[doc benway]

"The empty aspect (stong cha) of the Natural State is called the Mother (ma), while its clarity aspect (gsal cha) is called the Son (bu) or the Wisdom of Awareness (rig pa'i ye shes). These two are inseparable. There is no separation involved here and their unity shining in all its vividness is called the nature of mind (sems kyi gnas lugs). All this must be very clear as it is the very base of Dzogchen and if this does not arise as something very clear for the individual, then the rest of the teachings will be of no use at all. In order to clearly experience this state devoid of all thoughts, it is necessary to practice and recognize the space between thoughts. Then you have to practice for weeks, months, and years to be familiar with the empty clarity of mind."

 

Lopön Tenzin Namdak RInpoche - commentary from The Three Precepts: From the Oral Transmission of the Great Perfection in Zhangzhung transl. Jean-Luc Achard

 

 

 

 

 

[silent thunder]

mind the gap... one of my favorite mind games...

[Jetsun]

In my experience the space that occurs between the thoughts is the same space in which the thoughts arise, which is always present because it is that which everything arises within and permeates. So if it is always there then there is no need to try to create a state of no thought to recognise it, the only issue which prevents the recognition of the space is fixation on what is arising, if you stop fixating then you can recognise that the stillness and space is always there no matter what. So from that perspective the state of mind full of thoughts is no better or worse than that with no thought, the issue is the narrowing and fixating of attention on the content to the detriment of what the content is arising within; which is usually because we have some sort of mind fabricated story connected to our sense of "I" within the content arising. Not that I expect anyone to take my word ahead of a Lama with an official title and lineage but that is my experience and understanding at this current time.

[doc benway]

if you stop fixating then you can recognise that the stillness and space is always there no matter what.

 

Exactly… the difference between us and the Buddhas is that we have not yet stopped fixating…

Abide, liberate, continue….

[ralis]

Suppose I am using complex multi variable calculus for a project and must be focused for days on this project. According to Dzogchen, that would be fixating? If so, then what?

[doc benway]

Suppose I am using complex multi variable calculus for a project and must be focused for days on this project. According to Dzogchen, that would be fixating?

Not necessarily

 

 

If so, then what?

Exactly

[ralis]

Not necessarily

 

Would you care to further elaborate?

[rex]

Er .. can't one be in the natural state and still do things that require particular attention? I think its referrd to as integration.

 

edit:tpyos

Edited February 15, 2014 by rex

[C T]

fixation can be used in the context of losing the ability to extricate oneself from the quagmire of deluded habits and negative thought patterns, or in the neutral sense of keeping one's mind on the important tasks at hand, or one-pointed concentration in meditative exercises. So it can be harmful, neutral or positive, depending on the individual's knowledge and understanding.

[Marblehead]

Every time I see this thread title I think, "Aiming at the space between your ears."

[doc benway]

Would you care to further elaborate?

 

Like rex said, integration. The work doesn't end on the cushion.

[asunthatneversets]

Extending the space between thoughts is an excellent (and necessary) preliminary practice, however the assumption that there is a gap between thoughts (which becomes more apparent) would still be a subtle byproduct of ignorance.

 

A gap between thoughts assumes that thoughts sequence consecutively in a linear fashion, and that they arise and fall. This assumption however is predicated on a fundamental misconception and therefore the 'gap' will not reveal the definitive nature of mind [sems nyid]. Recognition of the definitive nature of mind is recognizing the non-arising of thoughts and gaps.

 

Achieving a stable śamatha is important to sever (or decrease) the compulsory habit of conceptualization, but simply increasing that space between thoughts is nothing more than a stable śamatha [tib. zhi gnas]. Yes you marry the śamatha with vipaśyanā but whether it is wisdom or ignorance makes all the difference. The true vipaśyanā of the natural state is resting in svayambhu vidyā [tib. rang byung rig pa], which only occurs when the stillness and movement of mind are recognized to have been inseparable since beginningless time... and the clarity [cognizance] of mind is then recognized as empty i.e. non-arisen.

 

Thoughts sequencing consecutively with gaps in between is still a subtle structuring of ignorance. The illusion of a space abiding between apparent occurrences is partly responsible for the idea of an entity (or capacity) which exists in time and is subject to experiences in the first place. When mentation is recognized to be the immediate and disjoint clarity of mind itself, then it's suddenly realized there was never a space between thoughts (beyond conventionality) and the foundation for the chain of conceptualization and cyclic existence is undone. Only then does the primordially non-arisen display of wisdom [ye shes] become fully apparent.

 

Resting in the stillness of mind and refraining from involvement with thought still assumes there is something that can accept or reject thought. The idea is to see that 'thought objectifying thought' is one of the main culprits which sustain the illusion of the mind's continuity, along with the various implications, tendencies, proclivities, habits, propensities etc., which arise as a direct result of that error.

 

The underlying substratum (or gap) that seems to abide apart from thought is actually an illusion created by the supposition that thoughts are relating to each other in time. So thought B is supposing that it follows thought A etc., and then thought B will even suppose it can refer to thought A, but by the time that's occurring it's thought C. None of them ever touch, no two thoughts are ever present together in the immediacy, so a thought isn't referencing anything, but only infers that other thoughts have preceded it, it is an illusion. Even the idea that there is more than one thought. That very idea creates the notion that there is a space between them etc.

Edited February 16, 2014 by asunthatneversets

[asunthatneversets]

Thusness also has some succinct insight on this:

 

"Depending on the conditions of an individual, it may not be obvious that it is 'always thought watching thought rather than a watcher watching thought.' or 'the watcher is that thought.' Because this is the key insight and a step that cannot afford to be wrong along the path of liberation, I cannot help but with some disrespectful tone say,

For those masters that taught,

'Let thoughts arise and subside,

See the background mirror as perfect and be unaffected.'

With all due respect, they have just 'blah' something nice but deluded.

Rather,

See that there is no one behind thoughts.

First, one thought then another thought.

With deepening insight it will later be revealed,

Always just this, One Thought!

Non-arising, luminous yet empty!"

[ralis]

Er .. can't one be in the natural state and still do things that require particular attention? I think its referrd to as integration.

 

edit:tpyos

 

You are the only one who has ever presented a clear no nonsense explanation.

[silent thunder]

Er .. can't one be in the natural state and still do things that require particular attention? I think its referrd to as integration.

 

edit:tpyos

 

 

You are the only one who has ever presented a clear no nonsense explanation.

What's the saying... if you can't explain something simply, you don't really understand it?

 

I'd say rex understands, well said rex...

Edited February 16, 2014 by silent thunder

[Simple_Jack]

What's the saying... if you can't explain something simply, you don't really understand it?

 

That shouldn't apply across the board in every situation. There are times when there's a need for elaborate explanations.

Edited February 16, 2014 by Simple_Jack

[silent thunder]

That shouldn't apply across the board in every situation. There are times when there's a need for elaborate explanations.

Very true!

 

Although when it can, it's often quite profound, with broad implications and deep breadth of application.

[rex]

You are the only one who has ever presented a clear no nonsense explanation.

 

 

What's the saying... if you can't explain something simply, you don't really understand it?

 

I'd say rex understands, well said rex...

 

Glad it helped, though the credit goes to Garab Dorje and his Three Statements. The Third Statement is relevant to Ralis' question:

 

On the Three Statements of Garab Dorje

[asunthatneversets]

Glad it helped, though the credit goes to Garab Dorje and his Three Statements. The Third Statement is relevant to Ralis' question:

 

On the Three Statements of Garab Dorje

 

The third testament of Garab Dorje is 'continuation', which is the state of one's condition after the second testament [confidence or familiarity i.e. integration] has been brought to its culmination and there is no longer a difference between equipoise and post-equipoise. It is said that this level occurs only for those practitioners who are very close to buddhahood. Most individuals are generally not capable of this.

 

It should be understood that the three testaments of Garab Dorje coincide with the basis, path and result in Dzogchen. The first (i) introduction, is recognition of the basis. Once that recognition has occurred the basis then becomes the path, which is the second testament, 'confidence', which involves integration and familiarity as mentioned above. After one's rigpa has been brought to its full measure, then the path becomes the result, as buddhahood, and that is the third testament i.e. 'continuation'.

[doc benway]

On the Three Statements of Garab Dorje

 

Nice link - I like Dudjom Rinpoche's "Instruction on Meditation."

[Anderson]

It should be understood that the three testaments of Garab Dorje coincide with the basis, path and result in Dzogchen. The first (i) introduction, is recognition of the basis. Once that recognition has occurred the basis then becomes the path, which is the second testament, 'confidence', which involves integration and familiarity as mentioned above. After one's rigpa has been brought to its full measure, then the path becomes the result, as buddhahood, and that is the third testament i.e. 'continuation'.

 

The three statements also correspond to the three cycles Sem de , Longde and Mengagde.

[Simple_Jack]

The three statements also correspond to the three cycles Sem de , Longde and Mengagde.

 

According to ChNN's interpretation which is unique among Dzogchen masters. By the way does asunthatneversets post above apply to the general explanation of the statements or does it also apply to ChNN's way of explaining it?

[Anderson]

According to ChNN's interpretation which is unique among Dzogchen masters. By the way does asunthatneversets post above apply to the general explanation of the statements or does it also apply to ChNN's way of explaining it?

 

Actually CNNr talks about integration almost every time there is a webcast and i got the impression from what rinpoche said that integration is difficult but accessible.

I think that the way asunthatneversets explains is the classical way of describing the path of dozgchen.

 

But the way CNNr describes it is that after the DI if one is not sure whether they've discovered their nature or not they can continue on their own with that method of introduction or they can use other methods to help with the discovery.

Then if one has discovered something but due to the various obscuration they are not sure whether that is rigpa or not they can use the methods of Longde to engender confidence and get rid of doubts.

Once one has absolute confidence in their discovery and can identify rigpa and rest at will , even for a short time in rigpa , from there onwards one tries to extend that resting as much as possible through the practice of treckchod.

Just doing that becomes the path.

After that one can start practicing thogal.

Edited February 18, 2014 by Anderson

[asunthatneversets]

The three statements also correspond to the three cycles Sem de , Longde and Mengagde.

 

Not necessarily, since each cycle actually has its own introduction and so on. They are different cycles and aren't meant as a progression. Klong sde is actually not too widely practiced, Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche has gone out of his way to make it available whereas for the most part sems sde and man ngag sde practices are the most common.

[Anderson]

I was probably wrong in saying that tregcho is the path because according to Malcolm:

 

"Tregchö is not the path in Dzogchen.

It is the ground for practicing the path. The path in Dzogchen is thögal. Hence, the way the basis is explained in Dzogchen reflects the actual path in Dzogchen, thus the explanation of the basis in Dzogchen is completely different than that of Mahāmudra. "