The Course in Buddhist Reasoning and Debate

[Apech]

May I ask if anyone on here actually practices Dzogchen as their main practice.

[Simple_Jack]

May I ask if anyone on here actually practices Dzogchen as their main practice.

 

What do you mean by "Dzogchen?" According to TI this means formless shamatha and tregcho.

[Simple_Jack]

Anything can be "Dzogchen practice" as long as you have received direct introduction by a qualified/authorized guru and recognized the nature of mind [sems nyid].

Edited March 11, 2014 by Simple_Jack

[steve]

... browser malfunction...

Edited March 11, 2014 by steve

[steve]

 

May I ask if anyone on here actually practices Dzogchen as their main practice.

Yes

Edited March 11, 2014 by steve

[Simple_Jack]

yes

 

Does this mean you practice ngondro? Because I've seen transmission for the ZZNG ngondro advertised on Tenzin Wangyal's ligmincha website. Or do you practice according to the A-khrid cycle?

Edited March 11, 2014 by Simple_Jack

[C T]

Yes they do, but what I'm trying to say is that Dzogchen employs methods which are classifiable as 'tantric practices'. TI seems to think that Dzogchenpa's limit their repertoire to formless shamatha and tregcho.

Ah, ok... its clear now.

 

To my knowledge, Dzogchen does not differentiate path and fruition. Both are present simultaneously, from the preliminaries right up to ati. Some may choose to employ methods, either on a temporary or permanent basis, while others prefer the less methodic approach, which is simply to recall the taste of mind essence whenever distraction is noted to have arisen. This is also practical, but not the easiest to follow, due to obvious reasons. It all depends on the individual. Both approaches have the essence of the kayas already inlaid within. Dzogchen is very comprehensive in this regard.

[Apech]

yes

 

May I ask who is your teacher and what is his lineage?

[Apech]

What do you mean by "Dzogchen?" According to TI this means formless shamatha and tregcho.

 

 

I mean someone who practices within a recognised lineage teaching of Dzogchen. For instance for comparison I am practicing the Kagyu ngondro and sadanha(s) (which involve mahamudra meditiation) as taught by a lama who holds the lineage ... I meet him about once a year for guidance other wise a practice accoding to his instructions and based on his lungs and empowerments on my own.

[Simple_Jack]

May I ask who is your teacher and what is his lineage?

 

http://thetaobums.com/topic/33057-tenzin-wangyal-rinpoche/?p=511021

 

I just returned from a 6 day silent Dzogchen retreat with Tenzin Rinpoche.

Simply put, the practices are authentic and effective provided the student is ready.

HH the Dalai Lama respects the Bön lineage so that's a good enough reference for me.

Tenzin Rinpoche is warm, approachable, direct, genuine, and powerful.

I highly recommend his teachings to anyone looking to make an important change in their life.

He offers very high level practices and opportunities as you say and there are no strings attached other than those you bring with you.

...

 

These 'high level practices' could be a variety of things so he would need to clarify without breaking samaya.

[Apech]

http://thetaobums.com/topic/33057-tenzin-wangyal-rinpoche/?p=511021

 

I just returned from a 6 day silent Dzogchen retreat with Tenzin Rinpoche.

Simply put, the practices are authentic and effective provided the student is ready.

HH the Dalai Lama respects the Bön lineage so that's a good enough reference for me.

Tenzin Rinpoche is warm, approachable, direct, genuine, and powerful.

I highly recommend his teachings to anyone looking to make an important change in their life.

He offers very high level practices and opportunities as you say and there are no strings attached other than those you bring with you.

...

 

These 'high level practices' could be a variety of things so he would need to clarify without breaking samaya.

 

Ok but I think Steve will answer for himself.

 

(also we have all probably gone on retreats on this and that ... it doesn't mean it has become our main practice.)

 

ALSO also there is nothing loaded in my question I am just asking ...since everyone talks so much about Dzogchen who here actually practices it.

[rex]

May I ask if anyone on here actually practices Dzogchen as their main practice.

 

May I ask who is your teacher and what is his lineage?

 

I wouldn't want to besmirch my teachers or their lineages by publicly associating myself with them.

 

 

[Simple_Jack]

Ah, ok... its clear now.

 

To my knowledge, Dzogchen does not differentiate path and fruition. Both are present simultaneously, from the preliminaries right up to ati. Some may choose to employ methods, either on a temporary or permanent basis, while others prefer the less methodic approach, which is simply to recall the taste of mind essence whenever distraction is noted to have arisen. This is also practical, but not the easiest to follow, due to obvious reasons. It all depends on the individual. Both approaches have the essence of the kayas already inlaid within. Dzogchen is very comprehensive in this regard.

 

Either way, paraphrasing ChNN, we need to recognize our limitations.

 

"Many people have the idea that Dzogchen is a beautiful path of self-liberation and say, ‘What needs to be changed?’ Everything is Samantabhadra: everything you see naturally liberates.’ They have this nice idea but their understanding just remains on an intellectual level. In practice, they are totally distracted and are not in the state of rigpa or contemplation at all. In which case, everything is not in the condition of Samantabhadra.

 

If you do not make this distiction clear it can become a problem. You may think everything is Samantabhadra and fool yourself for the whole of your life. This can be very dangerous. If someone understands and truly integrates all of their sense contacts into the state of contemplation, then certainly that is the state of Samantabhadra or the state of integration. But a normal person does not have this capacity. Even if someone has had certain experiences of knowledge they do not spend all their lives in the state of integration - in fact, they still have many distractions.” ~ Chogyal Namkhai Norbu

 

 

ALSO also there is nothing loaded in my question I am just asking ...since everyone talks so much about Dzogchen who here actually practices it.

 

It seems to be a loaded question on TTB's since apparently Dzogchenpa's are only supposed to practice formless shamatha and tregcho.

[Apech]

It seems to be a loaded question on TTB's since apparently Dzogchenpa's are only supposed to practice formless shamatha and tregcho.

 

Almost every thread on here about Buddhism (and a few which are not) end up with a discussion on dzogchen (even without our late lamented friend alwayson/romzongfan). I just find it a bit odd if no one actually practices it. Also I feel left out cos I know nothing about it - and I may add I don't really want to know that much

[Simple_Jack]

Almost every thread on here about Buddhism (and a few which are not) end up with a discussion on dzogchen...

 

It's inevitable especially since its been declared as emancipated from the confines of "Institutional Buddhism."

 

[steve]

May I ask who is your teacher and what is his lineage?

All I meant was that you had my permission to ask…

I have no interest in discussing my practices publicly.

[thelerner]

I find my KISS kindergarten level of Buddhism to be very satisfying. Its fascinating how deep it goes, but the simple ideas and explanations are profound.

even at the Fiire... GOood level.

[steve]

I wouldn't want to besmirch my teachers or their lineages by publicly associating myself with them.

 

 

 

Ditto

[Apech]

It's inevitable especially since its been declared as emancipated from the confines of "Institutional Buddhism."

 

 

Declared by who?

[Apech]

All I meant was that you had my permission to ask…

I have no interest in discussing my practices publicly.

 

Fair enough I was just interested.

 

... and i didn't want details just the general idea.

Edited March 11, 2014 by Apech

[Tibetan_Ice]

Yes they do, but what I'm trying to say is that Dzogchen employs methods which are classifiable as 'tantric practices'. TI seems to think that Dzogchenpa's limit their repertoire to formless shamatha and tregcho.

Sorry, Sample Jack.

I'm using the term Tantra in Tenzin Namdak's contrasting of the difference between tantra and Dzogchen. In tantra, you are transforming something, you are doing something. In the pure practice of Dzogchen, there is nothing to transform.

 

I'm well aware that many use the term "tantras" much like the generic use of the term "document". That is not it.

 

Quit putting false assumptions about my understanding out there..

 

Further, you seem to conveniently lose your eye for detail. It is not just shamatha, or the second phase of shamatha that Tenzin Wangyal is writing about. It is the ultimate effortless shamatha when object and subject dissolve which reveals rigpa. So in a sense, pure Dzogchen is much like ultimate shamatha. The ultimate "letting it be".

There is no tantra (transformation) in pure Dzogchen.

 

[Apech]

Sorry, Sample Jack.

I'm using the term Tantra in Tenzin Namdak's contrasting of the difference between tantra and Dzogchen. In tantra, you are transforming something, you are doing something. In the pure practice of Dzogchen, there is nothing to transform.

 

I'm well aware that many use the term "tantras" much like the generic use of the term "document". That is not it.

 

Quit putting false assumptions about my understanding out there..

 

Further, you seem to conveniently lose your eye for detail. It is not just shamatha, or the second phase of shamatha that Tenzin Wangyal is writing about. It is the ultimate effortless shamatha when object and subject dissolve which reveals rigpa. So in a sense, pure Dzogchen is much like ultimate shamatha. The ultimate "letting it be".

There is no tantra (transformation) in pure Dzogchen.

 

 

So is there a pure Dzogchen which is different to any other kind of dzogchen?

[asunthatneversets]

Hi NeverSets,

 

You said: "The insight of rigpa does not occur spontaneously, it arises due to recognizing one's nature, recognizing the nature of mind."

I have to disagree. Rigpa does arise spontaneously. And when it does, it takes someone to point it out to you that that experience is called such and such. Otherwise, you can't put a label to it. This has been my experience.

 

First, here are some quotes which establish rigpa as "intrinsic awareness" in English:

 

 

Secondly, there is that word "spontaneous" ...

The Great perfection is accomplished spontaneously.

 

 

 

Not only is there mention of the "umoving and changeless Mind", which in my vocabulary is shamatha, but that last paragraph also mentions that "Intrinsic Awareness", which I would call rigpa, which Longchen calls rigpa, is accomplished spontaneously.

 

In response to your next statment, "Your charge that primordial wisdom does not rely on the senses and therefore would not need to taste chocolate is a wild misconstruing of the metaphor. Whether you're doing that consciously in an attempt to discredit the example of tasting chocolate, or whether you simply are not grasping this notion and that misconstruing is out of confusion, I'm not sure. Either way though your assertion makes no sense."

 

I would say: First, I never called it "primordial wisdom", you did. Secondly, the 5 consciousnesses which apprehend the senses are stable and do not interfere with each other. It is the conceptual mind which interprets and marks experiences with their own flavours. From the point of view from rigpa, everything looks (or tastes) the same. You are everything. Everything is love, bliss, radiant, brilliant, perfect... Further, if you dissolve thoughts, dissolve your conceptual mind, the space that remains is capable of knowing things even before the little voice in your head can activate and iterate thoughts. Pre-conceptual mind.

To simplify my position, I am saying that one does not have to experience chocolate through the sense consciousnesses in order to realize chocolate. There is a higher capacity which can come into play, which appears to be able to grant you access to any experience that you'd like, and to some experiences that the ordinary sense consciousnesses do not have access to .

 

Then you say "Further, your charge that knowledge is not intrinsic to rigpa because we experience rigpa many times while falling asleep is nothing that the system of Dzogchen says. The teachings speak of experiencing the clear light while falling asleep and the natural light, but it never ever says we experience rigpa while falling asleep. This misunderstanding sheds a great deal of light on why you have aversion to understanding rigpa as knowledge though. So this disagreement is starting to make sense more as we go along."

 

Again, I have to disagree. Clear Light is rigpa. Don't you know?

 

According to Tenzin Namdak:

 

 

Have you never heard of "The Clear Light of Bliss"? Gyatso?

How about "Bliss of Inner Fire" - Six Yogas of Naropa?

 

 

Only difference between tantra and Dzogchen is that in Dzogchen you accomplish everything through effortless non-meditation spontaneously.

 

 

TI

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Regarding your misinterpretation of 'spontaneity'; the recognition of rigpa does not arise spontaneously, otherwise there would be no reason for the teachings. Rigpa is indeed an innate attribute of sentient beings, however it is not known spontaneously, it must be pointed out and then recognized.

 

This is why the Unwritten Tantra states;

"Though the nature of vidyā pervades all, the dharmakāya is encountered in the intimate instructions."

 

As for rigpa being translated as 'intrinsic awareness', it has been pointed out that this is merely a popular trend in translation. A trend which translators are slowly choosing to turn away from due to the potential confusion it can cause. The english term 'awareness' carries various connotations and meanings which can lead to misinterpretations, one of the most prominent being the mistake of holding everyday defiled cognizance as rigpa. That misstep, paired with the cig car rhetoric which is common in Dzogchen leads many people to misunderstand the teachings as promoting complete non-action, and so beings delude themselves into believing their afflicted relative state is dharmatā. A grievous error which if left unresolved will sever any chances of liberation in this lifetime.

 

To add to the list of the aforementioned translators who have expressed disagreement with translating rigpa as 'awareness', we can also add Lama Tony Duff, who writes; "To translate it (rig pa) as 'awareness', which is a common practice today, is a poor practice; there are many kinds of awareness but there is only one rigpa and besides, rigpa is substantially more than just awareness. Since this is such an important term and since it lacks an equivalent in English, I choose not to translate it. This is the term used to indicate enlightened mind as experienced by the practitioner on the path of these practices. The term itself specifically refers to the dynamic knowing quality of mind. It absolutely does not mean a simple registering, as implied by the word 'awareness' which unfortunately is often used to translate this term. There is no word in english that exactly matches it, though the idea of 'seeing' or 'insight on the spot' is very close. Proof of this is found in the fact that the original Sanskrit term 'vidyā' is actually the root of all words in English that start with 'vid' and mean 'to see', for example 'video', 'vision', and so on."

 

In the quote you cite from "The Practice of Dzogchen"; "In the unmoving and changeless Mind, Maintain the unchanging Dharmatā like Mt. Meru. The “simultaneously perfected Intrinsic Awareness,”85 spontaneously perfected and uncompounded, Neutrality [of good and bad] and non-duality of actions and efforts will be accomplished spontaneously."

 

Your assertion that the phrase 'unmoving and changeless Mind' is a reference to śamatha is an erroneous claim. In this translation by Tulku Thondup, deluded mind [sems] and the nature of mind [sems nyid] are distinguished in the capitalization of the 'M' in the word 'mind'. So when 'Mind' is capitalized it is referring to the nature of mind [sems nyid], and when 'mind' is not capitalized it is referencing afflicted samsaric mind. As can be seen on page 43, where it states: "The Natural Great Perfection [rang bzhin rdzogs pa chen po] is the Mind [sems nyid] which is free from mind [sems]."

 

Ergo, the quote you cited above is not discussing śamatha by any means, but rather is speaking of resting in the nature of mind [sems nyid], as can be seen by its capitalization of 'Mind', and the referencing of dharmatā which is never associated with mind [sems].

 

Have to go for now but I will respond to the rest of your post later this evening.

[steve]

Fair enough I was just interested.

 

... and i didn't want details just the general idea.

 

I genuinely enjoy sharing things that are important to me in a supportive and loving environment.

This forum, especially the "Buddhist" subform, tends to be hypercritical and caustic…

Much more suitable for intellectual debate than spiritual sharing.

[Apech]

I genuinely enjoy sharing things that are important to me in a supportive and loving environment.

This forum, especially the "Buddhist" subform, tends to be hypercritical and caustic…

Much more suitable for intellectual debate than spiritual sharing.

 

 

I would like to see that change. I find that people who actually practice are much gentler in their approach than those who just interested in intellectual form. Which is why are asked if people actually practiced. So much interest in Dzogchen terminology must be based in something I guess but I don't know what. It is not ok to disparage other paths ... in fact it is a root downfall in vajrayana.

 

I would like to see some true Buddhist values in this sub forum.