d.sullivan wrote:I would argue that a defining characteristic of most of the Tibetan Buddhist schools is the devotional - devotion to the Guru. That doesn't mean that they don't also put a lot of emphasis on reason and dialectics, but we can't ignore that devotion plays a big part in Tibetan Buddhism.
That's what I thought, and the reason I originally shied away from Tibetan Buddhism and most forms of Mahayana Buddhism except Zen. Devotion to Gurus and Buddha figures. There seemed to be a gap between the emptiness teachings and the devotional side, as far as explaining how they are connected. I did not understand how it fit together until I had some experiences, nothing to do with anything I read.
d.sullivan wrote:I wonder how general HHDL's original statement is, and if he includes the Thai Forest tradition, for example, in the group of traditions that are less rational than his tradition?
I spent a lot of time only listening to Theravada teachers, even though I was committed to the Bodhisattva aspiration! Because Theravada seemed the most logical, the least imbued with "fluff". Sorry but that's how I saw it at the time. Yeah I've had a bumpy ride... right now I'm going to a Chinese temple.