On Mon, February 11, 2008 3:45 am, Felicia wrote:
> Is there a demarcation/distinction between the Tibetan government in
exile and the Dalai Lama as religious leader or private citizen?
As a point of information: Yes. Although he was originally enthroned as
head of state and government in Tibet in 1950, he has in recent years
emphasised that the government-in-exile should be a democratically-elected
body, with a democratically-elected leader. He appears to be distancing
himself from any activity that might be construed as 'governing'--although
he is still head of state (perhaps the best analogy would be to the Queen
of England, who is head of state of the UK--and of other countries, such
as Canada, for that matter--but who has no actual political power). He is
*also* the religious leader of Tibetan Buddhism, but this position does
not appear to be tied to his role as head of state. At the moment it is,
perhaps, difficult to think of him as a 'private citizen', given his
hectic public schedule; but he consistently refers to himself as 'a simple
monk' and has spoken recently of wishing to withdraw completely from any
kind of political life in the fairly near future. It does not appear that
this withdrawal from political life would affect his status as religious
leader.
> In an earlier post (Feb. 10), Felicia also wrote:
> Fwiw, I don't see evidence of *any* tantric influence within wicca.
> Wicca does not focus on the states of samadhi leading to
> asamprajnata-nirvikalpa-samadhi whereas tantrism does. Imnsho,
> only in the superficial understanding of sex as related to spirituality
> and sex as "goddess worship" which is primary to Western Neo-Tantrism does
> one see any parallel to Wicca.
The 'focus' of Tantric practice, at least within Buddhism, is the
attainment of enlightenment. In pursuit of this focus it utilises many
more techniques than simply the development of meditative states (which I
assume is what Felicia means by 'states of samadhi leading to
asamprajnata-nirvikalpa-samadhi'). Again, I refer to Rob Preece's 'The
Psychology of Buddhist Tantra', which list members might find a rewarding
read (for example with regard to the technique of visualisation, and for a
clarification of the role of sexual practices within Tantric Buddhism).
That being said, I agree that it's highly unlikely that Tantric Buddhism
has influenced the development of Wicca (except perhaps, as Felicia says,
'in the superficial understanding of sex as related to spirituality'),
mostly because there is still very little understanding in the West as to
what Tantric Buddhism is (and is not)--and there was probably even less
when Crowley and Gardner were developing their systems.
Similarities may (appear to) exist between the two systems--indeed I think
they do; but I would suggest those similarities are fortuitous rather than
derivative.
Interesting discussion, thank you all.
--
Margaret Gouin
PhD Candidate
Centre for Buddhist Studies
Department of Theology and Religious Studies
University of Bristol (UK)
|