|
he1ixx posted:This is pretty old but gives some indication about the NKT weirdness and how we got here. I know the whole NKT comes up once in a while and this info isn't usually all in one place Thanks for this. NKT has a center in a high-traffic part of my city, and the couple of Buddhist or Buddhist-friendly friends I have here have pretty much only tried it. I don't think they openly discuss much of this. Also, no one I know goes more than once every couple months, so that may be part. I'm hoping to get the word out about a small Zen practice I've found nearby. I've only lived here 2 months, so I might find another group nearby, but they look promising.
|
#
?
May 29, 2014 19:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 23:34 |
|
|
Apparently these guys figured out buddha loss is dependent on linguistics, and are cheating the system by translating a poo poo ton of tibetan manuscripts. Now they should either realize that ecen the dalai lama wants to bury poo poo (djurgen shugden etc) or they should expand and wander forgotten caves in Burma and Pakistan so they can complete their impossible and slightly naive vision. http://84000.co/news Ps. Their youtube pic is pretty and sounds like cracked's secrets of the science.
|
|
#
?
May 30, 2014 23:57
|
|
|
Sithsaber posted:Apparently these guys figured out buddha loss is dependent on linguistics, and are cheating the system by translating a poo poo ton of tibetan manuscripts. Now they should either realize that ecen the dalai lama wants to bury poo poo (djurgen shugden etc) or they should expand and wander forgotten caves in Burma and Pakistan so they can complete their impossible and slightly naive vision.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2014 17:57
|
|
|
Nessus posted:Why does the Dalai Lama want to bury that particular thing you mentioned? There's a video explaining it cited at the top of the page, or two posts before yours if you have a different page length set.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2014 18:23
|
|
|
Nessus posted:Why does the Dalai Lama want to bury that particular thing you mentioned? The Shugden people come from a sectarian subschool that reveres a suspect prebuddhist guardian spirit that has challenged and supposedly killed a dalai lama on occasion. It basically isn't panbuddhudist and comes from the epoc before buddhism cleansed the local ppractices and tibetan asura spirits. I think this is better explained on a prior page.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2014 19:31
|
|
|
Or more realistically, New Kadampa are being used a stooges for the Chinese occupiers and frequently are used to attempt to leverage people politically against His Holiness, generally in terms of "look at that fascist Dalai Lama, he banned us from worshiping whoever we want unlike Glorious People's Liberation Army!" and so on. I don't have 30 minutes of time to spend watching a documentary about demon worshipers, but the more important aspect to the controversy in my opinion is the Chinese interference and encouragement of NKT in and out of Tibet.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2014 20:30
|
|
|
Paramemetic posted:Or more realistically, New Kadampa are being used a stooges for the Chinese occupiers and frequently are used to attempt to leverage people politically against His Holiness, generally in terms of "look at that fascist Dalai Lama, he banned us from worshiping whoever we want unlike Glorious People's Liberation Army!" and so on. I don't have 30 minutes of time to spend watching a documentary about demon worshipers, but the more important aspect to the controversy in my opinion is the Chinese interference and encouragement of NKT in and out of Tibet. If we're gonna be honest here, the lamas have a long history of being lecherous dicks. The Dalai lama is trying to parlay his role as a symbol of cultural resistance into becoming a even more widely recognized Buddhist pope/God king.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2014 21:04
|
|
|
Sithsaber posted:If we're gonna be honest here, the lamas have a long history of being lecherous dicks. The Dalai lama is trying to parlay his role as a symbol of cultural resistance into becoming a even more widely recognized Buddhist pope/God king. No, he isn't.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2014 23:22
|
|
|
Sithsaber posted:If we're gonna be honest here, the lamas have a long history of being lecherous dicks. The Dalai lama is trying to parlay his role as a symbol of cultural resistance into becoming a even more widely recognized Buddhist pope/God king. There's plenty of reasons to be critical of both Tibetan Buddhism and of the Dalai Lama as well, but that's one thing he seems pretty innocent of.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2014 00:50
|
|
|
The-Mole posted:There's plenty of reasons to be critical of both Tibetan Buddhism and of the Dalai Lama as well, but that's one thing he seems pretty innocent of. It's more a criticism of his office and his western following.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2014 02:50
|
|
Sithsaber posted:It's more a criticism of his office and his western following. It's not even a criticism of that, it's kind of a dumb throwaway I-watched-crazy-people-youtube-videos-and-now-feel-obligated-to-post-in-a-thread-like-I'm-doing-in-the-Freemasonry-thread thing which provides nothing of value. There are definitely valid criticisms of the tulku system, (the Sakya kings could be argued to be a straight-up traditional monarchy stuck into the framework of Avalokitesvara's emanations) but saying the Dalai Lama is out to make himself Dharmapope is on its face pretty silly.
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2014 03:35
|
|
|
His prestige is illusionary. The Dalai Lama never traditionally wielded the power to declare associated lhamassaries straight up heretical, and although I support the repression of shugden, it does smack of the archaic mistreatment of undiluted Bon traditions.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2014 04:38
|
|
|
Sithsaber posted:lhamassaries This is not a word. quote:straight up heretical, and although I support the repression of shugden, it does smack of the archaic mistreatment of undiluted Bon traditions. And this is a ridiculous thing to claim His Holiness would do, seeing as HHDL is one of the main dudes who has advocated for the acceptance of Bon as a "sixth tradition" of Buddhism. He literally holds that Bon is Buddhism at this point, why would he "mistreat Bon traditions?" Again, this doesn't seem to be something you're very knowledgeable about. It seems like you're agitating just for the sake of agitating.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2014 05:09
|
|
|
1. http://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/lamasery 2. Historically his past lives behaved differently. His present position may be tolerant of Bon, but this tolerance is grounded in the refocusing of the wild aspects that make up the old spirits. (Tradition says Buddhist monks subjugated and harnessed the wrath of the Gyalpa etc etc) Lingering mistrust is understandable, and his position is not completely pure. That's not naivity, that's common sense. Press releases and good will tours only go so far.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2014 06:19
|
|
|
I signed up for a weekend meditation course at the local Chan center. They are affiliated with Dharma Drum and seem like nice people. Has anyone had any experiences with that sect/lineage?
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2014 09:27
|
|
|
mcustic posted:I signed up for a weekend meditation course at the local Chan center. They are affiliated with Dharma Drum and seem like nice people. Has anyone had any experiences with that sect/lineage? It's just the Chinese precursor to Zen isn't it? I would imagine it would function similarly, though I think there priest are more "conservative" than the Japanese in the sense that they are celibate and require Vegetarianism.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2014 09:51
|
|
|
Sithsaber posted:His prestige is illusionary. The Dalai Lama never traditionally wielded the power to declare associated lamaseries straight up heretical First: The ban was suggested by the ganden tripa- the head of tibetan gelugpa buddhism and not the dalai lama. HHDL, following the advice of the ganden tripa, who at the time was his tantric master, helped suggest that other gelugpa practitioners not engage in this dangerous practise. Second: You really want to be careful when talking about the "traditional" power of the dalai lama- Given that, y'know, historically the dalai lama was not only the major religious power of central asian buddhist society. . .But y'know the supreme power of the cho-sid-nyi (Paramemetic is that the correct pinyin?), supreme enough that the most powerful civil authority in tibet was abolished by the whim of the seventh dalai lama. You know the dalai lama, in his "illusory" position of prestige and the kowtowing of westerners excommunicated an entire school of tibetan buddhism? Third: Actually traditionally? The fifth dalai lama (Note we're on number fourteen) is the one who banned Dorje Shugden practise when he consolidated supreme authority under the oirat/dzunghar mongols. Maybe you don't consider it traditionally though, it did happen just five hundred years ago  Fourth: Kelsang Gyatso never completed his geshe degree, he flunked out. He's not just a heretic, he's an unqualified one, and if you'd watched the video he is deliberately schismatic (an action which prompts a birth in the greatest of the hell realms) but promotes his own worship as a living buddha Shugden isn't some pre-buddhist figure he's cracking down on. While the roots certanly extend to prebuddhist times (Mahakala being similar, as an appropriation of then-developing shaivist yoga) the figure of dorje shugden which causes controversy is one that is entirely buddhist in its conception. Sithsaber posted:Apparently these guys figured out buddha loss is dependent on linguistics, and are cheating the system by translating a poo poo ton of tibetan manuscripts. Now they should either realize that ecen the dalai lama wants to bury poo poo (djurgen shugden etc) or they should expand and wander forgotten caves in Burma and Pakistan so they can complete their impossible and slightly naive vision. I also cannot find them speaking at all about buddha loss or cheating any sort of system- What I see is them describing an earnest effort to not only attempt a preservation of classical tibetan (which is very endangered as a language), but working on translating this classical tibetan with the few remaining that understand it, just in case. Why just in case? The PRC might put a bullet in any of the old monks out in those "lamaseries" that could save it. Classical chinese is taught in secondary schools, even in lhasa. The chinese mahayana canon then, is technically accessible to the citizenry and is widely available to scholars. It's pretty strange you'd call this serious linguistic effort a naive vision- it also has gently caress all to do with other forms of buddhism, so I'm not sure why they'd have to go trumping around in caves in burma and pakistan to accomplish their goal of translating texts they have full access to in libraries. Despite what you say- this is actually a really great project and a good example of crowdfunding worthy academia. PrinceRandom posted:It's just the Chinese precursor to Zen isn't it? I would imagine it would function similarly, though I think there priest are more "conservative" than the Japanese in the sense that they are celibate and require Vegetarianism. Chan is indeed the precursor school for japanese zen. It's not totally fair to call it more conservative though, when you consider that much of japanese zen is reaching out to Chan to recover traditions and texts they'd lost. I would also argue that zen technically requires vegetarianism and celibacy for its monks- but in many of those instances the vinaya is never taken in lieu of cultivating a hereditary temple position. Decrees of the emperor of japan and all. Still, that's all aside from his question. Chan founded kung-fu. Doesn't get cooler than that. I don't have any experience with dharma drum, but I do with Chan. It's a good and solid school, well founded in mahayana thought.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2014 12:17
|
|
|
Quantumfate posted:First: The ban was suggested by the ganden tripa- the head of tibetan gelugpa buddhism and not the dalai lama. HHDL, following the advice of the ganden tripa, who at the time was his tantric master, helped suggest that other gelugpa practitioners not engage in this dangerous practise. 1. The Shugden ban had to be overturned, and the dorje shugden people "celebrate" (more like preach the futility of standing against their god ) their survival. 2. Historically the lhamas were very exploitative, kind of like a suped up version of the papacy. The DL's authority had to be fought for and is by no means a timeless institution. quote:
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gelug Now behold the hat sects http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Hat_sect 3. The the youtube quip was meant to be a joke. I called it naive because of the natural and seemingly spontaneous changes that occur in syncretic and occasionally folk religions like Buddhism. This organization is probably just focusing on the gelupa sect.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2014 16:16
|
|
|
Sithsaber posted:lhamas Why do you keep doing this? བླ་མ་ does not have a "h" in it, it's not aspirated, it's not even an aspirated ཕ as the root letter in the བླ་ syllable. It's these weird little pretensions like this bizarre and utterly fabricated spelling that confuses me. As above, when you talked about "lhamasseries" instead of lamaseries, to my confusion. There is an aspirated l sound in Tibetan, such as in ལྷ་ས་ , but this word is not one of those words. As for the other points: Sithsaber posted:1. The Shugden ban had to be overturned, and the dorje shugden people "celebrate" (more like preach the futility of standing against their god ) their survival. It has not been overturned by any legitimate monastic leaders, so I mean, there's that. Incidentally, preaching the futility of standing against their god more or less demonstrates exactly why it's heretical. quote:2. Historically the lhamas were very exploitative, kind of like a suped up version of the papacy. The DL's authority had to be fought for and is by no means a timeless institution. Yes, you're right, historically when Tibet was a loose constellation of warlord city states, politics were not so cut and dry and the lama who brought Buddhism to the Mongols was pretty politically powerful. There are still politics that go on in these things, and so what? Your claim of HHDL being some kind of exploiter are straight out of Chinese propaganda. quote:Now behold the hat sects As a lineage holder for the golden rosary lineage, a red hat sect, I can say with some certainty that even the red hats love HHDL, as he's seen as both a high lama and a culture hero. He's not exploited his way to this position, though. It has a lot to do with Tibetan nationalist sentiment, and not a lot to do with Westerners being fooled by some clever PR, as you seem to be implying. Tibetans really, really love His Holiness, because he is one of the most visible continuations of their cultural heritage. Again, this isn't "some smart dude is taking the West for a ride," it's completely unrelated. This is "some people from a culture adore their culture hero, a literal emanation of a bodhisattva and a sworn protector of their people." quote:3. The the youtube quip was meant to be a joke. I called it naive because of the natural and seemingly spontaneous changes that occur in syncretic and occasionally folk religions like Buddhism. This organization is probably just focusing on the gelupa sect. I don't know anything about this translation project, except what I read from the very first page of its website, which specifically mentions that it's focusing its efforts entirely on the Kangyur, which, though they vary to some degree regionally, are generally accepted each as canonical by any follower of Ri Me, which holds all of the sects, including Bon, with both their Kangyur and Tengyur, to be accepted canonically. There is no "Gelug bias" here because there is no "Gelug Kangyur" that differs meaningfully from, say, a Drikung Kangyur, or a Karma Kangyur, except inasmuch as the different monasteries have their own versions. Paramemetic fucked around with this message at 17:45 on Jun 3, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2014 17:35
|
|
|
Paramemetic posted:Why do you keep doing this? བླ་མ་ does not have a "h" in it, it's not aspirated, it's not even an aspirated ཕ as the root letter in the བླ་ syllable. It's these weird little pretensions like this bizarre and utterly fabricated spelling that confuses me. As above, when you talked about "lhamasseries" instead of lamaseries, to my confusion. There is an aspirated l sound in Tibetan, such as in ལྷ་ས་ , but this word is not one of those words. The rest of your post has some merit. The DL is a a symbol of cultural continuation true, but this symbol is formed through a not wholly honest narrative. I'm not saying the PRO were liberators, merely that the office and his authority is questionable.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2014 17:52
|
|
|
Sithsaber posted:Come on, I probably got that spelling from a old book. (Or the animal) I spelled it wrong, who gives a poo poo. The Government in Exile? Or his position as head of the Gelug lineage? I mean this is the thing that I'm not sure what you're trying to say. He's the head of the Government in Exile only nominally, as he abdicated his leadership of that some years ago. And he didn't choose to be a head of a lineage, that's kind of a thing that just sort of happens based on recognition and so on by other lamas. If Tibetans love him and want him to govern Tibetans, I fail to see how that can be anything but legitimate. Hell, it's probably the most legitimate, and far more authentic than any Western democracy, for Tibetan people to nearly unanimously adore a person and want that person to lead them.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2014 17:57
|
|
|
Paramemetic posted:The Government in Exile? Or his position as head of the Gelug lineage? I mean this is the thing that I'm not sure what you're trying to say. He's the head of the Government in Exile only nominally, as he abdicated his leadership of that some years ago. And he didn't choose to be a head of a lineage, that's kind of a thing that just sort of happens based on recognition and so on by other lamas. If Tibetans love him and want him to govern Tibetans, I fail to see how that can be anything but legitimate. Hell, it's probably the most legitimate, and far more authentic than any Western democracy, for Tibetan people to nearly unanimously adore a person and want that person to lead them. I want him to act like the king of Nepal. I don't even like The British monarchy
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2014 19:57
|
|
|
Sithsaber posted:I want him to act like the king of Nepal. I don't even like The British monarchy Murdered by his children? In all seriousness, he's already completely abdicated all of his political power to the Kalon Tripa and the Parliament of the CTA in 2011. I'm not sure what more than "completely ceded all political power and removed himself from the organization's structure" you can want from a dude. Before that, in 2001, he ceased the practice of appointing the Kalon Tripa himself and opened it to voters in the exile community. Like, I'm really confused as to what you would have him do. He abdicated his executive privilege for the Central Tibetan Administration that he himself founded upon his escape. Then you brought up actions of people in his position 14 lifetimes ago, which seems really distant and unrelated when back then the issue was to keep the peace between warring city-states and now it is "try to advocate for the establishment of actual autonomy in the Tibetan Autonomous Region," since His Holiness doesn't even advocate for full independence.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2014 20:43
|
|
|
Paramemetic, you are a lineage holder? Can you tell us more about that?
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2014 21:48
|
|
|
Sithsaber posted:I want him to act like the king of Nepal. I don't even like The British monarchy The king of nepal has plans to return the office of the monarchy and will likely re-attempt to seize power. Against popular protests otherwise. Contrast this with the Dalai Lama, who went against popular wishes and spoke to his government to remove himself from political office permanently. He's not even the head of the Gelug lineage, as I pointed out earlier that's the Ganden Tripa. He's just the most-high lama of the gelugpa (and arguably tibetan buddhism in general at this point) Sithsaber posted:1. The Shugden ban had to be overturned, and the dorje shugden people "celebrate" (more like preach the futility of standing against their god ) their survival. If you'd read 84000, you'd know their goal is the translation of the kangyur and tengyur- which would make them ecumenical and not just gelugpa. It also has nothing to do with syncretism or folk religious adoption because its goal is the translation and preservation of canon. Now- let's talk sects. the Phagmodrupa, Rinpungpa and Tsangpa. These were brutal warlords and absolute monarchs that held their power in concentrated fortresses and slave plantations enfeoffed by their supplication to the yuan imperial mandate. Tibet's appointed religious heads were the sakyapa, one of your sects. The Sakyapa head is drawn from the male members of a dynasty- they are arguably a theocratic monarchy. With the collapse of the Yuan imperial mandate backing the phagmodrupa, the Kagyu and Nyingma schools rose to a brief prominence further shattering tibet from the control of the phagmodrupa dynasty. Meanwhile, the recent gelug school's influence over central asian horde polities allowed them a chance to force an ecumenism and peace among warlords. Fifth Dalai Lama, with the backing of Gushi Khan reuinted tibet under mongolian politics. The Desi was the chief secular authority acting in behalf of the mongols. Seventh Dalai lama found this position was fast approaching too much power and abolished it, declaring the kashag. Let's talk the dorje shugden ban- Dolgyal was banned in the fifteen hundreds by the dalai lama. Dolgyal is not bonpo, Dolgyal is purely buddhist. Purely Gelug. In the nineteenth and twentieth centuries it was reinstituted by a hugely popular monk, Pabongka. This monk declared that Bon practitioners could not be buddhists. He cracked down on an ecumenical movement because he felt it violated gelug supremacy. He was not the head of the gelug, he was not the dalai lama. He threw out the teachings of the founder regarding tutelary gyalpos and deities of the gelugpa to promote the tutelary properties of a violent anti-ecumenical spirit. To give you some perspective on the "tradition" and "history" of the dalai lama's position? The prime minister of italy is an illusory position of prestige by your definition. Historically the prime minister of italy hasn't had legislative power! It wasn't until the 1860s when the risorgimento- a violent invasion of a minority of military troops backed by foreign powers imposed their will against the wishes of the italian polities. Of course we recognize the italian state as legitimate and recognize the authority of the italian government over its own people. You come a Sithsaber posted:Come on, I probably got that spelling from a old book. (Or the animal) I spelled it wrong, who gives a poo poo. And I'm actually going to call bullshit on this. Lamaseries as a word describing the monastic system of tibet reeks of orientalist bunk, especially lhamasseries. I can't help but feel you're arguing out of your rear end just for the sake of arguing given how over the place you are. Points for being spot-on with the cutting edge of uninformed westerner views though EDIT: mcustic posted:Paramemetic, you are a lineage holder? Can you tell us more about that? It means he's a member of a chuch, essentially. He's a follower of Kagyu tibetan buddhism. By lineage holder it means that his teacher is the student of a student of a student of a student of a student of a student etc. . . of the kagyu founders. Lineage of scholastic succession is usually the primary method of hierarchy within buddhism. Comparable examples in western religious history would be something like the succession of cluniac benedictine christianity in france until the the rival succession of the bernardine/cistercian orders. Quantumfate fucked around with this message at 22:45 on Jun 3, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2014 22:39
|
|
|
mcustic posted:Paramemetic, you are a lineage holder? Can you tell us more about that? Yeah basically what Quantumfate said. Lineage holding does not mean anything overly special. I've received transmissions from someone who has received empowerments from someone who has... From the lineage master. In the unlikely event that I became a fantastic practitioner or something, and received a lot of further training and empowerments and on and on, I could in theory propagate the lineage. Lineage is super important in Tibetan Buddhism, without it there is no basis for transmission. In truth it's a little more than "member of a church" but a lot less than "at all important or special." But it does mean that I count as part of the sect.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2014 22:59
|
|
|
Quantumfate posted:The king of nepal has plans to return the office of the monarchy and will likely re-attempt to seize power. Against popular protests otherwise. Contrast this with the Dalai Lama, who went against popular wishes and spoke to his government to remove himself from political office permanently. He's not even the head of the Gelug lineage, as I pointed out earlier that's the Ganden Tripa. He's just the most-high lama of the gelugpa (and arguably tibetan buddhism in general at this point) Lhamasary is a "monastery" of lamas. We also use the word temple and sanctuary in ways that are technically incorrect.k
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2014 23:06
|
|
|
Paramemetic posted:Yeah basically what Quantumfate said. Lineage holding does not mean anything overly special. I've received transmissions from someone who has received empowerments from someone who has... From the lineage master. In the unlikely event that I became a fantastic practitioner or something, and received a lot of further training and empowerments and on and on, I could in theory propagate the lineage. Lineage is super important in Tibetan Buddhism, without it there is no basis for transmission. In truth it's a little more than "member of a church" but a lot less than "at all important or special." But it does mean that I count as part of the sect. Oh, I thought that was a very rare thing, like in Zen. There are only a few dozen living Rinzai lineage holders in the entire Japan, and in Soto Zen it's needed for the entry level of priesthood.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2014 23:11
|
|
|
Sithsaber posted:Lhamasary is a "monastery" of lamas. We also use the word temple and sanctuary in ways that are technically incorrect.k Nothing else to remark, eh? As well, it's not an issue of technical correction or pedantry, it's an issue of using orientalist terminology. Like Mohammedan to mean Muslim. mcustic posted:Oh, I thought that was a very rare thing, like in Zen. There are only a few dozen living Rinzai lineage holders in the entire Japan, and in Soto Zen it's needed for the entry level of priesthood. It's actually common for buddhism in general! In vajrayana, where even tantras are technically accessible to laity there's no real qualms about saying that the laity possesses the capacity to hold the lineage. Chan for example traces lineage through the twenty eight indian patriarchs and then the six chinese patriarchs- following that it's a division of differing schools. I believe sri lankan theravada has similar monastic succession in terms of schools and tradition. You might suggest that the patriarchates of Myanmar and Thailand are a means of organizing monastic succession outside of lineage in technicality. But in practise it works like a more state ordained lineage. Certainly Mahasi Sayadaw and Forest Traditions for Myanmar and Thailand respectively represent this tradition of scholastic succession as subsects. With regards to Japanese zen it's more representative of Mahayana in general. Technically laity could be said to be holders of a lineage, but it's pointless to call them that, as only monks have the capacity to propagate that lineage further.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2014 23:25
|
|
|
It is true though that generally someone would not refer to themselves as a lineage holder casually unless they were trying to demonstrate that they have a trivial claim to some manner of legitimacy when saying things like "my tradition holds no animosity toward His Holiness despite what you're claiming." It just so happens that exact situation arose. Generally anyone who receives a complete transmission is a lineage holder. If they were to fully realize that transmission, they'd be able to give the transmission. There are three types of spiritual master associated with transmission, being superior, mediocre, and inferior. All three are capable of transmission, but their capacities and those of the recipients determine how likely that is to "take." My understanding is that in Zen language, a lineage holder doesn't "pass the lineage" until they die, and then it passes to the senior student who has received all of the teachings, is that correct? In Vajrayana, anyone who has received the transmission from a qualified lama is technically a lineage holder, but that doesn't mean they are capable of passing the lineage. It simply means that they have received the transmissions from an unbroken line from its origin. In truth, I probably shouldn't have used that specific term as while it's technically true, I only said it mainly to impress that a) not all Westerners are Gelugpa who think of His Holiness as some kind of Buddhist Pope, and b) even so, every Tibetan I've met adores HHDL, and while there are some who don't, they mainly exist in China and were born after the cultural revolution.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2014 23:43
|
|
|
Sithsaber posted:His prestige is illusionary. The Dalai Lama never traditionally wielded the power to declare associated lhamassaries straight up heretical, and although I support the repression of shugden, it does smack of the archaic mistreatment of undiluted Bon traditions. The "undiluted Bon traditions" are most likely 11th century revivalism, from what I understand Bon died out and was reconstructed around the 12/11th centuries.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2014 13:42
|
|
|
mcustic posted:Oh, I thought that was a very rare thing, like in Zen. There are only a few dozen living Rinzai lineage holders in the entire Japan, and in Soto Zen it's needed for the entry level of priesthood. Depends on context and how you view lineage, keep in mind Buddhism itself is a lineage, but on a much more grander scale. For example the current Buddha wasn't the only one, but separated through innumerable world cycles (aeons and aeons) there were already previous Buddhas countless numbers of them and of course there is suppose to be the next one to come. You could say "Maitreya" is the next lineage holder to come and the object of every Buddhist (minus theravada and those aspiring to be little-buddhas and arahants) to meet eventually in a future life or.......
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2014 13:03
|
|
|
Since we were/are on the subject, here's a change.org petition requesting NKT devotees stop being obnoxious at teachings by His Holiness: http://www.change.org/petitions/new...-the-dalai-lama
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2014 05:26
|
|
|
Trip report: I went to the local Chan center for the weekend meditation course I mentioned earlier. It was a really good experience. The teacher was very insightful, knowledgeable and funny. There were people of all levels of experience, from totally unexperienced all the way to a woman that's been practicing for 25 years. We did a lot of counting of breath as well as two kinds of walking meditation. We also learned a little bit about the history of Chan and Buddhism and general. I must admit I already knew most of the facts we heard, but the teacher's subtle humor and skillful storytelling made listening a real joy. I will definitely come back to the center.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2014 22:46
|
|
|
Behold the forums, teaching us the truth of impermanence of death.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2014 04:34
|
|
|
I am only on page 2 of this thread, but I am going to skip ahead and ask my questions and a little bit about my circumstances. I have had an interest in Buddhism for a while now, but I live in an area where the only Buddhist center is more than an hour away. On top of that, Saturday seems to be the day in which they have open meditation, and between my work schedule and family, Saturday is virtually impossible. Another apprehension I have is rooted in my early twenties, I was quite active in the Freemasons. This is relevant because when I read accounts of 'master-student' relationships and 'esoteric knowledge', I get a little apprehensive. In my experience with 'esoteric knowledge', a large percent of it is about passive-aggressively saying "look at my degree number" and generally flaunting that you know something someone else doesn't (which is never, in fact, much of anything). I understand Freemasonry is more of a 'good old boy' thing, and I am probably just projecting my prejudices. So I am not totally against trying out a center, but the logistics prevent this from happening at this moment. What can I do in my situation to at least strengthen my Buddhist 'foundations', if you will? Are there any successful solo practitioners here? If so, what type of outline do you follow?
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2014 16:06
|
|
|
Does the center have any other events you might be able to attend? It could be worth just giving them a call, explaining your situation, and seeing if get have other services you could attend. I know it could go to Buddhist services on either Sunday or Wednesday, and then there are other events(book clubs etc) that occur during the week as well. Solitary practice can be good or bad. It really depends on what you're doing. Read. Read a lot of Buddhist stuff, from sutras and suttas to modern books on Buddhism. Three Pillars of Zen is a good introductory book to Zen. Mindfulness in Plain English is a good Theravada meditation and practice guide. Meditate. I like to before and after work. Sometimes I do at lunch. Either 10 or 20 minutes depending on my schedule at the time. ashgromnies fucked around with this message at 17:43 on Jun 26, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2014 17:41
|
|
|
Dr.Caligari posted:I am only on page 2 of this thread, but I am going to skip ahead and ask my questions and a little bit about my circumstances. Access to Insight has a good overview of the teachings (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/index.html)that can be worked through on your own. I highly recommend it as a starting point. That entire site is a goldmine of Theravada texts and teachings - it is probably the single most important Theravada site that currently exists. There are also some good study guides: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/study/index.html In terms of solitary practice, you can meditate on your own very well with nothing more than a pillow and a lot of patience. The above recommendation of Mindfulness in Plain English is, in my opinion, the best way to get into Buddhist meditation. You can start in very small increments, 15 minutes or so, and simply watch the breath and it rises and falls. It is a good practice to get into regularly and it really helps bring the teachings into focus. I don't meditate nearly as much as I should, but when I'm regularly practicing it is immensely helpful. Even if you only have 10 minutes to spare in the morning before work, you can get a session in. As far as esoteric practices are concerned, I believe that is more in the domain of Tibetan Buddhism, I may be wrong but we have two extremely knowledgeable practitioners in this thread who can speak to that. The texts and teachings of the Buddha in terms of Theravada are open to anyone, which is one of the things that resonated with me in terms of that tradition. People Stew fucked around with this message at 18:20 on Jun 26, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2014 18:16
|
|
|
Dr.Caligari posted:I am only on page 2 of this thread, but I am going to skip ahead and ask my questions and a little bit about my circumstances. I hope you can find something. Some centers can only do one day a week or somesuch, and that's just the reality of it. Meditation itself is something anyone can practice anywhere, though, so beyond some basic instruction I wouldn't stress on missing open meditations. Can you tell us what tradition the center is? With the different "flavors" of Buddhism being so distinct, it's really apples and oranges between, say, Theravadan and Tibetan Buddhism, and even within Tibetan Buddhism there are granny smiths and red deliciouses and so on. quote:Another apprehension I have is rooted in my early twenties, I was quite active in the Freemasons. This is relevant because when I read accounts of 'master-student' relationships and 'esoteric knowledge', I get a little apprehensive. In my experience with 'esoteric knowledge', a large percent of it is about passive-aggressively saying "look at my degree number" and generally flaunting that you know something someone else doesn't (which is never, in fact, much of anything). Speaking as a Freemason and a practitioner of "esoteric Buddhism" I can say with fair confidence that this is not the same thing at all. In Freemasonry, the esotericism comes from the fact that Masonry was at one point an initiatic Western mystery tradition. Anymore, it is largely a good old boy's club and you can take from the rituals what you get. Degrees are something that everyone gets, and don't really reflect on much more than time spent or ambition within the Craft, except in rare cases. By contrast, the master-student relationship in "esoteric Buddhism" is about lineage lines and transmission, but also about having a living, actual teacher. The teacher is not just someone who has collected the right degrees, but rather someone who has been recognized to have mastered those "degrees." There is something resembling initiatic work, but not in the sense of Freemasonry. The short of it is I wouldn't let your experience with Freemasonry taint your perception on the Vajrayana. Incidentally, the esotericism from Vajrayana does not come from self-aggrandizement or this sense of "we need to keep this secret from the unwashed masses, so only the worthy learn of it." Rather, Vajrayana is considered "esoteric" or "secret" because without a qualified teacher, it's simply not going to work. It's not like Freemasonry's secrets which can certainly be attained by anyone ambitious enough without joining the order. Rather, Vajrayana is based on lineage-transmissions. The transmissions are done from teacher to disciple in such a way that both are necessary. If you were to pick up a tantric text and read it, even memorize it and recite it perfectly, without the explanations from a qualified lama it would be incomprehensible, and without the actual transmission from a lama, even if you knew exactly what it meant, it wouldn't "take." quote:What can I do in my situation to at least strengthen my Buddhist 'foundations', if you will? Are there any successful solo practitioners here? If so, what type of outline do you follow? Don't worry about the esoteric stuff, for one. The Vajrayana is but one path in Buddhism, of three major ones, and Buddha taught 84,000 paths to Enlightenment, based on the various inclinations of sentient beings. The Hearer's path, the Theravada, is open to anyone. It requires no transmissions, no secret knowledge. Its teacher is the Buddha. It is also the basic foundation of all Buddhist paths. The Four Noble Truths, the Noble Eightfold Path, these are open to anyone and in fact must be practiced by anyone in the other two paths. Simply because one practices the Mahayana doesn't mean they get to grasp and cling and avoid Renunciation. The Mahayana, too, is open to anyone, and these two work hand in hand. In truth, only Vajrayana, essentially Tibetan Buddhism, is so dependent on a teacher, and that because of how it is structured. In Tibetan Buddhism, the Lama is hugely important because the Lama is actually present right now, and so becomes the greatest refuge. So yeah, don't let any talk of esotericism turn you off. The vast majority of Buddhists don't engage in any of it. Those that do rarely use the word and never the concept in the sense you're used to.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2014 19:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 23:34 |
|
|
Thank you all for your replies and links. I should have mentioned in my first post, that the closest major city that I spoke of is Columbus Ohio. I have been browsing different centers there and I have seen several that I think would be accommodating to my needs. Columbus Karma Thegsum Choling: http://www.columbusktc.org/ This one has Tuesday evening times that work for me, and there Sunday morning schedule is very appealing to me. They even have a meditation based AA group, which I am interested in attending. In the immediate future I plan on reading as much as I can on the paths, and try to narrow it down to the ones that I feel are 'for me'. But then again, picking a Columbus center that fits my schedule and just going and seeing how it goes also seems tempting. Is anyone familiar with Columbus centers? Recommendations? If it's not too much, could you give me any thoughts on the link to the one I posted? Dr.Caligari fucked around with this message at 02:12 on Jun 27, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2014 02:08
|
|