Simple_Jack

Tsongkhapa's Lam Rim Chen Mo w/ audio and video commentaries

Recommended Posts

Now that I proved that "the traditional Geluk understanding" fully admits to "deviations in Tsongkhapa's thought", I don't want to derail your thread. Carry on.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's ok, bro, I won't ever mention Tsongkhapa on this board again. You don't like it, it's not allowed, it's not cool.

 

I allow it

 

 

P.S. LAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAW!!!!!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can totally expect this sectarian attitude from you, so it's not surprising to me

 

Why am I sectarian?

 

Geshe Thupten Jinpa, the Dalai Lama's translator, says "the traditional Geluk understanding" fully admits to "deviations in Tsongkhapa's thought":

 

"The traditional Geluk understanding of these deviations in Tsongkhapa's thought attributes the development of his distinct reading of Madhyamaka philosophy to a mystical communion he is reported to have had with the bodhisattva Manjusri........It is interesting that the tradition Tsongkhapa is claiming to honour is, in a strict sense, not the existing system in Tibet; rather, it appears to be in the tradition of Manjusri as revealed in a mystic vision!"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why am I sectarian?

 

Geshe Thupten Jinpa, the Dalai Lama's translator, says "the traditional Geluk understanding" fully admits to "deviations in Tsongkhapa's thought":

Seriously? Because Thupten Jinpa follows Tsongkhapa even though he acknowledges his Madhayamaka deviates from the Indian tradition, whereas you think that invalidates everything he taught. That makes you sectarian.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seriously? Because Thupten Jinpa follows Tsongkhapa even though he acknowledges his Madhayamaka deviates from the Indian tradition, whereas you think that invalidates everything he taught. That makes you sectarian.

 

whatever.

Edited by alwayson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I trust the Dalai Lama's research and interpretation on this matter

 

Obviously you don't trust HH Dalai Lama, because you say Tsongkhapa:

 

seems completely consistent with other masters before him

 

Geshe Thupten Jinpa, the Dalai Lama's translator, fully admits Tsongkhapa is a deviant who did not honor the existing tradition:

 

"The traditional Geluk understanding of these deviations in Tsongkhapa's thought attributes the development of his distinct reading of Madhyamaka philosophy to a mystical communion he is reported to have had with the bodhisattva Manjusri........It is interesting that the tradition Tsongkhapa is claiming to honour is, in a strict sense, not the existing system in Tibet; rather, it appears to be in the tradition of Manjusri as revealed in a mystic vision!"

Edited by alwayson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For anyone that's interested:

 

1. Tsongkhapa's Ocean of Reasoning on scribd: http://www.scribd.com/doc/113108520/Ocean-of-Reasoning

 

2. Tsongkhapa's Sngags rim chen mo/Great Treatise on the Stages of Tantra:

 

Vol 1 - http://books.google.com/books/about/Tantra_in_Tibet.html?id=STm_SEdgoCkC

 

Vol 2-3 - http://books.google.com/books/about/The_Yoga_of_Tibet.html?id=goXfIvghdmYC

 

Also, look for a new translation of the above by Thomas F. Yarnall & AIBS team called "Great Treatise on the Stages of Mantra".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So is the Gyu Lama not Indian origin ... I understood it was translated into Tibetan by Kashmiri/Tibetan scholars.

It is, or at least from the "Indosphere", as are the Tathagatagarbha sutras. Most orthodoxy Tibetan scholarship identifies Yogacara with "mind only" idealism and interprets Tathagatagarbha in purely Madhyamaka terms. Shentong seems to be the label for anything that does not do this. It originally referred to Dolpopa's philosophy, which is particularly Advaita-like and drew criticism from Tsongkhapa and Gorampa alike, but now it is used more generally. Shakya Chokedn and the Third Karmapa are Shentong proponents according to the wider definition who are less less Advaita-like than Dolpopa.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In second thought, I'm not quite done with this thread....

 

I actually agree with what Lopon Namdrol (aka. Malcolm) says about taking a more constructive approach to comparing the different Tibetan commentaries on Nagarjuna and Chandrakirti's Madhyamka:

 

http://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=102&t=6731&start=100

 

"....I am attempting to encourage people to take a more constructive approach: instead of saying, as I have many times in the past, "Tsongkhapa was wrong to say that we may leave off the second two alternatives of the four extremes because they are double negatives", it is better think long and hard why he might give such an opinion. Rather than immediately assume that Gorampa is wrong in asserting that Candrakiriti accepts things like svasamvedana conventionally, it is better to ask yourself why he might assert that. These great scholars almost always have very solid reasons for saying what they do about this and that thing, and the thing is, we have to really question ourselves if we think something they said is wrong. That is my point."

 

And Rongzom trashed all of Madhyamaka.

 

Rongzom said that while sutra subscribes to the 2 truths, the better tantric view subscribes to 1 truth.

 

http://www.amazon.com/Establishing-Appearances-Divine-Reasoning-Madhyamaka/dp/1559392886

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wasn't Tsongkhapa responsible for rejuvinating monastic Tibetan Buddhism when it had fallen into severe degradation with sexual indulgence on the rampage

 

Tsongkhapa himself taught karmamudra. On this issue Tsongkhapa is in the mainstream.

 

Tsongkhapa speaks of the qualifications required of one who would engage in the karmamudra yogas:

 

"Here both oneself and the mudra should be beings of highest capacity, and should have received the pure empowerments. Both should be learned in the root and branch guidelines of tantric practice, and have the ability to maintain them well. Both should be skilled in the sadhana of the mandala cycle, and mature in practicing four daily sessions of yoga. Also, they should be skilled in the sixty-four ways of sexual play as described in A Treatise on Bliss. They should be mature in meditation upon the doctrine of emptiness; be experienced in the techniques for inducing the four blisses in general and the innate wisdom awareness in particular; and be able to control the melted drops and prevent them from escaping outside.

 

Such are the characteristics required of the practitioners as described in the original tantras and also in the treatises of the [indian] mahasiddhas."

Edited by RongzomFan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites