Nechung Kuten Recognizes Yeye Omileye

[A Ah Sha Sa Ma Ha]

I can't wait till this comes out !

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/18 ... ts/1959285

[Kris]

Predicted response: Sherab will argue that precedence is not sufficiently reasonable.

Tsongkhapa fan will bring up the fact that Tsongkhapa seems to have used two mediums in his career: a Nyingmapa Lama through whom he had a conversation with Vajrapani to remove his doubts about Dzogchen teachings; and Lama Umapa, through whom he had conversations with Mañjuśrī and clarified his doubts about Madhyamaka.

The oracle has spoken!

[Malcolm]

So how does that makes it impossible for a Buddha to manifest specifically through a medium since having no intentions does not preclude the Buddha from manifesting as as anything anyway.

Sure it does, a buddha cannot manifest as a mara, for example. All the activities of a buddha are determined by a buddha”s prior path aspirations.

Are you implying that a Buddha MUST BE manifesting as a mara if he manifests through a medium?

Are you also implying that there is no possibility for the Buddha to manifest as a mara in specific instances that are consistent with the Buddha's prior path aspirations?

You really do have the strangest way of putting things. How can a Buddha manifest as the personification of delusion and self-grasping? As a general rule, anything or person that offers a distraction from the three trainings of the path— discipline (ṡīla), one-pointed concentration (samadhi), and wisdom (prajñā) — can also be regarded as a personification of Mara. Thus, how can a buddha offer distractions from the path of awakening? For what possible reason?

Any entity which manifests through a trance medium and claims to be either a buddha or an āryabodhisattva is necessarily a māra, and further, anyone who claims an entity who manifests through a trance medium is a buddha or āryabodhisattva is either mistaken due to ignorance or is deluded.

[Malcolm]

Perhaps, but I do hope that we can keep arguing about the oracle stuff.

Predicted response: Sherab will argue that precedence is not sufficiently reasonable.....

This is really uncalled for since I have already stated that it is both unskillful and unnecessary for a Buddha to manifest through a medium. But that does not imply that the Buddha does not have the power to manifest through a medium. The absence of evidence of a Buddha manifesting through a medium can support the claim that such a manifestation would be unskillful and unnecessary but it does not support the claim that the Buddha does not have the power to manifest through a medium.

In other words, as I predicted, you are arguing that precedence is not sufficiently reasonable to eliminate the claim the Buddha can speak through a trance medium. Sigh.

[A Ah Sha Sa Ma Ha]

As a general rule, anything or person that offers a distraction from the three trainings of the path— discipline (ṡīla), one-pointed concentration (samadhi), and wisdom (prajñā) — can also be regarded as a personification of Mara. Thus, how can a buddha offer distractions from the path of awakening? For what possible reason?

Then why did the Nechung Kuten recognize this woman, Yeye Omileye as the Mamaki Emanation ?

Do you think she hypnotized him ? (She is also a hypnotist)

[cyril]

As a general rule, anything or person that offers a distraction from the three trainings of the path— discipline (ṡīla), one-pointed concentration (samadhi), and wisdom (prajñā) — can also be regarded as a personification of Mara. Thus, how can a buddha offer distractions from the path of awakening? For what possible reason?

Then why did the Nechung Kuten recognize this woman, Yeye Omileye as the Mamaki Emanation ?

Do you think she hypnotized him ? (She is also a hypnotist)

I remember Nebesky-Wojkowitz mentioning at some point in his famous book that sometimes oracles get bribed to provide a certain desired answer or to recognize so-and-so as being the reincarnation of so-and-so. I am not saying that this is the case; just that there are many mundane explanations one could think of.

[A Ah Sha Sa Ma Ha]

I remember Nebesky-Wojkowitz mentioning at some point in his famous book that sometimes oracles get bribed to provide a certain desired answer or to recognize so-and-so as being the reincarnation of so-and-so. I am not saying that this is the case; just that there are many mundane explanations one could think of.

Amazing...they can be bribed..
Amazing the lengths people will go to fabricate...just to get rich & famous (if that what she's doing)
We really don't know the full story...i normally don't get so involved or worked up in these things either..
But i am looking forward to the movie or series that will come out, showing the ceremony...etc....
I guess i want it to be true too, (that she is the Mamaki Emanation).....

[PeterC]

I guess i want it to be true too, (that she is the Mamaki Emanation).....

Why on earth would you want this to be true? It is such an obvious scam. This sort of nonsense can only be harmful to the Dharma. Frankly the use of spirit oracles is something that really shouldn’t be widely publicized in the first place, because it gives people the wrong impression regarding the vajrayana.

When you think a little about what people like this Yeye character are doing, you realise that they take money from ill-informed and credulous people, and in this case they propagate false dharma. They should be denounced.

[PeterC]

As a general rule, anything or person that offers a distraction from the three trainings of the path— discipline (ṡīla), one-pointed concentration (samadhi), and wisdom (prajñā) — can also be regarded as a personification of Mara. Thus, how can a buddha offer distractions from the path of awakening? For what possible reason?

Then why did the Nechung Kuten recognize this woman, Yeye Omileye as the Mamaki Emanation ?

Do you think she hypnotized him ? (She is also a hypnotist)

I remember Nebesky-Wojkowitz mentioning at some point in his famous book that sometimes oracles get bribed to provide a certain desired answer or to recognize so-and-so as being the reincarnation of so-and-so. I am not saying that this is the case; just that there are many mundane explanations one could think of.

Speculating here. Let’s say she gets the right introductions by making various donations to his entourage. He’s told that she is some kind of oracle for another tradition, the lama rationalizes it within his frame of reference (if she’s an oracle she must be some kind of emanation, perhaps it’s an emanation of this figure, who knows). The lama is persuaded to perform some kind of blessing ceremony. Various vague comments are made and improperly translated, again money changed hands and someone in the entourage drafts a statement of some kind. All the while photos are being taken. We don’t have to believe that the oracle himself was bribed to see how this could all have been set up.

I’m now channelling my own spirit oracle who tells me that Malcolm will weigh in on the general nonsensicality of institutional recognition in 3...2...1...

[A Ah Sha Sa Ma Ha]

this could all have been set up.

Yeah true...but what if it wasn't ?????

Why on earth would you want this to be true?

Because i'd be really pissed if it wasn't ! Just like you guys are pissed now.

Maybe i am very naive

[cyril]

Then why did the Nechung Kuten recognize this woman, Yeye Omileye as the Mamaki Emanation ?

Do you think she hypnotized him ? (She is also a hypnotist)

I remember Nebesky-Wojkowitz mentioning at some point in his famous book that sometimes oracles get bribed to provide a certain desired answer or to recognize so-and-so as being the reincarnation of so-and-so. I am not saying that this is the case; just that there are many mundane explanations one could think of.

Speculating here. Let’s say she gets the right introductions by making various donations to his entourage. He’s told that she is some kind of oracle for another tradition, the lama rationalizes it within his frame of reference (if she’s an oracle she must be some kind of emanation, perhaps it’s an emanation of this figure, who knows). The lama is persuaded to perform some kind of blessing ceremony. Various vague comments are made and improperly translated, again money changed hands and someone in the entourage drafts a statement of some kind. All the while photos are being taken. We don’t have to believe that the oracle himself was bribed to see how this could all have been set up.

I’m now channelling my own spirit oracle who tells me that Malcolm will weigh in on the general nonsensicality of institutional recognition in 3...2...1...

Yes, of course, that was exactly my point. There are so many ordinary explanations one can come up with before invoking hypnotic suggestion and other stuff like that.

[Kris]

Did anyone else take the time to listen to this sisters take of the whole ceremony?
http://www.yeyeosun.com/wp-content/uplo ... -2018.mp3

Edit: If you want to get straight to her talking about the ceremony start around 48 minutes in.

[cyril]

Is the source of this story legit herself? :

''Lama Yeshe Dechen Wangmo became a lineage holder of The Dakini Heart Essence (mkha 'gro thug thig), a treasure teaching of His Holiness Dudjom Rinpoche, when Repkong Lama Tharchin Tsedrup Rinpoche enthroned her in 1992.

Based on thirty-eight years of vajrayana study and practice in Canada and the United States, her knowledge is informed by personal retreats, competence in literary Tibetan, and personal guidance from the 16th Karmapa, Kalu Rinpoche, His Holiness Dudjom Rinpoche, Dungse Thinley Norbu Rinpoche and Lama Tsedrup Tharchin Rinpoche.''

It seems odd that someone so well qualified and experienced would make such a basic error.

I never met Lama Yeshe Dechen Wangmo in person and I know nothing about her qualifications. However, a few years ago she initiated a project named "pearl mala" to which I have made a modest donation. During the following year, I received a lot of unsolicited e-mails from LYDW's organization, Jnanasukha from which I learned about her activities. I couldn't help but notice that they had a very strong feminist bend to say the least, which really put me off because I really don't like it when various social or political ideologies are being mixed with Dharma. I imagine therefore that a strong bias such as this could have make her blind to the obvious and make her fall for this whole shebang.

[dzogchungpa]

Did anyone else take the time to listen to this sisters take of the whole ceremony?
http://www.yeyeosun.com/wp-content/uplo ... -2018.mp3

Edit: If you want to get straight to her talking about the ceremony start around 48 minutes in.

OK, I'm checking it out. The part about the ceremony starts at about 51:40 to be precise.

Also, she responds to Vajrayana World taking down that page here:
https://www.facebook.com/omileye.achike ... 6272591774

[A Ah Sha Sa Ma Ha]

Did anyone else take the time to listen to this sisters take of the whole ceremony?
http://www.yeyeosun.com/wp-content/uplo ... -2018.mp3

Edit: If you want to get straight to her talking about the ceremony start around 48 minutes in.

I listened to the whole thing....at the end now while the guests are talking....

She sounds very sincere. Beautiful voice. Sounds like she is authentic to me. Maybe others will be more convinced when they SEE
the videos, etc. Sometimes you gotta see it to believe it ? They sure went through a lot of special planning ...enough time to determine if she was a phoney or not.....but her karma made it happen....

[tingdzin]

It seems that there are those who have a vested interest in seeing this as being true, and others who have a similarly strong personal interest in seeing it as false. IMO, there are (more than a few) outright frauds and (many) self-deluded people who are doing worse damage to the teachings of the Buddhas than this woman, who is probably a flash in the pan anyway. Those who want all her claims to be true should ask themselves if they would feel the same and as strongly if the medium in question were a man, and those who sneeringly denounce her should ask themselves why that is. While it is true that according to strict doctrine, Buddhas do not speak through mediums, there is a whole lot of valuable stuff in the practice of (particularly) Vajrayana for which convincing scriptural justification is rather hard to find.

Never mind -- "the jackal barks, the caravan passes". It's probably more fruitful to spend more time in one's own practice than to feel that one has to be the Defender of True Buddhiam.

[A Ah Sha Sa Ma Ha]

Buddhas do not speak through mediums

Mamaki is a consort (of Ratnasambhava)....a Goddess ....is she also a female buddha ?

Anyways....maybe this explains it :

https://books.google.com/books?id=DbxE8 ... ha&f=false


ok :

http://www.rigpawiki.org/index.php?title=Mamaki

[PeterC]

It seems that there are those who have a vested interest in seeing this as being true, and others who have a similarly strong personal interest in seeing it as false. IMO, there are (more than a few) outright frauds and (many) self-deluded people who are doing worse damage to the teachings of the Buddhas than this woman, who is probably a flash in the pan anyway. Those who want all her claims to be true should ask themselves if they would feel the same and as strongly if the medium in question were a man, and those who sneeringly denounce her should ask themselves why that is. While it is true that according to strict doctrine, Buddhas do not speak through mediums, there is a whole lot of valuable stuff in the practice of (particularly) Vajrayana for which convincing scriptural justification is rather hard to find.

Never mind -- "the jackal barks, the caravan passes". It's probably more fruitful to spend more time in one's own practice than to feel that one has to be the Defender of True Buddhiam.

I think we need an emoji on this forum of a straw man, it would shorten a lot of posts.

Everyone is of course free to believe what they want. But among the 'sneering denouncers' you will find people who are pointing out what sutra and tantra actually *says* on this, and what historical precedent is. Everyone should care about that, otherwise you're then on the slippery slope to just making it up as you go along. There are plenty of other reasons to dislike this, not least the heavy scent of new age con artist BS, but those have been discussed above.

[tingdzin]

From the highest point of view, Mamaki is the name given to a type of awakened dynamic presence that sentient beings, dumbing it down through ignorance, perceive as "water". Perceiving "her" to be female is to some degree just a matter of convention and convenience. To perceive Mamaki as to be a "goddess", like Athena or Durga, is just a way for human beings to frame metaphorically what the name stands for. Further, to consider Mamaki to be somehow separate from her "consort" is not in accordance with the Vajrayana in its most developed form. As the quote points out, this conception of Mamaki may not have always been visible in the sutras and tantras, but since presumably we Vajrayana practitioners are all aiming to practice from the most profound perspective (though few if any of us can actually realize it fully), we are settling for chaff while throwing away the grain if we try to bring "Mamaki" down to our level, rather than raising ourself up to an experience of hers.

[tingdzin]

But among the 'sneering denouncers' you will find people who are pointing out what sutra and tantra actually *says* on this, and what historical precedent is.

WEll, I thought I made it clear that I myself don't give much credence to the whole business, and Malcolm's objections, for example, do not have much feel of sneering contempt in them, but are based in simple expressions of what the scriptures say. It's the condescending tone of some of the sneerers, rather than the content of their disagreements, that might be taken issue to. Not a single one of my teachers in any Buddhist school has ever exhibited sarcastic contempt for questions or misunderstandings, however ignorant. People who reply sarcastically generally do so from a feeling of superiority, which is hardly part of the Mahayana path.