Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [TBG] How can we as Buddhist develop more Compassion ?:

Expand Messages
  • Do I Even Know?
    The conserns about karma...aftr I look around googlin I find this drama is much larger than just a posting here. How does the person chasing around after
    Message 1 of 21 , Dec 2, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      The conserns about karma...aftr I look around googlin' I find this
      drama is much larger than just a posting here. How does the person
      chasing around after what they perceive as a wrong get slapped with
      karma?

      The proper way to deal with impostors, as was relater to me by my
      Lama, and which I have read in many books (Buddhist and Christian)
      is to just ignore them. Don't waste time spreading angry hateful
      words about people.

      I do not know either of these persona, nor do I care how they
      present themselves on the internet. The internet is a world of
      false fronts and hidden identities. I can't prove wgho anyone is,
      not even if I meet them in person. So why have a tissy about what
      someone chooses as a name?

      bahB


      --- In tibetanbuddhistgroup@yahoogroups.com, "R. Kenoyer"
      <rubylou@...> wrote:
      >
      > I'm not sure that it matters in this case. Dharma is dharma, and
      > nobody is soliciting donations.
      >
      > ~~Rachael
      >
      >
      > On Nov 29, 2007, at 6:19 AM, dorjeshonnu wrote:
      > >
      > > Peter Ray is not a Buddhist monk. Peter Ray represents himself as
      > > Thubten Pema Tenzin, a purported monk, and a purported tulku. We
      are
      > > each capable of assessing the value of links on our own. The
      value of
      > > dharma is beyond dispute; this is irrelevant. The actions of
      Peter Ray
      > > in providing these links is an appropriation of dharma content
      with
      > > the intent of misrepresentation of his identity online as not
      only an
      > > ordained, but also an accomplished source of refuge. Thus while
      the
      > > content is positive, the karma involved is negative.
      > >
      >
    • dorjeshonnu
      ... No tissy, no angry hateful words involved. But you try getting on your Lama s throne before a teaching. Put on some robes and the whole kit. See what
      Message 2 of 21 , Dec 3, 2007
      • 0 Attachment
        "Do I Even Know?" <bahbdorje@...> wrote:
        >
        > The concerns about karma... after I look around googlin' I find this
        > drama is much larger than just a posting here. How does the person
        > chasing around after what they perceive as a wrong get slapped with
        > karma?
        >
        > The proper way to deal with impostors, as was related to me by my
        > Lama, and which I have read in many books (Buddhist and Christian)
        > is to just ignore them. Don't waste time spreading angry hateful
        > words about people.
        >
        > I do not know either of these persona, nor do I care how they
        > present themselves on the internet. The internet is a world of
        > false fronts and hidden identities. I can't prove who anyone is,
        > not even if I meet them in person. So why have a tissy about what
        > someone chooses as a name?

        No tissy, no angry hateful words involved.
        But you try getting on your Lama's throne before a teaching.
        Put on some robes and the whole kit. See what happens.

        You will be removed, one way or another, for your own good.
      • imperialdlptutoring
        Isn t the real issue here kind and gentle speech and skillfullness (which I think are particularly important online since one can t see the facial expressions
        Message 3 of 21 , Dec 4, 2007
        • 0 Attachment
          Isn't the real issue here kind and gentle speech and skillfullness
          (which I think are particularly important online since one can't see
          the facial expressions of people reading one's messages) rather than
          whether someone is or isn't a monk (but, nonetheless a sentient being
          who's wellness we should wish for)? I (personally) believe the
          original motivation for the posting with links was positive and am
          not (personally) interested in whether the person posting the message
          is a monk or not. Further, I find it ironic and more than a little
          disheartening that a thread about compassion, in one of the more
          compassionate parts of the internet, degenerates into an exchange
          which strikes me as far from compassionate. So, for the benefit of
          ALL subscribers of this list could I respectfully request/suggest
          that members exercise a measure of restraint and skillfullness
          (motivated by compassion, being mindful particularly of 'right
          speech') before posting messages which might be misconstrued and
          cause mental anguish in fellow subscribers!

          With metta,

          Mike

          --- In tibetanbuddhistgroup@yahoogroups.com, "dorjeshonnu"
          <dorjeshonnu@...> wrote:
          >
          > Steven Levey <sallev1@> wrote:
          > >
          > > Is it that I am not a Buddhist Monk for appreciating the links,
          or is
          > > the one sending the links not a Buddhist monk? And just what
          state of
          > > mind are you in to overlook the value of links, which offer so
          much
          > > to the student regarding bodhicitta, so that you might be
          accusatory.
          > > Is that not the opposite of the intention here?
          >
          > Peter Ray is not a Buddhist monk. Peter Ray represents himself as
          > Thubten Pema Tenzin, a purported monk, and a purported tulku. We are
          > each capable of assessing the value of links on our own. The value
          of
          > dharma is beyond dispute; this is irrelevant. The actions of Peter
          Ray
          > in providing these links is an appropriation of dharma content with
          > the intent of misrepresentation of his identity online as not only
          an
          > ordained, but also an accomplished source of refuge. Thus while the
          > content is positive, the karma involved is negative.
          >
          > The compassionate action in this case is to take steps to correct
          any
          > misrepresentations of identity that Peter Ray undertakes.
          Particularly
          > before he begins soliciting donations on the basis of these
          > misrepresentations - again. Thank you for the direct question
          Steven.
          >
        • Do I Even Know?
          And no actual responce to my questions or staements. I m not putting on any robes. The Karmic Question concerns how YOU are acting. What is your qualification
          Message 4 of 21 , Dec 4, 2007
          • 0 Attachment
            And no actual responce to my questions or staements.

            I'm not putting on any robes.

            The Karmic Question concerns how YOU are acting. What is your
            qualification to denounce people? Are you privy to all the refuge and
            ordination records? What's the deal? I am asking questions here. I
            am curious how it works that you feel untainted by your accusations.
            Never has any Tibetan Buddhist, or any other Buddhist (except
            scammers) make a point about anyones qualifications as you have.



            --- In tibetanbuddhistgroup@yahoogroups.com, "dorjeshonnu"
            <dorjeshonnu@...> wrote:
            >
            >
            > No tissy, no angry hateful words involved.
            > But you try getting on your Lama's throne before a teaching.
            > Put on some robes and the whole kit. See what happens.
            >
            > You will be removed, one way or another, for your own good.
            >
          • dorjeshonnu
            ... Hello to you in California. Thank you for your concern about my wellbeing. I appreciate it very much, and hope your own practices are fruitful. The
            Message 5 of 21 , Dec 5, 2007
            • 0 Attachment
              "Do I Even Know?" <bahbdorje@...> wrote:
              >
              > The Karmic Question concerns how YOU are acting. What is your
              > qualification to denounce people? Are you privy to all the refuge
              > and ordination records? What's the deal? I am asking questions
              > here. I am curious how it works that you feel untainted by your
              > accusations. Never has any Tibetan Buddhist, or any other Buddhist
              > (except scammers) made a point about anyone's qualifications as you
              > have.

              Hello to you in California. Thank you for your concern about my
              wellbeing. I appreciate it very much, and hope your own practices are
              fruitful. The situation of my causes is greatly helped by the
              Vajrasattva 100-syllable sadhana provided to me and others by the
              Venerable Khenpo Sonam Tobgyal Rinpoche, as well as the other
              wang/tri/lung empowerments and transmissions I've been fortunate
              enough to receive from other teachers. I direct my daily actions
              according to the advice and texts of credible sources of authority,
              and own best judgment. While I do not live what some would call an
              ideal life, I have confidence in the Three Jewels, my teachers, and
              methods, and look forward to liberation, or the next life of benefit
              to sentient beings.

              There is no especial qualification involved in denouncing anyone,
              other than that the situation be significant enough for action to be
              taken, and that the person so denouncing be adequately informed enough
              to make a credible assertion. In the case of a person falsely claiming
              to be ordained sangha, the situation seems significant enough to me.

              I am not privy to "all refuge and ordination records". In the case at
              hand I am privy enough to the claims made by the individual, the
              observed conduct of the individual, and his ongoing insinuations of
              identity here. Amongst the various pictures he has taken from other
              people's websites he includes a photo of documents, with refuge names,
              that he claims are ordination records - these constitute nothing of
              the sort. There have been various small inconsistencies in his
              accounts about himself, some glaring problems with conduct, and in
              fact vajra siblings of mine have investigated some of his claims
              specifically.

              For instance he has claimed to be a tulku recognized by Ngakpa Orgyen
              Kusum Lingpa Rinpoche. An email was sent to the people here:

              http://www.omura.com/k_lingpa/klingpa1.htm

              and the response was this:

              ...

              "Hello,
              I don't know who you are, or why you are concerned about this person.
              I remember him having visited our center one time and as I remember
              Kusum Lingpa only recognized him to be a pretty crazy guy. He seemed
              to me to be mentally unbalanced although not harmful. The last I knew
              of him he was in Nepal, sending messages back for financial support.
              There is no proof anywhere that Kusum Lingpa recognized him as a tulku.
              Yours,
              Yeshe Tarchin"

              ...

              Thus on the basis of small, greater, and direct statements from a
              credible source as evidence, I have made my statements here, and am
              satisfied with any causes which may in future ripen on the basis of
              these actions.

              I think it is uncommon to see this sort of thing because most people
              in their right minds have no interest in representing themselves in
              such a way. As you said, you will not be putting on the robes.

              As for Peter Ray, whose name is actually, sorry, Donald Peter Ray Jr,
              I am willing to believe that he has taken refuge and perhaps even
              bodhisattva vows, and may in fact be deluded by the thought that these
              have in some sense constituted full ordination. But this merely
              compounds his difficulties if, having taken particular vows, he has
              acted against them. In no sense do I believe him to be acting out of
              pure malice, or that he is some kind of mara. It is simply that his
              story does not hold up under inspection, and thus I believe he needs
              to be protected from his own actions.
            • Do I Even Know?
              Thank you for the information. I will now put it all out of my mind if I can, and try to stay focused on what I can do to continue my own practices. bahB ...
              Message 6 of 21 , Dec 7, 2007
              • 0 Attachment
                Thank you for the information. I will now put it all out of my mind
                if I can, and try to stay focused on what I can do to continue my
                own practices.

                bahB


                --- In tibetanbuddhistgroup@yahoogroups.com, "dorjeshonnu"
                <dorjeshonnu@...> wrote:
                >
                > "Do I Even Know?" <bahbdorje@> wrote:
                > >
                > > The Karmic Question concerns how YOU are acting. What is your
                > > qualification to denounce people? Are you privy to all the refuge
                > > and ordination records? What's the deal? I am asking questions
                > > here. I am curious how it works that you feel untainted by your
                > > accusations. Never has any Tibetan Buddhist, or any other
                Buddhist
                > > (except scammers) made a point about anyone's qualifications as
                you
                > > have.
                >
                > Hello to you in California. Thank you for your concern about my
                > wellbeing. I appreciate it very much, and hope your own practices
                are
                > fruitful. The situation of my causes is greatly helped by the
                > Vajrasattva 100-syllable sadhana provided to me and others by the
                > Venerable Khenpo Sonam Tobgyal Rinpoche, as well as the other
                > wang/tri/lung empowerments and transmissions I've been fortunate
                > enough to receive from other teachers. I direct my daily actions
                > according to the advice and texts of credible sources of authority,
                > and own best judgment. While I do not live what some would call an
                > ideal life, I have confidence in the Three Jewels, my teachers, and
                > methods, and look forward to liberation, or the next life of
                benefit
                > to sentient beings.
                >
                > There is no especial qualification involved in denouncing anyone,
                > other than that the situation be significant enough for action to
                be
                > taken, and that the person so denouncing be adequately informed
                enough
                > to make a credible assertion. In the case of a person falsely
                claiming
                > to be ordained sangha, the situation seems significant enough to
                me.
                >
                > I am not privy to "all refuge and ordination records". In the case
                at
                > hand I am privy enough to the claims made by the individual, the
                > observed conduct of the individual, and his ongoing insinuations of
                > identity here. Amongst the various pictures he has taken from other
                > people's websites he includes a photo of documents, with refuge
                names,
                > that he claims are ordination records - these constitute nothing of
                > the sort. There have been various small inconsistencies in his
                > accounts about himself, some glaring problems with conduct, and in
                > fact vajra siblings of mine have investigated some of his claims
                > specifically.
                >
                > For instance he has claimed to be a tulku recognized by Ngakpa
                Orgyen
                > Kusum Lingpa Rinpoche. An email was sent to the people here:
                >
                > http://www.omura.com/k_lingpa/klingpa1.htm
                >
                > and the response was this:
                >
                > ...
                >
                > "Hello,
                > I don't know who you are, or why you are concerned about this
                person.
                > I remember him having visited our center one time and as I remember
                > Kusum Lingpa only recognized him to be a pretty crazy guy. He
                seemed
                > to me to be mentally unbalanced although not harmful. The last I
                knew
                > of him he was in Nepal, sending messages back for financial
                support.
                > There is no proof anywhere that Kusum Lingpa recognized him as a
                tulku.
                > Yours,
                > Yeshe Tarchin"
                >
                > ...
                >
                > Thus on the basis of small, greater, and direct statements from a
                > credible source as evidence, I have made my statements here, and am
                > satisfied with any causes which may in future ripen on the basis of
                > these actions.
                >
                > I think it is uncommon to see this sort of thing because most
                people
                > in their right minds have no interest in representing themselves in
                > such a way. As you said, you will not be putting on the robes.
                >
                > As for Peter Ray, whose name is actually, sorry, Donald Peter Ray
                Jr,
                > I am willing to believe that he has taken refuge and perhaps even
                > bodhisattva vows, and may in fact be deluded by the thought that
                these
                > have in some sense constituted full ordination. But this merely
                > compounds his difficulties if, having taken particular vows, he has
                > acted against them. In no sense do I believe him to be acting out
                of
                > pure malice, or that he is some kind of mara. It is simply that his
                > story does not hold up under inspection, and thus I believe he
                needs
                > to be protected from his own actions.
                >
              • imperialdlptutoring
                Just picking up on one (important) point and then I really will go ... Since Buddhism IS par excellence about sanity and having a healthy mind (and, indeed,
                Message 7 of 21 , Dec 9, 2007
                • 0 Attachment
                  Just picking up on one (important) point and then I really will go
                  quiet, return to my practice, and allow the group/list to do the same:

                  --- In tibetanbuddhistgroup@yahoogroups.com, "dorjeshonnu"
                  <dorjeshonnu@...> wrote:
                  > Kusum Lingpa only recognized him to be a pretty crazy guy. He seemed
                  > to me to be mentally unbalanced although not harmful.

                  Since Buddhism IS par excellence about sanity and having a healthy mind
                  (and, indeed, the benefits of meditation in terms of mental health are
                  widely documented), not surprisingly, quite a few people suffering
                  mental illness ARE drawn to Buddhism (in a genuine effort to take
                  control of their minds and help themselves). So my personal view is
                  that the compassionate action, so far as possible, is to welcome these
                  individuals and applaud/assist them in their efforts to help themselves
                  (albeit sometimes deluded and misguided) rather than condemn them.

                  I also believe quite a few individuals suffering mental illness
                  subscribe to online Buddhist lists like this one. So, since people
                  suffering mental illness may be very vulnerable, and we cannot know
                  what state of mind they are in when posting/reading online messages I,
                  personally, believe kind and gentle speech is VERY important online
                  when communicating with/about these troubled/disturbed individuals who,
                  through no fault of their own, are suffering mental illness. If anyone
                  reading this post IS suffering mental illness (and there is no stigma
                  in that) perhaps I could draw your attention to the Buddhist Wellness
                  Group:

                  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BuddhistWellnessGroup/

                  ... which has an explicitly mental health focus and where all are
                  welcomed (whether monks or not ;-) ).

                  OK, I really WILL go quiet here and leave everyone in peace to get on
                  with their practice!

                  With metta,

                  Mike
                • Steven Levey
                  Dear Mike, Regarding this statement of yours: I personally, believe kind and gentle speech is VERY important online when communicating with/about these
                  Message 8 of 21 , Dec 17, 2007
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Dear Mike,
                       Regarding this statement of yours:
                     "I personally, believe kind and gentle speech is VERY important online
                    when communicating with/about these troubled/disturbed individuals who,
                    through no fault of their own, are suffering mental illness."
                        I feel a couple of ways at once about this. First, let me say that I think your basic point is well taken. But I also think it serves well to have another explain a situation as best they can, (such as he who initially made us aware of the other's issues) without, as you mentioned, harsh overtones. That is, if they are really aware of something regarding a possible abuse of trust, of which others may not.
                       Secondly, If it were true that the mental instability in question were really-karmically, not the fault of the disturbed individual, then by the law of our being and Karma, there would be no way for one to make corrections (even as presented by a practioner), if they were inclined to allow Buddhism to work its alchemy upon them through a new humility and Mindfullness. This is because we are all responsable for the state of our minds, even in so much that the causes seem inscrutable. So, if we are not the cause, then we can not be the effect. Therefore, it must be true-only if we are the cause can we be effective in making the change, which we first have to admit we need (no small task), and then admit that only through "self devised and self imposed efforts" can equalibrium be reinstated-by the one who at some point must have been the original cause in the resultant disequalibrium (even in the case where our Karma has had us incarnate in a body with an imperfect mind/brain relationship-it is still our Karma!). It is taught, and experience shows, that Cause and Effect is an exact linear relationship, although egoity wishes for only reasons it knows, to make it seem otherwise. Of course this is part of the problem of any resultant mental disequalibrium.
                       There is a Tibetan text which says that "The mind is the great slayer of the Real. Let the disciple slay the slayer". The implication being that it is only though Buddha mind that the Monkey mind can be aligned. However, until then, the Monkey mind is, through attachment to external phenomena, making desicions based upon Mara. To varying degrees, this is the cause of delusion for all of us and to those most afflicted, it is also the basis of their "troubled/disturbed" state.
                       None of the above is merely imperical. It is an understanding arrived at through Mindfullness and application to my own issues, as I have learned from those wiser than me. Does it require a "Professional" to present the antidote? Or, will a "wakefull" being do? Can there be both?-Sure. I think it aught to be said however, as Psong ka pa points out, as do others, that this human state is rare to attain, and per the Diamond Sutra, it is must be even further rare to have the Karma of the Three Jewels in ones life. To abuse such a combination seems very sad.
                     
                    Steve

                    ----- Original Message ----
                    From: imperialdlptutoring <imperialdlptutoring@...>
                    To: tibetanbuddhistgroup@yahoogroups.com
                    Sent: Sunday, December 9, 2007 5:00:26 AM
                    Subject: [TBG] Re: How can we as Buddhist develop more Compassion ?:

                    Just picking up on one (important) point and then I really will go
                    quiet, return to my practice, and allow the group/list to do the same:

                    --- In tibetanbuddhistgrou p@yahoogroups. com, "dorjeshonnu"
                    <dorjeshonnu@ ...> wrote:

                    > Kusum Lingpa only recognized him to be a pretty crazy guy. He seemed
                    > to me to be mentally unbalanced although not harmful.

                    Since Buddhism IS par excellence about sanity and having a healthy mind
                    (and, indeed, the benefits of meditation in terms of mental health are
                    widely documented), not surprisingly, quite a few people suffering
                    mental illness ARE drawn to Buddhism (in a genuine effort to take
                    control of their minds and help themselves). So my personal view is
                    that the compassionate action, so far as possible, is to welcome these
                    individuals and applaud/assist them in their efforts to help themselves
                    (albeit sometimes deluded and misguided) rather than condemn them.

                    I also believe quite a few individuals suffering mental illness
                    subscribe to online Buddhist lists like this one. So, since people
                    suffering mental illness may be very vulnerable, and we cannot know
                    what state of mind they are in when posting/reading online messages I,
                    personally, believe kind and gentle speech is VERY important online
                    when communicating with/about these troubled/disturbed individuals who,
                    through no fault of their own, are suffering mental illness. If anyone
                    reading this post IS suffering mental illness (and there is no stigma
                    in that) perhaps I could draw your attention to the Buddhist Wellness
                    Group:

                    http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/BuddhistWe llnessGroup/

                    ... which has an explicitly mental health focus and where all are
                    welcomed (whether monks or not ;-) ).

                    OK, I really WILL go quiet here and leave everyone in peace to get on
                    with their practice!

                    With metta,

                    Mike




                    Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
                  • imperialdlptutoring
                    Thanks Steve! On the first point, I still hold that skillfullness and kind and gentle speech are important when dealing with disturbed and vulnerable people
                    Message 9 of 21 , Dec 19, 2007
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Thanks Steve! On the first point, I still hold that skillfullness and
                      kind and gentle speech are important when dealing with disturbed and
                      vulnerable people and other 'difficult' situations in life. I take as
                      my basic moral benchmark 'non harm' (in speech and action). Will my
                      words (or actions) do harm to others?? If so, then either remain
                      silent or rephrase them (more skillfully) in a form that will not do
                      harm.

                      On the second point I think the issue of responsibility and
                      diminished responsibility is a complicated one legally and in
                      relating to/helping people suffering mental illness. But, as a
                      relative Buddhist neophyte, I'm grateful for your explanation from
                      the Buddhist perspective, and will take some time to try and digest
                      this and it's implications!

                      Metta,

                      Mike (who really will try and go quiet here, having made his point...)

                      --- In tibetanbuddhistgroup@yahoogroups.com, Steven Levey
                      <sallev1@...> wrote:
                      >
                      > Dear Mike,
                      > Regarding this statement of yours:
                      > "I personally, believe kind and gentle speech is VERY important
                      online
                      > when communicating with/about these troubled/disturbed individuals
                      who,
                      > through no fault of their own, are suffering mental illness."
                      > I feel a couple of ways at once about this. First, let me say
                      that I think your basic point is well taken. But I also think it
                      serves well to have another explain a situation as best they can,
                      (such as he who initially made us aware of the other's issues)
                      without, as you mentioned, harsh overtones. That is, if they are
                      really aware of something regarding a possible abuse of trust, of
                      which others may not.
                      > Secondly, If it were true that the mental instability in
                      question were really-karmically, not the fault of the disturbed
                      individual, then by the law of our being and Karma, there would be no
                      way for one to make corrections (even as presented by a practioner),
                      if they were inclined to allow Buddhism to work its alchemy upon them
                      through a new humility and Mindfullness. This is because we are all
                      responsable for the state of our minds, even in so much that the
                      causes seem inscrutable. So, if we are not the cause, then we can not
                      be the effect. Therefore, it must be true-only if we are the cause
                      can we be effective in making the change, which we first have to
                      admit we need (no small task), and then admit that only through "self
                      devised and self imposed efforts" can equalibrium be reinstated-by
                      the one who at some point must have been the original cause in the
                      resultant disequalibrium (even in the case where our Karma has had us
                      incarnate in a body with
                      > an imperfect mind/brain relationship-it is still our Karma!). It
                      is taught, and experience shows, that Cause and Effect is an exact
                      linear relationship, although egoity wishes for only reasons it
                      knows, to make it seem otherwise. Of course this is part of the
                      problem of any resultant mental disequalibrium.
                      > There is a Tibetan text which says that "The mind is the great
                      slayer of the Real. Let the disciple slay the slayer". The
                      implication being that it is only though Buddha mind that the Monkey
                      mind can be aligned. However, until then, the Monkey mind is, through
                      attachment to external phenomena, making desicions based upon Mara.
                      To varying degrees, this is the cause of delusion for all of us and
                      to those most afflicted, it is also the basis of
                      their "troubled/disturbed" state.
                      > None of the above is merely imperical. It is an understanding
                      arrived at through Mindfullness and application to my own issues, as
                      I have learned from those wiser than me. Does it require
                      a "Professional" to present the antidote? Or, will a "wakefull" being
                      do? Can there be both?-Sure. I think it aught to be said however, as
                      Psong ka pa points out, as do others, that this human state is rare
                      to attain, and per the Diamond Sutra, it is must be even further rare
                      to have the Karma of the Three Jewels in ones life. To abuse such a
                      combination seems very sad.
                      >
                      > Steve
                      >
                      >
                      > ----- Original Message ----
                      > From: imperialdlptutoring <imperialdlptutoring@...>
                      > To: tibetanbuddhistgroup@yahoogroups.com
                      > Sent: Sunday, December 9, 2007 5:00:26 AM
                      > Subject: [TBG] Re: How can we as Buddhist develop more Compassion ?:
                      >
                      > Just picking up on one (important) point and then I really will go
                      > quiet, return to my practice, and allow the group/list to do the
                      same:
                      >
                      > --- In tibetanbuddhistgrou p@yahoogroups. com, "dorjeshonnu"
                      > <dorjeshonnu@ ...> wrote:
                      > > Kusum Lingpa only recognized him to be a pretty crazy guy. He
                      seemed
                      > > to me to be mentally unbalanced although not harmful.
                      >
                      > Since Buddhism IS par excellence about sanity and having a healthy
                      mind
                      > (and, indeed, the benefits of meditation in terms of mental health
                      are
                      > widely documented), not surprisingly, quite a few people suffering
                      > mental illness ARE drawn to Buddhism (in a genuine effort to take
                      > control of their minds and help themselves). So my personal view is
                      > that the compassionate action, so far as possible, is to welcome
                      these
                      > individuals and applaud/assist them in their efforts to help
                      themselves
                      > (albeit sometimes deluded and misguided) rather than condemn them.
                      >
                      > I also believe quite a few individuals suffering mental illness
                      > subscribe to online Buddhist lists like this one. So, since people
                      > suffering mental illness may be very vulnerable, and we cannot know
                      > what state of mind they are in when posting/reading online messages
                      I,
                      > personally, believe kind and gentle speech is VERY important online
                      > when communicating with/about these troubled/disturbed individuals
                      who,
                      > through no fault of their own, are suffering mental illness. If
                      anyone
                      > reading this post IS suffering mental illness (and there is no
                      stigma
                      > in that) perhaps I could draw your attention to the Buddhist
                      Wellness
                      > Group:
                      >
                      > http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/BuddhistWe llnessGroup/
                      >
                      > ... which has an explicitly mental health focus and where all are
                      > welcomed (whether monks or not ;-) ).
                      >
                      > OK, I really WILL go quiet here and leave everyone in peace to get
                      on
                      > with their practice!
                      >
                      > With metta,
                      >
                      > Mike
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      ______________________________________________________________________
                      ______________
                      > Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page.
                      > http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
                      >
                    • Steven Levey
                      Mike, The key to this issue: On the second point I think the issue of responsibility and diminished responsibility is a complicated one legally and in
                      Message 10 of 21 , Dec 25, 2007
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Mike,
                             The key to this issue:

                        "On the second point I think the issue of responsibility and
                        diminished responsibility is a complicated one legally and in
                        relating to/helping people suffering mental illness."
                         
                        lies in the those conditions under which we subscribe upon taking state liscensure boards, and which I understand. There is no way in which one who takes such "vows" can keep his practice, both morally and legally, if they were to go back on their basis. However, you should be aware that regardless of these rules to which one has subscribed, unless the patient will take the advice given as a theraputics to be PRACTICED and APPLIED to themselves-by themselves, there will be no benefit for him (her). In this sense all theraputics, whether offered by a liscenced practioner (Psychiatrist or otherwise), or a Monk will not have any effect, unless the individual does their work. 
                            I feel that we must not seperate the Dharama of the Teachings from our daily life, and since we subscribe to the Dharma, it must also hold true in the world of our daily round. If not, the Dharma for us is only another sectarian practice where we are looking to be saved, rather than save ourselves with the aide of the Truth as in the Four Noble Truths.
                         
                        Steve
                        ----- Original Message ----
                        From: imperialdlptutoring <imperialdlptutoring@...>
                        To: tibetanbuddhistgroup@yahoogroups.com
                        Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2007 3:03:45 AM
                        Subject: [TBG] Re: How can we as Buddhist develop more Compassion ?:

                        Thanks Steve! On the first point, I still hold that skillfullness and
                        kind and gentle speech are important when dealing with disturbed and
                        vulnerable people and other 'difficult' situations in life. I take as
                        my basic moral benchmark 'non harm' (in speech and action). Will my
                        words (or actions) do harm to others?? If so, then either remain
                        silent or rephrase them (more skillfully) in a form that will not do
                        harm.

                        On the second point I think the issue of responsibility and
                        diminished responsibility is a complicated one legally and in
                        relating to/helping people suffering mental illness. But, as a
                        relative Buddhist neophyte, I'm grateful for your explanation from
                        the Buddhist perspective, and will take some time to try and digest
                        this and it's implications!

                        Metta,

                        Mike (who really will try and go quiet here, having made his point...)

                        --- In tibetanbuddhistgrou p@yahoogroups. com, Steven Levey
                        <sallev1@... > wrote:

                        >
                        > Dear Mike,
                        > Regarding this statement of yours:
                        > "I personally, believe kind and gentle speech is VERY important
                        online
                        > when communicating with/about these troubled/disturbed individuals
                        who,
                        > through no fault of their own, are suffering mental illness."
                        > I feel a couple of ways at once about this. First, let me say
                        that I think your basic point is well taken. But I also think it
                        serves well to have another explain a situation as best they can,
                        (such as he who initially made us aware of the other's issues)
                        without, as you mentioned, harsh overtones. That is, if they are
                        really aware of something regarding a possible abuse of trust, of
                        which others may not.
                        > Secondly, If it were true that the mental instability in
                        question were really-karmically, not the fault of the disturbed
                        individual, then by the law of our being and Karma, there would be no
                        way for one to make corrections (even as presented by a practioner),
                        if they were inclined to allow Buddhism to work its alchemy upon them
                        through a new humility and Mindfullness. This is because we are all
                        responsable for the state of our minds, even in so much that the
                        causes seem inscrutable. So, if we are not the cause, then we can not
                        be the effect. Therefore, it must be true-only if we are the cause
                        can we be effective in making the change, which we first have to
                        admit we need (no small task), and then admit that only through "self
                        devised and self imposed efforts" can equalibrium be reinstated-by
                        the one who at some point must have been the original cause in the
                        resultant disequalibrium (even in the case where our Karma has had us
                        incarnate in a body with
                        > an imperfect mind/brain relationship- it is still our Karma!). It
                        is taught, and experience shows, that Cause and Effect is an exact
                        linear relationship, although egoity wishes for only reasons it
                        knows, to make it seem otherwise. Of course this is part of the
                        problem of any resultant mental disequalibrium.
                        > There is a Tibetan text which says that "The mind is the great
                        slayer of the Real. Let the disciple slay the slayer". The
                        implication being that it is only though Buddha mind that the Monkey
                        mind can be aligned. However, until then, the Monkey mind is, through
                        attachment to external phenomena, making desicions based upon Mara.
                        To varying degrees, this is the cause of delusion for all of us and
                        to those most afflicted, it is also the basis of
                        their "troubled/disturbed " state.
                        > None of the above is merely
                        imperical. It is an understanding
                        arrived at through Mindfullness and application to my own issues, as
                        I have learned from those wiser than me. Does it require
                        a "Professional" to present the antidote? Or, will a "wakefull" being
                        do? Can there be both?-Sure. I think it aught to be said however, as
                        Psong ka pa points out, as do others, that this human state is rare
                        to attain, and per the Diamond Sutra, it is must be even further rare
                        to have the Karma of the Three Jewels in ones life. To abuse such a
                        combination seems very sad.
                        >
                        > Steve
                        >
                        >
                        > ----- Original Message ----
                        > From: imperialdlptutoring <imperialdlptutorin g@...>
                        > To: tibetanbuddhistgrou p@yahoogroups. com
                        > Sent: Sunday, December 9, 2007 5:00:26 AM
                        >
                        Subject: [TBG] Re: How can we as Buddhist develop more Compassion ?:
                        >
                        > Just picking up on one (important) point and then I really will go
                        > quiet, return to my practice, and allow the group/list to do the
                        same:
                        >
                        > --- In tibetanbuddhistgrou p@yahoogroups. com, "dorjeshonnu"
                        > <dorjeshonnu@ ...> wrote:
                        > > Kusum Lingpa only recognized him to be a pretty crazy guy. He
                        seemed
                        > > to me to be mentally unbalanced although not harmful.
                        >
                        > Since Buddhism IS par excellence about sanity and having a healthy
                        mind
                        > (and, indeed, the benefits of meditation in terms of mental health
                        are
                        > widely documented), not surprisingly, quite a few people suffering
                        > mental illness ARE drawn to Buddhism (in a genuine effort to take
                        > control of their minds and help themselves). So my personal view is
                        > that the compassionate action, so far as
                        possible, is to welcome
                        these
                        > individuals and applaud/assist them in their efforts to help
                        themselves
                        > (albeit sometimes deluded and misguided) rather than condemn them.
                        >
                        > I also believe quite a few individuals suffering mental illness
                        > subscribe to online Buddhist lists like this one. So, since people
                        > suffering mental illness may be very vulnerable, and we cannot know
                        > what state of mind they are in when posting/reading online messages
                        I,
                        > personally, believe kind and gentle speech is VERY important online
                        > when communicating with/about these troubled/disturbed individuals
                        who,
                        > through no fault of their own, are suffering mental illness. If
                        anyone
                        > reading this post IS suffering mental illness (and there is no
                        stigma
                        > in that) perhaps I could draw your attention to the Buddhist
                        Wellness
                        > Group:
                        >
                        >
                        href="http://groups./" target=_blank rel=nofollow>http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/BuddhistWe llnessGroup/
                        >
                        > ... which has an explicitly mental health focus and where all are
                        > welcomed (whether monks or not ;-) ).
                        >
                        > OK, I really WILL go quiet here and leave everyone in peace to get
                        on
                        > with their practice!
                        >
                        > With metta,
                        >
                        > Mike
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        ____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _
                        ____________ __
                        > Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page.
                        > http://www.yahoo. com/r/hs
                        >




                        Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
                      • imperialdlptutoring
                        Thanks, Steve- that makes sense. I just needed a bit of time for the penny to drop! Thanks! Mike ... state liscensure boards, and which I understand. There is
                        Message 11 of 21 , Dec 26, 2007
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Thanks, Steve- that makes sense. I just needed a bit of time for the
                          penny to drop!

                          Thanks!

                          Mike

                          --- In tibetanbuddhistgroup@yahoogroups.com, Steven Levey
                          <sallev1@...> wrote:
                          >
                          > Mike,
                          > The key to this issue:
                          >
                          > "On the second point I think the issue of responsibility and
                          > diminished responsibility is a complicated one legally and in
                          > relating to/helping people suffering mental illness."
                          >
                          > lies in the those conditions under which we subscribe upon taking
                          state liscensure boards, and which I understand. There is no way in
                          which one who takes such "vows" can keep his practice, both morally
                          and legally, if they were to go back on their basis. However, you
                          should be aware that regardless of these rules to which one has
                          subscribed, unless the patient will take the advice given as a
                          theraputics to be PRACTICED and APPLIED to themselves-by themselves,
                          there will be no benefit for him (her). In this sense all
                          theraputics, whether offered by a liscenced practioner (Psychiatrist
                          or otherwise), or a Monk will not have any effect, unless the
                          individual does their work.
                          > I feel that we must not seperate the Dharama of the Teachings
                          from our daily life, and since we subscribe to the Dharma, it must
                          also hold true in the world of our daily round. If not, the Dharma
                          for us is only another sectarian practice where we are looking to be
                          saved, rather than save ourselves with the aide of the Truth as in
                          the Four Noble Truths.
                          >
                          > Steve
                          >
                          > ----- Original Message ----
                          > From: imperialdlptutoring <imperialdlptutoring@...>
                          > To: tibetanbuddhistgroup@yahoogroups.com
                          > Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2007 3:03:45 AM
                          > Subject: [TBG] Re: How can we as Buddhist develop more Compassion ?:
                          >
                          > Thanks Steve! On the first point, I still hold that skillfullness
                          and
                          > kind and gentle speech are important when dealing with disturbed
                          and
                          > vulnerable people and other 'difficult' situations in life. I take
                          as
                          > my basic moral benchmark 'non harm' (in speech and action). Will my
                          > words (or actions) do harm to others?? If so, then either remain
                          > silent or rephrase them (more skillfully) in a form that will not
                          do
                          > harm.
                          >
                          > On the second point I think the issue of responsibility and
                          > diminished responsibility is a complicated one legally and in
                          > relating to/helping people suffering mental illness. But, as a
                          > relative Buddhist neophyte, I'm grateful for your explanation from
                          > the Buddhist perspective, and will take some time to try and digest
                          > this and it's implications!
                          >
                          > Metta,
                          >
                          > Mike (who really will try and go quiet here, having made his
                          point...)
                          >
                          > --- In tibetanbuddhistgrou p@yahoogroups. com, Steven Levey
                          > <sallev1@ > wrote:
                          > >
                          > > Dear Mike,
                          > > Regarding this statement of yours:
                          > > "I personally, believe kind and gentle speech is VERY important
                          > online
                          > > when communicating with/about these troubled/disturbed
                          individuals
                          > who,
                          > > through no fault of their own, are suffering mental illness."
                          > > I feel a couple of ways at once about this. First, let me say
                          > that I think your basic point is well taken. But I also think it
                          > serves well to have another explain a situation as best they can,
                          > (such as he who initially made us aware of the other's issues)
                          > without, as you mentioned, harsh overtones. That is, if they are
                          > really aware of something regarding a possible abuse of trust, of
                          > which others may not.
                          > > Secondly, If it were true that the mental instability in
                          > question were really-karmically, not the fault of the disturbed
                          > individual, then by the law of our being and Karma, there would be
                          no
                          > way for one to make corrections (even as presented by a
                          practioner),
                          > if they were inclined to allow Buddhism to work its alchemy upon
                          them
                          > through a new humility and Mindfullness. This is because we are all
                          > responsable for the state of our minds, even in so much that the
                          > causes seem inscrutable. So, if we are not the cause, then we can
                          not
                          > be the effect. Therefore, it must be true-only if we are the cause
                          > can we be effective in making the change, which we first have to
                          > admit we need (no small task), and then admit that only
                          through "self
                          > devised and self imposed efforts" can equalibrium be reinstated-by
                          > the one who at some point must have been the original cause in the
                          > resultant disequalibrium (even in the case where our Karma has had
                          us
                          > incarnate in a body with
                          > > an imperfect mind/brain relationship- it is still our Karma!). It
                          > is taught, and experience shows, that Cause and Effect is an exact
                          > linear relationship, although egoity wishes for only reasons it
                          > knows, to make it seem otherwise. Of course this is part of the
                          > problem of any resultant mental disequalibrium.
                          > > There is a Tibetan text which says that "The mind is the great
                          > slayer of the Real. Let the disciple slay the slayer". The
                          > implication being that it is only though Buddha mind that the
                          Monkey
                          > mind can be aligned. However, until then, the Monkey mind is,
                          through
                          > attachment to external phenomena, making desicions based upon Mara.
                          > To varying degrees, this is the cause of delusion for all of us and
                          > to those most afflicted, it is also the basis of
                          > their "troubled/disturbed " state.
                          > > None of the above is merely imperical. It is an understanding
                          > arrived at through Mindfullness and application to my own issues,
                          as
                          > I have learned from those wiser than me. Does it require
                          > a "Professional" to present the antidote? Or, will a "wakefull"
                          being
                          > do? Can there be both?-Sure. I think it aught to be said however,
                          as
                          > Psong ka pa points out, as do others, that this human state is rare
                          > to attain, and per the Diamond Sutra, it is must be even further
                          rare
                          > to have the Karma of the Three Jewels in ones life. To abuse such a
                          > combination seems very sad.
                          > >
                          > > Steve
                          > >
                          > >
                          > > ----- Original Message ----
                          > > From: imperialdlptutoring <imperialdlptutorin g@...>
                          > > To: tibetanbuddhistgrou p@yahoogroups. com
                          > > Sent: Sunday, December 9, 2007 5:00:26 AM
                          > > Subject: [TBG] Re: How can we as Buddhist develop more
                          Compassion ?:
                          > >
                          > > Just picking up on one (important) point and then I really will
                          go
                          > > quiet, return to my practice, and allow the group/list to do the
                          > same:
                          > >
                          > > --- In tibetanbuddhistgrou p@yahoogroups. com, "dorjeshonnu"
                          > > <dorjeshonnu@ ...> wrote:
                          > > > Kusum Lingpa only recognized him to be a pretty crazy guy. He
                          > seemed
                          > > > to me to be mentally unbalanced although not harmful.
                          > >
                          > > Since Buddhism IS par excellence about sanity and having a
                          healthy
                          > mind
                          > > (and, indeed, the benefits of meditation in terms of mental
                          health
                          > are
                          > > widely documented), not surprisingly, quite a few people
                          suffering
                          > > mental illness ARE drawn to Buddhism (in a genuine effort to take
                          > > control of their minds and help themselves). So my personal view
                          is
                          > > that the compassionate action, so far as possible, is to welcome
                          > these
                          > > individuals and applaud/assist them in their efforts to help
                          > themselves
                          > > (albeit sometimes deluded and misguided) rather than condemn
                          them.
                          > >
                          > > I also believe quite a few individuals suffering mental illness
                          > > subscribe to online Buddhist lists like this one. So, since
                          people
                          > > suffering mental illness may be very vulnerable, and we cannot
                          know
                          > > what state of mind they are in when posting/reading online
                          messages
                          > I,
                          > > personally, believe kind and gentle speech is VERY important
                          online
                          > > when communicating with/about these troubled/disturbed
                          individuals
                          > who,
                          > > through no fault of their own, are suffering mental illness. If
                          > anyone
                          > > reading this post IS suffering mental illness (and there is no
                          > stigma
                          > > in that) perhaps I could draw your attention to the Buddhist
                          > Wellness
                          > > Group:
                          > >
                          > > http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/BuddhistWe llnessGroup/
                          > >
                          > > ... which has an explicitly mental health focus and where all are
                          > > welcomed (whether monks or not ;-) ).
                          > >
                          > > OK, I really WILL go quiet here and leave everyone in peace to
                          get
                          > on
                          > > with their practice!
                          > >
                          > > With metta,
                          > >
                          > > Mike
                          > >
                          > >
                          > >
                          > >
                          > >
                          > >
                          > ____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _
                          > ____________ __
                          > > Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page.
                          > > http://www.yahoo. com/r/hs
                          > >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          ______________________________________________________________________
                          ______________
                          > Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page.
                          > http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
                          >
                        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.