|
|
 |
|
| Author |
 Topic  |
|
mikael
27 Posts |
 Posted - Jul 26 2009 : 1:43:43 PM
|
for anyone genuinely interested in learning about Rainbow Body, as it seems nobody in this thread has any clue, check out Crystal and the Way of Light by Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche..
and no.. Hindus do not attain Rainbow Body, which is a bit different than 'knowing the Self' or 'merging with Brahman'. Rainbow body is a very highly realized Siddhi that is only available to those with insight into Emptiness and that have Bodhicitta (desire to awaken for the sake of all beings). Emptiness is not the same as Brahman in Vedanta because Brahman is real, it is the static essence behind all phenomena while Emptiness is not a static essence but merely the condition of all phenomena, the illusory-like nature of all phenomena. Nothing exists behind Phenomena which can be called anything such as Self. Furthermore, in Hinduism, separate mindstreams are illusion and only God exists, this is completely opposite to the Buddhist view which has infinite amount of mindstreams... therefore its impossible to truly cultivate Bodhicitta as a Hindu because you don't even believe in mindstreams. why would you awaken for the sake of all beings when everything and everyone is God anyway?
it is a very subtle business, but necessary to differentiate. intellectualism is necessary to a certain point, and Right View is the 1st of the 8 Fold Path. this is because having the right View enables one to have the proper realization, the proper interpretation of experience.
I'm sorry to burst any bubbles, but Buddhism is not Hinduism. I'm not saying Buddhism is better, but its different. You gotta accept that, or you just aren't looking deep enough.
|
 |
|
|
Suryakant
USA
259 Posts |
Posted - Jul 26 2009 : 2:00:25 PM
|
| The trajectory of this thread reminds me of some words spoken by Neem Karoli Baba: "It is deception to teach by individual differences and karma. See all the same. You can't realize God if you see differences. Learn to find the love within." |
|
|
|
Konchok Ösel Dorje
USA
545 Posts |
Posted - Jul 26 2009 : 3:59:59 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by mikael
for anyone genuinely interested in learning about Rainbow Body, as it seems nobody in this thread has any clue, check out Crystal and the Way of Light by Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche..
and no.. Hindus do not attain Rainbow Body, which is a bit different than 'knowing the Self' or 'merging with Brahman'. Rainbow body is a very highly realized Siddhi that is only available to those with insight into Emptiness and that have Bodhicitta (desire to awaken for the sake of all beings). Emptiness is not the same as Brahman in Vedanta because Brahman is real, it is the static essence behind all phenomena while Emptiness is not a static essence but merely the condition of all phenomena, the illusory-like nature of all phenomena. Nothing exists behind Phenomena which can be called anything such as Self. Furthermore, in Hinduism, separate mindstreams are illusion and only God exists, this is completely opposite to the Buddhist view which has infinite amount of mindstreams... therefore its impossible to truly cultivate Bodhicitta as a Hindu because you don't even believe in mindstreams. why would you awaken for the sake of all beings when everything and everyone is God anyway?
it is a very subtle business, but necessary to differentiate. intellectualism is necessary to a certain point, and Right View is the 1st of the 8 Fold Path. this is because having the right View enables one to have the proper realization, the proper interpretation of experience.
I'm sorry to burst any bubbles, but Buddhism is not Hinduism. I'm not saying Buddhism is better, but its different. You gotta accept that, or you just aren't looking deep enough.
Brahman refers to Vedanta. The Kashmir Shaivism tradition has Voidness as a view/practice which is called Bhairava; it is not the Self; they call it the "middle-state." See the Vijnanabhairava Tantra. Clearly cross-pollination and chicken before egg conundrums re Shaivism and the Buddha's Dharma.
Lama Drubpon Gonpo Dorje Rinpoche a retreat master of the Drikung Kagyu lineage explains that there are high and low rainbow bodies. He teaches that some Hindu Yogis have attained the rainbow body; some of which he witnessed during his stay near Mount Kailash. Lord Jigten Sumgon explained that the formless realm meditations of Hindu Yogis are high not low, and are the foundation for the liberated meditations of the Hiniyana path. Also, many Hiniyana yogis attained the rainbow body and they don't have the view of emptiness or the bodhisattva path.
The Buddha did not attain a Rainbow Body. Because of this Lama Drubpon Gonpo Dorje Rinpoche teaches that the Rainbow Body is not important. His Holiness Taklung Matul Rinpoche does not agree; though he does agree that the Buddha did not attain a Rainbow Body.
I am very familiar with ChNN, own all his works, sat through about hundred hours of his lectures including pointing out initiation last year, a practicing Drikung Kagyu student. I take both Dzogchen and Mahamudra as my path; though my sadhanas are Essence Mahamudra according to Lord Jigten Sumgon's oral instructions. I do a 7-day retreat about every three months. His Holiness Taklung Matul Rinpoche and Drubpon Rinpoche will be coming for dinner in a few weeks. I will ask him whether he agrees or disagrees with Lama Drubpon Rinpoche.
ChNN seems to blend Bon and Nyingma Dzogchen views. The Nyingma and Kagyu views are exactly the same; and both do not rely on philosophical points. The Bon view of the Rainbow Body is unorthodox and talks about impure rainbow body, which from a Vajrayana standpoint is not possible.
My view is that there are many possible outcomes to an individual yogi's meditation. Just because the school asserts something or the other doesn't mean the yogi won't realize something extraordinary in their mindstream due to past life karma. I meditated as a hindu on AUM for 30 years and had a profound vision of impermanence and emptiness. The Yogis at AYP don't all profess a truly existent God; some do; some do for expediency of language, which is the case for many high hindu yogis. It is the case for my Guru Ram Swaroopji; one can use different bodies of language for different purposes, because all possible knowledge is available in the letter AUM.
There are many different possible views and experiences, as many as there are beings. It seems that your bubble surrounds fixed ideas of schools of thought, which do not exist.
Emptiness is the essence of the mind. The "ness" refers to something not non-existent which is essential, mind's real nature; it is known by thousands of names, through realizing it obscurations self-liberate and one naturally takes the bodhisattva burden.
In the path of the Mahasiddhas, there are no lines.
Now you have a better clue about who we are. |
Edited by - Konchok Ösel Dorje on Jul 26 2009 6:01:17 PM |
|
|
|
Kirtanman
USA
1651 Posts |
Posted - Jul 27 2009 : 9:32:34 PM
|
Hello Mikael,
The Rainbow Body, like all spiritual symbols and descriptors, is known by many names.
It does indicate reality - reality not exclusive to any religion or path.
The truly tantric (experiential) paths emanating from Indian (i.e. Kashmir Shaivism) traditions, being non-dual in nature, teaching and result have nothing at all to do with belief.
Hinduism does not preclude the rainbow body; only certain interpretations within Hinduism preclude the rainbow body, just as certain interpretations within Buddhism, or any other path, preclude the rainbow body.
Actually: it is only interpretation which precludes the rainbow body.
Best not to chase rainbows, bodily or otherwise.
The fullness of it all is right here, right now.
Have you realized?
Heart Is Where The AUM Is,
Kirtanman
|
Edited by - Kirtanman on Jul 27 2009 9:35:18 PM |
|
|
|
alwayson2
USA
546 Posts |
Posted - Jul 27 2009 : 10:35:25 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by mikael
for anyone genuinely interested in learning about Rainbow Body, as it seems nobody in this thread has any clue, check out Crystal and the Way of Light by Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche..
and no.. Hindus do not attain Rainbow Body, which is a bit different than 'knowing the Self' or 'merging with Brahman'. Rainbow body is a very highly realized Siddhi that is only available to those with insight into Emptiness and that have Bodhicitta (desire to awaken for the sake of all beings). Emptiness is not the same as Brahman in Vedanta because Brahman is real, it is the static essence behind all phenomena while Emptiness is not a static essence but merely the condition of all phenomena, the illusory-like nature of all phenomena. Nothing exists behind Phenomena which can be called anything such as Self. Furthermore, in Hinduism, separate mindstreams are illusion and only God exists, this is completely opposite to the Buddhist view which has infinite amount of mindstreams... therefore its impossible to truly cultivate Bodhicitta as a Hindu because you don't even believe in mindstreams. why would you awaken for the sake of all beings when everything and everyone is God anyway?
it is a very subtle business, but necessary to differentiate. intellectualism is necessary to a certain point, and Right View is the 1st of the 8 Fold Path. this is because having the right View enables one to have the proper realization, the proper interpretation of experience.
I'm sorry to burst any bubbles, but Buddhism is not Hinduism. I'm not saying Buddhism is better, but its different. You gotta accept that, or you just aren't looking deep enough.
I agree with you 100%.
I have been saying this the entire time.
By the way, this IS alwayson. Its a long story why I don't have my original account. |
|
|
|
mikael
27 Posts |
Posted - Jul 28 2009 : 01:17:24 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Konchok Ösel Dorje
Brahman refers to Vedanta. The Kashmir Shaivism tradition has Voidness as a view/practice which is called Bhairava; it is not the Self; they call it the "middle-state." See the Vijnanabhairava Tantra. Clearly cross-pollination and chicken before egg conundrums re Shaivism and the Buddha's Dharma.
the Buddha's Dharma was around before Shaivism. you could probably say that for Buddhist Tantra vs Hindu Tantra, as they cross pollinated in the Himalayan regions.. but no you can't say that for Buddha's Dharma. Hindus like to push dates back but theres no evidence of that.
Bhairva is not the same as Shunyata because Shunyata is never reified as real while the goal of Shivaism is Shiva, who alone is real. the Vijnanabhairava Tantra has the goal of God consciousness, which is a state of meditation. Nirvana is not a state of meditation but rather an insight into the true nature of phenomena. The goal of Shivaism is called, in Buddhist meditative terms, the Dimension of neither perception nor non-perception. this is a formless state of absorption where there is no longer an I, and it is non-conceptual because the dualistic mind is transcended. this state is then reified or 'made real' and taken to be God or Shiva. This is not the same as Emptiness because emptiness directly means lacking essence or substantiality. This is also not the same as Rigpa because Rigpa is empty. the goal is not just Non-dual consciousness. Pure luminosity is not unique to Buddhism. Hindus got it, as did many Sufis, Taoists, Christians, Jewish Qabalists, and probably Shaman as well. What sets Buddhism apart is the view that this pure non-dual awareness is empty of essence, thus there is no grasping. There is no making it real and turning it into a universal consciousness that everyone is One with. This leads to deeper insight, and realization because there is no grasping. There is no escaping that Shivaism is monistic where the goal is oneness while Buddhism has no such goal, there is no universal consciousness, there are infinite # of mindstreams which are without beginning or end, there is no merging at all.
Abhinavagupta himself says that only Shiva has the power of creation, even if we can become one with Shiva, we don't have the power of creation. Also, Abhinavagupta say's that since Shiva is true and real, the entire cosmos is true and real and nothing bud Shiva. Also, the ability to dissolve the body is not particular to Dzogchen. Just because one can dissolve the body and disappear, that can just be a mundane siddhi. It's the view of Dzogchen that's important and the intention.
Kashmir Shaivism still reifies an absolute oneness, reifies formless states, and reifies a supreme creator soul to the cosmos.
quote:
Lama Drubpon Gonpo Dorje Rinpoche a retreat master of the Drikung Kagyu lineage explains that there are high and low rainbow bodies. He teaches that some Hindu Yogis have attained the rainbow body; some of which he witnessed during his stay near Mount Kailash. Lord Jigten Sumgon explained that the formless realm meditations of Hindu Yogis are high not low, and are the foundation for the liberated meditations of the Hiniyana path. Also, many Hiniyana yogis attained the rainbow body and they don't have the view of emptiness or the bodhisattva path.
we are not talking about the Rainbow Jalu, or Body of Light, which is the result of Thogal practice in the Dzogchen tradition. I think you are equating Rainbow body with Illusory body.
Rainbow body is completely IMPOSSIBLE without having the View of Buddhism and Bodhicitta. Why? because Rainbow body has nothing to do with disappearing and merging with a universal Soul. the purpose of attaining Rainbow body is to help beings in any dimension through manifesting infinite ways of compassionate activity. Thats it. Thats the goal of Buddhism. Cause and effect; The proper intention has to precede the realization. Without the intention there is no realization. How can there be?
quote:
The Buddha did not attain a Rainbow Body. Because of this Lama Drubpon Gonpo Dorje Rinpoche teaches that the Rainbow Body is not important. His Holiness Taklung Matul Rinpoche does not agree; though he does agree that the Buddha did not attain a Rainbow Body.
I am very familiar with ChNN, own all his works, sat through about hundred hours of his lectures including pointing out initiation last year, a practicing Drikung Kagyu student. I take both Dzogchen and Mahamudra as my path; though my sadhanas are Essence Mahamudra according to Lord Jigten Sumgon's oral instructions. I do a 7-day retreat about every three months. His Holiness Taklung Matul Rinpoche and Drubpon Rinpoche will be coming for dinner in a few weeks. I will ask him whether he agrees or disagrees with Lama Drubpon Rinpoche.
I'd be very interested to hear what the Rinpoches have to say about this.
If you have studied the teachings of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche, then you would know that Rainbow body is only possible for solitary practitioners or teachers with very small number of pure disciples. A teacher with many students such as the Buddha could not have realized Rainbow body.
Some teachers downplay Rainbow Body and Dzogchen and focus more on Tantra and Bodhicitta and the Preliminaries. This is because they view Dzogchen as too 'high-end', too difficult, and for only highly realized practitioners. Many teachers view Westerners as really deluded and focus only on the most elementary of subjects.
quote:
ChNN seems to blend Bon and Nyingma Dzogchen views. The Nyingma and Kagyu views are exactly the same; and both do not rely on philosophical points. The Bon view of the Rainbow Body is unorthodox and talks about impure rainbow body, which from a Vajrayana standpoint is not possible.
one important note is that Nyingma and Kagyu views are not the same when it comes to the essence of Mind where Kagyus take the Shentong view. just a small difference. but I think all Tibetan schools are in essence the same. Bon is another school of Tibetan Buddhism now.
quote:
My view is that there are many possible outcomes to an individual yogi's meditation. Just because the school asserts something or the other doesn't mean the yogi won't realize something extraordinary in their mindstream due to past life karma. I meditated as a hindu on AUM for 30 years and had a profound vision of impermanence and emptiness. The Yogis at AYP don't all profess a truly existent God; some do; some do for expediency of language, which is the case for many high hindu yogis. It is the case for my Guru Ram Swaroopji; one can use different bodies of language for different purposes, because all possible knowledge is available in the letter AUM.
There are many different possible views and experiences, as many as there are beings. It seems that your bubble surrounds fixed ideas of schools of thought, which do not exist.
Emptiness is the essence of the mind. The "ness" refers to something not non-existent which is essential, mind's real nature; it is known by thousands of names, through realizing it obscurations self-liberate and one naturally takes the bodhisattva burden.
In the path of the Mahasiddhas, there are no lines.
Now you have a better clue about who we are.
I agree what what you have to say and I thank you for posting. It is great to meet dedicated practitioners. I also agree with practitioners attaining high realizations regardless of tradition, but it is important to call things by their right names and distinguish proper causes, as it is not possible to truly say you had that realization simply by meditating on AUM and not because of past life aspirations.
the most important teaching of the Buddha Shakyamuni and the first of the 8 fold path is Right View. without View, you do not have Buddhism. and this is why Buddhism distinguishes itself from other traditions and does not take the Hindu route of saying all are paths up the mountain. View is not a method, as you think, to separate Buddhism from other schools and attain the same realizations as other schools. Buddhism is as pragmatic as you can get, and if the realizations and goals were the same, then Buddha and the many realized practitioners of the various schools of Buddhism would've taught people to take teachings from other traditions.
I just want to point out that I respect all traditions, and I praise all practitioners of spirituality. I do not mean to sound as if I am disrespecting anybody or any tradition. I think more respect is given to a tradition when you recognize what the goal actually is and not assuming that they are all the same. I think that it is wise to analyze and truly see this. |
Edited by - mikael on Jul 28 2009 05:27:08 AM |
|
|
|
Konchok Ösel Dorje
USA
545 Posts |
Posted - Jul 28 2009 : 10:32:51 AM
|
There is a Hindu Tantra dating back 5000 years, the Darmar Tantra. Shiva practice is far older than the Buddha's dharma, already ancient by that time.
What you say about formless realm of Hindu meditation is what I already said. But you are not correct that God consciousness is the goal of Shaivism. That might be what they say on the surface, but if you look at the material, and writings by Lakshmanjoo. What they are describing is the "middle-state," which has nothing to do with God.
I agree with what you are saying about dharma, emptiness and non-grasping. However, Dzogchen refers to the meditation state as "Instant Presence." Emptiness is not just empty. One arrives there by total non grasping, but it is an experience of Presence. That Presence is empty, but the "ness" refers to one's mind. Though one cannot identify anything called a mind, it's one's own vision of no thing to see. So you cannot even say, it is emptiness. Dzogchen and Mahamudra both say that this state is the exact same as the Buddha's mind. So you cannot say that one's mind is separate from the Buddha; we all have buddha-nature. The difference between non-dual and monism is barely a difference at all; though you may be conditioned to think so. To a yogi, it makes no difference.
I use Kashmir Shaivism as example. I'm just making you aware that there are Hindu Yogis for whom God is not important, and understand the practice is relative to one's own mind.
I'm interested in the Rainbow Body only available to small number of practitioners. Perhaps Shakyamuni's intent was to benefit humans and establish the dharma on Earth. Whereas, the Rainbow Body results in wanting to help all sentient beings in the universes and all dimensions. Then, does that mean the Buddha Shakyamuni was a lower vehicle practitioner? He turned all the wheels of Dharma, no?
I don't think the Kagyu Lamas think Dzogchen is more high-end than Mahamudra. For the Mahamudra practitioner the high-end practice is the View, Practice, Action, until the Fourth Yoga of non-meditation which is also the view one attains in the Fourth Vision of Thogal. My practice is Essence Mahamudra. The preliminaries are abbreviated, Mahamudra is emphasized. It is rarely taught. It is more rare than Thogal teachings. All Vajrayana students must at least do Guru Yoga, Vajrasattva and Mandala. Dzogchen lamas will require these as well. They really help clear away obscurations and the meditation experience improves a lot. But you are right, few students ought to be exposed to Dzogchen if they can identify the nature of mind from the pointing out instructions.
The Nyingma separates Sem and Rigpa. Kagyu does not and just says mind is Sem, Rigpa is mixed in. That makes sense because both schools say that the fruition is the union of appearances and emptiness. Nyingma makes sense too, because in that state, it is naked awareness that self-liberates, and Mahamudra agrees with this. Fine distinction that when you see both sides, makes for a much fuller and richer understanding.
I agree one must have right view, right motivation, guard karma, right livelihood and all that. However, in the path of the Mahasiddhas, the lines blur, and they disappear. Names and distinctions about this school and that school disappear. There is even no emptiness, no world, no sentient beings and no buddha. What people reify or don't reify don't matter. One will encounter beings who defy description and classification with views that are not identifiable as this or that view.
Have this debate over email with Yogani and see what you come up with. Is he Hindu? Does he reify some state? Is he a Bodhisattva? If you think you can find something there to identify, I will eat my socks.
Obviously my past lives involved Dharma or I would be encountering Mahamudra and Dzogchen teachers. I'm more concerned where my present life is flowering. |
Edited by - Konchok Ösel Dorje on Jul 28 2009 10:40:20 AM |
|
|
|
alwayson2
USA
546 Posts |
Posted - Jul 28 2009 : 11:36:39 AM
|
Amen to mikael.
Also Shakyamuni does have the Sambhogakaya. Rainbow body is the term for when a practitioner gains Sambhogakaya on earth (Buddhahood during one's actual life here while still alive...a rare feat).
From Mahayana point of view, the Buddha was the nirmankaya of Vairocana, a Buddha who possesses the Sambhogakaya (as all Buddhas do.)
Vairocana is Sambhogakaya in place other than earth, so that is why Shakyamuni does not display rainbow body, since he is a nirmankaya of Vairocana. Even from Theravada point of view, Shakyamuni gained complete enlightenment in Akanistha heaven before being born on earth. His enlightenment under the Bodhi tree is for show.
By the way, this point is often overlooked by Theravadins, but their system of four Jhanas is TOTALLY tantric. It is even more directly tantric than Vajrayana visualization techniques.
So to suggest from the Theravada point of view, that Shakyamuni did not practice with the energy body (my definition of tantra) is also wrong. The Divine Eye, which Buddha used to gain DIRECT experience with reincarnation and karma, comes about through energy body practice... |
Edited by - alwayson2 on Jul 28 2009 1:24:25 PM |
|
|
|
Kirtanman
USA
1651 Posts |
Posted - Jul 28 2009 : 1:29:20 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by alwayson2
Amen to mikael.
Also Shakyamuni does have the Sambhogakaya. Rainbow body is the term for when a practitioner gains Sambhogakaya on earth (Buddhahood during one's actual life here while still alive...a rare feat).
Hi AlwaysOn, Mikael, Konchok & All,
I have just a brief moment now, but would like to ask:
Can someone please help with clarification of terms, per the last few posts, and the portion of the dialog related to distinctions between certain schools of Buddhism & Kashmir Shaivism?
Example:
Per the quote above, how is "Buddhahood during one's actual life", different than the Jivan Mukti awareness resulting from the realizations arising from Kashmir Shaivism?
Are you saying that rainbow body is simply yet another term for Liberation/Enlightenment?
If so, it appears (pun fully recognized, intended & enjoyed  ) ) that we're all in agreement.
Heart Is Where The AUM Is,
Kirtanman |
|
|
|
Konchok Ösel Dorje
USA
545 Posts |
Posted - Jul 28 2009 : 2:13:49 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by alwayson2
Amen to mikael.
Also Shakyamuni does have the Sambhogakaya. Rainbow body is the term for when a practitioner gains Sambhogakaya on earth (Buddhahood during one's actual life here while still alive...a rare feat).
From Mahayana point of view, the Buddha was the nirmankaya of Vairocana, a Buddha who possesses the Sambhogakaya (as all Buddhas do.)
Vairocana is Sambhogakaya in place other than earth, so that is why Shakyamuni does not display rainbow body, since he is a nirmankaya of Vairocana. Even from Theravada point of view, Shakyamuni gained complete enlightenment in Akanistha heaven before being born on earth. His enlightenment under the Bodhi tree is for show.
By the way, this point is often overlooked by Theravadins, but their system of four Jhanas is TOTALLY tantric. It is even more directly tantric than Vajrayana visualization techniques.
So to suggest from the Theravada point of view, that Shakyamuni did not practice with the energy body (my definition of tantra) is also wrong. The Divine Eye, which Buddha used to gain DIRECT experience with reincarnation and karma, comes about through energy body practice...
Who is suggesting Theravada point of view, Buddha did not practice with energy body? The illusory body (mind-made body) practice is described generally in the "Fruits of the Homeless Life Sutra."
Where do you get the Buddha Shakyamuni emanated from Vairocana? The brief research I did says Mahayana believe he emanated from Amitabha. Why would he engage in six years of hard austerities, eating feces and urine, nearly starving, etc.? The idea that Shakyamuni was born enlightened is hard to swallow. He describes how he was a bodhisattva before being enlightened under the tree. No doubt his vast accumulation of merit made him a powerful nirmanakaya.
Sambhogakaya is non local and all pervasive. It's not like Vairocana grabbed his piece of the kaya and once he had it he didn't need it attain it anymore. However, I do agree that once one has attained enlightenment, one can be born as a Nirmanakaya and one's body is not karmic, thus there would be no dissolution at death. One's body would result not from attachment, but from the bodhisattva's wish. |
|
|
|
alwayson2
USA
546 Posts |
Posted - Jul 28 2009 : 2:19:21 PM
|
To Kirtanman
There are a lot of differences. |
Edited by - alwayson2 on Jul 28 2009 2:21:17 PM |
|
|
|
chinna
United Kingdom
241 Posts |
Posted - Jul 28 2009 : 2:24:57 PM
|
Several thoughts come to mind:
We're on the edge of language with many of these concepts (if we are not, they are not much use to us). If we look deep enough 'through' any of them, we find all the others too.
We need to beware of thinking that any of these concepts is 'definable' as against others. That just means we have got stuck. The drawing of distinctions means we haven't yet seen through them, and thus also not yet seen through the distinction of separate self, whether in a rainbow body or an 'ordinary' one, or no body at all.
If we feel competitive about our tradition, as to which is the oldest etc, we are surely too identified with it?
We can't even elucidate the historical truth, as the exchanges show. All traditions are so full of propaganda and 'reverse engineering' of their pre-eminence. There will be as many diffent views of the history as there are teachers and commentators, and none of it gets us a millimetre closer to what we seek.
Are emptiness and God two or one?.....
One and Not-Two are Not-Two, by definition.
One and Not-Two are One, by definition.
God and Emptiness are One, by definition.
God and Emtiness are Not-Two, by definition.
Or so it seems to me.
The Great Traditions love these distinctions, despite themselves, because there is always a competition when they come into contact. And each tradition always presents the most subtle and advanced view of itself, and the least subtle and advanced view of the other.
"In the transmission of this Great Matter, absolutely no communication takes place." (Dogen)
|
Edited by - chinna on Jul 28 2009 2:30:38 PM |
|
|
|
alwayson2
USA
546 Posts |
Posted - Jul 28 2009 : 2:26:22 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Konchok Ösel Dorje
The idea that Shakyamuni was born enlightened is hard to swallow.
Even in Hinayana, Shakyamuni planned out many years of rebirth with intention. He was 99.9% or 100% enlightened before he was even born depending on point of view. Thats actually the main point.
If this was not the case, buddhism falls apart. |
Edited by - alwayson2 on Jul 28 2009 2:32:11 PM |
|
|
|
Konchok Ösel Dorje
USA
545 Posts |
Posted - Jul 28 2009 : 2:33:00 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by alwayson2
quote:
Originally posted by Konchok Ösel Dorje
The idea that Shakyamuni was born enlightened is hard to swallow.
Even in Hinayana, Shakyamuni planned out many years of rebirth with intention. He was 99.9% or 100% enlightened before he was even born depending on point of view. Thats actually the main point.
If this was not the case, buddhism falls apart.
If one can only be a Buddha if 99.9% enlightened before birth, then how can ordinary people ever hope to attain buddhahood? AYP'rs will want to know that. |
|
|
|
alwayson2
USA
546 Posts |
Posted - Jul 28 2009 : 2:37:13 PM
|
If you want to become Buddha in this lifetime, which I think is your question Osel, practice kundalini and thogal... after taking Mahayana refuge of course (which you could do on your own).
http://www.surajamrita.com/bon/buddhahood.html |
Edited by - alwayson2 on Jul 28 2009 3:07:14 PM |
|
|
|
CarsonZi
Canada
3189 Posts |
Posted - Jul 28 2009 : 2:40:17 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by alwayson2
If you want to become Buddha in one lifetime, ..., practice kundalini and thogal... after taking Mahayana refuge of course...
Hahaha....So there is only one Path eh? Sounds like preaching to me!
Love,
Carson |
|
|
|
alwayson2
USA
546 Posts |
Posted - Jul 28 2009 : 2:41:41 PM
|
Carson,
If you want to become a Buddha, practice buddhism
If you want to unite with Brahman, pracitce hinduism |
Edited by - alwayson2 on Jul 28 2009 3:00:28 PM |
|
|
|
CarsonZi
Canada
3189 Posts |
Posted - Jul 28 2009 : 2:47:34 PM
|
Where is that rolling eyes emoticon again?? |
|
|
|
alwayson2
USA
546 Posts |
Posted - Jul 28 2009 : 3:02:15 PM
|
You can also become an arhat, if you want more choices.
Arhat is recognized by Mahayana as well. |
|
|
|
Konchok Ösel Dorje
USA
545 Posts |
Posted - Jul 28 2009 : 3:21:26 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by alwayson2
If you want to become Buddha in this lifetime, which I think is your question Osel, practice kundalini and thogal... after taking Mahayana refuge of course (which you could do on your own).
http://www.surajamrita.com/bon/buddhahood.html
That's the Bonpo view. There are many tools in Vajrayana path; Thogal is prominent in the Nyingmapa lineage for discovering the natural state. In the Kagyu lineage the oral instructions and Guru Yoga are prominent in discovering the natural state. All these tools are for discovery the natural state as the union of the three Kayas. The Dharmakaya is the nature of mind. The Sambhogakaya is the radiant continuum of mind's nature. The Nirmanakaya is the union of thoughts/emotions/appearances and emptiness. To achieve Buddhahood in one life, one merely rests in the natural state of spontaneous presence. Practices like Thogal, Tummo and Deity Yoga allow one to recognize the natural state. Yogani's instructions about DM appear to be very close. |
|
|
|
alwayson2
USA
546 Posts |
Posted - Jul 28 2009 : 3:27:03 PM
|
The link is Bonpo point of view, but the what I said about kundalini and thogal is true across mahayana. By the way, Bonpo is like a cross between Gelug, Sakya and Nyingma.
The link is actually reprentative of the Gelug point of view, except the current Dalai Lama who has a slightly different take.
Natural state is not even close to being a Buddha. Says so in many places like the Bardo Thodal. Even third vision of thogal is still light years from being a Buddha.
You don't even make sense because Buddhahood must be CAUSED.
Secondly, the natural state has nothing to do with action anyway.
I'm pretty sure you are another western victim of Kagyu "sutra mahamudra" |
Edited by - alwayson2 on Jul 28 2009 4:00:46 PM |
|
|
|
grihastha
USA
184 Posts |
Posted - Jul 28 2009 : 3:59:42 PM
|
quote:
Even in Hinayana, Shakyamuni planned out many years of rebirth with intention. He was 99.9% or 100% enlightened before he was even born depending on point of view. Thats actually the main point.
If this was not the case, buddhism falls apart.
Actually, for me, if this IS the case, Buddhism falls apart. The whole notion of a human being who sets out to achieve enlightenment, succeeds, and then also succeeds in formulating the way that everyone else can achieve it too - that, to me, is the seed-essence of the Buddha.
Btw, what is it about Tibetan Buddhism that brings out the sectarianism? What is this - the 30 Years War?
gri |
|
|
|
alwayson2
USA
546 Posts |
Posted - Jul 28 2009 : 4:05:43 PM
|
If you want to talk about that, make a different thread, and Ill be happy to discuss that with you.
By the way, doesn't your point of view make you sectarian as well?
Especially the way you phrased it... |
Edited by - alwayson2 on Jul 28 2009 4:24:04 PM |
|
|
|
Konchok Ösel Dorje
USA
545 Posts |
Posted - Jul 28 2009 : 4:28:25 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by alwayson2
The link is Bonpo point of view, but the what I said about kundalini and thogal is true across mahayana. By the way, Bonpo is like a cross between Gelug, Sakya and Nyingma.
The link is actually reprentative of the Gelug point of view, except the current Dalai Lama who has a slightly different take.
Natural state is not even close to being a Buddha. Says so in many places like the Bardo Thodal. Even third vision of thogal is still light years from being a Buddha.
You don't even make sense because Buddhahood must be CAUSED.
Secondly, the natural state has nothing to do with action.
I'm pretty sure you are another western victim of Kagyu "sutra mahamudra"
You are so far from being correct. I barely want to even bother correcting you.
How can Thogal be used across Mahayana when only the Nyingmapa and Bonpo lineages use it? Thogal is strictly a Vajrayana practice limited to Nyingma/Bonpo.
The Nyingma and Kagyu lineages describe the natural state as the Dharmakaya which is identical to the Buddha's mind. Both teach that Buddhahood is caused by the two accumulations. Just recognizing the natural state is just the beginning, then one progresses through the Four Yogas (Non-distraction, Non-Discrimination, One Taste, Non-Meditation) in the case of Kagyu, or the Four Visions of Thogal in Nyingmpa.
My practice is Essence Mahamudra taught by Lord Jigten Sumgon. The Drikung lineage does not have a Sutra Mahamudra, Karma Kagyu does. You are the victim of trying to figure things out by yourself. You are genuinely confused. It is impossible to decipher lineage teachings from books. Without a Lama, you are going to get rather lost, which is what you are.
When one is directly introduced to the Natural State (cause #1), then removes all doubts about the natural state (cause #2), and then confidently remains in the natural state (cause #3) one attains the path of buddhahood in time. This teaching of Garab Dorje the Nyingmpa nirmanakaya is identical to Mahamudra.
The preparatory Vajrayana practices provide skillful means for the swift accumulation of merit: Refuge, Vow, Guru Yoga, Vajrasattva recitation and Mandala offering. For the swift accumulation of wisdom, one receives the pointing out instructions and other techniques that enhance deep insight like tummo, thogal, phowa, etc. When one rests in the natural state, one becomes skilled in releasing, and emotions, thoughts and most importantly appearances (especially the body) self-liberate in the Dharmakaya. Based on the bodhisattva's motivation, enlightened activities naturally occur, the vast limitless accumulations of merit that arise by serving the needs of all sentient beings naturally lead to buddhahood. |
|
|
|
grihastha
USA
184 Posts |
Posted - Jul 28 2009 : 4:44:57 PM
|
By the way, doesn't your point of view make you sectarian as well?
Especially the way you phrased it...
Not at all. I'm still pretty ecumenical... No, I'm on the way IN to Vajrayana, and I'm simply expressing my surprise at the amount of name-calling I'm finding in the Sangha. I've yet to take a position here.
I confess: I don't, ultimately, give a monkey's about the difference between Rainbow Body and Rainbow Jalu. I simply want to realize the nature of my mind.
gri |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
| AYP Public Forum |
© Contributing Authors (opinions and advice belong to the respective authors) |
|
|
|
|
Buddhism, The Rainbow Body and Enlightenment
