Guru Rinpoche As...

Forum for discussion of Tibetan Buddhism. Questions specific to one school are best posted in the appropriate sub-forum.
Post Reply
User avatar
Mantrik
Posts: 1728
Joined: Sun Apr 09, 2017 8:55 pm
Contact:

Re: Guru Rinpoche As...

Post by Mantrik » Mon Oct 22, 2018 1:07 pm

michaelb wrote:
Mon Oct 22, 2018 10:36 am
Adzom Drukpa calls the tigress the consort.
I refer you back to Malcolm's earlier request:
''I have seen no actual text from a terma that actually states this identification of the tigress as a consort of Guru Rinpoche. So I am going to hold you to your own standard. Show us the text. ''

I was simply saying that if you apply caveats to ChNN's descriptions as needing the reader to take care, not a matter of trust, or that they are innovations, and that you will only be convinced by some sort of textual source, it surely applies to all other versions of the imagery.

I have no idea why you single out one version to challenge. when either all are open to challenge or none, as they apply only to the context of the terma and master transmitting it. It seems a little obsessive and strange.
http://www.khyung.com

Om Thathpurushaya Vidhmahe
Suvarna Pakshaya Dheemahe
Thanno Garuda Prachodayath

Micchāmi Dukkaḍaṃ (मिच्छामि दुक्कडम्)

User avatar
kalden yungdrung
Posts: 3840
Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2010 10:40 pm

Re: Guru Rinpoche As...

Post by kalden yungdrung » Mon Oct 22, 2018 1:42 pm

SonamTashi wrote:
Mon Oct 22, 2018 1:00 pm
kalden yungdrung wrote:
Mon Oct 22, 2018 11:33 am
SonamTashi wrote:
Mon Oct 22, 2018 10:26 am




As for me, I have no horse in this race. CHNN wasn't my guru, I don't practice Bon, etc. But I'm not going to categorically state that CHNN was wrong if it happens to conflict with my tradition. That would be sectarian.
Ok , then for some this Ati Muwer "story" is true and for some it is not true.
Guess if you would investigate Bön more you would see also other truths.

Sectarian that was already explained as such, so don´t come up here again with that vision.
CHNN was wrong ? I never stated that, because his knowledge about Bön is very good. It is unfortunately the case that his statements are not further questioned as such, written on paper, discussed etc.

I have not a horse here in the race but a very old Tradition called Yungdrung Bön.

For me personal as Bönpo and for many other Bönpos , these Tertön stories and other innovative stories never would be according to the Bön story, which nevertheless also is NOT and NEVER accepted here aboard and why is the Bön story not accepted / respected whereas we have everything also in Terma, orally and sometimes on paper ?

It means Bönpos are general "wrong or mistaken", if we compare their stories with Vajrayana stories, like here where Bönpos have to accept the subjugating of one of their Gods in favor of a multi explainable story, which has here and there unanswered questions ?

Guess you would accept that Bönpos never and ever would accept that, isn´t it ?
The best meditation is no meditation

User avatar
SonamTashi
Posts: 123
Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2017 7:30 pm

Re: Guru Rinpoche As...

Post by SonamTashi » Mon Oct 22, 2018 2:38 pm

kalden yungdrung wrote:
Mon Oct 22, 2018 11:33 am


Ok , then for some this Ati Muwer "story" is true and for some it is not true.
Guess if you would investigate Bön more you would see also other truths.

Sectarian that was already explained as such, so don´t come up here again with that vision.
CHNN was wrong ? I never stated that, because his knowledge about Bön is very good. It is unfortunately the case that his statements are not further questioned as such, written on paper, discussed etc.

I have not a horse here in the race but a very old Tradition called Yungdrung Bön.

For me personal as Bönpo and for many other Bönpos , these Tertön stories and other innovative stories never would be according to the Bön story, which nevertheless also is NOT and NEVER accepted here aboard and why is the Bön story not accepted / respected whereas we have everything also in Terma, orally and sometimes on paper ?

It means Bönpos are general "wrong or mistaken", if we compare their stories with Vajrayana stories, like here where Bönpos have to accept the subjugating of one of their Gods in favor of a multi explainable story, which has here and there unanswered questions ?

Guess you would accept that Bönpos never and ever would accept that, isn´t it ?

As far as Bon goes, I have absolutely no opinion either way on it. But perhaps you are right, maybe if I did study it I would decide you are right. But like I said, I have no horse in this race.

And you certainly did say CHNN was wrong. You said "Bön-sku Atimuwer is a Dharmakaya aspect first and second it is in Bön never known as a tigress or other animal.
Guru Rinpoche can ride on every Avatar no problem for me, but NEVER on a Bön Dharmakaya, that is anyway impossible, because for that we need at least a Sambhogakaya form....." and "Indeed the story of one of the 5 Consorts of Guru Rinpoche gives an explanation about the source of the pregnant / heated Tigress.
This is then probably the answer that the heated Tigress does not represent Ati Muwer, like earlier explained here aboard.

- Then, can we conclude that the other stories are not true"

Look, no one here is making you accept CHNN's opinion of Vajrayana Buddhist ideas. That's why I reemphasized all of those quotes in my first post. There is simply a difference of opinion here. You find the Bon explanations authoritative, others find various Buddhist explanations authoritative. Neither group should force the other to agree. We all have to decide for ourselves what is authoritative. Don't let other people sharing the statements of their Buddhist teachers make you think that they're trying to make you give up on the explanations of your Bon teachers.
Last edited by SonamTashi on Mon Oct 22, 2018 2:41 pm, edited 3 times in total.
:bow: :buddha1: :bow: :anjali: :meditate:

Crazywisdom
Posts: 1725
Joined: Fri May 23, 2014 5:48 pm

Re: Guru Rinpoche As...

Post by Crazywisdom » Mon Oct 22, 2018 2:38 pm

Drolod is for swiftly accomplishing Buddha Activities.
I got my Chili Chilaya.

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 28541
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Guru Rinpoche As...

Post by Malcolm » Mon Oct 22, 2018 3:59 pm

michaelb wrote:
Mon Oct 22, 2018 10:36 am
I half suspect it was through historical research and textual analysis. ChNN's knowledge of how Bon and Buddhism related to one another was second to none.
I think the most likely explanation is that the legend of Khyidron being the consort is quite late (I can find no reference to it earlier than the Taksham bio of Tsogyal -- it is not mentioned in any earlier bio of Tsogyal-- I looked), and that ChNN was referring to earlier historical sources he had available to him that are now obscure, since as you mention, it seems no one asked him for a source, including myself.
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

michaelb
Posts: 506
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2011 3:04 pm

Re: Guru Rinpoche As...

Post by michaelb » Mon Oct 22, 2018 4:19 pm

Mantrik wrote:
Mon Oct 22, 2018 1:07 pm
michaelb wrote:
Mon Oct 22, 2018 10:36 am
Adzom Drukpa calls the tigress the consort.
I refer you back to Malcolm's earlier request:
''I have seen no actual text from a terma that actually states this identification of the tigress as a consort of Guru Rinpoche. So I am going to hold you to your own standard. Show us the text. ''

I was simply saying that if you apply caveats to ChNN's descriptions as needing the reader to take care, not a matter of trust, or that they are innovations, and that you will only be convinced by some sort of textual source, it surely applies to all other versions of the imagery.

I have no idea why you single out one version to challenge. when either all are open to challenge or none, as they apply only to the context of the terma and master transmitting it. It seems a little obsessive and strange.
So, you're answering by point by referring to something Malcolm said, but you didn't think to refer to what I had said? I've previously said,
I've not had a chance to look through the 500+ pages of his Drolo cycle, but all mentions of tigresses I found were pretty standard and like other Drolo sadhanas, like the tersar ones: 'jigs rung stag mo, rgya stag drus ma, sgrol yum stag (ie. the tigress is the realised liberating consort) , etc. I am perfectly okay with the idea that Chogyal Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche had a dream, as Malcolm suggested earlier, and came to the idea that way.
Needless to say, the tigress is often referred to as the consort or "yum" in many places including Dudjom Tersar and Adzom Drukpa's terma.
Adzom Drukpa calls the tigress the consort.
As I said, the tigress appears in Adzom Drukpa's terma in very similar ways to she appears in other terma cycles such as Dudjom Tersar, described as the consort (yum). I've not found a single mention of Ati Muwer or anything like it. And, I'm guessing, if there was one, as Malcolm's apparently read the whole Adzom Drolo cycle, he would have posted it already.

I'm not obssessing over this. I'm just putting forward the pretty standard view that the tigress is the consort of Drolo, and not a subjugated god. This view is pervasive and mentioned everywhere where there is a tigress. When Drolo doesn't have a tigress, like in the Yongey Mingyur Dorje's Drolo gun khyer, he has a consort in the more common way (even if she also has "feline" characteristics.)

User avatar
kalden yungdrung
Posts: 3840
Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2010 10:40 pm

Re: Guru Rinpoche As...

Post by kalden yungdrung » Mon Oct 22, 2018 4:51 pm

SonamTashi wrote:
Mon Oct 22, 2018 2:38 pm
kalden yungdrung wrote:
Mon Oct 22, 2018 11:33 am



As far as Bon goes, I have absolutely no opinion either way on it. But perhaps you are right, maybe if I did study it I would decide you are right. But like I said, I have no horse in this race.
KY wrote:
See it bi lateral, that makes sense. here it is mainly seen uni lateral.
And you certainly did say CHNN was wrong. You said "Bön-sku Atimuwer is a Dharmakaya aspect first and second it is in Bön never known as a tigress or other animal.
KY wrote: Then i must be more clear. Like i told, because Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche is very well informed about Bön history, more than any other Vajrayana teacher, and has contributed like the Dalai Lama to a better understanding of Bön, it is for me astonishing that he explained that Ati Muwer = the Tigress where Guru Rinpoche is riding on. Like explained earlier, this needed better and to the point explanations and references , which are not there and would not be there./quote]


Guru Rinpoche can ride on every Avatar no problem for me, but NEVER on a Bön Dharmakaya, that is anyway impossible, because for that we need at least a Sambhogakaya form....." and "Indeed the story of one of the 5 Consorts of Guru Rinpoche gives an explanation about the source of the pregnant / heated Tigress.
This is then probably the answer that the heated Tigress does not represent Ati Muwer, like earlier explained here aboard.



Look, no one here is making you accept CHNN's opinion of Vajrayana Buddhist ideas.

That's why I reemphasized all of those quotes in my first post. There is simply a difference of opinion here.

You find the Bon explanations authoritative, others find various Buddhist explanations authoritative.


Neither group should force the other to agree. We all have to decide for ourselves what is authoritative. Don't let other people sharing the statements of their Buddhist teachers make you think that they're trying to make you give up on the explanations of your Bon teachers.
KY wrote:
Agreeing on belief we don´t like in Buddhism and Bön. And i have so the feeling that there is here some believing inside which makes the movie running. Never others can change my Mind regarding the Yungdrung Bön, but i can accept sure similarities like that there are many Buddhas and Bön has also its Buddha, Yidams, Tree of Refuge etc. But also here some Vajrayana followers have a claim on the name Buddha which results in the term Buddhism, neglecting that Dzogchen Masters can attain full Buddhahood and so we can go on with the created differences.
So sectarian behavior/ mentality, is sure not that which results when we disagree to something.


That these two Spiritual Tibetan Traditions, are never similar that would be logic seen this done discussion regarding the tigress.
The best meditation is no meditation

User avatar
Mantrik
Posts: 1728
Joined: Sun Apr 09, 2017 8:55 pm
Contact:

Re: Guru Rinpoche As...

Post by Mantrik » Mon Oct 22, 2018 6:09 pm

Malcolm wrote:
Mon Oct 22, 2018 3:59 pm
michaelb wrote:
Mon Oct 22, 2018 10:36 am
I half suspect it was through historical research and textual analysis. ChNN's knowledge of how Bon and Buddhism related to one another was second to none.
I think the most likely explanation is that the legend of Khyidron being the consort is quite late (I can find no reference to it earlier than the Taksham bio of Tsogyal -- it is not mentioned in any earlier bio of Tsogyal-- I looked), and that ChNN was referring to earlier historical sources he had available to him that are now obscure, since as you mention, it seems no one asked him for a source, including myself.
Could ChNN have encountered Ati Muwer as a Zhang Zhung Tibetan being to which Bonpos then ascribed one set of characterisitics, and Buddhists another? I'm also wondering if there were perhaps two totally different figures of that name in Zhang Zhung.
Last edited by Mantrik on Mon Oct 22, 2018 6:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.
http://www.khyung.com

Om Thathpurushaya Vidhmahe
Suvarna Pakshaya Dheemahe
Thanno Garuda Prachodayath

Micchāmi Dukkaḍaṃ (मिच्छामि दुक्कडम्)

Miroku
Posts: 848
Joined: Fri Jul 24, 2015 11:18 am

Re: Guru Rinpoche As...

Post by Miroku » Mon Oct 22, 2018 6:20 pm

kalden yungdrung wrote:
Mon Oct 22, 2018 4:51 pm
KY wrote: Then i must be more clear. Like i told, because Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche is very well informed about Bön history, more than any other Vajrayana teacher, and has contributed like the Dalai Lama to a better understanding of Bön, it is for me astonishing that he explained that Ati Muwer = the Tigress where Guru Rinpoche is riding on. Like explained earlier, this needed better and to the point explanations and references , which are not there and would not be there.
Kalden, please relax. It really has nothing to do with bön. Just like Chakrasamvara is supposed to be either slayer os subjucator of Shiva has nothing to do with hinudists. Different aspects take different forms in different tradition. And Bön is different from Buddhism. And please stop suggesting that we here are against bön. We are not. This discussion goes nowhere. I am a student of ChNN and my vision is clear how I should practice Drolo. You are a student of bön lamas and you know yours. We dont really have to give a damn what the other thinks about one aspect.
Child, if you are not hypocritical and out of control, that is conduct.
~ Padampa Sangye

You say such clever things to people, but you do not apply them to yourself.
The faults within you are the ones to be exposed.
~ Padampa Sangye

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 28541
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Guru Rinpoche As...

Post by Malcolm » Mon Oct 22, 2018 6:31 pm

michaelb wrote:
Mon Oct 22, 2018 10:36 am

Adzom Drukpa calls the tigress the consort.

Yes,in his Drollo ter cycle, the medium length sadhana refers to the tigress as the sbyor yum, "the consort for union," who is a passionate (ngar ma) bengal tigress (rgya stag). In another place, a long praise, the tigress is referred to as the "sgrol yum," the consort for liberation" who is a brilliant red, wrathful tigress. In the Kha thang literature, the union consort is generally understood to be Tsogyal, the liberation consort is generally understood to be Tashi Kyidren. In yet another place, the mount is a red and black terrifying bengal tigress with iron claws.

Overall however, the liberation consort is generally identified as Ekajati, and as in the Bio of Tsogyal, Tsogyal is identified as Ekajati, while the tigress is Kyidron. However, as I specified before, this identification arrives in a terma of the later period, and it seems that it spread widely, since Taksham's bio of Tsogyal paints a far more comprehensive lifestory of Tsogyal than other, earlier bios which make no mention of this episode at Paro Taksang.
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

User avatar
kalden yungdrung
Posts: 3840
Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2010 10:40 pm

Re: Guru Rinpoche As...

Post by kalden yungdrung » Mon Oct 22, 2018 8:06 pm

Miroku wrote:
Mon Oct 22, 2018 6:20 pm
kalden yungdrung wrote:
Mon Oct 22, 2018 4:51 pm
KY wrote: Then i must be more clear. Like i told, because Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche is very well informed about Bön history, more than any other Vajrayana teacher, and has contributed like the Dalai Lama to a better understanding of Bön, it is for me astonishing that he explained that Ati Muwer = the Tigress where Guru Rinpoche is riding on. Like explained earlier, this needed better and to the point explanations and references , which are not there and would not be there.
Kalden, please relax. It really has nothing to do with bön. Just like Chakrasamvara is supposed to be either slayer os subjucator of Shiva has nothing to do with hinudists. Different aspects take different forms in different tradition. And Bön is different from Buddhism. And please stop suggesting that we here are against bön. We are not. This discussion goes nowhere. I am a student of ChNN and my vision is clear how I should practice Drolo. You are a student of bön lamas and you know yours. We dont really have to give a damn what the other thinks about one aspect.
Do you suggest that Ati Muwer has nothing to do with Bön or is not related to Bön ?

Guess that Guru Rinpoche , karmic seen, has something to do with Bön IF he is /was riding on Ati Muwer, whereas he is not a Bönpo, according Vajrayana.
Sure, nobody has here something against Bön and i did not suggest that.
You can practice D.D. sure according you have learned it, also for me ok and what your visualisations are is for me not so important to know.
For me it is interesting to know what others think and are convinced about, especially if it touches the Yungdrung Bön history.
Here are all Bönpos on one line.
The best meditation is no meditation

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 28541
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Guru Rinpoche As...

Post by Malcolm » Mon Oct 22, 2018 9:50 pm

Mantrik wrote:
Mon Oct 22, 2018 6:09 pm


Could ChNN have encountered Ati Muwer as a Zhang Zhung Tibetan being to which Bonpos then ascribed one set of characterisitics, and Buddhists another? I'm also wondering if there were perhaps two totally different figures of that name in Zhang Zhung.
It basically boils down to the difference between the Buddhist, and largely western academic view, that the Bon of the time of the imperial period, 800 and before was a completely different religion from the Bon that emerged during the 10th and eleventh century under the influence of Buddhism. This is also Chogyal Namkhai Norbu's point view. From this perspective then, the Ati Mu wer that we see pictured in the Gekhod cycle is a later innovation, only nominally related to the A ti mu wer who was an important protective deity of Zhang Zhung.

That fact that Buddhists do not accept Bonpo accounts of history in general is always going to be a sore spot between Buddhism and Bon. As far as the majority of Buddhists are concerned, modern Bon is basically an imitation of Buddhism. However, in many Bonpo ritual texts, and even some kinds of ritual texts preserved by Buddhists, such as lha bsang offerings and so on, we can see evidence of the real pre-Buddhist religion of Tibet. Most of the Buddhist worldly protectors are originally pre-Buddhist local deities, btsan, rgyalpos, and so on.

Bonpos, naturally, will be unhappy with these opinions.
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

michaelb
Posts: 506
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2011 3:04 pm

Re: Guru Rinpoche As...

Post by michaelb » Mon Oct 22, 2018 9:51 pm

Malcolm wrote:
Mon Oct 22, 2018 3:59 pm
I think the most likely explanation is that the legend of Khyidron being the consort is quite late (I can find no reference to it earlier than the Taksham bio of Tsogyal -- it is not mentioned in any earlier bio of Tsogyal-- I looked), and that ChNN was referring to earlier historical sources he had available to him that are now obscure, since as you mention, it seems no one asked him for a source, including myself.
Sadly, this is all conjecture as no one asked him. A possible ancient text on Ati Muwer is not impossible, but there's no evidence for it. There is also no proof that the description of the tigress as Tashi Chidren started with Samten Lingpa. We would have to look at older texts that deal with Drolo in the various terma traditions, and there are quite a lot of those. One thing is for sure, though, the Drolo texts in the termas as Adzom Drukpa's and Dudjom Tersar include mention of the tigress as the consort rather than as a subjugated Bon deity.

The other day I just had a quick flick through the 500+ pages of Adzom Drukpa's Drolo cycle and noticed that the tigress is treated pretty much the same as in the Dudjom Tersar. For example, on page 144 it describes the mandala in the usual way starting talking about the uncontrived immeasurable display of the cremation ground, in the middle of a roaring blazing hurricane of red wind, in the expanse of a turbulent dark red lake of blood, on the peak of an adamantine rock mountain, above a lotus of non-attachment and a sun and moon of means and wisdom, on a throne of crossed male and female rudras of the ego, a seat of a wrathful liberating consort, a majestic red tiger or words to that effect.
སྒྲོལ་ཡུམ་ཁྲོས་པ་སྟག་དམར་བརྗིད་པའི་གདན༔
Adzom Drukpa clearly doesn't think that it is odd to have the heruka ride on the consort. Dudjom Rinpoche, as you surely know, said exactly the same kind of thing (in the Pema srog drup) referring to the tigress as the liberating consort, a carnivorous pregnant tigress.
སྒྲོལ་ཡུམ་ཟ་བྱེད་སྟག་མོ་གྲུས་མ་ནི༔
Again, in the kong wa, the tigress is referred to as "the greatly blissful wisdom (shes rab - prajna) the liberating consort"
བདེ་ཆེན་ཤེས་རབ་སྒྲོལ་བའི་ཡུམ

I think considering the tigress as the consort of Drolo is so pervasive that there isn't really any reason to discuss it. We can accept that on one occasion an alternative was taught, and appreciate that a multiplicity of views adds colour and diversity to the mythos, but ultimately, that the tigress is Drolo's consort is the most commonly accepted view.

Anyway, this really is enough from me. I even managed to bore myself.

michaelb
Posts: 506
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2011 3:04 pm

Re: Guru Rinpoche As...

Post by michaelb » Mon Oct 22, 2018 10:08 pm

Malcolm wrote:
Mon Oct 22, 2018 6:31 pm
Yes,in his Drollo ter cycle, the medium length sadhana refers to the tigress as the sbyor yum, "the consort for union," who is a passionate (ngar ma) bengal tigress (rgya stag). In another place, a long praise, the tigress is referred to as the "sgrol yum," the consort for liberation" who is a brilliant red, wrathful tigress. In the Kha thang literature, the union consort is generally understood to be Tsogyal, the liberation consort is generally understood to be Tashi Kyidren. In yet another place, the mount is a red and black terrifying bengal tigress with iron claws.

Overall however, the liberation consort is generally identified as Ekajati, and as in the Bio of Tsogyal, Tsogyal is identified as Ekajati, while the tigress is Kyidron. However, as I specified before, this identification arrives in a terma of the later period, and it seems that it spread widely, since Taksham's bio of Tsogyal paints a far more comprehensive lifestory of Tsogyal than other, earlier bios which make no mention of this episode at Paro Taksang.
So...
Malcolm wrote:
Sun Oct 21, 2018 6:40 pm
This is not certain. I have read many Drollo cycles. Actually, I have never seen any Drollo cycle explicitly identify the nature of the tigress in either a sadhana or an empowerment. Not ruling it out, I have not read everything, but apart from popular references I have seen no actual text from a terma that actually states this identification of the tigress as a consort of Guru Rinpoche. So I am going to hold you to your own standard. Show us the text.
Malcolm wrote:
Sun Oct 21, 2018 6:40 pm
1. In what other sadhana have you ever seen the main deity riding the consort? If you think about it, it really does not make any sense.
?
You're now agreeing that the tigress is the consort but that this is a later 17th century innovation based on Samten Lingpa's Tsogyal namthar, and in fact the older story includes Ati Muwer? Well, I suppose we will never know as no one thought to ask Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche about it. Someone could research the history of Drolo and come up with answers, possibly. I'm guessing the practice itself doesn't actually go back that far.

I can't help think that this whole discussion could have been avoided if you had originally just said that the tigress is taught by some traditions to be a consort of GR and taught by ChNN to be Ati Muwer.

User avatar
Mantrik
Posts: 1728
Joined: Sun Apr 09, 2017 8:55 pm
Contact:

Re: Guru Rinpoche As...

Post by Mantrik » Mon Oct 22, 2018 10:44 pm

Malcolm wrote:
Mon Oct 22, 2018 9:50 pm
Mantrik wrote:
Mon Oct 22, 2018 6:09 pm


Could ChNN have encountered Ati Muwer as a Zhang Zhung Tibetan being to which Bonpos then ascribed one set of characterisitics, and Buddhists another? I'm also wondering if there were perhaps two totally different figures of that name in Zhang Zhung.
It basically boils down to the difference between the Buddhist, and largely western academic view, that the Bon of the time of the imperial period, 800 and before was a completely different religion from the Bon that emerged during the 10th and eleventh century under the influence of Buddhism. This is also Chogyal Namkhai Norbu's point view. From this perspective then, the Ati Mu wer that we see pictured in the Gekhod cycle is a later innovation, only nominally related to the A ti mu wer who was an important protective deity of Zhang Zhung.

That fact that Buddhists do not accept Bonpo accounts of history in general is always going to be a sore spot between Buddhism and Bon. As far as the majority of Buddhists are concerned, modern Bon is basically an imitation of Buddhism. However, in many Bonpo ritual texts, and even some kinds of ritual texts preserved by Buddhists, such as lha bsang offerings and so on, we can see evidence of the real pre-Buddhist religion of Tibet. Most of the Buddhist worldly protectors are originally pre-Buddhist local deities, btsan, rgyalpos, and so on.

Bonpos, naturally, will be unhappy with these opinions.
Thanks. Important for all to remember that there was a Zhang Zhung !
http://www.khyung.com

Om Thathpurushaya Vidhmahe
Suvarna Pakshaya Dheemahe
Thanno Garuda Prachodayath

Micchāmi Dukkaḍaṃ (मिच्छामि दुक्कडम्)

michaelb
Posts: 506
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2011 3:04 pm

Re: Guru Rinpoche As...

Post by michaelb » Mon Oct 22, 2018 11:46 pm

Malcolm wrote:
Mon Oct 22, 2018 3:59 pm
ChNN was referring to earlier historical sources he had available to him that are now obscure, since as you mention, it seems no one asked him for a source, including myself.
Just to add, these historical sources couldn't be too old or obscure, not, for example, referring back to pre-Buddhist deities from Zhang Zhung, as the stories of Drolo and the eight manifestations started, I guess, with Guru Chowang in the 13th century, once the growth of the "Buddhist inspired" Bon was well underway. I assume you are not suggesting that the Lama Sangdu has some old Bon local guardian as the tigress?

User avatar
javier.espinoza.t
Posts: 927
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2017 12:29 am
Location: Chile

Re: Guru Rinpoche As...

Post by javier.espinoza.t » Tue Oct 23, 2018 5:22 am

i don't want to troll but, i have maybe a few naive questions

1) ¿why this yidam must have only one mount?

2) the yidam is riding, not stepping over. the mount is an active part, bonpos should be honored about the ChNN commentary ¿no?

and finally

3) ¿is tibetan and sanskrit is mixed in it's name? ¿why?
what are you doing

User avatar
Mantrik
Posts: 1728
Joined: Sun Apr 09, 2017 8:55 pm
Contact:

Re: Guru Rinpoche As...

Post by Mantrik » Tue Oct 23, 2018 7:49 am

michaelb wrote:
Mon Oct 22, 2018 11:46 pm
Malcolm wrote:
Mon Oct 22, 2018 3:59 pm
ChNN was referring to earlier historical sources he had available to him that are now obscure, since as you mention, it seems no one asked him for a source, including myself.
Just to add, these historical sources couldn't be too old or obscure, not, for example, referring back to pre-Buddhist deities from Zhang Zhung, as the stories of Drolo and the eight manifestations started, I guess, with Guru Chowang in the 13th century, once the growth of the "Buddhist inspired" Bon was well underway. I assume you are not suggesting that the Lama Sangdu has some old Bon local guardian as the tigress?
Malcolm wrote:
''From this perspective then, the Ati Mu wer that we see pictured in the Gekhod cycle is a later innovation, only nominally related to the A ti mu wer who was an important protective deity of Zhang Zhung . ''

That was in answer to my question, since people seem to be most obsessed about Ati Muwer being either Buddhist or later Bon and seemed not to have considered Zhang Zhung at all. For Drolo to interact with an ancient Zhang Zhung figure in this way makes sense.

So, maybe if you want a textual reference you'd better start scouring pre-Buddhist sources. ;)
http://www.khyung.com

Om Thathpurushaya Vidhmahe
Suvarna Pakshaya Dheemahe
Thanno Garuda Prachodayath

Micchāmi Dukkaḍaṃ (मिच्छामि दुक्कडम्)

michaelb
Posts: 506
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2011 3:04 pm

Re: Guru Rinpoche As...

Post by michaelb » Tue Oct 23, 2018 8:26 am

Mantrik wrote:
Tue Oct 23, 2018 7:49 am
That was in answer to my question, since people seem to be most obsessed about Ati Muwer being either Buddhist or later Bon and seemed not to have considered Zhang Zhung at all. For Drolo to interact with an ancient Zhang Zhung figure in this way makes sense.

So, maybe if you want a textual reference you'd better start scouring pre-Buddhist sources. ;)
That's kind of what was behind my last point, because even if textual evidence for Ati Muwer, the ancient local guardian of Zhang Zhung could be found, how would he have interacted with Dorje Drolo, a relative new-comer, being confined to the terma, especially the later terma traditions?

My guess is Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche came across this ancient Zhang Zhung guardian which had both tiger and possibly southern Tibet / Bhutan connections, thought they kind of fitted with the idea of Drolo on a tiger and came up with a new narrative. This satisfies his interest in Drolo and with Zhang Zhung and ancient Bon guardians.

All of everything anyone can say on this is just guesswork, though, as we have literally no idea how he came up with the narrative. Maybe the only way to shed light on it would be if another lama teaches it. Perhaps asking other Adzom lineage holders would be a way forward?

I've also been thinking about this whole question of whether faith entails that we unquestioningly agree with everything a lama ever teaches. One of my lamas is also a scholar and likes studying history. He has a bit of a thing for looking for the correct historical sites. In his research he discovered something that confirmed for him that Zahor and the lotus lake are nowhere near Mandhi and Tso Pema. I love Tso Pema and think he is just wrong. I think he's relying on slightly dodgy historical research done by others. That in no way means i question his realisation or position as a holder of the lineage. I just disagree with his historical research.

I think faithful students of ChNN could potentially disagree with him on the Ati Muwer claim without that entailing a loss of faith or breakage of samaya.

User avatar
Mantrik
Posts: 1728
Joined: Sun Apr 09, 2017 8:55 pm
Contact:

Re: Guru Rinpoche As...

Post by Mantrik » Tue Oct 23, 2018 8:43 am

michaelb wrote:
Tue Oct 23, 2018 8:26 am


I think faithful students of ChNN could potentially disagree with him on the Ati Muwer claim without that entailing a loss of faith or breakage of samaya.
I think if it is a matter related to an empowerment then if someone disagrees with what they receive they should bugger off and find a different Lama. ;)
http://www.khyung.com

Om Thathpurushaya Vidhmahe
Suvarna Pakshaya Dheemahe
Thanno Garuda Prachodayath

Micchāmi Dukkaḍaṃ (मिच्छामि दुक्कडम्)

Post Reply

Return to “Tibetan Buddhism”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Fa Dao, Fruitzilla, Lobsang Chojor, PemaSherab, Tata1, xabir and 71 guests