Dzogchen (and Buddhism) Summarized

[ralis]

 

It's gotta be painful to admit that perhaps Buddhism has to share some of its distinctions with other paths.

 

Please elaborate with some examples.

 

ralis

[goldisheavy]

There is a middle ground.

 

Talk about your personal experiences/opinion, but DO NOT PASS IT OFF AS AUTHENTIC BUDDHISM

 

Look alwayson, you have plenty of space for yourself. Other people's claimed realizations and experiences really shouldn't hurt you so much, if at all. Even if someone belongs to Buddhism and claims all kinds of realizations, and is even respected by the community, and is describing all kinds of amazing experiences, this really shouldn't crimp your style or make you feel claustrophobic.

 

You are apprehensive because you think if other people belong to Buddhism, your chosen club, and describe their various experiences, it will either invalidate your experiences, which are different, or leave you in a place where you find yourself needing to duplicate those experience in order to feel legitimate, or in order to be perceived legitimate by the community.

 

That's just claustrophobia. You have plenty, plenty of space for both experience and realization. You don't have to be so anxious about experiences. Experiences are limitless. If someone has a handful of snow in Alaska, or a handful of sand in Sahara, do you get anxious? Of course not. Your instinct to own and to possess is really blinding you.

[goldisheavy]

Please elaborate with some examples.

 

ralis

 

Can you be more specific? What do you want an example of?

 

By the way, I was referring to Buddhism sharing with Taoism the absence of a supreme agent. Perhaps you want an example of me showing you how a Taoist could defend against an accusation that Tao is a supreme agent?

Edited July 1, 2010 by goldisheavy

[goldisheavy]

They were not made under delusion, they were made well, and they were always good. Of course they were not infinitely effective because they are only words, and need to be interpreted by the mind of the reader. The problem was that people clung to them. It is the same if people cling to a notion of a mindstream, or a notion that one thing is delusion and another is the true mind. Then we would need to add a line in the tantra for Dzogchen people being obscured by attachments to the mindstream and the natural state. No matter how virtuous, wise, simple, and true to reality a doctrine is, there will always be a need to turn people away from clinging to it. There is often even a need to turn people away from the notion of turning away. If there were only perfect teachings of silence, only a few people would understand them. If they were too simple, they would not be comprehensive enough to teach people who still have delusions.

 

Do the criticized teachings have their own self-criticisms? If yes, we can go easy on them. I believe it's true of the Mahayana, the way of the Bodhisattvas, which has sufficient self-criticism. It also may be somewhat true of Dzogchen, because I've at least heard of its own practitioners criticizing it, if not the texts. What about the others on the list?

 

If a teaching is cognizant of its own limitations, that's OK.

 

However, what happens one day when your legs are freezing cold in meditation, and your mind is constantly agitated? How do you deal with those things? Your meditation is supposed to be improving,

 

I don't equate meditation with legs or with some particular mental activity. So mind racing and legs getting cold are not impediments and do not necessarily need improvement. Or you can improve them, because such conditions don't have to be preserved as is either.

 

so why does it seem to be getting worse?

 

Lack of wisdom.

 

What if serious health problems arise, or your meditation goes off course?

 

You could die or become insane. Neither of which is a big problem.

 

Can you really just sit in meditation in the natural state then?

 

You can always stand up and walk around. Beware of self-imposed limitations.

 

What if you are practicing, but you don't seem to be getting any results?

 

You might need to be more patient, or you may be hindered by an assumption. Assumption is a safer bet.

 

Every day you meditate, but your mind and body do not go through any transformations?

 

Exactly this happened to me in the past. I was hindered by an assumption about body, mind, the world, etc.

 

And what if you get to a particular state of mind, and you don't know what its significance is?

 

All significances are provisional. People really should be taught to make their own significances instead of getting them from a master.

Edited July 1, 2010 by goldisheavy

[RongzomFan]

Look alwayson, you have plenty of space for yourself. Other people's claimed realizations and experiences really shouldn't hurt you so much, if at all. Even if someone belongs to Buddhism and claims all kinds of realizations, and is even respected by the community, and is describing all kinds of amazing experiences, this really shouldn't crimp your style or make you feel claustrophobic.

 

You are apprehensive because you think if other people belong to Buddhism, your chosen club, and describe their various experiences, it will either invalidate your experiences, which are different, or leave you in a place where you find yourself needing to duplicate those experience in order to feel legitimate, or in order to be perceived legitimate by the community.

 

That's just claustrophobia. You have plenty, plenty of space for both experience and realization. You don't have to be so anxious about experiences. Experiences are limitless. If someone has a handful of snow in Alaska, or a handful of sand in Sahara, do you get anxious? Of course not. Your instinct to own and to possess is really blinding you.

 

 

 

Thats fine, but DON'T PASS IT OFF AS AUTHENTIC BUDDHISM.

 

EPIC FAIL

 

I don't understand why its so difficult for you to understand.

Edited July 1, 2010 by alwayson

[JustARandomPanda]

Thats fine, but DON'T PASS IT OFF AS AUTHENTIC BUDDHISM.

 

 

I doubt anyone who has the freedom on these boards to say what their gonna say will give a hoot about whether or not anyone disagrees with their experiences being authentic buddhism. If someone believes those experiences to be authentic buddhism then of course he/she should state exactly that.

 

It doesn't take away your ability to not believe and/or critique why you think they're wrong. Critiquing is extra work on your part but I'm sure they'll be ready to defend why they're right.

 

 

And with that, I am done with this fucking thread. mikaelz, you can ride my ass all you want.

 

BTW - why are you still on this thread with the EPIC FAILING commentary? I thought you were done with it.

[goldisheavy]

Thats fine, but DON'T PASS IT OFF AS AUTHENTIC BUDDHISM.

 

EPIC FAIL

 

I don't understand why its so difficult for you to understand.

 

I don't pass anything off. I specifically said that I am not a Buddhist many times. I don't like to be chained to a group identity of some kind. I believe I am not the only one who has expressed freedom from religion as a personally desirable condition, and thus refuses the religious identification. I think your complaint here can really only be aimed at Vajrahridaya, who claims to be a Buddhist. Styro hasn't been talking about his experiences, or if he has, I missed it.

 

Either way, it doesn't matter. What if someone passes something as authentic Buddhism? So what? What is the big deal? Why do you care?

Edited July 1, 2010 by goldisheavy

[RongzomFan]

I don't pass anything off. I specifically said that I am not a Buddhist many times.

 

 

Then why are you trying to pass your thinking as authentic buddhism.

 

Yes you.

 

 

EPIC FAIL

Edited July 1, 2010 by alwayson

[goldisheavy]

Then why are you trying to pass your thinking as authentic buddhism.

 

Yes you.

 

 

EPIC FAIL

 

Can you quote something where I do that?

[RongzomFan]

Can you quote something where I do that?

 

 

Whose conclusions they are is not important. What's important is that they are wrong.

[goldisheavy]

 

 

I think someone's opinion is wrong. What else is new?

[RongzomFan]

I think someone's opinion is wrong. What else is new?

 

 

That someone was an recognized buddhist teacher.

 

Similar comments pepper the entire thread

[Pero]

BTW - why are you still on this thread with the EPIC FAILING commentary? I thought you were done with it.

 

Because he's the epic moron.

[JustARandomPanda]

~~~ TheTaoBums Moderation Team ~~~

 

After Pero's insult was reported and after he was given the choice to edit and/or delete his statement or get a 7 day ban for violating ToS. Pero opted for the 7 day ban.

 

 

- Sereneblue

 

~~~ Mod Squad out ~~~

[styrofoamdog]

Do the criticized teachings have their own self-criticisms? If yes, we can go easy on them. I believe it's true of the Mahayana, the way of the Bodhisattvas, which has sufficient self-criticism. It also may be somewhat true of Dzogchen, because I've at least heard of its own practitioners criticizing it, if not the texts. What about the others on the list?

 

If a teaching is cognizant of its own limitations, that's OK.

The Buddha usually uses silence or says "thus", "such", or "thusly". Even the term "Tathagata" is referring to suchness. He does not criticize the teachings per se, but does point out that they are not the reality of the truth itself. In the Diamond Sutra, he says "The so-called Buddha Dharma is not the Buddha Dharma", and "The Prajnaparamita expounded by the Buddha is not Prajnaparamita". At other times, though, he does say "Such is the True Dharma", referring in a concealed way to suchness, and in a naive way to the teachings previously given. The sutras are often written in a way that causes people of low capacity to revere them, and people of high capacity to see beyond to the ultimate truth.

 

I don't equate meditation with legs or with some particular mental activity. So mind racing and legs getting cold are not impediments and do not necessarily need improvement. Or you can improve them, because such conditions don't have to be preserved as is either.

...

You might need to be more patient, or you may be hindered by an assumption. Assumption is a safer bet.

...

Exactly this happened to me in the past. I was hindered by an assumption about body, mind, the world, etc.

...

These are just examples that the people could get hung up on. Everyone is hindered by something. If they weren't, they would already be a buddha. For some people a short text is enough, but for others a longer text is necessary. One is not necessarily better than another. The important thing is that it helps someone at a particular time.

[Vajrahridaya]

I believe I understand what you are trying to say in your criticism, but I still don't agree. I think teachings such as those presented in Tao Te Ching and Chuang Tzu are vague enough that any inference of a supreme agent must be your own doing rather than something that's inherently in the text. I think some doctrines are pretty clear about the supreme agent, others are not so much.

 

It's gotta be painful to admit that perhaps Buddhism has to share some of its distinctions with other paths.

 

Taoism is vague, that's why it's texts could be interpreted towards Buddhahood. I've always said this, but most interpret Tao as an Alpha and an Omega, somewhat like Brahman.

[ralis]

Taoism is vague, that's why it's texts could be interpreted towards Buddhahood. I've always said this, but most interpret Tao as an Alpha and an Omega, somewhat like Brahman.

 

Are you into the "you people" rant again? The Tao has nothing to do with Brahman! If you spent more time in nature such as I have you would know that.

 

Perhaps there are similarities between Buddhism and Taoism. I don't see Taoism as vague at all.

 

ralis

[Sunya]

~~~ TheTaoBums Moderation Team ~~~

 

After Pero's insult was reported and after he was given the choice to edit and/or delete his statement or get a 7 day ban for violating ToS. Pero opted for the 7 day ban.

 

 

- Sereneblue

 

~~~ Mod Squad out ~~~

 

 

You're kidding right? He was only telling the truth. Ban the one causing all of this, not those reacting. Mod squad really failed on this one. Same thing happened back in April when alwayson was inciting everyone and gold ended up being banned for simply pointing out an obvious fact, like Pero just did. Good members get punished while those who are only here to argue and lack civility go on posting. Does this kid need to be reported? Nobody really takes him seriously when he insults us, so nobody reports him, but when he gets insulted he clicks the report button and magically people go away. You're only encouraging him.

Edited July 2, 2010 by mikaelz

[RongzomFan]

You're kidding right? He was only telling the truth. Ban the one causing all of this, not those reacting. Mod squad really failed on this one. Same thing happened back in April when alwayson was inciting everyone and gold ended up being banned for simply pointing out an obvious fact, like Pero just did. Good members get punished while those who are only here to argue and lack civility go on posting. Does this kid need to be reported? Nobody really takes him seriously when he insults us, so nobody reports him, but when he gets insulted he clicks the report button and magically people go away. You're only encouraging him.

 

 

I never reported anyone. I logged back in after this happened. Mod can confirm.

 

EPIC FAIL

 

And thats news to me that I got goldisheavy banned. Goldisheavy got banned way early in that thread because he was insulting Vortex. A lot of people had problems with his behavior. I never reported him. Vortex was the main guy he had a problem with, not me.

 

EPIC FAIL

 

You really do like to ride my ass don't you? You started on page 1 and continued till page 14.

 

LEAVE ME ALONE. Why don't you understand such a simple concept?

Edited July 2, 2010 by alwayson

[JustARandomPanda]

You're kidding right? He was only telling the truth. Ban the one causing all of this, not those reacting. Mod squad really failed on this one. Same thing happened back in April when alwayson was inciting everyone and gold ended up being banned for simply pointing out an obvious fact, like Pero just did. Good members get punished while those who are only here to argue and lack civility go on posting. Does this kid need to be reported? Nobody really takes him seriously when he insults us, so nobody reports him, but when he gets insulted he clicks the report button and magically people go away. You're only encouraging him.

 

Alwayson did not report the post. Someone else did (I'll let that person decide if he wishes to out himself as to hitting the report button). I posted earlier for everyone to stop with the insults. The very next person to do so just happened to be Pero. He could have phrased a similar sentiment without insults. Furthermore I offered him one whole day to edit out his insult. He specifically refused and opted for the 7 Day Ban instead so it's not like Pero was given zero choice in his suspension.

 

Had he edited out his commentary he would still be here today posting away. It was his choice. He chose to let the insult stand and take the ban.

 

 

BTW - when I made my post about dropping the insults I meant it for everyone in this thread which of course included Alwayson. And yes...if Alwayson had posted an insult after I made that general request then he, too, would've been given those same two choices. Abide by the ToS and edit it out or Ban.

 

In general I prefer to give people the chance to retract their insults first. If they refuse that option then they know what the alternative will be - a Taobums vacation. Pero was given that option - he refused it of his own free will.

[nac]

Dependent origination and emptiness are not two sides of the same coin, but rather the same side. They are synonyms.

As the Heart Sutra puts it, "Form is Emptiness; Emptiness is Form". In other words:

Before the face of proper, total absorption on the actual nature (of everything) like that, there is just the severance of mentally fabricated extremes regarding (everything of) samsara and nirvana, such as (inherent, findable) existence, (total) nonexistence, and so on. Yet after you have arisen, when you inspect, (you see that) the dependent arising of the functioning of what is merely imputedly existent, simply by names, undeniably and naturally still cognitively dawns, like dreams, mirages, reflections of the moon in water, and illusions.

 

(When you realize simultaneously that) appearances do not obscure voidness and voidness does not make appearances cease, you are manifesting, at that time, the excellent pathway mind (that cognizes from the single viewpoint) of voidness and dependent arising being synonymous.

Source: http://www.berzinarchives.com/web/en/archives/e-books/published_books/gelug_kagyu_mahamudra/pt2/mm_06.html

 

PS. Forms are called "empty" when they're found to be emergent experiences constituting a part of larger conglomerations of phenomena arising in impermanent configurations as a result of interdependent causation by all phenomena as a whole, the names we ascribe to them being chosen for human convenience, and not to reflect self-existent essences. If we apply this to all forms perceived through the indriyas, then Emptiness and DO become synonymous. Um... this is Mahamudra though, not Dzogchen.

Edited July 2, 2010 by nac

[goldisheavy]

That someone was an recognized buddhist teacher.

 

Oh noes... I think a recognized buddhist teacher is wrong. Heaven forbid.

[RongzomFan]

Oh noes... I think a recognized buddhist teacher is wrong. Heaven forbid.

 

 

For a non-buddhist you sure seem desperate to proclaim your superiority over buddhist authorities.

 

I know you already said that Vajrahridaya is more knowledgeable than the Dalai Lama, but then later in the thread you called him "crazy" and "insane"

 

Stick to getting banned.

Edited July 2, 2010 by alwayson

[gendao]

As the Heart Sutra puts it, "Form is Emptiness; Emptiness is Form". In other words:

Before the face of proper, total absorption on the actual nature (of everything) like that, there is just the severance of mentally fabricated extremes regarding (everything of) samsara and nirvana, such as (inherent, findable) existence, (total) nonexistence, and so on. Yet after you have arisen, when you inspect, (you see that) the dependent arising of the functioning of what is merely imputedly existent, simply by names, undeniably and naturally still cognitively dawns, like dreams, mirages, reflections of the moon in water, and illusions.

 

(When you realize simultaneously that) appearances do not obscure voidness and voidness does not make appearances cease, you are manifesting, at that time, the excellent pathway mind (that cognizes from the single viewpoint) of voidness and dependent arising being synonymous.

PS. Forms are called "empty" when they're found to be emergent experiences constituting a part of larger conglomerations of phenomena arising in impermanent configurations as a result of interdependent causation by all phenomena as a whole, the names we ascribe to them being chosen for human convenience, and not to reflect self-existent essences. If we apply this to all forms perceived through the indriyas, then Emptiness and DO become synonymous. Um... this is Mahamudra though, not Dzogchen.

I love that! Thanks!

 

I sort of had an inkling of that before, but this guy really nailed it in words!

[Vajrahridaya]

For a non-buddhist you sure seem desperate to proclaim your superiority over buddhist authorities.

 

I know you already said that Vajrahridaya is more knowledgeable than the Dalai Lama, but then later in the thread you called him "crazy" and "insane"

 

Stick to getting banned.

 

No way am I more knowledgeable than the Dalai Lama. He's a Rinpoche who has mastered the knowledge and experience of all Tantric lineages and Dzogchen, no matter how humble he comes across, he has exceedingly deep and subtle realization.