this is dusgusting. dkr is becomming a full blown monster

corboy Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> But, this is the noble, ancient, oppressed culture
> that regarded Drukpa Kunley and his Wonder Weiner
> as purveyor of enlightenment.
>
> [www.google.com]
>
> In the West, Drukpa Kunley would be on the Sex
> Offenders' Registry -- unless
> of course, he arrives clad in silk and brocade as
> a giggling Tibetan Buddhist guru, accompanied by
> an entourage.


I seriously question the extent to which Drukpa Kunley's behavior was approved of, even celebrated. Himalayan culture was and still is, very Victorian. OTOH, the theocracy had (and still has) a lot of people bamboozled into believing that if the monk, abbot or lama chooses your daughter, your 12-year-old child, even, to use for sex, it's a great blessing. But what happens to that daughter after a pregnancy or two, when the monastery discards her, and all the eligible bachelors in the village regard her as used goods?

There's also similarly celebratory mythology relating to the 6th Dalai Lama, who was a blatant womanizer, and composer of love poetry. He was basically useless as a spiritual and temporal leader, being not at all suited to the job. Somebody made a big mistake in declaring him a "tulku" in his tender years. But of course, the hagiographers had to cast him in the best light, so all they could come up with was praise for his sexual prowess.

The rogue, Padmasambhava, had similar hagiographies written about him, casting him as Tibet's great saint. This sweeps under the rug the fact that the King of Tibet threw him out of the country for practicing black magic. In addition, the royal family and much of high society in Tibet at the time were outraged at the sex-cult form of Buddhism he proselytized.

The Reting regent, who ruled when the Dalai Lama was a child, was similarly corrupt, having affairs with ministers' wives, and others. Although he was in charge of his own monastery, he was regarded as a failed monk, due to this behavior. As the Dalai Lama approached adulthood, he had the (at that point--former) regent thrown in the Potala jail. He was also guilty of favoring China, and being involved in endless political machinations.

These examples should allow us to put the Drukpa Kunley stories into perspective. The fact that he's a celebrated figure says much about the lot that Bhutan's women have been relegated to. These are women who, in a national survey a few years ago, admitted to being abused wives, further admitting that they believed they deserved to be beaten for burning food, and other small errors at home.

If we look at Tibetan-related peoples around the periphery of Tibet on the Chinese side, we see a number of ethnic groups displaying matriarchal characteristics. From this, we can infer that Tibet, itself, used to be matriarchal. Even to this day, the Earth Goddess is venerated, pilgrimages to her sacred lakes and mountains are carried out painstakingly, often performed as prostrations along the entire path, taking a year or even two or three years, to complete. The imposition of virulently patriarchal values and a misogynistic monastic system onto what was once a matriarchal society has been a great and ongoing tragedy for Tibet's women, and Bhutan's.

ollaimh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> this is dusgusting. dkr is becomming a full blown
> monster

What he's unwittingly done, is to reveal the moral bankruptcy of the Lamaist system. He has shouted it from the rooftops, and people have heard it. He demonstrates a complete failure of compassion for women students of Tibet's peculiar brand of Buddhism, revealing to the world women's lowly status in Tibetan (and Bhutanese) culture. They're not even deserving of the much-vaunted compassion that he and his ilk preach about incessantly! If they object to being manipulated into sex, or worse--taken violently, as Tibet's and Bhutan's women have been for hundreds of years, being told it's a great blessing to be chosen for rape by a monk or a group of monks in a ceremony, then they are to be denounced, and turnend into the butt of jokes.

Thanks to Dzongsar Khyentse, Sogyal, and Trungpa, the world now knows that in Tibetan Buddhism, the compassion is fake, the celibacy is fake, the Buddhism is a sham, ethics are non-existent, and the teachers are dangerous, hazardous to students' well-being, and full of indignation at any effort to deny them their entitlement to sex with their students.

sad but true. dkr used to praise jetsum kushock, the real thing, and she keeps tradition without abuse. if he still respects her, he learned nothing from her

I dare wonder if part of what makes these Tibetan and other gurus seductive
is not just their promise of power, but also how many of them convey
a vibe of childish playfulness and in some cases, a childish pathos and vulnerability.

Many of us go into the guru scene seeking healing, yes. But it may not
be appreciated how many of us may, without realizing it, seek to redeem
ourselves by healing the wounds we sense in the guru.

Few things are more wounding, more draining than to feel one has failed to heal
the suffering of one's own parents. This can be especially anguishing if one is burdened with a sense that one's own parents failed to achieve their life's purpose.

For one's parents to have died unfulfilled, while one remains alive may leave a son or daughter feeling ashamed not only to have survived, but ashamed to
live fully because the parents have not.

In this predicament, one may feel oneself cursed and perhaps unconsciously hope to be released from bondage by healing the ailments of a surrogate parent, such as a guru.

So many of the Tibetan tulkus were abducted as little children from their own
families, taken from their mothers and sent at pitifully young ages to all male establishments for a life of indoctrination, their humanity displaced, to be
replaced with a life not their own.

A tulku produced by such a system is condemned to function as a "Manchurian Candidate" his actual childhood entombed.

No matter how brilliant and playful such a tulku may be, a scent of soul-death, a pathos, must seep out from the cracks of the tomb.

Perhaps part of the spell that captivates so many Westerners is the hope of
healing and rescuing that lost child in the tulku and thus
somehow heal and love back to health the lost child in oneself.

But as the price of resurrection, the tulku would have to give up tulku hood
and consent to be an ordinary human being.

Which is why most tulkus do not want to be rescued, no matter how much the
buried child in them cries in silent anguish.

It is a mission impossible for disciples.

Trungpa did not want to be rescued.


Misstyk wrote:

Quote

Isn't that the ultimate gaslighting technique? Training you to believe your perceptions don't count and aren't trustworthy. That's very insidious.

But also keep in mind that this is what narcissistic parents do to their kids: deny the child's perceptions, lead them to think their thinking is off-base.

Kids raised in an environment like that grow up to be extremely vulnerable to predators and scammers, because they don't know how to listen to their inner voice, their gut feelings about things.

Something tells me that TB groups, especially those run by these ego-driven opportunists, are full of people who grew up trained not to trust their instincts or to think about their own needs.

Friends, here is a way to picture what Misstyk is describing.

people who grew up trained not to trust their instincts or to think about their own needs.

When we are born, we are already pre-formatted. Pre-formatted to expect and
seek social, physical, emotional contact. We are social mammals. We are born
seeking this before we are even conscious. We are born TRAINABLE.

And, without conscious awareness we are receptive and disposed to expect
the best.

And a lot of the training Misstyk refers to takes place before we have any
verbal conscious awareness.

If any of us knows Word, ponder what a pre formatted text consists of, such as template for a document.

Depending on how that template is programmed, anything typed into it will
automatically be positioned according to selected margins, any text will, here and there, be bold, or plain or italic, paragraphs will follow selected specifications.

If you are reared in a fear ridden family, you may be unable to apply critical thinking to anything or anyone that unconsciously reminds you of parental authority figures.

If when you were little someone big and powerful repeatedly violated your
limits, you may have split off your feelings of horror and disgust, so that
you go numb and silent. So, as an adult, if someone who unconsciously reminds
you of your original perpetrator ignores your boundaries, you may go
numb, your mind may shut down and you may freeze. The perpetrator will
then convince themselves you consented, when what you did was do a trauma
response. Later, you may be easily shamed if you try to speak up.

All this spells trouble if someone from an unhappy upbrining seeks healing
in a guru led group, especially one like Vajrayana/Tibetan Buddhism, with
its elaborate methods of training people to distrust their own perceptions.

Trauma survivors are also vulnerable to shame if laughed at. The group laughter
characteristic of guru led groups can easily have a paralyzing effect.

Shame disables the part of our selves that is at the basic neurophysiological level. The scared animal 'freeze' response is the origin of what we humans
experience as shame.

When extreme, shame freezes critical thinking. We forget what we know.

Or, to put it another way, if you grew up finding it horribly painful
to notice that your parents were lying to you, you'd train yourself
to stop noticing inconsistencies in what your parents said and did, so
you'd no longer notice clear evidence that they were lying.

If you found it horribly painful or were punished for applying critical
thinking skills to what adult authority figures in your life
said and did, you'd learn to fear your critical thinking skills and
learn to fear or even feel ashamed of this talent.

Saddest of all, in such an upbringing, you might unconsciously equate
family, nurture and affection with numbing out your own awareness, your own
inner integrity. All this might come to feel like 'home'.

The social atmosphere in a group that enables and makes excuses for a person
such as Chogyam Trungpa, Sogyal, etc would then seem familiar, 'homey'.


happytown wrote:

Until then, when your guru chairs a board meeting
and it becomes obvious that he has no clue about
an issue, as a prudent member of that board you
shouldn’t hesitate to supply him with the
information he needs. At the same time, as a
Vajrayana student, you must skilfully remind
yourself the guru only looks clueless to you
because of your own impure perception, and that by
appearing to need your assistance the guru is
actually giving you the chance to accumulate
merit."
>
I CAN'T BELIEVE I ACTUALLY USED TO THINK LIKE
THIS!!!!!


Isn't that the ultimate gaslighting technique? Training you to believe your perceptions don't count and aren't trustworthy. That's very insidious. But also keep in mind that this is what narcissistic parents do to their kids: deny the child's perceptions, lead them to think their thinking is off-base. Kids raised in an environment like that grow up to be extremely vulnerable to predators and scammers, because they don't know how to listen to their inner voice, their gut feelings about things. Something tells me that TB groups, especially those run by these ego-driven opportunists, are full of people who grew up trained not to trust their instincts or to think about their own needs.

There's a small but growing buzz among Buddhists online, in response to Dzongsar Khyentse's two posts about abuse issues. They're talking about Tibetan Buddhism as a rape culture. I think June Campbell pointed it out first, in her book, "Traveler Through Space". But DKR, in the wake of many abuse scandals over the decades, has sealed the deal with his cynical and callous joke about the whole thing.

having been at his teachings for seven years and part of an inner practice group, i now think he realized he couldn't get his movies made or live like a king unless he took up his lineage. he was before that saying he wouldn't teach the lineage, then that he didn't believe in tulkus, then he supported critical thinking, but he has now abandoned all that. moreover one of his senior instructors is a landmark educator. he has no apparent awareness that this is close to being a money grubbing cult. now the sexual views. its a betrayal of the people who listened to him, but most have been in for long enough they are successfully gaslighted.

Quote

but he has now abandoned all that. moreover one of his senior instructors is a landmark educator.

"landmark educator".

Is this any different from the est group started by Werner Erhard?

ollaimh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> having been at his teachings for seven years and
> part of an inner practice group, i now think he
> realized he couldn't get his movies made or live
> like a king unless he took up his lineage. he was
> before that saying he wouldn't teach the lineage,
> then that he didn't believe in tulkus, then he
> supported critical thinking, but he has now
> abandoned all that. moreover one of his senior
> instructors is a landmark educator. he has no
> apparent awareness that this is close to being a
> money grubbing cult. now the sexual views. its a
> betrayal of the people who listened to him, but
> most have been in for long enough they are
> successfully gaslighted.

Thanks for these insights. This makes sense. Yes, he was quoted long ago, by an ex-girlfriend, as saying he didn't want to have anything to do with the lineage and the teacher scene. Then, suddenly, he was off to Hong Kong to raise money for his Buddhist films. Also, in his film, "WOrds Of My Perfect Teacher", he disparages the tulku system, and says to forget about it.

He's really been through an "evolution" of sorts, or perhaps, a "devolution". Shocking that he's defending corrupt, sleazy lamas, but someone elsewhere pointed out that he's known for having affairs with his students. So maybe the extreme tone in his posts is due to defensiveness.

There is no concept in medieval societies, of fiduciary duty of spiritual leaders toward their "flock". Especially not in medieval tantric circles. I think he genuinely doesn't understand what the fuss is about. They're used to meek teenage girls and their parents considering it to be an honor to "serve" as "consort". DKR sounds frustrated that Western women don't consider it an honor.

This is what some of the monasteries in Bhutan look like. Bhutan's saint is Drukpa Kunley, a supposed yogi known for spending his career womanizing all over the country. He was considered a saintly madman, and the mythology states that the thousands of women "blessed" with his "gifts" were grateful for his attention. Notice that the imagery depicts ejaculation, although yogis are supposed to practice seminal retention. According to the Dalai Lama, allowing ejaculation is a sin, because it means the so-called practitioner, a monk or yogi, is enjoying the sensuality, rather than focusing on meditation and the prevention of ejaculation. It's a root downfall, he says. So this imagery would have us believe that the supposed "saint" caused hundreds, if not thousands, of pregnancies, either leaving the women and girls to fend for themselves, or perhaps creating new crops of child novices for the monasteries.

So what this imagery communicates quite clearly is the cultural matrix and belief system that nurtured the mentality of Dzongsar Khyentse and his colleagues and compatriots. From this perspective, his cluelessness about abuse, callousness, and sense of entitlement are more understandable, which is not at all to imply they are justifiable. It's the 21st Century, for heaven's sake, and he has adopted the persona of a modern, hip lama.

In Bhutan, the general population was brainwashed to believe that having their underage girls, even pre-pubescent girls, taken by the monastery to serve as "goddesses" and "Buddha mothers" (meaning--used for tantric sex rituals) was a high honor. According to the testimony of one former "goddess", the girls, like herself, didn't even know this was abuse. After being "retired" from her "service" by the monastery, she got an education in India, where she learned that raping 12- and 14-year-old girls was abuse.

It seems that Dzongsar Khyentse can't understand why Western women don't fall in line with the Bhutanese and Tibetan medieval mindset, and consider themselves honored to be chosen by their teacher for sex. All he's able to do is mock women who feel used and abused, and scoff at legal systems making spiritual teachers like him accountable for their crimes.

He doesn't seem to be aware that even in Bhutan, taking girls into the monasteries to use them for sex has been illegal since the late 1960's. This would indicate how well the law is complied with by the monks. The former Buddha-mother/goddess interviewed above told the interviewer the practice continues in secret.