ralis

I guess that is the way fanatical Buddhists see others outside their purview. Just keep your little clique/herd intact and by all means exclude anyone with a contrary experience.

Precisely! When I was on retreat, and practicing a lot of sky gazing, I was only able to achieve the natural state when I was completely relaxed. That kind of relaxation occurs in exceptional circumstances. Most of the practitioners that practice togal are in caves that are isolated and a small group lends support.

Maras? Are you referring to the relative of a guinea pig or gangs?

That is why I am not on the DW forum. I don't think you guys understand the nature of the criticism given your extreme attachment to a parental system.

Exactly. Persons claiming their teachers are realized use no independent criteria to make such an assessment. The criteria are provided by the power holders.

Quoting the Dharma Wheel is preposterous. What about real historical texts? I doubt you have read much academic history given that statement. Of course that gives you plenty of latitude in any discussion. Stop insulting my intelligence.

Are you being facetious? If not, I will take that as a serious statement. Dharma Wheel can't be relied upon for academic historical references.

The public sentiment would not be in agreement with you. It reflects badly on Buddhism and such behavior that I discussed is no excuse! Your statement lacks any compassion for the victims, but is more along the lines of excusing the behavior.

Neuroses is a term used in the venue of psychoanalysis and you banter it about while hiding behind your system without taking personal responsibility for your actions. Unless you are a licensed professional, then stop the use of such terms. When you term someone neurotic, you are making a medical diagnosis. Your judgmental terms are meant to demean the opposition.

Many are unaware of the problems that I have pointed out. There are others on this forum besides you.

The terms are judgmental in the context in which you framed them and you alone are responsible for using them. So don't blame and hide behind the system, but take responsibility for your own actions.

Just wanted to start this thread and see what interesting responses are posted. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/02/psychology-book_n_1315990.html#s747885&title=Inhumane_or_simply Extreme right wing Nazi Hermann Goering provides details as to how crowds are manipulated by abusive right wing propaganda and fear. Is this any different than what the Republicans are using in their divisive political discourse against progressives?

Thanks for your views on this serious problem. Some just wish to brush it off and deny it. As far as Trungpa is concerned many see him as realized. That is my experience, but for me to not point out the problems with this system, would be irresponsible on my part. We are not living in a feudalistic culture in which a theocracy is the form of government nor are we living in the 'dark ages'. Seeing monks running around in strange looking hats and robes is an artifact from a bygone era.

@ asunthatneversets I disagree. To say that applying that any given practice i.e, upāya will somehow guide one to realization is blind faith. This is putting one's life in the hands of a parent priest. The Lama priest hierarchy has always been determined by a high or low birth. Tulku's supposedly of a higher birth are reincarnate and take their previous seats by default which monopolizes power,. Common monks are classified of lower birth and are given by their parents at a very young age to the monastic system. This comes off as preachy and judgmental. Several points are apparent. If one doesn't understand the Buddhist model, then one has very little faculties of comprehension, which by extension of your statement, would apply to the inability to comprehend any model. Furthermore, to admonish one to accept the guru for what they are misses the point that no one can read the mind of another and precludes critical questioning, but is based on blind faith. Your use of specific judgmental terms 'neuroses', 'irrationalities' and 'the darkest heart of delusion' again defines your belief system as absolutely correct while denoting outsiders that are not in agreement with your world view, in a derogatory manner. Are you an academic? Studied Buddhism in college? A dilettante?

I have heard this argument before and by extension, one could justify any behavior of the authoritarian hierarchy in question. I have known for almost 30 years about the pedophilia in the Tibetan monasteries. Recently, journalists et al., have investigated this problem and found very good evidence to support these allegations. How about the so called enlightened behavior of Trungpa and his successor Osel Rangdrol spreading AIDS to many persons in Boulder in the name of enlightened activity. Realization is not about abject passivity, rejecting mores, switching off critical thinking or accepting replacement parents. And not accepting that it is just 'an appearance'.

Are you criticizing my experience as being not valid? Lesser than yours? You don't even know me. Your post is vague and evasive as usual.

I had the same experiences or what you term realizations when I was very young. The very same experiences when I met Norbu. He just verified it.

My first retreat with Norbu was direct and to the point. Had nothing to do with verbal discourse, but the opening was energetic, most likely as a result of a relaxed state that I had never experienced until that point. Very difficult to explain. Norbu talked extensively in regards to energy. Before I met him, I saw a photo of him and the same energetic opening happened.

Anyone not buying your philosophy is deluded? Prove it!

I am not confused whatsoever! Definitive is stating an absolute truth which I don't agree with. You in no way can prove a definitive view within the bounds of your logic except with circular logic.

Abstractions of what? What I mean by universal is the totality of all form and energy that is not in form. Indian mysticism did not arise in a vacuum, but was influenced by forces outside of India parts of what is now Eastern Europe. Sanskrit is Indo-European.

From my study of Buddhism, there is a pretense of being universal which encompasses all phenomena, imagination and so forth, but in reality the parameters are carefully defined and reductionist. E.g. the monastic system, vows etc. Not very flexible.

Grammar can be culturally biased, whereas mathematics are not. I stand by my statement which was based on studying this period. When persons or writers of texts are rigidly defining their philosophical beliefs such as what Buddhism is replete with, then my statement stands.

Listed here are a number of scholarly resources on the Axial Age. http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss_1?url=search-alias%3Dstripbooks&field-keywords=religions%20of%20the%20axial%20age&sprefix=religions+of+the+ax%2Cstripbooks&rh=i%3Astripbooks%2Ck%3Areligions%20of%20the%20axial%20age

For academia to create a science called economics is bogus. Look at what Milton Friedman and the 'Chicago School of Economics' and their bogus 'supply side theory' has done to this economy.