Am I the only one seeing this as wrong or what?

Since when Buddhas teachings can be mixed as articles in grocery store. If there are countless practices streamlined directly from holy beings where is the need for making up a new one.

Wtf? There is a 100 syllable mantra from practice for which you need empowerment, mixed with all other mantras from different practices of different Buddha families. Also a Tara's mantras. If you heap up parts from ten different planes on one place why do you thing it would fly? If you buy 9 articles in a market and slip between them one stolen does it make it OK?

But if you by your divine eye can make practices as you like, then you are no different than other holy beings who did it. So should we pray to you instead, o great holy Zenji lama, dispeller of illusions, destroyer of wrong views, protector of all beings? 

So, by that logic, the Gaden Lhagyama, which does not require empowerment, is useless?  My prostrations made to the Buddha, with the aspiration of attaining the Buddha mind, are useless? 

We are not talking about practice that originated from lord Buddha, but practice you made up. I have no idea what Gaden Lhagyama is but if you can practice it without empowerment why would you want to come up with your own practice.

As I have understood from Rinpoche, any practice, while perhaps not immediately benefiting me, creates the imprints to further my dharma practice in future lifetimes.

Yes.

What I think Khyentse Rinpoche meant was for deeper tantric practices, like Mahakala.  I can chant Mahakala's mantra, I can dig up a sadhana to do for Mahakala, but without the empowerment from a guru, it would be like trying to navigate a dense jungle without a guide.

I don't know what he meant i know what he said.

Any actions that turn the mind towards dharma could never be considered a waste of time.

Ultimately yes, but it doesn't meant that you shouldn't pick most beneficial practice. In the time of death your mind will stay out of six sense base. If you watch your mind, you'll see that he is largely influenced by them. Mind is depicted in wheel of life as monkey jumping from one sense base to other (depicted as tree). When you die there will be nothing to stop or influence your line of thoughts. So if your mindset in that particular moment isn't extraordinary one, you will not be able to get favorable outcome no mater how many prostrations you did in this life.

So if you have a opportunity to practice higher teachings you should immediately put it into practice. If you fail in this life you will benefit from your virtuous deeds, but there is no way to tell when and how. And it could (and probably would) pass a countless aeons before we are reborn as humans again.

I have at the moment wounded bird. She hit a wall at full speed at fifth floor, and then fell into ground. I paid for her operation, and now she is with me in a place with holly images etc. Is this the way you are hoping for your virtuous deeds to manifest? Because it is the only way you can get it from samsara.

[don't]

You should find a way to get a empowerment. It shouldn't be such a problem if you aren't in Iran or North Korea. Also there is a pray called "calling a lama from afar". http://khandro.net/prayers_callingthelama.htm
Concerning your saddhana don't do it. At best you'll be wasting your time. Late Kyabye Dilgo Khytntse Rinpoche said that trying to get result by practicing without empowerment would be like pressing a rock to get oil. http://www.snowlionpub.com/samples/GEST_Ch1.pdf

... He will also see it as the dog sees it. He will furthermore see it exactly as the human beings see it and also the gods...

Technically, he sees it only as a Buddha, but he is aware of all the ways other beings sees it. Because if he would actually "see" it as hells beings see it then such perception would also cause suffering in the mind of a Buddha.

Well the question about compassion was because I feel that if I cultivate that sadness more and more I would end up being unable to function I think...  ...I can either cultivate this sadness or I can try another approach such as developing a mind that the best way to help others is to cultivate happiness and find how to experience happiness and liberation.

Well, i don't know. I know about very famous geshe Langri Tangpa (1054-1123) who wrote down the eight verses of training the mind. He was called "dark faced" because he rarely smiled because of his contemplations on the sufferings of sentient beings. But seems that it did not stop him to become one of the holiest persons of his time (or he become such because of his compasion).

...How can I say that is compassion when surely one who has compassion will not focus on sorrow...

Now you got me thinking  If extensive compassion is a bit limiting, you could develop a sense of rejoicing to virtuous deeds of other beings as an antidote.

... Maybe this is why Bodhissatvas focus on seeing the world as pure and everyone is a Buddha via Tantra...because then they do not feel overwhelmed by sorrow?

No, no... They are doing it because world really is pure. You should watch Matrix to get a very rough feeling of what is the Buddhist perceptive of reality. However we don't have red and blue pills, so we must trick our own mind to recognize it. And that is ultimately the only thing we can do for other beings. You'll understand... 

Someone who I don't know personally died recently and I felt a feeling of sadness. The main feeling I felt was a wish that this persons parents and friends do not suffer extensively over a long period. These people are non Buddhists so I believed they would suffer a great deal. This thought filled me with sadness.

They may suffer even more if they become Buddhists, and realize where could that person end up. Welcome to the reality of first two Arya truths.

I then developed a question in my mind. Is this sadness a virtuous mind? Is this compassion or not? I concluded that if I felt like this every time someone was suffering because there are countless I would feel such a heavy sadness all the time. So my first question is, how do I proceed with my working on compassion? Is the correct feeling this heavy feeling or have I got it wrong? For example when your teacher Rinpoche sees the animals and knows there is these cruelties every moment does his compassion experience manifest as a heavy heart? Are all Dharmas minds of happiness or are there Dharmas that are minds of sadness?

You got it right. Unfortunately this feeling wont last long. You should use it to get true renunciation for pleasures of this life, and genuine wish to liberate all sentient beings because they obviously don't know how. Dharma means both all things and also holy teachings.  So your question is bit unclear. If you were asking does enlighten being suffer by seeing other being suffering the answer is no. He is aware of what you are feeling, he is aware of all the causes and conditions that lead to it, and he will help you in ways you cant imagine, but he is not in suffering, although it is a virtuous state of mind for a human being.

The second question involves exchanging cherishing self with cherishing other. When I try to do this I feel like I am entering others worlds seeing what is important to them, how they feel, what offends them and what makes them feel comfortable and at ease. I concluded this was right so I tried to do this more and more. It feeling like others desires are my desires......but others desires are very ordinary so my mind is suddenly filled with many worldly things, as if I have taken on all their hang ups, issues, burdens. What was important to others wasnt important to me when I thought only about my own viewpoint. But now others needs are important and so extensive.  The question is am I going in the right direction or am I missing an important aspect of this practice? When I was self orientated soley because I was happy everything was ok. Now I am unhappy about a lot of things because other people are. I am aware of all the spiritual doubts negativity towards spiritual people and its hard to not be affected by others doubts and complaints. Before I didnt notice it all just focusing on myself.

Very nice . You should use your knowledge of Buddhism to decide what is best for them and help them in that way. I.e. if someone is unhappy with life and wants to hang himself, it is not a Bodhisattva activity to give him money to buy a rope.

If the person you are speaking to, or teaching mantra to, is a deity yoga practictioner, they should have realized that reactive anger is wrong action. 

I wouldn't be so sure. As far as I know, when anger arises practitioner should detach from emotion, "look" at it, and ask himself where does it come from.

...I'm going to step back to the original topic, and try to analyze it in light of higher and lower truth, as well as deluded vs. pure consciousness...

There is a very interesting book with whole chapter on what is mantra and how does it actually work by Jamjon Mipham - "Luminous Essence - A Guide to the Guhyagarbha Tantra". You can find it here if you have an urge to learn: http://ifile.it/kcnq3uz/1559393270.pdf    

"Good deeds are karmic cause only for good results, but they can be condition for any kind of other karma to manifest."

So, I can tell a cat a mantra, with good intentions, and because of his karmic conditioning (which is lower than a human for him to be in the state of cat) – he bites me, because of his own karmic conditioning or misconditioning?

If there is any single exception from some rule, then the rule is wrong. I.e. work isn't the cause of money, because peoples sometimes get payed, and sometimes don't. So work can only be a condition (and not the cause) for someone to get money.
On the other side if you have a cause for money, any kind of action (robbing, killing, stealing, borrowing, working, etc...), can serve as condition. It has nothing to do with intentions.
So in your case, causes are ripen to see some ungrateful cat. And, since you are the one who is perceiving unpleasant result, it is product of both YOUR and cats bad karma. The real causes (fruits) of mantra are not yet manifested in yours neither in cats mind.

Of course, it could also be argued, the mantra, under the guidance of the deity, is sitting dormant in the cat’s consciousness, until such times as causes ripen for it to take proper effect?  That is, the cat dies and takes a rebirth as a human.

Actually yes, this is what i claim. Effects of mantra are stored in alaya, or store-house consciousness, and will manifest once the conditions are ripen. In your or mine or cats case, it could be in numerous aeons. Only when conditions are ripen, we will see the result. So, you should simultaneously work on purifying your mind, and not solely on planting karmic seeds, by mere chanting of the words.

Of course i could be wrong  in this 

Another reason I like to include the subject-object dichotomy in a discussion involving two entities – A synonym for perception is Skandha – who is also deified as a protector warrior deity.  Hence, if one attempts too much to alter the Skandha or perception of another, they are in effect invoking an inner warrior deity in the other, who’s purpose is to protect that one’s view of truth  – and a highly charged reaction can occur.

Personally, I believe this is the reason for the old adage – “a curse can only be softened, not broken.”

Based on this, perhaps I should atone as well for false notions of Skhanda I’ve created as well?  People will fight, it seems, to protect both their relative and their absolute truths, even when they are clearly shown to be an error.

I'm sorry, this is out of my league. I really don't know why peoples are sometimes afraid to accept change in circumstances or in the way they are thinking. However, i would not claim that if you are attempting too much to alter the Skandha or perception of another, that you are in effect invoking an inner warrior deity in the other, who’s purpose is to protect that one’s view of truth, because it would be arguable that peoples then cant collect bad karma, because it is the inner warrior deity who is in fact responsible and should go in hells instead of them or at least with them.   

In my opinion, mantra itself inherently neutral.  It's the meaning that is put on it that biases it one ways or another. 
...
Using the cat example, if I were to tell my cat a mantra, I would not know if the mantra would be received as good, bad, or neutral from the perspective of a cat in its current state of being ...

Well, this is how i understand it.

Mantra is inherently beneficial, in sense that it creates extremely strong positive karmic imprints. Period. However, like all things it also depends on causes and conditions. In order to make conditions ripen for mantra to benefit us in this life, we should transform ourselves. And this is done by lung and transmission. So, mantra itself is unchanged by it, but it is us (or our mindstream if you like it) we should strive to change.

Also, by telling mantra to some living being, it may look sometimes that they are getting upset. This has noting to do with mantra. Karmic imprints don't ripe immediately. If that were the case our ribs would start to brake the instant we step on a ant. This is unfortunately not the case.

All manifested things are simultaneously cause and condition. Good deeds are karmic cause only for good results, but they can be condition for any kind of other karma to manifest. So, when you are telling a mantra to a dog, and he is trying to bite you, this is what is actually happening: you are helping him, (and yourself) by putting some very good karmic imprints in his mind. Simultaneously conditions are ripened (independently of the nature of act itself) for his bad karma to manifest, and in the same time your own bad karma of being ungrateful for other beings kindness from the past. That being the case if you perceive mad dogs as unpleasant of course.

I hope you'll understand it correctly, because i have the difficulties expressing myself adequately in English. 

Take Yamantaka's mantra.  Any person can repeat those words over and over again.  The difference is the motivation. 
...
BUT, if the mantras are chanted with a proper motivation (i.e. the liberation of all sentient beings, the end of samsaric existence, etc etc) then, even though without transmission, that person is developing an imprint on their mindstream to bring themselves and others towards the dharma in future lifetimes, thus, generating good karma in the long run.

You are right about motivation, but i think you are missing the point. From your answer, it is obvious that you consider mantra itself as neutral. So why then someone with proper motivation couldn't chant: "Mary had a little lamb, Its fleece was white as snow", and receive the same benefits as chanting Yamantaka or any other mantra.

The site cautioned me that this topic has not been addressed in 120 days, and perhaps I should start a new topic.  Please excuse me, if that is a rule - this thread struck me close to home, and I would rather continue it.

Welcome here . It is not a problem, although you may not get answered in some older posts. And this is a debate part of forum so don't take any answers here for granted, because at least one side here is wrong.

Personally, I keep my practice, as well as mantras and methods secret from most people I meet.  I tend to receive a negative reaction to anyone I discuss them with, "outside of school." 

Peoples tend to get scared when they don't understand. Question here was if you tell a mantra, or Buddhas word if you like it to a cat, would it be beneficial to her, neutral, or would it create a negative karma for her.

If you say it is beneficial to her, then why would anyone keep it concealed, and why is there a need for  Lung, explanation and empowerment at all. If you say it is neutral, then explanation and empowerment are those who benefit to peoples, and instead of chanting mantras peoples should chant only empowerment and explanations. If it is negative, then why would a Buddha teach such a terrible thing especially concerning all those countless small animals and insects which every day hears mantras peoples chant.

With regards to western "occult" practices - I would say that much of what I see or read, as generally available on the internet or in commercial bookstores - represents a degenerate form of spirit worship,  more than a true path to liberation or enlightenment.  The worse piece of spiritual commercialism I encountered recently was a self-help book on making money from some spirit god of Haiti  - published in the wake of their recent hardships.  Personally I would not want the karmic returns from any practice associated with that "teaching."

I thing we can all agree on that. 

I am still searching for the recording of Rinpoche reciting Ganden Lygyama to play for him in his final days.  Please post link for it if you find it.  Thank you.

Maybe you can try this instead: http://www.amitabhahospice.org/public/spiritual_support/powerful_%20mantras.pdf

Hello, does anybody know the name of the 6th Buddha, the one after Maitreya. Please post a link or some info if you have any. Thanks

http://www.rigpawiki.org/index.php?title=1002_buddhas_of_this_Fortunate_Aeon   

hi i dont know what u mean by mahayana lama, i hv heard in malaysia- brickfields temple there have THERAVADA.. What is the difference btwn both?
tq

Well, both were taught by lord Buddha, but for different kind of peoples. Both are true, correct, having the same goal, but using different approaches. Reason i was suggesting Mahayana, is mainly because results are much faster to accomplish, nothing else in your case. However since you actually are in Kuala Lumpur, you may consider yourself very lucky (or having a great karma if you like it that way) to be near teacher like Tsem Tulku Rinpoche, so you should go to him. And, yes he is a Mahayana. 


More on Theravada and Mahayana differences: http://www.religionfacts.com/buddhism/fastfacts/differences_theravada_mahayana.htm

Black neighbors to picket woman's Confederate flag
Posted 10/15/2010 6:27 PM EDT
SUMMERVILLE, S.C. (AP) -- Annie Chambers Caddell, whose ancestors fought in the Civil War, insists the Confederate flag flying over her home is an important reminder of her heritage. But for her neigbors in this tree-shrouded, historically black neighborhood, it's an unpleasant reminder of a by-gone era they'd rather not see every time they pass by her house.

  is this good bad or does not matter what you think. thanks everyone G.

You are talking about emptiness of flag. The same object, colorful peace of cloth, is causing three completely opposite responds. Pride (happiness), rage and indifference.

It seems to me that she's more into provoking, and not into caring for heritage. Unless of course she has no space inside her house to put the flag on display.  By same reasoning pedophiles could (if they feel pride about that heritage), publicly hang and display images of their victims, young Germans could wear theirs grandpas  Nazi uniforms, etc...