________________
90
Hermann Kuhn
with 'The Consequences of Self-inflicted Asceticism' and with 'Freedom From Eternally Transitory Aims'.
In the first instance the lamas probably could not bear Padma-Sambhava declaring renunciation and asceticism as ineffective for inner growth. The strict beliefs and convictions connected to the monks' particular life-style prohibited them to accept what the text really said and made them bend the original words almost beyond recognition.
Yet Padma-Sambhava plainly states that renouncing elements of life not only bars the widening of our perception, but also distorts the way we see reality.
Perception expands because this attract us more than our current experience. That our previous, lesser developed state becomes obsolete in this process and falls away, is a consequence, not the cause.
When switching from a radio station with 'boring' music to a more interesting program, we'd never see this as 'renouncing the boring music', but rather as a nice change for the better
The monks mistook the disappearance of irrelevant ('boring') factors of life - which actually is only a sideeffect - for the main cause of spiritual development. They then tried to produce this side-effect by renunciation, denial and asceticism, all the while believing that this would further inner expansion, - a strategy that never works. A classic case of confusing cause and effect.
In the second instance the lamas mangled the entire segment on transitory aims. Padma-Sambhava's wholesale declaration of futility of the Middle path as taught by
