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.
Kalu Rinpoche controversy .... now what?
33_3
Veteran
I bought The Dharma That Illuminates All Beings Impartially Like the Light of the Sun and the Moon by Kalu Rinpoche at my used bookstore. As I was doing some referencing on the web as I read I taken back at where the information led me. A lot is on this forum.
Being a real novice this is the kind of information that could mess with me if I do not step back and realize I have much much more to learn. It led to to Tantra discussions which were unsettling.
I plan to put the Kalu Rinpoche text down and return to Dali Lama /Thich Nhat Hanh until understand much more.
This is where someone to talk with that is a teacher or a veteran would help.
1
Comments
Tantra is not my path at this stage, I can understand why it works but it's not for me.
Can you elaborate on what was so unsettling?
I'm sure there are numerous people here that have experience with this path.
I heard someone say something that really helped me. He said: "Don't take anything you read as truth, the only truth is what you experience right now, drop everything else"
So I took that as, well I know exist. Everything else is questionable!
Metta
I don't blame you at all . . . and this is a very important 'lesson' for each of us to learn.
The problem, so to speak, is in our expectations of our leaders, religious or otherwise, that they be Christ-like and so utterly perfect they could piss on a plate and not spill a drop.
The Buddha was a human being. I'm sure we haven't heard HALF of it.
His message, though? It remains as useful and important as ever. I don't know much about Kalu Rinpoche -- OK I don't know sh*t about him (her?).
I'm more speaking to the dynamic that operates in all of us. A really stupid and evil person can indeed speak the truth, and that truth is useful and important for others.'
We AIN'T gonna escape being human beings until we're all Buddha's.
Nothing wrong with switching back to HHDL and TNH though, for sure
I would.
Yes, @33_3, controversies like this crop up from time to time.
Whenever human beings are involved, sh.. happens.
As to the tantra stuff, I would first tackle the basics before getting into that.
Tantra, as I understand, is better transmitted directly from teacher to student, and I'm not even sure if Kalu Rinpoche would be the best place to start.
I agree with @Hamsaka, HHDL and TNH are probably best starters.
I've been re-reading HHDL's "The Heart of the Buddha's Path" recently and I recommend it wholeheartedly.
K.I.S.S.
Keep in mind those are only allegation. Kalu Rinpoche has never been brought to trial, he only stands accused, and that by only one person and then 18 years after the "fact". He's also dead, so, any final word is impossible. If you want to put down a dead teacher based on what others say about him in an unsubstantiated manner, fine, but you'll start running out of teachers pretty quick.
There have been people on this forum who you'd guess would dismiss a teacher for running a stop light.
That said, KR was brilliant no matter how you cut it.
>
No he won't. There are plenty of other teachers around with no whiff of scandal or taint to their names, far more than those who have been held to suspicion.
If he's nervous, then he has every right to take a step back and evaluate.
There's no smoke without fire.
The guy aroused enough suspicion to bring his behaviour into question.
That in many peoples' books, is enough to give pause for thought.
Even HH the DL exhorts those questioning the validity and reputation of a teacher, to proceed with extreme caution...
"This should be done in accordance with your interest and disposition, but you should analyze well. You must investigate before accepting a lama or teacher to see whether that person is really qualified or not. It is said in a scripture that just as fish that are hidden under the water can be seen through the movement of the ripples from above, so also a teacher's inner qualities can, over time, be seen a little through that person's behavior.
We need to look into the person's scholarship -- the ability to explain topics -- and whether the person implements those teachings in his or her conduct and experience."_
>
From here.
None that you've heard, anyway.
sounds like he's done evaluating and all he has to go by is allegation. How would you like it if someone denied you a job because they heard you were a crack dealer?
That's all we have on Kalu Rinpoche. Basically one person's account, 18 years after the alledged activity took place. There isn't a court of law in the US that would touch that where the accused can't answer to any charges.
I don't see any smoke. Just someone who's just as likely to be trying to sell books as she is trying to right a wrong.
I know people who are students (women) contemporary with Ms. Campbell and they can't confirm anything she's said.
And yes, questioning the validity of a teacher is all of our responsibility, but the decisions we come to should be informed and rational. We don't have that. Just acusations. Accusations without trial are meaningless.
You'll have to engage with the OP on that one. Obviously something struck a chord, didn't it?
We shall see what they come back with.
>
Well, I'd have to know who my accuser was, of course....
I have a feeling that if KR were around when the book was published, it would turn into one of those "he said/she said" struggles. Or maybe not. He might withdraw, and let his devoted students speak for him.
I think if the OP is concerned about this type of issue, there are plenty of other authors he can explore for beginner-level teachings, while he sorts out his feelings on the can of worms he accidentally opened.
It's all up to 33_3 to be sure, but I think we're oftentimes very quick to condemn others based on scanty evidence. Here we have one person, basically, who reported an abusive relationship 18 years after the fact. 30 years ago when my wife and I were in college abusive relationships were no more acceptable than they are today. Why did KR's accusser wait so damned long and then until KR had died? That alone is suspect enough to merit complete dismissal. If a teacher abuses you sexually you crush the bastard NOW, not 18 years from now. Anyone can acuse someone of anything. Accusations alone mean nothing to me and they should mean nothing to you. Just because someone says something doesn't mean it actually happened. That's why we have courts. IF KR did what Ms. Campbell said he did, he should have been hauled before a judge 18 years ago.
It's like the crack dealer scenario. It's your right to face your accuser in court. It would be grossly unfair for mere hearsay, and untested at that, to be allowed to negatively affect your future. Yet, we have no qualms, it seems, where it comes to a teacher's reputation.
People always use that argument in this case. The author explains that in her book. It took her years to work through the situation emotionally and psychologically, which is typical of people who have suffered a trauma. Intense confusion and disorientation can set in with abuse cases, and can take years to resolve. There could be a degree of Post-Traumatic Stress present. And in this case, it took additional years (and a lot of strength) to write the book. KR was already in his early 80's when the activity occurred, and died just a few years after.
Sexual abuse cases and rape cases often are not situations where "you crush the bastard NOW". Intense therapy is usually needed. And back in those days, effective trauma therapy was almost nonexistent and extremely hard to find. The psychological consequences of this type of case can be very hard for men to understand. It's easy to sit by and say, "she must have been lying, because she didn't report it right away". There needs to be more public education about the effect trauma has on people, and how that can hinder the timely exercise of justice.
And it's a valid argument.
IF the trauma ever occurred in the first place. THERE IS NO PROOF.
There could be a degree of Post-Traumatic Stress present.
Or not .....
Convienient wouldn't you say. Easy to makee accustions when you don't have to take responsibility but being cross-examined.
People do it all the time.
Intense therapy is usually needed. And back in those days, effective trauma therapy was almost nonexistent and extremely hard to find.
Back in those days? Are you joking? Dinosaurs were not roaming the Earth. There has been immediate sexual abouse treatment available for over 30 years
BULLSHIT!!!
Men are raped and/or sexually aboused every damned day
Had it gone to court, a defense lawyer would have successfully used that argument
This isn't about justice. It's too late for that. Justice could have been served 18 years ago. Little late now.
Then I'd expect you to be understanding.
Effective trauma treatment was not easily available back then. For that matter, it still isn't now, judging by how war vets struggle. There are effective treatments out there, but people still have a hard time finding therapists who offer them.
I think the main question controversies like this raise for Buddhist practitioners, and for beginners like the OP, is: what does Buddhism have to do with sex? How did sex practice become part of Buddhism? Is that what the Buddha taught?
'
It can be very confusing for beginners, or even for more experienced practitioners, who haven't heard of "esoteric" Buddhism.
It's not a matter of understanding. It's about believing. We have no proof whatsoever that anything sexual ever happened.
Yes, it was.
Thereapy takes time. The sooner it starts the better. Waiting 18 years isn't a good thing at all.
One phone call is all it takes. If you call 911 in this country and say you've been sexually abused you'll get all the help you'll ever need. Now. If you wait 18 years, probably not.
In tantric Buddhism it does. Kalu Rinpoche was probably empowered to teach it. I can't explain just how it works as I'm not a Tantrika and even if I was, samaya prohibits my discussing it.
Nope. Tantric practices come from a different source. Tantric Buddhism developed with other forms of tantric practices found in the Indian subcontinent about 1000 years ago. They were brought to Tibet by Padmasambhava and others.
Correct, but I rather doubt that the book 33_3 picked up had anything to do with tantric sexual congress. It may be about esoteric practices, sure. There are books out there that discuss it, but 33_3's decision to set the book aside had nothing to do with misunderstanding esoteric practice. From the OP it had everything to do with cotroversy based on ZERO proof.
I feel you already have your solution.
In Tantric Buddhism the Sadhana or actual practices can seem weird. They often need explanations.
Just focus on the teachings and practices that resonate
http://www.berzinarchives.com/web/x/nav/n.html_1399149948.html
Sex is an extremely important aspect of buddhism. It is an unavoidable metric. And in my very humble opinion, is not disregarded or shunned as in other religions.
You cannot exist in the present moment without there have being a previous union of male with a female form. And as form is emptiness - and vice versa, any aversion to it renders you sterile and non-productive, in both physical and mental manifestations. To deny it is to deny that you emerged from a womb, and your inevitable entry to the tomb. Facing up to it is part of the process...
I didn't know KR other than a bit of a controversy, but he was human right, and humans have desires, and to be really human requires a little satiation from time to time, whatever, that means is up to you to define for yourself, but being sterile does not amount to satiation, just a cleansing ritual (like smelling nice after washing with a certain brand of soap), but in the world we live in, nothing remains sterile for long - tantric sex - I'd do it, but don't have the time, so have had to opt with normal sex.... And 3 kids later, reaise tantric sex would overburden my little mind that directs my actions from deep within my nether regions (of my mind of course!)
...\lol/...
Effective trauma treatment was not easily available back then.
You're taking some of these comments out of context. The comment about "being understanding" was in regards to discussion of how long it takes to recover from trauma, not about the credibility of Campbell's claims.
Effective trauma treatment was very difficult to find in the 80's and 90's. The methods commonly used back then not only didn't work, they sometimes re-traumatized the patient, by requiring him/her to retell and relive the experience. There are very effective methods now that don't require that, and get wonderful results in just a few treatments.
See above comment. Resolution of PTSD and other trauma symptoms doesn't have to take long at all with the right methods. And you don't know that she waited 18 years before going for therapy. More likely she sought it out after gaining enough clarity to realize that the situation she'd been in was abusive, sometime before writing the book. In any case, KR only lived about 4 years after Cambell left India. Not enough time to resolve trauma, write a book, and get it published.
If you call 911 or a rape or suicide hotline, all you get is a referral to practitioners who have given their contact info to the hotline. These often are people who are trying to build up their practice, and use the hotlines as free advertising. Some of those people have new practices, they're not even all that experienced. Even the experienced therapists listed with them don't necessarily have effective methods. The hotline staff don't do any screening of therapists who list with them.
These matters are no where near as simple as you think.
Sorry, I meant the Buddha didn't teach sex technique, and he practiced celibacy. Some Buddhists are surprised to discover that there are traditions in which the monks aren't celibate, and sex is viewed as the path to Enlightenment. That's what I meant by saying that sex isn't usually a part of Buddhism, and it can be confusing to beginners to find out that sex is considered by some to be a key component in the path to Enlightenment. It's confusing because the Buddha did say it's to be set aside in the practice of non-attachment.
Key word: non-attachment
Do you think you can have sex without non-attachment?
This is why it's confusing to beginners. It wasn't taught by the Buddha. Best to begin at the beginning, and learn the basics. That alone can keep people busy for a few years.
My personal opinion is that when you have sex, you are in the process of attachment, and it might be viewed as enjoyable. However, there is also the process of non-attachment, which in my opinion, is the time when you are not engaged in sexual activity, so might be viewed as either a positive, negative or equanimous position or 'view', depending on your point of view...
One thing I will say which is off topic is that some people (@Dakini?) present the perception that sexuality is what the vajrayana is about. Whereas I have transcribed dharma talks for the past 9 years with a a vajryana sangha and have never heard of sexuality as a dharma practice.
Zzzzzzzzzzzz
You can receive an important dollop of Life's Wisdom from a tape worm, if your state of mind is that rarified. Homo sapiens bodies are horny and impulsive, and it's kind of funny how purported sexual exploits of our most revered are considered WORSE than some other things. Orgasms are primarily handled at the spinal cord level for gosh sakes, and that makes wanting and getting one about as amoral as a slug leaving a slime trail. Sex is mostly reflex, like sneezing or vomiting.
After reading the many thought provoking comments and suggestions I would like to elaborate if I may.
As some May have read in my other posts Christian fear has plagued me since my teens for reasons I need not rehash here.
Also some may have read I lost my brother October 05 to Cancer. The loss led me to Buddhism. It has been difficult at times but the peace I am finding far out weighs my confusion with areas of Buddhism I know nothing about.
Thank you ! You have been supportive each time I stumble and suggest a possible way to get back on track.
I try everyday to live without thinking negative thoughts or speaking ill of anyone or anything. (As a recovering alcoholic this is a huge success )
My issue with what I read was not if was true or false, rather it was unsettling which can do me harm at this stage. KR's work falls in line with what I am learning and will be of great value to me.
Shamar Rinpoche, one of the top authorities in the Kagyu "school" has set up Bodhi Path centers around the US, Europe and elsewhere, that leave out most of the tantric teachings. They focus on the Bodhisattva path, in addition to teaching Buddhism basics. http://www.bodhipath.org/
That wouldn't eliminate the problem of corrupt teachers, though. Zen doesn't have a Vajrayana component, and Zen in the US has had very serious problems.
We don't know what the nature of the OP's concern is, exactly. Is it that he's not interested in a tantric tradition? Is it that he's not comfortable reading the teachings of a teacher who may not have walked his talk in some respects? Is it a concern about an author/teacher's integrity? A tantra issue? Both and more? We don't know.
Glad for your success and investigation of the Buddhist path 33_3 it is surely hard in a world where we DO think negative thoughts. Those thoughts are also not my favorite. Blessings to you!
You might be doing it wrong
More like not at all