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've read a lot of Trungpa's books and have to say I really value his works. As someone else rightly pointed out, the 1960s and 70s were VERY hedonistic. To present the dharma in an accessible way for westerners (as he did so very well) one can't help but think he needed to immerse himself in the culture of the time.
I'm not saying I agree with his drinking, etc, but one wonders whether he could have written so wonderfully in a way that us westerners can relate to, if he had continued to wear his robes and not integrated so much with the society of the time.
Trungpa has also had an ongoing and very positive impact on the spread of Buddhism in the west through people like Pema Chodran, Reggie Ray et al.
@federica said:
It's like a head teacher admonishing parents for taking their children out of school for a week's holiday in term time, then taking the whole of the winter semester off, to go skiing with a couple of teaching colleagues.
"Don't eat meat, it's morally wrong!" he cried, tucking into a t-bone steak....
Hmmmm....
Two excellent analogies that say it all for me :-)
Maybe if I ever get the time I will listen to Sogyal Rinpoches retreat focusing on Lojong, but I've managed to find lots of other excellent, and pretty in depth ones, so they'll keep me busy for a while.
Spiritual frauds in my opinion often receive the compassion and understanding seldom extended to their victims. For myself because something resonates may also be the product of simple liking rather than wisdom.
4
federicaSeeker of the clear blue sky...Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubtModerator
@grackle said:
Spiritual frauds in my opinion often receive the compassion and understanding seldom extended to their victims. For myself because something resonates may also be the product of simple liking rather than wisdom.
I fully take what you are saying. But in this discussion we have been focusing entirely on the credibility and character of the Gurus in question, because of the thread title and initial-post topic.
While I am neither suggesting nor insinuating that you are taking the discussion off-track, I don't think there is any question, once any allegations are proven and true, that the victims (as you term them) deserve the utmost consideration, compassion and understanding.
I know what you mean; you read news reports of convictions or arrests of certain criminals and you get a long swathe of mitigating circumstances, stories of the criminal's sad and sorry background - and you hear nothing of the victims and the utter devastation their lives have been left in.
I guess it's why, in recent times (speaking of one specific type of crime) rape victims have permitted their identities to be revealed in order to staunchly support others in the same circumstances, and because they refuse to hide and remain in victim-mode anonymity.
But as I stated, this thread is largely focused on the intentions, reputations and credibility of these specific gurus, which is why little or no mention has been made of others.
I'm not really talking about others. If it seems that way it is an error on my part. The two in question are bad enough. I earnestly believe that the violation by these Gurus? of the trust placed in them causes harm far beyond the merely conjectured. Would anyone wish to identify these two Gurus as dispellers of darkness. I see them as purveyors of that which is harmful. Adarhma rather than dharma. But people may be embarrassed to admit being gulled. Though my words are strong there is in my opinion something close to spiritual assault that leaves victims negatively impacted for a long time.
2
federicaSeeker of the clear blue sky...Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubtModerator
By 'others' I mean the purported victims, not other Gurus.
This thread has shown me an internal double standard that I possess. I completely agree with the notion that wisdom is wisdom and I should not deprive myself of it because I find the purveyor personally distasteful. MLK was a wife-beater, but he is revered for his civil rights work, and rightly so.
Yet, I catch myself emotionally devaluing the music of Ted Nugent because I am disgusted by his politics, and refusing to own a Nike product because of their corporate ethics.
So apparently I disagree with myself. Ironically, the person not doing what they espouse (and sincerely believe) is me.
First, to address something from earlier, not all monks are teachers. Not everyone who takes the vows does so in order to teach others. That is not the point in every tradition.
@nakazcid Second, to my knowledge, neither Sogyal Rinpoche nor Chogyan Trungpa Rinpoche, suggested they were "realized" or "awakened" any more than any other current teacher does.
Third, there is a definite pattern of those of very high intelligence having problems with substance abuse and other such things. My ex was the same. He was a brilliant man in many ways, but it came at a cost of a lack of connection with the rest of the world. Due to that, he suffered and self-medicated for that suffering. I'm not saying that is what Trungpa did, I wouldn't know. Nor am I suggesting it is ok. But I do understand how that happens. Wisdom comes from so many places. It is all valuable.
It's rare that I come across something and have it give me understanding that I don't run by my teacher. If I am unsure of the validity of anything, I discuss it with him or his senior students to see what they think. It's not simply a matter of what I happen to like, as I am quite aware of that bias so I check myself with other people who are much better at not falling victim to it than I am.
Sogyal's Tibetan Book of Living and Dying is a wonderful work. It has so much to offer and I have found it immediately helpful both in understanding Phowa teachings I received from my teacher, and in practical situations dealing with dying and ill people who find comfort in various verses in it.
Every single human is afflicated with something. Very few teachers tout themselves as awakened/enlightened/realized and those that do I tend to watch from a distance as I don't think those who truly are feel a need to advertise it. If they were not still victims of samsara, they wouldn't be here anymore.
Trungpa rather openly lived a hedonistic life. The people who were around him wrote about how he'd try to get the pretty women to sleep with him, stayed drunk half the time, and enjoyed the lavish gifts from his admirers with no hesitation. He was also a great communicator with a deep understanding of the dharma, having a way with words that made the Buddha's teachings comprehensible to Western students. His teaching had a great influence on students who went on to teach the Dharma themselves.
So how can both of these describe the same man? His followers justified it by saying it's an example of "crazy wisdom" and an enlightened Master such as Trungpa does not live by the same rules as ordinary people. Complete bullshit, of course. Enlightenment is not a ticket to party or drag your students into bed with you. But this crazy wisdom excuse allowed his inner circle to justify enabling a man with addictions instead of helping him.
And his problems did affect his teaching. He did not teach restraint. One of his often quoted teachings: "Problems in life don't come from being aggressive or lustful. The problem is, you want to bottle those up and put them aside - and you become expert in deception." This is Buddhism as hedonism.
To me, and it's only my own reaction, it's sad that a great man didn't get the personal help he needed to become even greater. He was a great but greatly flawed teacher of the Dharma.
Funny, my fiancee and I have this discussion every month or two. (Just for reference, she is a Wiccan practitioner.) She believes it is possible to find wisdom in a teacher's words even when the guru doesn't "practice what they preach", or has questionable morals. I believe that if a teacher doesn't follow the teachings they or their tradition espouse, takes advantage of students or gleefully embraces their celebrity status, they are a hypocrite and their teachings cannot be trusted. It should be noted that I have serious trust issues, as I've been taken advantage of in the past (not religiously though), nor do I have a trusted teacher to ask about questionable teachings.
0
federicaSeeker of the clear blue sky...Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubtModerator
@nakazcid said:
Funny, my fiancee and I have this discussion every month or two. (Just for reference, she is a Wiccan practitioner.) She believes it is possible to find wisdom in a teacher's words even when the guru doesn't "practice what they preach", or has questionable morals. I believe that if a teacher doesn't follow the teachings they or their tradition espouse, takes advantage of students or gleefully embraces their celebrity status, they are a hypocrite and their teachings cannot be trusted. It should be noted that I have serious trust issues, as I've been taken advantage of in the past (not religiously though), nor do I have a trusted teacher to ask about questionable teachings.
Then you're permitting your issues to cloud your judgement.
It is insufficient to say their teachings cannot be trusted.
you have to show that they cannot be trusted, because if they are not first-hand, they must have come from somewhere.
And the 'somewhere' they came from, may not be hypocritical, or have questionable morals.
Can you prove their teachings are questionable?
Forget them for a moment.
Point to any teaching that is in and of itself, questionable.
I would further point out that there are a whole fleet and raft of famous, notable and excellent literary authors who have written masterpieces of incalculable worth; whose own lives were highly questionable and subject to deep criticism.
Are you going to condemn their books as untrustworthy in their value?
Alright, consider Trungpa for a moment. If you know he'd be willing to manipulate his students in order to get them into bed, that means he's willing to manipulate others as well. So every teaching that comes from him I have to analyze, asking myself is Trungpa trying to manipulate me or get me to buy his next book? Why waste the mental effort on all that analysis and filtering? I'll just skip his works entirely.
Oscar Wilde is a fine author. But I would not rely on him to guide me on living my life or approaching my religion. That is exactly what we rely on these spiritual teachers to do for us, and thus I hold Trungpa to a higher standard than I do Wilde.
0
federicaSeeker of the clear blue sky...Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubtModerator
You're missing the point.
You're missing CONTENT.
You're missing ORIGIN.
Don't look at him and what he's DOING.
Look at what he's saying, where it comes from, whether it's verifiable, substantiated and authentic.
So? Don't question him.
I said, before.
Look at his teachings, whence they came. The source.
is it reliable?
beause 99 times out of ten, such Gurus are mere middle-men....
Most of his books were published after he died, @nakazcid. They were transcribed from his retreats and other teachings over many years. There were only a few available prior to his death and the book selling world was not then what it is now. He also started Naropa, which continues to be the only Buddhist-based college in the US (to my knowledge) It is an amazing place with a basis of compassion and meditation to go along with the standard education. Fabulous. I know several people who have been to school there and they learned many things they carry with them decades later. No doubt he is not free of trouble, nor is Shambhala as a whole. But his teachings have made an actual difference in the world. Many of his students are top teachers today, including Pema Chodron.
Also, and I am not discounting anything any victim has ever said, but just keeping perspective. Not everything that someone reports a particular way is 100% true the way they report it. There is a line somewhere of when someone is abused and manipulated into making decisions when they are pressured by a person they view as a leader, and when they knowingly made a choice that they later regret. It's a very difficult position and people who feel they've made a bad choice often do not want to admit it. Similar to several cases of admitted consensual sex between people where one regretted it and then pressed charged against the other. I'm not talking about rape here, of course, But regretted consensual activity. It is difficult to know without having been there how close reality and the stories match. Especially 30+ years later. Sometimes the adult person making the choice to sleep with a teacher has some responsibility, too.
@federica said:
You're missing the point.
You're missing CONTENT.
You're missing ORIGIN.
Don't look at him and what he's DOING.
So it's OK it he talks the talk, but can't walk the walk?
Look at what he's saying, where it comes from, whether it's verifiable, substantiated and authentic.
So? Don't question him.
I said, before.
Look at his teachings, whence they came. The source.
is it reliable?
beause 99 times out of ten, such Gurus are mere middle-men....
So let's assume Trungpa is merely a conduit for the wise men who came before him. We've established from his behavior that he is liable to manipulate others; how do we know he is not injecting his own agenda into what he's passing on?
Consider the Udayi Sutta:
"It's not easy to teach the Dhamma to others, Ananda. The Dhamma should be taught to others only when five qualities are established within the person teaching. Which five?
"[1] The Dhamma should be taught with the thought, 'I will speak step-by-step.'
"[2] The Dhamma should be taught with the thought, 'I will speak explaining the sequence [of cause & effect].'
"[3] The Dhamma should be taught with the thought, 'I will speak out of compassion.'
"[4] The Dhamma should be taught with the thought, 'I will speak not for the purpose of material reward.'
"[5] The Dhamma should be taught with the thought, 'I will speak without hurting myself or others.'[1]
"It's not easy to teach the Dhamma to others, Ananda. The Dhamma should be taught to others only when these five qualities are established within the person teaching."
Note 1. According to the Commentary, "hurting oneself" means exalting oneself. "Hurting others" means putting other people down.
I've got to admit, I haven't studied every allegation against Trungpa in detail. But there are enough of them that I doubt that he meets all of these criteria, so I don't consider him a trustworthy source of the Dharma.
@grackle said:
I'm not really talking about others. If it seems that way it is an error on my part. The two in question are bad enough. I earnestly believe that the violation by these Gurus? of the trust placed in them causes harm far beyond the merely conjectured. Would anyone wish to identify these two Gurus as dispellers of darkness. I see them as purveyors of that which is harmful. Adarhma rather than dharma. But people may be embarrassed to admit being gulled. Though my words are strong there is in my opinion something close to spiritual assault that leaves victims negatively impacted for a long time.
That is my understanding too.
Many people arrive at dharma as flawed individuals, looking for direction, lost and in search of the next scoop of ice cream.
In other words even as adults we may be undeveloped, lack discernment, have a fish or other addiction and be overly dependent on the sangha, guru or dairy lama for guidance, inspiration and right action.
Students may not be internally honest or have limited integrity and rational capacity. That is why the Sangha, Guru and source of the transmission is venerated and looked to as an exemplar of basic morality, ethics and being non exploitative of vulnerability.
In this sense, the real message of dharma is transmitted in a great part by behavour. We look to teachers for more than a good story. We look to them as an enactment or personification of the teaching. In essence we find a good teacher is an antidote to the exploitative, sham in both ourselves and others. Choose your Guru with attentive care.
Then wecan confidently take refuge in the three jewels.
There are times the HHDL does not line up to those criteria, either. Because Buddhism is a practice and not a perfection. You will find fault in most masters. Sometimes, we get too entrenched in our own addictions and problems to find the way out, even if we know where it is. That doesn't necessarily mean we can't use that experience to help others. Addictions of all sorts are incredibly hard to break. It is best, of course, not to get started in them from the beginning. But for some, once you do, that is the beginning of the end. I think Trungpa was an addict in several ways. That doesn't mean he's not responsible for his actions. It just means seeing things from a different perspective other than simply he made bad choices. He was incapable of making other choices at the time. Many musical and artistic geniuses are/were addicts as well. We don't refuse to acknowledge the genius in their art as a result, however.
I talk the talk a lot. To myself, to my kids, here. I most certainly do not walk it perfectly by any means. I am not a monk or revered teacher or guru, no. But I take my commitment seriously and my inability to always follow it doesn't negate the value of it.
Do what works for you, that's really all that matters. I just find it a shame to give up what could be valuable resources and teachers because of preconceived ideas of what they should be based on our perceptions that usually come from the perceptions of others. And perceptions are always colored by so many things.
0
federicaSeeker of the clear blue sky...Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubtModerator
To me it's very logical: If it makes sense, is verifiable and resonates, it's worth considering on its own merit.
If the words sound loaded, or seem to have an agenda, I step back and re-consider.
We've never met these men. We're highly unlikely to either, so we're not going to be coming under their direct influence any time soon.
All we have to go on, are their written words.
It's really not that hard, and I think we're making it more angst-ridden than it needs to be.
I enjoyed this discussion when it happened, it might be of interest to some here. One of our members was a long time student of Trungpa's and said all of his students are stuck with the conflict of knowing what Trungpa was after having been in his presence, and knowing the deeds he did and trying to resolve those things. There was some good input on the thread for those interested. http://newbuddhist.com/discussion/18951/my-guru-was-a-drunk/p1
A man says A, and it is verifiably true. He also comes up with B, and B is questionable or not true. So, dismiss B and stick with A and find more truths that resonate with you.
The person who teaches A and B is a composite of both. Find one where the valuable teachings outweigh the questionable ones and you have found someone whom you can learn to respect. But why dismiss the valuable teachings because of the disagreeable ones?
However, it's totally up to you to decide how strictly you apply your criteria.
I personally do not need to elevate anyone to super status nor do I feel they need to be the ultimate teacher. I love Alan Watts and he is vilified by many for the same reasons as Trungpa.
All I can think of is how these 2 must have struggled privately to overcome their addictions.
Someone mentioned the Enablers. That, IMO, is the other side of the coin, the very unhealthy hero worship. Luxury gifts are along these lines. A cheaper tech device works just as well for the ordinary use of a monk or teacher. The smaller car will take him from here to there, and the watch will be just as accurate -- just no bling.
Resisting the bling is IMO part of a Buddhist's job description. If you notice someone not being able to resist, it just shows that this person still has a lot to learn, and what s/he teaches may be mostly book knowledge and just knowing what to say and how to say it so that people will admire him/her (their word bling).
And that is where you come into the picture. You don't have to follow or admire this person.
People who are led astray by charlatans have some serious issues to overcome. Not sure to what degree the description 'victim' applies here. Using questionable judgment and then blaming the other person is unethical as well.
As a thinking person I cannot see myself being that needy nor blindly trusting someone just because they are a teacher with a large following (sheeple?).
IOW, use your noodle and notice what and who resonates for the right reasons.
Make your own Buddhist patchwork quilt that fits your current views if you cannot find one that's ready-made.
@Cinorjer said:
Trungpa rather openly lived a hedonistic life. The people who were around him wrote about how he'd try to get the pretty women to sleep with him, stayed drunk half the time, and enjoyed the lavish gifts from his admirers with no hesitation. He was also a great communicator with a deep understanding of the dharma, having a way with words that made the Buddha's teachings comprehensible to Western students. His teaching had a great influence on students who went on to teach the Dharma themselves.
So how can both of these describe the same man? His followers justified it by saying it's an example of "crazy wisdom" and an enlightened Master such as Trungpa does not live by the same rules as ordinary people. Complete bullshit, of course. Enlightenment is not a ticket to party or drag your students into bed with you. But this crazy wisdom excuse allowed his inner circle to justify enabling a man with addictions instead of helping him.
And his problems did affect his teaching. He did not teach restraint. One of his often quoted teachings: "Problems in life don't come from being aggressive or lustful. The problem is, you want to bottle those up and put them aside - and you become expert in deception." This is Buddhism as hedonism.
To me, and it's only my own reaction, it's sad that a great man didn't get the personal help he needed to become even greater. He was a great but greatly flawed teacher of the Dharma.
The Dalai Lama, when asked about "crazy wisdom as an excuse for bad behavior", as you put it, said there is no such thing as "crazy wisdom". He said teachers should always uphold high ethical standards (the conventional standards set out by the Buddha), and that teachers who don't do that are not well-grounded in the foundations of their tradition. I think that makes things pretty clear.
4
federicaSeeker of the clear blue sky...Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubtModerator
edited September 2016
Thanks @Dakini but that's just the opinion of a simple monk. Remember, he is merely the representative of one specific school...He also stated homosexuality was unacceptable, and should not be part of anyone's lifestyle. He is not without blemish, according to some.
So you see, while his words appear wise and appropriate, they seem wise and appropriate to you and you thinking it makes things pretty clear, is just your opinion.
In Tantra the Guru is regarded as an empithany or personification of Buddha qualities. The Dalai Lama is regarded as an emanation of the Boddhisatva of compassion.
Their every action and word can be dramatic and have a greater import than that of 'simple monks'.
So if following a simple monk, find one who is simply a monk. If finding a guru, find one who is worthy of the status.
0
federicaSeeker of the clear blue sky...Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubtModerator
For those to whom reputation matters, there are plenty of teachers whose reputations remain beyond reproach. Follow them.
For those to whom reputation is not so important, take whatever you will from wherever you want and put it to good use.
Seems to me that there are two camps going back and forth here that probably aren't going to come to some sort of agreement, because it's really a personal decision for a personal practice.
someone accepting the wisdom of someone you find to be dubious at best, is not affecting your own practice. It is their road to take, with all the consequences of it, same as your road.
for me personally to even attempt to put on equal terms the wisdom of someone like Mr. Crazy Wisdom Rimpoche to someone like say Ajahn Chah, is a laughable. But I can't deny the experience of others who seem to of benefited from him, it is also my own view, and views are thorny, dangerous things often best let go of inside before letting go out of the mouth lol.
As usual with the HHDL, it varies a bit depending on what you read, and from when. His focus is almost always on whether the guru has asked you to do something that goes against the dharma. Then you must speak up and if you cannot clarify within Buddha's guidelines, then you should leave that guru. But if the guru is giving you advice in line with the dharma (but not following it himself) it isn't quite as clear.
"Perception of faults in the guru should not cause us to feel disrespect, for by demonstrating faults to us the guru is actually showing us what we should abandon." From his book The Path to Enlightenment.
He also talks about how his followers treat him as Buddha, as all his words and actions are perfect, and they should not. He has said this view of gurus and teachers being like Buddha and thus pure and infallible is harmful and a poison to the dharma. It likewise up to the practitioner to see with a clear mind what is going on with their guru. The responsibility doesn't lie only on the guru but the student to question when things are not clear and when he is pointing you west but going east himself. He also acknowledges there is a big difference between advanced practitioners and those who are beginners but jump into guru relationships and tantric Buddhism because it is the most interesting, to a lot of people. They jump in without proper foundation and training and then completely misunderstand what is going on and what it means to trust the guru entirely. The responsibility for understanding rests on both the guru and the student.
@nakazcid
How do you reconcile what you said here (quote below) and what you said here in this discussion? I'm confused how you excuse what this man says as troubling in favor for the other good things he has to say, but cannot do the same with regards to others? You mentioned earlier you have trust issues which contribute to this view, but those don't come into play when someone advocates torture, nuclear war "because of what Islamists believe" and the profiling of Muslims? And in fact advocates for killing people simply for having beliefs whether they ever act on them or not?
"That said, I find some of views quite troubling (torture, Islam, etc.) But his thoughts are normally razor sharp and extraordinarily clear."
Is what he says excusable because he is not a Buddhist teacher? But is he not a teacher of sorts anyhow, using his neuroscience background to get people to trust what he has to say and thus sell his books? He has had 5 books on the NYT best seller list and is a sought after lecturer and guest commentator in many huge publications. He, it seems, has a wider audience available to him than Trungpa ever did, or even does now. But his views are excusable??
It seems that as always, a middle ground is best. Don't expect the Teacher to be perfect, but don't accept the excuse "He's enlightened so rules don't apply to him."
From the Zen teachings, there are monks described who I think fit the "crazy wisdom" category. The behavior is crazy and often breaks a vow, but it's not selfish or indulgent. A monk carried a woman across a river in the famous story, breaking his vow, but he didn't ask for sex from her in exchange. A Master cut a cat in two (so it is said) when none of the students present could answer his zen riddle, but cried about it later when he discovered the one monk who could answer and save the cat's life was late arriving. There's crazy and then there's crazy.
When debating the worth of Dharma teachers who don't practice what they preach ie, live up to their discourse..... "Be careful not to throw the baby out with the bath water !" to do so would be somewhat extreme....just saying
@karasti I had to think about this for a moment. I suppose it’s because I don’t see Harris as a hypocrite or manipulator. As far as I know, he doesn’t sleep with his students (does he have any?) nor does he guzzle booze like a frat boy. In short, I’m not aware of him violating any precepts despite espousing his extreme views. In the last book of his I read, The End of Faith, he was not advocating religious profiling nor nuclear war against Islam, though he did morally equate torture with “collateral damage.” I stopped following him about 8 years ago due to what I perceived as a lack of compassion. Nonetheless, he did provide me my first glimpse of the Buddhist meditative practice. If he is now advocating nuclear war against Islam and religious profiling, I don’t stand behind those positions.
In the past I would’ve trusted statements he made about the nature of consciousness, the neurological effects of meditation on the brain, etc., but I wouldn’t heed his advice on how to be a compassionate human being. Clearly he lacks this, but I do think he has a better handle on the nature of consciousness than most Westerners.
My point was that you "excused" (for lack of better word) his shortfalls because he had things to offer that you could make use of. Or rather didn't refuse the wisdom he had to offer despite his shortfalls. It's not really any different. You just are judging different things in Trungpa that you find less acceptable. Why do we accept alcoholism as a disease that people cannot control in everyone except those we don't like? When we dislike them, it's their choice to be a drunk. When we like them, it's a disease they are powerless over. Interesting how that works. Anyhow, we are all free to do such cherry picking, and I'm sure most of us do it. Just saying, that is pretty much what is happening. You found value in his words despite disagreeing with other parts of his message. Anyone who writes books or speaks at lectures, and writes articles for large media publications, is, in effect, a teacher.
@karasti It's not as simple as cherry-picking wisdom. To extend your analogy of any speaker or writer as a teacher, when I read Trungpa's works I effectively become his student. Because he has demonstrated a history of manipulating and abusing his students, I have to look at every single word with mistrust. I simply can't trust anything he has to say. Zip, zilch, nada.
@nakazcid I'm not trying to convince you of anything. Likewise, I wouldn't trust a man to adequately discuss literally anything who advocates for the things Sam Harris does.
Actually, I often find the best fruit from the dying plants Especially raspberries. And commonly apples as well produce their best lot right before they die.
@lobster said:
I love cherries.
I know how to pick them.
Me too.....
On a more serious note...It's all relative.... there's no such thing as a bad teacher, there are teachers whose 'goodness' needs to ripen more, or perhaps have struck an obstacle on the path (its their karma) that's all...
I guess, if it's ones karmic flow which leads the student to interact with a certain teacher, so be it ...A lesson is a lesson , what's done is done, and if one has not learnt a lesson from the experience (the student's particular karma pattern has not been fully exhausted/experienced ) the chances are they will come across other teachers of a similar quality and continue their lesson .....
I tend to give all the teachers I come across the benefit of the doubt there's always a lesson to be learnt....
And as the ol' saying goes "When the student is ready...the teacher will appear" and what form the teacher takes is up to the student
Part of the responsibility is with the student. People follow those who are hypocrites (spoiler alert) because they prefer to join the dream circus of a strong persona.
It is difficult for the fast asleep and snoring to admit that their perceptions and discerning capacity is not yet perfecting.
After some practice, training and experience in integrity and detached discernment, we gain the capacity to know the value and sortcomings of ourself, HH The Pope, HH The giggling Dairy Lama and the convincing spiritual snake oil salesmen.
@nakazcid said: @karasti It's not as simple as cherry-picking wisdom. To extend your analogy of any speaker or writer as a teacher, when I read Trungpa's works I effectively become his student. Because he has demonstrated a history of manipulating and abusing his students, I have to look at every single word with mistrust. I simply can't trust anything he has to say. Zip, zilch, nada.
Understood.
In a sense it can be of value to examine our reaction, more than the source. For example I never trust anything I say or think, just in case it is of limited value. However it is usually the best I can do.
There's an element of context we've been leaving out of the conversation. Here's what I mean:
Could an alcoholic narcissistic womanizer be a good math professor? Sure, if he knows math, and knows how to teach. (And why are these charming "high intensity" people so often men?) Would the math lessons taught by this person be valid, and valuable? Sure. Conversely though, if the subject is not math but a set of principles and practices by which to live your life, then not only is this teacher questionable; so are the teachings.
I think that is part of what made Trungpa different. He was not all that focused on the 4 noble truths or the Eightfold Path as far as what he taught directly, which isn't uncommon in Vajrayana Buddhism. So perhaps in his mind he removed himself so far from the foundations and he didn't need them. We rarely talk about them directly with my teacher, but they are always wound within everything we do and talk about. I don't know that I've ever heard my teacher even mention the Eightfold path. It is more an expectation that you know and understand and are going to tackle them from a different angle. But they are always there, as they should be.
It never seemed to me that Trungpa's teachings were how to live an ethical life in the manner we would normally see Buddhism, so maybe that is why he appealed to some of the people he did. He was more about pointing out that there are different ways to look at and survive life. He was not a strict foundational teacher, and i think that is where a lot of the conflict comes from. In addition, being a Vajrayana teacher complicates things as well because he was so well-known but Vajrayana is not. So he was always looking at things from that perspective while most of the people who read his books were not. It is one of the problems with bringing high levels, advanced teachings to the forefront. Some people just want a group to meditate with and focus on the eightfold path and practical ways to live your life and feel better about it, but you aren't going to get that with a Vajrayana teacher. For whatever reason, Vajrayana is what speaks to me.
I, of course, never met Trungpa but I've been on retreats with some of his students and their methods are just what work best for me. My teacher does not have a problem with it and I've had many discussions with him about these things. But being able to do so helps me to separate valid teachings from Trungpa's issues which I do think is important. When what he says in a particular way can help me to learn a very difficult concept, and my teacher can verify that yes, that is correct understanding, then it is invaluable. And that is all that matters to me as far as my practice goes. Vajrayana is a uncomfortable and difficult path, and I need all the help I can get, lol.
In any case, we all find teachers that speak to us, in all sorts of ways. The HHDL, while I found being in his presence an amazing experience, is not someone I can relate to. I don't think I have completely finished a single one of his books, I just cannot stay with them. I read his thoughts on a lot of topics, but articles are as much as I can manage. I love TNH and think he is one of the most important teachers of our time, but, he has dozens of books that mostly all say the same thing.
@karasti I actually tried to read Trungpa once and found his ideas unnecessarily complicated. It's becoming more and more clear from your comments and from other experiences that Vajrayana is not for me. Sadly, that's the only option available to me locally.
Please don't take my comments as a personal attack; I find your contributions to the forum wise and insightful.
1
federicaSeeker of the clear blue sky...Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubtModerator
@karasti continued:... In any case, we all find teachers that speak to us, in all sorts of ways. The HHDL, while I found being in his presence an amazing experience, is not someone I can relate to. I don't think I have completely finished a single one of his books, I just cannot stay with them. I read his thoughts on a lot of topics, but articles are as much as I can manage. I love TNH and think he is one of the most important teachers of our time, but, he has dozens of books that mostly all say the same thing.
I can completely equate with the (first) bolded bit: he's heavy going and quite elaborate and convoluted. I too, have never successfully completed any full book of his, apart from the one he co-wrote or collaborated in with Howard Cutler ('The Art of Happiness'). I have three of his books, which seem to have him as sole author (in that obviously, English not being his first language, he collaborated with others in writing, for lingual purposes).
As for the second bolded (italic) part, again, I completely get you point. I have four of his books and you're right; you could basically glean the same message from all of them.
None of this takes anything away from either of them, nor does it devalue their worth to the path, or Dhamma.
@nakazcid no offense or any such thing taken whatsoever. I always enjoy these discussions because they keep me in check when I find myself overly defending things and/or people.
It is my only option as well, and even with that my teacher is 250 miles away (and for 6 months a year he is in Asia). But over the years, it's been working out. Sometimes it is too intense and I back off, which is ok. I am more focused on the Mahayana right now, but slowly working through some of the Vajrayana stuff. It's difficult but I find it quite rewarding when I stick with it. I feel like I ask most questions than most, lol. There are other options in my state, I just do not have the ability to travel and my teacher is the only one that travels to this part of the state. At this point, I don't think I would chose another option even if I could but a few years ago I might have. There are times I feel like I am in my first year of a foreign language and everyone else in the room already took 10 years of it. But it is coming together, a little at a time.
@federica definitely. They have both been instrumental in the spread of Buddhism in the west. And I think it is a gift that TNH can take a main message and apply it in so many ways to get the attention of so many people. The message might be overall the same, but each book will appeal to a person who is dealing with a different issue, or is looking for something in particular. I quite enjoy his messages, but I find I need more of a challenge to keep learning and I guess that is why Trungpa appeals to me. His "cut the crap and look at yourself, for real" is what I need. It's like having a parent who says "don't give me that line of BS" lol. I tend to be a very stagnant person so I need different thing to shake me up so I keep moving forward.
I think that spiritual leaders that engage in drug/alcohol abuse, sexual abuse, and other similar harmful activities really do a disservice to their religions or spiritual traditions.
I think, in general, that unless your born into a religion, then you turn to it because you're looking for something that the rest of society is not offering, be it truth, a way of improving oneself, or whatever.
If it's OK for a leader to do whatever he or she wants, then it really sends the message that we all just may as well engage in any kind of nihilistic or narcissistic behaviour that we feel like.
I don't think there was ever a message that it was ok, not from Trungpa at least. Not that doing the "I do it, but you shouldn't" is ideal for a guru. But also remember as far as drugs and alcohol goes, addiction isn't a choice. Despite all the questionable things Trungpa and Sogyal engaged in, their message was never that anyone should engage in that behavior. If you (generally speaking) are going to say "well he does it, I can do it too" then that problem still lies with you. Buddhism is still always about investigating your teacher, your actions, your thoughts, everything. And if you don't do so, that fault is on you. I've never thought that because someone else does something, that makes it ok for me. Whether what they were doing was good or bad, I had to determine what was right for me.
And for people like Sogyal and Trungpa, Buddhism wouldn't be what it is in the western world today without them, most likely. They changed the landscape. There is a Buddhist college here because of Trungpa. There are meditation centers across the country, hundreds of them, because of Sogyal and Trungpa. Helping thousands of people to learn meditation and Buddhist beliefs.
On the plus side, considering the behavior of some, at least those who use ipads don't look so bad now For myself, I investigate teachers for the quality of their information. If I was involved ina guru relationship with them, then that investigation is upped a level and I would not want someone I didn't trust in that kind of a relationship. But I would still use their wisdom where I could. When I find I want to judge someone for their use of anything, whether too much FB, a phone I disapprove of, driving a car or wearing clothes that seem out of place, I try to stop and look at why I feel it's my place to judge, and whether what is happening has any bearing on me. And whether it has any bearing on the truth that person is speaking. If not, I move on, and try to worry more about myself and my FB and cell phone use than someone else's. As is usually the case, when I find the need to point out something about someone else, I usually find it is my own doubts about that same thing in my life that I have a problem with.
Addiction may or may not be a choice. But seeking help to overcome it is. So is stepping aside from a leadership role if one is facing inner demons that would hinder one's ability to be a clear-minded role model.
There is a great deal more to the growth of Buddha Dhamma in the west than the above mentioned. But it has to be sought out. If you were to do this you might have a different opinion.
I didn't say they were the only catalysts in the growth of Buddhism. But they were major players early on and have helped thousands of people who might not otherwise have been interested. I know more people who have said they were influenced by Trungpa than almost any other teacher and none of them are hedonists or nihilists or drunks or womanizers. They were all able to take his teachings for what they were and make use of them in their daily lives. Some have kept with that tradition, others have moved on. No teacher is ideal for every student. But something about Trungpa speaks specifically to many western students. He was able to bridge that gap between cultures, perhaps in part because he fell victim to our society in much the same way many of us do in our early lives.
@Walker yes, I agree. But people in the depths of addiction often do not even recognize that they need help and his inner circle did a lot to enable him and not much to encourage him to take other steps. Someone dealing with inner demons doesn't often even realize they are there. Seeking help requires understanding of the problem and often that requires outside intervention.
Comments
I've read a lot of Trungpa's books and have to say I really value his works. As someone else rightly pointed out, the 1960s and 70s were VERY hedonistic. To present the dharma in an accessible way for westerners (as he did so very well) one can't help but think he needed to immerse himself in the culture of the time.
I'm not saying I agree with his drinking, etc, but one wonders whether he could have written so wonderfully in a way that us westerners can relate to, if he had continued to wear his robes and not integrated so much with the society of the time.
Trungpa has also had an ongoing and very positive impact on the spread of Buddhism in the west through people like Pema Chodran, Reggie Ray et al.
Two excellent analogies that say it all for me :-)
Maybe if I ever get the time I will listen to Sogyal Rinpoches retreat focusing on Lojong, but I've managed to find lots of other excellent, and pretty in depth ones, so they'll keep me busy for a while.
Spiritual frauds in my opinion often receive the compassion and understanding seldom extended to their victims. For myself because something resonates may also be the product of simple liking rather than wisdom.
I fully take what you are saying. But in this discussion we have been focusing entirely on the credibility and character of the Gurus in question, because of the thread title and initial-post topic.
While I am neither suggesting nor insinuating that you are taking the discussion off-track, I don't think there is any question, once any allegations are proven and true, that the victims (as you term them) deserve the utmost consideration, compassion and understanding.
I know what you mean; you read news reports of convictions or arrests of certain criminals and you get a long swathe of mitigating circumstances, stories of the criminal's sad and sorry background - and you hear nothing of the victims and the utter devastation their lives have been left in.
I guess it's why, in recent times (speaking of one specific type of crime) rape victims have permitted their identities to be revealed in order to staunchly support others in the same circumstances, and because they refuse to hide and remain in victim-mode anonymity.
But as I stated, this thread is largely focused on the intentions, reputations and credibility of these specific gurus, which is why little or no mention has been made of others.
I'm not really talking about others. If it seems that way it is an error on my part. The two in question are bad enough. I earnestly believe that the violation by these Gurus? of the trust placed in them causes harm far beyond the merely conjectured. Would anyone wish to identify these two Gurus as dispellers of darkness. I see them as purveyors of that which is harmful. Adarhma rather than dharma. But people may be embarrassed to admit being gulled. Though my words are strong there is in my opinion something close to spiritual assault that leaves victims negatively impacted for a long time.
By 'others' I mean the purported victims, not other Gurus.
Thank you for making that clear.
This thread has shown me an internal double standard that I possess. I completely agree with the notion that wisdom is wisdom and I should not deprive myself of it because I find the purveyor personally distasteful. MLK was a wife-beater, but he is revered for his civil rights work, and rightly so.
Yet, I catch myself emotionally devaluing the music of Ted Nugent because I am disgusted by his politics, and refusing to own a Nike product because of their corporate ethics.
So apparently I disagree with myself. Ironically, the person not doing what they espouse (and sincerely believe) is me.
First, to address something from earlier, not all monks are teachers. Not everyone who takes the vows does so in order to teach others. That is not the point in every tradition.
@nakazcid Second, to my knowledge, neither Sogyal Rinpoche nor Chogyan Trungpa Rinpoche, suggested they were "realized" or "awakened" any more than any other current teacher does.
Third, there is a definite pattern of those of very high intelligence having problems with substance abuse and other such things. My ex was the same. He was a brilliant man in many ways, but it came at a cost of a lack of connection with the rest of the world. Due to that, he suffered and self-medicated for that suffering. I'm not saying that is what Trungpa did, I wouldn't know. Nor am I suggesting it is ok. But I do understand how that happens. Wisdom comes from so many places. It is all valuable.
It's rare that I come across something and have it give me understanding that I don't run by my teacher. If I am unsure of the validity of anything, I discuss it with him or his senior students to see what they think. It's not simply a matter of what I happen to like, as I am quite aware of that bias so I check myself with other people who are much better at not falling victim to it than I am.
Sogyal's Tibetan Book of Living and Dying is a wonderful work. It has so much to offer and I have found it immediately helpful both in understanding Phowa teachings I received from my teacher, and in practical situations dealing with dying and ill people who find comfort in various verses in it.
Every single human is afflicated with something. Very few teachers tout themselves as awakened/enlightened/realized and those that do I tend to watch from a distance as I don't think those who truly are feel a need to advertise it. If they were not still victims of samsara, they wouldn't be here anymore.
The bodhisattvas and mahasattvas remain guiding us with compassion and wisdom. No cost or obligation.
Trungpa rather openly lived a hedonistic life. The people who were around him wrote about how he'd try to get the pretty women to sleep with him, stayed drunk half the time, and enjoyed the lavish gifts from his admirers with no hesitation. He was also a great communicator with a deep understanding of the dharma, having a way with words that made the Buddha's teachings comprehensible to Western students. His teaching had a great influence on students who went on to teach the Dharma themselves.
So how can both of these describe the same man? His followers justified it by saying it's an example of "crazy wisdom" and an enlightened Master such as Trungpa does not live by the same rules as ordinary people. Complete bullshit, of course. Enlightenment is not a ticket to party or drag your students into bed with you. But this crazy wisdom excuse allowed his inner circle to justify enabling a man with addictions instead of helping him.
And his problems did affect his teaching. He did not teach restraint. One of his often quoted teachings: "Problems in life don't come from being aggressive or lustful. The problem is, you want to bottle those up and put them aside - and you become expert in deception." This is Buddhism as hedonism.
To me, and it's only my own reaction, it's sad that a great man didn't get the personal help he needed to become even greater. He was a great but greatly flawed teacher of the Dharma.
Funny, my fiancee and I have this discussion every month or two. (Just for reference, she is a Wiccan practitioner.) She believes it is possible to find wisdom in a teacher's words even when the guru doesn't "practice what they preach", or has questionable morals. I believe that if a teacher doesn't follow the teachings they or their tradition espouse, takes advantage of students or gleefully embraces their celebrity status, they are a hypocrite and their teachings cannot be trusted. It should be noted that I have serious trust issues, as I've been taken advantage of in the past (not religiously though), nor do I have a trusted teacher to ask about questionable teachings.
Then you're permitting your issues to cloud your judgement.
It is insufficient to say their teachings cannot be trusted.
you have to show that they cannot be trusted, because if they are not first-hand, they must have come from somewhere.
And the 'somewhere' they came from, may not be hypocritical, or have questionable morals.
Can you prove their teachings are questionable?
Forget them for a moment.
Point to any teaching that is in and of itself, questionable.
I would further point out that there are a whole fleet and raft of famous, notable and excellent literary authors who have written masterpieces of incalculable worth; whose own lives were highly questionable and subject to deep criticism.
Are you going to condemn their books as untrustworthy in their value?
Alright, consider Trungpa for a moment. If you know he'd be willing to manipulate his students in order to get them into bed, that means he's willing to manipulate others as well. So every teaching that comes from him I have to analyze, asking myself is Trungpa trying to manipulate me or get me to buy his next book? Why waste the mental effort on all that analysis and filtering? I'll just skip his works entirely.
Oscar Wilde is a fine author. But I would not rely on him to guide me on living my life or approaching my religion. That is exactly what we rely on these spiritual teachers to do for us, and thus I hold Trungpa to a higher standard than I do Wilde.
You're missing the point.
You're missing CONTENT.
You're missing ORIGIN.
Don't look at him and what he's DOING.
Look at what he's saying, where it comes from, whether it's verifiable, substantiated and authentic.
So? Don't question him.
I said, before.
Look at his teachings, whence they came. The source.
is it reliable?
beause 99 times out of ten, such Gurus are mere middle-men....
Most of his books were published after he died, @nakazcid. They were transcribed from his retreats and other teachings over many years. There were only a few available prior to his death and the book selling world was not then what it is now. He also started Naropa, which continues to be the only Buddhist-based college in the US (to my knowledge) It is an amazing place with a basis of compassion and meditation to go along with the standard education. Fabulous. I know several people who have been to school there and they learned many things they carry with them decades later. No doubt he is not free of trouble, nor is Shambhala as a whole. But his teachings have made an actual difference in the world. Many of his students are top teachers today, including Pema Chodron.
Also, and I am not discounting anything any victim has ever said, but just keeping perspective. Not everything that someone reports a particular way is 100% true the way they report it. There is a line somewhere of when someone is abused and manipulated into making decisions when they are pressured by a person they view as a leader, and when they knowingly made a choice that they later regret. It's a very difficult position and people who feel they've made a bad choice often do not want to admit it. Similar to several cases of admitted consensual sex between people where one regretted it and then pressed charged against the other. I'm not talking about rape here, of course, But regretted consensual activity. It is difficult to know without having been there how close reality and the stories match. Especially 30+ years later. Sometimes the adult person making the choice to sleep with a teacher has some responsibility, too.
So it's OK it he talks the talk, but can't walk the walk?
So let's assume Trungpa is merely a conduit for the wise men who came before him. We've established from his behavior that he is liable to manipulate others; how do we know he is not injecting his own agenda into what he's passing on?
Consider the Udayi Sutta:
See here for the whole sutta: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an05/an05.159.than.html
I've got to admit, I haven't studied every allegation against Trungpa in detail. But there are enough of them that I doubt that he meets all of these criteria, so I don't consider him a trustworthy source of the Dharma.
That is my understanding too.
Many people arrive at dharma as flawed individuals, looking for direction, lost and in search of the next scoop of ice cream.
In other words even as adults we may be undeveloped, lack discernment, have a fish or other addiction and be overly dependent on the sangha, guru or dairy lama for guidance, inspiration and right action.
Students may not be internally honest or have limited integrity and rational capacity. That is why the Sangha, Guru and source of the transmission is venerated and looked to as an exemplar of basic morality, ethics and being non exploitative of vulnerability.
In this sense, the real message of dharma is transmitted in a great part by behavour. We look to teachers for more than a good story. We look to them as an enactment or personification of the teaching. In essence we find a good teacher is an antidote to the exploitative, sham in both ourselves and others. Choose your Guru with attentive care.
Then wecan confidently take refuge in the three jewels.
There are times the HHDL does not line up to those criteria, either. Because Buddhism is a practice and not a perfection. You will find fault in most masters. Sometimes, we get too entrenched in our own addictions and problems to find the way out, even if we know where it is. That doesn't necessarily mean we can't use that experience to help others. Addictions of all sorts are incredibly hard to break. It is best, of course, not to get started in them from the beginning. But for some, once you do, that is the beginning of the end. I think Trungpa was an addict in several ways. That doesn't mean he's not responsible for his actions. It just means seeing things from a different perspective other than simply he made bad choices. He was incapable of making other choices at the time. Many musical and artistic geniuses are/were addicts as well. We don't refuse to acknowledge the genius in their art as a result, however.
I talk the talk a lot. To myself, to my kids, here. I most certainly do not walk it perfectly by any means. I am not a monk or revered teacher or guru, no. But I take my commitment seriously and my inability to always follow it doesn't negate the value of it.
Do what works for you, that's really all that matters. I just find it a shame to give up what could be valuable resources and teachers because of preconceived ideas of what they should be based on our perceptions that usually come from the perceptions of others. And perceptions are always colored by so many things.
To me it's very logical: If it makes sense, is verifiable and resonates, it's worth considering on its own merit.
If the words sound loaded, or seem to have an agenda, I step back and re-consider.
We've never met these men. We're highly unlikely to either, so we're not going to be coming under their direct influence any time soon.
All we have to go on, are their written words.
It's really not that hard, and I think we're making it more angst-ridden than it needs to be.
I enjoyed this discussion when it happened, it might be of interest to some here. One of our members was a long time student of Trungpa's and said all of his students are stuck with the conflict of knowing what Trungpa was after having been in his presence, and knowing the deeds he did and trying to resolve those things. There was some good input on the thread for those interested.
http://newbuddhist.com/discussion/18951/my-guru-was-a-drunk/p1
A man says A, and it is verifiably true. He also comes up with B, and B is questionable or not true. So, dismiss B and stick with A and find more truths that resonate with you.
The person who teaches A and B is a composite of both. Find one where the valuable teachings outweigh the questionable ones and you have found someone whom you can learn to respect. But why dismiss the valuable teachings because of the disagreeable ones?
However, it's totally up to you to decide how strictly you apply your criteria.
I personally do not need to elevate anyone to super status nor do I feel they need to be the ultimate teacher. I love Alan Watts and he is vilified by many for the same reasons as Trungpa.
All I can think of is how these 2 must have struggled privately to overcome their addictions.
Someone mentioned the Enablers. That, IMO, is the other side of the coin, the very unhealthy hero worship. Luxury gifts are along these lines. A cheaper tech device works just as well for the ordinary use of a monk or teacher. The smaller car will take him from here to there, and the watch will be just as accurate -- just no bling.
Resisting the bling is IMO part of a Buddhist's job description. If you notice someone not being able to resist, it just shows that this person still has a lot to learn, and what s/he teaches may be mostly book knowledge and just knowing what to say and how to say it so that people will admire him/her (their word bling).
And that is where you come into the picture. You don't have to follow or admire this person.
People who are led astray by charlatans have some serious issues to overcome. Not sure to what degree the description 'victim' applies here. Using questionable judgment and then blaming the other person is unethical as well.
As a thinking person I cannot see myself being that needy nor blindly trusting someone just because they are a teacher with a large following (sheeple?).
IOW, use your noodle and notice what and who resonates for the right reasons.
Make your own Buddhist patchwork quilt that fits your current views if you cannot find one that's ready-made.
The Dalai Lama, when asked about "crazy wisdom as an excuse for bad behavior", as you put it, said there is no such thing as "crazy wisdom". He said teachers should always uphold high ethical standards (the conventional standards set out by the Buddha), and that teachers who don't do that are not well-grounded in the foundations of their tradition. I think that makes things pretty clear.
Thanks @Dakini but that's just the opinion of a simple monk. Remember, he is merely the representative of one specific school...He also stated homosexuality was unacceptable, and should not be part of anyone's lifestyle. He is not without blemish, according to some.
So you see, while his words appear wise and appropriate, they seem wise and appropriate to you and you thinking it makes things pretty clear, is just your opinion.
You see?
In Tantra the Guru is regarded as an empithany or personification of Buddha qualities. The Dalai Lama is regarded as an emanation of the Boddhisatva of compassion.
Their every action and word can be dramatic and have a greater import than that of 'simple monks'.
So if following a simple monk, find one who is simply a monk. If finding a guru, find one who is worthy of the status.
For those to whom reputation matters, there are plenty of teachers whose reputations remain beyond reproach. Follow them.
For those to whom reputation is not so important, take whatever you will from wherever you want and put it to good use.
It's all progress in one way or another.
Seems to me that there are two camps going back and forth here that probably aren't going to come to some sort of agreement, because it's really a personal decision for a personal practice.
someone accepting the wisdom of someone you find to be dubious at best, is not affecting your own practice. It is their road to take, with all the consequences of it, same as your road.
for me personally to even attempt to put on equal terms the wisdom of someone like Mr. Crazy Wisdom Rimpoche to someone like say Ajahn Chah, is a laughable. But I can't deny the experience of others who seem to of benefited from him, it is also my own view, and views are thorny, dangerous things often best let go of inside before letting go out of the mouth lol.
As usual with the HHDL, it varies a bit depending on what you read, and from when. His focus is almost always on whether the guru has asked you to do something that goes against the dharma. Then you must speak up and if you cannot clarify within Buddha's guidelines, then you should leave that guru. But if the guru is giving you advice in line with the dharma (but not following it himself) it isn't quite as clear.
"Perception of faults in the guru should not cause us to feel disrespect, for by demonstrating faults to us the guru is actually showing us what we should abandon." From his book The Path to Enlightenment.
He also talks about how his followers treat him as Buddha, as all his words and actions are perfect, and they should not. He has said this view of gurus and teachers being like Buddha and thus pure and infallible is harmful and a poison to the dharma. It likewise up to the practitioner to see with a clear mind what is going on with their guru. The responsibility doesn't lie only on the guru but the student to question when things are not clear and when he is pointing you west but going east himself. He also acknowledges there is a big difference between advanced practitioners and those who are beginners but jump into guru relationships and tantric Buddhism because it is the most interesting, to a lot of people. They jump in without proper foundation and training and then completely misunderstand what is going on and what it means to trust the guru entirely. The responsibility for understanding rests on both the guru and the student.
@nakazcid
How do you reconcile what you said here (quote below) and what you said here in this discussion? I'm confused how you excuse what this man says as troubling in favor for the other good things he has to say, but cannot do the same with regards to others? You mentioned earlier you have trust issues which contribute to this view, but those don't come into play when someone advocates torture, nuclear war "because of what Islamists believe" and the profiling of Muslims? And in fact advocates for killing people simply for having beliefs whether they ever act on them or not?
"That said, I find some of views quite troubling (torture, Islam, etc.) But his thoughts are normally razor sharp and extraordinarily clear."
Is what he says excusable because he is not a Buddhist teacher? But is he not a teacher of sorts anyhow, using his neuroscience background to get people to trust what he has to say and thus sell his books? He has had 5 books on the NYT best seller list and is a sought after lecturer and guest commentator in many huge publications. He, it seems, has a wider audience available to him than Trungpa ever did, or even does now. But his views are excusable??
It seems that as always, a middle ground is best. Don't expect the Teacher to be perfect, but don't accept the excuse "He's enlightened so rules don't apply to him."
From the Zen teachings, there are monks described who I think fit the "crazy wisdom" category. The behavior is crazy and often breaks a vow, but it's not selfish or indulgent. A monk carried a woman across a river in the famous story, breaking his vow, but he didn't ask for sex from her in exchange. A Master cut a cat in two (so it is said) when none of the students present could answer his zen riddle, but cried about it later when he discovered the one monk who could answer and save the cat's life was late arriving. There's crazy and then there's crazy.
When debating the worth of Dharma teachers who don't practice what they preach ie, live up to their discourse.....
"Be careful not to throw the baby out with the bath water !" to do so would be somewhat extreme....just saying
@karasti I had to think about this for a moment. I suppose it’s because I don’t see Harris as a hypocrite or manipulator. As far as I know, he doesn’t sleep with his students (does he have any?) nor does he guzzle booze like a frat boy. In short, I’m not aware of him violating any precepts despite espousing his extreme views. In the last book of his I read, The End of Faith, he was not advocating religious profiling nor nuclear war against Islam, though he did morally equate torture with “collateral damage.” I stopped following him about 8 years ago due to what I perceived as a lack of compassion. Nonetheless, he did provide me my first glimpse of the Buddhist meditative practice. If he is now advocating nuclear war against Islam and religious profiling, I don’t stand behind those positions.
In the past I would’ve trusted statements he made about the nature of consciousness, the neurological effects of meditation on the brain, etc., but I wouldn’t heed his advice on how to be a compassionate human being. Clearly he lacks this, but I do think he has a better handle on the nature of consciousness than most Westerners.
My point was that you "excused" (for lack of better word) his shortfalls because he had things to offer that you could make use of. Or rather didn't refuse the wisdom he had to offer despite his shortfalls. It's not really any different. You just are judging different things in Trungpa that you find less acceptable. Why do we accept alcoholism as a disease that people cannot control in everyone except those we don't like? When we dislike them, it's their choice to be a drunk. When we like them, it's a disease they are powerless over. Interesting how that works. Anyhow, we are all free to do such cherry picking, and I'm sure most of us do it. Just saying, that is pretty much what is happening. You found value in his words despite disagreeing with other parts of his message. Anyone who writes books or speaks at lectures, and writes articles for large media publications, is, in effect, a teacher.
@karasti It's not as simple as cherry-picking wisdom. To extend your analogy of any speaker or writer as a teacher, when I read Trungpa's works I effectively become his student. Because he has demonstrated a history of manipulating and abusing his students, I have to look at every single word with mistrust. I simply can't trust anything he has to say. Zip, zilch, nada.
I love cherries.
I know how to pick them.
Clue one, don't go to a diseased tree for the best cherries.
... and now back to baking excellent cherry pies ...
@nakazcid I'm not trying to convince you of anything. Likewise, I wouldn't trust a man to adequately discuss literally anything who advocates for the things Sam Harris does.
Actually, I often find the best fruit from the dying plants Especially raspberries. And commonly apples as well produce their best lot right before they die.
Me too.....
On a more serious note...It's all relative.... there's no such thing as a bad teacher, there are teachers whose 'goodness' needs to ripen more, or perhaps have struck an obstacle on the path (its their karma) that's all...
I guess, if it's ones karmic flow which leads the student to interact with a certain teacher, so be it ...A lesson is a lesson , what's done is done, and if one has not learnt a lesson from the experience (the student's particular karma pattern has not been fully exhausted/experienced ) the chances are they will come across other teachers of a similar quality and continue their lesson .....
I tend to give all the teachers I come across the benefit of the doubt there's always a lesson to be learnt....
And as the ol' saying goes "When the student is ready...the teacher will appear" and what form the teacher takes is up to the student
Indeed @Shoshin
Part of the responsibility is with the student. People follow those who are hypocrites (spoiler alert) because they prefer to join the dream circus of a strong persona.
It is difficult for the fast asleep and snoring to admit that their perceptions and discerning capacity is not yet perfecting.
After some practice, training and experience in integrity and detached discernment, we gain the capacity to know the value and sortcomings of ourself, HH The Pope, HH The giggling Dairy Lama and the convincing spiritual snake oil salesmen.
Understood.
In a sense it can be of value to examine our reaction, more than the source. For example I never trust anything I say or think, just in case it is of limited value. However it is usually the best I can do.
There's an element of context we've been leaving out of the conversation. Here's what I mean:
Could an alcoholic narcissistic womanizer be a good math professor? Sure, if he knows math, and knows how to teach. (And why are these charming "high intensity" people so often men?) Would the math lessons taught by this person be valid, and valuable? Sure. Conversely though, if the subject is not math but a set of principles and practices by which to live your life, then not only is this teacher questionable; so are the teachings.
Thanks for putting it so well.
I think that is part of what made Trungpa different. He was not all that focused on the 4 noble truths or the Eightfold Path as far as what he taught directly, which isn't uncommon in Vajrayana Buddhism. So perhaps in his mind he removed himself so far from the foundations and he didn't need them. We rarely talk about them directly with my teacher, but they are always wound within everything we do and talk about. I don't know that I've ever heard my teacher even mention the Eightfold path. It is more an expectation that you know and understand and are going to tackle them from a different angle. But they are always there, as they should be.
It never seemed to me that Trungpa's teachings were how to live an ethical life in the manner we would normally see Buddhism, so maybe that is why he appealed to some of the people he did. He was more about pointing out that there are different ways to look at and survive life. He was not a strict foundational teacher, and i think that is where a lot of the conflict comes from. In addition, being a Vajrayana teacher complicates things as well because he was so well-known but Vajrayana is not. So he was always looking at things from that perspective while most of the people who read his books were not. It is one of the problems with bringing high levels, advanced teachings to the forefront. Some people just want a group to meditate with and focus on the eightfold path and practical ways to live your life and feel better about it, but you aren't going to get that with a Vajrayana teacher. For whatever reason, Vajrayana is what speaks to me.
I, of course, never met Trungpa but I've been on retreats with some of his students and their methods are just what work best for me. My teacher does not have a problem with it and I've had many discussions with him about these things. But being able to do so helps me to separate valid teachings from Trungpa's issues which I do think is important. When what he says in a particular way can help me to learn a very difficult concept, and my teacher can verify that yes, that is correct understanding, then it is invaluable. And that is all that matters to me as far as my practice goes. Vajrayana is a uncomfortable and difficult path, and I need all the help I can get, lol.
In any case, we all find teachers that speak to us, in all sorts of ways. The HHDL, while I found being in his presence an amazing experience, is not someone I can relate to. I don't think I have completely finished a single one of his books, I just cannot stay with them. I read his thoughts on a lot of topics, but articles are as much as I can manage. I love TNH and think he is one of the most important teachers of our time, but, he has dozens of books that mostly all say the same thing.
@karasti I actually tried to read Trungpa once and found his ideas unnecessarily complicated. It's becoming more and more clear from your comments and from other experiences that Vajrayana is not for me. Sadly, that's the only option available to me locally.
Please don't take my comments as a personal attack; I find your contributions to the forum wise and insightful.
Good body of post, @karasti
I can completely equate with the (first) bolded bit: he's heavy going and quite elaborate and convoluted. I too, have never successfully completed any full book of his, apart from the one he co-wrote or collaborated in with Howard Cutler ('The Art of Happiness'). I have three of his books, which seem to have him as sole author (in that obviously, English not being his first language, he collaborated with others in writing, for lingual purposes).
As for the second bolded (italic) part, again, I completely get you point. I have four of his books and you're right; you could basically glean the same message from all of them.
None of this takes anything away from either of them, nor does it devalue their worth to the path, or Dhamma.
@nakazcid no offense or any such thing taken whatsoever. I always enjoy these discussions because they keep me in check when I find myself overly defending things and/or people.
It is my only option as well, and even with that my teacher is 250 miles away (and for 6 months a year he is in Asia). But over the years, it's been working out. Sometimes it is too intense and I back off, which is ok. I am more focused on the Mahayana right now, but slowly working through some of the Vajrayana stuff. It's difficult but I find it quite rewarding when I stick with it. I feel like I ask most questions than most, lol. There are other options in my state, I just do not have the ability to travel and my teacher is the only one that travels to this part of the state. At this point, I don't think I would chose another option even if I could but a few years ago I might have. There are times I feel like I am in my first year of a foreign language and everyone else in the room already took 10 years of it. But it is coming together, a little at a time.
@federica definitely. They have both been instrumental in the spread of Buddhism in the west. And I think it is a gift that TNH can take a main message and apply it in so many ways to get the attention of so many people. The message might be overall the same, but each book will appeal to a person who is dealing with a different issue, or is looking for something in particular. I quite enjoy his messages, but I find I need more of a challenge to keep learning and I guess that is why Trungpa appeals to me. His "cut the crap and look at yourself, for real" is what I need. It's like having a parent who says "don't give me that line of BS" lol. I tend to be a very stagnant person so I need different thing to shake me up so I keep moving forward.
I think that spiritual leaders that engage in drug/alcohol abuse, sexual abuse, and other similar harmful activities really do a disservice to their religions or spiritual traditions.
I think, in general, that unless your born into a religion, then you turn to it because you're looking for something that the rest of society is not offering, be it truth, a way of improving oneself, or whatever.
If it's OK for a leader to do whatever he or she wants, then it really sends the message that we all just may as well engage in any kind of nihilistic or narcissistic behaviour that we feel like.
I don't think there was ever a message that it was ok, not from Trungpa at least. Not that doing the "I do it, but you shouldn't" is ideal for a guru. But also remember as far as drugs and alcohol goes, addiction isn't a choice. Despite all the questionable things Trungpa and Sogyal engaged in, their message was never that anyone should engage in that behavior. If you (generally speaking) are going to say "well he does it, I can do it too" then that problem still lies with you. Buddhism is still always about investigating your teacher, your actions, your thoughts, everything. And if you don't do so, that fault is on you. I've never thought that because someone else does something, that makes it ok for me. Whether what they were doing was good or bad, I had to determine what was right for me.
And for people like Sogyal and Trungpa, Buddhism wouldn't be what it is in the western world today without them, most likely. They changed the landscape. There is a Buddhist college here because of Trungpa. There are meditation centers across the country, hundreds of them, because of Sogyal and Trungpa. Helping thousands of people to learn meditation and Buddhist beliefs.
On the plus side, considering the behavior of some, at least those who use ipads don't look so bad now
For myself, I investigate teachers for the quality of their information. If I was involved ina guru relationship with them, then that investigation is upped a level and I would not want someone I didn't trust in that kind of a relationship. But I would still use their wisdom where I could. When I find I want to judge someone for their use of anything, whether too much FB, a phone I disapprove of, driving a car or wearing clothes that seem out of place, I try to stop and look at why I feel it's my place to judge, and whether what is happening has any bearing on me. And whether it has any bearing on the truth that person is speaking. If not, I move on, and try to worry more about myself and my FB and cell phone use than someone else's. As is usually the case, when I find the need to point out something about someone else, I usually find it is my own doubts about that same thing in my life that I have a problem with.
Addiction may or may not be a choice. But seeking help to overcome it is. So is stepping aside from a leadership role if one is facing inner demons that would hinder one's ability to be a clear-minded role model.
There is a great deal more to the growth of Buddha Dhamma in the west than the above mentioned. But it has to be sought out. If you were to do this you might have a different opinion.
I didn't say they were the only catalysts in the growth of Buddhism. But they were major players early on and have helped thousands of people who might not otherwise have been interested. I know more people who have said they were influenced by Trungpa than almost any other teacher and none of them are hedonists or nihilists or drunks or womanizers. They were all able to take his teachings for what they were and make use of them in their daily lives. Some have kept with that tradition, others have moved on. No teacher is ideal for every student. But something about Trungpa speaks specifically to many western students. He was able to bridge that gap between cultures, perhaps in part because he fell victim to our society in much the same way many of us do in our early lives.
@Walker yes, I agree. But people in the depths of addiction often do not even recognize that they need help and his inner circle did a lot to enable him and not much to encourage him to take other steps. Someone dealing with inner demons doesn't often even realize they are there. Seeking help requires understanding of the problem and often that requires outside intervention.