Apech

I meant the question in a simple sense. But I saw a vid of Namkhai Norbu called an introduction to dzogchen and it was a basic run through of the path starting with 4 Noble Truths. This is the same approach as mahamudra and lam rim which are definitely presented as 'buddhist' in this sense. I just wondered if someone was teaching Dzogchen as a totally separate thing (ignoring Bon for amoment) if you see what I mean.

Like that famous Lama - Lobster Rampa known for his unshellfish nature. (sorry)!

Dzogchen is not Buddhism in your view?

he was also a Legalist ... in fact he was in philosophical terms what in the west would be called a Renaissance man.

I like to think they met up for a drink now and then.

I think a lot of people confuse that intellectual arguments for emptiness and no-self with the realisation of the same. Hence the barrage of fruitless arguments which prevail. Without rehearsing all those arguments I would say that the Buddhist view in my experience steers us more to a paradoxical situation where you both exist and don't exist at the same time and going for either complete absence of self (non-existence) or an eternal indestructible self is a kind of cop out. The philosophy is supposed to loosen your attachment to whatever it is you are clinging on to so that you can more easily go to the actual experience of seeing things as they really are. Part of the process is living with the paradox. That Buddhism and Advaita take different views and approaches is a good thing as in this way more people with different preferences of thought and action can be guided to liberation. There is no need to conflate the two or even choose one as superior to the other. People follow which ever path draws them through personal karmic connection and hopefully respect the other way. This is what great teachers seem to do and I don't see why we should do any different.

Thanks for that clarification. So bodhicitta is being translated as 'pure and total consciousness' ... well maybe there are reasons for this in terms of Dzogchen terminology but its an unusual translation ... indeed I would have thought that bodhicitta is familiar enough to everyone to leave untranslated.

I think its unlikely that this term would be used in this way in this context. The reason I asked is that translation of terms from sanskrit and tibetan which relate to consciousness is a minefield of nuance and misunderstanding. This is well known by translators. There are a number of words like citta, manas and so on which could be termed mind or awareness and so on as well as vijnana which as has been pointed out appears in the 12 steps of dependent origination and does not exist without an object. The idea of a kind of free floating overall consciousness is absent in Buddhist terminology as far as I am aware ... but of course many writers and speakers talk as if it is a valid Buddhist concept. So if anyone has the root text of the dzogchen material it would be interesting to see what term is being used here and rendered as consciousness. Without this the debate is going to be fruitless and circular.

My weaknesses are manifold.

Does anyone know which sanskrit/tibetan word is translated as consciousness in the text being quoted?

Spoke too soon.

Sorry for the long wait I must have nodded off. I have no real idea what no. 30 means except it sounds like when you wait ages for a bus and then two turn up at once. LOL.

What's going on ... people are being nice to each other.

Just as out of interest ... I was reading the intro to Shaughnessy's I Ching (a translation of the Mawangdui text) and he comments on the order of the hexagrams given in this version being different to the received King Wen version. He then goes on to suggest that because of some textual indicators that there are reasons to believe that the received version (King Wen attributed) is actually older than the Mawangdui version. Which intrigued me as it reminds us that just because a version is the oldest archeological find does not make it either 'the original' or even authoritative. There is a tendency in academics to want pare everything back to the supposed pure original. I think this idea has to be handled with care. Also since he has been mentioned I find myself a huge fan of Wang Bi based on reading Lynn's translations of both the DDJ and the YiJing. In the intro to the DDJ there is Wang Bi's discussion of non-being which I think is excellent and clear. To think this man only lived to be 23! What more would he have done if he had survived longer.

After speaking of his own meditational experience, endurance, and several accomplishments – such as his ability to walk across a river without getting wet – Milarepa told Gampopa that his practice of meditation for enlightenment was like an attempt to squeeze oil out of sand: no such result is possible. Milarepa further told him that by practicing his path of method (thabs lam), he would soon see the essence of mind; it is the sesame seed that gives oil. When Gampopa protested that the Kadampa also had mantric teachings, Milarepa declared these to be mere lower mantra, containing theoretical explanations but devoid of crucial practical instructions on how to attain enlightenment. Having received Milarepa's instructions, Gampopa started with the practice of vital energy (rlung). Soon he started to have experiences that he had never had before. Then, although Gampopa had already received the Bde mchog (Cakrasaṃvara) initiation from his earlier teacher, for auspicious (rten 'brel ) purposes, Milarepa initiated him once again. He also imparted other instructions and practices, above all the caṇḍālī (gtum mo, inner-heat, lit. fierce woman) practices. The teachings and initiations Gampopa received from Milarepa included: instructions on caṇḍālī, a Cakrasaṃvara Initiation, exercises for channels and vital energies (rtsa rlung 'khrul 'khor), blessings bestowed within a restrictive oral lineage (snyan rgyud), dohā, sublime caṇḍālī, and the Six Doctrines of Nāropa. The final advice that Milarepa gave as he sent Gampopa off contains some of his most important instructions. The lama's advice, which may have greatly shaped Gampopa's life, ranged from how one should live as a successful practitioner to mahāmudrā, the reality of all phenomena. Thirteen months after Gampopa's arrival, Milarepa told him that although Gampopa had yet to gain mastery over the channels and vital energies (rtsa rlung dbang thob pa), he had made them serviceable (las su rung ba), and therefore no longer needed to stay with him. He said Gampopa had already received the requisite teachings and now only needed to perfect his practice. Milarepa instructed Gampopa to practice alone until he saw the essence of mind. At that point he should receive and teach students, and go to Sgam po, where he would benefit many in the future. Then, having walked up to the bridge to bid Gampopa farewell, Milarepa said: "Let us, father and son, talk; take off your backpack and sit here." Gampopa emotionally prostrated himself and, raising his head, touched it to the feet of Milarepa who sat on one side of the bridge. Gampopa shed many tears, which Milarepa, delighted, called a very good sign. Milarepa handed Gampopa a gold-colored myrobalan146 and a flint, and told him he would need them as he faced difficult choices and downs in his practice. Milarepa then introduced him to the inseparability of the mind- and-energies of mahāmudrā. Having said, "You are to be a perfected meditator," Milarepa went on to say: "O son, abandon your pride in your ancestors. Cut the ties to your relatives. Destroy the ties of attachment to this material world. Practice all teachings as a totality. Direct your prayers to me, an old man." Milarepa taught him that mantric practice could be successful only with secrecy, cautioned not to sell dharma for material benefits, and that practice, not knowledge, is what counts. He said one should not trust those who have dharma only in their mouths, but rather should trust one's own commitment and the words of one's lama. He further advised Gampopa not to associate with those who had a high level of any of the three poisons for that would obscure his practice. Milarepa said: There are people who ask who your lama is and what dharma you practice. If you tell the truth, they won't believe it, but a flame-like anger will burn in them and then cause both them and others to create karma and thus go to lower realms. There are people whose desire is like boiling water: they keep accumulating all kinds of odds and ends, thinking they might need them one day when they get old. They engage in a wrong livelihood, saying they need wealth to accumulate merit. There are people whose ignorance is like a thick dark night: they say now is not the time to meditate on absolute truth; it is impossible to attain enlightenment within one lifetime. The statement that whoever stays over seven nights among "hearers" (nyan thos, śrāvaka) commits the seventh transgression, also applies to cases like these. Milarepa warned Gampopa to be cautious, patient, friendly, and keep very clean, and pay little heed to superstition. Go for retreat in mountains, never give up your lama even if you regard your mind as enlightened, never fail to accumulate even the slightest merits, never overlook even the tiniest sin, and never criticize any individual or the teachings. Milarepa sent Gampopa off, asking him to come to the mountain of Brin and Snye nam on the fourteenth day of the month of horse and in the year of the hare.

The 'colums' mentioned int he text are 1. sutrayana 2. mantrayana and 3. mahamudra.

Yes that may be a widely held view but here is another view from the same source text quoted in OP:

The original text I quoted in the OP says that Gampopa was actually teaching mahamudra as transmitted by Milarepa ... but which had come to Milarepa from Maitripa via Marpa. That is Marpa held two lineages thus: direct lineage is Vajradhara Tilopa Naropa Marpa Milarepa Gampopa indirect lineage vajradhara Ratnamati Saraha Nagarjuna Savaripa Maitripa Marpa Milarepa Gampopa the indirect lineage is specifically concerned with the transmission of mahamudra. In the first lineage mahamudra is used as a term specifically to refer to the eventual awakened state but there is no practice or method called mahamudra, while in the second there is a mahamudra method which centres around preparation for a transmission of mahamudra. Shamatha would be used as a preparatory tool to prepare the mind for transmission.

I have learned that although I may be crazy there is always someone more crazy than me

Before you say it I know we have a lot of subs now but I think we/I would benefit from another one. I'm doing some study of the I Ching at the moment and did a google search on TBs and there a few threads but they are well hidden. I think a while ago we tried to have a regular thread on it but it didn't continue. A lot from the I Ching feeds into other areas like the Bagua trigrams - what they mean and the two main arrangements ... the concept of yin and yang of course. Many people use it without understanding its structure and lost of opportunities to share source material - if it was all together in one place. Anyway please give it some thought. Over to you Mod Gods ... I prostrate myself humbly before thee.

The arrangements of the bagua are important. No idea about the image.

I suppose that's what makes it the mystic tablet ... no one can make out what the hell's going on

Yes they are reversed well spotted.

And yet some of you attempt to claim Gampopa as your own. I am not a Dzogchenpa so this is not a problem to me.