The context does not change. In terms of us it means reciting mantras and performance of rituals and or prayers. Dakinis then take care of the actions. In the case of a realized master one manifests as a deity and does the action.PadmaVonSamba wrote: ↑Mon Feb 08, 2021 11:31 amWhich brings us back to the original question:Varis wrote: ↑Mon Feb 08, 2021 7:51 amThe concept of subduing and binding spirits exists in every culture. There was even an entire genre of books about the subject that used to be very popular in Western culture until the enlightenment era.PadmaVonSamba wrote: ↑Sun Feb 07, 2021 10:04 pm I suspect that it’s a very poetic way of saying that he took the existing religious methodologies (deities, rituals, etc) and turned them into Vajrayana Buddhist practices.
Wherever Buddhism spreads, it absorbs the local culture. Other cultures might not rely as heavily on the literary imagery of ‘subduing and bounding’ to get the point across.
To Tibetans it's very literal.
...and comes back to my inquiry as to what that ‘bounding and subduing’ actually comes down to, what it actually means.Crazywisdom wrote: ↑Sun Feb 07, 2021 10:50 am A master like Guru Padmasambhava is said to have subdued spirits and bound them by oath to serve mantra folks. So why isn't everyone subdued and bound by oath?
In the movie, ‘Ghost Busters’ the spirits were sucked into a kind of vacuum cleaner. Guru Rinpoche didn’t have one of those.
So, if ‘bounding and subduing’ is going to occur today, or is to be applied to all classes of beings, then to answer the original (OP) question, then an explanation of ‘bounding and subduing’ is necessary.
I also think discussing it will be of benefit to vajrayana students and practitioners. These types of (I called it ‘poetic’) phrases show up a lot and are casually and automatically accepted and used, but perhaps with only a vague sense of what they imply (which, again, brings us back to the question posed in the OP).
So, what would ‘bounding and subduing’ mean in today’s context?
Subduing and Oath Binding
Re: Subduing and Oath Binding
Re: Subduing and Oath Binding
This is the Crux of the idea.fckw wrote: ↑Sun Feb 07, 2021 8:27 pm It's a truly odd question. I don't remember where it is said but the historical buddha clearly rejected the idea that an enlightened being can "cause" realization in anyone else in the sense like flipping on a switch. So, why should Padmasambhava be able to do such a thing?
Re: Subduing and Oath Binding
Yes one does read about some very direct conduct.GrapeLover wrote: ↑Mon Feb 08, 2021 12:37 pmIn terms of wrathful subjugation, for a human, I imagine it would involve something along the lines of threatening to beat them up, actually beating them up if that doesn’t work, then telling them you’ll beat them up again if they don’t behave (and that they’ll go to hell). But that they’ll be taken care of for as long as they do behave. There isn’t really any mind control or anything, and it’s quite a straightforward and understandable occurrence. It’s just a master demonstrating to a spirit that they are more powerful than them and compelling them to accept an oath of samaya on that basis, and then if they break that oath it will have bad consequences for them.PadmaVonSamba wrote: ↑Mon Feb 08, 2021 11:31 amWhich brings us back to the original question:
...and comes back to my inquiry as to what that ‘bounding and subduing’ actually comes down to, what it actually means.Crazywisdom wrote: ↑Sun Feb 07, 2021 10:50 am A master like Guru Padmasambhava is said to have subdued spirits and bound them by oath to serve mantra folks. So why isn't everyone subdued and bound by oath?
In the movie, ‘Ghost Busters’ the spirits were sucked into a kind of vacuum cleaner. Guru Rinpoche didn’t have one of those.
So, if ‘bounding and subduing’ is going to occur today, or is to be applied to all classes of beings, then to answer the original (OP) question, then an explanation of ‘bounding and subduing’ is necessary.
I also think discussing it will be of benefit to vajrayana students and practitioners. These types of (I called it ‘poetic’) phrases show up a lot and are casually and automatically accepted and used, but perhaps with only a vague sense of what they imply (which, again, brings us back to the question posed in the OP).
So, what would ‘bounding and subduing’ mean in today’s context?
Mipham describes wrathful methods as including “ summoning, separating, binding, suppressing, averting, killing, and expelling; terrorizing, such as destroying something or driving someone insane; and creating bad omens, lightning, hail, and so on.”
So bringing that sort of thing to bear on a being in order to subdue it. Wrathful methods may not be necessary if peaceful, enriching or magnetising methods are sufficient to ‘tame’ the being.
As for why it hasn’t been done to everyone, I imagine the answer is along the lines of the fact that it’s quite a miserable experience, and enlightened beings wouldn’t want to increase net mundane suffering for beings who can be brought to liberation through peaceful methods. It’s also not guaranteed to have the desired effect, certainly on a permanent basis.
For the techniques Padmasambhava used, you can read accounts like this https://www.lotsawahouse.org/tibetan-ma ... confidence
Re: Subduing and Oath Binding
Assuming you're a vajrayana practitioner, you should have a general idea of what the six action rituals look like. If not, then go find out.PadmaVonSamba wrote: ↑Mon Feb 08, 2021 11:31 am ...and comes back to my inquiry as to what that ‘bounding and subduing’ actually comes down to, what it actually means.
In the movie, ‘Ghost Busters’ the spirits were sucked into a kind of vacuum cleaner. Guru Rinpoche didn’t have one of those.
So, if ‘bounding and subduing’ is going to occur today, or is to be applied to all classes of beings, then to answer the original (OP) question, then an explanation of ‘bounding and subduing’ is necessary.
I also think discussing it will be of benefit to vajrayana students and practitioners. These types of (I called it ‘poetic’) phrases show up a lot and are casually and automatically accepted and used, but perhaps with only a vague sense of what they imply (which, again, brings us back to the question posed in the OP).
So, what would ‘bounding and subduing’ mean in today’s context?
"I have never encountered a person who committed bad deeds." ― Ven. Jìngkōng
- Sonam Wangchug
- Posts: 427
- Joined: Sat Feb 06, 2010 8:26 pm
Re: Subduing and Oath Binding
They also had to merit to encounter Guru Rinpoche and be bound by him.Crazywisdom wrote: ↑Sun Feb 07, 2021 10:50 am A master like Guru Padmasambhava is said to have subdued spirits and bound them by oath to serve mantra folks. So why isn't everyone subdued and bound by oath?
"To have confidence in the teacher is the ultimate refuge." -Rigzin Jigme Lingpa
Re: Subduing and Oath Binding
I'm sure you did not mean it that way, but this argument could be seriously misunderstood. Particularly, if you consider the more recent Tibetan history and the fate of Vajrayana as a religion in Tibet. And if you go further back in history, also regarding the fate of Vajrayana in India.Sonam Wangchug wrote: ↑Tue Feb 09, 2021 6:15 am They also had to merit to encounter Guru Rinpoche and be bound by him.
- Sonam Wangchug
- Posts: 427
- Joined: Sat Feb 06, 2010 8:26 pm
Re: Subduing and Oath Binding
How so?fckw wrote: ↑Tue Feb 09, 2021 8:35 amI'm sure you did not mean it that way, but this argument could be seriously misunderstood. Particularly, if you consider the more recent Tibetan history and the fate of Vajrayana as a religion in Tibet. And if you go further back in history, also regarding the fate of Vajrayana in India.Sonam Wangchug wrote: ↑Tue Feb 09, 2021 6:15 am They also had to merit to encounter Guru Rinpoche and be bound by him.
"To have confidence in the teacher is the ultimate refuge." -Rigzin Jigme Lingpa
Re: Subduing and Oath Binding
It is the standard argument of every imperialist force in this world when conquering an other's territory, i.e. that it's their own superiority over the primitive others that grants them every right to subdue them and force upon them a new culture, new beliefs, new ways of living. And to punish them accordingly if they don't adopt these new ways of living.
Chinese Maoists burned Tibetan monasteries using exactly this argument.
-
- Posts: 291
- Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2020 12:55 am
Re: Subduing and Oath Binding
It’s quite straightforwardly true that to encounter and make a connection with an enlightened being requires merit, even if they use wrathful methods to tame you. It’s difficult to see how pointing this out would indicate that one sympathises with mundane imperialism or the principle of “might makes right” in general.fckw wrote: ↑Tue Feb 09, 2021 6:52 pmIt is the standard argument of every imperialist force in this world when conquering an other's territory, i.e. that it's their own superiority over the primitive others that grants them every right to subdue them and force upon them a new culture, new beliefs, new ways of living. And to punish them accordingly if they don't adopt these new ways of living.
Chinese Maoists burned Tibetan monasteries using exactly this argument.
For instance, there are confessional prayers where you beseech Vajrasattva to wrathfully liberate you, but this doesn’t indicate that you’re in favour of being murdered by just anyone on the street.
Re: Subduing and Oath Binding
Yeah. You just said like the most obvious buddhist thing lolGrapeLover wrote: ↑Tue Feb 09, 2021 7:48 pmIt’s quite straightforwardly true that to encounter and make a connection with an enlightened being requires merit, even if they use wrathful methods to tame you. It’s difficult to see how pointing this out would indicate that one sympathises with mundane imperialism or the principle of “might makes right” in general.fckw wrote: ↑Tue Feb 09, 2021 6:52 pmIt is the standard argument of every imperialist force in this world when conquering an other's territory, i.e. that it's their own superiority over the primitive others that grants them every right to subdue them and force upon them a new culture, new beliefs, new ways of living. And to punish them accordingly if they don't adopt these new ways of living.
Chinese Maoists burned Tibetan monasteries using exactly this argument.
For instance, there are confessional prayers where you beseech Vajrasattva to wrathfully liberate you, but this doesn’t indicate that you’re in favour of being murdered by just anyone on the street.
Re: Subduing and Oath Binding
How many enlightened beings have you come across for whom you were certain that they were enlightened?GrapeLover wrote: ↑Tue Feb 09, 2021 7:48 pmIt’s quite straightforwardly true that to encounter and make a connection with an enlightened being requires merit, even if they use wrathful methods to tame you. It’s difficult to see how pointing this out would indicate that one sympathises with mundane imperialism or the principle of “might makes right” in general.fckw wrote: ↑Tue Feb 09, 2021 6:52 pmIt is the standard argument of every imperialist force in this world when conquering an other's territory, i.e. that it's their own superiority over the primitive others that grants them every right to subdue them and force upon them a new culture, new beliefs, new ways of living. And to punish them accordingly if they don't adopt these new ways of living.
Chinese Maoists burned Tibetan monasteries using exactly this argument.
For instance, there are confessional prayers where you beseech Vajrasattva to wrathfully liberate you, but this doesn’t indicate that you’re in favour of being murdered by just anyone on the street.
By the way, I did not say that you sympathised with imperialism, I just pointed out that the same argument was commonly used by imperialists as the one you used. Motivation and conviction are probably very different, yet the argument is structurally same.
So, better be careful with this argument then.
-
- Posts: 291
- Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2020 12:55 am
Re: Subduing and Oath Binding
I didn’t make the initial argument. In any case, it was just a pretty straightforward statement that you need merit to encounter and make a connection with an enlightened being (Guru Rinpoche), even if the methods they use are wrathful (binding and subjugation). Do you disagree with that?fckw wrote: ↑Tue Feb 09, 2021 9:26 pmHow many enlightened beings have you come across for whom you were certain that they were enlightened?GrapeLover wrote: ↑Tue Feb 09, 2021 7:48 pmIt’s quite straightforwardly true that to encounter and make a connection with an enlightened being requires merit, even if they use wrathful methods to tame you. It’s difficult to see how pointing this out would indicate that one sympathises with mundane imperialism or the principle of “might makes right” in general.fckw wrote: ↑Tue Feb 09, 2021 6:52 pm
It is the standard argument of every imperialist force in this world when conquering an other's territory, i.e. that it's their own superiority over the primitive others that grants them every right to subdue them and force upon them a new culture, new beliefs, new ways of living. And to punish them accordingly if they don't adopt these new ways of living.
Chinese Maoists burned Tibetan monasteries using exactly this argument.
For instance, there are confessional prayers where you beseech Vajrasattva to wrathfully liberate you, but this doesn’t indicate that you’re in favour of being murdered by just anyone on the street.
By the way, I did not say that you sympathised with imperialism, I just pointed out that the same argument was commonly used by imperialists as the one you used. Motivation and conviction are probably very different, yet the argument is structurally same.
So, better be careful with this argument then.
You’d have a point if someone had tried to make a generalised argument like “you can never tell if something’s good or bad because it might have been an enlightened being doing it”, but it’s specifically a discussion of Guru Rinpoche. In the Nyingma forum I think it is safe to operate on the assumption that he was enlightened.How many enlightened beings have you come across for whom you were certain that they were enlightened?
There is a kind of implied assumption that Buddhas are justified in their enlightened activities, but I think that is an orthodox Buddhist belief.
Re: Subduing and Oath Binding
Exactly Guru Padmasambhava was a Dharma King and conquered the local primitives and their ghosts for the benefit of the world. And that's why we all get to practice Vajrayana today. Can be one point of view.
Last edited by Natan on Wed Feb 10, 2021 10:38 am, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Subduing and Oath Binding
Merit is not the right word for this. There may be some connections but a demon lacks merit. That's why there are wrathful means,, to overpower those without merit so they can start gaining some. Next someone will say they were actually emanations of Bodhisattvas disguised as demons just to fool us into respecting wrathful means. When folks said Milarepa was an emanation, Mila said such ideas slander Vajrayana. These methods work regardless of merit one started with because the Buddha nature is naturally pure. Probably GP had the merit to handle all comers and didn't need to ask demons to perform mandala offerings.GrapeLover wrote: ↑Tue Feb 09, 2021 10:01 pmI didn’t make the initial argument. In any case, it was just a pretty straightforward statement that you need merit to encounter and make a connection with an enlightened being (Guru Rinpoche), even if the methods they use are wrathful (binding and subjugation). Do you disagree with that?fckw wrote: ↑Tue Feb 09, 2021 9:26 pmHow many enlightened beings have you come across for whom you were certain that they were enlightened?GrapeLover wrote: ↑Tue Feb 09, 2021 7:48 pm
It’s quite straightforwardly true that to encounter and make a connection with an enlightened being requires merit, even if they use wrathful methods to tame you. It’s difficult to see how pointing this out would indicate that one sympathises with mundane imperialism or the principle of “might makes right” in general.
For instance, there are confessional prayers where you beseech Vajrasattva to wrathfully liberate you, but this doesn’t indicate that you’re in favour of being murdered by just anyone on the street.
By the way, I did not say that you sympathised with imperialism, I just pointed out that the same argument was commonly used by imperialists as the one you used. Motivation and conviction are probably very different, yet the argument is structurally same.
So, better be careful with this argument then.
You’d have a point if someone had tried to make a generalised argument like “you can never tell if something’s good or bad because it might have been an enlightened being doing it”, but it’s specifically a discussion of Guru Rinpoche. In the Nyingma forum I think it is safe to operate on the assumption that he was enlightened.How many enlightened beings have you come across for whom you were certain that they were enlightened?
There is a kind of implied assumption that Buddhas are justified in their enlightened activities, but I think that is an orthodox Buddhist belief.
Re: Subduing and Oath Binding
This is the interesting question. Logically a Buddha cannot make you get enlightenment. So what's really happening in subduing and liberating? Maybe forcing circumstances that open up an undeniable glimpse?Crazywisdom wrote: ↑Mon Feb 08, 2021 2:00 pmThis is the Crux of the idea.fckw wrote: ↑Sun Feb 07, 2021 8:27 pm It's a truly odd question. I don't remember where it is said but the historical buddha clearly rejected the idea that an enlightened being can "cause" realization in anyone else in the sense like flipping on a switch. So, why should Padmasambhava be able to do such a thing?
Last edited by Natan on Wed Feb 10, 2021 2:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 291
- Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2020 12:55 am
Re: Subduing and Oath Binding
Just because you’re born in a demonic form in a particular life, it doesn’t mean you literally have no merit in your continuum. If they had no merit to result in them connecting with a Buddha, they would have been born in a dark eon in some other world system with no manifest Buddha or Dharma. The fact that they were born during a Dharma dispensation with the fortune to directly encounter and be tamed by a Buddha is the ripening of merit. Of course, other unfortunate aspects of their birth or circumstances are the ripening of negative karma.Crazywisdom wrote: ↑Wed Feb 10, 2021 2:03 pm Merit is not the right word for this. There may be some connections but a demon lacks merit. That's why there are wrathful means,, to overpower those without merit so they can start gaining some. Next someone will say they were actually emanations of Bodhisattvas disguised as demons just to fool us into respecting wrathful means. When folks said Milarepa was an emanation, Mila said such ideas slander Vajrayana. These methods work regardless of merit one started with because the Buddha nature is naturally pure. Probably GP had the merit to handle all comers and didn't need to ask demons to perform mandala offerings.
As a comparison, we've been born during the 'dregs of time', as (canonically speaking) almost the most degenerated form of womb-born human, as opposed to a spontaneously-born human with an 80,000+ year lifespan. We're also quite overcome with kleshas and probably pretty wretched in the eyes of various different types of being. But our connection with the Dharma is still due to merit.
Subduing and binding is just compulsion to accept an oath, really, and you can be bound but still remain completely worldly. So there's no forced enlightenment or even necessarily a glimpse involved. In terms of wrathful liberation, in Vol 4 of his teaching of Karma Chakme's Mountain Dharma, Khenpo Karthar Rinpoche states that those who don't have the merit to be born in a pure buddhafield will be born as part of the unenlightened retinue of an enlightened protector. He cites Guru Rinpoche's "Command Seal Prediction" for this, but I don't know anything about that.This is the interesting question. Logically a Buddha cannot make you get enlightenment. So what's really happening in subduing and liberating? Maybe forcing circumstances that open up an undeniable glimpse?
Re: Subduing and Oath Binding
Merit is a very relative idea. Sure they have the merit to be demons in a land with gurus.GrapeLover wrote: ↑Wed Feb 10, 2021 2:52 pmJust because you’re born in a demonic form in a particular life, it doesn’t mean you literally have no merit in your continuum. If they had no merit to result in them connecting with a Buddha, they would have been born in a dark eon in some other world system with no manifest Buddha or Dharma. The fact that they were born during a Dharma dispensation with the fortune to directly encounter and be tamed by a Buddha is the ripening of merit. Of course, other unfortunate aspects of their birth or circumstances are the ripening of negative karma.Crazywisdom wrote: ↑Wed Feb 10, 2021 2:03 pm Merit is not the right word for this. There may be some connections but a demon lacks merit. That's why there are wrathful means,, to overpower those without merit so they can start gaining some. Next someone will say they were actually emanations of Bodhisattvas disguised as demons just to fool us into respecting wrathful means. When folks said Milarepa was an emanation, Mila said such ideas slander Vajrayana. These methods work regardless of merit one started with because the Buddha nature is naturally pure. Probably GP had the merit to handle all comers and didn't need to ask demons to perform mandala offerings.
As a comparison, we've been born during the 'dregs of time', as (canonically speaking) almost the most degenerated form of womb-born human, as opposed to a spontaneously-born human with an 80,000+ year lifespan. We're also quite overcome with kleshas and probably pretty wretched in the eyes of various different types of being. But our connection with the Dharma is still due to merit.
Subduing and binding is just compulsion to accept an oath, really, and you can be bound but still remain completely worldly. So there's no forced enlightenment or even necessarily a glimpse involved. In terms of wrathful liberation, in Vol 4 of his teaching of Karma Chakme's Mountain Dharma, Khenpo Karthar Rinpoche states that those who don't have the merit to be born in a pure buddhafield will be born as part of the unenlightened retinue of an enlightened protector. He cites Guru Rinpoche's "Command Seal Prediction" for this, but I don't know anything about that.This is the interesting question. Logically a Buddha cannot make you get enlightenment. So what's really happening in subduing and liberating? Maybe forcing circumstances that open up an undeniable glimpse?
I like these other points you make
- Sonam Wangchug
- Posts: 427
- Joined: Sat Feb 06, 2010 8:26 pm
Re: Subduing and Oath Binding
I believe in Guru Rinpoche, but then, I'm a Nyingmapa. You don't have to.fckw wrote: ↑Tue Feb 09, 2021 6:52 pmIt is the standard argument of every imperialist force in this world when conquering an other's territory, i.e. that it's their own superiority over the primitive others that grants them every right to subdue them and force upon them a new culture, new beliefs, new ways of living. And to punish them accordingly if they don't adopt these new ways of living.
Chinese Maoists burned Tibetan monasteries using exactly this argument.
"To have confidence in the teacher is the ultimate refuge." -Rigzin Jigme Lingpa
Re: Subduing and Oath Binding
Many old skriptures are written (or translated) in a quite belligerent language. If some lama explains the exact meaning, it's always all about metaphors, conquering the own passions, establishing stability in emptiness view etc.fckw wrote: ↑Tue Feb 09, 2021 8:35 amI'm sure you did not mean it that way, but this argument could be seriously misunderstood. Particularly, if you consider the more recent Tibetan history and the fate of Vajrayana as a religion in Tibet. And if you go further back in history, also regarding the fate of Vajrayana in India.Sonam Wangchug wrote: ↑Tue Feb 09, 2021 6:15 am They also had to merit to encounter Guru Rinpoche and be bound by him.
I think, war, defeat and conquer had a different connotation in ancient times. My modern mind can't stand this kind of language and thus I just change texts to what I was told is the true meaning.
Important is the meaning behind superficial words, I believe.
Re: Subduing and Oath Binding
The only demons you have to subdue are your own inner demons. By putting them under oath means you redirect those energy in a positive way. Tantra is about transformation.
If you conquer anger you conquer all ennemies. It is a famous quote.
Changing others way of believing or their religion so they follow the « right way » is arrogant because you don’t know the right way, and you don’t know what is best for someone. If you think controlling and subjugating someone to change their beliefs is good, you may learn the hard way it is not when someone stronger will wrathfully control yourself.
All those terms : war, conquest, subdue... should be understand in an inner way. The virus of egocentrism is really the most dangerous enemy. We should clean in front of our door and let other people and energy live.
If you conquer anger you conquer all ennemies. It is a famous quote.
Changing others way of believing or their religion so they follow the « right way » is arrogant because you don’t know the right way, and you don’t know what is best for someone. If you think controlling and subjugating someone to change their beliefs is good, you may learn the hard way it is not when someone stronger will wrathfully control yourself.
All those terms : war, conquest, subdue... should be understand in an inner way. The virus of egocentrism is really the most dangerous enemy. We should clean in front of our door and let other people and energy live.