Buddhism and Violence: The Perfection of Meekness

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:

"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 Value

Bernard 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 Lodrö

Mary 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, 21/09/2017

The 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,
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

If you wonder why “the caravan of men”, MPS anticipated you’d wonder about this, and provides an answer:

“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]?
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."

A good disciple is a meek (dul ba) disciple, or as Chogyam Trungpa would put it:

“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.”

“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]”

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”.

***

[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.

Réussir (siddhi)

Dans les échanges du groupe Facebook Open Buddhism créé par le journaliste d’investigation néerlandais Rob Hogendoorn, certains tentent, suite à l’affaire Sogyal Lakar, d’analyser les causes qui ont conduit au rôle d’un maître bouddhiste tibétain tel qu’il est souvent perçu aujourd’hui en occident. Une des influences déterminantes semble être Chogyam Trungpa (1939 - 1987), avec ses créations Vajradhatu, Naropa Institute, Shambala Training etc. « Quand on questionne les marges, on arrive au cœur de la politique » dirait Michel Foucault, on pourrait dire la même chose des dysfonctionnements et des crises quand ceux-si se répètent et semblent faire partie d’un système. Et parmi les crises autour de Trungpa la plus célèbre est l’incident autour du poète américain William Stanley Merwin (né en 1927).

Dans Open Buddhism, nous avons pu avoir accès à des documents d’époque avec des témoignages de première main : The Party, A Chronological Perspective on a Confrontation at a Buddhist Seminary l’enquête menée par Investigative Poetry Group (Ed Sanders etc. Naropa Institute, 1977). L’article Behind the veil of Boulder Buddhism et l’interview avec Allen Ginsberg When the Party's over). Il y a l’incident, les réactions immédiates auxquelles il a donné lieu (entre autres les « Guerres des poètes de Naropa »), le storytelling au sujet de Trungpa par ses disciples, et la perception de Chogyam Trungpa par d'autres lamas tibétains. C’est le dernier aspect qui m’intéresse plus particulièrement aujourd’hui.

De manière générale, les lamas tibétains admirent Chogyam Trungpa pour son habileté. Il avait réussi à transformer une bande de hippies, de chercheurs spirituels, de manifestants anti guerre de Vietnam, des rebelles anti-système « se lavant au savon végétal », et à les faire se prosterner devant quelqu’un dans une uniforme kaki[1], à porter des costumes cravate et des uniformes khaki en les faisant marcher au pas, nous raconte Dzongsar Khyentsé R. Il se souvient que Dilgo Khyentsé Rinpoché I avait même une photo de Trungpa sur son autel où il portait l’uniforme coloniale britannique.

Gardes Kasoung

Staff of Kalapa Court, Mapleton Avenue, 1976

Thrangu R. aussi rit encore de bon cœur quand il repense au coup de maître de Trungpa (vidéo Vimeo  à 10:45), les hippies aux cheveux longs et aux habits fantasques qu’il avait réussi à mettre en uniforme par les instructions de Shambala, ou mis au travail en leur faisant porter des costumes-cravate. 

Sogyal Lakar, qui visita Trungpa à Boulder en 1976 fut aussitôt séduit par le style de vie de Trungpa et changea radicalement de méthode dès son retour à Londres[2]. Il gronda ses propres disciples pour manquer d’ambitions mondaines et se fit désormais appeler « Précieux » (Rinpoché).

Google employees meditated during a motivational class in 2012.
Credit Peter DaSilva for The New York Times

Dzongsar Khyentse R. explique qu’il ne souhaite pas que ses disciples partent méditer dans des grottes. Il veut qu’il restent des laïques et qu’ils aient de la dévotion tout en suivant la doctrine bouddhiste. Et puis qu’ils deviennent président, premier-ministre, des hommes d’affaires très compétitifs. Qu’ils réussissent, en étant très compétitifs, mais tout en restant un peu réticent... Une sorte de taqîya sociale qui vise à dissimuler le bouddhiste derrière l’homme d’affaires, l’officier d'armée, le président etc. que l’on « jouerait » (sct. līlā) à fond[3]. Dans l'autre sens, il organise des formations de management pour les tulkous et les abbés, pour en faire des bons gestionnaires. Des éveillés à la recherche de leur gestionnaire intérieur. 

Ce n’est finalement pas si différent de la pleine conscience ou de la compassion en entreprise ou dans l’armée. Un peu de pleine conscience et de compassion, pour ne pas oublier qu’au fond on est quelqu’un de bien et que nos réticences bouddhistes n’ont pas à freiner la marche du monde et la réussite des uns et des autres.

Pour finir un extrait d'une conservation entre Chogyam Trungpa et Allen Ginsberg suite à l'affaire Merwin :

 « [Trungpa] dit, eh bien le problème avec Merwin — c'était il y a quelques jours — il dit, le problème de Merwin était la vanité. Il dit, je voulais me charger de lui en m'ouvrant totalement à lui, en mettant de côté toutes les barrières. “C'était un pari.” dit-il. Alors je demandais était-ce un erreur ? Il répondit “Non.” Alors je dis que si c'était un pari et que cela n'avait pas marché, pourquoi ne serait-ce pas une erreur? Eh bien, parce que maintenant tous les étudiants doivent y réfléchir, cela servira d'exemple, et leur fera peur. Alors je rétorquai “Et si tout le monde en parle à l'extérieur, cela ne causerait pas un scandale énorme?” Et Trungpa de répondre, “Eh bien, ne sois pas étonné de découvrir que tout l'enseignement se réduit finalement à la vacuité et la docilité.”[4]

***

[1] « At a time when the Beatles had ponytails and it was all the fashion to wear bell-bottoms, smoke marijuana, wash with vegetable soap, and keep long fingernails, there was a rebellious freedom in the air, a trend of going slightly against the system.There was also a trend of spiritual seeking.
Chogyam Trungpa Rinpoche came along and insisted that all the Vietnam War-protesting Dharma students wear khaki uniforms, ties, and suits with pins. He even made them march like British soldiers on American soil. He combined Japanese simplicity and elegance with colonial British style and imposed all of this on the Woodstock-going hippies. It sounds crazy, but each command was so skillful. » — Dzongsar Jamyang Khyentse Rinpoche, The Guru Drinks Bourbon?

[2] « At first Sogyal was “one of the boys”, but took off for a while to visit Chogyam Trungpa Rinpoche, who pioneered Tibetan Buddhism in the USA. Trungpa was a formidably intelligent iconoclast who acquired a nationwide following, with a formula that shook Buddhist America to the core and generated enthusiasm wherever he alighted. In contrast to the more familiar austerities of Zen Buddhism, Trungpa offered authentic Tibetan theory and practice in tandem with a sybaritic lifestyle. An early American seeker, Victoria Barlow, recalls meeting Sogyal in Boulder, Colorado in 1976: “Sogyal was enthralled by Trungpa’s sexual conquests,” she says, “he told me outright that he wanted what Trungpa had and aimed to achieve a rock star lifestyle.” Sogyal returned to London in a radically altered state of mind – berating his students for their lack of worldly ambition and demanding to be treated like a “precious one”. » Behind the Thangkas, Mary Finnegan.

[3] "I am little reluctant to send people to the caves. I want actually to do this: What I want them to do is, dwell in the lay person situation, have devotion and really have a trust to the right view which is emptiness or the four seals of whatever, interdependent arising. Take refuge wholeheartedly to the triple gem. And then, yes be the president, be the prime minister, be the business person, very competitive. But once you have this, specially the right view, what will happen is you will be actually much better business person. Look, this is what will happen. You will plan, you will have this plan. And because of the right view, one part of you will tell to you, it might not work, whatever you are planning. Your competitor doesn’t know this. They are so blind, it will work. So you are actually end up making plan A, plan B, whatever plan you make you also ready that any of this will collapse, any time. You understand? So this way what you will end up become? You become a successful reluctant president, successful reluctant prime minister, successful reluctant business man or woman. And this is what I think you should aim for if you are asking me."

~ Dzongsar Jamyang Khyentse Rinpoche's "Parting from the Four Attachments", Nepal June 2009 (videos via YouTube )

[4] " 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 thestudents 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.” When the Party’s Over, interview avec Allen Ginsberg dans Boulder Monthly, mars 1979.