I am just finding that obedience to Spiritual authority figues is a false hope to remedying the situation.

Which is something I have not made a judgment on yet, myself. I agree with you when it comes to the terms you’re using, I just don’t think they apply to all teachers. Where they do, you’re right, where they don’t, I disagree.

You seem nervous about owning your own power of discernment.

I am, no secret there. :)

We may even be ahead of Buddha, as he lived thousands of years ago and was ignorant of scientific knowledge we view as commonplace.

You seem nervous about owning your own power of discernment. I am not criticizing you, thats part of life. I am just finding that obedience to Spiritual authority figues is a false hope to remedying the situation.

But your last comment, as much as I respect your intent, points out something I have a problem with (and something I wrestle with myself). If no one knows anything for sure, how can we be in anyway “ahead”? If there’s an ability to be “ahead” then there must be people who are also “ahead” of us from whom we can learn. Right?

And on the other hand, how do we know we’re not going in the wrong direction? It’s certainly not an impossibility.

Again, I am not saying anything about Shambala, I respect your decision not to study under them. I don’t think there’s any need to go any further into that here.

Also I am not bashing. I just think rape is bad. None of my accusations were baselss.

I mean come on dude, the Last head honcho right behind the Current leader of Shambala raped his students and knowingly gave them AIDS. I mean that is a serious scandal not far back at all.

All I was doing was making an attempt to learn under these people. The Universe gave me an answer.

Anyway I won’t I tink we both want the same thing.

I guess I just brought it up because we were talking about meditation

But we weren’t talking about meditation at the time. We were talking about theories and definitions of the witness:

Weird to think of “the witness” as both something the self can inhabit, and something that can watch the other parts of the self doing stupid shit. :)

Really gets rid of the idea that self is any certain thing, if it can change like that…

Any synchronicity. And beer. :)

But then somehow it turned into bashing Tibetan Buddhism. :(

Well that would be really convenient Ian. These Coke snorting AIDS spreading profligates, (With a Lineage recognized by other Buddhist Muckety mucks as perfectly legit) know best and want to protect everyone and thats why they rule under a veil of secrecy.

Please explain where I said this, or what you’re even responding to by saying this.

its not fake corruption its real.

I never said it was fake, in fact, I specifically said I was NOT defending them.

This is part and parcel with this path, it really seems to me.

This I agree with 100%. Have you read Saint’s and Psychopaths by Bill Hamilton? Check it out here if not.

At the same time, not 100% of organization are corrupt. I simply will not allow it to be said on my blog that anything is 100% one way. I don’t believe the world works this way. In fact, when we believe something is 100% a certain way, its probably in our best interest to seek out the opposite of what we believe because we’re probably missing something.

What if no one knows any more than you already do right now?

Then why bother seeking? That’s a false consolation and an excuse for laziness.

what if lots of people figure out everything pretty much on their own because there isn’t as much to figure out as we think?

maybe that’s the hook? We think these high up spiritual teachers know all this shit we don’t and than it turns out they just want lots of pussy, money and power.

They really don’t know Jack. What if no one knows any more than you already do tight now?

I guess I just brought it up because we were talking about meditation it seems like you get a lot out of it and I went to this thing and wanted to get more serious about meditation and just googled them and uncovered all this corruption. its not fake corruption its real.

I am wary of this stuff but also a sincere spiritual seeker. I went with my Aunt who is the same way. She was once a moonie. Same abuiive dynamic.

Its really wide spread this abusiive dynamic. Even Ken wilbur and Alex grey came under the spell of Da Free John, a totally corrupt guru.

This is part and parcel with this path, it really seems to me.

That’s what Buddhism seems to be based on to me.

As I said above, that’s fine. I don’t agree, but that’s fine. Why can’t I disagree with you on this?

People prefer it to figuring things out on their own, so this perpetuates the abuse.

And so what happens when someone does figure it out “on their own”? A) Do you know anyone who’s done this? and B) What do they do after this?

And you haven’t answered my question…:

But I keep feeling like we’re missing the point somewhere. Where did all the even come from? I never said anything about Tibet, Shambala, Tantricism or any of this, it all came from you. Why did you bring all this up in the first place?

I’d also like to point out that you’re using criticism against the Dalai Lama as evidence against Shambala, even though these are two entirely different lineages and organizations.

Oh, come on. How many fricken Lamas are there? We are talking about a Tiny elite among a very small nation, most of which were illiterate sefs 50 years ago.

You really think good can come from organizations ruled top down by people with secret occult initiation and history of sexual impropriety? I mean come on? “crazy wisdom?”

This is like the SS or the Mafia or Gustapo.

The fact is people like doing what authority figures tell them to do, jumping through hooops and eventually becoming an insider. That’s what Buddhism seems to be based on to me. People prefer it to figuring things out on their own, so this perpetuates the abuse.

We are all co-creators of these structures and people could wthdraw assent to them at any time in which case they would collapse. But they are perpetuated because people are willing to compromise.

For a good explanation of Vajrayana practice, check these:

BG 111: Japanese Shingon: The True Word School
BG 112: Vajrayana in Plain English

And I did look through your links, I just didn’t post them here since you went and put them on your site and since I don’t agree with them.

The Tibet Myth isn’t anything new, and American Buddha quite frankly hurts my eyes too much to read in depth.

I’ve already looked at and dismissed “The Shadow of the Dalai Lama” on personal grounds. To me, it seems like too much of a smear campaign. Plus, I’ve read “Stick Out Your Tongue” by a Chinese author who toured Tibet which said the same things from a more balanced viewpoint. I don’t deny that there were bad practices in Tibet at some point. This doesn’t mean that all Tibetan Buddhist are child rapists. Knives can be used to kill people, it doesn’t mean everyone who owns a knife is a murderer.

I’d also like to point out that you’re using criticism against the Dalai Lama as evidence against Shambala, even though these are two entirely different lineages and organizations.

And on the other hand, please don’t twist this to say that I am defending Shambala. I never actually said anything in defense of them specifically, I said I think the attempt to make an organization that helps and supports and carries on spiritual seeking is a good thing, and a hard thing to do well. I have no respect for people who only point out others errors without trying to undertake the same attempts they’re criticizing.

Basically, if you’d don’t like hierarchical organizations, fine. No one ever said you have to. If you don’t like Buddhism, fine, no one’s making you follow it. If you think the best spiritual path for you is going solo, also perfectly fine. I wish you luck.

But I keep feeling like we’re missing the point somewhere. Where did all the even come from? I never said anything about Tibet, Shambala, Tantricism or any of this, it all came from you. Why did you bring all this up in the first place?

Vajrayana

Its really not that complicated. In order to be a teacher in Shambala Buddhism you need to take these vows, and classes and then there is this seminary you have to go to and then you get to the secret esoteric teachings. Which is Tantra, which is sex magic. I linked to what it involves. It involves something that any normal decent human being would call sexual abuse of young girls.
Not reading my link, while claiming to argue against me is akin to a technique of covering your ears and saying “lalalalalalala I can’t hear you.”

I didn’t bomb you with links all were straigt the the point. But the fact is this dude I saw yesturday went the seminary and became privvy the the secret tantric shit. Its right on their website, what you have to do to rise through the ranks.

So the core teaching is a secret kept from the vast majority of the low level people.

The coke snorting, philandering and alcaholism by CHOGYAM TRUNGPA is all documented. The fact that is successor had unprotected gay buttsex with his follwers after he knew he was HIV positive is well documented also.

This teacher guy that was nervous around me, was one degree of seperation of all this stuff. He is a direct muckity muck from the lineage.

I don’t believe in you!” the girl screamed; then his claws pass right through her without causing harm

Which I can say repeatedly, but my problem seems to be putting myself within reach of those claws to test out my theories.

Granted, I don’t know if that’s actually needed, I like to think the universe puts us where it needs us. If it ever needs me to stand there and get slashed at by nightmares, I’m sure it’ll arrange to put me in front of one when it thinks I’m ready for it. I don’t want to fuck things up by getting in the way! :)

I appreciate that you’ve toned down the level of your argument, and like I said, I do appreciate your point of view. We can certainly keep the discussion going so long as it doesn’t devolve to sweeping generalizations of hierarchical organizations.

I think what you’re talking about is much more helpful when looked at as a metaphor. Many people in power who don’t believe they should be in power (and by “believe they should be in power” I mean that they have an understanding of the heavy responsibility required to wield power properly, and that power over others is, when looked at honestly, not something all that desirable). If they don’t have a good understanding of their position, then they’ll rely on keeping other people weak in order to not feel threatened in their power. This can take the form of a sort of emotional vampirism, but is not really any different than a silverback gorilla bellowing and pounding its chest to intimidate a rival. Its just good and evil don’t enter into it for the gorilla, but they do for us, so we can fuck up things up a lot more than the gorilla can.

As far as meeting your eyes, given that this guy was an authority figure, and given your repeatedly stated dislike of authority figures, I could see that maybe his sensing that might have had something to with him not meeting your eyes. Doesn’t necessarily mean he’s off raping little girls on the weekend, it just means he’s not too secure in his position. But hey, lots of people can’t hold eye contact, and they can’t all be satanic vampire child rapists.

So essentially you are saying “And that being able to look evil in face without fear severely limits its powers” but you don’t want to look it in the face.

This, however, I take as sort of a personal assault on me, which doesn’t really seem warranted. But actually, in one sense, you’re right, I don’t want to look at evil directly. But that’s because I don’t believe in evil as a distinct thing. I think it bleeds to often into goodness (or at least good intent) around the edges, and that to focus on only the evil is actually to grow that evil in a way you don’t intend. Instead, I prefer to focus on the good, and see how I can address myself to that goodness in everyone. Doing so can make evil suddenly unnecessary, and I personally believe this is the correct way (for me) to look evil in the face. With love, because I have taken the time to find some goodness attached to it.

But no, I’m not running around doing this, and yes, this is mainly a theory, an opinion. I’m willing to admit that, just as I’m willing to admit that you believe differently. And again, I don’t mean to imply that you’ve ever stated the opposite of this, I am simply stating my own opinion on the matter. If it seems like I’m saying you claim the opposite, its only because our views differ so greatly on this matter. :)

What Spritual authority did Buddha appeal to?

A few things here:
1) You are now appealing to the Buddha as a spiritual authority. Maybe that’s because I clearly respect him as one and you’re trying to address the issue from my viewpoint. If so, I respect you attempt.
2) However, the Buddha did have spiritual authorities. He left home and studied under one teacher. He mastered everything that teacher had to offer, and felt he needed more. He went and studied under another teacher, mastered everything that teacher had to offer, and felt that he needed more.
3) Then he went and studied with a group of ascetics, people who very clearly had a belief system they followed that was probably based on someone’s teaching at some point. Buddha became the leader of this group because of his severe asceticism, but then abandoned this because he felt he needed more.

That makes three schools of thought, three authority systems, that Buddha went through from beginning to end before he could resolve the matter enough to seek on his own. If Buddha had to go through two teachers and the building and dissolving his own community before he had a good enough grasp on what he wanted and what wasn’t enough, I don’t think we have any right to assume that we don’t need to do at least that much.

What Spritual authority did Buddha appeal to?

He didn’t. So what does that say? To me at says there is no such thing as “spiritual authority” all these lineages are corrupt. We can all be Buddha on our own without crying “tears of devotion” to some Tibetan aristocrat or guru, just because he claims to be the reincarnation of some big shot in the past.

That’s all Buddhism is based on at the top leadership levels.

I looked it in the face yesturday. I looked at a guy in one of these Lineages and he couldn’t meet my gaze. As soon as I got home within five minutes I knew why.

I wasn’t there to stir up trouble, I was there to meditate. I was initially attracted to them becausse they don’t wear fancy robes. But the Leadership structure is the same.

To be fair I never said all these things that you are comcluding here that evil always wins and so forth that its all powerful and in control of everything and everybody.

All these evil institutions are actually failing and crumbling away. Information is too freely available, to keep people in the dark.

But they rely on people supporting them through belief, assent, etc. Blind faith void of critical analysis.

Any way Dude these people are always nervous around me. I see through them. Eventually most people will be like me in relation to these people and they will have zero power over anyone.

PS – you mentioned that “And that being able to look evil in face without fear severely limits its powers.” – in a tangent I erased without posting, I made the same observation with a jokey reference to Freddy Kruger in the “Dream Master” sequel … ["I don't believe in you!" the girl screamed; then his claws pass right through her without causing harm ... ] lol …

You can, and will, see angels or demons everywhere you look for either of them.

I agree with you on this as well, but I know that Ted feels differently. I simply don’t believe that anyone has that kind of control over the way everything unfolds while he does.

I respect that Ted feels differently, but I know he and I can simply argue back and forth over this without anything changing. I don’t want to change my opinion to agree with him, and I know that he feels the same way about my position on the matter. I do usually enjoy his comments and the fact that his views differ from mine on some things, but when it comes to this topic, I think we’ve both got too much invested in our own views for a discussion to bear much fruit.

I simply think that, to the extent that evil does exist, it is by its very nature limited, whereas good is not because good accepts evil, whereas evil does not accept good.

And that being able to look evil in face without fear severely limits its powers.

And that we need people to try these things (such as setting up an organization like Shambala) and have them work out in a good way. Is it easy? No. Is it even possible? Who knows, but I certainly don’t want to think that it isn’t. Because then evil wins without my even trying.

Meanwhile, the google synchronicities do indeed continue, although something must also be said for Mr. Boucher’s SEO abilities. :)

Wow. It is hilarious, and wonderful, that the Boucher blog is connected to all three of you – I found him just by a quick Googling for “aldous reducing valve” so I could find some Huxley quotes to send ya’ll toward.

The Google synchronicity continues!