With a focus on the Tibetan, Nepalese, and Mongolian forms of Mahayana Buddhism
8 posts • Page 1 of 1
This looks very interesting ...
Practitioners who cultivate the personal realization of buddha knowledge dwell in the bliss of whatever is present and do not abandon their practice.
For anyone who may not know, Chogyal Namkhai Norbu is one of the best known teachers of Dzogchen. at least in the west.
A system that starts by emphasising the absolute necessity of a teacher from the get-go.
Chogyal Namkhai Norbu is a great master. I had the privilege of being with him in 1999 at a retreat on Lake Tahoe for several days... It was a Buddha field, as the Tibetans can do. I moved heaven and earth to get there, having nothing. I wasn't sorry.
Thanks for the info on the movie.
Not last night,
not this morning;
Melon flowers bloomed.
I was looking in the old stuff here at the forum and realised a whanted to wright somthing. So i started here. I myself not considering myself a student of Chogyal Namkai Norbu has liseded to some, two online teachings by him. He is a great lama. I have not seen the this movie, it looks like a good one. I have made some comparison befor. what is Mahamudra/ Dzogchen and what is Zen and Shikantasa? Are there eny differenses? Now it seemes like this is not correct. People practis meny things. Samsara is a vast place full of surprises. And one person can sustains more then one practis. For example Chanting and sitting.
I am intrested because i like to do more then one stuff at the time and is intrested in other peoples opinions in thet topiq. If i go to a friend and talk to her for some time. Then i whant to do somthing else. So i go to my apartment and have a cup of coffé and i think abit. What did i leave back there with my friend. Then i spend my day and i go to bed. Sleep and time is a limitation people can have also space. And my question is how and if i can do this in a easy and good way for my. For example if a say thet Buddha is a friend of mine, i have meet him at times in books. How can i be right in thet statment, for myself?
Symbols of the sun, symbols of the snow
For those how go beyond, for those how go below.
I met Ferdinand on more than one occasion in books- Others have too- And like Buddha, he sat beneath a tree- You are right in that statement too for yourself as well-
My perspective is definitely in the minority. For most people the question is to either on the one hand to deny karma and its effects as an antiquated and anti-scientific superstition, or on the other hand to accept it unquestioningly as an article of faith.
My POV is that I firmly acknowledge the fact of karma, the causes and conditions arising from karma, and rebirth/reincarnation. Yet, I observe in BOTH the Hindu non-Buddhist uses and the Tibetan Buddhist uses of karma certain attitudes and factors which can only be called "the abuse of karma" resulting from a perverted view of karma and consequences.
Sticking to the Tibetan example, since it is Buddhist useage and I believe we should always criticize our own "team" before we criticize others, as a Buddhist I observe the whole institution of the tulkus from the Dalai Lama on down to be an abuse of the very recognition of karma. To establish "leadership" positions for a people or a religion based on identifying karmic streams is to only affirm the false notion of an individual self that transmigrates from life to life.
The whole process of recognizing tulkus creates the fantasy of knowing a particular stream of consciousness as a coherent identity throughout successive lives. My point has primarily to prongs. First, is the political abuse of such recognition, and second is the factual abuse.
The potential for political abuse has been noted by Tenzin Gyatso, the current Dalai Lama, who has opened the door to the elimination of the Dalai Lama system for a change to political democracy. In an official statement on reincarnation and the Dalai Lama system, he writes:
As I see it in my words, the Dalai Lama and tulku system of political leadership is nothing other then religious dictatorship. As a system that completely fuses church and state, it goes against the modern "enlightenment" value of the separation of church and state. Whether it is the Roman Catholic Church, the Muslim Caliphate, or the Tibetan Gaden Phodrang Labrang (the Dalai Lama’s institution), the original basis for such an institution to have political control in order to establish some bulwark against the perceived chaos and anarchy of primitive tribal and "barbarian" beliefs has long gone. Tenzin Gyatso recognized this problem and voluntarily gave up the political rule. As Tim Robertson wrote in an article from September 2014, that is "a rare thing."
But what about the spiritual dictatorship that such institutions also engender? Yes, I find their institutional hegemony to be counterproductive to the very values espoused by those very same institutions. With the political powers of the Dalai Lama institution disbanded, will the Tibetan's allow for the spiritual power of the institution to be taken apart? For Tibetan Buddha Dharma, the idea of reincarnated beings as specially qualified teachers is simply a case of "the emperor having no clothes" that is largely a taboo subject within the system that supports it.
While Tenzin Gyatso has shown an enlightened attitude toward the idea of disbanding the spiritual institution of the Dalai Lama, he is not making the decision unilaterally.
This is understandable, since no matter what his personal views on it are, the institution is a social construct that goes far beyond an individuals' personal mental constructs. However, the socially conventional construct is the conglomeration of the individual constructs that amalgamate to form the convention, therefore is it important for individual Buddhists to assess and determine for ourselves whether the construct is beneficial. This is, in fact, what Tenzin Gyatso is asking the influential Tibetan leadership to do for themselves. Institutions die hard, and it is very unlikely that the hundreds and hundreds of years of institutional ossification will be easily set aside.
But at the root of Buddha Dharma, there really is no legitimate justification for the institution of reincarnate leadership as either a political or a spiritual institution.
I could go on but that get's the gist of my perspective.
Why you do not understand is because the three carts were provisional for former times, and because the One Vehicle is true for the present time. ~ Zen Master 6th Ancestor Huineng
8 posts • Page 1 of 1
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest