Bon and the karmic problems of Tibet

[adinatha]

That is some very convincing evidence, my friend.

[kalden yungdrung]

Jean Luc Achard knows these things very well..
Unfortunately he is not around but maybe one day he will visit this place and elucidate some of these matters...

until then do your best...

Tashi delek Alpha,

How are you?

I feel, you are not happy with the different opinions here.

Well regarding JLA, please invite him to join us here, he would be welcome.
Besides him are a lot of other Bonpos who also can give good interpretations or elucidation regarding Bon.
Then we know Bonpos and not Bonpos who give their interpretation here on this Bon site.
We are used as Bonpos to this sometimes senseless critiques which are in fact about 1200 years old and based on anti Bon sentiments, whereas Bonpos never did persecutions, banning philosophy, killing and genocide. So what is up? Only that Bon cliams to have a Buddha, that is the crucial point here.

Some Tibetans dare to say that this Bon Buddha is not proven and that a mind to mind tradition would be impossible.
Would remind that in Kagyu, Tilopa did received from Dorje Chang instructions.
Well nobody does doubt that but in case of doubts one could also not prove that, maybe because only Bodhisattvas of the 8th Bhumi can only correspondence with a Sambhogakaya aspect?
But personal do i have no problems with those statements because i do respect some others believe etc.


Must say that there are some who give here interpretations regarding Bon in the line of some old anti Bon directed meanings / propaganda.

We must not forget that in western Tibet are the Chinese ruling and it is difficult to do there archelogical research.
Further did the Chinese like everywhere destroyed many cultural goods and nomads do also destroy there a lot Bon cultural goods.

But i have heard from John Belezza that the Chinese government is interested in Bon and its culture adn so we can probably know in the nearby future more about the ancient Bon.

But what is proven from Bon are its Dzogchen lineage holders, their Zhang Zhung language and the proven realistation about the Bon Dzogchen Masters who did attain the Rainbow Body.That is for me as a Dzogchen practitioner at the moment much more important than to doubt the origen of our lineage etc.

The ultimate result counts for me and therefore am i converted to Bon and therefore a Bonpo in the La and the Heart.
Could also be maybe Nyingma because they also have Dzogchen, but the destiny is in my case Bon.....

Best wishes for our daily practice
Kalden Yungdrung

[Heruka]

to survive, Bon and Buddhism means we have to be proper vessels to receive these blessings. it means not going for temporal gain over long term benefit.



respect your bonpo brothers and sisters.

[kalden yungdrung]

Depends which Bonpo you ask I suppose the new or old variety ?

Tashi delek Caz,

If you would ask a new or old variety about their history the new Bonpos or the adherents of Bon Sarma see a close relationship with Buddha Drenpa Namkha, who did reincarnate several times during the Tibetan history. In one reincarnation Drenpa Namkha had two sons Tsewang Rigdzin and Pema Yungne. Over this linegae we get Bon Sarma and they keep therefore Guru Rinpoche in high esteem like also other Dorje Thekpa elements. Their origen is about 1700 or maybe also 1400.

The old Bonpos they adhere to the facts of the older traditions in Bon who go back to Zhang Zhung.
The origin here of Bon is Tazik and Persia / Iran, namely the area from Persia to Tazekistan, there are the roots of Bon and they claim that Bon is 18.000 years old.
The Zhang Zhung kingdoms were there before the year 800 with own priests, language, Dzogchen, burial rituals, fortresses etc. They were situated along the silk road. These Zhang Zhung kingdoms were asked to help the Tibetan central king, reagrding conquering the Tang emperor, because of the silk.
They did succeed with the help of the Zhang Zhung kings and afterwards the last Zhang Zhung king Ligmincha was killed.........

Then started the big persecution untill 1967 were it did end because of the proclamation if the Dalai Lama 14 who declared that Bon was not the first Tibetan tradition but the fifth. Also here a big understanding why the fifth and not the first. Ok Bonpos were happy with that adjusted fact, but the beat goes on and on reagrding the slandering against Bonpos. And that one can i understand because their teachers do belong to the old line and they were just indoctrinated to be anti Bon and they also know not why but they have just that opinion.

I do belong to as well old Bon as well new Bon or Bon Sarma.

Mutsog Marro
Kalden Yungdrung

[Caz]

Is there still an old variety?

Apparently I watched a documentary( cant remember the name ) not long back about a Journey a New Bon monk took to mount kalish with a journalist of some sort and accompanied by a few other monks of Buddhists traditions and on the way they encountered several mystic men who poclaimed possession by local spirits and called them selves Bon it was much to the Bon monks dismay as he though these guys where nothing to do with what he had been taught as Bon, However it is interesting to note that the Shaman guys who affirmed themselves as Bonpo resemble the earlier stories of what Old Bon was like.

[kalden yungdrung]

Is there still an old variety?

Tashi delek DN,

Yes indeed we have an old variety, the Zhang Zhung Nyen Gyud. It stems form the ancient ZZ kingdom which consisted out of 18 smaller kingdoms and 1 cnetral kingdom e.g. the capital of that kingdom. The last king was Ligmincha who was killed by the central Tibetan king. Here ended the Bon and here started soon the big persecution which ended in 1967 by the fair declaration of the Dalai Lama 14, that Bon would be the 5th TIbetan tradition.

But nevertheless one cannot eradicate 1,2,3 a 1200 years old karmic imprint of murder and persecution, so it is logic and i can understand that some Tibetans and no Tibetans adhere to the old vision of their tradition and so the same beat can slowly continue. It is not anymore like heavy like in the Tibet from before 1959, because it did lost its roots. So the big exodus was from the other side for Bonpos a great event, they became a member of the Tibetan Kashag.

That does mean that there is no voting possible, a little old tradition must survive abroad..............

Best wishes for our daily practice
Kalden Yungdrung

[kalden yungdrung]

I'm going by what the scholars say

http://earlytibet.com/2009/08/24/buddhism-and-bon-iv/

Do you have a carbon dating for Zhang Zhung Nyen Gyud?

Tashi delek Enochian,

Carbon dating for Zhang Zhung kingdoms are not nescessary because we know that they at least did exist before 800.
Evidence are the ruins in north - western Tibet which are inspected on a regular base by John Belleza.

Bon states that they have a background from up to 18.000 years.
Some count these years also in the mind / way of the residence inside the sacred spiritual land Olmo Lungring where the years are different counted because it is an unseen country. One can compare it with Shambala which does exist but is not seen by unbelievers.
So time tables need sometimes interpretations in case of spiritual realms.

Best wishes for our practice
Kalden Yungdrung

[heart]

He is saying "The conclusion I’d like to draw is that at least some Buddhists, by the end of the 10th century and perhaps earlier, thought of the funeral rituals practised in earlier times by Tibetan ritual specialists as a religion called Bon." . It is clear enough.

/magnus

In this sentence, he is saying 10th century buddhists RETROACTIVELY applied the term "Bon"

Why not try reading it?

Yes, but of course it is retroactively since the text are from the 10th century, but according to normal scientific approach that is a confirmation of the theory that there was a religion called Bon before the 10th century.

/magnus

[Malcolm]

He is saying "The conclusion I’d like to draw is that at least some Buddhists, by the end of the 10th century and perhaps earlier, thought of the funeral rituals practised in earlier times by Tibetan ritual specialists as a religion called Bon." . It is clear enough.

/magnus

In this sentence, he is saying 10th century buddhists RETROACTIVELY applied the term "Bon"

Why not try reading it?

Yes, but of course it is retroactively since the text are from the 10th century, but according to normal scientific approach that is a confirmation of the theory that there was a religion called Bon before the 10th century.

/magnus

Troy existed 900 years before the Illiad and for 2600 hundred years all we knew of it was a story -- then someone tracked the story down and found a city buried where the story said it would be three thousand years later.

There certainly was a religion in Tibet we can call "Bon" prior to Buddhism. The first Tibetan king live circa 120 BCE. Prior to that there were many generations of Zhang Zhung kings. Zhang Zhung fell not because of Tibetan aggression -- the kingdom of Zhang Zhung failed because of overgrazing and climate change (for which there is both archaeological evidence and climate evidence).

Bon claims to had a transmission of Dzogchen, etc.,, independent of Shakyamuni Buddha and Garab Dorje's lineage according to their tradition coming from a teacher Shenrab Miwoche. They place the origin of Tonpa Shenrab in Western Central Asia.
This is reasonable since it is a certainty that the Zhang Zhung people migrated to the high plateau of western Tibet from somewhere else, most likely the west and they were not Tibetan, so did not come into Tibet through the low country in Kongpo like the early Tibetan tribes.

After the fall of Zhang Zhung, some Zhang Zhung people continued to migrate east into eastern Tibet and western China, settling in the border lands there. The Naxi people are among the remnants of this migration.

Some Zhang Zhung people stayed behind and moved south into the lower more fertile valleys around Kinnaur. There exists is a small population that continues to speak a descendent of Zhang Zhung language. In my opinion, because Tibetan became the dominant tongue in Western Tibet, the Zhang Zhung people lost their original grammar and thus the small Kinnauri population that speak "Zhang Zhung dialect" of Tibetan now speak a kind of colonial patois of Tibetan with many Zhang Zhung words.

The real facts are lost to history. But we can respect Yungdrung Bon as a fellow tradition that shares the ideals, goals, and essential doctrines of Buddhism. We also should respect Bon because it is important to Tibetan culture.

Did Bon borrow extensively from Buddhism? well, in my opinion, it is very likely. Does this matter? No. Does it matter if it can all be pinned down definitively? No. Do Bonpos attain liberation through Dzogchen teachings? Yes. That, in the end, is all that matters (if you are a Dzogchen practitioner).

Do people sometimes get confused about all this? Often. Is Buddhist behavior towards Bon often despicable? Yes.

N

[heart]

I feel inclined to agree with Namdrol. I would study Bon Dzogchen but my mind feels to small to accommodate two religions.

/magnus

[Enochian]

He is saying "The conclusion I’d like to draw is that at least some Buddhists, by the end of the 10th century and perhaps earlier, thought of the funeral rituals practised in earlier times by Tibetan ritual specialists as a religion called Bon." . It is clear enough.

/magnus

In this sentence, he is saying 10th century buddhists RETROACTIVELY applied the term "Bon"

Why not try reading it?

Yes, but of course it is retroactively since the text are from the 10th century, but according to normal scientific approach that is a confirmation of the theory that there was a religion called Bon before the 10th century.

/magnus

No there wasn't. Now I know you are just being obtuse on purpose. First off the retro term was only applied to funerary rites, not a religion.

Secondly, he specifically says "But the fact is it’s not at all clear that there was a religion in Tibet called “Bon” before the 11th century."

[Jikan]

Hey, guys, I know very well, very very well, why it was all happened with Tibet! Pay attention, please:

Once upon a time there was a guy in Czech Republic who was interested in yoga, buddhism, mysticism, etc. While he was in meditation one day, he saw an old man comming and entering in him. According to him, it was Marpa Lotsawa and he became his tulku. Later on he claimed, that he has stolen kagyu teachings from Tibet and because of this, the TIbet will suffer!!! His followers up to this days have no interest to meet any lama at all, cos why for? Lamas have no teaching at all, everything was stolen long time ago....

And here it is:

http://mahayana.cz/english/Vishnu/default.html

Looks like this.

viewtopic.php?f=64&t=3949&start=20#p37441

[tatpurusa]

Is there still an old variety?

Apparently I watched a documentary( cant remember the name ) not long back about a Journey a New Bon monk took to mount kalish with a journalist of some sort and accompanied by a few other monks of Buddhists traditions and on the way they encountered several mystic men who poclaimed possession by local spirits and called them selves Bon it was much to the Bon monks dismay as he though these guys where nothing to do with what he had been taught as Bon, However it is interesting to note that the Shaman guys who affirmed themselves as Bonpo resemble the earlier stories of what Old Bon was like.

Sorry, but you are mixing things up.
That documentary was about a journey of Geshe Gelek, a Yungdrung Bon (old variety) monk, a disciple of Tenzin Namdak Rinpoche.
He met there some shamans calling themselves "bonpo".
The confusion arises, because "bon" is used to designate 3 different traditions:
1. Pure old shamanism, that has not much to do neither with Bon, nor with Buddhism at all. It seems Indian-style buddhists have used the designation "Bon" for everything in Tibet, that they identified as "not belonging to buddhism of Indian origin"
2. Yungdrung Bon, or the original old Bon Buddhist lineage coming from Tonpa Shenrab Miwoche
3. "New Bon", based on later found termas by tertons like Vairocana et al. Several of these tertons found both Bonpo and Nyingma termas.

[padma norbu]

I'm going by what the scholars say

http://earlytibet.com/2009/08/24/buddhism-and-bon-iv/

Do you have a carbon dating for Zhang Zhung Nyen Gyud?

Ever read this:
http://www.wisdom-books.com/ProductDetail.asp?PID=19801
?

[heart]

No there wasn't. Now I know you are just being obtuse on purpose. First off the retro term was only applied to funerary rites, not a religion.

Secondly, he specifically says "But the fact is it’s not at all clear that there was a religion in Tibet called “Bon” before the 11th century."

"The conclusion I’d like to draw is that at least some Buddhists, by the end of the 10th century and perhaps earlier, thought of the funeral rituals practised in earlier times by Tibetan ritual specialists as a religion called Bon. I suspect that this was not quite the same thing that Tibetans meant when they said “Bon” after the 10th century. As usual, I welcome the thoughts of those better qualified than myself. Below they will find the relevant Tibetan text and my unsatisfactory translation."

/magnus

[muni]

Bon, Buddhism...just some words of Yeshe Tsogyal.

The Supreme Being is the Dakini Queen of the Lake of Awareness!
I have vanished into fields of lotus-light, the plenum of dynamic space,
To be born in the inner sanctum of an immaculate lotus;
Do not despair, have faith!

When you have withdrawn attachment to this rocky defile,
This barbaric Tibet, full of war and strife,
Abandon unnecessary activity and rely on solitude.
Practice energy control, purify your psychic nerves and seed-essence,
And cultivate mahamudra and Dsokchen.

The Supreme Being is the Dakini Queen of the Lake of Awareness!
Attaining humility, through Guru Pema Jungne's compassion I followed him,
And now I have finally gone into his presence;
Do not despair, but pray!

When you see your karmic body as vulnerable as a bubble,
Realising the truth of impermanence, and that in death you are helpless,
Disabuse yourself of fantasies of eternity,
Make your life a practice of sadhana,
And cultivate the experience that takes you to the place where Ati ends.

[Tenzin1]

I'm going by what the scholars say

http://earlytibet.com/2009/08/24/buddhism-and-bon-iv/
http://www.questhimalaya.com/journal/zhang-zhung-01.htm

Do you have a carbon dating for Zhang Zhung Nyen Gyud?

Tashi delek Enochian,

Carbon dating for Zhang Zhung kingdoms are not nescessary because we know that they at least did exist before 800.
Evidence are the ruins in north - western Tibet which are inspected on a regular base by John Belleza.

Radiocarbon date results for Zhang Zhung say the culture existed at least as early as 1000 BCE, per recent studies by Belleza. Also, similar cultural attributes have been found in Mustang, and it's postulated that Mustang belonged to Zhang Zhung culture as well. Zhang Zhung extended all the way to Khotan and beyond, in the north. It covered a territory the size of California and Texas combined. The Chinese now are doing archaeological work on Zhang Zhung, alongside Belleza.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/14145413/Bon- ... n-of-Tibet
http://www.questhimalaya.com/journal/zhang-zhung-01.htm

Kalden Yungdrung, I've always wondered if nations have karma, like individuals. Interesting that the Bon lama said they do.

FYI, some scholars these days use the term "Bon" to refer to the amalgam of Tibet's pre-Buddhist religion and Buddhism (as Bon has been influenced to some extent by Buddhism). They use the term "Pre-Bon Religion" to refer to the indigenous shamanist and animist traditions that existed before Buddhism. But there is no agreement among scholars on this yet; many still refer to the Native shamanism/animism as "Bon". So it seems that the field of Bon Studies is evolving. And it seems that the Bonpos themselves use the term to refer to both pre-Buddhist and post-Buddhism-arrival traditions. Clearly, there is a continuity there. In any case, this may be why some say that Bon didn't exist before the 11th Century. It depends on how one defines Bon.

[kalden yungdrung]

Tenzin1 wrote:

Kalden Yungdrung, I've always wondered if nations have karma, like individuals. Interesting that the Bon lama said they do.

FYI, some scholars these days use the term "Bon" to refer to the amalgam of Tibet's pre-Buddhist religion and Buddhism (as Bon has been influenced to some extent by Buddhism). They use the term "Pre-Bon Religion" to refer to the indigenous shamanist and animist traditions that existed before Buddhism. But there is no agreement among scholars on this yet; many still refer to the Native shamanism/animism as "Bon". So it seems that the field of Bon Studies is evolving. And it seems that the Bonpos themselves use the term to refer to both pre-Buddhist and post-Buddhism-arrival traditions. Clearly, there is a continuity there. In any case, this may be why some say that Bon didn't exist before the 11th Century. It depends on how one defines Bon.
Tenzin1 Posts: 41Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2011 5:36 am

Tashi delek,

Thanks fore your usefull elucidations about the ancient Bon history.

"Pre-Bon Religion" you did mentioned, is that what Bon did encounter when they came to Tibet over Tazik.
These " Tibetans " they met there where indeed Shamans with bloody rituals etc.
One of the great contributions of Bon is then also the alternative of the Torma, which replaces the bloody sacrifices.

Well there are still Shamans of this cult in Nepal, they are a mix of different Shamanistic tribes and not per se Bonpos.
Some people make the mistake to call these Shamans Bonpos.
I heard and saw one time (on TV) the legend that the source of their Tradition stems from India, where long time ago 2 Shamans did revived the death corpse of an Indian princess. Based on these 2 Shamen this cult did spread into the Himalayan area.

Further is it not logic that the Bon Buddha Tonpa Shenrab Miwoche, would allow these slaughter festivals.
But one can easy suggest that the doctrine and the practice could be 2 different things or that there are everywhere good and bad persons.
This one can watch in all religions etc.

Mutog marro
KY

[kalden yungdrung]

Tenzin1 wrote:

Kalden Yungdrung, I've always wondered if nations have karma, like individuals. Interesting that the Bon lama said they do.

FYI, some scholars these days use the term "Bon" to refer to the amalgam of Tibet's pre-Buddhist religion and Buddhism (as Bon has been influenced to some extent by Buddhism). They use the term "Pre-Bon Religion" to refer to the indigenous shamanist and animist traditions that existed before Buddhism. But there is no agreement among scholars on this yet; many still refer to the Native shamanism/animism as "Bon". So it seems that the field of Bon Studies is evolving. And it seems that the Bonpos themselves use the term to refer to both pre-Buddhist and post-Buddhism-arrival traditions. Clearly, there is a continuity there. In any case, this may be why some say that Bon didn't exist before the 11th Century. It depends on how one defines Bon.
Tenzin1 Posts: 41Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2011 5:36 am

Tashi delek,

Thanks fore your usefull elucidations about the ancient Bon history.

"Pre-Bon Religion" you did mentioned, is that what Bon did encounter when they came to Tibet over Tazik.
These " Tibetans " they met there where indeed Shamans with bloody rituals etc.
One of the great contributions of Bon is then also the alternative of the Torma, which replaces the bloody sacrifices.

Well there are still Shamans of this cult in Nepal, they are a mix of different Shamanistic tribes and not per se Bonpos.
Some people make the mistake to call these Shamans Bonpos.
I heard and saw one time (on TV) the legend that the source of their Tradition stems from India, where long time ago 2 Shamans did revived the death corpse of an Indian princess. Based on these 2 Shamen this cult did spread into the Himalayan area.

Further is it not logic that the Bon Buddha Tonpa Shenrab Miwoche, would allow these slaughter festivals.
But one can easy suggest that the doctrine and the practice could be 2 different things or that there are everywhere good and bad persons.
This one can watch in all religions etc.

Mutog marro
KY

[Malcolm]

Radiocarbon date results for Zhang Zhung say the culture existed at least as early as 1000 BCE, per recent studies by Belleza.

Pots are not people.

For example, would we expect to find Celts today living along the Danube?

In any case, this may be why some say that Bon didn't exist before the 11th Century. It depends on how one defines Bon.

What they mean is that we do not have a single Bon text which can be dated earlier that the 11th century.

N