Something I wrote in another forum (TheTaoBums), in a topic (created by others) titled How does it feel to Party while in an Enlightened Egoless State? DA ZEN OF PARTY & DRUGS - Project X Outta Your Mind
.
"Well, this is all great, but in Vajray�na students are disempowered in
all kinds of direct and indirect fashions which makes examining teachers
for proper qualities damn near impossible. Students are put in the
catch-22 of comitting to lamas they do not know or missing out entirely
because they do not trust the situation. For the most part, the cultural
hierarchies that Tibetan Buddhism is embedded within make it virtually
impossible to for students, especially beginning students to have a
clear picture of their teachers. These memes and hierarchies are also
exploited by western teachers. And this is not merely a problem in
Vajray�na, this is also a problem in Zen. (In Theravada it is a little
more clear since lay teachers are compartively rare and monastic
precepts are highly valued.) The of course there is the taboo again criticizing any lama from whom one has received transmission no matter how egregious their behavior has been. This taboo is actually more enforced by students than lamas. So
there is enormous peer pressure within dysfunctional groups to regard
the pathological behavior of Dipshit Rinpoche, etc., as "awakened
activity".
So frankly, while I can appreciate the caveat emptor approach, we are
too quick to divorce gurus from their own personal responsibilty to
their students when we insist it is all on the student. "
~ Malcolm/Loppon Namdrol
My comments:
NOBODY, including lamas, gurus, rinpoches, zen masters, roshis, any
funny-sounding-titles, beings you considered 'enlightened' etc, should
be placed above scrutiny.
I suspect Buddha would have been very disappointed if he were around, at
some of those posing as teachers while behaving in ways contrary to
dharma, actions which clearly show that they have not abandoned
afflictions.
No, merely having an enlightenment experience does not mean one has
eliminated all afflictions. There are degrees of enlightenment, and
degrees of liberation. And if a teacher claims (or hints) to have an
enlightenment experience and continues to fuel his afflictions in mind,
speech and action, that should not be defended merely because "he is
enlightened and therefore all his actions are enlightened wisdom, his
wanton womanizing is for tantric sex practice, his drinking is
enlightened action, whatever" (what utter nonsense) as it is neither
good for himself nor his/her students.
To those who think "oh that enlightened dude is so freakin enlightened
that he so transcends [insert vice]/[insert affliction] but continues to
do it coz its some crazy wisdom enlightened action tantric whatever",
here is what the Buddha has to say:
MN22: “Bhikkhus, that
one can engage in sensual pleasures without sensual desires, without
perceptions of sensual desire, without thoughts of sensual desire – that
is impossible.”
In other words, it is impossible for a person fully liberated from afflictions to continue indulging in sensual pleasures. Sometimes you just have to realize that so called "masters" may be just human like the others, with greed for $$$, sex, etc.
p.s. I still drink a little on rare occasions (maybe 1/10 of what I used
to drink, as I no longer do binge drinking like in the past), eat junk
food sometimes, etc, but I do not defend my action as some noble acts,
and do openly admit that this is something contrary to dharma. However I
have noticed that afflictions have generally decreased to a minimal
through dharma practice, and this is something even my family members
has noticed and told me (e.g. no longer have a temper, etc).
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an09/an09.007.than.html
Buddha:
"[1] It is impossible for a monk whose mental fermentations are ended to intentionally deprive a living being of life. [2] It is impossible for a monk whose mental fermentations are ended to take, in the manner of stealing, what is not given. [3] It is impossible for a monk whose mental fermentations are ended to engage in sexual intercourse. [4] It is impossible for a monk whose mental fermentations are ended to tell a conscious lie. [5] It is impossible for a monk whose mental fermentations are ended to consume stored-up sensual things as he did before, when he was a householder.
"[6] It is impossible for a monk whose mental fermentations are ended to follow a bias based on desire. [7] It is impossible for a monk whose mental fermentations are ended to follow a bias based on aversion. [8] It is impossible for a monk whose mental fermentations are ended to follow a bias based on fear. [9] It is impossible for a monk whose mental fermentations are ended to follow a bias based on delusion.
Originally posted by An Eternal Now:Something I wrote in another forum (TheTaoBums), in a topic (created by others) titled How does it feel to Party while in an Enlightened Egoless State? DA ZEN OF PARTY & DRUGS - Project X Outta Your Mind
.
"Well, this is all great, but in Vajray�na students are disempowered in all kinds of direct and indirect fashions which makes examining teachers for proper qualities damn near impossible. Students are put in the catch-22 of comitting to lamas they do not know or missing out entirely because they do not trust the situation. For the most part, the cultural hierarchies that Tibetan Buddhism is embedded within make it virtually impossible to for students, especially beginning students to have a clear picture of their teachers. These memes and hierarchies are also exploited by western teachers. And this is not merely a problem in Vajray�na, this is also a problem in Zen. (In Theravada it is a little more clear since lay teachers are compartively rare and monastic precepts are highly valued.) The of course there is the taboo again criticizing any lama from whom one has received transmission no matter how egregious their behavior has been. This taboo is actually more enforced by students than lamas. So there is enormous peer pressure within dysfunctional groups to regard the pathological behavior of Dipshit Rinpoche, etc., as "awakened activity".
So frankly, while I can appreciate the caveat emptor approach, we are too quick to divorce gurus from their own personal responsibilty to their students when we insist it is all on the student. "
~ Malcolm/Loppon Namdrol
My comments:
NOBODY, including lamas, gurus, rinpoches, zen masters, roshis, any funny-sounding-titles, beings you considered 'enlightened' etc, should be placed above scrutiny.
I suspect Buddha would have been very disappointed if he were around, at some of those posing as teachers while behaving in ways contrary to dharma, actions which clearly show that they have not abandoned afflictions.
No, merely having an enlightenment experience does not mean one has eliminated all afflictions. There are degrees of enlightenment, and degrees of liberation. And if a teacher claims (or hints) to have an enlightenment experience and continues to fuel his afflictions in mind, speech and action, that should not be defended merely because "he is enlightened and therefore all his actions are enlightened wisdom, his wanton womanizing is for tantric sex practice, his drinking is enlightened action, whatever" (what utter nonsense) as it is neither good for himself nor his/her students.
To those who think "oh that enlightened dude is so freakin enlightened that he so transcends [insert vice]/[insert affliction] but continues to do it coz its some crazy wisdom enlightened action tantric whatever", here is what the Buddha has to say:
MN22: “Bhikkhus, that one can engage in sensual pleasures without sensual desires, without perceptions of sensual desire, without thoughts of sensual desire – that is impossible.”
In other words, it is impossible for a person fully liberated from afflictions to continue indulging in sensual pleasures. Sometimes you just have to realize that so called "masters" may be just human like the others, with greed for $$$, sex, etc.
p.s. I still drink a little on rare occasions (maybe 1/10 of what I used to drink, as I no longer do binge drinking like in the past), eat junk food sometimes, etc, but I do not defend my action as some noble acts, and do openly admit that this is something contrary to dharma. However I have noticed that afflictions have generally decreased to a minimal through dharma practice, and this is something even my family members has noticed and told me (e.g. no longer have a temper, etc).
Just to respond to your comments. Though I am no buddhist but when I encounter buddhist monks, nuns which display their carnal side I don't feel comfortable and I will usually stop visiting such temples.
Yes, always try to observe the teacher.
However sometimes we can make a mistake... for example, sometimes a monk who talks to a female person intimately may sound very suspicious.
Rather than thinking "that monk must have lust" or "that monk must be horny", its best to keep observing. Maybe the monk is just treating a newcomer nicely and explaining dharma. Maybe we are just misunderstanding.
However, if we know beyond doubt that said teacher or said monk is indeed engaging in ways contrary to dharma, then perhaps one should go elsewhere.
Just my 2 cents.
Originally posted by winsomeea:Just to respond to your comments. Though I am no buddhist but when I encounter buddhist monks, nuns which display their carnal side I don't feel comfortable and I will usually stop visiting such temples.
Assess the teacher properly first, take as much time as you wish. However, once you have received the kindness of his teachings/initiations/transmissions etc (esp in Vajrayana context), you should NEVER criticise and you should maintain respect for him/her. Any negativities committed towards the Guru will only harm yourself greatly and will definitely land you in the lower realms.
Gampopa said: If the Dharma is not practised properly, it will lead you to the lower realms.
We practise the Dharma to gain liberation and bliss. It is not for the sake of creating sufferings. So don't use the Dharma to create negativities.
@AEN……….
No, merely having an enlightenment experience does not mean one has eliminated all afflictions. There are degrees of enlightenment, and degrees of liberation. And if a teacher claims (or hints) to have an enlightenment experience and continues to fuel his afflictions in mind, speech and action, that should not be defended merely because "he is enlightened and therefore all his actions are enlightened wisdom, his wanton womanizing is for tantric sex practice, his drinking is enlightened action, whatever" (what utter nonsense) as it is neither good for himself nor his/her students.
Such situation could happened to someone who have some experience/realization on the Mahayana thoughts on the subject of non duality and think they are enlightened, free from all that is considered good and bad, defilement and purity and is free to acts as they see fit.
That is where I feel it is better for the beginners in Buddhism to start building their foundation with the Theravada teaching wherein the practical path starts systematically with the purification of morality in tandem with the purification of mind and then the building up of our wisdom as we progress on these two paths. The Suttas as the earliest of the Buddha teachings are certainly the best references one can get, and in doubt one should always referred to them.
By all means go to a teacher for guidance and to clear any doubts, but I feels it would be best to build up one’s foundation on the fundamentals of the Buddha’s teaching first. To me the best original information can be found in the Pali Suttas. There are also structured courses available, such as that recently listed by AEN on this thread: sgforums.com/forums/1728/topics/259510Cached.
Loppon Namdrol:
That depends on whether someone who has acted as your guru is acting
in accordance with the Dharma or not. If they are no, there is not
fault in severing one's relationship with them. And if you criticize
them with a view to protecting others from their mistaken and harmful
actions, there is also no fault. Look it up, you will find I am correct.
"Guru" is a role, not a person. The role as certain
obligations, just as the role "student" has certain obligations. The
sooner people sort this out, the better.
N
...........
I can't speak to the Sanghas
you frequent since I do not know them, apart from Shenphen Rinpoche,
and I know he is a good guy. I really do have full confidence in him.
But...this
is a pervasive problem in dharma centers in the West. To think
otherwise is to be ignorant. I personally know instances (yes plural) of
woman pressured to have abortions after they have been impregnated by
their teachers.
One of the problems is a corrupted idea of
samaya -- women subject to harrasment, etc. in Tibetan Buddhist dharma
centers feel silenced by "vows" and so they do not speak up for many
reasons.
......
I consider non-harming to the be the basic criteria of Dharma.
For example, it is the commitment of taking refuge in the Dharma.
Samaya
is a social construct, and has no meaning outside of that construct.
For example, samaya represents a contract between two people, a teacher
and a student. But the salient point is that it is a two way contract
and the teacher is as obliged to observe these comittments as the
student.
......
This is no guarantee that the teacher, once found, will be a good
one, a qualified one. If that teacher does not measure up to Dharma
standards, he or she should be dropped like a hot coal from one's hands.
Originally posted by Aik TC:
@AEN……….
Agreed
Originally posted by Weychin:Good article of root guru:- http://www.khenpokarten.org/q-a/the-root-guru
Thanks
Originally posted by An Eternal Now:But...this is a pervasive problem in dharma centers in the West. To think otherwise is to be ignorant. I personally know instances (yes plural) of woman pressured to have abortions after they have been impregnated by their teachers.
One of the problems is a corrupted idea of samaya -- women subject to harrasment, etc. in Tibetan Buddhist dharma centers feel silenced by "vows" and so they do not speak up for many reasons.
shit... how many of these cases happened already...?
by the way... i heard it is not right to criticize the Sangha... no matter what mistakes they made. It is to be solved among themselves. Because of the robe they wear, we still have give respect. Is this possible...?
Originally posted by 2009novice:
shit... how many of these cases happened already...?by the way... i heard it is not right to criticize the Sangha... no matter what mistakes they made. It is to be solved among themselves. Because of the robe they wear, we still have give respect. Is this possible...?
It is very prevalent in the west.
Don't spread rumours or criticize unnecessarily.
But if you need to warn someone to prevent them from harm (e.g. sexual abuse, or whatever), keeping your mouth shut and letting the harm continue is also a bad thing. There must be right motivation and awareness of the consequences.
Originally posted by An Eternal Now:Loppon Namdrol:
That depends on whether someone who has acted as your guru is acting in accordance with the Dharma or not. If they are no, there is not fault in severing one's relationship with them. And if you criticize them with a view to protecting others from their mistaken and harmful actions, there is also no fault. Look it up, you will find I am correct.
"Guru" is a role, not a person. The role as certain obligations, just as the role "student" has certain obligations. The sooner people sort this out, the better.
N...........
I can't speak to the Sanghas you frequent since I do not know them, apart from Shenphen Rinpoche, and I know he is a good guy. I really do have full confidence in him.
But...this is a pervasive problem in dharma centers in the West. To think otherwise is to be ignorant. I personally know instances (yes plural) of woman pressured to have abortions after they have been impregnated by their teachers.
One of the problems is a corrupted idea of samaya -- women subject to harrasment, etc. in Tibetan Buddhist dharma centers feel silenced by "vows" and so they do not speak up for many reasons.
......
I consider non-harming to the be the basic criteria of Dharma. For example, it is the commitment of taking refuge in the Dharma.
Samaya is a social construct, and has no meaning outside of that construct. For example, samaya represents a contract between two people, a teacher and a student. But the salient point is that it is a two way contract and the teacher is as obliged to observe these comittments as the student.
......
This is no guarantee that the teacher, once found, will be a good one, a qualified one. If that teacher does not measure up to Dharma standards, he or she should be dropped like a hot coal from one's hands.
I remember very clearly reading from Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche, Namdrol's guru, that it is VERY BAD to criticise your Guru. It stayed in my mind because Rinpoche emphasized it very strongly. Due to the many books there are, i can't locate the exact quote right now. But this is very emphasized in the Vajrayana. You will break your samaya if you criticise. There are very severe karmic consequences. Students who break their samayas also hurt their Gurus' life and activities.
Oh yes, i don't think samaya is just a social construct or contract. Haha... it is quite strange that people can think this way.
Shortcomings of not devoting to a guru correctly
(1) If we criticize our guru, we criticize all the buddhas
(2) Each moment of anger toward our guru destroys merit for eons equal in number to the moments of our anger and will cause us to be reborn in the hells and suffer for the same number of eons
(3) Even though we practice tantra, we will not achieve the sublime realization
(4) Even if we practice tantra with great hardship, it will be like attaining hell and the like…
(5) We will not generate any fresh realisation or knowledge and our previous realisation/knowledge will degenerate
(6)We will be afflicted even in this life by illness and other undesirable things
(7)In future lives, we will wander endlessly in the lower realms
(8) In all our lives, we will lack gurus / virtuous friends
Any negative karma created in relation to the guru is the heaviest because the guru is the most powerful object, more powerful than numberless buddhas. If we do alot of dharma practice,… but continue to continuously make mistakes in our devotion and displease our guru, we create a big obstacle. If we don’t pay attention to fulfilling the holy wishes of our guru, we won’t accomplish much because we will have created an obstacle the size of this earth. There is no greater obstacle than this.
If we don’t practice guru devotion, our minds will become like a rock, it can’t be moved or easily changed. Nothing we meditate on affects our mind…
A tantric text states: “A vajra master is equal to all the buddhas, therefore, we should never belittle or disrespect the vajra master.”
The Essence of Nectar states:
“It is said that the actions of all the Victorious Ones
Appear in one’s own guru.
Disrespecting him is thus disrespecting all the Victorious Ones.
What could have a heavier ripened aspect result than that?”
Kalachakra Tantra states:
“One destroys the merit accumulated over eons equal to the number of moments one feels angry at the virtuous friend / guru and for the same number of eons one experiences intense suffering in the hells and so on…”
The Tantric Text Self-Arisen and Self-Manifested explains,
“One should not go against the good advice; if one does, one will fall into a hell state. Criticizing the virtuous friend/guru or fabricating his faults is like having killed a hundred thousand ordained beings. It is only the cause of the Inexhaustible Suffering hell. Even if one thinks that the vajra master is bad-tempered, one has to suffer for sixty eons in Inexhaustible Suffering”
Guhyasamaja Root Tantra states:
“Those who have committed heavy negative karma
Such as the five uninterrupted actions and so on,
Can achieve the great ocean of Vajrayana, the sublime vehicle.
But those who have scorned their guru from the heart
Will achieve no success in their practice.”
In the root tantra Ornament of the Vajra Essence
“For those who have criticized their master,
Even if they practice tantra for thousands of eons
By avoiding all sleep and distractions,
It will be like attaining hell.”
Lama TsongKhapa, the second buddha said,
“Without being careful at all in regard to despising your guru, if you then try very hard to do listening, reflecting and meditating, it will be like opening the door to the lower realms.”
The Essence of Nectar says,
“If one is devoid of devotion for the sublime object, the guru,
Qualities are not generated and those generated already will degenerate.”
In the Fifty Verses of Guru Devotion,
“The great fool who criticizes the vajra master will die from an epidemic, cold disease, a demon, a fever or poison. That person may be killed by a king, fire, poisonous snake, water, wrathful dakinis, thieves, spirits or malignant fiends. After being killed in one of these ways, he then goes to hell.”
The Vajrapani Empowerment Tantra states:
Vajrapani once asked Guru Shakyamuni Buddha, “Bhagavan, what is the ripened aspect result of despising the guru?” This refers to criticizing or renouncing the guru. Buddha replied, “Don’t ask me that Vajrapani. If i explained the shortcomings of having made mistakes in devotion to the virtuous friend/guru, all the devas and other worldly beings will be terrified. The bodhisattvas, who have great compassion for sentient beings, would vomit blood. But steel yourself, and i will tell you a little, O Lord of Secrets. The person who has made mistakes in devotion to the guru by having criticized him, renounced him and so forth will be born after this life in the hell realm that i have described for the person who has committed the five uninterrupted negative karmas. He will abide there for infinite eons. Therefore , one should never belittle, criticize or give up the vajra master.”
The thirteenth Dalai Lama explained,
“Even eating or drinking with someone who has broken samaya with one of your gurus causes you to go to the lower realms. The pollution degenerates your mind and causes you to be reborn in the lower realms.”
Serkong Dorje Chang said,
“Even drinking water from the same valley where there is a fellow disciple who has scorned your own guru causes you to be born in the hells.”
The result of disrespecting the virtuous teacher is that in all future lifetimes we will not find a virtuous teacher, so we will not hear the holy Dharma. Not meeting a virtuous friend in the future is experiencing the result similar to the cause of having disrespected or made mistakes in relation to the virtuous friend. In life after life, we will be born in places where there is no freedom to practice Dharma, where we will not meet a virtuous friend. As we don’t meet a virtuous friend, we don’t meet the Dharma.
– Lama Zopa Rinpoche
Namdrol:
That depends on whether someone who has acted as your guru is acting in accordance with the Dharma or not. If they are no, there is not fault in severing one's relationship with them. And if you criticize them with a view to protecting others from their mistaken and harmful actions, there is also no fault. Look it up, you will find I am correct.
N
it's some what similar to Bodhisattva Precepts' Sixth Major Precept posted before -
http://sgforums.com/forums/1728/topics/418654
6. Sixth Major Precept
On Broadcasting the Faults of the Assembly
A disciple of the Buddha must not himself broadcast the misdeeds or infractions of Bodhisattva-clerics or Bodhisattva-laypersons, or of [ordinary] monks and nuns -- nor encourage others to do so. He must not create the causes, conditions, methods, or karma of discussing the offenses of the assembly.As a Buddha's disciple, whenever he hears evil persons, externalists or followers of the Two Vehicles speak of practices contrary to the Dharma or contrary to the precepts within the Buddhist community, he should instruct them with a compassionate mind and lead them to develop wholesome faith in the Mahayana.
If instead, he discusses the faults and misdeeds that occur within the assembly, he commits a Parajika offense. (31)
extract:
我们看ä¸�四的开缘情况。说罪之心，ä¾�奖励之心，ä¸�ä¾�æ²»ç½šå¿ƒæˆ–é™·æ²¡å¿ƒè€Œå®£è¯´ã€‚ä½ çŸ¥é�“这个è�©è�¨çŠ¯äº†é‡�ç½ªï¼Œä½ ç§�ä¸‹åŽ»æ‰¾ä»–ï¼Œä½ è·Ÿä»–äº¤æƒ…ä¸�é”™ã€‚ä½ è·Ÿä»–åŠ�è°�说，æŸ�æŸ�äººå•Šï¼Œæˆ‘æ˜¯ä¸ºä½ å¥½ï¼Œä½ æœ€å¥½è¿™ä»¶äº‹ä¸�è¦�å�šäº†ã€‚é‚£ä¹ˆä½ æ˜¯ç”¨é¼“åŠ±çš„å¿ƒæ€�，而ä¸�是以陷没心或治罚心æ�¥å®£è¯´ï¼Œé‚£ä¹ˆåœ¨å¾‹ä¸Šè¯´ï¼Œä½ å�¯ä»¥æœ‰ä¸‰æ¬¡çš„åŠ�è°�。第一次的åŠ�è°�，他没有å��åº”ï¼›ä½ æ‰¾é€‚å½“çš„æœºä¼šå†�åŠ�è°�一次，他å�ˆæ²¡æœ‰å��应；å†�讲第三次，他都没有å��应。这个时候，è�©è�¨å°±ä¸�应该å†�讲下去了，默然离开就å�¯ä»¥äº†ã€‚å› ä¸ºä½ å·²ç»�ä»�è‡³ä¹‰å°½äº†ï¼Œä½ ç»�过三次的åŠ�è°�ã€‚ä½ æ�¥ç‚¹é†’他，他都没有醒过æ�¥ï¼Œä½ 该å�šçš„都å�šäº†ã€‚这个时候开缘。
è¿™æ�¡æˆ’它的æ„�æ€�我们讲一下。它的整个制戒的é�“ç�†åœ¨å“ªé‡Œï¼Ÿå› 为佛法二å®�èµ–åƒ§å¼˜ä¼ ï¼Œä¸‰å®�çš„ä½�世是é� 一个有明了性的僧å®�æ�¥ä½�æŒ�ã€‚å› ä¸ºä½›é™€ç�度了，在这个世间上å�ªå‰©ä¸‹ä½›åƒ�，佛åƒ�也ä¸�能讲è¯�。法å®�是放在图书馆，它自己也ä¸�能讲è¯�。所以佛å®�跟法å®�在世间上的æµ�ä¼ æ˜¯é� è�©è�¨åƒ§å®�çš„å�‘心，æ‰�使令这个代代的光明能够æµ�ä¼ åˆ°ä¸–é—´ä¸ŠåŽ»ã€‚æ‰€ä»¥ä¸‰å®�çš„ä½�世是é� 一个有明了性的人，这个人是僧å®�æ�¥ä½�æŒ�ä½›å®�跟法å®�。那么这个人就很é‡�è¦�了。我们一般人的概念是人跟法是分ä¸�开的。有些人说“ä¾�法ä¸�ä¾�人”，其实这å�¥è¯�是我们一般人å�šä¸�到的。人跟法是分ä¸�开的。我ä¸�知é�“诸ä½�æƒ³æ³•æ˜¯ä»€ä¹ˆï¼Ÿä½ çš„å¸ˆçˆ¶å‡ºçŽ°é‡�å¤§è¿‡å¤±ï¼Œä»–æ•™å¯¼ä½ æ³•çš„æ—¶å€™ï¼Œä½ è¿˜ä¼šåŽ»ä¿®ï¼Œæœ‰å�¯èƒ½å�—？ä¸�太å�¯èƒ½ã€‚å› ä¸ºäººè·Ÿæ³•å¾ˆéš¾åˆ†å¼€ã€‚æ‰€ä»¥ä½ è¯½è°¤ä»–çš„äººï¼Œå°±è¿žå¸¦ç�€è¿žä»–æ‰€å¼˜ä¼ çš„æ³•ä¹Ÿäº§ç”Ÿäº†éšœç¢�，那这个时候å�—伤的是è°�？当然是跟他å¦çš„弟å�嘛ï¼�ä½ æ€Žä¹ˆç ´å��我å¦ä¹ çš„å› ç¼˜ï¼Ÿ
所以在律上说，一个è�©è�¨åƒ§å®�，å�³ä½¿ä»–犯了错，就åƒ�什么呢？è¬å¦‚æ»å°¸ï¼ŒçŠ¹èƒ½åº¦äººã€‚这个人身体æ»æŽ‰äº†ï¼Œä»–æ»æŽ‰æ˜¯ä»–çš„å› æžœå˜›ï¼�但是我们抱ç�€æ»å°¸ï¼Œæˆ‘们还是å�¯ä»¥åˆ°å½¼å²¸å˜›ï¼�è¬å¦‚æ»å°¸ï¼ŒçŠ¹èƒ½åº¦äººã€‚就是说，这个è�©è�¨æœ‰è¿‡å¤±ï¼Œæˆ‘ä¸�èƒ½å®£è¯´ï¼Œå› ä¸ºä»–è®²çš„æ³•è¿˜æ˜¯æ£æ³•ï¼Œå¾ˆå¤šå¼Ÿå�è·Ÿä»–å¦ä¹ ，还是å�¯ä»¥æ ½åŸ¹å–„æ ¹ï¼Œè¿˜æ˜¯äº§ç”Ÿå¢žä¸Šï¼Œè¿™ä¸ªæ»å°¸è¿˜æ˜¯å�‘挥了把这个人从æ¤å²¸åº¦åˆ°å½¼å²¸çš„效果，虽然他自己牺牲掉了。所以å�³ä¾¿ä»–的身å�£æ„�有过失，è�©è�¨ä¸ºäº†æŠ¤æŒ�æ£æ³•çš„缘故，ä¸�应该æ�¥å®£è¯´ã€‚
但是有一个例外，这个人ä¸�ä½†ç ´æˆ’ï¼Œè¿˜ç ´è§�，那这个è�©è�¨è¦�å‡»é¼“è€Œæ”»ä¹‹äº†ã€‚å› ä¸ºä»–ä¸�是ç§�下行为有问题而已，他宣
说的法是错误的，开始在误导众生，一盲引众盲，相牵入ç�«å�‘ã€‚ä»–è¯´ï¼Œä¸–é—´ä¸Šæ²¡æœ‰å› æžœï¼Œä»–è¯´æ²¡æœ‰æž�ä¹�世界的å˜åœ¨ï¼Œå¤§ä¹˜ä½›æ³•é�žä½›è¯´ã€‚这个时候他所释放出æ�¥çš„å·²ç»�ä¸�是对众生产生引导的力é‡�，那这个就跟这æ�¡æˆ’ä¸�ä¸€æ ·äº†ã€‚æ‰€ä»¥æˆ‘ä»¬å¿…é¡»åŽ˜æ¸…ç ´æˆ’è·Ÿç ´è§�çš„å·®åˆ«ã€‚ç ´æˆ’ï¼Œä»–æ˜¯ä¸€ä¸ªæ»å°¸ï¼Œè¿˜æ˜¯å�¯ä»¥å¸®åŠ©äººå‰�进。å�ªè¦�他的法是æ£ç¡®çš„，我们没有讲è¯�的余地，ä¸�è¦�è¯´ä½ ï¼Œæˆ‘ä¹Ÿä¸€æ ·ï¼Œæˆ‘ä»¬éƒ½æ²¡æœ‰è®²è¯�çš„ä½™åœ°ã€‚å› ä¸ºä½ è®²å‡ºæ�¥ï¼Œå¯¹å¤§å®¶éƒ½æ²¡æœ‰å¥½å¤„。第一个他ä¸�å�¯èƒ½æ”¹å�˜ï¼Œç¬¬äºŒä¸ªä½ 讲出æ�¥ï¼Œä½ ä¼¤å®³ä½ çš„è�©æ��å¿ƒï¼Œç¬¬ä¸‰ä¸ªå¯¹æ•´ä¸ªå¤§ä¹˜ä½›æ³•çš„å¼˜ä¼ äº§ç”Ÿè´Ÿé�¢çš„效果。三方é�¢éƒ½æ�Ÿå¤±ï¼Œè®²çš„人æ�Ÿå¤±ï¼Œè¢«è®²çš„人æ�Ÿå¤±ï¼Œå¦ä½›çš„人也æ�Ÿå¤±ã€‚三方é�¢éƒ½æ�Ÿå¤±ï¼Œæ²¡æœ‰ä¸€ä¸ªäººå¾—到好处，å�ªæœ‰å¤–é�“æœ€é«˜å…´ã€‚ä½†æ˜¯ä»–ç ´è§�，那就ä¸�ä¸€æ ·äº†ï¼Œé‚£æˆ‘ä»¬å°±ä¸�能包容了，就ä¸�能ä¿�æŒ�默然了。所以这æ�¡æˆ’大家è¦�æŠŠè¿™ä¸ªç ´æˆ’è·Ÿç ´è§�åŽ˜æ¸…ã€‚å½“ç„¶ä½ æœ‰æ�ƒåŠ›è¯´ï¼Œè¿™ä¸ªæ³•å¸ˆæˆ‘å°±ä¸�亲近他了，我也ä¸�护æŒ�他了，å�¯ä»¥ï¼Œä½ å�¯ä»¥é»˜ç„¶ç¦»å¼€ï¼Œå�¯ä»¥çš„ï¼Œä½ æœ‰é€‰æ‹©æ�ƒã€‚这个是佛陀对è�©è�¨çš„一个戒法，所谓的说四众过戒，他整个制戒的é�“ç�†åœ¨è¿™é‡Œã€‚
unless it involve breaking the precepts ç ´æˆ’ AND ç ´è§� EXTREME view! ç ´è§� EXTREME view is quite different from breaking the precepts ç ´æˆ’. EXTREME view in term of telling people to kill their parent, do sucide bombing, saying there's no cause and effect, no pureland, ALL and ALL, HARMING OTHERES etc. then that we can opposite. other than that it is VERY BAD to criticise as i concur with Dharmadhatu.
/\
Originally posted by Dharmadhatu:remember very clearly reading from Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche, Namdrol's guru, that it is VERY BAD to criticise your Guru. It stayed in my mind because Rinpoche emphasized it very strongly. Due to the many books there are, i can't locate the exact quote right now. But this is very emphasized in the Vajrayana. You will break your samaya if you criticise. There are very severe karmic consequences. Students who break their samayas also hurt their Gurus' life and activities.
Oh yes, i don't think samaya is just a social construct or contract. Haha... it is quite strange that people can think this way.
Of course, it is very bad to criticize your guru in normal circumstances. But if the "Guru" is sexually abusing people etc, what do you do? If you need to criticize him *for the right motivation: to protect others*, I say do it. As stated,
"Guru" is a role, not a person. The role as certain obligations,
just as the role "student" has certain obligations. The sooner people
sort this out, the better.
Of course, this does not give us license to criticize the "guru"'s every perceived mistake etc. Most of the time, for all those minor stuff, we are better to mind our own business. But every now and then, if some so called "guru" comes to bring great harm to others, then something must be done to stop the harm from continuing unchecked.
More posts by Loppon Namdrol:
On whether you should stay with a teacher who has acted in a way
that is not in accord with Dharma, simply examine page 51 of Buddhist
Ethics where it clearly says that one should immediately sever one's
relationship with such a person. On whether it is necessarily a breakage
of samaya to criticize one's guru, examine the six criteria Kongtrul
lists for samaya breakage to exist when criticizing one's guru, page
257. It depends primarily on one's motives.
No one is ever going to feel good about it, but sometimes, for the protection of others, it is necessary.
Josef:
I think this is a key point. And it illustrates a huge problem with how Tibetan Buddhist structures function in the west.
We
are often treated at best as placeholders for the teachings until the
next generation of Tibetans come of age and at worst we are expected to
be serfs with American dollars and a good exchange rate.
When
Tibetan teachers are busted sexually abusing or ripping off their
American students its called crazy wisdom or they just get a free pass.
When an American teacher does this kind of thing they are excommunicated
and publicly ruined and turned into an example of how "we arent ready"
to be real holders of the lineage.
Its feudalism and racism, nothing more.
Namdrol:
Yes, and when Someone Rinpoche and Tulku So and So gets into
trouble, the putative hierarchies in Tibetan Buddhism act with complete
impotence, because Someone Rinpoche and Tulku So and So are "recognized"
to be some enlightened yogin, and it is all such total intolerable
bullshit.
M
Here is what The Dalai Lama has to say:
‘Criticize openly,’ His Holiness declared. ‘That’s the only way. If there is incontrovertible evidence of wrongdoing, teachers should be confronted with it. They should be allowed to admit their wrongs, make amends, and undergo a rehabilitation process. If a teacher won’t respond, students should publish the situation in a newspaper, not omitting the teacher’s name,” His Holiness said. “The fact that the teacher may have done many other good things should not keep us silent.” Again, in 2001, when answering a similar question, he advised potential converts to check a guru’s qualifications carefully; ‘The best thing is,‘ the Dalai Lama said, ‘whenever exploitation, sexual abuse or money abuse happen, make them public.’
By the way, like in ANY scenarios... one must never give rise to a mind of hate or negativity. I.e. even to the lama who abused you etc. This goes to anyone, not just to a lama. A person who has this hatred will likely go to lower realms regardless of who he is dealing with - whether with a true vajra master, fake vajra master or just an ordinary person like your boss or your friend.
So if you want to criticize or whatever it must be done out of right circumstance, right motivation and compassion, never a negative mind.
This is what the Buddha said in the suttas:
Even were bandits savagely to sever you limb from limb with a two-handled saw, he who entertaineth hate on that account in his heart would not be one who carried out my teaching.
Originally posted by sinweiy:
å½“ç„¶ä½ æœ‰æ�ƒåŠ›è¯´ï¼Œè¿™ä¸ªæ³•å¸ˆæˆ‘å°±ä¸�亲近他了，我也ä¸�护æŒ�他了，å�¯ä»¥ï¼Œä½ å�¯ä»¥é»˜ç„¶ç¦»å¼€ï¼Œå�¯ä»¥çš„ï¼Œä½ æœ‰é€‰æ‹©æ�ƒã€‚这个是佛陀对è�©è�¨çš„一个戒法，所谓的说四众过戒，他整个制戒的é�“ç�†åœ¨è¿™é‡Œã€‚
sorry don't quite understand... if we keep mute, wouldn't others be in harm's way...?
Would it be better to feedback to the Sangha community and let them decide the best course of action...?
Originally posted by 2009novice:
sorry don't quite understand... if we keep mute, wouldn't others be in harm's way...?
Would it be better to feedback to the Sangha community and let them decide the best course of action...?
I think you didn't read this part by sinweiy:
unless it involve breaking the precepts ç ´æˆ’ AND ç ´è§� EXTREME view! ç ´è§� EXTREME view is quite different from breaking the precepts ç ´æˆ’. EXTREME view in term of telling people to kill their parent, do sucide bombing, saying there's no cause and effect, no pureland, ALL and ALL, HARMING OTHERES etc. then that we can opposite. other than that it is VERY BAD to criticise as i concur with Dharmadhatu.
/\