Guest guest Posted May 10, 2005 Report Share Posted May 10, 2005 hello everyone, Despite claiming reality to be empty and striving for theh union of wisdom and emptyness or sometimes of emptiness and bliss, why do the Buddhists depict their deities as trampling upon Rudra and kalaratri or Bhairava and kalaratri? This is even more irritating, keeping in mind that the Buddhist tantras are derived from Hindu ones. AQny Hindu tantric should despise Buddhist tantras for perverting tantra and history and for their vindictive attitude. Bhairavoham... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 10, 2005 Report Share Posted May 10, 2005 It's pretty hard for a the religious to understand Buddhist tantra. I have never met one yet, and your judgemental attitude proves this. So why bother asking a question when you have made up your mind already. Just go on and hate Buddhists and be simple with that. I'll never change your mind. On the other hand, Buddhists study the Madhiyatmika Prasangika, or the Middle Way. The Middle Way is not between right and wrong or between good or bad as some suggest, but it is the middle way between eternalism and nihilism. This may be hard to understand, and it should be because it's not conceptual, but in Buddhism, and Kalachakra in particular, the symbology is very particular and is trying to invoke a certain je ne sais quoi of the essence of the experience. That essence is of the madhiyatmika. Basically the madhiyatmika talks about various emptinesses, of which there is also the emptiness of the eternal, and the emptiness of the nihilistic. The emptiness of the eternal is like saying that since one cannot know something eternal with the mind it is of no ultimate consequence to the knower. Because to keep thinking of the eternal is just to get stuck in thoughts of the eternal rather than the darshan. Therefore this consideration is trampled. Moreover, since the mind or awareness also doesn't just die and cease then also the awareness tramples the nihilistic thought. Darshan of the divine is the key, but it is a nonconceptual darshan, and the wrathful symbology is helpful to shock the mind into nonconceptuality. Tantra goes beyond thought. All tantras, or otherwise they are merely more bookish knowledge. The ultimate point of this tantra, as with most Buddhist tantras is the consumption of the mind into its own blazing purity free of all notions. The Buddha mind, if you will. A thing that many Buddhists have noted of followers of Gods and eternal notions is that they ultimately get confused about nonduality and fall back upon dualistic notions of mine, I, God, and such, always reaffirming separation from their own mental constructions and thereby constantly redeveloping new mental trains of samsaric tendencies (vrittis) only to get once again stuck in samsara (Ongoing wars over idols and deities are proof of such). As Buddhism in general is about taming samsara, it also is about taming the dualities of oneself and the heavens above, and a mental fabrication of an eternal god somewhere which is of help to an individual. It's not that God doesn't exist, it's just that thoughts of God aren't the same thing as darshan of God. Something more is needed and that something is tantra. It's funny that you mentioned Bhairava as Bhairava cuts off your head and tramples your corpse. If that is less blasphemous than Kalachakra then consider whether you are important in the whole process of knowing or not. If you say no then who is writing and questioning this whole process. In either case the cutting off of discursive thought is perhaps the main key. Ultimately all deities are forms of Mahamaya. Freedom from samsara is freedom from the clutches of mental impressions including the huge ones of hope of eternality and fear of cessation. These too must go. Hope this helps. Peace. Namo Buddha. Merits to the Suffering. So it's Rudra and Kamadeva, as examples of the Eternalistic notions and the Hedonistic/Nihilistic notions. Elsewhere in Kalachakra mandala Shiva makes another appearance as a protector named Hara. More study is perhaps needed as a cursory purview of this tantra is merely disrespectful of a 1,300 year old tradition, and disrespectful of your own intellectual abilities. - anandanatha Tuesday, May 10, 2005 6:58 PM Hindu and Buddhist tantra. hello everyone, Despite claiming reality to be empty and striving for theh union of wisdom and emptyness or sometimes of emptiness and bliss, why do the Buddhists depict their deities as trampling upon Rudra and kalaratri or Bhairava and kalaratri? This is even more irritating, keeping in mind that the Buddhist tantras are derived from Hindu ones. AQny Hindu tantric should despise Buddhist tantras for perverting tantra and history and for their vindictive attitude. Bhairavoham... Links / b.. c.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.