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.
Did Buddha Teach the Tantras and Tantric Sex? And What is this Teaching?
Don't get the wrong idea that the bodhisattva path is about breaking the five precepts. It is very rare. The bodhisattva trains in the 6 paramitas to even get to that point: generosity, ethics, patience, joyful effort, and meditative concentration. Those 5 paramitas are a stable support for the purpose of developing wisdom. To support the wisdom. The second purpose is to become more attractive to sentient beings. That they admire you and wish to become a student. So that you can show them their own wisdom.
Jeffrey, I recall from studying TB at university, that many words have dual (or more) meanings. Standard words have completely different meanings in esoteric Buddhism . For example (fasten your seat belt): padma means lotus. So far so good. but what is the lotus? What does "jewel in the lotus" mean? Sounds kind of nonsensical, doesn't it? The lotus is a symbol of the female genitalia. "Mani" means jewel. What jewel? "Jewel" in the tantric texts refers to the tip of the penis. Om Mani Padma Hum--the jewel in the lotus. Make more sense now? The vajra (dorje) is also a phallic symbol. The dorje and the bell. To ring the bell, you insert the dorje into the bell and ring the bell by means of the dorje (bells didn't have clappers in old Tibet, unlike the reproductions sold these days). The bell, of course, is a symbol for the vagina. Get it?
Thao is right; bodhichitta, I was told, refers to the drop of semen, that first drop that's generated in the tantric rituals. At the moment the first drop appears, the initiate has to exercise restraint and prevent any semen from spilling. It's about prevention of ejaculation, and redirection of the semen upward, thereby engendering a bliss state. It's possible that bodhichitta refers to the semen in general. My university lessons were a long time ago, I only remember the professor discussing the significance of that first drop. Maybe you could find something about it on the internet.
0
personDon't believe everything you thinkThe liminal spaceVeteran
Bodhi means our ‘enlightened essence’ and chitta (Skt. citta) means ‘heart’ or 'mind', hence the translation ‘the heart of enlightened mind’.
In the symbolism of this tantric practice you imagine the semen to be bodhicitta. But its just a representation in order to utilize actual bodhicitta even if its actual semen thats used. You could have a spiritual practice where you vizualize bodhicitta as chicken feathers, that doesn't make bodhicitta actually chicken feathers. So bodhicitta has a specific translation and meaning but you can use any item as a representation of it, real or imagined.
My lama says the material in wikipedia was probably arrived at from an insight at a retreat. Such insights are not reality itself because reality has no characteristics it is only apparent.
The genitalia is a symbol of something else. Both the something else and the genitalia are empty. Spacious. Not pure or impure. Not as they appear and not otherwise.
"It is very good to recite the mantra Om mani padme hum, but while you are doing it, you should be thinking on its meaning, for the meaning of the six syllables is great and vast... The first, Om [...] symbolizes the practitioner's impure body, speech, and mind; it also symbolizes the pure exalted body, speech, and mind of a Buddha[...]"
"The path is indicated by the next four syllables. Mani, meaning jewel, symbolizes the factors of method: (the) altruistic intention to become enlightened, compassion, and love.[...]"
"The two syllables, padme, meaning lotus, symbolize wisdom[...]"
"Purity must be achieved by an indivisible unity of method and wisdom, symbolized by the final syllable hum, which indicates indivisibility[...]"
"Thus the six syllables, om mani padme hum, mean that in dependence on the practice of a path which is an indivisible union of method and wisdom, you can transform your impure body, speech, and mind into the pure exalted body, speech, and mind of a Buddha[...]"
Remember dharma teachings are a raft. To relieve suffering. They do not exist (non-self). They are impermanent. And they are suffering when grasped to. This is how you can see if it is a dharma teaching or not.
Bodhi means our ‘enlightened essence’ and chitta (Skt. citta) means ‘heart’ or 'mind', hence the translation ‘the heart of enlightened mind’.
Interesing post, person. I might tweak your translation a little; according to what you say, bodhicitta would mean: "enlightened essence of heart/mind". I can see where they would see "essence" as semen. You're right, you can project any symbol onto something, but that's sort of neither here nor there. The point is that in esoteric tantric practice, there are secret meanings to otherwise ordinary words, what is called a "twilight language" that only initiates know how to translate. If anyone read a tantric text that talked about what to do with the "mani", they would't know what was being discussed, unless they knew the esoteric meaning of "mani". If the text described bodhichitta emanating from the mani, you might think compassion was being discussed, when in fact, physiological functions were the topic. This explanation of mine (above) was posted to elucidate what Thao was saying about bodhichitta and how meanings differ between esoteric and exoteric Buddhism, not to initiate an argument about symbols being arbitrary, or something. That's kind of off-topic.
compassionate warrior, I don't know since you are claiming it is esoteric. Were you a student of tantric buddhism? How do you know? Or are you guess? Or learned in your buddhism class in college?
What is more significant? 'Coming' or the love in your heart? How could you misunderstand one for the other?
When everything is dull and grey and lifeless in our heart. That is frozen bodhicitta. Some people drive across frozen ice to go from their home on an island to get to their work. What do you think about that compassionate warrior?
compassionate warrior, I don't know since you are claiming it is esoteric. Were you a student of tantric buddhism? How do you know? Or are you guess? Or learned in your buddhism class in college?
In university classes on TB, there are no secrets. Everything is up for academic discussion and analysis. It's all very matter-of-fact, no one is shocked or denies what the prof is saying.
I was just trying to be helpful, but my info seems to be being taken as criticism of the tradition. ...??
What is more significant? 'Coming' or the love in your heart? How could you misunderstand one for the other?
When everything is dull and grey and lifeless in our heart. That is frozen bodhicitta. Some people drive across frozen ice to go from their home on an island to get to their work. What do you think about that compassionate warrior?
You've lost me entirely here, Jeffrey. I don't know what you're talking about. In fact, I had no idea the comments were addressed to me until the very end, and I don't know why they're addressed to me, or what they're in reference to. Perhaps there's been a misunderstanding? As I explained a couple of posts above, I only intended to explain about how Thao's statement that bodhicitta has a completely different meaning than the commonly-understood one is part of a system of secret language, "twilight" language used in tantric texts. That's not a big deal, is it? Just a statement of fact. Is it upsetting to learn about this? If so, why?
Jeffrey, the teaching about chakras, semen/bodhicitta, etc. is Eastern science and sacred science. To someone practicing spiritual sex (tantra), to liken semen to a pack of cigarettes is to demonstrate a very mundane view. It would be viewed as denigrating semen, which in tantra is viewed as a sacred substance. The woman's emissions are also sacred.
Thao: traditionally the lama taught tantra to monks, not to women he likes. Though it's true that in the old days, some lamas did take consorts, I think in many cases it's not tantric sex that happened. Anyway, from what I understand, the monks or lay initiates were supposed find and provide the consorts. Low-caste women were recommended in the case of monks, immediate relatives in the case of lay initiates.
So sad that there's such a disregard for ethics on the guru scene. I'm sorry for your disillusioning experiences, Thao.
"Sorry Jeffrey, but bodhicitta has two meanings, and the second meaning, which shocked me, is that it is semen. Its states in in the book."
That is two contradictory definitions. Bodhicitta means awakened mind. The wish to bring all beings to enlightenment. I cannot fathom how semen is bodhicitta. It would be like saying love is pack of cigarettes. Could someone say that?
The white bodhicitta in your quotation says that it descends from the crown and is turned into joy in the various chakras. Anybody who studies anatomy knows that semen does not come from the crown of the head. There is no channel for such. The channel for semen is in the genital region.
The chakras do not refer to anything physical. You can not dissect a body and find the chakras. They refer to subtle energies that are subjective experience. Bodhicitta is also a subjective experience.
Semen too is a subjective experience. It is the form skanda and there can be feelings of good bad or neutral regarding semen. For example one may experience it as gross (bad). There is also the perception skanda which would be the tactile qualities of semen. The viscosity saltiness and sweetness of semen. Wether there are globules or discoloration in the semen. All of that is perception. Finally there are fantasies and ideas about semen. Fourth skanda of karmic formations which form are formed out of perceptions into craving (or aversion) and so forth. The consciousness skanda I don't understand correctly, but intuitively consciousness... well its consciousness.
All of the five skandas are citta. Bodhicitta is awakened citta. Because there is no pure or impure semen can be included in bodhicitta? All things are included. Anger is included in bodhicitta. The realization of bodhicitta is the start of actually (as opposed to vowing) a bodhisattva (in my understanding). At that point the bodhisattva recognizes that all beings (and situations) can be brought to an awake nature.
Sexuality and the five skandas of semen can also be brought and used to bring an awake nature.
Let me quote from the book Commentary on the Kalachakra Tantra:
"The white bodhicitta refers to the semen in the Kalachakra practice, the emission of semen or the white bodhcitta is the root downfall." This is where the male disciple has to retain his semen, and if he can't, it is a root downfall.
I did not write this book. I agree with you that there is no canal, but hey, that is tantra for you. Have you ever saw the canal that they are talking about? The one that awakens kundalini? No. You won't see this one either, and maybe it is going through those canals.
Jeffrey, I recall from studying TB at university, that many words have dual (or more) meanings. Standard words have completely different meanings in esoteric Buddhism . For example (fasten your seat belt): padma means lotus. So far so good. but what is the lotus? What does "jewel in the lotus" mean? Sounds kind of nonsensical, doesn't it? The lotus is a symbol of the female genitalia. "Mani" means jewel. What jewel? "Jewel" in the tantric texts refers to the tip of the penis. Om Mani Padma Hum--the jewel in the lotus. Make more sense now? The vajra (dorje) is also a phallic symbol. The dorje and the bell. To ring the bell, you insert the dorje into the bell and ring the bell by means of the dorje (bells didn't have clappers in old Tibet, unlike the reproductions sold these days). The bell, of course, is a symbol for the vagina. Get it?
Thao is right; bodhichitta, I was told, refers to the drop of semen, that first drop that's generated in the tantric rituals. At the moment the first drop appears, the initiate has to exercise restraint and prevent any semen from spilling. It's about prevention of ejaculation, and redirection of the semen upward, thereby engendering a bliss state. It's possible that bodhichitta refers to the semen in general. My university lessons were a long time ago, I only remember the professor discussing the significance of that first drop. Maybe you could find something about it on the internet.
This is what the Commentary book says too. Gives new meaning to the jewel, the lotus and bodhicitta. I am so glad that I quit Tibetan Buddhism. Now is to get those words back to their original meaning, if that is at all possible.
Taoists practice tantra, they call it "sexual alchemy", but there are no secrets, and no abuse, AFAIK. No twilight language, because nothing's secret. Maybe if Tibetan tantra is to survive, this is the route it should take. Transparency, ethics, straight talk. But secrecy is power; maybe the boys won't want to give that up. But power is ego, so they're supposed to give it up. idk. Maybe like Shamar says, tantra's time has passed. Or maybe as Jeffrey has implied, there is something valuable there, something about a healthy (or I'd say, spiritual) attitude towards sex. But we have to clean up the dishonesty, manipulation, and abuse. And IMO, we shouldn't be calling it Buddhism, putting the Buddha's name on it, like a Good Housekeeping Seal.
RE: whether or not chakras and the canals along the spinal column exist on the physical plane--apparently not. But that doesn't necessarily mean they don't exist at all. If you dissect a corpse, you won't find any acupuncture meridians, but they're there on live sentient beings. They're electrical pathways that bio-energy (Chi, Prana) flows along. The Kundalini channel is probably something similar. I'd like to see research done with someone whose Kundalini is "up". Wire them up to a machine that can measure the body's electrical activity when it's "on" Kundalini. That's the only way we'll know for sure if Kundalini is "real". Except that monks practicing tummo have been studied to some extent and it's clear that something unusual is going on: they've dried icy cold towels with their body heat, and so forth, in front of scientists. No electrical measuring was done, though.
I think the body is much more complex than Western science is aware. I don't think we should dismiss the idea of canals and meridians just because they don''t exist on the physical plane. Can you see electricity? Most of the time, not. Yet you don't doubt it exists. Back when electricity was "discovered" and harnessed for everyday use, people regarded it in mystical terms. Now we know it's just electricity, not a big deal. We may find out the same someday regarding the Kundalini canals and acupuncture meridians, and possibly a lot more.
I think it was you vinlyn that asked me about the 3 councils. I have more information, and I believe that Jeffry asked me if I believed there there could be more Buddhas. The answer is in here, but briefly Jeffry, the Buddha said that his teachings would be the teacher, that there would be no other teachers. So Tibetans that say that another Buddha brought the teachings to Tibet, well, it was another Buddha but it was not thee Buddha's teachings.
ust as long as no-one confuses the three meetings mentioned in your post above with The Three Councils of early Buddhism, beginning just after the Parinibbana of the Buddha:
''The history of Theravada as a school of Buddhism should begin with a quick survey of the life of Gotama Buddha himself. He was born as a Sakyan prince at a place near the Himalayas about six hundred years BC. Grieved at the ills of life such as old age, sickness and death, he renounced the world at the age of 29 and started seeking the way to Nibbana, "Extinction" of all forms of suffering. At 35 he achieved his goal and became Buddha. He then carried out his teaching mission for 45 years. At 80 he attained Parinibbana, "Total Extinction" (which is the Buddhist way of expressing his demise). Just before that event he left a message to his cousin and attendant monk, Ananda, part of which being:
When I am gone, the Dhamma (Doctrine) and Vinaya (Discipline) that I have taught and laid down shall be your Teacher!
This implies that the Buddha did not want to appoint any person to succeed him on his demise. The two Great Disciples Sariputta and Moggallana had already passed away; but Maha Kassapa who enjoyed the good reputation of being the Third Disciple was alive. But even a man of his stature would not become the Buddha"s successor. By this injunction the Buddha made it clear that only his Dhamma and Vinaya would adequately and effectively serve as the sole guide to his followers. Dhamma-Vinaya therefore was the designation given by the Master himself to his twofold teaching (pavacana) about the time of his Parinibbana. There was no reason whatever to dub it Theravada.
When the First Council was held at Rajagaha three months after the Buddha"s demise with the noble aim of consolidation the Dhamma-Vinaya "before righteousness fades away and before unrighteousness shines forth". The Council was presided over by Maha Kassapa whose questions on the Vinaya and the Dhamma were answered by Upali and Ananda respectively. The answers were confirmed by 500 monks who recited both in unison and passed on from teacher to pupil orally. The name Theravada remained unheard of, at least publicly. It that Buddhism as one whole body with its original designation of Dhamma Vinaya stood in full bloom all over India.
A century later the Second Council was held at Vesali under the collective leadership of Yasa, Revata and Sabbakami to discuss the "ten points" which in fact were the Buddha's certain disciplinary ruler relaxed and practised by imprudent Vajjian monks. The Council composed of 700 members decided the points unlawful and condemned the Vajjians who seceded from that Council to convene their own known as Maha sangha or Mahasangiti, the Great Council, since their number 10,000 far exceeded that of the former. It was the open and serious schism that took place in the Sangha, the Buddhist Order, for the first time. And with the schism emerged two factions of Theravadins, followers of Theravada, and Mahasanghikas or Mahasangitikas, those of the secession.
The Third Council in the tradition of Theravada was held in the 3rd century, according to the Chronicles and Commentaries, with Moggaliputta Tissa as its president and Asoka to the Moriyan Dynasty as its supporter. The venue of the Council was the imperial city Pataliputta. The purpose was to purify the religion and to restore peace to the Order, for many heretics who had joined the Sangha for convenient livelihood caused confusion and unfortunate incidents in the Sangha.'' http://www.budsas.org/ebud/ebdha136.htm
The only studies i know that have been done were done by Dr. Andrew Newberg, which you may know about, but it only shows the brain on meditation. I loved his books.
The three councils I am referring to are those which currently represent Buddhism throughout the world.
I disagree with someone who felt those councils really had no power or influence. That's what some said about what was going on in the Catholic Church...that priests shouldn't be expected to report improper goings on. That's called a coverup. Today's Buddhist groups should speak out against wrong doing. Period. No excuses.
Vinlyn, I agree that someone needs to oversee what's going on in the different schools of Buddhism, in the monasteries, possibly investigate reports of misconduct/malfeasance. It's clear that no authority in Zen or TB is going to police their own. But Thao researched the councils you mentioned, and posted earlier a policy statement of theirs that said they don't interfere in the inner workings of different traditions. And what would you define as wrong-doing? Is including sexual practice and ritual as part of a tradition wrong-doing or is it the tradition's right to define for itself what legitimate practice is?
The Dalai Lama encourages students to speak out and go to the press, and even initiate lawsuits, if necessary. But I don't think that's enough. Why should the burden be entirely on the students? Some dharma centers have enacted strict codes of conduct. That's helpful. What more can be done? Are you suggesting that there be a global Buddhist watchdog entity with its own tribunal to impose order? I wonder how practical a suggestion that is, and I also wonder how well it would work and whether it would cause sectarian strife? Would we be able to trust the appointees to it, if a lineage has a history of corruption? Would it be made up of lay practitioners as well as (ostensibly) respected sectarian leaders? I'm all for practical suggestions to address what seems to have been a pretty chaotic situation in the past. But I don't know where to start. By "today's Buddhist groups", who do you mean? The councils you mention? I think that if we're to take this matter seriously, there are hard questions that need to be examined and answered.
...But Thao researched the councils you mentioned, and posted earlier a policy statement of theirs that said they don't interfere in the inner workings of different traditions. And what would you define as wrong-doing? Is including sexual practice and ritual as part of a tradition wrong-doing or is it the tradition's right to define for itself what legitimate practice is?
The Dalai Lama encourages students to speak out and go to the press, and even initiate lawsuits, if necessary. But I don't think that's enough. Why should the burden be entirely on the students? Some dharma centers have enacted strict codes of conduct. That's helpful. What more can be done? Are you suggesting that there be a global Buddhist watchdog entity with its own tribunal to impose order? I wonder how practical a suggestion that is, and I also wonder how well it would work and whether it would cause sectarian strife? Would we be able to trust the appointees to it, if a lineage has a history of corruption? Would it be made up of lay practitioners as well as (ostensibly) respected sectarian leaders? I'm all for practical suggestions to address what seems to have been a pretty chaotic situation in the past. But I don't know where to start. By "today's Buddhist groups", who do you mean? The councils you mention? I think that if we're to take this matter seriously, there are hard questions that need to be examined and answered.
I don't have the answers. But to your first point, that they don't have the guts to take a moral stand...shame on them.
A watchdog entity. Well, let's put it this way. There is an international Mormon entity that sets the standards for Mormonism. Same for the Methodist Church. Same for the Catholic Church. Etc. And, each of those organizations "defrocks" ministers/priests that don't follow church standards. Why would it be any more impossible for Buddhist organizations? And to some extent, there is. In Thailand there is the Thai Supreme Sangha...and they do control Thai Buddhism to a degree. And, in fact, in Thailand, the government also controls Buddhism to an extent.
How well do all these things work? Well, as with any organization, we know that the effectiveness of such efforts varies. But with no such organization...anything goes...and that doesn't seem very reasoned.
Well, I can't help but wonder what the point would be to set up an oversight organization if it's only going to work as well as the Catholic Church's org has all these years.... :hrm:
Yes, I'm aware that monks do get defrocked in Thailand, the system seems to work there. Tibetan monks rarely, if ever, get defrocked in spite of routine misconduct. If there's corruption at the top, there's not going to be enforcement in the lower ranks (not to mention the upper ranks). I have the same impression of some Zen monks and teachers.
Women who get sexually abused by their gurus really can't stand up for themselves as I have said before. Lamas have sole power and can basically do what they want. The only way they get caught is if it is so widespread that women begin to speak out, but there is a lot of fear in speaking out. If I believe the lama that tried to tell me that there was a real hell, I would not be speaking out right now.
Buddha did not say you could not have two teachers. He just said the dhamma could be your teacher. Thich Nhat Hanh has an interesting commentary on the diamond sutra. In the diamond buddha I am not sure if he says what Thich does but he does this: a rose is not a rose. that is how it is a rose. The rose isn't an object which we understand as complete entity. A rose is all of the connections in the universe which we are sensitive to. A dynamic energy. When you grasp you suffer.
When you go with the flow and experience the energy of an empty rose everything takes care of itself due to the clarity openness and sensitivity of your mind. The mind is stained by kleshas but it also has a 'knowing' nature. If it did not we would have no basis to take refuge.
Thich Nhat Hanh points out: the dharma is not the dharma. that is how it is the dharma. So you include all teachings which are love and wisdom. christian teachings are the dharma.
the dharma is not an airtight theory buddha laid down. if you do not have a sensitive mind and a sense of lightness and responsiveness then you end up grasping the dharma by the wrong end.
I bow at the feet of my teacher Marpa. And sing this song in response to you. Listen, pay heed to what I say, forget your critique for a while.
The best seeing is the way of "nonseeing" -- the radiance of the mind itself. The best prize is what cannot be looked for -- the priceless treasure of the mind itself.
The most nourishing food is "noneating" -- the transcendent food of samadhi. The most thirst-quenching drink is "nondrinking" -- the nectar of heartfelt compassion.
Oh, this self-realizing awareness is beyond words and description! The mind is not the world of children, nor is it that of logicians.
Attaining the truth of "nonattainment," you receive the highest initiation. Perceiving the void of high and low, you reach the sublime stage.
Approaching the truth of "nonmovement," you follow the supreme path. Knowing the end of birth and death, the ultimate purpose is fulfilled.
Seeing the emptiness of reason, supreme logic is perfected. When you know that great and small are groundless, you have entered the highest gateway.
Comprehending beyond good and evil opens the way to perfect skill. Experiencing the dissolution of duality, you embrace the highest view.
Observing the truth of "nonobservation" opens the way to meditating. Comprehending beyond "ought" and "oughtn't" opens the way to perfect action.
When you realize the truth of "noneffort," you are approaching the highest fruition. Ignorant are those who lack this truth: arrogant teachers inflated by learning, scholars bewitched by mere words, and yogis seduced by prejudice. For though they yearn for freedom, they find only enslavement.
there are no self-existent entities 'buddhism' 'hinduism' 'christianity' 'islam'
Buddhism has a meaning in the context of turning towards truth. To see clearly and by your clear view the false clinging disappears. Suffering is the issue.
If you have an idea that something is or isn't buddhas teaching and you are clinging then it really doesn't matter what you think. What matters is that you are clinging. It is very kind to try to show somebody buddhas teaching out of compassion for their welfare. It shows a lack of respect to belittle the way that they practice. I understand that it comes from fear and lack of comfort in ones own skin (or the world) perhaps? Yet I appreciate the question of what is and what isn't buddhas teaching... thats an interesting point. Is it buddhas teaching because it brings liberation or because its in X canon?
CW, If the tantric teachings are esoteric (secret) then why are they known by your professors in an acememic classroom?
If they are not secret then why are people saying that they are?
This is a fair question. I imagine that the reason the prof knew about the tantric practices is that he had a very close relationship with the Sakya leaders, whom he brought to the US to settle in Seattle. Arranged their visas, set everything up. They trusted him. And he was a scholar of Buddhism, so he would have done research with them as his informants. His specialty was the Hevajra Tantra, since that's the Sakya's tantra.
Thats interesting thanks. My second question I am still curious about. Why is it said that these teachings are secret? Would it make sense if I said that I know a secret? And then you ask me what the secret is. So I tell you the secret: Bill Clinton had an affair with Monica Lewinsky. Would that be a secret that I had told you? Or is the secret part that we don't know the dynamic of Bill and Monica's relationship? We just know what fox news tells us, right?
Maybe your professor in this analogy is more like NPR
haha! NPR! Good one, Jeffrey! Well, if Tibetan Studies professors are teaching about the secret teachings, then they're not really secret, are they? But when you go to a sangha, they're very secret. Teachers (and advanced practitioners) lie and say no sex happens, there's no such thing, blah blah. And you have to go through empowerments to get to the deeper and deeper teachings. Maybe prospective TB practitioners should take a university course in the subject first, to find out what they're getting into. And those rituals involving girls and people's female relatives (mother (!), daughter (!!), sisters) have been kept top-secret until recently, when books discussing them began to appear. We can only hope those aren't practiced anymore.
Thao; about abused women not being able to speak up for themselves, or being terrified (threatened) into silence, and so forth--it's time to empower women to speak up! Time to form support networks, put up websites, blogs, whatever, so that those poor women don't have to suffer in silence, not to mention deal with psychological trauma in silence, which can be debilitating. Women don't realize that they actually have all the power--they know the secrets, so they can not only tarnish a false or unethical guru's reputation, they can blow the lid off the secrecy. (This of course goes for men, too, who suffer abuse from female teachers/gurus.) HHDL said to go public, get it into the media. Back in May there was a documentary braodcast in Canada on Sogyal's decades of chronic abuse of women, and on the whole problem of abuse in TB. This appears to be the only way to clean up the act, it doesn't look like reforms, or accountability or ethical standards are going to be imposed from within.
I'd like to be part of a tradition I can respect. I've lost respect for TB, and it's a little upsetting, disconcerting. Can we hope to restore respect to the tradition?
I'd like to be part of a tradition I can respect. I've lost respect for TB, and it's a little upsetting, disconcerting. Can we hope to restore respect to the tradition?
I quite agree. I no longer have any interest in learning about it after reading this thread. I'll stick to Theravada.
But I am a little confused. Is Tibetan Buddhism one branch within Mahayana Buddhism?
Yes, it is. There's Tibetan Buddhism, Zen (Korean, Vietnamese, Japanese) and it's Chinese equivalent, Ch'an, (maybe "equivalent" is the wrong word, but Zen evolved out of Ch'an historically),then there's Pureland Buddhism (which I think started in China, I don't know anything about it). Did I leave any out?
In Tibetan buddhism they divide the teachings into 'three turnings of the wheel of dharma'. vajra yana, mahayana, and hinayana. The term hinayana is interpreted as belittling often by theravadans. Likewise saying that Tibetan buddhism is not Buddha's teaching may be intended to belittle or invalidate somehow. In some cases it probably was.
Hina means little and maha means vast. It is not originally meant to mean better and worse. Mahayanists practice for the enlightenment of all beings. Hinayanists practice for the enlightenment of themselves in this life or in future lives. Hinayana is not synonym to Theravada. After all it is a Tibetan buddhist concept. A buddhist in a Tibetan sangha can be practicing hinayana mainly. I knew a guy who said in all schools of buddhism he can see limited amounts of all 3 turnings in every buddhist religion, but it is not meant to be literal it is more... probably a loose association he could have said he saw all three turnings in islam probably.
It is referred to as great and small because one person is less vast than all people. It is believed that the bodhicitta for the mahayana is more powerful due to power to release from ego and overcome kleshas which makes you more available for others because your not drowning in your own stuff.
Vajrayana is the diamond vehicle. I don't study the vajrayana but it is basicly the idea that although we stop grasping we manifest something as buddhas. That is to say one has not actually attained the other two yanas if they are not manifesting love and wisdom.
Therefore Tibetan buddhism 'could' be classified as mahayana. Remember all classifications are artificial in some way, well maybe outside of Aristotles view. Except for definitive ones such as rye bread is made from rye. But it is more vague what pizza is.
Why is it said that these teachings are secret? Maybe your professor in this analogy is more like NPR
Well, he didn't talk about those rituals involving 10-year old girls, etc. So I guess he was keeping that much secret. But consort practices, esoteric symbolism, "bodhicitta" were all discussed, all very important to the tradition, he considered. He said the sexual part was done by visualization, and I took his word for it at the time, but now I wonder.
But Mahayana, in general, doesn't go into the tantric sex thing. Or does it?
No, except I read on Wikipedia that Vietnamese Zen includes Vajrayana, but it didn't go into detail. And Japan has a tantric form of Buddhism called Shingon, but I've read conflicting info as to whether it involves sex or not. And Shingon was brought to Japan from China, so ... maybe the answer to your question is actually "yes", but we don't know for sure. But there are Mahayana traditions that don't involve tantric sex. Ch'an, Korean and Japanese (and maybe Vietnamese) Zen. Nichiren, and Pureland.
Thao; about abused women not being able to speak up for themselves, or being terrified (threatened) into silence, and so forth--it's time to empower women to speak up! Time to form support networks, put up websites, blogs, whatever, so that those poor women don't have to suffer in silence, not to mention deal with psychological trauma in silence, which can be debilitating. Women don't realize that they actually have all the power--they know the secrets, so they can not only tarnish a false or unethical guru's reputation, they can blow the lid off the secrecy. (This of course goes for men, too, who suffer abuse from female teachers/gurus.) HHDL said to go public, get it into the media. Back in May there was a documentary braodcast in Canada on Sogyal's decades of chronic abuse of women, and on the whole problem of abuse in TB. This appears to be the only way to clean up the act, it doesn't look like reforms, or accountability or ethical standards are going to be imposed from within.
I'd like to be part of a tradition I can respect. I've lost respect for TB, and it's a little upsetting, disconcerting. Can we hope to restore respect to the tradition?
Dakini, the problem is that men and women are being brainwashed in these organizations, brainwashed to believe in Hell, a literal one, and then brainwashed into keeping things secret, and also they seriously believe that the lama has powers and can harm them if they do speak out. So a very strong woman may not be so strong in a sangha if she really believes. But like someone else said, a lama can tell if a woman has had abuse in the past or is naive, and so he takes to this type of person, but not always. You would have thought that the Women's Lib movement of the 60s would have empowered women, but look how many joined the Hindu groups and ended up in bed with their teacher. I know of a woman that went to India, and she was upset because all of the gurus wanted to have sex with her. Just as she was about to give up she meets this guy who tells her that he knows of a wonderful guru who isn't like that. She goes to him, and becomes his student, and ends up in bed with him. Her book is, The Serpent Rising, and her name is Mary Garden. She has given up on all religion, and I don't blame her in the lest.
A woman doesn't really blow the lid off anything when a guru comes on to them. Why? In Hinduism, in every group I knew, the disciples would say of such a woman, She wants fame, she is lying, she has emotional problems, so don't believe her, and most don't believe her because they admire the guru and would never believe otherwise, and if it so happens that they do believe otherwise, they say that she came on to him first, and came on to him and came on to him, and it is all her fault.
I screamed just verbal abuse with a swami in Vedanta. He in turn shunned me. One women said, "He was trying to help you. If Swami Vivekananda had quit when he was shunned by his guru, where would we be, we would have have his writings." I watched other women leave, and i heard the same things, she was too emotionally unstable. When you hear these things you lose power to stand up for yourself, especially if the gurus and the students mean a lot to you. And if you have been told to keep quiet.
No one is immune to these things, no one is immune to brainwashing. I remember reading Dr. Margaret Singer, PhD, who helped ex cult members and people who had breakdowns due to meditation, say, "All they have to do is get their foot in the door." She said it didn't matter how intelligent a person is; if he listens to them he will become a believer. I remember a study in Psychology Today back in the 70s I believe, where these psychologist, psychiatrists, or psychology students listened to the fundamentalist Christians on a daily basis, and when they got alone, they had a hard time getting rid of the views that were being pounded into them.
But Mahayana, in general, doesn't go into the tantric sex thing. Or does it?
There is Theravada which uses just the Pali Canon, and then Mahayana that uses things like the Heart Sutra, Lotus Sutra, etc. and then there are the Tantra texts which are not part of Theravada or Zen. But the Tibetan Buddhists use the Pali Canon and the Mahayana texts just as the Zen Buddhists use the Pali Canon in addition to the Mahayana texts.
A big concept in the vajrayana is to use everything in your life in the buddhist path. Apparently this includes sex.
Use everything in your life? How about your anger? Do you use that? Yes, they most certainly do. And they justify that by saying that they are trying to destroy your ego, which doesn't really work and which I might add you need to survive. What happens is these people who are being verbally abused begin to think low of themselves, until they have no self esteem. And when they get a little power they abuse those below them. I have seen this in Vedanta Society. No one is really kind to others. I even saw this on the old eSangha board, and the lamas there called it "crazy wisdom" but it was just that, crazy.
So yes, apparently this includes sex, and when they say to "use everything", well, they do, they USE women and men for sex.
I don't have any respect for gurus of either Hinduism or Tibetan Buddhism, and when I am in a position where I feel I should show respect, it is faked.
Absolutely Thao yes anger too. Anger is believed to be a distortion of the buddha nature. The undistorted nature of anger is a clear 'no'. The anger is taken into awareness rather than applying an antidote. It is definitely related to the idea of buddha nature and the philophy of meditation taught by my teacher. In our meditation we include everything in our experience. For example if you have a thought you are delighted with or sickened with it neither deserves sanction or praise. You just let the thought be and keep to the breath.
Here's a nice description of how to practice with anger:
"The lion's roar, according to Chögyam Trungpa Rinpoche, is the fearless proclamation that whatever comes up in our state of mind, including powerful emotions, is workable. (F Lion's Roar * 12/12)"
"In the third turning of the wheel of dharma, the Buddha speaks of the lion's roar. The lion's roar is the fearless proclamation that anything that happens in our state of mind, including emotions, is manure. Whatever comes up is a workable situation; it is a reminder of practice, and it acts as a speedometer. It is a way to proceed further into the practice of meditation."
"So that is what is called the lion's roar: whatever occurs in the realm of samsaric mind is regarded as the path, and everything is workable. It is a fearless proclamation-lion's roar."
"But as long as we patch over what we feel are unworkable situations, as long as we try to put the patchwork of metaphysical, philosophical or neat religious ideas over the holes, then it ceases to be a lion's roar. It turns instead into a coward's scream-which is very pathetic."
"So unless we are completely mummified, which is death, being a corpse, there's no way to have perfect patchwork. For a living human being, patchwork is an absolutely impractical idea. From this point of view, buddhadharma without credentials is equal to the lion's roar."
"The lion's roar is analogous to space: space is constantly self-existing center as well as fringe. Wherever there's space, there's center as well as fringe. So space is all pervading and self-contained. Similarly, the idea of lion's roar is fearlessness in the sense that every situation that comes up in our life is workable. Nothing is rejected as a bad influence or grasped as a good influence. Everything that goes on in our life situation, all the types of emotion, is workable. The inherent essence of situations is workable, and the apparent qualities of situations are workable as well."
"Questions and answers:
[Jeffrey: I marked with five stars ones that I thought would be of interest to you, Thao. ]
Question: Is this true of any emotion, that you just deal with it by getting directly into it?
*****Trungpa Rinpoche: If you really get into it, which doesn't mean to say that you have to kill somebody or suppress it, but just get the texture of its own nature, yes.
Q: That sounds too simple.
*****TR: It is simple, that's why it's workable. This doesn't need special training, just use basic instinct.
Q: It seems that in certain emotional states, part of the state itself is a kind of paralysis; you are unable to respond, you're actually stuck in that place. Do you mean that at that point there must be an extra effort of conscious attention to that?
TR: Well, when you get stuck, it is a beautiful situation. You have more chance to relate with the textures. Let it be that way, rather than trying to get unstuck.
Q: What about depression? All the things you are talking about seem to be energies, emotions of energies, but a state of depression seems to be a negative energy, or absence of energy.
TR: Depression is one of the very powerful energies, one of the most common energies that we have. It is energy. Depression is like an oxygen tank which wants to burst, but is still bottled. It is a fantastic bank of energies, much more so than aggression and passion which are kind of developed and then let out. They are in some sense frivolous, whereas depression is the most dignified energy of all.
Q: I'm not quite satisfied. You say it's a bank of energy. How do you take the money out of the bank or does it just stay in the vault?
Well, try to relate to the texture of the energy in the depression situation. Depression is not just a blank, it has all kinds of intelligent things happening within it. I mean, basically depression is extraordinarily interesting and a highly intelligent state of being. That is why you are depressed. Depression is an unsatisfied state of mind in which you feel that you have no outlet. So work with the dissatisfaction of that depression. Whatever is in it is extraordinarily powerful. It has all kinds of answers in it, but the answers are hidden. So, in fact I think depression is one of the most powerful of all energies. It is extraordinarily awake energy, although you might feel sleepy.
Q: Is that because it wipes everything away? Could it be a kind of emptiness, a sort of doorway to meditation. I mean, in that kind of depression there is the feeling that nothlng is happening at all.
TR: Well, that's it. That's quite a profound thing. It has its own textures. Let's say that you feel extraordinarily depressed, and there is no point in doing anything. You seem to be doing the same thing all over again. You give up the whole thing but you can't. And on the whole, you are extremely depressed and trying to do something is repetitious. And trying not to do something is also irritating. Why should you do something? The whole thing is absolutely meaningless. You feel extremely down. Trying to get into the things that used to inspire you makes more depression, because you used to get off on them and you can't anymore. That's very depressing and everything is really ordinary, extremely ordinary and really real, and you don't really want to do anything with it. It's an extraordinarily heavy weight pushing down. You begin to experience that your ceilings are much heavier than they used to be, and the floor becomes much heavier than it used to be. There is a whole wall made out of lead, compressing you all over the place; there is no outlet at all. Even the air you breathe is metallic, or lead, or very thick. There is no freshness at all. Everything that depression brings is really, really real and very heavy. And you can't really get out of it because the idea of getting out of it itself brings further depression, so you are constantly bottled and pushed in that situation and you would like to just purely sit around.
Well, if the whole thing gets worse, then just trying to step out, which seems to be the only answer, is a suicidal approach. Things get very heavy and very slow. Meeting inspiring friends, who used to be inspiring friends, becomes depressing. When you try to put on a record of the music that used to inspire you, it also brings depression. Still nothing ever moves. The whole thing is black, absolute black.
But, at the same time, you are experiencing tremendous texture, the texture of how the stagnation of samsara works, which is fantastic. You feel the texture of something. That entertainment didn't work. This entertainment didn't work. Referring back to the past didn't work; projecting into the future didn't work. Everything is made out of texture, so you could experience depression in a very intelligent way. You could relate with it completely, fully. And once you begin to relate with it as texture of some kind, as a real and solid situation which contains tremendous texture, tremendous smell, then depression becomes a beautiful walkway. We can't discuss it really. We have to actually get into heavy depression and then feel about that.
Q: What about extreme physical panic or discomfort, the nausea, the headache, thinking you're going to pass right out, and sometimes the sweat, the cold sweat, the shortness of breath where you can't catch your breath.
TR: It seems to be psychosomatic. According to the Buddhist way of viewing physical health, any sickness that comes up is a hundred per cent, if not two hundred, psychosomatic. Always.
Q: So you just keep going back to that point?
TR: Yeah, back to mind, back to the heart. There is a Zen writing called "Trust in the Heart." You should read that.
Q: So what you're saying is that everything that I experience and everything that I think as "I-experience" is really buddhamind, experiencing itself?
TR: Yeah, without fear. That's the lion's roar. That is lion's roar.
Q: When you are doing sitting meditation, do you bring the emotions that arise in everyday life to your sitting, or is it simply enough to go back to your breath?
*****TR: Well, as far as the sitting practice is concerned, emotions are thinking, pure thinking. In our everyday life situations, emotions are a challenge, possibilities of path.
Q: So it would seem that the only time an emotion could harm you is if you try to repress it, if you try to push it back.
TR: As well as if you try to analyze it fully, or act it out in a frivolous way.
Q: What do you mean by frivolous?
TR: Well, go out and kill somebody. You know that.
Q: It seems like emotions take on a quality of coming towards you, so you have to figure them out, analyze them.
*****TR: I don't see problems with that. It's a question of whenever there is doubt, you find out the root of the doubt, and find out where the doubt came from, not particularly in order to solve the problem as such, but just to relate with the face value of things happening on the spot. That's what is called, in Buddhist terms, scientific mind. It is experiencing, analyzing on the spot without value judgment. So from that you begin to learn with tremendous directness, the simple facts of the matter, and you go on from that. You don't have to be goal oriented particularly. And scientific mind is not particularly goal oriented. True scientists are unconcerned with the goal. They are fascinated by finding out the facts of the matter.
Q: I don't quite know what you mean by experiencing emotions in meditation as thoughts. A powerful physical sensation might go along with an emotion. I don't know what you mean by experiencing it as a thought.
TR: An emotion is also a thought. You're enraged with anger, as if you are almost going to levitate on your meditation cushion. And it's still your thought, so you say "a thought," "thought;" you say "thinking," "thinking," "thinking."
Q: Are you saying that there is actually no feeling without thinking?
*****TR: Well, you see the thing is, the fifth skandha of consciousness, of thinking, plays the leading part, the introductory one. This goes back to the the conceptual, the feeling and everything. So the fifth skandha plays an important part, always. The fifth skandha is always the leading point.
Q: I know the point is not to get rid of your depression or anger, but do they wear out, like distractions?
TR: No promise, my dear. Wait and see. Have more patience.
"What happens is these people who are being verbally abused begin to think low of themselves, until they have no self esteem. And when they get a little power they abuse those below them. I have seen this in Vedanta Society. No one is really kind to others. I even saw this on the old eSangha board, and the lamas there called it "crazy wisdom" but it was just that, crazy."
Thats not what happens in my sangha. I would say there is a disconnect between what I have seen over five years and what you are claiming without any personal experience. I agree that in cases where there is abuse they are ashaming their tradition. But sexuality or 'teacher' (guru means teacher....like in zen there is a 'master') is not inherently shameful.
Your argumentation is confusing Thao. On one hand you are saying that there is corruption and abuse. On the other hand you are saying that anger and sexuality cannot be used for buddhist practice. I agree there should not be abuse. If there is than it should be exposed and corrected. For my own benefit too. I don't want to be ashamed of what people are doing in my tradition.
According to the basic text of my tradition:
[text describes the five families of buddha: incorrigable, solitary, hearer, indeterminate, mahayana]
V. Mahayana family. What kind of family is the Mahayana? The summary:
Classification, definition, synonyms, Reason it is superior to other families, Causal characteristics, and marks-- These six comprise the Mahayana family
........
F. Marks. The marks of this family are the signs which indicate the bodhisattva family. The Ten Noble Bhumis Sutra says:
The family of wise bodhisattvas Can be recognized by its signs Just as fire is known by smoke And water is known by water birds.
In that case, what kinds of marks are their? Their bodies and speech are naturally gentle without dependence on remedy. Their minds are less deceitful, and have loving kindness and clarity towards sentient beings. Thus, the Ten Noble Bhumis Sutra says:
No harshness or arrogance, Avoiding deceit and cunning, Having a clear loving attitude toward all sentient beings That is a bodhisattva
In other words, in whatever preparatory actions a bodhisattva undertakes, he always cultivates compassion for all sentient beings, has great inclination towards the mahayana teachings, has no hesitation to endure hardship, and perfectly performs the root of virtue of the perfections. Thus the Ornament of the Mahayana Sutra says:
Developing compassion at the preparation stage, Devoted interest, patience, Perfectly performing virtues-- These are the signs of the Mahayana family.
"The Kangyur is divided into sections on Vinaya, Perfection of Wisdom Sutras, Avatamsaka, Ratnakuta and other sutras (75% Mahayana, 25% Nikaya / Agama or Hinayana), and tantras."
I think what Thao is questioning, is the idea of using sex to overcome attachment to sex. And I also don't know about using anger to overcome anger. Awareness of anger when it comes up is one thing. Deliberately provoking anger to somehow go beyond anger...I don't know. Trungpa didn't use alcohol to overcome alcoholism. It killed him.
I don't think the Buddha taught a sexual path.There are no "supramundane" teachings about transforming sex into Enlightenment. The only explanation I've read of how he taught that is that he manifested as Abidharma (if I have that correct) at the same time as he was preaching abstinence to monks. So he was in two forms at the same time, teaching opposite things to 2 different groups of people. That sounds like mythology to me. And I'm sure he didn't teach about having sex with 10-year olds.
But you know what, Jeffrey? If this tradition is helping you, then go for it. You know what works for you. And I've seen you write elsewhere that you're not interested in the tantric sex practices, you're studying the many other teachings. And those teachings are very rich and sophisticated, I've seen some writings by some of the lamas. Very impressive. But I don't think it's fair to people who have suffered from misconduct, for practitioners to deny that their suffering happened. I don't know how students of this tradition would reconcile these unpleasant realities with their practice, but I guess that's up to them. It's really caused me to call everything into question, I can tell you that. So we each have to deal with it in our own way.
If what June Campbell says is true... then her teacher broke the bodhisattva vow quite likely.
There are two problems with this. I think it was on the "Teacher-Disciple Relationship" thread that Dazzle posted that part of the bodhisattva vow was that the person taking the vow pledges to break the vow if necessary to help someone who is having trouble with the teachings, or some such. She said to watch out about that vow. (I only noticed that recently, after Thao reopened that thread, and I couldn't believe it! But there were direct quotes from the vow.) Also, the tradition promotes the belief that Enlightened beings are above morality, they're not bound by the precepts. This is where trouble can crop up. I found that in a report about the meeting between Western dharma center leaders and HHDL on the question of abuse. HHDL said the abuse should be taken public, but later in the conversation, he maintained that the highest practitioners/lamas weren't bound by "mundane" morality. I'll try to find that again.
Comments
Thao is right; bodhichitta, I was told, refers to the drop of semen, that first drop that's generated in the tantric rituals. At the moment the first drop appears, the initiate has to exercise restraint and prevent any semen from spilling. It's about prevention of ejaculation, and redirection of the semen upward, thereby engendering a bliss state. It's possible that bodhichitta refers to the semen in general. My university lessons were a long time ago, I only remember the professor discussing the significance of that first drop. Maybe you could find something about it on the internet.
In the symbolism of this tantric practice you imagine the semen to be bodhicitta. But its just a representation in order to utilize actual bodhicitta even if its actual semen thats used. You could have a spiritual practice where you vizualize bodhicitta as chicken feathers, that doesn't make bodhicitta actually chicken feathers. So bodhicitta has a specific translation and meaning but you can use any item as a representation of it, real or imagined.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Om_mani_padme_hum
My lama says the material in wikipedia was probably arrived at from an insight at a retreat. Such insights are not reality itself because reality has no characteristics it is only apparent.
The genitalia is a symbol of something else. Both the something else and the genitalia are empty. Spacious. Not pure or impure. Not as they appear and not otherwise.
"It is very good to recite the mantra Om mani padme hum, but while you are doing it, you should be thinking on its meaning, for the meaning of the six syllables is great and vast... The first, Om [...] symbolizes the practitioner's impure body, speech, and mind; it also symbolizes the pure exalted body, speech, and mind of a Buddha[...]"
"The path is indicated by the next four syllables. Mani, meaning jewel, symbolizes the factors of method: (the) altruistic intention to become enlightened, compassion, and love.[...]"
"The two syllables, padme, meaning lotus, symbolize wisdom[...]"
"Purity must be achieved by an indivisible unity of method and wisdom, symbolized by the final syllable hum, which indicates indivisibility[...]"
"Thus the six syllables, om mani padme hum, mean that in dependence on the practice of a path which is an indivisible union of method and wisdom, you can transform your impure body, speech, and mind into the pure exalted body, speech, and mind of a Buddha[...]"
maleness and femaleness are not self existent. So the method is LIKE male and the wisdom is LIKE female. But not IS.
Is it true that females are always wise hahahhaahahahahah?
When everything is dull and grey and lifeless in our heart. That is frozen bodhicitta. Some people drive across frozen ice to go from their home on an island to get to their work. What do you think about that compassionate warrior?
I was just trying to be helpful, but my info seems to be being taken as criticism of the tradition. ...??
Thao: traditionally the lama taught tantra to monks, not to women he likes. Though it's true that in the old days, some lamas did take consorts, I think in many cases it's not tantric sex that happened. Anyway, from what I understand, the monks or lay initiates were supposed find and provide the consorts. Low-caste women were recommended in the case of monks, immediate relatives in the case of lay initiates.
So sad that there's such a disregard for ethics on the guru scene. I'm sorry for your disillusioning experiences, Thao.
Let me quote from the book Commentary on the Kalachakra Tantra:
"The white bodhicitta refers to the semen in the Kalachakra practice, the emission of semen or the white bodhcitta is the root downfall." This is where the male disciple has to retain his semen, and if he can't, it is a root downfall.
I did not write this book. I agree with you that there is no canal, but hey, that is tantra for you. Have you ever saw the canal that they are talking about? The one that awakens kundalini? No. You won't see this one either, and maybe it is going through those canals.
I think the body is much more complex than Western science is aware. I don't think we should dismiss the idea of canals and meridians just because they don''t exist on the physical plane. Can you see electricity? Most of the time, not. Yet you don't doubt it exists. Back when electricity was "discovered" and harnessed for everyday use, people regarded it in mystical terms. Now we know it's just electricity, not a big deal. We may find out the same someday regarding the Kundalini canals and acupuncture meridians, and possibly a lot more.
ust as long as no-one confuses the three meetings mentioned in your post above with The Three Councils of early Buddhism, beginning just after the Parinibbana of the Buddha:
''The history of Theravada as a school of Buddhism should begin with a quick survey of the life of Gotama Buddha himself. He was born as a Sakyan prince at a place near the Himalayas about six hundred years BC. Grieved at the ills of life such as old age, sickness and death, he renounced the world at the age of 29 and started seeking the way to Nibbana, "Extinction" of all forms of suffering. At 35 he achieved his goal and became Buddha. He then carried out his teaching mission for 45 years. At 80 he attained Parinibbana, "Total Extinction" (which is the Buddhist way of expressing his demise). Just before that event he left a message to his cousin and attendant monk, Ananda, part of which being:
When I am gone, the Dhamma (Doctrine) and Vinaya (Discipline) that I have taught and laid down shall be your Teacher!
This implies that the Buddha did not want to appoint any person to succeed him on his demise. The two Great Disciples Sariputta and Moggallana had already passed away; but Maha Kassapa who enjoyed the good reputation of being the Third Disciple was alive. But even a man of his stature would not become the Buddha"s successor. By this injunction the Buddha made it clear that only his Dhamma and Vinaya would adequately and effectively serve as the sole guide to his followers. Dhamma-Vinaya therefore was the designation given by the Master himself to his twofold teaching (pavacana) about the time of his Parinibbana. There was no reason whatever to dub it Theravada.
When the First Council was held at Rajagaha three months after the Buddha"s demise with the noble aim of consolidation the Dhamma-Vinaya "before righteousness fades away and before unrighteousness shines forth". The Council was presided over by Maha Kassapa whose questions on the Vinaya and the Dhamma were answered by Upali and Ananda respectively. The answers were confirmed by 500 monks who recited both in unison and passed on from teacher to pupil orally. The name Theravada remained unheard of, at least publicly. It that Buddhism as one whole body with its original designation of Dhamma Vinaya stood in full bloom all over India.
A century later the Second Council was held at Vesali under the collective leadership of Yasa, Revata and Sabbakami to discuss the "ten points" which in fact were the Buddha's certain disciplinary ruler relaxed and practised by imprudent Vajjian monks. The Council composed of 700 members decided the points unlawful and condemned the Vajjians who seceded from that Council to convene their own known as Maha sangha or Mahasangiti, the Great Council, since their number 10,000 far exceeded that of the former. It was the open and serious schism that took place in the Sangha, the Buddhist Order, for the first time. And with the schism emerged two factions of Theravadins, followers of Theravada, and Mahasanghikas or Mahasangitikas, those of the secession.
The Third Council in the tradition of Theravada was held in the 3rd century, according to the Chronicles and Commentaries, with Moggaliputta Tissa as its president and Asoka to the Moriyan Dynasty as its supporter. The venue of the Council was the imperial city Pataliputta. The purpose was to purify the religion and to restore peace to the Order, for many heretics who had joined the Sangha for convenient livelihood caused confusion and unfortunate incidents in the Sangha.''
http://www.budsas.org/ebud/ebdha136.htm
The only studies i know that have been done were done by Dr. Andrew Newberg, which you may know about, but it only shows the brain on meditation. I loved his books.
I disagree with someone who felt those councils really had no power or influence. That's what some said about what was going on in the Catholic Church...that priests shouldn't be expected to report improper goings on. That's called a coverup. Today's Buddhist groups should speak out against wrong doing. Period. No excuses.
The Dalai Lama encourages students to speak out and go to the press, and even initiate lawsuits, if necessary. But I don't think that's enough. Why should the burden be entirely on the students? Some dharma centers have enacted strict codes of conduct. That's helpful. What more can be done? Are you suggesting that there be a global Buddhist watchdog entity with its own tribunal to impose order? I wonder how practical a suggestion that is, and I also wonder how well it would work and whether it would cause sectarian strife? Would we be able to trust the appointees to it, if a lineage has a history of corruption? Would it be made up of lay practitioners as well as (ostensibly) respected sectarian leaders? I'm all for practical suggestions to address what seems to have been a pretty chaotic situation in the past. But I don't know where to start. By "today's Buddhist groups", who do you mean? The councils you mention? I think that if we're to take this matter seriously, there are hard questions that need to be examined and answered.
A watchdog entity. Well, let's put it this way. There is an international Mormon entity that sets the standards for Mormonism. Same for the Methodist Church. Same for the Catholic Church. Etc. And, each of those organizations "defrocks" ministers/priests that don't follow church standards. Why would it be any more impossible for Buddhist organizations? And to some extent, there is. In Thailand there is the Thai Supreme Sangha...and they do control Thai Buddhism to a degree. And, in fact, in Thailand, the government also controls Buddhism to an extent.
How well do all these things work? Well, as with any organization, we know that the effectiveness of such efforts varies. But with no such organization...anything goes...and that doesn't seem very reasoned.
Yes, I'm aware that monks do get defrocked in Thailand, the system seems to work there. Tibetan monks rarely, if ever, get defrocked in spite of routine misconduct. If there's corruption at the top, there's not going to be enforcement in the lower ranks (not to mention the upper ranks). I have the same impression of some Zen monks and teachers.
Buddha did not say you could not have two teachers. He just said the dhamma could be your teacher. Thich Nhat Hanh has an interesting commentary on the diamond sutra. In the diamond buddha I am not sure if he says what Thich does but he does this: a rose is not a rose. that is how it is a rose. The rose isn't an object which we understand as complete entity. A rose is all of the connections in the universe which we are sensitive to. A dynamic energy. When you grasp you suffer.
When you go with the flow and experience the energy of an empty rose everything takes care of itself due to the clarity openness and sensitivity of your mind. The mind is stained by kleshas but it also has a 'knowing' nature. If it did not we would have no basis to take refuge.
Thich Nhat Hanh points out: the dharma is not the dharma. that is how it is the dharma. So you include all teachings which are love and wisdom. christian teachings are the dharma.
the dharma is not an airtight theory buddha laid down. if you do not have a sensitive mind and a sense of lightness and responsiveness then you end up grasping the dharma by the wrong end.
If they are not secret then why are people saying that they are?
I bow at the feet of my teacher Marpa.
And sing this song in response to you.
Listen, pay heed to what I say,
forget your critique for a while.
The best seeing is the way of "nonseeing" --
the radiance of the mind itself.
The best prize is what cannot be looked for --
the priceless treasure of the mind itself.
The most nourishing food is "noneating" --
the transcendent food of samadhi.
The most thirst-quenching drink is "nondrinking" --
the nectar of heartfelt compassion.
Oh, this self-realizing awareness
is beyond words and description!
The mind is not the world of children,
nor is it that of logicians.
Attaining the truth of "nonattainment,"
you receive the highest initiation.
Perceiving the void of high and low,
you reach the sublime stage.
Approaching the truth of "nonmovement,"
you follow the supreme path.
Knowing the end of birth and death,
the ultimate purpose is fulfilled.
Seeing the emptiness of reason,
supreme logic is perfected.
When you know that great and small are groundless,
you have entered the highest gateway.
Comprehending beyond good and evil
opens the way to perfect skill.
Experiencing the dissolution of duality,
you embrace the highest view.
Observing the truth of "nonobservation"
opens the way to meditating.
Comprehending beyond "ought" and "oughtn't"
opens the way to perfect action.
When you realize the truth of "noneffort,"
you are approaching the highest fruition.
Ignorant are those who lack this truth:
arrogant teachers inflated by learning,
scholars bewitched by mere words,
and yogis seduced by prejudice.
For though they yearn for freedom,
they find only enslavement.
Buddhism has a meaning in the context of turning towards truth. To see clearly and by your clear view the false clinging disappears. Suffering is the issue.
If you have an idea that something is or isn't buddhas teaching and you are clinging then it really doesn't matter what you think. What matters is that you are clinging. It is very kind to try to show somebody buddhas teaching out of compassion for their welfare. It shows a lack of respect to belittle the way that they practice. I understand that it comes from fear and lack of comfort in ones own skin (or the world) perhaps? Yet I appreciate the question of what is and what isn't buddhas teaching... thats an interesting point. Is it buddhas teaching because it brings liberation or because its in X canon?
Maybe your professor in this analogy is more like NPR
Thao; about abused women not being able to speak up for themselves, or being terrified (threatened) into silence, and so forth--it's time to empower women to speak up! Time to form support networks, put up websites, blogs, whatever, so that those poor women don't have to suffer in silence, not to mention deal with psychological trauma in silence, which can be debilitating. Women don't realize that they actually have all the power--they know the secrets, so they can not only tarnish a false or unethical guru's reputation, they can blow the lid off the secrecy. (This of course goes for men, too, who suffer abuse from female teachers/gurus.) HHDL said to go public, get it into the media. Back in May there was a documentary braodcast in Canada on Sogyal's decades of chronic abuse of women, and on the whole problem of abuse in TB. This appears to be the only way to clean up the act, it doesn't look like reforms, or accountability or ethical standards are going to be imposed from within.
I'd like to be part of a tradition I can respect. I've lost respect for TB, and it's a little upsetting, disconcerting. Can we hope to restore respect to the tradition?
But I am a little confused. Is Tibetan Buddhism one branch within Mahayana Buddhism?
Hina means little and maha means vast. It is not originally meant to mean better and worse. Mahayanists practice for the enlightenment of all beings. Hinayanists practice for the enlightenment of themselves in this life or in future lives. Hinayana is not synonym to Theravada. After all it is a Tibetan buddhist concept. A buddhist in a Tibetan sangha can be practicing hinayana mainly. I knew a guy who said in all schools of buddhism he can see limited amounts of all 3 turnings in every buddhist religion, but it is not meant to be literal it is more... probably a loose association he could have said he saw all three turnings in islam probably.
It is referred to as great and small because one person is less vast than all people. It is believed that the bodhicitta for the mahayana is more powerful due to power to release from ego and overcome kleshas which makes you more available for others because your not drowning in your own stuff.
Vajrayana is the diamond vehicle. I don't study the vajrayana but it is basicly the idea that although we stop grasping we manifest something as buddhas. That is to say one has not actually attained the other two yanas if they are not manifesting love and wisdom.
Therefore Tibetan buddhism 'could' be classified as mahayana. Remember all classifications are artificial in some way, well maybe outside of Aristotles view. Except for definitive ones such as rye bread is made from rye. But it is more vague what pizza is.
A woman doesn't really blow the lid off anything when a guru comes on to them. Why? In Hinduism, in every group I knew, the disciples would say of such a woman, She wants fame, she is lying, she has emotional problems, so don't believe her, and most don't believe her because they admire the guru and would never believe otherwise, and if it so happens that they do believe otherwise, they say that she came on to him first, and came on to him and came on to him, and it is all her fault.
I screamed just verbal abuse with a swami in Vedanta. He in turn shunned me. One women said, "He was trying to help you. If Swami Vivekananda had quit when he was shunned by his guru, where would we be, we would have have his writings." I watched other women leave, and i heard the same things, she was too emotionally unstable. When you hear these things you lose power to stand up for yourself, especially if the gurus and the students mean a lot to you. And if you have been told to keep quiet.
No one is immune to these things, no one is immune to brainwashing. I remember reading Dr. Margaret Singer, PhD, who helped ex cult members and people who had breakdowns due to meditation, say, "All they have to do is get their foot in the door." She said it didn't matter how intelligent a person is; if he listens to them he will become a believer. I remember a study in Psychology Today back in the 70s I believe, where these psychologist, psychiatrists, or psychology students listened to the fundamentalist Christians on a daily basis, and when they got alone, they had a hard time getting rid of the views that were being pounded into them.
So yes, apparently this includes sex, and when they say to "use everything", well, they do, they USE women and men for sex.
I don't have any respect for gurus of either Hinduism or Tibetan Buddhism, and when I am in a position where I feel I should show respect, it is faked.
Here's a nice description of how to practice with anger:
http://www.shambhala.org/teachers/vctr/lionsroar.html
Adapted from the seminar Buddhadharma Without Credentials, held at the New York Dharmadhatu in March, 1973. ©1997 Diana J. Mukpo
"The lion's roar, according to Chögyam Trungpa Rinpoche, is the fearless proclamation that whatever comes up in our state of mind, including powerful emotions, is workable. (F Lion's Roar * 12/12)"
"In the third turning of the wheel of dharma, the Buddha speaks of the lion's roar. The lion's roar is the fearless proclamation that anything that happens in our state of mind, including emotions, is manure. Whatever comes up is a workable situation; it is a reminder of practice, and it acts as a speedometer. It is a way to proceed further into the practice of meditation."
"So that is what is called the lion's roar: whatever occurs in the realm of samsaric mind is regarded as the path, and everything is workable. It is a fearless proclamation-lion's roar."
"But as long as we patch over what we feel are unworkable situations, as long as we try to put the patchwork of metaphysical, philosophical or neat religious ideas over the holes, then it ceases to be a lion's roar. It turns instead into a coward's scream-which is very pathetic."
"So unless we are completely mummified, which is death, being a corpse, there's no way to have perfect patchwork. For a living human being, patchwork is an absolutely impractical idea. From this point of view, buddhadharma without credentials is equal to the lion's roar."
"The lion's roar is analogous to space: space is constantly self-existing center as well as fringe. Wherever there's space, there's center as well as fringe. So space is all pervading and self-contained. Similarly, the idea of lion's roar is fearlessness in the sense that every situation that comes up in our life is workable. Nothing is rejected as a bad influence or grasped as a good influence. Everything that goes on in our life situation, all the types of emotion, is workable. The inherent essence of situations is workable, and the apparent qualities of situations are workable as well."
"Questions and answers:
[Jeffrey: I marked with five stars ones that I thought would be of interest to you, Thao.
Question: Is this true of any emotion, that you just deal with it by getting directly into it?
*****Trungpa Rinpoche: If you really get into it, which doesn't mean to say that you have to kill somebody or suppress it, but just get the texture of its own nature, yes.
Q: That sounds too simple.
*****TR: It is simple, that's why it's workable. This doesn't need special training, just use basic instinct.
Q: It seems that in certain emotional states, part of the state itself is a kind of paralysis; you are unable to respond, you're actually stuck in that place. Do you mean that at that point there must be an extra effort of conscious attention to that?
TR: Well, when you get stuck, it is a beautiful situation. You have more chance to relate with the textures. Let it be that way, rather than trying to get unstuck.
Q: What about depression? All the things you are talking about seem to be energies, emotions of energies, but a state of depression seems to be a negative energy, or absence of energy.
TR: Depression is one of the very powerful energies, one of the most common energies that we have. It is energy. Depression is like an oxygen tank which wants to burst, but is still bottled. It is a fantastic bank of energies, much more so than aggression and passion which are kind of developed and then let out. They are in some sense frivolous, whereas depression is the most dignified energy of all.
Q: I'm not quite satisfied. You say it's a bank of energy. How do you take the money out of the bank or does it just stay in the vault?
Well, try to relate to the texture of the energy in the depression situation. Depression is not just a blank, it has all kinds of intelligent things happening within it. I mean, basically depression is extraordinarily interesting and a highly intelligent state of being. That is why you are depressed. Depression is an unsatisfied state of mind in which you feel that you have no outlet. So work with the dissatisfaction of that depression. Whatever is in it is extraordinarily powerful. It has all kinds of answers in it, but the answers are hidden. So, in fact I think depression is one of the most powerful of all energies. It is extraordinarily awake energy, although you might feel sleepy.
Q: Is that because it wipes everything away? Could it be a kind of emptiness, a sort of doorway to meditation. I mean, in that kind of depression there is the feeling that nothlng is happening at all.
TR: Well, that's it. That's quite a profound thing. It has its own textures. Let's say that you feel extraordinarily depressed, and there is no point in doing anything. You seem to be doing the same thing all over again. You give up the whole thing but you can't. And on the whole, you are extremely depressed and trying to do something is repetitious. And trying not to do something is also irritating. Why should you do something? The whole thing is absolutely meaningless. You feel extremely down. Trying to get into the things that used to inspire you makes more depression, because you used to get off on them and you can't anymore. That's very depressing and everything is really ordinary, extremely ordinary and really real, and you don't really want to do anything with it. It's an extraordinarily heavy weight pushing down. You begin to experience that your ceilings are much heavier than they used to be, and the floor becomes much heavier than it used to be. There is a whole wall made out of lead, compressing you all over the place; there is no outlet at all. Even the air you breathe is metallic, or lead, or very thick. There is no freshness at all. Everything that depression brings is really, really real and very heavy. And you can't really get out of it because the idea of getting out of it itself brings further depression, so you are constantly bottled and pushed in that situation and you would like to just purely sit around.
Well, if the whole thing gets worse, then just trying to step out, which seems to be the only answer, is a suicidal approach. Things get very heavy and very slow. Meeting inspiring friends, who used to be inspiring friends, becomes depressing. When you try to put on a record of the music that used to inspire you, it also brings depression. Still nothing ever moves. The whole thing is black, absolute black.
But, at the same time, you are experiencing tremendous texture, the texture of how the stagnation of samsara works, which is fantastic. You feel the texture of something. That entertainment didn't work. This entertainment didn't work. Referring back to the past didn't work; projecting into the future didn't work. Everything is made out of texture, so you could experience depression in a very intelligent way. You could relate with it completely, fully. And once you begin to relate with it as texture of some kind, as a real and solid situation which contains tremendous texture, tremendous smell, then depression becomes a beautiful walkway. We can't discuss it really. We have to actually get into heavy depression and then feel about that.
Unite with the depression.
Yeah, you become the depression.
Q: What about extreme physical panic or discomfort, the nausea, the headache, thinking you're going to pass right out, and sometimes the sweat, the cold sweat, the shortness of breath where you can't catch your breath.
TR: It seems to be psychosomatic. According to the Buddhist way of viewing physical health, any sickness that comes up is a hundred per cent, if not two hundred, psychosomatic. Always.
Q: So you just keep going back to that point?
TR: Yeah, back to mind, back to the heart. There is a Zen writing called "Trust in the Heart." You should read that.
Q: So what you're saying is that everything that I experience and everything that I think as "I-experience" is really buddhamind, experiencing itself?
TR: Yeah, without fear. That's the lion's roar. That is lion's roar.
Q: When you are doing sitting meditation, do you bring the emotions that arise in everyday life to your sitting, or is it simply enough to go back to your breath?
*****TR: Well, as far as the sitting practice is concerned, emotions are thinking, pure thinking. In our everyday life situations, emotions are a challenge, possibilities of path.
Q: So it would seem that the only time an emotion could harm you is if you try to repress it, if you try to push it back.
TR: As well as if you try to analyze it fully, or act it out in a frivolous way.
Q: What do you mean by frivolous?
TR: Well, go out and kill somebody. You know that.
Q: It seems like emotions take on a quality of coming towards you, so you have to figure them out, analyze them.
*****TR: I don't see problems with that. It's a question of whenever there is doubt, you find out the root of the doubt, and find out where the doubt came from, not particularly in order to solve the problem as such, but just to relate with the face value of things happening on the spot. That's what is called, in Buddhist terms, scientific mind. It is experiencing, analyzing on the spot without value judgment. So from that you begin to learn with tremendous directness, the simple facts of the matter, and you go on from that. You don't have to be goal oriented particularly. And scientific mind is not particularly goal oriented. True scientists are unconcerned with the goal. They are fascinated by finding out the facts of the matter.
Q: I don't quite know what you mean by experiencing emotions in meditation as thoughts. A powerful physical sensation might go along with an emotion. I don't know what you mean by experiencing it as a thought.
TR: An emotion is also a thought. You're enraged with anger, as if you are almost going to levitate on your meditation cushion. And it's still your thought, so you say "a thought," "thought;" you say "thinking," "thinking," "thinking."
Q: Are you saying that there is actually no feeling without thinking?
*****TR: Well, you see the thing is, the fifth skandha of consciousness, of thinking, plays the leading part, the introductory one. This goes back to the
the conceptual, the feeling and everything. So the fifth skandha plays an important part, always. The fifth skandha is always the leading point.
Q: I know the point is not to get rid of your depression or anger, but do they wear out, like distractions?
TR: No promise, my dear. Wait and see. Have more patience.
I don't believe the mahayana uses the pali canon. There are parallel sutras in their own canon's as far as I understand.
Thats not what happens in my sangha. I would say there is a disconnect between what I have seen over five years and what you are claiming without any personal experience. I agree that in cases where there is abuse they are ashaming their tradition. But sexuality or 'teacher' (guru means teacher....like in zen there is a 'master') is not inherently shameful.
Your argumentation is confusing Thao. On one hand you are saying that there is corruption and abuse. On the other hand you are saying that anger and sexuality cannot be used for buddhist practice. I agree there should not be abuse. If there is than it should be exposed and corrected. For my own benefit too. I don't want to be ashamed of what people are doing in my tradition.
According to the basic text of my tradition:
[text describes the five families of buddha: incorrigable, solitary, hearer, indeterminate, mahayana]
V. Mahayana family. What kind of family is the Mahayana? The summary:
Classification, definition, synonyms,
Reason it is superior to other families,
Causal characteristics, and marks--
These six comprise the Mahayana family
........
F. Marks. The marks of this family are the signs which indicate the bodhisattva family. The Ten Noble Bhumis Sutra says:
The family of wise bodhisattvas
Can be recognized by its signs
Just as fire is known by smoke
And water is known by water birds.
In that case, what kinds of marks are their? Their bodies and speech are naturally gentle without dependence on remedy. Their minds are less deceitful, and have loving kindness and clarity towards sentient beings. Thus, the Ten Noble Bhumis Sutra says:
No harshness or arrogance,
Avoiding deceit and cunning,
Having a clear loving attitude toward all sentient beings
That is a bodhisattva
In other words, in whatever preparatory actions a bodhisattva undertakes, he always cultivates compassion for all sentient beings, has great inclination towards the mahayana teachings, has no hesitation to endure hardship, and perfectly performs the root of virtue of the perfections. Thus the Ornament of the Mahayana Sutra says:
Developing compassion at the preparation stage,
Devoted interest, patience,
Perfectly performing virtues--
These are the signs of the Mahayana family.
.....................
Here is a link to information about the Chinese canon http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_Buddhist_canon
The Tibetan Buddhist canon is called the Kangyur.
"The Kangyur is divided into sections on Vinaya, Perfection of Wisdom Sutras, Avatamsaka, Ratnakuta and other sutras (75% Mahayana, 25% Nikaya / Agama or Hinayana), and tantras."
I don't think the Buddha taught a sexual path.There are no "supramundane" teachings about transforming sex into Enlightenment. The only explanation I've read of how he taught that is that he manifested as Abidharma (if I have that correct) at the same time as he was preaching abstinence to monks. So he was in two forms at the same time, teaching opposite things to 2 different groups of people. That sounds like mythology to me. And I'm sure he didn't teach about having sex with 10-year olds.
But you know what, Jeffrey? If this tradition is helping you, then go for it. You know what works for you. And I've seen you write elsewhere that you're not interested in the tantric sex practices, you're studying the many other teachings. And those teachings are very rich and sophisticated, I've seen some writings by some of the lamas. Very impressive. But I don't think it's fair to people who have suffered from misconduct, for practitioners to deny that their suffering happened. I don't know how students of this tradition would reconcile these unpleasant realities with their practice, but I guess that's up to them. It's really caused me to call everything into question, I can tell you that. So we each have to deal with it in our own way.