Path: shell.portal.com!shell.portal.com!not-for-mail
From: tyagi@houseofkaos.abyss.com (xiwangmu)
Newsgroups: alt.religion.buddhism.tibetan,alt.zen,alt.philosophy.zen,alt.magick.tyagi,alt.religion.buddhism,talk.religion.buddhism,alt.magick.tantra,talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: Tantra, Buddhism and Cultural Norms (was is a bodhisattva possible?)
Date: 15 Aug 1996 09:11:57 -0700
Organization: Portal Communications (shell)
Lines: 170
Sender: tyagi@shell.portal.com
Message-ID: <4uvi8d$8l2@jobe.shell.portal.com>
References: <4qs3mg$s45@news.umbc.edu> <REITEL.96Jun30130219@math66.rz.mathematik.uni-muenchen.de>... <32039BF9.7B7@radix.net> <4uimu0$gsm@jobe.shell.portal.com> <320F55AA.2E6C@mldff.mlm.lucent.com>
Reply-To: tyagi@houseofkaos.abyss.com (xiwangmu)
NNTP-Posting-Host: jobe.shell.portal.com
Xref: shell.portal.com alt.religion.buddhism.tibetan:10599 alt.zen:39427 alt.philosophy.zen:8869 alt.magick.tyagi:10037 alt.religion.buddhism:611 talk.religion.buddhism:24550 alt.magick.tantra:2513 talk.religion.misc:234870

49960815 AA1 NULatix!


Konchog Norbu <konchog@radix.net>:
#># I've been to India and Nepal thinking I might stay there, but once I saw
#># how many Westerners were on their cross-cultural "trips" I high-tailed it
#># back. Wearing robes here is a much deeper challenge. 

mu:
#> quite, especially if they are not traditional.

Richard Menninger <rmenning@mldff.mlm.lucent.com# writes:
# Actually, there are western traditions for robes, they just are
# not Buddhist traditions.  

but they may be upaya all the same.  traditional 'Buddhism' is not the
only way to awaken.


# But being unusual has both strengths and weaknesses.  Western theistic 
# traditions have reduced their unusualness of garb in many cases.  

and if we are to look at that we must understand what their goal is.
sometimes it is to reduce the challenge and forge a more close
association with the common people whom they serve.  sometimes it may
be simply to escape discomfort.


# But the issue is what is it contributing to practice and everyday life.  
# It could be a trip or it could be helpful.  

so we come to ask ourselves if we are on a 'trip' (should be done by *all*
Buddhists as regards their tradition too!) or if it is 'helpful' (to whom?).


# It is not in the garb, but in the attitude.  Does it provide a helpful 
# attitude of renunciation?

I agree completely.  how much attention do we draw?  is this our objective?
what does the garb bring up for us and for the people around us?  is this
valuable material for awakening experiences?  do we begin to question norms
of social culture?  do we set out, when with others of similar garb, to
then somehow stand out?  our motivations are valuable to understand.

'renunciation'?  yes agreed, and my understanding of this is as a 'letting
go' of things.  does our garb allow us to not cling to it, its appearance,
the reaction we may receive if unusual, etc.?  more importantly for the
traditionals, do they allow us to 'let go' of our identification with the
group?  do we use them as a sort of status?  for all, do they separate us
from the general community, and if so, why do we want to achieve this?


# ...we are still in a dark night for bringing the dharma to the west.

the dharma is everywhere.  we only fail to recognize its multitudinous forms.
because it does not assume the shape of Gautama we think it does not exist.
the dark night may be merely our refusal to see the varieties of light 
available.

 
#>#> reincarnation. Since westerners dont have this problem, why talk 
#>#> them into it just to talk them out of it? Bait and switch? 
#>#> ...he did not refute rebirth, he simply had a more precise understanding
#>#> of its nature and how it comes about. 

#> that is correct, and with no continuity of the person.

#Maybe in the sense that nothing solid, unchanging can be found.

anatman, yes.


# But you don't have to go to rebirth for that.  There is continuity.
# It can include continuity of purpose, commitment, memories, ...

where I come from that is called 'karma' and is quite aside from the
self, congregating around it and carrying forward after parinirvana.
my understanding is that the great masters even extinguish this karma
upon their dissolution and are never known even in their wakes, so great
is the power of their absorption.  they are the 'enfolded bodhisattvas'
who perform a thankless work without visibility and disappear from view
once more ("hey!  did you see that?!").


# The more highly realized the Tulku, the more people are supposed to
# recognize style through rebirth.  At least, so I have heard.
# So what exactly do you mean by "person" in your statement?

very interesting!  it appears that in your Buddhism it is considered a
mark of achievement to be recognized 'through rebirth'.  I would not
say this is incorrect, only that it does not conform to my experience
and understanding of the dharma (very little).  I'd understood that
karma is to be burnt away through release of activity (this is perhaps
a more 'zen' attitude), rather than refined and subsequently recognized
as a social indication (this varies from Tibetan tradition I think).
 

#># I had the awkward experience of being a guest speaker at a college
#># with another guy I didn't know. In the middle of Q&A he asserted
#># that it was possible to be a Buddhist and not accept rebirth. 
#> that is correct, it is very possible.

# It is not only possible, but desirable to not accept teachings
# on blind faith.  When you have significant personal evidence of
# something, then you accept it.  But then it is not faith, but
# genuine conviction based on your own evidence.  

I prefer the teachings of Nagarjuna on this.  my understanding is that
there are indeed two poles between which the Buddhist may stand: on the
one hand as you say, not accepting blindly through faith all which is
given by the tradition and masters and testing it out should we be
serious about entering into that structure.  

on the other hand (and this may be for the more developed and later 
instruction), not adhering to particular views about what is 'correct' 
and what is not.  doing what works and moving with the dharma (which 
may lead us away from those same traditional structures).


# Once you have such connections with some of the teachings, then the 
# credibility of others rises a lot.  This form of proven connection makes a
# huge difference in the later stages.  

is it possible that these 'stages' are delusory and that 'credibility' is,
as the word's root implies, merely the development of belief?  if it does
conform to our experience then surely it is valuable to utilize it, but
does this make it useful means (upaya) or something more?  i.e. should we
associate some sort of *truth value* to that which works for us, or should
we merely say 'this works for me' and suspend our urge to generalize this
to the experience of others?
 

# If you look at many of the stories from the past, you will find that 
# even major lineage holders of various lineages went through periods 
# where they consolidated their understanding through experience and 
# those became their truly accepted teachings....

# For a good while, rebirth is not where the rubber meets the road.
# You will not have experiences that help here for a while.

worse than this, it may be possible that different individuals require
different vehicles through their lives, and that only those of a 
particular temperament or raw material benefit from these lineages
of which you speak.  in this case it is surely valuable for those
who engage it, but for everyone else?  some say that this is why a
variety of lineages, methods and instructions arise, due to the
compassion of the Buddha and the infinite variety of awakening methods.
 

#># As above, yidams exist conventionally, not ultimately. Relative methods
#># are not stagnant. The reason we do them is to get to the point of going
#># beyond them. First things first. 

#> sounds like a sort of mental gymnastics which could prove delusory.

# Yidams are embodiments of your own qualities that you need to
# uncover fully.  They are sort of tantric diaper and toilet training.
# People make way too big a deal of them.  When you are ready, then it
# is not the big deal you have projected but a different deal all together.

then I would like to ask (since I am very ignorant as regards Tibetan
Buddhism), what is the difference between a 'yidam', a 'deity' and a
'buddha'?  are there differences of essence, of character, of permanence,
of relation to the member of the sangha?

mu
-- 
CC public replies to email - see http://www.hollyfeld.org/~tyagi/nagasiva.html
(emailed replies may be posted)  ----  and check: http://www.paranoia.com/coe/  
 * * * Asphalta Cementia Metallica Polymera Coyote La Cuckaracha Humana * * *