More Bon than Buddha?
- beautiful breath
- Posts: 85
- Joined: Fri May 06, 2011 11:00 am
More Bon than Buddha?
The Tibetan traditions seem a million miles away from the Theravadins who I understand are considered to be the closest to what the Buddha actually taught himself prior to any major interpretations. There were no Vajras, Bells, Inner Offerings....etc... in the Discourses
Is the Tibetan tradition more Bon than Buddha?
Thanks,
BB...
Is the Tibetan tradition more Bon than Buddha?
Thanks,
BB...
Re: More Bon than Buddha?
No. You seem to overlook the fact that the Buddhist tantric traditions of Tibet originated from Indian Buddhist tantrics. Of course there are some Bon influences, but...beautiful breath wrote:The Tibetan traditions seem a million miles away from the Theravadins who I understand are considered to be the closest to what the Buddha actually taught himself prior to any major interpretations. There were no Vajras, Bells, Inner Offerings....etc... in the Discourses
Is the Tibetan tradition more Bon than Buddha?
Thanks,
BB...
"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
- beautiful breath
- Posts: 85
- Joined: Fri May 06, 2011 11:00 am
Re: More Bon than Buddha?
But...?No. You seem to overlook the fact that the Buddhist tantric traditions of Tibet originated from Indian Buddhist tantrics. Of course there are some Bon influences, but...
Re: More Bon than Buddha?
Perhaps you are just ignorant about Theravada traditions? 2 minutes of google and I found this http://tdm.sas.upenn.edu/monastery/ritual_liturgy.htmlbeautiful breath wrote:The Tibetan traditions seem a million miles away from the Theravadins who I understand are considered to be the closest to what the Buddha actually taught himself prior to any major interpretations. There were no Vajras, Bells, Inner Offerings....etc... in the Discourses
Is the Tibetan tradition more Bon than Buddha?
Thanks,
BB...
/magnus
"We are all here to help each other go through this thing, whatever it is."
~Kurt Vonnegut
"The principal practice is Guruyoga. But we need to understand that any secondary practice combined with Guruyoga becomes a principal practice." ChNNR (Teachings on Thun and Ganapuja)
~Kurt Vonnegut
"The principal practice is Guruyoga. But we need to understand that any secondary practice combined with Guruyoga becomes a principal practice." ChNNR (Teachings on Thun and Ganapuja)
- beautiful breath
- Posts: 85
- Joined: Fri May 06, 2011 11:00 am
Re: More Bon than Buddha?
Nice read.Perhaps you are just ignorant about Theravada traditions? 2 minutes of google and I found this http://tdm.sas.upenn.edu/monastery/ritual_liturgy.html
/magnus
Still doesn't answer my question though.
No matter.
BB...
Re: More Bon than Buddha?
No, the Tibetan tradition of Buddhism is not Bon. Vajrayana traditions exist for example in Japan, Shingon, and has a direct lineage from India without passing Tibet. It has all the rituals and bells and all those things you don't think is Buddha's teaching.beautiful breath wrote:Nice read.Perhaps you are just ignorant about Theravada traditions? 2 minutes of google and I found this http://tdm.sas.upenn.edu/monastery/ritual_liturgy.html
/magnus
Still doesn't answer my question though.
No matter.
BB...
/magnus
"We are all here to help each other go through this thing, whatever it is."
~Kurt Vonnegut
"The principal practice is Guruyoga. But we need to understand that any secondary practice combined with Guruyoga becomes a principal practice." ChNNR (Teachings on Thun and Ganapuja)
~Kurt Vonnegut
"The principal practice is Guruyoga. But we need to understand that any secondary practice combined with Guruyoga becomes a principal practice." ChNNR (Teachings on Thun and Ganapuja)
Re: More Bon than Buddha?
Did you already learn that Buddha Shakyamuni turned 3 times the Wheel of the Dharma? ... the first time he mainly taught the 4 Noble Truths. That's what Sravakas (Theravadin, ...) think he taught only. The second turn he taught the prajnaparamita, teachings about emptiness, mainly. The third time he taught Buddha nature, Tathagatagarbha. All others vehicles (yanas) accept the 3 Turns of the Wheel of the Dharma.
Vajras, Bells, Inner Offerings and so on in Tibetan tradition are symbols, and used as skilful means ... and about Bon, some considere that Bon tooks many practice from the Tibetan tradition. This is subject to discussion.
Sönam
Vajras, Bells, Inner Offerings and so on in Tibetan tradition are symbols, and used as skilful means ... and about Bon, some considere that Bon tooks many practice from the Tibetan tradition. This is subject to discussion.
Sönam
By understanding everything you perceive from the perspective of the view, you are freed from the constraints of philosophical beliefs.
By understanding that any and all mental activity is meditation, you are freed from arbitrary divisions between formal sessions and postmeditation activity.
- Longchen Rabjam -
By understanding that any and all mental activity is meditation, you are freed from arbitrary divisions between formal sessions and postmeditation activity.
- Longchen Rabjam -
- conebeckham
- Posts: 5715
- Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 11:49 pm
- Location: Bay Area, CA, USA
Re: More Bon than Buddha?
No, it's mainly Indian, though certainly elements of native Tibetan practice were transformed and "incorporated" in Tibetan practice.beautiful breath wrote:The Tibetan traditions seem a million miles away from the Theravadins who I understand are considered to be the closest to what the Buddha actually taught himself prior to any major interpretations. There were no Vajras, Bells, Inner Offerings....etc... in the Discourses
Is the Tibetan tradition more Bon than Buddha?
Thanks,
BB...
You might, instead, ask whether Vajrayana is more Hindu than Buddhist...
དམ་པའི་དོན་ནི་ཤེས་རབ་ཆེ་བ་དང་།
རྟོག་གེའི་ཡུལ་མིན་བླ་མའི་བྱིན་རླབས་དང་།
སྐལ་ལྡན་ལས་འཕྲོ་ཅན་གྱིས་རྟོགས་པ་སྟེ།
དེ་ནི་ཤེས་རབ་ལ་ནི་ལོ་རྟོག་སེལ།།
"Absolute Truth is not an object of analytical discourse or great discriminating wisdom,
It is realized through the blessing grace of the Guru and fortunate Karmic potential.
Like this, mistaken ideas of discriminating wisdom are clarified."
- (Kyabje Bokar Rinpoche, from his summary of "The Ocean of Definitive Meaning")
རྟོག་གེའི་ཡུལ་མིན་བླ་མའི་བྱིན་རླབས་དང་།
སྐལ་ལྡན་ལས་འཕྲོ་ཅན་གྱིས་རྟོགས་པ་སྟེ།
དེ་ནི་ཤེས་རབ་ལ་ནི་ལོ་རྟོག་སེལ།།
"Absolute Truth is not an object of analytical discourse or great discriminating wisdom,
It is realized through the blessing grace of the Guru and fortunate Karmic potential.
Like this, mistaken ideas of discriminating wisdom are clarified."
- (Kyabje Bokar Rinpoche, from his summary of "The Ocean of Definitive Meaning")
Re: More Bon than Buddha?
Now there is a question worth asking!conebeckham wrote:You might, instead, ask whether Vajrayana is more Hindu than Buddhist...
"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: More Bon than Buddha?
The Buddha doesn't talk about incense or mediation mats in the Pali canon either, why talk about the tools?beautiful breath wrote:The Tibetan traditions seem a million miles away from the Theravadins who I understand are considered to be the closest to what the Buddha actually taught himself prior to any major interpretations. There were no Vajras, Bells, Inner Offerings....etc... in the Discourses
Is the Tibetan tradition more Bon than Buddha?
Thanks,
BB...
Also Theravada and Mahayana arose around the same time. So naturally their canon was selected to promote a certain point of view.
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
-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
- beautiful breath
- Posts: 85
- Joined: Fri May 06, 2011 11:00 am
Re: More Bon than Buddha?
Excellent point!The Buddha doesn't talk about incense or mediation mats in the Pali canon either, why talk about the tools
- beautiful breath
- Posts: 85
- Joined: Fri May 06, 2011 11:00 am
Re: More Bon than Buddha?
gregkavarnos wrote:Now there is a question worth asking!conebeckham wrote:You might, instead, ask whether Vajrayana is more Hindu than Buddhist...
Oddly enough, I recall noticing the glaring similarities in Kali and Vajrayogini when first coming across Vajrayana.
- Johnny Dangerous
- Global Moderator
- Posts: 17100
- Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 10:58 pm
- Location: Olympia WA
- Contact:
Re: More Bon than Buddha?
There's a kind of implied fundamentalism in saying "well, the Buddha never did this so"...I personally do not believe there is one right interpretation of Buddhism, but there are certainly those who can argue the case for their relevancy better than others, trouble is, when that argument is something like "this is the original teaching", that is generally a poor, and meaningless argument of and within itself.
While it's true that at first glance Vajrayana seems quite far from the Pali Canon, I think that if one starts with the Pali stuff and moves forward in history, there is actually a great deal of consistency, as much as one can hope for consistency from anything.
I wonder why people always single out Vajrayana for this complaint, when many of these supposedly "non-Buddhist" things are found throughout all of Mahayana.
While it's true that at first glance Vajrayana seems quite far from the Pali Canon, I think that if one starts with the Pali stuff and moves forward in history, there is actually a great deal of consistency, as much as one can hope for consistency from anything.
I wonder why people always single out Vajrayana for this complaint, when many of these supposedly "non-Buddhist" things are found throughout all of Mahayana.
Meditate upon Bodhicitta when afflicted by disease
Meditate upon Bodhicitta when sad
Meditate upon Bodhicitta when suffering occurs
Meditate upon Bodhicitta when you are scared
-Khunu Lama
Meditate upon Bodhicitta when sad
Meditate upon Bodhicitta when suffering occurs
Meditate upon Bodhicitta when you are scared
-Khunu Lama
- Dorje Shedrub
- Posts: 438
- Joined: Tue Apr 07, 2009 11:23 pm
- Location: Indiana, USA
Re: More Bon than Buddha?
Actually, He did speak of incense. Just one example:Konchog1 wrote:The Buddha doesn't talk about incense or mediation mats in the Pali canon either, why talk about the tools?
Also Theravada and Mahayana arose around the same time. So naturally their canon was selected to promote a certain point of view.
"And even, Ananda, as with the body of a universal monarch, so should it be done with the body of the Tathagata; and at a crossroads also a stupa should be raised for the Tathagata. And whosoever shall bring to that place garlands or incense or sandalpaste, or pay reverence, and whose mind becomes calm there — it will be to his well being and happiness for a long time." (Maha-parinibbana Sutta: Last Days of the Buddha ch. 5 vs. 26)
Homage to the Precious Dzogchen Master
Chögyal Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche
Chögyal Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche
Re: More Bon than Buddha?
That is what some of them think, but the Buddha didn't create the Theravada tradition. The Theravada is a buddhist branch based on a group of 'elders' that established their point of view relative to Buddhist scriptures.beautiful breath wrote:The Tibetan traditions seem a million miles away from the Theravadins who I understand are considered to be the closest to what the Buddha actually taught himself prior to any major interpretations.
Tibetan Buddhism is still Buddhism and with this the Theravada should agree, at least if they respect this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_Poi ... 1y%C4%81na
Re: More Bon than Buddha?
Oh, definitely.Johnny Dangerous wrote:There's a kind of implied fundamentalism in saying "well, the Buddha never did this so"...I personally do not believe there is one right interpretation of Buddhism, but there are certainly those who can argue the case for their relevancy better than others, trouble is, when that argument is something like "this is the original teaching", that is generally a poor, and meaningless argument of and within itself.
Re: More Bon than Buddha?
I read in, "Foundations of Tibetan Mysticism" by Lama Anagarika Govinda, that Buddhist Tantras came first and that the Hindus were heavily influenced from them.conebeckham wrote:No, it's mainly Indian, though certainly elements of native Tibetan practice were transformed and "incorporated" in Tibetan practice.beautiful breath wrote:The Tibetan traditions seem a million miles away from the Theravadins who I understand are considered to be the closest to what the Buddha actually taught himself prior to any major interpretations. There were no Vajras, Bells, Inner Offerings....etc... in the Discourses
Is the Tibetan tradition more Bon than Buddha?
Thanks,
BB...
You might, instead, ask whether Vajrayana is more Hindu than Buddhist...
To become a rain man one must master the ten virtues and sciences.
Re: More Bon than Buddha?
Is Theravada Buddhism more Hindu than Buddha(sic)?
"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
- beautiful breath
- Posts: 85
- Joined: Fri May 06, 2011 11:00 am
Re: More Bon than Buddha?
gregkavarnos wrote:Hanuman Yant blessed by the Theravada monk LP Sin of the Thai monastary Wat Laharnyai.
Is Theravada Buddhism more Hindu than Buddha(sic)?
Oooer! Odd how preconceptions and generic ideas can be so wrong!
I have always been content with how 'Tibetan' Buddhism has been presented to me, but equally always looked upon it as a divergence from the roots of Buddhist thought. Seems I may have been wrong after all. So the 'theravadins' don't actually have any real evidence to lay claim to being the 'purest' interpretation of the Dharma?
Maybe a dip into Buddhist academia might help me understand more...
- Thomas Amundsen
- Posts: 2034
- Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2011 2:50 am
- Location: Helena, MT
- Contact:
Re: More Bon than Buddha?
Correct. This point has been discussed a lot on here and other forums. I'm sure you can find some really long debates about this using the search function.beautiful breath wrote:So the 'theravadins' don't actually have any real evidence to lay claim to being the 'purest' interpretation of the Dharma?