 |
| Nouvelle version de Dharmacakra ? (notez le centre vide) |
L’Union Bouddhiste de France (UBF) est une association “non lucratif, apolitique” (Statuts), à l’image du bouddhisme qui se dit apolitique.
Il y a quelques jours sur le site de Rob Hogendoorn, il y avait une discussion au sujet de la notion des abus (physiques, sexuels, émotionnels,...). Quelqu’un suggérait que les maîtres tibétains n’étaient peut-être pas entièrement conscients du problème, puisqu’il n’y aurait pas de mot en tibétain qui correspondrait au mot abus. Et que cette méconnaissance serait peut-être dû à un manque de formation à l’occidentale.
Des lamas d’une plus jeune génération, qui ont vécu la plupart de leur vie en exil, ont souvent suivi une formation “à l’occidentale” en Inde. Ainsi, Sogyal avait fréquenté St. Augustine's à Kalimpong et St. Stephen's à Delhi. Dzongsar Jamyang Khyentse avait suivi des cours à la School of Oriental and Asian Studies (SOAS) de l’Université de Londres et HE Khandro Rinpoché avait fréquenté les écoles St. Joseph's Convent, Wynberg Allen School, Mussoorie, et St. Mary's Convent en Inde. Ils parlent tous parfaitement bien l’anglais et doivent comprendre le sens du mot “abus”.
Il semblerait par ailleurs que le mot tibétain utilisé le plus souvent pour rendre notre notion du mot “abus” soit le mot “brnyas bcos” (nyéchö) et ses diverse dérivations. Dans les écoles primaires bhoutanaises, des posters sont affichés pour avertir les enfants contre les différents types d’abus, en leur proposant des numéros d’appel pour signaler ces cas.
 |
| Campagne d'affichage dans les écoles bhoutanais |
Depuis le décès de Sogyal Lakar le 28/08/2019 en Thaïlande, les hommages les uns plus élogieux que les autres de la part de hiérarques tibétains affluent et sont publiés dans le cadre du “Parinirvana de Sogyal Rinpoché” sur le site de Rigpa. Aucune mention n’est faite à des allégations d’abus et à ses victimes. Tout est organisé comme si le décès de Sogyal Lakar était le parinirvana d’un grand maître tibétain “réalisé”. “Sogyal Rinpoché demeure en ce moment en thoukdam. Cet état se produit lorsqu’un pratiquant qui a atteint la réalisation continue, au moment de la mort, continue à reposer dans la reconnaissance de la nature de l’esprit.” Source Rigpa. Son “Corps”, appelé “sku gdung” (koudoung) est actuellement en Thaïlande, mais partira bientôt en tournée pour permettre aux disciples de Sogyal Lakar de lui rendre un dernier hommage (Bangkok, Lerab Ling en France, Bodhgaya en Inde à Shéchen Gompa, Gangtok au Sikkim). Le Koudoung sera finalement incinéré, tout comme celui de Jamyang Khyentsé Chökyi Lodrö JKCL), à Tashiding au Sikkim, un des huit grands charniers béni par Guru Rinpoché, et où se trouve le stupa avec les reliques de JKCL.
Le mot “abus” existe peut-être bien en tibétain, et les hiérarques tibétains en comprennent bien le sens, mais il ne peut pas être question ici d’abus, puisque Sogyal Lakar serait un être réalisé... Le Vajrayāna a pour objectif de transmuter l’expérience ordinaire “impure” en une expérience pure (dag snang). Le travail d’un maître est d’accompagner l’adepte sur cette voie. Grâce à la dévotion au gourou (guruyoga), le disciple est invité à ne déconsidérer aucun acte du gourou. L’irritation, la rébellion ou la simple émergence de mauvaise pensées qui replacent l’adepte dans l’ancienne expérience ordinaire impure, sont autant de signes que l’ego du disciple n’est pas encore suffisamment dégonflé. Certains actes d’humiliation et de … oui appelons cela abus (physiques, sexuels, psychologiques, émotionnels), peuvent aider à dégonfler l’ego du disciple, y compris par des humiliations en public (dont je publierai un exemple sous peu). Aussi bizarre que cela puisse paraître, l’objectif, l’ego dégonflé, ressemble à s’y méprendre à de la dissonance cognitive.
Le lendemain de la publication de la lettre ouverte des huit signataires, Sogyal Lakar aurait protesté dans un cercle restreint que si on l’empêchait d’utiliser “ces méthodes” (justifiées par la notion de “folle sagesse” depuis Chogyam Trungpa), il lui serait impossible de transmettre son enseignement.[1]
Pour transmettre le Dzogchen ou autre réalisation équivalente, le maître “folle sagesse” aurait besoin d’une autorité quasi-totale. Son bouddhisme est un bouddhisme très vertical, Jupitérien pourrait-on dire. Son entourage, son Sangha, est alors comme sa cour, et les membres du Sangha ses sujets. Cette conception d’un Sangha, qui est celle d’une monarchie théocratique, est-elle réellement apolitique ? Quand il s’agit de transformer toute son expérience ordinaire “impure” en une expérience “pure” où le gourou trône au centre en monarque théocratique, comment cela pourrait-il être apolitique ? Comment vie une personne manipulée par ce genre de métaphores et les injonctions qui vont avec ? Après avoir assisté à une séance de dégonflage d’ego en public, sans réagir, en admirant la science du maître, ce sujet redeviendrait-il ou elle un bon citoyen démocratique ?
Ci-après (sous la note n° 2) quelques exemples de déclarations de maîtres tibétains[2] sur la façon d’organiser un Sangha, et sur l’obstacle que des valeurs occidentales (démocratie, parité etc.) peuvent constituer pour la pratique adéquate du Vajrayāna. Le Vajrayāna est un bouddhisme vertical, les valeurs de l’occident sont plutôt (de moins en moins hélas...) horizontales. C’est une différence essentielle, et non superficielle, et qui est centrée autour du concept du gourou/Maître-Roi et le fonctionnement courtisan qui va avec. Les Sanghas occidentaux doivent-ils plutôt fonctionner selon des principes démocratiques ou courtisans ?
Si le bouddhisme (tibétain/Vajrayāna) ne peut pas être enseigné et transmis sans cette verticalité est-il adapté à l’Occident ? Ce bouddhisme vertical et Jupitérien est-il réellement apolitique ? D’autres formes plus horizontales et “républicaines” du bouddhisme ont existé dans le passé.
De toute façon, Dungse Thinley Norbu Rinpoche, Dzongsar Jamyang Khyentse et H.E. Khandro Rinpoche (l’actuelle directrice spirituelle permanente de Rigpa Lerab Ling depuis le 10/08/2019) ne veulent pas d’un bouddhisme horizontal. Ils comprennent très bien le vocabulaire “occidental”, comme p.e. abus, ainsi que les systèmes politiques. Il s’agit donc d’un choix. Si c’est le Vajrayāna qui ne leur permet pas de choisir autrement, le Vajrayāna se disqualifie sans doute lui-même comme religion occidento-compatible.
***
[1] “Sogyal, he said, was upset that people should be questioning his methods. If people didn’t understand what had actually happened, then they probably weren’t ready for the promised higher-level teachings, and Sogyal would not teach again during the retreat.” Sexual assaults and violent rages... Inside the dark world of Buddhist teacher Sogyal Rinpoche 21/09/2017 Mick Brown
Sogyal also declared “Each time I hit you I want you to remember that you are closer to me… closer to me. The harder I hit you the closer the connection.” (July 30th 2004, garden of Sogyal's villa in Lerab Ling, France) Youtube
[2] “Words for the West”, Dunse Thinley Norbu Rinpoche, TRICYCLE: the Buddhist Review .Fall(1998)
"Many people in the West now advocate depending on the collective wisdom of the sangha more, and diminishing the role of the teacher."
"These people have a distorted idea of freedom, just as some people do who always think the government is suppressing them."
"This conception originally comes from some kind of modern superficial democratic idea of equal rights, based on a nihilist point of view and not on wisdom. Spiritual ideas are totally different from worldly political ideas, but they try to put these worldly political ideas into spiritual ideas without considering pure dharma. These democratic ideas are supposed to be kept as worldly political ideas, and not misused as if they were spiritual.
It is fine to believe in democratic ideas, but why bother Buddhist ideas, including the right to be a teacher and the right to believe in teachers? Why are these people trying to prevent belief in teachers? Actually, democracy has the idea of individual rights, so what is wrong with Buddhists having rights? Religious belief is a choice made by the individual, and not a decision to be made by people who call themselves a sangha.
These people have no right to diminish the role of the teacher, and they cannot diminish it, because the quality of spirituality the teacher embodies is inconceivable and not like the materializations thought up by those in a nihilist sangha. Their ideas are actually not democratic ideas, but could be just the tradition of some weird other realm. If the purpose of politics is to deal with the needs of people, why are they trying to exclude Buddhism from what people need?"
'Distortion' "Dzongsar Jamyang Khyentse, (September 1997 Shambhala Sun magazine
"For this reason, most Oriental teachers are very skeptical about exporting dharma to the Western world, feeling that Westerners lack the refinement and courage to understand and practice properly the buddhadharma."
"There are enormous differences between the attitudes of various cultures and different interpretations of similar phenomena. It is easy to forget that such supposedly universal notions as "ego," "freedom," "equality," "power," and the implications of "gender" and "secrecy," are all constructions that are culture-specific and differ radically when seen through different perspectives. The innuendoes surrounding a certain issue in one culture might not even occur to those of another culture, where the practice in question is taken for granted." "Another example of the hypocrisy involved with this kind of attitude is the Western "benevolent" wish to "liberate" Eastern women from the clutches of what is imagined to be the oppressive tyranny of a misogynist system, resembling the Western missionaries wanting natives to adopt Christian morals and values." "Ideas such as democracy and capitalism, as well as equality and human rights, can be seen to have failed miserably in the West, and to be nothing but new dogmas."
"Nowhere is the difference between these two attitudes more obvious and more important than when it comes to criticisms of the guru in vajrayana Buddhism. Unfortunately, the guru is a must for vajrayana practice."
"In vajrayana, in order to enable the guru to help us and work on our dualistic ego-centered preoccupations, we are supposed to think that the guru is no different in wisdom than the Buddha. This is the highest form of mind training."
"If duality remains, then by definition there can be no equality. I think social equality between men and women is less important than realizing the equality between samsara and nirvana which, after all, is the only true way to engender a genuine understanding of equality. Thus the understanding of equality in vajrayana Buddhism is on a very profound level. "
"If anyone thinks they could have a pleasing and equal lover in a Rinpoche, they couldn't be more incorrect. Certain Rinpoches, those known as great teachers, would by definition be the ultimate bad partner, from ego's point of view. If one approaches such great masters with the intention of being gratified and wishing for a relationship of sharing, mutual enjoyment etc., then not only from ego's point of view, but even from a mundane point of view, such people would be a bad choice. They probably will not bring you flowers or invite you out for candlelit dinners."
H.E. Khandro Rinpoche discusses issues within the sangha “H.E. Khandro Rinpoche speaks about why democracy might not be the best fit for a sangha” Elle distingue entre “overt” and “covert” hierarchy.
"I come from an Eastern background where hierarchy is quite overt. It has its of course plus and minus points and I can understand. Jokingly or playfully I often say to the Westerners primarily because they always seem to have so much resistance to what they think is the Buddhist hierarchy. So they tried to be very cautious about it. Of course I understand that too. I am of course going to always have to recognize and say that democracy is a wonderful idea. When I say democracy doesn't necessarily work is because of having worked with students or Western students. With the idea of hierarchy often I find that human nature is the same east or west. There's not much of a difference. Of course the kind of dictatorship and the misuse of power is a very negative thing. But what I often find is, since the human nature is the same, there is a covert hierarchy which I find even worse than the overt hierarchical system. So I always say, you know, because the Westerners for example have this unique thing about « information is power », whoever has more information seems to have more power. There's another sort of a theory « first among equals » which I always have a lot of fun joking with people about, because even and what they believe to be a democratic system, is always « first among equals », and then the first one is the one who has the maximum information. That leads you to being very attached to the teacher, getting the first information, being the one who announces everything, and sort of tells others. Of course we have to have a system that is very good in communication, we have to be very transparent in our communication, we have to communicate, but then there is a communicator who communicates. So I always joke and say well that's a very covert hierarchy and it's sometimes messier than an overt hierarchy, because in an overt hierarchy you know whom to blame. Covert hierarchy gets very sticky sometimes, not always but sometimes, it is a sort of emotional entanglement, and people become very frustrated and distressed. There's so much change and the dynamic shifts so very often, that it sometimes hinders the progress. Every everybody becomes very defensive, individually very defensive. I think a good balance would be somewhat of an hierarchy, but a democratic hierarchical system. I don't know whether such a thing exists but one can always hope for basic sanity to prevail. I think it goes back to leadership. I really think leadership is something that people must understand, because when leadership is not understood, it can become misuse of power. That's the negative aspect of hierarchy. On the other hand, if there is no general sort of awareness of how to lead a community, then I think it causes for fragments of many groups to evolve and there is no one person to take as a reference. Of course in most of the communities we refer to the teacher as the reference, where everybody agrees, but if the main teacher is absent or for whatever reason is not in a leadership position, then the fragmenting of the group often leads to a situation, which is close to schism."
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire