Diana Mukpo’s potent letter re: Shambhala

[Schrödinger’s Yidam]

FYI I thought my post you just quoted was badly written so I deleted most of it. But you caught me before the edit went through, so...

Take 100 cruel selfish tantric teachers. 99 will be fakes and 1 will be Tilopa.

You’re being generous. I’d say 99.9% fake vs .1% realized.

Caveat Emptor. Instead you could go see a Karmapa or Dilgo Khyntse or Namkhai Norbu, etc and never have to deal with this stupid dilemma.

Yes, that is my preferred way to deal with the issue too.

But if you’re going to practice HYT you’ve got to let go of impure vision of life. That starts with letting go of impure vision of guru. And if on the odd chance your guru actually is a Buddha, any impurities you see in him actually are just the dirt in your own eyes.

It’s important to understand the theory behind the practice. But as you said, why not avoid a dilemma and get a well behaved guru instead?

dzongsar khyentse rinpoche-la makes it clear in the guru drinks bourbon? that it depends more on the student's view than the teacher's wisdom.

Like I said the point is to overcome our own impure vision. Among other things this opens our minds enough to receive blessings. I know that is unpopular to say, but it’s an important point to make.

[Arupajhana7]

I realize this isn't necessarily "standard", and I also know that for some people the more traditional hierarchy plays a significant role, I don't think it's wrong or lesser, i just don't think it's a given for all people or groups, much less a requirement for pure vision of one's Guru, which has zero to do with one's place in a pecking order with others, nor with following specific social customs. That is replacing the Dharma with particular Tibetan mores, which we can see have not always been in place, and are often disputed, or at least deeply questioned from within the traditions themselves.

I also really don't know why people keep beating their heads against the wall, implicitly recommending that people maintain pure vision of someone who raped or molested them. Do you think the average practitioner is even capable of that?

I mean really, whatever the solution is, that is not it. Or more accurately, while It would be greatly meritorious for them to retain pure vision here, perhaps also they can maintain that pure vision while the people doing the raping get held accountable...how's that for a compromise.

Thank you for saying this. I think it is unreasonable to ask people to maintain pure vision of abusers and personally believe that most who attempt to do so are actually disassociating themselves from the reality of their emotions and experience, thus pulling them further away from reality and not closer to it. I think it's not something you can fake, especially under such extreme circumstances.

But at the very least, yes they should be held accountable. Vast view does not undo relative reality. If the guru can maintain vast view while committing a harmful act they can do it while experiencing the consequences of their relative behavior. When they dodge such consequences it signals to me that they didn't really act out of non-dual wisdom but out of ego. It seems like self-protective behavior. All observable indicators would suggest that.

It is also really bad for the Dharma as a whole and for Tibetan Buddhism in particular. When teachers are allowed to go on acting like this until it all collapses in some big international news event like this, it causes many blocks for people currently practicing dharma and discourages new people from doing so. It also is bad for the public perception of Dharma practitioners and may result in prejudice and discrimination obstacles for decent lamas or teachers trying to establish dharma centers and sanghas.

[PeterC]

what if these 'questionable' teachers really are sacrificing all their worldly renown and so on in order to greatly benefit those who have various degrees of pure vision?

But they're not. This is a very important point. When they're caught, they go into long apologias or self-justifications. They are clearly very, very concerned about their worldly renown. Lakhar wrote about how much he cared for his students and went into retreat. Mukpo talked about his deep love for the sangha and the teachings, his wish to improve and his desire to support his father's special lineage. If they were genuinely unaffected by the worldly dharmas, their response would have been completely different. Their behavior is similar to the televangelist who gets caught spending the church's money on hookers - they turn their failure into a perverse justification of their holiness.

Tilopa did not apologize for his behavior or try to explain it in terms of his care for his students, because Tilopa was free from the worldly dharmas. Today's false gurus show deep attachment to the worldly dharmas, and that shows that they are not, in fact, acting unconventionally because they care for their students: they're acting unconventionally (from a sila perspective) because they like women, alcohol, cars, expensive food, etc. - in other words, by mundane standards, their behavior is completely conventional and contains nothing of the Dharma in it.

At this point someone truly delusional could say - aha, suppose it's a huge double-bluff? They're really pure teachers pretending to be impure teachers to trick us? Which is, of course, possible, just as it's possible that we're disembodied brains in vats of chemicals being manipulated by evil aliens. It's just not very *likely*. And since we have limited time in this human life, we have to make choices on how to use it based on what is likely to benefit us the most. Therefore no sensible person would follow these people: they would instead follow one of the many teachers in the world today with excellent moral conduct and deep knowledge of the Dharma, of which there are still many to be found.

[amanitamusc]

what if these 'questionable' teachers really are sacrificing all their worldly renown and so on in order to greatly benefit those who have various degrees of pure vision?

But they're not. This is a very important point. When they're caught, they go into long apologias or self-justifications. They are clearly very, very concerned about their worldly renown. Lakhar wrote about how much he cared for his students and went into retreat. Mukpo talked about his deep love for the sangha and the teachings, his wish to improve and his desire to support his father's special lineage. If they were genuinely unaffected by the worldly dharmas, their response would have been completely different. Their behavior is similar to the televangelist who gets caught spending the church's money on hookers - they turn their failure into a perverse justification of their holiness.

Tilopa did not apologize for his behavior or try to explain it in terms of his care for his students, because Tilopa was free from the worldly dharmas. Today's false gurus show deep attachment to the worldly dharmas, and that shows that they are not, in fact, acting unconventionally because they care for their students: they're acting unconventionally (from a sila perspective) because they like women, alcohol, cars, expensive food, etc. - in other words, by mundane standards, their behavior is completely conventional and contains nothing of the Dharma in it.

At this point someone truly delusional could say - aha, suppose it's a huge double-bluff? They're really pure teachers pretending to be impure teachers to trick us? Which is, of course, possible, just as it's possible that we're disembodied brains in vats of chemicals being manipulated by evil aliens. It's just not very *likely*. And since we have limited time in this human life, we have to make choices on how to use it based on what is likely to benefit us the most. Therefore no sensible person would follow these people: they would instead follow one of the many teachers in the world today with excellent moral conduct and deep knowledge of the Dharma, of which there are still many to be found.

This is a good point that both Lakhar and Mukpo are taking the back seat.I hope there are not any victims in the back seat.

[treehuggingoctopus]

dzongsar khyentse rinpoche-la makes it clear in the guru drinks bourbon? that it depends more on the student's view than the teacher's wisdom. what if these 'questionable' teachers really are sacrificing all their worldly renown and so on in order to greatly benefit those who have various degrees of pure vision?

Copy-pasting these views and attitudes from one culture to another will just not do.

[TrimePema]

what if these 'questionable' teachers really are sacrificing all their worldly renown and so on in order to greatly benefit those who have various degrees of pure vision?

But they're not. This is a very important point. When they're caught, they go into long apologias or self-justifications. They are clearly very, very concerned about their worldly renown. Lakhar wrote about how much he cared for his students and went into retreat. Mukpo talked about his deep love for the sangha and the teachings, his wish to improve and his desire to support his father's special lineage. If they were genuinely unaffected by the worldly dharmas, their response would have been completely different. Their behavior is similar to the televangelist who gets caught spending the church's money on hookers - they turn their failure into a perverse justification of their holiness.

Tilopa did not apologize for his behavior or try to explain it in terms of his care for his students, because Tilopa was free from the worldly dharmas. Today's false gurus show deep attachment to the worldly dharmas, and that shows that they are not, in fact, acting unconventionally because they care for their students: they're acting unconventionally (from a sila perspective) because they like women, alcohol, cars, expensive food, etc. - in other words, by mundane standards, their behavior is completely conventional and contains nothing of the Dharma in it.

At this point someone truly delusional could say - aha, suppose it's a huge double-bluff? They're really pure teachers pretending to be impure teachers to trick us? Which is, of course, possible, just as it's possible that we're disembodied brains in vats of chemicals being manipulated by evil aliens. It's just not very *likely*. And since we have limited time in this human life, we have to make choices on how to use it based on what is likely to benefit us the most. Therefore no sensible person would follow these people: they would instead follow one of the many teachers in the world today with excellent moral conduct and deep knowledge of the Dharma, of which there are still many to be found.

what matters is not what you think - it is actually the benefit of the action, which is unfathomable.

[TrimePema]

what if these 'questionable' teachers really are sacrificing all their worldly renown and so on in order to greatly benefit those who have various degrees of pure vision?

But they're not. This is a very important point. When they're caught, they go into long apologias or self-justifications. They are clearly very, very concerned about their worldly renown. Lakhar wrote about how much he cared for his students and went into retreat. Mukpo talked about his deep love for the sangha and the teachings, his wish to improve and his desire to support his father's special lineage. If they were genuinely unaffected by the worldly dharmas, their response would have been completely different. Their behavior is similar to the televangelist who gets caught spending the church's money on hookers - they turn their failure into a perverse justification of their holiness.

Tilopa did not apologize for his behavior or try to explain it in terms of his care for his students, because Tilopa was free from the worldly dharmas. Today's false gurus show deep attachment to the worldly dharmas, and that shows that they are not, in fact, acting unconventionally because they care for their students: they're acting unconventionally (from a sila perspective) because they like women, alcohol, cars, expensive food, etc. - in other words, by mundane standards, their behavior is completely conventional and contains nothing of the Dharma in it.

At this point someone truly delusional could say - aha, suppose it's a huge double-bluff? They're really pure teachers pretending to be impure teachers to trick us? Which is, of course, possible, just as it's possible that we're disembodied brains in vats of chemicals being manipulated by evil aliens. It's just not very *likely*. And since we have limited time in this human life, we have to make choices on how to use it based on what is likely to benefit us the most. Therefore no sensible person would follow these people: they would instead follow one of the many teachers in the world today with excellent moral conduct and deep knowledge of the Dharma, of which there are still many to be found.

Then you think HHDL is truly delusional. Go research his views on Pabongkha Rinpoche and Trijang Rinpoche. That is what he says about them.

[PeterC]

what matters is not what you think - it is actually the benefit of the action, which is unfathomable.

It’s totally fathomable. They’re abusive narcissistic and possibly sociopathic assholes whose actions have no benefit except to themselves, for the most part. All the facts support that quite reasonable conclusion. What’s unfathomable is why you keep posting these nonsensical Panglossian statements. Either you’re discussing in bad faith, or you’re an apologist, or you’re being extremely naive.

[Donny]

If you want to see and relate to the Teacher as an ordinary being just like ourselves, then stick to the Shravakayana and Mahayana.

I think you can add to that the three lower/outer Tantras.

Hey, it’s good enough!

is a Tantric magician with some minor powers and accomplishments worthy of such veneration if his character is still arrogant, devious, manipulative, insecure and greedy? In an age of charlatans isn't taming one's character the real siddhi? Even if you accomplish Shamatha you can do amazing things. But that is not what makes a teacher.

Exactly! I always have the feeling that the more contemporary form of "crazy wisdom" would be a person with flawless conduct and ethics. That would be completely against all norms.

[Grigoris]

In a hedonistic societies like ours, an ethical ascetic is the one displaying "crazy wisdom".

[Arupajhana7]

I believe the Dalai Lama has taken a clear stance against abusive behavior from gurus:

[Könchok Thrinley]

In a hedonistic societies like ours, an ethical ascetic is the one displaying "crazy wisdom".

Cannot be stressed enough.

Although, I cant agree more with saying that we should see our gurus with pure vision, however on the other hand... following a bad teacher is like drinking a poison. Such simple thing as pure ethics seem to be quite understated in the west. Here it is all about meditation. Which is cool. But we need the rest too. Maybe people like to believe their gurus are "crazy wisdom" gurus and not sharlatans because it makes the ego feel nice. Who else but a special being could be a student of someone who does not need such useless thing as pure ethics.

If you wanna see real crazy go to see Chetsang Rinpoche who not only went through cultural revolution but took part in it as a highschool student and helped his classmates and after that lived in a shack toiling from dusk till dawn. Thats crazy. If you want real crazy go see Garchen Rinpoche whose love and compassion are beyond anything I could ever imagine. And all developed in prison. If you want real crazy go see some ordinary lama who will tell you to do ngöndro first or to start with basics in general and will put a fight when it comes to dana. Thats real crazy.

[catmoon]

What a shit fest!

It's rather similar to what happens when the cargo cable snaps on a helicopter flying over the Super Bowl, and the cargo of sixteen overloaded Porta Potties carpet bombs the marching band below.

Why did this all happen? Cast your mind back to when the Buddha was dying. "Who will be your successor? How will it be decided?" they asked. And he said "Do not elect a successor. Let the gathered Sangha make the decisions, following the Dharma." Welp, they went ahead and put a Boss in Charge and gave him Power and Authority in direct contradiction of the Buddha's instructions. You'd think someone would have caught that one right away.

It's an awful shame about the marching band below... not a few were seriously hurt. On the other hand, due to the self sacrifice of these unwitting Bodhisattvas, an audience of 120,000 in the stadium learned firsthand about the dangers of suspending sixteen bulging Porta Potties from a single cable. And the television audience was in the tens of millions. We are talking massive direct enlightenment here.

[Schrödinger’s Yidam]

What’s unfathomable is why you keep posting these nonsensical Panglossian statements. Either you’re discussing in bad faith, or you’re an apologist, or you’re being extremely naive.

My understanding of the Vajrayana view is that it is far beyond Panglossian without being at all naive. It is 100% incompatible with a pedestrian view of life & reality.

So if you’re having trouble groking that you’re in the right ballpark. One of the key points is to let go of your attachment to the normal way you see things. If you want to see life on the essential level you’ve got to let go of criticisms and finding fault in anything whatsoever. Panglossian is headed in the right direction but falls far short of Vajrayana view.

Just sharing.

[PeterC]

What’s unfathomable is why you keep posting these nonsensical Panglossian statements. Either you’re discussing in bad faith, or you’re an apologist, or you’re being extremely naive.

My understanding of the Vajrayana view is that it is far beyond Panglossian without being at all naive. It is 100% incompatible with a pedestrian view of life & reality.

So if you’re having trouble groking that you’re in the right ballpark. One of the key points is to let go of your attachment to the normal way you see things. If you want to see life on the essential level you’ve got to let go of criticisms and finding fault in anything whatsoever. Panglossian is headed in the right direction but falls far short of Vajrayana view.

Just sharing.

Your comment, much like TrimePemas’, essentially says “you don’t understand the vajrayana, I do” - which is a bold assertion.

It’s always possible to invoke inconceivable view and unfathomable wisdom as a catch-all explanation. It’s a specious argument for the reasons I told TrimePema: in fact there’s little point of a discussion where it is constantly put forward. If you want to take people like Lakhar or Mukpo Jr as your gurus, I can only feel sorry for you. All the reasons why you should not are in the public domain, so at this point I guess it’s an informed decision.

[DechenDave]

what matters is not what you think - it is actually the benefit of the action, which is unfathomable.

It’s totally fathomable. They’re abusive narcissistic and possibly sociopathic assholes whose actions have no benefit except to themselves, for the most part. All the facts support that quite reasonable conclusion. What’s unfathomable is why you keep posting these nonsensical Panglossian statements. Either you’re discussing in bad faith, or you’re an apologist, or you’re being extremely naive.

Had to look up “Panglossian”. Nice reference.

[Nemo]

In a hedonistic societies like ours, an ethical ascetic is the one displaying "crazy wisdom".

Trungpa was a shit magnet. Sadly his group seems unable to fix this on their own since they are so brainwashed and invested in this fake "crazy wisdom" narrative and the pomp of fake royalty. Real crazy wisdom Gurus could drink molten lead. Next time one of these rapey weirdos on a throne pretends to be a Mahasiddha give him a cup of molten lead and say prove it. If they refuse they can be a wandering homeless weirdo like almost all of the real crazy wisdom Gurus of the past. You guys really blew it. All you did was make Dharma look bad. There was no miracle to wash it all away and make a point. Just a long tragedy of using human beings like toys for the amusement of narcissists and sociopaths.

The similarities to the Scientology cult are becoming very apparent. I would suggest watching Scientology and the Aftermath.
[media]https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x550m1t[/media]

[Nemo]

P.S. If one of these sketchy people showed you Dzogchen View or Mahamudra you are soooo screwed. You have my sympathy. You cannot escape.

[Lhasa]

In a hedonistic societies like ours, an ethical ascetic is the one displaying "crazy wisdom".

Trungpa was a shit magnet. Sadly his group seems unable to fix this on their own since they are so brainwashed and invested in this fake "crazy wisdom" narrative and the pomp of fake royalty. Real crazy wisdom Gurus could drink molten lead. Next time one of these rapey weirdos on a throne pretends to be a Mahasiddha give him a cup of molten lead and say prove it. If they refuse they can be a wandering homeless weirdo like almost all of the real crazy wisdom Gurus of the past. You guys really blew it. All you did was make Dharma look bad. There was no miracle to wash it all away and make a point. Just a long tragedy of using human beings like toys for the amusement of narcissists and sociopaths.

The similarities to the Scientology cult are becoming very apparent. I would suggest watching Scientology and the Aftermath.
[media]https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x550m1t[/media]

And Siddha Yoga....

[Lhasa]

P.S. If one of these sketchy people showed you Dzogchen View or Mahamudra you are soooo screwed. You have my sympathy. You cannot escape.

Please elaborate.