Dzogchen, superior to Tantra. Really...?

[Wells]

.

Edited May 10, 2016 by Wells

[Tibetan_Ice]

Probably one of the better books on Rigpa is "Ground, Path and Fruition" by Tony Duff.

He has the usual methods, like "phat", and numerous other methods too.

[Jox]

Is a "natural state" something like wu-ji state or mushin? If not, what is the difference?

 

I don know the teminology you use here ... anyway are Trecho / Thogal in any corelatino to the Tonal / Nagual from shamanic tradition? 

 

 

 

I have a few, books on that topic, I still havent read ... which one of them do you recommend ...

Edited January 2, 2016 by Jox

[Jonesboy]

Yoga is Dzogchen, the yogic observer state is the Natural State.

This becomes clear in the following quote:

Bonpo Dzogchen Teachings - Lopon Tenzin Namdak

page 182

The yogic state as in the Witness? Like observing thoughts, feelings etc..?

 

That is not Rigpa, seperation, observing is not the Natural State.

[ralis]

The yogic state as in the Witness? Like observing thoughts, feelings etc..?

 

That is not Rigpa, seperation, observing is not the Natural State.

 

Do you have textual references to back up your argument? Wells provided an excellent reference from a well known teacher.

[Jonesboy]

[ralis]

He did but it doesn't mean he interrupted it correctly

 

Mindfulness is not Rigpa. The Witness is not Rigpa.

 

From a yogi point of view Sahaja samadhi will help you get a better understanding.

 

 

Ramana Maharshi on Samadhi

 

Question : What is samadhi?

Ramana Maharshi : The state in which the unbroken experience of existence-consciousness is attained by the still mind, alone is samadhi. That still mind which is adorned with the attainment of the limitless supreme Self, alone is the reality of God.

 

When the mind is in communion with the Self in darkness, it is called nidra [sleep], that is, the immersion of the mind in ignorance. Immersion in a conscious or wakeful state is called samadhi. Samadhi is continuous inherence in the Self in a waking state. Nidra or sleep is also inherence in the Self but in an unconscious state. In sahaja samadhi the communion is con-tinuous.

 

Question : What are kevala nirvikalpa samadhi and sahaja nirvikalpa samadhi?

Ramana Maharshi :The immersion of the mind in the Self, but without its destruction, is kevala nirvikalpa samadhi. In this state one is not free from vasanas and so one does not therefore attain mukti. Only after the vasanas have been destroyed can one attain liberation.

 

Question : When can one practise sahaja samadhi?

Ramana Maharshi : Even from the beginning. Even though one practises kevala nirvikalpa samadhi for years together, if one has not rooted out the vasanas one will not attain liberation.

 

Question : May I have a clear idea of the difference between savikalpa and nirvikalpa?

Ramana Maharshi : Holding on to the supreme state is samadhi. When it is with effort due to mental disturbances, it is savikalpa. When these disturbances are absent, it is nirvikalpa. Remaining permanently in the primal state without effort is sahaja.

 

Question : Is nirvikalpa samadhi absolutely necessary before the attainment of sahaja?

Ramana Maharshi : Abiding permanently in any of these samadhis, either savikalpa or nirvikatpa, is sahaja [the natural state]. What is body-consciousness? It is the insentient body plus consciousness. Both of these must lie in another consciousness which is absolute and unaffected and which remains as it always is, with or without the body-consciousness. What does it then matter whether the body-consciousness is lost or retained, provided one is holding on to that pure consciousness? Total absence of body-consciousness has the advantage of making the samadhi more intense, although it makes no difference to the knowledge of the supreme.

 

Source: Be As You Are, David Godman

 

http://wanderling.tripod.com/sahaja.html

 

We are discussing Dzogchen and not Advaita in which there are differences. Are you a student of Jax?

 

Please stay on topic.

Edited January 2, 2016 by ralis

[Jonesboy]

Did not Wells mention Yoga? Was not my comments about the Witness not being our Natural State a direct response to his comments?

 

If there are higher states of being as mentioned by Ramana then again the Witness is not our Natural State.

 

No I am in no way a student of Jax.

 

Anytime someone explains emptiness as watching thoughts come and go and how one can then observe the emptiness of the mind as an explanation of emptiness.

 

I say run because they haven't experienced emptiness and therefore I doubt he has experienced Rigpa.

 

All the best,

 

Tom

Edited January 2, 2016 by Jonesboy

[Wells]

.

Edited May 10, 2016 by Wells

[ralis]

Did not Wells mention Yoga? Was not my comments about the Witness not being our Natural State?

 

If there are higher states of being as mentioned by Ramana then again the Witness is not our Natural State.

 

No I am in no way a student of Jax.

 

Anytime someone explains emptiness as watching thoughts come and go and how one can then observe the emptiness of the mind as an explanation of emptiness.

 

I say run because they haven't experienced emptiness and therefore I doubt he has experienced Rigpa.

 

All the best,

 

Tom

 

Have you had Dzogchen teachings? In Dzogchen, thoughts come and go which are the mind and nature of the mind. Emptiness and clarity. No need to suppress or transform anything.

[Wells]

.

Edited May 10, 2016 by Wells

[ralis]

Did not Wells mention Yoga? Was not my comments about the Witness not being our Natural State a direct response to his comments?

 

If there are higher states of being as mentioned by Ramana then again the Witness is not our Natural State.

 

No I am in no way a student of Jax.

 

Anytime someone explains emptiness as watching thoughts come and go and how one can then observe the emptiness of the mind as an explanation of emptiness.

 

I say run because they haven't experienced emptiness and therefore I doubt he has experienced Rigpa.

 

All the best,

 

Tom

 

Actually one can watch and still be in the natural state/nondualistic state.

[Apech]

Mindfulness is not Yoga as described by Patanjali in his Yoga Sutras.

 

 

Buddhism uses the term yoga for certain methods and practices.  It is not necessarily the same interpretation as Patanjali.

[Jonesboy]

Have you had Dzogchen teachings? In Dzogchen, thoughts come and go which are the mind and nature of the mind. Emptiness and clarity. No need to suppress or transform anything.

Do you think that is the end all be all? Just observing thoughts without attachment. Do you really believe that is the highest state of being aka Rigpa?

 

You can't reach samadhi while grasping or attaching to things.

 

Eventually one moves beyond observing. Silence fills ones mind, the energy/thoughts flow through without grasping but they are you, as in the flow. It is a being not an observing. Eventually you are the clouds and the sky and the birds as them, not observing them.

 

Emptiness with reference to thoughts is that all thoughts are energy. All things are energy and like clouds they seem to have form but in truth they are empty. The more we grasp, believe in our thoughts/ give them form the more suffering we experience. So emptiness of thoughts is realizing that thoughts are just energy, empty expect for what we grasp at.

 

As one progresses one is able to experience all things as oneness and the emptiness nature of things.

 

Aka void=form and form=void.

 

It is a state of being not observing.

 

All the best,

Edited January 2, 2016 by Jonesboy

[Jonesboy]

This may help,

 

From the Tao Te Ching

 

CHAPTER 4

The Dao is forever like an unfathomable empty space. If used, it can never be used up.

It is the source of the Ten Thousand Things.

Look with your heart, see its form in the glare,

be at one with the dust of the Earth, simplify your nature.

For it is ever present, hidden in the depths of the myriad things.

I don't know from whence it came, but it is great.

[ralis]

Do you think that is the end all be all? Just observing thoughts without attachment. Do you really believe that is the highest state of being aka Rigpa?

 

You can't reach samadhi while grasping or attaching to things.

 

Eventually one moves beyond observing. Silence fills ones mind, the energy/thoughts flow through without grasping but they are you. It is a being not an observing. Eventually you are the clouds and the sky and the birds as them, not observing them.

 

Emptiness with reference to thoughts is that all thoughts are energy. All things are energy and like clouds they seem to have form but in truth they are empty. The more we grasp, believe in our thoughts/ give them form the more suffering we experience. So emptiness of thoughts is realizing that thoughts are just energy, empty expect for what we grasp at.

 

As one progresses one is able to experience all things as oneness and the emptiness nature of things.

 

Aka void=form and form=void.

 

It is a state of being not observing.

 

All the best,

 

You fail to understand what I meant. Non attachment is just another way of rejecting phenomena. Furthermore, the meme of so called non attachment can cause much confusion and psychological damage to persons who have very little basis in critical thinking and by extension never question authority. Moreover, the basic practice is one of relaxation i.e, body, speech and mind.

Edited January 2, 2016 by ralis

[Tibetan_Ice]

...

 

I don know the teminology you use here ... anyway are Trecho / Thogal in any corelatino to the Tonal / Nagual from shamanic tradition?

 

.

The tonal and natural are the terms that the fictitious writer "Casteneda" used in his books, Journey to Ixtlan, etc.. The tonal is a sort of representation of form, of all forms. One way to stop internal dialog is to flood the tonal with so many objects that it can't grasp at all of them at the same time and becomes silent. Like a wide gazing practice. The Nagual, on the other hand, is the mysterious power that lies beyond and is the counterpart of the tonal. Please remember that Casteneda created his books by sitting in a library and translating various texts into his own concoctions, so some of the principles behind his stories have a foot in relative truth, but you have to take the gum boots off first. Power spots, gazing, losing self importance, art of dreaming (looking at your hands) etc are all viable practices that have their lessons, but I seriously doubt if his art form is a true representation of shamanism.

 

Trecko and thogal are Dzogchen practices. Trecko practice are a series of methods used to discover rigpa and train in remaining in rigpa for longer periods of time. Rigpa is a combination of "emptiness", "clarity" and the inseperableness of the two. Thogal is a "gazing" practice which monopolizes the Kati secret channel from the heart to the eyes in order to convince the practitioner that all visual phenomenon are illusory, a projection and have no absolute intrinsic nature apart from Primordial Wisdom, or if the basis is not recognized it is called "ignorance".

Edited January 2, 2016 by Tibetan_Ice

[ralis]

@ Jonesboy

 

Where did you get the idea that one's mind will eventually be silenced? That is an error in judgment and a 'new age' misunderstanding of neurophysiology.

Edited January 2, 2016 by ralis

[Wells]

.

Edited May 10, 2016 by Wells

[Jonesboy]

I completely understood what you meant.

 

I would agree that to experience Rigpa or non attachment one has to learn to relax, let go aka reside.

 

All the best to you,

 

Tom

[Jonesboy]

@ Jonesboy

 

Where did you get the idea that one's mind will eventually be silenced? That is an error in judgment and a 'new age' misunderstanding of neurophysiology.

Experience.

 

If you read my earlier post that quoted Ramana you would see that he agrees with me.

 

He is not very New Age either;)

Edited January 2, 2016 by Jonesboy

[ralis]

Experience.

 

If you read my earlier post that quoted Ramana you would see that he agrees with me.

 

He is not very New Age either;)

 

Advaita and Dzogchen are two different topics. I think Ramana is not in a position to agree or disagree with you since he has long since passed away.

 

My statement regarding neurophysiology and what the brain naturally does stands, which is in direct contradiction to your narrative.

Edited January 2, 2016 by ralis

[Jonesboy]

Advaita and Dzogchen are two different topics. I think Ramana is not in a position to agree or disagree with you since he has long since passed away.

 

My statement regarding neurophysiology and what the brain naturally does stands, which is in direct contradiction to your narrative.

Now you are just being difficult. Neurophysiology doesn't explain shaktipat or a whole host of spiritual aspects. Does it explain oneness or the void or the jhanas or emptiness?

 

Nope not at all.

 

With regard to Ramana, states of being are all the same.

 

Ramana Maharshi on Samadhi

 

Question : What is samadhi?

Ramana Maharshi : The state in which the unbroken experience of existence-consciousness is attained by the still mind, alone is samadhi. That still mind which is adorned with the attainment of the limitless supreme Self, alone is the reality of God.

 

Question : May I have a clear idea of the difference between savikalpa and nirvikalpa?

Ramana Maharshi : Holding on to the supreme state is samadhi. When it is with effort due to mental disturbances, it is savikalpa. When these disturbances are absent, it is nirvikalpa. Remaining permanently in the primal state without effort is sahaja.

 

 

A still mind without disturbances and residing in that is Sahaja Samadhi. Which is my attempt to help you understand Rigpa. Unless you think Sahaja Samadhi is a higher state of being than Rigpa?

[Tibetan_Ice]

...

You can't reach samadhi while grasping or attaching to things

 

...,

You should not come into a Buddhist forum and call Ramana's "natural state" the same as Dzogchen's "natural state".

Using the term "samadhi" is also a faux pas because you end up saying ridiculous statements like the one you said above.

Study Patanjali and his process for arriving at samadhi. It is a practice of GRASPING. It is taking hold of a single object and fixing the mind single pointedly on it until the subject and object fuse together. AYP bastardized the understanding of Patanjali's process for samadhi, samyama and you seem to be just spouting off what you picked up there.

[Wells]

.

Edited May 10, 2016 by Wells