Defining heresy

Heresy is not a popular word, in terms of criticising religious trends. It does not lend itself to the ‘feel good’ philosophy of our times. In terms of describing the manner in which the rôle of vajra master is being attemptedly discredited, however – it is an accurate usage. Heresy is the most precise term at our disposal in terms of describing the advent of ‘Western Buddhism’. By ‘Western Buddhism’ we do not mean ‘Buddhism in the West’ – but a post-modern psychotherapeutically revamped adaptation of loosely agglomerated Buddhist traditions. ‘Western Buddhism’ places an emphasis on an artificial egalitarianism which succeeds mainly in juggling nihilism and eternalism, in an effort to placate the cult of self-orientated process.

The Greek root of the word ‘heresy’ is hairesis, which means: a choosing from. Now let us define that more closely: There is an assemblage of interrelated, interactive, and interdependent spiritual coefficients from which one chooses isolated aspects, thereby damaging the integrity of the whole. If one takes the example of an automobile, one could choose to remove the spark plugs. That would constitute what is meant by a choosing from, and the result of the choosing from would be that the automobile would not function as an automobile. Then let us look at substitution: on concluding that petroleum (gasoline) is dermatologically detrimental, one could substitute vegetable oil. Refueling an automobile would certainly be hazard-free – but the vehicle would not function.

Heresy, therefore, does not merely signify a different translation, a different interpretation, or a different approach. We are not averse to differences of style – even radical differences of style. We are not averse to changes occurring – because the outer form of Dharma will always change, simply because it is form. Form changes. Form is emptiness. We have no argument with that. The outer form of Dharma has changed over the last several thousand years according to the many realised masters who have given their individual transmissions of Dharma. There is a great difference between ‘change’ and ‘heresy’– and we must come to an accurate understanding of that.

We are not traditionalists in the sense of adhering to historical and cultural precedent for its own sake – that much must be obvious to anyone who has read our books. If one looks at the history of Buddhism one can see that throughout its many changes – it has remained the same. The outer form has changed – but the essence has remained unchanged. The meaning of ‘heresy’, therefore, concerns changes to the central and essential definition of Dharma: the vajra master is both central and essential to Vajrayana.

One cannot have Vajrayana without the vajra master, and the concomitant vajra commitment according to the fourteen Root Vows which exist in every School, Tradition, and Lineage of Vajrayana. One can find water in many different forms: tap water, spring water, mineral water, sparkling water, and filtered water. One can also find water in the form of steam or of ice – but if someone offers water in powder form or pellet form, it is not water – by definition. It may well have all the trace elements which could be found in water – but without the water, you would have to add H2O in order for it to become water.

Vajrayana without the vajra master is an oxymoron – unless one has outlandishly insufficient comprehension of Vajrayana. The problem with the word ‘heresy’ is that people start imagining ‘witch hunts’ and the persecution of people who are merely different. Beyond these emotive implications, however, there exists a real question of the evident distortion of Dharma to fit modern ideas of psychotherapy and political correctness. We are not discussing traditional versus untraditional. We are not discussing Eastern versus Western. Dharma is not Eastern or Western – it is simply Dharma explained in the languages of different countries.

In Britain we have a law which is termed the ‘Trades Descriptions Act’. Under this act, manufacturers can be prosecuted for supplying misleading information concerning their products. For this reason one is no longer allowed to advertise cigarettes with claims that they enhance one’s life in any respect whatsoever. One now has to be reasonably truthful about one’s product. Tobacco products in Britain now have to carry the warning ‘Smoking Kills’ – and that warning has to cover half the front of the packet. A medical heretic—by this definition—is a doctor who claims that tobacco is a beneficial herb when its incinerated fumes are frequently inhaled. A doctor may freely state that cigarettes provide a form of nicotine narcosis which still appears to be sensually enjoyable to many in spite of irrefutable evidence that it is carcinogenic. It is not medically heretical for a doctor to make that statement, because it is a factual statement. What would be heretical would be for a doctor to take the aspect of ‘sensual enjoyment’ and to make that the central point of discussion rather than the fact that smoking is highly dangerous and deleterious to health. The central principle for a doctor is to promote health and to maintain life rather than to advocate sensual pleasure at the expense of life and health.

If we apply this to Dharma—and particularly to Vajrayana Dharma—that which is carcinogenic is the exclusion of the vital dynamic essence:  the vajra master.