Add a Comment

Comment by Ras Danzen on April 21, 2009 at 22:17

Come to think of it ( as one does) no need to answer that last question, as I am pretty sure I have the answer now. Just needed to turn it over in my head for a while. Kindest thoughts - Kenny

Comment by Ras Danzen on April 20, 2009 at 9:42

Dear Dharmavidya Thank you, I just read the fist part of Union of Mahamudra and Dzogchen (online amazon), I would hope to read it all if I can obtain a copy. That quote " 'if you want to be a lineage guru then you must study at the feet of one master but for the great majority of practitioners the thing to do is to learn from every lama who comes within reach'. Has the ring of real wisdom.

(Having not read the book fully) I'm going to ask is it possible to be both - do both? Or is it really a case of one master OR many. ( in a mutually exclusive manner)

As Franco rightly points out the skating across the surface principle also Clark rightly points to the plurality principle in the west. --- The Shobogenzo points out that every Ancestor has bowed to the 'way'.

So to put it another way still, If one chooses the 'Many Master' approach does it discount one from becoming grounded and commited to one tradition (lineage).(especially in terms of Ordination)
Best foot forward x KL

Comment by Sahishnu (Joy Marston) on April 18, 2009 at 12:26

I have read all with interest but have too much and too little to say but even more to tentatively reach out and feel.

Comment by Dharmavidya on April 18, 2009 at 8:39

Typos are fun - I wonder what 'hat practice' might look like
> we encourage people to get deeply and extensively into hat practice

I meant 'that', of course.

Comment by Dharmavidya on April 18, 2009 at 8:37

Dear Franco - I agree with you. Cases do differ, of course. I myself first got involved in Buddhism in Cambridge (the English one) where I was exposed to Kargyu, Theravada and Zen at least all at once. I took them as all just different facets of the same thing and this has stayed with me (to my advantage, i believe). Yes, it is important for anindividual to get grounded in a practice. Here at Amida-shu the practice is nembutsu and we encourage people to get deeply and extensively into hat practice. However, I also hope that we do not become narrow and that we remain open to the whole breadth of the Buddhist tradition, and, indeed, to the wisdom of the sages of all spiritual traditions. The kind of diletantism that you are worried about is, however, a real problem too. As ever there are pitfalls in both directions. Find the middle way. Practise deeply - respect all. There is a big difference between embracing all through deep practice and skating along on the surface, but it is difficult for the beginner caught in habits of opinion to distinguish them. Namo Amida Bu.

Comment by Dharmavidya on April 18, 2009 at 6:58

Dear Zhenlian - That is a very nice list. I especially like 'the poetry of everyday life'. Thank you for joining us.

Comment by Shantikara on April 18, 2009 at 6:49

Aloha Dharmavidya - It seems that this would be a good path (to open oneself to more than one stream) for a practitioner that is fairly well-grounded (mature) in one tradition, prior to exploring other traditions. I see so many people (my only experience being limited to people in the USA) who practice with numerous gurus, seek therapy from numerous psychotherapists, etc in rapid fire consumer-like succession. They never seem to ripen in their practice. So, I agree in principle, but I would caution practitioners to be careful that they do not simply go broad rather than going deep. Do your thoughts differ?

Comment by Dharmavidya on April 18, 2009 at 6:30

Dear Clark - Yes, I completely agree. Actually there is a Tibetan book Union of Mahamudra and Dzogchen that says, (I quote loosely) 'if you want to be a lineage guru then you must study at the feet of one master but for the great majority of practitioners the thing to do is to leaqrn from every lama who comes within reach'. This is good policy, I think, and, even if one wants to be a lineage guru it is advisable to have opened oneself to the offerings of several other streams too. In the modern world this is even more important and I agree with you that despite much early sectarianism this will probably happen naturally in the West since we are inventors and cross-fertilizers and mostly not of he temperament to be restricted.

Comment by Zhenlian on April 18, 2009 at 1:33

For me the tags for Buddhism are : peace,humanity,simplicity,love for all creatures,harmony,equality for all creatures,the poetry of everyday life,aspiration to save humanity from all miseries, prayers to help all people to stay away from sin, no excessive ambitions.

Comment by Clark Strand on April 17, 2009 at 17:29

Dharmavidya writes: This meant that to get an all round Buddhist education a disciple had to spend some time with one teacher and then some with another and do the rounds. Many Buddhist centres or monasteries later came to be organised on this principle.

I think this is being replicated today to a great extent in the West, don't you think? In my experience, the major difference between the Asian and Western convert Buddhist communities is that the latter tend to be informed by a much broader plurality of religious teachings and experiences. This may have certain drawbacks if one is trying to maintain anything like a coherent lineage, but on the whole I don't see much of a future for religious purity anyway, so it's probably a good thing. No?

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• Next ›
• Page