Anti-Tibetan Buddhism Signs

[Urgyen Dorje]

Even if you're not engaging in the path of skillful means, the completion stage with characteristics, the yab yum has the same symbolism. It has to, because the union of bliss and emptiness is the inherent nature of mind. It's not pointing to a particular skillfull means. It really couldn't, as even highest yoga tantra deities without a consort have the same inherent meaning of the union of bliss and emptiness as the consort is symbolically indicated by the presence of a khatvanga or some other symbol (as in the case of Vajravarahi or Vajrabhairava). No explicit sexual symbolism, but the same meaning.

The yab yum thangkas are not depictions of karma mudra.

They're not?

Among other things, they depict an understanding of the phenomenal world as the union of bliss with emptiness.

That understanding, with a number of variations, is what karmamudra is enacting. As I've said all along, consort practice is not sex.

[Schrödinger’s Yidam]

As I've said all along, consort practice is not sex.

I think you really have never received instructions for this practice. If you had, you would have understood that it is also called "taking desire into the path."

Have I had detailed instructions, as in how to actually do it? No. And, in point of fact, I probably never will during this lifetime.That's way over my head.

However I have had it made clear to me in no uncertain terms that in the Vajrayana poisons are never to be indulged in as such, but rather transmuted into wisdoms/medicine. If they remain untransmuted they are still poisons, and are not part of any Dharma path. This idea was specifically presented to me in the context of consort practice, not just as a general Vajrayana principle. The entire point of the conversation was to make certain thatI didn't get any wrong ideas about karmamudra.

There is a modern medicine for a heart attack that is made from from snake venom then "transmuted" into medicine. However nobody in their right mind would suggest the correct response to a heart attack is to go get bit by a rattlesnake. In the same way you can "take desire into the path", but if it is not transmuted into wisdom it is still poison.

Is that something normal people/non-yogis can do? No. Is it something normal people want to try? Yes. Why? Because they want a new way to enjoy their afflictive emotions. That's exactly not what Dharma is not about in general, and consort practice in particular.

My new favorite saying:

Unconscious secularization occurs when we use Buddhism to support, rather than challenge, our neuroses!

That's from Anne Klein, who is not a recognized Dharma teacher per se, but still true, and very pertinent to the subject at hand.
***********************************************************************************************************************

That was from a Gelug source, so Gelug bias may be present. On another thread JKhedrup queried the geshe he translates for about it and it was confirmed. For me the subject has simply not come up with any of my Kagyu or Nyingma teachers so I'm not going to say that is the way it is presented in all the sects, but it is a fair representation of one view. It is the way I've been taught and the way I see it. It is valid for me to repeat it here on the internet.

[Urgyen Dorje]

You're sort of not making any sense here.

On the one hand you say that the poisons need to be transmuted. This is why we work to integrate all of our experiences, without exception, onto the path, through methods appropriate to our ability-- and those methods might change according to the circumstances for us. That's our samaya to make that commitment.

That integration includes our sexual experiences if we're not monastics or otherwise celibate practitioners.

That doesn't necessarily mean that one is doing karmamudra. The fact that one is a lay person who is sexually active doesn't mean that one is doing "consort practice". That is a whole other separate ball of wax.

I'm just pointing this out because just as there is confusion that one can just have sex and that's karmamudra, there is also the confusion that unless is practicing the path of skillful means using the lower door, i.e. karmamudra, that one can't integrate one's sexual experiences into one's path. That's not true either.

As an example, even for highly realized yogis who have control over their winds, there are different types of sexual practices. One is karmamudra. It has a purpose. There are other sexual practices for longevity. Those have a purpose. There are other sexual practices for other purposes as well.

It's not all karmamudra because it involves sex.

However I have had it made clear to me in no uncertain terms that in the Vajrayana poisons are never to be indulged in as such, but rather transmuted into wisdoms/medicine. If they remain untransmuted they are still poisons, and are not part of any Dharma path. This idea was specifically presented to me in the context of consort practice, not just as a general Vajrayana principle. The entire point of the conversation was to make certain thatI didn't get any wrong ideas about karmamudra.

Anne Klein is actually a recognized dharma teacher.

... Anne Klein, who is not a recognized Dharma teacher per se...

[BrianG]

Is that something normal people/non-yogis can do? No. Is it something normal people want to try? Yes. Why? Because they want a new way to enjoy their afflictive emotions. That's exactly not what Dharma is not about in general, and consort practice in particular.

That's not really correct. How can a "normal" person, learn to transmute poison into wisdom if they never try? Sure, they might screw themselves up at first trying, but no more so than they would have in their normal, samsaric, day to day life, which will screw them for sure.

Also, the sex/violence/drinking aspects are also used for conversion purposes, to attract people to the Dharma who are heavily afflicted.

[Schrödinger’s Yidam]

The fact that one is a lay person who is sexually active doesn't mean that one is doing "consort practice". That is a whole other separate ball of wax.

That's the gist of what I've been saying.

Anne Klein is actually a recognized dharma teacher.

I stand corrected.

How can a "normal" person, learn to transmute poison into wisdom if they never try?

That's what the meditation cushion is for.

[Malcolm]

As I've said all along, consort practice is not sex.

I think you really have never received instructions for this practice. If you had, you would have understood that it is also called "taking desire into the path."

Have I had detailed instructions, as in how to actually do it? No.

Well, in that case, no disrespect intended, but you really do not know what you are talking about.

[Urgyen Dorje]

I really don't think we're saying the same thing at all.

Most of your earlier posts seem to address the issue of monastics taking sexuality onto the path. That's an entirely different matter, especially in the Gelug context that you reference, as one would be considering karmamudra, practices of the lower door in the completion stage, and one would be considering engaging in them without breaking one's pratimoksha ordination. That's a pretty high bar.

But then in your comments to Malcolm you seem to indicate that such a prohibition applies to lay people who happen to have partners and who happen to be sexually ative.

I strongly disagree with that. If a lay person finds themselves with a lover for whatever reasons, they better find a way to integrate that into their practice. It's our samaya to not run from the poisons, and I guarantee there will be some attachment and aversion coming up.

The alternative is that lay vajrayana Buddhists all become monastics, and if they are already have partners, leave them, or just sexually shu them. That in itself is an ethical problem.

The fact that one is a lay person who is sexually active doesn't mean that one is doing "consort practice". That is a whole other separate ball of wax.

That's the gist of what I've been saying.

[Schrödinger’s Yidam]

Well, in that case, no disrespect intended, but you really do not know what you are talking about.

If I were trying to teach this practice that would be a fair criticism. However that is not what I am doing. What I have repeated here is what is appropriate for Dharma students that are not advanced yogis to hear. Since this is a public internet forum I believe this presentation is the one that should be put forward regarding this topic.

I have faithfully repeated what my teacher explained to me in regards to this practice, which was independently confirmed by JKhedrup's geshe here on another thread at DW. If you have had different teachings, then feel free to put forward what your teachers have explained to you. I have not claimed that this perspective on this practice is held universally by all TB sects, but then again almost nothing ever is.

I do find is amusing to be taking a more conservative position on this than you obviously are doing. That's not easy to do. I'm actually somewhat proud of it.

[Urgyen Dorje]

smcj...

There is a difference between taking sex as a METHOD and working with sex as an EXPERIENCE.

If one takes up sex as a METHOD, than that method must have a context. It must have a foundation, a path, and particular fruition or result. That is where we can talk about karmamudra, because that has a specific context. And that's where we can talk longevity sexual pratices and all sorts of other things. And of course that's where we have to ask how that impacts our precepts and so on. All of your conservatism is entirely well founded. If you want to say you're frak because that's your spritiual practice, you have a pretty high bar to clear.

But if sex is simply an EXPERIENCE, as one who is a lay householder without precepts against sexual contact-- then it's actually one's samaya to integrate that experience. Malcolm is dead 100% on. We have to train to try to integrate everything, which is why we have yogas of eating, sleeping, washing, pissing, and yes, making love. Our samaya is to not skeve and recoil from the poisons, and with sex there is going to be attachment and aversion, so we better work with it. What that integration entails depends upon one's level of practice. Whatever it is, it's not going to be karmamudra or longevity practices, as that sexual contact isn't intended as a METHOD.

Not trying to bust balls, but it's also good counsel to hear that if one is going to have sex (or eat or sleep) then one should take that experience onto the path. Just saying. If we don't, then our spirituality is over *here* and our sexy time is over *there* and we've created a big dualistic schism in our experience.

What I have repeated here is what is appropriate for Dharma students that are not advanced yogis to hear. Since this is a public internet forum I believe this presentation is the one that should be put forward regarding this topic.

[Schrödinger’s Yidam]

There is a difference between taking sex as a METHOD and working with sex as an EXPERIENCE.

I have been talking about Vajrayana consort practice only, and that from a Gelug perspective. That's as far as my conversation with my teacher went.

I've never discussed normal sex with any authentic Dharma teacher, nor have I heard traditional teachings on the subject. So I will restrict myself to what I've heard from somebody that actually knows what they are talking about, and to the narrowness of the subject as they discussed it.

[Urgyen Dorje]

Fair enough. That wasn't the impression I was getting.

I've only asked for teachings on integrating a variety of experiences onto the path, sex included, not consort practice.

There is a difference between taking sex as a METHOD and working with sex as an EXPERIENCE.

I have been talking about Vajrayana consort practice only, and that from a Gelug perspective. That's as far as my conversation with my teacher went.

I've never discussed normal sex with any authentic Dharma teacher, nor have I heard traditional teachings on the subject. So I will restrict myself to what I've heard from somebody that actually knows what they are talking about, and to the narrowness of the subject as they discussed it.

[ShineeSeoul]

He is clearly trying to please china regardless of this thing...he has opposed HHDL visit to Taiwan, which he as a buddhist monk, shouldn't do so...he is doing this thing for the sake of growing his order to include PRC citizen...in short, thats not ethical thing at the end...we shouldn't turn blind eye to the abuses, if we do so, it will continue further

Ven. Master Hsing Yun has met with the Dalai Lama a number of times, and even hosted him. Here are his comments on the topic of HHDL:

"It's a very good thing the Dalai Lama's envoys can come. It's also a very good thing China is willing to accept (them)." ...
"The Dalai Lama is Tibet's spiritual leader. Politically, (China) should turn (him) from an enemy into a friend," Hsing Yun said in an interview.
Hsing Yun said he did not understand recent events in Tibet but called for "mutual respect and tolerance" between China and the Dalai Lama, who fled into exile in India in 1959 after an abortive uprising against Chinese rule.
Asked what he thought of the Dalai Lama, Hsing Yun said they have met several times and he found the 1989 Nobel Peace Prize laureate to be "optimistic, bright and cheerful, always wearing a smile and easy to get along with".
Hsing Yun urged China to take the Dalai Lama seriously, saying the Tibetan god-king is "very sincere" when he says he wants autonomy, not independence, for his homeland, albeit China does not believe him.

Besides this matter, it is hardly unethical to include PRC citizens in one's order. The Dharma should be spread, especially to where people are most hungry for it, which especially means China. This is just part of the practice of a Bodhisattva.

well he has recieved him before doesn't justify going on tv and saying he shouldn't come...he is clearly doing all of these things to please china including his criticizing toward DPP poltical party...he is desperate to take new member to his order, thats not ethical to satisfy the oppresser and not speaking the truth just to grow up his order

[WeiHan]

do you have the link of their appearance in China's TV?

if they are linked to China, which I believe it is..why would China create a group who have different beliefes than the rest of Chinese Mahayana?
Thats wierd also

http://www.tudou.com/programs/view/F6JeOfNwlM0/

Thanks for the link...is zhengjue the one who is wearing suit?

ZhengJue is the name of the organisation meaning literally "Straight Awareness" (which is a chinese way of saying enlightenment).

The guy in suit is one of their director, probably from what I guess, is one of those with deep pocket. The other guy in white is suppose to be their organisation instructor or teacher. The lady is the host. Founder is not in the programme. His name is Xiao Ping Shi.

Anyway, I may not believe that they have official money from mainland. Buddhists are like this. When they see a little wealth, they always conclude that it must be the chinese support.

[ShineeSeoul]

ZhengJue is the name of the organisation meaning literally "Straight Awareness" (which is a chinese way of saying enlightenment).

The guy in suit is one of their director, probably from what I guess, is one of those with deep pocket. The other guy in white is suppose to be their organisation instructor or teacher. The lady is the host. Founder is not in the programme. His name is Xiao Ping Shi.

Anyway, I may not believe that they have official money from mainland. Buddhists are like this. When they see a little wealth, they always conclude that it must be the chinese support.

Thanks for the information

I was thinking zhengjue is a founder haha..I understand now what that name is standing for

as for their money, the China's money won't be official, unless they will expose themselve to the public, its not official for sure

I don't believe without Chinese money, they could do all of these publications, books, and websites, its clear they have huge money, thats may be not enough for just ordinary busnissman to do it

even there is more suspecious thing about this group, they are focusing too much on tibetan buddhist, and forget that the biggest Vajrayana lineages in Taiwan, is in fact is from Taiwanese guy named Lu sheng yen..if they are genuin, why don't they target that guy who is popular there?

[Zhen Li]

well he has recieved him before doesn't justify going on tv and saying he shouldn't come...he is clearly doing all of these things to please china including his criticizing toward DPP poltical party...he is desperate to take new member to his order, thats not ethical to satisfy the oppresser and not speaking the truth just to grow up his order

You're free to think he's desperate, that's your own karma. But it doesn't sound sensible to me.

I'd like to see the sources for you're talking about. Just saying this without sources is essentially slander.

[Malcolm]

Well, in that case, no disrespect intended, but you really do not know what you are talking about.

If I were trying to teach this practice that would be a fair criticism. However that is not what I am doing. What I have repeated here is what is appropriate for Dharma students that are not advanced yogis to hear. Since this is a public internet forum I believe this presentation is the one that should be put forward regarding this topic.

And I think you are merely furthering misinformation and phobia.

I have faithfully repeated what my teacher explained to me in regards to this practice, which was independently confirmed by JKhedrup's geshe here on another thread at DW.

What the hell do monks know about these things? Nothing, that's what.

I do find is amusing to be taking a more conservative position on this than you obviously are doing. That's not easy to do. I'm actually somewhat proud of it.

Your approach is not more conservative in any respect at all. It is the opposite, actually. It is Vajrayāna lite™

[WeiHan]

ZhengJue is the name of the organisation meaning literally "Straight Awareness" (which is a chinese way of saying enlightenment).

The guy in suit is one of their director, probably from what I guess, is one of those with deep pocket. The other guy in white is suppose to be their organisation instructor or teacher. The lady is the host. Founder is not in the programme. His name is Xiao Ping Shi.

Anyway, I may not believe that they have official money from mainland. Buddhists are like this. When they see a little wealth, they always conclude that it must be the chinese support.

Thanks for the information

I was thinking zhengjue is a founder haha..I understand now what that name is standing for

as for their money, the China's money won't be official, unless they will expose themselve to the public, its not official for sure

I don't believe without Chinese money, they could do all of these publications, books, and websites, its clear they have huge money, thats may be not enough for just ordinary busnissman to do it

even there is more suspecious thing about this group, they are focusing too much on tibetan buddhist, and forget that the biggest Vajrayana lineages in Taiwan, is in fact is from Taiwanese guy named Lu sheng yen..if they are genuin, why don't they target that guy who is popular there?

The fact that they are invited to mainland for programme is probably an indication that they do have connection there.

Publications, books and websites don't require alot of money to do. Exactly, a few rich businessmen will suffice to do this.

[Schrödinger’s Yidam]

Your approach is not more conservative in any respect at all. It is the opposite, actually. It is Vajrayāna lite™

Well duh, of course. That's the point. For one thing I self-identify as a dilettante. The teaching I received, and have regurgitated here, was directed towards me, a non-yogi. That's what makes it appropriate to repeat in a public forum such as this. If I was discussing the specifics of the practice that would be completely inappropriate.

Like I said, JKhedrup's geshe confirmed these ideas independently here at DW on anther thread. So it seems like it is a Gelug perspective rather than something my teacher tailor made for a Dumbo like me. Other sects could easily have different presentations. But in the gamut of possible perspectives on this issue, what I've said here should be understood as one valid way of looking at it.

[Karma Dondrup Tashi]

The yab yum thangkas are not depictions of karma mudra.

They're not?

Among other things, they depict an understanding of the phenomenal world as the union of bliss with emptiness.

That understanding, with a number of variations, is what karmamudra is enacting. As I've said all along, consort practice is not sex.

Of course that is what karma mudra enacts. But anuttarayoga visualization is not karma mudra. That's the point. Karma mudra is a specific practice. You don't need to do consort practice to be working with an anuttarayoga visualization.

[Malcolm]

Well duh, of course. That's the point. For one thing I self-identify as a dilettante. The teaching I received, and have regurgitated here, was directed towards me, a non-yogi. That's what makes it appropriate to repeat in a public forum such as this. If I was discussing the specifics of the practice that would be completely inappropriate.

Actually, you should not be commenting about it all in my opinion.

Like I said, JKhedrup's geshe confirmed these ideas independently here at DW on anther thread.

And as I said, what the hell do monks know about it? Nothing, it is not something they practice.

Other sects could easily have different presentations.

Indeed, you but were over generalizing from the specific point of view of your experience.