If you ask Japhy if he thinks that Robert Thurman deserves the accolades he receives as an early adopter of Tibetan Buddhism, as an early adopter of Tibetan Buddhism himself, he gives Professor Thurman his props as a Tibetan Buddhist. Robert Thurman, unlike so many of his generation who went to India in the 1960’s, became monks, failed, and returned their robes, Professor Thurman not only kept his faith in Tibetan Buddhism, he has also devoted his life to the cause as a benefactor of Tibetan Buddhism.
I mentioned Uncle Bob, Uma’s pops, in a post. A reader picked up on the reference and posted a comment. Some Tibetan Buddhists lump Uncle Bob in with the celebrity endorsers of Tibetan Buddhism, for example, Richard Gere, because Uma Thurman is his daughter, but I don’t think of him like that. My eyes don’t roll back in my head like they do when someone mentions Richard Gere.
Unlike Richard Gere, who when he went public as a Tibetan Buddhist was for a number of years considered less than serious in his Tibetan Buddhism by Japhy and his cohorts, Robert Thurman, as a translator and author, has always been an early adopter to be reckoned with as far as Japjy is concerned. If Japhy does have any issue with Robert Thurman it has nothing to do with Professor Thurman’s Tibetan Buddhism but instead his generation.
I’m of the punk generation. I came of age during Watergate, the dark side of the 1970’s, so I grew up with nothing but disdain for Uncle Bob’s generation. Damn hippies. In a matter of a decade they spawned decades of rabid conservatives from Goldwater to Marco Rubio. Thank you Uncle Bob. I give Uncle Bob his props for his daughter, Uma, but his generation made such a mess out of this country, I don’t know what to say.
Japhy did one hundred prostrations and 1000 recitations of the refuge prayer over four hours of practice today. It was his first full session since he began HHK17’s “Brief Recitations for the Four Ordinary Foundations” ngondro based on HIs Holiness’ 2006 instructions, which are based on the 4x100K paradigm. HHK17 made some serious changes beyond re-doing the liturgy, which Japhy very much welcomes as a Westerner.
The number of recitations of the refuge prayer remains 100K but HHK17 has set the minimum number of prostrations at 1000, so instead of 100 prostrations for every 100 recitations I can instead do 10 prostrations for every 100 recitations. If I don’t go into cardiac arrest, I should be able to finish the first of the four foundations by this summer, depending on how much practice I can manage.
Another significant change HHK17 has made in his ngondro is that not only does he allow Japhy to do half prostrations instead of full prostrations, His Holiness allows him a medical accommodation in doing his prostrations to accommodate his congestive heart failure, which is great news if you have any health issues that would otherwise prevent you from doing prostrations.
I had been doing HHK17’s “Brief Recitations” as a daily practice based on His Holiness’ 2008 instructions, in addition to Karma Chakme’s ngondro. Since I became aware of HHK17’s 2006 instructions though, I felt it might be helpful for those following along at home, if I completed the “Brief Recitations” using the 4x100K paradigm, which is where I have to stop for today. I’ve used up the time I have allotted for this post. May it benefit sentient beings without exception.
Tinfoil Ushnisha 
I’m sure the prostrations will be very good for your body. I think they should help your heart condition too. Nicely done.
Thank you, my cardiologist would agree. It drives him crazy that I practice 4-6 hours a day yet refuse to take an hour out of my day to exercise. That I care not to live a moment longer other than to practice the dharma has had us butting heads since my heart attack in 2009. On the other hand though, given he pronounced me dead in 2010, “I’m sorry but your heart is simply too damaged,”and I’m still alive and kicking, it is hard for him to dismiss the role of my practice in my unexpected survival.
I would never write something on the Dharma or teach for that matter. There are too many opinions and they are rarely positive. Maybe it’s an American thing but reviews always seem to focus on what’s wrong. The fact that these guys try is commendable. I’ve read stuff from the early 1900’s and that is some interesting stuff. Whatever has been translated is completely watered down. Whatever “Real” Tibetan Buddhism is, it was lost long before the Chinese invaded. It was lost when the first Westerners creeped in and dropped their mouths at what was going on. Ritual is crazy stuff. Ancient patriarchal ritual can be even more disturbing (that goes for east, west, north or south).
I think “Americanization” is good for Buddhism. We all need to learn manners. What I really appreciate about most of the translators… is what they leave out.
In Tibetan Buddhism there is no wriggle room when it comes to the translation of a text or teacher. In this sense we need to draw a line between the translation of Tibetan Buddhists texts and teachers, and the interpretive gloss of translators, such as Robert Thurman.
In Tibetan Buddhism, translators who mix translation with their personal interpretative gloss, aren’t a problem in my experience. If lama Yeshe glossed his translation of Khenpo Karthar, for example, substituting his judgement for that of Rinpoche’s, he would be done as a translator.
When it comes to Buddhist authors with literary agents and publishers, like a Robert Thurman, there is much more latitude allowed in this regard.
Both you and wendy are swingers…swinging from love and hate. Robert like us all tried to make sense of it with his intellect…but it is still empty.
Naw Fred, I’m not a hater. Empty you say? I do not think that means what you think it means.
Fred isn’t big on thinking his comments online through before posting them.
Oh Fred, there you go shooting off your mouth without thinking what you post through. I know Wendy. Trust me, we aren’t on the same page as Tibetan Buddhists. We respect each other, and hear each other out, without jumping to half baked conclusions about each other. You might try this approach yourself someday. It would be a refreshing change, as far as I’m concerned. Surprise, surprise, your like Robert Thurman’s books. From what I know of you, based on our conversations online, you like your Tibetan Buddhism in the form of books. I don’t have much use for such books, nor the people that right them. It has nothing to do with love and hate.
Poor insight Bill. I am done with prostrations and am into vajravattva. Try posting something without hedging/qualifying your positive comments about someone. Ken McCleod teaches mostly out of the Shangpa play book. Robert Thurman is a great intellect who has made Tibetan buddhism accessible.
Dude, tell me you didn’t just use you ngondro prostrations to justify your lame apologia for your favorite Buddhist authors. I can’t believe you actually used your ngondro like that. You like your Buddhist authors. There is nothing wrong with reading them. There is nothing shameful in that. On the other hand, your attempt to use your ngondro prostrations to your advantage in a discussion online, that is very bad form in deed.
Although I’ve not read much of what’s available, what I have read of Thurman’s is impressive. English seems reinvigorated and beautiful again in his translations. In his hands, it is exalted in the best way. But it was especially sweet to have caught a wee glimpse of the powerful love, wisdom, and compassion to which the texts refer. That was the moment I realized that Thurman has a gift (clearly, one of many) for effortlessly capturing seemingly rare and elusive truths described in Tibetan text.
Yeah, I envied that guy for lots o’ reasons.
I can’t say I envy Robert Thurman as a Tibetan Buddhist. He is very much a product of the hippy dippy let it all hang out days of Tibetan Buddhism. I like my Tibetan Buddhism with the urban grit characteristic of 1980’s Tibetan Buddhism in America I cut my teeth on as a Tibetan Buddhist.