why vajrayana is dangerous
Jamyang Gyatso
I'e heard from many that vajrayana is a dangerous path, that if
not practised correctly will lead to a plunge into hell.
In what ways is it really dangerous? Examples will be
appreciated.
Bosco Ho
In <5an6k6$d...@nuscc.nus.sg>, On 5 Jan 1997 03:19:34 GMT,
chua...@iscs.nus.sg (Jamyang Gyatso) wrote:
not being qualified to talk about the danger from an authoritative
perspective, nonetheless i can see the various pitfalls lie ahead. To
begin with, as Lord Atisha [i think] has said, it is much harder to
maintain the tantric vows than that of the mahayana precepts, so much
so that the moment before, the moment after and the moment in between
must b attended to.
Vajrayana is the union of skilful means and wisdom, therefore, imho, a
slightly misunderstanding can plunge the practitioner in the abyss. As
the chinese saying, "even though the calculation is missed by a micron
of an inch, the resultant course will b off by a thousand miles!"
[sorry, kinda update the proverb with contemporary measurement in the
U.S. :-).)
From the common sense POV, it may b ok if someone is perpetuating
samsara out of ignorance (sorry, 'ok' is not the right way to say it;)
but it will b unacceptible for someone who knows the problem but
somehow still falls into the trap. Imagine if one knows a way out of
samsara but still act ignorantamously! A pure living hell!
i don't think i ve answer your query directly, but i hope others may
join in to show pity on my ignorance
Sarva Mangalam
bh
Kent Sandvik (Silicon Graphics, Inc).
On 5 Jan 1997, Jamyang Gyatso wrote:
>
>
> I'e heard from many that vajrayana is a dangerous path, that if
> not practised correctly will lead to a plunge into hell.
>
> In what ways is it really dangerous? Examples will be
> appreciated.
Bosco provided very good examples. So I have little to add, and I know
little myself. Just one observation, without a very, very, very solid
foundation in the Hinayana and Sutra teachings, a lot of the Vajrayana
practices could be misunderstood. This especially if one does not have a
solid foundation in the understanding of emptiness and great compassion.
I.e., if one creates divine pride, if the understanding of emptiness is
not good, one creates ego-centric pride instead. And if one does not work
for the benefit of all sentient beings, then the focus is plain wrong,
working on oneself, and that again might cause ego-centric activities.
Thx, Kent
---
May this be a contribution towards the harmonious growth of goodness and virtue.
Kent Sandvik - Silicon Graphics, Inc, Cosmo Applied Engineering
san...@sgi.com Phone: (415) 933 6417
Jeff Martin
In article <Pine.SGI.3.95.970105...@kent.engr.sgi.com>,
a young man entered into the Vajrayana path and recieved a number of
empowerments (about 12) at one time over a period of a few days. That was 2
years ago. He is now a paranoid schzophrenic. It has been found that his
motivation for entering the path was so that he could "mold the path to his
own design".... he KNEW the 'key' was compassion, yet he went off on some
messianic trip after a small bit of experience of Mind. He is forever looking
over his shoulder for those that are "going to kill him" and cannot function
without medication. In his madness he has twisted mantra and mudra to fit his
own speech and gesture design, though they are still recognizable to one who
has the empowerments he had recieved. He even has enough understanding to
have a few "disciples" (his word). We who live in this Buddhist community in
the woods had a sad visit from him not too long ago. He threw himself about
in fits of tears and fears. He ran through the woods screaming and crying.
He had to be carried/dragged out of a road. It was somewhat frightening to
some here, having never seen such a display. Dangerous? Yes.... in many
ways... the danger to the practitioner is one's true motivation... if it is
not firmly based in bodhicitta, it will not work, if it is knowingly not based
in bodhicitta, then it the outcome WILL be a living, bardo, and rebirth hell.
... Dangerous mostly to those innocents who will come in contact with such a
being, because they are being lead away from the dharma, in the name of the
dharma.
Also, I have found, that once one is practicing vajrayana they must be
completely honest with themselves and refer to their guru for which practices
would be suitable for them at their present level of understanding. It would
be quite possible for a Kriya Yoga (the earliest practices, like practice for
practice) practioner to recieve an Annutaratantrayoga. These high practices
tend ripen karma immediately, like allowing the grease to instantly rise to
the top. The 'grease' must be dealt with then and there. No way around it.
this 'ripening' could easily toss one into what could easily be called the
pits of hell...... example: how many times have you found yourself just so
beset with tasks that must be handled that they became such a weight you could
almost not function, or just wanted to run and hide from all of it....
multiply these simple daily difficulties of life a hundred fold and you may
have an idea of the results of high vajrayana practice. It is not a path for
everyone. The Kriya yogas are not for everyone, but for a large majority (not
all of us have a propensity towards messiahhood). The Kriya yogas, such as
Avalokiteshvara, Manjushri, Tara, etc, are lovely and not dangerous...... tho
they are a gateway, a practice, and a taste for the higher practices.
-Padma of Bodhi Pines
May all beings have peace, love, happiness, and equanimity!
Aum Mani Padme Hum
NOVAXAN93
Vajrayana uses very complex forms of visualization. If one does not have
some control over the mind one is likely to tip oneself over the edge (to
insanity). This may be seen also with people using western style astral
workings or "Scrying" or "Medium type work". It is a matter of being able
to "handle" the tech.
Secondly, most of the "higher" anuttara vajrayana practices are written in
code words (this is called Sandhyabhasa, or twilight language. Some words
dont mean what you may think! Once they were written to protect the
doctrines vs the profane, sometimes they also delude those who are
"sincere".
-------------------Hell is a state of Mind---------------------------
-a bodhisattva
Tyree Hilkert
"But tantrikas take the very dangerous path of power. Out of their
empty nature they arise as wonder-working awareness-beings, perfectly
endowed with every ability to fulfil the needs of others. I call vajra
pride taking psychosis as the path: Ngak-chang Rinpoche has written
about it exquisitely in 'Wearing The Body of Visions'."
-- "The Injector Seat", Ngakpa Rig'dzin Dorje
Vision: Magazine of the Non-Monastic Traditions of Buddhism
Winter 1996 - Issue 4, p. 7
Isn't that a wonderful phrase, "taking psychosis as the path"?
I met a "kundalini psychotic" who stumbled into our dharma center. He
was more an eclectic New Ager than a Buddhist. He had this intense
energy - he just glowed. But he also couldn't tell what was 'real'
(conventional reality) and what was strictly in his own mind.
Maybe energy practices alone are like turning up the volume on a tape
deck. It's quite amazing that the music gets louder, but so does the
noise and static, and it starts clipping. Maybe developing compassion
is like Dolby(tm) noise reduction?
Jamyang Gyatso
Kent Sandvik (Silicon Graphics, Inc). (san...@engr.sgi.com) wrote:
: Bosco provided very good examples. So I have little to add, and I know
...... my newsreader did not catch the thread Bosco wrote. Perhaps could
someone mail it to me using "m".
Thanks.
--
Chua Loong Koon ____ National University
Edmund _.' " of Singapore
_____________________ | .. o | _________________________
/ chua...@iscs.nus.sg |/ | |/ isc5...@leonis.nus.sg \
| http://www.iscs.nus.sg/~chualoon |
( "If you want change, be the change" )
( finger chua...@decunx.iscs.nus.sg for PGP key )
\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/-- /______\ --\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/^\/
Konrad
Tyree Hilkert (ty...@best.com) wrote:
[an analogy]
I heard one recently on a tape of Venerable Lama Chhoje Rinpoche
that i could share with whoever's reading at the moment.
One group of people is crossing a scorching desert. They see a
tree in the distance, but soon identify it as a poisonous tree. They are
filled with the strongest conviction to uproot the tree and kill it, so
that no one might be lured into seeking shelter there and suffer from the
poison it exhudes.
A second group comes along, seeing the first about to execute
their scheme, and says, "Hey, here's a more efficient way. Just pour
boiling water into the roots. They tree will die where it stands."
A third group arrives and sees the situation. They say, "Hold on
a second, we need that tree for our medicine. Although it's poisonous,
we can turn it into good medicine for ourselves."
Then [as told by this teacher], a peacock comes along and eats
the tree, which is the one food that allows it's feathers to bloom even
finer.
This story was told to illustrate differences between Hinayana,
Mahayana, Vajrayana and Dzogchen practices. Easy to read as a kind of
heirarchy, but if you resist that, it's just a story about what different
people need to do facing the same situation.
I think it's clear that it takes a certain type of person, perhaps
with a certain type of knowledge, to be able to "make medicine out of
poison." One would be a fool to eat any old mushroom in the forest, unless
one knew which were poison and which not. (And one way to learn is by
watching what someone else eats.)
Food for thought ;)
konrad
--
^Z
Kent Sandvik
In article <5as8br$e...@nuscc.nus.sg>,
Jamyang Gyatso <chua...@iscs.nus.sg> wrote:
>Kent Sandvik (Silicon Graphics, Inc). (san...@engr.sgi.com) wrote:
>
>: Bosco provided very good examples. So I have little to add, and I know
>
>...... my newsreader did not catch the thread Bosco wrote. Perhaps could
> someone mail it to me using "m".
The net is a wonderful place. Go to http://www.dejanews.com, and
write down in the search box: why vajrayana is dangerous bosco .
And you get the article. Oh, in the old days you had to figure out
a site that had tar archives of posted messages, and grep around...
Here's a repost of Bosco's posting:
---- In <5an6k6$d...@nuscc.nus.sg>, On 5 Jan 1997 03:19:34 GMT,
chua...@iscs.nus.sg (Jamyang Gyatso) wrote:
> I'e heard from many that vajrayana is a dangerous path, that if >not
practised correctly will lead to a plunge into hell.
> In what ways is it really dangerous? Examples will be >appreciated.
not being qualified to talk about the danger from an authoritative
perspective, nonetheless i can see the various pitfalls lie ahead. To
begin with, as Lord Atisha [i think] has said, it is much harder to
maintain the tantric vows than that of the mahayana precepts, so much so
that the moment before, the moment after and the moment in between must b
attended to.
Vajrayana is the union of skilful means and wisdom, therefore, imho, a
slightly misunderstanding can plunge the practitioner in the abyss. As the
chinese saying, "even though the calculation is missed by a micron of an
inch, the resultant course will b off by a thousand miles!" [sorry, kinda
update the proverb with contemporary measurement in the U.S. :-).)
From the common sense POV, it may b ok if someone is perpetuating samsara
out of ignorance (sorry, 'ok' is not the right way to say it;) but it will
b unacceptible for someone who knows the problem but somehow still falls
into the trap. Imagine if one knows a way out of samsara but still act
ignorantamously! A pure living hell!
i don't think i ve answer your query directly, but i hope others may join
in to show pity on my ignorance
Sarva Mangalam
bh
--
Sarva Mangalam! --Kent
--
Bernard Dominic Tremblay
Tyree Hilkert (ty...@best.com) wrote:
: "But tantrikas take the very dangerous path of power. Out of their
: empty nature they arise as wonder-working awareness-beings, [...]
: I met a "kundalini psychotic" who stumbled into our dharma center. He
: was more an eclectic New Ager than a Buddhist. He had this intense
It might be interesting to here note Shayamuni Buddha's rigour:
From his first teacher (Arada Kalama), he realised the "super-concious
state termed akimcanyayatana, or 'Sphere-of-Nothingness'". From there he
went to his second teacher, Udraka Ramaputra, and attained "a higher
state, that of naiva-smajnanasamjnayatana, or 'Sphere of
Neither-Perception-nor-non-Perception'".
My point is this: Having thus attained, his disatisfaction remained and it
was at this point the he began the ascetism which culminated in his
sitting beneath the tree, fully resolved. He was not easily placated.
May our motivation be so self-less and our intention so disciplined.
KC:
--
|------------- ----------------|
| Good and bad, |
| happy and sad; |
| All thoughts vanish, |
| Like the imprint of a bird in the sky. |
|--------------------- ----------------------|
Francisco de Leon
Francisco de Leon
I am not sure whether it was clear, so I have to clarify that the
preceding message is a reposting of Bosco Ho's message that other people
were trying to locate.
Kent Sandvik (Silicon Graphics, Inc).
On 8 Jan 1997, Francisco de Leon wrote:
> Kent Sandvik wrote:
> >---------------
> : PS: Any books out there describing all the tantric vows in detail?
> --------------->
>
> I understand that initiation is needed for the undertaking (and perhaps
> even study) of the tantric vows. The tantric vows have different levels of
> interpretation and without the assistance of a qualified lama there might
> be confusion in their practice. Having said that, I note that a commentary
> on the tantric vows has recently been published in Dudjom Rinpoche's
> _Perfect Conduct: Ascertaining the Three Vows_ (Wisdom Publications 1996).
> This text should be helpful under the guidance of a qualified lama.
I agree indeed that understanding the full meaning of vows requires
someone to teach this, at the same time it's good that there's a
publication with the vows so that someone might get a feeling and a small
understanding of the commitments before going full speed ahead witha
bigger empowerment. --Kent
Francisco de Leon
John Pettit
nt.engr.sgi.com> <01bbfd62$4c724480$037f...@kthubten.erols.com>
<Pine.SGI.3.95.97010...@kent.engr.sgi.com> Organization:
Internet Online Services Distribution:
The interpretation of Vajrayana vows differs somewhat between the old and
new traditions of translation. The Old (Nyingma) tradition holds that
there is quite a multiplicity of vows while the new (e.g., in Sakya
Pandita's sDom gsum "Analysis of the Three Vows") hold that the root
samayas of anuttara yoga tantra are precisely fourteen, etc.
One of my teachers, Lama Tharchin Rinpoche, has said that all tantric
practices can be subsumed into one: pure perception (dag snang). I think
it might be useful to study the tantric vows in light of this.
Kent Sandvik (Silicon Graphics, Inc). <san...@engr.sgi.com> wrote:
: On 8 Jan 1997, Francisco de Leon wrote:
: I agree indeed that understanding the full meaning of vows requires
Bernard D. Tremblay
Kent Sandvik (Silicon Graphics, Inc). (san...@engr.sgi.com) wrote:
: This is IMHO indeed a good topic, this because the little I've seen of the
: Tibetan Buddhist world, sometimes there's either a personal or a group
: pressure (not that evident, but when there's two people, there's a group)
: concerning taking various empowerments. Or then there's this 'California
: style' of taking empowerments just for the sake of it. Doesn't hurt...
Really "doesn't hurt"? Really? I know you aren't cavalier or
sloppy, Kent, so the fact that you should find this tripping so easily
off your, uhh, fingertips I think underlines the ease with which we can
slip into a mode of mindlessly and heedlessly collection empowerments.
: What we put into the actual situation is what we get out from it.
If somehow this amateur skier finds a detailed description of a
triple-back flip double-pike with a daffy, the damage caused is subject
to dispute. If I were so imprudent as to execute this move, well, execute
is an apt verb ...
: What Geshe Michael Roach told me was that taking highest yoga empowerments
: is the most important decision you make in your life. If one has such an
: understanding, I think one could make a good decision. If it's yet another
: 'diploma on the wall', that's where things are getting slippery.
Quite. My actions are predicated upon my understanding; and that
understanding, with all its flaws and errors, is predicated upon my
interpretations, which are predicated upon ...
My point is this: Exposing myself to advanced practices at this
point in my career will definitely have an effect. (I can only read
something for the first time _once_.) I can't see how hop-skip-jumping as
though I were on an impulse-buying binge can benefit me or others.
KC:
: --Kent
: PS: Any books out there describing all the tantric vows in detail?
... really?
: ---
--
|---------------- -----------------|
| Bernard D. Tremblay (Ben) | Ben Tremblay & Associates |
http://chebucto.ns.ca/~ab006/ | ../~ab006/gff/gff.html
Kent Sandvik (Silicon Graphics, Inc).
On 9 Jan 1997, Bernard D. Tremblay wrote:
> Kent Sandvik (Silicon Graphics, Inc). (san...@engr.sgi.com) wrote:
>
> : This is IMHO indeed a good topic, this because the little I've seen of the
> : Tibetan Buddhist world, sometimes there's either a personal or a group
> : pressure (not that evident, but when there's two people, there's a group)
> : concerning taking various empowerments. Or then there's this 'California
> : style' of taking empowerments just for the sake of it. Doesn't hurt...
> Really "doesn't hurt"? Really? I know you aren't cavalier or
> sloppy, Kent, so the fact that you should find this tripping so easily
> off your, uhh, fingertips I think underlines the ease with which we can
> slip into a mode of mindlessly and heedlessly collection empowerments.
Yep, the 'doesn't hurt' statement was a way to metaphorially explain how
we Californians think about spiritual quests...
> My point is this: Exposing myself to advanced practices at this
> point in my career will definitely have an effect. (I can only read
> something for the first time _once_.) I can't see how hop-skip-jumping as
> though I were on an impulse-buying binge can benefit me or others.
There's indeed some kind of effect, and if one takes personal commitments,
and don't fulfill these, there's an effect.
I actually like your metaphor of ski jumping, those who do it start from a
small hill, and go up to bigger and bigger hills, but seldom if ever one
should not climb up on the Olympic large hill to learn how to ski jump,
it's pretty evident what will happen (broken legs and such). At the same
time, if you really want to learn to ski jump, go ahead, but start with
the small hills, but if possible have a big mind about the possible final
end result.
--Kent (originally from the land of the good ski jumpers, Finland, but
he never dared to ski jump, at least from big hills).
Tyree Hilkert
On 9 Jan 1997 01:08:14 GMT, John Pettit <vdh...@tribeca.ios.com>
wrote:
>One of my teachers, Lama Tharchin Rinpoche, has said that all tantric
>practices can be subsumed into one: pure perception (dag snang). I think
>it might be useful to study the tantric vows in light of this.
I love simplification. Ngakpa Chogyam Rinpoche said that all samaya
boils down to kindness and awareness.
Julius von M
Francisco de Leon wrote:
>
> Kent Sandvik wrote:
> >---------------
>
> I understand that initiation is needed for the undertaking (and perhaps
> even study) of the tantric vows. The tantric vows have different levels of
> interpretation and without the assistance of a qualified lama there might
> be confusion in their practice. Having said that, I note that a commentary
> on the tantric vows has recently been published in Dudjom Rinpoche's
> _Perfect Conduct: Ascertaining the Three Vows_ (Wisdom Publications 1996).
> This text should be helpful under the guidance of a qualified lama.
As for the vajrayana -> commitments <- of the highest yoga tantra,
they are listed in a beautifull book I'm reading just now:
'Tantric Grounds & Paths' from Geshe Keltsang Gyatso.
Aside the whole surrounding affairs that got repeated in this ng threads
in connection with his name and family, (sic), I have to admit that this
good Lama opened several of my eyes by (western-like?) explaining Je
Tsongkhapa's view on lower Tantras in this book.
I am not even half through, and I can only highly recommend it. It is
good for those that would like to marry understanding with experience,
but are not learned enought (like me) to understand other, more complex,
explanations.
[I even ordered it over the web, under tharpa - bit expensive, though.]
may all be free of suffering,
yours,
Julius
Tyree Hilkert
On Wed, 15 Jan 1997 11:17:15 -0800, Kent Sandvik
<san...@engr.sgi.com> wrote:
>Here's something else that have kept me thinking this morning. If a
>Vajrayana practitioner considers everything as pure, and everyone as
>deities, every sound as mantra, and so on, it's really tough to keep this
>maintained when -- let's say your manager is highly critical of a mistake
>you did -- this whole model just ripples down to nothing, if not turning
>into something negative instead.
My favorite slogan from Pema Chodron's new book is:
LOWER YOUR STANDARDS AND RELAX AS IT IS
"The only solution is to LET GO. Realize that expectations are a
hindrance and let go of them as soon as they arise. In other words, we
should be a little looser in our approach. Sometimes we put too much
energy into our practice or we discipline ourselves too severely,
thinking that this will bring us more quickly to the desired
realizations. But too much effort often has the opposite effect; it
prevents our progress instead of helping it."
- "Introduction to Tantra", p. 136
Lama Yeshe
This letting go of expectation is how we can touch in on emptiness.
And emptiness is the basis of the tantric path:
"When we talk about visualization we're not discussing some form of
day-dream or intellectual imaging process. We're talking about VISION,
and vision can only arise within the space or emptiness of the Nature
of Mind...
"[The Yidam] arises out of emptiness. It creates itself out of the
impulse toward liberation; which, is the energy of enlightenment
itself. It creates itself as the inner reality of the Lama who is
giving the empowerment. After you've received empowerment into the
practice of a particular awareness-being, or yidam, the form of this
awareness-being will spontaneously arise out of the state of emptiness
when you engage in practice... It depends on the intensity of your
devotion."
- "Wearing the Body of Visions", p. 115
Ngakpa Chogyam Rinpoche
I think that the uncertainty, discomfort, and queasiness we feel when
our bosses are yelling at us is the REAL emptiness, not some vacuous
resonant nothingness.
rick
Kent Sandvik (Silicon Graphics, Inc). wrote:
> ...if one creates divine pride, if the understanding of emptiness is
> not good, one creates ego-centric pride instead. And if one does not work
> for the benefit of all sentient beings, then the focus is plain wrong,
> working on oneself, and that again might cause ego-centric activities.
Well said, Kent - thank you. My vague impression of vajrayana is
that it is a subtler form of attachment, in which the pretext of
'transmuting' worldly energies to 'divine' is a prolongation of
enjoyment of those worldly energies. Not that I'm against worldly
energies - I like 'em fine, and I know that eventually they will
all pass if I keep my practice on target. I just think it is a very
gray area and that people may be playing with fire instead of trying
to put it out.
What you said about keeping the focus on the benefit of all sentient
beings is the *key* issue here. If vajrayana gets us centered on
ourselves, it is egocentric and a stumbling block to enlightenment.
But then, what do I know?
Rick
Edmund Chua
rick (stc...@mit.edu) wrote:
: What you said about keeping the focus on the benefit of all sentient
: beings is the *key* issue here. If vajrayana gets us centered on
: ourselves, it is egocentric and a stumbling block to enlightenment.
: But then, what do I know?
....... I think that anyone who practices vajrayana should keep
constant tags on himself/herself. The basis of all
practice should centre on benefitting others.
If you find yourself trying to get back at others or having
some bad intentions, then perhaps your practice of vajrayana
had been centered on wrong intentions all along.
I believe that if we practice with the right intention, our
practice enhance our intention. If we practice with the
motivation of helping others, we would find ourself a
more compassionate person after a period of practice.
So, if you don't, do some self evaluation and perhaps you
will find the stumbling block.
--
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Edmund Chua Loong Koon Email: jgy...@letterbox.com
For PGP key, finger chua...@decunx.iscs.nus.sg
Kent Sandvik
Thanks for all the nice postings in this topic
On 15 Jan 1997, Edmund Chua wrote:
>
> ....... I think that anyone who practices vajrayana should keep
> constant tags on himself/herself. The basis of all
> practice should centre on benefitting others.
>
> If you find yourself trying to get back at others or having
> some bad intentions, then perhaps your practice of vajrayana
> had been centered on wrong intentions all along.
Here's something else that have kept me thinking this morning. If a
Vajrayana practitioner considers everything as pure, and everyone as
deities, every sound as mantra, and so on, it's really tough to keep this
maintained when -- let's say your manager is highly critical of a mistake
you did -- this whole model just ripples down to nothing, if not turning
into something negative instead.
Maybe that's another reason why Vajrayana is considered dangerous, as one
has suddenly a lot of responsibility for every single act done, said, and
thought.
Any other comments?
Thx, Kent
Randy Jewett
In article <5bi7cs$i...@nuscc.nus.sg>
chua...@iscs.nus.sg (Edmund Chua) writes:
>....... I think that anyone who practices vajrayana should keep
> constant tags on himself/herself. The basis of all
> practice should centre on benefitting others.
>
> If you find yourself trying to get back at others or having
> some bad intentions, then perhaps your practice of vajrayana
> had been centered on wrong intentions all along.
>
> practice enhance our intention. If we practice with the
> motivation of helping others, we would find ourself a
> more compassionate person after a period of practice.
want to benefit from your practice, since they don't hold the same view
or beliefs? It's like some xtians who say they are working to save your
soul and there is no other alternative; you MUST be saved.
In this case the vajrayana practicer would do better to keep to hirself
the motivations for practice, right? Not go around telling everyone that
they are practicing to free everyone from samsara, when many people don't
believe they are in samsara, but rather have been created one time only,
and this is it, be saved or damned forever.
These are 2 quite different views, that require different appraches,
n'est-ce pas?
rj
chan...@aol.com
Im Artikel <Pine.SGI.3.95.970115...@kent.engr.sgi.com>,
Kent Sandvik <san...@engr.sgi.com> schreibt:
>Here's something else that have kept me thinking this morning. If a
>Vajrayana practitioner considers everything as pure, and everyone as
>deities, every sound as mantra, and so on, it's really tough to keep this
>maintained when -- let's say your manager is highly critical of a mistake
>you did -- this whole model just ripples down to nothing, if not turning
>into something negative instead.
Well I think you should see everything as pure as you can, but if someone
obviously behaves in a non-constructive way, you think that he/she just
doesn't know better, but still is a Buddha.
>Maybe that's another reason why Vajrayana is considered dangerous, as one
>has suddenly a lot of responsibility for every single act done, said, and
>thought.
That responsibility you have anyway - it's called Karma (remember?) and
thus applies to everyone, regardless of lineage and in accordance with
buddhist belief in general...
>
Chan...@aol.com(Peter)
May all beings rise from the bed of samsara, may they find their true
enlightenment body, may I be of help to them until they have all reached
the ultimate goal. Karmapa Chenno!
Lorand Andahazy
Kent Sandvik wrote:
>
> Here's something else that have kept me thinking this morning. If a
> Vajrayana practitioner considers everything as pure, and everyone as
> deities, every sound as mantra, and so on, it's really tough to keep this
> maintained when -- let's say your manager is highly critical of a mistake
> you did -- this whole model just ripples down to nothing, if not turning
> into something negative instead.
>
> has suddenly a lot of responsibility for every single act done, said, and
> thought.
>
>
> Thx, Kent
I try to comprehend your statements and arrive at some confusion,
difficult to
diagnose.
There IS a lot of responsibility, whether recognized and/or accepted or
not.
The danger is not that one is forced to accept or deal with the
recognition of
responsibility. That would constitute a <threat to the continuity of
ignorance
and illusion>.
I see the danger in power without compassion. Cause and effect. One
might
cause one's own destruction (major setback) as a consequence of ill
considered
action. At a certain level, the spiritual and the physical are not
separate.
The effect could be immediate.
Edmund Chua
Lorand Andahazy (lor...@scheherazade.com) wrote:
: I see the danger in power without compassion. Cause and effect. One
: might
: cause one's own destruction (major setback) as a consequence of ill
: considered
: action. At a certain level, the spiritual and the physical are not
: separate.
: The effect could be immediate.
....... now we understand why bodhicitta is so heavily emphasised.
Edmund Chua
Randy Jewett (RJE...@nervm.nerdc.ufl.edu) wrote:
: There could be an interesting twist to this; what if others don't
: want to benefit from your practice, since they don't hold the same view
: or beliefs? It's like some xtians who say they are working to save your
: soul and there is no other alternative; you MUST be saved.
....... I think right practice does not meant going around converting
people into your mode of practice.
The best form of practice is through action. Show others
through action what we practice. Perhaps, they will be
inspired, perhaps they will start thinking... The most important
thing is, you have benefitted them in one way or another, but
not by enforcing your religious beliefs on them.
I still use this quote which I am quoting for the second time
today:
" One thousand monks, one thousand religion "
: In this case the vajrayana practicer would do better to keep to hirself
: the motivations for practice, right? Not go around telling everyone that
: they are practicing to free everyone from samsara, when many people don't
: believe they are in samsara, but rather have been created one time only,
: and this is it, be saved or damned forever.
....... That is what I believe such be done. Our motivations are
personal, but the person we strive to benefit is not ourselves.
: These are 2 quite different views, that require different appraches,
....... Well, I am still unable to see the differences. Perhaps
you could enlighten me with further explanations?
Edmund Chua
Kent Sandvik (san...@engr.sgi.com) wrote:
: Thanks for all the nice postings in this topic
....... I thank you for your excellent postings which had inspired me
in the past.
: Here's something else that have kept me thinking this morning. If a
: Vajrayana practitioner considers everything as pure, and everyone as
: deities, every sound as mantra, and so on, it's really tough to keep this
: maintained when -- let's say your manager is highly critical of a mistake
: you did -- this whole model just ripples down to nothing, if not turning
: into something negative instead.
....... Well, what about considering those irritations as tests to see
how deep you practices are? A good vajrayana will try to overcome
the anger with all his means. If he can't get over it, perhaps
he will at least know that he still has got a lot to learn.
The point is, if we are able to get over it after some time,
and come to terms that the matter isn't worth getting angry
or irritated about, then we are still on the right path.
Of course, if we could avoid all that anger, that will be
even better.
: Maybe that's another reason why Vajrayana is considered dangerous, as one
: has suddenly a lot of responsibility for every single act done, said, and
: thought.
....... I guess it could also be due to doing something that you
know is not right in the first place.
Bernard D. Tremblay
Tyree Hilkert (ty...@best.com) wrote:
: On Wed, 15 Jan 1997 11:17:15 -0800, Kent Sandvik
: <san...@engr.sgi.com> wrote:
: >Here's something else that have kept me thinking this morning. If a
: >Vajrayana practitioner considers everything as pure, and everyone as
: >deities, every sound as mantra, and so on, it's really tough to keep this
: >maintained when -- let's say your manager is highly critical of a mistake
: >you did -- this whole model just ripples down to nothing, if not turning
: >into something negative instead.
: My favorite slogan from Pema Chodron's new book is:
: LOWER YOUR STANDARDS AND RELAX AS IT IS
[ rest of lovely posting chopped ]
" ...
To this meditator, who rests simply
without altering it,
Grant your blessing
so that my meditation can be free from conception.
...
To this meditator, who arises in unceasing play
Grant your blessing
so that I realize the inseperability
of samsara and nirvana.
... "
Mangalam!
KC:
jo...@earthlink.net
In article <5an6k6$d...@nuscc.nus.sg>,
chua...@iscs.nus.sg (Jamyang Gyatso) wrote:
>
>
> I'e heard from many that vajrayana is a dangerous path, that if
> not practised correctly will lead to a plunge into hell.
>
> In what ways is it really dangerous? Examples will be
> appreciated.
It's my understanding that the danger lies in the fact that vajrayana
practices include methods for programming your own mind through certain
meditation techniques and initiations.
If you are unable to take a close look at the depths of your own mind
and to really SEE even those aspects of ourselves that we'd rather deny
and leave buried in our subconscious --- then the programming
visualations can be a very "bad trip" indeed.
Even with the practices, there can occur, months later, a sudden
shattering of a long-held "truth", and I speak from experience that it is
like going insane. When you have a belief that is so ingraned that you
don't even have the memory of it as anything else but "truth", and then
you suddenly realize, on ALL levels (not just intellectual) that it is
not Truth at all, it's like something dies. In fact, I recognized in
myself all of the Kubler-Ross levels that occur when a person learns s/he
is going to die. It *was* a death of sorts....
Very pragmatically, the danger is that the psychologically unstable
will come unglued. There is also the danger that someone who is
attempting any of the practice unguided may, through misunderstanding or
the fact that most books on vajrayana practices do NOT inculde the entire
practice, find that their attempts "don't work" and thus turn away from
the Dharma altogether.
I hope this was of some help.
Jo
-------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet
Rayya G.
Kent Sandvik <san...@engr.sgi.com> writes
>Here's something else that have kept me thinking this morning. If a
>Vajrayana practitioner considers everything as pure, and everyone as
>deities, every sound as mantra, and so on, it's really tough to keep this
>maintained when -- let's say your manager is highly critical of a mistake
>you did -- this whole model just ripples down to nothing, if not turning
>into something negative instead.
That sounds like the practitioner would be regarding the practice in a
rather prescriptive and conceptual way. Like 'where do I fit the
manager into the scheme - is he a deity or a demon?' as if you are
trying to do a jigsaw puzzle and imagine that if you get all the pieces
right the whole will fall into place. There is an attachment here to
some notion of an end result or achievement - like getting the model
'right'. I think it is more a case of developing faith and confidence
in the way things are and accepting that we don't/cannot know all the
detailed answers, however, we can still behave with respect and courage.
>
>Maybe that's another reason why Vajrayana is considered dangerous, as one
>has suddenly a lot of responsibility for every single act done, said, and
>thought.
But the 'one' is empty so how can they take credit for getting it right
of wrong?
>
>Any other comments?
I think I've said enough already :-)
--
Rayya
F. J.
Hello, I hope someone may be willing and able to answer a few
questions.
I am presently studying molecular anthropology and am very
interested in the mind
from a psychobiological perspective. Iam also interested in alternative
ways of knowing
so if you please, feel free to answer in whatever intelligible way you
desire.
My questions have to do with an experience I had over twenty years
ago. Allow me to
tell you the story, you will find the questions at the very end.
I became interested in buddhism many years ago while at college. I
ended up reading quite a few books on the subject and seemingly out of
the blue, invitations and opportu-
nities to experience sundry spiritual paths began to present themselves
to me. I never felt at ease to commit myself to any of them, yet, always
felt a greater attraction to Buddhism, consequently, I became curious,
even absorbed, in the mystery of kensho and satori. In my second year of
college I had a very unusual experience. A very close friend of mine
with whom I shared religious interests was sitting with me, we were
having an ontological discussion with a third person. Suddenly, as I was
speaking,
I realized that there was no difference between my friend and myself,
that our minds were speaking directly to one another. The strange part
was that I knew my friend was having the same realization about me. It
was as though we were existing as one person. At once, we immediately
stood up and walked away from each other, then as if looking in a
mirror, we turned around and looked back at each other exactly in synch.
We again turned and walked away from one another, and again turned face
to face. At this time we felt our consciousness leave our bodies and
hover somewhere outside of us. My friend Louie and I could actually
sense ourselves and know exactly what the other was experien- cing. All
of a sudden, we realized that judging by everyday experience this should
not be happening and immediately, the reality of the experience became
frightening, nay terrifying. I felt out of control, and wanted whatever
was happening to stop. In an instant we were back in our bodies, the
unusual awareness had left us. Afterwards, I remember not being able to
gather my thoughts. Both of us then began to shake with incredible
dread, as if we were going to die. We then went up to Louie's room. All
we could do was to pace the floor trying to logically reconstruct what
had happened. He kept on asking how it was possible for both of us to
have communicated without words, or to have floated outside of our
bodies, but, I could not answer him why, or how. I could only reaffirm
that we had experienced a mutual communication beyond what was usually
physically possible for people to do. I knew he knew and that he knew I
knew that we had spoken without words or gestures and that it had been
like sharing one mind simultaneously. Louie assured me that he too had
undergone the same thing. By that time everything began to seem even
stranger. Our logical reconstruction had failed to calm our minds at
all, instead, it had made what happened even harder to accept. Whatever
took place had occurred "to us both", thus, it could not be delusional,
the experience
thus, could not be labeled as subjective. We finally parted company at
about three o'clock in the morning. Knowing I could in no way fall
asleep, I told Louie I was going to spend the night in the infirmary. I
was not able to shake the feeling of dread
for the rest of that night. It was not until the nurse gave me some
sleeping pills that I was able to close my eyes. When I awakened the
following morning the feeling of dread immediately returned. For one
year I would experience panic attacks and some unusual events. It took
me about five years to be able to speak about that incident, something
I've only done about three times since, (something I don't do because it
tends to make people uncomfortable.) I must add that Iam no longer
scared of that experience. But it still puzzles me as to what caused it.
I would like to know if this experience can be explained from
within the phenomena of Buddhist practice. If so please contact me
either via (this newsgroup or privately) at your earliest convenience.
The following questions are of special interest, but any other
observations and/or comments you wish to make will be most welcome.
1. What might have brought on such an unusual experience?
2. Should I expect these kinds of phenomena if I begin meditation
practice?
3. How should we deal with these types of experinces?
Thank You,
F. J.