Sunya

Yes and no. If your goal is Oneness then it doesn't matter because all paths aim to dissolve the personal self in one way or another. If your aim is to go beyond Oneness and let go of the subtle conceptual attachment that leads to that state, then you have to contemplate the interdependent nature of phenomena and let go of the yearning to dissolve into a non-phenomenal void.

Non-dualism to mostly everyone is oneness, that's why I said D.O. is not non-dualism.

If there are instances of interdependent origination (emptiness) being expounded within the Upanisads, I'd really love to read them. Seriously. I'm very interested. BTW, interdependent origination is not the same as non-dualism.

Ralisji, It is uncertain to me as to why you continue here. You have an obsession to correct everyone's, and especially Vajra's, point of view and behavior. In your incessant need to correct everyone ad infinitum, you never once demonstrate the real Buddhist attributes of compassion, loving kindness and generosity.

Very nice clarification It's kind of scary NOT to have something to hold on to. The Self teachings seem rather easier because the hold onto consciousness and let go into that, then of course they can't let go of consciousness. But the Buddhist alternative of letting go into the potential for seeing is rather difficult for most, including me. I get it but I wish it weren't so I mean I get it conceptually, have't actually 'gotten it' yet.

Rex, There's really no such thing as Hinayana anymore. Theravada, the Buddhism practiced in Sri Lanka, Thailand, Burma, and some other places, is all about training the mind. Their goal is to realize wisdom right now, not eons from now, and also to cultivate metta (loving-kindness). It is a wisdom practice not a 'do not harm and cultivate merit for thousands of eons' practice. The '9 yanas' is a strictly Tibetan invention and is in fact quite useful, but viewing other Buddhist paths as 'lower' because they don't fit into the tight Tibetan model is rather unpractical. There was a book released not too long ago that is a comparison between Theravada and Dzogchen:

If you could please find the direct quote... I would greatly appreciate it I've personally never found that.

I really don't see how you came to that conclusion. Samkhya is a dualistic philosophy that viewed consciousness as pure and the world (matter) as impure. This is why India has a long history of ascetics that would punish their bodies. The goal was to overcome the body (the impurities) to have realization of the pure. Buddha did experiment with this sort of asceticism but ultimately came to the conclusion that it was wrong and does not lead anywhere. His philosophy was not dualistic as he saw no separation between consciousness and matter, in fact he dismissed both notions as incomplete concepts.

And this leads you to think that Heraclitus influenced the Siddhartha? Actual dates are unknown by the way, but most estimates of Heraclitus' timeframe are after the Buddha. Even if they were contemporaries, there's no known link between India and Greece until Alexander invaded India. I love seeing similarities in philosophy and religion, but that doesn't mean that there was direct influence. Early shamans all had a very similar view of reality, but that doesn't necessitate them directly communing with each other. I think links point to common lines of thinking.

mikaelz, on 28 June 2010 - 05:29 PM, said: All the 9 yanas find completion in Dzogchen. wtf? lol I never said that. ditto mmm... sipping on a nice hot cup of gyokuro (japanese green tea). So delicious.

This is why I don't talk to too many Tibetan practitioners. It's extremely difficult to get the essence of the Tibetan path without also getting brainwashed by the cultural elitist aspects of Tibetan culture. Who said you have to accumulate merits and wisdom for many lifetimes? All Buddhist schools use varying combinations of Shamata and Vipashana. Just because Vajrayana plays with chakras and energy doesn't make it any better. The channels get naturally purified, and prana enters the central channel, when you do Shamata/Vipashyana. It really just seems that Vajrayana is for those that like to obsess with details and feel that they are superior. Tibetans were warlike people with huge egos. The "fastest, quickest, best path with all the bells and whistles and colors and lights" is what suited those people. Doesn't make any of those things true. Tibetans like(d) to look down on others. They were a powerful kingdom and needed to retain that sense of superiority. Buddhism had to adapt to that cultural mindset. Americans have the same problem, no wonder Tibetan Buddhism is growing here. Not saying it's a bad path, but the cultural aspects really need to go. Much of it comes down to questioning old sutras which were written during these times.

Vaj, nobody is talking about that. Gold quoted that to show that even Dzogchen looks down on other vehicles as less superior. It's just a habit of schools to look down on other schools, and the quote shows how Dzogchen looks down on the Tantras as inferior. Nobody is mis-contextualizing. It really would be helpful to catch up with the discussion before participating.

Heraclitus lived after the Buddha, so there could not have been an influence. There weren't even any Greeks in India till Alexander came strolling in. I have noticed the similarities though. Heraclitus is my favorite Pre Socratic, second to Parmenides.

I have a sacred cow? I think its ok to criticize people but to always do so justly. That book is just biased nonsense, probably paid for by the CPC.

So he was a welcoming leader and was very nice to the Nazis that visited.. he even wrote a letter to Hitler. That means what? That means that the Dalai Lama supported the Holocaust? That is what the book and you are implying isn't it? When you say he supported the Nazis, you're saying he supported everything that they stand for. And your evidence is that he welcomed Nazis and was a hospitable host. Yeah, they really helped. What does this have to do with Buddhism? This is biased politics. Man I gotta wonder, you pretend to be smart but you really just seem incredibly naive. Do you believe everything you read?

Thank you..

Why not offer some balance and post a bad review as well? This horrid title is the kitchen sink of name-calling... a rabidly virulent anti-Dalai Lama book. It is an expansion of the Western Shugden Society's previous volume, "The Tibetan Situation Today" as if that wasn't already sickening enough. Like its predecessor, it is packed with polytheistic deity worshipping nonsense and has nothing to do with real Tibetan situation or authentic Dharma. In fact, this sort of unrelenting jealous rage and hatred gives real genuine Buddhism a black eye. According to the authors of this monstrous lunacy, the Dalai Lama is a Fascist, an evil Capitalist, and a Communist (all of which are mutually-exclusive)! One of the many deranged distortions claimed here is the Dalai Lama has ties to Nazis. The so-called Nazis "are" one Heinrich Harrer of "Seven Years in Tibet" fame (talk about a stretch!). Many more conspiracy theories abound within, to include having "shady ties" to the C.I.A. The authors even claim the Dalai Lama is pro-Communist Chinese!!! If anyone is caught with an image of the Dalai Lama in Communist China, they are subject to arrest and long-term imprisonment. Meanwhile, the Western Shugden Society operates openly in that country. You do the math. Additionally, these angry authors throw countless unsubstantiated slurs at his His Holiness to include labeling him "the devil" and "a murderer" ...and they really mean it! In summary, this book is insanely paranoid and evil with regards to its intent. If it weren't so divisive, it would be laughable. Unfortunately, the Western Shugden Society has many supporters as is evidenced by the nearly verbatim regurgitation of the book's main talking points within the positive reviews; almost cult-like in their fervor. Unbelievable expose? Well yes, unbelievable is an applicable word. Apparently, many people need hate and a "common enemy" within their lives and disguise it as "religious freedom" to relieve the guilt of such a practice. In that regard, this book does not differ much from the tactics employed by other extremist groups. THIS IS THE WORST BOOK EVER WRITTEN.

Styro, Since you seem quote acquainted with Zen.. could you tell us about Shikantaza? I hear that's an advanced practice and seems to be very similar to Dzogchen trekcho meditation.

How can you prove that someone is an 'omniscient Buddha' ? Supposedly there are Tibetan/Indian masters that were Buddhas, but how do you know? Because of stories?

And that makes Tantra superior? Many people get wonderful results from following the simpler shamata/vipashyana path. And you follow those that do so blindly. As I stated earlier, Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche has said that the goal of Dzogchen, minus Rainbow Body, is the same as Sutra paths like Zen. Namdrol said the same. The goal is realization of Emptiness/D.O. Those that claim Tantra is superior don't understand the so called 'Sutra' paths. And the methodology of Zen implies a very keen understanding of the subtle channels. Awareness of energy comes naturally once you go deeper in meditation. Do you think Zen masters were oblivious? Basic Zazen is meditating on the hara, which is the naval chakra. This is the same area where the 'red drop' is in gTummo and leads the energy into the central channel. Zen masters weren't dumb. They knew what they were doing. About direct introduction: the very roots of Zen were founded in the story of Buddha transmitting his wisdom to Mahakasyapa, when he held up a flower and Mahakasyapa was instantly enlightened. There are many stories of students experiencing awakening after the master touches them, says something to them, or simply looks at them. Very similar to old Dzogchen/Mahamudra stories.

Depends whether you take Rainbow Body seriously or not. Doesn't mean Dzogchen is superior, it just has a different goal in the long run. And all your posts about knocking sutra paths were stemming from this difference?

Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche wrote a book on Zen and said that it [and all Sutra paths] reaches the same realization of emptiness as Dzogchen but does not achieve Rainbow Body, but the same can be said for Mahamudra because the practice of 'thogal' is specific to the Dzogchen lineage. If thogal is the only practice that leads to Rainbow Body, then yes Dzogchen is the only path that gets you there. But this is questionable, who knows? You? It's also worth noting that 99% of people will be lucky to even have a taste of emptiness during their meditative careers, much less have a chance at Rainbow Body. It's also questionable whether this is truly the 'highest goal' as is espoused in Dzogchen. When you have full realization of emptiness, you're enlightened. Gaining the rainbow body is really just icing on the cake and not everyone might want that. It's more like a super super power since you have full manifestation. Nothing really to do with enlightenment, as I see it.

Then you should discuss what Rigpa actually is and is not compared to his statement, instead of arguing inecessantly for the superiority of Dzogchen over Sutra paths by making blanket statements.

Why are you arguing incessantly? I gave you a link prior where Namdrol said that the realization of Dzogchen is not above Dependent Origination, which is, and always was, the goal of all Buddhist schools. http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2009/10/dzogchen-rigpa-and-dependent.html Since Namdrol is a very experience Dzogchen practitioner, and a Sakya Loppon, can you give it a rest? Inferior? I don't see that. What I saw was him bringing Dzogchen down to earth and saying it's essence is the same as Zen and all Mahayana schools that aim for realization of Emptiness.

Really? Just calm down. Namdrol is an awesome teacher but that isn't the issue. It's that you cling to his authority without understanding the teachings experientially. That's what everyone is pointing out to you.