and you don't have to be Buddhist to put these principles into practice 😊

Everyone is special, she has just realized her true nature.

Does anybody know when this was recorded ?

Sadhu x3 and beyond 🙏🏼💚💚💚💚💚

Sadhu

Yes, she was very young

Great

One piece of advise I've heard is to look at the Lama's students. What are they like? We need to choose our teacher well because we will become like them. So check the Lama's students.

Do not rush

The first book that Venerable Jetsunma mentioned was the Bodhicaryāvatāra by Santideva. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bodhisattvacaryavatara The second book she mentioned, I believe, was a work by Khunu Rinpoche on Bodhicitta. Based on his wikipedia page, I think it is the book 'Vast as the Heavens, Deep as the Sea: Verses in Praise of Bodhicitta'. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khunu_Lama_Tenzin_Gyaltsen 🙏

Rinpoche - The word is used in the context of Tibetan Buddhism as a way of showing respect when addressing those recognized as reincarnated, older, respected, notable, learned and/or an accomplished Lamas or teachers of the Dharma. It is also used as an honorific for abbots of monasteries. -- after Wikipedia

Rinpoche is literally "jewel" as it is an honorific title given to a Tibetan Lama who does not have to be a recognized reincarnation ("tulku") but can be a simple monk or nun. It is given because of their spiritual attainment.

Equal to a Ph.D

are you asking about "tonglen" or "togden"? Tonglen is a kind of meditation practice in Tibetan (or Vajrayana) Buddhism, in which we focus our compassionate mind to "take/absorb" other beings' suffering and usie to weaken our ego and at the same time send our love/wishing of happiness/goodness to those beings. While Togden or Tokden is a designation we use to address an adept/accomplished yogi or retreat (meditation) masters, those who dedicate their whole life to be a meditator recluse.

Good question. I've come across different answers in my studies and am still trying to comprehend it.

@@sherryburrows882 Thanks for your reply. I have been contemplating this question for some time. Recently I realized this "paradox" might be due to the mixture of two discursive levels: the provisional truth and the ultimate truth. On the existential level, which includes not only this life, but also previous lives and future lives, the law of cause-effect and interdependent conditions work in our life. We need to sow good seeds in order to reap good results. As simple as that. But ultimately, in the ultimate reality, a different reality only enlightened eyes can see, there is no such thing as "self" nor the clinging to the self. To access that enlightened perspective requires years and even lives of practice, practice of observing the cause-effect law and of living every moment with full presence and mindfulness.

The Buddha, unlike later traditions, did not teach self. He instructed on what is not self (any form, feeling, perception, thinking, and consciousness, all elements, mental object, emotions, the world) all are not self. He never said there is no self and he never said what is, or if there is, any self. He avoided afirming any metaphysical or cosmological claims and instead instructed us how to see impermanent, unconditioned, empty nature of all phenomena. He taught this so that we can let go of everything with which the mind identifies or concocts concepts. What's left when this happens does not need to be explained. He just calls it Nibbana (coolness), which is the complete liberation of mind from greed, hatred and delusion. The later traditions long history of describing the nature of reality and talking about life after death was beside the point according to the Buddha. All we need are the Four Noble Truths so that whatever arises we understand as suffering arising, dependent on craving and clinging (identification), and whatever ceases is suffering ceasing through development of the path that leads to nongrasping. I'm amazed after the Buddha was the only human to reach the goal, we are still repeating the mistakes he explicitly taught us to avoid. 🙏🏼

@Dònal Brügge I think you misunderstood what I wrote. Not self is not the same as no self. The Buddha taught what is not self, which is anything subject to birth or origination. He did not name or conceptualize the deathless (amata). No matter what we call it, the unconditioned, ultimate, truth is beyond words, which is why Lord Buddha instead taught us the skills of knowing things as impermanent, unsatisfying, and empty, so the mind can realize the deathless, the reality void of birth and death. There is no Theravada, Mahayana, or Vajrayana, there is only the ultimate truth which Lord Buddha points out. In my own experience, however, the early traditions, Theravada, have preserved the Buddhadhamma the best, while later traditions have made the mistake of bringing back concepts like self that lead to metaphysical debate, which is not peaceful, not Nibbana. People have always misunderstood the Buddhadhamma as nihilistic. That's unfortunate. The Dhamma, though apparent here and now, is difficult to see and know. May you and I and all beings realize the peace of Nibbana 🙏🏼

I do not deny the validity of Mahayana or Vajrayana texts. I agree with your point that if we are to trust the validity of an oral tradition, then we should also trust Mahayana and Vajrayana texts. I just don't see much of a need for any teaching beyond the first three sermons (The Four Noble Truths, the Doctrine of Anata, and The Fire Sermon). Nonetheless, each tradition offers a different approach to the same Dhamma. My point in the original post was that the primary goal of the Middle Way is to extinguish greed, hatred, and delusion, rooted in ignorance and selfishness. I apply the Four Noble Truths with the question: What makes the mind peaceful? I am unfamiliar with much of the texts you discussed above but I think we mostly agree, and have a mutual devotion to the Lord's Dhamma. Great Blessing to you as well

Don’t sell yourself short

Well, karma is not really real, fully realising that is what makes you enlightened. Paradoxical I know but Truth goes beyond the merely rational.

confusion -- ignorance

She is certainly at peace.

Yes she was young, and yes she was excited about taking refuge w/him. It did not harm her, obviously! She is a skilled Teacher, I believe she is a kind soul, A passionate Teacher. Trustworthy.

@@oneseeker2 Read the buddhas teachings and practice what was taught... Mahaparinibbana sutta..... This is a mistake.