http://chagchen.org/2009/01/11/flakes-and-charlatans-revisited/ Enlightenment or bust Tue, 24 Apr 2012 21:37:31 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 http://chagchen.org/2009/01/11/flakes-and-charlatans-revisited/comment-page-1/#comment-2035 Alex W Wed, 28 Mar 2012 07:10:16 +0000 http://alex-wilding.com/dangzang/2009/01/11/flakes-and-charlatans-revisited/#comment-2035 Thank you for pointing out the limited nature of my understandings, and for reminding me of the vastness of the Dharma. The point is, of course, that neither Padmasambhava (at least as he is usually portrayed) nor Marpa (on any version of his story) pretended to be a "monk". I'm glad you yourself put that word in inverted commas, as its usage is not always as clear as one might think. There is no objection as far as I know to Michael having sex with as many partners as are happily willing. What there <em><strong>is</strong></em> an objection to is someone who is having sex but who claims at the same time to be upholding the vows of a fully ordained monk. I don't actually follow Michael's activity - does he still make that claim? Thank you for pointing out the limited nature of my understandings, and for reminding me of the vastness of the Dharma.
The point is, of course, that neither Padmasambhava (at least as he is usually portrayed) nor Marpa (on any version of his story) pretended to be a “monk”. I’m glad you yourself put that word in inverted commas, as its usage is not always as clear as one might think.
There is no objection as far as I know to Michael having sex with as many partners as are happily willing. What there is an objection to is someone who is having sex but who claims at the same time to be upholding the vows of a fully ordained monk.
I don’t actually follow Michael’s activity – does he still make that claim?

]]> http://chagchen.org/2009/01/11/flakes-and-charlatans-revisited/comment-page-1/#comment-2034 Va Wed, 28 Mar 2012 01:28:11 +0000 http://alex-wilding.com/dangzang/2009/01/11/flakes-and-charlatans-revisited/#comment-2034 geshe M. roach isnt the 1st or the last "monk" to have a divine partner. Padmasambhava, one of the most influent master in tibetan buddhsim had a partner wich were his disciple as well (Yeshe Tsoyal). And Marpa another of te most inflent master in tibetan buddhist was married and had children.... Don't do demagogy Alex. Dharma is way more vast than your intellect and your limited understandings. geshe M. roach isnt the 1st or the last “monk” to have a divine partner. Padmasambhava, one of the most influent master in tibetan buddhsim had a partner wich were his disciple as well (Yeshe Tsoyal). And Marpa another of te most inflent master in tibetan buddhist was married and had children…. Don’t do demagogy Alex. Dharma is way more vast than your intellect and your limited understandings.

]]>