augmented illusions

Well, it seems I’m off to Sweden at the end of this week to be with T., and C., and F. So much is coming together in our joint work. I’ve always been of the opinion that if the dharma is to flourish in the west, the tradition must be authentic in its inner workings. Yet, interpretation is necessary for it to be understood to the level of enlightenment. The thing is, not only are the languages different, not only is there a completely different cultural context to the dharma in its vajrayana guise. Concepts that are easily understood by Tibetans are almost impossible to take at face value for us, here. Their model of the universe, the tibetan cosmology, the asian concept of time. It’s easy to say, “oh, their understanding of time is cyclical, and ours linear.” But what does it mean, in terms of practice here, in this culture, in this time? It’s why it’s so vitally important that the dharma is taught authentically where it concerns its mechanisms, but within our time and culture where it concerns its external application. There is always the question what to translate and what to leave in the original Tibetan or Sanskrit. I always like to remember that buddhism has always been a very malleable and adaptable tradition as it traveled from country to country. For instance, there are sutras we now have in Tibetan only and not in the original Sanskrit from which they were translated. Monastic attire has always been true to the vinaya, but always adapted itself to local circumstances too. I try to steer between the extremes of the mystique of robes on the one hand, and the “nothing special” approach on the other hand. Because the dharma is special, it is a gift of treasure to those who are able to receive it fully. What that fullness is, differs from moment to moment, from place to place.

Trackback URI | Comments RSS