Why do only very few Dzogchen practitioners attain rainbow body?

[asunthatneversets]

Your level of escapism is incredible.

So not even a guru can come up with a comprehensive and logical reason why a book which contains the exact same text a guru would speak during a "transmission" could not replace the latter and enable the practitioner to train successfully in Dzogchen!

So we have established that people can successfully learn how to practice Dzogchen with the help of a good book and don't need a personal transmission from the guru to do so!

Thank you for your help!

On the contrary, what we have established is that you, like all sentient beings, had a seed placed in your hand the day you were born.

 

Some sentient beings do not have the wherewithal to recognize that they posses this seed and inborn potential. Yet others do... those who do recognize this potentiality are very fortunate, and have an important choice to make when it comes to planting that seed and caring for it so it sprouts and blooms into a beautiful flower.

 

If you want to bury your seed in dry, infertile soil and water it with urine that is your own choice, and tragically the situation will work itself out.

[Wells]

.

Edited October 28, 2014 by ZOOM

[Wells]

.

Edited October 28, 2014 by ZOOM

[steve]

I have heard this argument before and by extension, one could justify any behavior of the authoritarian hierarchy in question. I have known for almost 30 years about the pedophilia in the Tibetan monasteries. Recently, journalists et al., have investigated this problem and found very good evidence to support these allegations. How about the so called enlightened behavior of Trungpa and his successor Osel Rangdrol spreading AIDS to many persons in Boulder in the name of enlightened activity.

I'm not justifying any behavior, good or bad, I'm acknowledging it's existence and mode of existence.

I would not consider Trungpa's behavior enlightened, nor that of his successor.

He was a deeply flawed and disturbed human who happened to have a Tibetan Buddhist education and charisma.

Having a glimpse of the truth does not make one infallible.

Pedophiles and rapists should be dealt with appropriately.

The existence of pedophilia in religious people and institutions does not negate the value of Buddhism, other religions, or their associated views.

Just as the existence of pedophilia in schools does not negate the value of education, and the existence of pedophilia in humanity does not erase the value of all human beings.

It is a cancer and it is our obligation to cut it out when and where we can.

And pedophiles tend to be smart and resourceful and seek out sheltered environments and vulnerable victims.

You know that.

 

 

 

 

Realization is not about abject passivity, rejecting mores, switching off critical thinking or accepting replacement parents. And not accepting that it is just 'an appearance'.

I never advocated any of the above and yet there is certainly a role for passivity where appropriate, a role for switching off the critical thinking at times to experience that which is beyond thought, and a role for accepting a beloved teacher or guide into one's life if that relationship is wholesome, supportive, and conducive to spiritual growth. And the credible gurus are very direct about the importance of carefully evaluating your teacher before, during, and after accepting their guidance.

 

You do not need to accept that anything is "just an appearance," however that is a fundamental consequence of realizing emptiness. If you do not see the play between space, awareness, and the nature of phenomena, then you've not had that realization which is what I was referring to in my post.

 

Also, I would not use the adjective "just" regarding appearances. Appearances are very real to us and are in fact everything that we see, do, and are during our life in samsara and nirvana - no "just" about it. And yet they have no inherent existence - they are impermanent. When a thunderstorm has passed over, the sky remains unaffected, That does not mean that the storm didn't happen.

[steve]

PS - I will also acknowledge that I believe that much more can and should be done by the Tibetan Buddhist religious institution and all other religious institutions to fight sexual and physical abuse.

[asunthatneversets]

asunthatneversets fled the battlefield...

Nah, just went for a run.

[ralis]

@ asunthatneversets

 

An intelligent person with a clear mind would be able to clearly understand how upāya works in the context of the buddhadharma, and how conventional methodologies and views are applied to one's experience in order to create a fertile ground for progress.

I disagree. To say that applying that any given practice i.e, upāya will somehow guide one to realization is blind faith. This is putting one's life in the hands of a parent priest.

It is unarguably quite asinine to assert that these measures are put in place solely for the purposes of maintaining a divisive monopoly in a scheme to secure control and personal power. Such conclusions are clearly indicative of your own opinions and feelings rather than anything else.

The Lama priest hierarchy has always been determined by a high or low birth. Tulku's supposedly of a higher birth are reincarnate and take their previous seats by default which monopolizes power,. Common monks are classified of lower birth and are given by their parents at a very young age to the monastic system.

One of the foremost issues with your position on this, as mentioned above, is the fact that you unfortunately appear to have a steep poverty in comprehending how a conventional model or praxis functions. Which means you are falling victim to an inherent view where you cannot separate a loose functional method from your perceptions of rigid inherency. Meaning; rather than seeing the lama for what he or she is, you are overwhelmed by your own projections and in fact see an existent figure which should be either accepted or rejected based on certain characteristics and properties that individual is truly endowed with (rather than seeing such contentions as an arbitrary set of criteria stemming from yourself). Not only that, but you take this expression of incompetency and indiscriminately cast that shadow over the whole of gurus as a collective target, which is again, clearly an exhibition of your own neuroses rather than something inherent to the system or the teachers.

This comes off as preachy and judgmental. Several points are apparent. If one doesn't understand the Buddhist model, then one has very little faculties of comprehension, which by extension of your statement, would apply to the inability to comprehend any model. Furthermore, to admonish one to accept the guru for what they are misses the point that no one can read the mind of another and precludes critical questioning, but is based on blind faith.

Your use of specific judgmental terms 'neuroses', 'irrationalities' and 'the darkest heart of delusion' again defines your belief system as absolutely correct while denoting outsiders that are not in agreement with your world view, in a derogatory manner.

 

Are you an academic? Studied Buddhism in college? A dilettante?

Edited August 1, 2014 by ralis

[Wells]

.

Edited October 28, 2014 by ZOOM

[steve]

So we have established that people can successfully learn how to practice Dzogchen with the help of a good book and don't need a personal transmission from the guru to do so!

Thank you for your help!

 

You may be right Zoom - go for it!

 

Here are some of my favorite books on the subject -

Journey to Certainty by Anyen Rinpoche, a brilliant synthesis of view and practice

Buddhahood Without Meditation by Dudjom Lingpa, you can get a free, legal pdf online

Awakening the Luminous Mind by Tenzin Wangyal Rinpoche (although you didn't seem to think he teaches Dzogchen)

Mind in Comfort and Ease by The Dalai Lama

The Precious Treasury of the Basic Space of Phenomena by Longchenpa

 

 

Although I personally disagree with your assertion, Zoom. Not because a lama told me so but because of my own experience of reading and receiving direct teachings. So much goes on in a relationship and interaction with a teacher that cannot be captured in books. Some of it has to do with observation of the teacher - how they carry themselves, how they react in situations, how they look at you, treat you, talk to you, there is more to communication than information. Then there is the opportunity to ask questions, very personal and specific questions, and get feedback on practices, experiences, problems, feelings, emotions, etc.. Then there is the ability of a teacher to offer subtle nuances depending on who is receiving the teachings such that you may hear a dozen different examples describing a single subtle point so that everyone in the room gets a feel for what is going on - the many slight variations on a theme that would take thousands of pages to capture in print.

 

You may disagree, and that is fine. You are welcome and encouraged, at least by me, to read everything you can and practice, practice, practice, and see what happens. I'd love to hear your discoveries and progress!

 

I sincerely hope you succeed!

 

[ralis]

I'm not justifying any behavior, good or bad, I'm acknowledging it's existence and mode of existence.

I would not consider Trungpa's behavior enlightened, nor that of his successor.

He was a deeply flawed and disturbed human who happened to have a Tibetan Buddhist education and charisma.

 

Just as the existence of pedophilia in schools does not negate the value of education, and the existence of pedophilia in humanity does not

You do not need to accept that anything is "just an appearance," however that is a fundamental consequence of realizing emptiness. If you do not see the play between space, awareness, and the nature of phenomena, then you've not had that realization which is what I was referring to in my post.

 

Thanks for your views on this serious problem. Some just wish to brush it off and deny it. As far as Trungpa is concerned many see him as realized.

 

 

the play between space, awareness, and the nature of phenomena

 

That is my experience, but for me to not point out the problems with this system, would be irresponsible on my part. We are not living in a feudalistic culture in which a theocracy is the form of government nor are we living in the 'dark ages'. Seeing monks running around in strange looking hats and robes is an artifact from a bygone era.

[Wells]

.

Edited October 28, 2014 by ZOOM

[asunthatneversets]

So we have established that people can successfully learn how to practice Dzogchen with the help of a good book and don't need a personal transmission from the guru to do so!

Thank you for your help!

 

You cannot practice Dzogchen without a living transmission from a qualified guru... no guru, no Dzogchen, plain and simple.

 

If you want to delude yourself, read some books and think you're practicing Dzogchen by all means do so... but you will not be.

Edited August 1, 2014 by asunthatneversets

[steve]

Thanks for your views on this serious problem. Some just wish to brush it off and deny it. As far as Trungpa is concerned many see him as realized.

He may have realized emptiness, he may have had a direct and transformative experience of rigpa - that's not all that uncommon and can occur without training or transmission (from another human being - truth be told transmission does not occur from a human being, IMO, I'm with deci belle on that)... Being realized does not mean flawless. It is easy to fall back into samsaric patterns and, yes, even degenerate into the type of depravity that many gurus have been accused of (Trungpa, Gurdjieff, Osho,...).

 

 

That is my experience, but for me to not point out the problems with this system, would be irresponsible on my part.

I agree, point out the problems, there are some and they are important to acknowledge and address. It would be even better to do something concrete about those problems if it's truly important to you. I volunteer time and donate money to a wonderful organization that supports survivors of political torture. And when one has a deep realization of emptiness there is also a realization that the problem is not in the external world is in within ourselves. And if we are going to point out the problems we should similarly acknowledge and celebrate the successes and beauty. We are very quick to recognize and accept the reality of problems but much slower to accept the reality of beauty and wonderful experiences... it's curious.

 

 

We are not living in a feudalistic culture in which a theocracy is the form of government nor are we living in the 'dark ages'. Seeing monks running around in strange looking hats and robes is an artifact from a bygone era.

You may not be living in such a culture or in the dark ages but many people in the world are, including the Tibetans.

You're trying to impose your culture on them and they may not want it or be ready for it, any more than you were to accept their cultural bias. They do accept a theocracy and, for all its problems, it works for the majority of them and is much more nourishing and enriching to their lives than our plutocracy. Hats and robes aren't strange, it is you who judge them to be so based on your own bias and conditioning.

[BaguaKicksAss]

So in the practices I currently do, the real/good stuff is not in the books. It is oral tradition, not written, and most definitely not shared with any random teenager who walks into a bookstore sort of thing. This includes the martial arts.

 

Are Buddhist practices/books like this as well?

 

There's something going on with the teachings, the specific meditations work better when being taught in the group of about a dozen people. I would sum it up as energetic stuff, but looks like no one in this particular thread would agree with me .

[Wells]

.

Edited October 28, 2014 by ZOOM

[BaguaKicksAss]

I think maybe, if the lama or whoever is any good, it is not them teaching you, but a Deity, through them.

[asunthatneversets]

@ asunthatneversets

 

 

I disagree. To say that applying that any given practice i.e, upāya will somehow guide one to realization is blind faith. This is putting one's life in the hands of a parent priest.

 

 

 

The Lama priest hierarchy has always been determined by a high or low birth. Tulku's supposedly of a higher birth are reincarnate and take their previous seats by default which monopolizes power,. Common monks are classified of lower birth and are given by their parents at a very young age to the monastic system.

 

 

 

This comes off as preachy and judgmental. Several points are apparent. If one doesn't understand the Buddhist model, then one has very little faculties of comprehension, which by extension of your statement, would apply to the inability to comprehend any model. Furthermore, to admonish one to accept the guru for what they are misses the point that no one can read the mind of another and precludes critical questioning, but is based on blind faith.

 

Your use of specific judgmental terms 'neuroses', 'irrationalities' and 'the darkest heart of delusion' again defines your belief system as absolutely correct while denoting outsiders that are not in agreement with your world view, in a derogatory manner.

 

Are you an academic? Studied Buddhism in college? A dilettante?

 

If applying any practice in the context of upāya to lead one to realization is blind faith, then everything is blind faith. Your provisional path will be based on trust and faith until you actualize genuine insights, whereafter you will no longer need any type of faith due to the fact that you know your nature. If the initial confidence and faith required to begin the path is your gripe, then by all means don't ever start and spend your time doing whatever other pointless, relative activities you enjoy.

 

I'm not talking about the lama hierarchy. I was talking about the relationship with a qualified teacher in the context of Vajrayāna. If you don't like that aspect of Vajrayāna, then you aren't practicing Vajrayāna, so it really doesn't matter either way. No point talking about it.

 

Me coming off preachy and judgmental is like the pot calling the kettle black. Apart from that you aren't understanding what I'm saying regarding accepting the guru for what they are. In Vajrayāna, you initially rely on the outer guru who introduces you to your nature whereupon you either recognize that nature or you do not. If you do not, then the guru gives you instructions on how to recognize your nature and so on. Once your recognize your nature, then you know the inner guru, and rely on that.

 

The specific judgmental terms I used illustrated what is considered to be the proper view of the system, versus the unfounded statements Zoom is making which have no factual basis or relation to the teaching whatsoever and are nothing more than his own fabrications. This has nothing to do with my "world view", we are discussing Dzogchen and Vajrayāna.

 

I'm not an academic, nor did I study Buddhism in college, and I'm not sure if dilettante is an applicable term in this context.

[asunthatneversets]

You are just mindlessly repeating empty claims devoid of any reason.

Therefore, you are the deluded brain-washed blind believer living in a dream world!

Nobody can take you serious.

So please:

 

I can assure you I am not mindlessly repeating empty claims devoid of any reason. I can also assure you that I am not a deluded brain-washed blind believer living in a dream world. I can also assure you that I could care less whether you take me seriously, nor what you think in general, as you clearly have no idea what you are talking about.

[Wells]

.

Edited October 28, 2014 by ZOOM

[Tibetan_Ice]

 

You cannot practice Dzogchen without a living transmission from a qualified guru... no guru, no Dzogchen, plain and simple.

 

If you want to delude yourself, read some books and think you're practicing Dzogchen by all means do so... but you will not be.

You do know that In Bon, According to Tenzin Namdak, you are given preliminary practices which you practice and then tell your guru about the experiences that you have. Then, he points out the natural state if he recognizes the telltale signs. . So technically, the practices will bring about the natural state without a transmission by a guru and if you are lucky enough to identify the natural state on your own you are set.

 

According to this latest book that I am reading by Dudjom Rinpoche, Dzogchen meditation is remaining in the state where there is no subject and no object. Now, there are a few ways to get to that state. Samadhi. When subject and object combine, fuse together and then disintegrate. Or, letting go and letting be, but not to the point where letting go is an action.

 

MIND CLASS (SEMS SDE) Dudjom Rinpoche describes the Mind Class as follows: The philosophical approach of the Mind Class is that the compounded truth of the path-which is conditioned and fettered by firm perceptions that cling to the stages of vehicles, the two truths, the six paramitas, the two stages, and so forth-is resolved in vast stainless space, liberated from aspects of cause and result, virtuous and harmful actions, and acceptance or rejection, to be the wisdom of great purity and evenness-the original stainless space of phenomena that is the nature of enlightened mind, or the essential nature of ultimate truth free from conceptual elaboration. To put it concisely, all phenomena that dualistically appear within subject and object are transcended.

 

...

To begin with, it is your teacher who shows you the state of your awareness. And when you recognize it for yourself, it is then that you are introduced to your own nature. All the appearances of both samsara and nirvana are but the display of your own awareness; take your stand upon awareness alone. Just like the waves that rise up out of the sea and sink back into it, all thoughts that appear sink back into awareness. Be certain of their dissolution, and as a result you will find yourself in a state utterly devoid of both meditator and something meditated upon completely beyond the meditating mind.

 

 

You know, the argument that you are having reminds me of the idea that the Catholic Church had, that you could only talk to God through a priest and only if you had the sacrements. I could never believe that if there was a god, that there would be conditions that you had to obey before you could talk to him/her. I just couldn't believe that only a chosen few would go to heaven. So, in a way, I guess you are kind of like the Catholic Church, saying no guru, no Dzogchen. However, what I have found is that even without a real living physical guru, when you are ready, the "guru" will manifest on the other planes and come visit you anyway. But really, you are the inner guru so just look within your own heart and you will find him/her.

 

As Lama Tharchin Rinpoche explains in his commentary to the Concise Preliminary Practices of the New Treasures of Dudjom Rinpoche: There are actually three gurus: the outer guru, the inner guru, and the secret guru. The outer guru [your guru] is the same as Guru Rinpoche who has taken form. The inner guru is the Dharma he has given that has arisen from his realization. These instructions can lead us to the discovery and unveiling of our own Buddha-potential. As practice is established and the fruition begins to materialize, the realization of the secret guru dawns as none other than our own all-knowing wisdom awareness mind. (p. 41)

 

Edited August 1, 2014 by Tibetan_Ice

[ralis]

The specific judgmental terms I used illustrated what is considered to be the proper view of the system, versus the unfounded statements Zoom is making which have no factual basis or relation to the teaching whatsoever and are nothing more than his own fabrications. This has nothing to do with my "world view", we are discussing Dzogchen and Vajrayāna.

 

The terms are judgmental in the context in which you framed them and you alone are responsible for using them. So don't blame and hide behind the system, but take responsibility for your own actions.

[Wells]

.

Edited October 28, 2014 by ZOOM

[asunthatneversets]

As you are unable to quote any logical reason given by your guru to back up his absurd claim / your absurd belief,

your assurance is futile!

 

Have you read any books on Dzogchen or Vajrayāna? Or received any teachings whatsoever? Pick up any book on Dzogchen and you can find any number of statements regarding the importance of receiving direct introduction from a living master, guru yoga etc. If you can't find one you are either blind, incredibly afflicted by your own confirmation biases or are in a fog of denial.

[Simple_Jack]

Your level of escapism is incredible.

So not even a guru can come up with a comprehensive and logical reason why a book which contains the exact same text a guru would speak during a "transmission" could not replace the latter and enable the practitioner to train successfully in Dzogchen!

So we have established that people can successfully learn how to practice Dzogchen with the help of a good book and don't need a personal transmission from the guru to do so!

Thank you for your help!

 

AFAIK, the books that are currently available in the market won't provide much in practical instruction, beyond shamatha and tregcho. Stick with books on Sutra Mahamudra if you want to forgo a path reliant on a guru. You'll be provided with a step-by-step progression towards non-meditation, as long as you're not attached to the level of neoadvaitan pointers, in Jax's video linked some pages back.

 

That is my experience, but for me to not point out the problems with this system, would be irresponsible on my part.

 

You have yet to reveal any controversies that are not already well known within the Tibetan Buddhist community.

Edited August 1, 2014 by Simple_Jack

[asunthatneversets]

You do know that In Bon, According to Tenzin Namdak, you are given preliminary practices which you practice and then tell your guru about the experiences that you have. Then, he points out the natural state if he recognizes the telltale signs. . So technically, the practices will bring about the natural state without a transmission by a guru and if you are lucky enough to identify the natural state on your own you are set.

 

People all over the world have for centuries had random peak glimpses of their nature, that isn't the point. The point is that you are intending to practice Dzogchen as the system to support your path towards liberation. You effectively begin practicing Dzogchen after you have received direct introduction from a qualified lama, and are not practicing prior to that, nor in the absence of that. You must receive introduction from a qualified teacher who is connected to an unbroken lineage. You can practice Sūtrayāna and eventually recognize your nature as well, your nature is simply the view of buddhahood. However if you want to practice Vajrayāna you need transmission, and cannot practice Vajrayāna without transmission. That is how Vajrayāna works. It is not that difficult to understand. So no you cannot practice Dzogchen on your own without transmission from a teacher.

 

Why this is so controversial I have no idea.