3 posts • Page 1 of 1
This is not definite. First of all, there are is no rite by which an upasaka receives all these vows of a bhikṣu. Therefore, there is no onus to guard vows which has not taken, as Dudjom Rinpoche readily admits.xylem wrote:I have been studying Perfect Conduct, Dudjom Rinpoche's commentary on Ngari Panchen Pema Wangyal's Ascertaining the Three Vows. There is one section that has always perplexed me. In the section on the pratimoksha-vinaya, on p. 26, the last full paragraph, section 2.b.1(a.3.3) section (2) the root text says:
An upholder of lay ordination who is also a pure-awareness holder must, except for the signs and rituals of complete ordination, practice all that remains.
Dudjom Rinpoche follows:
An upholder of lay Buddhist ordination who has entered mantra becomes known as a pure-awareness holder, or a vidyadhara. Although it is not necessary for such an individual to display the outer signs of full ordination such as robes, begging bowl, or shaved hair-- which are the result of receiving a specific ritual-- all remaining precepts in the vinyaya system must be upheld and practiced.
This has always perplexed me because at first it has seemed in resonance with Guru Rinpoche's teaching to rise with the view while descending with the conduct. On the other hand I have yet to find a context where the vinaya and it's particular forms of discipline and purification (e.g. sojong) have been encouraged for lay tantrikas. At the same time, looking at the lives of great lay masters, such as Chatral Rinpoche, they certainly do seem to embrace the whole scope of the vinaya, even as lay practitioners.
Instead we can regard this as an instruction that lay practitioners ought, in an ideal world, to emulate the discplined behavior of a buddhist monk.
Incidentally, this instruction is rejected in the earlier Three Vows of Sapan.
<deleted by request>