Consider Summer...
...it is a functioning thing.The second academic year of Diamond Mountain University has ended and things are much quieter. But fear not, there are many exciting things happening this summer at Diamond Mountain and other places (almost too many things). Venerable Elly has put together a list of where DM students will be teaching this summer. The list includes over a dozen events in at least four countries.
Teachers' Schedule
As many of you know already, Geshe Michael and Christie-la will be teaching the third installment of Je Tsongkapa's The Essence of Eloquence on the Art of Interpretation. The teachings will take place in Dharamsala, India (monsoon season, bring a boat) during the evenings. During the day His Holiness the Dalai Lama will be teaching A Guide to the Bodhisattva's Way of Life. A one-two
India Teachings Info
And of course, there will be lots of happening at DM including a children's summer camp and lots of down 'n' dirty building. We could always use a hand on the many summer building projects. If interested in volunteering, please visit the volunteer section of the Diamond Mountain website and sign up today.
.
posted by Evan Osherow | Tuesday, May 30, 2006
28 Comments:
Questions re Dharamsala teachings.
1) Has anyone been polite enough to bother about notifying His Holiness the Dalai Lama's office that Roach and McNally plan to bring 200-250 students here in June? And advertise their evening teachings around town? (Maybe ya'll should phone).
2) How can the diamondmtn web site claim that they're blocking off 250 seats for students at these teachings? There's never any reserved seating -- except for the sponsor-group.
In this case, the sponsor is a very large Taiwanese group. Squeezing 200-250 folks on the concrete floors in addition to the normal number of non-sponsor attendees at these annual teachings will not be comfortable.
Just curious.
Hi, thanks for posting a comment. I think I can answer your questions.
1) Yes, His Holiness' Office does seem to be aware of Geshe Michael and Christie-la teaching and there are advertisements going up in Dharamsala/McLeod Ganj.
2) It is my understanding (and personal experience) that you are correct about reserved seating in the main temple. However, it seems that His Holiness' Office has agreed to reserve 250 entrances to the teachings, but not a reserved seating area.
The office has been very accommodating for us.
I hope to see you in India.
What are "entrances" -- will His Holiness' office be issuing tickets?
I'm not sure, but it looks like there is a limited amount of passes issued for the teachings, as has been the case is the past. I suppose you could call them tickets. They are ID card with a photo and name of the attendant and the signature and stamp of the Office of His Holiness.
If you'd like further instructions on how to attain this pass let me know, I'm happy to offer my memory.
Actually, what you are describing is the standard pass -- issued by the Security Department, not His Holiness Office -- in order to enter the area near to His Holiness. Requirements: display valid passport/visa, fill out a form, present two small photos and 5 rupees.
There is never any limit to the number of such passes that are issued. It's not a ticketing/seating operation but a security concern. Many people just want to go to one session or even less--just to see His Holiness. In order to enter the teaching area one must display this pass.
So, again, I'm curious what was the basis for your writing "His Holiness' Office has agreed to reserve 250 entrances" as His Office plays no role in issuing the security passes? Unless you've heard of some unique approach to this teaching, then the members of your group will be on an equal footing with the hundreds of other foreigners and many more Tibetans scrambling for a bit of floor space.
Since the area alloted to English speakers for these teachings is quite small, and very crowded in the past, I'm trying--and failing--to visualize how 250 more people are going to fit in. And I'm still wrestling with the wording of the web page re "blocking off 250 seats".
Thank you for your kind responses.
You raise some good points. I don't have any more information for you, however.
It sounds like you will be in Dharamsala for His Holiness' events. Perhaps we can meet up for some momos and sweet tea and we can discuss things further. Just ask a Diamond Mountain person for "Evan." They'll know where to find me.
I look forward to being there and meeting you.
Dear Evan,
Now the Office of His Holiness the Dalai Lama has accommodatingly published one of its written communications to Rev. Roach.
Plainly stating, "we advise you not to visit Dharmsala in the greater interest of the purity of the Tibetan Buddhist tradition", the letter can be found on http://www.diamond-cutter.org/references/dalai-lama-private-office.html
So does Rev. Roach still intend to come here at all; and if so will he and Ms. McNally be 'teaching' &/or attending His Holiness' teachings?
If not, when will the changes be posted on diamondmtn.org and here?
Of course, as the letter continues, "as for the other members of your group, those who are interested are welcome to attend the teachings of His Holiness the Dalai Lama."
So will ya'll be coming? In which event, I'll be happy to make your acquaintance. Looking at at 2005 blog, I see your web design talents are responsible for the fine design of diamondmtn.org.
Dear Evan,
For your convenience, here's a bit of elaboration on my last post.
My first posted inquiry here was not based on information from diamond-cutter.org (a site I only became aware of recently via a google search for the photo of Christie cutting the "novice" hairlock). However, I had good information that His Holiness' Office was not informed of Rev. Roach & Christie's plans to teach in Dharamsala until long after diamondmtn.org was soliciting people to travel to Dharamsala, India.
Is this proper Guru-Disciple behavior? Or is it even conventionally polite behavior?
My first posted inquiry here was on June 1; after which you replied that His Holiness' Office had been "very accommodating for us".
Yet as the accurate chronology on diamond-cutter.org makes clear on
"May 24 2006 ... the Private Office of His Holiness the Dalai Lama wrote to Geshe Michael Roach informing of the cancellation of TIPA as a venue, and requesting him to cancel his teachings in Dharamsala."
GMR replied on "May 30, 2006 ... [with] a long letter ... explaining that his 'realisations' qualify him to teach in such a manner and justify his behavior with Christie Mc Nally. The letter was signed Rev. Michael Roach."
[Having trouble in "Preview" with the post -- so will split it up here]
[continuation of post]
What will it take for His Holiness' Office to be UN-accommodating"?
Perhaps their reply to Rev. Roach of June 5? Wherein they stated,
"Dear Rev. Michael Roach,
This is to thank you for your letter of May 30, addressed to Chhime Rigzin-la both in English as well as Tibetan. Chhime-la is presently away with His Holiness and I am responding to your letter on behalf of our Office here.
We have gone through your long explanation but still do not support your coming to Dharmsala. If you have reached the path of seeing, as you claim in your letter, you should then be able show extraordinary powers and perform miracles like the Siddhas of the past. Only then will the followers of Tibetan Buddhists be able to believe and accept your claims.
Otherwise, as His Holiness the Dalai Lama is the Spiritual and Temporal leader of Tibet having responsibility over the welfare of Tibetan Buddhism many have often complained to Him that He should be strict with those who are not adhering to the general norms of discipline according to our tradition. And your coming to Dharmsala will be seen by many as His Holiness condoning your behavior and practice.
In view of all these we advise you not to visit Dharmsala in the greater interest of the purity of the Tibetan Buddhist tradition as clearly indicated in the letter of Chhime Rigzin-la dated May 24, 2006. However, as for the other members of your group those who are interested are welcome to attend the teachings of His Holiness the Dalai Lama.
Tenzin Geyche Tethong
Secretary to H.H. the Dalai Lama"
Now that Rev. Roach has been told not to come to Dharamsala, he still has not seen fit to publicly advise his students. who have spent considerable money and time preparing to follow him to India, that His Holiness does not approve of his conduct nor welcome his visit.
Is this an ethical exercise of his responsibilities as a Teacher?
Hi and thanks for your continued interest in this matter.
There is really nothing more I can tell you about the venue or changing of plans or any such matters. Things seem to be going ahead as planned.
As for the letter, I cannot say whether it is an authentic document or not. I truly have not heard of such letter existing, but the website from which you read it seems to be reputable.
We are all very much looking forward to our time in Dharamsala. I think a good test of a teacher is His or Her students. Try to meet some Diamond Mountain people, spend a few minutes with them and see what you think. I may not be the best representative, but I'd still like to meet you.
Well, Evan, you surely are a very 'nice person'. But in your last post you appear as a bit more incurious than most creative people.
Rest assured, the letter is a truly 'authentic document' from the Office of His Holiness the Dalai Lama.
In coming here, you must understand that no one objects to Rev. Roach being a New Age preacher of his own cooked up blend of Christianity and Buddhism.
But people are, for one example, 'shocked' and 'deeply concerned' about a non-monk trashing our 2,500 year old Buddhist tradition by pretending to ordain people in a fictitious fashion. And we are concerned that innocent well-meaning folks are duped by his slanderous fictions about Indian and Tibetan Buddhism: No. 1, that he is a teacher of His Holiness the Dalai Lama's 'lineage.'
During the teachings, you can find me sitting near the English translator with the ordained English-speaking sangha. Please come over, ask for Ani Nordron so we can talk.
Have a good journey -- and start asking questions.
How do you know he is a non-monk ?
1) Because he says that he has a sexual (both tantric and 'partnership') relationship with Christie.
If a monk or nun breaks one of their 'root vows' -- whether or not anyone not a party to the breakage knows about it, that ordained person is no longer a monk or nun. Doesn't matter if they keep wearing robes. And it doesn't matter what their 'motivation' was for breaking vows.
Hence, Atisha made it clear that monks and nuns cannot engage in tantric completion stage practices with a human being.
For example if a monk or nun instinctively reacted to save the life of someone else with a physical act that inadvertently caused the criminal attacker to die (when the monk only intended to disable the attacker), the monk or nun has broken their root vow against killing a human being and is no longer a monk or nun.
Doesn't matter what their motivation was.
2) Michael Roach has also claims to have had a direct mental realization of emptiness (and thereby became an arya being) when he was a young man at Sera Mey.
A monk or nun breaks their root vow against lying if they make false claims about their spiritual attainments. Since it is practically impossible to use conceptual terminology to discuss direct mental perception accurately, even His Holiness the Dalai Lama doesn't go around saying "I've attained the path of seeing"!!
So while you and I don't "know" what Michael's realizations are, I can safely say that his claims can't actually be 'true' in all respects.
But my authority on these matters, His Holiness the Dalai Lama, had his office send (and allow to be published) a letter making it clear that Roach's claims are not believed! If His Holiness is correct, then Roach has been lying about his spiritual attainments and thereby 'disrobed' himself by breaking another root vow.
3) Lesser rules (i.e., breaking them does not automatically and immediately "disrobe" an ordained person) that Michael Roach publicly and routinely breaks:
(a) Having hair longer than the width of two fingers.
(b) Wearing ornaments, jewelry and such.
(c) Playing musical instruments, singing and dancing (other than during the offering/invocation sections of pujas)
(d) Spending time alone with the door closed with a female.
(e) Matchmaking.
4) The "ordination" he conducted in January in the name of Tibetan Buddhism was shocking in its multiple violations of the rules and traditions of Buddhist ordination ceremonies. Buddhists believe that ordained sangha are necessary for the preservation of Buddha dharma in this world. We place great stock in proper 'lineage' of ordination. The persons who conduct ordination must be fully ordained and faithfully upholding the vinaya. Since LAY PEOPLE cannot even attend or witness an ordination ceremony, they certainly have no role to play in the ceremony! We trace back the valid lines of ordination to Lord Buddha. The ceremony must follow the rules for ordination that were established 2500 years ago. How could a Arya Buddhist engage in conduct so demeaning to the preservation of Lord Buddha's teachings in this world?
In any event, the Vinaya rules for monks and nuns are one of the main practices of the Liberation Vehicle practitioners. In Tibetan Buddhism, the Vinaya is most rigorously upheld as practice by the New Kadampa heirs to Atisha's Kadampa tradition -- the Gelukpa. Other Tibetan traditions place somewhat less emphasis on ordained sangha, and rinpoches and lamas of those traditions are often married lay people. Even in Gelukpa tradition, the practice of married people is highly valued.
So it's just inexplicable why Michael Roach has stubbornly clung to the fiction that he is a monk.
Where did he say that he has sex with women?
Apart from that, the rest of your post hangs off assumption and outright error (ie. matchmaking, hair, jewellry, the ordination). 'Outright error' here means more that it is of your own opinion that it is so [breaking a lesser rule], not that it didn't actually happened [that GMR has long hair for example].
Dear Anon,
Sorry if I wasn't perfectly clear. Perhaps we should look at what His Holiness the Dalai Lama's spokespersons have publically told the Rev. Roach.
(1) His Holiness does not "believe" "you have reached the path of seeing, as you claim" (see June 5 letter above).
Thus, His Holiness does not believe Michael Roach has told the truth about his spiritual attainments. Thus, His Holiness believes that RMR has broken the root vow not to lie about one's spiritual attainments. As noted before, if a monk or nun lies about their spiritual attainments, they are no longer a monk or nun. Therefore, His Holiness the Dalai Lama does not believe RMR is a Buddhist monk.
Please let me know if I have not explained this point with sufficient clarity.
2) His Holiness the Dalai Lama finds that Michael Roach’s conduct of the January ordination ceremony conflicts with the “rules of Vinaya”. (see May 24 letter above).
This means that the 'ceremony' was an illegitimate charade. The people who participated and witnessed were duped into participating in something a bit analogous to a black mass in that a sacred ancient, and essential Buddhist institution is mocked and denigrated.
(3) His Holiness the Dalai Lama asserts that Michael Roach’s “unconventional behavior does not accord with His Holiness's teachings and practice” (see May 24 letter above).
That is RMR is not a teacher or practitioner of the “Dalai Lama’s lineage” -- another claim by RMR about spiritual accomplishments that is false.
(4) His Holiness is so emphatic in his condemnation that he tells RMR “not to come to Dharamsala” because people might inaccurately conclude that His Holiness condones “your behavior and conduct”; thereby sullying the “purity of the Tibetan Buddhist tradition”! (May 24 letter below)
(5) You ask "Where did he say that he has sex with women?"
You can find this easily yourself in many places. RMR wrote letters which he posted on the web to various lamas including His Holiness the Dalai Lama wherein he stated that he had taken Christie as a "consort" -- this is a word that in this context refers to sexual intercourse including the specific act of penetration, that is specific acts that break a monk's root vow by which act he was immediately and automatically disrobed. You can listen to various mp3's available from RMR site of his 'spiritual partnership' teachings where he makes clear that he sought and found a physical and spiritual partnership with Christie.
Again, please let me know if this is not perfectly clear.
(6) The meaning of your last paragraph is not perfectly clear to me. You write "your post hangs off assumption and outright error ...'Outright error' here means more that it is of your own opinion that it is so [breaking a lesser rule], not that it didn't actually happened [that GMR has long hair for example]."
Are you suggesting that RMR doesn't have long hair or doesn't wear jewelry since his retreat ended? If so, perhaps you should look at easily available photos. Regarding "singing and playing musical instruments", you can download an mp3 of this from his site. Regarding 'matchmaking', read the account of the ordination ceremony and listen to his 'spiritual partnership' mp3s.
If you can't see that RMR is not a Buddhist monk after this, as RMR likes to blend in the Christianity: "There are none so blind as those who will not see."
I'll post the May 24 letter in another post below.
May 24, 2006
To: Rev. Michael Roach
Subject: Teachings in June
Dear Rev. Michael Roach,
We have recently learnt that you are planning to come to Dharmsala during the June teachings of His Holiness the Dalai Lama with a large group of Western Buddhists. We also understand that you plan to give separate teachings on the "Essence of Eloquence" to this group in the evenings following His Holiness's teachings in the afternoons.
On your Diamond Mountain website it is stated "that Geshe Thupten Rinchen is ill. As you may already know, he has tuberculosis in the past, and now he is having a recurrence, which is likely to require surgery. Geshe Thupten Rinchen has strongly encouraged Geshe Michael to conduct these teachings himself. Geshe Michael, knowing how many of you had already made their travel plans, has graciously agreed to do so."
We have made inquiries about what you have said and find that it is not strictly true, because Geshe Thupten Rinchen did not ask you to give the teachings on his behalf. Moreover, we have become aware that there is an unresolved controversy over your current observation of the Vinaya vows and your keeping company with women. We have received inquiries and letters of concern about your status and conduct from many people.
We have seen a photograph of you wearing long hair, with a female companion at your side, apparently giving ordination. This would seem to conflict with the rules of Vinaya, and as you know, the Gelug tradition makes a point of upholding these very strictly.
This unconventional behavior does not accord with His Holiness's teachings and practice.
Under the circumstances, keeping the greater interest of the purity of Buddhist tradition in mind, we advise you not to come to Dharamsala on this occasion.
Chhime R. Chhoekyapa
Joint Secretary
Cc: Department of Religion and Culture, Dharamsala
Cc: Office of Tibet, New York
Cc: Geshe Thupten Rinchen
Office of H.H. the Dalai Lama
Thekchen Choeling
McLeod Ganj - 176 219
Dharamsala, (H.P.)
INDIA
Ph.: +91 (1892) 221343, 221879, 221210
Fax: +91 (1892) 221813
Email: ohhdl@dalailama.com
So where in there did it say "Geshe Michael Roach has broken his vows," or "Geshe Michael Roach has not seen emptiness directly?"
I also noticed that the website which hosts these letters has removed to official seal of His Holiness which was once on the site. Is this because the documents are not actually official?
Isn't there a part of the bi-monthly Sojong ceremony where a monk or nun confesses to having flattly rejected the claim of someone having seen emptiness directly? Maybe it's not in there, though. Either way, to say that you know a person is not an Arya or even a Buddha is a terrible seed to plant in your own heart.
Please be careful.
- Craig
Dear Craig,
You write, "So where in there did it say . . . Geshe Michael Roach has not seen emptiness directly?"
The May 30 letter states:
"If you have reached the path of seeing, as you claim" . . .
How does one reach the path of seeing? One must perceive emptiness with direct mental perception in a meditative session that is the union of calm abiding (shamatha, single pointed) meditation and special insight (vipassana).
As the letter makes clear, His Holiness does not 'believe' RMR's claims that he has reached the path of seeing, which is just another way of saying, they don't believe his claims of having perceived emptiness directly. RMR made that claim in letters to his lamas that he posted on the web when the controvery broke out (in 2002 if memory serves).
His Holiness as the master of Vinaya, the supreme Abbot-ordinator of Geluk Buddhism, does not need to remind a person who took gelong vows what the four root vows are! Don't you think His Holiness assumes that RMR knows the four root vows he swore to hold for life?
Now you indicated that you are unfamiliar with them, so I've explained in quite precise detail what they are. For a monk to claim that he has perceived emptiness directly when he has not in fact done so breaks his vow not to tell lies at the root and he is immediately and automatically disrobed just by making that claim.
Speaking to people here, they are unwilling to 'debate' whether or not RMR is a monk or an arya or a follower of the Dalai Lama's lineage of conduct and practice.
Why not debate. Because he simply is not any of those things. It's an established fact in the Gelukpa lineage of Tibetan Buddhism. There's nothing to 'debate.'
As an Ameican, I realize that my countrypeople are ignorant of many of the basis for these facts so I'm presenting this information.
Dear Craig,
You write, "I also noticed that the website which hosts these letters has removed to official seal of His Holiness which was once on the site. Is this because the documents are not actually official?"
No, the documents are "official" expressions by His Holiness' spokespeople. Others have inquired directly to His Holiness office and received confirmation and their own copies (see /dmesbb.ning.com/?action=message&id=1392785):
From: ohhdl@dalailama.com Subject: June 5, 2006 letter to Rev. Michael Roach Date: June 12, 2006 4:49:23 AM EDT To: loppon@virupa.org Received: from [61.0.0.45] ([61.0.0.45]:36666 "EHLO ndl1mr1-a-fixed.sancharnet.in") by lmg15.affinity.com with ESMTP id S365212AbWFLIvy; Mon, 12 Jun 2006 01:51:54 -0700 Received: from conversion-daemon.ndl1mr1-a-fixed.sancharnet.in by ndl1mr1-a-fixed.sancharnet.in (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 Patch 2 (built Jul 14 2004)) id <0J0Q00501O9WCF@ndl1mr1-a-fixed.sancharnet.in> (original mail from kuger@sancharnet.in) for loppon@virupa.org; Mon, 12 Jun 2006 14:20:56 +0530 (IST) Received: from TGT.dalailama.com ([59.94.245.65]) by ndl1mr1-a-fixed.sancharnet.in (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 Patch 2 (built Jul 14 2004)) with ESMTPA id <0J0Q00CTDOKWN8@ndl1mr1-a-fixed.sancharnet.in> for loppon@virupa.org; Mon, 12 Jun 2006 14:20:56 +0530 (IST) Sender: kuger@sancharnet.in Message-Id: <6.2.1.2.0.20060612141637.00c873c0@dalailama.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.1.2 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
Dear Loppon Kunga Namdrol,
Thank you for your email of June 10, 2006. The letter dated June 5, 2006 addressed to Rev. Michael Roach has indeed been sent by me.
With best wishes,
Tenzin Geyche Tethong Secretary to H.H. the Dalai Lama
Office of H. H. the Dalai Lama Thekchen Choeling McLeod Ganj - 176 219 Dharamsala, H.P. INDIA
Tel.: +91 (1892) 221343, 221879, 221210 Fax: +91 (1892) 221813 Email: ohhdl@dalailama.com
Another email from Tenzin Geyche-la says:
Dear Todd Marek,
Thank you for your email of June 10, 2006. The letter dated June 5, 2006 addressed to Rev. Michael Roach has indeed been sent by me. I am also giving below a copy of the letter that was earlier sent to Rev. Michael Roach by my colleague, Mr. Chhime Rigzin Choekuapa.
Wouldn't it be nice if we could just wish away the conventional reality that conflicts with our prejudices.
Dear Craig,
You write, "Isn't there a part of the bi-monthly Sojong ceremony where a monk or nun confesses to having flattly rejected the claim of someone having seen emptiness directly?"
Again, that sentence does not exactly make sense to me. If you are saying that at a sojong monks and nuns 'declare' that they have not broken their root vows -- that's true.
Although as you know, in the General Confession we aver that we have broken all the vows and have committed the most heinous crimes in our countless lifetimes. We have similar language in a general confession regarding our secondary/tertiary vows.
Dear Craig,
You write, "Either way, to say that you know a person is not an Arya or even a Buddha is a terrible seed to plant in your own heart."
Actually, I'm not saying that I know that. I'm saying that His Holiness the Dalai Lama has made it plain since 2002 that the claims of RMR to be an Arya are not to be believed in our tradition.
Hopefully, RMR is acting in relation to His Holiness like Devadatta to Lord Buddha. For Mahayanists, Devadatta was enacting the deeds of a heretic, enemy of the Dharma, sangha splitter, false teacher to serve as a foil and provide an opportunity for Lord Buddha to give a pointed teaching.
Nonetheless, those who followed Devadatta's false teachings -- unable to distinguish the pure from the impure, the good from the bad -- accumulated negative karma and thereby experienced unnecessary suffering.
To clarify, the words:
"Wouldn't it be nice if we could just wish away the conventional reality that conflicts with our prejudices."
following Tenzin Geyche-la's email to Todd are my commentary.
Dear Craig,
You close with words of advice that are always pertinent and helpful: "Please be careful."
You too; okay.
On Tuesday, I attended the 2d day of a teaching by Demmo Lochoe Rinpoche at Gyuto Monastery. The text, de lam, Path to Bliss.
The whole flap about RMR teaching here and the expected arrival of over 200 diamond mountaineers now is well known by the local geshes and lamas.
In the Lam Rim section enjoining students to carefully investigate their prospective teachers, Rinpoche unusually repeated, with emphatic urgency, several times:
"False Teachers Lead their Students to Hell!"
Please take care,
Tenzin Nordron, getsul-ma
"" (1) His Holiness does not "believe" "you have reached the path of seeing, as you claim" (see June 5 letter above). ""
this is a very exaggerated interpretation on your behalf.
this is illustrated by your next point:
"" "His Holiness the Dalai Lama finds that Michael Roach’s conduct of the January ordination ceremony conflicts with the “rules of Vinaya”. ""
when the actual words were "seems to" and were working off a single photograph. everyone should be very careful when trying to read things correctly. your points do not stand under scrutiny, even your reply about GMR having engaged in sexual relations. in the mp3s that you cite, he is talking about (as many people have previously talked about) certain secret practices. that you insist he was talking about a normal sexual relationship is a total perversion of the truth.
A more articulate response is here: http://www.diamond-cutter.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=58
Dear Anon 11:22
Regarding the letters of His Holiness' spokespeople you write,
"everyone should be very careful when trying to read things correctly"
What is actually true is that anyone who purports to be a follower of His Holiness the Dalai Lama's tradition of Buddhism should be extremely careful about denegrating and deliberately misinterpreting His clearly stated warnings that RMR is no longer a teacher/practitioner of Tibetan Buddhism.
Of coufrse, if you are not a follower of His Holiness, fine, you can believe anything you want about anything.
But if you hold yourself to be any kind of Buddhist, why don't you stop acting like you can't make sense of plainly written English. Contact His Holiness office directly.
If we see an appearance of conflict between teachers, or anyone, doesn't that simply mean we are seeing results of some past conflict as created in the past? If my loving parents argue with each other, should I create a conflict about the argument with my siblings? Or should I let that wave of appearance exhaust itself and be glad I didn't create a similar appearance in the future? If karma and emptiness work, then I MUST disengage from conflict and remain joyful.
Thank you, Buddhas-in-disguise, for showing me the appearance of something that has no nature of its own, something that comes from me, so that I can love you more, and smash the causes in myself that produce an ill-fitting world.
Ah, I feel this appearance fading, as all temporary things do....
Dear Anon 9:36
As the Seventh Dalai Lama noted -- between Samsara and Nirvana no difference exists. Nonetheless, the effects of the karmic law of cause and effect are infallible.
Thus when His Holiness the Dalai Lama warns us to stay away from RMR -- because RMR has been engaging in black karmic deeds (according to Tibetan Buddhism -- trampling on the vows of a fully ordained monk and conducting a schismatic ordination for two) -- we should pay heed to the warning for the sake of this and future lives.
Warnings are not 'conflict'. [We don't want to engender animosity against RMR, CM or their students.]
As sane (and, yes, 'ordinary') beings living in this Jambudiva realm, we preserve our Precious Human Rebirth because we wisely alter our behavior and thinking based on warning advice.
Even though nicotine and cigarette smoke tar do not have a self-nature of being inherently existing carinogens, nonetheless inhaled in sufficient quantities by a body (also lacking inherently existing self-nature) such a body often develops a deadly illness (that also lacks such a self-nature).
Similarly, our mental continuua have "no nature" existing independently from their "own" side. Nonetheless, Buddha dharma teaches that the karmic consequences of the actions of following false teachers often is lower rebirth.
So when the toddler, who lacks an inherently-existent self nature runs towards a street (that cannot be found when searched for by a mind looking for the ultimate mode of existence of that road), and a loving adult (similarly empty of inherent nature) SCREAMS [in loud foreceful voice that is completely empty of self-nature] a message [similarly empty of self-sufficient existence] - STOP!!! COME BACK!" --
That's a loving warning -- not a good-karma-burning temper tantrum.
love,
Post a Comment
<< Home