yes of course.. it is not literal in its meaning.. but only in the course of practice, experience and realisation one may understand under realised teacher.. otherwise it may be very misguiding. Yes it is very late zen story but arousen from the very firm experience of realised ones.Malcolm wrote:This is a late Chan story. It is mot to be taken literally.Kunga Lhadzom wrote:Well..what did he realize when he saw the morning star ?
In seeing the morning star and exclaiming, “I and all sentient beings on earth, together, attain enlightenment at the same time,”
http://www.abuddhistlibrary.com/Buddhis ... Buddha.htm
Loch Kelly
Re: Loch Kelly
Re: Loch Kelly
Even with practice and experience, if one truly believes that all sentient beings awaken and/or are liberated at the same time as one's personal awakening or liberation, they are deluded and tragically confused.Matylda wrote:yes of course.. it is not literal in its meaning.. but only in the course of practice, experience and realisation one may understand under realised teacher..
Though obviously this was not their experience, ergo said statement cannot be interpreted literally.Matylda wrote:otherwise it may be very misguiding. Yes it is very late zen story but arousen from the very firm experience of realised ones.
When a sentient being awakens or is liberated, that incident occurs for them and not anyone else.
Otherwise when the first Buddha was liberated all beings would have been liberated and there would be no samsāra and no need for the buddhadharma whatsoever.
Re: Loch Kelly
When a sentient being awakens or is liberated, that incident occurs for them and not anyone else.krodha wrote:Even with practice and experience, if one truly believes that all sentient beings awaken and/or are liberated at the same time as one's personal awakening or liberation, they are deluded and tragically confused.Matylda wrote:yes of course.. it is not literal in its meaning.. but only in the course of practice, experience and realisation one may understand under realised teacher..
Though obviously this was not their experience, ergo said statement cannot be interpreted literally.Matylda wrote:otherwise it may be very misguiding. Yes it is very late zen story but arousen from the very firm experience of realised ones.
When a sentient being awakens or is liberated, that incident occurs for them and not anyone else.
Otherwise when the first Buddha was liberated all beings would have been liberated and there would be no samsāra and no need for the buddhadharma whatsoever.
This is what you may believe in, but it is NOT what zen masters taught.. therefore considering the source of information I would say that this kind of faith is invalid. Otherwise we should agree that all the gret zen masters of the last 1500 were deeply mistaken.
Re: Loch Kelly
If by "what you may believe in" you mean to say what is taught in Indian and Tibetan Buddhism then yes, that is the view I stand by.Matylda wrote:When a sentient being awakens or is liberated, that incident occurs for them and not anyone else.
This is what you may believe in
Perhaps not what some Zen masters taught. But I wouldn't know, and nor do I really care since I don't practice Zen, nor does it interest me particularly. Plus this is the Mahāmudrā sub-forum.Matylda wrote:but it is NOT what zen masters taught..
They very well may be if that is what they believe. But, that's not my business.Matylda wrote:therefore considering the source of information I would say that this kind of faith is invalid. Otherwise we should agree that all the gret zen masters of the last 1500 were deeply mistaken.
Re: Loch Kelly
Yes, you are absolutely right.. it is mahamudra forum. However I responded in support of Malcolm's post where zen/chan was mentioned by name. And since this teaching about awakening is part of traditional zen cannon I just added how it may be approached from the perspective of zen practice and result. I did not intend to mingle with mahamudra thingskrodha wrote:If by "what you may believe in" you mean to say what is taught in Indian and Tibetan Buddhism then yes, that is the view I stand by.Matylda wrote:When a sentient being awakens or is liberated, that incident occurs for them and not anyone else.
This is what you may believe in
Perhaps not what some Zen masters taught. But I wouldn't know, and nor do I really care since I don't practice Zen, nor does it interest me particularly. Plus this is the Mahāmudrā sub-forum.Matylda wrote:but it is NOT what zen masters taught..
They very well may be if that is what they believe. But, that's not my business.Matylda wrote:therefore considering the source of information I would say that this kind of faith is invalid. Otherwise we should agree that all the gret zen masters of the last 1500 were deeply mistaken.
I respect deeply your engagment in dharma practice of mahamudra of which I have no any idea, and forbid me my post, however many vajrayana dharma keens go to zen forum as well... so I hope I was not annoying anyone
Re: Loch Kelly
Good to hear your comments, understanding different approaches can be very useful. Seems like much of the problem comes from words/ labels/ descriptions...such as awakening, enlightenment, non duality.... Let's hope we can at some point Recognize our own experience without feeling the need to describe it... Going back to original question which I posed, I am happy to hear that Mingyur Rinpoche and Loch Kelly will be meeting to resolve the question of authorisation...krodha wrote:If by "what you may believe in" you mean to say what is taught in Indian and Tibetan Buddhism then yes, that is the view I stand by.Matylda wrote:When a sentient being awakens or is liberated, that incident occurs for them and not anyone else.
This is what you may believe in
Perhaps not what some Zen masters taught. But I wouldn't know, and nor do I really care since I don't practice Zen, nor does it interest me particularly. Plus this is the Mahāmudrā sub-forum.Matylda wrote:but it is NOT what zen masters taught..
They very well may be if that is what they believe. But, that's not my business.Matylda wrote:therefore considering the source of information I would say that this kind of faith is invalid. Otherwise we should agree that all the gret zen masters of the last 1500 were deeply mistaken.
Yes, you are absolutely right.. it is mahamudra forum. However I responded in support of Malcolm's post where zen/chan was mentioned by name. And since this teaching about awakening is part of traditional zen cannon I just added how it may be approached from the perspective of zen practice and result. I did not intend to mingle with mahamudra things
I respect deeply your engagment in dharma practice of mahamudra of which I have no any idea, and forbid me my post, however many vajrayana dharma keens go to zen forum as well... so I hope I was not annoying anyone
Last edited by Ayu on Wed Aug 17, 2016 10:03 am, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Fixed quote
Reason: Fixed quote
Re: Loch Kelly
I have never heard of such arrangement being required by any Dharma teacher that I know of, up to and including HH Sakya Trizin. HH Dalai Lama is a different case, because, as a former head of state, he travels with an entourage.JAC72 wrote:This is a pretty typical way to talk about whether the host can get enough people to attend for a teacher to accept an invitation to spend 5 days including travel. You can easily look at the fees on Loch’s website which are reasonable and similar to other dharma teachers.
In my opinion, apart from travel expenses, no Dharma teacher worth their salt should have any expectation of making a profit from their teachings. Making a profit from teaching Dharma is extremely gauche. Should students wish to make donations out of their devotion to this or that teacher, this is fine. When students understand that they must collaborate together to cover expenses and so forth in order to invite a teacher, this is also fine. But to set fees with the notion that teaching 1-5 students is too few in order to spend 5 days working with them is extremely saddening.
Now of course, if one is teaching inside of an institution like Omega or Kripalu, etc., these companies set a fee structure out of which a teacher will be paid. But the idea that someone decides to teach students based on whether there are "enough" students, especially in the case of teachings derived from the Tibetan and other traditions which have traditionally circulated in small groups, is exceedingly strange.
Being a Dharma teacher has a different set of qualifications than does being a wonderful person, etc. The latter is not necessarily commensurate with the former.JAC72 wrote: 2. Loch is a wonderful person who has mainly done clinical social work in New York City with the severely mentally ill, the homeless and families of 9/11, where he was a first responder.
Of course, people are free and they can do what they like.
-
- Posts: 602
- Joined: Thu Apr 16, 2015 1:41 pm
Re: Loch Kelly
These nondualists, as well as Caucasian Tibetan Buddhist teachers, never recognize the conceptualizing mind.
Just recognize the conceptualizing mind.
-
- Posts: 602
- Joined: Thu Apr 16, 2015 1:41 pm
Re: Loch Kelly
Fees to Tibetan Buddhism are tax deductible in some countries, if the religion is setup right with the government.
Fees to nondualists, are just to make them wealthy.
Fees to nondualists, are just to make them wealthy.
Just recognize the conceptualizing mind.
Re: Loch Kelly
You are speaking from experience, right?krodha wrote:When a sentient being awakens or is liberated, that incident occurs for them and not anyone else.
"My religion is not deceiving myself."
Jetsun Milarepa 1052-1135 CE
"Butchers, prostitutes, those guilty of the five most heinous crimes, outcasts, the underprivileged: all are utterly the substance of existence and nothing other than total bliss."
The Supreme Source - The Kunjed Gyalpo
The Fundamental Tantra of Dzogchen Semde
Jetsun Milarepa 1052-1135 CE
"Butchers, prostitutes, those guilty of the five most heinous crimes, outcasts, the underprivileged: all are utterly the substance of existence and nothing other than total bliss."
The Supreme Source - The Kunjed Gyalpo
The Fundamental Tantra of Dzogchen Semde
Re: Loch Kelly
That is a huge overgeneralization, so huge as certainly to be false.BuddhaFollower wrote:... Caucasian Tibetan Buddhist teachers...never recognize the conceptualizing mind.
- dzogchungpa
- Posts: 6333
- Joined: Sat May 28, 2011 10:50 pm
Re: Loch Kelly
I don't know how huge it is, but it is certainly false.Malcolm wrote:That is a huge overgeneralization, so huge as certainly to be false.BuddhaFollower wrote:... Caucasian Tibetan Buddhist teachers...never recognize the conceptualizing mind.
Mods, since this thread seems to be turning into a "Let's All Hate On Loch Kelly" thread, perhaps it could be moved to a more appropriate forum?
There is not only nothingness because there is always, and always can manifest. - Thinley Norbu Rinpoche
Re: Loch Kelly
BuddhaFollower wrote:These nondualists, as well as Caucasian Tibetan Buddhist teachers, never recognize the conceptualizing mind.
You sir/madam are racist. And as such, no Buddha follower.
“You don’t know it. You just know about it. That is not the same thing.”
Chogyam Trungpa Rinpoche to me.
Chogyam Trungpa Rinpoche to me.
Re: Loch Kelly
I don't hate Loch Kelly. I have never met him.dzogchungpa wrote:I don't know how huge it is, but it is certainly false.Malcolm wrote:That is a huge overgeneralization, so huge as certainly to be false.BuddhaFollower wrote:... Caucasian Tibetan Buddhist teachers...never recognize the conceptualizing mind.
Mods, since this thread seems to be turning into a "Let's All Hate On Loch Kelly" thread, perhaps it could be moved to a more appropriate forum?
I was responding to some facts which are available to anyone, since someone brought up his career.
And in any case, my lack of sympathy towards "spiritual workshop" culture is well known. These teachings, sadly have no lineage to speak of, and will never last beyond the lifetime of their promulgators, whether or not they obtain the "endorsement" of this or that famous Lama, Hindu Guru or western self-proclaimed "awakened master."
- dzogchungpa
- Posts: 6333
- Joined: Sat May 28, 2011 10:50 pm
Re: Loch Kelly
That's really great. I still think the thread should be moved, but it doesn't really matter.Malcolm wrote:I don't hate Loch Kelly. I have never met him.
I was responding to some facts which are available to anyone, since someone brought up his career.
And in any case, my lack of sympathy towards "spiritual workshop" culture is well known. These teachings, sadly have no lineage to speak of, and will never last beyond the lifetime of their promulgators, whether or not they obtain the "endorsement" of this or that famous Lama, Hindu Guru or western self-proclaimed "awakened master."
There is not only nothingness because there is always, and always can manifest. - Thinley Norbu Rinpoche
Re: Loch Kelly
It would be a better idea to the delete the thread in its entirety, since this is a forum for discussion of Buddhadharma, and not Milanese stews.dzogchungpa wrote:That's really great. I still think the thread should be moved, but it doesn't really matter.Malcolm wrote:I don't hate Loch Kelly. I have never met him.
I was responding to some facts which are available to anyone, since someone brought up his career.
And in any case, my lack of sympathy towards "spiritual workshop" culture is well known. These teachings, sadly have no lineage to speak of, and will never last beyond the lifetime of their promulgators, whether or not they obtain the "endorsement" of this or that famous Lama, Hindu Guru or western self-proclaimed "awakened master."
-
- Posts: 602
- Joined: Thu Apr 16, 2015 1:41 pm
Re: Loch Kelly
2016 is the rebirth global racism.Simon E. wrote:BuddhaFollower wrote:These nondualists, as well as Caucasian Tibetan Buddhist teachers, never recognize the conceptualizing mind.
You sir/madam are racist. And as such, no Buddha follower.
Just recognize the conceptualizing mind.
Re: Loch Kelly
Speaking from experience that I'm not liberated even though other masters have been? Certainly. That is your experience as well.Sherab Dorje wrote:You are speaking from experience, right?krodha wrote:When a sentient being awakens or is liberated, that incident occurs for them and not anyone else.
As for awakening, that is different than liberation. Yet still, when one is awakened, all beings are not awakened. The entire notion is absurd.
- dzogchungpa
- Posts: 6333
- Joined: Sat May 28, 2011 10:50 pm
Re: Loch Kelly
Thanks for that illuminating response, Mr. Dzogchen!krodha wrote:Speaking from experience that I'm not liberated even though other masters have been? Certainly. That is your experience as well.Sherab Dorje wrote:You are speaking from experience, right?krodha wrote:When a sentient being awakens or is liberated, that incident occurs for them and not anyone else.
As for awakening, that is different than liberation. Yet still, when one is awakened, all beings are not awakened. The entire notion is absurd.
I like your tolerance. I guess you prefer Tibetan stews?Malcolm wrote:It would be a better idea to the delete the thread in its entirety, since this is a forum for discussion of Buddhadharma, and not Milanese stews.dzogchungpa wrote:I still think the thread should be moved, but it doesn't really matter.
There is not only nothingness because there is always, and always can manifest. - Thinley Norbu Rinpoche
Re: Loch Kelly
If you can show me your "being", then I will show you my "liberation".krodha wrote:Speaking from experience that I'm not liberated even though other masters have been? Certainly. That is your experience as well.Sherab Dorje wrote:You are speaking from experience, right?krodha wrote:When a sentient being awakens or is liberated, that incident occurs for them and not anyone else.
As for awakening, that is different than liberation. Yet still, when one is awakened, all beings are not awakened. The entire notion is absurd.
"My religion is not deceiving myself."
Jetsun Milarepa 1052-1135 CE
"Butchers, prostitutes, those guilty of the five most heinous crimes, outcasts, the underprivileged: all are utterly the substance of existence and nothing other than total bliss."
The Supreme Source - The Kunjed Gyalpo
The Fundamental Tantra of Dzogchen Semde
Jetsun Milarepa 1052-1135 CE
"Butchers, prostitutes, those guilty of the five most heinous crimes, outcasts, the underprivileged: all are utterly the substance of existence and nothing other than total bliss."
The Supreme Source - The Kunjed Gyalpo
The Fundamental Tantra of Dzogchen Semde