What is wisdom in Dzogchen ?

[Simple_Jack]

We must have been exposed to entirely different facets of the Dharma scene, because the persons I've encountered were far more concerned with practice, over thoroughly learning the Dharma. Relatively few people in comparison are inclined towards learning beyond what they receive during the average retreat.

[Simple_Jack]

I would say this thread started from the OP's inability to understand non-arising in Mahayana.

[GrandmasterP]

Anyone who builds a cultivation reliant upon textual sources is building on sand.

To go by.....

"Because this text says thus I must do and/or believe what it teaches."

- is a recipe for discord ( we can see that in some posts here) at best and fundamentalism at worst.

Not so much at the point that an individual is putting all of their intellectual/cultivation eggs into a single 'belief basket', but at that next stage.

The stage that always happens.

When those folks begin banging on to all and sundry that it is 'their way or the highway' and that they are the only ones with ALL the right answers.

Everyone else, of course; is just plain wrong and brings the wrong attitude.

Fundies are seldom polite, always boring and; whilst we may tolerate their foibles it would be nice if, just now and again; they would 'change the record'.

 

Edited July 5, 2014 by GrandmasterP

[Jetsun]

“Studying texts and stiff meditation can make you lose your Original Mind.
A solitary tune by a fisherman, though, can be an invaluable treasure.
Dusk rain on the river, the moon peeking in and out of the clouds;
Elegant beyond words, he chants his songs night after night.”

 

- Ikkyu

[GrandmasterP]

Osho Scriptures are the footprints of the Buddhas, but the Buddhas are gone

 

Question : Is it not possible at all that the, great religious, scriptures of the world can help the seeker in his search for god?

 

Osho : The real seeker cannot search for God, because to start a search for God means you have already accepted that God is. You have already concluded. How can you start a search from a conclusion? You are already prejudiced. You are a believer, not a seeker. The seeker cannot search for God, because he does not know.

Edited July 5, 2014 by GrandmasterP

[steve]

We must have been exposed to entirely different facets of the Dharma scene, because the persons I've encountered were far more concerned with practice, over thoroughly learning the Dharma. Relatively few people in comparison are inclined towards learning beyond what they receive during the average retreat.

 

I'm more referring to folks on internet forums.

The people I've met at retreats are definitely more practice oriented.

The people I've interacted with online tend to be more wrapped up in the conceptual side - I guess that's to be expected.

Bottom line - I need to focus on myself and what I want out of my practice and study.

[Simple_Jack]

 

Zen and Osho quotes...why doesn't this surprise me.

Edited July 5, 2014 by Simple_Jack

[Simple_Jack]

Steve, if it seems that way on internet forums, especially ones dedicated to Buddhism, it's only because Buddhism is so vast; wouldn't you think they'd be pretty dead otherwise? Internet forums, such as DW, are acceptable means to delve into the intricacies of buddhadharma among like minded individuals.

[steve]

Steve, if it seems that way on internet forums, especially ones dedicated to Buddhism, it's only because Buddhism is so vast; wouldn't you think they'd be pretty dead otherwise? Internet forums, such as DW, are acceptable means to delve into the intricacies of buddhadharma among like minded individuals.

 

All of that is very true and I think there is more.

I think that there are many people out there (most?) who are too focused on the words and concepts and not focused enough on the experience and integration. The internet is a tool created by thought which reinforces and magnifies the central role that discursive and conceptual thought has assumed in our lives. The conceptual mind is only one aspect of our pursuit of dharma. I suspect that many "practitioners" are unbalanced in their approach and the internet has a tendency to accentuate that imbalance. It certainly takes time away from my own practice. I think if each of us looks honestly at how much time we read, how much time we utilize the internet, and how much time we spend in dedicated meditation practice, we would most likely find ourselves most lacking in the latter.... I was very imbalanced as recently as a year ago. I'm lucky enough now to have a teacher and teachings that I'm devoted to so that imbalance has improved greatly. When I think of the amount of time that monastics dedicate to the various aspects of the path, I know that I could do much, much more...

[Tibetan_Ice]

Osho Scriptures are the footprints of the Buddhas, but the Buddhas are gone

 

Question : Is it not possible at all that the, great religious, scriptures of the world can help the seeker in his search for god?

 

Osho : The real seeker cannot search for God, because to start a search for God means you have already accepted that God is. You have already concluded. How can you start a search from a conclusion? You are already prejudiced. You are a believer, not a seeker. The seeker cannot search for God, because he does not know.

Osho scriptures are the diarrhea of a twisted mind.

 

To search for truth does not mean that one has already accepted the hypothesis as truth, it means that there is a hypothesis that needs proving or disproving.

 

Someone who has found god is no longer a believer because belief is a conceptual construct and god is beyond the mind.

Someone who has found god is no longer a seeker because once one has experienced the All, there is no longer any need for belief or seeking.

Edited July 5, 2014 by Tibetan_Ice

[Simple_Jack]

It's hard to generalize about an entire demographic, although that's always a possibility, but inference has its place in the path, otherwise it wouldn't follow that realization proceeds from view, according to buddhadharma.

[Tibetan_Ice]

It's hard to generalize about an entire demographic, although that's always a possibility, but inference has its place in the path, otherwise it wouldn't follow that realization proceeds from view, according to buddhadharma.

Not everyone would agree with your statement. I have read some writings, especially in Bon, that say that first you have the experience and then you realize the view. Further, a view is a conceptual construct which falls by the wayside the deeper you get into meditation. Any adept practitioner would know that.

[Simple_Jack]

The 'experience' in this case is direct introduction from a guru, and that is only if the individual has a recognition of rigpa, but this doesn't equate to realization of 2-fold emptiness, which is where familiarization through the path of togal comes in, although togal is not the only means for this. When someone is receiving teachings, explanations, instructions on the view, path, result of Dzogchen, they are relying on inference; otherwise they would be realized beings. Views persist even into deep meditative absorption which is why shamatha alone is not considered sufficient for liberation in buddhadharma. The Indo-Tibetan traditions take this very seriously, going so far as to caution against grasping to various states of non-conceptuality and meditative absorptions, stating these create the seeds for rebirth in a long lived god realm or worse as an animal.

[Tibetan_Ice]

A view is a construct of thoughts. Shamatha practice is settling the mind to the point where all thoughts have dissolved away. Therefore, it is impossible to maintain a view during the state where all thoughts have dissolved away.

 

The purpose of thogal is to dissolve visions, which are thoughts, but a different type of thought, to prove to the mind that physical existence is an empty mind construct. Thogal also cultivates the Kati channel which is akin to practicing working with pristine awareness, primordial awareness, to prove to the mind that all creation is coming from the heart, that we create our own reality.

 

A view can only be maintained after the meditation is over, when the conceptual mind has come back to life. How the experience is interpreted is a product of culture and mental conditioning.

 

A view cannot cause enlightenment, as you have stated. Thoughts cannot cause enlightenment.

 

What causes enlightenment is when you have the experience, which may or may not correspond to the conceptual view that you have been taught, learned about, read about or obtained from some other source. Correlation is not causation.

 

You can hold the view that reality is empty but that belief system isn't going to let you walk through walls or walk on water.

You can believe that the elements are made of the five colored lights, but that isn't going to give you the ability to manifest physical objects.

 

Views are impermanent, even more so than karma, the skandas and the other factors that supposedly remain after enlightenment.

 

The traditions warn against grasping at non conceptual states, but they also warn against grasping at conceptual states too.

You kind of missed that point too. The whole point is to not grasp at anything at all, to not become stuck on any particular rung in the ladder as you climb. It is possible to get stuck in nirvana too!

 

A view is a belief system. It should be used as advice on how to behave, how to practice, but eventually the view dissolves away too once you have realization. It a kind of fake it until you make it type of thing.

[Simple_Jack]

Views, according to Buddhism, fundamentally pertains to a cognitive error, an apprehension of an entity, spawning views of "is" and "is not", a sheer force of habit which perpetuates one's experience of samsara from beginningless time. This issue goes much deeper than conceptuality or non-conceptuality, and shamatha doesn't cut it according to the Buddha's teachings, otherwise he would have been contempt to stay with either of the two of his teachers who taught him how to enter and abide in the jhanas of nothingness and neither perception nor non-perception, respectively. According to the entirety of buddhadharma, realization proceeds from view (i.e dependent origination), and it is view which separates buddhadharma from say hindudharma.

Edited July 6, 2014 by Simple_Jack

[C T]

In Vajrayana, the span of undistracted awareness, or pervasive awareness absent of conceptuality, is also known as 'resting in the View'.

[idiot_stimpy]

Is enlightenment conditioned upon transmission from a teacher?

[Apech]

Is enlightenment conditioned upon transmission from a teacher?

 

I don't think enlightenment is conditioned on anything ... but some traditions work very strongly in the guru/disciple interaction in which progress on the path is made by way of it.

[C T]

The Vajrayana master bestows onto the student a taste of what non-conceptual, pervasive awareness is -- its then up to the student to train on using that 'taste' as a sort of beacon. Having gotten the transmission, the student's practice then becomes one of regenerating confidence out of progressive stability in maintaining that View (beyond thoughts and words).

 

Sometimes too much emphasis is placed on that transmission to the point that confusion takes root; some students take a lot of pride in being conferred transmission and mistakenly assume that they have attained the fruit of Vajra perfection without realising that real work only begins after the fact.

[GrandmasterP]

Osho scriptures are the diarrhea of a twisted mind.

To search for truth does not mean that one has already accepted the hypothesis as truth, it means that there is a hypothesis that needs proving or disproving.

Someone who has found god is no longer a believer because belief is a conceptual construct and god is beyond the mind.

Someone who has found god is no longer a seeker because once one has experienced the All, there is no longer any need for belief or seeking.

Not an Osho fan then eh TI?

 

 

It's all words buddy.

Only difference between Osho's verbose meanderings and those 'holy scriptures' we see bandied about on here with such gay abandon is that we can all see Osho pontificating on YouTube.

Consequently there's less room for some second or three hundred and thirty-third-hand dude passing off what " Osho really said" in a book, sutra, "magical" siddha nor any other media.

Believers gotta believe.

Seekers seek.

Twas ever thus.

 

Edited July 6, 2014 by GrandmasterP

[Tibetan_Ice]

CT,

Why don't you distinguish the three types of rigpa?

 

By pervasive awareness, are you referring to pervading awareness rigpa?

 

From Tenzin Wangyal:

 

Three Kinds of Rigpa

There are three different kinds of awareness (rig pa): pervading awareness (chab rig); consciousness or moving-mind awareness (bsam rig); and primordial awareness (ye rig). Pervading awareness (chab rig) is inseparable from the kunzhi base and is omnipresent in all material existence. Moving-mind awareness is the son rigpa found only in the mind of sentient beings, in whom distraction can interrupt the continuity of awareness. When we are distracted, we cannot remain in the state of contemplation. Primordial awareness is the mother rigpa, the awareness that is always present whether we practice or not. This is the awareness that the moving-mind awareness is trying to comprehend. We should not think, however, that since pervading awareness is omnipresent and since primordial awareness is ever-present, there is no need to practice. It is the innate but unknown individual awareness that we need to encounter and develop and that the master introduces once we discover it in ourselves. It is possible for moving-mind awareness to understand primordial awareness because of the inseparability of mother and son and because the ever-present, self-existing, primordial awareness is not something the moving-mind awareness creates but simply discovers.

 

 

From The Berzin Archives:

 

The Three Types of Rigpa

There are three types of rigpa:

 

Basis rigpa (gzhii rig-pa) is the working basis that we all have. Although it pervades all moments of sem, like sesame oil pervades a sesame seed, we normally do not recognize it. The next two are the two aspects of rigpa that we recognize on the path.

First, we recognize effulgent rigpa (rtsal-gyi rig-pa). It is rigpa in its aspect of actively giving rise to and cognizing pure appearances in response to things. Although it has all three aspects of rigpa, the spontaneous establishing aspect is more prominent.

 

Then, we recognize essence rigpa (ngo-boi rig-pa) as what underlies effulgent rigpa. It is rigpa in its aspect of being the cognitive space (klong, spacious awareness) referring to other-voidness that allows for the arising and cognizing of pure appearances in response to things. Although it too has all three aspects of rigpa, the primal purity aspect is more prominent.

Edited July 6, 2014 by Tibetan_Ice

[Tibetan_Ice]

Views, according to Buddhism, fundamentally pertains to a cognitive error, an apprehension of an entity, spawning views of "is" and "is not", a sheer force of habit which perpetuates one's experience of samsara from beginningless time. This issue goes much deeper than conceptuality or non-conceptuality, and shamatha doesn't cut it according to the Buddha's teachings, otherwise he would have been contempt to stay with either of the two of his teachers who taught him how to enter and abide in the jhanas of nothingness and neither perception nor non-perception, respectively. According to the entirety of buddhadharma, realization proceeds from view (i.e dependent origination), and it is view which separates buddhadharma from say hindudharma.

Now we have three words to work with as we explore this topic: rigpa, expression, and play, which all relate to whether the expression of rigpa is obstructed or unobstructed. We have said that if the expression of rigpa is obstructed, then not grasping at anything cannot be the perfectly pure view. Alternatively, if the expression of rigpa is unobstructed, then not grasping at anything becomes the perfectly pure view. In this case, play can be recognized or experienced as wisdom itself and one can abide in a nonconceptual moment of perfect purity, or the uncontrived view.

 

-from As It Is, Volume II: 2

by Tulku Urgyen Rinpoche

 

 

In response to your attack on shamatha...

 

From Rainbow Painting:

 

meditation and conduct. Each has the same aim, to understand emptiness; and each employs practices called shamatha and vipashyana. On the Mahayana level, the ultimate shamatha and vipashyana is called the shamatha and vipashyana that delights the tathagatas. Though the same names are used, their depth is much superior to the shamatha and vipashyana employed in the shravaka system. Every vehicle, beginning with the shravaka yana, practices shamatha and vipashyana, so dont think that at the level of Dzogchen these two are ignored or left out. On the contrary, on the Ati level, the innate stability in rigpa, the nondual state of awareness, is the shamatha aspect, while the awake or cognizant quality is the vipashyana aspect. Our basic nature, also called awareness wisdom or cognizant wakefulness, is resolved or recognized through shamatha and vipashyana.

 

And, Alan Wallace on Dudjom Linpa on thogal: from "Stilling The Mind":

 

His next phrase, the vision of the direct perception of ultimate reality arose, is pregnant with meaning. The tögal stage of Dzogchen practice has four major phases of realization, each with a host of correlated experiences and transformations. Whereas in advanced samadhi practices you engage in specific techniques to develop particular siddhis, or paranormal abilities, in the practice of tögal those same siddhis emerge spontaneously. They are exactly the same abilitieswalking on water, flying through the air, and so forthonly in tögal they emerge directly from rigpa, like cream rising from milk. Here is a hint as to how powerful these can be: The final, culminating phase of realization in tögal is the extinction of all phenomena into ultimate reality. In that experience the universe dissolves into the absolute space of phenomena. The first phase of tögal is called the direct perception of ultimate reality. Düdjom Lingpa had this realization when he was twenty-seven years old.

Edited July 6, 2014 by Tibetan_Ice

[C T]

I don't see SJ 'attacking' shamatha at all. Thats such a strong word to use. Can discussion take place minus the prickly word-play please? We are here to exchange ideas and concepts... there is no gain to speak defensively or offensively.

[C T]

CT,

Why don't you distinguish the three types of rigpa?

 

Do you think that that was necessary in the context of transmitting nature of mind from master to student?

[Tibetan_Ice]

Not an Osho fan then eh TI?

 

 

It's all words buddy.

Only difference between Osho's verbose meanderings and those 'holy scriptures' we see bandied about on here with such gay abandon is that we can all see Osho pontificating on YouTube.

Consequently there's less room for some second or three hundred and thirty-third-hand dude passing off what " Osho really said" in a book, sutra, "magical" siddha nor any other media.

Believers gotta believe.

Seekers seek.

Twas ever thus.

 

You can see Elvis on YouTube too.

I started to wonder about Osho when I read, in his Book Of Secrets, that women should meditate on their breasts.

I also once saw a video in which Osho was very old and he was complaining that he could no longer have sex.

Now some people may think that this is enlightened behavior but it tells me that Osho was a con and an entertainer, not a being embedded with realization...

Edited July 6, 2014 by Tibetan_Ice