Simple_Jack

You gather the two accumulations in order to make progress towards buddhahood. As long as you don't rule yourself out of the equation, remember you're contributing just as much negativity with every thought that you put to the keyboard, thus creating non-virtuous karma for yourself.

http://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?p=247111#p247111 It is really simple — you find an awakened teacher, you respectfully ask for teachings. You apply them. If you have extra time in your life, then you also study a lot. If you don't, you mainly focus on practice. But Dharma is not something that is "worked out" — it is essentially a tradition grounded in hearing. You cannot learn Dharma from books. It must be heard. Then you apply it. This is the only proper way to approach the Dharma. http://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?p=247115#p247115 Again, those of us who are in the Dharma must emphasize to interested newcomers the essential import of engaging in the three prajñās of hearing, reflection and cultivation. There is no prajñā identified as "reading". In order to hear the Dharma one must go to a qualified kalayānamitra [lit. good friend], a virtuous mentor, and begin the process of hearing the Dharma. As I stated above, Dharma is a Aural Lineage. The Aural, or Hearing lineage, is much more important, relatively speaking, than the texts. The texts must be understood on the basis of the hearing the Dharma taught by a qualified teacher. Without that essential act of hearing the Dharma taught by a living, qualified teacher, one's understanding of the Dharma is sure to be bent askew right from the start. Once we decide to rely on a qualified mentor, then we will be able to know when our own or other's understanding of the Dharma is correct or incorrect. ~ Loppon Namdrol

There are quoted explanations by Rinpoches if you click on the links within the page.

It should be emphasized that gathering the two accumulations is needed in order to achieve the body of light i.e. buddhahood: http://www.rigpawiki.org/index.php?title=Two_accumulations

.

.

.

.

.

.

The majority of discussion on TTB's would fall under the category of religious belief.

.

http://www.rigpawiki.org/index.php?title=1002_buddhas_of_this_Fortunate_Aeon http://www.rigpawiki.org/index.php?title=Supreme_nirmanakaya: "A supreme nirmanakaya (Skt. uttamanirmāṇakāya; Wyl. mchog gi sprul sku) is a buddha who takes birth into the world, displays the twelve deeds of a buddha, and passes into parinirvana at the end of his life. Buddha Kashyapa, Buddha Shakyamuni and the Six Munis are examples of supreme nirmanakaya buddhas."

Not applicable in the context of Vajrayana narratives: http://www.rigpawiki.org/index.php?title=Garab_Dorje "Garab Dorje (Skt. Prahevajra/Pramodavajra/Surativajra[1]; Tib. དགའ་རབ་རྡོ་རྗེ་, Wyl. dga' rab rdo rje) — the lineage of Dzogchen, unbroken to the present day, is traced from the dharmakaya Samantabhadra (‘Kuntuzangpo’ in Tibetan) to the sambhogakaya, represented by the five buddha families and Vajrasattva, and then to the first human master Garab Dorje..." Why do you think there are anniversaries of Garab Dorje and Padmasambhava in the DC? In both the Hinayana and Mahayana canons, there are previous buddhas, with Shakyamuni declaring that he was not the first buddha to turn the wheel of Dharma after it had died out, while also speaking of his prediction of anuttarasamyaksambodhi by Dipankara Buddha in a previous life. In Mahayana, it gets a little complicated, since Shakyamuni is considered a supreme nirmanakaya, who had achieved anuttarasamyaksambodhi countless eons ago; in Vajrayana he's considered an emanation of Vajradhara (who in turn is considered an emanation of Samantabhadra). http://www.dhammawiki.com/index.php?title=28_Buddhas

That's correct GP and in that process, together, we shall embrace our religiosity.

Did you like that? I was making fun of the nature of internet forums, and the narcissistic prevalence in which people present the infallibility of their views and perceptions, which shapes their experience of the world around them, that are designated as an undisputed quality of people and things.

In due time, they will come to accept my statements, for others to know of my genius, my statements must be seen by as wide an audience as possible, my statements will be heard, and the others will come to understand the truth.

I don't think the credit can go to DB for this one, Thomas Cleary uses this as his English translation of bodhisattva, in his translation of the Avatamsaka Sutra Ok, but if it's the person that qualifies as "religious", then what about the role of faith or devotion in one's chosen path? If an individual has faith in a particular sort of mystical teaching that has many followers worldwide, is devoted to this mystical teaching, but likens this to being "spiritual", not having the "blind faith" of typical religious devotees, how does this not qualify as being "religious"? Society would definitely consider this religious devotion.

.

This is representative of the neuroticism I was alluding to in my post, which is particularly redundant and arbitrary, seeing as how [Zen] Buddhism has a textual corpus, religious hierarchical orders, etc. In my mind, I don't see a need to invent such a dichotomy, especially considering that mainstream society would regard the majority of discussion that takes place on TTB's, as belonging to the realm of religion.

.

.

.

.

.