By Scripture/Faith alone?

[Rael]

it cannot be done without an awakened teacher .......

Of course ... the Buddha.

Kind regards

but what if Pema's post is just Pema's view....

the idea of a Pratyekabuddha speaks of one attaining Buddhahood outside the schools and without a teacher....

Pema is saying the cause had to have been placed .....via "dependence upon powerful, deep-seated mental imprints of having learned and practiced the Dharma under the guidance of a teacher in the usual way in past lives.".....

and yet this form of Buddha is spoken off in such a manner as leaving one to think They achieve the state without any aid of anyone.....

[ground]

it cannot be done without an awakened teacher .......

Of course ... the Buddha.

Kind regards

but what if Pema's post is just Pema's view....

Let Pema have Pema's view. I just referred to the sentence quoted.

Kind regards

[Rael]

Let Pema have Pema's view. I just referred to the sentence quoted.

Kind regards

just a heads up...

posting just cause you can , can lead to confusion.....

when you posted that... it appeaered, there's that whole view thing again, you agreed with my moment of lucidity.....which turned to confusion after awhile...hence the new post.....


if you don't really like views...whay do you post them....you seem to have a disdain for any view but your own.....

just saying...i could be wrong...and not really seeing what you mean.....

whats your view on the matter....

[ground]

huh?

[Rael]

huh?

Perfect example of giving a view in an esoteric way....

well done Tmingy babes..

your good at this

[conebeckham]

Rael-
TMingyur's position is pretty clear, actually, if you read the thread. He does not explicitly reject "oral instructions," but states that he finds scripture to be more "helpful" or instructive, personally. In particular, he has indicated that the Pali Canon is most valued, for him. That is his experience. He feels that the Pali Canon is more direct, and less prone to conceptual proliferation. I think folks have been quick to feel that he is therefore denigrating Mahayana or Vajrayana, but he has not explicitly done so, as far as I can see. It's my opinion that there is a conditioned response on the part of some folks to feel Mahayana and Vajrayana are "attacked" when someone says there is "more chance of conceptual proliferation" in their canons.

As for the discussion of Pratyekabuddhas, as I understand his response, which, yes, is someone terse and therefore perhaps somewhat cryptic, his understanding of Pema Rigdzin's outline of the cause of realization of a Pratyekabuddha leads him to believe that, at some prior time, that Pratyekabuddha was taught by the Buddha. That's how I read the dialog, at least.

I hope this helps to clarify things....if any of this is incorrect, I trust the parties can clarify things for the sake of intelligent discourse.

[ground]

Rael-
TMingyur's position is pretty clear, actually, if you read the thread. He does not explicitly reject "oral instructions," but states that he finds scripture to be more "helpful" or instructive, personally. In particular, he has indicated that the Pali Canon is most valued, for him. That is his experience. He feels that the Pali Canon is more direct, and less prone to conceptual proliferation. I think folks have been quick to feel that he is therefore denigrating Mahayana or Vajrayana, but he has not explicitly done so, as far as I can see. It's my opinion that there is a conditioned response on the part of some folks to feel Mahayana and Vajrayana are "attacked" when someone says there is "more chance of conceptual proliferation" in their canons.

Ah ... thanks. You have very well summarized what I feel that I have written.

As for the discussion of Pratyekabuddhas, as I understand his response, which, yes, is someone terse and therefore perhaps somewhat cryptic, his understanding of Pema Rigdzin's outline of the cause of realization of a Pratyekabuddha leads him to believe that, at some prior time, that Pratyekabuddha was taught by the Buddha. That's how I read the dialog, at least.

I think this topic is subject to entail speculation only. So either conveniently accept one of the conventional views about it or simply put it aside.

Kind regards

[Rael]

Rael-
TMingyur's position is pretty clear, actually, if you read the thread. He does not explicitly reject "oral instructions," but states that he finds scripture to be more "helpful" or instructive, personally. In particular, he has indicated that the Pali Canon is most valued, for him. That is his experience. He feels that the Pali Canon is more direct, and less prone to conceptual proliferation. I think folks have been quick to feel that he is therefore denigrating Mahayana or Vajrayana, but he has not explicitly done so, as far as I can see. It's my opinion that there is a conditioned response on the part of some folks to feel Mahayana and Vajrayana are "attacked" when someone says there is "more chance of conceptual proliferation" in their canons.

As for the discussion of Pratyekabuddhas, as I understand his response, which, yes, is someone terse and therefore perhaps somewhat cryptic, his understanding of Pema Rigdzin's outline of the cause of realization of a Pratyekabuddha leads him to believe that, at some prior time, that Pratyekabuddha was taught by the Buddha. That's how I read the dialog, at least.

I hope this helps to clarify things....if any of this is incorrect, I trust the parties can clarify things for the sake of intelligent discourse.

thanks for the hand....

when things seem ridiculous to me...i resort to this program on my harddrive....
it gets confusing...

it's not meant to be mean...it's more like a way to understand the motives .....

i see dead people and motives.....

like i said i'm mad//mad as a march hare....

so no worries....

but to steal a quote;
subject to entail speculation only. So either conveniently accept one of the conventional views about it or simply put it aside.