"What is it you need for this supposed emanation?" That's a put down. What do you mean supposed? How do you know it's a supposed? Who is this person? You don't know. Who recognized this person? You don't know. So just keep quiet and wait. Who are you suppose to convince anyways?
ha ha ! my dear thaimonk you have so eloquently made my point here, I daresay I couln't have doen a better job!
I don't know who it is! I don't know who supposedly recognized him! "I know it's a supposed" because without any evidence whatsoever, all we can DO is suppose!
Saying "supposed emanation" does not say he is not, it just holds back from full acceptence in light of the paucity of evidence. Think it over.
thaimonk No one here is convinced by your ravings
so it is insulting and sarcastic when I say it, but not when you do? or is it the "he started it" defense?
Perhaps if you don't keep sinking down to your own level and be dharmic, I would listen more.
listen or not, up to you. By the way, it is insulting to say "sinking down to your own level!" tsk tsk, thaimonk, you are as bad as me!
Crazycloud, you don't need the tulkus to make dharma done for it. People like you are doing a great job already. Namdrol left because of you before he/she even started.
"People like me?" ha ha ! So now you are seeing that you are no better, for when provoked, the insults come fast and furious! The difference is, I can take it. I am not insulted in the least. In fact, I find you charming!
"TTGIE will completely ignore the ravings of anyone who claims he is who you say he is," Another derogatory statement. You asked for one thing, I gave you two. Ravings? Ravings is used for someone who is insane, or a lunatic.
sorry, didn't you just say I was raving a few sentences ago? The thing is dear Thaimonk, You can't have it both ways. You can say it is unkind to say raving, and that we shouldn't be unkind. OR you can use this term yourself in a pejorative manner as you did above, but if you do both, as you have, you look hypocritcal, and your words fail to convince anyone. See how that works?
Why do you put this tulku down? Why do you say he is raving??? Do you know who he is? NO. Do you know if he has made any claims or some seniors recognized him??? You don't know. You assume and you rave.
I am really beginning tho see that alot of this fuss is coming from the fact that many people did not understand the basics of what I wrote. I never said HE was raving, I said, and i thought clearly, that TGIE would not belive the ravings of anyone who claims this man is TDG. Was that not clear? I used ravings not to insult anyone, but ot indicate rather from a first person pov how it will certainly appear to TGIE, Pure madness. As for me, I have already stated that I believe there are countless emanations of Dorje Shugden in the world, how could I mean that anyone who said the same was raving? Think about it?
Wake up and stop trying to win the argument. This is a forum. Everyone can clearly read what you wrote CRAZYCLOUD.
apparently not.
In the above you generously said "NO ONE SAID THE TULKU SYSTEM IS WRONG, DID THEY?" But in your other statement "PLEASE REALIZE THAT THE TULKU TRADITION IS TOO DANGEROUS IN THESE DEGENERATE TIMES. IT WILL BE THE END OF THOSE WHO DANCE WITH IT." What are you Nostradamus now?? In one line you insinuate thet tulku system is not wrong, then in another line you say it's too dangerous. You didn't even say some tulkus are dangerous, but you said the tulku tradition which is all tulkus. What a total put down to all tulkus.
slow down, you are way ahead of yourself. To say the system is dangerous is not to say it is wrong. There is no debating that. It is dangerous to put all your money in one stack, but that does not make it wrong.
Idid not say "some tulkus are dangerous, and I certainly don't say "all tulkus" in fact, if you take a deep breath, you will see that I am talking about the system. this is not an indictment of any person, but rather a statment that at this time (get that?) it is foolish for us to say "this baby IS (name of high lama here) and then accept their words as the words of an enlightened being. Many mistakes are made this way. thinking people are Budhdas from their own side is a recipe for siaster as we are seeing with our dear Dalai Lama. Ww would have no problem stopping his strange behaviour if people weren't convinced he IS Avalokiteshavara. no one would put up with. WE just can't afford this kind of risk, when labrang managers accept bribes to make a child a tulku. This is common. WE can't hang the pure tradition of Je Tsongkhapa on a child. Nine times out of ten, you will probably be ok. But if the wrong numnber comes up....Dangerous. Not wrong. Just real, real risky.
The degenerate age didn't start this morning or 10 years ago, it's this whole cyle of time we are in now. And the tulku system of Tibet is like what 700 or 800 years old. So which is it? All tulkus from day one in Tibet are too dangerous or tulkus now are dangerous?? Wake up!! Since the first recognized tulku in Tibet (karmapa) it HAS BEEN THE DEGENERATE AGE ALL ALONG.
surely you will recognize that in 2010 is is more degenerate than five hundred years ago in an isolated plateau? I am not sure if it is I that needs to wake up......
If you follow the above argument, you will see that your dichotomy of "all tukus from day one" vs "tulkus now" is a false one. It was simply less risky to rely on them then, because their activities would be much much more limited. It would take three months to get to another monastery to give teachings! Now someone says something, and it is literally all over the world in less that a minute.
Your fixed mind based on your 'experience' of tulkus makes you put down all tulkus. Well not everyone had your experience with tulkus and not everyone will go along with what you rant non-stop about them. Think. Calm down forever and think.
I will try to calm down and think, although I am not sure about "calm down forever!" ha ha! I am guessing English is not your first language? No insult intended, I think you are certainly doing better than I would in a foreign language. It's just that a lot of the things you are upset about is just you not understanding what was written.
Pleas understand, I have great respect for Tulkus. My own precious Lama is a Tulku, for goodness' sake! My experience wiht Tulkus overall is fantastic. it's just that I think the system will be the end of Buddhism if we try to carry it into the modern world in it's currnet form. It's like miracle powers. at one point, very effective. Then as times degenerate, harmful to the Dharma. DOesn't mean miracle powers aren't great, we should just keep quiet about them. Same with Tulkus. keep it to yourself or you will destroy everything.
And no, I am not Nostradamus. I believe anyone with open eyes will be able to see this if they think about it for a while with a good heart.
cheers!
[/quote]
