Dzogchen, superior to Tantra. Really...?

[Jonesboy]

You feel I know nothing? There are many of my posts on that page and I stated that one can witness and still be in the natural state.

 

To repeat, the OP is in regards to Dzogchen, not Mahamudra. There are differences between the two.  The pointing out instructions in Dzogchen have nothing to do with receiving a 'big vibe'.

 

Again,

 

Please show me any teaching that says the Natural State is a state of observing ones thoughts, feelings etc.

 

If you are in a state of observing ones thoughts there is still a subject and an object and you are not in the Natural State.

 

Rigpa is when the observing/thoughts go away and it is just the flow. The ground the base which it all flows from.

 

From my earlier post:

 

Found this description in The Twenty-one Little Nails, the root text from the Zhang-Zhung Nya-Gyud, pointing to the difference between Rigpa and the "nature of mind", rather than "noticing mind"...

 

 

 

As for recognizing the Nature of Mind as distinct from mind, (there are four considerations regarding the Nature of Mind:)

 

 

 

1) it is without thoughts,

 

2) it becomes the basis of everything,

 

3) it is a neutral state (displaying neither virtue nor vice), and

 

4) everything possible originates from it and this is unceasing.

 

 

If you are observing thoughts you are "noticing mind" and not in the Natural State.

[Jonesboy]

With regard to transmissions:

 

From Malcolm...

 

 

 

The Dzogchen teachings are not something found outside of Buddhadharma for the simple reason that they are a Dharma that was taught by the Buddhas no amount of intellectual posturing can change this fact. Does this mean that someone has to sign up with a card that says "Registered Buddhist" like it is a political party? No, of course not.

 

 

 

These days a sort of intellectual "Dzogchen" is very fashionable — but it generally arises from a misconstrual of the Dzogchen tradition divorced from the matrix in which it emerged, the religious culture of Tibet from the 9th to the 12th century. During this four centuries, Dzogchen teachings were gradually promulgated in the context of Secret Mantra. One thing that ChNN also says is that there is no such a thing as "pure Dzogchen." What he means by this is that there is no practice of Dzogchen divorced from the rest of the Buddhist path (Bonpos are just Buddhists with a differing historical narrartive regarding the origins of their teachings). He also states in very plain language that the result of Sūtra, Tantra and Dzogchen are the same — the same buddhahood. He never makes this claim with regard to Christianity, Hinduism, Taoism and so on. Of course another intellectual fashion of the current day is that imagine that somehow there are teachings equivalent to Dzogchen in schools outside of Buddhadharma. This assertion is laughable. Beyond this, Dzogchen texts themselves take great pains to site their own teachings within the horizon of Buddhadharma, and outside the horizon of the teachings of this and that tīrthika school.

 

The only thing radical about Dzogchen in the end is that a few people might have the capacity recognize their own stated and live in that knowledge 24/7 obviating the need for any further path — but those of us who did not recognize that state and entered into delusion must labor away at our two obscurations, even though, as it is clearly stated in the Prajñāpāramita that when we reach the final result we will realize that there was nothing to accomplish and nothing to remove all along. In the meantime however, we soldier on because while we are under the the power of karma and afflictions there is a basis of purification and a reason for purification. This is recognized also in Dzogchen teachings, thus the reason there are so many purifications practices, purification practices for body, speech, mind and so on. The entire first chapter of the Dimension of Sound (sgra thal 'gyur) tantra consists of nothing but purification practices, including creation stage and completion stage practices, and the entire first volume of Vimalamitra's commentary to this text consists of nothing more than elaborating all these practices in detail.

 

As to the notion that direct introduction is sufficient, this is a gross error of understanding. As the famed Semde master Zhigpo Dudtsi points out, the only chigcharwas (instantaneous realizers) he knew of were Saraha and Lingje Repa (neither of them even Dzogchen practitioners), but that while he had sought out some other examples, he did not know of any while not ruling out the possibility that they existed. But it seems these days everyone is a chigcharwas. Further, if you are not practicing the profound teaching of thögal, one has no way of working with pure vision apart from the two stages. It is for this reason then that Tregchö is always combined with deity yoga in Dzogchen practice. As such, the practice of most so called Dzogchen practice is no different than what the Sakyapas, Gelugpas and Kagyus do, even though Nyingma sadhanas are gussied up with many fancy high sounding words. The plain reality is that most people do not have the capacity or time to practice Dzogchen in a serious way. This being the case, for example, ChNN strongly advises everyone to practice the short thun, which is a anuyoga sadhana combined with ati guruyoga. He explicitly says no one can remain in samadhi (contemplation) all the time, and so therefore, in order to do something useful, we have all these secondary practices which support samadhi, which create a container for it.

 

As to the the importance of tradition. There is no Dzogchen without lineage. A Dzogchen book without a live transmission is like a cellphone without a battery, it won't receive any calls. Dzogchen, as ChNN says again and again, does not live in a book, it lives in the transmission between teacher and student. That transmission is oral, symbolic and experiential. All of the different methods of empowerment, elaborate and so, are all methods of communicating that knowledge orally, symbolically and experientially. That knowledge is no different than what is communicated through the four empowerments of the Sarma schools. While the four Dzogchen empowerments may be more detailed, and in some sense they may be a bit more profound in details, a beginner cannot comprehend this. Without a great deal of understanding of Vajrayāna, the teaching of Dzogchen is completely opaque.

 

The teaching of Dzogchen is not confined to paeans of praise about our natural state. It consists of detailed instructions about the human body, it's channels, functions and so on, all of which require ripening through empowerment. If Dzogchen were only about our natural state, it would not go beyond the Prajñāpāramita sūtras.

 

As one of the Dzogchen tantras puts it — Mahāyoga is the ground, Anuyoga is the sky, and Atiyoga is the sun and moon which illuminates both. Dzogchen is called the pinnacle not because Mahāyoga and Anuyoga are unnecessary, but because, as Rongzom points out, it is needed for making other practices fruitful. This is not different than the Lamdre contention that the experiential view of the inseparability of samsara and nirvana that comes from empowerment must be meditated prior to engaging in the two stages.

 

In the end, I am afraid that the Sakya master, Dezhung Ajam ( a disciple of Adzom Drugpa) was right, many people who claim to be Dzogchen practitioners are like people whose bodies are separated from their heads — in other words, their "Dzogchen" is just intellectual theory. Sadly, we see many such discussions in the internet in various forums by various people that are completely ungrounded. These people, sadly, merely block their own realization. What a pity.

http://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=48&t=18326

Edited January 7, 2016 by Jonesboy

[Jonesboy]

From whom did you receive a Mahamudra transmission? A recognized lineage? What were the preliminaries?

 

I like to go here to share presence on Wednesday. This is also where I received the empowerment.

 

http://emahofoundation.org/index.php

[ralis]

With regard to transmissions:

 

From Malcolm...

 

 

 

The Dzogchen teachings are not something found outside of Buddhadharma for the simple reason that they are a Dharma that was taught by the Buddhas no amount of intellectual posturing can change this fact. Does this mean that someone has to sign up with a card that says "Registered Buddhist" like it is a political party? No, of course not.

 

 

 

These days a sort of intellectual "Dzogchen" is very fashionable — but it generally arises from a misconstrual of the Dzogchen tradition divorced from the matrix in which it emerged, the religious culture of Tibet from the 9th to the 12th century. During this four centuries, Dzogchen teachings were gradually promulgated in the context of Secret Mantra. One thing that ChNN also says is that there is no such a thing as "pure Dzogchen." What he means by this is that there is no practice of Dzogchen divorced from the rest of the Buddhist path (Bonpos are just Buddhists with a differing historical narrartive regarding the origins of their teachings). He also states in very plain language that the result of Sūtra, Tantra and Dzogchen are the same — the same buddhahood. He never makes this claim with regard to Christianity, Hinduism, Taoism and so on. Of course another intellectual fashion of the current day is that imagine that somehow there are teachings equivalent to Dzogchen in schools outside of Buddhadharma. This assertion is laughable. Beyond this, Dzogchen texts themselves take great pains to site their own teachings within the horizon of Buddhadharma, and outside the horizon of the teachings of this and that tīrthika school.

 

The only thing radical about Dzogchen in the end is that a few people might have the capacity recognize their own stated and live in that knowledge 24/7 obviating the need for any further path — but those of us who did not recognize that state and entered into delusion must labor away at our two obscurations, even though, as it is clearly stated in the Prajñāpāramita that when we reach the final result we will realize that there was nothing to accomplish and nothing to remove all along. In the meantime however, we soldier on because while we are under the the power of karma and afflictions there is a basis of purification and a reason for purification. This is recognized also in Dzogchen teachings, thus the reason there are so many purifications practices, purification practices for body, speech, mind and so on. The entire first chapter of the Dimension of Sound (sgra thal 'gyur) tantra consists of nothing but purification practices, including creation stage and completion stage practices, and the entire first volume of Vimalamitra's commentary to this text consists of nothing more than elaborating all these practices in detail.

 

As to the notion that direct introduction is sufficient, this is a gross error of understanding. As the famed Semde master Zhigpo Dudtsi points out, the only chigcharwas (instantaneous realizers) he knew of were Saraha and Lingje Repa (neither of them even Dzogchen practitioners), but that while he had sought out some other examples, he did not know of any while not ruling out the possibility that they existed. But it seems these days everyone is a chigcharwas. Further, if you are not practicing the profound teaching of thögal, one has no way of working with pure vision apart from the two stages. It is for this reason then that Tregchö is always combined with deity yoga in Dzogchen practice. As such, the practice of most so called Dzogchen practice is no different than what the Sakyapas, Gelugpas and Kagyus do, even though Nyingma sadhanas are gussied up with many fancy high sounding words. The plain reality is that most people do not have the capacity or time to practice Dzogchen in a serious way. This being the case, for example, ChNN strongly advises everyone to practice the short thun, which is a anuyoga sadhana combined with ati guruyoga. He explicitly says no one can remain in samadhi (contemplation) all the time, and so therefore, in order to do something useful, we have all these secondary practices which support samadhi, which create a container for it.

 

As to the the importance of tradition. There is no Dzogchen without lineage. A Dzogchen book without a live transmission is like a cellphone without a battery, it won't receive any calls. Dzogchen, as ChNN says again and again, does not live in a book, it lives in the transmission between teacher and student. That transmission is oral, symbolic and experiential. All of the different methods of empowerment, elaborate and so, are all methods of communicating that knowledge orally, symbolically and experientially. That knowledge is no different than what is communicated through the four empowerments of the Sarma schools. While the four Dzogchen empowerments may be more detailed, and in some sense they may be a bit more profound in details, a beginner cannot comprehend this. Without a great deal of understanding of Vajrayāna, the teaching of Dzogchen is completely opaque.

 

The teaching of Dzogchen is not confined to paeans of praise about our natural state. It consists of detailed instructions about the human body, it's channels, functions and so on, all of which require ripening through empowerment. If Dzogchen were only about our natural state, it would not go beyond the Prajñāpāramita sūtras.

 

As one of the Dzogchen tantras puts it — Mahāyoga is the ground, Anuyoga is the sky, and Atiyoga is the sun and moon which illuminates both. Dzogchen is called the pinnacle not because Mahāyoga and Anuyoga are unnecessary, but because, as Rongzom points out, it is needed for making other practices fruitful. This is not different than the Lamdre contention that the experiential view of the inseparability of samsara and nirvana that comes from empowerment must be meditated prior to engaging in the two stages.

 

In the end, I am afraid that the Sakya master, Dezhung Ajam ( a disciple of Adzom Drugpa) was right, many people who claim to be Dzogchen practitioners are like people whose bodies are separated from their heads — in other words, their "Dzogchen" is just intellectual theory. Sadly, we see many such discussions in the internet in various forums by various people that are completely ungrounded. These people, sadly, merely block their own realization. What a pity.

http://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=48&t=18326

 

We have had enough Malcolm quotes. Simple_Jack before he was banned from here incessantly posted Malcolmisms.

[ralis]

Again, Please show me any teaching that says the Natural State is a state of observing ones thoughts, feelings etc. If you are in a state of observing ones thoughts there is still a subject and an object and you are not in the Natural State. Rigpa is when the observing/thoughts go away and it is just the flow. The ground the base which it all flows from. From my earlier post: Found this description in The Twenty-one Little Nails, the root text from the Zhang-Zhung Nya-Gyud, pointing to the difference between Rigpa and the "nature of mind", rather than "noticing mind"... As for recognizing the Nature of Mind as distinct from mind, (there are four considerations regarding the Nature of Mind:) 1) it is without thoughts, 2) it becomes the basis of everything, 3) it is a neutral state (displaying neither virtue nor vice), and 4) everything possible originates from it and this is unceasing. If you are observing thoughts you are "noticing mind" and not in the Natural State.

 

I am tired of debating with you since you have very little comprehension of what I have written here. Wells made it very clear in a recent post as to what the natural state is and one's relationship to such state.

 

Given that you have never studied Dzogchen, asking questions is apropos as opposed to comparing and contrasting different systems. Go back to the Dharmawheel and debate there.

[Tibetan_Ice]

Again,Please show me any teaching that says the Natural State is a state of observing ones thoughts, feelings etc.If you are in a state of observing ones thoughts there is still a subject and an object and you are not in the Natural State. Rigpa is when the observing/thoughts go away and it is just the flow. The ground the base which it all flows from. From my earlier post:Found this description in The Twenty-one Little Nails, the root text from the Zhang-Zhung Nya-Gyud, pointing to the difference between Rigpa and the "nature of mind", rather than "noticing mind"...As for recognizing the Nature of Mind as distinct from mind, (there are four considerations regarding the Nature of Mind:)1) it is without thoughts,2) it becomes the basis of everything,3) it is a neutral state (displaying neither virtue nor vice), and4) everything possible originates from it and this is unceasing.If you are observing thoughts you are "noticing mind" and not in the Natural State.

You totally missed it here.

Your position is that there are no more thoughts in the natural state, in rigpa.

You say that after the thoughts go away there is just the flow.

And you try to support your position by distinguishing the mind from the nature of mind... and by claiming that if there is a subject and object then that is not rigpa.

 

Well, what do think is flowing?

 

 

The natural state, rigpa, consists of emptiness and clarity and the two are inextricably bound. Think about that.

 

It is the emptiness and the clarity that are flowing, manifesting all perceptions, thoughts included. You can't stop that.

 

The clarity is the the sambogakaya, the appearances, the knowing of the perceptions. They come from the base.

 

From the natural state, rigpa, you still see thoughts, just not in the normal manner. They look like a little school of rainbow fish floating above. And, when you do have a thought it appears to you separate and away from the school of fishes, and it is very clear, distinct and magical. There is much space between it and the school of fish thoughts. (There is also great bliss, luminosity and a wonderful pervading silence but you can still hear sounds etc..)

 

Ground, Path and Fruition points out that appearances still arise quite nicely:

 

You look at the essence then you see it. Having looked, what do you see? There is nothing to be seen whatsoever, there is no abiding whatsoever—this is the factor of emptiness. In this factor of emptiness there is knowing and this knowing is an unobstructed understanding in a non-stopped, complete open-ness—this is the factor of clarity.

 

When you are practising, sometimes real rigpa will come along. What is needed for it to be real rigpa is the unification of those two factors. "Uni-fication" is to be understood like this: within a situation of no abiding at all and nothing to be seen whatsoever, all the various appearances arise and those very appearances themselves are the essence which is emptiness. In other words, all the different things might come but as long as there is no grasping it does not matter whether the appearances occur or not. The key point is to be without grasping.

 

 

See the blooded text? It says "all the various appearances arise"!

Rigpa is self-knowing. It knows without conceptualization. It is a higher form of perception. It is kind of like "intuition" but a step above. It replaces the lower form of subject/object conscious grasping.

 

You get into rigpa by dissolving a thought and the the key is to stay there without grasping at the rest of the thoughts and appearances that will arise.. If rigpa was nothing, no thoughts, no appearances, then there would be no emptiness because the two are inextricably bound. You could not practice thogal. You have to have the appearances so that you can practice not getting caught up in them. So that you can realize that all perceptions are just a play of rigpa, that all reality is an empty appearance of rigpa.

 

This is all beyond subject and object. It is nondual perception. And, this nondual perception can view the subject and object in action if it so desires.

 

When someone starts talking about no thoughts, nothing to perceive, then they aren't talking about rigpa, the natural state.

[Tibetan_Ice]

Here is a continuation of the previous topic which also contains another very interesting facet about the natural state, rigpa:

 

From Ground, Path and Fruition:

138 DZOGCHEN, THE GREAT COMPLETION

there is dharmakaya, sambhogakaya, and nirmanakaya. In rigpa, the emptiness is the dharmakaya, the clarity is the sambhogakaya, and their unification is the nirmanakaya. So in fact, those three kayas are complete within the mind. In brief, all dharmas, all phenomena whatsoever, are complete within rigpa. In this case, "complete within the mind" is a Dzogchen way of talking which means completely contained within the mind. If you understand rigpa, you will understand all phenomena. Why? Because emptiness pervades all phenomena and one of rigpa's qualities is emptiness.

 

Just as the sky covers America, Kathmandu, and Australia, so emptiness covers all phenomena and, just as the sky is in touch with all those places, if you stay in emptiness, you will be connected with all things. Another example is the international telephone system: if you dial the international access code, you are linked to all countries via satellite and likewise, if you connect with emptiness, you connect with all other phenomena, the minds of all other sentient beings, and even with the Buddha himself.

 

This is important to understand because these days many people, thinking that there is no connection with others, ask the question, "if you stay in a cave you have no connection with others, so how can you help sentient beings?" But there is a connection. To use the telephone analogy, having the wire or the connection is like having the emptiness aspect and having the conversation, whatever it might be—love, compassion, dedication of merit—is the clarity aspect itself. In other words, the clarity part is the actual communication that gets carried via the medium of emptiness. So, whatever you are doing to provide benefit as you sit there in your cave such as dedicating virtue, expressing compassion, and so on, is communicated via the clarity aspect across the medium which is emptiness. This fact is the reason why we speak of: the purity of the three cycles in the superfactual truth; bodhichitta at the superfactual level; refuge at the superfactual level; and so on. So it is important to stay in rigpa because it provides the means by which you can connect directly with others and thus help them.

 

Following on from that, it is not all right to have emptiness by itself alone and it is not all right to have clarity by itself alone—there must be the third quality, the quality of being unified. When emptiness occurs with appearance and appearance occurs with emptiness it allows for proper communication. It is like a walkie-talkie: if you have a one-way walkie-talkie, you cannot conduct a proper conversation but when you have a two-way walkie-talkie you can do so without hindrance. Likewise, with either emptiness or clarity by itself some communication is possible but with the presence of the third quality, there can be communication which is very complete. Thus, we need to have the two things unified and so, as practitioners, we need to have the unification as part of our rigpa experience.

 

How is it when you are in a one-sided emptiness? You are stuck in emptiness. Because you are stuck, nothing can function in your experience because you are not giving appearances a chance to arise. And, when there are no appearances coming, the wisdom of a buddha, the omniscient quality of a buddha, cannot come because you have pushed it away.

 

 

 

Isn't it interesting that emptiness and clarity combined is the medium through which you can connect to others?

 

"So it is important to stay in rigpa because it provides the means by which you can connect directly with others and thus help them."

 

That explains allot.

Edited January 7, 2016 by Tibetan_Ice

[Jeff]

Here is a continuation of the previous topic which also contains another very interesting facet about the natural state, rigpa:

From Ground, Path and Fruition:Isn't it interesting that emptiness and clarity combined is the medium through which you can connect to others?

"So it is important to stay in rigpa because it provides the means by which you can connect directly with others and thus help them."

That explains allot.

 

Awesome quote and very cool point on Rigpa. Do you think that comment means that Rigpa is universal or shared, since one can communicate with and help others through it? Where one has stepped beyond "local" and there is a universal stratus/mind space?

[Jonesboy]

You totally missed it here.

Your position is that there are no more thoughts in the natural state, in rigpa.

You say that after the thoughts go away there is just the flow.

And you try to support your position by distinguishing the mind from the nature of mind... and by claiming that if there is a subject and object then that is not rigpa.

 

Well, what do think is flowing?

 

 

The natural state, rigpa, consists of emptiness and clarity and the two are inextricably bound. Think about that.

 

It is the emptiness and the clarity that are flowing, manifesting all perceptions, thoughts included. You can't stop that.

 

The clarity is the the sambogakaya, the appearances, the knowing of the perceptions. They come from the base.

 

From the natural state, rigpa, you still see thoughts, just not in the normal manner. They look like a little school of rainbow fish floating above. And, when you do have a thought it appears to you separate and away from the school of fishes, and it is very clear, distinct and magical. There is much space between it and the school of fish thoughts. (There is also great bliss, luminosity and a wonderful pervading silence but you can still hear sounds etc..)

 

Ground, Path and Fruition points out that appearances still arise quite nicely:

 

See the blooded text? It says "all the various appearances arise"!

Rigpa is self-knowing. It knows without conceptualization. It is a higher form of perception. It is kind of like "intuition" but a step above. It replaces the lower form of subject/object conscious grasping.

 

You get into rigpa by dissolving a thought and the the key is to stay there without grasping at the rest of the thoughts and appearances that will arise.. If rigpa was nothing, no thoughts, no appearances, then there would be no emptiness because the two are inextricably bound. You could not practice thogal. You have to have the appearances so that you can practice not getting caught up in them. So that you can realize that all perceptions are just a play of rigpa, that all reality is an empty appearance of rigpa.

 

This is all beyond subject and object. It is nondual perception. And, this nondual perception can view the subject and object in action if it so desires.

 

When someone starts talking about no thoughts, nothing to perceive, then they aren't talking about rigpa, the natural state.

Hi Ti,

 

I think you missed what I was saying. Here it is again.

 

 

You are right Wilfred. I was not being clear with my no thought posts.

 

Rigpa is not getting lost in them, not attaching to them as they flow through as one is thinking.

 

For example one will have a thought during a conversation, Rigpa is not thinking about what to say or getting lost in the daydream of trying to relate to someone's experience.

 

When one is not having a conversation one can just reside without thoughts, in the flow of that which is.

 

Forgive me for no making that clearer in my previous statements.

Next I said:

 

If you are in a state of observing ones thoughts there is still a subject and an object and you are not in the Natural State.

 

 

 

Rigpa is when the observing/thoughts go away and it is just the flow. The ground the base which it all flows from.

 

From my earlier post:

 

 

Found this description in The Twenty-one Little Nails, the root text from the Zhang-Zhung Nya-Gyud, pointing to the difference between Rigpa and the "nature of mind", rather than "noticing mind"...

 

As for recognizing the Nature of Mind as distinct from mind, (there are four considerations regarding the Nature of Mind:)

 

1) it is without thoughts,

 

2) it becomes the basis of everything,

 

3) it is a neutral state (displaying neither virtue nor vice), and

 

4) everything possible originates from it and this is unceasing.

 

 

If you are observing thoughts you are "noticing mind" and not in the Natural State.

 

I have also mentioned emptiness of mind and how one moves beyond "noticing mind"

 

 

 

 

 

 

Eventually one moves beyond observing. Silence fills ones mind, the energy/thoughts flow through without grasping but they are you, as in the flow. It is a being not an observing. Eventually you are the clouds and the sky and the birds as them, not observing them.

 

Emptiness with reference to thoughts is that all thoughts are energy. All things are energy and like clouds they seem to have form but in truth they are empty. The more we grasp, believe in our thoughts/ give them form the more suffering we experience. So emptiness of thoughts is realizing that thoughts are just energy, empty expect for what we grasp at.

 

As one progresses one is able to experience all things as oneness and the emptiness nature of things.

 

Aka void=form and form=void.

 

It is a state of being not observing.

 

 

Rigpa and Mind

 

 

In Dzogchen, a fundamental point of practice is to distinguish rigpa from sems (citta, (grasping) mind).[8] According to the 14th Dalai Lama, "sems is the mind which is temporarily obscured and distorted by thoughts based upon the dualistic perceptions of subject and object."[9] Rigpa is pure awareness free from such distortions.[9] Cittata, the nature of mind, is the inseparable unity of awareness and emptiness, or clarity and emptiness, which is the basis for all the ordinary perceptions, thoughts and emotions of the ordinary mind.[web 1]

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rigpa

 

 

Homage to the Guru, the teacher.

 

The View and Meditation of Dzogchen can be explained in many, many ways, but simply sustaining the essence of present awareness includes them all.

Your mind won’t be found elsewhere.

It is the very nature of this moment-to-moment thinking.

Regard nakedly the essence of this thinking and you find present awareness, right where you are.

 

Why chase after thoughts, which are superficial ripples of present awareness?

Rather look directly into the naked, empty nature of thoughts; then there is no duality, no observer, and nothing observed.

Simply rest in this transparent, nondual present awareness.

Make yourself at home in the natural state of pure presence, just being, not doing anything in particular.

Present awareness is empty, open, and luminous; not a concrete substance, yet not nothing.

Empty, yet it is perfectly cognizant, lucid, aware.

As if magically, not by causing it to be aware, but innately aware, awareness continuously functions.

These two sides of present awareness or Rigpa — its emptiness and its cognizance (lucidity) — are inseparable.

Emptiness and luminosity (knowing) are inseparable.

They are formless, as if nothing whatsoever, ungraspable, unborn, undying; yet spacious, vivid, buoyant.

 

Jamgön Kongtrül Lodrö Thayé (1813–1899), the first Jamgon Rinpoche, was a founder of the Rimé movement of Tibetan Buddhism and author of more than one hundred books.

 

http://freddieyam.co...n-kongtrul.html

All I have been trying to say is that if you are observing ones thoughts, that is mindfulness, not Buddha mind, non-dual awareness aka Rigpa.

 

Yes one can still work with visions, yes one will still think. Yet when one is for a better word residing in Ripga within oneself there is no subject and object of yourself.

 

That is what it means to reside in the flows, not observing ones thoughts and watching them float on by but to be one with the flow, the energy that makes up everything "non-dual awareness".

Edited January 7, 2016 by Jonesboy

[Jonesboy]

Here is a continuation of the previous topic which also contains another very interesting facet about the natural state, rigpa:

 

From Ground, Path and Fruition:

Isn't it interesting that emptiness and clarity combined is the medium through which you can connect to others?

 

"So it is important to stay in rigpa because it provides the means by which you can connect directly with others and thus help them."

 

That explains allot.

I agree and thank you very much for bringing that up.

 

Beautiful.

Edited January 7, 2016 by Jonesboy

[ralis]

Hi Ti,

 

I think you missed what I was saying. Here it is again.

 

 Next I said:

  

 

 

Rigpa is when the observing/thoughts go away and it is just the flow. The ground the base which it all flows from.

 

From my earlier post:

 

  

I have also mentioned emptiness of mind and how one moves beyond "noticing mind"

 

 

 

 

  All I have been trying to say is that if you are observing ones thoughts, that is mindfulness, not Buddha mind, non-dual awareness aka Rigpa.

 

Yes one can still work with visions, yes one will still think. Yet when one is for a better word residing in Ripga within oneself there is no subject and object of yourself.

 

That is what it means to reside in the flows, not observing ones thoughts and watching them float on by but to be one with the flow, the energy that makes up everything "non-dual awareness".

 

There is a critical part of the teaching that you are missing out on.

[steve]

Do you think that comment means that Rigpa is universal or shared, since one can communicate with and help others through it? Where one has stepped beyond "local" and there is a universal stratus/mind space?

 

My answer would be no. At least in Bonpo teachings, a universal or shared space/reality is not posited. What is emphasized is the fact that we are unable to connect to and help others when our mind is distracted by pain and suffering. Only when we can be completely open, uncontrived, and unconditioned (eg the natural state) are we in a position to really help ourselves and others. 

[Jeff]

My answer would be no. At least in Bonpo teachings, a universal or shared space/reality is not posited. What is emphasized is the fact that we are unable to connect to and help others when our mind is distracted by pain and suffering. Only when we can be completely open, uncontrived, and unconditioned (eg the natural state) are we in a position to really help ourselves and others. 

 

But does that (and Ti's quote) imply that in the natural state it is possible?  And hence an underlying framework that makes it possible to directly connect and help?

[Apech]

But does that (and Ti's quote) imply that in the natural state it is possible?  And hence an underlying framework that makes it possible to directly connect and help?

 

 

I can see what you are getting at Jeff but Buddhism doesn't posit some kind of universal consciousness which we are all part of.  The closest idea to this would perhaps be the Alaya, the base consciousness of the eightfold aspects of the mind in Yogacara philosophy.

 

Its tempting to build an ontology on the basis of the Buddhist View and although many have tried it just doesn't fit - the reason for this has to be found in the fact that Buddhism doesn't really address ontology because it doesn't see doing so as leading to liberation.

 

Other Dzogchen 'experts' on here may disagree but this is what I find.

[Jeff]

I can see what you are getting at Jeff but Buddhism doesn't posit some kind of universal consciousness which we are all part of.  The closest idea to this would perhaps be the Alaya, the base consciousness of the eightfold aspects of the mind in Yogacara philosophy.

 

Its tempting to build an ontology on the basis of the Buddhist View and although many have tried it just doesn't fit - the reason for this has to be found in the fact that Buddhism doesn't really address ontology because it doesn't see doing so as leading to liberation.

 

Other Dzogchen 'experts' on here may disagree but this is what I find.

 

I understand what you are saying and agree that is the common buddhist understanding... That is why I think that TI's quote is so powerful/controversial, because the quote is completely accurate in my experience. 

[Apech]

I understand what you are saying and agree that is the common buddhist understanding... That is why I think that TI's quote is so powerful/controversial, because the quote is completely accurate in my experience. 

 

 

Well it's refreshing to find you and T_I in some kind of agreement about something.  I don't think his quote is controversial or non-Buddhist though perhaps you could explain why you think it is.

[Jeff]

Well it's refreshing to find you and T_I in some kind of agreement about something.  I don't think his quote is controversial or non-Buddhist though perhaps you could explain why you think it is.

 

Because the quote is stating that it is possible to connect and help others.  And that is possible while residing in Rigpa  (or what I often call "light" in a mystical christian framework).  The classical buddhist view is that it is not possible to connect to others and also not possible to "help", because mind streams are completely separate and hence no framework for anyone to reach anyone else.

[Apech]

Because the quote is stating that it is possible to connect and help others.  And that is possible while residing in Rigpa  (or what I often call "light" in a mystical christian framework).  The classical buddhist view is that it is not possible to connect to others and also not possible to "help", because mind streams are completely separate and hence no framework for anyone to reach anyone else.

 

Not really to your second bit.  The Bodhisattva vow binds you to help all sentient beings gain liberation.  This would be impossible without the communicative aspect of the Sambogha Kaya. 

 

And I would question Rigpa = Light.

[Jeff]

Not really to your second bit.  The Bodhisattva vow binds you to help all sentient beings gain liberation.  This would be impossible without the communicative aspect of the Sambogha Kaya. 

 

And I would question Rigpa = Light.

 

No desire to debate meanings of words.  

 

But, you seem to be avoiding the issue of how others are connected or accessed while residing in rigpa. (Or are you just disagreeing with the quote? ) Are you saying that the connection process described is the same as the communicative aspect of the Samboghakaya? And by default, since their is direct contact or communication, does that not require some medium or framework for that communication to pass through?

[Apech]

No desire to debate meanings of words.

 

But, you seem to be avoiding the issue of how others are connected or accessed while residing in rigpa. (Or are you just disagreeing with the quote? ) Are you saying that the connection process described is the same as the communicative aspect of the Samboghakaya? And by default, since their is direct contact or communication, does that not require some medium or framework for that communication to pass through?

 

 

I have to confess I don't understand the point you are making.  The meanings of words or the limits of the application of terms is crucial to any understanding.  

 

Samboghakaya means complete enjoyment body and while not a medium as such is the way in which being communicate at the subtle level.

 

In terms of Rigpa it is the union of emptiness and clarity (sometimes appearance or luminosity). So rather than Rigpa = Light I would say Rigpa = union of light and dark - you will find this idea in the Hermetica and also Cabala.

[9th]

The reason there is no idea of a shared space of all beings in buddhism is because sentient beings are not seen as existent as separate entities to begin with, but rather as a mistaken perception resulting from composites of various elements.  

[Jeff]

The reason there is no idea of a shared space of all beings in buddhism is because sentient beings are not seen as existent as separate entities to begin with, but rather as a mistaken perception resulting from composites of various elements.  

 

Are you saying that there are no beings at all? Or more that there is one being and any perceived separation is just the one being confused?

[Jeff]

I have to confess I don't understand the point you are making.  The meanings of words or the limits of the application of terms is crucial to any understanding.  

 

Samboghakaya means complete enjoyment body and while not a medium as such is the way in which being communicate at the subtle level.

 

In terms of Rigpa it is the union of emptiness and clarity (sometimes appearance or luminosity). So rather than Rigpa = Light I would say Rigpa = union of light and dark - you will find this idea in the Hermetica and also Cabala.

 

In terms of "light", I am not thinking about it in terms of differentiating it between dark and light.  I am fine with the classic definition of Rigpa and happy to just drop the whole light thing for this discussion.

 

My point is probably found in what you seem to be calling the "subtle level".  You seem to be defining that there is a subtle level where communication amongst various beings can take place.  Hence, defining some "framework" or level for that communication to happen.  Where the classical view of buddhism has been that there is no such "subtle level" that connects.

[Apech]

In terms of "light", I am not thinking about it in terms of differentiating it between dark and light.  I am fine with the classic definition of Rigpa and happy to just drop the whole light thing for this discussion.

 

My point is probably found in what you seem to be calling the "subtle level".  You seem to be defining that there is a subtle level where communication amongst various beings can take place.  Hence, defining some "framework" or level for that communication to happen.  Where the classical view of buddhism has been that there is no such "subtle level" that connects.

 

 

This is more a vajrayana interpretation than classical Buddhism I think.

[9th]

Are you saying that there are no beings at all? Or more that there is one being and any perceived separation is just the one being confused?

 

The whole idea is irrelevant to begin with, which is why there is no great focus on an explanation for related phenomena.   The key understanding involves recognizing experiences of perception caused by mistaking subject and object as different, separate things.  This is why buddhism is regarded as a teaching from the perspective of anatman - "not self".  It begins from the position that there is no self.  Experience, awareness and perception is not regarded as self.  Therefore it is not regarded that there are other selves "out there" as well.

 

Especially classical buddhism as expounded in the Pali Canon is highly practical in a very nuts and bolts way - much less concerned with metaphysical maps and so forth.  The basic idea is "do this yourself, here is how".  There are plenty of stories illustrating understanding and various perspectives on the insights of practice, but when gleaning the most essential and therefore probably oldest surviving teachings from the actual person of Siddhartha, anything beyond practical talk was either patently ignored or curtly dismissed.