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.
Take away the concept of postmortem rebirth and the concept of karma as a judicial corrective force fails. But rebirth from moment to moment is verifiable by anyone here and now, and karma as the evolution of stable patterns of thought behavior and belief is still incredibly useful.
Many suttas and parts of suttas must be disregarded or given wholly new meaning because they contradict the so called "Core Buddhism".
So what? Why should they be accorded primacy over reason and personal experience? For that matter, why should the teachings of the Buddha himself be given such primacy? (Not the same question, because the scriptures were written long after his death, in a language which he didn't speak and about which there is great contemporary philological uncertainty. As Dhatu's philological observations clearly demonstrate, the role of postmortem rebirth in Gautama's own understanding of his teachings is not at all clear.) Gautama taught a technique which anyone can try for themselves. What's the harm in people trying it, and taking what works for them?
Even Nirvana is stripped to merely resemble death (yes I mean death in a rebirthless sense). So what is then the use of attaining Nirvana when a sufficient dose of Morfin or a fastjump in front of a train will get you there in no time? I just do not get it.
This is a misunderstanding. Nirvana is the peace which is always there, even in the midst of the storms of anger, despair, etc.
To be fair obviously many people have found inspiration without the concept of rebirth to cultivate. Which I find admireable because I could not do it. I'd go for the Yacht and the beachparties until death do us part... Ah to H with this I am hitting the sauna for some hedonistic pass time acting as if there is no rebirth.
There is nothing inherently wrong with Yachts, beach parties, saunas or other hedonistic pastimes...
Talks about the source of the idea of Alayavijnana being from the Pali.
If so, the source is wrong. The Pali defines only six kinds of consciousness.
You didn't even read it, how lazy... so any discussion in this is mute.
I have never seen any discourse where the Buddha said the anusaya or latent tendencies come from previous lives.
Regards
So you limit everything you know about reality to the limits of what is specifically said or your interpretation of what is specifically said in the Pali Suttas? You have no expanding insight of your own experience of the teaching?
Because everything is already luminous and free, empty of inherent bondage, and is reborn in every new moment in a new condition based upon the previous of variant intentions and ideations, chaos has its order.
Vajra
What you have said above makes no sense. The idea of "rebirth" or being "reborn" implies permanence.
I explained this idea about rebirth is wrong. Rebirth just reveals that the elements as well as consciousness have roots that are beyond the physical dimension. There is a web of causes and conditions that run through many dimensions, the 5 gross sense perception of yourself is merely one level of yourself. When that level of yourself breaks away, the mind stream of inter-acting conditions continues to manifest itself as another dimension of being, or otherwise there are many possibilities that are available as explained by the Buddha dependent upon the persons state of mind at death. For example, even though the body falls asleep, and appears dead, the mind continues to manifest a body of experience on a mental plane. Rebirth is somewhat like this, except more real than a dream.
The only permanent is impermanence. You will have to have an inner paradigm shift concerning your understanding regarding this, no amount of words seem to penetrate what you hold so dearly to your heart as truth. Through contemplation, the only way that circumstances can exist the way they do in this physical world is to realize that there are other dimensions of existence, equally as impermanent, and inter-dependent. This is why Quantum Physicists are creating theories surrounding a wider model of dimensionality in order to explain phenomena.
Allow me to quote something for you, which explains why the Buddha himself used the word "birth" in his Dependent Origination rather than the word "rebirth".
Please note, quote comes from an Asian rather than a Westerner.
As for your opinion EVERYTHING is already luminous and free, empty of inherent bondage, this is just Mahayana evangelism. It is the same as the Christian evangelism of "we are all pure because Jesus loves & forgives us".
I suggest you work with human beings or minds that suffer to learn about reality.
I'm beginning to see that it's pointless to talk with you, as you exist on an entirely different dimension of understanding and everything will be used to justify these mistaken views.
But, everything is free due to the fact of dependent origination. This is not evangelism and has nothing to do with an entity that loves us. This has to do with the fact that nothing is abiding.
I know plenty about suffering and the minds of suffering through direct experience.
...the rebirth of the same person does not occur. But the birth of different things is happening all the time. It happens often and continuously, but there is no rebirth. There is no such thing, in reality, as rebirth or reincarnation.
That there is one person, one "I" or "you," getting reborn is what reincarnation is all about. If all is anattā, there is nothing to get reborn.
There is birth, birth, birth, of course. This is obvious. There is birth happening all the time, but it is never the same person being born a second time. Every birth is new. So there is birth, endlessly, constantly, but we will not call it "rebirth" or "reincarnation."
While we have the chance, let's spill all the beans– there isn't much time left – there's no "person" or "being" (satva). What we call a person is merely a momentary grouping that does not last. It does not have any independent reality and is merely a stream or process of cause and effect, which is called the "dependent origination of `no person.'
Rebirth has nothing to do with being the same person, it's more a continuation of effects, that become causes for a new person in another realm or in another body in this dimension of experience, simply because the elements and consciousness do not only have this level of existence. This particular person will not exist again, but this stream of impressions will outlast this body or a person, and if one awakens awareness of the connections beyond merely the physical dimension, then one can experience directly this connectivity.
would understand most religious groups and many non-religious groups are acting to remedy human suffering in the world.
Yes, on different levels. Buddhism goes to the root of it within the mind with clearer methodology and philosophy as a kind of self clarifying psychology.
In other words, just because the beginning cannot be identified, just as the beginning of the universe cannot be identified, this does not necessary imply a "personal samsara" has existed since the beginning of time.
Kind regards
There is no beginning of time.
Rats there goes the entire Anicca doctrine down the drain.
Alright everybody not to worry we still got the Anatta and Dukkha doctrines left...
The Buddha, who was fully enlightened, understood it is "the mind" that suffers. The Buddha understood there is suffering, suffering exits but it is mind that suffers.
We know that and the mind is the person, the mind as well does not inherently exist, it is empty, just as the thoughts are. There is merely the appearance of all this, there is no inherent suffering. Suffering is not an ultimate truth, otherwise the 8 fold path wouldn't work.
In Mahayana we are always going on about the mind and it's layers. You do project a lot, your self is in the way of your ability to read other perspectives of the dharma. It's like speaking to someone with tunnel vision about peripheral vision, it's not possible, the capacity is not there.
But you keep posting about the "true self" and other forms of "self".
I never stated anything about an ultimate self. Not once. I speak of a self in a relative sense, from the self of a samsarin to the self of a Buddha, it's all relative, not ultimate. You really have a hard time understanding what I write, no wonder you don't understand Mahayana.
Ummm...there is no loving-kindness mentioned or practised in Theravada?
In fact, at the same dhamma-centre, the year before, a Theravadin monk provided a talk on loving-kindness, where, one man was so moved, he was in tears & offered a big donation.
Be careful about believing in the propaganda we may hear.
:buck:
He meant the idea of attaining liberation for the sake of others.
Take away the concept of postmortem rebirth and the concept of karma as a judicial corrective force fails.
I never intended to do that. I do not know any buddhist that does that. Of course the self arises from moment to moment. Thats how the illusion of self is established. Thats how the illusion of self continues post mortem.
But rebirth from moment to moment is verifiable by anyone here and now, and karma as the evolution of stable patterns of thought behavior and belief is still incredibly useful.
Absolutly but (and here comes the vital point) Karma without the concept of post mortem rebirth is not consistent with the suttas.
Many suttas and parts of suttas must be disregarded or given wholly new meaning because they contradict the so called "Core Buddhism".
So what? Why should they be accorded primacy over reason and personal experience?
I ask you the same. Why should I deny my experiences of rebirth and its place in understanding the preserved words of the Buddha and the Dhamma?
For that matter, why should the teachings of the Buddha himself be given such primacy? (Not the same question, because the scriptures were written long after his death, in a language which he didn't speak and about which there is great contemporary philological uncertainty. As Dhatu's philological observations clearly demonstrate, the role of postmortem rebirth in Gautama's own understanding of his teachings is not at all clear.)
I would go easy on putting faith in Dhatus observations and translation of the suttas. They have been faulty at a number of occasions. I have checked. Plus DD:s reasoning/methodology when translating them is not entirely sound. And bollox that postmortem rebirth in Gautama's teaching is not clear as I have pointed out to both DD and Valtiel.
Gautama taught a technique which anyone can try for themselves. What's the harm in people trying it, and taking what works for them?
Thinking the Dhamma is a smorgasboard to take from it the parts you like is not good approach I feel. I think DD would agree with me.
Even Nirvana is stripped to merely resemble death (yes I mean death in a rebirthless sense). So what is then the use of attaining Nirvana when a sufficient dose of Morfin or a fastjump in front of a train will get you there in no time? I just do not get it.
This is a misunderstanding. Nirvana is the peace which is always there, even in the midst of the storms of anger, despair, etc.
I can not argue. There are as many views on Nirvana as there are Buddhists. But that is not my understanding on Nibbana. Truth is we will know when we get there. I hope we all do.
To be fair obviously many people have found inspiration without the concept of rebirth to cultivate. Which I find admireable because I could not do it. I'd go for the Yacht and the beachparties until death do us part... Ah to H with this I am hitting the sauna for some hedonistic pass time acting as if there is no rebirth.
There is nothing inherently wrong with Yachts, beach parties, saunas or other hedonistic pastimes...
Yes, on different levels. Buddhism goes to the root of it within the mind with clearer methodology and philosophy as a kind of self clarifying psychology.
Vajradude
Your mind seems so stuck on evangelising propaganda that you even preach to the converted.
Rebirth has nothing to do with being the same person, it's more a continuation of effects, that become causes for a new person in another realm or in another body in this dimension of experience...
Vajrafriend
In the suttas, it is explicity taught the same person is reborn.
My opinion is your idiosyncratic opinion destroys or rips out the heart of the Buddhist rebirth teachings because, in upholding your pernicious view, self-interest for a better rebirth ceases.
Following your pernicious view, it would appear the motivation to do good for a better rebirth can only arise from altruistic intention, which is, for the most part, ridiculous.
Why would most people bother to do good if another person is to be the recipient of one's good deeds?
I can only sincerely say your views, however popular, are the antithesis of the Buddha's teachings on rebirth, which he taught to ordinary people so those people would refrain from self-harm & the harm of others.
The Buddha taught at least two levels of dhamma for the varying dispositions of his followers. The Buddha never ever taught empty (sunnata) dhammas are reborn.
For ordinary Buddhist people to uphold their morality so they avoid rebirth in a hell, ghost or animal realm, they must believe they themselves will be reborn.
Please try to keep in mind the Lord Buddha was fully enlightened. However, our average Johnny Come Lately Guru is generally not fully enlightened.
Then Ven. Sariputta and Ven. Ananda, having given this instruction to Anathapindika the householder, got up from their seats and left. Then, not long after they left, Anathapindika the householder died and reappeared in the Tusita heaven.
Then Anathapindika the deva's son, in the far extreme of the night, his extreme radiance lighting up the entirety of Jeta's Grove, went to the Blessed One and, on arrival, bowed down to him and stood to one side.
Ven. Ananda said to the Blessed One, "Lord, that must have been Anathapindika the deva's son. Anathapindika the householder had supreme confidence in Ven. Sariputta."
"Very good, Ananda. Very good, to the extent that you have deduced what can be arrived at through logic. That was Anathapindika the deva's son, and no one else."
That is what the Blessed One said. Gratified, Ven. Ananda delighted in the Blessed One's words.
He meant the idea of attaining liberation for the sake of others.
Which others?
Was the whole of Tibet liberated or were most of Tibet slave labourers for the ruling elite & the "monks"?
The relative fact that there are others, suffering beings. The majority of human beings, including Buddhists are ignorant fools. Those that truly understand the dharma are few and far between, those that act accordingly even 80 percent of the time are even fewer and those that have attained Buddhahood are even fewer, but Tibet produced thousands of Buddhas over the past 1200 or so years out of billions of beings. You choose to focus on the wrong things and make your view accordingly. This is one of the examples of ignorance that is practiced by a vast majority of Buddhists, no matter the tradition... I call it, negavision. Where you only see the dark side and you miss all the glorious beauty. The same problem exists in Theravada monasteries, where monks take advantage of their position and power. These are not examples that I choose to focus on.
How many "others" have you liberated?
Since the Tibetan gurus have come to the West, why is not the whole of the West liberated?
When I attend Vajrayana centres, why are not all the members liberated?
People who make comments like the one quoted above have an epidermic understanding of reality reflective of very little insight into the nature of things.
Is this Mahayana rhetoric any different than Christianity?
The Tibetans could not even save themselves from China. In that case, how are these people excepted to be able to save others?
Even the Dalai Lama had to run away. Did Jesus run away?
Since the Dalai Lama ran away, has he improved the Tibetan predicament?
How many Tibetan lamas, Western lamas & Zen priests are subject to scandals?
DUDE. There is no magical formula. Dhamma is just Dharma for each individual to practise themselves.
:om:
One practices for the sake of others in order to create conditions that allow the mind-stream to keep manifesting for the sake of others even after liberation from self clinging occurs, flipping beginningless conditions for suffering into endless conditions for helping others be free from suffering. This is how one deals with the fact of relativity. This is why Mahayana is deeper, it does delve into the science of life, not just self liberation. To limit ones view to a myopic understanding of what the Buddha taught is like blinders for a horse, it's needed during the developmental stage, then the individual mindstream will naturally evolve into other turnings.
To understand how this happens, one would have to have an understanding of the metaphysical processes discussed in the abhidhamma the abhidharma the abhidarmakosha and the abhidarmakoshabhyasam.
Of course its not a magical formula in the sense that you are thinking I'm implying... that'd just be stupid. So many Theravadin monks are subject to scandals as well. So many Mahayana teachers are incredibly lucid, enlightened, deep and experienced, emanating loving/kindness all the time. You choose what you wish to focus on and you cloud your understanding of reality in that way.
Rebirth has nothing to do with being the same person, it's more a continuation of effects, that become causes for a new person in another realm or in another body in this dimension of experience...
Vajrafriend
In the suttas, it is explicity taught the same person is reborn.
My opinion is your idiosyncratic opinion destroys or rips out the heart of the Buddhist rebirth teachings because, in upholding your pernicious view, self-interest for a better rebirth ceases.
Following your pernicious view, it would appear the motivation to do good for a better rebirth can only arise from altruistic intention, which is, for the most part, ridiculous.
Why would most people bother to do good if another person is to be the recipient of one's good deeds?
I can only sincerely say your views, however popular, are the antithesis of the Buddha's teachings on rebirth, which he taught to ordinary people so those people would refrain from self-harm & the harm of others.
The Buddha taught at least two levels of dhamma for the varying dispositions of his followers. The Buddha never ever taught empty (sunnata) dhammas are reborn.
For ordinary Buddhist people to uphold their morality so they avoid rebirth in a hell, ghost or animal realm, they must believe they themselves will be reborn.
Please try to keep in mind the Lord Buddha was fully enlightened. However, our average Johnny Come Lately Guru is generally not fully enlightened.
Then Ven. Sariputta and Ven. Ananda, having given this instruction to Anathapindika the householder, got up from their seats and left. Then, not long after they left, Anathapindika the householder died and reappeared in the Tusita heaven.
Then Anathapindika the deva's son, in the far extreme of the night, his extreme radiance lighting up the entirety of Jeta's Grove, went to the Blessed One and, on arrival, bowed down to him and stood to one side.
Ven. Ananda said to the Blessed One, "Lord, that must have been Anathapindika the deva's son. Anathapindika the householder had supreme confidence in Ven. Sariputta."
"Very good, Ananda. Very good, to the extent that you have deduced what can be arrived at through logic. That was Anathapindika the deva's son, and no one else."
That is what the Blessed One said. Gratified, Ven. Ananda delighted in the Blessed One's words.
Sure, only the Theravada is true, all other traditions produce ignorant beings with ignorant views. Only one Buddha has ever existed, and your interpretation of what he said is the end all be all truth of everything. Got it.
Why should I deny my experiences of rebirth and its place in understanding the preserved words of the Buddha and the Dhamma?
I'm not asking you to. I'm responding to the claim that accepting the concept of postmortem rebirth is essential to effective Buddhist practice.
I would go easy on putting faith in Dhatus observations and translation of the suttas. They have been faulty at a number of occasions. I have checked. Plus DD:s reasoning/methodology when translating them is not entirely sound.
If you could point out the specific flaws in his interpretations and the specific bases for your doubts about them, that would be very interesting.
Thinking the Dhamma is a smorgasboard to take from it the parts you like is not good approach I feel. I think DD would agree with me.
Smorgasbord is a false analogy, at least for how I relate to it. It's more like a chunk of nutritious food which is surrounded by unrewarding embellishments.
A capacity to see directly into the nature of your self clinging? A new paradigm of experiencing of your own energy?
No, a capacity for release from mediating experience through conceptual fabrications. Through this, there is a clear experience of the self-clinging and the energy behind the karma currently operating, but those are ancillary developments.
A capacity to see directly into the nature of your self clinging? A new paradigm of experiencing of your own energy?
No, a capacity for release from mediating experience through conceptual fabrications. Through this, there is a clear experience of the self-clinging and the energy behind the karma currently operating, but those are ancillary developments.
Ok, when I said "information" I was not talking about conceptual fabrications. I meant being informed about yourself, and the causes of ones own suffering, thus illuminating them and loosening the knot. This manifests an experience of clarity, even physical translucence or transparency. In my own transmission I experienced the nature of the different jhanas, their outcomes, their causes, the nature of the 31 planes of existence, the 6 realms on a level that was not conceptual, but more experiential. It was exceedingly amazing. I felt, informed. As in, there was a sense of omniscience.
Please do not brush away the truth of what i posted.
If one is to practise the Bodhisatva path, then one is to practise so other beings can remedy suffering.
There is only one disease - suffering!
The medicine of the Bodhisatva must be able to remedy suffering.
So for those who have not realised emptiness, the rebirth teachings cannot be about emptiness.
For those who have not realised emptiness, the rebirth teachings must be personal.
For example, when my mother dies, because she cared for me, I can believe she will be reborn in a good world or a heavenly world.
Such belief, such view, will help remedy my suffering of her loss.
But in your quest to win a trifling internet debate, which is mere maya or illusion, you have thrown away compassion.
The impression gained is in wishing to show off that you understand "emptiness", all compassion is discarded as the mind is overwelmed uncontrollability by vanity.
Such are the downfalls of the so-called Bodhisatva.
Your assertion that empty things are reborn is mere intellectualism.
Such assertions do not come from a heart, that knows, sees & is senstive to human needs.
:-/
THE BODHISATTVA VOWS
The Eighteen Root Downfalls
1. praising oneself and belittling others
6. abandoning the doctrine through sectarianism
9. holding perverted views
11. teaching emptiness to the untrained
13. causing others to break the vows of Individual Liberation
14. belittling those who follow the path of Individual Liberation
15. proclaiming false realisations such as the realisation of emptiness
The Forty-Six Secondary Downfalls
14. misconceiving that bodhisattvas do not attempt to attain liberation and failing to view delusions as things to be eliminated
22. wasting time and energy on trivial matters
27. abandoning the path of Theravada as unnecessary for one following the Mahayana
32. praising oneself and belittling others because of pride and anger
37. not alleviating the suffering of others
40 not relieving the sorrow of others
45. not acting with whatever means are necessary according to the circumstances to stop someone who is doing harmful action
(...) I can only sincerely say your views, however popular, are the antithesis of the Buddha's teachings on rebirth, which he taught to ordinary people so those people would refrain from self-harm & the harm of others.
The Buddha taught at least two levels of dhamma for the varying dispositions of his followers. The Buddha never ever taught empty (sunnata) dhammas are reborn.
For ordinary Buddhist people to uphold their morality so they avoid rebirth in a hell, ghost or animal realm, they must believe they themselves will be reborn. (...)
care to backup your claims?
Dhamma Dhatu, why you are not accepting that Shakyamuni inherited many ideas?
what about the phrase (from memory): "rebirth is ended, the holy life lived". Nirvana doesn't make much sense if there's no rebirth at all. and you are not being honest, it is almost as if "no rebirth" is dogma you hold.
This is why Mahayana is deeper, it does delve into the science of life, not just self liberation. To limit ones view to a myopic understanding of what the Buddha taught is like blinders for a horse, it's needed during the developmental stage, then the individual mindstream will naturally evolve into other turnings.
I trust the blinkers are your own.
As for Theravada, it also practises for the sake of others.
O Bhikkhus, protecting oneself, one protects others; protecting others, one protects oneself. And how does one, in protecting oneself, protect others? By earnest practice, cultivation and development (of satipatthana). In this way, by protecting oneself, one protects others. And how does one, in protecting others, protect oneself? By forbearance, by non-violence, by possessing a heart of metta and compassion. In this way, by protecting others, one protects oneself.
So many Mahayana teachers are incredibly lucid, enlightened, deep and experienced, emanating loving/kindness all the time.
Sure. So many Tibetan teachers try really hard to laugh alot, to the point it can get quite inappropriate. Like the lama I mentioned who was always giggling when he gave a talk on depression; who could not control his judgmental words & tone of voice. Many of the audience walked out, due to his inability to relate to the audience, Western culture & the subject & due to his both judgmental & condescending speech.
Vajra. Have you ever left the USA and visited other Buddhist countries, such as Thailand, Burma or Sri Lanka?
For example, once in Thailand, I was invited to a offering for (visiting) monks in a small & isolated village. The people of this village honored the monks & dhamma so much. Then I understood why, when I met the monk who lived in dependence on this village. This monk, living an obscure life, just looking after one small village, emanated so much loving-kindness.
As for Tibetan monks & lamas, those I have met, who I regard as well-practised, I find no different to any other illuminated monk or spiritual being.
Sorry dude. But lucidity, enlightenment & emanating loving/kindness is not the exclusive domain of Tibetans.
Possibly, you don't understand Asian culture, where showing a good face in public is crucial.
For example, when Westerners used to travel to Bali or Thailand, they would feel the love of the locals. Then the same locals may rob them or rip them off.
Sometimes, the "loving-kindness" you are inferring is mere social conditioning.
Literal rebirth is one of many ways to express the results of karma.
Whether the realms of existence are literal or psychological, the laws of karma remain unchanged.
As a Buddhist, I adhere to harmless karma. In fact, I adhered to the same karma before I found Buddhism or any religion.
Through my mind's own insight into harming, I renounced killing, stealing, sexual misconduct (sexual conduct without long term goals) & intoxicants years before I found Buddhism.
The essense of karma has no relationship to post-mortem rebirth whatsoever.
Karma is do good, get good; do bad, get bad.
Christianity does not teach rebirth but teaches each person reaps what they sow.
Islam is the same, where Mohamed (PBOH) taught even atom of good & bad will be weighed up by God and seen by its doer.
The essence of karma is psychological.
Many suttas and parts of suttas must be disregarded or given wholly new meaning because they contradict the so called "Core Buddhism".
Not so.
The Buddha taught a broad audience & often taught, in an improved way, pre-existing doctrines.
In many suttas, Brahmins and Brahmin lay followers approached the Buddha and asked him how they could obtain a good rebirth, something they already believed & wished for.
The suttas make it clear what the Buddha called his "special teaching, unique to Buddhas" and his "Heartwood".
As this has been mentioned many times before, to repeat them would fall upon deaf eyes and blind ears.
what about the phrase (from memory): "rebirth is ended, the holy life lived". Nirvana doesn't make much sense if there's no rebirth at all. and you are not being honest, it is almost as if "no rebirth" is dogma you hold.
Vincenzi
I have gained the impression you have language problems.
But worse, to call someone "not being honest" is a bigger problem.
The phrase is "birth is ended". It is not "rebirth is ended".
"Birth" is something mental, as I have described in detail.
The Buddha defined Nirvana as the end of greed, hatred & delusion, something to be experienced here & now, in the mind.
It follows not one of the three sentences in your post makes any sense at all.
All I can is you exemplify a Zennie, namely, "unlearned".
To be fair obviously many people have found inspiration without the concept of rebirth to cultivate. Which I find admireable because I could not do it. I'd go for the Yacht and the beachparties until death do us part... Ah to H with this I am hitting the sauna for some hedonistic pass time acting as if there is no rebirth.
Hi Victorious
Your post brought to mind a passage in the Bible, where Timothy admonishes his followers for their attachment to the moral law (The Torah). Timothy said the law is for sinners [those who do not know their right hand from their left], thus they need the law to keep them in line. But for those with understanding, they do not require the law because they know in their hearts what is wholesome & unwholesome.
We know that the law is good if one uses it properly. We also know that the law is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful, the unholy and irreligious, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers, for the sexually immoral, for slave traders and liars and perjurers —and for whatever else is contrary to the sound doctrine that conforms to the gospel concerning the glory of the blessed God, which he entrusted to me.
I actually live near the beach plus near many yatchts. But I would never go for yachts and beach parties (and beach parties happen all of the time here).
About those who do not comprehend the true nature of sensual pleasures, the Lord Buddha spoke as follows:
"Is it true, Arittha, that you have conceived this pernicious view: 'There are things called "obstructions" by the Blessed One. As I understand his teaching those things are not necessarily obstructive for him who pursues them'?"
"Yes, indeed, Lord, I understand the teaching of the Blessed One in this way that those things called 'obstructions' by the Blessed One, are not necessarily obstructive for him who pursues them."
"Of whom do you know, foolish man, that I have taught to him the teaching in that manner? Did I not, foolish man, speak in many ways of those obstructive things that they are obstructions indeed, and that they necessarily obstruct him who pursues them? Sense desires, so I have said, bring little enjoyment, and much suffering and disappointment. The perils in them are greater. Sense desires are like bare bones, have I said; they are like a lump of flesh... they are like a snake's head, have I said. They bring much suffering and disappointment. The perils in them are greater. But you, O foolish man, have misrepresented us by what you personally have wrongly grasped. You have undermined your own (future) and have created much demerit. This, foolish man, will bring you much harm and suffering for a long time."
Then the Blessed One addressed the monks thus: "What do you think, O monks: has that monk Arittha, formerly of the vulture killers, produced any spark (of understanding) in this teaching and discipline?"
"How should that be, Lord? Certainly not, O Lord."
After these words the monk Arittha, formerly of the vulture killers, sat silent, confused, with his shoulders drooping and his head bent, brooding and incapable of making a rejoinder.
Then the Blessed One, knowing (his condition), spoke to him: "You will be known, foolish man, by what is your own pernicious view, I shall now question the monks about this."
Then the Blessed One addressed the monks: "Do you, O monks, also understand the teaching proclaimed by me, in the same manner as this monk Arittha does, who misrepresents us by what he personally has wrongly grasped; who has undermined his own (future) and created much demerit?"
"Certainly not, Lord. For in many ways has the Blessed One told us of those obstructive things that they are obstructions indeed, and that they necessarily obstruct him who pursues them..."
"Good, monks. It is good that you thus understand the teaching proclaimed by me. For in many ways have I spoken of those obstructive things that they are obstructions, indeed, and that they necessarily obstruct him who pursues them. Sense desires, so have I said, bring little enjoyment, and much suffering and disappointment. The perils in them are greater. Sense desires are like bare bones, have I said; they are like a lump of flesh, like a torch of straw, like a pit of burning coals, like a dream, like borrowed goods, like a fruit-bearing tree, like a slaughter-house, like a stake of swords; like a snake's head are sense desires, have I said. They bring much suffering and disappointment. The perils in them are greater. But this monk Arittha, formerly of the vulture killers, misrepresents us by what he personally has wrongly grasped; he undermines his own (future) and creates much demerit. This will bring to this foolish man much harm and suffering for a long time.
"Monks, it is impossible indeed, that one can pursue sense gratification without sensual desire, without perceptions of sensual desire, without thoughts of sensual desire.
Please do not brush away the truth of what i posted.
If one is to practise the Bodhisatva path, then one is to practise so other beings can remedy suffering.
There is only one disease - suffering!
The medicine of the Bodhisatva must be able to remedy suffering.
So for those who have not realised emptiness, the rebirth teachings cannot be about emptiness.
For those who have not realised emptiness, the rebirth teachings must be personal.
For example, when my mother dies, because she cared for me, I can believe she will be reborn in a good world or a heavenly world.
Such belief, such view, will help remedy my suffering of her loss.
But in your quest to win a trifling internet debate, which is mere maya or illusion, you have thrown away compassion.
The impression gained is in wishing to show off that you understand "emptiness", all compassion is discarded as the mind is overwelmed uncontrollability by vanity.
Such are the downfalls of the so-called Bodhisatva.
Your assertion that empty things are reborn is mere intellectualism.
Such assertions do not come from a heart, that knows, sees & is senstive to human needs.
:-/
THE BODHISATTVA VOWS
The Eighteen Root Downfalls
1. praising oneself and belittling others
6. abandoning the doctrine through sectarianism
9. holding perverted views
11. teaching emptiness to the untrained
13. causing others to break the vows of Individual Liberation
14. belittling those who follow the path of Individual Liberation
15. proclaiming false realisations such as the realisation of emptiness
The Forty-Six Secondary Downfalls
14. misconceiving that bodhisattvas do not attempt to attain liberation and failing to view delusions as things to be eliminated
22. wasting time and energy on trivial matters
27. abandoning the path of Theravada as unnecessary for one following the Mahayana
32. praising oneself and belittling others because of pride and anger
37. not alleviating the suffering of others
40 not relieving the sorrow of others
45. not acting with whatever means are necessary according to the circumstances to stop someone who is doing harmful action
http://www.bodhicitta.net/BODHISATTVAVOWS.htm
If this is the outcome from reading my posts, you haven't understood them and neither have you understood the path of the Bodhisattva with is all compassion.
Your understanding of emptiness is epidermic and I see no resolution of your misunderstanding except through experiential means. You would have to be open to transmission from a master. Everything is already empty of inherent existence, it's not an element.
You have misunderstood the Buddha on an experiential level and also an intellectual level.
Basically, you don't know what you are talking about on a direct level. You obviously won't learn how and why from me.
All your projected understandings of what I said are wrong. You have not truly read the intention from my words... for this, I apologize. But, this apology has no meaning for you as you think you have read my posts and you have not. So, this has more to do with your capacity than what I have said.
These other realms do actually exist like this one does and can experience this truth viscerally and directly only through your own self uncovering in contemplation and meditation. There is plenty of compassion in understanding life beyond the 5 physical senses.
The majority of human beings, including Buddhists are ignorant fools.
:eek:
So much for the Bodhisatva path, the conviction all beings have Buddha nature & our boast we are the next enlightened saviour of all sentient beings.
When our mind is under pressure, under the pump, needing to prove we are right, such unloving words leak (asava) out of our heart.
No, my statement is merely a recognition of the depth and scope of suffering ignorance, not that Buddhists in general aren't trying to alleviate this ailment, but that for most, it is not done in just one lifetime.
This has nothing to do with the fact that all sentient beings do indeed have Buddhanature, from Hitler to Bodhidharma.
This is why Mahayana is deeper, it does delve into the science of life, not just self liberation. To limit ones view to a myopic understanding of what the Buddha taught is like blinders for a horse, it's needed during the developmental stage, then the individual mindstream will naturally evolve into other turnings.
I trust the blinkers are your own.
As for Theravada, it also practises for the sake of others.
O Bhikkhus, protecting oneself, one protects others; protecting others, one protects oneself. And how does one, in protecting oneself, protect others? By earnest practice, cultivation and development (of satipatthana). In this way, by protecting oneself, one protects others. And how does one, in protecting others, protect oneself? By forbearance, by non-violence, by possessing a heart of metta and compassion. In this way, by protecting others, one protects oneself.
Yes, I recognize that theravada has a Bodhisattva attitude, but it seems as if you don't fully understand it's depth and importance. Thus, you are not the crown royal of the meaning behind the Pali Texts.
Sorry dude. But lucidity, enlightenment & emanating loving/kindness is not the exclusive domain of Tibetans.
I never said as such. I grew up Hindu and there are plenty of great Hindu saints or just Easterners or Westerners with this capacity, even if they don't fully understand the causes and conditions behind the effect.
I never stated anything about an ultimate self. Not once. I speak of a self in a relative sense, from the self of a samsarin to the self of a Buddha, it's all relative, not ultimate. You really have a hard time understanding what I write, no wonder you don't understand Mahayana.
I explained the relative 'self' to you numerous times, including quoting the Buddha. The relative 'self' is just a mental formation, just a thought.
As for understanding the Mahayana and for your vigorous attempts to win this debate & protect your cherished "relative self", the Mahayana has the following to impart:
Whenever I interact with someone, May I view myself as the lowest amongst all, And, from the very depths of my heart, Respectfully hold others as superior.
When others, out of jealousy Treat me wrongly with abuse, slander, and scorn, May I take upon myself the defeat And offer to others the victory.
I never stated anything about an ultimate self. Not once. I speak of a self in a relative sense, from the self of a samsarin to the self of a Buddha, it's all relative, not ultimate. You really have a hard time understanding what I write, no wonder you don't understand Mahayana.
I explained the relative 'self' to you numerous times, including quoting the Buddha. The relative 'self' is just a mental formation, just a thought.
It is also a physical phenomena reflective of this mental state of clinging, unless you're enlightened, then it is a manifestation of compassion, a Nirmanakaya, like the Buddha. The Buddha trained in Tushita Heaven before he took birth on Earth for the sake of beings.
Everything is already empty and free. It's just a matter of being aware of this fact, realizing fearlessness is nothing other than a mental condition of awareness of the fact of dependent origination/emptiness.
As for understanding the Mahayana and for your vigorous attempts to win this debate & protect your cherished "relative self", the Mahayana has the following to impart:
Whenever I interact with someone, May I view myself as the lowest amongst all, And, from the very depths of my heart, Respectfully hold others as superior.
When others, out of jealousy Treat me wrongly with abuse, slander, and scorn, May I take upon myself the defeat And offer to others the victory.
:You don't understand the intention of this statement.
But, that's fine... you win, according to your own ideation of dependent origination/emptiness, I am deficient in understanding.
It's evidenced by the teachings of these thousands of Tibetan Buddhas since the 800's.
Study more, with an open mind.
Actually, if one goes to enough talks given by different Tibetans, one will start noticing the exact same teachings from their texts which they all teach and have learnt, often by repetition since they were small children. I have even heard them telling exactly the same jokes. As for them being buddhas - well that's how their students have been told to see them isn't it....to regard one's teacher as a Buddha. Somehow I don't think Buddhas would have been persecuting and murdering each other - if one takes a look at the history of the Tibetan lineages. Some of these intrigues and jealousies still continue till the present day too.
Of course some of them are really nice guys but there have also been dodgey ones! It's certainly a big mistake to regard Tibetans as some kind of super-race. They're just like anyone else and are careful now about how they are seen in public by westerners and the media.
It's evidenced by the teachings of these thousands of Tibetan Buddhas since the 800's.
Study more, with an open mind.
Actually, if one goes to enough talks given by different Tibetans, one will start noticing the exact same teachings from their texts which they all teach and have learnt, often by repetition since they were small children. I have even heard them telling exactly the same jokes. As for them being buddhas - well that's how their students have been told to see them isn't it....to regard one's teacher as a Buddha. Somehow I don't think Buddhas would have been persecuting and murdering each other - if one takes a look at the history of the Tibetan lineages. Some of these intrigues and jealousies still continue till the present day too.
Of course some of them are really nice guys but there have been dodgey ones too!
You've been focusing on the wrong ones, and you have a personal karma that manifests it's environment of experience, of course, that's how karma works.
You could very easily have the same perspective on so called Theravada Masters conditioned by their environment, some with insight and MOST without.
The list of Tibetan Masters is endless since the 800's, even plenty of undercover ones who have attained the "jalus" or Rainbow body within the last 100 years, leaving nothing but nails or hair or neither. Some are sincere cave yogi's and others are lay tantricas.
From Lonchenpa to the teachers of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche, to Garchen Rinpoche, to all the Turma revealers of Tibet and Machig Labdron of the Chod practice... etc... the list would exhaust this page without spaces. Read some Tibetan Autobiographies...?
Of course those Lamas and Tibetan Buddhists with very normal degrees of insight or lower would outnumber the Tibetan Buddhas by far. We're on planet Earth by the way.
Your inner interpretation of information is reflective of your outer experience and... give pause... vice versa, it's all karmic (inter-woven cause and effect). I'm not creating a judgement, so don't go off... "You don't know my experience... etc." But... what you say reveals what you know and what you've seen and how you understand based upon how you experience and again, vice versa.
You are welcome to your ideation, I suggest that you just don't cling to it as objective reality until you've completely expanded beyond yourself. It is possible, to be a self that sees past itself.
There are plenty of Masters in all traditions... but Tibet had the great good fortune of inheriting Vajrayana and Dzogchen, and there are plenty that got it, even though there are more that did not, or used certain aspects as excuses for their ignorance. You can focus on the vast majority of Buddhists with moderate insight or lack of insight, or you can focus on those that "got it", and there are plenty of those that got it from Tibet. Though, like i said, there will be far less Buddhas than abuddhas (unawake ones) by a huge amount. Need I remind you that we are on Earth? Tibet is on Earth... right?
My dear fellow, I have read innumerable stories and myths about the supposed achievements of Tibetan gurus through the centuries. I have also attended many teachings about them, because they are made more important than the Buddha. You are preaching to someone who was once converted and mesmirised by it all.. and please don't tell me how I should practice and study because I have certainly not asked for your advice, nor do I want it.
My dear fellow, I have read innumerable stories and myths about the supposed achievements of Tibetan gurus through the centuries. I have also attended many teachings about them, because they are made more important than the Buddha. You are preaching to someone who was once converted and mesmirised by it all.. and please don't tell me how I should practice and study because I have not asked for your advice.
Anyway.....boring, and off topic.
Ok, you're karmic impression. I'm glad you've taken refuge in the Buddha, dharma and the sangha, of whatever tradition.
Your length of time in this life devoted to any practice is not a pre-requisite for insight. i just recommend being humble, as there are those of us with lifetimes of practice in Buddhism. =^)
Theravada is awesome! Reading all the Pali suttas and studying them, contemplating them, deeper, and deeper, and deeper leads to all turnings of the wheel, including Dzogchen.. so... they are very much worth mastering!!
I honestly wish you well on this journey!! I'm still attempting to master what the Buddha taught in the Pali.
It seems that your karma manifested teachers that made other Buddhas more important than Shakyamuni, I don't have the same karma.
Though when I read the Pali Suttas, I see a meaning other than you and DD. Life's multifarious actives are empty, thus multifarious.
The principle of karma doesn't fall in the absence of belief in rebirth. As has been noted on this forum many times, karma still applies within the current lifetime.
However, Stephen Batchelor's studies of the Pali Canon turn up some very interesting passages in which the Buddha indicates he does not believe in rebirth, and furthermore, that much of what happens to us in life is due to chance, not the ripening of karma. It seems that the Canon has a little something in it for everyone, no matter what their view.
Was the whole of Tibet liberated or were most of Tibet slave labourers for the ruling elite & the "monks"?
When I attend Vajrayana centres, why are not all the members liberated?
The Tibetans could not even save themselves from China. In that case, how are these people excepted to be able to save others?
Even the Dalai Lama had to run away. Did Jesus run away?
Not all members at Vajrayana centers are liberated because, as you should know after years of study and experience, liberation takes time. The lama doesn't go into a dharma center and magically *poof* everyone is liberated. :rolleyes: Why do you raise such childish questions?
In your comments re: Tibetans not able to "save" themselves from China, the word "save" is used twice, each with a completely different meaning. In the first sentence, "save" is used in the sense of "rescue", or perhaps, "defend". In the second sentence, the word "save" is used in the spiritual sense, as in "liberate", or "save" a soul (in X-ian context for ex.) Therefore, the two scenarios presented: Tibetans "saving" themselves from armed attack, and "saving" other, are not at all comparable. The fact that Tibetans weren't able to defend themselves against one of the world's most aggressive armies (when Tibet had virtually none) has utterly no bearing on whether or not Tibetan spiritual leaders are capable of "saving" their disciples.
Jesus did run away to India after he survived the crucifixion, and continued to teach "in exile" from his homeland, just like the Dalai Lama.
Comments
The only permanent is impermanence. You will have to have an inner paradigm shift concerning your understanding regarding this, no amount of words seem to penetrate what you hold so dearly to your heart as truth. Through contemplation, the only way that circumstances can exist the way they do in this physical world is to realize that there are other dimensions of existence, equally as impermanent, and inter-dependent. This is why Quantum Physicists are creating theories surrounding a wider model of dimensionality in order to explain phenomena. I'm beginning to see that it's pointless to talk with you, as you exist on an entirely different dimension of understanding and everything will be used to justify these mistaken views.
But, everything is free due to the fact of dependent origination. This is not evangelism and has nothing to do with an entity that loves us. This has to do with the fact that nothing is abiding.
I know plenty about suffering and the minds of suffering through direct experience.
Rebirth has nothing to do with being the same person, it's more a continuation of effects, that become causes for a new person in another realm or in another body in this dimension of experience, simply because the elements and consciousness do not only have this level of existence. This particular person will not exist again, but this stream of impressions will outlast this body or a person, and if one awakens awareness of the connections beyond merely the physical dimension, then one can experience directly this connectivity.
Alright everybody not to worry we still got the Anatta and Dukkha doctrines left...
:scratch:
In Mahayana we are always going on about the mind and it's layers. You do project a lot, your self is in the way of your ability to read other perspectives of the dharma. It's like speaking to someone with tunnel vision about peripheral vision, it's not possible, the capacity is not there. I never stated anything about an ultimate self. Not once. I speak of a self in a relative sense, from the self of a samsarin to the self of a Buddha, it's all relative, not ultimate. You really have a hard time understanding what I write, no wonder you don't understand Mahayana.
Absolutly but (and here comes the vital point) Karma without the concept of post mortem rebirth is not consistent with the suttas. I ask you the same. Why should I deny my experiences of rebirth and its place in understanding the preserved words of the Buddha and the Dhamma? I would go easy on putting faith in Dhatus observations and translation of the suttas. They have been faulty at a number of occasions. I have checked. Plus DD:s reasoning/methodology when translating them is not entirely sound. And bollox that postmortem rebirth in Gautama's teaching is not clear as I have pointed out to both DD and Valtiel. Thinking the Dhamma is a smorgasboard to take from it the parts you like is not good approach I feel. I think DD would agree with me.
I can not argue. There are as many views on Nirvana as there are Buddhists. But that is not my understanding on Nibbana. Truth is we will know when we get there. I hope we all do. Just one word. Glendronach!
Night!
:dunce:
Was the whole of Tibet liberated or were most of Tibet slave labourers for the ruling elite & the "monks"?
How many "others" have you liberated?
Since the Tibetan gurus have come to the West, why is not the whole of the West liberated?
When I attend Vajrayana centres, why are not all the members liberated?
Is this Mahayana rhetoric any different than Christianity?
The Tibetans could not even save themselves from China. In that case, how are these people excepted to be able to save others?
Even the Dalai Lama had to run away. Did Jesus run away?
Since the Dalai Lama ran away, has he improved the Tibetan predicament?
How many Tibetan lamas, Western lamas & Zen priests are subject to scandals?
DUDE. There is no magical formula. Dhamma is just Dharma for each individual to practise themselves.
:om:
:coffee:
Tina Turner sung: "We don't need another hero. We don't need to know the way home. All we want is life beyond the thunderdome [dukkha]".
:clap:
Your mind seems so stuck on evangelising propaganda that you even preach to the converted.
:eek2:
In the suttas, it is explicity taught the same person is reborn.
My opinion is your idiosyncratic opinion destroys or rips out the heart of the Buddhist rebirth teachings because, in upholding your pernicious view, self-interest for a better rebirth ceases.
Following your pernicious view, it would appear the motivation to do good for a better rebirth can only arise from altruistic intention, which is, for the most part, ridiculous.
Why would most people bother to do good if another person is to be the recipient of one's good deeds?
I can only sincerely say your views, however popular, are the antithesis of the Buddha's teachings on rebirth, which he taught to ordinary people so those people would refrain from self-harm & the harm of others.
The Buddha taught at least two levels of dhamma for the varying dispositions of his followers. The Buddha never ever taught empty (sunnata) dhammas are reborn.
For ordinary Buddhist people to uphold their morality so they avoid rebirth in a hell, ghost or animal realm, they must believe they themselves will be reborn.
Please try to keep in mind the Lord Buddha was fully enlightened. However, our average Johnny Come Lately Guru is generally not fully enlightened.
Sadhu, sadhu ! :clap:
To understand how this happens, one would have to have an understanding of the metaphysical processes discussed in the abhidhamma the abhidharma the abhidarmakosha and the abhidarmakoshabhyasam.
Of course its not a magical formula in the sense that you are thinking I'm implying... that'd just be stupid. So many Theravadin monks are subject to scandals as well. So many Mahayana teachers are incredibly lucid, enlightened, deep and experienced, emanating loving/kindness all the time. You choose what you wish to focus on and you cloud your understanding of reality in that way.
Man... another brick in the wall.
Sure, only the Theravada is true, all other traditions produce ignorant beings with ignorant views. Only one Buddha has ever existed, and your interpretation of what he said is the end all be all truth of everything. Got it.
You guys should just f*@# already and get it over with.
...
If one is to practise the Bodhisatva path, then one is to practise so other beings can remedy suffering.
There is only one disease - suffering!
The medicine of the Bodhisatva must be able to remedy suffering.
So for those who have not realised emptiness, the rebirth teachings cannot be about emptiness.
For those who have not realised emptiness, the rebirth teachings must be personal.
For example, when my mother dies, because she cared for me, I can believe she will be reborn in a good world or a heavenly world.
Such belief, such view, will help remedy my suffering of her loss.
But in your quest to win a trifling internet debate, which is mere maya or illusion, you have thrown away compassion.
The impression gained is in wishing to show off that you understand "emptiness", all compassion is discarded as the mind is overwelmed uncontrollability by vanity.
Such are the downfalls of the so-called Bodhisatva.
Your assertion that empty things are reborn is mere intellectualism.
Such assertions do not come from a heart, that knows, sees & is senstive to human needs.
:-/
Dhamma Dhatu, why you are not accepting that Shakyamuni inherited many ideas?
what about the phrase (from memory): "rebirth is ended, the holy life lived". Nirvana doesn't make much sense if there's no rebirth at all. and you are not being honest, it is almost as if "no rebirth" is dogma you hold.
So much for the Bodhisatva path, the conviction all beings have Buddha nature & our boast we are the next enlightened saviour of all sentient beings.
When our mind is under pressure, under the pump, needing to prove we are right, such unloving words leak (asava) out of our heart.
:coffee:
As for Theravada, it also practises for the sake of others.
O Bhikkhus, protecting oneself, one protects others; protecting others, one protects oneself. And how does one, in protecting oneself, protect others? By earnest practice, cultivation and development (of satipatthana). In this way, by protecting oneself, one protects others. And how does one, in protecting others, protect oneself? By forbearance, by non-violence, by possessing a heart of metta and compassion. In this way, by protecting others, one protects oneself.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn47/sn47.019.than.html
Vajra. Have you ever left the USA and visited other Buddhist countries, such as Thailand, Burma or Sri Lanka?
For example, once in Thailand, I was invited to a offering for (visiting) monks in a small & isolated village. The people of this village honored the monks & dhamma so much. Then I understood why, when I met the monk who lived in dependence on this village. This monk, living an obscure life, just looking after one small village, emanated so much loving-kindness.
As for Tibetan monks & lamas, those I have met, who I regard as well-practised, I find no different to any other illuminated monk or spiritual being.
Sorry dude. But lucidity, enlightenment & emanating loving/kindness is not the exclusive domain of Tibetans.
Possibly, you don't understand Asian culture, where showing a good face in public is crucial.
For example, when Westerners used to travel to Bali or Thailand, they would feel the love of the locals. Then the same locals may rob them or rip them off.
Sometimes, the "loving-kindness" you are inferring is mere social conditioning.
All the best
Literal rebirth is one of many ways to express the results of karma.
Whether the realms of existence are literal or psychological, the laws of karma remain unchanged.
As a Buddhist, I adhere to harmless karma. In fact, I adhered to the same karma before I found Buddhism or any religion.
Through my mind's own insight into harming, I renounced killing, stealing, sexual misconduct (sexual conduct without long term goals) & intoxicants years before I found Buddhism.
The essense of karma has no relationship to post-mortem rebirth whatsoever.
Karma is do good, get good; do bad, get bad.
Christianity does not teach rebirth but teaches each person reaps what they sow.
Islam is the same, where Mohamed (PBOH) taught even atom of good & bad will be weighed up by God and seen by its doer.
The essence of karma is psychological. Not so.
The Buddha taught a broad audience & often taught, in an improved way, pre-existing doctrines.
In many suttas, Brahmins and Brahmin lay followers approached the Buddha and asked him how they could obtain a good rebirth, something they already believed & wished for.
The suttas make it clear what the Buddha called his "special teaching, unique to Buddhas" and his "Heartwood".
As this has been mentioned many times before, to repeat them would fall upon deaf eyes and blind ears.
:mullet:
I have gained the impression you have language problems.
But worse, to call someone "not being honest" is a bigger problem.
The phrase is "birth is ended". It is not "rebirth is ended".
"Birth" is something mental, as I have described in detail.
The Buddha defined Nirvana as the end of greed, hatred & delusion, something to be experienced here & now, in the mind.
It follows not one of the three sentences in your post makes any sense at all.
All I can is you exemplify a Zennie, namely, "unlearned".
All the best
Your post brought to mind a passage in the Bible, where Timothy admonishes his followers for their attachment to the moral law (The Torah). Timothy said the law is for sinners [those who do not know their right hand from their left], thus they need the law to keep them in line. But for those with understanding, they do not require the law because they know in their hearts what is wholesome & unwholesome.
I actually live near the beach plus near many yatchts. But I would never go for yachts and beach parties (and beach parties happen all of the time here).
About those who do not comprehend the true nature of sensual pleasures, the Lord Buddha spoke as follows:
This has nothing to do with the fact that all sentient beings do indeed have Buddhanature, from Hitler to Bodhidharma.
Study more, with an open mind.
As for understanding the Mahayana and for your vigorous attempts to win this debate & protect your cherished "relative self", the Mahayana has the following to impart:
Everything is already empty and free. It's just a matter of being aware of this fact, realizing fearlessness is nothing other than a mental condition of awareness of the fact of dependent origination/emptiness.
Somehow I don't think Buddhas would have been persecuting and murdering each other - if one takes a look at the history of the Tibetan lineages. Some of these intrigues and jealousies still continue till the present day too.
Of course some of them are really nice guys but there have also been dodgey ones! It's certainly a big mistake to regard Tibetans as some kind of super-race. They're just like anyone else and are careful now about how they are seen in public by westerners and the media.
You could very easily have the same perspective on so called Theravada Masters conditioned by their environment, some with insight and MOST without.
The list of Tibetan Masters is endless since the 800's, even plenty of undercover ones who have attained the "jalus" or Rainbow body within the last 100 years, leaving nothing but nails or hair or neither. Some are sincere cave yogi's and others are lay tantricas.
From Lonchenpa to the teachers of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche, to Garchen Rinpoche, to all the Turma revealers of Tibet and Machig Labdron of the Chod practice... etc... the list would exhaust this page without spaces. Read some Tibetan Autobiographies...?
Of course those Lamas and Tibetan Buddhists with very normal degrees of insight or lower would outnumber the Tibetan Buddhas by far. We're on planet Earth by the way.
Your inner interpretation of information is reflective of your outer experience and... give pause... vice versa, it's all karmic (inter-woven cause and effect). I'm not creating a judgement, so don't go off... "You don't know my experience... etc." But... what you say reveals what you know and what you've seen and how you understand based upon how you experience and again, vice versa.
You are welcome to your ideation, I suggest that you just don't cling to it as objective reality until you've completely expanded beyond yourself. It is possible, to be a self that sees past itself.
There are plenty of Masters in all traditions... but Tibet had the great good fortune of inheriting Vajrayana and Dzogchen, and there are plenty that got it, even though there are more that did not, or used certain aspects as excuses for their ignorance. You can focus on the vast majority of Buddhists with moderate insight or lack of insight, or you can focus on those that "got it", and there are plenty of those that got it from Tibet. Though, like i said, there will be far less Buddhas than abuddhas (unawake ones) by a huge amount. Need I remind you that we are on Earth? Tibet is on Earth... right?
You are preaching to someone who was once converted and mesmirised by it all.. and please don't tell me how I should practice and study because I have certainly not asked for your advice, nor do I want it.
Anyway.....boring, and off topic.
Your length of time in this life devoted to any practice is not a pre-requisite for insight. i just recommend being humble, as there are those of us with lifetimes of practice in Buddhism. =^)
Theravada is awesome! Reading all the Pali suttas and studying them, contemplating them, deeper, and deeper, and deeper leads to all turnings of the wheel, including Dzogchen.. so... they are very much worth mastering!!
I honestly wish you well on this journey!! I'm still attempting to master what the Buddha taught in the Pali.
It seems that your karma manifested teachers that made other Buddhas more important than Shakyamuni, I don't have the same karma.
Though when I read the Pali Suttas, I see a meaning other than you and DD. Life's multifarious actives are empty, thus multifarious.
I have a question for all of you:
If you do not believe in rebirth, how would you explain no-self?
However, Stephen Batchelor's studies of the Pali Canon turn up some very interesting passages in which the Buddha indicates he does not believe in rebirth, and furthermore, that much of what happens to us in life is due to chance, not the ripening of karma. It seems that the Canon has a little something in it for everyone, no matter what their view.
In your comments re: Tibetans not able to "save" themselves from China, the word "save" is used twice, each with a completely different meaning. In the first sentence, "save" is used in the sense of "rescue", or perhaps, "defend". In the second sentence, the word "save" is used in the spiritual sense, as in "liberate", or "save" a soul (in X-ian context for ex.) Therefore, the two scenarios presented: Tibetans "saving" themselves from armed attack, and "saving" other, are not at all comparable. The fact that Tibetans weren't able to defend themselves against one of the world's most aggressive armies (when Tibet had virtually none) has utterly no bearing on whether or not Tibetan spiritual leaders are capable of "saving" their disciples.
Jesus did run away to India after he survived the crucifixion, and continued to teach "in exile" from his homeland, just like the Dalai Lama.