RongzomFan

Are you claiming to be knowledgeable in 5 indian languages? Thats a pretty big claim.

Nope none of those. Considering I already told you my state and caste, I thought you would be better at this.

I can understand Telugu just fine. Just not written.

Considering I never made any such claim, what language do you think that is?

Even the 'real deal' had stuff about Jesus as an ascended master. How much more New Age can you get?

http://books.google.com/books?id=udZWwms7rgwC&pg=PA5&dq=kiss+of+the+yogini++This+is+the+basis+for+what+is+termed&hl=en&sa=X&ei=5xNWUbzqBIXV0gG9woEw&ved=0CDQQuwUwAA#v=onepage&q=kiss%20of%20the%20yogini%20%20This%20is%20the%20basis%20for%20what%20is%20termed&f=false

Exactly. This is Hindi. Hindi people of the north follow a reformed Hinduism based off European orientalism.

Please give me a break. Like I said, you don't follow real Hinduism.

Oh wait there is no such thing as Hinduism.

This is referring to outer phenomena like a gold and dirt. Internally, you need to distinguish between rigpa and sems.

I'm not militant. Just proud of Indian culture.

This is because clueless Buddhists critique Hindus all the time. Go onto any Buddhist forum and read discussions about "atman". By the way, atman is just sanskrit for identity, no matter the philosophy.

I'm not against Hinduism. Indeed I sent out a mass email regarding "Invading the Sacred" including a link to the youtube video. No Hindu gives a shit. And the local library wouldn't even accept a donation of the book.

Go to a museum with a huge collection of Indian artwork. Look at the dates of the Buddhist pieces. Then look at the dates of the Hindu pieces.

Have you heard of distinguishing rigpa from sems? Have you heard of the mirror/crystal ball metaphor where you distinguish reflections from the mirror?

I view generic Hinduism as a subset of Buddhism. Since its a subset, you can view it as either same or different. The Indian deity Hevajra holding all sorts of Indian deities in his various hands is a good visual summarization.

I laughed at the ridiculousness of the statement.

I literally LOL'd at that one.

You are like Mr. T

Even I think you are pushing it.

Says the man who follows the orientalist version of Hinduism. Atleast I was raised in real Hinduism. Keep citing Babaji's kriya yoga, a New Age tradition unknown by any Hindu I know.

"........ have been particularly susceptible to simplistic presentations of a unified Hinduism. They have had to offer reified and dogmatic responses to their Christian and Jewish peers." http://www.huffingtonpost.com/deepak-sarma/should-hindus-study-hinduism_b_1083986.html

Because its the original major religion of India. Rajiv Malhotra's favorite scholar says Indian royalty did pujas to the supreme universal deity Buddha, before they shifted to Vaisnava and Saiva rationales. http://books.google.com/books?id=RvuDlhpvvHwC&pg=PA12&dq=Buddhist+Vishnu+before+the+eighth+century,+the+Buddha+was+accorded&hl=en&sa=X&ei=41IpUeT_B7G80QHSkoEY&ved=0CC0Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=Buddhist%20Vishnu%20before%20the%20eighth%20century%2C%20the%20Buddha%20was%20accorded&f=true

You are free to argue with konchog uma. But citing Wikipedia for Buddhist info is a joke. Especially unreferenced sentences. Especially an article tagged at the top. And especially declaring "Wrong again" on top of all that.

No