﻿Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 3rd, 2014 at 8:42 PM
Title: Re: Dr. Sanderson: Phowa etc. are directly from Saivism
Content:
Sherlock said:
But Shingon has yogatantra too which is said to bring Buddhahood in one life?

Malcolm wrote:
Indeed. But unless you are a priest, your practice is mainly confined to the liturgical practice of reciting a few mantras and so on.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 3rd, 2014 at 7:35 PM
Title: Re: The limit of compunded phenomena
Content:
Sherab Dorje said:
I am interested to hear peoples opinions and especially to see some scriptural quotes that verify/contradict this.

Malcolm wrote:
He is perfectly correct. Since particles cannot be established since they do not bear ultimate analysis, there comes a time when under analysis they cannot be found at all. The chapter refuting permanent functioning phenomena in the 400 Verses demonstrates this very well.

Sherab Dorje said:
I wasn't doubting that he was correct, he is a khenpo after all, I was just looking for scriptural verification/contradiction.  I imagine there would be other schools/traditions, that may care to disagree.

Thanks for the info.

Malcolm wrote:
Not in Mahāyāna.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 3rd, 2014 at 9:39 AM
Title: Re: Dr. Sanderson: Phowa etc. are directly from Saivism
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Loppon Rinpoche states:

Therefore, followers of the Pāramitāyāna do not accomplish [awakening] in this degenerate age, but followers of Secret Mantra do accomplish [awakening] in this degenerate age. The Herukābhyadaya also states:
If one upholds Śrī Heruka,
There will be accomplishment in the decadent age.


There is no Śrī Heruka in lower tantra.

sherabpa said:
The lower tantras belong to Secret Mantra, and hence siddhis are attained.  As Sapan says in sdom gsum 3.262:
Nonetheless, on the level of action tantra
accomplishment may be obtained
by meditating on a painted image of the deity:
pleased by one's observance of austerity and cleanliness
the Buddha will bestow his attainments.
Now I believe it is said somewhere that only though anuttaratantra will one attain mahamudra siddhi in a single lifetime.  Supposing that is true, this is quite different to saying the lower tantras are ineffective, or pointless.

Malcolm wrote:
The Samputa states:
None of the eighty four thousand Dharmaskandhas 
have any result since the true state of the body is not understood.
Since the true state of the body is not taught outside of highest yoga tantra, etc., well then, I leave you to your own conclusions.

Now then, Ngorchen does clarify in his commentary on kriya tantra that the most a person can aspire to with kriya tantra practice is the tenth bhumi:
"The result accomplished in one life of anuttaratantra is only the perfect Buddhahood of the three inseparable kāyas; here, having relied on the three paths, one can manifest the tenth stage in this [life] and with that support, Buddhahood can be accomplished."
He also explains that even so, the path of kriya tantra is quite slow:
But in kriya tantra, because there is no teaching of taking siddhis apart from (40/a) inviting and creating the deity in front, the speed with which the result is accomplished is slight. The difference with Pāramitāyāna is very important, in that in [Pāramitāyāna] not even taking siddhis from a deity invited in front is ever taught.
Further, the difficulty with kriya tantra is that it is very precise and requires absolute adherence to ritual purity and so on. This is quite difficult to maintain unless you are in a place like Koyasan, etc. For all of these reasons then it is safe to say that for the most part we can consider kriya tantra ineffective in this day and age (which was my point), which also explains why outside of Shingon and Tendai, no one practices it anymore. There is also the consideration of which yuga a given teaching is most effective or needed, and in this yuga, the kali yuga, annuttarayoga tantra is a desiderata.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 3rd, 2014 at 6:15 AM
Title: Re: The limit of compunded phenomena
Content:
Sherab Dorje said:
I am interested to hear peoples opinions and especially to see some scriptural quotes that verify/contradict this.

Malcolm wrote:
He is perfectly correct. Since particles cannot be established since they do not bear ultimate analysis, there comes a time when under analysis they cannot be found at all. The chapter refuting permanent functioning phenomena in the 400 Verses demonstrates this very well.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 3rd, 2014 at 3:26 AM
Title: Re: What is Blessing?
Content:
Astus said:
What is the definition of blessing (any and all types)? What dharma is it? What are its qualities and conditions?


Malcolm wrote:
Byin rlabs means quite literally "conferral [rlabs] of power [byin]."

Byin is defined in Tibetan as "the ability or power to transform the minds and vision/appearances of another."

The word Byin rlabs is defined in Tibetan as "the power to remain in any subject of the Dharma of the Noble Path."

So that is your answer.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 3rd, 2014 at 2:30 AM
Title: Re: Recognising reincarnations
Content:
Sherab Dorje said:
So you believe that hereditary religious leadership is better than the tulku system?  Or do you prefer the Gelug model?

PS  The Dalai Lamas are tulku, are they not?

Malcolm wrote:
I think the Gelug model is best for the West.

HHDL is a tulku, however, the Fith Dalai Lama's recognition was fraudulent, according to his autobiography, and every one from the 8th to the 13th was selected by a lottery operated by the Qing dynasty Ambans.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 2nd, 2014 at 10:52 PM
Title: Re: Recognising reincarnations
Content:


Jikan said:
I think Sherab Dorje raised an interesting issue some time back that I'd like to bring us back to:  the question of whether or to what degree the tulku system as developed in Tibet offers an efficient way to identify and train teachers and leaders when resources are scarce.  Thoughts on this?

Malcolm wrote:
Not necessarily. Two major schools of Tibetan Buddhism do not operate this way: the largest, Gelugpa and as well as Sakya.

The Gelugpas appoint their leaders and teachers through education, not tulku lineages, with the notable exception of the Panchen Lama, who is the head of Tashi Lhunpo monastery. The Dalai Lamas are not monastic heads, but actually part of the Drepung Monastic system.

The leadership of Sakyapas is held in the Kohn family lineage. The abbocy of Ngor (a subsect of Sakya) is circulated among the scions of four families. It is only in the smallest of the Sakya subsects, Tshar, and Eastern Tibetan Sakya monasteries where tulkus play a significant role in the leadership of monasteries.

The leadership of Mindroling likewise is held in an old family, and is not tulku based.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 2nd, 2014 at 10:44 PM
Title: Re: Teacher as Buddha?
Content:


Mkoll said:
1) Is this belief common to all the Tibetan schools? Is it part of Shingon? I don't know much more about Mahayana than Vajrayana but I don't think it is part of the beliefs of any of their schools, is it?

Malcolm wrote:
It is not common to Shingon, because it is a practice restricted to the highest tantras.

Mkoll said:
2) How does one believe that one's teacher is a Buddha? What is the correct mindset? For example, does one believe they are fully enlightened like the historical Buddha was? Or is there some other approach?

Malcolm wrote:
You understand that the impure appearance of one's root guru as an ordinary person is due to one's own flaws and afflictions, but that in their real nature, they are actually Samyaksambuddhas and you accept their words as such.

Actually, it is very unlikely that any one of us meeting Gotama Buddha today would be able to see him as being a Samyaksambuddha. We would see an old North Indian guy dressed in ragged robes followed around by people of similar mien.

Anyway, this practice only applies to qualified people from whom one has received empowerment into a highest yoga tantra mandala. If you have not received such an empowerment, then there is no reason to follow this practice.

Mkoll said:
3) This one is kind of unrelated, but: Are all Tibetan schools Vajrayana Buddhism?

Malcolm wrote:
Yes.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 2nd, 2014 at 5:53 AM
Title: Re: Recognising reincarnations
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Dzogchen existed in India, and is found in the tantras, unlike the tulku system.

Sherab Dorje said:
If I remember correctly, a certain tulku  whose teachings I have been following the past few weeks, stated quite clearly, a number of times that the Dzogchen teachings/method did not originate from India, but from one of the current day -stans:  Kyrgyzstan, Turkmenistan...

So...

But now we digress.

Malcolm wrote:
Dzogchen was brought to Tibet from India by way of Vajrāsana. This is clearly stated in the early Dzogchen annals.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 2nd, 2014 at 4:47 AM
Title: Re: Recognising reincarnations
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
First, my authority is not Tibet, my authority is sutra and tantra. I do not have to accept Tibetan cultural practices as authoritative, I don't eat Tsampa, drink Chang, or herd yaks.

Sherab Dorje said:
So the tulku system is on par with eating tsampa and herding yaks...

Malcolm wrote:
My point is that it is a cultural practice.



Sherab Dorje said:
Greg, the tulku system started in Kagyu, than spread to other schools. It is not a universal thing in Buddhism, it never existed in India, and it does not need to exist in the West.
Neither did/is Dzogchen, you reckon we should get rid of that too?

Malcolm wrote:
Dzogchen existed in India, and is found in the tantras, unlike the tulku system.


Sherab Dorje said:
I can understand your attachment to it...
I am not attached to it.  If I was attached to it I would not be calling for its reformation.  I am just not averse to it.

Malcolm wrote:
I am not averse to it. If Tibetans want to continue the tulku system, they are free to. Some of their reincarnations might even be real ones, like ChNN — but most will be chosen and "blessed" as tulkus.


Sherab Dorje said:
But the point is that there is a sufficient amount of corruption in the system to call the whole system into question.
This is our fundamental point of disagreement.

Malcolm wrote:
Yup, we disagree on this point.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 2nd, 2014 at 2:43 AM
Title: Re: Recognising reincarnations
Content:
Sherab Dorje said:
The tantric texts do not call for abolishing of the tulku system though, do they?  They are all situated within the same framework:  Tibetan Vajrayana.

Malcolm wrote:
Considering that the tulku system does not come from tantras, why would they even mention it?

Sherab Dorje said:
They are all situated within the same framework:  Tibetan Vajrayana. Please don't cherry pick.

Malcolm wrote:
First, my authority is not Tibet, my authority is sutra and tantra. I do not have to accept Tibetan cultural practices as authoritative, I don't eat Tsampa, drink Chang, or herd yaks.

Greg, the tulku system started in Kagyu, than spread to other schools. It is not a universal thing in Buddhism, it never existed in India, and it does not need to exist in the West. I can understand your attachment to it, but it really is something which is a cultural practice of Tibetans and not really something which has a strong foundation in sutra and tantra.

This does not mean that there are no reincarnations, or that no one can recognize a reincarnation with accuracy. But the point is that there is a sufficient amount of corruption in the system to call the whole system into question. As long as there is no clearly defined criteria by which a tulku may be recognized, then I am afraid it is just a matter of faith whether one accepts someone as a reincarnation of a master or not.

This is why I bring up the examples of NKT. For example, according to them, <redacted> is Sakya Pandita's reincarnation. According to your logic, since this is the opinion of Trijiang Rinpoche, I should accept it, or at least not dispute it. Can't you see how crazy your point of view is? according to your point of view, I should accept that a worldly spirit is the reincarnation of one of the most important Sakya masters.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 2nd, 2014 at 2:32 AM
Title: Re: Recognising reincarnations
Content:
Sherab Dorje said:
The tantric texts do not call for abolishing of the tulku system though, do they?  They are all situated within the same framework:  Tibetan Vajrayana.

Malcolm wrote:
Considering that the tulku system does not come from tantras, why would they even mention it?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 2nd, 2014 at 2:31 AM
Title: Re: Recognising reincarnations
Content:
conebeckham said:
I am not certain we can infer that all those things are the result of the Tulku system.  Sometimes, in fact, I think they exist despite it.

Sherab Dorje said:
Maybe, maybe not.  Personally I would prefer an overhaul of the tulku system rather than its being scrapped just because it has some flaws.  Like I said earlier:  this is samsara, it is flawed by its very nature (Kongtrul's opinion, in his autobio, is worth a look......)
Thank you.  I will track it down and read it.

Is this the one you mean:  "Enthronement: The Recognition Of The Reincarnate Masters Of Tibet And The Himalayas" or is it this one:  "The Autobiography of Jamgon Kongtrul: A Gem of Many Colors"?

Malcolm wrote:
The real problem with tulku system is that it is a Tibetan cultural artifact, and not something which can be found in sutra or tantra.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 2nd, 2014 at 2:24 AM
Title: Re: Recognising reincarnations
Content:
Sherab Dorje said:
This is yet another clumsy attempt by you to deflect the conversation away from the real subject, in order to cover up your own logical flaws and egocentric concerns.

Malcolm wrote:
If there is a flaw in my logic, prove it. Otherwise, your comments are baseless ad hominem remarks with no substance.

Sherab Dorje said:
I have, you are unwilling to admit them and that is why this conversation continues to drag on for no reason at all.  I have pointed out what pure view entails and how preferring "one" over "another" has nothing to do with with pure view and everything to do with egotistical concern and dualising (like, dislike, believe, don't believe, is tulku, is not tulku, etc...).

I have admitted that the tulku system is flawed and shown how the idea of tulku cannot (unfortunately, and as much as I personally would like it to be able to) be separated from the system that recognises tulku.

You have responded by trying to start a bun fight over a certain controversy (notice how I did not take the bait?).  Now whilst the example does highlight some of the flaws in the system, at the same time it also shows how the system can, does and has worked in a positive manner, for over 800 years.

Malcolm wrote:
Hi Greg:

Well, you have not shown any such flaws, and moreover, you have only succeeded in proving that tulku system is inane by referring to pure vision. The tulku system only works in a world where there is higher and lower, pure and impure. Once you have decided that you are going to trot down the path of "pure vision", well, now you have no reason to ban <redacted> and NKT here at all. According to "pure vision", the pope is as much a Buddha as the HHDL or the HHK, etc.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 2nd, 2014 at 1:16 AM
Title: Re: Recognising reincarnations
Content:
Sherab Dorje said:
This is yet another clumsy attempt by you to deflect the conversation away from the real subject, in order to cover up your own logical flaws and egocentric concerns.

Malcolm wrote:
If there is a flaw in my logic, prove it. Otherwise, your comments are baseless ad hominem remarks with no substance (countdown to thread meltdown begins now...)


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 2nd, 2014 at 1:09 AM
Title: Re: Recognising reincarnations
Content:
conebeckham said:
Tulkus are GREAT!
The Tulku System sucks.

Malcolm wrote:
it seems our friend Greg does not want to distinguish between the two. I for one think nirmanakāyas are excellent. But developing a whole bureaucracy predicated in the principle of "recognitions", as we have seen throughout Tibetan history is fraught with manipulation, fraud and abuse.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 1st, 2014 at 10:36 PM
Title: Re: What is considered a teaching from the Upadesha cycle?
Content:
bryandavis said:
So a revealed cycle can have maya, anu, ati ect. as part of its corpus but upadesha would only refer to the ati aspect of the practices?
Is upadesha then direct personal experience of any of these paths given in pith to students who have the capacity to get it in a less unelaborated way?
Or is upadesha the method that points directly to rigpa without any secondary methods?

Malcolm wrote:
Upadesha just means "intimate instruction" from upa, meaning "close", and desha, meaning "to instruct". The inference is that these are instructions one hears at the feet of one's guru in an intimate setting. There are all kinds of upadeshas.

Also upadesha is translated two ways into Tibetan gdams ngag and man ngag. The former meaning oral advice, that latter means secret advice.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 1st, 2014 at 10:05 PM
Title: Re: Dzogchen & rainbow body
Content:
Tod said:
Hi, friends,

after the very detailed explanation of Gyurme Kundrol, I have a question as to what is considered a teaching from the Upadesha cycle.

All the Longsal teachings of Namkhai Norbu are called "upadesha" in their name, although they display many different methods. Not to name all, but there are very different ones, like Mandarava with it's Tsa Lung, not a Dzogchen teaching in itself maybe; Saltong, combining Tsa Lung, Semdzins etc; Todgal, and so on.

And what about a teaching like "The Upadesha of Introduction to the State of Ati", which has a method from Semde, but then explains also Tregchod?

Thanks for clarifying.

Tod

Malcolm wrote:
Longsal Khandro Nyinthig contains teachings from Anuyoga such as Jñāna Dakini and Mandarava (which are really all part of one cycle) as well as the three series of ati yoga.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 1st, 2014 at 9:59 PM
Title: Re: Recognising reincarnations
Content:
Sherab Dorje said:
at least we should refrain from cultivating aversion.

Malcolm wrote:
You do realize that now we are going to comb your every post for examples of aversion?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 1st, 2014 at 9:57 PM
Title: Re: Recognising reincarnations
Content:
Sherab Dorje said:
And, yes, doubting the veracity of the recognition of the Karmapa tulkus(or any other tulku teacher other than your own) is a condemnation of their capacities.

Malcolm wrote:
Therefore, according to your own reasoning, you yourself must accept that HH Karmapa, Orgyen Thrinly Dorje, is the real Karmapa. And if you don't, you are condemning him. Moreover, you are asserting that the late Shamarpa was wrong in not accepting Tai Situ's candidate. Not only that, but you are equally asserting that Tai Situ is wrong not to accept HH Karmapa, Thrinly Thaye Dorje, as being the real Karmapa.

The only solution for you then is that you must regard both Karmapas as the same and take teachings from them both.

Basically what you are saying is that we all must accept all tulku recognitions on faith without question.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 1st, 2014 at 5:12 AM
Title: Re: Recognising reincarnations
Content:


Malcolm wrote:
Accepting that ChNN is the reincarnation of Adzom Drugpa does not entail that I must accept all  or even any other recognitions of reincarnations.

Jikan said:
following this to its conclusion:  one may well have reason to believe someone is a reincarnation of someone else, but this has nothing to do with the question of the political institution of reincarnation-recognition.  I think this distinction is getting lost in the shuffle of this conversation for some parties.

if you have a precious human rebirth now, it follows that at some time in lives previous you'd done something right.  Is it necessary to have an enthronement ceremony for each of you in order to take this at face value?  Accepting this premise but rejecting the "tulku system" as a social construct are not contradictory positions.


Malcolm wrote:
Thank you.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 1st, 2014 at 3:12 AM
Title: Re: Recognising reincarnations
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
For example, if we accept that Tibet fell because of the non-virtue of its rulers, for the most part who were they? High tulkus.

ReasonAndRhyme said:
So Tibet was a theocracy then?

Malcolm wrote:
No.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 1st, 2014 at 2:48 AM
Title: Re: Zabmo Nangdon to be published by Shambhala
Content:


Malcolm wrote:
The entire (reliable) translation of Longchenpa's commentary on Guhyagarbha is available for free on the internet. It is ludicrous therefore for anyone to restrict commentaries on it.

Jikan said:
I'm interested in finding this one, but it seems my google skills aren't up to the task.  If anyone could please point me in the right direction, I'd appreciate it very much.  Thank you.

Malcolm wrote:
http://vajrayana.faithweb.com/guhyagarbhatantra.pdf


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 1st, 2014 at 1:54 AM
Title: Re: Recognising reincarnations
Content:
Sherab Dorje said:
They are still both tulku though.  Ratified through the tulku system.  And earlier you stated that you have no doubt that ChNN is a tulku.

Malcolm wrote:
ChNN did not believe in his own status as a tulku for many years.

He only accepted that he was the tulku of Adzom Drugpa later on in life based on some circumstances.

The reason why I accept that ChNN is an actual reincarnation of Adzom Drugpa has to do with those circumstances — primarily, ChNN wrote a commentary, and later on, when he finally got a copy of Adzom Drugpa's collected works, he found a text identical to the one he had written himself in that collection, the same for over a hundred folios. He explained all this in 1992 at the first SMS retreat at Tsegyalgar.

Further, the master that recognized him as the tulku of Adzom Drugpa was his own uncle, the one who attained rainbow body, not Yeshe's predecessor.

But the tulku system is just religious politics, completely and totally worldly in my opinion.

Sherab Dorje said:
So, really: You want to have your cake or do you want to eat it? Make up your mind.

Malcolm wrote:
Accepting that ChNN is the reincarnation of Adzom Drugpa does not entail that I must accept all  or even any other recognitions of reincarnations.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 1st, 2014 at 1:47 AM
Title: Re: Zabmo Nangdon to be published by Shambhala
Content:
Son of Buddha said:
I wish All dharmic texts were free,that's what the Buddha wanted.

Malcolm wrote:
That is true only of sutra. It is completely not true of tantra.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 1st, 2014 at 1:41 AM
Title: Re: Recognising reincarnations
Content:
Sherab Dorje said:
Strangely enough, not being enlightened and all, the only thing we are capable of doing is offering opinions. In my opinion the whole tulku system is a worldly system.
Except when it is being applied to your teacher and his son?

Malcolm wrote:
Yeshe's enthronement at the monastery of his predecessor is a completely worldly affair.

ChNN himself was never in line to head a monastery. He would have wound up being a disaffiliated teacher whether in the East or the West.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 1st, 2014 at 1:19 AM
Title: Re: Zabmo Nangdon to be published by Shambhala
Content:
conebeckham said:
Hard to believe, but perhaps that's not their chief goal...

Son of Buddha said:
Providing Dharma at a reasonable price so all people who are interested in it can learn it should be their chief goal.

Malcolm wrote:
If someone cannot cough up a 100 bucks for a rare text someone has gone through considerable trouble to translate then they don't really need it or want it.

Sutrayāna is different than Vajrayāna on this score. Eventually, whole Kenjur will be online, for free. This does not mean however that all books should be free. Even the Kenjur is not free -- 84000 is paying a lot of money to have those sutras and tantras translated.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 1st, 2014 at 1:10 AM
Title: Re: Recognising reincarnations
Content:


Sherab Dorje said:
PS  I tend to agree with Lord Jigten Sumgons analysis of karma where the actual act itself, regardless of intention/motivation etc... produces effects too.  So...

Malcolm wrote:
Another opinion, one that is not supported in the classical Indian texts, but whatever.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 1st, 2014 at 1:10 AM
Title: Re: Recognising reincarnations
Content:
Sherab Dorje said:
Being a tulku is not just a high worldly position.

Malcolm wrote:
It is simply a matter of opinion. In my opinion the whole tulku system is a worldly system. Your opinion is different.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 1st, 2014 at 12:27 AM
Title: Re: Recognising reincarnations
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
What sort of karma causes anyone to have a high position in samsara?

Sherab Dorje said:
It's not just a high position.  It is a high Dharma oriented position.  At the very least they will receive a really good Dharma education.  That's MUCH more than what most of us will encounter in this lifetime.  So it seems to me that even being falsely recognised as a tulku requires craploads of merit.

Malcolm wrote:
It is just a high worldly position.

Whether the person is a Dharma person or not depends on the qualities of the person in the chair, and not the chair itself.

There are a lot people with Dharma in their mouths but not in their hearts. "Dharma" words are not necessarily Dharma.

For example, if we accept that Tibet fell because of the non-virtue of its rulers, for the most part who were they? High tulkus. So you see, these institutional positions are actually quite worldly and there is a huge amount of writing by the people in these position of monastic authority bemoaning the fact that these positions are just worldly fetters that prevent them from practicing.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 1st, 2014 at 12:09 AM
Title: Re: Recognising reincarnations
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
As far as pure vision goes, if someone has the idea that even one person is not a fully awakened buddha, their vision is not pure.

Sherab Dorje said:
Exactly.  In which case EVEN if you were to see your teacher as a Buddha then the only thing you are doing is indulging in dualistic egotistical speculation:  He is a Buddha, He is not a Buddha.  They are real tulku, they are not real tulku.

So what is it going to be?  Pure vision or aversion/attraction?

Malcolm wrote:
Honestly, greg, I don't think other teachers much. What I do know is that my primary teachers are Buddhas. YMMV.

Sherab Dorje said:
You are also not obligated to put one up on the pedastal, while burying the other.  So why do it?

Malcolm wrote:
I didn't. I used the Karmapas merely as an example. I don't really think about them very much.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, July 31st, 2014 at 11:50 PM
Title: Re: Recognising reincarnations
Content:
Jikan said:
I can't speak for Malcolm, but I'd argue that if someone has concrete evidence that a recognition was made purely for material or political reasons, and not for the qualities of the one recognized, and that person judges that incarnation to be totally false, then that person isn't making egotistical speculation.  That person is making an informed judgment.  Not all judgments are rational, nor are they all speculative-egotistical, nor are they all matters of faith.

Sherab Dorje said:
Consider this though:  What sort of karma would lead to one being enthroned, as a child, as a false tulku?  What kind of karma is generated by the child after having been thrust into this role?

Malcolm wrote:
What sort of karma causes anyone to have a high position in samsara?

As for the second question, that really depends on whether they behave virtuously or non-virtuously.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, July 31st, 2014 at 10:03 PM
Title: Re: Dr. Sanderson: Phowa etc. are directly from Saivism
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Lower tantra a) is not effective in this day and age.

sherabpa said:
Wait, is anyone saying lower tantra is not effective because it was originally intended for Shaiva followers, lower castes etc?

I can see how one might conclude that the lower tantras are less effective than the higher tantras, but I cannot see that they are ineffective.

Sonam Tsemo says in the Tantra Sets Presentation that the lower tantras are distinct from paramitayana in that they have blessing and gazing/smiling at the deity, which makes them more similar to the higher tantras than to the paramitas.  But nothing is said to be ineffective.

I guess I am asking - what does effectiveness mean here?

Malcolm wrote:
Loppon Rinpoche states:

Therefore, followers of the Pāramitāyāna do not accomplish [awakening] in this degenerate age, but followers of Secret Mantra do accomplish [awakening] in this degenerate age. The Herukābhyadaya also states:
If one upholds Śrī Heruka,
There will be accomplishment in the decadent age.


There is no Śrī Heruka in lower tantra.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, July 31st, 2014 at 9:32 PM
Title: Re: Recognising reincarnations
Content:
JKhedrup said:
I think the point Malcolm makes is a pertinent one. From the Vajrayana POV, it is important to view one's Vajra Master as enlightened. This becomes even more essential with regards to Highest Yoga Tantra.

Sherab Dorje said:
While this is true, at the same time, this does not mean that one does not view other teachers with pure vision too.  I can understand if Malcolm considers ChNN a Buddha, but that does not mean he has the right to judge others as false incarnations.  Then his view is just reduced to egotistical speculation.

Malcolm wrote:
I did not judge anyone as a false incarnation. In other words, for example, I have no faith in the two Karmapas as incarnations of the 16th Karmapa. But my lack of faith in them as reincarnations has no bearing on whether they are the actual incarnations of the 16th or not. Just to clarify, I have 0 connection with the Karma Kagyu lineage, for whatever reason, just like I have 0 connection with the Gelug lineage.

As far as pure vision goes, if someone has the idea that even one person is not a fully awakened buddha, their vision is not pure. So, if we are going to take about pure vision, we really need to be clear what we mean.

I have no obligation to regard teachers other than my own as Buddhas. I am not even obliged to have pure vision of them (other than the same we try to imagine all sentient beings are buddhas in the context of the universe as a buddhamandala). I have no obligation to regard people who are not my teachers as anything more than ordinary worldly people with no special qualities worth mentioning.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, July 31st, 2014 at 4:48 AM
Title: Re: Recognising reincarnations
Content:
Norwegian said:
Malcolm said there's no way of giving an objective verification, and that it is all 100% faith based. So asking for objective evidence in that case is rather difficult...

Sherab Dorje said:
There is actually no objective verification of anything.  All verification is based on a majority of subjective opinion.  So why would it be different for tulku?  Why do we, in this case, call it faith and in other cases objective verification?

Malcolm wrote:
You can falsify a chemistry experiment, but not a tulku recognition. As for the latter, you either believe it or you don't.

In the case of ChNN, I believe it. In the case of both Karmapas, I don't believe in either one.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, July 31st, 2014 at 4:45 AM
Title: Re: Recognising reincarnations
Content:
zenman said:
Medieval beliefs. Surely there are no buddhas teaching at every dharma center. It is entirely misleading to spread such beliefs. I've seen the fruit of this when it is realised that the guru isn't a buddha after all.

Malcolm wrote:
You don't need to  believe someone else's guru is an actual Buddha, just your own. That is all that matters. If you cannot believe your root Guru is a Buddha, than you have no business taking any kind of Vajrayāna teachings and more to the point, the Vajrayāna teachings you do take will not be effective.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, July 31st, 2014 at 3:11 AM
Title: Re: Recognising reincarnations
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
It is %100 percent faith -- there is no objective way of verifying any of it. So just admit it and be happy.

Sherab Dorje said:
Objective?  That's a strange term coming from you Malcolm!  So I guess that a tulku admitting that they had memories of their past life when they were still a child but that over time the memories faded so that now they have little recollection of their previous life is not objective.  So what would be an objective source of evidence then?

Malcolm wrote:
I have always made a distinction between falsifiable phenomena and non-falsifiable phenomena. Frankly, even though, from a Buddhist perspective, all children have some memory of past lives due to the activation of clairvoyance from the eighth month of pregnancy onwards, accepting this idea is based on faith, indeed even rebirth is just something you have to have faith in, %100.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, July 31st, 2014 at 3:01 AM
Title: Re: Recognising reincarnations
Content:


heart said:
Well, many tulkus seems to be verified by dreams great masters have. I am not really sure I would call that just faith.

/magnus

Malcolm wrote:
%100 percent faith. Why? well, if you accept the testimony of such a master it is based on faith, %100.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, July 31st, 2014 at 2:52 AM
Title: Re: Recognising reincarnations
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Just admit it Greg, it is all %100 faith based.

Sherab Dorje said:
I wouldn't say 100%.  Having talked to a tulku and seen and read some accounts it seems to be more than just faith.  Some do display specific/extraordinary qualities.  Of course there is nepotism and (like I said) politics involved, which means that there it also has a strategic component, thus we are talking about a deviation from the ideal of faith.  That in itself means that it is not 100% faith.  There is some cunning in there too. Plus, of course, other more objective factors.  Maybe even some virtue.

Malcolm wrote:
It is %100 percent faith -- there is no objective way of verifying any of it. So just admit it and be happy.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, July 31st, 2014 at 2:44 AM
Title: Re: Recognising reincarnations
Content:
zenman said:
Procedure meaning a process done by some or many experienced lamas who investigate and either reject or confirm it? I'd think that this is more a matter of perception, intuition and discrimination (as in the ability to discern the quality of subtle vibration) than procedure, if it means something like I explain here. Yes? No?

Sherab Dorje said:
Procedure like:  This lama is responsible for making the final decision regarding candidates, in the event that this lama is not in the position to make the decision, then the responsibility lies with this lama, etc...

Or:  A candidate will be considered valid on the basis of this, this and this criteria, if they do not satisfy the aforementioned criteria then they will not be eligible...

Procedure.  You see there is property and wealth involved too, many times, not just a title.  Or the future of a lineage may depend on the "right" candidate being found.  So, as we all well know quite well, whenever money, wealth and power comes into things then politics arise.  Since they are bound to arise, if there is a set procedure (which there isn't) then this acts as a check to the politics.  Even if there are politics involved, if there is a procedure in place then at least the politics are executed in a relatively smooth and conflict-free fashion.

But there is no set procedure, and intuition is a little difficult to verify objectively.  And anyway, just because two (or more) intuited results conflict, doesn't mean that all of them are incorrect.

Malcolm wrote:
Just admit it Greg, it is all %100 faith based.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, July 31st, 2014 at 12:43 AM
Title: Re: Recognising reincarnations
Content:


Malcolm wrote:
Klesha obscurations and Knowledge obscurations. Bodhisattvas on the bodhisattvas have these.

zenman said:
Bodhisattvas on the bodhisattvas? A typo?

Malcolm wrote:
yes, on the bodhisattva bhumis, as opposed to ordinary bodhisattvas.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, July 30th, 2014 at 11:38 PM
Title: Re: Recognising reincarnations
Content:
Sherab Dorje said:
...why do these disagreements exist?
Because there is no clear cut procedure.

zenman said:
Procedure meaning a process done by some or many experienced lamas who investigate and either reject or confirm it? I'd think that this is more a matter of perception, intuition and discrimination (as in the ability to discern the quality of subtle vibration) than procedure, if it means something like I explain here. Yes? No?

Malcolm wrote:
A "reincarnation" means the rebirth of someone who has some portion of the two obscurations remaining. An "emanation" is someone who is in fact an expression of the compassion of a fully awakened Buddha who may manifest as an ordinary person externally, but internally has all the full mature qualities of a Buddha. How do you tell the difference? In Vajrayāna it does not really matter, since you are supposed to regard your guru as an actual buddha in every respect.

zenman said:
Great! A clear explanation What are the two obscurations of the reincarnations?

Malcolm wrote:
Klesha obscurations and Knowledge obscurations. Bodhisattvas on the bodhisattvas have these.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, July 30th, 2014 at 10:03 PM
Title: Re: Recognising reincarnations
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
A "reincarnation" means the rebirth of someone who has some portion of the two obscurations remaining. An "emanation" is someone who is in fact an expression of the compassion of a fully awakened Buddha who may manifest as an ordinary person externally, but internally has all the full mature qualities of a Buddha. How do you tell the difference? In Vajrayāna it does not really matter, since you are supposed to regard your guru as an actual buddha in every respect.

zenman said:
These two quotes lead me to consider a subject that I've pondered a few times before: the differences in recognitions of lamas reincarnations. I recall this matter has come by a few times before but I can't remember which cases exactly.

I'm not familiar with what emanations and reincarnations mean, have to do some googling on those, unless someone could easily explain it for me.

Anyway, my main question is, based on these two messages below as well as other similar cases, that there are disagreements on recognitions of the reincarnations. My intention is not to argue about this but to analyse why do these disagreements exist?

Thanks for the input all.

Karma Jinpa said:
... a letter from Namdroling monastery:  Kyabjé Drubwang Pema Norbu's reincarnation has been found!!!
All Palyulpas and Nyingmapas in general should rejoice; a great being---an emanation of Vajrasattva and reincarnation of Vimalamitra---has returned to tame beings once more!
reincarnation of Vimalamitra

Malcolm wrote:
He can't be a reincarnation of Vimalamitra since Vimalamitra, according to legend, attained 'pho ba chen po, and still lives at Wutai Shan.
He would be an emanation of Vimalamitra. As the legend has it, Vimalamitra returns to Tibet every one hundred years.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, July 30th, 2014 at 9:51 PM
Title: Re: Religions vs Communist Party in China
Content:
Will said:
Or is it so closely watched and/or infiltrated that Chinese Buddhism in China is just a sham?

Malcolm wrote:
Very likely.

Will said:
Your 'Very likely' is just a speculation, right?  My guess would be the same, but I would like to hear from any Chinese Buddhism followers who know from 1st hand or have heard reliable testimony about the facts.  Of course, they may endanger themselves when they share such facts publicly.  So silence is 'very likely'  too.

Malcolm wrote:
During the 90's, many Vietnamese temples, even in the US, were infiltrated by monastic spies from Vietnam. It became a real problem for them.

The fact is that monks in monasteries in China are little more than museum guards. Their standard of education in Dharma is very poor, and they are forced to spend a lot of time in political education classes. Tibetan Monasteries are also forced to waste time on political education classes. If you want high quality Chinese Dharma you must go to Taiwan.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, July 30th, 2014 at 9:28 PM
Title: Re: Religions vs Communist Party in China
Content:
Will said:
Or is it so closely watched and/or infiltrated that Chinese Buddhism in China is just a sham?

Malcolm wrote:
Very likely.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 29th, 2014 at 10:57 PM
Title: Re: Re 21 Taras
Content:
pemachophel said:
Narraboth,

Sorry, I can't answer your questions although they are good ones. I hope someone addresses them in a knowledgeable way. In my case, I'm working on a Dakini sadhana (sorry, can't say which one) which includes visualization of the 21 Taras around the periphery of the central Dakini. The text says to visualize the 21 Taras in terms of color, hand implements, expression, etc. clearly and precisely but doesn't say how exactly. When I asked my Teacher Who gave me this practice which of the various versions of the 21 Taras to use, He said to use this one. That's what spurred my OP.

When I did Yumka Dechen Gyalmo, I was not given this lay-jor of the 21 Taras. I hope some day to receive it in the context of Yumka.



Malcolm wrote:
If you received the transmission of Tara from ChNN, you received this.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 29th, 2014 at 9:29 PM
Title: Re: Restricted Publications-An Effective or Ineffective Tact
Content:
yegyal said:
I was actually referring to SofB's description of book costs more than anything.  It seems that this became a thread dedicated to a different topic since my last post.


Malcolm wrote:
I know, and I agree with you %100. As a translator I can tell you we survive solely on sponsorships. There is no money in translating books.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 29th, 2014 at 8:55 PM
Title: Re: Zabmo Nangdon to be published by Shambhala
Content:
yegyal said:
One of the reasons that Sanskrit titles are included at the beginning of Tibetan translations of Indian texts is to remind the reader of the kindness of the translators.  This notion seems to be lost in the fray of these discussions about the cost of Dharma books.   Elizabeth Callahan has been working on this book for years and people are talking about how much profit can be made selling bound up copies of ink on paper.  That shows very little understanding of the value of the work.  Of course, none of this would even get to the point of being published if there wasn't a sponsor supporting her.  In fact, that's why all those books are available in Tibetan, because sponsors took it upon themselves to have them printed and made available for a nominal price.  Even TBRC is funded by sponsors.  So all this talk about things being free or available is all because of somebody else footing the bill.  So rather than complaining about the costs of books like this, maybe you should appreciate how cheap it really is.  What's dinner and a movie cost these days?   Is that really worth more to you than being able to read the scriptures of your chosen religion?

Malcolm wrote:
Right, but the issue here is not cost, it is restrictions vs. lack of restrictions, and the reality is that restricting books is a little fatuous.

Personally, making books like khrid ye shes bla ma and so on expensive automatically restricts them. Setting a high price for important tantric texts is a more effective strategy than making people fill out questionnaires and signing oaths.

Anyway, as I already pointed out, well trained students will not purchase books for which they do not have transmission/permission.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 28th, 2014 at 10:47 PM
Title: Re: Melody of Dharma No. 13
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
http://www.hhthesakyatrizin.org/pdfs/Melody_of_Dharma_13.pdf

This volume contains our translation (Khenpo Migmar Tseten and myself) of an important never before translated text by Mahāsiddha Virupa.

Enjoy!


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 28th, 2014 at 10:29 PM
Title: Re: Zabmo Nangdon to be published by Shambhala
Content:


Anders said:
Maybe those lamas aren't thrilled with the TIbetan situation either and reckon that at least in English, it can be 'done right'...

Malcolm wrote:
The reason why these books are available in Tibetan is because the Tibetan Buddhist Lineage Heads want these books out there so that they won't die. Every book on TBRC has a database entry through which any text can be restricted by tradition of they so choose. There are many books on TBRC that in fact are restricted by tradition.

When Tibetan lineages send books to TBRC they do so knowing full well that they are openly making these texts available.

Now, Sherapa has brought up the point of samaya — and this is a valid point. If you are a practitioner, and take lineage seriously, it is better to get permission to read this or that text if you are interested in it. This is the proper approach. On the other hand, a text like Zabmo Nangdon is a general text on tantric anatomy, so in fact anyone who has received HYT empowerment is qualified to read it.

Even then, the Shambhala "restriction" pages are kind of ludicrous because anyone can just lie if they want to get the book.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 25th, 2014 at 10:57 PM
Title: Re: Dogen's quote: arhathood or buddhahood?
Content:
LastLegend said:
I am willing to hear the explanation why Vajra methods can take people to full Buddhahood? What rational explanation behind this?

Malcolm wrote:
A realized master directly introduces a willing and interested student to their own state through different kinds of experiences. Rinse, repeat. This is the shortest explanation. There are many more complicated discussions. The essence of them all is that Vajrayāna has the method of taking the result as the path. Dzogchen is also a little different than this.

uan said:
That's a great way of stating it. Could you expand a bit on how Dzogchen is a little different?

Malcolm wrote:
Dzogchen takes the result as the basis, and the basis is practiced as the path.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 25th, 2014 at 9:31 PM
Title: Re: Dogen's quote: arhathood or buddhahood?
Content:
LastLegend said:
I am willing to hear the explanation why Vajra methods can take people to full Buddhahood? What rational explanation behind this?

Malcolm wrote:
A realized master directly introduces a willing and interested student to their own state through different kinds of experiences. Rinse, repeat. This is the shortest explanation. There are many more complicated discussions. The essence of them all is that Vajrayāna has the method of taking the result as the path. Dzogchen is also a little different than this.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 25th, 2014 at 9:29 PM
Title: Re: Dogen's quote: arhathood or buddhahood?
Content:


Dan74 said:
I agree with Jikan that it is fraught with danger to use a Kagyu master's teachings in response to a Soto Zen teacher, as they are coming from different initial assumptions and often different terminology. The (apocryphal?) story of Hashang Mahayana, the Ch'an monk who debated with Vajra masters and lost, is a great case in point when two traditions meet but not much contact takes place. Another one is the case of Kalu Rinpoche and Seung Sahn.

Malcolm wrote:
The Samye debate was not a debate between Vajrayāna masters and Hashang. Kamalashila was debating a strictly sutrayāna point of view grounded in standard Indian Mahāyāna. Not all Tibetans agree that Kamalashila won the debate either.

If you want to read a Dzogchen master's treatment of 8th century Northern School Chan, then you need to read Nubchen Sangye Yeshe's "Lamp of the Eye of Dhyāna". One of the interesting things about this text is that it cites scores of Tibetan Chan masters, not just Chinese masters.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 25th, 2014 at 9:22 PM
Title: Re: Dogen's quote: arhathood or buddhahood?
Content:
Vajrasvapna said:
From Nyingmapa point of view, Chan/zen affirmation are correct...

Malcolm wrote:
Well, not so fast, Kiomosabe, for one thing, the type of Chan Tibetans were exposed to was a Northern School variant. It is very hard to make a case that 10th century Tibetan doxologies apply to the Vajrayāna influenced Zen of the Kamakura period, or even Sung Dynasty Chan.

Secondly, Nubchen makes it very, very clear that while Chan (as known in Tibet) follows the definitive Mahāyāna sutras, it is not as direct or efficient as Mahāyoga, and addresses the seeming contradiction here inso far as the fact that Chan is supposedly a "sudden" path, where as Mahāyoga is gradual. And of course, he clearly places Atiyoga as the pinnacle of all.

Third, the idea that one can "realize" Dharmakāya without achieving full buddhahood is somewhat absurd. Sure, we call the emptiness aspect of the mind "the dharmakāya" of the basis, but this does not mean we have realized the result dharmakāya even though there is no substantial difference between the dharmakāya of the basis and the dharmakāya of the result.

It is very interesting to examine Nubchen's detailed and nuanced arguments.  It is true that Thuken wrote about Chan in 18th century China, but he dismisses it as Yogacara in a short summary fashion. While it is true that Longchenpa and Jigme Lingpa comment briefly on Chan, there is no Tibetan whose treatment of the Chan/Gradualist debate is more authoritative than Nubchen's.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 25th, 2014 at 9:06 AM
Title: Re: Dogen's quote: arhathood or buddhahood?
Content:


Jikan said:
According to Vajrayana.  Your mileage may vary in some Mahayana schools.

Malcolm wrote:
There is no common Mahāyāna school,including Chan/Zen, that works with the body method the way it is worked with in Vajrayāna. Further, all common Mahāyāna schools are paths of renunciation.

Tendai is in a sort of bizarre situation, for it is the only school in which distinct elements of Vajrayāna are present, but nevertheless are subordinated to a sutrayāna exegetical framework.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 25th, 2014 at 4:52 AM
Title: Re: Dogen's quote: arhathood or buddhahood?
Content:


zenman said:
When I get this clear, then I'll get back to the topic.

Malcolm wrote:
Put succintly there are two kinds of emptiness, the emptiness of persons and the emptiness of phenomena. Hinayāna paths such as Theravada and so forth do not realize the emptiness of phenomena, only the emptiness of persons.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 25th, 2014 at 4:00 AM
Title: Re: Dogen's quote: arhathood or buddhahood?
Content:
asunthatneversets said:
Arhats only have knowledge of "one-fold" emptiness, so they have full knowledge of the emptiness of self but lack (or have incomplete) insight into emptiness of phenomena.

zenman said:
Is that a view that is upheld by all or most buddhist trads? Doesn't onefold emptiness mean the same as that the "I" disappears for good and hence anatta/no-self is realised?

Malcolm wrote:
This is the point of view of Indian Mahāyāna and virtually all its descendants.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, July 24th, 2014 at 12:06 AM
Title: Re: Dorje Gotrab deity picture origin
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
rdo rje go khrab, vajra armor, is a generic name for all kinds of practices, not just one practice or lineage of practice.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, July 23rd, 2014 at 10:00 PM
Title: Re: Dzogchen & rainbow body
Content:
Jesse said:
How does one .....rainbow....?

Malcolm wrote:
You received Dzogchen teachings on a complete way from a realized master. Then you practice diligently, devoting yourself to little else in this lifetime.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, July 23rd, 2014 at 6:55 AM
Title: Re: Tarot as divination tool
Content:


Karma Dorje said:
Mipham's dice divination practice published as Mo: Tibetan Divination System does not require empowerment or retreat:

https://books.google.ca/books/about/Mo.html?id=c6Z8KqdF6LoC&redir_esc=y " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The results are quite precise, including what practices one should do in the event of problems.  This level of detail is not possible with Tarot.

Motova said:
I have this book! Are you saying I can practice Mo using this book with absolutely no guidance? If so, where is this information coming from?

Malcolm wrote:
You need to do the retreat.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, July 23rd, 2014 at 1:48 AM
Title: Re: Tarot as divination tool
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Well, for starters he wrote any number of very interesting books.

dzogchungpa said:
Any in particular that you recommend? I've always been daunted by the vastness of his output.

Malcolm wrote:
There is a good bio of him called Perdurabo, which makes no attempt to whitewash his career or person at all.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, July 23rd, 2014 at 12:35 AM
Title: Re: Tarot as divination tool
Content:
Mkoll said:
I agree with Vajrasvapna about Crowley. I've read of others who have lost their minds or come close to it by delving too deep into his work.

Malcolm wrote:
In other words, you don't really know anything about him.

Mkoll said:
And why any Buddhist would admire him is beyond me.

Malcolm wrote:
Well, for starters he wrote any number of very interesting books. For another he was in the employ of the British Secret Service for decades, using his masonic credentials as a cover. Beyond that, he was a world class mountain climber and all around adventurer. Even further, he studied Vipassana in Burma and Yoga in South India., etc.

He is one of the all-around most interesting people of early 20th century.

Having said all that, however, it doesn't mean I think AC taught a valid path, etc. AC was interesting, but still a worldly person in every respect. His "wickedness" however is totally overstated and silly:


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 22nd, 2014 at 8:32 PM
Title: Re: Clouded perception
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
You are not responsible for other's reactions.

Sherab Dorje said:
That is not 100% true.  If I said to somebody that they should go make love to their mother and the person get's angry and upset, it is quite obvious that I have acted as a cause or condition for their reaction.  If, on the other hand, I engage in Right Speech, and the person gets angry or upset, then my responsibility (ie my acting as a cause/condition) for their reaction is reduced drastically (maybe even to zero).

Malcolm wrote:
I don't agree Greg, I also don't care enough about this issue to bother mounting a counter argument.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 22nd, 2014 at 9:19 AM
Title: Re: Hello board and admins
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Take me to your leaders...


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 22nd, 2014 at 7:46 AM
Title: Re: Tarot as divination tool
Content:
Vajrasvapna said:
It is very difficult to understand how a Buddhist might recommend something from a black magician, known for the practice of animal sacrifice.


Malcolm wrote:
In general I think Tarot and WET is a waste of time for Buddhists.

AC was not a "black magician". He may have on one or two occasions experimented with animal sacrifice (a practice he in general abjured).

In fact, he was on of the few westerners in his day who had any real understanding of Buddhism.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 22nd, 2014 at 7:27 AM
Title: Re: Tarot as divination tool
Content:
Karma Dorje said:
You know, you could make things easier and just add that to your signature.

dzogchungpa said:
I don't think you can put images in a signature.


Malcolm wrote:
This is veering awfully close to a metadiscussion.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 22nd, 2014 at 7:22 AM
Title: Re: Tarot as divination tool
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
The best deck was and remains the Thoth Tarot of Crowley.

dzogchungpa said:
Why do you say that?


Malcolm wrote:
Crowley was a genius.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 22nd, 2014 at 7:00 AM
Title: Re: Tarot as divination tool
Content:
emptydreams said:
Okay this is going to be a weird question.

I have the ability to use tarot cards to take a peek into decision making situations, the same way how some Lamas use Mo divination.

How do I get the cards 'initialized' in a Buddhist way? I rarely use the cards except when my intuition (which is very strong) starts being muddled. Usually the cards' answers are the same as my intuition. Can i bring them along to tsog or request a Lama to bless/cleanse  them?

hope this isnt too weird of a question...

Karma Dorje said:
These are not a Buddhist divination technique.  They have their own context in the tradition of Ceremonial Magic that should be respected.

My advice is not to mix up the traditions into a porridge, but rather if you are going to use Tarot do so according to the context that produced it.

Jetavan said:
I believe tarot cards originated as a type of playing card, and were later adopted for divination by occultists in general, not limited to ceremonial magickians. There's a least one set of tarot cards based on http://www.aeclectic.net/tarot/cards/buddha/.

Malcolm wrote:
My theory about the origin of playing cards and ultimately Tarot is that they originated in the small initiation cards used central Asia for initiations.

The best deck was and remains the Thoth Tarot of Crowley.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 22nd, 2014 at 6:32 AM
Title: Re: Am awareness itself meditation
Content:
avisitor said:
I believe there is no object to attain in meditation.

Malcolm wrote:
That would be the standard Mahāyāna view.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 22nd, 2014 at 5:21 AM
Title: Re: Clouded perception
Content:
Qing Tian said:
Question: How can I exercise Right Speech when I cannot anticipate all possible reactions to what I say?

Malcolm wrote:
You are not responsible for other's reactions.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 22nd, 2014 at 3:26 AM
Title: Re: Am awareness itself meditation
Content:
avisitor said:
"Naturally occurring timeless awareness

Malcolm wrote:
What is being described is rang byung ye shes, which can be translated a number of ways such as "naturally occurring timeless awareness", "spontaneous pristine gnosis", "self-originated primordial wisdom" and so on.

avisitor said:
I am sorry but where does it say it is a state of meditation or in any way related to meditation??
I don't contend the translation.

Malcolm wrote:
It is not a state of meditation. It is a transcendent state, quite beyond meditation and a meditator.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 22nd, 2014 at 3:21 AM
Title: Re: Am awareness itself meditation
Content:
avisitor said:
"Naturally occurring timeless awareness

Malcolm wrote:
What is being described is rang byung ye shes, which can be translated a number of ways such as "naturally occurring timeless awareness", "spontaneous pristine gnosis", "self-originated primordial wisdom" and so on.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 22nd, 2014 at 2:54 AM
Title: Re: Dorje Gotrab deity picture origin
Content:
heart said:
I have seen it before, there is also a short sadhana. This is what is written in the beginning of the translation: "sngags 'bum rdo rje go khrab Adamantine Armor, mantras for protection and for repelling obstacles, revealed by Dorje Lingpa"

The DC booklet contains a full translation of at least one of the texts by Dorje Lingpa from this terma. So both practices can be correct.

/magnus

Malcolm wrote:
The Dorje Lingpa tradition has no visualization in the main text. The image is from a later terma, Ratna Lingpa, I think.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 22nd, 2014 at 2:53 AM
Title: Re: ACLU: UN to Confront USA on Persistent Racial Discrimina
Content:
David N. Snyder said:
The U.S. like most countries has a long way to go toward ending discrimination, but in what other country could a half-black, half-white, son of a man from Kenya become president for two terms? I won't mention names of countries, but can you imagine very many other countries electing a man or woman to prime minister or president where they are originally from Turkey, Iran, Congo, etc.?

Malcolm wrote:
Well, there is India.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 21st, 2014 at 11:14 PM
Title: Re: Uninterrupted motivation to practice mindfulness
Content:
Dan74 said:
A good point. The trouble is, as I see it, that most of the time it is not so much akusalacittas, but habitual mental patterns that occupy our minds. The technique of mindfulness is to help us break out of these habits ans attend to the matter at hand with complete attention and a fresh seeing.

Malcolm wrote:
Dan,

One, we have to make a distinction between sṃṛtī and sṃṛtyupasthāna. The former is a mental factor, the latter is "Close placement of mindfulness", familiar to us as the four foundations of mindfulness.

Secondly, sṃṛtī is always accompanied by saṃprajāna, i.e. attentiveness. These two always work in a pair.

The point is that we cannot have a mind where kusalacaittas and akusalacaittas are present at the same time -- it's impossible

This is why even simple exercises of mindfulness, the mundane kind, are useful. For example, mindfulness it is often described by the Buddha means when eating one knows that one is eating, when walking, one knows that one is walking, when wearing pangs, one knows that one is wearing pants. Before you can have "right mindfulness" of the kind that TRC is describing, you have to develop mindfulness.

But more to the point, when you have the presence of the mental factor of sṃṛtī, the mental factor of vīrya, diligence, is automatically present. Why? Because the kusalacaittas always work in company, where one is found all the other nine are to be found as well.

Moreover, when the ten kusalacaittas are present, it is impossible for the akusalacaittas to arise in the mind, including the three afflictions referenced above. So therefore, as long as one is mindful and attentive  even in an ordinary way, this eliminates the possibility for the akusalacaittas and the afflictive cittas to arise.

So the answer to the question is, uy understanding how mind and mental factors function the motivation to practice mindfulness arises merely by understanding how the mind works and taking opportunity of this knowledge. It does not have to be this formal, academic, intellectual trip.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 21st, 2014 at 5:51 PM
Title: Re: CHNN Shang Shang publications - Password?
Content:
vajraheart said:
Hi,
I just received several download links for restricted items that I ordered from the Shang Shang store of CHNNR. After downloading the files, when attempting to open them I am prompted for a password, but was never sent one in the email. Where do I get the passwords to open my files? Thanks...

Malcolm wrote:
They will send you ine, but it might take day.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 21st, 2014 at 2:36 PM
Title: Re: Uninterrupted motivation to practice mindfulness
Content:
TRC said:
I have to disagree with your characterisation of mindfulness as being “nothing more profound” than “not forgetting to put your pants on” Malcolm.

Malcolm wrote:
Mindfulness is simply a mental factor.

Of course there are different objects of mindfulness, but the act of being mindful is the same in so far as it is a mental factor associated with all positive minds. Mindfulness is always beneficial, since it is a kusalacaitta. This does not make mindfulness profound however.

The point here of course is to point out that we are always being mindful of something, unless of course we are distracted by the akusalacaittas,, etc.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 21st, 2014 at 8:12 AM
Title: Re: Uninterrupted motivation to practice mindfulness
Content:
SeekerNo1000003 said:
Hi,
One thing bothers me a lot lately & that is the lack of a continuous motivation to practice mindfulness.
It bothers me that I am distracted most of the day & too lazy to do anything about it.

I imagine that this is normal & motivation becomes more continuous as we continue to practice. On the other hand, I've experienced sudden rises in
determination as far as other things are concerned (e.g., finding a solution to a problem that remained unsolved for too long).

In the case of practicing mindfulness more consistently, it feels to me that a simple insight of some sort may be missing...
I'm curious have you ever had any breakthroughs or insights that helped you get into gear in the practice of mindfulness? Could you kindly share with your experience?

Malcolm wrote:
Mindfulness means not forgetting to put your pants on before you step out the door. It is really nothing more profound than this, but it is very useful to have.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, July 20th, 2014 at 10:39 AM
Title: Re: Why do only very few practitioners attain rainbow body?
Content:
smcj said:
Upon sober reflection...

Malcolm wrote:
Well, I did ask you if you were high.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, July 20th, 2014 at 10:38 AM
Title: Re: Why do only very few practitioners attain rainbow body?
Content:
smcj said:
Part of what he was talking about was wishing for validation of the teachings, to make them something more than stories and ideas, to make them something you can know you can rely on.



Malcolm wrote:
The practice of Dzogchen has the ability to eradicate the two coarse obscurations [i.e. the obscurations of affliction and knowledge] even in ordinary practitioners below the path of seeing because it permits ordinary practitioners to encounter their real condition even though they are not what one would be normally considered "enlightened" [i.e. the path of seeing/the first bodhisattva stage and beyond].

The path of Dzogchen is really quite extraordinary precisely because of its benefits for normal, everyday people.

Of course, one still must continue to practice and attain awakening in order to deal with the two subtle obscurations which remain.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, July 20th, 2014 at 4:53 AM
Title: Re: Why do only very few practitioners attain rainbow body?
Content:
smcj said:
I believe that the points that I was making were entirely in keeping with the traditional Nyingma approach to Dzogchen.

Malcolm wrote:
How would you know? Not all Nyingma teachers teach Dzogchen or have a deep understanding of Dzogchen, much less a deep practice of Dzogchen.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, July 20th, 2014 at 3:13 AM
Title: Re: Rainbow body question
Content:
Fa Dao said:
sorry if am am a little dense..just want to make sure I understand you correctly..this is serious shit, ya know?
3rd level=Awakened person=you just Know?

Malcolm wrote:
Well, one, if you reach the 3rd vision, this assumes you have had instructions on all four visions. So yeah, once you hit the third vision you also enter the first bhumi and the path of cultivation, and you are guaranteed buddhahood from that point on in the bardo at minimum.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, July 20th, 2014 at 2:42 AM
Title: Re: Rainbow body question
Content:
Fa Dao said:
ok..so in that slow dissolution does one just Know how to do that? Is it an intrinsic part of the process? or are there specific practices when one does reach that level? I am not asking for any specific details of course, especially in an online forum, just asking for future reference..


Malcolm wrote:
Once you hit the third vision you are an awakened person.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, July 20th, 2014 at 2:14 AM
Title: Re: Rainbow body question
Content:
Fa Dao said:
my question is simple..does rainbow body just happen spontaneously when one reaches the 4th vision as described in Longde/Thogal/Yangti texts? or does one just know what to do when they reach that level? or are there specific practices that one does when they reach that level?

Malcolm wrote:
The fourth vision is described as a gradual process.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, July 20th, 2014 at 2:01 AM
Title: Re: Why do only very few practitioners attain rainbow body?
Content:
uan said:
Hi Malcolm, I thought this thread would be a better place to follow up on a response you made (just so we don't go off topic on the Western Buddhist thread). I was hoping you could clarify a couple things.
Malcom wrote
uan wrote:

Based on that, is there a reason you would be presently incarnated here, rather than having attained rainbow body in the bardo or in a pure nirmanakāya buddhafield?

When you wake up in the bardo, you also generate emanations. Maybe I am one of those.
In terms of the rainbow body, whether it's attained at death or afterwards in the bardo/a pure nirmanakāya buddhafield, is that a mark that a practitioner has entered on the Bhumis or is it a mark that one has attained full Buddhahood? Does awaken mean realized or enlightened - and are those two terms describing different things or not? My understanding, which is likely to be incorrect, is that "realized" meant a person was at least on the 1st Bhumi, while "enlightened" would mean full Buddhahood. Your insight would be appreciated.


Malcolm wrote:
Generally, speaking here we mean buddhahood.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, July 20th, 2014 at 2:00 AM
Title: Re: Dharma wheel, ethics, value & online communities
Content:
boda said:
I think this often springs from the notion that newcomers must be protected from wrong views or whatever.

Malcolm wrote:
No, we are just tired of arguing with obstinate materialists about what the Buddha actually taught.

boda said:
Who on the forum is a materialist?

Malcolm wrote:
well, lets see, there was A108, etc.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, July 20th, 2014 at 1:26 AM
Title: Re: Dharma wheel, ethics, value & online communities
Content:
boda said:
I think this often springs from the notion that newcomers must be protected from wrong views or whatever.

Malcolm wrote:
No, we are just tired of arguing with obstinate materialists about what the Buddha actually taught.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, July 20th, 2014 at 12:31 AM
Title: Re: Dharma wheel, ethics, value & online communities
Content:
martin123 said:
I can honestly say that of all the forums i have visited(not just Buddhist forums) Dharmawheel is the most heaviest in atmosphere.What is heavy(in a negative sense) about wisdom and compassion?something worth considering.

boda said:
It reeks of self-importance.

Sherab Dorje said:
What reeks of self-importance?

Malcolm wrote:
DW


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, July 20th, 2014 at 12:26 AM
Title: Re: Why do only very few practitioners attain rainbow body?
Content:


Crazywisdom said:
Dzogchen is nothing like the lottery. Dzogchen is not reserved only for the mahasiddhas. If you listen, contemplate and practice the teachers words, you can have that realization in one life.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, July 19th, 2014 at 11:57 PM
Title: Re: Recent tragic events and the West vs Russia situation
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
MOSCOW (AP) — A top pro-Russia rebel commander in eastern Ukraine has given a bizarre version of events surrounding the Malaysian jetliner crash — suggesting many of the victims may have died days before the plane took off.

The pro-rebel website Russkaya Vesna on Friday quoted Igor Girkin as saying he was told by people at the crash site that "a significant number of the bodies weren't fresh," adding that he was told they were drained of blood and reeked of decomposition.

The Malaysia Airlines Boeing-777 was shot down Thursday, killing all 298 people aboard. The plane was flying 10,000 meters above an area where Ukrainian forces have been fighting separatist rebels. Each side accuses the other of downing the plane.

U.S. intelligence authorities said a surface-to-air missile brought down the plane, and U.S. Ambassador Samantha Power told the U.N. Security Council in New York on Friday that the missile was likely fired from a rebel-held area near the Russian border.

Girkin, also known as Strelkov and allegedly a former Russian military intelligence agent, said he couldn't confirm the information. But it's sure to add to the intense emotions surrounding the crash, with the rebels accused of shooting down the plane.

Girkin said "Ukrainian authorities are capable of any baseness."

He claimed that a large amount of blood serum and medications were found in the wreckage.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, July 19th, 2014 at 11:53 PM
Title: Re: Why do only very few practitioners attain rainbow body?
Content:
smcj said:
I think my response to Zoom was better than yours. You are welcome to try it again.

Malcolm wrote:
Are you high?

smcj said:
No, Gelug/Kagyu.

Malcolm wrote:
Right, and so your interest in the Dzogchen forum is?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, July 19th, 2014 at 11:52 PM
Title: Re: Why do only very few practitioners attain rainbow body?
Content:
smcj said:
I think my response to Zoom was better than yours.

Malcolm wrote:
I was being sarcastic because his comment was not serious. In fact, none of his comments have been serious.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, July 19th, 2014 at 11:45 PM
Title: Re: Why do only very few practitioners attain rainbow body?
Content:
smcj said:
I think my response to Zoom was better than yours. You are welcome to try it again.

Malcolm wrote:
Are you high?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, July 19th, 2014 at 11:34 PM
Title: Re: Why do only very few practitioners attain rainbow body?
Content:
smcj said:
You guys make too much of a big thing about Dzogchen.

Malcolm wrote:
No we don't. Dzogchen is our path. It is not yours, and that's ok.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, July 19th, 2014 at 10:19 PM
Title: Re: Recent tragic events and the West vs Russia situation
Content:


Karma Dorje said:
What I find deeply disturbing ...

Malcolm wrote:
Nothing that governments do is disturbing, or rather, it's all disturbing on one level or another.

Karma Dorje said:
Why are you correcting me when I am saying what *I* find disturbing?  If you don't find it disturbing, that's up to you.

Malcolm wrote:
it was an observation spurred by your comment, not a correction...


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, July 19th, 2014 at 8:31 PM
Title: Re: Diet in relation to Rainbow Body
Content:
zenman said:
I read the book Incarnation by Tulku Thondup. Fascinating stuff, a very good book. So many have attained the rainbow body that it kind of surprises.

My question is a specific one: What has been the role and content of the diet of these people who have attained rainbow body? I am especially interested in the changing situation of the need for food. I suppose most if not all of them have been vegetarians. What have they eaten? Does anyone know?

Malcolm wrote:
Probably very few of them were vegetarians. But they all practiced what is known as Chulen or rasāyana, which is an important secondary practice for attaining rainbow body.

And slowly, they would have reduced their dependence on food.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, July 19th, 2014 at 8:27 PM
Title: Remember 1988?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Navy Missile Downs Iranian Jetliner

By George C. Wilson
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, July 4, 1988; Page A01
A U.S. warship fighting gunboats in the Persian Gulf yesterday mistook an Iranian civilian jetliner for an attacking Iranian F14 fighter plane and blew it out of the hazy sky with a heat-seeking missile, the Pentagon announced. Iran said 290 persons were aboard the European-made A300 Airbus and that all had perished.

"The U.S. government deeply regrets this incident," Adm. William J. Crowe Jr., chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told a Pentagon news conference.

The disaster occurred at mid-morning over the Strait of Hormuz, when the airliner, Iran Air Flight 655, on what Iran described as a routine 140-mile flight from its coastal city of Bandar Abbas southwest to Dubai in the United Arab Emirates, apparently strayed too close to two U.S. Navy warships that were engaged in a battle with Iranian gunboats.

The USS Vincennes, a cruiser equipped with the most sophisticated radar and electronic battle gear in the Navy's surface arsenal, tracked the oncoming plane electronically, warned it to keep away, and when it did not fired two Standard surface-to-air missiles.

Navy officials said the Vincennes' combat teams believed the airliner to be an Iranian F14 jet fighter. No visual contact was made with the aircraft until it was struck and blew up about six miles from the Vincennes; the plane's wreckage fell in Iranian territorial waters, Navy officials said.

Iranian vessels and helicopters searched for survivors, but there was no indication last night that anyone survived what apparently is the sixth worst aviation disaster. Iranian television broadcast scenes of bodies floating amid scattered debris.

It was the first time any U.S. military unit had shot down a civilian airliner. It occurred almost five years after a Soviet fighter pilot shot down an off-course Korean Air Lines Flight 007, killing 269 people.

Iran accused the United States of a "barbaric massacre" and vowed to "avenge the blood of our martyrs."

President Reagan in a statement said he was "saddened to report" that the Vincennes "in a proper defensive action" had shot down the jetliner. "This is a terrible human tragedy. Our sympathy and condolences go out to the passengers, crew, and their families . . . . We deeply regret any loss of life."

Reagan, who was spending the Fourth of July holiday at Camp David, said the Iranian aircraft "was headed directly for the Vincennes" and had "failed to heed repeated warnings." The cruiser, he said, fired "to protect itself against possible attack."

News of the downing of the plane began with sharply conflicting accounts from Iran and from the Defense Department of what had transpired in the Persian Gulf. Early yesterday, Tehran broadcast accusations that the United States had downed an unarmed airliner.

The Pentagon at first denied the Iranian claims, declaring that information from the fleet indicated that the Vincennes, equipped with the Aegis electronic battle management system, had shot down an attacking Iranian F14 jet fighter. But after sifting through more detailed reports and electronic intelligence, Reagan directed the Pentagon to confirm there had been a tragic case of mistaken identity in the war-torn gulf.

Crowe, in his hastily called news conference at the Pentagon, also backed up the skipper of the Vincennes and faulted the Iranian airline pilot. Crowe said the Airbus had flown four miles west of the usual commercial airline route from Bandar Abbas to Dubai and that the pilot ignored repeated radioed warnings from the Vincennes to change course.

Why and how the Vincennes mistook the bulky, wide-bodied Airbus A300 for a sleek, supersonic F14 fighter plane barely a third the transport's size will be the subject of "a full investigation," Reagan promised. A military team under the command of Rear Adm. William N. Fogarty of the U.S. Central Command will leave this week to begin that investigation, Defense Department officials said.

The shootdown of the Airbus represents the biggest loss of life on the strategic waterway since the U.S. warships began escorting Kuwaiti tankers in and out of the Persian Gulf last July. Pentagon officials then said the increased U.S. naval presence would have from a "low to moderate risk" of provoking confrontations with Iran.

But in the past year, although the United States and Iran are not in a formal state of war, there have been a series of brief but fierce sea battles in the gulf between the two countries' military forces. Vigilance and readiness among U.S. forces intensified after the near-sinking of the patrol frigate USS Stark by an Iraqi fighter-bomber on May 17, 1987, in a missile attack that killed 37 sailors.

Yesterday started out as another sea battle, and ended with what the Vincennes commanders misinterpreted as a "Stark profile" attack on the high-tech cruiser. Crowe in his briefing and other Navy and Defense Department officials offered a detailed version of how the shoot-down occurred.

At 2:10 a.m. EDT, the Pentagon said, three Iranian Boghammar gunboats fired on a helicopter that had flown off the Vincennes on a reconnaissance mission. The helicopter flew back to the cruiser unscathed. The Vincennes and a smaller warship, the frigate USS Elmer Montgomery, a half-hour later closed on the gunboats and put them under fire with 5-inch guns, sinking two and damaging the third.

At 2:47 a.m. EDT, the Iranian Airbus with almost a full load of passengers took off from Bandar Abbas, a big Iranian naval base on the northern coastal elbow of the Strait of Hormuz. The field at the base is used by civilian and military aircraft and recently had become the center for Iran's dwindling force of F14s, a twin-engine, two-place fighter that the United States sold to Iran during the rule of the shah.

Two minutes after the Airbus took off, the far-reaching radars of the Vincennes Aegis cruiser saw the plane was coming its way. The skipper of the ship, operating under liberalized rules of engagement that call for U.S. captains in the Persian Gulf to fire before being fired upon to avoid another Stark disaster, warned the approaching aircraft to change course, according to the Pentagon.

The Vincennes and most airliners are equipped with identification of friend or foe (IFF) electronic boxes that query each other across the sky to establish identities. The Vincennes' IFF questioned the Airbus IFF via telemetry, but received no response. A response would come in radio pulses that would be deciphered and displayed as an identifying number on the ship's combat information center consoles.

Failing to raise the Airbus by IFF, the Pentagon said, the Vincennes broadcast its warnings by voice radio, using the emergency UHF and VHF channels that aircraft crews would hear if they followed standard practice of monitoring those frequencies. Crowe said three warnings were sent over the civilian emergency channel and four over the military one, called "Guard." The Pentagon said the Vincennes could have issued the warning over the air traffic control channel but did not.

"The suspect aircraft was outside the prescribed commercial air corridor," Crowe told reporters. Defense Department officials said later that the Airbus was four miles west of commercial air corridor. "More importantly," Crowe continued, "the aircraft headed directly for Vincennes on a constant bearing at high speed, approximately 450 knots."

Without becoming specific, Crowe said there were "electronic indications on Vincennes" that led the U.S. crew to conclude the approaching airliner was an F14. "Given the threatening flight profile and decreasing range, the aircraft was declared 'hostile' " at 2:51 a.m. EDT. The airliner at that crucial moment was on a course of almost due south, 185 degrees, and descending toward the Vincennes from an altitude of 7,800 feet, according to Crowe. Visibility was no more than five miles, Crowe said.

Three minutes later, at 2:54 a.m. EDT, the Vincennes launched two Standard surface-to-air missiles from its deck. The missiles whooshed toward the twin-jet airliner, which was nine miles away and not visible to the naked eye because of the haze hanging over the gulf. The Standard missiles homed in on the heat of the quarry's engines and at least one of them exploded when it pulled abreast of the Airbus. Such a missile hit usually slices an aircraft apart and turns it into a fireball of burning fuel.

"At least one hit at an approximate range of six miles," Crowe said. "We do have some eyewitness reports that saw the vague shape of the aircraft when the missile hit, and it looked like it disintegrated."

Asked if the Vincennes' skipper had been prudent or impetuous by firing at a plane he could not see, Crowe replied: "The commanding officer conducted himself with circumspection and, considering the information that was available to him, followed his authorities and acted with good judgment at a very trying period and under very trying circumstances . . . . Not only was he following this aircraft and concerned about it," but he also "was engaged on the surface with Iranian units."

Crowe said it was "logical" for the skipper to assume an aircraft that was coming down from the sky at high speed and would not respond to radio warnings was putting the Vincennes "in jeopardy."

At another point in the news conference Crowe broadened his defense of the Vincennes skipper, declaring "the No. 1 obligation of the commanding officer of a ship or units are the protection of his own people. We deeply regret the loss of life here, but that commanding officer had a very heavy obligation to protect his ships, his people. We've made that clear throughout the Persian Gulf mission . . . . "

Crowe, who used a chart of the Strait of Hormuz that displayed the approximate positions of the vessels and the route of the airliner, said he did not have enough data to explain fully why the multiple kinds of detection gear aboard the Vincennes mistook a wide-bodied jetliner for a fighter.

But he noted that the Vincennes' radar was focused on a plane coming at it head-on, reflecting a smaller dot on the console screens than would be the case from a side view. Also, he said, no Air Force Airborne Warning and Control System (AWACS) or Navy Hawkeye sentry planes were aloft over the Strait of Hormuz to provide additional identification data to the Vincennes at the time of the shootdown.

Navy leaders said Iranian commercial aircraft had flown over U.S. warships in a threatening manner at least eight times before the Stark was hit by two French Exocet missiles fired by an Iraqi jet. Ever since the Stark attack, skippers in the gulf have been less tolerant of such apparent threats.

Asked if the skipper of the Vincennes would have held his fire under the interpretation of the rules of engagement followed before the Stark was attacked, Crowe replied: "I don't know. Certainly the rules of engagement would not have been as specific as the authorities granted him." He said another review of the rules of engagement would be part of the general investigation of the shootdown.

Crowe said there were "fundamental differences" between the actions of United States in this incident and the Soviet Union in the downing of Korean Air Lines Flight 007, which strayed into Soviet airspace on the night of Sept. 1, 1983, during a flight from Alaska to Japan. The Soviet airspace was not a war zone like the Persian Gulf, Crowe said, "and there was not combat in progress" as was the case yesterday. "It was at very high altitude" and no Soviet warnings were issued.

"In the Persian Gulf," Crowe said, there is very little time or maneuver room when ships are put at risk. "We're fighting in a lake."

Staff writer Molly Moore contributed to this report.

© Copyright 1996 The Associated Press

Back to the top


---


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, July 19th, 2014 at 8:18 PM
Title: Re: Dharma wheel, ethics, value & online communities
Content:
Dan74 said:
But more importantly here on fora, there are clearly people seem to spend an inordinate amount of time arguing over the doctrine, which I suspect is detrimental to other aspects of practice, would you agree? So I was simply trying to say that there isn't one uniquely correct way of looking at this. That's all.

Malcolm wrote:
I have found that arguing about things between lineages is not productive, say Chan and Highest Yoga Tantra, or even between Kagyu and Sakya, for example.

Why? Partially it has to do with the way different schools perceive themselves. If you tell a Chan practitioner that Chan is not the apex of buddhadharma, they will think you are crazy. If you tell a Vajrayāna practitioner that one can attain Buddhahood by common Mahāyāna in less than three incalculable eons (and that includes Chan), they will think you are crazy. Similarly, if you tell Theravadins they are following Hinayāna they get all offended and huffy. If you try to insist to Vajrayānists that Theravada does not fall under the criteria of what we define as Hinayāna, you will get blank stares.

On the other hand, if one wants to go and understand why Chan considers itself the apex, or why Vajrayānists consider Theravada Hinayāna, and so on, then one should do so with an open mind.

Then of course there is the issue of conflicting assumptions — a lot of long time Mahāyānists and Vajrayānists, as we know, claim to unconcerned with the assertion that their texts and so on are not really products of Buddha speech as traditionally defined (that is spoken, by permission, or blessed). This also raises complexities. Then there is the difference of canons -- for example, frequently Chinese Buddhists will cite the Shurangama Samaadhi 2, for the sake of convenience. This sutra, whether authentic or not, simply is not read in the Tibetan Canon and so therefore, will not be felt of much authority by Tibetan Buddhists. It is certain that it existed, but unlike many other sutras, for whatever reason, the Tibetans chose not to translate it into Tibetan because perhaps they doubted its authenticity.

Then of course there is the modern pro-atman interpretation of the Dharma, grounded far more in the Coomaraswamy, Grim, and modern early 20th century authors, than traditional discourse, AFACT, represented by our own Son of the Buddha, and elsewhere, Zenmar (aka Ardent Hollingsworth), who right or wrong, represent a vocal minority on virtually every Buddhist forum I have been on in the past 20 years.

Finally, there are the out and out "Buddhist" skeptics such as the Triratna Order's Jayarava Atwood and Richard Hayes. What possible interest they have in Dharma anymore is totally beyond me, since people like they seem bent on tearing Buddhism down completely, but whatever. They seem to emanated out of the forensic trend of Buddhist historical scholarship, but of what use this is for the practice of Dharma is totally mystifying.

All of this leads to a rather complex maze of issues and assumptions one has to navigate on a heterogeneous forum such as this. And most people do not have the long view I have, since they  have not participated on these forums of and on. How many folks remember alt.buddha.short.fat.guy?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, July 19th, 2014 at 7:36 PM
Title: Re: Why do only very few practitioners attain rainbow body?
Content:
ZOOM said:
I never heard that even one of all the Westerner Dzogchen practitioners (no matter if they are in an official lineage, have an official teacher, got direct "empowernment" or instruction from the teacher) ever attained rainbow body.
This poor success rate for Westerners (0.000%) seems very disconcerting and leads to a lot of questions.
In case that I am misinformed, I would be happy if someone could point out some rainbow body success stories of Westerner students to me!
Thank you very much!

Malcolm wrote:
Yup, I guess Dzogchen just doesn't work for westerners. Better move along, nothing to see here.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, July 19th, 2014 at 7:34 PM
Title: Re: Recent tragic events and the West vs Russia situation
Content:


Karma Dorje said:
What I find deeply disturbing ...

Malcolm wrote:
Nothing that governments do is disturbing, or rather, it's all disturbing on one level or another.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, July 19th, 2014 at 7:31 PM
Title: Re: Recent tragic events and the West vs Russia situation
Content:
Dan74 said:
But the West, who have removed and installed regimes as they saw fit from Iran to Central America, and in the past annexed huge swathes of land from Hawaii to Mexico, hardly has the high moral ground.

Malcolm wrote:
The Monroe Doctrine, formulated during an era when the US was under constant thread from European Colonial powers. That was amended by Teddy Roosevelt's big stick policies.



Dan74 said:
I don't think Putin is the power-crazed despot, Western media portrays his to be. His thinking, as far as I can make out, is to push back and re-establish Russia as a power to be reckoned with. A Russia that will protect its national interest and throw its weight around if needs be, rather than being pushed around by the West, as it is perceived domestically. Russia has always focused on its local scene - Chechnya, Abhasia, Ukraine, which it sees as its legitimate sphere of influence after the loss of the Warsaw Pact states. I think much of what we see is a product of the West trying to contain Russia (just like China) and maintain hegemony over world affairs.

Malcolm wrote:
As far as I can tell, Russia is interested annexing the whole of the Ukrain, which Russians regard as properly a part of Russia.

This a screw up of massive proportions on the part of the Russians.

Dan74 said:
I am seriously worried about where this is all heading...

Malcolm wrote:
No where. Russia's lost the moral high ground, despite the Ukrainian Nazis and so on.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, July 19th, 2014 at 8:55 AM
Title: Re: Is Western Buddhism an (ethnic) identity-based Buddhism?
Content:
Jikan said:
We're way off topic, but that can be sorted out in a moment.

Question for Malcolm et al:  define "early age" for the purpose of this conversation.  what age of taking an interest might indicate such a thing?

Malcolm wrote:
Kungfu came on when I was 10, Cutting Through, etc. at 16. I have self-identified as a Buddhist since then.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, July 19th, 2014 at 7:34 AM
Title: Re: Is Western Buddhism an (ethnic) identity-based Buddhism?
Content:


uan said:
Based on that, is there a reason you would be presently incarnated here, rather than having attained rainbow body in the bardo or in  a pure nirmanakāya buddhafield?

Malcolm wrote:
When you wake up in the bardo, you also generate emanations. Maybe I am one of those.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, July 19th, 2014 at 7:26 AM
Title: Re: Why do only very few practitioners attain rainbow body?
Content:


kirtu said:
It is the case that for most people it is easier to attain Arhatship

Malcolm wrote:
This just really is not the case, kirt. But far be it from me to sway you from your superior knowledge.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, July 19th, 2014 at 4:00 AM
Title: Re: "Protestant" vs Traditional/"Orthodox" approaches to Dha
Content:


Johnny Dangerous said:
It might be time to sit back, keep an eye on whether or not the changes we are in the process of implementing make DW a place you want to spend time, or if they don't after some time, make your decision accordingly.

Announcement July 18th, 2014 said:
2. People are free to question the teachings and traditional interpretations in Open Dharma subforum as has mostly been happening. Questions about a practice, a teaching or belief are appropriate in the specific subforum where the practice belongs, but criticisms belong in Open Dharma only and should be done sensitively, where possible with reference to the appropriate teachings. For example, do not challenge the core Dharma concepts and principles of Pure Land Buddhism in the Pure Land subforum and the same goes with the other specific traditions as well.

Malcolm wrote:
This means you have decided to change nothing. This means that criticism of Mahāyāna and Vajrayāna will proceed unchecked. This means that you are WILLINGLY providing a harbor for adharma. Why you all fail to understand this is somewhat astonishing. The fact that some of you possess samaya and still are willing to aid and abet those māras who would criticize Mahāyāna and Vajrayāna is even more astonishing still.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, July 19th, 2014 at 3:54 AM
Title: Re: "Protestant" vs Traditional/"Orthodox" approaches to Dha
Content:
Fruitzilla said:
Teyes was mostly hands-off, especially at the last stages. Besides, there was a sudden tightening of policy which can be called a power grab in all reasonableness IMHO.

Malcolm wrote:
Nope, there was no grab. At that point I had totally stepped down.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, July 19th, 2014 at 3:45 AM
Title: Re: Dharma wheel, ethics, value & online communities
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
It was never mandatory to believe in rebirth on e-sangha, it was forbidden to argue against it.

Sherab Dorje said:
Same thing.

Malcolm wrote:
No, not the same thing at all.



Sherab Dorje said:
It's different, no one is arguing with him.
Yes, this is true, but this is a discussion forum after all and the example was to highlight the necessity of the repetitive reinforcement of basic principles.  ie You missed the pint.

Malcolm wrote:
Sorry, but you miss the point —— i.e. ChNN does not have to deal with argumentative people when reiterating basic points. He reiterates basic points again and again because new people come again and again. Here, it is not new people coming again and again, it is old people with the same old axes to grind, often from E-Sangha.


Sherab Dorje said:
It would be a lot easier to manage, and the level of conversation would be more elevated people if did not feel entitled to argue with every basic aspect of the teachings regardless of forums. For example the user TRC feels completely at ease being confrontational in every forum, the same goes for Alfredo.
Okay.  So if they are breaking the Terms of Service by being unnecessarily disruptive you report them and they get warned, suspended and banned.

Malcolm wrote:
That is the problem, people get reported, a moderator handles the report, and often nothing happens because as long as no one uses expletives, for whatever reason the moderation style here is "let the $8!# fly", for example, the tactless pillorying of the late Rachel Olds.

Sherab Dorje said:
The tullku system as it is present in Tibet has no precedent in sutra and tantra. It is relied upon heavily in Kagyu and Nyingma, less so in Gelug, and almost non-existence in Sakya outside of east Tibet.
Really?  Coz I am sure that it would have some precedent in tantra.

Malcolm wrote:
It has no precedent in sutra or tantra. You can listen to ChNN state this quite clearly today since you do not believe me. The Tulku system started with Karma Pakshi.

Sherab Dorje said:
I seem to remember a couple of predictions by Guru Padmasambhava being thrown around.

Malcolm wrote:
The tulku system has no precendent in sutra and tantra. Yes, in the Mañjuśrī mulakalpa there are some predictions of rebirths of bodhisattvas in Tibet such as Gampopa, and in the Padma Khathang there are lists of predictions about where this terma is concealed and by which of the 25 disciples it will be revealed in a later incarnation, and so on, but there is no precedent for system of reincarnated lineage heads like you have in Nyingma and Kagyu exclusively. The fact that it is not bound by some canonicity is why there can be disputes over the recognition of the Karmapa, for example. There is no clear guide in sutra and tantra which regulates how reincarnations are recognized/selected, trained, appointed, succeeded and so on. For this reason then, the recognition of Steven Segal as a minor tulku generated some controversy in the West. Many people really could not and still cannot understand why he was recognized by Penor Rinpoche — it was not for money, I can guarantee that. Since it is not really a part of sutra and tantra, the recognition of tulkus merely boils down to the opinion of this or that master. If someone follows that master, they are likely to give credence to the reincarnations he recognizes.

Sherab Dorje said:
So who has the say about the orthodoxy of the tulku system then?  Who's orthodoxy (tradition) are we going to follow?

Malcolm wrote:
[/quote]

The tulku system is an embedded feature of Tibetan culture, religious life, politics and economics, but it is a deeply ingrained custom, it is not a system which is grounded in sutra and tantra. That being said, it is an integral feature of many lineages in Tibet such as Gelug (Drepung, Ganden, Sera), Drikung, Drugpa, Karma Kagyu etc., Palyul, Khathog, Dorje Drag, Dzogchen, Shechen and so on, as well as Dzongsar, as well as Bon monasteries also.

Thus, even though the tulku system does not have the orthodox and canonical backing of say bodhisattva vows or samaya, it is a deeply embedded part of Tibetan religious culture, and at this point, I would say Tibetan religious culture could barely function without it, which is why the Chinese are so keen on regulating it.

Unfortunately, due to the highly subjective nature of recognitions, it is difficult to say there is an "orthodox" position on the issue of recognitions. Sometimes reincarnations are recognized in dreams, sometimes, by divinations, sometimes, as in the case of the Dalai Lamas of late 18th and 19th centuries, by drawing lots; sometimes by predictions of the dying Lama like the 13 Dalai Lama or the 16th Karmapa (if you follow Tai Situ's version), etc. Sometimes by tests, and in the case of 5th Dalai Lama, even though he failed the tests, the regent proclaimed to the Kashag that he passed them all and successfully recognized the belongings of the 4th.

The buddhology of tulkus is still being worked out by Tibetans. The only books I know that attempts to work out this buddhology is Tulku Thondup's INCARNATION: The History and Mysticism of the Tulku Tradition of Tibet. It is an attempt, but I have to say, it is a little scanty. There is also Enthronement: The Recognition Of The Reincarnate Masters Of Tibet And The Himalayas. This book makes it eminently clear that the rite of enthroning a tulku is basically the same as the rite of consecrating a statue.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, July 19th, 2014 at 2:58 AM
Title: Re: "Protestant" vs Traditional/"Orthodox" approaches to Dha
Content:
Jikan said:
How is it that so many recent DW posts get derailed into discussions of moderation policy and practice instead of Dharma?  Surely that is an obscure and boring topic for most of us.

Fruitzilla said:
Well, basically because it is a power grab. IIRC it's about the same thing that happened on e-sangha.

Malcolm wrote:
There was no power grab on e-Sangha. Teyes was always the owner of the board. We always served in our various capacities at his pleasure.

There is no power grab here happening here, just an honest discussion of what is appropriate and inappropriate for a board of this type which great out of a discussion started by Sherlock.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, July 19th, 2014 at 12:22 AM
Title: Re: Ukraine says Malaysian Airliner shot down, 295 dead
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Yup, well, Russia has a lot of answering to do...

Norwegian said:
Usually planes don't suddenly explode in mid air with debris falling down, so I think we can rule out the crash theory.

As for being shot down, that's the only legible solution. And that Ukraine would shoot down the plane makes no sense. However, we do know that pro-Russian separatists are in the area where the plane crashed, we do know that they have issued warnings before that they consider the airspace above where they are located as theirs, and we also do know that they have bragged about having BUK missiles in the past. These are just the kind of missiles you need to shoot down a commercial airliner, which has an altitude that is far beyond what "regular" missiles (which what most rebels and terrorists are in possession of) have.

This cached link shows the pro-Russian separatists in that area tweeting an image of the BUK missiles: https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache%3ANF6E5FCKFNEJ%3Ahttps%3A%2F%2Ftwitter.com%2Fdnrpress%2Fstatus%2F483248037629018112 " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;  -- and I say cached, because they have now deleted that image.

And earlier today, on Russian social network VKontakte (a sort of Russian Facebook), a leader of the pro-Russian separatists bragged about having shot down a Ukrainian military plane over the exact same town as the Malaysian airliner crashed down into. There has been no Ukrainian military plane crashing down there today, only the Malaysian airliner - ergo it was a misunderstanding of gigantic proportions. This post on VK have since been deleted...

And now US intel confirms that indeed a missile have been fired at the airliner: "A senior U.S. official said one radar system saw a surface-to-air missile system turn on and track an aircraft right before the plane went down.  A second system saw a heat signature at the time the airliner was hit, the official said. The United States is analyzing the trajectory of the missile to try to learn where the attack came from."

The pro-Russian separatists are now intending on sending the discovered black box of the airliner to Moscow.

This is a tragedy that easily could've been avoided if people had made the right choices. And I really do wonder what Putin is thinking right now...


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, July 19th, 2014 at 12:21 AM
Title: Re: "Protestant" vs Traditional/"Orthodox" approaches to Dha
Content:
Mkoll said:
The purpose of this sub-forum is to openly permit important and challenging discussion on the Dhamma. By establishing a particular forum as a "Free-For-All", albeit one where members must still be nice to each other, we aim to keep other areas of the site free from vociferous debate...

Malcolm wrote:
The problem, as I see it, is that Dhammwheel is more heterogeneous than Dharma Wheel. Secondly, debates tend to spill over into all forums here. Third, this forum is more heterogeneous and it is not as tightly run a ship as Dhammawheel. You have to recall, they all learned their mod skills at E-Sangha and basically transferred the Theravadin forum from E-Sangha to there. ESangha was also a much more tightly run ship than DW is at present. We also had a lot more mods.

My approach to this issue is to mark of dangerous shoals and navigate past them all together, rather than use up the man hours necessary to sound shallow water so we don't constantly run aground, i.e., as I have said several times, shutter this forum rather than trying to fix it.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, July 19th, 2014 at 12:13 AM
Title: Re: Why do only very few practitioners attain rainbow body?
Content:
smcj said:
I am personally of the opinion that Dzogchen has been over-marketed here in the West.

Malcolm wrote:
That's true. And even worse it is marketed as just another meditation technique. Just look at the latest cover of Shambhala Sun:



smcj said:
I do not doubt the validity of anything about it, just that it has pandered to many of our cultural preconditions and thus has gotten an undue amount of attention.

Malcolm wrote:
A lot of people use Dzogchen to sell their teachings, without really teaching Dzogchen at all.


smcj said:
The reason there are 9 yanas is because one size does not fit all. The best medicine is the one that cures the sickness you have got, not the most powerful or famous medicine.

Malcolm wrote:
In this case, the best Dharma for you is the one you want to practice. Dzoghen is a high teaching. That does not mean it is not a path. It is a path. And it can be practiced by any interested person.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 18th, 2014 at 11:52 PM
Title: Re: Dharma & Science
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Motova, you seriously misunderstand my point. My point is solely that it becomes a problem for practitioners and for Dharma in general when people who are nominally "buddhists" take refuge science rather than Dharma. There are a lot of negative consequences  one could list. We can start with most obvious one, the denial,of rebirth, which the Buddha clearly  defines as a wrong view.

Motova said:
I get what you're saying. But using science and taking refuge in science are two different things. There are people with the karma capable of using science/technology to complement their practice of the Dharma, without having to give up refuge.

Malcolm wrote:
I agree, in principle. On the other hand, sometimes the tools we use shape how we think, i.e., to a hammer, everything is a nail, and so on.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 18th, 2014 at 11:49 PM
Title: Re: "Protestant" vs Traditional/"Orthodox" approaches to Dha
Content:
smcj said:
But from what you've said elsewhere based on your E-Sangha experience those discussions spilled over to the other forums.

Malcolm wrote:
Constantly.

The goal here should be to limit opportunity for Adharma speech.

Inevitably someone is going bring up the point of who decides what is Adharmic speech.

Well, this is a Mahayāna/Vajrayāna forum, so right there, questioning the authenticity of Mahāyāna or Vajrayāna should be off limits. It does not mean of course that anyone should be expected to accept Vajrayāna, or for that matter Mahāyāna, but criticisms of these traditions should not be allowed.

In general. DW should be a forum devoted to the promulgation and positive growth of Mahāyāna and Vajrayāna. How can that happen if we allow random people to engage in slanderous criticism of Mahāyāna and Vajrayāna? Somehow it is a major sin to refer to Theravada as a Hinayāna school, but no one blinks even once when the authenticity of Mahāyāna sutras and tantras are questioned or even denied.

Anyway, I think everyone gets my point.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 18th, 2014 at 11:38 PM
Title: Re: "Protestant" vs Traditional/"Orthodox" approaches to Dha
Content:
Mkoll said:
]I'm not convinced, but I don't know much about inter-Mahayana relations so I can't say for sure. However, and this is putting it lightly, I do know for certain that Theravada has a different presentation of Dhamma than Mahayana.

Malcolm wrote:
And they have their own forum, don't they?

Mkoll said:
Well, I've come closer to your side of the fence on this issue since we've started talking about it. I could see a valid argument for certain topics of debate (like the legitimacy of the four concepts I mentioned) being anathema to the forum as a whole because they only serve to increase the hindrance of doubt.

Malcolm wrote:
Classically speaking, debate in Dharma is meant to clarify one's understanding of Dharma because one wants to understand the Dharma with more precision. The purpose of debate in Dharma has never been to fault Dharma teachings and replace them with some post-modern revision. But because of the way we conduct political discourse in the West, we extend that to religious discourse. Then because we have this idea of "free speech", we are offended by the notion that some lines of conversation might be considered non-virtous from the perspective of Dharma. In other words, we constantly confuse political speech with Dharma speech thinking that it should be the kind free for all we might find in the Hyde Park Speaker's corner.

What I am pointing out is that this "open dharma" forum violates the very TOS of DW by its very nature because of the kind of speech that is built into the forum itself. As I mentioned before, it provides a natural platform for adharma.

Classically speaking, in ancient India, debate was lead by qualified masters who taught students how to think more clearly and precisely about the Dharma. It has never been a free-for all as we find here. The purpose of this debate was to lessen the students' conceptual doubt and to sharpen their thinking. But that does not happen here. Mostly, it becomes the default forum for what are essentially non-virtuous discussions.

In ancient India, if tīrthikas wanted to debate with us, they were sent to the gatekeepers, expert Panditas like Naropa, etc., whose job it was to debate all comers, both Buddhist and non-Buddhist. Well, we don't have that kind of capacity here. We are not a Buddhist university. There are no panditas here.

In the end, the goal should not be to have lots of users, or lots of controversial conversations. The goal at DW should be to have meaningful, edifying discussions about Mahāyāna and Vajrayāna Dharma.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 18th, 2014 at 11:14 PM
Title: Re: Why do only very few practitioners attain rainbow body?
Content:
Punya said:
waking up in the bardo do as well? (but not saying that's easy).

Malcolm wrote:
Achieving Buddhahood in the bardo is much easier than in this life. Why? It is because in the bardo state we have seven times more clarity. Buddha Vajrasattva states in the Victor’s Speech Tantra
After that, in the bardo of rebirth the present unobstructed awareness with complete sense organs has seven times more clarity.

kirtu said:
But one's negative emotions are also unimpeded thus making it difficult unless one has a very high level of clarity already.

Kirt

Malcolm wrote:
For this reason we have Dzogchen teachings, which make waking up in the bardo relatively easy. Of the 21 capacities of Dzogchen practitioners listed the Rig pa rang shar tantra it is only the last three or four who need to take rebirth in a pure nirmanakāya realm in order to attain buddhahood.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 18th, 2014 at 11:11 PM
Title: Re: Why do only very few practitioners attain rainbow body?
Content:
kirtu said:
It is more easy to become an Arhat than attain rainbow body.

Malcolm wrote:
This is really not the case. Who ever taught you this?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 18th, 2014 at 10:58 PM
Title: Re: Dharma wheel, ethics, value & online communities
Content:


Sherab Dorje said:
What do you propose:  like e-sangha where it was mandatory to believe in rebirth?  A list of topics people are allowed/not allowed to debate and discuss?  According to which traditions criteria?

Malcolm wrote:
It was never mandatory to believe in rebirth on e-sangha, it was forbidden to argue against it.

Sherab Dorje said:
How many times has he given the lung for the tun, etc...?

Malcolm wrote:
It's different, no one is arguing with him.

Sherab Dorje said:
Like you stated in the sangha poll, this is not a sangha.  There is no teacher.  So obviously anything more than recycling the basics, requires sending a member to find a teacher.

Malcolm wrote:
It would be a lot easier to manage, and the level of conversation would be more elevated people if did not feel entitled to argue with every basic aspect of the teachings regardless of forums. For example the user TRC feels completely at ease being confrontational in every forum, the same goes for Alfredo.

Sherab Dorje said:
And let's look at this idea of "traditional".  Traditional according to which tradition and who?  You claim a traditional approach yet, if I remember correctly (and please correct me if I am wrong) I have heard you express doubts/objections regarding the tulku system.  Well, doesn't that make you non-traditional or a reformist of types?  So according to the orthodoxy of your own position, you should not be allowed to take part in discussions on this forum.

Malcolm wrote:
The tullku system as it is present in Tibet has no precedent in sutra and tantra. It is relied upon heavily in Kagyu and Nyingma, less so in Gelug, and almost non-existence in Sakya outside of east Tibet.

I never said the tulku system was completely bad, merely that it was rife for opportunity for abuse. I never stated that there were no authentic tulkus, merely that many so called tulkus are tulkus only named for economic reasons or political reasons. ChNN just finished discussing this issue not 15 minutes ago. I have also expressed my doubt about whether this system is appropriate for continuing the teachings in the West.

Sherab Dorje said:
Discussion and questioning (to a reasonable degree) are a valid tool for learning

Malcolm wrote:
That is not what happens in the so called open dharma forum; and as in e-Sangha, the acute skepticism found here tends to spill into other forums. This is why we shuttered the equivalent forum on esangha.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 18th, 2014 at 10:47 PM
Title: Re: "Protestant" vs Traditional/"Orthodox" approaches to Dha
Content:


Jikan said:
That's how learning happens.  It can be ugly and uncomfortable working with people at the level of their own affliction, and acknowledging and working with one's own affliction under the guidance of a teacher.  I'm thankful I've had teachers who are willing to keep prodding me.

Malcolm wrote:
My point is that this forum, the open dharma forum, is not a teacher. It is place where people come and share their own confusion and increase that of others.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 18th, 2014 at 9:51 PM
Title: Re: "Protestant" vs Traditional/"Orthodox" approaches to Dha
Content:
Mkoll said:
I will concede that certain points are most certainly adharmic such as outright rejection of: the Buddha's existence, his enlightenment, karma, or rebirth. Someone going on like this on a Buddhist forum is probably trolling. However, polite questions regarding these things coming from a newbie who is clearly amenable to learning and is not here to preach their own adharmic views is different.

Malcolm wrote:
We have a beginners forum for those questions.

Mkoll said:
Also, when you talk of "incorrect presentations of Dharma", we enter another gray area. Each of the traditions has a different presentation of Dharma and who is to decide what is correct or incorrect? Not only that, but each practitioner has their own approach and own perspective.

Malcolm wrote:
Not grey at all. We have different traditions for many reasons, but in general, when it comes to general Mahāyāna, I have no true quibbles with any of the great Mahāyāna traditions, traditional Chan/Zen, Pure Land, etc.; Kagyu, Sakya, Nyingma, Gelug, Jonang, etc.

Mkoll said:
In the end, what you are suggesting is an increase in censorship of those people posting adharmic views, a change in the structure of the forum, and a change in the way moderators do their job. It's not a small change.

Malcolm wrote:
Well, it is pretty easy to see which kinds of arguments are not appropriate in this or that forum. For example, if a Theravadin comes to the general Mahāyāna forum and claims that the Mahāyāna sūtras were not taught by the Buddha, well, this is inappropriate. If a Mahāyani goes to Dhammawheel for example, and insists that Mahāyāna sūtras be accepted as Buddha's speech, they will be laughed off the forum.

But if you a forum devoted for the sole purpose of debating the very validity of Buddha's teaching, what use does this serve but to further Adharma. For example, the Buddha did advise us to check his teachings the way a goldsmith checks gold, but not because Buddha doubted that what he was teaching was gold. He knew that his teachings were gold. So when we are checking the Buddha's teachings for its "gold content", we are doing so because we want to find gold, not because we want to find pyrite. But the way that kind of forum works is that we begin from a posture of no trust, we assume from the outset than what we are being handed is pyrite, and not gold. We then spend all of our energy in trying to prove this shiny substance in our hand is not gold, and even when we find out it is not pyrite, still we are not sure it is gold. This is the incorrect way of understanding the Buddha's teaching on testing his doctrine like a goldsmith tests gold. Even more to the point, when it comes to Vajrayāna, you had better make damn sure you have already decided the teachings are gold, because after you enter Vajrayāna, if you decide the teachings are not for you, then you can have real problems and obstacles.

Moreover, such a forum just gives a safe haven to those who harbor all sorts of wrong views about the Dharma in general, and Vajrayāna and Mahāyāna in particular. In a free for all zone, no one can prevent someone from slandering Mahāyāna and Vajrayāna. This forum, the "Open" Dharma forum, is just such a haven. While not all the threads in this forum are pernicious, there a great number that are very pernicious for one reason or another. It is because of the nature of the forum that this is so.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 18th, 2014 at 9:02 PM
Title: Re: Why do only very few practitioners attain rainbow body?
Content:
ZOOM said:
You just have to do the minimum of training your guru requires & pay your membership fee and your guru will take care that you will be enlightened after death?

Malcolm wrote:
Actually, in Vajrayāna in general, after receiving empowerment, as long was one scrupulously maintains samaya, liberation is guaranteed in seven lifetimes.

ZOOM said:
I mean, it has to be your guru who takes care of it...otherwise people wouldn't believe adamantly that you have to have a guru or you won't attain enlightenment.

Malcolm wrote:
There is no means of entering any Vajrayāna path without a Guru — ergo, no Guru, no path, no awakening by means of that path. That is why the Guhyasamaja Tantra states:
The Guru is the Buddha, the Guru is the Sangha,
likewise, the Guru is the Sangha,
the Guru is great glorious Heruka.

ZOOM said:
Because, you can learn from books as well as you can learn from your guru.

Malcolm wrote:
One cannot received transmission from a book. Having made an effort to receive transmission and the precious oral instructions which are not contained in any book from the mouth of the Guru, then one can rely on books as a supplement.

ZOOM said:
Many books are compiled out of speeches of gurus and reading those speeches does not lead to a worse learning success than hearing the speeches directly standing in front of the guru.

Malcolm wrote:
First, you must have a connection with the lineage. That means you must have a guru. And even so, quite frankly hearing the teachings directly has the quality of transmission, of being in the same state at the same time as the teacher. You just do not get that with a book. It is much better to have received the reading transmission of the Dharma text you wish to follow so that you have a living connection with that teaching. There are many Dharma texts you really are not allowed to read without such transmission. There are many Dharma texts that have one to one transmissions.

For mantra, it is indispensable to have the reading transmission, in other words, you cannot successfully practice any mantra without first having received the lung, the sole exceptions being the mantras of Avalokiteshvara, Tara, Mañjuśri, Śakyamuni and some others. But for deities like Vajrayogini, Kalacakra, etc., it is indispensable.

ZOOM said:
And hearing the speeches of the guru is all that most students get concerning their communication with their guru. Only the few who practically live with their guru get more.

Malcolm wrote:
A realized guru's job is the teach through body and voice. For example, everything that a teacher like Chogyal Namkhai Norbu (and HH Dalai Lama, HH Sakya Trizin etc.) does is a teaching, the way he walks, dresses, eats, laughs, smiles, frowns, goes to the bathroom, washes, sleeps, wakes up, i.e., the way he lives and the way he dies.

It is important to make time to spend attending one's guru. But you do not have to spend your life doing so. Even so, serving the guru is an important part of practice, and the fastest, most excellent way to earn merit.

In reality all a guru can do is show one the path. There is nothing a guru can do more than that. There is nothing you can do more than receive their transmission and practice. You practice, and when you have questions, you ask. That's it. His or her job is to give transmission, your job is to apply transmission and realize what they have realized.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 18th, 2014 at 7:23 PM
Title: Re: Using the Dharma to Quit Smoking
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
We use the Dharma to stop suffering. Smoking is a kind of suffering. Therefore, one absolutely should use the Dharma to stop smoking.

As to smoking itself -- smoking causes craving which gives rise to addiction. Sensation conditions craving, contact gives rise to sensation.

You must avoid all conditions where you encounter tobacco in any form, and all people who use it. It is also useful to cultivate an extreme aversion to tobacco.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 18th, 2014 at 3:18 PM
Title: Re: "Protestant" vs Traditional/"Orthodox" approaches to Dha
Content:


Mkoll said:
If you don't want to read this kind of stuff, don't read this sub-forum! It's that simple.


Malcolm wrote:
Frankly, I just don;t understand why a Dharma practitioner would support a fora devoted to adharma. People are always droning on about "RIght Speech" here, but has it not occurred to anyone that incorrect presentations of Dharma is the essence of adharma; that rejecting rebirth is adharma; etc.?

Why would we wish to provide a platform for the promulgation of adharma? It is out of some notion of preserving "free speech"? Adharmic speech is not free, it is binding, it causes bad karma and providing a platform for its promulgation is also a cause of bad karma.

Seriously, I wish people would use their heads a bit more and understand that our thoughts and our words have consequences. What we choose to permit on this forum and what we choose not to, also has consequences. This is why, much to the anger of many, we chose to eliminate "the abandon all hope ye who enter here" forum, the so called debate court.

You really should understand that so called Open Dharma forum is really just an Adharma forum. it should be shuttered.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 18th, 2014 at 2:45 PM
Title: Re: "Protestant" vs Traditional/"Orthodox" approaches to Dha
Content:
Alfredo said:
For example, the Dalai Lama has stated that if a Buddhist belief is ever disproven by science (e.g., the flat earth), then the Buddhist thing to do would be to follow science.

Malcolm wrote:
Again, as I pointed out to James, this is really not what HHDL says, which is why I disagreed with the statement, "as written and as presented". But of course people who do not actually read what HHDL says tend to naively present this citation much in the same way as the Kalamas Sutta is naively presented. The source of the citation is The Universe in a Single Atom:

His Holiness, The Dalai Lama said:
My confidence in venturing into science lies in my basic belief that as in science so in Buddhism, understanding the nature of reality is pursued by means of critical investigation: if scientific analysis were conclusively to demonstrate certain claims in Buddhism to be false, then we must accept the findings of science and abandon those claims.

Malcolm wrote:
Dalai Lama (2005-09-13). The Universe in a Single Atom: The Convergence of Science and Spirituality (Kindle Locations 48-50). Crown Publishing Group. Kindle Edition.

This citation comes on the second page of the preface, which is why it is so widely cited. But the context for HHDL's statement is found here:

His Holiness, The Dalai Lama said:
As I see it, science falls within the scope of the first truth in that it examines the material bases of suffering, for it covers the entire spectrum of the physical environment—“ the container”— as well as the sentient beings—“ the contained.” It is in the mental realm— the realm of psychology, consciousness, the afflictions, and karma— that we find the second of the truths, the origin of suffering. The third and fourth truths, cessation and the path, are effectively outside the domain of scientific analysis in that they pertain primarily to what might be called philosophy and religion.

Malcolm wrote:
Dalai Lama (2005-09-13). The Universe in a Single Atom: The Convergence of Science and Spirituality (Kindle Locations 1248-1252). Crown Publishing Group. Kindle Edition.

So you see, the first quote may only be properly understood when it is given its full context, provided later on in the same book. I.e. HHDL is saying that when it comes to things like cosmology, physics and biology, the material basis of suffering, Buddhists should defer to science, as this fall under the rubric of suffering, or in other words, conventional truth of deluded persons. However, the third and fourth truths are part of ultimate truth, and are beyond science, according to HHDL. This leaves the second truth in a funny position. It might seem to some that since HHDL is saying here that the second truth concerns mental phenomena which are under the domain of scientific analysis, but since he clearly states that cessation and the path are beyond the domain of science altogether, this really leaves only psychology within the realm of scientific analysis; karma, affliction and consciousness are outside this domain because these three things are precisely what the third and fourth noble truth are concerned with.

So it is important to understand the citation properly.

Some words by Dungsey Thrinly Norbu are appropriate here:
The reason Buddha did not predominantly teach science is that beings are already attached to materialism and reality, so they can become distracted by material ideas. Instead of only increasing materialism, Buddha taught how to believe in karma, how to develop good karma, and how to purify karma to go beyond karma on the path of enlightenment. Buddha taught beings to have faith in sublime beings because ordinary beings do not know the right direction; they can only know through faith in sublime beings who can show them the correct path. This kind of teaching is so much more powerful than ordinary materialism because it shows how not to create negative karma and how to create positive energy until attaining enlightenment. Spiritual ideas cannot be compared to the material ideas of science, and Buddhist spiritual ideas cannot be changed to accommodate scientific ideas. In Buddhism, the sciences that are taught are never totally material, because they are connected with spirituality, since they are understood to be reflections of the mind and do not deal solely with material existence.

Since modern science generally deals with material existence, people often mistakenly think that it is important for them to know more about it. By miscalculating that a material rather than a spiritual orientation will help them sustain themselves and prosper within their immediate lives, they become more concerned with materialism than with spirituality. This is the antithesis of a spiritual point of view. Since the mind does not end, it is the mind’s development of spiritual qualities that is important, and these qualities endure from one life to the next throughout the succession of one’s lives.
Norbu, Thinley (2011-05-26). A Cascading Waterfall of Nectar (Kindle Locations 3243-3255). Shambhala Publications. Kindle Edition.

OK. I hope this clears that up.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 18th, 2014 at 2:16 PM
Title: Re: "Protestant" vs Traditional/"Orthodox" approaches to Dha
Content:
Karma Dorje said:
Why should I tell them they can't hold these views or discuss them?

Malcolm wrote:
We are not telling them that they cannot hold these views or discuss them. They can do both, elsewhere.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 18th, 2014 at 2:15 PM
Title: Re: "Protestant" vs Traditional/"Orthodox" approaches to Dha
Content:
smcj said:
Maybe David Snyder should open a third website for secular Buddhists?

Malcolm wrote:
RIght, he can call it "Training Wheel: A forum devoted to fingerpainting on Dharmabooks."


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 18th, 2014 at 2:11 PM
Title: Re: Dharma wheel, ethics, value & online communities
Content:


Dan74 said:
As for presenting 'unadulterated Dharma', the way I see it, this forum is not a master, it is a place of discussion. The forum isn't presenting anything, it is providing a space for people to discuss the Dharma.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, Mahāyāna and Vajrayāna Dharma. Not everything people want to call "Dharma" in order to sell a book, make a buck and gain followers.



Dan74 said:
There would be no consensus on what this 'unadulterated Dharma' constitues on a number of issues among the many schools that make up this forum,

Malcolm wrote:
This is why we have different fora devoted to traditional Mahāyāna and Vajrayāna SCHOOLS.

Dan74 said:
even if it were desirable to enforce such a thing. But the ethos of the forum, if I understand correctly, is not to be a mouthpiece of someone's take on 'unadulterated Dharma' but a forum for inclusive discussion of the Dharma.

Malcolm wrote:
Much of what passes here for discussion does not merit the appellation "Dharma".

Dan74 said:
What would be desirable, IMO, is for the more experienced and knowledgeable members such as yourself, to share their experience and knowledge, to cite sources and (gently) correct misunderstanding or wrong views when they arise. That's how people learn.

Malcolm wrote:
Dude, it isn't working. That's what FAQS are for.

Dan74 said:
They don't learn by the mods coming down on questions because we are tired of hearing them after decades on the Interwebs. They don't learn if we crush them with our superior attitude and patronising tone (not pointing at you or anyone, but many of us, including myself , have been guilty of it at times). They will just think Buddhism is full of jerks. They will likely not understand the air of exasperation and not even hand-wringing over the direction of the forum.

Malcolm wrote:
I don't crush anyone with superior attitudes. I just answer questions -- but then having to put up oceans of irrelevancy over and over again means that discussions here rarely rise out of the explaining basic concepts to people (who really ought to know better) again and again.

Dan74 said:
What's going to work for the folks who come here with an open mind is a patient sincere generous attitude from more experienced people and for the folks with a closed-mind, well, we should be patient as well - closed mind is not a permanent condition, however, they should be kept within the ToS so as not to disrupt the flow of discussion and recurring themes/memes can be amalgamated so as not to clog up the forum, IMO. Of course, you know all this.

Malcolm wrote:
Well, it is not happening. We have people in the Dzogchen forum again questioning why a Guru is needed for Dzogchen, etc., when by now it should be %$^#%^& axiomatic in Dzogchen and Vajrayāna that this is indispensable. There are many more interesting questions that could be answered, if we were not constantly having to deal with argumentative naifs who disrupt fora after fora, conversation after conversation, even the ones they themselves start.

Dan74 said:
But do you have concrete suggestions, Malcolm? Do you think posts that question certain tenets have no place on the forum?

Malcolm wrote:
Of course that is what I think.

Dan74 said:
Do I understand you correctly? So Batchelor goes, IMS probably goes, a bunch of Zen teachers like Nishijima, Brad Warner, certainly Nonin, who believes in impermanent Buddhahood, maybe a whole lot more who at one time or another have said something heterodox, maybe Ajahn Sumedho, because he generally talks of rebirth in the present moment context?

Malcolm wrote:
There are whole forums devoted to Bathchelor, the secularized brand of Vipassana IMS promulgates, Warner, Nonin and so on. What use is bringing all that here?

Dan74 said:
To me as a Seon practitioner this preoccupation with perfect doctrine is putting the cart before the horse. AFAIAC, our view should be right as much as is necessary for practice, everything else can actually be counterproductive, clogging up the mind with more proliferations, expectations, creating more divisions, aversions, cravings, etc. KISS and learn things as you go, on a need to know basis. But I know that this view is not necessarily shared by other schools. Maybe I should push to close all those 'unnecessary' threads that detract people from practice and mold the forum to be sparse and minimalist like a Zen monastery? I don't think so. Different strokes for different folks and I am glad it's like this.

Malcolm wrote:
This is supposed to be a forum devoted to MAHAYANA and VAJRAYANA, but over and over again, we cannot even lift the conversation out of arguments about rebirth, karma, and so on. When was there a substantive conversation about the bodhisattva path that was not disrupted almost immediately by someone who wants to go and revision the Buddha's Dharma? Honestly, it is a problem. Generally speaking, the most successful conversations here are rarely about Dharma, but rather worldly topics like peak oil, politics, and these sorts of things.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 18th, 2014 at 1:55 PM
Title: Re: Dharma wheel, ethics, value & online communities
Content:
Son of Buddha said:
You say there is no place for secular buddhism on this forum,are you advocating the ban of secular buddhists and or secular buddhist discussions?
Didnt you yourself have untraditional views not more than a month ago?
It seems to many people want to be the sanctioned dharma police.

Malcolm wrote:
There is no such a thing as Secular Mahāyāna. How could there be?

Eliminating secular buddhism from this forum would not have any negative effect on the this forum, and a very salutary effect. There are plenty of places on the internet where people of such persuasions can theorize and proliferate to their little heart's content about the children of barren woman (i.e. the result of so-called secular buddhism).

How can a forum supposedly devoted to MAHAYANA and VAJRAYANA even put up with such nonsense?

As far as my decision to abandon the western text critical approach to the history of Mahāyāna sūtras, that has been a long time coming. I finally realized that giving credence to the whole edifice of western text criticism which is based on unfounded theories and speculations was nonvirtuous and harmful to my practice as well as that of others. But if you carefully examine the content of my posts over many years, you will see that I have always emphasized a so-called traditional approach to Dharma explanation, teaching and practice.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 18th, 2014 at 1:41 PM
Title: Re: Why do only very few practitioners attain rainbow body?
Content:
Ivo said:
...because the Guru is just our own twisted samsaric perception of the buddha nature. He/she is as external, or internal, as you want him/her to be, but never absolutely so.

ZOOM said:
I agree with your view.
Good insight into the true meaning of the guru!

Malcolm wrote:
The Dzogcehn point of view of about gurus is taught in The Magical Dimension of Sound Tantra, the root tantra of all Dzogchen teachings:
Gurus of perfect characteristics
are the source of all qualities, 
the ones who sustain the basis of perfect awakening.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 18th, 2014 at 12:43 PM
Title: Re: "Protestant" vs Traditional/"Orthodox" approaches to Dha
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
E-sangha had such a forum once, we closed it because in fact it just became a source of constant attacks on the Dharma, like we see occurring here time and time again. The whole idea that there is an "open" Dharma is completely wrong-headed. This forum should actually be shuttered.

Alfredo said:
What I hear you saying is that, as a fundamentalist / traditionalist, you are offended by modernist interpretations of Buddhism, and feel they should be banned from the site, or at least made to wear a funny hat.

Karma Dorje said:
There is no monolithic "fundamentalist/traditionalist" viewpoint.  What is being suggested is that in a board dedicated to Mahayana and Vajrayana, each of the traditions comprised under this rubric should be evaluated and respected on its own terms.  Pure Land schools should be respected according their own scriptures and modes of interpretation. Zen, Chan, Nichiren, etc. should similarly be respected as those who uphold each of these traditions represents.

Nyingmas should not come here to try to undercut Gelukpa points of view and vice versa. How can one construe this as a monolithic position and equate it with a Buddhist Taliban as has been done on other threads? What the traditionalists have been suggesting is that the only way to respect the plethora of Buddhist traditions is respect the viewpoints *grounded in the traditions* of each in the respective forums. This so-called Buddhist modernism is really a way of dismissing all of the Buddhist traditions and replacing them with a Rorschach blot of quasi-scientific speculation. There is no lineage for this, there are no scriptures and there is no dharma of realization. It's simply discursiveness and idle chatter.

One can't go onto a medical forum and just make stuff up according to one's own viewpoint.  One would quite rightly be called a quack and a nuisance and be banned in short order. I have no problem with a separate Skeptical Buddhism forum dedicated to these issues.  I have a huge problem with having to read topic after topic where conversation degenerates to this lowest common denominator of belief argued by those interlocutors with the least grounding in scripture and meditative training and the least openness to what the traditional perspectives have to offer.

Mkoll said:
The threads you're describing, including this one, are in the Open Dharma sub-forum. I'll copy-paste the description of it below, with my own emphasis added:
No holds barred discussion on the Buddhadharma. Argue about rebirth, karma, commentarial interpretations etc. Be nice to each other.
If you don't want to read this kind of stuff, don't read this sub-forum! It's that simple.

Now, I could understand a gripe about threads being in the wrong sub-forum. But looking through them briefly, I don't see any polemical threads that stand out. The mods do a good job of sequestering that kind of stuff here. And if you have a problem with where a thread is, maybe you can contact a mod about it.

~~~

TLDR: Complaints about the no holds barred discussion, argument about rebirth, kamma, etc., or "untraditionalist" views in the Open Dharma forum are unwarranted.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 18th, 2014 at 12:36 PM
Title: Re: Dharma & Science
Content:


Motova said:
It doesn't matter, science won't go away. You might as well make the best of it. I never said the terrible shit stopped.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, we work with circumstances as best we can. But it does not mean we remain passive and silent.

Motova said:
Are any of us going to have a serious impact on scientific theory or method in our lives? Unlikely. You can yell as loud as you want. I'm not saying I will have any impact, but it's a means of relieving suffering and supporting the Dharma. If it's here to stay, why not use it? That's what it comes down to. I can still achieve enlightenment while using science as a means to acquire merit, there's nothing wrong with it if you do it skillfully. If I had been born in Asia maybe I could have been a monk, a thangka painter or sculptor. But that's not really in the cards now.


Malcolm wrote:
Motova, you seriously misunderstand my point. My point is solely that it becomes a problem for practitioners and for Dharma in general when people who are nominally "buddhists" take refuge science rather than Dharma. There are a lot of negative consequences  one could list. We can start with most obvious one, the denial,of rebirth, which the Buddha clearly  defines as a wrong view.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 18th, 2014 at 12:15 PM
Title: Re: Dharma wheel, ethics, value & online communities
Content:
David N. Snyder said:
As a discussion forum get fairly large, there is bound to be a diverse set of views. There will be some who want a hard-line certain Dharma-view / their interpretation only, some that will want something more toward a secular view, etc. And that is fine as long as everyone is cordial. Here and at Dhamma Wheel too, we sometimes get complaints that we are allowing too many secular views to be expressed. And then we also get complaints from the opposite side that we are being Dharma-police and not allowing other views and interpretations.


Malcolm wrote:
Hi David:

I guess, speaking as a traditionalist, there really isn't room for views of Dharma in a forum that imagines itself dedicated to Mahāyāna and Vajrayāna that are not grounded in the tradition itself. This is especially true of a Vajrayāna forum where the lineage and lineage explanations absolutely vital. But beyond that, like the point I made in another thread, Mahāyāna and Vajrayāna, like the Śravaka schools, are grounded in hearing, reflection and cultivation, i.e. the three prajñās, whereas the so called "secular Buddhism" is just based on a intellectual interpretation of Dharma that is not grounded in the three prajñās. Instead it is based on the three vikalpas [conceptualities] reading, proliferation and attachment to views. Really, in a forum dedicated to Mahāyāna and Vajrayāna, there should be no place at all for so called "Secular Buddhism". Why? Because there is no Dharma in "Secular Buddhism".

Dan74 said:
Forgive me if I am getting this wrong, Malcolm, but weren't you espousing quite a different approach not that long ago to the point of rejecting the label "Buddhist"? I wasn't following closely, so I may be getting this wrong. But if not, I am glad you weren't booted out of the place. We all go through changes, our views change, positions change, it is sensible, IMO, to not allow the board to be derailed or overtaken by modern/divergent interpretations but ban them altogether? I don't think so. It would not be the compassionate thing to do, even if one were certain the view is wrong. And how many of us truly have this certainty about all our current positions?

Malcolm wrote:
I follow Dharma. not "Buddhism", precisely for the reason that I do not not think everything  called "buddhism" these days is Dharma. That is part of my discarding the label "buddhist" that many people ignored, though i made it plain at the time.

The compassionate thing to do is to present unadulterated Dharma for those who are interested. That is necessarily based on hearing the dharma from realized lineage teachers, and studying authentic teachings of the Buddha, which here, on this forum, also includes Mahayana sutras and tantras and treating them with proper respect., as well as the treatises of the sublime masters of India, Tibet, China, Korea and Japan.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 18th, 2014 at 12:05 PM
Title: Re: Why do only very few practitioners attain rainbow body?
Content:
Ivo said:
Zoom, you have some very valid points. I don't know why no one is explaining here that the attainment of the rainbow body is generally a product of the very special practice ot Togyal - a practice which requires much effort and which, in order to be brought to this particular conclusion needs to be done in strict retreat. Very few practitioners are actively and seriously engaged in Thogyal at this point in time. The rainbow body does not result from regular contemplation/resting in Rikpa, even if this is authentic. Other attainments result from that and they are described very extensively in the Dzogchen literature.

And, strictly speaking, the Guru does not do it for you, in the bardo or anywhere else, because the Guru is just our own twisted samsaric perception of the buddha nature. He/she is as external, or internal, as you want him/her to be, but never absolutely so.

Malcolm wrote:
It is easier to bring it conclusion in the bardo.

Of course, having met a path, it is up to you follow, as the  Buddha said "i cannot wash away your misdeeds with water, nor remove your suffering with my hand, but i can show you the  path to liberation."

Nevertheless, without a realized teacher of Dzogchen, it is difficult to make any progress on the path Of Dzogchen. If one does not have confidence that one's teacher is really a buddha, well, one will not make much progress on the path no matter how much one practices this or that technique.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 18th, 2014 at 8:39 AM
Title: Re: Dharma & Science
Content:


Motova said:
It doesn't matter, science won't go away. You might as well make the best of it. I never said the terrible shit stopped.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, we work with circumstances as best we can. But it does not mean we remain passive and silent.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 18th, 2014 at 8:34 AM
Title: Re: "Protestant" vs Traditional/"Orthodox" approaches to Dha
Content:
Alfredo said:
What I hear you saying is that, as a fundamentalist / traditionalist, you are offended by modernist interpretations of Buddhism, and feel they should be banned from the site, or at least made to wear a funny hat.

Malcolm wrote:
I am not offended by them, I pity those who hold them. But I feel that their confusion has many other places where it can be spread, and does not need to be coddled here.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 18th, 2014 at 8:31 AM
Title: Re: Why do only very few practitioners attain rainbow body?
Content:


ZOOM said:
Is the answer that you have to be the member of an old Dzogchen lineage or that you have to be the student of an accomplished Dzogchen teacher?

No, because if that was the reason then every member of an old Dzogchen lineage or every student of an accomplished Dzogchen teacher would attain rainbow body.

But this is not the case.[/u][/b]

Malcolm wrote:
Every practitioner that I know who follows an authentic teacher will attain total realization either in this life, the bardo or in the natural nirmanakāya buddhafields.

This is what my teachers state, this is what the tradition states.

And yes, you need to be the student of a realized master.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 18th, 2014 at 8:28 AM
Title: Re: Why do only very few practitioners attain rainbow body?
Content:


ZOOM said:
Yes, and the only way to know if someone is approaching or attaining enlightenment are visible signs as those I was already talking about.

Malcolm wrote:
That is not the only way to know whether someone is approaching or has attained awakening.

Such signs are actually for those who lack faith and require miracles.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 18th, 2014 at 8:23 AM
Title: Re: Dharma & Science
Content:
Motova said:
How would you improve science Malcolm (the theory, goal and method)?

If scientific development were up to you, would you just halt it?

Malcolm wrote:
If it were up to me, I would regulate scientific research in accordance with Dharma ethics.

The point here is that science is not an activity carried out by awakened people, which is why so much of it is perverted.

But what I am really talking about is the pervasive tendency to subordinate Dharma to science that we see in so many practitioners.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 18th, 2014 at 7:56 AM
Title: Re: Dharma wheel, ethics, value & online communities
Content:
David N. Snyder said:
As a discussion forum get fairly large, there is bound to be a diverse set of views. There will be some who want a hard-line certain Dharma-view / their interpretation only, some that will want something more toward a secular view, etc. And that is fine as long as everyone is cordial. Here and at Dhamma Wheel too, we sometimes get complaints that we are allowing too many secular views to be expressed. And then we also get complaints from the opposite side that we are being Dharma-police and not allowing other views and interpretations.


Malcolm wrote:
Hi David:

I guess, speaking as a traditionalist, there really isn't room for views of Dharma in a forum that imagines itself dedicated to Mahāyāna and Vajrayāna that are not grounded in the tradition itself. This is especially true of a Vajrayāna forum where the lineage and lineage explanations absolutely vital. But beyond that, like the point I made in another thread, Mahāyāna and Vajrayāna, like the Śravaka schools, are grounded in hearing, reflection and cultivation, i.e. the three prajñās, whereas the so called "secular Buddhism" is just based on a intellectual interpretation of Dharma that is not grounded in the three prajñās. Instead it is based on the three vikalpas [conceptualities] reading, proliferation and attachment to views. Really, in a forum dedicated to Mahāyāna and Vajrayāna, there should be no place at all for so called "Secular Buddhism". Why? Because there is no Dharma in "Secular Buddhism".


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 18th, 2014 at 7:39 AM
Title: Re: Why do only very few practitioners attain rainbow body?
Content:
ZOOM said:
Visible results are the name of the game.

Malcolm wrote:
No, not really. The name of the game is waking up, attaining buddhahood for the benefit of all sentient beings. It does not matter much if it happens in this life, the bardo or the next life.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 18th, 2014 at 7:37 AM
Title: Re: Why do only very few practitioners attain rainbow body?
Content:
ZOOM said:
books or gurus!

Malcolm wrote:
The way things work in Vajrayāna Dharma is that we do not make assertions about the teachings unless they are backed up in the words of the Buddha, which are found in Dzogchen and other kinds of tantras.

A guru is indispensable in Dzogchen teachings, as well as all other Vajrayāna teachings. Without a guru, there is no path. Without a path, there is no result, much less rainbow body. Without a Guru we cannot receive the transmissions for the books in which Dzogchen teachings are recorded. So a Guru is indispensable as the root of the path.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 18th, 2014 at 6:51 AM
Title: Re: "Protestant" vs Traditional/"Orthodox" approaches to Dha
Content:
Alfredo said:
It seems to me that what we're talking about here is not an issue of Protestant Buddhism, but of a clash between fundamentalist and modernist approaches to Buddhism.

Malcolm wrote:
There is no modernist approach to Dharma. If it is not traditional, i.e., based on hearing the teachings from qualified masters, like a seal and its imprint, it really isn't Dharma at all.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 18th, 2014 at 6:44 AM
Title: Re: Why do only very few practitioners attain rainbow body?
Content:
Punya said:
waking up in the bardo do as well? (but not saying that's easy).

Malcolm wrote:
Achieving Buddhahood in the bardo is much easier than in this life. Why? It is because in the bardo state we have seven times more clarity. Buddha Vajrasattva states in the Victor’s Speech Tantra
After that, in the bardo of rebirth the present unobstructed awareness with complete sense organs has seven times more clarity.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 18th, 2014 at 6:28 AM
Title: Re: Why do only very few practitioners attain rainbow body?
Content:
ZOOM said:
The only Dzogchen practitioners we can be sure that they achieved something meaningful at all in their training are those attaining rainbow body during life or at death.

Malcolm wrote:
I think you really need to study the teachings a bit more before making such confidence pronouncements.

All these grades of practitioners are described in detail by the Buddha in such tantras as the Self-Arisen Vidya Tantra and so on, where the whole process is very precisely described, how many days they remain in the bardo of dharmatā, how many emanations they will have after achieving liberation in the bardo and so on.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 18th, 2014 at 6:19 AM
Title: Re: Is Western Buddhism an (ethnic) identity-based Buddhism?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
It makes sense when discussing people with affinities for Tibetan Buddhism. The Chinese started suppressing Buddhism right way, it reached the height of suppression between 1959-1968, then was suppressed until the early 80's. Meanwhile the refugee community in India was really in dire straights, so many people who were Tibetan practitioners in their past life, such as myself, were born into western families so we could meet the Dharma again with freedom and endowment to practice.

Mkoll said:
So are you claiming to recollect your past life as a Tibetan practitioner, Malcolm?

Malcolm wrote:
Nope, but I am sure it is the case for many, many reasons I won't bore you with. Suffice it to say, in my last lifetime, I was a practitioner from the Derge region of Eastern Tibet. Educated in Sakya, practitioner of Dzogchen, just like now.

I will share with you however that when I was in Central Tibet, I had past life memories, not very precise in detail, but vivid. This is when we were on our way to Samye and being in Samye. I remembered the place. Not Deja vu, something much stronger. Most specifially I remembered how the mountains looked in the Yarlung Valley, among other things.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 18th, 2014 at 6:13 AM
Title: Re: Is Western Buddhism an (ethnic) identity-based Buddhism?
Content:
Nemo said:
Chinese invade Tibet in 1950, give the reincarnated 20 years to grow up in the West. Western Tibetan Buddhism should start flourishing in the 1970's with a huge influx of new students but by 1980 that should start slowing down to a trickle. Now they would likely be born in Asia. It is quite possible that Tibetan Buddhist centres will become museums when that initial influx starts passing on in another 30 years. I don't think many Sanghas will be growing now unless they are selling something that is not genuine Dharma.

Perhaps my reincarnation based identity theory is too Buddhist for some.

uan said:
Is that how rebirth in Buddhism works? I don't know if it's too Buddhist for some, or not Buddhadharma at all.

Mkoll said:
I'd go with the latter.


Malcolm wrote:
It makes sense when discussing people with affinities for Tibetan Buddhism. The Chinese started suppressing Buddhism right way, it reached the height of suppression between 1959-1968, then was suppressed until the early 80's. Meanwhile the refugee community in India was really in dire straights, so many people who were Tibetan practitioners in their past life, such as myself, were born into western families so we could meet the Dharma again with freedom and endowment to practice. And yes, I was definitely a Tibetan practitioner for many lifetimes.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 18th, 2014 at 5:42 AM
Title: Re: "Protestant" vs Traditional/"Orthodox" approaches to Dha
Content:
uan said:
The question is, how would someone in the West know a translation or interpretation is wrong? They need to rely on the translators, but which one? Places like DW provide a place where the translations can be held up in the light of day to by people with the knowledge of Dharma from the source(s) and of the West, and who can provide a lingua franca for better understanding.

Malcolm wrote:
Again, those of us who are in the Dharma must emphasize to interested newcomers the essential import of engaging in the three prajñās of hearing, reflection and cultivation. There is no prajñā identified as "reading".

In order to hear the Dharma one must go to a qualified kalayānamitra [lit. good friend], a virtuous mentor, and begin the process of hearing the Dharma.

As I stated above, Dharma is a Aural Lineage. The Aural, or Hearing lineage, is much more important, relatively speaking, than the texts. The texts must be understood on the basis of the hearing the Dharma taught by a qualified teacher. Without that essential act of hearing the Dharma taught by a living, qualified teacher, one's understanding of the Dharma is sure to be bent askew right from the start.

Once we decide to rely on a qualified mentor, then we will be able to know when our own or other's understanding of the Dharma is correct or incorrect.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 18th, 2014 at 5:37 AM
Title: Re: "Protestant" vs Traditional/"Orthodox" approaches to Dha
Content:
Kim O'Hara said:
I think we only have two choices: we can try to go back to the past (or stay in it, like the Amish) or we can tackle the messy but stimulating process of working out an approach to the dharma which adapts to, and benefits people in, the society we live in. We will just have to do our best not to lose or distort anything essential.
Kim

Malcolm wrote:
It is really simple — you find an awakened teacher, you respectfully ask for teachings. You apply them. If you have extra time in your life, then you also study a lot. If you don't, you mainly focus on practice.

But Dharma is not something that is "worked out" — it is essentially a tradition grounded in hearing. You cannot learn Dharma from books. It must be heard. Then you apply it. This is the only proper way to approach the Dharma.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 18th, 2014 at 5:16 AM
Title: Re: Why do only very few practitioners attain rainbow body?
Content:
ngodrup said:
How many dzogchen yogis are free of the eight worldly concerns
and spend a significant portion of their life in solitary retreat?

Malcolm wrote:
The same could be said of many so called "Dzogchen teachers".

Anyway, whether your corpse shrinks or you wake up in the bardo, your body still reverts to the five lights of pure consciousness [ye shes].

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 18th, 2014 at 5:03 AM
Title: Re: Dharma & Science
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
My hearing of of the Dharma would depend very much on where I was born. The fact that I have entered the Dharma in this life at an early age pretty much guarantees I was a Buddhist for a long time, in many life times.

Emakirikiri said:
On this note it's said that Dzogchen practitioners of average capacity that do not recognise in the bardo of dharmata are then transferred to the five Pure Lands and attain Enlightenment. Does this mean that we were less than average Dzogchen practitioners in our past lives or that this is the first time we have properly entered into Dzogchen in our continuum?


Malcolm wrote:
Capacity here is related to diligence, that's all.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 18th, 2014 at 4:42 AM
Title: Re: Why do only very few practitioners attain rainbow body?
Content:
ZOOM said:
Why do only very few Dzogchen practitioners attain rainbow body compared to the high number of Dzogchen practitioners in the world?

Malcolm wrote:
There are 21 types of capacties of practitioners. Only the best of the best attain great transference body, i.e., rainbow body in this life. Virtually all others attain it in the bardo, or failing that, in a pure nirmanakāya buddhafield.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 18th, 2014 at 4:08 AM
Title: Re: Dharma & Science
Content:




Malcolm wrote:
Science, in its present iteration, is reductive and destructive.

Science is clearly not a panacea, has actually done nothing to remove the total amount of suffering in the world [in fact it has increased it substantially] and so on.

catmoon said:
What a perfectly ridiculous thing to say. Without scientific advances you'd be illiterate, diseased, and have a life expectancy of 28 years. You would never have heard of the Dharma or Buddha either.

Malcolm wrote:
Even with scientific "advances" people are still illiterate, have short life spans, and suffering from many diseases that did not exist even 100 years ago.

BTW, most life expectancy stats are factor in infant mortality — remove that, and we still tend to live into our 70s and 80s. After all Buddha lived to be 80, and that was not considered unusual at all.

My hearing of of the Dharma would depend very much on where I was born. The fact that I have entered the Dharma in this life at an early age pretty much guarantees I was a Buddhist for a long time, in many life times.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, July 17th, 2014 at 7:20 PM
Title: Re: "Protestant" vs Traditional/"Orthodox" approaches to Dha
Content:
Kim O'Hara said:
HI, Sherlock,
I'm not going to disagree (not yet, anyway! ) but do you distinguish between approaches coming from Protestantism as opposed to the scientific method as opposed to historical research techniques as opposed to the (European) Enlightenment philosophical tradition and, if so, how?


Kim

Malcolm wrote:
They are all of a piece.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, July 16th, 2014 at 11:58 PM
Title: Re: Complete Togal Instruction in Unrestricted New Book
Content:
Crazywisdom said:
I'm sure she will find the teachings again.

Malcolm wrote:
Then why paint such a condemning picture?

Crazywisdom said:
Her students will not. She received Longchen Nyingthig. Her students received Earth Visions.

Malcolm wrote:
I really don't think they have many students.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, July 16th, 2014 at 10:33 PM
Title: Re: Complete Togal Instruction in Unrestricted New Book
Content:
Crazywisdom said:
I'm sure she will find the teachings again.

Malcolm wrote:
Then why paint such a condemning picture?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, July 16th, 2014 at 8:39 PM
Title: Re: Direct introduction and purification of the 6 lokas
Content:
frank123 said:
If Rinpoche gives the lung for the 6 lokas at the end of the upcoming Massachusetts retreat will one be able to practice the 6 lokas and incorporate Vajrasattva into the practice?or is Vajrasattva with six lokas part of the Longsal Ngondro only and need the specific lung?Apologies if it sounds like i'm repeating myself.

Malcolm wrote:
The Longsal Ngondro is something very specific, it is not the same thing as the retreat he gave recently, though in essence it is the same.

frank123 said:
I was studying the Paris retreat from 2006 where the 6 lokas incorporates Vajrasattva.So would  a 6 lokas lung be suffice to do the practice from this retreat?

Malcolm wrote:
No Idea. At this point you really need to ask the boss.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, July 16th, 2014 at 8:35 PM
Title: Re: Complete Togal Instruction in Unrestricted New Book
Content:


Crazywisdom said:
No. They did not. They completely misunderstood the teachings. They might have seen bindus but they did not understand the part about not conceptualizing them and not concretizing or universalizing them.

Malcolm wrote:
Do you know them personally, or are you basing your opinion merely off of their books? Also, doesn't it strike you as a bit unkind to refer to Rachel Olds in such a condemning way? Speaking strictly for myself I would prefer to think that she will take a human birth again, in a Dharma family.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, July 16th, 2014 at 8:32 PM
Title: Re: Complete Togal Instruction in Unrestricted New Book
Content:
Crazywisdom said:
She's going to go into the bardo thinking she's supposed to see "essence... nothing, not nothing" When she sees the deities, she'll freak out and be in hell.

Malcolm wrote:
I don't think so. She understood what chos nyid mngon gsum was well enough, this alone is enough to prevent rebirth in lower realms forever.

Crazywisdom said:
That might be the case for someone who doesn't misrepresent dharma and teach a bastardized path. Chos nyid mngon gsum is only path of application. Even a first bhumi bodhisattva can be reborn in hell, like when The Bodhisattva killed the boatman. And that was considered a righteous killing.

Malcolm wrote:
As ChNN states, again and again, whoever has the experience of chos nyid mngon gsum will never take rebirth in lower realms again, cf. sgra thal gyur tantra.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, July 16th, 2014 at 8:16 PM
Title: Re: Dharma & Science
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Afflicted people make guns. Afflicted people do science. See the problem? It is the one I have been talking about.

Mkoll said:
And afflicted people practice Buddhism.

I don't see the problem.


Malcolm wrote:
The difference is when they practice the path. Unlike all other phenomena, the path, while conditioned, is unafflicted. Why? Because it comes from the wisdom of awakened people and, at least in Vajrayāna, is transmitted by awakened people. Science, on the other hand, is afflicted knowledge transmitted by afflicted people about afflictive phenomena.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, July 16th, 2014 at 8:10 PM
Title: Re: Dharma & Science
Content:
Dan74 said:
Are you suggesting we ban science?

Malcolm wrote:
Of course not, Dan. What I am pointing out, all other distractions aside, is that the benefits of science are not nearly as great as some of its enthusiasts imagine, that in fact there are long range harmful effects of our present, scientific industrial culture. What I am also suggesting the reason for this is that science is not derived from wisdom.

But this is not even the main point — the main point is that science is taken as more authoritative than Dharma. For example, Wayfarer constantly refers to a scientist to defend rebirth (without notable success), not masters like Nāgārjuna and so on. Perhaps he feels that people are more likely to listen to a scientist than an ancient masters?

Amazingly, I see more impassioned defense of science here than Dharma.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, July 16th, 2014 at 7:08 PM
Title: Re: Dharma & Science
Content:
TRC said:
Science and Technology aren't the problem. Greed, hatred and delusion are the problem. Stop blaming Science!

Malcolm wrote:
Right, guns are not the problem, it's people. You really do need to read In Absence of the Sacred.

Mkoll said:
Who makes the guns? People.

Why do people make guns? Defilement.

That's not to say guns aren't a problem, but they aren't the root of the problem.

Malcolm wrote:
Afflicted people make guns. Afflicted people do science. See the problem? It is the one I have been talking about.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, July 16th, 2014 at 9:17 AM
Title: Re: Dharma & Science
Content:
TRC said:
Science and Technology aren't the problem. Greed, hatred and delusion are the problem. Stop blaming Science!

Malcolm wrote:
Right, guns are not the problem, it's people. You really do need to read In Absence of the Sacred.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, July 16th, 2014 at 9:16 AM
Title: Re: Dharma & Science
Content:
Dan74 said:
That said, there will always be individuals in all walks of life who don't care about anything and anyone other than themselves and who can work with no regard to ethical consequences of their work. My impression is that they are a tiny fringe, generally hidden in some secret military laboratories and every scientists I've had dealings with has been very conscious of the big picture.

Malcolm wrote:
I would argue that on the contrary, it is institutionalized and wide spread. As you say "corporate sociopathy".

Dan74 said:
But going after science because its discoveries has been misused is pretty pointless and misguided, I think. We should go after the polluters, the governments that don't protect our interests and the natural heritage that we should be custodians of, rather than destroyers. We should go after the culture of consumerism and corporate sociopathy. Science is knowledge and sure enough knowledge can be a dangerous thing. But the genie is out of the bottle and there is no use trying to shove it back in or throw stones. Best to be constructive and learn to use it wisely.

Malcolm wrote:
Another "people kill people" argument.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, July 16th, 2014 at 6:23 AM
Title: Re: Complete Togal Instruction in Unrestricted New Book
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
She understood what chos nyid mngon gsum was well enough...

dzogchungpa said:
Just out of curiosity, how do you know that?

Malcolm wrote:
Because they received the teachings, and knew what they meant.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, July 16th, 2014 at 5:40 AM
Title: Re: Dharma & Science
Content:
Johnny Dangerous said:
It's not your forum, and not your call to interpret how that rule gets implemented. I'm willing to listen to concrete complaints personally, but mostly what I have is general hand-wringing from a small group of users who feel that DW somehow is "attacking them" on both sides of the debate due to simply not seeing the larger picture.

Malcolm wrote:
Did I ever say DW was attacking me? No, never.

What I said was the DW does not live up to its advertising as a forum for Mahāyāna and Vajrayāna. One assumes that means that Mahāyāna and Vajrayāna should be the main focus of conversation, not endless reruns with the same people who deny rebirth, who insist that Dharma must conform to science and so on.


Johnny Dangerous said:
There are endless reruns of all sorts of conversations on here, what do you expect, a Mahayana loyalty pledge? Do you expect us to actively censor heterdox views that don't break the ToS?


Malcolm wrote:
I think you ought to be a forum for Mahāyāna and Vajrayāna as you claim to be. Instead it is "Buddhism is whatever the hell I think it is" quite often.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, July 16th, 2014 at 5:29 AM
Title: Re: Dharma & Science
Content:
Johnny Dangerous said:
It's not your forum, and not your call to interpret how that rule gets implemented. I'm willing to listen to concrete complaints personally, but mostly what I have is general hand-wringing from a small group of users who feel that DW somehow is "attacking them" on both sides of the debate due to simply not seeing the larger picture.

Malcolm wrote:
Did I ever say DW was attacking me? No, never.

What I said was the DW does not live up to its advertising as a forum for Mahāyāna and Vajrayāna. One assumes that means that Mahāyāna and Vajrayāna should be the main focus of conversation, not endless reruns with the same people who deny rebirth, who insist that Dharma must conform to science and so on.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, July 16th, 2014 at 5:23 AM
Title: Re: Direct introduction and purification of the 6 lokas
Content:
frank123 said:
If Rinpoche gives the lung for the 6 lokas at the end of the upcoming Massachusetts retreat will one be able to practice the 6 lokas and incorporate Vajrasattva into the practice?or is Vajrasattva with six lokas part of the Longsal Ngondro only and need the specific lung?Apologies if it sounds like i'm repeating myself.

Malcolm wrote:
The Longsal Ngondro is something very specific, it is not the same thing as the retreat he gave recently, though in essence it is the same.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, July 16th, 2014 at 5:17 AM
Title: Re: Dharma & Science
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
With regard to the problems and conflicts between science and Dharma, science is not a wisdom tradition, its practitioners not necessarily wise. We can understand that this because it is technology, which we all understand to be a product of science [after all, how often have I been chided in the past two days for using technology while criticizing science as the be all and end all?] that has plunged this world into a human-made crisis of epic proportions, a fact which no one seems willing to acknowledge. Somehow, we are supposed to imagine that science in its own little unassailable domain, exempt from criticism because of its touted "benefits". Dharma on the other hand, is also assigned its domain, restricted to moral issues, but when it comes down to things like the four or five elements, etc., we are supposed to dismiss these as archaic, obsolete, "unscientific" doctrines.

Dan for example, says "...are we to blame Tibetan herbs because they can be harmful if used incorrectly?" Gee Dan, you are making a perfect argument for the NRA, since after all, it is people that kill people and not guns. As I pointed out already, most of the ills of the world today, the pollution, the over-population, the manufactured toxins in our environment, GMO crops, the extinction crisis, etc., are all a result of science that is not guided by wisdom. These days, most people understand that the proliferation of guns is not a good thing. Why is it so hard for these same people to understand that at present, in the hand of confused people science is more dangerous than any gun.

Science and Dharma should not be kept in their own domains, on the contrary, science should be subordinate to Dharma, that is to say, a follower of Dharma needs to evaluate science and technology according to its impact on the world. This is rarely done in any systematic way, and this is largely because the moral fiber and wisdom of the world-wide Post-Industrial Civilization is very weak.

Beyond this are the obvious tensions between science and Dharma that have already been pointed out.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, July 16th, 2014 at 4:45 AM
Title: Re: Dharma & Science
Content:
Johnny Dangerous said:
there will continue to be a "secular Buddhism".

Malcolm wrote:
We should not even have to put up with this for one second. Supposedly this forum is "...on Mahayana and Vajrayana Buddhism". I don't see where "Secular Buddhism" even has a place here at all. They have their own forums, named as such.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, July 16th, 2014 at 4:31 AM
Title: Re: Dharma & Science
Content:
Johnny Dangerous said:
My own experience of things is that the rhetoric on this has gotten to a place where it's creating it's own vortex of malaise, bad feelings, and general back-and forth about who is properly Buddhist and who is not. While I have my own opinion about the arguments themselves, I hope those of you going polemic about this on either will periodically  question what level of this kind of debate is actually beneficial, and if and when it reaches a point of dragging things here downhill.

Malcolm wrote:
It has reached the point where the ability to talk here is stymied by two things) 1 constant referral to the Pali Canon when in fact discourse should be grounded in Mahāyāna and Vajrayāna texts 2) the inability to conduct a conversation about Mahāyāna and Vajrayāna without it being sidetracked by skeptics. These two facts have lead to an exodus of more traditionally minded users, if you haven't noticed. The third issue is that people who really have no idea what they are talking about are allowed to waffle on and one for months without being curbed.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, July 16th, 2014 at 4:16 AM
Title: Re: Complete Togal Instruction in Unrestricted New Book
Content:
Crazywisdom said:
She's going to go into the bardo thinking she's supposed to see "essence... nothing, not nothing" When she sees the deities, she'll freak out and be in hell.

Malcolm wrote:
I don't think so. She understood what chos nyid mngon gsum was well enough, this alone is enough to prevent rebirth in lower realms forever.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, July 16th, 2014 at 1:17 AM
Title: Re: Dharma & Science
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
But here, on DW, it really seems that the general tone of this board is that where Buddhadharma is contradicted by "Science", well, this is what we have to follow.

Mkoll said:
Your perception of the "general tone of this board" is based on the personal outspoken views of whatever select members you have in mind.

"We" don't have to follow anything of the sort.


Malcolm wrote:
Basically, it is really simple — whenever someone posts something about some traditional topic, be it authorship of Mahāyāna, etc., by far and away the consensus always comes down in favor of secular scholarship. Someone recently suggested that the TOS of the board be changed from: Do not be disruptive. Dharma Wheel is an environment for the discussion of Mahayana and Vajrayana Buddhism.
To:
Do not be defensive of tradition. Dharma Wheel is a secularizing, science-based, unevenly regulated environment for the dissection, dissolution and eventual replacement of Mahayana and Vajrayana Buddhism with a new secular philosophy stripped of all inconvenience.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, July 16th, 2014 at 1:09 AM
Title: Re: Dharma & Science
Content:
Mkoll said:
I really don't understand how religious fundamentalists can spit on science while using as their medium to do so a computer and the internet.

Malcolm wrote:
This is a very facile observation, and specious to boot. What I pointed out, and am pointing out is that science is not based in the perceptions of awakened people. It is based in the lowest common denominator, ordinary perception.

But here, on DW, it really seems that the general tone of this board is that where Buddhadharma is contradicted by "Science", well, this is what we have to follow. We can beat up Buddhist teachings all we like, but god forgive that anyone should question the sacred cow "Science" which is such a cornucopia of "benefits".


Jikan said:
Malcolm, do you think this view pertains to DW's users in plurality, or its team members, or...?

I see forceful arguments being made against the putative Dharma-science connection by more than one voice in this thread and elsewhere.

Malcolm wrote:
I think it is a general tone, some members reflect that tone more than others. But this board is hardly perceived as being devoted to upholding traditional Buddhist values. In general, the primary standard-bearers of Buddhadharma here are the Tibetan Buddhists.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, July 16th, 2014 at 12:45 AM
Title: Re: Dharma & Science
Content:
Mkoll said:
I really don't understand how religious fundamentalists can spit on science while using as their medium to do so a computer and the internet.

Malcolm wrote:
This is a very facile observation, and specious to boot. What I pointed out, and am pointing out is that science is not based in the perceptions of awakened people. It is based in the lowest common denominator, ordinary perception.

But here, on DW, it really seems that the general tone of this board is that where Buddhadharma is contradicted by "Science", well, this is what we have to follow. We can beat up Buddhist teachings all we like, but god forgive that anyone should question the sacred cow "Science" which is such a cornucopia of "benefits".


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, July 16th, 2014 at 12:40 AM
Title: Re: Dharma & Science
Content:


Dan74 said:
Utility is only one aspect. I would actually start with understanding. You practice Tibetan medicine. I suspect that at some stage, knowledge of Tibetan plants has been used to poison people. At some other stage, some quacks probably practiced it inappropriately with disastrous consequences. Should all the books have been burned then? Should people have railed against it as doing "nothing to remove the total amount of suffering in the world"? I think not.

Malcolm wrote:
The point is not "is this this scientific technique of analysis good or bad?" The point is that many people who post here subordinate the Dharma to science, arguing incorrectly that HH Dalai Lama actually holds such a position as well. They then immediately then bring up the utility argument "The benefits of science" argument, if you will. Then, if anyone should even venture to suggest that science, as it is being used today, is actually pernicious and harmful, they immediately bring up the "well this computer and internet was brought to you by science, so shut up." These people have apparently never read In the Absence of the Sacred: The Failure of Technology and the Survival of the Indian Nations by Jerry Mander.

Dan74 said:
As for science being "reductive and destructive", it can be, usually in its infancy it is because when starting from nothing, a simple reductive model is the best you can do. In its maturity it progresses to more complex models.

Malcolm wrote:
As opposed to Buddhadharma, which begins from a place of maturity and wisdom, and is never destructive, never requires adaptation, never requires any change whatsoever, since it is the highest point of human knowledge possible.

Dan74 said:
No, knowledge can be abstract and specific and one kind can inform the other. The prevailing ignorance, like the example you describe, is hardly the fault of science. And I wholeheartedly agree with you about the importance of being connected with the place you live. I can do better, get my hands dirtier more often and contribute more positively to our local environment. But again, this is at best tangental to the topic at hand.

Malcolm wrote:
It is not tangential at all. We live in a society of heads without bodies, we are more alienated and disconnected with our world (as it rapidly disappears before our eyes, being transformed into wasteland) than at any time in history. Our civilization has produced the greatest harm to the planet we have ever seen. All of this is result of our brimming confidence in science and the technological solutions it proposes, each one of which has brought more sorrow to us than the last. All of this is a result of our collective abandonment of the wisdom traditions of our elders, our sacred traditions, our sense of sacred place, etc.

Dan74 said:
But I think you are not serious with your dismissal. Abjure all technology, give up all new materials, build your own house from basic materials and no help from powertools, sell your car, grow your own food, live like a true Luddite and you will have some credibility as far as a philosophical position on technology is concerned. But that still doesn't touch science. Science, first and foremost, is about understanding. Do you really want to close the door on scientific understanding of the material world?

Malcolm wrote:
First of all, the Luddites were not opposed to technology per se, they were trying to prevent the destruction of artisanal cottage industry weaving.

Second of all, my specific criticism is focused on the idea that scientific knowledge can supersede Dharma or that Dharma is can be understood in the manner which those who do "science" are accustomed to looking at things. Why, because as a said science is not based on wisdom, it does not even discover wisdom, it just discovers material intricacies, it is very detailed and so on, but its meaning is very, very coarse and not at all profound. There is nothing profound in science at all.

It is not possible now to live the way you suggest.

Anyway, it is you who are conflating issues, not me. I presented this premise:

Science operates from a lowest common denominator approach to evaluating knowledge. It is predicated on the perceptions of confused sentient beings, not the perceptions of awakened people.

Please examine your statements in light of my statement there.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 15th, 2014 at 11:21 PM
Title: Re: Dharma & Science
Content:
Dan74 said:
This might be a starting point for those who are interested: http://undsci.berkeley.edu/article/whatisscience_01

Malcolm wrote:
How patronizing...


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 15th, 2014 at 11:18 PM
Title: Re: Dharma & Science
Content:
Dan74 said:
But this has nothing to do with your argument.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, actually it has a lot do with my argument — you are now making a utility argument for science. I think that is a poor argument. There is not nearly as much utility in science as you want to believe.

The point about knowledge of place is that most of the knowledge you are talking about is just abstract, it has nothing to do with where people live, how they live, and so on. We live in a world where children do not know that eggs come from chickens.

Dan74 said:
but its a great approach, it imbues us with fascination and respect as natures secrets reveal themselves.

Malcolm wrote:
Science, in its present iteration, is reductive and destructive.

Science is clearly not a panacea, has actually done nothing to remove the total amount of suffering in the world [in fact it has increased it substantially] and so on.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 15th, 2014 at 11:03 PM
Title: Re: Dharma & Science
Content:
Dan74 said:
...while our worldview has been so enriched both by our understanding of the Universe, genetics, biology, particle physics and quantum mechanics.

Malcolm wrote:
Dan, I am going to ignore your other statements, since they are rhetorical flourishes for the most part that don't bear any need of reply.

However:

How many plants can you name which grow where you live, which ones are edible, poison, or neither? What are their medicinal properties?

How well do you know the movements of stars in the sky?

How connected are you actually with the place where you live?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 15th, 2014 at 9:59 PM
Title: Re: Is Western Buddhism an (ethnic) identity-based Buddhism?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
This is really only true of the Vipassana folks.

Jikan said:
I was going to pose a related question:

Is there such a thing as a Western Buddhism, that is, a single one?  It seems to me that some of what is swept into the category "WB" corresponds to the criticism made in the OP, but there's a great deal of diversity elsewhere in the same category.  Maybe even contradictions.

One reason these discussions can get so prickly:  it's very difficult to generalize about these issues intelligently

Malcolm wrote:
Oh definitely there is a "Western Buddhism"; it is characterized by a commitment to secularism, scientism, and a psychotherapeutic approach to meditation.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 15th, 2014 at 9:50 PM
Title: Re: Is Western Buddhism an (ethnic) identity-based Buddhism?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
This is really only true of the Vipassana folks.

Seishin said:
I would say mostly rather than only, in my experience at least (I'm not sure about the rest of the world). But could this be because vipassana (and anapanasati) is being pegged as the "scientific" practice??

Gassho.

Malcolm wrote:
Probably.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 15th, 2014 at 8:49 PM
Title: Re: How Tibetans feel about the occupation of Tibet
Content:
Unknown said:
On Monday, during the telephone interview, Ms. Woeser gave a dire assessment of the situation in Tibetan regions, where more than 120 people have set themselves on fire as a political protest in recent years, unnerving Chinese officials.

“The current situation hasn’t changed, and the oppression still has not been relaxed,” she said. “As for what will happen in the future, it’s difficult to predict. On the one hand, the authorities’ policy of guilt by association is very harsh, and also the current tactic of control is one of micromanagement. The entire Tibetan area is under a management grid. On the surface, it appears that the situation had been easing up from such strict control, but it hasn’t. The Lhasa that I know is still under tight control.”

Malcolm wrote:
http://sinosphere.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/07/15/tibetan-activist-on-her-latest-house-arrest/?_php=true&_type=blogs&ref=world&_r=0


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 15th, 2014 at 8:47 PM
Title: Re: How Tibetans feel about the occupation of Tibet
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
https://www.callofthewhitecrane.blogspot.com/p/petition-for-jailed-tibetan-singers.html


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 15th, 2014 at 8:41 PM
Title: Re: Is Western Buddhism an (ethnic) identity-based Buddhism?
Content:
JKhedrup said:
I know I take a risk at presenting this, but I thought this quote COULD foster a measured, kind discussion on the issue of lack of multi-ethnic participation in Western Buddhism. Hopefully any discussion will be free from false accusations (without apologies), one line missives,tit for tat claims etc.

The below I think is a response to some people objecting to specific Buddhist practice spaces for People of Colour or specific ethnic groups. Larry Yang argues that Western Buddhism is identity-based Buddhism, as Western teachers trained in Asia did not feel culturally comfortable in that paradigm and wanted to establish a space where people like them could practice:
Larry Yang: Ironically, identity-based retreats were long in the making because when the teachers of the European-American mainstream sangha came back from Asia to teach, they didn’t go to the existing Asian temples or venues that were already in North America. They started the mainstream centers we know today because they didn’t see themselves reflected in these Asian temples. They didn’t hear their life stories, they didn’t hear the relevance to how these teachings actually dissolved their particular suffering in their particular life. This is the exact same reason that the identity retreats have been formed. Even in our expression of difference, we’re the same. There is something that still completely connects us. The point of these retreats is to garner a strength of practice to enable us to see beyond the differences.
http://www.thebuddhadharma.com/web-archive/2011/11/9/forum-why-is-american-buddhism-so-white.html " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Malcolm wrote:
This is really only true of the Vipassana folks.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 15th, 2014 at 8:40 PM
Title: Re: Direct introduction and purification of the 6 lokas
Content:
bryandavis said:
Thanks for any reply. Still trying to figure out how to navigate with in the DC.
.

Malcolm wrote:
In the end, since you will hear many different answers from students, it is always better to ask Rinpoche himself personally. The reason you will hear many different answers is that Rinpoche has given many different answers to different students at various times in different circumstances.

In general, this ngondro practice can be practiced if you have the lung of the text, and Rinpoche often uses methods of introduction which are from Longsal such as the Yeshe Zangthal. He will give the lung if requested.

But when you have questions and are really not sure, it is always better to ask him directly.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 15th, 2014 at 8:33 PM
Title: Re: Dharma & Science
Content:
Wayfarer said:
Thanks for clarifying that.

There is no need for there to be a conflct between science and Buddhism. I can't see any reason why the Buddha, and Buddhists, would oppose the means of enhancing life expectancy, providing communications technology, optimising food crops, and developing many new means of livelihood, to mention but a few aspects.  Scientific medicine alone has done immense amounts to reduce human suffering.

Malcolm wrote:
As HHDL puts it in the book from which you draw your quote:
Buddhism draws the critical division differently— i.e., between sentience and non-sentience— because it is primarily interested in the alleviation of suffering and the quest for happiness. In Buddhism, the evolution of the cosmos and the emergence of the sentient beings within it— indeed, effectively everything within the purview of the physical and life sciences— belong within the domain of the first of the Four Noble Truths, which the Buddha taught in his initial sermon. The Four Noble Truths state that within the realm of impermanent phenomena there is suffering, suffering has an origin, the cessation of suffering is possible, and there is a path to the cessation of suffering. As I see it, science falls within the scope of the first truth in that it examines the material bases of suffering, for it covers the entire spectrum of the physical environment—“ the container”— as well as the sentient beings—“ the contained.” It is in the mental realm— the realm of psychology, consciousness, the afflictions, and karma— that we find the second of the truths, the origin of suffering. The third and fourth truths, cessation and the path, are effectively outside the domain of scientific analysis in that they pertain primarily to what might be called philosophy and religion.
Dalai Lama (2005-09-13). The Universe in a Single Atom: The Convergence of Science and Spirituality (Kindle Locations 1243-1252). Crown Publishing Group. Kindle Edition.

You see here, rather than saying this or that topic falls within science's domain, he claims that science falls within a specified subset of the Buddhist analysis of the existential problem facing all sentient beings, suffering.

It is true that modern medicine has had some impact on the area of the first kind of suffering, the suffering of suffering, it has had no impact on the second kind of suffering, the suffering of change, and in fact it can be argued that suffering of change is more endemic than ever before in what we know of human history. No only that, modern science has vastly increased the means of inflicting the suffering of suffering, as we see in the wars we have been having in the Middle East and during the 20th century. So, advances in technology are not really so rosy in fact, and do not actually add up to more happiness for human beings and other kinds of creatures.

A great deal of what we call "science" is merely technology, and great deal of science that is done has no practical use at all. For example, most of the scientific knowledge we have about the cellular processes of the human body are not at all valuable in medical cures, and the vast majority of synthesized drugs are derived from plants whose properties have been known for centuries by indigenous healers. Moreover, many of the diseases we now can cure are diseases that are a product of our technological and very toxic industrial civilization, diseases which were rare or non-existent even in the not so distant past. One thing I will grant is that in the area of surgery, surgical technology has been able to advance a great deal in the past 170 years, but primarily due to two factors, antibiotics and anesthesia.

In other words, the scientific revolution has created ten problems for every one that it has solved, from global warming to increased pollution of the biosphere, to an unprecedented extinction event that is ongoing and so on.

So forgive me for not placing any confidence at all in the confused perception of ordinary beings, whose thrashing efforts to free themselves from suffering merely bring more problems and pain.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 15th, 2014 at 8:52 AM
Title: Re: Buddhist "relics"?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
The pity is that the topic of Buddhist relics is very interesting and worthy of discussion, but the topic itself was poisoned by the OP's confrontational and close-minded perspective.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 15th, 2014 at 8:41 AM
Title: Re: Dharma & Science
Content:
Wayfarer said:
I would like to know if you disagree with that statement from the Dalai Lama 'If scientific analysis were conclusively to demonstrate certain claims in Buddhism to be false, then we must accept the findings of science and abandon those claims.' Yes or no?

Malcolm wrote:
I disagree with HHDL on this point, as written and as presented. You have to bear in mind that the way the Gelugpa school defines conventional truth is in terms of how it corresponds with the deluded perceptions of worldly beings. HHDL is a Gelugpa and presents these issues from that framework.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 15th, 2014 at 8:08 AM
Title: Re: Buddhist "relics"?
Content:


nichirenista said:
I suppose what I'm ultimately trying to do is define the term "relic."

Malcolm wrote:
Shariraṃ, relics, are the small pellet—like secretions found in the ashes of Buddhist saints when they are cremated.

Crazywisdom said:
They look like pearls. These are but one kind.
There have been many Kagyu masters whose eyes, tongue and heart fused in cremation.

Malcolm wrote:
That is not really a relic, per se.

Crazywisdom said:
Some manifested bija on their teeth. Some manifested mandalas in their skulls, mantras on bones, etc.

Malcolm wrote:
Those are not shāriraṃ, but are called "gdung", bone relics. They are a bit different than shariraṃ and are not the kind of relics on display at the Maitreya Relic Tour,
Another form of relic is the remains of the saint, like the hair or even the robe. These carry very powerful blessings.
No doubt, but these things are not described in sutra and tantra per se.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 15th, 2014 at 8:04 AM
Title: Re: Thinley Norbu Rinpoche's Sole Panacea
Content:
nickhol said:
I just read Thinley Norbu Rinpoche's new Sole Panacea: A Brief Commentary on the Seven-Line Prayer to Guru Rinpoche That Cures the Suffering of the Sickness of Karma and Defilement.  Its a must read.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, it dispenses very nicely with the scientific materialism that forms the dominant culture of today.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 15th, 2014 at 8:02 AM
Title: Re: Buddhism, r/atheism, Human Rights...
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Modernity has yet to come to terms with desire, hatred and ignorance.

There is nothing particularly noble about "modernity" (read, post-Hegelian Western culture) and nothing especially difficult about living in a so called modern culture. Sentient beings are still the same — afflicted by the three poisons — and Buddhadharma is still relevant to that state of affairs and always will be.

Queequeg said:
I certainly did not suggest modernity is noble or that living in it is particularly difficult. However, short of some catastrophic decline of modern civilization, these are the conditions human being will be living in, the context in which they will have to come to terms with desire, hatred and ignorance. I didn't even come close to suggesting that Buddhadharma is not relevant today. In fact, I think my whole argument is that it IS relevant.

That said, would the Buddha, if he were to appear today, be counseling someone in breathing meditation using the example of a blacksmith's bellow? No, more likely he'd be referring to spin class.


Malcolm wrote:
I am pretty sure the Buddha would call a dashboard a dashboard, even though no one has really used horse drawn wagons for a hundred years in the US and England.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 15th, 2014 at 7:47 AM
Title: Re: Buddhist "relics"?
Content:


nichirenista said:
I suppose what I'm ultimately trying to do is define the term "relic."

Malcolm wrote:
Shariraṃ, relics, are the small pellet—like secretions found in the ashes of Buddhist saints when they are cremated.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 15th, 2014 at 7:35 AM
Title: Re: Dharma & Science
Content:
Wayfarer said:
No, I definitely and emphatically do not reject belief in rebirth.  Ian Stevenson spent 30 years researching children who recalled their previous lives. He said, and I fully accept, that this evidence suggest the truth of re-birth. And he was a scientist - but not a materialist. Science and scientific materialism are different things. You need to get some clarity around that.

Malcolm wrote:
I have a lot of clarity around this issue, thank you very much. Science operates from a lowest common denominator approach to evaluating knowledge. It is predicated on the perceptions of confused sentient beings, not the perceptions of awakened people. Buddhadharma on the other hand is predicated on the perception of awakened people, not confused people — you need to get some clarity around that.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 15th, 2014 at 7:26 AM
Title: Re: Buddhist "relics"?
Content:
Wayfarer said:
I don't think there are *any grounds whatever* to accuse this contributor of 'scientism' or 'materialism' on the basis of what he has written here. He is asking honest questions and wrestling with honest doubts  I regard such accusations as ad hominem and would suggest that they are dropped.

Malcolm wrote:
I would suggest that your observation is out of place and inaccurate, so I will ask you not interfere further unless you have something value to add. You are over-moderating.

I would also point out the person in question made defamatory remarks about the Buddhist tradition, implying it was preposterous because it does not fit with what he understands as "scientific".

In other words, it is ok, in your view, to make defamatory remarks about Buddhadharma since it is not "scientific", but it is not ok to call people on it when they make such remarks from a scientific materialist perspective. In other words, we, who follow Buddhadharma, are barred from defending our tradition, according to you, if its traditions contravene "science".


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 15th, 2014 at 7:25 AM
Title: Re: Buddhist "relics"?
Content:


Malcolm wrote:
Technology is one thing. technology is not a truth claim, scientism like yours however is.

M

nichirenista said:
The earlier statement was that science is for confused people. My response is that science is what has allowed us to have computers and communicate via the Internet. I'm not making a so-called truth claim here. This is fact.

Similarly, the relics are either those of the historical Buddha who lived 2500 years ago in India,  or they are not.

Malcolm wrote:
I did not say science was for confused people, I said that your criteria of a truth claim is based on the ordinary perceptions of confused people.

Saying this or that is a "fact" is another kind of truth claim.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 15th, 2014 at 7:02 AM
Title: Re: Dharma & Science
Content:
Wayfarer said:
But I also don't think that religious practitioners ought to say that they are in possession of some facts which over-rule science in regards to matters in which scientific measurement obviously holds sway.

Malcolm wrote:
I guess you reject rebirth then, since as far as science is concerned, brains = minds.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 15th, 2014 at 6:59 AM
Title: Re: Buddhist "relics"?
Content:


nichirenista said:
What was shaken was my faith in the integrity of certain Buddhist leaders. It's disillusioning for me to see that representatives of other traditions make outrageous claims that almost certainly would not stand up to scientific verification. I'd thought Buddhism was above that.

Malcolm wrote:
Science takes the vision of ordinary confused human beings as the benchmark for truth claims. Buddhadharma takes the wisdom vision of awakened beings as the bench mark for truth claims.

You have made your choice.

nichirenista said:
You can thank science for enabling you to communicate with me now through your computer via the Internet. You can thank science for lighting up the room where the relics were displayed and powering the sound  the monk used to speak to the group assembled at the event.

Yes, I've made the choice to acknowledge something most people on this thread apparently won't accept: my opinion on the matter ultimately has no bearing. Either the relics are historically/archaeologically real, or they aren't. My personal perspective is not the deciding factor.

I hope those of you who are posting that I am insensitive will take a look at the how insensitive you are being to me. There is no need to attack me.

Malcolm wrote:
Technology is one thing. technology is not a truth claim, scientism like yours however is.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 15th, 2014 at 5:44 AM
Title: Re: Buddhist "relics"?
Content:
nichirenista said:
What was shaken was my faith in the integrity of certain Buddhist leaders. It's disillusioning for me to see that representatives of other traditions make outrageous claims that almost certainly would not stand up to scientific verification. I'd thought Buddhism was above that.

Jesse said:
Lol. There's lots of things which are true that science can't verify. There's more to reality and life than can be measured, and while it's fine and all that you've chosen logic over dogma, don't go throwing materialistic beliefs like it's the defacto stance of science.


Malcolm wrote:
He has just chosen a different dogma, that's all.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 15th, 2014 at 5:39 AM
Title: Re: Buddhist "relics"?
Content:


nichirenista said:
What was shaken was my faith in the integrity of certain Buddhist leaders. It's disillusioning for me to see that representatives of other traditions make outrageous claims that almost certainly would not stand up to scientific verification. I'd thought Buddhism was above that.

Malcolm wrote:
Science takes the vision of ordinary confused human beings as the benchmark for truth claims. Buddhadharma takes the wisdom vision of awakened beings as the bench mark for truth claims.

You have made your choice.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 15th, 2014 at 5:37 AM
Title: Re: Buddhist "relics"?
Content:


Malcolm wrote:
Doesn't sound to me like there is much Buddhadharma in your Buddhism, but rather, a whole lot of materialism.


nichirenista said:
Ironic that I'm the one who was accused of being insensitive.

I leave you to bask in your spiritual superiority to me….


Malcolm wrote:
It is not about superiority -- you might as well chant Namo Mickey Mouse, based on your own stated belief I've read that scientific studies have revealed that chanting (no matter the religion) is good for mental health because the rhythm of chanting corresponds with that of the pulse of brain activity. Such ideas really have nothing to do with Buddhadharma.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 15th, 2014 at 5:07 AM
Title: Re: Buddhist "relics"?
Content:
nichirenista said:
Science speaks for itself. A relic either is or isn't literally from the historical Buddha. My attitude is not the deciding factor. No religious faith on my part was necessary in appraising the historical verifiability of the Venus of Willendorf.

I'm not Nichiren Daishonin and this isn't the 1200s. Heck, I'm not even Japanese. I'm a "white ethnic" raised in the Roman Catholic Church in the Unites States of America -- where one of our greatest freedoms is the freedom of expression. My reasons for chanting are different from Nichiren's (I like the scientific view), and I'm aware that he believed things that I don't. I find his beliefs and history to be beneficial to study -- but from a historical, scholarly standpoint.

I suppose what I'm saying is that mythology is different from science, and I wish the advertisement for this event would have made it clear that this event was within the realm of "Buddhist mythology." But I think I have to accept that maybe it wasn't advertised that way because some people believe it is scientifically, literally true that the relics are from the historical Buddha.


Malcolm wrote:
Doesn't sound to me like there is much Buddhadharma in your Buddhism, but rather, a whole lot of materialism.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 15th, 2014 at 12:21 AM
Title: Re: Buddhism, r/atheism, Human Rights...
Content:
Queequeg said:
[
As a whole, Buddhism has not come to terms with modernity.

Malcolm wrote:
Modernity has yet to come to terms with desire, hatred and ignorance.

There is nothing particularly noble about "modernity" (read, post-Hegelian Western culture) and nothing especially difficult about living in a so called modern culture. Sentient beings are still the same — afflicted by the three poisons — and Buddhadharma is still relevant to that state of affairs and always will be.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 14th, 2014 at 8:14 PM
Title: Re: Buddhist "relics"?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
The term is "sharira". The Buddha's remains from his cremation were divided into eight parts and placed in Stupas.

Buddhist masters have been producing shariraṃ in all traditions for centuries. The understanding of shariraṃ is highly developed in Tibetan Buddhism, especially in the Dzogchen teachings, where many different kinds of shariraṃ from different parts of the body, indicating different levels of practice are detailed by the Buddha in texts such as the Brilliant Relics Tantra and so on. For example,  in the Self-Arisen Vidyā Tantra, Buddha states:
After my nirvana
in order to generate the devotion of migrating beings 
place the relics in a statue. 
Place these major classes of relics
in statues of my form.
The Buddha teaches in the Bhadrakalpika-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra
Making a small offering to the relics of the Sugata in nirvana has limitless qualities.
Kuśalamūla-paridhara-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra
The transformation of his relics, 
is just like my nirvana, 
the relics of the Sugata sNying po Tshogs,
those will transform.
The Arya-sarvadharmaguṇavyūharāja-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra:
At a place of stupa containing relics or a temple, make offerings with incense, scents, various flowers and various pennants.

nichirenista said:
I hesitate to start this thread because I don't mean to seem disrespectful, much less sacrilegious. So, let me state upfront that this is an honest, sincere question….

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

I attended the loving kindness tour a few days ago, which is a part of the Maitreya Project through the Foundation for the Preservation of the Mahayana Tradition. I was completely caught off guard. When I saw the word "relic" in their advertisements, I thought in terms of archaeology. I didn't know about the concept of "relics" in the Tibetan tradition. I came to feel that these are relics in the same way that the bread was the body of Jesus in my Catholic childhood. Symbolically.

To be honest I'm almost at a loss here. I will refrain from posting my more blunt thoughts on the topic, for fear of offending some people. But I suppose my questions would be as follows: 1. What is the general consensus of the relics on this tour? Do people actually believe that they have relics from the historical Buddha? (It would seem to me that something that rare and valuable would be displayed at the Smithsonian behind lock and key, under video surveillance, and under the careful watch of a security guard nearby. Not casually displayed at the local Masonic Temple, where any average Joe from off the street could wander in and then place the relics of the historical Buddha on his head!) 2. Have such relics ever been verified by any scientist?

I'll be a little more blunt, though hopefully tactful and not disrespectful. Truth is that it was a very disillusioned and disappointing display for me. I guess I would like to know that there are other Buddhists out there who don't believe in this either….


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 14th, 2014 at 12:10 PM
Title: Re: Are Karma and Rebirth Real?
Content:
Wayfarer said:
Again, you make many sweeping statements without any attribution or justification. When asked for justification, you offer bad interpretations of scholastic Buddhist texts, reading things into them which aren't there and coming to conclusions which the texts don't justify.

(I am starting to appreciate why certain levels of teaching were traditionally kept secret....)

Andrew108 said:
This is pretty bad. I have enough of this attitude.

Malcolm wrote:
Oh, i think this evaluation of your posts is entirely justifiable in many ways.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 14th, 2014 at 11:21 AM
Title: Re: Are Karma and Rebirth Real?
Content:
Wayfarer said:
Of course, I agree, but as you say, it gets to a point where it is unseemly to refer to advanced teachings as a basis for making unsubstantiated and sweeping claims about Buddhist fundamentals..

Malcolm wrote:
You seem to be suffering from the misapprehension that it is always inappropriate to cite higher texts when they support teachings found in lower yanas.

Finally, if you don't mind, i will cite any text i deem appropriate in support of any point i wish to make.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 14th, 2014 at 7:48 AM
Title: Re: Are Karma and Rebirth Real?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
The teachings are not something to be debated about for sport.

Wayfarer said:
I don't think it is much use referring to advanced texts in trying to reason with someone who demonstrates no understanding of the basics. For someone whose understanding is basic, basic texts are all that is required.

Malcolm wrote:
The point is that A108 was refuting teachings which are found in Dzogchen teachings, of which he professes to be a practitioner, as well as Abhidharma in favor of Theravadin presentations.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 14th, 2014 at 3:38 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen & rainbow body
Content:
Gyurme Kundrol said:
since in the ultimate nature such an intention or aspiration, or even such a thought is literally not needed.

Malcolm wrote:
Correction, does not exist.

But Dzogchen practice is predicated first of all on vidyā, rigpa, knowledge. Without that experiential knowledge we call "rigpa" all these nice Dzogchen words are empty of meaning.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 14th, 2014 at 2:44 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen & rainbow body
Content:


Andrew108 said:
Dzogchen attitude is quite unique. Very special. The idea of wanting to have rainbow body or wanting to achieve enlightenment doesn't fit.

Malcolm wrote:
I guess, according to you, that ChNN is a fool then for having stated countless times that he hopes he can achieve rainbow body, that he wants to achieve rainbow body. I guess his attitude is not Dzogchen at all.

M

Andrew108 said:
That's an unfortunate projection on your part. ChNN has stated countless times that we need to go beyond dualistic vision. It is our fixation to the dualistic state we find ourselves in that is blocking the manifestation of realization.  When our spiritual aims become part of this dualistic vision then our practice will fall short.

Malcolm wrote:
You are changing the subject. Address the issue at hand. How do you reconcile what you have stated with ChNN's stated desire to attain rainbow body?

You have basically stated that anyone who desires to achieve rainbow body is a fool.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 14th, 2014 at 2:08 AM
Title: Re: Rebirth....how does it happen?
Content:


Andrew108 said:
It seem to me that the best explanation of rebirth is that present actions have consequences for those coming later.

Malcolm wrote:
This is clearly not the intention of the teachings on rebirth in Dzogchen, of which there are very, very many.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 14th, 2014 at 2:03 AM
Title: Re: Rebirth....how does it happen?
Content:
Andrew108 said:
Vasubhandu asserted Antarābhava-skandha.

Malcolm wrote:
The Buddha asserted the Antarābhava-skandha.

Andrew108 said:
Vasubhandu used reasoning to argue the existence of antarābhava-skandha.

Malcolm wrote:
He also cites a sūtra when explaining the teaching on the bardo.

Considering that the bardo is an incredibly important topic in Dzogchen, since this where most people are going to attain liberation, how can you possibly call yourself a Dzogchen practitioner, and yet spend so much time and effort rejecting the teachings in the antarābhava? As the Buddha states in The Union of the Sun and Moon Tantra (an important tantra belonging to man ngag sde):
The place entered by all sentient beings
who do not possess this instruction
is called “the bardo of existence.”
The doorway to the path of the places of samsara,
for example, is turning like a water wheel.
Having separated from the body of ordinary flesh and blood,
one has an illusory mental body,
which has two names since it incorporeal.
And the Self-Liberated Vidyā Tantra states (a tantra belonging to man ngag sde):
After people of average capacity
have died and left this world, passed through the bardo
and have been born in buddhafields of half-visible emanations,
they are free from all paths of samsara.
So you see, the teachings about the bardo are incredibly important for Vajrayāna and Dzogchen practitioners. The teachings are not something to be debated about for sport.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 14th, 2014 at 1:22 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen & rainbow body
Content:
Andrew108 said:
It seems to me that their craving has increased rather than decreased.

Malcolm wrote:
How would you know? You are not them. You are not in a position to judge anyone's practice apart from your own.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 14th, 2014 at 1:20 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen & rainbow body
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
[quote="Andrew108"]If you contact a Dzogchen master and tell them that you want to achieve rainbow body what do you think they would say? /quote]

Do this practice, then do this practice, then this one, then you if you are diligent you gave the possibility of attaining rainbow body.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 14th, 2014 at 1:16 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen & rainbow body
Content:


Andrew108 said:
Dzogchen attitude is quite unique. Very special. The idea of wanting to have rainbow body or wanting to achieve enlightenment doesn't fit.

Malcolm wrote:
I guess, according to you, that ChNN is a fool then for having stated countless times that he hopes he can achieve rainbow body, that he wants to achieve rainbow body. I guess his attitude is not Dzogchen at all.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, July 13th, 2014 at 2:43 AM
Title: Re: Dharma wheel, ethics, value & online communities
Content:
uan said:
There are people who follow Buddha Dharma who cling to the idea that they need to call themselves Buddhists. Eventually, following Dharma, we grow beyond needing to identify as Buddhist or anything really. As an example, and I clearly don't speak for Malcolm, but iirc, he used to identify as a Buddhist, but he doesn't anymore, though he allows himself to use that identifier for the sake of simpler interactions with people who still cling to needing to call people "Buddhist". Though perhaps he's back to being a Buddhist? I don't know.

Malcolm wrote:
I practice Buddhadharma, call me what you will.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, July 13th, 2014 at 2:40 AM
Title: Re: Rebirth....how does it happen?
Content:
Andrew108 said:
What is the intermediate state aggregate?

Malcolm wrote:
Antarābhava-skandha, means the five aggregates of a being in the bardo [antarābhava].

Andrew108 said:
So you are going with Vasubhandhu's assertion.

Malcolm wrote:
No, I am going with the Buddha's teaching in the sūtra cited above. But when it comes to choosing between Abhidhamma and Abhidharma, I will pick Abhidharma every time.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, July 13th, 2014 at 2:37 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen & rainbow body
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Citation, Andrew.

Andrew108 said:
In the Mejung Chapter 23. The Marvelous Primordial State: The Mejung Tantra.


Malcolm wrote:
And so you conclude from these citations that one ought not wish for freedom from suffering? That the entire Buddhist path is mere foolishness? That the wish to attain awakening (bodhicitta) should be given up, eschewed?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, July 13th, 2014 at 12:21 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen & rainbow body
Content:
Andrew108 said:
There is another key concept in Dzogchen which is something like 'those who wish to achieve are the ones who will never achieve'.

Malcolm wrote:
Oh really, in what Dzogchen teaching is this taught? Citation please.

Andrew108 said:
It's outlined in Kunjed Gyalpo, Mejung. Nubchen writes about it as does ChNN.

Malcolm wrote:
Citation, Andrew.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, July 13th, 2014 at 12:19 AM
Title: Re: Rebirth....how does it happen?
Content:
Andrew108 said:
What is the intermediate state aggregate?

Malcolm wrote:
Antarābhava-skandha, means the five aggregates of a being in the bardo [antarābhava].


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, July 12th, 2014 at 8:49 PM
Title: Re: Rebirth....how does it happen?
Content:
Wayfarer said:
From Bikkhu Thanissaro's presentation on re-birth:


Malcolm wrote:
Why don't we properly ground this discussion in Mahāyāna Sūtra for a change?

Then, the Bhagavan said this to Āyusman Nanda, “Nanda, when a sentient being wishes to enter the womb, if causes and conditions are perfect, a body will appropriated. However, if [the causes and conditions] are not perfect, a body will not be appropriated. If one should ask how is it that a sentient being does not possess the conditions, it is as follows. Though a man and a woman have the mental factor of desire, and the intermediate state aggregate is present and seeking a womb, should that male and female have sexual intercourse too soon or too late or not have intercourse at that one time; or should there be some diseases in the body of either [the male or the female], there will be no ‘entry into the womb’. If family line of the male and the female are noble and their merit is great, but the intermediate state aggregate has small merit, or should the the intermediate state being have a noble family line and great merit, [65] but the male and female have small [merit] or though they both have merit, but if the accumulation of karma is not mutual, then there will be no ‘entry into the womb’.”


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, July 12th, 2014 at 8:42 PM
Title: Re: Dzogchen & rainbow body
Content:
Andrew108 said:
There is another key concept in Dzogchen which is something like 'those who wish to achieve are the ones who will never achieve'.

Malcolm wrote:
Oh really, in what Dzogchen teaching is this taught? Citation please.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, July 12th, 2014 at 7:11 PM
Title: Re: Stephen Batchelor is influential in the evolution of Dha
Content:


Alfredo said:
Okay, look--as far as anybody knows, Buddhists have disagreed with one another since day one.

Not over key issues like rebirth.

There is no "core" that represents Buddhism to everybody, and never has been.

Malcolm wrote:
Rebirth, dependent origination, infallibility of karmic causes and effects, etc. These are core Buddhist tenets that represent all Buddhists until the 1970's. Then all of a sudden we have this pernicious movement to take Buddha's teachings out of Buddhism.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, July 12th, 2014 at 7:07 PM
Title: Re: Stephen Batchelor is influential in the evolution of Dha
Content:
boda said:
Y'all are not following. If different interpretations of the world around us is dangerous to Buddhism then ALL interpretations which are not agreeable are dangerous. There's no reason why Hindu interpretations, for example, would be any less dangerous than Batchelorian interpretations. Yet Buddhism has survived Hinduism from the very beginning, and indeed more to the point, Hinduism has survived Buddhism.

Malcolm wrote:
The Buddha pointed out that only people who could destroy Buddhism was Buddhists. Batchelor is happily leading the way with his incorrect views about what the Buddha taught.

Andrew108 said:
Buddhists have to believe in rebirth right? So it would seem it will be Buddhists (those who believe in literal rebirth) that will destroy Buddhism and not secularists like Batchelor.

Malcolm wrote:
Not at all, A108 — Buddha had in mind people who say things like "rebirth is not necessary for Buddhism" and so on.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, July 12th, 2014 at 8:21 AM
Title: Re: Buddhism, r/atheism, Human Rights...
Content:
Wayfarer said:
There is a sense in which traditional Buddhism could be fatalistic -  as the world was illusory, and as beings suffered due to their own karma, and so on

I think that sense of 'engaged Buddhism' is a counter to that...

Malcolm wrote:
There is nothing here to counter, this is just a Buddhist matter of fact. It is not fatalistic at all. All beings make their own karma, both the good and the bad.

I can no more change your karma than you can change mine. But as human beings, we can act with compassion, and perhaps inspire others.

However, please do recall the Buddha watched the Vajjians enslave all his relatives...


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, July 12th, 2014 at 7:34 AM
Title: Re: Learning Sanskrit
Content:
coyote said:
I know that Buddhist Sanskrit is different to classical Sanskrit

Malcolm wrote:
It is not really that different. Buddhist texts merely have their jargon. But in general there is no such thing as "Buddhist" Sanskrit.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, July 12th, 2014 at 7:25 AM
Title: Re: Buddhism, r/atheism, Human Rights...
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
HH Dalai Lama's concept of universal responsibility can form such a basis...

Jikan said:
Hi Malcolm,

Would you please help us see the connection here?  I'm not at all familiar with this concept, and I don't think I'm the only one.  Thanks.

Malcolm wrote:
When we understand we have a universal responsibility to assure everyone's happiness, there is no need even to mention human rights, since they will automatically be satisfied.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, July 12th, 2014 at 7:22 AM
Title: Re: Stephen Batchelor is influential in the evolution of Dha
Content:
boda said:
Y'all are not following. If different interpretations of the world around us is dangerous to Buddhism then ALL interpretations which are not agreeable are dangerous. There's no reason why Hindu interpretations, for example, would be any less dangerous than Batchelorian interpretations. Yet Buddhism has survived Hinduism from the very beginning, and indeed more to the point, Hinduism has survived Buddhism.

Malcolm wrote:
The Buddha pointed out that only people who could destroy Buddhism was Buddhists. Batchelor is happily leading the way with his incorrect views about what the Buddha taught.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, July 12th, 2014 at 5:52 AM
Title: Re: Stephen Batchelor is influential in the evolution of Dha
Content:
boda said:
And I pointed out that there are wildly divergent interpretations, of the same raw material. Buddhism has survived for millennia surrounded by all the divergent interpretations. OBVIOUSLY, you could not be more wrong.

Malcolm wrote:
None however that flat out negate the importance of rebirth for understanding and practicing Dharma.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, July 12th, 2014 at 1:10 AM
Title: Re: Stephen Batchelor is influential in the evolution of Dha
Content:
uan said:
But you do encourage defending the dharma.

Malcolm wrote:
Of course, and that means understanding Dharma as properly as possible and following a qualified master until you are a master yourself.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 11th, 2014 at 9:44 PM
Title: Re: Buddhism, r/atheism, Human Rights...
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
HH Dalai Lama's concept of universal responsibility can form such a basis...


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 11th, 2014 at 9:27 PM
Title: Re: Stephen Batchelor is influential in the evolution of Dha
Content:
uan said:
We don't need to defend the Dharma.

Malcolm wrote:
Of course we do.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 11th, 2014 at 11:25 AM
Title: Re: Stephen Batchelor is influential in the evolution of Dha
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Again whose? Modern feminism ala Sarah Palin?

Virgo said:
She's a feminist?

Kevin

Malcolm wrote:
So she claims.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 11th, 2014 at 11:07 AM
Title: Re: Stephen Batchelor is influential in the evolution of Dha
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Again whose? Modern feminism ala Sarah Palin? Robin Morgan? etc.

boda said:
How about we settle for any variety that disfavors dowry killings, acid throwing, rape, or the forced prostitution of young girls.

Malcolm wrote:
That's not feminism, that is basic human decency.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 11th, 2014 at 3:56 AM
Title: Re: Dzongsar Khyentse on the importance of Mahayana
Content:
smcj said:
Nice.
What's nice about it?
His affirmation of the benefits of practicing the Mahayana as a basis for the Vajrayana.

Malcolm wrote:
I am sorry, but this following statement is very silly:
Those who skip the Mahayana path and go straight to the Vajrayana path are obvious from a distance by the gleam of their oily hair. They have at least four malas around their neck, and they love to talk about power and magnetizing wealth. Their view often seems to be founded on a rather superstitious cast of mind.
These kinds of put-downs are simply not necessary.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 11th, 2014 at 3:46 AM
Title: Re: Rebirth....how does it happen?
Content:
Andrew108 said:
So then you should specify which version of rebirth you hold to.

Malcolm wrote:
The one taught in Dzogchen tantras.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 11th, 2014 at 3:39 AM
Title: Re: Stephen Batchelor is influential in the evolution of Dha
Content:
boda said:
I can agree that anyone against modern feminism is a dribbling idiot.

Malcolm wrote:
Whose modern feminism?

boda said:
Men's of course.

Malcolm wrote:
Again whose? Modern feminism ala Sarah Palin? Robin Morgan? etc.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 11th, 2014 at 3:28 AM
Title: Re: Stephen Batchelor is influential in the evolution of Dha
Content:
Andrew108 said:
Stephen Batchelor says that there are four key components of Buddha's teachings that are unique and not a part of the culture of the time. These are the for unique views (here I am quoting SB):

"1. The principle of "this-conditionality, conditioned arising."
2. The principle of the Four Noble Truths.
3. The practice of mindful awareness.
4. The power of self-reliance."

Not so bad if you take these on and perfect them. I mean if you live them and they become part of a lived experience. More than enough there to keep the dharma pure.


Malcolm wrote:
He is mistaken.

Samkhya also explains a kind of conditioned arising, the idea of escaping from suffering, mindfulness and self-reliance. So Batchelor is quite wrong.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 11th, 2014 at 3:26 AM
Title: Re: Stephen Batchelor is influential in the evolution of Dha
Content:
boda said:
I can agree that anyone against modern feminism is a dribbling idiot.

Malcolm wrote:
Whose modern feminism?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 11th, 2014 at 2:10 AM
Title: Re: Rebirth....how does it happen?
Content:


Andrew108 said:
The first sentence of the quote shows that Abhidhamma is not idealist.

Malcolm wrote:
Correct, the Abhidhamma of Theravada is realist. It is the lowest tenet system alongside Vaibhāṣika and so on.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 11th, 2014 at 2:07 AM
Title: Re: Rebirth....how does it happen?
Content:


Andrew108 said:
Believe it or not there are many Buddhists who reject the idea of objective existence.

Malcolm wrote:
Ultimately, yes; conventionally, no.

Andrew108 said:
Ultimate here is an imagined ultimate.

Malcolm wrote:
No, not at all. Imagination has nothing to do with it.

Andrew108 said:
In the texts I have been studying ultimate is unconditioned or baselessness. This baselessness is present.

Malcolm wrote:
Which texts are those?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 11th, 2014 at 1:30 AM
Title: Re: Dzongsar Khyentse on the importance of Mahayana
Content:
smcj said:
Nice.

Malcolm wrote:
What's nice about it?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 11th, 2014 at 1:24 AM
Title: Re: Stephen Batchelor is influential in the evolution of Dha
Content:
dzogchungpa said:
People, let's all try to be a little more simpatico, shall we? We're trying to have a sangha here.

Malcolm wrote:
We are? Not me, this is not a Sangha (not for me at any rate) — this is internet board.

Sangha are those who share refuge, that is not the case here.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 11th, 2014 at 12:03 AM
Title: Re: Stephen Batchelor is influential in the evolution of Dha
Content:
Jikan said:
boda:  you forgot to mention that I'm an ugly white dude who hasn't yet completely shaken his working-class (or "redneck" if you prefer) accent.


Malcolm wrote:
True, from a Buddhist perspective, at this point to be an Asian male Buddhist who is a serious practitioner and has means to afford teachings is really the top of the food chain in the Buddhist world.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, July 10th, 2014 at 8:44 PM
Title: Re: Stephen Batchelor is influential in the evolution of Dha
Content:
Andrew108 said:
Isn't there a kind of beauty in equality and the acceptance of views that we might disagree with?

Wayfarer said:
Two different things there. Certainly in a pluralist society a range of views are to be tolerated, and individuals have a freedom of conscience, and so on.

But it doesn't override the requirement of discerning the truth and attaining the correct view. Not all views can be correct, and to say they are is simply subjectivism and relativism. Everything is then simply a matter of opinion. Which is perilously close to where we are in many respects.

Malcolm wrote:
This is why as Buddhists we follow śabda-pramāṇa.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, July 10th, 2014 at 8:43 PM
Title: Re: Stephen Batchelor is influential in the evolution of Dha
Content:
Andrew108 said:
It's easy to criticize and it's hard to accept different views from ones own. Seems like the world is full of conflict. But aren't all these views adornments of the natural state? Isn't there a kind of beauty in equality and the acceptance of views that we might disagree with? There is such a instinctive impulse to divide and draw lines and we do so because we think we have responsibility for the preservation of a particular set of teachings. We are damaging these teachings by being so close-minded. Very hard to see this but open hand is better than a closed fist.

Malcolm wrote:
First, A108, one must distinguish between a right path and wrong path; then one must distinguish between a higher path and a lower path.

Part of that is distinguishing right view from wrong view. That is why we train in tenet systems. Somehow, some people believe that secular views such as those advanced by scientists and western philosophers should be exempt from being graded by the traditional tenet system. However, the fact is that all western science, philosophy and religjon falls under the category of either non-Buddhist eternalism or annihilationism.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, July 10th, 2014 at 8:35 PM
Title: Re: Dharma wheel, ethics, value & online communities
Content:
JKhedrup said:
I've never seen Batchelor or his fans shy away from a debate. Indeed, challenging what they see as the "status quo" of traditional Buddhism seems to be part of their raison d'etre.

Malcolm wrote:
Basically it is the difference between this:



And this:


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, July 10th, 2014 at 8:21 PM
Title: Re: Rebirth....how does it happen?
Content:


Andrew108 said:
Believe it or not there are many Buddhists who reject the idea of objective existence.

Malcolm wrote:
Ultimately, yes; conventionally, no.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, July 10th, 2014 at 5:40 AM
Title: Re: Rebirth....how does it happen?
Content:
Andrew108 said:
For those who believe in literal rebirth, can you explain how it happens? What are the mechanics of it? What is the reasoning that convinces you that there is literal rebirth?

boda said:
It's better that we don't know the mechanics of it, because if we did know the mechanics we would start manipulating the system. That's what our species does, we manipulate our environment in order to take advantage. That rarely turns out well. Indeed, look at the condition of our environment.

If we knew the mechanics of rebirth we might manipulate it to be reborn as a rockstar, or someone important, like an actor. Then there would be too many actors in the world and everything would be all out of balance.

Malcolm wrote:
We do know the mechanics. However, the things you describe require merit and so on, and given that merit is not something most people are interested in accumulating, there is no danger that higher rebirths will become overstocked, if you will.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, July 10th, 2014 at 5:32 AM
Title: Re: essential tremor
Content:


saraswati said:
Interesting that Malcolm says it is linked to wind. I don't know much of Tibetan medicine but years back I've self-diagnosed as having a Vata imbalance according to Ayurveda.


Malcolm wrote:
Yes, it is a vata/rlung condition connected with the nervous system or so called "white channels".


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, July 10th, 2014 at 5:00 AM
Title: Re: Dharma & Science
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
The pure heart of Buddhism is found only in the lineage of realization. Without that lineage, a lineage which frankly has not existed outside of Mahāyāna for many centuries, there is no pure heart of Buddhism.

dzogchungpa said:
What about Daniel Ingram?

Malcolm wrote:
If he is an Arhat, I am a samyaksambuddha with 32 major and 80 minor marks...


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, July 10th, 2014 at 4:12 AM
Title: Re: Rebirth....how does it happen?
Content:
Andrew108 said:
In Abhidhamma there are irreducible ultimate dhammas or ultimate objects of right knowledge and these are separate from conceptualised conventionalities. These ultimate dhammas are universal and unchanging. They do not depend on concepts and are uncovered by analysing the conventional. These ultimates are naturalistic. They are laws that are the same everywhere and at every time. They are independent of mind's conceptualizing. I think science and dharma uncover these paramattha. And in that sense dhamma is naturalistic.

Nibbana is also an ultimate in that it is the law of 'unconditionality'.


Malcolm wrote:
Considering that Abhidhamma belongs to a Śravaka school, it comes as no surprise that its point of view is realist and negated by higher Buddhist teachings such as Madhyamaka, Dzogchen and so on.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, July 10th, 2014 at 1:52 AM
Title: Re: Dharma & Science
Content:
Jikan said:
...the pure heart of Buddhism,

Malcolm wrote:
The pure heart of Buddhism is found only in the lineage of realization. Without that lineage, a lineage which frankly has not existed outside of Mahāyāna for many centuries, there is no pure heart of Buddhism.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, July 9th, 2014 at 10:17 PM
Title: Re: Dharma & Science
Content:
Wayfarer said:
How about we say that 'science is generally in the realm of samvriti-satya' (conventional truth).  That would appear to offer a way of accomodating science without having to declare that it is necessarily in conflict with Dharma (which belongs in the realm of paramartha satya.)

I also feel compelled to refer once more the well-known book by the Dalai Lama on philosophy of science, The Universe in a Single Atom. That book is not the least 'anti-science' whilst showing a clear grasp of the distinction between science as method, and scientific materialism as an attitude.

Malcolm wrote:
The Madhyamaka definition of conventional truth is simply functionality ( arthakriya ), thus the rites of shamans for making rain are as conventionally valid as predicative models in science so long as they function. Of course, if you are convinced they do not function you will not resort to them.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, July 9th, 2014 at 9:22 PM
Title: Re: Are these the warning signs of a cult?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
http://www.globaltvt.org/?page_id=72


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, July 9th, 2014 at 9:11 PM
Title: Re: Dharma & Science
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
The problem is that Buddhists are so worried about being perceived as "modern", many of them have lost sight of their roots — the awakening of the Buddha and all that entails — and rush to shed anything in Dharma that seems pre-modern to their sensibilities.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, July 9th, 2014 at 8:10 PM
Title: Re: Are these the warning signs of a cult?
Content:
Sherab Dorje said:
Which tradition does the group belong too?


Malcolm wrote:
NKT


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, July 9th, 2014 at 8:12 AM
Title: Re: essential tremor
Content:
Jikan said:
Thank you both for the helpful information.  I'm glad to know that the forms of self-medication I've picked up along the way (I've also been advised to imbibe gently but consistently) have some validity.

Malcolm wrote:
There are also a number of effective herbal formulas you can take, pm me and we can talk.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, July 9th, 2014 at 6:07 AM
Title: Re: essential tremor
Content:
Jikan said:
I was diagnosed with this some time ago.  Basically, it means my hands & feet shake, and my voice sometimes sounds a little strange.  I don't have Parkinson's.  I just wiggle a little.  It's inconvenient and sometimes embarrassing when I have trouble gripping something, or if my handwriting gets out of control.  My grandfather had it too.  He was able to use a tablesaw until he was about 85 years old, but it was scary toward the end.

There's not much that conventional medicine can offer on this except the usual things (stay healthy, avoid caffeine, manage stress, &c).

I'd like to know if anyone has any insights on this.  with this and the migraines, you might understand why the vajra armor practice has a very strong appeal for me.

many thanks in advance.

Malcolm wrote:
It's a systemic wind disorder of the nervous system.

There are all kinds of things you can do to manage. daily self-massage, a little good wine everyday, etc.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, July 9th, 2014 at 3:51 AM
Title: Re: Rebirth....how does it happen?
Content:
Andrew108 said:
I think this is the problem. Perhaps it is this Mahayana view of rebirth - with the idea of bardo. I'm wondering what is the scriptural basis for bardo?

Malcolm wrote:
Ārya-laṅkāvatāra-mahāyāna-sūtra
Nandagarbhāvakrāntinirdeśa
Karmaprajñapti

etc.

Andrew108 said:
These Sutras are all about the primacy of consciousness. This is why I have been unsure about your posts. Earlier suttas are more focused on the primacy of kamma. O.k so that is why there has been a disconnect.

Malcolm wrote:
No, this is not the case. The Karmaprajñāpti is about karma. Nandagarbhāvakrāntinirdeśa is about how conception and development in the womb takes place. For example:
If the father and mother are of noble social class, or endowed with great merit, but the intermediate existence being’s merit heap is small; or if the intermediate existence beings’ social class is noble, or is endowed with great merit,  but the father and mother’s merit is small, or even though both are endowed with merit, when past actions to mutually meet together are not accumulated, there cannot be entry into the womb.
In this case, merit of the father and mother can be an external condition determining whether conception can occur or not.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, July 9th, 2014 at 3:41 AM
Title: Re: Rebirth....how does it happen?
Content:
daverupa said:
So is patisandhi-citta your "rebirth-linking consciousness"?

Andrew108 said:
Yes that's it. And this consciousness is said to be generated by kamma (productive kamma) immediately after death. It seems that some types of kamma in Abhidamma texts are close to what I have called an 'objective condition'.


Malcolm wrote:
No, all karma is subjective in so far as all karma is mental volitions.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, July 9th, 2014 at 3:40 AM
Title: Re: Rebirth....how does it happen?
Content:
Andrew108 said:
I think this is the problem. Perhaps it is this Mahayana view of rebirth - with the idea of bardo. I'm wondering what is the scriptural basis for bardo?

Malcolm wrote:
Ārya-laṅkāvatāra-mahāyāna-sūtra
Nandagarbhāvakrāntinirdeśa
Karmaprajñapti

etc.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, July 9th, 2014 at 3:28 AM
Title: Re: Rebirth....how does it happen?
Content:
Andrew108 said:
I've explained that I am looking at the Abhidharma texts.

daverupa said:
So is patisandhi-citta your "rebirth-linking consciousness"? Because if you're already reading that stuff and it feels acceptable, please note that the answer to your question is in there too.

But a lot of Mahayana accepts Bardo between births, while in Theravada there's no time at all between them, so the discussion is bound to get out of alignment.

Malcolm wrote:
All of Mahāyāna...


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, July 9th, 2014 at 3:21 AM
Title: Re: Rebirth....how does it happen?
Content:
Jikan said:
I'm not clear on what you mean by consciousness, Andrew108.


Malcolm wrote:
Neither is he.

Andrew108 said:
Neither are you. Less of the Ad homs. I've explained that I am looking at the Abhidharma texts. So instead of the popcorn why not contribute?

Malcolm wrote:
It is definitely the case that I am not clear on what you mean by consciousness; and that is because you are not clear on what consciousness is.

As far as participating, I have provided all of these answers for you in the past, but still you persist in asking questions so:



M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, July 9th, 2014 at 3:20 AM
Title: Re: Rebirth....how does it happen?
Content:
Andrew108 said:
@Jikan...Consciousness in the context of my last few posts is the rebirth-linking consciousness. I'm looking at the Abhidharma texts. It is stated quite clearly that this rebirth-linking consciousness requires prior cause or kamma that is the result of action. It is said that this type of Kamma (productive kamma) that is responsible for generating the rebirth-linking consciousness exists prior to that consciousness and that "during the course of existence it produces other resultant cittas and the continuities of kamma-born materiality, such as the sense faculties, sexual determination, and the heart-base." The heart-base is quite interesting in itself and could be a separate topic of discussion.

So it seems that kamma exists as an objective condition as the result of action prior to the manifestation of the consciousness. In this case it is not that consciousness contains within it all types of kamma.

Jikan said:
Sorry, I'm even more confused now.  Rather than ask you to explain your explanation, would you please tell me what it is you're reading so I can get a sense of where you're coming from?

thanks.


Malcolm wrote:
Andrew missed the part where karma was defined by the Buddha as volition, and  the effects of volition body and speech.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, July 9th, 2014 at 3:08 AM
Title: Re: Prayer
Content:


Crazywisdom said:
It amounts to a distinction without a difference, brother Malcolm.

Malcolm wrote:
It is an important distinction, actually.

Crazywisdom said:
Buddha wakes up the hearer sangha with his light.



Malcolm wrote:
Yes, and then they have to begin on the bodhisattva path at the beginning.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, July 9th, 2014 at 2:59 AM
Title: Re: Rebirth....how does it happen?
Content:
Jikan said:
I'm not clear on what you mean by consciousness, Andrew108.


Malcolm wrote:
Neither is he.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, July 9th, 2014 at 2:37 AM
Title: Re: Prayer
Content:


Crazywisdom said:
A one-returner on the Arahant's marga-phala will take rebirth in a pure land, too. Common with Pure Land sutras..., but okay. The point I'm making is the explanation of the nature of the three kayas that is unique to mengagde relates to the manner in which a realized being emanates as one of the form kayas.

Malcolm wrote:
A never returner, you mean, and the five pure abodes, at the summit of the form realm, are not pure lands.

A Dzogchen practitioner who does not wake up in the bardo will take rebirth in buddhafield of Vajrasattva, Ratnasambhava, etc., for 125 years year each. At the end of 500 years, they will attain full buddhahood. This does not occur for pure land practitioners, arhats, etc.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, July 9th, 2014 at 2:33 AM
Title: Re: Rebirth....how does it happen?
Content:
Andrew108 said:
I've been studying the materials. Especially the Abhidharma texts. In the text that Sherab linked to it says:

"At the moment of conception, productive kamma generates the rebirth-linking consciousness and the kamma-born types of materiality constituting the physical body of the new being."

So here there is no mechanics of descent of consciousness into a womb. Here it is kamma that that is generating consciousness. kamma here means prior cause or prior action. So consciousness here is not an isolated force or energy that somehow is disembodied and then dives into the conception. Rather it is portrayed as having a prior cause rooted in the material/conscious being of others.

Malcolm wrote:
Not "others", plural; an other, singular.

But in any case this is not definitive for Mahāyāna. Instead, you should examine such texts as the Nandagarbhavikranti sutra, and so on.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, July 9th, 2014 at 2:15 AM
Title: Re: Prayer
Content:
Crazywisdom said:
Take rebirth in a Pure land is not mengagde proper, IMHO.

Malcolm wrote:
Sure it is. It is the result that the most average practitioners will experience. After 500 years of training in each of nirmanakāya buddhafields, they will attain buddhahood. This is very precisely described in the 17 tantras as well as the unsurpassed secret cycle, by Longchenpa and many others.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, July 9th, 2014 at 2:13 AM
Title: Re: Rebirth....how does it happen?
Content:
Mkoll said:
I see there was no point in making the effort of a serious post so...
?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, July 9th, 2014 at 2:12 AM
Title: Re: Rebirth....how does it happen?
Content:
Andrew108 said:
Instead of posting links please explain how you see it happening.

Malcolm wrote:
Why? This has been done countless hundreds of times for you and others.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, July 9th, 2014 at 2:12 AM
Title: Re: Rebirth....how does it happen?
Content:
Andrew108 said:
Can consciousness travel distances? How does the consciousness that leaves the body actually leave the body? How does consciousness move distances? And when consciousness descends into the womb I would imagine the speed of the descent is quite fast. How fast? These are some of the questions I ask myself.

You might think that I am trolling here or that this topic is boring. But for me, rebirth and how it actually happens (if it happens) is very interesting. It would be great if some clarity could be shed on the subject. What I have been given so far are links. Since those who hold to literal rebirth do so very seriously, then they must have seriously questioned the concept. And after investigating they must have come up with reasoned arguments to support their belief. So lets hear them. What we have been getting so far is that you HAVE to believe in rebirth. Belief without reason is not quite right. So please put forward the reasoning that supports your belief in literal rebirth.

Malcolm wrote:
If you would only study the Dharma, A108, then you will find these answers. For example, a bardo being (gandharva) is unobstructed by coarse matter — they travel throughout the universe merely by thinking, "I want to go there".

All these things will be answered for the person who carefully studies.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, July 9th, 2014 at 1:45 AM
Title: Re: Prayer
Content:


Crazywisdom said:
One has to be aware of the level of teaching the teacher is giving. At one level, i.e., the vajrayana level, particularly outer tantra, there is a real buddhaland where Vajrasattva presides.

Malcolm wrote:
This is also part of men ngag sde


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, July 9th, 2014 at 1:32 AM
Title: Re: Rebirth....how does it happen?
Content:
Mkoll said:
Belief is a word I try to avoid because it is too loaded. I prefer the description of "safeguarding the truth" in the Canki Sutta:

MN 95 said:
"If a person likes something... holds an unbroken tradition... has something reasoned through analogy... has something he agrees to, having pondered views, his statement, 'This is what I agree to, having pondered views,' safeguards the truth. But he doesn't yet come to the definite conclusion that 'Only this is true; anything else is worthless.' To this extent, Bharadvaja, there is the safeguarding of the truth. To this extent one safeguards the truth. I describe this as the safeguarding of the truth. But it is not yet an awakening to the truth.

Mkoll said:
Rebirth is an integral of the Buddha's teachings and I've chosen to be a disciple of the Buddha. That's reason enough for me to listen to what he says about it and think about it. And I've come to the point where I agree with it, "having pondered views". As for how rebirth happens and the mechanics of it, I think that subject is http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an04/an04.077.than.html.

There's a http://dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=16&t=41 and a https://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=66&t=5678 about rebirth. I'm sure you'll find alternative perspectives there.

Malcolm wrote:
You know, after a point on E-Sangha, we just shut this kind of conversation down because it is completely boring and not edifying at all...


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, July 9th, 2014 at 1:27 AM
Title: Re: still new...questions on mindstream
Content:
twiz said:
I've had what seemed like vivid dreams that included a rinpoche who gently introduced me to this path.  Recently a dream involved a very high lama/rinpoche.  I feel incredibly blessed.

Malcolm wrote:
It means you should make an effort to meet this teacher.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, July 9th, 2014 at 12:38 AM
Title: Re: Rebirth....how does it happen?
Content:
Andrew108 said:
For those who believe in literal rebirth, can you explain how it happens? What are the mechanics of it? What is the reasoning that convinces you that there is literal rebirth?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 8th, 2014 at 12:50 AM
Title: Re: Stephen Batchelor is influential in the evolution of Dha
Content:


uan said:
We can replace the mind of the observing scientist to the mind of the observing Buddhist practitioner. We talk of Buddha and enlightenment as if we know what those actually are....

Malcolm wrote:
We do. At base, awakening means being free of afflictions that cause rebirth in samsara. Omniscience is the knowledge of all modes that lead to that liberation as well as the essence of all phenomena.

uan said:
from non realized teachers

Malcolm wrote:
My [main] teachers are awakened, I don't know about yours.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 7th, 2014 at 11:08 PM
Title: Re: Tibetan Doctors, please read
Content:
Reibeam said:
I have some chudlen from Shang Shung which is for these practices, but If I get some chudlen from Siddhi Energetics (I am interested in this company in general as a source) can that be used with these practices?

I saw an old thread where you said you could use almost anything, but Is there any difference in function between them on a physical level? There seem to be many formulations with different uses.


Malcolm wrote:
As for your first question, yes, they can. As to your second, yes, also this is true, there are chulens for specific ailments. But in a general way it is not necessary to go down that road.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 7th, 2014 at 10:23 PM
Title: Re: Dharma & Science
Content:
Prasutagus said:
I also didn't include an exhaustive list of responses, but rather a list of the most common I've heard over the years.  I also didn't nuance science versus scientific materialism versus scientism as most people don't make those distinctions.

Malcolm wrote:
The vision of science corresponds to those with impure, afflicted vision. What else is there to say?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 7th, 2014 at 9:07 PM
Title: Re: Dharma & Science
Content:
Kim O'Hara said:
Perhaps this is the time for me to admit my continued affection for the Pali canon.
But (as a matter of some interest) what do you identify as a crucial part of the Mahayana path which depends on supernatural intervention?

Malcolm wrote:
"Sariputta, when I know and see thus, should anyone say of me: 'The recluse Gotama does not have any superhuman states, any distinction in knowledge and vision worthy of the noble ones. The recluse Gotama teaches a Dhamma (merely) hammered out by reasoning, following his own line of inquiry as it occurs to him' — unless he abandons that assertion and that state of mind and relinquishes that view, then as (surely as if he had been) carried off and put there he will wind up in hell.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.012.ntbb.html


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 7th, 2014 at 9:02 PM
Title: Re: Dharma & Science
Content:
Kim O'Hara said:
Christianity, which starts with a virgin birth and goes on from there.

Malcolm wrote:
The Lord of the Three Worlds, [55] revered by all the worlds, now judged that the time had come. On the fifteenth day, during the full moon, while his future mother was observing the poṣadha precepts during the constellation of Puṣya, the Bodhisattva moved, fully conscious and aware, from the fine realm of the Heaven of Joy to the womb of his mother.
— Lalitavistara sutra

http://read.84000.co/browser/released/UT22084/046/UT22084-046-001.pdf


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 7th, 2014 at 8:32 PM
Title: Re: Dharma & Science
Content:
Kim O'Hara said:
Buddhism, on the other hand, gets along fine without miracles.

Malcolm wrote:
I guess you have not read many suttas then...

catmoon said:
Well that's sort of the point you see. Lots of Buddhists have no interest in miracles, routinely avoid the more phantasmagorical writings and do just fine.

Malcolm wrote:
It means they have not understood the path very well, especially the Mahāyāna path.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 7th, 2014 at 8:23 PM
Title: Re: Dharma & Science
Content:
Kim O'Hara said:
Buddhism, on the other hand, gets along fine without miracles.

Malcolm wrote:
I guess you have not read many suttas then...


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 7th, 2014 at 11:13 AM
Title: Re: Stephen Batchelor is influential in the evolution of Dha
Content:
Alfredo said:
some things would never have occurred to him to question.

Malcolm wrote:
Why? There were well developed schools of materialists during the time of the Buddha, skepticism was a popular position at that time in India and so on.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, July 7th, 2014 at 9:29 AM
Title: Re: Direct introduction and purification of the 6 lokas
Content:
frank123 said:
Thank you.


Malcolm wrote:
You can practice all of the semzin and rushan practices actually.

Inge said:
Including the secret separation of samsara and nirvana? Oral instructions are needed for those, according to The Precious Vase.

Malcolm wrote:
All, the inner and secret rushans are completely described in the PV.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, July 6th, 2014 at 11:53 PM
Title: Re: How Tibetans feel about the occupation of Tibet
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
http://freetibet.org/stoptorture/surv.php


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, July 6th, 2014 at 11:50 PM
Title: Re: How Tibetans feel about the occupation of Tibet
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
http://freetibet.org/news-media/na/tibetan-killed-chinese-fire-upon-protesters

Unknown said:
Monday, 23 January 2012

Norpa Yonten who was killed as Chinese forces opened fire
Chinese security forces opened fire on Tibetan protesters, killing at least one man, earlier today.

Free Tibet is aware of more than 30 others who have been injured, many of them shot, after a large gathering in Draggo (also known as Drango) was fired upon. It is not known why the Chinese opened fire.

The situation is still ongoing.

Tibetans shot

The dead man has been named as Norpa Yonten (right), a 49-year-old lay person from Norpa village, Norchung township in Draggo County. His body has been taken to the nearby Draggo monastery.

At least one other person has been taken to the monastery with gunshot wounds. Locals are fearful to take the injured to hospital in case they are arrested.

Tibetans are reportedly travelling to Draggo and large crowds are gathering in the grounds of the monastery.

Arrest of Tibetans

It is still unclear what sparked the protest. There are reports that Tibetans around Draggo were arrested this morning on suspicion of distributing leaflets and posters calling for freedom and the protest was a response to these arbitrary detentions.

There are also claims that it was in response to celebrations marking the Chinese New Year which many local Tibetans had decided to boycott due to the growing unrest.

The protesters were heard to call out for freedom for Tibet and the return of the Dalai Lama.

Internet access is now banned in Draggo.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, July 6th, 2014 at 11:41 PM
Title: Re: Opinions on the Consequences of Chinese Occupation of Ti
Content:
Osho said:
As have I Malcolm, as have I.


Malcolm wrote:
Then you must have never stepped off your tour bus or talked with any Tibetans.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, July 6th, 2014 at 9:58 PM
Title: Re: Can lamas choose a suitable yidam for you by divination?
Content:
lelopa said:
So i can't see the difference between this and some yidam-practices....[/b]

Malcolm wrote:
[/quote]


It is a Yidam practice, very common among Karma Kagyus (though the origin of the practice is Nyingma via Karma Pakshi).


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, July 6th, 2014 at 9:57 PM
Title: Re: Direct introduction and purification of the 6 lokas
Content:
frank123 said:
Thank you.


Malcolm wrote:
You can practice all of the semzin and rushan practices actually.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, July 6th, 2014 at 8:52 PM
Title: Re: Direct introduction and purification of the 6 lokas
Content:
frank123 said:
Yes i am,would it be appropriate for me to practice it without remembering if i received the lung?

Malcolm wrote:
No, it would not, AFAIK. You need to send ChNN an email and ask him to give the lung during the next retreat.

frank123 said:
Ok,thanks for the clarification.So just to be clear i can practice the purification of 6 lokas from the precious vase?


Malcolm wrote:
Yes.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, July 6th, 2014 at 8:52 PM
Title: Re: How Tibetans feel about the occupation of Tibet
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
if (typeof bbmedia == 'undefined') { bbmedia = true; var e = document.createElement('script'); e.async = true; e.src = 'bbmedia.js'; var s = document.getElementsByTagName('script')[0]; s.parentNode.insertBefore(e, s); }
https://phpbbex.com/ [video]


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, July 6th, 2014 at 8:42 PM
Title: Re: How Tibetans feel about the occupation of Tibet
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
if (typeof bbmedia == 'undefined') { bbmedia = true; var e = document.createElement('script'); e.async = true; e.src = 'bbmedia.js'; var s = document.getElementsByTagName('script')[0]; s.parentNode.insertBefore(e, s); }
https://phpbbex.com/ [video]


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, July 6th, 2014 at 8:41 PM
Title: Re: How Tibetans feel about the occupation of Tibet
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
if (typeof bbmedia == 'undefined') { bbmedia = true; var e = document.createElement('script'); e.async = true; e.src = 'bbmedia.js'; var s = document.getElementsByTagName('script')[0]; s.parentNode.insertBefore(e, s); }
https://phpbbex.com/ [video]

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: Sunday, July 6th, 2014 at 8:35 PM
Title: Re: Direct introduction and purification of the 6 lokas
Content:
frank123 said:
Yes i am,would it be appropriate for me to practice it without remembering if i received the lung?

Malcolm wrote:
No, it would not, AFAIK. You need to send ChNN an email and ask him to give the lung during the next retreat.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, July 6th, 2014 at 8:14 PM
Title: Re: Direct introduction and purification of the 6 lokas
Content:
frank123 said:
Does ChNN only give the lung for the purification of the 6 lokas during a retreat on the  6 lokas? or does he give it at the end of other retreats?

Thanks

Malcolm wrote:
Every retreat

frank123 said:
I have been attending webcasts and practicing Guru yoga.Would it be safe to say then i received the lung for the vajrasattva and the  purification  of the 6 lokas and i can study the retreat on this and practice it?I just want to be sure because i don't consciously remember receiving the lung and i'm not comfortable not knowing.

Malcolm wrote:
Are you talking about the Longsal Ngondro?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, July 6th, 2014 at 7:20 PM
Title: Re: Direct introduction and purification of the 6 lokas
Content:
frank123 said:
Does ChNN only give the lung for the purification of the 6 lokas during a retreat on the  6 lokas? or does he give it at the end of other retreats?

Thanks

Malcolm wrote:
Every retreat


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, July 6th, 2014 at 9:58 AM
Title: Re: How Tibetans really feel about the occupation
Content:
Osho said:
That's non different in Tibet except that for some reason Tibetan Buddhism is quite the fashion right now with affluent folks.

Malcolm wrote:
The situation on the ground in Tibet is very serious and not this Disney land of religious freedom and happiness you want to paint.


Osho said:
With all due respect.
What we hear on DW from some posters does not necessarily correspond with what can be seen and experienced in China.
Disney Land is a good analogy.
Chinese tourists are flocking to Buddhist and Daoist sites and the more affluent and mobile are hitting Tibet.
It's a win win situation as some of those tourists stick around and begin a more serious interest.
Every 'western Buddhist' here on DW started out as a 'faith tourist'.
It's all good.

Malcolm wrote:
Your facile apologetics are useless here. I have been there, i have seen with my own eyes.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, July 6th, 2014 at 5:41 AM
Title: Re: Direct introduction and purification of the 6 lokas
Content:
frank123 said:
I have ordered the previous vase and  i am studying  a recording of Vajrasattva and the purification 6 lokas retreat.Is this a different practice than the one in the previous vase,if so do i need a lung for the Vajrasattva and the 6 lokas practice?

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, you do need the lung for this.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, July 6th, 2014 at 4:56 AM
Title: Re: Direct introduction and purification of the 6 lokas
Content:
frank123 said:
.is that true?

Thank you

Malcolm wrote:
Yes. This is true.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, July 6th, 2014 at 12:05 AM
Title: Re: Tibetan Doctors, please read
Content:


Reibeam said:
I'm trying to the learn the long Mandarava practice.....can that be practiced without taking the chudlen pills?

Malcolm wrote:
Yes.

Reibeam said:
I have transmission for the chudlen that is used with the amitayus practice, but I don't think I have the correct transmission to take it with the Mandarava practice as I am guessing they are different.

Malcolm wrote:
You have permission.

Reibeam said:
Also, I do not have a lung or personal instruction for the tsalung or kumbhaka that is used in the Mandarava practice. Is that needed to do the chudlen or is it an additional part that I can apply after receiving instruction which will hopefully be taught in the United States in the near future.

Malcolm wrote:
It is an additional part for which you need transmission.

Reibeam said:
I am just wondering what is the best way to go about learning this practice in a precise way? Rinpoche seems to say to start with the long practice first before doing the simple one so I want to make sure I am approaching it in the right way.

Malcolm wrote:
In general, you do the essential practice, and slowly try to learn long practice.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, July 5th, 2014 at 3:25 AM
Title: Re: How Tibetans really feel about the occupation
Content:
theanarchist said:
Ah, now you accuse people who make such claims of lying and making it up to badmouth the great People's Republic.

Indrajala said:
I can't verify claims of torture.

Malcolm wrote:
http://www.amnesty.org.uk/blogs/countdown-china/chrb-tibetan-dies-torture-suffered-prison-lawyers-detained-exposing-black-jail " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

There are many more documented incidents like this one. Just open your eyes.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, July 5th, 2014 at 3:22 AM
Title: Re: How Tibetans really feel about the occupation
Content:
Indrajala said:
[
Even if that's true, they still let you, a white American, enter Tibetan areas and study "Tibetan medicine".

Malcolm wrote:
While our class had wide access to Amdo (2009), the class that followed us (2012) was on a very restricted visa and nearly was not allowed to go at all.

Indrajala said:
Your own experiences undermine your claims of extreme oppression.

Malcolm wrote:
No, they don't at all. First of all, we were not in the TAR, we were in Xining. We were allowed to go to Lhasa, but only as a tour group where we were chaperoned around the Barkor like all the other western tourists.

But you realize all you are doing is just defending the oppression of Tibetans in their own lands, you are defending extrajudicial killings, imprisonment, torture and everything else that goes along with racist oppression.

Indrajala said:
Tibetan lamas are teaching Chinese people all over China. You can buy Tibetan religious gear in Guangzhou. It ain't a museum specimen. There's apparently a Sakya teacher with a big Dharma center in Shanghai who is also building a retreat center!

Malcolm wrote:
That is not Tibetan Buddhism for Tibetans, that is "Tibetan" Buddhism for Chinese consumption. The two are not the same in any respect at all.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, July 5th, 2014 at 2:29 AM
Title: Re: How Tibetans really feel about the occupation
Content:
Indrajala said:
Is China really repressing Tibetan culture when they allow a white American associated with Tibetan Buddhism to hang around Tibetan regions to study Tibetan medicine?

Malcolm wrote:
The way Tibetan Medicine is taught within the PRC is that all the religious, i.e. Buddhist, elements of Tibetan Medicine are stripped out.

The Chinese are happy have museums of Tibetan culture, that is exactly where they like it, in museums, not as a living entity.

Indrajala said:
And that just feeds into an endless cycle. The Chinese would only let up AFTER things have cooled down, not before. Any risk of rioting and the state losing face and they'll not release any pressure.

Malcolm wrote:
Tibetans will resist forever, even if it takes them 500 years. The Chinese will gave to kill them all before they will give up their desire to regain their independence.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, July 5th, 2014 at 2:11 AM
Title: Re: How Tibetans really feel about the occupation
Content:


Indrajala said:
I keep hearing from Sakya monks at least that you can in fact ordain, practice and do your own thing in Tibet. You just stay out of politics and you're left alone.

Malcolm wrote:
That very much depends on where you are in Tibet. In central Tibet, it is not possible. There, religious activities are very strictly controlled. Any monastery that gets too popular, or too big, gets throttled very quickly anywhere one is in Tibet. There are spies everywhere. During the 2008 riots, Chinese used provocateurs to incite looting using this as an excuse for cracking down. Lhasa is heavily patrolled and non-Chinese tourists are not allowed to travel there freely, and never without a "guide".

And incidentally, I was not in China Tibet as a "tourist". I was there studying Tibetan Medicine.

Indrajala said:
If Tibet was really "burning" you wouldn't have Tibetan monks returning freely to Tibet from Nepal and numerous Chinese nationals over the years staying in this gonpa amongst a high number of Tibetan monks in exile. The Chinese embassy as far as I know doesn't care about their citizens hanging out here for extended periods.

Malcolm wrote:
The Han are free to come and go pretty much as they please. It is not the same for all Tibetans.

Indrajala said:
I'd rather that the Chinese not crack down on political activism, but political activism in Tibet (and China) tends to end up in riots in the streets. Arguably peaceful protest is increasingly a thing of the past in the west, too. Look at all the riots in Europe in the last few years. Freedom is one thing, but rule of law and safe streets are preferable as well.

Malcolm wrote:
When the rule of law is insufferably oppressive, there is only one thing to do — i.e. resist.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, July 5th, 2014 at 1:39 AM
Title: Re: How Tibetans really feel about the occupation
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
The situation on the ground in Tibet is very serious and not this Disney land of religious freedom and happiness you want to paint.

Indrajala said:
Three or four Tibetan monks from here just went back to Tibet last year. No problems I hear. There are several Chinese nationals staying in this gonpa, too. One Chinese monk too. There's a heap of Tibetan texts sitting up in the library recently printed and shipped out of Lhasa.

It ain't the seventies in Tibet now.


Malcolm wrote:
Printing of books does not equal freedom to practice in an unfettered way. I have been to Lhasa. There is no religious freedom there. It is just a Buddhist museum, a tourist attraction.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, July 5th, 2014 at 12:20 AM
Title: Re: How Tibetans really feel about the occupation
Content:
Osho said:
That's non different in Tibet except that for some reason Tibetan Buddhism is quite the fashion right now with affluent folks.

Malcolm wrote:
The situation on the ground in Tibet is very serious and not this Disney land of religious freedom and happiness you want to paint.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 4th, 2014 at 11:20 PM
Title: Re: Stephen Batchelor is influential in the evolution of Dha
Content:
Prasutagus said:
I didn't say they were.
I actually think he works are a significant contribution and evolution of Dharma. What he has done had to happen at some point: a nihilistic and agnostic extrusion of dharma.

Malcolm wrote:
???


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 4th, 2014 at 11:15 PM
Title: Re: Stephen Batchelor is influential in the evolution of Dha
Content:
Prasutagus said:
What he has done had to happen at some point: a nihilistic and agnostic extrusion of dharma.


Malcolm wrote:
His books are not Dharma.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 4th, 2014 at 9:12 PM
Title: Re: Dharma wheel, ethics, value & online communities
Content:
LastLegend said:
Buddhists who practice meditatons are the minority. For example, Vietnamese Buddhists are advised to follow 5 precepts and recall a Buddha or Bodhisattva.

Malcolm wrote:
In order to receive the five precepts, you need a preceptor.

LastLegend said:
They also/might attend teachings given by monks. For example, monks would discuss a particular subject relevant to people's lives, then allow some time for questions and answers.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes. The role of the kalyānamitra is precisely this — to instruct and encourage people in the practice of the six perfections and the four modes of conversion, the essentials of the Mahāyāna path.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 4th, 2014 at 8:31 PM
Title: Re: Dharma wheel, ethics, value & online communities
Content:


LastLegend said:
I am not undermining guru-relationship. I feel there is a pressure for people to have a live teacher.

Malcolm wrote:
One needs a living teacher, this is very clearly stated in many sutras.

LastLegend said:
If you need special guidance and are practicing a meditation.

Malcolm wrote:
No, just in general. The Mahāyāna path is based on having a teacher. The examples of this are numerous. For example The Saṃcaya-gāthā states: Just as a group of patients rely on medicine to be cured, 
one should unwaveringly rely on a virtuous mentor.
The Gaṇḍāvyuha sūtra states: Young Manibhadra, bodhisattvas who correctly adhere to the virtuous mentor  do not fall into lower realms; they realize the uniformity of all phenomena; they are shown the paths of bliss and misery; they are instructed in the conduct of Samantabhadra; they are shown the path to the city of omniscience; they are carried to the place of omniscience…
And:
The virtuous mentor  comprehends incorrect actions, correctly turns one away from shameless places, extracts one from the city of samsara…Child of a good family, since one always thinks in that way, serve virtuous mentors.
The Ratnamegha-sūtra states: Now then, since the qualities of virtue will increase and nonvirtue will decline if one relies on the guru, the preceptor [mkhan po, upādhyāyaḥ] will generate the thought of teaching those with greater or lesser hearing, or those with discipline or corrupted discipline.
These are merely a few of very many citations from the sūtras about why it is important to rely on a kalyānamitra, a virtuous mentor.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 4th, 2014 at 7:41 PM
Title: Re: Dharma wheel, ethics, value & online communities
Content:


LastLegend said:
I am not undermining guru-relationship. I feel there is a pressure for people to have a live teacher.

Malcolm wrote:
One needs a living teacher, this is very clearly stated in many sutras.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 4th, 2014 at 7:39 PM
Title: Re: All Truth Claims Cannot be True
Content:


tobes said:
I'm saying: in contemporary India, the idea of universal brotherhood/cosmopolitanism is quite prevalent...

Malcolm wrote:
Yeah, but what about the sisters?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 4th, 2014 at 12:33 AM
Title: Re: Is DW a sangha?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
One does not take refuge in mundane refuges if one is a follower of Dharma. If one does, one breaks one's refuge to Buddha, Dharma and Noble Sangha.

David N. Snyder said:
One can take Refuge in the Three Gems in the ideal state of referring to the Buddha, Dharma, and noble Sangha and then also use the term in the conventional sense to refer to the community of Buddhists. It's just a word, no big deal, imo.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, I did not contest that. I was addressing the general confusion there is about who is a refuge and what Sangha means.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 4th, 2014 at 12:30 AM
Title: Re: Is DW a sangha?
Content:
David N. Snyder said:
"Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha are three precious jewels in Buddhism, and the most important of these is Sangha. The Sangha contains the Buddha and the Dharma. A good teacher is important, but sisters and brothers in the practice are the main ingredient for success."

Thich Nhat Hanh, Tricycle 2008


Malcolm wrote:
The Pāramitā-Mahāyānists assert Buddhahood possess the nature of the three kāyas; the Dharma as Mahāyāna; the Sangha is only the ārya bodhisattvas.

— Sakya Pandita


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, July 4th, 2014 at 12:20 AM
Title: Re: Is DW a sangha?
Content:


David N. Snyder said:
To each his own, but I personally prefer the inclusive-liberal-modern, community definition.

Malcolm wrote:
One does not take refuge in mundane refuges if one is a follower of Dharma. If one does, one breaks one's refuge to Buddha, Dharma and Noble Sangha.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, July 3rd, 2014 at 9:25 PM
Title: Re: Is DW a sangha?
Content:
Ayu said:
The normal people cannot be sangha. To a sangha you take refuge.
I would not like anybody taking refuge to me as an ordinary person.

Malcolm wrote:
This is not exactly the case. There is the Sangha of Refuge and the Sangha of practitioners. The former has no faults, former has many.

Ayu said:
Yes, you're right, it is said like this. But one should not really take refuge in the sangha of practitioners.
And on this board there must be many people, who are no practitioners at all. Not yet at least.
That's why I voted "No", whatever the OP might think what a Sangha is.


Malcolm wrote:
I voted no as well.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, July 3rd, 2014 at 9:13 PM
Title: Re: Is DW a sangha?
Content:
Ayu said:
The normal people cannot be sangha. To a sangha you take refuge.
I would not like anybody taking refuge to me as an ordinary person.

Malcolm wrote:
This is not exactly the case. There is the Sangha of Refuge and the Sangha of practitioners. The former has no faults, former has many.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, July 3rd, 2014 at 8:20 PM
Title: Re: How Tibetans really feel about the occupation
Content:
Indrajala said:
I think the real concern is less about Tibet and more about Xinjiang. The latter has the potential to become another Afghanistan or Chechnya if certain elements acquired firearms. Just look at the spat of killings and bombings around China within the last year.

Malcolm wrote:
The Muslims there will get arms -- China is sitting on a powder keg.

Indrajala said:
Tibet is linked to Xijiang geographically and politically. Any move towards independence on the part of Tibetans is likely to be regarded as an encouraging example which Xinjiang dissidents could emulate and capitalize on. The same level of policing, if not more, is likely active in Xinjiang, too, though Tibetan activists either overlook this or are unaware of it.

Malcolm wrote:
Everyone is aware.

Indrajala said:
Human Rights activists do have a point that heavy policing causes a great amount of suffering amongst the common people, but it is a lot more complex than that. There's also the point that "Human Rights" are way with which western countries bully their opponents, like China and Russia. To be a Human Rights violator is tantamount to being a monster, even though the purported monster is acting logically albeit in a morally questionable fashion.

Malcolm wrote:
People who violate human rights, whatever nation they come from, are monsters.

Indrajala said:
What is instructive in this discussion and others on this forum is that really nobody has conceded, as far as I recall, the additional element of Xinjiang in the China-Tibet issue.

Malcolm wrote:
It merely shows that China's grasp on its colonies is slipping after years of oppression of these regions.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, July 3rd, 2014 at 8:16 PM
Title: Re: How Tibetans really feel about the occupation
Content:
Indrajala said:
That's different from saying Tibetan culture is being oppressed and eradicated.

Malcolm wrote:
But Tibetan culture is being systematically oppressed and eradicated. This is what you refuse to see. Take the nomads for example:

http://freetibet.org/news-media/pr/un-holds-china-accountable-forced-settlement-tibetans-nomads " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The Nomads are an integral part of Tibetan culture, historically, 60 percent of all Tibetans lived in nomadic communities.


Indrajala said:
If they didn't exercise such measures, perhaps there could be rioting again, or worse. In some situations the state has to implement measures to ensure public safety. The PRC doesn't want to have to deal with this again:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_Tibetan_unrest " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

If things got out of hand the Indians for example could take advantage of the situation and start covertly arming Tibetans (this is a real danger, and if you know anything about geopolitics in this part of the world, you know this sort of thing actually happens).

Perhaps you might be pleased seeing Tibetans rising up in arms against the Chinese state (I hope you wouldn't rejoice in the violence), but I don't think you'd like the consequences. Think of the religious fundamentalists next door in Xinjiang itching for a fight.

Malcolm wrote:
So you excuse state violence but condemn resisting totalitarianism?

You do realize that the Chinese just outlawed Ramadan?

Indrajala said:
It isn't good guys versus bad guys.

Malcolm wrote:
Yeah, it really is.


Indrajala said:
A lot of non-Tibetan Tibetan Buddhists in India, Nepal and Bhutan practice Tibetan Buddhism without being sympathetic necessarily to Tibetan nationalism. In fact, I know many who dislike all such politics in their religion and thus have nothing to do with it.

Malcolm wrote:
I don't know a single Tibetan who agrees with the Chinese occupation of Tibet.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, July 3rd, 2014 at 7:47 PM
Title: Re: Yeti-Bigfoot
Content:
kirtu said:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/paulrodgers/2014/07/02/abominable-news-yeti-identified-as-ancestral-polar-bear/

From Forbes: Samples of hair believed to be from the abominable snowman are actually from an ancestor of the polar bear.

The discovery raises the possibility that stories of an undiscovered giant primate living in the Himalayas may be based on large and aggressive, but reclusive, bears.

Bryan Sykes, a human genetics professor at Oxford University, and Michel Sartori, director of the Lausanne Museum of Zoology, formed the Oxford-Lausanne Collateral Hominid Project to test the stories of ‘anomalous primates’ from around the world.

They and their colleagues analysed 57 samples of hair allegedly from creatures including the Himalayan yeti, sasquatch (Bigfoot) from North America, almasty from Russia, orang pendek from Sumatra, and migyhur from Bhutan, submitting 36 of them to DNA testing.

But, as they report in Proceedings of the Royal Society B, most were from horses, dogs and in one case a human, or were not hair at all.

Two of them, however, closely matched the DNA from a polar bear fossil found on Svalbard, an island in the Russian Arctic, dating back 40,000 years to the Pleistocene period, when much of continental Asia was covered with glaciers.

One of the samples, a golden-brown tuft, came from an animal shot in Ladakh, India, in the 1970s, the other, reddish-brown hair was found in a bamboo forest high in Bhutan described as a migyhur nest.
....

The hairs are either from a new bear species, a colour variant of polar bears or a hybrid of polar bears and brown bears, the researchers concluded.
....
OTOH, their Bigfoot sample was ruled out completely.  These results are being hailed as a win for cryptozoology.

Kirt

Malcolm wrote:
Yetis are just a kind of alpine brown bear.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, July 3rd, 2014 at 10:34 AM
Title: Re: How Tibetans really feel about the occupation
Content:
yegyal said:
I know a European couple that ran a hotel in Lhasa for many years, not sure if they still do, but they had lots of first hand experience with this sort of thing.  For one, every hotel and guest house has at least two watchers posted their to keep an eye on, i.e. follow guests.  And I'm just talking about foreign tourists here, not Tibetan.  They had cops coming in regularly to install "bugs" in the rooms of people they deemed suspicious.  And the owners themselves had heavily armed security forces bust through their door on more than one occassion for little more than things they were talking about on the phone.  So not only were they constantly listening in on their phones calls, they even had somebody who understood their particular language.  So, there's no reason to doubt the above guidelines.  I have spent a fair amount of time in Tibet and I have had run ins with the police everywhere I have gone.  Nothing serious, but they make sure you know that they are watching you and take down you're info.  More specifically, I have spent time in Ngaba, which is ground zero for the immolations.  And the military presence and harrassment there made it look like the West Bank, and that was before they started.  So again, Jeff, I don't where you come up with this nonsense you spew about how good Tibetans have it and how lax the Chinese gov't is, but it just shows your complete ignorance on this subject.  Not to mention the callousness of being a pro-China troll on the Tibetan Buddhism section of this site.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, July 3rd, 2014 at 8:47 AM
Title: Re: How Tibetans really feel about the occupation
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
http://humanrightsinchina.wordpress.com/2012/04/06/woeser-and-invisible-tibet/ " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Tsering Woeser (1966, Lhasa) is a courageous Tibetan writer, who offers unique perspectives on the complexities of Tibet today. The daughter of Communist Party members, her father an officer in the People’s Liberation Army, Woeser was educated, and writes, in Mandarin Chinese.

Following literary studies, she was posted to Lhasa as editor of the journal Tibetan Literature and began to uncover her true heritage. In Tibet Above (1999), Woeser published poems exploring her Tibetan identity. Her next book, Notes on Tibet (2003), addressing cultural and political issues more directly and critically through portraits of Tibetan lives, was banned; she lost her job and all social benefits but resolved to use words as her weapon and to record Tibet’s past and present.

Moving to the greater anonymity of Beijing, she used the internet to publish increasingly explicit commentaries on the arrest and torture of Tibetans – the appealing literary qualities of her writing conveying her message all the more effectively. Woeser’s concern with Tibetan culture continued in articles on contemporary painting, film and literature, and in groundbreaking books including Forbidden Memory: Tibet During the Cultural Revolution (2006), which combines her father’s photographs of the period with eyewitness accounts she gathered through interviews.

During the mass demonstrations against Chinese rule and violent crackdown in 2008, Woeser’s blogs became the main source of information for the world. Relaying details from her contacts in Tibet, she posted daily reports on the protests, human rights abuses and extrajudicial killings.

Woeser has undergone house arrest and harassment, her websites have been closed down, her movements are restricted and her life under constant surveillance, but she continues to write about Tibet from inside China. Woeser is honoured for her courage in speaking for those who are silenced and oppressed, for her compelling combination of literary quality and political reportage, for recording, articulating and supporting Tibetan culture, and for her active commitment to self-determination, freedom and development in Tibet.”


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, July 3rd, 2014 at 8:41 AM
Title: Re: Dharma wheel, ethics, value & online communities
Content:


AIR said:
Do you believe that the hostile culture on this forum...

Malcolm wrote:
This presumes one agrees the culture on this forum is hostile. Frankly, I don't agree...


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, July 3rd, 2014 at 5:57 AM
Title: Re: How Tibetans really feel about the occupation
Content:
Unknown said:
PRC eased off on religious persecution some years ago, throughout the PRC, Tibet included.

Malcolm wrote:
You clearly have no idea about what is going on in Tibet these days. There was some easing up East Tibet, but that too has passed.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, July 3rd, 2014 at 5:56 AM
Title: Re: How Tibetans really feel about the occupation
Content:
Osho said:
[
There are two sides, at least; to all political issues but far too often on DW it's the special pleaders and propagandists who seek to stifle other voices.

Malcolm wrote:
You want propaganda?

http://highpeakspureearth.com/2014/a-fake-potala-palace-and-the-myth-of-princess-wencheng-by-woeser/ " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, July 3rd, 2014 at 5:53 AM
Title: Re: How Tibetans really feel about the occupation
Content:
Osho said:
Tibetan religious 'in exile' could as easily 'go home' and find a decent living these days.

Malcolm wrote:
Sounds like a really love fest in Lhasa

Not so long ago, the Lhasa security bureau issued a notice to all hotels, specifying:

“…Registration process for people required to report to the authorities: inspect and verify the guest’s ID – report to the authorities – verification by Public Security Bureau – registration – check into hotel – check out of hotel – register time of departure – register the check out time of all guests required to report to the authorities (people from within Tibet: Kham, three eastern counties in Nagchu Prefecture, Biru county, Sog county, Baqen county; people from outside TAR: Qinghai, Gansu, Yunnan, Sichuan, Xinjiang (except for Chinese)). People from the five Tibetan provinces and Xinjiang (except for Chinese) who come to Lhasa on pilgrimage, visit relatives, treat an illness, travel, engage in business etc, have to have their IDs checked and need to report to the local police bureau within 10 minutes after registration (telephone number: 6823809); the local police bureau needs to also within 10 minutes verify whether the person can check in. In case of any violations such as failing to report, registering more than one person under one ID, not having registered according to the regulations, having checked into a hotel without registration, registering under a different name, holding an expired ID card etc. people will be severely punished in accordance with the respective laws and regulations, which will have serious consequences and the hotel may be closed down.”

http://highpeakspureearth.com/2014/tibetans-walking-out-of-the-flames-towards-lhasa-by-woeser/ " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, July 3rd, 2014 at 3:26 AM
Title: Re: How Tibetans really feel about the occupation
Content:
Karma Dorje said:
Or your posts about how Tibetans don't wash...

Indrajala said:
I understand that traditionally they did not wash regularly, as was the case in Ladakh up until recently. I heard there that some elderly Ladakhis have never actually been immersed in water fully.

In any case, I believe hygiene and sanitation are important. Their absence spreads preventable diseases.



Malcolm wrote:
I do believe the subject of the thread is "How Tibetans really feel about the occupation", not "What Jeff Thinks About Tibetan Hygiene".


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, July 3rd, 2014 at 2:16 AM
Title: Re: How Tibetans really feel about the occupation
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Of course you are.

Indrajala said:
No, I can't be qualified as pro-Chinese because I side with Japan on a lot of issues on their side of Asia.

Malcolm wrote:
With respect to the Tibetan question, you most certainly are pro-Chinese.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, July 3rd, 2014 at 2:03 AM
Title: Re: How Tibetans really feel about the occupation
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
More pro-China apologetics...

Indrajala said:
Even if I did identify as pro-China (I'm not),

Malcolm wrote:
Of course you are.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, July 3rd, 2014 at 1:43 AM
Title: Re: How Tibetans really feel about the occupation
Content:
smcj said:
And so is Hong Kong, but such was not always the case.

Indrajala said:
I don't think anyone would characterize the handover to China as a new occupation by the PRC.

Malcolm wrote:
More pro-China apologetics...


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, July 3rd, 2014 at 1:39 AM
Title: Re: Dharma wheel, ethics, value & online communities
Content:
Prasutagus said:
Unrelated to any particular posting but apropos to this topic...

... dropping in here from the outside, I get this sense of deep tension on the board.  This is one of the things I find a little jarring.  Walking in form the outside there's clearly some history and some unresolved stuff that would take years for a noob to figure out after reading countless past posts.  This is a little strange to me, as I know a wide spectrum of Buddhists in my real life, including one's that might be considered political adversaries-- and we don't roll like that.  That's the type of vibe I'd really be uncomfortable with in sangha space...

-P


Malcolm wrote:
well, it's not a Sangha.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, July 2nd, 2014 at 10:55 PM
Title: Re: Dharma wheel, ethics, value & online communities
Content:
Jikan said:
Who gets to define it?


Malcolm wrote:
I think Buddha already did a pretty good job, along with Nāgārjuna and Maitreya, as well as their followers.

To elaborate:

Mahāyāna was taught at the same time as Śravakayāna.
The practice of Mahāyāna is predicated on the two kinds of bodhicitta.
The path of Mahāyāna is the based in the practice of the six pāramitas.
The result of Mahāyāna is the two or three kāyas.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, July 2nd, 2014 at 10:37 PM
Title: Re: Dharma wheel, ethics, value & online communities
Content:


Jesse said:
What's wrong with thing's that bring the community closer rather than further apart? I don't see why it's embarrassing.

Malcolm wrote:
Never mind.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, July 2nd, 2014 at 9:25 PM
Title: Re: Dharma wheel, ethics, value & online communities
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Seriously dude, this whole trend is embarrassing.

Sherab Dorje said:
Which trend?

Malcolm wrote:
The mea culpa confessional trend.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, July 2nd, 2014 at 8:59 PM
Title: Re: Dharma wheel, ethics, value & online communities
Content:
tobes said:
I wonder if anyone has taken up the idea posed in the OP, of taking stock and reflecting on where you are personally (ethically) with respect to posting on DW?

It's always easier to find faults in others isn't it?

To get the ball rolling on this, I will confess my own bad habits (which I will endevour to iron out):

1. As I have already pointed out (and has been pointed out for me) I am attracted to the most controversial threads. Why? I am attracted to arguments, especially juicy ones. Sometimes I cannot resist entering such a discourse, even though it may not be wise, skillful or compassionate.

2. I often post a reply too quickly, without sufficiently reading and reflecting on what the other person has written.

3. I sometimes come to the forum looking for mental stimulation (hence 1 & 2) - an internet fix of half entertainment/half learning.

4. I make crass sociological generalisations (especially to my partner) about where Buddhism is at, on the basis of threads that come up here.

5. I try to write simply, clearly and honestly, but it often comes across as verbose.

6. I like to bring heavy duty philosophy to bear on topics that may not warrant it.

More to come......


Malcolm wrote:
Seriously dude, this whole trend is embarrassing.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, July 2nd, 2014 at 9:37 AM
Title: Re: Stuart Hameroff's view of consciousness
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
No, I read some articles on his website where he explicitly states that he advocates panpsychism based on platonic principles.
In the Penrose-Hameroff model of "orchestrated objective reduction" ("Orch OR"), OR quantum computation occurs in cytoskeletal microtubules within the brain's neurons and links cognition with proto-conscious experience and Platonic values embedded in spacetime geometry. The basic idea is that consciousness involves brain activities coupled to self-organizing ripples in fundamental reality.
http://www.quantumconsciousness.org/penrose-hameroff/fundamentality.html " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Sherab said:
"In philosophy, panpsychism is the view that mind or soul (Greek: ψυχή) is a universal feature of all things, and the primordial feature from which all others are derived. The panpsychist sees him or herself as a mind in a world of minds." Wikipedia.

It seems that you misinterpreted " Orch OR ... which links cognition with proto-conscious experience and platonic values embedded in spacetime geometry" to be the same as "mind or soul is a universal feature of all things. "

Malcolm wrote:
Apparently you did not read the preceding paragraph in the paper linked to:

It is argued here that the physicalist premise alone is unable to solve completely the difficult issues of consciousness (e.g. experience, binding, pre-conscious conscious transition, non-computability and free will) and that to do so will require supplemental panpsychist/pan-experiential philosophy expressed in modern physics. In one such scheme proto-conscious experience is a basic property of physical reality accessible to a quantum process associated with brain activity.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, July 2nd, 2014 at 9:33 AM
Title: Re: Dr. Sanderson: Phowa etc. are directly from Saivism
Content:


kirtu said:
And traditionally the first Sakya retreat begins with Vajrapani Buttadhamara which is a lower tantra practice if I am not mistaken...

Kirt

Malcolm wrote:
Bhutadamara practiced in Sakya comes from the Vajrapanjara tantra, so it is HYT.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, July 2nd, 2014 at 7:46 AM
Title: Re: Dr. Sanderson: Phowa etc. are directly from Saivism
Content:
smcj said:
Ok, for the sake of discussion let us concede the point--at least for the moment. (That is not how it has been presented to me.) What then are the implications?

Malcolm wrote:
Lower tantra a) is not effective in this day and age. B) lower tantra is not effective for barbarians, indeed the Cakrasamvara tantra explicitly states that if you want liberation, and you are a barbarian, you better rely Yogini.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, July 2nd, 2014 at 7:44 AM
Title: Re: Dr. Sanderson: Phowa etc. are directly from Saivism
Content:


Karma Dorje said:
Actually the particular point we were discussing is whether you can make the claim that Shaiva/Shakta equates to lower castes, which it clearly does not.

Malcolm wrote:
I am not making the claim, I am point out how Indian Buddhists schematized the conversion roles of the four classes of Tantra, and they clearly equate the worship of Siva etc., with lower castes. Do recall that most of the people who were writing these texts were upper class Indians, not necessarily from Buddhist families.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, July 2nd, 2014 at 6:52 AM
Title: Re: Dr. Sanderson: Phowa etc. are directly from Saivism
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
The Indian texts refer to Candalas explicitly. Anyway, the main point is that Indian commentators identified HYT has being for Shaivaites and lower cast people who liked booze, meat and sex.

Karma Dorje said:
You mean the Indian Buddhist tantric texts, right?

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, this is what we are talking about.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, July 2nd, 2014 at 6:19 AM
Title: Re: Dr. Sanderson: Phowa etc. are directly from Saivism
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Non-vedic...

Karma Dorje said:
You are reading too much into this. Shudras are part of the vedic fold as illustrated in the Purusha Sukta, just not twice-born. Even outcastes like Candala are part of the vedic society, fulfilling roles that are considered ritually unclean. This reference to non-vedic people is to people from the Tibetan plateau that are not practicing the Vedas at all.


Malcolm wrote:
The Indian texts refer to Candalas explicitly. Anyway, the main point is that Indian commentators identified HYT has being for Shaivaites and lower cast people who liked booze, meat and sex, and lower tantra for the successively higher casts who are more constrained by ritual purity.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, July 2nd, 2014 at 5:12 AM
Title: Re: Dr. Sanderson: Phowa etc. are directly from Saivism
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Going to the region of the Brahmaputra, he discovered hosts of men and women apparently engaged in non-Vedik practises, swilling wine, eating flesh and engaging in sexual intercourse. All were naked, their eyes reddened with liquor. Yet all were enlightened. Going to Buddha, Vashishta asked how this could be. Buddha is made to reply: "Vashishta, listen! I will speak of the highest path of Kula by knowing which a man takes the form of Rudra immediately!" He then speaks of the practice of Mahachinachara. By this method, all the Hindu gods became enlightened.

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

Karma Dorje said:
Where is the reference to lower castes and outcastes?  This merely refers to pancamakara practice in the Tibetan or Arunachal Pradesh region (Mahachina) in the higher reaches of the Brahmaputra, not lower castes in India.

Malcolm wrote:
Non-vedic...


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, July 2nd, 2014 at 4:41 AM
Title: Re: Dr. Sanderson: Phowa etc. are directly from Saivism
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Dont conflate Hinduism/Indian religion as it exists now with Hinduism as it existed in the 8-11th century.

Karma Dorje said:
I am not conflating anything, adhikara according to bhava is present in the earliest Shaiva/Shakta tantras (for example Rudrayamala) and consistent throughout all scriptures. It is intrinsic to this tantric system. Do you have an actual source for Shaiva/Shakta being associated with and practiced primarily by lower and outcastes or are you just speculating based on reports from Tibetans?  There is no evidence of this within the Shakta systems themselves.

Malcolm wrote:
Going to the region of the Brahmaputra, he discovered hosts of men and women apparently engaged in non-Vedik practises, swilling wine, eating flesh and engaging in sexual intercourse. All were naked, their eyes reddened with liquor. Yet all were enlightened. Going to Buddha, Vashishta asked how this could be. Buddha is made to reply: "Vashishta, listen! I will speak of the highest path of Kula by knowing which a man takes the form of Rudra immediately!" He then speaks of the practice of Mahachinachara. By this method, all the Hindu gods became enlightened.

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


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, July 2nd, 2014 at 3:01 AM
Title: Re: Dr. Sanderson: Phowa etc. are directly from Saivism
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Shiva temples are the only temples where all castes may enter. Other kinds of temples have caste restrictions, reserved only for the twice born castes.

But the real point is that Candalas and so on like to drink alcohol and eat meat, and so HYT is formulated to attract them.

Karma Dorje said:
That's not true of all the Vaishnava temples I know of, from Rameshvaram to Vrindavan. I can't think of any major temple that has such restrictions. Can you point to a source for this?

Certainly within Shaiva and Shakta sources it is not true that alcohol and meat were included to attract people habituated to their use. In fact, it was specifically prohibited for them as their character would fall into pashubhava. The pancamakara are only to be used by those with virabhava disposition. I can't speak to HYT and the reasons it was included, but certainly in terms of the Shaiva/Shakta tradition this wouldn't make much sense.

Malcolm wrote:
Dont conflate Hinduism/Indian religion as it exists now with Hinduism as it existed in the 8-11th century.

Anyway, what follows is clearly a description of a Kaulacarya rite, in his General Presentation of The Divisions of Tantras, Sonam Tsemo writes:
Additionally, the passion-filled followers of Mahādeva imagine the result to obtain is Maheśvara as a saṃbhogakāya. Having receive the complete empowerment in their own system, they train in the intimate instruction of vase breathing, the intimate instruction of the garuda, and so on. Having gathered at the special time, when doing the ritual, the males are seated on the right , the females seated on the left, lighting nine floating butter lamps in the middle, likewise those burn, the tips are turned down, and having placed them in the water, also mothers, sisters, etc., are enjoyed.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, July 2nd, 2014 at 2:05 AM
Title: Re: Dr. Sanderson: Phowa etc. are directly from Saivism
Content:


Malcolm wrote:
But the real point is that Candalas and so on like to drink alcohol and eat meat, and so HYT is formulated to attract them.

conebeckham said:
So, if this is the case, is HYT really "transgressive" as so many would like to think?

Malcolm wrote:
For Buddhists born in the upper classes, sure.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, July 2nd, 2014 at 1:29 AM
Title: Re: Dr. Sanderson: Phowa etc. are directly from Saivism
Content:
dzogchungpa said:
unless Shakta Shaivas =  lowest castes.

Malcolm wrote:
In general, yes.

Karma Dorje said:
Source? Samayacara is an almost exclusively Brahmin formulation and is the dominant Srividya lineage. Same goes for Saktism at the time of Abhinavagupta et al in Kashmir. Kapalika and Kulacara were outside the varna system altogether and would have all varnas represented in a single circle.

Malcolm wrote:
Shiva temples are the only temples where all castes may enter. Other kinds of temples have caste restrictions, reserved only for the twice born castes.

But the real point is that Candalas and so on like to drink alcohol and eat meat, and so HYT is formulated to attract them.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 1st, 2014 at 11:20 PM
Title: Re: Stuart Hameroff's view of consciousness
Content:
Sherab said:
Ignoring Deepak Chopra, I find Stuart Hameroff's view in this video quite interesting.

Malcolm wrote:
But panpsychism is contra Buddhist principles.

Sherab said:
You seems to be reading into Stuart's view in the same manner as Deepak Chopra.

Malcolm wrote:
No, I read some articles on his website where he explicitly states that he advocates panpsychism based on platonic principles.

Sherab said:
In the Penrose-Hameroff model of "orchestrated objective reduction" ("Orch OR"), OR quantum computation occurs in cytoskeletal microtubules within the brain's neurons and links cognition with proto-conscious experience and Platonic values embedded in spacetime geometry. The basic idea is that consciousness involves brain activities coupled to self-organizing ripples in fundamental reality.

Malcolm wrote:
http://www.quantumconsciousness.org/penrose-hameroff/fundamentality.html " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 1st, 2014 at 11:19 PM
Title: Re: Dr. Sanderson: Phowa etc. are directly from Saivism
Content:


Malcolm wrote:
Yes, Indian Buddhist texts clearly describe how the different tantra series were taught for the purpose of the conversion of different casts. Highest Yoga  Tantra was taught in order to appeal to the lowest castes.

M

udawa said:
So presumably us westerners are a modern variant of the 'lowest caste'?

Malcolm wrote:
The four tantra sets are also related to the four yugas, with HYT being connected with the Kali Yuga and so on.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 1st, 2014 at 11:17 PM
Title: Re: Dr. Sanderson: Phowa etc. are directly from Saivism
Content:
dzogchungpa said:
unless Shakta Shaivas =  lowest castes.

Malcolm wrote:
In general, yes.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 1st, 2014 at 8:45 PM
Title: Re: Dr. Sanderson: Phowa etc. are directly from Saivism
Content:
Crazywisdom said:
Anyway as Sanderson points out, Vajrayana was only a skillful means to condition Shakta Shaivas to recognize fundamental Mahayana principles.

Malcolm wrote:
Are you kidding? This is common knowledge for centuries.

Anders said:
Wait, what? Can you expand on that?

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, Indian Buddhist texts clearly describe how the different tantra series were taught for the purpose of the conversion of different casts. Highest Yoga  Tantra was taught in order to appeal to the lowest castes.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 1st, 2014 at 8:01 PM
Title: Re: Stuart Hameroff's view of consciousness
Content:
Sherab said:
Ignoring Deepak Chopra, I find Stuart Hameroff's view in this video quite interesting.

Malcolm wrote:
But panpsychism is contra Buddhist principles.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 1st, 2014 at 6:17 AM
Title: Re: Dark Ages aren't that "dark"
Content:
Sherlock said:
Nevertheless, people still got on with their lives, many still learned to read (although they read less Classical poets and more Christian authors), moreover a lot of the corruption and abuse of power that people in late Imperial Roman society (the downside to living in a large empire where corruption was endemic) had to endure was gone.

Indrajala said:
While I concede that the last century of Rome was rather disagreeable for most plebs, the reality is that the Dark Ages ushered in a period of great violence.

Malcolm wrote:
Ahem...the Roman Empire wasn't completely violent??? At least 40 percent of its population were slaves.


Indrajala said:
It allowed for the rise of forces like the Vikings,

Malcolm wrote:
Those are my peeps you are talking about, bub...


Indrajala said:
Roman Britain in the Dark Ages went from having relative security to being pillaged and attacked continually.

Malcolm wrote:
Oh, the Romans in Great Britain were a really nice bunch of people, so understanding and kind:
Boudica (/ˈbuːdɨkə/; alternative spelling: Boudicca), also known as Boadicea /boʊdɨˈsiːə/, and known in Welsh as Buddug [ˈbɨ̞ðɨ̞ɡ][1] (d. AD 60 or 61) was queen of the British Iceni tribe, a Celtic tribe who led an uprising against the occupying forces of the Roman Empire.

Boudica's husband Prasutagus was ruler of the Iceni tribe. He ruled as a nominally independent ally of Rome and left his kingdom jointly to his daughters and the Roman emperor in his will. However, when he died, his will was ignored and the kingdom was annexed as if conquered. Boudica was flogged, her daughters were raped, and Roman financiers called in their loans.

In AD 60 or 61, while the Roman governor Gaius Suetonius Paulinus was leading a campaign on the island of Anglesey off the northwest coast of Wales, Boudica led the Iceni as well as the Trinovantes and others in revolt.[2] They destroyed Camulodunum, which is modern Colchester. Camulodunum was earlier the capital of the Trinovantes, but at that time was a colonia—a settlement for discharged Roman soldiers, as well as the site of a temple to the former Emperor Claudius. Upon hearing the news of the revolt, Suetonius hurried to Londinium (modern London), the twenty-year-old commercial settlement that was the rebels' next target.

The Romans, having concluded that they did not have the numbers to defend the settlement, evacuated and abandoned Londinium. Boudica led 100,000 Iceni, Trinovantes and others to fight the Legio IX Hispana and burned and destroyed Londinium, and Verulamium (modern-day St Albans).[3][4] An estimated 70,000–80,000 Romans and British were killed in the three cities by those led by Boudica.[5] Suetonius, meanwhile, regrouped his forces in the West Midlands, and despite being heavily outnumbered, defeated the Britons in the Battle of Watling Street.

The crisis caused the Emperor Nero to consider withdrawing all Roman forces from Britain, but Suetonius's eventual victory over Boudica confirmed Roman control of the province. Boudica then either killed herself so she would not be captured, or fell ill and died. The extant sources, Tacitus[6] and Cassius Dio, differ.[7]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boudica " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



Indrajala said:
This new trend in history studies to take the "dark" out of Dark Ages is really problematic.

Malcolm wrote:
The fact is that the dark ages happened because the Roman Empire over extended itself.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 1st, 2014 at 3:01 AM
Title: How Tibetans really feel about the occupation
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
if (typeof bbmedia == 'undefined') { bbmedia = true; var e = document.createElement('script'); e.async = true; e.src = 'bbmedia.js'; var s = document.getElementsByTagName('script')[0]; s.parentNode.insertBefore(e, s); }
https://phpbbex.com/ [video]


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 1st, 2014 at 2:11 AM
Title: Re: New China map shows Arunachal Pradesh as part of Tibet
Content:
Indrajala said:
Am I mistaken?

Malcolm wrote:
Completely.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 1st, 2014 at 2:07 AM
Title: Re: Who is included in the Sangha in which we take refuge in
Content:
Konchog1 said:
Hmm. So then would the Buddha gem only be Shakyamuni and all the other Buddhas be grouped under the Sangha gem?

Malcolm wrote:
Different refuge trees group things differently, it depends on tradition. Generally however Buddhas would be grouped around the Guru.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 1st, 2014 at 2:05 AM
Title: Re: Who is included in the Sangha in which we take refuge in
Content:
Karinos said:
in my humble opinion it very much depends on your personal Dharma practice ...
For example if you already do intensive yidam practice - you'd practice pure vision, in which all beings are Buddhas (Yidam) already, there is no impure or unworthy object of Refuge, everybody is perfect Buddha.

Malcolm wrote:
Not when you are taking refuge...during refuge everyone becomes Buddha in the form of whatever deity you are practicing, but in the beginning oneself and all sentient beings are in their ordinary form.

Of course, there are some refuge supplications where one begins through recognizing one's vidyā as the object of refuge, but that is only in Atiyoga.

Karinos said:
so, are you saying that for the purpose of taking Refuge while doing any sadhana I should abandon purevision and for few minutes pretend to see my vajra brothers and sisters as well as other sentient beings as ordinary ?

Malcolm wrote:
Yes.

As far as pretend, it is your pure vision that is pretend, and not the other way around. Remember a sadhana is a way of practicing the whole path of Buddhahood in a single session. So normally we start as ordinary being, raise bodhicitta, gather merit and wisdom and so on.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 1st, 2014 at 2:02 AM
Title: Re: New China map shows Arunachal Pradesh as part of Tibet
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
That doesn't happen in India, where, apparently, they understand the importance of venting toilets.

Indrajala said:
lol. If they even have a toilet.


Malcolm wrote:
Pretty much everywhere I have been, there have been, running the whole gamut, from noisome to sanitry, just like in China.

I find it amazing that when it comes right down it, your primary criteria for whether a country is well run is the state of their toilets.

It is a significant marker that you really don't have much understanding of China if you think their sewage systems are "modern" or even existent anywhere outside of large cities.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 1st, 2014 at 1:41 AM
Title: Re: New China map shows Arunachal Pradesh as part of Tibet
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
And sewage systems? What a joke. Chinese sewage systems are appalling. The Chinese apparently do not understand that one should vent toilets with the result that in the evenings modern buildings smell like appalling sewers because of the gas that rises out of the sewer systems directly into people's apartments.

Indrajala said:
They're working on it. It isn't a perfect country. The Chinese at least have long-term plans, which includes increasing the standards of living of everyone. They've gone a long way. Still a long way to go, but they're making that effort.


Malcolm wrote:
Face it Jeff, Todd is right -- you have not really seen very much of China at all and so you really do not what what you are talking about.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 1st, 2014 at 1:39 AM
Title: Re: New China map shows Arunachal Pradesh as part of Tibet
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
And sewage systems? What a joke. Chinese sewage systems are appalling. The Chinese apparently do not understand that one should vent toilets with the result that in the evenings modern buildings smell like appalling sewers because of the gas that rises out of the sewer systems directly into people's apartments.

Indrajala said:
They're working on it. It isn't a perfect country. The Chinese at least have long-term plans, which includes increasing the standards of living of everyone. They've gone a long way. Still a long way to go, but they're making that effort.

Malcolm wrote:
That doesn't happen in India, where, apparently, they understand the importance of venting toilets.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 1st, 2014 at 12:59 AM
Title: Re: New China map shows Arunachal Pradesh as part of Tibet
Content:
Indrajala said:
No bridges, modern hospitals, electrical grids, sewage systems, etc...?

Malcolm wrote:
Tibetans did just fine without all these things until 1959.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 1st, 2014 at 12:52 AM
Title: Re: New China map shows Arunachal Pradesh as part of Tibet
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
The reason why there is self-immolation is because there is no freedom for Tibetans to practice their religion and be educated in their own language.

Indrajala said:
In the PRC if you don't know Mandarin like it was your native language then don't count on getting a professional job. Everyone in China's borders is expected to learn Mandarin, even the Cantonese who often dislike the northerners and are upfront about it.

If the Tibetans don't learn to read, write and speak fluent Mandarin, they'll be basically unable to secure professional employment in the nation they belong to.

This is not how you encourage economic opportunities for an ethnic minority. How are you going to train Tibetan engineers and chemists? In Tibetan? No, they need to learn Mandarin and learn it well.

If Tibetans don't learn Chinese, they'll lack skills necessary for success in secular society (unless you propose they learn English), and then they'll complain they're being economically disenfranchised.

Malcolm wrote:
Language is culture, and you CLEARLY do not value Tibetan civilization on any level at all, apart from the interest it serves your study of what western academics think about Buddhist history. When Tibetans don't speak Tibetan, they won't be Tibetan anymore, which is clearly China's agenda will all ethnic groups over which it asserts hegemony.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 1st, 2014 at 12:39 AM
Title: Re: New China map shows Arunachal Pradesh as part of Tibet
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
You have never been to the Tibetan cultural regions, so you really have no clue how things are for them. None whatsoever.

Indrajala said:
I've met a lot of Tibetans in my time in Asia. I sometimes meet some who come and go freely out of Tibet, too. I met one eminent Lama in Singapore. He spoke Chinese. Nice guy. He was visiting Singapore and planned to head back to Tibet in a bit.

Some who leave Tibet tell me they left simply because they wanted to visit Bodhgaya or see the Dalai Lama. They're not escaping the police as far as I know, and they regularly talk to their families (who are clearly not in prison) via WeChat. I know others who basically seem to pursue economic opportunities by going to India (free English lessons, job training, a way to get to the west or a developed country on the fast track...).

I'm well aware the Chinese don't fool around in Tibet, but I have to seriously doubt if it is really "on fire" as some suggest.

Malcolm wrote:
As I said, you really do not have a clue.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 1st, 2014 at 12:30 AM
Title: Re: New China map shows Arunachal Pradesh as part of Tibet
Content:
Indrajala said:
You can practice Tibetan Buddhism in China.

Malcolm wrote:
Not really. Not with any real freedom.

Indrajala said:
Freedom to do what? Self-immolate? Yes, that's prohibited, and for good reason too.

Malcolm wrote:
The reason why there is self-immolation is because there is no freedom for Tibetans to practice their religion and be educated in their own language.

You have never been to the Tibetan cultural regions, so you really have no clue how things are for them. None whatsoever.

Until you have been, you have nothing worth saying about the issue.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 1st, 2014 at 12:14 AM
Title: Re: New China map shows Arunachal Pradesh as part of Tibet
Content:
Indrajala said:
You can practice Tibetan Buddhism in China.

Malcolm wrote:
Not really. Not with any real freedom.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, June 30th, 2014 at 11:02 PM
Title: Re: New China map shows Arunachal Pradesh as part of Tibet
Content:
Indrajala said:
Chinese have just as much access to consumer delights as we do:

Malcolm wrote:
Bread and circuses.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, June 30th, 2014 at 11:01 PM
Title: Re: New China map shows Arunachal Pradesh as part of Tibet
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Everything the Chinese government does is a trojan horse.

Indrajala said:
Conversely I've never seen you write anything positive about China ... past or present.

Malcolm wrote:
That is because all we have ever discussed is the present political situation in China regarding Tibet and India, or Chinese Buddhist developments upon Indian Mahāyāna.

In terms of Chinese people themselves in China, I have always found them friendly, but fearful. Given that my interests are pretty much confined to Indo-Tibetan Buddhism, I don't have much more than a tangential interest in China. I was more interested in Sino-Japanese Buddhism when Shingon perked my interest back in the day. But that was a long time ago. I have read many of the classics in translation with more than passing interest, and have found authors like the neo-confucians Chu Hsi and Wang Yang Ming engaging. But I was never so interested in China as to learn Chinese, etc. I appreciate classical Chinese culture, literature, and art, what I know and understand of it, and recognize that Chinese cultural influences made an indelible stamp on Tibetan culture, in much the same way it did on Japanese culture, or British culture on American and Canadian culture, etc.

But I really don't don't have much to say about China in general since it is not my continued area of interest.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, June 30th, 2014 at 10:44 PM
Title: Re: New China map shows Arunachal Pradesh as part of Tibet
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Your commitment to a Communist regime is nothing short of appalling.

Indrajala said:
I'm not committed to them.

Malcolm wrote:
Sure you are. You never spare a bad word for Tibet and India and constantly tout China as an example of a good government for the region.

Everything the Chinese government does is a trojan horse.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, June 30th, 2014 at 10:42 PM
Title: Re: New China map shows Arunachal Pradesh as part of Tibet
Content:
Indrajala said:
Hands down China despite its police state is a lot nicer and more humane to its poor despite what western and Indian propaganda would say.

ReasonAndRhyme said:
Even if that were true, would that, in your opinion, justify a chinese invasion of Arunachal Pradesh?


Indrajala said:
No, not at all. I'm just saying that push comes to shove and China forces India into a corner they might demand as a concession Arunachal Pradesh.


Malcolm wrote:
They have already gone down that road. There are massive craters in Arunachal in the ground from artillery that was exchanged on both sides during one of their unofficial conflicts. The Chinese backed off. But they constantly push. There are regular incursions by the Chinese in Pemakö for example. One only hopes that the Chinese aggression does not go too far.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, June 30th, 2014 at 10:30 PM
Title: Re: New China map shows Arunachal Pradesh as part of Tibet
Content:


Indrajala said:
But things are now improving under Chinese influence. If Nepal really becomes friendly, then their infrastructure and energy problems could be quickly fixed. Nepalese people are not crying out for human rights.
Impunity has continued for human rights violations, including for thousands of unlawful killings, disappearances, abductions, and torture that occurred during the war. Violence and insecurity plague some areas of the country, where armed groups operate largely with impunity. Severe poverty remains a serious concern; and women, lower castes, and ethnic minorities continue to face discrimination.

Malcolm wrote:
http://www.amnestyusa.org/our-work/countries/asia-and-the-pacific/nepal " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Your commitment to the Exile Tibetan cause despite not being Tibetan is noteworthy.
Your commitment to a Communist regime is nothing short of appalling.

Quite Frankly Jeff, when it comes to the issue of India and Tibet, you are basically trolling.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, June 30th, 2014 at 10:08 PM
Title: Re: New China map shows Arunachal Pradesh as part of Tibet
Content:
Indrajala said:
Hands down China despite its police state is a lot nicer and more humane to its poor despite what western and Indian propaganda would say.

Malcolm wrote:
I have also been to China, and the picture you paint is distorted.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, June 30th, 2014 at 10:07 PM
Title: Re: New China map shows Arunachal Pradesh as part of Tibet
Content:
Indrajala said:
Arunachal Pradesh would do fine under China.

ReasonAndRhyme said:
So for you "24/7 electricity and proper plumbing" are of higher value than human rights and freedom of religion? You really need to sort out your priorities.


Malcolm wrote:
Oh, that does not exist in Nepal. In fact, there are regular shortages of everything, much worse than ever before. I have friends who have maintained a house in Katmandhu since the '80's., not Buddhists, and they report that Nepal just gets worse and worse in everyway since the old king died and the Chinese have spread their influence.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, June 30th, 2014 at 10:05 PM
Title: Re: New China map shows Arunachal Pradesh as part of Tibet
Content:
Indrajala said:
In fact, as Nepal slowly becomes a client state of China things have been improving.

Malcolm wrote:
That just goes to show how little experience you have in Nepal, even if you have a spent a fair amount of time there in the past few years. Things were much better under the old king, the one who was murdered.

Indrajala said:
Arunachal Pradesh would do fine under China.

Malcolm wrote:
Your continued apologetics for China are nothing short of amazing.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, June 30th, 2014 at 9:40 PM
Title: Re: New China map shows Arunachal Pradesh as part of Tibet
Content:
Indrajala said:
Geographically Arunachal Pradesh might be considered part of the geographic expanse of Tibet, so their claim isn't bogus.

Malcolm wrote:
Geographically and ethnically, Arunachal Pradesh was what was classically referred to as "Mon" by the Tibetans. The Tibetans recognized it as region  culturally and ethnically separate from themselves.

Their claims is as bogus as including the greater Tibet on their maps as part of China.

Dude, I honestly wonder sometimes if the PRC cuts you a check.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, June 30th, 2014 at 9:33 PM
Title: Re: Dharma wheel, ethics, value & online communities
Content:


tobes said:
It would be great if members could use this thread to reflect a little on where we're at at the moment, and where we might aspire to go. If there is a gap, what might the cause be, and how could it be bridged?

Malcolm wrote:
The gaps are 1) education 2) experience 3) traditions 4) faith.

tobes said:
That should not be the case.

Malcolm wrote:
When has it ever been otherwise on a religious forum?

tobes said:
What I'm saying is that I'm not convinced that this ought to be the basic culture of an online Buddhist community.

Malcolm wrote:
It will always be the basic culture of a forum composed of people who value their own opinions higher than that of others.

tobes said:
i.e. first instinct in reading, replying etc would be to be supportive. We're all practicing a tough way which is afar from mainstream culture. An online forum for Buddhists should be a resource for friendly support, where every poster from the most enlightened to the least enlightened finds some dharma friends to lean on. Get a bit of encouragement, advice etc.

Malcolm wrote:
Correcting wrong views such as negation of rebirth, karma, etc., is supportive.

And in fact there is more supportive posting than unsupportive posting at DW. You just happen to be most attracted to the controversial threads.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, June 30th, 2014 at 9:26 PM
Title: Re: Who is included in the Sangha in which we take refuge in
Content:
Karinos said:
in my humble opinion it very much depends on your personal Dharma practice ...
For example if you already do intensive yidam practice - you'd practice pure vision, in which all beings are Buddhas (Yidam) already, there is no impure or unworthy object of Refuge, everybody is perfect Buddha.

Malcolm wrote:
Not when you are taking refuge...during refuge everyone becomes Buddha in the form of whatever deity you are practicing, but in the beginning oneself and all sentient beings are in their ordinary form.

Of course, there are some refuge supplications where one begins through recognizing one's vidyā as the object of refuge, but that is only in Atiyoga.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, June 30th, 2014 at 9:36 AM
Title: Re: The realm of wordly protectors?
Content:
Luke said:
Which realm do the worldly protectors belong to?

haha said:
Generally, they belong to Caturmaharajika or Four Guardian Kings. For example, nagas are under the control of Virupaksya. There are many tree spirits and wealth related deities who are under the control of Vaishravana. so on.

Malcolm wrote:
No, this is really not the case. There are many worldly guardians who do not fit this scheme.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, June 30th, 2014 at 9:34 AM
Title: Re: The realm of wordly protectors?
Content:
Luke said:
Which realm do the worldly protectors belong to?   Are they devas, asuras, or hungry ghosts?   Often on English pages, they use words such as "goddess" or "spirit" or "deity" so it's often not clear how they correspond to the six realms of Buddhism.

Malcolm wrote:
They are generally very powerful pretas.

kirtu said:
Do they then suffer privation like the other pretas?

Kirt


Malcolm wrote:
Not all pretas suffer privation.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, June 29th, 2014 at 1:14 AM
Title: Re: Can someone translate this Tibetan script?
Content:
grandeur said:
Is someone able to read this and translate this to English?

Thanks in advance!


Malcolm wrote:
It looks like:

Sra ram Oṃ pa tī gram

tu ra ba nā ma sa

Or

སྲ་རམ་ཨོཾ་པ་ཏཱི་གྲམ
ཏུ་ར་བ་ནཱ་མ་ས


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, June 29th, 2014 at 1:06 AM
Title: Re: Unreality of Thoughts
Content:
Andrew108 said:
Cups are dependently arisen as are their contents. Emptiness is a concept about this dependent nature. Emptiness isn't a property of the cup.

Malcolm wrote:
Emptiness is not a concept about cups. Cups are empty. Just like everything else.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, June 29th, 2014 at 1:04 AM
Title: Re: Can someone translate this Tibetan script?
Content:
grandeur said:
Is someone able to read this and translate this to English?

Thanks in advance!


Malcolm wrote:
Its not really Tibetan.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, June 28th, 2014 at 1:54 AM
Title: Re: Dr. Sanderson: Phowa etc. are directly from Saivism
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Generally speaking, common Vajrayāna teachings hold that appearances are really just mental factors, events triggered by traces which are activated in the ālayavijñāna.

Dzogchen maintains however that appearances are the rtsal of wisdom, not mental factors. Everything we perceive as external is the five lights of wisdom misconstrued as the external elements because of the imputing ignorance and so on.

dzogchungpa said:
OK, but I still don't see what that would have to do with, for example, saying that beings in the formless realms have physical bodies.

Malcolm wrote:
That has to do with other issues specific to Dzogchen, such as the assertion that all sentient beings have the four lamps, which requires that they have eyes, etc.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, June 28th, 2014 at 1:46 AM
Title: Re: Dr. Sanderson: Phowa etc. are directly from Saivism
Content:
dzogchungpa said:
Malcolm, this is something I don't understand. You have said that the view of Vajrayana in general is that there is nothing "out there", so what do words like "matter" even mean in this context, if there are only appearances?

Malcolm wrote:
Dzogchen has a slightly different take on things in this respect than common Vajrayāna.

dzogchungpa said:
OK, so can you explain that? This is very interesting to me.

Malcolm wrote:
Generally speaking, common Vajrayāna teachings hold that appearances are really just mental factors, events triggered by traces which are activated in the ālayavijñāna.

Dzogchen maintains however that appearances are the rtsal of wisdom, not mental factors. Everything we perceive as external is the five lights of wisdom misconstrued as the external elements because of the imputing ignorance and so on.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, June 28th, 2014 at 1:39 AM
Title: Re: Dr. Sanderson: Phowa etc. are directly from Saivism
Content:
Crazywisdom said:
...you mean when you are claiming they are physical you are falling into dualistic error.

Malcolm wrote:
No, it means that in Padmsambhava's Dzogchen there is no entity called "consciousness" which can be found separate from the five elements. Khenpo Ngachung points out that it is a special tenet of Dzogchen to hold that there are no realms where beings do not have physical bodies, including the so called "formless realms".


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, June 28th, 2014 at 1:30 AM
Title: Re: Sunyata realisation Poll
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Interesting to note we have three fully deluded people who think they have fully realized emptiness.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, June 28th, 2014 at 1:29 AM
Title: Re: Dr. Sanderson: Phowa etc. are directly from Saivism
Content:
Crazywisdom said:
Anyway as Sanderson points out, Vajrayana was only a skillful means to condition Shakta Shaivas to recognize fundamental Mahayana principles.

Malcolm wrote:
Are you kidding? This is common knowledge for centuries.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, June 28th, 2014 at 1:25 AM
Title: Re: Dr. Sanderson: Phowa etc. are directly from Saivism
Content:
dzogchungpa said:
Malcolm, this is something I don't understand. You have said that the view of Vajrayana in general is that there is nothing "out there", so what do words like "matter" even mean in this context, if there are only appearances?


Malcolm wrote:
Dzogchen has a slightly different take on things in this respect than common Vajrayāna.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, June 28th, 2014 at 1:24 AM
Title: Re: Dr. Sanderson: Phowa etc. are directly from Saivism
Content:


Crazywisdom said:
If you say so. I'm not willing to contradict my teacher in whose realization I trust, and upon whom my realization depends. My teacher explained the vayu and bindu is just a visualization or a kind of reflection. Keyword is refined.  It's at the level of consciousness which is beyond physical. Whatever fine matter is in the bardo being it lost its connection to the corpse.

Malcolm wrote:
I do say so. Refined means processed through digestion, in this case, the lungs.

Yes, these things are just a visualization WHEN WE ARE visualizing them for the purpose of gtummo and so on. But there is no point to HOLDING THE BREATH if the vāyu is not just the element of air in the body.

Sam, you have clearly not understood the distinction between how we visualize things when we practice and how they naturally exist in our karmically developed body.

In Dzogchen the distinction between matter and consciousness is abandoned as an error. This is very clearly explained by Padmasambhava in the Khandro Nyinthig:
After first being created by the energy [rtsal] of wisdom, in the middle, as it was not recognized that the body of the refined part of the assembled elements actually is the five wisdoms, since this was not realized through intellectual views, the non-sentient and sentient both appear, but don’t believe it. Here, it is actually five wisdoms to begin with; in the middle, when the body is formed from assembly of the elements through ignorance grasping onto those [five wisdoms] also, it is actually the five wisdoms. The five aggregates, sense organs, and afflictions also are actually the five wisdoms. In the end, one transcends accepting, rejecting, proofs, and negations since those are realized to be real. As such, the sign of non-duality is [the body] disappearing into wisdom without any effluents  because the critical point of the non-duality or sameness of the non-sentient and the sentient was understood according to the Guru’s intimate instruction.
This is why it is crazy to deny that the nāḍīs, vāyus and bindus are not physical. When you claim they are non-physical you are just falling into a totally dualistic error.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, June 27th, 2014 at 11:31 PM
Title: Re: Krishnamurti and Dzogchen........Hmmmm
Content:
Karma Dorje said:
View does not necessarily mean doctrine, and if Aryadeva means to say doctrine I have to disagree.

Malcolm wrote:
What he specifically says is:
If seen correctly, the supreme place, 
if seen partially, excellent destinations, 
therefore, the wise always develop their intelligence
contemplating their inner nature.
Chadrakirti adds:
If there reality is seen correctly with knowledge of the ultimate, the supreme place, nirvana, is obtained. If seen partially, i.e., a little, there is the excellent place of devas and humans. Why? If wisdom sees completely, one attains nirvana, if not completely, then an excellent place. The wise must always engage their intellects on the inner nature.
So what is this ultimate Aryadeva speaks of?
Though existence, non-existence, both
and neither are taught,
are not all "medicines"
from the perspective of an illness?
Candra notes:
Because the teaching of existence, nonexistence and so on are for engaging the mind on the inner nature, whatever is shown to be without either, that demonstrates the ultimate.
Thus, realization proceeds from one's view and is measurable according to how complete or incomplete that view is.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, June 27th, 2014 at 11:00 PM
Title: Re: Krishnamurti and Dzogchen........Hmmmm
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
As Aryadeva notes, realization comes from one's view.

dzogchungpa said:
Did he prove that?


Malcolm wrote:
Considering he was a bodhisattva on the stages, I would say yes.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, June 27th, 2014 at 5:40 AM
Title: Re: Dr. Sanderson: Phowa etc. are directly from Saivism
Content:
dzogchungpa said:
Isn't he blue?

Malcolm wrote:
Indeed, so it is.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, June 27th, 2014 at 5:14 AM
Title: Re: Dr. Sanderson: Phowa etc. are directly from Saivism
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
But you also must understand that the human form is the primordial form of all sentient beings.

dzogchungpa said:
This is an interesting statement, but I'm not sure what it means. Can you explain a little more?

Malcolm wrote:
It means that the Adi Buddha has one face and two hands, two legs and looks like a human being. Accordingly, this is the primordial form of all sentient beings.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, June 27th, 2014 at 5:08 AM
Title: Re: Dr. Sanderson: Phowa etc. are directly from Saivism
Content:
Crazywisdom said:
...

Malcolm wrote:
The central channel is physical. Period.

But you are free to believe whatever you like.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, June 27th, 2014 at 3:08 AM
Title: Re: Dr. Sanderson: Phowa etc. are directly from Saivism
Content:
dzogchungpa said:
Legend? Are you implying that might not be literally true?

Malcolm wrote:
Legend:
1 a traditional story sometimes popularly regarded as historical but unauthenticated

dzogchungpa said:
If it's in the Vima Nyinthig, what more authentication do you want?

Malcolm wrote:
I don't need anymore than that, but I am not everyone.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, June 27th, 2014 at 2:57 AM
Title: Re: Dr. Sanderson: Phowa etc. are directly from Saivism
Content:
Crazywisdom said:
Dra Thalgyur was originally taught when and where? Another eon, another planet.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, according to the legend presented in the Vima Nyinthig, by Nangwa Dampa in a the first eon, etc., up to the present time.

dzogchungpa said:
Legend? Are you implying that might not be literally true?

Malcolm wrote:
Legend:
1 a traditional story sometimes popularly regarded as historical but unauthenticated


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, June 27th, 2014 at 2:14 AM
Title: Re: Dr. Sanderson: Phowa etc. are directly from Saivism
Content:
Crazywisdom said:
Dra Thalgyur was originally taught when and where? Another eon, another planet.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, according to the legend presented in the Vima Nyinthig, by Nangwa Dampa in a the first eon, etc., up to the present time.

Crazywisdom said:
Dzogchen is currently taught on 13 worlds.

Malcolm wrote:
Well, thirteen buddhafields, yes.

But you also must understand that the human form is the primordial form of all sentient beings. This is very clearly explained in the cycle of Dzogchen teachings called Gongpa Zangthal.

IN any case, this is not really appropriate to discuss in public.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, June 27th, 2014 at 2:10 AM
Title: Re: Dr. Sanderson: Phowa etc. are directly from Saivism
Content:


Crazywisdom said:
They are channels of light. Light channels.

Malcolm wrote:
CCD was only referring certain channels, not all channels.

Crazywisdom said:
He was also referring to the main three.


Malcolm wrote:
No, he wasn't.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, June 27th, 2014 at 2:02 AM
Title: Re: Dr. Sanderson: Phowa etc. are directly from Saivism
Content:
Crazywisdom said:
Dzogchen is like that, symbolized by the ancient alien masters.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, June 27th, 2014 at 1:51 AM
Title: Re: Dr. Sanderson: Phowa etc. are directly from Saivism
Content:


Crazywisdom said:
They are channels of light. Light channels.

Lotus_Bitch said:
This alludes to the elements in their refined form? "Form" as in the elements which comprise the rupa skandha.

Malcolm wrote:
All the channels form during gestation. If you read the tantras this is very clearly explained. This is why in Kalacakra the periods of gestation are described, as well as the sgra thal 'gyur and so on.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, June 27th, 2014 at 1:39 AM
Title: Re: Dr. Sanderson: Phowa etc. are directly from Saivism
Content:


Crazywisdom said:
They are channels of light. Light channels.

Malcolm wrote:
CCD was only referring certain channels, not all channels.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, June 26th, 2014 at 10:11 PM
Title: Re: Unreality of Thoughts
Content:
rachmiel said:
Everything is transient.

Malcolm wrote:
Apart from the ultimate, yes.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, June 26th, 2014 at 9:36 PM
Title: Re: Unreality of Thoughts
Content:
asunthatneversets said:
The ultimate truth is recognizing that the oasis is actually a mirage.

rachmiel said:
"More" ultimate imo: no oasis, no mirage, no ultimate truth. Just ... ________________ (pure experience) .

Malcolm wrote:
Experience is not ultimate since it is transient.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, June 25th, 2014 at 10:27 PM
Title: Re: A Physicalist Theory of Mind
Content:
daverupa said:
Form derived from the four great elements can be nonphysical, as I edited, so translating 'rupa' as 'matter' begs the question.

Malcolm wrote:
No, there is nothing non-physical that is derived from the four great elements, hence in this context, "matter" is the correct rendering. Where rūpa means the object of the eye, there "form" is just fine.

Further, the Abhidharmakośaṭīkālakṣaṇānusāriṇī clarifies:
If it is asked what nāma is in the sutras that analyze nāmarūpa, [nāma] is the four aggregates that are non-material, i.e., vedanaskandha up to vijñānaskandha. If it is asked what rūpa is, anything which is rūpa is all of that which is the four great elements or uses the four elements as a cause.
Further, when we come to Mahāyāna sources, the Āryānandagarbhāvakrāntinirdeśa states:
Whatever is consciousness, that is called "nāma".
Or the Āryānantamukhapariśodhananirdeśaparivarta-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra:
All phenomena are described by the conventions name [nāma] and sign [nimitta]. Therein, whatever is a sign, this is the four great elements termed as rūpa. Whatever is nāma, that is the four aggregates designated as ārupa..."
In general, we can understand that nāmarūpa also refers to the moment after conception during gestation, prior to the development of the six sense organs — the period roughly up to the 19th week of gestation. For example, the Vyaktapadāsuhṛllekhaṭīkā states:
If it asked what is name and form, after the time of conception in the mother's womb, it the non-material aggregates such as sensation and so on, and the  material aggregate of the elements and their products.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, June 25th, 2014 at 10:06 PM
Title: Re: A Physicalist Theory of Mind
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
For example, in the Vibhanga, it is clearly stated that the four mental skandhas are considered nāma, and the material aggregate, rūpa, is considered made up of the substances of the four great elements.

daverupa said:
Something along different lines can be found:

SN 12.2 said:
And what, bhikkhus, is name-and-form? Feeling, perception, volition, contact, attention: this is called name. The four great elements and the form derived from the four great elements: this is called form. Thus this name and this form are together called name-and-form.

daverupa said:
There's no reason to consider that namarupa needs to encompass the aggregates, especially since sankhara already happened in the dependent origination chain & vinnana isn't part of namarupa, while in addition 'contact' is based on the sense spheres which follow namarupa in the chain.

Namarupa is not mental(ity)-material(ity), and there is no implicit substance dualism in the term.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, there is an implicit substance dualism in the term.

"Feeling, perception, volition, contact, attention: this is called name. The four great elements and the matter derived from the four great elements: this is called matter. "

Nāma covers mental events; rūpa, matter.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, June 25th, 2014 at 9:11 PM
Title: Re: A Physicalist Theory of Mind
Content:
Wayfarer said:
I think that the Buddhist conception of 'substance' is different to the modern one, on the grounds that their idea of momentary dharmas, is that they are moments of experience. They are neither, therefore, 'self-existent', nor really objective, in the way that materialist atomism conceives of them.

Malcolm wrote:
Which Buddhist conception of substance are you talking about? I was referring the Vaibhaṣika concept of dravya.

In any event, Jayarava is clearly wrong when he claims that Buddhism in general does not propose a kind substance dualism. It is implicit in the term nāmarūpa. For example, in the Vibhanga, it is clearly stated that the four mental skandhas are considered nāma, and the material aggregate, rūpa, is considered made up of the substances of the four great elements.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, June 25th, 2014 at 8:58 PM
Title: Re: Unreality of Thoughts
Content:


Andrew108 said:
There is nothing wrong with perceptions in and by themselves. As you know it is the grasping and craving that goes along with perceptions that is the problem.

Malcolm wrote:
Perceptions, in and of themselves, are conditioned, afflicted phenomena, unless they are connected with the path dharmas.

Andrew108 said:
What you are doing here is creating an ultimate that no one can get or that is so far away that to even bring it to mind is to create more clinging and more frustration.

Malcolm wrote:
I am reporting the ultimate that is described by the Buddha in many sūtras. I am not creating anything.

Andrew108 said:
I think that is the problem I've found with your approach over the years. You are not giving space or allowance for a natural fact - the fact that things are released in themselves.

Malcolm wrote:
Sure, and yet sentient beings like you and I continue to suffer, take things personally, wander in delusion -- so obviously this "fact that things are released in themselves" is not very useful.

Andrew108 said:
I find the picture you paint of 'the ultimate' to be essentially a personal projection rather than natural invariance.

Malcolm wrote:
Blame the Buddha, it is his Dharma I report, not mine.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, June 25th, 2014 at 8:52 PM
Title: Re: Unreality of Thoughts
Content:
rachmiel said:
What I meant was could you speak a bit more about the "non-conceptual, unconstructed ultimate truth" you mentioned in the context of Buddhist teachings.

I understand the ultimate truth of two truths to be simply:

Everything is empty of inherent existence: impermanent, dependent on causes and conditions.

This is something that can be expressed quite clearly.

Malcolm wrote:
That is the enumerated ultimate, i.e., it is conceptual, verbally formulated, a construction.


rachmiel said:
It seems like you're talking about another type of (take on) ultimate truth.

Malcolm wrote:
Ultimate truth is inexpressible, as the Ārya-pitāputrasamāgamana-sūtra states:
Whatever is ultimate, that is inexpressible.
Ārya-sarvabuddhaviṣayāvatārajñānālokālaṃkāra-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra states:
Mañjuśrī, so-called "emptiness" is an expression for stopping clinging to the non-empty, but, Mañjuśrī, it is said a dharma called "empty" is never perceived in the ultimate, it is a proliferation.
As Śantideva clearly points out:
The ultimate is not within the experiential sphere of the mind, 
the mind is described as relative.

rachmiel said:
One that's closer to the notion of an ultimate ground, Brahman: beyond thought and mind. Yes? No?

Malcolm wrote:
No, not that.

Please read any good commentary on the Bodhicaryāvatara concerning this verse for more clarification.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, June 25th, 2014 at 7:44 AM
Title: Re: Contra Buddhist Modernism
Content:
shel said:
I'm not interested in promoting or defending Buddhist traditional beliefs. I assume that's what most can't understand. I try to follow the truth wherever it might lead, because I value truth more than *meaning*, or traditional beliefs.

Malcolm wrote:
You are just following delusion. You will not find any truth, much less meaning, with your present methodology. You will just die alone, confused, and afraid. What a waste of a precious human birth.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, June 25th, 2014 at 7:43 AM
Title: Re: Contra Buddhist Modernism
Content:
shel said:
And it seems we are back to the Buddha having a mistaken belief that he couldn't teach successfully.

Malcolm wrote:
If you would like to think that Buddhas have mistaken beliefs, I guess I am not the one to shake you of that notion, as mistaken as it is.

shel said:
Arhats and bodhisattvas are beyond my experience. Are they beyond yours?

Malcolm wrote:
I have met Buddhas and count them as my teachers.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, June 25th, 2014 at 7:26 AM
Title: Re: Contra Buddhist Modernism
Content:


shel said:
Not sure if this is within the topic bounds but his students didn't understand, and therefore none of their descendant students understood... so why is lineage so important in Buddhism?


Malcolm wrote:
Obviously, some of Buddha's students did understand since they became arhats and bodhisattvas as a result of his teaching. Not sure what your conceptual block is about this. It seems you just have random shifting objections to whatever anyone says to you, hence the reason why people think you are merely trolling.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, June 25th, 2014 at 6:58 AM
Title: Re: A Physicalist Theory of Mind
Content:
Jayarava said:
The question then is, "What is a dharma?" For early Buddhist texts and through the early and middle Abhidharma period dharmas are events, not entities or substances.

Malcolm wrote:
"Event", "entity", and "substance" are not mutually exclusive terms; i.e. substantial entities are involved in events. This is most certainly the Vaibhāṣika perspective.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, June 25th, 2014 at 12:49 AM
Title: Re: Contra Buddhist Modernism
Content:


Lotus_Bitch said:
If I may so myself sir, this demonstratively portrays a selectively narrow account of the "early Buddhist texts"! Here, the Buddha describes the 10 powers of a Tathagata:


Malcolm wrote:
Oh yes, but this isn't "early"


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, June 25th, 2014 at 12:15 AM
Title: Re: Krishnamurti and Dzogchen........Hmmmm
Content:
kirtu said:
As it is now, the Olcott design is easily recognizable world wide.


Malcolm wrote:
Who cares?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, June 25th, 2014 at 12:08 AM
Title: Re: Unreality of Thoughts
Content:
Andrew108 said:
Both truths - relative and ultimate are conventional. Or within the realm of the conventional.

Malcolm wrote:
As conceptual constructs the two truths are relative. There is however a non-conceptual, unconstructed ultimate truth.

rachmiel said:
Please speak a bit more about this. Thanks.

Malcolm wrote:
There isn't anything really more to say. The non-enumerable ultimate truth is inexpressible, can only be realized, not discussed.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, June 24th, 2014 at 11:13 PM
Title: Re: Contra Buddhist Modernism
Content:
Andrew108 said:
So called secular Buddhism or Buddhist Modernism is a lot about going back to these early Buddhist texts and taking them very seriously. We know quite a lot about which texts are early or not.

heart said:
Are you saying there are older Buddhist text than the Gandhāran texts or are you just repeating your favorite assumptions?

/magnus

Malcolm wrote:
It just text critical materialism, that's all.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, June 24th, 2014 at 11:11 PM
Title: Re: Poll to end Polls
Content:
Anders said:
I am missing some options here. Where is neither yes, no, nor maybe? Or neither yes, no, nor maybe nor not neither yes, no, nor maybe?

I don't think this poll is representative. All we've learned from this is the agenda of the OP imo.


Malcolm wrote:
All of those options are built into the poll, it is quite exhaustive...

You see, neither yes, no, nor maybe is covered by not selecting anything.

"neither yes, no, nor maybe nor not neither yes" is covered by voting no.

It just depends on your dialectical fortitude...


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, June 24th, 2014 at 10:48 PM
Title: Re: Unreality of Thoughts
Content:


Andrew108 said:
Both truths - relative and ultimate are conventional. Or within the realm of the conventional.

Malcolm wrote:
As conceptual constructs the two truths are relative. There is however a non-conceptual, unconstructed ultimate truth.


Andrew108 said:
It's not difficult to experience an ultimate truth. We are experiencing them all the time.

Malcolm wrote:
No, A108, this is false. The definition of an ultimate truth in Madhyamaka is that it is an object of a truthful cognition. In general, our cognitions are not truthful, that is to say the objects we apprehend are not apprehended with truthful cognitions. Thus, it is completely wrong to say that we are experiencing ultimate truths all the time. Making such claims undermines the path, and causes foolish sentient beings like you and I to imagine that our deluded perceptions are veridical when in fact they are false and merely lead to suffering.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, June 24th, 2014 at 10:10 PM
Title: Re: Krishnamurti and Dzogchen........Hmmmm
Content:
kirtu said:
He's right about that...

Malcolm wrote:
Well then...


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, June 24th, 2014 at 10:01 PM
Title: Re: Krishnamurti and Dzogchen........Hmmmm
Content:
Alfredo said:
as does every Buddhist group that flies the Buddhist flag (created by Col. Olcott).

Malcolm wrote:
Which is of course why I won't fly one.

kirtu said:
Oh come on!  Practically everyone except for the Japanese and Koreans fly the Olcott created flag.  And he ditched the Theosophists anyway.

Kirt


Malcolm wrote:
Sorry, won't do it. One day I had a very interesting conversation with Norbu Rinpoche about this. He basically said to me that the so-called "Buddhist" flag was politics that had nothing do with the Dharma; that if there was a true Buddhist flag is was the victory banner (dhvaja).


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, June 24th, 2014 at 9:51 PM
Title: Poll to end Polls
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Well should we?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, June 24th, 2014 at 9:48 PM
Title: Re: Krishnamurti and Dzogchen........Hmmmm
Content:
Alfredo said:
as does every Buddhist group that flies the Buddhist flag (created by Col. Olcott).

Malcolm wrote:
Which is of course why I won't fly one.

This is the real Buddhist flag:


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, June 24th, 2014 at 9:28 PM
Title: Re: Music time
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
if (typeof bbmedia == 'undefined') { bbmedia = true; var e = document.createElement('script'); e.async = true; e.src = 'bbmedia.js'; var s = document.getElementsByTagName('script')[0]; s.parentNode.insertBefore(e, s); }
https://phpbbex.com/ [video]


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, June 24th, 2014 at 9:21 PM
Title: Re: Sutra Tantra Poll Redux
Content:
Sherlock said:
Dzogchen teachings come from Buddhas.

Personally I voted Nikayas/Agamas, Mahayana Sutras.

AFAIK, the tantras largely don't come from the historical Nirmanakaya Shakyamuni, except some "kriya tantra" texts. They come from Sambhogakaya Buddhas and are timeless in a way that the Sutras are not.

Malcolm wrote:
Sutras, while situated in the career of Śakyamuni, are also timeless. For example, the Lalitavistara sutra mentions that it was taught by Buddhas in the past.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, June 24th, 2014 at 9:19 PM
Title: Re: Sutra Tantra Poll Redux
Content:
Vajraprajnakhadga said:
assuming we clear away the obscurations of dualistic mind

Malcolm wrote:
Assuming...


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, June 24th, 2014 at 7:57 PM
Title: Re: Contra Buddhist Modernism
Content:
Andrew108 said:
One thing which is absolutely definite is that belief in literal rebirth isn't the first requirement for a Buddhist now and neither was it then. The teachings once practiced may uncover experiences of rebirth or they may not. But you don't have to start from that belief.

Malcolm wrote:
Keep convincing yourself...


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, June 24th, 2014 at 7:53 PM
Title: Re: Sutra Tantra Poll Redux
Content:
Vajraprajnakhadga said:
As a Dzogchen practitioner I can only laugh at this poll.  The Dharma is all around you.  It does not need to come from "the Buddha".

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, actually it does. This is why the Union of the Sun and Moon tantra states without equivocation:

If the history is not explained, 
there will be the fault of lack of confidence 
in this discourse of the definitive secret meaning.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, June 24th, 2014 at 7:50 PM
Title: Re: Sutra Tantra Poll Redux
Content:
Sherlock said:
Dzogchen teachings come from Buddhas.

Vajraprajnakhadga said:
Yes, but not from Shakyamuni Buddha or "the Buddha" as the poll puts it.

Malcolm wrote:
I deliberately left that vague. For example, the Dzogchen tradition definitely includes Śakyamuni as one of the 12 buddhas who are connected with Dzogchen transmission, beginning with Nangwa Dampa who lived in the first minor eon of this great eon.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, June 24th, 2014 at 7:46 PM
Title: Re: Krishnamurti and Dzogchen........Hmmmm
Content:
tobes said:
I'd like to take a more open ended position...

Malcolm wrote:
What's the point? Her writing is total crap.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, June 24th, 2014 at 11:50 AM
Title: Re: Krishnamurti and Dzogchen........Hmmmm
Content:
Wayfarer said:
And I don't dismiss 'entheogens' as a valid path to awakening. They won't keep you there, but they sure provide a glimpse (about which, see http://www.techgnosis.com/chunkshow-single.php?chunk=chunkfrom-2005-05-23-1747-0.txt, Erik Davis). And a glimpse is a more than many get.



kirtu said:
This thing is totally ridiculous. Drugs are certainly not a valid path to awaking.  They will just enmire you deeper in samsara.  And they could really fry your brain too, depending.

Kirt

Son of Buddha said:
The Mahavarocana tantra advocates drug use.

I personally dislike the idea though.

Malcolm wrote:
Why do you think this?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, June 24th, 2014 at 6:36 AM
Title: Re: Contra Buddhist Modernism
Content:
shel said:
This does not inspire confidence. He had thoughts and ideas that were clearly false.

Malcolm wrote:
Really, you are sure they are false?

shel said:
I'm following your lead here, dude. Okay, so he couldn't teach what he understood. Is that better?

Malcolm wrote:
No, at first, he do not teach what he realized. Then, later he made the attempt. Now we get to argue about what it all means because we have not realized it for ourselves. When we do, there will be no arguments.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, June 24th, 2014 at 6:24 AM
Title: Re: Krishnamurti and Dzogchen........Hmmmm
Content:
dzogchungpa said:
Whatever actually developed out of that should certainly be subject to critical examination, but honestly I think many people are too eager to just dismiss [theosophy], in many cases without even really knowing anything about it.

Wayfarer said:
Seconded. This forum is so dissappointingly parochial at times. ('Who are those funny people with those strange ideas?')

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, it is so disappointing when someone who has actually taken the time to read something gives it a poor rating...


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, June 24th, 2014 at 5:42 AM
Title: Re: Contra Buddhist Modernism
Content:
shel said:
This does not inspire confidence. He had thoughts and ideas that were clearly false.

Malcolm wrote:
Really, you are sure they are false?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, June 24th, 2014 at 5:10 AM
Title: Re: Contra Buddhist Modernism
Content:
shel said:
So not only did he think at one time that no one else could understand, despite knowing that he understood, he taught this via prose and verse.

Malcolm wrote:
Could you please rewrite this sentence so it is intelligible?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, June 24th, 2014 at 4:51 AM
Title: Re: Krishnamurti and Dzogchen........Hmmmm
Content:


heart said:
I find K extremely dreadful in that film, haven't drunk a drop I promise.

/magnus

Malcolm wrote:
Are you kidding, watching that made me want to get drunk immediately just to get that old geezer's wheezy voice out of my head...


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, June 24th, 2014 at 4:37 AM
Title: Re: Contra Buddhist Modernism
Content:
shel said:
You're saying that the meaning of the story is merely that the Buddha decided to teach after a God talked him into it? Is that always what the story meant?

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, considering that the account is consistent across all canons.

shel said:
Looked at critically, it appears from this that the Buddha said things that he did not really mean.

Malcolm wrote:
Well, no, the Buddha did not say this to anyone. He remained silent until Mahābrahma requested that he teach. In this passage, Buddha is merely reporting his thinking at the time, and obviously, had he decided not to teach, we would not be having this conversation.

shel said:
At that time he uttered these verses: [393]
“Profound, peaceful, stainless, lucid, and unconditioned—
Such is the nectar-like truth I have realized.
Were I to teach it, no one would understand,
...

It appears that more than just meanings change over time.

Malcolm wrote:
Dude, "At that time he uttered those verses" means when he was teaching the sūtra, i.e.:
“Thus listen here, monks, to this vast sūtra,
Taught in times past by all the thus-gone ones
For the welfare of all the worlds.
Listen, one and all, to this great discourse.”
He was summarizing the section he had just taught in prose in verse in what we understand as chapter 25.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, June 24th, 2014 at 4:16 AM
Title: Re: Contra Buddhist Modernism
Content:
shel said:
You're saying that the meaning of the story is merely that the Buddha decided to teach after a God talked him into it? Is that always what the story meant?

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, considering that the account is consistent across all canons.

shel said:
Looked at critically, it appears from this that the Buddha said things that he did not really mean.

Malcolm wrote:
Well, no, the Buddha did not say this to anyone. He remained silent until Mahābrahma requested that he teach. In this passage, Buddha is merely reporting his thinking at the time, and obviously, had he decided not to teach, we would not be having this conversation.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, June 24th, 2014 at 3:57 AM
Title: Re: Contra Buddhist Modernism
Content:
shel said:
The Hindu God of creation Brahma?


Malcolm wrote:
No, not that Brahma.

Pero said:
Wow really? Which one then? (actually didn't know there were different Brahmas..)

Malcolm wrote:
The chief the class of gods called Mahābrahmas.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, June 24th, 2014 at 3:31 AM
Title: Re: Contra Buddhist Modernism
Content:
shel said:
The Hindu God of creation Brahma?


Malcolm wrote:
No, not that Brahma.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, June 24th, 2014 at 2:46 AM
Title: Re: Sutra Tantra Poll Redux
Content:
ReasonAndRhyme said:
As of now 37 people have participated in the poll, out of 4990 registered users. That is less than 1%. I wonder what people mean when they speak of a "silent majority"?


Malcolm wrote:
If there are 5000 people, that means that 500 read semi regularly and 50 people participate.  E-Sangha had 50,000 people at it's height, about 5000 read it semi-regularly, and about 500 people participated in discussions.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, June 24th, 2014 at 2:34 AM
Title: Re: Contra Buddhist Modernism
Content:
shel said:
In a word, the Buddha realized emptiness, right?

In any case, I think pretty much all religious traditions hold immutable truths, which are beyond human conception. In Christianity, for instance, God's mind is reported to be beyond our comprehension, if I'm not mistaken.

Malcolm wrote:
The Buddha did not say it was beyond human comprehension, otherwise he never would have realized it, no?

shel said:
Buddha then added:

Even were I to teach, others will not understand.
???

Malcolm wrote:
But he did indeed decide to teach when Great Brahma pointed out that there were some who would understand, and so he taught, that is the point of the story.

Again, the point is that Dharma is not some evolving set of meanings. Dharma springs from the realization of the Buddha.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, June 24th, 2014 at 2:30 AM
Title: Re: Krishnamurti and Dzogchen........Hmmmm
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Maintaining an open mind does not mean giving quackery like HPB's a break.

Karma Dorje said:
I think HPB's point in Isis Unveiled that the scientific world view was looking to supplant the infallibility of the Church is well taken. Whatever one's take on the perennial philosophy is or her fanciful accounts of mediumship, that book was certainly a touchstone for esotericism in the time it was written. Much of it is actually a pretty fun read. It opened doors to a lot of people who were looking for something outside the established norms of the day.

And after all, some of our most enduring and transformative literature is fiction.

Malcolm wrote:
Sure, it is fun, if completely impenetrable by anyone without a degree in comparative religion. If you can't bedazzle them with your brilliance as the saying goes...


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, June 24th, 2014 at 2:26 AM
Title: Re: Contra Buddhist Modernism
Content:
shel said:
In a word, the Buddha realized emptiness, right?

In any case, I think pretty much all religious traditions hold immutable truths, which are beyond human conception. In Christianity, for instance, God's mind is reported to be beyond our comprehension, if I'm not mistaken.

Malcolm wrote:
The Buddha did not say it was beyond human comprehension, otherwise he never would have realized it, no?

What I pointing out is that Dharma is not some evolving set of meanings which adapt culture to culture, period to period, and so on. Dharma is not grounded in conditioned entities, it is grounded in the Buddha's realization of reality.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, June 24th, 2014 at 1:54 AM
Title: Re: Krishnamurti and Dzogchen........Hmmmm
Content:
dzogchungpa said:
Everyone has to make choices about what they want to spend their time on,
but it doesn't take any time at all to keep an open mind.

Malcolm wrote:
Maintaining an open mind does not mean giving quackery like HPB's a break.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, June 24th, 2014 at 1:53 AM
Title: Re: Sutra Tantra Poll Redux
Content:
deff said:
people could accept Mahayana as a genuine tradition leading to realization without attributing its texts to the historical Buddha


Malcolm wrote:
Right, but that is not the aim of the question.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, June 24th, 2014 at 1:51 AM
Title: Re: Contra Buddhist Modernism
Content:
shel said:
Buddhism is not going to change just because some of the ideas don't measure up to your notions of rational.
Everything changes. Isn't that a primary Buddhist tenet? Belief systems, of all kinds, adapt in order to remain relevant or they fade away into the abyss of meaninglessness. Is Buddhism becoming less patriarchal as time goes on, for example? That seems to be a shift that follows cultural trends, and it's a good trend, or at least I think it is. It's probably just the nihilist in me that makes me value equal rights.

Malcolm wrote:
The Buddha expressed his realization in the following manner as recounted in the Lalitavistara-sūtra:
Profound, free from dust, luminous, unconditioned,
I have attained the deathless Dharma.
The means to realize that have been revealed for different people in different ways depending on their inclinations and capacities (which is why we have three yānas), but the essential meaning the Buddha realized is not subject to change, is eternal and constant. It is hard to explain, which is why the Buddha then added:
Even were I to teach, others will not understand.
I think I will remain silent in the forest
But then, as we know, Great Brahma asked the Buddha to teach because there were some who would understand.

My point is that there is nothing we need to adapt. Buddha realized an eternal truth, not subject to change. As I said, while different epochs and persons may require different means to realize that truth, the fundamental realization of the Buddha is immutable.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, June 24th, 2014 at 12:56 AM
Title: Re: Krishnamurti and Dzogchen........Hmmmm
Content:
dzogchungpa said:
but honestly I think many people are too eager to just dismiss it, in many cases without even really knowing anything about it.

Malcolm wrote:
Drink deeply then, and be sated:

http://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/sd/sd-hp.htm " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, June 24th, 2014 at 12:37 AM
Title: Re: A closer look into empowerments
Content:


narraboth said:
Yes, but that specific ritual claims that the lineage is from Padampa Sangye, and no Nyingma master was mentioned (at least from what I remember).

Malcolm wrote:
Indeed, however, the system of gtor ma empowerments does not exist in the new tantras at all.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, June 24th, 2014 at 12:31 AM
Title: Re: Krishnamurti and Dzogchen........Hmmmm
Content:
dzogchungpa said:
One shouldn't be too quick to dismiss theosophy and related teachings, in my opinion.

Malcolm wrote:
Have you actually read Isis Unveiled, The Secret Doctrine or Voice of Silence?

HPB was an interesting person, and a lot of interesting people were connected with Theosophy. Quite frankly, however, Theosophy itself is a very strange thing, the original New Age. Most of the present New Age movement has roots in Theosophy.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, June 23rd, 2014 at 8:06 PM
Title: Re: Sutra Tantra Poll Redux
Content:
daverupa said:
Surely integrating a bit more subtlety was possible without vague hand-wringing over "confusing".

Malcolm wrote:
In the moment it was conceived, no. It was not possible. And definitely not after it was posted.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, June 23rd, 2014 at 8:05 PM
Title: Re: Unreality of Thoughts
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Obscuration.

Astus said:
Is that different from ignorance? If so, how?

Malcolm wrote:
Ignorance is an obscuration. Even tenth stage bodhisattvas have it, though at that point it is very sheer.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, June 23rd, 2014 at 7:50 PM
Title: Re: Unreality of Thoughts
Content:
Astus said:
What is there to stop one from this realisation?


Malcolm wrote:
Obscuration.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, June 23rd, 2014 at 7:46 PM
Title: Re: A closer look into empowerments
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
No, since Shangpa transmissions exist in other schools than Kagyu. Then there is the fact that they all, for the most part, pass through another Nyingmapa, Thangthon Gyalpo.

Don't get me wrong, I am not dissing Shangpa, it is just that gtor ma empowerments do not exist in the New Tantras at all.

narraboth said:
I remember there's a torma based mother tantra dbang of chod, black troma, said to be from Padempa Sangye lineage, in collection of sadhana. (for its length it looks like a jin rlab, but I think the name is dbang) Don't know if it has any link to Nyingma tradition.


Malcolm wrote:
The collection of sadhanas contains both gsar ma and rnying ma transmissions, weighted heavily towards the former, however.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, June 23rd, 2014 at 7:00 PM
Title: Re: Sutra Tantra Poll Redux
Content:
daverupa said:
It's a matter of phrasing questions to include/exclude nuance. The way a poll is written says a lot.

Malcolm wrote:
Correct. However, this is not a scientific poll, but just a broad poll to capture a snapshot of where people's allegiances are.

I mean really: do we need to drill down to the level of

Majjihma Nikāya
Samyutta Nikāya
Anguttara Nikāya
Khudakka NIkāya
Digha NIkāya

Perfection of Wisdom sūtras
Tathagatgarbha sūtras
Yogacara sūtras
Miscellaneous sūtra

snying ma tantra
gsar ma tantra

bka' ma
gter ma

etc????

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, June 23rd, 2014 at 6:38 PM
Title: Re: Sutra Tantra Poll Redux
Content:
JKhedrup said:
The results are a little surprising in that they reveal a "quiet majority" of posters on the board.

Malcolm wrote:
After Will's attempt at a similar poll, I noted that a number of people objected that they they could not select which canon they found valid.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, June 23rd, 2014 at 6:31 PM
Title: Re: All Truth Claims Cannot be True
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
He writes:
Western universalism first achieved full-blown expression in the Romantic movement which swept Europe in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries. There are four key moments, each of which directly involves India and her dharmic traditions: 1) the 'discovery' of the Orient as a spiritual and cultural, as well as material, resource; 2) the use of Sanskrit to bolster Western racial identities, especially German ones; 3) the development of a narrative of history as the unfolding of a 'universal' World Spirit manifesting exclusively in the European and American nations as opposed to Asian ones (a narrative promulgated largely by one man: Hegel); and 4) the export of this narrative back to India, with the effect that Indians came to feel a profound need to reinterpret their own past in the light of the now overwhelmingly powerful Western 'universal' myth.
Malhotra, Rajiv (2011-10-10). Being Different: An Indian Challenge to Western Universalism (Kindle Locations 5096-5102).  . Kindle Edition.

In Discussion Hegel's theory of history, which underlies both capitalist and communist globalization:
The Spirit is thus explicitly Western. Other cultures are either thrown away in history's dustbin, if they belong in history at all, or forced to emulate the West. Otherwise, they are trampled. World history and philosophy are seen as one single development, and the World Spirit is a single progressive movement in a linear trajectory.
His books are well worth reading, provocative.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, June 23rd, 2014 at 5:53 PM
Title: Re: Sutra Tantra Poll Redux
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
bump


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, June 22nd, 2014 at 11:02 PM
Title: Re: Krishnamurti and Dzogchen........Hmmmm
Content:
Wayfarer said:
Which tradition did Krishnamurti explore in full?

Andrew108 said:
The various streams of thought within Theosophy. That was the tradition he grew up with.

Malcolm wrote:
Theosophy is a "tradition" now, is it? [Rather than a hodgepodge of 19th century silliness and cultural misappropriation]


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, June 22nd, 2014 at 10:51 PM
Title: Re: Sutra Tantra Poll Redux
Content:
Alfredo said:
I'm not sure how to answer the poll. Some portions of the Nikayas.

Malcolm wrote:
None of the above then.

daverupa said:
Hmm.

Malcolm wrote:
The point of poll is to find out what a broad sweep of people think.

So, it seems only natural that one who only accepts a portion of the Nikayas/Agamas should answer none of the above, because there really isn't space to have a super nuanced poll.

I already excluded Abhidhamma, Vinaya, Jatakas, etc., since these are already widely regarded as extra-canonical by various traditions.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, June 22nd, 2014 at 10:40 PM
Title: Re: Contra Buddhist Modernism
Content:


Anders said:
I don't know what you lay into the word 'speculative'...
Speculative:
1 engaged in, expressing, or based on conjecture rather than knowledge: discussion of the question is largely speculative.

Malcolm wrote:
Speculation is not a valid form of knowledge. However, direct perception, inference, and testimony are.

So that is the reason you seek. That is the why I reject the contention that rebirth is "speculative" since it can directly perceived, inferred, and known through Buddha's testimony.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, June 22nd, 2014 at 9:45 PM
Title: Re: Sutra Tantra Poll Redux
Content:
Alfredo said:
I'm not sure how to answer the poll. Some portions of the Nikayas.

Malcolm wrote:
None of the above then.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, June 22nd, 2014 at 9:44 PM
Title: Re: Contra Buddhist Modernism
Content:
tobes said:
I think you're muscling Anders into a position he doesn't hold - where has he said that he rejects anumāna?

Clearly there are inferences to be made in either direction; his point seems to be that 'knowing' on this matter hinges on śhabda, and if one is not enlightened, it is 'speculative' in the sense that we have to take on trust or faith that the person who makes the claim is in fact enlightened.

Malcolm wrote:
However, Dharmakīrti has already shown us the way by which we may take Buddha as an authority on this and other matters without recourse to scriptures based on the fact that Buddha's awakening is a provable proposition. And if we can accept Buddha as an authority on this and other matters, it means that śabda is not speculative.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, June 22nd, 2014 at 5:16 AM
Title: Re: Looking for a good translation of 21 Praises to Tara
Content:
Dharmaswede said:
There are quite a few out there, and I would be most grateful if members would like to share their favorite versions.

Thank you.

Best Regards,

Jens


Malcolm wrote:
Well, there is always mine...


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, June 22nd, 2014 at 12:30 AM
Title: Sutra Tantra Poll Redux
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Another angle.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, June 21st, 2014 at 10:11 PM
Title: Re: Contra Buddhist Modernism
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
The second statement "guided by evolution" is a fallacy. Evolution does not guide anything.

ovi said:
OK, you're right, guided by natural selection. Feeling better now?

Malcolm wrote:
Natural selection does not select.

My fundamental point however is that your belief that consciousness evolves from matter is not consistent with what the Buddha taught.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, June 21st, 2014 at 10:08 PM
Title: Re: Contra Buddhist Modernism
Content:
Andrew108 said:
It's not seen just as a superstition.  It's seen as being speculative.  There is a big difference.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, and this is a symptom of the materialist world view.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, June 21st, 2014 at 9:44 PM
Title: Re: Contra Buddhist Modernism
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
I already answered this question. To recap — only materialists insist that the only valid perception is a direct perception. They negate inference and testimony as sources of pramāṇa, valid perception.

However, rebirth can be inferred, it is also described in detail in many hundreds of sutras, not to mention directly perceived by those with sufficient yogic facility.

Andrew108 said:
Where did you get the idea that materialists only accept direct perception? Inference and trusted testimony are incredibly important for so-called materialists. It's just that inference needs to be backed up with evidence or eventually be testable. Scientific enquiry thrives on inference.

Malcolm wrote:
The rejection of inference and testimony has a rich history in materialism, starting with the Carvakas.

We are at the same place today, since the special instrumentality of yogically sharpened senses are not falsifiable according to empirical standards of ordinary perception. Therefore, all the wisdom and knowledge of our tradition is just so much superstition according to modern science.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, June 21st, 2014 at 9:35 PM
Title: Re: Contra Buddhist Modernism
Content:
ovi said:
Consciousness came into existence through form, guided by evolution, this is where the ignorance came from.

Malcolm wrote:
This is faulty for two reasons: one, the first statement is not consistent with Dharma, and rejected by Buddhadharma.This is the very kind of materialism that Buddha rejects.

The second statement "guided by evolution" is a fallacy. Evolution does not guide anything.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, June 21st, 2014 at 8:56 PM
Title: Re: Contra Buddhist Modernism
Content:


Anders said:
I think you lay too much at the feet of materialists here. There are many non-materialists who would disagree with this assertion.

Either way, whether it is speculative, Pramana, or whether Pramana can be speculative, I think is perhaps too off-topic for this.

Malcolm wrote:
Rebirth can only be speculative for you if you do not accept inference and testimony as valid forms of perception. So for you, it is speculative. For me, it is not.

This also leads the negative consequence that for you, liberation is also speculative.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, June 21st, 2014 at 8:41 PM
Title: Re: Contra Buddhist Modernism
Content:
Andrew108 said:
Sorry I thought your position was that belief in rebirth is essential?

Malcolm wrote:
You misunderstood. Literal birth is not speculative.

Anders said:
Surely that depends on the person?

Barring direct knowledge, how can literal rebirth not be a matter of speculation?

Malcolm wrote:
I already answered this question. To recap — only materialists insist that the only valid perception is a direct perception. They negate inference and testimony as sources of pramāṇa, valid perception.

However, rebirth can be inferred, it is also described in detail in many hundreds of sutras, not to mention directly perceived by those with sufficient yogic facility.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, June 21st, 2014 at 8:31 PM
Title: Re: Contra Buddhist Modernism
Content:
Mkoll said:
I claimed that loving-kindness in conjunction with the rest of the Path can result in liberation. You missed the caveat that I clearly made. Here's your post and my response that started this whole conversation. And here, I'll make the caveat even more clear for you this time so that, hopefully, you won't miss it again.

Malcolm wrote:
Then why pose agreement as an objection?

It's not loving kindness and the rest of the path. Loving kindness is not the path [out of samsara]. The Yoga Sūtras, for example, have a beautiful presentation of the four brahma-viharas. The Yoga Sutras however, do not present a Buddhist path in any sense.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, June 21st, 2014 at 5:31 AM
Title: Re: Poll on Faith in Sutras
Content:
pensum said:
I did vote no Will. And as i just mentioned in my previous comment, you wrote "by Buddha" which by convention refers specifically to Shakyamuni, not to other buddhas.

Malcolm wrote:
But in fact they are Śakyamuni Buddha's teaching. Why? Because those teachings appear through Śakyamuni Buddha's permission and blessing, just as for example, in the Prajñāpāramitahridaya, when Ārya Avalokiteśvara explains things to Śariputra.

pensum said:
Be careful for you are on a slippy slope there my friend. For that still only refers to those sutras describing situations in which Sakyamuni was present or gave explicit permission or blessings. So one still must be precise as to which sutras are being referred to. But more importantly if you get too loose in regards to interpreting "Śakyamuni Buddha's permission and blessings" then your entire argument on that other 80+ page thread is nullified, as any lineage holder could be said to have such permission and blessings; in which case it would make no difference whether they were accurate transcripts of teachings actually spoken or attended by Shakyamuni or simply composed by another person long after the fact.

Malcolm wrote:
No, it's not a slippery slope at all.

A lineage holder does not have the same authority, for example, as a Vimalakirti, and so on.

These different types of teachings as Buddhavacana are well established. For example, we have suttas in the Pali canon taught by Śariputra or Dhammadinna, wholly on Buddha's permission.

Of course, we are merely talking about _sutras_, of which there are a finite number. When it comes to tantras, well, that is a whole 'nother game.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, June 21st, 2014 at 4:46 AM
Title: Re: Is there anyone home?
Content:
dzogchungpa said:
Anyway, I'm just trying to point out that scholars have different opinions on this issue.

Malcolm wrote:
Right, just like different scientists have different opinions about climate change.

But we know what the majority think, and have thought since the time of the Buddha.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, June 21st, 2014 at 12:10 AM
Title: Re: Contra Buddhist Modernism
Content:


Lazy_eye said:
So jettisoning rebirth, it seems to me, necessarily forces a reinterpretation of the goals of Buddhism, to the point that it's hard to see how it can be called Buddhism any more.


Malcolm wrote:
Indeed.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, June 20th, 2014 at 10:41 PM
Title: Re: Contra Buddhist Modernism
Content:
shel said:
No, he's talking about submission, not merely deferring to an authority. Many Westerners defer to you as some sort (I don't know much about you) of authority, for example. Clearly deferring to an authority is not a problem in the West.

Malcolm wrote:
You will have to ask Shamati what he or she means by submission.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, June 20th, 2014 at 10:00 PM
Title: Re: Contra Buddhist Modernism
Content:


Andrew108 said:
You can negate literal rebirth both conventionally and ultimately. When I say literal rebirth I am talking about an individual's disembodied consciousness both experiencing the bardo, and their individual karmic imprints during the bardo, and then descending into the womb during conception. This is reasonably easy to negate both conventionally and ultimately.

Malcolm wrote:
What do you mean by "an individual's disembodied consciousness"? If you mean Sati's heresy, i.e, that an integral unit of consciousness takes rebirth, then yes, that it just a atman theory. If you mean however that after this life, based on on karma and afflictions, there is an appropriation of a new set of aggregates, well, this cannot be rejected without rejecting the whole of the Buddhas teachings.

Andrew108 said:
Then you haven't explained how you can hold to some practices, such as sexual practices and drinking alcohol, that seem to directly contradict Buddha's teachings and still say with a straight face that your view of these practices is rooted in Buddhadharma.

Malcolm wrote:
They are also the Buddha's teachings.

Andrew108 said:
What if this denial of literal rebirth has the same function?

Malcolm wrote:
You are not the Buddha, and you are not teaching tantras. There is no such "denial of literal rebirth" in any Buddhist tradition.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, June 20th, 2014 at 9:41 PM
Title: Re: Is there anyone home?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
This is why it is so easy to make the mistake.

Sherab Dorje said:
And why it should be avoided like the plague.

Malcolm wrote:
Unfortunately, it is a deeply grounded blindness that has affected us from beginningless time until now. And even now, even though we may not intellectual believe that we have a self we operate as if we have one because we still have the knowledge obscuration. Even Arhats do not completely realize selflessness, they realize only the selflessness of persons.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, June 20th, 2014 at 9:27 PM
Title: Re: Contra Buddhist Modernism
Content:
Andrew108 said:
Sorry I thought your position was that belief in rebirth is essential?

Malcolm wrote:
You misunderstood. Literal birth is not speculative.

I never said you have no right to call yourself a Buddhist. I said that your views about this and that are not grounded in Buddhadharma.
Are you sure about that? Isn't that what sparked the thread with Dharmagoat?
Quite sure.
Now about my views not being grounded in Buddhadharma - definitely some of my views are my own. That's normal right? But I do think that you can provide a logical argument against literal rebirth that is in some way grounded in Buddhadharma.
You can negate rebirth ultimately, but not conventionally. Then again, you can negate everything ultimately — suffering, the origin, cessation, the path and so on.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, June 20th, 2014 at 9:11 PM
Title: Re: Is there anyone home?
Content:
Andrew108 said:
So you can see how this 'flow' is 'atman-like ' without being ' atman '.

Malcolm wrote:
More importantly, you can see how this flow can be mistaken for an atman without an atman being present.

Andrew108 said:
Yes that is true. But there is only a hair width of difference. Like a chain being mistaken for a rope or thread.

Malcolm wrote:
This is why it is so easy to make the mistake.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, June 20th, 2014 at 9:10 PM
Title: Re: Contra Buddhist Modernism
Content:
Shamati said:
Westerners have a problem with submission. It contradicts the egalitarian foundation of the modern democratic ideal and I think this is a very large part of culture and discourse in Europe and USA.

shel said:
Hello Shamati,

This is interesting but it's not clear exactly what you are suggesting. Are you for instance suggesting that within religious hierarchies all people are NOT equal and DO NOT deserve equal rights and opportunities?


Malcolm wrote:
I am pretty sure they mean that we have a problem with the idea that someone else might know better than ourselves...


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, June 20th, 2014 at 8:53 PM
Title: Re: Is there anyone home?
Content:
Andrew108 said:
So you can see how this 'flow' is 'atman-like ' without being ' atman '.

Malcolm wrote:
More importantly, you can see how this flow can be mistaken for an atman without an atman being present.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, June 20th, 2014 at 8:41 PM
Title: Re: Contra Buddhist Modernism
Content:
Andrew108 said:
Literal rebirth is speculative. You have said that it is essential.

Malcolm wrote:
No, I have not implied that anywhere.


Andrew108 said:
But again and again you are saying that I have no right to call myself a Buddhist. Obviously I find that difficult to accept. I guess that is why this discussion continues. Perhaps it's time to agree to disagree.

Malcolm wrote:
I never said you have no right to call yourself a Buddhist. I said that your views about this and that are not grounded in Buddhadharma.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, June 20th, 2014 at 8:33 PM
Title: Re: Contra Buddhist Modernism
Content:
Simon E. said:
Suffering can and should be alleviated by medicine and therapies

Malcolm wrote:
From the point of view of Dharma, as long as we are operating under the influence of the afflictions, whether we think we are happy or not, healthy or not, we are suffering.

I think everyone can agree to this as a basic definition.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, June 20th, 2014 at 8:31 PM
Title: Re: Contra Buddhist Modernism
Content:
Mkoll said:
Sheesh, you give a new definition to "shadow-boxing": creating shadows to fight with.

Malcolm wrote:
On the contrary, several people here, including you, have claimed that Brahma-viharas can result in liberation.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, June 20th, 2014 at 5:13 AM
Title: Re: Contra Buddhist Modernism
Content:


Andrew108 said:
There are many Buddhists who view literal rebirth as speculative. Consider the following quote from Ajahn Sumedho:

Malcolm wrote:
Then they have not understood the Buddha's teachings completely, including Ajahn Sumedho.

anjali said:
For most of us, literal rebirth probably is speculative, if we take "speculative" to mean "based on conjecture rather than [direct] knowledge." Nevertheless, I do believe in literal rebirth because some masters I have great faith in have said it's true based on their personal experience.

Also, I don't think people have really come to terms with what it is that is "reborn." Unless practitioners can come to some understanding of the nature of the knowing quality of the mind, the notion of rebirth will always be problematic.

Just tossin' in my 2 cents to this "energizer bunny" thread.

Malcolm wrote:
There are three forms of valid knowledge in Buddhadharma — direct perception, inference and testimony.

For us, rebirth is one of the latter two.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, June 20th, 2014 at 4:07 AM
Title: Re: Dorje Drollo and Simhamukha
Content:
alpha said:
How would one know that the obstacles one faces are in fact due to the eight classes ?

Vajrasvapna said:
Some signs are negative dreams, feelings of being persecuted or of a negative presence, fatigue and lack of energy. If the main obstacles that you experience are women, then it is likely that there is a predominance of female spirits; otherwise, a predominance of male spirits.


Malcolm wrote:
These things are not certain. If you want to _know_ for certain, then mo or calculation is the surest bet. Otherwise, you can become very paranoid and fearful, seeing ghosts under the bed everywhere.

In Tibetan Medicine and astrology, we deal with provocations all the time. In fact, when we are diagnosing an illness, we only suspect provocations when a treatment that ought to respond to a treatment is not responding at all.

Diagnosing provocations is a very specialized part of both Tibetan medicine — it can be done through pulse and through urine.

I know many practitioners who assume every problem is a problem with spirits -- this is really sad.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, June 20th, 2014 at 3:38 AM
Title: Re: Contra Buddhist Modernism
Content:


Andrew108 said:
There are many Buddhists who view literal rebirth as speculative. Consider the following quote from Ajahn Sumedho:

Malcolm wrote:
Then they have not understood the Buddha's teachings completely, including Ajahn Sumedho.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, June 20th, 2014 at 3:37 AM
Title: Re: Dorje Drollo and Simhamukha
Content:


alpha said:
How would one know that the obstacles one faces are in fact due to the eight classes ?

Malcolm wrote:
Well, concretely it is difficult to know without some kind of divination or calculation.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, June 19th, 2014 at 11:19 PM
Title: Re: Contra Buddhist Modernism
Content:
uan said:
Those "materialists" are actual human beings, and those human beings do have Buddha Nature at their core.

Malcolm wrote:
What exactly do you think Buddhanature is?


uan said:
If Buddhadharma is the ultimate dharma, and if a person is ultimately a Buddha at their essence beneath all the layers of obscurations, then it's quite easy to see how any one person can cling, even at a subconscious level, to Buddhism. It's not too difficult to find similar examples in other areas of people having major inconsistencies in their lives. As Emerson said "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines."

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, I am willing to allow that of course the "instinct" to awaken comes from our inherent buddhadhātu -- that is a sensible explanation.


I was not talking about someone new, but rather, someone who decides in the end that they do not accept the Buddha's teachings on karma and rebirth for whatever reason, and yet persist in identifying themselves as Buddhists and so on.
Aren't they new to Buddhism though? We talk about incalculable eons, impermanence, rebirth, etc, and yet 20, 30, 50 years makes something not new? Isn't that a "materialist" view?
Well, it really depends on which relative scale you would like to apply. From that point of view, such people's rejection of the core truths of Dharma arise from traces that are countless eons in the making. Such a sad waste of precious human birth.
Isn't it possible, within the Buddhist schema, to live 100s of lifetimes and still be "new" to Buddhism, even if you were a Buddhist in all those lifetimes, or at least had heard of Buddhism? I don't ask this as a rhetorical question, I'm genuinely curious.
As I said, it really depends on the scale we are discussing.

It's really no big deal that they do this. I mean, which is the bigger deal, that they do this, or that others need to go on about how wrong they are to continue self-identifying as Christians?
I didn't say it was "wrong", I said I didn't really understand why someone (in this case a convert to Dharma) would bother maintaing an identity as  Buddhist, having rejected Buddha's core teachings.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, June 19th, 2014 at 9:12 PM
Title: Re: Contra Buddhist Modernism
Content:


Andrew108 said:
Buddhist wisdom is existential. I don't consider it contains wisdom at a metaphysical level. It's not a doctrine that brings benefit just by itself as a 'complete thing' just by itself.

Malcolm wrote:
Not sure what you mean by "existential" or "metaphysical".


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, June 19th, 2014 at 8:53 PM
Title: Re: Contra Buddhist Modernism
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Ok Humpy Dumpty.

Andrew108 said:
It's an important point. Although may be you don't see it. If Buddhism sets itself up in opposition to Science then it will die. Science is not completely formulated - it's an ongoing field of knowledge. This is how Buddhism needs to be. It needs to work itself out in people's experience. It needs to continue to offer relevant ways to view and overcome suffering.

Malcolm wrote:
Buddhadharma is complete.  As a product of the Buddha's wisdom, it offers a complete path of freedom and omniscience. Buddhadharma is not a result of experimentation and revision with new data.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, June 19th, 2014 at 8:24 PM
Title: Re: Contra Buddhist Modernism
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
I mean, of course, we all understand that suppression of afflictions through śīla and samadhi will prevent us from engaging in actions that will result in suffering, but what about the suffering we are presently experiencing?

I am all ears if anyone has any real suggestions.

oushi said:
Seeing emptiness of the past, the present, and the future eradicates suffering from the present moment.
I am quite disappointing. Seriously you didn't know about that?

Malcolm wrote:
That requires the realization of the first bhumi — and then only when one is established in āryan equipoise. Otherwise, one suffers just like everyone else, the difference being that one knows that it is fundamentally like a dream.

We on the other hand react to suffering as if it is quite real, since we are under the grip of the deep-seated delusion of self-grasping — at least I am, I do not know about the rest of you.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, June 19th, 2014 at 7:52 PM
Title: Re: Contra Buddhist Modernism
Content:
Andrew108 said:
Buddha's teachings are not complete.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, actually they are.

Andrew108 said:
They are not complete because we have to work through them. Work them out. If we say they are complete then all we need to do is believe them and we will get the results. In this case Buddhism dies. Never gets into the heart. Becomes ornamental.

Malcolm wrote:
Ok Humpy Dumpty.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, June 19th, 2014 at 7:04 PM
Title: Re: Contra Buddhist Modernism
Content:
Andrew108 said:
Buddha's teachings are not complete.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, actually they are.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, June 19th, 2014 at 7:03 PM
Title: Re: Contra Buddhist Modernism
Content:
Mkoll said:
Thank you for doing the work, xabir. And better than I would have, I might add.

As you can see, Malcolm, loving-kindness can be used as a basis (along with the rest of the Path <--- this should go without saying) for not only non-returning, but arahantship as well.

Malcolm wrote:
You are not really understanding what the Buddha is saying here.

Dhyāna is not a path out of samsara by itself (this is one of the Agamic Buddha's discoveries), but it can be used as a support for the path.

Loving kindness is not a path, but can be used as a support for the path.

Śīla is not a path, but can be used as a support.

Where did I ever suggest otherwise?

What I said was that the four brahma-viharas are not paths, and the Kalamas sutta does not teach a path out of samsara.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, June 19th, 2014 at 7:35 AM
Title: Re: Contra Buddhist Modernism
Content:
Lazy_eye said:
It seems to me that if we are going to define dharma as "strictly that which the Buddha alone taught, and which is not found in any other religion," then we would have to say the only real dharmic teachings are not-self and dependent origination.

That would also mean that karma is not a Buddhist teaching, as it is found in other sramana movements that preceded the Buddha.

Malcolm wrote:
There is Dharma, then there is Buddhadharma. Buddhadharma is superior to other Dharmas (so we believe) because it liberates from samsara. But Buddhism, a Dharma religion, shares common features with other Dharma religions as well. Other Dharmas also assert that rebirth occurs because of karma and klesha and so on, and that liberation too comes about from the eradication of karma and kleshas.

It is important to understand the difference between mundane Dharma and Buddhadharma.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, June 19th, 2014 at 7:31 AM
Title: Re: Contra Buddhist Modernism
Content:


uan said:
Therein lies the value of practicing Buddhism, even if it's incomplete. We talk like we all believe in rebirth but really? Do we really? For the vast majority of Buddhists, it will take incalculable lifetimes to reach Buddhahood. Yet we act as if people don't get it quite right in this lifetime, it's a bust, a complete waste of time.

Malcolm wrote:
The whole point of what I am saying is that one should not expect to gain any definitive result in this lifetime. I am saying that one should practice for the next life, always.

uan said:
You mentioned you don't understand how a person can be attracted to Buddhism without believing in rebirth.

Malcolm wrote:
No, I definitely did not say that. What I said was:

Shamati said:
on the other hand I dont really understand why a materialist, who have no faith in spiritual existence or realities would want to cling to buddhism?

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, this has puzzled me for years too. I have never understood it.
I was not talking about someone new, but rather, someone who decides in the end that they do not accept the Buddha's teachings on karma and rebirth for whatever reason, and yet persist in identifying themselves as Buddhists and so on.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, June 19th, 2014 at 7:24 AM
Title: Re: Contra Buddhist Modernism
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Sorry, but the four brahmaviharas are not a liberative path — that is why the Buddha called them, as well as the practice of the ten virtues, "the vehicle of humans and devas" since they only lead to higher rebirth and not out of samsara.

Mkoll said:
By themselves, you are correct, they are not sufficient for liberation. But, along with the rest of the Eightfold Path, loving-kindness can be used as a basis, a meditation object if you will, for the attainment of non-returner in the Theravada tradition. Please see the http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/snp/snp.1.08.than.html for the evidence of this.

Malcolm wrote:
I do not see this as saying that metta leads to the path of a non-returner, but rather, it is contrasting a mundane path with a transmundane path.

Buddha does this frequently.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, June 19th, 2014 at 5:30 AM
Title: Re: Contra Buddhist Modernism
Content:
Sherab Dorje said:
The point being that there are tangible fruits, here and now, from Buddhist practices, even if one does not subscribe to a right view (ie if one is an essentialist or a nihilist).  MBT is a perfect example of the advantages of Buddhist practices, even without a Buddhist view.

Malcolm wrote:
The loving kindness and compassion are not buddhist practices per se. Neither is moral discipline. This is saying nothing more than if you are a nice, ethical person, your life will better. Laudatory, but not Buddhist per se.

Anders said:
So what? That Buddhism shares these factors of goodness with other religions doesn't make them any less Buddhist or any less worthwhile. They are what the Buddha taught - That makes them straight up 'Buddhism per se'.

Malcolm wrote:
Sorry, but the four brahmaviharas are not a liberative path — that is why the Buddha called them, as well as the practice of the ten virtues, "the vehicle of humans and devas" since they only lead to higher rebirth and not out of samsara.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, June 19th, 2014 at 5:28 AM
Title: Re: Contra Buddhist Modernism
Content:


Andrew108 said:
Lets repeat again what buddhism is about.  It is about identifying craving and clinging and then having that craving and clinging dry up...

Malcolm wrote:
This might prevent the arising of future suffering in a future time, but will not put an end to suffering in this here and now.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, June 19th, 2014 at 5:25 AM
Title: Re: Contra Buddhist Modernism
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Buddhism does not teach a way not to suffer in this life. Where did you ever read this? Buddhism teaches us that we are suffering, why, that there can be an end, and how to arrive at that end. But there is no guarantee in Buddhism that if you practice Dharma you will "suffer less in this life" -- especially considering the three kinds of suffering.

Sherab Dorje said:
There is if you reach enlightenment in this lifetime, that's what the whole Vajrayana deal is about, ain't it?

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, of course if you become a buddha or an arhat in this life, you will cease suffer. Apart from that, no, you will not cease to suffer. Instread

When I say that "Buddhism does not teach a way not to suffer in this life" what I mean is that Buddhism does not provide any means of eradicating suffering apart from full buddhahood. Certainly even bodhisattvas on the paths and stages still experience suffering since, they possess the twin obscurations on the lower bhumis. Granted, Bodhisattvas on the pure stages do not experience suffering, but then they have conquered death.

So, exactly in what way does Buddhadharma teach a way not to suffer in this life short of attaining some āryan realization?

I mean, of course, we all understand that suppression of afflictions through śīla and samadhi will prevent us from engaging in actions that will result in suffering, but what about the suffering we are presently experiencing?

I am all ears if anyone has any real suggestions.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, June 19th, 2014 at 1:29 AM
Title: Re: Poll on Faith in Sutras
Content:
pensum said:
I did vote no Will. And as i just mentioned in my previous comment, you wrote "by Buddha" which by convention refers specifically to Shakyamuni, not to other buddhas.

Malcolm wrote:
But in fact they are Śakyamuni Buddha's teaching. Why? Because those teachings appear through Śakyamuni Buddha's permission and blessing, just as for example, in the Prajñāpāramitahridaya, when Ārya Avalokiteśvara explains things to Śariputra.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, June 19th, 2014 at 1:25 AM
Title: Re: Contra Buddhist Modernism
Content:


Anders said:
"I suffer [in this life]. Buddhism teaches a way to not suffer [in this life].  It also seems to be the best path for this. Therefore I practise Buddhism." Not hard at all. Nor even untrue.


Malcolm wrote:
Buddhism does not teach a way not to suffer in this life. Where did you ever read this? Buddhism teaches us that we are suffering, why, that there can be an end, and how to arrive at that end. But there is no guarantee in Buddhism that if you practice Dharma you will "suffer less in this life" -- especially considering the three kinds of suffering.

Whatever suffering you experience is the ripening of past actions not even the buddha's can prevent. The goal of Buddhist practice is to awaken and end the cycle of birth in samsara.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, June 19th, 2014 at 1:21 AM
Title: Re: Contra Buddhist Modernism
Content:
Sherab Dorje said:
The point being that there are tangible fruits, here and now, from Buddhist practices, even if one does not subscribe to a right view (ie if one is an essentialist or a nihilist).  MBT is a perfect example of the advantages of Buddhist practices, even without a Buddhist view.

Malcolm wrote:
The loving kindness and compassion are not buddhist practices per se. Neither is moral discipline. This is saying nothing more than if you are a nice, ethical person, your life will better. Laudatory, but not Buddhist per se.

My objection is that people are constantly putting this forward as evidence of tangible fruits of Buddhist practice when they are not even Buddhist practices at all per se, and do not, in any way whatsoever address the issue of suffering.

I don't know what "MBT" is.


