this is the only place those of us who have differing ideas can go to sort things through. clearly some have deep devotion to CTR: i was not around in the day. nor am i particularly impressed w. the new students showing up. i’m torn about SMR even though i have taken samaya vows w. him. if i didnt take samaya seriously, there would be no discussion or consideration on my part.

it’s the easy way out to simply catagorize people. engaging with the complexities takes far more insight, patience, exertion, discipline, compassion and a willingness to see conflict as a tool of transformation.

I expect that the emphasis in the SI sangha on the Shambhala terma and the Scorpion Seal path and the lack of attention by SMR to Kagyu practices is a part of the reason. Three year retreat is not going to be something that many can do — but to fill 12 to 16 positions every five years would require several hundred new Vajrayogini practioners over the same time period (a small percentage of whom would be inspired to do the three year retreat).

It’s a shame.

I don’t think that there is a problem with any of this — for anyone who is practicing with the right view (i.e. a non-dogmatic view — or one where when you experience fixed mind you realize that ego hasn’t made any “progress” in defeating ego — and it breaks your heart).

I worry about some who post on this site who have such fixed views — and use this forum as a feedback loop to strengthen their opinions. And the anonymous juvenile posts on some of the other threads are stupid as well. It is a shame because with a soft, open approach and a willingness to have your opinions change there is a lot that could be shared here in the way of genuine ideas.

The comment I wish to make at this time is that I don’t believe that one can really, truly understand and and feel the subtlety, heart, intelligence and skillful means of the Sakyong without engaging in the Primordial Rigden Ngondro.

I completed the Kagyu Ngondro 20 years ago and finished half of my Vajrayogini practice before making a detour for a number of years to study with Khandro Rinpoche. I really wasn’t connecting to the Sakyong or Werma practice at the time and felt a bit confused about my path, but when I received the Rigden ngondro and completed it, I felt that I was back home.

I know many other students of Trungpa Rinpoche who have similar appreciation for this powerful practice and feel the indivisibility of the father and son gurus. It puts the -she into the Ashe, touching the wheels of the vision of enlightened society down onto the ground. I have practiced 3 different ngondros and their sadhanas, and for me, this is by far the most poignant, demanding. pragmatic and transformative practice I’ve ever engaged with.

Trungpa Rinpoche said, “If you want to understand my mind, practice the Werma Sadhana”. Similarly, if you wish to know the Sakyong, do the Rigden Ngondro—you may see–as many of us have–that what he did is so very good and brilliant. It’s nothing less than a direct uplink to the Vidyadhara and his vision of Shambhala.

I’m not saying this would end criticism of the Sakyong, but I am saying that without having this experience, you will not know the Sakyong; your conclusions will fall far short of a deep and comprehensive understanding of what he is accomplishing.

If you were to do it, I am quite certain you’d be deeply touched and inspired. I’m not saying it would change everything, but I suspect that there would be a marked de-escalation of *certainty* about the Sakyong’s purported mis-steps.

As the inestimable Dorje Dradul said on Shambhala Day 1981:
“We need further effort. We cannot expect that because what we are doing is right, therefore, we have the right to have a red carpet unfolded for us. In fact, if we study the histories of past warriors, we find that the great warriors suffered enormously because of their diligence, because of their righteousness, and because of their virtue. it was not that they were wicked, and therefore, they were punished; they suffered because they were wonderful. The more profound their understanding, the more the attacks against them were, the more sharp and precise.”

This could be regarding you and me…..it definitely is in regard to the Sakyong. Many of us know this, and our experience deserves being examined and considered as being as real and true as you feel yours is.

Cheerio,
Alan Anderson

yes Ashoka is quite a force isn’t he………………interesting debates……….his words have turned my mind up and down but there still needs to be more discussion happening………….Gordon Kidd has posted on another thread a query about doing stuff to change things…………yes we all do stuff…………we all change things in our own way………….part of of doing stuff is also getting into debates about politics/life/religion life as we know it Jim…………….you know when I lived in Halifax there was talk about having
a sort of Hyde Park corner where you could just spout off about things………I thought that was a really good idea…………been to Hyde Park Speakers corner myself -the quality of the speakers there was immense for example got to hear Lord Soper who was at the time the head of the Methodist church who debated openly with people in the crowd. At one point thought not much of the corner but when living with an Iraqi student in London he told me he was astounded by what was occuring there –if he ever tried to speak like that in Iraq he would have been arrested. London you meet so many different nationalities there – they remind you of the freedoms you have in the West to just delight in conversation, debate for its own sake…………..so that at times you might arrive at some consensus/sharing of views…………I hope with have some more honchos visiting this site……….they seem a trite mute at the moment …..more glorious debates to happen hopefully

best

rita ashworth
stockport uk

I agree I think we can accommodate non-Buddhist practice and view within the centers and Shambhala. especially if the goal for those folks is to be calmer, get their lives more together, etc. sounds very possible to me without having people adopt a view of egolessness or emptiness or Buddhist views particularly. and it doesn’t require any kind of agenda of eventually converting people.

all I think we are talking about on this site is that there is room/paths created for people who dont want to become Buddhists again……………..dunno I like the idea of CTR delegs if people wish to discuss Trungpa’s teachings in more depth than is possible within SI at the present time I dont see that there is a problem with that……..doesnt mean you will not mix with other delegs at times………and also inspire them as well…….learnt a lot from Marks expostion of Vajra Politics above…..
……..as to becoming fixated on terms etc, etc ———–yes you can do that but study also requires that you examine a text aswell ———people do that in literature, plays, all forms of western/eastern study……..it helps people to really understand/comprehend the words used…………until maybe eventually you get a spontaneous hit on something in poetry ………felt that myself after reading lots of GInsbergs and Kerouacs poetry…………….fixation maybe in a psychological sense means that you are hanging on to your viewpoint when the world just isn’t that way……..if you(Ashoka) mean fixation in this sense then I could agree with you here.

………..yes people are becoming more attracted to Buddhism when I go in my local supermarket………there are Buddhas on the shelves………maybe they are attracted to the calmness of the form but when they go to a centre I think what attracts people is the possibility that through meditation they could come to some new appreciation of their minds and their life and hopefully get things more together……..dont think they want to become Buddhists though………..they just want that human connection of meditation…………..why not devise more ways of allowing more people to do that within SI…………and hopefully go further without the Shambhala Buddhism stamp…………..I think its possible to do that.

best

Rita Ashworth

So rather than a black or white “on the bus” / “off the bus” mentality, there is an opportunity and a venue to express that connection. A middle ground of sorts.

I can completely understand when people can’t connect with the Sakyong, or feel like they’ve been taken out of their comfort zone and it’s not helpful for them on their path. But when it becomes a self-righteous thing where it’s about this idea that the Vidyadhara is being pushed out the door or that the Sakyong “has fallen far from the tree,” that is when I start to feel like reality is being bent to fit people’s agenda. Sorry but that’s just how I see it, personally. I mean, don’t you have a little more faith in the magic of the lineage than this?

There are just, so many wounds here, with all of this… I understand this site, and there are some really smart people writing articles around here. I just feel like maybe there’s no spine, no drala to it. That’s all. That “vague golden days” thing was not a crack at anybody, or sarcasm… it was just a reaction to this idea that people practicing in the 70s and 80s either A) were manifesting bodhichitta more clearly than students today or B) really ever knew what was going on other than how overjoyed they were to be in the presence of a mahasiddha. I’m a child of this sangha. Y’all had your problems my man. Our generation does too, without a doubt… but anyway. I just think it’s a shame that some people feel like they have to meet in small rooms as little “CTR” delegs because they’re so upset at every little tiny minutae change that happens; as if CTR wanted everything preserved in glass after he died. What a stuffy, grey idea… I think you should all come hang out and meet the new students and humble yourselves enough to display what little you understand of the dharma so that we might benefit from it without trying to convince everyone that they’re going to go off the deep end for trying to calm their minds down a little bit. Nobody gets any of this stuff, so why not cheer up and let go? My 2 cents. Not flaming you guys…I’m like you, I can’t help but pretend that my discursive conceptual blah blah blah is important enough to be written down on the internet, that’s all.

RE back in these vague golden days. This is sarcasm. It doesn’t help. The job of the editors of this site is, for blog posts (not for comments – those are your own), to spot and remove any such twists or digs, little pops of aggression. So we can all straighten up.

Re “Vajrayana gone politics” as a description of Shambhala, this should be familiar to students of “Political Consciousness” and the related “Political Treatise”, of the Vajra Politics classes that used to be held at seminary, of the Druk Sakyong’s motivation for Shambhala Vision, and hopefully of your/my own motivation. To me this means that you’re in the world with helping hands, bull and self transcended. Buddhism’s the bull. It doesn’t mean you _reject_ the bull – you go further. It also means that the details of the phenomenality of this world and, oh, what shall we call it – rigpa, let’s say – are not two. It’s not just that individual enlightenment is possible, but that societal enlightenment is possible, and that this can reach into every detail and gut of this economic/financial/environmental/political etc world.

The idea of “buddhadharma without credentials” is very applicable here. That’s a buddhist way of saying that you can let go your fixation on props that keep you from direct experience, including buddhist props – which lets you realize and teach buddhadharma much better, in a completely fresh and to-the-person way. “Shambhala without buddhist credentials” is saying the same thing, fresh and to this 21st century world. Buddhists can appreciate Shambhala and weave delightful commentaries about it using their Buddhist or Dzogchen or whatever language, but Shambhala does not inherently need this – it has its own language (not that that language journey is complete) – and yogins of other practicing spiritual traditions could also elaborate using their languages. The same could be said for national/cultural accoutrements: Shambhala does not inherently belong to Tibet, or to England.

Such a vision of Shambhala was not realized in the Druk Sakyong’s lifetime: that’s why he stipulated in his will that he be cremated rather than buried in the ground (as a blessing to the land). The fact that 99% of Shambhala subjects were Buddhists shows that back then was early days, and today may be even earlier days. We, especially we Buddhists, have to do better. Diana Mukpo recounts in her book that when she asked CTR what he would think of having a non-buddhist son, who was, say, a Christian, he replied that he would want him to be the best possible Christian he could be. That’s the Druk Sakyong’s vision of Shambhala world. You don’t have to be a Buddhist to see yourself as the Rigden King. Can you imagine a non-Buddhist Sakyong? Such an eventuality would be to the greater glory of Shambhala.