C T

Are you a promoter of real spirituality then? Im interested to hear what it means.

Tantra throws lots of curve balls too right.... At speed. If one hopes for serenity, quietude etc best not to work with that path.

Of course. Surely it wont help to fall into the error of imagining that relative considerations are somehow anathema, regardless of the proportion of time spent immersed in the View of the great perfection.

My understanding is that one's primordial nature from beginningless time has never been separated, fragmented, or incomplete. Since there is no fragmentation, the question of merging (becoming one?) is moot, but I can understand where there are those who struggle with the concept of an already perfect self nature. After all, its common to form the assumption that if we are thusly perfect, there is nothing to do, right.... so why exert effort to practice? The short answer is that practice stabilises the View, which at the beginning is rather fragile (see that analogy of the newborn in that quote you dug up). Doing anything does not make it more perfect, and not doing anything does not hinder/reduce its perfected quality.... so, from the Dzogchen perspective, the encouragement is to gain confidence in the knowledge of this primordial completeness aka great perfection. In a nutshell, Dzogchen introduces the unmistakable View, and tantric methods cement that recognition of the View until its completely integrated in being ie body, speech and mind attains adamantine clarity, like buddhas.

I don't see the contradiction between what was said then and now. If you can point it out more specifically perhaps we can work around it and hopefully dissolve that seeming confusion?

Thats how it went across because ideally we dont want to get hung up and fumble on terminologies, I hope. That realization/actualization of the qualities you mentioned is what "Embodiment" refers to. This embodiment is effected post-connection. Connection is the point of contact - embodiment is the process of establishing a continuum of contact, if that makes any sense.

Perhaps a more workable terminology would be Embodiment rather than connection. At least thats how it goes in authentic Guru Yoga wrt to fruition. There's also the ground and path prior to that (fruition), although these may not necessarily be linear since a true refuge seeker will ultimately realize the inseparability of the yanas, kayas, and so forth, culminating in Ekayana, or solitary vehicle of reality (which is beyond past, present and future, and where notions of Is or Is Not no longer applies). As the layers of delusion peel away, this inseparability can be seen with increasing clarity. Teachers like to use the metaphor of the moon gradually appearing as if to emerge from behind the clouds when in fact the moon neither appears or disappears but conventionally thats how people think. So tantra comes in to help with deconstructing the rigidities of such conventions. Ekayana fruition combines working with the View (which the Vajradhara points out to the ripened mindstream of the practitioner) and then supported afterwards with the various yogas to gain stability of that View (for eg Mahayoga - learning to be fearless in terms of working with negative emotions, Anuyoga - learning to transform desires, and finally Atiyoga - the direct way to cut thru ignorance). Symbols are often used, as you said, but these are by no means the limit in terms of practical applications as there is a vast array of resources available for the enjoyment of the serious (or playful.... both works) yogi or yogini.

~ Tsoknyi Rinpoche ~ Carefree Dignity: Discourses on Training in the Nature of Mind What usually happens is that whenever something is seen or heard, we feel that it demands our attention. We fall under the command of the visible form being seen and we feel that we have to get involved in discriminating what it is. So we stay busy attaching values and defining and pigeon-holing it. If a sound occurs, we immediately think, “I have to listen to that sound.” We get caught up again and again, trapped in discriminating whether we like the sensation or don't like it; whether we must accept it or reject it. That very process is the creation of karma, right there. That is what we are trying to step out of right now through meditation training.

~ James Low ~ Thoughts are very fragile; they don’t live very long and they can’t do very much. There is no end to thinking and thoughts do not establish anything reliable. However, we use these thoughts to create the whole world. Every day we are constructing this great edifice of samsara with our thoughts. Thoughts are very young, they like to play. Let them play. The point here is, don’t ask your thoughts to give you the meaning of existence. They cannot do that. Don’t ask thoughts to do what they can’t do… …Tantra is a path of activity, and one of its strengths is that it gives us something to do. There are mudras to do with your hands, a dorje and bell to hold, instruments to play, things to read, and many things to visualise. The beauty and the skilful organisation of these patterns of movements allows such a focus of attention that there is no spare aspect of the mind to be caught up in distraction. In tantra you are working with energy, with the transformation of your experience of what is occurring. However, in Dzogchen, one is concerned simply to relax into the natural purity of the open state…

Perhaps there were simply too many referential points at that time. These can be really obstructive, at least from the view of authentic buddha-tantra and Dzogchen practice. As Dilgo Khyentse Rinpoche said, "Referentiality is the process by which we retreat from the direct experience of everyday life." Being present (a term so often used to imply something positive and affirming) can trigger fears too, more so when we are not properly attuned to the possibility and also the means by which to cut through the barriers of habitual emotional patterns which is where fears and other neuroses are rooted.

Within the exclusive context of Vajrayana (not inferring or alluding or comparing with any other traditions in the hope of avoiding confusion), the idea of "Sharing Rigpa" is not a thing - In its proper setting, and under the assumption that all the factors and conditions are in place, the guide/master/guru introducing the nature of mind to ripened receptacles (a more appropriate term than recipient) of such an intro is not doing anything in particular, as for example in the case of some traditions where some transference of energy is passed from master to initiate, but simply pointing out, at the precise moment, when the receptacle is resting in its pristine state beyond the three times, and then the student will have an unmistaken recognition of what the nature of mind is. But its easy to see how rigpa can be misconstrued as some kind of energetic force, like chi or kundalini.

The seed of fetters are not sown by appearances but by the simultaneous birth of aversion and craving upon sense contact.

~ Dzongsar Khyentse Rinpoche ~ In Buddhist philosophy, anything that is perceived by the mind did not exist before the mind perceived it; it depends on the mind. It doesn't exist independently, therefore it doesn't truly exist. That is not to say that it doesn't exist "somewhat". Buddhists called the perceived world relative truth - a truth that is measured and labeled by our ordinary minds. In order to qualify as ultimate truth, it must not be fabricated, it must not be a product of the imagination, and it must be independent of interpretation.

The wholeness of a knife lies in its sharpness. A knife does not sharpen itself - it needs contact with a whetstone, yes? In this contact three exhaustions occur - the exhaustion of the whetstone, the exhaustion of the metal and the exhaustion of effort. In this is completeness understood.

With thousand yard stare Big Brother knows your secrets tax dodgers beware!

~“We do not say that because things are empty they do not exist; we say that because things exist they are empty.” ~ A Tibetan saying Because everything is empty of an essential, definable nature, conventional truth not only depends upon conditions but upon thought. The conventional designation of phenomena does not point to inherently existent things, but are relative, relational characterizations, like large is to small, or as smooth is to rough. What we consider to be different things, depend upon other things to be considered different. When characteristics are seen to exist independently, they deceptively appear to have their own inherent nature. Such reification is a conceptual overlay that gives the false impression that characteristics stand outside of thought as their own separate things.~This reification process also mistakes empty, relative characteristics to be the properties, as they are literally called, of an object or objects, as in it’s solid or they’re shiny. It mistakes relative descriptions as being owned by or belonging to an object, or to a subject as in the case of a self. But there are no objects hiding behind these characteristics, collecting or harboring them, no concealed core in which to find the essence of things. There are not two objects, one with characteristics and one without characteristics. Instead, all objects are designated on the basis of relationally described characteristics and to be an object is merely to be characterized. ~ Susan Kahn ~

~ Chokyi Nyima Rinpoche ~ The mind is empty, cognizant, united, unformed. Please make the meanings of these words something that points at your own experience. You can also say the mind is the “unformed unity of empty cognizance.” These are very precious and profound words. “Empty” means that essentially this mind is something that is empty. This is easy to agree on: we cannot find it as a thing. It is not made empty by anyone, including by us - it is just naturally empty, originally so. At the same time, we also have the ability to know, to cognize, which is also something natural and unmade. These two qualities, being empty and cognizant, are not separate entities. They are an indivisible unity. This unity itself is also not something that is made by anyone. It is not a unity of empty cognizance that at some point arose, remains for a while and later will perish. Being unformed, it does not arise, does not dwell, and does not cease. It is not made in time. It is not a material substance. Anything that exists in time or substance is an object of thought. This unformed unity of empty cognizance is not made of thought; it is not an object of thought.

What are the eight worldly concerns? Hope for happiness and fear of suffering. Hope for fame and fear of insignificance. Hope for praise and fear of blame. Hope for gain and fear of loss. Dudjom Rinpoche said, "Mixing the eight worldly concerns with your spiritual practice is extremely dangerous, like eating food mixed with poison. The eight worldly concerns in concise form can be reduced to two things: Hope and Fear, which are, in fact, Desire and Anger."

As Ponlop Rinpoche said, though intrinsically wisdom mind and samsaric mind is the same, the differences manifest in terms of expression - the former unbound by time and space, while the latter transmigrate within the three times by way of habitual tendencies.

A Brief Discourse on Emptiness and Existence - The Dalai Lama and Lama Tsongkhapa We all have a valid, proper sense of self, or “I,” but then we additionally have a misconception of that “I” as inherently existing. Under the sway of this delusion, we view the self as existing under its own power, established by way of its own nature, able to set itself up. However, if there were such a separate I—self-established and existing in its own right—it should become clearer and clearer under the light of competent analysis as to whether it exists as either mind or body, or the collection of mind and body, or different from mind and body. In fact, the closer you look, the more it is not found. This turns out to be the case for everything, for all phenomena. The fact that you cannot find them means that those phenomena do not exist under their own power; they are not self-established. Sometime during the early sixties when I was reflecting on a passage by Tsongkhapa about unfindability and the fact that phenomena are dependent on conceptuality, it was as if lightning coursed within my chest. Here is the passage: "A coiled rope’s speckled colour and coiling are similar to those of a snake, and when the rope is perceived in a dim area, the thought arises, “This is a snake.” As for the rope, at that time when it is seen to be a snake, the collection and parts of the rope are not even in the slightest way a snake. Therefore, that snake is merely set up by conceptuality. In the same way, when the thought “I” arises in dependence upon mind and body, nothing within mind and body—neither the collection which is a continuum of earlier and later moments, nor the collection of the parts at one time, nor the separate parts, nor the continuum of any of the separate parts—is in even the slightest way the “I.” Also there is not even the slightest something that is a different entity from mind and body that is apprehendable as the “I.” Consequently, the “I” is merely set up by conceptuality in dependence upon mind and body; it is not established by way of its own entity." Buddha said many times that because all phenomena are dependently arisen, they are relative—their existence depends on other causes and conditions and depends on their own parts. A wooden table, for instance, does not exist independently; rather, it depends on a great many causes such as a tree, the carpenter who makes it, and so forth; it also depends upon its own parts. If a wooden table or any phenomenon really were not dependent—if it were established in its own right—then when you analyze it, its existence in its own right should become more obvious, but it does not. Additional reading: Dependent Arising and Emptiness: A Tibetan Buddhist Interpretation of Madhyamika Philosophy by Elizabeth Napper

On some level, Tantra, can be understood as the way towards cultivating a level of sustainable, easeful conduct untainted by, and free of distraction. In the absence of distraction, the mundanity and routineness of habitual thoughts, words and actions evaporate of their own accord - there is no requirement for conscious doing or expanding energy to analyse, control, or subjugate the self in order to control emotions and other psychophysical outflows, and/or associated outflows other than the initial adjustments needed to maintain a certain mental poise so as to remain relaxed yet alert, creating a conducive environment for mindful awareness of that clear state of non-distraction. Tantric meditation can sometimes mean learning the art of getting used to being relaxed and unconcerned with seeming dualities, especially that of self and other, and all the other biased habitual tendencies that, by default, are rooted in the three times (past, present & future). With sufficient practice, these tendencies will loosen up, and one will begin to experience spontaneous bliss-like states arising, and slowly flowing out in no particular direction, eventually trickling down and permeating even the simplest of routines. Now, its possible that one might not particularly note the subtle changes, nor should one be overly concerned of them, but those around can feel and see the transformation quite tangibly. Over time, these bliss-like states stabilise, and one is less and less affected by the grosser affairs that occur around the peripherals of one's awareness. There is a beauty associated with this inward journey - this beauty has nothing to do with mundane pleasure-seeking, and fulfilment of sense gratifications - its a beauty thats suffused with a grace and dignity that becomes more apparent as the layers of delusion begin to get peeled back. As it matures, the combined qualities, that of bliss, clarity and non-thought comes to the fore, and can be tangibly felt by others. Its paradoxical, but this maturity is suffused with child-like wonder, vulnerability and tenderness, not to be confused as signs of weakness - on the contrary, these are signs of ultimate resilience and unbreakable fortitude. Authentic tantric practice is often informed by such paradoxes, and yet, it is through becoming curious, vulnerable and tender that harmony prevails, seeping into ever-subtler levels of both waking and sleep consciousness. It can indeed be blissfully addictive, and the practitioner will do well to exercise vigilance lest one gets side-tracked and led astray by unfamiliar yet rather pleasurable states of being.

Some soft words I chanced upon today that might add a drop of inspiration to the ocean of seeming despair..... an important process In changing your patterns and unconscious programs Is feeling the impulse to behave in a certain habitual way and choosing not to act on it. Instead, just sitting with the feeling. ~ maryam hasnaa ~

This is true for younger yogis and yoginis who are instructed and initiated on the Path of Great Bliss of the Lower Gates (Tib. Oggo Dechen Lam), one of 3 main Yogas (tantric paths) associated with the Nyingma school, and forms a major part of the Dzogrim (Completion) stage of Highest Yoga Tantra. In some traditions, like the Yuthok Nyingthig for example, there are 2 methods by which to access Highest Yoga Tantra: One is by way of receiving empowerments in the Path of Desire (Karmamudra), designated for non-celibates, and the other is by way of initiation into the Path of Liberation (Mahamudra), encouraged for celibates and older practitioners with lowered libidos and those with tainted and/or defective channels.

Puts darkness to flight Seagulls gather at the dock Unfazed by the sun....

So we have two challenges at the heart of Dzogchen: don't allow the vision to be buried by your life - by the economy, by politics and so on. Don't let the vision get lost while you are caught up in what happens on a daily basis and in your own conduct. This is the first challenge. The second is: don't let your vision of the Middle Way, the vision of the Great Perfection, suffocate and erase your interest in day-to-day issues - your life, your family, the political situation, among others. Don't let the vision exclude situations from life as if they didn't matter, because they do. Keep this expression in mind: "stillness in the face of movement". As soon as we get out of here, we will all face a great deal of movement and activity in the world outside. There is no doubt about that. Will we be caught up and carried away by these ever-changing conditions and situations in the world, returning to the non-lucid dream of awakened life? Or will we turn off the internet, television, radio, and all media so that we don't have to see or hear any "evil", certain that "this is not for me, I am a practitioner of Dzogchen"? If we do this, we will become irrelevant, won't we? We will be of no significance to the world. Our practice, therefore, is quietness in the midst of movement. ~ Alan Wallace ~