RongzomFan

life has been kicking my ass since since I was 4

Well I never said anything about meditation or ultimate origin of the universe. The only difference between a Buddha and a human is that a Buddha sees "reality" correctly. Thats where Dzogchen and other practices come in.

Was this for me? Or for someone else?

I thought I already did. This universe is dependently originated. Maybe research what that means. So if this universe is dependently originated, how can something independent like God interact with it. Because Mādhyamaka shows that everything that is dependently originated is empty (if you know what that means). If you still don't get it, read "The Middle Way" by the Dalai Lama. Thats where I got it from.

And all I am saying is don't tell me that distinguishing rigpa and sems is a feature of semde, when its not. Along with thogal, it is pretty much the highest teaching in buddhism.

Yes its a proof that there is no God or independent reality. There may be a deluded being, who misbelieves he is the Creator, but thats another story.

If there was a permanent independent God, he would not be able to interact with this universe, because this universe is dependently originated. The two natures are not compatible. Thus it would be meaningless to talk about God at all. Thats essentially what the Dalai Lama says in "the middle way" Everything that is dependently originated is empty (if you know what emptiness means).

I like how you keep posting the same thing over and over again. I have actually read Namdrol's writings on esangha for years. Rigpa is free from extremes because it is not bound by the dualistic mind. Thats why its view is compatible with Mādhyamaka. So again here it is about distinguishing rigpa from sems.

Actually this is in the distinguishing feature of the nying thig part of the Menngagde LOL jesus christ dude "Jigmé Lingpa’s differentiation of the two approaches is based on the distinction, particular to the Instruction Series (man ngag sde) of the Great Perfection, between the samsaric, conceptual mind (sems), and nirvanic, non-conceptual awareness (rig pa). The meditation practices of the Instruction Series found in the Longchen Nyingtig proceed on the basis of this distinction, which comes from the earliest Instruction Series scriptures, the Seventeen Tantras.[21] Therefore it is not surprising that Jigmé Lingpa insists upon the importance of the distinction. He argues that, if the meditator attempts to stop conceptual activity without distinguishing between mind (sems) and awareness (rig pa), the result is a blank indeterminacy (lung ma bstan). In awareness, he argues, conceptualisation is neutralised in a state that is “like a crystal ball”, a simile which points to clarity and vividness, rather than indeterminacy and blankness." -Sam van Schaik

I am only 12

Hi Vaj, I rely on interpretations by learned people like Namdrol, who used to explain Mādhyamaka on the old esangha forum and the Dalai Lama. In every teaching the Dalai Lama has given on Mādhyamaka, he always says discrepancy between appearances (thoughtforms) and reality. You can confirm this yourself. This is really the whole point of Mādhyamaka! Citing english translations means absolutely nothing to me. And Hi Sunya, I listen to actual Dzogchen teachers, so you can't float your own nonsense that you pass of as Dzogchen. Even the Dalai Lama says to distinguish rigpa and sems. And Jigme Lingpa is absolutely adamant on the issue, calling rigpa nirvanic pure and sems samsaric and impure. You can ask Namdrol on his blog. Don't take my word for anything. And of course in Mādhyamaka samsara=nirvana. I don't disagree with that at all. But please don't combine Dzogchen and Mādhyamaka into some sort of mish mash. They are not the same

Of course it does. Thats the entire point LOL. If you imagine President Obama, he only exists in your mind as a thoughform. Even if he was in front of you, your thoughtform of him would be relatively stable. But the actual reality is that the President's thoughts and emotions would be constantly fluctuating. Thus there is a discrepancy between appearances (thoughtforms) and reality. If you see your ipod on a table and you think "this ipod is mine", there is a discrepancy between that thoughtform and reality. The reality is that there is simply an ipod on the table. The same logic can be used for the thought "I" This is my understanding from a lifetime of Mādhyamaka study including the Dalai Lama's "The Middle Way".

I don't know who this Greg guy is, but he doesn't understand emptiness in the Mādhyamaka way. Emptiness in Mādhyamaka is merely a nonimplicative negation. In other words emptiness is just a denial of another philosophy's claim of self. Emptiness itself does not make a claim, therefore has none to defend. Emptiness also relates to the idea that there is discrepancy between every thoughtform and reality. On the other hand emptiness in Dzogchen simply means kadag (primordial purity), one of the three wisdoms of rigpa.

all these things come about via energy work in trance, and pretty quickly too within a couple of sessions

http://www.astraldynamics.com/home/new-energy-ways/using-new-full-tutorial/73-part-2-no-visualization.html Robert Bruce's method does not use the ability to literally see something behind closed eyes. It uses tactile imaging and body awareness. Basically doing everything by FEEL. Only when you develop clairvoyant abilities, can one actually literally see what they are picturing. Then Robert makes a further distinction between visualization (which is simply imagination) and clairvoyance, which is a psychic ability to actually literally see stuff.

Well its not just "simply" that. Advaita Vedanta has some buddhist influence, as my quotes above showed.

Advaita Vedanta is known to be developed from a combination of the Upanishads and buddhism, including Nagarjuna’s Madhyamaka. And even some of the Upanishads show direct buddhist influence.

Although I was condemning black magicians, black magicians don't usually physically harm others. They use magickal means, which is 100% legal. If anything at most they will use a drop or two of their own blood from a pin prick as offering to demons. Black magicians aren't that bad, as all magicians are generally super nerds and geeks. I just don't want them corrupting sacred teachings...which I know they would.

Would you rather have this information slip into the hands of black mages? There are a ton of magick forums, and lot of people practice black magick etc. Don't take my word for it, you can confirm yourself by going into the magick forums on the internet. Black magick takes EVERYTHING "white" and flips it to make it black. They do it with everthing from Golden Dawn magick (invert the pentagrams etc.), to Goetia (worship the demons instead of subjugating) to even enochian (angelic) magick. They can't help themselves! And my understanding is that this is the traditional concern as per Keith Dowman's commentary in "Flight of the Garuda"

Sorry another Robert Bruce thread. This forum is a little slow though. Robert Bruce has an interesting take on nonduality. Usually people take nonduality to be a state of mind. But Robert Bruce takes it further saying YOU are literally God. Everyone is a part of YOU. Everyone who prays to God all around the world is actually praying to YOU. Its crazy stuff, that sort of reminds me of some Vajrayana stuff I read about in Chakrsamvara tantra by David Gray. Robert Bruce uses this power to manifest stuff through verbal affirmations. Verbal affirmations apparently work on the astral plane where your "Higher Self" is more receptive. Maybe this is how eastern mantras work? He just came out with a new product on the Higher Self: Manifestation and Healing DVD

Did you all read these links? Even if you disagree its still an interesting, almost mind blowing perspective. And here is part of an email I sent him: That would be true robert On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 2:16 AM, <[email protected]> wrote: What if I said to you: "I am Source, and it is OTHER beings who have a sense of individual identity apart from me".

okkk

Ok and? What are you trying to prove? I don't support Ati-lite. I posted comments on the blog under a different handle that blasted ati-lite.

Please back up your statements. By the way, you can always confirm anything by asking Namdrol on his blog: www.atikosha.org Um, because they know better? I would rather listen to a knowledgeable Sakya loppon who has been initiated all the way on the Dzogchen path by multiple Dzogchen gurus than you.

do you have a point in this post? Also are you aware that in Dzogchen, compassion comes from abiding in rigpa? Its not something artificially manufactured like in other yanas. Longchenpa had some teachings regarding this which was quoted by Namdrol on the old esangha forum.