Some
Western practitioners view Tibetan Buddhism to consist of Dharma
practice mixed in part with Tibetan tradition. Often, they cannot
distinguish between the two. It is very important to know the
difference between tradition and the Dharma.
The
biographies of Milarepa, Marpa, and Gampopa relate only the pure
Dharma. Everything about these great Kagyu masters from the way
they lived to the way they taught was the authentic Dharma. For
example, Marpa brought the teachings from India to Tibet to teach
the Tibetans. He first studied the Dharma in India according to
the Indian tradition. Naropa, his teacher, lived in India. Most
of the time Naropa was naked. Sometimes he would wear the ornaments
of a Heruka. This was the tradition of some Indian yogis in those
days. But Marpa never told the Tibetans to copy Naropas
way of attire. When Marpa taught in Tibet, he did not introduce
any Indian customs such as the wearing of saddhu robes.
His Tibetan followers continued to wear the chuba, a Tibetan
style of clothing. Marpa taught the Dharma in a very pure way.
In
the West, people have read a lot about "Tibetan lamas".
Some Western scholars traveled to Tibet to seek adventure. Later
in America, Lobsang Rampa wrote books full of fantasies, including
stories of astral travels: about one mind transmitting messages
to anothers mind. The result of meditation gained by highly
realized Buddhist practitioners is the ability to understand supernatural
things and to read thoughts. When a very, very good meditation
is attained, the meditator is capable of knowing some unbelievable
things. The Buddha, for instance, knows all the thoughts of every
single sentient being. Unfortunately, Lobsang Rampa misrepresented
these special powers. He made them out to be mystical powers.
He created the fictitious notion that a person can send his mind
to another in order to read thoughts. His books influenced Western
ideas about Tibet in a negative and false way. Later on, when
the biographies were translated into the various Western languages,
all the "sensational stuff" was of course included.
In this way, many erroneous ideas about Tibetan Buddhist saints
were developed. One example is the claim that they could all fly
in the air.
Most
Westerners think that all Tibetan lamas are totally pure. Whatever
it is that a lama might do, they would think like this, "Oh,
there must be some deep meaning behind it." When a lama seemed
a little bit unusual, there must be a reason for it. They assume
that the lama must have seen something in their minds. This is
my experience with some Westerners.
Another
misconception of Westerners is to think that it is important to
bring all the Tibetan traditions into the Dharma practice. They
think that the system of monasteries in Tibet is somehow related
to enlightenment. Nowadays people can travel to Tibet easily.
They are often shocked by the reality check when they are there
- how different reality is to their own ideas of it. They think,
"What is this? The lamas are like us. They have the same
problems as we do." Some of them become totally confused.
But the truth of the matter is that lamas are just human beings.
In Kathmandu, you can see monks going to the casinos. I can say
this here because some of you have seen this for yourselves. This
is not a secret.
How
does the Tibetan system of monasteries work?
A
long time ago, a system was introduced in Tibet where very young
children were brought to the monastery. They were fed and cared
for free of charge. In today's Afghanistan, there was once a "Vajrayana
Kingdom" called Oddiyana. A very holy king ruled there. He
had achieved enlightenment and taught all his subjects. They too
became enlightened and the kingdom disappeared. Then a Tibetan
king also wanted to do the same. He wanted to end samsara by letting
the kingdom of Tibet disappear. He introduced some new rules.
Monasteries for monks and nuns were erected all over the country.
All monks and nuns received food for free and the harvest from
the farmers went to the monasteries. As a result, the people became
monks not only to become enlightened but because there was free
food. There were also enlightened monks but they were not the
majority, maybe one in a million. Enlightened beings were very
rare then because there were so many distractions. There was enough
to eat but not much to do. None of them practiced like Milarepa
did in the earlier times. Nevertheless, there was a monastery
in every valley and all of Tibet was filled with monasteries which
housed big administrations.
In
the beginning, there was a Kagyu master who founded a monastery
in a right way. He started a study program and a meditation center.
His wish was to preserve the teachings and not to let them simply
vanish. At that time, there was no Tulku system (the system of
recognition of consciously reborn Buddhist masters). It was then
up to the master's son to take on the responsibility for the monastery
in succession to the father. In this way, many Kagyu monasteries
expanded. But as time went by, things deteriorated. Monasteries
became little kingdoms with very arrogant administrators. They
were often very cunning. They knew that the spiritual leaders
were necessary to control the people. They would then introduce
a spiritual leader, but tried to keep all the power in their own
hands. It was all very political. Beneath the spiritual exterior
was a political underside.
Every
monastery had land. Sometimes the property was extensive. When
the monasteries bordered on one another, each side wanted to protect
their own land. If an animal from one side crossed over the border
it would be kept there. Sometimes fighting broke out over disputed
borders. The peasants worked on the land much like slaves of the
monasteries, and the administrators reigned like dictators.
The
actual ruler of the country had hardly any power. Each monastery
ruled supreme. Between monasteries, there was constant fighting.
The government was completely powerless. It was later on that
they managed to gain some influence and organized themselves like
the monasteries did. Then the country was controlled in a strictly
religious manner. Good practitioners were not part of the administration.
The good masters and monks mainly practised in isolation. Nearly
nobody reached enlightenment in a monastery. Monks were too strictly
organized by the administration. Religion and politics were so
intermingled in Tibet. The politicians used religion to control
the people. The problem was not the enlightened masters, but the
administrators. Unfortunately, Westerners have the idea that everything
in the Tibetan monasteries was related to Dharma. They think that
a monastery is a big mandala, and that every monk is a certain
Buddha aspect and the guru is Dorje Chang.
People
also think that the thrones of the lamas are a part of the Dharma
practice. Actually they can often be a source of conflict. Take
for example that you have prepared a throne for me. I am sitting
on it now. If you do not do the same thing for another teacher,
then problems may arise. This is the way of politics. If you had
provided a beautiful chair instead, nobody would have any problems
with it. The older Tibetan lamas, even the good and friendly ones,
are used to certain customs based on their culture. When they
come to the West, the absence of Tibetan musical accompaniment,
or the throne lacking a beautiful brocade cover, might make them
feel that something is missing. They will also tell you that you
should arrange everything in a certain way. You might then think
that this is part of the practice. If you do, you are building
up the Tibetan tradition in the West. I do not think that these
cultural protocols are going to last. If they do, they will be
a source of problems in the future. Who should have a higher throne?
Somebody is bound to have a smaller throne. In this way many problems
can come up.
You
must see the difference between Dharma and tradition. When problems
occur, understand that they do not come from the enlightened ones,
but from the administrators. Even the Chinese communists who do
not believe at all in religion nevertheless use it from time to
time for their own political ends. This is because the administration
system is so well established and is so powerful. In the West
you do not have to adopt the administrative and political aspects.
I do not mean that your teachers should now sit somewhere on the
floor, or you should point your feet at them when you sit. But
there is simply no need for too much tradition.
Lecture
given in Vienna, September 1993.