Mipham Rinpoche channels Weinstein:

Forum for discussion of Tibetan Buddhism. Questions specific to one school are best posted in the appropriate sub-forum.
Locked
User avatar
Karma Dorje
Posts: 1354
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2011 10:35 pm

Re: Mipham Rinpoche channels Weinstein:

Post by Karma Dorje » Sat Jun 30, 2018 10:42 pm

Snowbear wrote:
Sat Jun 30, 2018 4:47 pm
Virgo wrote:
Sat Jun 30, 2018 2:31 pm
Snowbear wrote:
Sat Jun 30, 2018 7:03 am


I hope in some time and place there will be a being on Earth that will not suffer from those problems.
There are different levels to problems of mind (degrees of afflictions), and different types of problems. Wishing to abuse people, or not understanding that your thoughts, words, or deeds are abusive when in fact they are is very serious and abnormal.

Kevin...
In one level or another, everyone has them. I think calling these teachers "charlatans" is a defense against questioning how much our perceived Buddhist teachers' goodness/purity is offset by their real hidden, inconvenient humanity. If one dismisses them as charlatans when the inconvenient parts show up, we can move on easy with our lives.
It's really quite simple. In jurisprudence there is the idea of the prudent man rule, i.e. what would a prudent man do in this circumstance? With leadership of a community comes responsibility. Osel Mukpo has acted deplorably. There is no possible circumstance where one could say that a prudent man would have done what he did to his students. One can't excuse it by saying that this is OK in Tibetan culture, first of all because it would totally NOT be cool with Tibetan women. Secondly, Osel Mukpo is not Tibetan-- he is Canadian. He grew up in a society where it is abundantly clear that alcoholism and abuse of one's position of trust do not meet the bar of what is prudent.

All humans struggle with sexuality to some degree or another. Few students expect their teachers to be free from desire. What they do expect is that the needs of the student are primary, not the impulses and self-gratification of the teacher. I agree with the previous tongue-in-cheek suggestion about Tinder. If a teacher wants to screw, there are lots of avenues through which they can have sex with no strings attached. They don't do that because those partners couldn't be sworn to secrecy and threatened with samaya violation if they talk about it. This is a colossal, reprehensible abuse of power that has no place in modern society.
"Although my view is higher than the sky, My respect for the cause and effect of actions is as fine as grains of flour."
-Padmasambhava

User avatar
javier.espinoza.t
Posts: 921
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2017 12:29 am
Location: Chile

Re: Mipham Rinpoche channels Weinstein:

Post by javier.espinoza.t » Sat Jun 30, 2018 10:56 pm

a question related to the conduct of the Shambala comm. leader:

¿are Vajrayana practices intended to diminish anxiety and mundane desires, or are they intended to potentiate and increase them?

¿is a Lama or pracitioner the man, woman, etc., who develop and is full of mundane desires?

As i'm looking now, the problem might not be only about misconduct, but about misuse of the tantric path also. I would realy like to know if this is correct or incorrect, in order to learn Vajrayana and not speculate.
what are you doing

User avatar
dzogchungpa
Posts: 6333
Joined: Sat May 28, 2011 10:50 pm

Re: Mipham Rinpoche channels Weinstein:

Post by dzogchungpa » Sat Jun 30, 2018 11:33 pm

Karma Dorje wrote:
Sat Jun 30, 2018 10:42 pm
Osel Mukpo is not Tibetan-- he is Canadian.

Traduce him all you want, but calling him Canadian is a bit of a stretch.
There is not only nothingness because there is always, and always can manifest. - Thinley Norbu Rinpoche

smcj
Posts: 5848
Joined: Wed May 29, 2013 6:13 am

Re: Mipham Rinpoche channels Weinstein:

Post by smcj » Sat Jun 30, 2018 11:45 pm

¿are Vajrayana practices intended to diminish anxiety and mundane desires, or are they intended to potentiate and increase them?
Diminish. The idea is to transform them. They are not to be indulged in without being transformed into the corresponding enlightened awareness.

Think of it like anti-snake venom medicine. It is actually made from the venom itself. So if you get bit by a poisonous snake, the medicine they give you was originally venom but has been transformed into the antidote for venom. How stupid would you have to be to try treating your snake bite by applying more poison that hasn't been transformed into medicine? As ridiculous as that sounds, that effectively is how some people think the mental poisons are supposed to be handled in Vajrayana.
I support Mingyur R and HHDL in their positions against Lama abuse.

User avatar
Jangchup Donden
Posts: 266
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2010 5:44 am

Re: Mipham Rinpoche channels Weinstein:

Post by Jangchup Donden » Sun Jul 01, 2018 1:17 am

Grigoris wrote:
Sat Jun 30, 2018 7:55 am
Jangchup Donden wrote:
Sat Jun 30, 2018 3:23 am
Personally, I'd like to shy away from a blanket "a guru should never take a student as a karmamudra ever, ever" as Guru Rinpoche didn't follow that example. On the other hand, I'm pretty comfortable saying a guru should not be having mundane sex with a student.
So teachers should only get laid via Tinder?

I imagine that many teachers have lasting and loving relationships with students. I cannot see why that is a problem. Not all sex is abusive, after all...
Would an enlightened guru ever have mundane sex?

I can see an not-yet-enlightened (non-monastic) lama falling in love with a student and having a loving consensual beneficial relationship. But that's something I think would need to be done carefully to avoid impropriety.

Even then, I'm a professor and I can't fathom ever having sex with any of my students due to the damage it would do to my department, reputation and all the other potential problems that could arise because of it (conflict of interest, abuse of power, etc). And that's a far less serious relationship than that between a guru and a student.

I don't deny the potential for a bodhisattva to benefit beings through sex. There's lots of examples of this (hell, Yeshe Tsogyal was of immense benefit to her rapists). But I'm pretty sure it's not going to happen in a "hey baby, let's get drunk and screw" situation, especially with a guru/student power structure. And I also don't think in those cases this will leave the unenlightened being feeling taken advantage of spiritually.

User avatar
Snowbear
Posts: 288
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2018 10:41 am

Re: Mipham Rinpoche channels Weinstein:

Post by Snowbear » Sun Jul 01, 2018 1:33 am

Jangchup Donden wrote:
Sun Jul 01, 2018 1:17 am
Would an enlightened guru ever have mundane sex?
First of all, why not? Second of all, what is an "enlightened guru" in your eyes?

User avatar
TharpaChodron
Posts: 621
Joined: Wed Apr 18, 2012 2:13 am
Location: California

Re: Mipham Rinpoche channels Weinstein:

Post by TharpaChodron » Sun Jul 01, 2018 1:49 am

Regarding the samaya of not having sex with non-practitioners:

What are those of us who have relationships with non-practitioners to do, divorce or otherwise leave our partners? We're told that being Buddhist is a matter of karma and thus, we don't proselytize and convert others if they don't have the same karma. Yet, we (okay, I) had the karma to get involved with another who is not cut from the same cloth...

And, if one breaks a branch samaya, what can one do? Usually, the remedy is to vow to never do it again, but what if one is married or falls in love. Not so easy.

I'm okay with not ever engaging in higher yoga practice, if that's what it takes. I just find it slightly off putting that the Dharma, would be so rigid when it comes to something which has nothing to do with unkindness.

this is giving me the notion I may have to give up my lifelong spiritual beliefs because it doesn't fit into the "rules". But, I would rather think it simply bullshit, like whomever told Tara she could not become enlightened in female form.

User avatar
javier.espinoza.t
Posts: 921
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2017 12:29 am
Location: Chile

Re: Mipham Rinpoche channels Weinstein:

Post by javier.espinoza.t » Sun Jul 01, 2018 1:55 am

Snowbear wrote:
Sun Jul 01, 2018 1:33 am
Jangchup Donden wrote:
Sun Jul 01, 2018 1:17 am
Would an enlightened guru ever have mundane sex?
First of all, why not? Second of all, what is an "enlightened guru" in your eyes?
mundane sex involves passion, afaik "enlightenment's" mark is the absence of passions by means of renunciation, transformation or selfliberation.

edit: what about loosig the essence?
what are you doing

User avatar
Jangchup Donden
Posts: 266
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2010 5:44 am

Re: Mipham Rinpoche channels Weinstein:

Post by Jangchup Donden » Sun Jul 01, 2018 2:05 am

Snowbear wrote:
Sun Jul 01, 2018 1:33 am
Jangchup Donden wrote:
Sun Jul 01, 2018 1:17 am
Would an enlightened guru ever have mundane sex?
First of all, why not? Second of all, what is an "enlightened guru" in your eyes?
Someone whose at least on the path of seeing, i.e., the first Bodhisattva level. But ideally, a Buddha. I think Patrul Rinpoche is pretty clear on what standards we should hold our guru to, and what they should ideally be -- an actual Vidyadhara.

User avatar
Jangchup Donden
Posts: 266
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2010 5:44 am

Re: Mipham Rinpoche channels Weinstein:

Post by Jangchup Donden » Sun Jul 01, 2018 2:07 am

TharpaChodron wrote:
Sun Jul 01, 2018 1:49 am
Regarding the samaya of not having sex with non-practitioners:

What are those of us who have relationships with non-practitioners to do, divorce or otherwise leave our partners? We're told that being Buddhist is a matter of karma and thus, we don't proselytize and convert others if they don't have the same karma. Yet, we (okay, I) had the karma to get involved with another who is not cut from the same cloth...

And, if one breaks a branch samaya, what can one do? Usually, the remedy is to vow to never do it again, but what if one is married or falls in love. Not so easy.

I'm okay with not ever engaging in higher yoga practice, if that's what it takes. I just find it slightly off putting that the Dharma, would be so rigid when it comes to something which has nothing to do with unkindness.

this is giving me the notion I may have to give up my lifelong spiritual beliefs because it doesn't fit into the "rules". But, I would rather think it simply bullshit, like whomever told Tara she could not become enlightened in female form.
I have a similar question. I also imagine if one broke up with their significant other for the fact they were not a Buddhist, or even if they were Buddhist but had not had proper empowerment, that could make them significantly adverse to the Buddhadharma and Vajrayana which would really not be in their long term best interest...

Miroku
Posts: 842
Joined: Fri Jul 24, 2015 11:18 am

Re: Mipham Rinpoche channels Weinstein:

Post by Miroku » Sun Jul 01, 2018 2:08 am

Jangchup Donden wrote:
Sun Jul 01, 2018 2:07 am
TharpaChodron wrote:
Sun Jul 01, 2018 1:49 am
Regarding the samaya of not having sex with non-practitioners:

What are those of us who have relationships with non-practitioners to do, divorce or otherwise leave our partners? We're told that being Buddhist is a matter of karma and thus, we don't proselytize and convert others if they don't have the same karma. Yet, we (okay, I) had the karma to get involved with another who is not cut from the same cloth...

And, if one breaks a branch samaya, what can one do? Usually, the remedy is to vow to never do it again, but what if one is married or falls in love. Not so easy.

I'm okay with not ever engaging in higher yoga practice, if that's what it takes. I just find it slightly off putting that the Dharma, would be so rigid when it comes to something which has nothing to do with unkindness.

this is giving me the notion I may have to give up my lifelong spiritual beliefs because it doesn't fit into the "rules". But, I would rather think it simply bullshit, like whomever told Tara she could not become enlightened in female form.
I have a similar question. I also imagine if one broke up with their significant other for the fact they were not a Buddhist, or even if they were Buddhist but had not had proper empowerment, that could make them significantly adverse to the Buddhadharma and Vajrayana which would really not be in their long term best interest...
The key is to tell them "it is not you it is me" ;). But all joking aside that question is bothering me too.
Child, if you are not hypocritical and out of control, that is conduct.
~ Padampa Sangye

You say such clever things to people, but you do not apply them to yourself.
The faults within you are the ones to be exposed.
~ Padampa Sangye

User avatar
dzogchungpa
Posts: 6333
Joined: Sat May 28, 2011 10:50 pm

Re: Mipham Rinpoche channels Weinstein:

Post by dzogchungpa » Sun Jul 01, 2018 2:22 am

TharpaChodron wrote:
Sun Jul 01, 2018 1:49 am
I would rather think it simply bullshit, like whomever told Tara she could not become enlightened in female form.

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

User avatar
Snowbear
Posts: 288
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2018 10:41 am

Re: Mipham Rinpoche channels Weinstein:

Post by Snowbear » Sun Jul 01, 2018 2:30 am

TharpaChodron wrote:
Sun Jul 01, 2018 1:49 am
Regarding the samaya of not having sex with non-practitioners:
There's no such thing. :lol:

Best not to get Dharma information from the internet.
Last edited by Snowbear on Sun Jul 01, 2018 2:45 am, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
Snowbear
Posts: 288
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2018 10:41 am

Re: Mipham Rinpoche channels Weinstein:

Post by Snowbear » Sun Jul 01, 2018 2:31 am

Jangchup Donden wrote:
Sun Jul 01, 2018 2:05 am
Snowbear wrote:
Sun Jul 01, 2018 1:33 am
Jangchup Donden wrote:
Sun Jul 01, 2018 1:17 am
Would an enlightened guru ever have mundane sex?
First of all, why not? Second of all, what is an "enlightened guru" in your eyes?
Someone whose at least on the path of seeing, i.e., the first Bodhisattva level. But ideally, a Buddha. I think Patrul Rinpoche is pretty clear on what standards we should hold our guru to, and what they should ideally be -- an actual Vidyadhara.
I'm more interested in a definition in your own words. To me, teachers/gurus are normal human beings.

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 28491
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Mipham Rinpoche channels Weinstein:

Post by Malcolm » Sun Jul 01, 2018 2:44 am

TharpaChodron wrote:
Sun Jul 01, 2018 1:49 am
Regarding the samaya of not having sex with non-practitioners:

What are those of us who have relationships with non-practitioners to do, divorce or otherwise leave our partners? We're told that being Buddhist is a matter of karma and thus, we don't proselytize and convert others if they don't have the same karma. Yet, we (okay, I) had the karma to get involved with another who is not cut from the same cloth...

And, if one breaks a branch samaya, what can one do? Usually, the remedy is to vow to never do it again, but what if one is married or falls in love. Not so easy.

I'm okay with not ever engaging in higher yoga practice, if that's what it takes. I just find it slightly off putting that the Dharma, would be so rigid when it comes to something which has nothing to do with unkindness.

this is giving me the notion I may have to give up my lifelong spiritual beliefs because it doesn't fit into the "rules". But, I would rather think it simply bullshit, like whomever told Tara she could not become enlightened in female form.

This what vajrasattva is for. No one expects you to abandon your spouse. It is s branch downfall, not a root downfall. In any case, samaya is easily purified, unlike lower yana vows. However, Buddhadharma is probably the least sentimental path there is.
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
Snowbear
Posts: 288
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2018 10:41 am

Re: Mipham Rinpoche channels Weinstein:

Post by Snowbear » Sun Jul 01, 2018 2:49 am

Malcolm wrote:
Sun Jul 01, 2018 2:44 am
TharpaChodron wrote:
Sun Jul 01, 2018 1:49 am
Regarding the samaya of not having sex with non-practitioners:

What are those of us who have relationships with non-practitioners to do, divorce or otherwise leave our partners? We're told that being Buddhist is a matter of karma and thus, we don't proselytize and convert others if they don't have the same karma. Yet, we (okay, I) had the karma to get involved with another who is not cut from the same cloth...

And, if one breaks a branch samaya, what can one do? Usually, the remedy is to vow to never do it again, but what if one is married or falls in love. Not so easy.

I'm okay with not ever engaging in higher yoga practice, if that's what it takes. I just find it slightly off putting that the Dharma, would be so rigid when it comes to something which has nothing to do with unkindness.

this is giving me the notion I may have to give up my lifelong spiritual beliefs because it doesn't fit into the "rules". But, I would rather think it simply bullshit, like whomever told Tara she could not become enlightened in female form.

This what vajrasattva is for. No one expects you to abandon your spouse. It is s branch downfall, not a root downfall. In any case, samaya is easily purified, unlike lower yana vows. However, Buddhadharma is probably the least sentimental path there is.
Vajrasattva for marrying a non-Buddhist? Come on, man.

User avatar
Jangchup Donden
Posts: 266
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2010 5:44 am

Re: Mipham Rinpoche channels Weinstein:

Post by Jangchup Donden » Sun Jul 01, 2018 3:20 am

Snowbear wrote:
Sun Jul 01, 2018 2:31 am
Jangchup Donden wrote:
Sun Jul 01, 2018 2:05 am
Snowbear wrote:
Sun Jul 01, 2018 1:33 am


First of all, why not? Second of all, what is an "enlightened guru" in your eyes?
Someone whose at least on the path of seeing, i.e., the first Bodhisattva level. But ideally, a Buddha. I think Patrul Rinpoche is pretty clear on what standards we should hold our guru to, and what they should ideally be -- an actual Vidyadhara.
I'm more interested in a definition in your own words. To me, teachers/gurus are normal human beings.
'
So you're saying there's no enlightenment to be had? No qualities of realization? Or that there isn't any more (hooray kali yuga)?

User avatar
javier.espinoza.t
Posts: 921
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2017 12:29 am
Location: Chile

Re: Mipham Rinpoche channels Weinstein:

Post by javier.espinoza.t » Sun Jul 01, 2018 3:24 am

Snowbear wrote:
Sun Jul 01, 2018 2:49 am
Malcolm wrote:
Sun Jul 01, 2018 2:44 am
TharpaChodron wrote:
Sun Jul 01, 2018 1:49 am
Regarding the samaya of not having sex with non-practitioners:

What are those of us who have relationships with non-practitioners to do, divorce or otherwise leave our partners? We're told that being Buddhist is a matter of karma and thus, we don't proselytize and convert others if they don't have the same karma. Yet, we (okay, I) had the karma to get involved with another who is not cut from the same cloth...

And, if one breaks a branch samaya, what can one do? Usually, the remedy is to vow to never do it again, but what if one is married or falls in love. Not so easy.

I'm okay with not ever engaging in higher yoga practice, if that's what it takes. I just find it slightly off putting that the Dharma, would be so rigid when it comes to something which has nothing to do with unkindness.

this is giving me the notion I may have to give up my lifelong spiritual beliefs because it doesn't fit into the "rules". But, I would rather think it simply bullshit, like whomever told Tara she could not become enlightened in female form.

This what vajrasattva is for. No one expects you to abandon your spouse. It is s branch downfall, not a root downfall. In any case, samaya is easily purified, unlike lower yana vows. However, Buddhadharma is probably the least sentimental path there is.
Vajrasattva for marrying a non-Buddhist? Come on, man.
i understand Vajrasattva because one stains own's Samaya. Can't see the problem.
what are you doing

User avatar
Snowbear
Posts: 288
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2018 10:41 am

Re: Mipham Rinpoche channels Weinstein:

Post by Snowbear » Sun Jul 01, 2018 3:30 am

javier.espinoza.t wrote:
Sun Jul 01, 2018 3:24 am
Snowbear wrote:
Sun Jul 01, 2018 2:49 am
Malcolm wrote:
Sun Jul 01, 2018 2:44 am



This what vajrasattva is for. No one expects you to abandon your spouse. It is s branch downfall, not a root downfall. In any case, samaya is easily purified, unlike lower yana vows. However, Buddhadharma is probably the least sentimental path there is.
Vajrasattva for marrying a non-Buddhist? Come on, man.
i understand Vajrasattva because one stains own's Samaya. Can't see the problem.
Staining it with those unclean non-Buddhist "heretics?" :lol:

That's just not true.

User avatar
javier.espinoza.t
Posts: 921
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2017 12:29 am
Location: Chile

Re: Mipham Rinpoche channels Weinstein:

Post by javier.espinoza.t » Sun Jul 01, 2018 3:37 am

Snowbear wrote:
Sun Jul 01, 2018 3:30 am
javier.espinoza.t wrote:
Sun Jul 01, 2018 3:24 am
Snowbear wrote:
Sun Jul 01, 2018 2:49 am


Vajrasattva for marrying a non-Buddhist? Come on, man.
i understand Vajrasattva because one stains own's Samaya. Can't see the problem.
Staining it with those unclean non-Buddhist "heretics?" :lol:

That's just not true.
not really, non-Buddhist are not "heretics", here is no "enemy" but our stuborness.
i meant staining it by not keeping one's commitments, if one can't hold it then one is stained, tainted. if one took that commitment, obviously.
what are you doing

Locked

Return to “Tibetan Buddhism”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Kim O'Hara, lelopa, namoh and 74 guests