styrofoamdog

I didn't see the quote as criticizing doctrine, but rather the various notions that people cling to based on doctrine. In the Diamond Sutra, the Buddha would say that the true appearance is not an appearance, and thus the Tathagata speaks of a true appearance. Another line is that all appearances are empty and false, and if all appearances are not seen as appearances, then this is perceiving the Tathagata. Yet another is that the unified appearance cannot be spoken (cannot be thought, cannot be communicated, cannot be grasped), yet ordinary people try vainly to acquire it. The words in the tantra seem very much in line with this, saying that no explanation or systematic philosophy can imbue someone with the ultimate truth of the true nature of the mind -- that it is unconditioned by anything. These teachings are meant to cut off grasping and teach non-attachment to any mental phenomena. That is, that all words and teachings are conscious fabrications only. Zen also does things to shock people and pry them away from their attachments. In one case, a Zen Buddhist master ordered his disciples to prepare a non-vegetarian feast. This was strictly against the precepts in China, completely taboo and terrible for monks or nuns. Most of the disciples turned away and left him. It was just a test, and the ones who had the real Dharma Eye and stayed were the ones who received his teachings.

I'd like to remind everyone about the history of Mahayana and Vajrayana in India. In the earliest esoteric texts, there is no mention of Vajrayana, nor esoteric Buddhism being a different vehicle from Mahayana. In the first texts such as the Vairocanabhisambodhi Tantra, they simply call it the Mantra Path. They also do not claim that it is superior to Mahayana. The Shingon school still practices these earlier esoteric teachings that predate those of Tibetan Buddhism. There are some Buddhists in China who also use these original tantras. In the later tantras, they use the term "Vajrayana" and they attempt to make the case for its superiority over traditional Mahayana. Then they also added things like stages 11-13, which traditionally did not exist. In Mahayana Buddhism the 10th stage was always the top stage for a bodhisattva, and after that he could become a buddha. The difference between the two movements in India was more a cultural one, though, because this esoteric approach came from Hindu tantra. It did not exist in Mahayana Buddhism prior to this. Because there was this cultural conflict within Buddhism, they needed to have claims of superiority to keep the tradition alive. However, Mahayana Buddhism also had esoteric techniques, and many at that. These include mantra recitation, mudras, complex visualizations, deity yoga as buddhanusmrti, etc. The difference is that they did not treat these things as secrets only passed down from a guru, or as separate yoga exercises. They taught them as teachings of the Buddha in the sutras. Therefore, even in the earliest Mahayana texts there are many esoteric techniques including those for the Bardo state found in the practices of Amitabha Buddha. These things were secrets "out in the open", but if you didn't have wisdom, you could not understand the sutra enough to see these things. To this date, I remain skeptical of exactly what Vajrayana offers that is new and different. I only see a few things. Off the top of my head... 1. Use of mandalas 2. Use of seed syllables 3. Guru as the teacher instead of Buddha 4. Everything is very secretive 5. Fascination with mysticism and the supernatural 6. Sexual techniques I don't see these as anything special or especially critical for Buddhism, which was traditionally more concerned with high-level cultivation of the mind. Then again, everyone has his or her own opinion. I just look at the history and try to use my own wisdom to distinguish what is truly beneficial and what is not.

Yes, she instantly transformed into a perfected male bodhisattva, and then instantly became a buddha. There was no rebirth as a male in a future life, nor were there eons of effort to perfect the six paramitas. She became a buddha in her lifetime. In the Vimalakirti Nirdesa Sutra, Shariputra must also accept that there is no true characteristic of male or female, and that women cannot be discriminated against in Mahayana. Shariputra's two erroneous arguments were the same as your own, he was wrong on both counts, and had to silently accept the authority of the naga maiden's words.

CowTao is exactly right about the way many people treat the temples. If you give $$$, you get lots of merit, and merit is always associated with luck and fortune. That's the way many people think, so the temples in China can become very rich. I have a friend who is an important Chinese Buddhist monk, and he drives around in a Mercedes Benz. The master of a temple often has an opulent chamber and is surrounded by rich decorations and beautiful Buddhist art. These people range from the worldly, to the very cultivated. I have yet to meet any master of a temple who is not a very kind and gentle person, though. The temple you visited was part of Humanistic Buddhism, and those places really do rake in the big money. They try to adapt Buddhism to modern standards and conveniences. That is, they are very focused on making Buddhism an affirming and feel-good philosophy for modern living. They don't really care so much about meditation. There was an incident in California where the biggest Humanistic Buddhism temple donated a large sum of money to Al Gore. There was some fallout from that, because it seemed odd that individual monks and nuns would donate thousands of dollars each to a political campaign. One of the nuns fled back to Taiwan when things went south. Fortunately there is a really good Chinese Buddhism and Chan tradition in the U.S. that Hsuan Hua founded, exemplified by City of Ten Thousand Buddhas. They really care about meditation, studying the sutras deeply, and strict adherence to the traditional precepts for monks and nuns. Some of them even go beyond that and take vows of silence. They won't even let people burn incense in the temples, because they think that it is superstitious. The difference basically came from Hsuan Hua, who was very blunt and forceful about his views, eschewing money, comfort, and fame. One person like that can really make a difference in the world. In all, it is really a mixed bag when it comes to Chinese Buddhism. There is ignorance and superstition, and there is amazing dedication and knowledge. It was also like this in the past. Around a hundred years ago, there was the same superstition and greed. However, there were also dedicated practitioners who would go so far as to burn off their fingers as offerings to the Buddha, or to write huge sutras like the Avatamsake Sutra (1600+ pages in English) in their own blood. There are still hermits up in the mountains, and still people who really endeavor in meditation. These people usually associate themselves with Chan, or simply with "Chinese Buddhism."

It is basically the main Zen method, for which all other meditations are skillful means. Shikantaza is just a name, and there are a million names for such practices among the different schools and traditions. In the Diamond Sutra, Subhuti asks the Buddha how a bodhisattva can pacify his mind, and how the mind should dwell so as to attain Supreme Perfect Enlightenment. The Buddha replies that he should pacify his mind thusly, and that his mind should dwell thusly. There is no distinction between anything in this suchness. However, it is so inconceivable to Subhuti that he tells the Buddha that he does not understand. When people try to stay in what Dzogchen calls the natural state of the mind, they often become confused and attached to various thoughts that arise. Then doubt comes up, and they begin to think more and ask questions. For example, although some people on this thread have experienced a bit of this natural state, how many could sit indefinitely in meditation, and attain samadhi all without expending any effort? The Sandhinirmocana Sutra says that all tathagatas arise from a state of effortlessness, yet everyone puts forth this effort due to karma and grasping. Therefore, this is just one part of seeing the path, and they are unable to refrain from delusions. As a result of Subhuti's confusion, the Buddha has a long lecture teaching non-attachment, cutting down all conceptualization. He repeatedly tells Subhuti to practice thusly, and that all worthy sages are distinguished by means of the unconditioned Dharma. The main teaching of the Diamond Sutra is actually this blocking method, turning the mind away from grasping at different phenomena that arise, so as to be able to abide in the natural state. To know that all phenomena are thus, and to use this knowledge to become a buddha, is the purpose of the Prajnaparamita sutras. Simply sitting and abiding thusly (natural state) is the essential teaching of Shikantaza. The reason that some schools emphasize koans first is to develop some clarity of mind so that people can more easily remain unattached to the various mental formations that arise. However, if someone remains in a state of no-thought, this is called no-birth, and that is also the wrong path: dead tree Zen. In proper the contemplation, one does not create nor suppress mental formations. Here is a Zen poem describing the free state of dwelling nowhere and remaining unattached to anything. There is another poem from the Tang dynasty about watching thoughts while remaining unattached: "Recognizing the East wind" means recognizing mental formations as false and illusory, which correspond with the element of wind within the body. "Blossoms in reds and purples" are the cakras opening up on the body, which the meditator remains unattached to. "Arrival of spring" is a metaphor used by Daoists as well, for the state when the energy in the body flows completely freely, rejuvenating and refreshing the body. However, this is just watching the mind and remaining unattached to false thoughts. It is still not abiding thusly without discriminations as the Buddha originally taught. There is another Zen poem in response to it composed later correcting it: Hopefully these different illustrations help. The Diamond Sutra became the central teaching of the Zen school after the Tang Dynasty, and it is always a good reference for the Zen teachings because so much of the teaching methods are shared.

A real link to Indian traditions is not currently recognized by scholars. Sanskrit Buddhist Canon: http://www.uwest.edu/sanskritcanon/dp/index.php?q=node/107 Chinese Buddhist Canon with Sanskrit names: http://www.acmuller.net/descriptive_catalogue/indexes/index-sanskrit.html I would be interested in finding reference to Dzogchen in Sanskrit or Chinese texts predating the arrival of Buddhism in Tibet. Since you have told me very confidently that commentaries on this Indian tantra, referencing a Dzogchen tradition, are composed in Sanskrit and come from India, you should be able to tell us where.

How very Buddhist of you, to call me an idiot. You truly embody the principle of no self, and the endeavor to perfect the wisdom of a bodhisattva. Are these commentaries extant in Indian texts? Do they have parallel translations in the Chinese canon, do you know? Most important early Vajrayana texts from India are also found in the Chinese canon. Do these commentaries reference the Dzogchen tradition by name? If so, what is the Sanskrit term for the school? There is a Digital Sanskrit Buddhist Canon hosted by the University of the West, which preserves extant Sanskrit manuscripts from this period in history. Could you find these commentaries for me in Sanskrit? It would not only be of great interest to me, but if you wrote an academic paper on the subject, you would likely become published (if it actually established a link between Dzogchen and India).

That is an Indian tantra, not a Dzogchen text of any kind (nor does it present itself as a Dzogchen text). If some people in Dzogchen use this tantra and its methods, it would still not establish a link between the Dzogchen tradition and India. That's like someone saying their Aikido came from Bruce Lee because they read one of his books on Kung Fu.

Exactly when did they ever make this distinction? It is nowhere in history, and you are just making things up as you go along. The Platform Sutra clearly indicates that Hongren was a buddha. Anyone who achieves Bodhi is a buddha, per the basic definition. No, these are not sources that pre-date the Tibetan tradition or that are established outside the Dzogchen lineage. In other words, there is no credible historical evidence whatsoever, except for a short list of names that supposedly covers about 1000 years. In other words, it was not a significant part of Indian Buddhism in any way. Some of the dalai lamas were great practitioners of a practice that is essentially one tradition within Tibetan Buddhism. I have never disagreed with that. What is wrong is for you to claim that Dzogchen has an Indian pedigree, when there is no historical evidence besides a very short list of names that comes from within the Dzogchen tradition. The issue of the Rainbow Body represents cultivation of the Sambhogakaya, or the karmic reward body of a buddha. In Zen, this can be cultivated directly with Anapana, same as with the early Buddhist schools and the arhats who had supernatural powers. It was against the rules of discipline for monks in China to show off supernatural powers, though. There are many stories in Zen history about masters making a final supernatural display immediately before death. Sometimes their body would shrink and shine like the Rainbow Body, transforming the elements of the body. Sometimes it would disappear except for a few bits of fingernails and hair. These are difficult to completely transform because they belong to the element of earth, which is very dense, and because they are constantly growing. So they were left behind as mementos for their disciples. In one case, a master quickly wrote a message to his students, tossed his pen across the room, and died immediately before the pen hit the floor. This was to show that he had completely mastered birth and death. These are all common accounts in Zen. Nan Huaijin is an enlightened Zen master as well, and he was also recognized as such by a khutuktu the Kagyu school 60-70 years ago, and given the title Vajra Master. He has explained the Rainbow Body and Anapana practice, and mentions that the Rainbow Body should not be taken as anything representing ultimate attainment in Vajrayana, just a transformation of the body.

Thanks, I appreciate that there are some people watching who can see this thread for what it is.

It is not wrong, and the Gelug school has always favored its own practices and Mahamudra. Alright, so can you give me a reputable source stating that Dzogchen was historically practiced in the other schools of Tibetan Buddhism as well? Baizhang, Mazu, Hongren, Linji, Caodong, Dogen.... Which sutras? In the Lotus Sutra, the Buddha says clearly that there is no valid distinction between men and women regarding enlightenment and buddhahood. This is also demonstrated by the female nagakanya becoming a buddha instantly. This is an important source for Mahayana Buddhist canon and always played an important role in establishing the ability of women to achieve buddhahood in Mahayana. It is also often cited by academics as the definitive proof that Mahayana accepts women as buddhas. It is extremely dubious, with most people supposedly living for hundreds of years. There is no actual contemporaneous history of Dzogchen in India, from any sources. Try to give me a source that pre-dates the introduction of Buddhism to Tibet by Padmasambhava. There are none, because Dzogchen is essentially a Tibetan tradition. There are no records of it before Tibet. I have an agenda to dispel ignorance about basic Buddhism. I've addressed all your points, and you are still extremely ignorant about the simplest history and teachings of Buddhism. If you actually read the sutras, you might learn something or develop some ability to see the relationships between the different traditions.

How can the natural state belong to sutras or tantras? Don't you see how foolish and irrelevant those classifications are? Mahamudra is a different tradition analogous to Dzogchen, and there is some controversy in Tibet among the schools about Dzogchen's historical links to the Bon religion, and the Dalai Lama's practice of Dzogchen which is viewed as unorthodox for the Gelug school. If you knew about the history of Buddhism, you might have realized these things. Dzogchen is a tradition related to the Nyingma school and was historically not part of the others. Zen does not emphasize esoteric anatomy because it is low level. However, most Mahayana sutras do speak in veiled language about esoteric transformations of the body. You would not know this because you have never actually studied Mahayana Buddhism. Direct introduction in Zen: Yes, Zen is essentially about direct introduction. Haven't you even read this: Buddhahood in one lifetime: Yes, there are many buddhas in the history of Zen. Buddhahood for females: Yes, all schools of Mahayana Buddhism include this. Distinguishing rigpa from sems: Yes, it is called Vipashyana, but it was viewed as skillful means. Just a meditation method, and not the ultimate. If Dzogchen was founded in India, what school was it a part of? What is its history in India? What was its Indian name? It is not part of the history of Indian Buddhism, or if it was, it was never noticeable or relevant as a school or practice. However, as I have already explained, the analogous practice was Prajnaparamita. Vajrahridaya is much better educated about Buddhism than you are, and experienced in the practice. He has already acknowledged the closeness between Zen and Dzogchen practices, which you would know about too if you actually studied Buddhism rather than trying in vain to teach things that you haven't even learned on a superficial level yourself.

And they were planning to bomb Germany 70 years ago, so they invented the Holocaust too, right? When every other country knows otherwise, and there are photos and video footage for everyone to see, it's only the conspiracy theorists and the cooks who believe otherwise. It is well known that many groups faced persecution during the Cultural Revolution, and the modern government of China does not try very hard to hide this fact. These are facts that the global community and the U.N. have known about from the very beginning. It was not even acceptable to practice Daoism in China 20-30 years ago, so the government promoted Qigong as a secular alternative for health rather than spiritual practice. Not only that, but it is still impossible to have a real party position in the government if someone does not declare themselves to be atheist. If you go anywhere outside of China, all the Chinese know about these things, as well as the other citizens. Most native Chinese people know about them as well, if they are not so ignorant as to stick their fingers in their ears and drown out the reality with the standard line of propaganda. The only people who deny these things are ignorant shills who cannot bear to face the reality.

The Chinese Buddhist Canon was disseminated to Japan and Korea during ancient times, and it was never actually destroyed in China. In fact, there were a few texts from the Yogacara school of Buddhism that were missing from the Buddhist canon in China long ago. In the 20th century prior to the revolution, the Chinese rediscovered these additional texts in Japan (originally transmitted by China in ancient times), and there was some real excitement among Chinese Buddhists. There was a lot of work done to standardize and modernize the understanding of Buddhism in the early 20th century in China, but that movement was destroyed by the Revolution and all the turmoil. In recent years it has resurfaced, and there are again Buddhists in China who are studying Yogacara. There is even some talk of using it to provide an extremely detailed analysis and critique of modern psychology. The Yogacara analysis of consciousness is so detailed and systematic that someone who has a deep understanding of it can analyze any phenomena of the mind with it.

Nan Huaijin brought a great deal of the Daoist canon to Taiwan when he left China, because he was worried about the classics of Buddhism, Daoism, and Confucianism being destroyed. There was another person who also helped to preserve the texts, but I can't remember his name. The Daozang (Treasury of the Dao) is fairly large: http://www.daoistcenter.org/ZH.gif If it were translated in its entirety into English, it would probably take three times the number of volumes, due to how compact ancient Chinese is. If the entire Chinese Buddhist canon were translated into English, it might be around 500 volumes.

I can experience it through the practice of certain mantras. However, it will not resurface and truly rise on its own yet because the yin has not been stripped off enough -- that is to say, there are still blockages in my legs. Anyone who has truly opened their legs will experience the yang qi. This is because the yin qi must first pass through the front of the legs, down through the feet and toes, and finally back up the back of the legs. If these passages have cleared, then the yang qi will rise naturally and the yin qi will fade away. The lotus position quickens this process, which is why Daoism emphasized this following its introduction into China. Anyone who has opened the legs to some degree is able to sit indefinitely in lotus position without pain. If someone practices in silence without creating thoughts, this will all happen in the natural order. That is why the high level texts don't explain these things in terms of the body and qi movement. If they did, people would snatch hold of these ideas about trying to recreate all these various phenomena, and that is something entirely different. The lower level texts explain all these things, but were naturally misinterpreted, so people thought that Daoist practice was a matter of mixing and circulating this and that. Just a technical matter of being clever and gathering all the right ingredients for the cake. This was totally different from the orthodox Daoism of the classical period. Now people can't even read Laozi without looking for secret Qigong methods. Originally Daoism stressed a mind of purity, stillness, virtue, and silence. The eyes see nothing, the ears hear nothing, and the mind creates no thoughts. Pre-heaven qi and post-heaven qi are essentially the same as yang qi and yin qi in this context. There is also pre-pre-heaven qi, but that is at a stage that is so far beyond that it isn't even worth talking about. "Post-heaven" refers to the sources of energy gained from mundane life through food and air. "Pre-heaven" refers to the primordial energy inherent in life. "Yang" here refers to the pure and the positive. "Yin" here refers to the turbid and negative. Post-heaven qi is propelled through the motion of the lungs and coarse breathing. Yang qi moves on its own accord naturally, which roughly coincides with the natural cessation of the breath. Yes, when the experiences and the descriptions match, then you are at the same point.

Of course if you have no practice, you won't understand a lot of what is in the Daoist classics. But if you don't take the time to study the Daoist classics, you won't have a larger understanding of the path. Then you will just drift around like many people do on this forum, going from one Qigong practice to the next. The whole thing devolves into complete nonsense when these people use totally different concepts and vocabulary borrowed haphazardly from New Age sources, and then they try to pass that off as Daoism. It's just a big joke.

It is true that some Daoist classics can be difficult to translate, but even these can still serve their purpose. Someone with experience can look at even a botched translation and pick up the original meaning. However, the language of most classics is not so difficult. Their symbolism may be more complex in the case of alchemical texts, but these are just one type. Most Daoist texts don't use elusive language, but the meaning is deep and may not be interpreted correctly by the reader. Thomas Cleary does a decent job, partially because he has translated so many other spiritual texts. Eva Wong is also decent as well. Both have put a great deal of effort into publishing original Daoist classics. Sadly, few so-called "Daoists" in the West ever take the time to read any of them. In the past, Daoists loved to study and collect knowledge about the Dao, which they viewed as being as valuable as treasure. Even the Chinese Daoist canon is called the "Treasury of the Dao." All accounts depict the Daoist sages as great lovers of learning who respected the classics and were eager to learn their methods. Now people aren't even willing to cough up $10 and a few hours to learn from them, because they would rather dabble in a modern craze. They are equally ignorant of even the most basic history. Is it any wonder that Buddhism and Hinduism are in good order, but Daoism is in such a poor state?