Hi William: On Dec 2, 2011, at 12:31 PM, emptybill wrote:
> Buddhist literary borrowings from shaiva texts are quite clear. However that > does not invalidate the idea of a common yogic cultural sphere which went > both ways. Yogins often do not mind mixing dharmas since they are concerned > primarily with what works. > > That is a good point. It's also important to get that the idea of strict, compartmentalized "paths" is actually relatively new, within the last millennium or so. I also think you should read Sanderson's detractors responses to appreciate his errors. > The Bon dharma appears to synthesize the pre-tantric Buddhism of Zhang Zhung > with Trans-Himalayan, native shamanism. So what? That is no reason to indulge > in doctrinaire attributions. Tibetans like to do that … why ape them? > The primary problem is people's outside of Tibet tended to collectively downgrade their opinions of not only Tibetans as a people, but Tibetans as a civilization. Consequently historical opinions as to cultural diffusion were skewed against the Tibetans. Nothing could ever have originated from these barbarians (never mind that's where many rishis came from). The Chinese effectively branded them as barbarians, and other surrounding countries performed similar disinformation campaigns. To place it in the context of the USA, it would be like Mestizo descendants of Don Juan Matus suddenly begin dissolving into rainbow light over the Southwest, multiplying and their leader crosses the border into Rick Perry's Texas. > Khachab Rinpoche took Bon Dzogchen teachings from Lopon Tenzin Namdak and > personally verified their authentic nature along with their correspondences > to Nyingma Dzochen. His sister was a Bonpo practitioner married to a > Mongolian Lama. He has real knowledge about their teachings and practice. > > I also have teaching from the Lopon, and close, regular advice from his heart-students. It's very clear the diffusion went Zhang Zhung -> India and to China as well (remember Taoism?). What amazed me was how much the Bonpos understood about Shaivite pre-history. > Considering your many Shaiva contentions here on FFL, I would expect you to > agree that Shaiva MahaBhairava traditions influenced Buddhist Tantric > practices rather than try to mystify it all into Tögal bindus. > Well no, I assume there was some hybridization. However, at the level of experience, beyond time or place, you see and appreciate a universal level. The only lineal markings are our own projections. > Same for Tertons. They don't need to be puffed up into Vedic rishis since > they already possess a profound set of teachings transmitted directly by > rigpa yeshe. > > Yes, of course. But then there are official lineages and there are natural lineages too.
