Bad News About Dharma

Dzongsar Khyentse Rinpoche

Never think that you will be able to settle your life down by practicing the dharma. The dharma is not therapy.
In fact, it is just the opposite.
The purpose of the dharma is to really stir up your life.
It is meant to turn your life upside down.
If that is what you asked for, why complain?
If it is not turning your life upside down, on the other hand, the dharma is not working.
That kind of dharma is just another one of these New Age methods;
the dharma should really disturb you. – Dzongsar Khyentse Rinpoche

25Comments

Add yours

1

Joanne on July 19, 2014 at 1:15 pm
Reply

I struggle with this one a lot. On one hand, yes, there has to be some considerable discomfort involved in true Dharma practice. One friend at the monastery where I worked said that Dharma was like being led as far over the edge as possible without falling in. However, I personally let it go too far with my own practice and would have done better to have backed off earlier. My practice turned into a complete torture, but I kept persevering and persevering and that did me no good at all. The years of torture left lasting scars, trauma and anxiety that I still struggle with. I also lost sight of my own intuition and ability to judge. I lost trust in myself.

So it’s difficult I think. Sometimes we definitely have to go into those hard, scary places. But sometimes we need to know when to back off. We can follow the lama in absolute, blind trust over precipices and chasms– we can trust that he/she knows when we should persevere and when to back off– or we can cultivate in ourselves some means, some skill-set for judging these things for ourselves. I think there has to be a little of both; we have to trust ourselves as well as the lama. What do people think?

I also know that DKR’s statement and the belief system that it embodies can be very dangerous in the hands of the wrong lama. It could be like telling someone to drink poison because they need to feel sick. Our psychological make-up has healthy signals and symptoms that we need to pay attention to. In cults, people are taught to ignore so many signals from their healthy selves, taught to denigrate those signals.
- 2
  
  dharmaanarchist on July 21, 2014 at 8:52 am
  Reply
  
  Yes, but dharma does not CREATE this discomfort, it only brings certain facts of life into perspective that we usually ignore, it’s not the dhamra that stirs up life but the removal of self-deception.
  
  And in that respect it has similarities to a good psychotherapy.
- 3
  
  tenpel on July 21, 2014 at 9:43 am
  Reply
  
  I think what Rinpoche is focusing on and stressing is a side of the Dharma that is less seen or stressed. The Dharma can be a deep inspiration, bringing joy, ease and release. On the other hand, the Dharma is contrary to the views of the world and oneself. The Dharma attacks and undermines the delusions and in that sense it kicks out people’s wrong projections, and clinging. In that sense it is disturbing, threatening to the own views, ego etc.
  
  However, some people are rather insecure, weak and have a low self-esteem. They might wish to feel more secure, safe and to have good and cosy feelings … but the Dharma questions, attacks and is meant to question and undermine all of those illusions, including the provisional delusions which a mentally rather weak person might need in order to feel some ground under their feet or to have a feeling of security and safety. It is up to the person and his/her responsibility to understand where he/she is and not to take medicine that is too strong or unsuitable at a given time. However, the Dharma is meant to attack the ego, to attack the egoistic ways of thinking etc. and as a result of its application or just even hearing it you loose grip to the things you cling, it undermines all wishes to have a somewhat pleasant and secure samsaric life. There is no security, no safety, there is no basis for any grip that is stable. This loosing ground is not necessarily pleasant; for some it feels threatening for some as a release. Actual, its a good sign that Dharma is working! (At least this is how I understand this.)
  
  In the West nowadays Buddhism seems to be misunderstood as a religion that serves to have good feelings, to feel better and to have a more stable, joyful life. But Buddhism is meant to wake up. When the Buddha in a former life as a Bodhisattva turned the mind of a cannibal to the Dharma, the cannibal said: “Hearing the Dharma, I am totally confused. Now I turn my mind towards the Dharma.” So, even according to the scriptures, the Dharma can be a condition that incites confusion, disturbances and uncomfortable feelings.
  
  Thubten Choedroen (USA) also says that it is wrong to expect that you feel only good with the Dharma because the Dharma is meant to attack the ego thinking and the ego doesn’t like that.
  
  However, it is important to be gentle to oneself and to understand oneself in order to be able to decide what one currently really needs. If a person needs stabilization (or a healthier, stronger ego) therapy might be very useful. If a person has a healthy and strong ego and aims to go beyond Samsara, therapy would be the wrong means but the Dharma would be the way. If the latter person is thoroughly disturbed and looses the grip to the habituated ways of thinking, grasping and viewing things, that person is strong enough to bear it.
- 4
  
  tenpel on July 21, 2014 at 9:54 am
  Reply
  
  My practice turned into a complete torture, but I kept persevering and persevering and that did me no good at all. The years of torture left lasting scars, trauma and anxiety that I still struggle with. I also lost sight of my own intuition and ability to judge. I lost trust in myself.
  
  So it’s difficult I think. Sometimes we definitely have to go into those hard, scary places
  
  This is very sad! What you write rather sounds like that the Dharma was abused to manipulate you. The Dharma is no torture but it can be abused and distorted to undermine people’s self-esteem, to make them dependent, to exploit others for one’s own needs. Dharma doesn’t require to “follow the lama in absolute, blind trust over precipices and chasms” – actual, this is already a distortion of the Dharma(!). The Dharma asks you to judge things and to have the three qualities of a student: 1) intelligence in order to be able to discriminate wrong from correct teachings, 2) a non-partisan attitude where you not take sides, 3) diligence. If you have this you can trust yourself and your own judgements. Tsongkhapa says without these qualities you are not a suitable vessel for the Mahayana Dharma.
  
  Yes, as in every religion, Buddhism can be exploited for the ego purposes of the lama, the student and the group members and then it becomes extremely dangerous. But Rinpoche here stresses another point that is important to consider and not meant to justify those poisoned Dharma teachings and manipulations of misleading gurus and the self-manipulations and misinformation of their misled disciples.
  - 5
    
    dharmaanarchist on July 21, 2014 at 1:05 pm
    Reply
    
    But it can also accidently go wrong simply if you misunderstand valid teachings given by a qualified teacher due to your own neurotic assumptions and preoccupations.
    - 6
      
      Adamo on July 21, 2014 at 7:39 pm
      Reply
      
      @dharmaanarchist: Do exlude any failure by the side of the lama, and do you see 100% rsponsibility on the side of the student ?
      - 7
        
        dharmaanarchist on July 21, 2014 at 9:55 pm
        Reply
        
        To act responsibly you have to have knowledge in the first place.
        
        Nearly all tantric buddhist gurus are Tibetan, not westerners, and one such qualified lama told me outright, that he doesn know much about the the psychological problems stuff. He didn’t grow up around it and he was never affected. He (and the organisation he teaches in) is not involving western spiritual seekers in the full program of Tibetan buddhism randomly. For example you have to have the teachers specific permission to start with preliminary practices and he does not always give it. Now I guess that in a lot of cases these “accidents” happen because the traditionally educated Tibetan lama has not the means and knowledge to handle the typical western type of neurosis, which in it’s inner mechanics is apparently different from the form commonly found among Tibetans..
        
        Now as with the new students stumbling into vajrayana, of course they can not have this knowledge. There are a few books on the topic, for example one by Alex Berzin. But if you are very neurotic and prone to the psychological phenomenon of transferrence and projection, as well as a tendency to misinterpret the dharma in a certain twisted way because you lack self esteem, this is something that will be very hard for the person to correct him- or herself to find a healthy relationship to a traditional guru.
        
        .
        
        8
        
        dharmaanarchist on July 21, 2014 at 10:02 pm
        Reply
        
        Oh, and the question whose failure this is?
        
        I guess in a lot of cases it’s noones failure really but an accident. Neither the traditionally educated Tibetan teacher nor the new western student with psychological hangups really has the means to handle this in a satisfactory way.
        
        9
        
        Joanne on July 21, 2014 at 11:05 pm
        
        I don’t think this subject is a matter of where to dish out blame. I’d rather see some acknowledgement on the parts of both students and teachers that caution is needed– on both sides! East meeting West is a challenge– and I think people fail to really see that.
        
        And Tenzin, I responded the way that I did because my experience, particularly within the Dzogchen tradition, was that lamas would act in ways that were supposed to help students work on themselves– like insulting them or giving peculiar, enigmatic responses to questions. Because I myself had neurotic habits of self-torture and I lacked boundaries, I didn’t know how to set boundaries on how much I could endure, how many insults I could take for example,– so I pushed too hard and harmed myself. Since leaving mainstream dharma centers, I’ve found that Dharma itself, just pure Dharma, has just the right balance of safety and difficulty. It’s not about feeling good, most of the time I don’t– but it’s about moving forward instead of spinning around, beating myself up and getting nowhere. I think Dharma is beyond the cultural confusion and so the hardship there is not going to harm. Lamas don’t need to send neurotic students to therapists. They simply need to provide a safe, strong foundation of Dharma, (instead of giving them an initiation on their first visit for example.)
10

Joanne on July 19, 2014 at 1:38 pm
Reply

For example, one of my main Kagyu lamas was never very nice to me. He would frequently brush me aside or fail to answer my questions or ignore me. In a normal situation, I would have simply decided that this person was not a person I could have a friendship with and I would have simply sought other company. No big deal. But because he was a lama, I took every slight and offense from him as a profound teaching and I kept coming back for more– the result was that I became very confused! And in the end, his slights turned into rages and I became a suicidal mess. I would have saved myself years of torment if I had simply been open to my wiser self and stayed clear of this lama. So I still remain very wary of statements such as that one by DKR!
- 11
  
  Adamo on July 20, 2014 at 4:55 pm
  Reply
  
  I agree in general with DKR. But then: Every kind of abuse is the story of the victim alone, if you use his way of logics. The Lama is always right, since he presents the Dharma.
  
  When I got to realize, that some of this Rinpoches are so very human, with regards to their little tendecies to apply “crazy wisdom mastery” towards some of their students.
  
  For me : Dharma belongs to those who practice it, rather to those with a title and limitless “chuzpe” instead.
  
  A western student, who is a little more undeceived, seems to be a less attractive target for some kind of Lamas, there seems a strong conviction that a student has to be easily manipulated. It is like a question to have the absolute power or not.
  
  I dont think, that the Buddha has taught like this!
- 12
  
  dharmaanarchist on July 21, 2014 at 9:06 am
  Reply
  
  This kind of guru-disciple relationship (Milarepa tough type) is only for 100% mentally stable people who willingly and knowing want to commit to such a relationship.
  
  You entered something in that direction without being ready for it, you developted an unhealthy emotional dependency, you felt rejected and of course it went totally wrong.
  Probably you fell into what in psychology is called transferrence. This can get very destructive if it’s not worked with.
  
  Now how could this be prevented? Firstly, lamas should generally assume a mahayana kalyanamitra attitude towards western students and only engage in a guru-disciple relationship with people who are hand picked and capable of handling it.
  
  And secondly, disciples should be discouraged to make themselves emotionally dependent of the teacher.
  - 13
    
    tenpel on July 21, 2014 at 10:10 am
    Reply
    
    Yes Milarepa and Naropa were mature, stable had abundant merits etc. Also they didn’t step in into those relationships without sober checking the lama, and they were able and consequent in checking their teachers (Marpa/Tilopa). However, the abusive lamas seem to like to stress those stories in order to manipulate their students not paying attention to the facts that they are not like Tilopa or Marpa and their students are not like Naropa or Milarepa … What a delusion and what pride and ignorance!
    
    What ever Joanne entered, the question is how much she was prepared and how much she was (allowed to be) manipulated by the teacher, group with distortions of the Dharma. I don’t know the details … Misleading teachers and their manipulated students (groups) can make a mess of true spiritual seekers – you find this already in the story of Angulimala.
    
    I agree that teachers (as well as students) should see people who explain the Dharma for the first years just as friends on the path. Actually, this is what the Dalai Lama stressed different times. Only if you have enough knowledge and the qualities of a suitable student of the Mahayana Dharma you should start to consider a guru-disciple relationship …
    
    Moreover, I think instead of stressing the guru in the West, Buddha nature, Metta (especially cultivating love for oneself), and the qualities of a student s/he should cultivate should be stressed. Here what Tsongkhapa says about the latter. If people just take this to mind, reflect and understand it and if they put this advice into practice they would be quite protected but sadly most teachers don’t stress these points and most students don’t study or reflect these qualities a suitable student should have …
    
    The defining characteristics of the student who relies upon the teacher
    
    Aryadeva states in his Four Hundred Stanzas (Catuh-sataka):
    
    “It is said that one who is non-partisan, intelligent, and diligent
    Is a vessel for listening to the teachings.
    The good qualities of the instructor do not appear otherwise
    Nor do those of fellow listeners.”
    
    Aryadeva says that one who is endowed with the three qualities is suitable to listen to the teachings. He also says that if you have all these qualities, the good qualities of one who instructs you in the teachings will appear as good qualities, not as faults. In addition, he says that to such a fully qualified person the good qualities of fellow listeners will also appear as good qualities and not as faults.
    
    It is stated in Candrakirti’s commentary that if you, the listener, do not have all these defining characteristics of a suitable recipient of the teachings, then the influence of your own faults will cause even an extremely pure teacher who instructs you in the teachings to appear to have faults. Furthermore, you will consider the faults of the one who explains the teachings to be good qualities. Therefore, although you might find a teacher who has all the defining characteristics, it may be difficult to recognize their presence.
    
    Thus, it is necessary for the disciple to have these three characteristics in their entirety in order to recognize that the teacher has all the defining characteristics and in order then to rely on that teacher.
    
    With respect to these three characteristics, “nonpartisan” means not to take sides. If you are partisan, you will be obstructed by your bias and will not recognize good qualities. Because of this, you will not discover the meaning of good teachings. As Bhavaviveka states in his Heart of the Middle Way (Madhyamaka-hrdaya):
    
    “Through taking sides the mind is distressed, Whereby you will never know peace.”
    
    “Taking sides” is to have attachment for your own religious system and hostility toward others’. Look for it in your own mind and then discard it, for it says in the Bodhisattva Vows of Liberation (Bodhi-sattva-pratimoksa):
    
    “After giving up your own assertions, respect and abide in the texts of the abbot and master.”
    
    Question: Is just that one characteristic enough?
    Reply: Though non-partisan, if you do not have the mental force to distinguish between correct paths of good explanation and counterfeit paths of false explanation, you are not fit to listen to the teachings. Therefore, you must have the intelligence that understands both of these. By this account you will give up what is unproductive, and then adopt what is productive.
    
    Question: Are just these two enough?
    Reply: Though having both of these, if, like a drawing of a person who is listening to the teachings, you are inactive, you are not fit to listen to the teachings. Therefore, you must have great diligence. Candrakirti’s commentary says “After adding the three qualities of the student to the two qualities of being focused and having respect for the teaching and its instructor, there are a total of five qualities.”
    
    Then, these five qualities can be reduced to four:
    (1) striving very diligently at the teaching,
    (2) focusing the mind well when listening to the teaching,
    (3) having great respect for the teaching and its instructor, and
    (4) discarding bad explanations and retaining good explanations.
    
    Having intelligence is the favourable condition that gives rise to these. Being non-partisan gets rid of the unfavourable condition of taking sides.
    
    Investigate whether these attributes that make you suitable to be led by a guru are complete; if they are complete, cultivate delight. If they are incomplete, you must make an effort to obtain the causes that will complete them before your next life. Therefore, know these qualities of a listener. If you do not know their defining characteristics, you will not engage in an investigation to see whether they are complete, and will thereby ruin your great purpose.
    
    (Lam Rim Chen Mo, p 75ff, Snow Lion Publications)
    - 14
      
      Joanne on July 21, 2014 at 11:22 pm
      Reply
      
      Yes, Tenzin, I totally agree with that statement. I was definitely imbalanced and neurotic– but I was also hungry for Dharma, for answers, for quotes from Tsongkhapa such as the one you’ve given. Isn’t it supposed to be a medicine? Dharmaanarchist– I think it is hard to say which student is most psychologically unbalanced and unprepared for a relationship with a lama. Aren’t we all sick, emotionally unbalanced and needing the medicine of Dharma? It seems to me that if a lama is simply straightforward, kind and consistent in giving the Dharma that there would be fewer problems. I wonder if I am worse off in my wounded exile than those students who are close friends to big lamas and have developed big egos as a result?
      - 15
        
        dharmaanarchist on July 23, 2014 at 3:48 pm
        Reply
        
        Yes, we are all prone to emotional imbalance.
        
        But not everyone in the west is prone to developing unhealthy emotional dependency of fatherly figures of authority. And not everyone has a background that will cause a tendency for the unhealthy phenomenon called transference (projecting a childhood conflict onto unrelated people in their adult life) in modern psychology.
16

Sam Hoff on July 19, 2014 at 11:16 pm
Reply

Jigme Lingpa said if one abandons all one’s possessions and go on lifelong retreat, one has accomplished half the Dharma.
- 17
  
  Sam Hoff on July 21, 2014 at 5:07 am
  Reply
  
  One doesn’t necessarily have to go on retreat. But one needs to practice diligently and completely master sleep yoga to take advantage of those sleeping hours per restricted manuals of Dudjom Rinpoche, Dilgo Khyentse etc.
18

Joanne on July 20, 2014 at 6:49 pm
Reply

Yes, Sam, I think that is where the original idea of Dharma entailing hardship has come from– from Buddha himself and the need for true renunciation. And I totally agree with Jigme Lingpa. It’s when the lama attempts to recreate hardship, inflicting mental, psychological and emotional hardships on the student– particularly with otherwise comfortable Western students– that I think there’s a risk for trouble. As Marpa demonstrates, there is also a legitimate benefit in it– but there’s also a risk. And Marpa and Mila came from the same culture, same orientation, same sex– that counts for a lot.
19

Khedrup on July 22, 2014 at 5:50 am
Reply

People are drawn to the gurus with the big personalities or with a large number of followers, and it seems in many ways the crazy wisdom method (and the intense groupies) are part and parcel of following such a teacher. However, there are many khenpos, geshes and lamas who don’t have high titles and simply teach the dharma, as it is. The presentation might not be as excited or sexy, but all the information one needs to progress on the path is there.

Humility is demonstrated over a period of time by examining the teacher in a variety of situations (KG may seem humble due to his demeanor and way of speaking but when one looks at his tyrannical /dictatorial`management style one sees relatively quickly this is not the case).

Unfortunately, though, Westerners often value charisma more than other qualities. My advice: if you can’t stand the heat, stay out of the fire. I stay out of the fire- most of my teachers are low key and not so well known with the exception of HHDL and HH Karmapa. Most of them just teach the dharma and are not so concerned about making fashionable. Unfortunately, this means they will never be as well known as I think they deserve to be (due to their inner qualities and knowledge), but is also means I won’t have to deal with a weird bunch of gatekeeping groupies every time I want to ask questions about my practice.
- 20
  
  Joanne on July 22, 2014 at 8:39 pm
  Reply
  
  Well said, Khedrup– you’ve touched on much of what I have been trying to say. Thank you.
- 21
  
  Sam Hoff on July 23, 2014 at 12:30 am
  Reply
  
  I think people are drawn to whomever is near them geographically.
  
  Many Buddhists in Italy are students of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu.
  
  Shugdenpas are especially British since NKT established many centers there.
  
  If Norbu established himself in Britain, and NKT established itself in Italy, the situation would be the opposite.
22

TDamdul on July 23, 2014 at 4:55 pm
Reply

“On the other hand, the Dharma is contrary to the views of the world and oneself. The Dharma attacks and undermines the delusions and in that sense it kicks out people’s wrong projections, and clinging. In that sense it is disturbing, threatening to the own views, ego etc.”
I agree with what Tenpel has said.
From my bit of understanding – Non Buddhists & even ‘newbies’ to Buddhism equate it with ‘New Age’ feel- good warm -fuzziness or as some serene relaxation therapy. That might be true if you are in it for the worldly/relative samsaric benefits. But the real long & hard job of working with the mind is what I think Rinpoche is pointing to – Vajrayana Buddhism.
23

Sam Hofff on July 23, 2014 at 8:55 pm
Reply

Dzongsar Khyentse Rinpoche is obviously talking about going long retreats.

Both his primary teacher, Dilgo Khyentse, and his grandfather, Dudjom Rinpoche, wrote famous retreat texts.
- 24
  
  Joanne on July 24, 2014 at 1:05 pm
  Reply
  
  No, Sam, I think he’s simply talking about Dharma practice and discomfort. No one disagrees that there has to be some pain for gain in Dharma practice– just like there has to be pain in athletic training. However, athletes rely on a good coach and trainer to insure that their rigorous training doesn’t cause them any injury. In the same way, reliance on a lama should provide the same benefit and insurance.
  - 25
    
    Sam Hoff on July 24, 2014 at 6:30 pm
    Reply
    
    Dzongsar Khyentse Rinpoche has given instruction on atleast Dudjom Rinpoche’s retreat manual.
    
    So that’s why I think he is referring to that.

	tenpel on Who is demonstrating against t…
	Tenpel on Heartwood Hosts Its First Gath…
	Exposing the New Kad… on Who is demonstrating against t…
	tenpel on Who is demonstrating against t…
	Peartree Layne on Who is demonstrating against t…
	astrologerdevanand on Hurts within the Karma Kagyu s…
	mikepazda on Western Shugden Society / New…
	tenpel on Who is demonstrating against t…

See also

Rate this:

Share this:

Related