What is wisdom in Dzogchen ?

[Apech]

--- Moderator Message ---

 

I did ask nicely. Do I really have to split all this drivel out? Its a waste of my time.

 

--- Message Ends ---

[Tibetan_Ice]

--- Moderator Message ---

 

I did ask nicely. Do I really have to split all this drivel out? Its a waste of my time.

 

--- Message Ends ---

Do you think it is ok that sj told gatito to suck it? I don't. I think that sj loses credibility, actually lost credibility a long time ago.

What do you think sincere seekers think when they see someone tell someone else to "suck it" on a forum?

 

http://thetaobums.com/topic/35103-what-is-wisdom-in-dzogchen/?p=560387

 

Further, I have thrown out the book "the Marvelous Primordial State" because according to most Buddhist posters on this forum, it is highly inaccurate. Or perhaps there there are no Buddhists here, just a bunch of crazy people with inflated vocabularies and brown noses?

[Simple_Jack]

Or perhaps there there are no Buddhists here, just a bunch of crazy people with inflated vocabularies and brown noses?

 

I love brown nosing especially when it involves authority figures...but not when it includes neo-Advaitans such as Tony Parsons, Dennis Waite, Rupert Spira, Adyashanti, etc.

Edited July 8, 2014 by Simple_Jack

[Apech]

Do you think it is ok that sj told gatito to suck it? I don't. I think that sj loses credibility, actually lost credibility a long time ago.

What do you think sincere seekers think when they see someone tell someone else to "suck it" on a forum?

 

http://thetaobums.com/topic/35103-what-is-wisdom-in-dzogchen/?p=560387

 

Further, I have thrown out the book "the Marvelous Primordial State" because according to most Buddhist posters on this forum, it is highly inaccurate. Or perhaps there there are no Buddhists here, just a bunch of crazy people with inflated vocabularies and brown noses?

 

No its not ok which is why I keep leaving messages asking people to behave properly.

[gatito]

--- Moderator Message ---

 

I did ask nicely. Do I really have to split all this drivel out? Its a waste of my time.

 

--- Message Ends ---

 

If you're going to spit out dribble, could you use a spittoon and do it in private please, as this threads already very messy?

 

PS In fairness to Simple_Jack, he's right about Tony Parsons but I guess that if you have enough typewriters, you'll just get lucky in the end....

[Apech]

If you're going to spit out dribble, could you use a spittoon and do it in private please, as this threads already very messy?

 

PS In fairness to Simple_Jack, he's right about Tony Parsons but I guess that if you have enough typewriters, you'll just get lucky in the end....

 

split not spit.

[Simple_Jack]

To get back to the OP -

Wisdom in Dzogchen is practicing rather than spending time on the internet.

...but there wouldn't be any posts undermining the authority of Neo-Advaita on the TTB's.

 

How else would that happen steve?

Edited July 8, 2014 by Simple_Jack

[gatito]

split not spit.

 

Oh....OK

 

That sounds worse though.

 

Is it like the quartering bit of hanging, drawing and quartering?

 

Because if it is, you need to put an 18 certificate on the thread.

[Simple_Jack]

I love brown nosing especially when it involves authority figures...but not when it includes neo-Advaitans such as Tony Parsons, Dennis Waite, Rupert Spira, Adyashanti...

 

...Jeff Foster, Francis Lucille, James Swartz, etc.

[gatito]

Do you think it is ok that sj told gatito to suck it? I don't. I think that sj loses credibility, actually lost credibility a long time ago.

What do you think sincere seekers think when they see someone tell someone else to "suck it" on a forum?

 

<snip>

 

That he needs to spend less time on the internet, find himself a nice boyfriend and stop propositioning older happily-married heterosexual men?

[Simple_Jack]

That he needs to spend less time on the internet, find himself a nice boyfriend and stop propositioning older happily-married heterosexual men?

 

Just be glad I'm not propositioning you over PM with dick pics I took in various locales.

[gatito]

Just be glad I'm not propositioning you over PM with dick pics I took in various locales.

 

That would actually constitute a serious criminal offence.

[Tibetan_Ice]

 

Do you recall these posts distinguishing the basis as personal or transpersonal in Dzogchen:

 

http://thetaobums.com/topic/33574-substance-dualism-in-buddhadharma/?p=533221

 

Nyibum* states:

 

As such, because the basis, ones unfabricated mind, arose as the essence of reality of a single nature, there is no need to search elsewhere for the place etc., i.e. it is called self-originated wisdom.

 

The basis is nothing more nor nothing less than this.

 

*the son of Zhang stong Chobar, the terton of the Vima Nyinthig...

 

The basis is not a backdrop. Everything is not separate from the basis. But that everything just means your own skandhas, dhātus and āyatanas. There is no basis outside your mind, just as there is no Buddhahood outside of your mind....

 

http://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?p=218256#p218256

 

In order for there to be a reified sentient beings, there has to be a mind which reifies, it is an inescapable reduction. Reification cannot occur without a reifying mind. When a mind ceases to reify, it simply dissolves into its own nature, which is described in Dzogchen texts as the basis. The basis is just one's own unfabricated mind. Any other explanation is complete gibberish...

 

As such, ones mind present as the nature of all the phenomena of buddhahood is realized as buddha.

-- Nyima Bum

 

~ Loppon Namdrol

 

Buddhahood is characterized as omniscient, but not an omnipresence, in buddhadharma.

 

 

The "Supreme Source" is an overall inaccurate translation of the Kunjed Gyalpo..."all the things that exist in the animate and inanimate universe, are the nature of pure and total consciousness."

 

This is not an interpretation of Brahman!

 

"Non-dual" in Dzogchen is no different than non-dual in Madhyamaka - it means that the categories of being and non-being are cognitive errors.

 

Also in Dzogchen practice one does not seek to avoid discursive thoughts. One seeks to recognize their actual state....

 

"Nondual" in Dzogchen does not mean everything is the same in the one without a second (Brahman, Advaita Vedanta); it means that ontic pairs such as existence and non-existence cannot be found. What nondual really means in Dzogchen is that everything is in a state of liberation from the beginning, not the absence of diversity with respect to this and that thing.

 

"Non-duality" is trivial in general because it is just an intellectual trip.

 

The nature of things is "non-dual", simply meaning free from existence and non-existence. Great, now one knows this. Then what? How are you going to use this fact? How do you integrate this into your practice? Better not do so conceptually, since that will just result in taking rebirth as a formless realm god.

 

The purpose of emptiness is to cure views. Emptiness is not a view. "Non-duality" is a view. That is why Vimalakirti kept his trap shut.

 

~ Loppon Namdrol

 

Suck it gatito!

Bull,

The dharmakaya is omnipresent,

http://www.zengong.org/book/chapt-2.htm

 

1. The Greatness of Essence

 

The Greatness of Essence is the essence of sugatagarbha, the True Reality, and the Buddha nature. It is the dharmakaya of Buddhas which is omnipresent. It pervades Dharmadhatu (the entire dharma realm). It unifies mind and matter, emptiness and existence. The primordial nature of all sentient beings is identical to the Buddha nature. Practicing the systematic teachings of Mahayana Zengong will allow one to progressively actualize the Greatness of Essence and enable one's own dharmakaya to become omnipresent and to pervade the dharma realms. Many students told me that they had seen me manifested in a large golden body that blessed them when they most needed me to help resolving their suffering. They would ask me if I knew about that. I would simply smile. They would also ask me if I had really blessed them. I would reply "The Dharmakaya exists everywhere." One of my Australian students John Vagar suffered a broken left collar bone in a car accident. He told me that he had seen my golden body blessing him in person three times. As a result, he felt almost no pain. The doctor at the hospital was amazed at his speedy recovery. There are too many cases like this to mention. The profound Mahayana Zengong teaching is inconceivable.

 

 

http://dharmaconnectiongroup.blogspot.ca/2014/02/dharmakaya-and-kun-gzhi.html

 

Dharmakaya as defined a bit by John Reynolds, translator and Dzogchen scholar:

 

"As we have pointed out elsewhere, it is true that the Dharmakaya, the dimension of reality, is universal, like infinite space itself. It is one in the sense of transcending all dualities. It is omnipresent and all-pervading and all sentient beings, the enlightened and the unenlightened, equally participate in this single Dharmakaya. But Dharmakaya refers not to mind (sems), but to the Nature of Mind (sems-nyid) and this is a crucial distinction in Dzogchen. Furthermore, the Dharmakaya, which is understood in Dzogchen as the state of Shunyata and the basis of everything (kun-gzhi), is not a mind, let alone the One Mind or the Universal Mind, even though it is the context for the activities of thought. For this reason, the Dharmakaya is compared to the clear open sky, whereas thoughts are compared to the clouds that come to fill the sky. Moreover, there is also the Rupakaya or Form Body, the dimension of form, which is equally the manifestation of Buddhahood and this Rupakaya is always individual in its nature. Therefore, the enlightenment of a Buddha has both a universal aspect, the Dharmakaya, and a particular and individual aspect, the Rupakaya."

 

Edited July 8, 2014 by Tibetan_Ice

[idiot_stimpy]

Could you all please stop Spitting.

[asunthatneversets]

Bull,

The dharmakaya is omnipresent,

http://www.zengong.org/book/chapt-2.htm

 

 

 

http://dharmaconnectiongroup.blogspot.ca/2014/02/dharmakaya-and-kun-gzhi.html

 

 

Uh, did you just quote Jax's misinterpretation of dharmakāya in that dharma connection blog link?

 

Which I will not comment on any further seeing as how the entire discussion in that link is between he and I.

Edited July 8, 2014 by asunthatneversets

[asunthatneversets]

I take it your comment "Bull", followed by "the dharmakāya is omnipresent" is suggesting that you believe dharmakāya to be transpersonal?

[GrandmasterP]

If you're going to spit out dribble, could you use a spittoon and do it in private please, as this threads already very messy?

 

PS In fairness to Simple_Jack, he's right about Tony Parsons but I guess that if you have enough typewriters, you'll just get lucky in the end....

 

OK.

That's it.

This needs settling.

Tony Parsons v Dzogchen.

FIGHT!

 

Three rounds, two submissions or a knockout to decide the winner.

Refereee: HH The Dalai Lama.

Timekeeper: Chronos.

Official Team Seconds:

Parsons Corner... Nobody.

Dzogchen Corner... To be announced.

 

 

 

[rex]

👹

[Jetsun]

OK. That's it. This needs settling. Tony Parsons v Dzogchen. FIGHT! Three rounds, two submissions or a knockout to decide the winner. Refereee: HH The Dalai Lama. Timekeeper: Chronos. Official Team Seconds: Parsons Corner... Nobody. Dzogchen Corner... To be announced.

 

For what its worth I have been to see both Tony Parsons and one of the highest Dzogchen Lama's in the UK for group meetings and felt a lot more energetically and felt a lot more clarity about what was being pointed out when seeing Tony Parsons.

[gatito]

 

For what its worth I have been to see both Tony Parsons and one of the highest Dzogchen Lama's in the UK for group meetings and felt a lot more energetically and felt a lot more clarity about what was being pointed out when seeing Tony Parsons.

 

^^^

The official result.

 

Tony Parsons knocks out one the UK's best Dzogchumps in the first two seconds of round one but unfortunately, while everyone was blinking Kali Vmarco had eaten Tony (although she spat him out as he tasted a bit off): -

 

 

Sure,...according to Parsons Non-Dual construct of Duality. Many great one liners from his teachers, like Gurdjieff, Osho, and neo-Advaita,...but his conclusion appears to come from his own ego's enlightenment (and a clinging to particular non-dual beliefs for his identity). He contradicts what Buddha and Lao Tzu pointed to. His shift in direction from Contracted energy (Yang) to Expanded energy (Yin) is not the absolute emptiness of the Tao,....but merely an another aspect of the illusion of Duality. He has not even realized the nature of One,...which is also an illusion,...but fully mired in Duality.

 

I do admire him for shifting his Contracted energy to an Expansive energy,....that is more than most do,....but that is not full liberation. He continues an attachment for things to be other than they are.

 

By the way,...Buddha never said to give up desire,....he said let go of the desire for things to be other than they are.

Edited July 8, 2014 by gatito

[Apech]

There have been many times when I wished things were other than they are.

[gatito]

Take heart Apech

 

Perhaps you can extract some small comfort from the last line of Vmarco's kiss of death

[gatito]

Or perhaps we should let the referee have the last word: -

 

[Paul]

"If one knows [shes] the buddhahood that has always been [ye] naturally formed by nature, there will be buddhahood of clear realization. That is the definition of wisdom [ye shes]."

- Rigpa Rangshar tantra [per Malcolm]

careful not to throw your pearls...

[Paul]

What the hell is buddhahood ?

 

Buddhahood is seeing the empty-clarity of awareness until one's elements disappear.

 

And what the hell is naturally formed by nature ? (By what "nature" and what is "naturally formed")

 

The clarity sphere of awareness appears in different ways to different beings. Water appears as fire to ghosts, as space to fish, as the color white to Buddhas. This is water's "nature."

 

And what the hell is buddhahood of clear realization.

("Clear realisation" is such a generic term -"Yesterday i had a very clear realisation as to the fact that my dog is not a cat")

 

One clearly realises nothing is real.

 

Tell me how do these expressions relate to your experience right now ?

What is "buddhahood" , "naturally formed by nature " and "buddhahood of clear realization" right now , tell me??

I need you to get real and verify if your experience right now has any resemblance to whatever these things mean.

 

To some beings water appears as a shining light.

 

I dont need people like Kyle with his scholarly wannabe attitude to come here and litter the place up with quotes written in an alien language.All he does is that he always hides behind very well choreographed answers littered with quotes and written in a jargon that smells from a mile of I-have-my-head-so-far-up-my-ass-that-i-can't-be-bothered-with-ignorants-like-you.

Don't you see that he is incapable of giving straight answers , experiential answers , which come from direct experience of the teachings ?

People who have had direct experience of the knowledge of dzogchen, when explaining of how it is to rest in nature they don't use language like "i experience the display as non-arisen".What the hell is non-arisen?

 

It is to be completely relaxed without any hangups. One can be so relaxed one's body disappears. That's buddhahood, omniscience, etc...