Gurus For Hire Enlightenment For Sale

[Malcolm]

People evolve past needs all the time, just like babies evolve past the need for the tit. Like babies, we need to evolve past the need for the tit of religion.

We didn't evolve past the need for nourishment (which the tit provided), all we did is change the source. Has it ever occured to you that religion may not be the tit but the need for nourishment? Has it ever occured to you that instead of having outgrown religion you have merely outgrown for one expression of religion and merely moved onto another expression?

Your point is good providing you define religion as sustenance itself. Your point is not good if you define religion as a means of sustenance, one among others, or as a stage of sustenance, one among others. As you can see, here I am defining it as a means and a stage, rather than sustenance itself.

M

[Malcolm]

We need the form of religion to preserve the conduit of wisdom and transformation for people who don't just jump to direct experience. We also need the form to support people whose experience is not strong (and that's most people).

Kirt

No we don't, especially when those forms become pathological (as they have) and threaten to destory the host species (as they are doing, in general). It is not enough to look at Christianity and Islam as pathological in terms of their effect in history and so on. We have to search deeper and look into that part of the human psyche's evolution that results in the elaboration of such forms, the creation of such leviathans as Christianity and Islam and then move past that part.

[conebeckham]

In your posts as we see here in this thread you are basically resuming to attack religion yet again in general and in specific major religions and making a even more specific target of Buddhism and Vajrayana. That is what the content of your posts are, attacking religions mainly Buddhism. All in the name of your new personal self made religion.

Most people who know me do not know I am a Buddhist except a very few or even suspect I am religious, far from it. However even ordinary people would say you and your few supporters here are actually very religious people in every possible way as you appear. Yet attacking the banner of the same religion you have protection under and enjoy the fruits of yet deny. Absurd.

I think you're not getting what Malcolm is saying, Username. In my opinion....

Religions are expedient means. They're "Rafts," as Buddha famously said. No need to carry the raft over miles of dry land, after you've crossed the river.

Even CNNR's organization is a "raft," of course. And yes, some people cling to "Dzogchen" as a raft, and would rather paddle around out there in the middle of the river, because they're so enamored of the raft. (CNNR's students, some of them, will quickly point out that those who do, are missing the essential point....) You know, if you are attached to riding on a raft, then pretty soon you're outfitting your raft with sleeping quarters, a toilet, a kitchen, and after awhile you've got a houseboat. You may have forgetting the purpose of the raft, or even altered the purpose, you know?

Malcolm is quite rightly pointing out the difference between a "belief system" and an "experiential approach." If one leaves one's Buddhism as a collection of concepts, rituals, ceremonies, and doctrine, then of course one will eventually come into conflict with some other religious tradition(s). But if one recognizes expediency for what it is, and grasps the main point, all such conflicts are thrown into a different perspective, one that recognizes the relative value of such expediencies.

There is value, make no mistake, in the expediencies. I don't think Malcolm denies that.

[Dechen Norbu]

People evolve past needs all the time, just like babies evolve past the need for the tit. Like babies, we need to evolve past the need for the tit of religion.

We didn't evolve past the need for nourishment (which the tit provided), all we did is change the source. Has it ever occured to you that religion may not be the tit but the need for nourishment? Has it ever occured to you that instead of having outgrown religion you have merely outgrown for one expression of religion and merely moved onto another expression?

Perhaps we should outgrow the need itself. The more secure we try to feel, the worse will it be. Dharma teaches that. Buddhism, OTOH, may be just another substitute for the tit. There's nothing wrong with Dharma. There's a lot of wrong stuff with Buddhism. All in all, if at least Buddhism is the means one has to practice Dharma, great. If it is usurped for other ends, it's tragic.

[conebeckham]

...I should have said, "There is value in some expediencies. "

The other big point Malcolm makes, I think, is the potential (inevitability?) of "corruption," or of agendas other than the original one.

Pretty soon, your "raft-cum-houseboat" becomes a floating opera, or a brothel, or an investment bank......or a jail.

[Malcolm]

...I should have said, "There is value in some expediencies. "

The other big point Malcolm makes, I think, is the potential (inevitability?) of "corruption," or of agendas other than the original one.

Pretty soon, your "raft-cum-houseboat" becomes a floating opera, or a brothel, or an investment bank......or a jail.

Or in this day and age, a mall that serves as all four.

[username]

In your posts as we see here in this thread you are basically resuming to attack religion yet again in general and in specific major religions and making a even more specific target of Buddhism and Vajrayana. That is what the content of your posts are, attacking religions mainly Buddhism. All in the name of your new personal self made religion.

Most people who know me do not know I am a Buddhist except a very few or even suspect I am religious, far from it. However even ordinary people would say you and your few supporters here are actually very religious people in every possible way as you appear. Yet attacking the banner of the same religion you have protection under and enjoy the fruits of yet deny. Absurd.

I think you're not getting what Malcolm is saying, Username. In my opinion....

Religions are expedient means. They're "Rafts," as Buddha famously said. No need to carry the raft over miles of dry land, after you've crossed the river.

Even CNNR's organization is a "raft," of course. And yes, some people cling to "Dzogchen" as a raft, and would rather paddle around out there in the middle of the river, because they're so enamored of the raft. (CNNR's students, some of them, will quickly point out that those who do, are missing the essential point....) You know, if you are attached to riding on a raft, then pretty soon you're outfitting your raft with sleeping quarters, a toilet, a kitchen, and after awhile you've got a houseboat. You may have forgetting the purpose of the raft, or even altered the purpose, you know?

Malcolm is quite rightly pointing out the difference between a "belief system" and an "experiential approach." If one leaves one's Buddhism as a collection of concepts, rituals, ceremonies, and doctrine, then of course one will eventually come into conflict with some other religious tradition(s). But if one recognizes expediency for what it is, and grasps the main point, all such conflicts are thrown into a different perspective, one that recognizes the relative value of such expediencies.

There is value, make no mistake, in the expediencies. I don't think Malcolm denies that.

No it is you who doesn't get what I am saying. I told you before I do know Dzogchen is beyond religions or anything communicated in semantics, unlike you guys who do not practice what you preach to the masses. I told you before I even gave away all my paraphernalia. I guess your memory does not serve. However starting a campaign to attack religions and specifically Buddhism and Vajrayana which is the content of his posts as we see is not the right way.

Experience is personal. I doubt the validity of his content and intent. Anyway that can not be transmitted in words but hinted at by a true master's teachings far less by attacking the lower yanas as he does repeatedly regardless of people in lower yanas. you should know that concept. As for religion, to me Dzogchen is the pinnacle as I always said. Malcolm had 2 phases where he said Dzogchen is the same as the 4th stage. Now he has had yet another U-turn followed by a left turn denying religions. He was in the extreme then and now he is thoughtless of the masses. That is the main problem. You are thoughtful of others to a good extent. Unlike your friend who is the motivation of your post I guess, I never changed so do not need to be told about Dzogchen and religion as you just did which you should have seen in my footnote.

[Yudron]

Perhaps because I was off-line for a few years, it is more obvious to me than others that (while always infinitely knowledgeable and generous with his time) Malcolm's on-screen personality has changed dramatically from an arrogant, sectarian, controlling, and condescending presence, to a kind, gentle, live-and-let-live presence. This has gone hand-in-hand with his distancing himself from institutionalized Buddhism. These changes in a practitioner's personality are unmistakable signs of advancement in the practice of Dharma. Perhaps I'm wrong, but it seems it has been critical to put down the flag of "Buddhism" as a cause to move forward in his practice. Perhaps this is true for others as well. "Buddhism" that becomes another us-and-them mentality is not Dharma. It is more dualism.

[gregkavarnos]

...As you can see, here I am defining it as a means and a stage, rather than sustenance itself.

Point taken. The Buddha himself did "condemn" clinging to rites and rituals as means of liberation. But was he condemning the clinging, or the practice of rites and rituals. You see I believe that people have a real need for rites and rituals (expressed, for example, through religion). This can be seen by those that eschew religion only to set up a whole other sets of R&R to suit/satisfy their need. I have yet to come across somebody that has done away completely with this need. I am not sure if it is possible, within the limits of human experience/existence, to do away with this need. But then, it is not religion which is the problem, is it? It is any system that is constructed to capitalise upon this need.

[Malcolm]

However starting a campaign to attack religions and specifically Buddhism and Vajrayana which is the content of his posts as we see is not the right way.

Hahahahaha...

A campaign to start attacking religions? Seriously? Did you forget your pills today?

[Malcolm]

While some people are taking the time to actually read what I have said, other people are engaging in deluded and wild accusations accusing me of saying things I never said, therefore, I am finished with this thread.

[Sönam]

... and there it goes again, the battle of Hernani has no end, progressive vs immediate (with various forms). I still stay out for a while ... maybe.

Sönam

[username]

However starting a campaign to attack religions and specifically Buddhism and Vajrayana which is the content of his posts as we see is not the right way.

Hahahahaha...

A campaign to start attacking religions? Seriously? Did you forget your pills today?

Thank you for your kind, gentle personal posts to me. Have a good week & best wishes.

[Malcolm]

However starting a campaign to attack religions and specifically Buddhism and Vajrayana which is the content of his posts as we see is not the right way.

Hahahahaha...

A campaign to start attacking religions? Seriously? Did you forget your pills today?

Thank you for your kind, gentle personal posts to me. Have a good week & best wishes.

Use a mirror, pal. Your problem, and it is obvious for everyone to see, is that you take other peoples posts wildly out of context, and then start arguing with them about things they never implied let along intended. I cannot remember the number of times you have brazenly gone off on people for no other reason than you imagined they were saying something they were not. It is tiresome.

You constantly accuse people of attacking this and attacking that and attacking you, and in reality, you just attack people all the damn time, whether or not they have even remotely earned the slightest amount of criticism. Really, I am not alone in this assesement -- many people here agree, though they maybe to polite to say so. You really need to revaluate how you relate to other people -- because frankly, you just alienate the shite out of them.

[Dechen Norbu]

Perhaps because I was off-line for a few years, it is more obvious to me than others that (while always infinitely knowledgeable and generous with his time) Malcolm's on-screen personality has changed dramatically from an arrogant, sectarian, controlling, and condescending presence, to a kind, gentle, live-and-let-live presence. This has gone hand-in-hand with his distancing himself from institutionalized Buddhism. These changes in a practitioner's personality are unmistakable signs of advancement in the practice of Dharma. Perhaps I'm wrong, but it seems it has been critical to put down the flag of "Buddhism" as a cause to move forward in his practice. Perhaps this is true for others as well. "Buddhism" that becomes another us-and-them mentality is not Dharma. It is more dualism.

Couldn't have been better said, Yudrom.
It's quite easy to miss Dharma practice while thinking one is doing it, with dire consequences. The great Patrul Rinpoche warns us about this in his Kunzang Lama'i Shelung.
I think the biggest problem is that while at it, one may develop a sort of "immunity" to the medicine of Dharma, making it worse and worse the more one gets involved. Like a disease caused by a bacteria that grows a shell after a weak antibiotic being taken, thus becoming nearly indestructible.
Practitioners, myself included, should be really careful about this. The worse that can happen to someone is developing a new and shinny "Buddhist" ego layer. Then, the more one studies and practices, if not corrected, the worse it gets. It's a big problem and should not be taken lightly, in my opinion. Perhaps we are more vulnerable to it than most would like to admit.

[treehuggingoctopus]

I think you're not getting what Malcolm is saying, Username. In my opinion....

Religions are expedient means. They're "Rafts," as Buddha famously said. No need to carry the raft over miles of dry land, after you've crossed the river.

Even CNNR's organization is a "raft," of course. And yes, some people cling to "Dzogchen" as a raft, and would rather paddle around out there in the middle of the river, because they're so enamored of the raft. (CNNR's students, some of them, will quickly point out that those who do, are missing the essential point....) You know, if you are attached to riding on a raft, then pretty soon you're outfitting your raft with sleeping quarters, a toilet, a kitchen, and after awhile you've got a houseboat. You may have forgetting the purpose of the raft, or even altered the purpose, you know?

Malcolm is quite rightly pointing out the difference between a "belief system" and an "experiential approach." If one leaves one's Buddhism as a collection of concepts, rituals, ceremonies, and doctrine, then of course one will eventually come into conflict with some other religious tradition(s). But if one recognizes expediency for what it is, and grasps the main point, all such conflicts are thrown into a different perspective, one that recognizes the relative value of such expediencies.

There is value, make no mistake, in the expediencies. I don't think Malcolm denies that.

...I should have said, "There is value in some expediencies. "

The other big point Malcolm makes, I think, is the potential (inevitability?) of "corruption," or of agendas other than the original one.

Pretty soon, your "raft-cum-houseboat" becomes a floating opera, or a brothel, or an investment bank......or a jail.

And that seems to me to be a wonderfully accurate (and comprehensive) resume of exactly what Malcolm said in his posts here. Again, nothing particularly controversial or incendiary, if you ask me. No call to take arms and dethrone the ancient regime. No balloons or red leaflets or Molotov cocktails. No Sunday propaganda.

One may agree or disagree, but there's really no reason for war...

[JKhedrup]

Interesting that this discussion has entered a thread on one of Tsem Tulku's books.

Gotta love that ongoing, all pervading Dharma Wheel is Dzogchen a religion debate.
(this is meant as a joke)

[Malcolm]

Again, nothing particularly controversial or incendiary, if you ask me. No call to take arms and dethrone the ancient regime. No balloons or red leaflets or Molotov cocktails. No Sunday propaganda.

...apart from the ones in username's febrile imagination.

[Malcolm]

Interesting that this discussion has entered a thread on one of Tsem Tulku's books.

Gotta love that ongoing, all pervading Dharma Wheel is Dzogchen a religion debate.
(this is meant as a joke)

The real quesion is Dharma a religion. My answer is no.

M

[username]

Hahahahaha...

A campaign to start attacking religions? Seriously? Did you forget your pills today?

Thank you for your kind, gentle personal posts to me. Have a good week & best wishes.

Use a mirror, pal.

We are often taught by various masters that we should respect the gathering (cyber)places and personal dimensions of other Buddhists or indeed followers of other religions, paths or even secular beliefs, summed up well here:

"As all individuals have their own perception, it is not right to harbor wrong views and speak maligning words. One should maintain pure vision, rejoice, and give praise - thus making a good connection. To slander other people or their deities is the basis for misfortune.

To arouse interest and develop faith in outsiders - Buddhists and ordinary people - and to dispel arguments about this holy place at the same time, I began with an explanation of the history of Maratika." -Chatral Rinpoche

That has always been my unchanging ideological position.

...apart from the ones in username's febrile imagination.

Thank you again and best of luck to you.