The Superiority of Tantra to Sutra

[RongzomFan]

I didn't mean to imply that this was a Dzogchen tantra. Although, zhitro is an important terma revelation, that has a direct correlation with Dzogchen.

 

Its all divine anyway. Tertons reveal more Mahayoga and Anuyoga than even Dzogchen.

[Anderson]

Yeah, I'm totally confused... I didn't think it could be Dzogchen. I mean you guys have got those dark retreats, lights and stuff. I know it's secret and you don't discuss it but what little I've heard, is very different from HYT.

 

In the Nyingma scheme Ati is the ninth path, the pinnacle of all training but its methods are different from those on the paths bellow which use transformation. Although the scheme seems gradual is not meant to be understood in that way since each path (approach) is independent from the other and can lead to total realisation.It's just that some paths are faster then others.

So dzogchen has nothing to do with HYT .

[yabyum24]

In the Nyingma scheme Ati is the ninth path, the pinnacle of all training but its methods are different from those on the paths bellow which use transformation. Although the scheme seems gradual is not meant to be understood in that way since each path (approach) is independent from the other and can lead to total realisation.It's just that some paths are faster then others.

So dzogchen has nothing to do with HYT .

That was my understanding of the situation. Thanks for clarifying.

Edited February 11, 2014 by yabyum24

[RongzomFan]

Sarma - HYT

 

Nyingma - Mahayoga and Anuyoga

 

 

Deities are different

[RongzomFan]

The statement "Dzogchen is tantra" is the type of statement that I'd expect from you.

 

According to standard Nyingma classification, Atiyoga is one of the "3 inner tantras" along with Mahayoga and Anuyoga.

 

https://www.google.com/search?tbm=bks&hl=en&q=inner+3+tantras+mahayoga+anuyoga#hl=en&q=inner+3+tantras+mahayoga+anuyoga+atiyoga&tbm=bks

 

https://www.google.com/#hl=en&q=inner+tantras+mahayoga+anuyoga+atiyoga&safe=off&tbm=bks

Edited February 11, 2014 by RongzomFan

[RongzomFan]

Yes, but let's qualify it. A class of literature is fine, and I'm cool with that.

And according to standard Nyingma classification, Atiyoga is one of the "three inner tantras" along with Mahayoga and Anuyoga.

 

https://www.google.com/search?tbm=bks&hl=en&q=inner+3+tantras+mahayoga+anuyoga#hl=en&q=inner+3+tantras+mahayoga+anuyoga+atiyoga&tbm=bks

 

https://www.google.com/#hl=en&q=inner+tantras+mahayoga+anuyoga+atiyoga&safe=off&tbm=bks

Edited February 11, 2014 by RongzomFan

[RongzomFan]

Madhyamaka never says causality is inherently true or ultimately real. Causal occurrences apply to conventional designations, as do causal relationships.

 

I found this pertaining to Madhyamaka:

 

"A true relative truth is somethat that is efficient and producing a result, for example, a wheat seed that produces a wheat sprout. "

 

http://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=39&t=6423&hilit=salt&start=60#p77715

 

Rongzom has a lot of objections to this from the tantric POV, and thus asserts tantra as superior to Madhyamaka.

Edited February 11, 2014 by RongzomFan

[asunthatneversets]

 

I found this pertaining to Madhyamaka:

 

"A true relative truth is somethat that is efficient and producing a result, for example, a wheat seed that produces a wheat sprout. "

 

http://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=39&t=6423&hilit=salt&start=60#p77715

 

Rongzom has a lot of objections to this.

All that is saying, is that within the context of relative truth, a 'valid' process is judged according to its efficacy. However it is still a relative truth, as was pointed out in the link you shared, and therefore it is predicated on an invalid cognition either way.

 

The relative is always merely relative, that isn't being disputed. Within the relative, for purposes of relative accuracy, there are so-called valid and invalid truths. That does not mean that the valid relative is ultimately valid.

[RongzomFan]

I understand what a relative truth is per Candrakirti.

 

Rongzom would dispute even almighty Candrakirti.

 

http://vajracakra.com/viewtopic.php?f=27&t=1195&hilit=Rongzom&start=10#p13857

 

You have to throw Madhyamaka in the trash can. Don't be attached.

Edited February 11, 2014 by RongzomFan

[asunthatneversets]

I understand what a relative truth is per Candrakirti.

 

Rongzom would dispute even almighty Candrakirti.

 

http://vajracakra.com/viewtopic.php?f=27&t=1195&hilit=Rongzom&start=10#p13857

Neither Candrakirti nor Rongzompa hold relative truths to be actually true.

[RongzomFan]

Neither Candrakirti nor Rongzompa hold relative truths to be actually true.

 

Candrakirti still has 2 truths, no matter how you try to get around it.

[RongzomFan]

And then the Dzogchen tantras themselves throw the 2 truths in the trash can:

 

http://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=40&t=14929&p=206339&hilit=samv%E1%B9%9Bitti#p206339

[asunthatneversets]

You have to throw Madhyamaka in the trash can. Don't be attached.

Being that the majority of the key Dzogchen adepts held the Prasanga view ala Nāgārjuna to be a definitive view, I can't say they would agree. Apart from the fact that the praxis of Dzogchen differs, in that unlike Madhyamaka it does not implement logical analysis as its main path, the views of the two systems are identical.

 

Madhyamaka does a good job of 'throwing itself in the trash can' as it is.

[asunthatneversets]

 

Candrakirti still has 2 truths, no matter how you try to get around it.

Much like his teacher Nāgārjuna, Candrakīrti did not assert that relative truths were ultimately valid.

[asunthatneversets]

And then the Dzogchen tantras themselves throw the 2 truths in the trash can:

 

http://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=40&t=14929&p=206339&hilit=samv%E1%B9%9Bitti#p206339

As does Madhyamaka.

[RongzomFan]

Being that the majority of the key Dzogchen adepts held the Prasanga view ala Nāgārjuna to be a definitive view

 

False.

 

Dudjom Rinpoche and Dilgo Khyetse subscribed to Other Emptiness at the sutra level.

 

This is pretty well known.

[RongzomFan]

I don't know why you are arguing with me.

 

Take it up with Rongzom.

Edited February 12, 2014 by RongzomFan

[RongzomFan]

As does Madhyamaka.

 

Malcolm would disagree with you.

[RongzomFan]

Much like his teacher Nāgārjuna, Candrakīrti did not assert that relative truths were ultimately valid.

I agree that a relative truth per Candrakirti is an object of deluded cognition.

 

This is defined in Candrakirti's Madhyamakavatara VI.23

 

The object of perfect seeing is true reality, (ultimate truth)

And false seeing is seeming reality. (relative truth)

Edited February 12, 2014 by RongzomFan

[asunthatneversets]

 

False.

 

Dudjom Rinpoche and Dilgo Khyetse subscribed to Other Emptiness at the sutra level.

 

This is pretty well known.

By 'key adepts' I mean the original adepts; Longchenpa, Jigme Lingpa and so on.

 

It has also been pointed out that while Dudjom Rinpoche was a widely respected teacher, his view on that matter is by no means definitive either.

 

Gzhan stong in and of itself is by no means definitive, and honestly makes no sense in general.

[asunthatneversets]

 

I agree that a relative truth per Candrakirti is an object of deluded cognition.

Candrakīrti agrees as well.

[asunthatneversets]

 

Malcolm would disagree with you.

Not likely being that he himself has pointed this out numerous times.

[RongzomFan]

Not likely being that he himself has pointed this out numerous times.

I already linked to several posts of Malcolm.

 

You are clearly not correct.

Edited February 12, 2014 by RongzomFan

[RongzomFan]

By 'key adepts' I mean the original adepts; Longchenpa, Jigme Lingpa and so on.

 

Longchenpa and Jigme Lingpa are not original adepts.

 

WTF

Dudjom Rinpoche was a widely respected teacher, his view on that matter is by no means definitive either.

 

Dudjom Rinpoche and Dilgo Khyetse follow Jamyang Khyentse Wangpo and Jamgon Kongtrul I believe.

 

Not 100% sure.

[asunthatneversets]

Longchenpa and Jigme Lingpa are certainly considered to be key figures of the system.

 

There surely was no gzhan stong for the original teachers; Garab Dorje, Manjusrimitra, Śri Simha, Vimalamitra and so on.