Dzogchen Teachings

[RongzomFan]

So, taking it upon myself to rephrase Ralis' question, to what level would you say that your obscurations have been removed to a point where you can confidently say the removal should be almost permanent? And, what would be some examples of these obscurations that you have managed to cut, and by what methods employed?

 

 

I don't know what teachings asunthatneversets follows but.....

 

Dzogchen is about recognition vs nonrecognition. Knowledge vs. ignorance.

Edited March 22, 2013 by alwayson

[asunthatneversets]

 

 

I don't know what teachings asunthatneversets follows but.....

 

Dzogchen is about recognition vs nonrecognition. Knowledge vs. ignorance.

Recognition of your nature implies knowledge (vidyā/rigpa) of your nature. Non-recognition of your nature implies ignorance (avidyā/marigpa) of your nature. Recognition is crucial, hence direct introduction being first and foremost in dzogchen.

[asunthatneversets]

 

 

I don't know what teachings asunthatneversets follows but.....

 

Dzogchen is about recognition vs nonrecognition. Knowledge vs. ignorance.

My apologies I misread your post and thought you had said dzogchen is 'not' about recognition vs. non-recognition. I would've edited my post above but don't see how to on the phone. Yes I agree though... Dzogchen is concerned with recognition vs. non-recognition / knowledge vs. ignorance.

[C T]

asunthatneversets...

 

Is there any reason why you have chosen to avoid or delay answering the questions posed to you? (post 492)

 

You come across as someone with vast esoteric knowledge and perhaps experience, reading some of your posts over in DW, so i thought it would be so good to have you share with us your realizations.

 

Yet, if you choose to disregard the questions, that too is very acceptable, so no pressure.

[RongzomFan]

You come across as someone with vast esoteric knowledge and perhaps experience, reading some of your posts over in DW

 

Is this supposed to be sarcastic?

[C T]

Is this supposed to be sarcastic?

Why did you ask?

[Mandrake]

I for one, am not necessarily for adopting the 'outer garb' of a foreign culture in place of our own. Nor am I an advocate of dismissing the accomplishments and/or sophistication of our own cultures philosophies...buuuuut, our own philosophies tend be what is termed as a form of realism in Buddhism...

Simple Jack:

I was thinking about for example the accomplishments in philosophy of law, the role of individuals contra the state, moral philosophies, philosophy of science etc. We have a sophistication here, that has done tremendously much in order to improve the states of both groups and individuals. Then, fallible tendencies can be found in people in the west and east, and in practice things may not reach their optimal expression.

 

 

M

[Mandrake]

In any case, the current situation of the politics of Tibet and its institutions is quite complicated. There are organizations that have broken from the typical mold of presenting the teachings such as ChNN's Dzogchen Community, Kalu Rinpoche's organization, and FMPT to name a few. I for one don't think that the current situation of Tibetan institutions of monasteries, lineages and what not, are going to improve anytime soon.

 

Honestly, I don't care either way how the teachings are presented. I just think that we shouldn't totally dismiss or sterilize the tradition of lineages which preserved Tibetan practices, in order for it to fit within our culture. I'm all for adaptation, but not necessarily to the point that we have an anemic form of practice for the sake of the Western mindset.

 

@S_J:

But you would agree that the teachings will not preserve themselves? Buddhism historically has been adapted to cultures and times, and has survived. In what form do you think these teachings will best be preserved in this age?

 

 

M

[RongzomFan]

putting on protective shades....

 

(•_•)

( •_•)>⌐■-■

(⌐■_■)

[Jetsun]

 

@S_J:

But you would agree that the teachings will not preserve themselves? Buddhism historically has been adapted to cultures and times, and has survived. In what form do you think these teachings will best be preserved in this age?

 

 

M

If you look at the work being done by people like the Dalai Lama and Mingur Rinpoche it looks to me that they are trying to preserve the teachings in a scientific non sectarian form.

[asunthatneversets]

asunthatneversets...

 

Is there any reason why you have chosen to avoid or delay answering the questions posed to you? (post 492)

 

You come across as someone with vast esoteric knowledge and perhaps experience, reading some of your posts over in DW, so i thought it would be so good to have you share with us your realizations.

 

Yet, if you choose to disregard the questions, that too is very acceptable, so no pressure.

Hey sorry for the delayed response... I suppose I don't see the benefit in discussing myself. In the context of realizations, insights and experience, I'm a proponent of speaking from experience but not about one's own experience. There are many who brag and flaunt the little experience they have, making mountains out of molehills while others with vast experience are quiet and humble, never saying a word. I respect humility and though there are exceptions, I do not find teachers or individuals who boast about how long they've been practitioners, what transmissions they've acquired or what level of attainment they hold... to be any different than the man who drives a exotic sports car draped in gold chains and diamonds rings with little wealth to his name. They are both compensating for their lack of confidence and measure themselves by the amount of attention and praise they get. Worse yet, others speak of their length of practice, transmissions and level of attainment while having none at all, fooling everyone into thinking they are profound and experienced practitioners or teachers... how sad it is for everyone they beguile... and how sad it is for them that they are compelled to play such a petty game, especially a game where no one wins. I would rather no one listen to me than for people to accept what I say based off of my experience.

 

"Wealth, success and status are all simply ways of attracting enemies and demons... aren’t you just bragging... all their praise and acknowledgements will only make you proud... there’s no better sign of accomplishment than a disciplined mind, this is true victory for the real warrior who carries no weapons."

- Chatral Rinpoche

[Tibetan_Ice]

Hey sorry for the delayed response... I suppose I don't see the benefit in discussing myself. In the context of realizations, insights and experience, I'm a proponent of speaking from experience but not about one's own experience. There are many who brag and flaunt the little experience they have, making mountains out of molehills while others with vast experience are quiet and humble, never saying a word. I respect humility and though there are exceptions, I do not find teachers or individuals who boast about how long they've been practitioners, what transmissions they've acquired or what level of attainment they hold... to be any different than the man who drives a exotic sports car draped in gold chains and diamonds rings with little wealth to his name. They are both compensating for their lack of confidence and measure themselves by the amount of attention and praise they get. Worse yet, others speak of their length of practice, transmissions and level of attainment while having none at all, fooling everyone into thinking they are profound and experienced practitioners or teachers... how sad it is for everyone they beguile... and how sad it is for them that they are compelled to play such a petty game, especially a game where no one wins. I would rather no one listen to me than for people to accept what I say based off of my experience.

 

"Wealth, success and status are all simply ways of attracting enemies and demons... aren’t you just bragging... all their praise and acknowledgements will only make you proud... there’s no better sign of accomplishment than a disciplined mind, this is true victory for the real warrior who carries no weapons."

- Chatral Rinpoche

 

Hi A sun that never sets

How sad to percieve the sharing of experiences from the point of view of ego, that it's sole purpose is either to boost one's self up or attain some kind of status. Or that humility and secrecy are somehow subduing the ego.

 

All things are impermanent and prisons in their own right. Not only the golden chains and hot sports cars, but accomplishments and experiences as well. You and I are impermanent. We all are.

 

There are some of us who share our experiences for the benefit of others. It is a good thing, to help others.

 

There are some of us who share experiences to learn more about the practices, what areas to focus on, which to relinquish.

 

In 100 years, you and I will both be dead and forgotten.

 

How many accomplished masters, carrying their secrets to the grave, suddenly realize that their secrecy or humility has benefitted nobody but themselves? And then they write a book about it, or ask someone to write one for them.

 

How can you assess the competency of your guru if they tell you that everything that they teach you is to remain secret?

 

If the guru has bound you to secrecy and has told you that the astral planes are as high as you can get and you never compared notes, how will you know that you were deceived?

 

If a teaching relies on it's secrecy to retain its potency, then there is no substantial truth in the teaching.

 

If your own humility is binding you, then you are a prisoner. If you view discussing practices, spiritual techniques, psychic architecture as only bragging and posturing and therfore refrain from it, you are missing out on helping others and also refining your own understanding.

 

Buddha said, don't accept his word for anything. Examine, assess, criticize and discover the truth for yourself. One way you do this is by comparing notes with others.

 

Buddha did not say, don't tell anyone about your accomplishments, keep it secret and carry it to your grave. Did he? I'm sure he didn't say to openly display abilities, like a circus, but he might have said: in the proper time and place, abilities are usefull and serve as a help for serious students. He might have said to compare notes, share what you have learned and experienced in hopes of getting a better understanding and a deeper realization.

 

Why do you think that there are so many books about Buddhism out there about rainbow bodies, writing in stone, leaving footprints in rock, milking pictures of cows producing milk, accomplishments, miracles, siddhis etc? They aren't bragging. They are showing us that the reality that most of us believe in is not the real thing. It has nothing to do with ego, humility, self agrandizement or posturing. To perceive it that way is to view it through the green-colored-glasses.

 

Is it better to hide your experiences and secrets from the world and take them to your grave, or to try to foster an atmosphere of learning, education and try to benefit all sentient beings?

 

After all, it may be this world that your next life will be in. If nobody shared their spiritual insights and knowledge, the future might look pretty glum.

 

Besides, here is the west, people think you are an idiot if you openly share your experiences and insights, instead of selling them, like everybody else does. LOL

 

The heart knows no secrecy and it betrays the conceptual mind and intellectual knowledge the first chance it gets.

 

Just thought I'd give you the other point-of-view.

 

TI

[asunthatneversets]

 

Hi A sun that never sets

How sad to percieve the sharing of experiences from the point of view of ego, that it's sole purpose is either to boost one's self up or attain some kind of status. Or that humility and secrecy are somehow subduing the ego.

 

All things are impermanent and prisons in their own right. Not only the golden chains and hot sports cars, but accomplishments and experiences as well. You and I are impermanent. We all are.

 

There are some of us who share our experiences for the benefit of others. It is a good thing, to help others.

 

There are some of us who share experiences to learn more about the practices, what areas to focus on, which to relinquish.

 

In 100 years, you and I will both be dead and forgotten.

 

How many accomplished masters, carrying their secrets to the grave, suddenly realize that their secrecy or humility has benefitted nobody but themselves? And then they write a book about it, or ask someone to write one for them.

 

How can you assess the competency of your guru if they tell you that everything that they teach you is to remain secret?

 

If the guru has bound you to secrecy and has told you that the astral planes are as high as you can get and you never compared notes, how will you know that you were deceived?

 

If a teaching relies on it's secrecy to retain its potency, then there is no substantial truth in the teaching.

 

If your own humility is binding you, then you are a prisoner. If you view discussing practices, spiritual techniques, psychic architecture as only bragging and posturing and therfore refrain from it, you are missing out on helping others and also refining your own understanding.

 

Buddha said, don't accept his word for anything. Examine, assess, criticize and discover the truth for yourself. One way you do this is by comparing notes with others.

 

Buddha did not say, don't tell anyone about your accomplishments, keep it secret and carry it to your grave. Did he? I'm sure he didn't say to openly display abilities, like a circus, but he might have said: in the proper time and place, abilities are usefull and serve as a help for serious students. He might have said to compare notes, share what you have learned and experienced in hopes of getting a better understanding and a deeper realization.

 

Why do you think that there are so many books about Buddhism out there about rainbow bodies, writing in stone, leaving footprints in rock, milking pictures of cows producing milk, accomplishments, miracles, siddhis etc? They aren't bragging. They are showing us that the reality that most of us believe in is not the real thing. It has nothing to do with ego, humility, self agrandizement or posturing. To perceive it that way is to view it through the green-colored-glasses.

 

Is it better to hide your experiences and secrets from the world and take them to your grave, or to try to foster an atmosphere of learning, education and try to benefit all sentient beings?

 

After all, it may be this world that your next life will be in. If nobody shared their spiritual insights and knowledge, the future might look pretty glum.

 

Besides, here is the west, people think you are an idiot if you openly share your experiences and insights, instead of selling them, like everybody else does. LOL

 

The heart knows no secrecy and it betrays the conceptual mind and intellectual knowledge the first chance it gets.

 

Just thought I'd give you the other point-of-view.

 

TI

I can speak from experience without discussing my own experience. I can share knowledge, insight and help other individuals without listing off my own accomplishments and attainments... I don't see what the issue is.

[C T]

Hey sorry for the delayed response... I suppose I don't see the benefit in discussing myself. In the context of realizations, insights and experience, I'm a proponent of speaking from experience but not about one's own experience. There are many who brag and flaunt the little experience they have, making mountains out of molehills while others with vast experience are quiet and humble, never saying a word. I respect humility and though there are exceptions, I do not find teachers or individuals who boast about how long they've been practitioners, what transmissions they've acquired or what level of attainment they hold... to be any different than the man who drives a exotic sports car draped in gold chains and diamonds rings with little wealth to his name. They are both compensating for their lack of confidence and measure themselves by the amount of attention and praise they get. Worse yet, others speak of their length of practice, transmissions and level of attainment while having none at all, fooling everyone into thinking they are profound and experienced practitioners or teachers... how sad it is for everyone they beguile... and how sad it is for them that they are compelled to play such a petty game, especially a game where no one wins. I would rather no one listen to me than for people to accept what I say based off of my experience.

 

"Wealth, success and status are all simply ways of attracting enemies and demons... aren’t you just bragging... all their praise and acknowledgements will only make you proud... there’s no better sign of accomplishment than a disciplined mind, this is true victory for the real warrior who carries no weapons."

- Chatral Rinpoche

love the quote, thanks!

 

There are skillful and subtle ways of imparting wisdom and catalyze transformation in others.

 

Some teachers do it (all the time) without the initiate even fully knowing or acknowledging they had been helped directly.

 

After all, the highest transformation is also the most ordinary, the most complete and the most natural path. When one is in touch with the most ordinary, there is no need to even contemplate virtues like humility and equanimity, for do you not agree that in one who is realized, such qualities as these are spontaneously present?

 

Its not that hard to see thru who the pretenders are.

[Jeff]

 

Some teachers do it (all the time) without the initiate even fully knowing or acknowledging they had been helped directly.

 

After all, the highest transformation is also the most ordinary, the most complete and the most natural path. When one is in touch with the most ordinary, there is no need to even contemplate virtues like humility and equanimity, for do you not agree that in one who is realized, such qualities as these are spontaneously present?

 

.

 

Definitely worth repeating.

[RongzomFan]

There are skillful and subtle ways of imparting wisdom and catalyze transformation in others.

 

After all, the highest transformation

 

 

I guess you are speaking from a generic Vajrayana POV with all this transformation stuff. Which is fine by me.

 

 

Dzogchen on the other hand is about recognition vs nonrecognition. Knowledge vs. ignorance.

Edited March 26, 2013 by alwayson

[konchog uma]

How can you assess the competency of your guru if they tell you that everything that they teach you is to remain secret?

 

obviously by practicing the yogas they teach you and evaluating whether or not they have an awakening effect. Whether you can talk to others about what youre doing (or think youre doing) is irrelevant to the competency of the guru. Whether or not you can talk about your practices publicly has no bearing whatever on whether the practices are effective. I would trust a vajrayana guru who told me not to talk about my practice to others over one who said it was fine to blab tantra this tantra that everywhere. Secrecy maintains the space, the container, which helps subdue ego and creates effective practice.

 

When one has broken samaya, it can disrupt their steadiness in meditation and cause other problems for them. For a more complete explanation, i recommend Dakpo Tashi Nyamgal's Clarifying the Natural State. It is hard for westerners to understand, but there are pragmatic reasons for samaya.

 

All things are impermanent and prisons in their own right. Not only the golden chains and hot sports cars, but accomplishments and experiences as well.

 

liberating accomplishments can liberate, as can experiences. But talking to others about accomplishments and experiences is rarely liberating. One might even think they are helping others, but they could be taken in the wrong way, or give an incomplete explanation which is not helpful. It can even be harmful. You were saying on this very forum about how clear light had to do with visions of luminosity, which it simply doesn't, and false claims like that can be misleading to beginners who don't know any better but to listen to those who seem to offer the "fruits of practice" but aren't actual teachers, only students with no sense of samaya. Thats why its advised to leave the teaching to the teachers, and as a student, to just focus on practice, not on talking about practice. Thats why if you read buddhist forums and questions about direct introduction, tantra, clear light, mahamudra, dzogchen, etc, there usually aren't a lot of replies, except some idle speculation by practitioners who don't know any better, and the senior practitioners who point out that that topic is not for public talk.

 

 

 

 

"It is not secret because there is something to hide, but in order to protect the practitioner from the pitfalls and downfalls that ego can bring to the practice. In particular, practitioners tend to fall prey to “spiritual materialism,” where their practice becomes just another fashion statement intended to adorn their egos and make them feel important, or have them feel that they’re part of a ‘cool’ social tribe, rather than to tame and transform their minds. When practiced in this way, the Vajrayana path becomes worse than useless.

Also, the Vajrayana teachings are "hidden" in the sense that their meaning is not apparent to someone who has not received the appropriate teachings. It’s like a foreign language. Because some of the imagery and symbolism can seem strange or even violent to the uninitiated, it’s generally recommended to keep it hidden so that it doesn’t put off newer practitioners, who might develop wrong views about the Buddhist path in general and the Vajrayana path in particular."

-Dzongsar Khyentse Rinpoche

[konchog uma]

 

Thats why if you read buddhist forums and questions about direct introduction, tantra, clear light, mahamudra, dzogchen, etc, there usually aren't a lot of replies, except some idle speculation by practitioners who don't know any better, and the senior practitioners who point out that that topic is not for public talk.

 

with the notable exception of DC of course lol

[Tibetan_Ice]

 

konchog uma, on 26 Mar 2013 - 12:14, said

You were saying on this very forum about how clear light had to do with visions of luminosity, which it simply doesn't, and false claims like that can be misleading to beginners who don't know any better but to listen to those who seem to offer the "fruits of practice" but aren't actual teachers, only students with no sense of samaya.

 

 

The clear light, sambhogakaya, which is inseperable from emptiness is that from which the five lights arise. Therefore, all visions arise from the dharmakaya and the sambhogakaya. Therefore, all visions have the intrinsic property of clear light.

 

Fine, you quoted Tenzin's strict interpretation of clear light on the other thread and it is a good one. But it didn't explain the "Clear Light of Bliss" or the "Clear LIght of Death" or the "Clear Light of Dreaming", did it?

 

Don't go accusing me of making false claims when it is you who does not understand the mechanism or the dependancies..

Edited March 29, 2013 by Tibetan_Ice

[konchog uma]

if you can provide evidence that clear light has anything to do with luminosity that would be more appropriate.

 

clear light is not samboghakaya.

[RongzomFan]

Clear light can refer to about three different things.

 

1. The inseperable clarity and emptiness of the mind, called kun gzhi, Buddha Nature etc. in Mahamudra. "Emptiness" in this specific context means you cannot point to clarity with your finger. You cannot find clarity, nor get rid of clarity.

 

2. The usual meaning of clear light is when the winds (vayus) are slowed down to a significant extent. Winds and mind are the same thing, so if the winds move subtlety that is considered "subtle mind". Clear light of sleep occurs naturally every night when the winds reconfigure. In dream yoga, you enter the clear light of sleep, and from there you enter a lucid dream. Basically the same thing as wake initiated lucid dreaming, although its combined with transmission of course. Natural death is similar.

Edited March 26, 2013 by alwayson

[konchog uma]

whats the third?

[C T]

I guess you are speaking from a generic Vajrayana POV with all this transformation stuff. Which is fine by me.

 

 

Dzogchen on the other hand is about recognition vs nonrecognition. Knowledge vs. ignorance.

yes, its about recognition. but how many can remain in the perpetual state of knowing that non-recognition is in fact a deception?

 

i am more interested in the basic ordinary mind of beings. references to things pertaining to ultimate reality are simply not sustainable, as good as hot air in a balloon, limited usage time.

 

According to master Thinley Norbu, ordinary mind (tha mal gyi shes pa) can be synthesized into 3 definitions.

 

The ordinary mind that is continuously distracted in delusion is basic delusion that is totally engaged in dualistic mind. Sentient beings hold to existence as self-characterized, so this kind of ordinary mind is only an object of purification.

 

Ordinary mind as experienced by practitioners on the path occurs when, for example, any conceptions that arise are instantly identified so that both mindfulness and conception are objectless and pure in natural clarity. This is called the ordinary mind of experience (nyams kyi tha mal gyi shes pa), which is not totally ordinary.

 

The ordinary mind of realization is the mind that recognizes, everything is included there. No one has known anything other than that.

 

Thus, as said, in the basic nature of wisdom mind that is originally perfectly pure and transcends all effort, by not engaging in any attempt to change, modify, abandon or accept, present awareness is only wisdom that has never known delusion. Since this is ordinary awareness that realizes the unending nature, it is not at all necessary to grasp mindfulness. This is the ordinary awareness of realization, and this alone, one should affirm that one will realize. At the time of death, when the sounds, forms, lights and especially the appearances of the peaceful and wrathful deities of the bardo of dharmata dawn, for all those who have attained confidence in the developing and completing stages, it will be as it is said in The Essence of Butter pith instructions:

 

All appearances of rainbow light are the natural clarity of one's own awareness.

All appearances of the manifestations of peaceful and wrathful wisdom deities

are the natural form of one's own awareness.

All sounds are one's own sound.

All light is one's own light.

Have no doubt or second thoughts about this.

If doubt arises, one will be thrown into cyclic existence.

If one decides that these are self-manifesting appearances, not wavering from clear emptiness,

The Three Kayas will be attained, and that right there is Buddhahood.

Even if one is thrown into cyclic existence, one will definitely not go there.

Edited March 27, 2013 by C T

[RongzomFan]

yes, its about recognition. but how many can remain in the perpetual state of knowing that non-recognition is in fact a deception?

 

What does that even mean?

 

In trekcho, you either recognize unfabricated presence vs the conceptualizing mind.

 

Or you don't.

[RongzomFan]

At the time of death, when the sounds, forms, lights and especially the appearances of the peaceful and wrathful deities of the bardo of dharmata dawn

 

 

These peaceful and wrathful deities won't pop up unless you practice Shitro etc.

 

Christians probably experience Satan. Indeed there are youtube videos of NDE's.

 

"Avoid the sorry fate of most people, who get completely overwhelmed believing the displays of their own buddha nature to be devils coming to torture them and carry them off to hell. What a pity that would be!"

Urgyen, Tulku Rinpoche (2011-12-13). Quintessential Dzogchen: Confusion Dawns as Wisdom (p. 26). Random House Inc Clients. Kindle Edition.

Edited March 27, 2013 by alwayson