premjan

I guess taoism might be equally good in some respects, but buddhism is better principally because it assumes fewer unnecessary things (in an echo of occam's razor). No need for a "Tao" or "ether" which pervades everything for example, or a "brahman" energy field pervading matter either.

Yeshi

from Great Perfection (Dzogchen) buddhist point of view, all the paths lead to pinnacle (or at least ascend somewhat).
But you can see them all only once you reached the summit.

In the meantime one can juggle oh so many word-concepts, but that helps you not with a single step on the Path.

premjan

i know you are more enlightened than me; no need to rub it in.

Vajradhara

Namaste all,

occams razor has applicability in some areas.. but not all.. especially science. the simpliest answer is hardly ever the case

in any event...

it really depends on the individual beings capacity to practice the teachings.. i suppose, on a conventional level, we could say that some teachings were more appropos than others... but this is terribly subjective and likely to be incorrect.

Yeshi

Premjan, its only 'cos i recognize your potential that i speak some things here at all.

The warning is that if one mixes several "spiritual" styles, one sinks into "New Age" and does not advance at all but gets more deluded/wastes time.

But you know that already, so i am stating the obvious.