Dharma Wheel

A Buddhist discussion forum on Mahayana and Vajrayana Buddhism
It is currently Mon Dec 22, 2014 11:53 pm

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Forum rules


Please click here to view the forum rules



Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 7 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun Aug 16, 2009 10:20 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 24, 2009 11:54 pm
Posts: 302
Have people found these criticisms true about the monastics of today? ( I know historically there have always been people who have wanted a free ride in monastaries, Buddhist or Christian)

Stuff like this has made me depend only on myself in gaining the Dharma teachings. I go to the temples, but I don't talk to monks or nuns for any guidance. I just :anjali: and :meditate: and donate some money - keeps me from getting into too much trouble. For me personally, my relationship is between me and Buddha -- thank goodness! :smile:



http://www.strippingthegurus.com/stgsamplechapters/dalai.asp


This book criticizes just about all religions, including Christianity:

Quote:
The caliber of monks today has not, it seems, radically improved:

[O]ver 90% of those who wear the robes [in India, and elsewhere] are “frauds” in the sense the questioners would connote by “fraud.” The idea that the monk is more perfect than the non-monk is inveterate, and it is kindled by the monks themselves. If perfection is to mean greater dedication to the search for spiritual emancipation, then there is undoubtedly more of it among the monks. But in terms of human morality and of human intellect, monks are nowhere more perfect than lay people (Bharati, 1980; italics added).
Far too many men become Buddhist monks, because it’s a good life and they have devotion. The Dalai Lama has publicly stated that only ten out of one hundred monks are true candidates (Mackenzie, 1999).
Likewise for Japanese Zen:

It seemed to me that most of the monks [at Suienji] were proud of their position, lazy, stupid, greedy, angry, confused, or some combination. Mainly they were the sons of temple priests putting in their obligatory training time so that they could follow in daddy’s footsteps. They listened to radios, drank at night and had pinups on the wall.
What they were really into, though, was power trips. It’s what got them off.... The senior monks were always pushing around the junior monks, who in turn were pushing around the ones that came after them (in Chadwick, 1994).
The observations of a Thai Buddhist monk, in Ward (1998), at a monastery run by Ajahn Chah, are no more flattering:

The farang [Westerners] at this wat [monastery] who call themselves monks are nothing but a bunch of social rejects who have found a place where they can get free food, free shelter and free respect. They are complacent and their only concern is their perks at the top end of the hierarchy.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Aug 16, 2009 10:39 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Apr 10, 2009 7:04 pm
Posts: 129
Content deleted at member's request.

_________________
http://www.buddhismwithoutboundaries.com


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Aug 16, 2009 11:35 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 24, 2009 11:54 pm
Posts: 302
Hi Dazzle,

I don't understand, are you saying that the article is false?

The book itself pretty much attacks all the religions "gurus", not just the Dalai Lama.

Are you saying, Mahayanists should not question the state of monasticism or corruption therein and don't have a right to question anyone?

That sounds more like Hinayana oppression, not Mahayana liberation. :smile:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 17, 2009 12:20 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Apr 10, 2009 7:04 pm
Posts: 129
.
All I'm going to say, Sraddha, is that youre really not doing anybody any favours by posting that stuff. I'm not so indiscreet as to be saying any more and going into details on a public forum, but sometimes the motivations and connections of the writers of such information should also be investigated.
(Additionally its worth adding that people assume that all Tibetan lamas automatically have monastic vows, which of course they don't, some are lay lamas.)

I'm not saying that people shouldn't question corruption, but they should certainly get second hand supposed information right first, and investigate who puts out the material and why. Anyway, as I've said before, this is tired old scandal-mongering on the same level as the worst tabloid press. It's been around on the internet for years, its not something new you've found.

However, if people don't have anything better to do with their precious time other than read such material and gasp and cluck (yes, cluck, remember Eternal Spirit ? )- and believe it all - then lots of good luck to them. Some people just love some juicy scandal ,don't they ! Especially we women eh?

As for the word 'Hinayana' I never use it myself. Bye.... .........:alien:

_________________
http://www.buddhismwithoutboundaries.com


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 17, 2009 4:54 am 
Offline
Founding Member

Joined: Tue Apr 07, 2009 8:44 pm
Posts: 2230
Hi all,

While it's fine and normal to investigate teachers, this book contains a lot of negativity, particularly about HHDL, and it's been around the Internet for a long time. In the past, however, I've only seen it cited or linked to by people who are involved with the New Kadampa Tradition.

If anyone would like to start a general discussion about gurus, consorts, and so forth (which inevitably always comes up at Buddhist forums) then we can do that, given that it's conducted in a respectful manner.

The guru/student relationship can seem mysterious if you're not a vajrayana practitioner. I understand and appreciate that. Let's please do this nicely :smile:

Thanks a lot,
Drolma

--topic has been closed--


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 18, 2009 11:00 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 24, 2009 11:54 pm
Posts: 302
Hi Dazzle,

Comments removed, topic is closed.

Hi Laura,


The Dalai Lama says, "I'm just a monk" -- he is not "just a monk", he is the Ruler of Tibet and head of the 4Tibetan schools.

And if he is a monk, how does the Vinaya allow him to be a ruler of lay people? Is the Tibetan Vinaya different? I heard it was exactly the same.

This is in contrast to the other Vajrayana tradition of Newar Buddhism.
Tantra itself is practiced by those who are advanced enough to return to the lower life and disrobe and taking the lay precepts (atleast it is in the Vajrayana tradition of Newar Buddhism where the high priest whom I've corresponded via email, is a married man and all in that tradition have married priests, so the wisdom consort is none other than their wives) :smile:

Is this also true of the Tibetan tradition, where upon disrobing, the advanced students return to the lay life? A lay Buddhist is allowed to fully practice with the 5 chords of sensual pleasure.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 19, 2009 7:15 am 
Offline
Founding Member

Joined: Tue Apr 07, 2009 8:44 pm
Posts: 2230
Hi sraddha,

Please feel free to start a topic about Vinaya, the historical role of the Dalai Lamas as temporal leaders of Tibet, disrobing vs. monastic life, or Newar Buddhism in a new thread.

Thanks,
ND


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 7 posts ] 

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], valdemar and 21 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group