"...but the science of Buddhism will never change."

Moderator: Tibetan Buddhism moderators

Re: "...but the science of Buddhism will never change."

Postby Malcolm » Tue Dec 31, 2013 1:45 am

Tsongkhapafan wrote:
I don't really want to get into this as it is obviously pointless and divisive. Dzogchen is not the entire basis of the Nyingma school, they follow Buddha's Sutra and Tantra teachings.


Dzogchen is the pinnacle of the Nyingma schools teaching. They are the ultimate teaching of the Nyingma school. Dzogchen is Buddhahood as well as the basic reality out of which Buddhahood is realized.



There's no mention of Dzogchen at all in this.


You apparently do not read carefully. From the page you give:

From the point of view of individually ascribed names, there are numerous traditions, such as those of the simultaneously arising as merged, the amulet box, possessing five, the six spheres of equal taste, the four syllables, the pacifier, the object to be cut off, dzogchen, the discursive madhyamaka view, and so on.

when you start denigrating Nagarjuna...


No one denigrated Nāgārjuna.

...something that was not taught by Buddha at all...


There you go again with the sectarian, biased, rubbish-filled rhetoric that Dzogchen was not taught by a Buddha. I don't think you really want to go down the road of making accusations that some teachings were not taught by the Buddha such as certain practices which exist in certain quarters that come to mind...
Last edited by Malcolm on Tue Dec 31, 2013 2:13 am, edited 4 times in total.
http://www.bhaisajya.net
http://www.bhaisajya.guru
http://atikosha.org
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔

Though there are infinite liberating gateways of Dharma,
there are none not included in the dimension of the knowledge of the Great Perfection.

-- Buddha Samantabhadri
User avatar
Malcolm
 
Posts: 11942
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: "...but the science of Buddhism will never change."

Postby ConradTree » Tue Dec 31, 2013 1:46 am

Malcolm wrote:There you go again with the sectarian, biased, rubbish-filled rhetoric that Dzogchen was not taught by a Buddha.


Exactly.

:cheers:

Dzogchen comes from realized people who acheived full Buddhahood.
ConradTree
 
Posts: 303
Joined: Sun Dec 29, 2013 6:33 pm

Re: "...but the science of Buddhism will never change."

Postby tobes » Tue Dec 31, 2013 1:47 am

......the science of Buddhism will never change. Doesn't it come down to a first principle? I'll frame it thus:

"My school was founded by the second Buddha, whose word is equal to the first Buddha."

(Dzogchenpas vs Gelugpas...wow....fascinating, I've never seen that before....)

:anjali:
User avatar
tobes
Global Moderator
 
Posts: 1140
Joined: Fri Dec 24, 2010 5:02 am

Re: "...but the science of Buddhism will never change."

Postby Malcolm » Tue Dec 31, 2013 1:49 am

Tsongkhapafan wrote:
Buddha Vajradhara, the enjoyment body aspect of Buddha Shakyamuni, taught Tantra.


Buddha Samantabhadra, the Dharmakāya aspect of Buddha Shakyamuni, taught Dzogchen. So did Buddha Vajradhara on the Amolika rock of the Thirty Three Heavens.
http://www.bhaisajya.net
http://www.bhaisajya.guru
http://atikosha.org
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔

Though there are infinite liberating gateways of Dharma,
there are none not included in the dimension of the knowledge of the Great Perfection.

-- Buddha Samantabhadri
User avatar
Malcolm
 
Posts: 11942
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: "...but the science of Buddhism will never change."

Postby Malcolm » Tue Dec 31, 2013 1:51 am

Tsongkhapafan wrote:
Norwegian wrote:What has gone astray, is your understanding Tsongkhapafan, which is sorely lacking. Not only that, but your reading comprehension is lacking as well:

"From the point of view of individually ascribed names, there are numerous traditions, such as those of the simultaneously arising as merged, the amulet box, possessing five, the six spheres of equal taste, the four syllables, the pacifier, the object to be cut off, dzogchen, the discursive madhyamaka view, and so on. Nevertheless, when scrutinized by a yogi, learned in scripture and logic and experienced (in meditation), their definitive meanings are all seen to come to the same intended point."

From the page you yourself just linked.

Please rid yourself of your narrowmindedness and secterianism, and be more open minded. Study more. You may learn something.


Thank you for pointing that out, I did make a mistake and didn't notice that reference, I scanned the document too hastily.



Yes, this means that for you, Dzogchen is valid because it is validated in a scripture you consider fundamental to your school.
http://www.bhaisajya.net
http://www.bhaisajya.guru
http://atikosha.org
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔

Though there are infinite liberating gateways of Dharma,
there are none not included in the dimension of the knowledge of the Great Perfection.

-- Buddha Samantabhadri
User avatar
Malcolm
 
Posts: 11942
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: "...but the science of Buddhism will never change."

Postby Malcolm » Tue Dec 31, 2013 1:52 am

conebeckham wrote:Wait, I thought Heruka Cakrasamvara appeared and taught tantra......?!?!? :shrug:


The Sakyapa position is that Cakrasamvara was not taught by Śakyamuni during this dispensation.

Loppon Sonam Tsemo states:

“Other than his general activities, he did not recite or teach later on. Having taught the Tattvasamgraha in the beginning, after completing that tantra he arrived in human lands....” and so on. Likewise, he performed the deeds of arriving in Jambudvipa, etc., but he did not recite or teach the Śrī Cakrasamvara Tantra later on”

Not only did Śakyamuni not teach this during his eighty year sojourn in India, but also the root Yogatantra, Tattvasamgraha was not taught by Śakyamuni during this period either.

This is actually the position of the Indian master, Bhavyakirti. He along with Bhavabhata maintain:

This teacher (i.e. Śakyamuni) having attained buddhahood in the beginningless past taught the Cakrasamvara tantras, but later, after becoming the son of Śuddodana, did not teach it. Their reasoning holds that since Cakrasamvara is continually practiced by the heros and yoginis of the twenty four countries, even when the eon forms and perished (the twenty four countries) do not form and perish so [the Cakrasamvara] does not disappear. Even though other dharmas may have also been taught in the beginning, since they are destroyed by the formation and perishing of the eon, since they disappear during the interval, they must be taught again by Śākyamuni.
Last edited by Malcolm on Tue Dec 31, 2013 2:29 am, edited 1 time in total.
http://www.bhaisajya.net
http://www.bhaisajya.guru
http://atikosha.org
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔

Though there are infinite liberating gateways of Dharma,
there are none not included in the dimension of the knowledge of the Great Perfection.

-- Buddha Samantabhadri
User avatar
Malcolm
 
Posts: 11942
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: "...but the science of Buddhism will never change."

Postby Malcolm » Tue Dec 31, 2013 2:20 am

tobes wrote:......the science of Buddhism will never change. Doesn't it come down to a first principle? I'll frame it thus:

"My school was founded by the second Buddha, whose word is equal to the first Buddha."

(Dzogchenpas vs Gelugpas...wow....fascinating, I've never seen that before....)

:anjali:


Actually, it is more like, Dzogchen (according to its texts) was taught by the primordial ultimate Buddha [ye nas don dam pa'i sangs rgyas]. Everything else by the relative Buddhas.
http://www.bhaisajya.net
http://www.bhaisajya.guru
http://atikosha.org
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔

Though there are infinite liberating gateways of Dharma,
there are none not included in the dimension of the knowledge of the Great Perfection.

-- Buddha Samantabhadri
User avatar
Malcolm
 
Posts: 11942
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: "...but the science of Buddhism will never change."

Postby Tsongkhapafan » Tue Dec 31, 2013 2:32 am

Malcolm wrote:
Tsongkhapafan wrote:Buddha Samantabhadra, the Dharmakāya aspect of Buddha Shakyamuni, taught Dzogchen


The Dharmakaya does not teach because it can only be perceived by other Buddhas. The Dharmakaya manifests subtle and gross form bodies for the purpose of teaching.
User avatar
Tsongkhapafan
 
Posts: 229
Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2011 9:36 am

Re: "...but the science of Buddhism will never change."

Postby Malcolm » Tue Dec 31, 2013 2:38 am

Tsongkhapafan wrote:
Malcolm wrote:
Tsongkhapafan wrote:Buddha Samantabhadra, the Dharmakāya aspect of Buddha Shakyamuni, taught Dzogchen


The Dharmakaya does not teach because it can only be perceived by other Buddhas. The Dharmakaya manifests subtle and gross form bodies for the purpose of teaching.



Master Sonam Tsemo contends:

If the teacher’a sambhogakāya teaches Dharma to the retinue, if it is wondered how there can be teaching since the teacher’s dharmakāya does not teach anything, since the mind of the teacher is the dharmakāya, it will also teach. Further, also the dharmakāya itself, demonstrates aspects of form. Its behavior as a Dharma teacher is called “Teacher Śrī Vajradhara”. As the Tattvasamgraha says:

E ma ho, I am the stable being,
self-originated Samantabhadra.
Since he is stable, although without a body,
he transforms into the body of a being.


What do you imagine that name of the Buddha who teaches Dzogchen is? Why Samantabhadra, of course.
Last edited by Malcolm on Tue Dec 31, 2013 2:44 am, edited 3 times in total.
http://www.bhaisajya.net
http://www.bhaisajya.guru
http://atikosha.org
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔

Though there are infinite liberating gateways of Dharma,
there are none not included in the dimension of the knowledge of the Great Perfection.

-- Buddha Samantabhadri
User avatar
Malcolm
 
Posts: 11942
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: "...but the science of Buddhism will never change."

Postby conebeckham » Tue Dec 31, 2013 2:43 am

Malcolm wrote:
conebeckham wrote:Wait, I thought Heruka Cakrasamvara appeared and taught tantra......?!?!? :shrug:


The Sakyapa position is that Cakrasamvara was not taught by Śakyamuni during this dispensation.

Loppon Sonam Tsemo states:

“Other than his general activities, he did not recite or teach later on. Having taught the Tattvasamgraha in the beginning, after completing that tantra he arrived in human lands....” and so on. Likewise, he performed the deeds of arriving in Jambudvipa, etc., but he did not recite or teach the Śrī Cakrasamvara Tantra later on”

Not only did Śakyamuni not teach this during his eighty year sojourn in India, but also the root Yogatantra, Tattvasamgraha was not taught by Śakyamuni during this period either.

This is actually the position of the Indian master, Bhavyakirti. He along with Bhavabhata maintain:

This teacher (i.e. Śakyamuni) having attained buddhahood in the beginningless past taught the Cakrasamvara tantras, but later, after becoming the son of Śuddodana, did not teach it. Their reasoning holds that since Cakrasamvara is continually practiced by the heros and yoginis of the twenty four countries, even when the eon forms and perished (the twenty four countries) do not form and perish so [the Cakrasamvara] does not disappear. Even though other dharmas may have also been taught in the beginning, since they are destroyed by the formation and perishing of the eon, since they disappear during the interval, they must be taught again by Śākyamuni.


This relates to the assertion that Samvara, unlike the other HYT deities, did not "dissolve" after teaching, but remained.....which is what I was referring to.

But my larger point is that all sorts of assertions are made regarding legitimacy....all sorts of arguments are made. Garab Dorje must have existed chronologically in an earlier eon than Sakyamuni, thus "legitimizing" Dzogchen.....HYT was "Taught by Emanations of Sakyamuni," therefore Gelukpas, who are after all reformed Kadampas, can "buy in" to HYT practices, etc. The Agamas are closer to the historic Buddha's time, therefore, more "correct."

It's all well and good, but utlimately I'm more interested in soteriological relevance than historical accuracy. And that's a good thing, I think.
May any merit generated by on-line discussion
Be dedicated to the Ultimate Benefit of All Sentient Beings.
User avatar
conebeckham
 
Posts: 2679
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 11:49 pm
Location: Bay Area, CA, USA

Re: "...but the science of Buddhism will never change."

Postby Malcolm » Tue Dec 31, 2013 2:46 am

conebeckham wrote:It's all well and good, but utlimately I'm more interested in soteriological relevance than historical accuracy. And that's a good thing, I think.



Oh I agree, but TKf started in with all of this nonsense, making no effort to establish his view with recourse to reasoning, preferring instead to regale us with "Just so" stories. Well, I am pretty good at that too, maybe a little better, actually.
http://www.bhaisajya.net
http://www.bhaisajya.guru
http://atikosha.org
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔

Though there are infinite liberating gateways of Dharma,
there are none not included in the dimension of the knowledge of the Great Perfection.

-- Buddha Samantabhadri
User avatar
Malcolm
 
Posts: 11942
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: "...but the science of Buddhism will never change."

Postby IdleChater » Tue Dec 31, 2013 2:54 am

ConradTree wrote:Wikipedia is not correct.

Anyway the point is that Tilopa, Naropa, Saraha, Khenpo Pelzang are full Buddhas and are as authoratative as Shakyamuni.


Actually you said they were samyaksambuddhas, which they are not - at least not Tilopa and Naropa.

Wikipedia does contain a correct definition of samyaksambuddha.
IdleChater
 
Posts: 18
Joined: Fri Dec 27, 2013 4:08 am

Re: "...but the science of Buddhism will never change."

Postby smcj » Tue Dec 31, 2013 3:06 am

Cone wrote:It's all well and good, but utlimately I'm more interested in soteriological relevance than historical accuracy.

If by "soteriological relevance" you mean validity and legitimacy, I would agree. I think Nagarjuna (naga-arjuna) is valid even though I don't buy the sea-serpent time capsule version of Madhyamaka's legitimacy/validity. I don't need everything traced back to Sakyamuni in order to be legitimate. Dharma can progress and develop.

Malcolm wrote:Well, I am pretty good at that too, maybe a little better, actually.

I'm going to go with "a little better" on that one.

But I still reserve the right to disagree with you!
Last edited by smcj on Tue Dec 31, 2013 3:27 am, edited 1 time 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: 2078
Joined: Wed May 29, 2013 6:13 am

Re: "...but the science of Buddhism will never change."

Postby ConradTree » Tue Dec 31, 2013 3:26 am

IdleChater wrote:are not - at least not Tilopa and Naropa.


yes Tilopa and Naropa are samyaksambuddhas.

IdleChater wrote:Wikipedia does contain a correct definition of samyaksambuddha.


No it doesn't.
ConradTree
 
Posts: 303
Joined: Sun Dec 29, 2013 6:33 pm

Re: "...but the science of Buddhism will never change."

Postby smcj » Tue Dec 31, 2013 3:37 am

ConradTree wrote:
IdleChater wrote:are not - at least not Tilopa and Naropa.

yes Tilopa and Naropa are samyaksambuddhas.

I thought the next samyaksambuddha after Shakyamuni was Maitreya.
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: 2078
Joined: Wed May 29, 2013 6:13 am

Re: "...but the science of Buddhism will never change."

Postby IdleChater » Tue Dec 31, 2013 3:39 am

smcj wrote:
ConradTree wrote:
IdleChater wrote:are not - at least not Tilopa and Naropa.

yes Tilopa and Naropa are samyaksambuddhas.

I thought the next samyaksambuddha after Shakyamuni was Maitreya.


That's right.
IdleChater
 
Posts: 18
Joined: Fri Dec 27, 2013 4:08 am

Re: "...but the science of Buddhism will never change."

Postby Tsondru » Tue Dec 31, 2013 7:08 am

Re: Tsongkhapa fan 'Buddha did not teach Dzogchen' however what your lineage practices was taught by the Buddha. Furthermore if another lineage did differ from following the Madhyamaka that you prefer from Nagarjuna and Chandrakirti no buddhahood is to be attained. So let me get this straight if for example Dzogchen differs from the madhyamaka you prefer you've come to provide us with a handy quote that no practitioner of Dzogchen can or has attained enlightenment? You really can't be claiming that can you? :crazy: :lol:

Would you kindly explain your view to HHDL who has received various nyingma traditions and learned Dzogchen? perhaps you could fill him in that he is not practicing what the Buddha taught.. Of course you wouldn't be able to ;)

"The main teaching of the original teacher Buddha Samantabhadra is Dzogchen, the Great Perfection. The teachings of Dzogchen are the pinnacle of all nine vehicles. Before the Dzogchen teachings arrived in our human world, they were propagated through the Gyalwa Gong-gyü, the mind transmission of the victorious ones, in the three divine realms: first in Akanishtha, then in Tushita, and lastly in the Realm of the 33 Gods, the world of Indra and his 32 vassal kings located on the summit of Mount Sumeru.
Generally, it is said that the 6,400,000 Dzogchen teachings entered this world via Garab Dorje, the first human vidyadhara, who directly received the transmission from the Buddha in the form of Vajrasattva. These teachings first arrived in Uddiyana, and later were propagated in India and Tibet. Before the era of Buddha Shakyamuni the Dzogchen teachings were propagated in our part of the universe by other buddhas known as the Twelve Dzogchen Teachers. Buddha Shakyamuni is usually counted as the fourth guide in this Excellent Aeon in which one thousand fully enlightened buddhas are to appear in our world. Although in this context he is known as the fourth guide, Shakyamuni is the twelfth in the line of Dzogchen teachers.
No Dzogchen teachings have occurred apart from the appearance of a buddha in this world, so we must count Buddha Shakyamuni as one of the chief teachers through whom the teachings were transmitted. He did, indeed, convey Dzogchen teachings, though not in the conventional manner. His conventional teachings were primarily received by those who had a karmic connection with the teachings appropriate to shravakas, pratyekabuddhas and bodhisattvas. It was not that they were not allowed to receive the Dzogchen teachings; their karmic fortune was such that they received the teachings to which they were suited. The Buddha gave Dzogchen teachings, as well as other Vajrayana instructions, by first manifesting the mandala of a deity and then imparting the tantric teachings to a retinue seated within that setting. This, however, does not lie within the scope of what was perceived by ordinary people.
--Tulku Urgyen Rinpoche "
Tsondru
 
Posts: 7
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2013 6:57 am

Re: "...but the science of Buddhism will never change."

Postby smcj » Tue Dec 31, 2013 8:32 am

The Buddha gave Dzogchen teachings, as well as other Vajrayana instructions, by first manifesting the mandala of a deity and then imparting the tantric teachings to a retinue seated within that setting. This, however, does not lie within the scope of what was perceived by ordinary people.
(formatting mine)

So it happened outside of what an ordinary person could perceive? Did it happen in another dimension? :shrug:
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: 2078
Joined: Wed May 29, 2013 6:13 am

Re: "...but the science of Buddhism will never change."

Postby Lindama » Tue Dec 31, 2013 8:51 am

smcj wrote:
The Buddha gave Dzogchen teachings, as well as other Vajrayana instructions, by first manifesting the mandala of a deity and then imparting the tantric teachings to a retinue seated within that setting. This, however, does not lie within the scope of what was perceived by ordinary people.
(formatting mine)

So it happened outside of what an ordinary person could perceive? Did it happen in another dimension? :shrug:


The quote is talking about a teaching that some have eyes for and others don't. It is right here, on the ground, not in another dimension imo.

From a zen perspective and my partial understanding, I don't understand ordinary mind as an indication of mundane, or lacking a higher value than an extra ordinary mind as in a comparison. Ordinary mind is pointing at a natural state lacking in concept, rich in relationship.... feeling that when I stand up, the whole world stands up. Beware, the literalists!
Lindama
 
Posts: 464
Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2012 4:26 pm

Re: "...but the science of Buddhism will never change."

Postby Tsongkhapafan » Tue Dec 31, 2013 10:08 am

Tsondru wrote:Re: Tsongkhapa fan 'Buddha did not teach Dzogchen' however what your lineage practices was taught by the Buddha. Furthermore if another lineage did differ from following the Madhyamaka that you prefer from Nagarjuna and Chandrakirti no buddhahood is to be attained. So let me get this straight if for example Dzogchen differs from the madhyamaka you prefer you've come to provide us with a handy quote that no practitioner of Dzogchen can or has attained enlightenment? You really can't be claiming that can you? :crazy: :lol:

Would you kindly explain your view to HHDL who has received various nyingma traditions and learned Dzogchen? perhaps you could fill him in that he is not practicing what the Buddha taught.. Of course you wouldn't be able to ;)

"The main teaching of the original teacher Buddha Samantabhadra is Dzogchen, the Great Perfection. The teachings of Dzogchen are the pinnacle of all nine vehicles. Before the Dzogchen teachings arrived in our human world, they were propagated through the Gyalwa Gong-gyü, the mind transmission of the victorious ones, in the three divine realms: first in Akanishtha, then in Tushita, and lastly in the Realm of the 33 Gods, the world of Indra and his 32 vassal kings located on the summit of Mount Sumeru.
Generally, it is said that the 6,400,000 Dzogchen teachings entered this world via Garab Dorje, the first human vidyadhara, who directly received the transmission from the Buddha in the form of Vajrasattva. These teachings first arrived in Uddiyana, and later were propagated in India and Tibet. Before the era of Buddha Shakyamuni the Dzogchen teachings were propagated in our part of the universe by other buddhas known as the Twelve Dzogchen Teachers. Buddha Shakyamuni is usually counted as the fourth guide in this Excellent Aeon in which one thousand fully enlightened buddhas are to appear in our world. Although in this context he is known as the fourth guide, Shakyamuni is the twelfth in the line of Dzogchen teachers.
No Dzogchen teachings have occurred apart from the appearance of a buddha in this world, so we must count Buddha Shakyamuni as one of the chief teachers through whom the teachings were transmitted. He did, indeed, convey Dzogchen teachings, though not in the conventional manner. His conventional teachings were primarily received by those who had a karmic connection with the teachings appropriate to shravakas, pratyekabuddhas and bodhisattvas. It was not that they were not allowed to receive the Dzogchen teachings; their karmic fortune was such that they received the teachings to which they were suited. The Buddha gave Dzogchen teachings, as well as other Vajrayana instructions, by first manifesting the mandala of a deity and then imparting the tantric teachings to a retinue seated within that setting. This, however, does not lie within the scope of what was perceived by ordinary people.
--Tulku Urgyen Rinpoche "


I'm saying three things:

1. Buddha Shayamuni/Buddha Vajradhara did not teach Dzogchen - his teachings are the Sutras and Tantras. These teachings are a complete system that lead to liberation and enlightenment by removing all mental obscurations.

2. The true nature of phenomena is emptiness, lack of inherent existence. There is no attainment of enlightenment without realising this because grasping at its opposite is the cause of all mental obscurations.

3. There is no path to higher attainments that doesn't depend upon meditating on emptiness. The meaning of emptiness was explained by Buddha and reiterated by Nagarjuna and Chandrakirti.
User avatar
Tsongkhapafan
 
Posts: 229
Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2011 9:36 am

PreviousNext

Return to Tibetan Buddhism

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Boris, Gyaltsen Tashi, heart, rai and 29 guests

>