while kids had no food them two watched the country burn Karma bit their ass...

~ HH Dudjom Rinpoche ~ Meditation consists of being attentive to such a state of rigpa, free from all mental constructions, whilst remaining fully relaxed, without any distraction or grasping. For it is said that ‘meditation is not striving, but naturally becoming assimilated into it'.

~ Yang Gonpa ~ The essence of thoughts that suddenly arise is without any nature. Do not inhibit their appearance in any way, and without thinking of any essence, let them arise clearly, nakedly, and vividly. Likewise, if one thought arises, observe its nature, and if two arise, observe their nature. Thus, whatever thoughts arise, let them go without holding onto them. Let them remain as fragments. Release them unimpededly. Be naked without an object. Release them without grasping. This is close to becoming a Buddha. This is the self-extinction of samsara - samsara is overwhelmed; samsara is disempowered; samsara is exhausted. Knowledge of the path of method and wisdom, appearances and emptiness, the gradual stages, the common and special paths, and the 84000 entrances to the Dharma is made perfectly complete and fulfilled in an instant. This is self-arisen, for it is present like that in the very nature [of awareness]. Natural liberation is the essence of all the stainless paths, and it bears the essence of emptiness and compassion.

~ Karl Brunnholzl ~ "The embrace between Samantabhadra and Samantabhadri represents the inseparable union of the pure awareness of self-arising, luminous wisdom, and the vast open expanse of the dharmadhatu, or emptiness. The vibrantly clear insight and awareness of this wisdom arises naturally within the open spaciousness of the expanse of emptiness, radiating throughout it and pervading it. Their inseparable union is not just a nonconceptual cognitive dimension; its affective dimension or tone is the experience of the inexhaustible great bliss that is completely unconditional and free from all mundane emotions, such as desire, attachment, clinging, and pride. Their lotus seat symbolizes their freedom from all stains of conditioned phenomena and characteristics. Just as a mother gives birth to children, all phenomena arise from and within the open yet fertile and luminous space of emptiness. Thus, the symbolism of the feminine principle makes it clear that emptiness is not a blank voidness, an utter nonexistence, a negative, or some static state, but the indeterminate yet dynamic dimension of infinite potentiality. The masculine principle refers to the awareness of nonconceptual wisdom that is accomplished by the warm heart of compassion; this is what moves within, permeates, and is aware of the spaciousness of this boundless realm, manifestly expressing all its enlightened and enlightening possibilities and qualities."

There was once a truly great sage in China who roamed from village to village debating with all comers on any subject, and never once lost a debate. One day, he came upon an orange elephant in a glass house, and began to marvel at it. Soon, people gathered round, and word got out that such a magnificent beast was discovered, and large crowds began making a beeline to witness this wonder of nature. Fearing that something untoward may happen due to ever-increasing number of curious onlookers, this sage began addressing the crowd. With his masterful eloquence, gradually he convinced them that this orange elephant is something other than what they think it is, and no matter what, they must not believe whats right in front of their eyes - the existence of an orange elephant in a glass house. The crowd was pacified, and eventually they began to disperse. Of course the elephant wasn't too pleased at losing all the attention save for that given by one mere mortal human, and one whose intelligence and skilfulness meant nothing to the elephant, whose only desire is to bask in the adulations of the throngs of people that came to see it. He became at first dejected, then angry, and in a sudden clouded moment of irrationality, he went charging out of the glass house. Needless to say, it got badly wounded by all the splintering glass that pierced him in a million places, and it eventually died, not as a direct result from the physical injuries, but mainly from that deep sense of feeling neglected and abandoned. Before its final breath, the elephant muttered to the sage, "If only you knew I was the chosen one." And with that, it went to elephant heaven. Doubly tragically, the sage became most forlorn from losing the one thing that truly captured his deepest admiration and devotion. Alas, he wouldn't have had to endure this scorching pain had he realised that his own powers of persuasion, when not able to be appreciated from deep within his own being, was in itself his own little elephant in a glasshouse. The end.

~ Sara Isayama ~ Why Voicing the Dharma Matters Have you ever been in a discussion in a Buddhist group, or witnessed one, where two people were going back and forth, and one of them was making valid points, but the other just wasn’t willing to listen? And then finally after this has gone on for some time, the latter finally instead of conceding the points, responds with something to the effect of, “Well all positions are just aspects of the ego mind. When we truly see nothingness, we realize no such positions exist.” This is what I like to call the “Ultimate erases the relative” fallacy, that is common in Buddhist discussions. It’s a kind of cop out—a way of preserving the ego, and changing the discussion from dialogue about a relative topic to one of an Ultimate one, in an attempt to distract from the main point someone is making by saying relative subjects don’t exist. Paradoxically, the person saying this will often passive-aggressively imply that the other person is in their “ego mind” meanwhile they, the enlightened profound person, have understood a wisdom so deep and profound that the other person just simply doesn’t understand. And “one day” perhaps the other person will reach their own level of profundity. This is a fallacy, and there are important reasons why it does not work. Because it is so common in Buddhist discussions, I thought I would address it here. I see this most often in Zen circles, though it appears in Vajrayana ones as well. Essentially the argument boils down to this: that because the Ultimate nature of reality can never fully be expressed, we shouldn’t speak (Never mind the fact that the person saying this has usually done quite a bit of speaking before this, up until this point!). If this perspective were true, then the Buddha would never have given voice to the Dharma, and indeed, even the person’s own teacher wouldn’t have given them the practices that they currently practice. The problem with this is that All is One, and all is different at the same time. The Two Truths does not mean one truth and one lie. Right Action doesn’t mean “no action” just because everything is Ultimate. If that were true there would be no reason for training whatsoever, or speaking about anything, (and no Bodhisttvas) and everyone can go right on continuing being miserable. The irony is that while those who express these kinds of views often have very strong opinions about the Dharma themselves (which they usually are quite happy to share and argue), when someone else expresses a view on the Dharma they disagree with; they seem to be saying: “Well nothing can be truly expressed anyway, so stop talking.”

There's no need to wait for another life Intent is what matters most. Intent is the child of bodhi. One does not have to become a bodhisattva in order to visualise joyful, altruistic bodhisattva activities. With the increasing clarity & strength in visualisation, eventually the imaginary veil that seems to separate existences will fall away, and one touches reality as is, in the present.

I mean, lets take pure perception as an actual experience or manifestation, and not a theoretical premise: Some folks think pure perception means seeing the lama as perfect, and some schools actually sell that notion as truth. Which is disappointing. So, what does pure perception actually entail? In my understanding, it means going beyond the mundane into the very heart of enlightenment itself, which is that essentially there is a non-dual order to the myriad forms, where these are seen to arise out of ignorance, which then leads to being captivated by distractive habits, which then leads to grasping, which then propels samsara. By knowing how to trace the steps back to that original, self-perfected union of form & emptiness, one arrives ultimately at the view of equanimity, that is, thru gaining confidence in the view of recognising the primordial state: that all things are fundamentally without opposites. When this becomes an experiential understanding, then dualistic thought will resolve itself, and the state of equanimous poise arise spontaneously out of that resolution. To get there, practice is essential. Guided Practice is likened to having a proper GPS in place that enables some sort of protection against incidental detours and dead-ends. Without this GPS its like having a boat but no propeller, or having a propeller and vessel, but an inadequate operator who does not have the necessary navigation skills, or one who has had no guidance on how to calibrate the scales adequately.

Work with the original and only authentic guru, Buddha Shakyamuni, or Guru Rinpoche, with whom I have strong affinity with. All the gurus are after all emanations of Buddha Shakyamuni, so its really not an issue.

I'm still not sure if the purpose of Ngondro is properly understood by the OP. Its very possible to practice it without obeisance to any particular lineage or teacher. I'm doing it, but I've cut all ties with the root teacher that I started out with. No samayas broken, as far as I'm concerned cos he was an utter hypocrite and a predator. No bitterness on my part - I remain faithful to the practice despite the weakness that came up.

~ Tulku Urgyen Rinpoche ~ Unless we connect with the two types of precious bodhicitta, we will not approach enlightenment even in the slightest; this is certain. The two types of bodhicitta are relative bodhicitta, compassion, and ultimate bodichitta, the insight into emptiness. Without these two, there is absolutely no way to take even one step closer towards buddhahood. Any Dharma practice devoid of these two kinds of bodhicitta will not bring the practitioner even one step toward enlightenment - I will swear to that.

There's this work by Randall Studstill: The Unity of Mystical Traditions: The Transformation of Consciousness in Tibetan and German Mysticism that I think will interest you (assuming you haven't yet come across it). Overview: "The book supports an ecumenical theory of mysticism through a comparative analysis of Tibetan Dzogchen and German mysticism. Using a systems model of consciousness as an interpretive framework, it shows how the distinct doctrines and practices of these two traditions function in parallel, equally transformative ways."

You have a brave & noble vision. Hope its enough to guide you towards that which you are hoping to achieve. I've been trying to be a steady Dzogchen student since 96. Over the years, I have met numerous teachers, yogis, and adepts who are neither teacher nor yogi, and they have ALL shared the same emphasis on the vital importance of some sort of support practice (Ngondro - preliminaries) to really pound the foundation in order to dissolve old habitual physical and mental gaits that, if allowed to remain, will hinder one's speed towards ultimate fruition, which, quintessentially means the gradual onset of permanent equipoise. Establishing the taste of what exactly the View is in Dzogchen is pretty simple and straightforward, while losing that View to old habitual patterns is just as easy and effortless. Without wanting to sound preachy, I'll end by saying that there is essentially no dividing line between Dzogchen and Ngondro. The practitioner who can attain fruition without cultivating the 2 types of bodhicitta (thru Ngondro) is rare indeed. I strongly believe even Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche could not have attained his Dzogchen mastery without having had grounding as a Ngondro novice. My intention is not to debate whether Ngondro can or cannot be dispensed with. For those who feel that the support of Ngondro can be put aside and still maintain the View with prolonged ease, then more power to them. As for me, Ngondro and the View is inseparably entwined and integral to lengthier periods of resting in that space of equipoise. Wishing you the very best on your journey.

Integrating mind & body the Drukpa Kagyu way. Heartening to note how this tradition departs from stuffy norms in its quest to empower nuns.

~ Paramito Ladakh ~ Consider this: Is Wisdom a direct product of age, or of the breadth of our life experience? Or is it a direct product of our insightful engagement with all of life's many and varied experiences, throughout all stages of our life? "Insightful engagement" requires us to be fully present with whatever experience is arising in the moment, unencumbered by the array of habitual assumptions and conditioned attitudes that would otherwise inevitably jaundice our view of that experience. We can invest huge amounts of time, energy and money in learning new things, but very little, or perhaps even none, of that is ever directed at investigating the mechanism or process of learning itself. Wisdom is so much more than mere knowledge and understanding - it is the very mechanism or process of knowing or understanding. Therefore, Wisdom is not that which is held in awareness, but is awareness itself.