Dzogchen master's perspective [from The Sacred...]

Casual conversation between friends. Anything goes (almost).
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: The sacred in Buddhism 2

Post by Malcolm »

kirtu wrote: Kongtrul Rinpoche, delogs and others report classical Indian forms (because they are steeped in that imagery).
So, here you are suggesting that buddhas are conditioned?

Awakened beings view the world from a purified perspective and that's the point (and since the form isn't a mere emptiness it is able to engage in the world so other teachings dealing with other aspects such as spontaneous arising, etc. are not excluded from the use of the image).
But for whom are these images, those to be tamed or those taming?
User avatar
kirtu
Former staff member
Posts: 6997
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2010 5:29 pm
Location: Baltimore, MD

Re: The sacred in Buddhism 2

Post by kirtu »

Malcolm wrote:
kirtu wrote: Kongtrul Rinpoche, delogs and others report classical Indian forms (because they are steeped in that imagery).
So, here you are suggesting that buddhas are conditioned?
No, the beings reporting their visions are conditioned to some extent (including Jamgon Kongtrul, reportedly a 7th bhumi Bodhisattva). And we are conditioned as well. So great lamas like Jamgom Kongtrul and Chatral Rinpoche use conditioned language to talk to us about their experiences (for example, Chatral Rinpoche's reported visions).

Awakened beings view the world from a purified perspective and that's the point (and since the form isn't a mere emptiness it is able to engage in the world so other teachings dealing with other aspects such as spontaneous arising, etc. are not excluded from the use of the image).
But for whom are these images, those to be tamed or those taming?
For those to be tamed and for teachers within a specific cultural milieu (see above - lamas reporting visions and otherwise communicating with us). People who have "adopted" Buddhism also sometimes see images from within this cultural filter.

Kirt
“Where do atomic bombs come from?”
Zen Master Seung Sahn said, “That’s simple. Atomic bombs come from the mind that likes this and doesn’t like that.”

"Even if you practice only for an hour a day with faith and inspiration, good qualities will steadily increase. Regular practice makes it easy to transform your mind. From seeing only relative truth, you will eventually reach a profound certainty in the meaning of absolute truth."
Kyabje Dilgo Khyentse Rinpoche.

"Only you can make your mind beautiful."
HH Chetsang Rinpoche
Schrödinger’s Yidam
Posts: 7885
Joined: Wed May 29, 2013 6:13 am

Re: The Sacred in Buddhism [from Dharma Decline]

Post by Schrödinger’s Yidam »

Malcolm wrote:
smcj wrote: What I was trying to work towards, without much luck, is saying it is the mirror itself that is sacred.
It is just a mirror — it will reflect a golden Buddha statue or a golden bedpan with equal indifference. It will not discriminate this image and say "This is sacred" and reflect it more brightly, nor will it discriminate another image and say, "This is profane" and dim the image. The mirror reflects everything equally well without discriminating whether it is good or bad, large or small, etc. Why? Because the function of a mirror is to reflect anything placed before it.
I said the mirror itself was sacred, not the images in it per se. The images, being nothing other than the mirror, can then also ALL be seen as part of the mirror, and therefore even painful and ugly things are sacred as well. Thus it is "one-taste", "non-dual", etc.

What is "sacred" about the mirror?
It is Truth (Clarity). The Truth of what? The Truth of the actions of sentient beings being made clear by becoming experience, meaning the law of karmic cause and effect.
It is Love. How so? Because Love animates the images on the mirror. Even hate is love that has been twisted and corrupted by unawareness.
It is Freedom (emptiness). With nothing fixed by having own-nature the images are 100% free to take on whatever form is appropriate to demonstrate the Truth.
And it is Purity. There no phenomena of either samsara or nirvana at all present in the mirror.

Truth, Power (Love), Freedom and Purity. It is not only universal, it is the universe.
Malcolm wrote:Relatively, when it is not recognized, it is called "the basis appears as the universe." At the time it is recognized, it is called "The universe arises as the basis."
And you guys object to calling it "sacred"?
Last edited by Schrödinger’s Yidam on Sun Nov 29, 2015 8:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.
1.The problem isn’t ‘ignorance’. The problem is the mind you have right now. (H.H. Karmapa XVII @NYC 2/4/18)
2. I support Mingyur R and HHDL in their positions against lama abuse.
3. Student: Lama, I thought I might die but then I realized that the 3 Jewels would protect me.
Lama: Even If you had died the 3 Jewels would still have protected you. (DW post by Fortyeightvows)
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: The Sacred in Buddhism [from Dharma Decline]

Post by Malcolm »

smcj wrote:
What is "sacred" about the mirror?
It is Truth (Clarity).
No, since it reflects truths and and falsity without discrimination.
The Truth of what? The Truth of the actions of sentient beings being made clear by becoming experience, meaning the law of karmic cause and effect.
There is no karma in the mirror. The images in the mirror are not part of the mirror.
It is Love. How so? Because Love animates the images on the mirror. Even hate is love that has been twisted and corrupted by unawareness.
If loves animates the images in the mirror, it is not the mirror. The mirror is not capable of generating its own images. Images arise from secondary conditions.
It is Freedom (emptiness). With nothing fixed by having own-nature the images are 100% free to take on whatever form is appropriate to demonstrate the Truth.
Again, the images do not come from the mirror. The mirror does not reflect truth. It reflects secondary conditions.
And it is Purity. There no phenomena of either samsara or nirvana at all present in the mirror.
Then there are no images that come from the mirror.
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: The sacred in Buddhism 2

Post by Malcolm »

kirtu wrote:
Malcolm wrote:
kirtu wrote: Kongtrul Rinpoche, delogs and others report classical Indian forms (because they are steeped in that imagery).
So, here you are suggesting that buddhas are conditioned?
No, the beings reporting their visions are conditioned to some extent (including Jamgon Kongtrul, reportedly a 7th bhumi Bodhisattva). And we are conditioned as well. So great lamas like Jamgom Kongtrul and Chatral Rinpoche use conditioned language to talk to us about their experiences (for example, Chatral Rinpoche's reported visions).

Awakened beings view the world from a purified perspective and that's the point (and since the form isn't a mere emptiness it is able to engage in the world so other teachings dealing with other aspects such as spontaneous arising, etc. are not excluded from the use of the image).
But for whom are these images, those to be tamed or those taming?
For those to be tamed and for teachers within a specific cultural milieu (see above - lamas reporting visions and otherwise communicating with us). People who have "adopted" Buddhism also sometimes see images from within this cultural filter.

Kirt
But mandalas, for example, are supposed to reflective of the state of Buddhahood, not seventh stage bodhisattvas and so on. Therefore, it is impossible to believe that they are to be taken literally.

  • Since this bodhicitta, the essence of everything,
    has always been the naturally perfected intrinsic nature,
    there is no need for searching and practice with the ten natures.
-- Kun byed rgyal po
Schrödinger’s Yidam
Posts: 7885
Joined: Wed May 29, 2013 6:13 am

Re: Dzogchen master's perspective [from The Sacred...]

Post by Schrödinger’s Yidam »

Malcolm wrote: The mirror does not reflect truth. It reflects secondary conditions.
The mirror is purity and clarity. So it purely and clearly reflects the secondary conditions.
Malcolm wrote:Relatively, when it is not recognized, it is called "the basis appears as the universe."
The pure/clear basis appearing as the universe? Purely and clearly? Truthfully.
1.The problem isn’t ‘ignorance’. The problem is the mind you have right now. (H.H. Karmapa XVII @NYC 2/4/18)
2. I support Mingyur R and HHDL in their positions against lama abuse.
3. Student: Lama, I thought I might die but then I realized that the 3 Jewels would protect me.
Lama: Even If you had died the 3 Jewels would still have protected you. (DW post by Fortyeightvows)
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Dzogchen master's perspective [from The Sacred...]

Post by Malcolm »

smcj wrote:
Malcolm wrote: The mirror does not reflect truth. It reflects secondary conditions.
The mirror is purity and clarity. So it purely and clearly reflects the secondary conditions.
Malcolm wrote:Relatively, when it is not recognized, it is called "the basis appears as the universe."
The pure/clear basis appearing as the universe? Purely and clearly? Truthfully.
The point is that the mirror does not judge the appearances in the mirror, and reflects will reflect "real" and and "illusory" elephant without any judgement.

The basis appears as the universe under the influence of ignorance. The universe appears as the basis under the influence of knowledge. The basis itself has no judgment.
Schrödinger’s Yidam
Posts: 7885
Joined: Wed May 29, 2013 6:13 am

Re: Dzogchen master's perspective [from The Sacred...]

Post by Schrödinger’s Yidam »

The basis itself has no judgment.
Judgment? Who said Judgment? There's no thought process involved at all.
1.The problem isn’t ‘ignorance’. The problem is the mind you have right now. (H.H. Karmapa XVII @NYC 2/4/18)
2. I support Mingyur R and HHDL in their positions against lama abuse.
3. Student: Lama, I thought I might die but then I realized that the 3 Jewels would protect me.
Lama: Even If you had died the 3 Jewels would still have protected you. (DW post by Fortyeightvows)
User avatar
kirtu
Former staff member
Posts: 6997
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2010 5:29 pm
Location: Baltimore, MD

Re: The sacred in Buddhism 2

Post by kirtu »

Malcolm wrote: But mandalas, for example, are supposed to reflective of the state of Buddhahood, not seventh stage bodhisattvas and so on. Therefore, it is impossible to believe that they are to be taken literally.
I of course didn't say that mandalas are to be taken literally. However the imagery is generally the relative means through which teaching, communication, transmission or transformation takes place (of course it depends on what context you intended the discussion about mandalas to take place). Mostly mandalas are symbolic anyway.

But take a look at Gem of Many Colors - Kongtrul expresses his dreams and visions mostly in classical imagery mixed with common Tibetan experience. Remember that you yourself said that one of our mutual teachers spoke directly with GR, Clearly this experience is rooted in a relative, conventional expression of an experience of mind beyond that of most ordinary beings (remember that Shabkar for example only reported seeing GR once or so in his dreams and in the form of Lama Tsongkhapa).

Perhaps it's just best to say that the tantric forms are an effective method for purification and transformation and that their power transcends mundane cultural constraints and to leave it at that.

Kirt
“Where do atomic bombs come from?”
Zen Master Seung Sahn said, “That’s simple. Atomic bombs come from the mind that likes this and doesn’t like that.”

"Even if you practice only for an hour a day with faith and inspiration, good qualities will steadily increase. Regular practice makes it easy to transform your mind. From seeing only relative truth, you will eventually reach a profound certainty in the meaning of absolute truth."
Kyabje Dilgo Khyentse Rinpoche.

"Only you can make your mind beautiful."
HH Chetsang Rinpoche
Natan
Posts: 3685
Joined: Fri May 23, 2014 5:48 pm

Re: Dzogchen master's perspective [from The Sacred...]

Post by Natan »

On good authority I know Dzogchen master feels the joy and making love to 78 penthouse centerfolds simultaneously 24/7 so be sure to become a Dzogchen master.
Vajra fangs deliver vajra venom to your Mara body.
Schrödinger’s Yidam
Posts: 7885
Joined: Wed May 29, 2013 6:13 am

Re: Dzogchen master's perspective [from The Sacred...]

Post by Schrödinger’s Yidam »

It occurs to me that Malcolm has already answered the question in this post:
At the time it is recognized, it is called "The universe arises as the basis."
http://dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f= ... th#p303022
The question then becomes; what the heck does that mean?
1.The problem isn’t ‘ignorance’. The problem is the mind you have right now. (H.H. Karmapa XVII @NYC 2/4/18)
2. I support Mingyur R and HHDL in their positions against lama abuse.
3. Student: Lama, I thought I might die but then I realized that the 3 Jewels would protect me.
Lama: Even If you had died the 3 Jewels would still have protected you. (DW post by Fortyeightvows)
Schrödinger’s Yidam
Posts: 7885
Joined: Wed May 29, 2013 6:13 am

Re: Dzogchen master's perspective [from The Sacred...]

Post by Schrödinger’s Yidam »

I'd actually like to make a request of Malcolm. Since this thread is premised as a thought experiment and creative writing exercise, let a few of us monkeys have at this football for a couple of posts before you clarify that quote. And if after a day or so nobody speculates on what it might mean, then go at it.
1.The problem isn’t ‘ignorance’. The problem is the mind you have right now. (H.H. Karmapa XVII @NYC 2/4/18)
2. I support Mingyur R and HHDL in their positions against lama abuse.
3. Student: Lama, I thought I might die but then I realized that the 3 Jewels would protect me.
Lama: Even If you had died the 3 Jewels would still have protected you. (DW post by Fortyeightvows)
MiphamFan
Posts: 1096
Joined: Thu Jun 18, 2015 5:46 am

Re: Dzogchen master's perspective [from The Sacred...]

Post by MiphamFan »

Let people wallow in confusion and creating erroneous concepts you mean...

I don't think there is any point in speculating especially if you are not a Dzogchen practitioner and definitely not here in a public space. That said, there are plenty of sutra-level explanations of what Buddhahood entails. Like here where Malcolm went over some of Gorampa's explanations.
T. Chokyi
Posts: 510
Joined: Sat May 26, 2012 11:19 am

Re: Dzogchen master's perspective [from The Sacred...]

Post by T. Chokyi »

smcj wrote:I'd actually like to make a request of Malcolm. Since this thread is premised as a thought experiment and creative writing exercise, let a few of us monkeys have at this football for a couple of posts before you clarify that quote. And if after a day or so nobody speculates on what it might mean, then go at it.
I'm a redundant monkey so I'll give you a post to just gab at you about the meaning of a Dzogchen masters Non dual ....whatever.

CHNN often wears a melong "mirror", I believe this is a kind of symbol for Dzogchen path. Dualism occurs when we don't bring the wisdom of the teachings to our experience, we forget, go groggy and foggy, loose the ability to remain present or forget to be present when it comes to application, we easily become distracted, and we begin thinking and judging.

For a Dzogchen master the stability is there but no one can make a measurement of a masters experience of Rigpa during his/her everyday life, and certainly we can't do some kind of measurement of how much we are or are not in rigpa, so we try to be present, so we aren't to continue in a kind of divided way where the mind is two rather than one. What do I mean by that? I mean we have a tendency to judge things as fixed in "goodness" of fixed in "badness" etc....this is a "friend" or this is an "enemy". I believe a Dzogchen master has the stable wisdom to not create a dualistic vision of people or things, or places, a vision that goes beyond dividing things into "this" or "that", also I don't think they see any problem as being "fixed"...everything is moving, changing, so "enemy" or "friend", "dirty" or "clean" also these are just "concepts" and often they change, enemies become friends etc... so I believe Dzogchen masters go beyond this kind of limitation of thinking and judging in a dualistic way, but for practitioners going beyond clinging to appearances and making fixed judgments about beings is not so easy because we all have strong habitual tendencies to do the opposite, in other words it's ingrained by habit to think and experience in a dualistic way, to divide into black, white, good, bad, lower, higher, friend, enemy, and grasp at those divisions we create as truly existent... ad infinitum.

I believe a Dzogchen master has genuine ongoing non dual experience of how it is (things, people, everything) because they don't sully up that direct experience by pouring on the judgments during their perceptions, they can't because after a while their mind and experiences are unified, more and more it gets like that for them I believe...so they just see what's there, like what a mirror does. When it's said Buddha's don't have minds I believe this is partially what is meant that they aren't pouring a proliferation of thoughts or concepts because that's exhausted, but with sentient beings we will be clinging, grasping, and judging appearances.

I believe that the way to start working towards a non dualistic way to engage with our experiences is to try to be present and not loose presence, in other words not forgetting that the appearances are not static, sentient beings are not "fixed", sentient beings are constantly revolving on the wheel as ghosts, gods, hell beings, fighting gods who are just making an appearance as humans here for a very short time according to an individuals karma, if you have a mirror it will reflect back all those things as they are, and that's all the mirror will do, it won't judge the appearances as "good" or "bad" and likewise the mirror won't grasp to the appearances as real, clinging to the reflections, it just reflects the images back in a very clear way. If we had a "non dual" way of seeing, we would not divide beings into "good" or "bad"... "pretty" or "ugly" just like the mirror does not divide, instead there would only be the direct perception which is what the mirror provides in a clear and limpid way without any divisional concepts such as "higher" or "lower".
Schrödinger’s Yidam
Posts: 7885
Joined: Wed May 29, 2013 6:13 am

Re: Dzogchen master's perspective [from The Sacred...]

Post by Schrödinger’s Yidam »

Thanks for trying to connect the dots. Here's two quick questions:

What do you mean by "non-dual"? That the mirror (the basis) and the images (phenomena) are not two separate things? Or something else?

Do you have a guess as to what...

Relatively, when it is not recognized, it is called "the basis appears as the universe." At the time it is recognized, it is called "The universe arises as the basis."

...means?
1.The problem isn’t ‘ignorance’. The problem is the mind you have right now. (H.H. Karmapa XVII @NYC 2/4/18)
2. I support Mingyur R and HHDL in their positions against lama abuse.
3. Student: Lama, I thought I might die but then I realized that the 3 Jewels would protect me.
Lama: Even If you had died the 3 Jewels would still have protected you. (DW post by Fortyeightvows)
T. Chokyi
Posts: 510
Joined: Sat May 26, 2012 11:19 am

Re: Dzogchen master's perspective [from The Sacred...]

Post by T. Chokyi »

smcj wrote:Thanks for trying to connect the dots. Here's two quick questions:

What do you mean by "non-dual"? That the mirror (the basis) and the images (phenomena) are not two separate things? Or something else?

Do you have a guess as to what...

Relatively, when it is not recognized, it is called "the basis appears as the universe." At the time it is recognized, it is called "The universe arises as the basis."

...means?
Perhaps the mirror can remain completely empty of phenomena, not reflecting anything, however because things change and movement is also part of our nature then the Universe seems to arise and then end over long periods of time. Samantabhadra is often given as an example of non duality, but unlike him we did not have any recognition. The mirror reflects a temporary impermanent image of our face when we look in it, so just showing the reflections (phenomena), I can't assert that the mirror (the basis) and its images (phenomena) are anything or something else.
"It would be better, bhikkhus, if an uninstructed ordinary person regarded this body, made of the four great elements, as himself rather than the mind. For what reason? This body is seen to continue for a year, for two years, five years, ten years, twenty years, fifty years, a hundred years, and even more. But of that which is called mind, is called thought, is called consciousness, one moment arises and ceases as another continually both day and night."
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html
Schrödinger’s Yidam
Posts: 7885
Joined: Wed May 29, 2013 6:13 am

Re: Dzogchen master's perspective [from The Sacred...]

Post by Schrödinger’s Yidam »

My curiosity is piqued by this:
Relatively, when it is not recognized, it is called "the basis appears as the universe."
Because this is, in theory, describing the way we see the world now. We do not recognize the basis.

So then how is this different?
At the time it is recognized, it is called "The universe arises as the basis."
Because this is supposedly how a Dzogchen master sees it. Does it mean that the universe is seen as Truth (clarity), Freedom (emptiness), and Power (love/compassion)? And as non-dual, in that since the universe consists of the basis and nothing else, all is perfect?
1.The problem isn’t ‘ignorance’. The problem is the mind you have right now. (H.H. Karmapa XVII @NYC 2/4/18)
2. I support Mingyur R and HHDL in their positions against lama abuse.
3. Student: Lama, I thought I might die but then I realized that the 3 Jewels would protect me.
Lama: Even If you had died the 3 Jewels would still have protected you. (DW post by Fortyeightvows)
User avatar
dzogchungpa
Posts: 6333
Joined: Sat May 28, 2011 10:50 pm

Re: Dzogchen master's perspective [from The Sacred...]

Post by dzogchungpa »

Crazywisdom wrote:On good authority I know Dzogchen master feels the joy and making love to 78 penthouse centerfolds simultaneously 24/7 so be sure to become a Dzogchen master.
Mind is blown.
There is not only nothingness because there is always, and always can manifest. - Thinley Norbu Rinpoche
Vasana
Posts: 2231
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 11:22 am

Re: Dzogchen master's perspective [from The Sacred...]

Post by Vasana »

smcj wrote:My curiosity is piqued by this:
Relatively, when it is not recognized, it is called "the basis appears as the universe."
Because this is, in theory, describing the way we see the world now. We do not recognize the basis.

So then how is this different?
At the time it is recognized, it is called "The universe arises as the basis."
When embarking, practicing,learning ,studying tantras , removing doubts about one's Rigpa etc, the basis is the path.
Sentient Beings with innate-grasping at a subject-object duality , see the basis as the substantial display of the Mahābhūta , the elements, the sense organs and, the aggregates and so on.

When the basis is recognized, the universe is seen as luminous display of rigpa (the elements are seen as the 5 lights, hence the universe is just the display of the basis.
Vairocana said:

At the time of vidyā, wisdom arises as the dhātu;
at the time of avidyā, wisdom appears as samsara;
though there is a great difference between vidyā and avidyā,
all the buddhas of the three times
never move from the great dhātu itself.
At the time of avidyā, it is the all basis,
that never moves from the dharmatādhātu;
at the time of vidyā, it is the great blissful dharmakāya.
[Lifted from Malcolms treasury of Ati blog]

---
smcj wrote: Because this is supposedly how a Dzogchen master sees it. Does it mean that the universe is seen as Truth (clarity), Freedom (emptiness), and Power (love/compassion)? And as non-dual, in that since the universe consists of the basis and nothing else, all is perfect?
Truth and freedom are troublesome words to use for now. Since falsities and illusions can also appear, as the examples of the mirror's unbiassed reflections have demonstrated.The Great-perfection subsumes all extremes, which includes notions of truth and falsity, freedom and it's apparent lack, wisdom (vidyā ) and ignorance (avidyā), Buddhas and beings.

It's all perfect in that sense, because it subsumes notions of perfection and imperfection, but because emptiness /dependent-origination arises as everything whatsoever , that very same emptiness of 'unborn-bliss free from suffering' also appears to manifest as the appearance of every possible shade of suffering, ala Samsara.

The capacity for moments of suffering to exhaust them self has always been inherent in their dependently arisen,compounded nature. This understanding taught by the Buddha, conjoined with the power of beings' past and present aspirations and roots of conditioned-merit, enable the conditions to manifest which lead to finding the teachings and an authentic teacher and being able to put them into practice.

The compassion of realized beings as rupakaya emanations is non-dual when appearing to sentient beings as there are no sentient beings or any realms of Samsara outside of the self-diplsay of the kayas. Even so, for beings who don't know or experience that, samsara is as real as it feels.

When Yeshe Tsogyal said “Meditate upon the guru as the glow of your awareness.”, this wasn't merely a platitude and encouragement for conditioned-devotion, but a description of how it really is.

Rather than 'sacred', maybe it's 'Ema-ho' you're looking for.
'When thoughts arise, recognise them clearly as your teacher'— Gampopa
'When alone, examine your mind, when among others, examine your speech'.— Atisha
Schrödinger’s Yidam
Posts: 7885
Joined: Wed May 29, 2013 6:13 am

Re: Dzogchen master's perspective [from The Sacred...]

Post by Schrödinger’s Yidam »

Truth and freedom are troublesome words to use for now. Since falsities and illusions can also appear, as the examples of the mirror's unbiassed reflections have demonstrated.The Great-perfection subsumes all extremes, which includes notions of truth and falsity, freedom and it's apparent lack, wisdom (vidyā ) and ignorance (avidyā), Buddhas and beings.
Exactly so. For the sake of discussion let us for the moment put Truth and Freedom aside and instead focus on Love.

As has been explained elsewhere, when talking about bodhicitta in the context of the basis it is no longer simply "compassion" or "love". It is energy. In fact it is the fundamental energy of the universe. As such it can be said that not a single atom anywhere vibrates that is not powered by love. Even hate, the opposite of love, is in its genesis/essence love. Hate is love corrupted and perverted by ignorance and self-cherishing, but still love nevertheless.

So if you can understand that Love in the basis is not only what we experience as compassion but hate also, then by analogy you can see the Truth that is the basis reveals both truth and falsity also.
It's all perfect in that sense, because it subsumes notions of perfection and imperfection, but because emptiness /dependent-origination arises as everything whatsoever , that very same emptiness of 'unborn-bliss free from suffering' also appears to manifest as the appearance of every possible shade of suffering, ala Samsara.
See, we agree! :twothumbsup:

**************************************

Ok Malcolm. Thank you for your patience. Your turn. :popcorn:
1.The problem isn’t ‘ignorance’. The problem is the mind you have right now. (H.H. Karmapa XVII @NYC 2/4/18)
2. I support Mingyur R and HHDL in their positions against lama abuse.
3. Student: Lama, I thought I might die but then I realized that the 3 Jewels would protect me.
Lama: Even If you had died the 3 Jewels would still have protected you. (DW post by Fortyeightvows)
Post Reply

Return to “Lounge”