Sex and the Lama

[Malcolm]

What it's meant is that both have received HYT empowerments.

No, what is meant that they are on the same stage i.e. path of application or seeing, etc.

The Tseringma sisters are not worldly deities, they were liberated by Guru P.

[deepbluehum]

What it's meant is that both have received HYT empowerments.

No, what is meant that they are on the same stage i.e. path of application or seeing, etc.

That's like saying they understood the empowerments. Geshe Ngawang Dhargyey's commentary on the Kalachakra states that the initiations correspond to the stages of the path. In his completion stage comments he says that they should both be at the same level of realization, meaning, if the male is at the level of "mind liberation" then the female should be too, so that they can elevate each others realization. This is another way of saying the third or fourth initiation has been understood. In this commentary, the coupling begins with the first initiation. In fact, there is no 2nd or 3rd initiation without the descent of the fluids during coupling. What I've reasoned out is that they are both beginners and helping each other understand the initiations and the path. Granted this is a Gelug version. But it's good.

The Tseringma sisters are not worldly deities, they were liberated by Guru P.

In the Milarepa songs it talks about how they were full of negative emotions after they broke their samayas to Guru P. I don't want to get into a polemic about who liberated them first. I was just using this as an example of how, according to the story itself, not you or some nyingmapa text, but the story, according to the story, Milarepa consorted with them, he was 10th bhumi by then, they weren't buddhas yet, and he attained buddhahood because of them. But if you want to use your version, the sisters were liberated and Milarepa was on the path, so again, they weren't on the same level.

Nonetheless, Guru P was a buddha way before any of his consorts were. They obviously were not at the same level.

[alpha]

I think this is the second time around----that i know of--- when this subject is mainly discussed by men.
What does that tell you?
Is it because that are mainly men left on this forums or is it something else?

[odysseus]

So the whole matter is not so easily categorized in neat piles like you want it to be.

Piles and piles, I said only a short comment on your comments to my post that was meant as a little humorous post. I can´t see what piles or limited ideas I talked about.

I think if you are caught up in these ideas and definitions, you are probably a prude and are badmouthing karmamudra because you are scared of that little tingle inside.

Sure I anticipated being called prudish for what I said, but in the context of our posts it´s not the reality of me despite your personal judgement. Badmouthing anything, can´t see where I did that. "Scared of a tingle", how can you know that and that´s a strict opinion?

Don't hate. Turn it around.

Good advice but ahh, no hate really. I agree with you but our comments seem to come from another Internet forums misunderstanding, making people constantly admonishing each other.

I did´nt condemn any sluts, no-no...

[mantrika]

I think this is the second time around----that i know of--- when this subject is mainly discussed by men.
What does that tell you?
Is it because that are mainly men left on this forums or is it something else?

Something else...

[deepbluehum]

I think this is the second time around----that i know of--- when this subject is mainly discussed by men.
What does that tell you?
Is it because that are mainly men left on this forums or is it something else?

Men are chatty.

[Nighthawk]

To practice karmamudra you need a really uninhibited woman.

Is that your personal experience or did you receive a teaching from a lama to that effect?

It mentions in the commentaries to some of these instructions that you need someone who's a riot in the sack (paraphrasing). The idea is to get really balls to the walls passionate. This is about energy. Guru Rinpoche mentions using toys and you need a pretty open minded lady to join in that activity. If you read the accounts by Mandarava and Yeshe Tsogyal about how they got into it with Guru Rinpoche, it got wild. ChNN gave instructions recently about it. KDL spoke about it. There's really not a lot to the practice. It's pretty basic. Lamas these days speak in guarded tones about this stuff. The texts are much more candid. Where ChNN uses the term "vigorously," you understand, "Go nuts."

[Yudron]

I think this is the second time around----that i know of--- when this subject is mainly discussed by men.
What does that tell you?
Is it because that are mainly men left on this forums or is it something else?

IMHO For DW and all the similar forums before it to have more female participation would require a re-envisioning of the whole process from the ground up. That would mean that the facilitators and the owner of the list would have to be open to doing something very different. I have been one of few women participating in these things more than ten years.

[Konchog1]

To practice karmamudra you need a really uninhibited woman.

Is that your personal experience or did you receive a teaching from a lama to that effect?

It mentions in the commentaries to some of these instructions that you need someone who's a riot in the sack (paraphrasing). The idea is to get really balls to the walls passionate. This is about energy. Guru Rinpoche mentions using toys and you need a pretty open minded lady to join in that activity. If you read the accounts by Mandarava and Yeshe Tsogyal about how they got into it with Guru Rinpoche, it got wild. ChNN gave instructions recently about it. KDL spoke about it. There's really not a lot to the practice. It's pretty basic. Lamas these days speak in guarded tones about this stuff. The texts are much more candid. Where ChNN uses the term "vigorously," you understand, "Go nuts."

I would love some sources. Not because I don't believe you, but because I want to read this for myself.

[Malcolm]

But if you want to use your version, the sisters were liberated and Milarepa was on the path, so again, they weren't on the same level.

Nonetheless, Guru P was a buddha way before any of his consorts were. They obviously were not at the same level.

Liberated does not equal fully awakened.

I would not regard Namthars written by disciples as accurate reports of the level of realization of this or that person.

[deepbluehum]

Is that your personal experience or did you receive a teaching from a lama to that effect?

It mentions in the commentaries to some of these instructions that you need someone who's a riot in the sack (paraphrasing). The idea is to get really balls to the walls passionate. This is about energy. Guru Rinpoche mentions using toys and you need a pretty open minded lady to join in that activity. If you read the accounts by Mandarava and Yeshe Tsogyal about how they got into it with Guru Rinpoche, it got wild. ChNN gave instructions recently about it. KDL spoke about it. There's really not a lot to the practice. It's pretty basic. Lamas these days speak in guarded tones about this stuff. The texts are much more candid. Where ChNN uses the term "vigorously," you understand, "Go nuts."

I would love some sources. Not because I don't believe you, but because I want to read this for myself.

You should see the commentaries to Padma Nyingthig.

[deepbluehum]

Nonetheless, Guru P was a buddha way before any of his consorts were. They obviously were not at the same level.

Liberated does not equal fully awakened.

I would not regard Namthars written by disciples as accurate reports of the level of realization of this or that person.[/quote]

We don't need to get hung up on stupid details. It's just an example. It's simple logic. Guru P was enlightened before he got with Mandarava and Yeshe Tsogyal. So...

[Malcolm]

Nonetheless, Guru P was a buddha way before any of his consorts were. They obviously were not at the same level.

Liberated does not equal fully awakened.

I would not regard Namthars written by disciples as accurate reports of the level of realization of this or that person.

We don't need to get hung up on stupid details. It's just an example. It's simple logic. Guru P was enlightened before he got with Mandarava and Yeshe Tsogyal. So...[/quote]
According to their namthars both M and Yt were emanations also...

[Silent Bob]

I think this is the second time around----that i know of--- when this subject is mainly discussed by men.
What does that tell you?
Is it because that are mainly men left on this forums or is it something else?

IMHO For DW and all the similar forums before it to have more female participation would require a re-envisioning of the whole process from the ground up. That would mean that the facilitators and the owner of the list would have to be open to doing something very different. I have been one of few women participating in these things more than ten years.

And you've taken a few hits over the years for no reason apart from your gender, if I recall correctly.

Chris

[Virgo]

I think this is the second time around----that i know of--- when this subject is mainly discussed by men.
What does that tell you?
Is it because that are mainly men left on this forums or is it something else?

IMHO For DW and all the similar forums before it to have more female participation would require a re-envisioning of the whole process from the ground up.

What do you mean by that Yudron? And by the way, I am happy to see you posting here.

Kevin

[Stewart]

Off topic, sorry....Kevin, what's your new avatar?

[Virgo]

Off topic, sorry....Kevin, what's your new avatar?

That's a photograph of a hoopoe.

Kevin

[undefineable]

I think this is the second time around----that i know of--- when this subject is mainly discussed by men.
What does that tell you?
Is it because that are mainly men left on this forums or is it something else?

Men are chatty.

The reverse, in a sense, perhaps? - The 'prevailing weather' here gives an impression of intellectualism that screams 'male geek' in a way that I know (from personal experience as well as second-hand ) to be off-putting -for obvious reasons- to those who identify with the supposed salient features of the feminine gender - particularly relationship-building, intuition, emotionality, and so on. This is ironic, since intellectualism in matters of universal concern (philosophy etc.) is, for me, an ambitious (albeit indirect) way of expressing a range of feelings and (sometimes) helping build relationships of sorts. {It's also ironically disconnected from the more mainstream male stereotype of aggressive egotism.}

Having said that, Buddhism in my country (the UK) still suffers from a menopausal image which might be connected to this topic in subtle ways. {Buddhism strikes me as having been taken under the 'wing' of the political Left in the US, which may also be relevant _ }

[anjali]

What an interesting discussion. While it may be ok in principle to have sexual relations between student and teacher under special circumstances, that doesn't mean it is ok in practice. There are other considerations.

I used to work for a large organization that required all employees to have yearly refresher ethics classes to update everyone on what seemed be the primary ethics issues for that year, any rules that might have changed, and an ongoing reminder of the core ethical values for the organization. Here were two general rules I remember that seem to apply in this situation.

1. Each person (lama) should avoid even the appearance of wrong-doing.
2. Each person (lama) is responsible not only for his/her own reputation, but also for that of the organization (Buddhism in general/Tibetan Buddhism more specifically/the lama's immediate lineage in particular).

In my opinion, lamas who fail to take these two rules into consideration will eventually be the cause of suffering for themselves and others. At least in the cultural context of the West.

[Yudron]

I think this is the second time around----that i know of--- when this subject is mainly discussed by men.
What does that tell you?
Is it because that are mainly men left on this forums or is it something else?

IMHO For DW and all the similar forums before it to have more female participation would require a re-envisioning of the whole process from the ground up.

What do you mean by that Yudron? And by the way, I am happy to see you posting here.

Kevin

Hi Kevin,

Well, I have ideas of what might make women be more likely to participate in this kind of thing, that are based on similar observations to the post by "Undefineable" above. Bottom line, though, is that long time female practitioners would need to be actively involved in the envisioning of the entire project from the base, and their input, different priorities, and mode of expression would need to be respected by the men who wanted to partner on the project. How the resultant site would look under those circumstances would probably be very different. The decision-making process of the moderator's group would be different, and the governance might even be different.

I am not trying to instigate some kind of revolution, because I am appreciative of the generosity of the site owner, and the moderators who sacrifice a lot of potential practice time to their work on this board. This seems to be the kind of interaction they want, so it is what it is.