 |
| Buddha sitting on the earth, taking the earth as witness (photo: Indiadivine) |
Quite a long digression as an introduction, but don’t worry, I will get to the point.
In old mythologies preceding the classic ones, there was the earth and the female/male womb of the earth. The cycle of life consisted of life being generated on the earth from the womb and returning to the womb of the earth, which contained all the seeds of plants, animals and men, male and female seeds, without any identity. This cycle (di-odos) consists of the ascension (an-odos) of biological entities and their descent (cath-odos) back into the womb of the earth. The cycle of life. No heaven and hell, no good or evil, no gods and demons, etc. were needed for this process. This "superstructure" was minimalist. Men and women were born, procreated offspring with their biological seed, and returned into the womb. The “seed” of grandfathers was thought to be “reborn” into grandsons, and the “seed” of grandmothers into granddaughters. No individual identity was attached to these “seeds”.
In my fertile imagination the thought of having to free oneself from an ever returning “identical seed”, or from this Cycle of life didn’t seem to occur then. Even less so the thought of having to help and guide others to “free” themselves too. As for thinking about a beginning and an end of a cycle, what would have been the point?
With the invention of the third (tertiary) level "heaven", a better quality of “life” outside the Cycle of life, and of a "liberated" permanent individual seed, all the attention was directed towards a superstructure, and a new economy evolved around it. Simple life and survival on earth were henceforth in competition with a more glorious afterlife in heaven, at least for those believing in it. One could make efforts for this life, survival and/or comfort, or efforts with longer lasting effects (“investments”) for the afterlife (tib. tshe phyi ma). Celestial experts (hereafter Celestines) would explain how exactly to invest in the future, while making sacrifices in the present.
Since “Seeds” had become permanent and (like Google accounts) capable to keep records of all deeds, words and thoughts of the life of an individual, those who didn’t invest in their afterlife (hereafter Earthlings), would keep descending (cath-odos) back in the womb of the earth, after their death, and, from a Celestine point of view, the same “Seed” would be coming back (an-odos) on earth, as long as their afterlife needs were neglected. Since the Seeds had become individual and permanent, families could be divided into Celestine members caring for their afterlife, and Earthling members who didn’t, out of ignorance or sheer ill will. This entailed that some members of a family could end up in heaven, while others would return to the womb of the earth, henceforth called Hell, Hades, etc. A new cause of worry for the Celestines, who in order to help their unlucky Earthling brothers and sisters needed powerful means, which Celestine experts would gladly provide.
Sure, the newly added third level, would be yet another source of anguish, but at the same time it provided all the means to get a certain peace of mind, provided by Celestine experts. Earthlings could be converted, even at the very last moment, or could be helped in other ways, through prayers and investments on their behalf, to alleviate their future fate (the Cycle of life), to avoid the return to the womb of the earth, and sometimes to get them a place in heaven, even despite themselves.
These two afterlife destinations (womb of earth > earth, and heaven, “the two cities”) are to be found in creeds and religions under all sorts of forms and names. The “heavenly city” is permanent and the “earthly city” is cyclic, and therefore a cause of permanent anguish. The heavenly reality is higher, the earthly reality lower. I mean open your eyes… heaven is above, and earth below.
It’s common sense that acting in favour of, and investing in a higher and permanent reality is better than to do so in a lower one. Those who deny this are Nihilists, who don’t care for the third level. Nihilists, just like their Earthling ancestors living base lives, no better than plants and animals, in a two-leveled world myth cycle. In the three-leveled myth, as long as they are on the earth, and at least until their afterlife, all sprouted “Seeds” are subjected to two realities, the higher and the lower one, and will have to make do with both.
Celestine rules may forbid killing, fornication, stealing, lying, etc., but whilst living on the earth, Celestine experts and their patrons may, in the performance of their duties, need to “seem to” break some Celestine rules, in order to act in the best interest of all, Celestines, Earthlings and Nihilists without distinction. Not only does Celestine realpolitik allow them to do so, it even rewards them for it.
The legend of the Buddha learns us that the Buddha did not take Heaven and the gods as the witness of his Awakening, but the Earth (bhūmisparśa-mudrā). Perhaps he felt closer to the Earthling two-level system or more comfortable with it. You can touch and feel the earth.
As a religion, Buddhism too has a Celestine (paramārtha) and an earthly (saṃvṛti) reality. Buddhism started off as a Śramaṇic movement of renunciates, who wanted to free themselves not only from the earthly reality, but also from certain essentialised elements of Celestine reality. The nirvāṇa thus obtained seems to have been, initially, not an annihilation of the “Seed”, but an unbinding, extinction or “blowing out”, although Buddhists never agreed on the subject. The Celestine reality made quite a spectacular comeback with mahāyāna and vajrayāna, and the former nāstika Buddhism was welcomed back as a peer among other three-level religions. And there was much rejoicing.
Just like any other religion, Buddhism’s own survival has become its first priority, and any sacrifices made for its survival are necessary, and all efforts will be generously rewarded. Buddhism is not a violent religion as long as its interests remain untouched. Alliances with and protection by a Dhamarāja, a Theocrat, or if needed any secular, military and economic power is sought for, in order to guarantee its survival and development. Killing (and almost anything else) is allowed, provided it’s done “with compassion” and for “a good reason”, such as to destroy an enemy. Celestine reality overrules earthly reality, and the cycle of life will continue, until it ends by itself, or until competing Celestine realities finally rid us of it completely. “Compassion” in this context is not empathy, or altruism, but, in Buddhism, the simple conformity to the mahāyāna project of converting those to be converted to Celestine interests, in the long term, by various means, including through the four types of Tantric “enlightened activity” (caturkarman).
Many examples can be found in Michael Jerryson’s Buddhist Warfare (2010) of what may seem like Buddhist violence for those looking at it through earthly eyes. For Mahāyāna, anyone with power and wealth is a (potential) bodhisattva, entitled to “violence” for a good (Celestine) cause.
In Chan Buddhism, the Jueguan lun[1] similarly states that, if a murderous act is as perfectly spontaneous as an act of nature, it entails no responsibility:
This is not to point at violence used in Tibetan Buddhism in Tibet, in the past, but at the violence still present today in Western settings, and still considered as a part of the transmission. Sogyal Lakar (1947-2019) considered himself a student of Jamyang Khyentse Chökyi Lodrö (1893 – 1959).
Sure, the newly added third level, would be yet another source of anguish, but at the same time it provided all the means to get a certain peace of mind, provided by Celestine experts. Earthlings could be converted, even at the very last moment, or could be helped in other ways, through prayers and investments on their behalf, to alleviate their future fate (the Cycle of life), to avoid the return to the womb of the earth, and sometimes to get them a place in heaven, even despite themselves.
These two afterlife destinations (womb of earth > earth, and heaven, “the two cities”) are to be found in creeds and religions under all sorts of forms and names. The “heavenly city” is permanent and the “earthly city” is cyclic, and therefore a cause of permanent anguish. The heavenly reality is higher, the earthly reality lower. I mean open your eyes… heaven is above, and earth below.
It’s common sense that acting in favour of, and investing in a higher and permanent reality is better than to do so in a lower one. Those who deny this are Nihilists, who don’t care for the third level. Nihilists, just like their Earthling ancestors living base lives, no better than plants and animals, in a two-leveled world myth cycle. In the three-leveled myth, as long as they are on the earth, and at least until their afterlife, all sprouted “Seeds” are subjected to two realities, the higher and the lower one, and will have to make do with both.
Celestine rules may forbid killing, fornication, stealing, lying, etc., but whilst living on the earth, Celestine experts and their patrons may, in the performance of their duties, need to “seem to” break some Celestine rules, in order to act in the best interest of all, Celestines, Earthlings and Nihilists without distinction. Not only does Celestine realpolitik allow them to do so, it even rewards them for it.
The legend of the Buddha learns us that the Buddha did not take Heaven and the gods as the witness of his Awakening, but the Earth (bhūmisparśa-mudrā). Perhaps he felt closer to the Earthling two-level system or more comfortable with it. You can touch and feel the earth.
As a religion, Buddhism too has a Celestine (paramārtha) and an earthly (saṃvṛti) reality. Buddhism started off as a Śramaṇic movement of renunciates, who wanted to free themselves not only from the earthly reality, but also from certain essentialised elements of Celestine reality. The nirvāṇa thus obtained seems to have been, initially, not an annihilation of the “Seed”, but an unbinding, extinction or “blowing out”, although Buddhists never agreed on the subject. The Celestine reality made quite a spectacular comeback with mahāyāna and vajrayāna, and the former nāstika Buddhism was welcomed back as a peer among other three-level religions. And there was much rejoicing.
Just like any other religion, Buddhism’s own survival has become its first priority, and any sacrifices made for its survival are necessary, and all efforts will be generously rewarded. Buddhism is not a violent religion as long as its interests remain untouched. Alliances with and protection by a Dhamarāja, a Theocrat, or if needed any secular, military and economic power is sought for, in order to guarantee its survival and development. Killing (and almost anything else) is allowed, provided it’s done “with compassion” and for “a good reason”, such as to destroy an enemy. Celestine reality overrules earthly reality, and the cycle of life will continue, until it ends by itself, or until competing Celestine realities finally rid us of it completely. “Compassion” in this context is not empathy, or altruism, but, in Buddhism, the simple conformity to the mahāyāna project of converting those to be converted to Celestine interests, in the long term, by various means, including through the four types of Tantric “enlightened activity” (caturkarman).
Many examples can be found in Michael Jerryson’s Buddhist Warfare (2010) of what may seem like Buddhist violence for those looking at it through earthly eyes. For Mahāyāna, anyone with power and wealth is a (potential) bodhisattva, entitled to “violence” for a good (Celestine) cause.
In Chan Buddhism, the Jueguan lun[1] similarly states that, if a murderous act is as perfectly spontaneous as an act of nature, it entails no responsibility:
"Question: “In certain conditions, isn’t one allowed to kill a living being?”—Answer: “The fire in the bush burns the mountain; the hurricane breaks trees; the collapsing cliff crushes wild animals to death; the running mountain stream drowns the insects. If a man can make his mind similar [to these natural forces], then, meeting a man, he may kill him all the same."In a “heavenly” mindset, when in harmony with heaven, a man may kill another man, acting merely as a Celestine instrument, without any selfish reasons of himself. For the Fifth Dalai Lama, his Mongol protector Gushri Khan, a bodhisattva in disguise, was “entitled” to violence, because he was an ally and protector, and heaven smiled on his pro-Celestine activities. Another Dalai Lama, the Fourteenth, the Nobel Peace Prize 1989, “abstained from condemning the U.S. invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq”[2], the U.S. being his ally and protector. He also may have thought that these invasions were in harmony with natural forces, the hand of God or Karma, and that it would not be wise to interfere. Anyway, anthropology (Freud, Girard, Lévy-Strauss, …) teaches us that violence, or even murder (Freud), is found at the beginning of society. The price to pay for leaving the “incomplete” two-leveled Earthling system. Can there be humanity (jen) without heaven (tian)? So, when societies and civilisations are murdering away, they are simply fighting for their own survival. Is violence for higher Celestine (tian) reasons perhaps the price to pay for “humanity” and “compassion”? Is that sort of “compassion” indeed higher than the empathy and compassion of Earthlings, that Chogyam Trungpa and his disciples call “idiot compassion”.
“Chogyam Trungpa once said that you can actually kill someone with a sword and penetrating them with the blade is like making love to them. This expression of love and compassion is the same as holding the brother accountable. You can lovingly sink the blade of tough love into him and cut down his ego fixation on approval. If you remind him that his actions caused this result and you cannot offer him absolution. It comes from a place of pure love and compassion for the brother’s confusion. An intimate empathy can almost boil over in your heart as you say the words. But you know that telling the truth, when its hard is the right thing, not excusing your brother’s misconduct — no matter if it damages your family.” Karma Tsering Paljor, Idiot Compassion is not a Buddhist ValueBernard Faure rightly observes that Buddhist violence isn’t limited to warfare, but includes also “ militant syncretism”.
“[...] rival doctrines were co-opted and integrated at a lower rank in a doctrinal classification (Ch. panjiao) that placed one’s own doctrine at the top. Needless to say, this kind of syncretism easily led to sectarianism[3].”Metaphors for the conversion of local deities are associated with “sexual submission”[4].
“An even cruder sexual symbolism is found in a variant of the myth of Maheśvara’s submission, in which Rudra (another form of iva) is literally sodomized by his Buddhist nemesis, Hayagrīva (a terrible form of the “compassionate” Avalokiteśvara).[5]”Bernard Faure mentions asceticism as a form of violence (tapas, fasting) against oneself, as long as one is not in compliance with heavenly prescriptions. Discrimination against women, yet at the same time putting women on a pedestal and using them as instruments to liberation, or to be displayed as status objects (concubines). Sexual abuse of mudrās, and of children in monasteries. Violence used for the education of young monks or in Western Buddhist centers (OKC). Violence used by gurus/lamas in “crazy wisdom”, “smashing concepts” and “insulting the ego”.
This is not to point at violence used in Tibetan Buddhism in Tibet, in the past, but at the violence still present today in Western settings, and still considered as a part of the transmission. Sogyal Lakar (1947-2019) considered himself a student of Jamyang Khyentse Chökyi Lodrö (1893 – 1959).
“For three years, while his tutor was ill, Jamyang Khyentse worked hard to fetch water, gather firewood, look after him and so on. He had no help from anyone else, but did it all on his own. Later on, he would say this had been a supreme method for gathering merit and purifying his obscurations. He used to say, “I purified a little of my negative karma by really serving my teacher.” His teacher was very strict, and used to beat him whether there was good reason or not. Later in his life whenever he shaved his head you could see all the scars from the beatings. It was at the end of his thirteenth year that the tutor passed away.” Orgyen Tobgyal Rinpoche, The Life of Jamyang Khyentse Chökyi LodröMary Finnigan and Rob Hogendoorn wrote about this in Sex and Violence in Tibetan Buddhism.
“[Jamyang Khyentse] Chokyi Lodro was a tyrant who punished monks ten at a time. When a flogging was ordered, Rinpoche insisted on four or five hundred lashes and he always watched from the window of his residence when the punishment was delivered.
For some people, being hit on the head is alleged to be a healing method; Chokyi Lodro once knocked a lama nearly unconscious because his blood was said to be toxic. The beating allegedly induced a complete recovery. Orgyen Topgyal even alludes to the possibility that he may have assaulted his young wife. “I haven’t heard that Rinpoche ever hit her, but people tend not to talk about such things".[6].The day after Sogyal Lakar, Chokyi Lodro’s disciple, lost his temper and hit a nun in her stomach in front of a large audience, he declared this was part of “his method”.
"The next day, one of the Rigpa hierarchy addressed the doubters. 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." The Telegraph, Sexual assaults and violent rages... Inside the dark world of Buddhist teacher Sogyal Rinpoche, Mick Brown, 21/09/2017The Tibetan term for what we see translated as “disciplining”, “converting”, “taming”, “breaking in”, “subjugating” is btul ba or dul ba, in Sanskrit vinayati and damya. In the Mahā-prajñāpāramitā-śastra (The treatise on the great virtue of wisdom), attributed to Nāgārjuna, the Buddha is called “puruṣa-damya-sārathi”, “‘Leader of the caravan of men to be converted”.
“The doctrine of the Buddha is a chariot, the disciples are the horses,If you wonder why “the caravan of men”, MPS anticipated you’d wonder about this, and provides an answer:
The true dharmas are the merchandise, the Buddha is the leader.
When the horses stray from the path and wander from the way,
The Buddha corrects them and controls them.” MPS
“Question. – The Buddha converts (vinayati) women (strī) also and makes them fond of the Path. Why is it a question of men only [in the name puruṣadamyasārathi]?A good disciple is a meek (dul ba) disciple, or as Chogyam Trungpa would put it:
Answer. – Because men are noble whereas women are lowly, because the woman follows the man and because the man [alone] is master of his actions."
“Well, don’t be amazed to find that actually the whole teaching is simply emptiness and meekness.” Trungpa in conversation with Allen Ginsberg[7].In Tibetan Buddhism, including as taught and practiced in the West, students are required to practice the “Four Foundations of Buddhist Practice” (sngon 'gro), the last one is specifically called “Guru-Yoga” (bla ma’i rnal ‘byor), but even the first one presents a Refuge tree with the specific lamas of a specific lineage, and the lama is the center of all four practices. One of the books still used as an explanation of these practices, including in the West, is Jamgon Kongtrul’s The Torch of Certainty, Shambhala Publications Inc.
“Failure to appreciate the guru's kindness reveals lack of esteem for the Dharma. If you lack such esteem, all your Dharma practice will be futile and will net you no positive qualities no matter how hard you try. If, due to this lack of esteem, you take the arrogant view that it is impossible for the guru to acquire positive qualities, or you take the diffident view that it is impossible for the rest of us to do so, you are meditating with a perverted attitude. Since you have fallen into the first transgression, all your previously accumulated merit is swept away ! Re- spect for the guru and the Dharma will arise of their own accord if you appreciate the guru's kindness. All positive qualities will then be yours spontaneously, with no effort on your part.”This will lead to the Perfection of Meekness and the attainment of supreme siddhi. Once a guru yourself, you will require the same of your own “manly” students. As for the other ones, “make them fond of the Path”.
“Buddhajñānapāda's faithless perception caused him to see Manjushri as a married monk with children. This perception obstructed his attainment of supreme siddhi. Similarly, your own mental attitude causes you to see faults in the guru. How can a Buddha have faults? Whatever he does, let him do it! Even if you see your guru having sexual relations, telling lies and so on, calmly meditate as follows: "These are my guru's unsurpassed skillful methods of training disciples. Through these methods he has brought many sentient beings to spiritual maturity and liberation. This is a hundred, a thousand times more wonderful than preserving a pure moral code! This is not deception or hypocrisy but the highest mode of conduct!" In particular, when he scolds you, think: "He is destroying my bad deeds!" When he hits you, think: "He is chasing away the demons who obstruct (my spiritual progress]!" · Above all, consider the fact that your guru loves you like a father loves his son. His friendship is always sincere. He is very kind. If he seems displeased or indifferent toward you, think that this is the retribution which will remove your remaining karmic obscurations. Try to please the guru by serving him in all ways possible. In brief, do not find fault with the guru.[8]”
***
[1] “Jueguan lun,” in Suzuki Daisetsu Zensh, Vol. 2, ed. D. T. Suzuki (Tokyo: Iwanami shoten, 1980 [1968]) (94a1–5). Quoted by Bernard Faure, Afterthoughts in Michael Jerryson’s Buddhist Warfare (2010.
[2] Ibid. Bernard Faure
[3] Ibid. Bernard Faure
[4] See my French language blog “Le phallus qui soumet la nature et la femme” 01/02/2014
[5] Ibid. Bernard Faure
Also see my blog La promotion fulgurante de l’ambitieux yaksha Vajrapāṇi 20/11/2011
“Le Dict de Padma contient un exemple de conversion particulière. Les 24 territoires (S. pīṭha) sont contrôlés par les dieux et démons (S. vighna) sous les ordres de Rudra en faisant souffrir les habitants. Rudra, résidant à Pretapuri, doit être converti pour que la doctrine bouddhique puisse se répandre. Evidemment, Vajrapāṇi sera de la partie. Ce sont Hayagrīva et Vajravārāhi, le cheval et le sanglier, qui sont chargés de cette mission par la congrégation de bouddhas. Hayagrīva pénètre par la "porte du bas" de Rudra, jusqu’à ce que sa tête de cheval sorte par le sommet de la tête de Rudra. Les bras et les jambes de Rudra s’étendent. Vajravārāhi pénètre par le bhaga (vagin) de sa compagne (Umā[7]), et sa tête de sanglier sort du sommet de la tête de la compagne. L’union (T. zhal sbyar) de "Cheval" (Hayagrīva) et de "Cochon" (Vajravārāhi) donne naissance à une manifestation de Vajrapāṇi portant le nom Bhurkumkuta (T. rta phag zhal sbyar dme ba brtsegs pa[8] bskrun [9]). Le culte de Vajravārāhi (Kubjikā) est cependant apparu après l'époque du roi Khri srong lde btsan.”
[6] Finnigan, Mary and Hogendoorn, Rob. (2019). Sex and Violence in Tibetan Buddhism, The rise and Fall of Sogyal Rinpoche, Jorvik Press, p. 25
[7] When the Party’s Over, interview avec Allen Ginsberg in Boulder Monthly, mars 1979.
“ He said, well, the problem with Merwin — this was several years ago — he said, Merwin’s problem was vanity. He said, I wanted to deal with him by opening myself up to him completely, by putting aside all barriers. “It was a gamble.” he said. So I said, was it a mistake? He said, “Nope.” So then I thought, if it was a gamble that didn’t work, why wasn’t it a mistake? Well, now all the students have to think about it —so it serves as an example, and a terror. But then I said, “What if the outside world hears about this, won’t there be a big scandal?” And Trungpa said, “Well, don’t be amazed to find that actually the whole teaching is simply emptiness and meekness.”
[8] Jamgon Kongtrul. (1977). Torch of Certainty, translated by Judith Hanson, Foreword by Chogyam Trungpa.
.jpg)
