It's a sign / Magical thinking is stupid

Anything goes (almost).

It's a sign / Magical thinking is stupid

It's a sign! - just when I needed it most, I got a sign inexplicably from the universe or something!
11
37%
Magical thinking is stupid! - be logical & you won't find yourself in such desperate situations, clinging to such desperate nonsense.
19
63%
 
Total votes : 30

Re: It's a sign / Magical thinking is stupid

Postby tatpurusa » Sat Nov 23, 2013 10:14 pm

smcj wrote:Atiyoga is tantric Dzogchen. It is tantra.

Non-tantric Dzogchen is slightly different. Non-tantric Mahamudra is sutra Mahamudra. So as I've said, if the parallel systems are consistent, then non-tantric Dzogchen is sutra Dzogchen. Or maybe not, but that's how the Sarma traditions are classified.

ChNN has some unusual perspectives. He is an authentic teacher and what he says is valid. But what he says isn't always mainstream. I personally can't think of anyone else with quite his take on things. That's ok. What he is teaching is legitimate. But try to name someone that has the same perspective that isn't a student of his, and you'll have to look hard.


Not true.
The classification of Sutra (renunciation), Tantra (transformation), and Dzogchen (spontaneous auto-liberation) is just the same within Bon.
I have read and heard the same classification from Yongdzin Tenzin Namdak and other Yungdrung Bon masters.
tatpurusa
 
Posts: 171
Joined: Sat Oct 31, 2009 1:17 am

Re: It's a sign / Magical thinking is stupid

Postby smcj » Sat Nov 23, 2013 10:30 pm

I have read and heard the same classification from Yongdzin Tenzin Namdak and other Yungdrung Bon masters.

Ah, Bon. Well all bets are off with that. I have no idea how they classify stuff.
A human being has his limits. And thus, in every conceivable way, with every possible means, he tries to make the teaching enter into his own limits. ChNN
smcj
 
Posts: 2082
Joined: Wed May 29, 2013 6:13 am

Re: It's a sign / Magical thinking is stupid

Postby futerko » Sat Nov 23, 2013 10:31 pm

padma norbu wrote:
futerko wrote:
padma norbu wrote:That sounds like a one-liner to avoid the specifics I've raised.

Are we making up mandalas out of wholecloth that aren't really there in order to eventuate their reality? OR do those mandalas and visions of reality already have some reality, albeit as empty as our own? From what I have been taught, they exist, but we don't have that particular karmic vision.


What is the difference between a pure view and an impure one? Is it maybe that one recognises emptiness while the other doesn't?


Why can't you just answer my question directly instead of now for the second time not answering the question, specifically?


Because I'm not really understanding the question.
we cannot get rid of God because we still believe in grammar - Nietzsche
User avatar
futerko
 
Posts: 993
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2012 5:58 am

Re: It's a sign / Magical thinking is stupid

Postby tatpurusa » Sat Nov 23, 2013 10:42 pm

smcj wrote:
I have read and heard the same classification from Yongdzin Tenzin Namdak and other Yungdrung Bon masters.

Ah, Bon. Well all bets are off with that. I have no idea how they classify stuff.


Well, there are many differences, but regarding the classification of Sutra, Tantra and Dzogchen they go along with Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche.
And I assume ChNNR's classification is the standard Nyingma one.
tatpurusa
 
Posts: 171
Joined: Sat Oct 31, 2009 1:17 am

Re: It's a sign / Magical thinking is stupid

Postby padma norbu » Sat Nov 23, 2013 11:48 pm

futerko wrote:Because I'm not really understanding the question.


I don't know how to ask the question any clearer, but Tatpurusa already answered in a way I understood perfectly, so I guess it doesn't matter.
"Use what seems like poison as medicine. We can use our personal suffering as the path to compassion for all beings." Pema Chodron
User avatar
padma norbu
 
Posts: 2000
Joined: Sun May 29, 2011 1:10 am

Re: It's a sign / Magical thinking is stupid

Postby padma norbu » Sat Nov 23, 2013 11:50 pm

tatpurusa wrote:
smcj wrote:
I have read and heard the same classification from Yongdzin Tenzin Namdak and other Yungdrung Bon masters.

Ah, Bon. Well all bets are off with that. I have no idea how they classify stuff.


Well, there are many differences, but regarding the classification of Sutra, Tantra and Dzogchen they go along with Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche.
And I assume ChNNR's classification is the standard Nyingma one.


I think the answer to this question of Atiyoga being tantra or not is found in The Crystal & The Way of Light, p. 174, 3rd paragraph down:
http://books.google.com/books?id=C1WtWH ... ra&f=false
"Use what seems like poison as medicine. We can use our personal suffering as the path to compassion for all beings." Pema Chodron
User avatar
padma norbu
 
Posts: 2000
Joined: Sun May 29, 2011 1:10 am

Re: It's a sign / Magical thinking is stupid

Postby catmoon » Sun Nov 24, 2013 3:19 am

Sherab Dorje wrote:Oh look, it's stopped raining again! It's a sign that the practice went well and the Naga are happy! I knew I was on the right track!


Well gee, it hasn't rained here for several days. It think it means its time for you to catch up on your practice. By sending me some souvlaki.
Sergeant Schultz knew everything there was to know.
User avatar
catmoon
Former staff member
 
Posts: 3006
Joined: Thu Nov 19, 2009 3:20 am
Location: British Columbia

Re: It's a sign / Magical thinking is stupid

Postby smcj » Sun Nov 24, 2013 4:05 am

I think the answer to this question of Atiyoga being tantra or not is found in The Crystal & The Way of Light, p. 174, 3rd paragraph down:
http://books.google.com/books?id=C1WtWH ... ra&f=false

In my paperback version p. 174 is an index. That must be the Kindle version.

Anyway, here's the quote:

Although Atiyoga as such does not belong to the Path of Transformation of Tantra, its root texts are nevertheless called tantras and, ever since the second spread of the teachings in Tibet, it has been included among the Inner Tantras and considered to be the supreme level of Tantra.

So it is correctly called Tantra. It goes on to say…

In the same way, although Atiyoga is not a gradual path--for in it one begins immediately with Direct Introduction to the state of Dzogchen--it may also be approached by those who have been 'climbing' through the successive stages of the gradual path, as the latter's last stage.

So just like Vajrayana is a specific form of Mahayana, Atiyoga/Dzogchen is a specific form of Tantra.

But that's just classification. What difference does it really make?
Last edited by smcj on Sun Nov 24, 2013 4:13 am, edited 2 times in total.
A human being has his limits. And thus, in every conceivable way, with every possible means, he tries to make the teaching enter into his own limits. ChNN
smcj
 
Posts: 2082
Joined: Wed May 29, 2013 6:13 am

Re: It's a sign / Magical thinking is stupid

Postby catmoon » Sun Nov 24, 2013 4:09 am

conebeckham wrote:"There are more things on heaven and earth, Padma Norbu, then are dreamt of in your philosophy."

-Wille the Shake


Seriously, though......there's "magical thinking," and then there is the limit of conceptual mind to comprehend the finer workings of interdependent origination. When "something" happens, it could, indeed, "be a sign"--though a sign of what, we don't know....and in the end, "signs" are merely mental signifiers, with no separate reality aside from the mind that signifies.

People who "poo poo" so-called Magical Thinking think they can explain and understand everything rationally, and conceptually, and that the dreamers are out of touch with the way things are. I say "no" to that. On the other hand, most Magical Thinking is ego-based in the final analysis, and usually has no basis in a true comprehension of interdependant origination--it's merely ego's "dream" as it were. Both rationalists, and our more, shall we say, "creative" types, are wrong. That's why there's no correct answer to your poll.

:tongue:


If the magical thinkers are wrong, and the rationalists are wrong, well it sounds an awful lot like you're saying everyone is mad but you!
Sergeant Schultz knew everything there was to know.
User avatar
catmoon
Former staff member
 
Posts: 3006
Joined: Thu Nov 19, 2009 3:20 am
Location: British Columbia

Re: It's a sign / Magical thinking is stupid

Postby dharmagoat » Sun Nov 24, 2013 4:38 am

catmoon wrote:If the magical thinkers are wrong, and the rationalists are wrong, well it sounds an awful lot like you're saying everyone is mad but you!

Middle path, dear cat, middle path.
May all beings be happy
dharmagoat
 
Posts: 1270
Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2009 8:39 pm
Location: Gone Bush

Re: It's a sign / Magical thinking is stupid

Postby catmoon » Sun Nov 24, 2013 4:42 am

dharmagoat wrote:
catmoon wrote:If the magical thinkers are wrong, and the rationalists are wrong, well it sounds an awful lot like you're saying everyone is mad but you!

Middle path, dear cat, middle path.


I'm just sayin that if you eliminate both, it doesn't leave much room for walking.
Sergeant Schultz knew everything there was to know.
User avatar
catmoon
Former staff member
 
Posts: 3006
Joined: Thu Nov 19, 2009 3:20 am
Location: British Columbia

Re: It's a sign / Magical thinking is stupid

Postby smcj » Sun Nov 24, 2013 5:25 am

catmoon wrote:
dharmagoat wrote:
catmoon wrote:If the magical thinkers are wrong, and the rationalists are wrong, well it sounds an awful lot like you're saying everyone is mad but you!

Middle path, dear cat, middle path.

I'm just sayin that if you eliminate both, it doesn't leave much room for walking.

Do the splits and have one foot on each path!
A human being has his limits. And thus, in every conceivable way, with every possible means, he tries to make the teaching enter into his own limits. ChNN
smcj
 
Posts: 2082
Joined: Wed May 29, 2013 6:13 am

Re: It's a sign / Magical thinking is stupid

Postby padma norbu » Sun Nov 24, 2013 5:46 am

smcj wrote:
I think the answer to this question of Atiyoga being tantra or not is found in The Crystal & The Way of Light, p. 174, 3rd paragraph down:
http://books.google.com/books?id=C1WtWH ... ra&f=false

In my paperback version p. 174 is an index. That must be the Kindle version.

Anyway, here's the quote:

Although Atiyoga as such does not belong to the Path of Transformation of Tantra, its root texts are nevertheless called tantras and, ever since the second spread of the teachings in Tibet, it has been included among the Inner Tantras and considered to be the supreme level of Tantra.

So it is correctly called Tantra. It goes on to say…

In the same way, although Atiyoga is not a gradual path--for in it one begins immediately with Direct Introduction to the state of Dzogchen--it may also be approached by those who have been 'climbing' through the successive stages of the gradual path, as the latter's last stage.

So just like Vajrayana is a specific form of Mahayana, Atiyoga/Dzogchen is a specific form of Tantra.

But that's just classification. What difference does it really make?


It doesn't make any difference to me, but someone in this thread was figure out why it's called a tantra or something. Seems like the Atiyoga root texts are referred to as tantras just sort of as a traditional thing, but it doesn't belong to the path of transformation known as "tantra", as it clearly says there.
"Use what seems like poison as medicine. We can use our personal suffering as the path to compassion for all beings." Pema Chodron
User avatar
padma norbu
 
Posts: 2000
Joined: Sun May 29, 2011 1:10 am

Re: It's a sign / Magical thinking is stupid

Postby smcj » Sun Nov 24, 2013 6:10 am

Actually I wanted a good definition of tantra, and included Mahamudra and Dzogchen in my homespun definition. I'm still looking for one.

I came across one by ChNN where he said it was "continuity" or something. That didn't' work for me either.
A human being has his limits. And thus, in every conceivable way, with every possible means, he tries to make the teaching enter into his own limits. ChNN
smcj
 
Posts: 2082
Joined: Wed May 29, 2013 6:13 am

Re: It's a sign / Magical thinking is stupid

Postby padma norbu » Sun Nov 24, 2013 6:30 am

smcj wrote:Actually I wanted a good definition of tantra, and included Mahamudra and Dzogchen in my homespun definition. I'm still looking for one.

I came across one by ChNN where he said it was "continuity" or something. That didn't' work for me either.



This is pretty interesting:
http://www.berzinarchives.com/web/en/ar ... ra_01.html
"Use what seems like poison as medicine. We can use our personal suffering as the path to compassion for all beings." Pema Chodron
User avatar
padma norbu
 
Posts: 2000
Joined: Sun May 29, 2011 1:10 am

Re: It's a sign / Magical thinking is stupid

Postby Lindama » Sun Nov 24, 2013 6:35 am

I heard tantra quite a while ago described as continuation in ChNN or Lama Yeshe's thin book? ... as tantra is a relationship with energies, entering/becoming the energy.... that seems like continuation to me... and continuity. That one word seemed to capture it.
Lindama
 
Posts: 472
Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2012 4:26 pm

Re: It's a sign / Magical thinking is stupid

Postby dharmagoat » Sun Nov 24, 2013 6:40 am

You can look up "tantra" in the online Monier-Williams Dictionary, for what it's worth.

Just type "tantra" in the citation box, and click the Search button.

(Selecting "Roman Unicode" in the Output box will provide a more readable romanised sanskrit.)
May all beings be happy
dharmagoat
 
Posts: 1270
Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2009 8:39 pm
Location: Gone Bush

Re: It's a sign / Magical thinking is stupid

Postby tatpurusa » Sun Nov 24, 2013 10:11 am

Lindama wrote:I heard tantra quite a while ago described as continuation in ChNN or Lama Yeshe's thin book? ... as tantra is a relationship with energies, entering/becoming the energy.... that seems like continuation to me... and continuity. That one word seemed to capture it.


Yes, it has to do with relationships.

tan (skt. verb root) = to weave + tra (a particle that derives noun out of a verb, denoting the instrument used for doing that activity)
very much like in English out of the verb "to cook" we can derive the noun "cooker" using the particle '-er', denoting the instrument used for cooking.
sūtra (from verb root sūtr = "to string or put together") = thread , yarn , string , line , cord

Tantra is the instrument to "weave" one's mind, i.e. to put it into relationship with the whole fabric of the universe created by minds.
This "weaving" has "yarn , string" (sūtra) as its raw material and leading line, direction.

This way of weaving one's mind into mandalas and minds of deities, giving it the right direction (sūtra) is what I call "magical" about tantra.

As always in sanskrit, there exist also other meanings, and in sanskrit texts (especially in trantric ones) it is very common to intentionally exploit, play with the various layers of meanings of words. This is what makes tantric texts so difficult to translate into modern languages.
tatpurusa
 
Posts: 171
Joined: Sat Oct 31, 2009 1:17 am

Re: It's a sign / Magical thinking is stupid

Postby padma norbu » Wed Dec 04, 2013 5:30 pm

I have finally decided... I vote in favor of magical thinking. Even the psychotic kind seems to work for some people. I do, after all, believe in magic. And I'll always have a friend wearing big red shoes.
"Use what seems like poison as medicine. We can use our personal suffering as the path to compassion for all beings." Pema Chodron
User avatar
padma norbu
 
Posts: 2000
Joined: Sun May 29, 2011 1:10 am

Re: It's a sign / Magical thinking is stupid

Postby conebeckham » Wed Dec 04, 2013 9:37 pm

catmoon wrote:
conebeckham wrote:"There are more things on heaven and earth, Padma Norbu, then are dreamt of in your philosophy."

-Wille the Shake


Seriously, though......there's "magical thinking," and then there is the limit of conceptual mind to comprehend the finer workings of interdependent origination. When "something" happens, it could, indeed, "be a sign"--though a sign of what, we don't know....and in the end, "signs" are merely mental signifiers, with no separate reality aside from the mind that signifies.

People who "poo poo" so-called Magical Thinking think they can explain and understand everything rationally, and conceptually, and that the dreamers are out of touch with the way things are. I say "no" to that. On the other hand, most Magical Thinking is ego-based in the final analysis, and usually has no basis in a true comprehension of interdependant origination--it's merely ego's "dream" as it were. Both rationalists, and our more, shall we say, "creative" types, are wrong. That's why there's no correct answer to your poll.

:tongue:


If the magical thinkers are wrong, and the rationalists are wrong, well it sounds an awful lot like you're saying everyone is mad but you!


Where did I say I was not mad?
I am an occasional magical thinker, and an occasional hard-boiled rationalist....but always deep in the mire of samsara. That is madness...the madness we all share.
May any merit generated by on-line discussion
Be dedicated to the Ultimate Benefit of All Sentient Beings.
User avatar
conebeckham
 
Posts: 2742
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 11:49 pm
Location: Bay Area, CA, USA

PreviousNext

Return to Lounge

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Fruitzilla, LastLegend, muni and 8 guests

>