Zen Sutrayana Approach to Recognizing Unfabricated Presence

[yabyum24]

Even Karma Chagme admits that these paths don't line up.

So they're not complementary?

[Simple_Jack]

So they're not complementary?

 

They're definitely complementary, but the path of Dzogchen differs because of thogal, which informs the epistemology of Dzogchen. This is how Mahamudra can be summarized:

 

Mahamudra is Dzogchen semde in drag ~ Malcolm

 

Although, the approach of these two paths differ, they are both regarded as leading to the same result i.e. buddhahood.

[Tibetan_Ice]

 

They're definitely complementary, but the path of Dzogchen differs because of thogal, which informs the epistemology of Dzogchen. This is how Mahamudra can be summarized:

 

Mahamudra is Dzogchen semde in drag ~ Malcolm

 

Although, the approach of these two paths differ, they are both regarded as leading to the same result i.e. buddhahood.

Sample Jock,

Lopon Tenzin Namdak disagrees.

 

Read "Bonpo Dzogchen Teachings".

 

http://www.amazon.com/Bonpo-Dzogchen-Teachings-According-Tenzin/dp/9994678868

 

Start at page 99.

 

 

Edited February 12, 2014 by Tibetan_Ice

[Simple_Jack]

Thanks, TI, but I'm well aware of the polemics. This does not make the above statement utterly invalid.

[RongzomFan]

Sample Jock

 

 

[Simple_Jack]

Take a look at the example of the four yogas from Mahamudra and the four ting 'dzins of Dzogchen semde, here:

 

http://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=100&t=6459&start=120

[Apech]

They're definitely complementary, but the path of Dzogchen differs because of thogal, which informs the epistemology of Dzogchen. This is how Mahamudra can be summarized:

 

Mahamudra is Dzogchen semde in drag ~ Malcolm

 

Although, the approach of these two paths differ, they are both regarded as leading to the same result i.e. buddhahood.

 

What does this mean?

[yabyum24]

What does this mean?

Six inch stilettos and a facial hair problem by the sound of it

[Apech]

Six inch stilettos and a facial hair problem by the sound of it

 

[Apech]

Just a general comment on this and similar threads.

 

The dharma is very rich and abundant in that it produces many forms of practice and so on without losing its essential dharma truth. The 84,000 collections of dharma which are mentioned in texts. This is not because the basis of dharma is twisted or changed but simply reflects the variety of audience. If you were to arrive in an orchard with lots of different fruit trees .... then to start debating whether apples and better than pears are better than oranges - seems a bit fruitless (sorry about the pun). Maybe we should remember that we are at a unique period of history where we have access to this variety. In the past people would have the dharma of their particular region unless they were exceptionally lucky to travel the world.

 

The different forms of dharma are not monolithic. So all forms of Zen are not the same and so a variety of approaches is supported even within the different schools. It has been said that there are Theravadans who have a mahayana outlook. I'm not suggesting this answers the main point but it at least broadens the outlook from pick and chose mentality and also this is better than that mentality.

 

Also this. When Milarepa turned from his black magic practices and sought liberation he wen to a Dzogchen master called Rongton Lhaga and although he received the transmission it had no effect. This lama then urged Milarepa to seek out Marpa and the rest of the story is well known.

 

So the question is ... if Dzogchen are the highest teachings and Milarepa proved to be a gifted student .... why didn't the transmission bear fruit? Why did it take the lineage teachings of Marpa (form Naropa, Tilopa - which included the mahamudra lineage)??

 

Was it because there was something lesser or deficient in Dzogchen? was it that there was something deficient in Rongton Lhaga ? No and no.

 

The answer is that it took the personal connection between Marpa and Milarepa to take root and grow.

 

After this time many of the great Karmapas received and held both mahamudra and dzogchen teachings. In the Rime movement sectarian rivalry and the exclusiveness of certain teachings was overcome. Many lamas teaching today hold more than one lineage ... including my own who holds both Kagyu and Sakhya lineages.

 

Maybe we should learn from this.

[Anderson]

What does this mean?

 

I think it means that Gampopa was a dzogchen practitioner

[yabyum24]

Maybe we should remember that we are at a unique period of history where we have access to this variety.

Exactly. It's tempting to compare but often it comes across like school boys arguing about the relative merits of luxury class sports cars. They're years away from holding a driving license and scraping some cash together to buy their first old banger.

 

In the mean time they can still cover a great distance on a simple bicycle.

 

It's how far you can get with what you have that counts. A simple breathing meditation, done correctly can allow one to attain all jhanas and beyond (in much less then one lifetime). A supreme transmission or empowerment is worth very little if the recipient just wears it like a badge, swaggering and belittling others.

Edited February 12, 2014 by yabyum24

[rex]

Maybe we should remember that we are at a unique period of history where we have access to this variety.

 

Also that we have the freedom to choose and practice without being arrested.

[C T]

Also that we have the freedom to choose and practice without being arrested.

Thats still happening in Tibet, beneath all the facade of 'progress'.

[Apech]

Thats still happening in Tibet, beneath all the facade of 'progress'.

 

 

yes we are lucky to have religious freedom

[Apech]

I think it means that Gampopa was a dzogchen practitioner

 

 

He wasn't ... he was a kadampa monk who then received the (mahamudra) transmission from Milarepa.

[Simple_Jack]

What does this mean?

 

It possibly means that Gampopa's Mahamudra schema was influenced by his days as a Nyingmapa.

 

It's how far you can get with what you have that counts. A simple breathing meditation, done correctly can allow one to attain all jhanas and beyond (in much less then one lifetime). A supreme transmission or empowerment is worth very little if the recipient just wears it like a badge, swaggering and belittling others.

 

Generally, in Vajrayana, jhanas are virtually unimportant to the path of practice. In addition, They are regarded as conceptually contrived states, especially In the nongradual systems, such as Mahamudra, Dzogchen, Chan/Zen. To show that I'm not just making this up, here's something by Malcolm:

 

http://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=69&t=14954

 

What the Chan/Zen schools have understood, like the Dzogchen and Mahāmudra traditions which followed them, is that buddhahood is not a result accomplished through effort, that afflictions are not something concrete that can be cleansed the same way we wash our clothes (in fact there is nothing to remove), and the cultivation of conditioned states of samadhi/dhyāna lead nowhere than to more conceptuality.

 

I'm not saying that it's unbeneficial to cultivate these states or that an individual won't naturally encounter these states during their career as a cultivator, just that they are unimportant to progress on the path in nongradual systems.

 

He wasn't ... he was a kadampa monk who then received the (mahamudra) transmission from Milarepa.

 

Gampopa apparently started out in Nyingma.

[yabyum24]

I'm not saying that it's unbeneficial to cultivate these states or that an individual won't naturally encounter these states during their career as a cultivator, just that they are unimportant to progress on the path in nongradual systems.

I would have thought that anything barring resultant Buddhahood is unimportant to nongradual systems. Still, nice to have something to do whilst you wait for it to magically manifest.

 

I disagree that cultivation, as outlined by Buddha in the suttas, just leads to "more conceptuality". It's pretty obvious to anyone who takes a bit of time to check it out, that this is the reverse of the truth. In fact it's a lie. Sorry - it is. Period.

 

I do understand the necessity of making the suttas look as trivial as possible in order to underline the superiority of Dzogchen, but that shouldn't mean misrepresenting what is in them in order to achieve this.

[Simple_Jack]

I disagree that cultivation, as outlined by Buddha in the suttas, just leads to "more conceptuality". It's pretty obvious to anyone who takes a bit of time to check it out, that this is the reverse of the truth. In fact it's a lie. Sorry - it is. Period.

 

Jhanas are considered conceptual according to nongradual systems. In this case, it requires understanding the context of "conceptual", when being used to refer to jhanas. Maybe Rongzomfan can repost the threads from dharmawheel which explains these contexts in Vajrayana terms.

[Anderson]

 

He wasn't ... he was a kadampa monk who then received the (mahamudra) transmission from Milarepa.

 

.....while he was a dzogchen yogi.

[yabyum24]

Jhanas are considered conceptual according to nongradual systems. In this case, it requires understanding the context of "conceptual", when being used to refer to jhanas. Maybe Rongzomfan can repost the threads from dharmawheel which explains these contexts in Vajrayana terms.

I agree the context is important and it's true that all jhanas below nirvana are still to some measure "conditioned". There is still subtle clinging somewhere in them. But there is a progression from grosser to more refined states ie. less and less conceptuality. Not "nowhere than to more conceptuality". I don't see how that can be applied unless the non-conceptual systems have their own straw man jhanas which they can set up and knock down. You know the suttas very well S.J. You wouldn't recognise such a description of jhana in them would you?

 

Sure, if you compare any of them to Buddhahood, they're "lacking" but if Buddhahood is the only benchmark, then everything is lacking.

 

Non-gradual systems have their own "Hashang-style" take on things (if that's not a loaded term eh?), but it's probably a case of gradual training followed by sudden non-gradual awakening. I don't have any problem with non-gradual teachings, in fact quite the opposite, but no need to skew Buddha's sutta teachings.

 

Tell Malcolm it's gonna need the mother of all explanations to convince me otherwise.

[Simple_Jack]

Sure, if you compare any of them to Buddhahood, they're "lacking" but if Buddhahood is the only benchmark, then everything is lacking.

 

Non-gradual systems have their own "Hashang-style" take on things (if that's not a loaded term eh?), but it's probably a case of gradual training followed by sudden non-gradual awakening. I don't have any problem with non-gradual teachings, in fact quite the opposite, but no need to skew Buddha's sutta teachings.

 

For Mahayana paths. buddhahood is the sole benchmark of complete awakening, which means everything else is lacking in comparison, including the "nirvana" of lower vehicles, which constitutes an extreme. Although, in sutrayana, the criteria of bodhisattvas consists in mastering every type of samadhi/dhyana, along their progress towards buddhahood. In the case of Zen, sudden awakening is emphasized above all else, but gradual cultivation is not completely irrelevant. This is from the thread I linked to above:

 

http://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=69&t=14954&start=60

 

As for “gradual cultivation,” although he has awakened to the fact that his original nature is no different from that of the buddhas, the beginningless proclivities of habit (vāsanā) are extremely difficult to remove suddenly. Therefore he must continue to cultivate while relying on this awakening so that this efficacy of gradual suffusion is perfected; he constantly nurtures the embryo of sanctity, and after a long, long time he becomes a sage. Hence it is called gradual cultivation.

(Moguja’s Secrets on Cultivating the Mind, in Collected Works of Korean Buddhism, vol 2, p 216-217)

[Apech]

.....while he was a dzogchen yogi.

 

 

... can you give me a link or reference for this. I know he was eclectic at an early stage but I can find no reference to practicing Dzogchen.

[Apech]

It possibly means that Gampopa's Mahamudra schema was influenced by his days as a Nyingmapa.

 

 

Generally, in Vajrayana, jhanas are virtually unimportant to the path of practice. In addition, They are regarded as conceptually contrived states, especially In the nongradual systems, such as Mahamudra, Dzogchen, Chan/Zen. To show that I'm not just making this up, here's something by Malcolm:

 

http://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=69&t=14954

 

What the Chan/Zen schools have understood, like the Dzogchen and Mahāmudra traditions which followed them, is that buddhahood is not a result accomplished through effort, that afflictions are not something concrete that can be cleansed the same way we wash our clothes (in fact there is nothing to remove), and the cultivation of conditioned states of samadhi/dhyāna lead nowhere than to more conceptuality.

 

I'm not saying that it's unbeneficial to cultivate these states or that an individual won't naturally encounter these states during their career as a cultivator, just that they are unimportant to progress on the path in nongradual systems.

 

 

Gampopa apparently started out in Nyingma.

 

 

Did he? at what stage? Do you have a reference for this?

[Simple_Jack]

Did he? at what stage? Do you have a reference for this?

 

http://kagyuoffice.org/kagyu-lineage/the-golden-rosary/gampopa/

 

"...He also became interested in dharma and started to study in the Nyingma lineage from the master Bar-rey, and in the Kadam tradition with Sharpa Yonten Drak..."