RongzomFan

Dharmakaya is not a thing. It is the realization of emptiness.

Ok forget about the word Brahma. I will use the western word "demiurge."

Brahma has always been a metaphor for this whole issue. Thats the point of Brahma. He is not an actual being.

There is no difference between your views on Allah and Brahma.

If a Creator creates cause and effect, he is a changing being like Brahma, the demiurge of Dharma.

You just said "Creator created cause and effect."

Then Allah is a changing being.

Allah is Uncaused. Something that in uncaused / unchanging is beyond cause and effect

There are only 3 options, all of which debunk a Creator: 1. Big Bang has no cause. Obviously, there is no Creator here. 2. The Big Bang has causes, which in itself has causes, which in itself has causes etc. There is no place for a Creator in infinite regression of cause and effect. 3. Creator is beyond cause and effect. If Creator is beyond cause and effect, he would have no way of interacting with our physics.

Someone else posted it another thread a few months ago.

Yes Street Fighter is inseperable from your Sufism:

Yidams come from the visions of lhun grub. Even total western oriented people see a seated Buddha and deities in yab-yum. These things are not made by the mind.

To understand everything is illusion, you only need Madhyamaka reasoning. Logic. http://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=48&t=6185&sid=66bfdf5114f9a42b5804d855d6dac9e4&start=220#p74244 First, if an appearance is an existent, can it arise from another existent? Or does it arise from a non-existent? As for the first, an existent does not arise from another existent because the arising of something existent is a contradiction in terms; and the arising of an existent from a non-existent is impossible. To address this, Nāḡrjuna writes: An existent does not arise from an existent; an existent does not arise from a non-existent; a non-existent does arise from an existent; a non-existent does not arise from a non-existent — where then can there be an instance of arising? If the arising of existents is not established, the arising of appearances is not established. If arising is not established, remaining is not established, and likewise, perishing is not established. If the three, arising, remaining and perishing, are not established, then there is no reason to accept the charge of annihilationism since I never suggested that there was an existent entity that could perish. All we are left with is empty appearances: they are not real because no existence, etc., can be ascertained regarding them; they are not unreal since they appear. All we can say about them is that they arise in dependence. - Loppon Namdrol

I don't understand ralis' vague criticisms. Something about e-prime, something about transmission (which I addressed), and of course extreme prejudice against Buddhism.

Gatito dug himself into the bigger hole. Extravagant claims about Vedanta have been debunked, and are still being debunked, by South Asian academics.

bump for ralis

Adi Shankara was a theist who believed in gods: http://books.google.com/books?id=0z02cZe8PU8C&pg=PA313&dq=krishna+a+sourcebook+He+describes+Krishna+as+an+avatara+of+Vishnu/Narayana,+indeed&hl=en&sa=X&ei=JVGhUsCSOc_lsATU04DwAw&ved=0CDQQuwUwAA#v=onepage&q=krishna%20a%20sourcebook%20He%20describes%20Krishna%20as%20an%20avatara%20of%20Vishnu%2FNarayana%2C%20indeed&f=false

Vedanta was debunked in academia by both western and Indian sides: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarvepalli_Radhakrishnan#Criticism_and_context

LMAO, still nothing

Why don't you man up, and actually state your criticism??

You refuse to state your criticism. I've asked you countless times. You probably still won't

Since Gatito refuses to tell us what he knows about, I will refer to this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarvepalli_Radhakrishnan#Criticism_and_context Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan made all sorts of weird claims about Vedanta, which South Asian scholars even to this day love tearing apart.

Not a special judgement, but no unfair lynching either.

God damn it Gatito Are you going to tell us what you know??

bump for a response