Dzongsar Khyentse on the importance of Mahayana

[dzogchungpa]

From DJKR's commentary on "Parting from the Four Attachments":

I would like to re-iterate: Mahayana is very important. When I go to places like Taiwan, I meet two kinds of people. I meet people who have followed the Mahayana path and training, and were later drawn to practise Vajrayana. And I meet people who have entered straight into Vajrayana with no foundation in Mahayana. The difference between these two kinds of people is as plain as the difference between a firefly and the sun, I must say.

Those who skip the Mahayana path and go straight to the Vajrayana path are obvious from a distance by the gleam of their oily hair. They have at least four malas around their neck, and they love to talk about power and magnetizing wealth. Their view often seems to be founded on a rather superstitious cast of mind. Whereas those who have first practised Mahayana seriously have a very mature and refined approach to practising the Vajrayana.

[Schrödinger’s Yidam]

Nice.

[Malcolm]

Nice.

What's nice about it?

[Schrödinger’s Yidam]

Nice.

What's nice about it?

His affirmation of the benefits of practicing the Mahayana as a basis for the Vajrayana.

[Malcolm]

Nice.

What's nice about it?

His affirmation of the benefits of practicing the Mahayana as a basis for the Vajrayana.

I am sorry, but this following statement is very silly:

Those who skip the Mahayana path and go straight to the Vajrayana path are obvious from a distance by the gleam of their oily hair. They have at least four malas around their neck, and they love to talk about power and magnetizing wealth. Their view often seems to be founded on a rather superstitious cast of mind.

These kinds of put-downs are simply not necessary.

[emaho]

Those who skip the Mahayana path and go straight to the Vajrayana path are obvious from a distance by the gleam of their oily hair. They have at least four malas around their neck, and they love to talk about power and magnetizing wealth. Their view often seems to be founded on a rather superstitious cast of mind.

I find this statement very misleading. Since Vajrayana is based on Mahayana and therefore includes it, there is no such thing as Vajrayana without Mahayana, just as there can be no such thing as water without hydrogen. Likewise there is no such thing as skipping the Mahayana path when going to Vajrayana. If people believe they can practice Vajrayana without Mahayana what they're doing is nothing but mimicry. And that is, of course, what DJKR is alluding to here. However the way he expresses his thesis is strictly speaking wrong. There's nothing wrong with going straight to Vajrayana without practicing vajrayanafree-Mahayana first, because correctly understood Vajrayana practice includes Mahayana practice.

[Schrödinger’s Yidam]

I find this statement very misleading. Since Vajrayana is based on Mahayana and therefore includes it, there is no such thing as Vajrayana without Mahayana, just as there can be no such thing as water without hydrogen. Likewise there is no such thing as skipping the Mahayana path when going to Vajrayana. If people believe they can practice Vajrayana without Mahayana what they're doing is nothing but mimicry. And that is, of course, what DJKR is alluding to here. However the way he expresses his thesis is strictly speaking wrong. There's nothing wrong with going straight to Vajrayana without practicing vajrayanafree-Mahayana first, because correctly understood Vajrayana practice includes Mahayana practice.

I think DKR knows all that.

[DGA]

correctly understood Vajrayana practice includes Mahayana practice.

Right. But what about incorrectly-understood Vajrayana?

is it possible that DKR is attempting to criticize those who use Vajrayana methods but who lack Mayahana motivation? (see also: spiritual materialism)

[emaho]

What I'm saying is that the way he expresses his thesis is wrong.

Instead of

Those who skip the Mahayana path and go straight to the Vajrayana path

it should be something like this

Those who wrongly believe they can skip the Mahayana path and who wrongly believe they can go straight to a non-Mahayanistic Vajrayana path

[emaho]

I find this statement very misleading. Since Vajrayana is based on Mahayana and therefore includes it, there is no such thing as Vajrayana without Mahayana, just as there can be no such thing as water without hydrogen. Likewise there is no such thing as skipping the Mahayana path when going to Vajrayana. If people believe they can practice Vajrayana without Mahayana what they're doing is nothing but mimicry. And that is, of course, what DJKR is alluding to here. However the way he expresses his thesis is strictly speaking wrong. There's nothing wrong with going straight to Vajrayana without practicing vajrayanafree-Mahayana first, because correctly understood Vajrayana practice includes Mahayana practice.

I think DKR knows all that.

Then why does he say otherwise?

[Schrödinger’s Yidam]

Then why does he say otherwise?

He was just making a point without being rigorous for brevity's sake.

[emaho]

That's one of the pitfalls of working with transscriptions from oral teachings that many of the phrasings are not as exact as they should be in a written publication.

[Astus]

hey have at least four malas around their neck, and they love to talk about power and magnetizing wealth. Their view often seems to be founded on a rather superstitious cast of mind. Whereas those who have first practised Mahayana seriously have a very mature and refined approach to practising the Vajrayana.

What the above seems to say is that when Vajrayana is used for worldly purposes, it is nothing but a system of magic techniques, whereas with the motivation of enlightenment it is a means of the bodhisattva path. However, I think most Westerners don't believe in magic anyway, so the mistakes about Vajrayana are different.

[amanitamusc]

DkR makes a point but he skips Sutrayana.When you skip one you miss them all?Or the Higher yanas include the lower.

[emptydreams]

I think this was taken out of context.

the base for Vajrayana is Mahayana and without Mahayana Vajrayana becomes nothing nore than a set of rituals. I feel he is referring tothose who go straight for the surface of Vajrayana like intiations that bestow power and money instead of the actual core teachings of Vajrayana which is actually Mahayana.

[dzogchungpa]

However, I think most Westerners don't believe in magic anyway, so the mistakes about Vajrayana are different.

I think most Westerners who are interested in Vajrayana do believe in magic. I certainly do.

[Malcolm]

They have at least four malas around their neck, and they love to talk about power and magnetizing wealth. Their view often seems to be founded on a rather superstitious cast of mind.

Yup, I know many, many, many Tibetans and Chinese people to whom this applies; not so many westerners though.

[Johnny Dangerous]

DJKR makes a point here, I mostly agree.

But just to gum up the works, you can also Mahayana only practitioners who talk love and compassion, but who display a rigid, neurotic, puritanical approach to Dharma. The Vajrayana style of neurosis may be more ostentatious...but I'm not sure I'm convinced it's any more common. The same two trends can be simultaneous too.

[Virgo]

This topic has been moved to the Tibetan Buddhism Forum from the Mahayana Forum.

Thank you.

Virgo

[pael]

How about those who skip the Theravada path and go straight to the Mahayana?