Tuesday, 1 May 2012
How you can help us!
You can help us by creating links to this website and spreading the word. Also the more comments on articles the better!
If you wish to write articles I can publish them also. I am quite flexible on editing my own articles if you have any comments in this regard.
To submit an article anonymously however is more difficult. My suggestion is to create an anonymous email address at google or yahoo and then email the article to myself at anonymous_wone@yahoo.co.uk.
Another option is to use this website http://justpaste.it/ and just post the link to me in comments.
Wednesday, 27 July 2011
Focus on meaning of Dharma
Western teachers can talk about many different subjects. Comedy stories, Geshe Kelsang, up and coming festivals, ebooks, cds, temples, future courses, voluntary work, fundraising. They can spend a large amount of time advertising. This would be an example of future degeneration. Laziness is defined as a dodging of meaningful activity. As trainees in virtue it would be very easy for this to filter into every area of our organisation. We stop studying, teaching in detail and make it more basic for example. It is far easier to spend an hour talking about how much you like Geshela and applying the teaching on love than it is to explain the details of what Buddha conveyed to this world.
Geshe Kelsang always conveyed the details of Buddhas message, without watering it down and omitting parts. He gave a full and complete path with many scriptural examples to show it was Buddhas instruction and not his own ideas.Even when he retired he spend 100 minutes explaining Dharma then 2 minutes giving his goodbye speech. After 30 years of teaching us he chose giving us Dharma as more important than saying goodbye to us. If then is not a time when other topics are of importance on the throne we have to ask ourselves, when IS it more important to say an administrative or social topic on the throne IF EVER?
Did Geshe Kelsang ever advertise books or courses during his discourses? How much of his discourses did he devote to praising people or revering his root guru? How much time did he discuss his own social life or daily routine?
Geshe Kelsang always conveyed the details of Buddhas message, without watering it down and omitting parts. He gave a full and complete path with many scriptural examples to show it was Buddhas instruction and not his own ideas.Even when he retired he spend 100 minutes explaining Dharma then 2 minutes giving his goodbye speech. After 30 years of teaching us he chose giving us Dharma as more important than saying goodbye to us. If then is not a time when other topics are of importance on the throne we have to ask ourselves, when IS it more important to say an administrative or social topic on the throne IF EVER?
Did Geshe Kelsang ever advertise books or courses during his discourses? How much of his discourses did he devote to praising people or revering his root guru? How much time did he discuss his own social life or daily routine?
Equality love
When some teachers teach they look at their favourite listeners and ignore the rest. Sometimes the teaching becomes what their preferred students need. At festivals for example the teaching is sometimes more catering for people who have been attending for many years.
At other teachings the teaching can be given as a beginners teaching because there are one or two new people. And since there are always one or two new people topics become habitually omitted until they are removed from the course altogether and become only spoken of in teachings that are not drop in/open to the public (such as foundation programme).
Geshe Kelsang never compromised the teaching in this way. He nver omitted topics. He gave teachings in such a way that all levels of listener could learn about and enjoy BUDDHISM. He was not afraid to teach BUDDHAS WORDS. He believed that people would like Buddhism and that they would appreciate it and use it and if they want a filtered version they could filter it themselves.
He believed in and valued everyone without having people he preferred, or favourites. When he went to greet a group he would greet everyone equally, not moving towards familiar faces and blanking strangers. In this way he put thought into his teachings and how to fulfil everyones wishes who attended.
At other teachings the teaching can be given as a beginners teaching because there are one or two new people. And since there are always one or two new people topics become habitually omitted until they are removed from the course altogether and become only spoken of in teachings that are not drop in/open to the public (such as foundation programme).
Geshe Kelsang never compromised the teaching in this way. He nver omitted topics. He gave teachings in such a way that all levels of listener could learn about and enjoy BUDDHISM. He was not afraid to teach BUDDHAS WORDS. He believed that people would like Buddhism and that they would appreciate it and use it and if they want a filtered version they could filter it themselves.
He believed in and valued everyone without having people he preferred, or favourites. When he went to greet a group he would greet everyone equally, not moving towards familiar faces and blanking strangers. In this way he put thought into his teachings and how to fulfil everyones wishes who attended.
Humble love
When Western teachers give discourses they often appear very different to how Geshe Kelsang did. They have an aloofness, sometimes with a mocking sarcasm. They say I know this and I know that. They can appear very holy or in a deep trance, rolling their eyes in ecstacy.
Geshe Kelsang never did any of this. If anything he appeared very bashful, like a servant and occassionally a cheeky but shy boy. He was simply passing on a message that he saw as incredibly important without omitting or adding anything, and especially not wanting any credit for it. When he gave his final teaching and retired he spent the whole discourse discussing pure holy Dharma and it was only in the last two minutes he said goodbye, He was more interested in conveying the Dharma topic. When he waved and said goodbye he was very shy. He didnt want any special ceremony or ritual of appreciation.
We have to ask ourselves as westerners if we convey the same, or do we have large parties and recieve lots of gifts
Geshe Kelsang never did any of this. If anything he appeared very bashful, like a servant and occassionally a cheeky but shy boy. He was simply passing on a message that he saw as incredibly important without omitting or adding anything, and especially not wanting any credit for it. When he gave his final teaching and retired he spent the whole discourse discussing pure holy Dharma and it was only in the last two minutes he said goodbye, He was more interested in conveying the Dharma topic. When he waved and said goodbye he was very shy. He didnt want any special ceremony or ritual of appreciation.
We have to ask ourselves as westerners if we convey the same, or do we have large parties and recieve lots of gifts
Unrestricting love
Western teachers often make a mistake of being graspy or clingy when teaching when giving pointing out instructions or advice. They will say we MUST do this or that. Many years ago a famous teacher would say when you first wake up you should think this as your 1st thought. After a while he had said so many things we must think when we wake up! Some Dharma teachers get so excited they start to sound fanatical or domineering.
Geshe Kelsang never did this because he was demonstrating respecting others and allowing them freedom to be themselves. This is part of love. Many times he would say its up to you if you want to do. You have freedom. You have choice. And he would not make the practice restrictive. He would make it flexible. He was also one to rebel against rules - removing restrictions. When it was raining and we were all camping he would say "someone could stay in my room", during the discourse. He was flexible not rigid. He was not trying to chain people or control them so its important we represent his energy to future generations by demonstrating this form of love.
Geshe Kelsang never did this because he was demonstrating respecting others and allowing them freedom to be themselves. This is part of love. Many times he would say its up to you if you want to do. You have freedom. You have choice. And he would not make the practice restrictive. He would make it flexible. He was also one to rebel against rules - removing restrictions. When it was raining and we were all camping he would say "someone could stay in my room", during the discourse. He was flexible not rigid. He was not trying to chain people or control them so its important we represent his energy to future generations by demonstrating this form of love.
Faith in Others
Geshe Kelsang always did something completely different that perplexed me for many years until I realised his nature.
When Western teachers taught they would always say we are rubbish, we are deluded, we are failures, we are bad Buddhists. After such discourses I would come out discouraged and deflated or fired up to change.
But I was highly aware that Geshe Kelsang never did this in his discourses. When I came out of Geshe Kelsangs teachings I always felt confident and encouraged in my practice. I felt positive about myself and my activities and keen to develop them.
It is because part of his love is to believe in people with no thought of underestimating, undermining abilities but believing in ability and being very positive about it and about the future. This powerful positive energy and the fact he believed in the people he was talking to was a blessing and part of the teaching. He was demonstrating that Dharma makes you feel good and people would have incredible positive minds coming instead of self chastising and self effacing.
I also found it damaging to my faith if a senior teacher was looking at all the monks and nuns and telling them they were not practicing Buddhism when I was trying to see them as Sangha Jewels. Geshe Kelsang taught correctly and we should follow his example.
When Western teachers taught they would always say we are rubbish, we are deluded, we are failures, we are bad Buddhists. After such discourses I would come out discouraged and deflated or fired up to change.
But I was highly aware that Geshe Kelsang never did this in his discourses. When I came out of Geshe Kelsangs teachings I always felt confident and encouraged in my practice. I felt positive about myself and my activities and keen to develop them.
It is because part of his love is to believe in people with no thought of underestimating, undermining abilities but believing in ability and being very positive about it and about the future. This powerful positive energy and the fact he believed in the people he was talking to was a blessing and part of the teaching. He was demonstrating that Dharma makes you feel good and people would have incredible positive minds coming instead of self chastising and self effacing.
I also found it damaging to my faith if a senior teacher was looking at all the monks and nuns and telling them they were not practicing Buddhism when I was trying to see them as Sangha Jewels. Geshe Kelsang taught correctly and we should follow his example.
Unassuming Love
Many Western teachers are assuming things or not realising things when they are teaching. Geshe Kelsang took everyone from the start of the path to the final stages of the path. He always began at the start, our basic wish for happiness and took us to Enlightenment. In this way everyone was included and able to make progress. The beginner was taken from the beginning and the senior students strengthened their beginning and middle and tried to get to the end!
As Western teachers we are not doing this. We make the following mistakes
General Program including festivals and courses:
1) We use words people dont understand ASSUMING they understand them - Dharma Sangha Geshela 3 jewels delusions etc
2) We ask people to do prayers ASSUMING they know the words and not giving prayer sheets to read from
3) We say terms such as GP FP TTP KMC KMB and most people are simply baffled
4) We do not explain the entire path because we assume people will not like Buddhism
Festivals:
1)It is assumed that long tireades of praise of the spiritual director or founder will help many people - But to the people who do not know the person being praised it makes no sense. We need to ask ourself. Did Geshe Kelsang mainly focus on praising people or did he focus on the holy Dharma. How big a portion of the teaching did he dedicate to his root Guru or the lineage Gurus? If we fill a quarter of the discourse with this is it beneficial?
2) Lack of definitions- I have just returned from a festival review where half the discourse was praising Dharma using many analogies followed by a plug for the book Modern Buddhism. The teaching was simply the benefits of Modern Buddhism and encouragement to read it. As well as an encouragement to devote oneself to Geshe Kelsang. There was no explanation of Geshe Kelsangs qualities either simply that he is incredible and magical. Geshe Kelsang NEVER taught like this. This could be the discourse of the future if teachings degenerate. No explanation of what Dharma is. No giving of Dharma but simply a motivational speech with no explanation of WHY we need Dharma just a proclaimation that we do and that it is amazing. If we do not reveal what the Dharma is at a festival because we assume everyone knows it already it is a big mistake. Because even senior people need to be told what the Dharma is, who is Buddha, what is Sangha, what are delusions etc. If we do not give a detailed explanation when the clearest teaching of the year is traditionally given, when will clear teachings ever be given??
As Western teachers we are not doing this. We make the following mistakes
General Program including festivals and courses:
1) We use words people dont understand ASSUMING they understand them - Dharma Sangha Geshela 3 jewels delusions etc
2) We ask people to do prayers ASSUMING they know the words and not giving prayer sheets to read from
3) We say terms such as GP FP TTP KMC KMB and most people are simply baffled
4) We do not explain the entire path because we assume people will not like Buddhism
Festivals:
1)It is assumed that long tireades of praise of the spiritual director or founder will help many people - But to the people who do not know the person being praised it makes no sense. We need to ask ourself. Did Geshe Kelsang mainly focus on praising people or did he focus on the holy Dharma. How big a portion of the teaching did he dedicate to his root Guru or the lineage Gurus? If we fill a quarter of the discourse with this is it beneficial?
2) Lack of definitions- I have just returned from a festival review where half the discourse was praising Dharma using many analogies followed by a plug for the book Modern Buddhism. The teaching was simply the benefits of Modern Buddhism and encouragement to read it. As well as an encouragement to devote oneself to Geshe Kelsang. There was no explanation of Geshe Kelsangs qualities either simply that he is incredible and magical. Geshe Kelsang NEVER taught like this. This could be the discourse of the future if teachings degenerate. No explanation of what Dharma is. No giving of Dharma but simply a motivational speech with no explanation of WHY we need Dharma just a proclaimation that we do and that it is amazing. If we do not reveal what the Dharma is at a festival because we assume everyone knows it already it is a big mistake. Because even senior people need to be told what the Dharma is, who is Buddha, what is Sangha, what are delusions etc. If we do not give a detailed explanation when the clearest teaching of the year is traditionally given, when will clear teachings ever be given??
Unconditional Love
When Geshe Kelsang taught, all those in the room felt loved. This was because he was looking around the room in a genuine way wanting to see the people not blotting them out. When he saw the people his eyes sparkled he was so delighted. And you could hear the enthusiasm in his voice.
If we are not looking at the people and engaging with them they will not engage with us as well. How can we see a spiritual teacher as a supreme spiritual friend if they act like a stranger and there is no warmth?
There was also no sense that you have to convert to Buddhism or that you are being blotted out because you dont need love or you have not been doing pleasing things. All were loved without exception.
If we are not looking at the people and engaging with them they will not engage with us as well. How can we see a spiritual teacher as a supreme spiritual friend if they act like a stranger and there is no warmth?
There was also no sense that you have to convert to Buddhism or that you are being blotted out because you dont need love or you have not been doing pleasing things. All were loved without exception.
Preventing Degeneration of Holy Dharma
The degeneration of Buddhas teachings is inevitable. Buddha Maitreya will come because the Dharma has dissappeared. Our job is to make sure it does not degenerate on our watch!
We need to understand what is pure and what is degeneration. What are the signs of degeneration and do we keep silent when it is happening? The truth is that there will always be manifestations of wrathful behaviour whenever there is any trace of degeneration. The real question is, when we encounter people who are wrathful, shocking, challenging us, do we see them as emanations or a force of evil?
In the 1980s in this tradition, it was seen as normal to challenge each other in this way, and the teacher would often mock (and by doing so) warn clearly of the signs and dangers of degenerating the tradition. Using elaborate and comical theoretical scenarios and often posing themselves as the 'clown' who behaves in this degenerate manner. One example was mocking how we might use our status as a 'buddhist' to impress people, make friends, gain status and maybe even make money.
Now there is silence and no criticism is allowed. It is as if the 10 youthful wrathful attendants and many of Shugdens retinue have been gagged. When we do Kangso (extensive Shudgen prayers) we transform local guardians, ghosts, spirits - all those we fear and see as enemies or challengers - into Dharma Protectors who are emanations of Shugden. There is a reason for this! These beings CAN FUNCTION to protect and enhance the tradition. It all depends how we see them. If someone comes along like a crazy Drukpa Kunleg with a donkey saying can he join your monastery as he has a good voice and all you care about is music, we should be like those monks he spoke to. Thanking the crazy person for teaching then telling the story saying he is emanation of Shugden. Not he is an evil man. Of course you send them away, we cant have Buddhist centres filled with wildness and wierdness. But to say they are evil beings is totally wrong. To have a sadness that we are surrounded by enemies. Who decided they were enemies? We did! And so the protection for the tradition is reducing because we reject the teachings and warnings instead of being blessed and inspired by them.
To protect the teaching in the Gompa itself from degenerating is what will protect the rest. Any problem can be solved via a teacher. Therefore below I am going to post a summary on pure teachings based on the differences between Geshe Kelsangs style and western teachers style. Of course all comment is welcome and if my article is wrong and comments are made I will edit it. Its important to be accurate and correct
Geshe Kelsang teachings are always demonstrating the following Dharmas:
Unconditional love
Unassuming love
Faith in others
Unrestricting love
uncontrolling love
Unlecturing love
Unarrogant love
Humble love
Thoughful love
Intuitive love
Considerate love
Careful love
Unforcing love
Gentle love
Respectful love
Equality love
No favourites love
Focus on meaning of Dharma
Focus on future lives
We need to be aware that students copy their teacher and so we are creating a tradition of how western people teach. As Geshe Kelsangs teaching style becomes a memory and unseen by the next generation, these lineages could be lost as well as these demonstrations of love. Also the instructions given can change meaning if not taught with love. For example without seeing all in front as equal and precious we might give a teaching only for new people or only for experienced people. It is quite easy to reform a teaching so all people benefit from it and its powerful for all as indeed Geshe Kelsang did achieve every time he taught without exception.
Summary
-----------
I sincerely believe the ITTP (Teacher Training Programme) would benefit greatly from having videos of Geshe Kelsangs teaching style studied and discussed as part of the curriculum. Perhaps after 2 students give a talk on a topic, play a video where Geshela teaches that very topic, and then discuss the differences.
We need to understand what is pure and what is degeneration. What are the signs of degeneration and do we keep silent when it is happening? The truth is that there will always be manifestations of wrathful behaviour whenever there is any trace of degeneration. The real question is, when we encounter people who are wrathful, shocking, challenging us, do we see them as emanations or a force of evil?
In the 1980s in this tradition, it was seen as normal to challenge each other in this way, and the teacher would often mock (and by doing so) warn clearly of the signs and dangers of degenerating the tradition. Using elaborate and comical theoretical scenarios and often posing themselves as the 'clown' who behaves in this degenerate manner. One example was mocking how we might use our status as a 'buddhist' to impress people, make friends, gain status and maybe even make money.
Now there is silence and no criticism is allowed. It is as if the 10 youthful wrathful attendants and many of Shugdens retinue have been gagged. When we do Kangso (extensive Shudgen prayers) we transform local guardians, ghosts, spirits - all those we fear and see as enemies or challengers - into Dharma Protectors who are emanations of Shugden. There is a reason for this! These beings CAN FUNCTION to protect and enhance the tradition. It all depends how we see them. If someone comes along like a crazy Drukpa Kunleg with a donkey saying can he join your monastery as he has a good voice and all you care about is music, we should be like those monks he spoke to. Thanking the crazy person for teaching then telling the story saying he is emanation of Shugden. Not he is an evil man. Of course you send them away, we cant have Buddhist centres filled with wildness and wierdness. But to say they are evil beings is totally wrong. To have a sadness that we are surrounded by enemies. Who decided they were enemies? We did! And so the protection for the tradition is reducing because we reject the teachings and warnings instead of being blessed and inspired by them.
To protect the teaching in the Gompa itself from degenerating is what will protect the rest. Any problem can be solved via a teacher. Therefore below I am going to post a summary on pure teachings based on the differences between Geshe Kelsangs style and western teachers style. Of course all comment is welcome and if my article is wrong and comments are made I will edit it. Its important to be accurate and correct
Geshe Kelsang teachings are always demonstrating the following Dharmas:
Unconditional love
Unassuming love
Faith in others
Unrestricting love
uncontrolling love
Unlecturing love
Unarrogant love
Humble love
Thoughful love
Intuitive love
Considerate love
Careful love
Unforcing love
Gentle love
Respectful love
Equality love
No favourites love
Focus on meaning of Dharma
Focus on future lives
We need to be aware that students copy their teacher and so we are creating a tradition of how western people teach. As Geshe Kelsangs teaching style becomes a memory and unseen by the next generation, these lineages could be lost as well as these demonstrations of love. Also the instructions given can change meaning if not taught with love. For example without seeing all in front as equal and precious we might give a teaching only for new people or only for experienced people. It is quite easy to reform a teaching so all people benefit from it and its powerful for all as indeed Geshe Kelsang did achieve every time he taught without exception.
Summary
-----------
I sincerely believe the ITTP (Teacher Training Programme) would benefit greatly from having videos of Geshe Kelsangs teaching style studied and discussed as part of the curriculum. Perhaps after 2 students give a talk on a topic, play a video where Geshela teaches that very topic, and then discuss the differences.
Saturday, 2 October 2010
Worldy peoples view on religion and spirituality
This article concerning peoples dislike of religious and spiritual groups. Peoples viewpoint of religion is important and we need to study it and ask ourselves - does our group come across like this and if so can anything be done?
Normally we do not look at negative comments because we fear we will develop deluded doubts. We only read material that confirms what we believe. When we do read something that contradicts us we quickly conclude it is damaging our faith and stop.
We need to move forward from this weak position. It a position where we cannot listen to others. We have to leave a room when someone disagrees with us with this type of position. If we believe this position is correct, the following reasons disprove it:
1) In Tibet and India all all the great monasteries there was a great deal of open debate. People with many different viewpoints listened to each other and banged heads for hours or days at a time. The purpose of this was to deepen their understanding of reality and experience of logic/reasoning. Buddhists debated Hindus over Ishvara for example. We can see a summary in Meaningful to Behold.
2) Buddha defeated all the Maras. He did not run away from them. When he was under the Bodhi tree they tried every line of reasoning, but Buddha was so strong in logic that noone could destroy his faith. We need to follow this example and deepen our understanding of all topics. If we have true faith in Buddha we will not hold to the view that if we look at reality too closely we will see something that disproves Buddhas teachings and our bubble will be burst.
3) With clairvoyance we will see what everyone is thinking and we will hear everyones voice. If the sound of one voice we have to run away how are we going to strive for Buddhahood? We need to deal with this so the sound of others voices is teaching us Dharma. Every voice is explaining one thing, how samsara functions (the 12 dependant related links) or how nirvana functions. Therefore if we understand this we can see that everything confirms Buddhas teachings and deepens our faith. For example if we are surrounded by immoral people we see their karma and we also see our own superiority complex. Both teach Dharma.
So now we understand this we need to care for our kind mothers and try to look to see what is blocking them from religion so we can help them. We need to consider that they will have many valid points. Not everything people say is invalid. Its self cherishing that places us on the mountain of pride looking down at all other people, telling them to be quiet. Everything we know we have learned from others. Others led us to Buddhism by showing us love, patience, ettiquette, generosity. They gave us the taste for these things that made us seek more detailed instructions. The only reason others words dont sound like Dharma is because of our own spiritual weakness. Buddha hears Dharma teachings from every sound.
So by studying what has put people off religion we can ensure that we do not repeat these patterns. For example pushing people to convert. Therefore I recommend studying the following website.
Yahoo answers - all latest questions on hating religion
Yahoo answers - all the latest questions on problems with religion
Why do people insult religion- ballistics answer is very clearly expressing people views
What is the biggest problem with religion and spirituality?
Why do atheist have such a problem with religion?
Do atheists have a problem with religion in general or just God
Is religion the problem or is it the people in the religion?
What is spiritual abuse?
Why do spiritual people hate the word religion so much?
Normally we do not look at negative comments because we fear we will develop deluded doubts. We only read material that confirms what we believe. When we do read something that contradicts us we quickly conclude it is damaging our faith and stop.
We need to move forward from this weak position. It a position where we cannot listen to others. We have to leave a room when someone disagrees with us with this type of position. If we believe this position is correct, the following reasons disprove it:
1) In Tibet and India all all the great monasteries there was a great deal of open debate. People with many different viewpoints listened to each other and banged heads for hours or days at a time. The purpose of this was to deepen their understanding of reality and experience of logic/reasoning. Buddhists debated Hindus over Ishvara for example. We can see a summary in Meaningful to Behold.
2) Buddha defeated all the Maras. He did not run away from them. When he was under the Bodhi tree they tried every line of reasoning, but Buddha was so strong in logic that noone could destroy his faith. We need to follow this example and deepen our understanding of all topics. If we have true faith in Buddha we will not hold to the view that if we look at reality too closely we will see something that disproves Buddhas teachings and our bubble will be burst.
3) With clairvoyance we will see what everyone is thinking and we will hear everyones voice. If the sound of one voice we have to run away how are we going to strive for Buddhahood? We need to deal with this so the sound of others voices is teaching us Dharma. Every voice is explaining one thing, how samsara functions (the 12 dependant related links) or how nirvana functions. Therefore if we understand this we can see that everything confirms Buddhas teachings and deepens our faith. For example if we are surrounded by immoral people we see their karma and we also see our own superiority complex. Both teach Dharma.
So now we understand this we need to care for our kind mothers and try to look to see what is blocking them from religion so we can help them. We need to consider that they will have many valid points. Not everything people say is invalid. Its self cherishing that places us on the mountain of pride looking down at all other people, telling them to be quiet. Everything we know we have learned from others. Others led us to Buddhism by showing us love, patience, ettiquette, generosity. They gave us the taste for these things that made us seek more detailed instructions. The only reason others words dont sound like Dharma is because of our own spiritual weakness. Buddha hears Dharma teachings from every sound.
So by studying what has put people off religion we can ensure that we do not repeat these patterns. For example pushing people to convert. Therefore I recommend studying the following website.
Yahoo answers - all latest questions on hating religion
Yahoo answers - all the latest questions on problems with religion
Why do people insult religion- ballistics answer is very clearly expressing people views
What is the biggest problem with religion and spirituality?
Why do atheist have such a problem with religion?
Do atheists have a problem with religion in general or just God
Is religion the problem or is it the people in the religion?
What is spiritual abuse?
Why do spiritual people hate the word religion so much?
Friday, 24 September 2010
Taking and cherishing others opens us to abuse?
This is an obstacle to spiritual progress. The reason why it is written as an obstacle to the tradition is because we blame our external environment for this obstacle. No matter who we live with we will have problems with this deluded doubt. If we become unhappy with a non buddhist friend thinking they are taking advantage of our new good nature, this does not damage our faith in Buddhism. But if we develop the same problem whilst living in a spiritual community we may conclude that the sangha is at fault. If we believe that non Buddhists also will also do this though, is this not a sign in truth that it is not all the living beings in the world who need to change? We simply need to overcome this obstacle because until we do we wont be able to see cherishing others as plausible. Blaming the sangha simply damaging our chance to have spiritual friends because if the sangha were to vanish this problem would remain. This shows that the sangha is not the cause.
Is spiritual practice supposed to be always comfortable?
What do we achieve if we run away or reject all hardships? We need to check what an authentic spiritual path will entail. If we study and discuss interesting topics and spend some time in a caring community, enjoying having many people friendly towards us - this is comfortable. But it is not the spiritual path. We can enjoy these comforts for many years and maintain a spiritual identity for these benefits. We can provide good intelligent spiritual discussions saying correct answers and points and appear to be fully engaged.
However if we want to engage in spiritual practice from the heart, we will be at out own pace, challenging ourself. There are various topics one comes to terms with when one trains in Buddhas teachings with deep faith.
During authentic practice one gains convicion in the existance of the lower realms. We need to ask ourselves how comfortable will we be knowing that beings who we come to regard as our mothers are experiencing hell realms. We need to ask this in our heart. If we fully engage in these realizations will we not be subject to a great internal challenge?
If we say that inducing fear, throwing oneself at a teacher and becoming intensely devoted and faithful is bad religion, are we not invalidating the core of the Buddhas teaching? We would have to reject the lower realms, death meditation, refuge practice and even meditation on emptiness as this can invoke fear and desperate tugging of our teachers robes.
Other topics such as facing our fear of death are not a walk in the park. When we feel we are falling from a building in dreams we experience terror. This is our current experience when we face death. We have to change on a deep level to overcome this response. How can it be that completely reversing all our normal ways of thinking is going to be a problem free proccess? We are talking about the most radical transformation of ourselves possible.
Our normal response is to blame others when anything goes wrong. This is human nature and we all do it. So who are we going to blame when this mental transformation proccess does not go smoothly?
However if we want to engage in spiritual practice from the heart, we will be at out own pace, challenging ourself. There are various topics one comes to terms with when one trains in Buddhas teachings with deep faith.
During authentic practice one gains convicion in the existance of the lower realms. We need to ask ourselves how comfortable will we be knowing that beings who we come to regard as our mothers are experiencing hell realms. We need to ask this in our heart. If we fully engage in these realizations will we not be subject to a great internal challenge?
If we say that inducing fear, throwing oneself at a teacher and becoming intensely devoted and faithful is bad religion, are we not invalidating the core of the Buddhas teaching? We would have to reject the lower realms, death meditation, refuge practice and even meditation on emptiness as this can invoke fear and desperate tugging of our teachers robes.
Other topics such as facing our fear of death are not a walk in the park. When we feel we are falling from a building in dreams we experience terror. This is our current experience when we face death. We have to change on a deep level to overcome this response. How can it be that completely reversing all our normal ways of thinking is going to be a problem free proccess? We are talking about the most radical transformation of ourselves possible.
Our normal response is to blame others when anything goes wrong. This is human nature and we all do it. So who are we going to blame when this mental transformation proccess does not go smoothly?
Wednesday, 15 September 2010
Thinking that Buddhists lack motivation and are denying themselves
What does it mean to be overcoming the ego? Does it mean we lose our motivation? When we subdue a powerful motivating force and replace it with an intellectual new idea this new motivation is obviously going to be very unfamiliar and lacking in potency of our previous driving force. So necessarily we will at first appear less motivated and dynamic.
We can see that if someone asks a person to do something where there is a big reward for the ego, that person finds energy that they didnt even know they had! Even someone who has been slow and lifeless for years can surprise everyone by suddenly moving with incredible speed!
When there is no reward for the ego most people will refuse to do anything. If an act of altruism rewards the ego people feel more motivated. Always general program students straight away raise their concerns that without the primal force of the ego, they will become bored and unmotivated.
Therefore at the beginning when you meet Buddhist who is not following the desires of the ego but instead trying to think of others getting the reward, of course when you ask them to do something they might appear reluctant. This is a sign in reality that they are not relying upon their old way of thinking.
They cannot develop the motivation to help you:
- so that you will be their friend
- so that they can develop a sense of achievement or congratulate themselves
- so that they will develop a reputation in a social circle and impress people
- so that you will help them later on/owe them one/return the favour
- to get into your good books
These are ego motivations. The motivation they are trying to generate is in its early stages. It is a motivation for no personal reward or benefit. But it is not powerful because they are training in it. Therefore it is not a fault that they cannot muster the same level of enthusiasm for helping others that comes when seeking personal reward. They havent mastered no reward motivations. But it is a great quest and so we should respect that they are trying their best and allow them the liberty to strive for these things without judgement. Because if they do succeed eventually it will be a great achievement.
In summary it is incorrect to say that people are not sincere about cherishing others because they appear less fired up. The fire is usually delusion or ego. If the fire is tamed this is a sign of a genuine wish to change.
We can see that if someone asks a person to do something where there is a big reward for the ego, that person finds energy that they didnt even know they had! Even someone who has been slow and lifeless for years can surprise everyone by suddenly moving with incredible speed!
When there is no reward for the ego most people will refuse to do anything. If an act of altruism rewards the ego people feel more motivated. Always general program students straight away raise their concerns that without the primal force of the ego, they will become bored and unmotivated.
Therefore at the beginning when you meet Buddhist who is not following the desires of the ego but instead trying to think of others getting the reward, of course when you ask them to do something they might appear reluctant. This is a sign in reality that they are not relying upon their old way of thinking.
They cannot develop the motivation to help you:
- so that you will be their friend
- so that they can develop a sense of achievement or congratulate themselves
- so that they will develop a reputation in a social circle and impress people
- so that you will help them later on/owe them one/return the favour
- to get into your good books
These are ego motivations. The motivation they are trying to generate is in its early stages. It is a motivation for no personal reward or benefit. But it is not powerful because they are training in it. Therefore it is not a fault that they cannot muster the same level of enthusiasm for helping others that comes when seeking personal reward. They havent mastered no reward motivations. But it is a great quest and so we should respect that they are trying their best and allow them the liberty to strive for these things without judgement. Because if they do succeed eventually it will be a great achievement.
In summary it is incorrect to say that people are not sincere about cherishing others because they appear less fired up. The fire is usually delusion or ego. If the fire is tamed this is a sign of a genuine wish to change.
Doubts about Dharma Protector practice
These doubts arise when we think that we are to accept all the conditions that arise seeing them as divine signs. With this attitude we conclude that as soon as someone asks us to do something, because we prayed for Buddha to arrange our conditions, that this is a sign and we must do this job. We then say yes to everything, end up in all sorts of difficulty, and then blame our Dharma Protector saying 'Why did you make all this happen?'
A great illustration of the illogical this behaviour is can be seen by watching the movie The Yes Man starring Jim Carey
This is a classic example of the important challenges to understanding reality correctly presented in Buddhas teachings on ultimate view. We can study the example of the Chittamatrin school who believe that everything is mind only. We know that when analysing dreams we regard everything as 'signs' because we know that all the objects are soley creations of the mind. However when inside the dream we do not take a passive position because at that time we do not believe the objects to be created by mind nor as created by Buddha to teach us some specific lesson.
This is an intellectual view we develop when awake. There are many spiritual followers of different religions who do this. They regard everything from a person knocking on their door to the number that comes when a dice is throw as determined and created by their deity. This direction leads to throwing dough balls, dice, divinations etc and is not the path of our tradition. The seeking of magical signs is a craving for excitement and arises if we feel we need a boost to energise our spiritual practice. It leads to many incorrect understandings where we conclude that people exist to feed our spiritual life. We cannot develop a genuine love for others if we are still thinking that people are tools and need them to be magicians for our entertainment.
A great illustration of the illogical this behaviour is can be seen by watching the movie The Yes Man starring Jim Carey
This is a classic example of the important challenges to understanding reality correctly presented in Buddhas teachings on ultimate view. We can study the example of the Chittamatrin school who believe that everything is mind only. We know that when analysing dreams we regard everything as 'signs' because we know that all the objects are soley creations of the mind. However when inside the dream we do not take a passive position because at that time we do not believe the objects to be created by mind nor as created by Buddha to teach us some specific lesson.
This is an intellectual view we develop when awake. There are many spiritual followers of different religions who do this. They regard everything from a person knocking on their door to the number that comes when a dice is throw as determined and created by their deity. This direction leads to throwing dough balls, dice, divinations etc and is not the path of our tradition. The seeking of magical signs is a craving for excitement and arises if we feel we need a boost to energise our spiritual practice. It leads to many incorrect understandings where we conclude that people exist to feed our spiritual life. We cannot develop a genuine love for others if we are still thinking that people are tools and need them to be magicians for our entertainment.
Friday, 10 September 2010
Thinking that Buddhists are less moral/caring than non Buddhists
The story of the good samaritan illustrates this obstacle. At some point in our life we are metaphorically like a man fallen at the side of a road. Perhaps our car is broken down or we become seriously ill. At such times we look to see who walks by and who asks us if we are ok.
Then we begin deluded doubts towards the people who walked past seeing them as bad Buddhists. We then start thinking that Buddhists are less moral/caring than non Buddhists. What is the answer to this?
We need to ask ourselves - How many non Buddhists would walk by? And how many Buddhists would?
The fact is the ratio is much improved and it is unreasonable to not only expect everyone to be perfect but to demand that people who have been working very hard to take on these extra tasks. Buddhists are not perfect. But they are here and trying to improve. Why do we demand so much of them? Why are we so judgemental of them?
If we told a worldly person that they have to be perfect and serve our every need they would tell us we are an idiot, yet this is our attitude towards senior Buddhists and senior followers of other religions.
We say things such as -
You are training in compassion therefore sit and listen to my problems its your job!
You are training in patience so I will test your patience and will judge your level of attainment by your reaction!
You are training in equanimity so you must treat me as equal to your best friend!
You are training in forsaking worldly desires therefore you must give me everything for free!
You are training in love so why are you not making me feel welcome, smiling at me, talking to me and so forth!?
You are training in happiness so why do you not smile more!?
In this way as soon as someone tries to lead a spiritual life they become subject to a tirade of criticisms. We need to support people who are trying to improve not attack them. Even if they are not doing a very good job they are trying. Why is this not good enough? Why do they have to be perfect?
This is the human way. To attack anyone who stands as a representative of good saying - You are not doing it properly or correctly. We can see it throughout history. When this mind is fully developed it turns into imprisoning religious people and torturing them to 'break them down' or 'test their level of accomplishment'.
This is ultimately what happened in the story of Jesus. Because he claimed to be a moral person and people following him claimed he had miracle powers as well as being the son of God, those who sought to disprove all this took him and tried to put him in a position where he could only free himself by revealing his powers and if he did not reveal his powers those leaders sought to claim he had no powers. They also tried to break him so that he would forsake his faith. Why? Because if he gave up they can then say that the path/religion doesnt work and then in proving it justify their own choices of lifestyle.
We can see also the witchcraft trials, trying to force people to show magical powers by making it so only magic could prevent death. Through this showing that magic doesnt work and to attack those who do anything unusual. It is a way of enforcing conformity to ordinary lifestyles.
We can also read the story of Shariputra how he was cornered by a demon who told him he wished for him to cut off his hand. Why do we try to corner spiritual people and attempt to make them look foolish?
Then we begin deluded doubts towards the people who walked past seeing them as bad Buddhists. We then start thinking that Buddhists are less moral/caring than non Buddhists. What is the answer to this?
We need to ask ourselves - How many non Buddhists would walk by? And how many Buddhists would?
The fact is the ratio is much improved and it is unreasonable to not only expect everyone to be perfect but to demand that people who have been working very hard to take on these extra tasks. Buddhists are not perfect. But they are here and trying to improve. Why do we demand so much of them? Why are we so judgemental of them?
If we told a worldly person that they have to be perfect and serve our every need they would tell us we are an idiot, yet this is our attitude towards senior Buddhists and senior followers of other religions.
We say things such as -
You are training in compassion therefore sit and listen to my problems its your job!
You are training in patience so I will test your patience and will judge your level of attainment by your reaction!
You are training in equanimity so you must treat me as equal to your best friend!
You are training in forsaking worldly desires therefore you must give me everything for free!
You are training in love so why are you not making me feel welcome, smiling at me, talking to me and so forth!?
You are training in happiness so why do you not smile more!?
In this way as soon as someone tries to lead a spiritual life they become subject to a tirade of criticisms. We need to support people who are trying to improve not attack them. Even if they are not doing a very good job they are trying. Why is this not good enough? Why do they have to be perfect?
This is the human way. To attack anyone who stands as a representative of good saying - You are not doing it properly or correctly. We can see it throughout history. When this mind is fully developed it turns into imprisoning religious people and torturing them to 'break them down' or 'test their level of accomplishment'.
This is ultimately what happened in the story of Jesus. Because he claimed to be a moral person and people following him claimed he had miracle powers as well as being the son of God, those who sought to disprove all this took him and tried to put him in a position where he could only free himself by revealing his powers and if he did not reveal his powers those leaders sought to claim he had no powers. They also tried to break him so that he would forsake his faith. Why? Because if he gave up they can then say that the path/religion doesnt work and then in proving it justify their own choices of lifestyle.
We can see also the witchcraft trials, trying to force people to show magical powers by making it so only magic could prevent death. Through this showing that magic doesnt work and to attack those who do anything unusual. It is a way of enforcing conformity to ordinary lifestyles.
We can also read the story of Shariputra how he was cornered by a demon who told him he wished for him to cut off his hand. Why do we try to corner spiritual people and attempt to make them look foolish?
Wednesday, 8 September 2010
Pacifying Deluded Doubts
There are so many deluded doubts so all ideas are welcome
Thinking that Buddhism is a cult - here we analyse definition of religious abuse and traditional Buddhism
Thinking that Buddhists are less moral/caring than non Buddhists - here we can see the story of the good samaritian
Thinking studying one teacher is sectarian - here we look at traditional Buddhism to check
Thinking that our traditions can avoid human problems - Here we can see an amazing range of similar situations in the Catholic Church in this documentary about the Pope
Doubts about Dharma Protector practice - How our circumstances are not secret commands
Doubts about Guru Devotion practice
Thinking that Buddhists lack motivation and are denying themselves
Doubts about the focus on fundraising and work - thinking Modern Buddhism pressurises to give wealth and work.
Doubts observing the differences between senior Buddhists and new people
Thinking that Buddhism is a cult - here we analyse definition of religious abuse and traditional Buddhism
Thinking that Buddhists are less moral/caring than non Buddhists - here we can see the story of the good samaritian
Thinking studying one teacher is sectarian - here we look at traditional Buddhism to check
Thinking that our traditions can avoid human problems - Here we can see an amazing range of similar situations in the Catholic Church in this documentary about the Pope
Doubts about Dharma Protector practice - How our circumstances are not secret commands
Doubts about Guru Devotion practice
Thinking that Buddhists lack motivation and are denying themselves
Doubts about the focus on fundraising and work - thinking Modern Buddhism pressurises to give wealth and work.
Doubts observing the differences between senior Buddhists and new people
Monday, 6 September 2010
who can the worldly accept
could they accept Milarepa? What would happen to him in the modern world?
Many traditional Buddhist ways are no long acceptable? Therefore of course people are going to find many things unacceptable. People in our society are publically hounded and ridiculed. Noone is spared, look at what happened to Lady Diana. She spent near the end of her life touring minefields whilst being mocked and then killed. Anyone who is religious is detested before they even have a chance to introduce themselves let alone explain what their religion is.
Many traditional Buddhist ways are no long acceptable? Therefore of course people are going to find many things unacceptable. People in our society are publically hounded and ridiculed. Noone is spared, look at what happened to Lady Diana. She spent near the end of her life touring minefields whilst being mocked and then killed. Anyone who is religious is detested before they even have a chance to introduce themselves let alone explain what their religion is.
Why do we study one teacher?
Why do we study under one teacher?
We can see Milarepas story. When Marpa would not give a discourse Milarepa went to another teacher. However with this teacher he could not gain any experiences.
Is this saying that this teacher Lama Ngokpa was not teaching correctly? NO. He was a perfect teacher. The issue is that Milarepa had given his heart to another teacher. Because he had bonded deeply with this teacher the bond could not develop with another teacher.
The first time you fall in love is always an experience you cannot get a second or third time. There is always one person in your life you develop a deep bond with one that you cannot feel for others. But then there is the question of Atisha and Je Tsongkhapa who had many many teachers. Atisha had a deep bond with Tara. He didnt ask many people for advice he always asked Tara.
For some people it works to have one teacher for some people many. So what is the answer?
We can see Milarepas story. When Marpa would not give a discourse Milarepa went to another teacher. However with this teacher he could not gain any experiences.
Is this saying that this teacher Lama Ngokpa was not teaching correctly? NO. He was a perfect teacher. The issue is that Milarepa had given his heart to another teacher. Because he had bonded deeply with this teacher the bond could not develop with another teacher.
The first time you fall in love is always an experience you cannot get a second or third time. There is always one person in your life you develop a deep bond with one that you cannot feel for others. But then there is the question of Atisha and Je Tsongkhapa who had many many teachers. Atisha had a deep bond with Tara. He didnt ask many people for advice he always asked Tara.
For some people it works to have one teacher for some people many. So what is the answer?
7) There are records, books, news articles, or television programs that document the abuses of the group/leader.
Biography of Milarepa
Biography of Naropa
Biography of Marpa
Biography of Tilopa
According to Rick Ross Buddhism is a cult. I say it is authentic spiritual practice. What are we to do about this quandry in our modern world?
We have a great sense of romance about ancient Buddhist masters and it is often our admiration of their stories that drew us towards Buddhism. One movie that depicts this well is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spring,_Summer,_Fall,_Winter..._and_Spring
There are excerpts on youtube but in Korean but the story is clear
The beginning of the story is where he is told if one creature has died he will carry the stone in his heart forever.
Later he runs away with a girl and is told by his master that lust leads to the wish to possess and from that deeds such as murder. He returns distraught having killed his wife out of jealousy
His master finds him trying to suffocate for suicide and and subjects him to gruelling purification and he carves the Prajnaparamita Sutra to purify.
We have to decide if we admire these stories or not. We admire a path of hardship and then cannot endure the slightest difficulty. Was the young boy abused? Making him walk with a rock, reducing him to tears, then as a man having him walk with a rock as well as beating him with a stick?
Did not many of the great masters of Buddhism including Buddha himself have people or groups of people campaigning against them?
Devadattas campaign against Buddha
People are said to have made trouble for Marpas students here
Atisha had the works of King Langdarma to contend with and many false teachers challenging him to debate
Troubles of the Panchen Lama
Sakya Pandita and the Mongols
Just because there are difficulties and gossip does not mean that a teacher is inauthentic
Biography of Naropa
Biography of Marpa
Biography of Tilopa
According to Rick Ross Buddhism is a cult. I say it is authentic spiritual practice. What are we to do about this quandry in our modern world?
We have a great sense of romance about ancient Buddhist masters and it is often our admiration of their stories that drew us towards Buddhism. One movie that depicts this well is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spring,_Summer,_Fall,_Winter..._and_Spring
There are excerpts on youtube but in Korean but the story is clear
The beginning of the story is where he is told if one creature has died he will carry the stone in his heart forever.
Later he runs away with a girl and is told by his master that lust leads to the wish to possess and from that deeds such as murder. He returns distraught having killed his wife out of jealousy
His master finds him trying to suffocate for suicide and and subjects him to gruelling purification and he carves the Prajnaparamita Sutra to purify.
We have to decide if we admire these stories or not. We admire a path of hardship and then cannot endure the slightest difficulty. Was the young boy abused? Making him walk with a rock, reducing him to tears, then as a man having him walk with a rock as well as beating him with a stick?
Did not many of the great masters of Buddhism including Buddha himself have people or groups of people campaigning against them?
Devadattas campaign against Buddha
People are said to have made trouble for Marpas students here
Atisha had the works of King Langdarma to contend with and many false teachers challenging him to debate
Troubles of the Panchen Lama
Sakya Pandita and the Mongols
Just because there are difficulties and gossip does not mean that a teacher is inauthentic
Saturday, 4 September 2010
6) Former members often relate the same stories of abuse and reflect a similar pattern of grievances.
Whilst building and demolishing houses for Marpa this became Milarepas situation
If Marpa had 1000 students who he gave such methods there would be 1000 stories of abuse. In our lifetime there have been Tibetan Buddhist Masters who have been very hard with their students. So we need to decide, are we going to disparage these great masters or are we going to allow these sometimes quite outrageous teacher-disciple relationships a place in our society. When is it abuse and when is it qualified practice of Buddhism?
Dagmema came and asked him why he was crying, but Milarepa did not reply. She lifted up his chin and said: Don't cry; you will get the Dharma teaching. Milarepa finally told her his real feelings: You are kind to me as a mother. And in order to obtain the precious Dharma, I must build this house. Yet in building this house my body is becoming nothing but a huge wound. Until now I have worked as hard as I can carrying stones and earth, but it is extremely painful. Dagmema now looked at Milarepa's body which had been covered before, and seeing all his festering, open sores, she cried: You are right. I've never seen such wounds on a human being before. Your situation is even worse than an animal's. A horse only gets saddle sores on its back, but you have them all over your body. I don't understand why Marpa is making you go through all of this.
One day Marpa was giving the initiation of Chakrasamvara (Demchok). Many of his students had come and brought wonderful offerings. Milarepa also went and happily joined the crowd. But Marpa looked at him and said, What do you have to offer? Milarepa replied, Well, I've been building this house and that's my offering. Marpa admonished him: You're building this house but it's not finished. It's a finished house that you must offer. And he chased Milarepa away, but Milarepa did not leave immediately even though he'd been told to. He made his request again: Please, let me stay and receive this initiation. Marpa came up to him, cuffed him across the face and tossed him outside. Milarepa went sobbing to Dagmema, who comforted him, Don't worry. Slowly, with time, you will receive the Dharma. Sometime after this initiation, Marpa came to Milarepa. We had a little bit of a set-to the other day. Has your mind not turned against me for this? Milarepa replied, I have committed monstrous negative actions. They are the cause of the bad things that happen to me. My faith in the lama has not changed, not at all.
If Marpa had 1000 students who he gave such methods there would be 1000 stories of abuse. In our lifetime there have been Tibetan Buddhist Masters who have been very hard with their students. So we need to decide, are we going to disparage these great masters or are we going to allow these sometimes quite outrageous teacher-disciple relationships a place in our society. When is it abuse and when is it qualified practice of Buddhism?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)