We feel a personal responsibility to address the question of 'conference dharma' and to discuss emptiness, in the sense in which certain phenomena are 'empty of'. Fashion items, for example, are 'empty of' the qualities projected onto them as intrinsically desirable objects. The current fashion amongst certain people who aspire to the practice of Buddhism is the notion of 'Western Buddhism' and or 'American Buddhism'. Part of this fashion, and a central element of reasoning amongst those who espouse the concept of creating a new form of Buddhism, is the phenomenon of 'empty issues'. What is an 'empty issue'? It is the realisation of nothing in particular, about which much can be said in all manner of contexts - but let us look at the pragmatic criteria which constitute its dynamic. An 'empty issue' is a. controversial, and of apparently significant concern to the well meaning, caring, liberally minded individual. b. one which has been artificially coaxed into being by spokespersons of a trend of thought. c. self-serving per se and seeks to promote belief in itself rather than encouraging diversity of opinions.
Spokespersons who employ 'empty issues' are advantaged by the naïve public reaction they create, and a feedback loop is formed in which hysterical reaction becomes an accepted norm. The old fashioned word for purveying misinformation is 'propaganda' but 'empty issues' are somewhat more insidious than propaganda. With propaganda, one can detect the source, but this is not necessarily so with 'empty issues'. Once an 'empty issue' has been assiduously coaxed into existence, other persons (otherwise unconnected with the initial falsification) take it up as a legitimate cause. These other persons are then believed because they are known to be sincere, and are otherwise not given to propagandising. This process has much in common with a phenomenon known as the 'urban legend' which was exposed in the 1980s. For those who are unfamiliar with the 'urban legend', we will offer a brief definition: One hears an extraordinary story from a friend. One then repeats the story simply because it is extraordinary. One believes the story because it has the trappings of truth i.e. a. Knowledge of the story, or 'fact', originated from a trusted friend. b. The incident happened to someone known to a friend of the person telling the story. c. The individual who is the subject of the story, or 'fact' is always three persons removed, thereby making any personal verification of the story or 'fact' difficult.
A curious feature of the urban legend is that: the source of the urban legend remains three persons away on each occasion the incident is retold. Everyone passes on the account as true simply because the person who told it was known to be honest. But what seems to happen is that every new 'teller of the story' or 'revealer of the fact' seems to want to maintain credibility by bringing the incident one person closer to home. Even otherwise completely honest people will remember themselves having acted in this way when they are informed of the modus operandi of the urban legend. Many people will remember furthering urban legends particularly when they begin to read the examples. The new medium for the urban legend is e-mail and the 'internet forum' in which one can create any kind of reality one wishes. It would appear certain Western Buddhist teachers are promoting 'teacher-student abuse' and 'the dangers of the vajra master' in order to further their cause. Having made this statement, we must emphasise that we are not stating that abuse has never occurred. We are simply stating that it has become the current fashion to be 'concerned with abuse', and to seeing exploitation and abuse everywhere whether it exists or not. The fashion for 'concern with abuse' is not merely a modality within 'Western Buddhism' and 'American Buddhism', but one which exists in almost every area of society - to such an extent, that in some in countries, parents have to be cautious about public displays of affection toward their own children.
With regard to Buddhism, and in particular to Vajrayana Buddhism, we need to consider the degree to which the individual needs to be responsible. We need to look at the manner in which the individual could be helped to become more personally responsible, rather than advocating reliance on the protection of legislation. Protective legislation is not problematic per se - but in this age of political correctness, legislation often seems to be created by those who take pleasure in creating legislation in order to control others. The best and most effective legislation however, is personal responsibility.
Those who approach any field of endeavour need to accept personal responsibility with regard to seeking appropriate information concerning the field of endeavour - be it Buddhism or ballistics. It is not intelligent to use firearms without education and training, and if one is to take one's interest further into the field of re-loading cartridges - one needs to read extensively and methodically in order to make sure that one knows how to take adequate precautions. One cannot approach explosives from 'first principles'. Trial and error is not a valid means of research unless one is genuinely prepared for fatality. Heroism may well be appropriate in terms of protecting others, but when one adopts an heroic stance, one does not blame those one sought to protect if one is wounded in their service. A hero or heroine cannot claim they were abused by those they sought to save at the risk of their own lives. Only children imaginee that they can be heroes and heroines who emerge from all conflicts unscathed.
There is an 'abuse bandwagon', and it would appear that certain Western Buddhist teachers have bought their tickets and climbed aboard. We do not believe that this is a useful way to proceed, either for the future of Buddhism in the West or for the protection of the individual. The best protection for the individual is adequate knowledge of Buddhism - and one cannot begin the process of educating people concerning Buddhism if one begins by distorting its principles. The vajra master, for example, is central to Vajrayana, and one cannot speak of either Tantra or Dzogchen without the vajra master being the key to every aspect of the path. If the röle of vajra master is deemed too dangerous a modality, then one must conclude that Vajrayana is too dangerous per se. One cannot extract the vajra master from the equation, because the resultant vehicle would not be Vajrayana. Without the vajra master there is no Vajrayana. Those who wish to understand the rôle of vajra master in Tantra and Dzogchen need to take the responsibility to educate themselves as to the experiential basis from which relationship with the vajra master becomes understandable and indispensable. Those who feel the vajra master is dispensable are not merely ignorant of Vajrayana as Buddhist teachers, they are ignorant of Vajrayana at the level of relatively immature Dharma students. The teacher of automobile mechanics who professes that 'petroleum (gasoline) is dispensable to the internal combustion engine', on the basis that it is 'dermatologically harmful', makes the statement that they do not understand the internal combustion engine - let alone the vehicle it propels. The centrality of the teacher is not only common to Nyingma, Kagyüd, Sakya, and Gélug - but to all schools of Mahayana Buddhism. If certain people wish to create a new religion loosely based on Buddhism - they are free to do so, but it is as unethical to call it Buddhism as it is to claim that the internal combustion engine can function on tofu.
With regard to education concerning the principles of Vajrayana - we have discussed this subject in detail in chapters 5 and 6 of 'Wearing the Body of Visions' - Aro Books - 1995. There are many books in English and European languages which deal with this subject - either in depth or in passing. It is therefore not possible to claim ignorance, if one is deceived by a charlatan posing as a vajra master - it is only possible to claim dereliction of adult responsibility with regard to education. If one studies the qualities which need to be possessed by the vajra master, then one can proceed to move toward such a relationship - but, one must also study the qualities which should be possessed by the students and ask oneself whether one truly posses such qualities. One of the central texts currently available is 'The Teacher-student Relationship' by Jamgön Kongtrül the Great translated by Ron Garry - Snow Lion - 1999. This book will answer anyone's questions on the subject in great depth. If this text is found intellectually a little too challenging, then there is a book by Ngala Rig'dzin Dorje entitled 'Dangerous Friend' which would avail itself to those less well equipped to follow the thread of a translated text. Another excellent book which is simple and easy to read is 'Introduction to Tantra - a vision of totality' by Lama Yeshé in which chapter 9, 'Inspiration and the Guru', provides a highly clear description of the rôle of vajra master. This book has been available since 1987 and there is therefore no excuse for anyone seriously interested in Vajrayana Buddhism not to have access to it. We could extend this list to include many books which refer to the teacher student relationship both within Sutrayana and Vajrayana - but our current discuss does not warrant exhaustive detail of this kind.
Referring to the reports of abuse by teachers in the West, the Venerable Thanavaro asked His Holiness the Dala'i Lama if it was possible for a teacher who was truly embodying the wisdom of the Dharma to hurt his students. His Holiness the Dala'i Lama gave a one word answer: "No". It is therefore the responsibility of the prospective Vajrayana student to understand Dharma sufficiently to make an informed decision regarding the teacher - just as it is the responsibility of the individual to investigate the parameters of any crucially significant life commitment. The prospective Vajrayana student must know what is required of a Lama in terms of '... truly embodying the wisdom of the Dharma.'
We advise our own students to examine us extremely carefully and to examine our teachings meticulously with regard to the extant works of the Nyingma tradition in English. We advise them to study with other teachers of the Nyingma Tradition, and to check whether our presentation accords with theirs. We advise them to take time, and to be cautious with regard to taking vajra commitment with us. For example one of a number of prerequisites we now require, is a minimum of nine weeks solitary retreat, before we will consider someone as being eligible to request entry into vajra commitment.
Those who fear the rôle of the vajra master are usually those who have little or no knowledge of the copious body of Buddhist material available on the subject - but ignorance is no excuse; it is up to the responsible adult individual to research. There are libraries, and there are websites. This of all times, is the age of communication. More information is now available than has ever existed before with such ease, and all that is required is modest effort. One would not set out to explore difficult terrain without studying the area and knowing what it demanded in the way of clothing and equipment unless one is naïve, irresponsible, and immature. Spiritual commitment has never been described as 'easy' or 'comfortable' - and if aspects of the path prove arduous, this does not necessarily constitute abuse. We have become a society increasingly reliant upon litigation as a means of avoiding personal responsibility. We increasingly demand a world made safe in all aspects - rather than taking intelligent responsibility for acquiring the necessary education to approach given situations. The result is that the world is increasingly replete with hand rails and barriers to prevent us damaging ourselves. Precipices however, are not potential abusers. It is not incumbent upon us to cover the world with safety nets to prevent the careless and the headstrong from damaging themselves - unless we wish to reduce everyone to the condition of pre-school children. From our point of view, the real abuse is to undermine personal responsibility - and make a virtue of self-induced vulnerability, ineptitude, ignorance, and irresponsibility.
Those on the 'abuse bandwagon', and the 'reform bandwagon' to which it is coupled, would seem to care little for the broader picture in which they figure. That broader picture is the rich and vital historical context in which we all play a part. We are looking at approximately three thousand years of history - and the central core of Vajrayana cannot be dismissed consequent to a decade of conferences. Most of us play an extremely small part in terms of the unfolding of history. Only the enlightened masters stand out in the fabric of time as people who illuminated the path for others. It takes hundreds of years for a religion to integrate into a new society, and anyone who feels they need to hurry the process is guilty, at least, of the most grandiose naïveté. This is a time when anyone who is looking at the integration of Buddhism into the cultures of the West, needs to be extremely tentative unless they are Buddhas. To answer this charge by saying that "The sangha is Maitreya Buddha - and therefore changes can be made now through the consensus of the wisdom sangha." is both a misuse of Buddhist terminology, and a misuse of language. One may as well say: "Dog is 'god' backwards therefore I will worship my pet's tail." It is alarming to witness the number of otherwise intelligent people who find no fault with oxymoron as long as it exists within the sphere of ostensible spirituality. In other circumstances such people would not be duped - but within the field of Buddhism in the West it would seem to have become possible to conjure 'NU-BUDDH' out of nothing, through concocting word salads from technical terms - irrespective of their actual meanings within Buddhism.
When we researched the subject, it became increasingly evident that the 'issue' of 'teacher-student abuse' is 'an issue' merely because it has been engineered as such to suit certain ends. We do not know who was responsible for the initial deception and who has merely been carried along in the wake of the movement. It does not concern us to deal with individual personalities - what concerns us is to examine the trend, and to expose the mechanism by which it perpetrates its campaign of misinformation.
We are fairly confident of what we are saying because we teach in a variety of contexts around the world, and members of a broad range of traditional Buddhist sanghas attend our teachings. We also teach at various traditional Vajrayana Buddhist centres, and from this experience, we conclude that the evidence for abuse is to all practical purposes non-existent. The only actual cases of abuse which have come to our attention, have been with Western cult teachers' claiming connection with Vajrayana traditions through various shades of 'partial authorisation' to complete lack of authorisation - or even connection. It would appear in these cases that the persons to have suffered were sadly uninformed, misinformed, and manipulated as to real specifics of Vajrayana practice and the samayas involved. In every case, a better education would have almost immediately severed the association of the people who suffered dubious treatment. There are, as we have said previously, texts which deal with the qualities of the Lama - and these texts are available in most Western languages. If people are to launch a campaign, it needs to be an educational campaign - not a campaign of misinformation with regard to Vajrayana and the vajra master.
The engineering of the 'abuse issue' and the 'danger of the vajra master issue' (albeit on an ad hoc basis - by an amalgam of associated persons) would appear to be based on need for a political platform on the part of those who seek to proclaim themselves as the founders of Western Buddhism / American Buddhism. Were this not the case - those involved would not be campaigning as vociferously, and magazines such as Tricycle - the 'mouth piece of American Buddhism' would be open to giving space to valid, carefully written arguments from the traditional position.
The emergence of Damtsig, and the consequent solicitation of this article would appear to have been necessitated by the lack of any other medium through which issue could be taken with Tricycle magazine and other quasi-fascist organs of political correctness. We are concerned with the fascism nascent within political correctness, as are people in other walks of life. We have met with this sense of vague anxiety in people who were once strong spokespersons of political change. Julia Cutmore (of Swansea University, Wales) a feminist psychologist, confided to us that she felt: '... it is as if we had been misheard, and that a sinister organ of control has been built on the work feminists had contributed in the 1970s and 1980s.' and 'that things have gone too far and those who have moved into positions of authority have lost sight of the human level of issues.' This is a subject in itself, and we mention it only to emphasise that we are not merely looking at disagreements with Buddhism or particular schools of Buddhism. We are looking at the distortion of Buddhism at the hands of a secular philosophy of our times - and more than that, a secular philosophy with drive toward self-promotion.
A certain degree of self-promotion is an inevitable aspect of life if one is presenting anything to the public in the West. As soon as one organises an event and makes it known to the public, one becomes involved with publicity and advertising. This, within certain parameters, is legitimate - it is the nature of the Western World and it systems of mass communication. We have no argument with working with the communications forms which exist. However - when such promotion is based on concern with an engineered 'issue', highly unsavoury comparisons become possible. When concern with 'abuse', and 'scare mongering with regard to the vajra master', become a political platform - we would do well to look at other 'egalitarian' political parties who have used similar tactics to persuade the public of the truth of their cause. The 1990s were the decade which saw the inception of 'conference-dharma' - a peculiar institution, which has worrying similarities with the 'political rally'. This 'conference dharma', which initially posed as a forum in which peers could discuss their experience of teaching, has now evolved into a political committee in which the future of 'Western Buddhism' is being discussed - as if 'Western Buddhism' was a recognised world religion. At the risk of somewhat morbid humour - we wonder if such conferences are ever concluded with that charming song from The Sound of Music - 'Tomorrow belongs to me ... '
The very concept of 'Western Buddhism' itself is epistemologically untenable. Dharma is not connected with a hemisphere. Maybe this idea arises from the existence of the term 'Tibetan Buddhism' but that term was not coined by Tibetans. 'Tibetan Buddhism' is also a Western notion. Tibetans use the word Dharma to describe the religious practice of their country; and, of the other countries in which it exists - including the West. We are also Western Buddhist Teachers - inasmuch as we are Western, we are Buddhists, and we are teachers. We are not however teachers of 'Western Buddhism'. Neither are we teachers of Eastern Buddhism - we are simply Nyingmas, and belong to the Nyingma Tradition as it exists both in the East and the West. The hemisphere is irrelevant to us.
In 1999, 'Ursache und Wirkung', the magazine of Buddhism in Austria decided to devote an entire edition to the issue of 'abuse'. The edition was entitled 'Konflicte im Weltbuddhismus' (conflict in World Buddhism). We had not heard of anything which could be described in those terms. We imagine that most other Austrian Buddhists were also unaware of 'the global strife within the Buddhist world'. The students of Phüntsog Tulku and of Ngala Rig'dzin Dorje who invited us to Austria were puzzled by the magazine. They asked whether we knew what was happening, that such a statement should appear on the front cover of the magazine. This question did not come from simple-minded uninformed people. These people had not led sheltered lives immured in Forchtenstein, so what was the nature of their perplexity? Surely they knew of the conflict in World Buddhism'? Apparently not. They knew nothing about it until they read 'Ursache und Wirkung', and met its 'empty issues'.
Forchtenstein is a long way away from New York home of the 'Tricycle' magazine, but many of the same names were there within the pages of Ursache und Wirkung' which ironically translates as cause and effect'. The 'cause' is the publication of 'empty issues', and the 'effect' is public credibility concerning the 'empty issue of abuse' and the 'empty issue of the danger of the vajra master'. Amongst the names quoted in an authoritative manner in Ursache und Wirkung, were several of the same names we saw throughout the 1990s. These are the names of the Western Buddhist conference organisers and conference delegates who have been making their views known to such a degree that a surprising number of the innocent Buddhist public are now concerned. We have met a few of these Western Buddhist teachers, and we are familiar with their apparently well-meaning approach.
We saw the 'empty issue' at work in its most unprincipled and ruthless mode last year. It was then that Tricycle magazine chose to misrepresent Dungsé Thrinlé Norbu Rinpoche in such way as to incite a welter of enraged letters. Having thus fostered the 'empty issue', Tricycle then ensured it appeared 'real' by deliberately publishing none of the dozen or so intelligently written criticisms of the magazine's transparently manipulative journalism. We are keenly aware of this, because we have read a number of such unpublished letters. Amongst the letters which Tricycle received was one we wrote. We wrote it with great care, and avoided all form of invective and harsh language. We made our points as concisely as we could, and asked questions in a style which opened itself to hearing real answers from Tricycle. Our letter was ignored in favour of letters which contained ample rhetoric against Dung-sé Thrinlé Norbu Rinpoche and against the röle of the vajra master. We wrote again asking why our letter had been ignored when it had attempted to address an issue in the most non-emotive terms. We were ignored again as were many other people who wrote calm and educated responses. We may be of no account, but several other letters were from people of substance in the Buddhist world, and that these letters never saw the light of day was an act of outright journalistic dictatorship. It is for this reason that Khandro Déchen and I have felt obliged to speak out in other venues. In an interview with Tricycle magazine divisively entitled 'Words for the West', Dungsé Thrinlé Norbu Rinpoche's made various highly pertinent criticisms with regard to the current trend within 'Western Buddhism' and 'American Buddhism'. The interviewer, however, edited herself in such a way as to make it appear that Dungsé Thrinlé Norbu Rinpoche was addressing Western people in general. The interviewer also presented herself as asking 'short innocuous questions', after which the replies were reconstructed as 'tirades'. The readership of Tricycle was thereby deliberately manipulated. Those who responded were set up to react with consternation, and consequently several pages of 'outraged' letters were published under the insulting caption of 'Lama Drama'. The letters of congratulation on Dung-sé Thrinlé Norbu Rinpoche's comments were not published - even though we have discovered that several letters were sent, not only by our own students, but by the students of other Lamas. Having seen the original interview, it is clearly apparent that Dungsé Thrinlé Norbu Rinpoche's comments were all directly addressing the spokespersons actively involved with the creation of 'Western Buddhism' / 'American Buddhism', and with the attempted 'democratisation' of Vajrayana. His comments were not 'Words for the West,' but words for those who use the word 'West' to identify their psycho-egalitarian revamping of the Dharmas of different traditions.
It pains us excessively to involve ourselves in controversy of this kind, but we feel compelled to do so as a matter of honour. We are unable to stand on the sidelines in comfortable anonymity when Lamas with whom we have taken transmission and the most profound teachings are being slandered. We cannot continue to write 'happy accounts of Vajrayana in the West' in the face of a deliberate assault on the heart of authentic Vajrayana. We will not be discussing individuals here, and it is a cause of great shame and regret to us the we have had to mention Dungsé Thrinlé Norbu Rinpoche in this context. We should say that we have not met this great Lama. All we know of him derives from the excellent reputation he commands with many senior Buddhist students in the West. Dungsé Thrinlé Norbu Rinpoche is highly revered by our friend Tharchin Rinpoche, and by our own Tsa-wa'i Lamas; but none of our Lamas or Tibetan Lama friends have said a word to us on this subject. We say this because we wish it to be clearly known that we are not in anyone's pocket. No one has asked us to write in this way apart from Damtsig. The only other requests we have received have been from our own students - to whom this material was originally addressed.
We are not enlightened masters - so we have no authority. We are due no respect other than common courtesy, and even when this is lacking we have no serious complaint to make. We are given licence by our students and disciples to give advice on the basis of the Buddhist path; and we endeavour to the best of our ability to be worthy of the rôle we perform. We see ourselves as the servants of a lineage, and in this rôle it is our duty to protect the Vajrayana and it's Lineage Lamas from abuse. In the edition of 'Ursache und Wirkung', there was a questionnaire entitled: 'How dangerous is your (Buddhist) group?' It was shocking to read between the lines of some of the questions posed by this specious questionnaire. The most manipulative set of 'response options' were allotted to the question: 'How do you deal with abuses (by the teacher) in your group?' The answers: 'Our teacher has never committed any form of abuse.' and 'I am content and grateful to have been accepted as a disciple by my teacher.' were not options. The only available options concerned 'abuse' and how the group dealt with such 'abuse'. This was by no means the only question to which the responses were geared to lead the reader to preordained conclusions. This is another aspect of 'empty issue' politics - the 'form aspect' of indoctrination through manipulation of information. We could well ask our own question: 'How many neurotic Western Buddhist students do you know?' and provide the answers: a. 5-10, b. 10-25, c. 25-50. d. 50 and above. It might be interesting to prepare a counter questionnaire - How dangerous are you to your Buddhist Teacher? An example could possibly follow this pattern:
Question: What would you do if your Lama advised you to be less selfish, and to act with greater kindness toward your spouse?
At least in this whimsical example we offer e. as a choice. Were we to have followed the example of 'Ursache und Wirkung' option e. would not have been available.
A subject which as yet has had no airing is that of students abusing their teachers. The history of Tibetan Buddhism in the West is littered with the most appalling vow breakage. We know of many such cases, and one does not have to look to the esoteric implications of the 14 Root Vows to understand what this means, because much of what we have seen has been comprehensible at the level of ordinary human betrayal and deceit. We have known Lamas to take on students and care for them as if they were their own children, only to be reviled and slandered when the students proved too narcissistic to endure simple guidance in the face of their dysfunctional interpersonal behaviour. So many people have presented themselves to Tibetan Lamas as 'sincere practitioners', and have thereby gained access to the highest levels of teachings - teachings which would otherwise have been far more restricted in Tibet. Tibetan Lamas have tended to see Western people as highly intelligent, and therefore capable of understanding. We may be intelligent in terms of having sufficient knowledge to ask the most profound questions - but whether we have the capacity to understand the answers to these questions at a level which proves meaningful, is now more open to question than it has ever been. It is clear that honour and the integrity to follow through promises made, is a rare commodity. Whether the 'East' is as afflicted by 'process orientation' as the 'West' we would not care to guess. There was honour and the capacity to keep promises in the 19th Century - but these values are distinctly lacking at this time. Even the meaning of the word 'friend' has become so eroded that we have no idea what it means when we see it written. Advertising companies now write to potential customers as 'Dear Friend'. The very language we speak and write has become corrupt. We will not begin to list student abuses of Lamas which have come to our attention - it would fill a book. Neither shall we allude to our own experiences as teachers - suffice it to say that one lays one's life on the line as a Lama. In some sense, we would not have it any other way for ourselves. As Lamas, we are servants of the Nyingma tradition. Our concern is for the living embodiments of the Tibetan Buddhist lineages. Those of us who care to think of themselves as Tibetan Buddhists need to think carefully about their attempts to seduce Lamas with our much vaunted 'integrity' ... We have known several people who described themselves to their Lamas as 'men of integrity' and have not been impressed particularly when their 'integrity' embraced alcoholism, adultery, gerontophilia, pædophilia, exploitative misrepresentation, and larceny.
In the 19th Century and even the earlier half of the 20th Century, there was a social function in Britain, designated as 'breech of promise', whereby a young lady could sue for damages if trifled with by a man who made a promise of marriage which he did not honour. We will not peruse this analogy with regard to the Lama, apart from saying that 'breech of promise' is now a joke - people can say whatever they wish and not be held accountable to anyone. We find this a highly depressing state of affairs. We do not feel that this is a way to build a better world - either in the spiritual or the secular sense. If we cannot keep promises, we should attempt not to make promises but, of course, if we do not make promises ... Vajrayana becomes inaccessible. Vajrayana is only accessible through promise. Vajrayana is not just another process - a temporary palliative to be discarded when it has served its purpose. If one does not feel equipped for Vajrayana - one should be content to follow another path. If one wishes to fabricate one's own religion - one is free to do so, but not to confuse or deceive people by describing it as Buddhism.
In conclusion:
We feel we must apologise to those good people who will be upset and
saddened by our statement. We have met with this response before, when
the first version of this article was published in 'vision' magazine.
People expressed disappointment in us, in the sense that we had
betrayed their impression of us as 'kind and friendly people'. We are
naturally sorry if we alienate good and well meaning people, but that
has always been the price of speaking out against anything about which
there is confusion. We would ask those who are upset with us on the
grounds of 'liberal idealism' to consider that we do not present this
material without considerable thought and deep reflection. We are,
and will continue to be, fundamentally tolerant of divergence and
difference of approach - how could we be otherwise? In response to
the sense of upset we have encountered - we have had to say, somewhat
tongue-in-cheek, that we represent the 'extreme liberal wing of
traditionalism'. We feel that some people have been confused as to
where we stand - due to the fact that we communicate in fairly
idiosyncratic contemporary English. Some people have erroneously
assumed from this that we are 'un-traditional'. We may well be
untraditional linguistically, and possibly in some other respects -
but we have never been, and never will be untraditional with regard to
the essential nature of Vajrayana. It is this fact which has brought
us into closer association and friendship with people whom we would
not previously have imagined to be open to our mode of presentation.
It would appear that the central concern is one which makes strange
bedfellows; and, perhaps, unexpected theoretical opponents. If one
examines 18th - 20th Century Western history however, and particularly
American history, one will be forced to acknowledge that central
concerns have always been thus. If we are to look at 'Buddhism in the
West' we have to look at our own Western history and culture; and, we
have to confront the uncomfortable fact that disagreements are real.
One cannot be real oneself if one avoids confrontation on the basis
that it isn't nice. Refusal to stand up and be counted is not
kindness - merely cowardice.