Could someone explain the Buddhist belief system to me?

[Apech]

Atman = identity.

 

Thats how Karl Brunnholzl translates it in "Center of the Sunlit Sky" for just one example.

 

P.S. Studying Buddhism or Hinduism on Wikipedia is a joke. No wonder you are confused.

 

Not a joke if the definitions are correct. I believe these sources are being used because they are easily available and it does not indicate they are the subject of study in themselves. I think accusing others of being confused in not appropriate in these circumstances.

[GrandmasterP]

Pure Land is deistic to all intents and purposes.

Nothing wrong with that at all.

[GrandmasterP]

 

 

 

Every other path besides Buddhism is 'realist'.

.....................

Not necessarily..

Taoism

Theosophy

Secular Spiritualism

To name but three non realist paths if I understand you to be using realist in the sense of non duality.

Sure to be several more and it does really depend on which Buddhism you use as a comparator, there being so many to choose amongst.

[RongzomFan]

Pure Land is deistic to all intents and purposes.

Nothing wrong with that at all.

 

Buddhas are not Creators.

 

And maybe this is ad hominem, but Pure Lands are merely bardo experiences according to a Sakya Loppon.

Edited November 4, 2012 by alwayson

[RongzomFan]

.....................

Not necessarily..

Taoism

Theosophy

Secular Spiritualism

 

I'm pretty sure, all three of those claim things exist.

Edited November 4, 2012 by alwayson

[RongzomFan]

He means it in the sense of eternalism

 

I mean it in the sense of existence. One cannot claim anything exists.

[GrandmasterP]

Yep, this iPad exists at the moment. I just posted this message on it and it's still right here on my lap next to the cat.

cat definitely exists. Try telling her otherwise and she'd likely have your eye out. Not a very nice cat.

[RongzomFan]

Yep, this iPad exists at the moment. I just posted this message on it and it's still right here on my lap next to the cat.

cat definitely exists. Try telling her otherwise and she'd likely have your eye out. Not a very nice cat.

 

All that stuff can happen in a dream. Research the "vajra sliver" reasoning.

[GrandmasterP]

Bit like that finger pointing at the moon, it also indicates the death of irony .

[RongzomFan]

Vajra Sliver Reasoning on why one cannot claim anything exists:

 

http://books.google.com/books?id=8zeh8VAFCvAC&pg=PA238&dq=vajra+is+indestructible+Center+of+the+Sunlit+sky&hl=en&sa=X&ei=6_iWUKuCGMb40gHN5IHQBQ&ved=0CCwQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false

[GrandmasterP]

I love this stuff. Trouble is some prat has convened a faculty meeting at 9 am tomorrow and it's a three-line whip so I have to show my face, whether said face truly exists or not.

You want illusory?

Try sitting for two hours or more with thirty academics some of them labouring under the illusion that meetings actually accomplish something worthwhile.

G'night all.

:-(

[XieJia]

funny thing

 

existence, non existence.

 

they should introduce a new word in English

meaning neither of the two.

[RongzomFan]

funny thing

 

existence, non existence.

 

they should introduce a new word in English

meaning neither of the two.

 

There is a word already:

 

Illusory / illusion

[C T]

Buddhas are not Creators.

 

Pure Lands are merely bardo experiences according to a Sakya Loppon.

Indeed they are, when identified and solidified into a 'reality'. As with all things arising from mind.

[DreamBliss]

As I understand it it's not so much that it does or does not exist, it's more about that the object is more than the mere object. Mr. Hanh uses the illustration of a table. The table is really at a molecular level just atoms orbiting around. If you squeezed them all together they'd just be a tiny fraction of the table's original size, and look nothing like the table. As well the table isn't just its molecules. It is sun, air, earth, the people who made the table, the people who made the tools that made the table, etc. ad infinitum. If you take any of the non-table elements away from the table it would no longer exist. I thought about this, how someone would argue that the table would still be built, by a different tool or person or tree, but it would not be the same table at all. The table we are talking about is what it is based off its unique configuration of non-table elements. Any other table made in its place would be a completely different table even if it looked the same. So if the table's existance depends on changable elements, then it is not real in Buddhist thought, because, to paraphrase, "It is only real if it never changes."

 

Anyhow that will either clarify or confuse, I hope for the former not the latter Thanks everyone for all your posts! @ the poster talking about leaving one's faith... I have already said it but I will repeat, I ran into a dead-end with my faith. Maybe there are branches off the Christian tree I could follow, like Chistian Mysticsm. But in the end it comes down to the fact that I don't believe the Bible is accurate and I want nothing to do with a God that consigns people to Heaven or Hell. A God that basically gives me free will then punishes me for using it and not following His chosen faith. Such a narrow-minded entity to my mind could not be God, could not be someone who conceptualized the designs of this planet and all the life on it, as well as the rest of Creation. Too many people project into the Astral Planes and bring back similar reports that are nothing like the afterlife described by the Bible for me to keep those old beliefs. Too many questions... Here;s another... In the Bible there is an uncrossable gulf between Heaven and Hell. Yet in Job what do we see? Satan has come before God, crossing an uncrossable gulf, to basically get God's permission to persecute Job, for not good reason at all, and God grants it! Yeah, that kind of God is no God for me. But I mean no offense to any Christians or returning Christians here. If this faith is what draws you go for it. As for me I will test the Magical, Buddhist, Taoist and Yogic paths for now, drawing from each whatever it is I need to learn to become more aware of what is real, I.E. what is unchanging in Creation. So I guess that'll make me what, a former Christian Mystical Shaman Taoist/Buddhist/Yogic Magician? Maybe I have to invent a catchy label for myself, since everyone loves labels so much...

- DreamBliss

[Jeff]

Hi Dreambliss,

 

I completely understand your perspective on Christianity. Opening yourself to other traditions is very helpful. As you study other traditions, I think you will find a deeper understanding in the words of Jesus. So much has been lost/obscured by the "institutions". Jesus says nothing about a "judging old man" in the Gospels, only a "spirit" and "love".

 

If you don't mind, a couple of suggestions... Read the first chapter of gospel of John (King James version). It is a quick and consise overview about Jesus coming to teach us all to be "sons of God". Also, read the Gospel of Thomas. It will help point the way.

 

Upon exploration, you may find that Christian Mysticism is remarkably similar to Tibetan Dzogchen. In the end, there is only one Primoridal State (or being one with God).

 

[GrandmasterP]

Spot on Jeff. All this stuff is embedded in every faith pathway you just need to know where and how to look for it. Buddhists don't have a monopoly on non duality,. Philokalia ( sayings of the desert fathers) for example marvellous stuff. Thing that bugs me slightly about some of our 'convert to Buddhism' cousins is their over dependence on the written word, kit ( they do love a bit of kit do born again Buddhists) and endless bleddy rituals. Born Buddhists I've come across more or less take their pathway for granted and don't make such a song and dance about Sutra this and canon that as these rather intense bods who take to it as a hobby cum lifestyle tend to do.

Whatever path gets you up the mountain is as good as any other path that does the same job.

[C T]

Spot on Jeff. All this stuff is embedded in every faith pathway you just need to know where and how to look for it. Buddhists don't have a monopoly on non duality,. Philokalia ( sayings of the desert fathers) for example marvellous stuff. Thing that bugs me slightly about some of our 'convert to Buddhism' cousins is their over dependence on the written word, kit ( they do love a bit of kit do born again Buddhists) and endless bleddy rituals. Born Buddhists I've come across more or less take their pathway for granted and don't make such a song and dance about Sutra this and canon that as these rather intense bods who take to it as a hobby cum lifestyle tend to do.

Whatever path gets you up the mountain is as good as any other path that does the same job.

 

Dont know which is heavier... your axe or the grindstone, mr Grandmaster.

 

Btw, your claim that born Buddhists take their path for granted... is, for the most part, an inaccurate assessment. Understandable tho, given that you're always passing judgement on your fellow Western buddhist practitioners.

 

observation from a born Buddhist.

[GrandmasterP]

Grindstone.

:-)

has to be heavier or axe stays blunt. A whetsone now, that can be lighter, quite portable too ; whetstones.

People who are comfortable in their religious skin tend not to make a fuss about said skin.

Those who really need to convince themselves shout loudest and converts are always the most zealous on any path.

We have New Kadampas and WBO (or Whatever hey are called this year) Brit Buddhist 'monks n nuns' locally.

Brother they are a sorry crew to behold and the turnover is phenomenal. r've only lived her six years but both centres ( we go to heir cafes) churn devotees. It's a phase some folk go through, as you well know CT.

[Simple_Jack]

Hi Dreambliss,

 

I completely understand your perspective on Christianity. Opening yourself to other traditions is very helpful. As you study other traditions, I think you will find a deeper understanding in the words of Jesus. So much has been lost/obscured by the "institutions". Jesus says nothing about a "judging old man" in the Gospels, only a "spirit" and "love".

 

If you don't mind, a couple of suggestions... Read the first chapter of gospel of John (King James version). It is a quick and consise overview about Jesus coming to teach us all to be "sons of God". Also, read the Gospel of Thomas. It will help point the way.

 

Upon exploration, you may find that Christian Mysticism is remarkably similar to Tibetan Dzogchen. In the end, there is only one Primoridal State (or being one with God).

 

Except that dzogchen tantras go to great lengths to refute eternalist schools of thought. Here's one example...

 

http://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=66&t=9750&p=122573&hilit=Shankaracarya#p122573:

 

"Malcolm: If you are going to assert that the intention of Dzogchen and Advaita are the same, then you need to provide side by side citations.

 

There is no point of course, because, for example, the Rig pa rang shar specifically refutes Advaita, naming Shankaracarya by name in the 25th chapter.

 

So what I am telling you is that even if you try to present citations from both Advaita and Dzogchen to try and illustrate their commonality, it will be easy to show how you are mistaken.

 

Sadly, many people make the same mistake you are making and come up with a system that is called "ra ma lug" in Tibetan i.e. a system that is neither a goat nor a sheep. How do they do this? By relying on their own intellectual contrivances."

 

P.S. Malcolm is a Loppon

[GrandmasterP]

Spot on Jeff. All this stuff is embedded in every faith pathway you just need to know where and how to look for it. Buddhists don't have a monopoly on non duality,. Philokalia ( sayings of the desert fathers) for example marvellous stuff. Thing that bugs me slightly about some of our 'convert to Buddhism' cousins is their over dependence on the written word, kit ( they do love a bit of kit do born again Buddhists) and endless bleddy rituals. Born Buddhists I've come across more or less take their pathway for granted and don't make such a song and dance about Sutra this and canon that as these rather intense bods who take to it as a hobby cum lifestyle tend to do.

Whatever path gets you up the mountain is as good as any other path that does the same job.

...

 

Not familiar with Philokalia then eh Simple-Jack?

If you choose to hold 1-2-1 converations perhaps with those you can comprehend; then possibly you'd be better doing so via PM.

 

The Pureland jhanas are vipassana/samatha hybrids, and are only available to those advanced practitioners who have attained to the level of anagami or arahat. As such, they are useful landmarks of progress; a person who can access either of the Pureland jhanas is, by definition, at least an anagami. Traditionally, these states are referred to as part of the suddhavasa or "pure abodes."

....

Have you the first idea about Pure Land cultivation or does your knowledge stem from a virtual community via t'internet old chum?

The above hybridisation would tend towards the latter.

Edited November 5, 2012 by GrandmasterP

[Jeff]

Except that dzogchen tantras go to great lengths to refute eternalist schools of thought. Here's one example...

 

http://www.dharmawhe...racarya#p122573:

 

"Malcolm: If you are going to assert that the intention of Dzogchen and Advaita are the same, then you need to provide side by side citations.

 

There is no point of course, because, for example, the Rig pa rang shar specifically refutes Advaita, naming Shankaracarya by name in the 25th chapter.

 

So what I am telling you is that even if you try to present citations from both Advaita and Dzogchen to try and illustrate their commonality, it will be easy to show how you are mistaken.

 

Sadly, many people make the same mistake you are making and come up with a system that is called "ra ma lug" in Tibetan i.e. a system that is neither a goat nor a sheep. How do they do this? By relying on their own intellectual contrivances."

 

P.S. Malcolm is a Loppon

 

 

I have had a couple discussions with Malcolm (and I am sure that he would agree with you ). But, the "primordial state" is what is. Tibetan Dzogchen is not the only tradition of "direct transmission". In certain Gnostic Christian traditions, it is called the "Thunder path".

 

[GrandmasterP]

'Way of the Wild Goose' in some others.

[GrandmasterP]

Like trying to reason with Jehovah's Witnesses engaging with some on here..

Fruitless.

Edited November 5, 2012 by GrandmasterP

[RongzomFan]

Did Malcolm say that they were exclusively bardo experiences?

 

I don't know about exclusively. But Malcolm did say it more than once.

 

 

Also, if you read Dudjom Lingpa's biography: He talks of visiting different pure lands and meeting dakas and dakinis, since he was born (being that he was a direct rebirth of Terton Rigdzin Dudul Dorje of Kathok Gon and was born with spiritual powers.)

 

I actually brought this specific example up to Malcolm, and he said I was being too conceptual about these things.

 

I know in general Malcolm says that one's own wisdom takes the form of deities and dakinis. He has been saying that repeatedly since Esangha.

Edited November 5, 2012 by alwayson