Is Buddhism a complete path?

[Nungali]

I am in late here , didnt read all of it, just the last few pages .... it seems to have come out as I suspected . In my brief perusal here (and of my familiarity  from elsewhere , I feel confident that I can declare ...

 

Yes, Buddhism as a religion is a complete system . It has teachings , practices , temples, fees, donations, political motivations and operations,  an attraction to gaining 'funds' , an elite 'priesthood' , sexual impropriety , coverups , genuine simple practitioners that dont want any of that 'stuff'   , extravagant robes ,  cool objects  ( jeweled phurba !  Wow ! )  , hipster cred ,    etc etc ... I mean, for a religion

 

Whaddaya want ?   Thats the 'full path' . 

[Mark Foote]

On 2/14/2024 at 1:21 PM, old3bob said:

 

 

 

Hmm, where is Suzuki on that picture 
 

 

 

More like:

 

 

 

Edited February 15 by Mark Foote

[Mark Foote]

On 2/14/2024 at 3:03 PM, ChiDragon said:

Yes, Buddhism is a complete system for ending suffering permanently. A person has to be enlightened, in order, to become a Buddha. 
 

I would say the teachings attributed to Gautama in the first four Nikayas are an incomplete system toward the ending of suffering, when suffering arises. 

A complete system would be full of contradictions, as many of the later teachings are.
 

[snowymountains]

9 hours ago, Nungali said:

I am in late here , didnt read all of it, just the last few pages .... it seems to have come out as I suspected . In my brief perusal here (and of my familiarity  from elsewhere , I feel confident that I can declare ...

 

Yes, Buddhism as a religion is a complete system . It has teachings , practices , temples, fees, donations, political motivations and operations,  an attraction to gaining 'funds' , an elite 'priesthood' , sexual impropriety , coverups , genuine simple practitioners that dont want any of that 'stuff'   , extravagant robes ,  cool objects  ( jeweled phurba !  Wow ! )  , hipster cred ,    etc etc ... I mean, for a religion

 

Whaddaya want ?   Thats the 'full path' . 

 

You are already enlightened 😁

 

[old3bob]

12 hours ago, Mark Foote said:

 

More like:

 

 

 

shall we play a rousing sea shanty again?   

 

[Apech]

17 hours ago, snowymountains said:

To be practical see eg this case

Given the environment she grew up in, her very young age, was she realistically in a position see it coming beforehand? ( This one is on trial btw do we don't yet know for sure what happened )

 

 

Well as I said before if these Lamas actually taught a curicullum  of vajrayana Buddhism (or actually Mahayana Buddhism first) as they should - including Tsarchen Losal Gyamtso's "Opening the Door to the Precious Siddhis" this would not have happened.  

 

In terms of those who show up at Dharma centres there's a kind of weird two way problem.  Firstly 'fringe' religions attract a lot of weak and damaged people who are understandably looking for help or a way out of the unhelpful circumstances they have been born into.  The last thing such people should take on is the strong medicine of vajrayana.  They need a long period of gentle settling down and sorting their life out ('clean their room' to quote a certain popular gentleman)  - but this can appear rather boring and unlikely to help the desperate.  The other 'problem' is that turning away or abandoning sentient beings is not allowed for a bodhisattva - so you really can't say - sorry but come back when you're sorted.  Dharma isn't therapy, not to say that Buddhists can't offer therapy.  But this means that many Dharma centres are full of weak and vulnerable people.  Whereas they should be full of high flying top minds looking for a great challenge.

 

There is another issue of a tradition of mahasiddha transgressiveness - which has a long history both in India and Tibet (and in Hindu schools also) - where rather like the Greek Diogenes their is an idea of kind of testing out the 'one flavour' of shunyata by performing antinomian acts , often in public, such as having sex with prostitutes (I won't go on), to break any attachment to worldly concerns.  This has caused a lot of head scratching in the west - it was termed Crazy Wisdom by one Tulku.  The answer is simple actually.  Normal rules of society apply and if such yogis do something illegal then they should be prosecuted and imprisoned like anyone else.  If they are truly non-attached then this should mean nothing to them.  If they are not then they will find out quite quickly that their 'enlightenment' was illusory.  

 

 

 

 

[snowymountains]

1 hour ago, Apech said:

 

Well as I said before if these Lamas actually taught a curicullum  of vajrayana Buddhism (or actually Mahayana Buddhism first) as they should - including Tsarchen Losal Gyamtso's "Opening the Door to the Precious Siddhis" this would not have happened.  

 

In terms of those who show up at Dharma centres there's a kind of weird two way problem.  Firstly 'fringe' religions attract a lot of weak and damaged people who are understandably looking for help or a way out of the unhelpful circumstances they have been born into.  The last thing such people should take on is the strong medicine of vajrayana.  They need a long period of gentle settling down and sorting their life out ('clean their room' to quote a certain popular gentleman)  - but this can appear rather boring and unlikely to help the desperate.  The other 'problem' is that turning away or abandoning sentient beings is not allowed for a bodhisattva - so you really can't say - sorry but come back when you're sorted.  Dharma isn't therapy, not to say that Buddhists can't offer therapy.  But this means that many Dharma centres are full of weak and vulnerable people.  Whereas they should be full of high flying top minds looking for a great challenge.

 

There is another issue of a tradition of mahasiddha transgressiveness - which has a long history both in India and Tibet (and in Hindu schools also) - where rather like the Greek Diogenes their is an idea of kind of testing out the 'one flavour' of shunyata by performing antinomian acts , often in public, such as having sex with prostitutes (I won't go on), to break any attachment to worldly concerns.  This has caused a lot of head scratching in the west - it was termed Crazy Wisdom by one Tulku.  The answer is simple actually.  Normal rules of society apply and if such yogis do something illegal then they should be prosecuted and imprisoned like anyone else.  If they are truly non-attached then this should mean nothing to them.  If they are not then they will find out quite quickly that their 'enlightenment' was illusory.  

 

 

 

 

 

I agree re the group of people that are attracted to Dharma centres, it's in line with my anecdotal experience, and this btw is the main reason I'm very critical of meditative techniques that involve eg regressions.

People in weakness are still people though, they're not an alien intelligence, it could be that our children or ourselves in a few years that are in their shoes.

 

So there's need for enforcement of a code of conduct internally. The centres are not there to do therapy, correct, so they won't be able to help the student side on that front but they can enforce standards on the teacher side.

 

What was attributed till recently to "crazy wisdom" went beyond that scope, even raw physical abuse was called "crazy wisdom"..

 

Even revered figures like Marpa, Tilopa were abusers, so a degree of normalisation is there.

If one day abuse was proven to be an intergenerational theme in Tibetan Buddhism, I wouldn't be surprised tbh, given the scale. As @SirPalomides said, they themselves may had been victims of abuse.

 

So internal preventive and punitive measures are badly needed, to break the cycle, but this needs leadership which takes this very seriously and makes it a top priority.

 

So far it's only in countries with strong legal systems that they've faced consequences for abuse

Did some of these cases really need to be allowed to exist till they reach the legal system.. wouldn't it had been better if Rinponche titles and support had instead been revoked before?

 

 

Edited February 16 by snowymountains

[Apech]

2 hours ago, snowymountains said:

 

I agree re the group of people that are attracted to Dharma centres, it's in line with my anecdotal experience, and this btw is the main reason I'm very critical of meditative techniques that involve eg regressions.

People in weakness are still people though, they're not an alien intelligence, it could be that our children or ourselves in a few years that are in their shoes.

 

In my experience of actual dharma centres a great deal of kindness and care is extended to all.  It is a Mahayana practice (lojong) to place others needs before your own.  And ok there's a mixture of all sorts involved but I personally saw this idea generally respected.

 

2 hours ago, snowymountains said:

So there's need for enforcement of a code of conduct internally. The centres are not there to do therapy, correct, so they won't be able to help the student side on that front but they can enforce standards on the teacher side.

 

Again in the centres I am linked to they have adopted various codes of conduct and so - a bit superfluous in my opinion as dharma is in itself such a code - but for better or worse they have modern type policy documents and a system for reportiing abuse and harassment etc.

 

2 hours ago, snowymountains said:

What was attributed till recently to "crazy wisdom" went beyond that scope, even raw physical abuse was called "crazy wisdom"..

 

I think most of it can be attributed to the over consumption of saki.

 

2 hours ago, snowymountains said:

Even revered figures like Marpa, Tilopa were abusers, so a degree of normalisation is there.

 

Not really.  This is a big subject (and I'm not sure what abuse you are accusing Marpa of anyway) but properly understood the stories about Tilopa and Naropa are not about abuse - it is that some disreputable Lamas misrepresent them this way in order to gain power over others.

 

2 hours ago, snowymountains said:

If one day abuse was proven to be an intergenerational theme in Tibetan Buddhism, I wouldn't be surprised tbh, given the scale. As @SirPalomides said, they themselves may had been victims of abuse.

 

So internal preventive and punitive measures are badly needed, to break the cycle, but this needs leadership which takes this very seriously and makes it a top priority.

 

I think this is true in the monastic orders.  Rather like the Catholic Church there are internal cultural problems.

 

2 hours ago, snowymountains said:

So far it's only in countries with strong legal systems that they've faced consequences for abuse

Did some of these cases really need to be allowed to exist till they reach the legal system.. wouldn't it had been better if Rinponche titles and support had instead been revoked before?

 

 

 

Rinpoche (lit. precious one) signifies like the term tulku that the person has been recognised as a reincarnate lama.  I don't see how once given anyone would be able to revoke it - 'you've been a naughty boy and now you are no longer reincarnate'.  Teaching authority would come with a lineage transmission which someone holds and this could be from a long dead lama - so unless the lama still lives and decides to act I don't see what authority could take away teaching authority. 

 

The Dalai Lama is a political head and also the head of only one of the four main schools.  In the Nyingmapa school I believe there is no head as such and therefore no such authority structure.

 

 

[liminal_luke]

Effortless enlightened action enjoys a gloss of perfection rarely sustained by teachers, students, or organizational administrators.  We mostly muddle through.  It's good to call out abuse; not so good to permanently store a pitchfork in the entryway.   

Edited February 16 by liminal_luke

[snowymountains]

26 minutes ago, liminal_luke said:

Effortless enlightened action enjoys a gloss of perfection rarely sustained by teachers, students, or organizational administrators.  We mostly muddle through.  It's good to call out abuse; not so good to permanently store a pitchfork in the entryway.   

 

Label it as you like but there's a huge abuse problem and I prefer to call it for what it is instead of brushing it aside.

[snowymountains]

56 minutes ago, Apech said:

 

In my experience of actual dharma centres a great deal of kindness and care is extended to all.  It is a Mahayana practice (lojong) to place others needs before your own.  And ok there's a mixture of all sorts involved but I personally saw this idea generally respected.

 

 

Again in the centres I am linked to they have adopted various codes of conduct and so - a bit superfluous in my opinion as dharma is in itself such a code - but for better or worse they have modern type policy documents and a system for reportiing abuse and harassment etc.

 

 

I think most of it can be attributed to the over consumption of saki.

 

 

Not really.  This is a big subject (and I'm not sure what abuse you are accusing Marpa of anyway) but properly understood the stories about Tilopa and Naropa are not about abuse - it is that some disreputable Lamas misrepresent them this way in order to gain power over others.

 

 

I think this is true in the monastic orders.  Rather like the Catholic Church there are internal cultural problems.

 

 

Rinpoche (lit. precious one) signifies like the term tulku that the person has been recognised as a reincarnate lama.  I don't see how once given anyone would be able to revoke it - 'you've been a naughty boy and now you are no longer reincarnate'.  Teaching authority would come with a lineage transmission which someone holds and this could be from a long dead lama - so unless the lama still lives and decides to act I don't see what authority could take away teaching authority. 

 

The Dalai Lama is a political head and also the head of only one of the four main schools.  In the Nyingmapa school I believe there is no head as such and therefore no such authority structure.

 

 

 

I wasn't talking in specific about the centres you visit, only you can talk about these.

 

Well let's not call abuse abuse then call it cultural or lama politics etc.

 

Catholics too are scrutinised and scrutiny is a good thing for these institutions.

If a system can't fix itself, then it's up to journalists and the legal system.

 

Where there is will there is effort, they could have a public dB if they wanted with Rinpoches that are no longer endorsed by the political branch if they wanted to. This is just semantics there are many ways to call it out if they wanted to

 

Where there is no will on the other hand there is ... what we read in the news about them

[Apech]

57 minutes ago, snowymountains said:

 

I wasn't talking in specific about the centres you visit, only you can talk about these.

 

Yes, that's what I did - talk about them.

 

57 minutes ago, snowymountains said:

Well let's not call abuse abuse then call it cultural or lama politics etc.

 

Eh?

 

57 minutes ago, snowymountains said:

Catholics too are scrutinised and scrutiny is a good thing for these institutions.

If a system can't fix itself, then it's up to journalists and the legal system.

 

Where there is will there is effort, they could have a public dB if they wanted with Rinpoches that are no longer endorsed by the political branch if they wanted to. This is just semantics there are many ways to call it out if they wanted to

 

There is no political oversight - it doesn't exist.

 

57 minutes ago, snowymountains said:

Where there is no will on the other hand there is ... what we read in the news about them

 

Mostly good - with a few worrying cases of abuse.  That's what we read.

[snowymountains]

5 minutes ago, Apech said:

 

Yes, that's what I did - talk about them.

 

 

Eh?

 

 

There is no political oversight - it doesn't exist.

 

 

Mostly good - with a few worrying cases of abuse.  That's what we read.

 

Unless what we read is the tip of the iceberg, and we'll read about the rest of the iceberg in the coming years.

It's quite a lot of them already btw, not few.

 

It's reasonably recent after all that lawyers started specialising into this type of groups and advertise their track record.

Perhaps they see a business opportunity there.

Edited February 16 by snowymountains

[Mark Foote]

11 hours ago, old3bob said:

 

shall we play a rousing sea shanty again?   

 

A favorite, o brother by another mother, though I prefer the Weavers' rendition.  Checking the history via Wikipedia:
 

Alan Lomax published a completely different version, that he heard from a sailor called J.M. Hunt in 1935

We're sailing down the river from Liverpool^[4]

Heave away Santy Anno

Around Cape Horn to Frisco Bay

Along

the plains of Mexico

The Weavers made that:

 

... Around Cape Horn to Frisco Bay
We're bound for Californio.
 

Edited February 16 by Mark Foote

[old3bob]

3 hours ago, Mark Foote said:

A favorite, o brother by another mother, though I prefer the Weavers' rendition.  Checking the history via Wikipedia:
 

Alan Lomax published a completely different version, that he heard from a sailor called J.M. Hunt in 1935

We're sailing down the river from Liverpool^[4]

Heave away Santy Anno

Around Cape Horn to Frisco Bay

Along

the plains of Mexico

The Weavers made that:

 

... Around Cape Horn to Frisco Bay
We're bound for Californio.
 

 

and a mountain song for a mountain picture...

 

[manitou]

On 2/12/2024 at 9:21 AM, Maddie said:

Recent discussions have brought some interesting points for consideration to light. Namely being is Buddhism a complete system for ending suffering permanently aka "enlightenment" all by itself or is it dated and lacking things? 

 

 

I don't think any religious structure is a complete system for enlightenment.  As I see it, the most important component of enlightenment is abandoning the triggers which cause us to react, first.  Things can't be seen in their reality if they are colored by emotion or anxiety.  Abandoning our triggers is done by clearing out the blockages within, rectifying memories that affect our life today.  That's the inner work of enlightenment.  If one had a good Buddhist rinpoche that was self-aware and knew himself inside out, that would be a very helpful addition to the Buddhist teachings.  Enlightenment is nothing more than realizing who you really are.  It's a realization, a self-realization.

[old3bob]

all systems and a teachers help are for preparation with some being more "complete" than others,  but making preparation's for a leap of faith into the unknown can only go so far or are not covered-  since doing that is up to us alone.  (and i don't mean blind faith)

[manitou]

2 hours ago, old3bob said:

all systems and a teachers help are for preparation with some being more "complete" than others,  but making preparation's for a leap of faith into the unknown can only go so far or are not covered-  since doing that is up to us alone.  (and i don't mean blind faith)

 

 

Nicely put!  A leap of faith into the unknown, and by ourselves.  That's the distance between the tip of the master's finger and the moon.

[steve]

3 hours ago, old3bob said:

all systems and a teachers help are for preparation with some being more "complete" than others,  but making preparation's for a leap of faith into the unknown can only go so far or are not covered-  since doing that is up to us alone.  (and i don't mean blind faith)

 

I think this is an interesting distinction - faith vs blind faith. What do you, or others, see as the difference? Is it safe to say that all faith is blind to some degree?

[stirling]

2 hours ago, steve said:

I think this is an interesting distinction - faith vs blind faith. What do you, or others, see as the difference? Is it safe to say that all faith is blind to some degree?

 

Faith in Buddhist practice isn't blind, it is intended to be generated by seeing that practice changes you and your life. Most people who begin practicing the Noble Eightfold Path, and commit to meditating for 20 minutes a day for a month will find themselves less reactive, but more thoughtful about their actions, and more kind.

[old3bob]

3 hours ago, steve said:

 

I think this is an interesting distinction - faith vs blind faith. What do you, or others, see as the difference? Is it safe to say that all faith is blind to some degree?

 

 

I wouldn't say so...also that saying about "he who hesitates is lost" comes to mind, and if used in this context points to an an inner knowing of when to take such a leap which has to be beyond hesitation or half ass-ing it.

Edited March 8 by old3bob

[old3bob]

and in many cases there are preparations and faith gained through making  smaller leaps or steps that can lead up to a biggy...

[manitou]

7 hours ago, steve said:

 

I think this is an interesting distinction - faith vs blind faith. What do you, or others, see as the difference? Is it safe to say that all faith is blind to some degree?

 

 

Blind faith is what I was taught in Sunday School.  To believe something that makes no sense whatsoever when the adult brain looks at it.

 

Faith (or hoping that something external is coming to save us?) is replaced with Knowing at some point.  When you realize who the navigator actually is, there is no need for faith, blind or otherwise.  

[steve]

5 hours ago, stirling said:

 

Faith in Buddhist practice isn't blind, it is intended to be generated by seeing that practice changes you and your life.

 

I have experienced this personally and agree with both your statement and the merit of the method.

 

48 minutes ago, manitou said:

Faith (or hoping that something external is coming to save us?) is replaced with Knowing at some point.  When you realize who the navigator actually is, there is no need for faith, blind or otherwise.  

 

In reflecting on these posts, I suggest faith is what is there before knowing, be that through seeing positive changes through practice or self-realization. Once we experience or realize, it is knowing that drives us, not faith. Knowing which engenders trust. Faith is no longer necessary.

 

It seems to me that all faith is necessarily blind. If one is not blind one would see, and know or not know, faith is unnecessary when knowing is there. I do not disregard or demonize faith. It is good to have faith in your cancer treatment or your buddy who’s got your back in the shit. Good to have faith in parents, partners, teachers, coaches, etc… 

Faith is only a problem when we are too identified so as to fail or refuse to see truth when it shows itself and act accordingly. The biggest danger of faith is that it can make us vulnerable, susceptible to influence and abuse. 

 

It’s OK to feel faith if it is truly there, it is simply already there, a feeling, an idea, a hope, or a dream. There is nothing wrong with any of that and it does not present a threat if we are aware and responsive. Disappointment is Ok too, if it is there. It is important, however, that it doesn’t become a fixed part of our identity. All of this comes and goes if we don’t hold on. I think this is the key or me. 

 

These three words - belief, faith, and trust are interesting for me to sit with and to investigate. What counts more than these words are the concepts with which we associate them and our relationship to that, I think. 

 

In practice, all three have a similar function in directing and motivating action, whether religious, spiritual, political, martial, material, and so on. Some words and concepts make us more or less comfortable as individuals, eg regular faith is Ok, blind faith not so much, or belief is bad but trust is good. At the end of the day, for me there is knowing and not knowing. In between the two are these shades of conceptual grey where I feel we often dance and it’s interesting to me to observe and explore. And as powerful as “knowing” is it is also always the experience of a fallible human not as different from faith as we might like to believe. 

 

[old3bob]

Intuition is not meant to be separate from our being and neither are a great many other factors including a leap of faith, when or as it's needed.