Guess who said this?

[smcj]

This is supposed to be a poll, but I can't figure out how to format it that way. If a mod would make it a real poll that would be nice.

Here are the quotes:

I don't mind saying "god", this is not a problem for me. One is spelt G-O-D. The other is spelt B-U-D-D-H-A. There is no difference to me; it is just a different language with a different terminology. Buddha's blessings are these for all sentient beings at all times.

also

For me, the way we receive the Buddha's blessings is the same way that Christians receive "God's grace," and everybody has their own reasons for requesting it.

Here are the candidates:
A. Eckhart Tolle
B. Deepak Chopra
C. Pema Chödrön
D. Situ Rinpoche
E. HH Dalai Lama
F. None of the above

In a couple of days I will post the quotes in their original contexts.

[krodha]

Ah yes, another www. jesuswheel .net moment.

[smcj]

Ah yes, another www. jesuswheel .net moment.

So your guess as to who said it is...who?

[Norwegian]

Ah yes, another www. jesuswheel .net moment.

So your guess as to who said it is...who?

D. Tai Situ, as that's what a simple Google search reveals.

[Ayu]

But it is an interesting speech: http://www.greatliberation.org/library/ ... 202007.pdf

[smcj]

D. Tai Situ, as that's what a simple Google search reveals.

spoilsport.

[Aryjna]

Why does it matter who said it? Especially when it is taken out of context and is essentially slander in that it misrepresents the view in the above article?

[Karma Dondrup Tashi]

Perhaps one of the Brahma-viharas led to the original post.

Maybe eventually one of the mods will delete it because after all cleanliness is next to godliness.

[emaho]

I would have guessed Eckardt Tolle, because I find the idea of equating Buddha and God completely misguided....

[Kim O'Hara]

I would have guessed Eckardt Tolle, because I find the idea of equating Buddha and God completely misguided....

Me too.


Kim

[smcj]

I would have guessed Eckardt Tolle, because I find the idea of equating Buddha and God completely misguided....

The link above is actually from Situ R.'s "Creation and Completion". In another section he talks about leaning towards being an eternalist--of sorts.

There is nothing that is not primordially connected. Everything is primordially united beyond the concepts of far and near. Things can be billions of miles away but they are still united. This is, let us say, a simplistic way to describe the internal and external view of the Mahamudra. Eternalists and nihilists, who are habitually at each other’s throats, often misunderstand this view. Not understanding, the eternalists look at the Mahamudra view and call it nihilism. Not understanding, the nihilists look at the Mahamudra view and call it eternalism. The Mahamudra view does not say we want to realize nothingness, that Buddhahood is the realization of nothingness. We understand emptiness as being beyond everything. Actually, it is quite the opposite of nothingness. It is everything-ness. Nor is the primordial essence permanent or impermanent. If someone held me up at gunpoint and ordered me to say whether it was impermanent or permanent. I would rather say it was permanent, but this is not necessarily correct. I would only say this under duress. What I would comfortably say is that understanding Mahamudra philosophy means understanding the unity of the universal, transcendent and relative truths.

Anyways, I suspect that if Situ R. was to anonymously post here he would be shot down as not knowing what he was talking about.

Just sayin'

[conebeckham]

Why does it matter who said it? Especially when it is taken out of context and is essentially slander in that it misrepresents the view in the above article?

I don't know if it's slander....but I think the quotes, taken out of context, lead to assumptions that are not borne out by What Rinpoche is saying.

[smcj]

I don't know if it's slander....but I think the quotes, taken out of context, lead to assumptions that are not borne out by What Rinpoche is saying.

Which is why it is incumbent upon people to read the context in the above link. Forget about his perspectives on Christianity. Just ignore that. It's not his field of expertise. However what he says about Buddhism is a rare exposition on Kagyu orthodoxy.

[conebeckham]

What is your understanding of what he is saying with respect to "Kagyu orthodoxy?" I'm genuinely curious. For that matter, what is "Kagyu orthodoxy" anyway? I am not sure I know....

Perhaps this is matter for another thread, though.

[Jesse]

I would have guessed Eckardt Tolle, because I find the idea of equating Buddha and God completely misguided....

Me too.


Kim

Which god?

[boda]

I thought it was Deepak Chopra. He'll say anything to sell a book. Not that his books are without value.

[Thomas Amundsen]

Ah yes, another www. jesuswheel .net moment.

[emaho]

Anyways, I suspect that if Situ R. was to anonymously post here he would be shot down as not knowing what he was talking about.

Just sayin'

Doesn't need much fantasy to imagine that

What I meant to say is just that I don't really see what sense it makes to equate Buddha and God. If he had said Buddhanature or primordial essence I wouldn't disagree, but Buddha?

[smcj]

Anyways, I suspect that if Situ R. was to anonymously post here he would be shot down as not knowing what he was talking about.

Just sayin'

Doesn't need much fantasy to imagine that

What I meant to say is just that I don't really see what sense it makes to equate Buddha and God. If he had said Buddhanature or primordial essence I wouldn't disagree, but Buddha?

“Buddha” is the primordial essence appearing as a human without any obscurations. That is the Nirmanakaya, or more accurately all the kayas combined, which is the Swabhavakakaya. After Paranirvana the Nirmanakaya ends, leaving the Dharmakaya (and Sambogakaya?). I think it ok to still say “Buddha” at that point.

This is different than “God” in that there are no thought processes of any kind, no evaluations or judgments, no omnipotent actions. . Buddha Activity is automatic (usually translated as spontaneous) and appropriate to the karma of beings. Presumably that includes the karma created by prayer, thus Situ R’s reference to blessings.

At least that’s how I understand it is put in the last chapter of the Uttaratantra, which is what I think Situ R is basing these ideas on.

[emaho]

“Buddha” is the primordial essence appearing as a human without any obscurations.

Funny you say that, because for me that is exactly the reason why he could not be equated with God, I think the analog to God is rather the primordial essence