In Hyde Park in London, there is a spot called Speaker's Corner. Anyone can haul a crate out to Speaker's Corner, stand up on the box, and hold forth about anything, sometimes to small crowds, sometimes to no one at all. Speaker's Corner is a wonderful institution - if it can be called that - for two reasons:
The days of personal web pages listing "my favorite album, color, clothing designer, theory," etc. seem thankfully to have waned, with perhaps the odd exception. Generally, none of these warrants any sort of critique. The exceptions are sites or articles that either incite harm against others, or so badly misinform that innocents may take up the ideas there and harm themselves.
These exceptions are especially true if there seems to be a movement or a trend emerging. If an idea is taking on a life of it's own, and belief in the validity of that idea is increasing simply because it has become popular, we may owe it to our world to comment, to dissent, to point out misinformation or outright lie. There will and should always be voices of dissent, but since "a little knowledge is a dangerous thing," those choosing to offer their knowledge to others, especially when those others may number in the thousands or more, should at least try to check their facts.
The musings found on Christopher Calder's page Call for a New Buddhism are sadly misplaced and woefully misinformed. Though I don't seek to censor Mr. Calder or those like him, I regret that those who know nothing of Buddhism may read his ideas and come away believing they understand something. If Mr. Calder's words were unique, there would be little need to take any notice; indeed, there are people out there with far more education on the subject of Buddhism than Mr. Calder seems to have, offering essentially the same misinformation. Mr. Calder's piece simply came to my attention at a time when too many other writers have approached Buddhism, among other traditions, with the same ignorant arrogance.
There seems to be a largely unquestioned view that we, today, by virtue of our technology, our democracy, our prosperity, represent the pinnacle of civilization, and we equate this view with "knowing the truth," or more of the truth than was previously available. Our belief that our scientific accomplishments represent true knowledge of the nature of our existence is common in the West. This belief also extends itself into religion. We have debunked the quaint myths of five thousand years of human history, laid to rest the superstitions and useless ritual of other cultures and times. As a natural extension of this view, we feel qualified to re-make the religions and spiritual systems whose knowledge we wish to assimilate, or with which we wish to integrate. Mr. Calder's writing is a sadly misplaced example.
Without quoting Mr. Calder's Call for a New Buddhism ad tedium, the main points of his confusion are as follow:
There are so many misunderstandings of Buddhist fundamentals in Mr. Calder's piece, thrown together with his own socio-political views, that it is difficult to know where to begin. Again, this would simply be a sad state of affairs regarding the intractability of Mr. Calder's own confusion and not worth addressing in a forum such as this were it not for the other voices out there saying much the same thing.
In short, teachings from any spiritual tradition must be approached in their own terms. Buddhism is a spiritual system, a precisely balanced collection of myriad methods for recognizing truth - rather than representing "Truth" itself. Buddhism is a religion of method which directs the practitioner toward truth - as the non-dual nature of emptiness and form. Over time and in different cultures, these methods have changed to continually address in the most effective - i.e. compassionate - way, the suffering and confusion of the times. The fundamental cause of our suffering is form-addiction - not form itself, but the compulsion to seek the referential security of form and avoid the threat we perceive in emptiness. The desire to posit a "soul" is the ultimate expression of this compulsion. In the quest to cure this addiction, the Four Noble Truths are a method. Celibacy is a method. Ritual is a method. "Emptiness as goal" is a method. Guru yoga and devotion are methods. None of these methods, however, is truth itself, though presenting these methods as truth has always been one of the methods available to Buddhist masters and their lineages. Different methods contradict each other if we approach them seeking the comforting consistency we attribute to "truth," as seen from our deluded form-identified perspective.
Renunciation as the method of Sutric Buddhism contradicts transformation as the method of Tantric Buddhism. Neither can be said to be ultimate "truth" in terms of describing reality, yet they are both indisputably "truth" in terms of validity as methods for realizing "truth:" enlightenment. The key to understanding the principle and function of Buddhism as it evolves over time is understanding the non-dual nature of emptiness and form, as manifested in truth and method; wisdom and compassion; principle and function; even the red and white essences of the Tantras.
All of these methods have worked over time, and continue to work for the right configurations of human confusion. And none of these methods was brought into compassionately effective play by committee, by those whose confusion they were manifested to benefit. These methods must be realized and made available by those who have traversed their own path: who have utilized a particular method, realized directly the non-dual (enlightened) nature of their own existence through that method, and then addressed the confusion of their own students, either through that method or a (realized) adaptation of it. This brings us to the last of Mr. Calder's points of confusion, and the issue of greatest concern to Damtsig:
The Buddha said, as quoted in the Astasahasrika Prajnaparamita Sutra:
So, the Bodhisattva, the great being, who wishes to manifestly and fully awaken to supreme, right, and full awakening, first of all should approach the wisdom teachers, follow them, and honor them.
Though different manifestations of Buddhism over time and geography vary, every school and branch since the Buddha understands the indispensable role of the teacher.
As noted above, devotion to the teacher is a method, namely the method of Vajrayana Buddhism, which encompasses both Tantra and Dzogchen. More correctly, devotion to the Lama is the method that forms the basis for all of the many thousands of other methods and practices of the Vajrayana. The vast body of teachings which comprise the various Vajrayana systems and schools are all based on a view at the heart of which is the Lama. It is often said that the Lama is the beginning and end of the Vajrayana path.
Like all forms of Buddhism, Vajrayana is based on a particular view of principle and function. In the case of Tantra, the principle is the transformation of all phenomena from their distorted dualistic appearance into their liberated non-dual nature; in terms of Dzogchen, the principle is the "self-liberation" of all phenomena into their own inherent non-dual nature. In either case, the function, or method, of these systems rests upon the fulcrum of the Lama as the symbolic representative of the disciples' own realization. The Lama both expresses the enlightened state for the benefit of the student, and safeguards the student against confusing any subjective state or view with enlightenment.
As the principle and function of the Vajrayana is based upon understanding human existence as fundamentally non-dual, it is a system outside of our Western cultural experience. In order to attempt to understand its principle and function, we could look at the principle and function of more familiar systems, for example the genuinely noble principles of democracy cited by Mr. Calder. We can easily see how the nature of the protections for "We the People" built into the American system of democracy are based on the fundamental principle of the "checks and balances" of the branches of government.
All actions and decisions occur within this structure, and are continually checked against the fundamental principles of this structure. In the vast open space of Vajrayana, which accepts all phenomena as expressions of enlightenment, the Lama functions necessarily as the "check" on his or her disciples' tendency to try to co-opt liberation for the purposes of habitual dualistic self-referencing. The famous story of Rudra is the classic example.
While we as Westerners certainly have the ability to understand these teachings and become enlightened, we don't have an "inalienable right" to that. The "truths" of non-duality, while available to everyone, are not necessarily "self-evident."
There is of course no reason we as Westerners cannot know the same heights and depths as Eastern masters. Eastern masters say as much. Dungsé Thinley Norbu Rinpoche, one of the most revered Nyingma Tibetan Buddhist masters alive today once said: "What's the difference between a Tibetan Lama and a Western Lama? The Tibetan Lama has a flat nose; the Western Lama has a Rocky Mountain nose. Otherwise, no difference."
Mr. Calder writes: "The West is far removed from Asian culture so it seems obvious that a new Western Buddhism be even more unique in both philosophy and methodology." We need to be very careful to examine our cultural and political baggage when we claim to be creating a new Buddhism or anything else "free from cultural baggage." Egalitarianism, "our finest principles of equality and democracy" are simply the current mode. They are no more nor less ultimately correct than any "imperial model." We need as Westerners also to accept that democracy in action is also largely mythical.
We need to examine the definition of freedom. In a spiritual sense, we can enjoy an entirely hollow freedom to swim around endlessly in our own tiny fishbowl of delusion. If we don't know the world outside the fishbowl we can only have a very primitive and confused idea about freedom - one we wouldn't choose if we knew the real possibilities. Mr. Calder imagines that "science can give us the added energy we need to have it all." While, according to the Vajrayana view, the nature of every thing and every experience is primordially pure, an ornament of the non-dual state, we need to be sure we do not mistake our compulsive consumerism for liberation. It is easy for us as Westerners to believe in our superiority, to believe our own press as it were. We are fortunate to have realized astonishing material progress. We can do amazing things with the elements of our world with skills built upon the knowledge of our forebears through experimentation, trial and error, historical memory. In order to make spiritual progress, we need to accept and then understand the power of non-dual experience.
We must resist the temptation to create a New Buddhism "in our own image." At first - and we are now in the "at-first" phase - we need to accept the genuine methods being imported from other cultures, the variants of Buddhist realization that come from within other cultures. Why? Because we have none of our own yet. The same was true of Buddhism's spread to those cultures in the past. The prevailing form of the "mother country" was first learned by a few, and imported. Buddhism in all its forms is method; there is no expression of Buddhism without a means of expression.
Actually, as I write this, signs are emerging that the West is entering the next phase. Westerners have begun to attain realization and teach, and at least one new Buddhist system has begun to emerge directly from within the realization of a Western master. I am referring to the Tsogyel Nyingthig Terma which is held by Lama Traktung Rinpoche and Lama A'dzom Rinpoche. It is important to remember, however, that, these two great Lamas have teachers of their own. There is a seamless continuity even though the method is new.
Other pages at Mr. Calder's site indicate that he had been involved with some New Age variants of Buddhism which left an unpleasant taste in his mouth. About that I'm sorry; there's a lot of it around. Even with bona fide traditions and teachers the habitual patterns in our Western minds can come into conflicts that are not easily resolved. There is at once a rich cross-pollination and the most vile distortion. This is simply the time and place we find ourselves in. As a Western Lama once said at Pema 'ö-Sel Ling: "This is a fascinating and exciting time for Buddhism in the West. It is sadly also a disagreeable and vexatious time." In other times there would have been a locally predominant form of Buddhism in a given place. In most cases, someone wishing to practice would have become a part of the local tradition. Prosperity and technology have made possible the spread of many forms of Buddhist method around the world. In a way, we do seem to "have it all." We simply need to be careful shoppers, or voters. We need to be honest about what we do and do not know. We need to research the fundamentals and details of groups or traditions that resonate with us, and then proceed with awareness. We may stumble; it has happened before and it will happen again, in the East and in the West. But let us not make the error of creating a "New Buddhism" that, because it is merely a re-packaging of current patterns of confusion, is neither new nor Buddhist.
In addition to the article Call for a New Buddhism, there are other pages at Mr. Calder's site, including a "meditation handbook." A passage there warrants specifically cautious attention:
WARNING: Avoid the use of mantras and repetitive chanting. Repeating the same words over and over is a method of forgetfulness which will bore the mind and leads to the light sleep state hypnosis problem mentioned earlier.... Mantra use has proven to be medically helpful for some people because it unleashes hormones that can temporarily calm the mind. Mantras are healthier than taking tranquilizers but they are fundamentally different from meditation which relies on the purifying fire of self-observation. Self-observation is a difficult task that requires courage and an endurance of character and spirit. Real meditation has the real payoff of leading to a naturally calm expanded state of consciousness, not just an artificially silenced mind that remains fundamentally shallow.
I append this passage here because such ignorant criticism can seriously damage the inspiration and the practice of those practitioners for whom doubt is still present. It is highly arrogant and spurious to give advice to others when one does not know. Period.
Mr. Calder seems to fall into the trap of many, many, Western thinkers and feelers these days, namely believing in one's own subjectivity. We are at once defenders and victims of individual liberty - believing in the self-evident truth of our thoughts, feelings, emotions, ideas. We should be sure we know what we are talking about before we propagate recommendations for others' spiritual practice. Even if one's teacher recommends against mantra practice, or recommends against it at a certain phase, many others do teach and recommend mantra.
Without diversity there is no need for democracy. Mr. Calder and others who seek to enshrine democracy in the constitution of any "New Buddhism" should attempt to practice before they set out to preach.