Dzogchen, superior to Tantra. Really...?

[Apech]

I salute Tibetan Ice's honesty, openness and to a certain extent courage in talking directly about his own experiences - because it is almost bound to provoke denial from others.  I'm not saying I share his experiences or that I find them a convincing description of Rigpa - but I do think that we each approach the Natural State from our own perspective and the experiences we have along the way are (mostly) personal.

[Brian]

It is not a thing or object with a specific location. Any so called experience of rigpa is useless without realizing space which is not an object or location. The experience is non verbal.

 

The natural relaxed state is one of relaxing into space. That is not to say that I am objectifying space. The Longde series as taught by Norbu makes this very clear. It is far too easy to make this an anthropocentric experience which is an error in judgement.

This closely parallels my experience as well.

[already]

Please explain why his experiences are not rigpa?

Because rigpa is not an experience.

[ralis]

Because rigpa is not an experience.

 

Instead of attacking everyone's posts here, why not write from your own experience? What is and what is not an experience? I bet you have no way to explain that one.

[Brian]

I think quibbling over semantics makes the topic harder to discuss rather than clarifying it. That said, I think I would say the natural state is not an experience but is experienced as part of the process of relaxing into the natural state. I cannot speak to how I might attempt it describe the natural state after it becomes my natural state because I'm not "there." I suspect, though, that it will be akin to the way I currently don't "experience having a left arm" but simply have a left arm...

Edited January 5, 2016 by Brian

[already]

Instead of attacking everyone's posts here, why not write from your own experience? What is and what is not an experience? I bet you have no way to explain that one.

An experience it is a temporary occurrence.

Rigpa doesnt arises from causes and therefore is not the result of a process that involves effort and activity.

[ralis]

I think quibbling over semantics makes the topic harder to discuss rather than clarifying it. That said, I think I would say the natural state is not an experience but is experienced as part of the process of relaxing into the natural state. I cannot speak to how I might attempt it describe the natural state after it becomes my natural state because I'm not "there." I suspect, though, that it will be akin to the way I currently don't "experience having a left arm" but simply have a left arm...

 

However, that only becomes an issue if one believes that one has no inherent existence and therefor there is no one to experience. The Advaita teachings have confused that issue.

[Apech]

It's an excellent point that anything described as an 'experience' must contain a degree of subject/object separation and so is not the 'true thing' if I may put it that way.  But it is also true to say that the dawning of a new awareness of rigpa must present in the first place as an experience.

[ralis]

An experience it is a temporary occurrence.

Rigpa doesnt arises from causes and therefore is not the result of a process that involves effort and activity.

 

So, rigpa is not experiential in anyway shape or form according to your supposition?

[ralis]

Perhaps Dzogchen is just another game in our known universe, which is one realm among many, in which there are an unlimited number of games to play.

[Apech]

Perhaps Dzogchen is just another game in our known universe, which is one realm among many, in which there are an unlimited number of games to play.

 

 

The central practice of Dzogchen, as far as I can see, is to read a lot of books (mostly entitled 'the Secret Oral Teachings ...') and so forth, and then run to the nearest computer and start an argument about rigpa.   To that extent it certainly is a game.

[Brian]

However, that only becomes an issue if one believes that one has no inherent existence and therefor there is no one to experience. The Advaita teachings have confused that issue.

If I woke up one morning with a prehensile tail, that would be a new and different experience for me. Over time, however, that that would become natural for me and I would cease to "experience having a tail" and I would simply have a tail. That doesn't mean that I currently don't believe I inherently have a left arm or, if I suddenly grew a tail, that I would believe my tail was inherently nonexistent but merely that parts of "me" are literally parts of me. Similarly, I think that my current experiences of the natural state of mind are not yet fully integrated into my concept of "me" so this seems like something I am experiencing on and off rather than being the true me -- or, perhaps more correctly, "me" being part of the true nature of mind.

[Jonesboy]

I am quoting you Dzogchen teaching

 

Here are some more for you.

 

Rigpa and Mind

 

 

In Dzogchen, a fundamental point of practice is to distinguish rigpa from sems (citta, (grasping) mind).[8] According to the 14th Dalai Lama, "sems is the mind which is temporarily obscured and distorted by thoughts based upon the dualistic perceptions of subject and object."[9] Rigpa is pure awareness free from such distortions.[9] Cittata, the nature of mind, is the inseparable unity of awareness and emptiness, or clarity and emptiness, which is the basis for all the ordinary perceptions, thoughts and emotions of the ordinary mind.[web 1]

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rigpa

 

 

Homage to the Guru, the teacher.

 

The View and Meditation of Dzogchen can be explained in many, many ways, but simply sustaining the essence of present awareness includes them all.

Your mind won’t be found elsewhere.

It is the very nature of this moment-to-moment thinking.

Regard nakedly the essence of this thinking and you find present awareness, right where you are.

 

Why chase after thoughts, which are superficial ripples of present awareness?

Rather look directly into the naked, empty nature of thoughts; then there is no duality, no observer, and nothing observed.

Simply rest in this transparent, nondual present awareness.

Make yourself at home in the natural state of pure presence, just being, not doing anything in particular.

Present awareness is empty, open, and luminous; not a concrete substance, yet not nothing.

Empty, yet it is perfectly cognizant, lucid, aware.

As if magically, not by causing it to be aware, but innately aware, awareness continuously functions.

These two sides of present awareness or Rigpa — its emptiness and its cognizance (lucidity) — are inseparable.

Emptiness and luminosity (knowing) are inseparable.

They are formless, as if nothing whatsoever, ungraspable, unborn, undying; yet spacious, vivid, buoyant.

Nothing whatsoever, yet Emaho!, everything is magically experienced.

Simply recognize this.

Look into the magical mirror of mind and appreciate this infinite magical display.

With constant, vigilant mindfulness, sustain this recognition of empty, open, brilliant awareness.

Cultivate nothing else.

There is nothing else to do, or to undo.

Let it remain naturally.

Don’t spoil it by manipulating, by controlling, by tampering with it, and worrying about whether you are right or wrong, or having a good meditation or a bad meditation.

Leave it as it is, and rest your weary heart and mind.

....

 

Jamgön Kongtrül Lodrö Thayé (1813–1899), the first Jamgon Rinpoche, was a founder of the Rimé movement of Tibetan Buddhism and author of more than one hundred books.

 

http://freddieyam.com/gen2/p/jamgon-kongtrul.html

 

Rigpa is a being not a doing or an observing.

[ralis]

If I woke up one morning with a prehensile tail, that would be a new and different experience for me. Over time, however, that that would become natural for me and I would cease to "experience having a tail" and I would simply have a tail. That doesn't mean that I currently don't believe I inherently have a left arm or, if I suddenly grew a tail, that I would believe my tail was inherently nonexistent but merely that parts of "me" are literally parts of me. Similarly, I think that my current experiences of the natural state of mind are not yet fully integrated into my concept of "me" so this seems like something I am experiencing on and off rather than being the true me -- or, perhaps more correctly, "me" being part of the true nature of mind.

 

Excellent response. I like where you are going with this.

 

I was responding to the Buddhists who rant regarding no inherent existence of self and the incessant parroting of whatever text they read.

Edited January 5, 2016 by ralis

[Brian]

Why chase after thoughts, which are superficial ripples of present awareness?

Rather look directly into the naked, empty nature of thoughts; then there is no duality, no observer, and nothing observed.

Simply rest in this transparent, nondual present awareness.

Make yourself at home in the natural state of pure presence, just being, not doing anything in particular.

Present awareness is empty, open, and luminous; not a concrete substance, yet not nothing.

Empty, yet it is perfectly cognizant, lucid, aware.

As if magically, not by causing it to be aware, but innately aware, awareness continuously functions.

These two sides of present awareness or Rigpa — its emptiness and its cognizance (lucidity) — are inseparable.

Emptiness and luminosity (knowing) are inseparable.

They are formless, as if nothing whatsoever, ungraspable, unborn, undying; yet spacious, vivid, buoyant.

Nothing whatsoever, yet Emaho!, everything is magically experienced.

Simply recognize this.

Look into the magical mirror of mind and appreciate this infinite magical display.

With constant, vigilant mindfulness, sustain this recognition of empty, open, brilliant awareness.

Cultivate nothing else.

There is nothing else to do, or to undo.

Let it remain naturally.

Don’t spoil it by manipulating, by controlling, by tampering with it, and worrying about whether you are right or wrong, or having a good meditation or a bad meditation.

Leave it as it is, and rest your weary heart and mind.

....

 

Jamgön Kongtrül Lodrö Thayé (1813–1899), the first Jamgon Rinpoche, was a founder of the Rimé movement of Tibetan Buddhism and author of more than one hundred books.

 

http://freddieyam.com/gen2/p/jamgon-kongtrul.html

 

Rigpa is a being not a doing or an observing.

Drop the articles so that last sentence reads "Rigpa is being, not doing or observing" and I am in total agreement!

[Seeker of Wisdom]

Nobody is doubting that TI has had real experiences, the question is whether or not they represent what the Dzogchen tradition calls rigpa. I'm not going to weigh in on that - I know next to nothing about Dzogchen and haven't experienced anything like what TI has.

 

There definitely is a place, an important place, for people saying 'hey, not doubting your experience, but I think you're mistaken when you call it X because ... It may be Y or Z, perhaps.' We don't want anyone calling any experience anything, because then there's no point having terminology! Terms can be misused, especially when it comes to this kind of thing.

 

But then - my above example was reasonable. Too many people say 'You think that was X? Trololol, the texts say nothing like that!' and walk away pleased with themselves for being Mr Dharma Protector™. Often it really feels like these people simply don't think anyone can achieve anything really any more, and that even if someone did, they wouldn't talk about it under any circumstances. Who does this help?

 

Personally I'm glad for TI's experience reports. They're interesting and very encouraging, and I remember him giving very helpful pointers to people unsure whether they were experiencing something or something else.

[Brian]

Excellent response. I like where you are going with this.

 

I was responding to the Buddhists who rant regarding no inherent existence of self and the incessant parroting of whatever text they read.

I think sometimes people can understand things intellectually without assimilating them into their essence. It is a challenge in so many areas of exploration. I first encountered it with fellow physics students who could work the math for electromagnetic radiation but couldn't really wrap their hearts around light being particle, wave, both & neither. First there is a mountain...

[Brian]

Nobody is doubting that TI has had real experiences, the question is whether or not they represent what the Dzogchen tradition calls rigpa. I'm not going to weigh in on that - I know next to nothing about Dzogchen and haven't experienced anything like what TI has.

 

There definitely is a place, an important place, for people saying 'hey, not doubting your experience, but I think you're mistaken when you call it X because ... It may be Y or Z, perhaps.' We don't want anyone calling any experience anything, because then there's no point having terminology! Terms can be misused, especially when it comes to this kind of thing.

 

But then - my above example was reasonable. Too many people say 'You think that was X? Trololol, the texts say nothing like that!' and walk away pleased with themselves for being Mr Dharma Protector™. Often it really feels like these people simply don't think anyone can achieve anything really any more, and that even if someone did, they wouldn't talk about it under any circumstances. Who does this help?

 

Personally I'm glad for TI's experience reports. They're interesting and very encouraging, and I remember him giving very helpful pointers to people unsure whether they were experiencing something or something else.

Thank you. I also appreciate and enjoy it when people share their personal experiences or the fruits of their studies.

 

I am here to share with others and to learn from what they share. My own experiences are insignificant but I share them openly in hopes of learning from the responses of others and of the potential that some reader might say, "Oh! That made something go 'click!'"

Edited January 5, 2016 by Brian

[ralis]

I think sometimes people can understand things intellectually without assimilating them into their essence. It is a challenge in so many areas of exploration. I first encountered it with fellow physics students who could work the math for electromagnetic radiation but couldn't really wrap their hearts around light being particle, wave, both & neither. First there is a mountain...

 

As for myself, the Dzogchen teachings were very disorienting at first, but slowly, the preconceived notions I had dropped away. By stating 'being' in your response to Jonesboy was apropos.

[ralis]

Dzogchen as Norbu teaches has no rules and that can be a difficult situation for most.

[Brian]

Dzogchen as Norbu teaches has no rules and that can be a difficult situation for most.

I would imagine so! I think many people want cookbooks rather than topographic maps.

 

Can you point me towards a collection of Norbu's teachings?

[already]

So, rigpa is not experiential in anyway shape or form according to your supposition?

What knows experience ?

Is rigpa.But a more coarse type of rigpa.

Experience doesnt arise in a vacuum.

What knows the source of experience and its nature is true rigpa.

So experiences no matter how wonderful or mundane they are all known and that which knows should be our concern.

[ralis]

I would imagine so! I think many people want cookbooks rather than topographic maps.

 

Can you point me towards a collection of Norbu's teachings?

 

I will PM you first chance I get. Going out to run errands now.

[ralis]

What knows experience ?

Is rigpa.But a more coarse type of rigpa.

Experience doesnt arise in a vacuum.

What knows the source of experience and its nature is true rigpa.

So experiences no matter how wonderful or mundane they are all known and that which knows should be our concern.

 

Can you bring that down to earth please?

[already]

Every experience is known. Why is this difficult to understand ?But just knowing experience doesnt suffice because you are only knowing it as an object.But when we look at the root of this experience and the nature of this experience then we are getting closer in recognising that which is unconditioned.And we understand this unconditioned reality by recognision how this was always with us and no matter what we do we cannot produce it destroy it increase it or making more of it.