The Tantric Age: A comparison of Shaiva and Buddhist Tantra

Forum for discussion of Tibetan Buddhism. Questions specific to one school are best posted in the appropriate sub-forum.
Post Reply
User avatar
dzogchungpa
Posts: 6333
Joined: Sat May 28, 2011 10:50 pm

Re: The Tantric Age: A comparison of Shaiva and Buddhist Tantra

Post by dzogchungpa » Fri Sep 01, 2017 5:28 pm

You guys might find this interesting if you haven't heard about it before:
https://tricycle.org/trikedaily/angulim ... -buddhism/
There is not only nothingness because there is always, and always can manifest. - Thinley Norbu Rinpoche

Tolya M
Posts: 228
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2016 7:26 pm

Re: The Tantric Age: A comparison of Shaiva and Buddhist Tantra

Post by Tolya M » Fri Sep 01, 2017 11:47 pm

Asanga wrote:Why is that cessation also called bliss (siva)? Because it is a
state of wrell-being.
Lord Adinath Amitabha ... There is such a phenomenon as "polysemy". Cock is a male chiken. If a collective farmer writes this word in the register he is not the porn star due to this.

Varis
Posts: 138
Joined: Tue Jul 11, 2017 5:09 am

Re: The Tantric Age: A comparison of Shaiva and Buddhist Tantra

Post by Varis » Sat Sep 02, 2017 6:45 am

TharpaChodron wrote:I started reading it, but don't have enough time to finish it. Aren't the north Indian Nathas part of this connection? I think so, but im not exactly sure?
The Amritasiddhi is a Buddhist Vajrayana text that is frequently quoted all over Natha texts, and in specific texts concerning Hatha Yoga. All the major texts of the Hatha tradition, including the Hatha Yoga Pradipika, Shiva Samhita, and Goraksa Shataka, quote from it without actually citing it. It's also the earliest known text to show all the hallmarks of Hatha Yoga that differentiate it from other forms of Yoga.

You can learn more here: http://www.academia.edu/26700528/The_Am ... ource_Text

User avatar
TharpaChodron
Posts: 623
Joined: Wed Apr 18, 2012 2:13 am
Location: California

Re: The Tantric Age: A comparison of Shaiva and Buddhist Tantra

Post by TharpaChodron » Sat Sep 02, 2017 9:04 am

DharmaChakra wrote:
Indeed they are..

Some how or another there seems to be some sort of point to prove, when mostly the original idea was only trying to straighten out the distortions of dharma by western academics/religious nuts and colonialists. The academic and study of the teachings of dharma is not found with the ordinary intellect. In most Indian Dharmic traditions they first accept and understand the 4 levels of speech Vak, sound~Shabda, without understanding this what to speak of cultivating it through practice I have no idea why anyone would claim to know anything about the dharmic traditions. I am sure there is something similar to this in Tibetan Buddhist traditions too. Tantra is there is Pali Suttas if your trained to see it
Varis wrote:
The Amritasiddhi is a Buddhist Vajrayana text that is frequently quoted all over Natha texts, and in specific texts concerning Hatha Yoga. All the major texts of the Hatha tradition, including the Hatha Yoga Pradipika, Shiva Samhita, and Goraksa Shataka, quote from it without actually citing it. It's also the earliest known text to show all the hallmarks of Hatha Yoga that differentiate it from other forms of Yoga.

You can learn more here: http://www.academia.edu/26700528/The_Am ... ource_Text
I don't want to be a bullshit artist and I'm no scholar, but interesting.

on this subject, kind of, what's everyone's general consensus on John Reynolds?

mutsuk
Posts: 589
Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2010 7:35 pm

Re: The Tantric Age: A comparison of Shaiva and Buddhist Tantra

Post by mutsuk » Sat Sep 02, 2017 10:26 am

TharpaChodron wrote:on this subject, kind of, what's everyone's general consensus on John Reynolds?
I don't think there is a general consensus about him. You'll get an answer from people who like his work, a different one from people who can read and translate tibetan, and still another from tibetologists.

User avatar
TharpaChodron
Posts: 623
Joined: Wed Apr 18, 2012 2:13 am
Location: California

Re: The Tantric Age: A comparison of Shaiva and Buddhist Tantra

Post by TharpaChodron » Sun Sep 03, 2017 3:52 am

mutsuk wrote:
TharpaChodron wrote:on this subject, kind of, what's everyone's general consensus on John Reynolds?
I don't think there is a general consensus about him. You'll get an answer from people who like his work, a different one from people who can read and translate tibetan, and still another from tibetologists.
gotcha. Reynolds once said that there's a Padmasambhava as Amitayus sadhana that in Dudjom Rinpoche's notes D.R. directly referred to Amitayus/Padmasambhava as Amaranatha, which is also a name for Siva as immortal lord/protector. A name/term is just a name, so it probably is inconsequential.

User avatar
Javierfv1212
Posts: 120
Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2015 1:39 am
Location: Sacramento, CA

Re: The Tantric Age: A comparison of Shaiva and Buddhist Tantra

Post by Javierfv1212 » Sat Sep 09, 2017 6:03 pm

It is important to point out that the author of this paper, Christopher 'Hareesh' Wallis, is a Shaivite "scholar-practitioner" (his own words). So of course, it is clearly not a totally unbiased look at the relationship between Buddhist and Shaiva Tantra, but most likely colored by his own Shaiva advaita monistic views.

I mention this because I recently have been reading his blog posts on the Recognition sutras of Ksemaraja which posit the Tantrik Shaiva philosophy of Abhinavagupta. Needless to say, it is eternalism.

It is strange then to see his claim that both traditions are "conterminous, coeval, and co-functional". If he had studied Vajrayana somewhat, he might realize the importance that is stressed on the view, which is itself functional. Though perhaps what he means is functional in terms of ritual, imagery, deity veneration and practices - which, it is true that there is shared material between the two traditions.

Anyways I was reading his blog to get an understanding of what the non-dual Shaiva philosophy is and how it differs from Buddhadharma. I am still having some difficulty in finding what exactly is the key difference. At first I thought it was Shunyata, but there does seem to be a view of Shunya being part of Shiva in some Shaiva works:
“The wise one who meditates on Śiva as the void, his mind absorbed in the void, attains the highest release, completely free of all attachment.“ - Svāyambhuva-sūtra-saṅgraha Yogapāda, 20.43
Of course, I think the Shaivas see this Shunya aspect in a different way than Buddhists, and they ultimately see Shiva as the absolute consciousness, a truly existing reality, which is also your eternal self (but it is also self in a process of flux, because it is always vibrating - spanda). So perhaps it is their view which might be called 'idealistic realism' which differentiates them (though, again, some cittamatra views approach this as well).

So yea, even the views sound really close. I know they are different, but at least it seems to me, not that different. However Wallis doesn't really seem to want to focus on this, so I think what his paper is trying to argue is that they were co-functional in an outer/external sense not necessarily in a philosophical sense - he does touch on this briefly in the article but doesn't seem to want to go too deep into it.
It is quite impossible to find the Buddha anywhere other than in one's own mind.
~Padmasambhava

Amid those who are self-constrained, the Stable One would not posit as categorically true or false
anything seen, heard, or sensed, clung to and considered truth by others.
Since they have already seen this dart to which people cling and adhere,
saying “I know, I see, it is just so,”
the Tathāgatas cling to nothing.
-Kalaka sutta

User avatar
Grigoris
Global Moderator
Posts: 18173
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 9:27 pm
Location: Greece

Re: The Tantric Age: A comparison of Shaiva and Buddhist Tantra

Post by Grigoris » Sat Sep 09, 2017 8:21 pm

Yes, after (finally) carefully reading through the whole article it became quite clear that the author started off with some pretty mistaken (biased by his own belief system) assumptions about Buddhist Tantra and then developed his argument from there. BUT there are some very valid (albeit somewhat misdirected) points in there too.
"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

fckw
Posts: 418
Joined: Mon Jan 06, 2014 11:10 am

Re: The Tantric Age: A comparison of Shaiva and Buddhist Tantra

Post by fckw » Mon Sep 11, 2017 6:49 pm

The point I am not certain about (but have neither proof nor disproof) is the idea that tantric practitioners at the height of Buddhist tantric movement in India actually made any difference at all whether they were practicing "Buddhism" or "anything else". One must keep in mind that at that time the vast majority of people outside of monastic traditions were obviously illiterate, i.e. they had no means of reading any tantric texts. Hence, this would lead to a situation with at least two sorts of tantra practitioners:
1) The non-monastic traditions, with the majority of people being illiterates, and hence little education in philosophy, astrology etc. It is to be assumed that these people simply practiced, i.e. they did not care too much about whether a particular Yidam would be Buddhist, Sivaite or anything else, as the more subtle points of these traditions were mostly irrelevant to them. They would practice whatever worked for them.
2) The monastic traditions, with at least some - if not many - people being highly educated. These guys would be able to converse in various languages, translate between them, know the philosophical backgrounds of different traditions etc. It is to be assumed that these people actually did care a lot about the philosophical backgrounds of their traditions and therefore functioned as a "preserver" of orthodoxy.

Yet, if this is true, then nevertheless there obviously existed also an open exchange between the two groups. In other words, I believe that the tantric traditions back then were "heterodox" in a way, there were streams of practitioners, some more conscious of philosophical differences and some less. There obviously existed an ongoing "cross-fertilization" of ideas, systems, deities etc. As the first group was - as I claimed - in the majority illiterate, many of those practices must have been lost over time. What stayed were more those preserved by the monastic traditions. One would expect that the distinctions between Buddhist vs. non-Buddhist tantras were more exaggerated by the monastic authors than they were important to the non-monastic practitioners.

What's your opinions on this take?

Bristollad
Posts: 445
Joined: Fri Aug 21, 2015 11:39 am

Re: The Tantric Age: A comparison of Shaiva and Buddhist Tantra

Post by Bristollad » Tue Sep 12, 2017 7:25 am

fckw wrote:The point I am not certain about (but have neither proof nor disproof) is the idea that tantric practitioners at the height of Buddhist tantric movement in India actually made any difference at all whether they were practicing "Buddhism" or "anything else". One must keep in mind that at that time the vast majority of people outside of monastic traditions were obviously illiterate, i.e. they had no means of reading any tantric texts. Hence, this would lead to a situation with at least two sorts of tantra practitioners:
1) The non-monastic traditions, with the majority of people being illiterates, and hence little education in philosophy, astrology etc. It is to be assumed that these people simply practiced, i.e. they did not care too much about whether a particular Yidam would be Buddhist, Sivaite or anything else, as the more subtle points of these traditions were mostly irrelevant to them. They would practice whatever worked for them.
2) The monastic traditions, with at least some - if not many - people being highly educated. These guys would be able to converse in various languages, translate between them, know the philosophical backgrounds of different traditions etc. It is to be assumed that these people actually did care a lot about the philosophical backgrounds of their traditions and therefore functioned as a "preserver" of orthodoxy.

Yet, if this is true, then nevertheless there obviously existed also an open exchange between the two groups. In other words, I believe that the tantric traditions back then were "heterodox" in a way, there were streams of practitioners, some more conscious of philosophical differences and some less. There obviously existed an ongoing "cross-fertilization" of ideas, systems, deities etc. As the first group was - as I claimed - in the majority illiterate, many of those practices must have been lost over time. What stayed were more those preserved by the monastic traditions. One would expect that the distinctions between Buddhist vs. non-Buddhist tantras were more exaggerated by the monastic authors than they were important to the non-monastic practitioners.

What's your opinions on this take?
Just sounds speculative, with the groups you identify matching the roles you want them to play :shrug:

User avatar
Konchog1
Posts: 1486
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2011 4:30 am

Re: The Tantric Age: A comparison of Shaiva and Buddhist Tantra

Post by Konchog1 » Tue Sep 12, 2017 7:35 am

fckw wrote:The point I am not certain about (but have neither proof nor disproof) is the idea that tantric practitioners at the height of Buddhist tantric movement in India actually made any difference at all whether they were practicing "Buddhism" or "anything else". One must keep in mind that at that time the vast majority of people outside of monastic traditions were obviously illiterate, i.e. they had no means of reading any tantric texts. Hence, this would lead to a situation with at least two sorts of tantra practitioners:
1) The non-monastic traditions, with the majority of people being illiterates, and hence little education in philosophy, astrology etc. It is to be assumed that these people simply practiced, i.e. they did not care too much about whether a particular Yidam would be Buddhist, Sivaite or anything else, as the more subtle points of these traditions were mostly irrelevant to them. They would practice whatever worked for them.
2) The monastic traditions, with at least some - if not many - people being highly educated. These guys would be able to converse in various languages, translate between them, know the philosophical backgrounds of different traditions etc. It is to be assumed that these people actually did care a lot about the philosophical backgrounds of their traditions and therefore functioned as a "preserver" of orthodoxy.

Yet, if this is true, then nevertheless there obviously existed also an open exchange between the two groups. In other words, I believe that the tantric traditions back then were "heterodox" in a way, there were streams of practitioners, some more conscious of philosophical differences and some less. There obviously existed an ongoing "cross-fertilization" of ideas, systems, deities etc. As the first group was - as I claimed - in the majority illiterate, many of those practices must have been lost over time. What stayed were more those preserved by the monastic traditions. One would expect that the distinctions between Buddhist vs. non-Buddhist tantras were more exaggerated by the monastic authors than they were important to the non-monastic practitioners.

What's your opinions on this take?
Can't agree more.
Equanimity is the ground. Love is the moisture. Compassion is the seed. Bodhicitta is the result.

-Paraphrase of Khensur Rinpoche Lobsang Tsephel citing the Guhyasamaja Tantra

"All memories and thoughts are the union of emptiness and knowing, the Mind.
Without attachment, self-liberating, like a snake in a knot.
Through the qualities of meditating in that way,
Mental obscurations are purified and the dharmakaya is attained."

-Ra Lotsawa, All-pervading Melodious Drumbeats

User avatar
Grigoris
Global Moderator
Posts: 18173
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 9:27 pm
Location: Greece

Re: The Tantric Age: A comparison of Shaiva and Buddhist Tantra

Post by Grigoris » Tue Sep 12, 2017 9:37 am

fckw wrote:1) The non-monastic traditions, with the majority of people being illiterates, and hence little education in philosophy, astrology etc. It is to be assumed that these people simply practiced, i.e. they did not care too much about whether a particular Yidam would be Buddhist, Sivaite or anything else, as the more subtle points of these traditions were mostly irrelevant to them. They would practice whatever worked for them.
You see this constantly in modern Nepal. Buddhists praying at Bhairava temples, Hindus praying to Mahakala.
"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

DharmaChakra
Posts: 76
Joined: Tue Dec 06, 2016 9:38 am

Re: The Tantric Age: A comparison of Shaiva and Buddhist Tantra

Post by DharmaChakra » Tue Sep 12, 2017 11:18 am

Namaste

If I was looking into Kashmir Shavism, then the only real recommendation as todays authority of Abhinavagupta and Ksemaraja teachings would be Swami Laxmanjoo.

Its best not to mix to closely the tantric works of Tibet and Shiva traditions, especially as its been done with mundane literal skills by academics and neophytes. You wont understand it this way. There are differences in the teachings in monism and advaita between Abhinavagupta and Adi Shankara, but that does not mean that there is not a complimentary teaching going on, or that they are opposed to each other, no matter how you interpret it with empirical literal translations and speculations, Adi Shankara was Shiva, and its not eternalism ( whatever that is supposed to mean) its a coined phrase by western academics and philosophers.

For those that are clinging to verification via the modern education system I could only suggest throwing out all the books and doing practice and engage the higher faculty where things are clearer.



With Metta

User avatar
treehuggingoctopus
Posts: 1693
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 6:26 pm
Location: Mudhole? Slimy? My home, this is.

Re: The Tantric Age: A comparison of Shaiva and Buddhist Tantra

Post by treehuggingoctopus » Tue Sep 12, 2017 1:33 pm

fckw wrote:The point I am not certain about (but have neither proof nor disproof) is the idea that tantric practitioners at the height of Buddhist tantric movement in India actually made any difference at all whether they were practicing "Buddhism" or "anything else". One must keep in mind that at that time the vast majority of people outside of monastic traditions were obviously illiterate, i.e. they had no means of reading any tantric texts. Hence, this would lead to a situation with at least two sorts of tantra practitioners:
1) The non-monastic traditions, with the majority of people being illiterates, and hence little education in philosophy, astrology etc. It is to be assumed that these people simply practiced, i.e. they did not care too much about whether a particular Yidam would be Buddhist, Sivaite or anything else, as the more subtle points of these traditions were mostly irrelevant to them. They would practice whatever worked for them.
2) The monastic traditions, with at least some - if not many - people being highly educated. These guys would be able to converse in various languages, translate between them, know the philosophical backgrounds of different traditions etc. It is to be assumed that these people actually did care a lot about the philosophical backgrounds of their traditions and therefore functioned as a "preserver" of orthodoxy.

Yet, if this is true, then nevertheless there obviously existed also an open exchange between the two groups. In other words, I believe that the tantric traditions back then were "heterodox" in a way, there were streams of practitioners, some more conscious of philosophical differences and some less. There obviously existed an ongoing "cross-fertilization" of ideas, systems, deities etc. As the first group was - as I claimed - in the majority illiterate, many of those practices must have been lost over time. What stayed were more those preserved by the monastic traditions. One would expect that the distinctions between Buddhist vs. non-Buddhist tantras were more exaggerated by the monastic authors than they were important to the non-monastic practitioners.

What's your opinions on this take?
Sounds very plausible.
. . . there they saw a rock! But it wasn't a rock . . .

User avatar
Javierfv1212
Posts: 120
Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2015 1:39 am
Location: Sacramento, CA

Re: The Tantric Age: A comparison of Shaiva and Buddhist Tantra

Post by Javierfv1212 » Tue Sep 12, 2017 4:12 pm

DharmaChakra wrote:Namaste

If I was looking into Kashmir Shavism, then the only real recommendation as todays authority of Abhinavagupta and Ksemaraja teachings would be Swami Laxmanjoo.

Its best not to mix to closely the tantric works of Tibet and Shiva traditions, especially as its been done with mundane literal skills by academics and neophytes. You wont understand it this way. There are differences in the teachings in monism and advaita between Abhinavagupta and Adi Shankara, but that does not mean that there is not a complimentary teaching going on, or that they are opposed to each other, no matter how you interpret it with empirical literal translations and speculations, Adi Shankara was Shiva, and its not eternalism ( whatever that is supposed to mean) its a coined phrase by western academics and philosophers.

For those that are clinging to verification via the modern education system I could only suggest throwing out all the books and doing practice and engage the higher faculty where things are clearer.
With Metta
Actually Christopher Wallis, the author of this article, has written a good book on the tradition "Tantra illuminated", it is quite an interesting read which sheds some light on our sister tantric tradition (if you will).

Also the work of Mark S. G. Dyczkowski is also relevant.
It is quite impossible to find the Buddha anywhere other than in one's own mind.
~Padmasambhava

Amid those who are self-constrained, the Stable One would not posit as categorically true or false
anything seen, heard, or sensed, clung to and considered truth by others.
Since they have already seen this dart to which people cling and adhere,
saying “I know, I see, it is just so,”
the Tathāgatas cling to nothing.
-Kalaka sutta

User avatar
Grigoris
Global Moderator
Posts: 18173
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 9:27 pm
Location: Greece

Re: The Tantric Age: A comparison of Shaiva and Buddhist Tantra

Post by Grigoris » Wed Sep 13, 2017 11:30 am

dzogchungpa wrote:You guys might find this interesting if you haven't heard about it before:
https://tricycle.org/trikedaily/angulim ... -buddhism/
Interesting.
"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

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 28686
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: The Tantric Age: A comparison of Shaiva and Buddhist Tantra

Post by Malcolm » Wed Sep 13, 2017 2:09 pm

DharmaChakra wrote:eternalism ( whatever that is supposed to mean) its a coined phrase by western academics and philosophers.
No, the term, sāśvata-dṛṣṭi, is a Buddhist term used to for tīrthikas.
Buddhahood in This Life
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔


[A]nything at all that is well spoken is the word of the Buddha.

-- Ārya-adhyāśaya-sañcodana-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra

The different sūtras in accord with the emptiness
taught by the Sugata are definitive in meaning;
One can understand that all of those Dharmas in
which a sentient being, individual, or person are taught are provisional in meaning.

-- Samadhirāja Sūtra

DharmaChakra
Posts: 76
Joined: Tue Dec 06, 2016 9:38 am

Re: The Tantric Age: A comparison of Shaiva and Buddhist Tantra

Post by DharmaChakra » Wed Sep 13, 2017 4:35 pm

Namaste,
No, the term, sāśvata-dṛṣṭi, is a Buddhist term used to for tīrthikas.
Yes it is but both words do not have such a fixed meaning as you seem to be giving and is translated in a lot of todays study, many of the English translations, which is a very coarse form of prakrit are borrowed and do not always match what the native language points to, what to speak of the insight and realization.

sāśvata can mean anything from enduring, contsant, ever lasting and so on so we can say eternal, but in the right context eternalism is not correct and should not be used, its not a fixed philosophical view or a belief or an ism, as there are no isms in any dharma traditions, isms was introduced by western academics and philosophers in 18th century, and it seems to have stuck.

dṛṣṭi, well good luck to translate that and give it fixed meaning, vision, sight, view (cognitive), again dṛṣṭi doesnt bear well with saying its a view as in an opinion or a belief.

tīrthikas, this can range from normally not buddhist or one who doesnt believe or practice Buddha Dharma, words such as heretics or Jains, to one who believes in nihilism or eternalism, but still nihilism as a school or belief system and eternalism does not exist in any dharma traditions even if they have some mention, even one accepts in the conscious absolute unfolded sat~ सत् doesnt exactly mean eternalism.

If there is no birth, death or decay then its impossible to think of something eternal.

With Metta

User avatar
Javierfv1212
Posts: 120
Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2015 1:39 am
Location: Sacramento, CA

Re: The Tantric Age: A comparison of Shaiva and Buddhist Tantra

Post by Javierfv1212 » Wed Sep 13, 2017 4:40 pm

Malcolm wrote:
DharmaChakra wrote:eternalism ( whatever that is supposed to mean) its a coined phrase by western academics and philosophers.
No, the term, sāśvata-dṛṣṭi, is a Buddhist term used to for tīrthikas.
Malcom, what do you think about using tirthika mantras and chants, and perhaps even samatha practices. Does it matter as long as one has the correct view?

I ask because at my [Tibetan buddhist] sangha there is a regular group that gets together for chanting, and they intersperse a lot of hindu/sikh mantras into things. It's not a big deal but I wonder what the tradition would say of it
It is quite impossible to find the Buddha anywhere other than in one's own mind.
~Padmasambhava

Amid those who are self-constrained, the Stable One would not posit as categorically true or false
anything seen, heard, or sensed, clung to and considered truth by others.
Since they have already seen this dart to which people cling and adhere,
saying “I know, I see, it is just so,”
the Tathāgatas cling to nothing.
-Kalaka sutta

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 28686
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: The Tantric Age: A comparison of Shaiva and Buddhist Tantra

Post by Malcolm » Wed Sep 13, 2017 8:39 pm

Javierfv1212 wrote:It's not a big deal but I wonder what the tradition would say of it
What is the point? Of doing practices for which one has no lineage? We are not Sikhs, we are not Hindus. Chanting Namaḥ Shivaya is not wrong, but why bother?

If one wants to do Shiva protector practice one should receive the transmission of Shiva from a qualified Lama so that one's practice actually has blessings of the lineage, and so that Shiva obeys the oaths to protect the Dharma to which he was bound by Guru Padmasambhava.
Buddhahood in This Life
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔


[A]nything at all that is well spoken is the word of the Buddha.

-- Ārya-adhyāśaya-sañcodana-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra

The different sūtras in accord with the emptiness
taught by the Sugata are definitive in meaning;
One can understand that all of those Dharmas in
which a sentient being, individual, or person are taught are provisional in meaning.

-- Samadhirāja Sūtra

Post Reply

Return to “Tibetan Buddhism”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: HandsomeMonkeyking, Terma, Tiago Simões and 89 guests