![]() ![]() Lobsang Rapgay: What we see in these recent cases, in addition to issues associated with the psychological development of the teacher, is a lack of rigorous traditional training and education, as well as the absence of ethics as the foundation of their teachings. What does the guru model look like when it’s not working well? How does it break down? Maybe it’s the guru model that’s broken, or maybe it’s my own efforts that are not quite refined enough to enter into this very profound relationship.īuddhadharma: We’ve all heard stories, especially recently, of how this model can sometimes lead to harm. My personal relationship with the guru is something I’ve had to come to terms with through really intense negotiations with my own projections, my own hang-ups, my own lack of understanding of what authentic relationship with another human being looked like. The guru means different things to different people. We’re transplanting a certain kind of relationship that was prevalent in another culture onto this Western paradigm, and I think we are still doing the work to unlock what the guru means for us as Westerners. Lama Rod Owens: When I hear the word guru, I feel this heaviness in my guts-I did even before I came onto the Buddhist path. ![]() I’ve certainly met lots of Vajrayana practitioners who believe there is one model and one right way for this relationship to be, but in my experience, it’s tremendously diverse. Other times, it can be more like a coach or even a spiritual friend. Sometimes it’s more intellectual and teacherly. Some are more authoritarian, some are more parental. Pema Khandro Rinpoche: I feel a sense of curiosity about what the question means, because there are a lot of different models for teacher–student relationships in Tibetan Buddhism. However, given the vast cultural, social, and political differences between Tibet and the West, it is critical to examine whether that model is also feasible and sustainable here. In Tibet, the teachings are passed down from one guru to another, making the guru indispensable. But I also think there’s a contextual element to it in the culture. Lobsang Rapgay: My initial reaction, too, was to say, no, it’s not broken. Relationship is crucial to one’s practice at every level of the path, and definitely key to progress in tantra and Dzogchen. ![]() Like, no, it can’t be broken! Because if it’s broken, then the whole tradition is broken. Lama Rigzin Drolma (Anne Klein): I’m not sure I want to tell you this, but when I heard the question, my first reaction was alarm. –Editorsīuddhadharma: The question at the heart of this forum is, “Is the guru model broken?” We’ll explore an actual answer to that, but first, how do you feel when you hear the question? However, the conversation is relevant to any Buddhist traditions in which the teacher-whether a lama, roshi, or ajahn-holds great power. In light of the most recent upheavals, we’ve chosen in this discussion to focus on the guru model in the Tibetan tradition, in which the teacher is central to the path our panelists are deeply involved in guru practice and offer, from the inside, insights into how that teacher–student model may or may not be workable going forward. ![]() While communities are still grappling with these allegations and legal issues remain to be resolved, these allegations have given rise to many questions and concerns regarding the role of the teacher in Buddhism. But a lot happened in a year: the #MeToo movement hit the world by storm, and shocking revelations of abuse by Buddhist teachers in high-profile communities, including Shambhala and Rigpa, became mainstream news. A year ago, it would have been hard to imagine publishing an article with this headline. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |