Gorampa & Tsongkhapa

Moderator: Tibetan Buddhism moderators

Re: Gorampa & Tsongkhapa

Postby JKhedrup » Tue Apr 29, 2014 2:32 am

Throwing sutra out completely in favour of tantra caused all sorts of problems for Buddhism at several points in its history.

I realize ethics such as avoiding the Ten Non-Virtues are not as sexy as arising as a yidam etc. But they are necessary.

I truly believe that in the West with its sensual culture that without a foundation in Sutra Vajrayana will become a free for all, an excuse for all sorts of weirdness. We see this starting already.
In order to ensure my mind never comes under the power of the self-cherishing attitude,
I must obtain control over my own mind.
Therefore, amongst all empowerments, the empowerment that gives me control over my mind is the best,
and I have received the most profound empowerment with this teaching.
-Atisha Dipamkara
brtsal ba'i bkhra drin
JKhedrup
 
Posts: 2324
Joined: Wed May 30, 2012 8:28 am
Location: the Netherlands and India

Re: Gorampa & Tsongkhapa

Postby JKhedrup » Tue Apr 29, 2014 2:40 am

Conrad,
Never would I say to follow sutra is to follow Tzongkapa. Once again with your bizarre sectarianism, on the Gelug subforum no less.

A lama I greatly respect, your teacher incidentally,
Dzongsar Kyentse Rinpoche, praises Tzongkhapa's unique presentation on youtube. Watch it. It might act as an antidote to your vitriol against Gelug that has played out in other threads.

I am all for debate, indeed I have studied texts of other traditions and translated teachings on them for Geshela. In many ways I find Sapan's view more compelling than Tzongkhapa's.

I am not convinced LTK's presentation of emptinrss is tbe clearest, but not well studied or read enough to say it isn't.

Have you ever read any significant text by Tzongkhapa? Malcolm has. Informed opinions are what I am interested in. Not creepy sectarian aversion. That's why when convetsations hete are above my head? Which they often are, I remain silent rathet than pushing my agenda.
Last edited by JKhedrup on Tue Apr 29, 2014 2:46 am, edited 1 time in total.
In order to ensure my mind never comes under the power of the self-cherishing attitude,
I must obtain control over my own mind.
Therefore, amongst all empowerments, the empowerment that gives me control over my mind is the best,
and I have received the most profound empowerment with this teaching.
-Atisha Dipamkara
brtsal ba'i bkhra drin
JKhedrup
 
Posts: 2324
Joined: Wed May 30, 2012 8:28 am
Location: the Netherlands and India

Re: Gorampa & Tsongkhapa

Postby asunthatneversets » Tue Apr 29, 2014 2:42 am

ConradTree wrote:Well most sutra followers would prefer the view of PP sutras, Nagarjuna and Candrakirti (nonarising) to Tsongkhapa (lack of inherent existence).

Nāgārjuna, Candrakīrti and the prajñāpāramitā sūtras all point to a lack of inherent existence as well.
asunthatneversets
 
Posts: 1346
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2011 10:30 pm

Re: Gorampa & Tsongkhapa

Postby JKhedrup » Tue Apr 29, 2014 2:51 am

Of course. As well as Sapan, the 9th Karmapa and so forth.

As I stated, I am not emotionally invested in one Tibetan interpretation over tbe other. I am still learning.

You seriousky need to watch DKR's video and relax.

Back to constructive discussion please.

Sectarianism is a snore, whether from Pabongkha or the other side.
In order to ensure my mind never comes under the power of the self-cherishing attitude,
I must obtain control over my own mind.
Therefore, amongst all empowerments, the empowerment that gives me control over my mind is the best,
and I have received the most profound empowerment with this teaching.
-Atisha Dipamkara
brtsal ba'i bkhra drin
JKhedrup
 
Posts: 2324
Joined: Wed May 30, 2012 8:28 am
Location: the Netherlands and India

Re: Gorampa & Tsongkhapa

Postby Adi » Tue Apr 29, 2014 3:42 am

JKhedrup wrote:...
Watch DKR's video on Tzongkhapa, and chill with the vitriol, that's all I am asking….


This short one, or is there a longer talk about this?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e1w9CFdRkxI

Adi
Adi
 
Posts: 328
Joined: Sun Nov 08, 2009 10:45 pm

Re: Gorampa & Tsongkhapa

Postby JKhedrup » Tue Apr 29, 2014 4:02 am

That is a clip, thought there was a longer o e but I'm working from a handphone.

Still, it is good enough to give you a general idea. Thank goodness teachers are often more open and tolerant than their students. Hallelujiah, actually.
In order to ensure my mind never comes under the power of the self-cherishing attitude,
I must obtain control over my own mind.
Therefore, amongst all empowerments, the empowerment that gives me control over my mind is the best,
and I have received the most profound empowerment with this teaching.
-Atisha Dipamkara
brtsal ba'i bkhra drin
JKhedrup
 
Posts: 2324
Joined: Wed May 30, 2012 8:28 am
Location: the Netherlands and India

Re: Gorampa & Tsongkhapa

Postby Adi » Tue Apr 29, 2014 4:06 am

JKhedrup wrote:...Thank goodness teachers are often more open and tolerant than their students. Hallelujiah, actually.


:bow:
:bow:
:bow:


Adi
Adi
 
Posts: 328
Joined: Sun Nov 08, 2009 10:45 pm

Re: Gorampa & Tsongkhapa

Postby ConradTree » Tue Apr 29, 2014 4:12 am

DKR is clearly criticizing Tsongkhapa, but feel free to your own interpretation. :shrug:
ConradTree
 
Posts: 303
Joined: Sun Dec 29, 2013 6:33 pm

Re: Gorampa & Tsongkhapa

Postby Adi » Tue Apr 29, 2014 4:15 am

ConradTree wrote:DKR is clearly criticizing Tsongkhapa, but feel free to your own interpretation. :shrug:


LOL! If you think that was an insult, what would you consider a compliment? DKR is "clearly" doing whatever one perceives him to be doing. I see profound compliment and caution to the other three schools. You see insult. And so it goes.

Adi
Adi
 
Posts: 328
Joined: Sun Nov 08, 2009 10:45 pm

Re: Gorampa & Tsongkhapa

Postby Norwegian » Tue Apr 29, 2014 4:48 am

Chogyal Namkhai Norbu was invited to Mongolia some years ago. He was invited by a Gelug monastery, so he could give teachings on Dzogchen. And so he did. He taught Dzogchen through the lens of Tsongkhapa, on what I believe was Guru Yoga on Tsongkhapa (I apologize if my memory of this is wrong here). So, here you have an incomparable Dzogchen master, invited by Gelugpas, and teaches Dzogchen to them, by way of using Tsongkhapa as the means of doing so. They were very happy, though they wished a more "classical" teaching on Dzogchen as well. So after a little ChNN obliged, and gave an essential teaching on the base, path, and fruit. And to continue, In the Merigar Gonpa (of Dzogchen Community), there are several Gelugpas in the lineage master paintings. Including Tsongkhapa. There are also Bonpos, Nyingmapas, Sakyapas, and Kagyupas.

So, let's make one point clear here: vile secterianism is a cancer.

And to call sutra garbage, or hate teachers like Tsongkhapa and his lineage, is really shameful. I am not a fan of Tsongkhapa's Madhyamaka presentation, but so what?

Let's turn our heads to Shabkar:
"Shabkar lived at a time in Tibetan history when many spiritual lineages were on the verge of extinction. Bitter religious secterianism and tribal feuds divided monasteries and peoples. Transcending these differences, Shabkar exemplified religious tolerance, altruism, and "pure perception", the foremost characteristics of a genuine Buddhist practicioner.

A vision of Guru Padmasambhava he experienced toward the end of his life is typical of Shabkar's Rime (nonsecterian) approach to the four main schools of Tibetan Buddhism. During the vision, Shabkar tells Guru Padmasambhava, "I have prayed to you all my life and have been blessed by visions of many other deities and spiritual masters, but only now do you appear to me." Guru Padmasambhava replied, "Do you remember when, on the island of The Heart of the Lake, you had a vision of Tsongkhapa, who gave you the teaching of the Graded Path? That was I." In The Emanated Scriptures of Orgyen, in which Shabkar recounts this vision, he expresses his faith in the inseparability in Guru Padmasambhava, Atisha, and Tsongkhapa, a triad of teachers who dominated Shabkar's life, practice, and teaching.

The core of Shabkar's practice was the Great Perfection, Atiyoga, the summit of the nine vehicles, the extraordinary treasure of the Nyingma tradition. Yet his realization of the Great Perfection was firmly grounded in the impeccable precepts of the Kadampa masters, which inspire practicioners to have few needs and desires; authentic feelings of renunciation, humility and inner calm, loving-kindness, compassion and, above all, the precious Bodhicitta - the intense resolve to bring all sentient beings to the perfect freedom of enlightenment.
"
(From "The Life of Shabkar", translated by M.Ricard, who also wrote the above).

And Malcolm (http://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.ph ... 5&start=80
"Madhyamaka is not equivalent with Dzogchen and Mahamudra. As both Longchen pa and Jigme Lingpa points out, while the intellectual structure of the view of Prasanga and Dzogchen are identical i.e. free from all extremes, the former is based on an intellectual analysis whereas the latter is based on a personal experience.

In Dzogchen and Mahamudra meditation is based on an example wisdom. This is not the case with Madhyamaka.

Since meditation in Vajrayāna systems is based on an example wisdom gained during the introduction of the third and fourth empowerments, Gorampa points out in a treatise refuting some on Tsongkhapa's interperations of the Guhyasmaja sadhana that it doesn't matter very much what your intellectual view might be; whether cittamatra or madhyamaka, since your meditation is not based on an intellectual analysis, but rather a path wisdom derived from the introduction of third and fourth empowerment.

Therefore, I feel personally that all of this scholastic nit picking about Tibetan scholar's disagreements about what they think Indian scholars think is pretty much just an empty diversion. Hence the reason I lack patience with it, and and not very interested in defending Gorampa or criticizing Dolbupa, or Tsongkhapa, etc. I simply think that it is a waste of time.

If people want to spend their time reading books about Madhayamaka, I have no problem with that, but silly thread titles like "Gorampa untenable according to Karmapa" for me are meaningless. Honestly, who cares? (well obviously mariusz does). Also Ganden Chophel faults Gorampa for this and that point -- and there is no doubt the eighth Karmapa can be faulted for this and that point. It is all just meaningless dancing on books to me, something scholars do when they have a bit a free time for fun. The whole history of Tibetan Buddhist scholastics is scholars faulting each other for this and that point.

That is why I recommend going back to the basics: If you want read Madhyamaka, read the originals. If you have to learn Tibetan or Sanskrit to do so, great. But honestly, all this "Tsongkhapa is wrong!" "Gorampa is wrong!" "Karmapa is wrong!" Dolbupa is wrong" is really nonsensical and just perpetuates a sectarian intellectual culture that we should leave behind.
"


So can we please leave this behind?
Last edited by Norwegian on Tue Apr 29, 2014 5:13 am, edited 1 time in total.
Norwegian
 
Posts: 337
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2011 7:36 pm

Re: Gorampa & Tsongkhapa

Postby jiashengrox » Tue Apr 29, 2014 4:56 am

ConradTree wrote:
Malcolm wrote:Pabhongkha was pretty indignant that Gorampa's collected works were collected and revived in Eastern Tibet and it seems to be one of his motives for encouraging sectarianism there.


Pabhongkha's false dharmas triggered the invasion of Tibet, if the invasion of Tibet has a mystical cause.
ConradTree wrote:I apologize for being vitriolic.

I should have just said Tsongkhapa was demon possessed like Gorampa did.

ConradTree wrote:The moral of all of this is to throw out sutra entirely, and stick to tantra like Rongzom says.

http://www.amazon.com/Establishing-Appe ... 1559392886" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Do you realise all these comments are just purely ridiculous?

You would need to have some background knowledge of madhyamika before u can even crticise the views of Je Rinpoche.

I agree that Je Rinpoche has some views that are innovative, but by far it has been the clearest for me (followed by mipham) (i am still in the period of studying, so my opinion changes) Rongton's commentary is a little too succinct, and Pingala's commentary requires annotation, which Reverend Ji Tsang gives, but its too large (spanning abt 1000 pages in Chinese!)

Criticising w/o any valid evidence or understanding is just heading for trouble. You might fall into a infraction of criticising the dharma in the bodhisattva precepts.

Hope it helps. :namaste:
Homage to the Mother of Buddhas as well as of the groups of Hearers and Bodhisattvas
which through knowledge of all leads Hearers seeking pacification to thorough peace
And which through knowledge of paths causes those helping transmigrators to achieve the welfare of the world,
And through possession of which the Subduers set forth these varieties endowed with all aspects.

- Ornament of Clear Realisation
jiashengrox
 
Posts: 117
Joined: Wed Mar 28, 2012 10:50 am

Re: Gorampa & Tsongkhapa

Postby ConradTree » Tue Apr 29, 2014 5:24 am

jiashengrox wrote:You would need to have some background knowledge of madhyamika before u can even crticise the views of Je Rinpoche.


Here are some direct quotes from Indian Madhyamaka texts. It is nothing like Tsongkhapa's teaching.

Nagarjuna in ''Mūlamadhyamakakārikā'' 21.12. states:
"An existent does not arise from an existent;
neither does an existent arise from a non-existent.
A non-existent does not arise from a non-existent;
neither does a non-existent arise from an existent." translated by Kalupahana

Here are some quotations from 2 top books, Nagarjuna's Reason Sixty and Center of the Sunlit Sky:

Nagarjuna taught , "bereft of beginning, middle, and end," meaning that the world is free from creation, duration, and destruction."
-Candrakirti

"Once one asserts things, one will succumb to the view of seeing such by imagining their beginning, middle and end; hence that grasping at things is the cause of all views."
-Candrakirti

"the perfectly enlightened buddhas-proclaimed, "What is dependently created is uncreated."
-Candrakirti

"Likewise, here as well, the Lord Buddha’s pronouncement that "What is dependently created is objectively uncreated," is to counteract insistence on the objectivity of things."
-Candrakirti

"Since relativity is not objectively created, those who, through this reasoning, accept dependent things as resembling the moon in water and reflections in a mirror, understand them as neither objectively true nor false. Therefore, those who think thus regarding dependent things realize that what is dependently arisen cannot be substantially existent, since what is like a reflection is not real. If it were real, that would entail the absurdity that its transformation would be impossible. Yet neither is it unreal, since it manifests as real within the world."
-Candrakirti

Nagarjuna said "If I had any position, I thereby would be at fault. Since
I have no position, I am not at fault at all."

Aryadeva said "Against someone who has no thesis of “existence,
nonexistence, or [both] existence and nonexistence,” it is not possible to
level a charge, even if [this is tried] for a long time."

"I do not say that entities do not exist, because I say that they originate in dependence. “So are you a realist then?” I am not, because I am just a proponent of dependent origination. “What sort of nature is it then that you [propound]?” I propound dependent origination. “What is the meaning of dependent origination?” It has the meaning of the lack of a nature and the meaning of nonarising through a nature [of its own]. It has the meaning of the origination of results with a nature similar to that of illusions, mirages, reflections, cities of scent-eaters, magical creations, and dreams. It has the meaning of emptiness and identitylessness."
-Candrakirti

Nagarjuna in Mūlamadhyamakakārikā 1.1. states:

"Not from themselves, not from something other,
Not from both, and not without a cause-
At any place and any time,
All entities lack arising."

Buddhapālita comments (using consequentalist arguments which ultimately snowballs into Tibetan prasangika vs. svatantrika):

"Entities do not arise from their own intrinsic nature, because their arising would be pointless and because they would arise endlessly. For entities that [already] exist as their own intrinsic nature, there is no need to arise again. If they were to arise despite existing [already], there would be no time when they do not arise; [but] that is also not asserted [by the Enumerators].

Candrakīrti, in ''Madhyamakāvatāra'' VI.14., comments:

"If something were to originate in dependence on something other than it,
Well, then utter darkness could spring from flames
And everything could arise from everything,
Because everything that does not produce [a specific result] is the same in being other [than it]."

Candrakīrti, in the ''Prasannapadā'', comments:

"Entities also do not arise from something other, because there is nothing other."

Nagarjuna in ''Mūlamadhyamakakārikā'' 1.3cd. states:

"If an entity in itself does not exist,
An entity other [than it] does not exist either."

Candrakīrti, in the ''Prasannapadā'', comments:

"Nor do entities arise from both [themselves and others], because this would entail [all] the flaws that were stated for both of these theses and because none of these [disproved possibilities] have the capacity to produce [entities]."

Nagarjuna, in ''Mūlamadhyamakakārikā'' VII.17., states:

"If some nonarisen entity
Existed somewhere,
It might arise.
However, since such does not exist, what would arise?"

Nagarjuna, in ''Mūlamadhyamakakārikā'' VII.19cd., states:

"If something that lacks arising could arise,
Just about anything could arise in this way."
ConradTree
 
Posts: 303
Joined: Sun Dec 29, 2013 6:33 pm

Re: Gorampa & Tsongkhapa

Postby jiashengrox » Tue Apr 29, 2014 5:40 am

ConradTree wrote:
jiashengrox wrote:You would need to have some background knowledge of madhyamika before u can even crticise the views of Je Rinpoche.


Here are some direct quotes from Indian Madhyamaka texts. It is nothing like Tsongkhapa's teaching.

Nagarjuna in ''Mūlamadhyamakakārikā'' 21.12. states:
"An existent does not arise from an existent;
neither does an existent arise from a non-existent.
A non-existent does not arise from a non-existent;
neither does a non-existent arise from an existent." translated by Kalupahana

Here are some quotations from 2 top books, Nagarjuna's Reason Sixty and Center of the Sunlit Sky:

Nagarjuna taught , "bereft of beginning, middle, and end," meaning that the world is free from creation, duration, and destruction."
-Candrakirti

"Once one asserts things, one will succumb to the view of seeing such by imagining their beginning, middle and end; hence that grasping at things is the cause of all views."
-Candrakirti

"the perfectly enlightened buddhas-proclaimed, "What is dependently created is uncreated."
-Candrakirti

"Likewise, here as well, the Lord Buddha’s pronouncement that "What is dependently created is objectively uncreated," is to counteract insistence on the objectivity of things."
-Candrakirti

"Since relativity is not objectively created, those who, through this reasoning, accept dependent things as resembling the moon in water and reflections in a mirror, understand them as neither objectively true nor false. Therefore, those who think thus regarding dependent things realize that what is dependently arisen cannot be substantially existent, since what is like a reflection is not real. If it were real, that would entail the absurdity that its transformation would be impossible. Yet neither is it unreal, since it manifests as real within the world."
-Candrakirti

Nagarjuna said "If I had any position, I thereby would be at fault. Since
I have no position, I am not at fault at all."

Aryadeva said "Against someone who has no thesis of “existence,
nonexistence, or [both] existence and nonexistence,” it is not possible to
level a charge, even if [this is tried] for a long time."

"I do not say that entities do not exist, because I say that they originate in dependence. “So are you a realist then?” I am not, because I am just a proponent of dependent origination. “What sort of nature is it then that you [propound]?” I propound dependent origination. “What is the meaning of dependent origination?” It has the meaning of the lack of a nature and the meaning of nonarising through a nature [of its own]. It has the meaning of the origination of results with a nature similar to that of illusions, mirages, reflections, cities of scent-eaters, magical creations, and dreams. It has the meaning of emptiness and identitylessness."
-Candrakirti

Nagarjuna in Mūlamadhyamakakārikā 1.1. states:

"Not from themselves, not from something other,
Not from both, and not without a cause-
At any place and any time,
All entities lack arising."

Buddhapālita comments (using consequentalist arguments which ultimately snowballs into Tibetan prasangika vs. svatantrika):

"Entities do not arise from their own intrinsic nature, because their arising would be pointless and because they would arise endlessly. For entities that [already] exist as their own intrinsic nature, there is no need to arise again. If they were to arise despite existing [already], there would be no time when they do not arise; [but] that is also not asserted [by the Enumerators].

Candrakīrti, in ''Madhyamakāvatāra'' VI.14., comments:

"If something were to originate in dependence on something other than it,
Well, then utter darkness could spring from flames
And everything could arise from everything,
Because everything that does not produce [a specific result] is the same in being other [than it]."

Candrakīrti, in the ''Prasannapadā'', comments:

"Entities also do not arise from something other, because there is nothing other."

Nagarjuna in ''Mūlamadhyamakakārikā'' 1.3cd. states:

"If an entity in itself does not exist,
An entity other [than it] does not exist either."

Candrakīrti, in the ''Prasannapadā'', comments:

"Nor do entities arise from both [themselves and others], because this would entail [all] the flaws that were stated for both of these theses and because none of these [disproved possibilities] have the capacity to produce [entities]."

Nagarjuna, in ''Mūlamadhyamakakārikā'' VII.17., states:

"If some nonarisen entity
Existed somewhere,
It might arise.
However, since such does not exist, what would arise?"

Nagarjuna, in ''Mūlamadhyamakakārikā'' VII.19cd., states:

"If something that lacks arising could arise,
Just about anything could arise in this way."


Elaborate and explain the differences between their views? It seems like u are just quoting direct w/o explaining or referring to je rinpoche's works that i do not even know what are the differences between the views.
Last edited by jiashengrox on Tue Apr 29, 2014 5:47 am, edited 1 time in total.
Homage to the Mother of Buddhas as well as of the groups of Hearers and Bodhisattvas
which through knowledge of all leads Hearers seeking pacification to thorough peace
And which through knowledge of paths causes those helping transmigrators to achieve the welfare of the world,
And through possession of which the Subduers set forth these varieties endowed with all aspects.

- Ornament of Clear Realisation
jiashengrox
 
Posts: 117
Joined: Wed Mar 28, 2012 10:50 am

Re: Gorampa & Tsongkhapa

Postby kirtu » Tue Apr 29, 2014 7:41 am

JKhedrup wrote:I truly believe that in the West with its sensual culture that without a foundation in Sutra Vajrayana will become a free for all, an excuse for all sorts of weirdness. We see this starting already.


That would be a disaster.

Kirt
Kirt's Tibetan Translation Notes

"Only you can make your mind beautiful."
HH Chetsang Rinpoche
User avatar
kirtu
Former staff member
 
Posts: 4497
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2010 5:29 pm
Location: Baltimore, MD

Re: Gorampa & Tsongkhapa

Postby kirtu » Tue Apr 29, 2014 8:05 am

ConradTree wrote:
jiashengrox wrote:You would need to have some background knowledge of madhyamika before u can even crticise the views of Je Rinpoche.


Here are some direct quotes from Indian Madhyamaka texts. It is nothing like Tsongkhapa's teaching......


Seriously???? Just providing quotes from Nagarjuna, Chandrakirti, Aryadeva, etc. ? These are supposed to show by themselves that Tsongkhapa's view is invalid? Or that you have mastery of Madhyamika? (What is "mastery of Madhyamika" anyway? Whose Madhyamika?)

This looks like a case of medicine used as a poison.

Kirt
Kirt's Tibetan Translation Notes

"Only you can make your mind beautiful."
HH Chetsang Rinpoche
User avatar
kirtu
Former staff member
 
Posts: 4497
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2010 5:29 pm
Location: Baltimore, MD

Re: Gorampa & Tsongkhapa

Postby Sherab Dorje » Tue Apr 29, 2014 9:02 am

Topic locked.
"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
Global Moderator
 
Posts: 9784
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 9:27 pm
Location: Greece

Re: Gorampa & Tsongkhapa

Postby Sherab Dorje » Tue Apr 29, 2014 9:26 am

I am sitting here, on this most auspicious day, wasting my precious time deleting childish nonsense and sectarian blatherings, instead of doing my practice. :tantrum:

Thread unlocked.

Stay on topic people and please watch your language.
"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
Global Moderator
 
Posts: 9784
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 9:27 pm
Location: Greece

Re: Gorampa & Tsongkhapa

Postby Adi » Tue Apr 29, 2014 9:59 am

Sherab Dorje, how could using discriminating wisdom, practicing patience, and dealing with adversity not be a part of your practice?

Then again this board is full of Mahayana and Vajrayana folks, so perhaps it is too hard to play the drum, ring the bell, chant the tune and type simultaneously. :)

And what Gorampa and Tsongkhapa would have to say about all this is something I do not know.

Adi
Adi
 
Posts: 328
Joined: Sun Nov 08, 2009 10:45 pm

Re: Gorampa & Tsongkhapa

Postby jiashengrox » Tue Apr 29, 2014 10:28 am

Sherab Dorje wrote:I am sitting here, on this most auspicious day, wasting my precious time deleting childish nonsense and sectarian blatherings, instead of doing my practice. :tantrum:

Thread unlocked.

Stay on topic people and please watch your language.


Thanks a lot for cleaning up, really sorry for the mess :/

Anw, are there any texts and evidences on the replies to Gorampa?

:namaste:
Homage to the Mother of Buddhas as well as of the groups of Hearers and Bodhisattvas
which through knowledge of all leads Hearers seeking pacification to thorough peace
And which through knowledge of paths causes those helping transmigrators to achieve the welfare of the world,
And through possession of which the Subduers set forth these varieties endowed with all aspects.

- Ornament of Clear Realisation
jiashengrox
 
Posts: 117
Joined: Wed Mar 28, 2012 10:50 am

Re: Gorampa & Tsongkhapa

Postby Sherab Dorje » Tue Apr 29, 2014 11:49 am

Adi wrote:Then again this board is full of Mahayana and Vajrayana folks, so perhaps it is too hard to play the drum, ring the bell, chant the tune and type simultaneously. :)
It's going to be even harder for some people to type if I stick my iron phurba through their third eye! :tongue:
"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
Global Moderator
 
Posts: 9784
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 9:27 pm
Location: Greece

PreviousNext

Return to Gelug

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: lelopa and 17 guests

>