Page 2 of 2

Re: Theravadan view on Vajrayana Gurus?

Posted: Sat Oct 15, 2011 9:30 pm
by tiltbillings
TMingyur wrote: . . .To provide occasion for effort.
Which you have yet to make.
tiltbillings wrote: And guru yoga? You use this term without explaining it. It is a practice that most people on this forum are not going to have a clue as to what it is. What purpose is served here by trying to tie one unexplained thing to another unexplained thing?
The purpose was to playfully interact with the OP of this thread. Linguistic practices. The difference between Theravada and Vajrayana in the context of the practitioners is strongly exaggerated ... from my perspective.

But there is no doubt that the linguistic practices based on the suttas do not comply with those of vajrayana.
You bring in vajrayana "guru yoga" without even a hint of explanation from you as to what "guru yoga" means, so whatever "playfulness" is simply lost in obfuscation.

Re: Theravadan view on Vajrayana Gurus?

Posted: Sat Oct 15, 2011 11:52 pm
by Alex123
PaulD wrote:As stated in the subject heading.

This was one of many reasons that I didn't pursue Tibetan Buddhism even though the first or one of the first books on Buddhism that I've read was Tibetan.
Another was Ngöndro (inner preliminaries) requirement (do 400,000 ritual acts before even becoming a student). One could die before completing four different rituals 100,000 repetitions each. I would perfectly understand it if the requirement to be a student would be to learn the basics (such as MMK or Chandrakirti's work) by heart so as to be prepared and not bother the teacher with basic questions, but these ritual acts?

IMHO the Sutta-Vinaya is the final teacher. Ultimately path is to be personally walked and there will not be a nanny to save you. Teachers are not infallible, and if you can do your own research (and read lots of good books) the need for one can be less needed.

Re: Theravadan view on Vajrayana Gurus?

Posted: Sun Oct 16, 2011 4:19 am
by ground
Alex123 wrote:IMHO the Sutta-Vinaya is the final teacher.
What if there is a text - be it "Sutta-Vinaya" or some other - and one does not get to the essence of it, one does not understand - neither conceptually nor non-conceptually - the "message" implied. But if once after having been taught by some person - not necessarily the same text - this text "all of a sudden" delivers a message?
What or who then may be validly called "final teacher"?

Kind regards

Re: Theravadan view on Vajrayana Gurus?

Posted: Mon Oct 17, 2011 7:21 pm
by Alex123
TMingyur wrote:
Alex123 wrote:IMHO the Sutta-Vinaya is the final teacher.
What if there is a text - be it "Sutta-Vinaya" or some other - and one does not get to the essence of it, one does not understand - neither conceptually nor non-conceptually - the "message" implied. But if once after having been taught by some person - not necessarily the same text - this text "all of a sudden" delivers a message?
What or who then may be validly called "final teacher"?

Kind regards
In that case, if the teacher is faithful to the Suttas, I have no problem. But teacher just explains the Buddha Dhamma, s/he shouldn't create a new one.

With best wishes,

Alex

Re: Theravadan view on Vajrayana Gurus?

Posted: Wed Oct 19, 2011 4:10 am
by Sylvester
TMingyur wrote:If I may add my neither-Theravada-nor-Vajrayana view?

The Buddha is my vajrayana guru.

Why is this?
He who sees Dhamma, Vakkali, sees me; he who sees me sees Dhamma. Truly seeing Dhamma, one sees me; seeing me one sees Dhamma."

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .wlsh.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

This is the context I am practicing guru yoga.


Kind regards

At the risk of sounding really irreverant, the context of the Buddha's utterance to Ven Vakkali would reveal that there is really nothing quite so vajraya-nish about it. The Commentaries inform us that Vakkali ordained because he was "in love"/"in lust" with the Buddha, and hoped that his monastic status would afford him the proximity to constantly gaze at the Buddha.

I think the antidote offered by the Buddha in that passage disavows any identification or even appropriation of the perception of the Buddha by Ven Vakkali. How could such a strategy be a sound basis for guru yoga of any sort?

Re: Theravadan view on Vajrayana Gurus?

Posted: Wed Oct 19, 2011 5:07 am
by ground
Sylvester wrote:I think the antidote offered by the Buddha in that passage disavows any identification or even appropriation of the perception of the Buddha by Ven Vakkali. How could such a strategy be a sound basis for guru yoga of any sort?
Your "any sort" seems to exclude some sorts in the first place.


Kind regards

Re: Theravadan view on Vajrayana Gurus?

Posted: Sun Oct 23, 2011 10:31 pm
by Goedert
It is difficult to say something, but emptiness have to be mixed with interdependente phenomena.

So some teachings or teachers that rely too much on emptiness... one should be carefull... because one can fall in amoralism or absolutism... being an incorrigeable person of wrong view such as Makkali Gosala, Sanjaya, and others.

The eighth demonic army is dangerous.