Buddhist Emanations in Indian Religions

Moderator: Tibetan Buddhism moderators

Re: Buddhist Emanations in Indian Religions

Postby Malcolm » Wed May 09, 2012 2:50 pm

Karma Dorje wrote:
I guess you consider yourself a great master. It must be so since you are arguing from experience.


How terribly patronizing. The experience I argue from is my interaction with masters, particularly my tsawai lama that held lineages from both traditions.


Who says your mulaguru actually knows shit? Everyone has a a root guru. Very few of them are realized. And even if you claim he/she is realized, who can vouch for your claim? Proclamations of the realization of one's master is pretty much a shell game.
http://www.bhaisajya.net
http://atikosha.org
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔

" The one who teaches the benefits of peace,
he is said to be a ṛṣī; the others are the opposite of him."

-- Uttaratantra
Malcolm
 
Posts: 10154
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Buddhist Emanations in Indian Religions

Postby Karma Dorje » Wed May 09, 2012 3:24 pm

Namdrol wrote:Who says your mulaguru actually knows shit? Everyone has a a root guru. Very few of them are realized. And even if you claim he/she is realized, who can vouch for your claim? Proclamations of the realization of one's master is pretty much a shell game.


I trust that if someone is recognized by both the Sixteenth Karmapa and Penor Rinpoche, spends more than 40 years of their life in strict retreat, does not attempt to build a dharma kingdom and is able to introduce his students to the dzogchen view and stabilize it, the chances are pretty good that he or she knows what they are talking about. I can't speak for the realization of the root lamas of others as you feel qualified to, but there is little question in my mind that realized gurus are far more common than you opine. Maybe not as common as scholars puffed up with the pride of a sharp mind and a lifetime of reading, but not altogether rare either. Either way, I prefer a charitable view of the realization of others.

All that aside, I suggested that the matter of the realizations gained by masters of various lineages and traditions bears greater consideration not that anyone should take either my opinion or my guru's at face value. If you prefer to dismiss out of hand and condescend, go right ahead. The last thing I want to do is argue about brand marketing with a true believer.
Karma Dorje
 
Posts: 731
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2011 10:35 pm

Re: Buddhist Emanations in Indian Religions

Postby Adamantine » Wed May 09, 2012 3:32 pm

Karma Dorje wrote:I trust that if someone is recognized by both the Sixteenth Karmapa and Penor Rinpoche, spends more than 40 years of their life in strict retreat, does not attempt to build a dharma kingdom and is able to introduce his students to the dzogchen view and stabilize it, the chances are pretty good that he or she knows what they are talking about.


Who is your Guru? Sounds like an interesting Lama. 40 years is a lot of time in retreat.
Contentment is the ultimate wealth;
Detachment is the final happiness. ~Sri Saraha
User avatar
Adamantine
Global Moderator
 
Posts: 2679
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2011 7:09 am

Re: Buddhist Emanations in Indian Religions

Postby Malcolm » Wed May 09, 2012 3:43 pm

Karma Dorje wrote:The last thing I want to do is argue about brand marketing with a true believer.


The only thing I believe in is my own personal experience. Claims of realization are bullshit. Realization is bullshit.

That being said, the idea that the goals of this or that Hindu system and this or that Buddhist system are the same is pretty far fetched, as far as I am concerned.

For example, Jivanmuktis are held to be able to remove the karma of others. This is a preposturous claim from a Buddhist perspective.

N
http://www.bhaisajya.net
http://atikosha.org
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔

" The one who teaches the benefits of peace,
he is said to be a ṛṣī; the others are the opposite of him."

-- Uttaratantra
Malcolm
 
Posts: 10154
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Buddhist Emanations in Indian Religions

Postby Karma Dorje » Wed May 09, 2012 3:55 pm

Namdrol wrote:No it hasn't. Havn't you read Witzel's debunking of the Hindutva nationalist origins theory? Especially Frawley's tepid presentation?


Witzel has staked his reputation on defending a theory that there is no objective evidence for. He has politicized the conversation to a large degree, and of course hearkens from the same system that produced Max Mueller et al. Rajaram gives background to his whole sad story:

http://indianrealist.wordpress.com/2009 ... alifornia/

and speaking to his questionable academic integrity:

http://www.omilosmeleton.gr/pdf/en/indo ... Witzel.pdf

The most damning evidence to the theory, aside from the complete lack of an archeological record which substantiates their fanciful interpretation of veda and itihasa is current genetic analysis that demonstrates that the population of India has been indigenous for at least the last 10,000 years. Whilst at McGill in the 90s, I had constant arguments with Katherine Young and others about this theory which they have all now rejected in light of current scientific evidence. When philology and fact collide, facts usually win.
Karma Dorje
 
Posts: 731
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2011 10:35 pm

Re: Buddhist Emanations in Indian Religions

Postby Karma Dorje » Wed May 09, 2012 4:14 pm

Adamantine wrote:Who is your Guru? Sounds like an interesting Lama. 40 years is a lot of time in retreat.


The late Peling Tulku Rinpoche. http://www.palyulcanada.org/teachers/ve ... -rinpoche/
Karma Dorje
 
Posts: 731
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2011 10:35 pm

Re: Buddhist Emanations in Indian Religions

Postby Adamantine » Wed May 09, 2012 4:18 pm

Namdrol wrote:
For example, Jivanmuktis are held to be able to remove the karma of others. This is a preposturous claim from a Buddhist perspective.

N


But to be fair, aren't there aspects of Tibetan Buddhist belief that are similar? There is a spring related to Guru RInpoche that is a common pilgrimage place in Nepal that is said to wash away one's sins.. There are terma statues that are "liberation on sight" that are said to seal the doors to the lower realms for the person who sees them directly, etc.
Contentment is the ultimate wealth;
Detachment is the final happiness. ~Sri Saraha
User avatar
Adamantine
Global Moderator
 
Posts: 2679
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2011 7:09 am

Re: Buddhist Emanations in Indian Religions

Postby Malcolm » Wed May 09, 2012 4:43 pm

You should read Bryant's book. His basic pov it is that there is little in the way of solid proof for either side of this debate.

Another book you ought to read:

The Horse, The Wheel and Language by David W. Anthony, Princeton, 2007

In partcular you should read the section from 402-411. This entire book adequately supports the claim that PIE evolved in the steppes of Asia among nomads.

The basic point is that language carries culture, not DNA.

So there is plenty of evidence for the fact that Proto IE languge speakers moved into India from outside of it: dna, linguistics, archaeology, etc. These days these kinds of movements can be plotted mathematically on the basis of both linguistics and dna, just as the spread of human language can be plotted mathematically from South Africa to Polynesia. Both phonemic and genetic diversity is densest in South Africa, and least dense in among Polynesians.

Sure, the first people to move into India probably moved there 75,000 years ago. There have been many successive movements of people into India. Humans beings come from Africa, not India.

Witzel owned Frawley because Witzel's Sanskrit is much better than Frawley's and Witzel is a better scholar.

Karma Dorje wrote:
Witzel has staked his reputation on defending a theory that there is no objective evidence for.


The same charge may be leveled at Hindutvavada. Read Bryant.

He has politicized the conversation to a large degree...


So have the Hindutvavadins.

The most damning evidence to the theory, aside from the complete lack of an archeological record which substantiates their fanciful interpretation of veda and itihasa is current genetic analysis that demonstrates that the population of India has been indigenous for at least the last 10,000 years.


This does not prevent IE languages coming from some location in central Asia. Languages, as well as pots, are not people. English proves that well enough.

Whilst at McGill in the 90s, I had constant arguments with Katherine Young and others about this theory which they have all now rejected in light of current scientific evidence. When philology and fact collide, facts usually win.


It is highly unlikely that the IE languages and cultures evolved in India and spread from there. The Hindutva theory is every bit as racist as the Hindutvavadins claim the Aryan Invasion Theory to be.


N
http://www.bhaisajya.net
http://atikosha.org
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔

" The one who teaches the benefits of peace,
he is said to be a ṛṣī; the others are the opposite of him."

-- Uttaratantra
Malcolm
 
Posts: 10154
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Buddhist Emanations in Indian Religions

Postby Lhug-Pa » Wed May 09, 2012 5:30 pm

Even though I would agree that the first human beings (both Enlightened and unenlightened) were Black (i.e. heavily melanated), I'm not so sure about some of the contemporary secular out-of-Africa theories. Sure it would be difficult to deny that the oldest humans of this epoch were and are in Africa. However I think that many of the said secular theories are racist because they imply:

"Black people evolved from apes in Africa, and then Caucasians evolved from Black Africans." In other words implying that Black people are closer to apes, and Caucasians are "more evolved". Which overall is obviously not the case.

So I agree with Chögyal Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche that the idea of humans "evolving from apes" is rather silly.

Anyway I'm not implying that anyone else here thinks that we "evolved from apes", just expanding on the discussion.

Also, I'd definitely like to study more the relationships between Sanskrit and the Dravidian languages such as Tamil.
Last edited by Lhug-Pa on Wed May 09, 2012 6:09 pm, edited 6 times in total.
User avatar
Lhug-Pa
 
Posts: 1409
Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2011 11:58 pm

Re: Buddhist Emanations in Indian Religions

Postby dakini_boi » Wed May 09, 2012 5:44 pm

Lhug-Pa wrote:So I agree with Chögyal Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche that the idea of humans "evolving" from apes is rather silly.


Where does he say this?
dakini_boi
 
Posts: 678
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 2010 1:02 am

Re: Buddhist Emanations in Indian Religions

Postby Karma Dorje » Wed May 09, 2012 5:48 pm

At issue is not where the IE languages developed, but the timeframe and the mechanism of its diffusion. The Aryan invasion theory as you are aware posits a light-skinned conquering tribe of nomadic "Aryas" on chariots that conquered a dark-skinned Dravidian city-dwelling culture bringing with them the Vedic culture. This theory is proto-fascist hogwash based on a fanciful reading of itihasa.

There is no evidence that the Vedic culture originated anywhere other than India. This is not to say that Vedic culture is the source of the IE language family. Conquest is much less effective than commerce to spread a language. English is a perfect example of that.
Karma Dorje
 
Posts: 731
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2011 10:35 pm

Re: Buddhist Emanations in Indian Religions

Postby Lhug-Pa » Wed May 09, 2012 6:07 pm

dakini_boi wrote:
Lhug-Pa wrote:So I agree with Chögyal Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche that the idea of humans "evolving from apes" is rather silly.


Where does he say this?


Not the recent Singapore webcast but the one before that (25 Spaces of Samantabhadra) where he taught about some of the history of Bön and the legitimacy of the Dzogchen of Yungdrung Bön. :thumbsup:
Last edited by Lhug-Pa on Wed May 09, 2012 6:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Lhug-Pa
 
Posts: 1409
Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2011 11:58 pm

Re: Buddhist Emanations in Indian Religions

Postby dakini_boi » Wed May 09, 2012 6:21 pm

cool, thank you.
dakini_boi
 
Posts: 678
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 2010 1:02 am

Re: Buddhist Emanations in Indian Religions

Postby Acchantika » Wed May 09, 2012 7:03 pm

Lhug-Pa wrote:Even though I would agree that the first human beings (both Enlightened and unenlightened) were Black (i.e. heavily melanated), I'm not so sure about some of the contemporary secular out-of-Africa theories. Sure it would be difficult to deny that the oldest humans of this epoch were and are in Africa. However I think that many of the said secular theories are racist because they imply:

"Black people evolved from apes in Africa, and then Caucasians evolved from Black Africans." In other words implying that Black people are closer to apes, and Caucasians are "more evolved". Which overall is obviously not the case.

So I agree with Chögyal Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche that the idea of humans "evolving from apes" is rather silly.


Caucasians didn't evolve from Black Africans. Modern native Africans and modern Caucasians share a common pre-modern African ancestor, from whom they both diverged and are equally distant genetically. So there is no implication that any one race is "more" or "less" evolved.
...
Acchantika
 
Posts: 292
Joined: Sat Jul 30, 2011 5:04 am

Re: Buddhist Emanations in Indian Religions

Postby Sherab Dorje » Wed May 09, 2012 10:09 pm

Namdrol wrote:...Realization is bullshit.
Now,now Namdrol, why don't you calm down a bit and be more discerning in your use of terminology! :tongue: There are lots of Buddhists out there that may just disagree with this point! Maybe you could further expand on what exactly you mean?
:namaste:
"When one is not in accord with the true view
Meditation and conduct become delusion,
One will not attain the real result
One will be like a blind man who has no eyes."
Naropa - Summary of the View from The Eight Doha Treasures
User avatar
Sherab Dorje
Former staff member
 
Posts: 7878
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 9:27 pm
Location: Greece

Re: Buddhist Emanations in Indian Religions

Postby Malcolm » Wed May 09, 2012 11:02 pm

Karma Dorje wrote:At issue is not where the IE languages developed, but the timeframe and the mechanism of its diffusion. The Aryan invasion theory as you are aware posits a light-skinned conquering tribe of nomadic "Aryas" on chariots that conquered a dark-skinned Dravidian city-dwelling culture bringing with them the Vedic culture. This theory is proto-fascist hogwash based on a fanciful reading of itihasa.

There is no evidence that the Vedic culture originated anywhere other than India. This is not to say that Vedic culture is the source of the IE language family. Conquest is much less effective than commerce to spread a language. English is a perfect example of that.



George Dumezil shows there is clear continuity between, for example Roman ritual practices conducted by flamens and Indian ritualism conducted by brahmins, and as we all know, br becomes fl by phonetic shift.

No one has suggested by the way that the Rg Veda was composed outside of India since places in NW India can be clearly discerned with it. What has been suggested is that it was composed by peoples who had newly arrived in India, that the language of the text bears evidence of this fact, and that the culture that produced the Rg Veda bear a culture continuity with steppe nomads.

If by Vedic culture you mean the post Harappan civilization that emerged in India, then we can agree. But if you are proposing the Sarasvati culture meme of the Hindutvavadins, well, they have little evidence for this. It is all very speculative.
http://www.bhaisajya.net
http://atikosha.org
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔

" The one who teaches the benefits of peace,
he is said to be a ṛṣī; the others are the opposite of him."

-- Uttaratantra
Malcolm
 
Posts: 10154
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Buddhist Emanations in Indian Religions

Postby Malcolm » Wed May 09, 2012 11:11 pm

Lhug-Pa wrote:So I agree with Chögyal Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche that the idea of humans "evolving from apes" is rather silly.


Umm, actually Humans evolved from earlier homonids. Apes evolved along different lines than humans, branching off from the hominidea clade. No one who studies paleo-anthropology would say that humans evolved from apes.

The phyisical form we call "homo sapiens" at present is 100% a product of evolution.

Evolution is not merely a theory, it is a demonstrable fact that can be empirically reproduced in labs.
http://www.bhaisajya.net
http://atikosha.org
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔

" The one who teaches the benefits of peace,
he is said to be a ṛṣī; the others are the opposite of him."

-- Uttaratantra
Malcolm
 
Posts: 10154
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Buddhist Emanations in Indian Religions

Postby Lhug-Pa » Wed May 09, 2012 11:45 pm

I don't deny evolution. However I also do not believe that modern humans evolved from hominids that evolved from apes. Sure there may have been various evolutionary and/or devolutionary branches of creatures that resembled something somewhere between apes and humans; but I don't believe that modern Homo Sapiens-Sapiens evolved from semi-upright grunting hominids. I'm not a Theosophist or a professional scientist, but I do lean more towards the Theosophical conceptions of humanity's history; or even better, towards the explanations of how humans are descendants of more Enlightened Beings such as I've been reading in Adriano Clemente's translation of parts of the Kunjed Gyalpo Tantra and appendix 1 of the Padmakara translation of Treasury of Precious Qualities. Not that I take all of it literally either, for example I don't think that Mt. Meru and it's continents was meant to be completely literal.

If there exists the law of evolution, then there would have to be a corresponding law of devolution. Possibly it was even that some hominids and/or apes devolved from Homo-Sapiens.

Anyway, if you didn't attend the retreat I mentioned where Rinpoche talked about some of this, the replay should be available as you know.
User avatar
Lhug-Pa
 
Posts: 1409
Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2011 11:58 pm

Re: Buddhist Emanations in Indian Religions

Postby Malcolm » Wed May 09, 2012 11:50 pm

Lhug-Pa wrote:I don't deny evolution. However I also do not believe that modern humans evolved from hominids that evolved from apes...

Anyway, if you didn't attend the retreat I mentioned where Rinpoche talked about some of this, the replay should be available as you know.


Apes also evolved from hominids. We are all cousins. This is just a genetic fact.

I heard what Rinpoche said. He does not beleive in Meru. Ok. Cool. He does not beleive in the evolution of humans from apes. Ok. Cool (anthropologists don't either). He prefers the Treta Yuga etc., model. Ok cool -- but that has nothing to do with the mathematical precision with which we can track DNA, etc., and nothing to do with the fact that our human form evolved from earlier and less sophisticated forms.

N
http://www.bhaisajya.net
http://atikosha.org
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔

" The one who teaches the benefits of peace,
he is said to be a ṛṣī; the others are the opposite of him."

-- Uttaratantra
Malcolm
 
Posts: 10154
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Buddhist Emanations in Indian Religions

Postby mañjughoṣamaṇi » Thu May 10, 2012 12:34 am

Lhug-Pa wrote:If there exists the law of evolution, then there would have to be a corresponding law of devolution. Possibly it was even that some hominids and/or apes devolved from Homo-Sapiens.


You are using the term evolution in a non-technical manner. Evolutionary theory, unlike the various 19th century new age histories you mention, does not imply a teleological narrative of progress from lower to higher. Using the term devolution when discussing evolution is meaningless. Evolution is adaption driven by environmental pressures. Many species have evolved themselves out of existence by adapting too narrowly to a given ecosystem which then undergoes dramatic changes too rapidly for the species to adapt.
སེམས་རྣམ་པར་གྲོལ་བར་བྱའི་ཕྱིར་བྱམས་པ་བསྒོམ་པར་བྱའོ།
“In order to completely liberate the mind, cultivate loving kindness.” -- Maitribhāvana Sūtra
mañjughoṣamaṇi
 
Posts: 115
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2011 9:26 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Tibetan Buddhism

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: heart and 14 guests

>