A directive for a non-sectarian approach to practice (HHDL)

[JKhedrup]

HH the Dalai Lama Dharamsala Lam Rim Commentary 1998

Therefore Kagyupas must know the Mahamudra teaching in Sakya. The Sakyapas must know Dzogchen, they must know Kagyu. The Gelugpas must know Dzogchen, they must know Sakya and Kagyu. Such knowledge should not be learned merely for scholarship but for the sake of one's practice.

For the sake of one's practice one should receive important empowerments, get important transmissions and in this way on the one hand you will get some idea and knowledge, and at the same time be able to gain more understanding.

In my own experience, with regards to understanding the meaning of clear light as explained in the Guyyasamaja, I was able to get much inspiration from my study and understanding of Dzogchen. Likewise, certain teachings in the Gelugpa tradition, such as the explanation of the three voidnesses, such kind of understanding will be very helpful in understanding the Dzogchen or Nyingma tradition.

[ReasonAndRhyme]

...am I right in assuming this is a quotation?

[JKhedrup]

Yes, that is why (HHDL) appears after the title. But I will cite it more clearly so there is no confusion.

Gave the exact citation, hope it is helpful. Sorry if there was confusion.

[ReasonAndRhyme]

thank you!

[Indrajala]

Do you think Tibetan non-sectarianism would ever expand outside of the realm of Tibetan Buddhism?

As in, making use of Theravada or East Asian traditions?

With so much literature being translated into English, this could be immensely helpful to Tibetan Buddhists. For example, a lot of Indian literature only survives in Classical Chinese translation. Much has been and is being translated into English, which any Buddhist could readily make use of.

Non-sectarianism in TB just seems to mean not discriminating against other Tibetan traditions.

[JKhedrup]

Dear Huseng,

I think that establishing non-sectarianism within the Tibetan traditions is a first step. But it is my dearest wish to see this extend to all forms of Buddhism. But this of course would involve challenging some uncomfortable prejudices on both sides!

I know that there are a few initiatives that can give one hope.

For example, Dzongsar Kyentse Rinpoche has an initiative called 84,000 which aims to translate the complete Buddhist canon. Part of this initiative includes finding which parts are missing in the Tibetan but available in the Chinese, and vice versa:
http://84000.co/planning-workshop-on-tr ... he-buddha/

The key objective of this conference was to explore the possibility of embarking on cross-translations of the Chinese Tripitaka and Tibetan Kangyur with the aim of completing both canons. The conference unanimously affirmed the importance of this work, and agreed to proceed with the following:

(1) Chinese –> Tibetan: Alak Zenkar Rinpoche (Tudeng Nima Rinpoche) will lead a pilot project to translate the Ksitigarbha Sutra and the Amitabha Sutra from Chinese into Tibetan.

(2) Tibetan –> Chinese: All parties agreed to do research and preparatory work in the next 12 months to lay the ground for translations from Tibetan into Chinese.

It is initiatives like this that can truly build understanding across the yanas.

I hear that there is an Institute planned with His Holiness' blessing at one of the holy sites in India (which escapes my memory, I will try to find it) where they plan to invite respected scholars from East Asian Mahayana, THeravada and Tibetan Buddhism.

So, there is a thrust in this direction, though I am sure it faces obstacles due to some narrow minded people.

[plwk]

directive? must? hmmm....

[JKhedrup]

C'mon let's not let a good discussion get sidetracked due to the entymology of the title I chose (perhaps badly). It would be an advice or directive for students of His Holiness just like the words of another person's main teacher would be a directive for them.
But please, let's try to focus on some of the positive implications here, it could make for a very good discussion.

[Indrajala]

So, there is a thrust in this direction, though I am sure it faces obstacles due to some narrow minded people.

I'm happy to hear about these projects. I know here in Taiwan there is a lot of interest in Tibetan literature. I imagine a lot of funding for such projects (Tibetan-Chinese translations) would originate from Taiwan.

I know IBA in Kathmandu is also working on Tibetan-Chinese translations as well.

Ideally we could set ethnicities aside and just accept Buddhist literature regardless of what language or culture it comes from. I somehow don't see this as happening because of many being emotionally and materially invested in certain cultures.

[Jnana]

I hear that there is an Institute planned with His Holiness' blessing at one of the holy sites in India (which escapes my memory, I will try to find it) where they plan to invite respected scholars from East Asian Mahayana, THeravada and Tibetan Buddhism.

Didn't HHDL also express interest in having the Pāli Tipiṭaka (or at least the Pāli Abhidhammapiṭaka) translated into Tibetan?

[JKhedrup]

His Holiness has, though I cannot find the citation. There are also some meetings on the Vinaya going on, which His Holiness eludes to in the speech he gave at World Buddhist Congregation in 2011.

Now, as I mentioned yesterday, a friend spoke about there being some kind of gap or wall between the Pali tradition and the Sanskrit tradition. This wall is to nobody’s benefit. We must come together and exchange. There are a lot of things for us to learn from your traditions, from your pratimokshas [monastic vows]. You also can learn some of our Sanskrit pratimoksha. So more regular sort of meetings—not just in a ceremonial way, but serious meetings, serious discussions—are very, very essential. This is one thing.

[JKhedrup]

So, there is a thrust in this direction, though I am sure it faces obstacles due to some narrow minded people.

I'm happy to hear about these projects. I know here in Taiwan there is a lot of interest in Tibetan literature. I imagine a lot of funding for such projects (Tibetan-Chinese translations) would originate from Taiwan.

I know IBA in Kathmandu is also working on Tibetan-Chinese translations as well.

Ideally we could set ethnicities aside and just accept Buddhist literature regardless of what language or culture it comes from. I somehow don't see this as happening because of many being emotionally and materially invested in certain cultures.

This is my sincere hope. I think that HHDL shares this view because he has traveled widely and encountered masters from all the different Buddhist traditions. HH Karmapa also has good cross yana connection for example with Masters in Taiwan (Hui Thai, Tai Hui- forget the name at the moment.)

Other lamas who have not had these encounters may not be so open, but as the world becomes smaller and smaller I have hope.

I know that even in the early His Holiness sent Geshe Tengye, who now lives at an FPMT centre in France, to study the Theravada tradition in Thailand for perhaps as long as 5 years. After that, Geshe la lived in the Monastery of the well-known Vietnamese Buddhist Linh Sonh order in Paris. So there are such people around!

[Jangchup Donden]

Do you think Tibetan non-sectarianism would ever expand outside of the realm of Tibetan Buddhism?

As in, making use of Theravada or East Asian traditions?

With so much literature being translated into English, this could be immensely helpful to Tibetan Buddhists. For example, a lot of Indian literature only survives in Classical Chinese translation. Much has been and is being translated into English, which any Buddhist could readily make use of.

Non-sectarianism in TB just seems to mean not discriminating against other Tibetan traditions.

I know Bardor Tulku Rinpoche addresses this in his vision for Kunzang Palchen Ling: http://kunzang.org/kpl-btr-vision.html

In fact, the very first thing he mentions is:

It is my wish that in the future Kunzang Palchen Ling should:

Possess a non-sectarian regard for all Dharma teachings and have visiting teachers who have maintained samaya from all schools and traditions of Buddhist practice

So I think this will happen.

[Virgo]

I know Bardor Tulku Rinpoche addresses this in his vision for Kunzang Palchen Ling: http://kunzang.org/kpl-btr-vision.html

In fact, the very first thing he mentions is:

It is my wish that in the future Kunzang Palchen Ling should:

Possess a non-sectarian regard for all Dharma teachings and have visiting teachers who have maintained samaya from all schools and traditions of Buddhist practice

So I think this will happen.

Hi everyone,

HHDL is a true livning master. He really embodies the teachings. He is incredible.

Jangchup, in one video I saw Bardor Tulku specifically mentioned that one should get "pointing out instructions" from many lamas, not just one. This way, one has a better chance of their practice developing because one has a stronger chance to meet a teacher that they have a stronger karmic connection with. I think that is amazing advice.

Many amazing teachers out there these days. We should not be limited.

Kevin

[deepbluehum]

I have found that it helps me think of the whole Tibetan thing as one thing. There's so much cross-fertilization there. All the stuff about inter-lineage rivalry and debate is Tibetan business. I look for good wisdom from the whole tradition. I do the same for South and East Asian Buddhism. As Western dharma people, we don't owe any loyalties. The onus is on them to substantiate their claims about their practices and tenets. We can do what we want with it. The era of Western Buddhism is ahead. At first it will be a non-sectarian deal that syncretically digests all these traditions. Later, Western buddhist sectarianism will arise, just like it did in all these other regions. But there is no duty to make friends. Scientists have no duty to incorporate the teachings of sorcery. If a teaching is scientific it will survive as long as a better science doesn't replace it. Where there is really good ancient science, clouded over by sorcery, it would be better to redact the sorcery. This is basically what Western buddhists are facing with all these traditions.

[Caz]

HH the Dalai Lama Dharamsala Lam Rim Commentary 1998

Therefore Kagyupas must know the Mahamudra teaching in Sakya. The Sakyapas must know Dzogchen, they must know Kagyu. The Gelugpas must know Dzogchen, they must know Sakya and Kagyu. Such knowledge should not be learned merely for scholarship but for the sake of one's practice.

For the sake of one's practice one should receive important empowerments, get important transmissions and in this way on the one hand you will get some idea and knowledge, and at the same time be able to gain more understanding.

In my own experience, with regards to understanding the meaning of clear light as explained in the Guyyasamaja, I was able to get much inspiration from my study and understanding of Dzogchen. Likewise, certain teachings in the Gelugpa tradition, such as the explanation of the three voidnesses, such kind of understanding will be very helpful in understanding the Dzogchen or Nyingma tradition.

It sounds like he is saying that these lineages are not complete in of their selves unless it is a mistranslation, To be Non sectarian does one have to mix lineages or just respect them as equals ?

[Malcolm]

HH the Dalai Lama Dharamsala Lam Rim Commentary 1998

Therefore Kagyupas must know the Mahamudra teaching in Sakya. The Sakyapas must know Dzogchen, they must know Kagyu. The Gelugpas must know Dzogchen, they must know Sakya and Kagyu. Such knowledge should not be learned merely for scholarship but for the sake of one's practice.

For the sake of one's practice one should receive important empowerments, get important transmissions and in this way on the one hand you will get some idea and knowledge, and at the same time be able to gain more understanding.

In my own experience, with regards to understanding the meaning of clear light as explained in the Guyyasamaja, I was able to get much inspiration from my study and understanding of Dzogchen. Likewise, certain teachings in the Gelugpa tradition, such as the explanation of the three voidnesses, such kind of understanding will be very helpful in understanding the Dzogchen or Nyingma tradition.

It sounds like he is saying that these lineages are not complete in of their selves unless it is a mistranslation, To be Non sectarian does one have to mix lineages or just respect them as equals ?

What he is saying is that all teachings reinforce one another, that one's understanding of Dzogchen, for example will be improved by studying Lamdre and Guhyasamaja, One's understanding of Mahamudra will be improved by studying Dzogchen and Lamdre, one's understanding of Lamdre will be improved by studying Dzoghen and Mahamudra, etc.

I think he is mostly talking to lineage heads.

M

[Virgo]

It sounds like he is saying that these lineages are not complete in of their selves unless it is a mistranslation, To be Non sectarian does one have to mix lineages or just respect them as equals ?

While respecting the structure and blessings of specific lineages without any doubt, we should not really look at things in terms of "lineage". We don't need tantric teachings or people being put into pigeon holes.

Kev

[Caz]

HH the Dalai Lama Dharamsala Lam Rim Commentary 1998

Therefore Kagyupas must know the Mahamudra teaching in Sakya. The Sakyapas must know Dzogchen, they must know Kagyu. The Gelugpas must know Dzogchen, they must know Sakya and Kagyu. Such knowledge should not be learned merely for scholarship but for the sake of one's practice.

For the sake of one's practice one should receive important empowerments, get important transmissions and in this way on the one hand you will get some idea and knowledge, and at the same time be able to gain more understanding.

In my own experience, with regards to understanding the meaning of clear light as explained in the Guyyasamaja, I was able to get much inspiration from my study and understanding of Dzogchen. Likewise, certain teachings in the Gelugpa tradition, such as the explanation of the three voidnesses, such kind of understanding will be very helpful in understanding the Dzogchen or Nyingma tradition.

It sounds like he is saying that these lineages are not complete in of their selves unless it is a mistranslation, To be Non sectarian does one have to mix lineages or just respect them as equals ?

What he is saying is that all teachings reinforce one another, that one's understanding of Dzogchen, for example will be improved by studying Lamdre and Guhyasamaja, One's understanding of Mahamudra will be improved by studying Dzogchen and Lamdre, one's understanding of Lamdre will be improved by studying Dzoghen and Mahamudra, etc.

I think he is mostly talking to lineage heads.

M

I appreciate they may reinforce one and other but how is it necessary to study Lamdre in order to improve your understand of Guhyasamaja or Dzogchen, Surely if one accomplishes the results of one perfect clarity and understand will come naturally regarding the rest ?

[Caz]

HH the Dalai Lama Dharamsala Lam Rim Commentary 1998

Therefore Kagyupas must know the Mahamudra teaching in Sakya. The Sakyapas must know Dzogchen, they must know Kagyu. The Gelugpas must know Dzogchen, they must know Sakya and Kagyu. Such knowledge should not be learned merely for scholarship but for the sake of one's practice.

For the sake of one's practice one should receive important empowerments, get important transmissions and in this way on the one hand you will get some idea and knowledge, and at the same time be able to gain more understanding.

In my own experience, with regards to understanding the meaning of clear light as explained in the Guyyasamaja, I was able to get much inspiration from my study and understanding of Dzogchen. Likewise, certain teachings in the Gelugpa tradition, such as the explanation of the three voidnesses, such kind of understanding will be very helpful in understanding the Dzogchen or Nyingma tradition.

It sounds like he is saying that these lineages are not complete in of their selves unless it is a mistranslation, To be Non sectarian does one have to mix lineages or just respect them as equals ?

What he is saying is that all teachings reinforce one another, that one's understanding of Dzogchen, for example will be improved by studying Lamdre and Guhyasamaja, One's understanding of Mahamudra will be improved by studying Dzogchen and Lamdre, one's understanding of Lamdre will be improved by studying Dzoghen and Mahamudra, etc.

I think he is mostly talking to lineage heads.

M

I appreciate they may reinforce one and other but how is it necessary to study Lamdre in order to improve your understand of Guhyasamaja or Dzogchen, Surely if one accomplishes the results of one perfect clarity and understand will come naturally regarding the rest ?