Dharma Wheel

There's also this point of interest for European countries involved:

http://www.news.com.au/world/middle-eas ... b63a9afb74

Also, disappearance of the body does not necessarily indicate the body of light, this was discussed on here before some time ago.

Yes, the Longsal Thogal and Longsal Yangti books are restricted to students who attended those retreats in person. The Longsal Thogal was published? Rinpoche said it was in the works at the retreat and then I never heard anything after that. I don't know if it's available. Thanks, the only update I...

Josef wrote: ↑

Tue Apr 03, 2018 7:41 pm

Yes, the Longsal Thogal and Longsal Yangti books are restricted to students who attended those retreats in person.

The Longsal Thogal was published?

Rinpoche said it was in the works at the retreat and then I never heard anything after that.

I don't think there is any difference. There is a monumental difference. For one, the Dzogchen tantras reject the Advaita view by name and also explicitly reject the view of non-duality that Advaita Vedanta promulgates. The view of Advaita also breaks a Dzogchen samaya. There's no room for interpre...

Lukeinaz wrote: ↑

Mon Apr 02, 2018 9:09 pm

Now where do I find some good cord to attach it?

I use two cords, in case one fails.

You hold the view that there is only cognition that is conventional, i.e. cognition that goes through a sense media. I hold that there is cognition which goes through an intermediary and a cognition which does not. This is a point of disagreement. The issue is that you are conflating contexts. In t...

Just wait, it gets more insane by the episode. Unethical behavior disguised as spirituality all around.

From Buddhapālita, per Malcolm: Here, with respect to your claim for an ascertained cause for the production of a result, wheat, etc., and a non-productive condition and non-condition, ‘the arising of a result is not accepted’ was previously explained. 

If that result does not exist, where will ‘th...

The basic problem is this: when recognition is convention, it is non-veridical. Recognition is a conventional occurrence. What are we ideally recognizing? The dharmatā of phenomena, which is their non-arising. We present that non-arising as the ultimate truth of the given dharma in question, but ev...

An ontological non-duality [sanatanadharma] is where everything is reduced to a single substance that exists alone by itself. For example if subject and object were merged and we then held a view that the union of the two as a single X is truly substantial and valid. This cannot be true as it impli...

Huayan says the same of phenomena/dharmas as they arise only in the mind so they are all of the same nature. Being identical in nature is why it is said the "one" (nature) is the same as the "all" (phenomena). But like you said the nature or the one isn't a Vedatin notion of a single monolithic and...

The crypto-Vedanta view of "one mind" is treating the "singular" aspect of the principle as an entity rather than a quality or characteristic. "One mind" does not mean there is "one" singular, transpersonal mind. "One" in this context means "same" in the sense that the nature of mind as non-arisen a...

And what are the implications of the quasi-Vedanta usage? There is a Buddhist term for non-dual, which is ‘advaya’. It is similar, but different, to the Hindu ‘advaita’. They’re different forms of non-dualism. And in this thread I think the distinction is being blurred. Here are some sources on the...

Who else is planning to go to Santa Fe? I am.

https://flipboard.com/article/congress- ... forbes.com

In ya face, Jeff.

Hopefully same protection will extend to adult use.

Then when the Buddha said in the Samdhinirmocana that "the ultimate is realized individually by the Aryas" "the ultimate belongs to the signless realm" "the ultimate is inexpressible" "the ultimate is devoid of conventions." he was in fact saying that the ultimate is non-existent? If so, why don't ...

Sherab wrote: ↑

Wed Mar 14, 2018 12:16 am

My analysis led me to the position that everything can be ascertained in the ultimate, except that what is ascertained is indescribable. See the difference?

Why continually lean on the concept of "ineffability?"

Then you have missed what I wrote here : https://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.p ... 40#p438687 My reasoning for maintaining that there is a difference between the relative and the ultimate is simply this. If the ultimate is truly indescribable, then you cannot say that it is truly non-existent. If...

The example of how a chariot is examined actually show what a conventional truth is, namely a designation made on the appearance of an object without examining what underlies the appearance. If I might offer my own interpretation, I would agree with the above-quoted material, but I would also say, ...