Response to Bernie

Forum for discussion of Tibetan Buddhism. Questions specific to one school are best posted in the appropriate sub-forum.
smcj
Posts: 5709
Joined: Wed May 29, 2013 6:13 am

Re: Response to Bernie

Post by smcj » Fri Mar 16, 2018 2:49 pm

heart wrote:
Fri Mar 16, 2018 2:45 pm
narraboth wrote:
Fri Mar 16, 2018 12:07 pm
It always puzzles me that, how come people who actually received mind instruction and 'got it' ever possible to stand up against that certain guru, as DJKR said 'you owe him the world for it'? Does that supposedly greatest moment so insignificant for some people, that they think when they find out the certain guru behaved badly, they don't owe that guru that favour anymore? Or actually it's so insignificant, because it was given in a wrong way, therefore insignificant for students?

This puzzles me as well.

/magnus
+1

That is, if it wasn’t all just make-believe on the student’s part.
I support Mingyur R and HHDL in their positions against Lama abuse.

Simon E.
Posts: 5517
Joined: Tue May 15, 2012 11:09 am

Re: Response to Bernie

Post by Simon E. » Fri Mar 16, 2018 2:58 pm

I received mind instruction from a teacher and 'got it'.

Later he began to behave in an increasingly erratic way ( to say the least). Eventually his behaviour was such that I was no longer able to view samaya as still being an operant factor.

Which does not diminish my eternal gratitude to him. Both things are true.
If you use the word 'mind' without defining your terms I will ask you politely for a definition. :smile:
This is not to be awkward. But it's really not self-explanatory.

User avatar
Powerful bliss
Posts: 18
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2017 4:51 pm

Re: Response to Bernie

Post by Powerful bliss » Fri Mar 16, 2018 3:21 pm

I wonder why DJKR thinks he has a legitimacy to speak in the name of Vajrayana in general. He can talk for himself or his lineage but why does he think that he knows all about Vajrayana and its methods? :shrug:

Clearly, different schools have different approaches. Why should we listen to him about Vajrayana if he is not one of our teachers?

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 27757
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Response to Bernie

Post by Malcolm » Fri Mar 16, 2018 3:33 pm

narraboth wrote:
Fri Mar 16, 2018 12:07 pm
It always puzzles me that, how come people who actually received mind instruction and 'got it' ever possible to stand up against that certain guru, as DJKR said 'you owe him the world for it'? Does that supposedly greatest moment so insignificant for some people, that they think when they find out the certain guru behaved badly, they don't owe that guru that favour anymore? Or actually it's so insignificant, because it was given in a wrong way, therefore insignificant for students?
People overrate their own capacity to "get it."
When we need to seriously talk about samaya based on text and commentaries, including unconventional pointing-out instruction really make defining samaya establishing and breakage quite difficult.
This is all very clearly explained in tantras such as the Rigpa Rangshar. 1) A qualified guru is indispensable. 2) Empowerments are indispensable 3) Protecting the samaya one receives from empowerment is indispensable. 4) Gurus can break samaya, and if so, the breach is irreparable.

Maybe not so much a problem when Dzogchen mind point out/rigpa tsal wang was so rarely given, so secret, and so strict in both guru and student's qualification, while nowadays.....
The idea that this was rare or difficult to get is an institutional myth. Secrecy is Vajrayāna's main marketing tool.
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

User avatar
dzogchungpa
Posts: 6321
Joined: Sat May 28, 2011 10:50 pm

Re: Response to Bernie

Post by dzogchungpa » Fri Mar 16, 2018 4:03 pm

Malcolm wrote:
Fri Mar 16, 2018 3:33 pm
Maybe not so much a problem when Dzogchen mind point out/rigpa tsal wang was so rarely given, so secret, and so strict in both guru and student's qualification, while nowadays.....
The idea that this was rare or difficult to get is an institutional myth. Secrecy is Vajrayāna's main marketing tool.

I'm quite willing to believe this but, just out of curiosity, how do you know this?
There is not only nothingness because there is always, and always can manifest. - Thinley Norbu Rinpoche

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 27757
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Response to Bernie

Post by Malcolm » Fri Mar 16, 2018 4:16 pm

dzogchungpa wrote:
Fri Mar 16, 2018 4:03 pm
Malcolm wrote:
Fri Mar 16, 2018 3:33 pm
Maybe not so much a problem when Dzogchen mind point out/rigpa tsal wang was so rarely given, so secret, and so strict in both guru and student's qualification, while nowadays.....
The idea that this was rare or difficult to get is an institutional myth. Secrecy is Vajrayāna's main marketing tool.

I'm quite willing to believe this but, just out of curiosity, how do you know this?
By reading Buddhist history and literature for the past 33 years?
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

User avatar
dzogchungpa
Posts: 6321
Joined: Sat May 28, 2011 10:50 pm

Re: Response to Bernie

Post by dzogchungpa » Fri Mar 16, 2018 4:19 pm

Malcolm wrote:
Fri Mar 16, 2018 4:16 pm
dzogchungpa wrote:
Fri Mar 16, 2018 4:03 pm
Malcolm wrote:
Fri Mar 16, 2018 3:33 pm

The idea that this was rare or difficult to get is an institutional myth. Secrecy is Vajrayāna's main marketing tool.

I'm quite willing to believe this but, just out of curiosity, how do you know this?
By reading Buddhist history and literature for the past 33 years?

Well, what did you read that shows that this was the case?
There is not only nothingness because there is always, and always can manifest. - Thinley Norbu Rinpoche

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 27757
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Response to Bernie

Post by Malcolm » Fri Mar 16, 2018 4:59 pm

dzogchungpa wrote:
Fri Mar 16, 2018 4:19 pm
Malcolm wrote:
Fri Mar 16, 2018 4:16 pm
dzogchungpa wrote:
Fri Mar 16, 2018 4:03 pm



I'm quite willing to believe this but, just out of curiosity, how do you know this?
By reading Buddhist history and literature for the past 33 years?

Well, what did you read that shows that this was the case?
You mean is there one book that demonstrates this? No, but it is obvious when one reads through Tibetan history that Dzogchen was a very poorly kept secret for something so reserved, esoteric, and only for the elect. Dzogchen masters like Rigzin Godem had thousands of students, same with many popular tertons like Jatson Nying, Dudul Dorje, Jigme Lingpa, etc. For something so secret, it is amazing there is more literature on Dzogchen in Tibetan literature than any other tantric genre. I mean, if Dzogchen is so secret, how is it possible that 100,000 monks at Kathog attained rainbow body, as the story goes? Kathog was the earliest Nyimgma monastery, founded in the 12th century by Deshek Dampa, Phamgo Drukpa's younger brother.

That equals 100 monks a year for the past thousand years attaining rainbow body, 8.3 per month— one rainbow body every 3.6 days for the past thousand years!
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

smcj
Posts: 5709
Joined: Wed May 29, 2013 6:13 am

Re: Response to Bernie

Post by smcj » Fri Mar 16, 2018 5:01 pm

Simon E. wrote:
Fri Mar 16, 2018 2:58 pm
I received mind instruction from a teacher and 'got it'.

Later he began to behave in an increasingly erratic way ( to say the least). Eventually his behaviour was such that I was no longer able to view samaya as still being an operant factor.

Which does not diminish my eternal gratitude to him. Both things are true.
I am currently entertaining the idea that advanced Vajrayana spirituality is not a guarantee against addiction.
Even though 12 step programs are much more basic spiritually, they are formulated in such a way so as to address that particular pathology.

I don’t advocate “mixing” the two per se, but rather I see recovery as being a good initial spiritual orientation the Vajrayana can build on. 12 step before/below Vajrayana. And I see elements of recovery in NgonDro, which would make sense.

Anyway that’s the kind of stuff I daydream about.
I support Mingyur R and HHDL in their positions against Lama abuse.

User avatar
dzogchungpa
Posts: 6321
Joined: Sat May 28, 2011 10:50 pm

Re: Response to Bernie

Post by dzogchungpa » Fri Mar 16, 2018 5:28 pm

Malcolm wrote:
Fri Mar 16, 2018 4:59 pm
dzogchungpa wrote:
Fri Mar 16, 2018 4:19 pm
Well, what did you read that shows that this was the case?
You mean is there one book that demonstrates this? No, but it is obvious when one reads through Tibetan history that Dzogchen was a very poorly kept secret for something so reserved, esoteric, and only for the elect. Dzogchen masters like Rigzin Godem had thousands of students, same with many popular tertons like Jatson Nying, Dudul Dorje, Jigme Lingpa, etc. For something so secret, it is amazing there is more literature on Dzogchen in Tibetan literature than any other tantric genre. I mean, if Dzogchen is so secret, how is it possible that 100,000 monks at Kathog attained rainbow body, as the story goes? Kathog was the earliest Nyimgma monastery, founded in the 12th century by Deshek Dampa, Phamgo Drukpa's younger brother.

That equals 100 monks a year for the past thousand years attaining rainbow body, 8.3 per month— one rainbow body every 3.6 days for the past thousand years!

The issue is not whether the existence of Dzogchen was secret or how large its associated literature is, but rather how rare it has been to receive the pointing out instructions or whatever. This rarity may have varied historically, so citing certain specific cases is not sufficient. E.g., it is quite possible that there were more qualified students at various times etc. As far as the 100,000 monks goes, perhaps that is also a myth and even if it is true I point out that they were monks, not lay people. Anyway, it doesn't really matter, but I don't really see how one could establish this point.
There is not only nothingness because there is always, and always can manifest. - Thinley Norbu Rinpoche

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 27757
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Response to Bernie

Post by Malcolm » Fri Mar 16, 2018 6:08 pm

dzogchungpa wrote:
Fri Mar 16, 2018 5:28 pm

The issue is not whether the existence of Dzogchen was secret or how large its associated literature is, but rather how rare it has been to receive the pointing out instructions or whatever.
Not rare at all. Instructions for ritual murder were and are much more restricted than any Dzogchen transmission. Then of course, any major treasure cycle must have three things: Guru, Avalokiteśvara, and Dzogchen.
This rarity may have varied historically, so citing certain specific cases is not sufficient. E.g., it is quite possible that there were more qualified students at various times etc.
In the 12th century, Nyangral Nyima Ozer states that after Chegom (early 12th century) the teaching of the 17 tantras were very wide spread in Tibet. There is simply no evidence that Dzogchen ever waned in popularity or was actually kept in the strictest of secrecy.

Finally, because Dzogchen was seen as controversial in the dominant monastic colleges of the day, it mainly spread outside monasteries among the laity, and the vast majority of Dzogchen literature, then as now, was committed to writing by lay tertons.
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

User avatar
dzogchungpa
Posts: 6321
Joined: Sat May 28, 2011 10:50 pm

Re: Response to Bernie

Post by dzogchungpa » Fri Mar 16, 2018 6:34 pm

Malcolm wrote:
Fri Mar 16, 2018 6:08 pm
dzogchungpa wrote:
Fri Mar 16, 2018 5:28 pm

The issue is not whether the existence of Dzogchen was secret or how large its associated literature is, but rather how rare it has been to receive the pointing out instructions or whatever.
Not rare at all. Instructions for ritual murder were and are much more restricted than any Dzogchen transmission. Then of course, any major treasure cycle must have three things: Guru, Avalokiteśvara, and Dzogchen.
This rarity may have varied historically, so citing certain specific cases is not sufficient. E.g., it is quite possible that there were more qualified students at various times etc.
In the 12th century, Nyangral Nyima Ozer states that after Chegom (early 12th century) the teaching of the 17 tantras were very wide spread in Tibet. There is simply no evidence that Dzogchen ever waned in popularity or was actually kept in the strictest of secrecy.

Finally, because Dzogchen was seen as controversial in the dominant monastic colleges of the day, it mainly spread outside monasteries among the laity, and the vast majority of Dzogchen literature, then as now, was committed to writing by lay tertons.

Well, apparently some received ideas are myths so perhaps a few myths have crept into your preferred narrative. Anyway, like I said, it doesn't really matter, have to run.

:cheers:
There is not only nothingness because there is always, and always can manifest. - Thinley Norbu Rinpoche

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 27757
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Response to Bernie

Post by Malcolm » Fri Mar 16, 2018 6:55 pm

dzogchungpa wrote:
Fri Mar 16, 2018 6:34 pm

Well, apparently some received ideas are myths so perhaps a few myths have crept into your preferred narrative. Anyway, like I said, it doesn't really matter, have to run.
Alternately, like many before you, you have fallen for the "secrecy" marketing scheme. Worked wonders for Masonry too.
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

pemachophel
Posts: 1145
Joined: Sat Dec 25, 2010 9:19 pm
Location: Lafayette, CO

Re: Response to Bernie

Post by pemachophel » Fri Mar 16, 2018 7:44 pm

ime, whether dzogchen is kept secret or not depends on the individual teacher. i've had three teachers who kept dzogchen extremely secret even though it was being broadcast openly all around them.
Pema Chophel པདྨ་ཆོས་འཕེལ

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 27757
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Response to Bernie

Post by Malcolm » Fri Mar 16, 2018 8:54 pm

pemachophel wrote:
Fri Mar 16, 2018 7:44 pm
ime, whether dzogchen is kept secret or not depends on the individual teacher. i've had three teachers who kept dzogchen extremely secret even though it was being broadcast openly all around them.
Oh, I am not saying that it should not be kept within the confines of initiation. But the word "secret" in Dzogchen and Vajrayāna in general merely means that these principles are not known in lower vehicles, not that they are confidential like a top secret file.
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

Punya
Posts: 1212
Joined: Thu Dec 20, 2012 10:50 pm

Re: Response to Bernie

Post by Punya » Fri Mar 16, 2018 9:54 pm

Simon E. wrote:
Wed Mar 14, 2018 4:50 pm
For what it's worth I am of the view that the best thing he can do both for Rigpa and for Vajrayana in the west is shut the frack up about the issue.
Which he has now done. This has been posted on his Facebook page.
In the midst of all my imperfections. I can claim only a tiny bit of pure motivation in wanting to clarify some of the doubts, misinterpretations, and misunderstandings about the Vajrayana teachings that have arisen recently in connection with Sogyal Rinpoche and his behaviour.

As I am fundamentally just a mortal human being, I cannot make a judgement about another human being. Determining whether someone is a saint or sinner is an individual decision based on each person’s own reasoning.

After all, remember the Buddha’s fundamental instruction not to rely on the person but on the teaching. Those who want me to proclaim someone else as good, bad or anything else are empowering me as either an omniscient being or a cult leader.

So, all I’ve tried to do with the best of intentions and relying on the very limited knowledge I have acquired through my training, is simply to offer some clarifications on the Vajrayana. I hope that, at least for some people, our discussions might have shed light on some of their concerns. At the same time, I have no illusion whatsoever that my feeble blabbering has managed to dispel all confusions and resolve all doubts.

In its 2,500-year history, the Vajrayana has faced so much criticism, not only of the kind we have heard in recent months but indeed far more virulent. And because we are human beings grappling as best we can with cosmic and transcendent truths, I am certain such criticism will keep happening in the future.

If, due to my own prejudice and lack of humility and mindfulness, I have upset some people, I hope that they might at least not fall right away into a fixed bias either “pro” or “con”. And if I’ve caused anything like rage in people’s minds, I want to apologize totally and unreservedly from my heart.

At the same time, I know with certainty that the Vajrayana has extraordinarily vast, subtle and profound teachings and practices. So, if some people, like many of those writing on What Now for example, are still dissatisfied, then all I can do is aspire to use our present karmic link to wish them very well in all spiritual and worldly matters. Above all, may all our karmic debts be exhausted so that they never again have to suffer by bumping into someone like myself in their journey.

I also don’t want to be bound further by the karmic debts that will inevitably accumulate by persisting in these exchanges. So, this is my last posting on this Facebook page concerning the Sogyal Rinpoche affair and related matters, and I can no longer read or respond to any further questions, comments or challenges on this matter.
May the stupid meditators be awakened from the sleep of ignorance;
May the attacks of the logicians with their sophistries be vanquished.

Chogyam Trungpa Rinpoche in The Rain of Wisdom

Simon E.
Posts: 5517
Joined: Tue May 15, 2012 11:09 am

Re: Response to Bernie

Post by Simon E. » Fri Mar 16, 2018 10:23 pm

Anytime he needs my advice... :smile:
If you use the word 'mind' without defining your terms I will ask you politely for a definition. :smile:
This is not to be awkward. But it's really not self-explanatory.

Punya
Posts: 1212
Joined: Thu Dec 20, 2012 10:50 pm

Re: Response to Bernie

Post by Punya » Fri Mar 16, 2018 10:50 pm

Simon E. wrote:
Fri Mar 16, 2018 10:23 pm
Anytime he needs my advice... :smile:
I'm sorry to tell you Simon, but it probably wasn't your advice that prompted this. :D
May the stupid meditators be awakened from the sleep of ignorance;
May the attacks of the logicians with their sophistries be vanquished.

Chogyam Trungpa Rinpoche in The Rain of Wisdom

User avatar
dzogchungpa
Posts: 6321
Joined: Sat May 28, 2011 10:50 pm

Re: Response to Bernie

Post by dzogchungpa » Fri Mar 16, 2018 10:57 pm

Punya wrote:
Fri Mar 16, 2018 10:50 pm
Simon E. wrote:
Fri Mar 16, 2018 10:23 pm
Anytime he needs my advice... :smile:
I'm sorry to tell you Simon, but it probably wasn't your advice that prompted this. :D

I wouldn't be so sure, Punya. I've long suspected that Simone's eloquent posts carry a great deal of weight with many of today's important lamas.
There is not only nothingness because there is always, and always can manifest. - Thinley Norbu Rinpoche

Simon E.
Posts: 5517
Joined: Tue May 15, 2012 11:09 am

Re: Response to Bernie

Post by Simon E. » Fri Mar 16, 2018 11:05 pm

Punya wrote:
Fri Mar 16, 2018 10:50 pm
Simon E. wrote:
Fri Mar 16, 2018 10:23 pm
Anytime he needs my advice... :smile:
I'm sorry to tell you Simon, but it probably wasn't your advice that prompted this. :D
Darn..I'll cancel that Gucci robe set then. :cry:
If you use the word 'mind' without defining your terms I will ask you politely for a definition. :smile:
This is not to be awkward. But it's really not self-explanatory.

Post Reply

Return to “Tibetan Buddhism”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Majestic-12 [Bot], namoh and 60 guests