Tibetan Buddhism is not Buddhism; Lamas are not Buddhists.

[SauLan]

Children aren't fathered via tantra.

Then why did you write: "There just aren't enough half-Tibetan babies running around for the "tantric teachers abuse students" stories to be logical." ?

You are contradicting your own argument.

Additionally, children could very easily be accidentally fathered by tantra (with real, not visualized, consorts, of course). Retention of semen is not an exact art.

My point was that if a baby happens, it either wasn't a true tantric exercise to begin with, or became a failed one. Secondly, I'm referring to the oft-flouted "abuse" allegation which holds that "many" or "most" so-called tantric gurus use the claim of tantric exercise as an excuse to somehow abuse women by luring them into ordinary sex. Again, if it's abusive, or ordinary, or both, it's not a tantric exercise.

[SauLan]

As for the thread title and subsequent conversations, it's that old question: do you engage disinformation, or ignore it? In this case the wording of the thread title was taken from a sign which is/was erected in Taiwan, so banning the topic would be hard to justify, though I agree that "Horrible Sign" might be a better header

Does anyone know if the sign is still up?

And what kind of deal does Zhengjue have with the local authorities to allow PRC front operations free reign on Taiwanese soil...

But even in HK in the 1970s the huge "China Products" store loomed, complete with flimsy little bicycles, communist propaganda books (in English!) directed at children, and the ubiquitous, oh-so-memorable bumper carts on the roof. There is simply no quicker way to a child's heart than bumper carts.

[Buddhism]

What sexual abuse cases?

Just a few reports for your references, if you would care to read; please try to be fair and rational when you write. Thank you.

http://marte-micaela-riepe.blogspot.tw/ ... 1398211704
An Open Letter to Lama Ole Nydahl
(Riepe was a religious sexual abuse victim of Lama Ole Nydahl.)

http://tantrismuskritik.blogspot.tw/201 ... ed-of.html
Ole Nydahl & Diamond Way accused of sexual abuse in Switzerland (with comments from victims)

http://lacrossetribune.com/news/local/a ... 002e0.html
Joe Orso: Lama Ole: Buddhist teacher or charlatan?

Review of Stephen T. Butterfield- The Double Mirror
http://www.amazon.com/The-Double-Mirror ... 1556431767
The following material was sent to me by a friend. I have decided to reproduce it as it is. This seems to be a very important book in understanding the phenomenon of the abusive and ambiguous intermediate zone gurus. Butterrfield was a follower of Trungpa, and was ostracised by the community because of this book - MAK.

The Double Mirror: A Skeptical Journey into Buddhist Tantra: Stephen T. Butterfield

He asks the vital question: why was it important to follow the Buddhist ethical guidelines in the early stages of practice and how then did these suddenly become irrelevant as soon as you were practicing at tantra level?

http://www.american-buddha.com/sect.alarmed.htm
Buddhist Sect Alarmed by Reports That Leader Kept His AIDS A Secret

[Buddhism]

Buddhism, do you perhaps mean that the genuine sutras are those which were favored by the Cittamatra school? For example, right now, on my desk, I have a volume of the Middle Length (Pali) Suttas, and a translation of the Avatamsaka (Hua Yen) Sutra. Do either (or both) of these represent the genuine teaching of the Buddha? Why? How can one decide?

I will come back to you when I manage with my time.
Thank you.

[Buddhism]

Buddhism, do you perhaps mean that the genuine sutras are those which were favored by the Cittamatra school? For example, right now, on my desk, I have a volume of the Middle Length (Pali) Suttas, and a translation of the Avatamsaka (Hua Yen) Sutra. Do either (or both) of these represent the genuine teaching of the Buddha? Why? How can one decide?

I would say both of them are genuine teachings of the Buddha. (Are the Middle Length (Pali) Sutras 中阿含 in Chinese? I just want to be 100% sure.)

You don’t look to the school, but you look into the essence of their teachings; the Cittamatra school could have favored Vijnana-Only (Vijnanavada) Sutras, what if they interpreted them in a wrong way then? Basically the Sutras are all right (apart from the tantras), but how people interpret them are quite important.

The Four Agamas Sutras (the first round of wheel-turning) focus on the Liberation-Way practices (the very basic for both Mahayana and Hinayana practices), which elaborate on the five aggregates, four noble truth, noble eightfold paths, and the twelve links of dependent arising. The subjects are all within the worldly five skandhas, twelve ayatanās and eighteen dhatavahs.

The Cittamatra school proceeds further to foster the Prajñāpāramitā wisdom, to uncover what is the original cause behind the whole existence and how it functions. These are the second and the third round of wheel-turning. Cittamatra refers to “three realms being Citta-Only, and all dharmas being Vijnana-Only.” In terms of Buddhism, the whole existence are divided into two categories, the mental dharma心法 and the form dharma 色法.

The Avatamsaka (Hua Yen) Sutra is much too profound to be properly understood by normal humans. When the Buddha attained Buddhood, He initially expounded the Hua Yen Sutra to the heavenly great Bodhisattvas. This is to show that the Buddha did attain the unsurpassed ultimate enlightenment; then the Buddha started to teach earthlings from the very beginning of the four Agamas Sutras.

How can on decide?
e.g., Any English native speaker can easily see my English writing is inadequate; just as simple as that! You just have to study and understand the contents of the Agama sutras as the very basic for the Buddhist learning, which I have compiled on the other thread more or less (very superficial only).

In Buddhist learning, you have to piece the knowing altogether like a jigsaw puzzle into a whole picture, the same way as we build up a pyramid, and the foundation is quite important. Once you have the fundamental knowledge of Buddhism, whenever someone is talking about Buddhism, you will automatically know it is or is not true Buddhism. The same way as you can judge my English. The difference is that, inadequate English can pass by with some guessing, but true Buddhism needs zoom lens in every details, it is about nothing or eternity.

I hope my reply is to your satisfaction, if not, please let me know. Thank you.

[SauLan]

So, it's official - I have a copy now of Gendun Chopel's book (edited by Hopkins), "Tibetan Arts of Love." Contrary to what the "Trimondis" clam, this author says absolutely nothing about offering sweets to 12 year old girls to entice them into ritual sex.

Here's a link to a PDF copy of the book (small, abt 1 MB):

http://hk.plm.org.cn/e_book2011/xz-44017.pdf

Sadly, on countless Buddhist websites and forums now, you will find people posting the Trimondi's slander.

Yet another lesson in checking primary sources.

[adikarmika]

What sexual abuse cases?

Just a few reports for your references, if you would care to read; please try to be fair and rational when you write...

How about this for fair and rational?

Since none of the cases you cite is an actual instance of sexual abuse established in a court of law, then we must assume that such cases don't exist. Otherwise you would have cited them (instead of mere allegations anonymously posted on a blog.)

Furthermmore, even if such cases were successfully proven in the courts, it would not follow that sexual abuse is institutional within Tibetan Buddhism.

And even if it were, it would not follow that Tibetan Buddhism was not a form of Buddhism (though, admittedly, it may be a corrupt form.)

Once you have the fundamental knowledge of Buddhism, whenever someone is talking about Buddhism, you will automatically know it is or is not true Buddhism.

What you mean to say is:

Once you have blindly swallowed the fundamentalist dogma of your fringe sect (and ignored the well-researched writings of countless scholars), whenever someone is talking about a tradition of Buddhism that has beliefs and practices different from your own, instead of accepting that Buddhism may take many forms or subjecting your own essentialist beliefs to closer scrutiny, you automatically become super-defensive and deny that those other traditions could possibly be Buddhism.

One has to wonder why. What are you afraid of?
It just doesn't make sense. Unless, of course, you have some sort of ulterior motive (or are being manipulated by others with such motives.)

[SauLan]

The Chinese Communist Party wants Tibet--and every trace of it--to disappear. It's that simple. Taiwan's next.

[Zla'od]

You will see that the idea that dharmas possessed some sort of "own being" that enabled them to be distinguished form one another is a concept that emerged around the second century B.C.E.

That was my impression as well. I assume Shakyamuni to have been a rather more engaging speaker!

In this light, then, it is possible (without committing theological inconsistency) to be either a Theravadin or a Mahayanist, and yet reject the tantras (or some of the tantras, e.g. the ones with sexual imagery). It is also possible--though by no means required--for such a person to maintain that those who accept such tantras are not really Buddhist.

Though you may be able to find some scholarly agreement about a very limited range of teachings attributable to the historical Buddha, I think you will find more agreement among scholars with Gregory Schopen's criticisms of efforts to find an essence of Buddhism within its doctrines,which is an approach that he says "may reflect more of our own religious history and values than the history of values of Indian Buddhism."

Yes, in real life (as opposed to contrived debate) I agree with this--and note the Wittgensteinian insight's affinities with Buddhism!

Homey (poster--no, I am not lapsing into AAVE), I wouldn't worry too much. Just as Chinese propaganda tends to be counterproductive, so does Zhengjue's (and the Trimondis'). More people around here humor them than support them.

On the canon, it seems that Buddhism (poster) accepts both the Pali canon (represented by the Middle-Length Suttas) and the traditional Chinese canon (represented by the Avatamsaka Sutra). I speculate that she would reject, say, the Sutra of the Owl-Headed Dakini (a treasure text) or the messages delivered through Elizabeth Clare Prophet (who channeled Buddha, Maitreya, and Padmasambhava, among other worthies). The question naturally arises: why? Is there a reason why one should prefer some, but not other, claimed sutras? For example, should we rely on the opinions of scholars, or on the traditions of modern Buddhist teachers? Or should we evaluate them in light of some preconceived theology, which we assume the genuine sutras ought to reflect? (Would it matter if the Sutra of the Owl-Headed Dakini, or Mrs. Prophet, taught Cittamatrin doctrines?)

PS. Guess whose birthday it is tomorrow!
(Hint: I hear he's a notorious lecher.)

[SauLan]

Well, I now know one thing: the "Trimondis" (Herbert & Mariana Röttgen, allegedly), are complete bollocks. Their claims agains the author, Gedun Chopel, were completely false.

It's time now to find out who the really are (if they even exist, or are mere pen-names-of-pen-names for a Chinese political party), and what they're up to!