Was Chogyam Trungpa a Bodhisattva?

Steve_B

A larger-than-life personality, a set of circumstances, a very high intelligence, created a situation where he had access to much wisdom to convey, the ability to convey it with aplomb, and a wide audience.

An important figure in Western Buddhism? Obviously.

A bodhisattva? Obviously not.

Dakini

Chaz said:

Sure I know about Stienbeck (I'm a huge fan of his father) and his wife, and I also know that there are those who discredit his account and motivations.

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?

If people got something positive from his teachings, good for them. But many people didn't. The Steinbecks are just one example among many who were harmed by him. Heck, even he, himself, was harmed by him! He died of alcoholism and drug abuse. Hardly the behavior of a bodhisattva.

Citta

If the idea of his being a Bodhisattva had been put to him he would have made a short sharp reply. It would have been along the lines of letting go of fantasy.
Anyone who has read and internalised Cutting Through Spiritual Materialism will know that the idea of claims and counterclaims of attainment,or denial of attainment or indeed of attainment per se, are alien to his whole view.
There is good reason for anyone following the Sutric path to reject Trungpa, but to accuse him of failing to be something he never claimed to be, and indeed that he saw as invalid, is disingenuous.

Jeffrey

Double awesome, @Citta. Hit the nail on the head.

oceancaldera207

Perhaps what one is drawn to in someone like trungpa is the 'reflections' of greater wisdom contained in his sayings. I believe that the light of wisdom is so strong in many of the ancient doctrines, that the truth shines even through the mud.
I personally believe that trungpa used his education and bits and pieces of the ancient scriptures to form his own following in order to satiate his base desires.
The reason i am so rough with words on this subject is that I am aware of the hardship, piety and morality of many ancient monks, whose words are ignored these days in favor of people like trungpa. The legacy of a lifetime of chastity, meditation, hunger and relentless seeking is cast aside for someone using the teachings for personal gain... this is something I will fight against until the day I die.

Sometimes the easy way isnt the right way. Look hard. Think hard.

oceancaldera207

honestly, from my perspective, trungpa uses a technique that causes a mild 'alarm effect.' this was most likely derived from ch'an methodologies, but instead of using it exclusively and in a specific manner with the intention of keeping monks from drifting in focus from the essential principle*, he uses it to shock and disturb with impunity. This was used for one purpose: to assert dominance. it was especially effective on the populace on which he predated...they had limited contact with monastics and little energy to ascertain and absorb the ancient scriptural subtleties, if they even had access to clear translations at all.
His basic method was rife with encouragement for supporters to create conceptual hierarchies that benefited him almost exclusively... not just incorrectness but willful ignorance and violence to the basic tenets of the buddha.

Nevermind

genkaku said:

Though I have heard both the good tales and the bad, still I only met the man once. I read his books and liked them ... but I only met him once. Whether he was a bodhisattva or not doesn't interest me in the least. He did me a good service and I am as thankful for that as I might be to anyone who lent me a hand I was capable of recognizing.

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.

Let's cut the bullshit... wow, and he didn't even have the guts to say it out loud.

Jeffrey

oceancaldera207 said:

honestly, from my perspective, trungpa uses a technique that causes a mild 'alarm effect.' this was most likely derived from ch'an methodologies, but instead of using it exclusively and in a specific manner with the intention of keeping monks from drifting in focus from the essential principle*, he uses it to shock and disturb with impunity. This was used for one purpose: to assert dominance. it was especially effective on the populace on which he predated...they had limited contact with monastics and little energy to ascertain and absorb the ancient scriptural subtleties, if they even had access to clear translations at all.
His basic method was rife with encouragement for supporters to create conceptual hierarchies that benefited him almost exclusively... not just incorrectness but willful ignorance and violence to the basic tenets of the buddha.

How do you know what Trungpa intended? If you are not Trungpa then you cannot know for certain why he used various techniques.

fivebells

What is the value of a practice which leaves the practitioner an awful person?

Steve_B

Negative to that particular practitioner perhaps.
Perhaps also a net positive, if the practice leaves most practitioners better people.

Jeffrey

That's subjective that he was an awful person, @fivebells. A lot of his students loved him. Pema Chodron, my guru Lama Shenpen Hookham, and Rigdzin Shikpo were greatly helped in their understanding of Buddhism and they have gone on to spread what he showed them to their students. He is a dharma grandfather. He is considered an important part of the Karma Kagyu lineage. This might be sectarian on your end @fivebells? Maybe not too.

oceancaldera207

Jeffrey said:

oceancaldera207 said:

honestly, from my perspective, trungpa uses a technique that causes a mild 'alarm effect.' this was most likely derived from ch'an methodologies, but instead of using it exclusively and in a specific manner with the intention of keeping monks from drifting in focus from the essential principle*, he uses it to shock and disturb with impunity. This was used for one purpose: to assert dominance. it was especially effective on the populace on which he predated...they had limited contact with monastics and little energy to ascertain and absorb the ancient scriptural subtleties, if they even had access to clear translations at all.
His basic method was rife with encouragement for supporters to create conceptual hierarchies that benefited him almost exclusively... not just incorrectness but willful ignorance and violence to the basic tenets of the buddha.

How do you know what Trungpa intended? If you are not Trungpa then you cannot know for certain why he used various techniques.

I have ascertained this from the history of his actions and from the few brief moments I can stand reading his vile imitation of 'teaching'. Just like I can be fairly sure that hitler was anti semetic even though I didn't know him.
I also disagree with his subsequent lineage of teachers.
In my perception (which it might comfort you to call an opinion); trungpa and ilk 'teachings' are like a cacaphony of mindless screaming, in comparison to the symphony of intricate knowledge that is the remnants of ancient masters who did not touch drink, did not sexually violate people, did not worship money and intoxicants.

Take a moment. Picture a monk living 80 years without sex, eating little, suffering hardships, constantly working to expand knowledge. This monk worked tirelessly pass this message of the utterly profound, to us.
And then, all of his work is dashed for countless people by a self absorbed drunk sexual predator with nothing but a farcical surface knowledge of the things he speaks of, which he uses to control, to decieve, and to serve his own desires.

Jeffrey

I think you are biased against his work and the karma kagyu. That's just what I think. What school of Buddhism and teacher do you study under? You seem to gravitate towards speech which tears down other sanghas. I'm sure I don't practice your teachers methods, but I don't publicly denounce them either. Trungpa was not a monk and thus did not break any vows regarding alcohol or celibacy. My teacher Lama Shenpen Hookham says there should be a sign on the front of every sangha that says "sleep with the guru at your own risk"... Let the buyer beware, a point of law on merchandise, in the US.

Who is your teacher? Why does this teacher advocate divisive speech? Do you have a teacher?

It's a different discussion relating to should a person in a student/mentor relationship have sex? In colleges this is not uncommon. Personally I think Trungpa's teachings are wonderful. Isn't that nice that we can have diversity?

Chaz

Jeffrey said:

I think you are biased against his work and the karma kagyu. That's just what I think.

I think he's a troll. :screwy: That's just what I think.

Jeffrey

Glad Hitler made his appearance in this thread. :zombie:

Chaz

Jeffrey said:

Glad Hitler made his appearance in this thread. :zombie:

And on that note, it's time this thread was closed.

Flag's flyin'

oceancaldera207

Fine ill make another simile, I can be fairly sure that Ghandi was a magnanimous person even though I didn't know him. Exact same point.

I just take this issue personally because a I deal with drunks, sexual predators, manipulators every day. I know them when I see them. They can be clever if it gets them what they want.
$$

Jeffrey

Sure make a simile. We can have a tear down Kagyu ceremony. The trick is to pour a glass of wine and then stomp on it. Then you take as many Trungpa books throw them onto the fire and urinate on them. Inviting Hitler is an awesome accompanyment. Be sure not to listen to music, or other forms of entertainment which also dulls the senses (of lay people). To that end a video of the Who or Jimmy Hendrix smashing their guitars is recommended.

Below is what you are doing to the Dharma of other sanghas.


Sorry you don't like diversity in teachings. Let me know if there is anything I can do to ease that burden.

fivebells

Jeffrey said:

That's subjective that he was an awful person, @fivebells.

I'm not going to take a position on that. I was responding to @Citta.

Citta said:

He was a Essence Mahamudra adept. Everthing else was window dressing.
He was also an awful person..one has no bearing on the other.

Jeffrey

@fivebells I didn't realize you were talking to Citta. Apologies. You know you didn't put '@Citta' in the post. That would have helped had you done that.

Nevermind

Close this topic now. Oh, and Merry Christmas.

oceancaldera207

No, I meant the you can replace the Hitler simile with the Ghandi one I made. Same effect in the original paragraph.

Sure I may be close minded.
But then again, if getting drunk and making snappy but essentially vapid comments with buddhist undertones is teaching, we should all start getting blasted on coke and whiskey every day, then write a bunch of books and get rich and ejaculate on or into students for the benefit of their 'enlightenment.'
He predated on people's confusion. Plain and simple.
I'm sorry to be so rough, but no one stands up to him or his ilk..and he seems to think that he's the only one that can make provocative statements..I would have had had plenty for him, Like for one, how about donating all the money you spend on booze and cocaine to a homeless or animal shelter.

If you want to know basic enlightenment, help others. Help animals. You'd be so much better off learning from the gratitude of those to whom you show compassion.

I promise this will be the last time I chime in on this subject. I just want to express that some of us have issues with not only his behavior, but also his basic knowledge of wisdom and buddhism.

Citta said:

If the idea of his being a Bodhisattva had been put to him he would have made a short sharp reply. It would have been along the lines of letting go of fantasy.
Anyone who has read and internalised Cutting Through Spiritual Materialism will know that the idea of claims and counterclaims of attainment,or denial of attainment or indeed of attainment per se, are alien to his whole view.
There is good reason for anyone following the Sutric path to reject Trungpa, but to accuse him of failing to be something he never claimed to be, and indeed that he saw as invalid, is disingenuous.

I disagree. I believe that he worked very diligently to decieve and to pass off warped fragments of scripture as his own. He did so for money, sex, and chemicals. He has no view beyond what will garner him satiation for his base desires. Complete and utter spiritual bankruptcy.
Though he proclaimed to be against labels, spiritual materialism and such things, he clearly asserted himself as a teacher and organized a following. So yes he failed at what he claimed he wasn't in to, but actually was.
I fail to understand the pull. Any one of us here could easily write any of those books. I'd much rather read a book by you citta or Jeffery, because you are actually human beings, and Im sure I could benefit from your experiences, struggles to me good moral people...this is fundamentally what the experience of life and spirituality is all about.

Trungpa? Not so much. Think he missed that memo.

Jason

Sigh. This is why we can't have nice things.