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.
Was Chogyam Trungpa a Bodhisattva?
Chaz
The Remarkable ChazAnywhere, Everywhere & Nowhere Veteran
With all the talk about so-and-so being a Bodhisattva, I got to thinking, but not before I paid a rare visit to DharmaWheel this morning.
I was reading a long thread about Chogyam Trungpa and decided it was high time I watched the film "Crazy Wisdom: The Life & Times of Chogyam Trungpa Rinpoche" again. For those of you who haven't seen or heard, it's a 2011 documentary about, and you guessed it, Chogyam Trungpa, focusing on his life and work in the US.
It's an interesting film.
I've had a long-time fascination with the Vidyadhara. I've spent years trying to reconcile the obvious genius seen in his teaching and the equally obvious humanity, warts and all, seen in his life.
I've always watched - sometimes bemused, sometimes alarmed, and sometimes touched by the broad range of reactions to even the mention of his name out here in forums such as this. I marvel at the continuing devotion in the lives he touched. I find some opinions of him amusing in how far they'll go in an attempt to denegrate his legacy. I become alarmed how prudish we become with regards to his ..... procivities.
I'm also reminded about how he taught all of this to be nothing but spiritual materialism and a profound obstacle to realization - how we foist our preconceptions about how a dharma teacher should be and shut out any who don't conform to those preconceptions. And we don't stop there - we go on an insist, either implicitly or explicitly, that the rest of us should conform as well. It goes beyond spiritual materialism - it goes on to the darkest angels of our nature.
For me, it gives me something to think about and something to bring to the cushion.
My own journey to reconciliation with the Vidyadhara is aided, for better or worse, by the many people I associate with - friends - Dharma brothers and sisters - who knew the man personally, who were taught by him and practiced under his guidance. These are people whose devotion is as sharp, clear and freah as it was on the day the Vidyadhara died. These are people with deep, strong practice. People who I am taught by, both formally and informally.
And I ask myself, how can a man who "violated" so many precepts, who was so controversial, outrageous and unconventional be as realized as everyone who knew him personally says.
Like Ani Pema Chodron says in the film, "I don't know".
And I doubt that I ever will.
Trungpa is an enigma.
Bodhisattvas are said to be governed by standards beyond our ability to understand. They can be a Kurt Cobain, or a Charles Dickens.
They can be a Chogyam Trungpa.
Trungpa was a lot of things, and perhaps a Bodhisattva, manifesting for the benefit of beings.
I like to think that he was.
I was reading a long thread about Chogyam Trungpa and decided it was high time I watched the film "Crazy Wisdom: The Life & Times of Chogyam Trungpa Rinpoche" again. For those of you who haven't seen or heard, it's a 2011 documentary about, and you guessed it, Chogyam Trungpa, focusing on his life and work in the US.
It's an interesting film.
I've had a long-time fascination with the Vidyadhara. I've spent years trying to reconcile the obvious genius seen in his teaching and the equally obvious humanity, warts and all, seen in his life.
I've always watched - sometimes bemused, sometimes alarmed, and sometimes touched by the broad range of reactions to even the mention of his name out here in forums such as this. I marvel at the continuing devotion in the lives he touched. I find some opinions of him amusing in how far they'll go in an attempt to denegrate his legacy. I become alarmed how prudish we become with regards to his ..... procivities.
I'm also reminded about how he taught all of this to be nothing but spiritual materialism and a profound obstacle to realization - how we foist our preconceptions about how a dharma teacher should be and shut out any who don't conform to those preconceptions. And we don't stop there - we go on an insist, either implicitly or explicitly, that the rest of us should conform as well. It goes beyond spiritual materialism - it goes on to the darkest angels of our nature.
For me, it gives me something to think about and something to bring to the cushion.
My own journey to reconciliation with the Vidyadhara is aided, for better or worse, by the many people I associate with - friends - Dharma brothers and sisters - who knew the man personally, who were taught by him and practiced under his guidance. These are people whose devotion is as sharp, clear and freah as it was on the day the Vidyadhara died. These are people with deep, strong practice. People who I am taught by, both formally and informally.
And I ask myself, how can a man who "violated" so many precepts, who was so controversial, outrageous and unconventional be as realized as everyone who knew him personally says.
Like Ani Pema Chodron says in the film, "I don't know".
And I doubt that I ever will.
Trungpa is an enigma.
Bodhisattvas are said to be governed by standards beyond our ability to understand. They can be a Kurt Cobain, or a Charles Dickens.
They can be a Chogyam Trungpa.
Trungpa was a lot of things, and perhaps a Bodhisattva, manifesting for the benefit of beings.
I like to think that he was.
1
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Trungpa himself, in his autobiography, says that monks and tulkus, when removed from the highly structured monastic environment, tend to lost their orientation completely, and succumb to all manner of indulgence. That's a very telling observation. Anyone as callous to the suffering he inflicted on some of his followers couldn't possibly be a bodhisattva.
(See: The Other Side of Eden: Life With John Steinbeck, by John Steinbeck IV & Nancy Steinbeck)
Who do you believe, whoever's account tend to reinforce your own preconceptions? I know dozens, maybe more than 100 (I've never sat down and counted) who are still utterly devoted to the man? Who have remarkable practice and are themselves marvelous teachers? What do you do about that, discount their devotion and what they gained from knowing Trungpa because of one disgruntled former student?
Have you ever been in direct contact with any of his former students?
How much of his stuff have you read.
How much of my post did you read? Or, are you simply reacting to the title?
Those in the pros category tend to outnumber the cons in my experience. But of course that doesn't mean anything, either.
Noone ever talks about W.S. Merwin. Ever wonder why?
And that's the thing. He was FAR from perfect. He could be incosiderate, and even cruel. No one, NO ONE denies that. Yet, his teachings stand the test of time of masterworks in the Dharma as it was presented to the west in those days.
My post is supposed to be about how to reconcile the obvious shortcomings of the man, to what appeared to be pure genius.
They say that sometimes there's a fine line between genius and insanity.
What I find useful in my life as regards the Vidyadhara is the constant challenge his life offers to my ongoing path.
In all honesty this same debate happens in Theravada but its, was Ajahn Chah Enlightened, was Ajahn Maha Bua, is Ajahn Brahm..no way to know, best not to care and work on your own path.
And in this case, it might clarify whether someone should consider him a worthy teacher.
Quite right.
One thing about CTR, is that while his teachings remain very important, his life and style often flies in the face of teachings of the precepts and about what constitutes a "worthy" teacher - as in Paltrul Rinpoche's "Words of My Perfect Teacher". It can be very easy to dismiss CTR, but is that wisdom or merely a convenient cop-out on thinking for oneself?
One thing about CTR, is that while his teachings remain very important, his life and style often flies in the face of teachings of the precepts and about what constitutes a "worthy" teacher - as in Paltrul Rinpoche's "Words of My Perfect Teacher". It can be very easy to dismiss CTR, but is that wisdom or merely a convenient cop-out on thinking for oneself?
is every teacher in the tradition supposed to be a Bodhisattva? I'm ignorant of such things.
if not then I think there is a clear difference in discussion between the two.
Human language is ill-equipped to convey the complexity and perplexity of the world and its beings. Chogyam Trungpa seems to have had a positive influence on many (including Pema Chodron), but harmed or exploited others. If you are one of the former, acknowledging the positive influence his teachings had on your life with the label "bodhisattva" may be useful. If you were one of the latter, perhaps not. I've read two of his books, and they were very incisive and have had a deep influence on my practice. But my experience is just my own.
Personally, I don't believe "bodhisattvas" or "buddhas" or "arahants" exist outside the realm of human languaging.
From the OP This “dark angel of my nature” - as you put it – simply says that there’s a moral code for spiritual teachers. That’s not so weird. There’s a pretty strict moral code for my job as well. When I break it I lose my job. It is not such a “profound obstacle for my realization” as you think to acknowledge the value of such a moral code.
I don’t mind the idea that Trungpa maybe was a Bodhisattva. I do object the suggestion that it is somehow very narrow minded to insist that dharma teachers keep some basic rules of behavior.
A bodhisattva may act like an irresponsible idiot, but if he chooses to be a dharma teacher he should know and keep some basic rules.
In the case of CTR, so much is said about his realization and paranirvana and in my own experience the obvious legacy reflected in his students that I know personally, it may be that this particular teacher was.
http://www.kagyu.org/kagyulineage/buddhism/int/int04.php
Everybody was screwing everybody and those that weren't wanted to. If you think what was going on in CTR's sangha was "weird", read up on what was happening at Apple Computer about that same time. Nobody demonizes Steve Jobs for the near-constant orgy that was reportedly going on at Apple.
the thing is, it is kinda narrow-minded, though.
1 You need to take refuge AND develop some degree of calm abiding (shamathai)
2 abandon negative actions
(1) aspiration (strong determination to practice Dharma), (2) diligence (enthusiastic effort), (3) recollection (not forgetting the practice), and (4) meditative concentration (one-pointedness of mind without distractions).
I do care that you hold the idea that if something's not going to change "your life", that it's not worth contemplating.
This very much goes back to my teaching science. It was less important to me that my students learned scientific facts, than it was that they learned how to think in a scientific manner.
Here is the service he did me:
One one particular night, Trungpa was to lecture at the Zen center I attended. I was three or four or five years into practice and still pretty starchy as a Zen student. Everyone was excited at Trungpa's visit, but of course they were all acting cool as cucumbers, Buddhist-fashion. When Trungpa arrived on time (he was notorious for being late), I asked one of his students how they had managed to get him to an appointment on time. "Easy," said the student, "we just told him it was three hours earlier than it actually was."
Trungpa sat in front of the zendo hall, in front of the altar. He had a tall glass of clear liquid by his left knee. And he talked. I literally could not understand him. His enunciation had been affected by a car accident, I was told later. After the talk, a group of us went to the Zen teacher's house for tea. Trungpa and the Zen teacher sat at a cafe-sized round table in front of the room. Trungpa had a tall glass of clear liquid in front of him. The Zen teacher sipped tea. The students sat at low rectangular tables about the size of picnic benches. Everyone was chatting amiably, but I kept looking at Trungpa. Finally, I decided, what the hell, I was never going to see the man again so why not go and ask a question?
I approached the table, bowed with my palms together, and asked Trungpa some off-the-shelf-Buddhist question. I was standing perhaps 30 inches from him. And when he opened his mouth to reply, I was hit by the very-high octane of his breath. The guy, if I had to guess, was plastered. I managed not to back up as I listened to his reply, which was about 200 words long. Of those 200 words, I understood precisely one: "Cheetos."
Unwilling to repeat my question and perhaps receive a comprehensible answer, I put my palms together and bowed, but as I was returning to a standing position, his right hand shot out of his lap like a rattlesnake. With it, he gently but firmly grabbed my two joined hands and, as I looked up in surprise, he looked me right in the eye and gently pulled my hands down. Looking into his eyes, it was as if he were speaking in the clearest possible English: "Let's cut the bullshit!" I never forgot and I never forget the gratitude I felt then and still feel today.
Were his actions in many instances cruel and manipulative? I imagine they were. Were his actions sometimes kind and caring? I imagine they were. Either way, I still have to tie my shoes in the morning and there's only one bodhisattva that can do that.
Trungpa was essentially raised, groomed and educated to be a monk - a teacher of the Dharma...
Just because he was trained thoroughly and trained well, and as a gifted "student" absorbed all that was necessary to regurgitate that Dharma knowledge, even if he CAN claim moments of keen insight, still makes him no more than a man, essentially raised, groomed and educated to be a monk.
But he was a monk that broke all the rules, many times over, in many ways - and also truly hurt people along the way, and soured the taste of the Dharma for many others. He drank, he did drugs, he banged everything that moved, (and often encouraged those in his Sangha to do the same); he was the Guru to the Stars and the Rich.
He fell deeply into the well of Ego, Wealth and Celebrity Power.
Trungpa cursed and spoke ill of people who challenged him; he often flew into rages, he often disrespected women... all in all, he was a real gem of a "holy man" wasn't he?
Only those who wish to idolize him and excuse his wretched behavior (that no other Catholic priest, Christian clergyman or rabbi would EVER get away with, I might add), try to say he was a Bodhisattva.
I may be wrong, but As far as I know, no learned, respected, higher echelon Lama, Teacher or monk claims Trungpa was a Bodhisattva. As a matter of fact, most of the time they avoid mentioning him at all. And I can understand why.
@MaryAnne, do you know what a Bodhisattva is? If not well then how can you offer an opinion?
Also Trungpa is exceptional even with respect to other monks who trained at a young age. He is a genius.
I've had sex outside a commitment. What is the difference between that happening once in my life and having that happen 100s of times? Or should I feel guilty for having sex outside of a commitment? If not then why is it worse if it happens 100 times?
CTR was, according to the traditions of his people, literally born to be a monk. He was recognized as a tulku at 18 months. he would spend the rest of his life up to his exile, in a monastic environment.
The would he encountered outside Tibet was markedly different from the one he lived in.
As he came better known in the west, and if the stories I hear from people who were there (women as well as men) are to be believed, women (and men) were throwing themselves at him. For a young man in the prime of life, it must have been a big temptation. You would have to have been made of stone to not respond to that.
That's not to excuse anything, of course, but if you're going to condemn him for being as human as everyone else, you might consider casting the light on yourself, first.
I can't condemn they guy. I drink, I've used drugs, I've slept around, I've used people who trusted me, and I've hurt people in ways CTR never would or did. I'm not any better or worse than him, so condemn him? Not on your life.
If you're better than that, I applaud you.
Where am I condemning the guy? The topic at hand is Do you think Trungpa was a Bodhisattva? I don't. And I gave the reasons why I don't believe so.
I don't "condemn" him for being an ordinary man, with issues and flaws.
I'm just saying he's not a Bodhisattva and shouldn't be revered as one.
He was a lousy Buddhist (if one is going to judge by behavior and adherence to the precepts, etc - which is done nearly every damn day right here in this forum), and a lousy example as a monk.
To answer your question;
* The bodhisattva vow is the commitment to put others before oneself. It is a statement of willingness to give up one’s own well-being, even one’s own enlightenment, for the sake of others. And a bodhisattva is simply a person who lives in the spirit of that vow, perfecting the qualities known as the six paramitas [perfections]—generosity, discipline, patience, exertion, meditation, and transcendental knowledge—in his effort to liberate beings.
Taking the bodhisattva vow implies that instead of holding our own individual territory and defending it tooth and nail, we become open to the world that we are living in. It means we are willing to take on greater responsibility, immense responsibility.
In fact it means taking a big chance. But taking such a chance is not false heroism or personal eccentricity. It is a chance that has been taken in the past by millions of bodhisattvas, enlightened ones, and great teachers.
In taking the bodhisattva vow, we acknowledge that the world around us is workable. From the bodhisattva’s point of view it is not a hard-core, incorrigible world. It can be worked with within the inspiration of buddhadharma, following the example of Lord Buddha and the great bodhisattvas. We can join their campaign to work with sentient beings properly, fully, and thoroughly—without grasping, without confusion, and without aggression. Such a campaign is a natural development of the practice of meditation because meditation brings a growing sense of egolessness.
By taking the bodhisattva vow, we open ourselves to many demands. If we are asked for help, we should not refuse; if we are invited to be a parent, we should not refuse. In other words, we have to have some kind of interest in taking care of people, some appreciation of the phenomenal world and its occupants. It is not an easy matter. It requires that we not be completely tired and put off by people’s heavy-handed neurosis, ego-dirt, ego-puke, or ego-diarrhea; instead we are appreciative and willing to clean up for them. It is a sense of softness whereby we allow situations to take place in spite of little inconveniences; we allow situations to bother us, to overcrowd us.
Taking a bodhisattva vow means that we are inspired to put the teachings of Buddhism into practice in our everyday lives.
By taking the bodhisattva vow, we actually present ourselves as the property of sentient beings: depending on the situation, we are willing to be a highway, a boat, a floor, or a house. We allow other sentient beings to use us in whatever way they choose. As the earth sustains the atmosphere and outer space accommodates the stars, galaxies, and all the rest, we are willing to carry the burdens of the world.
__________________________________________________________
IMO- As usual, Trungpa talked a good game, said all the right words, but yet it's pretty hard to do all the above while drunk, stoned or busy bedding young teen girls or other people's wives, no? He was no bodhisattva, as evident by his own description of one....
(Bold and italics are mine- for emphasis)
* From The Collected Works of Chögyam Trungpa, Volume Three, edited by Carolyn Rose Gimian. © 2003
So now you are implying I'm Stupid? How charming...
But if it doesn't walk like a duck...
re: Secular Buddhism and Boddhisatvas.
Can only speak for myself, they are useful as role models. Harry Potter could be a role model without believing in magic or Harry Potter.
I was not an alcoholic (probably) but I was drinking too much for awhile after I broke up with a girl I was head over heals for. The example Trungpa made of wisdom mind cut through a lot of the rubbish (shit) I was dealing with. Because CTR was also an alcoholic it was an inspiration that I was still worth something and that helped to get OFF the drinking. I used a method of compassion, with letting go (of meditation) to get off of drinking. I also used 'sitting with difficult states', and that is also meditation.
So I might not be here if not for Trungpa.
Exactly.
Hardly.
That's about as much response as it deserves.
Just to clarify.... "MaryAnne" didn't say: "She's a secularist. The Bodhisattva is predicated, in part, on reincarnation, something far outside the realm of the "secular" Buddhist. "
That was the ever smug Chaz saying that about me; a secular Buddhist.
As for the rest of your post, not much I can disagree with, except the last part about "judging" others. A question was asked regarding a specific person being a Bodhisattva. The question was answered with opinions. Personally, I don't care who chooses to idolize Trungpa or not. Every man is entitled to their hero-worship... no matter how silly.
Trungpa is not the Buddha, he didn't "discover" the truth... he merely retells it. He said what has been said thousands of times before he said them. We each are given access to that "Truth", it's up to us to realize it for ourselves.
I merely see the reality of who he was- a man with flaws and delusions.
No better, no worse than any other lay person. However, I do believe he was not up to par with anyone who deserved to be called a "monk". And I think he knew it, too, which is why he took off the robes. He knew.
All that said- I just find the notion that he was some sort of a sacred "holy man" with powers of a Bodhisattva a little astounding...
If I was on the jury, I'd sure give him a pass.
Then it's obvious that you've never read or heard a single one of his teachings, and if you have it's equally obvious that you did't get it.
No, I'm not calling you stupid.
A Buddhist teacher is supposed to be a reference on how to learn how to live a certain type of life, and he is teaching things including the Precepts and how to end suffering.
A doctor is treating physical illnesses. Totally different realm.
I had some great professors in college. The best of them were sleeping with their students and drinking heavily.
It had no bearing whatsoever on how well they understood the subject or how good they were at teaching it.
I think a Buddhist teacher isn't supposed to help you live a certain type of life. A teacher is supposed to lead you to awakening.
Maybe those more a more secular outlook are more interested in Buddhism as if it were some self-improvement strategy.
How can anyone know if someone else is enlightened? In 40 years, I have only found one answer that fills my bill: In order to recognize an enlightened being, the one doing the recognizing would (ipso facto) have to be enlightened him/herself. The chances of an unenlightened being recognizing an enlightened being are precisely nil.
I realize that recognizing an unenlightened being carries with it similar strictures, but we can leave that for another day.
But not as a result of living "a certain type of life". You have to wake up. That's what a teacher's for.
Thats it.
I don't think what CTR represented had anything to do with stages, or processes, or gradual attainment of anything. I don't think he was a Bodhisattva because I think that whole concept is a later accretion, as is the 'arhat' concept.
I am pretty sure that he thought that too.
He was a Essence Mahamudra adept. Everthing else was window dressing.
He was also an awful person..one has no bearing on the other.