The siddhi of winning wars

Forum for discussion of Tibetan Buddhism. Questions specific to one school are best posted in the appropriate sub-forum.
Varis
Posts: 122
Joined: Tue Jul 11, 2017 5:09 am

Re: The siddhi of winning wars

Post by Varis » Sat Dec 30, 2017 8:50 am

Javierfv1212 wrote:
Wed Dec 27, 2017 9:16 pm
Also the Mongolians used Mahakala as their army's protector deity during some of their wars with China.
I just found reference of Vajrayogini being called upon to help in war. In 1739 Chimaji Appa called upon Vajreshwari (Vajrayogini) to help him conquer a fort from the Portuguese, and she instructed in a dream. Albeit this was by a Hindu and not a Buddhist.

Crazywisdom
Posts: 1064
Joined: Fri May 23, 2014 5:48 pm

Re: The siddhi of winning wars

Post by Crazywisdom » Sat Dec 30, 2017 5:52 pm

climb-up wrote:
Sat Dec 30, 2017 7:27 am
Crazywisdom wrote:
Sat Dec 30, 2017 2:40 am
climb-up wrote:
Fri Dec 29, 2017 9:45 pm


I know of those interpretations, but they are certainly not the only ones,
The Kalacakra sort of resolves all these questions.
Are you saying that the Kalacakra tantra does not contain specifically wrathful (in the literal sense) practices?
Or are you saying that the tantra resolves the practical and ethical issues of when to use them?
It’s says that those metaphors don’t mean what you think they mean and they stand for yoga and winds.
Delete my account

climb-up
Posts: 417
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2016 6:32 am

Re: The siddhi of winning wars

Post by climb-up » Sat Dec 30, 2017 9:54 pm

Crazywisdom wrote:
Sat Dec 30, 2017 5:52 pm
climb-up wrote:
Sat Dec 30, 2017 7:27 am
Crazywisdom wrote:
Sat Dec 30, 2017 2:40 am

The Kalacakra sort of resolves all these questions.
Are you saying that the Kalacakra tantra does not contain specifically wrathful (in the literal sense) practices?
Or are you saying that the tantra resolves the practical and ethical issues of when to use them?
It’s says that those metaphors don’t mean what you think they mean and they stand for yoga and winds.
Okay. My understanding is that it refers to both outer, inner and secret and that the practices absolutely can be used for external enemies, but I don't practice kalacakra and I know longer have the books I used too on it to reference.
How does that line up with prophecies of war and and explicit instructions for war machines?
I know some say that these are symbolic only, but that is not at all the consensus (according to my limited understanding at least).

Outside kalacakra then, at least, many knowledgable lamas teach that wrathful Siddhis are exactly what they seem, in addition (not instead) to being applicable to inner issues and channels, winds and tigle.
It can even be considered breaking Samaya not to destroy certain enemies of the dharma; which is my understanding of the wrathful siddhis, as compassionate act.
Here's one knowledgable guy who (seems to, I believe) agree, at least in regards to the literalness:
Malcolm wrote:
Mon Dec 25, 2017 5:52 pm
WeiHan wrote:
Mon Dec 25, 2017 4:20 pm
I thought Tantras cannot be read literally and that is why we need pith instruction from a Guru in order to understand and know how to practice them correctly? The mantra of Hevajra itself, contains words like "Slay slay......bind, bind...the enemies" but I don't think they should be understood literally?
Mantras for destroying armies, pretty much literal.

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 27365
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: The siddhi of winning wars

Post by Malcolm » Sat Dec 30, 2017 9:59 pm

climb-up wrote:
Sat Dec 30, 2017 9:54 pm

Here's one knowledgable guy who (seems to, I believe) agree, at least in regards to the literalness:
Not with respect to Kālacakra, however —— the text itself indicates that the Shambhala war, which is mostly discussed in chapter 5, the so-called Wisdom chapter, is symbolic. In the inner chapter it also states very clearly that the war visited upon the mlecchas will be a vast illusion where it seems that there is killing and so on, but in reality it is all an illusion conjured to intimidate the mlecchas in Baghdad, and no one is actually harmed.
Buddhahood in This Life
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔


[A]nything at all that is well spoken is the word of the Buddha.

-- Ārya-adhyāśaya-sañcodana-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra

The different sūtras in accord with the emptiness
taught by the Sugata are definitive in meaning;
One can understand that all of those Dharmas in
which a sentient being, individual, or person are taught are provisional in meaning.

-- Samadhirāja Sūtra

climb-up
Posts: 417
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2016 6:32 am

Re: The siddhi of winning wars

Post by climb-up » Sat Dec 30, 2017 10:15 pm

Malcolm wrote:
Sat Dec 30, 2017 9:59 pm
climb-up wrote:
Sat Dec 30, 2017 9:54 pm

Here's one knowledgable guy who (seems to, I believe) agree, at least in regards to the literalness:
Not with respect to Kālacakra, however —— the text itself indicates that the Shambhala war, which is mostly discussed in chapter 5, the so-called Wisdom chapter, is symbolic. In the inner chapter it also states very clearly that the war visited upon the mlecchas will be a vast illusion where it seems that there is killing and so on, but in reality it is all an illusion conjured to intimidate the mlecchas in Baghdad, and no one is actually harmed.
Wow! I stand corrected (...again).

fckw
Posts: 357
Joined: Mon Jan 06, 2014 11:10 am

Re: The siddhi of winning wars

Post by fckw » Sat Dec 30, 2017 11:25 pm

Shaolin monks were involved in battle activities for centuries. Similar monastic traditions that combined Buddhist religious practice with fighting practice and activities exist(ed) also in Korea, as well as in Japan. Furthermore, Japanese samurai were Buddhists and Shintoists. All of these groups existed for hundreds or thousands of years and were involved in very real and very bloody fighting activities in the battlefield. I am sure they would have appreciated the siddhi of winning wars.

More relevant perhaps for practitioners of Vajrayana is the fact that certain (Buddhist and also non-Buddhist) tantras explicitly state that you should kill living beings. Now, how this is to be interpreted obviously needs to be contemplated by those who practice said tantras. If it were all to be understood on a purely symbolic level, as is usually argued, then why would those tantric texts use such violent language without necessity and in obvious violation of basic sutric commandements? Shouldn't it be considered "bad speech" using unnecessarily violent language to only make a point? [Don't get me wrong: I am not stating the opposite, i.e. that these texts are to be taken on a literal level, but I also don't believe in a simple "translation of terms" from one meaning to another one. For a lengthy discussion of the topic see for example here.]

Most relevant to this discussion however I consider the latent suppression of aggressive energy in many Western Buddhist practitioners. It's a widespread cultural phenomenon - perhaps also in other parts of the world, I don't know. It usually goes so far that many Western Buddhist practitioners don't even recognize their own aggressive potential anymore, as it's buried so deeply under layers of "civilized behavior". They are then astonished to learn about the relatively bloody history of Tibetans, or to learn that the Dalai Lama consumes (moderate amounts) of meat, or to learn that tantric sriptures are full of "black magic" to subdue virgins, become a king, win wars, poison others or find cures against others' poisons.

User avatar
TharpaChodron
Posts: 570
Joined: Wed Apr 18, 2012 2:13 am
Location: California

Re: The siddhi of winning wars

Post by TharpaChodron » Sun Dec 31, 2017 2:10 am

fckw wrote:
Sat Dec 30, 2017 11:25 pm
Shaolin monks were involved in battle activities for centuries. Similar monastic traditions that combined Buddhist religious practice with fighting practice and activities exist(ed) also in Korea, as well as in Japan. Furthermore, Japanese samurai were Buddhists and Shintoists. All of these groups existed for hundreds or thousands of years and were involved in very real and very bloody fighting activities in the battlefield. I am sure they would have appreciated the siddhi of winning wars.

More relevant perhaps for practitioners of Vajrayana is the fact that certain (Buddhist and also non-Buddhist) tantras explicitly state that you should kill living beings. Now, how this is to be interpreted obviously needs to be contemplated by those who practice said tantras. If it were all to be understood on a purely symbolic level, as is usually argued, then why would those tantric texts use such violent language without necessity and in obvious violation of basic sutric commandements? Shouldn't it be considered "bad speech" using unnecessarily violent language to only make a point? [Don't get me wrong: I am not stating the opposite, i.e. that these texts are to be taken on a literal level, but I also don't believe in a simple "translation of terms" from one meaning to another one. For a lengthy discussion of the topic see for example here.]

Most relevant to this discussion however I consider the latent suppression of aggressive energy in many Western Buddhist practitioners. It's a widespread cultural phenomenon - perhaps also in other parts of the world, I don't know. It usually goes so far that many Western Buddhist practitioners don't even recognize their own aggressive potential anymore, as it's buried so deeply under layers of "civilized behavior". They are then astonished to learn about the relatively bloody history of Tibetans, or to learn that the Dalai Lama consumes (moderate amounts) of meat, or to learn that tantric sriptures are full of "black magic" to subdue virgins, become a king, win wars, poison others or find cures against others' poisons.
May I bring up the practice of Chod, understanding that it only refers to subduing spirits, not armies. As Wompt says, "The so-called spirits to be destroyed in Cho are not anywhere outside. They are within us...External demons are just deluded perceptions. as long as you do not destroy your belief in self, trying to kill them will not put them to death...What's today's so called Cho practitioners mean by Cho is a grisly process of destroying malignant spirits by killing, slashing, chopping, beating or chasing them. Their idea of Cho involves constantly being full of anger. Their bravado is nothing more than hatred and pride. They imagine they have to behave like the henchman of the Lord of Death...they work themselves into a furious display of rage, staring with hate-filled eyes as large as saucers, clenching their fists, biting their lower lips, lashing with blows...This is called subduing spirits, but to practice Dharma like that is totally mistaken." Patrul Rinpoche

fckw
Posts: 357
Joined: Mon Jan 06, 2014 11:10 am

Re: The siddhi of winning wars

Post by fckw » Sun Dec 31, 2017 11:04 am

TharpaChodron wrote:
Sun Dec 31, 2017 2:10 am
As Wompt says, "The so-called spirits to be destroyed in Cho are not anywhere outside. They are within us...External demons are just deluded perceptions. as long as you do not destroy your belief in self, trying to kill them will not put them to death...
Well, that's the exegesis commonly encountered. And it's certainly right. However, I think there are deeper layers of meaning behind "you should kill living beings" that are not touched upon in your quote.

User avatar
Grigoris
Global Moderator
Posts: 16684
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 9:27 pm
Location: Greece

Re: The siddhi of winning wars

Post by Grigoris » Sun Dec 31, 2017 11:18 am

fckw wrote:
Sat Dec 30, 2017 11:25 pm
Shaolin monks were involved in battle activities for centuries. Similar monastic traditions that combined Buddhist religious practice with fighting practice and activities exist(ed) also in Korea, as well as in Japan. Furthermore, Japanese samurai were Buddhists and Shintoists. All of these groups existed for hundreds or thousands of years and were involved in very real and very bloody fighting activities in the battlefield. I am sure they would have appreciated the siddhi of winning wars.

More relevant perhaps for practitioners of Vajrayana is the fact that certain (Buddhist and also non-Buddhist) tantras explicitly state that you should kill living beings. Now, how this is to be interpreted obviously needs to be contemplated by those who practice said tantras. If it were all to be understood on a purely symbolic level, as is usually argued, then why would those tantric texts use such violent language without necessity and in obvious violation of basic sutric commandements? Shouldn't it be considered "bad speech" using unnecessarily violent language to only make a point? [Don't get me wrong: I am not stating the opposite, i.e. that these texts are to be taken on a literal level, but I also don't believe in a simple "translation of terms" from one meaning to another one. For a lengthy discussion of the topic see for example here.]

Most relevant to this discussion however I consider the latent suppression of aggressive energy in many Western Buddhist practitioners. It's a widespread cultural phenomenon - perhaps also in other parts of the world, I don't know. It usually goes so far that many Western Buddhist practitioners don't even recognize their own aggressive potential anymore, as it's buried so deeply under layers of "civilized behavior". They are then astonished to learn about the relatively bloody history of Tibetans, or to learn that the Dalai Lama consumes (moderate amounts) of meat, or to learn that tantric sriptures are full of "black magic" to subdue virgins, become a king, win wars, poison others or find cures against others' poisons.
Coz everybody knows that Buddhism is not about taming one's mind but about subduing others... :roll:
"My religion is not deceiving myself."
Jetsun Milarepa 1052-1135 CE

"Butchers, prostitutes, those guilty of the five most heinous crimes, outcasts, the underprivileged: all are utterly the substance of existence and nothing other than total bliss."
The Supreme Source - The Kunjed Gyalpo
The Fundamental Tantra of Dzogchen Semde

fckw
Posts: 357
Joined: Mon Jan 06, 2014 11:10 am

Re: The siddhi of winning wars

Post by fckw » Sun Dec 31, 2017 11:27 am

Grigoris wrote:
Sun Dec 31, 2017 11:18 am
Coz everybody knows that Buddhism is not about taming one's mind but about subduing others... :roll:
Well, these text passages won't go away by themselves, will they? Plus, I'm astonished so few Buddhist practitioners even know about such stuff. Talk to some fellow practitioners and you'll find that the majority has never even read a translation of an original tantric text (only the highly edited excerpts distributed by their organization). So, rather than ignoring such text passages it might actually make sense to do a little contemplation what they could mean to modern practitioners and why they were included in the first place. Beyond the literal level, that is.

User avatar
Grigoris
Global Moderator
Posts: 16684
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 9:27 pm
Location: Greece

Re: The siddhi of winning wars

Post by Grigoris » Sun Dec 31, 2017 12:51 pm

fckw wrote:
Sun Dec 31, 2017 11:27 am
Grigoris wrote:
Sun Dec 31, 2017 11:18 am
Coz everybody knows that Buddhism is not about taming one's mind but about subduing others... :roll:
Well, these text passages won't go away by themselves, will they? Plus, I'm astonished so few Buddhist practitioners even know about such stuff. Talk to some fellow practitioners and you'll find that the majority has never even read a translation of an original tantric text (only the highly edited excerpts distributed by their organization). So, rather than ignoring such text passages it might actually make sense to do a little contemplation what they could mean to modern practitioners and why they were included in the first place. Beyond the literal level, that is.
Sure. But trotting out the standard trope of Shaolin monks and Samurai is boring and pointless. Shaolin monks and Samurai are a tiny section of the Buddhist community. They are not representative of Buddhism in general.
"My religion is not deceiving myself."
Jetsun Milarepa 1052-1135 CE

"Butchers, prostitutes, those guilty of the five most heinous crimes, outcasts, the underprivileged: all are utterly the substance of existence and nothing other than total bliss."
The Supreme Source - The Kunjed Gyalpo
The Fundamental Tantra of Dzogchen Semde

fckw
Posts: 357
Joined: Mon Jan 06, 2014 11:10 am

Re: The siddhi of winning wars

Post by fckw » Sun Dec 31, 2017 2:04 pm

Grigoris wrote:
Sun Dec 31, 2017 12:51 pm
fckw wrote:
Sun Dec 31, 2017 11:27 am
Grigoris wrote:
Sun Dec 31, 2017 11:18 am
Coz everybody knows that Buddhism is not about taming one's mind but about subduing others... :roll:
Well, these text passages won't go away by themselves, will they? Plus, I'm astonished so few Buddhist practitioners even know about such stuff. Talk to some fellow practitioners and you'll find that the majority has never even read a translation of an original tantric text (only the highly edited excerpts distributed by their organization). So, rather than ignoring such text passages it might actually make sense to do a little contemplation what they could mean to modern practitioners and why they were included in the first place. Beyond the literal level, that is.
Sure. But trotting out the standard trope of Shaolin monks and Samurai is boring and pointless. Shaolin monks and Samurai are a tiny section of the Buddhist community. They are not representative of Buddhism in general.
Well, I agree that Shaolin monks or Samurais were just a small fraction of all Buddhist practitioners in the past. Their influence on both Chinese and Japanese culture however is not to be underestimated. And China's population is huge. Furthermore, the percentage of Vajrayana practitioners among Buddhists in general is estimated to be only 6% (see here). In other words: A relatively small minority in terms of pure numbers. Then again, perhaps the cultural significance is far higher than the relatively low numbers imply - or perhaps not, I don't know.

WeiHan
Posts: 434
Joined: Sun Oct 30, 2011 5:50 pm

Re: The siddhi of winning wars

Post by WeiHan » Mon Jan 01, 2018 5:37 am

It is very clear that whatever subduing activities that kill certain beings that an accomplished yogi used is accompanied by his subsequent activities to liberate such beings to a more favorable state. If he can't liberate such beings that he has killed, he is not allowed to perform such activities as dictate by the Buddhist teachings.

Varis
Posts: 122
Joined: Tue Jul 11, 2017 5:09 am

Re: The siddhi of winning wars

Post by Varis » Mon Jan 01, 2018 9:17 am

fckw wrote:
Sun Dec 31, 2017 2:04 pm
Furthermore, the percentage of Vajrayana practitioners among Buddhists in general is estimated to be only 6% (see here). In other words: A relatively small minority in terms of pure numbers. Then again, perhaps the cultural significance is far higher than the relatively low numbers imply - or perhaps not, I don't know.
There is no living form of Buddhism uninfluenced by Vajrayana, including Theravada.

Soma999
Posts: 281
Joined: Fri Apr 15, 2016 3:52 pm

Re: The siddhi of winning wars

Post by Soma999 » Sun Jan 07, 2018 11:03 pm

A tradition is highly linked with the place where it evolved. Buddhism in Tibet is related to high mountains, very dangerous places and extremly powerful nature.

Because you can lose your life so easily there are a lot of practice to prevent untimely death.

Because the blue sky is so close and the view is so vast, the mind and how to contemplate its open nature is very widespread.

I am not so sure Tibet has always been a peaceful place. Tantra contains a lot of practice we could understand as magic. Now we speak of high tantras and it’s maybe better.

Buddhist are human. Humans have white and dark side. Many tantras contains dangerous knowledge. Now it seems everything become angelic. Well, why not. But any true work on oneself should recognise our darkness, fears and agressivity. Tantra give means to tranform this dark side whén the guidance is good.

Crazywisdom
Posts: 1064
Joined: Fri May 23, 2014 5:48 pm

Re: The siddhi of winning wars

Post by Crazywisdom » Sat Jan 13, 2018 9:05 pm

climb-up wrote:
Sat Dec 30, 2017 9:54 pm
Crazywisdom wrote:
Sat Dec 30, 2017 5:52 pm
climb-up wrote:
Sat Dec 30, 2017 7:27 am

Are you saying that the Kalacakra tantra does not contain specifically wrathful (in the literal sense) practices?
Or are you saying that the tantra resolves the practical and ethical issues of when to use them?
It’s says that those metaphors don’t mean what you think they mean and they stand for yoga and winds.
Okay. My understanding is that it refers to both outer, inner and secret and that the practices absolutely can be used for external enemies, but I don't practice kalacakra and I know longer have the books I used too on it to reference.
How does that line up with prophecies of war and and explicit instructions for war machines?
I know some say that these are symbolic only, but that is not at all the consensus (according to my limited understanding at least).

Outside kalacakra then, at least, many knowledgable lamas teach that wrathful Siddhis are exactly what they seem, in addition (not instead) to being applicable to inner issues and channels, winds and tigle.
It can even be considered breaking Samaya not to destroy certain enemies of the dharma; which is my understanding of the wrathful siddhis, as compassionate act.
Here's one knowledgable guy who (seems to, I believe) agree, at least in regards to the literalness:
Malcolm wrote:
Mon Dec 25, 2017 5:52 pm
WeiHan wrote:
Mon Dec 25, 2017 4:20 pm
I thought Tantras cannot be read literally and that is why we need pith instruction from a Guru in order to understand and know how to practice them correctly? The mantra of Hevajra itself, contains words like "Slay slay......bind, bind...the enemies" but I don't think they should be understood literally?
Mantras for destroying armies, pretty much literal.
Knowledge is relative. There’s always a higher teacher. And it depends on you, as in where you stand in relation to the teaching. Ultimately and relatively, destruction of enemies is within you.
Delete my account

amanitamusc
Posts: 905
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2010 3:32 am

Re: The siddhi of winning wars

Post by amanitamusc » Sun Jan 14, 2018 8:36 am

fckw wrote:
Sun Dec 31, 2017 2:04 pm
Grigoris wrote:
Sun Dec 31, 2017 12:51 pm
fckw wrote:
Sun Dec 31, 2017 11:27 am

Well, these text passages won't go away by themselves, will they? Plus, I'm astonished so few Buddhist practitioners even know about such stuff. Talk to some fellow practitioners and you'll find that the majority has never even read a translation of an original tantric text (only the highly edited excerpts distributed by their organization). So, rather than ignoring such text passages it might actually make sense to do a little contemplation what they could mean to modern practitioners and why they were included in the first place. Beyond the literal level, that is.
Sure. But trotting out the standard trope of Shaolin monks and Samurai is boring and pointless. Shaolin monks and Samurai are a tiny section of the Buddhist community. They are not representative of Buddhism in general.
Well, I agree that Shaolin monks or Samurais were just a small fraction of all Buddhist practitioners in the past. Their influence on both Chinese and Japanese culture however is not to be underestimated. And China's population is huge. Furthermore, the percentage of Vajrayana practitioners among Buddhists in general is estimated to be only 6% (see here). In other words: A relatively small minority in terms of pure numbers. Then again, perhaps the cultural significance is far higher than the relatively low numbers imply - or perhaps not, I don't know.
Good points and to add the influence on American culture with tmnt.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Al de Baran, Terma and 53 guests