Pero

Real, as in aliens. I was more or less joking about it hehe. And actually come to think of it, I think I confused something, it's been a long time since I read about it. Ok. Do you mean that they're not anymore? I think this just depends on whether you're talking about inner or outer tantra. Also, maybe it's disorienting to call them dieties, when they're actually Buddhas. And there are plenty of Buddhist temples with Buddha statues around. Something like that I guess. I meant more like self-generating as the diety like in Vajrayana. I don't know since I don't have the capacity to look in the past or other realms. I don't think this is particulary relevant to ones practice though. They're just as real as you and I (but with yidams it's a little different). But that doesn't mean I have to believe the newspapers if they come out with a story that you're an astronaut who landed on the moon in a secret mission last week. True or not, it would be irrelevant to my having discussions with you about Hinduism and Buddhism. This being so, why not just have fun in life to the fullest. Drugs, sex and rock 'n' roll.

I don't think those are Buddhist ideas.

I think the outcome of that conversation was that it's better to believe in rebirth. But then I could be confusing this with something else. We are talking about Buddhism. If someone says he's a Buddhist but doesn't believe in rebirth, that pretty much amounts to nihilism. Because when you die, there is nothing. Even if it weren't nihilism, not believing in rebirth would make parts of Buddhism really strange, like uhm, trying to end rebirth... And if you believe you'll go to heaven or hell, or something else, that is irrelevant, since that's not a Buddhist belief in the first place.

ROFL!!! :lol: But no, those are just stories. Hindu alien gods were for real though. I'm just half joking about this really. From a long time ago I have some vague memory of reading about this. In general the gods from ancient civilations could be aliens. Heck, if we could go back in time with our tech it's not unlikely we wouldn't be considered gods ourselves. BTW, off topic question. Do you have transformation into a diety in any part of Hinduism?

Well I can't speak for others, but for myself they're just stories. If you don't take them to be exact depiction of things that happened it doesn't change one's practice IMO. Personally I like to think that Hindu gods were actually aliens. How is it evident if you say "We can come up with flowery explanations, symbolic allegories, details of how yidam is a manifestation of shunyata and so on"?

He was? Where? Not believing in rebirth pretty much makes one a nihilist. If there's nothing after death, then why not just end your life right now, you will have complete peace in death. You could say that the point of Buddhism is to stop rebirth, if there's no rebirth what is the point of Buddhism?

Hm well Harsha I never said I don't agree about incompatibility. But saying that they're incompatible or that only Vajrayana leads to supreme enlightenment, does not neccessarily mean you don't respect other religions to me. Although maybe it depends on what kind of practitioner you are. For myself it's better to respect. Ok will read later, am at work. Actually yes it is, that is what Buddhism claims. Buddhism is a supramundane vehicle, the rest are mundane. I agree.

Not sure what you mean here. Not at all. I have my own gripes with some things sometimes, I just don't usually complain about it. Yes I know this position of Namdrol's and don't agree with it. Was a little surprised when he said it (on E-Sangha, not where you're talking about, wasn't around hehe). The E-Sangha TOS is strict, perhaps too much, but when I occasionally look at the other larger Buddhist forums... Well I think it's better that way.

Yeah it's like when you go to a christian church the priest is so biased, he doesn't speak about anything other than christianity. I mean seriously, the nerve some people have right?

Dwai I really don't understand this. Of course Buddhism is superior, from Buddhisms point of view. I don't see what is so strange here.

Oh please don't be ridiculous. I don't think Sean is making much if any money at all from this forum (more likely the opposite). I don't think the topic is "taboo", but I think that for relatively normal people it's clear that sex with prepubescent children is wrong. And it's one thing to play "doctor" when you're a kid, and another to play doctor with kids when you're an adult.

Yeah, 16 is supposedly the best age (and not 6...). I remember that was the age I started to actually experiment with qigong and meditation and not just read about it. Things were happening. I think I also read in one of Yang Jwing Mings books that from 16-21 or so is the best age for practicing, but the problem is it's difficult to keep constant practice (also know from experience haha).

In which case it would no longer be pedophilia but something else.

Well at least it's clear now that Lucifer approaching Eve millenias ago was incredibly fortunate.

Dude, WTF?!?!?! I thought it wasn't possible but you just reached a higher level on the weirdness scale.

LOL...... BTW, just to repeat a note, "living Buddha" is simply someone who is considered a tulku. So the Dalai Lama is also a living Buddha, which makes this attempt at marketing a little funny.

Is this a joke too or for real?

Why because he haven't tried to commit suicide? Because we don't condone it? That's ridiculous. Well obviously it's not a good way since you're still here with us.

Madhyamika is the middle way free from extremes.

Not many maybe, but some prominent ones like Tulku Urgyen.

Well one thing we have forgotten than in Buddhism itself there are different views which don't agree with each other. So coincidentally I just read on E-Sangha, that shentong position is more or less the same as that of advaita. I think Rex (hi) already mentioned something about shentong in the begining but it was overlooked.

Yes I was (except the really long posts ). Actually I read something that made me sure, but what that is I won't say because then we might have a discussion I don't want to have. DO is not something that is superimposed on emptiness. Ah you see, in Buddhism, there is not even "Is". Emptiness is not. Anyway, it doesn't matter. I read in one of Dzongsar Khyentse Rinpoche's books that when a certain Buddhist master (whose name I have forgetten) died, Atisha cried and said that there were only two people in the whole world who knew the difference between Hinduism and Buddhism, and now one of them has died.

........ But you said nothing that would actually show that.