ralis
-
Content count
13,827 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
55
Everything posted by ralis
-
There is much rumor that his body is shrinking which is a manifestation of the 'rainbow body'. If so, then a precise accounting must be presented to the public. http://www.phayul.com/news/article.aspx?id=36974
-
Thom Hartmann has written a number of books on this subject and are well worth the read. http://www.amazon.com/Edison-Gene-ADHD-Hunter-Child-ebook/dp/B004GEAWOK/ref=la_B000AQ449C_1_6?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1452361827&sr=1-6
-
That fits my city of Santa Fe quite well. What city are you in if I may ask?
-
It has been decades since I read this book and if I remember correctly, it may touch on this subject. Although, I can't be absolutely certain. http://www.amazon.com/Spiritual-Choices-Problem-Recognizing-Transformation/dp/0913729191/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1452359635&sr=1-1&keywords=spiritual+choices
-
I guess one should have 'no view'? Just stating "I am a Buddhist" is a point of view. Your posts state a point of view.
-
There was a Tibetan Lama that gave a weekend teaching here in Santa Fe back in the early 90's, who worked in a psychiatric hospital in London. During the weekend, he was asked as to why he didn't teach meditation to the patients. His response was that meditation in almost any form could have negative effects if a person was not mentally balanced. Ken Wilbur stated similar concerns in an interview in East West Journal back in the 80's. He was responding to the idea that meditation can cure psychological problems. He adamantly stated that psychological problems can be worsened due to the fact that a weak sense of self/ego when undermined by meditation can have serious consequences.
-
Tonglen can be risky for anyone with psychological problems. Some may downplay that aspect, but there are persons that should not practice certain techniques.
-
All views are hindrances? I don't agree with that whatsoever. One can have a flexible view that allows for evolution or unlimited potential. Read my post on maps for an explanation as to why I don't concur.
-
There is very little comparison of tantra and Dzogchen.
-
The use of terms such as empty, no self and so forth are extremely misleading and quite frankly serve very little utility in this or any other discourse. Such terms are posited as two extremes e.g. self, no self, which denote absolute points, but with no posited variables between the two points. A more plausible way of seeing these terms in a different light is to understand that semantics are nothing more than maps/models which convey meaning and is never a one-one relationship between the map and the territory. Maps display nothing more than probabilities which are not absolute and such are always <1.
-
This thread is moving off topic. Please discuss Dzogchen.
-
There is a critical part of the teaching that you are missing out on.
-
I am tired of debating with you since you have very little comprehension of what I have written here. Wells made it very clear in a recent post as to what the natural state is and one's relationship to such state. Given that you have never studied Dzogchen, asking questions is apropos as opposed to comparing and contrasting different systems. Go back to the Dharmawheel and debate there.
-
We have had enough Malcolm quotes. Simple_Jack before he was banned from here incessantly posted Malcolmisms.
-
You feel I know nothing? There are many of my posts on that page and I stated that one can witness and still be in the natural state. To repeat, the OP is in regards to Dzogchen, not Mahamudra. There are differences between the two. The pointing out instructions in Dzogchen have nothing to do with receiving a 'big vibe'.
-
Never once did I state anything regarding mindfulness. Pointing out is different from what one believes is a transmission. A Dzogchen teacher points out.
-
Obviously you have not taken any Dzogchen teachings and have no right to critique the OP.
-
Again may I remind you that the discussion is in regards to Dzogchen and not Advaita.
-
I didn't understand and therefor am ignorant in your opinion? On what factual basis are you making this judgement? Were you there in 1989? Actually, I understand more than you could possibly imagine!
-
One thing about Norbu that some may not understand is that he said, that the Dzogchen master that transmits the natural state is always in the natural state by default. Norbu was a professor at the University of Naples for years and is now retired. If he was always in the natural state without fail and was able to carry on his professorial responsibilities, then I rather doubt that he was in a state of permanent no thought.
-
That is not what Norbu taught me back in 1989. I can still see and hear him discussing this point. Thoughts liberate into their own energy, but that does not mean no thought is the goal. He specifically stated that to have no thought is an error. Perhaps you are confusing Dzogchen with Advaita.
-
edit
-
The problem is that very few in this world will ever have a personal relationship with a teacher that allows time for in depth discourse. It is not going to happen unless one is a trust fund baby (I know a few that have). Vows limit most Lama's as to what they can discuss unless of course one conducts a three year retreat. The assumption coning from the hierarchy is that all are somehow ignorant. I refuse to accept that.
-
One can engage in thought and no thought at the same time. If you had correct instruction from Norbu you would understand that. I guess you have two contexts for your life. One is normal everyday mundane thinking. Lastly, on the weekend you switch into the being mode Much love? This is a public forum so please refrain from sweet and sugary feel good stuff.
-
You are confusing the whole one with Brahma trip with universal individuality. I happen to think for myself and refuse to be a parrot.
