Dzogchen Teachings

[ralis]

I am not making claims but I have years in this work dating back to the mid 80's and starting practicing yoga when I was 15 in 1965. My question is what is your practice?

[xabir2005]

I am not making claims but I have years in this work dating back to the mid 80's and starting practicing yoga when I was 15 in 1965. My question is what is your practice?

I started practicing meditation when I was 15 as well. Had many experiences since then, started writing a journal when I was 19 after a spiritual realization. You can read it here: http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com.au/2010/12/my-e-booke-journal.html

Edited March 8, 2013 by xabir2005

[ralis]

Most of what I see in debates are intellectual musings seeking to justify a position. Right/wrong etc. Nothing more than maps that have very little correspondence to direct experience. The primordial awareness is non verbal.

[xabir2005]

Most of what I see in debates are intellectual musings seeking to justify a position. Right/wrong etc. Nothing more than maps that have very little correspondence to direct experience. The primordial awareness is non verbal.

So called "intellectual points" may seem intellectual on the surface but have experiential implications to a meditator.

 

However I should say, I tend not to have very deep disagreements with Jax nowadays, which is not the case until recently.

Edited March 8, 2013 by xabir2005

[ralis]

So called "intellectual points" may seem intellectual on the surface but have experiential implications to a meditator.

 

However I should say, I tend not to have very deep disagreements with Jax nowadays, which is not the case until recently.

 

 

My point is that semantics are not an accurate map of one's experience. Semantics are reductionist in context and the English language in particular is based on Aristotelian logic. That is to say a language of absolute opposites. Yes/no, black/white and so forth. Further, when using this reductionist logic, there are only two possibilities in which two persons debating can take sides.

 

Given the complex nature of the cosmos, anyone with an anthropocentric worldview view is reducing phenomena to only two possibilities. Wars, poverty, wealth, political parties and religions are defined by absolute opposites. With few exceptions.

 

Will write more later.

Edited March 8, 2013 by ralis

[forestofemptiness]

How do you distininguish between vijnana and rigpa? In your teaching, what is vijnana experientially?

 

No, actually rigpa is wisdom and all phenomena are also wisdom. Phenomena are just information. What knows this information? What "informs"? What displays this information as its intrinsic effulgence spontaneously? When you speak of knowing phenomena you are speaking horizontally, Rigpa also has a quality of verticality or depth in which phenomena may not be present, nor the consciousness, vijanana as the fifth skandha. Rigpa is a super-consciousness above, within and beyond the five skandhas. The Buddha mentioned this as well...

[C T]

So called "intellectual points" may seem intellectual on the surface but have experiential implications to a meditator.

 

However I should say, I tend not to have very deep disagreements with Jax nowadays, which is not the case until recently.

Is there anything which does not contain the seed of experience, Xabir?

 

To many, its the implications which give rise to grasping, and not the actual experiences per se. Its easy to get 'lost' or distracted in trying to match the various implications against experience. This process of sifting, which can be very attractive as it seems to add dimension and depth to one's knowledge (not wisdom) is exactly what Dzogchen is not about, relatively speaking. In the absolute sense, after rigpa has become stable, then the latent distractive properties or seeds no longer have any ground to take root. This signals the end of new karma. Old karma will ripen quicker, dissolving simultaneously as it ripens, due to the final removal of obscurations.

 

Those who do not have a good foundation in the prelims will tend to become unhinged at around this time, once again, creating a new cycle of karma, albeit a slightly less problematic one. But for those who have established a strong foundation of prelim practices and have realized the spontaneous liberation of arising thoughts, this potentially distractive, karmic-inducing phase will not occur.

 

This is my understanding.

[RongzomFan]

Xabir2005,

 

 

You either recognize unfabricated presence (ma bcos shes pa skad cig ma) vs the conceptualizing mind.

 

Or you don't.

 

There are no "degrees" or "stages" of it.

 

And many people, including Hindus, Zen, Taoists, neoAdvaitins recognize it. Thats not what makes Vajrayana different.

[Jax]

Wrote this on the spur of the "moment"...

 

"What is Dzogchen, the Great Perfection? It is only this moment, not more, not less. It's not a teaching or theoretical understanding. It points to the fact that you are completely this moment with no parts left out.

 

There is nothing to do or to recognize in order to know this moment. It's always known, isn't it? All of reality will only be this moment.

 

What is "awareness"? Awareness is this luminous moment, there is no other awareness. Can you find "awareness" outside of this moment? Can you know luminous experience outside of awareness? Can you separate awareness from experience in this moment or in any moment of direct experience?

 

What you are seeking couldn't get any closer; it's this exact moment. You can never lose this moment. You can't even successfully avoid this moment. It's always in your face. It's always your face. It's never not been your face. It's even the moment of not recognizing your face.

 

It's not knowledge about this moment. This moment requires no training or maintenance. It can't be established. It's unestablished by nature.

 

Where is there a permanent self image in this moment?

 

When has the flow of immediate experience ever become frozen without change?

 

The emptiness of the moment is the emptiness of the awareness that appears as each empty and luminous moment. Variety is assured.

 

Where is the freedom of the moment restricted.? What binds the present moment from being the present moment? When are you ever absent to this moment, whether in a thought-moment or a sensory moment or an empty moment?

 

Some might say you are "absent" in deep sleep, but no one can affirm that and yet report the result.

 

This is your moment... Wake up to it!

Revel in it! Enjoy it!

[Jeff]

Hi Jax,

 

Thanks for the above. In your description of the "moment"... Is "existence" the same? Just with the dropping of the conceptualizing mind?

 

Thanks, Jeff

[Jax]

 

You should read my text from 4 years ago called "Awareness is Everything". It's really today a re-shuffling of words and meanings, that allow Theravadin views to fit into the already clear paradigm of the "unestablished". Shentong view is perfectly acceptable as proper Dzogchen. Advaita Vedanta was not my view...

 

I will ask you the same question as simple_jack. Are you critiquing Jax out of experience with your practice or just having an academic rant?

[Ish]

Xabir2005,

 

 

You either recognize unfabricated presence (ma bcos shes pa skad cig ma) vs the conceptualizing mind.

 

Or you don't.

 

There are no "degrees" or "stages" of it.

 

And many people, including Hindus, Zen, Taoists, neoAdvaitins recognize it. Thats not what makes Vajrayana different.

 

I'm sure you've said it before, but I can't find it at the moment. So what's different about Vajrayana?

If you've written it before pointing me to it would be great thanks.

[RongzomFan]

I'm sure you've said it before, but I can't find it at the moment. So what's different about Vajrayana?

If you've written it before pointing me to it would be great thanks.

 

 

Direct introduction and working with the body.

 

 

Of course some Zen people say they also have direct introduction.

Edited March 8, 2013 by alwayson

[ralis]

 

 

You should read my text from 4 years ago called "Awareness is Everything". It's really today a re-shuffling of words and meanings, that allow Theravadin views to fit into the already clear paradigm of the "unestablished". Shentong view is perfectly acceptable as proper Dzogchen. Advaita Vedanta was not my view...

 

I will ask you the same question as simple_jack. Are you critiquing Jax out of experience with your practice or just having an academic rant?

 

 

Expanding on what I said about the need to create levels and divisions via language and concepts. Some will argue that their practice of tantra is higher than vipassana or whatever. That always bothered me.

[RongzomFan]

Expanding on what I said about the need to create levels and divisions via language and concepts. Some will argue that their practice of tantra is higher than vipassana or whatever. That always bothered me.

 

 

 

"Gampopa had perfected the view and the meditations of calm abiding and

superior insight in the Madhyamaka context according to the Kadampa system

when he came to Milarepa. When Gampopa offered his realization to him,

Milarepa said, “As for the aspect of calm abiding in your practice, however good

all of this may be, it does not go beyond being a cause for rebirth in the higher

realms of samsara. As for the aspect practice of superior insight, all of this entails

the danger of divergence into the four deviations from emptiness. It may well

serve as a remedy for some portions of reification, such as clinging to real exis-

tence. However, since it is not able to cut through the entirety of clinging to

extremes, there is the danger that the whole complex of this excellent view and

meditation itself could turn into cognitive obscurations. Hence, if one is fettered,

there is no difference between being fettered by an iron chain and being fettered

by a golden chain.” Later, Gampopa said about this, “If I had not met the great

master Milarepa, I would have risked rebirth as a long-lived god.”"

http://books.google.com/books?id=8zeh8VAFCvAC&pg=PA58&dq=Center+of+the+Sunlit+Sky+Gampopa+had+perfected+the+view+and+the+meditations&hl=en&sa=X&ei=TYEIUebJKMqt0AGRsIHABA&ved=0CDMQuwUwAA#v=onepage&q=Center%20of%20the%20Sunlit%20Sky%20Gampopa%20had%20perfected%20the%20view%20and%20the%20meditations&f=true

[Ish]

Direct introduction and working with the body.

 

So first difference is that it takes a lot longer to realise unfabricated presence without direct introduction?

 

The other traditions, in particular Taoism and Hindu tantras, definitely work with the body & channels. The difference therefore lies in HOW they do it compared to Dzogchen?

[ralis]

What I just stated and what I believe Jax is saying is that all these practices are not mutually exclusive. The three Kayas are not mutually exclusive. Vipassana is not mutually exclusive from tantric practices and so on. A fragmented view makes everything in the cosmos mutually exclusive.

 

Most here are just parsing words i.e, legalism.

Edited March 8, 2013 by ralis

[ralis]

What I see Jax doing here is expanding and bridging the gap that is sorely needed!

[RongzomFan]

If people don't understand tantric systems, they bring in Hinayana or Mahayana type explanations. This is a known problem.

 

Mahamudra has all sorts of unique terminologies.

[ralis]

If people don't understand tantric systems, they bring in Hinayana or Mahayana type explanations. This is a known problem.

 

Mahamudra has all sorts of unique terminologies.

 

 

You just made my point. Terminologies are only constructs. Further, I wasn't attempting to explain using one term for another. You missed my point with preconceived notions.

Edited March 8, 2013 by ralis

[RongzomFan]

You just made my point. Terminologies are only constructs.

 

 

Then why do the people like xabir, simple jack etc. have much longer posts than I do?

 

These people constantly try to bring in lower systems into totally independent tantric systems

[ralis]

 

Then why do the people like xabir, simple jack etc. have much longer posts than I do?

 

These people constantly try to bring in lower systems into totally independent tantric systems

 

 

Another point of division which is unnecessary. There are no lower or higher except how the mind constructs in a divisive manner. How can anything be independent?

Edited March 8, 2013 by ralis

[RongzomFan]

Another point of division which is unnecessary. There are no lower or higher except how the mind constructs in a divisive manner. How can anything be independent?

 

Well then you go ahead and enjoy page long posts of pseudoBuddhist gobbledygook.

[teknix]

Well then you go ahead and enjoy page long posts of pseudoBuddhist gobbledygook.

 

That is a poor argument imo, if you are unable to further explain your position than don't post anything? It seems like the intention of the above post is more geared towards being hurtful than helpful, imo.

[idiot_stimpy]

Whatever becomes the perception of the mind, is not the true nature, it is a subjective naming. The true nature is not created by the Guru and not by the pupil.

 

 

Edited March 8, 2013 by idiot_stimpy