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.
I visited a Meditation centre today where the teacher claims he 'IS' a BUDDHA (fully enlightened)
The women were also able to provide documents to the Sunday Canberra Times that showed complaints about Lama Choedak's conduct were met with stern warnings from senior foreign figures in the Tibetan Buddhist movement, who said talking to the media or telling new group members what had happened could be spiritually damaging and prevent other Canberrans from ''achieving enlightenment through buddhism''.
Don't you love this logic (being sarcastic)? It's not the perpetrator who is behaving in a "spiritually damaging" way and possibly preventing others from "achieving enlightenment through buddhism", it's the victims who cry "foul", and are exercising compassion and right speech in speaking out and warning others. :shake:
The women were also able to provide documents to the Sunday Canberra Times that showed complaints about Lama Choedak's conduct were met with stern warnings from senior foreign figures in the Tibetan Buddhist movement, who said talking to the media or telling new group members what had happened could be spiritually damaging and prevent other Canberrans from ''achieving enlightenment through buddhism''.
Don't you love this logic (being sarcastic)? It's not the perpetrator who is behaving in a "spiritually damaging" way and possibly preventing others from "achieving enlightenment through buddhism", it's the victims who cry "foul", and are exercising compassion and right speech in speaking out and warning others. :shake:
Sorry to say that this approach is more common than uncommon ... in Buddhist circles, Catholic circles, business circles and perhaps even personal circles: Shoot the messenger! Like all errors, the best anyone can take away from it is, "Don't YOU do that!"
Besides, it's not true that criticism of one sect in one tradition will turn people off to Buddhism as a whole. It may turn people off to that sect, or to that tradition (which may not be a bad thing. Dare one hope that such an eventuality would force the tradition to clean up its act?), but there are other traditions in Buddhism that the disenchanted can turn to, as well as the option of studying on one's own. And there are non-sectarian dharma centers where one can study. The leadership mentioned in the article either has no idea how badly they're behaving, or doesn't care. Or maybe is reacting out of fear. (End rant. Back to topic...)
CW -- No criticism or dissent intended, but I think that one of the great obstacles in Buddhist practice is to imagine that because my longing is to be 'pure' or 'unblemished' or 'enlightened,' others' longings will run along similar lines. This is foolish and a waste of time. It is not foolish and a waste of time because others do not have similar longings or because they transgress from within their chosen school or format. Some do. Some don't. But either way we are left to extinguish the fires of hell in our own houses.
I am not suggesting that a jaundiced view of humanity is warranted. I am not suggesting that a rosy view is warranted either. These are just more barriers. I am trying to suggest that having decided to make a Buddhist effort, we should do so with determination -- learning from others, perhaps, but not relying on either their horns or their halos.
I wasn't referring to you, but to the hierarchy that threatened that Aussie sangha, and said they were risking turning people off to the Dharma, a common accusation when someone whistle-blows. That riff was sort of a continuation of my post previous to that.
"from senior foreign figures in the Tibetan Buddhist movement,"
This is true (as a personal testimony) but it could be misleading because there isn't a unified Tibetan movement. It would be more powerful if the women had named specific senior figures. Wouldn't it? Then say we organize a petition. Who is going to vote a 'screw TB' petition? No we need specific perps.
"from senior foreign figures in the Tibetan Buddhist movement,"
This is true (as a personal testimony) but it could be misleading because there isn't a unified Tibetan movement. It would be more powerful if the women had named specific senior figures. Wouldn't it? Then say we organize a petition. Who is going to vote a 'screw TB' petition? No we need specific perps.
Jeffrey, I'm detecting a pattern to some of your posts. You always ask people to name names. This isn't always possible, in part due to libel laws. I think we can safely assume the women worded their statement the way they did for good reason. They probably put a lot of thought into how to word their statement.
So you don't find it misleading to name a tibetan buddhist movement when there is no centralization. I do. I hadn't thought of libel laws. The reason I favor naming names is so that the innocent do not bear the burden of the guilty. Does that make sense? In essence it is an overgeneralization and a shotgun approach to going about business.
Comments
___________________________
@dakini No, American. But that doesn't mean I won't sic my attack kangaroo on anyone who fails to play nice.
I am not suggesting that a jaundiced view of humanity is warranted. I am not suggesting that a rosy view is warranted either. These are just more barriers. I am trying to suggest that having decided to make a Buddhist effort, we should do so with determination -- learning from others, perhaps, but not relying on either their horns or their halos.
This is true (as a personal testimony) but it could be misleading because there isn't a unified Tibetan movement. It would be more powerful if the women had named specific senior figures. Wouldn't it? Then say we organize a petition. Who is going to vote a 'screw TB' petition? No we need specific perps.
___________________________
But can they spell it?