure. It's not the same thing as pure water.

Malcolm wrote:
No, this is an mistaken point of view. Water is always pure. This is why when it is allowed to be still, any turbidity settles naturally and all that remains is limpid water. This is the meaning of the Buddha's statement, "Monks, the mind is luminous and afflictions roll in; monks, the mind is luminous and afflictions roll out." Afflictions are not part of the nature of the mind. If they were, the mind could never be pure.


Tsongkhapafan said:
Similarly, if you have a defiled mind, it's not the same as an undefiled mind. We cannot say that the mind before attaining Buddhahood at the mind at the time of Buddhahood are the same.

Malcolm wrote:
They are exactly the same. The only difference is context. For example, when one is in a dark room one cannot see anything, even though one has eyes which are healthy. But when light is added to that room, one can see everything automatically without needing any training at all. But nothing about one's eyes has changed at all. They are the same in both cases.

Tsongkhapafan said:
If sentient beings are Buddhas they do not need to do anything - there are no obscurations, no suffering, no need for a path and no result needed.

Malcolm wrote:
The only thing sentient beings need to do is recognize their own state. Beyond that there is nothing they need to do.


Tsongkhapafan said:
Clearly, this is incorrect; if it were true, Buddhism would be unnecessary.

Malcolm wrote:
Buddhism is necessary because sentient beings become convinced they have problems, but those problems are not real. For as long as sentient beings suffer from the delusion they are not awake, for that long they will seek paths and stages and create karma. But the solution to this is really not so complicated as lower vehicles make it out to be. Sentient beings can be introduced to their own state of buddhahood directly, even when they are under the power of afflictions. This method is called "direct introduction."


Tsongkhapafan said:
On the other hand, If sentient beings are Buddhas with obscurations, they aren't Buddhas! We can, however, say that sentient beings are potential Buddhas. They have the potential for purity just as dirty water has the potential to be pure water if the dirt is removed.

Malcolm wrote:
As above, water is already pure. It cannot be contaminated by mud. Likewise, the mind is already pure, it cannot be contaminated by afflictions.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, February 3rd, 2017 at 2:57 AM
Title: Re: Primordial Buddha: A Reprise
Content:


Tsongkhapafan said:
Is the Tantra of the Great Array one of the Nyingma Tantras in the Kangyur?

Malcolm wrote:
No, but the absence of a text in the bka' 'gyur is no indication of invalidity. For example, there are many protector tantras, for example, the Shasanapatti tantra, which are not in the bka' 'gyur.

Tsongkhapafan said:
I see, so what is the undisputed word of Buddha? How can it be proved?

Malcolm wrote:
It is not something that can be proven. For example, there is the famous Tara Tantra. It exists in the bka' 'gyur, yet it, along with a number of other "gsar ma" tantras of the Kriya Tantra are not accepted by Ngorchen Kunga Zangpo.

One cannot prove any text to be spoken by the Buddha. This is why, when challenged over the doctrine of the bardo, Vasubandhu simply states, "merely because you do not read it does not mean it is invalid." This is his response to the charge that this or that text is not Buddhavacana.

This is why my response to you is that merely because you do not read this or that text, does not invalidate it. Moreover, just as Nāgārjuna warned Hinayanists who criticized Mahāyāna it was better oif they merely put it aside without criticizing it, likewise too, you would be better off putting Dzogchen aside without criticizing it.

As for obscurations, they are not real, substantial things that need to removed, like a stain from clothes. As the famous Haribhadra points out, when one achieves buddhahood, one understands one was never deluded all along. As Maitreyanath states, "Nothing here to add, nothing here to remove."


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, February 3rd, 2017 at 2:26 AM
Title: Re: Primordial Buddha: A Reprise
Content:
Minobu said:
ok so why do you use Sakyamuni Buddha and say that he stated stuff  in the Tantra of the Great Array (bkod pa chen po rgyud)

how is that possible? teach me like i am a total moron. which maybe i am...I have no sense of false pride when it come to humbling myself to learn one thing in Buddhism....

Was it Garab Dorje that first put to pen Tantra of the Great Array (bkod pa chen po rgyud)...who put it to pen.
i just want to know, how the prediction got into Buddhism .

Malcolm wrote:
The same way the Lotus Sūtra got into Buddhism, it was taught by the Buddha.

Tsongkhapafan said:
Is the Tantra of the Great Array one of the Nyingma Tantras in the Kangyur?

Malcolm wrote:
No, but the absence of a text in the bka' 'gyur is no indication of invalidity. For example, there are many protector tantras, for example, the Shasanapatti tantra, which are not in the bka' 'gyur.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, February 3rd, 2017 at 2:02 AM
Title: Re: Primordial Buddha: A Reprise
Content:




Minobu said:
i want to know when this was introduced to our history

Malcolm wrote:
Śākyamuni Buddha, in the Tantra of the Great Array (bkod pa chen po rgyud), stated that Garab Dorje would appear 360 years after his parinirvana. When Garab Dorje was 32 years old, he began teaching all the Dzogchen tantras, in addition to various tantric cycles such as Yamantaka and so on. He did not just teach Dzogchen.

Minobu said:
ok so why do you use Sakyamuni Buddha and say that he stated stuff  in the Tantra of the Great Array (bkod pa chen po rgyud)

how is that possible? teach me like i am a total moron. which maybe i am...I have no sense of false pride when it come to humbling myself to learn one thing in Buddhism....

Was it Garab Dorje that first put to pen Tantra of the Great Array (bkod pa chen po rgyud)...who put it to pen.
i just want to know, how the prediction got into Buddhism .

Malcolm wrote:
The same way the Lotus Sūtra got into Buddhism, it was taught by the Buddha.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, February 3rd, 2017 at 1:26 AM
Title: Re: Primordial Buddha: A Reprise
Content:
Minobu said:
The Realms and Transformations of Sound Tantra,
i want to know when this was introduced to our history

Malcolm wrote:
Śākyamuni Buddha, in the Tantra of the Great Array (bkod pa chen po rgyud), stated that Garab Dorje would appear 360 years after his parinirvana. When Garab Dorje was 32 years old, he began teaching all the Dzogchen tantras, in addition to various tantric cycles such as Yamantaka and so on. He did not just teach Dzogchen.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, February 2nd, 2017 at 11:54 PM
Title: Re: Recognizing rigpa
Content:
cepheidvariable said:
\Would it be considered, "stealing teachings" if I were to reach out to the DC and maybe attend a webcast after already haven received lung in a different tradition?:

Malcolm wrote:
Nope. It is perfectly fine.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, February 2nd, 2017 at 11:46 PM
Title: Re: Primordial Buddha: A Reprise
Content:
Tsongkhapafan said:
Malcolm says that sentient beings are already Buddhas...

Malcolm wrote:
No, the Buddha said this in The Questions of Kāśyapa:
"If sentient beings are buddhas by nature, just what is the difference between buddhas and sentient beings? 

‘They both differ not in nature, but differ by virtue of realization and non-realization.’
The Hevajra Tantra states:
Sentient beings are buddhas, 
but they are temporarily obscured by taints—
when removed, they are buddhas.
This is why sentient beings do not need a prediction for buddhahood. The anuyoga tantra, Sarvatathāgata-citta-jñāna-guhyārtha-garbha-vyūha-vajra-tantra-siddhi-yogāgama-samāja-sarvavidyāsūtra-mahāyānābhisamaya-dharmaparyāya-vivyūha-nāma-sūtra, states:
With respect to seeing or not seeing
natural, primordial buddhahood—
that is not seen in inferior conditions,
it is seen in superior conditions.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, February 2nd, 2017 at 10:47 PM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:
jlhundrup said:
Dear all, Today Rinpoche has given the tranmission and a slight explanation of the chod practice of Jigme Lingpa: "The Sound of Dakini Laughter". Is enough with this lung to be able to practice it? No need any initiation? And also, there is a book translated by Tony Duff titled: "Longchen Nyingthig Chod Practice Sound of Dakini Laughter". After receiving this transmission, is it possible to read it? Thanks and forgive the questions, I'm a newbie. Thank you.


Malcolm wrote:
The lung is enough. You can find Jigme Lingpa's chod on the webcast website if you poke around in the files section.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, February 2nd, 2017 at 10:42 PM
Title: Re: Primordial Buddha: A Reprise
Content:


Malcolm wrote:
There is no contradiction at all between being a practitioner of Hevajra and being a practitioner of Dzogchen. Dzogchen is the meaning of the Hevajra Tantra, as it is of all tantras.

Tsongkhapafan said:
Um, so you say It's funny how Buddha Vajradhara didn't mention Dzogchen as being the meaning of all the Tantras.

Malcolm wrote:
Why sure he did, here are Buddha Vajradhāras precise words:
Because the lion roars, the other predators are shocked and frightened. 
The nomenclature of the Great Perfection shocks all in the lower vehicles. 
The meaning of Ati, the unparalleled Great Perfection,
is the most distilled secret of all the buddhas,
the location of the supreme Dharma, and the mind of all buddhas.

Tsongkhapafan said:
It is also clear cut that Atisha wrote a wonderful little text on Dzogchen view, meditation and conduct which is preserved today in all versions of the bstan 'gyur. You may find it inconvenient that this is so (just as you find it inconvenient that a wonderful text on Dzogchen exists in all editions of Tsongkhapa's collected works, in the first volume), but it exists.

Malcolm wrote:
As I said, he didn't write it and everything you say is a matter of interpretation[/quote]

Yes, in fact Tsongkhapa wrote the text down in his own hand and preserved it among his writings. Your obstinance in resisting this fact is as entertaining as Trump's denial that he lost the popular vote.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, February 2nd, 2017 at 10:25 PM
Title: Re: Primordial Buddha: A Reprise
Content:
Monlam Tharchin said:
He explains principle object of refuge for Mahāyānis is the dharmakāya.
A side question for Malcolm.

For instance when I take refuge in the Sangha, I try to visualize like a sea of teachers, bodhisattvas, and so on before me while bowing.
But the Dharmakaya isn't a specific form I thought, so what does taking refuge in it "look like" in practice?

Malcolm wrote:
When you take refuge in any buddha, you are taking refuge in the dharmakāya.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, February 2nd, 2017 at 10:32 AM
Title: Re: Primordial Buddha: A Reprise
Content:


Queequeg said:
1. The prediction does matter... because its actually one of the steps to becoming a Buddha.

Malcolm wrote:
The prediction does not matter. No one predicted Buddha Samantabhadra. Buddha Samantabhadra merely recognized his own state and woke up without traveling a path or taking any steps. Sentient beings do not need a prediction for buddhahood. They're already buddhas.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, February 2nd, 2017 at 6:33 AM
Title: Re: Primordial Buddha: A Reprise
Content:
Queequeg said:
I have no comment about other "variegated" nirmanakayas.

Malcolm wrote:
This is standard Mahāyāna doctrine. One supreme nirmanakāya at a time, all other nirmanakāya buddhas during the dispensation of a supreme nirmanakāya are considered variegated in that they do not display all the major and minor marks, and can appear in any form at all, even as a bridge for example.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, February 2nd, 2017 at 6:30 AM
Title: Re: Primordial Buddha: A Reprise
Content:


Queequeg said:
The various vows the various Buddhas extend to us here in the Saha world aside, Shakyamuni is our "original" teacher in this world.

Malcolm wrote:
This is not at all true. Śākyamūni is the fourth or seventh teacher in this world, depending on how you count it. Prior to him there was 1) Vipaśyin, 2) Śikhin, 3) Viśvabhū, 4) Krakucchanda, 5) Kanakamuni, 6) Kaśyapa and then 7) Śākyamuni. After the latter, 8) Maitreya Buddha will arrive.

Apart from these seven supreme nirmanāyās, there are infinite variegated nirmanakāyas like Padmsambhava, Garab Dorje, etc.

Clinging to Śākyamuni is a mistake.

Tsongkhapafan said:
Wow, reinventing history as well?  Buddha Shakyamuni is the fourth Buddha of the Fortunate Aeon and Krakucchanda is the first - where did these others comes from?

Malcolm wrote:
This list of seven buddhas comes from our Vinaya, the Mulasarvastivada Vinaya. It may also be found here:

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/dn/dn.32.0.piya.html
http://tipitaka.wikia.com/wiki/Maha-padana_Sutta

Tsongkhapafan said:
And Buddha Shakyamuni is indeed the original Teacher of Buddhism in this world in this age and the principal object of refuge for all Buddhists. Without him, there's no Buddhism for us - no need to cling, it's a fact.

Malcolm wrote:
Śākyamuni is not the original Buddha of this world and this eon. If you count via the Bhadrakalpa Sūra, he is the fourth of 1002.

Secondly, a nirmanakāya is never the principle object of refuge, as Maitreyanatha explains in the Uttaratantra. He explains principle object of refuge for Mahāyānis is the dharmakāya.

Tsongkhapafan, you should really learn to ask questions first, instead of issuing hotheaded statements that are easily corrected and merely show that you are not well-studied.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, February 2nd, 2017 at 5:37 AM
Title: Re: Primordial Buddha: A Reprise
Content:


Queequeg said:
The various vows the various Buddhas extend to us here in the Saha world aside, Shakyamuni is our "original" teacher in this world.

Malcolm wrote:
This is not at all true. Śākyamūni is the fourth or seventh teacher in this world, depending on how you count it. Prior to him there was 1) Vipaśyin, 2) Śikhin, 3) Viśvabhū, 4) Krakucchanda, 5) Kanakamuni, 6) Kaśyapa and then 7) Śākyamuni. After the latter, 8) Maitreya Buddha will arrive.

Apart from these seven supreme nirmanāyās, there are infinite variegated nirmanakāyas like Padmsambhava, Garab Dorje, etc.

Clinging to Śākyamuni is a mistake.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, February 2nd, 2017 at 5:32 AM
Title: Re: Primordial Buddha: A Reprise
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
It is very solid.

Grigoris said:
Only if you believe it...

Malcolm wrote:
Sure, that is the whole point. People make irrational claims based on books all the time.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, February 2nd, 2017 at 5:08 AM
Title: Re: Primordial Buddha: A Reprise
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Since when did you decide to follow text critical academic Buddhist history?

Grigoris said:
I didn't, but the textual justification is not all that solid, is it now?


Malcolm wrote:
It is very solid.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, February 2nd, 2017 at 5:06 AM
Title: Re: Primordial Buddha: A Reprise
Content:


Tsongkhapafan said:
The inclusion of the Nyingma Tantras in some editions of the Kangyur has been a subject of some debate in the past but we're all free to decide what we regard as canonical. I'm still mystified as to how a teaching by Buddha Krakuchchanda could exist today.

Malcolm wrote:
By the time the bka' 'gyur was compiled by Buton Rinchen Drup, this debate had been stilled.


Tsongkhapafan said:
I'm still mystified as to how a teaching by Buddha Krakuchchanda could exist today.


Malcolm wrote:
I guess you will be surprised to learn that the teaching "Avoid negative deeds, engage in positive deeds, observe your mind — this is the teaching of the Buddha" are actually the words of Buddha Krakucchanda preserved in the Vinaya.

There is nothing mystifying about it. Since the mind of all buddhas are the same, they all have access to all Dharma that has ever been taught by any buddha anywhere at anytime.




Tsongkhapafan said:
As for Atisha, this matter is far more clear cut: he was a practitioner of Highest Yoga Tantra, in particular Hevajra Tantra.

Thanks for your reply.

Malcolm wrote:
There is no contradiction at all between being a practitioner of Hevajra and being a practitioner of Dzogchen. Dzogchen is the meaning of the Hevajra Tantra, as it is of all tantras.

It is also clear cut that Atisha wrote a wonderful little text on Dzogchen view, meditation and conduct which is preserved today in all versions of the bstan 'gyur. You may find it inconvenient that this is so (just as you find it inconvenient that a wonderful text on Dzogchen exists in all editions of Tsongkhapa's collected works, in the first volume), but it exists.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, February 2nd, 2017 at 3:47 AM
Title: Re: Primordial Buddha: A Reprise
Content:


Minobu said:
Not to disparage Dzogchen in any way...but as a reference to actual predictions by Lord Buddha Sakyamuni.

Malcolm wrote:
As I said, the prediction of Śākyamuni Buddha and Garab Dorje are both in the Realms and Transformations of Sound Tantra, which was taught by the teacher Sublime Appearance ( snang ba dam pa ) in the first eon when life spans were measureless.

Minobu said:
If it is in some Sadhana made up by a guy and useing Lord Sakyammuni's name as the source of the prediction...if you are going to teach us this...well people wonder the whole thing...


Malcolm wrote:
It is not in a sadhana made up by some guy.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, February 2nd, 2017 at 3:20 AM
Title: Re: Primordial Buddha: A Reprise
Content:
Minobu said:
I've heard this before somewhere...what text are you going by? I would really like to know this for this is really really important for me at this juncture in my practice...so please as much as you can...

Malcolm wrote:
The Realms and Transformations of Sound Tantra, which is the first Dharma to be taught by the first Buddha of this eon, lists Śākyamuni Buddha among the 12 teachers of Dzogchen. The other Buddha we know about from others sources which is included in this list is Buddha Kaśyāpa.

Tsongkhapafan said:
Can you please give a scriptural reference to a Sutra where Buddha Shakyamuni taught Dzogchen?

How could the teachings of Buddha Krakuchchanda still be existing in this world when even the teachings of Buddha Kanakamuni and Buddha Kashyapa have passed away?  Is there a way to access this text?

Malcolm wrote:
I just did give a scriptural source, The Realms and Transformations of Sound Tantra. Then there is the Kulyarāja Tantra (D 828) (Sarvadharma-mahāśanti-bodhicittakulayarāja), which is in all bka' 'gyurs. This tantra mentions Śākyamuni Buddha in chapter thirty-four in which it is explained that Kulyarāja, the teacher of all teachers, encompasses the mind of Samantabhadra, Vajrasattva, the seven buddhas including Śākyamuni, the 1002 buddhas of the Bhadrakalpa, and buddhas no matter where they are or when they are. The transcendent state of all the buddhas that has always been naturally perfected from the beginning in the dimension of the unconditioned, all-pervading dharmadhātu is equal with space. In other words, the three kāyas of all the victors are contained within the mind of perfect realization (byang chub sems, bodhicitta) which generates everything.

There is also the Sarvatathāgata-citta-jñāna-guhyārtha-garbha-vyūha-vajra-tantra-siddhi-yogāgama-samāja-sarvavidyāsūtra-mahāyānābhisamaya-dharmaparyāya-vivyūha-nāma-sūtra, Sarvatathāgatacittaguhyajñānārthagarbha-krodhavajrakula-tantra-piṇḍārthavidyāyogasiddhi-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra, Śrī-guhya-garbha-tattva-viniścaya,Devījāli-mahāmāyā-tantra-nāma and the Śrī-heruka-karuṇākrīḍita-tantra-guhya-gaṃbhīra-uttama-nāma.

All of these tantras, which all exist in the bka' 'gyur, all teach Dzogchen.

Then there is the Bodhicittamahāsukhāmnāya composed by Atisha, D 1696, which is text explaining the view and meditation of Dzogchen, which supports the view of the Nyinthig tradition that Atisha attained his realization through practicing the Great Perfection.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, February 2nd, 2017 at 2:12 AM
Title: Re: Primordial Buddha: A Reprise
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
You haven't corrected anything, no more than Vasubandhu was corrected by Theravadins who claimed there was no antarabhāva since they did not read the sūtra in which the antarabhāva is taught.

Coëmgenu said:
You made a universal claim that was not universal. You made a disputed claim. I merely called it what it is: disputed, or, more politely, "according to some".

Malcolm wrote:
The only way to dispute it is to call the text itself into question. Sure you want to go there?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, February 2nd, 2017 at 1:59 AM
Title: Re: Primordial Buddha: A Reprise
Content:
Coëmgenu said:
According to some. The notion that a tantra was the first Dharma taught, in this era or not, is definitely not a belief with universal mainstream consensus.

Malcolm wrote:
Not merely, according to some, according to the Buddha. You may not read The Realms and Transformations of Sound Tantra, but this does not form a sound justification for rejecting it.

These things do not depend on consensus for their validity.

Coëmgenu said:
It is according to some that it is according to the Buddha. I have not rejected anything, I have just corrected a universal claim about when a certain thing came chronologically, because such a claim was not truly universal.

Malcolm wrote:
You haven't corrected anything, no more than Vasubandhu was corrected by Theravadins who claimed there was no antarabhāva since they did not read the sūtra in which the antarabhāva is taught.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, February 2nd, 2017 at 1:29 AM
Title: Re: Primordial Buddha: A Reprise
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
The Realms and Transformations of Sound Tantra, which is the first Dharma to be taught by the first Buddha of this eon

Coëmgenu said:
According to some. The notion that a tantra was the first Dharma taught, in this era or not, is definitely not a belief with universal mainstream consensus.

Malcolm wrote:
Not merely, according to some, according to the Buddha. You may not read The Realms and Transformations of Sound Tantra, but this does not form a sound justification for rejecting it.

These things do not depend on consensus for their validity.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, February 2nd, 2017 at 1:27 AM
Title: Re: Primordial Buddha: A Reprise
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
The Realms and Transformations of Sound Tantra, which is the first Dharma to be taught by the first Buddha of this eon, lists Śākyamuni Buddha among the 12 teachers of Dzogchen. The other Buddha we know about from others sources which is included in this list is Buddha Kaśyāpa.

Grigoris said:
Has this text been dated?  And if so, how?  I could write a text now that justifies current innovations in spirituality and make it look that it predicts and rubber stamps current teachers and trends.

Malcolm wrote:
Since when did you decide to follow text critical academic Buddhist history?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, February 2nd, 2017 at 1:00 AM
Title: Re: Primordial Buddha: A Reprise
Content:



Malcolm wrote:
Well, an argument can be made for the superiority of Śākyamuni Buddha's teachings in one respect, he predicted both Padmasambhava and Garab Dorje.

Minobu said:
I've heard this before somewhere...what text are you going by? I would really like to know this for this is really really important for me at this juncture in my practice...so please as much as you can...

Malcolm wrote:
The Realms and Transformations of Sound Tantra, which is the first Dharma to be taught by the first Buddha of this eon, lists Śākyamuni Buddha among the 12 teachers of Dzogchen. The other Buddha we know about from others sources which is included in this list is Buddha Kaśyāpa.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, February 1st, 2017 at 11:04 PM
Title: Re: Primordial Buddha: A Reprise
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Well, an argument can be made for the superiority of Śākyamuni Buddha's teachings in one respect, he predicted both Padmasambhava and Garab Dorje.

Queequeg said:
Its not the absolute superiority of the teaching - but a question of most appropriate for this world. Shakyamuni has a connection to this world and its beings who appear here. His teachings are for us. Notwithstanding, I don't think those predictions had reached Japan by the 13th c.


Malcolm wrote:
We all recognize this world system is dominated by the supreme nirmanakāya Śākyamuni, in this particular time in the Bhadrakalpa. But times change and to take this into account Sākyamuni Buddha either directly taught different teachings for different time periods, or predicted the teachers who would. We now live in the period of the five degenerations, and so the path of renunciation teachings are not longer very effective because the afflictions of sentient beings are too strong.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, February 1st, 2017 at 10:22 PM
Title: Re: Primordial Buddha: A Reprise
Content:
tomamundsen said:
Isn't the Youthful Vase Body "unique" in some way?

Malcolm wrote:
The youthful vase body is a description of the homeostatic nature of reality before the liberation of buddhas and the delusion of sentient beings.

Queequeg said:
Is that posited as having happened, or is it a hypothetical for the purpose of elaborating the teaching?

Malcolm wrote:
There are a couple of ways of understanding it. But in general it is a didactic device.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, February 1st, 2017 at 6:24 AM
Title: Re: Primordial Buddha: A Reprise
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
If on the other hand you begin to claim as some do that only Śākyamuni is the real buddha, etc., then you slip into the deviation of condemning the Dharma and slandering the Buddha.

Coëmgenu said:
Perhaps you should take that up with Nichiren

He would call that statement right there Buddhadharma-slander, if my impression of him is at all correct. Which it is likely not to be.

Queequeg said:
Not quite.
When the Buddhas are viewed in terms of the unchanging equality of their enlightenment, there are no distinctions to be made among them. But when they are viewed in terms of the ever-present differences among their preaching, then one should understand that each of them has his own realm among the worlds of the ten directions, and that they distinguish between those with whom they have already had some connection, and those with whom they have no such connection.


Malcolm wrote:
Well, an argument can be made for the superiority of Śākyamuni Buddha's teachings in one respect, he predicted both Padmasambhava and Garab Dorje.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, February 1st, 2017 at 6:14 AM
Title: Re: Primordial Buddha: A Reprise
Content:
Coëmgenu said:
Traditional Buddhist discourse surrounding the Awakening of the Buddha is superior.
.

Malcolm wrote:
Which one, the Hinayāna one or the Mahāyāna one?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, February 1st, 2017 at 6:13 AM
Title: Re: Primordial Buddha: A Reprise
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
If on the other hand you begin to claim as some do that only Śākyamuni is the real buddha, etc., then you slip into the deviation of condemning the Dharma and slandering the Buddha.

Coëmgenu said:
Perhaps you should take that up with Nichiren

Malcolm wrote:
He would most certainly lose the debate.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, February 1st, 2017 at 5:59 AM
Title: Re: Primordial Buddha: A Reprise
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
It is also important to understand the dharmakāya of the buddhas of the three times is single. It is the same realization. It is never a different realization. The buddhas have one transcendent state. It does not matter if you call a buddha Samantabhadra, Vajradhara, Vajrayogini, Mañjuśrī, Vairocana, Vipassi, Śākyamuni, etc. They all have the same mind. The dharmakāya is single.

tomamundsen said:
Isn't the Youthful Vase Body "unique" in some way?

Malcolm wrote:
The youthful vase body is a description of the homeostatic nature of reality before the liberation of buddhas and the delusion of sentient beings.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, February 1st, 2017 at 5:15 AM
Title: Re: Primordial Buddha: A Reprise
Content:
Jeff H said:
This discussion is way over my head, so pardon me for interrupting. But here’s what it sounds like to me. Am I missing the point?

Shakyamuni sat down as an ordinary being but arose as a buddha. The crossing over into enlightenment occurred for Shakyamuni under the bodhi tree, but the pristine mind of the buddha who arose cannot be understood with any reference to time.

Malcolm wrote:
No, Mahāayāna doxology in general maintains that Śākyāmuni is a nirmanakāya, a manifestation of the sambhogakāya Vairocana. It is accepted in all Mahāyāna schools that Śākyamuni Buddha's 12 deeds were merely a display, a mere show to inspire sentient beings. Indeed, that his entire career explained in the Jataka tales, offering his body to the starving tigress, residing in Tuṣita Heaven as the deva Svetaketu, and even his very first moment of bodhicitta in hell was merely a dramatic display for sentient beings.

The one Indian commentary we have on the Lotus Sūtra suggests that references in the sūtra to the nirmanakāya's longevity and so on are to be understood as attributes of the sambhogakāya and dharmakāya. There are five certainties with respect to sambhogakāya: place, teacher, retinue, teaching, and time. The place is Akaniṣṭha Gandavyuha (only accessible to bodhisattvas on the pure stages). The teacher is always Vairocana. The teaching is always Mahāyāna. The retinue is always bodhisattvas on the pure stages. The time is always. The nirmanakāyas on the other hand does not possess these five certainties. However, in order to generate faith, the 15th chapter of the Lotus deliberately ascribes qualities, a lifespan, and the five certainties to the nirmanakāya normally reserved for the dharmakāya and sambhogakāya.

It is also important to understand the dharmakāya of the buddhas of the three times is single. It is the same realization. It is never a different realization. The buddhas have one transcendent state. It does not matter if you call a buddha Samantabhadra, Vajradhara, Vajrayogini, Mañjuśrī, Vairocana, Vipassi, Śākyamuni, etc. They all have the same mind. The dharmakāya is single. Therefore, there is only one Teacher, no matter how many manifestations of that teacher appear. This is the actual profound point the Lotus Sūtra is making with respect to the person of the Buddha. There is a manifestation of the Teacher's nirmanakāya beyond all limitations for each and every sentient being.

When this chapter is read with reference to the wider context of general Mahāyāna doxography, it becomes quite clear what the intent is. The intent is to make people understand that the three kāyas are inseparable. Wherever there is a nirmanakāya, that nirmanakāya possesses also the other two kāyas, and vice versa.

If on the other hand you begin to claim as some do that only Śākyamuni is the real buddha, etc., then you slip into the deviation of condemning the Dharma and slandering the Buddha.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, February 1st, 2017 at 2:25 AM
Title: Re: Primordial Buddha: A Reprise
Content:
Coëmgenu said:
That is the narrative that the text sets for itself, that it is a very very "difficult to believe" teaching that is ultimately true. I don't think it says "difficult to understand". I think it says "difficult to believe", but I will have to go check.

Malcolm wrote:
The Buddha states in the Mahāparibanna sutta that there is no actual limit to his lifespan. In that Hinayāna scripture, he demonstrates parnirvana only due to Ānanda's delinquency in asking him not to pass into nirvana. Indeed, this is why, in the seven limb prayer we ask the Buddhas not to remain in a state of nirvana. It is a common assumption in Mahāyāna in general that on attaining Buddhahood, the one attaining buddhahood now is completely free to manifest nirmanakāyas in a potentially unlimited number of worlds for as long as samsara exists.

Coëmgenu said:
The theorized original Prakrit Lotus Sutra is so far lost that I am almost sure that very few Buddhists we could easily name ever read any edition of the Lotus Sutra that was not primarily in Chinese. The Prakrit-Sanskrit originals have been completely lost as far as I know. The contemporary Sanskrit versions available are from a much later recension, as far as I know. "Primordial" however is an Englishism. "Source Buddha" or "Root Buddha" are better translations I think, but what do I know?

Malcolm wrote:
Nāgārjuna? Vasubandhu? Asanga? I can give you a list of Indian Panditas as long as your arm.

The contemporary Sanskrit edition is indeed later than the recension the Tibetan translation is based upon. But there are no serious differences between the recension the Tibetan translation is based upon and the recension that Kumarajiva used. It goes without saying that the Tibetan translation is more accurate than the Chinese translation, of any period.

[/quote] Well I don't even necessarily believe that either, but it is a valid reading of what the text literally says, and for many Buddhists, nothing around the Chapter 15-17 mark of the Lotus Sutra is at all provisional.[/quote]

The point of chapter fifteen is to explain why, among other things, the Buddha manifested nirvana when in fact he had no need to:

If it is asked why  show nirvana without going to nirvana, 
if I was always to be seen,
the ignorant who do not understand would become lazy.
And as for the lifespan issue, Pṛthivībandhu explains:
The lifespan with which nirmanakāya of the Tathāgata is endowed is an expedient explanation so that sentient being will generate devotion to [the Tathāgata] because the qualities and lifespan of the dharmakāya and sambhogakāya is incalculable


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, January 31st, 2017 at 7:48 PM
Title: Re: Primordial Buddha: A Reprise
Content:
Coëmgenu said:
a time when there will not exist a Buddha cannot be said to exist any amount of time in the future. The Buddha did not, in truth, according to one reading of the literature in question, achieve Awakening at Bōdh Gayā, he attained Awakening a time ago that is immeasurable and boundless. That does not necessarily mean that the Buddha was ever not Awakened.

Malcolm wrote:
Primodial Buddhahood of this kind is rejected as irrational by Indian masters. Any assertion that there can be a primordial Buddha in the sense you mention above is "heretical," outside the pale of Dharma.

It is well understood that Śākyamuni is a nirmanakāya, i.e., an emanation of the sambhogakāya Vairocana, who in turn is the emanation of the dharmakāya, sometimes referred to in Yoga tantra and so as as Samantabhadra. This means that the Buddha's 12 acts were merely a play. But it does not mean that there wasn't a continuum at some point that realized the nature of reality and attained the dharmakāya level of realization, manifesting in myriad ways to benefit sentient beings according to the latter's inclinations.

However, just as there is no beginning of samsara, there was never a time when there were no buddhas guiding sentient beings.

But when we speak of buddhas living outside, in the world, etc., this is a very external view. It had nothing to do with how the three kāyas relate to ourselves and our own nature. The latter is far more important than provisional buddhological  cosmologies.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, January 31st, 2017 at 7:04 PM
Title: Re: Saddharmapuṇḍarīka & maṇipadme
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Oṃ simply means "auspicious."

Coëmgenu said:
Why do you think it means that?

Malcolm wrote:
Because that is how it is universally explained by Buddhist Panditas.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, January 31st, 2017 at 7:02 PM
Title: Re: The Prayer of Kuntuzangpo:
Content:
javier.espinoza.t said:
the meaning is much more important than language  here anyway:)


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, January 31st, 2017 at 6:38 PM
Title: Re: Primordial Buddha: A Reprise
Content:


Coëmgenu said:
So the Lotus Sutra does still use the language of "attaining Buddhahood", which could be interpreted as to say that there exists a "beginning" to Buddhahood, that there existed a time when a being conventionally called Śākyamuni was not Buddha, but the wording of this sutra establishes the beginning of the Buddha's Buddhahood as without measure or limit. In short, according to the Lotus Sutra, there was never a time when the Buddha was not the Buddha, as the Buddha is established therein as beginningless.
But good men, it has been immeasurable, boundless hundreds, thousands, ten thousands, millions of nayutas of kalpas since I in fact attained buddhahood.

Malcolm wrote:
Thus means the person saying this was once an ordinary being.

Coëmgenu said:
I think immeasurable and without boundary/limit is more heavy a claim than you are making it. In fact it is more or less directly stated that such a date of "when the Buddha became enlightened" is impossible to conceive of.

Malcolm wrote:
It does not matter now long ago, at one point the Buddha was an ordinary person like you and I. Once buddhahood is attained, then normal mortal limitations do not apply.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, January 31st, 2017 at 6:25 PM
Title: Re: Primordial Buddha: A Reprise
Content:
Coëmgenu said:
there was never a time when the Buddha was not the Buddha, as the Buddha is established therein as beginningless.

Minobu said:
so no cause then?

I don't think thats possible. You have to be a defiled human in order to become a Buddha.
unless we are talking about something else. Which starts to border on God Themes.

Coëmgenu said:
Ignorance is also causeless/beginningless, but it is not a god. “Bhikkhus, this is said: ‘A first point of ignorance, bhikkhus, is not seen such that before this there was no ignorance and afterward it came into being.’
(AN 10.61)

Or, if you prefer, the āgama-parallel is more ambiguous: I have heard thus: Once, the Buddha travelled to Śrāvastī and stayed at Anāthapiṇḍada’s Park in Jeta’s Grove.

At that time, the World Honored One addressed the bhikṣus: “That the craving for existence is the ultimate origin for it is unknowable. Or is there no craving for existence at the origin? But, there does presently arise this craving for existence.
(MA 51)

Malcolm wrote:
Ignorance is conditioned. Is buddhahood conditioned?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, January 31st, 2017 at 6:15 PM
Title: Re: Primordial Buddha: A Reprise
Content:


Coëmgenu said:
So the Lotus Sutra does still use the language of "attaining Buddhahood", which could be interpreted as to say that there exists a "beginning" to Buddhahood, that there existed a time when a being conventionally called Śākyamuni was not Buddha, but the wording of this sutra establishes the beginning of the Buddha's Buddhahood as without measure or limit. In short, according to the Lotus Sutra, there was never a time when the Buddha was not the Buddha, as the Buddha is established therein as beginningless.
But good men, it has been immeasurable, boundless hundreds, thousands, ten thousands, millions of nayutas of kalpas since I in fact attained buddhahood.

Malcolm wrote:
Thus means the person saying this was once an ordinary being.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, January 31st, 2017 at 5:43 AM
Title: Re: Primordial Buddha: A Reprise
Content:
Grigoris said:
My "realization" came during your post...

Basically it is quite simple:  if you take the Lotus Sutra as the only authoritative teaching by Shakyamuni Buddha and the commentary by Nichiren (for example) as the only authoritative commentary then you are going to arrive at a certain view.

Malcolm wrote:
A very narrow one.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, January 31st, 2017 at 5:12 AM
Title: Re: Primordial Buddha: A Reprise
Content:
Grigoris said:
I saw that already, but I don't see how it answers my question.

DGA said:
because there is at least one Buddhist school that upholds that there is a Primordial Buddha, and that said Buddha is Shakyamuni Buddha.

Malcolm wrote:
This of course is an extremely foolish, completely irrational, and indefensible doctrine.


DGA said:
Further, as reflected in the post above, if you disagree with this, then you are bringing an Indian Buddhist bias to bear on the improvements made upon Buddhist doctrine in East Asia.

Malcolm wrote:
The trials and tribulations of dealing with a multicultural Buddhist world...and Dzogchen practitioners in particular.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, January 31st, 2017 at 4:56 AM
Title: Re: Saddharmapuṇḍarīka & maṇipadme
Content:
Minobu said:
I always thought that Om was supposed to be the true sound or vibration of the Universe.

Malcolm wrote:
Oṃ simply means "auspicious."

Minobu said:
Then there is a school of thought that it is more AUM ...

Malcolm wrote:
Not in Buddhist texts.



Minobu said:
Then when I got into Nichiren Shonin's Dharma i thought they both have six syllables and they both talk of the lotus...

Malcolm wrote:
Pundarika is a white lotus; Padma is a red lotus. Different plants altogether.

Minobu said:
Thanks Malcolm.

So in Buddhist terms do the colour of the lotus blossoms have meaning

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, definitely. Padma shows that Avalokiteśvara belongs to the lotus family of buddhas and bodhisattvas. The Pundarika is a symbol of purity.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, January 31st, 2017 at 4:31 AM
Title: Re: Saddharmapuṇḍarīka & maṇipadme
Content:
Minobu said:
I always thought that Om was supposed to be the true sound or vibration of the Universe.

Malcolm wrote:
Oṃ simply means "auspicious."

Minobu said:
Then there is a school of thought that it is more AUM ...

Malcolm wrote:
Not in Buddhist texts.



Minobu said:
Then when I got into Nichiren Shonin's Dharma i thought they both have six syllables and they both talk of the lotus...

Malcolm wrote:
Pundarika is a white lotus; Padma is a red lotus. Different plants altogether.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, January 31st, 2017 at 4:25 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:
Vasana said:
For slightly more context, I recall Rinpoche saying something loosely along the lines of,

"Belief is useless in the Dzogchen teachings, it is discovery that is the most important."

This may not have been the exact phrase but 'belief' and 'discover' were definitely paired for contrast. As in, you can't Just believe or intellectualise your way to recognizing and stabilizing Rigpa since it has to be discovered in a concrete way beyond any doubts or fabrications.

Malcolm wrote:
He has made this point very often. And he does not only confine it to Dzogchen. He often says, "you can believe anything."


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, January 31st, 2017 at 4:24 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:


tiagolps said:
I have not seen his teachings but now I have a question. At what stage can one say that he has no beliefs if they are useless?

Malcolm wrote:
I will give you a simple example — I believe in rebirth but I do not know if it is true, and won't be able to find out if it is true until I have the capacity to be aware at some future moment during a time of death, the bardo, and the conception of my mindstream. However, my confidence in Dzogchen teachings is not based on a belief because I have confirmed them for myself experientially. This allows me to reasonably infer other Buddhist beliefs I have may be true, but they remain unconfirmed beliefs. So, one should be very diligent in distinguishing that which one knows as opposed to that which one simply believes.

tiagolps said:
Ahh I understand. Thanks acharya! So if one as not confirmed them for oneself experientially, then do they have any value?

Malcolm wrote:
They may or they may not.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, January 31st, 2017 at 3:41 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:


Lukeinaz said:
While of course there is no substitute for direct experience but cannot belief help until we get there?

For instance if we understand the benefits of practice and believe they are true we are more likely to follow the teachings.

Malcolm wrote:
One never knows whether or not a belief is true.

tiagolps said:
I have not seen his teachings but now I have a question. At what stage can one say that he has no beliefs if they are useless?

Malcolm wrote:
I will give you a simple example — I believe in rebirth but I do not know if it is true, and won't be able to find out if it is true until I have the capacity to be aware at some future moment during a time of death, the bardo, and the conception of my mindstream. However, my confidence in Dzogchen teachings is not based on a belief because I have confirmed them for myself experientially. This allows me to reasonably infer other Buddhist beliefs I have may be true, but they remain unconfirmed beliefs. So, one should be very diligent in distinguishing that which one knows as opposed to that which one simply believes.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, January 31st, 2017 at 3:21 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Belief is useless in any teaching; in general, it is useless in life.

Lukeinaz said:
While of course there is no substitute for direct experience but cannot belief help until we get there?

For instance if we understand the benefits of practice and believe they are true we are more likely to follow the teachings.

Malcolm wrote:
One never knows whether or not a belief is true.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, January 31st, 2017 at 3:09 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
"Belief is useless in dzogchen teaching."

I believe this is closer to what was said today.

How can I find more about the vajra position?  And then does one simply roll over and lay down?  Rinpoche used a word here that sounded like "narwop" when we recognize mind and the nature of mind.

Wonderful!
Belief is useless in any teaching; in general, it is useless in life.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, January 31st, 2017 at 2:43 AM
Title: Re: Documentation on Stupa building [Request]
Content:
javier.espinoza.t said:
Dear all,

Besides say hello, i would like to request formal documentation on stupa building. This is for a personal long-term proyect, as i would like to honor and thank the Buddhas of all directions through this as a public building open for all.

This is intended to exist on a major city in my country -about ten years from now- as a building where people can enter -inside-, but due that i don't know if there are specific instructions from Guru Padmasambhava or Buddha Sakyamunni or Mahasiddhas, i'm requesting such important information.

Also would like to say that this proyect is not intended as a lineage or school phiosophy form-like stupa, in this sense original -old like- information is very appreciated.

By now this project is in prefeasibility stage, so this is why i need this information related to the dimensions, materials, and essential elements needed in general.

Best regards.

Malcolm wrote:
You should ask Chogyal Namkhai Norbu, since you are part of the DC. You might think of making a Longsal stupa.

javier.espinoza.t said:
i came to the same conclusion haha. i wonder how to make crystal material construction possible. thank you M.

Malcolm wrote:
Well, the problem of course is that you cannot have an empty stupa. But they made a Longsal stupa in Romania.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, January 31st, 2017 at 2:15 AM
Title: Re: Primordial Buddha: A Reprise
Content:
Queequeg said:
In Dzogchen - is Samantabadra Adi-Buddha?

If so, then

How does Samantabadra relate to Manjusri in terms of AdiBuddha?

Malcolm wrote:
Mañjuśrī, Samantabhadra, Vajrasattva, Vairocana, cittavajra, tathāgatagarbha, prajñāpāramitā, mind-essence, ordinary mind, luminosity, emptiness, pristine consciousness, bodhicitta, etc., are all just synonyms for the same thing: one's own unfabricated mind. As Ju Mipham states:
That luminosity of the primordial original basis, the original reality, is the ultimate dharmatā of all phenomena. All appearances of samsara and nirvana arise from that state. As soon as they arise, [3/b] it is impossible that there is a single phenomena other than abiding in that state. Since this is the ultimate ground of liberation, this is called “the dharmakāya of ultimate reality.” When the ultimate obscuration along with temporary traces are purified, the truth of cessation of the supreme vehicle is called “the svabhāvakāya that possesses the two ultimate purities.” That basis in which there is neither delusion nor liberation is the totally uniform nature.
The Self-Arisen Vidyā Tantra states:

Everything is gathered into the essential state of Mañjuśrī, 
the pristine consciousness of all Secret Mantra,
the measure of the unerring transcendent state.
Therefore I am called the jñānasattva. 
Everything is part of the family
of Mañjuśrī no matter where it is, 
utterly pure, issuing from my state. 
I am the Bhagavan victor
But as Norbu Rinpoche said again today, belief is useless because you can believe or have faith in anything. Only direct experience is useful, because then a) you will not need to believe anything and b) you will have no doubt.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, January 31st, 2017 at 1:50 AM
Title: Re: Primordial Buddha: A Reprise
Content:
Queequeg said:
Following up on my post.

The Primordial Buddha's enlightenment being always positioned in the remote past - the corollary is that our enlightenment is infinitely in the future.

This is the relative sense.

The Primordial Buddha being "eternal", then opens the path for immediate enlightenment, also.

Malcolm wrote:
But there is no basis in sūtra for such an idea.

Queequeg said:
After years of trying to make a $ out of 99 cents, I think I have to agree with that, unless "reading between the lines" counts.


Malcolm wrote:
No, there is no reading between the lines in this.

The term ādibuddha canonically arrived with the Mañjuśrī-jñānasattvasya-paramārtha-nāma-saṃgīti, where the term adibuddha is used as a name for Mañjuśrī by Śākyamuni Buddha:
The adibuddha lacks a cause.
Garab Dorje define the phrase as follows:
"The adibuddha lacks a cause" means self-originated pristine consciousness
"Self-originated" here means something discovered within oneself, not something that was shown to one from outside.

Mañjuśrimitra explains the line as follows:
[Mañjuśrī] is the adibuddha because his identity from the first is dharmatā.
Vimalamitra explains the line in a more general sense, based on the passage that precedes:
If is asked how it is free from cause and condition,
since there is no beginning and end in buddhahood, 
the activity of the Buddhas of the three times,
the adibuddha lacks a cause—
the single eye of pristine consciousness is untainted.
He comments:
The activity of the buddhas of the buddhas of the three times is guiding sentient beings, but since there is no source for buddhahood in the beginning, nor a place to go in the end, it has no first cause.  Since the taints of dualistic grasping are absent in it, the eye of pristine consciousness is single.
Thus, in the text spoken by the Buddha, adibuddha refers not to a person, but rather to a principle.

The instance on the part of Nicherin Buddhists on Śākyamuni Buddha as "the adibuddha" misses the mark, in my opinion.

There are an 32 different writing on various aspects of this text attributed to Mañjuśrimitra alone out of a total of 79. It is probably the most commented upon tantra.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, January 31st, 2017 at 12:58 AM
Title: Re: Primordial Buddha: A Reprise
Content:
Queequeg said:
Following up on my post.

The Primordial Buddha's enlightenment being always positioned in the remote past - the corollary is that our enlightenment is infinitely in the future.

This is the relative sense.

The Primordial Buddha being "eternal", then opens the path for immediate enlightenment, also.

Malcolm wrote:
But there is no basis in sūtra for such an idea. The idea was obviously tossed around in India, but as noted above, Indians largely rejected it, in the pre-tantra period, including Vasubandhu.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, January 31st, 2017 at 12:56 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
"Belief is useless."

-- Chogyal Namkhai Norbu


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, January 31st, 2017 at 12:36 AM
Title: Re: Primordial Buddha: A Reprise
Content:


Malcolm wrote:
No. Also in the Lotus Sutra he explains that at one point he was an ordinary person.

DGA said:
It follows from a casual reading of the Lotus Sutra that if there is such a thing as Primordial Buddhahood, it must be something that inheres in ordinary persons, can be recognized by ordinary persons when pointed out to them by Buddhas who create situations in which such recognitions are made possible (see chapters 3-4), and is not limited to one historical personage (Shakyamuni Buddha).

correct or no?

Malcolm wrote:
First one would have to establish whether this sūtra actually teaches the idea of primordial buddhahood.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, January 31st, 2017 at 12:09 AM
Title: Re: Buddhahood in This Life
Content:
Marc said:
Hi Malcolm,

Pardon my asking again (I'm surprised no one else did):

Is there any update as regards to this possible Oral Transmission of Vimalamitra's Great Commentary ?

Many thanks in advance


Malcolm wrote:
It will happen in June.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, January 31st, 2017 at 12:09 AM
Title: Re: Documentation on Stupa building [Request]
Content:
javier.espinoza.t said:
Dear all,

Besides say hello, i would like to request formal documentation on stupa building. This is for a personal long-term proyect, as i would like to honor and thank the Buddhas of all directions through this as a public building open for all.

This is intended to exist on a major city in my country -about ten years from now- as a building where people can enter -inside-, but due that i don't know if there are specific instructions from Guru Padmasambhava or Buddha Sakyamunni or Mahasiddhas, i'm requesting such important information.

Also would like to say that this proyect is not intended as a lineage or school phiosophy form-like stupa, in this sense original -old like- information is very appreciated.

By now this project is in prefeasibility stage, so this is why i need this information related to the dimensions, materials, and essential elements needed in general.

Best regards.

Malcolm wrote:
You should ask Chogyal Namkhai Norbu, since you are part of the DC. You might think of making a Longsal stupa.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, January 31st, 2017 at 12:02 AM
Title: Re: Primordial Buddha: A Reprise
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
The term is much misunderstood with respect to Dzogchen teachings and also Vajrayāna.

DGA said:
...and entirely distinct from the notion that when Buddha Shakyamuni claims in the Lotus Sutra that his lifetime is really, really, really long (but still finite), that he really meant to say that his lifetime is eternal and primordial, correct?

Malcolm wrote:
No. Also in the Lotus Sutra he explains that at one point he was an ordinary person.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, January 30th, 2017 at 11:15 PM
Title: Re: Primordial Buddha: A Reprise
Content:
DGA said:
Depending on how you count, this is the second or third attempt to discuss this topic.

http://dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=53&t=23832

"Primordial Buddha" is a concept that is emphasized in different ways across Mahayana traditions.  It would be useful to put this concept in the context of Mahayana thought generally, and its various permutations.  It would also be useful to identify differing understandings or definitions of this concept, and instances in which this concept is not upheld at all.

Any takers?


Malcolm wrote:
Well, the term does not exist in sūtras, it is basically a tantric term.

The literal concept rejected by Mādhyamikas such as་Jayananda, (11th-12th century),  supported by Yogacara authors such as Ratnakaraśanti (who was also a contemporary of Naropa's at Nalanda).

The term is much misunderstood with respect to Dzogchen teachings and also Vajrayāna.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, January 30th, 2017 at 7:41 PM
Title: Re: Help! Ran into a problem with meditation
Content:
SoapBubble said:
I am now utterly convinced that the mind doesn't exist.

Malcolm wrote:
You need to observe the mind that cannot find its own nature. When you observe that, that is called "clarity."


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, January 30th, 2017 at 12:13 PM
Title: Re: what is whiteness? what is it to be "white" in the USA?
Content:
Zhen Li said:
I am not sure you really know what you are arguing for.

Malcolm wrote:
I am arguing for a universal, secular society based on humanist ethics. I think it is superior to any society based on any religious system.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, January 30th, 2017 at 12:04 PM
Title: Re: Mahamaya and Buddhakapala
Content:
conebeckham said:
Sakyapas have Gyepa Dorje and Naro Khachoma

Malcolm wrote:
In fact Lamdre has a collection of completion stage practices derived from the Guhyasamaja, Hevajra, and Cakrasamvara systems

Yogini in turn is based on Naropa's Kalacakra influenced presentation of Cakrasamvara completion stage practices.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, January 30th, 2017 at 12:01 PM
Title: Re: Mahamaya and Buddhakapala
Content:
Karma Jinpa said:
So basically this means that the yogic practices originate from those cycles of tantra, correct?

Malcolm wrote:
Yes.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, January 30th, 2017 at 7:56 AM
Title: Re: Karmic retribution
Content:
Minobu said:
your quotes are very beautiful, but once you declare The Lotus Sutra as something below a slice of bread you insult The Tathagata .

What goes on inside your head and your interpretations that suit your agendas....I see that now a little more clearly. Ego can be amazingly destructive Malcolm.

The Lotus Sutra states ,"I have not yet revealed the Truth " and then went on to teach us the Truth. All Sutras are then analyzed through the lens of the Lotus Sutra, not texts Malcolm likes. .

Malcolm wrote:
Correction, you analyze everything through the Lotus Sūtra. I feel no need. I do not find your hermeneutics or those of Tien Tai, etc., even slightly compelling.

I analyze all texts through the above criteria and that set forth in the Sandhivyākaraṇa Tantra:
The beautiful single vajra word
became many different words
through the differences in the inclinations of migrating beings.

Minobu said:
Fair enough , I don't . At the end of the day The Buddha's words in the Lotus Sutra states that you too will eventually attain Buddhahood. If thats your goal, you will have it . If it is not , you will have it.

love
d

Malcolm wrote:
The Ekayāna doctrine is not in doubt. Your limitation of it to one person's understanding in 13th century Japan is very much so.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, January 30th, 2017 at 4:09 AM
Title: Re: Nichiren on Who Went to Hell
Content:
Admin_PC said:
... yet his own corpse was burned the day after he died. Wonder why that is?

Malcolm wrote:
Poor guy. Bad move, it takes three days for consciousness to leave the body.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, January 30th, 2017 at 4:06 AM
Title: Re: Karmic retribution
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
So no, I do not actually base my Buddhist practice on any texts. But in terms of texts I like.

Minobu said:
your quotes are very beautiful, but once you declare The Lotus Sutra as something below a slice of bread you insult The Tathagata .

What goes on inside your head and your interpretations that suit your agendas....I see that now a little more clearly. Ego can be amazingly destructive Malcolm.

The Lotus Sutra states ,"I have not yet revealed the Truth " and then went on to teach us the Truth. All Sutras are then analyzed through the lens of the Lotus Sutra, not texts Malcolm likes. .

Malcolm wrote:
Correction, you analyze everything through the Lotus Sūtra. I feel no need. I do not find your hermeneutics or those of Tien Tai, etc., even slightly compelling.

I analyze all texts through the above criteria and that set forth in the Sandhivyākaraṇa Tantra:
The beautiful single vajra word
became many different words
through the differences in the inclinations of migrating beings.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, January 30th, 2017 at 3:07 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:
Karma_Yeshe said:
This secretarian attitude of some of ChNNs students is really annoying.

KY


Malcolm wrote:
Wanting all humans on this planet to receive Dzogchen teachings from ChNN is not sectarian. It is a very kind and generous thought.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, January 30th, 2017 at 3:05 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:
Johnny Dangerous said:
Can someone pm me about which rushens practice was being referred to in today's webcast, and if/where it might be found?


Malcolm wrote:
The text has not been translated yet. But it is very short, so I see no reason why it should not be released soon.

Anyway, these rushans are a little different than what is in the precious vase, but the latter are also perfectly fine to use.

Take good notes and you should be fine.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, January 30th, 2017 at 2:49 AM
Title: Re: Nichiren on Who Went to Hell
Content:
Minobu said:
I 'm aware that there are certain tricks people have learned to do at the point of death.
I'm sure that one would have to be fairly enlightened to them to actually enact them. Not your everyday buy the initiation and voila your set to go.



Malcolm wrote:
This is per Nāgārjuna, who observes that the dominant factor in throwing karma that determines your next rebirth is your state of mind at the moment of death.

Minobu said:
could you you show me where Lord Nagarjuna states this. As you know I thirst for knowledge from Lord Nagarjuna. anything more to add from this statement would be appreciated.


Malcolm wrote:
He states it very clearly in the MMK, karma chapter. He states that one's next rebirth is determined by the ripening of special karmic trace at the point of death.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, January 30th, 2017 at 2:45 AM
Title: Re: Karmic retribution
Content:


Minobu said:
Also like all Mahayana teachings that have power ,one should be careful in disparaging them.

Malcolm wrote:
The Lotus Sūtra is fine. I just don't think it is the best thing since sliced bread.

Minobu said:
so you don't base your Buddhist practice on the Sutras??? You ignore certain aspects They declare????

Malcolm wrote:
I base my practice on wisdom. In other words, the Buddha said:
Follow the Dharma, not the person.
Follow the meaning, not the words.
Follow the definitive meaning, not the provisional meaning.
Follow wisdom, not mind.
The definitive meaning is set forth by the Akṣayamatinirdeśa sūtra:
Any sūtrānta that explains a self, a sentient being, a living being, a human being, a person, a man, human, a creator, a feeler in so many words, which shows that which lacks a self to be a self, those sūtrāntas are called "the provisional meaning." 

Any sūtrānta that explains emptiness, signlessness, wishlessness, nonformation, nonarising, nonproduction, nonexistence, nonself, no sentient being, no living being, no person, no lord, and shows the gates of liberation, those sūtrāntas are called "the definitive meaning."
So no, I do not actually base my Buddhist practice on any texts. But in terms of texts I like, I prefer the sūtras that meet the criteria listed in about.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, January 30th, 2017 at 2:09 AM
Title: Re: Karmic retribution
Content:


Minobu said:
Also like all Mahayana teachings that have power ,one should be careful in disparaging them.

Malcolm wrote:
The Lotus Sūtra is fine. I just don't think it is the best thing since sliced bread.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, January 30th, 2017 at 1:56 AM
Title: Re: Nichiren on Who Went to Hell
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
This is per Nāgārjuna, who observes that the dominant factor in throwing karma that determines your next rebirth is your state of mind at the moment of death.

Minobu said:
could you you show me where Lord Nagarjuna states this. As you know I thirst for knowledge from Lord Nagarjuna. anything more to add from this statement would be appreciated. People should be very concerned with their state of mind at the moment death. Being in a state of anger or attachment at the moment of death can ruin a life of devout practice.
From a Lotus Buddhist perspective it is more important on how you lived your life .The experience at the last moments of death would not toss it all out the window from a  confused deathbed moment.

Malcolm wrote:
Yeah, actually it can. It has nothing do to with what kind if Buddhism you follow. It has to do with your state of mind at death.

Minobu said:
There can be great benefit in mummifying the bodies of great masters.
I never heard of this in Buddhism, how so ?

Malcolm wrote:
They are relics.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, January 30th, 2017 at 1:40 AM
Title: Re: (carefully) Broadcasting Dzogchen through music
Content:
dzogchungpa said:
Well, I know I will get in trouble for mentioning this...

Malcolm wrote:
Never seems to have stopped you before...


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, January 30th, 2017 at 1:24 AM
Title: Re: Karmic retribution
Content:


Queequeg said:
Uncompromisingly recognizing buddhahood in ourselves and all other beings and conducting ourselves accordingly is met with antagonism in this world. Enduring that antagonism, even at the cost of one's life, is the practice that immediately expiates karma. It is such a powerful practice that it overwhelms everything else, like a giant wave overwhelming ripples on the surface. This is exemplified by Sadaparibhuta (Never Disparaging). Nichiren practiced this.

Malcolm wrote:
There are much easier ways to eliminate all karma of taking rebirth in the six realms than experiencing intense austerity and suffering from antagonism.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, January 30th, 2017 at 1:01 AM
Title: Re: Question about processes
Content:
Khenpo Brothers said:
On the absolute level, phenomena have no substantial existence whatsoever; they are dependently arisen mere appearances, like reflections in a mirror.

rachmiel said:
So:

On the conventional level, the process of the earth revolving around the sun exists.

Malcolm wrote:
If you maintained that arising and dissolution of existents are indeed seen,
arising and dissolution are only seen because of delusion.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, January 30th, 2017 at 12:59 AM
Title: Re: Mahamaya and Buddhakapala
Content:
Karma Jinpa said:
The Shangpa Kagyu lineage propagates five tantras of the Anuttara yoga class, each tantra is considered the seminal expression of a principal sadhana:
Hévajra tantra is the zenith of candali (heat) yoga
Chakrasamvara tantra is the zenith of consort yoga (karma mudra)
Guhyasamaja tantra is the zenith of illusory body and clear light yogas
Mahamaya tantra is the zenith of dream yoga
Dorje Jigdzé is the zenith of enlightened action.

Malcolm wrote:
All this means is that each practice is found in the tantric cycles connected with each of these Yidams.

Thus, the main completion stage practice of Hevajra is Tummo, and so on.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, January 30th, 2017 at 12:45 AM
Title: Re: Nichiren on Who Went to Hell
Content:
Queequeg said:
Even a life of devout practice could be ruined by a moment of distress at death. .

Malcolm wrote:
This is per Nāgārjuna, who observes that the dominant factor in throwing karma that determines your next rebirth is your state of mind at the moment of death.

People should be very concerned with their state of mind at the moment death. Being in a state of anger or attachment at the moment of death can ruin a life of devout practice.

There can be great benefit in mummifying the bodies of great masters.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, January 29th, 2017 at 11:30 PM
Title: Re: what is whiteness? what is it to be "white" in the USA?
Content:
Zhen Li said:
They'll go to hell.

The Dharma is for benefit and welfare. There's no connection to anything I have said. You're just grasping at straws.

Malcolm wrote:
In reality, greg provided counterfactual evidence to your claim that people who ostensibly live under the Dharma are more likely to be virtuous.

In reality, there is little or no connection between the ideals a government claims it promulgates and what it actually does. Case in point, the USA.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, January 29th, 2017 at 6:13 PM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:
Norwegian said:
Looks like everything just went offline...


Malcolm wrote:
it is back up


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, January 29th, 2017 at 5:59 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:
Lukeinaz said:
Earlier this morning Rinpoche was using two terms I couldnt quite pick up.  From memory they are something like kudon and lungdza referring to our non-dual natural state.  Can someone please tell me the actual words he was using?  Thanks again!

Malcolm wrote:
Kadag, original purity, and lhundrup, self-perfection, in DC lingo.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, January 29th, 2017 at 5:33 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:
Norwegian said:
I was unable to attend today's teaching. Was transmission of any text given? Or will that begin tomorrow?

Malcolm wrote:
He discussed his dream connected with this transmission.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, January 29th, 2017 at 5:32 AM
Title: Re: Dorje Dudulma in Sanskrit
Content:
Karma Jinpa said:
Currently having trouble translating one of Machik's names (back) into Sanskrit.  Her form in Kechara is known as Dorje Dudulma ( rdo rje bdud 'dul ma ), but I can't find it rendered in Sanskrit in any of the texts I have.

It should be Vajramara_____ because dorje = vajra and dud = mara, but I can't figure out what "tamer" should be.  Anyone know the name, or have a decent command of Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit and care to help me out?

Thanks.


Malcolm wrote:
Based on Mahavyutpatti. it is Varjamārajit.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, January 29th, 2017 at 1:51 AM
Title: Re: Thun how long
Content:
migacz said:
god evening all and everywhere

i wolud like to ask how long should last one thun?

i mean: "THE PRACTICES OF THE BASE OF SANTIMAHASANGHA (One day  of  practice corresponds to four thuns.  If  you cannot do long
retreats, you can do the required number  of  thuns in a longer time according to
your own possibilities.)" from The Precious Vase, appendix.

3 hours x 4 =12 Am i right?

i'll be gratefull for any help.

Malcolm wrote:
A thun generally should last two hours. But it can be shorter, it depends on your time — don't force.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, January 28th, 2017 at 11:36 PM
Title: Re: what is whiteness? what is it to be "white" in the USA?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
You cannot found a nation on pañcaśīla. Nor can you enforce it. Pañcaśīla is for personal development, not a set of rules for a nation. Why? Because you cannot force people to take refuge, and without refuge, they do not possess pañcaśīla.

Zhen Li said:
If a large number of people in proportion to the population support the Dharma, that is better than otherwise.

Malcolm wrote:
You were born in the wrong country.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, January 28th, 2017 at 11:05 AM
Title: Re: what is whiteness? what is it to be "white" in the USA?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
You cannot found a nation on pañcaśīla. Nor can you enforce it. Pañcaśīla is for personal development, not a set of rules for a nation. Why? Because you cannot force people to take refuge, and without refuge, they do not possess pañcaśīla.

Grigoris said:
Well, Burma seems to be a nation trying to enforce this ideal, and we can clearly see the outcome of this sort of thinking.

Malcolm wrote:
Indeed.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, January 28th, 2017 at 6:49 AM
Title: Re: what is whiteness? what is it to be "white" in the USA?
Content:
Zhen Li said:
The sila taught by the Buddha does not necessarily lead to liberation. It can simply bring benefit and welfare in the here and now. I stand by the claim that the Buddha's ethics are the best, regardless of the motivation.

Malcolm wrote:
You cannot found a nation on pañcaśīla. Nor can you enforce it. Pañcaśīla is for personal development, not a set of rules for a nation. Why? Because you cannot force people to take refuge, and without refuge, they do not possess pañcaśīla.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, January 28th, 2017 at 6:34 AM
Title: Re: Difference in guru yogas
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
In Gelug, as in Sakya, your root guru is considered to be any person from whom you have received a major empowerment such as Kalackara, Hevajra, etc.

fckw said:
Out of curiosity: What about the Nyingmas and Kagyus?


Malcolm wrote:
The person from whom you understood the nature of the mind.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, January 28th, 2017 at 6:31 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:
Lukeinaz said:
Thank you Dharma Wheel friends!  I really enjoyed the teaching today so thanks for steering me over there.

He mentioned a short text by Sakya Pandita on Mahamudra.  Anyone know this?

Also, I thought I heard mention that our vows are only good for this life??

Malcolm wrote:
Hinayāna and Vajrayāna vows only last a single lifetime, since they are connected with the body.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, January 28th, 2017 at 6:29 AM
Title: Re: Nichiren on Who Went to Hell
Content:
Admin_PC said:
But the claims made; as recorded in the article, are personal. They consist of personal attacks against a long list of masters based on claims of insider knowledge and details given that neither match up to historical biographies nor academic fact. The claims that appear in the article simply cannot be defended.

Malcolm wrote:
An early practitioner of alternative facts, perhaps?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, January 28th, 2017 at 6:28 AM
Title: Re: Nichiren on Who Went to Hell
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
The prevalence of the three turnings ideas in Tibetan Buddhism comes from Korea, not India.

Queequeg said:
No kidding? That is interesting. How did it get from Korea to Tibet?

Malcolm wrote:
Through the Tibetan translation of a commentary on the Samdhinirmocana Sūtra written by Yüan-tse, the Chieh-shên-mi-ching-shu.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, January 28th, 2017 at 5:06 AM
Title: Re: Nichiren on Who Went to Hell
Content:


Queequeg said:
This has been a feature of Mahayana since the beginning, though. The first major distinction was between Hinayana and Mahayana. But even in the Nikaya/Agama there are differences in teaching for lay people and renunciates. Later you had the Three Turnings. Etc. This sort of analysis has its start in India. It took on its own life in East Asia.

Malcolm wrote:
In India, the three turnings had almost no play. It was of no importance. Again, it was East Asian Buddhists who took this up. The prevalence of the three turnings ideas in Tibetan Buddhism comes from Korea, not India.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, January 28th, 2017 at 5:01 AM
Title: Re: Chinese New Year one month before Tibetan this year??
Content:
topazdreamz said:
Why is the Chinese New Year celebrated tomorrow, but Tibetan New Year next month? Aren't they usually at the same time?


Malcolm wrote:
The Tibetan calendar has an extra month this year.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, January 28th, 2017 at 4:10 AM
Title: Re: Difference in guru yogas
Content:
SangyeMenladharma said:
Thank you Malcolm.
I have received many empowerments - most from different lamas. (Not those you mention though). Perhaps this is why I find it difficult to know who my root guru is.
I will stop practicing the lama chopa for now.
Thanks again.

Malcolm wrote:
In general, this is a very specific Gelug practice, and you should be able with some effort to find someone who can teach you it.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, January 28th, 2017 at 3:47 AM
Title: Re: Nichiren on Who Went to Hell
Content:
Queequeg said:
Following the East Asian Buddhist tradition of ranking sutras in terms of profundity, he put the Lotus Sutra in third place, below the Avatamsaka (2nd) and the Vairocana Sutra (iirc) first.

Admin_PC said:
Yeah but his premise of inauspicious signs on the body doesn't hold up for Kukai whatsoever.

Queequeg said:
Why? Because he's seated in eternal samadhi at Oku-no-in?

Nichiren's answer would be, "you can't believe what his followers tell you."

Malcolm wrote:
That is a blade that cuts both ways.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, January 28th, 2017 at 3:36 AM
Title: Re: Difference in guru yogas
Content:
SangyeMenladharma said:
Hi everyone, just registered with this forum. I've been a practicing buddhist since 2004 but am still unclear about Guru Yoga. Thanks for the info about the differences between lama chopa and lama tsongkhapa guru yoga. As an isolated practitioner I have been reciting the former at home but didn't realise it required HYT empowerment. Which I have not received by the way.  Sorry for my ignorance.
Also, who are we supposed to visualise in this sadhana? Who is the root guru? Who is 'my guru'? Are they both the same eg is one HH Dalai Lama and one the main teacher of the particular group I sometimes visit? Is it Buddha Shakyamuni, an archetype, or is it both mixed with Tsongkhapa? I am really confused.

Thanks in advance.

Malcolm wrote:
In Gelug, as in Sakya, your root guru is considered to be any person from whom you have received a major empowerment such as Kalackara, Hevajra, etc.

Without these kinds of empowerments, you are not authorized really to practice Lama Chodpa.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, January 28th, 2017 at 3:28 AM
Title: Re: Nichiren on Who Went to Hell
Content:


Queequeg said:
When talking about theory, what's not intellectual and contrived?

Malcolm wrote:
Direct perception.

Queequeg said:
Direct perception, though, is not theory, not intellectual, not contrived.

Malcolm wrote:
There is also a theory of the direct perception of buddhahood. The difference between intellectual theories about buddhahood and the theory of the direct perception of buddhadhood however is that the latter can be confirmed easily and the former can never be confirmed, ever.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, January 28th, 2017 at 2:29 AM
Title: Re: Nichiren on Who Went to Hell
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Seems all rather intellectual and contrived.

Queequeg said:
When talking about theory, what's not intellectual and contrived?

Malcolm wrote:
Direct perception.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, January 28th, 2017 at 2:04 AM
Title: Re: Nichiren on Who Went to Hell
Content:
Queequeg said:
This thread complements Pork Chop's thread on Kamakura Buddhism.

Yes, those texts are considered authentic. Some survive in his own hand.

You have to understand Nichiren's teaching to understand why he said these things. And he was vocal and untiring in his assertions.

His teachings are based on the Lotus Sutra and the Tiantai-Tendai teachings.

1. Nichiren asserted that a direct connection to the Buddha's enlightenment is the only real path to Buddhahood. Everything else, all upaya, if taken as a final path, is just a painful austerity.

2. The moment you hear the Buddha's name, ie. you are introduced to the real nature of the Buddha, whether you understand it or not, you are unalterably on the path to enlightenment. As the Avatamsaka Sutra explains, entering the path is fundamentally not different than achieving the goal. In the Tiantai-Tendai-Nichiren view, the Buddha is revealed in full, without expedients, only in the Lotus Sutra. Hence, the Lotus Sutra is the profoundest teaching. Everything else in comparison is upaya and coarse/unrefined/provisional.

3. For Nichiren, the field of endeavor of the Buddhist path is the saha world. Escape from the Saha world for Nichiren is a Phantom City. This is where the endeavor for Buddhahood plays out. This is the swamp from which the Lotus sprouts. Buddhahood is attained now,  in this body.

Nichiren's teaching is radically oriented to this moment. At the same time, understood through ichinen sanzen, this moment is the apex of the cosmos - the profoundest moment where enlightenment is achieved. Practice undertaken now in this moment is the awakening of enlightenment. This moment is THE crucial moment.

Any teaching that does not directly teach this immediate path is an upaya that is to be discarded in light of this teaching (its a little more refined than that - the revelation of the immediate path is said to transform expedients into the immediate path - opening the provisional to reveal the real). Teachers who obfuscate the immediacy of enlightenment lead people wrong, and are karmically culpable. Hence, the teachers he asserted fell into hell are in his view, people who who knew this immediate teaching but obfuscated the immediacy of enlightenment and caused people to waste this precious human life on fruitless austerities.

Malcolm wrote:
Seems all rather intellectual and contrived.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, January 27th, 2017 at 9:57 PM
Title: Re: what is whiteness? what is it to be "white" in the USA?
Content:
Zhen Li said:
I don't think that the Sangha should be councillors. However, the Dharma preserved and propagated by the Sangha can help us to overcome harmful emotions.

Malcolm wrote:
You have to drink the koolaid first. Not everyone is a Dharma practitioner, even in Buddhist countries. The Tibetans have a useful concept, mi chos and lha chos; mi chos, human Dharma, means secular ethics. They apply to everyone. Then there is lha chos, divine Dharma, this is the Dharma for dealing with afflictions and leads to eventual liberation.

But we have to start with mi chos.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, January 27th, 2017 at 10:43 AM
Title: Re: what is whiteness? what is it to be "white" in the USA?
Content:
Zhen Li said:
I don't think that there are foundations of societies. But I think that Buddhism is a moral framework that, when individuals or societies live up to it, results in benefit and welfare.

Malcolm wrote:
No system at all results in benefit and welfare. But we try.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, January 27th, 2017 at 4:16 AM
Title: Re: The left is no longer liberal
Content:
Johnny Dangerous said:
It's silly to accuse me of backing up the right wing

Malcolm wrote:
What I have noticed lately is an increasing number of left wing people poaching stereotypes from the right.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, January 27th, 2017 at 3:43 AM
Title: Re: The left is no longer liberal
Content:
YogaDude11 said:
People stayed home because of Hillary's undeniable crookedness. It should have been Sanders vs Trump, but Hillary made sure that would never happen.


Malcolm wrote:
Hillary's crookedness is quite deniable; in fact.

Apart from that, I agree with you it should have been Sanders vs. Trump. Sanders would have won.

But I don't think the people who stayed home would have turned out for another white guy either.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, January 27th, 2017 at 1:17 AM
Title: Re: Bön Ngöndro Free online course
Content:
Miroku said:
Hello,

just wanted to share an event. Chaphur rinpoche will be giving teachings on bön ngöndro and it will be via webcast.

Here is the link http://gyalshen.org/ngondro-practice-online/

Also I would like to ask about Chapthur rinpoche, does anybody here follow his teachings? I would like to know if you would recommend him as a teacher, he seems to be quite charming and interesting teacher and I am interested in following this teachings.

Also I would like to ask on the ngöndro. Does anybody know where the text can be bought? Or could someone tell me more into detail about bön ngöndro as it seems slightly different from other ngöndros.


Malcolm wrote:
I have met Chapur Rinpoche, and he is a very nice person.

Bon ngondro is basically the same as any other ngondro. No difference at all really.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, January 27th, 2017 at 1:15 AM
Title: Re: The left is no longer liberal
Content:



Johnny Dangerous said:
That is  a pretty reductionist view, I don't find that often on "the left" any more outside of classical Marxism or Communism.

How is the thread about Islam, other than the Majid Nawaaz etc. stuff?

Malcolm wrote:
Oh, because Fa Dao selected, tellingly, these two figures as a basis to complain about the SPLC.

There are a lot of white guys on the left, like Bernie, who don't get the identity thing at all (and you know I admire Bernie highly).

Johnny Dangerous said:
I don't think it's that they don't "get it", inasmuch as they are probably tired of seeing liberalism fail utterly because it cannot create a mass movement that's capable of responding to "Trumpism", precisely because liberalism is class-blind, by design. Trump successfully united White identity politics, nativism, and racism (if that ain't relevant to this thread, what is lol) with a working class message. As toxic and terrible as it is, the mainstream liberal establishment has nothing in response to this.

Malcolm wrote:
Trump won because people stayed home.


Johnny Dangerous said:
Dollars to donuts not only will you be disallowed from having a contrary opinion, but you will be shut down and called a racist for daring to believe that you can have common cause across racial lines, or that indeed you can share a struggle in common with "People of Color" without some obligatory means-testing.. This is the opposite of solidarity, which is what is needed right now, and yet, it is the kind of attitude that prevails among "liberals" and many who class themselves "progressive' even.

Malcolm wrote:
Sorry, but I live in one of the most liberal areas of the country, and I just do not see this stereotype as valid. In fact, it is a favorite republican stereotype and I am not sure why you think it is useful to reinforce it.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, January 27th, 2017 at 1:07 AM
Title: Re: what is whiteness? what is it to be "white" in the USA?
Content:
Zhen Li said:
I'm only speaking of ideals. But somewhere like Taiwan where Buddhism is deeply entrenched is clearly better for it.

Malcolm wrote:
Taiwan is hardly a model of a diverse society.

Zhen Li said:
You would be surprised. Besides the aborigines, of whom there are over 14 tribes, each of whom has different customs and rites, the "Chinese" population is very diverse.

Malcolm wrote:
Sorry, but half a million people out of 23 million does not make for a diverse culture.


Zhen Li said:
The Hakka, Hokkien, and the post WWII immigrants each have different sets of customs and languages, though there are many they share in common, like Chingming.

Malcolm wrote:
70 percent of Taiwan is made up of the so called Hoklo, the rest Hakka and Mainlanders. But in reality, they are all Han Chinese, albeit, different migrations


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, January 27th, 2017 at 12:38 AM
Title: Re: The left is no longer liberal
Content:


Johnny Dangerous said:
Huh? Classical Marxists deny the need at all for identity politics, whereas most other versions of Marxism see racial struggles as necessary, but only when connected to the working class struggle thing. I have never seen a Marxist saying that it should be addressed separately, if anything that is the dominant liberal position - that there is such a thing as an exclusive racial identity to organize around, that doesn't need to be connected to socioeconomic class.

For myself, I certainly see the need for groups like BLM doing what they do, but I think this very election was proof that "liberals" in the US don't get class, because a freaking billionaire scooby do villain just won the election partially because he injected working-class messages into his campaign and sadly, modern liberals politics are -SO- blind to such messages that they ignored it.

Not sure what point you are trying to make, don't mistake me for a "racism doesn't exist" person please, i can have my own opinion without falling into the category you expect.

Malcolm wrote:
Sorry, that was a typo, I mean to write, "does not need to be addressed separately from the question of class."

In other words, leftists need to understand that identity issues cannot be solved by addressing class only.


Johnny Dangerous said:
That is  a pretty reductionist view, I don't find that often on "the left" any more outside of classical Marxism or Communism.

How is the thread about Islam, other than the Majid Nawaaz etc. stuff?

Malcolm wrote:
Oh, because Fa Dao selected, tellingly, these two figures as a basis to complain about the SPLC.

There are a lot of white guys on the left, like Bernie, who don't get the identity thing at all (and you know I admire Bernie highly).


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, January 27th, 2017 at 12:27 AM
Title: Re: The left is no longer liberal
Content:


Malcolm wrote:
Social justice is linked with class. But it does not help anyone to pretend, as many white people on the left do (mainly Marxists), that identity, whether gender or racial, needs to be addressed separately from the question of class.

Johnny Dangerous said:
Huh? Classical Marxists deny the need at all for identity politics, whereas most other versions of Marxism see racial struggles as necessary, but only when connected to the working class struggle thing. I have never seen a Marxist saying that it should be addressed separately, if anything that is the dominant liberal position - that there is such a thing as an exclusive racial identity to organize around, that doesn't need to be connected to socioeconomic class.

For myself, I certainly see the need for groups like BLM doing what they do, but I think this very election was proof that "liberals" in the US don't get class, because a freaking billionaire scooby do villain just won the election partially because he injected working-class messages into his campaign and sadly, modern liberals politics are -SO- blind to such messages that they ignored it.

Not sure what point you are trying to make, don't mistake me for a "racism doesn't exist" person please, i can have my own opinion without falling into the category you expect.

Malcolm wrote:
Sorry, that was a typo, I mean to write, "does not need to be addressed separately from the question of class."

In other words, leftists need to understand that identity issues cannot be solved by addressing class only. And yes, identity alone can be organized around,  such as civil rights, women's movement, and so on. Class struggles did not address the issues facing these identities.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, January 27th, 2017 at 12:26 AM
Title: Re: The left is no longer liberal
Content:


Johnny Dangerous said:
Yes, that was an awful mistake, the SPLC is like ADL and other "anti discrimination" groups in some ways, in that they often lack any nuance to their decisions, and spend too much time "shaming" rather than actively working against racism, making good arguments etc.

Malcolm wrote:
What? Don't be silly. SPLC is excellent. Maajid Nawaz is on their list because he has a questionable history and has connections with Frank Gaffney.

https://medium.com/insurge-intelligence/donald-trump-s-trojan-horse-in-britain-bdb40f7d1867#.8ta22tay6, as does Hursi Ali.

I am sorry, but this thread is just seems to be a pretext for our friend Fa Dao to exercise his aversion to Islam. And you, JD, just fell for it, hook, line, and sinker.


Johnny Dangerous said:
I didn't fall for anything, I follow Maajid Nawaaz and think he occasionally says some decent stuff, and think that indeed the SPLC is a bit of a boneheaded organization from time to time, though I appreciate their work, especially in these times.

It is possible you know, to critique someone with complete condemnation, and still appreciate what they do.  Islam has yet to be brought into the conversation in anything but the context of Ayaan Hirsi Ali or Nawaaz, so please do not somehow accuse me of "falling for" something simply because I'm willing to critique the SPLC.

Here's an article on the happening for anyone who is interested:

http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2016/10/maajid-nawaz-splc-anti-muslim-extremist/505685/

Malcolm wrote:
This thread is not really about liberals or identity politics. It's about, and boringly so, Islam.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, January 27th, 2017 at 12:14 AM
Title: Re: The left is no longer liberal
Content:


Johnny Dangerous said:
A big fat straw man. I didn't say racism doesn't exist, nor that discrimination based on it is unimportant. I'm very aware of just the sort of thing you're talking about.

I said liberals generally don't talk about class, and that their politics hinge on not acknowledging it.

Malcolm wrote:
No, you've confused liberals with conservatives.


Johnny Dangerous said:
The basic idea that our society can be made into some sort of a "fairer" meritocracy with total class mobility and racial justice is a mainstream liberal position, this is the reason that somehow things like how many female CEO's we have can be equated in the minds of some with actual struggles for racial justice of oppressed people.

Malcolm wrote:
No, this is just a measure of how few women CEOs there are in fact.


Johnny Dangerous said:
Whereas, someone on "the left" proper generally sees that racial justice and class are deeply linked, and that it is not possible to have the kind of racial justice that liberals want under the structures of system as they stand now. Lots of different viewpoints in that continuum, but I think that's the case.

Malcolm wrote:
Social justice is linked with class. But it does not help anyone to pretend, as many white people on the left do (mainly Marxists), that identity, whether gender or racial, needs to be addressed separately from the question of class.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, January 27th, 2017 at 12:09 AM
Title: Re: The left is no longer liberal
Content:
Fa Dao said:
JD,
and how about the part where he talks about Majid and Ayan Hursi Ali being put on the SPLC's list? Unbelievable, right?

Johnny Dangerous said:
Yes, that was an awful mistake, the SPLC is like ADL and other "anti discrimination" groups in some ways, in that they often lack any nuance to their decisions, and spend too much time "shaming" rather than actively working against racism, making good arguments etc.

Malcolm wrote:
What? Don't be silly. SPLC is excellent. Maajid Nawaz is on their list because he has a questionable history and has connections with Frank Gaffney.

https://medium.com/insurge-intelligence/donald-trump-s-trojan-horse-in-britain-bdb40f7d1867#.8ta22tay6.

So does Hursi Ali.

I am sorry, but this thread is just seems to be a pretext for our friend Fa Dao to exercise his aversion to Islam. And you, JD, just fell for it, hook, line, and sinker.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, January 26th, 2017 at 11:08 PM
Title: Re: Attaining Full Enlightenment During an Empowernment
Content:
naljor said:
What kind of practice is precisely Thig le rgya can? Is it Anuyoga?

Malcolm wrote:
The practice itself is an anuyoga level guru sadhana. It originally had no empowerment. Khyentse Wangpo wrote one, however.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, January 26th, 2017 at 10:16 PM
Title: Re: The left is no longer liberal
Content:
Johnny Dangerous said:
because liberalism refuses to acknowledge class, and identity politics is a fantastic way of avoiding conversations on class entirely.

Malcolm wrote:
This is nonsense. For example, you have Sanders. One reason Sanders lost was because of his inability to understand racism was not a class issue, it was an identity issue. Why? Because among the working class, certain groups have always been isolated because of their identity. For example, Italian socialists returning from the US were upset with the German domination of Socialism in the US. This actually informed the rise of Fascism in Italy. African-Americans have been historically marginalized among so called "working class people" because of their race. Indeed, during the 18th century, laws were established in many southern colonies to advantage poor whites over blacks in order to prevent them from uniting against the wealthy in those colonies.

The best way to deny someone's civil rights is to claim their identity does not matter. For example, the campaign to legally eliminate American Indian Tribes in the late 19th century.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, January 26th, 2017 at 10:05 PM
Title: Re: The left is no longer liberal
Content:
Fa Dao said:
JD,
and how about the part where he talks about Majid and Ayan Hursi Ali being put on the SPLC's list? Unbelievable, right?
Born Ayaan Hirsi Magam, she migrated to the Netherlands in 1992, changed her name to Hirsi Ali, and lied to Dutch authorities about her past. Contrary to the story she told the government, she arrived in the Netherlands not from war-torn Somalia, but from Kenya, where she lived in a secure environment and under the protection of the United Nations, which funded her education at a well-regarded Muslim girls’ school. Though she told immigration authorities and the Dutch public she had fled from civil war in Somalia, she left that country before its war broke out. Indeed, she did not live through a war there or anywhere else. Thanks to her fabrications, Hirsi Ali received political asylum in just five weeks.

Hirsi Ali told astonished audiences on Dutch talk shows that her supposedly devout family had forced her to marry a draconian Muslim man, that she had not been present at her own wedding, and that her family had threatened to kill her for offending their religious honor. However, Zembla told a drastically different story. Hirsi Ali’s brother, aunt and former husband each testified that she had indeed been present at her wedding. It turned out that Hirsi Ali’s mother had sent her brother to a Christian school, not exactly an indication of Islamic fanaticism.

Malcolm wrote:
http://www.alternet.org/media/anti-islam-author-ayaan-hirsi-alis-latest-deception


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, January 26th, 2017 at 9:45 PM
Title: Re: what is whiteness? what is it to be "white" in the USA?
Content:
Zhen Li said:
[
I believe the ideal country is one run in accordance with the Dharma, and where the state supports the Sangha. The secular-religious divide is a western and protestant originated one.

Malcolm wrote:
And I think that it is entirely regressive to imagine any religious system can constitute a basis for governing a diverse, multicultural country.

Zhen Li said:
I'm only speaking of ideals. But somewhere like Taiwan where Buddhism is deeply entrenched is clearly better for it.

Malcolm wrote:
Taiwan is hardly a model of a diverse society.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, January 26th, 2017 at 11:22 AM
Title: Re: Dalai Lama about non sectarian approach towards Buddhist study and practice.
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
No, everything else, whether more or less rapid, sūtra or tantra, ends where Dzogchen begins.
Facts do not rely on consensus.

HHDL said:
The fact that both the fundamental innate mind of clear light in the new translation schools Highest Yoga Tantra, and the pristine awareness of rigpa in the Dzogchen teachings, ultimately comes down to the same meaning can be found in the writings of Longchen Rabjam, and in Jikme (sic) Lingpa's commentary to his own "Treasury of Enlightened Attributes". You can also find the same point in the writings of the 5th Dalai Lama...

smcj said:
You are engaging in "alternative facts".


Malcolm wrote:
Not at all. I agree with HHDL. I also stand by what I said, "everything else, whether more or less rapid, sūtra or tantra, ends where Dzogchen begins."


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, January 26th, 2017 at 10:48 AM
Title: Re: Dalai Lama about non sectarian approach towards Buddhist study and practice.
Content:
smcj said:
FWIW, to me that does make it unique, but not "better" or "higher". It still ends up at the same place.

Malcolm wrote:
No, everything else, whether more or less rapid, sūtra or tantra, ends where Dzogchen begins. That's the point. And one can begin with Dzogchen. Anyone  who is interested, that is. The reason I insist upon this is to assist people with a previous disposition for Dzogchen teachings to pursue them without fear of or thinking they need to follow some gradual path. I am thinking of those people's benefit, not my own. My own benefit is quite secure.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, January 26th, 2017 at 10:45 AM
Title: Re: Dalai Lama about non sectarian approach towards Buddhist study and practice.
Content:
smcj said:
However there is not universal consensus...

Malcolm wrote:
Facts do not rely on consensus.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, January 26th, 2017 at 5:37 AM
Title: Re: Dalai Lama about non sectarian approach towards Buddhist study and practice.
Content:
Grigoris said:
Again, I must draw attention to the motivation of those opposed to the idea of non-sectarianism as espoused by His Holiness.  If the motivation is merely to oppose everything said by HHDL merely on ideological grounds, rather than to do so based on logic and fact then intelligent discussion is not going to be of all that much benefit.

anjali said:
Yes, indeed. Nicely said.

Grigoris said:
The shortcomings of TSF's position have been refuted using on logic and fact and yet...

anjali said:
...as long as any member doesn't violate the terms of service (in particular, "No putting down of other traditions or elevating one above the other, except within the Forum of the tradition in which such teachings are taught." And there are others) people are free to remain, even in the face of logical defeat.

Malcolm wrote:
Just as you cannot put down nor elevate the peak of a mountain, you cannot put down nor elevate Dzogchen. All one can do is claim the peak is not there when it is obscured from view by the clouds of one's own ignorance.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, January 26th, 2017 at 5:30 AM
Title: Re: what is whiteness? what is it to be "white" in the USA?
Content:
Zhen Li said:
[
I believe the ideal country is one run in accordance with the Dharma, and where the state supports the Sangha. The secular-religious divide is a western and protestant originated one.

Malcolm wrote:
And I think that it is entirely regressive to imagine any religious system can constitute a basis for governing a diverse, multicultural country.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, January 26th, 2017 at 5:27 AM
Title: Re: Dalai Lama about non sectarian approach towards Buddhist study and practice.
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
...

anjali said:
Since this is a thread about "non sectarian approach towards Buddhist study and practice"...

I suspect there are a number of Buddhists who do not accept the truth claims of at least some of your statements about Dzogchen. Does that make them inherently sectarian?

Malcolm wrote:
Yes.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, January 26th, 2017 at 3:07 AM
Title: Re: Dalai Lama about non sectarian approach towards Buddhist study and practice.
Content:
anjali said:
All, once again, a few posts have been removed which have contributed nothing to the topic. Sadly, this topic is very close to becoming permanently locked. For now, the thread will be reopened. 

Staying open will require posters to focus on the quality of their arguments. Respond to the substance of a post with substance. Ignore everything else. That shouldn't be too much to ask, for moving forward. If you are unwilling to engage is constructive discussion and debate, then it's ok to agree to disagree and bow out of the discussion.


Malcolm wrote:
TKF's reliance on "alternative facts" is a legitimate point.

anjali said:
If something is stated as a fact, that fact can, and should, be subject to verification. That's part of good argumentation. If everyone keeps it at that level, no problem. Stay on topic, respond with substance.

Malcolm wrote:
It is a fact. Just review his claims and my claims. My claims are factual, his claims are not. For example, he claims that Dzogchen is not part of Tsongkhapa's oeuvre. This is false. It is.

He claims that Dzogchen is not a valid Buddhist teaching. Again, this is false, since there are at least two major tantras in the bka'  'gyur that are either Dzogchen tantras or mention Dzogchen. In addition we have many texts by Padmasambhava and so which refute this claim.


He claims that Dzogchen is not the teaching of Śākyamuni. Again false. Śākyamuni is one of the 12 Buddhas who taught Dzogchen either directly or indirectly.

It is also a fact that Dzogchen is highest teaching of the Buddha there is. Just read the Kulayarāja tantra.

TKF has promulgated a cascade of false assertions about Dzogchen, many of them for some years. He has never been challenged on the facts of these claims by anyone administering this board.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, January 26th, 2017 at 2:28 AM
Title: Re: Dalai Lama about non sectarian approach towards Buddhist study and practice.
Content:
anjali said:
All, once again, a few posts have been removed which have contributed nothing to the topic. Sadly, this topic is very close to becoming permanently locked. For now, the thread will be reopened. 

Staying open will require posters to focus on the quality of their arguments. Respond to the substance of a post with substance. Ignore everything else. That shouldn't be too much to ask, for moving forward. If you are unwilling to engage is constructive discussion and debate, then it's ok to agree to disagree and bow out of the discussion.


Malcolm wrote:
TKF's reliance on "alternative facts" is a legitimate point.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, January 25th, 2017 at 11:11 PM
Title: Re: Dalai Lama about non sectarian approach towards Buddhist study and practice.
Content:
Matt J said:
Why is it okay for people to be triumphalist about Dzogchen, but other traditions cannot be similarly triumphalist about their highest teachings?

Malcolm wrote:
Dzogchen isn't triumphalist.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, January 25th, 2017 at 10:54 PM
Title: Re: Dalai Lama about non sectarian approach towards Buddhist study and practice.
Content:
Tsongkhapafan said:
Thank you, you make a valid point. I was simply rebuffing the view that Dzogchen is the highest...

Malcolm wrote:
Likewise, Śrāvakas rebuff the idea that Mahāyāna is higher. So what? Your rebuttal is groundless, since it based neither in scripture nor in reason, just like the Śrāvaka rebuttal of Mahāyāna.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, January 25th, 2017 at 10:50 PM
Title: Re: Dalai Lama about non sectarian approach towards Buddhist study and practice.
Content:
DGA said:
By the way, Lama Tsongkhapa was right to approve of Dzogchen.  I notice that you've yet to show that Je Tsongkhapa disapproved of it.

Tsongkhapafan said:
There's no evidence that Je Tsongkhapa approved of Dzogchen

Malcolm wrote:
Yes there is, it is found in his collected works. For you to continuously deny this is nothing short of astonishing.

Tsongkhapafan said:
and it clearly isn't part of the teachings of Buddha Shakyamuni/Buddha Vajradhara

Malcolm wrote:
It clearly is part of the teaching of Śakyamiuni/Vajradhara since Dzogchen is found in the Guhyagarbha Tantra, in addition to the fact that Kulyarāja Tantra, one of the fundamental tantras of Dzogchen, is found in all editions of the bKa' 'gyur, along with the Guhyagarbha.

Tsongkhapafan said:
- it wasn't part of the original 'revelation' of Buddhism at the time of Buddha Shakyamuni but that's beside the point; he didn't teach it because it is unnecessary in his system.

Malcolm wrote:
Śākyamuni Buddha predicted the advent of Dzogchen, therefore, it is part of the original "revelation" of Buddhism at the time of Śākyamuni. Not only this, but if it was not part of Śākyamuni's teachings, for what reason then are the two tantras mentioned above found in all editions of the Bka' 'gyur?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, January 25th, 2017 at 4:35 AM
Title: Re: Dalai Lama about non sectarian approach towards Buddhist study and practice.
Content:
Virgo said:
You would think that if people can accept tantras, that they would accept Dzoghen tantras as well.

Kevin

Tsongkhapafan said:
No, because Dzogchen contradicts Highest Yoga Tantra and HYT is Buddha's highest teaching and ultimate intention.

conebeckham said:
Making such assertions without being able to back them up is a textbook illustration of Sectarian attitude.


Malcolm wrote:
[Edit] After all, Atisha found the original Sanskrit copy of the Guhyagarbha Tantra at Samye. The Guhyagarbha clearly mentions Dzogchen. No one can deny this, just as no one can deny that Dzogchen comes from Oḍḍiyāna via India.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, January 25th, 2017 at 2:39 AM
Title: Re: Attaining Full Enlightenment During an Empowernment
Content:
DGA said:
is there not at least one major empowerment that includes, in a recognizable if not necessarily named way, direct introduction?

Malcolm wrote:
The fourth empowerment is similar to direct introduction. However, rig pa'i rtsal dbangs are generally more detailed and clear than fourth empowerments. They also do not depend on the experience of small bliss received in the third empowerment.

conebeckham said:
In the Rinchen Terdzo there is a section of Ati empowerments.  However, there are also Rigpai Tselwangs in cycles not included in this section, if I recall?  For example, LaDrup Tigle GyaChen?

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, the rig pa'i rtsal dbang in the Thig le rgya can is fairly extensive, etc. But by contrast, the most unelaborate empowerment in the Khandro Nyinthig is pretty concise and brief.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, January 25th, 2017 at 2:34 AM
Title: Re: Dalai Lama about non sectarian approach towards Buddhist study and practice.
Content:


Tsongkhapafan said:
Shantideva didn't teach or practise Dzogchen. He practised Highest Yoga Tantra, particularly meditating on emptiness with a very subtle mind of clear light during sleep.


Malcolm wrote:
You missed the point. The principle is the same, the ultimate of the lower is the relative of the higher.

But since you don't know anything at all about Dzogchen teachings, it is very foolish for you to continually condemn it, especially since Tsongkhapa clearly accepted it.

If you say that Dzogchen contradicts Highest Yoga Tantra, there is no fault since Madhyamaka contradicts Yogacara. Just as Yogacara is lower than Madhyamaka, likewise, Highest Yoga Tantra is lower than Dzogchen. Just as Kriya tantra is lower than carya, carya is lower than yoga, and yoga tantra is lower than annutarayoga tantra, etc, likewise, in general, highest yoga tantra belongs to what is termed in Nyingma tantras as mahāyoga. But there are two more categories of tantra higher than mahāyoga (to which Guhysamaja, etc., belong), i.e. anuyoga and atiyoga (Dzogchen).

In general, all of the creation and completion practice of the Sarma schools is confined to mahāyoga. Anuyoga focuses mainly on completion stage practice. Atiyoga is beyond both.

conebeckham said:
Atiyoga is beyond both, I agree.  However, it also can "include" all the vehicles, provided one has the instructions on how to approach things like creation and completion from the POV of Dzogchen.  In fact, Mahamudra can also include such things.  One needs to obtain and understand the instructions regarding how this is done, however.   Agreed?

Malcolm wrote:
There are direct and indirect approaches to the state of Dzogchen. The two stages are part of the indirect approach. The direct approach does not require either.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, January 25th, 2017 at 2:02 AM
Title: Re: Dalai Lama about non sectarian approach towards Buddhist study and practice.
Content:


Tsongkhapafan said:
No, because Dzogchen contradicts Highest Yoga Tantra and HYT is Buddha's highest teaching and ultimate intention.

Malcolm wrote:
As Santideva says, the ultimate of the lower (in this case the two stages) is the relative of the higher (i.e. Dzogchen).

Tsongkhapafan said:
Shantideva didn't teach or practise Dzogchen. He practised Highest Yoga Tantra, particularly meditating on emptiness with a very subtle mind of clear light during sleep.


Malcolm wrote:
You missed the point. The principle is the same, the ultimate of the lower is the relative of the higher.

But since you don't know anything at all about Dzogchen teachings, it is very foolish for you to continually condemn it, especially since Tsongkhapa clearly accepted it.

If you say that Dzogchen contradicts Highest Yoga Tantra, there is no fault since Madhyamaka contradicts Yogacara. Just as Yogacara is lower than Madhyamaka, likewise, Highest Yoga Tantra is lower than Dzogchen. Just as Kriya tantra is lower than carya, carya is lower than yoga, and yoga tantra is lower than annutarayoga tantra, etc, likewise, in general, highest yoga tantra belongs to what is termed in Nyingma tantras as mahāyoga. But there are two more categories of tantra higher than mahāyoga (to which Guhysamaja, etc., belong), i.e. anuyoga and atiyoga (Dzogchen).

In general, all of the creation and completion practice of the Sarma schools is confined to mahāyoga. Anuyoga focuses mainly on completion stage practice. Atiyoga is beyond both.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, January 25th, 2017 at 1:36 AM
Title: Re: Dalai Lama about non sectarian approach towards Buddhist study and practice.
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Why does this matter? Because all the Rime Lamas and lineage holders hold Dzogchen as their main practice, including HH Dalai Lama. Why? Because Dzogchen is more profound than other teachings.

Virgo said:
You would think that if people can accept tantras, that they would accept Dzoghen tantras as well.

Kevin

Tsongkhapafan said:
No, because Dzogchen contradicts Highest Yoga Tantra and HYT is Buddha's highest teaching and ultimate intention.

Malcolm wrote:
As Santideva says, the ultimate of the lower (in this case the two stages) is the relative of the higher (i.e. Dzogchen).


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, January 25th, 2017 at 12:50 AM
Title: Re: Dalai Lama about non sectarian approach towards Buddhist study and practice.
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Why does this matter? Because all the Rime Lamas and lineage holders hold Dzogchen as their main practice, including HH Dalai Lama. Why? Because Dzogchen is more profound than other teachings.

Virgo said:
You would think that if people can accept tantras, that they would accept Dzoghen tantras as well.

Kevin

Malcolm wrote:
I know, it is sad. For examples, Gelugpas in general reject treasures, but then get giddy over things like the Ganden Miraculous Volume, etc. Sakyas who reject treasures accept such things as Tsembupa's Pure Vision, Thangthogn Gyalpo and so on.

Even Kongtrul for a time when through a period when he rejected the treasure tradition.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, January 25th, 2017 at 12:05 AM
Title: Re: Hope!
Content:
tingdzin said:
Now some of the same attitude is appearing on the left.

Malcolm wrote:
Appropriately so.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, January 24th, 2017 at 11:51 PM
Title: Re: Attaining Full Enlightenment During an Empowernment
Content:
DGA said:
is there not at least one major empowerment that includes, in a recognizable if not necessarily named way, direct introduction?

Malcolm wrote:
The fourth empowerment is similar to direct introduction. However, rig pa'i rtsal dbangs are generally more detailed and clear than fourth empowerments. They also do not depend on the experience of small bliss received in the third empowerment.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, January 24th, 2017 at 11:49 PM
Title: Re: Dalai Lama about non sectarian approach towards Buddhist study and practice.
Content:


conebeckham said:
I think it's fair to say that the "Rimay Movement" as we know it...

Malcolm wrote:
was started by three Khampas who were primarily interested in Dzogchen teachings and treasure revelation.

conebeckham said:
Well, yes--as I said.  But Kongtrul, in particular, was concerned that other lineages be preserved.  Shije, Chod-Yul, Orgyen Nyendrup, Shangpa Kagyu, Jonang instructions, would all be far less "sturdy" without his work, and the inspiration of Jamyang Khyentse, his teacher and friend.

Malcolm wrote:
Kongtrul was actually told by Khyentse to write the five treasures. It was not his idea.

Basically, Khyentse understood that without compiling these teachings in one place, they would be lost.

Khyentse's own personal project was preserving all the major Sarma empowerment lineages as well as the the sadhana lineages which have come down through Sakya in the rgyud sde kun 'dus and the sgrub thabs kun 'dus.

But when we look at what Khyentse, Kongtrul and Choling were most interested in, they were most interested in Dzogchen teachings, treasures and their revelation.

Why does this matter? Because all the Rime Lamas and lineage holders hold Dzogchen as their main practice, including HH Dalai Lama. Why? Because Dzogchen is more profound than other teachings.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, January 24th, 2017 at 11:24 PM
Title: Re: Attaining Full Enlightenment During an Empowernment
Content:
Virgo said:
Through Dzogchen teachings and practice we can have the experience of rigpa.  But then we can also have dualistic vision afterwards.  We are not  fully enlightened at that point.  What I am talking about here is someone who is in a state of mahamudra 24/7 full Buddhahood.



Kevin

javier.espinoza.t said:
if mahamudra is your target, i'm tempted to say yes. but i don't know...

Virgo said:
Javier, I am talking about a person who has a human body.  They are receiving an empowerment like Cakramasvara, and they are becoming Full Buddhas on the spot.  How is that possible?  They still have a human body with chanells which cause the experience of the human realm, so how can they possibly experience rigpa 24/7 until they are Buddhas?  This is what I am asking. They may be able to have an experience of enlightenment for a fingersnap at times, but not 24/7.  They have a human body here and now.

Kevin


Malcolm wrote:
The process of empowerment transforms the human body through dependent origination. Sadhana is for those who do not obtain buddhahood during the empowerment.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, January 24th, 2017 at 11:02 PM
Title: Re: Dalai Lama about non sectarian approach towards Buddhist study and practice.
Content:
michaelb said:
HH Dalai Lama mentions three Nyingma lamas: Kunkhyen Longchenpa, Kunkhyen Jigme Ling and Dodrupchen Tenpai Nyima.

Malcolm wrote:
The first master is quite impossible. Longchenpa passed away in 1364. Tsongkhapa was born in 1357.

It is true however that Jigme Lingpa's presentation of Madhyamaka is more or less copied word by word from Tsongkhapa's texts, and Dodrupchen Monastery is in a part of Amdo which is mainly Gelug.

It is also important to note that both JIgme Lingpa and Dodrupchen understood the limits of Madhyamaka, and in fact, Dodrupchen Tenpay Nyima attacks the Gelug Madhyamaka by pointing out some contradictions that emerge in Vajrayāna practice if one tries to apply Gelug Madhyamaka view.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, January 24th, 2017 at 10:43 PM
Title: Re: what is whiteness? what is it to be "white" in the USA?
Content:
Grigoris said:
Damn those rich white people in positions of power have a hard time. I really pity them...

Zhen Li said:
We were not debating whether someone is pitiable or not, we were debating the presence of privileges and or discriminations. The issues I addressed were not taken up by anyone except Malcolm. There is no point being childish about this.
Malcolm wrote:
This has at least two false assumptions — 1) that grades are scored objectively across all school systems 2) that someone with an A is necessary more qualified for a given position than someone who gained a lower score.

Zhen Li said:
I only know of one post-secondary school that takes into account grade inflation in certain school districts. As regards qualifications based on grades, this is typically a question of grade cut offs based on SAT scores in the US or overall averages in Canada. After that, references and writing samples are typically of most importance. So, this is a question of the cut offs, which may be quite competitive for some schools.

Malcolm wrote:
It is demonstrable that white children in the US overwhelmingly have better access to educational resources than children of color without the corollary that white children are any more intelligent than children of color. Since this is so, passing over a white child for admission to school X will demonstrably affect that child less in comparison to the advantage conferred to the child of color in question. In other words, affirmative action measures are fair as long as there is no equitable federal standards and funding for public schools across all districts.

Education is a right, not a privilege.
Agreed, on a certain level. But I said that education of my children by me would be a privilege. Not all children have the right to be educated by me. Education is a right, but education in two languages of a choice is a privilege.
Not a big fan of home schooling or charter schools.
On another level, all rights are just guarantees made by the state, or by a number of states when the right in question is based upon some decision at, for instance, the UN level. There is no underlying reason for a right to be guaranteed other than that it is viewed to be ideal. This is why, ultimately, we must depend upon something like the Dharma to give us a foundational reason for these things.
Rights are inalienable. That means they are intrinsic to persons.

The Dharma is a religious perspective. As such, it has no business in secular affairs.

Not being discriminated against is certainly a privilege,
No, it is a right.
Not so. Schools may, if they choose, be boys only or girls only schools. That is a form of discrimination. Is it necessarily a bad thing? No. It is done because many consider it beneficial to education. Similarly, there are often laws prohibiting men from using a women's lavatory. This is discrimination, but it makes sense. Freedom from discrimination is not, inherently, a right. In many cases, however, it is a privilege.
You are conflating discrimination in its primary sense with discrimination in its secondary sense. Freedom from discrimination (in its primary sense) is an inalienable right. Sending boys and girls to gendered schools is not necessarily discriminatory in the primary sense— though it could be, if like my mother, as part of that education one was forced to learn how to peal peaches with white gloves on since no boys were ever expected to learn such a useless skill. That being said, all-boys and all-girls schools are denied federal funding.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, January 24th, 2017 at 11:22 AM
Title: Re: (carefully) Broadcasting Dzogchen through music
Content:
dzogchungpa said:
Apparently a "Dzogchen-inspired album " exists, see:
http://www.lionsroar.com/check-out-sambhogakaya-from-the-new-dzogchen-inspired-album-by-sir-richard-bishop-and-w-david-oliphant/


Malcolm wrote:
Sounds dreadful.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, January 24th, 2017 at 11:09 AM
Title: Re: (carefully) Broadcasting Dzogchen through music
Content:
RikudouSennin said:
As far as music, is it permissible to perform bhajans of  traditional mahayana verses from sutras or acaryas?

For example the type of music Bodhi Bhajan Project is producing?

https://soundcloud.com/sanghamitra-vijaya/sets/songs-based-on-shantidevs

Malcolm wrote:
Sure.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, January 24th, 2017 at 11:08 AM
Title: Re: Where to Receive Wang/Lung for Medicine Tantra
Content:
tomamundsen said:
Hi all,

Does anyone know a lama who gives the wang and/or lung for the medicine tantras ( http://shangshung.org/store/index.php?main_page=product_info&products_id=518 )?

Thanks,
Thomas


Malcolm wrote:
There is no wang for the four tantras. There is a lung. The four tantras are used in the Yuthok Wang as a symbol. But the Yuthok Wang is not like an empowerment for the four tantras. They are however related.

The lung is mainly given to doctors.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, January 24th, 2017 at 11:05 AM
Title: Re: Dalai Lama about non sectarian approach towards Buddhist study and practice.
Content:


conebeckham said:
I think it's fair to say that the "Rimay Movement" as we know it...

Malcolm wrote:
was started by three Khampas who were primarily interested in Dzogchen teachings and treasure revelation.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, January 24th, 2017 at 10:58 AM
Title: Re: Bernie gives a thumbs up to Trump
Content:
Wayfarer said:
I don't know how to assess it, but here in Oz,  TPP had support from both sides of politics.

The commentary here is around the fact that the Chinese will exploit the perceived vacuum left by the US withdrawal to sign trade deals with as many Asia Pacific powers as it can.

Johnny Dangerous said:
This is always what people say about not signing trade deals that are actually about benefiting multinational corporations, that there is some boogeyman who will take advantage.


Malcolm wrote:
With respect to renegotiating trade deals and cancelling them, here are some people who always find advantage in these sorts of events, people who know how to work the arbitrage angle and make money coming and going. These people often enough try to manipulate the system to benefit themselves, and use popular opinion to mask their financial dealings. For example, the Trump Corporation's hostile take over of the United States of America.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, January 24th, 2017 at 4:10 AM
Title: Re: (carefully) Broadcasting Dzogchen through music
Content:
MaximRobinCossette said:
Hello Sangha,

I'm relatively new to Dzogchen so please pardon any ignorant questions on my part. I'm trying to tread as carefully and responsibly as possible here, I'm aware of the immense power.

I'm a musician who's recently received pointing out instructions, I'm interested in writing songs about my experience.

Can anyone definitely say what I should steer clear of and what is fair game in terms of writing about Dzogchen and my experience? I'm interested in different opinions.

Different but related question, as someone who meets and performs in front of crowds, exposing many people to dzogchen seems in line with the bodhisattva vows. Am I off base here? Yeah, Nay? How should I go about it if so?

Thank you,

Max,

http://www.maximcossette.com

Malcolm wrote:
You should not write of your experience. Nor should you write anything about Dzogchen.

There are masters alive today whose job it is to promulgate Dzogchen teachings. We can assist them. Otherwise, there is nothing we ordinary people can do other than practice Dzogchen.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, January 23rd, 2017 at 9:56 PM
Title: Re: what is whiteness? what is it to be "white" in the USA?
Content:
Zhen Li said:
Then there's the fact that an upper class white student, who got an A average, will still be passed over for admissions to some schools by a lower or upper class racial minority, with lower grades (and hence less desert), because of affirmative action.

Malcolm wrote:
This has at least two false assumptions — 1) that grades are scored objectively across all school systems 2) that someone with an A is necessary more qualified for a given position than someone who gained a lower score.

Zhen Li said:
For instance, if I have children, I would prefer them, and them alone (with my wife if I have one), to have the privilege of living in my house, and benefiting, as much as is possible, from my guidance and teaching. Preferably, I would home school my children. This is conferring a true a privilege, and I do not think there is any negative value that one can give to it. No other person off the street is entitled to that in the same way. Owning any private property, also, is a privilege. In Canada, all citizens are entitled to be educated in either English or French, except in Quebec. This is a privilege of all citizens.

Malcolm wrote:
Education is a right, not a privilege.

Zhen Li said:
Not being discriminated against is certainly a privilege,

Malcolm wrote:
No, it is a right.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, January 23rd, 2017 at 4:41 AM
Title: Re: Dalai Lama about non sectarian approach towards Buddhist study and practice.
Content:


Grigoris said:
Some time ago I came across the teaching:  The Wheel of Sharp Weapons.  It is a practice based on wrathful Yamanataka which is almost exclusive to the Gelugpa.

heart said:
Not exactly true. Yamantaka is for example a main practice in Drikung Kagyu and in Nyingma you can find it both as Kama ( http://www.chinabuddhismencyclopedia.com/en/index.php/List_Of_Nyingma_Kama_Empowerments_Bestowed_By_Kyabje_Yangthang_Rinpoche,_Bodhgaya,_2010 ) and as Terma.

/magnus

Grigoris said:
I am talking about the SPECIFIC practice, not the practice of Yamanatka per se.  There are Yamantaka practices in the Karma Kagyu too.

That said: [Mod note: snarky remark removed.]

Malcolm wrote:
You are referring to Vajrabhairava. It is widely practiced in Sakya and Gelug. The specific Vajrabhairava transmission to which you are referring is the one from Atisha.

It however is not the main Bhairava transmission practiced in Gelug, which comes originally from Rwa Lotsawa, supplemented by Lama Umapa's pure visions.

The Atisha lineage is preserved principally iin Sakya, even so, Rwa lugs is the main transmission practiced in both Sakya and Gelug.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, January 20th, 2017 at 11:53 PM
Title: Re: How Madhyamika Philosophy Solves the Mystery of Quantum Physics
Content:
pael said:
Could you tell difference between Sanjaya's eel-wriggling and Nagarjuna's tetralemma? In Samannaphala Sutta (DN 2), Sanjaya is recorded as saying:

'If you ask me if there exists another world [after death], if I thought that there exists another world, would I declare that to you? I don't think so. I don't think in that way. I don't think otherwise. I don't think not. I don't think not not. If you asked me if there isn't another world... both is and isn't... neither is nor isn't... if there are beings who transmigrate... if there aren't... both are and aren't... neither are nor aren't... if the Tathagata exists after death... doesn't... both... neither exists nor exists after death, would I declare that to you? I don't think so. I don't think in that way. I don't think otherwise. I don't think not. I don't think not not.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanjaya_Belatthiputta


Malcolm wrote:
Most def.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, January 20th, 2017 at 11:44 PM
Title: Re: The role of Samadhi in your practice
Content:
Justmeagain said:
but I thought emphasis was on analytical practices

Malcolm wrote:
You've been reading too many Gelugpa books.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, January 20th, 2017 at 11:42 PM
Title: Re: How Madhyamika Philosophy Solves the Mystery of Quantum Physics
Content:
Kenneth Chan said:
OK, we are understanding the terminology differently. The ultimate truth is that the pot is empty of inherent existence because it is dependently arisen. The conventional truth refers to the "mere existence" of the conventional appearance and functionality.

Malcolm wrote:
So the ultimate truth of the pot is the nonexistence of something called inherent existence, correct?

Jeff H said:
No. Ultimate analysis asks, "how does this pot really exist?". The rational answer is, "I don't know, but it certainly isn't inherently."

Malcolm wrote:
Hahahahah, very funny Jeff. But this kind of eel-wriggling has never been allowed since the time of the Buddha.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, January 20th, 2017 at 11:41 PM
Title: Re: How Madhyamika Philosophy Solves the Mystery of Quantum Physics
Content:
Kenneth Chan said:
My apologies, it was indeed Conebeckham who made that comment. In any case, both you and Conebeckham can take a look again at these two explanatory posts: One was posted on Sun Jan 15, 2017 5:45 pm, and another on Thu Jan 19, 2017 8:26 pm. If either of you disagree with them, please explain why you disagree.

Malcolm wrote:
You cited Tsongkhapa:
Even reality, the ultimate truth, has no intrinsic nature at all.
Again, this is the assertion that the ultimate is a nonexistence.

Jeff H said:
I don't think LTK is defining ultimate truth as a non-existent. He says inherent existence cannot be found when analyzed by reason. It is this irrationally imposed inherency which is non-existent. Rational analysis can only address rational objects. We can prove, rationally, that there is not, has not been, and could never be any inherently existing thing. That does not posit non-existence as the nature of ultimate truth; it simply points out that inherency is no truth at all, neither relative nor ultimate, and takes it out of the equation.

Malcolm wrote:
Is the nonexistence of the true existence of things, the emptiness which is the absence of inherent existence, ultimate truth or not?

In Tsongkhapa's system he very clearly defines the nonexistence of the true existence of things, the emptiness which is the absence of inherent existence, as ultimate truth.

How can you then claim that Tsongkhapa is not advocating this nonexistence as the ultimate?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, January 20th, 2017 at 11:38 PM
Title: Re: How Madhyamika Philosophy Solves the Mystery of Quantum Physics
Content:
Kenneth Chan said:
I think we are understanding the terminology differently. The pot is empty of inherent existence because it is dependently arisen. Being dependently arisen does not mean that it is nonexistent. It just means that it exists in dependence on causes and conditions, in dependence on its parts, and in dependence on the imputation by the conventional mind.

Malcolm wrote:
What is the ultimate nature of something which, in the relative sense, arises in dependence?

Kenneth Chan said:
OK, we are understanding the terminology differently. The ultimate truth is that the pot is empty of inherent existence because it is dependently arisen. The conventional truth refers to the "mere existence" of the conventional appearance and functionality.

Malcolm wrote:
So the ultimate truth of the pot is the nonexistence of something called inherent existence, correct?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, January 20th, 2017 at 11:19 PM
Title: Re: How Madhyamika Philosophy Solves the Mystery of Quantum Physics
Content:
Kenneth Chan said:
No, actually it does not mean that "the ultimate is a nonexistence." What it means is that the "ultimate truth" is also empty of inherent existence. "Empty of inherent existence" does not mean that it is nonexistent.

Malcolm wrote:
Defining emptiness as the absence of inherent existence is defining the ultimate as a nonexistence. For example, a pot. You claim a pot appears dependently, it relative nature; but that its ultimate nature, its emptiness, is the absence of inherent existence. This means you assert the ultimate nature of a pot is a nonexistence.

Kenneth Chan said:
I think we are understanding the terminology differently. The pot is empty of inherent existence because it is dependently arisen. Being dependently arisen does not mean that it is nonexistent. It just means that it exists in dependence on causes and conditions, in dependence on its parts, and in dependence on the imputation by the conventional mind.

Malcolm wrote:
What is the ultimate nature of something which, in the relative sense, arises in dependence?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, January 20th, 2017 at 11:04 PM
Title: Re: How Madhyamika Philosophy Solves the Mystery of Quantum Physics
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
You cited Tsongkhapa:
Even reality, the ultimate truth, has no intrinsic nature at all.
Again, this is the assertion that the ultimate is a nonexistence.

Kenneth Chan said:
No, actually it does not mean that "the ultimate is a nonexistence." What it means is that the "ultimate truth" is also empty of inherent existence. "Empty of inherent existence" does not mean that it is nonexistent.

Malcolm wrote:
Defining emptiness as the absence of inherent existence is defining the ultimate as a nonexistence. For example, a pot. You claim a pot appears dependently, it relative nature; but that its ultimate nature, its emptiness, is the absence of inherent existence. This means you assert the ultimate nature of a pot is a nonexistence.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, January 20th, 2017 at 10:45 PM
Title: Re: How Madhyamika Philosophy Solves the Mystery of Quantum Physics
Content:
Kenneth Chan said:
Malcolm, I recently posted a number of very long explanations of Lama Tsongkhapa's meaning, together with extensive quotes from the Lam Rim Chen Mo, in order to show that you have misinterpreted him. You did not even respond to the content of those explanations. And now you want to question whether I understand Lama Tsongkhapa? Why did you not even attempt to refute those earlier explanations of mine if you disagreed?

Malcolm wrote:
You are responding to cone, not me.
With respect to Lam rim chen mo —— marvelous book, good translation. Cutler and his team have done a remarkable job.
With respect to to certain points of LRCM, however, I have some disagreements. The essence of them we are discussing now. I do not need you to cite long passages from LRCM.

I did not question whether you understand Tsongkhapa, though your recent responses have indeed brought up the doubt about whether you understand Madhyamaka at all, let alone Tsongkhapa.

Kenneth Chan said:
My apologies, it was indeed Conebeckham who made that comment. In any case, both you and Conebeckham can take a look again at these two explanatory posts: One was posted on Sun Jan 15, 2017 5:45 pm, and another on Thu Jan 19, 2017 8:26 pm. If either of you disagree with them, please explain why you disagree.

Malcolm wrote:
You cited Tsongkhapa:
Even reality, the ultimate truth, has no intrinsic nature at all.
Again, this is the assertion that the ultimate is a nonexistence.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, January 20th, 2017 at 10:34 PM
Title: Re: Minobu's Muse: Lord Nagarjuna, The Lotus Sutra, The Gakki
Content:
DharmaChakra said:
Namaste,

I will just add one thing to a comment that said that nagas are responsible for cancers and disease. This is such a mundane understanding. In Bhagavat Purana Prariksit Maharaja was bitten by Taxila Naga, it was a curse of a Brahmin, on the outside it was seen as though he was cursed to die within seven days, and Avadhuta Sukadeva taught Him Bhagavta Dharma, that snake bite from Taxila was a naga to open his consciousness in a higher realm to receive very high teachings. What appears for mundane scholars is only external symptoms, the disease, what appears from inside is higher teachings. All shastra has double meaning.....

Malcolm wrote:
The Bhagavat Purana has nothing to do with Buddhadharma, at all, being a Vaishnava text.

This is a site for discussing Buddhadharma alone.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, January 20th, 2017 at 10:19 PM
Title: Re: How Madhyamika Philosophy Solves the Mystery of Quantum Physics
Content:
conebeckham said:
If your system does not posit the Ultimate nature as the emptiness which is lack of inherent existence, what does it posit as the Ultimate nature?
Are you certain you understand TsongKhapa?

Kenneth Chan said:
Malcolm, I recently posted a number of very long explanations of Lama Tsongkhapa's meaning, together with extensive quotes from the Lam Rim Chen Mo, in order to show that you have misinterpreted him. You did not even respond to the content of those explanations. And now you want to question whether I understand Lama Tsongkhapa? Why did you not even attempt to refute those earlier explanations of mine if you disagreed?

Malcolm wrote:
You are responding to cone, not me.

With respect to Lam rim chen mo —— marvelous book, good translation. Cutler and his team have done a remarkable job.

With respect to to certain points of LRCM, however, I have some disagreements. The essence of them we are discussing now. I do not need you to cite long passages from LRCM.

I did not question whether you understand Tsongkhapa, though your recent responses have indeed brought up the doubt about whether you understand Madhyamaka at all, let alone Tsongkhapa.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, January 20th, 2017 at 10:10 PM
Title: Re: How Madhyamika Philosophy Solves the Mystery of Quantum Physics
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
I did explain it to you.
All entities have two natures, one ultimate, one relative. The ultimate nature of all entities is emptiness.
However, there is some disagreement about what emptiness means.

You assert that emptiness means the absence of inherent existence. If you define emptiness solely as the absence of inherent existence, you are defining emptiness as a nonexistence. The nonexistence of what? The nonexistence of inherent existence. This means you are defining ultimate emptiness as a nonexistence.

Kenneth Chan said:
You are still playing semantic games and putting words in my mouth. Please explain your point instead of playing around with words. For example, what exactly do you mean by "defining ultimate emptiness as a nonexistence"? What, in fact, do you mean by "ultimate emptiness"? I do not know what you are talking about.

Malcolm wrote:
Kenneth, I never play with words, ever. So stop claiming that I do. It's rude.


Ultimate truth is emptiness. You define emptiness, the ultimate nature of things, as the nonexistence of inherent existence. It is very clear in every post that you write.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, January 20th, 2017 at 9:52 PM
Title: Re: The role of Samadhi in your practice
Content:


Justmeagain said:
From my understanding the various Tibetan practices don't afford as much time to developing Samadhi.
.

Malcolm wrote:
Sadhana practices as themselves samadhis. This is how you develop Samadhi in Tibetan practices.

Or you can do sitting practices, or you can do a hundred things, all of which will develop samadhi.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, January 20th, 2017 at 9:48 PM
Title: Re: How Madhyamika Philosophy Solves the Mystery of Quantum Physics
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
You do assert the ultimate is a nonexistence. All entities have two natures, one relative, one ultimate. You assert the ultimate nature of all entities is the absence of inherent existence alone. This means you assert the ultimate is a nonexistence. Ergo, you are an advocate of ultimate nonexistence.

Kenneth Chan said:
Malcolm, stop playing semantic games. And stop putting words in my mouth. I did not assert "the ultimate is a nonexistence." I did not assert "the ultimate nature of all entities is the absence of inherent existence alone." And I did not assert "the ultimate is a nonexistence." I am not even sure, actually, what you mean with your terminology, since you do not accept the terminology as used by Lama Tsongkhapa. So, until you actually explain what you mean, all this is just a play with words.


Malcolm wrote:
I did explain it to you.

All entities have two natures, one ultimate, one relative. The ultimate nature of all entities is emptiness.

However, there is some disagreement about what emptiness means.

You assert that emptiness means the absence of inherent existence. If you define emptiness solely as the absence of inherent existence, you are defining emptiness as a nonexistence. The nonexistence of what? The nonexistence of inherent existence. This means you are defining ultimate emptiness as a nonexistence.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, January 20th, 2017 at 9:30 PM
Title: Re: 17 tantras of Dzogchen: typed in wily transliterations or Tib Unicode?
Content:
mutsuk said:
Check here in Wylie transcription :

https://wikisource.org/w/index.php?search=rgyud&title=Special:Search&go=Go&searchToken=ekpftazsnby3j6m53abtb136m

Careful though, this is inputed from the Adzom blocks which are usually quite famous for their precision but in the present case, they are not really good, obviously over-edited and the over-edition is often wrong... You should try to locate the Gangteng-b mss version or the inputed version made at the Viriginia University.


Malcolm wrote:
A problem inherited from Derge NGB.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, January 20th, 2017 at 9:16 PM
Title: Re: How Madhyamika Philosophy Solves the Mystery of Quantum Physics
Content:
Kenneth Chan said:
Malcolm, are you arguing over semantics yet again? This is getting tiresome. How is this being a "realist" when all phenomena are empty of inherent existence (which means empty of true existence), and when nothing exists from its own side, not even a tiny bit? You also ignored my explanation that this nature of reality that we label "mere existence" is also empty of inherent existence or true existence, because it exists in name only, since it is a label imputed by the conventional mind.

And since I specifically also said that it is important not to claim that this "mere existence of conventional appearances and functionality" is totally nonexistent, how does that make me an "advocate of nonexistence"? Please stop arguing over mere semantics. It is pointless.

Malcolm wrote:
You are an advocate of ultimate nonexistence. Why? Because you assert the ultimate is a nonexistence. This is inescapable conclusion of assertign the ultimate is only the nonexistence of inherent existence.

Kenneth Chan said:
Everything you say here is incorrect. I am not "an advocate of ultimate nonexistence." I do not "assert the ultimate is a nonexistence." Neither do I say that "the ultimate is only the nonexistence of inherent existence."

All things are empty of inherent existence because they are dependently arisen. This does not mean that they are nonexistent. There is the mere existence of conventional appearances and functionality.

Let's not argue over semantics again.

Malcolm wrote:
You do assert the ultimate is a nonexistence. All entities have two natures, one relative, one ultimate. You assert the ultimate nature of all entities is the absence of inherent existence alone. This means you assert the ultimate is a nonexistence. Ergo, you are an advocate of ultimate nonexistence.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, January 20th, 2017 at 11:41 AM
Title: Re: How Madhyamika Philosophy Solves the Mystery of Quantum Physics
Content:
Kenneth Chan said:
It is what remains after we have already examined phenomena with the analysis of whether or not they intrinsically exist.

Malcolm wrote:
And this is precisely the problem with the view you gave adopted. Your analysis is incomplete and leaves you a realist with respect the relative, and an advocate of nonexistence with respect to the ultimate.

Kenneth Chan said:
Malcolm, are you arguing over semantics yet again? This is getting tiresome. How is this being a "realist" when all phenomena are empty of inherent existence (which means empty of true existence), and when nothing exists from its own side, not even a tiny bit? You also ignored my explanation that this nature of reality that we label "mere existence" is also empty of inherent existence or true existence, because it exists in name only, since it is a label imputed by the conventional mind.

And since I specifically also said that it is important not to claim that this "mere existence of conventional appearances and functionality" is totally nonexistent, how does that make me an "advocate of nonexistence"? Please stop arguing over mere semantics. It is pointless.

Malcolm wrote:
You are an advocate of ultimate nonexistence. Why? Because you assert the ultimate is a nonexistence. This is inescapable conclusion of assertign the ultimate is only the nonexistence of inherent existence.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, January 20th, 2017 at 10:48 AM
Title: Re: How Madhyamika Philosophy Solves the Mystery of Quantum Physics
Content:
Kenneth Chan said:
It is what remains after we have already examined phenomena with the analysis of whether or not they intrinsically exist.

Malcolm wrote:
And this is precisely the problem with the view you gave adopted. Your analysis is incomplete and leaves you a realist with respect the relative, and an advocate of nonexistence with respect to the ultimate.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, January 19th, 2017 at 10:35 PM
Title: Re: How Madhyamika Philosophy Solves the Mystery of Quantum Physics
Content:


Tsongkhapafan said:
The problem is that Gorampa doesn't actually understand Nagarjuna's intention unmistakenly. Tsongkhapa's explanation is in accordance with Nagarjuna's intention so it's not surprising that Gorampa disagrees with it.

Malcolm wrote:
I see, and you have actually read Gorampa to ascertain this? Talk about blind faith.

Tsongkhapafan said:
I have read 'The Two Truths Debate' which compares and contrasts Gorampa and Tsongkhapa.

Please list these points and we can address them, but it's all a bit pointless. I still think we should just follow the views of our Spiritual Guides.


Malcolm wrote:
Thakchoe's book is hardly an objective appraisal of Gorampa's views.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, January 19th, 2017 at 10:31 PM
Title: Re: Mahamudra and Theravada practices
Content:
fckw said:
The Vipassana practice practiced by Theravadins is usually quite different...

Malcolm wrote:
There are several different approaches to it, actually.

fckw said:
Same for Therevada-Vipassana. Goenka meditation style is actually quite different to Mahasi Sayadaw meditation style.

(For any reason beyond my understanding the whole reasearch community on "mindfulness meditation" skips this essential point.)


Malcolm wrote:
I was referring to Theravada in fact.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, January 19th, 2017 at 10:06 PM
Title: Re: Mahamudra and Theravada practices
Content:
fckw said:
The Vipassana practice practiced by Theravadins is usually quite different...

Malcolm wrote:
There are several different approaches to it, actually.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, January 19th, 2017 at 9:51 PM
Title: Re: How Madhyamika Philosophy Solves the Mystery of Quantum Physics
Content:
Kenneth Chan said:
In order to make any such claim, you have to first demonstrate that you actually understand Lama Tsongkhapa's meaning.

Malcolm wrote:
All that is necessary is to point out that Tsongkhapa departs in important ways from Nāgārjuna, for by example, by arguing that since the second pair in the fourfold negation are double negatives, they are redundant. Or that appearances are not to be directly analyzed, only their nature is to be analyzed, and so on.

Gorampa made a list of over 150 points where Tsongkhapa seriously departs from the meaning set forth by Nāgārjuna. They have never been adequately responded to by the Gelugpa school.

Tsongkhapafan said:
The problem is that Gorampa doesn't actually understand Nagarjuna's intention unmistakenly. Tsongkhapa's explanation is in accordance with Nagarjuna's intention so it's not surprising that Gorampa disagrees with it.

Malcolm wrote:
I see, and you have actually read Gorampa to ascertain this? Talk about blind faith.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, January 19th, 2017 at 9:38 PM
Title: Re: anything similar to Choying Dzo...
Content:
Fa Dao said:
Was wondering if anyone can recommend a text, Tantra, teaching etc that is similar in content to Choying Dzo but not as long, more pithy, and more focused on practice?


Malcolm wrote:
Dorsem Namkhache...


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, January 19th, 2017 at 9:32 PM
Title: Re: How Madhyamika Philosophy Solves the Mystery of Quantum Physics
Content:
Kenneth Chan said:
All this disagreement is the result of your misunderstanding the terminology as it is used by Lama Tsongkhapa.

Malcolm wrote:
No. All this disagreement is based on the fact that Tsongkhapa departs in important ways from the meaning intended by Nagārjuna, etc.

Kenneth Chan said:
In order to make any such claim, you have to first demonstrate that you actually understand Lama Tsongkhapa's meaning.

Malcolm wrote:
All that is necessary is to point out that Tsongkhapa departs in important ways from Nāgārjuna, for by example, by arguing that since the second pair in the fourfold negation are double negatives, they are redundant. Or that appearances are not to be directly analyzed, only their nature is to be analyzed, and so on.

Gorampa made a list of over 150 points where Tsongkhapa seriously departs from the meaning set forth by Nāgārjuna. They have never been adequately responded to by the Gelugpa school.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, January 19th, 2017 at 9:19 PM
Title: Re: Consciousness turns back upon itself; it does not extend beyond name-and-form
Content:
Queequeg said:
From the http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn12/sn12.065.than.html, SN 12:65



This formulation of the arising of suffering has puzzled me for a long time. It differs from the more common teaching on the 12 Linked Chain in that consciousness does not have its base in "constructing activities" which in turn has its base in ignorance. Rather, consciousness and name-and-form are proposed as mutually dependent and arising. Name-and-form is a function of consciousness and consciousness is a function of name-and-form. This is not quite a materialist view, but seems closer to it than the picture given by the 12 Linked Chain.

Can someone please explain what is going on here?

Malcolm wrote:
It is only taking about the process of this life.

Aemilius said:
The thing is that Shakyamuni didn't always repeat the same teachings exactly to the letter. It all depended on the particular listeners and their understanding and their needs, runs the traditional explanation for the inconsistency found in the teachings, this is said for example in the Arthaviniscaya sutra commentary called Nibandhana.
Etienne Lamotte has pointed out that there are variations in the teaching of  dependent rising in the Pitakas.
In the formulation of Nagara sutta "consciousness" stands for the first three links of the more common formulation. The first three links  are consciousness.
The standard formulation of 12 links is true as it is in the explanation of one life only. There is no need to take away ignorance and karmic formations to make it apply to this life only.

Malcolm wrote:
In serial dependent origination, the link of consciousness means conception in the womb.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, January 19th, 2017 at 9:18 PM
Title: Re: what is whiteness? what is it to be "white" in the USA?
Content:
dreambow said:
When activism takes over then you have special interest groups. Each group thinks their plight is more urgent, more worthy of respect then the other.

Malcolm wrote:
Not at all. They just understand they have a wound that needs to be addressed.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, January 19th, 2017 at 9:17 PM
Title: Re: what is whiteness? what is it to be "white" in the USA?
Content:


Johnny Dangerous said:
I don't see any viable analysis of the politics of race to be made outside of it's interaction with class. The idea that people from completely different circumstances and backgrounds have something magical in common based on the notion of their racial characteristics being similar (at least to the degree were are talking here) makes no sense to me.

Malcolm wrote:
That is because you are not black, latino, native, etc., and not a member of these communities, marginalized as they have been on the basis of presumed, yet imaginary, racial differences.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, January 19th, 2017 at 8:46 PM
Title: Re: What is Ignorance (avidya)?
Content:


Queequeg said:
Is this the subtle ignorance that is removed on the attainment of Buddhahood?

Malcolm wrote:
Yes.


Queequeg said:
What is the "first cause"? Is it the knowledge obscuration ignorance?

Malcolm wrote:
There are no first causes in dependent origination. This why in Mahāmudra and Great Perfection teaches we talk about connate ignorance rather then causal ignorance.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, January 19th, 2017 at 8:44 PM
Title: Re: How Madhyamika Philosophy Solves the Mystery of Quantum Physics
Content:
Kenneth Chan said:
All this disagreement is the result of your misunderstanding the terminology as it is used by Lama Tsongkhapa.

Malcolm wrote:
No. All this disagreement is based on the fact that Tsongkhapa departs in important ways from the meaning intended by Nagārjuna, etc.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, January 19th, 2017 at 10:17 AM
Title: Re: what is whiteness? what is it to be "white" in the USA?
Content:


Johnny Dangerous said:
Class typically effects that sort of thing more than racial identification...


Malcolm wrote:
Spoken like a true white person...

Bernie made the same mistake...


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, January 19th, 2017 at 10:12 AM
Title: Re: How Madhyamika Philosophy Solves the Mystery of Quantum Physics
Content:
Kenneth Chan said:
"Overcoming karmic appearances" is not achieved by negating what Lama Tsongkhapa calls the "mere existence" of conventional appearance and functionality, since negating this "mere existence" would also mean negating the fact that there is karma, cyclic existence, the Four Noble Truths, and so on.

Malcolm wrote:
There is a difference between outright negation and ascertaining the unreality of things. Still, in both cases karma, samsara, and so on are completely unreal, products of delusion, etc.

Kenneth Chan said:
Malcolm, you are now saying basically the same thing that Lama Tsongkhapa has been saying all along, only with different terminology. Saying that there is “no outright negation” of karma, samsara, and so on, is essentially the same as saying that there is the “mere existence” of conventional appearances and functionality.

Malcolm wrote:
Not at all. In classical Madhamaka appearances are investigated directly, but not in Tsongkhapa's revisionist approach.


Kenneth Chan said:
Saying that they are “completely unreal, products of delusion, etc.” is essentially the same as saying that “nothing exists from its own side, not even a tiny bit.” You have been merely arguing over semantics all this while, and that is what I have been trying to point out all this while.

Malcolm wrote:
Again, not at all.


Kenneth Chan said:
No one is “more and more strongly reinforcing” conventional appearance and functionality. I have repeatedly made this point that there is no “affirmation of existence” (as you put it) in Lama Tsongkhapa’s meaning. So please do not keep insisting on this misinterpretion. If "nothing exists from its own side, not even a tiny bit," in terms of ontology, what else is left to be negated?

Malcolm wrote:
The assertion that things exist dependently, or your "mere existence."


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, January 19th, 2017 at 8:18 AM
Title: Re: How Madhyamika Philosophy Solves the Mystery of Quantum Physics
Content:


Kenneth Chan said:
"Overcoming karmic appearances" is not achieved by negating what Lama Tsongkhapa calls the "mere existence" of conventional appearance and functionality, since negating this "mere existence" would also mean negating the fact that there is karma, cyclic existence, the Four Noble Truths, and so on.

Malcolm wrote:
There is a difference between outright negation and ascertaining the unreality of things. Still, in both cases karma, samsara, and so on are completely unreal, products of delusion, etc.


[/quote]
Kenneth Chan said:
Is the purpose of Madhyamaka to enable us to control the elements? Note that Milarepa could conjure up hailstones even before he began his spiritual journey with Marpa.

Malcolm wrote:
Milarepa's spiritual journey did not begin with Marpa. He studied with ten different Nyingma masters before he went to Marpa. He was already quite educated in Buddhadharma prior to meeting Marpa Lotsawa.
I know this. But the question still remains: Is the purpose of Madhyamaka to enable us to control the elements? It would appear that this is not the case, because Milarepa still had to undergo a difficult spiritual journey with Marpa. In fact, Milarepa's ability to control the elements actually hindered him here, because his actions in conjuring up hailstones ended up creating negative karma. Is that not so?[/quote]

The point is that karmic appearance such as the elements are a limitation to be overcome, not a convention to be more and more strongly reinforced.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, January 19th, 2017 at 3:19 AM
Title: Re: Chogyal Namkhai Norbu retreats this summer
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
For example, if you ask what I generally drink with dinner, I will say, "I always drink wine." But I certainly did not drink wine when I was two.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, January 19th, 2017 at 3:15 AM
Title: Re: Pure lands/Nichiren Shonin's take
Content:


Minobu said:
I pointed out http://dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?p=373374#p373374 was a prayer in a tantric practice and that did not satisfy me... for it is a prayer...

Malcolm wrote:
No, actually it was a not a prayer. It was a prediction. I can provide you many such predictions from sūtra and tantra, but you won't accept them so there is no point.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, January 19th, 2017 at 1:26 AM
Title: Re: How Madhyamika Philosophy Solves the Mystery of Quantum Physics
Content:
Wayfarer said:
Where this question arose was in respect of the reality, or absence thereof, of pots and other objects of normal perception. The argument was that 'upon analysis' none of these things can be 'established'.

Malcolm wrote:
When Candrakīrti was distracted, in front of a student he bumped into a pillar. When he was not distracted, in front of the same student he passed his hand right through the pillar.

There are limits to how far we should take the idea that conventional things "appear and are functional." Their appearance and functionality is dependent on a cognitively-encased delusion.

Kenneth Chan said:
Note, though, that Candrakirti’s Commentary on the “Four Hundred Stanzas” says:

“… our analysis is intent upon seeking intrinsic nature. We refute here that things exist essentially; we do not refute that eyes and such are products and are dependently arisen results of karma. Therefore they exist. Hence, when eyes and such are explained as results of karma, they do exist.”

Malcolm wrote:
The purpose of Madhyamaka is not to keep us trapped in karmic appearances. The purpose of Madhyamaka is to help us overcome them.



Kenneth Chan said:
Is the purpose of Madhyamaka to enable us to control the elements? Note that Milarepa could conjure up hailstones even before he began his spiritual journey with Marpa.

Malcolm wrote:
Milarepa's spiritual journey did not begin with Marpa. He studied with ten different Nyingma masters before he went to Marpa. He was already quite educated in Buddhadharma prior to meeting Marpa Lotsawa.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, January 19th, 2017 at 1:21 AM
Title: Re: Tara/Saraswati
Content:
DGA said:
Sorry, I didn't notice that we were in the Shingon forum.  I can say that she is well represented in Japanese Buddhism generally.  I learned her mantra from a Tendai master, for example.

Karma Jinpa said:
No worries, mate.  Would that be a sutric mantra, or does Tendai have esoteric practices derived from tantra also?  My knowledge of the Japanese schools is admittedly quite limited, as I've spent most of my time studying the Tibetan side of things.

All I really know about Tianti/Tendai is that Chan/Zen developed in part as a reaction to their scholasticism, couching the school in anti-intellectualist terms.  And that was taught to me by a professor who is also a lay Chan teacher in the Dharma Drum Mountain lineage of Master Sheng Yen, so there may have been some bias there.


Malcolm wrote:
Tendai has esoteric traditions.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, January 19th, 2017 at 12:46 AM
Title: Re: Blue stripe on monastics robes
Content:


lelopa said:
that is one reason.....
but many western physicians doubt that f.e. the helicobacter pylori comes from eating at evening....

Malcolm wrote:
I treat many people for digestive disorders, one in 10 has H. pylori. The rest have terrible eating habits.

Norwegian said:
Malcolm, you said the following: "At midday our metabolic heat is strongest because the sun is high in the sky. When we eat in the evening, it is harder for us to digest meals."

In general, how is it for those of us who live where the winters are very long, and where sunlight is more or less absent?

Malcolm wrote:
The principle still applies, eat most when the sun is strongest.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, January 19th, 2017 at 12:38 AM
Title: Re: Blue stripe on monastics robes
Content:
Bristollad said:
For instance, one Geshe I know does not normally eat after the midday meal (this is in keeping with vinaya)

Malcolm wrote:
................
............

If you look at the west, millions and millions of people are on Prilosec and so on. The reason is very simple. They eat the wrong combinations of food in the wrong amounts at the wrong times.

lelopa said:
that is one reason.....
but many western physicians doubt that f.e. the helicobacter pylori comes from eating at evening....

Malcolm wrote:
I treat many people for digestive disorders, one in 10 has H. pylori. The rest have terrible eating habits.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, January 19th, 2017 at 12:17 AM
Title: Re: Pure lands/Nichiren Shonin's take
Content:
Minobu said:
I took for granted Buddhists, even Rinpoche's were not that concerned with going to the pure land.

Malcolm wrote:
You were wrong.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, January 19th, 2017 at 12:07 AM
Title: Re: What is Ignorance (avidya)?
Content:
Queequeg said:
In another thread about a presentation of a 10 linked chain of causation in the Tipitaka (SN 12:65 and DN 14), Malcolm raised a point about ignorance in the 12 linked chain of causation being different than ignorance as the lack of knowledge about the selflessness of dharmas. MKoll brought up the definition of ignorance in the Pali Sutta as being ignorance of the Four Noble Truths.

This brought me to a fundamental question. A very brief search of this forum did not turn up any recent discussions on the topic, so, I'm starting a new thread.

What is the technical meaning of ignorance (avidya) in Mahayana Buddhism?

Malcolm wrote:
There are two, ignorance that is a knowledge obscuration, discussed by Vasubandhu in the opening the Kośa as the nonafflictive ignorance of Arhats and Pratyekabuddhas, and the ignorance that is the first link (but not the first cause) in the twelve nidanas, which is afflictive ignorance that arises from not knowing causes and results.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, January 19th, 2017 at 12:05 AM
Title: Re: Pure lands/Nichiren Shonin's take
Content:


Minobu said:
So these are tantric verses approving themselves for themselves...

but not really from sutra?

Malcolm wrote:
Since when has sūtra been more definitive than tantra?

Minobu said:
Well I'm looking for some source that states Vajrayana is not going to be effected by the degenerative age cycle.

Malcolm wrote:
The principle is that Vajrayāna is the only effective practice in so called "last five hundred years."


Minobu said:
I might be mistaken

Malcolm wrote:
You are.


Minobu said:
so if thats it, and you want to ignore the Lotus Sutra and it's edicts, fine for you. what ever floats your boat.

Malcolm wrote:
The Lotus is fine, as Sūtras go. But like all sūtras, it offers no swift path to buddhahood.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, January 18th, 2017 at 11:36 PM
Title: Re: Chogyal Namkhai Norbu retreats this summer
Content:



lelopa said:
in the last years....
f.e. in 1991 in germany at kamalashila institute he taught in italian


https://dzogchen-munich.org/de/#row-programm-de

Malcolm wrote:
OK, but that was 25 years ago.


lelopa said:
correct, Sir - but i thought "always" include 25 years...

ok, so i was always an adult dzogchen-practitioner

Malcolm wrote:
Depends on the implied tense.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, January 18th, 2017 at 11:19 PM
Title: Re: Consciousness turns back upon itself; it does not extend beyond name-and-form
Content:


Queequeg said:
Ignorance is not recognizing the real nature of dharmas as impermanent. .

Malcolm wrote:
Ignorance in the 12 nidānas is not the same ignorance as the knowledge obscuration of ignorance which misapprehends a self, etc.

The former is a stand in for all the afflictions of the past life, just as formations stands for all the karma.

Aemilius said:
Alex Berzin says the opposite in his explanation of the 12 links, namely that the fundamental ignorance(unawareness), that keeps the 12 links revolving, is the ignorance of reifying "I" or "me" onto or in the aggregates.
See http://www.studybuddhism.com/web/x/nav/eb_toc.html_1253243166.html

Malcolm wrote:
Read chapter three of the Kosha. I think Vasubandhu is somewhat more authoritative than Berzin.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, January 18th, 2017 at 10:25 PM
Title: Re: How Madhyamika Philosophy Solves the Mystery of Quantum Physics
Content:


Wayfarer said:
Where this question arose was in respect of the reality, or absence thereof, of pots and other objects of normal perception. The argument was that 'upon analysis' none of these things can be 'established'.

\]

Malcolm wrote:
When Candrakīrti was distracted, in front of a student he bumped into a pillar. When he was not distracted, in front of the same student he passed his hand right through the pillar.

There are limits to how far we should take the idea that conventional things "appear and are functional." Their appearance and functionality is dependent on a cognitively-encased delusion.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, January 18th, 2017 at 10:13 PM
Title: Re: Buddhahood in This Life
Content:
RikudouSennin said:
Could you explain a bit more about the various modalities of an individual's consciousness.

1)Since ye shes (pristine consciousness), shes rab (wisdom) and rnam shes (consciousness) are different modalities of shes pa.

In this context what is the difference for example  between ye shes and shes rab?

2) Aren't they both operative words to describe a knowledge that determines all phenomenon as being empty? (wisdom)

3)Or to the manifest state of the ground? (pristine consciousness)

I hope im not just complicating these terms.

Malcolm wrote:
Shes rab and rig pa are synonyms. Dzogchen is based on the idea found in some Sarma tantras as well, that all phenomena are included in potentiality (rtsal) of ye shes when the basis arises from the basis. When the potential of ye shes is misperceived, this is rnam shes and this in turn cases samsara. When it is correctly perceived (i.e. shes rab) as one's own state, this is the cause for nirvana.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, January 18th, 2017 at 10:00 PM
Title: Re: What is the Dzogchen and/or Nyingma assertion of how conventional phenomena exists?
Content:


Lukeinaz said:
If conventional phenomena have always been primordial enlightenment and conventional truth is delusion then is delusion primordial enlightenment?  Now I understand all the drinking and sex.  Sign me up!

Malcolm wrote:
You should read Rongzom's hook.

Lukeinaz said:
Entering the Way?


Malcolm wrote:
Yes, that or the appearances as divine.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, January 18th, 2017 at 9:56 PM
Title: Re: Enlightenment vs. Liberation vs. Awakening
Content:
Karma Jinpa said:
Furthermore, since Buddha and bodhi are related in Sanskrit, why is there not a similar relation between the equivalent Tibetan terms, sangs rgyas and byang chub?  Etymologically they seem distinct.

Malcolm wrote:
Sangs rgyas means "fully (rgyas) awake (sangs)."

Byang chub means is etymologized as purifying (byang) all obscurations to be abandoned and realizing (chub) all qualities to be realized.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, January 18th, 2017 at 9:52 PM
Title: Re: What is the Dzogchen and/or Nyingma assertion of how conventional phenomena exists?
Content:
bhava said:
In dzogchen and nyingma, conventional phenomena have allways been primordial enlightenment.  One leaves analytical approach of "exist nor non-exist" far away, as it is the domain of conceptual mind. In the state of rigpa it your direct experience. Of course as upaya one can use any kind of analytical meditation, but real view completely transcends conceptual mind and its assertions.

Lukeinaz said:
If conventional phenomena have always been primordial enlightenment and conventional truth is delusion then is delusion primordial enlightenment?  Now I understand all the drinking and sex.  Sign me up!

Malcolm wrote:
You should read Rongzom's hook.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, January 18th, 2017 at 9:06 PM
Title: Re: How Madhyamika Philosophy Solves the Mystery of Quantum Physics
Content:


Wayfarer said:
Do you mean, someone who has realised emptiness has supernatural ability, so doesn't need a pot?

Malcolm wrote:
It means they can control the elements, if they so choose.

Wayfarer said:
So, this is a reference to siddhi, supernatural powers, isn't it?

Where this question arose was in respect of the reality, or absence thereof, of pots and other objects of normal perception. The argument was that 'upon analysis' none of these things can be 'established'.

But if that analysis terminates in an insight into the nature of matter which is literally 'beyond reason', then it's not a rational argument, it relies on revelation of an insight 'beyond mere logic' as the sutras describe it.

Isn't that so?

Malcolm wrote:
Siddhis also have a rational basis, "Where emptiness is possible, everything is possible..."


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, January 18th, 2017 at 2:38 AM
Title: Re: Consciousness turns back upon itself; it does not extend beyond name-and-form
Content:


Queequeg said:
Ignorance is not recognizing the real nature of dharmas as impermanent. .

Malcolm wrote:
Ignorance in the 12 nidānas is not the same ignorance as the knowledge obscuration of ignorance which misapprehends a self, etc.

The former is a stand in for all the afflictions of the past life, just as formations stands for all the karma.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, January 18th, 2017 at 2:27 AM
Title: Re: Pure lands/Nichiren Shonin's take
Content:
Minobu said:
Interesting, can you show us your source. this should be interesting for it's Malcolm...not sarcasm...always show respect to those who are  more informed .. but i thnk i might win this one...

Malcolm wrote:
The Herukābhyudaya Tantra:
Having been cared for by Śrī Heruka,
there will be success in the degenerate age.

The Ḍākārṇava Tantra states:
In the kali yuga this will
be taught by countless bhagavans. 
The tantra taught by Śākyasimha 
will carry one to the other shore of yoga.
Etc.

Minobu said:
So these are tantric verses approving themselves for themselves...

but not really from sutra?

Malcolm wrote:
Since when has sūtra been more definitive than tantra?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, January 18th, 2017 at 2:08 AM
Title: Re: Pure lands/Nichiren Shonin's take
Content:


Minobu said:
Mappo then is when actual tantra and most meditative practice actually  do not produce result.

Malcolm wrote:
No the end times is when Vajrayāna is the only effective practice.

Minobu said:
Just think for a moment..If Lord Buddha Maitreya is going to drop meditation completely , and use ethics and morals ,what does that say about the last moments of Vajrayana in the last degenerative years of Lord Sakyamuni's Dharma.Could this be why  Nichiren Shonin who studied ShinGon decided to say it was of no value .

Malcolm wrote:
Nicherin was wrong, plain and simple.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, January 18th, 2017 at 2:07 AM
Title: Re: Pure lands/Nichiren Shonin's take
Content:


Minobu said:
Mappo then is when actual tantra and most meditative practice actually  do not produce result.

Malcolm wrote:
No the end times is when Vajrayāna is the only effective practice.

Minobu said:
Interesting, can you show us your source. this should be interesting for it's Malcolm...not sarcasm...always show respect to those who are  more informed .. but i thnk i might win this one...

Malcolm wrote:
The Herukābhyudaya Tantra:
Having been cared for by Śrī Heruka,
there will be success in the degenerate age.

The Ḍākārṇava Tantra states:
In the kali yuga this will
be taught by countless bhagavans. 
The tantra taught by Śākyasimha 
will carry one to the other shore of yoga.
Etc.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, January 18th, 2017 at 1:45 AM
Title: Re: Pure lands/Nichiren Shonin's take
Content:


Minobu said:
Mappo then is when actual tantra and most meditative practice actually  do not produce result.

Malcolm wrote:
No the end times is when Vajrayāna is the only effective practice.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, January 18th, 2017 at 1:43 AM
Title: Re: Pure lands/Nichiren Shonin's take
Content:
Minobu said:
What ever you want to believe about Nichiren Shonin in order to blind you and make your paradigm more real...He never lost a Buddhist Debate.
.

Malcolm wrote:
Standards for Buddhist debate where never that high in Japan.

DGA said:
I don't know what kind of evidence is available to support Minobu's claim on Nichiren's history as a debater.

I can say that there is significant evidence of high standards for debate in Japanese Buddhism in more than one school, for instance in the time of Ryogen.  Paul Groner documents this in his Ryogen biography.

Malcolm wrote:
The Ryogen bio actually shows that debate standards degenerated after Ryogen's time when schools like Hosso and Tendai stopped debating each other.

Compare a 1000 year continuous interschool debate history in Tibet with a three hundred year history of interschool debate history in Japan and I think you will see my point.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, January 18th, 2017 at 1:15 AM
Title: Re: Pure lands/Nichiren Shonin's take
Content:
Minobu said:
What ever you want to believe about Nichiren Shonin in order to blind you and make your paradigm more real...He never lost a Buddhist Debate.
.

Malcolm wrote:
Standards for Buddhist debate where never that high in Japan.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, January 18th, 2017 at 1:07 AM
Title: Re: Chogyal Namkhai Norbu retreats this summer
Content:
javier.espinoza.t said:
ChNN said that the official language of the DC is english, in year 200x,

Malcolm wrote:
Correct.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, January 17th, 2017 at 11:51 PM
Title: Re: How Madhyamika Philosophy Solves the Mystery of Quantum Physics
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
I am pretty certain that the reason why Gelugpas also attain high realization is because of Vajrayāna practice, but not because the view of emptiness set forth by Tsongkhapa in various places is unmistaken or perfect.

Kenneth Chan said:
Malcolm, how are you able to make such a claim concerning the view of emptiness set forth by Lama Tsongkhapa when you have not demonstrated that you are even interpreting his meaning correctly? Your previous attempt at summarising what Lama Tsongkhapa meant is incorrect, as I have already pointed out.

Malcolm wrote:
You think you pointed that out. According to you, you have to accept all of Tsongkhapa's definitions and ways of explaining things as correct. Only then can you be said to understand his meaning.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, January 17th, 2017 at 11:17 PM
Title: Re: Chogyal Namkhai Norbu retreats this summer
Content:
Brev said:
Hello,

I've been looking for information about ChNN's retreats this summer in Europe and wonder if any of the Dzogchen practitioners here might know more about them or have experience with them. ChNN has three-day retreats in Munich and Vienna in July. Will all instruction be in Italian/German or is English supported at all? Also, what is the typical suggested donation for these retreats?

Thank you very much!

heart said:
Rinpoche always teach in English.

/magnus


lelopa said:
in the last years....
f.e. in 1991 in germany at kamalashila institute he taught in italian


https://dzogchen-munich.org/de/#row-programm-de

Malcolm wrote:
OK, but that was 25 years ago.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, January 17th, 2017 at 11:04 PM
Title: Re: How Madhyamika Philosophy Solves the Mystery of Quantum Physics
Content:
Jeff H said:
Is it correct to say that you believe no one has ever achieved, or ever could achieve, the union of method and wisdom by following Tsongkhapa’s system of negating intrinsic existence with reason separately from, but in tandem with, negating conventionality with bodhicitta?

Malcolm wrote:
No, that is not what I am saying at all. Indeed, it completely misses the mark.

But I will say that I don't think anyone at all is going to move from the sūtra path of preparation to the path of seeing by meditating on a lopsided emptiness.

I am pretty certain that the reason why Gelugpas also attain high realization is because of Vajrayāna practice, but not because the view of emptiness set forth by Tsongkhapa in various places is unmistaken or perfect.

Why do I say this? Because even Cittamatrins like Virupa attained realization of the stages without having a completely correct understanding of emptiness because of their Vajrayāna practice (specifically in his case he attained the first bhumi during empowerment).


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, January 17th, 2017 at 10:21 PM
Title: Re: Blue stripe on monastics robes
Content:
Bristollad said:
For instance, one Geshe I know does not normally eat after the midday meal (this is in keeping with vinaya)

Malcolm wrote:
In general, the instruction not to eat after noon really has nothing to do with discipline. It has to do with health. At midday our metabolic heat is strongest because the sun is high in the sky. When we eat in the evening, it is harder for us to digest meals.

The Buddha was a wise person and observed that those who ate large meals in the evening suffered from digestive problems.

If you look at the west, millions and millions of people are on Prilosec and so on. The reason is very simple. They eat the wrong combinations of food in the wrong amounts at the wrong times.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, January 17th, 2017 at 10:02 PM
Title: Re: Enlightenment vs. Liberation vs. Awakening
Content:
Karma Jinpa said:
Something that I haven't seen talked about on here are the terms we seem to have accepted as standard jargon for Buddhism in English.

Sanskrit bodhi (Tibetan byang chub ) is most often translated as "enlightened," but does that accurately convey the meaning of the term in either of the canonical languages?  I've heard it said that this is a poor translation, and that the connotation we have for enlightenment in English is absent.

Malcolm wrote:
Correct. It is an incorrect translation of bodhi, which means "to awaken."


Karma Jinpa said:
The same person (a former nun) preferred to use the term "liberation" instead (Sanskirt moksha, Tibetan thar pa ), since we are freed from the shackles of karma and no longer trapped in Samsaric existence.

Malcolm wrote:
She is wrong.


Karma Jinpa said:
But how does moksha ( thar pa ) compare to bodhi ( byang chub )?  For that matter, where does the Tibetan verb sgrol ba come in?  Drölma ( sgrol ma ) is "She who Liberates," so how does sgrol relate to thar?  Are there subtle differences in subtext/connotation?


Malcolm wrote:
There is a small difference between thar pa and grol ba; the former translates mokṣa, the latter mukti, so both may be translated as liberation. Sgrol ba however translates tāraka, meaning to free or to save.

Karma Jinpa said:
Sometimes bodhi is translated to English as "awakening," which seems more in tune with the Buddha being "the Awakened One," a reference to the dream-like illusory nature of Samsara and having woken from said dream, seeing things as they actually are.  Is "awakening" a superior translation that should supercede "enlightenment"?  Is there another term not considered here which would more accurately portray the words in Sanskrit/Tibetan?  Or should we stick to "enlightenment," and if so, why?

Malcolm wrote:
Awakening is the only accurate translation of bodhi.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, January 17th, 2017 at 9:46 PM
Title: Re: How Madhyamika Philosophy Solves the Mystery of Quantum Physics
Content:


Kenneth Chan said:
“Understanding conventional truth enables the practitioner to develop the method side—compassion, concentration, and ethics—whereas understanding the ultimate truth leads to the wisdom side—emptiness. These realizations will, in turn, result in the two Buddha bodies, the truth body and the form body.”

If the realization of the rainbow body has really to do with the level of realization, involving the union of method and wisdom, this means that it is more a case of the highly advanced mind being able to influence the way conventional appearances manifest (and not the case of what you consider a difference in the “level of negation” in the understanding of emptiness) that counts.

Malcolm wrote:
The first paragraph is definitely Gelug orthodoxy.

In the second case, you cannot influence the way others see you. If you realize rainbow body in this life, called the great transference body, people will see you as ordinary if they are ordinary. But what you can do is place your mind in inanimate things, make them move and so on. There are also other things you can do.

Conventional truth is a measure of your own delusion.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, January 17th, 2017 at 9:42 PM
Title: Re: How Madhyamika Philosophy Solves the Mystery of Quantum Physics
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Someone who has realized emptiness does not need a pot to boil water.

Wayfarer said:
Do you mean, someone who has realised emptiness has supernatural ability, so doesn't need a pot?

Malcolm wrote:
It means they can control the elements, if they so choose.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, January 17th, 2017 at 11:17 AM
Title: Re: How Madhyamika Philosophy Solves the Mystery of Quantum Physics
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
As long as someone thinks that the appearance of pots withstand analysis, for that long they will never even have a chance of realizing rainbow body.

Bakmoon said:
No educated Gelugpa would ever say that appearances withstand analysis. Rather, they would say that analysis refutes them in terms of their ontological status, but it doesn't refute the fact that appearances appear to us or that they function.

Malcolm wrote:
Which means that appearance withstand analysis.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, January 17th, 2017 at 6:42 AM
Title: Re: Mahamudra and Theravada practices
Content:
Justmeagain said:
Higher in what respect?

Isn't a realisation of the nature of the mind the same in both respects?

Malcolm wrote:
Higher in terms of omniscience and realization.

Justmeagain said:
But thats an assertion from Tantric practitioners yes?


Malcolm wrote:
Well you are asking in the Mahamudra section so...


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, January 17th, 2017 at 5:58 AM
Title: Re: Mahamudra and Theravada practices
Content:
Justmeagain said:
Higher in what respect?

Isn't a realisation of the nature of the mind the same in both respects?

Malcolm wrote:
Higher in terms of omniscience and realization.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, January 17th, 2017 at 5:32 AM
Title: Re: How Madhyamika Philosophy Solves the Mystery of Quantum Physics
Content:
Matt J said:
A smashed pot holds no water, but an analyzed pot still does. Unless we mean some thing completely different by analysis.

Malcolm wrote:
It all depends on what you analyze the pot for. If you analyze the appearance itself, it won't withstand analysis.

Wayfarer said:
But if what you want to is boil water in it, then it's lack of ultimate own-being is  neither here nor there.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, and this is why refuting only inherent existence rather that all four extremes misses the mark.

Someone who has realized emptiness does not need a pot to boil water.

But the idea that inherent existence is all we need to negate makes emptiness more comfortable for modern people who at base do not wish to abandon their realism.

As long as someone thinks that the appearance of pots withstand analysis, for that long they will never even have a chance of realizing rainbow body.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, January 17th, 2017 at 4:35 AM
Title: Re: Mahamudra and Theravada practices
Content:
Justmeagain said:
Hi,

I am just teading Drikung Kyabgon Chetsang Rinpoches book 'The Practice Of Mahamudra'

On page 29 he suggests that the end result is the same whether we practice Tantric or Sutra Mahamudra. The latter being Samatha and Vipassana.

Does this mean that Theravadins acheive Mahamudra too by practicing Vipassana and Samatha?

_/|\_


Malcolm wrote:
No, there is the small matter of the view and motivation.

Also it is not certain that the result of sūtra and tantra are the same. There are many assertions in the tantra that the result of practicing Vajrayāna is higher.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, January 17th, 2017 at 2:56 AM
Title: Re: The 'Dharma practioners' of the degenerate times
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Are you including yourself?

orgyen jigmed said:
"  Those lacking that authentic approach, the 'Dharma practitioners' of the degenerate times, do not engage in proper view and conduct.  With no time to listen, they long to meditate.  With no time to meditate, they long to explain. Not matured themselves, they long to empower others.  Not free themselves, they teach experiential guidance to others. Those with no meditation do fake meditation. Those with no realization offer fake realization.  Those with no freedom offer fake freedom. Those with no experience make a lot of noise about emptiness.  Their outer appearance is of venerable scholars, proclaiming themselves.  Doing their recitations, they portray a false image of erudition.  Those with no qualities label the faults of others.  What are their names? Choje, Rinpoche, Tokden, Siddha, Loppon, Khenpo, Gomchen, Yogin, Monk, Geshe, and Sangha.  They are labeled with these pure names, these Dharma practitioners, dressed up in fancy red cloth and silk.  Many a one has been seen here in Tibet.

" Generally, in this bad, degenerate time, the signs that evil blessings have struck will be that a charlatan is preferred to a fine individual and that a gift of a morsel of tasty food is preferred to heartfelt explanation of instructions.  Without realization in subjective meditational experience, practitioners will look to assemble the conducive external conditions.  Since there are so many kinds of savages and criminals, no one will be able to be a great mediator in the mountains, so in general those great meditators will have no realization.  The monks will have no discipline, the realized ones no sacred pledge, and the mantra adepts no powers.  Disciples of bold lamas will gather around to sell their own fame.  Girls without vows will secretly sleep with the clergy.  Delinquent boys will sleep in secret with nuns.  The crevices in the walls of monasteries will be full of the corpses of the clergy's illegitimate infant boys and girls.

"  They will say they are practising Secret Mantra but will have no quality of the path of means.  They will say they have discipline but will keep no vows.  The profound esoteric instructions will be sold for wealth.  Diligence will all go to creating curses and adversity.  Dharma language will be broadcast by lay people, and in the philosophical language of emptiness, all women will be esteemed.  Keeping their teacher secret, disciples will broadcast their own greatness.  Many will be those who desire Dharma, but few who desire a lama.  The fortunate noble person whose karma from previous training has awakened, just the few who have not regressed before the end of their aspirations, the few who truly practice the Dharma, will be scattered outside of Tibet and few will remain."

- PADMASAMBHAVA

Excerpt from: Refined Gold: The Dialogue of Princess Pemasal and the Guru, from a Terma discovered by Pema Lingpa (1450-1521), and translated into English by Sarah Harding from: Bla ma  nor bu rgya mtsho Vol: 1-2: Ka/Kha, Pad gling gter chos (Pema Lingpa's Collection of Treasures) or pp. 76-77, " The Life and Revelations of Pema Lingpa " (2003) Snow Lion Publications, Boulder, Colorado


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, January 17th, 2017 at 2:47 AM
Title: Re: How Madhyamika Philosophy Solves the Mystery of Quantum Physics
Content:
Matt J said:
A smashed pot holds no water, but an analyzed pot still does. Unless we mean some thing completely different by analysis.

Malcolm wrote:
Appearances are not rejected prior to analysis. But they do not survive analysis. No more than a pot survives a hammer.
It all depends on what you analyze the pot for. If you analyze the appearance itself, it won't withstand analysis.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, January 17th, 2017 at 1:21 AM
Title: Re: Surangama Sutra as an anti-Dzogchen intervention
Content:


Minobu said:
To me what i been reading about dogzhen according to Malcolm it's a sell.

Malcolm wrote:
If you are interested, go find a Dzogchen master. You won't hear anything difference between what they say and what I said.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, January 17th, 2017 at 1:19 AM
Title: Re: Surangama Sutra as an anti-Dzogchen intervention
Content:
javier.espinoza.t said:
it is possible to stop rebirth at the moment of death.

.

Minobu said:
Why would you want to?

Malcolm wrote:
He means afflicted rebirth. In other words, for those who have the proper instructions it is possible to attain full buddhahood at the moment of death or in the bardo, if one does not manage to do so in this life.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, January 17th, 2017 at 12:51 AM
Title: Re: Expanse of time
Content:
Grigoris said:
I would think it would be safe to say that the eyes perceive things as they are, in exactly the moment that the light rebounding off (or emitted from) the object reaches them.  The speed of light is such that it would be a more or less instantaneous (unless the light was coming from an object a crazily large distance away, but still, the eyes would receive an impression of the visual object as it looks at that moment to us here and now).  The process of seeing occurs after that.  The mind process of seeing is pretty bloody fast too, though.  But what we see (at the end of the entire process) is actually something that no longer exists.  A thing of the past.

Perception also includes interpretation, and this addition to / projection onto the object is normally based on past experiences so, effectively, at the end of the entire process, perception is essentially of the past.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, this is why mind (manas) is understood to be in the past. We cannot "be here now" or "be in the present moment" no matter how much we want to unless we are resting in a state free of concepts.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, January 17th, 2017 at 12:26 AM
Title: Re: How Madhyamika Philosophy Solves the Mystery of Quantum Physics
Content:
Matt J said:
That's what I said. However, they pointed out that 1) "inherent existence" was a mental projection, and removing this projection revealed appearances to be empty; and 2) that reasoning can only refute mental projections, and not appearances as such.


Malcolm wrote:
This is the limitation of Gelug Madhyamaka. Something other than appearances is subject to analysis, not the appearances themselves.

Appearances are not rejected prior to analysis. But they do not survive analysis. No more than a pot survives a hammer.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, January 17th, 2017 at 12:02 AM
Title: Re: Surangama Sutra as an anti-Dzogchen intervention
Content:
javier.espinoza.t said:
it is possible to stop rebirth at the moment of death.

you know what? i once asked Namkhai Norbu -a Buddha- this question: "is the rainbowbody like reflations in a mirror?", and he said "yes, even the rainbowbody is like reflations in a mirror". what this means? it means that at last there is no limitation, we can rebirth, we can go to a pure land, we can manifest as a rigdzin, we can manifest as a boddhisattva, we can reside in a statue, we can stay in the rainbowbody, ..., we have an infinite amount of possibilities and everything will be "like reflations in a mirror" if we understand what it really means and "total realize ourselves".

people tend to think that nirvana, or the rainbowbody, and so, is like anoter thing of different nature like from another planet -don't laugh-. but nature of samsara and realization is not different for the nature of mind is exactly the same all the time.

i won't try to convince anybody, because this is a elucidation from a question and it's answer, and language can be very tricky and i could be in a wrong understanding also, only proof can confirm, but to me everything points in that direction.

Malcolm wrote:
It just means even rainbow body is something relative, not ultimate.

javier.espinoza.t said:
i feel that in reality there is no such thing as ultimate haha

Malcolm wrote:
Agreed.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, January 16th, 2017 at 11:57 PM
Title: Re: How Madhyamika Philosophy Solves the Mystery of Quantum Physics
Content:
Jeff H said:
To properly set the stage, he begins the module with this quote of HHDL from The Four Noble Truths:

Malcolm wrote:
And so conventional appearances are never discarded and are accepted as they stand. All that is rejected is that they have any nature.

So the question becomes, is there something left over at the end of ultimate analysis? If so, what?

Jeff H said:
At the end of ultimate analysis the mere appearances of conventionality are left over, causally interactive but utterly without nature.

Malcolm wrote:
This is the limitation of Gelug Madhyamaka. Something other than appearances is subject to analysis, not the appearances themselves.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, January 16th, 2017 at 11:15 PM
Title: Re: How Madhyamika Philosophy Solves the Mystery of Quantum Physics
Content:
Jeff H said:
To properly set the stage, he begins the module with this quote of HHDL from The Four Noble Truths:
HH Dalai Lama said:
So how can we develop a personal understanding of the fundamental Buddhist doctrine of the Two Truths? By coming to know our everyday world of lived experience, we appreciate what is known as samvrti satya, the world of conventional reality, where the causal principle operates. If we accept the reality of this world as conventional, then we can accept the empty nature of this world which, according to Buddhism, is the ultimate truth, the paramartha satya. The realationship between these two aspects of reality is important. The world of appearance is used not so much as a contrast or an opposite to the world of ultimate truth, but rather as the evidence, the very basis on which the ultimate nature of reality is established.
[Emphasis added]

Malcolm wrote:
And so conventional appearances are never discarded and are accepted as they stand. All that is rejected is that they have any nature.

So the question becomes, is there something left over at the end of ultimate analysis? If so, what?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, January 16th, 2017 at 10:59 PM
Title: Re: Surangama Sutra as an anti-Dzogchen intervention
Content:
javier.espinoza.t said:
it is possible to stop rebirth at the moment of death.

you know what? i once asked Namkhai Norbu -a Buddha- this question: "is the rainbowbody like reflations in a mirror?", and he said "yes, even the rainbowbody is like reflations in a mirror". what this means? it means that at last there is no limitation, we can rebirth, we can go to a pure land, we can manifest as a rigdzin, we can manifest as a boddhisattva, we can reside in a statue, we can stay in the rainbowbody, ..., we have an infinite amount of possibilities and everything will be "like reflations in a mirror" if we understand what it really means and "total realize ourselves".

people tend to think that nirvana, or the rainbowbody, and so, is like anoter thing of different nature like from another planet -don't laugh-. but nature of samsara and realization is not different for the nature of mind is exactly the same all the time.

i won't try to convince anybody, because this is a elucidation from a question and it's answer, and language can be very tricky and i could be in a wrong understanding also, only proof can confirm, but to me everything points in that direction.

Malcolm wrote:
It just means even rainbow body is something relative, not ultimate.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, January 16th, 2017 at 10:58 PM
Title: Re: Expanse of time
Content:
Grigoris said:
Seen by the mind or seen by the eyes?

KarmaOcean said:
"your eyes"

Grigoris said:
Present.

Malcolm wrote:
Depends on what one means by "seen." All conceptual cognition is second order, not direct perceptions.

Direct perceptions are nonconceptual so we are not aware of them per se.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, January 16th, 2017 at 10:46 PM
Title: Re: How Madhyamika Philosophy Solves the Mystery of Quantum Physics
Content:


treehuggingoctopus said:
When ontological anti-foundationalism presents itself together with egotism/egoism, it reveals its being contaminated with hardcore realism...

Malcolm wrote:
It will not surprise you that in the Prasannaapāda, Candrakīriti notes a certain kinship between ancient Indian materialist anti-foundationalists and Madhyamaka.

treehuggingoctopus said:
Thanks, Malcolm. Unsurprising but quite new to me.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, someone objects and says Madhyamaka are basically nastikas for claiming that there is no good or bad actions, no agent, and no result because there is no inherent existence,  they are like nihilists.

Candra agrees that both nihilists and Mādhyamikas are alike in rejecting inherent existence, but they differ in that Mādhyamikas advocate dependent origination, and claim that this life and the next lack inherent existence. The second thing is that nihilists reject what they cannot see, whereas the Mādhyamika willing infers from dependent origination that there is another world after death in this one and so on.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, January 16th, 2017 at 10:07 PM
Title: Re: The essessence of the teachings is not different...
Content:


DharmaChakra said:
We can see this as a national consequence in most Asian culture there is not really religious tension in Dharma traditions,

Malcolm wrote:
Hahah, you need to study some history, friend. Indian, Central Asian, Southeast Asian and East Asian religious history is filled with examples of competing sects going to war with each other.


DharmaChakra said:
do you think at Nalanda they were scrutinizing the texts, or was they discovering, recording, comparing with open mind, all related around Dharma, which is a living force.

Malcolm wrote:
The stakes used to be high‚ if you lost a debate you had to convert to the POV of your opponents, and often enough the penalty for losing debates was execution.


DharmaChakra said:
Many of these main cultural timeline powers, of Vedic, Buddhist, Brahminical all supported by different said realized teachers integrated everything, there is no tension in the hand over, usually the sadhus would charm the rulers with suttas or poems, to show their understanding, it was exchanges of beauty and poetry,they would give them power and protection and say tey have found a sadhu, it was a change of religion, discoveries are mysterious and always connected in some form.

Malcolm wrote:
You apparently have read none of the accounts of the Indian Mahasiddhas and their conflicts with Indian rulers and brahmins.

Read the lifestory of Padmasambhava if you want a picture of how things really were on the ground in Ancient India between Buddhists and Hindus.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, January 16th, 2017 at 9:36 PM
Title: Re: How Madhyamika Philosophy Solves the Mystery of Quantum Physics
Content:


treehuggingoctopus said:
When ontological anti-foundationalism presents itself together with egotism/egoism, it reveals its being contaminated with hardcore realism...


Malcolm wrote:
It will not surprise you that in the Prasannaapāda, Candrakīriti notes a certain kinship between ancient Indian materialist anti-foundationalists and Madhyamaka.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, January 16th, 2017 at 9:34 PM
Title: Re: How Madhyamika Philosophy Solves the Mystery of Quantum Physicsx
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
In common perception, if something exists, it can be destroyed. For example, a pot or a tree. When we cut down a tree, we commonly say, "There used to be a tree there, now it no longer exists."

"There used to be a coral reef there, now it no longer exists."

This is the way common people speak, and it is not accurate.


Wayfarer said:
Nāgārjuna's arguments were with opponents that what we would call philosophers. But they weren't concerned with scientific or theoretical questions about 'how the world works' or what are the principles behind why objects fall or what radiation is. They were concerned with the question of ultimate truth. They had various doctrinal formulae about the ultimate nature of things, all of which were shown by Nāgārjuna to be self-contradictory.  When it is said that 'something cannot be established' or has no 'sva-bhava', it is in the context of a discussion about ultimates.

There is a sense in which the 'common people' are deluded (speaking as one of them) - but the way 'common people speak' is perfectly adequate in respect of matters of mundane fact. If you were ill, you would go a common person designated and trained as a doctor for treatment, and hopefully he would diagnose the cause of the malady and proscribe the appropriate treatment. It would do you no good to have him say 'well according to Nāgārjuna neither your illness or yourself have any basis in reality'. That might be true in an ultimate, philosophical sense, but it is very much a matter of context, and in the context, appealing to Nāgārjuna would not be germane.

Malcolm wrote:
Nāgārjuna strictly defines his notions of existence and nonexistence to what common people consider existence and nonexistence. This is evident from reading chapter 15 of the MMK and a number of other sections.

Where we disagree, is over whether or not relative truth is to be left alone. It is not. It is by analyzing the things of relative truth that we arrive at the ultimate. In other words, we analyze our mistaken perceptions in hopes of coming to a veridical one.

But in the end we have to accept that neither the relative or ultimate are established as real in anyway.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, January 16th, 2017 at 9:59 AM
Title: Re: Surangama Sutra as an anti-Dzogchen intervention
Content:


Minobu said:
They all claim Buddhahood, but  only the Lotus Sutra predicts it for all, in plain words to see and read.

Malcolm wrote:
No, this is a common myth but it is not true.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, January 16th, 2017 at 6:31 AM
Title: Re: How Madhyamika Philosophy Solves the Mystery of Quantum Physics
Content:
Jeff H said:
But, Malcolm, isn't it true that Tsongkhapa's graduated system is intended to guide one through method and wisdom into union? He makes it clear that once a practitioner has achieved a certain level, the lam rim isn't enough and it is necessary to invoke vajrayana.

Malcolm wrote:
The Gelugpa point of view, along the later Sakya POV, is that view of reality in sūtra and tantra is the same. The Gelugpas further insist that even if you are meditating Vajrayāna, your view must be strictly in accord with their understanding of Prasangika.

Jeff H said:
In the meantime, the examination of mere existence is about discerning which appearances function and how to choose between that which is helpful and that which is harmful.

Malcolm wrote:
Ascertaining that which is a wrong path and that which is a right path is not really the specific domain of Madhyamaka critique, though indeed Aryadeva does spend four of his eight chapters in clarifying correct relative truth.

Jeff H said:
Madhyamaka may indeed be as limited as you say. But I don't think it can be argued that Tsongkhapa is focusing on the point where convention means the ultimate.

Malcolm wrote:
No one made this assertion. The assertion being made is that by asserting that the ultimate is only the absence of inherent existence, the consequence of this is that the ultimate is a mere nonexistence.

Jeff H said:
He is trying to make it clear that the conventional is not about what's "real", and to begin cultivating a mere concept of emptiness to be further realized when bodhicitta has been more fully developed.

Malcolm wrote:
Nevertheless, in discussions about Madhyamaka with Gelugpas in general, one finds oneself discussing the how to make a conventional truth that won't upset the neighbors. So endless verbiage is spent trying to perfect something which is not essential and has no essence in the least.


Jeff H said:
In the conventional world suffering is real enough that it needs our attention. Tsongkhapa addresses that while telling us let go of the appearances.

Malcolm wrote:
The suffering of suffering seems real enough for those to whom it appears. For example, when I have a kidney stone, it seems pretty real in that moment, since I am just an ordinary guy. But I also have training and so I also know it is not real, it is not essential, and is principally a function of delusion and karma by which this false appearance is maintained. I also know that delusion is not solid or real, and that any tendency to give into feelings of solidity or realness reinforces that mistaken perception. So while I am writhing in agony I am also acutely aware of the fact apart from pain that has been experienced and has not been experienced, at present there is no pain — at least in my better moments.


