Words of My Perfect Teacher

[C T]

You don't need siddhis and you don't need to tell fairy stories to see when someone's insincere.

 

I've sat directly in front of a so-called rinpoche trying to inflate his own importance and that of his 'teachings" with such fairy stories and by the time he'd finishished he couldn't look me in the eye.

Only one?

[gatito]

Only one?

 

Absolutely not.

 

He's by no means the only insincere hawker of fairy stories.

[GrandmasterP]

 

 

You can be a perfect teacher if you teach perfectly.

In my job that's seldom a good idea 'officially'.

If we get a Grade 1 " Outstanding" when the Ofsted ( Government Education Inspectors in England) come to call then one tends to find the diary filled up by management with additional gigs ( for no extra pay) along the lines of " How I got my Grade 1".

Such gigs tend not to endear one to ones colleagues ( nobody likes a clever clogs) nor oneself as anyone doing extra work for the same pay tends to feel like a bit of a fool.

GMP's Rule of thumb for lecturers ...

Give it 100% every session except when being officially observed then rein it in just a tad.

Get a Grade 2 and you're 'improving' get a Grade 1 and where next?

( Extra work is 'where').

Edited June 24, 2014 by GrandmasterP

[C T]

Absolutely not.

 

He's by no means the only insincere hawker of fairy stories.

Yes, you gotta name and shame the insincere ones at all costs.

 

Now, go set the world 'right'.

[gatito]

Yes, you gotta name and shame the insincere ones at all costs.

 

Now, go set the world 'right'.

 

Interestingly, I didn't name him and he shamed himself: so you'll have to deal with the insincere ones by yourself CT.

 

As for setting the world to rights - I'll leave that to you as well because, as far as I can see, God hasn't screwed up.

[GrandmasterP]

Us old Osho Sannyasins took 'insincere' as a given.

Our dude revelled in insincerity.

Osho was truly sincere about being insincere.

Maybe that 'insincere' Lama there was working some powerful transmission but some sitters kinda missed the point.

"What works - works , for whom it works."

 

Edited June 24, 2014 by GrandmasterP

[Stosh]

But doesn't suffering and pain serve the purpose of helping to awaken the person?

Wanting others to be happy and free of bad things, isn't that like removing their lessons, their motives to reach beyond?

Isn't true compassion to love someone and share in their suffering, but letting be?

NO, its not , You may feel that way of course , that you want to suffer like others do and not fix any of it but no its not the view of compassion most seem to have of it.

The idea of just letting the suffering persist so as to motivate , is perhaps, good intent, but its not compassionate and really sounds horribly callous or useless.IMO

 

Compassion is that which makes the heart of the good move at the pain of others. It crushes and destroys the pain of others; thus, it is called compassion. It is called compassion because it shelters and embraces the distressed. —The Buddha

 

Yeah thats from wikipedia, but I figure any presentation of that idea will be refuted.

But since you be making the distinction between metta and compassion , Ill add, if you truly wish the alleviation of suffering , that would extend to yourself as well ( defeated by sharing suffering).

I dont know what they said about this wishing , can the true wish for a total lack of suffering be divided from the intent to act directed at present suffering ?

The clips I have read may be missing some wise aspect , considered by the ancients , which defies this connection between the compassionate suffering and the affirmative intent to mediate it. Im cuurious what that argument might be (in brieif)

Edited June 24, 2014 by Stosh

[C T]

Interestingly, I didn't name him and he shamed himself: so you'll have to deal with the insincere ones by yourself CT.

 

As for setting the world to rights - I'll leave that to you as well because, as far as I can see, God hasn't screwed up.

Why, thanks!

 

God? Nice. another phantasmagoric creation of the mind. No harm though. God is... after all.

[C T]

Interestingly, I didn't name him and he shamed himself: so you'll have to deal with the insincere ones by yourself CT.

ps... its clear that i meant if ever you come across another one, bite his behind and dont let go. Cling tightly to what you perceive to be his or her faults, and proclaim such as loud as you can. God will back you up.

[C T]

Us old Osho Sannyasins took 'insincere' as a given.

Our dude revelled in insincerity.

Osho was truly sincere about being insincere.

Maybe that 'insincere' Lama there was working some powerful transmission but some sitters kinda missed the point.

"What works - works , for whom it works."

 

Seriously though, some really are crooked. Not many, but some. Gatito may well have spotted one. Im sure there are others too. We should not turn a blind eye based on blind faith.

[gatito]

Why, thanks!

 

God? Nice. another phantasmagoric creation of the mind. No harm though. God is... after all.

 

ps... its clear that i meant if ever you come across another one, bite his behind and dont let go. Cling tightly to what you perceive to be his or her faults, and proclaim such as loud as you can. God will back you up.

 

You're very welcome CT - but again, I'll leave that to you because, as I said, I find no fault in God's creation.

[C T]

I find no fault in God's creation.

I admire a person with an unflinching conviction! Bravo.

[gatito]

I admire a person with an unflinching conviction! Bravo.

 

Thanks again.

[gatito]

.......for making my point for me.

[C T]

Seriously though, some really are crooked. Not many, but some. Gatito may well have spotted one. Im sure there are others too. We should not turn a blind eye based on blind faith.

Their behaviour has absolutely no bearing on the principle of guru yoga though. One practices guru yoga to develop and maintain an on-going relationship with the highest aspiration of the Mahayana Path, not with appointed representatives. If the focus is on the representative and not the ideal, one misses the boat altogether. Unfortunately, grasping and aversion can sometimes manifest even stronger in those who claim to be Dharma practitioners.

[gatito]

Their behaviour has absolutely no bearing on the principle of guru yoga though. One practices guru yoga to develop and maintain an on-going relationship with the highest aspiration of the Mahayana Path, not with appointed representatives. If the focus is on the representative and not the ideal, one misses the boat altogether. Unfortunately, grasping and aversion can sometimes manifest even stronger in those who claim to be Dharma practitioners.

 

I've noticed that.

[C T]

Thanks again.

No worries, anytime.

[gatito]

No worries, anytime.

 

I've noticed that too.

[C T]

I've noticed that too.

[gatito]

 

Finished now?

[BaguaKicksAss]

Their behaviour has absolutely no bearing on the principle of guru yoga though. One practices guru yoga to develop and maintain an on-going relationship with the highest aspiration of the Mahayana Path, not with appointed representatives. If the focus is on the representative and not the ideal, one misses the boat altogether. Unfortunately, grasping and aversion can sometimes manifest even stronger in those who claim to be Dharma practitioners.

 

Doesn't a bit of the path/teaching get passed down with some of their... trying to find words for this... energy/karma/nastyness along with it? Or does that path work a bit differently, or does that sort of thing fall away with practice?

 

On a side note, mostly off topic, and nothing to do with the comment above, just the title of this thread. I have been called a "perfect teacher" before. To me that is a warning sign, and I start talking about pedestals and falling off such things, and how they may be not looking at the reality of the situation .

[C T]

Finished now?

God's creation is perfect, no? One would hope perfection is beyond such a limit as 'finished'.

[Tibetan_Ice]

NO, its not , You may feel that way of course , that you want to suffer like others do and not fix any of it but no its not the view of compassion most seem to have of it.

The idea of just letting the suffering persist so as to motivate , is perhaps, good intent, but its not compassionate and really sounds horribly callous or useless.IMO

 

Compassion is that which makes the heart of the good move at the pain of others. It crushes and destroys the pain of others; thus, it is called compassion. It is called compassion because it shelters and embraces the distressed. The Buddha

 

Yeah thats from wikipedia, but I figure any presentation of that idea will be refuted.

But since you be making the distinction between metta and compassion , Ill add, if you truly wish the alleviation of suffering , that would extend to yourself as well ( defeated by sharing suffering).

I dont know what they said about this wishing , can the true wish for a total lack of suffering be divided from the intent to act directed at present suffering ?

The clips I have read may be missing some wise aspect , considered by the ancients , which defies this connection between the compassionate suffering and the affirmative intent to mediate it. Im cuurious what that argument might be (in brieif)

This reply is pointed to nobody in particular..

 

I don't approach it like that.

 

Having compassion should be a non exclusionary act. You have compassion and love for everyone, regardless of whether or not they are in pain or suffering.

 

To act with compassion without enlightenment is kind of like being a hypocrite, isn't it?

 

It is like putting the horse behind the cart. It is even kind of arrogant.

 

If you have compassion for someone that isn't in pain or suffering, do you then cause them pain or suffering? No. They are so ignorant that they don't even know they are suffering.

 

Unless you are enlightened and understand the meaning and purpose of life, you have no grounds to base a judgment of whether or not some other being's pain or suffering, or lack thereof is beneficial or detrimental.

 

You can imitate an enlightened being by acting with compassion, but that is sort of like the "fake it until you make it" syndrome.

If you believe in morals and ethics, then you benefit yourself, especially when you try to rest the mind. For, if your conscience keeps interrupting your meditations, you aren't going to succeed in quieting the mind and blossoming the heart. But you've been programmed like that.

 

If you ever have had an experience where true boddhicitta comes out of your heart and you become one with all, you would see how you love everything, how you are everything, and how could you not help but love everything in that state?

 

Therefore, work on yourself and open your heart. Don't focus on the effects from actions which have been programmed into you, based on the culture and beliefs of your time. The relative has some merits and temporary effects, but it is the permanent realization that should be sought.

 

If Buddha had spent his whole life alleviating the pain and suffering of other beings, he would have never had the time to do the practices that led to his enlightenment. He was selfish first and then after his awakening he focused on others.

 

Seek the permanent end to suffering in yourself and others. That is where it is at.

 

And after all that perhaps you could explain the idea that there are no others...

 

You see, I have no answers... I'm always surprised when somebody else claims to have answers.

 

[gatito]

God's creation is perfect, no? One would hope perfection is beyond such a limit as 'finished'.

 

That's a bit too obscure for me, so I'll leave you discuss that with someone who's interested.

[Apech]

I must have been fortunate ... I have never met one of these dodgy Rinpoches ... all the Lamas I have met have been exemplary, kind, generous and willing to explain everything. There are strange stories in Buddhism but they are always explained in the sense that you can take some meaning from them ... its nothing to do with believing fairy tales and so on.