Should I Go Buddhist?

[steve]

Hi Ryan,

FWIW, some comments about your OP -

 

The reason for the title is that I am not a Buddhist, I have not taken refuge, etc. I am normally anti-religion, as in the institution of it, hierarchy etc etc.

 

But for some reason I find myself continually attracted to Buddhism, ...

 

If this is the case, pursuing some teachings, in person, from a credible teacher may be worth your time. Books are wonderful but not the same, IMO. There is no need to over think it and struggle with the idea of vows and samaya and so forth. If the teachings touch you, all of that will fall into place naturally. If not, it will be clear and you will look elsewhere.

 

 

By temperament, cultural upbringing, and logic, I am anti religious authority. I could get into why but I'm sure most of you are aware of the general reasons already. That said, I am in a place where I am looking for a well-trodden path to the highest truths. I sense that there is some ingredient in a traditional approach that is not present in blazing one's own trail, so to speak.

 

I agree with you here. Well established traditions and lineages have figured out a lot of things that can help someone along the way. You still need to do the work yourself but having some guidance is a good thing for most people. The Tibetan Buddhist method has been developed and refined by countless practitioners over a long period of time. They've already done much of the trial and error work for you. That said, it is not for everyone and not everyone who adopts it is successful.

 

One of the ingredients you are referring to is exactly what you have an aversion to - guru yoga. It helps to cultivate the trust and devotion which are the fuel that keeps people going when the going gets tough, both on the spiritual path and in life. As Bubbles alluded to, it is widely misunderstood. The guru is the very same teacher we are appealing to when we eschew all paths and choose to be on our own. The teacher is the essence of our being, the nature of reality, the nature of mind - the Tibetans call it Kuntuzangpo which translates to "all good." The human guru is the living embodiment or representative of that, insofar that they embody the fruition of the practices in their actions. If they do not, look elsewhere. Union with the guru is simply following their lead in an effort to recognize and express that very essence in ourselves.

 

Like you, I had a strong aversion to religious and spiritual authority for most of my life. I found a teacher and path that changed that. The reason it changed was that I saw the effect of the view and practices for myself in my own life and that effect was profound.

 

 

So there are multiple levels of questions in this post. The first is whether or not I should pursue Buddhism in general. As I said, I am attracted to it, but am turned off by both appeal to authority well as emphasis on moral conduct (am I allowed to drink and eat meat in Vajrayana? I am concerned this path would be disruptive to my relationships).

 

Next, what are your thoughts on Vajrayana as a path compared to other Buddhist approaches? I know this is a potentially loaded question so please play nice!

 

Lastly, what are others' experience with this specific practice program? Is it worth it? How far did you go? Does anyone have any experience with Chokyi Nyima Rinpoche?

 

Thanks in advance,

 

-Ryan

 

Regarding moral conduct, if you make a personal connection to the teachings, that will take care of itself. Either you will see and feel the reason to make changes in your life and actions or you will not and move on. The Tibetans have always been meat eaters - veggies don't grow well at altitude. Many now in diaspora in India and around the world have adopted vegetarian diets but that is a very recent development. Many also drink a bit of alcohol during certain ceremonies to demonstrate to themselves that they are not too attached to the restrictions. If you are drawn deeply into the practices, you will naturally let go of drugs and alcohol as they are simply too much of an interference.

 

In terms of which Buddhist approach to adopt, I think they are all wonderful, as are most spiritual traditions when taught by an accomplished master who walks the walk. More than which approach to pursue, I think it is much more important to make a deep, heartfelt connection with the right teacher. That is where the "juice" is.

 

I agree with Apech - if you are questioning whether to get involved, don't jump into any formal commitments - you're simply not ready for that and it can have a negative effect under those circumstances. But it certainly wouldn't hurt to go to a weekend retreat or something along those lines, get your feet wet, and see if it is a good fit. And you may need to try a few different groups to find the right fit. No way you can really make an informed decision about such an important step through books, videos, and discussion with others. You need to see and feel it for yourself if you want to do the possibility justice.

 

Once you have put a reasonable amount of time into thinking about and analyzing the question, let it go completely. If you already have a meditative practice, continue that, quiet the monkey mind and trust that the causes and conditions will either come together to bring you to the right Buddhist teacher, or they will not.

 

Warm regards and good luck on your decision.

[RyanO]

Steve, thank you for your thorough and insightful post!

[Aetherous]

Overall, the triple excellence program is very very good! I highly recommend you to it. I am part way through the first step of the 2nd excellence. The 3rd excellence portion isn't complete yet from what I understand, so no one can tell you about that phase of it.

 

I personally had a hard time with some of the 1st excellence. Some aspects of Buddhist philosophy and beliefs don't appeal to me personally...such as actually believing there are different realms like the hell realm, god realm, etc. And I also am really not fond of the droning British accent in the lessons...you can try a month for free right now on the site, I think, and see what I mean about that. I personally just turn down the volume and read it myself...and I personally don't do it twice a day. Due to my busy schedule, I actually skip many days and just read a lot of them at one time. Not that I recommend you to do this, but you can make it work even if you're a bad student in it.

At one point I made a review on here, that the program isn't good. But I changed my opinion later, as I continued. Now my opinion is that it's one of the best programs of transformational learning out there.

Over time and if you keep going at it, you'll get a lot out of it. It's a great way to learn about Buddhism, which is very dissimilar to the Buddhism you've seen at this forum from some members (it's more practical while giving insight into the actual meanings of the philosophies, rather than getting stuck on them), and to practice the methods which can be liberating. Literally, liberating for your emotions...not just a turn of phrase. It makes understanding the Buddhist philosophy quite easy and intuitive, rather than obtuse.

So, I view it as basically one of the most precious things in the world...because it can benefit you, and the world, so much...and is very accessible while actually being advanced (the perspective it teaches from is considered to be at a higher stage of learning in Buddhism).

 

Having an in person teacher. Well, an in person empowerment is required before doing the 3rd excellence anyway. At least with this program, you'll be very well versed in Buddhism by the time that comes. You'll also have received many video taped teachings from Chokyi by that time, and can receive some personal instruction in the forum from his long time students and associated lamas.

About refuge...I think you'll appreciate the perspective of the program, which is not about taking refuge in some person. And it's not about a blind leap of faith, or about giving away your power to think for yourself, or anything. It's more about honesty, and understanding how liberation works...while also incorporating some very basic vajrayana aspects.

 

Oh yeah...and to be clear, there is no commitment in this program. I'm not even sure if the 3rd excellence requires a commitment. At least at this stage, the 2nd excellence, it is laid back and you could quit and go do another path with no ill effects.

Edited February 6, 2015 by Aetherous

[RyanO]

Very good to know Aetherous, thanks!

[Bubbles]

Hi RyanO,

 

Please find below found on HH the Gyalwang Drukpa's website. It explains what Tantric vows mean. I find it good.

 

Hope it helps,

Wishing you the best!

 

*************************************

The mystery of samaya

 

First of all, whoever supposedly has given you samaya or so-called Tantric vows, is he or she keeping his or her own samaya pure and unbroken? You must understand that you cannot give away things that you yourself do not possess. If the teacher has broken his or her own samaya with guru and Vajra brothers, then he or she has no samaya to give you. Samaya has to come from a pure and golden lineage, unbroken, and the teacher giving you the samaya also must have been keeping the samaya pure, golden and unbroken. It has to be a beautiful lineage, pure, golden and unbroken.

 

Samaya is not something that just pops up from nowhere, no way! Samaya has a lineage from Vajradhara up until your own guru. Samaya is actually nothing but the realisation, the Mahamudra or Maha Ati realisation. For example, I as the guru must have the Vajradhara realisation from Tilopa to Naropa, to the rest of the lineage masters and then to my own guru, or from Guru Padmasambhava to my guru. Once I receive the samaya, I have to keep it preciously. Not only keeping it, I have to practise it, I have to realise it, I have to sustain it with pure motivation for the benefit of all beings and pass it on to qualified disciples and students. A qualified disciple is one that is ready and that has the quality and qualification of realisation or understanding.

 

In this information age, a lot of Vajrayana teachings have been translated, with contents partially extracted and communicated to the public. Sometimes out of compassion and kindness, Vajrayana masters give Anuttarayoga Tantra teachings and initiations even to beginners for them to have a connection with the Vajrayana path. Such teachings often come with samaya vows. However it does not mean that the students receiving them who lack the qualifications to practise and the realisation are bound by these vows. The students must have some realisation after practising, and having received the samaya from the Annutarayoga Tantra, there should be some genuine effect after practising. If there is no intention of practising nor receiving the samaya vows, and samaya vows were received without any intention or understanding, then the students would not have received the samaya vows at all. Basically, both the guru and the student must be qualified in order to effect the samaya vows.

 

Samaya is not a joking matter or something to be abused. It cannot be passed on like a piece of mundane contract, it is a very serious matter. The one giving you must have the pure samaya, and the one receiving it must be ready and must have the quality to receive it.

 

Generally, we say that a student needs to be a perfect vessel to receive the teaching, and in the case of samaya connection, the guru too needs to be a perfect vessel to pass on the teaching. Think of samaya being pure nectar. If a guru is not ready or does not have the authentic samaya, he or she is like a contaminated vessel, and no matter how golden and precious the nectar is, it would become contaminated. So when it is given to the disciple, the samaya is also not pure and golden. It's become something else other than what we all know as samaya.

 

Just because I have given you refuge and now you are bound to me by samaya. Definitely not. Refuge is not samaya. Samaya is not a dark spell casted on you. We are followers of Buddha's teaching, we are not followers of a cult. While we always blame that this is a Dark Age full of teachers with impure motivation, let's check our own motivation as followers, whether we are seeking a path of liberation for the benefit of others, or we are just roaming around and hanging out in a fan group. As the Buddha says so many times in different teachings, "My teaching is a means of practice, not something to hold onto or worship."

 

Once again, I urge everyone, including my own students and disciples, to investigate your teachers, their teachings and their actions. An authentic teacher would not be afraid to be tested. Return to the basic principles taught by the Buddha. The Buddha gave us the 5 refuge precepts so that we do not harm others and then he gave the Mahayana Bodhicitta precepts so that we would protect and help others. We should at least be practising these two levels of precepts well. At least we should have this motivation of not harming and of helping others, this is the least we can do if we call ourselves Buddhist practitioners and if we genuinely want to be good human beings.

*******************************************

 

Source: http://www.drukpa.org/index.php/en/news-updates/news-in-2014/360-the-mystery-of-samaya

[3bob]

RyanO,

 

At some point you may also need ask yourself if you want to be a monk or a householder although it sounds like that would be a fair ways off...

 

Good fortune to you however you go.

 

edit: I'd be remiss not to say that some Buddhist schools have higher-ups that may be married, you probably know a lot more about that than me...

Edited February 8, 2015 by 3bob

[C T]

how very clandestine

[taoismtaoism]

I'd say it is completely up to you if you want to go Buddhist. If you feel like going for it, then go for it.

[3bob]

CT, It sounds like you might be beating around the bush, thus I'd suggest getting on with it or not.

Besides and being that you study a lot I'm sure you have lots of information and alternate views or interpretations related to certain histories that I've only very initially brought up?

Edited February 7, 2015 by 3bob

[Seeker of Wisdom]

...

 

Gautama leaving his family at the start of his search may have been a dick move or may not have been or may have been a bit of both, little detail is known about it [or known to me, anyway...] - even if newly found historical documents show exactly what went down, there will still be debate about the morality of it. In any case, I don't think it has any bearing on the value of central Buddhist theory and practice.

[C T]

CT, It sounds like you might be beating around the bush, thus I'd suggest getting on with it

That won't be necessary, but thanks for the suggestion anyhow.

[3bob]

I'd say the bearing or effect it could have would be debatable case for case depending on how people might follow suit in an impressionable like way and broke their householder dharma before such was fulfilled so they could go off and get enlightened...

[Seeker of Wisdom]

^^^ I doubt RyanO or anyone else here is intending to become a monk/nun in the immediate future, and I really doubt anyone posting in this thread is so impressionable that they would leave their dependents because of hagiography. I can't help but see this episode here as another show of your bias against one particular path... someone is considering trying this path, and your response is to say that hagiography might inspire him to leave his family.

Edited February 7, 2015 by Seeker of Wisdom

[3bob]

this site has had lots of various people saying this and that and doing this and that in impressionable sounding ways (besides my observational view)... and recently in this string of post bubbles speaks of a saintly so and such (as you imply with hagiography) as in being perfect in this and that way of requirements...

[Marblehead]

On second thought, yes, go Buddhist. There are not yet enough people on this planet who are suffering. One more will help the percentages.

[steve]

[edit to clarify] Seeker and 3bob -

 

I think this is a worthwhile point of discussion. When someone connects with a teaching that stirs something deep inside for the first time, it can be extraordinarily powerful and can lead them to make some impulsive changes. Buddhism can occasionally have that effect, especially when the newcomer has never been religious or felt the true meaning of things like prayer, devotion, or trust in something "higher" than the mundane in their life. If they really get a glimpse of their true nature or simply feel a deeper level of love and connection for the first time, it can be life changing.

 

I think it's important to remind people who have this experience that the intensity is generally transient. Quite a few folks make extreme changes in their lives which they later regret. When the surge ebbs, they find that they haven't really changed all that much and the same old issues and problems are following them wherever they are. Some have left families, sold everything, left jobs, and while that's not always a bad thing it can be quite destabilizing. For most people, it is probably better to begin to take some teachings and to find a way to integrate them gradually into their lives as they are. Over time, this will lead to a more stable, lasting, and genuine transformation and, in the long run, may be better for them than taking the extreme path. When we begin to see positive changes in our lives, especially if they are abrupt, we get this impression that if we make certain changes we will transcend samsara overnight and find nirvana. It simply not true, as long as we live we are subjected to ups and downs, the struggles and pain, we live in samsara. We need to welcome and incorporate these changes but not lose perspective, otherwise we will face disappointment that often leads to bitterness and premature abandonment of the path.

 

The fact that Ryan is beginning to explore the possibility of practicing Buddhism and is already looking at things like long term commitments and major lifestyle changes points to how many of us are really looking for something powerful and transformative in our lives. This is not in any way a criticism of Ryan, I think it's a beautiful and inspiring thing and is one of the (few) things I love about this site - the passion and enthusiasm. But those characteristics need to be tempered and balanced. The other point worth considering is that there are quite a few young, impressionable, and sometimes unstable folks participating in these discussions. I don't mean to include Ryan in that description but quite a few folks like that have come and gone in the past.

Edited February 7, 2015 by steve

[steve]

On second thought, yes, go Buddhist. There are not yet enough people on this planet who are suffering. One more will help the percentages.

 

Can you clarify this statement?

It sounds as if you feel that Buddhism will cause Ryan to suffer.

It sounds very bitter and sarcastic but I may be misunderstanding you.

[Bubbles]

recently in this string of post bubbles speaks of a saintly so and such (as you imply with hagiography) as in being perfect in this and that way of requirements...

I am quite surprised..I am not sure where I spoke the way you describe. Probably my wording was less than perfect as english is not my first language.

 

So first of all, sorry _/\_

 

I suspect it was in the first post I wrote in this thread, since the second was only to quote an article..

 

So I'll try to sum up what I was trying to say and leave the thread so that it won't turn into a debate that would be useless to RyanO.

 

My point was not to speak about becoming a saint.

 

I was only saying that hesitating about commitments can be an hindrance in any path. When one resonates with a specific path and choose to follow it, it requires commitment in the same way it requires commitment to learn piano playing.

 

Let me repeat that RyanO said in the OP that he was looking for 'highest truths'. In Buddhism, in Daoism or in any authentic gradual path, strong dedication is required. This dedication means that one doesn't follow his emotional and psychological ups and down but that one sticks to his commitment. Making vows in front of a teacher or to oneself doesn't make any difference to me. However there is a difference between digging in the same spot for 40 years and digging here and there as one wishes. Following our wishes carries the risk of falling into what Chogyam Trungpa called spiritual materialism.

 

Here is a quote from Chogyam Trungpa taken from Cutting through spiritual materialism

 

****************

"It is important to see that the main point of any spiritual practice is to step out of the bureaucracy of ego. This means stepping out of ego's constant desire for a higher, more spiritual, more transcendental version of knowledge, religion, virtue, judgment, comfort or whatever it is that a particular ego is seeking. One must step out of spiritual materialism. If we do not step out of spiritual materialism, if we in fact practice it, then we may eventually find ourselves possessed of a huge collection of spiritual paths. We may feel these spiritual collections to be very precious. We have studied so much. We may have studied Western philosophy or Oriental philosophy, practiced yoga or perhaps studied under dozens of great masters. We have achieved and we have learned. We believe that we have accumulated a hoard of knowledge. And yet, having gone through all this, there is still something to give up. It is extremely mysterious! How could this happen? Impossible! But unfortunately it is so. Our vast collections of knowledge and experience are just part of ego's display, part of the grandiose quality of ego. We display them to the world and, in so doing, reassure ourselves that we exist, safe and secure, as "spiritual" people.

 

But we have simply created a shop, an antique shop. We could be specializing in oriental antiques or medieval Christian antiques or antiques from some other civilization or time, but we are, nonetheless, running a shop. Before we filled our shop with so many things the room was beautiful: whitewashed walls and a very simple floor with a bright lamp burning in the ceiling. There was one object of art in the middle of the room and it was beautiful. Everyone who came appreciated its beauty, including ourselves.

 

But we were not satisfied and we thought, "Since this one object makes my room so beautiful, if I get more antiques, my room will be even more beautiful." So we began to collect, and the end result was chaos."

********************************

 

 

I hope it is more clear.

 

Take care

Edited February 7, 2015 by bubbles

[Marblehead]

Can you clarify this statement?

No.

 

It sounds as if you feel that Buddhism will cause Ryan to suffer.

It may. I cannot see into the future.

 

It sounds very bitter and sarcastic but I may be misunderstanding you.

It was meant as a joke and the only reason I made the post was because of the way the thread was heading.

[steve]

No.

 

 

It may. I cannot see into the future.

 

 

It was meant as a joke and the only reason I made the post was because of the way the thread was heading.

 

Thanks for the reply, the last line sums it up.

My misunderstanding.

[3bob]

Seeker of wisdom did have a fair point on an important point thus I have edited most of my previous post #32 and offer apologies to RyanO for my side-tracking of that important point, namely the inspiration to seek and study.

Edited February 8, 2015 by 3bob

[Apech]

The Buddha was born into (though possibly on the fringes of) the Vedic Culture. A householder in the vedic culture was obligated to an onerous round of ritual and social duties which pretty much consumed his life 24/7. The term householder means the head of a household ... which would be an extended family going through probably three generations plus servants and attached workers (so a lot of people) whom the householder essentially managed. The Sakya clan of which the Buddha was a member contrary to popular myth did not have a king but was ruled by a council of elders (gana-sangha), so the Buddha was not actually a prince but it is likely he was the son of the leader of the elders ... its a moot point really because he would have been a member of the super rich of his day. The modern idea of someone with a job and family also having the time and luxury to practice dharma did not exist. Though there have in later history been many notable masters who were not monks (like Marpa for example) in the Buddhas day those who wished to escape the worldly duties took to the forests as sramanas. Which is what the Buddha did. The Buddha realised that it was impossible for him to achieve enlightenment while locked into the daily duties and responsibilities of being a householder. And he later created the role of monk to give people a way to do this as well. This becomes a kind of meme for the whole first turning of the wheel that is renouncing the eight worldly dharmas of fame and so on.

 

The moral question of leaving a wife a child is a difficult one. But I think it has to be seen in the context of the social order of his day and also that coming from a very wealthy family they would be well cared for ... he was not leaving them to starve for instance.

 

Renunciation of the world is not so much a matter of walking away as letting go attachment so I don't think it is in any way necessary to follow the Buddha in the sense of replicating his life. In fact the details of the buddha's life are not as important as the dharma ... to think they are is a kind of interference from Christianity where the life of Jesus is paramount. As long a dharma is effective it doesn't even matter if the Buddha turned out to be a myth (in some sense).

[3bob]

"we get this impression that if we make certain changes we will transcend samsara overnight and find nirvana. It simply not true, as long as we live we are subjected to ups and downs, the struggles and pain, we live in samsara". By Steve

 

Hi Steve and others, I pulled this quote out your earlier and fine post. Samsara as you are apparently using it above sounds like, or could sound like its something, someplace and or some-time that is solid in and of itself, or real illusion - but as we know, "samsara properly seen is nirvana" (or something very close to that quote per certain Buddhist teachings) thus there is really only samsara-perception and or complications to be cleared and not some kind of real samsara to reject for nirvana-perception to then dominate, btw, the historic Buddha described such as the "Wonder of wonders".

Edited February 10, 2015 by 3bob

[steve]

"we get this impression that if we make certain changes we will transcend samsara overnight and find nirvana. It simply not true, as long as we live we are subjected to ups and downs, the struggles and pain, we live in samsara". By Steve

 

Hi Steve and others, I pulled this quote out your earlier and fine post. Samsara as you are apparently using it above sounds like, or could sound like its something, someplace and or some-time that is solid in and of itself, or real illusion - but as we know, "samsara properly seen is nirvana" (or something very close to that quote per certain Buddhist teachings) thus there is really only samsara-perception and or complications to be cleared and not some kind of real samsara to reject for nirvana-perception to then dominate, btw, the historic Buddha described such as the "Wonder of wonders".

 

Funny - you're seeing eternalism in my posts and Tibetan Ice is seeing nihilism.

I guess I'm all over the place, hopefully I'll eventually come to rest somewhere in the middle.

Your reminder of the empty nature of things is welcome.

The proper seeing you refer to is the awakening of bodhicitta.

That is truly a "wonder of wonders."

[3bob]

Ok, btw I don't have a problem with "eternal-ism", as in "the soul of the soul".

Edited February 10, 2015 by 3bob