Matylda wrote:dzogchungpa wrote:@Matylda, another question. Do you know of any living, authentic Zen masters, according to your understanding of what a Zen master is?
yes
OK, may I ask who you are thinking of?
Matylda wrote:dzogchungpa wrote:@Matylda, another question. Do you know of any living, authentic Zen masters, according to your understanding of what a Zen master is?
yes
Matylda wrote:Well so now we have to remove all women from buddhist centers...there are plenty of teachers on YT speaking to the mixed audience very often mostly women who smile, and make jokes and so on, both Western and Asian teachers... what to do with that???
tigerdown wrote:May I ask a question of Matylda?
Matylda, some of your opinions on the infallibility of a Roshi, and some other opinions, do not match what I have heard from some Japanese Soto Roshis.
Do the opinions you are stating represent mosly your own personal opinion? The opinion of all or most Soto Zen Roshi in Japan? Only some or a minority of Roshi? If so, would you tell us which lineage you may be closest to in these opinions, for example, Harade-Yastani lineage?
T
dzogchungpa wrote:Matylda wrote:dzogchungpa wrote:@Matylda, another question. Do you know of any living, authentic Zen masters, according to your understanding of what a Zen master is?
yes
OK, may I ask who you are thinking of?
Astus wrote:Matylda wrote:Well so now we have to remove all women from buddhist centers...there are plenty of teachers on YT speaking to the mixed audience very often mostly women who smile, and make jokes and so on, both Western and Asian teachers... what to do with that???
My point is that it's not a Christian, not a Hinayana, nor a modern idea to warn teachers about the dangers of having any kind of affair with women. It is also not acceptable to call such affairs a Dharma teaching, according to the Lotus Sutra.
Ānanda, these (retributions) come from the karmic acts of living beings who create ten karmic causes by their vicious habits and so suffer from six kinds of retribution.
The Habit of Sexual Desire
Ānanda, what are these ten causes? Lust grows into a habit because of sexual intercourse in which two people caress each other thereby producing heat that therefore stimulates desire. This is like the heat caused by rubbing the hands together. The two habits from karma and lust stimulate each other and cause visions of hot iron beds on hot iron supports (1). Hence all Buddhas regard sexual intercourse as a burning fire of desire and all Bodhisattvas avoid carnality as if it were a fiery pit.
------
1. 'The bed stands for sexual desire and its supports for the partner on whom the sinner depends to stimulate his sexual appetite'
Matylda wrote:yes according to Lotus sutra yes... but it is not final exposition in zen... moreover I hope you know how the bodhisattva is viewed in zen. I cannot quote but one can find in Sogenji writings as far as I know...
Sara H wrote:tobes wrote:If one ought not make moral judgements - or any kind of conceptual demarcations - then on what basis can one deny 'Christianized thinking' as bad and promote liberal attitudes towards sexuality as good?
There is an implicit claim for universality here - but in fact it is deeply, deeply normative.
Anyway, I freely admit that I am quite weak on understanding the Sino-Japanese traditions, so perhaps it's best if I bow out here.
"Prajna" instead of wisdom,
"ought" instead of should,
"demarcations" instead of lines or boundaries,
"Universality" instead of all-encompasing
"deeply normative" instead of perfectly normal or standard...
Tobes, I appreciate that you enjoy the use of a large vocabulary,
but your use of exotic words does not make you seem more knowledgeable or experienced about the subject matter.
On the contrary, it demonstrates an attempt to hide an insecurity behind a veil of fancy words.
To answer your question,
The first part, "If one ought not make moral judgements"...
Buddhism is not about judgement. One can see things as they actually are, without making a judgement upon them.
This is actually possible to do, though it might seem very hard at first, it is actually a more accurate way of looking at things.
The second part: "or any kind of conceptual demarcations"...
This second part is not dependent upon the first. You can make/draw/identify distinctions between things without judging them. As I said in regard to the first, this is actually possible.
The third part: "then on what basis can one deny 'Christianized thinking' as bad and promote liberal attitudes towards sexuality as good?"...
The answer is one cannot. Which is why in my case that's what I am not doing.
I am not promoting "Christianized thinking" as bad, Tobes, merely pointing out the obvious, that "Christianized thinking" is not based out of Buddhist teachings, and therefor deserves to be examined under the eye of critical thinking as to whether it "ought" (see I can do it too) to be applied automatically, without thought, or whether perhaps such ways of looking at things should be re-examined, and updated, with a more Buddhist way of looking at things.
On the other end, however, I cannot claim to be either promoting, nor being averse to, "liberal attitudes towards sexuality as good", as the use of "liberal" is extremely vague, the definition of which depends entirely upon what one's definition of "conservative attitudes" towards sexuality are, and upon what one considers "normal" sexually, and upon how one defines "normal".
In Gassho,
Sara H.

Astus wrote:Matylda wrote:yes according to Lotus sutra yes... but it is not final exposition in zen... moreover I hope you know how the bodhisattva is viewed in zen. I cannot quote but one can find in Sogenji writings as far as I know...
"Monetary and sexual matters are a far more serious cause of misfortunes than poisonous snakes. One should most carefully stay away from them."
(Baizhang Zen Monastic Regulations, fol. 5, ch. 7, §6; p. 219. tr. Ichimura)
"Thus, [pure] conduct and observance [of precepts] is Dharma that is not to be neglected even for an instant."
(Dogen: SBGZ: Gyoji; vol. 2, ch. 30; p. 165. tr. Nishijima & Cross)
jeeprs wrote:"On the Ten Causes and Six Effects in the Realm of Hells"Ānanda, these (retributions) come from the karmic acts of living beings who create ten karmic causes by their vicious habits and so suffer from six kinds of retribution.
The Habit of Sexual Desire
Ānanda, what are these ten causes? Lust grows into a habit because of sexual intercourse in which two people caress each other thereby producing heat that therefore stimulates desire. This is like the heat caused by rubbing the hands together. The two habits from karma and lust stimulate each other and cause visions of hot iron beds on hot iron supports (1). Hence all Buddhas regard sexual intercourse as a burning fire of desire and all Bodhisattvas avoid carnality as if it were a fiery pit.
------
1. 'The bed stands for sexual desire and its supports for the partner on whom the sinner depends to stimulate his sexual appetite'
Śūraṅgama Sutra, trs Charles Luk, 1966, p179.
Other of the 'ten causes' include arrogance, anger, decietfulness, lying, resentment, and so on. But passages of this type condemning fornication are found in various texts. The kinds of 'retribution' which are said to occur after death include consignment to various hells, where 'he will experience both light which reveals all sorts of evil things everywhere which give rise to boundless dread, and silent darkness which hides everything and causes infinite fear'. (These descriptions occupy 4 pages of text.)
Matylda wrote:of course, and now, does it apply to buddha as well???
Matylda wrote:does it apply to buddha as well???
Matylda wrote:I can see that zen is very kind of social event in America or Europe... practice is kept pretty much in open and people talk about it a lot. There are also exteremly many misconceptions concerning zen, like being a hinayana, or any other distorted opinion. Then anything which goes in this circles will cause a lot of waves of negative emotions, and many people will not fail but fall under the burden of negativity..
Moreover there are so many moralists getting angry at teachers, whether they are right or wrong does really not matter, that even those unrelated to particular teacher with their anger will fall too... don't you think so?
Yudron wrote:
So, it entirely right that people on internet forums should denounce even the idea that such beings could exist in the world today, much less that any specific individual is at that level. There is no problem with that, and there is nothing to defend.
Dan74 wrote:Yudron wrote:
So, it entirely right that people on internet forums should denounce even the idea that such beings could exist in the world today, much less that any specific individual is at that level. There is no problem with that, and there is nothing to defend.
A true master, however, will not be grasping after pleasure or lust, especially at the expense of their students' welfare.
Yudron wrote:Matylda wrote:I can see that zen is very kind of social event in America or Europe... practice is kept pretty much in open and people talk about it a lot. There are also exteremly many misconceptions concerning zen, like being a hinayana, or any other distorted opinion. Then anything which goes in this circles will cause a lot of waves of negative emotions, and many people will not fail but fall under the burden of negativity..
Moreover there are so many moralists getting angry at teachers, whether they are right or wrong does really not matter, that even those unrelated to particular teacher with their anger will fall too... don't you think so?
Well, I am Vajrayana practitioner who does not view Zen as belonging to the Hinayana. We view it a sublime Mahayana practice.
Matylda, there is a kernal of what you are saying that I really appreciate. Stated broadly, if we have faith in the teachings of our lineages that claim to be a rapid path to enlightenment, then we have faith that there are many teachers alive right now high on the Bodhisattva bhumis, or have realized Buddhahood. Yes, my school as well as yours teaches that these people--a subset of the very best masters -- may display uncontrived conduct. The last thing I want to see is for these wisdom beings to be put in a box, and regulated by some kind of professional licensing boards that require them to be fine upstanding citizens according to the standards of the culture in which they find themselves. That being said, centers cannot thrive today -- as opposed to even 15 years ago -- with teachers who grope students breasts or genitals, beat up their students, display drunkenness, or act weird or crazy. Enlightened or unenlightened, that kind of thing won't work here in the West anymore... they would need to act as solo teachers, non-teachers, or hermits.
Most of the humans in this world are not Buddhist, and of Buddhists many are Theravadin, and of the Mahayana Buddhists, most do not practice in depth. Of those Mahayana practitioners who practice and study in depth, many belong to schools who emphasize the value of controlled conduct and appearing acceptable to society. Thus, there is hardly anyone in this world who have a willingness to engage with teachers who act weirdly.![]()
Therefore, "good teachers who act badly"-- as Khyentse Rinpoche calls them -- can expect to be rejected by Buddhists and non-Buddhists alike. That is one of the benefits of either unfabricated conduct, or deliberate "crazy" or "immoral" behavior (a powerful practice for those already on the bhumis)... that the practitioner will be disrespected and even despised by everyone. To be persona non-grata is said to be a very important practice to catapult one towards Buddhahood. Few have the courage for that!
So, it entirely right that people on internet forums should denounce even the idea that such beings could exist in the world today, much less that any specific individual is at that level. There is no problem with that, and there is nothing to defend.
greentara wrote:Matylda, No more pussy footing, lets face it it's hard to reason with you as others have tried to do, it's to no avail as you become even more obstreperous.
All meetings between human beings, that between teacher and student is archetypal. It's form is ancient, its manifestation ever new. So special and trusting. So it is with Marpa and Milarepa, Shams el Din and Rumi etc etc
Again I repeat, so special so trusting!
Yudron wrote:Dan74 wrote:Yudron wrote:
So, it entirely right that people on internet forums should denounce even the idea that such beings could exist in the world today, much less that any specific individual is at that level. There is no problem with that, and there is nothing to defend.
A true master, however, will not be grasping after pleasure or lust, especially at the expense of their students' welfare.
Or rejecting.
If I was a teacher and had students (hah!) I would not know what would benefit my students' awakening, so I would just try to gentle and kind, and "follow the rules." But, although many--perhaps most--contemporary Buddhists do not believe it, I have faith that an enlightened being's conduct will effortlessly be in accordance with what will accelerate the student's awakening.
Say a teacher punches one of his students, for example. I can't say that that is "at the expense of the student's welfare." But an Arya Bodhisattva who can literally or figuratively "see" future lives knows whether that punch will help or hinder.
Few people will like this kind of talk, it understandably pushes buttons.

Users browsing this forum: Nilasarasvati and 6 guests