Are all the religions equally corrupt?

[orb]

I used to think that some religions are better or cleaner then others, but seems like they are all the same just a difference in semantics....WTF

 

Just ran into this art.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/belief/2011/jul/01/lama-sex-abuse-sogyal-rinpoche-buddhist

 

It's all about money, sex, drugs..........................

[doc benway]

I think that it is individuals who are primarily corrupt. Organizations and institutions by and large are exploited by, or created by, corrupt individuals. That said, there are certainly examples of systematic and organized abuse and/or protection of corrupt individuals in religious organizations as well. If we were to look at the statistics available, some religious organizations have considerably higher incidences of abuse, whether individual or organizational, than others. The question is, how accurate are the statistics? This is touched upon in your link.

I don't think any religious organization is exempt but clearly some seem to be worse than others.

Thanks for that link.

[dawei]

I am not sure what you seek: A utopia of perfect beings? I hate to be the one to tell you, but you were born into the wrong race. Even The Great Way (Dao) would tell you this: Life arises in variation; as soon as we label it, there is good and bad; pretty and ugly; perfection and corruption. IT EXISTS because IT ARISES. Don't you ever see that among nature?

 

What is it you really want in this life?

 

This kind of denouncement of "money, sex, drugs" makes me smile... welcome to life. Learn to navigate your path.

[Aaron]

I am not sure what you seek: A utopia of perfect beings? I hate to be the one to tell you, but you were born into the wrong race. Even The Great Way (Dao) would tell you this: Life arises in variation; as soon as we label it, there is good and bad; pretty and ugly; perfection and corruption. IT EXISTS because IT ARISES. Don't you ever see that among nature?

 

What is it you really want in this life?

 

This kind of denouncement of "money, sex, drugs" makes me smile... welcome to life. Learn to navigate your path.

 

 

Does this remind you of a conversation we had? Anyways I asked you this question in a roundabout way and you told me the same thing and I didn't get it. I think that book you lent me at the time "The Empty Mirror: Experiences in a Japanese Zen Monastery" by Van de Wetering was what really opened my mind to this notion because it had very poignant scenes where Masters who had reached the highest level of their training still were very much human. Arguing over money to go to the movies, enjoying baseball, and so many other mundane things that helps you to understand that enlightenment doesn't mean that you will suddenly be free of vice or become instantaneously virtuous, but rather it just means you've achieved a degree of understanding. In the end you will always be very much human. Humans make mistakes. I make mistakes. We either learn to accept that or we can become cynical and bitter which in the end will only lead us to more suffering.

 

Aaron

[orb]

I am not sure what you seek: A utopia of perfect beings? I hate to be the one to tell you, but you were born into the wrong race. Even The Great Way (Dao) would tell you this: Life arises in variation; as soon as we label it, there is good and bad; pretty and ugly; perfection and corruption. IT EXISTS because IT ARISES. Don't you ever see that among nature?

 

What is it you really want in this life?

 

This kind of denouncement of "money, sex, drugs" makes me smile... welcome to life. Learn to navigate your path.

 

I am not seeking anything...

I just didn't expect smb that's a "Lama" to be so weak and cheap, that's all. I know that the catholic church is full of sex abuse scandals but as a contrast in my experience I've met quite a few tibetan lamas that seemed to be very remarcable people - an impression that I've never gotten from a representative of any other religion. But now this just taught me to be more careful about my "labels".

And I am sure other people will find the article interesting.

[dawei]

so many other mundane things that helps you to understand that enlightenment doesn't mean that you will suddenly be free of vice or become instantaneously virtuous, but rather it just means you've achieved a degree of understanding. In the end you will always be very much human. Humans make mistakes.

Even a Zen experience has something to teach us all

[dawei]

I just didn't expect...

I am not trying to be hard on you but the pretense as you share here: "I just didn't expect..."

Life falls short of expectations; even with those lamas', priests, daoists, etc.

 

I would try to learn to understand why it happens and then you will learn to accept all human 'ways' more. It is just a manifestation of their 'way'. Not what you or I would do; not what we would hope they would do; but we can come to understand that it is what it is.

[Nanashi]

"The Empty Mirror: Experiences in a Japanese Zen Monastery" by Van de Wetering

 

A great book, along with "A Glimpse of Nothingness: Experiences in an American Zen Community". Anyone interested in Japanese monastic life, or dream of an American commune life, should give these a read. The author has a unique experience of both worlds, starting off his spiritual seeking by abandoning everything, and his European perspective on things makes for a poignant narrative.

Edited July 23, 2011 by Nanashi

[Apech]

The Guardian article is a very poor one IMO. I am not defending Sogyal Rinpoche - I don't think he is the best example of a lama one could have - and I think he has been seduced himself by western culture of celebrity. But the abuse allegations have to be proven and the article is written without any question as to whether they are true at all.

 

''How can a fat little man attract pretty girls " ... whatever ... well look around you. What exactly was the abuse? Is it just that he had sex with them ... or something worse? The writer doesn't understand samaya properly.

 

No I would need to know more to draw any conclusion from this.

[C T]

Sogyal Rinpoche, as is most Nyingma teachers, are Ngagpas (google for definition) - they are lay people who take up teaching Buddhist Tantra, in the main. Tantra is not so concerned with the Vinaya aspect of Dharmavinaya. Since they have not taken any monastic vows, they can choose to have sexual contact.

 

Vulnerable women sometimes get a thrill out of sleeping with authority figures, more so when they project such figures to be god representatives. Vulnerable priests and monks (those who have vowed celibacy) sometimes get a thrill out of sleeping with women/men/girls/boys/sheep as well. God only knows what they are projecting.

 

Its easy to see why some folks, both lay and monastic, are ignorant around this. The human condition dictates.

 

 

edit to add: Sogyal Rinpoche is a Tantric Master of the highest calibre. He may not be all holy and sombre (which again people think how lamas ought to be), but he cuts thru alot of bs in his approach to Dzogchen. How he appears outside has no relevance. Inside, he is resplendent with wisdom and compassion (not the kind most people associate with) and is as dedicated and hardworking as they come. Even though i no longer associate with his Sangha, he will always be dear to my heart. He made me see stuff no one else can.

Edited July 23, 2011 by CowTao

[Vajrahridaya]

They are not equally corrupt, no. Buddhism is based upon a huge cannon of clarifying concepts, so there is less of a chance for corruption in Buddhism, even though it still happens, of course.

 

I think Monotheisms that are not based on a large cannon of clarifying concepts, that just say, "believe because this book say's so and it's the word of God" have a higher chance of corruption.

 

Of course, every tradition has it's mystics, which is what I've always sought for. It's just that Eastern traditions have more mystics than the Western as the Eastern traditions are already mystical in the sense of how their core scriptures are exemplified from the very beginning with inner practices, rather than just outer shows of virtue for the sake of an omnipotent gods favor.

 

Again, the mystics interpretations of these Monotheistic concepts are different from what they might appear to mean on the surface though.

Edited July 23, 2011 by Vajrahridaya

[Simple_Jack]

.

Edited February 5, 2014 by Simple_Jack

[Harmonious Emptiness]

 

Also I remember reading a story about the 3rd Patriarch of Zen, Seng T'san: After he had transmitted the robe and bowl to the 4th Patriarch; he would be seen drunk at the brothel district having fun (don't know if he was having sex or not. It wasn't specified) and when a monk saw him one day as he was passing by, he asked him why he was there. Seng T'san than said "I'm tempering my mind!" What was the reason for this? Surely he knew what he was doing? Not only was he enlightened; he was well versed with all the scriptures of Buddhism. What was the reason for this response?

 

Also keep in mind, I'm sure that someone at this level would fully understand cause and effect, so I'm not saying that someone would necessarily act in henious ways, either.

 

 

What he might have meant by this is that he was immersing himself in temptation to make sure that he was strong enough to be immersed in it yet strong enough not to be tempted. If he was tempted then he would have needed tempering..

[mYTHmAKER]

I think that it is individuals who are primarily corrupt. Organizations and institutions by and large are exploited by, or created by, corrupt individuals. That said, there are certainly examples of systematic and organized abuse and/or protection of corrupt individuals in religious organizations as well. If we were to look at the statistics available, some religious organizations have considerably higher incidences of abuse, whether individual or organizational, than others. The question is, how accurate are the statistics? This is touched upon in your link.

I don't think any religious organization is exempt but clearly some seem to be worse than others.

Thanks for that link.

 

Yes it is the individuals that are corrupt.

Religion, usually based on fear and power over others, is a good place to take advantage of people.

[mYTHmAKER]

A great book, along with "A Glimpse of Nothingness: Experiences in an American Zen Community". Anyone interested in Japanese monastic life, or dream of an American commune life, should give these a read. The author has a unique experience of both worlds, starting off his spiritual seeking by abandoning everything, and his European perspective on things makes for a poignant narrative.

 

Yep Great book

[RiverSnake]

"The Empty Mirror: Experiences in a Japanese Zen Monastery" by Van de Wetering was what really opened my mind to this notion because it had very poignant scenes where Masters who had reached the highest level of their training still were very much human.

Aaron

 

Thanks i'm putting it on my list

[Path]

I used to think that some religions are better or cleaner then others, but seems like they are all the same just a difference in semantics....WTF

 

Just ran into this art.

http://www.guardian....npoche-buddhist

 

It's all about money, sex, drugs..........................

 

many roads to the city, many ways to get there... its the driver...

[mYTHmAKER]

Also worth reading

A Glimpse of Nothingness: Experiences in an American Zen Community, 1975 by Van de Wetering

[Lucky7Strikes]

Were these monks verified to have achived the dharmakaya? Or they hadn't reached that stage yet?

 

Anyways, assuming that they had achieved the dharmakaya and were not commiting henious acts, but just acting in mundane ways: This could be in celebration of thier Spirit of Awakening. In other words realizing the total "ungroundedness" of reality; someone who's reached Great Awakening (while amongst the world who seems to be attached to external activity,) is merely demonstrating thier complete freedom of "mind," from acceptance or rejection. Even if they seem to act in certain ways that the ordinary person would judge unbefitting of such a person. They can be amongst the world, yet totally trancend it mentally; due to the experiences of conscioussness self-liberating upon inception. Also what I said above.

 

Have you ever read any of the stories of the 84 Mahasiddhas? Thier stories reflect unconventional behaviour of what is deemed unacceptable behaviour of an enlightened individual. You've read some stories on the 8 Immortals of Taoism right?

 

Also I remember reading a story about the 3rd Patriarch of Zen, Seng T'san: After he had transmitted the robe and bowl to the 4th Patriarch; he would be seen drunk at the brothel district having fun (don't know if he was having sex or not. It wasn't specified) and when a monk saw him one day as he was passing by, he asked him why he was there. Seng T'san than said "I'm tempering my mind!" What was the reason for this? Surely he knew what he was doing? Not only was he enlightened; he was well versed with all the scriptures of Buddhism. What was the reason for this response?

 

Also keep in mind, I'm sure that someone at this level would fully understand cause and effect, so I'm not saying that someone would necessarily act in henious ways, either.

EDIT: SPELLING

I don't agree with the comparison among the Mahasiddhas, the Zen patriarch, and Sogyal. The Mahasiddhas were mostly ascetics who took in willing consorts or went to the brothels to practice sexual tantra. In fact, only a very handful of the 84 Mahasiddhas practiced that form of tantra in the first place. As for the Zen patriarch, he had already left his responsibilities and place in society and became a wandering ascetic.

 

Sogyal on the other hand is very aware that he should be the head of the efforts to assimilate Buddhism into the West. He knows that he had power over these women and abused them when they were most vulnerable and looking for a guide. They weren't hookers or willing consorts.

 

He is a leading scholar and a goddamn monk who heads other monks. If indeed he benefited these women truly through his powers they would not call him an abusive little twat. Stuff like this disgusting and shows no matter how much Buddhist lingo you can juggle, it doesn't matter if you don't put it into practice.

[C T]

I don't agree with the comparison among the Mahasiddhas, the Zen patriarch, and Sogyal. The Mahasiddhas were mostly ascetics who took in willing consorts or went to the brothels to practice sexual tantra. In fact, only a very handful of the 84 Mahasiddhas practiced that form of tantra in the first place. As for the Zen patriarch, he had already left his responsibilities and place in society and became a wandering ascetic.

 

Sogyal on the other hand is very aware that he should be the head of the efforts to assimilate Buddhism into the West. He knows that he had power over these women and abused them when they were most vulnerable and looking for a guide. They weren't hookers or willing consorts.

 

He is a leading scholar and a goddamn monk who heads other monks. If indeed he benefited these women truly through his powers they would not call him an abusive little twat. Stuff like this disgusting and shows no matter how much Buddhist lingo you can juggle, it doesn't matter if you don't put it into practice.

Sogyal Rinpoche is not a monk.

[Jetsun]

Sogyal on the other hand is very aware that he should be the head of the efforts to assimilate Buddhism into the West. He knows that he had power over these women and abused them when they were most vulnerable and looking for a guide. They weren't hookers or willing consorts.

 

He is a leading scholar and a goddamn monk who heads other monks. If indeed he benefited these women truly through his powers they would not call him an abusive little twat. Stuff like this disgusting and shows no matter how much Buddhist lingo you can juggle, it doesn't matter if you don't put it into practice.

 

I agree with you, even if things begin as consensual between adults he is in a position of authority and often the people who go to gurus in the west are vulnerable and wounded so it can easily be regarded as exploitation to use your position in that way.

 

Chogyam Trungpa perhaps sets a bad example for the others to follow as he was a womaniser but he had disrobed as a monk and was completely open about his relationships, but things won't turn out well if people take him as the example to follow for conduct.

[Vajrahridaya]

He is a leading scholar and a goddamn monk who heads other monks. If indeed he benefited these women truly through his powers they would not call him an abusive little twat. Stuff like this disgusting and shows no matter how much Buddhist lingo you can juggle, it doesn't matter if you don't put it into practice.

 

I think he played a monk in that movie Little Buddha, but I don't think he's actually a monk who took vows of celibacy. So, these criticisms don't apply to a ngakpa. I've also heard from many of his students that he has amazing abilities, super powers of love and compassion. I don't know how many of the accusations are embellished and what is true. He probably has more realization than all of us, but that doesn't mean he doesn't make mistakes. I don't think it's ever been claimed that he is a anuttarasamyaksambuddha, so to persecute him like this when he's not even a monk is not really right I think. Being a Lama is not the same as being a Monk, which is a very popular Western misunderstanding. Sure, he has many other Lamas under his tutelage, but that doesn't mean they are celibate monks either. At the time that these women had sex with Sogyal Rinpoche, they probably felt differently about it, but when he didn't meet their conceptual pre-requisites, they probably got all flipped out. At the same time, I have no idea, maybe he did enter into abusive relationships? None the less, he's not a monk so that type of criticism does not at all apply.

 

Wiki: Lama description.

 

Lama (Tibetan: བླ་མ་; Wylie: bla-ma; "chief" or "high priest") is a title for a Tibetan teacher of the Dharma. The name is similar to the Sanskrit term guru (see Tibetan Buddhism and Bön).

 

Historically, the term was used for venerated spiritual masters or heads of monasteries. Today the title can be used as an honorific title conferred on a monk, nun or (in the Nyingma, Kagyu and Sakya schools) advanced tantric practitioner to designate a level of spiritual attainment and authority to teach, or may be part of a title such as Dalai Lama or Panchen Lama applied to a lineage of reincarnate lamas (Tulkus).

 

Perhaps due to misunderstandings by early western scholars attempting to understand Tibetan Buddhism, the term Lama has historically been erroneously applied to Tibetan monks generally. Similarly, Tibetan Buddhism was referred to as Lamaism by early western scholars and travelers who perhaps did not understand that what they were witnessing was a form of Buddhism; they may also have been unaware of the distinction between Tibetan Buddhism and Bön. The term Lamaism is now considered by some to be derogatory.

 

In the Vajrayana practice path of Tibetan Buddhism, the lama is often the tantric spiritual guide, the guru to the aspiring Buddhist yogi or yogini. As such, the lama will then appear as one of the Three Roots (a variant of the Three Jewels), alongside the yidam and protector (who may be a dakini, dharmapala or other Buddhist deity figure).

Edited July 23, 2011 by Vajrahridaya

[Vajrahridaya]

I agree with you, even if things begin as consensual between adults he is in a position of authority and often the people who go to gurus in the west are vulnerable and wounded so it can easily be regarded as exploitation to use your position in that way.

 

Chogyam Trungpa perhaps sets a bad example for the others to follow as he was a womaniser but he had disrobed as a monk and was completely open about his relationships, but things won't turn out well if people take him as the example to follow for conduct.

 

What, you can't have fun and have it be a part of your process as a Tantrica and a teacher? I'm sure he experienced the things that people take for granted in a far more enlightened and celebratory fashion than the vast majority who party out of a desire to escape reality rather than from a space of celebration of reality and the senses. I think the West has way too many pre-conceptions about spirituality, which is why this type of demonizing and persecuting happens. Because we come from a puritanical idea about spirituality in the West, we have a subconscious tendency to project these values onto spiritual systems that have absolutely nothing to do with this puritanicalism of Abrahamic religions.

 

This doesn't only happen in the West either, but Tantrics have a long history of acting outside of the puritanical fold of spirituality.

 

Vajrayana is a Tantric path.

 

p.s. Then again, I also agree that just because you're able to suffuse an activity with a supernormal state of bliss, doesn't automatically make that activity wholesome or conducive to awakening others.

Edited July 23, 2011 by Vajrahridaya

[Vajrahridaya]

Edited July 23, 2011 by Vajrahridaya

[Lucky7Strikes]

What, you can't have fun and have it be a part of your process as a Tantrica and a teacher? I'm sure he experienced the things that people take for granted in a far more enlightened and celebratory fashion than the vast majority who party out of a desire to escape reality rather than from a space of celebration of reality and the senses. I think the West has way too many pre-conceptions about spirituality, which is why this type of demonizing and persecuting happens. Because we come from a puritanical idea about spirituality in the West, we have a subconscious tendency to project these values onto spiritual systems that have absolutely nothing to do with this puritanicalism of Abrahamic religions.

 

This doesn't only happen in the West either, but Tantrics have a long history of acting outside of the puritanical fold of spirituality.

 

Vajrayana is a Tantric path.

 

p.s. Then again, I also agree that just because you're able to suffuse an activity with a supernormal state of bliss, doesn't automatically make that activity wholesome or conducive to awakening others.

Pretending to be a spiritual guide and using his position to exploit young women is not "having fun." That's not celebration. He has a responsibility as a leading member of an organization that advocates right sexual conduct and compassion. Baiting others into your room and jumping on them in the name of some tantric path the other person is not ready or unaware of is... If he knows about the West's sensitivity to sexual misconduct in religious organizations, the more cautious he should have been.

 

Ok, so let's say he is not a monk. Who cares? Same power exploitation. Sogyal isn't the only one reported to have been exploiting Western women. Kalu rinpoche also has some shady background.

Edited July 23, 2011 by Lucky7Strikes