# Shambhala



## Xue Sheng (Mar 17, 2009)

Does anybody know anything about Shambhala

Recently I was rather surprised that I found a group near me and even more surprising to me is that I am interested in a couple of classes they are offering "Learn to meditate" and a kind of introductory overview of Buddhism. 

I have trained qigong but not this type of meditation and to be honest eastern religions I find rather interesting which leads me to I am considering going to check these classes out but I really don't know what I am getting myself into if I do. Any info will help


----------



## JadecloudAlchemist (Mar 18, 2009)

Hey Xue 
Pema Chodron is part of the organization she is a popular Buddhist writer and her work is pretty good.

http://pemachodron.org/

Shambhala is considered a mythical place and the Kalachakra teachings are suppose to have come from there.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalachakra

It is some heavy stuff.


----------



## harlan (Mar 18, 2009)

I don't have any direct experience with the organization. I've read about it for several years: the history, the politics, the founder, etc.  While all that leaves me leary of  'joining', the few folks I know who belong to the local group are 'normal'   , always open to my queries, and okay with the idea of 'just meditating'. 

Like any group doing 'outreach', of course...new members are the hope. But I wouldn't let that put me off of the opportunity to learn more.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Mar 18, 2009)

JadecloudAlchemist said:


> Hey Xue
> Pema Chodron is part of the organization she is a popular Buddhist writer and her work is pretty good.
> 
> http://pemachodron.org/
> ...


 
Thanks. I may go check out the class since I have become interested in Buddhist mediation practices of late, more Zen/Chan than Tibetan but it is a place to start. However I do not really plan on taking this much further than the classes since what little I know of Tibetan Buddhism tells me it is more than I want to get involved in, but the links were great, thanks 



harlan said:


> I don't have any direct experience with the organization. I've read about it for several years: the history, the politics, the founder, etc. While all that leaves me leary of 'joining', the few folks I know who belong to the local group are 'normal'  , always open to my queries, and okay with the idea of 'just meditating'.
> 
> Like any group doing 'outreach', of course...new members are the hope. But I wouldn't let that put me off of the opportunity to learn more.


 
I have no intention of joining them but I may take the courses to get some addition to my training. I have become rather interested in the whole meditation process that is found in Zen of late as well as the Tibetan approach so the classes are cheap and short so I might just sign up. 

Besides, my mother-in-law is a Chan Buddhist, if I go off and join a Tibetan group shell beat me or worse yet stop cooking Chinese food for me


----------



## JadecloudAlchemist (Mar 18, 2009)

Xue,

Harlan does have a point.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chögyam_Trungpa

He is a controversal figure.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shambhala_International

I don't know if this is a cult like Buddhist sect or what but it may be something to keep an eye on.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Mar 18, 2009)

JadecloudAlchemist said:


> Xue,
> 
> Harlan does have a point.
> 
> ...


 
Then I shall think about this a bit more, my gut told me to check it out first before I did anything and I have learned to trust my gut. 

There is a (small) Chan Buddhist Temple a bit south of me; maybe I will see if they have anything... And I know they are legit so no worries. And of course further south is Zen Mountain but I really don't want to go into a 3 day Zen Immersion thing, I just want a bit of meditation training and some history and philosophy if you will.


----------



## harlan (Mar 18, 2009)

My post didn't mean to imply anything other than Shambala does have a history. But so does any religion...even Zen is replete with politics.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Mar 18, 2009)

harlan said:


> My post didn't mean to imply anything other than Shambala does have a history. But so does any religion...even Zen is replete with politics.


 
Very true, but I am not really looking for the religion as much as the meditation that they do and how they approach it. And of course to learn more about it, I am, as I said, rather fascinated by religion, particularly eastern religions. There is, I recently discovered, a view of Buddhism as Therapy in the west as well along the lines with psychological counseling and this to me is rather interesting.

Thanks


----------



## Tensei85 (May 24, 2009)

So if i may ask what are you looking to gain out of meditation? As far as basic meditations such as Zazen really this can be obtained through Qigong. (counting the breaths, obtaining samadhi, inner realization) But if your looking to cultivate spiritual growth than meditation would be great! Not saying people cant meditate for health, relaxation, mental growth etc... But the goal of meditation is to gain a deep realization or Kensho (Zen). This is generally cultivated from a Guru (Sifu) to Student empowerment or in Chan a "heart to heart" connection. A story was always told to me from a Sihing in Buddhism stating that at one time in China there was gathering of all the Buddhist sect ordered by the Emperor who was a devote Buddhist. So each of the sects came together and started repeating there various Mantra's that were unique to their sect of Buddhism except for one small group who seemed not to repeat any mantras at all. So they were scorned by some of the people gathered and the Emperor came and asked the particular sect why was it being that all the other sects came and repeated there mantras that they would not? So the head monk stated that we have no need for such things as we already have a heart to heart connection. So we do not repeat any Mantra's at all. So the Emperor being suprised asked from what sect they belonged to and the monk replied we practice "Chan" thus the term heart to heart connection was coined. But in most cases especially Tantric Buddhist practices require an empowerment from the Guru before you can progress and you have to take refuge under a Temple and a Guru for protection. And later you establish a connection to specific Buddha's to gain empowerment and deeper realization as well as gain a Bun Jyun or Protector. But as far as Buddhism seeing how you want to study meditation I would recommend Chan seeing as though you have suggested that practice as well, the most important thing being to find a method that you can relate to. I would say for you its better to study Buddhism as opposed to practice as it generally requires a person to seek refuge but there are decent meditation teachers out there. But my entire point is you may not get everything there is out of just this type of thinking which relates to your practice but if your fine with that its great and I wish you the best! : )


----------



## 7starmarc (May 24, 2009)

Xue Sheng said:


> Very true, but I am not really looking for the religion as much as the meditation that they do and how they approach it. And of course to learn more about it, I am, as I said, rather fascinated by religion, particularly eastern religions. There is, I recently discovered, a view of Buddhism as Therapy in the west as well along the lines with psychological counseling and this to me is rather interesting.
> 
> Thanks


 
I was just (re)listening to an interview with a Buddhist monk (Lama Marut) in the Tibetan Tradition who was speaking about the view of "Buddhism as Therapy". He basically discounted it as a watering down and Westernization which basically removed all of the actual power from the practice. Some Buddhist teachings can be worked into coping mechanisms, but that, according to him, is definitely not the goal of Buddhism.


----------



## Xue Sheng (May 25, 2009)

7starmarc said:


> I was just (re)listening to an interview with a Buddhist monk (Lama Marut) in the Tibetan Tradition who was speaking about the view of "Buddhism as Therapy". He basically discounted it as a watering down and Westernization which basically removed all of the actual power from the practice. Some Buddhist teachings can be worked into coping mechanisms, but that, according to him, is definitely not the goal of Buddhism.


 
The goal of Tibetan Buddhism is not to help people? Is it them only to help ones self all others be damned? 

This is an interesting view, but then I do not always agree with Tibetan Buddhists view... but then there are very few religious types out there that I would agree with on everything they say.

Jon Kabbet-Zin took mindfulness practice which is part of Buddhism, but he may have got it from Yoga, and is using it in MBSR and helping a whole lot of people and yet he is not practicing Buddhism or Hinduism for that matter but still helping other people which I think is great 

But regardless I am not looking to become a Buddhist and if I where it would not be Tibetan it would more likely be Chan (I might even be able to get away with Zen), otherwise my mother-in-law would beat me


----------



## 7starmarc (May 25, 2009)

Xue Sheng said:


> The goal of Tibetan Buddhism is not to help people? Is it them only to help ones self all others be damned?
> 
> This is an interesting view, but then I do not always agree with Tibetan Buddhists view... but then there are very few religious types out there that I would agree with on everything they say.



That is not what I meant. Compassion (and Compassionate acts) is a key part of the Tibetan tradition. But it is only part of the path, not the goal (except in that achieving Enlightenment can be viewed as achieving the ultimate capacity for compassion and the capacity to actually save all beings from a life of suffering).

I was only repeating the view that to see Buddhist teachings as therapy/coping mechanisms ("Samsaric management") as opposed to the path to enlightenment ("escaping for Samsara" altogether) is a watered down version of Buddhism. This way of teaching Buddhism, actually, could be seen as ultimately failing the person receiving the "therapy" (and therefore not really helping them), because it does not provide them the tools to true Enlightenment and relief from all suffering. Such a failure could also cause people to turn people away from Buddhism as ineffective, when they actually did not get the "real thing".

I must admit, there are a wide range views and traditions of Buddhism. And I am most certainly not the one best equipped to represent any of them completely (or perhaps even adequately).


----------



## Tensei85 (May 25, 2009)

7starmarc said:


> That is not what I meant. Compassion (and Compassionate acts) is a key part of the Tibetan tradition. But it is only part of the path, not the goal (except in that achieving Enlightenment can be viewed as achieving the ultimate capacity for compassion and the capacity to actually save all beings from a life of suffering).



I'm not really sure about this in Tibetan Buddhism we always addressed the issue between life/death cycle's as it relates to oneself and others first and foremost even at the beginning of seeking refuge. 

We also cultivate good karma through the practice of Mantra's not just for oneself but as to wash away the bad karma from friends, enemies, family each of these is how we approach our cultivation. 

As compassion for all sentient beings is the pre-requisite however I'm not saying that there can't be a progression for this as well. As there is cultivation for each dimension. Not just one. 

Enlightenment can be seen as many things but its none of these:

A story was a young monk asked his Sifu: Sifu does a dog have "Buddha Nature" the Sifu replied "MU". 

The attachment to enlightenment should be non existent as those that have attachment to such do not obtain it. 

Clear the attachment, and experience the true realization. 

That's it, now I'm done.


----------



## Xue Sheng (May 25, 2009)

7starmarc said:


> That is not what I meant. Compassion (and Compassionate acts) is a key part of the Tibetan tradition. But it is only part of the path, not the goal (except in that achieving Enlightenment can be viewed as achieving the ultimate capacity for compassion and the capacity to actually save all beings from a life of suffering).
> 
> I was only repeating the view that to see Buddhist teachings as therapy/coping mechanisms ("Samsaric management") as opposed to the path to enlightenment ("escaping for Samsara" altogether) is a watered down version of Buddhism. This way of teaching Buddhism, actually, could be seen as ultimately failing the person receiving the "therapy" (and therefore not really helping them), because it does not provide them the tools to true Enlightenment and relief from all suffering. Such a failure could also cause people to turn people away from Buddhism as ineffective, when they actually did not get the "real thing".
> 
> I must admit, there are a wide range views and traditions of Buddhism. And I am most certainly not the one best equipped to represent any of them completely (or perhaps even adequately).


 
But this is a Tibetan Buddhist (Vajrayana) point of view and not necessarily the view of Zen, Chan (Mahayana) or Theravada. And if I have learned anything it is that they do not all agree on everything. 

If your goal is enlightenment then go into any sect of Buddhism you want full tilt. However Buddhism is not necessary for enlightenment. But if the use of parts of it can help people in a psychological setting then I am all for it. Also it has at times been an introduction to things like this that bring some into Buddhism as a religion. 

Meditation is not only done by Buddhist nor is Buddhist mediation any better of worse than Hindu, Zen, Christian, etc. And to go further a Tibetan Buddhist Mediation is not always the same as Zen Buddhist mediation. 

My originally about a Shambhala group near me however I have since decided to not go there. I am happy with the meditation that I have learned through Qigong, Taiji and what I am learning from Yoga.


----------



## Tensei85 (May 25, 2009)

Xue Sheng said:


> But this is a Tibetan Buddhist (Vajrayana) point of view and not necessarily the view of Zen, Chan (Mahayana) or Theravada. And if I have learned anything it is that they do not all agree on everything.
> 
> If your goal is enlightenment then go into any sect of Buddhism you want full tilt. However Buddhism is not necessary for enlightenment. But if the use of parts of it can help people in a psychological setting then I am all for it. Also it has at times been an introduction to things like this that bring some into Buddhism as a religion.
> 
> ...



Nice view! I agree on this, and in fact even though I Bai Si as a Buddhist I don't necessarily consider myself a Buddhist given Buddhism is only a method, similar to Christianity, Taoism or any number of other methods.

For instance in Buddhism they have the concept called the 48,000 ways referencing even though the goal or intent maybe the same there are multiple ways to reach the destination. That concept has been exceptionally viable my entire life!

This is becoming a great discussion! Thanks


----------



## Xue Sheng (May 26, 2009)

Tensei85 said:


> Nice view! I agree on this, and in fact even though I Bai Si as a Buddhist I don't necessarily consider myself a Buddhist given Buddhism is only a method, similar to Christianity, Taoism or any number of other methods.
> 
> For instance in Buddhism they have the concept called the 48,000 ways referencing even though the goal or intent maybe the same there are multiple ways to reach the destination. That concept has been exceptionally viable my entire life!
> 
> This is becoming a great discussion! Thanks


 
What I find interesting here is the correlation with Taijiquan (which is more Taoist) it is not 48,000 but there are multiple applications to every posture that all reach the same destination. And I agree this concept is quite viable to everyday life.


----------

