Meaning clear light

[Tibetan_Ice]

Even better, TI: I'm that kid who leaves a floater in the pool, ruining the pool party for everybody.

 

"No disrespect, but just because Malcolm says something doesn't mean he is right. I realize you think Malcolm is the final word, and if he says "being" is neo-advaita then it must be so."

 

Well, when it comes to what Dzogchen teaches in general and on what ChNN specifically teaches: Yes, I trust the accuracy of his posts.

 

"And why did you present heresay evidence that Jackson Peterson was being naughty? Are you trying to discredit his exposition of the Map?"

 

It's not hearsay, when it's confirmed by his former root guru. Further, I'm not discrediting his experiences as false: What I'm discrediting is his degree of realization of 'total presence,' as representing what Dzogchen teaches. I'm not saying you or other people can't learn something from him, but the degree to which he can ultimately lead someone to complete recognition of their real nature is limited [Especially, if you were to stabilize your current experience.]

 

I'm also basing this off of what he's posted over on DW. These are some of the more obvious quotes:

 

Some posts from Malcolm elucidating the view of Dzogchen:

 

Also, personally for me, what he says to asunthatneversets and xabir is very telling of where his level realization is at (asunthatneversets is an experienced student of ChNN):

 

Hi Simple Jack..

Now why did I think that you were going to copy and paste a shitload of quotes from Malcolm and DharmaWheel?

Malcolm didn't reveal anything new, but a whole lot of what it isn't.

 

You seem to be involved with assessing the fingers that point to the moon.

It's a losing battle.

Take a look at Chogyam Trungpa. Do you think he was realized?

wiki:

Trungpa was also known for smoking tobacco and for his liberal use of alcohol;many who knew him characterized him as an alcoholic. He began drinking occasionally shortly after arriving in India. Before his coming to America, Trungpa drove a sports car into a joke shop in Dumfries, Scotland.While his companion was not seriously injured,Trungpa was left partially paralyzed. Later, he described this event as a pivotal moment which inspired the course of his teachings. Some accounts ascribe the accident to drinking. Others suggest he may have had a stroke.^[According to Trungpa himself, he blacked out.

 

He often combined drinking with teaching. David Chadwick recounts: "Suzuki [Roshi] asked Trungpa to give a talk to the students in the zendo the next night. Trungpa walked in tipsy and sat on the edge of the altar platform with his feet dangling. But he delivered a crystal-clear talk, which some felt had a quality – like Suzuki's talks – of not only being about the dharma but being itself the dharma." However, in some instances, he was too drunk to walk, and had to be carried.Also, according to the Steinbecks, on a couple of occasions his speech was unintelligible. One woman reported serving him "big glasses of gin first thing in the morning."

 

Two former students of Trungpa, John Steinbeck IV and his wife, wrote a sharply critical memoir of their lives with him in which they claim that, in addition to alcohol, Trungpa used $40,000 a year worth of cocaine, and used Seconal to come down from the cocaine. The cocaine use, say the Steinbecks, was kept secret from the wider Vajradhatu community.

 

Yet, "From 1959-1963, by appointment of the Dalai Lama, Chögyam Trungpa served as the spiritual advisor for the Young Lamas Home School in Dalhousie, India.".

 

As someone I am acquainted with quoted "Was trungpa realized? hell yes, the dalai lama and the karmapa pronounced him to be a living mahasiddha (they both said do as he says not as he does!) and he could make it rain, read minds, transmit the natural state to students, manifest various siddhis, wrote and taught dharma prolifically, the list goes on! "

 

So, if you want to keep staring at the finger and judge where it's been by looking at the crustations between the skin cells, that's fine with me. But you are missing the moon.

 

Perhaps this will give you a better understanding of the three kayas away from all the nonsense and nit-picking at DharmaWheel:

 

http://www.kagyu.org/kagyulineage/buddhism/cul/cul02.php

THE FRUITION OF BUDDHIST PRACTICE is the realization of the three kayas--Dharmakaya, Sambhogakaya, and Nirmanakaya. These are the three bodies of Buddha's being or enlightenment. Dharmakaya corresponds with one's mind, Sambhogakaya with one's speech, and Nirmanakaya with one's body. Dharmakaya is the formless body. It is an undifferentiated state of being which we cannot talk about in terms of either confusion or enlightenment.

The Dharmakaya is something that is always present; it is rediscovered rather than created anew. Because it is atemporal and ahistorical, we cannot attribute change or transformation to it. Because it is passive and indeterminate in nature, Dharmakaya cannot manifest as a medium for one to work for the benefit of others, but it does give rise to the deterministic aspects of Sambhogakaya and Nirmanakaya.

Like the Dharmakaya, the Sambhogakaya is always present. It has to do with mental powers, with the ability of one's mind to manifest in relation to the five wisdoms. In tantric practice, all deities are manifestations of Sambhogakaya because they embody the five different types of wisdom. The Sambhogakaya is connected with communication, both on the verbal and nonverbal levels, and it is also associated with the idea of relating, so that speech here means not just the capacity to use words but the ability to communicate on all levels. Both the Sambhogakaya and Dharmakaya aspects are already embodied within each sentient being, and fruition is a matter of coming to that realization.

Nirmanakaya is the physical aspect of an enlightened being, the medium through which communication and relating can be carried out. It can be said to be new or different, because it is only on the physical level that one can become transformed. In Tibetan the purified body, called ku, is the manifestation of the fully transformed body free from the influence of deeply set and inculcated karmic residues.

Our ordinary physical body is called lu. It is the product of karmic traces and dispositions, and it is lacking in spontaneity and creativity. Through the purification of one's body, speech, and mind, the physical body ceases to be a locus for undesirable negative tendencies, excessive desires, and obsessions, and instead becomes the Nirmanakaya, a medium with extraordinary power to work with and benefit others.

The idea of three bodies should not mislead us into thinking that there are three different entities. Dharmakaya and Sambhogakaya do not refer to entities so much as existential states of being, and only the Nirmanakaya body is created anew in physical form. Actually the three kayas are two bodies--the formless body and the body of form. Both the Sambhogakaya and Nirmanakaya are normally called the form bodies of the Buddha, while Dharmakaya is formless.

 

 

Anyway, please do me a favor. Please don't cut and paste reams of quotes from DharmaWheel.

If I were you I would quit examining the dirty finger (you don't know where it's been) and spend more time meditating. (or non-meditating).

 

All the best.

 

TI

[Simple_Jack]

.

Edited February 5, 2014 by Simple_Jack

[Simple_Jack]

.

Edited February 5, 2014 by Simple_Jack

[Simple_Jack]

.

Edited February 5, 2014 by Simple_Jack

[C T]

SJ, I cant say for sure whether or not Peterson is authorized to teach, nor am i really that interested, tbh. For all intents and purposes, he may have been authorized by some other lineage master, but this is not my concern. What i am more interested in is the fact that he was able to share something which an aspirant(s) could relate with and use as aid on the journey of spiritual unfoldment, and that was exactly what i endorsed in the first instance. And this primarily was the reason why the video was used, to point out to you that ChNNR also encourages this (at the 5-min mark).

 

As i have mentioned elsewhere, im fairly heretical when it comes to Dzogchen. Purists like Malcolm et al are good up to a point. The funny thing is, they either cant or wont say anything which could render their position 'non-puritanical', if you know what i mean. In a way, this is not very beneficial, because the tendency to cling to a particular stance and becoming rather rigid/contracted in the process seems pretty apparent.

 

No matter what we recognize as aids on the path, the crucial point which all great masters constantly remind us is to let go of clinging to such aids. ChNNR said that what is being used need not even be buddhist by name (this was in the clip).

 

We need to be open enough sometimes to see and accept what is useful, and then use the revelations as 'lubricant' to make the realizations come forth. That is the important aspect of practice, not who is authentic or who is not. Of course, when it comes to receiving empowerments, it goes without saying that one should get them only from authentic masters, but here, we are not receiving such, are we? We are merely doing an exercise to limber up the mind, to untie knots, and perhaps, to shake off some ingrained karmic 'claws'. In such attempts, there is really no reason to discard the possibility of picking up useful tips when such are recognized, rather than dismissing the existence of such a possibility based on the premise of someone's lack, or because we think that someone is not authentic (in this case), when, as a matter of fact, sometimes we can learn more from what is deemed lacking than from that which seems so full.

 

Personally, i dont dig this Malcolm dude too much, but still, i do consider some of his insights to be of great help to further my own understandings, but i would not go as far as to say that he is the final authority on Dzogchen intricacies. He may have many years of study under his belt, but still, i find a fair amount of rigidity in his thinking, but this is just me. Again, that could be because he has this reputation to upkeep, so its understandable.

[Creation]

Hi Creation

Thank you so much for finding these links. You wouldn't believe how they resonate with me.. In fact, I started to tingle when I first saw the links, even before I clicked on them..

Wonderful! They resonated enormously with me too. Pretty mindblowing stuff, about light channels and the non-necessity of deliberately manipulating the central channel. Very inspiring to practice, if nothing else. Mr. Peterson is definitely someone with realization and who has a refreshing willingness to speak straight about it. Now, would I practice guru yoga with his mindstream? No, I'll stick with authorized Dzogchen lamas for that. But I enjoy and benefit from his writing that are based on his experiences.

[Creation]

He may have many years of study under his belt, but still, i find a fair amount of rigidity in his thinking, but this is just me. Again, that could be because he has this reputation to upkeep, so its understandable.

I suspect that this kind of rigidity is actually encouraged by the Tibetan monastic education system. What do you think about this?

Edited January 11, 2013 by Creation

[C T]

Wonderful! They resonated enormously with me too. Pretty mindblowing stuff, about light channels and the non-necessity of deliberately manipulating the central channel. Very inspiring to practice, if nothing else. Mr. Peterson is definitely someone with realization and who has a refreshing willingness to speak straight about it. Now, would I practice guru yoga with his mindstream? No, I'll stick with authorized Dzogchen lamas for that. But I enjoy and benefit from his writing that are based on his experiences.

 

Precisely. Well said.

[C T]

I suspect that this kind of rigidity is actually encouraged by the Tibetan monastic education system. What do you think about this?

 

Very much so. Some encourage it more than others, in fact. For the initiates, discipline and structure is very much part of the early learning process. But there has to be a point of departure, somehow. Very much like lifting a jumbo jet into the air. To ensure safety and surety, a pilot has to abide by strict guidelines, with greater emphasis at take-off and when landing, no matter how many flight hours he or she has done. We dont want to speculate on outcomes if such protocol were not followed, but there is no room for laxity.

 

The novices that are found 'ready for departure' (numbering very few among the flock) move forward to the inner sanctum of higher teachings, whereupon the rigid structures loosen up, slowly at first, then gathers momentum, and finally, freedom. However, after the fact, some among the few will remain within the bounds of tradition by choice, while others use this freedom as a license to operate outside its perimeters, inciting much excitement along the way, not surprisingly, giving birth to the term, 'crazy wisdom'. Im sure you have come across the kind of almost unbridled 'crazy' these yogins can get up to... but, at the start, yes, they were all subject to very strict formalities -- but its just a phase, nonetheless.

[RongzomFan]

-----

Edited March 8, 2013 by alwayson

[RongzomFan]

-----

Edited March 8, 2013 by alwayson

[RongzomFan]

find a fair amount of rigidity in his thinking

 

Do you have an example.....

Edited January 12, 2013 by alwayson

[C T]

Do you have an example.....

 

Have you learnt anything from him that has made a significant impact on your progress? Really practical tools i mean, other than furthering your convictional stamp on differentiating the various methods into whats right and wrong?

 

 

Gawd, i missed your acidic quips. where have you been?

Edited January 12, 2013 by C T

[RongzomFan]

Have you learnt anything from him that has made a significant impact on your progress? Really practical tools i mean, other than furthering your convictional stamp on differentiating the various methods into whats right and wrong?

 

 

Gawd, i missed your acidic quips. where have you been?

 

 

Yes of course. Many things. And you dodged the question.

 

Most lamas say that ngondro, retreats etc. are necessary before direct introduction. Malcolm doesn't have this position. So that flies in the face of your perceived rigidity of Malcolm.

Edited January 12, 2013 by alwayson

[C T]

Yes of course. Many things. And you dodged the question.

 

Most lamas say that ngondro, retreats etc. are necessary before direct introduction. Malcolm doesn't have this position. So that flies in the face of your perceived rigidity of Malcolm.

 

Thats because he's not a lama, is he now? Are you implying that the lamas are outdated and Malcolm's stance hold more current value?

 

What about your view on the prelims.. do you think they are dispensable?

 

Tulku Urgyen, Dudjom Rinpoche, Jamyang Khyentse Rinpoche, Dilgo Khyentse Rinpoche, Dzogchen Rinpoche... are these learned masters the ones you are referring to as 'most lamas'? It goes without saying whose advice i would rather heed.

[RongzomFan]

Thats because he's not a lama, is he now? Are you implying that the lamas are outdated and Malcolm's stance hold more current value?

 

What about your view on the prelims.. do you think they are dispensable?

 

Tulku Urgyen, Dudjom Rinpoche, Jamyang Khyentse Rinpoche, Dilgo Khyentse Rinpoche, Dzogchen Rinpoche... are these learned masters the ones you are referring to as 'most lamas'? It goes without saying whose advice i would rather heed.

 

Now you are changing the subject from the rigidity of Malcolm to something else because you know you lost that argument.

[Tibetan_Ice]

Yes that would invalidate what he has written.

No that would not invalidate what he has written. Truth is where you find it regardless of source.

 

The excerpt that Jax wrote on the Kati Crystal Secret Channel conforms to my experiences. Perhaps that is the difference here. You are going by book knowledge, hearsay, intellectual 'knowledge' whereas I am resonating from experience.

 

What about 'accuracy'? Jax has always been hilariously misinformed, before any opinion of Malcolm. I'm not sure Malcolm was even aware of Jax until quite recently.

 

Jax is not knowledgeable about Menngagde in the least. To the extent he is authorized to teach Semde is unclear and murky.

 

I have never heard about Menngagde. What does that make me?

 

You remind me of the ancient Catholic clergy, looking down long noses through reading spectacles, reading a long list of requisites to see if the person is qualified to speak the truth. Does she float? Much simpler to burn them at the stake, eh?

 

TI

[RongzomFan]

samaya

Edited January 13, 2013 by alwayson

[RongzomFan]

No that would not invalidate what he has written. Truth is where you find it regardless of source.

 

The excerpt that Jax wrote on the Kati Crystal Secret Channel conforms to my experiences. Perhaps that is the difference here. You are going by book knowledge, hearsay, intellectual 'knowledge' whereas I am resonating from experience.

 

Your clairvoyant visions etc. have NOTHING to do with kati channel.

 

If it did, anyone who meditated could achieve rainbow body.

 

On any Buddhist forum like Esangha or Dharma Wheel, you would have been banned by now.....

 

 

P.S. I have the same psychic abilities as you, but I don't go talking about it all the time like a freaking maniac.

Edited January 13, 2013 by alwayson

[RongzomFan]

New Age, Hindu, Theravadin people have clairvoyant visions all the time.

 

I don't see them attaining rainbow body.

[Simple_Jack]

.

Edited February 5, 2014 by Simple_Jack

[Tibetan_Ice]

Your clairvoyant visions etc. have NOTHING to do with kati channel.

 

If it did, anyone who meditated could achieve rainbow body.

 

On any Buddhist forum like Esangha or Dharma Wheel, you would have been banned by now.....

 

 

P.S. I have the same psychic abilities as you, but I don't go talking about it all the time like a freaking maniac.

 

Hi Alwayson,

You are right. The Kati Secret Channel has nothing to do with clairvoyant visions, clairaudience, premonitions, reading peoples' minds.. That is all third eye stuff and fairly elementary.

 

You don't know what abilities I have, do don't go presuming that you have the same abilities. Can you play chess blindfolded?

 

I am so grateful that here at the TTB, we are free and open to discuss practices, subtle anatomy and the spiritual path without the threat of punishment or reciprocity. Perhaps you should put me on "Ignore".

 

 

TI

[RongzomFan]

You don't know what abilities I have, do don't go presuming that you have the same abilities. Can you play chess blindfolded?

 

Seeing through closed eyelids is so common, its ridiculous. Go onto lucid dreaming forums.

 

Experienced it many times.

 

You have a grandiose sense of yourself.

[RongzomFan]

Seeing through closed eyelids is in OBE/astral projection books at Barnes and Noble.

[Tibetan_Ice]

Seeing through closed eyelids is so common, its ridiculous. Go onto lucid dreaming forums.

 

Experienced it many times.

 

 

One does not see through closed eyelids to play chess blindfolded.

One visualizes the chess board in the head and then the person you are playing calls out their moves (or someone else calls out the moves). The hard part was learning how to think while maintaining the visualization. I was doing this when I was 16 yrs old. This is a fact.

 

I too have seen through closed eyes. It is not uncommon. But everything looks kind of greeny. The principle is described in the "Zen and the Brain" book. If I recall correctly, it is using the pineal gland to see through things when the eyes have disconnected.. Actually, the mind/awareness can do that on it's own if properly trained.

 

You have a grandiose sense of yourself.

 

What? There is no self. You used the word "self". Why didn't you use the word "identity"? Not hip?

 

TI