What is wisdom in Dzogchen ?

[asunthatneversets]

 

Historicity provides a false sense of certainty.

The certainty comes through direct experiential realizations and insights. And that certainty results in deep appreciation for the teachings.

[Paul]

LOL

go where your friends are then

[Simple_Jack]

Historicity provides a false sense of certainty.

 

From your guru, bro:

 

A human being has his limits. And thus, in every conceivable way, with every possible means, he tries to make the teaching enter into his own limits. ~ Dzog Chen and Zen, ChNN

Edited July 9, 2014 by Simple_Jack

[Paul]

I am very careful in just that way.

 

 

 

Take your pride in your lineage. Magnify it 1 million times. Now internalize it. What do you get? You get me.

 

You're good for a few laughs.

[steve]

What do we look like when such a rare and precious teaching stimulates our intellects but fails to touch our hearts?

 

Rails - your generalization does not apply to all Buddhists but far too many.

 

If the teachings don't elicit real compassion and bodhicitta, if they do not create more love in our lives and relationships, if they don't lead to enlightened activity in body, speech, and mind; then they are worthless and we have not fulfilled our samaya.

 

It doesn't matter if we are right or wrong, or if others agree or disagree.

What matters is to what degree we treat each other with genuine respect and kindness.

 

Swine will benefit more from kindness than pearls, as will princes.

And those who feel that they are above the swine have never known emptiness.

 

Peace

[gatito]

The certainty comes through direct experiential realizations and insights. And that certainty results in deep appreciation for the teachings.

 

The certainty that I've seen comes from an indoctrination into a belief system based on a misinterpretation of what the Self-realised knew and taught from first-hand experience.

 

The fact that it's merly a belief system manifests itself as a childish stupidity when challenged.

 

And the penultimate sentence wasn't aimed at you; I find that you carry yourself with a considerable dignity.

[gatito]

The certainty that I've seen comes from an indoctrination into a belief system based on a misinterpretation of what the Self-realised knew and taught from first-hand experience.

 

The fact that it's merely a belief system manifests itself as a childish stupidity when challenged.

 

And the penultimate sentence wasn't aimed at you; I find that you carry yourself with a considerable dignity (as does steve)

[Simple_Jack]

I'm partial to whatever works and I've seen no evidence of that in contemporary Buddhism

 

That's fine, just stop trying to tell us we "don't get it". Neoadvaita is not hard to understand.

[Paul]

What do we look like when such a rare and precious teaching stimulates our intellects but fails to touch our hearts? Rails - your generalization does not apply to all Buddhists but far too many. If the teachings don't elicit real compassion and bodhicitta, if they do not create more love in our lives and relationships, if they don't lead to enlightened activity in body, speech, and mind; then they are worthless and we have not fulfilled our samaya. It doesn't matter if we are right or wrong, or if others agree or disagree. What matters is to what degree we treat each other with genuine respect and kindness. Swine will benefit more from kindness than pearls, as will princes. And those who feel that they are above the swine have never known emptiness. Peace

 

People love to hear themselves wax poetic. Bottom line is this is a Buddhist thread and non-buddhists want to come here and start a fight, and I won't argue. I'll just laugh. That's the most loving thing I can do, because Dzogchen cannot be communicated to skeptics and denouncers. It would cause both speaker and listener to descend to the lower realms. If someone persists in trying to pick a fight, the most loving thing to do is to give them the boot. That's much better than both falling into dialogue hell. If someone has a genuine interest or has a sincere question asked respectfully, then of course the loving thing to do is to spend as much time as needed to help that person. And these are pearls. Those who come here to denigrate these teachings are swine. I love swine. I have swine coming out of my ear.

Edited July 9, 2014 by Paul

[Simple_Jack]

The certainty that I've seen comes from an indoctrination into a belief system based on a misinterpretation of what the Self-realised knew and taught from first-hand experience.

 

The fact that it's merly a belief system manifests itself as a childish stupidity when challenged.

 

And the penultimate sentence wasn't aimed at you; I find that you carry yourself with a considerable dignity.

 

A human being has his limits. And thus, in every conceivable way, with every possible means, he tries to make the teaching enter into his own limits. ~ Dzog Chen and Zen, ChNN

[gatito]

People love to hear themselves wax poetic. Bottom line is this is a Buddhist thread and non-buddhists want to come here and start a fight, and I won't argue. I'll just laugh. That's the most loving thing I can do, because Dzogchen cannot be communicated to skeptics and denouncers. It would cause both speaker and listener to descend to the lower realms. If someone persists in trying to pick a fight, the most loving thing to do is to give them the boot. That's much better than both falling into dialogue hell.

 

steve is a longstanding member, former Moderator and a Buddhist who walks the walks - unlike you.

[Paul]

steve is a longstanding member, former Moderator and a Buddhist who walks the walks - unlike you.

 

Good for him I guess. I'm just relating what Dzogchen says, not what I say. I don't toot my own horn, unlike you or Steve.

Edited July 9, 2014 by Paul

[Paul]

The certainty that I've seen comes from an indoctrination into a belief system based on a misinterpretation of what the Self-realised knew and taught from first-hand experience.

 

The fact that it's merly a belief system manifests itself as a childish stupidity when challenged.

 

And the penultimate sentence wasn't aimed at you; I find that you carry yourself with a considerable dignity.

 

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

[goldisheavy]

From your guru, bro:

 

A human being has his limits. And thus, in every conceivable way, with every possible means, he tries to make the teaching enter into his own limits. ~ Dzog Chen and Zen, ChNN

 

I respect ChNN, but not as a guru. I respect ChNN as one of the first individuals that I am aware of who has opened up Dzogchen teachings to a wider audience in the West.

 

Let me point out where I disagree with the statement above.

 

Firstly the beings we ordinarily consider "human" are at their core not actually human. Therefore all human beings, even the very ignorant ones, have a hidden side to them which can become manifest under appropriate conditions. This is true from 1st person and 3rd person perspectives. In other words, how you regard your own identity and limitations is not something set in stone, but is subject to change depending on let's say the commitments you maintain most deeply. Similarly, if anyone were to use the full power of one's own point of view, it would be possible to look at an ignorant person and elicit speech and behaviors that would be identical to those of fully realized Buddhas. This is possible because what we consider "a human being" is not a thing in its own right. It's just a suggestive appearance in the mind which appears to have stable properties only due to the stability of our own related commitments.

 

Now let's take the case where the person appears to be receiving help from outside of oneself. How will such help be recognized as indeed helpful? Clearly the teacher cannot summarily install his or her own sensibilities into the student. When a student looks for a teacher, on what basis are the teachers discriminated and recognized? Clearly whatever those basis are, they have nothing to do with the teachers themselves. They must be internal to the student.

[Simple_Jack]

The certainty that I've seen comes from an indoctrination into a belief system based on a misinterpretation of what the Self-realised knew and taught from first-hand experience.

 

The fact that it's merly a belief system manifests itself as a childish stupidity when challenged.

 

And the penultimate sentence wasn't aimed at you; I find that you carry yourself with a considerable dignity.

 

There we go, gatito fulfilling the role of the prototypical neoadvaitan, telling everyone they "don't get it", while correcting the understanding of an entire lineage.

[goldisheavy]

I don't toot my own horn, unlike you or Steve.

 

Nothing of value will be lost if you start tooting your own horn. Nobody cares. Go ahead and toot your horn out.

[Paul]

Limitations means discovering what's hinders you.

[Paul]

Nothing of value will be lost if you start tooting your own horn. Nobody cares. Go ahead and toot your horn out.

 

Wrong again. It's not about what others will think of me. Its about humility.

Edited July 9, 2014 by Paul

[goldisheavy]

You're good for a few laughs.

 

Thank you.

[goldisheavy]

Wrong again. It's not about what others will think of me. Its about humility.

 

I don't see the difference. You're still arrogant no matter what you do. Toot or no toot, you're arrogant.

[goldisheavy]

Limitations means discovering what's hinders you.

 

Finally you say something intelligent. Thank you.

[goldisheavy]

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

 

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.

[Paul]

I don't see the difference. You're still arrogant no matter what you do. Toot or no toot, you're arrogant.

 

Maybe you shouldn't bother with me then. In fact, why don't you find a way to avoid the Dzogchen thread unless you are genuinely interested in what it has to say from someone experienced with its terms.

Edited July 9, 2014 by Paul

[Simple_Jack]

The certainty that I've seen comes from an indoctrination into a belief system based on a misinterpretation of what the Self-realised knew and taught from first-hand experience.

 

The fact that it's merly a belief system manifests itself as a childish stupidity when challenged.

 

And the penultimate sentence wasn't aimed at you; I find that you carry yourself with a considerable dignity.

There we go, gatito fulfilling the role of the prototypical neoadvaitan, telling everyone they "don't get it", while correcting the understanding of an entire lineage.

[Paul]

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.