Manopubbangama wrote: ↑
Tue Feb 26, 2019 8:32 am
If you feel like contributing to the actual thread regarding your experiences in tantra we'd love to here it, if not, I fail to see further value-add here....were you involved in these practices? Were you a tantric-consort to an elderly, vajra-weilding Tibetan gentleman?
I have little knowledge and actually zero interest in Tibetan Vajrayana and its Western offspring -- maybe a good reason for me to neither write about it nor have too deep an opinion on it?
This, of course, seems not to stop you at all.
It is more than obvious, that you know laughingly little of what you talk about, even though you bristle with conviction; this is actually the sign of a fanatic, instead of somebody who has explicated and thought hard about something before internalizing the useful and discarding the not useful (this is what happens during Dhamma and all other study: critical exegesis).
This is starting with the obvious impossibility that I could be personally involved in a tantric coupling with another man (as the philosophy has from its beginnings been based on complementary yab/yum or yin/yang, male and female energies; see my other topics on early Vajrayana and esoteric Theravada in Maritime Southeast Asia... a hint: both geographically and philosophically, the distance is great).
Of course, on the chance that you still would wish to engage constructively with this thread (started by yourself, was it not?), try reading a differentiated, maybe even (social) sciences-grounded view on the matter, like Gayley, Holly - Revisiting the “Secret Consort” (gsang yum) in Tibetan Buddhism
Such texts are easy to find and frankly looking for them on Google is still much preferable to your researching of toxic rap slang.
This article revisits the question, first introduced by feminist scholars in the mid-1990s, about whether sexual practices within Buddhist tantra (heterosexually conceived) are empowering or exploitative to women.
The purpose here is to complicate this question, given the different geographic settings and cultural contexts in which consort relationships have been embedded—from eastern Tibet to North America—and to nuance our understanding of the potential and pitfalls of sexuality in tantric contexts.
To do so, I query the dynamics of secrecy and sexuality in tantric practice, examining twentieth century examples of female practitioners of Tibetan Buddhism who have participated in such relationships and thereby highlighting the localized ways that the “secret consort” (gsang yum) has been invoked as a social role.
This issue is especially relevant today in light of the global #MeToo movement and recent disclosures of sexual improprieties and alleged abuse involving Tibetan teachers at the head of Buddhist communities in Europe and North America. For this reason, to conclude, I discuss shifting perspectives on sexuality as Buddhist tantra has spread beyond Asia and draw attention to current voices calling for greater transparency and community accountability.
Already by 1993, when a group of twenty-two western Buddhist teachers from various traditions (Tibetan, Zen, Theravāda) gathered to meet with His Holiness the Dalai Lama in Dharamsala, the topic of misconduct among Buddhist teachers was a significant issue. Under the rubric of “Teachers and Ethics,”questions were raised about the issue of secrecy if students witnessed or experienced misconduct by Buddhist teachers. The Dalai Lama responded by suggesting that it is “worthwhile to publicize these things”in order to make “a clear distinction [between] what is true Buddhist teachings [and] this individual's behavior;”otherwise it is "very harmful to the Buddhadharma.” Yet he admitted that the samaya vow complicates how to handle this since, according to its commitments, one should never disparage the teacher.
I think so, it is again (!) important to pronounce the difference between Theravada as being part of "Buddhism" and the breaking of moral values by practitioners of other "Buddhist" schools.
Your constant intermingling of them confers the idea that either Theravada Sila is a general yardstick for all "Buddhist" morals, or that all "Buddhists" are likely to in the same way perpetrate sexual harassment due to their "Buddhist" beliefs which include 'consorts'. Both ideas would be fallacies and by confounding Theravada with Vajrayana you confuse any discussion possible.
The teaching is a lake with shores of ethics, unclouded, praised by the fine to the good.
There the knowledgeable go to bathe, and cross to the far shore without getting wet.