konchog uma

Allan Wallace says they are not part of Dzogchen.

 

Start listening to Alan Wallace at 1:25

 

"not Vajrayana. Not Dzogchen."

 

well i can cite teachers who teach it as part of dzogchen and you can cite teachers who don't, which is stupid, why i said it depends on who teaches it. Ontul is head of Yangtzab lineage and was teaching from Garab Dorje's instructions so if thats not authoritative enough for you, don't meditate! Meditation has helped me greatly so im going to stick with it. Theres no point having this conversation any further.

Nonconceptual meditation is a contradiction in terms. Meditation by definition is conceptual.

 

http://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=40&t=4704

that thread was about the dhyanas, not the whole of meditation. Again, if you think nonconceptual meditation is impossible, don't sit. Awareness is not in and of itself conceptual, and meditation resting in this awareness is possible according to some teachers.

Ajahn Brahm is teaching Hinayana.

Then he is probably qualified to talk about the contents of the hinayana sutras. I knew you would focus on that fact instead of the point of what i was saying, so i pointed out that his background has nothing to do with the fact that the Buddha taught a tenfold path including nonconceptual wisdom and meditation. Your thinking that Brahms teaching of hinayana or the dhyanas is some kind of refuting of my point is a logical fallacy (composition/division)

This is just a bunch of logical fallacies and opinions.

which logical fallacy? and yes its my opinion. well observed.

Ontul Rinpoche teaches meditation as an integral part of dzogchen, specifically the mingling of meditation and post-meditation, so there is meditation. I am never sure what you are talking about when you say vajrayana doesn't employ meditation, as mahamudra and dzogchen both employ forms of zhine and lhakthong.

Even at my Tibetan temple, we sit in zhine every week. I don't doubt that you are repeating someone's official opinion which has been written in official form in books and maybe even tantras, but i think in the end it depends on who teaches one vajrayana and what they focus on.

As far as the 8fold path being part of hinayana and path of arhats, sure of course, but my point was that even at that level of teaching, Shakyamuni was practicing nonconceptual meditation and giving teachings which supported and led to this. Just because one utilizes the guidance of the 8fold path doesn't necessarily mean they will become a non-returner. The 8fold path is just a tool for guidance, and originally, the buddha taught right wisdom (nonconceptual) and right meditation as part of it (according to Ajahn Brahm) so its relevant, and has nothing to do with Brahm, i just learned that in the sutras its a tenfold path from him, so that he teaches jhanas has nothing to do with what im saying. I'm saying the 8fold path can serve as a support no matter which yana you practice.

I wish more vajrayanists had a foundation in the lower yanas, its absurd how arrogant and egotistical people can be if they haven't tempered those aspects of themselves. Not directed at anyone in particular, just my own experience w vajrayanists as opposed to practitioners of "lower" yanas

while onlookers stare

i sit in repose, gazing

softly at the sky

I agree that the first 8 vehicles are contrived, but i just recently started to study and practice dzogchen, so i have 15 years of conditioning to dissolve. I still think that until one achieves stability in their ati, practicing virtues and looking at one's life in terms of the eightfold path can be really helpful. I think that the eightfold path was intended to assist practitioners in achieving a state where non-conceptual meditation was possible.

immortal fetus.

mom has carried it for so

long shes forgotten

can i take you home?

enough about my treehouse!

i'm moving on now

just one parachute

what kind of treehouse is this?

gimme that damn thing

might just be enough

if it's not i'll get Jimmy

to jump off with me

freedom is my goal.

if i jumped from my treehouse

i would fly briefly

It doesn't matter that other practitioners are confused and egotistical ... its irrelevant.

it doesn't matter to me either, i don't go there to socialize, or to look for non-egotistical people, i go there to receive dharma teachings and be in the presence of my lama.

swaying with the breeze

maybe my treehouse should have

walls or a railing

Vajrayana is a totally independent vehicle (or a set of vehicles).

 

Why would you need to walk the eightfold path?

 

You don't need any background in sutra at all. You can enter Vajrayana directly.

 

People should be encouraged and applauded for seeking genuine Vajrayana.

 

The problem is the opposite than what you outline, that is people bringing lower vehicle understanding into higher vehicles.

 

Mahamudra, for example, is an independent system with unique terminology such as kun gzhi (alaya).

interesting. i guess it depends on who teaches it. my lama doesn't teach it as completely independent, but emphasizes the virtues and views of the lower yanas too. and that sangha is full of egomaniacal assholes, so its obviously no failsafe. appreciate your pov tho.

The more rules you make for yourself, the more you will suffer as you constantly break those rules in your head. Sorry it's like this. There are always better ways to be..each day presents us with this opportunity to become actual masters of ourselves. By placing one's own mind in the cauldron of lust, you can achieve greatness with great speed! Follow your desire and it will show you the way.

actually tantric practice is about sublimating lust, and is full of rules.

if you're smoking in my car i'll tell you to put that stinky shit out right now.

but i wanted to reply to the OP, that i was just saying something in vmarco's thread in the pit about healthy sanghas about this. So heres a link

a person who has realized the nature of illusion can point out illusion to others in a way that isn't ridiculous, and that a person who has gone beyond their own ego can reduce the egos of others skillfully. Most times the case is that someone who read in a book that everything is illusion is trying to tell you this without any realization of their own, or someone who is coming from a place of ego is calling you egotistical, but not always.

lol im with you marblehead

if we were open to everythind we'd all be speaking german right now

we'd all be neanderthals because homo sapiens would have been like "wow man thats a nice club you wanna hit me with that thing and have sex with my wife? oh yeah thats groovy baby youre a freak show me how you do it"

its hard to deal with aggression but as they say someones gotta do it

i think that westerners lack the discipline to really ground themselves in the lower yanas, they want the tantra and the deity empowerments and the inner yogas and so on more than they want to walk the eightfold path or cultivate the paramitas.

also, most people in vajrayana sanghas are (in my experience anyway) just doing the open practices, they aren't necessarily tantrikas and haven't taken vajrayana vows. They just read books on dzogchen and mahamudra and like to think that they are practicing very advanced stuff.

lastly, anyone can cut down someone's ego. An angry idiot can insult someone and make them feel smaller than they did before, and then justify the toxicity of that situation with something like: "oh its good for them". But the skillful means of a genuine dharma practitioner usually go beyond just threatening the egos of their so called friends, and often involve kind and gentle words and the modeling of a good role for others to see. How does this person deal with ego? How do they deal with conflict and interpersonal issues?

I see a lot of ego in the people who try to cut down others ego, like they don't like what they see in the mirror so they are trying to break it. Someone who has really conquered ego can accomplish the same goal with humor, with kindness, sometimes with silence, and in all sorts of ways. Those sorts of people are the ones that i admire.

Edit: found it. http://www.visiblemantra.org/vajrasattva.html

interesting about optional hum and phat at the end.. i always wondered about that. Thanks!

some are, some aren't. Usually vajrayana attracts egomaniacs or prospective egomaniacs (who become egomaniacal thinking that they are practicing "the most advanced techniques")... Some sanghas are healthy but all sanghas are just groups of humans, who tend to be fundamentally deluded by the poisons.

its hard to find a healthy sangha

lol yeah like if you say the mantra in tibetan you get no benefit right?... vajrasattva only responds to perfectly spoken sanskrit sorry tibet.. and everyone else

i can't worry too much about that opinion.

In drikung kagyu, Vajrapani and Amitabha are open to everyone as well.

And one doesn't need initiation to say the Vajrasattva 100 syllable mantra according to Berzin archives (im getting a 404 error or i would give you a link.. its on the vajrasattva mantra page), but when I received empowerment to do that practice, we learned things about it and visualizations and so on that assist so greatly that its like two radically different levels of the same practice.

I don't know about one's sanskrit pronunciation having to be perfect.. mine isn't and my practice isn't useless. Sounds neurotic to me, just 2 cents

No problem. I understand (and appreciate) your thought that I am "grasping [at] some kind of answer" and that "rather than shut down the whole conversation", you are only trying to "stop the comparison" and stopping what you believe is "nominalization, and dualistic distinctions...".

 

Like you, I am a huge fan of "just letting go and doing it", but I find it useful when people share perspective. Hopefully, some of the readers of these threads will also come to understand that things like transmissions are "real".

 

Have a great weekend. Thanks for the discussion.

sure thing Jeff, i appreciate your attitude

from a certain pov, all words are nonsense, and every time nonconceptual practice comes up, i have observed jeff to take the approach of asking many questions which basically boil down to "so would you conceptualize it like This, or perhaps like That" and so on. I feel that grasping some kind of answer as truth will only get in the way of practice, in that it is fabricated by the intellect.

That is what i am trying to offer. Not judgement of what anyone has realized, or trying to shut down the whole conversation at all, just not taking part in it myself as an expression of what i think is most helpful to realization : stopping the comparison, nominalization, and dualistic distinctions of the intellect, and just letting go and doing it.

Hi knonchog uma,

 

I agree in general with your comments regarding philosophy and intellectualization. I am sorry that you consider my questions "nonsense", but am not interested (or trying to compare) the philosophy at all. My questions are about the "experiential reality" and the transmission/teaching techniques of the Dzogchen tradition. I have my own direct experience with what I consider to be similar/parallel paths. I was just looking for the qualitative feeling/description of initiates for comparison.

 

Best wishes,

Jeff

i didn't call your questions nonsense. i said that what i would say to you would be nonsense.

best luck w your practice.

K'u -- just curious... You make these suggestions to Jeff...is this based upon your assumption that he has not yet realized his original nature...?

no. Its just in response to the line of questioning. I can never tell what anyone has realized.