doc benway

I enjoy the similarity of discussions here and …

My pleasure, I don't mind but also not sure my answers will be satisfying! No, there is no renunciation in dzogchen whatsoever. That said, nearly every practitioner of dzogchen has at some point engaged in sutric or tantric practice, renouncing or committing to samaya vows but none of this is a part of the dzogchen path which is one of radical non-avoidance. No, I don't think it would accurate to say that. To posit an identity of any sort that takes the place of the individual, conditioned identity would be to simply substitute a more sophisticated conceptual identity which would continue the cycle as you point out. From the side of the absolute, there is no need tot fill that space created by the absence of self-identification. From the side of the conceptual mind, we need to fill that gap or we are unable to continue the dialogue, internally or externally. Consequently we can use terms and concepts to describe what is present when the self-identification drops away but these are simply conceptual labels that attempt to communicate characteristics of the ineffable, nothing more. We can list a variety of characteristics but must not mistake them for what they describe. Interestingly, what we describe when we engage in this exercise is not the absolute itself but only the obstacles we experience as a part of our samsaric nature. I hope that makes some sense. Anytime @whocoulditbe? PS - another way to say it is that if there is a sense of me present that is identifying with something, no matter how great or small, there is already subject/object duality present and this is a wrong not the dzogchen view

@liminal_luke and @Daniel I’ll leave it to others to quote Buddha Shakyamuni. I can best speak to the way I’ve been taught to practice and understand dzogchen. Dzogchen is unequivocally rooted in non-avoidance. The view is to be completely open to each and every moment. Consequently, all experience becomes the path. The sutric path is different. Avoidance of actions leading to negative karma is the method - renunciation. Tantric practice does not avoid but rather transforms. Dzogchen is a path of leaving experience just as it is, allowing full engagement and spontaneous liberation. The only thing that is extinguished, or maybe better to say seen through, is the illusion of my existence as a separate and independent agent. And this has to be spontaneous and experiential in nature, not conscious avoidance or denial. When the identification with a limited and separate sense of self is no longer as much of an obstacle, through grace, understanding, or practice, there is a profound and pervasive sense of completeness, of belonging, of being that is often described as great bliss. It is called great because it is unconditional, it is called bliss because there is no limitation or karmic traces related to identification with a separate and limited body and mind. As always this is just my flawed understanding and explanation, ymmv

Be safe my Mexican and Californian friends! ❤️

I haven’t read much of this thread but wanted to comment on this. One error in your argument can be seen in the comments above. Non-duality is not something one escapes into. There is no severing of pain and holding on to joy. Non-duality is not in any way devoid of experience, not at all blank in any sense. These are wrong views. I’m coming from a dzogchen background so I am not referring to nirvana as non-duality. Non-duality embraces both nirvana and samsara in the dzogchen paradigm.

For me, this instruction is inviting me to look inside and to find something in myself that is similar to what I can observe in the natural world around me. It is not overly obvious or explicit, it is subtle and deep. It is something to which I'm often disconnected. It's qualities include spontaneity, purity, and authenticity among others. It cannot be created or destroyed, it cannot be grasped or even named in a meaningful way, but it is very real and the ultimate resource.

I don’t need an amulet for that!

I love this little parable by Anthony Demello on the relationship between spirituality and religion. ”After many years of labour an inventor discovered the art of making fire. He took his tools to the snow-clad northern regions and initiated a tribe into the art — and the advantages — of making fire. The people became so absorbed in this novelty that it did not occur to them to thank the inventor who one day quietly slipped away. Being one of those rare human beings endowed with greatness, he had no desire to be remembered or revered; all he sought was the satisfaction of knowing that someone had benefited from his discovery. The next tribe he went to was just as eager to learn as the first. But the local priests, jealous of the stranger’s hold on the people, had him assassinated. To allay any suspicion of the crime, they had a portrait of the Great Inventor enthroned upon the main altar of the temple; and a liturgy designed so that his name would be revered and his memory kept alive. The greatest care was taken that not a single rubric of the liturgy was altered or omitted. The tools for making (ire were enshrined within a casket and were said to bring healing to all who laid their hands on them with faith. The High Priest himself undertook the task of compiling a Life of the Inventor. This became the Holy book in which his loving kindness was offered as an example for all to emulate, his glorious deeds were eulogized, his superhuman nature made an article of faith. The priests saw to it that the Book was handed down to future generations, while they authoritatively interpreted the meaning of his words and the significance of his holy life and death. And they ruthlessly punished with death or excommunication anyone who deviated from their doctrine. Caught up as they were in these religious tasks, the people completely forgot the art of making fire.”

99.9% of climate scientists agree that climate change is real AND significantly impacted by human behavior, an unprecedented concordance. And their conclusions are in opposition to the interests of the deepest pockets on the planet… About 30-40% of Americans don’t believe them. That lack of belief IMO is directly related to trust. Similar statistics regarding natural selection. People choose their paradigms and are skilled at reifying and defending them.

The question is how many are aware of this?

Unpopular opinion #37: Nearly everything everyone says here is an expression of their own personal condition and experience and has relatively little to do with the outside world.

China

Make Dao Great Again!

My new slogan - MDGA

I appreciate you sharing your ideas and experience. The only thing I feel is slightly different for me is that we don't become one with the magnificence of universe, rather my experience is that we become aware of our magnificence as the universe, never having been separate from it for an instant, only unaware. Mine too.... _/\_

Another consideration is the audience to whom Rinpoche is speaking. For many of us there is effort required to recognize our disconnection, to return to the presence and fullness of this moment, and to remain connected, living from that openness. The novice needs a reminder, support, and effort. @silent thunder describes a relatively mature and stable relationship with his essence, a rare and beautiful thing. 🙏🏼❤️🙏🏼

Did I? I don't recall ever feeling that way about you personally and have no recollection of calling you a cancer. I did, and do, feel that way about the fake-conservative, fake-christian, alt-right fascist movement in US politics. It directly threatens the lives and well being of millions of women, non-whites, immigrants, and LGBTQ human beings in my country, including many close friends and family. If you identify with that group of sick authoritarian bullies then there's not much more for me to say other than good riddance. Somehow I can't picture you as a part of that cult but one never knows. I have nothing against you personally and genuinely apologize for offending you. I've never felt anything but warmth for you in my heart and I have always enjoyed your presence and contributions here. All that said, I feel less connection to the forum lately. I've taken an indefinite break from moderating and if it's me keeping you away, that may not be much of an issue moving forward.

I feel the same as Luke. I miss a lot of folks that were affected by the ban. Here are some interesting laws on the books in my home state - https://www.onlyinyourstate.com/maryland/crazy-laws-md/ One of them is that it's against the law to take a lion to the movies, WTF?!

Absolutely, if what we study and practice is real then every appearance is ultimately ME and all love and warmth I send outward is benefiting ME as well as others.

Years ago a very time consuming and tedious part of my job was dictating reports on my interaction with people. I hated it, such a waste of time! I returned to work after a 10 day silent retreat and it completely shifted Every dictation was like a mantra. As I chanted the words I could feel the person in my heart and I could feel a warm and loving sense of healing radiating to them with every word I uttered. It was beautiful and completely unexpected. I tried to share my experience with my colleagues but they thought I was crazy, they didn’t have the ears to hear what I was saying. Now most of our documentation is clicking buttons and typing into an app though I still dictate some of it. Not quite as easy to feel the love but still possible.

In my understanding, dzogchen is far more than a training method. The label dzogchen encompasses our view and understanding of reality, our training method, our daily interaction with the world through our behavior, and the ultimate outcome or fruition of engaging in this path. The basic tenet is that reality is absolutely perfect just as it is. Enlightenment is always already present in us but obscured by karma and habit. Nothing has ever needed to be changed, nothing added or subtracted. This radical view has been the subject of criticism and controversy from earliest times to the present day. I've seen people get quite frustrated, indignant, even angry when trying to come to grips with the view in teachings. One important point is that this view is from the side of the mind's essence which is primordially pure and perfect. All the qualities of enlightenment, such as the ten paramitas and four immeasurables are already alive in us just waiting to be unveiled. And the avenue to reach that is through doing and changing absolutely nothing whatsoever. In the dzogchen paradigm, each of these four - view, meditation, conduct, and fruition is precisely the same as the other three. That is they are inseparable other than as an artificial distinction for the sake of communication and learning. Just thought I'd add more fodder for discussion. It's one of my favorite topics.

In teachings I've received this distinction between mindfulness and resting in the nature of mind is considered very important. Mindfulness necessarily implies subject-object duality, a sense of subject is present who is remaining mindful or observing. Mindfulness may be defined differently in Mahamudra, I know very little about it, but this is one difference between the two from the Bön dzogchen perspective as far as I've come to understand. Dzogchen abiding, or trekchod, involves releasing even the effort or focus associated with remaining mindful into the spaciousness and immediacy of the present moment. One technique for doing this is precisely what CT mentions. A thought invariably arises and is allowed to be as it is. If it releases effortlessly, we simply continue to abide but when the watcher arises, the instruction is to turn the attention toward the watcher and simply observe. There is nothing there, nothing to grasp. The watcher is now watching itself and extinguishes itself, and that openness and freshness is where dzogchen practice occurs. Similar to mindfulness, there is a need to maintain this "state" of abiding and there are aspects of the awareness that are engaged in identifying when we have disconnected and so forth. This is a subject of some of the more subtle and advanced understandings of the practice. The other thing I'll share is that in the dzogchen teachings I've received, no distinction is made between practicing with appearances and practicing with awareness. This may be a difference between Bön and Buddhist traditions or between Mahamudra and dzogchen teachings in general, I don't know. The two, appearance and awareness, are inextricably related. It is said in the dzogchen teachings that when sounds, lights, and rays (eg any appearances, including thought and feeling) present to the ordinary mind through the sense gates these appearances are impure and karmic traces are generated. When those same appearances present to the mind's essence, they are pure and inherently perfect, generating no karmic traces. This is the source of the name "dzogchen" and is the basis for the practice of thodgal. The general idea in dzogchen is to practice with the senses fully open, including the eyes. The sense gates are open but unfocused on anything in particular. Once stability in this mode of abiding is achieved sitting quietly and undisturbed on the meditation cushion, the instruction is to begin to integrate this with all appearances in an active fashion. The behavior as described in dzogchen instruction is that all appearances become the path, this is what we "work" with in what is referred to as informal practice - everything that presents itself is the path. Of course, it takes time to get to the point where our precision and stability allow this level of integration. There is a book by His Eminence Tenzin Namdak Rinpoche, the most senior Bön practitioner currently alive, called Bönpo Dzogchen. It is largely a relatively comprehensive comparison of dzogchen to other methods of practice, including Mahamudra. If anyone is interested in the theoretical basis of sutra, tantra, and dzogchen and how they relate to each other and other specific practices from a Bön perspective, it's a very good resource. As I recall it even addresses differences and similarity between Bön and Buddhist dzogchen. One caveat, my knowledge and experience are very limited, especially my scholarship and theoretical knowledge. Take everything I say with a heaping tablespoon of salt. One last thing I'll mention is that there are four distinct lineages of dzogchen teachings in Bön. The first and most treasured is the Zhangzhung Nyengüd, said to be an unbroken transmission of the teachings (oral only until the 8th century then written down) from the Nature of Mind itself, Samantabhadra, to the present time. The others are A-Tri, Drakpa Korsum, and Yetri Thasel. Each lineage has slightly different emphasis and qualities but again, all have comparable view, meditation, behavior, and conduct.

I think there are some differences in form and character. I don't think they affect the essence of the view, practice, or fruition. The lineage and iconography are certainly different with some overlap. There are some who believe Bön dzogchen came from India however Bönpos attribute their dzogchen teachings to Tonpa Shenrab and central Asia. You do see some variation in language, emphasis and metaphors in the teachings. Bönpo teachings often incorporate terms from the Zhangzhung language but I think there are some differences even in the use of Tibetan and Sanskrit at times. Bön teachings tend to be a bit more sparse, metaphorical and practice focused than much of the Buddhist scripture I've read but I've received little in the way of teachings in Buddhist dzogchen so qualify my comments. I've been told that the presentation of trekchod and thogal teachings differs a bit between the two, but for all intents and purposes I believe the view, practices, and result are essentially the same.

It appears that Steve Gray, aka Starjumper, has passed on. Steve was a frequent participant here over the years. He was brash, outspoken, and entertaining. He was a practitioner and teacher of Chinese martial arts and neigong and author of A Lineage of Dragons and Zhan Zhuang Power Secrets. I did not always see eye to eye with Steve but I am sorry to hear of his passing. My condolences go out to his loved ones. Rest in Peace @Starjumper