Dzogchen Teachings

[Mandrake]

Is your personal view higher than that of divine terma which is directly from Buddhas?

 

 

http://thetaobums.com/topic/26017-taobums-moderators-forcing-practitioners-to-break-samaya/

 

As a Dzogchenpa, I believe that Dzogchen terma is primordial and sacred down to the rules and regulations.

 

 

Do you believe in divine terma or not?

 

Yes or no?

 

The unquestioned belief in knowledge through divine revelation instead of a process of testing, correlating and falsifying, is an archaic attitude that yokes cultures. There's no merit in just being a true believer.

 

As for the term Dzogchenpa, it is just a term, and may have no correlation with any realizations - or lack thereof - of the person that brandishes himself with it, none at all.

 

 

M

[Mandrake]

Note the title of this forum......"Buddhist Discussion". Are you one?

 

Shakyamuni himself didn't use the term "Buddhist"; he didn't have "Buddhist Discussions" with his followers. People at this forum and elsewhere may recognize him as a vastly accomplished cultivator, partaking of his wisdom and tips to fellow cultivators - without turning it into an monolithic ideology as people have a propensity to do.

 

 

Mandrake

[Tibetan_Ice]

In the part you did not bold, it says very clearly this is talking about complex daily Vajrayana commitments that some people have.

 

Yes, but you said you were a pure Dzogchenpa:

 

alwayson, on 13 Mar 2013 - 16:51, said:

Yes, you can be a pure Dzogchenpa like Norbu, Malcolm or myself with no other religion.

 

So being a pure Dzogchenpa, you should have no samaya. Why do you keep saying you are a vajrayana practioner?

 

Who is your guru Alwayson?

[RongzomFan]

http://thetaobums.com/topic/27366-dzogchen-teachings/page-25#entry414247

[Tibetan_Ice]

http://thetaobums.com/topic/27366-dzogchen-teachings/page-25#entry414247

 

Can you be any more vague than that?

 

Is your guru C N Norbu? Did you meet him in person?

 

And he teaches you Vajrayana practices like you mentioned in other posts? mantra and tummo?

[RongzomFan]

Can you be any more vague than that?

 

The subject of your text selection is Vajrayana commitments to do certain practices.

 

"....on receiving an initiation there is always a specific commitment to observe."

[Simple_Jack]

 

So being a pure Dzogchenpa, you should have no samaya.

 

And he teaches you Vajrayana practices like you mentioned in other posts? mantra and tummo?

 

It's not like there is a total lack of samaya in Dzogchen.....

 

ChNN gives empowerments for meditational deities and other practices that have their own set of samayas. In that context, what he is explaining above is that in Dzogchen, it is not absolutely necessary to uphold those specific commitments: Because in the Dzogchen view, everything is accomplished in the state of rigpa. If for whatever reason you are not able to continue in the state of rigpa, then you fall back on maintaining the pure perception of the deity or whatever.

[themiddleway]

You last line is nothing more than an escapist attitude. That is what troubles me about Buddhists. As to the first, lineages and gurus are a thing of the past in which I am not interested in such authoritarianism.

 

The reliance and necessity of a teacher in Vajrayana is difficult for Westerners to accept but it is indicative of how Buddhist view the world, namely, that we are not all equal. The trend to do away with spiritual lineage ignores that hierarchies are an inevitable part of life. If this core feature of Dzogchen is not present, it ceases to exist as a teaching. We are not all one.

[ralis]

The reliance and necessity of a teacher in Vajrayana is difficult for Westerners to accept but it is indicative of how Buddhist view the world, namely, that we are not all equal. The trend to do away with spiritual lineage ignores that hierarchies are an inevitable part of life. If this core feature of Dzogchen is not present, it ceases to exist as a teaching. We are not all one.

 

 

I don't appreciate the overt put down of Westerners as if as a group we are lesser than or heathens. Further, you imply that the Buddhist worldview preached by the Lama hierarchy is superior and therefor the Lamas are superior? The primitive view of needing a divine intercessor such as what you posit in the Lama tribal view is no different than the Papal view.

[RongzomFan]

The primitive view of needing a divine intercessor such as what you posit in the Lama tribal view is no different than the Papal view.

 

The constant Chinese Communist propaganda of you and Mandrake calling us "archaic" and "primitive" is getting tiring.

[konchog uma]

without looking at the issue in terms of superior and inferior, its true that the Tibetan tradition of lamaism is based on the lama's ability to give empowerments, guidance, and to transmit the experience of the natural state. So its not without basis.

 

Its also true that its entrenched in dogma and antiquity and, from a certain point of view (which i believe is where you are coming from ralis) could use an overhaul in order to make it more accessible to those who do not have the need for the trappings of a guru (putting the lama before all others, making prostrations to the lama, and other trappings of lamaism that strike westerners as strange)... and i think its good that the dharma spreads in the west moreso than that bunch of Tibetan men get to maintain their time-honored traditions and religious fetishes.

 

But i think that the lineage of ridgens or vidyadharas who can awaken others is valid, and not because it reflects a need for divine intercession, but of human intercession. Its a practical thing, not something you need faith to practice or belief in what can't be proven. The benefit of a qualified teacher is tangible, quantifiable. A person may be able to achieve realization without one if their karmic conditions are right, but a lama makes an incaculable difference.

[RongzomFan]

Noone is forcing people to go into Vajrayana in the first place.

 

There are other types of Buddhism, and other religions altogether.

[Jetsun]

Tibetan Buddhism is lamaism, all the classic introductory texts make it clear that your whole path and development at least in the beginning is entirely dependent on your lama, so if relying on and putting your life in the hands of a lama does not suit your temperament then it is wise to look at other paths.

[konchog uma]

Thanks for your addition. Only one comment - rather than a "lama mak[ing] an incalculable difference," could you not simply say... it is "one who has the indefatigable qualities of a lama (or realized one)" that can "make the difference."

 

Your thoughts?

 

rv, im not sure what youre getting at. Its less simple to say it that way, in word count anyway. It seems semantic, except that in rare cases, there are those people who have devoted themselves to study and practice and logged the retreat time that lamas typically have etc. In that case (which i am not personally familiar with) i guess it would depend on if they had achieved a state of mind which allowed them to introduce students directly to the natural state.

 

I have been given empowerments, guidance, transmissions etc by westerners which were effective. Surprising even. But nothing like the experiences i have had with my lama... he is electric... so i am only speaking from my own point of view here. I haven't had any experience with people who have the indefatigable qualities of a lama who weren't actually lamas

 

not sure that answers your question but there is a lineage energy beyond someone's personal energy that a lineage holder taps into adn carries at all times. Being a lama might be qualitatively different than just having meditated and studied a lot, but im not %100 sure

[RongzomFan]

Thats a mythic story. Tilopa had human teachers.

 

http://books.google.com/books?id=j6IP550t4cAC&pg=PA13&dq=Mahamudra+and+Related+Instructions+contradicting+the+history+of+four+transmissions&hl=en&sa=X&ei=TJFDUc7uC8fc4AOnuIG4BQ&ved=0CC8QuwUwAA#v=onepage&q=Mahamudra%20and%20Related%20Instructions%20contradicting%20the%20history%20of%20four%20transmissions&f=true

 

"A song attributed to Tilopa, though it is not included in the canonical works, even claims he had no human guru, contradicting the history of four transmissions mentioned above. This discrepancy is sometimes explained as Vajradhara having given only the blessing, while the instructions came from his human teachers."

Edited March 15, 2013 by alwayson

[RongzomFan]

And Tilopa was a monk at one point, so he would have had even more undocumented teachers besides his later ones.

Edited March 15, 2013 by alwayson

[themiddleway]

I don't appreciate the overt put down of Westerners as if as a group we are lesser than or heathens. Further, you imply that the Buddhist worldview preached by the Lama hierarchy is superior and therefor the Lamas are superior? The primitive view of needing a divine intercessor such as what you posit in the Lama tribal view is no different than the Papal view.

 

 

Lamaism is a misnomer. The importance of the Guru has its origin in the mahasiddas of India who shared the Vajrayana teachings with the Tibetans.

 

The ‘Lama hierarchy’ faithfully preserved the teachings down into the modern era, so they do have authority when it comes to these teachings. This living lineage is available for anyone who has an interest in the Dzogchen teachings.

 

You are free to practice Dzogchen regardless of your faith, or lack of, but it requires transmission from a qualified Guru. There are other spheres of knowledge that require a qualified teacher in the West/ East; I don’t get what the big deal is?

 

What you are proposing is blind egalitarianism, which is a sickness of the New Age school and neo-Advaita.

 

It’s a brutal world full of ignorant people; true spiritual teachers should be treasured.

[ralis]

What you are proposing is blind egalitarianism, which is a sickness of the New Age school and neo-Advaita.

 

It’s a brutal world full of ignorant people; true spiritual teachers should be treasured.

 

I am not proposing equality but am in opposition to deifying Lamas who happen to be fallible humans. Furthermore, Donald Lopez would disagree with you about Lamaism which is just a mishmash of teachings from different cultures.

 

http://www.amazon.com/Prisoners-Shangri-La-Tibetan-Buddhism-West/dp/0226493113/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1363453747&sr=8-3&keywords=donald+lopez

 

I am not some ignorant fool as you so characterize me but have taken teachings from Theravada to Dzogchen. Moreover, I am criticizing the shills who persistently apologize from within the system as opposed to thinking critically by asking questions. To question and challenge one's preconceived ideas is a sign of intelligence.

Edited March 16, 2013 by ralis

[RongzomFan]

but am in opposition to deifying Lamas who happen to be fallible humans.

 

That is your opinion. Then live as you wish and stop preaching.

 

I don't believe that Dudjom Rinpoche, Nyala Pema Dudul, Kunzang Dechen Lingpa etc. were fallible humans.

Edited March 16, 2013 by alwayson

[ralis]

That is your opinion. Then live as you wish and stop preaching.

 

I don't believe that Dudjom Rinpoche, Nyala Pema Dudul, Kunzang Dechen Lingpa etc. were fallible humans.

 

 

What is your evidence of this?

[RongzomFan]

What is your evidence of this?

 

 

What is the evidence of Jesus' resurrection?

 

Its a faith thing. If you want to start a "rationalist" forum on Tao Bums ask the moderators.

[ralis]

What is the evidence of Jesus' resurrection?

 

Its a faith thing. If you want to start a "rationalist" forum on Tao Bums ask the moderators.

 

You made a statement and I am challenging it. By positing an absolute statement then claiming it is faith based (blind faith) does not make your argument valid. Furthermore, you must defend what you stated.

 

Saying Dudjom Rinpoche was infallible because you say so is absurd.

 

You can't prove or disprove your premise.

Edited March 16, 2013 by ralis

[RongzomFan]

You made a statement and I am challenging it. By positing an absolute statement then claiming it is faith based (blind faith) does not make your argument valid. Furthermore, you must defend what you stated.

 

Saying Dudjon Rinpoche was infallible because you say so is absurd.

 

 

I said "I don't believe that Dudjom Rinpoche, Nyala Pema Dudul, Kunzang Dechen Lingpa etc. were fallible humans."

 

 

Its a matter of religious faith, like Jesus being God, or Mohammed being the final messenger, or whatever.

[ralis]

I said "I don't believe that Dudjom Rinpoche, Nyala Pema Dudul, Kunzang Dechen Lingpa etc. were fallible humans."

 

By stating that you are also stating they were infallible. You are trapped in an either/or dilemma. A problem with an absolute dichotomous world view.

Edited March 16, 2013 by ralis

[RongzomFan]

Are you aware of the doctrine of Papal infallibility?