The Berzin Archives - Introductory Comparison of the Five Tibetan Traditions of Buddhism and Bon

The Berzin Archives

Archives | News | About | Author | Home | Donate

Introductory Comparison of the Five Tibetan

Traditions of Buddhism and Bon
Alexander Berzin
Search Berlin, Germany, January 10, 2000
supplemented with excerpts from a lecture on the same topic
Munich, Germany, January 30, 1995

Bon as the Fifth Tradition of Tibet

Most people speak of Tibet as having four traditions: Nyingma, Kagyu, Sakya, and
Gelug, with Gelug being the reformed continuation of the earlier Kadam tradition. At the
Page Contents nonsectarian conference of tulkus (incarnate lamas) and abbots that His Holiness the
Dalai Lama convened in Sarnath, India, in December 1988, however, His Holiness
emphasized the importance of adding the pre-Buddhist Tibetan tradition of Bon to the
four and always speaking of the five Tibetan traditions. He explained that whether or not
we consider Bon a Buddhist tradition is not the important issue. The form of Bon that
has developed since the eleventh century of the Common Era shares enough in
common with the four Tibetan Buddhist traditions for us to consider all five as a unit.

Hierarchy and Decentralization

Before we discuss the similarities and differences among the five Tibetan traditions, we
need to remember that none of the Tibetan systems forms an organized church like, for
example, the Catholic Church. None of them is centrally organized in this manner.
Heads of the traditions, abbots, and so on are mainly responsible for giving monastic
ordination and for passing on lineages of oral transmissions and tantric empowerments
(initiations). Their main concern is not with administration. Hierarchy mostly affects
where people sit in the large ritual ceremonies (pujas); how many cushions they sit on;
the order in which they are served tea; and so on. For various geographic and cultural
reasons, the Tibetan people tend to be extremely independent and each monastery
tends to follow its own ways. The remoteness of the monasteries, huge distances
between them, and difficulties in travel and communication have reinforced the
tendency toward decentralization.

Common Features

The five Tibetan traditions share many common features, perhaps as much as eighty
percent or more. Their histories reveal that the lineages do not exist as separate
monoliths isolated within concrete barriers, without any contact with each other. The
traditions have congealed into five from their founding masters having gathered and
combined within themselves various lines of transmission, mostly from India. By

http://www.berzinarchives.com/comparison_buddhist_traditions/intro_compar_5_traditions_buddhism_bon.html (1 of 14)09/10/2004 17:05:19 Phil

The Berzin Archives - Introductory Comparison of the Five Tibetan Traditions of Buddhism and Bon

convention, their followers have called each of their syntheses "a lineage," but many of
the same lines of transmission form part of the blends of other traditions as well.

Lay and Monastic Traditions

The first thing the five share in common is having both lay and monastic traditions. Their
lay traditions include married yogis and yoginis engaged in intensive tantric meditation
practice and ordinary laypeople whose Dharma practice entails mostly reciting mantras,
making offerings at temples and at home, and circumambulating sacred monuments.
The monastic traditions of all five have the full and novice monk ordination and the
novice nun ordination. The full nun ordination never came to Tibet. People normally join
the monasteries and nunneries around the age of eight. Monastic architecture and
décor are mostly the same in all traditions.

The four Buddhist schools share the same set of monastic vows from India, Mula-
Page Contents Sarvastivada. Bon has a slightly different set of vows, but most of them are the same as
the Buddhist. A prominent difference is that Bonpo monastics take a vow to be
^Top of Page vegetarian. The monastics of all traditions shave their heads; remain celibate; and wear
the same maroon sleeveless habit, with a skirt and a shawl. Bon monastics merely
substitute blue for yellow in the central panels of the vest.

Sutra Study

All Tibetan traditions follow a path that combines sutra and tantra study with ritual and
meditation practice. The monastics memorize a vast number of scholarly and ritual texts
as children and study by means of heated debate. The sutra topics studied are the
same for both Buddhists and Bonpos. They include prajnaparamita (far-reaching
discrimination, the perfection of wisdom) concerning the stages of the path,
madhyamaka (the middle way) concerning the correct view of reality (voidness),
pramana (valid ways of knowing) concerning perception and logic, and abhidharma
(special topics of knowledge) concerning metaphysics. The Tibetan textbooks for each
topic differ slightly in their interpretations not only among the five traditions, but also
even among the monasteries within each tradition. Such differences make for more
interesting debates. At the conclusion of a lengthy course of study, all five traditions
grant a degree, either Geshe or Khenpo.

The four Tibetan Buddhist schools all study the four traditions of Indian Buddhist
philosophical tenets - Vaibhashika, Sautrantika, Chittamatra, and Madhyamaka.
Although they explain them slightly differently, each accepts Madhyamaka as presenting
the most sophisticated and precise position. The four also study the same Indian
classics by Maitreya, Asanga, Nagarjuna, Chandrakirti, Shantideva, and so on. Again,
each school has its own spectrum of Tibetan commentaries, all of which differ slightly
from each other.

Tantra Study and Practice

The study and practice of tantra spans all four or six classes of tantra, depending on the
classification scheme. The four Buddhist traditions practice many of the same Buddha-
figures (deities, yidams), such as Avalokiteshvara, Tara, Manjushri, Chakrasamvara
(Heruka), and Vajrayogini (Vajradakini). Hardly any Buddha-figure practice is the
exclusive domain of one tradition alone. Gelugpas also practice Hevajra, the main
Sakya figure, and Shangpa Kagyupas practice Vajrabhairava (Yamantaka), the main
Gelug figure. The Buddha-figures in Bon have similar attributes to the ones in Buddhism

http://www.berzinarchives.com/comparison_buddhist_traditions/intro_compar_5_traditions_buddhism_bon.html (2 of 14)09/10/2004 17:05:19 Phil

The Berzin Archives - Introductory Comparison of the Five Tibetan Traditions of Buddhism and Bon

- for example, figures embodying compassion or wisdom - only different names.

Meditation

Meditation in all five Tibetan traditions entails undertaking lengthy retreats, often for
three years and three phases of the moon. Retreats are preceded by intensive
preliminary practices, requiring hundreds of thousands of prostrations, mantra
repetitions, and so on. The number of preliminaries, the manner of doing them, and the
Page Contents structure of the three-year retreat differ slightly from one school to another. Yet,
basically, everyone practices the same.
^Top of Page
Ritual

Ritual practice is also very similar in all five. They all offer water bowls, butter lamps,
and incense; sit in the same cross-legged manner; use vajras, bells, and damaru hand-
drums; play the same types of horns, cymbals, and drums; chant in loud voices; offer
and taste consecrated meat and alcohol during special ceremonies (tsog); and serve
butter tea during all ritual assemblies. Following the originally Bon customs, they all offer
tormas (sculpted cones of barley flour mixed with butter); enlist local spirits for
protection; dispel harmful spirits with elaborate rituals; make butter sculptures on special
occasions; and hang colorful prayer flags. They all house relics of great masters in
stupa monuments and circumambulate them - Buddhists clockwise, Bonpos
counterclockwise. Even their styles of religious art are extremely similar. The
proportions of the figures in paintings and statues always follow the same set guidelines.

Tulku System of Reincarnate Lamas

Each of the five Tibetan traditions also has the tulku system. Tulkus are lines of
reincarnate lamas, great practitioners who direct their rebirths. When they pass away,
usually in a special type of death-juncture meditation, their disciples use special means
to look for and locate their reincarnations among young children, after an appropriate
time has passed. The disciples return the young reincarnations to their former
households and train them with the best teachers. Monastics and laypeople treat the
tulkus of all five traditions with the highest respect. They often consult tulkus and other
great masters for a mo (prognostication) about important matters in their lives, usually
made by tossing three dice while invoking one or another Buddha-figure.

Although all Tibetan traditions include training in textual study, debate, ritual, and
meditation, the emphasis varies from monastery to monastery even within the same
Tibetan school and from individual to individual even within the same monastery.
Moreover, except for the high lamas and the elderly or sick, the monks and nuns take
turns in doing the menial labor required to support the monasteries and nunneries, such
as cleaning the assembly halls, arranging offerings, fetching water and fuel, cooking,
and serving tea. Even if certain monks or nuns primarily study, debate, teach, or
meditate; still, engaging in communal prayer, chanting, and ritual takes up a significant
portion of everyone's day and night. To say that Gelug and Sakya emphasize study,
while Kagyu and Nyingma stress meditation is a superficial generalization.

Mixed Lineages

Many lineages of teachings mix and cross among the five Tibetan traditions. The
lineage of The Guhyasamaja Tantra, for example, passed through the translator Marpa

http://www.berzinarchives.com/comparison_buddhist_traditions/intro_compar_5_traditions_buddhism_bon.html (3 of 14)09/10/2004 17:05:19 Phil

The Berzin Archives - Introductory Comparison of the Five Tibetan Traditions of Buddhism and Bon

to both the Kagyu and the Gelug schools. Although the mahamudra (great seal)
Page Contents teachings concerning the nature of mind are usually associated with the Kagyu lines,
the Sakya and Gelug schools also transmit lineages of them. Dzogchen (the great
^Top of Page completeness) is another system of meditation on the nature of the mind. Although
usually associated with the Nyingma tradition, it is also prominent in the Karma Kagyu
school from the time of the Third Karmapa and in the Drugpa Kagyu and Bon traditions.
The Fifth Dalai Lama was a great master of not only Gelug, but also of dzogchen and
Sakya, and wrote many texts on each. We need to be open-minded to see that the
Tibetan schools are not mutually exclusive. Many Kagyu monasteries perform Guru
Rinpoche pujas, for example, although they are not Nyingma.

Differences
Usage of Technical Terms

What are the major differences, then, among the five Tibetan traditions? One of the
main ones concerns the usage of technical terms. Bon discusses most of the same
things as Buddhism does, but uses different words or names for many of them. Even
within the four Buddhist traditions, various schools use the same technical terms with
different definitions. This is actually a great problem in trying to understand Tibetan
Buddhism in general. Even within the same tradition, different authors define the same
terms differently; and even the same author sometimes defines the same terms
differently in his various works. Unless we know the exact definitions that the authors
are using for their technical terms, we can become extremely confused. Let me give a
few examples.

Gelugpas say that mind, meaning awareness of objects, is impermanent, while

Kagyupas and Nyingmapas assert it is permanent. The two positions seem to be
contradictory and mutually exclusive; but, actually, they are not. By "impermanent,"
Gelugpas mean that awareness of objects changes from moment to moment, in the
sense that the objects one is aware of change each moment. By "permanent,"
Kagyupas and Nyingmapas mean that awareness of objects continues forever; its basic
nature remains unaffected by anything and thus never changes. Each side would agree
with the other, but because of their using the terms with different meanings, it looks as if
they completely clash. Kagyupas and Nyingmapas would certainly say that an
individual's awareness of objects perceives or knows different objects each moment;
while Gelugpas would certainly agree that individual minds are continuums of
awareness of objects with no beginning and no end.

Another example is the word "dependent arising." Gelugpas say that everything exists in
terms of dependent arising, meaning that things exist as "this" or "that" dependently on
words and concepts being able to validly label them as "this" or "that." Knowable
phenomena are what the words and concepts for them refer to. Nothing exists on the
side of knowable phenomena that by its own power gives them their existence and
identities. Thus, for Gelugpas, existence in terms of dependent arising is equivalent to
voidness: the total absence of impossible ways of existing.

Page Contents Kagyupas, on the other hand, say that the ultimate is beyond dependent arising. It
sounds as if they are asserting that the ultimate has independent existence established
^Top of Page by its own power, not just dependently arising existence. That is not the case.
Kagyupas, here, are using "dependent arising" in terms of the twelve links of dependent
arising. The ultimate or deepest true phenomenon is beyond dependent arising in the
sense that it does not arise dependently from unawareness of reality (ignorance).

http://www.berzinarchives.com/comparison_buddhist_traditions/intro_compar_5_traditions_buddhism_bon.html (4 of 14)09/10/2004 17:05:19 Phil

The Berzin Archives - Introductory Comparison of the Five Tibetan Traditions of Buddhism and Bon

Gelugpas would also accept that assertion. They are just using the term "dependent
arising" with a different definition. Many of the discrepancies in the assertions of the
Tibetan schools arise from such differences in the definitions of critical terms. This is
one of the major sources of confusion and misunderstanding.

Viewpoint of Explanation

Another difference among the Tibetan traditions is the viewpoint from which they explain
phenomena. According to the Rimey (nonsectarian movement) master Jamyang-
kyentse-wangpo, Gelugpas explain from the point of view of the basis, namely from the
point of view of ordinary beings, non-Buddhas. Sakyapas explain from the point of view
of the path, namely from the point of view of those who are extremely advanced on the
path to enlightenment. Kagyupas and Nyingmapas explain from the point of view of the
result, namely from a Buddha's viewpoint. As this difference is quite profound and
complicated to understand, let me just indicate a starting point for exploring the issue.

From the basis point of view, one can only focus on voidness or appearance one at a
time. Thus, Gelugpas explain even an arya's meditation on voidness from this point of
view. An arya is a highly realized being with straightforward, nonconceptual perception
of voidness. Kagyupas and Nyingmapas emphasize the inseparability of the two truths,
voidness and appearance. From a Buddha's viewpoint, one cannot possibly talk about
just voidness or just appearance. Thus, they speak from the point of view of everything
being complete and perfect already. The Bon presentation of dzogchen accords with
this manner of explanation. An example of the Sakya presentation from the point of view
of the path is the assertion that the clear-light mind (the subtlest awareness of each
individual being) is blissful. If that were true on the basis level, then the clear-light mind
manifest at death would be blissful, which it is not. On the path, however, one makes
the clear-light mind into a blissful mind. Thus, when Sakyapas speak of the clear-light
mind as blissful, this is from the point of view of the path.

Type of Practitioner Emphasized

Another difference arises from the fact that there are two types of practitioners: those
who travel gradually in steps and those for whom everything happens all at once.
Gelugpas and Sakyapas speak mostly from the point of view of those who develop in
stages; Kagyupas, Nyingmapas, and Bonpos, especially in their presentations of the
highest class of tantra, often speak from the point of view of those for whom everything
happens all at once. Although the resulting explanations may give the appearance that
each side asserts only one mode of travel along the path, it is just a matter of which one
they emphasize in their explanations.

Approach to Meditation on Voidness in Highest Tantra

As mentioned already, all the Tibetan schools accept Madhyamaka as the deepest
Page Contents
teaching, but their ways of understanding and explaining the different Indian Buddhist
systems of philosophical tenets differ slightly. The difference comes out most strongly in
^Top of Page
the ways in which they understand and practice Madhyamaka in highest tantra. As this
is also a very complex and profound point, let us try here just to get an initial
understanding.

Highest tantra practice leads to gaining straightforward nonconceptual perception of

voidness with the subtlest clear-light mind. Thus, two components are necessary: clear-
light awareness and correct perception of voidness. Which one receives the emphasis

http://www.berzinarchives.com/comparison_buddhist_traditions/intro_compar_5_traditions_buddhism_bon.html (5 of 14)09/10/2004 17:05:19 Phil

The Berzin Archives - Introductory Comparison of the Five Tibetan Traditions of Buddhism and Bon

in meditation? With the "self-voidness" approach, the emphasis in meditation is on

voidness as the object perceived by clear-light awareness. Self-voidness means the
total absence of self-existent natures giving phenomenon their identities. All phenomena
are devoid of existing in this impossible way. Gelugpas, most Sakyapas, and Drikung
Kagyupas emphasize this approach; although their explanations differ slightly
concerning the impossible ways that phenomena are devoid of existing in.

The second approach is to emphasize meditation on clear-light mind itself, which is

devoid of all grosser levels of mind or awareness. In this context, clear-light awareness
receives the name "other-voidness"; it is devoid of all other grosser levels of mind. Other-
voidness is the main approach of the Karma, Drugpa, and Shangpa Kagyupas, the
Nyingmapas, and a portion of the Sakyapas. Each, of course, has a slightly different
way of explaining and meditating. One of the major areas of difference, then, among the
Tibetan schools is how they define self-voidness and other-voidness; whether they
accept one, the other, or both; and what they emphasize in meditation to gain clear-light
awareness of voidness.

Regardless of this difference concerning self-voidness and other-voidness, all Tibetan

schools teach methods for accessing clear-light awareness or, in the dzogchen
systems, the equivalent: rigpa, pure awareness. Here, another major difference
appears. Non-dzogchen Kagyupas, Sakyapas, and Gelugpas teach dissolving the
grosser levels of mind or awareness in stages in order to access clear-light mind. The
dissolution is accomplished either by working with the subtle energy-channels, winds,
chakras, and so on, or by generating progressively more blissful states of awareness
within the subtle energy-system of the body. Nyingmapas, Bonpos, and practitioners of
Kagyupa lineages of dzogchen try to recognize and thereby access rigpa underlying the
grosser levels of awareness, without actually having first to dissolve the grosser levels.
Nevertheless, because earlier in their training they engaged in practices with the energy-
channels, winds, and chakras, they experience that the grosser levels of their
awareness automatically dissolve without conscious further effort when they finally
recognize and access rigpa.

Whether Voidness Can Be Indicated by Words

Yet, another difference arises concerning whether voidness can be indicated by words
and concepts or whether it is beyond both of them. This issue parallels a difference in
cognition theory. Gelugpas explain that with nonconceptual sensory cognition, for
Page Contents
example seeing, we perceive not only shapes and colors, but also objects such as a
vase. Sakyapas, Kagyupas, and Nyingmapas assert that nonconceptual visual cognition
^Top of Page perceives only shapes and colors. Perceiving the shapes and colors as objects such a
vase occurs with conceptual cognition a nanosecond later.

In accordance with this difference concerning nonconceptual and conceptual cognition,

Gelugpas say that voidness can be indicated by words and concepts: voidness is what
the word "voidness" is referring to. Sakyapas, Kagyupas, and Nyingmapas assert that
voidness - whether self- or other-voidness - is beyond words and concepts. Their
position accords with the Chittamatra explanation: words and concepts for things are
artificial mental constructs. When you think "mother," the word or concept is not really
your mother. The word is merely a token used to represent your mother. You cannot
really put your mother into a word.

Use of Chittamatra Terminology

http://www.berzinarchives.com/comparison_buddhist_traditions/intro_compar_5_traditions_buddhism_bon.html (6 of 14)09/10/2004 17:05:19 Phil

The Berzin Archives - Introductory Comparison of the Five Tibetan Traditions of Buddhism and Bon

In fact, Sakyapas, Kagyupas, and Nyingmapas use a lot of Chittamatra vocabulary even
in their Madhyamaka explanations, particularly in terms of highest tantra. The Gelugpas
rarely ever do. When non-Gelugpas use Chittamatra technical terms in highest tantra
Madhyamaka explanations, however, they define them differently from when they use
them in strictly Chittamatra sutra contexts. For example, alayavijnana (foundation
awareness) is one of the eight types of limited awareness in the sutra Chittamatra
system. In highest tantra Madhyamaka contexts, foundation awareness is a synonym
for the clear-light mind that continues even into Buddhahood.

Summary

These are some of the major areas of difference concerning profound philosophical and
meditation points. We could go into tremendous detail about these points, but I think it is
very important never to lose sight of the fact that about eighty percent or more of the
features of the Tibetan schools are the same. The differences among the schools are
mostly due to how they define technical terms, which point of view they explain from,
and what meditation approach they use to gain a clear-light awareness of voidness.

Preliminary Practices

Further, the general training practitioners receive in each of the traditions is the same.
Merely the styles of some of the practices are different. For example, most Kagyupas,
Nyingmapas, and Sakyapas complete the full set of preliminaries for tantra practice (the
hundred thousand repetitions of prostrations, and so on) as one big event early in the
training, often as a separate retreat. Gelugpas typically fit them one at a time into their
schedules, usually after they have completed their basic studies. Practitioners of all
traditions, however, repeat the full set of preliminaries at the start of a three-year retreat.

Page Contents
Three-Year Retreats

^Top of Page In a three-year retreat, Kagyupas, Nyingmapas, and Sakyapas typically train in a
number of sutra meditation practices and then in the basic ritual practices of the main
Buddha-figures of their lineages, devoting several months successively for each
practice. They also learn to play the ceremonial musical instruments and to make
sculpted torma offerings. Gelugpas gain the same basic meditation and ritual training by
fitting each practice one at a time into their schedules, as they do with the preliminaries.
The Gelug three-year retreat focuses on the intensive practice of just one Buddha-
figure. Non-Gelugpas normally devote three or more years in retreat to one tantra
practice only in their second or third three-year retreats, not in the initial one.

Participation in the full monastic ritual practice of any Buddha-figure requires completion
of a several-month retreat entailing repetition of several mantras hundreds of thousands
of times. One cannot perform a self-initiation without having completed this practice.
Whether Gelugpas fulfill this requirement by doing a several-month retreat on its own or
non-Gelugpas do it as part of a three-year retreat, most monastics in all the traditions
complete such retreats. Only the more advanced practitioners of each tradition,
however, do intensive three-year retreats focused on only one Buddha-figure.

Conclusion

It is very important to maintain a nonsectarian point of view with regard to the five
Tibetan traditions of Buddhism and Bon. As His Holiness the Dalai Lama always

http://www.berzinarchives.com/comparison_buddhist_traditions/intro_compar_5_traditions_buddhism_bon.html (7 of 14)09/10/2004 17:05:19 Phil

The Berzin Archives - Introductory Comparison of the Five Tibetan Traditions of Buddhism and Bon

stresses, these different traditions share the same ultimate aim: they all teach methods
for achieving enlightenment to benefit others as much as is possible. Each tradition is
equally effective in helping its practitioners reach this goal and thus they fit together
Berzinarchives harmoniously, even if not in a simple manner. In making even an introductory
needs your comparative study of the five traditions, we learn to appreciate the unique strong points
Support of our own tradition and to see that each tradition has its own outstanding features. If we
wish to become Buddhas and to benefit everyone, we need eventually to learn the
entire spectrum of Buddhist traditions and how they all fit together so that we are able to
teach people of different inclinations and capacities. Otherwise, we risk the danger of
"abandoning the Dharma," which means discrediting an authentic teaching of Buddha,
thereby disabling ourselves from being able to benefit those whom Buddha saw that the
teaching suits.

It is important eventually to follow only one lineage in our personal practice. No one can
reach the top of a building by trying to climb five different staircases simultaneously.
Nevertheless, if our capacities allow, then studying the five traditions helps us to learn
the strong points of each. This, in turn, may help us to gain clarity about these points in
our own traditions when they receive less elaborate treatment there. This is what His
Holiness the Dalai Lama and all the great masters always emphasize.

It is also very important to see that for anything that we do - be it in the spiritual or the
material sphere - there are perhaps ten, twenty, or thirty different ways of doing the
exact same thing. This helps us not to avoid attachment to the way in which we are
doing something. We are able to see the essence more clearly, rather than becoming
caught up in "This is the correct way of doing it, because it is my correct way of doing it!"

Page Contents What questions would you like to ask?

^Top of Page Questions

Question: Which tradition do you follow?

Answer: His Holiness the Dalai Lama and one of his teachers, Serkong Rinpoche, my
main spiritual guide, have always encouraged me to follow their examples, which is to
study and practice all the Tibetan traditions as much as I can, while keeping the main
emphasis on Gelug. I have tried to follow this guideline to the best of my ability.

Question: Isn't it confusing to do meditation practices from many different traditions?

Isn't it confusing even to do the practices of many different Buddha-figures within one
tradition?

Answer: There are different ways of approaching Buddhist practice, particularly tantra.
One Tibetan saying goes, "Indians practiced with one Buddha-figure and were able to
realize a hundred; while the Tibetans practice a hundred figures and are not able to
realize any!" The import of this saying is that it is important to go into depth in one
practice if we are to get anywhere with many. The extent of our practice depends on our
individual capacities. To assess our capacities, we need both to look honestly at
ourselves and to consider our teachers' advice.

If we are capable of engaging in tantra practices from several Tibetan lineages, it is

important, as His Holiness warns, not to make a stew out of them. We need to do each
practice individually, according to its own tradition, in its own way. If we find doing many

http://www.berzinarchives.com/comparison_buddhist_traditions/intro_compar_5_traditions_buddhism_bon.html (8 of 14)09/10/2004 17:05:19 Phil

The Berzin Archives - Introductory Comparison of the Five Tibetan Traditions of Buddhism and Bon

practices confusing, His Holiness advises that it is best not to put equal emphasis on all
of them. If we have received empowerments and practices from many lineages or even
for many Buddha-figures within one lineage and we find it confusing, we can just
maintain the karmic connection with some of them by reciting the mantra three times
daily. We can then go into depth with merely the practices for which we have the most
understanding, and with which we feel the strongest links.

I believe that the ability to engage in many practices depends on how well we
understand the general theory of tantra. If we understand the theory correctly, we can
see how each particular practice fits with the others. Otherwise, our practice of tantra
runs the risk of becoming schizophrenic.

Question: Can you please elaborate on His Holiness the Dalai Lama's advice against
mixing practices?

Answer: One reason for not mixing or adulterating practices is to show respect for
lineage and tradition. To mix would be like to walk into a Catholic Church and make
three prostrations to the altar, while everyone else was genuflecting and crossing
themselves. The Fifth Dalai Lama is a good example of someone who mastered several
traditions, but never mixed them. When he composed Gelug texts, he wrote them
completely in Gelug style; when he composed Sakya texts, they were in Sakya style
Page Contents from start to finish; and when he wrote Nyingma texts, the style was totally Nyingma. In
Nyingma texts, one praises Padmasambhava at the start, not Tsongkhapa.
^Top of Page
Another reason for keeping each practice pure is that within the sadhana visualization
practice of one tradition, for instance, the component parts of the practice, the
vocabulary, and the manner of expression are all consistent. They fit harmoniously
together like the component parts of a particular make and model automobile. Within the
Sakya tradition of Hevajra practice, for example, the seven-limb prayer omits
beseeching the Buddhas not to pass away. This is because the Sakya teachings of
lamdray (the paths and its results) emphasize the Buddhas' sambhogakaya
manifestations, which remain until every being has become free from all suffering, rather
than the nirmanakaya appearances that teach impermanence by passing away. The
sambhogakaya emphasis also reflects in the way one stabilizes the visualization of
oneself as the Buddha-figure and receives the empowerments. To mix into a Sakya
lamdray practice a Gelug-style seven-limb prayer, which includes beseeching the
Buddhas not to pass away, would be like trying to fit a Volkswagen part into a Ford
engine. It simply won't work.

Question: Aren't there examples in which practices from different lineages have
combined?

Answer: In some cases when practices have been introduced into one lineage from
another, they have been kept purely in their original forms. For example, the Gelug
practice of Hayagriva Yangsang from the treasure texts revealed by the Fifth Dalai
Lama is purely in the same style of practice as that of any Nyingma sadhana.

In some cases, one part of a practice has been changed to that of the lineage into which
it has been introduced. For example, the Vajrayogini practice brought into Gelug from
Sakya shares most features in common with typical Gelug sadhanas. It merely
substitutes Gelug-style voidness meditation for Sakya-style.

Sometimes, however, we do find hybrids. The Karma Kagyu practice of Guru Rinpoche,

http://www.berzinarchives.com/comparison_buddhist_traditions/intro_compar_5_traditions_buddhism_bon.html (9 of 14)09/10/2004 17:05:19 Phil

The Berzin Archives - Introductory Comparison of the Five Tibetan Traditions of Buddhism and Bon

for example, contains most of the components of a Nyingma sadhana, but typically
Karma Kagyu terminology and approach to voidness meditation. In the sadhana
practice of Karma Pakshi (the Second Karmapa), although Guru Rinpoche sits in Karma
Pakshi's heart and one of the offerings resembles Nyingma style, most of the rest of the
practice is typically Karma Kagyu. The main hybrid feature is visualization of oneself as
a Buddha-figure in the form of a great lineage master. Someone must be a very great
master with far-reaching wisdom, however, to make any synthesis. It is not taboo, but
requires great care. For ordinary beings such as ourselves, making new syntheses will
probably lead merely to confusion.

Question: If our main practice is Gelug, but we also like to practice dzogchen, what
would be the best way of doing this?

Answer: The best way is to practice dzogchen as a separate meditation. It is like in

Page Contents
school: when we do math we do math, when we do composition we do composition. We
attend one class at a time, separately. In the end, everything we learn fits together in
^Top of Page our own development.

For many people, practicing a variety of methods is too much, so there is no need to do
this. Better to stick to one style of practice, while appreciating the validity of the wide
diversity of Buddhist methods. Otherwise, we might go to another Dharma center, meet
other practitioners, and see that they are doing something slightly differently from the
way that we do. As followers of a Tibetan tradition, for instance, we might go to a Zen
center and see the way the members make prostration. Our ears go up like a rabbit in
front of a car light and we gasp, "That is wrong! They have palms up on the floor, not
down; they are going to go to hell!" Our shock and horror are the fault of not having a
broad enough Buddhist education. Chinese Buddhists all prostrate that way. Although
some Tibetan masters may take a fundamentalist stance regarding their traditions, there
is no need to follow their examples.

Question: How do we know which tradition suits us the best?

Answer: It is not easy. In Tibet, people went to whatever monasteries and teachers
happened to be in their valleys. Those who felt that was not enough and who wished to
study further, went elsewhere after their basic Buddhist educations. One of my teachers,
Geshe Ngawang Dhargyey, for example, entered a local Sakya monastery as a young
child, but when he grew older, pursued his main studies in Gelug monasteries, first in
his district and then far away in Lhasa.

The situation here in the West is much different now. In many cities, a wide variety of
options is available, so it is possible to shop around at the various Dharma centers.
Eventually, however, we need to choose a lineage within which to focus our main study
and practice. To spend all our time shopping and never to buy anything would be sad. If
we automatically feel familiar and comfortable with a particular lineage or teacher, this is
a good sign that we have a karmic connection. It "feels right."

In choosing a lineage or a teacher, it is important to remain open-minded and not to

have the attitude, "I am only going to go to my Dharma center. I am not going to set foot
into any other center or listen to any other teacher." This, I think, deprives us of many
excellent opportunities to learn more. On the other hand, it is not necessary to go to
everything. Better to exercise discriminating awareness and follow a "middle path."

If we live in a remote area, with very few options for Dharma study available, we

http://www.berzinarchives.com/comparison_buddhist_traditions/intro_compar_5_traditions_buddhism_bon.html (10 of 14)09/10/2004 17:05:19 Phil

The Berzin Archives - Introductory Comparison of the Five Tibetan Traditions of Buddhism and Bon

probably need to follow the traditional Tibetan example. We can start by going to
whatever centers and teachers are the closest and most convenient. If they suit us, this
is wonderful. If we find them unsatisfactory, we respectfully learn as much as we can
and, if the opportunity presents itself, we may pursue further study and practice
elsewhere.

Page Contents If this is the pattern we follow, it is important to dismiss any feelings we might have that
our going on to other teachers, centers, or even lineages is an act of disloyalty and
betrayal to our home centers or teachers. Going from high school to college is not a
^Top of Page
betrayal of our high school or of its teachers. The same is true with transferring to
another university if we find that the one we first entered does not provide the program
or level of study we want. If we maintain respect and appreciation for the teachers we
had and their instruction, there is no guilt or blame.

Question: What is the best way to regard the refutations of the philosophical positions of
other traditions that we find in the texts of each of the Tibetan schools?

Answer: His Holiness the Dalai Lama and some of the greatest masters of the past have
stressed that although the Tibetan schools - and even within one school, the various
monastic textbooks - have differences of opinion on minor points, their positions are not
contradictory regarding the most important issues. Moreover, as His Holiness also
points out, several great masters of the past were not especially gifted in explaining their
meditation experiences in a logical or a consistent manner. Yet, if we examine their
practices and accomplishments impartially, we must conclude that they achieved
authentic results.

Many texts contain heated debates between various scholars, not only from one school
to another, but also even within one school. Sometimes, rude inflammatory remarks
punctuate the texts. We can regard these debates like battles between hostile sides, but
such an attitude prevents us from benefiting from the contents of the debate. If we look
from a more detached viewpoint, we can hear their words implying, for example, "If you
say that mind is permanent, without clearly defining what you mean by permanent, then
some people will understand the term with my definition. They will then become
extremely confused, because this and that absurd conclusion and inconsistency follow
when you define permanent as I do and ascribe that to mind." I think that this is one type
of unbiased conclusion we can reach from these strongly worded debates.

Question: Many Tibetan Buddhist lamas have spoken or written very negatively about
the Bon tradition. Can you comment on that?

Answer: Prejudice against the Bonpos stems back to the ancient conquest of Zhang-
zhung, the homeland of Bon in Western Tibet, and its incorporation into the first Tibetan
Empire in Central Tibet. Originally, the term "Bonpo" referred to ministers and other
officials who came from Zhang-zhung, not to those who carried out the Zhang-zhung
rituals at the imperial court. Prejudice against the Bonpos was originally motivated by
politics, not by religious beliefs or practices. His Holiness emphasizes that this prejudice
is divisive and negative. It would be best if Tibetan Buddhists worked to eliminate it from
their mentalities.

If we look from the viewpoint of Jungian psychology, I think we can gain insight into the
historical development of the anti-Bon prejudice. Over time, the practice of seeing the
spiritual teacher as a Buddha received growing emphasis. As the intensity of so-called
Page Contents
"guru-devotion" increased, many practitioners who had not yet achieved stable levels of

http://www.berzinarchives.com/comparison_buddhist_traditions/intro_compar_5_traditions_buddhism_bon.html (11 of 14)09/10/2004 17:05:19 Phil

The Berzin Archives - Introductory Comparison of the Five Tibetan Traditions of Buddhism and Bon

emotional balance were unable to digest the practice in a healthy manner. The more
^Top of Page they stressed and projected the side of perfection onto their teachers, the more they
empowered the hidden negative side - what Jung called "the shadow." They projected
this onto the so-called "enemies of the Dharma." Much of the projection fell on the
heads of the Bonpos.

As my good friend, Dr. Martin Kalff, a Tibetan Buddhist teacher and Jungian
psychologist, pointed out to me, the account of Shakyamuni Buddha meditating under
the bodhi tree and being attacked by Mara, the embodiment of interference and
negativity, indicates this psychological principle. Conscious focus on our positive sides
brings unconscious focus on our negative ones as a counterbalance. Only when
Shakyamuni demonstrated that Mara could no longer affect him, did he attain
enlightenment.

It is significant that the Buddhist lineages with the most fanatic guru-devotion often are
the ones with the most ferocious and gory protector practices. The more they seemingly
worship their gurus, the more fixated they seem to become on destroying the enemies
of the Dharma. This polarization is very unhealthy. It is very important that, as Western
practitioners, we take care not to fall prey to this tendency to make our lineage gurus
into gods and the teachers of other lineages and religions into the devil.

Question: Which Tibetan lineage is the largest?

Answer: The Gelug tradition has the largest following in Tibet and Mongolia. Among the
Tibetans in exile, Gelug also has the highest number of adherents. Among Westerners
and East Asians who were not traditionally Tibetan Buddhists, Karma Kagyu seems to
be the largest group. In the Tibetan Government-in-Exile, however, each of the Tibetan
traditions has equal representation.

Question: Has His Holiness ever expressed any thoughts about the usefulness of
preserving the five Tibetan traditions or the benefits of combining them into one
tradition?

Answer: Neither the Dalai Lama nor any other Tibetan spiritual leader has the power or
authority to make such changes. His Holiness always welcomes a diversity of spiritual
traditions in order to suit people's varying tastes. Nevertheless, at the nonsectarian
conference I mentioned earlier, His Holiness recommended establishment of a
committee to select a body of common prayers from among the Tibetan translations of
Indian Buddhist prayers - for instance, Shantideva's prayer - that all Tibetan traditions
could accept as a common liturgy when they meet together. The ability to pray together
would not eliminate the traditions, but rather bring them closer together. His Holiness's
suggestion would undoubtedly be helpful also for Buddhist centers in the West.

Thank you.

Back | ^Top of Page | Home

http://www.berzinarchives.com/comparison_buddhist_traditions/intro_compar_5_traditions_buddhism_bon.html (12 of 14)09/10/2004 17:05:19 Phil

The Berzin Archives - Introductory Comparison of the Five Tibetan Traditions of Buddhism and Bon

Section Contents
Source of Inspiration Modern Adaptation of Buddhism Vows and Commitments

Introduction to Buddhism Sutra Teachings Prayers and Tantra Practices

History of Buddhism and Bon Tantra Teachings Tibetan Astrology

Comparison of Buddhist Traditions Kalachakra e-Books

Buddhism in the World Today Dzogchen Bibliographies

Buddhism and Islam Mahamudra

Page Contents

Bon as the Fifth Tradition of Tibet

Hierarchy and Decentralization
Common Features
Lay and Monastic Traditions
Sutra Study
Tantra Study and Practice
Meditation
Ritual
Tulku System of Reincarnate Lamas
Mixed Lineages
Differences
Usage of Technical Terms
Viewpoint of Explanation

http://www.berzinarchives.com/comparison_buddhist_traditions/intro_compar_5_traditions_buddhism_bon.html (13 of 14)09/10/2004 17:05:19 Phil

The Berzin Archives - Introductory Comparison of the Five Tibetan Traditions of Buddhism and Bon

Type of Practitioner Emphasized

Approach to Meditation on Voidness in Highest Tantra
Whether Voidness Can Be Indicated by Words
Use of Chittamatra Terminology
Summary
Preliminary Practices
Three-Year Retreats
Conclusion
Questions

Back

^Top of Page

Archives | News | About | Author | Home | Donate

© 2003 The Berzin Archives - All Rights Reserved. - Page Last Updated 05/18/2004 - Design by WebsiteMechanic

http://www.berzinarchives.com/comparison_buddhist_traditions/intro_compar_5_traditions_buddhism_bon.html (14 of 14)09/10/2004 17:05:20 Phil