I'm confused about Buddhist arguments against a creator God and what that entails for buddha activity?

[Malcolm]

I can imagine, its about "Temple des Traditions", not ChNN, or any well-meaning Buddhist master
Since long, many teachers spent time to uproot animal sacrifice in Tibetan-speaking areas of the Himalayan range - where they actually still exist here and there in nominally Buddhist areas (one letter of the Karmapa XVI to Manang is available)
They still exist in Latö
We can mention also Nedo Karma Chagmé for Kham and numerous Mongolian teachers but I'm going

Also in Eastern Bhutan, where Kunzang Dechen Lingpa had to correct Nyingmapas who thought they had to slaughter animals for ganapujas.

[nyonchung]

I can imagine, its about "Temple des Traditions", not ChNN, or any well-meaning Buddhist master
Since long, many teachers spent time to uproot animal sacrifice in Tibetan-speaking areas of the Himalayan range - where they actually still exist here and there in nominally Buddhist areas (one letter of the Karmapa XVI to Manang is available)
They still exist in Latö
We can mention also Nedo Karma Chagmé for Kham and numerous Mongolian teachers but I'm going

Also in Eastern Bhutan, where Kunzang Dechen Lingpa had to correct Nyingmapas who thought they had to slaughter animals for ganapujas.

Still going on in Bhutan (see some studies by Samten Karmay in Journal of Bhut. Stud. ), in Nepal in the Thak Khola area (Jomosom), all areas surrounding Khumbu etc... but what I feel strange in the case of "Temple des Traditions" is that somebody like Denys - who spent some timesi n Sonada around where ritual slaughter is regularly perfomed by various animistic groups , shamanistc one (I make the difference), shaktas and the whole set of hindu tantrists or pretending to be so ... and saw what it actually entails
where was I?
and could see that was of course repulsive to Kalu Rinpoché and his longtime friend (and neighbour when he was in Kurseong), Chadral Rinpoché, still t brought shamanism in the same worship and practice place as an a equal to Buddhadharma, this is beyond my understanding, but as my pseudo suggest, maybe I am the madman.
So that this is going on as a "Nalanda Rimay" as a form of "Western Buddhism", this is pushing the ris med bit too far ...
dark times ...

smyon chung

[Artziebetter1]

I think that Buddhists have done an excellent job of refuting the classical theistic God .I think that theistic personalism is reducing God to a contingent creature since any being that does not have it's being as it's existence is deriving it's being from another ,but a being who's essence is identical to it's existence cannot be passable or mutable because it has no becoming or potentiality .any being that goes from act to potentiality is derivative.Now I'm not saying that a being who's essence is identical to it's existence can exist but that is theism.a theism without this aspect cannot exist as the Catholics rightly assert ,but this would make God utterly simple and impassable and thus a dead rock that isn't even sentient nor can act to create the world.

[Natan]

Mahāmudrā has plenty of commentary and analysis, whole volumes of it.

Well, yes, of course...but I think you are missing my point.
I am making a distinction between the mode of explication and analysis, and the mode of meditative instruction and pith.

But, meh...you know what I mean, I am sure.

My point is that meditation without analysis is method sans wisdom, just as analysis without meditation is wisdom sans method.

You got this backwards.

[Natan]

My point is that meditation without analysis is method sans wisdom, just as analysis without meditation is wisdom sans method.

Meditation as experience can stand independent, and more meaningful, than any cognitive process (analysis).

Some people assert that, but such people cannot distinguish awakening from samadhi. This was the fault the Buddha ascertained in the teachings of his two teachers, confusing samadhi for awakening. Awakening is strictly a result of insight. Insight depends on view. View depends on analysis. Analysis depends on discernment.

View does not depend on analysis. It depends on guru's pith instructions about looking at the mind. Analysis is not the cause of insight, it's just speculative proliferation. It can be helpful to orient oneself. But it's meditation on what came from initiation and pith instructions that is the cause of insight. Madhyamaka is a sutra level thing and like in King of Samadhi Sutra those Bodhisattvas have to practice the six paramitas to attain awakening. If wisdom could be done from analysis there wouldn't be a Bodhisattva path, there would be the path of analysis. There is no tradition of awakening by analysis.

[Natan]

Some people assert that, but such people cannot distinguish awakening from samadhi. This was the fault the Buddha ascertained in the teachings of his two teachers, confusing samadhi for awakening. Awakening is strictly a result of insight. Insight depends on view. View depends on analysis. Analysis depends on discernment.

Not at all.
The wisdom of experience trumps (sorry!) the wisdom of cognition. As you stated: we are discussing a process. Also: insight depends on experience.

I don’t think we are using the same language. Merely sitting in samadhi will never lead to awakening.

What do you think the completion stage is? Samadhi is a loose term and be post meditation experience as well.

[Schrödinger’s Yidam]

Then there’s the whole “Godhead” thing, where there’s no idea of a creature.

[Malcolm]

Then there’s the whole “Godhead” thing, where there’s no idea of a creature.

And why should we care about such Christian foolishness?

[Schrödinger’s Yidam]

Then there’s the whole “Godhead” thing, where there’s no idea of a creature.

And why should we care about such Christian foolishness?

I was trying to comment on “Artziebetter1’s” post. However several posts appeared between his and mine. So there’s no context for my post.

[lhaksam.dorje]

Then there’s the whole “Godhead” thing, where there’s no idea of a creature.

And why should we care about such Christian foolishness?

Traleg Rinpoche went through a stage of giving whole seminars about this.