[Buddha-l] Victim? - was Victimized vegans?

[Christopher Fynn]

Joy Vriens wrote:

> The situation of TB is quite complex. It is not simply a question of some 
> "rotten apples". Some behaviour is orthodox and institutional as June Campbell points out. 

While her book does touch on a number of important points a problem with is that 
as I recall it was also full of factual errors and other things completely 
twisted to fit in with her thesis.

It wouldn't surprise me in the least to learn that Kalu Rinpoche had one or
more "secret consorts". As you point out below that could be seen as perfectly 
in keeping with his tradition. However for many reasons I think JC's particular 
claim to have been one of these "secret consorts" is highly unlikely.


> As I see it, the complexity is mainly due to the dominating position that the highest yoga 
> tantra practices have taken from about the 15th century onwards, after a period of polemics. 

Perhaps we can (at least in part) blame this on the "reformer" Tsongkhapa and 
his followers who seem to have been amongst those held the view that HYT 
practice required a physical karmamudra - and that complete enlightenment was 
impossible without it.

> The highest realisation, "full Buddhahood", was only possible through the highest yoga tantras 
> (HYT) and the HYT taught in resume that there was "no mahaamudraa without karmamudraa". Purely 
> a question of a combination of alchemy and hathayoga in order to obtain an immortal body (i.e. 
> the formal bodies needed to work for the benefit of all). 

> For Indians the question of lineages may have been a bit of a loose concept, for the 
> Tibetans it - and transmission in general - became a very serious matter.

Sure that's how they validated themselves - and in Tibet establishing legitimacy 
of ones spiritual transmission came to have a lot to do with establishing 
political legitimacy.

> That is why the growing success of HYT as the unique path to the highest realisation 
> became a problem for the more monastically enclined  schools that had lineage holders 
> with vows as heads. In order to be able to keep a lineage alive, the practises need to 
> be re-actualised before being transmitted further. This means that even lineage holders 
> with vows, monks, have to practice in person the means that lead to full awakening before 
> transmitting them further. And that is where the problem lies. 

> There are three solutions : either internalising the karmamudra (through visualisation) 
> or making it into a symbolic practice, but this is too heavy a concession to the alchemical 
> requirements which are very materialistic. 

> Practising karmamudraa secretly with a gsang yum, which is the solution chosen by many 
> lineageholders with vows. The third that I see as a possibility see would be to remain a
> monk, but to allow for the karmamudraa practice in all transparancy but within well defined 
boundaries.

> At very specific times, surrounded by specific rituals, the lineage holding monk, fully 
> identified with the god, so no longer a monk, could do what he thinks he has to do for full awakening...

Some Jonangpa scholars claimed that *only* monks could successfully practice HYT 
- since only they had sufficient discipline not to release semen.

> Of course lineages such as Nyingmapa and Sakyapa, that are not headed by monks 
> don't have the same problem. But it doesn't safeguard their gurus against rogue behaviour either.

 From the point of view exposed above,
IF Kalu Rinpoche and Bokar Rinpoche and the Karmapas or any other vow holding 
lineage lamas,
did practice karmamudraa, secretly, this isn't misbehaviour or abuse in itself, 
but orthodox
behaviour for a lineage holder with vows. The means used to bind their partners 
to secrecy is IMO.
I am not condoning anything here, I am simply trying to see things from their 
POV.

The argument against "openness" would probably be that it would not be conducive 
to  "ordinary practitioners" maintaining monastic vows.

I'm not quite sure what you are referring to as "The means used to bind their 
partners to secrecy" - and this being abusive. I'm not convinced that any 
particular threats or whatever would be needed to keep most people brought up in 
traditional Tibetan culture from talking openly about such a relationship.

> That's why I would suggest to make HYT simply one of the means that lead to "full awakening". 
> IMO this would get rid of useless pressure and a lot of issues Tibetan Buddhism gets criticized 
for.

As I'm sure you are aware, there are good sources to base an argument for 
something like this on - Saraha for one. Some Dzogchen teachers also state
that there is no need for bskyed rim & rdzogs rim.

- Chris