No, what is meant that they are on the same stage i.e. path of application or seeing, etc.deepbluehum wrote:What it's meant is that both have received HYT empowerments.
The Tseringma sisters are not worldly deities, they were liberated by Guru P.
No, what is meant that they are on the same stage i.e. path of application or seeing, etc.deepbluehum wrote:What it's meant is that both have received HYT empowerments.
That's like saying they understood the empowerments. Geshe Ngawang Dhargyey's commentary on the Kalachakra states that the initiations correspond to the stages of the path. In his completion stage comments he says that they should both be at the same level of realization, meaning, if the male is at the level of "mind liberation" then the female should be too, so that they can elevate each others realization. This is another way of saying the third or fourth initiation has been understood. In this commentary, the coupling begins with the first initiation. In fact, there is no 2nd or 3rd initiation without the descent of the fluids during coupling. What I've reasoned out is that they are both beginners and helping each other understand the initiations and the path. Granted this is a Gelug version. But it's good.Malcolm wrote:No, what is meant that they are on the same stage i.e. path of application or seeing, etc.deepbluehum wrote:What it's meant is that both have received HYT empowerments.
In the Milarepa songs it talks about how they were full of negative emotions after they broke their samayas to Guru P. I don't want to get into a polemic about who liberated them first. I was just using this as an example of how, according to the story itself, not you or some nyingmapa text, but the story, according to the story, Milarepa consorted with them, he was 10th bhumi by then, they weren't buddhas yet, and he attained buddhahood because of them. But if you want to use your version, the sisters were liberated and Milarepa was on the path, so again, they weren't on the same level.The Tseringma sisters are not worldly deities, they were liberated by Guru P.
Piles and piles, I said only a short comment on your comments to my post that was meant as a little humorous post. I can´t see what piles or limited ideas I talked about.deepbluehum wrote:So the whole matter is not so easily categorized in neat piles like you want it to be.
Sure I anticipated being called prudish for what I said, but in the context of our posts it´s not the reality of me despite your personal judgement. Badmouthing anything, can´t see where I did that. "Scared of a tingle", how can you know that and that´s a strict opinion?deepbluehum wrote: I think if you are caught up in these ideas and definitions, you are probably a prude and are badmouthing karmamudra because you are scared of that little tingle inside.
Good advice but ahh, no hate really. I agree with you but our comments seem to come from another Internet forums misunderstanding, making people constantly admonishing each other.deepbluehum wrote:Don't hate. Turn it around.
Something else...alpha wrote:I think this is the second time around----that i know of--- when this subject is mainly discussed by men.
What does that tell you?
Is it because that are mainly men left on this forums or is it something else?
Men are chatty.alpha wrote:I think this is the second time around----that i know of--- when this subject is mainly discussed by men.
What does that tell you?
Is it because that are mainly men left on this forums or is it something else?
deepbluehum wrote:It mentions in the commentaries to some of these instructions that you need someone who's a riot in the sack (paraphrasing). The idea is to get really balls to the walls passionate. This is about energy. Guru Rinpoche mentions using toys and you need a pretty open minded lady to join in that activity. If you read the accounts by Mandarava and Yeshe Tsogyal about how they got into it with Guru Rinpoche, it got wild. ChNN gave instructions recently about it. KDL spoke about it. There's really not a lot to the practice. It's pretty basic. Lamas these days speak in guarded tones about this stuff. The texts are much more candid. Where ChNN uses the term "vigorously," you understand, "Go nuts."Tilopa wrote:Is that your personal experience or did you receive a teaching from a lama to that effect?deepbluehum wrote: To practice karmamudra you need a really uninhibited woman.
IMHO For DW and all the similar forums before it to have more female participation would require a re-envisioning of the whole process from the ground up. That would mean that the facilitators and the owner of the list would have to be open to doing something very different. I have been one of few women participating in these things more than ten years.alpha wrote:I think this is the second time around----that i know of--- when this subject is mainly discussed by men.
What does that tell you?
Is it because that are mainly men left on this forums or is it something else?
I would love some sources. Not because I don't believe you, but because I want to read this for myself.deepbluehum wrote:It mentions in the commentaries to some of these instructions that you need someone who's a riot in the sack (paraphrasing). The idea is to get really balls to the walls passionate. This is about energy. Guru Rinpoche mentions using toys and you need a pretty open minded lady to join in that activity. If you read the accounts by Mandarava and Yeshe Tsogyal about how they got into it with Guru Rinpoche, it got wild. ChNN gave instructions recently about it. KDL spoke about it. There's really not a lot to the practice. It's pretty basic. Lamas these days speak in guarded tones about this stuff. The texts are much more candid. Where ChNN uses the term "vigorously," you understand, "Go nuts."Tilopa wrote:Is that your personal experience or did you receive a teaching from a lama to that effect?deepbluehum wrote: To practice karmamudra you need a really uninhibited woman.
Liberated does not equal fully awakened.deepbluehum wrote:
But if you want to use your version, the sisters were liberated and Milarepa was on the path, so again, they weren't on the same level.
Nonetheless, Guru P was a buddha way before any of his consorts were. They obviously were not at the same level.
You should see the commentaries to Padma Nyingthig.Konchog1 wrote:I would love some sources. Not because I don't believe you, but because I want to read this for myself.deepbluehum wrote:It mentions in the commentaries to some of these instructions that you need someone who's a riot in the sack (paraphrasing). The idea is to get really balls to the walls passionate. This is about energy. Guru Rinpoche mentions using toys and you need a pretty open minded lady to join in that activity. If you read the accounts by Mandarava and Yeshe Tsogyal about how they got into it with Guru Rinpoche, it got wild. ChNN gave instructions recently about it. KDL spoke about it. There's really not a lot to the practice. It's pretty basic. Lamas these days speak in guarded tones about this stuff. The texts are much more candid. Where ChNN uses the term "vigorously," you understand, "Go nuts."Tilopa wrote: Is that your personal experience or did you receive a teaching from a lama to that effect?
Liberated does not equal fully awakened.Malcolm wrote:Nonetheless, Guru P was a buddha way before any of his consorts were. They obviously were not at the same level.
We don't need to get hung up on stupid details. It's just an example. It's simple logic. Guru P was enlightened before he got with Mandarava and Yeshe Tsogyal. So...[/quote]deepbluehum wrote:Liberated does not equal fully awakened.Malcolm wrote:Nonetheless, Guru P was a buddha way before any of his consorts were. They obviously were not at the same level.
I would not regard Namthars written by disciples as accurate reports of the level of realization of this or that person.
And you've taken a few hits over the years for no reason apart from your gender, if I recall correctly.Yudron wrote:IMHO For DW and all the similar forums before it to have more female participation would require a re-envisioning of the whole process from the ground up. That would mean that the facilitators and the owner of the list would have to be open to doing something very different. I have been one of few women participating in these things more than ten years.alpha wrote:I think this is the second time around----that i know of--- when this subject is mainly discussed by men.
What does that tell you?
Is it because that are mainly men left on this forums or is it something else?
What do you mean by that Yudron? And by the way, I am happy to see you posting here.Yudron wrote:IMHO For DW and all the similar forums before it to have more female participation would require a re-envisioning of the whole process from the ground up.alpha wrote:I think this is the second time around----that i know of--- when this subject is mainly discussed by men.
What does that tell you?
Is it because that are mainly men left on this forums or is it something else?
That's a photograph of a hoopoe.Stewart wrote:Off topic, sorry....Kevin, what's your new avatar?
The reverse, in a sense, perhaps? - The 'prevailing weather' here gives an impression of intellectualism that screams 'male geek' in a way that I know (from personal experience as well as second-hand ) to be off-putting -for obvious reasons- to those who identify with the supposed salient features of the feminine gender - particularly relationship-building, intuition, emotionality, and so on. This is ironic, since intellectualism in matters of universal concern (philosophy etc.) is, for me, an ambitious (albeit indirect) way of expressing a range of feelings and (sometimes) helping build relationships of sorts. {It's also ironically disconnected from the more mainstream male stereotype of aggressive egotism.}deepbluehum wrote:Men are chatty.alpha wrote:I think this is the second time around----that i know of--- when this subject is mainly discussed by men.
What does that tell you?
Is it because that are mainly men left on this forums or is it something else?
Hi Kevin,Virgo wrote:What do you mean by that Yudron? And by the way, I am happy to see you posting here.Yudron wrote:IMHO For DW and all the similar forums before it to have more female participation would require a re-envisioning of the whole process from the ground up.alpha wrote:I think this is the second time around----that i know of--- when this subject is mainly discussed by men.
What does that tell you?
Is it because that are mainly men left on this forums or is it something else?
Kevin