Posted by Tony Page on January 13, 19100 at 12:56:18:
In Reply to: The natural wolf posted by john y on January 13, 19100 at 12:27:20:
An interesting contribution. I lived in Hong Kong for 17 years and allowing for translation differences recognise this as a form of a long told and well-known part of Chinese mythology (truth?) that basically involves the cultural equivalent in the West of, say, succubi or possessive spirits. On a more mundane level, this area has often (as in the West!) proved fertile ground for some of the more sensational Hong Kong film-makers.
However, the reference to 1994 is intriguing, although as this forum is specifically aimed at Buddhist teachings perhaps any further discussion would be best off list.
On the other hand, john's contribution does raise the interesting question of the degree to which Tibetan Buddhist cultural traditions are relevant to non-Tibetan Buddhists. What does anyone think? Is there a point when such aspects of the teachings actually hinder the spread of the Dharma? Should we try and strip away the "non-essential" cultural elements of the Teachings to make them perhaps more intelligible to non-Tibetans? Or would that simply be taking a lot of the colour out of Mahayan Buddhism and making it less attractive?
What do you think...
May the Dharma be with you!
Post a Followup