“The Kagyu lineage being broken will be by students who are not suitable, qualified “vessels”, meeting gurus who lack realizations and thus they are unable to see the guru as a Buddha.” —8th Karmapa, One Hundred Instructions
“The greatly intelligent obey the guru’s commands with effort and joy, but if unable, explain to them their inability properly.”
“It is from the guru that you receive siddhis, high realms, and happiness. So put your every effort into never transgressing the guru’s commands.”
“There are the words of the guru actually teaching dharma, and then there is the daily speech about the worldly things, the regular conversation. If we divide these into two different things, that is not good. There is absolutely no distinguishing these two for a qualified guru because everything, they say becomes a Dharma teaching.” –17th Karmapa
Introduction/Summary
On Day 9 of the Fifty Verses on the Guru teaching, the 17th Gyalwang Karmapa continued with the second and third ways (out of eight) to respect and serve a qualified Vajrayana Guru, according to the Sanskrit root text and other Tibetan Buddhist commentaries.
In this teaching, the 17th Karmapa focused in particular on ways of showing respect and reverence to the guru, such as not even wanting to “step on their shadow” as a sign of humility and devotion. Although, he emphasised that this should not be taken too literally, as the Shakyamuni Buddha would never try to make our lives difficult without good reason. So, when not possible it should be taken merely as a metaphor for having great respect for a qualified Vajrayana Guru,
The Karmapa then discussed the third way listed of serving a guru in the root text, about how students should generally always obey the commands of a guru, once they have fully accepted them as a qualified guru, especially if the command accords with the Dharma. However, if the Guru commands a student to do something, which either does not accord with the Dharma, or the student is unable to accomplish the task (with good reasons), they should explain that politely and reasonably to the guru, and not just ignore or abandon it. So it requires obedience but not blind obedience.
Again, the 17th Karmapa emphasised that the student and Guru both have to be qualified. He interestingly cited a quote by 8th Karmapa that stated the reason Kagyu lineage (am assuming this is referring to the greater Kagyu lineage, meaning the Buddha’s teachings, for more on the meaning of Kagyu, see here) would be broken was unqualified, unsuitable students (lacking the pre-requisite qualities as already discussed of compassion, generosity, faith in the Buddha, Dharma and Sangha and so on) meeting with unqualified gurus who do not have the qualities or realisations. So that the student would then be unable to see the guru as a Buddha. Here is a short video clip I made of this section with English subtitles.
As a personal observation, this seemed to be the era we are in now, so many unqualified gurus, some well-known some not, offering online or mass empowerments to hundreds or dozens of people online, without even meeting them, never mind getting to know them personally, and examining them for the pre-requisite qualities!
The 17th Karmapa ended with some fascinating stories about how for great masters, there is no distinction between Dharma and worldly activities, they are all “one taste” and all beneficial. Such as when the 1st Karmapa, Dusum Khyenpa went to the bathroom and relics were said to have appeared in his toilet waste (although the Karmapa said it was not clear if it was his poo or urine). A golden shower of blessings indeed! Also, when Milarepa told Gampopa to drink the alcohol/chang in his skull cup when Gampopa was a fully ordained monk.
Then, about how Marpa and other guru’s asked their students to do challenging things, and were testing them, actions that would look and seem crazy to others these days. And that is the real challenge in Vajrayana, first, being able to examine and check a guru for the pre-requisite qualities (and knowing what those qualities) are, then checking oneself is actually a qualified student, and then once having accepted them, doing whatever they request, even when it may seem “wrong”.
The Karmapa also made a significant point that many people divide the guru’s words into what they teach in a Dharma context, and what they say in daily life, but that is not correct or good. For a great guru, there is no distinction between the two and it is all Dharma. In addition, if the guru is saying anything about what virtues to adopt and what to abandon, that is clearly Dharma.
The 17th Karmapa finished with some stories about the negative consequences and “interrupted” interdependent connections of renowned students who did not fulfilling the guru’s commands, such as the excessive (and wrong) humility of the Tsalpa Kagyu founder, Lama Zhang’s student, who did not carry out his guru’s command of maintaining his Tsalpa monastic seat, which led to the deterioration of the Tsalpa Kagyu lineage to this day.
Then, the actions of the 1st Zhamarpa, Dragpa Senge who did not carry out the 3rd Karmapa’s command he go to Kampo Nenang, and so was unable to meet and bring the 4th Karmapa, Rolpe Dorje to central Tibet. Then, the 2nd Karmapa’s guru, Pomdragpa not listening to his guru Sangye Rechen’s instruction not to go to Markham, and passing away when he disobeyed and went there.
Personal Observations
These examples reminded me of two other senior tulku Rinpoches I had known personally quite well, one a Jonang Rinpoche (a Kālacakra teacher and practitioner) who told us all in one of his classes how his root Jonang guru (who has since passed away) had told him not to leave Tibet and go to India, and he ignored the advice. Another a senior Karma Kagyu tulku, also told me personally that his root guru, Dilgo Khyentse Rinpoche had told him from the age of 60 onwards he should go into a strict, solitary isolated retreat but he is still giving empowerment and teachings to this day (so no idea what happened there either). I guess these examples, serve as reminders to us all, that it is not always easy to do exactly as the guru says, but if we cannot we need to make sure we have good reasons why, and explain those to our guru.
As I finished writing up this transcript, the lyrics of For My Lover by Traci Chapman, and What Difference Does it Make by the Smiths, entered into my mindstream, songs about a devotion that would “do anything for them” even “leaping into a flying bullet for them”. But then there are also the times when something just is not OK and has to be refused! A golden shower of blessings descending from the guru might be beyond the devotion of most students for example, ha ha ha. Although it is said that some devoted students will even drink their gurus’ urine, and see it as a great blessing.
I wondered that if I (like other devotees) presented myself in person to the guru, with a “dog collar” around my neck (as the Karmapa has taught several previous masters have done), and also give the “suck tongue” blessings (apparently “normal and acceptable” in Tibetan culture according to some (never seen it before though outside a family context), would the guru be as wish-fulfilling then? I guess it all depends on the student and guru’s intention. After all, a student has to examine and test the guru too, right? Or would the student, like the unconventional gurus also be unceremoniously “kicked out” as those gurus were kicked out of the monasteries? The proof is in the pudding as they say!
For me, that is the “elephant in the room” here, when talking about these unconventional conduct examples of past masters, they were all laypeople, who had been monastics but left the monasteries (or were told by their teachers to do so). When monastics engage in unconventional means, it can lead to a lot of resentment, confusion, and unethical conduct by unqualified students and teachers (especially involving women), as we have all seen and are witnessing, right? So on the one hand, what the Karmapa says is correct that nowadays it is becoming more difficult for gurus to adopt unconventional means, but on the other positive side, perhaps it is also becoming much more difficult for unqualified gurus to do unethical, sexist things under the guise of being a Vajrayana yogi? Pure perception might also look at it that way.
Music? For My Lover by Traci Chapman, Black is the Colour of My True Love’s Hair by Nina Simone, I Would do Anything for Love (but I Won’t do That) by Meat Loaf.
Compiled and transcribed by Adele Tomlin, 26th April 2025.
Fifty Verses on the Guru, 17th Karmapa
Transcript (Day 9, 2025)
According to the outline, we have come to the second point: viewing the guru as a Buddha. In viewing the guru as a Buddha perhaps I should show this to you. First the second of these points has two subtopics:
- the actual point and
- avoiding the disrespectful to their shadow and so forth.
Qualities of the student according to the Sanskrit Commentary
So, viewing the Guru as a Buddha it says: “Thus, students with qualities of compassion, generosity, discipline, and patience should not ever consider the master to be different from Vajradhara.”
Generally, I explained this the other day, but I have not talked about it according to the Sanskrit commentary whose title is the Textual explanation of Serving the Guru. First of all, I would like to say a few words about this according to the Sanskrit commentary. According to the interpretation in the Sanskrit commentary, the first word “thus” are the reasons students give offerings to the guru, when they pay them respect and so forth. We have already gone through this right? because of those reasons that have been discussed before.
“The students” are the people who listen to the guru, which means people who are studying and training on the path. What sort of a student should they be? Of course, there are better medium and lower students. It says they must have compassion and so forth.
“Compassion” means “loving.” According to the Sanskrit commentary, it says they have the three types of compassion:
- compassion focused on sentient beings
- compassion focused on dharma and
- non-referential compassion
It refers to all these.
Next is generosity, which means giving, being generous. There are three different types of generosity:
- giving dharma,
- giving of material things,
- giving loving kindness, or giving refuge and safety.
These are the three types of generosity, and generosity here includes all three types of generosity.
Then discipline means being free of breaches of discipline, free of immorality. The three types of a Bodhisattva discipline:
- the discipline restraint from harmful acts
- the discipline of benefiting beings
- the discipline of gathering virtuous qualities.
So, discipline is included in these three types of discipline.
Patience here means calmness of mind, which means the patience:
- the patience of contemplating the dharma
- the patience of accepting suffering and
- the patience of taking no harm from others.
It refers to all three types of patience.
Then it says “with the qualities.” These qualities mean the compassion, discipline, and patience that we have spoken about, and someone who has increased them and meditated upon them again and again. So, this is why they are called qualities because meditated on.
Then the word “with” means that they “possess” them. They possess the qualities of compassion, generosity, discipline, and patience. So, we mean a student who has these qualities.
When it says we should not “ever consider the master to be different from” as different, this word in Tibet “mi” means ma yinpa (is not) it is a negation. It is a negating particle, right? In the Sanskrit commentary there is a suffix thumb on the word, but in Tibetan there is no such particle.
In the Tibetan translation of the Fifty Verses here it says the “Lopon/ master.” it does not say guru like the Sanskrit manuscripts. The Chinese translations also use the word guru. So, actually the word master, should be changed to guru, but in brief, guru means the master. “Vajra-holder” means Vajradhara.
In brief, a student with the qualities of compassion and so forth, who wants to achieve siddhis should never see the guru and Vajradhara as being different. They should not see the guru as being one being, and Vajradhara as someone else. They should not think this in any way, even in their dreams. So that sort of a student, the way they should view their guru whoever that may be, is the guru is themselves Vajradhara. So, whoever the guru is, that is Vajradhara. So, they should think that briefly, they are not seeing the guru as over there and Vajradhara as over there. So, whoever the guru is they themselves are Vajradhara. That is the way they should view them.
The Sanskrit commentary gives a quotation which says:
“They themselves are always Vajradhara, the Tathagata, and the Ratnakirti. They are the great ocean of wisdom, the wish-fulfilling gem that gives the great purpose.”
They give this citation, which is probably from the Tantra of the Net of Illusions.
Basically, when we explain the Fifty Verses according to the Sanskrit textual commentary on the Fifty verses that is how it is interpreted.
We do not need to say too much but, in brief, when viewing the guru as a Buddha, as I said the other day, in both the foundation vehicle and the Mahayana, it is taught in the Vinaya that you should view the Khenpo as a Buddha. Many of the Mahayana Sutras say that the dharma teachers and spiritual friends should be viewed as Buddhas. So, I gave you many examples, the other day from Sutras, right? I showed them to you. Not just those, there are also many other sutras that have such words. In particular, within secret mantra it also says view the guru as being an actual Buddha and this appears in many of the tantras themselves, and in particular in the practice lineage of the Dagpo Kagyu, it is very important to the view the guru as Buddha. This is important and we say this over and over again, right?
Reasons why the Kagyu lineage will be broken: unrealised teachers meeting unqualified students
As the 8th Karmapa, Mikyo Dorje wrote in One Hundred Short Instructions and I think there is a real point in it. First, I will read the words:
“The Kagyu lineage being broken will be the students who are not receptive meeting gurus who lack realization, and not seeing the guru as a Buddha.”
So, we have the Kagyu lineage, and if it will ever be broken, the circumstances of it being broken will come down to this. That the guru has no realization, they do not have the qualities of experience and realization and the student is not receptive. So not really having genuine gurus and students and when these two come together, the student does not view the guru as Buddha and the guru will not have any qualities worthy of being seen as a Buddha. So, for this reason the Kagyu lineage will be broken, he says. So, if the Kagyu lineage is ever going to be broken, then this is the circumstance. These are the causes and conditions for the lineage to be broken. So, the most important is the great masters are gurus with experience and the students are receptive. This means primarily whether or not they have faith, that is what being receptive depends on right? So, they must see the guru as a Buddha.
If the student sees the guru as a Buddha, the blessings of a Buddha will enter them. If the blessings enter them, they will receive the Mahamudra blessings of Buddha in their mindstream, and if they receive those Mahamudra blessings, then they will be able to develop the realization of a Buddha and they will be able to uphold the lineage. I think this is a really critical point.
Seeing the Guru as a Buddha (2): Avoiding being disrespectful to their shadow and so on
The second point is “avoiding being disrespectful to their shadow and so forth.” The verse reads:
“If you would not step over their shadow from fear the misdeed would be like smashing a stupa, what need to mention stepping over their shoes, seat, ride, and such?”
First of all, I will give the explanation according to the Sanskrit commentary, which says the guru is one who has the great qualities, who is able to tame the disciples.
So, the first word here is “stupa.” Here stupa is among the representations of body, speech, and mind. A stupa means one of the eight types of stupas. Sometimes stupa can also refer to those the representations of body, speech, and mind, and sometimes it refers only to the representation of mind. In Tibetan, choten is stupa in English, we say stupa it means a particular type of representation for offerings. And “smashing” means to destroy or to demolish something. To completely demolish it is to destroy it entirely by down all the way down to its foundations, that is what it means. If an individual were to completely demolish a stupa, then they would have committed a terrible negative action, and because of that terrible action the result would be terrifying and full of suffering. So, there is fear of the misdeed of smashing a stupa, they would be fearful of that.
Then it says the word “shadow, as in when one has the shadow behind the body right? It is like an image we have the dark shadow that you would not step on it or walk over it.
Then “shoes and seat” etc shows mean the footgear. Generally, it means footgear, in Sanskrit when you talk about the word chapal, that could also mean sandals. In the Vinaya, we talk about the word called chapal, sandal so it means all sorts of foot gear. “The seat” here means like the cushion that they sit on. The word “ride” here means like the palanquin chariot. These are sometimes in India, right? If someone needs to climb a steep mountain, they will get some Indian workers and they will have two sticks and, in the middle, there will be some bamboo and there will be four people who pick them up and carry them. Either two or four people will carry them up the mountain. The ride here does not necessarily mean a horse or an elephant or so forth but the ride here means like a palanquin that primarily means something carried by humans. But it can also be understood as horses and elephants. These days we could say it also in could be understood as a car and so forth.
Then there is the phrase “and such” which include the guru’s clothing, jewellery, and so forth. So, for that reason, you do not step on their shoes, seat or so forth. What need to mention means one does not need to know or speak about it. That is the interpretation in the Sanskrit commentary.
In Je Tsongkhapa’s commentary it is a little bit easier to understand. When talking about smashing a stupa, we have the five heinous acts and there are also the five nearly heinous acts. So, destroying a stupa is one of the nearly heinous acts, so it is a terrible misdeed. It is not an actual misdeed but it is close to that. So, if you are stepping on the shadow of the guru, that also brings a misdeed. So, you should be afraid of that misdeed and not even step on the guru’s shadow. If you are not going to step on the guru’s shadow then there is no need to mention stepping on their shoes, seat, ride and all the rest, right?
As it says in the first chapter of Tantra Net of Illusion:
“Do not step on their shadow, it is thought to be like smashing a stupa.”
So, this is also taught in the Ornament of the Vajra Essence tantra and the Vajra Dakini Tantra. It says quite a bit about this in the? chapter the vajra so anyone who steps on the guru’s parasol, or shadow, or seat, or feet, or pillow, such people who do this is a great wrong. There is quite a lot about this but we do not need to go through all of that.
Sometimes, in a particular situation, there are times when there is no way not to step on it and what you must do then, is described on the chapter of beds in the Vinaya chapters of the Vinaya.
For example, sometimes you are not allowed to step on images of the Buddha. For example, if you are going to dust a Buddha statue, or if you need to repaint the face, or if you need to put white wash on stupas or temples or so forth. If you are going to clean them then there is no way to avoid stepping on them. You have to walk on and go through them. It says that you recite the Sutra of the verses about the temple as you walk, and if you do this, then there is no fault. It says likewise in tantra there are also particular ways to counteract the faults. I think that these will come later.
In any case, there are some situations because there is there is no way not to step on them in those situations there are methods to do that.
Generally, there are people who actually practice this even in Tibet. There are some old women who when they walk circumambulate the temple will not step on the shadow of a sutra. They are very careful about this there are people like this. I think from one perspective it is good I think from this perspective they are very careful of even the most minor karmic, cause and effect. Even in the finest points I think that you might think there is no problem there. If you start to loosen up at this point, there is a point eventually you start to get relaxed about even the important points. So, there are people who consider this.
But in this context, we are talking about not stepping on the Buddhist shadow is and I think it is representative of having great respect for the guru. Sometimes, there is some danger that it will be a prohibition that you are unable not to fill you are always walking looking about whether you are stepping in the shadow. There is a difficulty you might fall or something, because in the Buddhist teachings it said there are these prohibitions that you are not able to complete. So, there are times the Buddha would not make any rules that cannot be kept because the Buddha is compassionate, he does not make pointless rules that just make things hard for people. So, for this reason, when we are talking about not stepping on their shadow, there is actually something about if you are actually stepping on their shadow, but the main thing is not that. The question is you are being very respectful towards them, so that even stepping on their own shadow you feel hesitant. It is a sign of having great respect for the Buddha and so considering this very important. It is like a sign of that.
So, to continue with the commentary there are eight points on how to be respectful. Of these eight points, I think it is best to show this from the beginning:
- making offerings,
- view them as a Buddha,
- fulfilling their instructions and so on. We have gone through the first two.
Third way to serve the guru: Fulfilling their instructions (Ka Drubpa) as “practice”
At this point we have come to the third, fulfilling the guru’s instructions. Before, we were talking about viewing the guru as a Buddha and seeing the guru as the same as a Buddha. Having contemplated that, then we need to keep, accept and fulfil the instructions. Otherwise, there is a danger that viewing the guru as a Buddha just becomes like mere words. So for that reason, we need to respect their instructions and follow their instructions.
As for fulfilling their instructions, in Je Tsongkhapa’s commentary, it says: “If we look at it in terms of the words from the Ornament of the Mahayana Sutras, it means serving the spiritual friend with a respect, gifts service, and practice.”
So, if you combine this with serving the guru in terms of practice, with the Fifty Verses, it is practising fulfilling their instructions. According to the Mahayana Ornament Sutra if we combine it with that then, it is serving the guru through practice. To go through the words of this it says:
“The greatly intelligent obey the guru’s commands with effort and joy, but if unable, explain to them their inability properly.”
Generally, there are two stanzas on this. The first of the two stanzas is this one. Here is the comparative table of the Sanskrit and so forth.
So as for the first stanza, if we explain it according to the Sanskrit commentary, the textual explanation of following the guru, it says: “greatly intelligent.” Lo here means their mind is vast and greatly intelligent so this means someone who has an unimpeded intelligence in mind, exceptionally intelligent with great discernment.
The words “with joy” here means with mental delight, an attitude of delight. “The guru” here means the gurus or the masters. So those with great intelligence obey the guru’s commands, which means their instructions and words, their commands. The guru’s commands mean their instructions and what they say. When the guru gives spiritual instructions, you can understand it as that. Or we can understand it as whatever the guru says, as meaning everything the guru says.
“Effort” here means with a desire for, seeking merit. Then “obey” means to fulfil it, to accomplish this. So, here it means obeying the means you need to obey and listen to them. You need to do what the guru said. So “unable” here means I think it is better to look at it here:
So, “unable” means you are unable because of the cause and or result of it. Then, “to explain” here means to request to explain is to request. To say “I’m unable to do this.” to explain it to them and “To them” here means to the guru and here “properly” means explain it with analogies to demonstrate this so you have to have a reason. Basically, you need to have analogies and reasons for this.
So, the point of this, the essence of what it means, if we talk about it according to the interpretation of the Sanskrit commentary, if the guru tells you to do that is something you should be able to, if you are able to do it, or if you are able to accomplish it, that student should strive with great efforts to accomplish it. If they are unable to accomplish it, or unable to, or if they do not have the time or if there are not the circumstances, it is the circumstances that prevents them and they are unable to do that, then in those times, it does not mean that you just leave it on your own, and disregard the words, and leave it and forget about it. If you forget about it and disregard the guru’s words then it becomes a misdeed.
So, out of fear of committing a negative action, one thinks about the reasons and explains to the guru the reasons why. Such as saying, “I don’t have the ability to accomplish what you have told me to do.” You have to explain it clearly to the guru. So, this is the intention of the Sanskrit commentary.
Je Tsongkhapa’s commentary states that the words “greatly intelligent” means great prajñā, the students with great intelligence obey the guru’s commands or the words of the guru with great effort. They work hard and listen and they fulfil the words and it is not as if they are doing it unwillingly. Like if a king tells you to do something, whether you want to do or not, because the king tells you to do something then you have no choice but to do it. It is not a question of you being under someone else’s power or not, right? Instead, you should do it with an attitude of great joy and delight. As it is said, the students with great intelligence should do this with joy.
Do we really have to do everything the guru says?
You might wonder should we do everything that guru says we have to do? Do we have to do it all? This is an important question; do you have to do everything the guru tells you to do? If the commands/words violate the dharma, that are not according to Dharma, there is no problem with not doing it. But if it is a command that accords with the dharma, but sometimes no matter how hard you try you are unable to do this, you are not capable of accomplishing it. This does happen right? So, then you explain the reasons why you are unable to do it in understandable words and communicate the reason to the guru, then there is no fault if you are unable to do it. There is no problem. Even if you do not fulfil it, there is no problem.
Not only that, if the action is one that you can accomplish with the proper methods. So, we can talk about the ones that are in accord with the dharma that is one thing. But if we are talking about instructions that are not in accord with the dharma then you need to explain that as well as the ones that are in accord with dharma. We need to explain them and make it understandable.
As Manjushrikirti says in the Essence Ornament of the General Virtues of All Glorious Things, which is a treatise and and important and famous text. The reason why it that within our Tengyur we have many presentations of the root downfalls and these are primarily written by the Indian masters. However, among them 3rd Karmapa, Rangjung Dorje’s explanation of the root downfalls, in the Ocean of Samaya is primarily based upon master’s Manjushrikirti’s explanation of this. So, when we talk about the Essence Ornament of the General Virtues of All Glorious Things it is a treatise by Manjushrikirti, and it is a very well-known treatise. There is a citation of it given by Je Tsongkhapa and the one in the Tengyur itself. They are a little bit different. The one in the Tengyur says:
“with words that encourage non-virtuous action, make a request and refuse.”
The quote in Tsongkhapa is a little bit different. Not a big difference between the two.
“If they instruct non-Dharmic things refuse.”
So, if they speak about things that are non- dharma that you cannot accept doing it, you refuse. Also, in the Vinaya it speaks about this.
So, for this reason, if the guru tells you to do something that is non-dharmic that is something that should not be done and they insist that you do this, then you do not have to do them. However, you do not take that as a reason, to then lose faith in the guru, or criticize the guru. This is what it says this is lord Tsongkhapa says in his explanation.
Second Verse: Put every effort into not transgressing the guru’s commands, who is the source of the siddhis
Next, we have the second of the two stanzas and this is the second stanza it says:
“It is from the guru that one receives siddhis, high realms, and happiness. So put your every effort into never transgressing the guru’s commands.”
If this is explained according to the intent of the Sanskrit commentary. It says “from the guru,” which means from the master right?
“Siddhis” here means the accomplishments you desire. There are two types of these siddhis/accomplishments: mundane/worldly and supra-mundane ones.
The worldly siddhis mean the eye, the sword, the eye medicine, food ointment and so forth these are mundane siddhis. The sword and eye medicine and so forth, if you achieve these siddhis, they are not really beneficial for achieving liberation or omniscience. They are like achieving a superpower that others do not have. So, we call these things super powers in English.
So like “eye medicine” if you put that in your eye, you can see things under the ground, like treasures, if you want to find where there’s gold or oil or something under the ground. These days we do not really need those because we can do it with technology, right? There is no need for us to go through all the effort of preparing an eye medicine.
There is also swift-footedness, which means that you can go really fast, a lot faster than ordinary people. You could probably go even faster than horses go. That is also not so useful today because we have cars and airplanes. In the old days, one always had to either go on foot or on horse. There was not really any other way with any other sort of vehicle. So, if one had that siddhi of fast walking then it was beneficial for going wherever you wanted easily.
Also, there is the siddhi of invisibility, which might be somewhat beneficial these days. There are invisibility cloaks and things that some scientists are trying to see if they can make invisibility cloaks and such. In any case, if you can have an invisibility cloak then sometimes it might be kind of beneficial, right? Like in Tibet, if you had an invisibility cloak and went to Tibet then you can go wherever you want to go.
So, these are through the mantras, and superpowers that others do not have. These are the powers of worldly siddhis that are not really of any benefit for achieving this Buddhahood or liberation.
Attaining Enlightenment is the supra- mundane siddhi, and the reason for that is because the guru is the same as Buddha then you can receive these siddhis.
Then, it says “from the guru” again. In the English translation, the words “from the guru” comes once but in the Sanskrit, it appears three times. So, for that reason, there is the word from the guru in the high realms.
The word “high realms” means the world of the gods. These are the gods of the desire realm, form realm, and formless realm. They are the three realms and these are included in the three realms. So, among these we have, in terms of the desire realm, in general they are the places of the abodes the gods and demigods because we have the four continents for humans. They are also included in the four realms but there are also god realms in the desire realm those are the six realms and then there the four of four realms, and in the formless realm, the four absorptions of the formless and so forth. In any case, the higher realms mean the worlds of the gods.
Generally, higher realms can also be understood as both humans and gods. Here, primarily it means the gods is what it says in the Sanskrit commentary this is achieving the worlds of the higher realms. So, because the guru is the essence of dharma, this is primarily saying that achieving the abode of the higher realms is primarily because of understanding karmic cause, and effect and practicing positive, virtuous actions. That is why it is probably said the essence of dharma would also receive from the guru is happiness.
Again, in the Sanskrit, there is the word “from the guru” appearing again but in the Tibetan English there is not the word.
As for the word “Happiness” [transcriber’s note: I would translate this as “bliss”] there are two types: worldly/mundane happiness and supra-mundane happiness. Worldly happiness is like the happiness of political power, the happiness of the gods and humans. So, it is the happiness of having political power and wealth, and also means the happiness of being able to enjoy all the pleasures of the gods.
The supra-mundane happiness is the pleasure of liberation. So, you will be able to truly achieve because the guru is the essence of the because the guru is the essence of the three jewels and produces every result for this and the future.
The guru is indeed the essence of the three jewels so this is proving that the guru is the essence of the three jewels. So, therefore in the end, it says “with every effort.” So, “with true effort,” if you this all, the guru will receive all of the benefits that are spoken about here. Because if you do this you should do this with every effort. This means in every situation with great intention. So, the guru here means the master. One should not transgress or overstep the guru’s commands.
If we compare it with the intention of thought in Tsongkhapa’s commentary, as I said before, it says if the guru teaches says something that is non-dharmic but is contrary to the dharma, then you need to explain why clearly and you do not have to do a non-dharmic command. Otherwise, whatever the guru’s dharma commands, one needs to always do them with an effort you are able to. You need to do what the guru tells you to do.
The reason is that both the supreme and common siddhis come in dependence on the guru. The higher realms, the abodes of gods and humans, and all the necessary pleasures are received from the guru. So, the words of the guru are the primary gateway for the student to receive the Buddha’s blessings. So, one should never transgress them. The second verse here is taken from the Tantra of the Drop of the Secret Moon (Candraguhyatilakatantra ཟླ་གསང་ཐིག་ལེའི་རྒྱུད། ) .
17th Karmapa’s personal observations and thoughts
Next, there are the two verses about fulfilling the guru’s commands. To sort of digress from these, I would like to say a few things about my own opinion. The first are the reasons why we need to fulfil the guru’s commands. From Jakarta Tales it says:
“The way to honour those who speak beneficially, is to practice according to their instructions.”
So, those who benefit us, if we want to worship or make offerings, then the way to repay their kindness, the best offering to them is to practice according to their instructions. One should do basically whatever they tell you. If you put it into practice that is the best way.
As I said, the best way to remember the kindness of the guru is to practice. The best way to repay the guru’s kindness is to do as the guru tells you to. This is like the best way of the three. Pleasing teachers and offering to the gurus are well known but the best way to serve the guru now this is not categorically.
In general, the best among the three ways is the way of pleasing the teacher, or the best of the offerings is to it is the best of offerings.
Generally, many of us think there is what the guru says, the guru’s speech. People think they are kind of two different types of speech, right? What are these two different types? One of these is that when the Guru is actually giving formal dharma teachings, empowerments, and transmission instructions, they are giving a teaching, we call that the words of the guru right? That is what the guru says and so we call them the words of the guru. In actuality, that is just the true dharma itself. It is the dharma of scripture, right?
So, another way we can understand the guru’s words is the things that the guru says in the course of daily life. That is also the guru’s speech that is another way we can understand it.
So, we have got these two different types: the first is when the guru is actually teaching dharma, reciting the dharma words they are teaching the dharma itself. That is one way of understanding the guru’s words. Another is like everything that they say. Whatever basically the guru, says is the guru’s words. That is another way to understand it.
As for the first of these, we think if we understand the guru’s words, that first step then it is kind of easier to fulfil them. Because the question is only whether we are diligent enough or whether we are capable enough or not. it’s like no thought at all no suspicion about whether we should do it all we just don’t wonder whether we should do it because the guru when they give the teaching they’re teaching dharma itself and the dharma that they teach it’s a question of whether able to do it or not whether we can do it’s not a question of Whether we should do it or not we don’t doubt that because it’s the Dharma of scripture itself right? In brief it is performing the true Dharma.
The difficult one is the second one. That is the second type of speech/commands and that is hard to fulfil. The reason the second type is difficult is because basically it means that whatever the guru says you have to listen to it. If they say to do something, you have to do it that is the way we understand it.
So, generally many of us think that “yeah I’ll do whatever the guru tells me to do.” Basically, we are going to think that way. However, when you are actually carrying out the guru’s instructions it might not match your wishes, it might not something you want to do. It does not turn out the way you hoped or what the guru tells you to do is does not seem to be terribly connected to dharma practice.
If they are just telling you to do something and you think it is like it is not really connected dharma practice, then not only is it something that is not connected to the dharma, but it is actually kind of harmful. It is possible that they might tell you to do something like that. The guru might even tell you to do a lot and then when you have difficulties, then he is like “oh I can’t do that” you might think when you actually encounter difficulties.
Only then until you realize that it is not so easy to do everything that they tell you to do it is only when you actually meet the difficulty that you can tell whether you have a true intention.
So, when we take an empowerment from pretty much anyone these days, it is pretty scary actually, because you say “I am going to do whatever they tell me to do. I will listen to whatever you say. I am going to help you if you want to.” That is something we have to think about and it is not that easy.”
The relationship between Marpa and Milarepa and other Indian mahasiddhas
To give an example, when Lord Marpa first met Milarepa, he made him build a whole lot of houses for the four different activities the peaceful, enriching, magnetizing and wrathful. He made different ones, and they made it destroyed and tear it down, and bring the earth back to where it came from the rocks back to where they came from. Then, he made him build the nine-storey tower and he had back wounds like an animal saddle sore, it is like his back was completely covered with wounds.
Still Marpa did not let him set stop and not only that he made like a pad for his back and instead of making him carry the rocks on his back, he told him to carry them in front of him and made him continue working. So, it was shocking how he treated him absolutely terribly.
Now, when we read this the life of Milarepa, many centuries have passed since Milarepa’s time, and it is because of Marpa’s kindness and Milarepa ‘s own perseverance that he became a great master of yoga, we all know that. So, when we read about the hardships, we think of course it is right that he did this. We do not think how horrible it was, but the people of that time when Marpa was treating him badly, the people who saw the situation happening did think it was bade. This was before Milarepa was going to achieve siddhis before he became well-known. When they saw that Marpa was treating him badly, they did not see any of the benefit or the result. They could not see that in the future he would achieve siddhis. They only saw that he was treating him badly. So, all they saw is him treating Milarepa absolutely terribly and they thought that Marpa has gone crazy and that he is making him work so hard. They said Marpa is crazy, he making he is really good at working but he is treating him so badly he is basically almost killing him. So, they said no it is understandable for them because they could not see what in the future would happen. That Milarepa would become a great Mahasiddha, like the Tibetan master of yoga.
Likewise, when Tilopa subjected Naropa to the 12 great trials and 12 minor trials, these are even more people for us to get our minds around. It is even stranger than the way that Marpa treated Milarepa. Tilopa made Naropa jump off of a roof and to smash a rock with his own vajra. So, we cannot get our minds around that, it is just impossible to understand.
So, when you think about it like this, we think we have the dharma teachings the guru gives us then it is okay to do those, but if we have to do everything that the guru tells us to do, that is difficult. So, as I said before, there are two different types of teachings, there are the teachings of the guru, and then everything the Guru says. One has to kind of distinguish between the two and think about them as slightly different. We do not think that these two go together. If we think that and you have to mix them together, and think of them all as one taste, that is really difficult. The reason is if you have to do everything the guru says, if you do everything, they tell you to do, that is incredibly difficult. That is something we really need to think about and that many masters of the practice lineage, in particular, there are many of the skilful teachers when they are guiding students on the path, they did not immediately teach them dharma teachings and they would not teach them nature of things and the reasoning and such.
First, they would not give them the dharma teachings at all. Even worse than that they made them do like these minor tasks that are you know annoying tasks that are related to the dharma like Marpa making Milarepa build houses. There is no direct connection between building houses and making houses he is doing all these like pointless works, like he is just treating a person badly. Sometimes even they have them do things that seem to like contradict the dharma teachings.
Another example is when Lord Gampopa first went to see Milarepa at that time, he had a skull cup full of beer leftover from Milarepa’s drinking so he had that full skull cup and he gave it to Gampopa and said drink it. Gampopa was a fully ordained monk in the Kadampa tradition, right? So, the Kadampa at that time were extremely strict in observance the Vinaya.
So, he was a pure monk and he had a very strict vows, and he had been raised in an environment with very strict discipline and at that time it referred to just Gampopa and Milarepa, but at that time they are also many of students all around at that point he gave him this like skull cup filled with beer. Gampopa was not able to immediately drink all. He was kind of looking around, and Milarepa is saying drink the beer and he was not able to drink it at first, and was hesitant. So, Milarepa said “don’t overthink it just drink this beer.” When he said that, then whatever thoughts and doubts Gampopa had had just disappeared, and he thought “this is what the guru says” and drank the entire uh skull cup of beer without leaving any left. Because of drinking this Milarepa thought in his mind that now Gampopa will be able to hold the lineage, he will be a suitable vessel receptive for all the complete instructions because he drank the whole cup of beer. So, at that time, Gampopa thought: “oh I can’t drink this, I am a monk, please I can’t do this.” If he had given that back to Milarepa then that would have shown that he probably would not have become someone who could uphold the lineage, and receive all the instructions.
From one perspective, it is a sign of interdependence, and another way is like Milarepa was testing Gampopa. He, gave him a big pitcher of beer to drink but this is like contradictory of the dharma.
Not distinguishing between a guru’s speech in a Dharma context and speech in daily life and the First Karmapa, Dusum Khyenpa’s “toilet relics”
When the guru is speaking about dharma and then there’s worldly speech, we think that it is different. One is the dharma you have to practice and you have human life. So, you think that the dharma and the daily life are different. But for Je Milarepa and other qualified gurus, their perception was that there is no daily life apart from the dharma. There is no separate dharma. For those people they are the same, they are one taste. Everything has become one with the true dharma. So, whatever they do, is the dharma. Whatever they do, there is nothing that was not in accord with the Dharma for them. There is no difference between the worldly and dharma.
For us, we see the dharma as this, and we see the world over there. Because for us the dharma and the individual are separate. We have not been able to incorporate all the dharma into our being. When we have mixed all the dharma and our mind stream becomes mixed with the dharma, then there is no way to do this. So, they are able to do that, so in every way they lead their life everything they do becomes the dharma. So, even when such masters fart you could say that it is the dharma.
The reason for this, I will tell you a little short story about it. We have the glorious 1st Karmapa, Dusum Khyenpa, just below Tsurphu, which is in the upper part of the valley. So Tsur means the upper part of the valley. So, if you go down to the bottom of that to the lower part of the valley, and you get to a place called Nagara, a small village. In front of that there was a meditation hut called the omniscient wisdom. So, we often supplicate to guru at that at that place.
So, when glorious Dusum Khyenpa stayed there, when he went to the bathroom, many relics came out of his toilet waste. I do not know whether this was from urinating or defecating. In any case, there were relics that came from there, and they became known as Duskhyen’s toilet relics.
So, for such masters, even if they go to the bathroom, then it is actually meaningful right? This happens right? So, for such a guru it is like there, is no difference between the dharma and worldly. It is us who make a difference between the two. For them though, there is no separation between dharma and life.
As the eighth Karmapa, Mikyo Dorje says in the Hundred Short Instructions:
“As long as a master thinks of nothing other than the wealth of sentient beings, then it is impossible for them not to do anything that does not benefit sentient beings. Not even a single word of what they say, what to do and what to not do is anything other than dharma. So, I have the conviction and trust that it is so. Whatever they say becomes dharma, and it is impossible to misinterpret their words as meaningless chatter.” he says.
So, as a guru has nothing else to think of other than the welfare of sentient beings, then any action of their body, speech, and mind, no matter what it might be, it is impossible that would be anything than except for the benefit of sentient beings.
Likewise, no matter what instruction they give, any dharma that tells you what to do and what not to do in the world, it is not meaningless speech at all. So, basically everything they are saying about the virtue to adopt and the negative actions to abandon because we have certainty in this, then all the dharma that they teach, whatever the guru says, we should not just let it go. It is not like some joke and they are just saying like that. They are not just saying anything to us. It is meaningful and there is a reason for saying it, they will not say anything that does not have any purpose or reason.
So, a guru who only thinks of nothing but the wealth of sentient beings. Or a guru who thinks of all sentient beings as being like their mother, or the way a mother thinks of their only child, then everything they say is meaningful and purposeful and has a reason. However, now, for us the level of our dharma is not perfect we are not at that level of experience and resistance is high enough. We have not got to that level yet. So, we are not able to understand that what the guru says is for that reason, because the level of our experience and realization is like that. Even though everything the guru says is dharma and because we do not know then, it is better to do as much as we can to do whatever they say. As we do not know whether what they say is dharmic and which is not, we are not able to distinguish what to do. It is as I mentioned before, there are the words of the guru actually teaching dharma, and then there is the daily speech about the worldly things, the regular conversation. If we divide these into two different things, that is not good. There is absolutely no distinguishing these two for a qualified guru because everything, they say becomes a Dharma teaching.
Sometimes, some people think that a qualified guru is somebody who sits on a throne and wears a hat and then when they say something, that’s dharma. That is what we think right? Or if they go into a classroom and when they are holding the class they make a scheduled time from 9 till 10 that is the dharma. Then anything else at that time is not dharma, that is strange, isn’t it? The guru’s Dharma is like a class that we hold these days, right? So, if we understand it like that, it is not good. Whatever they are saying, if they are an authentic guru, then it is going to be beneficial for you. So, you need to keep that in mind and pay attention to them. That is something we need to keep in mind.
Believing in a guru’s words is the same as believing in karmic, cause and effect
Likewise, the great masters of the past have said that believing in the guru’s commands and having faith and believing in karmic cause and effect are the same. So, believing in the guru’s commands is the same as believing in karmic cause and effect, it is having faith in the guru, right?
The reason is that a guru or a spiritual friend only teaches the stages of giving up what should not be done and doing what should be done, they have nothing else to say. If we are talking about a qualified guru, then they are always explaining to us the karmic things to do and not to do. They are teaching in accordance with karmic cause and effect, the way they teach you what you should do or not do and there is nothing else that they should teach. So, for that reason believing in the guru’s words and believing in karmic cause and effect come down to the same point.
Similarly, we talk about believing in karmic cause and effect and the guru’s words being the foundation of the path and because it is because of the guru teaching giving up what should not be done and doing what should be done that all goodness and happiness arise. So, this is believing what the guru says and believing in karma cause and effect come down to the same point. So, then the basic point, is the same thing. So, following the guru’s words is believing in the karmic cause and effect and believing the guru’s commands is related to believing in karmic cause and effect. So, for that reason, many people said that, and Tsongkhapa said, that believing the guru’s words and believing karmic cause and effect in fact are very related.
This is a really important point. The reason it is so important is because if we think about the Indian Maha siddha forefathers, like Naropa and Marpa and all of their students, all the three Kagyu forefathers, Gampopa and his disciples and Tsangpa Gyare and his two students, all of them did whatever the guru told them to do exactly that. So, this is the reason we need to do as the guru instructs.
What to do when one cannot follow the guru’s instructions and interrupting/breaking the “interdependent” connection
The next problems that comes up is if you cannot do as the guru says. Now, as I said before when an authentic guru says something, they are primarily talking about practicing and taking up a virtue and giving up misdeeds. There is nothing else other than basically giving dharma advice. Even if it does not look like dharma instructions on the outside, in actuality it is. Yet, if you do not listen to that and you do the opposite, then it is like disrespecting the guru’s words. So, therefore it is a negative action.
In particular, there are two different ways of not doing as the guru says. The first I think is intentionally doing something that transgresses the Guru’s words. So, like with a bad or negative motivation. So, when you do not do it and you are unable to do it, there are these two different types right? The first, there is no need to say that, the first is a big negative action. Sometimes, even though there is no bad motivation because you are not able to do as the guru says it kind of interrupts/breaks the interdependence. So, whether in terms of practice or activities in this life, it can make some obstacles with this. There are quite a few stories about this.
So, when we say you have to respect the guru’s instructions, there are many reasons for it. It is not just like saying “it is not okay and imposing a long rule and we are forcing you to do this, and insisting that you do something.” That is not how we should think of it. We have to look at the question whether you are respecting the guru’s words or not. There are reasons for that. It is like knowledge because there is a lot to learn from it there are many things it is not just saying you have to do this and just doing it blindly.
Examples of not obeying a guru’s instructions: Lama Zhang’s student, Namkha Od and the Tsalpa Kagyu lineage
I will give some examples of this that I think will make it a bit clearer. First, there is the Tsalpa Kagyu tradition. We talk about the four elder and the eight younger, so among the four elders one of them is Tsalpa Kagyu. The founder of the Tsalpa Kagyu was Lama Zhang Yudragpa Tsöndrü Drakpa (zhang g.yu brag pa brtson ’grus grags pa, 1123-1193)[i] and he thought he should entrust his monastic seat, Tsal Gungtang to his disciple, Namkha Od[ii] to take it over and maintain afterwards.
So, one time Lama Zhang then gave Namkha Od the Chakrasamvara empowerment, and at the end told him: “I am giving you my monastic seat, so please maintain it. Take care of it.” Namkha Od replied: “Oh, I haven’t gathered enough merit, so I can’t uphold it the same way as the guru. I cannot perform activity like the guru did, so instead of that I would like to devote my life to practice. That is my wish and pray that in the future I am able to benefit all just like you, this is my aspiration in this lifetime. I cannot benefit others so much, so I primarily want to focus on retreat and meditation.”
At that time, Lama Zhang said to Namkha Od: “Sacred beings only think of benefiting sentient beings, they don’t think about having peace for themselves, or about achieving enlightenment themselves. They only think: “I am going to benefit beings and the teachings.” So that is no way to think like that. If you think about the foundation vehicles and shamatha meditation for an entire lifetime you will not achieve Buddhahood. So, you should work for the benefit of sentient beings.”
Then Lama Zhang gave him all of the instructions and did not criticize him at that point. However, because Namkha Od did not maintain Lama Zhang’s monastery and as a very important instruction he had been given by the guru was broken, he had many obstacles to his life. We do not need to go through all of them. Also, he only had a few receptive/qualified disciples, so his activity was not able to spread very widely.
However, there was a prophecy that in his future life, he would attain Buddhahood with a name and become Buddha. This prophecy is described in the liberation stories of the Tsalpa Kagyu. Basically, saying in the next life, Namkha Od would awaken to Buddhahood.
For that reason, if at that time, Namkha Od had done as Lama Zhang had told him to, if he had followed his guru’s instructions and upheld it, that would have benefited himself and it would also benefited Tsalpa Kagyu Dharma lineage. Perhaps he was just too humble as a guy, he was overly humble. On the other hand, he wanted to emphasize his own practice, and was kind of stubborn about this. But as it was such an important command from his teacher Namkha Od was unable to fulfil it, and in the end, it was actually a great loss for both himself and for others. Because now, there is no longer a Tsalpa Kagyu there. So, we cannot say that it was only Namkha Od who did not follow the guru’s commands but that is one situation right?
Not following the guru’s instructions: the 3rd Karmapa’s instructions for 1st Zhamarpa, Dragpa Senge
Not only the Tsalpa Kagyu, but also there are such stories in our Karma Kamtsang traditions, there have been such events that have occurred. For example, the First Zhamarpa was one of the 3rd Karmapa, Rangjung Dorje’s main disciples who said “Among the third Karmapa, Rangjung Dorje’s students, there is no one greater than or equal to me.” 3rd Karmapa, Rangjung Dorje said “ In terms of experience and realization the one who is superior to me is Sa. The one who is equal to me is Drag-seng”. In any case he was a chief disciple.
According to the dharma history, Feast of Scholars, Rangjung Dorje first intended to entrust his teachings to the great realized master, 1st Zhamarpa, Dragpa Senge (1283 – 1349) but he did not appoint him to look after Dechen Yang-ri. There is this location, Dechen right? There is a place just below Tsurphu, which was the place of 3rd Karmapa, Rangjung Dorje’s retreat. There is a very high mountain range and before, many great siddhas arose from there. So, this is a retreat place called Dechen Yang-ri. Instead of appointing him to go there, he instructed him to go to Kampo Nenang in Kham. That is the first seat of the first Karmapa, Dusum Khyenpa right? So, he told him to go to Kampo Nenang.
So, when Dragpa Senge left to go to Kampo Nenang he had a white mule and it was going down to the lower part of Tsurphu Valley. There is the top of valley then the bottom. When they got to the middle of the valley, the mule did not go on but climbed up the mountain and no-one could stop it. It went all the way up the mountain until it got to the top. There was a really nice grassy plain there with a spring and the mule just laid down there and stayed. It was just resting there, so he let it rest for a little while and he rested himself and had some tea. And then he thought “I should build a monastery here.” So, for that reason this is called Nenang, now Pawo Rinpoche’s monastery is? So, he went up the mountain and found a nice place and built a monastery right there. He also called it by a name it is connection with Rangjung Dorje. So, he did not continue his way down to Kampo Nenang.
However, as he was unable to go to Kampo Nenang, he was unable to meet the 4th Karmapa, Rolpe Dorje, and because of that the 4th Karmapa actually was not able to go to central Tibet. Actually, the 3rd Karmapa’s intention was that Dragpa Senge would meet with the 4th Karmapa and would bring him to central Tibet. As they were unable to come to Tsurphu. People say this happenedbecause 3rd Karmapa, Rangjung Dorje did not listen to his own guru’s teachings, that he had students who never listened to what he said.
This also happened during the time of the Second Zhamarpa, Khacho Wangpo, many of his students also did not listen to what he said. This is probably because of the fault of Dragpa Senge disobeying his teacher’s instructions. It happens like that depending on whether it is a major or minor thing. Basically, at the worst it can lead to misdeeds, and at the least there is a danger that it disrupts and stops the interdependence and so forth.
2nd Karmapa, Karma Pakshi’s guru, Pomdragpa disobeying his guru, Sangye Rechen’s instructions and the consequences
There is another story about the 2nd Karmapa, Karma Pakshi’s root guru, Pomdrakpa Sonam Dorje( སྤོམ་བྲག་པ་བསོད་ནམས་རྡོ་རྗེ། 1170 – 1249), whose root teacher was Sanggye Rechen Peldrak (sangs rgyas ras chen dpal grags, 1148-1218 [a disciple of the 1st Karmapa]), who told Karma Pakshi not to go to Markham.” Later after Sangye Rechen had passed away, he went to Markham. The moment he got there, he broke the interdependent connection, and he passed away.
There is this story and it is taught in Mikyo Dorje’s Hundred Short Instructions, which says when Pomdragpa was staying with his guru, he wanted to practice and he thought that he should go to practice in Markham. He asked Sangye Rechen who said to him: “you’ve been seized by a demon, there’s an obstacle, so don’t go now.”
Later, Pomdragpa went to Markham and when he got there, he fell ill. The 2nd Karmapa was with him and Pomdragpa said: “I’m dying now and this because I broke Sangye Rechen’s command and that must be why.” He then passed away and as Pomdragpa was dying he told Karmapa his last testimony, which said: “if you accomplish exactly what I have taught if you do everything as I tell you to do if you do as I instruct it will, please all of the venerable gurus, but also your disciples. Also, merely by remembering you, they will instantly receive all the supreme and ordinary accomplishments. So, never be separated from your guru.” he said.
At that time, Pomdragp wanted to go to Markham and it was not just a question that Markham was a dharma bad place. Pomdragpa’s reason for going to Markham was to continue the Karmapa’s legacy he wanted to continue that. So, he had a good motivation, it was not a bad one, but because of the interdependence, the guru had told him do not go and he still insisted on going. So, there is a danger that not following the guru’s commands, creates bad interdependence.
Next time, I will speak about the story of Rechungpa not obeying his guru. It is not just once or twice he did that, but many times but there is one story I will tell you next time.
Endnotes
[i] The Tshalpa Kagyu lineage (tshal pa) was established by Zhang Yudragpa Tsöndrü Drakpa (zhang g.yu brag pa brtson ’grus grags pa, 1123-1193), also known as Lama Shang (bla ma zhang), a disciple of Dakpo Gomtshul (dwags po sgom tshul tshul khrims snying po, 1116-1169).
[ii] I could not find any other information for this student, other than this link on BDRC: http://purl.bdrc.io/resource/P4155