Dzogchen "Direct Introduction" Videos

[asunthatneversets]

Sure, feel free to disagree. Will such disagreements set records straight, or merely lead to more doubts arising in people looking in for a peep at the buddha-Drama which seems to be a constant feature here?

 

There is such a thing as skilful means, right?

 

You seem like someone who's been reasonably exposed to Tibetan Buddhism, and presumably have been in the company of eminent teachers from that tradition ~ tell me, how many times have you seen these teachers demonstrate an attitude of arrogance towards those who act disruptively during teachings and retreat workshops? As a matter of great significance, those who are suddenly overcome by emotional outbursts (which happens now and then) actually get to feel more warmth and given more understanding by the teacher.

 

The more stable one's view, the more expansive one's ability to hold others, especially those whose steps are not fully steadied yet.

 

 

That has nothing to do with whether an individual is qualified to transmit certain practices. Receiving teachings from an unqualified teacher means you might as well not receive the teaching at all, as there is no connection to the essence.

[C T]

Funny, the influence which first aroused Tsem Rinpoche's deep, deep need to become a Dharma student was a plumber/author who went by the pen name of Lobsang Rampa.

 

I mean no disrespect, but i think people like you will never get it. You simply want to maintain what you think is pure and right on the one hand, and on the other, you crumple, all in one smooth motion, the very foundation of Buddhadharma.

 

You can argue about qualifications, lineage authenticity, blah blah, till the cows come home, but honestly, when the day's done, what have you achieved? Even if you win the argument, what have you really achieved? A tally to your meritorious accumulations?

[asunthatneversets]

I'm not talking about coarse petty qualifications and lineage shit. I'm talking about whether the individual has completed (or is near completion) the practice they are transmitting.

 

Thögal for example, requires that the teacher transmitting to have at least accomplished third vision. If said teacher has not encountered the third vision, or exhaustion of dharmatā, they are unqualified to teach thögal. It is very simple.

 

You're welcome to act like you're beyond such 'limitations' but that is something for you to work out.

Edited February 4, 2014 by asunthatneversets

[Anderson]

Funny, the influence which first aroused Tsem Rinpoche's deep, deep need to become a Dharma student was a plumber/author who went by the pen name of Lobsang Rampa.

 

I mean no disrespect, but i think people like you will never get it. You simply want to maintain what you think is pure and right on the one hand, and on the other, you crumple, all in one smooth motion, the very foundation of Buddhadharma.

 

You can argue about qualifications, lineage authenticity, blah blah, till the cows come home, but honestly, when the day's done, what have you achieved? Even if you win the argument, what have you really achieved? A tally to your meritorious accumulations?

 

No offence, but you seem to be very adept in lecturing everybody of how a dzogchen pracritioner should behave .

Why dont you try to be less critical and follow your own advice ?

[Anderson]

I'm not talking about coarse petty qualifications and lineage shit. I'm talking about whether the individual has completed (or is near completion) the practice they are transmitting. Thögal for example, if in's has not encountered the third vision or exhaustion of dharmatā, they are unqualified to teach thögal. It is very simple. You're welcome to act like you're beyond such 'limitations' but that is something for you to work out.

 

Hear that Jax ....?

 

Third vission, nothing less...

[C T]

No offence, but you seem to be very adept in lecturing everybody of how a dzogchen pracritioner should behave . Why dont you try to be less critical and follow your own advice ?

i do consciously try, as much as possible.

[asunthatneversets]

The same type of premise is applicable with receiving information about a city.

 

Can you depend on the information of an individual who has only read about that city and is giving second hand information?

 

Or would the information of someone who lives there and is familiar with that city, from first hand experience, be far more reliable?

 

Any smart person would obviously go with the latter information and guidance. Why? Because that person is actually qualified to be giving that information.

[C T]

I'm not talking about coarse petty qualifications and lineage shit. I'm talking about whether the individual has completed (or is near completion) the practice they are transmitting.

 

Thögal for example, requires that the teacher transmitting to have at least accomplished third vision. If said teacher has not encountered the third vision, or exhaustion of dharmatā, they are unqualified to teach thögal. It is very simple.

 

You're welcome to act like you're beyond such 'limitations' but that is something for you to work out.

I know my limitations. I am not omniscient, therefore i am unable to call someone out, in full confidence, to say that they are not in the position to teach something, and furthermore, to pound away disparagingly at the integrity of this individual. I dont care if you say it, or even if some high lama were to say it, this is contrary to buddhist conduct.

 

If you are so precise and full of wisdom (you obviously come across as knowledgable) then you will know instinctively the right approach to adopt in this instance, instead of resorting to nonchalant remarks and quips, for example, by saying "dangerous, dangerous".... is that some ego-stoking thing or what? Could you not have chosen a better, clearer, more helpful response? (yes, you could) but in your lapse of clarity, you uttered those words which are completely without substance, and here you are again, showing your knowledgable side (the good looking side) as if saying, hey, people, see how pretty i can sling the mud?

 

Hypocrites, the likes of you and Anderson.

 

Go chant more Vajrakilaya mantras.

[C T]

The same type of premise is applicable with receiving information about a city.

 

Can you depend on the information of an individual who has only read about that city and is giving second hand information?

 

Or would the information of someone who lives there and is familiar with that city, from first hand experience, be far more reliable?

 

Any smart person would obviously go with the latter information and guidance. Why? Because that person is actually qualified to be giving that information.

nowadays the trend is to depend on sat navs.

[asunthatneversets]

I know my limitations. I am not omniscient, therefore i am unable to call someone out, in full confidence, to say that they are not in the position to teach something, and furthermore, to pound away disparagingly at the integrity of this individual. I dont care if you say it, or even if some high lama were to say it, this is contrary to buddhist conduct.

 

If you are so precise and full of wisdom (you obviously come across as knowledgable) then you will know instinctively the right approach to adopt in this instance, instead of resorting to nonchalant remarks and quips, for example, by saying "dangerous, dangerous".... is that some ego-stoking thing or what? Could you not have chosen a better, clearer, more helpful response? (yes, you could) but in your lapse of clarity, you uttered those words which are completely without substance, and here you are again, showing your knowledgable side (the good looking side) as if saying, hey, people, see how pretty i can sling the mud?

 

Hypocrites, the likes of you and Anderson.

 

Go chant more Vajrakilaya mantras.

 

My so-called nonchalant remarks and quips are, in my opinion, a semi-polite way to voice an objection without engaging in disparaging ad hominem attacks. I say 'dangerous' because the post I commented on contained what I consider to be dangerous rhetoric, there is really no need to elaborate further than that. The controversial aspects of the post in question are surely self-evident. I'm not quite sure what your issue is, if you disagree with what I said you are welcome to, if you believe my response was unelaborated and lowbrow, you are welcome to. Everyone has opinions, and you are welcome to your own.

 

At any rate, I beg to differ that my voice of discord is contrary to buddhist conduct. Mahāvidyādhara Jigme Lingpa clearly states:

 

"In the first place, the primary condition necessary for initiation is none other than the vajra master himself; therefore it is very important to examine the teacher to whom you are connected. As Orgyenpa has said:

 

'Having an unexamined lama is like jumping into an abyss;

Having an unexamined student is like drinking poison.'

 

Because you must not make a mistake in this basic situation. I will examine the nature of it. The rig pa rang shar tantra teaches the following on the characteristics of a master:

 

'A master endowed with the truth of the vajra should:

Have a good disposition and be skilled in teaching,

Have obtained initiation and have applied himself to the secret mantra,

Know all of the outer and inner activities,

Be inseparable from his yidam deity,

Be undistracted in contemplation,

Be learned in the secret tantras of the secret mantra,

Which hold the truth of rdzogs chen man ngag sde

Have achieved all outer an inner accomplishments,

Never move from the meaning of the view,

Perform the outer, inner, and secret activities,

With qualities like precious jewels,

And an inexhaustible treasury of activity.'

 

This tantra [rig pa rang shar] also speaks of six characteristics: having put all samsaric phenomena behind him, [ii] having few desires and being content, [iii] being skilled in practice and having had experiences, [iv] being learned in the meanings of the tantras and having striven to accomplish them, [v] being learned in the meaning of the view and being completely capable with it, and [vi] having great compassion and being happy in renunciation.

 

One with the complete set of these qualities is said to be necessary. If, on the other hand, he is merely an effigy of whom it is said 'This one is a wonderful source of miracles,' 'This one holds an unsurpassable rank,' and 'This one is a sacred object of worship and harmony with worldly people,' then he is not [a genuine teacher]. From the same tantra [rig pa rang shar]:

 

'Very proud and ignorant,

Followed because of his foolish words,

Without any realization of the meaning of secret mantra,

His arrogant words disparaging others,

Engaging in a false path,

Not seeing the face of the initiation mandala,

Becoming lax in his vows,

Not coming up with the answers to pure questions,

Very proud of the little he has learned,

The unexamined master is a demon of a master.'

 

As it says, do not get involved with such a demonic master."

 

Longchenpa, in his own response to the excerpt from the rig pa rang shar above (regarding the unqualified teacher), states: "Accordingly, I advise you to avoid them."

 

The kun byed rgyal po states:

"The inauthentic master teaches scripture like a monkey,

his false path beset with concepts."

 

And regarding the qualified teacher it goes on to say:

 

"The master who displays the truth is a precious treasury

worth an inestimable price."

[Jetsun]

Well you are a fellow Neoadvaitin.

 

~~~~~~~ Mod warning ~~~~~~~~

 

RongzamFan as you are recently back from a suspension I don't think it is a good idea for you to be baiting or subtly insulting other members, please refrain from doing so here and in all of the other threads in the Buddhist section or you will be suspended again. Further action may be taken once the other mods log in and see the reports

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

[BaguaKicksAss]

Carry on, I locked the wrong thread .

[C T]

 

 

'A master endowed with the truth of the vajra should:

Have a good disposition and be skilled in teaching,

Have obtained initiation and have applied himself to the secret mantra,

Know all of the outer and inner activities,

Be inseparable from his yidam deity,

Be undistracted in contemplation,

Be learned in the secret tantras of the secret mantra,

Which hold the truth of rdzogs chen man ngag sde

Have achieved all outer an inner accomplishments,

Never move from the meaning of the view,

Perform the outer, inner, and secret activities,

With qualities like precious jewels,

And an inexhaustible treasury of activity.'

So now we are all familiar with how aspiring teachers ought to conduct themselves.

 

While the inspiration is still there, would you also kindly remind us, the eager learners, how professing students of the Noble Ones ought to conduct themselves on a platform such as this so that we may stride forth with confidence and seize the throne of the dharmakaya, swift as an arrow in flight.

 

For example, should we spend time on frivolous issues, cutting down those whom we deem to be deviants, or perhaps use the precious time to check our own conduct, again and again, that we will quickly bring to fruition the subtle wisdom of the youthful vase body endowed perfectly with the six unique characteristics.

[asunthatneversets]

So now we are all familiar with how aspiring teachers ought to conduct themselves.

 

While the inspiration is still there, would you also kindly remind us, the eager learners, how professing students of the Noble Ones ought to conduct themselves on a platform such as this so that we may stride forth with confidence and seize the throne of the dharmakaya, swift as an arrow in flight.

 

For example, should we spend time on frivolous issues, cutting down those whom we deem to be deviants, or perhaps use the precious time to check our own conduct, again and again, that we will quickly bring to fruition the subtle wisdom of the youthful vase body endowed perfectly with the six unique characteristics.

You should tell us CT, since you appear to be the one quite preoccupied with cutting down those you deem to be deviants.

 

Perhaps that subconscious projection is why you are so concerned with policing the activity of others.

Edited February 5, 2014 by asunthatneversets

[johndoe2012]

....

Edited January 11, 2015 by johndoe2012

[C T]

Hypocrites or less political correct?

 

Right speech can imprison you if you have the wrong understanding and suppress yourself.

 

Hatred and aversion can easily be felt by others even in the disguise by being "friendly".

More than likely the thing that will imprison me would be to stay silent and uninvolved, watching from the sidelines in the face of intelligent-sounding, right-speeching buddhist elitists who band together to scream 'BEWARE, FOLKS' each time Jax comes to this forum to post something about what he is doing, which is not often, btw.

 

Its like some pattern, or some kind of oath these guys have taken to try to shut others down. By 'others' i would mean individuals whom they look upon as either 'renegade-ish', as in they have no time for buddhist pat-backing and decorum bs, or maybe individuals who simply want to do their own thing without wanting to be associated with all the clamouring and posturing often displayed by 'knowledgeable' so-called dzogchen cliques.

 

A similar thing happened around March last year as well, when Jax first came to the forum. Same pattern, same routine, and Jax's posts were given the same 'beware, folks' kind of treatment.

 

Hello, like, why does it have to be this way? I really want to understand why we feel the need to disallow others the freedom to do their thing here and not only that, but to set about creating tangible obstacles in their path?

 

Is it so hard to be cordial, friendly, open, receptive even in the face of each possessing different and contrasting views? What gives us the right to say to someone their view is inadequate, insubstantial, impure and therefore rubbish in terms of authenticity? What gives us the right to deny another's freedom to express their own creative impulses without having to do it in such a way as to have had the approval of the 'band of brothers', the ones who appoint themselves Dharma heirs, favoured princes and princesses of great lineage Masters with unbroken lineages all the way back to Garab Dorje?

 

Seriously? You bet. Just take a look in DW. So much prancing and bitching around it makes my skin crawl sometimes. If i could, i would hope that TTB will remain free of such fancy-pancy buddhism.

 

You should ask these guys their real motive(s) for trying to bring Jax's name to disrepute. What's worse, they can't even be honest about their intentions. If this is not hypocrisy, i really dont know what is.

Edited February 5, 2014 by C T

[yabyum24]

Its like some pattern, or some kind of oath these guys have taken to try to shut others down.

Yes, it bears all the hallmarks of a coordinated action. The SWAT Team has landed.

[C T]

Yes, it bears all the hallmarks of a coordinated action. The SWAT Team has landed.

Thank you for speaking up, YY24.

 

The Super-sized Wand of Adamantine Truth Team, on her majesty's secret service. At the end of the day, its simply a penis ~ misappropriated, it quickly becomes a dick.

[Anderson]

More than likely the thing that will imprison me would be to stay silent and uninvolved, watching from the sidelines in the face of intelligent-sounding, right-speeching buddhist elitists who band together to scream 'BEWARE, FOLKS' each time Jax comes to this forum to post something about what he is doing, which is not often, btw.

 

Its like some pattern, or some kind of oath these guys have taken to try to shut others down. By 'others' i would mean individuals whom they look upon as either 'renegade-ish', as in they have no time for buddhist pat-backing and decorum bs, or maybe individuals who simply want to do their own thing without wanting to be associated with all the clamouring and posturing often displayed by 'knowledgeable' so-called dzogchen cliques.

 

A similar thing happened around March last year as well, when Jax first came to the forum. Same pattern, same routine, and Jax's posts were given the same 'beware, folks' kind of treatment.

 

Hello, like, why does it have to be this way? I really want to understand why we feel the need to disallow others the freedom to do their thing here and not only that, but to set about creating tangible obstacles in their path?

 

Is it so hard to be cordial, friendly, open, receptive even in the face of each possessing different and contrasting views? What gives us the right to say to someone their view is inadequate, insubstantial, impure and therefore rubbish in terms of authenticity? What gives us the right to deny another's freedom to express their own creative impulses without having to do it in such a way as to have had the approval of the 'band of brothers', the ones who appoint themselves Dharma heirs, favoured princes and princesses of great lineage Masters with unbroken lineages all the way back to Garab Dorje?

 

Seriously? You bet. Just take a look in DW. So much prancing and bitching around it makes my skin crawl sometimes. If i could, i would hope that TTB will remain free of such fancy-pancy buddhism.

 

You should ask these guys their real motive(s) for trying to bring Jax's name to disrepute. What's worse, they can't even be honest about their intentions. If this is not hypocrisy, i really dont know what is.

 

 

It would be much better if you would go beyond concepts

[C T]

It would be much better if you would go beyond concepts

i'd rather you take the time to explain, thru your own insights, how this can be achieved, instead of badge-flashing (again).

 

 

For example, your signature acknowledges reality to be your consort... care to explain whats your take on that? Maybe then a dialog of some purpose can begin? At least, if we attempt rightly, there is a chance we wont become distracted with other people's affairs too much.

Edited February 5, 2014 by C T

[C T]

Reality is my consort. Lets Dance!!!

 

[gatito]

Yes, it bears all the hallmarks of a coordinated action. The SWAT Team has landed.

 

Or perhaps the Tibetan Inquisition?

[Anderson]

i'd rather you take the time to explain, thru your own insights, how this can be achieved, instead of badge-flashing (again).

 

When it comes to practice my own insights are my own alone and they are to be shared only with my teacher.

When my own insights will reach full measure i will not have to explain anything to anyone because they will make their own nature known similar to water which always displays its quality as being liquid .

 

 

For example, your signature acknowledges reality to be your consort... care to explain whats your take on that? Maybe then a dialog of some purpose can begin? At least, if we attempt rightly, there is a chance we wont become distracted with other people's affairs too much.

 

My signature is a metaphor for rigpa being my only concern, specifically its stabilization and its integration.

[Jeff]

i'd rather you take the time to explain, thru your own insights, how this can be achieved, instead of badge-flashing (again).

 

 

For example, your signature acknowledges reality to be your consort... care to explain whats your take on that? Maybe then a dialog of some purpose can begin? At least, if we attempt rightly, there is a chance we wont become distracted with other people's affairs too much.

 

Hi CT,

 

I personally would be very interested in such a thread a thread and the resulting discussion. I have always found your posts very open and thoughtful. Why don't you pick a topic and start us off in a new thread?

 

Let us attempt to step beyond words and titles...attempting to drive into insights.

 

Best wishes.

 

[yabyum24]

Thank you for speaking up, YY24.

That's fine. As far as I'm concerned, people who openly declare sutra to be "nursery bs" are not vajrayanists - although they like to present themselves as such. If they have ever taken tantric vows at all, then they are no longer bothering to uphold them on this forum.

 

So why should I have any confidence in anything they say?

 

I'm not a Dzogchenpa, so I keep an open mind on this whole jax business. I'll investigate and draw my own conclusions. But "innocent until proven guilty" I reckon.

Edited February 5, 2014 by yabyum24