namaskaram Pleroma ji
You have to choose sides you cannot be a Buddhist as well as a Vaishnavaite I would rather stop considering you as a Hindu or a Vaishnava. Do you believe in Brahman or do you not?
like all Vaisnava I belive in Brahman , I belive Brahman to be the formless indestructable , unchanging living entity which pervades all , ...but I also as a Vaisnava beleive that beyond Brahman , threre is Parabrahman , ...Purushottama, Visnu , Krsna , Nayayana who is the origin of all, ......however if to a Shaivite parameshwara is Siva , ...I am not perturbed , nor am I perturbed that both Shaivites and Buddhists call the supreme being Mahadeva as maha simply greatest Deva god , ...the Higest god , ...Maheshwara , Parameshwara , .....
to a Vaisnava it is Visnu , Narayana , Krsna , ...to a Shavite it is Siva , ..to a Buddhist it is Samantabhadra , Vairochana , Vajrasattva depending on ones tradition , ....and yes , contrary to the beleif of some many Buddhists Hold to the principle of the Adi Buddha ,(who is Parameshwara) , the eternal , the self originating , the origin of all .
I am consistent. Padmasambhava is the second Buddha and he was the reincarnate of the historical Buddha. Padmasambhava's teachings were superior to the historical Buddha.
sorry I do not wish to argue with you in the least , but let us be clear , ...first you said ''
Padmasambhava is the founder of Tibetan Buddhism.'' ......which is incorect , Buddhism existed in Tibet before the arival of Padmasambhava , this history I have allready given , ...then you change to saying that
''Padmasambhava introduced Tantra toTibet '', ....this is closer but still not entirely true !
Tantra already existed in Tibet before the arival of Padmasambhava as it would have come into Tibet alongside the Mahayana teachings from both Nepal and China , ...this I have allready pointed out , ...it was the second Dhamaraj Trisong Detsen who brought Shantarak****a and Vimalamitra to Tibet to Tibet to establish Samye , and to counter obsticals Shantarak****a requested that the king to send for Padmasambhava.
much as I love Padmasambhava and also accept him to be the second Buddha of this age , I canot abide your saying that Padmasambhava is in any way superior to Gautama Buddha , ...
as each are an emination of the same primordial wisdom ..(Adi Buddha)
Lord Buddha himself fortold that he would come agan in the form of the lotus born Pema Jungne , and whilst in the incarnation of Gautama Buddha taught 84,000 teachings which later became clasified as the individual Yanas.
it is true that the majority of Buddhists after the parinirvana of the Buddha followed the path of renunciation (sorry I do not like to use the term Hinayana as many missunderstand it to be derogatory when it is not ) ....but it is also true that Gautama Buddha taught other teachings for practitioners of different scopes , although these teachings remained to a large extent hidden they were planted in much the same way as Padmasambhava left hidden terma to be found when the minds of the practitioners had sufficiently ripened .
...thus Buddha himself fortold that he would return as Padmasambhava to establish these teachings in Tibet , ....
there fore you canot say that Padmasambhava
''introduced ''tantra to Tibet , ...he
established it as a practice , it was allready there , but it needed the infavorable obsticals in its path to be removed , ...thus there exists
Eight forms of Guru Rinpoche some being benign some being wrathfull ....as
Dorje Chang manifestations of the Sambhogakaya , and as
Dorje Drolo the wrathfull form of Vajrasattva , ...so yes to me Padmasambhava is an emination of the Adi Buddha , the eternal , the self originating , the origin of all , in exactly the same way that Krsna and Rama are eminations of the supreme Parameshwara , ....there is no difference.
therefore you do not need to campaign against the Buddhists and ask them to give you back tantra becaue it originaly belonged to Hinduism, ...
because it didnt ! Lord Buddha taught it , yes this offends some Buddhists as they do not understand thus it is not so openly discussed as we should not disturb the minds of others when they diligently follow a particular path .
everyone Buddhist or Hindu will according to their mentality find a path which is suitable for them , therfore we should not rail against any one tadition or beleif , ....it is not only unkind , it is disruptive and it is Ignorant .
Buddha taught in 84 ,000 deluded states of mind , that is a lot of obsticals to remove , therefore is it any surprise that we do not allways see eye to eye , only when these 84,000 delusions are removed will we see clearly , then we will understand the nature of the Sambhogakaya , the nature of Brahman and Parameshwara .
the obstical that you need to remove rifgt now ids tha Buddhists are enemys of Hinduism , ...it may be something you have read , but it is not helping you .
Of course it is not an Abrahamic idea. Purushottama is still a creator deity in an emanationist sense. Why did the historical Buddha didn't taught these things and was silent in this matters. Was he an ignorant?
no , he was not ignorant , he gave teachings according to the mentality of the aspirant , .....
''Purushottama is still a creator deity in an emanationist sense'' ......exactly , this was my point it is just that we tend not to use creationist theories for this reason , creation only exists within the eternal cycle therefore in truth it is all an emination of Prushottma , ...in truth there is no creation everything is a cycle , creation is just an apperance , as is destruction , ...there is no final dissolution only dissolution of this incugnificant universe , ..one day in the life of Brahma .
Did the historical Buddha taught the Kamamudra Tantra or the Tantric sex? Did the historical Buddha had sex with women? Therevada Buddhists just do not accept these teachings so fix your divisions with in Buddhism first and then come back to me. The concept of Samanthabhadra was taught by Padmasambhava and it purely an Indian Hindu concept.
please read the above .....
Samantabhadra is not a concept , ....do you beleive in a supreme or not !!!
awareness and teachings on Samantabhadra came to Tibet throgh the Chinese Mahayana teachings in the 5th / 6th century , possibly earlier, ...
but became noted under the First Dhamaraj Songtsan Gampo .
Vajrayana deities are not a projection of one's mind it exists independent of the mind. Did the historical Buddha taught these things or was he an ignorant?
I did not say that Vajrayana Deities are a projection of mind , ....
it is your illformed veiw of me or what I am saying that I consider a projection of your mind ,
because you are wanting to veiw Buddhists as the enemy , because you are seeing everything relating to sides you are missing the point in much that I am saying , you are not even realising that I support much of what you say (if you would only get your facts a little streighter) , ...(unfortunatly you are quoting many wickipedia type of small inacuracies .)
Was the Prasad offered to a Hindu god or was it offered to Buddha? If it was offered to Buddha then please keep it with you.
in this ashram all bhoga offered to the Hindu deities , it is then offfered on as Prasad , if I say Prasad then I mean Prasad .
the Tsog offerings made to my Buddhas is a little different as per tradition , ...if you would like Prasad then on a celebration day you may recrive remnants of cake enjoyed by the Deities alongside all maner of other dishes , ...
if you would like the remnants of Tsog offerings then you may well receive flowers and Fruit , ....you may have either or both dependant upon whos blessings you wish to receive .
You reject historical Buddha but you accept mythological Krishna or Indra. Haha. That is the kind of thing Buddha spoke against.
