Sutra and Tantra Teachings

[Natan]

If you like Gongchik, then you follow that instruction. Your likes and dislikes are quite irrelevant to the paths of others, as are mine. In the end, there is only one authority, ourselves, and what we personally decide to accept and reject.

As we should both know, acceptance and rejection is illusion. I'm doing what one does when one doesn't accept or reject and keeps an open mind about what the lineage masters say is important.

Which means you are making a choice to accept X master as an authority. That is something you are accepting, and in the process are rejecting what other masters say.

Not if I didn't get taught by those masters.

[Malcolm]

As we should both know, acceptance and rejection is illusion. I'm doing what one does when one doesn't accept or reject and keeps an open mind about what the lineage masters say is important.

Which means you are making a choice to accept X master as an authority. That is something you are accepting, and in the process are rejecting what other masters say.

Not if I didn't get taught by those masters.

Umm., I was talking about a teacher you have accepted.

[Natan]

Which means you are making a choice to accept X master as an authority. That is something you are accepting, and in the process are rejecting what other masters say.

Not if I didn't get taught by those masters.

Umm., I was talking about a teacher you have accepted.

Just the teacher I could find. Luckily he was authentic Drikung Kagyu. For over 10 years I went to everything I could. I chose to go to teachings. I didn't choose what was taught or who taught it. That was chosen for me. Eventually I learned what composes a complete teaching, a complete lineage and accomplishment. I understood which teaching I had which was complete and focused on that. Then I was able to take stock in pith instructions like Gongchig or Dzogchen Upadeshas and understand the when, where, what and why it is useful. So I am very adamant it takes a foundation of an elder Buddha tantra for the pith instructions to be useful. The gurus who propound a foundation like this are indeed the best gurus with the siddhis and amazing students. Pith instructions are footnotes. No one understands a book by only reading the footnotes. Worse. Commentaries are footnotes. And pith instructions are endnotes. The tantra is the main text, unless it's a pity instruction tantra, then it's a book of endnotes.

[Malcolm]

Not if I didn't get taught by those masters.

Umm., I was talking about a teacher you have accepted.

Just the teacher I could find. Luckily he was authentic Drikung Kagyu. For over 10 years I went to everything I could. I chose to go to teachings. I didn't choose what was taught or who taught it. That was chosen for me. Eventually I learned what composes a complete teaching, a complete lineage and accomplishment. I understood which teaching I had which was complete and focused on that. Then I was able to take stock in pith instructions like Gongchig or Dzogchen Upadeshas and understand the when, where, what and why it is useful. So I am very adamant it takes a foundation of an elder Buddha tantra for the pith instructions to be useful. The gurus who propound a foundation like this are indeed the best gurus with the siddhis and amazing students. Pith instructions are footnotes. No one understands a book by only reading the footnotes. Worse. Commentaries are footnotes. And pith instructions are endnotes. The tantra is the main text, unless it's a pity instruction tantra, then it's a book of endnotes.

One may think: “We concede that our decisions are unreliable, but when we follow the decisions of the Buddha, we are infallible.” Then who decided that the Buddha is infallible? If you say, “The great scholars and adepts like Nagarjuna decided that he is infallible,” then who decided that Nagarjuna is infallible? If you say, “The Foremost Lama Tsong khapa decided it,” then who knows that the Foremost Lama is infallible? If you say, “Our kind and peerless lama, the excellent and great so and so decided,” then infallibility, which depends on your excellent lama, is decided by your own mind. In fact, therefore, it is a tiger who vouches for a lion, it is a yak who vouches for a tiger, it is a dog who vouches for a yak, it is a mouse who vouches for a dog, it is an insect who vouches for a mouse. Thus, an insect is made the final voucher for them all. Therefore, when one analyzes in detail the final basis for any decision, apart from coming back to one’s own mind, nothing else whatsoever is perceived.

— Ganden Chophel

[yagmort]

One may think...
....

...Therefore, when one analyzes in detail the final basis for any decision, apart from coming back to one’s own mind, nothing else whatsoever is perceived.

— Ganden Chophel

or, to make it a tad shorter:




p.s. i thought his name is Gendün though