Dzogchen, superior to Tantra. Really...?

[ralis]

All views are cognitive errors but they are simultaneously manifestations of primordial wisdom.

 

I guess one should have 'no view'? Just stating "I am a Buddhist" is a point of view. Your posts state a point of view.

[Tibetan_Ice]

More about merging minds in rigpa...

 

From The Tibetan Book of Living and Dying

SOGYAL RINPOCHE

 

The outer teacher introduces you directly to the truth of your inner teacher. The more it is revealed through his or her teaching and inspiration, the more you begin to realize that outer and inner teacher are indivisible. As you gradually discover the truth of this for yourself, by invoking it again and again in the practice of Guru Yoga, a deepening confidence, gratitude, joy, and devotion are bom in you, through which your mind and the wisdom mind of the master do actually become indivisible. In a Guru Yoga practice he composed at my request, Dilgo Khyentse Rinpoche wrote:

 

That which accomplishes the great purity of perception

Is devotion, which is the radiance of Rigpa ...

Recognizing and remembering that my own Rigpa is the master—

Through this, may your mind and mine merge as one.

 

This is why all the wisdom traditions of Tibet have placed so much importance on the practice of Guru Yoga, and all the foremost Tibetan masters have treasured it as their innermost heart practice.

 

Dudjom Rinpoche wrote:

It is vital to put all your energy into the Guru Yoga, holding onto it as the life and heart of the practice. If you do not, then your meditation will be very dull, and even if you do make a little progress, there will be no end to obstacles, and no possibility of true, genuine realization being bom within the mind. So by fervently praying with uncontrived devotion, after a while the direct blessing of the wisdom mind of the master will be transmitted, empowering you with a unique realization, beyond words, born deep within your mind.

 

[already]

All teachings that ever existed are expressions of natural state and that, of course, includes tantra.Consequently we cannot say that tantra is superior or inferior to dzogchen since dzogchen cannot be superior or inferior to itself.

[9th]

I am not trying to say that I personally find the distinctions helpful.  

 

Then why make them?

[Jeff]

Then why make them?

 

That explanation was included in my previous response.

 

I am not trying to say that I personally find the distinctions helpful.  My point was in the topic of the thread and comparing Dzogchen to Tantra.  To me, for such a discussion it is important to realize that there may be fundamental differences in the operating framework between the two.  Sort of what is "theoretically possible" with the different paths.

 

And "a dog chasing it's tail"... Is that not in many ways the nature of all discussion?  But, personally, I often learn things from such reflection...

 

Best wishes.  

[Apech]

I think perhaps one way of understanding the use of the term 'superior' in Buddhist and Bon texts is to mean more direct or more immediate.  For instance a superior student of a teaching is often described as such as one who immediately on hearing a teaching gains realisation.  They are primed and ready so to speak and just hearing the words one time causes the teachings to bear fruit.

 

In terms of paths - there are those which are more indirect and spend a lot of time laying foundations and so on - and those which deal with the essence directly or immediately.  So the mahayana is usually taught as a gradual path of accumulating merit over several life times, the vajrayana as more directly going to addressing energy transformation through sadhanas, and dzogchen as being even more direct in pointing at the 'truth' = rigpa.

 

I think it is a slight misunderstanding if you think because of this that the more indirect paths are just discarded in terms of praxis - though of course in terms of the guidance of the mind you would perhaps avoid any focus on gathering merit , or visualisation of deities and so on, you would let them drop away - but you would still understand them as support and remedy for self and others in appropriate circumstances.  So there might be circumstances where you would apply a tantric practice to clear certain obstacles and so on even though one's main practice is dzogchen.

 

I am basing this mostly on what I understand through mahamudra so if it is incorrect I apologise and stand to be corrected by true dzogchenis.

Edited January 11, 2016 by Apech

[C T]

Dont know (much) about other Dzogchen communities but the one i am familiar with, all new initiates must complete the Ngondro. Some senior students who have been with the teacher for over 20 years are still doing the Ngondro as part of their daily routine. I have been with the group since 2006 and have yet to hear of any new student being initiated into the secret teachings straight away. 

 

Ngondro is also Dzogchen, and if one has the View, there will be no aversion to practicing it. The reason its not popular it seems is the (false) idea of the preliminariness associated with the practice, but what people tend to overlook is the solid structure and base that Ngondro provides to the ardent student. So, if a student has the attitude that he or she wants to bypass Ngondro and go for the real deal cos he or she has the gumption to feel that he or she is ready for it, then for sure such an attitude is already a mistaken one. A readied practitioner makes no distinctions and does not engage in selectiveness when practicing the path of direct present awareness. In contrast, a readied practitioner, one motivated by bodhicitta and joyful renunciation, does not discriminate between superior and inferior. Having this sort of thinking, a kind of haughtiness or pride will become a cause for downfall, and definitely not conducive to Dharma practice. 

 

Advice from the masters - Always keep conduct of body, speech and mind in check. The greater the realisation and emancipation, the finer the conduct. This is quite evident in all the authentic lineage masters. They usually laugh upon seeing how students get too serious or follow everything the master says with a kind of wide-eyed wonderment, but sometimes such behaviours cant be helped. Being perfectly composed and equanimous is after all quite challenging, yet those who bear such fruit will sometimes roll on the floor laughing at how silly this whole business of taking the Dharma with grave seriousness can be. 

[Wells]

.

Edited May 10, 2016 by Wells

[dawei]

The preliminary practices are completely useless and a waste of time.

 

Prostrations are useless, resting your body in the Natural State is useful.

Reciting mantras is useless, resting your speech in the Natural State is useful.

Listening to your guru is useless, resting your listening in the Natural State is useful.

Gazing at your guru, mandalas etc. is useless, resting your gaze in the Natural State is useful.

Shamatha, visualizing mandalas, your guru etc. is useless, resting your mind in the Natural State is useful.

 

In other words:

Only the main practices are useful and not a waste of time.

You just need the correct training information of the main practices and the correct understanding of these.

If you get the correct training information and instructions by reading books or verbally from your guru is irrelevant,

as long as you understand correctly what to do, why to do it and how to do it.

 

I would suffix some lines with "for certain students".

 

Maybe the issue is that there is one path taught to 100,000 potential students.   A single way is easy to oversee, explain, etc.

 

As in life, there are lots of useless forms we endure because the masses in general need it to ensure they follow it correctly.

 

And if one finds a path is unyielding, then that is likely not a path which fits... keep going...

[Wells]

.

Edited May 10, 2016 by Wells

[dawei]

The problem with most books on the subject is that they deliberately contain only partial and not extensively explained informations on what to do, why to do and how to do the main practices.

If the gurus wanted, they could write one small book about Trekchod and Thogal,

that explains clearly, extensively and without any chance of misunderstanding what to do, why to do and how to do.

At least those gurus, which themselves have the complete informations and the correct understanding of these practices, could write such a book.

And at least those students, who have at least a common rational and down-to-earth understanding of things,

could understand and follow such a book.

 

Yes, very true... and so why not write the book?  Just a history of mistrust that it falls into the wrong hands?  Maybe.

 

Teachings has been generally selective and secret.  I'd likely agree that in this modern day, there should be a more open approach.

[Wells]

.

Edited May 10, 2016 by Wells

[Apech]

The preliminary practices are completely useless and a waste of time.

 

Prostrations are useless, resting your body in the Natural State is useful.

Reciting mantras is useless, resting your speech in the Natural State is useful.

Listening to your guru is useless, resting your listening in the Natural State is useful.

Gazing at your guru, mandalas etc. is useless, resting your gaze in the Natural State is useful.

Shamatha, visualizing mandalas, your guru etc. is useless, resting your mind in the Natural State is useful.

 

In other words:

Only the main practices are useful and not a waste of time.

You just need the correct training information of the main practices and the correct understanding of these.

If you get the correct training information and instructions by reading books or verbally from your guru is irrelevant,

as long as you understand correctly what to do, why to do it and how to do it.

 

 

Well, you seem very certain of all this.  But from my experience this is a misunderstanding of ngondro - because of the word 'preliminary'.  The ngondro are not like badges you need before higher practice - and where I depart from CT's view is to say that whether you do them or not, whether you do 100,000 or not is really not important.  Ngondro is just a way of firming up your natural state practice - which you do at every stage.  In other words after completing a number of prostrations each day you sit and do direct practice.  You of course may be one of those rare practitioners who have few obscurations to the natural state and thus I would agree that if this is the case then there would be no purpose to the ngondro, just sit ... or don't even sit if you don't need to.  They serve to remove obscurations which are empty illusory things ... But I can only voice my own experience and that is that they strengthen and improve your meditation.  Not theoretically, actually.

[Jonesboy]

Some words from Malcolm on the need for a guru.

 

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

 

Some public books with the name Dzogchen in the title are just sutra level teachings on emptiness and mindfulness, but politeness restrains me from naming which ones.

 

Sems sde at minimum requires introduction through the so called empowerment of the potentiality of vidyā (of which there are 18 connected with the dohas of 18 ancient masters), and is part of the completion stage of Mahāyoga and Anuyoga — the bodhicitta texts do not actually give much detail on the method of practice, being mainly concerned with theory and view. So called sems sde is primarily about the basis. Because the basic texts of sems sde provide little information on how it is to be practiced, there are three different systems of Sems sde practice in Tibet, each with its own preliminaries. For example, the Nyan lugs systems of Sems sde requires the regular four uncommon foundations and so on.

 

Longde requires initiation into the system of Ngondzog Gyalpo, and is connected with that yidam.

 

 

 

If the teaching on the natural state is no different from the Prajnaparamita sutras - that is, you seem to agree to the unity of Dzogchen, Mahamudra and Madhyamaka in terms of the ultimate view - is it your understanding that Dzogchen is a unique way because of its togal instructions and nothing else?

There are a number of things which make Dzogchen distinct, thögal is one, but there are others, the explanation of the generic basis is another, the specific preliminary practices related to thögal such as 'khor 'das ru shan and so on are others, and the general requirement for some kind of introduction either through the fourth empowerment of Mahāyoga, the ati yoga empowerment found in Anuyoga or the empowerment of the potentiality of vidyā.

 

As far as tregchö goes, there is really no difference between tregchö, Kagyu Mahāmudra and the meditation the view of the inseparability of samsara and nirvana — all three have the same point and all three depend on the experiential view imparted during empowerment.

 

I also want to point out that like the rest of Vajrayāna, Dzogchen practice, path and realization completely depends on the Guru. Guru Yoga is absolutely central to Dzogchen. Without guru yoga and devotion to a realized master, no progress at all is possible in Dzogchen, none whatsoever.

Edited January 12, 2016 by Jonesboy

[C T]

Well, you seem very certain of all this.  But from my experience this is a misunderstanding of ngondro - because of the word 'preliminary'.  The ngondro are not like badges you need before higher practice - and where I depart from CT's view is to say that whether you do them or not, whether you do 100,000 or not is really not important.  Ngondro is just a way of firming up your natural state practice - which you do at every stage.  In other words after completing a number of prostrations each day you sit and do direct practice.  You of course may be one of those rare practitioners who have few obscurations to the natural state and thus I would agree that if this is the case then there would be no purpose to the ngondro, just sit ... or don't even sit if you don't need to.  They serve to remove obscurations which are empty illusory things ... But I can only voice my own experience and that is that they strengthen and improve your meditation.  Not theoretically, actually.

I dont see where our views differ to any extent. The fog must be thick tonight. 

 

There is no such thing as a rare practitioner who can bypass the preliminaries. Even recognised tulkus have to undergo arduous training, for years in fact - let alone some western wannabe with a similar lack of respect like Wells. It just goes to show how arrogance can overshadow basic logical progression. 

[ralis]

I studied this particular text years ago and found it to be very useful. John Myrdhin Reynolds translated this particular text which is a stand alone transmission text, whereby one can read and receive the Dzogchen teachings. Reynolds at that time was a translator for Norbu. Also Norbu specifically stated that the natural state teachings are non sectarian/ecumenical and that includes the natural world being a realm where one can receive Dzogchen transmission.

 

One other point that Norbu was always adamant about regarding the Ngondro preliminaries is that many gurus require the accomplishment of such before receiving higher teachings such as Dzogchen and so forth. If someone passes on without receiving the Dzogchen teachings what good is doing myriad prostrations and the other preliminaries? 

 

There are way too many fundamentalists that never question or apply critical analysis to these teachings. Moreover, Tibet was ruled for over 800 years by monastic, feudalistic, overlords. That is a fact!

 

 

 

http://www.amazon.com/Self-Liberation-through-Seeing-Naked-Awareness-ebook/dp/B0062ZBHIQ/ref=sr_1_3?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1452555027&sr=1-3&keywords=john+myrdhin+reynolds

Edited January 12, 2016 by ralis

[ralis]

Some words from Malcom on the need for a guru.

 

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

 

Some public books with the name Dzogchen in the title are just sutra level teachings on emptiness and mindfulness, but politeness restrains me from naming which ones.

 

Sems sde at minimum requires introduction through the so called empowerment of the potentiality of vidyā (of which there are 18 connected with the dohas of 18 ancient masters), and is part of the completion stage of Mahāyoga and Anuyoga — the bodhicitta texts do not actually give much detail on the method of practice, being mainly concerned with theory and view. So called sems sde is primarily about the basis. Because the basic texts of sems sde provide little information on how it is to be practiced, there are three different systems of Sems sde practice in Tibet, each with its own preliminaries. For example, the Nyan lugs systems of Sems sde requires the regular four uncommon foundations and so on.

 

Longde requires initiation into the system of Ngondzog Gyalpo, and is connected with that yidam.

 

 

 

If the teaching on the natural state is no different from the Prajnaparamita sutras - that is, you seem to agree to the unity of Dzogchen, Mahamudra and Madhyamaka in terms of the ultimate view - is it your understanding that Dzogchen is a unique way because of its togal instructions and nothing else?

There are a number of things which make Dzogchen distinct, thögal is one, but there are others, the explanation of the generic basis is another, the specific preliminary practices related to thögal such as 'khor 'das ru shan and so on are others, and the general requirement for some kind of introduction either through the fourth empowerment of Mahāyoga, the ati yoga empowerment found in Anuyoga or the empowerment of the potentiality of vidyā.

 

As far as tregchö goes, there is really no difference between tregchö, Kagyu Mahāmudra and the meditation the view of the inseparability of samsara and nirvana — all three have the same point and all three depend on the experiential view imparted during empowerment.

 

I also want to point out that like the rest of Vajrayāna, Dzogchen practice, path and realization completely depends on the Guru. Guru Yoga is absolutely central to Dzogchen. Without guru yoga and devotion to a realized master, no progress at all is possible in Dzogchen, none whatsoever.

 

 

Nice cut/paste job from the Dharmawheel. A contributor who was banned last year by the name of Simple_Jack was banned for incessantly posting cut/paste quotes from Malcolm.

[Wells]

.

Edited May 10, 2016 by Wells

[C T]

I studied this particular text years ago and found it to be very useful. John Myrdhin Reynolds translated this particular text which is a stand alone transmission text, whereby one can read and receive the Dzogchen teachings. Reynolds at that time was a translator for Norbu. Also Norbu specifically stated that the natural state teachings are non sectarian/ecumenical.

and that includes the natural world being a realm where one can receive Dzogchen transmission.

 

One other point that Norbu was always adamant about regarding the Ngondro preliminaries is that many gurus require the accomplishment of such before receiving higher teachings such as Dzogchen and so forth. If someone passes on without receiving the Dzogchen teachings what good is doing myriad prostrations and the other preliminaries? 

 

There are way too many fundamentalists that never question or apply critical analysis to these teachings. Moreover, Tibet was ruled for over 800 years by monastic, feudalistic, overlords. That is a fact!

 

Haha quite funny

[Jonesboy]

Nice cut/paste job from the Dharmawheel. A contributor who was banned last year by the name of Simple_Jack was banned for incessantly posting cut/paste quotes from Malcolm.

Yes you have said that before.

 

Do you disagree with him?

[Jonesboy]

Who?

Fixed.

 

Anything else?

[Wells]

.

Edited May 10, 2016 by Wells

[Wells]

.

Edited May 10, 2016 by Wells

[ralis]

Haha quite funny

 

In what way is it funny?

[dawei]

A positive word about the Dzogchen gurus:

I am certainly very grateful to them for publishing their books on the subject of Dzogchen,

which contain the translations of various very precious source texts.

 

If this strays too much then just ignore it...

 

But what is the text without transmission?

 

I don't know much about Dzogchen but thought that was part-and-parcel.

 

When I consider the ancient daoists, it seems they always encountered some master which put them past the line they could not cross... no amount of text would do that.

 

I'm not trying to make an argument against texts... I value that as much as another... but transmission is singularly the most direct path anyways.  So why argue it out of an equation?