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

Re: Mipham Rinpoche channels Weinstein:

Post by Snowbear » Sun Jul 01, 2018 3:38 am

javier.espinoza.t wrote:
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


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 your commitments, if one can't hold it then one is stained, tainted. if one took that commitment, obviously.
Ah, gotcha. I agree. I was still in the "no sex with non-practitioners" conversation.

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 3:40 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.
Thanks for the clarification. Being sentimental is unavoidable for most humans, so we do our best. But being sentimental isn't a bad thing and I am not sure Buddhism isn't.
Last edited by TharpaChodron on Sun Jul 01, 2018 3:42 am, edited 1 time 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 3:40 am

Jangchup Donden wrote:
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


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)?
You think enlightenment erases a person's humanness? I don't.

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 28488
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Mipham Rinpoche channels Weinstein:

Post by Malcolm » Sun Jul 01, 2018 3:44 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.
Did I say that? No.
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
Malcolm
Posts: 28488
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Mipham Rinpoche channels Weinstein:

Post by Malcolm » Sun Jul 01, 2018 3:45 am

Snowbear wrote:
Sun Jul 01, 2018 3:40 am
Jangchup Donden wrote:
Sun Jul 01, 2018 3:20 am
Snowbear wrote:
Sun Jul 01, 2018 2:31 am


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)?
You think enlightenment erases a person's humanness? I don't.
Yes, completely, if by human one means being in an afflicted state.
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
Malcolm
Posts: 28488
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Mipham Rinpoche channels Weinstein:

Post by Malcolm » Sun Jul 01, 2018 3:49 am

TharpaChodron wrote:
Sun Jul 01, 2018 3:40 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.
Thanks for the clarification. Being sentimental is unavoidable for most humans, so we do our best. But being sentimental isn't a bad thing and I am not sure Buddhism isn't.
The minute one thinks Buddhism is sentimental, review karma and its results. Being sentimental is not necessarily bad, it is largely absent in Buddhism
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 4:20 am

Malcolm wrote:
Sun Jul 01, 2018 3:45 am
Snowbear wrote:
Sun Jul 01, 2018 3:40 am
Jangchup Donden wrote:
Sun Jul 01, 2018 3:20 am

'
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)?
You think enlightenment erases a person's humanness? I don't.
Yes, completely, if by human one means being in an afflicted state.
Do you think there is any person alive today that does not have sexual feelings? Other than, of course, abnormal clinical cases.

User avatar
Virgo
Global Moderator
Posts: 3478
Joined: Sat Feb 06, 2010 3:47 am
Location: Uni-verse

Re: Mipham Rinpoche channels Weinstein:

Post by Virgo » Sun Jul 01, 2018 4:35 am

Snowbear wrote:
Sun Jul 01, 2018 2:49 am


Vajrasattva for marrying a non-Buddhist? Come on, man.
No, you are wrong. Not non-Buddhists, but the uninitiated.

Kevin...

amanitamusc
Posts: 1363
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2010 3:32 am

Re: Mipham Rinpoche channels Weinstein:

Post by amanitamusc » Sun Jul 01, 2018 6:58 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.
In that case you will attain the level of a normal human being.

Simon E.
Posts: 5636
Joined: Tue May 15, 2012 11:09 am

Re: Mipham Rinpoche channels Weinstein:

Post by Simon E. » Sun Jul 01, 2018 8:08 am

amanitamusc wrote:
Sun Jul 01, 2018 6:58 am
Snowbear wrote:
Sun Jul 01, 2018 2:31 am
Jangchup Donden wrote:
Sun Jul 01, 2018 2:05 am


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.
In that case you will attain the level of a normal human being.
Which for much of humankind would be a promotion. For all kinds of psychological, biological and economic reasons.
To quote CTR (yet again) "Before embarking on Dharma it's necessary to be a functioning human being, that's the entry level requirement".
Last edited by Simon E. on Sun Jul 01, 2018 8:09 am, edited 1 time in total.
Back to fishin' folks... :namaste:

User avatar
Grigoris
Global Moderator
Posts: 17967
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 9:27 pm
Location: Greece

Re: Mipham Rinpoche channels Weinstein:

Post by Grigoris » Sun Jul 01, 2018 8:09 am

Jangchup Donden wrote:
Sun Jul 01, 2018 1:17 am
Would an enlightened guru ever have mundane sex?
Is your teacher enlightened? How many teachers do you know that are enlightened?
"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

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

Re: Mipham Rinpoche channels Weinstein:

Post by smcj » Sun Jul 01, 2018 9:54 am

Malcolm wrote:
Sun Jul 01, 2018 3:45 am
Snowbear wrote:
Sun Jul 01, 2018 3:40 am

You think enlightenment erases a person's humanness? I don't.
Yes, completely, if by human one means being in an afflicted state.
:good:

A fully realized Vajra Master is no longer a normal person, although he can pass as one. He is no longer a sentient being. He is an enlightened being. You’d have to expand your understanding of what “human” means to still include him in that category. He’s not like you and me. It’s not as if his humanness has been erased. It has been uncovered. What you and I think of “humanness” is the covering. You could say he is truly human and that we all are living as perversely human. He is in the natural state. We are in the unnatural state.

They are rare, but they do exist. If you meet one all the teachings on guru yoga start to make sense. But meeting even a somewhat realized being, one who is a mix of sentience and enlightenment, can give you enough of an experience so that you can have your mind opened enough to have your horizons broadened. That’s enough.
I support Mingyur R and HHDL in their positions against Lama abuse.

Gatinho
Posts: 61
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2018 8:32 pm

Re: Mipham Rinpoche channels Weinstein:

Post by Gatinho » Sun Jul 01, 2018 11:25 am

Just as a point of clarification (I hope!) looking at Sakya Panditas Vajrayani Mula Pati (Dorje Thegpa Tsa-wa'i Tungwa) the First Branch Downfall is:

'If one takes on the path a consort who has not had the initiation, by relying on her as a mental object, one commits the first branch downfall.'

What this means is that if you are practicing completion stage Anuttarayoga such as the 'path of messengers' you cannot do this with the physical consort who has not received empowerments or with the mental image of them as the yidam. Since for this practice you are relying on the consort it must be an appropriate one.

So the mistake would be to confuse ordinary sexual relations with yoga involving a consort.

Thus it is perfectly normal and pleasant to fall in love with a non-initiate, have a sexual relationship, feel the earth move, settle down, have children and argue over breakfast and so on but do not confuse this samsaric experience with the liberating effect of yoga tantra. That would be the branch downfall.

This is how I read it.

This is quite a different issue to the precept on 'sexual misconduct' - which by the way is the most poorly defined of the five lay precepts. And it is also a different issue to sex as an antinomial/trangressive act in tantra generally.

amanitamusc
Posts: 1363
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2010 3:32 am

Re: Mipham Rinpoche channels Weinstein:

Post by amanitamusc » Sun Jul 01, 2018 12:59 pm

Simon E. wrote:
Sun Jul 01, 2018 8:08 am
amanitamusc wrote:
Sun Jul 01, 2018 6:58 am
Snowbear wrote:
Sun Jul 01, 2018 2:31 am


I'm more interested in a definition in your own words. To me, teachers/gurus are normal human beings.
In that case you will attain the level of a normal human being.
Which for much of humankind would be a promotion. For all kinds of psychological, biological and economic reasons.
To quote CTR (yet again) "Before embarking on Dharma it's necessary to be a functioning human being, that's the entry level requirement".
For some seeing the root Lama as " entry level requirement" is fine for them.I choose
to see my Lama's as Buddha's.

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 28488
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Mipham Rinpoche channels Weinstein:

Post by Malcolm » Sun Jul 01, 2018 1:48 pm

Snowbear wrote:
Sun Jul 01, 2018 4:20 am
Malcolm wrote:
Sun Jul 01, 2018 3:45 am
Snowbear wrote:
Sun Jul 01, 2018 3:40 am


You think enlightenment erases a person's humanness? I don't.
Yes, completely, if by human one means being in an afflicted state.
Do you think there is any person alive today that does not have sexual feelings? Other than, of course, abnormal clinical cases.
Sexual urges are not necessarily afflictive, anymore more than the urge to eat. One however need not act on sexual urges at all, or overindulge them in the case of lay people. Indeed, for practitioners, it is better to avoid having children, no matter what level of the Dharma one practices.

It is pretty clear that in Tibetan Buddhism there are any number of male teachers who are more than willing to exploit naive and unqualified female students.
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
Karma Dorje
Posts: 1354
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2011 10:35 pm

Re: Mipham Rinpoche channels Weinstein:

Post by Karma Dorje » Sun Jul 01, 2018 1:50 pm

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?
If the sex is mundane, ur doing it wrong.
"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

pael
Posts: 542
Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2013 12:49 pm

Re: Mipham Rinpoche channels Weinstein:

Post by pael » Sun Jul 01, 2018 1:53 pm

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.
How to remember all committed downfalls? I am sure I commit all root downfalls billions of times every day.
May all beings be free from suffering and causes of suffering

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 28488
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Mipham Rinpoche channels Weinstein:

Post by Malcolm » Sun Jul 01, 2018 2:00 pm

Gatinho wrote:
Sun Jul 01, 2018 11:25 am
Just as a point of clarification (I hope!) looking at Sakya Panditas Vajrayani Mula Pati (Dorje Thegpa Tsa-wa'i Tungwa) the First Branch Downfall is:

'If one takes on the path a consort who has not had the initiation, by relying on her as a mental object, one commits the first branch downfall.'

What this means is that if you are practicing completion stage Anuttarayoga such as the 'path of messengers' you cannot do this with the physical consort who has not received empowerments or with the mental image of them as the yidam. Since for this practice you are relying on the consort it must be an appropriate one.
It is tempting to read it this way. But is not the case. If someone is engaged in HYT practice, it is not like they are allowed to put down their practice to engage in a bit of mundane sport, and then pick up their practice after having smoked a cigarette.
So the mistake would be to confuse ordinary sexual relations with yoga involving a consort.
Someone practicing inner tantra should never be involved in ordinary sexual relations. It is a downfall, easily repaired, but a downfall nevertheless. Since most people practice mother tantra, one should consult the 8 special samayas related to mother tantra.
Thus it is perfectly normal and pleasant to fall in love with a non-initiate, have a sexual relationship, feel the earth move, settle down, have children and argue over breakfast and so on but do not confuse this samsaric experience with the liberating effect of yoga tantra. That would be the branch downfall.

This is how I read it.
You are entitled to your reading, but there is sufficient commentarial evidence contra this interpretation.

This is quite a different issue to the precept on 'sexual misconduct' - which by the way is the most poorly defined of the five lay precepts. And it is also a different issue to sex as an antinomial/trangressive act in tantra generally.

If one is referring to the practice of taking low caste consorts like ḍombinis, and so on; this is part of vratacārya, brtul zhugs spyod pa. We do not have a cultural context for this in the West, any longer. Though of course the outrage in some quarters at Henry marrying Meghan Merkel approaches it.
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
Grigoris
Global Moderator
Posts: 17967
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 9:27 pm
Location: Greece

Re: Mipham Rinpoche channels Weinstein:

Post by Grigoris » Sun Jul 01, 2018 3:06 pm

Malcolm wrote:
Sun Jul 01, 2018 2:00 pm
Someone practicing inner tantra should never be involved in ordinary sexual relations. It is a downfall, easily repaired, but a downfall nevertheless. Since most people practice mother tantra, one should consult the 8 special samayas related to mother tantra.
According to this I either get divorced, or prepare for a stint in Vajra Hell.
If one is referring to the practice of taking low caste consorts like ḍombinis, and so on; this is part of vratacārya, brtul zhugs spyod pa. We do not have a cultural context for this in the West, any longer. Though of course the outrage in some quarters at Henry marrying Meghan Merkel approaches it.
Maybe in your part of the world, but you could try marrying a gyspsy/Roma girl here in Greece and see how that goes down.
"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

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 3:15 pm

I can't remember his name right now, but isn't (or wasn't) there a well respected lama living in England who was married to a Christian woman? I believe it was mentioned on this forum.
There is not only nothingness because there is always, and always can manifest. - Thinley Norbu Rinpoche

Locked

Return to “Tibetan Buddhism”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 65 guests