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.
Relying on a Teacher
NamelessRiver
Veteran
OK I having problems with this "Guru Devotion" business. I'd like to begin the thread with the following quotes:
Some people express
The good qualities of sandalwood
Saying, "Sandalwood is like this:
It is the pleasant aspect of incense."
Then some other people
Might ask them, "Do you possess
A bit of the sandalwood
Which you so praise?"
They then reply, "I do not have
The incense that I praise
To gain my livelihood."
Just so, in later times there will arise
Monks who do not strive at yoga
And make a living by praising ethical discipline.
They will have no ethical discipline.
[From King of Concentrations Sutra]
"If the abbot instructs you to do what is not in accord with the teachings, refuse." [From Sutra on the Discipline]
Sharawa said: "We use the word 'guru' for whomever is pleased by practice and does not give even the slightest consideration to material gifts. One who does the opposite is not suitable to be a guru for those wishing to achieve liberation."
From the general feel of instructions from the Lam Rim Chen Mo the idea is that you have to rely on the teacher for guidance, he has to have at least some qualities, but doesn't have to be perfect. You shouldn't be focusing on his faults though, but in his virtues. This seems for me to represent something like this: if you are learning physics or whatever and have a professor who is a jerk but delivers very good classes than you should focus on the physics and not on the jerk behind it. However, the main guide is the Dharma. Whenever Dharma vs. Guru arises, Dharma wins.
On the other hand, I find this idea that the Guru has faults incoherent with the idea that you have to view them as being the Buddha:
"If you would ask, O Lord of Secrets, how disciples should view masters, then I would answer that they should view them just as they view the Bhagavan." [From Tantra Bestowing the Initiation of Vajrapani]
How are these ideas not contradictory?
Some people express
The good qualities of sandalwood
Saying, "Sandalwood is like this:
It is the pleasant aspect of incense."
Then some other people
Might ask them, "Do you possess
A bit of the sandalwood
Which you so praise?"
They then reply, "I do not have
The incense that I praise
To gain my livelihood."
Just so, in later times there will arise
Monks who do not strive at yoga
And make a living by praising ethical discipline.
They will have no ethical discipline.
[From King of Concentrations Sutra]
"If the abbot instructs you to do what is not in accord with the teachings, refuse." [From Sutra on the Discipline]
Sharawa said: "We use the word 'guru' for whomever is pleased by practice and does not give even the slightest consideration to material gifts. One who does the opposite is not suitable to be a guru for those wishing to achieve liberation."
From the general feel of instructions from the Lam Rim Chen Mo the idea is that you have to rely on the teacher for guidance, he has to have at least some qualities, but doesn't have to be perfect. You shouldn't be focusing on his faults though, but in his virtues. This seems for me to represent something like this: if you are learning physics or whatever and have a professor who is a jerk but delivers very good classes than you should focus on the physics and not on the jerk behind it. However, the main guide is the Dharma. Whenever Dharma vs. Guru arises, Dharma wins.
On the other hand, I find this idea that the Guru has faults incoherent with the idea that you have to view them as being the Buddha:
"If you would ask, O Lord of Secrets, how disciples should view masters, then I would answer that they should view them just as they view the Bhagavan." [From Tantra Bestowing the Initiation of Vajrapani]
How are these ideas not contradictory?
0
Comments
'Genuine devotion and understanding the teachings
For the sake of all the sentient beings, one must see the truth, and eliminate this clinging to the self of the person and the self of the phenomena. To do that, one has to have tsültrim, discipline, and then one must hear and contemplate teachings like Madhyamakavatara. This is even more important in our modern society because, most of the time, our inspiration and devotion are very emotionally oriented. Normally we think devotion is a bit like faith; like believing in something without much reasoning. But Saraha, in one of his Doha, described devotion as lé gyündré la yi chepa (las rgyu ‘bras la yid chad pa), which means trusting cause, condition and effect. If you have the causes and conditions, and if you don’t have any obstacles, then the result has to follow.
For example, if you have an egg, and enough water and heat, and nobody disturbs it, then the egg will be cooked. That’s a fact. You cannot dismantle that sort of logic or law, and according to Saraha, trusting that rule or law of phenomena is what we call devotion.
If you have merit and genuine devotion, of course, we don’t have to talk about this. But for most of us beginners, although we might have some fleeting temporary devotion, it’s good for us to have a good ground of understanding the teachings through hearing and contemplation, because it will always be like insurance. Emotionally oriented devotion can easily fall apart: we are such weak beings that conditions can easily defeat us. Today we may think that our master or the Buddha is wonderful. Tomorrow, a ridiculous or trivial circumstance could arise, such as your guru not liking onion on his pizza, and just because you like onion so much, you might think, what kind of guru is this? That’s so pathetic, but that’s what I mean by emotionally oriented devotion.
As in the beginning of this text, we discussed that we should not rely on the teacher, but on his teachings. We should not rely on conception, but on wisdom. We should not rely on expedient teachings, but on absolute teachings. Until we manage to transform the master into the path, we should always have the insurance of having a good ground of understanding the teachings. For most of us, the guru is usually just some kind of big boss, and not a path; taking the lama as the path, lama lam du chepa (bla ma lam du byed pa), is very difficult. So, until we manage to do that, it is good for us to have a little insurance.
As we discussed yesterday, conceptions have no end. Things like reincarnation or no reincarnation, whether the mind is brain or not, whether things have beginning or not – all these are conceptions. It’s endless. What we need to really finalise, or actualise, is chö tamché gyi zhiluk (chos thams cad gyi gshis lugs), the reality or the absolute truth of all phenomena.' (page 407)
Edited From:
Introduction to the Middle Way: Chandrakirti’s Madhyamakavatara, With commentary by Dzongsar Jamyang Khyentse Rinpoche, Given at the Centre d’Etudes de Chanteloube, Dordogne, France, 1996, 1998, 1999, 2000, Arranged according to Gorampa’s commentary, Edited by Alex Trisoglio
© 2003 by Khyentse Foundation
:cheer:
The problem is that I know someone that follows a teacher that is quite erm...controversial. You probably know this person too Brother Bob. He\She licks the ground beneath this teacher's feet. All you have to do is listen to this so called teacher talk about anything buddhist, though, to see how watered down and misguided this teacher is, and to notice the enthralled stupor of the students. ;-|
Things like that make me quite apprehensive of putting a lot of trust on a Guru. I would surely respect someone more knowledgeable and sincere, but I wouldn't have this kind of "ohhh, I must be an obedient child" attitude. I would rather question him\her in every step, and I would only be with someone that wanted me to do that. If not, I'd rather be alone.
How is it that a lawyer can't find the loophole? ;-)
Hi,
I checked myself and deleted a responding post. If it got to you anyway, I apologize. It was off base. In reading your post more carefully, I agree with what you write.
I'm very careful about accepting instruction, which is what I imagine your referring to. I liked the information offered in my previous post because it points to a more reliable way of approaching a relationship with teachers.
Although, in interactions with master (teacher/gurus) I do follow the conventional protocol of whatever lineage they're in, even the more quirky one's; like not point feet at the guru, stepping on their shadow, always speaking of them as holy or venerable to others, blah blah blah.
This is, for me, a kind of public expression of respect and appreciation not any subservient groveling, which I just can't do anyway.
Most of the high level teachers I've encountered have been completely aware of this display (emphasis play!) and have often shared little smiles of understanding with me, kind of off to the side. We all know it's simply for the benefit of those who need to surrender to the teacher in order to feel comfortable.
I imagine the true benefit of the teacher as being an exemplar of how to tread the path and as one I may rely on to correct me when I get screwed up in training and not as one to grovel to, as a dog begging for scraps of food. I don't imagine any rectitude or dignity in that.
I think you have a pretty good point of view and that when you meet a teacher who you test and find reliable, you will fall in love with them and be willing to accept and act on whatever they recommend for you to put effort into in training.
:wavey:
Another thing to consider is that we are all viewing these teachers or guru' through our deluded view. We may not be able to understand their behavior, though we may judge it from our own dualistic and unenlightened mind's.
M
I guess we all need hero's!
Nothing is infallible Nameless River, and we should all proceed with great caution before trusting our selves to any teacher.
One good ( but not infallible ) rule of thumb is lineage.
Who is that teachers teacher ? And did that teachers teacher acknowledge that the teacher is authorised to teach, and can they prove that ?
Even if they can. there are other considerations to keep in mind. Is that teacher consistant in word and deed to the lineage ?
Certainly I would be very wary of anyone who purports to be a teacher and cannot demonstrate both a known lineage and permission from their teacher to teach.
Hi Citta
Do you think that this means that one could not, say, discover Dharma for themselves and then teach that Dharma (as the Buddha did) unless they could somehow prove there were connected, by lineage, to some other teacher?
Mat
In the case of the Theravada it is a much more informal relationship . Although if we are learning Vipassana it is a very good idea indeed to learn it in person from someone qualified.
In all cases Sangha is important , actual human Sangha that is.
I think that books, Cd's and cyber Sangha is very much a last resort, in the genuine absence of an alternative.
Hi Cita
I agree with you I think, espcially regarding meditation, which I think without a teacher you cant get that far in (or so i am finding!)
I think if the Buddha was around today he would have embraced online sangas:)
Thanks
Mat
Going to a Buddhist center is not like going to a swimming school. People there can have all sorts of distorted views and mess up your practice. The eager disposition of people to congregate around a "master" in the west has given rise to a long list of Cults.
Controversial Buddhist Teachers and Groups
What a list! Whether its politics, economics, families or religion the concentration of authority inevitably leads to negativity. Without Magic, why would Buddhism be any different?
Absolutely true that warm Sangha does quarantee anything, but when it works its peerless. And there is a higher likelihood of checks and balances than there is online, where lets face it, we have no idea at all to who we are talking.
I have just popped in from another forum where a member was talking about the importance of actual practice. I happen to know, because he recently told me, that he doesnt actually do any...You wouldnt know that from his series of posts on meditation and the issues around it. I think in the flesh many of us know instinctively if someone is making claims that dont stack up. Their behaviour and claims are incongruous.
But to emphasise the positive , there is no encouragement like meeting in person with people who are walking the talk.
Only Joking!
He is a aikido master\musician\actor\reincarnation of such and such lama [recognized by Penor Rinpoche, not too shabby]. Apparently his forte is aikido, though :P