Thread about Nothing

[mantis]

Dzogchen or 'Great Perfection' is a teaching in the Nyingmampa school (Red Hat) of Tibetan Buddhism and deals with mediatating directly on the nature of the mind to reach realization. Mahamudra (Great Seal) is the equivalent teaching in the Kagyu (Black Hat) school which is the central non-dualist meditation on the nature of the mind. The difference in the two schools lies in the teaching process. In Dzogchen the student is introduced directly to the nature of the mind by the master followed by practices to stabalize the experience. Mahamudra develops the practice through preliminary practices and the experience of the nature of the mind is introduced at a later stage. This is the only difference.

 

Karmamudra is about sexual symbolism within tantra.

 

from what i understand have read karmamudra isn't at all symbolic but quite literal

[Apech]

from what i understand have read karmamudra isn't at all symbolic but quite literal

 

 

I didn't mean it was symbolic but that it is a tantra (i.e. a text/teaching) which uses sexual imagery/symbolism - the practices may include sexual yoga and so on.

[minkus]

[Gerard]

If you do not have this one-to-one relationship with a teacher you can more or less forget it in practical terms. There are hundreds of books out there but in all my years of internet wandering, I've never met a single person willing or able to discuss how to actually do the nitty gritty of tantra let alone swap personal experience or give advice. Such openness is anathema to tantra and is actively discouraged. If you check the threads elsewhere you will find people being told to 'shut up' and 'ask their guru', or 'find an authentic teacher' and sit at his feet.

 

As a person who has no opportunity to globe trot after a guru, I count myself fortunate to have found the teachings of the Pali suttas. All the tools you need are there.

 

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/index.html

 

 

Nibbana is just a stone's throw away.

 

 

[rex]

Edited December 8, 2008 by rex

[RongzomFan]

lol

Edited January 3, 2010 by alwayson

[ralis]

I have received the Dzogchen intro. from several teachers. Dzogchen as it is taught by most is mixed with tantra and various preliminaries all of which have no relevance to the natural state. Read Keith Dowman's latest book "Old Man Basking In The Sun" for an explanation. There is no preparation or any exercise one can do to prepare for the natural state! If any Lama or teacher tells you otherwise, they are lying. The natural state can't be contrived or constructed.

 

What most do not want to accept or have no knowledge of historical facts, was that Tibet was a theocracy for 800 years. Tibet was composed of the ruling class of religious elites (monasteries and the Dali Lama) and a superstitious uneducated peasant class. If one wanted to do a practice then the only way to obtain permission was from the local monastery.

 

 

This authoritarian system treated the ordinary tibetan the same as most monks in the monastic system. The so called higher secret teachings were reserved for the very few. Usually the very few were the independent so called hill yogis. The threat of suffering in hell realms for eons for violating vows was the perfect check to keep the hierarchy on place. Read "The Torch of Liberation" by Kongtrul.

 

My point is that this same authoritarian system is still in place if one wants to receive the highest teachings. Prostrations, preliminaries etc. will be demanded while denying one's birthright of realization of the natural state, to the body of light.

 

 

Treckcho and thogal do not require purification preliminaries or moral constructs of any kind! I speak from experience, although one might lose one's mind, whatever that is. LOL!!

 

ralis

[rex]

There is no preparation or any exercise one can do to prepare for the natural state! If any Lama or teacher tells you otherwise, they are lying. The natural state can't be contrived or constructed.

It can't be contrived or constucted but it may remain unrecognised even when a teacher gives direct introduction. Some generous teachers give direct introduction first without the need for any preliminaries (in line with Garab Dorje's First Statement) but advise that if the natural state isn't recognised to also practice various preliminaries to remove obscurations.

 

My point is that this same authoritarian system is still in place if one wants to receive the highest teachings. Prostrations, preliminaries etc. will be demanded while denying one's birthright of realization of the natural state, to the body of light.

It's not a question of holding on to knowledge but of the samaya connection with the teacher who takes on a lot of personal responsibility when giving direct introduction. If the students break their samaya connection this can create all sort of problems for the teacher, one of which is not achieving rainbow body at the time of their death. I believe that the teachers would love to give the teachings out to as many people as possible but are mindful of the consequences of establishing connections with people who aren't serious i.e. shortened life span, corrupted teachings and practices loosing their efficacy. There's a saying in Dzogchen that goes if one hundred people want to hear the Dzogchen teachings that is not enough; if just one person doesn't want to hear that's too many.

 

 

edited for typos

Edited December 8, 2008 by rex

[RongzomFan]

lol

Edited January 3, 2010 by alwayson

[Pero]

LOL, more "insight"... Stop pretending to be a teacher when you're not. You are hurting yourself and possibly others if they follow by your example.

[RongzomFan]

lol

Edited January 3, 2010 by alwayson

[Pero]

Ancestors are irrelevant in regards to this.

And your 2nd statement makes no sense for you to be saying it now...

[RongzomFan]

lol

Edited January 3, 2010 by alwayson

[RongzomFan]

lol

Edited January 3, 2010 by alwayson

[RongzomFan]

lol

Edited January 3, 2010 by alwayson

[ralis]

It can't be contrived or constucted but it may remain unrecognised even when a teacher gives direct introduction. Some generous teachers give direct introduction first without the need for any preliminaries (in line with Garab Dorje's First Statement) but advise that if the natural state isn't recognised to also practice various preliminaries to remove obscurations.

 

It's not a question of holding on to knowledge but of the samaya connection with the teacher who takes on a lot of personal responsibility when giving direct introduction. If the students break their samaya connection this can create all sort of problems for the teacher, one of which is not achieving rainbow body at the time of their death. I believe that the teachers would love to give the teachings out to as many people as possible but are mindful of the consequences of establishing connections with people who aren't serious i.e. shortened life span, corrupted teachings and practices loosing their efficacy. There's a saying in Dzogchen that goes if one hundred people want to hear the Dzogchen teachings that is not enough; if just one person doesn't want to hear that's too many.

edited for typos

 

I submit that these so called samaya vows are contrived belief systems. Samaya vows are implied to be absolute and can follow the true believer through eons of time. It seems to me that this system of vows was created by humans (lamas) to make certain that their system was supported. They act as if their system was given by some all powerful deity that will punish if offended. Many of the deities have been bestowed with that kind of power.

 

ralis

[RongzomFan]

lol

Edited January 3, 2010 by alwayson

[rex]

I submit that these so called samaya vows are contrived belief systems. Samaya vows are implied to be absolute and can follow the true believer through eons of time. It seems to me that this system of vows was created by humans (lamas) to make certain that their system was supported. They act as if their system was given by some all powerful deity that will punish if offended. Many of the deities have been bestowed with that kind of power.

 

ralis

This raises an interesting question on the tension between blind belief and critical analysis. After examining a path and making a connection with it the responsibility for our conduct, attitude and subsequent relationship to the tradition lies purely with ourselves.

[Pero]

maybe not, BUT all the Lukhang murals depict long haired, brown skinned Indians doing the thogal practices.

Maybe so, but it still has absolutely zero relevance. I find it incredible that someone would even bring it up as an argument.

 

 

Samaya doesn't care if you believe in it or not if you've received it.

[RongzomFan]

lol

Edited January 3, 2010 by alwayson

[ralis]

This raises an interesting question on the tension between blind belief and critical analysis. After examining a path and making a connection with it the responsibility for our conduct, attitude and subsequent relationship to the tradition lies purely with ourselves.

 

Rex,

 

Point well taken! Too many people want some type of system to absolve themselves of any critical analysis. The preferred system seems to be one of being a tribal member and doing what one is told. This is the critical error of Tibetan Buddhism. The system is all about the Lama. (See Donald Lopez's "Prisoners of Shamballah"). He states that what is in Tibet is Lamaism and not real Buddhism. Just a mix if indigenous and various belief systems. Fear and superstition is the glue that holds it all together.

 

ralis

[ralis]

Anyway, Snow Lion Publications is coming out with an English copy of the "Yeshe Lama" within a month.

 

The "Yeshe Lama" is the Buddhist manual for thogal.

http://www.snowlionpub.com/

Full translation of the texts dealing with the preliminaries are already available at the back of the book "Approaching the Great Perfection" By Sam Van Schaik

 

 

Is "Yeshe Lama" the title of the book? Do you know when the publication date is?

 

ralis

[RongzomFan]

lol

Edited January 3, 2010 by alwayson

[Apech]

I submit that these so called samaya vows are contrived belief systems. Samaya vows are implied to be absolute and can follow the true believer through eons of time. It seems to me that this system of vows was created by humans (lamas) to make certain that their system was supported. They act as if their system was given by some all powerful deity that will punish if offended. Many of the deities have been bestowed with that kind of power.

 

ralis

 

 

Ralis,

 

Where have you read that Samaya vows are absolute? When I studied the vajrayana the teaching on the 14 Root Downfalls was that far from being absolute they can be 'repaired' by confession and also renewed by retaking them. In actual fact they were far from being absolute but were a way of safeguarding the relationship with the Lama within which the sadhana was supposed to work.

[rex]

Rex,

 

Point well taken! Too many people want some type of system to absolve themselves of any critical analysis. The preferred system seems to be one of being a tribal member and doing what one is told. This is the critical error of Tibetan Buddhism. The system is all about the Lama. (See Donald Lopez's "Prisoners of Shamballah"). He states that what is in Tibet is Lamaism and not real Buddhism. Just a mix if indigenous and various belief systems. Fear and superstition is the glue that holds it all together.

 

ralis

Ralis,

 

Now this is not a comment on your relationship to the transmission but on the general issues raised. For good or ill the responsibility lies with us in how we choose to relate to the tradition. Adherents of course would point out that the ground rules are clearly stated and that not believing in something does not exempt us or others from the effects of disregarding. Dzogchen without the living teacher and samaya connection is just another dry intellectual philosophy.

 

There is at least one teacher, who despite taking samaya seriously and constantly reminding students to guard it, is willing to give transmission to anyone interested - presumably as long as the practice is done then that is enough to maintain samaya, even if the practitioner doesn't believe in it. Such is their generosity. To accept transmission without a fundamental respect for the teacher and their tradition would be an unfortunate abuse of that generosity.

 

Rex

Edited December 9, 2008 by rex