﻿Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, December 19th, 2011 at 1:38 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchenpa by Accident?
Content:
Namdrol said:
Space and cessation are not caused

Center Channel said:
If you are positing something that is uncaused/nonconditioned permanent, as you do here, you really lose Madhyamaka view IMO


Malcolm wrote:
Space is uncaused, unconditioned.

You are really missing the point of Madhyamaka, CC. BUt I have to go out for the day and cannot respond in more detail.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, December 19th, 2011 at 1:36 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchenpa by Accident?
Content:
Namdrol said:
Space and cessation are not caused


Center Channel said:
Of course cessation is caused.


Malcolm wrote:
Nope. Cessation is an absence of causes, by definition.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, December 19th, 2011 at 12:46 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchenpa by Accident?
Content:
Namdrol said:
Emptiness isn't a thing, it is freedom from all extremes, hence it cannot be caused, destroyed, etc.

Center Channel said:
Sure I agree with all that.

But do you agree with this statement from Madhayamaka POV? :

"There is nothing that is not caused."

Malcolm wrote:
Space and cessation are not caused, so, no, the statement is not completely correct from a Madhyamaka POV.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, December 19th, 2011 at 12:37 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchenpa by Accident?
Content:
Namdrol said:
Emptiness is not caused.

N


Center Channel said:
There is nothing that is not caused.

Malcolm wrote:
Emptiness isn't a thing, it is freedom from all extremes, hence it cannot be caused, destroyed, etc.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, December 19th, 2011 at 12:32 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchenpa by Accident?
Content:
Dechen Norbu said:
CC,
That's a very awkward statement.  Emptiness being caused... really man, what are you thinking?

Center Channel said:
In Madhyamaka, EVERYTHING is caused......without exception.


Malcolm wrote:
Hi CC:

Emptiness is not caused.

Emptiness and DO are synonyms because whatever arises from a cause is empty by definition.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, December 19th, 2011 at 12:05 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchenpa by Accident?
Content:


heart said:
Exactly, and which Buddhist believe that Buddhahood results from a cause?  Certainly no Vajrayana Buddhists.

/magnus

Namdrol said:
Actually most Vajrayāna Buddhists. Again, you are so conditioned by Dzogchen you cannot even imagine that there is a view different than yours. Mahāyoga and Anuyoga are both result vehicles.

N

heart said:
Well, thanks, but I still can't see Buddha teaching that anatta is produced, nor is emptiness and certainly not the buddhanature (whatever name you want to give it). The Buddhas teaching is always pointing to something that already is there.

/magnus

Malcolm wrote:
No, for example, omniscience. This is a quality of Buddhahood that Kamashila, (and numerous other masters) assert arises from a cause. The result, i.e. the two kāyas, is considered to arise from gathering the accumulations of the merit and wisdom. That is what is meant by saying the "the vehicle of the cause". The vehicle of the result is so called, because one takes the result as path in order to rapidly gather the two accumulations.



N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, December 18th, 2011 at 10:34 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchenpa by Accident?
Content:
asunthatneversets said:
The starting and ending point is the same space of awareness.

Namdrol said:
Nope. There is a huge difference between mind (citta) and vidyā.

N

asunthatneversets said:
I'd replace 'huge' with 'monumental'.

Malcolm wrote:
Academic, if you have not distinguished the two.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, December 18th, 2011 at 10:08 AM
Title: Re: Parting from the Four Attachments in Tibetan?
Content:
kirtu said:
Are Tibetan cases then to be induced solely from examples?

Malcolm wrote:
Yes.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, December 18th, 2011 at 10:06 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchenpa by Accident?
Content:
asunthatneversets said:
The starting and ending point is the same space of awareness.

Malcolm wrote:
Nope. There is a huge difference between mind (citta) and vidyā.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, December 18th, 2011 at 10:03 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchenpa by Accident?
Content:
asunthatneversets said:
Understand that Dzogchen is a teaching which is meant to reveal your primordially pure enlightened state which has been absolutely perfect since beginningless time.

Malcolm wrote:
You really don't understand Dzogchen yet. But that's ok. Eventually you will. In the meantime, make sure that you pay attention to karma.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, December 18th, 2011 at 9:57 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchenpa by Accident?
Content:


heart said:
Exactly, and which Buddhist believe that Buddhahood results from a cause?  Certainly no Vajrayana Buddhists.

/magnus

Malcolm wrote:
Actually most Vajrayāna Buddhists. Again, you are so conditioned by Dzogchen you cannot even imagine that there is a view different than yours. Mahāyoga and Anuyoga are both result vehicles.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, December 18th, 2011 at 1:51 AM
Title: Re: Guardians of the Teaching
Content:
gregkavarnos said:
PS Is there anywhere we can find a translation of the gtor lung che chung gi rgyud (Major and Minor Torma Tantra)?  Thank you!


Malcolm wrote:
No, I do not think so.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, December 18th, 2011 at 1:32 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchenpa by Accident?
Content:


heart said:
Well, that could well be, but that is not exactly what is written in that quote.

/magnus

Malcolm wrote:
It means that Dzogchen should not be taught to people who are convinced that Buddhahood results from a cause.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, December 18th, 2011 at 12:58 AM
Title: Re: Guardians of the Teaching
Content:


alpha said:
And i think that the practice of the guardians if done in a state of knowledge is the best offering one can make while the relative offerings are not that important  and not really necessary .

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, that is correct.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, December 18th, 2011 at 12:46 AM
Title: Re: ཞི་གནས་ = shiney ?
Content:
kirtu said:
ཞི་གནས ་ = shiney ?

But it should be shi-na shouldn't it?  shiney should be ཞི་གནེས unless the sa actually modifies the na.

Thanks!

Hmm - the Wylie is indeed zhi-gnas.  So the sa isn't really silent but modifies the na?  Are there rules for that?

Kirt


Malcolm wrote:
Yes, a subsequent ས generally modifies the "a" to "e", for example, འདས་, གནས་,པས,བས,ལས, etc.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, December 18th, 2011 at 12:41 AM
Title: Re: Guardians of the Teaching
Content:
Center Channel said:
From a risk benefit scenario, how much better is working with the guardians than over SOV?

(Guardians can kick your butt as stated by several others. )

Noone needs to answer, I'm just thinking outloud...


Malcolm wrote:
SOV is essential, guardian practice is merely important.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, December 18th, 2011 at 12:40 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:


Lhug-Pa said:
Does anyone remember if he gave Lungs for Avalokitesvara Korwa Tongtrug and/or Narag Tongtrug at that retreat?

Malcolm wrote:
Both.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, December 18th, 2011 at 12:28 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchenpa by Accident?
Content:


heart said:
The reference in Kunjed Gyalpo to the "vehicles based on cause and effect" is actually the "vehicle of gods and humans" in the ancient five path scheme. The Vehicle of Gods and Humans is where one practices good actions and abandons bad ones. So why don't the Kunjed Gyalpo that the practitioners of this path should be taught Dzogchen? Because then they will abandon doing good actions and "for a long time they would lose any possibility of meeting me".

/magnus

Malcolm wrote:
No, it refers to the eight yanas. Three causal vehicles; and five resultant vehicles.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, December 18th, 2011 at 12:22 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
He did. He gave lung for all protectors including long invocations for all. As for your third question, all mantras require individual transmission, but you have received those.

Lhug-Pa said:
Does anyone know if Rinpoche gave the Narag Tongtrug transmission during this retreat?

Or if he gave any of the Lungs for the main Protectors?

(With the Protectors, isn't having received Dzogchen Transmission period, enough to work with the Protectors; considering that they're part of the Tun?)

If no one knows, then I'll try to listen to the replay soon and report back.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, December 18th, 2011 at 12:20 AM
Title: Re: Guardians of the Teaching
Content:


alpha said:
Why is it that in DC when doing TUN none of this is necessary?
Are the guardians still happy with us not offering anything whatsoever ?

Malcolm wrote:
Do you really think Guardians think in such dualistic terms?

When you do medium thun for example, it is sufficient to visualize offerings. If you want to set them up, that is ok too. Whatever you have space and time for.

In general, there are only two things that you need for offerings (apart from the Ganapuja), according to my understanding of ChNN's intent: light and incense, and even these are not absolutely required.

If you like setting out water offerings, sense offering, medicine and blood, tormas and so on -- go for it -- but it is not absolutely necessary. After all, the universe is a torma according to the torma tantra.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, December 18th, 2011 at 12:06 AM
Title: Re: Guardians of the Teaching
Content:
Namdrol said:
Equating illegal pornography with images of protectors just shows how much you like to exaggerate.

gregkavarnos said:
I did not equate illegal pornography with images of protectors, the point I was trying to make was that just because something is freely available does not make it's availability legitimate.  I understand what you are saying, it does not mean that I agree with it, but could you please refrain from straw men and ad homs?  Thank you.

Malcolm wrote:
Your example was a red herring.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, December 18th, 2011 at 12:01 AM
Title: Re: Ojas (general discussion)
Content:


Lhug-Pa said:
And from what I've learned Semen/Suhkra can indeed be transmuted into Ojas; however that if semen sits untransmuted in the body for too long, it dies (i.e. no longer capable of creating life externally or internally), and would therefore become a waste product in this latter case.

Nevertheless, there is not necessarily any need to ejaculate it if it happens to become a waste product, because it will come out on its own with our urine during defecation, or even during urination alone. At the very least, Sukrha can also be absorbed back into and dissolved in the bloodstream.

Malcolm wrote:
You still fail to understand the different between a rāsa and a kita.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, December 17th, 2011 at 2:16 AM
Title: Re: Guardians of the Teaching
Content:
Namdrol said:
...Greg, if your Lama thinks so, that is his opinion but has no relevance to me.

gregkavarnos said:
This is fair enough and I don't expect what my lama says to be of relevance to you but it does not answer my question:  Does the fact that it is present legitimate its presence?  Back in the "good ol' days" protector and yidam practices were personal and secret, you don't believe that here was a valid reason for this?  Does this reason no longer have a meaning in the "information age"?  Or maybe it is even MORE important to keep ones personal practices personal?


Malcolm wrote:
The "secrecy" of practices is a much vaunted and little kept thing. There are Mahakala statues in full public view all over Katmandhu and have been for centuries.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, December 17th, 2011 at 2:14 AM
Title: Re: Guardians of the Teaching
Content:
gregkavarnos said:
Or to be more precise:  Does this somehow justify its existence out there in cyberland?  Does the fact that it is present legitimate its presence?

Malcolm wrote:
It is simply there, it does not need justification.

You can cruise any Dzogchen Community website and find images of the protectors.

For example, the Merigar temple has all images of protectors in public view. The Merigar temples is a tourist destination.

There are many more examples.

Equating illegal pornography with images of protectors just shows how much you like to exaggerate.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, December 17th, 2011 at 2:07 AM
Title: Re: Guardians of the Teaching
Content:
gregkavarnos said:
The links which you posted in no way invalidate my point.  Just because information on the protectors is available does not mean that it should be available nor does it mean that we should make it available.


Namdrol said:
The internet routes around censorship.

kirtu said:
Tell that to Baidu users.

Anyway openness does not negate responsibility.  I have no idea why Rigpawiki made entries of protectors although the three mentioned are enlightened protectors aren't they?  Part of an argument for could be that most people will not encounter this information anyway.  Nonetheless circumspection and discernment is needed.

Kirt


Malcolm wrote:
discussing the protectors and their role is not a samaya breakage. It is silly to presume so. Greg, if your Lama thinks so, that is his opinion but has no relevance to me.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, December 17th, 2011 at 1:37 AM
Title: Re: Parting from the Four Attachments in Tibetan?
Content:
tantular said:
I wouldn't worry too much about English case names---they bear no relation to how Tibetans understand their own language. Even the Tibetan case names, mechanically borrowed from Sanskrit, don't explain how particles are actually used.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, December 17th, 2011 at 1:22 AM
Title: Re: Guardians of the Teaching
Content:
gregkavarnos said:
The links which you posted in no way invalidate my point.  Just because information on the protectors is available does not mean that it should be available nor does it mean that we should make it available.


Malcolm wrote:
The internet routes around censorship.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, December 17th, 2011 at 12:33 AM
Title: Re: Guardians of the Teaching
Content:
Namdrol said:
It is so silly to make this argument considering that every name and picture of  virtually every major protector has been spread far and wide on the internet.

gregkavarnos said:
Yes I agree, unfortunately this is very true, but we can be part of the problem or part of the solution.

Malcolm wrote:
Take it up with Rigpa Wiki:
http://www.rigpawiki.org/index.php?title=Ekajati " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.rigpawiki.org/index.php?title=Dza_Rahula " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.rigpawiki.org/index.php?title=Dorje_Lekpa " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, December 17th, 2011 at 12:21 AM
Title: Re: Understanding emptiness
Content:
conebeckham said:
So, Emptiness is not the sole most important topic, or apex, or summit, of "sutra" doctrine.


Namdrol said:
Sure it is.

N

conebeckham said:
Okay..what, then, "realizes" emptiness?

Malcolm wrote:
There is no realizer of emptiness; when emptiness is seen, there is no seer, no object, and no seeing.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, December 17th, 2011 at 12:13 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchenpa by Accident?
Content:


Adamantine said:
This is from the "SUPREME SOURCE" translation from ChNN and A. Clemente Pg 140 "Do not make my teaching known to those who follow the vehicles based on cause and effect! If you do, by affirming the law of cause and effect of positive and negative deeds, they would cover my true condition with conjectures, and for a long time they would lose any possibility of meeting me."

Malcolm wrote:
I didn't say that liberation was a result of cause and effect. It isn't. Liberation is a result of knowledge, knowing what your actual state is and integrating that knowledge. In the meantime, while you are integrating that knowledge, it is important to recognize and observe how you are living in a dualistic condition and behaving in a manner which takes that into account, rather than slipping into the ravine of denying afflictive cause and effect which is our present condition.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, December 17th, 2011 at 12:09 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchenpa by Accident?
Content:


asunthatneversets said:
Accumulating merit (which is an adopted notion in and of itself) to maintain a higher rebirth (another adopted notion) in samsara doesn't free one from samsara. It's the golden cage.... but still a cage. Dzogchen is saying the cage is illusory. So why not investigate why one takes the cage to be real? Instead of polishing the cage.


Malcolm wrote:
We know why we take the cage to real, so this is an empty question.

But hey, if you don't want to accumulate merit, and therefore, without doubt take birth in a lower realm, then please go ahead.


asunthatneversets said:
I mean in truth, these ideas like merit and rebirth are just ideas. They aren't tangible aspects of reality, one chooses to believe or disbelieve them based on opinion. And to boot they aren't even an integral part of dzogchen.... it stands with or without them.

Malcolm wrote:
You are quite wrong about this. This is why I said you are veering towards a "Dzogchen" nihilism. Merit and rebirth are both integral to Dzogchen. This is, for example, why there are so many purification practices aimed at removing causes for taking rebirth in the six realms and so on. This is why there is a detailed account of why you will achieve liberation in nirmanakāya buddhafields if you do not manage to achieve liberation in this life or in the bardo.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, December 16th, 2011 at 12:33 PM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:
Pero said:
I try to do Narag Tongtrug three times a month.

Adamantine said:
Hmmmmnnnn... I don't remember receiving a transmission of that from ChNN before, is it not one he normally gives at the end of retreats?


Malcolm wrote:
He used to give it more -- now only rarely.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, December 16th, 2011 at 12:25 PM
Title: Re: Understanding emptiness
Content:
conebeckham said:
So, Emptiness is not the sole most important topic, or apex, or summit, of "sutra" doctrine.


Malcolm wrote:
Sure it is.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, December 16th, 2011 at 11:20 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchenpa by Accident?
Content:


asunthatneversets said:
Very true and that isn't what i'm suggesting at all...

Malcolm wrote:
The potion you are missing is that as long as you are under the influence of afflictions, you will engage in actions. Actions will result in suffering. The purpose of accumulating merit (from a Dzogchen perspective) is to maintain higher rebirth in samsara and create favorable conditions for meeting the teachings, and of course, to dedicate it to others.

What you are veering towards is a sort of "Dzogchen" nihilism that will just ruin your path.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, December 16th, 2011 at 9:20 AM
Title: Re: Guardians of the Teaching
Content:
Namdrol said:
The idea that saying the name "rahula" breaks samaya is quite ridiculous.

gregkavarnos said:
You go with what your lama tells you, I'll go with what mine tells me.
If you believe it is quite okay and that it is valuable to plaster your protectors names all over a public board then go for it!  I am not judging, I am merely recanting what I have been instructed.


Malcolm wrote:
It is so silly to make this argument considering that every name and picture of  virtually every major protector has been spread far and wide on the internet.

Everyone knows knows that the ma-za-dam sum are the main protectors of Dzogchen. This is not a big secret.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, December 16th, 2011 at 9:13 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchenpa by Accident?
Content:


asunthatneversets said:
Right, so what i'm saying is that for those who fail to recognize their nature, they enter into actions and give credence to these notions such as karma, merit and rebirth which only serve to reify the seeming duality... thus never escaping from samsara.

Malcolm wrote:
You can not think yourself out of ignorance. You can not declare, "I am perfect" and then expect to awaken.

What you have to understand is the basis. The reason the basis is called "the basis" is because it has not been realized.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, December 16th, 2011 at 8:52 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:
Pema Rigdzin said:
way, do any of you other ChNN students do Vajrasattva daily too?


Malcolm wrote:
No.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, December 14th, 2011 at 7:38 PM
Title: Re: Guardians of the Teaching
Content:
gregkavarnos said:
Calling on protectors (stating their name) without appeasing breaks samaya.  Frivolous talk about protectors and their practices breaks samaya.


Malcolm wrote:
As I said, this all depends on the opinions of this or that Lama.

No one here is discussing the guardians frivolously.

The idea that saying the name "rahula" breaks samaya is quite ridiculous.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, December 14th, 2011 at 7:36 PM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:
alpha said:
I need to know this.

Having received all the usual lungs Rinpoche gives at the end of webcasts what would be the DAILY commitments i have to keep?
Do i have any samaya that i have to be aware of?
If i have broken any samaya can it be repaired with OM BENZA SATO SAMAYA.MANUPALAYA........given that i have reeived the DORJE SEMPA empowerment,lung and explanation............?


Malcolm wrote:
Guru Yoga is the only commitment. And that is super easy to maintain.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, December 14th, 2011 at 7:34 PM
Title: Re: Dzogchenpa by Accident?
Content:


asunthatneversets said:
Seems to only obscure and delay any assimilation in my eyes. I've never understood (aside from helping with ascending conduct) the presence of these notions in dzogchen. Your nature is primordially pure and perfect from beginningless time, which is what dzogchen points towards.


Malcolm wrote:
But you did not recognize your nature, and so, under the influence of ignorance, you fall into duality and enter into actions, thus never escaping from samsara.

Another way of putting it that I noticed in a Dzogchen text the other day "Vidyā is seeing the substance of the mind. Avidyā is not seeing the substance of the mind". We mostly continue in a state of avidyā.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, December 14th, 2011 at 9:39 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchenpa by Accident?
Content:


Namdrol said:
So, mentioning Dzogchen and speaking about it as often as possible is a compassionate act because it creates the seed?

mint said:
Yes, if you think someone is interested. Otherwise, better not to try to condition them.

N

Malcolm wrote:
But, one should speak as much as one's knowledge allows, yes?  Otherwise the wrong impression might be given thus ruining karmic opportunities for both parties.[/quote]


If you think someone is genuinely interested, suggest a book for them to read. If they buy, they are actually interested, if not, they were just being polite.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, December 14th, 2011 at 7:17 AM
Title: Re: Guardians of the Teaching
Content:
gregkavarnos said:
This thread is like the samaya breaking party of the year!


Malcolm wrote:
Talking about protectors breaks samaya?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, December 14th, 2011 at 4:08 AM
Title: Re: Guardians of the Teaching
Content:
asunthatneversets said:
They are meant for aid, inspiration, strength, courage and on some levels may not be anything other than archetypal in nature and implements to fortify our own intention and certainty we project into our practice and path.

Malcolm wrote:
They are not archtypes. Archtypes don't kick ass.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, December 13th, 2011 at 10:40 PM
Title: Re: Guardians of the Teaching
Content:
mint said:
So, there's no guardians who can aid the beginning student of Dzogchen? or, it's useless? or, it's too harmful?


Malcolm wrote:
Guardians exist to protect the teachings and assist practitioners.

As long as you have the lung for the practices, you can do them.

There are many different traditions around how to relate to guardians, most of the them based on the opinions of this or that lama. This is why there is no standard rule about it. So -- in the Dzogchen Community, if you do the short thun, then you always do guardian practice.

If you are following the ChNN's teachings, pay no attention to what those are not students of the ChNN say about guardians.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, December 13th, 2011 at 9:41 PM
Title: Re: Ojas, Shukra & Tummo
Content:
dakini_boi said:
Oh, I thought it was the ojas that was important.  Do shukra and ojas have different roles in tummo, or do they act together as the basis for bliss?

Also, what is the relationship between bindu and ojas?


Namdrol said:
In tummo, what is important is bliss.

There are different kinds of bindu. The most basic bindu is the bindu of pranavayu in the heart. The so called "bodhicitta" that circulates in the body is actually ojas.

Sukra acts as the basis for bliss.

rai said:
is there a connection between sukra and being joyful or depressed for normal people (not a yogis)? thank you

Malcolm wrote:
Only if they are are losing ojas. The main thing that depletes ojas however, is mental worry and stress.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, December 13th, 2011 at 10:56 AM
Title: Re: Rinchen Terdzod & Dudjom Tersar
Content:
Totoro said:
Well it's important for me to know since my point is to find out whether someone who has received Rinchen Terdzod but not Dudjom Tersar (explicitly) can practise or transmit Dudjom Tersar.   A Lama said he is not sure but maybe when DKR or Dudjom Rinpoche might have included it when they 'edited' Rinchen Terdzod? (don't mean to add more rumor and confusion, but the Lama himself was not sure so take this with a pinch of salt) So hope someone else can have more insight?


Malcolm wrote:
Dudjom Tersar is not in Rinchen Terzo. A person who has not received Dudjom Tersar cannot practice or transmit it.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, December 13th, 2011 at 5:33 AM
Title: Re: This is your brain on Madhyamaka....
Content:
Namdrol said:
I don't have the temperment for the rigors of academic writing.

Mr. G said:
What do you mean Namdrol?


Malcolm wrote:
It requires discipline.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, December 13th, 2011 at 5:32 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchenpa by Accident?
Content:
Namdrol said:
This is why I put འ༔ ཨ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔ ཧ༔ in my signature. These are the representation of the six munis in the six lokas in the form of syllables. The syllables enter the eye of the person who sees them and this creates the connection for them to be liberated.

mint said:
So, mentioning Dzogchen and speaking about it as often as possible is a compassionate act because it creates the seed?

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, if you think someone is interested. Otherwise, better not to try to condition them.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, December 12th, 2011 at 11:19 PM
Title: Re: This is your brain on Madhyamaka....
Content:
gad rgyangs said:
Namdrol is as good as a academically-trained scholar except he doesn't like to give useable references unless you twist his arm.

Malcolm wrote:
No, definitley not. I am a traditionally trained acarya. I don't have the temperment for the rigors of academic writing.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, December 12th, 2011 at 11:11 PM
Title: Re: Dzogchenpa by Accident?
Content:


wisdom said:
The difference is that all those social interactions don't produce anything in those individuals.


Malcolm wrote:
Sure it does. It creates a trace.

This is why I put འ༔ ཨ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔ ཧ༔ in my signature. These are the representation of the six munis in the six lokas in the form of syllables. The syllables enter the eye of the person who sees them and this creates the connection for them to be liberated.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, December 12th, 2011 at 10:38 PM
Title: Re: Dzogchenpa by Accident?
Content:


mint said:
What makes this so incredible is that, as a social being, every person I mention Dzogchen to, must have great merit, and every person they mention Dzogchen to must also have great merit, etc..  It grows exponentially until everyone has heard about Dzogchen.  Not a bad thing, but it just calls the issue of merit into question, I think.


Malcolm wrote:
And even more so those who practice Dzogchen...


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, December 11th, 2011 at 1:20 AM
Title: Re: Etymology of "Tantra"
Content:
dakini_boi said:
How did the word tantra come to be translated in Tibetan as gyud (continuity)?  I mean, what is the etymological connection between the two words?


Namdrol said:
Because in the Guhyasamaja tantra the word tantra (rgyud) is defined as a continuum (rgyun).

N

dakini_boi said:
Is there a similar etymology for the Sanskrit word tantra?  (i.e. does Tantra imply continuum in Sanskrit?)  Do we have access to the Sanskrit version of the Guhyasamaja Tantra?

Malcolm wrote:
Yes and yes.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, December 10th, 2011 at 10:59 AM
Title: Re: End of the Kali-Yuga and the Mayan-Tibetan Connection
Content:


Lhug-Pa said:
Such as I asked if there's even one example of where the Dalai Lama (who is not limited in his views to Gelug or Sarma) said that it's okay to orgasm...

Malcolm wrote:
HHDL is not an authority for all Tibetan Buddhists and schools. His POV is characteristically Gelug. It is not shared by Sakya, etc.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, December 10th, 2011 at 10:53 AM
Title: Re: Conceptuality in Buddhism
Content:
tobes said:
My posts have been moved a number of times from the Madhyamika vs Svatantrika thread. Not my idea, and seemingly not a very good idea.

They are explicitly about the relation between emptiness and the conventions of language - and it was a while ago now, but there was fruitful dialogue on the matter.

This topic cannot in any way be "a kind of imponderable" unless you want to also classify the preoccupations of just about every Mahayana tradition as similarly futile and irrelevant to liberation.


catmoon said:
Moved posts? I did all that thinking for nothing? Oh, that's just depressing that is. I guess you'll just have to disregard the lot. Nothing else for it.

Maybe I can salvage something... when you use the phrase "This topic" in the above quoteback, were you referring to my "this topic" or yours? Emptiness is not an imponderable, but I think there is credible argument that the inner workings of a Buddha's mind often are. It could even be fitted into one of the classic 14/10/8 imponderables. (Number varies with sources used).

tobes said:
I'm referring to the topic my posts have been engaged with.

The references to a buddha's mind are merely a synonym for shunyata /ultimate reality. i.e. in relation to the two truths, the perspective of paramatha satya.

I don't think it's credible to argue that this is anything like an imponderable topic.



Malcolm wrote:
As Candrakirti makes extremely clear, the two truths are for ordinary persons and not buddhas.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, December 10th, 2011 at 6:53 AM
Title: Re: End of the Kali-Yuga and the Mayan-Tibetan Connection
Content:


Namdrol said:
That was not what he "revealed" -- what he discovered was its gematria value (useless number mysticism though it is)


N

wisdom said:
Gematria is useful if you study Kabbalah, its not very useful in the way Crowley used it. Its used as a mnemonic tool for making associations between ideas in a quick manner or discovering associations that you otherwise would not have discovered. Its also used as a meditation tool by Abulafia. Some Kabbalists also claim that its used to conceal information, that only someone who has received the oral tradition of Kabbalah will understand fully.

Malcolm wrote:
As I said, useless number mysticism.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, December 10th, 2011 at 5:49 AM
Title: Re: End of the Kali-Yuga and the Mayan-Tibetan Connection
Content:



Namdrol said:
Crowley was correct: the Hindu Oṃ is formed out of four components: a u m and the bindu which is pronounced ṅg.

N

wisdom said:
Interesting! Crowley displays it as his own revelation, something he realizes in meditation. And perhaps he did, at that.

Malcolm wrote:
That was not what he "revealed" -- what he discovered was its gematria value (useless number mysticism though it is)


N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, December 10th, 2011 at 5:33 AM
Title: Re: End of the Kali-Yuga and the Mayan-Tibetan Connection
Content:


alwayson said:
Seriously what is this:
http://gnostic-community.org/distribution/topic?f=8&t=1801 " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

wisdom said:
This is the same kind of crap Crowley pulled when he said AUM is really AUMNG.


Malcolm wrote:
Crowley was correct: the Hindu Oṃ is formed out of four components: a u m and the bindu which is pronounced ṅg.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, December 10th, 2011 at 1:30 AM
Title: Re: Buddhist Jargon
Content:
Huseng said:
Mantras in Tibetan are rendered into Tibetan pronunciation.

Malcolm wrote:
No, Tibetans may pronounce mantras however they do, but they accurately represent the long and short vowels, consonants, the the ṭ series and so on correctly.

My take on this issue (as a professional translator) is that for general translations, there should be a short list of about 20-30 terms that are back translated into Sanskrit -- dharmadhātu, dharmakāya, vajra, prajñapāramita, dharmatā, etc. Then, depending on the specific literature, there may be more technical terms rendered in Sanskrit or not depending on circumstances.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, December 10th, 2011 at 1:15 AM
Title: Re: Thinley Norbu's terms for ignorance
Content:
dakini_boi said:
Are innate ignorance and imputing ignorance also sometimes translated as "cognitive obscurations" and "obscuration of afflicted emotions"?

Malcolm wrote:
Never.

However, there are two kinds of avidyā: one is non-afflictive and is a knowledge obscuration; the other is afflictive.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, December 10th, 2011 at 1:13 AM
Title: Re: Etymology of "Tantra"
Content:
dakini_boi said:
How did the word tantra come to be translated in Tibetan as gyud (continuity)?  I mean, what is the etymological connection between the two words?


Malcolm wrote:
Because in the Guhyasamaja tantra the word tantra (rgyud) is defined as a continuum (rgyun).

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, December 10th, 2011 at 1:09 AM
Title: Re: Tibetan Myth of Chan
Content:
MalaBeads said:
Isn't it possible that sudden enlightenment is only possible because of lhun grub?

Malcolm wrote:
Dzogchen is not a sudden awakening path. It has no grades, either sudden or gradual since it is the result that is free from a cause.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, December 9th, 2011 at 10:30 PM
Title: Re: Tibetan Myth of Chan
Content:
Astus said:
The buddha qualities in Zen is put under the term of function that is the perfect functioning of the six sense spheres in general. There are a few detailed discussions of these functions but it is not really important as one can use them spontaneously once the nature is realised, and such functioning is exemplified in many Zen stories.


Malcolm wrote:
But this is standard sutra (chinese style). Lhun grub is not about buddha qualities per se.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, December 9th, 2011 at 7:16 AM
Title: Re: Ojas, Shukra & Tummo
Content:
dakini_boi said:
Oh, I thought it was the ojas that was important.  Do shukra and ojas have different roles in tummo, or do they act together as the basis for bliss?

Also, what is the relationship between bindu and ojas?


Namdrol said:
In tummo, what is important is bliss.

There are different kinds of bindu. The most basic bindu is the bindu of pranavayu in the heart. The so called "bodhicitta" that circulates in the body is actually ojas.

Sukra acts as the basis for bliss.

Inge said:
Does it also act as the basis for the bliss that arises in the jhanas?

Malcolm wrote:
No.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, December 9th, 2011 at 6:29 AM
Title: Re: End times propaganda in Buddhism?
Content:


Huseng said:
is problematic because Madhyamaka teaches the cessation of all views via negation, not assertion.

Malcolm wrote:
This passage does not assert a view it provides a definition.


Huseng said:
How are conditioned entities able to depend on that which is unconditioned for their existence?

Malcolm wrote:
They don't, nor did I claim they were.

Huseng said:
My contention is that you assert it is unconditioned yet still forms an essential basis for which conditioned entities arise.

Malcolm wrote:
According to Candrakirti, emptiness can be accepted as a basis for the arising of phenomena.

BTW, the characteristic of space is not the absence of form since space pervades everything.



Huseng said:
Suchness is free of characteristics like this -- it is not conditioned, it is not unconditioned. It is beyond all characteristics.

Malcolm wrote:
As I pointed out already, suchness can be defined as unconditioned.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, December 9th, 2011 at 6:11 AM
Title: Re: Ojas, Shukra & Tummo
Content:
dakini_boi said:
Oh, I thought it was the ojas that was important.  Do shukra and ojas have different roles in tummo, or do they act together as the basis for bliss?

Also, what is the relationship between bindu and ojas?


Malcolm wrote:
In tummo, what is important is bliss.

There are different kinds of bindu. The most basic bindu is the bindu of pranavayu in the heart. The so called "bodhicitta" that circulates in the body is actually ojas.

Sukra acts as the basis for bliss.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, December 9th, 2011 at 5:40 AM
Title: Re: Ojas, Shukra & Tummo
Content:
dakini_boi said:
If shukra is a waste product, and ojas is generally not lost in the discharge of shukra - then what is the rationale behind not ejaculating when practicing tummo?


Malcolm wrote:
It acts as a basis for the bliss of tummy.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, December 7th, 2011 at 9:52 AM
Title: Re: Tibetan Myth of Chan
Content:
Astus said:
At the same time, it seems that either you think that Dzogchen can be discussed only by those who have gone through rigorous training of some sort...

Malcolm wrote:
Yes. Dzogchen is not Buddhism as usual.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, December 7th, 2011 at 4:03 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:
alwayson said:
The only essential feature is holding the breath.


Malcolm wrote:
Well, how is also essential, If you hold your breath the wrong way, you can give yourself many serious illnesses.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, December 7th, 2011 at 4:02 AM
Title: Re: Ojas (general discussion)
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
deleted


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, December 7th, 2011 at 1:21 AM
Title: Re: End times propaganda in Buddhism?
Content:
catmoon said:
The suchness of things is conditional on the existence of things, is it not?

Malcolm wrote:
No -- since things are not established, their suchness is not established either. That is the suchness of things.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, December 7th, 2011 at 1:19 AM
Title: Re: Ojas (general discussion)
Content:
Lhug-Pa said:
Samael Aun Weor wrote about the black Tantra practice of mixing masculine Sukra with feminine Raja right here:

http://sacred-sex.org/scriptures/western/64-samael-aun-weor-forms-of-tantra.html " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


alwayson said:
This Samael Aun Weor a@#hole has the most distorted and retarted understanding of Indian concepts I have seen in a while.

Malcolm wrote:
Indeed, what is presented there is nothing but a mishmash from his distorted confusion.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, December 7th, 2011 at 1:09 AM
Title: Re: Ojas (general discussion)
Content:


Lhug-Pa said:
Although I highly doubt that Buddhist Root Tantras recommend such a thing.


Namdrol said:
They do, actually. Furthermore, you need to read carefully the SOV book and see what ChNN has to say about this. You will discover that what I have said is in fact the case, from a Dzogchen perspective.

N

Paul said:
Do you have a page reference for that? Thanks.


Malcolm wrote:
Pg. 61-62.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, December 7th, 2011 at 1:03 AM
Title: Re: Tibetan Myth of Chan
Content:
Namdrol said:
The main point behind lhundrup is practical, it is not theoretical or abstract. It has to do with how Dzogchen is practiced.

Astus said:
Then it'd good if you could give it a definition. As a start, I bring here one.
Spontaneous presence/accomplishment is an inherent aspect of buddha-mind, and means the aware side and the buddha qualities.
As such, the same teaching is found not only in Chan but in all East Asian schools following the buddha-mind teachings as found in the treatise "Awakening Mahayana Faith" and other works.

Malcolm wrote:
Hi astus:

I really suggest you learn Tibetan and learn Dzogchen teachings in a proper way. Otherwise, you are just spinning empty words.

n


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, December 7th, 2011 at 12:43 AM
Title: Re: Tibetan Myth of Chan
Content:
LastLegend said:
Dzogchen and Chan are two completely different systems of teachings. However, all the teachings that Dzogchen teaches, Chan also teaches.

Namdrol said:
No, since the basis is different, than path is different, and since the path is different, the result is different.

Jikan said:
Do both paths lead one to Buddhahood?

(even if on different time scales?)

Malcolm wrote:
Of course.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, December 6th, 2011 at 10:49 PM
Title: Re: Ojas (general discussion)
Content:


Lhug-Pa said:
Although I highly doubt that Buddhist Root Tantras recommend such a thing.


Malcolm wrote:
They do, actually. Furthermore, you need to read carefully the SOV book and see what ChNN has to say about this. You will discover that what I have said is in fact the case, from a Dzogchen perspective.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, December 6th, 2011 at 10:24 PM
Title: Re: Tibetan Myth of Chan
Content:
kalden yungdrung said:
Chan fails to understand cleaning or not cleaning the mirror so we have here 2 aspects or point of view. Even without cleaning the mirror, i never heard the practice or Tantra about the Bardo States in Zen, which are unique only to the Dzogchen Traditions.

Astus said:
This is a valid point here, as far as Chan is not concerned with specific practices related to the intermediate state, however, such is not unique to Dzogchen but found in other Vajrayana traditions too. Nevertheless, that is not relevant to seeing the nature of mind.


Malcolm wrote:
Teachings concerning that bardo in other Vajrayāna systems are quite limited, compared to Dzogchen.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, December 6th, 2011 at 10:23 PM
Title: Re: Tibetan Myth of Chan
Content:
LastLegend said:
Dzogchen and Chan are two completely different systems of teachings. However, all the teachings that Dzogchen teaches, Chan also teaches.

Malcolm wrote:
No, since the basis is different, than path is different, and since the path is different, the result is different.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, December 6th, 2011 at 7:52 AM
Title: Re: Does this render the Buddhism redundant?
Content:
gad rgyangs said:
ok, then, would the light coming out of whatever-channels-it-comes-out-of be included in the rupa skandha?


Namdrol said:
Light does not come out of any channels of the human body. And that "light" to which you are referring is not part of the rupa-skandha since it is a wisdom appearance.

N

gad rgyangs said:
does it have any abhidharmic classification? and why are they called 'od rtsa then?

Malcolm wrote:
Of course not, since it is part of Dzogchen teachings. It is considered by some masters that these channels are composed of "light" i.e. wisdom.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, December 6th, 2011 at 7:29 AM
Title: Re: Tibetan Myth of Chan
Content:
Namdrol said:
I see, those colors are conditioned or unconditioned?

You can see where this is going, right? lhun grub is not conditioned. But your "function" is. So they are completely different.

Astus said:
Is rupakaya conditioned or unconditioned? Are the qualities of buddha-mind conditioned or unconditioned? Are the wisdoms conditioned or unconditioned? It is possible to argue for both actually. Still, since the conditioned is in fact unconditioned, such extremes are only pedagogic.

Malcolm wrote:
The answer to these questions depend very much on whose perspective one is considering.

However saying that the conditioned is unconditioned is unintelligable. Saying that both the conditioned and the unconditoned are not established, however, is perfectly reasonable.

The main point behind lhundrup is practical, it is not theoretical or abstract. It has to do with how Dzogchen is practiced.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, December 6th, 2011 at 7:11 AM
Title: Re: Tibetan Myth of Chan
Content:
Namdrol said:
So they are completely different.

Jnana said:
Semantic nonsense. Are you really this foolish Malcolm, or is it a game?

Jinul’s Complete and Sudden Attainment of Buddhahood:
It is also the perfectly bright purity of the original true nature of sentient beings which abides in pollution but is not stained, which is cultivated but becomes no purer. When defilements cover it, it is concealed; when wisdom reveals it, it appears. It is not something which comes into being due to the arising-cause; it is, rather, only understood through the understanding-cause.

If someone looks back on the radiance of his own mind’s pure, enlightened nature and thereby extinguishes falsity and cleanses his mind, the myriads of images then appear together. It is just like seawater that has settled: there are no images which are not reflected. Hence it is called the ever-abiding function of the oceanseal of all phenomena in the universe. Accordingly, we can know that the perfectly bright and self-reliant functions of the dharmadhātu which remain, including the unimpeded interpenetration of all phenomena as described in the three pervasions, are never separate from the pure enlightened nature. As explained by Uisang, the dharma-nature is perfectly interfused, has no name or sign, and is free of all relativity.

Malcolm wrote:
Hi Geoff:

This is not lhun grub.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, December 6th, 2011 at 6:10 AM
Title: Re: Does this render the Buddhism redundant?
Content:
gad rgyangs said:
would light coming out of the kati channels be included in the rupa skandha?


Namdrol said:
It does not come out of that channel.

gad rgyangs said:
ok, then, would the light coming out of whatever-channels-it-comes-out-of be included in the rupa skandha?


Malcolm wrote:
Light does not come out of any channels of the human body. And that "light" to which you are referring is not part of the rupa-skandha since it is a wisdom appearance.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, December 6th, 2011 at 5:41 AM
Title: Re: Tibetan Myth of Chan
Content:
Namdrol said:
How so? You mean you can see it with your eyes?

Astus said:
I can see colours with my eyes, also perceive and imagine colours in my mind. That is functioning.

Malcolm wrote:
I see, those colors are conditioned or unconditioned?

You can see where this is going, right? lhun grub is not conditioned. But your "function" is. So they are completely different.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, December 6th, 2011 at 4:44 AM
Title: Re: End Times NWO stuff
Content:
Namdrol said:
I mean, it is silly, calling Crowley's OTO a "black lodge" and so on. Crowley was the single most important and influential occultist of the 20th century. All this stuff and nonsense about white and black lodges amounts to nothing more than various occultists calling each other names because they disagreed.

Lhug-Pa said:
It's not about what they disagreed about so much, as it is about what they actually practiced. Although if I mention why Aleister Crowley's "X°" and "XI°" rituals are black  here, the mods will most likely delete my post.

As I've said, as for the 20th century the work of Rudolf Steiner, Huiracocha, Dion Fortune, Max Heindel, Samael Aun Weor, and Manly P. Hall, is all more relevant than Aleister Crowley's.

Malcolm wrote:
We will agree to disagree. As for tenth and eleventh degree, heterosexual intercourse and homesexual intercourse are nothing to be ashamed of, and are hardly "black". This is a sort of prudish Victorianism that Crowley righty ridiculed.



Lhug-Pa said:
Some of them were Buddhist. From what I understand H.P. Blavatsky and Henry Steele Olcott took Refuge (and H.P.B's The Voice of the Silence was approved of by the Dalai Lama and the Panchen Lama).

Malcolm wrote:
Not likely, and Blatvatsky was a great fraud. In fact, they all were to some degree or another, Blavatsky, Westcott, Mathers, etc.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, December 6th, 2011 at 3:15 AM
Title: Re: End Times NWO stuff
Content:
Lhug-Pa said:
Haha I knew you were going to say something like that.

Malcolm wrote:
I mean, it is silly, calling Crowley's OTO a "black lodge" and so on. Crowley was the single most important and influential occultist of the 20th century. All this stuff and nonsense about white and black lodges amounts to nothing more than various occultists calling each other names because they disagreed.

If they had any common sense they would have all just become buddhists.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, December 6th, 2011 at 3:01 AM
Title: Re: End Times NWO stuff
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Honestly, who cares about any of this stuff?

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, December 6th, 2011 at 2:43 AM
Title: Re: Does this render the Buddhism redundant?
Content:
gregkavarnos said:
would light coming out of the kati channels be included in the rupa skandha?
On that note:  what about the light produced during a visualisation? Sound does not have an absolute speed, light does.
Cars do not have an absolute speed but they are considered to have form, so why not sound?  Please note that I am playing the devils advocate here (to an extent)

PS  Namdrol, could you please post a reference to the Abhidharma text where this is stated In Abhidharma, light is a shape i.e. a form.

But terms in terms of radiation, light is a product of fire or heat.
I have not come across this concept in my studies of Abhidhamma and/or Abhidharma yet.

Malcolm wrote:
Light is defined as a form, an object of the eye, in the first chapter of the Abhidharmakosha.

Fires produce light and heat, so it stands to reason light is inlcuded under the fire element.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, December 6th, 2011 at 2:42 AM
Title: Re: Does this render the Buddhism redundant?
Content:
Blue Garuda said:
How is the talk of photons relevant to the OP?

tomamundsen said:
OP is asking how do formless phenomena interact with form. Someone posits that light is formless but interacts with the eye.

Also, for the record, light is not matter.


Malcolm wrote:
Well, not so fast:

"In physics, a photon is an elementary particle, the quantum of the electromagnetic interaction and the basic unit of light and all other forms of electromagnetic radiation."

Since energy and matter are convertable, to say that light is "non-physical" is not really correct.

Light has form in a classical buddhist context i.e. it is defined in terms of shape; and it is material, since it is a property of the fire element.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, December 6th, 2011 at 2:25 AM
Title: Re: Does this render the Buddhism redundant?
Content:
gad rgyangs said:
would light coming out of the kati channels be included in the rupa skandha?


Malcolm wrote:
It does not come out of that channel.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, December 6th, 2011 at 2:09 AM
Title: Re: Tibetan Myth of Chan
Content:
Namdrol said:
Does Buddhamind have color?

Astus said:
Essentially no, functionally yes.


Malcolm wrote:
How so? You mean you can see it with your eyes?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, December 6th, 2011 at 1:33 AM
Title: Re: Does this render the Buddhism redundant?
Content:
Namdrol said:
Light has a speed, right?

gregkavarnos said:
So does sound...


Malcolm wrote:
Sound does not have an absolute speed, light does.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, December 6th, 2011 at 1:31 AM
Title: Re: Does this render the Buddhism redundant?
Content:
gad rgyangs said:
i thought "matter" was a better translation of rupa anyway.


Namdrol said:
Well it depends on whether it is rūpa skandha or rūpa-āyatana. The former is best translated as matter, and the latter, form.

N

gad rgyangs said:
so then it needs to be clear whether light as matter or light as something perceived is meant.

Malcolm wrote:
In Abhidharma, light is a shape i.e. a form.

But terms in terms of radiation, light is a product of fire or heat. In terms of what greg is referring to, the physics of light and optics are well understood.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, December 6th, 2011 at 1:13 AM
Title: Re: Tibetan Myth of Chan
Content:
Namdrol said:
it would be better for you to properly learn Dzogchen and find out for yourself what the difference is.

Astus said:
As you seem to already know that difference, it would be beneficial for all reading this thread if you could explain it. General statements like "that is sutra, this is tantra" and "ask your guru" doesn't help.


Malcolm wrote:
Does Buddhamind have color?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, December 6th, 2011 at 1:11 AM
Title: Re: Does this render the Buddhism redundant?
Content:
gad rgyangs said:
i thought "matter" was a better translation of rupa anyway.


Malcolm wrote:
Well it depends on whether it is rūpa skandha or rūpa-āyatana. The former is best translated as matter, and the latter, form.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, December 6th, 2011 at 12:56 AM
Title: Re: Does this render the Buddhism redundant?
Content:
gregkavarnos said:
Fire is responsible for the heat of phenomena.  In the kasina meditations of the Theravadra tradition there is a different meditation for light and a different one for fire.  So...

PS If light had form and was composed of particles (photons) how would they pass through matter? Plus we know that light can exist without heat (phosphoresence for example) and heat can exist without light (friction for example).


Malcolm wrote:
Light has a speed, right?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, December 6th, 2011 at 12:21 AM
Title: Re: Tibetan Myth of Chan
Content:
Namdrol said:
it would be better for you to properly learn Dzogchen and find out for yourself what the difference is.

Astus said:
As you seem to already know that difference, it would be beneficial for all reading this thread if you could explain it. General statements like "that is sutra, this is tantra" and "ask your guru" doesn't help.


Malcolm wrote:
This has been explained many times to you and to others.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, December 5th, 2011 at 11:04 PM
Title: Re: Does this render the Buddhism redundant?
Content:
gregkavarnos said:
How does light (a formless phenomenon) interact with the eye?


Namdrol said:
It has form, called photons.

gregkavarnos said:
How can something that is massless be considered to have form?

PS If I take your statment as correct, then of which of the mahabhuta is light composed of?


Malcolm wrote:
Fire.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, December 5th, 2011 at 10:47 PM
Title: Re: End times propaganda in Buddhism?
Content:
Huseng said:
Namdrol,

You said,

Namdrol said:
Reality i.e. suchness, emptiness, etc., is not conditioned.

Huseng said:
Do you mean they are unconditioned?

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, of course the reality of things is unconditioned, since it is not a product. Anything which is a product is by definition is conditioned; anything which is not a product is unconditioned.



Huseng said:
I said that things arise in dependence i.e. dependently, because of the reality of things i.e. the reality of things being emptiess free from extremes.
In other words, it is due to the reality of things (which you assert are not conditioned, which I'm wondering if you mean unconditioned like space), that things arise in dependence.


Malcolm wrote:
In other words, like space, the reality of things is not a product. Emptiness, suchness and so on are not produced, etc., it is in that sense along that we consider the reality of things "unconditioned".

Huseng said:
If you say that emptiness is unconditioned, then you have to explain how it has some kind of causal functionality which allows things to arise in dependence.

Malcolm wrote:
Emptiness is not an efficient cause, but it is a formal cause, like space. In other words, if things were not empty, they could not arise since they would have to exist; the arising of the existent is a contradiction in terms.

Huseng said:
If you agree that suchness is neither conditioned nor unconditioned, then there is no disagreement. If you're saying that suchness is unconditioned (like empty space), then I will disagree.

Malcolm wrote:
Sucness is not a product, therefore, it is unproduced. Whatever is unproduced is not subject to conditions. Whatever is not subject to conditions is, by strict definition, unconditioned.

If you deny that suchness is unconditioned, you also disagree with the Madhyamaka school. For example the Tarkajvala states:

"The unconditioned is the two cessations, space and suchness"
The unconditioned is analytical cessation and non-analytical cessation, space and suchness. Analytical cessation is discriminating wisdom i.e. having analyzed and extinguished the evident afflictions, that analysis and cessation is given the name "nirvana". Non-analytical cessation is when a given thing is never separate from cessation by any means. Space opens up room and has the characteristic of being unobstructed. Suchness previously did not exist, nor come to not exist through destruction, is not [presently] mutually dependent and has no basis. Those four are permanent because their nature is unchanging.

I am afraid that trying prove that idea that suchness is niether conditioned nor unconditioned is fraught with definitional flaws.

Suchness is not a product, therefore, it is included among among unconditioned phenomena, like space and the two cessations.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, December 5th, 2011 at 9:31 PM
Title: Re: Does this render the Buddhism redundant?
Content:
gregkavarnos said:
How does light (a formless phenomenon) interact with the eye?


Malcolm wrote:
It has form, called photons.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, December 5th, 2011 at 9:27 PM
Title: Re: Tibetan Myth of Chan
Content:
Namdrol said:
The first is not lhun grub, and the second is not direct introduction.

Astus said:
Could you define the difference?

Malcolm wrote:
it would be better for you to properly learn Dzogchen and find out for yourself what the difference is.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, December 5th, 2011 at 9:25 PM
Title: Re: Tibetan Myth of Chan
Content:
MalaBeads said:
I am one who happens to think that there indeed methods of direct introduction to the nature of mind in both Chan and Zen.

Malcolm wrote:
Introduction to the nature of the mind exists in sutra.

But that is not what "encountering one's own state" (ngo rang thog du sprad) aka direct introduction aka the first of the three words of Garaba Dorje, means.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, December 5th, 2011 at 8:42 PM
Title: Re: Tibetan Myth of Chan
Content:
Astus said:
That all comes, abides and returns to the buddha-mind is found in Chan. And the classic definition of Chan explicitly says direct pointing to the nature of mind as the hallmark of the tradition.

Malcolm wrote:
The first is not lhun grub, and the second is not direct introduction.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, December 5th, 2011 at 7:24 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen and Religious Pluralism
Content:
gad rgyangs said:
btw i am born Catholic, baptised and confirmed. i dont consider myself a christian but ill say again: its all-good in the expanse.


Malcolm wrote:
Then, no problem. As far as they are concerend, you are still Catholic.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, December 5th, 2011 at 7:09 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen and Religious Pluralism
Content:
treehuggingoctopus said:
ChNNR explicitly and repeatedly said that a good Dzogchen practitioner has no problems participating in Christian (or any other non-Buddhist) rites:

Malcolm wrote:
But he would want you do it respectfully, understanding and not transgressing their limitations -- and in this case, if that limitation meant that one should not take part in the sacrements of the Church since one was not baptized, one should not. For example, I was never baptized, and I have never taken part in any Church sacrements and never would.

ChNN also makes a point about following the laws of the country one is in. Canon law specifically forbids non-Christians from participating in the sacrements.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, December 4th, 2011 at 9:50 PM
Title: Re: The hardest thing in the world
Content:
ryu said:
Hi friends,

Buddhism is such as challenge for me. I love everything its stands for but i find it challenges my comfort zone.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes. And it never stops.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, December 4th, 2011 at 9:32 PM
Title: Re: Dzogchen and Religious Pluralism
Content:


mint said:
This statement seems to implicitly suggest that all religious views and philosophical systems can ultimately be incorporated under the umbrella of Dzogchen since Dzogchen is the ultimate nature of every single being.

Malcolm wrote:
What it actually means is that worldly religions such as christianity, etc. are included in the nine yanas. The nine yanas in the root tantra of Dzogchen, the  "Drathal Jyur" are a little different than in other places. Here, the first vehicle is the vehicle of gods and men, where we can include Xianity, Islam, Hinduism, Confucism, Taoism, and so on.

As to your other question, yes, realizing the meaning of Dzogchen is Buddhahood.

People have to work out the implications of that for themselves.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, December 4th, 2011 at 9:24 PM
Title: Re: Tibetan Myth of Chan
Content:


Astus said:
A reoccurring critique and usual argument to differentiate Chan view from Dzogchen (nb. I don't say they're the same!) is that Chan knows nothing about the aware nature of mind but only the empty. That is of course not so.

Malcolm wrote:
This is not the Dzogchen critique of Chan. So what is it? Chan lacks an understanding of natural formation (lhun grub). It also lacks the principle of direct introduction.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, December 4th, 2011 at 9:06 PM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:
mint said:
What is the difference between these two books, aside from price?

http://www.shangshungstore.org/index.php?l=product_detail&p=104 " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

https://www.amazon.com/Cycle-Day-Night-Primordial-Essential/dp/0882680404/ref=sr_1_4?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1322956981&sr=1-4 " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Paul said:
Hi mint. Out of these two, the second is the one you want. The first has the root text and compares it paragraph by paragraph to an older terma - this is interesting of course, but the second has more useful information.

I would actually buy this instead: http://www.shangshungstore.org/index.php?l=product_detail&p=87 " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Malcolm wrote:
The text is not a terma -- the text is a tantra found in the Vairo gyud bum that ChNN discovered years later after writing CDN.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, December 4th, 2011 at 9:04 PM
Title: Re: Conceptuality in Buddhism
Content:
Food_Eatah said:
Without busy bodies to feed the trolls they could not possibily exist.  Just like gangstas attract gangstas and saints attract nobel friends...

Malcolm wrote:
Ummm, you do realize this post counts as a troll, right?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, December 4th, 2011 at 11:43 AM
Title: Re: Protective Result
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
They should make a point to attend the next open webcast of ChNN.

ronnewmexico said:
I have a close relation who is exposed to many peoples in their line of work.
These people are of the shaministic type, resorting to shamanistic magic as a result of a response to their situaion of inequality discrimination and lack of opportunity.
Some may be quite malignant, and act at times for no known reason. Sickness and even death may occur as result of curse or ceremony to bring curse.

A specific ceremony is present in their faith of protective nature but not of blanket nature. As in if one was to receive a curse one would then seek and receive a cure in ceremony from a spiritual person by participating.

I think a normal protective nature commitment in tibetan buddhism would suffice for this protective isssue.as one aspires to dhama one is protected by dharma.
This is not for me but for other who has this situation.

So.....(long winded)...does anyone know a protective empowerment teaching being given in the southwest perhaps central new mexico, albuquerque, gallup, southern colorado or western arizona.  This person is willing and able to establish a commitment.

I have checked locally with no result....so this is a shot in the dark. A month or two time frame would be preferable. As would a two or three day teaching on the weekend.
But this shot I will take


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, December 4th, 2011 at 11:36 AM
Title: Re: James Low & Simply Being
Content:
gad rgyangs said:
bump: still looking for a useable reference that includes the edition, you know, like how references are given in an academic publication...
thanks in advance.

Malcolm wrote:
I am not an academic (thankfully), but here you go:

dri med 'od zer. "gsang ba bla med sgron ma dbu skor gyi gdams pa:." In snying thig ya bzhi. TBRC W12827. 4: 158 - 245. delhi: sherab gyaltsen lama, 1975. http://tbrc.org/link?RID=O01CT0042%7CO01CT00423JT6812$W12827 " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, December 4th, 2011 at 11:31 AM
Title: Re: End of the Kali-Yuga and the Mayan-Tibetan Connection
Content:


Lhug-Pa said:
Even the Dalai Lama said something along the lines of that perhaps some 'Atoms' or 'Particles' (Ain-Soph Atoms) of the Absolute perhaps somehow originally came into manifestation in the relative Universe. I can't remember in what book, so I'll have to find it and maybe even post the quote here. Like I said, something along those lines, so I want to double check what he said not paraphrased.


Malcolm wrote:
No, what HHDL was talking about was particles of space in the Kalacakra cosmology.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, December 4th, 2011 at 11:30 AM
Title: Re: End of the Kali-Yuga and the Mayan-Tibetan Connection
Content:
Lhug-Pa said:
I'll have to look it up again like I said to get the proper context.

Basically, it seems that in Kabbalah, AIN (Soph) is The Absolute Truth (whether with or without Paranishpanna or Paramartha) and the Tree of Life itself (Paratantra) and the Klipoth spheres (Parikalita) are of Relative Truth.

Of course all of this would likely require much deeper analysis in relation to Madhyamaka and Yogachara philosophy in order to fully qualify these statements, intellectually anyhow.

Malcolm wrote:
No, this is not how the three own natures function. The non-existence of the imagined in the dependent is the perfected nature.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, December 4th, 2011 at 11:29 AM
Title: Re: End of the Kali-Yuga and the Mayan-Tibetan Connection
Content:
wisdom said:
The foundational philosophy of Kabbalah is emanationism, but beyond that point it recognizes almost all the points of DO.

Malcolm wrote:
Let me put it to you this way: an XML scheme that is broken is not XML at all. A teaching (such as Dzogchen) is either completely in agreement with dependent origination from top to bottom, or it is not.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, December 4th, 2011 at 5:58 AM
Title: Re: End of the Kali-Yuga and the Mayan-Tibetan Connection
Content:
Lhug-Pa said:
Well I would somewhat disagree Namdrol, in that "Kabbalah" would predate the written Zohar (and even the "Chaldean Book of Numbers"), and also predates Plato, Ammonius Saccas, Plotinus, Proclus, etc.


Malcolm wrote:
Nonsense.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, December 4th, 2011 at 5:40 AM
Title: Re: Thinley Norbu's terms for ignorance
Content:
MalaBeads said:
I would rather look for how it's the case.

Malcolm wrote:
His translations are overly literal.

lhan cig skyes translates sahaja, which just means innate; but it often literally translated out of Tibetan. Same thing with kun brtags, or parikalpita, a term borrowed from Yogacara in Dzogchen texts, which just means "imputed" or "imagined".

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, December 4th, 2011 at 5:37 AM
Title: Re: Conceptuality in Buddhism
Content:
Dechen Norbu said:
So that you fellows know, RichardLinde has been banned. This account was a sockpuppet as many of you had already figured.
Carry on, please.


Malcolm wrote:
He'll be back.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, December 4th, 2011 at 5:07 AM
Title: Re: End of the Kali-Yuga and the Mayan-Tibetan Connection
Content:
wisdom said:
Atika Qadisha (Something like the primordial Buddha, literally it means "The Ancient Holy One").

Malcolm wrote:
No, nothing at all like Samantabhadra.

Kabbalah and Dzogchen could not be further removed from one another.

Kabbaha is basically a mysticized neo-platonical emanationalism, Dzogchen is not.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, December 4th, 2011 at 4:47 AM
Title: Re: End of the Kali-Yuga and the Mayan-Tibetan Connection
Content:
alwayson said:
How do you reconcile the basis of Western esoteriscism, kabbalah, with the the fact that everything is dependently originated in Buddhism?

gregkavarnos said:
Dissociative Identity Disorder?  That would be one way to deal with it!
Anyway, kabbalah is esoteric judaism, that makes it semitic, not western.  I am sure there were esoteric traditions in the "west" well before esoteric judaism (13th century CE).  Some examples I can think of would be: the Eleusinian Mysteries, Orphism and Dionysian cults which existed around the 14-15th century BCE.

Malcolm wrote:
Kabbalah is esoteric Judaism with a strong shot of neo-platonic doctrine. Actually it is more neo-platonic than "semitic".

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, December 4th, 2011 at 4:11 AM
Title: Re: Thinley Norbu's terms for ignorance
Content:
dakini_boi said:
from Cascading Waterfall of Nectar, p.20:
Simultaneously born ignorance
Is the dispersion of mindless unawareness
All-naming ignorance
Is clinging to the duality of self and other.
These two, simultaneously born ignorance and all-naming ignorance,
Are the cause of delusion for all sentient beings.
Question:

"simultaneously born ignorance" = innate ignorance
"all-naming ignorance" = imputing ignorance
?


Malcolm wrote:
Yes.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, December 4th, 2011 at 3:54 AM
Title: Re: Curing sesame oil
Content:
Inge said:
While curing sesame oil I accidentally heated it to maybe 150 degrees celsius. Does this make it unsuitable for ayurvedic oil massage?


Malcolm wrote:
No, but why don't you just by some high quality ayurvedic oils?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, December 4th, 2011 at 12:56 AM
Title: Re: James Low & Simply Being
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
༄༅།  །གནད་ཀྱི་གཟེར་དྲུག།
Six Points.


མི་མནོ་
Don't anticipate.

མི་བསམ་
Don't plan.

མི་སེམས་
Don't think.

མི་དཔྱོད་
mi dpyod
Don't analyze.

མི་སྒོམ་
mi sgom
Don't cultivate.

རང་སར་བཞག་
Stay where you are.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, December 4th, 2011 at 12:40 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:
Lhug-Pa said:
Speaking of Santi Maha Sangha and The Precious Vase,[...] rather?
Edit (DN): As above. Please follow the advice Namdrol gave you.

Malcolm wrote:
Not an appropriate topic of discussion. If you have specific questions about topics in this book or others, best to write to Jim Valby or another SMS instructor. I am not one of these.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, December 4th, 2011 at 12:28 AM
Title: Re: Protection chords
Content:
Blue Garuda said:
I do recall a specific function of a cord as 'protection' prior to a specific Highest Yoga Tantra Initiation.


Malcolm wrote:
That is different, that functions to protect one's bodhicitta element and is only necessary during the empowerment.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, December 4th, 2011 at 12:00 AM
Title: Re: End times propaganda in Buddhism?
Content:
Lhug-Pa said:
Are there any Buddhist scriptures that mention the Precession of the Equinoxes?


Malcolm wrote:
Kalacakra takes precession into account, without mentioning it explicitly.

See Henning's book.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, December 3rd, 2011 at 11:51 PM
Title: Re: End of the Kali-Yuga and the Mayan-Tibetan Connection
Content:


padma norbu said:
Just found this:
"The Tibetan calendar is so similar to the Mayan that traditional scholars now speculate that they share a common origin."
from http://www.world-mysteries.com/sar_3.htm " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Malcolm wrote:
The Tibean calendar is based on calculations in the Kalacakra tantra, so, no relationship to Mayan calendar in anyway.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, December 3rd, 2011 at 11:39 PM
Title: Re: Protection chords
Content:
Dharmaswede said:
I am looking for information on protection chords; how they work, significance of different colors, different types of chords, exceptions to wearing them etc.

Thank you!

Best Regards,

Jens


Malcolm wrote:
Protection cords are for non-practitioners and animals. Practitioners have no need to wear them.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, December 3rd, 2011 at 10:57 PM
Title: Re: the great vegetarian debate
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Here is a basic point:

All living and non-living things are created from the five elements.
All living and non-living things are maintained by the five elements.
All living and non-living things are destroyed by the five elements.

There are no exceptions.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, December 3rd, 2011 at 9:30 PM
Title: Re: Conceptuality in Buddhism
Content:
Namdrol said:
Richard Linde is famous for making things up as they go along.

RichardLinde said:
That is not at all true.  All I ask is that people use reason to support their arguments, rather than relying on the fallacy of appeal to authority (false authority, usually).

That's not much to ask on an academic forum, is it?

Malcolm wrote:
If you want to know what Mahāyānist believe, Mr. Trevor Solway-Linde, then you should consult texts authored by Mahāyānists, instead of making things up based on your own limited reasoning.

RichardLinde said:
Who is it who decides that the Long PP sutra is valid?  And who decides which commentaries are valid?   And who decides how the commentaries are to be interpreted?

Malcolm wrote:
Centuries of Mahāyānists who wrote commentaries on this sutra in India, China, Tibet and Japan.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, December 3rd, 2011 at 10:36 AM
Title: Re: Conceptuality in Buddhism
Content:
Namdrol said:
Apparently, you are completely and totally ignorant of Mahāyāna positions.

RichardLinde said:
Where can I read the official Mahayana position?  Who decides what the official Mahayana position is?  Is there a team of people who get together and decide which Sutras are to be held to be authoritative, and exactly how those Sutras are to be interpreted?

Tom said:
Would you care then to provide at least one quote from a Mahayana specific commentary which explicitly supports your position.

I had thought the Mahayana position on omniscience was summed up nicely in the quote from Ornament of Clear Realisation that I referenced quite a few posts ago.

Malcolm wrote:
Kevin Solway aka Richard Linde is famous for making things up as they go along.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, December 3rd, 2011 at 10:35 AM
Title: Re: Conceptuality in Buddhism
Content:
Namdrol said:
Apparently, you are completely and totally ignorant of Mahāyāna positions.

RichardLinde said:
Where can I read the official Mahayana position?  Who decides what the official Mahayana position is?  Is there a team of people who get together and decide which Sutras are to be held to be authoritative, and exactly how those Sutras are to be interpreted?


Malcolm wrote:
Well, for starters you can read the Long PP sutra and its commentaries connected with the Abhisamaya-alamkara.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, December 3rd, 2011 at 9:58 AM
Title: Re: Conceptuality in Buddhism
Content:
RichardLinde said:
It doesn't help to appeal to the imagined "Mahayana definition", which doesn't even exist.

Malcolm wrote:
Apparently, you are completely and totally ignorant of Mahāyāna positions.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, December 3rd, 2011 at 6:39 AM
Title: Re: Conceptuality in Buddhism
Content:
Acchantika said:
If it is possible to know any detail about anything with certainty, that is a realist position...

Namdrol said:
The counter-example to your assertion is the omniscience of a buddha, which has unimpeded knowledge of all phenomena precisely because all phenomena are illusory and unreal.

N

Acchantika said:
Only if we consider unimpeded knowledge of all phenomena to be the same as knowing all details about everything with certainty.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, that is the Mahāyāna definition of omniscience.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, December 3rd, 2011 at 6:37 AM
Title: Re: Is receiving transmission via webcast a farce?
Content:
padma norbu said:
If you got any of the Longsal books, let me know what you think. I wanted to get them before they sold out, but it seemed like there was going to be an endless amount of volumes, so I just didn't even start. So many teachings and books...

Pero said:
Just FYI, Longsal volumes are now considered restricted to people who either received the respective teachings or received the Longsal root initiation.

Paul said:
When did that change happen?


Malcolm wrote:
recently.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, December 3rd, 2011 at 6:08 AM
Title: Re: Conceptuality in Buddhism
Content:


RichardLinde said:
There are two main camps: those who believe that it is possible to perfectly know all details about everything, including future events, and those who don't.

Namdrol said:
No, the difference is that former are not realists; and the latter are realists i.e. realists in the sense of thinking that phenomena are fundamentally real (even if they try excuse themselves with the 'lacking inherent existence clause) and that there are therefore concrete limitations on what an "unimpeded mind", such as a Buddha's, can know.

N

Acchantika said:
If it is possible to know any detail about anything with certainty, that is a realist position...

Malcolm wrote:
The counter-example to your assertion is the omniscience of a buddha, which has unimpeded knowledge of all phenomena precisely because all phenomena are illusory and unreal.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, December 3rd, 2011 at 4:15 AM
Title: Re: Conceptuality in Buddhism
Content:


RichardLinde said:
There are two main camps: those who believe that it is possible to perfectly know all details about everything, including future events, and those who don't.  The way I see it, the former are those who have "faith" in what they believe to be authority, and the latter are those who have investigated the issue.

Malcolm wrote:
No, the difference is that former are not realists; and the latter are realists i.e. realists in the sense of thinking that phenomena are fundamentally real (even if they try excuse themselves with the 'lacking inherent existence clause) and that there are therefore concrete limitations on what an "unimpeded mind", such as a Buddha's, can know.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, December 3rd, 2011 at 4:08 AM
Title: Re: End times propaganda in Buddhism?
Content:
Namdrol said:
Reality i.e. suchness, emptiness, etc., is not conditioned. Things arise in dependence because of the reality of things. Things are conditioned, but the reality of things is not.

N

Huseng said:
You say things arise in dependence because of the reality of things -- that those arisen things are conditioned, yet they arise in dependence on the unconditioned.

Malcolm wrote:
Read it again:

I said:

Things arise in dependence because of the reality of things.

You interpreted:

"that those arisen things are conditioned, yet they arise in dependence on the unconditioned"

I never said that things arise depending on the unconditioned. I said that things arise in dependence i.e. dependently, because of the reality of things i.e. the reality of things being emptiess free from extremes.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, December 3rd, 2011 at 2:53 AM
Title: Re: James Low & Simply Being
Content:
Namdrol said:
Hi

ChNN uses the term presence for what other people translated as mindfulness; and instant presence (rig pa skad cig ma) for being present in the stage of knowledge of one's primordial state. It is important to differentiate the two terms. Mindfullness is not rigpa.

N

mint said:
So, presence is not mindfulness?  Experientially, they would seem to be the same thing, I would think.

Is mindfulness the natural state?

Malcolm wrote:
Presence = mindfulness
Instant presence = rigpa.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, December 3rd, 2011 at 2:44 AM
Title: Re: Deity Yoga Questions
Content:
Adamantine said:
It seems that ChNN's style is to treat everyone as if they are the highest capacity...

Malcolm wrote:
This is not a style, this characteristic of Dzogchen teachings and teachers in general. For example, Shabkar's Flight states right at the outset:
If this is practiced, all will be liberated;
there is no distinction between sharpness and dullness in capacities.
Dogchen is not a gradual path.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, December 3rd, 2011 at 2:38 AM
Title: Re: James Low & Simply Being
Content:
Namdrol said:
Rigpa is the knowledge you have that allows you to wake up.  Rigpa is a complicated word in Dzogchen texts, and has different meanings in different contexts, but generally it just means knowledge, which in English is the antonym of ignorance (ma rig pa).

mint said:
Adriano Clemente translates 'rigpa' as 'presence' in the book "Dzogchen: The Self-Perfected State."  Is this the same as mindfulness?

Along those same lines, after my meditation, I have a sense of calm relaxation.  No thought or sensation disturbs me.  There is placidness and presence.  Even when talking, knowledge of this placidness remains.  Is this the natural state or rigpa?

Malcolm wrote:
Hi

ChNN uses the term presence for what other people translated as mindfulness; and instant presence (rig pa skad cig ma) for being present in the stage of knowledge of one's primordial state. It is important to differentiate the two terms. Mindfullness is not rigpa.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, December 2nd, 2011 at 10:04 PM
Title: Re: Reasons for Conventional Reality
Content:
Sherab said:
To give an example, the model tries to make consistent the ideas of causality, dependent arising and lhundrup.  It is still a work-in-progress though.  So far I've only attempted to float the model to one person but have met with silence from that person thus far.  Not sure if it was a polite silence or a freak-out silence.

Malcolm wrote:
it is simple:

vidyā                                             |              avidyā
---                                                 |              ...
original purity                                |             emptiness
natural formation                           |             dependent origination


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, December 2nd, 2011 at 6:16 AM
Title: Re: Is receiving transmission via webcast a farce?
Content:
mint said:
[Personally, I see the restricted texts as largely another business scheme, though I imagine it can't be very profitable considering its niche market.]


Malcolm wrote:
Dzogchen Community has never made a real profit in a material sense. In fact, the person who supports it financially the most is ChNN.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, December 1st, 2011 at 11:34 PM
Title: Re: Madyamika Sautrantika vs Prasangika
Content:
RichardLinde said:
I did cite the Buddha saying that he doesn't know with certainty what will happen after the Dharma is extinguished.  He doesn't give the reasons why he doesn't have this certainty, but we can work the reasons out for ourselves easily enough.

gregkavarnos said:
You have cited no such thing

RichardLinde said:
See http://www.cttbusa.org/shurangama/shurangama2.asp.
So too, will the Dharma flare and die. After this time it is difficult to speak with certainty of what will follow.
So clearly the Buddha doesn't have the kind of omniscience that would give him certain knowledge of future events - quite apart from the fact that such things can be easily proven to be impossible.


Malcolm wrote:
This text is inadmissable because it's authencity is disputed.

In any event your remarks Buddha's omniscience are appropriate from a non-Mahāyāna point of view, but not from a Mahāyāna point of view. Therefore, there is no further basis for a discussion because there is no common agreement about what omniscience of a buddha entails, much less whether a buddha possesses concepts.

N

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 30th, 2011 at 10:40 PM
Title: Re: James Low & Simply Being
Content:


gad rgyangs said:
interesting passage u got page ##s please?

Malcolm wrote:
Vima Nyinthig, volume two, starts on page 222.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 30th, 2011 at 10:34 PM
Title: Re: Is receiving transmission via webcast a farce?
Content:


mint said:
What happens when ChNNR has his pariniravana?


Malcolm wrote:
Then you follow ChNN's children -- who have both been given mandates to teach.

For now, stop worrying so much.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 30th, 2011 at 10:22 AM
Title: Re: Madyamika Sautrantika vs Prasangika
Content:
Tom said:
. . . the elimination of all knowledge obstacles

RichardLinde said:
The "obstacles" being refered to here are those obstacles arising from delusion, and not any other kind of obstacles.

The "knowledge" being refered to is knowledge of the true nature of things.  Such a knowledge does give a person a lot greater ability to predict the future than a normal person, but predictions of detailed future events can never be certain.


Malcolm wrote:
You are going to need to start providing citations for your opinions. Thus far, all you have presented are opinions -- but the rules of this specific forum require citations.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 30th, 2011 at 4:37 AM
Title: Re: James Low & Simply Being
Content:


heart said:
A single essence doesn't mean they are the same. Like the nature of mind not being the same as mind. Actually, what you say sounds more Mahamudra related then Dzogchen.

/magnus


Namdrol said:
It means there is only one vidyā that has five expressions.

heart said:
Not making a clear distinction between "sem" and "rigpa" is not the Dzogchen way, so it still sounds like Mahamudra to me.

/magnus


Malcolm wrote:
Take it up with Vimalamitra. He writes about this in both the Copper Letters and the Agate Letters.

The vidyā that apprehends characteristics: “the vidyā that imputes phenomena as universals and as mere personal names”, is one’s mere non-conceptual self-knowing awareness defiled by many cognitions. 

The [vidyā that] appropriates the basis creates all cognitions when present in one’s body, and is present as the mere intrinsic clarity [of those cognitions] is called “unripened vidyā”. 

The vidyā present as the basis is the reality of the essence, original purity, that exists possessing the three primordial wisdoms. The vidyā which is not covered by partiality is present as the essence of omniscient wisdom. Further, that primordial wisdom is present as a subtle primordial wisdom. If that primordial wisdom did not exist, there would be no liberation from emptiness. Further, there would be no liberation from the inert. However, if vidyā exists as primordial wisdom, it would be no different than the realist’s nirmanakāya. 

The vidyā of insight is those vivid appearances when the instruction is demonstrated. It is called “the essence of the self-apparent thigle”. As there are many unmixed appearances, the Teacher stated:
Everything arose from non-arising,
showing the great miraculous display in every way.
The vidyā of thögal is the absence of increase or decrease in experience having reached the full measure of appearance through practice. Having completed all the signs and qualities, also they are not established by their own nature. When self-manifesting as omniscient wisdom, it [the vidyā of thögal] is called “abandoning phenomena”, “the exhaustion of phenomena”, “beyond phenomena”, “liberated from phenomena”, and “no arising even in mere arising”. 

Are those vidyās different or not? They are not different since there is nothing more than a single nature.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 30th, 2011 at 3:50 AM
Title: Re: Deity Yoga Questions
Content:
mint said:
This thread was started to ask questions in relation to deity yoga:

Is a guru required before engaging in deity yoga?

Is ngondro required before engaging in deity yoga?

Does Dzogchen practice include deity yoga?

Malcolm wrote:
Yes

No

Yes, but not necessarily.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 30th, 2011 at 3:48 AM
Title: Re: James Low & Simply Being
Content:
Namdrol said:
mind is the result of karmic winds mixing with the rtsal of rigpa.

N
Thoughts are the energy [rtsal] of rigpa.

N


alwayson said:
Sure I believe all that

Then what does distinguishing between rigpa and sems mean if sems is actually partly derived from rigpa......

Malcolm wrote:
It means knowing the difference between the crystal that produces a rainbow and the rainbow projected from the crystal -- the rtsal of the crystal produces the rainbow, the rainbow comes from the crystal but is not part of the crystal. Likewise, thoughts come from the energy of vidyā, but they are not vidyā.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 30th, 2011 at 3:40 AM
Title: Re: James Low & Simply Being
Content:


heart said:
A single essence doesn't mean they are the same. Like the nature of mind not being the same as mind. Actually, what you say sounds more Mahamudra related then Dzogchen.

/magnus


Malcolm wrote:
It means there is only one vidyā that has five expressions.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 30th, 2011 at 3:36 AM
Title: Re: James Low & Simply Being
Content:
conebeckham said:
From the POV of Dzokchen, would a fully enlightened Buddha have "thoughts?" I'm thinking of the Madhyamika thread......I understand that the nature of thoughts is the energy of rigpa, but how does this impact the discussion of Buddhas being concept-free?

Namdrol said:
No impact, and no, a Buddha still has no thoughts since, from a Dzogchen POV, mind is the result of karmic winds mixing with the rtsal of rigpa.

N

Sönam said:
Then what is the rtsal of rigpa when no thoughts?

Sönam


Malcolm wrote:
rtsal.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 30th, 2011 at 3:11 AM
Title: Re: Sherab vs. Lodro
Content:
dakini_boi said:
Thanks, Namdrol.  So, in Tibetan, do they both imply "discriminating wisdom" or ordinary intelligence?  Or are they both used interchangeably for either of these?


Malcolm wrote:
They overlap.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 30th, 2011 at 2:57 AM
Title: Re: the great vegetarian debate
Content:
gregkavarnos said:
One can also make a karmic connection to an animal by saving it from from being slaughtered and eaten.

That's what the practice: Essence of Benefit and Joy by Jamgon Kongtrul Lodro Thaye is all about.

You can buy it here http://www.namsebangdzo.com/Essence_of_Benefit_and_Joy_p/5324.htm " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

And I have an electronic version of it available here for download https://dl.dropbox.com/u/9844773/Essence%20of%20Benefit.rar.exe " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; for whoever wishes.

Kyosan said:
I agree.

And what are these karmic connections from eating meat? Could it be that in a future life, the animal who was eaten is afraid of the person who ate him? Or could it be that in a future life the person is an animal and the animal is a person, and the person eats the animal? I see both of these as being negative; it would be interesting to see examples of positive karmic connections that are beneficial.

Malcolm wrote:
If you use the proper method, and maintain awareness while eating meat, that animal will be reborn as your student when you achieve awakening.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 30th, 2011 at 2:31 AM
Title: Re: Sherab vs. Lodro
Content:
dakini_boi said:
Could someone explain the difference between these two words, which are both translated as "wisdom"?  Are they used differently in Buddhist texts?

Thank you.

Malcolm wrote:
one translates prajñā (shes rab), the other translates mati (blo gros).

One means discriminating wisdom, prajñā, the other refers more to intellectual capacity, intelligence. In Tibetan they are somewhat synonymous.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 30th, 2011 at 2:12 AM
Title: Re: James Low & Simply Being
Content:
conebeckham said:
From the POV of Dzokchen, would a fully enlightened Buddha have "thoughts?" I'm thinking of the Madhyamika thread......I understand that the nature of thoughts is the energy of rigpa, but how does this impact the discussion of Buddhas being concept-free?

Malcolm wrote:
No impact, and no, a Buddha still has no thoughts since, from a Dzogchen POV, mind is the result of karmic winds mixing with the rtsal of rigpa.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 30th, 2011 at 1:53 AM
Title: Re: End times propaganda in Buddhism?
Content:
Dharma Atma said:
As for me I believe Dharma itself is conditioned.

Namdrol said:
Reality is not conditioned. The Dharma comes from recognition of reality. So while the expression of Dharma may be subject to change and adaptation, reality is always there to be perceived. Further, all Dharma teachings stem from Dzogchen. Dzogchen will be the first teaching in any given eon and the last.

N

catmoon said:
Reality is not conditioned? How does this fit in with dependent origination?


Malcolm wrote:
Reality i.e. suchness, emptiness, etc., is not conditioned. Things arise in dependence because of the reality of things. Things are conditioned, but the reality of things is not.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 30th, 2011 at 1:41 AM
Title: Re: James Low & Simply Being
Content:
Namdrol said:
For this reason we can understand that thoughts are included in rigpa.

N


alwayson said:
How can thoughts be included in rigpa??

What about the infamous distinction between rigpa (knowledge) and sems, expounded by the omniscient masters?

Malcolm wrote:
Thoughts are the energy [rtsal] of rigpa.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 30th, 2011 at 12:25 AM
Title: Re: James Low & Simply Being
Content:


heart said:
I am afraid that makes no sense. Does ChNN say this?

/magnus

Namdrol said:
Rig pa cog bzhag is allowing all thoughts to be as they are. Conceptual knowledge is included in thoughts.

heart said:
There is no conceptual knowledge apart from thoughts because this is the conceptual obscuration, the heart of "sem". Allowing the self-liberation of "sem" is rigpa.

/magnus



Malcolm wrote:
In The Lamp of Vidyā, five aspects of vidyā are described. According to Vimalamitra, the first, the vidyā which apprehends characteristics, designates general and specific phenomena, it is a non-conceptual awareness sullied by many cognitions.

When asked "Are those vidyā’ the same, or are they different?", the reply is that there is nothing other than a single essence.

For this reason we can understand that thoughts are included in rigpa.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 30th, 2011 at 12:18 AM
Title: Re: Madyamika Sautrantika vs Prasangika
Content:
Namdrol said:
If Buddhas appear to have concepts, that appearance comes from our concepts.

RichardLinde said:
There is only a problem with "concepts" if we define a "concept" to be the projection of inherent existence onto things.

Malcolm wrote:
But that is not how a vikalpa (rnam par rtog pa) is defined.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, November 29th, 2011 at 12:07 PM
Title: Re: James Low & Simply Being
Content:
gad rgyangs said:
Rigpa is that which enables you to be astonished that there is something rather than nothing.

Malcolm wrote:
What are you, a Heidegger fan?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, November 29th, 2011 at 12:05 PM
Title: Re: Madyamika Sautrantika vs Prasangika
Content:
RichardLinde said:
And Buddhas appear to have concepts, so we say they have concepts.


Malcolm wrote:
If Buddhas appear to have concepts, that appearance comes from our concepts.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, November 29th, 2011 at 8:35 AM
Title: Re: Deity Yoga Questions
Content:
alwayson said:
I thought you got Dzogchen transmission.

Forget about all this deity stuff and get some rigpa/vidya/knowldege.

As far as I understand, there are only 4 essential Dzogchen practices:

rigpa / guru yoga
Song of the Vajra
Chulen of Space
4 visions


Malcolm wrote:
Add rushen to that list and that would be about right.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, November 29th, 2011 at 8:28 AM
Title: Re: Root Lamas
Content:
Blue Garuda said:
I believe any guru giving you an HYT empowerment is considered to be a Root Guru. Vajra Masters may receive HYT empowerment from each other and become a Root Guru for each other for those practices.

heart said:
Any master that gives you an empowerment becomes your Guru, I am with you so far. However, root in root Guru is pointing directly at your own realization. If a lama and the  empowerment's he/she give you don't have a lasting influence on your own realization why would he/she be considered a root Guru? I think using the word root Guru in such a casual way degenerates the meaning of the word, using the word Guru is strong enough.

/magnus


Malcolm wrote:
Different lineage, different terminology.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, November 29th, 2011 at 8:25 AM
Title: Re: Root Lamas
Content:
kirtu said:
In Sakya the root lama is the lama who bestows highest yoga tantra empowerment:

From The Questions of the Contemplative Nyimo Gomchen and the Responses of Sakya Pandita What makes a person one’s true Guru? The person from whom one correctly receives the four empowerments in accordance with the Tantras in one’s true Guru. A Guru from whom one has not received such empowerment – how ever good a person he might be – is one’s Guru in name only, For example, the person from whom one receives monastic ordination is one’s true abbot, but if one has not been ordained by someone, he is not one’s true abbot. And even if he is called “Abbot”, he is such in name only. Thus: “without bestowing empowerment, there is no Guru. Without monastic ordination, there is no abbot. Without precepts, there is no continuum of virtue. Without going for refuge, one is not a spiritual person.” That is the meaning of the above verse.
Kirt


Caz said:
Bing Bing ! But as far as I know this is the same for all traditions

Malcolm wrote:
Nope.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, November 29th, 2011 at 8:25 AM
Title: Re: Root Lamas
Content:
kirtu said:
In Sakya the root lama is the lama who bestows highest yoga tantra empowerment:

heart said:
All of them?

/magnus

Paul said:
I think Magnus has a point - that quote only seems to describe a tantric guru, not ones root guru.

Malcolm wrote:
for those whose view is tantra, that is their mula guru.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, November 29th, 2011 at 7:53 AM
Title: Re: James Low & Simply Being
Content:


heart said:
I am afraid that makes no sense. Does ChNN say this?

/magnus

Malcolm wrote:
Rig pa cog bzhag is allowing all thoughts to be as they are. Conceptual knowledge is included in thoughts.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, November 29th, 2011 at 2:34 AM
Title: Re: End times propaganda in Buddhism?
Content:
Dharma Atma said:
As for me I believe Dharma itself is conditioned.

Malcolm wrote:
Reality is not conditioned. The Dharma comes from recognition of reality. So while the expression of Dharma may be subject to change and adaptation, reality is always there to be perceived. Further, all Dharma teachings stem from Dzogchen. Dzogchen will be the first teaching in any given eon and the last.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, November 29th, 2011 at 2:30 AM
Title: Re: Madyamika Sautrantika vs Prasangika
Content:
tobes said:
The direct apprehension of emptiness is pretty clearly defined as the cessation of conceptual thought

RichardLinde said:
I am suspecting that there has been an error in translation.  Can you give a reference to a text that defines the apprehension of emptiness as "the cessation of conceptual thought".

I mean, I could understand if it was defined as the cessation of papanca (deluded conceptual proliferation).

Malcolm wrote:
MMK 18:
aparapratyayaṁ śāntaṁ prapañcair aprapañcitaṁ
nirvikalpam anānārtham etat tattvasya lakśaṇaṁ|

།གཞན་ལས་ཤེས་མིན་ཞི་བ་དང༌། །སྤྲོས་པ་རྣམས་ཀྱིས་མ་སྤྲོས་པ།
།རྣམ་རྟོག་མེད་དོན་ཐ་དད་མེད། །དེ་ནི་དེ་ཉིད་མཚན་ཉིད་དོ།

Not known from another; peaceful; lacking proliferation with proliferations;
non-conceptual; undifferentiated — that is the characteristic of reality.



Buddhapalita comments:
"'Not known from another"; here not known from another i.e. not scriptural, but one's direct perception, thus it is a convention for one's direct perception. "Peaceful"  is a convention for "empty by nature".  "Lacking proliferation with proliferations" is a convention for freedom from mundane phenomena. "Non-conceptual" means not designated "This is this". Undifferentiated means not different objects such as "though it this, it is also this". Why is that? Because of lacking concepts, there is no proliferation with proliferations. Why? Because there is no proliferation by mundane phenomena. Why? Because that is peaceful, it is undifferentiated. Therefore, the knowledge of such a nature is a personal knowledge, not known from elsewhere. That should be understood to be the characteristic of reality.
According to Mahāyāna, a buddha is in a state of continuous equipoise on reality. It is impossible therefore that a buddha will experience concepts.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, November 29th, 2011 at 1:52 AM
Title: Re: Triyik Yeshe Lama.
Content:
alwayson said:
Of course.


Namdrol said:
In any case Yeshe Lama is kind of a beginners text. It is not that deep.

N

heart said:
I don't agree, I found it very special. But some parts are very short short and some seem to be missing.

/magnus


Malcolm wrote:
There is a reason why there is an oral instruction lineage connected with TYL, and that is because the text itself is not complete.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, November 29th, 2011 at 1:50 AM
Title: Re: James Low & Simply Being
Content:
Fa Dao said:
When we say "Knowledge" of the natural state is rigpa, by "knowledge" we mean gnosis not knowledge as in the acquisition of intellectual data, right?

Namdrol said:
By knowledge, we mean that you know what is being discussed. No need to gum up the works with fancy words like gnosis. In the beginning you need to acquire intellectual data. Then you need to apply it. This is all part of "rigpa".

If you say that rigpa is only a "gnosis" than this makes things more complicated --it means in order to have that knowledge you must already be awakened. But this is not the case. Rigpa is the knowledge you have that allows you to wake up.  Rigpa is a complicated word in Dzogchen texts, and has different meanings in different contexts, but generally it just means knowledge, which in English is the antonym of ignorance (ma rig pa). Conceptual knowledge is inlcuded under the general definition of vidyā, this is a poorly understood point.

N

heart said:
True, but in Dzogchen Trechö rigpa is not conceptual knowledge, that also seems to be poorly understood.

/magnus

Malcolm wrote:
Conceptual knowledge is included in rigpa in tregchö -- this is why we have rig pa cog bzhag.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, November 29th, 2011 at 12:42 AM
Title: Re: Triyik Yeshe Lama.
Content:
alwayson said:
Of course.


Malcolm wrote:
In any case Yeshe Lama is kind of a beginners text. It is not that deep.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, November 29th, 2011 at 12:35 AM
Title: Re: Triyik Yeshe Lama.
Content:
Pema Rigdzin said:
Exactly what is incorrect in Sangye Khandro and Lama Chonam's most recent translation? I haven't found a single mistake. This must just be something you've heard from someone partial to Duff's work or something.


alwayson said:
Duff's version is even more recent than this.

In the intro he trashes the Snow Lion Yeshe Lama on multiple grounds including even the source texts used.

Someone gave me a copy when they shouldn't have.  I have since deleted it, since I didn't feel right about having it.

Malcolm wrote:
There is no such a thing as a perfect translation.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, November 29th, 2011 at 12:34 AM
Title: Re: Primordial stains ?
Content:
Merely Labeled said:
Why didn`t  a primordial Buddha (Kuntuzangpo) fall into ignorance ?

Malcolm wrote:
Samantabhadra also possessed ignorance.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, November 29th, 2011 at 12:15 AM
Title: Re: Triyik Yeshe Lama.
Content:
Jnana said:
For example, he wants to read Maitripa and Milarepa as being proponents of gzhan stong.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, this is completely incorrect.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, November 29th, 2011 at 12:13 AM
Title: Re: Triyik Yeshe Lama.
Content:
Pema Rigdzin said:
I seem to remember hearing this from someone else. Personally, I have only so much as heard of Duff's name. But I was thinking that "Wisdom Guru" sounds a bit too literal for a translation of Yeshe Lama in this context; since the aim of the text is (ideally) enabling one to attain the unexcelled stage of Dzogchen realization called "yeshe lama," translating it as "Unexcelled Wisdom" or "Highest Wisdom" would seem to make more sense to me... even if the guru, the state of Dzogchen, and the realization of that state are all one in the same ultimately.

Malcolm wrote:
It means "highest wisdom", uttarajñāna, not jñānaguru. It is a reference to the sixteenth bhumi.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, November 29th, 2011 at 12:07 AM
Title: Re: Madyamika Sautrantika vs Prasangika
Content:
Namdrol said:
their acts of speech are not connected with concepts and signs.

RichardLinde said:
Do you mean to say that that the speech of a Buddha is not a pointer (a "sign") to the truth?  That the speech of a Buddha is not a finger which points to the moon?

In the context of Western culture, a "concept" is defined as a thought or idea, according to the Oxford dictionary.   Surely it wouldn't be correct to say that a Buddha has no thoughts or ideas?

Or does the word "concept" have an entirely different meaning within the context of Buddhism?

Malcolm wrote:
Hi Kevin Solway:

Buddha don't have thoughts, therefore, they have no concepts. They are however omniscient.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, November 28th, 2011 at 11:25 AM
Title: WTF?
Content:
Unknown said:
Mr. President, I would also point out that these provisions raise serious questions as to who we are as a society and what our Constitution seeks to protect.  One section of these provisions, section 1031, would be interpreted as allowing the military to capture and indefinitely detain American citizens on U.S. soil.  Section 1031 essentially repeals the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 by authorizing the U.S. military to perform law enforcement functions on American soil.  That alone should alarm my colleagues on both sides of the aisle, but there are other problems with these provisions that must be resolved.

Malcolm wrote:
http://markudall.senate.gov/?p=press_release&id=1746 " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, November 28th, 2011 at 11:03 AM
Title: Re: Madyamika Sautrantika vs Prasangika
Content:
tobes said:
Right - but how can any sentence that is heard be devoid of concepts?

Malcolm wrote:
Concepts are formed by sentient beings concerning what they interpret as speech acts by Buddhas.


tobes said:
What you're really saying is that vajra speech emanates from the dharmakaya right (i.e. as the sambogakaya)? So it is ontologically distinct from ordinary speech.

I would accept the argument that sambogakaya contains a multiplicity of different communicative modes, many of which are not linguistic.

But when there is linguistic communication, that involves words, symbols, signs, signifiers. So I suppose the question is: how can a signifier (or chain of signifiers which comprise a sentence) not be a concept?

Malcolm wrote:
What I am saying is really simple: Buddhas do not have conceptual minds, therefore, their acts of speech are not connected with concepts and signs.




[/quote]


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, November 28th, 2011 at 2:19 AM
Title: Re: TTM & herbs contra cancer
Content:
AdmiralJim said:
also to cure a tumour completely the only 100% effective way of doing that is cut it out and western surgery is more developed in this respect. traditional medicincal doctrines are better at preventing cancer because of their more developed dietary systems/advice.
so to prevent cancer follow the dietary advice of those older systems but if you get cancer it is better to see an oncologist and western surgeon to try to cure it.


Malcolm wrote:
Agreed.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, November 28th, 2011 at 2:12 AM
Title: Re: Weight
Content:
Kyosan said:
You don't have to eat meat to get enough calories. Grains, legumes, many root vegetables and nuts are all decent sources of calories.  Most fruits are lower in calories but avocados and durians are good fruit sources.

Ngawang Drolma said:
Thanks What's a root vegetable?

Best,
Laura


Malcolm wrote:
Carrots


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, November 28th, 2011 at 1:07 AM
Title: Re: Weight
Content:
Ngawang Drolma said:
Aye, three meals now.  Ok.  I dropped another ten in a week totaling 60 in five weeks.  At this point it's becoming an interference but I guess that would be obvious.

Thanks,
Laura

Malcolm wrote:
Whole grain cereals for breakfast with whole milk, pastries, etc., not yogurt and fruit
RIch, nutritious food at lunch, pasta, butter, olive oil, meat, etc.

Soups for dinner, beef barely, etc.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, November 28th, 2011 at 12:46 AM
Title: Re: Weight
Content:
Ngawang Drolma said:
Namdrol la and all,

How can you at least keep your weight from dropping even if you're consuming food and nutrients and even fats?

Thanks,
Laura


Malcolm wrote:
Eat three meals a day, with your noon meal being the largest.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, November 28th, 2011 at 12:34 AM
Title: Re: Restless itching sensation inside the chest.
Content:
Inge said:
Hi
At the age of 13 I started having a restless, burning and itching sensation in the chest. It is located at around four cm above the lower tip of the chestbone. It strenthens and weakens in waves, and at times it is so intense it is driving me mad, especially at night (it often begins in the afternoon, exhausts me through the night, and releases in the early morning. It is accompanied by feeling hot and dry on the body surface, itching of the skin (especially in the groin area), and excessive thirst. Holding something cool to the chest, and moving around is what I have found to ease the sensation. Often I have thought this might be heartburn, but once when the sensation was particularly tormenting I decided to lie completely still and listen to it in hope of figuring out what it was. In waves it grew stronger and stronger until at a point when I felt I was dying it exploded into blissful waves of "energy" going up and down the body, making me laugh and cry uncontrollably. After this the sensation was gone for some years, but now it is back. Do you know what this could be, and how to treat it?
I have made the following self-diagnosis: The itching sensation in the chest is in fact heartburn, probably due to a hiatus hernia that I recently learned that "everybody" on my mothers side of the family has. The blissful energy waves was bliss arising from concentration on unpleasant sensation.

Do tibetan medicne have useful treatment for heartburn?


Malcolm wrote:
You should cut down on processed foods, drink more hot water, never eat after 6, eat your main meal at noon, these habits should help reduce your acid reflux. There are also herbs that one can take such as Congzhi Drugpa.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, November 28th, 2011 at 12:26 AM
Title: Re: Democracy in the country that gave birth to democracy
Content:
tobes said:
Naomi Wolf gets it right again:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/nov/25/shocking-truth-about-crackdown-occupy " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



Malcolm wrote:
Alternet's refutation of Wolf's post:

http://www.alternet.org/occupywallst/153222/naomi_wolf%26acirc%3B%26euro%3B%26trade%3Bs_%26acirc%3B%26euro%3B%26tilde%3Bshocking_truth%26acirc%3B%26euro%3B%26trade%3B_about_the_%26acirc%3B%26euro%3B%26tilde%3Boccupy_crackdowns%26acirc%3B%26euro%3B%26trade%3B_offers_anything_but_the_truth?page=entire " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, November 27th, 2011 at 11:48 PM
Title: Conceptuality in Buddhism
Content:


tobes said:
...how can you explain the fact that if a Buddha still speaks to sentient beings, she must apprehend the concepts which those sentient beings communicate?

Those concepts are necessarily conventional.

So, does it not follow, that a Buddha must be able to apprehend the conventional phenomena of ordinary speech?


Malcolm wrote:
First, I don't regard that as a fact. The rest of your statement depends upon me accepting that fact, but I don't.

The primary Mahayāna sutra metaphor for a Buddha is a wishfulfilling gem because a wishfulfilling automatically gem fulfills the wishes of sentient beings without concepts.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, November 27th, 2011 at 11:40 PM
Title: Re: Madyamika Sautrantika vs Prasangika
Content:
tobes said:
Notice how you're leaning on a tantric text to support your argument?

There is nothing in Nagarjuna, nor Chandrakirti which asserts vajra speech. The assumption clearly comes from elsewhere.


Malcolm wrote:
There are sutra statements to similar effect. Anyway, it merely proves the point, which, in essence, is that people hear what they want to hear regardless of who is speaking.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, November 27th, 2011 at 11:27 PM
Title: Re: TTM & herbs contra cancer
Content:
kalden yungdrung said:
What did cause their conclusion e.g. that their treatment according the TTM would be "senseless"? Also seems it strange to me that they do not have remedies against cancer whereas TTM is/ was confrontated with cancer for many centuries.

Malcolm wrote:
According to most Tibetan doctors I know, modern cancers do not really exist in pre-modern Tibet.

[/quote]
Could you give some examples about the power of TTM / Aryuveda regarding the mentioned prevention of chronic diseases?
- Further,  what do you mean with a chronic disease or when is a disease chronic according TTM? [/color]

according to TM, cancers and all chronic diseases come from maldigestion -- other chronic diseases are edemas, benign tumors, and so on.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, November 27th, 2011 at 2:20 AM
Title: Re: TTM & herbs contra cancer
Content:


kalden yungdrung said:
How did you came to that conclusion, e.g. that western medicine would be better than TTM regarding the treatment of cancer?

Malcolm wrote:
Tibetan Doctors in the Tibetan Hospital in Xining.

Cancers on the outer body can be treated, but cancers of internal organs are not really treatable with Tibetan Medicine.

Prevention is a different issue -- TTM /Ayurveda are more effective than western medicine for prevention of many chronic diseases.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, November 27th, 2011 at 2:11 AM
Title: Re: Tibetan Astrological "overlap" with others?
Content:


padma norbu said:
That's just as bad as any creation myth I ever heard.

Malcolm wrote:
This is a truncated version of a much better version:

When that is applied to the tortoise of the basis, first, out of total nothingness there is the so called "primordially existing or abiding tortoise". And from this arose, or were produced, all the Buddhas of the three times and all the sentient beings of the three realms. The example for that is the void of spacem and since the meaning is the dharmadhātu of Samantabhadra, it exists without any coalescence or separation in any of the three times. No head or tail can be seen here, no limbs are shown here, in terms of time, here it abides without abiding. Without grasping to any extremes -- Buddhas and sentient beings are in that. The dharmakāya, the sambhogakāya, and the nirmanakāya, the emanations of the body, speech, mind, qualities and activities of the Victors, male, female, neuters, moving and resting and so on -- that superior one is called the "abiding tortoise"
Second, the tortoise of formation: the seven water maṇḍalas come from the moist breath of the abiding tortoise and from the mouth of the tortoise formes a green maṇḍala of water. Above that, from the flesh of the tortoise form Meru, the oceans and major and minor continents and the golden firmament. The pores of the tortoise form as grass and trees. That is the description of the tortoise of formation.
The golden tortoise of existence is the tortoise of existence that comes from the meeting of the tortoise of abiding and the tortoise of formation. The head of the tortoise of existence faces south. The rear-end faces north. The four limbs are in the four intermediate directions.
From its white carapace, Grandfather Sky [khen pa rgad bu] formed as heaven.
Above, the region of the gods arises, the four formless realms, the great god Brahma of the pure abodes and so on. Below that arose the Trāyāstriṁśāḥ gods and the Paranirmitavaśavartino gods on the top of Meru. On the slopes of Meru arose the four great king gods, the sun, the moon and all of the planets and stars.
The sun and moon arose from the eyes of the tortoise, and the sound of thunder came from the sound of his palate. Lightning flashes from his extended tongue produced thunder bolts and hail.
Wind came from the breath of the tortoise, the five external elements came from his five functional organs.
Earthquakes were caused by the movements of the tortoise’s body. The golden belly of the tortoise formed or arose from Grandmother Earth [khon ma rgan mo] as the ground. And from that region of the nāgās, the eight wild nāgās and so on, arose.
Furthermore, that tortoise of existence is divided into two, method and wisdom or male and female. The golden tortoise of mentation is equal with space, the nature of method, and face down. The silver tortoise of phenomenal objects is equal with the surface of the world, is the nature of wisdom and lays on its back and so on, as it is in the many methods of explanation.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, November 27th, 2011 at 2:06 AM
Title: Re: Tibetan Astrological "overlap" with others?
Content:
maybay said:
I haven't heard good reviews about this book.


Malcolm wrote:
It's a fine book.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, November 27th, 2011 at 12:04 AM
Title: Re: TTM & herbs contra cancer
Content:
kalden yungdrung said:
Tashi delek,

We all know all the illness called cancer.

Regarding cancer there arose some questions in relation to TTM.

- How is cancer seen and general treated in TTM ?
- What are the herbs etc. which can cure what kind of cancer ?
- Where can we obtain those pills or medicines ?
- How can (what kind of) cancer be avoided regarding the TTM ?

Mutosg Marro
KY

Malcolm wrote:
Western medicine is better than TTM for cancer.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, November 27th, 2011 at 12:03 AM
Title: Re: Madyamika Sautrantika vs Prasangika
Content:
Namdrol said:
Not at all. Recall, all phenomena means all the five sense organs and sense objects, six consciousnesses, mental factors and unconditioned phenomena i.e. what is included in one skandha, one ayatana, and one dhātu.

One's own wisdom means that one encompasses all phenomena with omniscience.

Thus, no monism.

N


alwayson said:
I see.

So it is more a realization of the nature of all phenomena.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, precisely.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, November 27th, 2011 at 12:01 AM
Title: Re: Democracy in the country that gave birth to democracy
Content:
Namdrol said:
Since utopias are impossible
N

alwayson said:
Serious question:

Is it not possible for a rainbow body to stay in this world and help establish a better society?

Malcolm wrote:
Of course, this result is called phowa chenpo. Kuzang Dechen Lingpa achieved this. Hopefully ChNN will manifest this as well.

For some time, ChNN has been emphasizing that the best way to go is personal evolution through Dzogchen -- he is convinced this will change the whole world. Revolution does not work.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, November 26th, 2011 at 11:59 PM
Title: Re: Madyamika Sautrantika vs Prasangika
Content:
Namdrol said:
one perceives all phenomena as the display of one's wisdom.


alwayson said:
Monistic tendencies strike again LOL



Malcolm wrote:
Not at all. Recall, all phenomena means all the five sense organs and sense objects, six consciousnesses, mental factors and unconditioned phenomena i.e. what is included in one skandha, one ayatana, and one dhātu.

One's own wisdom means that one encompasses all phenomena with omniscience.

Thus, no monism.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, November 26th, 2011 at 11:54 PM
Title: Re: Madyamika Sautrantika vs Prasangika
Content:
tobes said:
Therefore, how can it be asserted that conventional phenomena disappear upon apprehension of the ultimate?

Malcolm wrote:
Well, for bodhisattva on the stages, apprehension of the conventional occurs only in post-equipoise. Buddhas experience no post-equipioise phase, ergo, no apprehension of conventional i.e. deluded phenomena.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, November 26th, 2011 at 11:50 PM
Title: Re: Madyamika Sautrantika vs Prasangika
Content:
Unknown said:
So I don't agree. "completely non-conceptual"

Malcolm wrote:
I said "completely spontaneous" for emphasis on spontaneity; not completely non-conceptual, which would be redundant.
N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, November 26th, 2011 at 11:47 PM
Title: Re: Madyamika Sautrantika vs Prasangika
Content:
tobes said:
I think there is more at stake here than the inevitable Tsong Khapa vs everyone else Tibetan framing of the problem.

I'd agree that the way a Buddha perceives a given phenomenal object is devoid of any conceptual content.

But it doesn't matter how spontaneous a Buddha's interactions with sentient beings may be: if the Buddha speaks she is using concepts. Concepts which are necessarily conventional.

How could speech possibly be non-conceptual???

Malcolm wrote:
It is simply a Tsongkhapa vs. the world argument.

As far as Buddha's speech goes, as the Guhyasamaja says, "A single vajra word is heard differently by different sentient beings". A Buddha's vocal actions are also non-conceptual.

This is a very huge polemical area in Tibetan Buddhism, but in general, Nyingmas, Sakyapas and Kagyupas hold that a Buddha's actions, whether verbal or physical are completely spontaneous and free from conceptuality and cognition of conventional signs.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, November 26th, 2011 at 11:34 PM
Title: Re: Democracy in the country that gave birth to democracy
Content:
alwayson said:
The utopias you guys want will only ever be unrealistic fantasies.

You want government instead of private corporations?

We already tried it. Its called Stalin.

Malcolm wrote:
Since utopias are impossible, I would like to have a strong, democratic government than can keep the economic and environmental impact of banks and corporations beneficial and in the interests of the people, and which provides a high level of educational and social welfare benefits to everyone.

But even that is utopian in this day and age of corporate rapaciousness and neo-liberal, chicago school, economic piracy.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, November 26th, 2011 at 9:03 AM
Title: Re: Democracy in the country that gave birth to democracy
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
As we gather together in solidarity to express a feeling of mass injustice, we must not lose sight of what brought us together. We write so that all people who feel wronged by the corporate forces of the world can know that we are your allies.

As one people, united, we acknowledge the reality: that the future of the human race requires the cooperation of its members; that our system must protect our rights, and upon corruption of that system, it is up to the individuals to protect their own rights, and those of their neighbors; that a democratic government derives its just power from the people, but corporations do not seek consent to extract wealth from the people and the Earth; and that no true democracy is attainable when the process is determined by economic power. We come to you at a time when corporations, which place profit over people, self-interest over justice, and oppression over equality, run our governments. We have peaceably assembled here, as is our right, to let these facts be known.

They have taken our houses through an illegal foreclosure process, despite not having the original mortgage.

They have taken bailouts from taxpayers with impunity, and continue to give Executives exorbitant bonuses.

They have perpetuated inequality and discrimination in the workplace based on age, the color of one’s skin, sex, gender identity and sexual orientation.

They have poisoned the food supply through negligence, and undermined the farming system through monopolization.

They have profited off of the torture, confinement, and cruel treatment of countless animals, and actively hide these practices.

They have continuously sought to strip employees of the right to negotiate for better pay and safer working conditions.

They have held students hostage with tens of thousands of dollars of debt on education, which is itself a human right.

They have consistently outsourced labor and used that outsourcing as leverage to cut workers’ healthcare and pay.

They have influenced the courts to achieve the same rights as people, with none of the culpability or responsibility.

They have spent millions of dollars on legal teams that look for ways to get them out of contracts in regards to health insurance.

They have sold our privacy as a commodity.

They have used the military and police force to prevent freedom of the press. They have deliberately declined to recall faulty products endangering lives in pursuit of profit.

They determine economic policy, despite the catastrophic failures their policies have produced and continue to produce.

They have donated large sums of money to politicians, who are responsible for regulating them.

They continue to block alternate forms of energy to keep us dependent on oil.

They continue to block generic forms of medicine that could save people’s lives or provide relief in order to protect investments that have already turned a substantial profit.

They have purposely covered up oil spills, accidents, faulty bookkeeping, and inactive ingredients in pursuit of profit.

They purposefully keep people misinformed and fearful through their control of the media.

They have accepted private contracts to murder prisoners even when presented with serious doubts about their guilt.

They have perpetuated colonialism at home and abroad. They have participated in the torture and murder of innocent civilians overseas.

They continue to create weapons of mass destruction in order to receive government contracts. *

To the people of the world,

We, the New York City General Assembly occupying Wall Street in Liberty Square, urge you to assert your power.

Exercise your right to peaceably assemble; occupy public space; create a process to address the problems we face, and generate solutions accessible to everyone.

To all communities that take action and form groups in the spirit of direct democracy, we offer support, documentation, and all of the resources at our disposal.

Join us and make your voices heard!

*These grievances are not all-inclusive.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, November 26th, 2011 at 8:44 AM
Title: Re: Madyamika Sautrantika vs Prasangika
Content:
Dechen Norbu said:
Wouldn't that mean then that Buddha would bump every object along his way?
Might there be the case that, at least from a Dzogchen perspective, all phenomena are recognized as ornaments, manifestation of the energy aspect and not taken as something existent? I'm just asking to see if I can make some sense out of this.


Namdrol said:
Buddhas perceive only wisdom.

tobes said:
A Buddha gets into a car. When she encounters a traffic light, does she need to distinguish between the conventional meanings of red, orange and green?

Malcolm wrote:
Depends on who you ask. According to the Gelugpas, yes -- according to everyone else, no.



tobes said:
These are nothing but imputations of conventional meaning: but to say that they are not perceived is to say that the Buddha cannot function amidst the conventions of human life.


Malcolm wrote:
Conventional truths are objects of delusion. Buddhas possess no delusion, therefore, do not perceive conventional truths.


tobes said:
Surely it is necessary for a Buddha to perceive conventional meanings a/ in order to communicate with sentient beings and b/ in order to function harmoniously in the world of sentient beings.

Malcolm wrote:
Not at all, a Buddha's interactions with sentient beings are completely spontaneous and non-conceptual.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, November 26th, 2011 at 7:10 AM
Title: Re: Root Lamas
Content:
kirtu said:
Anutarayoga tantra empowerment in Sakya is relatively rare.

Kirt

Namdrol said:
What are you talking about -- this is total nonsense.

kirtu said:
In what way?

Malcolm wrote:
You made as sound as if HYT empowerments were rare in Sakya -- when what you really means is that Sakya Lamas are rare.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, November 26th, 2011 at 6:52 AM
Title: Re: Root Lamas
Content:
kirtu said:
Anutarayoga tantra empowerment in Sakya is relatively rare.

Kirt

Malcolm wrote:
What are you talking about -- this is total nonsense.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, November 26th, 2011 at 6:51 AM
Title: Re: Root Lamas
Content:
kirtu said:
In Sakya the root lama is the lama who bestows highest yoga tantra empowerment:

heart said:
All of them?

/magnus


Malcolm wrote:
Yes. But then there is one's karmic root guru.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, November 26th, 2011 at 6:44 AM
Title: Re: Democracy in the country that gave birth to democracy
Content:
Namdrol said:
Yup. I do. Eventually, you will come to understand that the type of capitalism we have today is very destructive, that is, unless, like neo-cons, you have a superstitious fetish for the so called "free market" (which we tried in the late nineteenth century -- it did not work out to well).


alwayson said:
Can anyone mention a better economic system than the "the type of capitalism we have today"

Proven in the real world of course

Malcolm wrote:
The system of capitalism we had in the United States of America between 1945 -- 1972 -- Strong controls on financial industry, high taxes on the wealthy, etc. Better, but not perfect.

Since 1980, when Reagan began dismantling the New Deal, average Americans have gotten increasing more poor, and corporations have had increasingly high profits.

Since 1999, when the barriers between savings and loans and investment banks were dismantled, things have gotten markedly worse.

Greer's three economy analysis is very good. Read The Wealth of Nature: Economics as If Survival Mattered.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, November 26th, 2011 at 2:53 AM
Title: Re: Democracy in the country that gave birth to democracy
Content:
alwayson said:
Are you sure you want me to read those?

I actually thought Food Inc., was a POSITIVE documentary  LOL!


Namdrol said:
https://www.amazon.com/Shock-Doctrine-Rise-Disaster-Capitalism/dp/0312427999/ref=pd_sim_b_30 " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


alwayson said:
67 one star reviews

Malcolm wrote:
Yup. I do. Eventually, you will come to understand that the type of capitalism we have today is very destructive, that is, unless, like neo-cons, you have a superstitious fetish for the so called "free market" (which we tried in the late nineteenth century -- it did not work out to well).


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, November 26th, 2011 at 2:22 AM
Title: Re: Democracy in the country that gave birth to democracy
Content:


alwayson said:
I think you are conflating investment banks with corporations.

These are not the same.

Germany, the strongest country in the EU, has a ton of corporations and business incentivizing.

Malcolm wrote:
From where do you think corporations get their monetary capital?

Corporations, conceptually speaking, are not inherently bad. But you seem to have neglected the fact that banks (there is no point is talking about investment banks anymore, banks are banks) are in fact corporations. Moreover, you seem to have neglected the fact that due to moneyed interests, the market deregulate has done more to destroy our environment and economy than anything else. We can thank Reagan and his crew.

I suggest you read:

https://www.amazon.com/When-Corporations-World-David-Korten/dp/1887208046/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1322245235&sr=1-2 " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

https://www.amazon.com/Shock-Doctrine-Rise-Disaster-Capitalism/dp/0312427999/ref=pd_sim_b_30 " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, November 26th, 2011 at 2:04 AM
Title: Re: Democracy in the country that gave birth to democracy
Content:
Namdrol said:
You need to investigate more deeply.


alwayson said:
I guess you are generating your own electricity and typing on your homemade laptop.


Malcolm wrote:
Bread and circuses again. You are missing the point -- Most of what is wrong with the world environment and economy today is precisely a result of rapacious corporate behavior.

I can't educate you about this, but you can educate yourself.

The way corporations act these days is criminal. It does not matter than they provide goods and services to privileged people in first world countries (though the US is slipping quickly into a second tier nation).

What matters is that the free marketeer, radical capitalist ideology that they have sold to the US and Europe is destroying the world.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, November 26th, 2011 at 1:06 AM
Title: Re: Democracy in the country that gave birth to democracy
Content:
Namdrol said:
Democracy is not possible for as long as we allow banks and corporations to rule the world.


alwayson said:
Investment banks yes, I agree.   They should be broken up into small firms or something.

I don't agree that corporations are bad.


Malcolm wrote:
You need to investigate more deeply.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, November 25th, 2011 at 11:17 PM
Title: Re: Democracy in the country that gave birth to democracy
Content:
Heruka said:
democracy is described as two wolves and one sheep voting on whats for dinner.

gregkavarnos said:
There are various levels and economic bases for democracy.  A direct democracy with an economic base of mutual aid is not the same as a representative democracy with a capitalist economic base.


Malcolm wrote:
http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2011/11/mark-ames-austerity-fascism-in-greece- " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;–-the-real-1-doctrine.html

Fascists back in power in Greece.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, November 25th, 2011 at 7:18 AM
Title: Re: Buddhism on God
Content:
tobes said:
Again, let me clarify - my interest on this thread is basically epistemological.

Maybe I'm wrong, but it seems to me that the general trend so far has been for Buddhist's to articulate Buddhism as rationally coherent, and critique theism on the grounds that it's irrational (i.e. merely unfounded belief, assumption etc).

Therefore, there is clearly an epistemological commitment to rationality.

Before we go anywhere else, does that sound basically right?


Malcolm wrote:
We are merely following the Buddha in this assessment.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, November 25th, 2011 at 5:15 AM
Title: Re: Travelling with herbal medicine
Content:
Paul said:
I am currently taking Tibetan medicine and it's impressively effective. I have to go to another country soon on business and will be flying. However I'm not looking forward to getting bags of brown powder through customs. Has anyone done this? Is it best to go in my main suitcase to avoid the nonsense about not taking certain things in ones hand luggage?


Malcolm wrote:
Put it in your suitcase.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, November 25th, 2011 at 4:05 AM
Title: Re: ChNN's Vajra Armour teaching
Content:
Pero said:
Man now I'm confused. http://www.fpmt.org/media/resources/dharma-dates.html says it's on Friday. As well as a calendar in my language and some other stuff online. But then I also found stuff that says it's today (Thursday). Which is it LOL? I wanted to do some practice on new moon and planned it for tomorrow. But if it's today I'll try to do it today. Oh and I'm in Europe BTW...


Malcolm wrote:
Just follow calendar.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, November 25th, 2011 at 2:31 AM
Title: Re: Buddhism on God
Content:


BradleyWiggens said:
Each mind stream is a condition for every other mind stream (among other things) but not itself.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, this is called karana-hetu.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, November 25th, 2011 at 2:30 AM
Title: Re: Buddhism on God
Content:
alwayson said:
So if you are agreeing with me, you are agreeing with Namdrol LOL

BradleyWiggens said:
And this (karma and rebirth) is not something that can be objectively proven.


Malcolm wrote:
Agreed -- I never claimed they could be. In fact, I have stated innumerable times that karma and rebirth can only be yogically verified, for oneself.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, November 25th, 2011 at 2:27 AM
Title: Re: Buddhism on God
Content:
Namdrol said:
DO and karma require that mind-streams are unique, separate and beginningless.

BradleyWiggens said:
You are correct, but there are countless such mindstreams in you right now.

Malcolm wrote:
No.


BradleyWiggens said:
This means that each mind stream is affected by every other mind stream.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, mind streams can and do influence other mind streams.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, November 25th, 2011 at 1:15 AM
Title: Re: Buddhism on God
Content:
BradleyWiggens said:
Yet your misunderstanding of the 12 links betrays your misunderstanding of DO in general.

Namdrol said:
Why don't you state what my misunderstanding of the 12 links might be?

BradleyWiggens said:
I don't want to get in trouble with the moderators for taking this topic off-topic.   So you will be personally responsible if this happens, right?

This should probably go in a separate topic.

The 12 links of DO are not about physical life and death.  "Birth" is not about physical birth, and "death" is not about physical death.  It has nothing at all to do with the physical human body.

You imagine that there are separate streams of consciousness, which each one associated with a particular physical body.  This is not the case. It's like you are putting things in a cage, constricting them, when DO is precisely about unconstricting.

Malcolm wrote:
We simply disagree. DO also includes literal rebirth.

Buddha's teachings on DO and karma require that mind-streams are unique, separate and beginningless.

Therefore, you, Kevin Solway aka Bradley Wiggens, do not have a proper understanding of dependent origination. Your understanding of DO is distorted.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, November 25th, 2011 at 12:55 AM
Title: Re: Buddhism on God
Content:
alwayson said:
Unless you are Kevin Solway, who believes he has rigpa.

BradleyWiggens said:
I thought that Kevin Solway said that he definitely didn't have rigpa, as you define it?

In any case, I don't know why you wouldn't want to hear the views of someone who claims to know what they are talking about.

Malcolm wrote:
Because one thinks they are full of it?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, November 25th, 2011 at 12:51 AM
Title: Re: Buddhism on God
Content:
BradleyWiggens said:
Yet your misunderstanding of the 12 links betrays your misunderstanding of DO in general.


Malcolm wrote:
Why don't you state what my misunderstanding of the 12 links might be?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, November 25th, 2011 at 12:44 AM
Title: Re: Buddhism on God
Content:


BradleyWiggens said:
The problem is that since you have a literal interpretation of the 12 links of dependent origination, this means that you don't understand dependent origination yourself.

Malcolm wrote:
Kevin Solway, you should understand that there are two models of DO. The twelve links are the specific theory of DO applied to the process of samsara. It is derived from the general theory of DO, "Where this exists, that exists..." and so on.

The specific theory of DO also has four variations, serial, static, momentary and simultaneous.

Now, since the Buddha admonished Ananda for thinking DO was an easy read -- what are we to make of your claim to have "understood" it before encountering Buddhism?

In reality, DO is profound and subtle. DO is also one of those things that when we first read it, we all say, "wow, I already get that." But that does not mean we really understand DO. It merely means we recognize the concept to be true.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, November 25th, 2011 at 12:02 AM
Title: Re: Buddhism on God
Content:
BradleyWiggens said:
How do you know?   Have you done a survey of every person on earth, quizzed them as to their concept of "God", if they have any, and fully understood what they told you, regardless of what language they were speaking?

alwayson said:
LOL

Is there another one besides dualism and monism?

I would be interested if there was!


Malcolm wrote:
Don't feed trolls.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, November 24th, 2011 at 11:59 PM
Title: Re: Buddhism on God
Content:


BradleyWiggens said:
So how come I fully understood dependent origination, long before I ever studied Buddhism?

Malcolm wrote:
You didn't.

BTW, Hi Kev.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, November 24th, 2011 at 11:43 PM
Title: Re: Buddhism on God
Content:
alwayson said:
C. Dependent Origination (Buddhism)

BradleyWiggens said:
So of all the people in the world, only Buddhists have realized the simple truth of dependent origination?

Malcolm wrote:
Yup. Them's the facts.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, November 24th, 2011 at 11:15 PM
Title: Re: Democracy in the country that gave birth to democracy
Content:
gregkavarnos said:
Eeeeeerrrrr... no actually, what I am saying is that they want to be actively taking part in the creation of their reality and not having it forced on them by others.  That's what democracy is all about.

Malcolm wrote:
Democracy is not possible for as long as we allow banks and corporations to rule the world.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, November 24th, 2011 at 9:16 AM
Title: Re: Buddhism on God
Content:
tobes said:
But it's interesting, isn't it, that we're happy to get our conceptions of theism from "ordinary definitions/common folk" but not our conceptions of Buddhism.

Malcolm wrote:
Buddhism derives our notions of god (Prajapati, etc.) from Samkhya, etc. Not from common people.

So this is not an accurate portrayal.

Western theists and philosophers are not so original that their theologies require some sort of special reading by Buddhists when the theologians and philosophers are subject to investigation.

In reality, there are only so many definitions of god that one arrive at i.e. creator, etc.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, November 24th, 2011 at 7:37 AM
Title: Re: Democracy in the country that gave birth to democracy
Content:
alwayson said:
Bhutan??


Malcolm wrote:
I prefer living in the US. But that does not mean it is "the best and most awesome" country.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, November 24th, 2011 at 7:22 AM
Title: Re: Democracy in the country that gave birth to democracy
Content:
conebeckham said:
It's not simple.  At all.   And just because no country on Earth is "awesome," doesn't mean we should accept defeat, or ignore the conventional problems we have.  Though I don't forsee Utopia in our future, frankly.


alwayson said:
This is a cop out.

You all should name a real country that is your ideal.

Malcolm wrote:
Khechari realm.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, November 24th, 2011 at 6:49 AM
Title: Re: Democracy in the country that gave birth to democracy
Content:
alwayson said:
99% of Americans are not homeless.   Its really quite simple.

Malcolm wrote:
That does not mean america is working very well for that 99 percent.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, November 24th, 2011 at 6:39 AM
Title: Re: Democracy in the country that gave birth to democracy
Content:
Namdrol said:
Stat extrapolated from National Center for Homelessness adjusted for downturn. Average number of homeless people is about 2 million. Then of course there is the inadequately housed, and that number is much higher.


alwayson said:
Isn't that less than 1% of the population??

If the American system works for 99% of the population, you don't mess with it.

Malcolm wrote:
But it isn't. Wages have not increased to match cost of living increases for 30 years. The average salary in US is 30,000 or so. That 30 grand is worth much less than it was thirty years ago.

Your argument about play stations and other consumer items is what the romans called "panem et circuses" i.e. bread and circuses to keep the masses appeased and complacent.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, November 24th, 2011 at 5:31 AM
Title: Re: Democracy in the country that gave birth to democracy
Content:
Sönam said:
Curiously (not so in fact), poor country have less homelessness, just because peoples are much more in solidarity. The poor in those countries give food and a place to others poors ... and I speak about experience (in Africa)

David N. Snyder said:
Assuming Namdrol's statistic is correct, that would be about 1% for the U.S. From my experience in Africa, the percentage appears much higher. At night, you can literally see rows and rows of people sleeping on the sidewalks and some onto the streets, taking their chances of not getting run over by cars and taxis.

That is true about the culture of helping people, but it can only go so far when the poverty is at such a large scale.

Malcolm wrote:
Stat extrapolated from National Center for Homelessness adjusted for downturn. Average number of homeless people is about 2 million. Then of course there is the inadequately housed, and that number is much higher.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, November 24th, 2011 at 5:08 AM
Title: Re: Buddhism on God
Content:


Namdrol said:
They tend to regard all devas as protectors of one kind or another.

Yeshe said:
I can't be sure that common folk don't know the difference  - they may simply propitiate both Hindu and Buddhist deities for different purposes or simply be 'hedging their bets.

However, I agree with Namdrol.  It is most unlikely that they differentiate.  I hope that the practices of the worldly protectors all die in time.

Malcolm wrote:
I don't think you want that -- some, like Virupaksha and so forth, have been with us since the Buddha.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, November 24th, 2011 at 5:07 AM
Title: Re: Democracy in the country that gave birth to democracy
Content:
kirtu said:
Homelessness in the US is usually a result of direct poverty.

Kirt


alwayson said:
Lets not conflate poverty with homelessness though.

VAST majority of poor are NOT homeless.

Many, but not all, homeless are drug addicts and mentally ill people who refuse all treatment.

Malcolm wrote:
There are two to three million homeless people.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, November 24th, 2011 at 4:30 AM
Title: Re: Buddhism on God
Content:
Jnana said:
Sounds like these ancient Indian non-Buddhists knew what a Buddhist wasn't willing to swallow. And this qualification could easily be expanded to include the rejection of atheistic/materialist views as well by surveying the extant Indian Buddhist literature which addresses these issues.

Huseng said:
Ironically in Nepal it is common for people to making offerings at a Buddhist temple and then go across the street and worship Shiva. The common folk don't necessarily distinguish between a theist Hinduism and non-theist Buddhism.

Jnana said:
Which is a good reason for not taking refuge in the "common folk."

Malcolm wrote:
They tend to regard all devas as protectors of one kind or another.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, November 24th, 2011 at 2:37 AM
Title: Re: Choegyal Namkhai Norbu's USA Program for 2012
Content:
Dechen Norbu said:
Yes and generally one can register till the day they start.

Pero said:
Actually you don't have to be a member to attend a retreat. Non-members just don't get any discounts on the price.


Malcolm wrote:
In merger they created a "temporary" membership.

But not in US.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, November 24th, 2011 at 2:34 AM
Title: Re: Romney outright lying about Obama in a campaign ad
Content:


kirtu said:
People are over the Mormon thing.

Kirt


Malcolm wrote:
Born again Christians aren't. They make up a substantial portion of the GOP base.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, November 24th, 2011 at 2:33 AM
Title: Re: Romney outright lying about Obama in a campaign ad
Content:
alwayson said:
You all know the one I am takling about right?

The one where they use a quote of Obama, using a quote of McCain.

But they edit out the part, where he begins with 'McCain said'

Namdrol said:
Yes, I know. It is unlikely America will vote in a Mormon. If he is picked by the GOP, Obama is looking at four more years.

kirtu said:
People are over the Mormon thing.  And people like me are looking to vote Green forever now.

Kirt

Malcolm wrote:
I am a registered green, but the Green Party, at best, is a social ecology platform ala bookchin. I agree with the Green platform, but it does not go far enough.

Also, the Greens have been sidetracked by the labor movement.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, November 24th, 2011 at 12:56 AM
Title: Re: Romney outright lying about Obama in a campaign ad
Content:
alwayson said:
You all know the one I am takling about right?

The one where they use a quote of Obama, using a quote of McCain.

But they edit out the part, where he begins with 'McCain said'

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, I know. It is unlikely America will vote in a Mormon. If he is picked by the GOP, Obama is looking at four more years.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, November 24th, 2011 at 12:39 AM
Title: Re: Madyamika Sautrantika vs Prasangika
Content:
Tom said:
Namdrol,

Do you mind elaborating on the apparent contradiction…

"A correct perception takes ultimate truth as its object" and "most Madhyamakas would say that objects are not perceived at all"

Or put another way how do you equate for Candra referring to ultimate truth as an object with Santideva's emphasis that it is not an object (9:2)

I understand that Gelugpa's in post meditation identify emptiness as an object and as such need to tweak Santideva's position but what about most Madhyamikas where ultimate truth is beyond any categorizations don't they need to tweak Candra's assertion which refers to ultimate truth as an object?


Malcolm wrote:
Candra is speaking conventionally, hence no contradiction.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, November 24th, 2011 at 12:37 AM
Title: Re: Romney outright lying about Obama in a campaign ad
Content:
alwayson said:
You all know about this?

I've never seen anything like it.

If this is how its going to be, America is going to be tore apart.


Malcolm wrote:
It already has been.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 23rd, 2011 at 8:53 AM
Title: Re: Madyamika Sautrantika vs Prasangika
Content:
Dechen Norbu said:
And wouldn't perceiving wisdom mean recognizing all phenomena as the energy aspect instead of not perceiving phenomena at all? Perceiving manifestation "as it is" instead of not perceiving manifestation? Again, just asking to see if this makes sense.

Malcolm wrote:
one perceives all phenomena as the display of one's wisdom. But this is not really part of madhyamaka.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 23rd, 2011 at 8:36 AM
Title: Re: Madyamika Sautrantika vs Prasangika
Content:
Dechen Norbu said:
Wouldn't that mean then that Buddha would bump every object along his way?
Might there be the case that, at least from a Dzogchen perspective, all phenomena are recognized as ornaments, manifestation of the energy aspect and not taken as something existent? I'm just asking to see if I can make some sense out of this.


Malcolm wrote:
Buddhas perceive only wisdom.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 23rd, 2011 at 8:23 AM
Title: Re: Madyamika Sautrantika vs Prasangika
Content:
conebeckham said:
Namdrol-
Thanks.  Would it be fair, then, to say that a correct perception does not see "objects," or phenomena, per se?


Malcolm wrote:
This where there is a huge divide between gelug and the rest of Tibetan madhyamakas. Gelugs would tend to say what is not perceived is inherent existence of objects; most Madhyamakas would say that objects are not perceived at all.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 23rd, 2011 at 5:56 AM
Title: Re: Madyamika Sautrantika vs Prasangika
Content:
conebeckham said:
I'll ask the "leading question" then...if objects can be perceived only in two ways, correctly and incorrectly, and incorrect perception is relative truth, then what is correct perception?

Or, in other words, is "perception" always incorrect?

Malcolm wrote:
A correct perception takes ultimate truth as its object.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 23rd, 2011 at 5:39 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:
Fa Dao said:
Will the upcoming webcast retreat in New York on Dec 9-14 be about Tibetan language or will it be like a normal webcast retreat?


Malcolm wrote:
Strictly about Tibetan language.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 23rd, 2011 at 5:38 AM
Title: Re: Tibetan Astrological "overlap" with others?
Content:
padma norbu said:
Well, that's what I was wondering; if such personality typing holds any water in Tibetan Astrology.

Namdrol said:
It does not really exist per se. Tibetan astrology is mostly about calendar creation and figuring out whether one will have obstacles and what do do about them. There is some procedures related to marriage, how to dispose of bodies and so on as well.

padma norbu said:
Thanks! I've never bought Namkhai Norbu's calendar before... have you? If so, do you notice things move along more swimmingly by following it? I think I would feel weird about not doing something on a certain day because it's not looking like a beneficial day for it, but then again... if it works...

Malcolm wrote:
I do follow astrology and yes I use Rinpoche's calendars and yes I do find that things move along more swimmingly if I pay attention.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 23rd, 2011 at 3:51 AM
Title: Re: Tibetan Astrological "overlap" with others?
Content:
padma norbu said:
Well, that's what I was wondering; if such personality typing holds any water in Tibetan Astrology.

Malcolm wrote:
It does not really exist per se. Tibetan astrology is mostly about calendar creation and figuring out whether one will have obstacles and what do do about them. There is some procedures related to marriage, how to dispose of bodies and so on as well.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 23rd, 2011 at 2:23 AM
Title: Re: Tibetan Astrological "overlap" with others?
Content:
padma norbu said:
This is pretty surprising stuff for me. I wonder when these cultures came into contact with each other... ancient Greece/India connection?


Malcolm wrote:
Yes, three are three main astronomical/astrolgical Siddhantas in India, Surya, Yavana (Greek) and Romish (Roman).


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 23rd, 2011 at 2:07 AM
Title: Re: Tibetan Astrological "overlap" with others?
Content:


padma norbu said:
Is there any overlap with this kind of detail (rising sign, trine, square, etc.) and the elements, animals, trigram, etc.?

Malcolm wrote:
None.


padma norbu said:
Do signs like Aries, Virgo, Gemini, Libra, etc. compare roughly equivalent with anything in Tibetan Astrology or it's just completely different altogether?

Malcolm wrote:
It is part of Kalacakra astrology.

padma norbu said:
Have you ever sat down and tried to compare a natal chart from a Tropical Western Astrological perspective vs. the Tibetan Astrological equivalent based on the year, time and place of a person's birth?

Malcolm wrote:
No. I have not.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, November 22nd, 2011 at 11:30 PM
Title: Re: Tibetan Astrological "overlap" with others?
Content:
padma norbu said:
I am of two minds on astrology; on the left hand (passive), I regard it with suspicion and doubt (sort of the 'default' position), but on the right hand (active) I keep an open-minded and superstitious leaning in favor of it.

The interesting thing, to me, is that Tropical Astrology is supposed to be bunk according to many people out there who favor Sidereel Astrology or Tibetan Astrology, but the older I get, the more I happen to fall into conversations with people about astrology and people always say the same things regarding certain signs.

I'm just curious what anyone who's studied multiple systems thoroughly has to say. I know nothing about Tibetan Astrology.

Malcolm wrote:
Tibetan astrology (skar rtsi) is tropical, since the Kalacakra is based on a tropical zodiac, unlike Jyotish, which is based on a sidereal zodiac. Incidentally, Kalacakra sets out to correct the calculations of Surya Siddhanta.

Elemental calculation ('byung rtsi or nag rtsi), often miscalled " Tibetan astrology", has nothing to do with horoscopy, and so on, so the Zodiac, tropical or sidereal, is perfectly irrelevent. It is based on the five elements i.e. wood, fire, earth, metal and water; the twelve years, tiger and so on; the eight trigrams (spar kha); what we call the magic square of saturn and its nine versions (sme ba).


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, November 21st, 2011 at 10:57 PM
Title: Re: Buddhism on God
Content:


tobes said:
Indeed. And also the inverse: why do so many western Buddhists so desperately feel the need to refute and negate the G-word whenever it appears near the context of Dharma?

Namdrol said:
Because it is a signifier that posits any number of monolithic, totalizing concepts that have nothing do with Dharma.


tobes said:
The truth is, this requires more philosophical work than simply decreeing that the signifier has nothing to do with Dharma -


Malcolm wrote:
No, it does not. And that is why this whole thread is mostly just intellectual masturbation.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, November 21st, 2011 at 10:33 AM
Title: Re: Madyamika Sautrantika vs Prasangika
Content:
Mariusz said:
Thank you very much conebeckham. You have exactly the same objections to Namdrol:

Malcolm wrote:
Your objection is totally faulty since your objecting to something I never said.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, November 20th, 2011 at 10:57 PM
Title: Re: Madyamika Sautrantika vs Prasangika
Content:
Mariusz said:
Perhaps what differentiate us is that I take these so-called "objects" as pedagogical tools only, expedient meaning but not as the definitive.

Namdrol said:
As I said, you are not understanding my point, and imputing things on to me that I have never stated.

Mariusz said:
The Consequentialists (Prasangikas) are not imputing anything You presented something of Candrakirti that suggested for me: first: the objects are perceived in the ultimate, second: all the "relative" is totally faulty. So can you please write what is you understanding of what you presented?

Excuse me, here was your presentation, not mine:
But false perception is mthong brdzun, so what Candrakirti is clearly saying is that false/faulty/incorrect perception is relative, or totally obscuring, truth. The two truths are about how objects are perceived. They can be perceived in only two ways, correctly and incorrectly. Perceiving them incorrectly, a false perception of them is called relative truth.

Malcolm wrote:
This does not say that objects are perceived in the ultimate.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, November 19th, 2011 at 11:33 AM
Title: Re: Buddhism on God
Content:


tobes said:
Indeed. And also the inverse: why do so many western Buddhists so desperately feel the need to refute and negate the G-word whenever it appears near the context of Dharma?

Malcolm wrote:
Because it is a signifier that posits any number of monolithic, totalizing concepts that have nothing do with Dharma.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, November 19th, 2011 at 1:18 AM
Title: Re: Madyamika Sautrantika vs Prasangika
Content:
Caz said:
I take note that there seem to be very few Rime practitoners for outside the Gelug tradition who would be familiar with The Gaden oral lineage of Mahamudra perhapes this is once again because others hold Je Rinpoches teachings to lack Authenticity ? As Namdrol has kindly elaborated people respect Je Rinpoche but apparently do not respect him enough to accord his teachings rightful authentication.

Malcolm wrote:
AFA Ganden Mahamudra goes, even within Gelug this teaching at one time was highly controversial since it first appeared with the First Panchen Lama.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, November 19th, 2011 at 12:44 AM
Title: Re: Gyalwa Gyatso / Red Avalokiteshvara / Jinasagara
Content:
Silent Bob said:
First he was asked by Marpa to go to India and receive these teachings on the nine dharmas of the formless dakinis from Tiphupa.


Namdrol said:
This part of Gampo abbey's thing is wrong. Mila asked Rechungpa to go, not marpa. Rechungpa never met Marpa.

Silent Bob said:
You're right--that part doesn't make sense. Please try to forgive me.

Malcolm wrote:
You are not at fault, so nothing to forgive.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, November 19th, 2011 at 12:38 AM
Title: Re: Madyamika Sautrantika vs Prasangika
Content:
Mariusz said:
You see, earlier I also was argued about definition of "the seeming" because the terms "faulty" or false" (for all the seeming) are a little tricky.

Malcolm wrote:
You are choosing to follow a very non-standard and rather modern translation for kun rdzob, samvritti -- for which the vast majority of people have for many years translated as "relative". There in no problem with this per se.

However, you are conflating two terms (mthong brdzun pa i.e. false/faulty/incorrect, etc. perception) with (kun rdzob (for which you like "seeming" following KB), the object of a false perception.

There is a breakdown of communication because we are not using the same English terms to discuss these things.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, November 19th, 2011 at 12:13 AM
Title: Re: Gyalwa Gyatso / Red Avalokiteshvara / Jinasagara
Content:
Silent Bob said:
First he was asked by Marpa to go to India and receive these teachings on the nine dharmas of the formless dakinis from Tiphupa.


Malcolm wrote:
This part of Gampo abbey's thing is wrong. Mila asked Rechungpa to go, not marpa. Rechungpa never met Marpa.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, November 18th, 2011 at 11:21 PM
Title: Re: Madyamika Sautrantika vs Prasangika
Content:
Mariusz said:
Perhaps what differentiate us is that I take these so-called "objects" as pedagogical tools only, expedient meaning but not as the definitive.

Malcolm wrote:
As I said, you are not understanding my point, and imputing things on to me that I have never stated.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, November 18th, 2011 at 11:10 PM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:
Namdrol said:
In Dzogchen the method of trying to discover what your actual state is begins with introduction. In Vajrayana, it begins with receiving some kind of empowerment, in Hinayana and Mahayana, it begins with receiving some kind of vows.

mint said:
So, the Song of the Vajra book and cultivating guruyoga are only recommendations/tools but not mandatory?

Also, how does one go about purchasing restricted books?  Am I given some sort of secret password after receiving transmission?

Malcolm wrote:
Nothing is mandatory in Dzogchen,at least not the way it is taught by ChNN.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, November 18th, 2011 at 10:54 PM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:


mint said:
What is a Samaya?  Is Lhug-Pa per Namdrol correct that all who receive the DT will receive a Samaya?
What happens if I don't immediately act on studying the Song of the Vajra book or cultivating guruyoga?
Have I been given contradictory advice?

Malcolm wrote:
A samaya is a comittment. In the case of receiving any Vajrayana transmission, it is impossible that someone did not receive some kind of comittment. But in Dzogchen the primary comittment is to recognizing and then maintaining knowledge of your actual state. So to begin with, you should be trying to discover what that is. This is the point of all Dharma. So on this point, all Dharma teachings have the same comittment. In Dzogchen the method of trying to discover what your actual state is begins with introduction. In Vajrayana, it begins with receiving some kind of empowerment, in Hinayana and Mahayana, it begins with receiving some kind of vows.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, November 18th, 2011 at 9:23 AM
Title: Re: Reasons for Conventional Reality
Content:
deepbluehum said:
Do you ever get the feeling you are in a room full of smokers discussing the fresh air in Switzerland?


Namdrol said:
No, I get the feeling that I am a non-smoker trying to convince smokers that they should breath fresh air.

deepbluehum said:
I meant except you of course. I'd like to read a good fishin' tale. Know any?


Malcolm wrote:
Old man and the sea?

Moby Dick?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, November 18th, 2011 at 9:17 AM
Title: Re: Reasons for Conventional Reality
Content:
deepbluehum said:
Do you ever get the feeling you are in a room full of smokers discussing the fresh air in Switzerland?


Malcolm wrote:
No, I get the feeling that I am a non-smoker trying to convince smokers that they should breath fresh air.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, November 18th, 2011 at 8:44 AM
Title: Re: Reasons for Conventional Reality
Content:
Lhug-Pa said:
http://www.dharmafellowship.org/library/texts/the-cuckoo-of-awareness.htm, http://gnosticteachings.org/books-by-samael-aun-weor/cosmic-teachings-of-a-lama/1259-alaya-and-paramartha.html, and http://gnosticteachings.org/books-by-samael-aun-weor/cosmic-teachings-of-a-lama/1278-substances-atoms-forces.html.


Malcolm wrote:
The three own natures are irrevelant in any discussion of Madhyamaka.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, November 18th, 2011 at 5:24 AM
Title: Re: Reasons for Conventional Reality
Content:
conebeckham said:
Perhaps we need to define what a "view" is.

Acchantika said:
View or position (Pali diṭṭhi, Sanskrit dṛṣṭi) is a central idea in Buddhism. In Buddhist thought, in contrast with the commonsense understanding, a view is not a simple, abstract collection of propositions, but a charged interpretation of experience which intensely shapes and affects thought, sensation, and action. Having the proper mental attitude toward views is therefore considered an integral part of the Buddhist path.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/View _(Buddhism" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;)

I personally feel this is a pretty good definition.

gad rgyangs said:
N doesn't say he doesn't have any view (drsti) he says he has no thesis (pratijñā)

Malcolm wrote:
Sure he says he has no views:

gang gis thugs brtse nyer bzung nas/ /lta ba thams cad spang ba'i phyir/ /dam pa'i chos ni ston mdzad pa/ /gau ta ma de la phyag 'tshal lo

"I prostrate to Gotama, who, through his loving mind, taught the sublime Dharma in order to abandon all views".


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, November 18th, 2011 at 5:19 AM
Title: Re: Reasons for Conventional Reality
Content:
Namdrol said:
So in other words, he is starting with what the opponenet takes as real, correct?

In this case, how is this a) his beleif b) a philosophical position of his? The answer is, actually, they are not his beleif nor his philosophical position.

M

gad rgyangs said:
He's accepting the validity of the two truths scheme, which (he says) is what Buddhas rely on to teach "truth". He would have to maintain either that he has already demonstrated the validity of this schema through his argumentation earlier in the book, or that he's accepting it on faith since Buddhas rely on it. In either case, its a philosophical position.

Malcolm wrote:
But if he does not accept the validity of conventional truth (he does not) how can you say he is erecting a philosophical position around the two truths?

Remember, he states "Since the Jinas have proclaimed nirvana alone is true, what wise person would not understand the rest is false?"

The two truths, are for Nāgārjuna merely a pragmatic methodology used by Buddhas to lead sentient beings from delusion to non-delusion. But they are not a philosophical system, at least, not for Nagarjuna and Aryadeva. In other words, if anything, the two truths are a pedagogical method, and that is all.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, November 18th, 2011 at 4:52 AM
Title: Re: Reasons for Conventional Reality
Content:


gad rgyangs said:
which contains all kinds of views about what conventional truth is, what the ultimate and nirvana are. In short, a whole worldview, not to mention all kinds of epistemological beliefs about what is or isn't valid reasoning etc.

Namdrol said:
All kinds of views? Describe them please and lets see of they are in fact views. For starters, what is a conventional truth according to Nāgārjuna. And why is this a thesis?

gad rgyangs said:
As it says two karikas earlier, conventional truth is worldly truth, that is, consensus reality. It isn't a thesis (neither he nor I said so), because he isn't trying to prove it: he's taking it as a given, which is even worse as it is an unproven belief.

Malcolm wrote:
So in other words, he is starting with what the opponenet takes as real, correct?

In this case, how is this a) his beleif b) a philosophical position of his? The answer is, actually, they are not his beleif nor his philosophical position.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, November 18th, 2011 at 4:26 AM
Title: Re: Reasons for Conventional Reality
Content:


gad rgyangs said:
which contains all kinds of views about what conventional truth is, what the ultimate and nirvana are. In short, a whole worldview, not to mention all kinds of epistemological beliefs about what is or isn't valid reasoning etc.

Malcolm wrote:
All kinds of views? Describe them please and lets see of they are in fact views. For starters, what is a conventional truth according to Nāgārjuna. And why is this a thesis?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, November 18th, 2011 at 4:12 AM
Title: Re: The Bad and The Ugly
Content:
Dechen Norbu said:
Hi Ron, can you give me some sources for me to find those episodes you talk about? The maitreyan revolutions thing. I never heard of it, but as this is the second time you talk about it...
Is http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Maitreya " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; your source?


Malcolm wrote:
The phenomena of Maitreya millenialism and the vigorous violence these Chinese cults engaged in are well know to history. But they have nothing really to do with Buddhism.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, November 18th, 2011 at 4:08 AM
Title: Re: Reasons for Conventional Reality
Content:
Namdrol said:
For example, what kind of philosphical position does Nāgārjuna hold. Please provide and example.

gad rgyangs said:
jeez, take your pick. how about 24.10 (and now thanks to Terma we have Bocking's translation to use):

"Unless you rely on the conventional truth
You will not attain the ultimate meaning.
Unless you attain the ultimate meaning
You will not attain nirvana."


Malcolm wrote:
This sounds like a prescription, not a position.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, November 18th, 2011 at 3:32 AM
Title: Re: Ojas (general discussion)
Content:
Lhug-Pa said:
My main focus is Dzogchen, yet I'm not considering to abandon Gnosis either; however I'll refrain from saying much more about this for right now, as I do not want to become somehow responsible for causing any sort of split in the Sangha (there are many other disciples of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche who post here).

If in Meditating upon it I conclude that something more should be said, then perhaps I will.


Best Regards


Malcolm wrote:
It's not about meditation or gnosis, its about physiology.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, November 18th, 2011 at 3:01 AM
Title: Re: Reasons for Conventional Reality
Content:
gad rgyangs said:
three views:

eternalist - "exists"

nihilist - "does not exist"

madhyamaka - "not 'exists', also not 'does not exist'"

Namdrol said:
This last view is refuted by Madhyamaka. This is explained most cleary by Aryadeva in the Jñānasarasammucaya.

gad rgyangs said:
ok six views then.

right now im sorting out N's use of the word pratijñā in VV and its use as a technical term in the Nyaya system.... basically it seems that a distinction needs to be made between the thesis of a syllogism, which N disavows, and philosophical positions, which his texts are of course full of. You can't just sweep everything under the word "view" because he didn't.

Malcolm wrote:
For example, what kind of philosphical position does Nāgārjuna hold. Please provide and example.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, November 18th, 2011 at 2:59 AM
Title: Re: 100 Syllable Mantra SUPO KAYO ME BHAVA
Content:
dakini_boi said:
Wow, Tantular, thank you.  You've cleared up my confusion.


Malcolm wrote:
Yes, nice explanation.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, November 18th, 2011 at 2:39 AM
Title: Re: Madyamika Sautrantika vs Prasangika
Content:
Mariusz said:
Thank you for continuing. It will benefit all of us.  Of course I took it: a correct perception of them (the perceived objects) is called ultimate truth. Thats why I asked you:  "Do you really think the so-called "objects", somewhere "out there", can be perceived correctly in the ultimate truth"?

Malcolm wrote:
Candrakirti very specificially says "yang dag mthong yul gang de de nyid de" i.e. " Any object [yul] of a correct (yang dag) perception (mthong) that is real (de nyid) " i.e. an ultimate truth. The he says mthong ba brdzun pa kun rdzob bden par gsungs i.e. "[The object of] a false perception is a relative truth."

He also specfies very precisely just before these two lines:

/dngos kun yang dag brdzun pa mthong ba yis/ /dngos rnyed ngo bo gnyis ni 'dzin par 'gyur

"Since all things are perceived correctly and falsely;
all things will possess two natures.

He then explains in his commenatary:

de'i phyir dngos po thams cad rang bzhin de gnyis 'dzin pa yin no/ /rang bzhin de gnyis las kyang mthong ba yang dag pa'i yul gang yin pa de ni de nyid de/ de ni don dam pa'i bden pa'o zhes bya ba'i don to/ /de'i rang gi ngo bo ni bshad par bya'o/ /mthong ba brdzun pa'i yul gang yin pa de ni kun rdzob kyi bden pa'o/ /de'i phyir de ltar bden pa gnyis rnam par gzhag nas/ mthong ba brdzun pa rnams la mthong ba yang dag pa dang brdzun pa nyid las

Therefore, all things possess two natures. Also out of those two natures, any object of a correct perception means that it is called "ultimate truth". It's own nature has been explained. Any object of a false perception is a relative truth. Therefore, after having demonstrated the two truths, among false perceptions there are also true and false."

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, November 18th, 2011 at 12:13 AM
Title: Re: Madyamika Sautrantika vs Prasangika
Content:
Mariusz said:
Can you specify what exactly the saying you mean? I compared only: "The two truths are about how objects are perceived. They can be perceived in only two ways, correctly and incorrectly. Perceiving them incorrectly, a false perception of them is called relative truth" with mine ""The ultimate is not the sphere of cognition ("perceptions" whatever if "false" or "correct") It is said that cognition is the seeming (only)" . I did not see agreement here.

Jnana said:
Center of the Sunlit Sky, p. 85:
There is no contradiction between, first, the explanation that the ultimate is taken as the object of the wisdom of noble ones and, second, the teaching in some sūtras and treatises that it is not the sphere of cognition.

Mariusz said:
Excuse me, I have not the book with me now to check the context. Are you quoting on the wisdom of noble ones that is beyond the perceptions of objects, beyond all reference points? If so, it agrees with Santideva saying, but not with the saying of Namdrol.


Malcolm wrote:
What do you take Namdrol to be saying? In your own words please.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, November 18th, 2011 at 12:07 AM
Title: Re: Can someone please post some works of Nagarjuna?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Bocking's Nagarjuna in China is one of the clearest. Full MMK plus commentary closely related to Buddhapalita which clear identifies positions. Translation of Kumarajiva's translation.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, November 17th, 2011 at 11:08 PM
Title: Re: Madyamika Sautrantika vs Prasangika
Content:


Caz said:
Ah Now I see Thanks for that Namdrol this is probley where alot of the Anamosity toward Gelugpa's Originally arose from. So I take it on that root practitoners from Non Gelug traditions would see Lama Tsongkhapas recieved Mahamudra teachings from Manjushri as equally false and wrong then ?

Namdrol said:
Well, while it is possible for ordinary people to have pure visions, they are not usually regarded as the basis for having large amounts of faith in that person.

Caz said:
Im sure your well aware what Implication that would have for the Gelug lineage and all of its teachings and transmitted lineages then. That it would be a false lineage.


Malcolm wrote:
No, Tsongkhapa was a good yogi, and had experience. He received the transmissions of the tantras, practiced them, was skilled in the arts of Vajramaster, and conveyed them properly, he was am interesting and novel scholar. However, it is precisely his novelty that landed him in hot water with those who were not his students.

In this instance, his students had lots of faith in him and thus there is a new lineage. Those who were not his students rather resented the Sakya sarmas as they were called for a while, these new Sakyapas later known as Gelugpas.

So while we all respect Tsongkhapa, we do not all assume that he achieved awakening.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, November 17th, 2011 at 10:53 PM
Title: Re: Reasons for Conventional Reality
Content:
gad rgyangs said:
three views:

eternalist - "exists"

nihilist - "does not exist"

madhyamaka - "not 'exists', also not 'does not exist'"

Malcolm wrote:
This last view is refuted by Madhyamaka. This is explained most cleary by Aryadeva in the Jñānasarasammucaya.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, November 17th, 2011 at 6:53 AM
Title: Re: St. John of the Cross on Spiritual Materialism
Content:
mint said:
He may have even been a pratyekabuddha.

Namdrol said:
Quite impossble. Pratyekabuddhas only occur when there is no Buddha.

N

TMingyur said:
Then it would be possible because at that time there was none.

kind regards


Malcolm wrote:
No, because the Buddha's sasana remains. Pratyekabuddhas only occur when there is no Buddha's sasana, to be more precise.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, November 17th, 2011 at 6:52 AM
Title: Re: Poll: Which Operating System Do You Use?
Content:
Namdrol said:
Sorry, my boy, that is just not the case. You can't FUD your way out of this.


alwayson said:
Thats absolutely the case.

Famed Mac security expert Charlie Miller, who won multiple years for the fast Mac hack at Pwn2Own, comments, " Mac OS X is no more secure than any other operating system. It has vulnerabilities, and it will let you download and run malware. The difference is that there simply isn't that much malware written for it. The bad guys have focused all their energies at Windows, which makes up the vast majority of the computers out there. However, as market share for Macs continues to inch up, that equation is going to change and bad guys will begin to focus in on Macs, if that hasn't already started to happen. And as I mentioned above, Macs are no more inherently secure than Windows, so when the bad guys decide to go after them with gusto, it'll get ugly fast."


Malcolm wrote:
More FUD. Same stuff we have been hearing for years.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, November 17th, 2011 at 6:47 AM
Title: Re: Madyamika Sautrantika vs Prasangika
Content:


Caz said:
Ah Now I see Thanks for that Namdrol this is probley where alot of the Anamosity toward Gelugpa's Originally arose from. So I take it on that root practitoners from Non Gelug traditions would see Lama Tsongkhapas recieved Mahamudra teachings from Manjushri as equally false and wrong then ?

Malcolm wrote:
Well, while it is possible for ordinary people to have pure visions, they are not usually regarded as the basis for having large amounts of faith in that person.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, November 17th, 2011 at 5:50 AM
Title: Re: Poll: Which Operating System Do You Use?
Content:
Namdrol said:
All holes a fixable, the point is, there should not be so many.

alwayson said:
Lets be clear that Mac has more such holes than Windows.

Malcolm wrote:
Sorry, my boy, that is just not the case. You can't FUD your way out of this.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, November 17th, 2011 at 5:43 AM
Title: Re: Poll: Which Operating System Do You Use?
Content:


Namdrol said:
http://arstechnica.com/business/news/2011/11/microsoft-fails-to-patch-duqu-but-fixes-critical-hole-in-windows-tcpip-stack.ars " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


alwayson said:
These are just typical updates that Microsoft releases.  My PC automatically installs them.  I don't even have to think about it.

You made it sound like there are some fundamental unfixable holes to Windows.

Malcolm wrote:
All holes a fixable, the point is, there should not be so many.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, November 17th, 2011 at 5:22 AM
Title: Re: Poll: Which Operating System Do You Use?
Content:


Namdrol said:
If this were true, there would not be so many holes in Windows.

N


alwayson said:
Who says there are holes in Windows 7?

There aren't any holes on Windows 7.

Like I said, it has UAC.


Malcolm wrote:
http://arstechnica.com/business/news/2011/11/microsoft-fails-to-patch-duqu-but-fixes-critical-hole-in-windows-tcpip-stack.ars " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, November 17th, 2011 at 5:20 AM
Title: Re: comparative sdom gsum texts
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
There is a section at the end of the book that details this.


xylem said:
lama namdrol...

i probably didn't make my question clear enough.  kongtrul's buddhist ethics is exhaustive in presenting the three systems of vows.  it is however, not exhaustive in presenting how different masters and schools understand the combined practice of these three systems of vows.  jan-ulrich sobisch (copenhagen) has written about how there are very subtle but often very substantial differences in the understanding how the three vows are held and practiced by an individual.  some masters, like jigten sumgon suggest that the three vows are essentially of the same nature as they are antidotes to the three poisons.  others like gampopa suggest that they are very distinct because they come into existence by very different rituals.  some masters suggest all the vows must be assumed together, each one supporting the other, while others suggest it is possible and even necessary to drop the outer aspects of the pratimoksha for the practice of mantra... while others see them being possessed upwardly, the higher systems perfecting the intention of the lower ones.

given the tibetan proclivities for comparative tenets and hemeneutics, it would seem natural that ethical comparative works might also be authored.

-xy
i am not overly familiar with the different genres of tibetan religious literature.  are there any comparative texts on the three vow systems?  i know different authors criticize and analyze different points of other authors, but are there any comparative treatments in the tradition?

-xy


Namdrol said:
Kongtruls' Buddhist Ethics is exhaustive in this respect.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, November 17th, 2011 at 4:18 AM
Title: Re: Poll: Which Operating System Do You Use?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
People use computers for three things:

Communications
Productivity
Entertainment


Most people have no need and do no want to tinker with their boxes. They just want a hassel free computer -- and for a hassle free computer, you cannot beat a mac.








wisdom said:
Like in many cases, we give up freedom for security.

Mac may be more secure, but there are far fewer variations available. When you look at things like the apps store you can see how much stricter (and therefore less free) Mac is vs. PC/Android. People who build gaming computers to my knowledge almost always do this with PCs, and most gamers own PCs and not Macs. Many games are released on Mac only after on PC. Everything Mac is more expensive. Mac is a single corporation, PC's can be (like a Dell computer), but often the parts and programs are all separate entities, so you have more choice in which companies, which hardware, and which software you want to have and support.

Basically as a Mac user you are a Mac user in its entirety, and must abide by the rules that Apple puts forth. As a PC user you can have thousands of permutations of hardware and software, and there really are no rules. You can build your own PC, have a warranty for each piece of hardware, and if any burns out you can just fix it yourself. No warranty is broken for fixing your own computer, which is cheaper and easier on every level if you know what you're doing. In terms of customization you can fit a TON Of things in a PC. Your expansion capabilities are also much higher. If you have a PC and a new better CPU comes out, you just buy a new motherboard/CPU, much cheaper than being forced to buy a whole new computer for only slightly more speed.

In terms of security a good anti-virus and spyware program, and a little forethought about what you are downloading and clicking on, will remove almost all potential security breaches from happening.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, November 17th, 2011 at 3:34 AM
Title: Re: Poll: Which Operating System Do You Use?
Content:
Namdrol said:
and virtually all require user permission to occur. This is not the case with Windows.

alwayson said:
Depends on the version. Windows 7 has UAC which I am sure you are aware of.

UAC prompts you every time some code wants to run.


Malcolm wrote:
If this were true, there would not be so many holes in Windows.

Face it, Windows is designed to run in a trusted enterprise. It is not safe machine. I have run my mac, without firewall or any security on the net behind a standard NAT router and have never been hacked or even tickled for years.

No workstation mac has ever been hacked. Macs that have been hacked are webservers, and only because they are running some kind of webserver with outdated code. But the OS itself is very bullet proof unless you download something on purpose and install it, like mac defender.

You just cannot make the same claim with any version of Windows.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, November 17th, 2011 at 3:01 AM
Title: Re: Madyamika Sautrantika vs Prasangika
Content:


Tsongkhapafan said:
That's actually not so because Tsongkhapa realized emptiness directly much later when he was able to see Manjushri  and receive teachings from him directly.


Malcolm wrote:
Yes, I understand that this is what you believe. You will forgive me for pointing out that Tsongkhapa is not universally regarded as someone who attained the path of seeing. We can respect Tsongkhapa as a great pracitioner and scholar without acquiescing to your demand that we perceive him to be an aryan pudgala.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, November 17th, 2011 at 2:55 AM
Title: Re: Buddhism on God
Content:
mañjughoṣamaṇi said:
at least in the early phases these were not compatible schools of thought and were in disagreement with each other.

All the best.

Malcolm wrote:
Correct; Prajñapāramitā schools, Tathāgatagarbha schools and Yogacāra schools were in some disagreement until Maitrryanath's synthesis. After the dust settled, it was left between the Yogacāras and the Madhyamikas to battle it out.

Then Vajrayāna made their arguments somewhat irrelevant because of the Vajrayāna synthesis of the two schools.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, November 17th, 2011 at 2:02 AM
Title: Re: Poll: Which Operating System Do You Use?
Content:
alwayson said:
Oh really?


http://www.dailytech.com/Apple+Orders+Technicians+to+Feign+Ignorance+About+Mac+Malware/article21693.htm " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Malcolm wrote:
MacDefender?

What a joke. There is one known exploit for the Mac, and it is more of a social engineering exploit than a true hack or malware -- it depends on the ignorance of someone to actually download a program and then physically give them a credit card number. This is not really a malware program. This is a fraud.

Really, this is the best that windows community can do in pointing out flaws in Mac Security?

If you want to know about ongoing issues for the mac, look here:

http://www.securemac.com/ " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

You will see that by comparison, there are very few exploits against the mac, and virtually all require user permission to occur. This is not the case with Windows.

Remember, I was a professional Windows system engineer for several years working in high security environments such as Putnam Investments, Genuity, and so on. So I am not just talking idly.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, November 17th, 2011 at 1:39 AM
Title: Re: Poll: Which Operating System Do You Use?
Content:


alwayson said:
Windows 7 is as secure as any other OS.


Malcolm wrote:
No, it really isn't.

Compared to a Mac, security wise W7 is terrible.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, November 17th, 2011 at 1:36 AM
Title: Re: Poll: Which Operating System Do You Use?
Content:


alwayson said:
Whats wrong with Windows 7?

Malcolm wrote:
The Windows part.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, November 17th, 2011 at 1:26 AM
Title: Re: Best Language to Learn First?
Content:
wisdom said:
What is the best language to learn first, Tibetan or Sanskrit? Which language have the bulk of most Buddhist texts been written in? Especially the Mahayana tradition?


Malcolm wrote:
Tibetan.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, November 17th, 2011 at 1:19 AM
Title: Re: Madyamika Sautrantika vs Prasangika
Content:
Mariusz said:
Perhaps you should read Karmapa Mikyo Dorje

Malcolm wrote:
I have. Thanks.

I have studied Tibetan polemical authors of Madhyamaka quite well.

The Indian masters are better.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, November 17th, 2011 at 1:10 AM
Title: Re: public evaluation of teachers
Content:


xylem said:
One, I have noticed over the years on various different Buddhist forums (the old Tricycle, e-sangha and now here) that the most vitriolic and divisive threads generally involve the evaluation of the authenticity of Buddhist teachers and lineages.

Malcolm wrote:
Correct, it is better to leave people to their delusions.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, November 17th, 2011 at 1:04 AM
Title: Re: Reasons for Conventional Reality
Content:
Acchantika said:
If we consider this in terms of your examples, we remember that Nagarjuna spent the previous 23 chapters negating the possibility of a referent.

gad rgyangs said:
...which is, of course, itself a view.

Acchantika said:
Negating something does not necessarily equal affirming its absence.


Malcolm wrote:
Agreed, a negation does not entail possession of a view. According to Rongzom, so called non-affirming negation is used to reject an opponents POV. The affirming negation is used to prove one's own view. According to him, Madhyamalas only use the former and never the latter in reference to reality. He also points out that they accept the consequence that their own position is harmed i.e. they do not maintain a position but purely maintain a critical stance.

But right from the beginning there was rebellion against this, for example, the harsh criticism of Candrakirti found in the colophon of the translation of Ratnakarashanti's Madhyamakalamkara.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, November 17th, 2011 at 12:58 AM
Title: Re: 100 Syllable Mantra SUPO KAYO ME BHAVA
Content:
tantular said:
Old Tibetan was not a tonal language, so this couldn't have been the difference between the ca and tsa sde, and when Lhasa dialect did develop tone, both series follow the same rules. Nowadays Himalayan peoples in Nepal write their Tibetan names in Devanagari as if ཙ་ = च: for example ཚེ་རིང་ is always written as छेरिङ. I've asked people why they do this, and it's not because they're aware of the official Tibetan transliteration of Sanskrit (most have no idea), but simply because to their ears Nepali छ sounds like the closest equivalent of ཚ་; certainly far better than त्स्ह would be.

The Tshigdzöd Chenmo states that ཅ་ and ཙ་ both have 1) the palate as place of articulation, 2) the middle of the tongue as organ of articulation, 3) contact of tongue and palate as its manner of articulation, & 4) unvoiced, unaspirated phonation, exactly the same as Sanskrit grammarians describe च. Sanskrit-Tibetan phonological theory does not distinguish plosives from affricatives (these are both called spṛṣṭa/phrad pa ), or the alveolar ridge and palate (both tālu/rkan ). Therefore, Sanskrit and Tibetan grammarians have no theoretical framework for distinguishing the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voiceless_postalveolar_affricate and the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voiceless_alveolo-palatal_affricate. In India this wasn't a problem because the latter sound didn't exist. It does exist in Tibetan, however, and therefore the Tibetan language needed to have two series of letters, even if the grammarians couldn't exactly describe the difference between them. All Tibetan grammatical treatises are in agreement that the tsa sde was invented first to represent the Sanskrit ca-varga, and the ca sde was only developed afterwards, once Tibetans realized their language had an additional set of affricates not found in Sanskrit. According to legend, this happened when Thonmi had a conversation with a traveller that included the "six new letters of Tibetan":

སློབ་དཔོན་གྱིས། ཁྱེད་གང་ནས་བྱོན་པར། དེ་ན་རེ། ཞང་ཞུང་ནས་འོངས་ཟེར། གང་དུ་འགྲོ་བྱས་པས། ཟ་ཧོར་རུ་འགྲོ་ཟེར། གང་གི་དོན་དུ་འགྲོ་བྱས་པར་ཇ་ཉོ་རུ་འགྲོ་ཟེར། ནམ་སླེབས་བྱས་པས་ཅི་ཆ་ཟེར།

dakini_boi said:
Thank you Tantular, that is very helpful.  This information seems in accord with the idea that the Indians who introduced Buddhism into Tibet may have been from a region where च was actually pronounced " tsa."  Would you agree with that?


Malcolm wrote:
It is the opposite. It does not accord with that idea.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, November 17th, 2011 at 12:11 AM
Title: Re: comparative sdom gsum texts
Content:
xylem said:
i am not overly familiar with the different genres of tibetan religious literature.  are there any comparative texts on the three vow systems?  i know different authors criticize and analyze different points of other authors, but are there any comparative treatments in the tradition?

-xy


Malcolm wrote:
Kongtruls' Buddhist Ethics is exhaustive in this respect.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 16th, 2011 at 11:55 PM
Title: Re: Reasons for Conventional Reality
Content:
Namdrol said:
A view is a position concerning either existence or non-existence, that is the basis of all views. Madhyamakas do not have views concerning either.

Astus said:
Should add that it's independent existence and total annihilation. But to say that "there is no self" is not a position of non-existence, i.e. annihilation, and to say that "phenomena are inter-dependent" is not a position of existence, i.e. eternal self-sufficient being.

Malcolm wrote:
As I have pointed out from time immemorial bhāva is included with svabhāva by Nāgārjuna.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 16th, 2011 at 11:53 PM
Title: Re: Buddhism on God
Content:


tobes said:
Knowing Nagarjuna's arguments about emptiness does not instantly grant access to all of the world's philosophies and the arguments therein.


Malcolm wrote:
Nope, it just makes them all completely irrevelevant to the one thing that matters: liberation.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 16th, 2011 at 11:36 PM
Title: Re: Madyamika Sautrantika vs Prasangika
Content:
Mariusz said:
In the short lineage of Yamantaka Umapa is not listed as I know. What is the source of your statement?

Malcolm wrote:
It is based on the lineage list (volume 30, page 109 compiled by Loter Wangpo) in the rgyud sde kun 'dus based on the lineage of Cangkya Rolpai Dorje

The close lineage is as follows:

From Vajrabhairva, Jamyang Tenpa'i Khor Lo (Mañjuśrī Sasanacakra, and Gyalba Jampal Nyingpo (Jina Mañjuśrīgarbha) or alternately, from Mañjuśrī and Vajrabhairava individually to Lama Umapa, and then all three to Tsongkhapa, then Kheydrup and so on.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 16th, 2011 at 11:06 PM
Title: Re: Reasons for Conventional Reality
Content:


Namdrol said:
Dependent origination is not a view. It is the pacification of views. Emptiness is not a view, it is the pacification of views. This is stated countless times in Madhyamaka texts.

Where there is no view, there is no proliferation. Where there is no proliferation, there is no view.

view = proliferation.

N

gad rgyangs said:
You still haven't defined what you consider a "view" to be. If its not "a statement about the nature of reality/how things are", then what is it? And "proliferation" basically just means "other people's views that you don't agree with", so thats not a definition.

Malcolm wrote:
A view is a position concerning either existence or non-existence, that is the basis of all views. Madhyamakas do not have views concerning either.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 16th, 2011 at 11:05 PM
Title: Re: Madyamika Sautrantika vs Prasangika
Content:


Mariusz said:
I don't want show you my curriculum vitae either because here I think only the investigation counts, sorry.

Malcolm wrote:
My investigation is finished. I have nothing further to investigate. I rely on my own knowledge now.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 16th, 2011 at 10:36 PM
Title: Re: Madyamika Sautrantika vs Prasangika
Content:
Mariusz said:
Please read the Madhyamaka Forum here in Dharmawheel.


Namdrol said:
There is no need for me read what amateurs have to say about Madhyamaka, whether Gelug or non-Gelug.

N

Mariusz said:
Upss, no comments


Malcolm wrote:
The point is, I can argue for or against any position and win. I don't really have a stake in a position. But I know perfectly well what Nāgārjuna says, Aryadeva, Buddhapalita, Candra, Jñānagarbha, Ṡ́antarakṣita, Sapan, Gorampa, Dolbuwa,Tsongkhapa, etc. have to say.

I have studied Madhyamaka for 25 years. On this forum, the only people who have anything to share with me about Madhyamaka is Jñāna and Ratna, and even then, it is only more sources, and different information. They have nothing to share with me concerning the essential principles of Nāgārjuna and other tenet systems.

So, you can either benefit from my extensive knowledge of these teachings, honed by years of constant study with the best Tibetan lamas in the world, mastery of classical Tibetan, and personal experience in meditation, or not. It is your choice. No one is forcing you to listen.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 16th, 2011 at 10:23 PM
Title: Re: Madyamika Sautrantika vs Prasangika
Content:
Mariusz said:
Please read the Madhyamaka Forum here in Dharmawheel.


Malcolm wrote:
There is no need for me read what amateurs have to say about Madhyamaka, whether Gelug or non-Gelug.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 16th, 2011 at 10:10 PM
Title: Re: Madyamika Sautrantika vs Prasangika
Content:
Namdrol said:
The two truths are about how objects are perceived. They can be perceived in only two ways, correctly and incorrectly. Perceiving them incorrectly, a false perception of them is called relative truth.
N

Mariusz said:
I do not agree. Do you really think the so-called "objects", somewhere "out there", can be perceived correctly in the ultimate truth?

Malcolm wrote:
Have you ever read Candrakirti? If not, I suggest you do.

It is pointless for me to educate you. But in breif, Candra says "all phenomena have two natures, one ultimate, the other, relative" and "Whatever is correctly perceived, that is real; false perception is said to be relative truth".

Please examine these things. I'm out.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 16th, 2011 at 10:01 PM
Title: Re: Madyamika Sautrantika vs Prasangika
Content:
Namdrol said:
You are not at liberaty to invent your own Dharma - well you are, just don't call it Candrakirti's intent.

False, faulty, incorrect, etc. All of these apply to relative truth.

N

Mariusz said:
Khenpo Karl Brunnholzl often use a alternative term "the deceiving" which I also like because doesn't suggest useless: "Generally speaking, if a given philosophical system differentiates the two levels of seeming and ultimate reality, then in whatever way it does so, one it speaks about seeming, relative, or deceiving phenomena", it must also accept this mean that such phenomena are precisely something that is not established.

Malcolm wrote:
Ok, you are not understanding something -- kiun rdzob is relative truth, but actually means "totally obscuring" in Tibetan. 

But false perception is mthong brdzun, so what Candrakirti is clearly saying is that false/faulty/incorrect perception is relative, or totally obscuring, truth. 

The two truths are about how objects are perceived. They can be perceived in only two ways, correctly and incorrectly. Perceiving them incorrectly, a false perception of them is called relative truth. The word brdzun pa means "to lie" as well. Further, for example, there are two schools in Yogacara rnam bden pa and rnam brdzun pa i.e. true aspect and false aspect. The latter is the higher of the two. The term brdzun pa means false.

So a false perception is relative truth. 

When Shantideva is taking about the two truths, he says - ultimate truth is beyond the mind, because the mind itself is relative. The mind can never apprehend ultimate truth. 

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 16th, 2011 at 9:55 PM
Title: Re: Madyamika Sautrantika vs Prasangika
Content:
Mariusz said:
In the short lineage of Yamantaka Umapa is not listed as I know. What is the source of your statement?


Malcolm wrote:
The lineage prayers.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 16th, 2011 at 9:21 PM
Title: Re: Madyamika Sautrantika vs Prasangika
Content:


Mariusz said:
Perhaps "faulty" is not correct here,

Namdrol said:
Faulty is quite correct, since that is what Candrakirti says i.e.:

mthong ba brdzun pa kun rdzob bden par gsungs

"False perception is said to be relative truth".

N

Mariusz said:
It is the same, false does not mean useless here I think but could suggest as it also. So I prefer the term seeming.

Malcolm wrote:
You are not at liberaty to invent your own Dharma - well you are, just don't call it Candrakirti's intent.

False, faulty, incorrect, etc. All of these apply to relative truth.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 16th, 2011 at 8:59 PM
Title: Re: Madyamika Sautrantika vs Prasangika
Content:


Mariusz said:
Perhaps "faulty" is not correct here,

Malcolm wrote:
Faulty is quite correct, since that is what Candrakirti says i.e.:

mthong ba brdzun pa kun rdzob bden par gsungs

"False perception is said to be relative truth".

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 16th, 2011 at 8:35 PM
Title: Re: Madyamika Sautrantika vs Prasangika
Content:
Caz said:
...no wonder why the schools would have problems with each other if this is what they would say of people who did not think the same way. Considering he was a Keeper of Vinaya and certainly we all know the benefits of refuge vows with regards to spirits that line of said reasoning really does sound petty.

Mariusz said:
Followers of non-sectarian Rime know the fact I posted above that Je Tsongkhapa had visions of Manjushri at least considering Yamantaka Single Hero practice of HYT.


Malcolm wrote:
This lineage actually starts with Lama Umapa. Nevertheless, it is preserved in Kongtrul's Dam sngags mdzod in the Kadampa section.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 16th, 2011 at 8:34 PM
Title: Re: Madyamika Sautrantika vs Prasangika
Content:
Caz said:
yes, whereas non-Gelugpas think he was deluded by a spirit posing as Manjushri.

N
Wow Namdrol its no wonder why the schools would have problems with each other if this is what they would say of people who did not think the same way. Considering he was a Keeper of Vinaya and certainly we all know the benefits of refuge vows with regards to spirits that line of said reasoning really does sound petty.

Malcolm wrote:
Gorampa mentions this as possibility in his differentiation of views, and basically asserts that Tsongkhapa was lead astray by Umapa's channeling of "Manjushri".

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 16th, 2011 at 8:23 PM
Title: Re: Reasons for Conventional Reality
Content:
Namdrol said:
Madhyamakas do not have views.
N

gad rgyangs said:
Ok, lets approach it this way: since Madhyamikas make all sorts of statements about the nature of reality (dependent origination, emptiness, etc), then, for you, a "view" is not a statement about the nature of reality. What is a "view" to you then?

Malcolm wrote:
Dependent origination is not a view. It is the pacification of views. Emptiness is not a view, it is the pacification of views. This is stated countless times in Madhyamaka texts.

Where there is no view, there is no proliferation. Where there is no proliferation, there is no view.

view = proliferation.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 16th, 2011 at 9:57 AM
Title: Re: Reasons for Conventional Reality
Content:


Tsongkhapafan said:
Gorampa is unable to distinguish...blah blah blah

Malcolm wrote:
The Gelug misunderstanding of madhyamaka is tragic.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 16th, 2011 at 9:55 AM
Title: Re: Reasons for Conventional Reality
Content:


Namdrol said:
"It is not that we claim non-existence, we merely remove claims for existing existents"

-- Buddhapalita.

Madhyamakas do not have views.

N

Tsongkhapafan said:
Yes they do.  'phenomena do not exist inherently' is a Madhyamika view.  It's not possible to follow a spiritual path without possessing correct views.

Malcolm wrote:
Correct view is no view.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 16th, 2011 at 9:54 AM
Title: Re: Reasons for Conventional Reality
Content:


Tsongkhapafan said:
All conventional truths are objects of deluded minds' is a pretty crude and wrong statement

Malcolm wrote:
This is Candrakirti's definition in Madhyamaka-avatara.

If you want to consider it crude, as compared to a Tibetan's POV, well, that is your problem.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 16th, 2011 at 8:31 AM
Title: Re: Reasons for Conventional Reality
Content:


Namdrol said:
MMK refutes both:

"Where is there an existent not included in inherent existence or dependent existence?
If an existent is not established, a non-existent is not established.
Those who perceive existents, non-existents,
inherent existence or dependent existence do not see the truth of the Buddha's teaching."

Madhyamaka therefore do not assert any views. Not asserting a view does not mean "incapable of engaging in conventional discourse", something you gelugpas seem to be afraid of.

N

gad rgyangs said:
Unless you rig the question by insisting that having a view can only mean accepting existence, non-existence, both,or neither, then having a view means any opinion about the nature of reality. In which case, what MMK is saying here is definitely a view: it is saying there is such a thing as the Buddha's teaching, and if you perceive X (which already assumes, and raises, all kinds of epistemological views), then you do not see it, etc.


Malcolm wrote:
"It is not that we claim non-existence, we merely remove claims for existing existents"

-- Buddhapalita.

Madhyamakas do not have views.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 16th, 2011 at 8:30 AM
Title: Re: Reasons for Conventional Reality
Content:
Sherab said:
Bodhisattvas on the 8th stage and beyond perceive appearances of buddhas don't they?  Are these appearances of buddhas deluded?


Malcolm wrote:
Their experience is divided in terms of meditation and post-meditation.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 16th, 2011 at 6:43 AM
Title: Re: Madyamika Sautrantika vs Prasangika
Content:
Mariusz said:
I like Je Tsongkhapa, as for example initiator of Yamantaka Ekavira Single Hero HYT system from Manjusri, because He wrote (in Tsongkhapa's Final Exposition of Wisdom; page.158):
"during states subsequent to meditative equipoise on the stages of generation and completion (of Highest Yoga Tantra)
one takes suchness to mind within analyzing it...with respect to that occasion, do not posit analytical meditation 
as one-pointed meditation" and there were many masters of His Yamantaka system who got Vajrayana realizations


Malcolm wrote:
Intellectual views do not count for much in Vajrayāna.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 16th, 2011 at 5:33 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:
mint said:
Also, as I've explained elsewhere in this thread, I just don't have the ability to watch (or understand) the webcasts when they air.  This factors into my less-than-stellar attitude towards all of this, too.

Acchantika said:
If you have time, there are some ChNN videos on youtube with English subtitles, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-XrfN8TY80Y&feature=related. This may help one get used to his manner of speech, accent etc.


Malcolm wrote:
Best is to just go meet him in person.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 16th, 2011 at 5:27 AM
Title: Re: Madyamika Sautrantika vs Prasangika
Content:
Mariusz said:
I very like Je Tsongkhapa because His intention was to built epistemological very complicated system, validated conceptually by valid cognition, that should fit together,

Malcolm wrote:
The problem is that pramanas and prameyas are just conventional fictions, as Nagarjuna shows in the Vigrahavyavartani. In other words, there are no ultimate pramanas, so elaborating a Madhyamaka systems which makes use of this kind of language is very faulty indeed.

In other words, valid cognitions, like all relative truths, are the objects of faulty cognitions.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 16th, 2011 at 5:06 AM
Title: Re: Poll: Which Operating System Do You Use?
Content:
alwayson said:
Any Windows lower than Windows 7 is complete crap.

I use Windows 7 Ultimate 64 Bit with Service Pack 1.


Malcolm wrote:
Revise that to "Any Windows is complete crap" and I will agree.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 16th, 2011 at 5:04 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:
mint said:
Wouldn't receiving the DT and then not practicing guruyoga be the karmic end of me?


Malcolm wrote:
No. If you don't want to practice Guru Yoga, you don't have to.

If you want to, you can.

But first, you need transmission.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 16th, 2011 at 3:59 AM
Title: Re: 100 Syllable Mantra SUPO KAYO ME BHAVA
Content:
dakini_boi said:
Ok.  Where can Sapan's explanation be found?


Malcolm wrote:
You can look in his collected works.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 16th, 2011 at 2:49 AM
Title: Re: 100 Syllable Mantra SUPO KAYO ME BHAVA
Content:
dakini_boi said:
Namdrol, can you tell me what is the textual source where he explains this idea?


Malcolm wrote:
Doesn't exist. Apart from two short texts, nothing of his survived. Sapan explains this quite well, but no one seems interested in taking Sapan's word for it. My explanation is based on that.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 16th, 2011 at 2:30 AM
Title: Re: 100 Syllable Mantra SUPO KAYO ME BHAVA
Content:
dakini_boi said:
so how would using those characters have prevented Tibetans from pronouncing the Sankrit with tonal alterations?


Namdrol said:
training.

dakini_boi said:
What I meant was, how would using characters tsa tsha dza have prevented pronouncing sanskrit with tonal alterations, any more than using ca cha ja - either way, training would be necessary.


Malcolm wrote:
You will have to ask Thonmi. It was his idea.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 16th, 2011 at 2:09 AM
Title: Re: Wine and Meat Offerings?
Content:
narraboth said:
I totally agree that people should follow what their master said, but i disagree that it's about "view", otherwise it will be an attack to dza paltrul rinpoche and all other nyingma monasteries/centres/groups following his trandition (or 'book').

No, preventing offer meat (at least fresh meat) is not 'lower tantra' view, because you don't even need to talk about meat to lower tantra practioners, they just don't use it. It is out of compassion and proper conducts of buddhism. Maybe just like ChNN advicing his group to 'buy meats from as many animals as possible', it's out of compassion (not because the view is higher, otherwise meat from one animal and many animals should be equal isn't it ). I don't see there's right or wrong between the two methods (as i was quoting from two great masters), but it's really nothing to do with the views. I don't think dza paltrul rinpoche's view would be lower than many masters at anytime, but i very appreciate that he pointed out important things that people easily miss in so-called high views. But of course, if someone can see sh*t equally as tasty sausages, he can comfortably say whay he want to say.

Malcolm wrote:
What I am saying is that the view of lower tantra is that it is not correct to eat meat.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 16th, 2011 at 2:08 AM
Title: Re: Wine and Meat Offerings?
Content:
gregkavarnos said:
You want a beer with your burger?

Malcolm wrote:
Always, and fries.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 16th, 2011 at 1:53 AM
Title: Re: Reasons for Conventional Reality
Content:


Tsongkhapafan said:
Conventional reality is only appearance, that's true, but to say that it's an appearance only for the deluded means that Buddhas do not perceive conventional reality.  This is refuted by Tsonghkapa and other authors.

Malcolm wrote:
And proven by Gorampa, etc.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 16th, 2011 at 1:52 AM
Title: Re: Buddhism on God
Content:
Jnana said:
Okay. So what exactly is the Theos of an atheist such as yourself?

KevinSolway said:
It is the All, composed of all phenomena, all concepts, all that is unknown and beyond concepts, and all of these elements tied together and impelled by cause and effect.


Malcolm wrote:
pantheism.

of course, such a concept is absolutely foreign to Buddhism.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 16th, 2011 at 1:28 AM
Title: Re: Madyamika Sautrantika vs Prasangika
Content:
Caz said:
Thats true Gelugpa's Believe Tsongkhapa's Doctrine distills the essence of Nagarjunas teachings.

conebeckham said:
Well, most Gelukpas do.....but see Gendun Chophel, for example....as for others- Sakayapas, Kagyupas, Nyingmapas, and Jonangpas generally do not.


Malcolm wrote:
Ganden Chophel, from the beginning, was a Nyingmapa. He was never a "pure" Gelugpa.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 16th, 2011 at 1:27 AM
Title: Re: Madyamika Sautrantika vs Prasangika
Content:


Mariusz said:
Irrelevant. Conceptual is essential even after these first two Paths acording to Tsong-kha-pa.

Namdrol said:
It is fairly straightfoward.

Gelugpas care very much about what Tsongkhapa says, and accept his as the supreme authority, even over Nāgārjuna.

Non-gelugpas don't, and don't accept him as an authority at all, let alone as an authority more important than Nāgārjuna.

N

Caz said:
Thats true Gelugpa's Believe Tsongkhapa's Doctrine distills the essence of Nagarjunas teachings.

Malcolm wrote:
yes, whereas non-Gelugpas think he was deluded by a spirit posing as Manjushri.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 16th, 2011 at 1:14 AM
Title: Re: Madyamika Sautrantika vs Prasangika
Content:


Mariusz said:
Irrelevant. Conceptual is essential even after these first two Paths acording to Tsong-kha-pa.

Malcolm wrote:
It is fairly straightfoward.

Gelugpas care very much about what Tsongkhapa says, and accept his as the supreme authority, even over Nāgārjuna.

Non-gelugpas don't, and don't accept him as an authority at all, let alone as an authority more important than Nāgārjuna.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 16th, 2011 at 12:53 AM
Title: Re: Wine and Meat Offerings?
Content:
narraboth said:
I don't know how wisdom deities accept offering

Malcolm wrote:
Without duality.




narraboth said:
but if they will feel 'happy', probably won't be because you kill some animals for offering them.

Malcolm wrote:
Wisdom deities are in a state of total equanimity. If there is negative consequence to killing animals for a ganapouja, it is because the act is predicated on ignorance and falls in the class fo the ten non-virtues.



narraboth said:
well, please don't take it as an attack to any group,

Malcolm wrote:
Not attacking anyone, merely pointing out that there are differences in views.

In this case, it is better for people to follow the advice of their individual teacher, rather than a teacher in a book. Every teacher has a different teaching because people are different and need different things. But if someone falls into Dozghen Community, then it is better they heed ChNN's instructions -- the same goes for everyone else.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 16th, 2011 at 12:47 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Monk?
Content:
Namdrol said:
They should be educated in the five major sciences, sutra, tantra, have done retreats, have gained some measure of signs of experience, skilled in giving explanations, in addition to having bodhicitta, and so on.

N

Sönam said:
And what's about Khyentse Yeshi and few others of the kind ?

Sönam


Malcolm wrote:
Khyentse Rinpoche is not my teacher, and I don't know him as a teacher, though I have met him.

I am sure he is qualified to teach because his father, my teacher, said so.

But I am talking in general, not each specific teacher. There are always exceptions to every rule.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 16th, 2011 at 12:43 AM
Title: Re: Reasons for Conventional Reality
Content:


gad rgyangs said:
two truths is a view.

Tsongkhapafan said:
That's right - it's the compatability of conventional and ultimate truths that Nagarjuna was teaching.  This is correct view.

Malcolm wrote:
The two truths are part of conventional truth, not ultimate truth. Therefore even the two truths are not established. The two truths are objects of mistaken minds.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 16th, 2011 at 12:41 AM
Title: Re: Reasons for Conventional Reality
Content:


gad rgyangs said:
I'm not sure who you mean by "we" (paleface), but the MMK is full of all kinds of views about sunyata, pratityasamutpada, etc

Namdrol said:
DO prescribed as the end of views in the MMK, not as a view in and of itself.

A view requires an existent or a non-existent. Since MMK shows that neither can be found, upon what could any view be based?

N

Tsongkhapafan said:
This is also an extreme. MMK refutes inherent existence, not existence per se.  It also refutes non-existence.  Views are based on mere imputation and mere appearances, that's why they exist and function.  It's incorrect to assert that the Madhyamikas do not assert any views.


Malcolm wrote:
MMK refutes both:

"Where is there an existent not included in inherent existence or dependent existence?
If an existent is not established, a non-existent is not established.
Those who perceive existents, non-existents,
inherent existence or dependent existence do not see the truth of the Buddha's teaching."

Madhyamaka therefore do not assert any views. Not asserting a view does not mean "incapable of engaging in conventional discourse", something you gelugpas seem to be afraid of.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 16th, 2011 at 12:32 AM
Title: Re: Wine and Meat Offerings?
Content:


narraboth said:
There are really two views of this, one is mainly from great dza patrul rinpoche, as in Kunzang Lama Shelung he suggested that offering killed meat to wisdom deities is like offering a killed child's meat to his mother.

Malcolm wrote:
But of course wisdom deities do not perceive offerings in this way. This is our perception.

narraboth said:
Quite convincing i have to say.

Malcolm wrote:
If your view is lower tantra, perhaps.


N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, November 15th, 2011 at 11:49 PM
Title: Re: Wine and Meat Offerings?
Content:
narraboth said:
theoritically they shouldn't even let outsiders see wine and meat on the shrine.


Malcolm wrote:
Those of us who follow ChNN follow what ChNN has to say. In this case, he says buy meat from markets, as many kinds as possible, sausage is better since it is made from the meat of many animals. When used in a ganapuja, it creates a cause for that animal's liberation.

Wine should be consumed in a mindful manner.

When you follow ChNN you follow the system of Dzogchen as he teaches it, since he is the only teacher that I know for a fact is a realized Dzogchen master. I am sure there are others, but I do not know that for a fact nor who they are. But I know ChNN is an awakened person and this is not because of my faith. This is because he has described his experience openly to a large extent. So I am certain he is an awakened person, beyond any doubt whatsoever.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, November 15th, 2011 at 11:44 PM
Title: Re: Buddhism on God
Content:


KevinSolway said:
Whether or not it includes God depends entirely on how God is defined.  You are thinking of God as some sort of phenomena or concept, which is an error.


Malcolm wrote:
There is no God in Buddhism. You are not allowed to redefine Buddhist principles just as you please.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, November 15th, 2011 at 10:15 AM
Title: Re: Buddhism on God
Content:
tobes said:
I'm just saying, be careful of contexts (i.e. not to assume Indian cosmology is the same as Hellenic cosmology), think carefully about the metaphysics and don't assume all of this is totally nailed.


Malcolm wrote:
All you have to assume is the precise definition of cause and condition and the answer is clear -- there is no room for a creator god in Buddhism.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, November 15th, 2011 at 10:13 AM
Title: Re: Buddhism on God
Content:
tobes said:
But we need to be a little more careful when thinking about his direct statements about the existence of the world in time. If the matter is clear cut, then why the silence?


Malcolm wrote:
He was never silent about the creation of conditioned entities. All effects must have causes, all causes are effects.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, November 15th, 2011 at 10:00 AM
Title: Re: Buddhism on God
Content:
tobes said:
And I do really think that there are some damn interesting dialogical possibilities with some strands within theism, which ought not automatically be closed down just because Buddhists feel comfortable enough in their own skin such that they can happily to refuse to bother with the most loaded signifier in history.


Malcolm wrote:
There is nothing interesting in theism at all. It is just pure delusion.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, November 15th, 2011 at 9:48 AM
Title: Re: Buddhism on God
Content:
catmoon said:
First, Buddhism flatly denies the existence of a Creator.

tobes said:
Metaphysically, yes. But I'd be wary of the statement 'Buddhism flatly denies....' ~ the Buddha was famously silent on such questions. Strong negations come later.


Malcolm wrote:
Buddha flatly denies a creator because the logic of dependent origination forbids it.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, November 15th, 2011 at 9:42 AM
Title: Re: Reasons for Conventional Reality
Content:


gad rgyangs said:
I'm not sure who you mean by "we" (paleface), but the MMK is full of all kinds of views about sunyata, pratityasamutpada, etc

Malcolm wrote:
DO prescribed as the end of views in the MMK, not as a view in and of itself.

A view requires an existent or a non-existent. Since MMK shows that neither can be found, upon what could any view be based?

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, November 15th, 2011 at 8:52 AM
Title: Re: Reasons for Conventional Reality
Content:
Paul said:
It is just for the sake of refuting non-Buddhist opponents
That the learned ones have promoted them

Astus said:
And for this purpose I'd like to see all the many reasons for the validity of the Buddhist view vis-a-vis non-Buddhist views.

Malcolm wrote:
We don't have a view, per se, we just eliminate the incorrect views of others.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, November 15th, 2011 at 8:02 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Monk?
Content:


Acchantika said:
My understanding is that traditionally, (native Tibetan) monks spend 9 years at a monastery college studying, then 3 years doing PhD-equivalent studies, then a further 3 years in retreat in the case of Nyingma Dzogchen. At this point they receive certification etc. So 15 years of hardcore study and retreat to become eligible to actually teach, at least.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, this is good. Less is insufficient.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, November 15th, 2011 at 12:01 AM
Title: Re: St. John of the Cross on Spiritual Materialism
Content:
mint said:
He may have even been a pratyekabuddha.

Malcolm wrote:
Quite impossble. Pratyekabuddhas only occur when there is no Buddha.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, November 15th, 2011 at 12:00 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Monk?
Content:
Namdrol said:
They should be educated in the five major sciences, sutra, tantra, have done retreats, have gained some measure of signs of experience, skilled in giving explanations, in addition to having bodhicitta, and so on.

N

Clarence said:
Well, why don't you teach more then? You are qualified according to your own qualifications. BTW, I think you are qualified as well. Just something I have been think about lately.

Thanks, C


Malcolm wrote:
Maybe I am not so qualified, sometimes I still get mad in political discussions.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, November 14th, 2011 at 11:58 PM
Title: Re: Reasons for Conventional Reality
Content:
Astus said:
I think this is going to an unintended direction. My question is if there are arguments to establish correct view on the conventional level.

Malcolm wrote:
In Madhyamaka, correct conventional is distinguished by efficiency. If it appears to work, it is correct conventional.

Of course, then there is famous example of a Geshe who challenged milarepa, who responded by banging on space with a stick as if it were a drum; or Candra who bumped into a pillarsince he had his head in a book, and when challenged about reality of the pillar, passed his hand right through it.

Conventional reality is an appearance for the deluded.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, November 14th, 2011 at 11:28 PM
Title: Re: Reasons for Conventional Reality
Content:


Tsongkhapafan said:
Nagarjuna's view is the perfect union of conventional and ultimate truth.

Malcolm wrote:
No. Nagarjuna's view is the following:

"Since the Jina's have declared that nirvana alone is true, what wise person would not understand the rest is false?"

And:

"Neither samsara nor nirvana exist;
instead, nirvana is the thorough knowledge of samsara"


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, November 14th, 2011 at 10:53 PM
Title: Re: Reasons for Conventional Reality
Content:
edearl said:
Are there an Ultimate Buddhist Reality, a Conventional Buddhist Reality and other realities, or are other realities part of Conventional Buddhist Reality?

Do all Buddhist schools teach the same or different Ultimate and Conventional realities?

Malcolm wrote:
All expressed truths, both relative and ultimate, are part of conventional truth. For this reason, Haribhadra states that the entire path, including the attainment of Buddhahood, is completely illusory -- it is not real in anyway.

The unenumerated ultimate truth is inexpressible.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, November 14th, 2011 at 10:50 PM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Monk?
Content:


Tsongkhapafan said:
Even animals can benefit from hearing the sounds of holy Dharma, so it's not wrong to teach if your motivation is good.


Namdrol said:
An unqualified physican is the enemy of his patients, doing more harm than good.

Likewise, an unqualified dharma teacher is a mara for his students, sending both himself and his students to hell.

N

Clarence said:
Namdrol,

When do you consider someone qualified? Of course it depends on what they are teachings but I am sure some generalizations can be made.

Malcolm wrote:
They should be educated in the five major sciences, sutra, tantra, have done retreats, have gained some measure of signs of experience, skilled in giving explanations, in addition to having bodhicitta, and so on.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, November 14th, 2011 at 10:44 PM
Title: Re: Reasons for Conventional Reality
Content:
Tsongkhapafan said:
There is no contradiction between the teachings of Dharmakirti and Nagarjuna.

Malcolm wrote:
Of course there is: Nagarjuna rejects the whole concept of pramana.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, November 14th, 2011 at 10:43 PM
Title: Re: Reasons for Conventional Reality
Content:
Tsongkhapafan said:
Conventional reality has gross and subtle aspects.  The gross nature of conventional truth can be established by valid cognition as explained by Dignaga and Dharmakirti (this is very important) because forms such as our body are objects of valid minds and they perform the functions they appear to possess.

Namdrol said:
No, it can't. All conventional truths are objects of mistaken cognitions, per Candrakirti.

Tsongkhapafan said:
It's important not to go to an extreme and negate the validity of all conventional truths.

Malcolm wrote:
Delusion is delusion. Better to recognize it for what it is, rather than making excuses for it and continuing in that way.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, November 14th, 2011 at 10:41 PM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Monk?
Content:


Tsongkhapafan said:
Even animals can benefit from hearing the sounds of holy Dharma, so it's not wrong to teach if your motivation is good.


Malcolm wrote:
An unqualified physican is the enemy of his patients, doing more harm than good.

Likewise, an unqualified dharma teacher is a mara for his students, sending both himself and his students to hell.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, November 14th, 2011 at 10:27 PM
Title: Re: Madyamika Sautrantika vs Prasangika
Content:



catmoon said:
I wonder tho, if I start digging into Pransangika-Madhyamaka, is that going to throw me into conflict with my foundation in Gelug orthodoxy?

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, since you will discover that gelug "prasanga" is not the "prasanga" of the founder of Prasanga, Batsab Nyima Drag.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, November 14th, 2011 at 10:20 PM
Title: Re: Reasons for Conventional Reality
Content:
Tsongkhapafan said:
Conventional reality has gross and subtle aspects.  The gross nature of conventional truth can be established by valid cognition as explained by Dignaga and Dharmakirti (this is very important) because forms such as our body are objects of valid minds and they perform the functions they appear to possess.

Malcolm wrote:
No, it can't. All conventional truths are objects of mistaken cognitions, per Candrakirti.


Tsongkhapafan said:
The subtle conventional reality, that is, form being a manifestation of emptiness can also be established by the same reasons that establish emptiness, since they are one nature.

Malcolm wrote:
See above.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, November 14th, 2011 at 9:09 PM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Monk?
Content:
wisdom said:
My only ambition in life is ... to be a spiritual teacher for others,

Namdrol said:
Big Ego Trip.

Best to give it up.

wisdom said:
Thanks Namdrol, this is sage advice.

Malcolm wrote:
The first principle is: anyone who thinks of being a teacher, must first understand there are many teachers superior to him or herself. So in this case, better to send prospective students to one's own or another teacher.

If in the end it turns out that someone really cannot enter the dharma without your help, then and only then is it really necessary for you to act as a teacher. Then it does not become an ego trip.

But even in this case, if you do not have sufficient knowledge, understanding and pratical experience, you really cannot help others, you will only harm them.

In this case, it is better not to teach, even if there are no other teachers available.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, November 14th, 2011 at 6:50 AM
Title: Re: Own-being cannot be cognized
Content:


Kyosan said:
I disagree that phenomena cannot be perceived.

Malcolm wrote:
He is saying there are no phenomenna qua phenomena, rather, there are only appearances.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, November 14th, 2011 at 6:49 AM
Title: Re: Own-being cannot be cognized
Content:
norman said:
" Form itself does not possess the own-being of form, etc. Perfect wisdom does not possess the mark (of being) ‘perfect wisdom.’ A mark does not possess the own-being of a mark. The marked does not possess the own-being of being marked, and own-being does not possess the mark of [being] own-being. "

- Prajnaparamita in 8000 lines

"Own-being" is therefore not cognizable as an object of thought.

Malcolm wrote:
Well, it can be an object of thought as an abstraction i.e. as a mere name. But a svabhāva cannot be perceived since there is no such thing.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, November 14th, 2011 at 6:34 AM
Title: Re: Buddhism on God
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Jungian Archetype thingy in my opinion is basically metaphysical nonsense.


Lhug-Pa said:
Nice^^^

Padma Norbu

Hm I remember reading where Vajranatha wrote that:

http://vajranatha.com/teaching/Simhamukha.htm " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

You may not agree with Vajranatha, but his and some other's exploring of these kinds of cross-cultural connections is far from "ridiculous" or "bologna".

Don't really want to debate it right now though.

May you achieve Omniscience through Dharma practice, and know if these things are true or not through direct-experience (Gnosis).


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, November 14th, 2011 at 5:56 AM
Title: Re: Commie scums and capitalist pigs!!!
Content:
Acchantika said:
Economic Left/Right: -6.38
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -8.05

Fight the power, man.

" If you're not liberal when you're young, you have no heart.
If you're not conservative when you're old, you have no brain." ~ Anonymous


Namdrol said:
Winston Churchill.

Acchantika said:
" There is no record of anyone hearing Churchill say this. "

~ http://www.winstonchurchill.org/learn/speeches/quotations/quotes-falsely-attributed
" The phrase originated with Francois Guisot (1787-1874): "Not to be a republican at twenty is proof of want of heart; to be one at thirty is proof of want of head." It was revived by French Premier Georges Clemenceau (1841-1929): "Not to be a socialist at twenty is proof of want of heart; to be one at thirty is proof of want of head. "

~ https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/List_of_misquotations " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Sorry old chap.


Malcolm wrote:
Hey, blame my dad -- he was the one that communicated it to me.

Incidentally, this does not mean that Churchill did not repeat it himself.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, November 14th, 2011 at 5:16 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:
mantrika said:
Is there also a practice text available for Nyangyud Khorva Dongtruk?


Malcolm wrote:
not yet


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, November 14th, 2011 at 5:13 AM
Title: Re: Buddhism on God
Content:


KevinSolway said:
The Buddha had the right idea, for when he criticized things like "the All", for example, he would qualify it as "the All as a phenomena".  And then he would explain the errors associated with the idea of "the All as a phenomena".

Malcolm wrote:
He did -- there is such a sutta.

"Monks, I will teach you the All as a phenomenon to be abandoned. Listen & pay close attention. I will speak."

"As you say, lord," the monks responded.

The Blessed One said, "And which All is a phenomenon to be abandoned? The eye is to be abandoned. [1] Forms are to be abandoned. Consciousness at the eye is to be abandoned. Contact at the eye is to be abandoned. And whatever there is that arises in dependence on contact at the eye — experienced as pleasure, pain or neither-pleasure-nor-pain — that too is to be abandoned.

"The ear is to be abandoned. Sounds are to be abandoned...

"The nose is to be abandoned. Aromas are to be abandoned...

"The tongue is to be abandoned. Flavors are to be abandoned...

"The body is to be abandoned. Tactile sensations are to be abandoned...

"The intellect is to be abandoned. Ideas are to be abandoned. Consciousness at the intellect is to be abandoned. Contact at the intellect is to be abandoned. And whatever there is that arises in dependence on contact at the intellect — experienced as pleasure, pain or neither-pleasure-nor-pain — that too is to be abandoned.

"This is called the All as a phenomenon to be abandoned."


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, November 14th, 2011 at 5:07 AM
Title: Re: Commie scums and capitalist pigs!!!
Content:
Acchantika said:
Economic Left/Right: -6.38
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -8.05

Fight the power, man.

" If you're not liberal when you're young, you have no heart.
If you're not conservative when you're old, you have no brain." ~ Anonymous


Malcolm wrote:
Winston Churchill.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, November 14th, 2011 at 3:16 AM
Title: Re: Buddhism on God
Content:
deepbluehum said:
You don't think the idea of Jesus as bodhisattva or Buddha is interesting?
Silly.

KevinSolway said:
So you think the Dalai Lama is silly?

It's very unusual on forums such as these for anyone to say a bad word against the Dalai Lama.

Malcolm wrote:
I think HHDL understands that the word bodhisattva has come to mean "compassionate person", and that is all.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, November 14th, 2011 at 3:15 AM
Title: Re: Buddhism on God
Content:
Namdrol said:
If someone should assert brahmin as an ultimate truth, it means they have not understood even a single word of the Buddha's teaching, let along have any realization whatsoever.

KevinSolway said:
Buddhists do not get to define the meaning of words from other traditions.  I mean that you can certainly define the word "Brahman" to mean something other than "Ultimate Truth" if you want to.  You can even define it to be a tea-cup if you want to.  But it is pointless to do so, since others have their own meaning for the term, which has nothing to do with the meaning you are giving to it.

Malcolm wrote:
You misunderstand -- if hindus define brahmin as an ultimate truth, that defintion will never be accepted by Buddhists. Such a person who define brahmin as ultimate in anyway shape or form is not a Buddhist.

For Hindus atman and brahman are interchangable.

What I am telling you is not that Buddhists are redefining brahman -- instead I am telling that we reject the hindu ideas about what is ultimate entirely. What they consider ultimate, we consider to be a non-existent, an imputation, an false thought.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, November 14th, 2011 at 3:10 AM
Title: Re: Commie scums and capitalist pigs!!!
Content:
gregkavarnos said:
there it is ladies and gentlemen our very first dharmawheel +/+.

Will said:
And probably the only one - you silly people.

Malcolm wrote:
We need a token conservative around here.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, November 14th, 2011 at 2:55 AM
Title: Re: Buddhism on God
Content:
Kunga Lhadzom said:
When something that is read is also comprehended, you are the same as the one that wrote it.

KevinSolway said:
There are many different levels of comprehension.  And there is also zero comprehension, which is more far more common than people imagine.

The understanding of Brahman, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brahman, requires an exceptional type of comprehension that isn't found in everyone.


Malcolm wrote:
Brahmin is not an ultimate truth for Buddhists. It is an ultimate truth for certain schools of Hindus.

If someone should assert brahmin as an ultimate truth, it means they have not understood even a single word of the Buddha's teaching, let along have any realization whatsoever.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, November 14th, 2011 at 2:53 AM
Title: Re: Buddhism on God
Content:
Namdrol said:
You don't think the idea of Jesus as bodhisattva or Buddha is interesting?
Nope, pretty boring. But then I was never baptized and was not raised in a Christian household.

KevinSolway said:
Well I think that the recognition of a bodhisattva, and the recognition of a whole new Dharma teaching, is very significant.

Malcolm wrote:
I don't. I don't even think that is what is happening.


KevinSolway said:
While I respect your book learning, I don't believe you have anything more than book-learning regarding such matters.  So I don't believe you are qualified to speak on the true nature of Brahman, or the Dharmakaya, etc.  You can only repeat what you have read.

Malcolm wrote:
You are not the first person to make that error, nor the last.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, November 14th, 2011 at 2:20 AM
Title: Re: Buddhism on God
Content:
padma norbu said:
So far, it seems to me like all of these debates led by KevinSolway have been pointless. Other than the "mental rebirth" concept he introduced in the "Are Karma And Rebirth For Real?" thread, the rest have been about God, The All, Ultimate Truth and Dharmakaya... with no worthwhile point ever being made.

KevinSolway said:
You don't think the idea of Jesus as bodhisattva or Buddha is interesting?

Malcolm wrote:
Nope, pretty boring. But then I was never baptized and was not raised in a Christian household.


KevinSolway said:
Or the similarities between the Hindu "Brahman" and the Dharmakaya?

Malcolm wrote:
There are no similarties— I can say that because I have studied Vedanta, Advaita, Vistadvaita, and so on quite thoroughly.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, November 14th, 2011 at 1:28 AM
Title: Re: Buddhism on God
Content:
padma norbu said:
So far, it seems to me like all of these debates led by KevinSolway have been pointless. Other than the "mental rebirth" concept he introduced in the "Are Karma And Rebirth For Real?" thread, the rest have been about God, The All, Ultimate Truth and Dharmakaya... with no worthwhile point ever being made.


Malcolm wrote:
Most of the conversations on the internet are pointless.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, November 14th, 2011 at 1:20 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:
Fa Dao said:
oops, almost forgot...does the practice that Rinpoche gave last night work the same as Purification of the Six Lokas?


Malcolm wrote:
It is similar.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, November 14th, 2011 at 1:10 AM
Title: Re: Wine and Meat Offerings?
Content:
Fa Dao said:
Im glad this was brought up. I am still struggling with this. Does anyone know if Shabkar Lama paticipated in Ganapujas?


Malcolm wrote:
He did.

Ganapujas are about going beyind limitations.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, November 14th, 2011 at 1:06 AM
Title: Re: Buddhism on God
Content:
deepbluehum said:
Quacks practicing without a license need to get ostracized publicly.

Malcolm wrote:
From experience, I can tell you that trying to maintain such standards on an internet board just leads to a world of conflict.

On the internet, everything is caveat emptor.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, November 14th, 2011 at 1:05 AM
Title: Re: Buddhism on God
Content:
deepbluehum said:
Brahma-Vishnu-Shiva trinity idea comes from Samkya philosophy and three gunas. Buddhism has a long history of easily trouncing three gunas; perhaps you are not aware. See Bodhicaryavatara.


Namdrol said:
Yes, however, they are also adopted into Buddhism via the Kalacakra tantra as well as the Samupta tantra.

N

deepbluehum said:
Just to keep this bit going: Three Gunas = Hinduism. Three gunas has not been adopted into legitimate Buddhism.

Malcolm wrote:
The three gunas (rnam gsum yon tan), sattva, rajas and tamas (snying stobs, rdul, mun) are discussed at length and used as important concepts in Kalacakra as well as some other Buddhist tantras.

It's just a simple fact. The way the three gunas are used in these tantras and their commentaries is very interesting.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, November 14th, 2011 at 12:32 AM
Title: Re: Commie scums and capitalist pigs!!!
Content:
Pero said:
Economic Left/Right: -8.00
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -4.82

So uhm, can someone explain to my uneducated self what this means?
I don't get these numbers.


Malcolm wrote:
It means you are junior tree-hugger.

The only reason my score was in the low -7s is that I did not put all strongly agree or disagree; some were only agree, disagree, since they were questions I do not have strong feelings about.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, November 14th, 2011 at 12:27 AM
Title: Re: Buddhism on God
Content:
deepbluehum said:
All you are is a self-appointed savant.

Malcolm wrote:
That applies to us all.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, November 13th, 2011 at 11:10 PM
Title: Re: Occupy wall street
Content:


tobes said:
In this sense, neoliberalism is profoundly totalitarian. It does not tolerate dissent, and is brazen in its contempt for anything genuinely democratic.

Malcolm wrote:
Indeed, unlike totalitarin regimes, the "free-market" neo-liberal corporations blackmail nations into suppressing dissent for them.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, November 13th, 2011 at 10:27 PM
Title: Re: The Dharmakaya. The Truth Body.
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
According Vasubandhu, the meaning of dhātu is mine i.e. source.

The definition Tibetans (such as Longchenpa and Jetsun Dragpa Gyaltsen) give for dbying is dbyung gnas i.e. source. The proper, though clumsy translation, of dharmadhātu i.e. chos kyi dbying in a Mahāyāna context therefore, is "source of phenomena".

In Abhidharma dharmadhātu means the object of the mind, comprised all mental factors as well as three unconditioned phenomena. To distinguish this Abhidharma concept of dharmadhātu the Tibetans translate it as chos kyi khams i.e. element of phenomena.



deepbluehum said:
Honestly, I do not ascribe to those descriptions. It's a lot of poetry only, mostly based on faulty translations of fautly Abhidharma analyses (making the basic subjects far more complicated and abstract than they need to be), that have in turn given rise to entirely faulty traditions. But you can look at the early suttas yourself to see how the Buddha used the words dharma, dhatu and ayatana.

(Mula Sutta)
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an10/an10.058.than.html " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

(Dhatu Sutta)
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn25/sn25.009.than.html " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

(Sabba Sutta)
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn35/sn35.023.than.html " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"Space of Phenomena" is a bad translation of dharmadhatu. Then one gets into a whole bunch of stuff about space and yoga, which in my opinion is on a wrong track. I am a Vajrayana practitioner mind you, so I am not discounting the power of the path of methods.

padma norbu said:
You should be a guru then, no? It seems to me your understanding must be beyond those of the teacher you follow if you are a vajrayana practitioner.

deepbluehum said:
I cannot stress enough, one must clearly understand what "a dharma" is in Buddhist terms. This will clear up a lot. If you know  in simple and clear terms what "a dharma" is, then what a "dharmakaya" or a "dharmadhatu" is will be very clear. There is no dharma apart from perception and cognition. So right there you are Xing out "outer" phenomena such as space. Also there is no such thing as "intrinsic awareness" in Buddhism, so there is no "inner space" either. Light touches the retina (phassa) and the brain constructs an image (vinnana); the mind says "this is X" (namarupa). You get some feeling (vedana) of pleasure or pain, and love or hate it (upadana), which makes you want to do something about it (tanha). In other words, 12-links is the dharmadhatu/dharmakaya. There is no "dharma" apart from 12-links, so how could there be a "dharmadhatu" or a "dharmakaya" that is something else either? Not knowing this is avidya. Knowing this is vidya (wisdom).

padma norbu said:
"Like space" is not the same as space. "Space of Phenomena" is not talking about actual space. It is likened to space because, what else could you compare it to? All the analogies, such as the crystal ball, the mirror, the sun and space are just analogies, and always explained as such.

Despite what you have just said, I see no error in the Vajrayana definitions which was supposedly pointed out in the suttas you linked. If "dharmadhatu" is exactly the same as "dharmakaya," why did he use two terms? And why are all the Tibetan gurus apparently not as knowledgeable in the matter as you are?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, November 13th, 2011 at 10:02 PM
Title: Re: Buddhism on God
Content:


KevinSolway said:
I am the Buddha of the Internet.


Malcolm wrote:
All your dharma are belong to us....


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, November 13th, 2011 at 9:57 PM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Monk?
Content:
wisdom said:
My only ambition in life is ... to be a spiritual teacher for others,

Malcolm wrote:
Big Ego Trip.

Best to give it up.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, November 13th, 2011 at 9:54 PM
Title: Re: Commie scums and capitalist pigs!!!
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Economic Left/Right: -7.75
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -7.08


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, November 13th, 2011 at 4:16 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:
Lhug-Pa said:
Aw well the schedule said 10 - 12AM, so unless it were a 14 hour webcaste, one would assume that 10PM to 12AM was meant. But that's why I sent an email asking about it. Eh... like I said, since no one responded, I should have gotten up early just in case. Well, if I get my Dzogchen Community membership-password soon, I can still watch it before the live Anniversary Transmission Webcaste on the 20th.

And I'd actually purchased a copy of the Song of the Vajra book on Amazon.com a couple weeks ago. Although I didn't read it yet, and didn't intend to until after having started practice. So it's sitting on my altar right now. I figured if there's a restricted book floating around on Amazon, if someone is going to get it it might as well be me, since I knew I'll treat it with respect. Maybe that's only pride and false justification though. But what's done is done. At least it's ready to be studied as soon as Receiving the Transmission.


Malcolm wrote:
Transmission comes along with doing Guru Yoga with Rinpoche. So tune in tomorrow morning, three am your time.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, November 13th, 2011 at 3:12 AM
Title: Re: Lama Dawa Rinpoche Live Webcast 19-20 November
Content:
catmoon said:
Is this the same Lama Dawa that does the divinations?


Malcolm wrote:
Yes.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, November 13th, 2011 at 3:08 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:
Lhug-Pa said:
Thanks Pero, Namdrol and Fa Dao

Namdrol, do you mean that the Guru Yoga Transmission Webcaste actually was early this morning in the USA time zones!?

Here's the body of an email I sent but didn't get any response:

To be sure, the next few days of the Guru Yoga Webcaste of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche from Tenerife are from 10PM to 12AM GMT?

Just want to make sure that 10AM - 12 was not meant by chance.
I'm in the Rocky Mountain timezone so figured that according to the Tenerife retreat schedule, it would be at 3PM here today.

Well it would be my fault for not getting up before 3AM just in case....


Malcolm wrote:
No,  three am.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, November 13th, 2011 at 2:25 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:
Lhug-Pa said:
Okay so what I meant is, since the Direct Introduction is as you say the meaning of the Four Empowerments, that we are Receiving not only the Four Empowerments of Vajrayana by default, but also the very essence and meaning of them?

About Dzogchen Samaya: So then it goes back to what I'd said at first, that we basically only have one Samaya, that is, to remain in Awareness of the Natural State, but also with Awareness of that by remaining in this Presence or Awareness we are eliminating or better said Self-Liberating the poisons/afflictions (i.e. kleshas, klistas, vasanas, samskaras, etc.) that obscure or cause us to have deluded perception of our Body, Speech, and Mind?

Another critical question:

If, in attending a Transmission, our minds are suffering afflictions at the moment of the Direct Introduction, we would most likely not recognize the Natural State at that moment? So in this case would the 'seed still be planted' so to speak, so that we could proceed with Rushen or Semdzin practice as to recognize that 'seed'? Or in such a case would it better to—instead of proceeding to practice Dzogchen—wait for another Transmission and in the meantime practice Shamatha/Zhine so that the next time we attend a Transmission our consciousness is more ripe for being simultaneous with the Guru's Pointing Out of the Natural State at the moment of Direct Introduction to the Nature of Mind?


Thank you.


Malcolm wrote:
You need to listen to this morning's talk again. Also you should get and read the Song of the Vajra book, which is Rinpoche's best general explanation of Dzogchen anywhere.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, November 13th, 2011 at 2:21 AM
Title: Re: Buddhism on God
Content:
deepbluehum said:
Brahma-Vishnu-Shiva trinity idea comes from Samkya philosophy and three gunas. Buddhism has a long history of easily trouncing three gunas; perhaps you are not aware. See Bodhicaryavatara.


Malcolm wrote:
Yes, however, they are also adopted into Buddhism via the Kalacakra tantra as well as the Samupta tantra.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, November 13th, 2011 at 2:20 AM
Title: Re: 100 Syllable Mantra SUPO KAYO ME BHAVA
Content:
dakini_boi said:
so how would using those characters have prevented Tibetans from pronouncing the Sankrit with tonal alterations?


Malcolm wrote:
training.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, November 12th, 2011 at 11:57 PM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:
Lhug-Pa said:
When we Receive the Introduction to the Natural State and Nature of Mind, I take it that the Four Empowerments of Vajrayana are included in It (?)

And if the Guru doesn't explain during the Teaching the Samaya(s) that comes with that Transmission, do we go ahead with just the one Samaya of remaining in the Natural State from moment to moment?

Or does Receiving the Dzogchen Transmission, without explanation of which Samaya(s) come with the Transmission, automatically imply the 28 Samayas of Dzogchen and/or the four Samayas of Trekchö and Thögal? (Which are listed in Enlightened Journey by Tulku Thondup)

(Of course the Samayas of Thögal wouldn't apply until we're actually at the level of Thögal)

Malcolm wrote:
'


Direct introduction is the mother of all empowerments, or so it is said. It does not contain all four empowerments. It is the meaning of the four empowerments.

As ChNN says, the principle is not empowerment and then vows; the principle is introduction and then maintaining. It does not mean you have no samaya. You do. But it is basically boils down to the body, speech and mind samayas common to Nyingma.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, November 12th, 2011 at 9:42 PM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:
Nangwa said:
You get used to the accent.
ChNN's accent is actually very light in comparison.

mint said:
It's not just the accent; the accent I can work with, maybe.  It's his phrasing, the stop/start of needing to be translated, the stop/start of poor buffering, etc.  It's extremely difficult to comprehend such deep subject matter with such distractions.  I seriously have yet to understood a single concept he's tried to convey yet because I don't know what concepts he's trying to convey.

Malcolm wrote:
KJeep listening and reading.

It is not that complicated. You have a primordial state. You don;t know what it is. This is how to discover it.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, November 12th, 2011 at 1:10 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:
Lhug-Pa said:
Thanks Namdrol.  I may address this more later....

For now though, it looks like today's Webcaste is audio only?

Will the Transmission on the 20th be audio and video?


Malcolm wrote:
I have video

http://www.shangshunginstitute.net/webcast/video.php " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, November 11th, 2011 at 11:16 PM
Title: Re: Buddhism on God
Content:
Namdrol said:
Buddhists just don't see it that way.

KevinSolway said:
It's possible that the Brahma in the Buddhist scriptures has a completely different meaning than it has in other religious traditions. But it certainly makes it confusing if the Buddha used words in his teaching that borrow from other religious traditions, but used them with a different meaning.

Malcolm wrote:
The Buddha does this all the time. For example, he terms a brahmin someone who is very virtuous; not someone from a particular family.

Mahāpitṛ Brahma (the one that is held to be the creatpr, so called the Brahma the great ancestor), in Buddhist texts, is understood to consider himself as the creator of the universe, but the Buddha personally ridicules him for this conceit in several places. The Buddha taught that the universe has no creator.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, November 11th, 2011 at 9:24 PM
Title: Re: Buddhism on God
Content:
padma norbu said:
It's interesting how KevinSolway still does not get that dharmakaya is a state.

KevinSolway said:
I have no idea how you get to that conclusion from the fact that the Brahma of the Buddhist scriptures is an aspect of Brahman, the Supreme Godhead

Malcolm wrote:
Buddhists just don't see it that way. We don't accept the existence of brahman at all. In fact, we explicitly reject it as eternalism.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, November 11th, 2011 at 8:55 PM
Title: Re: How Many Transmissions?
Content:
wisdom said:
How many transmissions can a Dzogchen student receive?
Should one strive to receive transmission from as many Gurus as possible when the opportunity arises?
Also assuming that you receive transmission from a Guru who is very busy and travels, how does one know when/how to progress with teachings when the teacher might be practically inaccessible due to traveling and having hundreds or thousands of students?


Malcolm wrote:
Limitless.

That depends on you. I have received teachings from perhaps forty gurus. Most of them Nyingma. I received Dzogchen transmission from seven of them. Three of them I am close to and have received may transmissions from. One is my primary root guru, Chogyal Namkhai Norbu, though in reality for me they are all Vajrasattva, but in the end, I am a Dzogchen Community person.
Rely on your vajra brothers and sisters. They will help you.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, November 11th, 2011 at 8:47 PM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:
Namdrol said:
The Buddhist counterpart is called "demarcating the boundaries" also known as the protection cakra. It is generally done at the beginning of more elaborate practices.

Lhug-Pa said:
Is there any direct relation at all between the practices of Vajrakilaya or Guru Tragphur and Demarcating the Boundaries/Protection Chakra?

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, in some types pf lower tantra,kīl̄as are used to established boundaries.




Namdrol said:
In Dzogchen, rig pa is the ultimate protection cakra, obviating the need for any explicit rites of protection.
This I do not doubt at all; although for reference, will you please cite any sources for this?


Malcolm wrote:
The protection cakra section of many anuyoga level sadhanas make this point.




Namdrol said:
I suggest you follow Dzogchen as a path unto itself and leave off all this other metaphysical/esoteric stuff. Eventually, it will just be so much dead weight. No need to carry it around.
That seems to be the general consensus around here.

And I agree with it to an extent. However I've addressed this in the "Rushen Preliminaries of Bönpo Dzogchen" thread.

Malcolm wrote:
Who needs anything other than the stainless teaching of the Buddha and Garab Dorje? The rest is all just a distraction.

Studying Crowley led me to Dharma. But I don't spend much time at all thinking about or referencing Crowley and Thelema and so on. For me, it is obsolete. Likewise, the whole western esoteric tradition with its Qabala, godforms, masonic roots, tarot and so on is obsolete for me. Once I gave myself to the Dharma, these things just became irrelevant.

Your time would be better spent on getting a handle on the five major and minor sciences, the study of Abhidharma and so on. At least this is directly connected with the teachings.

N








Best Regards[/quote]


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, November 11th, 2011 at 6:09 AM
Title: Re: Democracy in the country that gave birth to democracy
Content:
kirtu said:
Perhaps you do not recognize homelessness.  No one out on the street has asked you for money?

http://www.coalitionforthehomeless.org/pages/basic-facts

Kirt


alwayson said:
If you are using that criterion, I have seen some in America.

But all countries will have that.    You can't do anything about it.


Malcolm wrote:
All countries do not have homelessness.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, November 11th, 2011 at 6:00 AM
Title: Re: Democracy in the country that gave birth to democracy
Content:


Karma Dondrup Tashi said:
Yeah well hey if that's what you mean by point by point I can understand why you think it would be tedious bullshit.

Malcolm wrote:
The point by point thing is tedious because basically, the libertarian party will never gain power in this country.

We can agree that there is no way a third party will be a relevant force in American politics. You think it is because of "entitlement" programs and so on.

I think it is because corporations have their hands too deep in American politics and that so called free market thinking has been systematically destroying the middle class in America, a middle class that was birthed and grown under a Keynsian model.

I see the headlong rush of the rest of the world's economies to follow our example to be folly unparralled.

Instead of increased centralization and more policies that favor growth and expansion, we need to do a global about face, reduce world populations, etc.

You know the drill.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, November 11th, 2011 at 5:20 AM
Title: Re: Democracy in the country that gave birth to democracy
Content:
alwayson said:
Where are the impoverished masses resorting to cannibalism?

Like I said before, most "poor" people in America have air conditioning, a fridge, XBOX 360, DVD player, flat screens etc.

Malcolm wrote:
Gadgets bought on credit cards are not wealth.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, November 11th, 2011 at 5:14 AM
Title: Re: Democracy in the country that gave birth to democracy
Content:


Karma Dondrup Tashi said:
Hence all the armies, navies and fighter jets with Starbucks, Canon, Macy's, IBM, Microsoft, Merck, etc, logos on them. Check.

Malcolm wrote:
Only a matter of time.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, November 11th, 2011 at 5:12 AM
Title: Re: Democracy in the country that gave birth to democracy
Content:


Karma Dondrup Tashi said:
Hence all the armies, navies and fighter jets with Starbucks, Canon, Macy's, IBM, Microsoft, Merck, etc, logos on them. Check.

Malcolm wrote:
Well, had you studied history, you would have read about the Marine General, who upon retiring, detailed all the American adventures in Central America and elsewhere that he fought for Dole, etc.

Or the perhaps you recall the Allende government that was undermined by the CIA because Allende was going to nationalize the mines. ALCOA had a hand in that and benefitted mightly.

I could do on. The fact is that we do engage in military adventures precisely to benefit US corporations. Now that we have international corporations, we use NATO.

Lockheed Martin would be the logo you are thinking of, BTW.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, November 11th, 2011 at 5:04 AM
Title: Re: Democracy in the country that gave birth to democracy
Content:
Namdrol said:
Also, at a certain point, the point by point becomes tedious bullshit.

Karma Dondrup Tashi said:
Especially when you have all the answers. Got it.

Malcolm wrote:
Basically, I detest Ayn Rand. She was an evil bitch. She worshipped serial killers. Milton Friedman was her minion.  Ron Paul named his kid Rand. Need I say more?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, November 11th, 2011 at 5:02 AM
Title: Re: Democracy in the country that gave birth to democracy
Content:
Namdrol said:
It would certainly result in less wars.

Karma Dondrup Tashi said:
Oh ya and wars. Right. Cause Libertarians love wars. Like, you know, Ron Paul wants to stay in Iraq forever and thought it was a really good idea to invade. Right. Forgot. Sorry. Check check.

Malcolm wrote:
War is a result of unimpeded capitalism. Wars are fought because it is profitable. When libertarian capitialist see there is more profit in a war than in peace, they will go to war likety split.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, November 11th, 2011 at 5:00 AM
Title: Re: Democracy in the country that gave birth to democracy
Content:
Namdrol said:
You will be moved like cattle into large cities, warrens, really ...

Karma Dondrup Tashi said:
Uh this already happened it was called the industrial revolution.

Oh yeah I forgot, cities. Cities bad. Calhoun's rats. Dark Satanic Mills. Cities bad. All that. Got it. Check. Roger.


Malcolm wrote:
Large cities are pretty horrible, most of them. They smell bad, they are polluted, people who live in them tend to be pretty stressed out.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, November 11th, 2011 at 4:56 AM
Title: Re: Democracy in the country that gave birth to democracy
Content:
Namdrol said:
They are all evil bastards.

Karma Dondrup Tashi said:
So instead of using a computer made by a corporation, using a server run by a corporation over a phone line run by a corporation, using electricity produced by a corporation, generated by power administered by a corporation, from oil mined by a corporation, strip naked and wear a grass skirt and walk to me to deliver your messages to me on tree bark. That way I'd respect your outrage.


Malcolm wrote:
tried it, no one listened.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, November 11th, 2011 at 4:41 AM
Title: Re: Democracy in the country that gave birth to democracy
Content:
Namdrol said:
And yes, corporations are evil and they are basically sociopaths and serial killers.

Karma Dondrup Tashi said:
That is the most paranoid, deranged, pathologically insane thing I have ever heard anyone say on these boards.


Malcolm wrote:
Funny you post that -- you really want me to go through the list of labor, environmental, health and so on abuses of the corporate groups that produce all those commodities?

Just take ALCOA -- it has one of the worst pollution records. In addition, The Brazilian government used Agent Orange to defoliate a large section of the Amazon rainforest so that Alcoa could build the Tucuruí dam to power mining operations. Large areas of rainforest were destroyed, along with the homes and livelihoods of thousands of rural peasants and indigenous tribes. They run terrible sweatshops Mexico and elsewhere: http://www.globallabourrights.org/reports?id=0220 " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I could go on.

They are all evil bastards.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, November 11th, 2011 at 4:32 AM
Title: Re: Democracy in the country that gave birth to democracy
Content:
Namdrol said:
The middle class is all but dead.


alwayson said:
You are kidding me right?

Chill Namdrol....

Go to Best Buy or something.  Play some Wii or Xbox 360.


Malcolm wrote:
Dude, you just don't get it -- Wii etc., cheap electronic gadgets are just crack to keep the increasingly impovrished masses passive, bovine and content.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, November 11th, 2011 at 4:29 AM
Title: Re: Democracy in the country that gave birth to democracy
Content:


Namdrol said:
Market transparency means transparency to corporations -- we know, that like their human counterparts, they don't give a frak about anything other than enriching themselves at the expense of others.


alwayson said:
Not again with corporations being evil.

Go to India where meat is so expensive.

Corporations allow Americans to maintain a middle class lifestyle on multiple levels.

Malcolm wrote:
And yes, corporations are evil and they are basically sociopaths and serial killers.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, November 11th, 2011 at 4:28 AM
Title: Re: Democracy in the country that gave birth to democracy
Content:


Namdrol said:
Market transparency means transparency to corporations -- we know, that like their human counterparts, they don't give a frak about anything other than enriching themselves at the expense of others.


alwayson said:
Not again with corporations being evil.

Go to India where meat is so expensive.

Corporations allow Americans to maintain a middle class lifestyle.


Malcolm wrote:
No, they don't. The middle class lifestyle is swiftly disappearing in the US? Why? Corporations and neo-liberalization of trade. Cost of living has been rising steadily against wages for years in the US. The middle class is all but dead.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, November 11th, 2011 at 4:04 AM
Title: Re: Democracy in the country that gave birth to democracy
Content:
gregkavarnos said:
Look at the American deficit, is that due to the socialist agendas of Americas political parties?  NO!!!


alwayson said:
Is this supposed to be a joke?

43% (and exponentially increasing with population) of our debt in America is caused by socialistic entitlement programs such as Medicare and Social Security.

I mean, thats just fact.


Malcolm wrote:
NO, this is false.

Budget for 2011
$2.627 trillion (estimated) [1]

Total expenditures	$3.729 trillion

There is a 1.101 trillion dollar deficit.

So, lets say we look at the numbers:

$553.0 billion (+0.7%) - Department of Defense
$118.0 billion (-26.0%) - Overseas Contingency Operations

Right there, you have 671 Billion. That is more than half of the deficit. All that military entitlement spending.

Medicare and Medicaid combined is like 754 Billion.

So, like most Rebuplicans, you want to keep the army and spend more money on it, but strip people of already inadequate health care.

SSI brings in $925 billion - Social Security and other payroll tax
It spends $761 billion

Looks to be like SSI pays for itself pretty damn well. Nothing socialist there.

The simplest thing to do, to pay for the whole thing is redistribute some wealth from the %1. Yes, raise taxes of rich people, since they are not creating an goddamned job and are just bloodsuckers, capitalist leeches.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, November 11th, 2011 at 3:52 AM
Title: Re: Democracy in the country that gave birth to democracy
Content:
gregkavarnos said:
Look at the American deficit, is that due to the socialist agendas of Americas political parties?  NO!!!


alwayson said:
Is this supposed to be a joke?

Most of our debt in America is caused by socialistic entitlement programs such as Medicare and Social Security.

I mean, thats just fact.


Malcolm wrote:
These are not socialist programs, since people pay FICA out of their paychecks for them every week. We PAY for SS. Or did that little fact escape your attention.

The problem with our country is that there is no enough socialism in it; not that there is too much.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, November 11th, 2011 at 3:48 AM
Title: Re: Democracy in the country that gave birth to democracy
Content:


kirtu said:
The so-called neo-liberalism thing is almost certainly on the way out.  Anyway, how can you actually expect a group of social democracies to support a version of laisse-faire capitalism + fixed markets in international trade?  Or do you have another view of neo-liberalism?

Kirt

Malcolm wrote:
My view of neo=-liberalism is that WTO type agreements have basically caught everyone in a neo-liberal free trade nightmare. Look at all the so alled "austerity" measures being enforced by banks on this and that country. International capital has become a more powerful force than national governments, which is the whole point and goal of the neo-liberal agenda from the beginning i.e. less regulation, more market transparency, weaker unions, more profits, etc.

I think neo-liberalism is more powerful than ever, not weaker.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, November 11th, 2011 at 3:35 AM
Title: Re: Buddhism on God
Content:
Virgo said:
I'll ask Robert Kirkpatrick because I remember discussing this with him in Thailand.

This is from wikipedia:

"Brahmā Sahampati, said to be the most senior of the Mahābrahmās, was the deity who invisibly attended on the Buddha when he attained enlightenment, and when the Buddha was meditating at Uruvelā afterwards, encouraged him to teach the Dharma to humans. According to some commentaries he was an anagami (non-returner),[2] one of the Śuddhāvāsa (Pure Abodes) deities. He was the rebirth of a monk named Sahaka, who had been in the Saṅgha of Kāśyapa Buddha.

Kevin


Malcolm wrote:
I just had a look around the bka' gyur and bstan 'gyur -- and it appears everywhere that Sahampti is listed with worldly gods such as Indra, the four guardians and so on.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, November 11th, 2011 at 3:09 AM
Title: Re: Buddhism on God
Content:


Virgo said:
According to Theravada Commentaries, He (Brahma Sahampati) is actually an Anagami, having attained that stage under a past Buddha, and been reborn as a Brahma.


Malcolm wrote:
That's interesting.This is a commentarial difference. AFAIK, according to Sarvastivda, etc, beings can fall into five pure abodes from the arupyadhātu, which rules out their solely being locations of aryas. I will have to find out if Sahampati is considered an arya in Sarvastivada, since I don't know.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, November 11th, 2011 at 2:47 AM
Title: Re: Democracy in the country that gave birth to democracy
Content:
gregkavarnos said:
Look at the American deficit, is that due to the socialist agendas of Americas political parties?  NO!!!

Malcolm wrote:
According to Faux news, yes.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, November 11th, 2011 at 2:46 AM
Title: Re: Democracy in the country that gave birth to democracy
Content:
Namdrol said:
The Greek debt Crisis was caused by running large deficits

N



alwayson said:
You say large deficits.

I say socialism.

We are saying the same thing.

Malcolm wrote:
Deficits are a perfectly capitalist way of doing business. All governments run on debt. They always have.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, November 10th, 2011 at 11:17 PM
Title: Re: Are women conscious?
Content:
Namdrol said:
... see past the end of their own dicks.

Karma Dondrup Tashi said:
For the third dang time, as an inveterate wanker I take offense to the dick slandery that goes on in this forum. I personally find my dick to lead to all kinds of upaya in the name of world peace.

Heehehehehehehehehe!


Malcolm wrote:
I wasn't slandering dicks, I was pointing out the faults of myopia-- completely different.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, November 10th, 2011 at 11:11 PM
Title: Re: Democracy in the country that gave birth to democracy
Content:
Namdrol said:
It is time for the Euro to go.

N

Sönam said:
It's time for Euro to go federalism ... altogether, European countries have no problem and are strong. When one step is made to go "One World", also when at first it's made for business purpose, it's a positive step ...

Sönam


Malcolm wrote:
You will regret -- it would be better for European countries to return to their own currencies and dismantle the EU. The EU is actually a policy agenda of neo-liberalism.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, November 10th, 2011 at 11:09 PM
Title: Re: Are women conscious?
Content:


KevinSolway said:
Rousseau once said "Women, in general, are not attracted to art at all, nor knowledge, and not at all to genius".


Malcolm wrote:
Typical blind mysogyny. Of course, if you like you can find many men whose thinking about the other sex is quite primitive and dismissive, since they cannot, in their myopia, see past the end of their own dicks.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, November 10th, 2011 at 11:07 PM
Title: Re: Are women conscious?
Content:


Karma Dondrup Tashi said:
Before the mods ban you, I commend you. You have been running rings round everyone since you got here precisely because no one can apparently understand the fact that all of what you say is a JOKE.

Malcolm wrote:
KTD, sadly, it is not true. I first encountered Kevin and David Quinn on Buddha-l and Buddhist back in the 1990's. They have very persistent and consistent.

I don't think they are joking at all.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, November 10th, 2011 at 11:02 PM
Title: Re: Are women conscious?
Content:
Namdrol said:
Frankly, Kevin, to be blunt -- this is a very stupid way to put things. To say that male  = consciousness and female = unconsciousness is plain stupid.

KevinSolway said:
I don't know how many of the people that have been participating in this "Dharma-free-for-all" forum, since I've been here, are physically female, but I strongly suspect that the number is no higher than one or two.

I run a Youtube channel about philosophy with almost 1,500 subscribers, only 3% of which are female, and of that 3% at least half a dozen of them are male-to-female transsexuals.

This lack of interest in philosophy, and lack of interest in the realm of ideas, by those who are physically female, is no coincidence.

How many female geniuses have there been throughout the whole of human history?  None, so far as any thinking being can tell.  Perhaps there are one or two who are marginal.

Malcolm wrote:
Kevin:

Has it ever occurred to you once that perhaps women's general lack of interest in your philosophy has to do with its mysoginistic bent?

You see, I never participate in "philosophical" discussions of mysandrous feminsists. What would be the point?

So why should women participate "philosophical" discussions of mysogyinists men?

Your imputation about female geniuses is very immature. There have been countless female geniuses in all fields. For example, the first computer program was written by Lovelace. Here is a short list compiled out of 4000 years of famous woman in science.

http://www.astr.ua.edu/4000WS/timelist.shtml " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

You are stuck, Kevin. Just accept it and move on. You are reading history through a thick lense of mysogyny.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, November 10th, 2011 at 10:11 PM
Title: Re: Are women conscious?
Content:


KevinSolway said:
It's a matter of consciousness vs unconsciousness.


Malcolm wrote:
Frankly, Kevin, to be blunt -- this is a very stupid way to put things. To say that male  = consciousness and female = unconsciousness is plain stupid.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, November 10th, 2011 at 10:01 PM
Title: Re: "stress" in translations from Pali & Sanskrit
Content:
Aemilius said:
How does that word sound in your ear ?

Malcolm wrote:
Stupid. Effluent is better.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, November 10th, 2011 at 9:51 PM
Title: Re: Are women conscious?
Content:
Namdrol said:
Fortunately, this does apply to all Mahāyāna sutras, the episode with the Goddess of the Ganges being a pointed example:

KevinSolway said:
Even Hsuan Hua, the so-called "misogynist" relates the case of the dragon king's daughter:

"When Sariputra said that she could not become a Buddha, she took a precious gem, her most valuable and cherished possession, and offered it to the Buddha, who accepted it. She then asked Sariputra if the Buddha's acceptance of her offering was fast, and he replied that, indeed, it had been quick. "I shall become a Buddha that quickly," she said and then she became a Buddha. This is proof that women's lot is not hopeless. All they must do is resolve to cultivate courageously and they too can become Buddhas."

Malcolm wrote:
Not a perfect example. In the actual text of the sutra,the Saddharmapundrika, before the nāgā princess becomes a Buddha, she first transforms into a male bodhisattva and then becomes a Buddha.



KevinSolway said:
Different sutras are written for those of different capacity. Those with a mysogynistic bent, are, from my perspective, written intending those of lower capacity i.e. men who suffer from mysogyny and woman who suffer at the hands of mysogynistic men and wish to escape their "lower birth".
Your interpretation is mistaken. I haven't seen any sutras with a misogynistic bent. It takes but a single moment for a woman to be reborn as a man, provided the conditions are met.

Malcolm wrote:
You are a mysogynist, so naturally you don't see these texts as being "mysogynistic".

There is no reason why a woman should want to be a man, apart from men telling her that her state is inferior.



KevinSolway said:
Remember that rebirth is not about physical bodies, but mental ones.  A woman does not require the physical form of a male to be reborn as male.

Malcolm wrote:
Rebirth is minds appropriating physical bodies, Kevin.



KevinSolway said:
The truth is that there is no such thing as gender in phenomena
You said yourself that different beings have different capacities.  That is what we are talking about here.  It's nothing to do with physical sex.  A person with a woman's physical body can mentally be male.  In that case she has been reborn as a man.

Malcolm wrote:
As I said, there is no reason why a woman would want to be any other gender than the one she possesses, the same for a man -- unless said person has transgender impulses.

In Buddhist texts, men are considered method, but woman, wisdom. Awakening comes about from uniting means and wisdom.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, November 10th, 2011 at 9:41 PM
Title: Re: Ultimate Truth
Content:
Sherab said:
Hi KevinSolway, I've a question for you:

The relative truth refers to all that is conditioned.
The ultimate truth refers to all that is unconditioned.

Malcolm wrote:
This fails the test of a basic syllogism:

All that is unconditioned is ultimate truth;
space is unconditioned;
space is ultimate truth.

Your statement is therefore false because space is definitely not an ultimate truth.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, November 10th, 2011 at 9:37 PM
Title: Re: Are women conscious?
Content:


padma norbu said:
So, Namdrol, do women have the 5 poisons, then? Or not? While it was traditional in Buddhism due to cultural circumstances and implications to find a male human birth most favorable, is there anything to suggest women are not conscious?

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, woman are sentient beings, obviously, and they have three or five poisons. No, there is nothing to suggest in traditional literature that women are not conscious, indeed, there were many female arhats during the time of the Buddha and later; not to mention female bodhisattvas and Buddhas.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, November 10th, 2011 at 9:34 PM
Title: Re: Buddhism on God
Content:
catmoon said:
Source please.

KevinSolway said:
Before I go looking up sources, consider this for a moment: Do you honestly think that the Buddha, after having achieved  his Great Awakening, is going to take advice from a deluded being?  I think not.  By commonsense alone we know that the Brahma that the Buddha confers with is no samsaric being.

Malcolm wrote:
The Buddha accepts requests from samsaric beings, as in this case. By definition, any being defined as a deva is samsaric since they belong to the three realms. It is not possible for brahmas to enter the Buddhist path, actually. The path of awakening is open only to human beings. While it is true that there are devas who are arhats, they must have become stream enterers, once-returners or never returners as human beings in their previous births. It is no where indicated that this brahma was in fact an arya.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, November 10th, 2011 at 9:31 PM
Title: Re: Buddhism on God
Content:
Namdrol said:
The only reason why Brahma though he created the universe is that he was the first being to take rebirth in the brahmaloka. When other beings popped out after him, he convinced them he was the creator since he himself did not know where he had come from.

KevinSolway said:
You are speaking of a lower form of Brahma.  The highest form of Brahma, to whom the Buddha himself turned for advice upon his awakening, is identical with Brahman.

Malcolm wrote:
No, Kevin, you are clearly mistaken on this point.

"Then Brahma Sahampati, having known with his own awareness the line of thinking in the Blessed One's awareness, thought: "The world is lost! The world is destroyed! The mind of the Tathagata, the Arahant, the Rightly Self-awakened One inclines to dwelling at ease, not to teaching the Dhamma!" Then, just as a strong man might extend his flexed arm or flex his extended arm, Brahma Sahampati disappeared from the Brahma-world and reappeared in front of the Blessed One. Arranging his upper robe over one shoulder, he knelt down with his right knee on the ground, saluted the Blessed One with his hands before his heart, and said to him: "Lord, let the Blessed One teach the Dhamma! Let the One-Well-Gone teach the Dhamma! There are beings with little dust in their eyes who are falling away because they do not hear the Dhamma. There will be those who will understand the Dhamma."
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn06/sn06.001.than.html " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

This Brahma is not the so called "ancestor Brahma". In fact there are many Brahmas, since brahma is a class of deva, and not a single deva. This brahma is just a brahma in the brahmaloka.

So you are conflating these things a bit. It can be a bit confusing, I know, but patience and attention to detail is required to properly understand Buddhism and its context within Indian religion as a whole.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, November 10th, 2011 at 9:16 PM
Title: Re: Are women conscious?
Content:
Namdrol said:
How does this thread have anything to do with Buddhism?



KevinSolway said:
Amongst the writings and Buddhist quotations provided in this topic you will find much information and resources for those women who want to be reborn as men, as well as for those who want to be reborn in realms where there are no women at all.  That is one of the subjects covered in the Earth-store bodhisattva sutra.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, I am aware that within Mahāyāna sutras there is some pointed mysogyny.

Fortunately, this does apply to all Mahāyāna sutras, the episode with the Goddess of the Ganges being a pointed example:

Sariputra: Goddess, what prevents you from transforming yourself out of your female state?

Goddess: Although I have sought my "female state" for these twelve years, I have not yet found it. Reverend Sariputra, if a magician were to incarnate a woman by magic, would you ask her, "What prevents you from transforming yourself out of your female state?"

Sariputra: No! Such a woman would not really exist, so what would there be to transform?

Goddess: Just so, reverend Sariputra, all things do not really exist. Now, would you think, "What prevents one whose nature is that of a magical incarnation from transforming herself out of her female state?"

Thereupon, the goddess employed her magical power to cause the elder Sariputra to appear in her form and to cause herself to appear in his form. Then the goddess, transformed into Sariputra, said to Sariputra, transformed into a goddess, "Reverend Sariputra, what prevents you from transforming yourself out of your female state?"

And Sariputra, transformed into the goddess, replied, "I no longer appear in the form of a male! My body has changed into the body of a woman! I do not know what to transform!"

The goddess continued, "If the elder could again change out of the female state, then all women could also change out of their female states. All women appear in the form of women in just the same way

as the elder appears in the form of a woman. While they are not women in reality, they appear in the form of women. With this in mind, the Buddha said, 'In all things, there is neither male nor female.'"

Different sutras are written for those of different capacity. Those with a mysogynistic bent, are, from my perspective, written intending those of lower capacity i.e. men who suffer from mysogyny and woman who suffer at the hands of mysogynistic men and wish to escape their "lower birth".



KevinSolway said:
Kevin is entitled to his mysogeny.



Malcolm wrote:
Truth is not misogyny.  Are you saying that all those great Buddhist minds, and perhaps even the Buddha, were misogynists?

Was the author of "The Ultimate Extinction of the Dharma Sutra" a misogynist?

[/quote]

The truth is that there is no such thing as gender in phenomena, as we see from the above exchange between the Goddess and Sariputra. Gender is an imputation.

Many great Buddhist minds seem to have suffered from a culturally embedded mysogyny, yes.

But not the Buddha himself. Why? Because he had many female arhats among his disciples, as well as some teachers, such as Dhammadinna, whose sermons may be found in the Majjihma Nikaya, quite extensive as well.

When Ananda convinced the Buddha to ordain woman,while it is true that when the Buddha ordained women, he prediceted it would shorten the duration of the his Dharma; it is also true that the Buddha predicted that the ordination of women would cause the Dharma to spread much wider. So all that exchanged was a bit of length for increased width. And we can understand here that what he was really referring to the ordained Sangha. Such teachings as Dzogchen are not under the same restrictions as Vinaya and lower sutrayāna.

In short, you are cherry picking citations to support your views -- you are not presenting a balanced picture, presenting both negative and positive representations of women in Buddhist texts.


N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, November 10th, 2011 at 8:54 PM
Title: Re: Buddhism on God
Content:
catmoon said:
If we are talking about God the Father, God the Creator, God the Omniscient, Omnipresent and Omnipotent, Buddhism dismisses him as fiction.

KevinSolway said:
Buddhism doesn't dismiss Brahma the Ominipotent Creator, who convinced the Buddha to share his wisdom with others.

What makes you think that God is any different to Brahma (ultimately Brahman)?

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, the Buddha does. The only reason why Brahma though he created the universe is that he was the first being to take rebirth in the brahmaloka. When other beings popped out after him, he convinced them he was the creator since he himself did not know where he had come from.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, November 10th, 2011 at 8:28 PM
Title: Re: Democracy in the country that gave birth to democracy
Content:


catmoon said:
Now outside of Greece, Italy and Spain, governments are not completely stupid. Aware of the fact that high debt is an unstable situation, they limit debt to avoid the above nightmare scenario. But they still want to be able to buy votes, so they skate as close to the edge of disaster as they think they can get away with. This time, it isn't working, because of a new factor.

Malcolm wrote:
The debt situation of each of these three countries is completley different and independent.

The Spanis debt crisis was caused by a building bubble that collpased -- basically, very similar to the US.

The Greek debt Crisis was caused by running large deficits, which caused their bonds to give yeilds as high as %15 (meaning they are very risky).

The Italian debt crisis is being caused by rising yeilds on italian bonds, which means that borrowing costs for the Italian goverment is rising too high to make it easy for them to borrow. Typically, when bond yields rise above %7 they become riskier. This is not happening because the Italians want this to happen, it is happening because of poorly regulated financial markets putting pressure on the price of Italian debt.

US exposure to all of this debt comes in the form of CDS -- invented by Wall Street.

It is time for the Euro to go.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, November 10th, 2011 at 8:09 PM
Title: Re: Democracy in the country that gave birth to democracy
Content:
catmoon said:
Who is responsible? We are. We demand education for free, we demand unemployment insurance,  we demand the most expensive medical treatments, we demand high wages, we demand military supremacy, and as a direct result governments go into debt to meet those demands.

tobes said:
Totally disagree. The responsibility lies with the finance sector and the finance sector alone. They pushed for radical deregulations in the 70's & 80's. They resisted every attempt to re-regulate - and still resist, despite the catastrophe of the GFC mark 1. They are the ones who have made tremendous, startling, amazing profits over these few decades, whilst industries which actually make real stuff have bled dry....


Malcolm wrote:
Here, here -- I completely agree with you.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, November 10th, 2011 at 8:08 PM
Title: Re: Democracy in the country that gave birth to democracy
Content:


Namdrol said:
No, the debt crises was caused by Wall Street, not by Europe.



alwayson said:
According to multiple sources the Greek debt crisis was directly caused by their socialistic policies.

I already posted links to substantiate this in earlier threads.

Or just watch the nightly news.

Malcolm wrote:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204644504576652781479494882.html " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;:

"U.S. creditors own just 5% of direct exposure to Greek debt. But they are also indirectly exposed to at least 43% of such debt through CDSs, which total upwards of €25 billion. This equals about half of the European Central Bank's direct Greek exposure of €52 billion."

Credit Default Swaps were invented by Wall Street financial wizards. The reason we are exposed to the Greek debt crisis is because of derivatives we created in order to invest in debt. So please, don't give me a bunch of nonsense about how Greek Socialisms is destroying the American economy. The only thing destroying the American economy is the progressive deregulation of financial markets and the export of our manufacturing base, started by the GOP and continued by the Dems with NAFTA and the WTO agreements.

In short, what is destroying the world economy is nothing other than neo-liberal policies.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, November 10th, 2011 at 7:58 PM
Title: Re: Are women conscious?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
How does this thread have anything to do with Buddhism?

Kevin is entitled to his mysogany. And I think that exposing him to ridicule over it is a little cruel and certainly will not make him question whether or not his biological determinism is justified.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, November 10th, 2011 at 7:39 PM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:


Lhug-Pa said:
A Buddhist counterpart of this would then be Vajrakilaya, Guru Tragphur, etc.

So I asked if Guru Yoga would be sufficient for protection, because I'd remembered reading that during Guru Yoga we are in the Ultimate state of protection. Although perhaps that is just during the Guru Yoga Sadhana....


Malcolm wrote:
The Buddhist counterpart is called "demarcating the boundaries" also known as the protection cakra. It is generally done at the beginning of more elaborate practices.

In Dzogchen, rig pa is the ultimate protection cakra, obviating the need for any explicit rites of protection.

I suggest you follow Dzogchen as a path unto itself and leave off all this other metaphysical/esoteric stuff. Eventually, it will just be so much dead weight. No need to carry it around.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, November 10th, 2011 at 4:44 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:
alwayson said:
Does anyone know when the next Direct Introduction will be given?

I checked here:

http://tsegyalgar.org/theteachings/webcastcalendar/default.htm?month=&year=2012&idlist= " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Namdrol said:
Next worldwide transmission day is march eighth --

Sönam said:
there is one before  november 20th

Sönam

Malcolm wrote:
Oh right, I missed it in my calendar, sorry. Next one is one November 20th


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, November 10th, 2011 at 3:26 AM
Title: Re: Democracy in the country that gave birth to democracy
Content:
alwayson said:
I hate the fact that the American economy is at the complete mercy of Europe's socialism/debt problems.

Europe has been causing the world's problems for centuries........colonization of Africa, Asia, New World (slaughtering all the Mayans, Aztecs etc.)....... World Wars 1 & 2............and now this socialism / debt stuff.


Malcolm wrote:
No, the debt crises was caused by Wall Street, not by Europe.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, November 10th, 2011 at 2:52 AM
Title: Re: Democracy in the country that gave birth to democracy
Content:
Sönam said:
... Proudhon's theories ...

Karma Dondrup Tashi said:
Property is theft huh?

Meh. I own my body therefore I own the effects of what that body produces, whether that thing is three square meals, four walls, or a murder.

Malcolm wrote:
Really, so you own your children?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, November 10th, 2011 at 2:48 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:
alwayson said:
Does anyone know when the next Direct Introduction will be given?

I checked here:

http://tsegyalgar.org/theteachings/webcastcalendar/default.htm?month=&year=2012&idlist= " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Malcolm wrote:
Next worldwide transmission day is march eighth -- but the next webcast is open:


11-17 November 2011 - TENERIFE RETREAT:

Ati Yoga retreat of Rigdzin jangchub Dorje’s terma  "Nyangyud Khorva Dongtruk”  (Tib. Snyan-rgyud ‘khor-ba dong-sprug).

Tenerife Spain- GMT (+0) - OPEN WEBCAST

11th Nov.5-7pm. Teaching start.
12th Nov.10-12am. Teaching of transmission of Guru Yoga.

13th Nov.10-12am. After Guru Yoga altogether, teaching of “Nyangyud Khorva Dongtruk”.

14th Nov.10-12am. After Guru Yoga altogether, teaching of “Nyangyud Khorva Dongtruk”.

16th Nov.10-12am. After Guru Yoga altogether, teaching of “Nyangyud Khorva Dongtruk”.
4-7pm. Gana Puja and so on.

17th Nov.10-12am.  Giving some advice for daily practices and some tridlungs.  We finish our retreat with Ati Guru Yoga practice altogether.



To follow the webcast please see: http://shangshunginstitute.net/webcast/video.php " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 9th, 2011 at 10:19 PM
Title: Re: Buddhist Geeks 2012 Conference
Content:


Chaz said:
I made a list of recognized Buddhist teachers that have been Vince Horn's guest at least once.

Richard Reoch, Dzogchen Ponlop Rinpoche,  Sara Harding,  Surya Das,  Trudy Goodman,  Stephen Batchelor,  Christopher Titmuss,  Diane Hamilton,  Bernie Glassman,  Sumi Loundon Kim,  Hokai Sobol,  Richard Brown,  James Zito,  Kenneth Folk,  Jiun Foster,  Grace Schireson Genpo Merzel Roshi,  Rick Hanson,  Vincent Horn,  Judith Simmer-Brown,  Rodney Smith,  Kenneth Cohen,  Jaimal Yogis,  Yongey Mingyur Rinpoche,  Erik Curren,  Danny Fisher,  Norman Fischer,  Brad Warner,  Gaylon Ferguson,  Tami Simon,  Susan Blackmore,  Daniel Ingram,  Diana Winston,  Richard Shankman,  Gerry Shishin Wick,  Joseph Goldstein,  Reginald Ray,  Jun Po Denis Kelly,  Jeffrey Hopkins,  Ven. Robina Courtin,  Nova Spivack,  B. Alan Wallace,  Melvin McLeod,  Stuart Lachs,  Susan Piver,  John Daido Loori,  Diane Hamilton,  Wes Nisker,  Noah Levine,  Thubten Chodron,  Sharon Salzberg,  Ethan Nichtern,  Robert Spellman,  John Travis,  Annie McQuade,  Fleet Maull, and Phil Stanley.

Nangwa said:
There are several people on that list that I wouldnt consider to be Buddhist teachers.


Chaz said:
Really?  Care to name them?

Malcolm wrote:
Well, Nova Spivak, whom I happen to know personally since 1990, is an internet venture capitalist who happens to be a Buddhist, and so on -- but he is not a Buddhist teacher. Melvin Mcleod may have some role in Shambhala, but mainly he is an editor, the same with Susan Piver, etc.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 9th, 2011 at 10:10 PM
Title: Re: Ultimate Truth
Content:


KevinSolway said:
Define what you mean by "Enlightened" (with a capital "E", no less) and I'll attempt to answer your question in a constructive manner.

Malcolm wrote:
The minumum standard Buddhist definition of awakening (preferable to "enlightened") is that one has seen the truth of the world in such a way that one is freed from the first three of the ten fetters:
a view of personal identity
doubt concerning the meaning of the Buddha's teachings
attachmentto rules and rites as effective means of liberation
When one is free from these three fetters, one can no longer be troubled by afflictions [kleshas]. According to the teachings, such a person will become an arhat within seven to one lifetimes following this one.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 9th, 2011 at 10:02 PM
Title: Re: are karma and rebirth for real?
Content:
KevinSolway said:
Everything in the sutras is written from the perspective of Ultimate Truth.

Malcolm wrote:
If that is the case then you must hold that rebirth is an ultimate truth since the Vipaka sutta states:

"Monks, the taking of life — when indulged in, developed, & pursued — is something that leads to hell, leads to rebirth as a common animal, leads to the realm of the hungry shades. The slightest of all the results coming from the taking of life is that, when one becomes a human being, it leads to a short life span.

"Stealing — when indulged in, developed, & pursued — is something that leads to hell, leads to rebirth as a common animal, leads to the realm of the hungry shades. The slightest of all the results coming from stealing is that, when one becomes a human being, it leads to the loss of one's wealth.

"Illicit sexual behavior — when indulged in, developed, & pursued — is something that leads to hell, leads to rebirth as a common animal, leads to the realm of the hungry shades. The slightest of all the results coming from illicit sexual behavior is that, when one becomes a human being, it leads to rivalry & revenge.

"Telling falsehoods — when indulged in, developed, & pursued — is something that leads to hell, leads to rebirth as a common animal, leads to the realm of the hungry shades. The slightest of all the results coming from telling falsehoods is that, when one becomes a human being, it leads to being falsely accused.

"Divisive tale-bearing — when indulged in, developed, & pursued — is something that leads to hell, leads to rebirth as a common animal, leads to the realm of the hungry shades. The slightest of all the results coming from divisive tale-bearing is that, when one becomes a human being, it leads to the breaking of one's friendships.

"Harsh speech — when indulged in, developed, & pursued — is something that leads to hell, leads to rebirth as a common animal, leads to the realm of the hungry shades. The slightest of all the results coming from harsh speech is that, when one becomes a human being, it leads to unappealing sounds.

"Frivolous chattering — when indulged in, developed, & pursued — is something that leads to hell, leads to rebirth as a common animal, leads to the realm of the hungry shades. The slightest of all the results coming from frivolous chattering is that, when one becomes a human being, it leads to words that aren't worth taking to heart.

"The drinking of fermented & distilled liquors — when indulged in, developed, & pursued — is something that leads to hell, leads to rebirth as a common animal, leads to the realm of the hungry shades. The slightest of all the results coming from drinking fermented & distilled liquors is that, when one becomes a human being, it leads to mental derangement."


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 9th, 2011 at 7:03 AM
Title: Re: Madyamika Sautrantika vs Prasangika
Content:
Namdrol said:
I think it is better to stick to Nagarajuna and Aryadeva. Nagarjuna and Arydeva are straighyforward and easy to understand. This is the "pedagogical tradition" of Khenpo Shenga.

Terma said:
I will take your suggestion here, Namdrol.

I have been studying Chandrakirti's madhyamakavatara, by way of a very lengthy and detailed teaching given by Dzongsar Khyentse Jamyang Rinpoche (pdf format). It is quite "meaty", and somewhat challenging. But of course, like was mentioned some of the commentary/teaching is done according to the Tibetan Shedra tradition, though I feel Rinpoche tries to keep it to its original form, rather then taking the positions of the various lineages or schools.

Has anyone studied this? Comments? (BTW, I found this much easier to digest than Mipham's commentary)

Is Chandrakirti perhaps not the best angle to take here? Do you feel that Nagarjuna/Aryadeva might present things in an easier format as suggested earlier? Can someone recommend a good starting point in terms of nagarjuna (ie. books/commentaries)

thanks,

Terma

Malcolm wrote:
Candra is fine too, but not as essential.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 9th, 2011 at 5:57 AM
Title: Re: are karma and rebirth for real?
Content:
padma norbu said:
http://www.theabsolute.net/ " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Malcolm wrote:
Pretty mysognistic, overall.

Oh well, just another day in samsara.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 9th, 2011 at 1:58 AM
Title: Re: are karma and rebirth for real?
Content:
Namdrol said:
This is the point of view of Dzogchen, not sutra.

gregkavarnos said:
So there are no formless realms in Dzogchen?

Malcolm wrote:
The class exists, but here "formless" means "very little form", similar with Theravada Abhidhamma understanding of formless realms. It is kind if like saying that you are broke, even though you can afford a cup of coffee.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 9th, 2011 at 1:09 AM
Title: Re: are karma and rebirth for real?
Content:


deepbluehum said:
That's 7th Century stuff; a lot of water under the bridge there. I'm saying Pali Suttas are sutra stuff, and I can't find dualism in Buddha's sermons. The opposite.

Namdrol said:
The very fact that formless realms beings are immaterial proves substance dualism in sutrayāna.

gregkavarnos said:
I remember you saying in another thread that consciousness is composed of the mahabhuta of air, from which yana does this teaching come from, and if it is true (across all yana) then does this then not mean that even formless realm beings have a (subtle) physical basis (I was going to say body, but then reminded myself of name and form)?


Malcolm wrote:
This is the point of view of Dzogchen, not sutra.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 9th, 2011 at 12:54 AM
Title: Re: Triyik Yeshe Lama.
Content:


heart said:
Yes, I think you are right that I read from the top down. I never did anything except Ngondro in the Kagyu  so I actually know very little about Sarma Tantra. I think ati of mahayoga sounds just great to  me and in a way only the name makes a point I been trying to make many times here.

About Anuyoga I am not so sure. This is what I been taught about Anuyoga;

"Anuyoga focuses mainly on the completion stage (Tib. རྫོགས་རིམ་, dzogrim), and emphasizes the inner yoga of channels, winds-energies and essences" (Tib. རྩ་རླུང་ཐིག་ལེ་, tsa lung tiklé). Visualization of the deities is generated instantly, rather than through a gradual process as in Mahayoga.

http://www.rigpawiki.org/index.php?title=Anuyoga " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I thought the focus in Anuyoga was on "tsa-lung"?

/magnus

Malcolm wrote:
The main point of anuyoga is not rtsa rlung, since mahāyoga also possesses rtsa rlung as part of the completion stage.

The main point of difference between anuyoga and mahāyoga is view; the view ofthe basis in anuyoga dzogchen, from the beginning. For this reason there is no summoning of the wisdom being, or if there is, it is stated as a something like the commitment being and wisdom being have always been inseparable. Second, based on this, the method of creation is instant rather than gradual. That latter point is the most important difference between mahā and anu.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 9th, 2011 at 12:49 AM
Title: Re: are karma and rebirth for real?
Content:


deepbluehum said:
That's 7th Century stuff; a lot of water under the bridge there. I'm saying Pali Suttas are sutra stuff, and I can't find dualism in Buddha's sermons. The opposite.

Malcolm wrote:
The very fact that formless realms beings are immaterial proves substance dualism in sutrayāna.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 9th, 2011 at 12:45 AM
Title: Re: are karma and rebirth for real?
Content:


KevinSolway said:
So it's clear from the above that you cannot conceive of consciousness, as you define it, as having an external cause - outside of the series of moments of consciousness.  The only way this could be possible is if one of the following were true:

1.  You conceive of consciousness as being inherently existent.
or
2.  You conceive of consciousness as being the only thing in existence.

Do you agree?


Malcolm wrote:
No -- Neither the first nor the second consequence are entailed.

A given consciousness is a conditioned stream, composed of moments, each moment being neither the same nor different than the previous moment (this is the solution to the problem of identity in a series suggested by Nāgārjuna).

There are infinite number of such given beginnginless consciousnesses.

The status of objects in general is purely conventional, I am happy with either the relative truth model of sautrantikas or yogacara -- does not matter much to me. Which ever you like.

If you prefer sautrantika, then the stream of material existents is also without beginning. If you prefer yogacara, all material existents are mental projections and have no existence outside of the mind that perceives them.

This is all from a sutrayāna POV.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, November 8th, 2011 at 10:09 PM
Title: Re: Triyik Yeshe Lama.
Content:
Namdrol said:
From a Dzogchen perspective, guru yoga is better.

heart said:
From my perspective guru yoga contains the two stages. Probably the best way to practice the two stages.

/magnus

Malcolm wrote:
We differ on that point, probably because we practice different Guru Yogas.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, November 8th, 2011 at 10:07 PM
Title: Re: Triyik Yeshe Lama.
Content:


heart said:
Yes, but the theory of the development stage is not that "if you imagine that everything is a mandala it will become a mandala" rather it is "everything is a mandala use your imagination to discover your natural state".

/magnus

Namdrol said:
Hi Magnus:

Actually, in gsar ma schools that is exactly what creation stage means -- if you imagine it is a mandala, it becomes a mandala. This is why it is called "path of transformation". We are transforming our impure vision into a pure vision. We do this to undermine our tendency to engage in afflictive attachments. If we see everything as pure, we will have less grasping. The creation stage is conceptual, not non-coneotual. The completion stage is used to cut attachment to conceptuality of the creation stage. Eventually, we are supposed to unify creation and completion so that we are in the state of the union of illusory body and luminosity aka mahāmudra.

This is partially why one finds criticisms of the two stages approach even in Mahāmudra upadeshas.

Guhyagarbha contains the view of Dzogchen, this is why the thirteenth chapter of Guhyagarbha emphasizes that the mandala has always been naturally formed [ye nas lhun grub] . So it is a very different approach. It is not really the approach of the two stages.

You are so conditioned by Anuyoga, you have a hard time relating to mahāyoga in and of itself.

N

heart said:
Well that could well be, I can just say how I been taught to practice. I am currently reading the Guhyagarbha Tantra and, at least to me, it seem to support the understanding my Guru given me about these matters. Guhyagarbha Tantra is classified as a Mahayoga Tantra. The fact that it contains the view of Dzogchen seems to support what I say.

I can't say I been taught much Anuyoga.

/magnus

Malcolm wrote:
It supports what you say solely from a Nyingma POV. But Nyingma is not the end all and be all of Vajrayāna. Sarma schools have a different POV, especially Sakya and Gelug. So you need to qualify your statements.

As to Anuyoga, what you practice is mostly anuyoga. Most termas are anuyoga.

You need to be able to differentiate what you have been taught from the approach of other schools. Your reading is top down. Since your teachers are all Dzogchen practitioners, it is natural that Dzogchen colors everything they teach.

Guhyagarbha is classified as ati of mahāyoga, actually.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, November 8th, 2011 at 9:43 PM
Title: Re: Triyik Yeshe Lama.
Content:
heart said:
For this reason if you have recognized ripga Tantra is a really helpful as it hit the right spot.

/magnus


Namdrol said:
If you have discovered knowledge (rig pa) of the basis, you don't need creation stage and completion stage. That's the whole point of Dzogchen. Creation and completion stage are  means of discovering that knowledge, but not the only means. Hence, Dzogchen and direct introduction.

N

heart said:
But discovering that knowledge doesn't mean that you are constantly in that knowledge, so for this reason also after recognizing the natural state creation and completion is very helpful.

/magnus

Malcolm wrote:
From a Dzogchen perspective, guru yoga is better.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, November 8th, 2011 at 9:42 PM
Title: Re: Triyik Yeshe Lama.
Content:


heart said:
Yes, but the theory of the development stage is not that "if you imagine that everything is a mandala it will become a mandala" rather it is "everything is a mandala use your imagination to discover your natural state".

/magnus

Malcolm wrote:
Hi Magnus:

Actually, in gsar ma schools that is exactly what creation stage means -- if you imagine it is a mandala, it becomes a mandala. This is why it is called "path of transformation". We are transforming our impure vision into a pure vision. We do this to undermine our tendency to engage in afflictive attachments. If we see everything as pure, we will have less grasping. The creation stage is conceptual, not non-coneotual. The completion stage is used to cut attachment to conceptuality of the creation stage. Eventually, we are supposed to unify creation and completion so that we are in the state of the union of illusory body and luminosity aka mahāmudra.

This is partially why one finds criticisms of the two stages approach even in Mahāmudra upadeshas.

Guhyagarbha contains the view of Dzogchen, this is why the thirteenth chapter of Guhyagarbha emphasizes that the mandala has always been naturally formed [ye nas lhun grub] . So it is a very different approach. It is not really the approach of the two stages.

You are so conditioned by Anuyoga, you have a hard time relating to mahāyoga in and of itself.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, November 8th, 2011 at 9:01 PM
Title: Re: are karma and rebirth for real?
Content:
Namdrol said:
Sutrayāna upholds substance dualism

deepbluehum said:
I haven't found it in the Pali Canon.



Malcolm wrote:
Examine Dharmakirti's proofs of rebirth.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, November 8th, 2011 at 8:56 PM
Title: Re: are karma and rebirth for real?
Content:
Namdrol said:
There cannot be an absolute cause of a beginningless series.

KevinSolway said:
There can't be a serial beginning to a beginningless series, but there can certainly be a cause to the entire series.

What is it that separates one beginningless series from another one?  That would be the cause of a particular beginningless series.

Malcolm wrote:
One cannot posit a first cause of a beginningless series, that is a contradiction in terms.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, November 8th, 2011 at 8:54 PM
Title: Re: Triyik Yeshe Lama.
Content:
heart said:
For this reason if you have recognized ripga Tantra is a really helpful as it hit the right spot.

/magnus


Malcolm wrote:
If you have discovered knowledge (rig pa) of the basis, you don't need creation stage and completion stage. That's the whole point of Dzogchen. Creation and completion stage are  means of discovering that knowledge, but not the only means. Hence, Dzogchen and direct introduction.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, November 8th, 2011 at 8:53 PM
Title: Re: Triyik Yeshe Lama.
Content:


Namdrol said:
Tantric generation stage is exactly imagining that all beings and the world are the mandala. It is an exercise in creative imagination. If you think, if you really think that where you are is pure and everyone you meet is a buddha deity, then you cannot possibly have any problems.

N

heart said:
I keep hearing people repeating that Tantra is just imagination but I am afraid that this isn't what is written in the Guhyagharbha Tantra. Imagination is just the means that brings people to the natural state of inseparable purity and equality which is the view of  Mahayoga. Pure perception is the spontaneously occurring post-meditation. For this reason if you have recognized ripga Tantra is a really helpful as it hit the right spot.

/magnus

Malcolm wrote:
Magnus, read what I said again: Tantric generation stage...We are not talking about a result here. Just the means.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, November 8th, 2011 at 8:49 PM
Title: Re: Did I Receive Transmission?
Content:


Lhug-Pa said:
So my first question is:  If he had received authentic Direct Introduction at some point before this situation I'm describing here occurred, does that in itself qualify him to give others Transmission (if he was keeping his Samaya of course)?

Malcolm wrote:
No.

Lhug-Pa said:
Or would have to meet other qualifications (besides simply having received the Transmission) in order to qualify for giving the Direct Introduction to other people?

Malcolm wrote:
Yes.

Lhug-Pa said:
And if that alone doesn't make him qualified to do that, yet he for other reasons was somehow qualified to give me the Transmission (which I doubt); did it "count", since I was not fully aware of what was occuring?

In other words, has he been my Root Guru all along without me knowing it? If so, then I've been breaking Samaya innumerable times since then? (Bear in mind that this was over three years ago)

Malcolm wrote:
No.

Lhug-Pa said:
so I think he may have been or is a practitioner at some level; but was not qualified to teach others, and therefore I did not actually receive a Direct Introduction to the Nature of Mind (?)

Malcolm wrote:
Correct.


Lhug-Pa said:
Samaya is established only if it is made crystal clear to us everything that that specific Samaya entails, yes?

Malcolm wrote:
Samaya is established by interest in a teaching and participation. Samaya is like wine, it develops with age.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, November 8th, 2011 at 10:17 AM
Title: Re: are karma and rebirth for real?
Content:



KevinSolway said:
In the case of each series, there is neither a beginning nor an end.  And yet one series is not the other one. Something separates them.

Let's say that the first one is consciousness and the second one is some other infinite series.  It doesn't matter, for our purposes, what the cause of the second one is (for example, whether it is caused by consciousness).  The question is, what is the cause of the first one?  That is, what is the cause of the particular infinite series that we call "consciousness".

Malcolm wrote:
There cannot be an absolute cause of a beginningless series. A given series however is unique because its causes are unique to it.



KevinSolway said:
You appear to be upholding the views of the "Mind only" school, which have been refuted.

Malcolm wrote:
No, I am not a cittamatrin.



KevinSolway said:
Ok, I believe you are speaking something that makes more sense to me now.  It's good that we can agree on something.

Rather than saying there is "mind only" you are suggesting that mind is an aspect of something we might call "matter".

Malcolm wrote:
What I am suggesting is that mind and matter are a non-dual field -- rather than one being an epiphenomena of the other. They are in fact equally products of delusion in one sense. In another, they are merely expressions of intelligent light.





KevinSolway said:
But I don't believe that Sutrayana is as mistaken as you seem to suggest.

Malcolm wrote:
Sutrayāna upholds substance dualism, conventionally speaking. Vajrayāna, and in particular, Dzogchen, do not.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, November 8th, 2011 at 6:48 AM
Title: Re: Triyik Yeshe Lama.
Content:


heart said:
See, this I just don't get. Pure perception, they way I learned it, is not imagining that the world and beings are something good and pure, rather it is acknowledging the world just as it is. It is about relaxing and not about some high level fantasy. It hit right at the view if you know Dzogchen.

/magnus

Namdrol said:
Tantric generation stage is exactly imagining that all beings and the world are the mandala. It is an exercise in creative imagination. If you think, if you really think that where you are is pure and everyone you meet is a buddha deity, then you cannot possibly have any problems.

N

pensum said:
"Furthermore, if you believe in the way ordinary people see objects, you stray into materialistic ordinariness.
If you regard them one-sidedly as either existent or nonexistent, you stray into the eternalism or nihilism of heretical extremists.
If you believe that objects exist separate from mind, you into being a shravaka or pratyekabuddha.
If you claim that perceptions are mind, you stray into being a Mind Only follower.
If you believe that the world and beings are deities, you stray into Mantra.
What is the use of meditation practice without knowing how to cut through these strayings!"

Padmasambhava
(my emphasis)

Malcolm wrote:
This is appropriate for someone who has stabilized thier practice of Dzogchen. However, one cannot stray into Mantra if one has no concrete knowledge of Dzogchen, correct? I think ChNN's point is that it is far better to stray into mantra if you have a tendency to demonize your vajra brothers and sisters.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, November 8th, 2011 at 6:14 AM
Title: Re: are karma and rebirth for real?
Content:
Namdrol said:
Consciousness depends only on prior moments of consciousness

KevinSolway said:
Question for Namdrol.

Prior moments of consciousness are still consciousness. So what is the cause of consciousness itself?  That is, what is the cause of the whole infinite series of moments of consciousness?

Malcolm wrote:
As I said, there is no beginning to any given series, as the logic of dependent origination necessarily entails. In other words, consciousness is beginningless, also the other five dhātus (space and the four mahābhutani) are beginningless, since their cause, consciousness (i.e. the collective minds of all infinite sentient beings) has no beginning.

The Buddhist perspective, as indicated by the suttas and thousands of treatises, is that while consciousness contains the potentiality of all five elements, the five elements themselves do not contain the potentiality to give rise to consciousness.

However, you will find that when you move into Vajrayāna and especially the teachings of the Great Perfection, the explicit substance dualism of the sutrayāna is abandoned.

Up to this point, we have been discussing these issues from a strictly sutrayāna perspective.

In Vajrayāna there is begins to be a movement which recognizes that matter is in fact intelligent, rather than something inert opposed to consciousness.

This movement in Buddhist teaching reaches its fullest expression in the teaching of the Great Perfection (Dzogchen) where matter is seen as the pure expressive radiance of the natural processes of pure "consciousness" which in fact forms a non-dual field, punctuated, if you will, on the one hand by the delusion of non-recognition (of this matrix of radiant intelligence called "vidyā and jñāna(the name for the five elements in thier pure state)" because of subject/object dualism predicated on grasping identity in that which lacks identity) which creates serial point events called "sentient beings" and on the other hand, the wisdom of recognition which creates serial point events called "buddhas" and the shades in between i.e. yogis.

Within this scheme, nevertheless, karma as well as physical and literal rebirth are still quite possible and assumed because of the delusion of self-grasping. In Buddhism, ignorance (āvidya) drives rebirth and karma, and nothing else.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, November 8th, 2011 at 5:54 AM
Title: Re: Triyik Yeshe Lama.
Content:


pensum said:
For Magnus and any others who are "pro" ngondro: how does doing ngondro improve or increase buddha nature? and conversely how is buddha nature negatively affected if one doesn't do any ngondro?

And for all those who are "con" ngondro: how is buddha nature diminished or degraded by doing ngondro? and how does not doing any ngondro improve or augment buddha nature?

Malcolm wrote:
It is basically a question of time. Since time is limited, it is better to strive for the essence of the teachings from the beginning. It is better to select teachings which rapidly lead to personal experience. All teachings are good, but some are more effective.

So, the main message is don't waste time.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, November 8th, 2011 at 5:50 AM
Title: Re: Triyik Yeshe Lama.
Content:
Virgo said:
...simply practicing trechgo creates a great deal of merit and understanding.


Malcolm wrote:
more merit, actually.

But please recall, merit really refers to what kind of body you will get as a result.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, November 8th, 2011 at 5:13 AM
Title: Re: Triyik Yeshe Lama.
Content:
Sönam said:
I was just reading that ChNN's point of view regarding tantra (extracted from Dzogchen Teachings) ... it can help to clarifies some points.

Training in pure vision is the samaya, or commitment, of the Tantric teachings.
That is good also for Dzogchen practitioners. For example, if you see your Vajra brothers and sisters as enlightened beings, as if they were your teachers, you will never have problems with them. On the other hand, if you always think they are the ones who are creating difficulties, you will always have problems. Thus, it is very useful to train a little in pure vision according to the Tantric system. This is why we also need this knowledge and understanding.
Of course, the methods of the various levels of the path are different. In tantra we use transformation methods, whereas in Dzogchen the method used is that of self-liberation. If you understand how Tantric methods work, then, when you learn the method of self-liberation as it is practiced in Dzogchen, you can better understand what the difference is between them.

heart said:
See, this I just don't get. Pure perception, they way I learned it, is not imagining that the world and beings are something good and pure, rather it is acknowledging the world just as it is. It is about relaxing and not about some high level fantasy. It hit right at the view if you know Dzogchen.

/magnus

Malcolm wrote:
Tantric generation stage is exactly imagining that all beings and the world are the mandala. It is an exercise in creative imagination. If you think, if you really think that where you are is pure and everyone you meet is a buddha deity, then you cannot possibly have any problems.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, November 8th, 2011 at 3:38 AM
Title: Re: are karma and rebirth for real?
Content:
Dechen Norbu said:
. . . unless you can prove them.

KevinSolway said:
Well it's your forum and you can run it how you see fit.  I cannot force you to understand my arguments.

But I do hope you will be consistent with your rulings.

Unless a person can prove that one person can be reborn as another person, after their physical death, or that a person can be reborn as an animal, or a preta, etc, then they should not be permitted to express any such ideas here, either in their own words or in words quoted from anywhere else.


Malcolm wrote:
I suspect that  by "proof", Dechen means "actually found in the teachings of the Buddha" -- not empirically proven in a scientific study.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, November 8th, 2011 at 3:05 AM
Title: Re: are karma and rebirth for real?
Content:


KevinSolway said:
I consider that it is a matter of definition that the substrate or cause of consciousness is "physical", and it is ultimately the physical world, which is the cause of consciousness, which is the physical body.

Namdrol said:
The Buddha has taught us consistently that the cause of the physical world is consciousness.

KevinSolway said:
And he's not mistaken on this.  In the case that we divide things up into the duality of "mind" and "matter", there are only two things, and each of these two must be caused by something.  Since the only thing other than mind is matter, then matter must be the cause of mind.  Likewise the only thing other than matter is mind, so mind must be the cause of matter.

Beyond the duality of "mind" and "matter" is the undifferentiated Natural World, which has various names.


Malcolm wrote:
According to the Buddha all phenomena in the universe, the natural world, are categorized into six classes: consciousness, space, air, fire, water and earth. Conciousness is the cause of the other five. Consciousness has the potential to give rise to the other five, but the other five do not have the ability to give rise to consciousness. It is not a relation of mutual dependence. Matter depends on consciousness, but consciousness does not depend on matter. Consciousness depends only on prior moments of consciousness, and since there are no beginnings, according to the logic of dependent origination, there is no fault of infinite regress.

N

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, November 8th, 2011 at 2:17 AM
Title: Re: are karma and rebirth for real?
Content:


KevinSolway said:
I consider that it is a matter of definition that the substrate or cause of consciousness is "physical", and it is ultimately the physical world, which is the cause of consciousness, which is the physical body.

Malcolm wrote:
The Buddha has taught us consistently that the cause of the physical world is consciousness.

This, I will suggest, is the reason why your speculations are dissonate with what the majority of Buddhists understand about the Buddha's teachings.

Consciousness is the cause of matter, not the other way round.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, November 8th, 2011 at 1:20 AM
Title: Re: The matter of faith
Content:
Namdrol said:
If we know that someone is an awakened person, than as the Eastern Gatehouse shows, we can have confidence in what they say.

KevinSolway said:
Yes, but you would only know that they were awakened if you yourself were awakened.  So you would only trust them inasmuch as you can trust yourself.

Malcolm wrote:
No, this is false inference.

You can infere someone's awakening, or lack thereof, much in the same manner as a fire can be inferred from the presence of smoke.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, November 8th, 2011 at 1:18 AM
Title: Re: are karma and rebirth for real?
Content:


KevinSolway said:
If dependent origination was about the physical body, then things would be in an entirely different order.

Malcolm wrote:
Dependent origination is about both mind and body -- this is why we have links such as consciousness, name and form, six sense organs, etc.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, November 8th, 2011 at 1:16 AM
Title: Re: are karma and rebirth for real?
Content:
Namdrol said:
Conciousness has a cause, but not a material cause, even though, according to them, it can be conditioned by material substances.

KevinSolway said:
Conditions are the same as causes.

Malcolm wrote:
No, conditions are not the same thing as causes.

Conditions do not bear the potential to bring about a result. for example, no matter how much it rains, without a seed, there can be no shoot.

Causes carry the potential to bring about a result. For example, even though it may not rain, as long as a seed is viable, it can produce a sprout when the proper conditions are present.

In the example of consciousness, consciousness, according to the Buddhist model, is of six kinds: mental consciousness and five physical sense consciousness. The sole difference between these six is whether consciousness is conditioned by sense organs or not leading to the descriptors "eye consciousness" and so on. However, consciousness also exists in absence of a physical substrate, for example, arūpyadhātu beings, those beings of the four immaterial realms, have no physical bodies. In the Buddhist way of seeing things, mind and body are different substances, with different causes.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, November 7th, 2011 at 10:50 PM
Title: Re: The matter of faith
Content:
KevinSolway said:
I say that we only really have faith in that which we ourselves know.

The less we ourselves know, the less faith there is.


Malcolm wrote:
If we know that someone is an awakened person, than as the Eastern Gatehouse shows, we can have confidence in what they say.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, November 7th, 2011 at 9:21 PM
Title: Re: are karma and rebirth for real?
Content:
KevinSolway said:
that consciousness does not exist independently, but that it too has a cause, and that it's life is as fragile as that of a candleflame.

Malcolm wrote:
No one ever said that consciousness had no cause. Consciousness is a substance, conceived of by the Buddha and Buddhists to be of a different kind than matter. Conciousness has a cause, but not a material cause, even though, according to them, it can be conditioned by material substances.

Dharmakirit runs through these reasonings in much detail in the Pramanasiddhi chapter of the Pramandavartika.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, November 7th, 2011 at 2:07 AM
Title: Re: The matter of faith
Content:
KevinSolway said:
Even in the case that I'm not a Buddha, I could be of a level far higher than you can conceive of.

Malcolm wrote:
I doubt it. Your knowledge of the Dharma appears very elementary, basic and utterly lacking nuance. (Note to catmoon -- now that is a qualfied ad hominem statement).

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, November 7th, 2011 at 2:04 AM
Title: Re: The matter of faith
Content:


KevinSolway said:
Ironically, not according the the Kalama sutra!


Malcolm wrote:
The Kalamas were not followers of the Buddha.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, November 7th, 2011 at 1:15 AM
Title: Re: Madyamika Sautrantika vs Prasangika
Content:
Namdrol said:
Khenpo Shenga's commentary on MMK has not been published yet.

gad rgyangs said:
Speaking of which, Brother Namdrol, Lotsawa Namdrol, where are your translations????. Isn't it time to make a contribution? What are you waiting for? (certainly not a six figure advance from snowlion, i hope). With your experience, expertise and insight, how can you hide your light under a basket? If you dont want to make translations and give them away, and cant or wont deal with publishers, then just make pdfs and sell them on Lulu or Amazon. I'd buy every single one. I mean, come on, bro, daylight's burning. death is certain but the time is uncertain....you know the drill.


Malcolm wrote:
I want to make sure my mango not only looks ripe, but is in fact ripe.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, November 7th, 2011 at 12:32 AM
Title: Re: The matter of faith
Content:
KevinSolway said:
In any case, the Buddha himself made his own personal experience the criterion for all his judgements, and he accepted whatever accorded with his own personal experience, and rejected what did not accord with his own personal experience.


Malcolm wrote:
The difference between you and the Buddha is just that -- you are not a Buddha and so do not have access to the same level of personal experience. A sutta to balance the Kalamas is the Pubbakotthaka Sutta:

"Excellent, Sariputta. Excellent. Those who have not known, seen, penetrated, realized, or attained it by means of discernment would have to take it on conviction in others that the faculty of conviction... persistence... mindfulness... concentration... discernment, when developed & pursued, gains a footing in the Deathless, has the Deathless as its goal & consummation; whereas those who have known, seen, penetrated, realized, & attained it by means of discernment would have no doubt or uncertainty that the faculty of conviction... persistence... mindfulness... concentration... discernment, when developed & pursued, gains a footing in the Deathless, has the Deathless as its goal & consummation."

What is the Buddha's range of experience, according to the Buddha?

Ten Powers of a Tathagata
9. "Sariputta, the Tathagata has these ten Tathagata's powers, possessing which he claims the herd-leader's place, roars his lion's roar in the assemblies, and sets rolling the Wheel of Brahma.[5] What are the ten?

10. (1) "Here, the Tathagata understands as it actually is the possible as possible and the impossible as impossible.[6] And that [70] is a Tathagata's power that the Tathagata has, by virtue of which he claims the herd-leader's place, roars his lion's roar in the assemblies, and sets rolling the Wheel of Brahma.

11. (2) "Again, the Tathagata understands as it actually is the results of actions undertaken, past, future and present, with possibilities and with causes. That too is a Tathagata's power...[7]

12. (3) "Again, the Tathagata understands as it actually is the ways leading to all destinations. That too is a Tathagata's power...[8]

13. (4) "Again, the Tathagata understands as it actually is the world with its many and different elements. That too is a Tathagata's power...[9]

14. (5) "Again, the Tathagata understands as it actually is how beings have different inclinations. That too is a Tathagata's power...[10]

15. (6) "Again, the Tathagata understands as it actually is the disposition of the faculties of other beings, other persons. That too is a Tathagata's power...[11]

16. (7) "Again, the Tathagata understands as it actually is the defilement, the cleansing and the emergence in regard to the jhanas, liberations, concentrations and attainments. That too is a Tathagata's power...[12]

17. (8) "Again, the Tathagata recollects his manifold past lives, that is, one birth, two births, three births, four births, five births, ten births, twenty births, thirty births, forty births, fifty births, a hundred births, a thousand births, a hundred thousand births, many aeons of world-contraction, many aeons of world-expansion, many aeons of world-contraction and expansion: 'There I was so named, of such a clan, with such an appearance, such was my nutriment, such my experience of pleasure and pain, such my life-term; and passing away from there, I reappeared elsewhere; and there too I was so named, of such a clan, with such an appearance, such was my nutriment, such my experience of pleasure and pain, such my life-term; and passing away from there, I reappeared here.' Thus with their aspects and particulars he recollects his manifold past lives. That too is a Tathagata's power...

18. (9) "Again, with the divine eye, which is purified and surpasses the human, the Tathagata sees beings passing away and reappearing, inferior and superior, fair and ugly, fortunate and unfortunate, and he understands how beings pass on according to their actions thus: 'These worthy beings who were ill-conducted in body, speech and mind, revilers of noble ones, wrong in their views, giving effect to wrong view in their actions, on the dissolution of the body, [71] after death, have reappeared in a state of deprivation, in a bad destination, in perdition, even in hell; but these worthy beings who were well-conducted in body, speech and mind, not revilers of noble ones, right in their views, giving effect to right view in their actions, on the dissolution of the body, after death, have reappeared in a good destination, even in the heavenly world.' Thus with the divine eye, which is purified and surpasses the human, he sees beings passing away and reappearing, inferior and superior, fair and ugly, fortunate and unfortunate, and he understands how beings pass on according to their actions. That too is a Tathagata's power...

19. (10) "Again, by realizing it for himself with direct knowledge, the Tathagata here and now enters upon and abides in the deliverance of mind and deliverance by wisdom that are taintless with the destruction of the taints. That too is a Tathagata's power that a Tathagata has, by virtue of which he claims the herd-leader's place, roars his lion's roar in the assemblies, and sets rolling the Wheel of Brahma.

20. "The Tathagata has these ten Tathagata's powers, possessing which he claims the herd-leader's place, roars his lion's roar in the assemblies, and sets rolling the Wheel of Brahma.

21. "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.[13] Just as a bhikkhu possessed of virtue, concentration and wisdom would here and now enjoy final knowledge, so it will happen in this case, I say, that 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.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, November 7th, 2011 at 12:27 AM
Title: Re: Madyamika Sautrantika vs Prasangika
Content:
conebeckham said:
Thanks, Namdrol--that's really interesting!  Didn't know about that linguistic sleight-of-hand, and that's something most of us would never catch..... And a good example of why you stress the importance of the root (Indian) texts.
Do you know if Khenpo Shenga's commentary to MMK is in the works for publication in translation?

Also, off-topic I know, but w/ regard to Maitreya's Five Treatises, Are you familiar with this?
https://www.amazon.com/Universal-Discourse-Literature-Mahayanasutralamkara-Treasury/dp/0975373404/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1320596282&sr=1-1 " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I think Thurman was the head translator.  I'm wondering if it's a good translation? (Perhaps a thread about JamChoDeNga in translation may be a good idea...)


Malcolm wrote:
It's a little wierd in my opinion, but it is consistent in its wierdness and scholarly.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, November 6th, 2011 at 8:06 PM
Title: Re: Madyamika Sautrantika vs Prasangika
Content:
conebeckham said:
I know that text isn't Madhyamika, Namdrol....also understand how Mipham labors to make it non-contradictory....I recall that Khenpo Shenga's commentary on this particular text was based on Vasubhandu, per the forward...not Buddhapalita.

Perhaps he uses Budhapalita as a source for the true madhyamika works?

Malcolm wrote:
Right, we are not communicating well. Khenpo Shenga's commentary on MMK has not been published yet.

His commmentry on the dharmadharmata vibhanga is based on Vasubandhu. It also presents Mipham's side by side. Mipham's attempt to reconcile DDV with Madhyamaka is exactly the kind of Tibetan exegesis that muddies the water because Mipham uses a couple of linguistic sleights of hand that are possible in Tibetan (suggesting that if you substitute rnam par snang ba for rnam par rig pa (vijñapti) the text can the be read as Madhyamaka text) and are completely impossible in Sanskrit.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, November 6th, 2011 at 7:59 PM
Title: Appeals to Fact
Content:
KevinSolway said:
Appealing to authority is something you do as a very last resort

Malcolm wrote:
IF we are talking about what Kevin Solway thinks, the first thing I will do is look up Kevin Solway's writings. When talkig about what The Buddha thinks, the first thing I will do is look up the what the Buddha said in that or that sutta.

If Keven Solway claims some idea for the Buddha, if such a claim, no matter how reasonable, is not born out in an examination of the record of the Buddha's teaching, then Kevin Solway's claim must be rejected. For example, if Kevin Solway claims that Buddha intended rebirth to be interpreted figuratively but an examination of the record shows Buddha intended rebirth quite literally, then Kevin Solway's claim must be rejected, even if I myself too do not accept literal rebirth.

For example, if someone were to say "Kevin Solway believes in literal rebirth", and examination of your writings will show this to be false, therefore, that claim must be rejected.

In this case, these are not appeals to authority -- I have no interest in whether you beleive in rebirth or not -- but I am interested seeing that the Buddha's teaching not being corrupted by modernist revisionism whether Buddha's teachings about this and that in the end prove to be false.

For example, Vasubandhu teaches a geocentric Meru Cosmology that is clearly at odds with modern cosmology. I do not accept this cosmology, but if someone were to come along and try to convince me that Vasubandhu did not teach such a cosomlogy, I would point to the Kosha and show that Vasuybandhu plainly did teach such a cosmology. This is not an appeal to authority, it is an appeal to fact.

Pointing out that Buddha universally teaches literal rebirth in the sutras is a fact. Do not think you can select one or the other of the four distinct presentations of dependent origination, serial, static, momentary and simultaneous -- they are all necessary for a proper understanding of dependent origination and karma. Part of that is the Buddhist doctrine of conception i.e.literal rebirth taught by the Buddha himself in Vinaya to Nanda and in the Suttas to Ananda.

Those who rejected literal rebirth were considered nihilists by the Buddha and his disciples.

N


N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, November 6th, 2011 at 9:14 AM
Title: Re: are karma and rebirth for real?
Content:
Namdrol said:
Vasubandhu also rejected the physical existence of hell realms, but did not reject their existence altogether.

KevinSolway said:
Have you considered that ALL of the realms are not physically real.  That is, they are real, but no physically real.

They are mentally real, but that is all.

That is in fact my position.  Not only are the hell realms not physically real, but nor are the preta realms, the animal realms, the human realms, deva realms, etc.

They all exist within the mind, here and now.

The vast majority of homo-sapiens on earth are in fact in the lower realms, mentally, and this is very real.

Malcolm wrote:
Vasubandhu did not reject the conventional physical existence of human realms and so on -- merely the physical existence of hells since he reasoned that hell gaurdians must only be mental projections of the tormented. '

It is only when discussing how phenomena exist ultimately that they are ascertained to be "mind-only".

If however you maintain that phenomena are only mental real, then you very little basis for rejecting any of the six realms, and none whatsoever for rejecting rebirth as frogs, devas, and hell beings, as well as humans.

In fact, you just sank your whole argument against rebirth. Saying that literal rebirth is not a fact when you at the same time deny that there is any physical reality at all is incoherent.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, November 6th, 2011 at 9:10 AM
Title: Re: are karma and rebirth for real?
Content:
Namdrol said:
The suffering of a being experiencing a hell realm is far worse than any imaginable human suffering, however.

KevinSolway said:
And you know this how?

Malcolm wrote:
Unlike yourself, who cannot accept anything beyond your own senses, and cannot accept any authority beyond your limited direct perception, I am happy to accept the authority of the Buddha on such subjects.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, November 6th, 2011 at 9:08 AM
Title: Re: are karma and rebirth for real?
Content:


KevinSolway said:
Those who reject literal reincarnation do not reject serial rebirth.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, in fact they do. If


KevinSolway said:
"Serial" means "not occurring at the same time", and indeed, the consequences of one's actions do not occur at the same time as one's actions, but they occur afterwards. For example, a teacher must first teach the students before mental activities in the students can be kindled.  The one follows the other, in series. The future follows the present. This is what is meant by "serial rebirth".

Malcolm wrote:
Not according to the Buddha, and it is Buddha's definition of rebirth that are under consideration, not Kevin Solway's. In this instance, an appeal to authority is valid since the Buddha' teachings are the one's being considered. In some other circumstance, were we interested in discussing Kevin Solway's doctrine of karma and so on, then an appeal to the authority of the Buddha would be useless, since we would not be discussing Buddhism, but rather Solwayism.


KevinSolway said:
Those who reject the literal rebirth interpretation do in fact accept the teaching of the Buddha on mental causality.

Malcolm wrote:
Essentially,  serial rebirth is the serial or successive appropriation of successive bodies by an afflicted mental continuum; for example, a mental continuum that in one instance appropriated the body of an amphibian, and later came to appropriate the body of a deva or a human.




KevinSolway said:
read the mahāniddana sutta
Your interpretation differs from mine.  Please try to use reason rather than appealing to authority.  The appeal to authority is a logical fallacy, and this should be taught by all Buddhist teachers.

Malcolm wrote:
If you are not a Buddhist, an appeal to authority of the Buddha is of course useless. If you are a Buddhist, then an appeal to the authority of the Buddha' teaching, as recorded in hundreds of suttas, is entirely appropriate.

Essentially, it is rational decision tree:

Does mind derive from matter? Yes or no?

If one answers yes, then one is a physicalist and there is no point in proceding further. Buddha's teachings have little value beyond their ethical content, in this instance. There nothing particularly special about Buddhist teachings on emptiness, dependent origination, and so on that may be not gleaned from Hume, Adorno and so on.

If no, then we can continue. If mind does not derive from matter, it must have a cause, nevertheless. If it does not have a first cause, it must have a conditioned cause. Since things like memory of past lives and so on are best accounted for through mental moments that exist in a serial continuum, two moments in a continuum being neither the same nor different from one another, things like memory of past lives and so on are easily accounted for without having to invent a self as a repository of information.

It is the nature of mind as a substance (dravya) that requires that all mind are unique-- this is well established by Vasubandhu.



KevinSolway said:
It doesn't have anything to do with people being reborn as frogs or suchlike speculative nonsense.

Malcolm wrote:
Well, you can accuse the Buddha of being a speculator if you like. It is pretty clear that Buddha discussed person's taking rebirth as different forms of beings, animals, devas and so on and did so in a manner that indicates he actually beleived in rebirth as I have outlined it.

Now, you don't have to accept it, but please do not expect us to think that the Buddha did not beleive it. It is very clear that he did.

KevinSolway said:
Unless you have come up with a way to read words without interpreting them, then you are also interpreting the words.

Malcolm wrote:
There no need to interpret what the Buddha has said on this point.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, November 6th, 2011 at 8:32 AM
Title: Re: are karma and rebirth for real?
Content:
gregkavarnos said:
. .  in an unhappy destination, in perdition, in hell...

KevinSolway said:
Do you honestly think the countless hell realms, with their mountains of red-hot iron and black flames, are physically real places?  They're not.  They are created by the mind of the individual, here-and-now.  The reason there are so many hell realms (countless, in fact) is because of the countless forms of suffering people create inside their own minds.


Malcolm wrote:
From a Mahāyāna perspective, this is a trivial point. Vasubandhu also rejected the physical existence of hell realms, but did not reject their existence altogether.

The suffering of a being experiencing a hell realm is far worse than any imaginable human suffering, however.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, November 6th, 2011 at 6:04 AM
Title: Re: are karma and rebirth for real?
Content:


KevinSolway said:
Those who reject literal rebirth don't argue such a thing.

Just as a candle can be used to light many other candles, which burn simultaneously, in just the same way mental activities kindle many other mental activities, in other physical forms, which function simultaneously. For example, a teacher can have many students, and a parent can have many children.

Cause and effect is a tree-like web of interactions, rather than a narrow linear channel.

Malcolm wrote:
As to the first point, those who reject serial rebirth do not accept the teaching of the Buddha on mental causailty.

As to your second point, this is not what the Buddha meant by rebirth. What did he mean by rebirth? You can read the mahāniddana sutta.

As to your third point, you are conflating the teaching about general cause and effect with dependent origination. Whether you decide to use the model of the Sarvastivadas (six causes and four conditions) or the model of the Theravadins i.e. twenty four conditions (i.e. 6*4) matters little. The teaching of serial rebirth or reincarnation was clearly taught by the Buddha in hundreds of suttas.

You can of course choose to ignore the Buddha's teachings on this point, and try to "interpret" rebirth -- but you cannot present this modified doctrine as the Buddha's own teaching.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, November 6th, 2011 at 1:36 AM
Title: Re: Buddhism on God
Content:
Karma Dondrup Tashi said:
We are embodied here for a reason. Explicating what that reason is precisely requires the delicacy of our current situation.

Malcolm wrote:
We are embodied here because our minds are driven by afflictions. That's it.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, November 5th, 2011 at 9:25 PM
Title: Re: are karma and rebirth for real?
Content:
KevinSolway said:
Buddhists really do believe these things.

Malcolm wrote:
The Buddha didn't merely beleive these things, he knew these things to be so, and outlined methods through which one may come to know directly oneself.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, November 5th, 2011 at 9:22 PM
Title: Re: are karma and rebirth for real?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
For the Buddha, rebirth, punarbhāva, was a simple fact.

Either one accepts rebirth or one does not.

Arguing that the continual appropriation of new physical forms by an afflicted mental continuum that spans countless eons is not the Buddha's teaching is rather unwise, since it clearly is the Buddha's teaching.

It is unwise, therefore, to pretend that there is some other option, or that the Buddha meant rebirth only figuratively.

Arguing with people who do not accept rebirth is equally unwise because they are addicted to a trenchant physcalism and prefer a secular understanding of mind and life. However, such people, may, in a limited way, derive some benefit from Budda's teaching of dependent origination and so on even if that teaching will not lead them to ultimate liberation in this lifetime because of their addiction to views.

The answer to the thread is that yes, for Buddha karma and rebirth are for real. And if one wishes to have a full appreciation of the Buddha's teaching, it is important to understand this fact.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, November 5th, 2011 at 8:11 PM
Title: Re: Can a complete beginner benefit from Dzogchen practice?
Content:


TravisMay11 said:
I can't remember the sources right off hand where I've read about this, at the moment, but I believe traditionally that no one ever started practicing Dzogchen right off the bat.


Malcolm wrote:
One's good fortune in meeting Dzogchen teachings in this life depend greatly upon one's merit from past lives. If you have the merit to meet a great master like ChNN, etc., don't waste your time doing other things. Merely meeting such a master is a sign that you are not a "beginner" in Dzogchen teachings, it is a sign that one is riding the crest of one's merit from past lives.

if you follow a master like ChNN -- you will become a sane human being, even without studying Abhidharma and so on.

Following Dzogchen teachings is the best mind training.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, November 5th, 2011 at 7:52 PM
Title: Re: Namkha arte-sky gazing
Content:
Fa Dao said:
Does anyone know where this practice originated from?

Malcolm wrote:
The original form of sky gazing come from the perfection of wisdom sutras.

But Namkhai arte is not just gazing at sky since it is connected with Dzogchen view.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, November 5th, 2011 at 7:44 PM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:
Lhug-Pa said:
Ah I see.  Although everywhere I've searched it says that the booklet is either reserved or restricted. But since we most likely would have to sign up for at least an online Dzogchen Community membership in order to view the webcaste for the  Worldwide Transmission by Chogyal Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche, I guess it doesn't matter if it's restricted or not, since membership should grant permission to purchase the booklet or maybe even the Guru Yoga book.


Malcolm wrote:
You can get the transmission book-- you may have to call a gar to do so.
N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, November 5th, 2011 at 7:43 PM
Title: Re: Madyamika Sautrantika vs Prasangika
Content:
conebeckham said:
The third alternative, and one I feel the majority of us follow, is to stick to one Tibetan pedagogical tradition.

Namdrol said:
I think it is better to stick to Nagarajuna and Aryadeva. Nagarjuna and Arydeva are straighyforward and easy to understand. This is the "pedagogical tradition" of Khenpo Shenga.


N

conebeckham said:
...which is really just using Vasubandu's commentaries, mainly, to "flesh out" the rather terse original texts, in most instances, is it not?

I'm reading the translation of Maitreya/Asanga's Madhyantavibhaga currently, which has Khenpo Shenga's commentary as well as a commentary by Mipham.  This particular text is more terse, perhaps, than Nagarjuna and Aryadeva's originals, but I'm sure glad Mipham wrote his commentary.


Malcolm wrote:
Hi Cone:

This is but one text out of many. The text you are referring has nothing to do with Madhyamaka, despite Mipham's bold attempt to make it fit into a Madhyamaka mold by riding roughshod over the text.
Shenga's MMK commentary consists of wrapping the MMK in Buddhapalita's commentary.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, November 5th, 2011 at 7:41 PM
Title: Re: Madyamika Sautrantika vs Prasangika
Content:
conebeckham said:
I think it is better to stick to Nagarajuna and Aryadeva. Nagarjuna and Arydeva are straighyforward and easy to understand.

Jinzang said:
They aren't to me.

Malcolm wrote:
What do you find difficult about them?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, November 5th, 2011 at 1:41 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:
Lhug-Pa said:
Thanks Namdrol and Sönam

Since GURUYOGA by Chogyal Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche is a restricted book; if we are to receive the Direct Introduction from Chogyal Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche via the Worldwide Transmission, would we email a request to purchase GURUYOGA explaining that we currently do not have physical access to a Dzogchen Community center, and that we need the said book in order to participate in the Worlwide Transmission?

Malcolm wrote:
Generally, in order to purchase many book, you must be a member, If you are member of the DC, this shows your interest. Transmission will occur sometime. To do the world wide transmission, you need only the small worldwide transmission booklet  -- should be easy to get and is not restricted.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, November 4th, 2011 at 10:36 PM
Title: Re: Madyamika Sautrantika vs Prasangika
Content:
conebeckham said:
The third alternative, and one I feel the majority of us follow, is to stick to one Tibetan pedagogical tradition.

Malcolm wrote:
I think it is better to stick to Nagarajuna and Aryadeva. Nagarjuna and Arydeva are straighyforward and easy to understand. This is the "pedagogical tradition" of Khenpo Shenga.


N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, November 4th, 2011 at 10:10 PM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:
Pero said:
FYI, to attend the WWT you have to know what to do during it beforehand. If you don't, there's not that much use to attend.

Epistemes said:
Where do you go to learn what to do during it beforehand?  Is there a code in "The Crystal and The Way of Light" that we have to crack?  Not all of us have ease of access to a community.  Can other practitioners e-mail you the instructions?


Malcolm wrote:
There is a new book I saw, called Guru Yoga -- it has all the instructions for each of the three international transmission days, as well as complete instructions for all the major guru yoga practices in teh DC.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 2nd, 2011 at 11:37 PM
Title: Re: Triyik Yeshe Lama.
Content:
Namdrol said:
We need to strive for mutual respect. That is important.

heart said:
Yes, I feel that there is a lack of respect for the traditional Nyingma style of Dzogchen practice in this and other forums. I think you do understand the point I am trying to make Namdrol.

/magnus


Malcolm wrote:
Others feel there is a lack of respect for ChNN's style of Dzogchen and that people push this ngondro + two stages approach too hard and want to condition DC practitioners into their way of thinking.

Just accept it, we don't think tantric ngondro is that important over all. No use in trying to convince us.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 2nd, 2011 at 11:34 PM
Title: Re: Triyik Yeshe Lama.
Content:


heart said:
Longchenpa is not old-school enough for you Nangwa?

/magnus

Namdrol said:
Nope. He is too influenced by Sarma.

Rongzom, Aro Yeshe Jungney, Phang Mipham Gonpo, Chetsun Senge Wangchuk, now that is old school.

N

heart said:
so please post your proof that they didn't do Ngondro or Keyrim and Dzogrim before or during their Dzogchen practice. They were all pretty involved with Tantra as well, no?

/magnus

Malcolm wrote:
There is no creation stage, completion stage or deities in Vima Nyinthig.

Rongzom states quite clearly that there is no need for the two stages in the sixth chapter of his major work -- his approach to Dzogchen works equally well if you are a tantric practitioner or not.

Plus there is a broad understanding in sems sde, klong sde, etc.  that deity yoga is not necessary.

I don't think Senge Wangchuk was that involved with deity yoga -- there is no evidence that he emphasized it at all. I am sure he knew it, however. Aro Yeshe either.

What you did before you practice Dzogchen is not that important. As you agree already, Dzogchen is not gradual.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 2nd, 2011 at 11:11 PM
Title: Re: Triyik Yeshe Lama.
Content:
Karma Dondrup Tashi said:
The debate about ChNNR and ngondro has been done to death so many times before ...



Malcolm wrote:
It is not a debate. It is plain difference of style. Magnus is very Nyingma in his approach, based on his tradition and teachers. Magnus' idea is that ChNN students do not understand something important.

Personally, I think ChNN is the greatest master of Dzogchen alive. Just read my post on atikosha.org about him. But that is me.

Other people who follow other masters should feel their master and his or her approach is the best. Those of us who follow ChNN need to respect other masters and their students -- we should not get into some trip about this tradition or that tradition. Often these days ChNN is fond of saying that there is no "dzogchen tradition".

We need to strive for mutual respect. That is important.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 2nd, 2011 at 11:03 PM
Title: Re: Triyik Yeshe Lama.
Content:


heart said:
Longchenpa is not old-school enough for you Nangwa?

/magnus

Malcolm wrote:
Nope. He is too influenced by Sarma.

Rongzom, Aro Yeshe Jungney, Phang Mipham Gonpo, Chetsun Senge Wangchuk, now that is old school.

N


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 2nd, 2011 at 9:01 PM
Title: Re: Triyik Yeshe Lama.
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
In response to Geoff's question:

It is useless to read about togal without introduction to togal.

It can block your practice because it can cause strongly clinging and obsession.

Showing the postures and gazes in an incorrect way will, according to the texts, make your gaze unstable.

Tögal is not especially complicated, but if not approached in correct way, will cause problems for practitioner.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 2nd, 2011 at 8:55 PM
Title: Re: Buddhist ethics and BDSM?
Content:


Astus said:
BDSM is not intended to be a spiritual practice.

Malcolm wrote:
Tell that to the modern primitives.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, November 2nd, 2011 at 4:18 PM
Title: Re: Triyik Yeshe Lama.
Content:
heart said:
You can of course chose to ignore that if you want.

Namdrol said:
Yes, he should, his master is not all these other teachers -- his master is ChNN.

N

heart said:
Or he could keep an open mind and realize there might be more than one path that leads to the top of the mountain.

/magnus


Malcolm wrote:
He can keep an open mind, but still follow his master's advice which is not the advice of all these other masters.

Face it Magnus, people in the DC are _never_ going to agree that they have to do ngondro, creation stage, completion stage, etc., since our master says that the tantric approach to these things is not our approach and are not necessary. This is not the path that ChNN has laid for us.

As you well know, our master, ChNN says the only necessary thing for his students is Guru Yoga of White A. On the other hand, he also says that since people have many conditions and circumstances, they should not limit themselves, and this is why he provides methods such as tara, mandarava, namkha, serkyem, chulen, yantra, etc.


