Dalai Lama Bashing

[Heartspoon]

I fear you don't understand the meaning  of the term "partisan" and the negative connotations that are attached to it...

[LosangKhyentse]

I am not a partisan of my root guru
I do not hate those who write many things
That are made to appear like a correct path
I hold as a teacher only Him
Whose word possesses reason

You are the one who wrote partisan.

[Heartspoon]

Of course, I am the one who wrote partisan...

[LosangKhyentse]

Then you surpass all the teachers,
your wisdom is greater than theirs,
you have no klesas to overcome,
hence your view is supreme

Your view of those who possess reason or not
is unbiased since you have no karmas that bind,
therefore you need no teacher, as you hear
what you deem as reason and all others are not,

You need no guru, as only those that speak with your
reason you hold.
Hence the tantras become difficult as devotion is not necessary,
all the great masters who hold their gurus supreme, must rewrite the texts.
Ashvagosha, Atisha, Tsongkapa, Shantideva all would follow not a guru
to enlightenment and their devotions are wrong.
Woe to the student who need no guru, such is a time as predicted
in the kaliyuga.

Very well composed. Thank you.

[Heartspoon]

I even wrote "I am not a partisan"

[LosangKhyentse]

We need to rely on a teacher. There's no way around it. Anyone who does not, should not engage in Tantras or Tibetan Form of Buddhism. To engage in the Tantras, guru devotion is supreme. I didn't make that up, that was Vajradhara's stipulation.

Other forms of Buddhism may seem independent of a teacher in the beginning, but not for the higher teachings.

Ashvagosha in his famous composition on the 50 VERSES of GURU DEVOTION makes it very clear the importance of our spiritual teacher. Even Je Tsongkapa's own works makes it very clear how important the guru is.

If we read Trijang Rinpoche's biography, his devotion to his guru was supreme and complete. He confessed sometimes he didn't understand why the guru would have commanded this or that and it was only very later he understood, but nevertheless, he followed respectfully.

These are good examples to follow.

TK

[Heartspoon]

I am not a partisan of my root guru
I do not hate those who write many things
That are made to appear like a correct path
I hold as a teacher only Him
Whose word possesses reason

I bow to the feet of the guru who has as his nature
The glorious nondual transcendental wisdom
And as such is the root cause of the attainment
Of the state or stage of Vajrasattva

If you say "I have faith" and you put down the one
who arises from the transcendental wisdom vajra
Then really you have no clear idea of who he is
You have no idea of the workings of Buddha,
Bodhisattvas and their different forms.

[thaimonk]

Dear tk,

Thank you for your post, I agree with what you say and I fully understand. My devotions to my teacher has been for many years and I always listen to his wisdom. Sometimes through heavy klesa I have wrong views, but it is wonderful training to see my mind.

[Heartspoon]

"The disciple who has reverence for the guru always looks on the guru as follows:
The guru is the equal of all the enlightened ones. Always he himself is Vajradhara.
He holds all the qualities of the tathagata Ratnasambhava, the great ocean of
transcendental wisdom and the giver of the priceless wish-fulfilling gem.
Such a disciple does not consider, even in his thoughts, that the guru has any flaw."

Ornament of the Vajra Essence Tantra

[LosangKhyentse]

Then you surpass all the teachers,
your wisdom is greater than theirs,
you have no klesas to overcome,
hence your view is supreme

Your view of those who possess reason or not
is unbiased since you have no karmas that bind,
therefore you need no teacher, as you hear
what you deem as reason and all others are not,

You need no guru, as only those that speak with your
reason you hold.
Hence the tantras become difficult as devotion is not necessary,
all the great masters who hold their gurus supreme, must rewrite the texts.
Ashvagosha, Atisha, Tsongkapa, Shantideva all would follow not a guru
to enlightenment and their devotions are wrong.
Woe to the student who need no guru, such is a time as predicted
in the kaliyuga.

I have copied this to my computer and to my handphone. I am sending it to friends around the world. It is very well composed and it sums up our own arrogance due to karma that we know more than any/our teacher and we don't need them and we can do it on our own. We can't. Whether it's Lam Rim, Ornament of Clear Realizations, Ngarim Chenmo, or any of the commentaries of Yamantaka, Heruka, Guhyasamaja, Vajra Yogini, Kalacakra, a teacher is indispensible.

Thank you again.

[thaimonk]

Dear tk,

Disciples of various gurus in the room will always have 'conflict' of opinions. Each guru will skilfully guide their students according to his learning/methods and the students aptitudes.

One side may be against the Dalai Lama and the other for. But to both these students, their lama is Vajradhara, hence both correct. So what is better, to endlessly debate who is right, or respect eachothers views and not bash any lamas/sects or thoughts. I think not to bash would be good for everyone's spiritual practice.

I thank you for your words.

[thaimonk]

We need to rely on a teacher. There's no way around it. Anyone who does not, should not engage in Tantras or Tibetan Form of Buddhism. To engage in the Tantras, guru devotion is supreme. I didn't make that up, that was Vajradhara's stipulation.

Other forms of Buddhism may seem independent of a teacher in the beginning, but not for the higher teachings.

Ashvagosha in his famous composition on the 50 VERSES of GURU DEVOTION makes it very clear the importance of our spiritual teacher. Even Je Tsongkapa's own works makes it very clear how important the guru is.

If we read Trijang Rinpoche's biography, his devotion to his guru was supreme and complete. He confessed sometimes he didn't understand why the guru would have commanded this or that and it was only very later he understood, but nevertheless, he followed respectfully.

These are good examples to follow.

TK

What u say here is very clear and I have heard this from my own senior teacher also in the past a few times.

 

[beggar]

One side may be against the Dalai Lama and the other for. But to both these students, their lama is Vajradhara, hence both correct. So what is better, to endlessly debate who is right, or respect eachothers views and not bash any lamas/sects or thoughts. I think not to bash would be good for everyone's spiritual practice.

Thank you thaimonk for this sharing. These words ring very true, more so now in these times of confusion and conflict. It is more important than ever not to criticise other lamas, if we are to reflect our own teachers well and carry out their teachings. I think any real teacher would NOT encourage nor approve of their students speaking ill of any other lama.

I have read that as dharma practitioners, when we see or hear something of our own lamas that we do not understand or disagree strongly with, we are advised to just keep a respectful distance and not say anything, but just continue with our practices. If this is the advice given about our own lamas, then what more other lamas who we have not even studied under - what more right do we have to criticise or say ill things about them ?

[Heartspoon]

Then you surpass all the teachers,
your wisdom is greater than theirs,
you have no klesas to overcome,
hence your view is supreme

I bow to the feet of the guru who has as his nature
The glorious nondual transcendental wisdom

And not because I am a partisan 
Where did you ever hear that a disciple should be a partisan ?

[Heartspoon]

Then you surpass all the teachers,
your wisdom is greater than theirs,
you have no klesas to overcome,
hence your view is supreme

Why choosing a guru on the basis of his qualities and not as a partisan leads you to think
that the disciple's wisdom is greater than the guru's wisdom, that the disciple has no kleshas
to overcome and that hence his view is supreme ?