Dharma Wheel

Jampa Thaye would do well to take his own advice and stop associating with Ole Nydahl.

Knotty Veneer wrote:Jampa Thaye would do well to take his own advice and stop associating with Ole Nydahl.

He do?

/magnus

heart wrote:

Knotty Veneer wrote:Jampa Thaye would do well to take his own advice and stop associating with Ole Nydahl.

He do?

/magnus

See http://blog.dechen.org/2009/09/meeting-in-london.html

Also I think they cooperated on bringing Thaye Dorje to the UK this year. Jampa Thaye invited Nydahl as a guest of honour to H.H. Sakya Trizin's Kalachakra empowerment in London in 2010. See: http://blog.dwbuk.org/diamond-way-buddh ... ya-trizin/.

Mary Finnegan has quoted Jampa Thaye in at least one other article. Perhaps she is a student. Wonder if she will turn her withering gaze on Nydahl and his Tibetan enablers at some point?

When Karma Thinley Rinpoche was asked to take sides in the Karmapa controversy he said ' Perhaps they are both the Karmapa.' . In this way he is one of the very few to have remained completely neutral. His student Jampa Thaye has however chosen to take sides. This has required him to make certain political alliances, which he might ordinarily have avoided. For the same reason, the other faction has had to make equally regrettable alliances. What a mess!
R.

Raksha wrote:When Karma Thinley Rinpoche was asked to take sides in the Karmapa controversy he said ' Perhaps they are both the Karmapa.' . In this way he is one of the very few to have remained completely neutral. His student Jampa Thaye has however chosen to take sides. This has required him to make certain political alliances, which he might ordinarily have avoided. For the same reason, the other faction has had to make equally regrettable alliances. What a mess!
R.

I don't think it follows that just because he follows Thaye Dorje he is "required" to consort with Nydahl.

Unfortunately, there is a word for those who counsel others to do one thing and do the opposite themselves but I doubt the moderators would be pleased if I used it.

Knotty Veneer wrote:I don't think it follows that just because he follows Thaye Dorje he is "required" to consort with Nydahl.
Unfortunately, there is a word for those who counsel others to do one thing and do the opposite themselves but I doubt the moderators would be pleased if I used it.

That's silly, of course they have to associate with each other because they are in the same boat, likewise the other faction. As for your comment, I disassociate myself from it completely because, regardless of politics and factionalism, Dr.David Stott (Ngakpa Jampa Thaye) is an exceptional scholar and practitioner. You wouldn't have an axe to grind of your own by any chance Knotty Veneer?
R.

Knotty Veneer wrote:

Raksha wrote:When Karma Thinley Rinpoche was asked to take sides in the Karmapa controversy he said ' Perhaps they are both the Karmapa.' . In this way he is one of the very few to have remained completely neutral. His student Jampa Thaye has however chosen to take sides. This has required him to make certain political alliances, which he might ordinarily have avoided. For the same reason, the other faction has had to make equally regrettable alliances. What a mess!
R.

I don't think it follows that just because he follows Thaye Dorje he is "required" to consort with Nydahl.

Unfortunately, there is a word for those who counsel others to do one thing and do the opposite themselves but I doubt the moderators would be pleased if I used it.

Well it´s not like he became Ole´s student, they are just friends. While I am no fan of Nydahl´s teachings myself, I ask, can´t he have any friends? He is just a human like anybody else, I think it is better that we judge our own actions instead of having our attention on his. I had a discussion about Ole with my lama, who said that there not much point in criticising Ole. First the students who follow him, have a karmic link with him and if such link is in place those people will follow him no matter what. Secondly it engenders grudges and holding a grudge against anybody is not really helpful for one´s practice. So it is better to just let it go and not follow his teachings. There are many crazies acting as teachers of Dharma now, and there is going to be more and more. So it is better to watch out for oneself and stay relaxed and open with regards to others without judging them, othervise we can get crazy too.

dzoki wrote:Well it´s not like he became Ole´s student, they are just friends...can´t he have any friends?

Good point, I hadn't considered that. It could actually be very beneficial for Lama Ole to have a highly orthodox scholar like Lama Jampa as his best buddy.
R.

Raksha wrote: That's silly, of course they have to associate with each other because they are in the same boat, likewise the other faction. As for your comment, I disassociate myself from it completely because, regardless of politics and factionalism, Dr.David Stott (Ngakpa Jampa Thaye) is an exceptional scholar and practitioner. You wouldn't have an axe to grind of your own by any chance Knotty Veneer?
R.

My allegiance is well known on this forum. I have only heard good things about Jampa Thaye personally but surely you must agree that his closeness to Ole undermines his good reputation.

If he really would prefer to have nothing to do with Nydahl, as you suggest, then he really should really have nothing to do with him.

Nydahl uses the Karmapa controversy to promote himself. If this situation did not exist he would not be anything like as prominent. By associating himself with legitimate teachers, they are both, as Jampa Thaye points out, jumping off the cliff together.

@dzoki - I must respectfully disagree with your teacher. If no-one speaks out against people like Ole they are to continue their bad behavior. One must be skillful but I don't think th Bodhisattva vow permit one to close one's eyes.

Knotty Veneer wrote: My allegiance is well known on this forum. I have only heard good things about Jampa Thaye personally but surely you must agree that his closeness to Ole undermines his good reputation.

Who cares about reputation? Plus by the same logic HH. Dalailama meeting with Dubya Bush would have to ruin Dalailama´s reputation.

Knotty Veneer wrote: My allegiance is well known on this forum. I have only heard good things about Jampa Thaye personally but surely you must agree that his closeness to Ole undermines his good reputation. If he really would prefer to have nothing to do with Nydahl, as you suggest, then he really should really have nothing to do with him.

I'm new to this forum, so please excuse my ignorance. I did not suggest that Lama Jampa would prefer to have nothing to do with Lama Ole, rather that their organisations had to come together out of political expediency, a situation which would not have occurred but for the Karmapa controversy. As for the undermining of reputations, I am neutral regarding Lama Ole and I wouldn't comment on him personally because I have never met him.
R.

dzoki wrote:...by the same logic HH. Dalailama meeting with Dubya Bush would have to ruin Dalailama´s reputation.

...Not to mention Shoko Asahara (even the greatest Lamas can occasionally mess up)

With all due respect, I don't think showing human kindness to anyone is considered messing up, at least not in Buddhism.

Sheila wrote:With all due respect, I don't think showing human kindness to anyone is considered messing up, at least not in Buddhism.

His Holiness told Shoko Asahara, 'The future of Japanese Buddhism is in your hands' Doh! I'm not doubting that His Holiness' motivation was pure, as always, I'm simply saying that he seriously misjudged this chap. So I repeat, even the greatest Lamas can occasionally mess up.
R.

Maybe the future of Japanese Buddhism WAS in Shoko's hands. Apparently he dropped the ball.

With respect, I don't really know Lama Ole's teachings but he did have the authorisation of the 16th Karmapa to teach, so was His Holiness the Karmapa wrong to give him this authorisation?

I know from my own experience how distortions and misconceptions about Dharma Teachers can lead to them being regarded 'controversial' when in fact their teachings are perfectly valid and beneficial, so it's really dangerous to judge other Teachers unless their actions are clearly harmful and against the teachings, such as sexually abusing their students.

He may have given him permission to teach but did he give him permission to give High Tantric empowerments, change the practice of Mahakala Bernagchen (Black-Cape), a treasured instruction, and popularize it on a large scale? Most of the Kamtsang Kagyupas I know (and I do know a few) are not so happy about that. It was also mentioned to me that he never completed the 3 year retreat which is often considered the bare minimum qualification to teach in that tradition.

The questions to always ask about Western and Tibetan teachers are pretty basic:

1)How long has the person been studying Buddhism?

2)Do they practice ethical conduct in accordance with the teachings they profess?

3)Have they spent any time in deep study and retreat?

4)How is their suitability as a teacher determined by the organization? Test on Buddhist knowledge, experience in retreat?

5)Are they humble? Do they possess the qualities of spiritual teachers mentioned in Gampopa's Jewel Ornament of Liberation, for example?

6)Are they able to answer the tough questions or do they get by on charisma? Are the students allowed to question the teacher?

7)What do their former students say?

My concern with many of the organizations operating in the west is that insisting on the highest level of qualification for teachers has been set aside in favour of casting as wide a net as possible for growth of the organizations.

My opinion is that those organizations that have fewer teachers often offer higher quality teachings. The danger in sending neophyte students off to be teachers is that due to their lack of experience and understanding students can become more confused as a result of attending their courses. Wrong ideas about emptiness and morality can be particularly harmful.

Everyone owes it to themselves to seek the most experienced, qualified teacher possible. Listening to good teachers on youtube is better than going to a semi-qualified one for direct teachings in my opinion.

Actually, I'm more worried about the finger-pointing students who give Tibetan Buddhism a bad name. Can't we all get along?

Honest D,

I too find it to be somewhat embarrassing- that there is all this intrigue in Buddhism and in particular in Tibetan Buddhism. This is why for several years I stayed away from forums altogether. As I mentioned previously I am very wary of Ms.Finnegan's "crusade" in The Guardian newspaper.

But there is another side to the coin. In my 7 years of monastic life I have been approached- either over the internet or at centres where I translate, to counsel people who have left damaging Buddhist groups.

To be sure, every time someone says something negative we don't have to believe it. I have been in this situation where I heard certain serious allegations about a certain teacher but through my own research came to the conclusion that they weren't true. So I do leave room for the benefit of the doubt.

However, to never say anything out of politeness doesn't seem a viable alternative either, especially since to this day I am still getting emails from people damaged by several neo-Buddhist groups. It is a very frustrating dilemma.

I haven't seen anything to indicate that Tibetan Buddhism has a bad name.

There are definite hazards. A sore posterior from listening to hours of great teaching on works of Atisha, sore fingers from weeding garlic mustard on the center grounds, and a sore belly from laughing at the humorous perplexities of life.