The Gift of Mahayana

 

The Gift of Mahayana

To me the Bodhisattva Vows are really the dividing line between complete and incomplete dharma. We all need a firm basis* but there is so much more** to our minds and what is possible for us. On the level of words the teachings of the small and great vehicles sound the same but in energy the difference is vast. It is plain wrong when theravadins equate the way they see the buddhanature with the way mahayanis see it. Sometimes even mahayanis say the same thing but saying so they only reveal their lack of understanding.

*1-6 bhumis, hinayana/theravada terrain

**7-13 bhumis, mahayana and vajrayana terrain

The vow to be voluntarily reborn endlessly and to continue bodhisattvic activities life after life to help beings out of samsara, is not an artificial vow, something artificially imposed or a peculiar metaphysical belief. Not at all. The Bodhisattva Vows are based on how the greater subtle body that connects all life is built.

All beings are connected via the subtle system of countless subtle channels. You can see it if you meditate a lot and take a look. You can actually see countless thin threads made of light that connect all the people you know and have met, as well as animals and places. You have such connections from this life and countless past lives. You alone have millions of connections and each individual has the same. That's how the greater subtle body is built and where vowing to save all beings comes from. But if one's knowledge of the greater subtle body is insufficient and one doesn't see the point of making a commitment to that vow, is to ignore large part what is possible to us.

To focus on one's own liberation, to merely wish well, to pass blessings and to teach people how to practice shamatha and vipashyana of course accumulates good karma and merit but without the willingness to go to hells and awful places to help and liberate beings, to do whatever is needed, it's still basically a self-centered endeavor, a holiday of sorts. The heart and energy of a bodhisattva cannot be replaced with anything else.

There is a reason why masters of the past spoke of two (or three) different vehicles. They didn't do so to make themselves look better or wiser than those of the lesser vehicle but out of compassion because they actually cared. I also speak of this because I care but people don't see it that way. To point out that there is much more to go is a massive favour but people take it the wrong way, missing the fact that mahayana and vajrayana masters speak about the potential of all people, not just the potential they or people of their sect have.

My advice to hinayanis is to test the energy of the Bodhisattva Vows. Sit and calm down, and then recite the four great vows. See what happens in your subtle body, especially in the aura outside your body. That's where the higher bhumis, 7-10 are, that are not accessed at all with hinayana practice.

To mahayanis I suggest the opposite. You're used to opening and stretching the aura open, so do the opposite: just focus on our own liberation and express it through a prayer. "I want to attain liberation". For this experiment, forget your Bodhisattva Vows and just focus on your own freedom. Do it a number of times and feel the energy of that. It feels like being locked inside a cage. It feels like that because the subtle body is split in half and you only feel the insides of the body*.

*bhumis 1-6

What I have said here might be unpleasant for many to hear but I have given instructions for you to test and verify the underlying principles yourself so that your knowledge will be based on direct experience, rather than books, sayings or dictated by your own karma from past lives. If you hate me and say that this guy is a fraud who teaches outrageous nonsense against the true dharma, that's OK with me. By speaking out I have merely delivered the message that the buddha within you wants you to hear. If you wish to fight it, go ahead but sooner or later there will be a time when you become disillusioned by lesser paths and realize the gift of mahayana which is the gift of your own true being. In the end, we both win.

Bodhisattva Vows

I vow to liberate all sentient beings.

I vow to end all self-based confusion.

I vow to exercise the dharma that frees.

I vow to attain the great perfection.

Many blessings,

-Amrita Baba, 22 Jan 23

Emptiness and Compassion as Means to Attain Full Enlightenment

 

Emptiness and Compassion as Means

to Attain Full Enlightenment

Singh:>I completely agree with your view, before I discovered and more importantly grasped emptiness which is profoundly easy and difficult at the same time navigation seemed like fantasy. I don't have a clue why people don't get it. The Buddhist who are trained and get it, some of the them tend to get dogmatic about it.

Kim: -Another thing that people don't get or miss is the gift of compassion and emptiness combined, as in great vehicle. Buddhists of the small vehicle talk incessantly about anatman and arhathood but few of them realise that arhathood is half way. It is not full and complete. However, I give credit to theravadans because in some styles of it, they actually do become arhats and even if it is not full enlightenment, arhathood is farther than what many mahayanis and vajrayanis attain. I find it curious and strange that this is the case.

-But the thing with cultivating compassion and including all beings in one's motivation, it is revolutional in terms of spiritual practice. You practice for everyone, not just that "I want out and each to their own". Compassion is the katalysator and engine of enlightenment, regardless of religion or doctrine. I've seen some christian contemplatives who have absolutely incredible "bodhicitta". Compassion is the fabric of mature psychology and mature spirituality. That's why it's emphasized in systems that aim for full enlightenment, call it buddhahood or becoming like christ. If one doesn't have such maturity, many selfish habits go unnoticed. This means that for theravada arhats there is a whole world system that is unseen for them but like I said, in buddhist teaching there are also basic problems how compassion is taught and cultivated. The reason why I say all this is because without compassion, emptiness meditation cannot be finished. Without compassion, one will not attain full liberation.

Singh:>I try to transcend dogma, there is no doubt the crystal clear teaching on emptiness are in vajrayana especially dzogchen and mahamudra. 

Kim: -Mahamudra teachings are excellent, especially Gampopa. However, be careful because there are many dzogchen teachers out there who do not understand emptiness, though they can tap into the clarity of basic awareness. Full enlightenment, also known as great perfection includes everything that appears in the mind.

Kim, 11.6.2021

How Practitioners Become Fully Enlightened Buddhas

How Practitioners Become Fully Enlightened Buddhas

Seeing through the gross sense of me-ness in the form of thoughts and emotions is the foundation of all yoga and dharma. It needs to be the foundation because if we don't see through the gross ignorance, there is no way we are able to see through subtle ignorance.

In terms of buddhist vehicles, to see through gross selfing is the task of the so called hinayana, or small vehicle, where the focus of practice is to remove the most basic delusions about our self-identity. We cease to think in terms of me and you, self and other, to a noticeable degree and it is tremendously liberating. It is like coming to stand under a waterfall of pure fresh water, after you haven't taken a shower for a long time. It changes you.

But it doesn't change everything, and it is because of this why the so called caring and loving heartmind of all sentient beings (skt bodhicitta) is cultivated in the great vehicle (skt mahayana) of buddhism. Here we come to consider the difference of motivation in hinayana and mahayana.

A great vehicle practicioner takes the vow of becoming fully enlightened for the sake of all sentient beings. We take a vow to do all the internal work that is required to uncover ourselves as fully enlightened beings, in order to help, serve and to be an example for others so that they can also find a way out of samsara to liberation. In other words, we commit to complete and thorough death of the ego (jap. taigo tettei), to become buddhas for the sake of others. This death isn't dark or heavy, and it has nothing to do with sacrificing ourselves for others, as it is commonly understood. Realisation is always a very fulfilling and joyful path because you become who you really are, the ground of timeless existence imbued with goodness.

To clarify the difference between small and great vehicle practice, a mahayana practitioner, actually, in practice, takes into one's heart the suffering of all sentient beings. I am talking about the most basic mahayana buddhist practice of taking and giving (tib. tonglen). This practice is not for people who have not built a solid foundation of selflessness realisation because if this is done too early, taking in the suffering of all sentient beings can be overwhelming, too much. It is not dangerous, you just get scared and anxious for some time and if/when you do, it is a sign that you haven't worked on your gross selfing enough. You shouldn't take bodhicitta too seriously too early.

So, when you practice tonglen, you are actually taking in the confusion, anxiety, fear, greediness, jealousy and hatred of all sentient beings, incl. those in your immediate presence, into your own heart. Since you don't have gross selfing of your own anymore, you have developed a capacity to do bodhisattva - or should I say – advanced, practice of the great vehicle. Again, this capacity comes through small vehicle practice which by the way is what is practiced by most practitioners of mahayana meditators in their practice. It depends entirely on one's first hand realisation into selflessness and emptiness (skt anatman, shunyata) whether one is travelling on small or great vehicle. Someone might be chanting Bodhisattva Vows all one's life but without foundational recognition of one's own true nature, it's kind of using mahayana motivation to generate hinayana realisation which is backwards.

An excellent source of study of becoming a buddha are the 48 vows of Amitabha. These vows describe the attitude and motivation of a practicing bodhisattva called Amitabha, who wants to become a buddha for the sake of all beings. In his vows, he repeatedly states that if he after his attainment of buddhahood he failed to bring sentient beings to liberation, then may he not attain buddhahood. He states again and again, that if he fails to become a doorway for other's liberation, then he should never attain it himself. Because of those vows, Amitabha succeeded, and this is the whole point of bodhicitta. A bodhisattva is to put one's whole being, one's life, one's everything on the line for the sake of all sentient beings. This is an attitude that is to be applied in all one's life. A bodhisattva - mahayana practitioners - is to become that attitude, that vow.

Coming back to tonglen – a mahayana meditation exercise – this taking in of the pain of others and giving fresh pure love in return, becomes or should become one's main practice, or actually not merely practice, but a way of living one's daily life. You sit in your home, taking in the pain and giving love. You sit in a cafe, taking in the pain and giving beautiful pure light in return. You do this day and night, among those people, friends and strangers who you're surrounded with. Why? Because that's what buddhas do. Or actually, that's not what buddhas do, it's how they abide. To reach buddhahood, we simple emulate our own buddhahood by mimicking the heartmind of a buddha. This is the meaning of tonglen.

Thank you for reading. May your day be full of light and love,

Kim

Generosity - The Foundation of Mahayana Buddhism by Kim Katami

Generosity - The Foundation of Mahayana Buddhism

I was just talking with my teacher about money and generosity. To me and her, money was always means to do something, not something to accumulate or to hoard because there'd be no point in that for us. I give away money all the time for good purposes, like animal shelters, and people who need it. I am generous because that's who I am and that's who I want to be. I am not rich though and here's the thing: Why are people who have lots of money, so attached to it? It is always people who have lot of money, who are the most stingy. Vice versa, people who don't have so much money, give it away easily without reservations. There are of course exceptions to the rule but in general wealthy people seem to be attached to their money. From the point of view of humanity, this is embarrassing. From the point of view of dharma, this is a major pitfall.

Mahayana & Generosity

The first foundational guideline (paramita) of mahayana buddhism is generosity or dana. Why did the masters who constructed the mahayana buddhist doctrine, set generosity as the basis of mahayana buddhist practice? This clearly suggests that this is something important, though I always find it surprising how little dharma practitioners give thought to it.

Mahayana buddhism teaches that all beings have buddhanature and that it is possible to attain it. In this way mahayana buddhism empowers us by telling and giving us the tools how full enlightenment or buddhahood can be attained and actualised. Mahayana teaches wisdom (prajna) and compassion (karuna) as means to realise our innate wakefulness. Simultaneosly both wisdom and compassion are the two main characteristics of our buddhanature which means that someone who has some or complete first hand experience, is both wise and compassionate in terms of existencial matters. Wisdom means absence or lessening of self-based ignorance and compassion is the lively flowering of that wisdom that cares for others, I would say primarily from the perspective of mind-based suffering (dukkha) but also from the perspective of common suffering, such as poverty and illness.

The opposite of wisdom and compassion is self-based ignorance that only thinks for itself. In ignorant mind there is a lot of energy or power in the "I" thought. This is samsaric mind, which repeats the same thoughts and confusions again and again based on the deeply ingrained belief that there is "I" or "me" and "others". According to buddhism, this is the root of existential confusion that makes life a confusing and unsatisfactory experiece. Thinking in terms of me and other also creates separation and inequality between people. That is not normal or healthy in any way. This is duality and duality is pain.

So, ignorant mind thinks, talks and acts in ways that are selfish and narrow minded, and it is this deeply rooted habit of self-based ignorance that generosity is designed to break. Imagine what happens in a mind that begins to think, talk and act for the welfare of others, rather than oneself. This is the medicine of dharma that uproots our self-belief and removes the gap between me and others, lettin the buddha within to shine through as understanding and love.

Generosity is actually a geniously designed practice because money is related to our basic safety which in turn relates to our root chakra. A wise man knows the difference between real safety and illusory safety. That is really the only difference between someone who is caught up by samsara and who is liberated. Giving money away can change your life. It literally has the power to liberate you.

Vehicles

Vajrayana is the tantric interpretation of mahayana buddhism. Tantra that involves gurus, empowerments, deities, mantras and such, is or should be built on solid understanding of both mahayana and hinayana teaching. In the context of this article - generosity - this means that one cannot reap the promise of vajrayana, which is to attain buddhahood in this life, without the foundation of mahayana. Without genuine care for others - bodhicitta/compassion - one cannot reap the benefits of either mahayana or vajrayana. This downgrades vajrayana into a hinayana practice. It is not bad but it is not how it should be because tantra is not designed for that.

The three vehicles of buddhism: hinayana or small vehicle, mahayana or big vehicle and vajrayana or tantric vehicle, can be compared to woodwork. A carpenter takes a piece of wood that has the potential to be made into a fine work of art. In the beginning it's just a block of wood with bark on it. First, the carpenter makes a sketch of his sculpture on the wood, and begins to work on it with rough tools, like axe and chainsaw. After applying some skill and effort, he manages to make a rough outline of the design that already looks a lot like what the design is about. It is like a Lego-man compared to a fine work done by an Italian master sculptor. This is hinayana. Then the carpenter takes finer tools, like big and small chisels and continues to work with those. After some more applied effort, we really begin to see many details. We can also see a great difference between the former stage and present stage. This is mahayana. Then finally, the carpenter takes out a collection of sandpapers of various roughnesses and continues the work. He keeps working and finally... the finished sculpture looks so beautiful that we are amazed! This is vajrayana. We cannot expect to understand the fineness of vajrayana if we never even tried the foundational practices of mahayana, such as generosity.

The point with this analogy is that all three stages – vehicles – follow each other. Gross, middle and fine are all part of the same process and if any of them is missing the sculpture cannot be finished. This explains perfectly the progression from hinayana to mahayana to vajrayana teaching, and their corresponding practices and levels of insight. Not understanding this progression also explains why practitioners of the higher vehicles sometimes have lesser insight and understanding than those of lower vehicles. If vajrayanis don't have a solid foundation from gross and medium level insight, they cannot possibly understand the subtlety and fineness of vajrayana.

Jesus by Gian Bernini

Readiness

The sole purpose of dharma is removing our self-based views from our subtle nervous system or mind. The meaning of dharma is not in making our lives better, happier or more pleasurable while remaining arrogant and selfish. Committing to a dharma practice necessarily stings a bit but for someone who is fed up with self-created nonsense, this is both necessary and unavoidable. To such a practitioner, the process that gets lighter and easier with every insight and moment of practice. For someone who doesn't understand this and is in it only to make ones self-based life better, dharma is like ripping one's hair off one by one, that is, highly unpleasant. Such practitioners should look into the teachings of hinayana and mahayana because they are not ready or prepared for vajrayana.

Beginning to think about the welfare of those around us is a good place to start.

May you come in contact with the Buddha within,

-Kim Katami, 30.7.2020

*

Pemako Buddhism

www.pemakobuddhism.com

Sailing the Seas of Samsara

Sailing the Seas of Samsara

Hi all!

I hope you're all doing fine and practicing well during this time of global hardship. Coronavirus has taken us all by surprise but really there is nothing new in it as a samsaric occurrence. It is good time to contemplate transitoriness of life and to re-kindle our motivation for mahayana buddhist practice. Hardships like this can be great catalysators for dharma practice because when samsara becomes concrete, veils of illusion drop like drops of water from ducks feathers. The good in hardship like this is that our lazyness, distractedness and nonsensical excuses disappear like mist in the sun. So, please do make use of the opportunity and think about these occurrences in the light of dharma. Without dharma, we'd all be drowning. With dharma we can keep our noses above the water and learn to swim.

When we feel and take into our hearts the confusion and disorientation of people and all beings (really palpable these days!), we become bodhisattvas and things start going click in our mind. Layer after layer, click, click, click, calcified views of our self and existence burst open. That's the bhumis opening and perfecting, indications of correct practice, the ultimate medicine in action. So, please remember that the vow, literally, the *vow* of a mahayana bodhisattva is to personally "I vow to liberate, all sentient beings". Without deeply feeling this motivation, one will not attain the mahayana path to buddhahood and is not likely to have indications of correct practice either. When the course of a boat is right, it is easy to go ahead and sail the seas but if the course is wrong, sailing becomes difficult and you just keep hitting the reef. Bodhisattvas, even though they take a serious and compelling vow, travel with light feet. Bodhisattvas learn to sing and dance on the fields of fire and turmoil. 

 

This world of human beings and animals, by definition, is a samsaric realm. There is never a time when all beings on this planet do not have a need for support. However, during times like this this need is even greater. People are drowning in this ocean of suffering, scared and confused, and yet so many do not have the ripeness and fortunate karma to meet with dharma in one form or the other. But again, our own contemplation, developing of compassion - bodhicitta - and dedicating merits of our practice for all beings is what increases readiness for others. The more we feel the vow of a bodhisattva, the more it gets personal and emotionally binding, the more our practice helps others. Without emotional energy of love, care and devotion our practice becomes reduced to lifeless words and forms. This loving emotion keeps us nourished along the way.

Finally, our gurus, Guru Rinpoche and Yeshe Tsogyal, are fully enlightened and magnificient beings. They are beyond samsara. They have fulfilled their bodhisattva vows and became buddhas. They have done it like we are doing now. They have open invitation for everyone. "Here, grab my hand, I'll pull you to the shore. Just grab it!". When we turn to them for help, we find a safe place in all of samsara. We find a refuge, a safe place where we can come to understand what the heck is going on here. Day and night, we can grab their hand: Namo Guru Rinpoche, Namo Yeshe Tsogyal Ye, Namo Guru Rinpoche, Namo Yeshe Tsogyal Ye, Namo Guru Rinpoche, Namo Yeshe Tsogyal Ye. Spin that mantra with love, for the sake of all sentient beings, and especially for the sake of those around us who are now in deep trouble. Take refuge and share it. Keep taking refuge and keep sharing it!

May all beings be free!

-Kim Katami

Pemako Buddhist teacher,

www.pemakobuddhism.com

Mahayana Buddhism Includes Psychology and Doesn't Lack Anything

Mahayana Buddhism Includes Psychology and Doesn't Lack Anything

Santiago: Approaching the understanding of mind from these two sides that humanity has developed: The ancient teachings of awakening (the Wake up line of development) and the modern western discoveries that the ancient masters didn't have access to (the Grow up line of the development), understanding how they support and compliment each other, can help solve sooo many problems, giving us a better framework for understanding why "awakened people" are such a mess sometimes, and possibly help us move counsciousness towards a more inclusive, compassionate and integrated space.



Kim: So how did ancient master become masters if they didn't have access to the modern Western discoveries of psychology? Nothing personal Santiago but this whole idea is utterly ridiculous. I'm going to offend a lot of people but I'm going to say it anyway. It is a misconception of those who are 1. poor practitioners and 2. practitioners of sutrayana. Combine the two and you end up saying stoopid shit like that.

Chris: So, Kim, do you mean to say that medicine hasn't advanced beyond the ancient Buddhist understanding of the physiology of the brain, it's chemistry and the like? Why does the Dalai Lama favor studying that same "stoopid shit?" Is he stoopid, too?

Kim: What does my comment have to do with criticising the development of medicine? Can't speak for Dalai Lama or his interest towards science but you ever heard him mention his psychotherapist?

Chris: So you aren't opposed to combining the practices of Buddhism and the discoveries and practices of modern psychiatry, neuroscience and medicine, Kim?

Kim: No. Did you get that impression?

Chris: Yes, I got that impression from the above exchange.

Kim: Things can always be improved but the mahayana/vajrayana path doesn't lack anything as it has delivered innumerable sentient beings to the other shore. I got no problem with folks combining psychology and buddhist practice but it seems to me that their 1. understanding of buddhism and 2. practice of it has severe shortcomings. That this is their understanding and that they come to this conclusion that buddhism can be bettered with the findings of Western psychology, is not the fault of buddhism and what it has to offer.

Chris: Then I'm a "stoopid" one because I firmly believe that the combination of Buddhism and psychiatry/psychology/etc. is more powerful than either one by itself.

Kim: Suit yourself. I'm just saying that even though combination of the two, sutrayana and psychology, go farther together than they go alone, it is an unproved hypothesis when it comes to anuttara samyak sambodhi.

I haven't seen a tantric lama speak of combining vajrayana and psychology but if anyone has references, please let me know. I'll then be happy to tell what is wrong with them and their bhumis, just kidding.

To be clear, I was/am looking for tantric lamas who speak in favour for combining tantra and Western psy and consider that the tantric path is doesn't go far enough.

Chris: Kim, I don't think anyone is saying quite this - that the path doesn't go far enough. What I'm asserting is that Buddhism and the science of the mind are congruent. They support and enhance each other.
Have you seen:
https://www.mindandlife.org/mission/
And:
https://www.dalailama.com/…/buddh…/science-at-the-crossroads

Kim: Yes, I understood what you're saying. I have never had much interest in scientific or psychological findings in relation to dharma practice but I am not against it, either. Each to her or his own but I just don't agree with a lot of folks who say that the buddhist system as a whole lacks anything in terms of comprehensive development. I am however highly critical about a lot of things in buddhism, buddhist paths and buddhists, and admit that for a lot of buddhists, therapy along the noble 8-fold path or paramitas, is a very smart choice. A lot of buddhist practice leaves so much untapped and rather enforces samsaric habits than releases them. A lot depends on the teacher too.

Among teachers who have turned out to be mess, there are tantrics as well but as far as I am aware none of these bad apples were practitioners which is what I mentioned in some of my prev posts. There is no way anyone, incl. a tantric lama will be able to do her or his work well, without hassles and scandals, without making sure of one's personal practice. So, I don't know of tantric lamas who were practitioners, who screwed up. All of them were nonpractitioners and therefore not actual examples or embodiments of vajrayana buddhism.

I am yet to finish the vajrayana path but maybe, when I finish the cleaning process in some distant future, I come to agree that the path of vajrayana lacks something. However, so far, I do not see the slightest indication that this would be the case.

Shargrol: It's interesting to me that I've mostly agreed with some of your statements about many of the scandal teachers not being very advanced as practioners and I've also mostly agree with statements like people who still have emotional/psychological baggage haven't gone far enough... but I've held of agreeing because I couldn't quite figure something out...

But this last post made me realize what it is: it really is more about the practioner's attitude than the practice.

If someone is honest with themselves and continues to see their blind spots, the ways they are not finished, and owns that fact and works on it --- well, then there isn't going to be much of a problem and the practice won't matter much either. If someone is doing mindfulness meditation, tantra, therapy, or centering prayer... if they stay humble and honest, they will keep seeing their imperfections. And if they stay motivated and aware of their imperfections, they will improve.

In fact, I would put my money on a dedicated non-meditator (in therapy or doing religious centering prayer, for example) over a half-motivated vajrayana practioner -- you know what I mean?

I have no idea to inspire people to have high-ideals for themeselves and their practice. It's really the only way to live, but there is no external reward. No one will give you a reward for your practice. And what having high-ideals really means, if you are doing it right, is that almost every moment and every day and every week and every year will feel like a failure. You mostly see and feel the imperfections. But every moment, day, week, year, you continue to refine yourself because you can see and feel your imperfections. That's what it means to really pursue excellence.

Unfortunately, it's clear that these scandal teachers would much rather rest on their past successes and create a mental framework where they are at a kind of pinnacle that can't be surpassed (or they might humble brag and say they are near the top) and then project any remaining shadow sides on the people around them - distancing themselves from awareness of their imperfections... until the whole thing comes crashing down.

Anyway, ultimately I don't think people can rely on any particular framework for waking up and growing up. But the path is obvious and right under our nose.

Kim: I think that attitude is very much part of the practice. It is spoken very widely about by masters of the past. Obviously, "practice" is not only sitting practice.

You hit the nail on the head with, "what having high-ideals really means, if you are doing it right, is that almost every moment and every day and every week and every year will feel like a failure. You mostly see and feel the imperfections. But every moment, day, week, year, you continue to refine yourself because you can see and feel your imperfections.".

I can identify with that. It is not "fun", if you do it right.

Remaining vulnerable and open to have one's faults pointed out is an absolute necessity. It is easy to plateau and become self-confident in a dualistic fashion without it. I'm sorry if I get on people's nerves but still, I agree with Culadasa when soon before his case broke out said that the path (sutrayana) he has followed "doesn't go far enough" and that, "As you progress on the paths of awakening, the changes of you recognising them (parts of our pscyhe) as something that needs to be purified, diminishes." It is a striking statement coming from him. From what I have seen, sincerity or bad attitude never seemed Culadasa's weak point. Actually, to me he seemed to have an admirable character which obviously had a lot to do with what he accomplished/s in his life.

A tantric would never say what Culadasa did for the simple fact that if you practice deities, archetypes of enlightened mind, there is no way for becoming blind to one's own blindspots. It is impossible because the deity doesn't allow it. One simply keeps feeling bad as long as there is something wrong with one's view or attitude.

http://openheartopenheart.blogspot.com/…/culadasa-john…

Santiago: No offense on my part Kim, I'm grateful that we live in times where anyone has a right to express their opinion (although that's also a pain in the ass sometimes :grin. I just wonder, what is your expertice on modern Western psychological discoveries? Is it big enough to make the claim that the ancient Masters understood what this science has discovered? Did they also know about quantum physics, or even general newtonian physics? I'd just say that whenever someone thinks they have the Dharma all figured out (or figured out enough to deny new approaches that they themselves don't understand well), then THAT'S an utterly ridiculous, ignorant, shitty idea.

Kim: Hi Santiago.

I am not an expert of Western psychology or sciences but if I may, perhaps a bit of an expert of meditative yoga. Yogis, such as Shakyamuni Buddha, Guru Rinpoche and numerous others sought to find a solution to remove dualistic suffering through the doctrine of emptiness and practice of various yogas. They succeeded and that's how the whole thing got started, which is why there are people who attain the same what the ancient masters did, to this date. I do not know quantum physics but I doubt anyone has ever diminished or removed their self-based confusion (dukkha) through it. Reg. healing through psychology, I am sure it happens but whether this outcome is valid as buddhist practice, is a good question. Actually, it probably is an entirely irrelevant question to a lot of people who just wish to remove their knots in one way or the other.

Dharma doesn't seek to explain all possible things, just those of our mind. It adresses a very specific problem, that of self-delusion, and I know that through these means full enlightenment can be attained. Tantric guru yoga, in which one tunes in with some enlightened master such as those mentioned above or some other, reveals this. When one spends sufficient time in guru yoga it explains a lot of the tantric path in comparison to other paths, of one's own buddhanature and about the concerned mahasiddha guru. I can agree with what the tantric tradition says that this is an extremely valuable and unique experience that cannot be acquired by any other means. From that experience I can testify that perfect enlightenment is possible and that real masters do not have shadows or unresolved psychological issues, and that they do not behave in ways like samsaric beings do. If you wish to see one in person, Amma the hugging saint is one, though not a buddhist. I'd say Rana Rinpoche is another one, though I haven't yet met him in person. Their energetic radiation is completely different from others, incl. very experienced meditators.

Sutric buddhism doesn't have tantric guru yoga, so consequentially practitioners of those paths generally do not gain this experience. It is actually possible to get the same "transmission", if you will, from chanting of the Refuge of the Three Jewels or Bodhisattva Vows, but then it is very common for sutrics to not realise that there is an element of transmission or energetic charge related to these prayers. I have actually never seen this being pointed out by any teacher of sutra but nevertheless, the same potential is there. This is a common problem in established tantric buddhism as well, although the probability is higher since the energetic charges from lineage masters, deities and prayers are more.

Tantra, Buddhist Psychology and The Prince of Darkness

Tantra, Buddhist Psychology

and The Prince of Darkness

Question: My friend did a Yamantaka sadhana up on his farm and now he's being choked out by a dark spirit regularly. I feel like it was irresponsible of the rinpoche to give such a high tantric sadhana to him so early on and without support. But maybe he's meant to go through this, who knows...

Kim: All buddha dharma is based on the teaching of emptiness. You are empty, I am empty, horrible monsterous dark spirits are empty. Emptiness means that the self is not permanent, that there is no such constant entity in me, in you or within the devil. If there is, it is just a convincing mirage. In the desert people die after chasing mirages. That's how convincing images and thoughts are. We are son of a rich man, wandering around among the poor, as Hakuin put it. Because of self stored in thoughts, we are confused.

Buddhist view of emptiness, which is the ground without ground, puts a very different spin on harmful entities, compared to religions of dualistic view and exorcism. If there is no one here, and this is known through first hand experience, who is there to fight, who is there getting harmed, who is there doing the harming? If one has no taste, no experience of emptiness/selflessness, then one is likely to think in terms of self and other, and consequentially gets into conflict and confusion. But it need not be that way.

If one has a problem, like your friend, that she or he thinks she is being attacked by a dark spirit, one first needs to remind what the mahayana buddhist doctrine is and not get confused about duality. The things is that there is no stronger protection or medicine than emptiness which is both nondual and non-unitary. But if you think that ”emptiness protects me”, then it again becomes topsy turvy. In emptiness there is life in the form of beings who share the common ground of empty awareness. Empty means being without self, without me, without colour, without shape, without story, without excuse, without fear, without being screwed. That is where all beings; whether they are good, bad or liberated, meet, whether they know it or not. In one way or the other, all buddhists seek to know themselves as this basic awareness. So when discussing about protection, it's not like we would surround ourselves with some substance called emptiness so that the esoteric mafia couldn't get to us. No. When we know ourselves as empty awareness, there is no need for protection, for how could anyone fight or abuse space? You can't make space scared, either. This is the beauty of buddhist doctrine.

Regarding your friend's problem. Adopting a different view would be helpful. It'd be helpful if, what is first seen as a malefic entity, instead, would be viewed as a traumatic energy or self of one's own mind. I mean seeing the spirit to be part of one's own mind rather than something external. How did she or he come to think it's a dark spirit, in the first place? If a nasty presence or choking is felt, it can be seen as a manifestation of stress, rather than being attacked by an external being. This gives it a very different spin. From there, apply common vipashyana instructions.

You know, people can actually have such strong entities, emotional selves, that cause very strong sensations like the one you mention. The thing is that we may have very strong trauma or karma stored in our subconscious mind. You can think of all the worst actions committed by humans (that are abound!) and safely make the assumption that you, me and everyone else has done it in some life, at some stage in the past. What if you experience dark presence and getting choked because you might have choked someone to death in the past? I am merely suggesting that what if that is what is happening? What if this has nothing to do with anyone else except you and your own karma? Of course, understandably, it is difficult because of reactive fear and anxiety. We get scared of things unknown. The main point is that when we clarify our own stand (of emptiness), there isn't anything for the demons, devils and Princes of Darkness to dig their fangs on.

Samsaric mind is tricky and complex but the principle is simple. Students of vajrayana need to study and understand both sutra and tantra, not only tantra. Without sutra studies, one doesn't necessarily comprehend the psychological aspect of dharma, which is what I am suggesting here.

I do not know who the concerned rinpoche is or whether he gave the practice based on clairvoyance (therefore the practice being suitable despite of difficulties) but one thing that apparently is missing is opportunity for one-on-one with the lama. This is common problem and a lot of people complain about that. It's a valid complaint.

-Kim Katami, 29.6.2019

Open Heart Sangha,

www.en.openheart.fi

The First Person Who Opened All Bhumis with Dynamic Concentration

The First Person Who Opened All Bhumis with Dynamic Concentration

Kim's Comment: I received an email from ”CN”, who told me of her success with Open Heart practices. She briefly tells about her practice history in theravada buddhism and further progress with core Open Heart practices that she learned from the website and YouTube-videos. She is the first one who has opened all 13 bhumis without receiving tantric empowerments, by the power of Dynamic Concentration and other central exercises. I have asked CN for a more detailed account which will be published soon in this blog.

CN: First of all, I would like to thank you for making your teachings available on YouTube, the website and your books. I have benefitted greatly from them. I first heard Open Heart from the Dharma Overground website and was intrigued, I have been practising Theravadan Vipassana meditation for about 10 years and had reached 2nd path but wasn't seeing further progress. Once I started practicing with your guided meditations on YouTube, my practice became much more enjoyable and felt easier and also started to notice Bhumi openings. And I (humbly) believe that I may have open the 13th bhumi. My experience on the 11th bhumi opening lines up with several of the testimonials I have read. I have noticed other practices hinted at in the YouTube videos, so I would like to sign up for your course to learn these. I live in western Canada, , which is 10 time zones behind Finland.

Since I moved away from the Theravadan practice, I was doing a combination of Guru Yoga, Dynamic Concentration and Ati Yoga. I mostly followed the video: Introduction to Tibetan Heart Yoga: Guided Practice and the Dynamic Concentration: Buddha, Dharma & Sangha as well as others that you have available, I particularly enjoyed your recent series on Bodhicitta. Yes, opening the 11th was amazing, the natural state feels so available now.

Kim: Ah, so there it is... The effect of dynamic concentration. I am so happy to hear that you opened those bhumis with the help of these non-tantric exercises. All of my students have received Open Heart Yoga empowerment before beginning dynamic concentration practice, so you are the first one who actually opened all bhumis without empowerment. I am thrilled to hear that!

Learn more about Dynamic Concentration from 
What's Next? On Post-Awakening Practice-ebook.

Just As It Is – All Beings Are Free

Just As It Is – All Beings Are Free

Few days ago, compassionate motivation of enlightenment (skt. bodhicitta, j. bodaishin/菩提心), from the relative perspective, was discussed at Facebook. Mahayana and vajrayana approaches of buddhism are big on bodhicitta, where practitioners remind themselves of the suffering and confusion of all sentient beings, while mentally praying and physically acting for the liberation of all beings. This is what bodhisattvas, those aiming at full liberation, do, with great spiritual benefits. Bodhicitta is the tip of the spear of mahayana buddhism, which reveals our innate buddhanature while uncovering our selfish confusion in all of its forms, including those that are not easy to detect.

There is also another perspective to bodhicitta, ultimate bodhicitta, where all beings are already free. This perspective exists simultaneously with the relative one. The ultimate perspective doesn't deny the relative one, this is essential to understand.

In my experience, ultimate bodhicitta can be glimpsed along the way, as we keep praying and acting for the liberation of others. Then at some point, the fact that all beings are free already, sneaks on us, and we experience both perspectives. This makes our practice mature, as well as realistic. It is realistic because sentient beins are both, free and imprisoned, buddhas and samsaric beings, until we cease to be samsaric beings.

In my article, Nuts and Bots of Bodhicitta (to be published at Levekunst.com), I gave a simple meditative exercise to boost one's experience and understanding of bodhicitta.

The gist of this exercise is this: Be or sit with all beings.

This is a highly useful meditation for those who work to understand one's true nature. When familiarity increases, this exercise ceases to be an articial practice, and becomes what we actually are, a mind of perfect clarity and stability, that is shared by all life, in a dynamic lively way.

This can also be used to check if one's atiyoga (t. dzogchen atiyoga), or nonmeditation is correct. If we generate bodhicitta during nonmeditation, and our energyfield disappears by blessings shooting outwards from our body, and by consequence we become connected with sentient beings outside our energy field, it is an indication that our atiyoga is still unripe. It is unripe because atiyoga is ”buddhanature sitting” and in buddhanature all beings are already connected. In this case, we need to keep generating bodhicitta and focus on tantric practice. However, if nothing happens by saying a prayer, our practice is sound and correct.

This is how I understand, ”just as it is”, a phrase often used in zen buddhism, and this is what I believe, correct just sitting (j. shikantaza/只管打坐) is.

Thank you for reading,

- Kim Katami, 8.12.2018.

Pedagogy of Dharma

Pedagogy of Dharma

In many of my posts I have discussed problems related to the teaching methods of dharma. In constructive spirit, I am here continuing on dharma pedagogy in a casual manner.

Room for improvement

I often wonder how it is possible that there is very low pedagogical standards in transmitting of the dharma. When seeing how poorly teachings and practice instructions are delivered, anyone with some exposure to pedagogical studies probably wonders the same. If we think of any field of study, there are explicit requirements what the students are excepted to learn but unfortunately this doesn't seem to be the case in buddhism. Fortunately there are some exceptions to this rule but in general it can be said that dharma teachers would have a lot to improve in their skills. 

Practical example of poor pedagogy are extensive yet vague theoretical expositions with little or no relation at all to actual practice. Students listen to their teachers talk hour after hour, year after year and yet their understanding does not grow. I have joined many dharma events where teachers speak extensively yet never explain properly how the given theory is supposed to relate to the practice and have an effect on the minds of the students. I have seen people with over 20 years of diligent study inquire their teachers about the meaning of emptiness to which they were answered the same jargon of emptiness and compassion that is too symbolic to understand, just like it was 20 years before, and every year since.

If students weren't learning, that would make the bells go off in the head of an educated teacher of any other field of study but this doesn't seem to be the case in buddhism. Traditional teachers rarely seem to be able to think outside the box which is a great shame.

If the old ways and methods are not making practitioners (in plural) fully enlightened, or even making a notable number of practitioners evolved, then there is a need for comprehensive re-evaluation. If the old ways worked we would surely see a very different culture of dharma than we are seeing now. 

Like all old religions, buddhism also has the problem of having imbibed much cultural influences from the ancient cultures of the East. While these external influences give each tradition their distinctive outlook through ways, forms, rituals and religious and institutionalised features, this evolution of the outlook can make the core of dharma very unclear and murky. For many Westerners it is easy to see this in their native religion of Christianity but difficult in their chosen form of Eastern buddhism. 

While vagueness of instructions in buddhist meditation is common, at the same time teachers emphasize that the training deals with the mind. That is a valid point but at the same time is not helpful if the instructions actually are vague. Observing these two factors have lead me to think whether various teachers are able to comprehend the profundity of the teachings of the past masters, for example emptiness or the nature of mind which both are the bedrock of buddhist meditation. Vagueness of instructions indicates lack of first hand experience. If one has first hand eperience, one should be able to describe what theoretically seems complex, in a simple and straightforward language without any vagueness whatsoever. Scholarly jargon and excessive theoretical details only get in the way of direct understanding and experience.

Another example of bad teaching habits is talking voluminously yet not addressing the actual topic. It is amazing how some teachers give extensive series's of talks lasting days or even weeks and manage not to talk about anything that would actually be useful. Here the teacher only wastes the time of the students.

Some years ago I bought a set of DVD's on analytical meditation by a famous Tibetan buddhist teacher. The recordings contained 7 hours of talks. However, in all five discs, the actual topic was discussed for only 15 minutes. On average, the teacher, adressed the topic for one minute about every half and hour. What did he talk about then? Praise and hype about the tradition, exciting and illustrative stories of past masters and their great efforts, and loads of silly jokes. Imagine if a school teacher did that. He would get kicked out in weeks or months because there are certain and strict standards.

Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche states: ”When I went to the United States for the first time, I was in New York and over that period Dudjom Rinpoche was also there giving a teaching. In the newspaper, there was an announcement saying, 

”Dudjom Rinpoche is giving the supreme teaching of Dzogchen”. Then some of my students went to receive the teaching and we discovered that Dudjom Rinpoche was actually giving a teaching about Refuge, Bodhicitta and other such things. He was teaching on the Four Teachings of Gampopa. He taught (the first) three, but he didn't give the fourth one. The fourth one shows how illusion is tranformed into wisdom. This kind of teaching is more commonly applied in Tantra but it is not necessary in Dzogchen. Many teachers give this teaching, and it is an example of how something can misleadingly be given the title of Dzogchen. It is not so difficult to understand. When you give the title of Dzogchen to something and then teach some technique of practice, how to do Puja, or how to do different kinds of visualisation and transformation, then it is not Dzogchen.”

Giving hasty and poorly defined practice instructions is another common problem. Especially in Tibetan buddhism teachers deliver long talks about the theory. These talks can last hours but when they get to practice instructions, they are too hasty and without the needed detail. I don't mean pithy or concise. After hours or even days of explanation, the teacher can explain the technique in few short sentences and never repeat what he said. I've seen geshes (doctors) and high lamas do this. This causes the students problems because they don't exactly know what they are supposed to do and how. I have met people who practiced for years on the basis of such instructions doing the practice wrong and without getting much benefits. Also, in ”guided sessions” teacher's verbal instructions can be of no use whatsoever again due to vagueness and carelessness. The teacher should always put himself in the place of the listeners, considering what they need to know in order to do the practice correctly. The position of a teacher is a highly responsible one because others rely on his or her instructions. For this reason, a teacher cannot assume that everyone knows what he is talking about, without asking them. The teacher should always make sure the students understand what is taught.

Another common problem is to use too little (or too much) time for the actual practice during dharma events. I've seen both examples. I recently joined a weekend dzogchen seminar of a famous Tibetan lama where literally 1 minute of a 90 minute session was used for practice that was hastily described the previous evening and was never reviewed. After I had survived my dumbfoundedness it was hard for me to comprehend what had just happened because it was both a pedagogical and practical disaster. How is it possible that a lama with decades of exposure to dharma would use his time for travelling to another country and then as a teacher do so poorly in making the crowd interested in the actual practice? I question this because after all that is said, it is the practice that matters, right? How can anyone practice correctly after one single minute of practice based on poor instructions? 

Ngak'chang Rinpoche: "I think that people who are associated with Shambhala center, may not know that Chogyam Trungpa Rinpoche was the first lama ever to teach silent sitting as a group practice in the Tibetan tradition. This was really quite a radical move. It doesn't seem so radical from the perspective of theravada or zen but certainly from the Tibetan buddhist perspective. Khandro Dechen and I are always very happy if there are zen students who attend our retreats because they know how to sit. The Tibetan students tend to fidget because they are not used to silent sitting. So the reason why Trungpa Rinpoche introduced silent sitting as a group practice is because he wanted to establish a solid foundation for what came afterwards. In the dzogchen tradition we don't have group silent sitting because in the dzogchen tradition there are these ancillary practices. So for example when you sit and come across some obstacle then there are things you can do to that obstacle. There are certain syllables that are enunciated forcefully. Now as you can imagine if there is a whole room full of people who are all occasionally uttering forceful syllables its somewhat distracting. There are also changes in physical posture and there are also exercises that are sometimes quite athletic. However we have taken on this practice of group silent sitting because its extremely valuable in a supportive way as a sangha." from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1SthFvUtEp0

Some years ago I heard that there are no group meditations in Tibetan monasteries. For someone with a zen training history, this was a shock and I still don't understand how the Tibetans reasoned that sitting meditation was to be done alone at retreats, or by each person himself in the monastery. Surely sitting together with the sangha for a few hours a day would be (is) highly beneficial.

When teaching dzogchen, the teacher needs to be very careful and skillful in communicating, demonstrating and transmitting the natural state to the students. Ample time in practice together is an absolute requirement for that is the core of it all. All else is just support to this. This is the only way to properly pass the lamp of dharma, the lamp of the natural state. When this is achieved it is the recognition of the natural state that motivates the student, instead of secondary motives like the popularity of the teacher or his lineage.

Starting to do other things immediately after prayer recitation or mantras, without even a moment of conscious recognition, is another common fault. I have seen how teachers and students recite long prayers, from 10-60 minutes, but the moment they are done reading they stand up and get busy with other things. This  indicates a very poor understanding of the energetic side of dharma practice. If the blessings of the guru, The Three Jewels, Bodhisattva Vows, the deities (yidam, ishtadevata) or the energies of prayers are not well recognised by experiencing them in one's own body, heart and mind, then one is not really receiving the blessings, connecting to the lineage and therefore cannot get the proper benefit of the practice. The blessings and energetic charges, that do come about in all kinds of dharma practice from theravada, to mahayana and vajrayana, should be recognised and connected with with one's own body. Not doing this is like wanting to listen to a special radio show and carefully tuning to the right channel but then after tuning in, instead of listening to the special broadcast, beginning to do other things. I have seen dorje lopons (skt. vajracharya) with over 40 years of history do this. I think it is extremely unfortunate because this energetic aspect is the foundation of all dharma, and it is always there regardless of tradition or the vehicle.

Keeping it real

Dharma is about the mind, and mind is an abstract thing. But despite of its abstractness it is possible to speak, transmit and understand it in simple and common terms. If I look at buddhism, more specifically tantric buddhism and dzogchen, in the world today, there are many obvious issues there that would be easy to fix.

I do not claim to be omniscient but here I have discussed some problems that would be easy to fix, if the teachers wanted to. We cannot be too self-sufficient and merely rely on ancient ways. If we are willing to see and can admit, buddhism is not doing too well in terms of releasing suffering. 

We must always question fearlessly and analyse our ways so that we can see our faults. We also should listen and learn from others. Answering questions in a proper manner leads to more thorough understanding, real experiential knowledge. That is the only way to keep dharma alive.

- Kim Katami, 1.6.2017

Open Heart, www.openheart.fi