Chogyam Trungpa Rinpoche

A question earlier today ( http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index; ... raised this question for me.

There are hundreds of examples of Buddhist masters who have struggled to follow the precepts (Maezumi Roshi and Chogyam Trungpa Rinpoche, to name just two), and yet many people enlightened and established many Dharma heirs. Other Buddhist masters have strictly followed the precepts and yet have left no heirs. (And of course, the opposite is true for both cases.)

Which is more important - strictly following the precepts or help others wake up?

Thank you for your comments respectful.

P'ang hello, nice to hear from you. Your question is very exciting. A very good teacher Dharma knows exactly what the student or the student needs to wake up. We just need to read the life of Milarepa, how a qualified teacher is really true Dharma. If this is not following the precepts "In the eyes of society allows such a teacher to illuminate another, then this would obviously did. Are they really do not follow the precepts? Or are they very skilled in the use of the ability to arouse our emotions, our concern deny ourselves and put us on the path to enlightenment. It boils down to the correct motivation. We have the ability to find fault with anything and anyone. Even a practitioner who follows the precepts to the letter, will have to be, being reached on them. It all comes down to how we perceive things. If we do with the purity, we see things pure. Generally, our view and understanding is flawed, therefore we "look" of impurity, even if it does not. Who can tell when something is pure or impure? A Vajrayana practitioner will use whatever means they must teach students to really sincere, viewers will be upset, but it will not disrupt the teacher, he knows what he is and how to get the desired results. We must be less judgmental, and look with eyes to reality.
May all beings have causes of peace and happiness.

I believe in helping others is more important.

On a side note, Buddhism and the precepts are based on the teachings of Siddhartha Gautama Buddha. Who's to say that his specific spiritual path is the only path to enlightenment. On the otherhand, his teachings are wise, and I would personally tend to follow such a great teacher.

Edit:

This is very exciting as shown in the table of responses below (and above). Let me clarify by asking how I would react to a teacher does not follow Buddhist precepts. I am curious to know why. 1) If he has done with the intention of creating Dharma heirs and helping to generate many, there seems little commercialized, but I admire him for sacrificing his convictions for the greater good. 2) If he did because he believed he was no longer necessary (and not because of lack of discipline), then I might consider it (but not necessarily break the precepts) to see If I can learn something about my personal journey. For me, it is not good or bad, it is the experience and how it can be transformed.

Precepts should not be followed by attachment. In fact, attachment to precepts and practices is one of the last barriers to entry flow. However, a teacher must demonstrate integrity - meaning he or she has integrated into their lives for the beliefs it espouses. If a teacher calls for ethical behavior, then they must themselves be ethical.

I think you have created a false dichotomy, because it is possible both to follow the precepts and help awaken others. The precepts are for your own awakening. If you show no ability to live up to vows that you have done for yoursel.