The "Most Venerable"
Imagine you have a thirteen-year-old daughter, well-mannered, virtuous, and docile. You learn that a figure renowned for being "most venerable" has made her his sexual partner, raping her repeatedly, for his own personal pleasure – for what else, if not? You are furthermore told that this is an honour for your family. Will you prostrate yourself before the monster, considering it a privilege, while your very young daughter retains from this "special teaching" the memory of a traumatic abuse?
Such "great masters" have existed and still exist. And not only is the example I am thinking of – who died towards the end of the 20th century – world-famous, but through such acts, he ruined the lives of many teenage girls, merely to satisfy the coarsest of desires: carnal desire. There is no need to name him, for the purpose is not to put him on trial, but to open eyes to these deviations which are far too often downplayed. This rapist of girls was known as "a highly realised and most venerable Buddhist master". How is this possible?
This is simply the result of a confluence of circumstances including:
- a deeply blind culture that normalises this type of behaviour
- a religion that excuses and turns a blind eye to the worst when it concerns an individual presumed to have attained a "high spiritual state"
- the absence of questioning in the face of the weight of a firmly established reputation
- the fear of opposing everyone's conviction in the face of such a reputation
Thus, this rapist dressed in the noble monastic robe had attained the highest mastery of his tradition – practices that the Buddha did not even mention (not out of secrecy, for he never hid anything, but because they are useless on the path to Awakening). This old lama had also developed the ability to indicate his next incarnation (which also demonstrates that he was below the last two stages of inner attainment, since from the last two stages of Awakening onward, one no longer takes incarnation). At the very least, he had clearly not attained mastery over the basest impulses; the very foundation when one wishes to walk the path of inner purification.
When there is a problem at the foundation, it must be fixed before even considering building anything higher. Who would entrust the piloting of an Airbus A380 to a person with both eyes gouged out, even if they knew the cockpit of such an aircraft better than anyone? Yet that is exactly what was done with this individual, who moreover had a wife, which is unthinkable for someone supposed to be a monk. I fear it is necessary to remind you: a monk represents the very example of right conduct, kindness, and detachment.
As it happens, in his current incarnation, during his childhood in a monastery, he himself suffered sexual abuse on multiple occasions – karmic return, no doubt!
Monks and carnal desire
What the Buddha established
Contrary to some misconceptions of certain Buddhist traditions, the Buddha did not establish the Vinaya – the monastic code of discipline – for fools, for those who lack enough wisdom to understand what is proper to do or not. This set of monastic rules is the basis of irreproachable virtue, rigorously observed by the Buddha himself and his most eminent disciples, without any exception. According to this Vinaya, the mere act of touching a woman's skin with a finger, with even a spark of desire, already constitutes a serious offence that triggers a complicated procedure and the assembly of all the saṃgha members present (the community of monks). This is one of the reasons why one does not shake hands with a monk.
As for sexual intercourse, even consensual, even brief, even oral, and even with a man or an animal, it inevitably entails the permanent loss of monk status. This is one of the four most serious offences for a monk, along with theft, murder, and – pay close attention to this last one – the declaration (even indirectly, even implied) of a spiritual attainment not actually experienced.
The robe alone does not make the monk
In its dizzying ignorance, humanity always finds a way to perceive as "poetic" the exercise of its basest instincts (what is presented as "romantic" is merely the prelude to mating). The best example is undoubtedly the famous practice of tantras, considered a spiritual practice. Here again, the Buddha never mentioned any training where mating could prove to be a path to inner fulfilment. On the contrary, he always presented it as one of the main obstacles to inner liberation.
No tradition is spared from representatives who engage in abuses of all kinds (sex, money, power…), for any human being, regardless of their origin and conditioning, if they do not discipline their mind, can drift towards the most unhealthy mental states, exactly like a garden can become overrun with brambles and nettles if left untended. Of course – and fortunately – there are also many masters in all traditions, although not awakened, who are just, sincere, and work remarkably for the good and inner fulfilment of their community (monastic or lay).
Open your eyes!
A problem of visibility
You wonder how it is possible to venerate so much people who have not yet been able to climb the very first step of the long staircase to Awakening? The reason is very simple: because wisdom is a perfectly invisible thing, and what people take for wisdom are visible things!
What is mistaken for wisdom
Here are a few "qualities" that are all too often and wrongly taken for wisdom:
| Charisma | It is easy to be fascinated by the force of presence that a person imposes. Many politicians fall into this category. |
| Cunning | Diabolical minds are the most skilled at passing themselves off as great masters. They delight in others' blindness. No, one is not wise simply because one answers questions cleverly. |
| Miracles | What could be more impressive than extraordinary abilities? No psychic power has any connection with wisdom: mediumship, seeing the future or past lives, telepathy, out-of-body experiences, ecstatic absorptions, or even the ability to fly through the sky or create fire with one's hands. Many malevolent sorcerers possess some of these powers. |
| Erudition | Apart from a large quantity of intellectual knowledge, what is erudition? Many monks are venerated as enlightened beings solely for their high degrees in Buddhist studies. Why not then venerate university professors? |
| Lineage | Lineage is merely the continuity of a tradition, a teaching, or even just a style of teaching or even a simple name. Often, only the sign remains, to which the spirit of the lineage, its reputation, and its qualities are automatically associated. |
| Title | A title is nothing other than a label. Authentic sages rarely receive a title. Select a person at random. If an official body proclaims them as "Saint," "Holiness," "Rinpoche," "Ajahn," "Reverend," "Abbot," "Rabbi," or "Master," all believers will show them deep respect. |
| Appearance | No comment, right? Yet we are constantly fooled by appearance! The most dangerous and ill-intentioned beings often have the most beautiful, captivating, or serene appearances. This is the case for so many unhealthy gurus or so-called masters who experience deep meditation but have no understanding of reality. |
"After so much seniority? What a shame!"
To which I replied:
"No, it is not a shame. I continue to carefully practice virtue, cultivate detachment, and develop vigilance in the present moment. What is a shame are those who wear the monastic robe for many years and do none of that!"
The theatre around the person
When we speak of a man or woman known as "highly realised" or a "great master," what makes us say so, if not the media, books, what others assert or repeat? Even if we meet them in person, we are swept along by all the theatre built around the person, even by the role they play – consciously or not – and so we act like the other sheep; we swallow "the narrative" without questioning anything. All that glitters is not gold, need it be said?
What do I mean by "the theatre built around the person"? Imagine your first day at an international company as a simple office clerk. You are subjected to a hazing: the doorman has been dressed in a suit and tie, and all your colleagues – complicit in your hazing – behave exactly as if the disguised doorman were the CEO himself (bows, respectful tone, fear, downcast eyes, total obedience…). For you, there is no doubt: this man IS the company's CEO. If he asks you to shine his shoes in front of everyone, even though it is not part of your contract, it is highly likely that you will comply – you would not want to make waves on your first day, and you value this job.
You will have understood the idea: Like this fake CEO, many "great masters" are fake masters who "haze" their disciples for life.
And be careful when you enter your office building; the doorman might be the company's CEO disguised as a doorman in order to closely observe the behaviour of new employees!
The robe makes the monk, the narrative makes the master
"Darn, if only I had known! The little boat next door had no restaurant or swimming pool, and its paint was not freshly redone, but its wooden hull was robust; it could have crossed the sea without a hitch, and I would have reached my goal."
The narrative
What we see when we meet a person of such reputation is not a "highly realised" being or a "great master," but merely a belief created by the mind, an image, a narrative, what others say about them, and the less people know, the more they talk!
But sometimes, by chance, the narrative may correspond to reality!
One does not feel at all crushed by an "imposing presence," but on the contrary, one is as comfortable as can be, one is considered as one is, without the slightest trace of evaluation. The total absence of pride in these beings puts those who associate with them in a state of great serenity.
The bad excuses
I am saddened to note that instead of reacting firmly against the inappropriate behaviour of spiritual masters, people tend on the contrary to find excuses for them. The worst of these are the following:
- He can allow himself that; he acts with detachment.
- Do not judge; you cannot understand!
- He does it out of pure compassion; it is to reduce their karma.
- He has full wisdom; he no longer needs to follow the rules.
I hope you suspect it: none of these excuses are valid; they are in clear disagreement with the Buddha's teaching.
Making sound values seem outdated
In our era, where people are so eager to stand out (while remaining in the herd!), the fashion of playing the cleverest is thriving. Under the pretext of transcendence, people allow themselves the most grotesque behaviours, and invent every possible excuse not to cultivate virtue: "Rules are made to be broken," "It is not for us to follow the precepts, but for the precepts to follow us"... One does not hesitate to make chastity and abstention from everything harmful to body and mind seem old-fashioned. However, whatever our beliefs may be, these practices are the indispensable basis of a noble and venerable mind. An example to follow, therefore.
One might deplore this current custom which, under the pretext of tolerance, consists of fully accepting inappropriate behaviour and laissez-faire (one only has to observe the growing insolence and illiteracy of children, but that is another debate), but I rather suspect it is a way of downplaying one's own faults and shortcomings. Conversely, in order to ensure a community that is always clean and harmonious, the Buddha exhorted monks to encourage each other to correct and improve themselves in case of wrongdoing. Having a less virtuous practice or even simply giving in to laziness was frowned upon. Today, it is the very act of remarking on a monk's harmful behaviour that is frowned upon; it can even lead to prison, as I myself have experienced.
In short, nothing prevents you from polishing the doorman's shoes (after all, he opens the door for you every morning), but please, never leave your daughter (sister, niece, student…) alone with a master, a religious figure, a renunciant, whoever they may be. In any case, there is no reason for it to be necessary. And even if he is virtuous, it can needlessly give rise to slander or even conflicts. Moreover, according to the Vinaya, the fact of a monk being isolated for even a single moment with a woman – even still a baby! – already constitutes a "fairly serious" offence.
I presented an extreme example at the beginning of the article, but there are so many situations where we can be fooled by placing blind trust in individuals claiming advanced inner development, where it is even easier to be deceived.
How to avoid the trap?
A conditioning difficult to evade
Practically speaking, how can one avoid falling into this trap of mistaking for masters those who only have the reputation?
Unfortunately, culture, beliefs, and authority (parents, teachers, local customs…) have much more weight than the word of the wisest, or even than common sense! For this reason, it is difficult not to be deceived by labels, by our perception of everything related to spirituality, including the supposed value of religious figures. Nevertheless, with a certain amount of discernment, vigilance, and above all a naked vision of things, one can see clearly on these points.
Naked vision
"Naked vision" consists of seeing things as they are, stripped of all "description." When dealing with a person, see them as they present themselves, deliberately forgetting all annotations concerning them, such as their role, their occupation, but also everything that can describe them: their titles, diplomas, distinctions, reputation, religion, lineage, affiliations, etc. Even if they are very well known, act as if you are discovering them at this very moment.
Strip them completely of all possible labels. Once your mental bowl is empty of any mouldy idea, fill it with fresh and substantial information. See how this person behaves, what they have to share, how they do it, what they seek to obtain, what they do not seek to obtain…
Go to the source!
Regarding spiritual teachings and particularly that of the Buddha, rely on the source! We have the incredible fortune of still having access to the original teachings; it would be foolish to neglect such an opportunity. There is such a variety of versions of this teaching, the majority so transformed, so derived – not to say far-fetched – that they teach the very opposite of what the Buddha expounded.
Moreover, what you are reading here is only "isi's version" of the Dhamma. It is my point of view based on my own experience, my own understanding. It can help broaden everyone's vision through a concrete and contemporary angle, but for a precise study of the Dhamma, nothing beats the Buddha's word, whose main discourses, the suttas, and the monastic discipline, the vinaya, are accessible on my website en.dhammadana.org.
The proverb says it well: It is better to deal with God than with his Saints. This is all the more true since the "Saints" in question are far from being saints, not to say "un-saints."
Conclusion
Today, to find a great master worthy of the name, one must rise very early. And as far as any remain, in our deeply sick world, they remain very discreet, in the most unsuspected places and appearances.
It could be your elderly neighbour who spends her time in the shade of her cherry tree, the young nurse who cares far more about his patients than about his salary or his working hours, or perhaps even the man who holds the door for you in the morning when you arrive at your workplace.

