Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
JeroenLuminous beings are we, not this crude matterNetherlandsVeteran
@IdleChater said:
And it's not what you, or I choose to call them. They are Deities.
I seem to take these things somewhat less seriously, and perhaps from a broader perspective, than you, and it is fine that there should be personal differences.
I don’t have a great deal of respect for any spiritual path that manipulates its followers by promoting lesser spirits at will to be fully enlightened deities, as the Gelug leadership did with Dorje Shugden. When a key pillar of the faith is undermined in such a way, it calls into question many related things.
It is of course totally up to you what teachings you choose to absorb. But I find that the fewer delusions I carry with me, the happier I am, and I know how easy it is for humans to lie, dream and confabulate.
@SuraShine said:
From what I have read @Jeroen perhaps you should steer clear of Tibetan Buddhism
My personal preference ranges between Zen and the Thai Forest Tradition. I still regularly go back to the Complete Teachings of Ajahn Chah and find wisdom there.
@Jeroen said:
I don’t have a great deal of respect for any spiritual path that manipulates its followers by promoting lesser spirits at will to be fully enlightened deities, as the Gelug leadership did with Dorje Shugden.
Hardly.
Dharmapalas represent a Buddha in a sambhogokaya body. So, they don't have to be promoted to anything.
You are actively demoting one, so that doesn't make you any different from the Gelug leaders you disparage
When a key pillar of the faith is undermined
What "key pillar" are you referring to?
It is of course totally up to you what teachings you choose to absorb. But I find that the fewer delusions I carry with me, the happier I am, and I know how easy it is for humans to lie, dream and confabulate.
Are you saying that what teachings I follow is delusion?
@SuraShine said:
From what I have read @Jeroen perhaps you should steer clear of Tibetan Buddhism
My personal preference ranges between Zen and the Thai Forest Tradition. I still regularly go back to the Complete Teachings of Ajahn Chah and find wisdom there.
Then talk about that, and steer clear of talking about things you know little/nothing about. Unless it's a legit question.
I seem to take these things somewhat less seriously, and perhaps from a broader perspective
Broder perspective? I don't think so. If anything, it may the opposite
0
JeroenLuminous beings are we, not this crude matterNetherlandsVeteran
@IdleChater said:
Then talk about that, and steer clear of talking about things you know little/nothing about. Unless it's a legit question.
I’ll talk about what I like, thanks. It’s not usually done on this board to tell people what they should or should not talk about. It’s not exactly gentlemanly.
You seem to have an issue with what’s on the Dorje Shugden Wikipedia pages, I suggest you take it up with them, although I have to say it tallies with what I heard from other sources.
@Jeroen said:
I’ll talk about what I like, thanks.
I thought you would respond like that. I wanted to come back and rephrase, but the grace period expired.
It’s not usually done on this board to tell people what they should or should not talk about. It’s not exactly gentlemanly.
And you have my apology.
Let me put this in a different and hopefully kinder way.
It is unwise to speak of things you have little or no real knowledge of, especially in a public forum like this one. Someone with a greater knowledge will come along and make you look foolish. We don't want that, do we?
You seem to have an issue with what’s on the Dorje Shugden Wikipedia pages
DS sites are often too biased. Even Wikipedia. DS practice is so clouded in controversy, it's nearly impossible to figure it out. The DS wiki is edited by DS practitioners. DS is a hot mess, If you want to talk about Dharmapalas, it might be best to look into others. Mahakhala might be a better subject of study. IN any event, I don't worry about DS lore. Being a Kagyu, I would gravitate towards my lineage protector. DS is mostly a Gelug thing. Especially the controversy.
1
JeroenLuminous beings are we, not this crude matterNetherlandsVeteran
edited March 6
@IdleChater said:
Someone with a greater knowledge will come along and make you look foolish. We don't want that, do we?
Isn’t it inevitable on the internet, though? If you only talk about things which you are knowledgeable about then you rather limit the range of discourse, it’s the whole “bubble” thing. Many interesting discussions might never happen. And do we really care so much about our public masks and the esteem of others?
I admire @lobsters approach to humorous “crazy wisdom”, if everyone had a bit of that the world would be a better place. Right speech is all very well, but it can be taken too far, I don’t think humour, sarcasm, irony and even a little kind-hearted ribbing are bad.
Thanks for the advice on which Dharmapala to study, when next I turn my thoughts seriously to Tibetan Buddhism I will take a look. Seriously, thanks.
“When you go out into the woods, and you look at trees, you see all these different trees. And some of them are bent, and some of them are straight, and some of them are evergreens, and some of them are whatever. And you look at the tree and you allow it. You see why it is the way it is. You sort of understand that it didn’t get enough light, and so it turned that way. And you don’t get all emotional about it. You just allow it. You appreciate the tree.
The minute you get near humans, you lose all that. And you are constantly saying ‘You are too this, or I’m too this.’ That judgment mind comes in. And so I practice turning people into trees. Which means appreciating them just the way they are.”
― Ram Dass
I admire @lobsters approach to humorous “crazy wisdom”, if everyone had a bit of that the world would be a better place. Right speech is all very well, but it can be taken too far, I don’t think humour, sarcasm, irony and even a little kind-hearted ribbing are bad.
I don't. Not really a fan.
I find Lobster entertaining at times, I'm sure he is quite harmless and means well, but I have a nagging sense that it's merely clever affectation. Funny at times, yes. And he is very clever. Wise? Crazy? Nope.
One of my dreams is to sit at the table next to him and listen to him in a live conversation. I thank that would be amazing.
Want Crazy Wisdom? Study Chogyam Trungpa's life and teachings. He was crazy and his teaching were amazing. He wrote a book about it.
Comments
I seem to take these things somewhat less seriously, and perhaps from a broader perspective, than you, and it is fine that there should be personal differences.
I don’t have a great deal of respect for any spiritual path that manipulates its followers by promoting lesser spirits at will to be fully enlightened deities, as the Gelug leadership did with Dorje Shugden. When a key pillar of the faith is undermined in such a way, it calls into question many related things.
It is of course totally up to you what teachings you choose to absorb. But I find that the fewer delusions I carry with me, the happier I am, and I know how easy it is for humans to lie, dream and confabulate.
My personal preference ranges between Zen and the Thai Forest Tradition. I still regularly go back to the Complete Teachings of Ajahn Chah and find wisdom there.
Hardly.
Dharmapalas represent a Buddha in a sambhogokaya body. So, they don't have to be promoted to anything.
You are actively demoting one, so that doesn't make you any different from the Gelug leaders you disparage
What "key pillar" are you referring to?
Are you saying that what teachings I follow is delusion?
Then talk about that, and steer clear of talking about things you know little/nothing about. Unless it's a legit question.
Broder perspective? I don't think so. If anything, it may the opposite
I’ll talk about what I like, thanks. It’s not usually done on this board to tell people what they should or should not talk about. It’s not exactly gentlemanly.
You seem to have an issue with what’s on the Dorje Shugden Wikipedia pages, I suggest you take it up with them, although I have to say it tallies with what I heard from other sources.
I thought you would respond like that. I wanted to come back and rephrase, but the grace period expired.
And you have my apology.
Let me put this in a different and hopefully kinder way.
It is unwise to speak of things you have little or no real knowledge of, especially in a public forum like this one. Someone with a greater knowledge will come along and make you look foolish. We don't want that, do we?
DS sites are often too biased. Even Wikipedia. DS practice is so clouded in controversy, it's nearly impossible to figure it out. The DS wiki is edited by DS practitioners. DS is a hot mess, If you want to talk about Dharmapalas, it might be best to look into others. Mahakhala might be a better subject of study. IN any event, I don't worry about DS lore. Being a Kagyu, I would gravitate towards my lineage protector. DS is mostly a Gelug thing. Especially the controversy.
Isn’t it inevitable on the internet, though? If you only talk about things which you are knowledgeable about then you rather limit the range of discourse, it’s the whole “bubble” thing. Many interesting discussions might never happen. And do we really care so much about our public masks and the esteem of others?
I admire @lobsters approach to humorous “crazy wisdom”, if everyone had a bit of that the world would be a better place. Right speech is all very well, but it can be taken too far, I don’t think humour, sarcasm, irony and even a little kind-hearted ribbing are bad.
Thanks for the advice on which Dharmapala to study, when next I turn my thoughts seriously to Tibetan Buddhism I will take a look. Seriously, thanks.
“When you go out into the woods, and you look at trees, you see all these different trees. And some of them are bent, and some of them are straight, and some of them are evergreens, and some of them are whatever. And you look at the tree and you allow it. You see why it is the way it is. You sort of understand that it didn’t get enough light, and so it turned that way. And you don’t get all emotional about it. You just allow it. You appreciate the tree.
The minute you get near humans, you lose all that. And you are constantly saying ‘You are too this, or I’m too this.’ That judgment mind comes in. And so I practice turning people into trees. Which means appreciating them just the way they are.”
― Ram Dass
I don't. Not really a fan.
I find Lobster entertaining at times, I'm sure he is quite harmless and means well, but I have a nagging sense that it's merely clever affectation. Funny at times, yes. And he is very clever. Wise? Crazy? Nope.
One of my dreams is to sit at the table next to him and listen to him in a live conversation. I thank that would be amazing.
Want Crazy Wisdom? Study Chogyam Trungpa's life and teachings. He was crazy and his teaching were amazing. He wrote a book about it.
Here is a little light reading from the Bodhi of wisdom
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lotus_Sutra