Yonten Nyima wrote:I honestly wouldnt trust any organization outside of ones own authorized lineage masters, whatever their lineage be.
Astus wrote:I, personally, like the idea of training Dharma teachers. There is a need for people who actually know what the sutras and shastras contain and share it with those who find it difficult to spend time studying. Also it is a good way to make Buddhism more accessible to a larger audience. My question is only of the quality of the training.
Astus wrote:Well, as Yonten says, there is this hindrance that those who are somewhat familiar with Tibetan or Zen teachings think that teachers must be from a lineage of (enlightened) masters and that Buddhism is not something one can simply study and practice but that meditation is the essential way and to teach it there's a need for authorisation by a guru. This is a strong preconception indeed.
I, personally, like the idea of training Dharma teachers. There is a need for people who actually know what the sutras and shastras contain and share it with those who find it difficult to spend time studying. Also it is a good way to make Buddhism more accessible to a larger audience. My question is only of the quality of the training.
A good book with a trans-traditional view is Joseph Goldstein's "One Dharma", even if it is a rather introductory level.
Yonten Nyima wrote:How can one be assured that they fully understand?
Personally I cant see the logic behind something similar to an IOBM, especially if they dont have an aithorized lineage instructors (Bhikkus, Roshis, or Rinpoches)who is to be sure that they understand dharma, and they dont just have book knowledge? The lineage of ancestors serves a great purpose, and that is to assure we are passed the true teaching, not some college course buddhism, M.Div. buddhism, which is deviod of the essential spirit of Gautamas buddhadharma.
In my personal opinion, thatd be like letting a lay person of little experience teach others.
Astus wrote:That kind of lineage as seen in Zen for instance is not a universal part of Buddhism. Actually, the whole transmission lineage concept is restricted to a few traditions and others don't use it. And in the case of Zen lineage served mainly a political purpose rather than a spiritual/religious one. Transmission is a means of marginal groups to show how special they are. The major Indian schools had no use of that kind of authorisation because they were already authentic on their own. Lineage is not a proof of realisation or even correct view. The proof of realisation is one's life, and one's mind that can hardly be scrutinised by anyone else. The proof of correct view is being able to prove it through the use of scriptures and reasoning. What kind of proof is it if a person claims authority on secret transmission? Yes, it is a level of security if people are authorised by an accepted teacher, but even that is not 100%, just check out Shunryu Suzuki and his descendants.
Users browsing this forum: Konchog1 and 10 guests