Vajracakra

The Forum For Traditional Vajrayāna
It is currently Mon Sep 25, 2017 6:26 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 6 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Jun 26, 2017 9:35 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2015 7:44 am
Posts: 317
Location: South Africa
I remember this book getting some traction in discussion on DW. The review is quite short but interesting.

http://readingreligion.org/books/rainbo ... surrection

The thing that struck me was this paragraph:


"Tiso finds many daring and original analogies and continuities between the Tibetan Dzogchen tradition, in which the rainbow body is contextualized, and the figures, texts, and practices mostly from Christian Syro-Oriental churches, but also Manicheanism and the Tamil Siddha tradition, to connect rituals of and contemplative instructions on “luminosity” with the Tibetan rainbow body phenomenon. The bold historical analogies and the proposed transfers, extensions and exchanges from Egypt to China put forward by a scholar of Tiso’s standing deserve to be validated with both further discussion and study."


I skimmed the book, after catching the DW discussion and I don't remember these connections as being particularly well-established. I remember them as being tenuous at best.

I won't chance to go look at source again for at least a few days. Did I miss something here?


d


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 26, 2017 9:48 am 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2012 11:30 am
Posts: 3817
You did not miss anything. Tiso is a nice guy, but I don't think he really understands his subject matter.

_________________
Belief is useless.

-- Chogyal Namkhai Norbu


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 26, 2017 11:02 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2015 7:44 am
Posts: 317
Location: South Africa
if i remember the discussion correctly, your view was almost the diametric opposite of the review - essentially, the ethnographic stuff was interesting, but the theorising was weaker.


d


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jun 26, 2017 11:14 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2014 7:40 pm
Posts: 1331
Tiso believes in an Earthly Jesus.

But why didn't Paul ever place Jesus on Earth?

Remember the Gospels and Acts were written AFTER Paul's letters.

Encyclopedia Britannica: "The books are not arranged chronologically in the New Testament. The Epistles of Paul, for example, which address the immediate problems of local churches shortly after Christ's death, are considered to be the earliest texts."

According to Richard Carrier, Paul's letters indicate that Cephas (Peter), James, Paul etc. only knew Jesus from VISIONS/DREAMS, based on the Old Testament scriptures. Not what we would consider real life.

1 Cor. 15.:

"For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, and that He appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. After that He appeared to more than five hundred brethren at one time, most of whom remain until now, but some have fallen asleep; then He appeared to James, then to all the apostles; and last of all, as to one untimely born, He appeared to me also."

The Scriptures Paul is referring to here are:

Septuagint version of Zechariah 3 and 6 gives the exact Greek name of Jesus, describing him as confronting Satan, being crowned king in heaven, ‘rising’ from his place below, and building up God’s house, given supreme authority over God’s domain and ending all sins in a single day.

Daniel 9 describes a messiah dying before the end of the world.

Isaiah 52-53 describes the cleansing of the world's sins by the death of a servant.

Psalm 22-24, which Mark copies the language of, describes the death-resurrection cycle.

Gerd Lüdemann:
"Not once does Paul refer to Jesus as a teacher, to his words as teaching, or to [any] Christians as disciples."

"Moreover, when Paul himself summarizes the content of his missionary preaching in Corinth (1 Cor. 2.1-2; 15.3-5), there is no hint that a narration of Jesus’ earthly life or a report of his earthly teachings was an essential part of it. . . . In the letter to the Romans, which cannot presuppose the apostle’s missionary preaching and in which he attempts to summarize its main points, we find not a single direct citation of Jesus’ teaching."


Furthermore, Richard Carrier points out Paul viewed the death of Jesus (who had a human body manufactured by God) as occurring in outer space.

_________________
Just recognize the conceptualizing mind.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 27, 2017 3:46 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2015 7:44 am
Posts: 317
Location: South Africa
Malcolm wrote:
You did not miss anything. Tiso is a nice guy, but I don't think he really understands his subject matter.


what actually made me follow up originally was that he touches on the pervasiveness of light in the religious experience. iirc, Matthew Kapstein also wrote on this in The Presence of Light, an essay collection. i find that more interesting than some of the other correlation-work, which strikes me as a mashup of practices and principles that is not, as you said, clearly understood even with good intentions.


(i should note for the possible trolls, that Tiso is an excellent scholar in his own field/s, but that i think he's not sufficiently versed in the structures of dzogchen teaching and the inter-relationships required for progression or for experience. in saying that, i'm not suggesting that i am either, but i am pointing to my belief - based on my own experience - that actually very few people are really well-versed in this field and that it is therefore open to misrepresentation or hasty correlation, both by people who don't care about it and by people who do. basically, other things aside, i think Tiso throws too many things into the basket of things he regards as related. the inclusion of his Shroud of Turin thesis, for example, is unnecessary and hopelessly speculative to point of breaking and the orthodox hand-waving he has to do about it makes the rest of the discussion seem questionable.)

d


edited to add a caveat


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jun 27, 2017 4:36 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2015 7:44 am
Posts: 317
Location: South Africa
also, frankly the idea that Garab Dorje was Jesus, misunderstood by the ignorant savages in the East, is pretty standard Catholic chauvinism, perhaps hidden from him by his genuinely good intention to recover societal respect for mystic traditions. (And dumb.)


d


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 6 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group