Rebel Buddha: On The Road To Freedom

[heart]

Preservation is certainly a function, but a "central" claim? Sorry man, but I just can't go there with ya.

Why don't you ask DPR about it? See if we old folks might make some sense after all.

/magnus

[kirtu]

For example:

Boucher, Daniel. Bodhisattvas of the Forest and the Formation of the Mahāyāna: A Study and Translation of the Rāṣṭrapālaparipṛcchā-sūtra. University of Hawaii Press, 2008.

Nattier, Jan. A Few Good Men: The Bodhisattva Path According to the Inquiry of Ugra (Ugraparipṛcchā). University of Hawaii Press, 2005.

Ray, Reginald A. Buddhist Saints in India: A Study in Buddhist Values and Orientations. Oxford University Press, 1999.

Silk, Jonathan. The Origin and Early History of the Mahāratnakūṭa Tradition of Mahāyāna Buddhism With A Study of the Ratnarāśisūtra and Related Materials. Doctoral Dissertation, 1994.

Thanks! I'll check those out.

The siddha communities also developed to meet the needs of different people at a different time.

Well the siddha tradition is a source of controversy. There is no real history of the siddha tradition for example. We just know that Shakyamuni Buddha originally embraced the siddha life so it was likely long established prior to him (i.e. it wasn't a recent development during his time).

By "siddha communities" I mean the vajrayāna siddhas of the second half of the first century CE, not the śramaṇa community initiated by Gautama Buddha ~1000 years earlier.

But these siddha communities are totally lost in religious mythology; they have no written history (at least none I am aware of) until much later. Scholarly attempts to reconstruct the siddha communities seem speculative at best.

Kirt

[heart]

So you know exactly what the Buddha taught and to who he taught it exactly how?

The basis of what he taught has been preserved in the Pāḷi Nikāyas and the Sanskrit Āgamas. The basic dharma that was inspired by him is all there.

So your point is that Buddha wrote them himself? Seriously, one oral tradition might be of the same value as an other oral tradition, who can say what tradition covers the complete truth.

/magnus

[Chaz]

Yes, for sure.
Karl is brilliant, personable, witty, humble...and tall. Very tall.

Yes, Karl is mos def da man!

Out here in CO we don't get a chance to see KB very often. I've never been to one of his teachings, but the Boulder sangha has talked recently about sending him an invite. I guess I could (and perhaps should) attend Sangha retreat and catch him there, but .........

My hopes for Sangha retreat in '11 were dashed today by a visit with a Radiological Oncologist. Talk about depressing! FYI, I'm tasked with deciding whether or not to have my Non-Hodgkins Lymphoma treated this summer. That's right up there with deciding on a colonoscopy, except the colonoscopy doesn't last for a month.

It seems like American-born male Buddhist teachers are oftentimes "tall" - Karl is one. Reggie Ray and Andrew Holocek are two others.

[Jnana]

So you know exactly what the Buddha taught and to who he taught it exactly how?

The basis of what he taught has been preserved in the Pāḷi Nikāyas and the Sanskrit Āgamas. The basic dharma that was inspired by him is all there.

So your point is that Buddha wrote them himself?

No, that's not my point. Clearly he didn't. But these ancient collections do preserve the basic message and practice injunctions that were initiated by him and the earliest monastic disciples.

Seriously, one oral tradition might be of the same value as an other oral tradition, who can say what tradition covers the complete truth.

It's not a question of value. I consider the Mahāyāna (including the vajrayāna) to be valuable, otherwise I wouldn't practice these teachings. But my faith in the value of these teachings doesn't necessitate believing that they were taught by the śramaṇa Gautama Buddha. Nor does it necessitate believing that any of these Mahāyāna lineages have been preserved continuously by awakened human beings in this world.

[Chaz]

Preservation is certainly a function, but a "central" claim? Sorry man, but I just can't go there with ya.

Why don't you ask DPR about it? See if we old folks might make some sense after all.

/magnus

Well, next time I "see" him, I just might.

The only thing is I don't get to see and speak with DPR very often, and this "central claim" thing just isn't that important. If I'm gonna take up my guru's time, I'm not going to waste it on a question like that. I'm going to ask questions that would hopefully provide something worthwhile - like advice that will benefit my practice.

And as far as "old" goes, I'm not exactly a spring chicken myself.

[Jnana]

It seems like American-born male Buddhist teachers are oftentimes "tall" - Karl is one.

Karl is German. My guess is that he was probably born there?... Certainly a good and knowledgeable teacher.

[Chaz]

It seems like American-born male Buddhist teachers are oftentimes "tall" - Karl is one.

Karl is German. My guess is that he was probably born there?... Certainly a good and knowledgeable teacher.

The name is certainly german, but I don't know if he was born there or not. I thought he was born in the US.

No matter where he was born, he is certainly tall.

[heart]

Preservation is certainly a function, but a "central" claim? Sorry man, but I just can't go there with ya.

Why don't you ask DPR about it? See if we old folks might make some sense after all.

/magnus

Well, next time I "see" him, I just might.

The only thing is I don't get to see and speak with DPR very often, and this "central claim" thing just isn't that important. If I'm gonna take up my guru's time, I'm not going to waste it on a question like that. I'm going to ask questions that would hopefully provide something worthwhile - like advice that will benefit my practice.

And as far as "old" goes, I'm not exactly a spring chicken myself.

Well, understanding the heart of Buddhism is a very important subject no matter what you think. Once you grasp the importance of the transmission of wisdom you will also understand that what Buddhism is "preserving" is that the proof is in the pudding. You have to first realize it, then change the way you communicate it. Not the other way around.

/magnus

[Jnana]

You have to first realize it, then change the way you communicate it. Not the other way around.

Who here has suggested otherwise?

[heart]

It's not a question of value. I consider the Mahāyāna (including the vajrayāna) to be valuable, otherwise I wouldn't practice these teachings. But my faith in the value of these teachings doesn't necessitate believing that they were taught by the śramaṇa Gautama Buddha. Nor does it necessitate believing that any of these Mahāyāna lineages have been preserved continuously by awakened human beings in this world.

All Buddhist genuine lineages preserve the basic message no matter how fantastic it might seem. The Tibetan civilization is the ultimate proof of that since they preserved all the three yanas without twisting, mixing or distorting their message. They did this because the believed that the Buddhas teachings where sweet in the beginning, sweet in the middle ad sweet in the end. There is no point preserving something that don't have the power to liberate beings.

/magnus

[heart]

You have to first realize it, then change the way you communicate it. Not the other way around.

Who here has suggested otherwise?

Well this whole thread is about Westerners knowing, rather than realizing, the true meaning of Buddhism a lot better than the Asian teachers.

/magnus

[Chaz]

You have to first realize it, then change the way you communicate it. Not the other way around.

Who here has suggested otherwise?

Well this whole thread is about Westerners knowing, rather than realizing, the true meaning of Buddhism a lot better than the Asian teachers.

/magnus

You must be joking. This thread is about about a book (that you haven't read) and it's author (Check the OP). An author who just happens to be one the greatest teachers of his generation. It should also be noted that this teacher/author is "asian". He's an ethnic Tibetan, born in India. AND I can't think of a single one of his students who think they know more about the "true meaning of Buddhism" than Rinpoche does. I would dare to say he probably knows more about it than you do. And I can guarantee that his realizations are far beyond anyone on this board. Period.

[heart]

You must be joking. This thread is about about a book (that you haven't read) and it's author (Check the OP). An author who just happens to be one the greatest teachers of his generation. It should also be noted that this teacher/author is "asian". He's an ethnic Tibetan, born in India. AND I can't think of a single one of his students who think they know more about the "true meaning of Buddhism" than Rinpoche does. I would dare to say he probably knows more about it than you do. And I can guarantee that his realizations are far beyond anyone on this board. Period.

Sure, and in reply to you and other posters in this thread let me quote Thinley Norbu Rinpoche.

"Westerners think Buddhism comes from the East, and they do not want to have to depend on the East for Buddhism. But the idea that we don't need the East is racist and patronizing. Since these Westerners are eager to invent a special Western Buddhism, they must think it is particularly for the benefit of Western sentient beings, but Buddhism is for all sentient beings."

/magnus

[Jnana]

Well this whole thread is about Westerners knowing, rather than realizing, the true meaning of Buddhism a lot better than the Asian teachers.

As already mentioned previously in this post, it isn't about "Asian" versus "Western."

[heart]

Well this whole thread is about Westerners knowing, rather than realizing, the true meaning of Buddhism a lot better than the Asian teachers.

As already mentioned previously in this post, it isn't about "Asian" versus "Western."

Traditional versus Academic suits you better?

/magnus

[justsit]

The "point" as made by DPR is that he sees it as unrealistic to take the model of Tibetan Buddhism as practiced in Tibet, plunk it down in 21st century America, and expect it to work in the same way. Monasticism was the rock bottom foundation for TB in Tibet; how can that system work here?? We in the US do not have, and very likely will never have, a monastic orientation. We don't have enough candidates and qualified teachers, few if any parents here will send their 6 year olds away, we don't have the big financial sponsors, there is NO societal support. Rinpoche is suggesting that the outer form will of necessity be different. He is not trying to change for the sake of change, or "create" a wonderful new and better American Buddhism, or say that the old form is deficient in any way. If Buddhism evolved when it moved from India to Tibet, to China, to Japan, to Southeast Asia, why should it not evolve when moving here? So...he offers his thoughts to stimulate discussion...

I must say, I find it particularly disturbing that anyone on this forum would suggest that somehow there is any racist context or subcontext in Rinpoche's discussion.

[Chaz]

and in reply to you and other posters in this thread let me quote Thinley Norbu Rinpoche.

I, personally, couldn't care less what Thinley Norbu Rinpoche has to say as far as this thread is concerned.

I am DEEPLY offended. DEEPLY!!! The implication of racism is misplaced and wrong.

I also think it rather cowardly to think that your fellow Buddhists are racists and THEN hide behind Thinley Norbu Rinpoche to assert that in a public forum. You'd be better served to simply come out and demonstrate the courage of your convictions and just call us a bunch of racists leaving Thinley Norbu Rinpoche out of it.

The additional implied implication the the Dzogchen Ponlop Rinpoche somehow falls under that same pathetic umbrella of racism is beyond offensive.

I think you should be ashamed of yourself.

I also think an apology is in order.

[Josef]

and in reply to you and other posters in this thread let me quote Thinley Norbu Rinpoche.

I, personally, couldn't care less what Thinley Norbu Rinpoche has to say as far as this thread is concerned.

I am DEEPLY offended. DEEPLY!!! The implication of racism is misplaced and wrong.

I also think it rather cowardly to think that your fellow Buddhists are racists and THEN hide behind Thinley Norbu Rinpoche to assert that in a public forum. You'd be better served to simply come out and demonstrate the courage of your convictions and just call us a bunch of racists leaving Thinley Norbu Rinpoche out of it.

The additional implied implication the the Dzogchen Ponlop Rinpoche somehow falls under that same pathetic umbrella of racism is beyond offensive.

I think you should be ashamed of yourself.

I also think an apology is in order.

Why do you find it so offensive?
I think the Thrinley Norbu Rinpoche quote is totally relavent to the discussion and to be honest I agree with his statements.
Nobody is calling DPR a racist.
The average western approach to Buddhism is in my opinion extremely ethnocentric.
We constantly want to change the dharma because we dont want to actually have to change ourselves.

[justsit]

No one is saying change the dharma either. Sheesh.