RongzomFan

sloppy, it is clear you have little experience with women. you don't even read what pie is telling you.

I read both sides. Pie definitely wins the argument over Sloppy

Read my signature

Do you have a source for this?

The main problem with Prahlad Jani is the fact that his doctor also validated Hira Manek, which we now KNOW is a fraud. So I think the doctor himself is a fraud. Where does that leave Prahlad Jani? I have no clue...

I think there are some people in this thread who are not aware that "Tibetan buddhism" was practiced in INDIA for hundreds of years. All the tantric deities, like Heruka etc. are Indian. For pete's sake, all the commonly used root tantric texts in "Tibetan Buddhism" are completely Indian in every single way including linguistically, culturally, and geographically. And of course all the major heroes like Padmasambhava, Nagarjuna, Virupa, Tilopa, Naropa, Aryadeva Shantideva etc. are Indian. Even in Tibetan buddhist artwork, have you guys not seen brown skinned Indians? We know there was little influence from "Bon" on Tibetan buddhism, yet this false rumor is quite persistent. Bon did not exist before buddhism came in.

A lot of you are not mentioning the fact that Advaita was developed FROM BUDDHISM. So there is bound to be some similarity. Even the classical upanishads post-date and were influenced by buddhism. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandukya_Upanishad

This forum is pretty fancy, except for the fact you can't delete posts? Unless I am missing the option to do this?

I sent yet another PM

I sent you another PM.

It is not simple, because you are using Thusness' vocabulary, which I am not familiar with. You have been Thusness' lackey for so long, that you have convinced yourself you are using common terminology. Thusness' vocabulary, such as "I AM", does seem to be a hodgepodge of Michael Landford "The Most Rapid and Direct Means to Eternal Bliss" and some other neo-Advaitin/Zen stuff. I sent you a PM, but I got an error message, so let me know if you got it.

The problem is I could address this, but not on the open forum. I'll send you a PM.

Yes this guy on the internet who MAKES UP HIS OWN TEACHINGS is neo-Advaitin/Zen. Neo-Advaita/Zen is just a term for modern clueless nondualists like Adyashanti. Don't take the label literally. I can't even address this, because I don't subscribe to the idiotic internet teachings of Thusness. My friend, don't you realize you have been duped?

Milarepa had Nyingma lamas. So Mahamudra is a derived teaching. I have a source for this information as well. But either way, Thusness is not a Mahamudra teacher. Did I miss something? When did this internet fellow's teachings get elevated to the same level as Mahamudra and Zen? Neo-advaitin/zen is a label applied to all sorts of today's nondualists like Tolle, Adyashanti etc. Thats all I meant by it. I didn't invent the label. I am sure I read it somewhere in a book. The view of the highest teachings are SPECIFICALLY beyond bhumis. Yes, even for those who do not instantly become Buddhas. Ok, if you and Thusness say so, it must be true.

Except these stages are just another invention of another neo-Zen/Advaitin. Every neo-Zen/Advaitin, has his own schema. If you look at the highest buddhist teachings, you are "simply" told to distinguigh between clarity and the conceptual mind.

There is a clarity that is self-discerning. It is distinguished from the conceptual mind. However this clarity does not really have an intrinsic existence. It is also different than being "present", if you are present at the level of the conceptual mind.

This guy seems to be real, as opposed to Hira Manek. Apparently there was a second study on Prahlad Jani that just finished recently as reported by MSN, BBC, Foxnews recently etc.

From the viewpoint of Mahayana, there are two different goals. One is becoming an arhat. The other is becoming a buddha. A Buddha STILL IS a bodhisattva. A bodhisattva is ANYONE who has taken mahayana refuge. Despite popular belief, a bodhisattva tries to achieve Buddhahood AS FAST AS POSSIBLE for the sake of infinite beings.

What other realization is there besides realizing that there is a clarity/space that is both distinguished from the conceptual mind and also utterly beyond it? This conceptual mind especially includes "I see" and "I hear".

Let me get this straight...even after numerous objections by multiple people, you honestly believe either A ) The Buddha spoke english OR B ) Your bad english translation was sanctioned by Shakyanumi Buddha You must be friends with dwai and alchemicalwizard This is the best thread on taobums of all time!

Buddha spoke english? Do you know the definition of the word "quote"?

I guess you did not understand that different english translations of the Bhagavad Gita, for example, have totally different meanings.

You CANNOT use english translations for debate. Do you realize how many DIFFERENT english translations of the Bhagavad Gita there are?

Even if thats true, how does it influence development of Vajrayana in India? All these Vajrayana deities like Heruka etc. were practiced in India for hundreds of years, only later being transmitted to Tibet. "Tibetan" buddhism is simply the only living continuation of Indian Vajrayana. Where does Bon come in?

You do not think I have read the book? Since you read AYP forum, this link is specially for you http://www.aypsite.org/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=6032 The date of the thread is Jul 27 2009. Conclusion: You should apologize for wasting everyone's time and for being untruthful regarding your language skills.