ralis Posted August 15, 2014 (edited) Yes, unfortunately as soon as your attitude became clear I chose to refrain from giving arguments or citing sources that you could investigate to further your deprecation of these teachings. Â Do you have anything to say in regards to the effect on the winds by the clear light? Stop berating him as if you can read his mind. Edited August 15, 2014 by ralis 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Wells Posted August 15, 2014 (edited) . Edited October 28, 2014 by ZOOM Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
asunthatneversets Posted August 15, 2014 Dude, did you ever scrutinize any information your guru gave you or did you always immedeately believe every word he says? Â My root guru is one of the foremost Dzogchen masters of the past century. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
asunthatneversets Posted August 15, 2014 What are you doing in this thread if you are unwilling to discuss what you deem super secret? Â Some semblance of damage control. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Wells Posted August 15, 2014 (edited) . Edited October 28, 2014 by ZOOM Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
asunthatneversets Posted August 15, 2014 On the contrary, based on your condescending remarks, it is you who have little regard for Zoom's intelligent remarks and quest to understand the nature of the Dzogchen teachings. Â His quest for understanding the teachings is noble, though misguided and flawed due to various wrong views he upholds. As for my 'little regard' for his so-called intelligent remarks... I have no regard at all, much less 'a little'. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ralis Posted August 15, 2014 (edited) My root guru is one of the foremost Dzogchen masters of the past century. Â That is not an answer and implies that you believe every word without question. Edited August 15, 2014 by ralis 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ralis Posted August 15, 2014 His quest for understanding the teachings is noble, though misguided and flawed due to various wrong views he upholds. As for my 'little regard' for his so-called intelligent remarks... I have no regard at all, much less 'a little'. Â Misguided and flawed in what way? What wrong views? Again you are positing a rigid 'to be' myth. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
asunthatneversets Posted August 15, 2014 In other words,... Â In other words, a healthy level of scrutiny is always good, but there is a difference between (i) scrutiny, and (ii) vicious criticism steeped in ulterior motives and ignorance. Â I never exhibited the second, and was lucky enough to have a mentor who allowed and helped me to do the first in a constructive way. Â At this point scrutiny is no longer needed. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
asunthatneversets Posted August 15, 2014 That is not an answer and implies that you believe every word without question. Â And you revel in the thought of me believing every word without question because the prospect serves to confirm your own fabricated projections of who I am and how I conduct myself in my personal practice and relationships with the buddhadharma. Quite sad. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
asunthatneversets Posted August 15, 2014 In other words, you are not interested in a reality check. Â An amusing proposition coming from you. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Wells Posted August 15, 2014 (edited) . Edited October 28, 2014 by ZOOM 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Wells Posted August 15, 2014 (edited) . Edited October 28, 2014 by ZOOM 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ralis Posted August 15, 2014 (edited) And you revel in the thought of me believing every word without question because the prospect serves to confirm your own fabricated projections of who I am and how I conduct myself in my personal practice and relationships with the buddhadharma. Quite sad. Â If you would only posit an original creative out of the box thought, that would be a start. Also your narrative takes the form, 'you are either with us or against us' which defines political parties and religious group mindset. Classic example of primate group dynamics. Edited August 15, 2014 by ralis 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
asunthatneversets Posted August 15, 2014 As I have an open mind, want to achieve something real and am not a believer, I reality-check all the time. Â You do not have an open mind. And your statements regarding 'achieving something real' and 'reality-checks' are flawed by your definitions of what constitutes being 'a believer' and a 'reality-check' in general. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
asunthatneversets Posted August 15, 2014 If you would only posit an original creative out of the box thought, that would be a start. Also your narrative takes the form, 'you are either with us or against us' which defines political parties and religious group mindset. Classic example of primate group dynamics. Â Again, this notion is flawed by what you deem worthy of being "an original creative out of the box thought". Because from my perspective neither of you produce anything close to an original creative out of the box thought yourselves, ergo why you would request such a thing from me makes no sense. Â "You are either with us or against us"... sort of like the pot calling the kettle black to say this is the species of narrative I am employing... which means the other implications you listed are unfortunately indicative of your own behavior. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ralis Posted August 15, 2014 (edited) Again, this notion is flawed by what you deem worthy of being "an original creative out of the box thought". Because from my perspective neither of you produce anything close to an original creative out of the box thought yourselves, ergo why you would request such a thing from me makes no sense. Â "You are either with us or against us"... sort of like the pot calling the kettle black to say this is the species of narrative I am employing... which means the other implications you listed are unfortunately indicative of your own behavior. Â To put it more plainly for you, your world view takes the form 'Dzogchen is asunthatneversets absolute truth and has no flaws, all other systems not based on Dzogchen are flawed'. Refute that. Edited August 15, 2014 by ralis 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ralis Posted August 15, 2014 My response to the OP is that I have experienced health problems from these kind of practices. Some have lingered for years with no resolution from the medical profession. One major problem was the rising heat and waves of bliss/pain which doesn't accurately describe it. Dudjom Lingpa is correct in his assessment. 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
asunthatneversets Posted August 15, 2014 To put it more plainly for you, your world view takes the form 'Dzogchen is asunthatneversets absolute truth and has no flaws, all other systems not based on Dzogchen are flawed'. Refute that. Â I see the buddhadharma as having no flaws, and Dzogchen is an aspect of that. I personally would not deprecate other systems, if a teaching (of whatever stripe) is able to help someone and decrease their suffering then it is a wonderful thing. 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ralis Posted August 15, 2014 I see the buddhadharma as having no flaws, and Dzogchen is an aspect of that. I personally would not deprecate other systems, if a teaching (of whatever stripe) is able to help someone and decrease their suffering then it is a wonderful thing. Â You just berate anyone who disagrees with you. 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ralis Posted August 15, 2014 (edited) I see the buddhadharma as having no flaws, and Dzogchen is an aspect of that. I personally would not deprecate other systems, if a teaching (of whatever stripe) is able to help someone and decrease their suffering then it is a wonderful thing. Â How can you ever prove "I see the buddhadharma as having no flaws"? You can't! Why haven't you participated in the OP as opposed to trolling and derailing this discussion. BTW I posted some personal experiences, so why can't you? I suppose you see everyone here as beneath you except maybe a few of your fans that plus your narratives. Edited August 15, 2014 by ralis 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
asunthatneversets Posted August 15, 2014 How can you ever prove "I see the buddhadharma as having no flaws"? You can't! Â You are fixating on the teaching, as opposed to what the teaching points to. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
asunthatneversets Posted August 15, 2014 You just berate anyone who disagrees with you. Â As do you. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
asunthatneversets Posted August 15, 2014 Why haven't you participated in the OP as opposed to trolling and derailing this discussion. Â It is an inappropriate topic for open discussion on a public forum, but apart from that I already said I wouldn't discuss this type of information with Zoom. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Wells Posted August 15, 2014 (edited) . Edited October 28, 2014 by ZOOM 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
