RongzomFan Posted February 2, 2014 Read Rongzom http://www.amazon.com/Establishing-Appearances-Divine-Reasoning-Madhyamaka/dp/1559394196/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1391364555&sr=1-1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jeff Posted February 2, 2014 Why not just describe it in your own words? 7 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jetsun Posted February 2, 2014 Read Rongzom http://www.amazon.com/Establishing-Appearances-Divine-Reasoning-Madhyamaka/dp/1559394196/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1391364555&sr=1-1 No its not, read www.google.com Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RongzomFan Posted February 2, 2014 No its not, read www.google.com https://www.google.com/ Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RongzomFan Posted February 2, 2014 Why not just describe it in your own words? Sutra, like Madhyamaka, is slightly realist (Buddhist definition) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ralis Posted February 2, 2014 Sutra, like Madhyamaka, is slightly realist (Buddhist definition) Slightly? You must do better than that. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RongzomFan Posted February 2, 2014 Tantra downplays the notion of causal efficacy. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ralis Posted February 2, 2014 Tantra downplays the notion of causal efficacy. Why not expand on that. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Simple_Jack Posted February 2, 2014 Slightly? You must do better than that. I recommend reading this thread for more info: http://thetaobums.com/topic/33574-substance-dualism-in-buddhadharma/ Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RongzomFan Posted February 2, 2014 Why not expand on that. Its called interlibrary loan Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BaguaKicksAss Posted February 2, 2014 What is the diff between the two? Cliff notes newbie version? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RongzomFan Posted February 2, 2014 (edited) What is the diff between the two? Cliff notes newbie version? Tantra is based on tantras and dohas. Sutra is based on sutras Edited February 2, 2014 by RongzomFan Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BaguaKicksAss Posted February 2, 2014 (edited) Tantra is based on tantras and dohas. Sutra is based on sutras So mantras vs reading of books/phrases? (I just want to know what the basic definitions are, so I didn't go further than wiki . I forgot to ask for "in english" . Edited February 2, 2014 by BaguaKicksAss Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RongzomFan Posted February 2, 2014 Tantra is based on tantras and dohas, which are classes of literature Sutra is based on sutras, which is another class of literature 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ralis Posted February 2, 2014 The problem with the Buddhist apologist's is that only dogma and doctrine are posted here. No personal experience! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RongzomFan Posted February 2, 2014 The problem with the Buddhist apologist's is that only dogma and doctrine are posted here. No personal experience! http://thetaobums.com/topic/32153-mystical-buddhist-readings/ Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BaguaKicksAss Posted February 2, 2014 Tantra is based on tantras and dohas, which are classes of literature Sutra is based on sutras, which is another class of literature Is it sort of like meditate in type A. way vs meditate in type B sort of way? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ralis Posted February 2, 2014 http://thetaobums.com/topic/32153-mystical-buddhist-readings/ None of your personal experience in that thread. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RongzomFan Posted February 2, 2014 None of your personal experience in that thread. Noone wants to read my personal experience. Just like ChNN tells people, 'don't email me about your dreams people'. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BaguaKicksAss Posted February 2, 2014 Noone wants to read my personal experience. Just like ChNN tells people, 'don't email me about your dreams people'. Actually I would. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Simple_Jack Posted February 3, 2014 The problem with the Buddhist apologist's is that only dogma and doctrine are posted here. No personal experience! Meditational experiences (Tib. nyam) are temporary, ultimately they're delusions. Noone wants to read my personal experience. Just like ChNN tells people, 'don't email me about your dreams people'. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RongzomFan Posted February 3, 2014 Is it sort of like meditate in type A. way vs meditate in type B sort of way? Tantra has all sorts of features that are not in sutra. Like channels in the body, what happens during death etc. I am sure the list is pretty long. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Simple_Jack Posted February 3, 2014 Meditational experiences (Tib. nyam) are temporary, ultimately they're delusions. Mahayana 101: The basis, path, result, are completely equivalent to an illusion. Looking at this perspective in Dzogchen terms: http://thetaobums.com/topic/33574-substance-dualism-in-buddhadharma/ You have to understand that all of this explanation of cosmic cycles is really intended to be brought down to the level of the individual's life cycle in terms of the four bardos: The bardo of death == destruction of the universe up to the two higher form realms The bardo of dharmatā == the arising of the sound, light and rays of the basis The bardo of becoming == non-recognition of the basis The natural bardo of this life == the appearance of samsara and nirvana It is an explanation for practice. ~ Loppon Malcolm Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RongzomFan Posted February 3, 2014 None of your personal experience in that thread. You think I'm more important that autobiographies by Dudjom Lingpa, Jigme Lingpa etc.? Wow I'm flattered ralis 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
C T Posted February 3, 2014 (edited) There are no superior or inferior paths (in the Buddhist tradition). Due to the varying degrees in mental capabilities/potentialities of students, unfortunately the above had to come into existence. But its simply expedient ~ Means nought. Its quite pointless to give the most superior teaching to one of average mental capacity. Likewise, its going to be a let-down to train intelligent students using more time-consuming teachings, like sutras/sastras, for example. Typically, there will always be comparative tendencies, which tells on the person actually bothering to exert effort to make such comparisons. Distractions, all of it. edit to add: In actual settings, depending on the students' aims, those who wish to pursue a path where teaching Dharma is a priority, then all the levels are equally vital to learn. And those who go on to Geshe level (usually the brightest minds) spend more time on mastering the basic teachings, because they realize most of their students belong to the middling group of people. Edited February 3, 2014 by C T 4 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
