Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
Did Buddha teach tantrs? NOT a discussion on abuse in tantra
Jeffrey
Veteran
ok I think we need to separate these ideas...
0
Comments
Buddha also said that what he had taught was like a handful of leaves in a forest.
Now logically if the practice of buddhism does not produce enlightenment then it is no different from 'self help'. Might as well go golfing? Probably more fun. So assuming it does produce enlightened beings or even somewhat enlightened beings these may give enlightened practices. Second you are using the Pali Canon to validate itself. Third, there was a schism and the material presented by the southern school may have been politically motivated. Fourth, tantra existed in Therevada buddhism from 800 BCE to 1000 BCE. Fifth, some teachings in the dharma are definitive and some are in need of interpretation. That is what the Gelug school says at least. Personally I find the whole teaching of buddhism in need of interpretation. The bible says, ironically, "the letter killeth but the spirit giveth life". I agree with this and I am an example of a buddhist who takes teachings lightly and considers how they help my practice rather than a rigid hold to the letter. You are taking a rigid view that all of the teachings in the Pali Canon constitute the only dharma. That actually sounds ridiculous to me. Honest. To assert otherwise is to fall into the trap of fundamentalism.
The idea of this is that tantra could be derived from enlightened beings other than buddha.
really tantra uses pretty much anything. i can definitely see how tantra would work in a western culture because it can use materialism to move beyond materialism.
the problem is that tantra can really easily be abused. so in all honesty only a few select individuals can use tantra to awaken. but i can see how there will be a culture in the future where tantra will be used. we shall see though!
TB is as different from other schools of buddhism, as islam is compared to christianity. It is misleading to call it buddhism.
I think its misleading to say it not Buddhism, so there.
Jeffrey, you've made an interesting argumemt, comparing Mahayana (and some of the "revealed" texts, the "terma", too?) to the Gnostic gospels. That's a tough one to argue against. I'm giving up for today.
Maybe we're winding down on some of these topics, eh? I gotta go for today.
I grew up Hindu by the way, as an Advaita Vedantin, into Trika Shaivism, a Tantric form of Shaivism very much influenced by Buddhist Tantra and Dzogchen in the 900's A.D. For a long time I believed in the Hindu interpretations of Indian religious history, until I started studying with someone who reads Sanskrit, then someone who reads Tibetan. Many original Sanskrit texts from the earlier part of the 1st millennium A.D. were translated into Tibetan 1,000 years ago, thus they have a history of Indian Buddhism that is different from that which the Hindus report. The fact is, is that the Tibetan sources for Indian Buddhist history are older than the Hindu ones about Buddhism. There are also many original Sanskrit Buddhist Tantric texts still in existence in Nepal.
Here I'm going to quote from Wikipedia on the Newar Buddhist tradition of Nepal.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newar_Buddhism
"Newar Buddhism is the form of Mahayana-Vajrayana Buddhism practiced by the Newar ethnic community of the Kathmandu Valley in Nepal. It has developed unique socio-religious elements, which include a non-monastic Buddhist society based on a caste system and patrilineal descent. The ritual priests, Bajracharya or Vajracharya, and their Shakya assistants form the non-celibate religious sangha while other Buddhist Newar castes serve as the laity. Although there was a vibrant regional tradition of Buddhism in the Kathmandu Valley during the first millennium, the transformation into a distinctive cultural and linguistic form of Buddhism appears to have taken place in the fifteenth century, at about the same time that similar regional forms of Indic Buddhism such as those of Kashmir and Indonesia were on the wane. As a result, Newar Buddhism seems to preserve some aspects of the Indian Buddhism that were not preserved in Buddhist schools elsewhere.
"Newar Buddhism is characterized by its extensive and detailed rituals, a rich artistic tradition of Buddhist monument and artwork, and by being a storehouse of ancient Sanskrit Buddhist texts, many of which are now only extant in Nepal. According to the authors of Rebuilding Buddhism: The Theravada Movement in Twentieth-century Nepal: "Today traditional Newar Buddhism is unquestionably in retreat before Theravada Buddhism." Although Newar Buddhism was traditionally bound to the Kathmandu Valley and its environs, there is at least one new Newar Buddhist monastery in Portland, Oregon."
end quote.
The fact is, is that Buddhist Tantric texts that specify various philosophies and rituals that appear in both Buddhist and Hindu Tantra were codified first in Buddhism, as well as Buddhist Yoga movements (Yantra Yoga or in Tibetan, Trul Khor) were codified long before Hindu versions. Evidence points to Buddhist Tantra, actually not called Tantra back then, but "Secret Mantra" or "Mantrayana" was more of an organized movement first, but there is definitely evidence of cross influencing between both Shaivite Tantra and Buddhist throughout many years. Some masters of both traditions would sit together and share ideas. But, Buddhist Tantra has far more texts, more nuanced teachings, more living lineages and more recently surfacing archeological evidence pointing to it's earlier existence. Showing that Hindu Brahmins actually hid the truth long ago and re-wrote history to suit their needs. This happens all the time in so many cultures, China is probably one of the best examples due to how many different rulers there were in it's war torn history.
According to Tantric texts, the Buddha manifested as Chakrasamvara (meaning Wheel Stoppage as in the wheel of Samsara) and transmitted these teachings to high level Mahayana practitioners from another dimension after he left the body. Supposedly this same being manifested as Shiva and he transmitted worldly Tantras to those who weren't ready for the subtle approach of Buddhist Tantra from the same place as Chakrasamvara did on Mount Kailash, which is seen as a holy place by both Hindus for Shiva and Buddhists for Heruka Chakrasamvara. Also, the fact remains that Tibetan Buddhism isn't really Tibetan, it's Indian originally and just moved to Tibet in the 7 to 8 hundreds A.D. taking on some of the cloths, but the practices, and the deities are all originally from India. The only new additions that took place in Tibet to Vajrayana are the Tulku tradition and the Terma tradition... really. To read more on Terma, go here... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terma_(religion)
It's really Bon shamanism that was influenced by Indian Buddhism, not the other way around. Bon deities became Buddhist protector deities, but the main deities of Vajrayana are still Indian in origin. Sadly Bon was sometimes influenced by Buddhism forcibly. The same thing happened in Mongolia by political Tibetans. But that's another story. That's not the type of Tibetan history I like to focus on as it doesn't help me attain enlightenment.
Another point I'd like to make is that the Buddha while alive, sometimes as recorded in the Pali, taught not only Buddhadharma, but also the Brahmaviharas which lead to higher rebirth into the Brahma lokas (long lived god realms) and higher virtue, but not complete Buddhahood. As well as other teachings that are not as complete as those which appear in some of his other lectures. So, there is evidence of the Buddha having taught a few different teachings and perspectives to different people according to their capacity. Mahayana texts state that he taught the Mahayana while alive to certain key disciples, revealing that it's not a later creation. Vajrayana the Buddha supposedly taught from the "other side." I for one, due to my meditative experiences, believe that this is possible based on those experiences.
Everyone is of course free to believe what they want. I could go on and say more if need be though. Everyone take care!
@Vajrayana
thanks for this contribution
How do they easily lead to abuse?
There are plenty of monks abusing Theravada teachings in Tailand and Shree Lanka. Abuse of the Buddhas teachings happens in every single system. It's just not as bad as in other religions is all, simply due to the clarity involved in Buddhism, in my opinion.
I wasn't singling out any specific practice or teaching... I just said:
"IF the teachings lead easily to abuse they are NOT teachings of any buddha"
I think Vincenzi was referring to the practice of surrendering to the lama in guru yoga/Higher Yoga Tantra. The "my wish is your command" thing has been misused and misapplied. Just clarifying. I'm gonna go now.
Oh sure it has. But, at the same time, it also has not been misused, and there are more instances of it not being misused than it having been misused in Vajrayana. The problem with News, and gossip, and human beings, is the fact that most people focus on the negative, and the fact that even in the News on TV. It's not positive News that gets viewers, it's that News that scares people, it's that News that profits off the negative, as that is how most humans find their focus when they are most afraid. The problem is that they are conditioned by the otuer shows that ignite this sense of inspiration, and are not aware of it's inner, more primary causes of ignorance.
It's really the individual teacher that is at fault when such a great tradition is misused. A Guru should be empowering! Not in an egotistical sense either, but in a spiritual sense, like the Buddha did, as he also was a Guru who gave transmission to his disciples. Though they say, if you don't have a strong sense of ego, you can't transcend it. Yes, quite the paradox. But it makes sense to me. If you don't have a strong sense of personal awareness, how can you be humble enough to look at yourself? If your sense of self is weak, everything that challenges it is going to call forth a blind reaction of self protection, and the information that is actually positively challenging one to expand, will be seen as the enemy. As darkness identified with, is scared of the light that illumines and transforms it to light! A weak ego makes excuses to itself for it's own existence, and won't listen to other perspectives.
See, the Buddha is a perfect example of a strong and confident ego, pryer to his path to enlightenment. He was shown love, was given support, was shown positive attention. He had a strong sense of self worth! So, when he found the path of higher selfless discovery, he was very aware of what he was giving up, or trying to transcend. He didn't have the neurotic tendencies of an abused child, those who sadly grow up not knowing their own personal power.
And yes, again, it does tend to be those abused as children who fall into these pits. Not knowing their personal power would explain why they keep the secrecy for years, not realizing that they're the ones who have the power over the errant teachers.
But don't forget, there's also denial, there's a human tendency to want to sweep unpleasantness under the rug, rather than face it and do something to remedy it. There's also a human tendency to want to believe that fairy tales are real.
These threads haven't been about posting negative news in order to get attention. These topics start because someone has made a disturbing discovery, and they want others to know that something is seriously amiss, or they need help understanding the situation, or they want to find a solution to the problem.
Anyway, I think we're close to finished with this round. Nice to see you.
I do agree with everything you've stated in this last post.
At the same time, sometimes fairy tales are real. Yogic masters can do amazing things!! But yes, caution, even those that have incredible siddhi or psychic powers, are not necessarily enlightened.
I prefer the term phala instead of siddhi... phala is fruit; to help one keep going through the path, it is not the end and there should be not much focus on that.
TB strays away from this, instead of a fruit along the path it has the "promise of greater things" as the goal... and at the same time uses this frame of mind to promote so called tantric sex and rituals.
You have no idea what you're talking about. Fruit? Tantra is all about fruition, not being distracted by super natural powers but utilizing personal power for the sake of helping all sentient beings, it's the Mahayana vow. All Siddhi means is power, that's it. Power is the fruit of effort, and in a tantric context this has everything to do with the fruit of spiritual practice.
Hinayana is considered the ground, finding your own truth for the sake of your own liberation, and Mahayana is considered the path, attaining enlightenment is connected with everyone and everything else in the cosmos, so your action is compassionate and connected to a wider view of being. Vajrayana has to do with the fruit. Which is why it has to do with chakras, energy practices, as one's awareness becomes subtler through the ground and the path, either in one lifetime or through many, many lifetimes. You are either born aware of these energy levels and find practices that deal with that level of awareness, or you gain it through practice in this life. Vajrayana has to do with the wind channels in the body. If you are not aware of these, then you need to practice the ground or the path and not concern yourself with deminishing those that are practicing on the fruit. Those of us who are aware enough to turn every action, even if it's denied in the lower system tenets, into spiritual realization. This includes the transformation, of which tantra is about, of base energies into higher capacities of direct understanding. Of turning physical bliss, into spiritual insight through contemplating emptiness and inter-dependency.
To not see the seamless connection of Hinayana, Mahayana and Vajrayana is really just you. This has nothing to do with reality.
It's all according to capacity. If you don't have the capacity to understand the import of Tantra, that's fine. Having sex is not necessary for enlightenment. Before you make judgements, it behooves you as a self responsible human being to be informed about what you are denying. First of all, Tibetan Buddhism is not Tibetan, it's Indian in origin. It's Vajrayana and has it's origin in India, pre-tibet. Sexual Tantra exists in many strands of Vajrayana from Nepal, to Japan, not only in Tibet. Also, sexual tantra is not to be undertaken unless advised by a qualified master as there are experiential pre-requisites. There are pre-requisites for a monk before he or she can undertake such a practice, this includes a level of mastering dispassion.
Also, tell me, how many monks do you think have sex in Thailand that are supposed to be celibate monks under Theravadin rules of conduct? A lot! So, this infraction has nothing to do with a particular system, it has to do with individual capacity and that is all.
So, your projection of injustice is merely a reflection of your misunderstanding of the intention of sexual tantra. Tantra as a whole, is not at all about sex, but about transforming base level energies in the body into spiritual potentialities, or potency. Most Tantric adepts have been celibate for long periods of times, then maybe sexual to breed or practice something subtler as revealed in the Highest Yoga Tantra, or Anuttarayogatantra.
But, anyway... my point is, because you don't understand it, doesn't mean it doesn't make any sense. You need more of an education in the history of Buddhism.
http://www.rinpoche.com/teachings/gpf.htm
I was just pointing out that the frame of mind of lamas is basically the same as the frame of mind of hindu/brahmic gurus.
one of obtaining more siddhis, more power.
if phala is fruit, tantra is something else.
I'm just pointing out that your perception has nothing to do with reality.
The problem with your view is it doesn't take in the entire stretch of history of the Buddhist Mahasiddhas. The view in Buddhist Tantra is different from Hindu Tantra as well, so in that sense it's like comparing apples and oranges. The cultivation of virtue is also deeply present in Buddhist Tantra and is the entire point of the cultivation. The texts of Tantra speak about the fact that when siddhis arise, they should be ignored until the true siddhi of liberation comes about as not to get distracted. Siddhis should also only be used to help others and not for selfish gain. So, those that are distracted by siddhis, or who use them for selfish gain, could not be considered Buddhist during those points of time when they do as such. The famous Lamas or Rinpoches that I've met are deeply compassionate and deeply virtuous. They literally emanate it in there presence making everyone around them more peaceful and compassionate while they are in presence.
You should watch this video, that is if you want to get a better education and a better view of the reality.
The culmination of that research is her 1994 book, Passionate Enlightenment: Women in Tantric Buddhism. Now in its fourth printing, Passionate Enlightenment has been hailed as a groundbreaking contribution to the study of tantric history. Drawing on her exhaustive study of the central tantric texts in their original languages, as well as two and a half years of field research in India and Nepal, Shaw's book presents a revolutionary reexamination of the nature of tantric practice, revolving around one simple point: In addition to serving the spiritual progress of men, tantra was also for the enlightenment of women. While there has been a great deal of scholarship on both Buddhism and tantra over the past quarter century, prior to Shaw's work, the assumption underlying that research had always been that women were included in tantric practice only to the extent that they could support men in their pursuit of enlightenment. By setting that assumption aside and taking a fresh, in-depth look at both written and living sources, Shaw discovered a world in which women not only lived and practiced on an equal footing with men in their own pursuit of spiritual transformation, but in many cases even led the way. In fact, Shaw learned that for the serious male tantric practitioner, women were to be worshipped, honored and revered as the bringers of enlightened energy into the world. Through this revolutionary reinterpretation of the tantric texts, Shaw was finally able to make sense of many of the seemingly disparate strands of this complex tradition and, in so doing, to create a foundation for a new chapter in the study of tantric theory and practice.
http://www.enlightennext.org/magazine/j13/shaw.asp
WIE: There have been so many abuses of power by spiritual authorities over the past twenty years, and in particular, many reported cases of sexual abuse by teachers in the Buddhist tradition claiming to be practicing tantra. Often it seems that the word "tantra" is used to justify what usually turns out to be nothing more than the pursuit of personal sexual gratification, often at the disciple's expense. Even the great Kalu Rinpoche, revered as one of the greatest Buddhist masters of the modern era, often referred to as the Milarepa of the twentieth century and considered by many to have been a living Buddha, is now known to have been maintaining a secret sexual relationship with his young Western female translator, June Campbell, who claims with considerable support that she was intimidated into keeping the relationship secret.
MS: I have no doubt that it happened. She was emotionally coerced into a sexually abusive and exploitative relationship. Unfortunately, the word "tantra" does provide a shield behind which sexual predation can hide. But when you actually inquire into such sexual situations, you find out that tantric practice was not the intent of the relationship. The way, for example, that June Campbell describes their relationship, there was nothing even remotely tantric about it. It was not for their mutual pursuit of enlightenment. It was purely exploitative. This is not tantra.
I have been approached by people who would simply say something like, "Have sex with me and you'll become more enlightened!"—which of course is not tantra. If someone is approached by a spiritual teacher and is told, as it was told to June Campbell and others, that this is for the benefit of the teacher, then they should know automatically that it is not tantra. Because in tantra, you're not allowed to use the other person on any level. It has to be totally voluntary. Any form of coercion is disallowed in tantra. I think the tantrics foresaw this kind of abuse because they made a rule that the man may not directly approach or request a woman to enter into a tantric relationship. He has to approach her and offer himself subtly, indirectly through body language, through signs and a certain secret language they use.
We need this kind of clarity in the West, because women's lives, their peace of mind and even their spiritual practice are being destroyed by ordinary predation. This is simply sexual abuse in Eastern garb. I hope that work like mine, interviews like yours and this issue of your magazine will help to clarify what tantra is so that people cannot hide behind that label.
MS: These abuses and distortions actually justify the original insight and intent of tantra, which was that if you do not work directly with your sexuality, if you simply repress it or try to ignore it without mastering it, then you cannot become fully enlightened. It's not going to take care of itself. And it's not going to go away by itself if you have a lifetime of celibacy. What we see happening, even in the case of the great master, is that if sexuality is neglected, and at the same time, other sides of the personality, such as lust for power or accumulation, are also developing, then the sexual energies are simply going to be there to be claimed by the uncultivated and even possibly corrupt dimensions of the personality. This is the entire point of tantra: Enlighten your sexuality along with everything else!
WIE: Because if it's not looked into, if it's not reckoned with, then it's bound to resurface somewhere?
MS: Yes, it will surface as part of the unenlightened dimension of your character and emerge in a way that causes you suffering and inflicts suffering on others. The purpose of the path to enlightenment is to cease to suffer and to cease to cause others to suffer. Cases like this simply demonstrate that no matter how enlightened you may be, you must also pay attention to your sexuality.
I've read the Shaw book. She focusses only on the origins of tantra and what the practice was like back then, when women were in control of it. In the book, she denies that the practices changed when they entered Tibet (some would say: degenerated, or were distorted). She says in the book that she never had a problem with any of the lamas she's interviewed or studied with. She seems, in the book, to deny that there's a problem. While it's great to read about the original practices, she doesn't address contemporary reality, or reality in old Tibet, at all.
This is a very interesting interview, because she acknowledges there's a misuse of power, of the term "tantra", there's misconduct. Thanks for this.
*sexual liberation is a contradiction... this will probably be misquoted, but it is.
indeed.
my point is that liberation from samsara comes first...
and that "sexual" liberation is being used as an excuse to act in a way that furthers entrenches people to samsara.