RongzomFan
-
Content count
4,693 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
8
Everything posted by RongzomFan
-
Explain how they were biased? They gave you a fair shot. When you are proven wrong repeatedly you lose you temper, and then you get banned. I was warned about you by Pero before even Dharma Wheel existed.
-
I am waiting for Pero to join in. I sent him a PM.
-
In my opinion, I have yet to see Jax post something factually accurate. In my opinion, he is starting to rip off Malcolm a little bit, ever since Dharma Wheel.
-
Lets contrast the mods on this forum, with the mods elsewhere. http://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=48&t=8879&p=110644#p110620
-
Not really. I could cite Malcolm or Michael Comans. I would rather have Advaita Vedanta than many other Buddhist philosophies.
-
Its the fad for New Age writers.
-
D.O. fulfills the same purpose as Brahman though. Both get you nonarising/illusion. The philosophies are similar.
-
Stefos, now I understand why you are always undermining Buddhism: http://thetaobums.com/topic/27363-new-member/?p=411227
-
How much weird stuff do you see in complete darkness?
RongzomFan replied to Owledge's topic in General Discussion
Nevermind, I see that you meant closed eyes. -
How much weird stuff do you see in complete darkness?
RongzomFan replied to Owledge's topic in General Discussion
I saw a floating woman's face not too long ago. I see some weird stuff every once in a while. According to the New Age explanation, this is some sort of clairvoyance. -
-
If you ask a knowledgeable doctor, they will say that humans have more genetic errors than other species.
-
I'll stick to the technical definition of trekcho. You either recognize unfabricated presence (ma bcos shes pa skad cig ma) versus the conceptualizing mind. Or you don't End of thread.
-
Some people in this thread conceive direct introduction as some sort of magical shaktipat. Noone is expected to recognize their nature at direct introduction. This is a huge misconception that people have. What you are supposed to do is go home, reflect and deploy the teachings until you recognize your own primordial nature. For example in DC, you do semdzin, rushan, etc. until you recognize your own primordial nature. If you have a major empowerment like a deity, you practice that until you recognize your own primordial nature.
-
Any public teaching where the talk is about own's nature, is a direct introduction. Major empowerments are indeed the functional equivalent of direct introduction. The teachings often have minimum practice requirements.
-
According to the Indian masters Atisha, Kamalashila etc., the only Buddhist philosophy that is definitive is Madhyamaka And thats as simple as Advaita. Madhyamaka: Nonarising/illusion because dependently originated phenomenon do not arise in the first place. Advaita Vedanta : Nonarising/illusion since Brahman never displays as anything other than Brahman.
-
This is news to me. Maybe you meant that both Upanishads and Buddhism have a common origin in the Sramana religion, whose closest living descendant is Jainism.
-
What I'm saying is that "Buddhism" is the advanced PhD degree above "Hinduism", and the division between the two as separate religions is recent thing.
-
Does your picture keep changing color?
-
ok
-
Its all about freedom from grasping thoughts.
-
Its not like you stop thinking. Thinking and breath are tied together. As long as you breathe, you think.
-
What I'm saying is that many Brahmins etc. went to these universities that you cited to get an advanced education, as "Buddhist" philosophy is admittedly complicated. Again I have to reiterate, that even Madhyamaka texts have what are now considered "Hindu" deities. Dwai, are you familiar with this work? http://www.ambedkar.org/Tirupati/
-
This is my understanding. Maybe you can correct it if I am wrong. "Hinduism" was like a high school degree. "Buddhism" was like PhD. They were not different religions per se.
-
Most Hindus never heard of Shankara.
