dzogchen and daoism

[konchog uma]

reading Keith Dowman's Natural Perfection: Longchenpa's Radical Dzogchen, i was struck by the similarities between the dzogchen rhetoric and daoist rhetoric.

 

"DZOGCHEN was a secret tradition in Tibet. [...] Its popularity may be attributed to a single basic tenet, which is contained in the notion “nonaction.” The buddha-nature is immanent in every moment of experience and simply by recognizing the moment and relaxing into it that realization is achieved. Relaxation is the imperative need of our stressed-out culture and relaxation is the key to buddhahood here-and-now. The materialism, rationalism, and goal-oriented ambition that mark our contemporary societies is undermined by Dzogchen with its promise of optimal awareness and recognition of a natural state of perfection. Tangentially, the message of Dzogchen provides a functional approach to the medical ills of the age, a redemptive approach to sexuality, and a positive, joyful vision of death and dying. These popular effects of Dzogchen, however, should not obscure its fundamental purpose - to recognize the unity of all things in a nondual universe of full awareness, harmony, and compassion.

 

It is unfortunately true that a heavy seriousness tends to pervade texts on the Dzogchen view; but perhaps that is inevitable in works that purport to resolve our every existential quandary. Yet evidently in the work of providing meaningful commentary and translation of Dzogchen texts something crucial in the heart of Dzogchen is being forfeited. This essence of Dzogchen may be characterized as a lightness of being, humor, and laid back detachment, spontaneous joy and an uninhibited freedom of expression. Perhaps these qualities will emerge here in this work through an understanding of Longchenpa’s intent, but we need to apologize, immediately, for any failure to uphold the cosmic joke, full of joyful laughter, or to induce a dance of cosmic energy involving all life and work, and a pacific play of light that is free of all pain and anxiety. The exemplar of Dzogchen may be anonymous, but he is also the divine madman—or the urban yogi—jumping through decisive moments in life as easily as through the most trivial dilemma, gleefully shouting the absurdity of existence from the rooftops, and asserting the essential beauty of the human predicament."

 

one of the preliminaries of dzogchen is rushan, the practice of going to a place all by yourself where nobody is watching you and spontaneously acting out whatever arises in your mind or energies. It reminded me from the very beginning of the general who was flapping his arms like a chicken from the later chapters of Chuang Tzu...

 

i have always intuitively known that daoism and buddhism were two sides of the same coin, but at times they seem so different, and the egregious contentiousness of some daoists and buddhists when this sameness is implied has led me to wonder at times if this feeling in my bones was correct. I feel upon reading Dowman's introduction to the text that something has been rekindled in my heart, some non-sectarian sensibility that is beyond mundane boundaries like this-ism or that-ism. Something that strikes to the heart of experience, the experience we all share whether we are on this side of the fence or that. The experience of being human on planet earth, of having a body and a mind and trying to make sense of that.

 

I hope others take delight in finding this similarity or reading the above-quoted passage. May we all remember that we share far more similarities than differences!

Edited December 26, 2012 by anamatva

[三江源]

This essence of Dzogchen may be characterized as a lightness of being, humor, and laid back detachment, spontaneous joy and an uninhibited freedom of expression.

 

 

optimal awareness

 

 

 

a redemptive approach to sexuality, and a positive, joyful vision of death and dying.

 

 

 

Thanks for posting this, anamatva.

[Tibetan_Ice]

...

one of the preliminaries of dzogchen is rushan, the practice of going to a place all by yourself where nobody is watching you and spontaneously acting out whatever arises in your mind or energies. It reminded me from the very beginning of the general who was flapping his arms like a chicken from the later chapters of Chuang Tzu...

...

 

Hi Anamatva

I'm glad you explained "rushan" because I had it confused with the Dzogchen practice of Rushen.

Here is a link:

Also, doesn't that posture in the image look suspiciously like a posture out of the Kunlun book.. I think it was the "Travelling posture or the grass gliding posture".. or something like that.

 

http://books.google....Rushen"&f=false

 

 

TI

Edited December 27, 2012 by Tibetan_Ice

[konchog uma]

Hi Anamatva

I'm glad you explained "rushan" because I had it confused with the Dzogchen practice of Rushen.

Here is a link:

Also, doesn't that posture in the image look suspiciously like a posture out of the Kunlun book.. I think it was the "Travelling posture or the grass gliding posture".. or something like that.

 

http://books.google....Rushen"&f=false

 

 

TI

 

i think they might be the same thing, tibetan to english is like that.. not sure tho

 

according to Germano, David F. (1994). "Architecture and Absence in the Secret Tantric History of rDzogs Chen". In The Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies, vol. 17.2, p 262, rushan is "going to a solitary spot and acting out whatever comes to your mind."

[三江源]

Hi Anamatva

I'm glad you explained "rushan" because I had it confused with the Dzogchen practice of Rushen.

Here is a link:

Also, doesn't that posture in the image look suspiciously like a posture out of the Kunlun book.. I think it was the "Travelling posture or the grass gliding posture".. or something like that.

 

http://books.google....Rushen"&f=false

 

 

TI

 

.. yes! same posture.

 

really good to find out about rushan, so I add my thanks to TI's.

[RongzomFan]

If you think Dzogchen is similar to Taoism, then you don't understand Dzogchen.

 

Dzogchen is different than even Mahamudra.

Edited December 27, 2012 by alwayson

[Ish]

Is rushan described in Heart Drops of Dharmakaya? I think it was where you fall back after holding that vajra posture.

Edited December 27, 2012 by Ish

[三江源]

If you think Dzogchen is similar to Taoism, then you don't understand Dzogchen.

 

Dzogchen is different than even Mahamudra.

 

alwayson, could you contribute to the discussion constructively by making clear what your point is, not just by contradiction, but by explication of your point. Otherwise, your contrarianism acts without creativity. And is therefore lacking utility.

[steve]

What is..... simply is. Our concepts, symbols, and descriptions will never change that. The major spiritual traditions are all fingers pointiing to the same moon with their multicolored fingers.

 

The similarities between Daoism and Dzogchen are striking and extend right down to the core concepts such as mutual arising and the complementarity of opposites. To me, that simply reinforces the sophistication and effectiveness of each approximation.

 

Natural perfection is great book for anyone intetested in Dzogchen (and maybe even moreso for those who are not!)

[RongzomFan]

The similarities between Daoism and Dzogchen are striking and extend right down to the core concepts such as mutual arising and the complementarity of opposites. To me, that simply reinforces the sophistication and effectiveness of each approximation.

 

There is no arising in Dzogchen, just like in Madhyamaka.

[konchog uma]

regarding madhyamaka,

 

"The strong implication is that the mind of the observer (technically, a conceptually designating consciousness) provides the name, identity, function, and conventional discreteness to that object, i.e., imposes such a characterization to that seeming object. The relationship between the mind and object is commonly described as "Co-dependent arising, dependent arising, and dependent origination." The mind is also viewed as dependently arising on the basis of the object of which that mind is aware. This relationship explains why, when one analyzes a material object, a mind, or an abstract phenomena (like time, non-composed space, coming, going, causality, etc) nothing self-characterizing or identity-providing is found."

 

from Ocean of Reasoning by Tsongkhapa

 

yes i am aware that many sakyapas believed tsongkhapa to have an errant understanding of emptiness, to which i would point out that there is not "no arising" in madhyamaka either (nor is there both, or neither of course) and that the truth of dzogchen and madhyamaka is beyond words, so your attempts to clarify aren't really any more help than steve generalizing about dependant arising. its just a way of saying things... the mind and phenomena happen together.. you splitting hairs about what arises and what doesn't isn't really helpful is clarifying my understanding.

[RongzomFan]

yes i am aware that many sakyapas believed tsongkhapa to have an errant understanding of emptiness,

 

Not just Sakyapas. There is no debate about it really. Just read the original Indian works of Nagarjuna, Aryadeva etc.

 

to which i would point out that there is not "no arising" in madhyamaka either (nor is there both, or neither of course) and that the truth of dzogchen and madhyamaka is beyond words, so your attempts to clarify aren't really any more help than steve generalizing about dependant arising. its just a way of saying things... the mind and phenomena happen together.. you splitting hairs about what arises and what doesn't isn't really helpful is clarifying my understanding.

 

I don't even know what you are talking about here.

[RongzomFan]

Madhyamaka: Nonarising/illusion because dependently originated phenomenon do not arise in the first place.

 

Dzogchen Upadesha : Nonarising/illusion since the five pure lights never display as anything other than the five pure lights.

[konchog uma]

I don't even know what you are talking about here.

 

its not important.

[adept]

So many similarities between the traditions. You could also add nondual objectless contemplation/meditation from the Ch'an and Zen traditions also. Such as Hongzhi Zhengjue and his silent illumination teaching, or Dogen's similar shikantaza.

[RongzomFan]

So many similarities between the traditions. You could also add nondual objectless contemplation/meditation from the Ch'an and Zen traditions also. Such as Hongzhi Zhengjue and his silent illumination teaching, or Dogen's similar shikantaza.

 

You can realize unfabricated presence, the nature of the mind or whatever you want to call it in many traditions. Thats not what makes Dzogchen different.

[konchog uma]

we arent talking about the differences. of course there are differences

 

we're talking about the similarities. So if you want to take your usual boring argumentative stance, you would have to tell us (without any explanation of course) why there are no similarities between the two. Which would be stupid, because i just opened this thread with a post about the obvious similarities.

 

So im not really sure what youre posting about. Maybe you should send Keith Dowman an email lol

[steve]

There is no arising in Dzogchen, just like in Madhyamaka.

Would you prefer that I use the symbols 'd-e-p-e-n-d-e-n-t o-r-i-g-i-n-a-t-i-o-n' rather than 'm-u-t-u-a-l a-r-i-s-i-n-g?'

Or do you mean to say that this concept is not a part of the teachings of Dzogchen?

[RongzomFan]

There is no arising of any kind in Dzogchen or Madhyamaka.

[RongzomFan]

Madhyamaka: Nonarising/illusion because dependently originated phenomenon do not arise in the first place.

 

Dzogchen Upadesha : Nonarising/illusion since the five pure lights never display as anything other than the five pure lights.

[steve]

There is no arising of any kind in Dzogchen or Madhyamaka.

I understand - forgive me for using the wrong symbol.

In my view, your point is equally valid in Buddhism and Daoism in general.

I could similarly say:

"There is no origination of any kind in Dzogchen or Madhyamaka."

 

I generally avoid Buddhist discussion because I'm not one to be too concerned with semantics and definitions.

That sort of stuff is too distracting...

 

If you focus on the finger, the differences between Dzogchen and Dao are obvious.

If you gaze at the moon, the similarities are striking.

[konchog uma]

i knew what you meant steve. All that semantic nitpicking bothers me too, and i don't usually discuss buddhist philosophy except with my teacher.. lol i have never posted once on dharmawheel. the hairsplitting and the know-it-all-ism that goes on just aren't for me. I would rather practice meditation!

[Creation]

It is very hard, from the viewpoint of historical scholarship, to tease out the various strands of religions and understand who got what from whom. Even within Buddhism, it is a huge question where all the Mahayana and Vajrayana stuff came from. From pure visions of Buddhas? Perhaps from mixing of Buddhism with "Hinduism" in India? Perhaps from Buddhism mixing with Central Asian mysticism? Perhaps all of these?

 

Taoism has a way of action and a way of non-action. The way of action is the way of alchemy (transformation). The way of non-action emphasizes relaxation and naturalness above all. Sound familiar? Like Tantra and Dzogchen in Buddhsim perhaps? Now, Lao Tzu was presumably was influenced by the Chinese shamanic tradition, which in turn may have come from a larger Asian root shamanism, also including Tibetan, Mongolian, and Siberian shamanism. And Taoist teachings are said to come from the Kunlun mountains in the West, Lao Tzu was said to dissapear into the West, etc. Now, Bonpos hold that they have a transmission of Dzogchen separate from Nyingma, that came from Zhang Zhung in northwest Tibet, which in turn came from even further West. Nyinmapas hold Dzogchen to come from Oddiyana, in Pakistan or Afganistan, but historical evidence strongly points to a Tibetan origin for most of Dzogchen. Also, the early transmission of Buddhism in Tibet mixed with Chan. Some of the original Dzogchen masters were also said to be Chan masters.

 

Some more tidbits:

 

The language of the Vedic Aryans and the Persians have a common root, and Persian culture was centered in modern Afganistan before the migrated into modern Iran. Zoroaster, for example, was born in Afganistan.

 

An argument can be made for a Chinese influence on Tantra, from textual sources, and in terms of some aspects of energetic anatomy and the use of sexual practices.

 

India also had a tradition of external and internal alchemy, associated with the Siddha tradition. The Kriya yoga of Babaji, which uses the microcosmic orbit, is said to come from this tradition. There are speculations, which are impossible to verify at this point, about a connection with Chinese alchemy.

 

Now, that's a lot of potentially unrelated speculation, but my point is there are a great many pointers to there being a lot more cross pollination between different spiritual paths in India, Central Asia, and China than most people know about.

 

At any rate, I remember Santiago Dobles mentioning that his Bon lama told him that Taoism came from ancient Bon, which came from ancient Persians. Also, Bruce Frantzis (who, as it turns out, is a Dzogchenpa) is of the opinion that the Lao Tzu's tradition of Taoism and Dzogchen come from the same source.

Edited December 28, 2012 by Creation

[RongzomFan]

I could similarly say:

"There is no origination of any kind in Dzogchen or Madhyamaka."

 

In Madhyamaka, everything is dependently originated or dependently co-arisen.

 

Thats easy enough to understand.

 

The trick is to understand that dependently originated/co-arisen phenomena never arise in the first place, and thus are illusory. I know it is somewhat confusing.

Edited December 28, 2012 by alwayson

[steve]

In Madhyamaka, everything is dependently originated or dependently co-arisen.

 

Thats easy enough to understand.

 

The trick is to understand that dependently originated/co-arisen phenomena never arise in the first place, and thus are illusory. I know it is somewhat confusing.

Not confusing at all, actually.

Just difficult to try fit into these little squiggly, dark lines and internal narration.

Dao is the same - yin and yang dependently originated, no end ... no beginning ... collapsing into wu ji (emptiness) ... non-dual (tai ji) ... shake up all the words and concepts in a bag and sitting in silence, listen to the mystery unfold!

If you're quiet enough, it will hear you.