yabyum24

That's clear enough.

This perhaps: Ask your monk about Viññanam anidassanam. It looks like he's conflating the cessation of the activity of consciousness with the cessation of consciousness.

Just pour in some boiling volition and stir with the spoon of delusions and your drink is ready.

There are different approaches to this but it's fair to say (as in the Dhammapada) that "mind is the forerunner of all actions". In any kind of meditation - stabilization is going to help, and this can be developed in various ways. A measure of tranquility enables a contemplative to direct (or not) his mind. Both physical and mental energy work are options - the link between mind and energy is well known. I'm not sure to what extent one can entirely transform a physical body (beyond a slight improvement) but there is also the astral body which can be developed and this is linked to development in the waking state.

Thanks for sharing.

I've seen instructions for this practice but I was wondering what its purpose is exactly. Something to do with energy but does anyone have any more precise details.

I know, but does it quite cut it for you personally? Non-affirming negations? It's still in some way playing the ontology game it seems. Perhaps, it genuinely does for some people but for most, it's just a "better view" than those they refute.

But you can't "put an end to them" with better or even more refined views. You either engage in view-making/negating of one kind or another, or drop the whole shebang. As I understand it, the advantage of Dzogchen etc. is that they don't entertain ontological views. They have no need to.

I love it. I posited an undifferentiated awareness! That bugger must have just slipped out.

That's the irrelevant bit of the whole thing. What difference does any of that make at all. I don't understand any of that but if I fit neatly into one of your conceptual boxes, then good for you. It's one less loose-end to resolve.

Oh. Okay then.

It all depends on how they're interpreted IMHO. I don't like ontology, which according to Simple_Jack makes me a Buddhist realist - whatever that is... ... as opposed to an Unrealist? Idealist? Space Cadetist? No idea.

Now you are joking.

No, I like expositions of the two truths - it's a perfectly valid notion, as long as one doesn't consider it has anything to do with ontology. I don't think you get where I'm at on this at all.

That must be why I like his stuff so much, being a realist (Simple_Jack definition) myself.

I owe a lot to wooly new-agers and back-dated hippies. When I was a kid there was no alternative to the working class lifestyle which surrounded me and everyone I knew was unquestioningly signed up to it. You're at school only as long as necessary before you got a "proper" job. You find a girlfriend, get her pregnant, marry her, watch football and a few years (and marriages) later die of smoke, alcohol & lifestyle induced misuse. That was it. But I always had a deep feeling that there had to be more to it than that. When I finally drifted into further education (the first in my family) it was an eye-opener. Here were young people (and lecturers) doing things, believing things and discussing stuff I'd never heard of and I wanted to know a lot more. Nowadays 'alternative' is mainstream - everyone has heard of some kind of stuff, and there's the internet for the curious. Back then it was a mysterious door, opening on a whole new world. Rare books passed from hand-to-hand, small, informal groups meeting in flats. So, no - give a new-ager a hug. They're courageous in their own way. The young ones get abuse from their trendy "clone" peers. The old ones just get scoffed at. I'd share my muesli bar with any of them, even if "$$alternative-plc.££" is a mass product and not what it used to be.

Spot on. Here's a guys who has the balls to point out that the Emperor is naked. This has been a major gripe of mine for ages too. He's summed it up perfectly. Absolutely nailed it.

RongzomFan Tantric Approach to Attaining Tummo Reading a book ...as per the OP.

Okay, you're not going to say, so it's pointless me asking.

So, what's changed since then?

Well, tummo along with the 6 yogas and various deities belong to the Anuttarayoga class of tantras. Dzogchen belongs to the Nyingma system. I'd always believed that they had their own unique tantric practices, which differentiated them from the Anuttarayoga. Rushan, tregchöd, Thödgal, Rigpa, Rainbow Body etc. Look at this link See? That's what I mean. Where's the mention of tummo or karmamudra? And:

That's fine RongzomFan. Nobody expects anyone else to have all the answers. If you don't understand, then don't worry.

Wow. There's a first time for everything I guess. But I bet you'll have a peek nonetheless. In any case, it's obvious you were avoiding the question.

As Yascra rightly said "Tummo fire practice has stages." It's by default gradualist and not spontaneous, so why do Dzogchenpas do it when they have more direct means?

But why? It's a gradualist training.