How to know which image is restricted? (Split from "Do you know this diety?")

[yagmort]

[Mod note:] Topic split from here https://dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?p=546960#p546960

i'm confused how do we expect a vajrayana amateur to go about lots and lots of images over the web if none of them are said to be restricted, unlike texts? in case of images how do we recognise a restricted image before we look at it? seems impossible. has this issue been addressed by any lama/Rinpoche? should we purify our negative karma in case we stumbled upon a picture we shouldn't suppose to see?

[Matt J]

This is something of a hollow concern to my ears. If people are taking up a spiritual practice, we can expect them to treat it better than a minor hobby, can't we? Vajrayana is nothing to mess around with.

And if they don't, well, they learn on forums like this.

[Mod note:] Topic split from here https://dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?p=546960#p546960

i'm confused how do we expect a vajrayana amateur to go about lots and lots of images over the web if none of them are said to be restricted, unlike texts? in case of images how do we recognise a restricted image before we look at it? seems impossible. has this issue been addressed by any lama/Rinpoche? should we purify our negative karma in case we stumbled upon a picture we shouldn't suppose to see?

[GrapeLover]

This is something of a hollow concern to my ears. If people are taking up a spiritual practice, we can expect them to treat it better than a minor hobby, can't we? Vajrayana is nothing to mess around with.

And if they don't, well, they learn on forums like this.

[Mod note:] Topic split from here https://dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?p=546960#p546960

i'm confused how do we expect a vajrayana amateur to go about lots and lots of images over the web if none of them are said to be restricted, unlike texts? in case of images how do we recognise a restricted image before we look at it? seems impossible. has this issue been addressed by any lama/Rinpoche? should we purify our negative karma in case we stumbled upon a picture we shouldn't suppose to see?

It seems their concern is more about the negative impact of seeing such pictures, which is easy to do even when browsing carefully and responsibly, rather than sharing them. I assume you’re talking about people sharing them frivolously.

[Malcolm]

[Mod note:] Topic split from here https://dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?p=546960#p546960

i'm confused how do we expect a vajrayana amateur to go about lots and lots of images over the web if none of them are said to be restricted, unlike texts? in case of images how do we recognise a restricted image before we look at it? seems impossible. has this issue been addressed by any lama/Rinpoche? should we purify our negative karma in case we stumbled upon a picture we shouldn't suppose to see?

It is not your negative karma if you see; it is your negative karma if you share, since it is a violation of branch samayas. If you do not have such samayas, then it is just art.

[yagmort]

that's crystal clear. thank you.

[Matt J]

You're right. Karmic vision strikes again!

This is something of a hollow concern to my ears. If people are taking up a spiritual practice, we can expect them to treat it better than a minor hobby, can't we? Vajrayana is nothing to mess around with.

And if they don't, well, they learn on forums like this.

[Mod note:] Topic split from here https://dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?p=546960#p546960

i'm confused how do we expect a vajrayana amateur to go about lots and lots of images over the web if none of them are said to be restricted, unlike texts? in case of images how do we recognise a restricted image before we look at it? seems impossible. has this issue been addressed by any lama/Rinpoche? should we purify our negative karma in case we stumbled upon a picture we shouldn't suppose to see?

It seems their concern is more about the negative impact of seeing such pictures, which is easy to do even when browsing carefully and responsibly, rather than sharing them. I assume you’re talking about people sharing them frivolously.

[Fortyeightvows]

The other thing to add is that the same people who say it shouldn't be public are the same people who will have a totally open public webcast, where they show the images, say the mantras, etc.
Those webcasts are just as public as being online.
And for that matter, some empowerment that is totally open to whoever shows up, those thing will be shown, the event itself where those things are shown is public !

[Norwegian]

The other thing to add is that the same people who say it shouldn't be public are the same people who will have a totally open public webcast, where they show the images, say the mantras, etc.
Those webcasts are just as public as being online.
And for that matter, some empowerment that is totally open to whoever shows up, those thing will be shown, the event itself where those things are shown is public !

An "open public webcast" are for those who are interested in these teachings, in order to practice them, in a qualified way. Samaya still applies. It always does.

That is very different from putting something in the open online without that specific context of a retreat, etc., like spare radio parts spread out on an open table, without context, without being connected to the transmission.

Do you understand what the difference is?

[Fortyeightvows]

either way, anyone who is interested is just a few clicks away

[Norwegian]

either way, anyone who is interested is just a few clicks away

Just like anyone who is interested can attend a teaching by His Holiness the Dalai Lama, His Holiness Sakya Trichen, and so on. You have to actively participate and then you receive it in a proper way. Then it can be beneficial.

[Danny]

I assume you’re talking about people sharing them frivolously.

Years ago I sat in on the preparation for a vase empowerment, just myself, alone and Rinpoche doing his thing. I was really curious about went into such a empowerment, not just attending it. Rinpoche was super cool about that, but the sangha was another story. They tried ever so quietly to chase me out of there. They failed. Had a great meeting afterwards with Rinpoche and I had questions about all the preparations, and he answered and explained everything, so I understood not only the “why”, but also the “how” about what was going on. So when you say frivolously sharing, I agree completely, but also when others say I want to understand, then be super cool and try your best to explain, be honest about it if you can. Don’t be like sangha and just try and chase people away Just because you have that idea that’s what is expected.

[GrapeLover]

I assume you’re talking about people sharing them frivolously.

Years ago I sat in on the preparation for a vase empowerment, just myself, alone and Rinpoche doing his thing. I was really curious about went into such a empowerment, not just attending it. Rinpoche was super cool about that, but the sangha was another story. They tried ever so quietly to chase me out of there. They failed. Had a great meeting afterwards with Rinpoche and I had questions about all the preparations, and he answered and explained everything, so I understood not only the “why”, but also the “how” about what was going on. So when you say frivolously sharing, I agree completely, but also when others say I want to understand, then be super cool and try your best to explain, be honest about it if you can. Don’t be like sangha and just try and chase people away Just because you have that idea that’s what is expected.

Personally, I am of the opinion that the images themselves are already out there, and, in light of this, it probably does more harm than good to withhold the explanations. Not in terms of practices, super-specifics, and knowledge that actually could be harmful, but broader explanation of imagery etc.

This is similar to Dr Nida Chenagtsang’s justification for releasing his book on karmamudra. In the introduction he basically says that people already know it exists, are already scandalised, already think the worst, etc—the only thing they don’t know is the actual wisdom behind it, basically. So it made the most sense to him to publish an actual explanation.

So I agree.

[Cinnabar]

So I agree.

There is a meta-level to this.

That's less about what the rules are, what's restricted and what's not restricted, what norm this lama set, and so on.

It's about what type of practitioner do you want to be and why. The one that blazes tantric images or the one that is on the down low.

[GrapeLover]

So I agree.

There is a meta-level to this.

That's less about what the rules are, what's restricted and what's not restricted, what norm this lama set, and so on.

It's about what type of practitioner do you want to be and why. The one that blazes tantric images or the one that is on the down low.

Yes, I haven’t really said anything about sharing images. I was just agreeing that a level of explanation can be appropriate if it is sought.