Correction it happens in Thailand too. I"ve actually been approached by a fake monk in Thailand many years ago who used to ask for cash only from tourists, he quickly disappeared when I bluntly challenged his authenticity. If you are wise you only support monks that deserve dana, but this is not always possible if you don’t know them.
2 Likes
Looks like this is part one. Parts 1 and 2 of the audio are found on the page. Tapestry is (as I understand) a long running show on CBC Radio. I think it just came out a couple days ago.
3 Likes
Not only that guy (and every past head of Shambhala), but I also just learned that the MNDFL guy—Lodro Rinzler, who led “mindful drinking” (yes as in alcohol) “classes” and has also (surprise!) been accused of sexual misconduct—was (surprise!) also a Shambhala alum. 
Learned from the best, I guess
1 Like
Dear mods, could this post (the CBC story) get pinned to the top, or highlighted in some way?
1 Like
Gee, not once does the word “Vinaya” manage to escape anybody’s mouth in that entire epic CBC investigative report. Apparently there is no such thing as Vinaya, nor does it have any pertinence or applicability in this whole schlamozzle.
Boo, CBC, your research skills leave something to be desired.
The Shambhala tradition acknowledges a Vinaya text called “The Vinayasutra by Gunaprabha” here.
I did a little searching, trying to find a free English translation of that text. No luck so far. There’s a rare book in Sindhi, seen here.
I also feel it’s worth noting that to properly atone for some transgression, you need to state the particular transgression, not just vaguely say that one is sorry for whatever wrong has been done.
Here’s a relevant Khandaka quote about the need for monastics to not just confess vaguely (and have that count as sufficient):
Vinaya Pitaka - Monastic Rules - Khandaka 2: The Uposatha:
Whatever monk remembering while it is being proclaimed up to the third time [during the Pāttimokkha] that there is an existent offence and should not reveal it, there comes to be conscious lying for him. Now, conscious lying, venerable ones, is a thing called a stumbling-block by the Lord. Therefore the existent offence should be revealed by a monk who remembers that he has fallen (into an offence) and who desires purity; for when it is revealed there comes to be comfort for him.’"
…
He should reveal means: he should tell, he should make clear, he should open up, he should make plain in the midst of an Order or in the midst of a group or to one individual.
Well, none of the people involved are bhikkhus as far as I am aware.
3 Likes
Well, from the bio page here, wouldn’t the claim “He also holds the Kagyü and Nyingma lineages of Tibetan Buddhism” suggest being a Buddhist monk? How do you “hold” those lineages without being a monk? Are these lineages lineages of Buddhist monks? What are these lineages lineages of? A favourite noodle dish?
No, that doesn’t imply being a monk. The lineage is a transmission of tantric teachings.
5 Likes
It’s a teaching lineage, mainly a Vajrayana way of saying he’s a teacher in a tantric tradition. But these lineages can be held by laypersons.
However you’re not wrong in saying that Vinaya does have some relevance here, since even the tantric vows are supposed to subsume and contain the essence of the “lower” ethical trainings.
However what that means is interpreted in different ways. This allows for a lot of leeway. Throw in the idea of “skillful means” and you’ve got a hermeneutical nightmare for those who want to say that a teacher should always keep the precepts.
4 Likes
Hmm, so “lineage” here seems to mean “secular royal blood lineage, conflated with the mystique of a legitimate Buddhist monastic lineage, who would actually be bound by, and accountable to Vinaya”.
I think Clan dynamics explains this also. Whomever is the authoritarian leader of a clan, is virtually synonymous with the collective will, and reputation of the clan itself. When you call into the question the clan leader in any way (even for wrongs which he/she actually committed), you simultaneously call into question the reputation and legitimacy of the clan as a whole (whether that was actually your conscious intention or not).
So this triggers the defence mechanisms around preserving the clan reputation. You’ll be accused of tarnishing the entire clan’s reputation, since you dared to question the leader.
This egregious conflation of the (dominance-hierarchy-style) leader, with the will of the clan, and the clan reputation itself, is in stark contrast to the Buddha’s teaching in the Mahāparinibbānasutta ), and you certainly already know this, but I feel it’s relevant none the less:
(the 4 great references)
There the Buddha addressed the mendicants: “Mendicants, I will teach you the four great references. Listen and pay close attention, I will speak.”
“Yes, sir,” they replied. The Buddha said this:
“Take a mendicant who says: ‘Reverend, I have heard and learned this in the presence of the Buddha: this is the teaching, this is the training, this is the Teacher’s instruction.’ You should neither approve nor dismiss that mendicant’s statement. Instead, you should carefully memorize those words and phrases, then check if they’re included in the discourses or found in the texts on monastic training. If they’re not included in the discourses or found in the texts on monastic training, you should draw the conclusion: ‘Clearly this is not the word of the Buddha. It has been incorrectly memorized by that mendicant.’ And so you should reject it. If they are included in the discourses or found in the texts on monastic training, you should draw the conclusion: ‘Clearly this is the word of the Buddha. It has been correctly memorized by that mendicant.’ You should remember it. This is the first great reference.
Take another mendicant who says: ‘In such-and-such monastery lives a Saṅgha with seniors and leaders. I’ve heard and learned this in the presence of that Saṅgha: this is the teaching, this is the training, this is the Teacher’s instruction.’ You should neither approve nor dismiss that mendicant’s statement. Instead, you should carefully memorize those words and phrases, then check if they’re included in the discourses or found in the texts on monastic training. If they’re not included in the discourses or found in the texts on monastic training, you should draw the conclusion: ‘Clearly this is not the word of the Buddha. It has been incorrectly memorized by that Saṅgha.’ And so you should reject it. If they are included in the discourses or found in the texts on monastic training, you should draw the conclusion: ‘Clearly this is the word of the Buddha. It has been correctly memorized by that Saṅgha.’ You should remember it. This is the second great reference.
Take another mendicant who says: ‘In such-and-such monastery there are several senior mendicants who are very learned, knowledgeable in the scriptures, who have memorized the teachings, the texts on monastic training, and the outlines. I’ve heard and learned this in the presence of those senior mendicants: this is the teaching, this is the training, this is the Teacher’s instruction.’ You should neither approve nor dismiss that mendicant’s statement. Instead, you should carefully memorize those words and phrases, then check if they’re included in the discourses or found in the texts on monastic training. If they’re not included in the discourses or found in the texts on monastic training, you should draw the conclusion: ‘Clearly this is not the word of the Buddha. It has not been correctly memorized by those senior mendicants.’ And so you should reject it. If they are included in the discourses and found in the texts on monastic training, you should draw the conclusion: ‘Clearly this is the word of the Buddha. It has been correctly memorized by those senior mendicants.’ You should remember it. This is the third great reference.
Take another mendicant who says: ‘In such-and-such monastery there is a single senior mendicant who is very learned and knowledgeable in the scriptures, who has memorized the teachings, the texts on monastic training, and the outlines. I’ve heard and learned this in the presence of that senior mendicant: this is the teaching, this is the training, this is the Teacher’s instruction.’ You should neither approve nor dismiss that mendicant’s statement. Instead, you should carefully memorize those words and phrases, then check if they’re included in the discourses or found in the texts on monastic training. If they’re not included in the discourses or found in the texts on monastic training, you should draw the conclusion: ‘Clearly this is not the word of the Buddha. It has been incorrectly memorized by that senior mendicant.’ And so you should reject it. If they are included in the discourses and found in the texts on monastic training, you should draw the conclusion: ‘Clearly this is the word of the Buddha. It has been correctly memorized by that senior mendicant.’ You should remember it. This is the fourth great reference.
These are the four great references. You should remember them.”
2 Likes
Some TB lineages are based on family or clan lines like the Sakya school’s Khon family lineage, but most are not. Some are based on found reincarnations, like the Dalai Lama or the Karmapas (these two are almost always bhiksus).
Others are just lay teacher disciple lineages. This is more common in certain schools, for example, in Nyingma or Kagyu.
4 Likes
Some but not all have blood relations. It is not a literal lineage but a lineage in the sense of transmission from a teacher to a student.I think you may have taken lineage quite literally. If I say of the Kagyu or Gelug lineage it doesnt mean that I have any blood relations to any monks or whatnots its just that my teachers are from this school of teaching and of lineage between teacher and student in that school that can be traced back to the founder then to the Buddha.
In the tibetan tradition it is common to say lineage of this or that because there are 5 different buddhist sects etc afaik. It is complicated because there are ngagpas or lamas and presence of non monastic teachers which can be another topic but unfortunately there are no lamas or ngagpas here that we can talk to since this is mainly an ebt forum.
If we take it in a theravadan way. Some can claim a lineage of thai forest ordained by this thai forest monk taught by thjs teacher that can be traced back to Ajahn Mun Bhuridatto. Ajahn Mun Bhuridatto’s lineage would then be traced back to the Buddha so on and so forth. So when someone says that their lineage is of thai forest it doesnt mean that they have a father or blood relations to a thai forest monk.With the qualifier of course that in theravadan buddhism I do not know of a lama or ngagpa counterparts.
2 Likes
I attended my local Shambhala center on and off for several years and I never heard the Vinaya mentioned or any kind of Buddhist ethics that I recall.
The local folks were nice, but I never felt totally comfortable with the guru worship of both Trungpa and his son. The atmosphere was most definitely cultish.
2 Likes
The way I’m accustomed to thinking of the word “lineage” in the context of Buddhism, is in the sense of “Ordination lineage”. Meaning, an unbroken line of formally-ordained Buddhist monastics (who are no longer laypeople), all the way back to the Buddha. It implies the Ordinations were all formally done in the correct procedure as explained in the Dhamma and Vinaya, with all qualifications checked and met. Plus, the deal is that they agree to strive to attain Nibbana, and to be bound by Vinaya. The Vinaya is the “rules of the game”, as it were.
You can’t really apply a Theravada understanding of Buddhism to Tibetan Buddhism. It’s a very different beast. This is because of many different factors, such as culture, geography, when and how Buddhism was transmitted to Tibet (it was rather late), and tantra.
There have always been two somewhat conflicting traditions of Buddhism in Tibet. You had the monastic tradition, which was largely inherited from Nalanda monastery, and the tantric tradition, which has always had a very large number of lay teachers and practitioners. So, on the one hand you had Atisha, a monk, who helped solidify the monastic tradition, and then later Tsongkhapa, who reformed it. On the other hand you had people like Marpa Lotsawa and Milarepa, who were laymen, and are responsible for one of the major tantric lineages. Gampopa, a monk, fused these two traditions and created the Kagyu tradition. This is a very simplistic explanation, but I think it’s good enough for this discussion.
Tantra was assimilated in all monastic traditions eventually, but lay tantric practitioners never disappeared and continued to be very influential. For example, there is a kind of practitioner called a ngagpa in Tibetan. They are common, even today. They are something like tantric Buddhist shaman, and so play several roles in Tibetan society. They are astrologers, doctors, exorcists, and meditators, etc.
Even in Chinese Chan, Korean Soen, and Japanese Zen there is the idea of “lineage” that isn’t related to ordination. This is the whole idea of the “Zen Patriarch.” In those traditions they believe there was a direct mind-to-mind transmission of the Chan teachings that starts with the Buddha, went to Mahakasyapa, I believe, eventually was received by Bodhidharma (Daruma), who brought it to China.
Then it passed through generations of Chinese monks and was brought to Korea and Japan.
10 Likes
To this I would add “you’ve got an accountability nightmare”, when a bunch of sexual predation enters the picture, since it’s not obvious or clear as to which leaders, etc, are accountable to Vinaya, if any (in this case, none; you effectively have a bunch of foxes in charge of the henhouse, it seems). Even if some leader is accountable to Vinaya, good luck reading that Vinaya in Sindhi, in a hard-to-obtain, not-online copyrighted book.
2 Likes
Is it fair to apply an Early Buddhist understanding? If not, then in what way is Tibetan Buddhism “Buddhism”?
1 Like
The use of the term “Buddhism” is indeed a stretch. We certainly can’t call any Tibetan tradition “Dhamma Vinaya” (the Buddha’s own labelling of his own religion), who is not accountable to Vinaya.
Perhaps we can invent a new word to describe them, like “Buddhesque”? This would indicate the non-accountability to the Vinaya.
3 Likes
Before we get too carried away mocking other Buddhist traditions it might be good to remember that sexual misconduct, and sexual abuse perpetrated by monks happens in Theravada communities around the world, regardless of Vinaya. And they get away with it.
10 Likes