Almost every culture, religion, ideology, or world-view holds some things as sacred, pure, holy, or unquestionably true—and others as profane, unclean, or taboo.
Among the few exceptions are Zen and Dzogchen. They hold that there is nothing that is inherently sacred. (This ought to be an obvious consequence of the Heart Sutra—but most Buddhists do not see it that way.)
If you spend enough time with Aro Lamas, it is certain that they will at some point roast your sacred cows—whatever they are. They will contradict something you think every good person must believe. (That might be strongly-held political, religious, or cultural values.) Or they may do something you think no holy person ever should. (It might be a politically-incorrect joke, or eating meat, or ranting about how much they hate a kind of music you like.) They may violate fundamental assumptions you did not even know you had. …show more content…
The Aro Lamas tend more to do it just by being who they are—which will not be who you think they ought to be. None of them is the least bit holy.
I think Bodhidharma, the founder of Zen, said it best. When the Emperor of China asked him a stupid question about holiness, he replied:
No holiness, vastness!
Any fixed belief, or fixed emotional response, is a “reference point.” We use reference points as bricks to build the prison of identity. In meditation, we allow that structure to collapse. When the roof falls in, we see the boundless sky. That is the vastness of nonduality, where purity and impurity are equally meaningless.
We also must be willing to notice and let go of reference points when not meditating. That includes being willing to have our lamas poke fun at things we thought were very serious. nothing is
Among the few exceptions are Zen and Dzogchen. They hold that there is nothing that is inherently sacred. (This ought to be an obvious consequence of the Heart Sutra—but most Buddhists do not see it that way.)
If you spend enough time with Aro Lamas, it is certain that they will at some point roast your sacred cows—whatever they are. They will contradict something you think every good person must believe. (That might be strongly-held political, religious, or cultural values.) Or they may do something you think no holy person ever should. (It might be a politically-incorrect joke, or eating meat, or ranting about how much they hate a kind of music you like.) They may violate fundamental assumptions you did not even know you had. …show more content…
The Aro Lamas tend more to do it just by being who they are—which will not be who you think they ought to be. None of them is the least bit holy.
I think Bodhidharma, the founder of Zen, said it best. When the Emperor of China asked him a stupid question about holiness, he replied:
No holiness, vastness!
Any fixed belief, or fixed emotional response, is a “reference point.” We use reference points as bricks to build the prison of identity. In meditation, we allow that structure to collapse. When the roof falls in, we see the boundless sky. That is the vastness of nonduality, where purity and impurity are equally meaningless.
We also must be willing to notice and let go of reference points when not meditating. That includes being willing to have our lamas poke fun at things we thought were very serious. nothing is