Sogyal Rinpoche is the author of Tibetan Book of Living and Dying
erric solomon
I tried in a previous post to help clarify the question raised by some
whether Sogyal Rinpoche really authored the Tibetan Book of Living and
Dying (hereafter referred to as TBLD). I shared my personal experience
of watching Rinpoche editing, word by word, his book, thinking, naively
perhaps, that this would help clarify the situation. While I am no
longer as confident that I can clarify anything, I feel it at least
makes me feel better to try to state what I witnessed. I guess others
who weren’t there can still repeat alternative accounts of what they
heard anonymous others believe happened. At least tomorrow, when I look
into my newserver, one message will jive with what I know to be a
relative truth :).
mary wrote:
>Another person who was close to Sogyal and Andrew H at the time tells a
>different version of this story. This person insists that Andrew *wrote*
>the book, rather than *editing* it. I have read other books by Andrew,
>the style, content, presentation and view of the TBOLAD matches these
>exactly.
I think I already addressed the first point, twice now. I saw
transcripts of teachings and little meditation booklets of transcribed
teachings ten years before TBLD that had the same content as TBLD. The
stories in the book are definitely Sogyal Rinpoche’s, the view is
Padmasambhava’s. Sogyal Rinpoche did not simply let Andrew, Patrick or
anyone else edit the teachings but he personally went over and over them
after they were in book form.
Andrew did contribute *alot* (see, I can use little stars in my writing
too) to the style of prose and presentation of TBLD. That is why he was
brought in. As for content I beg to differ with Ms. Mary’s assessment.
Most people I know can see pretty clearly that Andrew Harvey’s belief
system is heavily influenced by Hindu philosophical schools. It seemed
to me he believes that the soul or at least mind exists. While I don’t
know what he believes, in writing, at least, he seems to express a view
that is a at best a cittamantran view and not the view of Madhayamika
Prasangika the philosophical basis for the Dzogchen teachings. While I
am not an expert, and haven't seen his latest books, it bothers me a
little that Mary makes such broad claims which, when I examine it for
myself, don’t hold up.
Mary asks:
>I wonder if you could explain the role of Christine Longacre in
>relation to Sogyal's Living and Dying teachings?
I hoping this is really a sincerely asked question, because sometimes I
get the feeling that Mary has already decided the answer to this. In
earlier posts she espoused a view that Sogyal Rinpoche used Christine
learn about death and dying and incorporated it into his teachings, w/o
proper credit. I still am assuming this is a sincere question and so I
will answer it as authentically as I am capable. I could tell you what
I know from Christine herself, but there is a more concrete way we can
answer this without asking the denizens of net surfers to just take my
word for it. First, a shameless plug for an old friend. Christine
Longaker has an excellent new book out. Titled "Facing Death and Finding
Hope" it picks up where TBLD left off in terms of helping the dying and
perparing for one’s own death. A pithy personal account of how the
Buddhist teachings can be applied in a meaningful way in a modern
context, this book is great for Buddhist and non-Buddhists alike. Oh,
but I digress… On page 12, Christine tells of her first encounter with
Sogyal Rinpoche. The subject of his talk was on death, so it seems that
Rinpoche was indeed already teachings on the subject before he met
Christine. Page 13 gives a very moving account of how Rinpoche related
in a very humble fashion practical advice for caring for the dying
including a story about his aunt that was in TBLD (I guess that at least
that story is Rinpoche’s and not Andrew Harvey’s). Christine is very
clear about the fact that she considers Sogyal Rinpoche a Buddhist
master and her understanding of the whole subject of care for the Dying
is a result of the wisdom and compassion of the Buddha’s as transmitted
by Sogyal Rinpoche.
On page 412 Sogyal Rinpoche thanks Andrew Harvey for a full paragrash,
of which I quote a sentence:
" My thanks also goes to my friend Andrew Harvey, a well known and
gifted writer, for the dedicated, impassioned, and selfless way in which
he has shaped the book and helped the majesty of the teachings to shine
through the words with radiant simplicity and brilliance."
Sounds like a pretty great endorsement of credit and thanks.
The next paragraph is for Patrick:
"I Thank Patrick Gaffney for his unfailing patience, his devoted
perseverance, his ardor, and the sacrifices he has made to see this book
through its many transformations over many years…This book is as much
his book as mine, for without him I cannot imagine that it would have
been possible…"
Mary asserts:
> ….Christine Longacre, who is not credited in anyway.
The next paragraph has a word of thanks for Christine Longaker. But I’m
sure you all are getting my point.
pema previously wrote:
>>I know from personal experience how many of today's books by Buddhist
>>masters are written. A dedicated student or group of students tranlate,
>>transcribe and edit the master's oral instructions.
To which Mary inquired:
>This is true, Trungpa R's works being a good example. IMO, where they
>and others differ from the TBOLAD and subsequent offerings from Sogyal
>is that they present an original interpretation of particular aspects of
>traditional Buddhist teachings -- in the same way as a great teacher
>like HH Dudjom R would use a text as a mnemonic (sp?), but his teaching
>would be informed and enlivened by his own contemplative experience. IMO
>and others, the TBOLAD lacks this personal depth and perspective.
In all honesty, I am surprised by the confidence of anyone who can so
easily judge the depth and perspective of anyone else’s realization. It
almost makes me suspicious, but perhaps Mary can actually judge such
things. I have to say that I think chapter 10 is extraordinary in that
presents the path of Dzogchen in a profoundly subtle way. It speaks on
so many levels that while beginners can find benefit, experienced
Dzogchenpas can use it as a concise meditation guide. To get into the
spirit of things, quoting anonymous sources, I know many senior
students of other lamas who have made the same observation.
I think that, to fly in the face of net news convention, when we make
claims of depth and perspective, it is useful to quote specific passages
so that others can see why someone believes the way they do. Again and
again I find myself, upon careful, studied reflection, at a very
different conclusion then Mary.
Just so my trip is clear. I have studied with Sogyal Rinpoche for 14
years. He is my refuge lama. It was through his great kindnes and skill
as a meditation master that I was able to connect with my root lama,
Kyabje Tulku Urgyen Rinpoche. That is just the way I put it based on
traditional ways of giving meaning to the phrases "root lama" and
"refuge lama." In reality, I don’t really make too many distinctions as
all my masters are emanations of Padmasambhava. I am not a paid
employee of Rigpa Fellowship. I do help them out. No one who works for
Rigpa Fellowship knows that I am writing this and all views are
exclusively mine although it is my samsaric, clinging mind that hopes
that I share views with others.
I don’t really have that much vested in winning any arguments and I am
actually not so sure that this little exercise is purifying any of my
obstacles. But on some level I feel little better that I told my truth
in as a sincere and heartfelt way as I know how.
With all the best wishes, love and joy,
pema dorje
(erric solomon)
Mary Finnigan
erric solomon writes refuting almost every word of my critique of The
Tibetan Book of Living and Dying. He writes from a declared position as
a disciple of Sogyal Lakar. He writes with gentle persuasion and deft
innuendo. He puts a devotee's spin on on the circumtances we discuss. I
do not view these circumstances from this position. I view them from the
position of a conscientious researcher, who does her best to ensure that
she quotes examples only on the basis of corroborated evidence. I know
Sogyal from 1973 and can also draw on my personal experience. In other
threads I have acknowledged his contribution to the development of
Tibetan dharama in the west. It is clear that Sogyal is effective as a
conduit and I do not doubt him in this respect.
Mary
Don Martin
In article <VTpnGAAN...@pema.demon.co.uk>,
ma...@pema.demon.co.uk (Mary Finnigan) wrote:
~~snip~~
> I know Sogyal from 1973 and can also draw on my personal experience. In other
> threads I have acknowledged his contribution to the development of Tibetan
> dharama in the west. It is clear that Sogyal is effective as a conduit and I
> do not doubt him in this respect.
> Mary
*** Just for the record.
--
Don, I live the life I love
The Born-Again Buddhist. & love the life I live
(....and again and again)