jogi secreto

I'm talking about the characteristic of viewing mantra as superior to sutra, which you cited as your reasoning for being a fan of Rongzom Which, it occurred to me, was a funny reason because all of Tibetan Buddhism shares that same view In any case, the important thing is that Rongzom the Great Pandita, the Good Dharma Lord, is great, great and profoundly great and I am very happy that you appreciate him!

Right...let's leave aside Rongzom's take on Madhyamaka for the time being. All Tibetan Buddhist schools accept and follow the general scheme of three vehicles, namely Hinayana, Mahayana, and Vajrayana - each one superior to the former in efficacy of leading to enlightenment. In particular, the sublime Nyingma school follows a 9 vehicle system based on the same principle. Therefore, all of Tibetan Buddhism accepts and knows that tantra is superior to sutra - just as all Mahayanists know that Mahayana is superior to Hinayana. Therefore, I was surprised by your reasoning for liking Rongzom, since that particular quality is shared with every Tibetan Buddhist! Nevertheless, Rongzom is indeed the Great One and it would be good to translate more of his works into English.

I did use over-the-top language before, sorry about that. There is no need to be like that, but as for this issue, it is as simple as black and white - Ramayana Das [sp.?] or whomever Hindu philosopher is what he is, and that is not a Dzogchen lama. I mean, how many ways do you need to hear it. And how do I know he is not a Buddha? He is clearly not a Buddha - are you seriously going to tell me he was a Buddha. Well, no. Ramayana Dasaman [sic?] was never a Buddha. Sorry! I know this will make you think, "Is he saying that there is no difference between a perfectly enlightened being and a Buddha? Is he saying that there is no such thing as an enlightened being who is not a Buddha? Is he saying that enlightenment and Buddhahood are one and precisely the same thing?" Indeed, I am. Why? Because it is so. And I couldn't change that even if I wanted to! And yes I have heard of the latest on Bon and Buddhism, I have heard of those folks you mentioned.

You like Rongzom for that reason?? Oh my goodness...that's kind of bizarre,,,because everyone knows sutra is inferior to tantra....Even the Lama from the Onion Region knows that... That seems like an odd reason to be a Rongzom fan :/ Even non-Buddhists know that tantra is superior to sutra...to say nothing of all Tibetan Buddhist schools. Strange.................Because you say (correctly) to study Rongzom, not Tsongkhapa (the Onion Region Lama) - but the reason you give is illogical - because Tsongkhapa also views tantra as superior...so you logic is lacking I would have thought? Wouldn't it be better to say that Rongzom is an omniscient one of the Dzogchen lineage, who teaches and knows all the Dzogchen tantras and upadeshas,- indeed, the complete 9 vehicles - whereas Tsongkhapa only knows and teachers the Anuttarayoga tantras. That would be a far more logical reason to like Rongzom over Tsongkhapa. I mean, the whole point of the 9 vehicles of the Nyingma is that it's a graded level of study and realisation, from Hinayana, Bodhisattvayana, tantra, Dzogchen....Even adherents of Yogacara dont necessarily say that their view is superior to tantra - and as for Madhyamaka, Madhyamaka is not separate from Dzogchen or tantra - [Prasangika-]Madhyamaka is the actual philosophy behind Dzogchen itself..In terms of dialectical proof and disproof, or valid cognition and its opposite, Prasangika-Madhyamaka is the tool of choice of the Atiyogin. That is why, in his Establishing Appearances as Divine - a sublime Nyingma text - Rongzom discusses at length and in extreme detail all the finer points of Madhyamaka philosophy..

Ahh...so, to continue the off-topic dialogue...Where did you acquire your Rongzom fan-ship from...? I expect you can study Tibetan or something? As for me, my fan-ship of Rongzom comes from: 1. Mipham's continued glorification of him and Longchen; 2. Rongzom, Longchenpa and Mipham being the "3 omniscient ones" 3. The two texts I mentioned. Again, sorry for the long off-topic digression. But after all, it's not everyday you meet a fellow Rongzom fan! And one with the perspicacious insight to also ward people off Onion Lama as well!

I know nothing about the life of Ramayana Mahapandita, or whatever his name is, but since he is not a Buddhist, far less a Dzogchen practitioner or guru/lama, it would be strange if he did have anything in common with the members of the Dzogchen lineage of masters, let alone any other Buddhist masters. By the bye, off the topic, RongzomFan, which teachings by Rongzom Mahapandita have you got access to? As far as I know, only the two have made their way into English: the well-known Establishing Appearances as Divine, and the slightly less-known commentary to the Nama-samgiti, which was brought out by a small, independent publisher about a year ago. Are there any other teachings by Rongzom that are available in English? PS again I apologise for wandering off the topic.

Err...this is my very first day on this forum. I never heard of Taobums, or Tibetan Ice, or anything of the like, except by accident, by searching ("googgoggling" I believe the plebs - of which I am one - term it) "Marvelous Primordial State". It came up with this extraordinary claim by our friend here...that Ramana Maharshi was most probably an enlightened Buddha and the equal of the Buddha and Padmasambhava. Not getting worked up, but such an outlandish thing...did tend to elicit a strong response.

Tibetan Ice, you post is shockingly off the mark. Of course Ramana Maharshi is not a Dzogchen master - that's as obvious as pointing out the blueness of the sky. I was shocked at your attempts to frame Ramana Maharshi as a Dzogchen master...Everybody knows that the Dzogchen masters are people like Padmasambhava, Garab Dorje, Vimalamitra, Shrisimha, Dhanasamskrta, Buddhaguhya, Vairocana, Jnanasutra, Rongzom, Longchenpa, Mipham, Dudjom and so forth. Where, o where, in these lineages is there mention of Ramana Maharshi? It's completely and utterly, tragically off the mark to start claiming that Ramana Maharshi or any random spiritual teacher is a Dzogchen master. Really amazing that you would think this. I suppose Jesus and Mohammad might also be Dzogchen masters? Malcolm is absolutely correct to admonish Adriano Clemente for inserting non-Buddhist teachings in his translation. Bravo Malcolm. Well said. People who think that any random spiritual teacher is or might be a Dzogchen master merely because of...your reasoning, which is totally incorrect - are way off. A Dzogchen master is just another name for a Buddha, a perfectly enlightened being, like the Buddha, or Longchenpa, or Padmasambhava. The lineages of enlightened buddhas have never included non-Buddhist teachers, and they never will..! Just how you propose to work Ramana Maharshi into the lineage of Buddhas is really puzzling - and it is also impossible and will not and cannot happen. Has Ramana Maharshi ever himself claimed to be a Buddha? I don't think so...has he ever taught Dzogchen? Or Mahayana? Or Prasangika-Madhyamaka or any Buddhist philosophy whatsoever? If he was never involved with any Buddhist teaching, how in the world could he be a Buddha? This is nothing but one of those really bizarre things that uninformed people dream up.

hello...found the site by random when searching up on something. Have already encountered some...novel, shall we say, or better, eye-opening, views on certain things.