Paul

What? Are you capable of having a real honest discussion?

I won't discuss Dzogchen with people who only want to be ruthless toward it. Is there anything else you want to discuss? Emptiness is the opposite of fundamentalism, BTW. It is the destruction of concepts...

Interesting. So you consider people you are exceptionally comfortable with to be your teachers? Am I right?

Nope.

And this is where you are wrong. You trust my appearance on some level because you respond to it. You may not trust some of the implications I would like you to trust, but to say you don't trust me in any way, shape or form is definitely wrong. You respond to my basic energy. So you do trust me. This is one of my many teachings for you, my son.

Whatever keeps you warm at night.

This is where I disagree with religious fundamentalists such as yourself. By deferring to the Buddha you have an ironclad defense with no weak points in your mind only.

 

The beginning of wisdom is admitting that there is much you don't know or understand.

 

I am intellectually ruthless with my concepts and belief systems. Do you question yourself? For most that creates much fear!

Fear the beard.

Very good! So how were you able to determine that your teachers are realized beings, whereas I am a joker on the internet?

Because in their presence life is bliss and you are a joker on the internet.

Never mind that one can be a realized being and a joker on the internet at the same time.

Sure, why not?

Quit being defensive. What you are protecting is not worth protecting, trust me. Just answer my questions.

I don't trust you in any way, shape or form.

I am also teaching you. Am I your teacher? If you answer "no" then teaching is not a sufficient condition and your answer is not a good one.

Here's the key difference. I requested teachings from these realized beings and they gave me transmissions of the lineage. You are a joker on the internet.

I asked if you thought the difference between what you are doing and what I am doing is substantial or ornamental. I prefer an honest and straightforward "no comment" to how you avoided the question.

I don't care.

Then please reconcile the idea that Dzogchen cannot be taught with your idea of having a whole list of Dzogchen teachers.

I don't have to. If you want to understand that we can meet and discuss in person or you can follow a transmission by a Dzogchen teacher.

Show me where I called the Buddha trite? You will not find it in any post of mine. You seem unreasonably defensive.

The Buddha is emptiness and emptiness is the Buddha.

Why are these people your teachers?

Because they taught me.

 

Do you think there is a substnatial difference between what you are doing and what I am doing? Or is the difference merely ornamental?

I think I'm following buddhas. I don't care what you are doing.

 

Then "having a teacher" amounts to lip service.

You say this because you have no idea what you are talking about.

You have a center? Anyone who wishes to discuss and not absolutely agree with your perspective is thrown out?

Coming with questions and doubts is one thing, calling Buddha trite will be taken as disrespectful. So you would find out no one has any time or anything to say to you.

You have misconstrued what I said. To repeat; the overuse of the term 'emptiness' makes that term trite.

The term appears millions of times in the sutras. It's fresh to me.

Bump.

Vedantins need gurus too

Hence the word "maybe" in what I said.

 

Please do, if you don't mind.

I mind.

 

Who?

Gelong Yeshe Rinpoche, Drubpon Gonpo Dorje Rinpoche, HH Drikung Chetsang Rinpoche, HH Taklung Matul Rinpoche, Khenpo Konchog Gyaltsen Rinpoche, HH Tenzin Gyatso, Traga Lama, Choegyal Namkhai Norbu, Kunzang Dechen Lingpa Rinpoche, Garchen Rinpoche

 

OK, so for you one word of Dzogchen may not be enough, is what you're saying?

I'm saying you might think going without a teacher might be enough, but for me that would be woefully deficient.

 

So you are wrong when you imply Dzogchen frowns on analysis. In fact more than one Dzogchen tantra invites analysis from their readers.

I never said Dzogchen teaching frowns on analysis. I said Dzogchen is beyond explanations. The teaching is not Dzogchen.

Hmmm.....given the evidence, either s/he's incompetent or you're unteachable.

It's none of your business. You reject the teacher in favor of yourself, so you're automatically out.

And maybe you even believe that you don't.

You don't know what I believe.

 

 

OK, in addition to telling me what your teachers say, can you tell me why they say whatever they say?

I sure can.

 

 

Who is the teacher?

I know who my teachers are.

 

Under the right conditions anything is enough, do you agree?

What's enough for you might not be for me.

 

Say what? What an ad-hoc mix of unrelated qualities. Do you know that many Dzogchen tantras are in and of themselves forms of analysis?

So?

Although after reading that, I can see that you're you're entirely competent in making fun of yourself and that you need no further help from me.

I suppose if respecting my teacher is funny, then laugh on... But consider, wisdom in Dzogchen depends on a teacher.

I hope not.

 

I'm just making fun of you and Simple_Jack, so I hope that everyone's laughing as much as I am.

Yay!

Sticking your tongue out is what you've been doing the whole time. In which post have you actually outlined your point of view in any detail? Saying something like "not it isn't" is not what any sane person would understand as "debating."

I don't have a view to outline. I can tell you what my Dzogchen teachers say. First thing they say is it breaks samaya to discuss Dzogchen with people who are not earnestly devoted to the teacher. A single word of Dzogchen teaching is enough to attain enlightenment. So each word is precious. Those who want to denigrate, analyze and be skeptical of Dzogchen have no business advising what these terms mean to an OP who appeared sincerely interested in what the terms are. I mentioned clarity-emptiness is wisdom in Dzogchen. To which, some joker said "emptiness" is trite. To which I replied, that's bullshit. Now here we are.

Don't expect anyone here to take you seriously ever again.

Did you expect anyone was taking you seriously?

Bump.

I know. It's better to stick my tongue out at these people than debate Dzogchen.

You do realise that you have to be at least 13 years old to join TTBs?

 

I'm going to call your mummy and tell her that you're being rude to grownups on the internet again.

My mummy died. I hate you.

Just what I expect from someone who is clinging to humility.

Go back to smelling your farts in the bathtub, genius.

I'll stay. But thank you for asking.

You're most unwelcome

Like a fart in a small bathtub full of water. Just terrible.

Puke face

You don't have a clue about Dzogchen and you shame yourself and the entire Dzogchen lineage

 

 

Not for you Paul - you're clearly suffering.

Go jump in a lake.

I give you 50%. The teaching doesn't have a fixed form either.

Their called the Dzogchen tantras. They are relics of the dharmakaya. So, yeah, they have a fixed form.

Let me fix it for you:

 

Dzogchen is not a belief system lineage. It is the end of systems lineages.

 

You like? Oh, don't bother answering. It's a rhetorical question.

You're right Dzogchen is not a lineage. But the teaching is.