Dalai Lama states -
"The continuum of an impure substratum will later cease, not existing in
Buddhahood, whereas a pure substratum's continuum of similar type will exist
right through Buddhahood."
Would any of you actually envisage yourself speaking or writing this way?
Even in a philosophically oriented discussion? This type of Gelugpa-speak is a
mode of discourse so divorced from human experience that it has ossified into a
ideologically fixated form of thinking.
Tsongkhapa, the founder of the Dalai Lama's Gelugpa sect was quite strident
in his claim that no one can be enlightened unless they hold the position that
reality (emptiness) is a "non-affirming negation" - in other words a complete
nullity or absence. So how do we hold such a point of view? By intellectually
coming to that conclusion and then maintaining that very conclusion as an idea.
Think about that for a moment. You can't be enlightened without holding a
"thought".
For the Dalai Lama it is this thought - "Any thing that is lacks inherent
existence".
For Christians it is the thought - "Jesus is my savior".
Furthermore:
For Buddhists there is no beginning but there is an end.
For Christians there is a beginning but no end.
Amazing what antinomies our minds will construe to maintain a sense of
meaning.
kenotic bill
quantum packet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
What he's saying is 180 degrees opposite to the nihilistic teachings
of Neo-Advaita.
Recent Activity
1
New Members
2
New Photos
Visit Your Group
Search Ads
Get new customers.
List your web site
in Yahoo! Search.
Yahoo! Groups HD
The official Samsung
Y! Group for HDTVs
and devices.
Yahoo! Groups
Be a Better Planet
Share with others
Help the Planet.
.
TD { font-family: verdana, helvetica, arial; font-size: 12px;
color: #333333; }
---------------------------------
Boardwalk for $500? In 2007? Ha!
Play Monopoly Here and Now (it's updated for today's economy) at Yahoo! Games.
