How can you have wrong thoughts based on right view? It is not possible.
Perhaps you should not be so judgmental?
How can you have wrong thoughts based on right view? It is not possible.
So each of these phenomena has an essential nature? Have you seen it? Care to describe it's shape, colour, sound, texture, smell, etc...
Yes. When one is engaged on the path of renunciation, this is the case. But you asked me to define the tantric path.Bundokji wrote: ↑Sat Jun 09, 2018 12:48 pmFrom my limited understanding of the Buddha's teachings, the training is generally conservative in the sense that it encourages the practitioner of seeing danger is tiniest faults, it acknowledges that we have tendencies and encourage us to go against the grain, it warns us from thinking "it will not happen to me" ...etc
According to the path of renunciation. But you asked me to define the tantric path.The way you introduced the lack of essential nature makes your statement (a phenomena) lacking essential nature hence we are back to square one: There are good Kamma and bad Kamma.
According to the path of renunciation, yes. But not according to the Bodhisattva path. On the Bodhisattva path one does not consider the kamma one will accrue but puts the salving the suffering of all sentient beings first.Also what you described as selfless attitude is open to many interpretation. For example, you might encounter a human being or an animal suffering, and you decide to end their lives out of compassion or selflessness. However, this would be against the first precept.
The rules are not so cut-and -dry. Consider the precept against intoxicants, for example: some include tobacco, others don't.Following the precepts is more selfless in my opinion as you adhere to rules or a code of conduct that is external to you. It also leaves less room for "personal opinion" because a rule is a rule.
This is very true, that is why on the Bodhisattva path the emphasis is on developing wisdom and compassion....and certain actions even if we call them exceptions, can easily turn into a habits (Kamma/slippery slope)
I am glad that works for you. Generally, it works for me as well. Like I said: The tantric practitioner is bound by all three sets of vows.I can relate to your description of "ignorant fools" because for a long time i tried to justify my indulgence in sensuality by using the three marks of existence and this led me no where except to more entanglement. At least now when/if i break the precepts i don't try to justify my actions but acknowledge my foolishness. The Buddha described the mind as subtle and always getting what it wants.
Realisation and enlightenment is only dangerous to ignorance.Personally, knowing the tendencies of my mind and the vast majority of human beings, i would be careful not to recommend or suggest dangerous practices as a part of Buddhism.
My statement referred to simple logic. Your answer reiterated that this is how tantric path is defined without solving the logical dilemma that i raised.Grigoris wrote: ↑Sat Jun 09, 2018 6:02 pmAccording to the path of renunciation. But you asked me to define the tantric path.The way you introduced the lack of essential nature makes your statement (a phenomena) lacking essential nature hence we are back to square one: There are good Kamma and bad Kamma.
Sorry. I am not judgemental but I am trying to help the people going down the wrong path.Perhaps you should not be so judgmental?
I see your point now.Bundokji wrote: ↑Sat Jun 09, 2018 8:32 pmMy statement referred to simple logic. Your answer reiterated that this is how tantric path is defined without solving the logical dilemma that i raised.Grigoris wrote: ↑Sat Jun 09, 2018 6:02 pmAccording to the path of renunciation. But you asked me to define the tantric path.The way you introduced the lack of essential nature makes your statement (a phenomena) lacking essential nature hence we are back to square one: There are good Kamma and bad Kamma.
Of course, i don't expect you to defend trantra, but as you understand it better than me, would you explain the above contradiction?
Yes you are.
Ok.Yes you are.
You've provided nothing that suggests it is otherwise.
Now, now... isn't that a slightly picky way to respond to another's well wishes?
Are you here to have an intelligent discussion or are you here merely to judge and mock?
Thanks Grigoris for the explanation.Grigoris wrote: ↑Sun Jun 10, 2018 5:40 am The explanation is twofold:
1. The logic is that ALL phenomena are ultimately empty.
This includes kamma.
Kamma, as phenomena, have no essential properties. If I asked you to identify the good and bad, in good and bad kamma, would you be able to find and show them to me?
2. In the Mahayana (common and uncommon) the key factor that will determine the outcome of an action (kamma) is motivation. That means that an action based on the correct motivation (selfless, motivated by compassion and wisdom) will not lead to suffering.
Jigten Drukpa of the Drukpa Kagyu lineage has a slightly different view: he believes that specific kamma produce specific outcomes (as per the Pali Canon) but that the vipaka and phala is modified by motivation to the point where the outcome may be insignificant.
In Tantra we believe that the accumulation of merit through wholesome actions is completely necessary, as it provides one with the causes and conditions to truly practice Tantra. Especially in the case of individuals who's mind is not ready for non-dual view 24/7, because if one is not in non-dual view, then the action will DEFINITELY accrue negative outcomes.
The only way to solve this contradiction is to see the three marks of existence as "descriptive" not "prescriptive". What is "prescriptive" is the training in morality.So ESSENTIALLY there is no difference between:
desire/compassion
hatred/love
greed/generosity
jealousy/sympathetic joy
ignorance/wisdom
It is not the subject of the discussion. I have veered far enough off-topic by giving explanations of what Tantra is. I did not start this thread either, I just entered it (with good will) to provide some clarification. I am not interested in Tantra vs Theravada arguments, as I am not a sectarian. I fully recognise the place of renunciation in liberation. Nobody here is compelled to agree with, or follow, Tantra but there is no reason to act like asses either. People should (as the Pali Canon teaches) check their aversion/hatred. If people want to preach the supremacy of their path, then their actions should be in accord with it. Otherwise we are just being hypocrites (and there is too much of that going around without us having to add to it).retrofuturist wrote: ↑Sun Jun 10, 2018 6:33 amYou've provided nothing that suggests it is otherwise.
Is it really necessary to encourage sectarianism? Do you consider the sectarian attitude a positive attitude? To me it seems that sectarianism is based on the poisons of attachement (to our view) and aversion (to the other view) based mainly on ignorance (of both views). Hardly Right Action...Now, now... isn't that a slightly picky way to respond to another's well wishes?
That's nice. Good also of you to admit that Tantra is not Theravada.
Once more, I agree with you...
Off-topic meta-discussion has been ignored.Terms of Service wrote:3. Action
The following actions are not permitted at Dhamma Wheel:
i. Proselytizing or evangelizing other spiritual paths
It is not really blurred. The Bodhisattva Path takes countless kalpa to complete, exactly because the Bodhisattva (on their path to assuage the suffering of sentient beings) will engage in activities that may lead to them accruing the causes of rebirth.Bundokji wrote: ↑Sun Jun 10, 2018 7:15 amThe second point is also similar to Theravada as i understand it, but again, Theravada do not draw the same conclusions. In Theravada, when i break a precept regardless of my intention, the precept is broken and i bear the fruit of my own Kamma (which could be a good Kamma, but this is a different matter altogether). This point of emphasis in Theravada of a great importance in my opinion as it wisely distinct between the actions of the individual and the doctrine. This distinction is somehow blurred in Tantra if i understand your description of it correctly.
Which is why the cultivation of wisdom and compassion are so important.The distinctions made in Theravada in the above two points is what keeps a religion/doctrine safe from the whims of individuals...
I don't think that is the point of the other members, I think their point is that only Theravada is Buddhism.which brings us back to the original point of discussion between you and other members on this thread: can Tantra be considered Buddhism? I personally fail to see how it could be.
I am neither proselytising nor evangelising, I am discussing.Terms of Service wrote:3. Action
The following actions are not permitted at Dhamma Wheel:
i. Proselytizing or evangelizing other spiritual paths