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.
sex and the single rinpoche
genkaku
Northampton, Mass. U.S.A. Veteran
0
Comments
To my mind, spiritual effort has a wonderful potential, although I hesitate to call it 'wonderful' because then the tendency can be to think that it is something glowing and unusual. Despite that danger, still I think it is wonderful and worth pursuing in ways that do not shy away from on-the-ground delights or on-the-ground horrors.
Naturally, everyone likes to think of spiritual effort as a positive and sometimes beautiful thing. That's for starters, and it draws us forward, inspires practice, and often is the source of much praise. All of us may long to climb the beautiful mountain and make a very good effort. It's hard work, but worth it. But not to come down from that mountain, not to walk freely in a world full of variety and vigor, beauty and ugliness is to miss the spiritual boat. How many religions do little more than leave its believers praising what they have not plumbed?
I'm not saying anyone has to seek out what is painful or ugly or dispiriting. But I am saying that where such things arise, we need to be at ease ... not distant or disgusted or defensively pious, but part of what simply is.
Personally, I dislike spiritual persuasions that allow one person to imagine it is all right to harm another. We all harm each other from time to time, but as practicing Buddhists, we do what we can to make amends and not to repeat that behavior. Are we perfect in such efforts? Probably not ... but we try anyway. Is it necessary to forgive or remain silent about the missteps of others simply because we make similar missteps ourselves? I think not ... missteps are missteps. Harm is harm. Ego-tripping is ego-tripping. Sociopaths are sociopaths. I can't tell you how many times I have seen and heard people use "the unconditioned realm" or "emptiness" or "compassion" as a means of avoiding very simple and straightforward responsibilities. On the one hand, it's a pity and on another, it's pure bullshit.
Are there wonderful people in spiritual life? Sure. Are there dimwits and worse? Of course. The only question that makes much sense to me is which one any of us might choose to be.
I apologize if this is not responsive to your question. It's just the best I can come up with at the moment.
If you had posted a link to a video entitled, "Life is imperfect; it simply is. Don't sweat it, just check your teacher carefully," I might feel better about your explanation.
Even if a medical professor had been indicted for sexual abuse, I wouldn't consider the story particularly representative of the study of medicine, much less if it's a case, as with Sogyal Rinpoche, where the person in question is legally innocent of wrongdoing at the current time.
At least pick someone who has been indicted, so we can discuss with a modicum of confidence their culpability; but even then, I ask, what's the relevance? If it's to tell people not to participate in Rigpa, for example, I would hope to see real evidence as to why that's not a good idea, given that at most Rigpa centers, at any particular time, Sogyal Rinpoche is not even present.
If it's to warn people against Sogyal Rinpoche in particular, then I would hope to at least see some specific commentary along those lines, giving explanation from personal experience or near-personal experience. Otherwise, one runs the risk of scaring people off from all Rigpa centers which generally are hosting wonderful, established and respected teachers not only from the Buddhist tradition but many other religious traditions as well. It's very easy to sling mud, but much harder to account for where it lands, imho.
Another scary issue is that one of the people featured in the video accusing Sogyal Rinpoche is also on record accusing HH Sakya Trizin of the same (in some versions, almost word-for-word) abuse--an accusation which even anti-Sogyal people reject, for the most part. If we're going to raise an issue as a warning, it's good to really check carefully where it leads; just because a video was made doesn't mean it's a good one. And really, overall, negativity breeds negativity. Meaning, it's probably more genuine, as helpful Buddhist adivce, to feature a video which helps people find a good teacher, rather than one which switches the focus to scandalizing stories of teachers accused of this or that. One can of course say that it's good to choose carefully, because there have been bad teachers in the past--but a video which focuses specifically on allegations against one particular teacher is serving some other function, imho.
-Therefore relish knowing the factors that bind you to this wheel,
Exuding disgust, and becoming determined to leave such existence.
Why don't you tell that to the victims of such abuse.
Can you even imagine what that would be like?
What I don't understand is, why the Zen community can discuss similar very serious issues in their community, and discuss them for the most part calmly and rationally and out of genuine concern. But when these issues are raised in TB, for some reason there's tremendous resistance.
The video focusses on one teacher because the case was a documented court case. The producer said (in an email to me) that they had to limit the coverage to that one teacher, with the documented case, to be clear of libel laws.
Maybe that's part of the wisdom of taking it easy, at least until we know for sure. Otherwise we're foaming about something without knowing whether it's true, which helps neither party. In the meantime, North Korean leaders are documented as having tortured and killed (and continuing to torture and kill) millions of people; why is this not a topic of discussion for concerned Buddhists?
Point being, how do we deal with samsara? It is ever-present. When I think of the North Korean children, or the millions of animals tortured to death for food, I melt down. Is melting down the answer? What is the Buddhist advice on dealing with samsara?
@genkaku, maybe it's appropriate at this point to ask for further clarification on taking it easy--to me this resonates, because if I don't take it easy when thinking about samsara, I can become so depressed I almost can't function. But without hearing your further thoughts, I can't know for sure that that's what you're referring to when you say that being at ease is important.
There are multiple people interviewed in the film, it isn't one person trying to sling mud.
They arent even slinging mud!
The reason this issue is more likely to be discussed is because of who Sogyal Rinpoche is and how he affects Buddhism.
Actions like this shit on Buddhism's image. Somebody claiming to be a person worthy of respect goes and does something like that?
It is pathetic.
There are many psychopaths that head goverments all over the world that are involved in killings of many.
To type about all of it would be too much really, there isn't enough key strokes to document the horror that goes on out there everyday.
They are psychopaths, it isn't surprising those things are happening.
What is surprising is somebody who asks to be seen as a fully enlightened Buddha, breaking one of the five precepts.
How do we deal with samsara?
Training in practice of Buddhadharma.. Sowing seeds of virtue. Right action, Right effort, etc. etc.
If you melt down you melt down, don't try to repress anything like that.
Emotions happen when they do,
Now here is where that advice is applicable:
Be at ease with your emotions, with yourself, be gentle, warm, compassionate to yourself.
Treat others the same.
The question (for me, as woman) is not whether anyone had sex, but whether a relationship was abusive. Aside from the fact that hearsay is not proof of sex, I really don't care if anyone had sex.
@genkaku, I know it's not an easy question, but what, in your summary if possible, is the message in your OP followup? You gave a long and detailed explanation, which I appreciate, but I think it's hard to tease out the main point.
I'll have to add, as a sort of P.S., that "sex and the single rinpoche" bothers me as a title, because it continues the fallacy that sex is bad, which as a woman, I find particularly troublesome. "Abuse and the single rinpoche" I could understand a bit better, because you'd be pointing out an alleged crime, but sex is not a crime. I really weary of sex constantly being referred to as dirty. So much for the P. (M.) S.
As you pointed out though, wrong doing is wrong doing, and it is important to call that out no matter who it is.
The suffering that people in those situations have gone through I just can't imagine.
You have a connection with a teacher, one can feel it, all pervasive.
Imagine being sexually abused by a teacher you really looked up to and having that same all pervasive dynamic attacking your consciousness.
It is beyond my comprehension truly.
Another thing, the big corporations in the USA, the term was coined:
"Too big to fail"
It is like that kind of with what Sogyal has got going for him. Over a hundred Rigpa centers in over 40 countries. That is a hell of an establishment.
It would be a huge blow if he was outed but honestly if such things are going on then I feel he should be outed.
People willing to not harm others would step up and gratefully be of service.
The teacher is seen as a living Buddha, the relationship with the teacher is seen as crucial for ones’ enlightenment, the whole thing is secretive and beyond conventional moral categories, beyond criticism.
It’s a sociopaths’ paradise. We as a Buddhist community have a responsibility to change that. We have to stop this lunacy of blind adoration. Teachers are human. Like any human being they cannot handle absolute power. It is devastating for them personally and for the sangha that they are in.
So don’t give them absolute power. Kick them out of office when that’s what they deserve.
The relationship between a teacher and student is a very personal one and one that is easily taken advantage of. Students are trusting, and teachers are in a position to abuse that.
Flying under the banner of Buddhism doesn't make anyone less susceptible to this kind of violation, either on the teacher or student end.
It happens in all religions, Buddhism is no exception.
Am I the only one who finds innocent-until-proven-guilty a valid approach?
If you interviewed one of the witnesses in this film about HH Sakya Trizin, she would make similar detailed allegations against that and several other teachers (or has done so in the past).
Does that mean HH Sakya Trizin is an abusive teacher? When I have brought this up on other forums, I have been roundly criticized for "repeating slander." But the witness is the same, and the allegations are long and detailed, and I wasn't present for any of the many alleged incidents she has reported with a long list of teachers, so as far as I can see, I'm asking a valid question.
We can discuss allegations all day long; there is absolutely no prohibition against it. It is a free country, and we can say whatever we want, any time, all the time.
The question is not whether we are allowed to say these things--in a free country, we certainly are. The question is, what is the goal? Wouldn't it suffice to simply repeat the 2500 year old instructions to examine the teacher? Or are you saying all people should avoid Rigpa, permanently, and immediately?
We have to look at what is deemed to be reasonable evidence when deciding what is true and what isn't. Conjecture doesn't stand in a court of law.
Technically, innocent until proven isn't really valid, but it does work and is the best approach in the context of our legal system.
It's not really valid because sometimes you know something to be true but can't actually prove it. But courts aren't really in a position to ponder that kind of thing, so within that context innocent until proven guilty makes sense because it's the fairest way.
We might find a more efficient way of detecting the truth in the future which would render IUPG meaningless.
I wish that were true! My father was legally accused by an employee of sexual harassment, which charges she later admitted under oath she had fabricated in anger that he had passed her over for promotion (due to her pattern of coming in to work hungover and sometimes still inebriated).
The reality is that almost no one will press slander or libel charges; we are, for most practical purposes, free to say anything we like about anyone. Any man we accuse of sexual impropriety is in the hotseat; anyone who defends him is a "supporter of abuse."
This is a paradigm in strong need of shifting, because it clouds the issues of real abuse when we declare ourselves judge and jury without a courtroom trial. Sure, it sucks--many guilty people haven't gone to court. But that is far, far better than sending innocent people to jail (or at least, that's my strong opinion).
As a woman who believes in women's suffrage, I include the view that this suffrage was not to get us raised to a higher status then men, but to achieve true equality; and that means that men don't get a bum rap simply for being men. They are innocent in the eyes of the law until proven guilty, no matter what any allegation states.
I don't have a huge stake in Sogyal Rinpoche, personally, but I do have a huge stake in the principles of democratic law. Advising people to examine their teacher is valid; deciding, based on a film, that someone is guilty, is not. There are people in jail for abuse; why are we not citing them as examples, instead of someone against whom no legal charges have been filed? I find that curious.
I highly recommend the film The Contender, starring Joan Allen. I can't say any more or I'll give it a way. A very worthy film on this subject, imho.
I have reservations about various aspects of Tibetan Buddhism, but this may be from ignorance and hearsay.
It might be a good thing to publicise the fact that sexual tantras are part of Tibetan Buddhism, because I get the impression that people get into this branch of Buddhism with an expectation of a negative attitude to sex that is more typical of religions (including most Buddhist traditions). The video seems to confirm this: the first that women hear about these practices is when a Rinpoche makes a sexual advance. This is not acceptable, in my view.
To get a feel for the rarity of actual bliss practice in Tibetan Buddhism, it's worth looking, for example, at the advice on practices which are less-advanced than bliss practices--protector practices, for example. In many schools, if you ask about adopting a protector practice, they will caution you against it and give examples showing that highly developed masters of the past begin these practices until they had completed years and even decades of preparation and grounding in all the basics, and then in medium practices, all the way up to finally--only some--deciding protector practice was the way to go.
When I went and asked for something as "simple" as refuge, it didn't happen for five years
Sexual misconduct is a completely different matter, and happens in every religion and vocation. No one is immune to samsara, and whether we are attending a new dance class, yoga class, music class or Buddhist class, we're going to have to use our good sense and research skills to determine whether the environment is a good fit for us and of course safe. But it doesn't make sense to go through life paralyzed with fear that everyone is out to get us; just observe any teacher for as long as it takes to get a feel for him/her, speak to other students of whatever class that teacher is teaching, do research about the reputation of any school, etc. There are more good people in the world than bad.
But there is also something to be said for reflecting on the activism anyone might choose to participate in. Some activists lose themselves in the notion that they can help, that they can make things better... in much the same way that others lose themselves in the notion that nothing can be done.
Better, I think, to do what you do whole-heartedly and rest easy in that whole-heartedness, correcting as necessary.
The case is public record - you can view the details here: http://bit.ly/QEWpjS
For those who, like I, who experienced pain at hearing something negative associated with the Tibetan Book of Living & Dying, I recommend reading at least a little of Erric Solomon's description of what it was like to be involved in the process of creating it: http://bit.ly/O4QnMP
This whole thing is a long and convoluted subject, but if one wants to investigate, I recommend really keeping eyes open and reading as many sides and perspectives as possible, and hopefully with the knowledge in mind that in Buddhism we are not required to suspend compassion for one person in order to express it for another.
I guess I'd also add to be mindful of innocent bystanders; there are many wonderful programs and teachings from multiple spiritual taking place at Rigpa centers, and at other Vajrayana centers including my own, and it would be shame to leave people with the impression that Tibetan Buddhism is bad--which is always a concept that is strongly implied in these discussions, always. If it is your belief and intent to show that Tibetan Buddhism is bad, then by all means make the case, but make it directly, and really work hard to show why. It has to be more than just, "I saw a movie on a guy."
Last thought: bliss practices are/were not limited to Tibetan Buddhism, nor even to Buddhism. The idea of sex, or a component of sexual union as sacred, is a very old one. But at least Buddhism has a long tradition of warning against the attempt, lol.
Is the OP here?
Lack of attention to multiple perspectives means that in general, a Buddhist scandal thread goes something like 1) I heard so and so is terrible, 2) Oh man, that's awful 3) I wish Tibetan/Zen Buddhism wasn't so terrible. Good thing there's Chan and Theravada. 4) Yep.
That is the sad nature of scandalous accusations--it's more interesting to talk about the bad than the good. It doesn't mean there isn't any bad, or that we shouldn't talk about it, just that this "headline phenomenon" leaves an imbalanced picture then in peoples' minds, creating an atmosphere of fear and paranoia that is disproportionate to reality--the good teachers outnumber any bad teachers.
We don't need to sweep anything under a rug, and neither should we object to multiple perspectives on what "it" is. By saying that something shouldn't be "swept under a rug," for example, we are implying, in advance, that one person's story is true and another's is false. That very phrase is an example of how easily we lurch at the imbalanced assumption of guilt. There may well be guilt--but in making assumptions, we contribute to confusion instead of clarity.
Instead, we get a mixture of denial, condemnation and approval, leaving us uncertain as to what is considered acceptable and what is not.
There are certainly Tibetan texts by respected figures within the tradition which support sexual practices, even going as far as to state that they are essential for enlightenment. The fact that this is unusual in a religious context suggests that this aspect should be made much clearer.
My husband's cousin is coming to stay with us in a few weeks; should I tell my girls the statistics on incest, and have them keep their eyes open? What's the effect of doing that; have I protected my girls, have I, given the statistics, made their lives better? I would certainly be justified, by the statistics, in bringing it up, but it strikes me instantly as a nasty, negative approach to life and relationships. I do always give them the general advice to be smart, use your brain, trust your senses--but singling out certain people, who have not done anything wrong, as examples of potential danger based on statistics, is I think misleading and wrong-headed in many ways.
It's a difficult subject, I totally agree. As a parent and as a woman (and as a daughter, oy vey), safety is a constant, daily subject. Too much, really. I absolutely am committed to trying to make the world a better place, not worse.
I think it would be ethical to warn people of dangers as long as you tried to provide a realistic risk assessment. If, for example, you want to say that in your opinion, based on [X] proof, some Tibetan teachers may want to have sex with you as part of their religion, you should add, "But statistically you are more likely to be sexually harassed by your boss or cousin, or struck by lightning," that would seem at least closer to a realistic risk assessment.
Perspective on this issue is not the same as denial. In theory, it's always okay to warn someone of danger; but a better term would be "risk." Danger is everywhere--what is our personal risk? That's the question. If I go outside today, I'm in more danger than if I stay inside. But overall, what is my risk? As always, be alert and aware, but also try to understand the overall risk without fixating or taking a paranoid approach.
http://downthecrookedpath-meditation-gurus.blogspot.co.uk/2012/07/abuse-of-women-in-buddhism-does-anyone.html My point in response would be, what about someone who is undergoing sexual therapy with a surrogate? Is the teacher/student relationship transgressed by someone who is specifically using a sex based therapy? Of course not.
But do practitioners make it clear that the therapy will involve sex? Of course they do, and if they didn't there'd be trouble. It's all about appropriate context. I think some Tibetan Buddhists, Rinpoches and newbies alike, aren't sure what context they're in.
I think the OP is gone, and at this point I am going to avoid the maze of twisty little passages all alike.
In that way, threads like this are good, because they help us understand where different cultures are coming from and what they consider to be ethical.
1. I think we need to remain open-minded about this person, but it does seem "creepy" to me. I guess I would go back to the old saying -- "Let the buyer beware". If one were interested in that teacher's teachings, they deserve to be made aware of the charges that have been made against him...and then decide. But, since the people involved were adults, then they should make decisions as adults and be responsible for what they do.
2. I think there may be a misunderstanding about what it means when a legal case is dismissed. It doesn't mean that someone did or didn't do what has been charged. It may mean there is a lack of evidence. In this case, it appears the case was settled out of court, but that the woman involved agreed not to make further public comments about it (nondisclosure). That standard can have a number of implications, depending on the reader.
3. Here's my question. I've never read anything in the Pali Dhamma where Buddha taught that the way to enlightenment can be best learned through sexual practices. Are there such teachings by Buddha himself?
4. If I were a total outsider to Buddhism looking in, I guess this would remind me of some of the 1960s things we often identify with "California thinking". And I would ask, "Is this what Buddhism is about?"
As for good scandalous stories in Buddhism, I know plenty of them. But I don't see this as a failure of Buddhism, but of teachers and students who are, for the most part, an-aryan (the uninitiated). I have been to enough Western Dharma centers to know that they are far from being ideal or perfect (when was the last time your teacher did a commentary to the Avatamsaka Sutra?).
And I've seen that kind of manipulation before. Not the sex part, but the "you must do x y z to become enlightened and if you leave me (the teacher) you will be ruining your karma and chances of enlightenment".
It's a pretty skeevy tactic.
People in the "inner circle" are considered to have good karma, to be more evolved than the other followers. It creates tension with the students, the "inner circle" students themselves can take advantage of it, and the teacher is in a position to take advantage of them.
The girl in the video correctly compared it to stockholm syndrome. You have this faith in your teacher, and begin to believe that everything they do is perfect, and that everything they do to you is a blessing.
I think the whole thing is pretty confusing though, because of the Rinpoche's connection with HHDL. If he truly were abusive, would HHDL endorse him as a teacher, like he seems to have done?
I don't think we can really tell what the truth is from this video. We have two girls. While their claims absolutely warrant investigation, like any claim of sexual abuse, I don't think that the makers of this video have really investigated it too much. The out of court settlement in one of the cases makes me lean toward the side of the girls, especially after the explanation they gave of the manipulation tactics used, but I wouldn't swear to it.
I just don't think there is enough information (in the video) to truly say what was going on. We've been provided with only one side of the story.
I think we should look at the circumstances; the sociopath’s paradise we create and the fundamental mistake that the personal relation with the teacher is declared crucial for our enlightenment.
All that said, we also need to recognize that corruption and abuse of power can happen anywhere. Zen has had a terrible time with these sorts of problems, and there's no tantric element there. I've heard from some students of Theravada now and then, that even Theravada teachers have succumbed to the lure of power over trusting female students. So it's not only an issue relating to tantra, but also that there is no accountability in the system, with rare exceptions, such as Thailand, where there's a national Buddhist organization charged with ethical oversight. And certainly, Western churches haven't been immune to scandal. Transparency and accountability are sorely needed on all fronts.
No one is particularly objecting to lamas, Rinpoches, roshis, teachers having sex. What they are objecting to is spiritual guides abusing the trust of members of their flock. That is a pretty universal human value, to respect the boundary between spiritual teacher and spiritual seeker.
My parents, for example, were both, alternately, spiritual teachers while the other was in the audience, and they had a great relationship and marriage. Individual spiritual tradition, respective age, community culture--all these things make a difference as to whether sex between two people is judged "healthy" by others. And it's really dicey to get into the game of judging consensual sex at all.
I think it's just as valid to speak in terms of abuse, rather than sex. This serves a number of purposes--delinking sex and "dirtiness," for one, which I personally find an important concept as a woman, and also therefore avoiding the mistake and pain of making people feel dirty who aren't doing anything wrong, and aren't considered to be doing anything wrong by the community (as was the case with my parents).
If my young, visiting Nyingma rinpoche happens to be dating the young Tibetan girl sitting next to me, what possible harm does that do me? Nyingmapas can marry and have kids; I just don't have a problem with it. I don't see what bearing this couple's private life has on my studies.
If my young, visiting Nyingma rinpoche happens to be dating the young Tibetan girl sitting next to me, what possible harm does that do me? Nyingmapas can marry and have kids; I just don't have a problem with it. I don't see what bearing this couple's private life has on my studies.
Actually you have to know the system, Bhikkus (monks) must be celibate, Yogis (practitioners) can get married. They have different precepts. Yogis are identified by a white stripe on their lower robes (its an absolute rule, but you have to really look hard).
Sakya Trizin is a Yogi and he's married, a lot of them are Yogis, not monks, or they were monks earlier, etc.
The problem lies in them still wearing monks robes, which is peculiar to TB. All other Buddhist orders must disrobe when they leave monkhood. Thats why its called disrobing... sigh!
The basics of TB need to be understood, before heated debates like this. Some dont even have a the slightest clue before hoisting their banner.
In future, ASK your lama whats his status and what are his precepts before jumping in blindly. If he is sketchy on this, then time to change.
The problem of improper association with lamas are also present in Asia, Malaysia, Singapore, Hong Kong, you name it. Recently Taiwan imposed a freeze on Visas for visiting lamas, due to this. Not nice to see them getting too close to female students in robes. It ultimately tarnishes Buddhism's reputation.
In Asia, nowadays within the lay support community, we ask for written recommendations from known monasteries before accepting visitors.
All said, there are always gullible followers and renown gurus who go astray despite the best intentions. After all isnt this what the Dharma is for?
One way of breaking trust is when a proclaimed celibate monk turns out to be a sexual predator behind closed doors. That’s the clearest case.
The other way of breaking trust is slightly different. If all we do is read a book or listen to a talk, we don’t care about the sex-life of the writer or the speaker very much.
But as a student we are supposed to open up to the teacher. We tell him very personal things and ask for help. He claims he has some wisdom to share which may help us in reaching the most important goal in life; liberation.
And it is a break of trust when the teacher – in this context – makes sexual advances, especially when this is presented as being part of the teacher/student relationship. This is abusive.
What a teacher can do, when he falls in love with a student is; immediately end the student/teacher relationship with that person. And it surely helps if he’s not secretive about the new kind of relationship they have. Secret sexual relationships in a group of people are probably never a good idea.
When sexual relationships are permitted between teacher and student; when these relationships are secretive; when there’s a competition between students for getting close to the teacher; when the teacher makes all the decisions on who gets status-jobs in the sangha; you have a sick group of people and a sociopath’s paradise.
So Westerners are very naive about monks, not to mention most students' complete ignorance of the tantric aspect of TB, the different types of robes, etc. Students are very trusting. This is a forum for those new to Buddhism, so it's really a public service genkaku has performed in posting his OP, so newbies can learn about the different customs and practices in different sects, the coded robes and their meaning, what kinds of questions to ask when choosing a tradition, a sangha, a teacher. Disseminating this type of information is partly what this forum is for. This is why it's so important to bear in mind that teachers are human. Though some say to regard them as an emanation of the Buddha, and some sutras say that Enlightened beings are above conventional morality (implying the teacher is Enlightened, and therefore infallible), students need to keep their critical thinking caps on, and not view the teacher as quasi-divine.
In TB, if one arrives at the stage of studying Highest Yoga Tantra, which involves "guru yoga", or accepting the lama as the Buddha, and his intentions for the student as only the best (which requires infinite trust), one needs to spend years beforehand checking out the teacher to make sure he or she is trustworthy, keeping an ear to the ground to see if there's any potentially valid negative rumors circulating, and observing his/her behavior to verify that s/he "walks their talk". This is what many authorities in TB, including the Dalai Lama, recommend. Do not trust the teacher until s/he has proven him/herself to be trustworthy. The students' trust must be earned, the teacher doesn't get it automatically, by virtue of wearing a robe, or having the title "yogi", "Rinpoche", or "roshi".