The importance of Bodhichitta and compassion

[Seeker of Wisdom]

SOrry for this little derail, but I hoped that someone could point some articles/books/etc (or posts)... which can clarify (easily) the opinions on Tsongkhapa's madness. Thank you

Some scholars think that his presentation of madhyamika slanted towards nihilism.

 

I'm not sure how, if true, that makes him crazy and invalidates everything he ever said; nor do I understand how it could even be possible to talk about madhyamika perfectly given the imperfections of language.

 

Speaking from my (very) limited knowledge of lamrim, I think that, even if Tsongkhapa's view of madhyamika was a pile of rubbish, his practical teachings are still a fine path we can follow to get to the right results, and hence to right view.

Edited November 20, 2013 by Seeker of Tao

[RongzomFan]

How can the Gelugpas be a cult based on Shugden, if the founder of the Gelugpa didn't worship Shugden?

 

Why do Christians insert all sorts of new stuff like Christmas on Dec 25?

Edited November 20, 2013 by RongzomFan

[RongzomFan]

his practical teachings are still a fine path we can follow to get to the right results

 

Tsongkhapa also innovated the path, with his illusory body stuff.

Edited November 20, 2013 by RongzomFan

[Aetherous]

"You cannot find absolute bodhichitta without relative bodhichitta, even if you look for one hundred eons."

- Khenchen Palden Rinpoche. The Dark Red Amulet: Oral Instructions on the Practice of Vajrakilaya (p. 5). Kindle Edition.

[C T]

"When you realize the suchness of your mind,

the Buddha will not linger among mere words,

so the highest yoga is attained right now.

 

For the unworthy ones of inferior fortunes,

even were the hidden revealed, they would not understand,

just as someone wishing for a precious jewel

will not gain it from polishing a piece of wood."

 

(from the Tantra of the All-Creating King)

[Simple_Jack]

http://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=77&t=14785&start=60:

 

jeeprs wrote: So, as I said, what is a better translation for 'Bodhicitta' than 'Compassion'?

 

Malcolm wrote: In the Mahāyāna context, "the intent to awaken".

 

jeeprs wrote: I think it is perfectly sound to translate bodhicitta as 'compassion'. It is often translated that way.

Macolm wrote: It is a) unsound and no one translates bodhicitta as compassion (karuna).

Why is it unsound? Every person who has bodhicitta has compassion, but not every person who has compassion also has bodhicitta.

 

Malcolm wrote: ... because while the term bodhicitta is only defined in Mahāyāna, there are different grades of bodhicitta, the intent to awaken as an arhat, and so on. It is only the intent to awaken as a buddha for the benefit of all sentient beings that we describe as the true Mahāyāna bodhicitta, but there are in fact different intents to awaken, not all of which spring from compassion.

 

The āryapañcaviṃśatisāhasrikāprajñāpāramitopadeśaśāstrābhisamayālaṃkāravṛtti states, for example:

"The bodhisattva mahāsattva who wishes to overwhelm the cittopāda of the pratyekabuddha (who rejoices in patience) trains in the perfection of wisdom".

The term "generation of bodhicitta" is a gloss for the term cittopāda, "generation of the intent". Intent for what? Intent for one of the three kinds of awakening, i.e., arhat, pratyekabuddha, or samyaksambuddha.

There are many examples like this in the literature of the Abhisamayālaṃkāra which extensively discusses the differences in the creation of the various "intents" to awaken...

...All three, arhats, pratyekabuddhas and buddhas arises from an intent to awaken [bodhicitta]. Much of Mahāyāna polemical discourse around this is to make sure that Bodhisattvas do not fall into the bodhicitta of an arhat or pratyekabuddha. All three attain bodhi, therefore, it is a misconception to say that those who aspire to arhatship and pratyekabuddhahood have no bodhicitta, but it must be recognized that these bodhicittas are considered inferior bodhicittas.