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

[Joy Vriens]

Hi Chris,

>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. 

I had to sift through it as well. As she said herself the book was written to work through some personal confusion. 
 
>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. 

Another possibility is that she became the spokeswoman of a secret consort or several secret consorts who didn't dare or want to speak out in their personal name and pretended that these things happened to her in order to protect them. But it wouldn't be my first intuition.     

>> 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. 

I was thinking of some Sakyapas actually, who attacked Gampopa's "Suutra Mahaamudraa". In reaction to those attacks, plus because of a sort coup d'état by the yogis the Kagyupa school became more tantra oriented than it was initially. Even nowadays the Sakyapa are the most militant and the less intransigeant when it comes to HYT.   
 
> 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. 

Yes, but then it could be associated to a general good practice of vinaya and yogic mastery. Not that I am in favour of it though... 
 
>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. 

Because the "threats" have probably been assimilated and integrated. So mostly a reminder would be unnecessary. The fact itself that the consorts are secret and have to remain secret is problematic. In the Nyingma school a secret consort is not secret and even a publicly respected person. Not that I am in favour of religious status, but if it goes up for one party then it should be the same for the other. It gives secret consorts a similar "role" as that of women of catholic priests in the West. Although their "status", as long as they keep their role secret, is probably a more respectable one. It also reminds me somehow of the seigneurial  right of the first night (jus primae noctis).      
 
>> 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. 

And so did Gampopa. But unfortunately his teachings didn't prevail.

Joy