Guru Rinpoche As...

Forum for discussion of Tibetan Buddhism. Questions specific to one school are best posted in the appropriate sub-forum.
Post Reply
michaelb
Posts: 506
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2011 3:04 pm

Re: Guru Rinpoche As...

Post by michaelb » Sun Oct 21, 2018 12:24 pm

Mantrik wrote:
Sun Oct 21, 2018 10:06 am
Many of us can see a light. Different candles lit at different times in different places by different people.
You seem somehow desperate to conflate and meld them as if it were in some way possible or desirable.

Bon people in this discussion seem desperate to play along, as if you are agreeing with them that there is only one candle to see, and you seem to be asking others to snuff theirs out and admire the Bonpo one.

It's all a very odd conversation and utterly meaningless in the context of termas and dreams. If you don't regard ChNN as a valid source of Adzom Drugpa's teachings then you should also disregard all the other terma sources living today who explain anything in any way, including the Dudjom ones.

You can use one candle to light another, but if you keep prodding at the flame to ensure the candle and wick meet your expectations ............ you end up in the dark.
Steady on, Dave. I'm not saying I don't regard ChNN as a valid source. I already said that I consider him to be a valid source and it is valid and appropriate for realised lamas to introduce novel innovations to lineages. I have never made the point that the tiger is not Ati Muwer, I would simply like more information about it, but there really doesn't seem to be any, only the repetition of the claim without anything at all to add. If this is an innovation from ChNN, and it seems it is, either from dream (as Malcolm suggested) or vision, or historical textual analysis, that's totally fine. I've no problem at all with it. But, it would be good to know.

My only points on this thread strike me as rather uncontentious and I'm surprised (well not really that surprised as I know how dharmawheel works) by the reception they have received. All I was saying was:
Most terma traditions say that the tigress is female and one of the transformed consorts of Guru Rinpoche (usually Tashi Chidren as she has a Bhutan connection, but sometimes Yeshe Tsogyal or Shakyadevi). Visualising a fully enlightened dakini has, to my mind, a different set of meanings to visualising a subjugated Bon god.

Tersar lamas don't teach that Drolo is "the essence of Vajrakilaya", and saying that Drolo practitioners should get dzogchen teachings from Namchak Putri doesn't mean that Drolo is the essence of anything.

Drolo Doesn't mean anything about guts or bellies.
and
All the Drolo sadhanas and commentaries I've seen never mention "crazy wisdom", sorry, Crazywisdom but they don't. I think it's something that Chogyam Thrungpa came up with. (of course, he's a terton, so it's valid as a teaching but it is uncommon and didn't exist before him.)

I'd be really happy for anyone to correct me with a textual reference - especially more info on Ati Muwer.

I will bail out now. Unless anyone does have more information beyond what has already been shared.

PS. my comment about seeing the light was a joke. I assumed he was joking...

Miroku
Posts: 902
Joined: Fri Jul 24, 2015 11:18 am

Re: Guru Rinpoche As...

Post by Miroku » Sun Oct 21, 2018 12:46 pm

michaelb wrote:
Sun Oct 21, 2018 12:24 pm
PS. my comment about seeing the light was a joke. I assumed he was joking...
I am afraid it wasn't meant ... lightly *ba dum tss *. Thank you, I was waiting for that possibility.
A boat delivers you to the other riverbank.
A needle stitches up your clothes.
A horse takes you where you want to go.
Bodhicitta will bring you to Buddhahood.

~ Khunu Lama Rinpoche

User avatar
Mantrik
Posts: 1746
Joined: Sun Apr 09, 2017 8:55 pm
Contact:

Re: Guru Rinpoche As...

Post by Mantrik » Sun Oct 21, 2018 12:58 pm

michaelb wrote:
Sun Oct 21, 2018 12:24 pm


I'd be really happy for anyone to correct me with a textual reference - especially more info on Ati Muwer.

I will bail out now. Unless anyone does have more information beyond what has already been shared.

PS. my comment about seeing the light was a joke. I assumed he was joking...
When we are considering Vajrayana and a terton, who is also seen as Adzom Drugpa, explains a visualisation from that source, it is perhaps unwise to say his teachings should be treated with care and that such things are not a matter of trust........and instead place trust in a 'textual source' rather than the Guru. It is also odd to assume it is ChNN's innovation rather than transmitted as part of oral tradition to him.

Logically, if he is your Guru then without trust you have nothing, and if he is not, even if you are armed with a truckload of texts, you have nothing of substance as a basis for practice.

Termas are unlikely to be less corrupted with age and neither are the commentaries, and there is an excellent argument for saying that the more recent a teaching is received, the more reliable it is likely to be.

If you do not believe there is a pin, even if you find a written description of the angels dancing upon it, it is unlikely to convince you.
http://www.khyung.com

Om Thathpurushaya Vidhmahe
Suvarna Pakshaya Dheemahe
Thanno Garuda Prachodayath

Micchāmi Dukkaḍaṃ (मिच्छामि दुक्कडम्)

Simon E.
Posts: 5637
Joined: Tue May 15, 2012 11:09 am

Re: Guru Rinpoche As...

Post by Simon E. » Sun Oct 21, 2018 1:32 pm

CTR either originated the term 'crazy wisdom' or appropriated it from some other source and introduced it to a Buddhist context. At that time he hung out a lot with Richard Alpert aka Ram Dass. Possibly it was something that Alpert brought to the table that came from his guru Neem Karoli Baba...I am speculating. (incidentally, Neem Karoli was deemed by many of his contemporaries to be actually, technically, clinically, crazy. Possibly the result of dementia)

What is a fact is that CTR at that time flew many kites in the hope of drawing the lightning.

Not all of them were intended to be seen as viable cornerstones for practice, to mix metaphors.

And certainly, they were not intended to be blueprints for a 20/21 century lifestyle for those too feckless or unstable to live without drawing attention to themselves.

Anywhoo.. :focus:
Back to fishin' folks... :namaste:

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

Re: Guru Rinpoche As...

Post by michaelb » Sun Oct 21, 2018 1:37 pm

Mantrik wrote:
Sun Oct 21, 2018 12:58 pm
When we are considering Vajrayana and a terton, who is also seen as Adzom Drugpa, explains a visualisation from that source, it is perhaps unwise to say his teachings should be treated with care and that such things are not a matter of trust........and instead place trust in a 'textual source' rather than the Guru.

Logically, if he is your Guru then without trust you have nothing, and if he is not, even if you are armed with a truckload of texts, you have nothing of substance as a basis for practice.

Termas are unlikely to be less corrupted with age and neither are the commentaries, and there is an excellent argument for saying that the more recent a teaching is received, the more reliable it is likely to be.

If you do not believe there is a pin, even if you find a written description of the angels dancing upon it, it is unlikely to convince you.
I would just like to have had more information on this. At the moment it appears unclear. Before jumping to any conclusions - from full acceptance of the idea to a total rejection of it - it would be good to see more information. So far we know that ChNN said that the tiger was Ati Muwer, a powerful spirit who intended to harm Guru Padma but was subjugated by him, almost exactly mirroring the Pehar scorpion Guru Drakpo story. Here people have claimed that Dudjom Lingpa, Adzom Drukpa and other lamas agree that the tiger was Ati Muwer. Some kind of evidence for this would be useful from the point of view of historical and textual analysis.
Practically, sure, if you received the Drolo wang from ChNN and want to practice the sadhana, you follow what he said. But I'm more interested in the overall context and how these different lineages interrelate. I'm also keen that casual observers wandering through Dharmawheel don't stumble across an assertion that "the tiger is the Bon deity Ati Muwer" and assume that this is a more generally held view. It's not. It's very niche.
Anyway, enough from me.

Sherab Rigdrol
Posts: 195
Joined: Sat Mar 09, 2013 9:07 pm

Re: Guru Rinpoche As...

Post by Sherab Rigdrol » Sun Oct 21, 2018 1:54 pm

Simon E. wrote:
Sun Oct 21, 2018 1:32 pm
CTR either originated the term 'crazy wisdom' or appropriated it from some other source and introduced it to a Buddhist context. At that time he hung out a lot with Richard Alpert aka Ram Dass. Possibly it was something that Alpert brought to the table that came from his guru Neem Karoli Baba...I am speculating. (incidentally, Neem Karoli was deemed by many of his contemporaries to be actually, technically, clinically, crazy. Possibly the result of dementia)

What is a fact is that CTR at that time flew many kites in the hope of drawing the lightning.

Not all of them were intended to be seen as viable cornerstones for practice, to mix metaphors.

And certainly, they were not intended to be blueprints for a 20/21 century lifestyle for those too feckless or unstable to live without drawing attention to themselves.

Anywhoo.. :focus:
Kind of off topic but..... Neem Karoli Baba was a mahasiddha. This was confirmed by the 16th Karmapa when two devotees showed him NKB’s picture.

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 28717
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Guru Rinpoche As...

Post by Malcolm » Sun Oct 21, 2018 2:19 pm

Tersar lamas don't teach that Drolo is "the essence of Vajrakilaya".
Obviously, there are Tersar Lamas that do, which I have already shown.
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

Crazywisdom
Posts: 1752
Joined: Fri May 23, 2014 5:48 pm

Re: Guru Rinpoche As...

Post by Crazywisdom » Sun Oct 21, 2018 2:58 pm

michaelb wrote:
Sun Oct 21, 2018 12:24 pm
Mantrik wrote:
Sun Oct 21, 2018 10:06 am
Many of us can see a light. Different candles lit at different times in different places by different people.
You seem somehow desperate to conflate and meld them as if it were in some way possible or desirable.

Bon people in this discussion seem desperate to play along, as if you are agreeing with them that there is only one candle to see, and you seem to be asking others to snuff theirs out and admire the Bonpo one.

It's all a very odd conversation and utterly meaningless in the context of termas and dreams. If you don't regard ChNN as a valid source of Adzom Drugpa's teachings then you should also disregard all the other terma sources living today who explain anything in any way, including the Dudjom ones.

You can use one candle to light another, but if you keep prodding at the flame to ensure the candle and wick meet your expectations ............ you end up in the dark.
Steady on, Dave. I'm not saying I don't regard ChNN as a valid source. I already said that I consider him to be a valid source and it is valid and appropriate for realised lamas to introduce novel innovations to lineages. I have never made the point that the tiger is not Ati Muwer, I would simply like more information about it, but there really doesn't seem to be any, only the repetition of the claim without anything at all to add. If this is an innovation from ChNN, and it seems it is, either from dream (as Malcolm suggested) or vision, or historical textual analysis, that's totally fine. I've no problem at all with it. But, it would be good to know.

My only points on this thread strike me as rather uncontentious and I'm surprised (well not really that surprised as I know how dharmawheel works) by the reception they have received. All I was saying was:
Most terma traditions say that the tigress is female and one of the transformed consorts of Guru Rinpoche (usually Tashi Chidren as she has a Bhutan connection, but sometimes Yeshe Tsogyal or Shakyadevi). Visualising a fully enlightened dakini has, to my mind, a different set of meanings to visualising a subjugated Bon god.

Tersar lamas don't teach that Drolo is "the essence of Vajrakilaya", and saying that Drolo practitioners should get dzogchen teachings from Namchak Putri doesn't mean that Drolo is the essence of anything.

Drolo Doesn't mean anything about guts or bellies.
and
All the Drolo sadhanas and commentaries I've seen never mention "crazy wisdom", sorry, Crazywisdom but they don't. I think it's something that Chogyam Thrungpa came up with. (of course, he's a terton, so it's valid as a teaching but it is uncommon and didn't exist before him.)

I'd be really happy for anyone to correct me with a textual reference - especially more info on Ati Muwer.

I will bail out now. Unless anyone does have more information beyond what has already been shared.

PS. my comment about seeing the light was a joke. I assumed he was joking...
Who said anything about crazy wisdom? Drolod is taught as super wrathful and the tiger as being in first heat or pregnant, so insanely wrathful, hence crazy wisdom. You can see videos of a leopard going ballistic in an Indian village to get the energy being conveyed. Next level wrathfulness. I was not taught to take Dzogchen teachings from elsewhere when I got the Dudjom Drolod. I was taught the method is extremely swift path to Buddhahood. So, that’s your bad. It is an essence nondual method to the fruit. It was meant to be a very secret guru deity yoga really kept private by the most accomplished masters.

How come no one seems to get that everything is Dzogchen? Let alone all the nine yanas? The bija is the simplest expression. Hello? Do you need to read 1000 pages about it?

Or you’re thinking bindu and togal is Dzogchen and the rest is playtime in kindergarten? The essence is good, and it’s all good.

I will visualize all his consorts invaded Ati Muwer as a tiger and transformed it into a female tiger in heat. Why not? If I die it’s a lie.
I got my Chili Chilaya.

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 28717
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Guru Rinpoche As...

Post by Malcolm » Sun Oct 21, 2018 6:40 pm

michaelb wrote:
Sun Oct 21, 2018 12:24 pm
Most terma traditions say that the tigress is female and one of the transformed consorts of Guru Rinpoche (usually Tashi Chidren as she has a Bhutan connection...
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.
but sometimes Yeshe Tsogyal or Shakyadevi). Visualising a fully enlightened dakini has, to my mind, a different set of meanings to visualising a subjugated Bon god.

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.
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
Malcolm
Posts: 28717
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Guru Rinpoche As...

Post by Malcolm » Sun Oct 21, 2018 10:06 pm

So, we find this in the Taksham Namthar of Tsogyal:

Riding the upon the tigress, into which the girl, Khyidren had been transformed, the Guru in union with Yeshe Tsogyal remained absorbed in the samadhi of Vajrakila...
-- Lady of the Lotus Born, pg. 96

This is without doubt the source of the identifications with one of Guru Rinpoche's consorts. It's fairly late, however. Taksham Nuden Dorje was active in the latter half of the 17th century. I am failing to find any reference to this idea earlier than this one.
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

pemachophel
Posts: 1256
Joined: Sat Dec 25, 2010 9:19 pm
Location: Lafayette, CO

Re: Guru Rinpoche As...

Post by pemachophel » Sun Oct 21, 2018 11:27 pm

IME, there are different ascriptions given to the tigress in different traditions. So best not to be too doctrinaire.
Pema Chophel པདྨ་ཆོས་འཕེལ

Crazywisdom
Posts: 1752
Joined: Fri May 23, 2014 5:48 pm

Re: Guru Rinpoche As...

Post by Crazywisdom » Sun Oct 21, 2018 11:34 pm

I have $1,000,000 for the one brings me the claw of the tigress.
I got my Chili Chilaya.

User avatar
Sennin
Posts: 741
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2012 1:19 am

Re: Guru Rinpoche As...

Post by Sennin » Mon Oct 22, 2018 2:49 am

:popcorn:
Namo Guru Bhyaḥ

User avatar
kalden yungdrung
Posts: 3869
Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2010 10:40 pm

Re: Guru Rinpoche As...

Post by kalden yungdrung » Mon Oct 22, 2018 9:45 am

Tashi delek,


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 / partial true etc., nevertheless they originate / stem from great Vajrayana Masters etc. ?
- Or must we make / add here additional interpretations ?

http://www.rigpawiki.org/index.php?title=Tashi_Khyidren
http://theyoginiproject.org/wisdom-daki ... i-khyidren
The best meditation is no meditation

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

Re: Guru Rinpoche As...

Post by michaelb » Mon Oct 22, 2018 10:12 am

Malcolm wrote:
Sun Oct 21, 2018 6:40 pm
michaelb wrote:
Sun Oct 21, 2018 12:24 pm
Most terma traditions say that the tigress is female and one of the transformed consorts of Guru Rinpoche (usually Tashi Chidren as she has a Bhutan connection...
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.
but sometimes Yeshe Tsogyal or Shakyadevi). Visualising a fully enlightened dakini has, to my mind, a different set of meanings to visualising a subjugated Bon god.
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.
i was planning to leave this. Enough has been said and no one can provide any futher information on the Ati Muwer story.
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.
Really, unless anyone can come up with more info on the Ati Muwer story, this discussion has run its course. As i said, I'm perfectly happy with a multiplicity of narratives. And i have no doubt in ChNN's realisation or ability to introduce valid innovations to the lineage.

User avatar
SonamTashi
Posts: 130
Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2017 7:30 pm

Re: Guru Rinpoche As...

Post by SonamTashi » Mon Oct 22, 2018 10:26 am

kalden yungdrung wrote:
Mon Oct 22, 2018 9:45 am
Tashi delek,


Indeed the story of one of the 5 consorts of Guru Rinpoche gives an explanation about the source of the tigress.
This is then probably the answer that the tigress does not represent Ati Muwer, like earlier explained here aboard.

- Then, can we conclude that the other stories are not true, nevertheless they originate / stem from great Vajrayana Masters etc. ?

http://www.rigpawiki.org/index.php?title=Tashi_Khyidren
http://theyoginiproject.org/wisdom-daki ... i-khyidren
The fact that some traditions teach that the tigress is Tashi Khyidren doesn't mean that other traditions don't teach that the tigress is Ati Muwer, or that other stories are untrue. As many people have already said in this thread:
pemachophel wrote:
Sun Oct 21, 2018 11:27 pm
IME, there are different ascriptions given to the tigress in different traditions. So best not to be too doctrinaire.
...

Making everything fit together is a waste of time, bc it doesn’t.
...

within Tibetan Buddhist traditions - including Bön - there are many, many contradictory stories, events, details, and so on.

There are at times different takes on a singular thing. And it's best to recognize this and just leave it be, instead of getting caught up in it.
...
When it comes to these conflicts, it is better that people part ways.
...
In Bön, Ati Muwer never manifested as a tigress. That is fine. Outside of Bön, according to one version of this story in relation to Dorje Drollo, Ati Muwer did. You don't need to accept this, just recognize that this is one of the ways the tigress is presented in its connection to Dorje Drollo, and leave it at that. Your presentation of Ati Muwer according to Bön is just fine. That is how it is presented there. I have no problem with that.

What would be a problem is for you to conclude "The one(s) who proclaimed that this would be the tigress of Guru Rinpoche was wrong." because this assumes that you are somehow speaking from the point of view of Vajrayana, in particular traditions related to Dorje Drollo (which you are not), and it also makes it seem as if this is to be dismissed as factually incorrect. But when we're dealing with terma, things can become very complicated, because something described can and usually are well above and beyond the limitations of dualistic vision, which means if one applies dualistic vision to a teaching that has its origin from the pure vision of a realized master, then one usually don't get very far, because one will get tangled up in a lot of mental constructions. And that never was the point of terma in the first place.

So, take it or leave it.
...
if your Guru explains an associated thangka to you as having Ati Muwer as the tigress in her first heat, then surely it is so, for the practice he has given you.

If a different Guru explains it differently for a different terma I don't find it problematic.
...
Norwegian wrote:
Sat Oct 20, 2018 2:16 pm
kalden yungdrung wrote:
Sat Oct 20, 2018 11:59 am
Like stated earlier this Bön Dharma Protector was never outside the Bön Tree of Refuge / subdued / converted etc.
The one(s) who proclaimed that this would be the tigress of Guru Rinpoche was wrong.
But it's really quite irrelevant what Bön thinks. What matters here is what is presented in the tradition of such and such Dorje Drollo cycle as found in Vajrayana.

Really, to say that this is "wrong" is completely improper, because it's not wrong. It's correct. From the point of view of the Dorje Drollo tradition that presents this as how the story is.

Bön might not like that, but that's just how it is. So yes, the tigress that Dorje Drollo stands upon is Ati Muwer. Or Tashi Kyidren. Or Yeshe Tsogyal. Etc. It depends on the traditions/cycles.
...
Mantrik wrote:
Sat Oct 20, 2018 8:41 am
As a simple soul if I am using a sadhana I use the descriptions associated with it as transmitted by the Guru. That is always the 'right' description.

Different Drolo sadhanas from different termas, different visualisations............can't see a problem.
...
Recall in many instances there are presentations of a single topic from the aspect of outer, inner, secret, innermost secret, etc, or from other contexts. And sometimes these things vary (just look at the differences of Hinayana, Mahayana, and Vajrayana). It is for that reason I am saying that to approach these things from the viewpoint of mere dualistic vision can produce some very problematic situations, if one allows it to go too far.
...
It is not weird at all. It just does not correspond to other traditions you heard.
...
Like I said at the end of my last post, there's often different statements about the same thing...Seems like there are different versions of the explanation of Dorje Drolo's tigress mount.
...
In Vajrayana there are very often two or more different stories for the same thing. Either slight variances or rather big ones, and the different sources are all just as trustworthy. That should tell you something about the limitations of dualistic vision in itself.
All of these people are saying the same thing: different traditions and gurus have different explanations and different stories for the same thing -- and that's fine. The only reason you're having trouble with it is because you're being obstinately sectarian. Bon has different stories and explanations. That's fine. That works for you. It only becomes a problem when you start claiming that others are wrong because their tradition has a different explanation.
:bow: :buddha1: :bow: :anjali: :meditate:

User avatar
Mantrik
Posts: 1746
Joined: Sun Apr 09, 2017 8:55 pm
Contact:

Re: Guru Rinpoche As...

Post by Mantrik » Mon Oct 22, 2018 10:27 am

michaelb wrote:
Mon Oct 22, 2018 10:12 am
And i have no doubt in ChNN's realisation or ability to introduce valid innovations to the lineage.
The problem is that every time you say you accept that ChNN's description is valid for the terma he is transmitting, you then qualify it with a remark about taking care about it or calling it an 'innovation' - there is simply no evidence that his description was not the one transmitted to him and to his teachers and so on down the lineage from Adzom Drugpa, yet you call his teachings into question in this way.

Yet seemingly you have equally no scriptural basis for the other description relating to riding a consort.
Why is this, then, not also questionable and unreliable or innovative (a vague way of saying 'made up')?
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 10:36 am

Mantrik wrote:
Mon Oct 22, 2018 10:27 am
Yet seemingly you have equally no scriptural basis for the other description relating to riding a consort.
Why is this, then, not also questionable and unreliable or innovative (a vague way of saying 'made up')?
Adzom Drukpa calls the tigress the consort. I'm really confused as to what you are saying. Malcolm has already said that It is not known how ChNN came to the view that the tigress was Ati Muwer. Maybe it was in a dream, as Malcolm suggested, or a vision. 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'm aware this is a sensitive issue for some people, and i apologise if i have upset anyone. I like looking at ideas, stories, histories and seeing where they came from, if possible. I did not intend to be insensitive. I'm sorry.

Just to add, for those unfamiliar with the word "yum", consort is a pretty standard translation. It refers to the female counterpart of a male deity, the wisdom aspect, though both are seen as equal in their realisation.
http://rywiki.tsadra.org/index.php/yum

User avatar
kalden yungdrung
Posts: 3869
Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2010 10:40 pm

Re: Guru Rinpoche As...

Post by kalden yungdrung » Mon Oct 22, 2018 11:33 am

SonamTashi wrote:
Mon Oct 22, 2018 10:26 am


All of these people are saying the same thing: different traditions and gurus have different explanations and different stories for the same thing -- and that's fine. The only reason you're having trouble with it is because you're being obstinately sectarian. Bon has different stories and explanations. That's fine. That works for you. It only becomes a problem when you start claiming that others are wrong because their tradition has a different explanation.

Like explained also by michaelb , there are no evidences to assume that Ati Muwer would function here as a subjugated God who is changed from male into a female Tigress.

That was the core of the discussion.
Re read the story please.

And because i feel myself not so comfortable with those explanations done in Vajrayana, with all those stories like here of defeated Bön Gods etc. i would be sectarian ? Sure i am not an easy to convince person regarding interpretations done by certain Vajrayana adherents , but that does not mean i am obstinate and sectarian etc.

If you would follow Namkhai Norbus explanations about Bön then you would understand that topic of discrimination and sectarianism better.

So it is fine that others have different explanations but they should be proved on realities.
It is not like that we can see the world like flat, square , round etc.
If we go over to proves / evidences, then the world is round, respecting that others can see it different.



Then as a last point regarding what Rinpochees tell and explain to us.
Mostly the Rinpochees are right with what they tell to us / explain.
But due to their bad English and wrong interpretations / understanding of the "translators" , the meaning of these / some explanations are somehow wrong or partly right.
The best meditation is no meditation

User avatar
SonamTashi
Posts: 130
Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2017 7:30 pm

Re: Guru Rinpoche As...

Post by SonamTashi » 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


All of these people are saying the same thing: different traditions and gurus have different explanations and different stories for the same thing -- and that's fine. The only reason you're having trouble with it is because you're being obstinately sectarian. Bon has different stories and explanations. That's fine. That works for you. It only becomes a problem when you start claiming that others are wrong because their tradition has a different explanation.

Like explained also by michaelb , there are no evidences to assume that Ati Muwer would function here as a subjugated God who is changed from male into a female Tigress.

That was the core of the discussion.
Re read the story please.

And because i feel myself not so comfortable with those explanations done in Vajrayana, with all those stories like here of defeated Bön Gods etc. i would be sectarian ? Sure i am not an easy to convince person regarding interpretations done by certain Vajrayana adherents , but that does not mean i am obstinate and sectarian etc.

If you would follow Namkhai Norbus explanations about Bön then you would understand that topic of discrimination and sectarianism better.

So it is fine that others have different explanations but they should be proved on realities.
It is not like that we can see the world like flat, square , round etc.
If we go over to proves / evidences, then the world is round, respecting that others can see it different.



Then as a last point regarding what Rinpochees tell and explain to us.
Mostly the Rinpochees are right with what they tell to us / explain.
But due to their bad English and wrong interpretations / understanding of the "translators" , the meaning of these / some explanations are somehow wrong or partly right.
I have read the discussion quite closely and don't need to read it again. Again, you seem to be missing the point. You don't have to accept CHNN's claim. If it conflicts with what you've been taught by your teachers (and clearly it does) then you can go ahead and personally reject it. But that doesn't mean you can definitively decide for everyone that it is wrong according to other Tibetan traditions. Even if it is not a commonly recognized formulation of the story, if some traditions teach it that way, that's enough for people in those traditions. This particular claim is clearly not made in the context of the Bon tradition. The claim made about Ati Muwer is clearly made in the context of Adzom Drugpa and CHNN, a terton who is seen as Adzom Drugpa. As such, what CHNN has said on the subject is authoritative evidence for people who have taken him as a guru. People who have not taken him as a guru can choose to accept it or not, it really doesn't matter. Whether CHNN's claim was made in the context of a text or a dream is irrelevant. For people who legitimately see him as Adzom Drugpa, then this is the same as Adzom Drugpa saying it himself. Therefore it is authoritative for CHNNs tradition and doesn't require any other evidence for his followers. You don't have to accept that, and you don't even have to like it. It is absolutely your prerogative to think whatever you like about it. It clearly isn't meant to be accepted by Bon practitioners. So yes, if you are saying that CHNN and other Vajrayana practitioners making this claim are wrong because it doesn't fit with your tradition, that is sectarian by definition.

Also, I don't buy that this interpretation from CHNN is a result of bad English, wrong interpretations or bad translators. This is Malcolm who is reporting this claim, and according to him, he questioned him in detail about it (it would be interesting to hear more about this though if he's willing to share). Based on Malcolm's qualifications and high standards when it comes to translating, I find it very unlikely that Malcolm simply didn't understand what CHNN was saying.

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.
:bow: :buddha1: :bow: :anjali: :meditate:

Post Reply

Return to “Tibetan Buddhism”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider], buddhagirl, namoh and 74 guests