NOT SACRIFICING CONDUCT FOR THE VIEW: Guru Padmasambhava on ethical conduct as an essential Buddhist foundation of Vajrayana, unconventional yogic conduct (tul-zhug), the questionable mis-use of mass empowerments and months of speed-read oral transmissions

“Maintain the view as spacious as the sky. Yet, in conduct, regard cause and effect as fine as grains of flour.” –Guru Padmasambhava

Guru Padmasambhava famously stated one should not sacrifice conduct for the view, and vice versa. In this article and short video reel, I explain what this statement means and why it is still important for Buddhist practitioners.

This teaching is particularly relevant these days, one reads the social media posts or responses of so-called Buddhist yogis (mainly male teachers), who will often excuse bad behaviour or misconduct (generally sexist or sexual) by citing the view, or pure perception. Yet this is spiritual bypassing and a misuse of the idea of the view (not an actual understanding of it) by unrealised/unqualified practitioners and teachers who are not  realised yogic siddhas, and are sometimes even monastics, bound by stricter Vinaya rules (more on that below).

The View and awareness of the effects of conduct in conventional reality

The “view” means maintaining (and ideally realising) conventional/worldly reality as a delusion in terms of being permanent, independent and inherently existent phenomena and beings, and that it is empty of any inherent existence and identity and interdependent appearances. Not forgetting the fundamental Buddha Nature of the mind/beings which is full of/replete with all the amazing qualities of awakening (joy, wisdom, love, compassion and power).

This view was never intended to condone or excuse breaches of general ethics, common human decency, like the five precepts of not killing, stealing, lying, sexual misconduct and being intoxicated/addicted to substances. For monastics in particular, bound by Vinaya rules, they should not abandon conduct for the view either. As the 17th Gyalwang Karmapa recently stated, when people think of Buddhism, they normally think of non-violence, love, compassion and not of the view of emptiness. Thus, if we need scriptures to know whether it is ethically right to kill or support the killing of animals for food, that is pathetic and shameful. Even ordinary worldly people and children can understand such activities are wrong and lack love and compassion,

Wrongly using the view  to justify or ignore sexism, racism and injustice

As Guru Rinpoche taught the view should not be sacrificed to conduct and vice versa, conduct should never be sacrificed to the view.  Understanding the view of emptiness and interdependent appearances,  should make us all more aware and sensitive to karmic cause and effect in dualistic reality (the reality where all sentient beings who identify with a clear I abide unless a Buddha). If we abandon conduct we take the grave and dangerous risk of turning the Dharma into worldly poison, and worse giving others negative impression of Buddhism and of monastics.

Nowhere is this more obvious than in the case of calling out sexism in society. I have lost count of the number of times, the glib response fired back by men is that there is no biology or gender in the ultimate view. Yes, for sure, but there are also no human beings either, with opinions and men who take advantage of patriarchal power and systems to continually ignore how they effect women and girls. At the same time, such men who dismiss concerns about sexism, are often very interested in calling out racism or other political injustices, such as in Tibet and so on.

Unconventional Conduct (Tul[-zhug) of a realised yogi: the necessity for extraordinary siddhis

Some people who call themselves yogis, and talk about Dzogchen or Mahamudra, and may even adopt the outward dress of a tantrika, take up the ‘cool’ pose that holding the view allows all sorts of ‘unconventional’ (tul-zhug) conduct, or ‘crazy wisdom’ type activities that breach worldly conventions and ethics. They cite great Indian siddhas, like Tilopa or Saraha who left the monasteries to be taught by low-caste prostitutes, or catching and eating fish as examples of conduct they emulate and follow.

However, this is also gravely mistaken. In fact, as Dzogchen Ponlop Rinpoche taught recently in Taiwan (a teaching I was going to type up but “did not have the time”) Indian siddhas advised yogis not to undertake any such ‘unconventional’ conduct unless one was a highly realised siddha. Many of us know the example of how Tilopa made Naropa serve him like a slave for years and requested he jump off a roof to test his confidence in him as a guru. When Naropa did that, Tilopa immediately restored his health and life force and began to teach him Vajrayana.  Dzogchen Ponlop Rinpoche gave the example of one yogi who begged his siddha teacher (I forget the name now) to allow him to enter into unconventional conduct. The siddha told him that only someone who could take away a being’s life force could (or should do that). The student did that, and then the yogi told him to now bring the animal back to life, and the yogi was unable to do so. The Siddha then told him that to enter into unconventional conduct, a practitioner had to be able to do both.

Mass empowerments (wang) and months of oral transmissions (lung): sacrificing conduct to the view?

Finally, another interesting example of how conduct has been sacrificed to the view, is the use of mass empowerments or months of oral transmissions (lung), a tradition that itself did not arise in original Buddhist India.

What is the benefit of months of oral transmissions read at high speed if most of those listening or even those giving it, do not have excellent and ethical conduct and vows? Would it not be better than instead of attending months of such oral transmissions, giving and getting donation and having a ‘good time’ socially together, where they don’t understand a word of what is being recited, to actually training in the basic ethical precepts and vows of Buddhism? Is it not more important that a Buddhist practitioner has a solid foundation of being a kind, compassionate, honest, trustworthy and safe person than someone who is able to say they attended months of a speed read oral transmission?

I even read and heard people raving about a Bhutanese Rinpoche (who has had several allegations of sexual misconduct and harassment reported against him and his community, need I say more) as being the fastest oral transmission reader, as though it were the Guinness Book of World Records! Only worldly people could turn the Buddha Dharma transmissions and teachings into one big ‘sports’ competition, right?

In fact, these long oral transmissions, or mass empowerments seem to be no more than just an easy way to gather large amounts of people for political, social and entertainment purposes, as can be seen in the misuse of Kalacakra empowerments inside and outside Tibet, since the time of the 9th Panchen Lama.

Conclusion

In sum, perhaps it is time Buddhist practitioners went back to  the foundations of original Buddhism, and established a strong and stable foundation, as Nāropa and all the great yogic mahasiddhas did, in order to become excellent and trustworthy Vajrayana practitioners and masters? If they behave like ‘crazy yogis’ as a PR ego appearance without any substance to gather fame, crowds and money, Vajrayana is in grave danger of degeneration, as are the people who follow such teachers. Even more so, is it not time that Highest Yoga Tantra practice in Vajrayana itself, which is reliant on ‘secret’ consort practice was returned to its more appropriate (and convenient) layperson roots, not only to save the ‘reputation’ and ‘image’ of the Buddhist monastic community, but also to prevent continuing emotional and physical harm to women used by these ‘celibate monks’ as nothing more than pretty faces and bodies?

Cited sources

“LEAPING FROM THE PRECIPICE” WITH THE UNEXAMINED: Vajrayāna empowerments for the “unexamined masses” and the question of their accordance with the Buddhist Tantras and samayas

“DAKINI IS TRUTH!” TILOPA’S OVERLOOKED FEMALE TEACHERS AND ENTERING ‘UNCONVENTIONAL’ CONDUCT (TUL-ZHUG)