﻿Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, October 4th, 2012 at 2:42 AM
Title: Re: Is Dzogchen really beyond cause and effect?
Content:


heart said:
That must have been quite an interesting discussion, all things considered.

/magnus


Malcolm wrote:
The way CHNN explains it, it was not so interesting for him.

heart said:
Yes, I also heard it several times, he don't sound to amused. But knowing Khenpo Choga a little, well he is not stupid and quite unusual. Did you ever meet him?

/magnus

Malcolm wrote:
No, I never met him.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, October 4th, 2012 at 12:59 AM
Title: Re: Is Dzogchen really beyond cause and effect?
Content:


heart said:
That must have been quite an interesting discussion, all things considered.

/magnus


Malcolm wrote:
The way CHNN explains it, it was not so interesting for him.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, October 4th, 2012 at 12:59 AM
Title: Re: Is Dzogchen really beyond cause and effect?
Content:


Dechen Norbu said:
Now I see what it's all about.
A typical a case where a religious fiction clashes head on with historical facts, with all the ruffle such accidents usually cause.
The big red book (Nyingma School of Tibetan Buddhism: Its Fundamentals and History by Dudjom Rinpoche) is rather well known. I, on the other hand, would be prone to recommend this particular book for those interested in History instead of the hegemonic religious version of it.


Yudron said:
It's not as simple as that--that one version is fact and one is fiction.  Neither version of early Dzogchen history fits our western idea of historical fact in any way, shape, or form.  I don't mean this disrespectfully, but they are legends, like Noah's Ark and so on.

Malcolm wrote:
ChNN's book is not about the history of Dzogchen. Dzogchen is mentioned tangentially in the book because he argues it was present in Bon prior to the arrival of Indian Buddhism to Tibet. The book is about establishing that Tibet already had its own culture, literature, system of writing and so on prior to the time of King Trisrong Detsen. I suggest you read it.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, October 4th, 2012 at 12:10 AM
Title: Re: Is Dzogchen really beyond cause and effect?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
. The back story is that on hearing that ChNN was coming to Nepal, Khenpo Choga started boasting to everyone that he was going to debate ChNN and defeat him. We all know how that turned out for him.

heart said:
So Khenpo Choga was one the Khenpos that visited ChNNR while he was at Tulku Urgyen?

Malcolm wrote:
Yes.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, October 3rd, 2012 at 10:43 PM
Title: Re: Is Dzogchen really beyond cause and effect?
Content:


Yudron said:
In any event, ChNN's old book Necklace of Zi upset a lot of lamas at the time, because it does not reflect the traditional Nyingma view of Tibetan History.  This lead to Dzongsar Khyentse saying that ChNN had done more to harm the Nyingma lineage than the Chinese ever did, and so on.  But that is water under the bridge.

My understanding of the story was that ChNN said that he was commissioned to write the book by the Tibetan Women's Association as a political history of Tibet and it was not meant to be a religious history, and that pacified the situation.

Malcolm wrote:
I have heard this story from ChNN myself, personally, more than once.

The back story is that on hearing that ChNN was coming to Nepal, Khenpo Choga started boasting to everyone that he was going to debate ChNN and defeat him. We all know how that turned out for him.

And yes, in the course of his research, ChNN has found many things that contradict certain features of both Nyingma as well as Bon accounts concerning the imperial era. And yes, this has upset some tibetans -- many who foolishly continue to assert to this very day that ChNN is a Bonpo.


Yudron said:
How I am supposed to relate to the lineage histories -- be they Nyingma or Bon -- of the origins of Dzogchen, as someone with a pretty good Western education, is a mystery to me.  I'm pretty excited about this subject actually... and open minded.

Malcolm wrote:
The origins of Dzogchen are given in the man ngag sde tantras, mainly the sgra thal gyur and its commentary. The account of the origins of Dzogchen is mythological in scope and involve the twelve teachers prior to Garab Dorje. AFAIK, ChNN takes this account literally, as fact. His twist, if you will, is adding the name of Tonpa Shenrab to that list as a Dzogchen nirmanakāya. This is not without precedent in Nyingma, since as you will recall Guru Chowang also asserts that Tonpa Shenrab is a nirmanakāya who taught the liberative vehicles as well in his gter 'byung che.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, October 3rd, 2012 at 9:00 PM
Title: Re: Lama and moving
Content:
freakpower70 said:
From what I have heard it is a violation of the student teacher relationship to take a new teacher before one has finished the formers instructions.


Malcolm wrote:
You heard wrong.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 2nd, 2012 at 5:11 AM
Title: Re: Is Dzogchen really beyond cause and effect?
Content:


username said:
They claimed to be Dzogchen masters and wanting to purge Dzogchen of Bonpos.

Malcolm wrote:
No.


username said:
They were told to go away once they started debating him by asking him about the view of the basis when he told them to go away.

Malcolm wrote:
No.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 2nd, 2012 at 5:11 AM
Title: Re: Is Dzogchen really beyond cause and effect?
Content:
username said:
We know there are differences of opinion on ngondro, etc. You are wrong on both counts.

underthetree said:
Are there differing opinions on rigpa (or whatever the translation du jour is - maybe I've just answered the question...)?

username said:
We are told rigpa is not a matter of semantic, cognition, concepts etc. but of ineffable experience and realization or knowledge of the ultimate state by the person. There are many opinions by them on how to teach students though.


Malcolm wrote:
Yes, as I said, differences on pedagogy -- (but of course since you love to disagree with every fricking thing I say, you even do so when you contradict yourself).


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 2nd, 2012 at 5:09 AM
Title: Re: Is Dzogchen really beyond cause and effect?
Content:


username said:
There are still TB Dzogchen masters who publicly do not accept Bonpos Dzogchen. I don't accept them. But that is my opinion.

Malcolm wrote:
What is that you do not accept? Bonpo Dzogchen masters?



username said:
We know there are differences of opinion on ngondro, etc. You are wrong on both counts.

Malcolm wrote:
Differences of opinion about pedagogy, not differences in opinion about the meaning of Dzogchen -- but you are such a tear to find fault with what I say, you are completely blind to anything other than whatever fictions you spin in your head.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 2nd, 2012 at 4:15 AM
Title: Re: Is Dzogchen really beyond cause and effect?
Content:


catmoon said:
Okay, then they should all be in perfect agreement in their teachings.

Malcolm wrote:
Dzogchen masters are, when it comes to discussing Dzogchen.

catmoon said:
All righty. With that kind of agreeent, it must surely be impossible that there would be sects in Dzogchen, since all the teachers are in perfect agreement. It must be nice to enjoy the sort of universal agreement that no other religion in the history of humanity has attained. This would also explain the complete absence of conflict in the Dzogchen threads here.

Nope, couldn't say it with a straight face.

Malcolm wrote:
There are no sects in Dzogchen per se. There are differences in how this knowledge should be approached, which is what you see being discussed. But there is no room for debate about what Dzogchen is. Of course, most of the people here talking about Dzogchen have little or no facility in Tibetan, and therefore, are quite limited in their scope.

These days, the definitive read on Dzogchen is held to be Longchenpa's four treasuries of the dharmadhātu, reality, subjects and supreme vehicle. Dzogchen is a very precise teaching and in this end, even when people disagree about the best method of pedagogy, they do not disagree about meaning.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 2nd, 2012 at 4:10 AM
Title: Re: Is Dzogchen really beyond cause and effect?
Content:
username said:
It is wrong to state all Dzogchen masters are united when discussing Dzogchen. ChNN often tells the story of when he was staying with Tulku Urgyen Rinpoche in Nepal and three Dozgchen masters, couple of Khenpos and a tulku, suddenly appeared to debate him in the presence of TUR on why ChNN is wrong to accept Bonpos as genuine Dzogchenpas. He disagreed. They asked for elaboration on the view of the base in Dzogchen and a debate on invalidity of Bonpo Dzogchen. ChNN said, you should know about the basis and there will be no explanation. We disagree and there will be no debate from me on Dzogchen or Bonpos with you. They promptly left.


Malcolm wrote:
ChNN never said they were Dzogchen masters.

If you are going to tell a story, get the facts straight.

They wanted to question him on the basis of their misunderstanding of a point of history he had explained in one of his books i.e. that Tonpa Shenrab existed before both Shakyamuni and Garab Dorje, and therefore, they concluded he, ChNN was stating that Dzogchen has its origin in Bon. Of course ChNN explained to them to the history of the 12 ancient masters of Dzogchgen beginning with Nangwa Dampa, who are much more ancient than Tonpa Shenrab.

The three, abashed, then requested Dzogchen teachings from ChNN, who replied to the effect he does not teach Dzogchen to people who come to debate with him about.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 2nd, 2012 at 2:01 AM
Title: Re: Is Dzogchen really beyond cause and effect?
Content:
catmoon said:
Ok, then there should be zero difference between realized masters.


Malcolm wrote:
There is zero difference in the substance of their realization.

catmoon said:
Okay, then they should all be in perfect agreement in their teachings.

Malcolm wrote:
Dzogchen masters are, when it comes to discussing Dzogchen.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, October 2nd, 2012 at 1:42 AM
Title: Re: Is Dzogchen really beyond cause and effect?
Content:
catmoon said:
Ok, then there should be zero difference between realized masters.


Malcolm wrote:
There is zero difference in the substance of their realization.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, October 1st, 2012 at 10:38 PM
Title: Re: Why is Tibetan Buddhism more popular?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
(Leaving aside Zen, which is actually more widespread than Vajrayāna Dharma), Vajrayāna is more popular because it promotes liberation in a single body and a single lifetime. Second, it is intrinsically more adapatable to our highly technilogical civilization because it is very much based on a yogic understanding of liberation i.e. how the body is an instrument of liberation, not just the mind alone.

M

Huseng said:
How many Tibetan Buddhists in the west though study it to that extent (the body as an instrument of liberation and all the technical details)?

Malcolm wrote:
I would say most, since empowerment into that knowledge is the defining feature of Vajrayāna.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, October 1st, 2012 at 10:19 PM
Title: Re: Why is Tibetan Buddhism more popular?
Content:
Huseng said:
I'm going to go out on a limb here and ask a question I've been pondering for awhile.

Why is Tibetan Buddhism more popular in the western world than, say, Zen, Chan, Tendai, Pure Land, Seon or any other form of contemporary Mahāyāna?


Malcolm wrote:
(Leaving aside Zen, which is actually more widespread than Vajrayāna Dharma), Vajrayāna is more popular because it promotes liberation in a single body and a single lifetime. Second, it is intrinsically more adapatable to our highly technilogical civilization because it is very much based on a yogic understanding of liberation i.e. how the body is an instrument of liberation, not just the mind alone.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, September 30th, 2012 at 12:35 AM
Title: Re: Is Dzogchen really beyond cause and effect?
Content:
catmoon said:
There is no Dzogchen, it's just a word. Each person's practice differs radically from the next guy's even if they are chanting from the same book, reciting identical words. That in turn differs radically from the teacher's practice, and his teacher's practice, all the way back.


Malcolm wrote:
You says this because you do not understand Dzogchen.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 29th, 2012 at 12:41 AM
Title: Re: Which Of The 17 Dzogchen Tantras Have Been Published?
Content:
username said:
He said he used the commentaries to clean up the old root's original commentary's photocopy his friend smuggled out of Potala into a definitive mistake-free correct version since the old copying method gremlins had struck that too. This took him several years. I don't think he had time to clean up 6 commentaries on it or cared to with all his activities and health problems during that time. Though possible he did and said so, but I doubt it and think he just used them as reference to clean up the main commentary. I hope you finish your Rongzom stuff too after all these years. He is undiscovered in the west and just as great if not greater than Longchenpa.

Malcolm wrote:
The six commentaries we have are:

a commentary on the sgra thal gyur (edited by ChNN from two different manuscripts, one belonging to the Great Fifth)
a commentary on the mu tig phreng ba
a commentary on the yi ge med pa
a commentary on the sgron ma bar ba
a commentary on the sku gdung 'bar ba
and a commentary on the kun bzang klong drug.

These six commentaries, apart from the Vima Snying thig and the seventeen tantras themselves, are the most important ancient Dzoghen texts we have.

My Rongzom translation needs to editing, along with a whole lot of other stuff I have done. But I am only one person.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 28th, 2012 at 9:09 PM
Title: Re: Which Of The 17 Dzogchen Tantras Have Been Published?
Content:
Sherlock said:
ChNN remarked that he helped prepare the text for the 6 commentaries in a recent webcast IIRC although he didn't elaborate.

Malcolm wrote:
He edited the sgra thal 'gyur commentary, but I was not aware that he was working on teh others, though it makes sense.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 28th, 2012 at 4:50 AM
Title: Re: Which Of The 17 Dzogchen Tantras Have Been Published?
Content:
Yudron said:
Thank you.  I do hope that if you start preparing Dzogchen translations for publication, that you will either have a glossary in the back with this kind of explanation

Malcolm wrote:
For key terms my glossaries will contain definitions derived from original and ancient Dzogchen commentaries themselves. My method is to base myself on how these terms are actually defined in Tibetan by the ancient masters as much as possible. While I will not be providing the texts themselves, my translations contain references to the Tibetan page number on every page, so someone with some facility in Tibetan can go and look in the original and see how I have translated something.

M

Yudron said:
That all makes sense for a scholarly minded person, who was reared in the Sakya tradition before coming to Dzogchen.

I'm really happy you will be providing glossaries and page references.  Which "ancient masters" do you rely on for definitions?   Rangzom?

Malcolm wrote:
Whoever wrote the commentaries on the seventeen tantras, traditionally attributed to Vimalamitra. In particular, the commentary on the sgra thal gyur attributed to him is an excellent source of definitions. There is much in that commentary alone that has been largely abandoned by the later tradition, not to mention the commentaries on the mu tig phreng ba, kun bzang klong drug, and so on, as well as the 119 intimate instruction section of the Vima snying thig.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 28th, 2012 at 4:45 AM
Title: Re: Svasamvedana
Content:
Yudron said:
Malcolm,

The rang syllable is an endless source of confusion for me.  The Dzogchen masters themselves seem to gloss it as meaning "of itself" (or "naturally") sometimes, and then sometimes it refers to the one's own person.  In general we beginners need to be aware of the genitive particle that is omitted in the contractions used in dzogchen texts (such as rang rig), and that may help us understand the usage?

Malcolm wrote:
Correct, self-aware or self-knowing requires the instrumental particle kyis/gis/gyis/ etc.

For example, "rang gi lus" means simply "one's body" likewise, "rang gi rig pa" means simply "one's knowledge". In the most ancient dzogchen commentaries such as the two volume commentary on the sgra thal gyur, "rang" of rang rig is glossed simply as gnas pa i.e. as a location.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 28th, 2012 at 4:25 AM
Title: Re: Is Dzogchen really beyond cause and effect?
Content:


Malcolm wrote:
This statement simply ignores and betrays ignorance of the entire history of tenet system literature in India as well as Tibet.

M

Mariusz said:
I've already read english books which I always quoted here. Of course I will be happy If you again present some new quotes in question. Thanx


Malcolm wrote:
Yes, you have read books influenced completely by a post-14th century read on Indian Tenet systems.

For example, the eleventh century Nyingam scholar, Rongzom Chozang, writes in his seminal intro to Mahayāna systems:
When the Yogacara assert the characteristic of emptiness of dualistic false conceptualities, emptiness is not asserted to be anything other than the other dependent.
Or:
Also in the system of the Yogacāra, the mind and mental factors of the three realms, the characteristic of the falsely imagined is not an object and also is not a subject, [6/a] but a tenet system of being the characteristic of a mere self-reflexive cognition empty of both [subject and object] is asserted.
And then he includes a paraphrase from Asanga's Mahayānasaṃgraha to support his assertion.

Or, when summarizing their final view:
When the [Yogacāra] tenets are summarized, all [schools of Yogacāra] claim “Non-conceptual primordial wisdom possessing the suchness of being empty of duality substantially exists as ultimate.
Thus, your claim that Tsongkhapa was the first to marginalize Yogacāra as cittamatra is shown to be unfounded. Also Sakya Pandita demonstrates the same thing as Rongzom.


Or Kawa Paltseg's lta ba'i rim pa bshad pa, written in the later 8th or early 9th century places Vijñaptimatra [i.e. Yogacāra/Cittamatra] below Madhyamaka:
The vehicle of characteristics has three divisions:
Vijñaptimatra; Yogacara
and Sautrantika Madhyamaka. 
The Vijñaptimatrins assert that [the appearance of] a man of [a misperceived] cairn
does not exist like bamboo horse, 
the deluded appearance of one's own consciousness;
assert that the ultimate is a moment of wisdom;
and are in accord with Yogacāra Mādhyamika [in terms of] the relative.
[But Mādhyamikas] assert the ultimate as non-arisen emptiness,
and the Sautrantika [Mādhyamikas] assert the relative as mere illusion,
seen as appearing from the perspective of the object. 
Since it is sublime, freedom from the two extremes
is asserted to be great Madhyamaka.

Now, the difference between Yogacara Madhyamaka, formulated by Shantaraksita and so called Sautrantika Madhyamaka (meaning Buddhapalita, Bhavaveka, etc.) was well known at this time. But Yogacara itself was considered inferior to Madhyamaka, and Yogacara, Vijñaptimatra and Cittamatra were all considered syonyms in Tibet up until the time Dolbupa.

This text, incidentally, gives the first appearance of the term "dbu ma chen po" that we know of.

So it is just wrong to claim that Tsongkhapa was the one who "margianalizes" Yogacara as cittamatra.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 28th, 2012 at 3:05 AM
Title: Re: Which Of The 17 Dzogchen Tantras Have Been Published?
Content:
Yudron said:
Thank you.  I do hope that if you start preparing Dzogchen translations for publication, that you will either have a glossary in the back with this kind of explanation

Malcolm wrote:
For key terms my glossaries will contain definitions derived from original and ancient Dzogchen commentaries themselves. My method is to base myself on how these terms are actually defined in Tibetan by the ancient masters as much as possible. While I will not be providing the texts themselves, my translations contain references to the Tibetan page number on every page, so someone with some facility in Tibetan can go and look in the original and see how I have translated something.

Like many practitioners of Dzogchen I study "Kama" and pratice terma.

I do not spend much time on later Dzogchen texts because they are all 100 percent derivative of ancient texts. About as modern as I get is the 14th century in general. Everything in Dzogchen has completely developed by that time. Longchenpa is not really at all original in terms of Dzogchen. He merely represents the culmination of the development of snying thig tradition, some might argue he is the fruit of that tradition.

In terms of actual content, there is nothing original in Dzogchen following the revelation of the Mkha' 'gro snying thig by Tsultrim Dorje in the early 14th century (which is notable mainly for the way it combines anuyoga into Dzogchen, not because it is especially novel in comparison with the Vima snying thig). Everything that follows is just restatement, a defense against polemics or a minor clarification.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 28th, 2012 at 2:44 AM
Title: Re: Sūtra, Tantra, & Essence Mahāmudrā
Content:
viniketa said:
Having only an elementary familiarity with both Mahāmudrā and Dzogchen, I recently ran across a book on Mahāmudrā and picked it up to learn more about Mahāmudrā: Brown, Daniel, (2006). Pointing Out the Great Way: The Stages of Meditation in the Mahāmudrā Tradition.  It seems a good overview of the Mahāmudrā tradition; I like the way in which the author places the tradition in the history of both Indian and Tibetan Buddhism and in the three major methods of practice: sūtra, tantra, & essence.

As I do not read (or speak) Tibetan, as I thought would happen, I am coming across terminology that seems familiar but that, without a Sanskrit or Pali base, I'm uncertain.  For example, the gnas lugs, Brown presents as the "Buddha nature" of mind, or "the way the realized mind stays".  Now, Buddha-nature I would equate with tathāgatagarbha, while "the way the realized mind stays" I would equate with alāya; however, these are not necessarily the same in some traditions.

So, first I would ask: are these the correct approximations in Sanskrit of those two terms?  Second, if so, does  Mahāmudrā generally consider these two an equivalent?

Thanks in advance for reading and answering.


Malcolm wrote:
gnas lugs renders two Sanskrit terms: bhutatā and tattva, for example Longchenpa's famed gnas lugs rin po che mdzod is given a Sanskrit title by him: tattvaratnakośa. I do not know why translators from Tibetan persist in translating "gnas lugs" as "way of abiding". Thus it is pretty clear the title of the text ought to be translated "Treasury of Precious Reality".

Gnas lugs in this context simply means "reality".

Ālaya and gnas lugs are equivalent in Mahāmudra teachings in both Kagyu and Sakya.

The third sense of gnas lugs, often overlooked, is "anatomy", for example, when we talk about the rtsa'i gnas lugs i.e. the anatomy of the channels, and so on.

M

Yudron said:
Thank you.  I do hope that if you start preparing Dzogchen translations for publication, that you will either have a glossary in the back with this kind of explanation or put the Tibetan in the same volume, so we can know what words you are translating.  When you actually give your reasoning, it is really good for stumbling old poor readers like myself, and also for aspiring young translators who can then ask scholars about these specific kind of points.

Malcolm wrote:
Sorry, I made a hasty error -- Longchenpa's text is not the tattvaratnakośa, but the tathatvaratnakosha. Nevertheless, my point is the same.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 28th, 2012 at 2:35 AM
Title: Re: Is Dzogchen really beyond cause and effect?
Content:
Mariusz said:
With regard to Madhyamika...well.........not so sure.

Malcolm wrote:
Tsonkhapa because of His the new Prasangika marginalized Yogacara to this Mind Only interpretation. [/quote]

This statement simply ignores and betrays ignorance of the entire history of tenet system literature in India as well as Tibet.

Yogacara was considered "mind only" in Tibet from the eighth century. I suggest you learn Tibetan and read Kawa Paltseg's treatise on tenet systems, not to mention Shantaraksita's Tattvasamgraha which is in English, which negates Yogacara as mind-only and so on.

It was only after the 14th century that a rennovated "Yogacara" was presented by some Tibetan scholars such as Dolbupa, etc. Prior to this, in general, Tibetans in general considered Yogacara "cittamatra". I can provide numerous examples going back to the 8th century.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 28th, 2012 at 2:01 AM
Title: Re: Contemporary tertons of Eastern Tibet
Content:
Yudron said:
...personally I think it's better to leave Ngakpa Chogyam and his students alone.

Malcolm wrote:
I could really care less anymore, I have no interest in hounding them at all. I was merely confirming what was reported.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 28th, 2012 at 1:07 AM
Title: Re: Mandala prayers
Content:
markadm said:
By the way, I wanted to ask: many prayers require permission or empowerment in order to 'work'.  Can I safely assume that anyone could make a mandala offering, even the elaborate (long) one?


Malcolm wrote:
Techinically, no. Mandala offerings are connected with Guru Yoga, and come from the Guhyasamaja tantra.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 27th, 2012 at 11:28 PM
Title: Re: Gelug View of Dzogchen?
Content:


Tom said:
I just have misgivings of the need to classify Dzokchen as a Gelug practice.


Malcolm wrote:
Dzogchen is not a Gelug practice -- nevertheless, there have been many great Gelug Dzogchen masters such as the great Fifth, Desri Sangye Gyatso, etc., and more recently, Khenpo Acho.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 27th, 2012 at 10:44 PM
Title: Re: Sūtra, Tantra, & Essence Mahāmudrā
Content:
viniketa said:
Having only an elementary familiarity with both Mahāmudrā and Dzogchen, I recently ran across a book on Mahāmudrā and picked it up to learn more about Mahāmudrā: Brown, Daniel, (2006). Pointing Out the Great Way: The Stages of Meditation in the Mahāmudrā Tradition.  It seems a good overview of the Mahāmudrā tradition; I like the way in which the author places the tradition in the history of both Indian and Tibetan Buddhism and in the three major methods of practice: sūtra, tantra, & essence.

As I do not read (or speak) Tibetan, as I thought would happen, I am coming across terminology that seems familiar but that, without a Sanskrit or Pali base, I'm uncertain.  For example, the gnas lugs, Brown presents as the "Buddha nature" of mind, or "the way the realized mind stays".  Now, Buddha-nature I would equate with tathāgatagarbha, while "the way the realized mind stays" I would equate with alāya; however, these are not necessarily the same in some traditions.

So, first I would ask: are these the correct approximations in Sanskrit of those two terms?  Second, if so, does  Mahāmudrā generally consider these two an equivalent?

Thanks in advance for reading and answering.


Malcolm wrote:
gnas lugs renders two Sanskrit terms: bhutatā and tattva, for example Longchenpa's famed gnas lugs rin po che mdzod is given a Sanskrit title by him: tattvaratnakośa. I do not know why translators from Tibetan persist in translating "gnas lugs" as "way of abiding". Thus it is pretty clear the title of the text ought to be translated "Treasury of Precious Reality".

Gnas lugs in this context simply means "reality".

Ālaya and gnas lugs are equivalent in Mahāmudra teachings in both Kagyu and Sakya.

The third sense of gnas lugs, often overlooked, is "anatomy", for example, when we talk about the rtsa'i gnas lugs i.e. the anatomy of the channels, and so on.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 27th, 2012 at 10:23 PM
Title: Re: Contemporary tertons of Eastern Tibet
Content:
Kunzang said:
If I recall correctly, back on e-sangha, Malcolm said that an acquaintance of his had attended a retreat with Namkha Rinpoche who gave a reading transmission of Dudjom's works (I don't recall which Dudjom) and Namkha Rinpoche came across the passage in question and was shocked.

Malcolm wrote:
This is correct -- this was in 2003 while I was at Merigar and a fellow from the Rigzin Sangha, Konchok, if I myself recall correctly, was attending a retreat at Merigar. He was the one who told me this.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 27th, 2012 at 4:03 AM
Title: Re: Is Dzogchen really beyond cause and effect?
Content:
Mariusz said:
If one can see my quotes from Vasubandhu and Buddha in this way, of course it is not a big problem. Tsongkhapa and others innovators used to like to see them this way of course.

Malcolm wrote:
Tsongkhapa, etc., is not an innovator in the slightest -- the innovators are people like Dolbupa etc., who have invented a Yogacara that never existed in India.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 27th, 2012 at 12:41 AM
Title: Re: Pracjnaparamita in 25,000 lines
Content:
Leo Rivers said:
There are basically two versions of the 25,000 line sutra: the unarranged version that lacks the headings of the Abhisamaya-alaṃkara and the collated version that possesses the topic headings of the AA.
Am I to expect that the the unarranged version
is the version to see as more original in spirit and text, then?

Malcolm wrote:
They are more or less identical. The headings of the AA merely show how the text was read after Ārya Vimuktisena's seminal AA commentary based on the PP in 25,000 lines was written.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 26th, 2012 at 10:45 PM
Title: Re: Pracjnaparamita in 25,000 lines
Content:
Leo Rivers said:
My general impression is that the Pancavimsatisahasrika-prajnaparamita-sutra is the "standard edition" of this collection of materials, the one that outlines reference, and the one that lay behind the Nagarjuna shastra.

My further impression is that Conze's long 100,000 version is a constructiced hybrid. I have aways had a high impression of him but I have heard people actually hiss at this.

Is the Pancavimsatisahasrika-prajnaparamita-sutra available in english somewhere?

And does it include the Wisdom chapter?


(Side note: that new interview with Paul Williams is, ahem, a Revelation....)

Malcolm wrote:
The answer, Leo, is no, not yet.

Conzes "Large Sutra" thus is an abridgement of the 18,000 and 25,000 line version. Conze's book is a construction from the 18,000 and 25,000 line version with some comparisons to the 100,000 line version.

There are basically two versions of the 25,000 line sutra: the unarranged version that lacks the headings of the Abhisamaya-alaṃkara and the collated version that possesses the topic headings of the AA.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 26th, 2012 at 9:19 PM
Title: Re: Is Dzogchen really beyond cause and effect?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
It would be more accurate to say that Dzogchen finds the doctrine of the dependent
nature faulty. The fault for which the yogacara school is criticized is the assertion the
dependent nature is ultimate.

Jyoti said:
The dependent arising nature (依他起性 paratantra-svabhāva) is not considered the
same as the absolute nature (圓成實性 parini·panna-svabhāva). The former is the
means of the latter (body), only the body is considered as established and therefore
ultimate. The two is not consider separate nor same, this is the basis of the two truths.

Jyoti

Malcolm wrote:
The perfected nature (parinispanna) is the non-existence of the imagined nature (parikalpita) in the dependent nature, that is all. The dependent nature, nevertheless is considered ultimate in Indian Yogacara.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, September 25th, 2012 at 11:20 PM
Title: Re: Is Dzogchen really beyond cause and effect?
Content:
Jyoti said:
Dzogchen does not possess the teaching of the three natures, there is danger that it will confuse the dependent arising nature with the imaginary nature.

Malcolm wrote:
It would be more accurate to say that Dzogchen finds the doctrine of the dependent nature faulty. The fault for which the yogacara school is criticized is the assertion the dependent nature is ultimate.

This is identical to the Madhyamaka criticism of Yogacara.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, September 24th, 2012 at 9:53 PM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:
heart said:
Anyone managed to write down the mantra for the Zhitro Khordas Rangdrol today? Please pm me, thanks!

/magnus


Malcolm wrote:
It is in the mantra book.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, September 24th, 2012 at 9:39 PM
Title: Re: Yogacara and dzogchen
Content:


Jyoti said:
Free from extremes refer only to the means


Malcolm wrote:
No, it refers to reality.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, September 24th, 2012 at 9:34 PM
Title: Re: Is Dzogchen really beyond cause and effect?
Content:
Tiger said:
And then claiming that the Buddhahood of Dzogchen is "self-emergent" or "spontaneous" and "beyond cause and effect", you contradict the first statement because a Guru's empowerment was logically concluded to be a necessary requirement in your sect. Either the requirement for Guru is indispensable for your goal (and your realization is NON-spontaneous) OR your vehicle leads to the arousal of "Buddhahood" spontaneously. It cannot be both at the same time.


Malcolm wrote:
Buddhahood in Dzogchen is analgous to picking fruit off of a tree. You need a Guru to show you where the tree is and that the fruit is there to be picked. You need do nothing to grow the fruit, however -- it is just hanging there to be picked.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, September 24th, 2012 at 12:16 AM
Title: Re: Anyone here practicing Vajrayana without a Guru?
Content:
lobster said:
A path that is no path at all . . .
Sounds ideal . . .


Malcolm wrote:
Krishnamurti, etc., is aisle three, under Eastern Philosophy, along with the Eckhart Tolle, Adhyashanti and pop Zen books.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, September 24th, 2012 at 12:05 AM
Title: Re: Yogacara and dzogchen
Content:


Jyoti said:
These are just play of names which are without the meaning.


Malcolm wrote:
People in glass houses ought not throw stones.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, September 23rd, 2012 at 10:58 PM
Title: Re: Anyone here practicing Vajrayana without a Guru?
Content:


lobster said:
Some practices such as Chenrezig, Tara and quite few others are complete paths, dependent on your sincerity.


Malcolm wrote:
Without transmission from a guru, these are not paths at all.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, September 23rd, 2012 at 5:20 AM
Title: Re: Anyone here practicing Vajrayana without a Guru?
Content:


Daniel83 said:
My question would be if there are actually people who practice Vajrayana without a teacher?


Malcolm wrote:
No, there is no such a thing. Everyone who practices Vajrayāna does so having received transmission from a Guru.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 22nd, 2012 at 11:21 PM
Title: Re: Pronunciation of "ai" in Tibetan
Content:
Sherlock said:
When is "ai" pronounced /ai/? In ChNN's own name for instance, it is usually pronounced /ai/ but in other instances invovling the genitive of namkha it is pronounced /namkhe/.


Malcolm wrote:
It depends on where you are from in Tibet.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 22nd, 2012 at 9:13 PM
Title: Re: Svasamvedana
Content:
Will said:
So Malcolm,  this translation (and notes) of the Three Statements is pretty poor?

"faith in Self-Reflexive Awareness" for example?

http://www.dharmafellowship.org/library/texts/three-statements.htm " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Malcolm wrote:
Yes... especially considering that they are missing have the text which occurs before the three statements themselves.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 22nd, 2012 at 1:33 AM
Title: Re: Direct Introduction online?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
He offers direct introduction with every webcasted retreat, not just three times a year.

23rd Sept. 10am-12pm.

Give a Donwang of Zhitro Khordas Rangdrol.

This contains direct introduction.

There is an open webcast which started today at 4 am eastern time -- I suggest you get up and listen.

http://www.shangshunginstitute.net/webcast/video.php " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

21st -27th September 2012
Zhitro Khordas Rangdrol

the terma teaching of Ridzin Jyangchub Dorje.
OPEN WEBCAST. Timezone: GMT+2

21st Sept. 10am-12pm.

Introduction about this Teaching and the transmission of Ati Guru Yoga related with the tridlung of Short Thun Practice.

monktastic said:
I just noticed this morning that I missed the first session (2 AM MDT). If the DI takes place on Sep 23., I will attend tomorrow and Sunday's sessions! BTW, how did you discover that the DI takes place on the 23rd? From the description bolded above? (If so, it's not something I would/could have discovered!)

Also, if I register as a member of the Community, it seems I can listen to / watch old webcasts. Does that mean I can listen in on old Direct Introductions? Does this even make sense if it's not real-time?

Thanks,
M


Malcolm wrote:
I have received this transmission.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 22nd, 2012 at 1:04 AM
Title: Re: Direct Introduction online?
Content:
monktastic said:
Hi all,

I'm practicing semi-self-taught Mahamudra right now, and I understand that it's not a good idea. So I'll be finding myself a guru.

I have a question about the Direct Introduction / Pointing Out Instruction. I know Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche offers direct transmission three times a year, and I will attempt to sit in on the November one. It sounds like it may be harder to receive online, and even harder if I only get an audio feed. Is this a reasonable concern? Do people actually recognize rigpa in this way, or is it much better to receive it in person? With any luck, I'll be doing that soon anyway, but that will probably happen later.

Thanks,
M

Malcolm wrote:
He offers direct introduction with every webcasted retreat, not just three times a year.

23rd Sept. 10am-12pm.

Give a Donwang of Zhitro Khordas Rangdrol.

This contains direct introduction.

There is an open webcast which started today at 4 am eastern time -- I suggest you get up and listen.

http://www.shangshunginstitute.net/webcast/video.php " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



21st -27th September 2012
Zhitro Khordas Rangdrol

the terma teaching of Ridzin Jyangchub Dorje.
OPEN WEBCAST. Timezone: GMT+2

21st Sept. 10am-12pm.

Introduction about this Teaching and the transmission of Ati Guru Yoga related with the tridlung of Short Thun Practice.

22nd Sept. 10am-12pm.

Giving more detail explanation about the teaching of Zhitro and its different methods.

23rd Sept. 10am-12pm.

Give a Donwang of Zhitro Khordas Rangdrol.

24th Sept. 10am-12pm.

Giving  instruction about the essential  practice of the Zhitro Khordas  Rangdrol.

25th Sept. 10am-12pm.

Giving instructions how we do the practice of Zhitro for the living and dying people.
12,30pm - 1pm. We do a Short Gana Puja for the day of Guru Rinpoche.

26th Sept. 10am-12pm.

We do the practice of Jyangchog for all dead people who we have good or bad relations.

27th Sept. 10am-12pm.

Giving some advices for the daily life practices and tridlungs of collective practices and so on.   We also do an Ati Guru Yoga altogether for finishing our retreat.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 22nd, 2012 at 12:45 AM
Title: Re: Svasamvedana
Content:
Will said:
Malcolm,

Is rang rig or rig pa the translation of this "self-awareness" term?


Malcolm wrote:
rang rig pa/svasamvedana means "reflexive knowing", and it is theory of cognition usually considered to have originated with Dignaga and Dharmakirti.

Will said:
But is it not important in Dzogchen, even Garab Dorje's (or Patrul's comments) Three Words using it?

Malcolm wrote:
No, svasvamvedana is different i.e. it is rang gyis rig, self-knowing.

Rang rig in Dzogchen is rang gi rig, one's own, and is derived instread from another Sanskrit construct: atmyavedana, and in turn this is part of a long phrase, very common in Sanskrit, pratyatmyavedanajñāna or in tibetan so sor rang gi rig pa'i ye shes i.e. personally known wisdom. This is what the rang rig means in Dzogchen i.e. one's own knowledge, wisdom that was no learned from another but arises from one's own experience.

The translation of Dzogchen tantras and texts is still in its infancy, and the 95 percent of them should not be trusted by people who do not know Tibetan,including my own translations.

As is the case with much tantric literature, the root tantras of Dzogchen cannot be understood completely without commentaries.But, within the past ten years or so, six seminal commentaries on the man ngag sde tantras attributed to Vimalamitra have come to light.

Earlier translations made without recourse to these commentaries will be somewhat inaccurate automatically -- it just cannot be helped and there is no reason to blame anyone for honest efforts carried out with insufficient supporting commentaries. But it must be understood that good translations of Dzogchen texts into English are a desiderata. My own efforts are merely a preliminary. I am sure that after I am gone, they will be picked up, picked over, polished or discarded as the case may be in the quest to make clearer and more accurate translations that conform to the definitions and explanations of key points of Dzogchen teachings found in the tantras and commentaries themselves.

In addition there is a wealth commentarial material in the Vima Nyinthig that needs to be digested well.

Maybe in 10 years we will start to have fully accurate, fully nuanced transalations of Dzogchen texts that are widely available. Frankly, most Tibetan lamas do not really deeply understand these tantras and their langauge even if they understand Dzogchen in general perfectly well (moral of story: you do not have to be an expert on the 17 tantras to achieve rainbow body).

For example, today I am working on a citation from the klong drug about nature, essence, and compassion which is literally 1.75 folios long. It is so dense, it cannot be unpacked or understood, let alone translated, without the commentary (which I have, fortunately). In this translation this long and important passage will have to be extensively foot noted with explanations from the commentary (or an appendix, since it covers some 7 long folios). Longchenpa is no help at all, since his method is to merely make a point, and then unleash a long citation from a root tantra with virtually no explanation of the meaning of the passage. In fact in his commentary which closely follows the commentary I am working on (i.e.the tshig don mdzod), he skips this passage entirely because it is so hard to understand without the commentary, or so I am convinced, because for the most part he merely follows the citations as given in this earlier work in the exact order they are presented in that latter.

Back to work...

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 21st, 2012 at 11:35 PM
Title: Re: Svasamvedana
Content:
Will said:
Malcolm,

Is rang rig or rig pa the translation of this "self-awareness" term?


Malcolm wrote:
rang rig pa/svasamvedana means "reflexive knowing", and it is theory of cognition usually considered to have originated with Dignaga and Dharmakirti.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 21st, 2012 at 12:20 AM
Title: Re: Six Types Of Mindfulness in Dzogchen?
Content:
Sönam said:
Bhumis in Dzogchen? ... does he "really" talks about Dzogchen?

mutsuk said:
Of course he talks about Dzogchen. There are 16 bhumis in Dzogchen, defined in the Rig-pa rang-shar and elsewhere (Longchenpa, etc.).

Skywalker said:
Sorry, I am just a humble fool regarding philosophy, but I heard otherwise from a student of Mr. Norbu. I was told that in Dzogchen there is only one Bhumi. Either you recognize the mind of clear light and are in Rigpa or you don't. I am not trying to disagree with you here, I am just pointing out a contradiction which comes to me. Being quite ignorant of the intricacies of Buddhist and Dzogchen philosophy, I am eager to learn.

Malcolm wrote:
Both are correct. There is only a single bhumi; and in there are also sixteen bhumis. There is a single stage from the point of view of reality, and sixteen stages from the point of view of experience on the path.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 21st, 2012 at 12:16 AM
Title: Re: Yogacara and dzogchen
Content:
Andrew108 said:
Ok good. So the sense in which Dzogchen and Yogacara are different depends on whether a genuine difference exists in terms of this understanding about the 8th consciousness. If they have the same view about this 8th consciousness then they would be saying the same thing. Is this a fair assessment? We are not trying to establish superiority here, but we are interested in whether Dzogchen does in fact share the same view as Yogacara. Is this okay?


Malcolm wrote:
It doesn't. Yogacara is a species of non-dual realism.

Mariusz said:
Again it. Cittamatra of course, but Yogacara is never a species of realism or nihilism as Madhyamaka is either. It was dicussed in the past forums already. Yogacara and Madhyamaka relies on the analysis until its collapse beyond all extremes in the end. Dzogchen relies on Direct Introduction into Rigpa since the start.


Malcolm wrote:
Right, we do not agree. I do not accept that there is a so called Indian Yogacara that is not cittamatra, despite whatever confusion some Tibetans and Westerners have about this issue.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 20th, 2012 at 10:36 PM
Title: Re: Yogacara and dzogchen
Content:
Andrew108 said:
Ok good. So the sense in which Dzogchen and Yogacara are different depends on whether a genuine difference exists in terms of this understanding about the 8th consciousness. If they have the same view about this 8th consciousness then they would be saying the same thing. Is this a fair assessment? We are not trying to establish superiority here, but we are interested in whether Dzogchen does in fact share the same view as Yogacara. Is this okay?


Malcolm wrote:
It doesn't. Yogacara is a species of non-dual realism.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 20th, 2012 at 10:12 PM
Title: Re: Difference between Sutras and Tantras
Content:
Tiger said:
Here, Malcolm, this is the Translator's not of Vajra-Suchi, that I was referring to, which shows that Brahmins usually were prejudiced heavily against Buddhism.


Malcolm wrote:
Brahmins were indeed intellectually biased against Buddhism, but their bias was not colonial. Western bias against Hinduism is colonial, and not intellectual. In other words, Hindu problems with Buddhism are based on Buddhist denials of a creator and so forth. Western problems with Tibetan Buddhism and Hinduism have to do with what Westerners see as grotesquery in Hinduism and Tantra Buddhism, and the bias against both Tibetan Buddhism and Hinduism has everything to do with Protestant reactions to the British and German encounter with Indian culture in the early nineteenth century; reactions and attitudes that to this day still infect unbiased study of both Hinduism and Tibetan Buddhism, as well as Bon, Taoism, Shinto, etc.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, September 20th, 2012 at 10:07 PM
Title: Re: Difference between Sutras and Tantras
Content:
Tiger said:
Malcolm,

Your post shows more similarities between Tantras and Sutras than differences. Why were the Tantras called "Tantras" instead of "Sutras"? Their format is similar to the Sutras and they contain discussions on Dharma, practices, moral discussions etc just as Sutras do.


Malcolm wrote:
"Yes, because they [tantras] also contain yogic methods and teachings which must be transmitted in certain specific ways since tantric practice is based on a very specific view of the human body and its role in liberation."

Additionally, the tantras teach a view of emptiness that is more profound than sūtra.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 19th, 2012 at 10:29 PM
Title: Re: Yogacara and dzogchen
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Ārya-pratyutpanna-buddhasaṃmukhāvasthitasamādhi-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra:

Jyoti said:
佛說般舟三昧經
Buddha Pronounces the Sūtra of the Pratyutpanna Buddha Sammukhāvasthita Samādhi:
"What should they do in order to achieve self-fulfillment, free from sycophancy and flattery and
unattached to the Three Realms of Existence? "

The above passage is indication that this is not a scripture of definitive meaning. The Maharatnakuta
sutra stated "If any scripture, there is a saying that show: revulsion against samsara and inclined
toward nirvana, is non-definitive."

Try to rely on any recognized scripture of definitive meaning if you want to compare the perspective
of sutras with dzogchen tantra.

Jyoti


Malcolm wrote:
The sutra in question is part of the Ratnakuta collection. We already discussed this -- we don't agree what "sutras of the definitive meaning" are and there is no agreement on this point between yogacara and madhyamaka either.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 19th, 2012 at 6:42 AM
Title: Re: Yogacara and dzogchen
Content:


anjali said:
Hmmm. What does "strictly" mean in your comment, "Because the nature of the mind for sutra is strictly emptiness"?

I like your quotes, particularly, "The wise are liberated by knowing the phenomena's empty luminous nature in that way."


Malcolm wrote:
Depends on how you use "nature" -- in this case what I mean is that the ultimate nature of the mind for sutra is absence of any nature, as demonstrated by my citations -- that does not conflict with the capacity of the mind to know or be aware etc., as demonstrated by my citations, not even does it contradict the that mind is ultimately the buddha when it knows its own nature.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 19th, 2012 at 5:14 AM
Title: Re: Yogacara and dzogchen
Content:
Josef said:
Chinul may state that mind-essence includes both awareness and emptiness but he is still missing the third part, thugje.
Thus no lhundrub, thus the two are clearly different definitions of nature of mind.

anjali said:
Elsewhere he states that the mind-essence has the three properties of a mirror: ground, luminosity, and capacity (to reflect anything). People can come to whatever conclusions they want: the same, different, both same and different, neither same nor different.


Malcolm wrote:
Also the common sutra has ādarśa-jñāna i.e. the mirrorlike wisdom.

Also Hindus use the metaphor of the mirror. Surely you are not going to equate Shankaracarya and Chinul?

Further the example of a mirror is used over and over again in sutra teachings. Surely you are not going to assert Dzogchen exists in sutra?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 19th, 2012 at 5:13 AM
Title: Re: Yogacara and dzogchen
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Because the nature of the mind for sutra is strictly emptiness. Lhundrup is never mentioned nor implied in sutra at all in any way. The understanding of mind (sems, citta) in Chan/Sutra is completely different than in Dzogchen for that reason.

But you can believe whatever you like, I don't have time to propely correct your misunderstanding. Read Nubchen.

anjali said:
Chinul clearly states that mind-essence includes both awareness and emptiness. Therefore, his exposition can't be considered strictly sutra. I will take a look at Nubchen, if I can find a good english translation.

Malcolm wrote:
What makes you think the nature of the mind being both empty and aware is not a sutrayāna perspective? It in fact is.

In the sangs rgyas kyi gtsug tor dpa' bar 'gro ba'i mdo it states:
"Next, from stabilizing clear and empty mind, it only becomes prajñā".
Ārya-susthitamatidevaputraparipṛcchā-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra:
"The wise are liberated by knowing the phenomena's empty luminous nature in that way."
Ārya-pratyutpanna-buddhasaṃmukhāvasthitasamādhi-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra:
Buddhas are made by the mind;
are also seen with the mind. 
The mind is my buddhahood;
the mind is the sugata.
The mind is my body;
buddhas are seen with the mind. 
The mind is my awakening;
the mind is natureless.
The mind is not known with the mind, 
the mind does not see the mind.
The mind is not perceved as the mind, 
not known as the mind, it is nirvana.
M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 19th, 2012 at 1:06 AM
Title: Re: Yogacara and dzogchen
Content:


anjali said:
Why do assert that Chinul is referring to mind when the distinction is clearly made between mind and mind-essence. And Chinul's mind-essence has the aspects we would expect it to?

Malcolm wrote:
Because the nature of the mind for sutra is strictly emptiness. Lhundrup is never mentioned nor implied in sutra at all in any way. The understanding of mind (sems, citta) in Chan/Sutra is completely different than in Dzogchen for that reason.

But you can believe whatever you like, I don't have time to propely correct your misunderstanding. Read Nubchen.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 19th, 2012 at 12:17 AM
Title: Re: Yogacara and dzogchen
Content:
anjali said:
Others may differ on that assessment!


Malcolm wrote:
I am unwilling to agree that the intention of Chinul and the intention of Tulku Orgyen, for example, are the same, based on superficial similarities based on English translations divorced from the original language of the texts cited.

Also, while I am not expert in any sense in Korean, Chinese, etc., I am expert in Tibetan language, especially the language of Dzogchen, as well as Indo-Tibetan tenet systems in general. I have digested Nubchen's differentiation of Dzogchen and Chan in his bsam gtan mig sgron (I suggest you try to as well) -- I therefore see no compelling reason to take your assessment seriously.

The best that can be said is that Dzogchen includes the meaning of Chan, Yogacara, etc., but the reverse cannot be said to be true.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, September 18th, 2012 at 8:39 PM
Title: Re: Yogacara and dzogchen
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
That's the problem with mere comparisons of terms, one loses all nuance.

You neglected to cite Tsognyi RInpoche in full i.e. "Rigpa is empty in essence, cognizant by nature, and unconfined in capacity. Simultaneously seeing these three is named rigpa."

Rigpa is also beyond mind, etc.

anjali said:
Actually, I was quoting his father. I get that Dzogchen makes the distinction between mind and mind-essence. As Urgyen Rinpoche says, "In every sentient being there is mind. The essence of this mind, whether it is known or not, is rigpa." The nature of rigpa is further elaborated as unconfined empty awareness.

Because of the importance of this distinction in Dzogchen, one can reasonably ask if such a distinction is made in other buddhist systems, perhaps under different terminology. For example, is generally acknowledged that Dzogchen and Mahamudra describe the same underlying nature, just with different terminology.

In the work I cited, Tracing Back the Radiance, such a distinction is made. For example,  "your pure mind-essence of void and calm numinous awareness." Here is a more elaborate description of this mind-essence in response to an expository question within the text,
These are examples of apophatic discourse; they are not intended to expose the essence of the mind. If I did not point out that the cler, constant awareness which is present now, never interrupted and never obscured, is your own mind, what could I refer to as being uncreated and signless and so forth? For this reason, you must realize that all the various teachings explain only that it is this awareness which is neither arising nor ceasing and so forth.
...
Voidness means that it is devoid of all signs; it is still an aphophatic term. Calm is the immutable, immovable aspect of the real nature; it is not the same as empty nothingness. Awareness refers to the manifestation of this very essence; it is not the same as discrimination. These three components alone comprise the fundamental essence of the true mind. Therefore, from the initial activation of the bodhicitta until the attainment of Buddhahood, there is only calmness and only awareness, unchanging and unterrupted. p 164
Thus, the essence of the mind clearly appears to be identified as empty and aware. For someone not looking to pick a nit, this sure seems to be describing rigpa. Now, to get back to the original reason for my comment--essence/function. On top of this basic understanding of mind-essence, with the two notions (functions) of luminosity and unconfined ability to reflect anything (per the mirror analogy mentioned earlier), we see that, although the terminology is different, the underlying framework is essentially the same as Dzogchen--unconfined empty awareness. At least that is how it appears to me.


Malcolm wrote:
It is not the same -- the workin Buswell you cited is referring to mind, but ngo bo, rang bzhin and thugs rje refer to the three aspects of the wisdom of the basis that are never involved with mind even for a second. Hence, it is different.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, September 18th, 2012 at 4:43 AM
Title: Re: Dharma and Magic: is the latter necessary?
Content:
Tarpa said:
I think this part of Buddhist culture, and I do see it as part of Buddhist culture itself, not ethno geographical cultural baggage, may be de-emphasised in transition to the west so as to make Buddhism more palatable to western acceptance, as I feel   vajrayana in some aspects in general has been made a bit more palatable and window shopping friendly beginning with the monastic inclusion of vajrayana to the present as it is presented more in a religious way.


Malcolm wrote:
Yes, more palatable to the Western Anti-Hindu colonial morays.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, September 18th, 2012 at 3:26 AM
Title: Re: Difference between Sutras and Tantras
Content:
Tiger said:
I am familiar with Sutras (and Suttas), but not much with the Tantras. In what way are both different from each other?

1. Are Tantras exclusively like training manuals of various Yogic and ritual practices unlike Sutras which contain both practices as well as metaphysical, moral and general discussion of Buddhism?

Malcolm wrote:
No, tantras also present metaphysical, moral and general discussions of Dharma.


Tiger said:
2. Tantras are meant to be secret where as Sutras are meant to be open?

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, because they also contain yogic methods and teachings which must be transmitted in certain specific ways since tantric practice is based on a very specific view of the human body and its role in liberation.


Tiger said:
How do you Vajrayanists reconcile with this fact?

Malcolm wrote:
I guess if I had decided that the Western historiographical approach to Indo-Tibetan relgious history was definitive I would be a bit worried. As I have not, and am not likely to, I can read  Indo-Tibetan relgious history as framed by western scholars with interest without it impinging my interest in the study and practice of Dzogchen.

Western academic studies of Hinduism and Indo-Tibetan Buddhism are often grotesque examples of colonial bias in action. The whole anxiety of Western and Westernized Buddhists (especially in Western neo-Theravada) about "Hinduism" quite frankly is a result of this colonial bias against Hinduism, just as your post betrays.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, September 17th, 2012 at 10:55 AM
Title: Re: Yogacara and dzogchen
Content:
Jyoti said:
But even mahayana (including dzogchen) practitioners who strayed to the body will make attempt to weaken the means (intellect), and consequently the fruit will not be higher than those achieved by the arahants and formless meditators.

Malcolm wrote:
This is like talking about water without ever having tasted it.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, September 17th, 2012 at 10:33 AM
Title: Re: Which Of The 17 Dzogchen Tantras Have Been Published?
Content:
Lhug-Pa said:
About how long would it take a Dzogchen practitioner who is between lower and medium scope at best regarding their capacity—yet who also has average or slightly-above-average intellectual-faculties—to learn Tibetan well enough in order to at least 'somewhat grasp' the sense of what is written in the 17 (+2) Dzogchen Upadesha Tantra's?


Malcolm wrote:
20 years. If you ask me in ten years, I will say 30.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, September 17th, 2012 at 10:30 AM
Title: Re: Yogacara and dzogchen
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
I have had similar pointless conversations with Astus, who also used this idea of essence/function in order to show how Zen was comparable with Dzogchen or even superior to it.

This idea is strictly Sino-Buddhist, and as you rightly point out, is completely incommensurable with Dzogchen.

anjali said:
The only reading I've done in this area is from the book Tracing Back the Radiance, Chinul's Korean Way of Zen, translated by Robert E. Buswell, Jr. Here is perhaps the clearest quote on the nature of essence/function in that work:
The original essence of the true mind contains two types of functions. First, there is the innate function of the self-nature. Second, there is the function which adapts to conditions. These can be compared to a bronze mirror. The bronze itself corresponds to the essence of the self-nature. The brightness of the bronze corresponds to the function of the self-nature. The images reflected because of that brightness are the function which adapts to conditions. Under suitable conditions images can be reflected and manifest in thousands of different ways; but the brightness is ever bright. p.165
From my limited knowledge, this seems to be similar to the notion of ground/luminosity/unconfined capacity.
The revelation teaching also employs the two approaches of revelation through inference and revelation through perception. Hung-chou notes, "The mind cannot be pointed out; it is through such properties as capacity for speech and so forth that we can prove its  existence and become aware of the presence of the Buddha-nature." This is the approach of revelation through inference. Ho-tse says straightaway, "Since the mind-essence is that which is capable of awareness, awareness is precisely the mind." To reveal the mind through its awareness is the approach of revelation through perception.
pp. 166
Elsewhere in the work, it is pointed out that the essence of the mind is void. Adding all this up, it seems to be similar to the notion of "empty in essence, cognizant/aware in nature, and unconfined in capacity."

Malcolm wrote:
That's the problem with mere comparisons of terms, one loses all nuance.

You neglected to cite Tsognyi RInpoche in full i.e. "Rigpa is empty in essence, cognizant by nature, and unconfined in capacity. Simultaneously seeing these three is named rigpa."

Rigpa is also beyond mind, etc.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, September 17th, 2012 at 3:06 AM
Title: Re: Can other religions lead to enlightenment?
Content:
viniketa said:
Not every śrāvaka attains śrotāpatti pratipannaka (stream entry), and not every śrotāpanna attains sakadagami (once returner), not every sakadagamanna attains anagami (non-returner) in their own lifetime. This is clear even from the Pali suttas, for example:

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an05/an05.202.than.html " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an06/an06.086.than.html " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an05/an05.179.than.html " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;




Malcolm wrote:
Yes, this also is an indirect path to liberation.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, September 17th, 2012 at 1:48 AM
Title: Re: Can other religions lead to enlightenment?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
All nine yānas lead indirectly or directly to liberation. The first yāna, the yānas of gods and humans, includes Hinduism, Christianity, Islam, Shamanism, Taoism, Confucism, etc.

JinpaRangdrol said:
Hmm...this seems like a big assertion. Sources? It was my understanding that the śrāvakayāna was still centered around Buddhadharma, and simply focused on renunciation and personal liberation as an Arhat. Christianity, Islam, etc generally do not promote renunciation (especially not in the 21st century), and do not recognize liberation as a goal. And the very idea of being a "listener" of the Buddha's teachings would clearly be absent in most other religions.
Don't get me wrong, I'd love to believe that all religions lead indirectly or directly to liberation, but I need scriptural sources to back that up.

Malcolm wrote:
There are two presentations of the nine yānas. The sgra thal gyur presentation of the nine yānas combines the śravaka and pratyekabuddha yāna into the one, making it the second yāna, and places the vehicles of gods and men as the first yāna. This is not only my understanding, but it is frequently mentioned by Chogyal Namkhai Norbu.

The feature of all these religions which makes them indirect paths is that they all extol some variation of the ten virtues. The practice of the ten virtues leads to higher rebirth. Therefore, they are indirect paths to liberation.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, September 17th, 2012 at 1:16 AM
Title: Re: Yogacara and dzogchen
Content:


heart said:
Since the concept isn't known in any source in Sanskrit using it as a kind of key-term, since everything you say revolves around this concept, to defend Yogacara is an error. I would even say that it makes most of your posts off topic.

/magnus


Malcolm wrote:
I have had similar pointless conversations with Astus, who also used this idea of essence/function in order to show how Zen was comparable with Dzogchen or even superior to it.

This idea is strictly Sino-Buddhist, and as you rightly point out, is completely incommensurable with Dzogchen.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, September 16th, 2012 at 9:24 PM
Title: Re: Yogacara and dzogchen
Content:
Jyoti said:
What errors? What ignorance?
According to what is being analysed through the theory of ti-yung. Various examples are in previous posts.

Jyoti


Malcolm wrote:
Essence/function is irrelevant to Dzogchen teachings.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, September 16th, 2012 at 7:27 PM
Title: Re: Yogacara and dzogchen
Content:
Andrew108 said:
So Jhoti what is it that you want? What do you want to happen? Do you have a goal in mind?

Jyoti said:
The intention is to clarify errors as well as ignorance within teaching of individual and tradition with
words that may be useful.

Jyoti

Andrew108 said:
What errors? What ignorance?

Malcolm wrote:
Her own.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, September 16th, 2012 at 7:24 PM
Title: Re: sanskrit translation of "rNam Dag"
Content:
namoh said:
Actually, at the risk of splitting hairs, Vishuddha seems to also mean Yangdak.  Does it simply serve double duty?

Malcolm wrote:
Yes.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, September 16th, 2012 at 7:24 PM
Title: Re: Does the soul exist in Mahayana thought?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
No rebirth in the triple realm. What else could possibly matter?

M

tomamundsen said:
Being able to help sentient beings.

Malcolm wrote:
That happens automatically.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, September 16th, 2012 at 2:13 AM
Title: Re: Dharma and Magic: is the latter necessary?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
On the other hand, it seems in the Buddha's time śramaṇas in the Buddhist community did not directly appeal to such forces, and instead focused on their meditative practices.
The Atanatiya Sutta contradicts this perception.

Huseng said:
Interesting. I didn't know about this before.

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/dn/dn.32.0.piya.html " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Interesting that the Buddha is offered this rather than teaching it:
"Bhante, may the Blessed One learn the Atanata[4] protection so that the displeased Yakkhas may be pleased, so that the monks and nuns, laymen and laywomen, may be at ease, guarded, protected and unharmed."

The Blessed One gave consent by his silence. Then the great King Vessavana, knowing that the Blessed One had consented, recited the Atanatiya protection:
When the night had passed the Blessed One addressed the monks: (The Buddha related to the monks word for word what has been said by the great King Vessavana, see above.) "Learn by heart, monks, the Atanata protection, constantly make use of it, bear it in mind. This Atanata protection, monks, pertains to your welfare, and by virtue of it, monks and nuns, laymen and laywomen may live at ease, guarded, protected, and unharmed."

Malcolm wrote:
The Buddha did teach it, that is why it is a sutta.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, September 16th, 2012 at 1:32 AM
Title: Re: Dharma and Magic: is the latter necessary?
Content:
Unknown said:
On the other hand, it seems in the Buddha's time śramaṇas in the Buddhist community did not directly appeal to such forces, and instead focused on their meditative practices.

Malcolm wrote:
The Atanatiya Sutta contradicts this perception.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 15th, 2012 at 10:53 PM
Title: Re: Purelands that decay
Content:
zamotcr said:
I always though that the Pure Lands were some kind of a special land where the Buddhas teach the dharma without restriction, a place where we can attain buddhahood without problems.

But it seems that this is not always the case. I have read that every Buddha has a Pure Land, and the Shakyamuni's Pure Land is this Saha world.
So, not every Pure Land is created by a Buddha, like our world, that wasn't created by Shakyamuni, and other Pure Lands are created by merit of some Buddha (like Amitabha's Pure Land, created by his own merits).

In the Lotus Sutra are a lot of examples of Buddha Lands that decay in the hands of Mara, so not every Buddha Land is perfect.

So, why these differents, what make each Pure Land so different?
Why some pure lands are outside samsara, and others are inside samsara?

Sorry for my bad english


Malcolm wrote:
The term "Pure land" is wrong. The Sanskrit term is buddhakṣetra which means "Buddhafield"  -- some, like Sukhavati, are considered outside of samsara. Some, like the Sahaloka, are part of samsara. However, both the Lotus Sutra and the Vimalakirti Nirdesha Sutra show that the idea of distinguishing between pure and impure buddhakṣetras is based on an error.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 15th, 2012 at 10:26 PM
Title: Re: Does the soul exist in Mahayana thought?
Content:


gad rgyangs said:
so what do you do instead of being born in the triple realm?


Malcolm wrote:
Presumably one dallies with celestial vigins, eating grapes and drinking wine.

M

gad rgyangs said:
virgins not for long! but seriously, I'd rather eat ice cream and smoke weed - is that an option there?


Malcolm wrote:
grapes and wine can be viewed as placeholders for a variable.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 15th, 2012 at 9:57 PM
Title: Re: Does the soul exist in Mahayana thought?
Content:


gad rgyangs said:
no rebirth as in "extinction", or no rebirth as in "an improvement in one's circumstances"?

Malcolm wrote:
No rebirth in the triple realm. What else could possibly matter?

M

gad rgyangs said:
so what do you do instead of being born in the triple realm?


Malcolm wrote:
Presumably one dallies with celestial vigins, eating grapes and drinking wine.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 15th, 2012 at 9:38 PM
Title: Re: Can other religions lead to enlightenment?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
All nine yānas lead indirectly or directly to liberation. The first yāna, the yānas of gods and humans, includes Hinduism, Christianity, Islam, Shamanism, Taoism, Confucism, etc.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 15th, 2012 at 9:34 PM
Title: Re: Does the soul exist in Mahayana thought?
Content:
gad rgyangs said:
and if you get rid of the afflictions, what's left?

Malcolm wrote:
No rebirth.

gad rgyangs said:
no rebirth as in "extinction", or no rebirth as in "an improvement in one's circumstances"?

Malcolm wrote:
No rebirth in the triple realm. What else could possibly matter?

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 15th, 2012 at 9:27 AM
Title: Re: Does the soul exist in Mahayana thought?
Content:
new2dharma said:
So do buddhists believe in an individual's soul or self? If not what gets reincarnated? Thanks and Namaste, Dan

Malcolm wrote:
No.

Afflictions.

gad rgyangs said:
and if you get rid of the afflictions, what's left?

Malcolm wrote:
No rebirth.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 15th, 2012 at 4:16 AM
Title: Re: Does the soul exist in Mahayana thought?
Content:
new2dharma said:
So do buddhists believe in an individual's soul or self? If not what gets reincarnated? Thanks and Namaste, Dan

Malcolm wrote:
No.

Afflictions.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 15th, 2012 at 12:21 AM
Title: Re: The Song of Vajra
Content:
Pero said:
No, that was the tantra for Yantra Yoga. The song of the vajra is not in this tantra but in the Upadesha tantra of the same name.

simhanada said:
So, for further clarification, we are talking about the Nyida Khajor as one of the 17 tantras? or different?


Malcolm wrote:
The upadesha for Yantra Yoga is Called Nyi zla kha sbyor.

There is also an upadesha tantra, one of the seventeen, called Nyi zla kha sbyor as part of its title.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 14th, 2012 at 11:54 PM
Title: Re: Back online and upgraded!
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
response time is definitely faster -- the old server was experiencing a bit of a lag at times.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, September 14th, 2012 at 11:15 PM
Title: Re: Which Of The 17 Dzogchen Tantras Have Been Published?
Content:
Bj Lhundrup said:
Anyone know the names that are used in the TsamDrak & TingKye editions for this tantra that goings by these names?
nag mo khros ma.
khros ma nag mo.
bka’ srung nag mo’i rgyud.
bka’ srung nag mo’i snying thun gsang ba.
sngags srung gsang rgyud.

These names are not in both those editions and I need to know what title they go by in these two version of the NGB.

thanks
L


Malcolm wrote:
As far as I can tell it is not in the NGB in either of those collections.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 5th, 2012 at 9:55 PM
Title: Re: Yogacara and dzogchen
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
But we do not accept Mahayana as definitive. We only accept Dzogchen as definitive, based on what the Buddha has taught in those teachings.

Jyoti said:
This type of claim is precisely the reason the buddha explicitly stated the guidelines on how to distinguish the scriptures of non-definitive meaning from the scriptures of definitive meaning. Therefore, based on those guidelines, no person can undermine the authenticity of the definitive scriptures, or the mahayana that is established by it.

Jyoti

Malcolm wrote:
This is not even very precise -- for example, one Indian school of common Mahāyāna (i.e.Madhyamaka) follows the Akṣayamati-nirdeśa sūtra for ascertaining what is definitive; another (Yogacara) follows the Saṃdhinirmocana sūtra. Both schools also utilize the four reliances from the Kaśyapa-parivarta sūtra. Your criteria therefore is far less certain that you pretend.

When it comes to Dzogchen, Dzogchen is beyond the considerations of common Mahāyāna.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 5th, 2012 at 9:50 PM
Title: Re: Shaivite and Buddhst Tantra. Which came first?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Further, in terms of textual history, the earliest tantra by name that we have is the core of the famed Ayurvedic classic, the Caraka Samhita. This text is called Agniveśa Tantra.

The term "tantra" is just a general word in Sanskrit that means effectively "manual".

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 5th, 2012 at 8:43 PM
Title: Re: Shaivite and Buddhst Tantra. Which came first?
Content:
Tiger said:
The Hindus (Shaivites) claim that they founded Tantras and the Buddhist claim that they were the first creators of Tantra. So which one came first?

I found this interesting explanation from http://www.kamakotimandali.com/blog/index.php?p=1082&more=1&c=1&tb=1&pb=1:

The nāgārjuna of vajrayāna is generally identified by the Tibetan Buddhists with the mādhyamika philospher, but these two were definitely different teachers. Matsyendranātha, a Tantric teacher of Shaktism, enjoying great reputation as a kaula yogin appeared in Assam sometime in the early centuries of the Christian era. He is taken as the founder of the Kaula system in kaliyuga. That system is said to have been started by four yuganāṭhas in four yugas and they are respectively khagendranātha, kūrmanātha, meṣanātha and matsyendranātha. arāha alias rāhulabhadra, a Buddhist monk of the vijnānavāda school, learnt Kaula Tantra from some efficient teacher belonging to the line of matsyendranātha. He adapted it to the fundamental principles of vijnānavāda and presented it efficiently as a secret sādhana taught by Buddhism. He eliminated cleverly two very important principles of śākta tantra for such purpose. One of these is the principle of the existence of a constant entity called ātman. The other principle is that of absolute theism. Besides, he changed the names of Tantric deities so as to make them look like Buddhist ones and gave all philosophical terms a Buddhist coloring. Thus he presented the śākta system of matsyendranātha as mystic Buddhism and gave it the name, vajrayāna. One of his very efficient disciples was a monk named nāgārjuna who also is, many a time, wrongly identified with the ancient mādhyamika philosopher of the South by the Lamas of Tibet and Mongolia. He popularized among Buddhist monks such Tantrism which passed on under the name of vajrayāna Buddhism. Padmasambhava, a disciple in his line, carried such Tantric Buddhism to Tibet and from there it spread to many countries of the Buddhist world.

How true is the above account?


Malcolm wrote:
It is very speculative. In any case, Buddhist tantras are primordial.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 5th, 2012 at 8:38 PM
Title: Re: Yogacara and dzogchen
Content:
Sönam said:
Then we do not have the same view on what's definitive ...
Sönam

Jyoti said:
This is not my view, it is the sutra's view about what is definitive, so anything outside this sutra's view that does not come from the Buddha cannot be relied. Note the instructions of the four reliances of mahayana.

Jyoti

Malcolm wrote:
But we do not accept Mahayana as definitive. We only accept Dzogchen as definitive, based on what the Buddha has taught in those teachings.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 5th, 2012 at 8:35 PM
Title: Re: Which Of The 17 Dzogchen Tantras Have Been Published?
Content:
asunthatneversets said:
In 3 separate places I've found 3 different deities being referenced to as the black wrathful goddess in the "Black Wrathful Goddess Tantra"...

In the OP I copied the run-down of the 17 Tantras from a website which listed the Black Wrathful Goddess Tantra (nag mo khros ma); as referring to a black form of Vajrayogini (khros ma nag mo).

In another more in depth run-down I found done by Khenpo Ngakchung it lists this tantra as the Tantra of The Wrathful Black Guardian Shri Ekajati, which resembles a sharp razor, describes how to protect the practitioner against harms inflicted by others. Obviously referencing Ekajati.

And then on Vajranatha's website he has this as referencing Simhamukha: The secret sadhana (gsang sgrub) is for the exceedingly wrathful black Krodha Kali Simhamukha (khros-ma nga-mo), "the wrathful black goddess", who appears to annihilate the delusion of ego, symbolized by the insatiable demon king Rudra, much like Durga cutting the head off the demon king Mahisha. The secret sadhana is also connected with the practice of Chod (gcod), the severing or cutting off of the ego. For this reason, this form of Simhamukha is also called Vajra Nairatma (rDo-rje bdag-med-ma), “she who destroys the notion of an ego.”

Which deity is actually being discussed in this tantra?

Malcolm wrote:
Mamo Ekajati. The confusion comes from the fact that the tantra is called "khros ma nag mo", which is also the name of several other cycles of unrelated devas.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 5th, 2012 at 1:35 AM
Title: Re: Did Shakyamuni Buddha also give empowerments?
Content:
Tiger said:
it is the Vajrayanists first who have claimed to be most supreme...

Malcolm wrote:
No,that would be Gautama Buddha, who proclaimed that only through his Dharma and VInaya woud one attained buddhahood, then came Mahāyāna (Perfection of wisdom sutras, etc.), then came Yogacara, third turning; then came general mantras, then annutarayogatantra, etc.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 5th, 2012 at 1:21 AM
Title: Re: Did Shakyamuni Buddha also give empowerments?
Content:
Tiger said:
If empowerment from a Guru is required to attain Anuttarasamyaksambodhi, then why is it called Anuttara samyaksam bodhi to begin with? Our Buddha is often described as a fully self enlightened one and this is because he attained enlightenment through his own efforts.

Malcolm wrote:
Anuttarasamyaksambodhi means "unsurpassed perfect full awakening"-- there is nothing about the term, from a Mahayāna perspectice that suggests that the Buddha was "self-enlightened".


We can see that gurus are intended to be respected in common Mahāyāna as well:

Ārya-mahākaruṇāpuṇḍarīka-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra shows that in the past when the Buddha was a bodhisattva he relied on a guru
Ananda, As such, in the past when I practiced the conduct of a bodhisattva I bowed fully bowed and prostrated to a Guru.
The buddhas arise in the world as gurus, as Saddharmapuṇḍarīka-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra clearly states:
Limitless amazing victors
produce loving minds to benefit the world;
since they arise as guiding Guru teachers, 
from now on they will attact disciples in the ten directions.
And also recommends that:
The wise generate devotion to a guru
Ārya-sarvadharmasvabhāvasamatāvipañcita-samādhirāja-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra recommends:
Serving the guru with noble intention,
doing whatever he asks just as he asks,
one should serve Dharma teachers without interruption,
such is the precept of the victor.
Ārya-sāgaramatiparipṛcchā-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra states:
Two Dharmas to esteem:
serving the spritual friend
and relying on the guru with devotion.
We can see from just this small sampling of important Mahāyāna sūtras how important it is to rely on a guru in common Mahāyāna in order to acheive Anuttarasamyaksambodhi. There are many other similar statements made in Mahāyāna sūtras. So we must understand that relying on a guru is critical for acheive buddhahood.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, September 5th, 2012 at 12:23 AM
Title: Re: Did Shakyamuni Buddha also give empowerments?
Content:
SSJ3Gogeta said:
So even in regular Mahayana there is a tantric-like empowerment that is given by the rest of the Buddhas when you are on the appropriate bhumi.

Thats what I'm understanding.


Malcolm wrote:
It takes place through light rays, but yes, effectively the Vajrayāna prinicple of empowerment is validated by Mahāyāna sutra. The principle difference fo course is that the empowerments of the former systemcan be granted to ordinary persons, while the empowerments of the latter system are reserved for tenth stage bodhisattvas.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, September 4th, 2012 at 10:41 PM
Title: Re: Did Shakyamuni Buddha also give empowerments?
Content:
Tiger said:
1. Vajrayana practitioners consider higher Tantras/Yogas (Mahamudra, Dzogchen etc) as the ONLY method to attain Buddhahood (correct me if I am wrong here). Which is why I asked if Buddha Shakyamuni also delivered empowerments.

Malcolm wrote:
Anuttarasamyaksambodhi is only possible through empowerment -- this is why for example abhiśeka is mentioned as a key feature of buddhahood in in the Āvataṃsaka sūtra and so on.

When a bodhisattva attains buddhahood, they do so on the basis of an empowerment (abhiśeka) transmitted through from all the tathagatas of the ten directions. For exmaple,the Buddhāvataṃsaka-nāma-mahāvaipulya-sūtra states:
Whoever attains facility through the supreme samadhi, they completely receive the ornaments of the empowerment conferred from the victors of the ten directions
Ārya-tathāgatācintyaguhyanirdeśa-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra states:
By attaining empowerment, one is endowed with all qualities.
Ārya-svapnanirdeśa-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra:
On the tenth stage one is predicted as a buddha through empowerment
Āryākṣayamatiparipṛcchā-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra:
Since the tenth creation of bodhicitta is the empowerment that grants power over qualities, wisdoms and all phenomena, it is seen to be equal with space through the example of the name "cakravartin".
Ārya-ratnacūḍaparipṛcchā-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra:
All who are impeded by a single birth obtain empowerment.
Ārya-lalitavistara-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra:
Through possessing love and compassion, the bodhisattva who has been conferred the empowerment of merit and wisdom leaves Tuṣita.
Thus, empowement in Vajrayāna, the direct route to experiencing anuttarasamyaksambodhi in a single lifetime in a single body, is fully validated by Mahāyāna sutras.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, September 4th, 2012 at 10:01 PM
Title: Re: Marihuana and meditation
Content:
TaTa said:
The mindfullness has drasticly reduce the "wanting" part of the addiction but still i cant seem to not smoke when someone lights one up around me.

Malcolm wrote:
Avoid people who smoke herb.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, September 4th, 2012 at 2:54 AM
Title: Re: Why is dependent origination so important?
Content:
Music said:
Why is it important to know? What does it mean to know, anyway? We all know that everything is connected with everything else ...


Malcolm wrote:
It is important for understanding how suffering arises, so it can be undone.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, September 3rd, 2012 at 9:13 AM
Title: Re: The Song of Vajra
Content:
Sönam said:
and there is a precise tempo, wether slow ( http://www.shangshunginstitute.net/webcast/files/SOV_SLOW.pdf ) or fast ( http://www.shangshunginstitute.net/webcast/files/SOV_FAST.pdf ) ... it is not supposed to be sung otherwise.

Sönam


Malcolm wrote:
I think you are being a little too rigid there, Sonam. Even ChNN does not sing SOV the way Adriano has transcribed it.

Pero said:
Yeah hahaha. As far as I understood Adriano in that webcast that's the way it's supposed to be in done in the dance of the vajra because it's coordinated with movements. When alone I try to sing it as close as I'm able to the way Adriano taught it then, but we don't sing it quite like that with Rinpoche.

Malcolm wrote:
I follow the boss.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, September 3rd, 2012 at 5:37 AM
Title: Re: Which Of The 17 Dzogchen Tantras Have Been Published?
Content:
Yudron said:
Jim Valby was kind enough to send me a CD of the 17 main Dzogchen tantras input into Wylie.  My intention is to eventually use Tibet doc to change them into u-chen.  I have not proofed any against the original yet.

I really appreciate his generosity.


Malcolm wrote:
Generally speaking I use the Adzom Chogar recension for convenience, but I have found that many respects the Tsham Brag recensionof the 17 to be more accurate, at least when it comes to comparing root text with commentaries.

Yudron said:
Thanks!  I'm really in over my head here:  I don't know what the tsham brag edition is.  Is that on TBRC?

I was assuming they were in the nyingma gyud bum.

Malcolm wrote:
There are three Nyingma rgyud 'bums: Ting skyes, Tsham brag and Derge (Adzom Chogar).

The first two share a common root, and the last is a separate tradition.

IN reality, you need all three. For example, the Rig pa rang shar version found in the Derge lineage was collated out of three manuscript traditions, and all three are represented here in the mchan 'grel i.e interlineal notes. These notes are absent from the first two collections of tantras.

I am presently working on translating all 17 tantras into English. When they are published, if they are published, it is quite likely I shall insist that they can only be made available to those people who have received at minimum either the Vima Nyinthig or Khandro Nyingthig empowerments or equivalents, and the complete lung for the seventeen tantras themselves. They will also cost a lot of money. Please do not ask me for them, I am not presently distributing them to anyone so I will just ignore you.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, September 3rd, 2012 at 5:23 AM
Title: Re: Which Of The 17 Dzogchen Tantras Have Been Published?
Content:
Yudron said:
Jim Valby was kind enough to send me a CD of the 17 main Dzogchen tantras input into Wylie.  My intention is to eventually use Tibet doc to change them into u-chen.  I have not proofed any against the original yet.

I really appreciate his generosity.


Malcolm wrote:
Generally speaking I use the Adzom Chogar recension for convenience, but I have found that in many respects the Tsham Brag recension of the 17 to be more accurate, at least when it comes to comparing root text with commentaries.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, September 3rd, 2012 at 3:45 AM
Title: Re: The Song of Vajra
Content:
Sönam said:
and there is a precise tempo, wether slow ( http://www.shangshunginstitute.net/webcast/files/SOV_SLOW.pdf ) or fast ( http://www.shangshunginstitute.net/webcast/files/SOV_FAST.pdf ) ... it is not supposed to be sung otherwise.

Sönam


Malcolm wrote:
I think you are being a little too rigid there, Sonam. Even ChNN does not sing SOV the way Adriano has transcribed it.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, September 3rd, 2012 at 3:42 AM
Title: Re: The Song of Vajra
Content:
heart said:
]

I don't either think its positive, it is a sign of the degenerate times we live in.

/magnus


Malcolm wrote:
Nonsense -- it is perfectly fine. The more people who see the video the better. The words of SOV are liberation through hearing all by themselvs, no matter how good the melody, etc.

M

heart said:
yeah, and the video is also a fine piece of art.

/magnus

Malcolm wrote:
No, it is pretty silly, but harmless.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, September 3rd, 2012 at 3:41 AM
Title: Re: The Song of Vajra
Content:


heart said:
No, the melody ChNNR sing the SoV is actually part of the terma which he received from Ekajati, if I understood correctly.

/magnus

Malcolm wrote:
No, the melody for SOV first came to ChNN in a dream when he was eight years old --no connection with his later Ekajati terma, which is connected with Mandarava.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, September 3rd, 2012 at 3:15 AM
Title: Re: The Song of Vajra
Content:
Sönam said:
It seems you all agree to say it's a positive thing ... sorry, I don't, and it is not insignificant too.

mutsuk said:
I don't think it's positive either. I would have preferred a perfectly sung version of the traditional melody with someone with a nice, extra nice and deep voice. That is something practitioners would love to have and it would easily sustain contemplation...Any good (DC traditional) recording around ? I have a CD from the DC dating back to the 1990s but the sound is ugly and the voice is... too loud (to close to the mikes).

heart said:
I don't either think its positive, it is a sign of the degenerate times we live in.

/magnus


Malcolm wrote:
Nonsense -- it is perfectly fine. The more people who see the video the better. The words of SOV are liberation through hearing all by themselvs, no matter how good the melody, etc.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, September 3rd, 2012 at 3:14 AM
Title: Re: The Song of Vajra
Content:
mutsuk said:
... the traditional melody ...


Malcolm wrote:
There is no "traditional" melody of the Song of the Vajra. Prior to ChNN's transmission, this melody did not exist in any human dimension.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, September 3rd, 2012 at 1:25 AM
Title: Re: Chinese language and Buddhism
Content:
Huseng said:
The translators had to accommodate all these preconditions in order to convey the purport and function of texts.


Malcolm wrote:
I think you have an obligation to read the guy's book before you comment much further.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, September 3rd, 2012 at 1:22 AM
Title: Re: Females who achieved rainbow body
Content:
mutsuk said:
No they are pretty much different, in terms of "waves of blessings" and capacity to liberate others.

Malcolm wrote:
Here rlabs means " nus  pa dang, mthu stobs kyi tshad,...nus rlabs dang ldan pa,...phan rlabs chung ba,...'phrin las rlabs chen,...gom pa rlabs can,...las chod rlabs che ba" not "chu sogs 'gul skabs byung ba'i gnyer ma,...chu rlabs,...rba rlabs,...rlabs mthon por 'phyur ba,...rlabs ris med pa.."

Thus bying rlabs has the connocation of "conferring power...." etc., which is characteristic of its Sanskrit corollary: adhiṣṭhānam

mutsuk said:
I know, I 'm not translating byin-rlabs as wave at all, but referring to the degree of the power of the byin-rlabs.

Malcolm wrote:
Ok, I just see a lot of translators doing that based on a false etymology.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, September 3rd, 2012 at 1:07 AM
Title: Re: Females who achieved rainbow body
Content:
mutsuk said:
No they are pretty much different, in terms of "waves of blessings" and capacity to liberate others.

Malcolm wrote:
Here rlabs means " nus  pa dang, mthu stobs kyi tshad,...nus rlabs dang ldan pa,...phan rlabs chung ba,...'phrin las rlabs chen,...gom pa rlabs can,...las chod rlabs che ba" not "chu sogs 'gul skabs byung ba'i gnyer ma,...chu rlabs,...rba rlabs,...rlabs mthon por 'phyur ba,...rlabs ris med pa.."

Thus byin rlabs has the connocation of "conferring power...." etc., which is characteristic of its Sanskrit corollary: adhiṣṭhānam


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, September 2nd, 2012 at 10:42 PM
Title: Re: Chinese language and Buddhism
Content:
Huseng said:
For native Chinese readers the Chinese translations generally conveyed the meaning of the original text.

Malcolm wrote:
Maybe, I think the thrust of the point is that they  were not successful in this project, and therefore, Chinese Buddhism evolved along lines dissimilar to contemporary Indian Buddhism during the same period.

It is hard for you to tell, since you have been educated into Buddhism via western Buddhological hermeneutical criteria and you read Chinese Buddhist material through the lense of an understanding heavily modified through a century of comparison of Chinese texts with Sanskrit and Tibetan.

Nevertheless, I also think Mutsuk is overstating the point, since there are a number of commentaries and small number of sutras that passed through Chinese on their way to Tibetan which are regarded as important.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, September 2nd, 2012 at 10:16 PM
Title: Re: Chinese language and Buddhism
Content:
Huseng said:
Tibetan texts are not necessarily superior to Chinese translations.

Malcolm wrote:
They are generally superior, even from a diachronic perspective that includes textual evolution.

viniketa said:
Superior meaning 'more accurate'...



Malcolm wrote:
Yes, more accurate. It is an accurate conceit that nevertheless Sino-Japanese scholars find annoying. But anyone who learns Tibetan and can compare with the Chinese will readily allow that there are advantages to Tibetan translations absent in Chinese translations where an original text cannot be recovered for comparison.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, September 2nd, 2012 at 10:01 PM
Title: Re: Chinese language and Buddhism
Content:
Huseng said:
Tibetan texts are not necessarily superior to Chinese translations.

Malcolm wrote:
They are generally superior, even from a diachronic perspective that includes textual evolution.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, September 2nd, 2012 at 1:10 AM
Title: Re: Most Sacred Pilgrimage Site in Dzogchen?
Content:
SSJ3Gogeta said:
My suspicion is that Potala is the same as Tirumala mountain, and that the statue of Venkateswara is actually that of Avalokiteśvara.

Malcolm wrote:
No, they are different.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, September 2nd, 2012 at 1:04 AM
Title: Re: Most Sacred Pilgrimage Site in Dzogchen?
Content:
username said:
Potala mountain.

Malcolm wrote:
Potala, Avalokiteśvara's buddhafield, is in South India:

http://buddhisma2z.com/content.php?id=317 " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 1st, 2012 at 10:49 PM
Title: Re: Females who achieved rainbow body
Content:


arsent said:
It looks like she did!

Malcolm wrote:
Nope:

http://www.treasuryoflives.org/biographies/view/Ayu-Khandro-Dorje-Peldron/13139 " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

And:

"Near the twenty-fifth, without any sign of illness, we found that she had left her body at the time she would normally be finishing her meditation session. She remained in meditation posture for two weeks and when she had finished her tugdam, her body had become very small.   We put some ornaments on it and many many people came to witness it.

"In the second month on the tenth day, we cremated her. There were many interesting signs at the time of her death. There was a sudden thaw and everything burst into bloom.  It was the middle of winter. There were many ringsel and, as she had instructed, all this and her clothes were put into the stupa that she had prepared at the Sakya monastery."

I, Namkhai Norbu, was given the little statue of Jamyang Khentse Wongpo and a volume of the Simhamukha Gongter and her writings and advice and spiritual songs. Among her disciples there were few rich and important people; her disciples were yogis and yoginis and practitioners from all over Tibet.  There are many tales told about her, but I have written only what she herself told me. This is just a little biography of A-Yu Khadro written for her disciples and those who are interested.

Since ChNN personally was present at her cremation, I don't think we can consider that she attained rainbow body.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 1st, 2012 at 8:30 PM
Title: Re: Sang offerings
Content:
philji said:
During a sang offering, should the emphasis be on offering all that is wonderful and precious etc to the 4 guests or of offering our own negative emotions and defilements for purification?


Malcolm wrote:
The former and never the latter.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 1st, 2012 at 4:45 AM
Title: Re: Opening Lha Kang
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
With the striped shirt?
So which one are you?

kalden yungdrung said:
Tashi delek,
Sangha Yungdrung Rignga Ling Netherlands.jpg
After some time our Lha Kang named Yungdrung Rignga Ling was opened on the 26-08-2012 by our Geshela Khorden Lhundup Gyaltsen.

Everybody was very happy that our Geshela blessed our Lha Kang.
Now we have a Sangha and a good filled program.

A Geshela, is like the head of the body.
Witout the head the body is death.


Mutsog Marro
KY
Tashi delek,

On the photo i am the second from the left side.

Mutsug marro
KY


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 1st, 2012 at 4:44 AM
Title: Re: Opening Lha Kang
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Which one are you in the picture?

So which one are you?

kalden yungdrung said:
Tashi delek,
Sangha Yungdrung Rignga Ling Netherlands.jpg
After some time our Lha Kang named Yungdrung Rignga Ling was opened on the 26-08-2012 by our Geshela Khorden Lhundup Gyaltsen.

Everybody was very happy that our Geshela blessed our Lha Kang.
Now we have a Sangha and a good filled program.

A Geshela, is like the head of the body.
Witout the head the body is death.


Mutsog Marro
KY


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 1st, 2012 at 3:57 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:
Pero said:
Perhaps Norbu Rinpoche is teaching more from a mengagde POV even when teaching Longde and Semde.


Malcolm wrote:
ChNN has said that all he teaches in general retreats is trekchö many times -- so don't ask him to teach it.

Pero said:
What is "it"?


Malcolm wrote:
Trekchö


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 1st, 2012 at 3:47 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:
Pero said:
Perhaps Norbu Rinpoche is teaching more from a mengagde POV even when teaching Longde and Semde.


Malcolm wrote:
ChNN has said that all he teaches in general retreats is trekchö many times -- so don't ask him to teach it.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 1st, 2012 at 2:28 AM
Title: Re: Opening Lha Kang
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
So which one are you?

kalden yungdrung said:
Tashi delek,
Sangha Yungdrung Rignga Ling Netherlands.jpg
After some time our Lha Kang named Yungdrung Rignga Ling was opened on the 26-08-2012 by our Geshela Khorden Lhundup Gyaltsen.

Everybody was very happy that our Geshela blessed our Lha Kang.
Now we have a Sangha and a good filled program.

A Geshela, is like the head of the body.
Witout the head the body is death.


Mutsog Marro
KY


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 1st, 2012 at 1:14 AM
Title: Re: Most Sacred Pilgrimage Site in Dzogchen?
Content:
mutsuk said:
The Zhai lhakhang (Zhwa'i lha khang) where the 17 Tantras were rediscovered...

Malcolm wrote:
Does that still exist?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 1st, 2012 at 1:13 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:
RikudouSennin said:
by lineage i meant is there a list that goes back to Garab Dorje or the Omniscient One Longchenpa?

oldbob said:
Don't know.

My take (47 years with the Tibetans) is that ChNN Rinpoche is Garab Dorje and the Omniscient One Longchenpa.

Don't need the list.

ob


Malcolm wrote:
According to the dgongs pa zang thal cycle of teachings there are three basic lineages: the long kama lineage; the short treasure lineage, the very short direct lineage i.e. samantabhadra, vajrasattva, one's guru. Of these three, the latter is the most critical.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, September 1st, 2012 at 12:09 AM
Title: Re: Most Sacred Pilgrimage Site in Dzogchen?
Content:
SSJ3Gogeta said:
Ok, what about most sacred Dzogchen site outside India?



Malcolm wrote:
IMO, Samye and Samye Chimphu in Tibet, as username alluded to before, as well as the many caves where Guru Rinpoche etc., did practice in Central Tibet.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 31st, 2012 at 10:46 AM
Title: Re: Most Sacred Pilgrimage Site in Dzogchen?
Content:
Yudron said:
Since most contemporary Dzogchen practitioners base their practice on a terma text  of Guru Rinpoche, all the many sacred places of Guru Rinpoche would be appropriate pilgrimage places.  In addition to that, Longchenpa and Jigme Lingpa wrote or discovered what are today the most important explanatory texts of the tradition, so the places they walked and practiced would be very significant.

Malcolm wrote:
Nevertheless the most sacred site for Dzogchen pratitioners is Vajrasana at Bodhgaya.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 31st, 2012 at 10:44 AM
Title: Re: Most Sacred Pilgrimage Site in Dzogchen?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Bodhgaya.

SSJ3Gogeta said:
Any specific connections to Dzogchen?

Malcolm wrote:
Buddha


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 31st, 2012 at 3:56 AM
Title: Re: Consciousness as just a sticker.
Content:
Nothing said:
Words are just words, it is the meaning behind them that matters most.
However the question is still a valid one.


Malcolm wrote:
A meaning separate from words cannot be meaningfully discussed.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 30th, 2012 at 11:43 PM
Title: Re: Consciousness as just a sticker.
Content:
DarwidHalim said:
Jyoti:
Consciousness is not composed of concept, so it cannot be prove or dis-proven by concept. There is no buddhist teaching high or low that is not based on the consciousness as the basis.
(I separate this topic)

So for you, it is clear that consciousness is not just a sticker. For you, if I take out the sticker, I will still able to see this unnamed consciousness.

Do you know that in 12 links dependent, no. 1 is ignorant, no. 3 is consciousness?

You should see there, because you have ignorant, then you can have consciousness.

If you don't have ignorant, you won't have consciousness.

But our position is different, regardless there is ignorant or know, consciousness is always there.

You remove the sticker, but you hold the unnamed basis as unnamed consciousness.

Malcolm wrote:
A lot of tallying up rabbit horns, shearing the hair of turtles, and breastfeeding children of barren women.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 30th, 2012 at 1:34 AM
Title: Re: Bonzhik Khyungnak the first Tibetan Tulku
Content:
Tilopa said:
What I should have said is " maybe, who cares and does it really matter? "

Malcolm wrote:
For Bonpos, a much unfairly maligned and disenfranchised group of Tibetans, yes, it matters quite a lot.

Apparently it mattered enough for you to comment upon it, in the typically dismissive mode so many Tibetan Buddhists have towards Bon.

If you don't care, why even comment at all?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 29th, 2012 at 10:49 PM
Title: Re: Bonzhik Khyungnak the first Tibetan Tulku
Content:
Sherlock said:
Rongzompa was recognised even earlier as an incarnation of an Indian guru by Atisa IIRC, Bonzhik Khyungnak might be the first recognised Tibetan reincarnation of a Tibetan lama though.

Malcolm wrote:
It is unlikely Atisha actually met Rongzom, but barring that detail, he was held to be an incarnation of Krishnacarya.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 29th, 2012 at 10:41 PM
Title: Re: How to disrupt any Buddhist conversation:
Content:


DarwidHalim said:
There is no Madyamaka there, there is no Dzogchen there, there is no Mahayana there, there is no Theravada there. Why should we care about it?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 29th, 2012 at 9:48 PM
Title: Re: How to disrupt any Buddhist conversation:
Content:
Andrew108 said:
Then there are those who teach themselves from books and become their own teachers..

Malcolm wrote:
[Serious note] Those sort of people do not acheive rainbow body, or any much, for that matter.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 29th, 2012 at 9:45 PM
Title: Re: Bonzhik Khyungnak the first Tibetan Tulku
Content:


dzoki said:
Well Marpa was recognized as an incarnation of Dombi Heruka

Malcolm wrote:
Posthumous recognitions in Namthars written centuries later hardly count.

What Achard is alluding to is that this is the first textual account we have of a Tibetan being recognized as the reincarnation of a previous [realized] Tibetan Lama.

Just as, for example, Bonpos count their treasure tradition earlier than the Buddhist treasure tradition.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 29th, 2012 at 9:42 PM
Title: Re: Bonzhik Khyungnak the first Tibetan Tulku
Content:
kalden yungdrung said:
The identification marks him as perhaps the first tulku in any Tibetan religious tradition

Tilopa said:
Yeah right, OK, sure, whatever.....


Malcolm wrote:
While no doubt I am the author of many a rude and uncalled for remark, this was rude, uncalled for and disrespectful.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 29th, 2012 at 9:39 PM
Title: Re: World must go vege.
Content:


Huseng said:
We might end up with a situation like in India where most people can't really afford to eat meat (even if they wanted to) and live mostly on lentils and simple carbohydrates like roti or rice.


Malcolm wrote:
That was the situation in North America during the 19th Century. Meat was scarce for many people;chicken and turkey were luxuries because they require grain feed.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 29th, 2012 at 8:40 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:


username said:
I know, I was agreeing with what you were saying to people. Dzogchen masters try to explain that view in concepts as much as possible though finally it has to be experienced for proper realization.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, agreed.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 29th, 2012 at 7:44 AM
Title: Re: World must go vege.
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
http://www.elephantjournal.com/2012/08/if-you-eat-meat-you-should-know-what-this-looks-like/ " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

“This particular steer was bought at auction when it was a calf, after buying the steer, paying for the guy to slaugter and deliver it to the butcher, then paying the butcher, the end cost was about $2/pound. The cheapest hamburger goes for about $3.50/lb where I live. He grazed for about 9 months before he was killed.

We now have a few cows and there’s a bull that visits when they want a gentleman caller. Last year we kept a calf from one of the cows and just had him slaughtered in June. Cost on that one was just over $1/lb. I’ve been told that the quality of the meat is on par with the organic free-range grass fed beef you’d find in high end grocery stores for upwards of $15-$20/lb. I’ve never bought that kind of meat so that’s just hearsay…

Grass is cheap, you don’t get as much meat and they grow slower, but the meat is lean and delicious. Also the cattle don’t seem to get sick when you’re not loading them up with grain and regular animal feed, so vet costs are few and far between.

We split the meat with another family since one steer produces a lot. I share some with my family and put the rest into a chest freezer at -10 degrees, it lasts 9 months easy, the ground beef will go a year pretty easy. If it gets too close to being too old we have a big BBQ to use up anything that’s at the limit. I also have a lot of it sliced for jerky, probably 20lbs or so out of each steer ends up as jerky…

Once you go grass fed the meat from the store will taste really funny. It’s got a much meatier flavor, for lack of a better word. Also leaner, and the fat that it does have has a much better flavor. This steer was split between 2 families, a total of 4 adults and 7 kids. It yielded around 320 pounds of meat which lasted about 6 months.”


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 29th, 2012 at 7:33 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:
username said:
I don't think any view can be %100 without concepts.

Malcolm wrote:
Dzogchen "view" means being in the state of contemplation, that is what i was getting at.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 29th, 2012 at 4:12 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
The difference in view in the three series is not conceptual, it is experiential.

heart said:
Experience have a tendency to be expressed conceptually in general, I think that might be true for all the nine yanas actually.

/magnus


Malcolm wrote:
Those expressions are not the experience.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 29th, 2012 at 3:50 AM
Title: Re: Most Sacred Pilgrimage Site in Dzogchen?
Content:
SSJ3Gogeta said:
Most Sacred Pilgrimage Site in Dzogchen?


Malcolm wrote:
Bodhgaya.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 29th, 2012 at 3:36 AM
Title: Re: How to disrupt any Buddhist conversation:
Content:
oushi said:
Great example. I will try it next time.

How about developing short and fast answer for sunyata addicts, that will easily extinguish their enthusiasm?

Tarpa said:
Sure, tell them to stand in front of a train, since the train, movement, and the person standing in front of it don't exist there should be no problem

Malcolm wrote:
Well, that is actually being called "being run over by one's own ignorance"


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 29th, 2012 at 2:53 AM
Title: Re: How to disrupt any Buddhist conversation:
Content:
David N. Snyder said:
Or the other one is that there is no killing since there is no soul and anyway, we don't exist. There is no person, animal, being to kill. And the animal, human, being will be reborn, so you can't kill him anyway.

Such rubbish could justify a small killing to even a genocide.

Which of course is poetic nonsense as the Buddha clearly mentioned how all beings suffer and feel pain and how we should not cause them pain or death.

Malcolm wrote:
Buddha was merely speaking to those who are ignorant of their own non-existence. Once they understand they do not exist, they will cease to feel any pain. Remember, after all, you only feel pain if you are ignorant. Even that ignorance of course is merely a convention, just like Buddha, in which case we can be free of any struggle at all, now that we have discerned that since neither Buddha nor suffering exist we can all relax... Prasanga Beer!


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 29th, 2012 at 2:50 AM
Title: Re: World must go vege.
Content:
David N. Snyder said:
it is acceptable to eat meat from an environmental point.

Malcolm wrote:
That is not what anyone is saying. It is not acceptable to eat grain fed meat.

David N. Snyder said:
You are advocating pasture raised cattle for slaughter. This is not realistic, especially in a growing population. As Huseng mentions, the population densities are rising. What pasture is available in Bangladesh, for example?

Malcolm wrote:
It is more realistic that Mcmansions with five acres in subdivisions where even gardening is prohibited, much less raising fowl.

If you want to understand the issues around Indian agriculture, read Vandana Shiva and Annam Bhrama: Organic Food in India. Also read Fatal Harvest if you really want to know how screwed up the industrial agriculture system is. Going vegetarian won't fix it.

In our own country, as I said, massive agricultural reforms to stimulate small farms all over is what is needed to forestall any food supply crises.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 29th, 2012 at 2:29 AM
Title: Re: World must go vege.
Content:
David N. Snyder said:
it is acceptable to eat meat from an environmental point.

Malcolm wrote:
That is not what anyone is saying. It is not acceptable to eat grain fed meat.

It is also not necessary, or would not be necessary since Goverment regulations in the US, and so called food safety laws (which are actually unsafe) make it impossible for farmers to butcher steers, fowl and so on on their farms.

The Food Gestapo in the USA make alternatives to large-scale feedlot etc., production prohibitive.

Food production is one area where we need much, much less regulation than what is currently in place, and smarter, scalable regulation so that small producers are not regulated out of entering the market.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 29th, 2012 at 1:17 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:
SSJ3Gogeta said:
Ok we all can agree that

Mengagde nyingthig / yangti >>>>>other Dzogchen

Malcolm wrote:
If you cannot understad it, man ngag sde is completely useless.
If you cannot understand it, long sde is completely useless.
If you cannot understand it, atiyoga is completely useless.
If you cannot understand it, anuyoga is completely useless.
If you cannot understand it, mahayoga is completely useless.
If you cannot understand it,yoga is completely useless.
If you cannot understand it, upa is completely useless.
If you cannot understand it, kriya is completely useless.
If you cannot understand it, the bodhisattva yāna is completely useless.
If you cannot understand it, the śravaka and prateyekabuddha yanas are completely useless.
If you cannot understand it, the vehicle of tirthikas is completely useless
If you cannot understand it, even the vehicle of gods and men is completely useless.

Therefore, the supreme vehicle for you is the one you can understand and practice.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 29th, 2012 at 1:10 AM
Title: Re: How to disrupt any Buddhist conversation:
Content:
conebeckham said:
My son's name is Karma....as to how he works, well......

He's a recent graduate.  Need I say more?

Malcolm wrote:
In reality you do not have any son. Why, because if you had a son, then your son must have inherently arisen, but since there is no inherent existence your son cannot have arisen. Since there is no arising, you do not have any son, because it is impossible that there can be any arising. And we all know that this is what prasanga says, and even that does not say anything...


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 29th, 2012 at 12:43 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
yang ti is part of man ngag sde.


SSJ3Gogeta said:
oh yes thats right.

yangti thinks its higher than the innermost secret cycle though.

Malcolm wrote:
No, not really; everything in yang ti is in snying thig and vice versa, including dark retreat.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 29th, 2012 at 12:29 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:
SSJ3Gogeta said:
Everything I've seen presents upadesha (mengagde) as the best class........better than longde or semde.

Actually thats not true, because yangti class claims its even higher?


Malcolm wrote:
yang ti is part of man ngag sde.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 29th, 2012 at 12:04 AM
Title: How to disrupt any Buddhist conversation:
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Example:

Q: How does karma work?

A1: Karma means intention and what results from intention

A2: There is no karma because karma is just a name...

Conversation sputters and dies and or goes off into long irrelevant screeds about "prasanga" madhyamaka, etc.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 28th, 2012 at 11:42 PM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:
Pero said:
Because of the fact that several methods for recognizing rigpa in mengagde are the same in semde and longde (or vice versa) I see no reason to think it is different across the three series.

Malcolm wrote:
Ok, whatever you like to beleive.

Pero said:
But why do you think it's different (without bringing thogal in the mix)?

Malcolm wrote:
You just answered your own question. There is also the fact that sems sde does not result in rainbow body.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 28th, 2012 at 11:34 PM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:
Pero said:
Because of the fact that several methods for recognizing rigpa in mengagde are the same in semde and longde (or vice versa) I see no reason to think it is different across the three series.

Malcolm wrote:
Ok, whatever you like to beleive.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 28th, 2012 at 11:02 PM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:
heart said:
But if there is a difference in view it should amount to something.

Pero said:
To what do you mean?
Of course I'm not saying there aren't any differences, there certainly are, but rigpa is the same throughout the three series. This is IMO undeniable.
As for the view, I actually don't find the views contradictory but then the explanations of the various views of the three series are not that clear to me. It could be I'm just not smart enough to understand it.

heart said:
In general the way the views are defined in all the nine yanas are quite abstract and to understand them fully I think you have to have a deep knowledge of Buddhist philosophy. Still, the whole idea is that the view gets more and more refined and less conceptual. Even within the Mengakde there are the four cycles that have views that are described in this way as increasingly subtle non-conceptual. Even if it always, even in the lower yanas, it is the same rigpa that we recognize it is obvious that we later might define it conceptually as this or that. I think for example that this is the essential meaning of Karma Lingpas terma translated by John Reynolds as "Self-Liberation Through Seeing with Naked Awareness".

Thank you for the article, it was interesting.

/magnus


Malcolm wrote:
The difference in view in the three series is not conceptual, it is experiential.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 28th, 2012 at 7:06 AM
Title: Re: the drajyor macabre
Content:
conebeckham said:
Hey Malcolm-

Isn't that Manual of Standard Tibetan focused more on colloq.?  I've not seen it, but reading the blurbs leads me to believe it's more about spoken Tibetan....??

Malcolm wrote:
It is not exclusively focused on colloquial.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 28th, 2012 at 2:15 AM
Title: Re: World must go vege.
Content:


Malcolm wrote:
Grass fed (i.e.natural) beef does not require any grain at all. The solution to food shortages is decentralized intensive small farming.

M

Dave The Seeker said:
I agree with you on this point, but the acres needed to produce beef is pretty significant. One must have enough acres to rotational graze as the previously grazed pasture recovers. As well as for us in the north, where there is winter, a supply of food stuffs to accommodate the months of no growing.
Also the weather plays a significant role as well. This year has shown the proof of that with the drought like conditions all over the US. Without proper water there will be no grass to graze on.

We'll see how the beef prices soar soon. As I know many feed lots that are reducing their animal count due to grain prices going through the roof right now, and still climbing. As well as hay, highest prices in over 10 years, and other sources of fodder not doing well because of weather and the fuel costs to get these products to the feed lot.
Beef is becoming too expensive to produce. The cost in the market goes up, but the producers price barely sees an increase.

Malcolm wrote:
Such are the perils of farming. But the gross misuse of industrial agriculture just make it all worse and more perilous.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 28th, 2012 at 1:40 AM
Title: Re: World must go vege.
Content:
Nemo said:
40% of corn in the USA is used to make ethanol fuel. That is 1,537,500,000,000 pounds of corn. Enough to feed 1,404,109,589 people a pound of corn three times a day.  This percentage will continue to grow by legal mandate. Canada pays over 200 million a year in subsidies in a similar program IIRC. If we stopped using food for fuel we have enough already. These programs have made corn too expensive for Mexicans(ironic as corn comes from and is the main staple of Mexico) who then buy rice. Rice goes up in price and people start starving. I think the powers that be are fine with starving a few hundred million to death by the end of the decade. Going veg is irrelevant if all the extra food i being burned in SUV's.

If you want to make things better you have to grapple with the Great Taboo. Free Market Capitalism. If global capital has no moral constraints the point is moot. Starving people with no money never appear on a corporations bottom line.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 28th, 2012 at 1:29 AM
Title: Re: Is the universe made of the same substance?
Content:


Malcolm wrote:
The five elements permeate all matter. They are a phenomenological observation about matter, about how we experience matter viz. solids, liquids, gases, heat and dimensionaility. This is how they are defined even in Abhidharma, despite the naive atomism that is also found there.

M

Andrew108 said:
Why are they called 'elements'? The term doesn't seem accurate.

Malcolm wrote:
The actual term in Sanskrit is bhūta; in Tibetan, 'byung ba. The meaning is something like "producer". We say "elements" because we don't have a very good English word for translating this concept. We use the term element from Latin "elementum" which means either "principle" or "rudiment" or "first principle, element, basic constituent...".


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 28th, 2012 at 1:10 AM
Title: Re: Is the universe made of the same substance?
Content:
oushi said:
Interesting thing happens when you approve such a person analysis, and even encourage him to elaborate more.


Malcolm wrote:
Madhyamika bloviation is a common problem on this forum. Stick around long enough and you will likely agree.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 28th, 2012 at 1:08 AM
Title: Re: Is the universe made of the same substance?
Content:
Andrew108 said:
But then again the 5 element hypothesis is extremely limited (childish even). Scientists seem to have much more interesting and accurate explanations concerning what the universe is made of. Plus they just landed a one tonne mobile science experiment on Mars. I think they win.

Malcolm wrote:
The five elements permeate all matter. They are a phenomenological observation about matter, about how we experience matter viz. solids, liquids, gases, heat and dimensionaility. This is how they are defined even in Abhidharma, despite the naive atomism that is also found there.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 28th, 2012 at 12:58 AM
Title: Re: World must go vege.
Content:
Huseng said:
Take for example that you need something like 14 kilos of grain to produce 1 kilogram of beef. You could feed a lot more people with the grain than with the beef.

Malcolm wrote:
You do realize of course that steers do not naturally eat grain (corn)?

Grass fed (i.e.natural) beef does not require any grain at all. The solution to food shortages is decentralized intensive small farming.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 28th, 2012 at 12:41 AM
Title: Re: the drajyor macabre
Content:
Yudron said:
Just memorizing the Tibetan alphabet will go a long way towards helping you pronounce things, although pronunciations are very regional.

Note: Your post seems to be about some text of the Dzogchen Community.  The Dzogchen forum is for all Dzogchen people, so please either make DC posts to the DC thread, or be clear in the title of your post what you are talking about, e.g. this one could be "Struggling with English Phonetics for Tibetan Practice Texts" and include us all in.

Thanks.

Blue Garuda said:
Not meaning to be rude, so please take this in the right way - that's a daft idea.

Anyone is permitted to ask a specific question in the Dzogchen forum, including those by DC members about a DC topic.
The rest of DW is the same - staff run it that way.

Single topics do get buried in a huge thread like the DC one, which is very fast moving, and such a topic may be several pages back before even a day has passed.

What if you had a series of questions about your own Guru's teachings and practices - you'd lump the lot into one thread forever?

Unless you place all the topics related to each school in only one special thread as well, across the whole of DW, this is illogical.

Methinks you are being a little over-sensitive.  If it isn't of interest to you, don't read it - simple.

Yudron said:
Well, I don't disagree with you that anyone can post on any topic.

I don't know what Tibetan words the "drajyor" refers too, but many Tibetan practices have the same abbreviated name, e.g. lanal for (one of thousands of) lama'i naljyors.  Just put a clue in the title, e.g. "help sought with DC community drajyor", and this will be a much more welcoming forum.  I'm not the most sensitive person in the world, so if I'm feeling it I'm sure others who are less verbal than I are feeling it as well.

I think everyone wants to be friendly, welcoming and kind, here.  We just forget sometimes.

Malcolm wrote:
sgra sbyor meanings "putting sounds together" and is the name of ChNN's transcripton system.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 28th, 2012 at 12:39 AM
Title: Re: Is the universe made of the same substance?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
You need to stick around a bit longer and observe...

oushi said:
You are probably right, I just wanted to say that the more you pressure madhyamaka proponent, deeper into elaborating he goes. Negation is a starting point of disagreement.
Every concept is a sticker, truth is beyond words, so it cannot be tainted by words. Although, words can point to truth, so throwing them away is not wise.


Malcolm wrote:
It is just a practical observation -- I have observed again and again how peple misuse madhyamaka anlaysis to engage in one-upsmanship on intenet forums. It is very boring and not the purpose of madhyamaka analysis.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 27th, 2012 at 9:21 PM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:
simhanada said:
FYi yantra is a secondary practice.
How do you understand the differentiation of main and secondary practices Malcolm?

As simple as Guruyoga and everything else?

Or as Magnus suggested Semde, Longde. Mannagde?

Where does Yantra and Dance fall under that schema?

Malcolm wrote:
The only essential practice is ate guru yoga. However, we cannot spend our whole life sounding A, so we have other practices too.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 27th, 2012 at 9:19 PM
Title: Re: Is the universe made of the same substance?
Content:
DarwidHalim said:
Conventional truth is nothing more than just an opinion.

If this universe has substance, this universe cannot work.

Because it doesn't have substance, dependent origination can work.

Because it also doesn't have substance, by convention you cannot say this as such or such.

It is meaningless than to say that this universe is made of 5 elements + consciousness.

Why? Because it is nothing more than just a stricker.

A sticker.

Malcolm wrote:
You need detox from the crack of madhyamaka analysis because it makes a bore to converse with you.

oushi said:
By accepting DarwinHalim view, you would release his karma. By negating it, you create more of it.
This strong madhyamaka approach is not wrong, neither is it right. It is a ladder to no views. We should encourage people to climb it.

Malcolm wrote:
You need to stick around a bit longer and observe...


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 27th, 2012 at 9:18 PM
Title: Re: the drajyor macabre
Content:
treehuggingoctopus said:
Thanks Malcolm.

And you know what, I'm going to. Could you recommend some decent handbooks, please? I'm afraid I'll have to do it all by myself, at least initially; can't really afford private lessons.

Malcolm wrote:
Manual of standard Tibetan.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 27th, 2012 at 8:33 PM
Title: Re: Is the universe made of the same substance?
Content:
DarwidHalim said:
Conventional truth is nothing more than just an opinion.

If this universe has substance, this universe cannot work.

Because it doesn't have substance, dependent origination can work.

Because it also doesn't have substance, by convention you cannot say this as such or such.

It is meaningless than to say that this universe is made of 5 elements + consciousness.

Why? Because it is nothing more than just a stricker.

A sticker.

Malcolm wrote:
You need detox from the crack of madhyamaka analysis because it makes a bore to converse with you.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 27th, 2012 at 8:29 PM
Title: Re: the drajyor macabre
Content:
treehuggingoctopus said:
Argh.

I've finally decided to teach myself to read drajyor correctly - ChNN stresses time and again that we should learn to pronounce Tibetan words in a way that is at least a bit related to the way they should be pronounced, and he's of course damn right. Enough of this silly pseudo-Tibetan chanting then, let's get down to business properly at last.

So I got meself the Drajyor book and the newly published Mantras and Invocations DVD/book combo, and started to analyse the drajyor transcriptions of the basic things we all know (or thought we knew) and love, such as the seven line prayer or Jigme Lingpa's puja, against the background of Rinpoche's reading them out slowly and clearly.

And it turns out that many of the rules spelled out in the drajyor book just don't make sense. If your apply the rules, you produce an utterance that as often corresponds to what ChNN actually says as it is way off the mark.

Has anyone tried to sort it out? Any guidance, any help? Are there any DOI handouts? A homebrew errata perhaps?

Help me, Dharma-Wheel. You're my only hope.

Btw, I don't speak or read Tibetan, of course, but I'm a philologist. Which is to say, if you want to, by all means get technical.

Malcolm wrote:
Just learn Tibetan.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 27th, 2012 at 8:27 PM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:
heart said:
Just a small comment, I think when ChNNR says "main practice" he means Semde, Longde and Mengakde. Rushan and Semdzin are actually preliminaries to the Mengakde.
/magnus

simhanada said:
Cool, thankyou for the clarification

Malcolm wrote:
FYi yantra is a secondary practice.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 26th, 2012 at 10:26 PM
Title: Re: Is the universe made of the same substance?
Content:


DarwidHalim said:
Conventionally, we can assume there is substance. But, that is just agreement based on unfound bases.

Conventionally as well, we can assert there is no substance, because by convention you cannot find anything when you separate the things into the smallest size.

Malcolm wrote:
You don't really understand the meaning of "conventional" -- "conventional" means "prior to analysis" for Madhyamaka, whether Candrakirti or anyone else.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 26th, 2012 at 8:46 PM
Title: Re: Is the universe made of the same substance?
Content:
DarwidHalim said:
There is no substance in this universe, not even fire, water, earth, space, wind, and consciousness.


Malcolm wrote:
Conventionally speaking, even in Madhyamaka, the universe is made of five elements plus consciousness, the so called sadadhātu.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 26th, 2012 at 8:40 PM
Title: Re: Is the universe made of the same substance?
Content:
Music said:
Whatever that substance is.

Jyoti said:
Consciousness (the body) and the seed of consciousness (means). The five elements do not exist apart from consciousness, the manifestation of all phenomena internal and external is due to the perfuming of the various seeds within consciousness.

Malcolm wrote:
Conventionally speaking, even in Yogacara, the universe is made of five elements plus consciousness, the so called sadadhātu.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 26th, 2012 at 2:01 AM
Title: Re: Dorje Drolo and Dzogchen
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
I have also been told, in connection with the Tersar lineage that Drollo is considered something like the essence of Kilaya and when I talked with Shenphen Rinpoche, he confirmed that indeed, all the instructions from Namchag Putri concerning Dzogchen etc., were applicable to Drollo since there is no elaborate set ofseperate teachings on Dzogchen for Drollo.

dakini_boi said:
Is this the case also with tsa lung practices?  I.E. the tsa lung from Namchag Putri being applied as completion stage practices for Dorje Drollo?


Malcolm wrote:
Yes, precisely.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 26th, 2012 at 2:00 AM
Title: Re: The Five Sciences and Buddhism
Content:


kirtu said:
You can hear Americans from everywhere make statements about some branch of knowledge being useless.

Malcolm wrote:
You might, I never do.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 26th, 2012 at 1:26 AM
Title: Re: The Five Sciences and Buddhism
Content:
kirtu said:
Malcolm in the past has said that my observation of these kinds of things is due to a limited experience of the US

Malcolm wrote:
we live in different countries. I don't live in the America you live in.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 26th, 2012 at 1:09 AM
Title: Re: The Five Sciences and Buddhism
Content:


kirtu said:
Having studied all of them except medicine, mathematics and logic are the most useful.

Of course this just means that particular people have particular affinities with different fields of study.

Kirt

Malcolm wrote:
Adhyātma vidya means Buddhism i.e. the inner sciences.

Math does not really mean math as you understand it -- it means calculating calendars, mostly.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 26th, 2012 at 12:10 AM
Title: Re: Dorje Drolo and Dzogchen
Content:
Sherlock said:
The recent Garuda donwang that ChNN gave seems to combine Hayagriva as well as Vajrakilaya too.


Malcolm wrote:
And Vajrapani.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 25th, 2012 at 11:49 PM
Title: Re: Dorje Drolo and Dzogchen
Content:
Blue Garuda said:
https://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=48&t=6781&hilit=DROLLO#p80925

I understand Drollo can be used in the Thuns in place of Guru Tragphur.

Yudron said:
In most Dzogchen lineages, but not all, Drolo and Phurba are practiced separately.  In your lama's terma tradition they are together.

Malcolm wrote:
Dragphur that is used in Dzogchen Community is actually a combination of Guru Dragpo,KIlaya, Hayagriva, Yangdag Heruka, Vajrapani and Garuda.

The principle of Dragphur is based on the so called "Son kilayas"of the KIlaya mandala, which is where the lower activities are concerned.

Most major cycles of terma have some form or another of a Tragpur yidam, including Dudjom Lingpa's termas.

Guru Dorje Drollo and Guru Dragpo are generally considered synoymous and often you see the mantra for Dragpo being used for Drollo Sadhanas.  When I first receive the Dudjom Tersar tradition of Drollo from Ngagpa Yeshe Dorje, he explained the account of Guru Dragpo subduing Pehar. I have also been told, in connection with the Tersar lineage that Drollo is considered something like the essence of Kilaya and when I talked with Shenphen Rinpoche, he confirmed that indeed, all the instructions from Namchag Putri concerning Dzogchen etc., were applicable to Drollo since there is no elaborate set ofseperate teachings on Dzogchen for Drollo.

However, it is not the case Guru Dragphur is Drollo combined with Phurba -- ChNN never explains it that way. Dorje Drollo is Dorje Drollo; Guru Dragphur is Guru Dragphur. They are more less the same in function. But they have different sources. According to ChNN, origin of Drollo is in Bhutan, where Drollo subdued the Bon deity Ati Muwer, and took her as his mount. The origin of Dragpo is Samye, where Guru Rinpoche subdued Pehar.

Further, the place of Paro Taktsang was the site of a tiger god worshipped by the ancient people living there; and Paro Takstang was hit by a flaming meteor which was taken as sign of that god. This ancient memory is referenced in the Padma Srogdrup sadhana of Dudjom Tersar.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 25th, 2012 at 8:15 PM
Title: Re: Trungpa Rinpoche and the Green woman?
Content:
illusionsgame said:
People like that need to be told to go sit.

Malcolm wrote:
It is not your business to condition people one way or another.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 25th, 2012 at 8:11 PM
Title: Re: Dorje Drolo and Dzogchen
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Drollo is means total integration. When you are totally integrated, everything becomes your servant.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 25th, 2012 at 7:29 PM
Title: Re: The Five Sciences and Buddhism
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Having studied them all, they are useful, especially medicine and adhyātma-vidyā

Huseng said:
What prompted you to study medicine? Was it a long-term interest or something that was sparked at some particular point?

Malcolm wrote:
I became interested in herbal medicine, and then the opportunity arose to study tibetan medicine. Glad I did.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 25th, 2012 at 6:30 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:
Karma Dondrup Tashi said:
?

I seem to recall he wrote about her in PV but I'm not home right now and can't check.

Malcolm wrote:
Sure, but there are no practices in the DC that involve her specifically.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 25th, 2012 at 1:24 AM
Title: Re: How do mind-streams interact?
Content:
mirage said:
So far I fail to understand how such a thing can be explained without falling into indirect realism of some sort or whatever.

futerko said:
I'm not sure I follow you here, if anything, Buddhism appears to be a form of subjective idealism, at least at a "naive" level.

mirage said:
Most contemporary authors, including Lusthaus whose book I am currently reading, seem very much opposed to the definition of Yogacara as any kind of idealism. So far I do not understand how do they classify it themselves.

But yes, on my current (indeed very "naive") level Yogacara looks somewhat similar to subjective idealism. So, the question is: how can subjective idealism avoid sliding into solipsism (or at least "functional solipsism" - other minds exist, but they are entirely separate and do not interact with our mind)?

Malcolm wrote:
This has been accounted for: mutual traces project a common container universe. This is discussed in the Mahāyāna Saṃgraha at length. If you read that book, your question will be answered.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 24th, 2012 at 11:18 PM
Title: Re: The Five Sciences and Buddhism
Content:
Huseng said:
In ancient Mahāyāna there developed an appreciation for the five sciences (pañca-vidyā), a kind of extracurricular set of pursuits that a bodhisattva could pursue for the benefit of beings. They include:

-grammar and composition (śabda-vidyā)
-the arts and mathematics (śilpakarma-sthāna-vidyā)
-medicine (cikitsā-vidyā)
-logic-epistemology (hetu-vidyā)
-philosophy (adhyātma-vidyā)

This perhaps reflects a more intellectual side to Indian Buddhism, but nevertheless the idea is that if someone is able they can and should pursue such studies as it enables a practitioner to further understand and benefit the world while more efficiently operating within it. It may not be directly aimed at liberation, but such knowledges are still useful nevertheless.

So how do you personally feel about studying such subjects? Do you think they would be worthwhile? If you have studied them, do you feel it benefits you as a practitioner? Have you helped others as a result?


Malcolm wrote:
Having studied them all, they are useful, especially medicine and adhyātma-vidyā


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 24th, 2012 at 11:16 PM
Title: Re: Is the universe made of the same substance?
Content:
Huseng said:
The universe is a result of the collective karma of all beings.


Malcolm wrote:
That is what makes it [collective karma], but that is not what it is made of i.e. like a potter and clay.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 24th, 2012 at 11:15 PM
Title: Re: How do mind-streams interact?
Content:
mirage said:
We have a very common example of the situation I am talking about: dreams. In dreams we interact with "people", but they are not sentient beings.

Huseng said:
Sometimes they are.

mirage said:
Maybe. But what matters in this case is that often they are not.

Malcolm wrote:
Only if you decide that the waking state is more real than dreaming, in which case you have sunk your whole position of doubt.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 24th, 2012 at 10:49 PM
Title: Re: Is the universe made of the same substance?
Content:
Music said:
Whatever that substance is.

Malcolm wrote:
The universe and everything it are made of six elements:

Earth, water, fire, air, space and consciousness.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 24th, 2012 at 10:44 PM
Title: Re: Rebirth
Content:
Music said:
Wouldn't that mean each person is on a different level?

Malcolm wrote:
Yes.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 24th, 2012 at 10:34 PM
Title: Re: How do mind-streams interact?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
You do not need to make it so complicated.We are communicating right now using words, via a print media i.e. body.

mirage said:
Oh, I do not know about that. I might as well be seeing a kind of a dream, and these words on my screen are just a bit of my karma manifesting, without any other sentient being involved. Probably good karma, but still.

Malcolm wrote:
Don't be silly, it simply a matter of conventional fact.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 24th, 2012 at 9:43 PM
Title: Re: Who is ngagpa?
Content:
Gyalpo said:
Also many western monks do have photos in robes. Does it make them pretenders?

Malcolm wrote:
The difference, Gyalpo, is that for monks wearing robes is actually part of their vows. The same cannot be said of so called Ngagpas. I have read many fulfillment rituals, I never saw one where a Ngagpa needed to confess not wearing his or her religious gear.

But like Joe said, if you are in a Sangha where the teacher likes his students to wear such things, then it is better to please your teacher.

ChNN thinks such things are pretty ridiculous on westerners, so I don't wear such articles. I prefer the shamanic hippy look.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 24th, 2012 at 9:36 PM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:
underthetree said:
Slightly off the wall question:

Does ChNN Rinpoche teach a practice of Yeshe Tsogyal?.

Malcolm wrote:
Not that I am aware of.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 24th, 2012 at 9:33 PM
Title: Re: How do mind-streams interact?
Content:
mirage said:
But I find the question of intersubjectivity to be very relevant to the aims of Mahayana. If the ultimate aim is Buddhahood for the benefit of all sentient beings, then any Mahayana philosophy has to explain how beings can possibly interact with each other.

Malcolm wrote:
I already explained: body, voice and mind.

mirage said:
Sorry, but I do not understand how this answers the question I asked earlier - the example with Eiffel Tower.


Malcolm wrote:
You do not need to make it so complicated.We are communicating right now using words, via a print media i.e. body. If we were talking that would be voice, if we had advanced skills of claivoyance, we could communicate mind to mind.

We do not need things like intersubjectivity and so on. They are rabbit holes.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 24th, 2012 at 9:04 PM
Title: Re: How do mind-streams interact?
Content:
futerko said:
The issue of epistemology focuses on the question of knowledge of phenomena which is less of an issue if one's focus of enquiry is the study of the structures of consciousness and the phenomena that appear in acts of consciousness.

Rather than the issue of objective knowledge, Buddhism enquires as the conditions for anything appearing at all - the focus is not about the truth "behind" appearances, but the truth about them.

mirage said:
But I find the question of intersubjectivity to be very relevant to the aims of Mahayana. If the ultimate aim is Buddhahood for the benefit of all sentient beings, then any Mahayana philosophy has to explain how beings can possibly interact with each other.

Malcolm wrote:
I already explained: body, voice and mind.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 24th, 2012 at 9:47 AM
Title: Re: essential tremor
Content:
Jikan said:
Essential tremor seems to run in my family.  I have some symptoms sometimes; these are mitigated by avoiding excesses of coffee and staying present in the moment.  I still get the shakes though.

what are the causes of this condition in TM?  general advice?

Malcolm wrote:
Without seeing you in person, it is hard to say.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 24th, 2012 at 5:04 AM
Title: Re: How do mind-streams interact?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
This is all explained pretty well in teh Mahāyāna Saṃhraha, from a Yogacara perspective.

Madhyamakas in general accept the outer universe etc., conventionally speaking.

mirage said:
Thanks. Actually, if I am trying to develop the right view to understand Buddhist practice on a deeper level, is it worth it to investigate Yogacara, or should I go straight for Madhyamaka which is considered a superior school? On the other hand, Yogacara seems far easier to understand.


Malcolm wrote:
Yogacara is much more difficult to understand than Madhyamaka.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 24th, 2012 at 2:20 AM
Title: Re: Offering The First Portion Of Every Meal
Content:
ToddR said:
Hello, been a lurker here for a while but this is my first posting.

I've been wondering how others perform the offerings of the first portion of every meal to the three jewels. Is there a specific procedure that most follow? Also, when eating out, would you bring back the first portion and place it on the shrine?

Any help or comments would be appreciated.

Thanks

Malcolm wrote:
You just offer the food before you yourself eat it -- this is called "offering the first portion".


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 24th, 2012 at 2:18 AM
Title: Re: How do mind-streams interact?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Only in Yogacara. And even within Yogacara in India there were several different schools, half-eggists, true aspectarians, false aspectarians, etc.

mirage said:
Could you please recommend a book or an article, where Yogacara and Madhyamaka viewpoints are explained in a more-or-less accessible way?
Malcolm wrote:
Shared or like traces produce a common container universe.

mirage said:
I understand that similar traces would produce similar phenomena in different mind-streams. But wouldn't it actually just result in two "synchronized" mind-streams, meaning that being A would see phenomena corresponding to being B and vice versa, and they would seemingly interact, but in fact their mind-streams would remain completely independent? I recall reading something like that.

Another example: person A sees an Eiffel Tower, and person B sees an Eiffel Tower. This actually means that phenomenon a1, labelled  "Eiffel Tower", appears in mind-stream A, and phenomenon b1, labelled  "Eiffel Tower", appears in mind-stream B. Phenomena a1 and b1 are distinct. How are they connected? There is no thing-in-itself which would produce both a1 and b1, connecting them.

Malcolm wrote:
This is all explained pretty well in teh Mahāyāna Saṃhraha, from a Yogacara perspective.

Madhyamakas in general accept the outer universe etc., conventionally speaking.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 24th, 2012 at 12:38 AM
Title: Re: How do mind-streams interact?
Content:
futerko said:
The idea of an existing thing-in-itself means something unchanging and eternal, and it is this that is disproven, but it does not then follow that phenomena do not appear whatsover.

mirage said:
True, phenomena do appear, that is obvious. But phenomena appear within mind-streams, right (or mind-streams consist of phenomena, I do not know which is the more correct way to say it)? So we have mind-stream A, in which phenomena a1, a2, a3... appear, and mind-stream B, in which phenomena b1, b2, b3... appear. How are they related and in what manner a material inter-subjective universe can exist?

Malcolm wrote:
Shared or like traces produce a common container universe.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 24th, 2012 at 12:37 AM
Title: Re: How do mind-streams interact?
Content:
mirage said:
But isn't it stated that everything that a being experiences is a result of a ripening karmic seed from that beings alayavijnana?

Malcolm wrote:
Only in Yogacara. And even within Yogacara in India there were several different schools, half-eggists, true aspectarians, false aspectarians, etc.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 23rd, 2012 at 10:43 PM
Title: Re: Atomic/Rainbow Body
Content:


Jeff said:
What words would you (or anyone else) use to describe the "feeling" of mindfulness from a Dzogchen perspective?

Malcolm wrote:
Mindfulness is just mindfulness -- it simply means that you know what you are doing when you are doing. For example, when typing a post, you know you are typing a post -- it is not different than any other form of mindfulness. The caveat only is that if you are a Dzogchen practitioner, than part of your mindfulness is informed by your discovery of your real nature.

Otherwise, there is no genuinely special form of mindfulness called "Dzogchen mindfulness".

Jeff said:
I agree that mindfulness is just mindfulness (when residing in mindfulness) and everything just feels "normal".

But, when for the first time experiencing (slipping into) mindfulness... Was there no "peaceful" feel of that "easy chair"? My experience has been a "growth" in being able to stay mindful (focused on the moment).


Malcolm wrote:
I suppose you could say there is a kind of a flowing experience.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 23rd, 2012 at 9:59 PM
Title: Re: Atomic/Rainbow Body
Content:


Jeff said:
What words would you (or anyone else) use to describe the "feeling" of mindfulness from a Dzogchen perspective?

Malcolm wrote:
Mindfulness is just mindfulness -- it simply means that you know what you are doing when you are doing. For example, when typing a post, you know you are typing a post -- it is not different than any other form of mindfulness. The caveat only is that if you are a Dzogchen practitioner, than part of your mindfulness is informed by your discovery of your real nature.

Otherwise, there is no genuinely special form of mindfulness called "Dzogchen mindfulness".


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 23rd, 2012 at 9:39 PM
Title: Re: How do mind-streams interact?
Content:
mirage said:
Hello everyone,

I am fairly new to Buddhism, so I have some basic questions.
As I understand, in Buddhist thought a sentient being is basically a mind-stream, i.e. a sequence of experienced states (I may be using wrong terminology here). These mind-streams are distinct - they are not all parts of a single universal consciousness, or something. This makes sense - if they were not distinct, we would all have the same experiences.
(I suppose this is a Yogacara position? Madhyamaka seems to be completely beyond me so far.)
My question is: how do sentient beings interact with each other? Because I am getting the impression that in the described model interaction would be in fact impossible - and how would then Buddhas and Boddhisattvas aid other sentient beings and so on?

Malcolm wrote:
conventionally sentient beings are series of aggregates inhabiting a universe, even for Yogacara. They interact with their bodies and voices on the materiallevel mostly; though some can interact directly through mind.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 23rd, 2012 at 9:16 PM
Title: Re: Atomic/Rainbow Body
Content:
Jeff said:
Could you describe how it would be different? Does not a senior student feel light/divine love in the presence of someone who has attained Rigpa? (Divine love "feels" more like a combination of "peace" and "joy" than what we normally describe as romantic love.)



SSJ3Gogeta said:
Divine love?

Dzogchen is nothing like this.  Its not like New Age love and light B.S.

Jeff said:
From a post by muni...

Tibetan teacher Tsoknyi Rinpoche describes the layers of self that cover over our "essence love," and the way that mindfulness reconnects us to our true nature.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dmEce-DxTYc " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Malcolm wrote:
But he is not really talking about Dzogchen. What he is describing is from a common Mahāyan̄a point of view.

The Dzogchen approach to developing compassion is not to cultivate compassion through mindfulness and so on, observing how one feels, etc. The Dzogchen approach is based on discovering one's real nature. Once that is discovered, it is impossible not to have compassion for all sentient beings who are ignorant of their real nature -- that is "essencelove".

However, SSJ3 is correct: Dzogchen is not connected with so called New age love and light trips.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 23rd, 2012 at 4:56 AM
Title: Re: Beings and consciousnesses, one or many?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
citta santana means "mind stream".

Karma Dondrup Tashi said:
_/\_

Right. But I meant - the mindsteam is the bindu, correct? I.e. they aren't really different things?

Malcolm wrote:
In father tantra, bindu refers to vāyu.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 23rd, 2012 at 4:36 AM
Title: Re: Who is ngagpa?
Content:
Jikan said:
a practical question on the hair commitment:

It seems to me from casual observation that many Tibetan men who keep this commitment do so with a simple topknot, and it's easy because the have so little hair.  Let's say you're gifted in the follicle department:  do you keep it in a topknot samurai style?  braided and out of the way?  or let it dread up for less maintenance?  or might it make sense to keep it covered as the Sikhs do?

Blue Garuda said:
And what about the beard?

Malcolm wrote:
It is skra dbang -- there is no need for a beard. Beards are not skra. Skra is the hair on your head, only.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 23rd, 2012 at 2:39 AM
Title: Re: Who is ngagpa?
Content:
Jikan said:
a practical question on the hair commitment:

It seems to me from casual observation that many Tibetan men who keep this commitment do so with a simple topknot, and it's easy because the have so little hair.  Let's say you're gifted in the follicle department:  do you keep it in a topknot samurai style?  braided and out of the way?  or let it dread up for less maintenance?  or might it make sense to keep it covered as the Sikhs do?

Malcolm wrote:
It does not matter how you where your hair. A lot of Ngagpas in Tibet have dreads.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 23rd, 2012 at 2:35 AM
Title: Re: Beings and consciousnesses, one or many?
Content:
Greg said:
In fairness, it is not entirely clear how grahika and grahya could be nondual and yet cittasantanas are still multiple in some sense. One can also see how East Asian stuff like rocks and mountains having Buddha nature arose - if  grahika and grahya are nondual how could they not?

Malcolm wrote:
Cittasantanas are real. Subject and object are not.

Greg said:
I'm still not clear as to how cittasantanas could be real and multiple without being subjects and objects of one another. Multiplicity and nonduality would seem to be mutually exclusive.

Malcolm wrote:
They can be subjects and objects of each other. This is specifically admitted in Yogacara theory. What does not exist is the apparent external world of subjects and objects.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 23rd, 2012 at 2:33 AM
Title: Re: Beings and consciousnesses, one or many?
Content:
Karma Dondrup Tashi said:
Please excuse the newb question - I presume in Vajrayana 'citta-santana' is pretty much the same as 'bindu'?


Malcolm wrote:
citta santana means "mind stream".


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 22nd, 2012 at 8:29 PM
Title: Re: Asceticism in TB and "The Middle Way"
Content:
Jnana said:
It doesn't matter what kind of teacher s/he claims to be. It's still a ridiculous characterization that doesn't at all describe the monks and nuns that I've known.

Malcolm wrote:
This is the whole statement by Rajneesh, and it has nothing to do with Bhiḳṣus, actually:

The more cultured and civilised the more dead. If you want to see perfectly dead men and yet still alive go to the monks in the monasteries, go to the priests in the churches, the Pope in the Vatican. They are not alive – they are so afraid of life, so afraid of nature that they have suppressed it from everywhere. They are already in their graves. You can paint the grave, you can even make a marble grave, very valuable – but the man inside is dead.

He is talking about Christian monasticism. Now, it still may not be an accurate statement, but nevertheless, the origin of the statement is in the contect of a discussion of Chang Tzu.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 22nd, 2012 at 10:36 AM
Title: Re: Beings and consciousnesses, one or many?
Content:
Greg said:
In fairness, it is not entirely clear how grahika and grahya could be nondual and yet cittasantanas are still multiple in some sense. One can also see how East Asian stuff like rocks and mountains having Buddha nature arose - if  grahika and grahya are nondual how could they not?

Malcolm wrote:
Cittasantanas are real. Subject and object are not.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 22nd, 2012 at 3:21 AM
Title: Re: Why follow one tradition of Buddhism?
Content:
KeithBC said:
The traditional protection agains such things is adherence to a traditional lineage.

Malcolm wrote:
Virtually all of the sexual misconduct I have heard about is in traditional lineages with traditional teachers.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 22nd, 2012 at 12:55 AM
Title: Re: Why follow one tradition of Buddhism?
Content:
Caz said:
With respect to Lama Phabonkhapa it would be fairly foolish to consider him sectarian when he incorporated the the Vajrayogini practice from the Sakya system.

Malcolm wrote:
It is proper to consider him sectarian based on the numerous grossly sectarian comments scattered in his collected works.

M

Caz said:
And yet when he taught he taught to all regardless of sect. But lets not get into the business of dragging Lama's names through the mud. Sectarianism to combat Sectarianism is still Sectarianism.

Malcolm wrote:
Of course, it is called "making converts".

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 21st, 2012 at 11:45 PM
Title: Re: Beings and consciousnesses, one or many?
Content:
viniketa said:
My point is that the ālayavijñāna seems to speak to 'dual existence' (in samsāra), while the vimuktikāyo is said to be dvidhādauṣṭhulyahānitaḥ, sa evānāśravo dhātur acintyaḥ kuśalo dhruvaḥ.

My understanding is that the ālayavijñāna contains bīja, vāsanā (karmic 'impressions') which provide 'initial conditions' for a continuum.  But I do not find in the literature that those vāsanā, if bīja are 'nullified', have any effect on the process of āśrayasyaparāvṛtti, 'return to the basis'.

This is what I am finding confusing.


Malcolm wrote:
The transformation of the basis is the conversion of vijñāna to jñāna based on the eradication of the bijas.

The Mahāyāna saṃgraha contains a complete account.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 21st, 2012 at 11:42 PM
Title: Re: Atomic/Rainbow Body
Content:
Jeff said:
No offense taken. I think you will find the terms/experiences that I am describing are part of many paths.

Malcolm wrote:
There are experiences in the Dzoghen path that are shared. There are experiences in the Dzogchen path that are unique to that path. Rainbow body comes from the latter experiences, and not the former.

Jeff said:
That may well be true. Those are the differences that I have looking for.

Malcolm wrote:
Well, then, you need to find a Dzogchen master in whom you have faith, recieve transmission and do whatever he or she says.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 21st, 2012 at 11:00 PM
Title: Re: Beings and consciousnesses, one or many?
Content:
viniketa said:
Thank you again, Joyti, for your reply.

I'm attempting to follow this discussion, so would like to back-up a bit...

malcolm said:
Correct, the Yogacara schools asserts an essence. This is why the Madhyamakas refer to them as "vastuvadins" i.e. realists. In other words, they are non-dualists because all phenomena of skandhas, dhātus and ayatanas are mind only. They are realists because they propose the existence of individual continuums.

viniketa said:
To which "Madhymakas" does this refer, specifically?

Malcolm wrote:
All Indian Madhyamaka.


viniketa said:
Also, the "individual continuums", I assume, are ālayavijñāna?

Thanks in advance.


Malcolm wrote:
Well, we can know this is so because Asanga, defending on the concept of ālayavijñāna asserts that it is the same thing as what is referred to in the "Nikaya" schools as the bhavaṅga-citta, the so called re-linking consciousness.

viniketa said:
Where, in Yogācāra literature, is the connection between ālayavijñāna and āśrayasya parāvṛttir?

Malcolm wrote:
Mahāyāna Saṃgraha, Trimsika, Yogacarabhumi, etc.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 21st, 2012 at 10:57 PM
Title: Re: ālayavijñāna, one or separate?
Content:


Jyoti said:
Actually I'm refering to your statement about dzogchen "The basis described in Dzocghen has no essence, is not established in anyway, being originally pure. In other word, the basis in Dzogchen is kadag, emptiness free from all extremes. " Your argument just point back to your own statement rendering it as of duality.

You also criticize proponents of yogacara as realists and advice me to read which I did, but I don't see any, mind to provide the reason why you think it is falling on the side of existence?

Malcolm wrote:
All statements made are necessarily confined to language, all language is dualistic. If you wish to be in the realm of non-duality, then don't say anything.

You need to read more thorougly and carefully.

But frankly, I don't see much point in continuing this conversation, since you are not here to learn.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 21st, 2012 at 10:33 PM
Title: Re: Atomic/Rainbow Body
Content:
Jeff said:
No offense taken. I think you will find the terms/experiences that I am describing are part of many paths.

Malcolm wrote:
There are experiences in the Dzoghen path that are shared. There are experiences in the Dzogchen path that are unique to that path. Rainbow body comes from the latter experiences, and not the former.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 21st, 2012 at 10:12 PM
Title: Re: ālayavijñāna, one or separate?
Content:


Jyoti said:
According to your logic, then the need to mention 'free from all extremes' mean such a doctrine is of 'duality, not free from extremes', then that would apply to your own view of dzogchen as well.

Malcolm wrote:
No, I never said that doctrine of Advaita was dualistic, merely that it fell on the side of existence. Likewise, Yogacara is a non-dual teaching, but it too falls on the side of existence.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 21st, 2012 at 10:01 PM
Title: Re: Tsong Khapa, form realm shamatha and emptiness
Content:
Virgo said:
Just so you know, in Theravada, vipassana refers to actual moments of penetrative insight, not to techniques that may or may not bring vipassana about.  Concentration is present with every arisen citta, so vipassana, including all stages of it, is possible at any moment.  This is why non-meditators and even some who were not exactly upstanding citizens gained insight (became aryas) while listening to an explanation by Buddha, etc.  For some people shamatha might be an aid because if done correctly it is kusala, or wholesome, and all kusala is an aid in wisdom.

Kevin

Tom said:
I am only slightly familiar with the Pāli tradition, however, I find the relationship between vipassana and Kuśala and the semantic differences between Kuśala and Puñña to be quite a fascinating topic. I think that understanding the difference between Kuśala and Puñña sheds light on the roles of samtha and vipassana but that is a little controversial and takes us down a different rabbit hole … anyways gotta run ...

Jnana said:
According to the Pāli Abhidhamma every skillful mind (kusala citta) includes both samatha & vipassanā.

Malcolm wrote:
Kusala is better translated as "positive".


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 21st, 2012 at 9:49 PM
Title: Re: ālayavijñāna, one or separate?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
The basis described in Dzocghen has no essence, is not established in anyway, being originally pure. In other word, the basis in Dzogchen is kadag, emptiness free from all extremes.

Jyoti said:
What is this kadag (emptiness) then, if an essence is nondual, there is no need to say 'free from all extremes'.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, there is a need, precisely because Advaitan non-duality is not free from extremes, it is the extreme of existence.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 21st, 2012 at 9:46 PM
Title: Re: Why follow one tradition of Buddhism?
Content:
JKhedrup said:
Yes, many Gelug teachers are trying to make peace with this. No one can deny what is there in black and white in his collected works, and not just one volume. Malcolm can direct you to where to find it. (He sent the stuff to me and as my Tibetan improved I forced myself to read it).

In fact, I thank Malcolm for opening my eyes in this way because it caused me a lot of soul searching and helped me find my own way of coping in the very traditional Tibetan Buddhist settings in which I work and live. (Well, it was one of several factors but much appreciated).

History has so many lessons to teach us. Some of them are painful.

Malcolm, I am sure... And I would think you are probably right that it was Ngulchu Dharmabhadra's commentary. Do you think that most of the Sakya lamas would be willing to give someone like me an initiation, who has had it previously in Gelug? It would be nice to be able to take a broader range of teachings on it.

I would love to know what the things Phabongkhapa instituted are, but I am betting they are too detailed for discussion on a general forum.

Malcolm wrote:
Any Sakya lama would happily give you the dbang lung and khri of the Naro Khacho system.

Major changes Pabhongkha made was tossing out the introduction to Dharmata; and he made the Guru yoga section very complicated in a completely unnecessary way, he added offerings and so on that are not needed, etc. In other words, he tried to bring the sadhana into line with Gelug expectations of a Cakrasamvara sadhana.

Actually, one on the most important commentaries in Sakya on Naro Khacho was written by a Gelug disciple of Khyentse Wangpo.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 21st, 2012 at 9:33 PM
Title: Re: ālayavijñāna, one or separate?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
You need to start providing citations -- and not just your so called "logic".

I don't care if someone is a Buddhist or a Hindu or whatever, but it pains me to see anyone so thoroughly misrepresent both traditions as you are doing here.

Jyoti said:
The mahayana scriptures don't specially mentioned this topic but the dzogchen scriptures and commentaries does provide some clues, with concept such as 'phenomena is mere appearance without an essence', the concept of 'existence of samantabadra as unique', etc. I'm sure you don't need me to provide citation for these.

Malcolm wrote:
If you are going to assert that the intention of Dzogchen and Advaita are the same, then you need to provide side by side citations.

There is no point of course, because, for example, the Rig pa rang shar specifically refutes Advaita, naming Shankaracarya by name in the 25th chapter.

So what I am telling you is that even if you try to present citations from both Advaita and Dzogchen to try and illustrate their commonality, it will be easy to show how you are mistaken.

Sadly, many people make the same mistake you are making and come up with a system that is called "ra ma lug" in Tibetan i.e. a system that is neither a goat nor a sheep. How do they do this? By relying on their own intellectual contrivances.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 21st, 2012 at 9:29 PM
Title: Re: Why follow one tradition of Buddhism?
Content:
JKhedrup said:
Even one Sakya lama praised some of the Gelug commentaries on VY but asked that this not be broadcast too widely!


Malcolm wrote:
The Sakya commentaries written Dharmabhadra and Thugkwan are fine in that they do not depart at all from the earlier Sakya commentaries. Pabhongakha instituted some novelties in his presentation of the system that earned some criticism by the present head of Sakya. It is for this reason that if you want to hear the Vajrayogini teachings from a Sakya Lama you must receive the empowerment from a Sakya lama.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 21st, 2012 at 9:26 PM
Title: Re: Why follow one tradition of Buddhism?
Content:
Caz said:
With respect to Lama Phabonkhapa it would be fairly foolish to consider him sectarian when he incorporated the the Vajrayogini practice from the Sakya system.

Malcolm wrote:
It is proper to consider him sectarian based on the numerous grossly sectarian comments scattered in his collected works.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 21st, 2012 at 9:22 PM
Title: Re: ālayavijñāna, one or separate?
Content:
Jyoti said:
there is no contradiction to the advaita vedanta and dzogchen perspective of the basis.


Malcolm wrote:
Of course there are differences: deep and important differences. Only someone ignorant of the details of both with make such a ridiculous claim.

Jyoti said:
The basis (body) has no details more than what is describe here, only the means are much difference with the three but we are not talking about the means here.

Malcolm wrote:
Brahman, the basis if you will, of Advaita Vendanta, is described as sat, cit, ananda -- being, conciousness and bliss. It is truly existent, unproduced, unchanged over time, etc.

The basis described in Dzocghen has no essence, is not established in anyway, being originally pure. In other word, the basis in Dzogchen is kadag, emptiness free from all extremes.

You see, you are misrepresenting both traditions by claiming they have the same meaning.

This is not a difference in means, this is a difference in fundamental view.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 21st, 2012 at 9:05 PM
Title: Re: ālayavijñāna, one or separate?
Content:
Jyoti said:
The body is similar but the means is different.

viniketa said:
Thank you for the answer, Jyoti.  Are you saying that Advaita Vedānta is a further implementation of Yogācāra?


Jyoti said:
No. Yogacara did not specifically say anything about the root consciouness being a singularity or plural, neither did any scriptures of the mahayana.

Malcolm wrote:
You need to start providing citations -- and not just your so called "logic".

I don't care if someone is a Buddhist or a Hindu or whatever, but it pains me to see anyone so thoroughly misrepresent both traditions as you are doing here.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 21st, 2012 at 9:04 PM
Title: Re: ālayavijñāna, one or separate?
Content:
Jyoti said:
there is no contradiction to the advaita vedanta and dzogchen perspective of the basis.


Malcolm wrote:
Of course there are differences: deep and important differences. Only someone ignorant of the details of both with make such a ridiculous claim.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 21st, 2012 at 8:58 PM
Title: Re: Beings and consciousnesses, one or many?
Content:
Jyoti said:
The root consciousness itself cannot be shared.

Malcolm wrote:
Right, that is why each individudal sentient being possesses their own unique, unshared mulavijñāna.

Each sentient being possess the eight consciousness separately which are merely different names for the operations of vijñāna. It is similar with prāṇa vāyu -- the main vāyu functioning in the body is prāṇa; but it takes different names based on its action.

Likewise, each sentient being possess a vijñāna skandha: when it is described from the point of view of possessing traces, it is called the ālaya or mūlavijñāna; when it function through the six senses, it it called the six sense conciousness; when it incorrectly grasps a self it is called the kliṣṭamano-vijn̄an̄a, etc.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 21st, 2012 at 10:15 AM
Title: Re: Is Guru Yoga Based on Pantheism?
Content:


Yudron said:
I'm not a scholar or  translator, but I do feel that rigpa (vidya Skt) does not mean knowledge.

Malcolm wrote:
Rigpa, in all Dzogchen texts, is constrasted with Ma rigpa. Because of not knowing [ma rig pa] our real state we enter samsara. Through knowing [rig pa] our real state, we attain liberation.

M

Yudron said:
Of course we don't disagree -- it's just the word knowing IMHO is not the best because it implies a thought.

Malcolm wrote:
Thought is not a problem for one who has rigpa. It is only a problem for those who do not.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 21st, 2012 at 9:13 AM
Title: Re: Atomic/Rainbow Body
Content:
Jeff said:
What happens in a Dzogchen master's transmission?

Malcolm wrote:
Not what you describe.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 21st, 2012 at 9:10 AM
Title: Re: ālayavijñāna, one or separate?
Content:
Jyoti said:
If it does, then beings are not mere appearance but possessing real essence.

Malcolm wrote:
Correct, the Yogacara schools asserts an essence. This is why the Madhyamakas refer to them as "vastuvadins" i.e. realists. In other words, they are non-dualists because all phenomena of skandhas, dhātus and ayatanas are mind only. They are realists because they propose the existence of individual continuums.


Jyoti said:
And we have the problem of shared consciousness.

Malcolm wrote:
Nope. This is why you need to read what Yogacara authors like Asanga actually say.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 21st, 2012 at 9:07 AM
Title: Re: The latest acadmenic thought on Dzog Chen and Mahayoga
Content:
conebeckham said:
Anything is possible when you're talking about Tibetan Hagiographies.   In particular, writers have agendas--even academics have agendas, much less adherents and promulgators of various lineages.

But in the end, Naropa is a source of great blessings, and he is known widely as the "synthesizer" (or compiler, if you like) of the most famous Tibetan Tantrayana Completion Stage system known to the wide world, and is important not merely for the Kagyupas--as well as being the source of Sakyapas Vajrayogini.  He is hardly "over-rated," regardless.


Malcolm wrote:
I think there is also a littel competition happening here --because the Naro Khacho teachings in Sakya are always billed as "The teaching so special even Marpa didn't get it".

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 21st, 2012 at 7:12 AM
Title: Re: Male and female
Content:
Virgo said:
Is there Buddhist and/or medical reasons why children are born either male or female?  What causes birth as a particular sex?  Are people always born as one or the other successively over lifetimes or does it change?

Thanks for any responses.

Kevin


Malcolm wrote:
There are reasons connected with karma and with biology. Tibetan Medicine emphasizes the biological aspect more. If semen is more profuse, it will be a boy. If the ovum is more profuse then it will be a girl. If both are in equal portion, then the child will be homosexual or intersexed.

M

JinpaRangdrol said:
I have never heard homosexuality as a result of equal virility of the essences. Only intersexuality. But it makes total sense! Is there a source where I can find more on the correlation? As a gay man, I'd be very interested to read more about TTM's explanation for sexual orientation.
Thanks so much!
JR

Malcolm wrote:
It is breifly explained in the chapter on conception in the explanatory tantra of the four medicine tantras.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 21st, 2012 at 6:49 AM
Title: Re: The latest acadmenic thought on Dzog Chen and Mahayoga
Content:
Stewart said:
Elaborate on this please, I have never heard that Marpa never met Naropa.


Malcolm wrote:
In Sakya sources, it is reported that Milarepa himself never reported that Marpa had met Naropa in person. Jetsun Dragpa Gyaltsen expresses the opinion therefore, that Marpa indeed never met Naropa in person. Jetsun Rinpoche was born mid 12th century.The standard dates for Mila are 1052-1135.

Jetsun Dragpa Gyaltsen lived 1147-1216. He was teaching the Hevajra tantra by the time he was eleven. He had received Kagyu teachings from minor lineage holder from Marpa.

So the Sakyas have always maintained that Marpa never met Naropa in person, that he was a disciple only of Maitripa in fact.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 21st, 2012 at 6:39 AM
Title: Re: Atomic/Rainbow Body
Content:


Jeff said:
Agreed. But, those are really not examples of what I meant by a "guru connection".

Malcolm wrote:
Then be more precise.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 21st, 2012 at 5:50 AM
Title: Re: Atomic/Rainbow Body
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
There are broad commonalities in Dzogchen with common Mahāyāna view; commonalities with Vajrayāna as well; but the perspetive of Dzogchen about the basis in terms of what is called sound, lights, and rays is unique to Dzogchen and not shared with other traditions -- though it is tempting to try and find connections.

M

Jeff said:
OK, one last question...

When you read the following statement...

Chogyal Namkhai Norbu. Dzogchen: The Self-Perfected State (Kindle Locations 179-182). Kindle Edition.

But such a being may manifest a body through which others can have the possibility of being helped. The Body of Light, or the Light Body of a being who has realized the Great Transfer, are both phenomena which can be actively maintained so that those having the visionary clarity necessary for perceiving them can communicate with the fully realized individuals whose bodies find themselves in a dimension of pure light.

... You do not think this communication is the same/similar as what is experienced between a Guru and an advanced student?


Malcolm wrote:
Depends on the tradition, the guru, and the student.

Receiving shaktipat from a Kundalini guru, for example,or satsang with an Advaita, etc., or Dokusan from a Zenmaster has nothing at all do with a direct introduction from a Dzogchen master. They are not even in the same ballpark. Different principles, different practices, different experiences, different results.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 21st, 2012 at 4:20 AM
Title: Re: Atomic/Rainbow Body
Content:
Jeff said:
As stated previously, I was just attempting to point out what I believe to be universal components.

Malcolm wrote:
There are broad commonalities in Dzogchen with common Mahāyāna view; commonalities with Vajrayāna as well; but the perspetive of Dzogchen about the basis in terms of what is called sound, lights, and rays is unique to Dzogchen and not shared with other traditions -- though it is tempting to try and find connections.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 21st, 2012 at 3:48 AM
Title: Re: Is Guru Yoga Based on Pantheism?
Content:


Yudron said:
I'm not a scholar or  translator, but I do feel that rigpa (vidya Skt) does not mean knowledge.

Malcolm wrote:
Rigpa, in all Dzogchen texts, is constrasted with Ma rigpa. Because of not knowing [ma rig pa] our real state we enter samsara. Through knowing [rig pa] our real state, we attain liberation.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 21st, 2012 at 3:10 AM
Title: Re: Atomic/Rainbow Body
Content:
Jeff said:
My point is that different paths describe similar things with different words. This is often because the various perspectives driven by the time and culture.

Malcolm wrote:
In this case you would be mistaken since you know next to nothing about Dzogchen.


Jeff said:
Making the 5 elements of your body dissolve into light can be "translated to" Ascending into heaven.

Malcolm wrote:
No, it can't. It has nothing to do with going to heaven, or anything like that.

Jeff said:
I will stop. You continue to miss my point. I am not trying to define that there is a "heaven". Only that to an educated person, seeing a body dissolve into light could be described as "ascending into heaven".


Malcolm wrote:
And you continue to miss mine i.e. you actually don't understand what is being discussed here in the Dzogchen forum, whatever else you may properly understand elsewhere.

And as to your point, you won't see anyone actually dissolving into light. At most, you would observe a shrinkage of the physical remains of a person.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 21st, 2012 at 2:48 AM
Title: Re: Who is ngagpa?
Content:


ngodrup said:
Dudjom Rinpoche, Jigdral Yeshe Dorje said this quite clearly in his Dzogchen View of Ngondro.
If you are a Dzogchen practitioner, Ngondro *is* the practice of Dzogchen.

Malcolm wrote:
Chogyal Rinpoche, Namkhai Norbu, says this very clearly in every retreat. If you are a Dzogchen practitioner, Guru Yoga is the practice of Dzogchen.

They are saying the same thing -- way of proceeding is a little different.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 21st, 2012 at 2:29 AM
Title: Re: Atomic/Rainbow Body
Content:


Jeff said:
My "Bet" is that if you were in the presence of someone who had attained Rigpa you would "feel" an overwhelming sense of "peace" (if you were not yet able to connect as Chogyal Namkhai Norbu describes).

Malcolm wrote:
You would lose that bet.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 21st, 2012 at 2:28 AM
Title: Re: Atomic/Rainbow Body
Content:
Jeff said:
My point is that different paths describe similar things with different words. This is often because the various perspectives driven by the time and culture.

Malcolm wrote:
In this case you would be mistaken since you know next to nothing about Dzogchen.


Jeff said:
Making the 5 elements of your body dissolve into light can be "translated to" Ascending into heaven.

Malcolm wrote:
No, it can't. It has nothing to do with going to heaven, or anything like that.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 21st, 2012 at 2:10 AM
Title: Re: Atomic/Rainbow Body
Content:
Jeff said:
I fail to see the point of the above comment other than to politely say that I don't know what I am talking about.

Malcolm wrote:
When it comes to Dzogchen, yes, you have no idea what you are talking about.

If you are interested in Dzogchen, you should connect with a Dzogchen master.

Saying that there is one truth and different paths is meaningless in this context. Without connecting with the transmission of Dzogchen, and applying it in your life you will never understand what Dzogchen is.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 21st, 2012 at 12:01 AM
Title: Re: Atomic/Rainbow Body
Content:


Jeff said:
Thank you for your words. I believe the above is exactly what I have said in this thread and in the "Guru Yoga" thread. I have just attempted to describe it in exeriencial (and simple) terms.

I will also check out your book recommendation.



Malcolm wrote:
Dzogchen is not something that you arrive to on your own. It depends on transmission from a qualified master.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 20th, 2012 at 10:10 PM
Title: Re: Atomic/Rainbow Body
Content:
Jeff said:
Could you describe how it would be different? Does not a senior student feel light/divine love in the presence of someone who has attained Rigpa? (Divine love "feels" more like a combination of "peace" and "joy" than what we normally describe as romantic love.)

Malcolm wrote:
No. Not at all. There is no "vibration" that you will feel emanating from someone who has genuine knowledge of the state of Dzogchen.

I suggest you read Dzogchen: The Self-Perfected State by Chogyal Namkhai Norbu, and become a little more educated about this subject.

I cannot educate you from the ground up. However, I can supply you with a couple of citations:

When a master teaches Dzogchen, he or she is trying to transmit a state of knowledge. The aim of the master is to awaken the student, opening that individual's consciousness to the primordial state. The master will not say, "Follow my rules and obey my precepts!" He will say, "Open your inner eye and observe yourself. Stop seeking an external lamp to enlighten you from outside, but light your own inner lamp. Thus the teachings will come to live in you, and you in the teachings."

Chogyal Namkhai Norbu. Dzogchen: The Self-Perfected State (Kindle Locations 179-182). Kindle Edition.

Ordinary beings are reborn without choice, conditioned by their karma into taking a body according to the causes they have accumulated over countless past lives. A totally realized being, on the other hand, is free from the cycle of conditioned cause and effect. But such a being may manifest a body through which others can have the possibility of being helped. The Body of Light, or the Light Body of a being who has realized the Great Transfer, are both phenomena which can be actively maintained so that those having the visionary clarity necessary for perceiving them can communicate with the fully realized individuals whose bodies find themselves in a dimension of pure light.

Chogyal Namkhai Norbu. The Crystal and the Way of Light: Sutra, Tantra and Dzogchen (pp. 162-163). Kindle Edition.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 20th, 2012 at 9:42 PM
Title: Re: Atomic/Rainbow Body
Content:
Jeff said:
In Dzogchen, is not the rainbow body something noticed/seen by another? One "reaches the point" where the radiating of light can be "seen". In Dzogchen, I had thought this was part of attaining Rigpa. (But, I apologize in advance, my specific knowledge of Dzogchen and terms is very limited.)

Malcolm wrote:
Ordinary people cannot perceive rainbow body.

It is called "rainbow body" because the five elements revert to their original nature as the five wisdom lights. But this light is not photons -- it is called "light" but it is not physical light.

M

Jeff said:
Agreed. That is why I put words like "seen" in quotes.

Seeing is a product (or conversion) of the mind. It would be better to say that it can be "felt" by one with an open heart. In other transitions it is described as "an outpouring of divine love".


Malcolm wrote:
Rainbow body, or the body of light is something very precise in Dzogchen teachings. It is not something felt by people with open hearts, etc.

It is a very specific result of a very specufic type of practice called tögal.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 20th, 2012 at 9:26 PM
Title: Re: Atomic/Rainbow Body
Content:
Jeff said:
In Dzogchen, is not the rainbow body something noticed/seen by another? One "reaches the point" where the radiating of light can be "seen". In Dzogchen, I had thought this was part of attaining Rigpa. (But, I apologize in advance, my specific knowledge of Dzogchen and terms is very limited.)

Malcolm wrote:
Ordinary people cannot perceive rainbow body.

It is called "rainbow body" because the five elements revert to their original nature as the five wisdom lights. But this light is not photons -- it is called "light" but it is not physical light.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 20th, 2012 at 9:23 PM
Title: Re: Beings and consciousnesses, one or many?
Content:


Jyoti said:
If one witness from a subjective angle, a being other than the witness is awakened, his awakening is of appearance only in term of the witness. It does not affect the purification of the witness's own alaya. On the other hand, if one witness one's own awakening, it does not affect the karma of other beings, since other beings were of mere appearance without an actual basis that is connected to one's own state.

Malcolm wrote:
You still have not solved the problem. You are speaking about this being and that being as independet continuums. This is only possible of each beings ālayavijñāna is separate, etc (which is of course the actual position of the yogacara school).

You just keep chewing away at this logically, and you will arrive at the position of Asanga and Vasubandhu -- or you could simply do yourself a favor and actually read what they say. Start with the Mahāyāna Saṃgraha.

Ok, I am finished with this conversation.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 20th, 2012 at 9:07 PM
Title: Re: Atomic/Rainbow Body
Content:
Jeff said:
They are both just different terms to describe the high level development of the energy/light body. With an "energy" approach, the feeling refines from periodic heat/vibrations in parts of the body, to the full body, to full 24/7, then to the full body at a cellular level (atomic). With a "meditation" approach, often one does not notice the energy until it starts "radiating" beyond the body and at that point, it is already so "refined" that it "feels" like light.



Malcolm wrote:
This has nothing to do with Dzogchen teaching on rainbow body.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 20th, 2012 at 8:59 PM
Title: Re: Beings and consciousnesses, one or many?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
The fault of this reasoning of course is that when one sentient being purifies the mulavijñāna, than all would be liberated.

M

Jyoti said:
Karma persist for beings with ignorance, but these are not view as impure by oneself who were awakened.


Malcolm wrote:
If this theoretical single mulavijñāna is purified, there is no possibility of ignorance for anyone.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 20th, 2012 at 8:02 PM
Title: Re: Beings and consciousnesses, one or many?
Content:
Jyoti said:
by Malcolm » Mon Aug 20, 2012 12:06 pm

Jyoti wrote:
Just as within a dream, appearances of people seems to have their own individual mind streams, but they are not real, only deceptively exist as appearance only. What make a dream environment possible is not due to multiple consciousnesses, but the consciousness of your own which is not share by anyone else. Similary in reality, all phenomena is manifestation of a single consciousness.


Malcolm:
This is Vedanta.

Jyoti:
This is not a problem on the position of definitive meaning.

Malcolm
Yes, it most certainly is. Moreover, since you are a fan of Yogacara, you should be aware that while Vasubandhu, for example, rejects outer objects, he defends the existence of sentient beings possessing distinct and unique mental continuums.

In other words, yogacara does not propose that the appearance of other minds is illusory -- in fact, when you read the Mahāyāna Samgraha, for example, by Asanga, he shows quite clearly that it is because of shared traces that we all perceive the same container world. In other words, for Yogacara, individual minds are real, but not their appearances.

I think you need to correct your understanding of Yogacara.

BTW, this is off topic for this thread, you should continue this in either the academic forum or somewhere else, but not in this thread.

M
I can merely discuss the matter itself based on my own understanding on the topics.

1. "for example, rejects outer objects, he defends the existence of sentient beings possessing distinct and unique mental continuums".

The alaya-vijnana stored the mental traces of others as well as those of our own, in other words, beings are not really exist outside of this single root consciousness.

2. "for example, by Asanga, he shows quite clearly that it is because of shared traces that we all perceive the same container world. In other words, for Yogacara, individual minds are real, but not their appearances. "

Being the content (traces) of the singular consciousness, of course these traces were shared, otherwise there is no means nor basis for such sharing to occur. The individual minds are real as one's own since both are equal as being contained within a single consciousness.

jyoti

Malcolm wrote:
The fault of this reasoning of course is that when one sentient being purifies the mulavijñāna, than all would be liberated.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 20th, 2012 at 12:06 PM
Title: Re: Is Guru Yoga Based on Pantheism?
Content:


Jyoti said:
Just as within a dream, appearances of people seems to have their own individual mind streams, but they are not real, only deceptively exist as appearance only. What make a dream environment possible is not due to multiple consciousnesses, but the consciousness of your own which is not share by anyone else. Similary in reality, all phenomena is manifestation of a single consciousness.

Malcolm wrote:
This is Vedanta.

Jyoti said:
This is not a problem on the position of definitive meaning.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, it most certainly is. Moreover, since you are a fan of Yogacara, you should be aware that while Vasubandhu, for example, rejects outer objects, he defends the existence of sentient beings possessing distinct and unique mental continuums.

In other words, yogacara does not propose that the appearance of other minds is illusory -- in fact, when you read the Mahāyāna Samgraha, for example, by Asanga, he shows quite clearly that it is because of shared traces that we all perceive the same container world. In other words, for Yogacara, individual minds are real, but not their appearances.

I think you need to correct your understanding of Yogacara.

BTW, this is off topic for this thread, you should continue this in either the academic forum or somewhere else, but not in this thread.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 20th, 2012 at 11:19 AM
Title: Re: masters of the tradition
Content:


humanpreta said:
Is the nirmanakaya buddhafield in one of samsara's realm? i.e.: formless.


Malcolm wrote:
No, it is not a formless realm and no it is not part of samsara.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 20th, 2012 at 7:28 AM
Title: Re: masters of the tradition
Content:
RikudouSennin said:
sorry i keep asking these repetitive questions.
just tryna get a good understanding.
thanks for the clarification.

peace


Malcolm wrote:
No worries.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 20th, 2012 at 5:04 AM
Title: Re: Tönpa Shenrab Miwoche is from a 14th century terma?
Content:
SSJ3Gogeta said:
By the way, if anyone thinks I am undermining Bon, Sam van Schaik does a similar treatment on Guru Rinpoche.

Malcolm wrote:
The earliest formal accounts of Tonpa Shenrab as a Buddha are from the Mdo 'dus and the Zer mig which both are termas revealed in the 11th century. However, there were 18 Bonpo Tertons before Shenchen Lugah.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 20th, 2012 at 3:27 AM
Title: Re: Mandala Offering in Ngondro
Content:
Sopa Yutso said:
Thank you, now it is all clear...


Malcolm wrote:
The universe has not yet been put up for sale, so it is still is without an owner.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 20th, 2012 at 3:00 AM
Title: Re: Who is ngagpa?
Content:


Blue Garuda said:
OK. That's the vernacular, but you mentioned 'all samayas' .  In DI the samaya encompasses all others, so presumably breaking it also breaks all others?

In terms of the Ngagpa, is it correct to assume they all practice Dzogchen, or do the Gelug Ngagpas not do so? (I was told there was a Gelug Ngagpa ordination, but I've not managed to confirm this.)

Malcolm wrote:
The term sngags pa is pretty general and loose.

The probable early origin of it had to do with the fact that serious Buddhist upasakas in India typically wore white. This custom was transferred to Tibet. Because in Tibet there was no context of a wider Buddhist society, upasaka mantra practitioners came to be respected along with the monks. It was never the case that in India there was a so called "sngags pa" sangha. The sngags pa class of practitioners evolved from the circumstances of Tibetan society. So, your so called sngags pa was originally a Buddhist upasaka who practiced tantra.

Later on when the Chö tradition was evolving, alongside of this there evolved a kind of Buddhist sadhu in Tibet called a chöpa. The present day hair empowerment tradition largely is derived from chö.

These days there are many people who are told by their teachers to where stripped robes, etc., and they call themselves Ngagpas too. Also the garb of different sngag pa colleges vary -- there really isn't a set thing.

There is no sngags pa tradition in Gelug. It exists only in Nyingma. The only Ngagpas in Sakya are the Khon, and their tradition is Nyingma as well. The Kagyus don't really have ngagpas in the same way as the Nyingmapas. They have Togdens and Repas (also another kind of Buddhist sadhu). In general, the term Ngagpa has come to mean "serious tantric practitioner who is not a monk", much like its original usage. The idea that ngagpas have to follow monastic vows is a very debatable point of view --but it comes from the approach to the nine yānas found in root Anuyoga tantra, Dupa'i Do.

ChNN does not emphasize a chatechistic approach to samaya where you are behaving like a hinayāna practitioner, obsessed with the details of one's vows.

Samaya means "being together". So in this case it refers to your relatsionship with the teachings, teacher, fellow students, and ultimately all beings. If you treat other people like shit, if you are rude to them without cause, etc., then you have made mistake. Also we often do not understand when we have broken a samaya so it is pointless to obsess about the vows. There are hundreds and thousands of samayas. So, we just do Guru yoga.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 20th, 2012 at 2:03 AM
Title: Re: Who is ngagpa?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Right, you still receive all samayas. There is no "samaya" free transmission.

Blue Garuda said:
Is there a brief definition of 'samaya' which applies here?


Malcolm wrote:
It means that you keepgood relations with your teacher and fellow students, and you don't blab about secret practices.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 20th, 2012 at 1:18 AM
Title: Re: masters of the tradition
Content:
RikudouSennin said:
need help  clarifying with the term infinite potentiality and the symbol of thr mirror.

thanks


Malcolm wrote:
The term "infinite potentiality" refers to the primordial state's capacity to allow any form at all to appear within it.

The mirror means your primordial state.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 20th, 2012 at 1:16 AM
Title: Re: Who is ngagpa?
Content:
SSJ3Gogeta said:
I'm talking about someone who just receives straight up Direct Introdution ala ChNN.

I'm pretty sure such people have sex with non-practitioners.

So would this be allowed?

Malcolm wrote:
Right, you still receive all samayas. There is no "samaya" free transmission.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 20th, 2012 at 12:44 AM
Title: Re: Is Guru Yoga Based on Pantheism?
Content:
xabir said:
'Thusness' asked me not to talk openly about his realizations in terms of bhumi (not that he rejects such maps). It is not good to tell people 'I am such and such bhumi' (it often carries lots of baggage) but it is ok to discuss one's experience/realization as it is.


SSJ3Gogeta said:
Its funny that 'Thusness' thinks he is on any bhumi at all.

Atleast Adyashanti has a Zen lineage.   'Thusness' is just a fraud.


Malcolm wrote:
I don't think we really need to be discussing this.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 20th, 2012 at 12:42 AM
Title: Re: Is Guru Yoga Based on Pantheism?
Content:


Jyoti said:
Just as within a dream, appearances of people seems to have their own individual mind streams, but they are not real, only deceptively exist as appearance only. What make a dream environment possible is not due to multiple consciousnesses, but the consciousness of your own which is not share by anyone else. Similary in reality, all phenomena is manifestation of a single consciousness.

Malcolm wrote:
This is Vedanta.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 19th, 2012 at 11:41 PM
Title: Re: Who is ngagpa?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Also receiving direct introduction is connected with samaya.


SSJ3Gogeta said:
yes but only one, as opposed to 14 root and 8 branch samayas.

Malcolm wrote:
No, also these other samayas applys.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 19th, 2012 at 11:39 PM
Title: Re: Who is ngagpa?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Everyone who recieves an anuttarayogatantra empowerment already has the 14 root and 8 branch samayas.


M


SSJ3Gogeta said:
Then its best not to take such empowerments, and just get Direct Introduction?

I know I'm changing the subject.

Malcolm wrote:
Also receiving direct introduction is connected with samaya. But if you are a ChNN student, you just worry about how he teaches it and don't worry abotu the rest.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 19th, 2012 at 11:08 PM
Title: Re: Who is ngagpa?
Content:
byamspa said:
*shrug*.  I was told to wear mine in practice situations, so i try to do that as practical.  If yours was causing problems, I can see that it would be just as practical to put it aside too.

It might slightly dharma-psycho-somatic or something, but i think it helps me focus on what im doing when i wear it.

Malcolm wrote:
I merely keep my hair long. You would just think I was some hippy. I don't wear any religion clothing of any kind. It is not necessary for me.

byamspa said:
we all do what we gotta do.  i have my instructions that i follow to the best of my ability.
.

Malcolm wrote:
Of course. Sometimes if it is cold, I might use a blanket. Then I kind of look like a fat blond guy wearing a native blanket.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 19th, 2012 at 11:05 PM
Title: Re: Is Guru Yoga Based on Pantheism?
Content:
deepbluehum said:
There are two suttas that describe nibbana as consciousness (vinnana) eternal (anantam) and everywhere (sabbato) aka omnipresent. And another that also calls it eternal (dhuvam). So it's hardly sketchy to refer to Nibbana as eternal. You yourself previously pointed out the dharmakaya is eternal as in the Mahayana Parinirvana Sutra. This has nothing to do with the Pudgala theory. There is simply a distinction being made between the conditioned vs. the unconditioned consciousnesses. Underlying everything is consciousness, meaning, it is the final analytic. And it is already beyond existence and non-, per the analysis of the 12-links. So I think Garchen Rinpoche and Jeff are right; it is due to the nature of consciousness being all-pervasive that Guru Yoga can have its effect.

Malcolm wrote:
Any consciousness by which one describing the Tathagata would describe him: That the Tathagata has abandoned, its root destroyed, made like a palmyra stump, deprived of the conditions of development, not destined for future arising. Freed from the classification of consciousness, Vaccha, the Tathagata is deep, boundless, hard to fathom, like the sea."

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.072.than.html " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

For the supported there is instability, for the unsupported there is no instability; when there is no instability there is serenity; when there is serenity there is no inclination: when there is no inclination there is no coming-and-going; when there is no coming-and-going there is no decease-and-uprising; when there is no decease-and-uprising there is neither "here" nor "beyond" nor "in between the two." Just this is the end of suffering.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/ud/ud.8.04.irel.html " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

There is, bhikkhus, that base where there is no earth, no water, no fire, no air; no base consisting of the infinity of space, no base consisting of the infinity of consciousness, no base consisting of nothingness, no base consisting of neither-perception-nor-non-perception; neither this world nor another world nor both; neither sun nor moon. Here, bhikkhus, I say there is no coming, no going, no staying, no deceasing, no uprising. Not fixed, not movable, it has no support. Just this is the end of suffering.

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/ud/ud.8.01.irel.html " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 19th, 2012 at 10:45 PM
Title: Re: Who is ngagpa?
Content:
byamspa said:
*shrug*.  I was told to wear mine in practice situations, so i try to do that as practical.  If yours was causing problems, I can see that it would be just as practical to put it aside too.

It might slightly dharma-psycho-somatic or something, but i think it helps me focus on what im doing when i wear it.

Malcolm wrote:
I merely keep my hair long. You would just think I was some hippy. I don't wear any religion clothing of any kind. It is not necessary for me.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 19th, 2012 at 10:43 PM
Title: Re: Who is ngagpa?
Content:


heart said:
Yes, sure. You know any such community?

/magnus

Malcolm wrote:
I don't mean like  place with a gate and land, I mean a society of practitioners who live near each other.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 19th, 2012 at 10:26 PM
Title: Re: Who is ngagpa?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
A real sngags pa (mantrika) is someone whose mantras actually work.

As such, they are the Tibetan equivalent of brahmins, and often belong to family lineages. Like traditional brahmins they wear white, have long hair, are married and are responsible for the ritual life of their communities.

heart said:
Yes, indeed. My Guru also said several times said that we should be able to show "some result from our practice" if we dress like that. Even tough I am a Ngakpa I have doubts about what Ngakpas could  or should be here in the west.  The picture you paint here Malcolm would certainly only work in a Buddhist society.

/magnus


Malcolm wrote:
Well, within a community of practitioners it would work just fine.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 19th, 2012 at 10:15 PM
Title: Re: Who is ngagpa?
Content:
ngodrup said:
Seems there's another category, the ngakpa who is ordained as such. At least this exists in the Nyingma.

I think its going to be a case by case analysis when talking about ngakpas who also happen to be western--
just the same as it is with those ngakpas from traditionally Buddhist countries. On top of that there are
various lineages of ngakpas and their style of practice varies.

Quite a few are practitioners of Dudjom Tersar, or Longchen Nyingtik, or Chang Ter; but then there are
dratsangs that practice several lineages and follow distinct traditions.

heart said:
It isn't actually a ordination, like the ordination to become a monk/nun, it is an empowerment. You can call it an elaborate Samaya if you like.

/magnus

Blue Garuda said:
There is often formal ordination based on tantric samayas.l

Malcolm wrote:
Sort of -- this is a kind of a Ngagpa by fiat sort of thing. It has nothing to do with a real sngags pa empowerment which is called a skra dbang, a hair empowerment.

If you are a real sngags pa then you receive the hair empowerment; and the most common tradition these days is Dudjom Tersar.

In point of fact that hair empowerment is intimately conncted with the uncontrived conduct of a Dzogchen practitioner.

Everyone who recieves an anuttarayogatantra empowerment already has the 14 root and 8 branch samayas. Recieving them again in a special cermenony along with a Zentra is just sort of a formality.

Actually, each item of Ngagpa "gear" has very profound meaning and points to a realization possessed or aspired to.

And finally, one's hair is empowered as a mandala of dakinis, so it can never be cut or trimmed -- because to do so would invite a punishment by dakinis for destroying their home.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 19th, 2012 at 10:03 PM
Title: Re: Who is ngagpa?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
A real sngags pa (mantrika) is someone whose mantras actually work.

As such, they are the Tibetan equivalent of brahmins, and often belong to family lineages. Like traditional brahmins they wear white, have long hair, are married and are responsible for the ritual life of their communities.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 19th, 2012 at 9:51 PM
Title: Re: Is Guru Yoga Based on Pantheism?
Content:


deepbluehum said:
He is citing a parallel with Buddha's discourses, not a distinction.


Malcolm wrote:
A parallel, yes, but with a distinction. You are overlooking the distinctions.

deepbluehum said:
Sure, there's a small distinction being made in context. The Buddha never asserts an unchanging individual atman; that's obvious. That's not what's important. What's important is that he never specifically refutes Upanishadic notions. That's number one. Number two, he does assert nibbana as an being eternal consciousness.

Malcolm wrote:
No, Buddha never says that. This is why there is so much discussion about it among various schools. He never comes right out and says, anywhere at all that "Nirvana is an eternal consciousness". This is the reason why, for example, the Sautrantikas can say that nirvana is a non-existence, etc. Why? Because they reject the speculations of the Abhidharmikas, and based themselves strictly on what the sutras say. Since the Śravaka sutras do not say explicitly this, we then have divergent schools of thought arising about what the Buddha meant.


deepbluehum said:
There's no getting around that. Number three, even if you assert an unchanging atman, if you assert a changing atman superimposed on the unchanging one, and the unchanging one merges into Brahman when the changing one ceases, then you have, in sum and in function, an identical theory with Buddhist liberation.

Malcolm wrote:
Only if you beleive in your first assertion.

deepbluehum said:
You would have what would amount to a distinction without a difference. This is what I've been pointing at in these recent threads, that all the profusions of Buddhist diatribe amounts to endless distinctions without a functional difference. And that is why you have the functionality of Guru Yoga which functions almost identically to the same procedure in Hindu tantric systems.

Malcolm wrote:
Only if your intitial premise is true. However, your initial premise is an gross overstatement not grounded in fact; rather it is grounded in a sketchy interpretation of one statement in the Tripitika. It is similar to the Pudgalavadins who try to prove, based on one or two statements, that Buddha taught the existence of an inexpressible person [pudgala] who is neither the same as nor different than the aggregates who nevertheless transmigrates.

Like their position, there is not sufficient evidence to support your present claim. It is definitely not sufficient for making argument about principles of Guru Yoga. Guru Yoga is simply a method of recognizing and abiding in the nature of the reality that your Guru introduces and nothing more.

On another note, it certainly would be nice if everyone was in a state of ekacitta -- then all these pointless conversations would cease.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 19th, 2012 at 11:14 AM
Title: Re: Tönpa Shenrab Miwoche is from a 14th century terma?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/96594534/Bellezza-Shenrab " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 19th, 2012 at 3:38 AM
Title: Re: Is Guru Yoga Based on Pantheism?
Content:
deepbluehum said:
[

He is citing a parallell with Buddha's discourses, not a distinction.


Malcolm wrote:
A parallel, yes, but with a distinction. You are overlooking the distinctions.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 19th, 2012 at 2:52 AM
Title: Re: Is Guru Yoga Based on Pantheism?
Content:


deepbluehum said:
Sometimes you have to let things stand. The passage means what it says.

Malcolm wrote:
You have misread -- see pg. 94, section 6.9:

"...though it is clearly seen as not having any metaphysical self/ ātman as an underlying support, as does the transmigrating ātman"


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 19th, 2012 at 1:40 AM
Title: Re: Is Dzogchen Compatible with the Madhyamika Prasangika POV ?
Content:
conebeckham said:
I think it's more correct to say that the basis in gzhan stong (Shentong) is "Buddha Nature," which is not EXACTLY equivalent with emptiness, at least according to Dolpopa's presentation.

Malcolm wrote:
It is exactly emptiness precisely in the fashion that I described it, even in Dolbuwa's presentation.

conebeckham said:
I think there's a subtle point here.  Shentong does say Buddha Nature is "Emptiness," but also discusses a basis beyond conceptual mind.  This is from the POV of post-equipoise dialectics, though--I agree that the meditation is the same.  "Prasangikas," that Tibetan invention, do not discuss a "basis" at all.

Yes?

Malcolm wrote:
No, they do discuss a basis. That basis is emptiness.

"Where emptiness is possible...", etc.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 19th, 2012 at 1:38 AM
Title: Re: Is Guru Yoga Based on Pantheism?
Content:
deepbluehum said:
The Upanishads were not in full bloom then. Even in Upanishadic tradition, the atman is not seen as unchanging. Harvey and Werner recognized this when commenting that Buddha was not rejecting Upanishadic notions. There is a definite symbiosis going on here.

Malcolm wrote:
The Chandogya, which defines Atman as permanant and unchanging, predates the Buddha by three or four hundred years, as does the Brihadarayanaka.

deepbluehum said:
As Harvey notes from Werner's analysis, the Buddha is only refuting an unchanging personality structure that could be called atta. An unchanging Unconditioned Atta is okay, Harvey also notes, Buddha describes Arahats as men of developed Atta. So Buddha is not refuting the Upanishadic notions at all.

Malcolm wrote:
The Upanishads are not proclaiming a personality structure as atman.

The Buddha clearly rejects an atman that is one of the five aggregates, all of the five aggregates, or seperate from the five aggregates.

I see little ground to support the notion that Buddha supported the notion of a Self.

Harvey's discusison is very nuanced, and very precise, and to understand it, you will agree, one must read the whole text thoroughly and carefully because it is easy to be mislead in the middle if you have not got all the way to the end.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 19th, 2012 at 1:05 AM
Title: Re: Is Guru Yoga Based on Pantheism?
Content:
Lotus_Bitch said:
This is yet again another Hindu/ Advaitin view, which is wrong view in all yanas of Buddhism.

Jyoti said:
These view is of definitive meaning that has only one yana, that is the mahayana, regardless of tradition.

Malcolm wrote:
The proper term is Ekayāna.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 19th, 2012 at 1:04 AM
Title: Re: Is Guru Yoga Based on Pantheism?
Content:
deepbluehum said:
The Upanishads were not in full bloom then. Even in Upanishadic tradition, the atman is not seen as unchanging. Harvey and Werner recognized this when commenting that Buddha was not rejecting Upanishadic notions. There is a definite symbiosis going on here.

Malcolm wrote:
The Chandogya, which defines Atman as permanant and unchanging, predates the Buddha by three or four hundred years, as does the Brihadarayanaka.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 19th, 2012 at 1:02 AM
Title: Re: Is Guru Yoga Based on Pantheism?
Content:


deepbluehum said:
You're right except when Buddha said in DN 11, MN 49 and Iti 43, that Nibbana is an eternal consciousness.

Malcolm wrote:
No,these passages do not state that nirvana is an eternal consciousness. If they did, Buddha would just be a Vedantin following the Upanishads.

deepbluehum said:
Two words:

Dhuvam,
Anantam,

These mean eternal.

One word:

Vinnana,

Means consciousness

So perhaps he is an Upanishadic Vedantin. As much as the exclusivism of Buddhism has allured me, it's not supported. It's something I've had to take time to accept. But, read 'em and weep.

Malcolm wrote:
Anantam just means limitless (an+anta); it does not mean eternal.

Dhuvam can mean permanent, but more often is understood as continuous:

Dhuva
Dhuva (adj.) [Sk. dhruva, cp. Lith. drúta firm; Goth. triggws=Ohg. triuwi (Ger. treue, trost); Ags. tréowe= E. true, of Idg. *dheru, enlarged form of *dher, see dharati] stable, constant, permanent; fixed, regular, certain, sure D i.18; S i.142; iv.370; A ii.33; J i.19; v.121 (˚sassataŋ maraṇaŋ); iii.325; Bu ii.82; Miln 114 (na tā nadiyo dh -- salilā). 334 (˚phala); Vism 77; DA i.112 (maraṇaŋ apassanto dh.), 150 (=thāvara); DhA iii.170 (adhuvaŋ jīvitaŋ dhuvaŋ maraṇaŋ); ThA 241; Sdhp 331. -- nt. permanence, stability M i.326; Dh 147. Also Ep. of Nibbāna (see ˚gāmin). -- nt. as adv. dhuvaŋ continuously, constantly, always J ii.24=Miln 172; PvA 207; certainly J i.18, v.103. -- adhuva (addhuva) changing, unstable, impermanent D i.19 (anicca a. appāyuka); M i.326; S iv.302; J i.393; iii.19 (addhuva -- sīla); VvA 77.
-- gāmin leading to permanence, i. e. Nibbāna S iv.370

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 19th, 2012 at 12:54 AM
Title: Re: Is Guru Yoga Based on Pantheism?
Content:
deepbluehum said:
Malcolm, The previous two posts skirt the issue. What quality do both possess the one can see it in the other and thereby see it in themselves.

Malcolm wrote:
Kadag, lhun grub and thugs rje, the three inseperable wisdoms of the basis.


deepbluehum said:
Dzogchen is almost unabashedly Vedantic in its functional procedures, which is why you were very defensive of Vedism previously, it take it. I could be wrong.

Malcolm wrote:
I wasn't defending Vedism because it has something to with Dzogchen. I was pointing out that Vedic culture has had much valuable knowledge to contribute to the world, regardless of how brahmins may have behaved. Your focus is on the power and privilege issue; my focus is on such thing as Ayurveda, Yoga, etc. We are really not talking about the same thing when we talk about "Vedism".

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 19th, 2012 at 12:48 AM
Title: Re: Is Guru Yoga Based on Pantheism?
Content:


deepbluehum said:
You're right except when Buddha said in DN 11, MN 49 and Iti 43, that Nibbana is an eternal consciousness.

Malcolm wrote:
No,these passages do not state that nirvana is an eternal consciousness. If they did, Buddha would just be a Vedantin following the Upanishads.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 19th, 2012 at 12:41 AM
Title: Re: Is Guru Yoga Based on Pantheism?
Content:
deepbluehum said:
Take Dzogchen direct introduction, for example. The guru has to "get into that state," otherwise you can't. How is it possible someone can recognize the guru's state without a pervasive continuity?

Malcolm wrote:
Just as two different dharmins, for example, two instances of fire, possess the same dharmatā, for example, heat; likewise two different sentient beings also possess the same state without the need for some ontically established pervasive continuity.

deepbluehum said:
Heat is something you can feel and transfer from on thing to the next. How does the student feel the state or what is transferred?

How do the sounds of the Song of the Vajra emanate directly from Samantabhadra, if nothing is there?

Malcolm wrote:
We are not really discussing Dzogchen -- we are discussing your speculations about Śravakayāna.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 19th, 2012 at 12:39 AM
Title: Re: Is Guru Yoga Based on Pantheism?
Content:
deepbluehum said:
Take Dzogchen direct introduction, for example. The guru has to "get into that state," otherwise you can't. How is it possible someone can recognize the guru's state without a pervasive continuity?

Malcolm wrote:
Just as two different dharmins, for example, two instances of fire, possess the same dharmatā, for example, heat; likewise two different sentient beings also possess the same state without the need for some ontically established pervasive continuity.

deepbluehum said:
Heat is something you can feel and transfer from on thing to the next.

Malcolm wrote:
Just as two different dharmins, for example, two instances of water, possess the same dharmatā, for example, pellucidity; likewise two different sentient beings also possess the same state without the need for some ontically established pervasive continuity.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 19th, 2012 at 12:38 AM
Title: Re: Is Guru Yoga Based on Pantheism?
Content:


Jeff said:
I would argue that everyone has equal access to everyone else's mind (body), but their perspective is obstructed.

Malcolm wrote:
Obstructions =lack of access.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 19th, 2012 at 12:23 AM
Title: Re: Is Guru Yoga Based on Pantheism?
Content:
deepbluehum said:
Take Dzogchen direct introduction, for example. The guru has to "get into that state," otherwise you can't. How is it possible someone can recognize the guru's state without a pervasive continuity?

Malcolm wrote:
Just as two different dharmins, for example, two instances of fire, possess the same dharmatā, for example, heat; likewise two different sentient beings also possess the same state without the need for some ontically established pervasive continuity.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 19th, 2012 at 12:13 AM
Title: Re: Is Guru Yoga Based on Pantheism?
Content:


deepbluehum said:
I was being a little coy. We don't all share one conditioned mind. But the unconditioned is shared, just like the space in the pots. So it doesn't mean same features. Otherwise how could he read their minds and be of "one mind." I think you are reading more into it than is there. It's quite plainly stated.

Malcolm wrote:
We simple do not understand this passage the same way. No point in discussing it further.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 18th, 2012 at 11:59 PM
Title: Re: Is Guru Yoga Based on Pantheism?
Content:
Lotus_Bitch said:
... the simile of Indra's Net from the Avatamsaka Sutra.

Malcolm wrote:
FYI, the origin of the Indra's net metaphor is found in the Atharva Veda.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 18th, 2012 at 11:57 PM
Title: Re: Is Guru Yoga Based on Pantheism?
Content:


Malcolm wrote:
No, this simply means that their invidividual continuums were freed of bounderies, not that there is only one mental continuum sharing three bodies. In other words, they have equal access to each other's mind, etc.

And it certainly does not mean that we are all just of one mind.

"eka" not only means "one" but can mean "same" in the sense of identical in feature i.e. this pot is the same as the pot, they are identical pots. See one, see all, etc.

So I think you are reading something in that passage that is not there.

M

Jeff said:
Maybe we have a semantics issue... In non-duality, how would "equal access to each other's mind" (body) be different?


Malcolm wrote:
Well, they do not have the same type of access to other people's minds and so on.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 18th, 2012 at 11:40 PM
Title: Re: Is Guru Yoga Based on Pantheism?
Content:
deepbluehum said:
I forgot I read Harvey already. He underscores that the suttas do not really deny a Self. He points to the same clauses I did to support that.


Malcolm wrote:
You need to read it again. He does not state what you just said.

deepbluehum said:
Check the quoted passage I just posted. "One citta." We are one.


Malcolm wrote:
No, this simply means that their invidividual continuums were freed of bounderies, not that there is only one mental continuum sharing three bodies. In other words, they have equal access to each other's mind, etc.

And it certainly does not mean that we are all just of one mind.

"eka" not only means "one" but can mean "same" in the sense of identical in feature i.e. this pot is the same as the pot, they are identical pots. See one, see all, etc.

So I think you are reading something in that passage that is not there.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 18th, 2012 at 10:16 PM
Title: Re: Is Guru Yoga Based on Pantheism?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
This "consciousness without feature" is the one-sided samadhi of cessation the Lanka-avatara asserts Arhats fall into, from which they are aroused to begin the Bodhisattva path.

Jnana said:
You remember, of course, that Nāgārjuna uses a version of the passage from DN 11 in his Ratnāvalī. There are also other sources, such as the Kāśyapaparivarta Sūtra, which describe the mind as being "anidarśana," etc.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, that is true. He uses the passage in the course of deconstructing the idea of an integral self.

Nāgārjuna commonly uses Agama passages to illustrate points the Nikāya schools and Mahāyāna hold in common. He also asserts in the Ratnāvalī that the teachings in the Sravaka canon are unable to bring one to Buddhahood.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 18th, 2012 at 9:32 PM
Title: Re: Is Guru Yoga Based on Pantheism?
Content:
deepbluehum said:
I forgot I read Harvey already. He underscores that the suttas do not really deny a Self. He points to the same clauses I did to support that.


Malcolm wrote:
You need to read it again. He does not state what you just said.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 18th, 2012 at 9:30 PM
Title: Re: masters of the tradition
Content:
Sherlock said:
Changchub Dorje didn't realise rainbow body; besides Uncle Togden, it was Ayu Khandro.


Malcolm wrote:
CCD did realize rainbow body. Ayu Khandro did not realize rainbody body:

"Near the twenty-fifth, without any sign of illness, we found that she had left her body at the time she would normally be finishing her meditation session. She remained in meditation posture for two weeks and when she had finished her tugdam, her body had become very small.   We put some ornaments on it and many many people came to witness it.

"In the second month on the tenth day, we cremated her. There were many interesting signs at the time of her death. There was a sudden thaw and everything burst into bloom.  It was the middle of winter. There were many ringsel and, as she had instructed, all this and her clothes were put into the stupa that she had prepared at the Sakya monastery."

I, Namkhai Norbu, was given the little statue of Jamyang Khentse Wongpo and a volume of the Simhamukha Gongter and her writings and advice and spiritual songs. Among her disciples there were few rich and important people; her disciples were yogis and yoginis and practitioners from all over Tibet.  There are many tales told about her, but I have written only what she herself told me. This is just a little biography of A-Yu Khadro written for her disciples and those who are interested.

http://www.khandro.net/book-womenofwisdom.htm " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 18th, 2012 at 9:27 PM
Title: Re: masters of the tradition
Content:


Malcolm wrote:
You just need to connect with Chogyal Namkhai Norbu and not look back. He is the only teacher alive today that I know of who had two masters achieve rainbow body in this life.[/quote]

I know one is Changchub Dorje Rinpoche, who is the other?
thx[/quote]


His Uncle, Togden Rinpoche.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 18th, 2012 at 5:04 AM
Title: Re: A directive for a non-sectarian approach to practice (HHDL)
Content:
username said:
Actually as I said before we consider all (17 historic) Hinayana schools such as Theravada (plus Mahayana ones) Buddhist but they do not consider Mahayana as buddhists & all of them consider Vajrayana not buddhist. This is much much worse than calling a path within Buddhism lower or higher or slower or faster, that was never answered here. If Hinayana establishment centers announce Mahayana as buddhists or both of them announce we Vajrayana followers are buddhists then they have made a Leap from the dark ages.

Jnana said:
Speak for yourself. This "us" vs. "them" dichotomy is not nearly as black and white as you seem to want it to be in order to justify your trip.

username said:
What a few say is irrelevant as official announcements from various establishment centers of both Hinayana & Mahayana sects, all of them, is required but this will never come. This is the real outrage & elephant in the room people like Reggie never answer & divert from by apparent emotions.

Jnana said:
Yes, it's a messy world.

Malcolm wrote:
He/she does have a point, Geoff.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 18th, 2012 at 4:50 AM
Title: Re: Is Guru Yoga Based on Pantheism?
Content:


deepbluehum said:
I will see the text you cite. Generally, I'm familiar with the arguments. The Lanka-avatara sutra's claim about this makes no sense vis a vis the Buddha's assertions that they attain parinibbana. There wouldn't be someone to wake up. It is exactly the samadhi Buddha had when he passed. I don't really believe the Lanka-avatara sutra. As for it not being rigpa, as it is the opposite of avijja, it is vijja, vidya, aka, rigpa.


Malcolm wrote:
If your standard for evidence is going to be a Pali sutra, all you will wind up with is a śravakayāna view. The śravaka canon does not present a complete picture. It is oriented towards people who merely want to escape.

"The ultimate of the lower is the relative of the higher"
--Shantideva.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 18th, 2012 at 4:21 AM
Title: Re: Is Guru Yoga Based on Pantheism?
Content:


deepbluehum said:
It says in the Kosha that color is form. It is not a materialist position. It is part of nama-rupa.

Andrew108 said:
It's saying that color is a form in dependence on the skandhas and the skandhas are?

deepbluehum said:
Andrew, please don't be pedantic. Just say what you want to say.

Skandhas are dependently arisen...

You will not do away with my point with this line of reasoning. The "consciousness without feature" is not dependently arisen.


Malcolm wrote:
That does not make it "pan" or "universal".

Each and every person who attains cessation experiences that continuum independently. Peter Harvey wrote quite a good book about this where he carefully goes through all the Pali sources.

The Selfless Mind: Personality, Consciousness and Nirvana in Early Buddhism

I highly recommend it.

This "consciousness without feature" is the one-sided samadhi of cessation the Lanka-avatara asserts Arhats fall into, from which they are aroused to begin the Bodhisattva path.

It is not rig pa.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 18th, 2012 at 4:18 AM
Title: Re: Is Guru Yoga Based on Pantheism?
Content:


deepbluehum said:
It says in the Kosha that color is form. It is not a materialist position. It is part of nama-rupa.

Andrew108 said:
It's saying that color is a form in dependence on the skandhas and the skandhas are?

Malcolm wrote:
It is saying that color is a form [rūpa] that is part of the material [rūpa] aggregates, so color is based on the arrangement of the atoms of the four elements. Color is part of the secondary or derived matter of the rūpa skandha.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 18th, 2012 at 3:59 AM
Title: Re: Is Guru Yoga Based on Pantheism?
Content:


deepbluehum said:
It says in the Kosha that color is form. It is not a materialist position. It is part of nama-rupa.

Malcolm wrote:
Correct, it says that rūpa, the object of the eye (as opposed to the rūpa skandha) is color.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 18th, 2012 at 3:38 AM
Title: Re: Is Dzogchen Compatible with the Madhyamika Prasangika POV ?
Content:
deepbluehum said:
Actually in Dzogchen you don't have a view. You have an experience. You go beyond the mind. For a Dzogchen practitioner, the practice part has nothing to do with thoughts.

Malcolm wrote:
There is a "view", the experience to which you refer is the "view".

deepbluehum said:
It's not a sentence is the point.


Malcolm wrote:
Gaining mastery of the obvious, are you?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 18th, 2012 at 3:36 AM
Title: Re: Is Guru Yoga Based on Pantheism?
Content:


deepbluehum said:
Again, unlike you, I don't just acquiece when a monk tells me what to think.

Malcolm wrote:
I don't acquiesce to what anyone tells me to think.

I provided those sources for information.

And unlike you, I refrain from baseless ad homninem remarks.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 18th, 2012 at 3:15 AM
Title: Re: Is Guru Yoga Based on Pantheism?
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
For context:


Where do earth, water, fire and air no footing find?
Where are long and short, small and great, fair and four –
Where are “name and form” wholly destroyed?
And the answer is:
‘Where consciousness is signless, boundless, all-luminous,
That’s where earth, water, fire and air find no footing,
There both long and short, small and great, fair and foul –
There “name and form” are wholly destroyed.
With the cessation of consciousness this is all destroyed.’”

Thannisaro renders it slightly differently:

Where do water, earth, fire, & wind
have no footing?
Where are long & short,
coarse & fine,
fair & foul,
name & form
brought to an end?
"'And the answer to that is:


Consciousness without feature,[1]
without end,
luminous all around:
Here water, earth, fire, & wind
have no footing.
Here long & short
coarse & fine
fair & foul
name & form
are all brought to an end.
With the cessation of [the activity of] consciousness
each is here brought to an end.'"


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 18th, 2012 at 3:07 AM
Title: Re: Is Dzogchen Compatible with the Madhyamika Prasangika POV ?
Content:
deepbluehum said:
Actually in Dzogchen you don't have a view. You have an experience. You go beyond the mind. For a Dzogchen practitioner, the practice part has nothing to do with thoughts.

Malcolm wrote:
There is a "view", the experience to which you refer is the "view".


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 18th, 2012 at 3:03 AM
Title: Re: Is Guru Yoga Based on Pantheism?
Content:


deepbluehum said:
The universal Buddha consciousness?

Malcolm wrote:
There is no such thing.

deepbluehum said:
I think Jeff disagrees with you. So does Garchen Rinpoche, such phrases like, "all pervading," even in Dzogchen texts, betray omnipresence, i.e., pan-psychism, etc.



Malcolm wrote:
Thanissaro notes:

Viññanam anidassanam. This term is nowhere explained in the Canon, although MN 49 mentions that it "does not partake in the allness of the All" — the "All" meaning the six internal and six external sense media (see SN 35.23). In this it differs from the consciousness factor in dependent co-arising, which is defined in terms of the six sense media. Lying outside of time and space, it would also not come under the consciousness-aggregate, which covers all consciousness near and far; past, present, and future. However, the fact that it is outside of time and space — in a dimension where there is no here, there, or in between (Ud 1.10), no coming, no going, or staying (Ud 8.1) — means that it cannot be described as permanent or omnipresent, terms that have meaning only within space and time. The standard description of nibbana after death is, "All that is sensed, not being relished, will grow cold right here." (See MN 140 and Iti 44.) Again, as "all" is defined as the sense media, this raises the question as to whether consciousness without feature is not covered by this "all." However, AN 4.174 warns that any speculation as to whether anything does or doesn't remain after the remainderless stopping of the six sense media is to "objectify non-objectification," which gets in the way of attaining the non-objectified. Thus this is a question that is best put aside.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 18th, 2012 at 2:37 AM
Title: Re: Is Dzogchen Compatible with the Madhyamika Prasangika POV ?
Content:


Malcolm wrote:
From a Dzogchen point of view, such a samanyārtha (spyi don) is an intellectual analysis, an conceptual contrivance.

Of course, you can play with words if you like, and argue that concepts are experiences, but that is not the distinction that is being drawn here.

The experience of vidyā Longchenpa is referring to is not a samanyārtha, a generic image, even for a commoner. It is also never a result of conceptual analysis of any kind.

In other words, to tease it out for you further, as you admit, the object for a commoner meditating emptiness according to any system of Madhyamaka is a conceptual object which in truth is conceptual abstraction based on an intellectual analysis.

The "object", for a commoner meditating according to the system of Dzogchen, is always a non-abstract non-conceptual pratyakṣa [mngon gsum] of dharmatā.

The ultimate meaning of both systems is the same, but the means and praxis are quite different --  thus providing the reason why Madhyamaka, being a sutrayāna path, requires three incalculable eons to traverse the paths and stages; whereas the path of atiyoga possesses only a single stage, traversable immediately.

M

cloudburst said:
Thank you for your informed and helpful answer.
I have many arguments with it, but don't see the benefit of debating it at the moment, especially as the gang here seems to be "of a view." Perhaps I'll be feeling more argumentative in the future, but for now, I hope you enjoy your summer!

Malcolm wrote:
Sure, enjoy your summer as well.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 18th, 2012 at 2:34 AM
Title: Re: masters of the tradition
Content:
Andrew108 said:
Seems like one of Jhoti's posts went missing?


Malcolm wrote:
Perhaps someone figured out that she is not really adding anything of value to the discussion of Dzogchen.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 18th, 2012 at 2:33 AM
Title: Re: masters of the tradition
Content:
RikudouSennin said:
wow i did not know that, there is alot i need to learn but im glad to be alive at the time of this great master and have the chance to connect with him.

im sure there will be many hardships but im happy to have discovered what ive been looking for,i just need to hold onto this enthusiasim for the ret of my life.

also afer i attend the WWT and join the DC will i be considered a disciple of Rinpoche?
i know he has thousands of disciples,how do i go about having a personal relationship with CNNR?obviously to meet him in person is the goal but even then wont it be a huge amount of people trying to meet him at the same time.

Malcolm wrote:
Well, for one thing he responds to emails. Secondly, people make a big deal out of close personal relationships with their teachers, but it is an over stated thing. ChNN teaches in such a way that you really won't need much personal attention. Plus there are many older students who can help you with 98 percent of your questions.and you will be able to meet him and say hello. There is more chance for personal contact with him in smaller and newer places. It is impossible really in merigar, tsegyalgar, etc.

Anyway, you won't have many questions that are worthwhile until you have applied the practices a bit.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 18th, 2012 at 2:03 AM
Title: Re: A directive for a non-sectarian approach to practice (HHDL)
Content:
Jnana said:
Your qualms about this quote are nonsense for one reason: It doesn't matter where it came from. It's high f*cking time to stop using it as a meaningful term to refer to any contemporary Buddhist or Buddhist tradition.

Malcolm wrote:
The term Mahāyāna than ceases to have much meaning, no?

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 18th, 2012 at 2:00 AM
Title: Re: A directive for a non-sectarian approach to practice (HHDL)
Content:
Jnana said:
I've never quoted it before.

Malcolm wrote:
Perhaps I have you confused with Tilt -- but I have certainly seen this quote used again and again.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 18th, 2012 at 1:23 AM
Title: Re: A directive for a non-sectarian approach to practice (HHDL)
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
He is entitled to his opinion but he is factually incorrect. The term Hināyāna, it's usage and understanding is derived from Indian masters and their commentaries. It is really too much to imagine they were not referring their contemporary non-Mahāyāna colleagues.

Jnana said:
Of course it's derived from Indian sources. That doesn't make it any more palatable. It's a divisive term with nasty connotations, as you yourself have acknowledged. It demonstrates quite well the all-too-human side of Mahāyāna Buddhism and the inescapable fact that this term is not the speech of the historical Buddha.

Malcolm wrote:
In Indian Mahāyāna Sūtra and śastra, in text after text, the word "hināyāna" is defined as the teachings followed by śravakas and pratyekabuddhas. I am certain that you do not imagine that these Indian texts were not referring to actual contemporary traditions?

It is useless to pretend that the term Hinayāna was not used by Indian Mahāyāna authors to refer to those who did not accept Mahāyāna sutras i.e. Sarvastivadins, Mahāsaṃghikas, Thervadins, etc.

According to Ray's statement "...it is really not appropriate to assume that the Tibetan definition of Hinayana identifies a venerable living tradition as the Theravada or any other historical school" one is left with the idea that term as it is used in Tibetan Buddhism has no predecent in Indian Buddhism.

This statement by Ray is nonsense for two reasons -- the way the term is used by Tibetans was determined by Indians. Those Indians certainly were referring to their contemporaries. Since this citation is not accurate at all, much less precise, you should not keep trotting it out as if it is a meaningful statement. It is not a meaningful statement at all since it is factually incorrect.

A factually correct statement would be "it is appropriate to assume that the Indian definition of Hinayana identifies then living traditions such as the Theravada and other historical schools..."

Another more or less correct statement might be "In absence of the polemical environment where the newly produced Mahāyāna movement was subject to constant criticism by conservatives among the Nikāya schools, Tibetans revisioned the term "hinayāna" in such a fashion that it no longer truly refers to any currently extant non-Mahāyāna tradition in a meaningful way".


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 18th, 2012 at 12:46 AM
Title: Re: masters of the tradition
Content:
RikudouSennin said:
So whats the chance of becoming fully awakened in this lifetime after being introduced o your real nature?


Malcolm wrote:
If you are a diligent person, have received introduction and applied the teachings of Dzogchen to your life in a concrete way, you will never need to fear of returning to samsara's three realms ever again. Even if you do not acheive full awakening in this life you will either acheive full awakening in the bardo, or in a nirmanakāya buddhafield.

RikudouSennin said:
well then i have found exactly what i have been looking for throughout my entire life

now only if i can manage to not die before i am introduced.


Malcolm wrote:
You just need to connect with Chogyal Namkhai Norbu and not look back. He is the only teacher alive today that I know of who had two masters achieve rainbow body in this life.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 18th, 2012 at 12:23 AM
Title: Re: Milarepa -- too lazy to practise Dzogchen or no results?
Content:
Sherlock said:
There are two different versions of Milarepa's story about receiving Dzogchen teachings, in one he just slacks off because he hears about how rapid Dzogchen is and in the other he practises diligently without results until his teacher sends him away. Which is the older one?


Malcolm wrote:
The first.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 18th, 2012 at 12:20 AM
Title: Re: Mandala Offering in Ngondro
Content:
Sopa Yutso said:
I've checked WOMPT and Torch of Certainty about this, but am still lost... in the mandala section of the Barchey Kunsel, we make offerings to the "three realms and worlds, the beings and all their splendor..."  Can anyone clarify what exactly these three realms and worlds are?  They are not the form, formless and desire realms...?

Malcolm wrote:
They are. The worlds means all the worlds in the universe.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 18th, 2012 at 12:19 AM
Title: Re: Is Guru Yoga Based on Pantheism?
Content:


deepbluehum said:
The universal Buddha consciousness?

Malcolm wrote:
There is no such thing.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 18th, 2012 at 12:17 AM
Title: Re: masters of the tradition
Content:
RikudouSennin said:
So whats the chance of becoming fully awakened in this lifetime after being introduced o your real nature?


Malcolm wrote:
If you are a diligent person, have received introduction and applied the teachings of Dzogchen to your life in a concrete way, you will never need to fear of returning to samsara's three realms ever again. Even if you do not acheive full awakening in this life you will either acheive full awakening in the bardo, or in a nirmanakāya buddhafield.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 18th, 2012 at 12:13 AM
Title: Re: Is Guru Yoga Based on Pantheism?
Content:


deepbluehum said:
Is everything permeated by this?


Malcolm wrote:
The three kāyas are the basis. Everything that appears to arise, arises from ignorance [ma rig pa] of this basis. When one is in possession of knowledge [rig pa] of the basis's actual state, and has integrated completely with that knowledge, then it is said that the universe arises as the basis.

It is not complex, nor does it entail pantheism, panpsychism or anything else. It is what it is.

M

deepbluehum said:
What it is is a Samkya Vedanta question. When It is what you say it is, it is compounded. When you are referring to faculties for the pragmatic approach to soteriology, what it is is irrelevant. You go straight to the finish where is, it or not  are unnecessary to fashion.

Malcolm wrote:
The basis is asaṃkrita.

The Dzogchen tantras are aware of Saṃkhya as well as Vedanta, and take specific pains to differentiate Dzogchen view from these systems.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 17th, 2012 at 9:21 PM
Title: Re: Is Guru Yoga Based on Pantheism?
Content:


deepbluehum said:
Is everything permeated by this?


Malcolm wrote:
The three kāyas are the basis. Everything that appears to arise, arises from ignorance [ma rig pa] of this basis. When one is in possession of knowledge [rig pa] of the basis's actual state, and has integrated completely with that knowledge, then it is said that the universe arises as the basis.

It is not complex, nor does it entail pantheism, panpsychism or anything else. It is what it is.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 17th, 2012 at 8:54 PM
Title: Re: rGyal tshab rJe Dar ma rin chen - UTTARATANTRA
Content:
gerdovan said:
Hi everbody,

I am looking for the Tibetan text of rGyal tshab rJe Dar ma rin chen's commentary on the rGyud bla ma ((UTTARATANTRA). Preferably not in Whylie.... can I download it from somewhere?

Can somebody help me with that?

Thank you!

Gerd


Malcolm wrote:
dar ma rin chen. "theg pa chen po rgyud bla ma'i TI k+ka/." In gsung 'bum/_rgyal tshab rje (bkra shis lhun po par rnying). TBRC W29194. 3: 5 - 440. dharamsala: sherig parkhang, 1997. http://tbrc.org/link?RID=O01ACI1%7CO01ACI101ACI23$W29194 " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 17th, 2012 at 8:41 PM
Title: Re: A directive for a non-sectarian approach to practice (HHDL)
Content:
Jnana said:
Reggie Ray thinks otherwise.

Malcolm wrote:
He is entitled to his opinion but he is factually incorrect. The term Hināyāna, it's usage and understanding is derived from Indian masters and their commentaries. It is really too much to imagine they were not referring their contemporary non-Mahāyāna colleagues.

Just run a word search on the bstan 'gyur for "theg pa chung" and you will be forced to come to the conclusion that term Hinayāna and its usage is not some Tibetan construction as presented by Ray.

Jnana said:
And the vajrayāna is merely upāya from soup to nuts.

Malcolm wrote:
This is hardly a fair assessment of the situation, though it is a fashionable sentiment post Sakya Pandita.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 17th, 2012 at 7:57 PM
Title: Re: Is Guru Yoga Based on Pantheism?
Content:
deepbluehum said:
Sure there is. Monism too. How else can the Dharmakaya be all pervasive so that two minds can unite?

Malcolm wrote:
That is not what happens in Guru yoga.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 17th, 2012 at 8:51 AM
Title: Re: Is Guru Yoga Based on Pantheism?
Content:
deepbluehum said:
I recently asked Garchen Rinpoche how Guru Yoga works. Garchen Rinpoche told me the nature of mind is omnipresent and permeates all beings which is why one can unite with the mind of the guru. I asked him if this was the same as the Hindu notion of Brahman? He said the Buddha only meant to refute a Creator God, but the notion of Brahman is basically fine with buddha-dharma. That was surprising to me.

Malcolm has also pointed out that in the Khandro Nyingthig texts Guru P has stated that everything is rigpa.

So does Guru Yoga betray the Pantheism underlying Mahayana, Vajrayana and Dzogchen?

Malcolm wrote:
Pantheism is an inappropriate term. There is no god in any form of Buddhadharma.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 17th, 2012 at 8:49 AM
Title: Re: Letter of resignation
Content:
tobes said:
I
On what  is unacceptable:


Malcolm wrote:
What is unacceptable is to give in to something you regard as evil and disengage.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 17th, 2012 at 8:47 AM
Title: Re: Is Dzogchen Compatible with the Madhyamika Prasangika POV ?
Content:
conebeckham said:
I think it's more correct to say that the basis in gzhan stong (Shentong) is "Buddha Nature," which is not EXACTLY equivalent with emptiness, at least according to Dolpopa's presentation.

Malcolm wrote:
It is exactly emptiness precisely in the fashion that I described it, even in Dolbuwa's presentation.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 17th, 2012 at 8:44 AM
Title: Re: The Pitfalls of Western analysis of "Dharmic Traditions"
Content:
pueraeternus said:
I may follow along if deepbluehum remains unreceptive.

deepbluehum said:
Aside from your factual interpretations, show me in the suttas where Buddha himself teaches how his realization is superior to the Arahats.


Malcolm wrote:
Apprently you beleive the Buddha's teachings are confined to the Nikayas/Agamas. That is ok, but such sentiments are out of place in a Mahāyāna forum.

This is religion, here, not science. If you want science, you are in the wrong place and wrong faith.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 17th, 2012 at 8:43 AM
Title: Re: The Pitfalls of Western analysis of "Dharmic Traditions"
Content:
pueraeternus said:
This has nothing to do with the topic about comparing the fruits of a Buddha and the fruits of an Arhat. You are talking about what may be best for people of various dispositions. Fine if you want to start another thread and talk about it. This thread is off topic enough already.

dharmagoat said:
I'm done.

pueraeternus said:
I may follow along if deepbluehum remains unreceptive.

Malcolm wrote:
DBH is going through a phase, it seems.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 17th, 2012 at 8:40 AM
Title: Re: The Pitfalls of Western analysis of "Dharmic Traditions"
Content:


deepbluehum said:
All you do is argue online.

Malcolm wrote:
No, it is not all I do. What I do is translate texts and see patients. I sporadically engage in conversations here which are usually trolled.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 17th, 2012 at 4:11 AM
Title: Re: The Pitfalls of Western analysis of "Dharmic Traditions"
Content:


Malcolm wrote:
No, actually they don't.

If so, then you have to ask why the Arhat Mogallana was forced to ask the Buddha where his mother had taken rebirth, since his "divine" eye was insufficiently strong to see where she had gone.

deepbluehum said:
Then you have to ask how come buddha had to ask where had all his students gone after he came out of his cave retreat, when he didn't know they had killed themselves.

You can ask a lot of questions.

Malcolm wrote:
It is quite simple. According to the Nikaya tradition, the Buddha's omniscience is only operative when he chooses to direct his attention towards a given phenomena -- a Buddha is not omniscient 24/7, according to the Nikayas. Nevertheless, the Buddha's six abhijñās are completely unobstructed and fully developed. The development of the six abhijñās are not necessary for an Arhat, and even then, never can develop to the full extent of a Buddhas. Why? They lack the requisite past-life training as a bodhisattva.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 17th, 2012 at 4:07 AM
Title: Re: The Pitfalls of Western analysis of "Dharmic Traditions"
Content:


Malcolm wrote:
Yes, like most one-sided polemicists.

deepbluehum said:
That's what you are, Mr. Dzogchen.

Malcolm wrote:
Unlike you, I am not pursuing a polemical agenda. I am happy to let people practice whatever the hell they want without telling them they are wrong, or screwed up, etc. If people want to believe that Arhats are omniscient, that's ok with me. I just don't believe it, and I don't think their citations or reasonings are sound. But I sure am not really that interested in arguing about it, I have better things to do with my time.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 17th, 2012 at 4:03 AM
Title: Re: The Pitfalls of Western analysis of "Dharmic Traditions"
Content:
deepbluehum said:
What you guys are willfully ignoring is that the bodhi for an arahant is the same as a buddha, an arahant is an arahant sammasambuddha. The Buddha clearly refutes any cognitive obscuration.

Malcolm wrote:
No, I understand that that is how it may seem to be defined in the Nikāyas and the Agamas depending on how one chooses to read things, but the Śravaka canon is not definitive for me [though it may be for you] and then there is the fact that in general the Nikāya schools do not comment on things in this way indicates that Tilt's POV is a modernist revisionism.

In short, all samyaksaṃbuddhas are arhats, but not all arhats are saṃyaksaṃbuddhas.

Śravaka-bodhi is not the same thing as the bodhi of an bodhisattva or that of a buddha. Please see the Abhisamaya-alaṃkara.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 17th, 2012 at 3:45 AM
Title: Re: The Pitfalls of Western analysis of "Dharmic Traditions"
Content:


deepbluehum said:
The suttas that Tiltbilings cites in his thread refutes these commentarial threads.

pueraeternus said:
Tilt cites only the suttas that suit his cause.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, like most one-sided polemicists.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 17th, 2012 at 3:39 AM
Title: Re: Is Dzogchen Compatible with the Madhyamika Prasangika POV ?
Content:


futerko said:
Hi Malcom, are you including Shentong Madhyamaka in this?

Malcolm wrote:
The actual mode of meditation in rang stong and gzhan stong are not different at all. The difference lay primarily in how they conceptualize the view in post-meditation.

futerko said:
Earlier you said, "the basis in Madhyamaka is emptiness, whereas the basis in Dzogchen is considered to be rigpa."
Presentations that I have seen tend to contrast the rang stong basis of emptiness with the gzhan stong basis of radiance, or the light of the clear light nature of mind which can only be realized non-conceptually and non-dualistically by the clear light nature of mind itself.

Is it only that the mode of meditation is different from Rdzogs chen, or are you also suggesting that this formulation of gzhan stong is still somehow conceptual?


Malcolm wrote:
The basis in gzhan stong is still emptiness, albeit is an emptiness qualified by the presence of ultimate buddha qualities, where samsaric phenomena are considere extraneous. Why? Because these ultimate qualities are only held to appear to exist in post-equipoise, but their appearance of existence disappear when in equipoise.

The equipoise in both rang stong and gzhan stong is characterized as an equipoise free from extremes. In the case of commoners, this freedom from extremes is arrived through analysis that negate the four extremes in turn. This is necessary even in gshan stong because attachment to the luminosity described by the PP sutras will result in an extreme view, just as grasping to emptiness results in an extreme view.

As I said, the most salient difference between R and S is in their post-equipoise formulation. In terms of how adherents of the so called R and S views actually meditate, there is no ultimate difference.

The pitfall of both approaches is the same -- failure to eradicate all extremes results in the former grasping to non-existence as emptiness, and the latter grasping to existence as emptiness.

The purpose of Madhyamaka analysis is not to come to some imagined "correct" generic image of the ultimate, but rather to exhaust the mind's capacity to reify phenomena according to any extreme so that one's experience of conventional truth upon reaching the path of seeing in post-equipoise is that all phenomena are seen to be illusions, dreams and so on i.e. unreal and yet apparent due to the force of traces.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 17th, 2012 at 2:23 AM
Title: Re: The Pitfalls of Western analysis of "Dharmic Traditions"
Content:
Jnana said:
FWIW,  according to the Theravāda Paṭisambhidāmagga a buddha has the following knowledges and abilities not shared by arhat disciples:
knowledge of the penetration of other beings' faculties
knowledge of other beings' biases and underlying tendancies
knowledge of the twin miracle *
knowledge of the attainment of great compassion
omniscience & unobstructed knowledge
The Theravāda commentaries also differentiate between sammāsambodhi, paccekabodhi, and sāvakabodhi. Accordingly, a mahābodhisatta develops the perfections, etc., to a greater degree in order to realize sammāsambodhi.


* i.e. the ability to produce fire and water from various parts of the body, as well as walk amid an aura of colors while a created image of his body sits or lies down, etc.


deepbluehum said:
The suttas that Tiltbilings cites in his thread refutes these commentarial threads.

Malcolm wrote:
No, actually they don't.

If so, then you have to ask why the Arhat Mogallana was forced to ask the Buddha where his mother had taken rebirth, since his "divine" eye was insufficiently strong to see where she had gone.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 17th, 2012 at 2:02 AM
Title: Re: Is Dzogchen Compatible with the Madhyamika Prasangika POV ?
Content:


futerko said:
Hi Malcom, are you including Shentong Madhyamaka in this?

Malcolm wrote:
The actual mode of meditation in rang stong and gzhan stong are not different at all. The difference lay primarily in how they conceptualize the view in post-meditation.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 17th, 2012 at 1:12 AM
Title: Re: Is Dzogchen Compatible with the Madhyamika Prasangika POV ?
Content:


cloudburst said:
The process of madhyamaka is based on intellectual analysis. Through this process of investigation, one develops insight. This new view is experiential, and this is the point of view of madhyamaka.

Malcolm wrote:
After an eon of meditating perhaps. But while one is below the path of seeing one's "insight" is conceptual, and not experiential.

cloudburst said:
The point of view is either conceptual or not depending upon the meditator.

How long it takes to become the type of meditator for whom it is non-conceptual depends upon the meditator, the methods, the guru etc. Could be aeons could a few years , or months .....days.... really it depends.

You have moved from saying that Madhyamaka is "just an intellectual analysis" to saying that conceptual is not experiential. I would say that for a yogi on the path of preparation meditating with ultimate  example clear light, the point of view is technically speaking conceptual, but this means something very very different from "just intellectual analysis," doesn't it? This discussion is about the prasangika point of VIEW, and a view is necessarily experiential, as it is a view.

meditating on a  generic image of ultimate truth with a mind of clear light is certainly experiential.

Malcolm wrote:
From a Dzogchen point of view, such a samanyārtha (spyi don) is an intellectual analysis, an conceptual contrivance.

Of course, you can play with words if you like, and argue that concepts are experiences, but that is not the distinction that is being drawn here.

The experience of vidyā Longchenpa is referring to is not a samanyārtha, a generic image, even for a commoner. It is also never a result of conceptual analysis of any kind.

In other words, to tease it out for you further, as you admit, the object for a commoner meditating emptiness according to any system of Madhyamaka is a conceptual object which in truth is conceptual abstraction based on an intellectual analysis.

The "object", for a commoner meditating according to the system of Dzogchen, is always a non-abstract non-conceptual pratyakṣa [mngon gsum] of dharmatā.

The ultimate meaning of both systems is the same, but the means and praxis are quite different --  thus providing the reason why Madhyamaka, being a sutrayāna path, requires three incalculable eons to traverse the paths and stages; whereas the path of atiyoga possesses only a single stage, traversable immediately.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 16th, 2012 at 11:03 PM
Title: Re: Dzogchen tantras uncreated and eternal
Content:
pueraeternus said:
...but I won't say that the other vehicles are incapable of approaching gnosis and attainment of anuttarasamyaksambodhi on their own terms.

Malcolm wrote:
No one has said this.

pueraeternus said:
Glad to hear this. The way some of the dzogchen threads around here went, it gave a lot of people the impression that dzogchenpas think only through dzogchen can one attain complete enlightenment.


Malcolm wrote:
All nine yānas, including the yāna of gods and humans, lead directly or indirectly to full awakening. (boy this thread has gone off-topic)


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 16th, 2012 at 9:26 PM
Title: Re: Dzogchen tantras uncreated and eternal
Content:


Tiger said:
Also my criticism...

Malcolm wrote:
We are not actually interested in your criticisms. Not...even...slightly.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 16th, 2012 at 9:08 PM
Title: Re: "No Thought" in Pao-T'ang Ch'an and early Atiyoga
Content:
Tiger said:
Nice paper.

https://www.google.co.in/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=atiyoga&source=web&cd=41&cad=rja&ved=0CEgQFjAAOCg&url=http%3A%2F%2Farchiv.ub.uni-heidelberg.de%2Fojs%2Findex.php%2Fjiabs%2Farticle%2Fdownload%2F8661%2F2568&ei=cd4sUKSgJYuY0QXTmoGwDA&usg=AFQjCNFj1L4O70DaC5veMycwxj9jjCnz0Q " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Andrew108 said:
Why do you think it's a nice paper?

Tiger said:
For the historical analysis.


Malcolm wrote:
This article is quite outdated. This is a much more recent, more informed, and a more nuanced presentation of the interaction of Chan and Atiyoga in Tibet:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/49744856/Lighting-the-Lamp-An-Examination-of-the-Structure-of-the-Bsam-Gtan-Mig-Sgron " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 16th, 2012 at 7:57 PM
Title: Re: Dzogchen tantras uncreated and eternal
Content:
pueraeternus said:
...but I won't say that the other vehicles are incapable of approaching gnosis and attainment of anuttarasamyaksambodhi on their own terms.

Malcolm wrote:
No one has said this.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 16th, 2012 at 7:32 PM
Title: Re: The Pitfalls of Western analysis of "Dharmic Traditions"
Content:
cloudburst said:
also, is there an example of ignoreace that is not delusion?

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, the non-afflictive ignorance possessed by Arhats and Pratyekabuddhas, etc.

cloudburst said:
and a definition of extremes, if you will?

Malcolm wrote:
A one sided state.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 16th, 2012 at 7:29 PM
Title: Re: Is Dzogchen Compatible with the Madhyamika Prasangika POV ?
Content:
cloudburst said:
Whether or not Madhyamaka fails in exceeding an intellectual approach depends upon whether or not the meditator fails to exceed and intellectual approach.

Malcolm wrote:
Madhyamaka is based on intellectual analysis. It has no form of vipashyana which is uniquely distinguished from sūtrayāna in general.

When it comes to meditating vipashyāna, one does not sit there and engage in intellectual analysis ala madhyamaka.

cloudburst said:
The process of madhyamaka is based on intellectual analysis. Through this process of investigation, one develops insight. This new view is experiential, and this is the point of view of madhyamaka.

Malcolm wrote:
After an eon of meditating perhaps. But while one is below the path of seeing one's "insight" is conceptual, and not experiential.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 16th, 2012 at 10:41 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen tantras uncreated and eternal
Content:
pueraeternus said:
... The Prajnaparamita...

Malcolm wrote:
Lacks the explanation of lhun grub.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 16th, 2012 at 10:38 AM
Title: Re: The Pitfalls of Western analysis of "Dharmic Traditions"
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
You need to study more.

deepbluehum said:
You're being silly again. I know where your position comes from. You think Arahats have the cognitive obscuration. Because I practiced more, I realized it's bullshit.

Malcolm wrote:
Now whose being silly?

Even in the Pali canon Buddha makes it very clear that Arhats do not possess omniscience. Furthermore, Vasubandhu is extremely clear about this point.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 16th, 2012 at 10:33 AM
Title: Re: Is Dzogchen Compatible with the Madhyamika Prasangika POV ?
Content:
cloudburst said:
Whether or not Madhyamaka fails in exceeding an intellectual approach depends upon whether or not the meditator fails to exceed and intellectual approach.

Malcolm wrote:
Madhyamaka is based on intellectual analysis. It has no form of vipashyana which is uniquely distinguished from sūtrayāna in general.

When it comes to meditating vipashyāna, one does not sit there and engage in intellectual analysis ala madhyamaka.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 16th, 2012 at 10:29 AM
Title: Re: The Pitfalls of Western analysis of "Dharmic Traditions"
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
The attainment of nirvana may entail the end of suffering and delusion but not of ignorance.

deepbluehum said:
That's ridiculous. Nirvana is not possible unless there is the cessation of ignorance.

Malcolm wrote:
You need to study more.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 16th, 2012 at 9:50 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen tantras uncreated and eternal
Content:
Jyoti said:
While some dzogchenpa busy themselves in reasoning out about the simple matter of mahayana due to their distorted system, the mahayanist already ahead of them in the utilization of means which are definitive.


Malcolm wrote:
You are in the wrong forum. If you wish to criticize Dzogchen teachings, you may. Its your samaya, not mine.

I am done here.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 16th, 2012 at 9:42 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen tantras uncreated and eternal
Content:
Jyoti said:
[

3. The alaya has karmic traces, but when it transformed as wisdom, it is the dharmakaya, same basis.

Malcolm wrote:
Dzogchen tantras define ālaya as ignorance. It cannot be transformed into wisdom.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 16th, 2012 at 9:03 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen tantras uncreated and eternal
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Even rocks have dharmatā. Resting in the dharmatā of a rock is not really going beyond the rock. In fact, it can't.

pueraeternus said:
But we are not rocks. And since the embodiment of the dharmata dawns as the dharmakaya...

Malcolm wrote:
This amounts to saying that mind dawns as dharmakāya since the mind is the embodiment of its own dharmatā. But this does not correspond to how things are. It is a theory. Why? The dharmatā of the mind is not wisdom, and resting in it does not go beyond mind.


However, as Khenpo Ngachung pointed out, even if it is pointed out to those of the eight lower yānas that their vehicles never go beyond mind, they will not believe it -- which again is yet another reason it is pointless to argue or discuss Dzogchen with those who are not really interested.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 16th, 2012 at 8:47 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen tantras uncreated and eternal
Content:
Pero said:
Sure it is. You don't have to read even one sutra to practice Dzogchen and even if you do, it will not help your understanding of Dzogchen. You can't understand Dzogchen by trying to look at it from the POV of a lower vehicle.

Jyoti said:
Unless you practicing in cave blocking all outside interference, then you don't need the many tools of mahayana that is meant for busy practitioners whose mind cannot be free from the thinking of the various matters of daily life. The mahayana is not a lower vehicle, the classification of the yana by the nyinama is not universal in buddhism.

Malcolm wrote:
There is no basis for this discussion since there is no common ground for a discussion at all. It is better to leave this here.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 16th, 2012 at 8:19 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen tantras uncreated and eternal
Content:


Jyoti said:
Yes, I'm capable, but I want your own interpretation on the matter, yet you can't even use your own terms.

Malcolm wrote:
In general, it is not correct to debate about Dzogchen teachings with people, especially people who have wrong views about Dzogchen. So I am not to about argue with you about your views and try to condition you. You have already sufficiently conditioned yourself into an incorrect view about Dzogchen teachings. It is up to you to condition yourself out of it.

However I will leave you with this much — If you do not differentiate mind and wisdom, you will not understand Dzogchen at all.

In Dzogchen, the all-basis (ālaya) is only a repository of traces. Ālaya is āvidyā, ignorance. From ignorance arises the eight consciousnesses. Ignorance of what? The ignorance that results from not recognizing the gzhi (sthana) i.e. the three wisdoms. All this is very clearly explained in many, many Dzogchen tantras and texts.

I have given you enough information so that you may untie yourself from the knot that you have created for yourself.

Good luck.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 16th, 2012 at 8:02 AM
Title: Re: Is Dzogchen Compatible with the Madhyamika Prasangika POV ?
Content:
cloudburst said:
In his Gelug/Kagyu Mahamura text the Dalai Lama advises Dzochen pratitioners to study Je Tsongkhapa's prasangika presentation of emptiness, saying that it would be "very beneficial."


Malcolm wrote:
While Jigme Lingpa in general gives Tsongkhapa's presentation of Prasanga in his Yon tan mdzod; later, in the Dzoghen section he criticizes Madhaymaka in general for failing to be able to exceed intellectual analysis.

Longchenpa, half a century before Tsongkhapa, writes in his autocommentary to the Treasury of the Dharmadhātu in chapter 8:

This system of the natural great perfection is equivalent with the Consequentialist Madhyamaka’s usual way of considering freedom from extremes and so on. 

However, emptiness in Madhymaka is an emptiness counted as similar to space, made into the basis; here naked pellucid vidyā pure from the beginning that is not established; that, merely unceasing, is made into the basis.

So in terms of freedom from extremes and so on, Madhyamaka and Dzogchen are identical. Where they differ is what is considered the basis [gzhi, sthana]-- the basis in Madhyamaka is emptiness, whereas the basis in Dzogchen is considered to be rigpa.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 16th, 2012 at 6:04 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen tantras uncreated and eternal
Content:
pueraeternus said:
[

Personally, I won't say that it does not really succeed, but that it uses different methods. In general, tantra (including Mahamudra and Dzogchen) has more efficient tools, or rather tools that suit a certain mentality.

Malcolm wrote:
This is a very post-Sakya Pandita view of tantric teachings in general.


pueraeternus said:
Why do you think so? *Genuine question - this is not a challenge*

Malcolm wrote:
Even rocks have dharmatā. Resting in the dharmatā of a rock is not really going beyond the rock. In fact, it can't.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 16th, 2012 at 5:30 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen tantras uncreated and eternal
Content:


pueraeternus said:
But that is because you pigeon-hole it into that category and assume it to be so. Prajnaparamita is also sutrayana, but that doesn't mean it is merely the transformation of vijnana.

Malcolm wrote:
That depends on one's exegetical tradition i.e. yogacara or madhyamaka.

Basically, the Dzogchen critique of sutrayāna in general is that even when sūtrayāna asserts wisdom beyond mind, it does not really succeed.

Even so, the emphasis of Chan is on dharmatā, not wisdom. Chan does not go beyond mind because it merely declares all things dharmatā.

That is not really going beyond mind.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 16th, 2012 at 4:56 AM
Title: Re: Is Dzogchen Compatible with the Madhyamika Prasangika POV ?
Content:
Caz said:
?

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, the difference is however that Prasanga is just an intellectual analysis where as Dzogchen is experiential.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 16th, 2012 at 4:11 AM
Title: Re: The Pitfalls of Western analysis of "Dharmic Traditions"
Content:
cloudburst said:
also, is there an example of ignoreace that is not delusion?

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, the non-afflictive ignorance possessed by Arhats and Pratyekabuddhas, etc.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 16th, 2012 at 3:05 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen tantras uncreated and eternal
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
If you assume the trikāya has something to do with vijñāna, then you would be correct. But that is not how the trikāya is understood in Dzogchen.

You need to read Primordial Experience, and understand how the Dzogchen tradition treats the cittamatra school and its doctrines so that you may correctly differentiate them. Otherwise, you will merely continue down this path of confusing yourself and others.

M

Jyoti said:
Why not just quote the text here or describe the content?

Malcolm wrote:
You are an intelligent person and capable of doing your own reading.

https://www.amazon.com/Primordial-Experience-Introduction-rDzogs-chen-Meditation/dp/157062898X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1345057594&sr=8-1&keywords=primordial+experience " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 16th, 2012 at 2:31 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen tantras uncreated and eternal
Content:
Andrew108 said:
Poor Jyoti. Seems like everyone is ganging up on him. But I'm sure some good understanding will come out of this.

Pero said:
True. Though it just sort of happened that way.

Malcolm wrote:
It is likely to happen whenever someone comes to the Dzogchen forum and starts asserting that Dzogchen is subordinate to common Mahāyāna.

Jyoti has obviously not read Manjushrimitra's rdo la gser zhun


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 16th, 2012 at 2:29 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen tantras uncreated and eternal
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Right, as I said, Dzogchen has nothing to do with mind, vijñāna.

Jyoti said:
So you equate mind as consciousness (vijnana), to have nothing to do with consciousness, you would have nothing to do with the dhamadhatu and the trikaya, and your version of dzogchen would have no basis.

Malcolm wrote:
If you assume the trikāya has something to do with vijñāna, then you would be correct. But that is not how the trikāya is understood in Dzogchen.

You need to read Primordial Experience, and understand how the Dzogchen tradition treats the cittamatra school and its doctrines so that you may correctly differentiate them. Otherwise, you will merely continue down this path of confusing yourself and others.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 16th, 2012 at 2:26 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen tantras uncreated and eternal
Content:


pueraeternus said:
Chan does not stop at the vijnana level.

Malcolm wrote:
From the point of view of Dzogchen, it does.

pueraeternus said:
It really doesn't, but there is nothing new in Buddhism for one tradition criticizing another based on incomplete understanding. Happens both ways.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, it really does. Why? Because for Chan, being a sutrayāna tradition, wisdom is the transformation of vijñāna.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 16th, 2012 at 2:08 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen tantras uncreated and eternal
Content:


pueraeternus said:
Chan does not stop at the vijnana level.

Malcolm wrote:
From the point of view of Dzogchen, it does.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 16th, 2012 at 1:53 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen tantras uncreated and eternal
Content:
Jyoti said:
... as for the definitive meaning of dzogchen, I can find it in ch'an and the consciousness-only school...

Malcolm wrote:
No, this is a mistake. But it is your mistake so I leave you to it.

Neither Chan nor Cittamatra go beyond mind.

M

Jyoti said:
Defined mind, otherwise don't simply go beyond because a tradition said so.  Both ch'an and the consciousness-only tradition focused only on consciousnesses and its transformation.

Malcolm wrote:
Right, as I said, Dzogchen has nothing to do with mind, vijñāna.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 16th, 2012 at 1:36 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen tantras uncreated and eternal
Content:
Jyoti said:
... as for the definitive meaning of dzogchen, I can find it in ch'an and the consciousness-only school...

Malcolm wrote:
No, this is a mistake. But it is your mistake so I leave you to it.

Neither Chan nor Cittamatra go beyond mind.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 16th, 2012 at 1:27 AM
Title: Re: The Pitfalls of Western analysis of "Dharmic Traditions"
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Nirvana is an extreme because nirvana is a cessation -- as the etymology of the name implies. But this is all besides the point.

deepbluehum said:
It is a cessation of suffering and delusion. Who wants to keep that going? It's funny the transforms that happen due to clinging to dictionary thinking.

Malcolm wrote:
The attainment of nirvana may entail the end of suffering and delusion but not of ignorance. Hence, nirvana is still an extreme because it is a mere cessation.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 16th, 2012 at 1:21 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen tantras uncreated and eternal
Content:


Jyoti said:
Experience is required, questions and answers are what appears when one analyse the words of the teacher or scriptures. You need a question, in order to find answer within experience.

Malcolm wrote:
Meaning comes from experience.

You don't really need to ask that many questions about it.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 15th, 2012 at 11:18 PM
Title: Re: How can Buddhists be so sure of themselves?
Content:
My Socks Smell said:
Am I to understand that, unlike materialism, Buddhism is a belief system based upon the assertion that there is something after death for us to worry about?

Malcolm wrote:
The mind stream does not die along with the body.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 15th, 2012 at 10:47 PM
Title: Re: Dzogchen tantras uncreated and eternal
Content:


Jyoti said:
Well I studied and practice dzogchen...

Malcolm wrote:
From whom did you receive Dzogchen transmission?

Teacher and Guru -- not the same thing at all.

Dzogchen is not based on questions and answers. It is based on experience.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 15th, 2012 at 10:14 PM
Title: Re: Dzogchen tantras uncreated and eternal
Content:


Jyoti said:
Point me to one dzogchen teacher who is still living who taught the sudden teachings without mixing with any gradual means in all of their teachings, and point me to a consciousness-only scriptures that teach the gradual method, then repeat the same statement above.

Malcolm wrote:
Chogyal Namkhai Norbu.

Gandavyuha, etc

Jyoti said:
N.N also taught skillful means such as yantra yoga and development stage yoga, where is purity of the sudden approach? The demand for purity is simple, there should not be mixture of two different approach in any discourse, otherwise confusion is inevitable. Also those who rely exclusively on the definitive meaning, do not required additional aid of skillful means.

Malcolm wrote:
This statement indicates that a) you do not understand the teachings of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu b) that you do not understand Dzogchen.

Jyoti said:
The Gandayyuha is not a scripture of definitive meaning,  and so would not be used by the consciousness-only school.

Malcolm wrote:
The Gandavyuha commonly considered a Yogacara sūtra.

There are a number of Yogacara sutras. Also for example the Saṃdhinirmocana is a gradualist sūtra belonging to the so called vijñaptimatra or cittamatra school -- a foundational text, actually.

It is fine if you want to consider Mahāyāna definitive. But that is just not how it is for we who follow the teaching of Dzogchen. We consider Dzogchen definitive, and everything else provisional. That is normal.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 15th, 2012 at 9:09 PM
Title: Re: Dzogchen tantras uncreated and eternal
Content:


Jyoti said:
Point me to one dzogchen teacher who is still living who taught the sudden teachings without mixing with any gradual means in all of their teachings, and point me to a consciousness-only scriptures that teach the gradual method, then repeat the same statement above.

Malcolm wrote:
Chogyal Namkhai Norbu.

Gandavyuha, etc


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 15th, 2012 at 10:26 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen tantras uncreated and eternal
Content:


Malcolm wrote:
Yogacara is not commensurate with Dzogchen.

Jyoti said:
I didn't find difficulty decibering dzogchen within the framework of consciousness-only system. They both belong to the sudden vehicle, but the consciousness-only system is purer as it is never a mixture of gradual and sudden teachings. The main collection of dzogchen teaching is from teachers who taught the gradual path of vajrayana.

Malcolm wrote:
Both of your assertions are unsupported.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 15th, 2012 at 9:07 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen tantras uncreated and eternal
Content:


Jyoti said:
Not the version of dzogchen that I know.


Malcolm wrote:
Then the version you know has a problem.

There is an extensive literature differentiating the ālaya from the dharmakāya based on the second chapter of the primary root tantra of Dzogchen, the sgra thal 'gyur.

Jyoti said:
Not objecting the need to differentiate alaya and dharmakaya either, but on the context above on transformation of consciousness into wisdom, it is regarding the body (basis), both alaya and dharmakaya are not from a different body.

Referring to the mahayana tripitaka:

頓悟入道要門論云：「問束四智成三身者，幾個智共成一身？幾個智獨成一身？答大圓鏡智獨成法身。平等性智獨成報身。妙觀察智與成所作智共成化身。」以上雖說四智三身，並無別佛，只是一佛所具！三身具足，四智圓滿之佛果，即是究竟位，此即唯識行者之大目的，大歸趣！

My rough translation:

<<The 'Commentary on the main point of sudden realization' said: "On the question regarding the four wisdoms becoming the trikaya, which wisdoms that combined to form the one body? The answer is the mirror-like wisdom alone become the dharmakaya. The equality wisdom become the sambogakaya. The combination of both discriminative wisdom and equality wisdom become the nirmanakaya". Although the above talked about the four wisdoms and trikaya, there are no other buddhas, but being possessed in a single buddha only! The perfection of the fruit of buddhahood that posessed the trikaya and four wisdoms is the seat of the ultimate, this is the grand objective and the meaning of the grand returning of the practitioner of the consciousness-only!>>

Here's the break down of the four wisdoms and their corresponding body and consciousness:

Mirror-like wisdom = dharmakaya = 8th consciousness (alaya-vijnana)
Equality wisdom = sambogakaya = 7th consciousness
Discriminative wisdom = 6th consciousness
Equality wisdom + discriminative wisdom = nirmanakaya

When one discusses on the stand-point of the body, the different terms are not considered different if they belong to same basis. But when one discussed conditions and method based on such conditions, those terms make a difference and should be differentiated in their respective condition.

Malcolm wrote:
Yogacara is not commensurate with Dzogchen.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 15th, 2012 at 4:07 AM
Title: Re: The Pitfalls of Western analysis of "Dharmic Traditions"
Content:
deepbluehum said:
I know. It seems Mahayana's nonabiding nirvana is jivan-mukti repackaged.

Malcolm wrote:
Nirvana is an extreme because nirvana is a cessation -- as the etymology of the name implies. But this is all besides the point.

It seems you have, for the time being, adopted the view that the Nikāya/Agamic Buddhism is the real stuff. Next you will be telling us that rebirth [punarbhava] is balony too, and that karma is bollocks.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 15th, 2012 at 3:47 AM
Title: Re: The Pitfalls of Western analysis of "Dharmic Traditions"
Content:
deepbluehum said:
What it boils down to is samsara vs. nirvana.


Malcolm wrote:
What is boils down to is going to both, since both are extremes.

deepbluehum said:
That's that double talk. Nirvana is not an extreme. It is the middle between extremes. Samsara fluctuates between extremes.


Malcolm wrote:
Dear fellow, from a Mahāyāna POV, nirvana is an extreme.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 15th, 2012 at 3:24 AM
Title: Re: The Pitfalls of Western analysis of "Dharmic Traditions"
Content:
deepbluehum said:
What it boils down to is samsara vs. nirvana.


Malcolm wrote:
What is boils down to is going beyond both, since both are extremes.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 15th, 2012 at 2:38 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen tantras uncreated and eternal
Content:


Jyoti said:
Not the version of dzogchen that I know.


Malcolm wrote:
Then the version you know has a problem.

There is an extensive literature differentiating the ālaya from the dharmakāya based on the second chapter of the primary root tantra of Dzogchen, the sgra thal 'gyur.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 15th, 2012 at 12:24 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen tantras uncreated and eternal
Content:
Andrew108 said:
What do you mean by body? Means is what exactly?

Jyoti said:
The body is what is permanent, uncreated, such as dharma, dharmakaya, dharmadhatu, nirvana and so on. The means is the functionalities of the body, it is make up of consciousnesses of the individual. There are 8 consciousnesses within the individual, only one is utilized as active means, the others as passive support, the body is actually the 8th consciousness (alaya-vijnana) which corresponds to the dharmakaya,  it also acts as passive support.  The active consciousness that utilized as means is the 6th consciousness, this consciousness support the thinking faculty and also discriminative wisdom, as long as this wisdom is activated, the 7th consciousness become support of the wisdom of equality. When these two is activated, the rest of the consciousnesses transformed into wisdom altogether.

Malcolm wrote:
This has nothing to do with dzogchen which explicitly rejects the idea that the ālaya = the dharmakāya.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 14th, 2012 at 11:31 PM
Title: Re: Child Abuse Rampant in Sinhalese Monasteries
Content:
JKhedrup said:
Malcolm,
Apologies. Actually, that part of the post was not a response to you, but to "Deep Blue Hum'. I know that you have read enough Sutras and other Buddhist literature to probably not suggest abandoning monasticism entirely, though you are critical of it (which I have been around long enough to be okay with, I am not wearing rose coloured glasses).

The latter part of my post, about the TCVs, was directed to you and that is why your name appeared. Because in fact I think that the problem has more to do with lack of oversight in the Tibetan institutions than monasticism or celibacy.
I have heard several stories of such abuse at both Tibetan and Indian boarding schools from some of the children and local concerned Westerners.


Malcolm wrote:
What I was referring to was the systematic child abuse in traditional pre-modern Tibetan monasteries.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 14th, 2012 at 11:26 PM
Title: Re: Dzogchen tantras uncreated and eternal
Content:
Andrew108 said:
What do you mean by body? Means is what exactly?


Malcolm wrote:
he already defined it, he means dharmadhātu.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 14th, 2012 at 10:12 PM
Title: Re: Child Abuse Rampant in Sinhalese Monasteries
Content:
JKhedrup said:
So then why are we suggesting the abandoning of monasticism entirely?

Malcolm wrote:
Only one person made that suggestion and it was not me. Another person agreed, again not me.

Granted, I personally think that Buddhist monasticism is not very relevant in today's society, at least in the West, but that is a different issue.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 14th, 2012 at 10:10 PM
Title: Re: The Pitfalls of Western analysis of "Dharmic Traditions"
Content:
viniketa said:
My understanding is that that any such 'rivalry' came later than the Vedas.

deepbluehum said:
The Vedas came from the Kshatriyas. The rulers basically had these things produced. There are geneological records of Kshatriya families in Hardwar that go back thousands of years. Especially the Kshatriya clans were by varna and jati from the beginning.

Malcolm wrote:
Seems your trenchant antipathy should be directed at the Ksatriyas then.

However, we can, from a the point of view of the sutras, understand that when brahmins were respected, buddhas are born to brahmin families; when kṣatriyas are respected, they are born to kṣatriya families. This is a universal point of view in all Buddhist presentations.

As far as the Vedas coming from kṣatriyas -- we actually do not know the real origin of the Vedas. We have some guesses, some literay theories. The Hindutva people want to make the Vedas super ancient. Western scholars like Witzel suppose they are merely 3500 years old or so. Regardless of their origin, I personally think they are very interesting texts, especially the Atharva Veda, which is arguably quite late, but very important for Ayurveda and the Tantric movement in general.

We know that the early Upanishads were not brahmanical compositions, since texts like the Brihadaranyaka and the Candogya clearly state they contain the meaning of the Vedas that was not understood by brahmins, but only by kṣatriyas. The Buddha was clearly aware of, and rejected, Upanishadic ideas like the atman idealized as a luminous essence in the center of the heart -- ideas that were later recapitulated in Buddhist tantrism in a modified form -- thus, for example necessitating refutations of this idea in the Rig pa rang shar tantra, to give one example, in order to differentiate Dzogchen from Vedanta. Concepts like nadis, the five vāyus, etc., find their earliest literary expression in Candogya Upanishad, etc. Other concepts, like the five experiences of union with brahman which come from these early Upanishads are found regularly in Buddhist tantric texts i.e. smoke, fireflies, butter lamps, etc., as signs that the vāyu is entering into the avadhuti nadi. In short, while the metaphysics of Buddhist tantra may ultimately be grounded in emptiness, many, many concepts found in the Buddhist tantras, from a text critical point of view, find their earliest expression in the ten Mukhya Upanishads, also accepted as śruti by Hindus, but not by Buddhists, of course.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 14th, 2012 at 8:42 PM
Title: Re: Hsuan Hua on Homosexuality
Content:



Malcolm wrote:
No, niether cannabis or opium is intended here. Smoking a specific blend of medicinal herbs that are good for the lungs is mentioned as part of dinācarya (regular conduct) in the Caraka Saṃhita.

Huseng said:
I stand corrected. However, it doesn't specify specifically what the substance is to be smoked.
《四分律》卷43：「爾時有比丘患風。醫教用煙。佛言聽用煙。」(CBETA, T22, no. 1428, p. 877, a12-13)

“At that time there was a bhikṣu suffering wind. The doctor instructed him to use 'smoking'. The Buddha said using 'smoking' was permissible.”

Malcolm wrote:
Which Vinaya is this from. It is probably clear in the Tibetan.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 14th, 2012 at 8:08 PM
Title: Vinaya Reference to Smoking
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Topic split from here:

https://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=53&t=9638 " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Huseng said:
《四分律》卷43：「爾時有比丘患風。醫教用煙。佛言聽用煙。」(CBETA, T22, no. 1428, p. 877, a12-13)

“At that time there was a bhikṣu suffering wind. The doctor instructed him to use 'smoking'. The Buddha said using 'smoking' was permissible.”

Lotus415 said:
Interesting, since Hsuan Hua said in the comments on smoking provided in the link above that, " during that time when the Buddha was in the world no one knew how to smoke."

Huseng said:
They knew how to smoke and clearly did. It was part of Ayurveda. Again, it wasn't tobacco, but probably opium or cannabis. Also, this was for medical reasons, not to get high.


Malcolm wrote:
No, niether cannabis or opium is intended here. Smoking a specific blend of medicinal herbs that are good for the lungs is mentioned as part of dinācarya (regular conduct) in the Caraka Saṃhita.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 14th, 2012 at 7:43 PM
Title: Re: Cha Sum
Content:
alexa42 said:
First off, I'd like to say hello This is my first real post, though I've been a regular lurker.
My question is, does anyone know what Cha Sum is?  I recently requested a puja from Kopan to help clear some obstacles to my practice, and the Geshe la there suggested Tara puja, and Cha Sum... I've never heard of the latter and the little information I can find online suggests that it is used to clear obstacles related to spirits.  Is anyone here familiar with this practice?


Malcolm wrote:
it is a common torma ritual from lower tantra.

cha gsum.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 14th, 2012 at 7:42 PM
Title: Re: The Pitfalls of Western analysis of "Dharmic Traditions"
Content:
Tiger said:
I will elaborate further on the disharmony and even hostility of Indian religions, especially Buddhists and Brahmanists, which gives another picture from the unified "Dharmic religions" diatribe of Malhotra.

Malcolm wrote:
He does not claim that there never periods of friction between religious groups in India. He does not even claim they were unified. He merely claims that Dharmic religions have a common cultural source and common expectations.

In any event, the majority of instances you cite come from the very unstable post-Gupta period when North India was thrown into dissarray after the invasion of the white Huns.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 14th, 2012 at 11:28 AM
Title: Re: Child Abuse Rampant in Sinhalese Monasteries
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Read the article again.

David N. Snyder said:
Okay.
Research carried out by the BBC Sinhala service has revealed that over the last decade, nearly 110 Buddhist monks have been charged for sexual and physical assaults on minors in Sri Lanka.

He and another leading monk in the town of Anuradhapura, Namalwewa Rathnasara Thera, are currently released on bail in relation to the accusations - which they vehemently deny.
Innocent until proven guilty.

If they are guilty then the monks in question should be hung from the nearest tree (metaphorically); disrobed and placed in prison until their next life.

These are terrible crimes, if true. I don't know the statistics about which is more likely to engage in such behavior (clergy or non-clergy), but I do know that when a clergy member or another person of power / famous person commits such an act or is accused of such an act, it is newsworthy. When the average Joe does so, it is not newsworthy. Thus, the media gives the illusion that celibate monks are all sex-crazed pedophiles, which is not the case in 99.9% of the clergy.

Malcolm wrote:
Unlike you, I have no confidence that Buddhist monastics are statistically less like to commit acts of sexual abuse than Catholic Clergy.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 14th, 2012 at 9:37 AM
Title: Re: Child Abuse Rampant in Sinhalese Monasteries
Content:
JKhedrup said:
I think it is a tired argument that monasticism leads to child abuse. There is child abuse anywhere where adults deal with children- boyscouts, boarding school, air cadets, softball, kindergarten have all seen many scandals.

David N. Snyder said:
Exactly. And most of the perpetrators are/were married older men, not celibate monastics of any kind.

Malcolm wrote:
Read the article again.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 14th, 2012 at 1:15 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen tantras uncreated and eternal
Content:
deepbluehum said:
Nirvana does not have this feature.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, actually the Pali sutras describe nirvana as deathless, permanant, etc.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 14th, 2012 at 1:12 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen tantras uncreated and eternal
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Yes, and therefore, you accept an uncreated and eternal tantra. Otherwise, you would have to assert that dharmakāya is a mere blank insentient voidness.

deepbluehum said:
How about this: What dharmakaya?

Malcolm wrote:
Right, you just became an annihilationist.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 14th, 2012 at 1:11 AM
Title: Re: The Pitfalls of Western analysis of "Dharmic Traditions"
Content:
deepbluehum said:
...Vedic cosmological views leading to an eon of genetic subjugation and enslavement.

Malcolm wrote:
This is pretty outlandish.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 14th, 2012 at 1:07 AM
Title: Re: The Pitfalls of Western analysis of "Dharmic Traditions"
Content:


deepbluehum said:
Pali suttas support the notion that Buddha rejected the notion of hereditary brahmins which was prevalent at the time, which is why he mentioned it.

Malcolm wrote:
The Pali suttas prove that varna was fluid and that people change their varna -- please examine the Ambhaṭṭha sutta in the Digha Nikāya.

They do not prove that Buddha rejected varna; merely that he thought personal moral character was of far greater importance than family lineage.

The Pali suttas however also, in keeping with the Upanishads, also support the idea that kṣatriyas were a better caliber of people than brahmins in general, which is why the Buddha was born in a Kṣatriya family -- since at that time they were more respected than brahmins.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 14th, 2012 at 12:38 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen tantras uncreated and eternal
Content:
deepbluehum said:
Tantras arise do to conditions, period.

Malcolm wrote:
Does the dharmakāya arise due to conditions?

deepbluehum said:
Doesn't arise at all.


Malcolm wrote:
Yes, and therefore, you accept an uncreated and eternal tantra. Otherwise, you would have to assert that dharmakāya is a mere blank insentient voidness.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 14th, 2012 at 12:20 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen tantras uncreated and eternal
Content:
deepbluehum said:
Tantras arise do to conditions, period.

Malcolm wrote:
Does the dharmakāya arise due to conditions?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 14th, 2012 at 12:16 AM
Title: Re: The Pitfalls of Western analysis of "Dharmic Traditions"
Content:
deepbluehum said:
The notion that sutrayana depends on taking a vow is an attitude ChNN reports about some version of Hinayana he had access to.

Malcolm wrote:
No, I am not making this assertion based on his point of view.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 14th, 2012 at 12:13 AM
Title: Re: The Pitfalls of Western analysis of "Dharmic Traditions"
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
It is invalid because it does not correspond to the mode of transmission of the teachings. Sutrayāna texts to do not require any transmission because they are essentially paths of renunciation, not tied to any particular experience. Sutrayāna paths are based on taking a vow. This has caused confusion for many famous Vajrayāna scholars in all schools such as Sakya Pandita, etc., who assume that the function of empowerments and so on is to impart yet another series of vows. But this is a terrible mistake.  The function of empowerments is to impart experiences. Subsquent to having that experience, it may be important to guard a comittment regarding that experience, but without that experience the vow is useless.

Your idea that texts are sufficient, and can be treated exactly as forumulas to be reproduced like for example, a drug formula, or a formula for synthesizing a plastic precisely demonstrates the pitfalls the western analysis of Dharma traditions.

deepbluehum said:
I don't agree with any of this.

Malcolm wrote:
It's ok, you don't have to.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 14th, 2012 at 12:05 AM
Title: Re: The Pitfalls of Western analysis of "Dharmic Traditions"
Content:
deepbluehum said:
Let me try to sew up a point here so that this might get back on topic. What's happening on this board with Western dharma is imagining a dharma that isn't real, a Pollyanna dharma. Vedic dharma has always been about heredity. The idea that from the primordial sound AUM emanated all the Vedas, the rishis the brahmans and all the castes is the basis for this millennial aged Eugenics program. Make no mistake, it is about racism. It's not good. It is a mind numbing evil. Shame on India for it. If you want to go get involved with that, you can't, you are barred by birth. You can go be an outcaste; see how you like it.

Malcolm wrote:
An analsys of the role of Varna in pre-5th century AD India shows that jati and varna were not so hard and fast. In fact the ossification of jati in India really is a function first of Mughal interference and secondly, British interference.

Incidentally, there really is no caste system in South India -- the area most free from colonial influence.

deepbluehum said:
Then, you look at Malcolm's new fetish for all things Vedic, I think it arises from the similarity of the Dzogchen tantras to the Vedas with respect to their "primordial origin" in the sound of "A."

Malcolm wrote:
You obviously have not been paying attention to my writing for many years. I have observed that Vedic ideas are important in Buddhism in a postive sense rather than the commonly assumed negative sense for the entire 17 years I have participated online in any fashion. I have always been interested in and felt positive regard for the Vedas.

Dzogchen, Tantra, and the Vedas, as well as some trends in Mahāyāna Sutra, all share common assumptions about śabda based on ancient Indian grammatical science.

deepbluehum said:
Here's a reason why India is so F'd up, it's the caste system. It makes people crazy. It makes the country crazy.

Malcolm wrote:
As noted above, the ossification of the caste system (in North India primarily) is largely a result of eight hundred years of external colonialism by first the Mughals and then the Brits-- imposing caste as a method of social control. It is not intrinsic to the Indian culural idea of Varna or Jati. Any quick read of the Pali suttas proves this.

Further, the Dalit identity was largely created by Colonial Brits.

deepbluehum said:
The idea that Sanskrit itself encodes the primordial sounds of divinity is stupid bullshit.

Malcolm wrote:
It's not about Sanskrit per se --though for some Indians it may very well be. Nevetheless, no one can argue that Sanskrit is not a brilliant language system, and in fact modern linguistics up to Chomsky is based on it.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 13th, 2012 at 11:44 PM
Title: Re: Child Abuse Rampant in Sinhalese Monasteries
Content:
JKhedrup said:
Also, one of the main cases mentioned in the article was related to the abuse of the children by the lay workers of the temple, not the monks. So clearly celibacy was not the main cause of the abuse in that case.

Malcolm wrote:
Research carried out by the BBC Sinhala service has revealed that over the last decade, nearly 110 Buddhist monks have been charged for sexual and physical assaults on minors in Sri Lanka.

JKhedrup said:
I think it is a tired argument that monasticism leads to child abuse. There is child abuse anywhere where adults deal with children- boyscouts, boarding school, air cadets, softball, kindergarten have all seen many scandals.

Malcolm wrote:
Mixing children with "celibate" males inevitably results in pedophilia. This is proven in the case of the Catholic Church, and is as it turns out, is broadly true in Tibetan Buddhism as well. You just have no idea the number of stories I have heard from Tibetans about this issue.



JKhedrup said:
Lord Buddha in both the Mahayana and Theravada canon states the importance of the ordained sangha again and again, so I don't think labeling it as "no longer of use" should be taken lightly.

Malcolm wrote:
He also points out that by this time, it is merely a reflection of what it was back in the day.


JKhedrup said:
For me, my ordination has been the greatest teaching tool in my spiritual life. From the moments of utmost joy, to the moments where I considered re-entering laylife. It is a way of life which is suited to my character, aspirations and way of practice. Should such an option be taken away for those few seekers who can truly cultivate it?

For me celibacy really is a natural way of life and what I struggle with as a monk has mostly to do with the other restrictions (such as not being able to go out late at night dancing, having to work in an authoritarian structure etc.) I don't think the fact that being celibate is natural for me makes me grotesque or a pervert, although in modern society I am often made to feel this way, even with remarks from family and friends.

Malcolm wrote:
The issue is not personal choice, but institutional facts.

JKhedrup said:
Why was one of Buddha's first acts after leaving the palace to shave his hair and don the robe of a shramana?

Malcolm wrote:
Shakyamuni Buddha was not the only Buddha. Not all Buddhas create a monastic sanga -- Sikhin, for example. And the answer is that in that day and age, shramanas were more respected as spiritual teachers than lay persons such as brahmins.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 13th, 2012 at 11:33 PM
Title: Re: The Pitfalls of Western analysis of "Dharmic Traditions"
Content:


deepbluehum said:
Take the Suttanta tradition for example.

Malcolm wrote:
Invalid example.

deepbluehum said:
So sayeth the King!


Malcolm wrote:
It is invalid because it does not correspond to the mode of transmission of the teachings. Sutrayāna texts to do not require any transmission because they are essentially paths of renunciation, not tied to any particular experience. Sutrayāna paths are based on taking a vow. This has caused confusion for many famous Vajrayāna scholars in all schools such as Sakya Pandita, etc., who assume that the function of empowerments and so on is to impart yet another series of vows. But this is a terrible mistake.  The function of empowerments is to impart experiences. Subsquent to having that experience, it may be important to guard a comittment regarding that experience, but without that experience the vow is useless.

Your idea that texts are sufficient, and can be treated exactly as forumulas to be reproduced like for example, a drug formula, or a formula for synthesizing a plastic precisely demonstrates the pitfalls the western analysis of Dharma traditions.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 13th, 2012 at 8:46 PM
Title: Re: The Pitfalls of Western analysis of "Dharmic Traditions"
Content:
JKhedrup said:
It seems this thread is veering into another subject entirely, not that it isn't interesting...

Malcolm wrote:
As usual...


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 13th, 2012 at 10:43 AM
Title: Re: The Pitfalls of Western analysis of "Dharmic Traditions"
Content:


deepbluehum said:
Take the Suttanta tradition for example.

Malcolm wrote:
Invalid example.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 13th, 2012 at 2:51 AM
Title: Re: The Pitfalls of Western analysis of "Dharmic Traditions"
Content:
deepbluehum said:
PS There is a misconception that the efficacy of mantras depends on hearing it from the guru.


Malcolm wrote:
There are differences in how mantras are regarded in Buddhadharma and in Sanatana Dharma. It is best not to conflate the two.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 13th, 2012 at 2:48 AM
Title: Re: The Pitfalls of Western analysis of "Dharmic Traditions"
Content:


deepbluehum said:
I'm referring to the story that Garab Dorje's mother bore him in a virgin birth. Then he was a spiritually precocious child who won debates with monks. Jesus' mother was a virgin; he was spiritually precocious and won debates with the Saducees. This story is a retelling of Horus/Isis.

Malcolm wrote:
First, the Jesus story is not Gnostic. Second, Buddha's mother was a virgin birth, also the Buddha was a precocious scholar. So you do not need to look to the middle east for the pattern of the Garab Dorje's story, nor that of Padmasambhava. Both of the latter biographies are grounded in the Mahasamghika sources for the Buddha's birth story, etc.

deepbluehum said:
But I agree with the other influences you cite. Those are all at play, better yet interplay.

Malcolm wrote:
I was not citing them as influences, actually — there is absolutely no evidence to support such influences on Dzogchen teachings. There is merely some speculation by scholars working in the 1950's and 60's such as RA Stien and so on, who were working from inadequate understandings of the texts and the traditions.


deepbluehum said:
The way I see it is there's no beginning to dharma. All we have is an old conversation between many old traditions. There is no neat boundary for anyone to live in. Take the Black Throma system. It's Dzogchen right? Well how come the Mahamudra lineage has a practice of Vajrayogini arising without seed syllables or mantras? There's no real line there. Even the mind/nature of mind thing is just efficiency.

Malcolm wrote:
Krodhakali's kama tradition is through Padampa Sangye. This is why it is associated with Cho. Throma in the Dudjom system is a pure vision of Saraha -- it technically is not a treasure teaching.

deepbluehum said:
You have Dzogchen Tantras, but Bon Dzogchen don't need 'em.

Malcolm wrote:
There are many, many Bon Dzogchen tantras. And even so, there is clear intertextuality between so called "Buddhist" and Bon Dzogchen.

deepbluehum said:
What is essential...

Malcolm wrote:
Now you are just dissembling because you shot off your mouth without any evidence to back up your point.

deepbluehum said:
I hold that all methods, if they are factually efficacious, should be reproducible from texts...

Malcolm wrote:
This results in a sterile practice that produces not results. You cannot learn these things from books. The books are there to reinforce the oral tradition, not substitute for it.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 12th, 2012 at 9:22 PM
Title: Re: The Pitfalls of Western analysis of "Dharmic Traditions"
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Actually, rather then speculate about what Dzogchen texts say, I read them. So I really am in a position to say whether or not there is so called "gnostic" influence on them or not.

Quite frankly, Vedic culture is much more a pressing influence in Dzogchen texts, if anything.

If you want to claim Gnostic influences on Dzogchen, you have to be very specific, give examples -- cite a text, show how some intertextuality -- prove a connection. If you can't, you are just spouting hot air.

deepbluehum said:
I gave you one. It's pretty simple. I guess you didn't want that one.

Malcolm wrote:
No, you didn't -- you made a vague and non-specific reference to the biographies of four persons.

Which Gnostics? Which texts? You would be on firmer ground arguing for pre-Muslim Iranian influences such Zorastrianism on Dzogchen. A possible Manichaen influence would be the notion that our bodies contain a "spiritual light". But this spiritual effulgence can easily also been seen as an influence from Shaivism where primordial sound flashes forth as light and then rays ( see Padoux, Vāc, The Concept of the Word in Selected Hindu Tantras). Or, as I perfer to view it, the Dzogchen tantras do not necessarily owe any debt to any tradition, but instead are the product of the realization of Buddhist yogis.

As I said, those who make arguments for external influence on Dzogchen, apart from its obvious grounding in Buddhadharma, do so very speculatively and with a lack of textual support.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 12th, 2012 at 9:03 PM
Title: Re: The Pitfalls of Western analysis of "Dharmic Traditions"
Content:
deepbluehum said:
My point is that the western academic notion that the Buddha rejected Vedic culture is a complete distortion.

Michael_Dorfman said:
Which scholars do you have in mind? The most recent work I can think of on the relationship between the Buddha and Vedic culture is Gombrich, and he's certainly not arguing that it is a simple rejection; rather, he argues that the Buddha intentionally echoed and re-deployed Vedic notions in a new, sometimes parodic manner.

Malcolm wrote:
Primarily 19th century scholars who sought to embed in Buddhism their own protestant values. However, such ideas have become deeply embedded in Buddhism's reception in the west and you often see these ideas repeated:

Buddha rejected the Vedas (he didn't and in fact refers to the Gayatri as the chief of all mantras)
Buddha was a reformer (he wasn't anything of the sort)
Buddha rejected jati and varna (he did not -- but he reframed the idea of a "brahman" as an ethical quality; but this did mean he neglected the value of brahmins in Indian society as a whole)

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 12th, 2012 at 9:15 AM
Title: Re: The Pitfalls of Western analysis of "Dharmic Traditions"
Content:
deepbluehum said:
Reading a bit about this book. The thing about "mutual respect" is a bit of a slight of hand on his part. He is basically trying to get other religions to respect Hindu ideals.

Malcolm wrote:
I don't think his point is that facile. For example, Buddha actually did respect other paths, even if he did not sign off on them.

viniketa said:
Though I wouldn't exactly call it 'slight of hand', here, deepbluehum has a point.  Malhotra defines 'respect' specifically as 'mutual respect', which means, to him, admitting that all paths lead to the divine.  He does this knowing full well Abrahamic religions cannot accord mutual respect due to their exclusivism.  Buddha would have had to 'sign off on them' to meet Malhotra's criteria.



Malcolm wrote:
No, I don't think so -- he adresses this point and includes Carvaka and Lokayati schools as well. You guys have not read this book carefully enough.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 12th, 2012 at 9:08 AM
Title: Re: The Pitfalls of Western analysis of "Dharmic Traditions"
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Any similarities in the birth stories of Padmasambhava, Garab Dorje, Jesus and Moses are incidental.

There are no gnostic influences on Dzogchen. Any imagined influences are purely speculative and not grounded in any concrete fact, historical or textual.

deepbluehum said:
You mean to say the textual similarity is not a textual similarity? You love Dzogchen too much. Everything about the origin of tantras is speculative. That's what the Tibetans need to figure out.


Malcolm wrote:
Actually, rather then speculate about what Dzogchen texts say, I read them. So I really am in a position to say whether or not there is so called "gnostic" influence on them or not.

Quite frankly, Vedic culture is much more a pressing influence in Dzogchen texts, if anything.

If you want to claim Gnostic influences on Dzogchen, you have to be very specific, give examples -- cite a text, show how some intertextuality -- prove a connection. If you can't, you are just spouting hot air.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 12th, 2012 at 9:05 AM
Title: Re: The Pitfalls of Western analysis of "Dharmic Traditions"
Content:


deepbluehum said:
What you are ignoring is the fact that Buddha used cultural Aikido on the Hindu world. Which in turn, they did back. This is the "Dharmic world." There was never any real respect for each other. The Buddha's story about the Vedic rite for his funeral is not what you think. There is a nonchalantness about it. If you live in Indian culture you can see this first hand how "respect for others" is given in a nonchalant way. In India, it's path of least resistance. It is way different than adoption. The Thai are playing imitation. The world has a hell of a time with India. India transcends reasons. The Western scholars are correct, Buddha was mocking Vedic cosmology. It's a very Indian kind of humor, very subtle and ironic, but the undertone is a death blow.

Malcolm wrote:
Buddha just did what all Indians did -- he had a palate and used it. He was not doing "aikido" of any kind. He was not trying to upset any applecarts. The whole idea that Buddha was trying reject the so called system of varna and jati is complete crap.

The Buddha's recommendations for his funeral was exactly what I said it was. -- shramanas were not expected to conduct in such rites, it was not in their job description.

My point is that the western academic notion that the Buddha rejected Vedic culture is a complete distortion.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 12th, 2012 at 9:00 AM
Title: Re: The Pitfalls of Western analysis of "Dharmic Traditions"
Content:
deepbluehum said:
What also comes to mind are texts like "The Sermon on the Mount According to Swami So and So," interpreting Christianity in Hindu terms. Everything this guy blames the West of doing, Hindus did it too. He's doing underhanded Hindu proselytizing. This is exactly the kind of empty debate the Buddha warned of.

Malcolm wrote:
No, he is actually being quite above board. He is making a cogent argument about a certain flexibility that Dharmic culture sustains, that Abrahamic cultures cannot.

What he is saying is not new-- for example, Bataille makes a distinction between festival cultures which regularly engage in the destruction of surplus value and hegemonic cultures which supress such destruction (see The Accursed Share). Or exam the interesting essay from Ten Thousand Plateus called Nomadology.

What Malhotra is interested in, among other things, as driving home the fact that western academic myth of the Aryan Invasion Theory, etc. has created many distortions of Indian culture. This is not to say that there are no linguistic continuities between peoples in the so called IE continuum. But languages are not peoples.

Also I find his work appealing, especially as someone who has abandoned Buddhist chauvanism -- and such chauvanism is essentially a Western phenomena.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 12th, 2012 at 8:52 AM
Title: Re: The Pitfalls of Western analysis of "Dharmic Traditions"
Content:
deepbluehum said:
Also let's not forget the similarity of the birth and childhood stories of Jesus and Garab Dorje, Padmasambhava and Moses. Scholars have noticed the gnostic influence on Dzogchen.

Malcolm wrote:
You mean they have imagined such an influence.

deepbluehum said:
It's a bit of a glaring similarity, bordering on plagarism.

Malcolm wrote:
Any similarities in the birth stories of Padmasambhava, Garab Dorje, Jesus and Moses are incidental.

There are no gnostic influences on Dzogchen. Any imagined influences are purely speculative and not grounded in any concrete fact, historical or textual.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 12th, 2012 at 8:50 AM
Title: Re: The Pitfalls of Western analysis of "Dharmic Traditions"
Content:
deepbluehum said:
Reading a bit about this book. The thing about "mutual respect" is a bit of a slight of hand on his part. He is basically trying to get other religions to respect Hindu ideals.


Malcolm wrote:
I don't think his point is that facile. For example, Buddha actually did respect other paths, even if he did not sign off on them.

What Malhotra was pointing out was that in general, in ancient India there was a cultural flexibility that could accomodate a pluralistic religious and social culture in ways that Abrahamic religions just cannot.

But when we read Indian polemics through western eyes, we tend to reify these debates into evangelisms that are just not present.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 12th, 2012 at 8:46 AM
Title: Re: The Pitfalls of Western analysis of "Dharmic Traditions"
Content:
deepbluehum said:
Reading a bit about this book. The thing about "mutual respect" is a bit of a slight of hand on his part. He is basically trying to get other religions to respect Hindu ideals. Only Hindus think all paths are equally paths to god. Almost all other religions are exclusivist, Buddhism included. Did Buddha respect Hindu ideas? Not really, he satirized them.

Malcolm wrote:
We have a very skewed view of Buddhism on the ground in ancient and how it was actually practiced -- we derive our view of Buddhism in India through the lense of a few polemical scholars, ignoring many inconvienient facts. For example, that fact that the Thai court still maintains brahmin priests, and has done so for hundreds of years, etc.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 12th, 2012 at 8:43 AM
Title: Re: The Pitfalls of Western analysis of "Dharmic Traditions"
Content:
deepbluehum said:
Also let's not forget the similarity of the birth and childhood stories of Jesus and Garab Dorje, Padmasambhava and Moses. Scholars have noticed the gnostic influence on Dzogchen.

Malcolm wrote:
You mean they have imagined such an influence.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 12th, 2012 at 8:42 AM
Title: Re: The Pitfalls of Western analysis of "Dharmic Traditions"
Content:


tobes said:
If we are to speak of a western univeralism, surely it is a/ the ideology of liberal-democracy and b/ the political economy of neo-liberalism. The vast majority of Indian students head to western institutions to learn about demand, supply, finance and management. This has nothing to do with German idealism, history or monotheism - and everything to do with the logic of utility.

And in India, this logic has become extremely powerful - if there is a national undercurrent at the moment, it is: economic growth, I.T., infrastructure, wealth creation. Little of that is Vedic.

So I just think Malhotra has the wrong end of the stick here.

Malcolm wrote:
All of these things that you mention are a logical extension of the ideological currents that begins with the Englightenment. Malhotra addresses the Indian capitulation to the exact type of Western Universalism you mention above.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 12th, 2012 at 5:55 AM
Title: Re: The Pitfalls of Western analysis of "Dharmic Traditions"
Content:
JKhedrup said:
Agreed, "how" is a question for another thread.

Malcolm wrote:
Well, Western "Buddhists" could start by recognizing the value of Vedic culture and its overwhelming contribution.

Western Tibetan Buddhists could start by dropping their obsession with validating their narratives in contradistinction to Bon narratives.

Theravadins could drop their obsession with finding "original Buddhism". etc.

deepbluehum said:
Hey don't blame White Man for everything. The Red Men of Tibet are pretty damn obsessed with their lineages and historical validity. Somehow White Man and Red Man combine to obscure the Indian persuasion.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, they are -- this is a symptom of a type of historical consciousness that the Sinosphere possessed that the Indosphere was rather lacking.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 12th, 2012 at 5:54 AM
Title: Re: The Pitfalls of Western analysis of "Dharmic Traditions"
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
If you read the Pali Canon, you can find that Buddha himself was not ill-disposed towards Brahmans, or tradition Vedic religion per se. He simply disputed certain theories still popular among Hindus. A good source for this is the Mahaparinibbana sutta in the Digha-nikāya.

viniketa said:
Thank you for the reply.  Of the above, I am aware.  I am interested in the idea of his rejection of śruti, per se.  Or, did you mean, earlier, that he rejected "shruti, uncreated and eternal" as a package?


Malcolm wrote:
Yes, uncreated and eternal shruti, as a package.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 12th, 2012 at 4:54 AM
Title: Re: The Pitfalls of Western analysis of "Dharmic Traditions"
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
He rejected the idea that the Vedas were shruti

viniketa said:
Thank you, Malcolm.  I would like to learn more about this, if you could point to a source.  It is confusing, given the nature of the śrāvaka tradition in Buddhism.



Malcolm wrote:
If you read the Pali Canon, you can find that Buddha himself was not ill-disposed towards Brahmans, or tradition Vedic religion per se. He simply disputed certain theories still popular among Hindus. A good source for this is the Mahaparinibbana sutta in the Digha-nikāya.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 12th, 2012 at 2:44 AM
Title: Re: Throma Nagmo Teachings by Lama Tharchin Rinpoche
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Elaborate ritual does not necessarily equate with mahāyoga. It is the style of creation that determines whether something is Mahayoga or not. Just so you know, I have the complete transmission of this cycle and over the years have practiced it a lot.


Yudron said:
Dudjom Lingpa'sThroma sadhanas with tsog combine mahayoga, chö, and the view of Atiyoga in a unique way -- it's really something...


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 12th, 2012 at 2:03 AM
Title: Re: The Buddhism trend in decline.
Content:
alpha said:
i dont want to be difficult but why is CNNR asking his disciple things he cant do himself.
According to him the one who can integrate ,in this instance, with the fire element will get permission from him to teach dzogchen.
Why is he not saying for example .."if you at least have my knowledge of dzogchen and my level of integration then you can teach dzogchen to others".

Malcolm wrote:
No, what he said was if you can do this, then he wants to take teachings from you!

As for the second statement, he is saying that, all the time.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 12th, 2012 at 2:02 AM
Title: Re: Hsuan Hua on Homosexuality
Content:


Huseng said:
I think it has more to do with the widespread fear among Chinese Buddhist bhikṣus about Tibetan Buddhism.


Malcolm wrote:
Which is fundamentally based on racism against Tibetans.

Huseng said:
Where do you get that idea?

Malcolm wrote:
History.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 12th, 2012 at 1:57 AM
Title: Re: Hsuan Hua on Homosexuality
Content:


Huseng said:
I think it has more to do with the widespread fear among Chinese Buddhist bhikṣus about Tibetan Buddhism.


Malcolm wrote:
Which is fundamentally based on racism against Tibetans.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 12th, 2012 at 1:31 AM
Title: Re: Hsuan Hua on Homosexuality
Content:
Jnana said:
I also think that there are a couple of points worth mentioning: (1) a bodhisattva practicing on any of the first six or seven bhūmis isn't perfect, they still have  cognitive and afflictive obscurations; and (2) there's no reason why an āryabodhisattva would have to automatically adopt liberal Western values upon attaining the first bhūmi.

Huseng said:
I still have to wonder where he got the idea that most Lamas have AIDS.

Malcolm wrote:
He is a racist, obviously.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 12th, 2012 at 12:42 AM
Title: Re: The Pitfalls of Western analysis of "Dharmic Traditions"
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Buddha was a Vedic Indian.

viniketa said:
We often see it written that Guatama Buddha 'rejected the Vedas' or 'rejected the authority of the Vedas', while it is my understanding that he rejected the authority of certain groups of Brahmin priests.  See Stephen Knapp: http://www.stephen-knapp.com/buddhism_and_its_vedic_connections.htm " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Malcolm wrote:
He rejected the idea that the Vedas were shruti, uncreated and eternal. Of course, such ideas are key in Dzogchen where we find the Dzogchen tantras are uncreated and eternal in the same sense the Vedas were held to be.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apaurusheyatva " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 11th, 2012 at 10:41 PM
Title: Re: The Pitfalls of Western analysis of "Dharmic Traditions"
Content:
JKhedrup said:
My appreciation for Vedic culture arose after my arrival in India. Though I'm a Buddhist monk with firm refuge in the triple gem, I wanted to understand the broader culture from which the dharma arose.
This led me to travel to various Hindu and Jain holy sites on the subcontinent such as Vrindavan, Varanasi and several ashrams. Though the Buddhist teachings are definitely "for me", the thread that runs through these dharmic traditions is one of mutual reciprocity and development. Some developments in Buddhism closely mirror those of Hinduism during a certain time period and vice versa.

As an aside, does anyone know what philosophy of "Hinduism" was held by the family of Siddhartha Gautama, Lord Buddha? What would the practice of his family have been like?

Malcolm wrote:
Buddha was a Vedic Indian. For example, when he died to recommended to Ananda that "faithful" brahmins could handle his funeral rites. Just because rejected the mechanical efficacy of brahmanical rites, he understood their deeper import. Thus, all the parts of the Stupa are named after parts of the Vedic Agnihotra precinct,including the so called "srog shing" or yaṣṭi (central pillar of the stupa), to which the the animal was to be tied in preperation for the yajanam (mchod sbyin), the offering.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 11th, 2012 at 10:28 PM
Title: Re: The Pitfalls of Western analysis of "Dharmic Traditions"
Content:
JKhedrup said:
Agreed, "how" is a question for another thread.

Malcolm wrote:
Well, Western "Buddhists" could start by recognizing the value of Vedic culture and its overwhelming contribution.

Western Tibetan Buddhists could start by dropping their obsession with validating their narratives in contradistinction to Bon narratives.

Theravadins could drop their obsession with finding "original Buddhism". etc.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 11th, 2012 at 10:22 PM
Title: Re: The Buddhism trend in decline.
Content:
Osho said:
We have neo Sufis here in the UK who seem to do little else but fire walk and place their unblemished hands onto red hot coals. Theyr'e not necessarily 'realized beings' but it does make for good theatre.


Malcolm wrote:
Um.... that is not what he means. He means putting one's hand in a fire and leaving it there indefinitely.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 11th, 2012 at 10:18 PM
Title: Re: The Pitfalls of Western analysis of "Dharmic Traditions"
Content:


JKhedrup said:
I only wish that Buddhist countries like Singapore had a Buddhist voice similar to Malhotra's in order to challenge the shift in culture that is leading to a youth uninterested in the teachings of the Buddha.

Malcolm wrote:
Sooner or later those of us who are proponents of Dharma culture are going to have to put aside our western style "faith commitments" and find a common ground in the Dharma, which is a pluralistic decentralized religious culture.

If we don't, then the culture of Dharma will vanish.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 11th, 2012 at 10:13 PM
Title: Re: Throma Nagmo Teachings by Lama Tharchin Rinpoche
Content:
Yudron said:
The terton himself never used that language to describe any aspect of the medium or short deity practice, or the cycle in general, and neither did Dudjom Rinpoche in the supportive texts.

Malcolm wrote:
Dudjom Throma, in all sadhanas, is explicitly described by Dudjom Rinpoche as a called "Ati syle of creation" i.e. instant recollection without any seed syllable at all. In the retreat manual it is stated:

"Here, the unelaborate ati creation beyond the conventions of the three samadhis is the universe arising as the basis, the self-originated naturally formed mandala, the totally perfect (rdzog chen par) self-visualization in a moment of recollection in the manner of a fish leaping from the water."

Since the goal of Anuyoga is atiyoga, it is fair to say that actually the Throma is ati of anu. Anu because it involves transformation, ati because the principle of creation is a self-originated naturally formed [rang byung lhun grub] mandala.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 11th, 2012 at 9:06 PM
Title: Re: The Pitfalls of Western analysis of "Dharmic Traditions"
Content:
Osho said:
If one accepts 'linear historicity' as if-this-then-that causal temporality then it surely must be taken as underpinning later western empiricist philosophies,all of them including Malhotra who has both feet rooted firmly within the western methodological approach albeit the PoMo subaltern. The elightenment project did not spring fully formed from the void and the subaltern is its child not its live in domestic help.
Dawkins is,after all; an evangelist as were those of his predecessors cited above.
Malhotra is non different.


Malcolm wrote:
I think you are missing a critical point: that of the purva-paksha. Malhotra is equally critical of Dharmic religions present lack of sophistication in constructing purva-pakshas i.e. "prior positions", to show that they readily understand the thought and implications of the intellectual (and in this case, cultural as well) opponent's POV. He devotes an entire chapter to purva-paksa, a discipline really unknown outside of Indian polemics. He introduces the concept in the first chapter:

The corrective to this problem in my view is the ancient and powerful Indian practice of 'purva paksha'. This is the traditional dharmic approach to rival schools. It is a dialectical approach, taking a thesis by an opponent ('purva pakshin') and then providing its rebuttal ('khandana') so as to establish the protagonist's views ('siddhanta'). The purva paksha tradition required any debater first to argue from the perspective of his opponent in order to test the validity of his understanding of the opposing position, and from there to realize his own shortcomings. Only after perfecting his understanding of opposing views would he be qualified to refute them. Such debates encourage individuals to maintain flexibility of perspective and honesty rather than seek victory egotistically. In this way, the dialectical process ensures a genuine and far-reaching shift in the individual.

Malhotra, Rajiv (2011-10-10). Being Different: An Indian Challenge to Western Universalism (Kindle Locations 842-848).  . Kindle Edition.

And:

Unfortunately, this tradition was not operative when Islam, Christianity and the European Enlightenment entered India. Rather than engaging in purva paksha with Islam and Christianity, or more recently with Marxism and secularism, the dharmic philosophers tended simply to ignore these foreign entries or else defer to them by adopting the attitude that 'all is one'. This stance, a misreading of the dharmic teachings, became an excuse for abandoning purva paksha, for if there are no differences, there is nothing important at which to gaze. The purva paksha method of engagement can engender sympathy as well as distance, understanding as well as critique. It must, however, retain several qualities not often found today: direct confrontation, clarification of difference, and an assumption of equality. Purva paksha should take place with transparency in as open a forum as possible and in such a way as to benefit each party. Acceptance of the need and potential for change should be a baseline from which to work.

Malhotra, Rajiv (2011-10-10). Being Different: An Indian Challenge to Western Universalism (Kindle Locations 856-863).  . Kindle Edition.

In other words he is equally critical of the Indian failure to engage the West with a purva-paksha, something it credits the Chinese for having done historiclly from the beginning of their engagement with the West.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 11th, 2012 at 8:58 PM
Title: Re: The Pitfalls of Western analysis of "Dharmic Traditions"
Content:
tobes said:
I see linear historicity as grounded far more in Enlightenment philosophies which were really running against the Abrahamic religions. i.e. Darwin, Hegel, Marx et al and conceptions of historical progress.

Malcolm wrote:
'While Christianity claims a divine mandate to superimpose its own history-centrism on the entire world, thinkers of the European Enlightenment have also developed various conceptual absolutes and endowed these with 'universal' status. The profound assumption is that the shape and direction of world history are leading to a single Western goal – be it salvation or scientific secular progress.

Malhotra, Rajiv (2011-10-10). Being Different: An Indian Challenge to Western Universalism (Kindle Locations 5079-5082).  . Kindle Edition.

But it was Hegel, among all German thinkers, who had the deepest and most enduring impact on Western thought and identity. It is often forgotten that his work was a reaction against the Romantics' passion for India's past. He borrowed Indian ideas (such as monism) while debating Indologists to argue against the value of Indian civilization. He posited that the West, and only the West, was the agent of history and teleology. India was the 'frozen other', which he used as a foil to define the West.

Malhotra, Rajiv (2011-10-10). Being Different: An Indian Challenge to Western Universalism (Kindle Locations 5174-5178).  . Kindle Edition.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 11th, 2012 at 9:46 AM
Title: Re: History of 17 Tantras
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
. . . the sgra thal 'gyur tantra is the root of all Dharma. It is the first Dharma ever taught to sentient beings. Every other Dharma comes from it.
M

dakini_boi said:
Where can I find out more on the history of the 17 Dzogchen Tantras?  Where is it said that the sgra thal gyur was the first dharma taught to sentient beings?
Thanksyou


Malcolm wrote:
In the sgra thal 'gyur, of course.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 11th, 2012 at 7:09 AM
Title: Re: The Pitfalls of Western analysis of "Dharmic Traditions"
Content:
tobes said:
I think it's a huge (and wrong, and bad) reification of 'western' epistemic/ hermeneutical frameworks.

Malcolm wrote:
He adresses this objection in his book early on.

tobes said:
What is his argument?



Malcolm wrote:
In making these arguments, I may be accused of using broad definitions, generalizations and extreme contrasts. When I speak of 'the West' vs 'India', or the 'Judeo-Christian religions' vs the 'dharma traditions', I am well aware that I may be indulging in the kind of essentialism that postmodern thinkers have correctly challenged. I am also aware that such large categories comprise multiple traditions which are separate and often opposed. I view these terms as family resemblances and guides, not as reified or immutable entities. Furthermore, most people do understand them as pointing to actual entities with distinct spiritual and cosmological orientations, even if they can only be defined in opposition to one another. The terms can thus be used as entry points for debate and as foils to contrast both sides, which may help deepen our understanding.
Malhotra, Rajiv (2011-10-10). Being Different: An Indian Challenge to Western Universalism (Kindle Locations 110-116).  . Kindle Edition.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 11th, 2012 at 7:05 AM
Title: Re: The Pitfalls of Western analysis of "Dharmic Traditions"
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
What is very interesting is that way Western ideas of historicity shape our concerns about the Dharmas we westerners choose to learn. These ideas are very foreign to the spirit of Dharmic religions, at least as expressed through Malhotra's book. I cite all of the endless debates about whether Mahāyāna was taught by the Buddha; weather the Pali Canon is the "real" Buddhism. Whether Vajrayāna is as valid as Mahāyāna, or more recently, the abortive debate over the historicity of Bon accounts of their religion. Malhotra argues:

Itihasa is also fundamentally pluralistic: there are usually a variety of versions. A remodelled account or a new version of a narrative does not nullify all others. There is no burning of old books to erase past versions. What gets rejected is simply ignored, possibly to be revived or revisited at a later time when it might again become contextually relevant. Hence, in India one finds ancient customs coexisting with those from later periods. An open past serves as a creative resource for future generations who might want to explore the roads not taken. The Western unfolding of history, on the other hand, does not have room for parallel streams, finding them threatening and hence believing it safer to display them in museums (i.e., not as living traditions but as dead ones). But collapsing all variations into a mono-history only produces a mono-culture. Such a lack of understanding and insight causes itihasa to get misconstrued as myth vis-à-vis some putative 'reality'.13 

The West demands that its myths be historicized so that they may be claimed as true. Indians do not carry the burden of history-centrism and so are under no pressure to present their myths as history. 

There are multiple stakeholders who compete for their respective versions of history to prevail. Power is always at work in the construction of history. (History is written by the victors, as the popular adage goes.) More often than not, history is arbitrary in terms of what is included and what is not, what is emphasized, whose point of view is privileged, what values get superimposed, and so forth. In the West, a powerful apparatus and elaborate process have evolved to present history, and the transformation of Western myths into fact remains a major preoccupation of the Western humanities.

Malhotra, Rajiv (2011-10-10). Being Different: An Indian Challenge to Western Universalism (Kindle Locations 1123-1136).  . Kindle Edition.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 11th, 2012 at 6:24 AM
Title: Re: The Buddhism trend in decline.
Content:
Andrew108 said:
I also know that there are western practitioners who have genuine realization, but they are somewhat undervalued.


Malcolm wrote:
Depends on what you mean by realization.

Chogyal Namkhai Norbu's definition is very stringent. If you can place your hand in fire without it being harmed, then he will consider you realized. Since he himself cannot do this, he does not consider himself realized, just a little nore experienced than we, his students.

I personally believe he is an arya, someone who is actually an awakened person -- but that is just me.

M

Nighthawk said:
You think he is a full fledged Buddha or just someone who is realized?

Malcolm wrote:
I think he is someone who is the constant knowledge of his own state.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 11th, 2012 at 5:28 AM
Title: Re: The Buddhism trend in decline.
Content:


underthetree said:
But it's a good point. How many realized beings are there in the world? Who is becoming realized in the West? How many have become enlightened in the last ten years? Twenty years? Fifty? The last century?

Malcolm wrote:
I can think of at least five people within the past 15 years who acheived total realization -- two bonpo in Tibet, a couple of  buddhist yogis in repkong, Khenpo Acho is famous. I am sure there are more.




underthetree said:
It gave me pause to read the recent thread on Buddhist saints. Every candidate was from the Middle Ages at the very latest.

Malcolm wrote:
Nah...there are plenty of saints, enough to go around for everyone, even in this century, Buddhist, Bonpo and Hindu -- even Christian.

alpha said:
How about westerners?
How many of those you know who have been educated in the west have achieved ,are very close to achieve or just about to achieve total realization or are very far gone , almost continually integrated,day and night ,free ,totaly free, nearly free,just about to be free?
How many?
Or lets go one step lower.
How many you know ,westereners, who can carry their rigpa around ,on leaving home,getting on the bus,reading on the bus,getting off the bus,taking the tube,reading on the tube getting off the tube,walking to office ,on the way to office saying hello to 50 individiuals,spending 10 hours doing shit in a stupid  f...d up office..leaving work.. etc...and so on...?

Malcolm wrote:
ChNN very recently said that he knows of students in the DC who have concrete knowledge of Dzogchen, good practitioners, this means they are very integrated.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 11th, 2012 at 4:07 AM
Title: Re: The Pitfalls of Western analysis of "Dharmic Traditions"
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
He adresses this objection in his book early on.

viniketa said:
He also addresses objections based in 'postmodern' arguments early-on.

Malcolm wrote:
Yes, actually I did not know about this author, but I read a substantial portion of his book "Being Different" last night, and I find that I broadly agree with his presentation of Dharmic culture as opposed to Judeo-Christian-Islamic culture. Many of his points are points I have made in the past in various places and to various people over the past 25 years.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 10th, 2012 at 10:24 PM
Title: Re: The Pitfalls of Western analysis of "Dharmic Traditions"
Content:
tobes said:
I think it's a huge (and wrong, and bad) reification of 'western' epistemic/ hermeneutical frameworks.

Malcolm wrote:
He adresses this objection in his book early on.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 10th, 2012 at 10:19 PM
Title: Re: Iron Ornaments
Content:
Yudron said:
I'm having a new iron security fence built, and I have the opportunity to have an iron ornament fabricated and welded on to it--this is pretty common.  I'm thinking a lotus motif, like a simple line drawing, might be nice.  Has anyone out there done anything like that?


Malcolm wrote:
Vajras would be better.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 9th, 2012 at 10:18 PM
Title: Re: Which Buddhist School is Right For Me?
Content:
My Socks Smell said:
I'm in Southwestern Virginia.

Malcolm wrote:
https://www.ligmincha.org " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://www.tcbci.org/ " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

And of course, because my master constantly gives webcasted retreats:

http://www.tsegyalgar.org " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 9th, 2012 at 10:09 PM
Title: Re: Does Zen/Chan Offer an Opinion Regarding Shentong/Rangtong?
Content:
Matylda said:
Rangtong and shentong have nothing to do with Indian Buddhism. Names and ideas are Tibetan... similarly there are no 4 or 6 tantra division in Japan, as there was no such division known in India.

Malcolm wrote:
Your first statement here is correct.

The second is false: there were such divisions in India -- it is found in such tantras as the Vajramala and so on, but they are post-eighth century.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 9th, 2012 at 9:50 PM
Title: Re: Confused on Yangti generalities
Content:
Jax said:
However Bon does not have the  cycle of Dungts'o  Repa regarding the Seven Levels of Visions that are quite extraordinary. Norbu offers this transmission, and I have found the results from practice to be most profound. It is considered in Nyingma to be the pinnacle of esoteric methods. I recommend everyone to pursue this unique transmission. Norbu recently taught all seven levels at a public retreat.

spanda said:
Does anybody know when  exactly has N. Norbu taught this transmission  of Dungts'o  Repa 's Seven Levels of Visions?
Except for Longde teachings , Yangti (taught not in a complete form), and Thogal teachings, I don't know any other teaching similar with this, given by N. Norbu..


Malcolm wrote:
ChNN has given the lung for this cycle teachings several times, for example, in 1992 in Conway. But he informed us then that we do the first level, then we communicate with him and based on our experience, he will communicate the next level and so on.

He gave the Longsal Yangti teaching last year in Merigar. It has the same basic structure.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 9th, 2012 at 4:47 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:
Blue Garuda said:
I am in the UK and it would be great to have a centre (Gar?) here.

Malcolm wrote:
Kunselling is there.


Blue Garuda said:
Yes, to clarify I meant a centre (as in permanent owned building) in the UK. Is there one?

EDIT:  Just found it - wonderful!


Malcolm wrote:
http://dzogchencommunity.org/kunselling/kunselling.html " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 9th, 2012 at 4:29 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:
Blue Garuda said:
I am in the UK and it would be great to have a centre (Gar?) here.

Malcolm wrote:
Kunselling is there.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 8th, 2012 at 9:50 PM
Title: Re: Capacity for following Dzogchen
Content:
Jnana said:
You still fail to understand or acknowledge the point: There are people who are not receptive to dzogchen.

Malcolm wrote:
Correct, as the Dzogchen tantras openly acknowledge.

The job of the teacher is identify such persons and steer them to the appropriate spritual solution. *

M

rai said:
i am wondering how does it happen when teacher has many students and don't know me very well (at all)?



* the quote is from "Dzogchen Teaching is Free From Limitations" thread but my question fits this discussion more i think.


Malcolm wrote:
A person like ChNN can size you up very quickly.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 8th, 2012 at 9:49 PM
Title: Re: The Buddhism trend in decline.
Content:
pueraeternus said:
What I said was that even if they receive DI, they do not necessarily experience rigpa (in fact, my opinion is that most people don't). This shows they have limitations and have to work on them. How do they work on them? They apply teachings for other yanas. But they have to know about these yanas first before they can apply, hence the teachings of other yanas are important.

Pema Rigdzin said:
Actually, such people would most likely benefit much more by diligently practicing rushen and semdzins...

pueraeternus said:
Or they could also do the usual hundred thousand Vajrasattvas, mandala offerings, etc, and other myriad methods from the other yanas. Nothing wrong with that.

As mentioned before, my replies were in response to how the thread in the Dharma-free-for-all forum went, and my intention to correct those sentiments that I felt wasn't appropriate for a general dharma audience, or even for aspiring Dzogchen practitioners. Moving these posts here have shifted the context of that discussion. But in any case, this is also the general Dzogchen forum, so teachings from other Dzogchen masters who follow a more traditional method should be honored too.

Malcolm wrote:
There is nothing wrong with a traditional ngondro, but it is not essential. Rushen and semzin on the other hand, are essential.

Aspiring Dzogchen practitioners should find the best possible lineage. I really do not know of any other master alive today who had two direct masters who attained rainbow body. Do you? Of course there are other masters who have concrete knowledge of four visions and so on. So you get who you get based on your karma -- but in general, we do not have much time. Therefore, I always tell people who want to really understand Dzogchen that they should receive teachings from ChNN.

Then there are a class of people like yourself who have received teachings from ChNN but are actually following other teachers in reality. This is fine, this is good-- but there is generally a disconnect between what your teachers consider important for Dzogchen practice and what mine does. It comes out again and again in the endless and fruitless debate over ngondro. It is inevitable that if someone following more traditional teacher claims you have to ngondro, etc., someone who is following ChNN will disagree.

There is really no need to follow other yānas if you are a Dzogchen practitioner. Why? Because the sgra thal 'gyur tantra is the root of all Dharma. It is the first Dharma ever taught to sentient beings. Every other Dharma comes from it. All this talk about the need to go step by step through all nine yānas is really a misconception forced on Dzogchen teachings by those who follow the system of Kamalashila and later, Atisha.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 8th, 2012 at 9:29 PM
Title: Re: The Pitfalls of Western analysis of "Dharmic Traditions"
Content:
catmoon said:
Might be good to start with Stephen Batchelor's "Buddhism Without Beliefs". He's not exactly trying to expunge karma and rebirth from Buddhism, and those looking for a classic anti-rebirth stance may be disappointed in his agnostic position, but he is a major figure on the scene. If there are "Pitfalls of Western Analysis of Dharmic Traditions", they should show up in his writings.


Malcolm wrote:
His explicit rejection of karma and rebirth happens in Confessions of a Buddhist Athiest.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 8th, 2012 at 6:16 AM
Title: Re: The Buddhism trend in decline.
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
You should read the Longchen Nyinthig aspiration of basis, path and result.

tomamundsen said:
Is there an English translation of this? If so, can you point us in that direction?

Thanks!
Is it http://www.lotsawahouse.org/tibetan-masters/nyingma-masters/jigme-lingpa/prayer-ground-path-and-fruition?


Malcolm wrote:
Yes.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 8th, 2012 at 3:14 AM
Title: Re: Capacity for following Dzogchen
Content:


username said:
- Finally it is wrong to say Rigpa is this or that, it is ineffable and has many manifestations, not just one.
http://rywiki.tsadra.org/index.php/Rigpa " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Malcolm wrote:
Vimalamitra defines five kinds of rig pa. These five more or less cover everything.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 8th, 2012 at 2:25 AM
Title: Re: Capacity for following Dzogchen
Content:


heart said:
Nice quote, but that is hardly everything I think.

/magnus

Malcolm wrote:
As far as people interested in Dzogchen goes, that passage is cited over and over again by many masters. There is another way to divide up capacities in 21 capacities. Apart from the best, the majority of the other capacities refer to when a person is liberated in the bardo, or if one is very average, in a nirmanakāya pure realm in one's next life.

Vimalamitra states in his commentary on the sgra thal 'rgyur tantra:

"...that person of extraordinary diligence will attain buddhahood in this life with the contaminated body disappearing. Even the average person, after taking spontaneous birth in a natural nirmanakāya buddhafield, will find solace from that and attain buddhahood. Therefore, merely by entering into this teaching of the definitive great secret one will not enter into the three realms."


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 8th, 2012 at 2:20 AM
Title: Re: The Buddhism trend in decline.
Content:


pueraeternus said:
If the introduction failed, they can't go on to the 2nd statement "Do not remain in doubt". Hence at this point they have to work with their situation and limitations so that they may be successful the next time.

Malcolm wrote:
No, you have missed a critical point. If they did not recognize their real nature from the direct introduction they must move to the second statement. This is the purpose of the methods of semzin and rushan. See page 29 of the SOV book.

Otherwise, if they definitely recognized their real nature through the direct introduction, then they can skip that and go to the third statement, continue in that state. But such people are very rare. So, the second statement means you confirm the experience of the direct introduction by using many methods, whatever it takes, whatever works for your condition best.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 8th, 2012 at 2:07 AM
Title: Re: The Buddhism trend in decline.
Content:
pueraeternus said:
Real Bodhisattva path really starts with the 1st Bhumi as an arya - the others are just aspiring Bodhisattvas.

Malcolm wrote:
This is also false. The true bodhisattva path starts with the path of accumulation i.e. sambharamarga. This is why it is stated quite clearly that a beginning bodhisattva who has just given rise to supreme bodhicitta on the path of accumulation is much superior to an Arhat.

Basically, every path starts with its mode of entry -- for Hināyāna it is taking a vow. For Mahāyāna it creating bodhicitta. For Vajrayāna it is taking an initiation. For Dzogchen it is receiving direct introduction.

You do not have to receive all these other rites of vows and so on however to enter into Dzogchen teachings. It is completely unnecessary.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 8th, 2012 at 2:05 AM
Title: Re: The Buddhism trend in decline.
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Real Dzogchen, as has been pointed out infinite times, starts with direct introduction, and that is all.

pueraeternus said:
Doesn't Real Dzogchen start with rigpa?

Malcolm wrote:
No, it starts with direct introduction. Thus, we have the first of Garab Dorje's threes statements.

If Dzogchen started with rigpa, it would be impossble for people who are ignorant to be introduced to their own nature. But because it is possible to introduce people to that nature, Dzogchen starts with direct introduction.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 8th, 2012 at 1:30 AM
Title: Re: The Buddhism trend in decline.
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
But if you start insisting people must conform to your limitations, I will point out that this is not so.

M

pueraeternus said:
I have not insisted others to conform to anything. I merely pointed out that (a) most of us have a lot of limitations, (b) we should be honest and aware of it as much as we can, (c) please don't diss the lower yanas, since they are precious in helping us overcome limitations.


Malcolm wrote:
On the contrary, you have insisted most assidously that people cannot practice Dzogchen even if they have received direct introduction. This is a completely misguided idea. In Dzogchen teachings we discover our limitations so we can go beyond them-- we do not decide to remain in our limitations.

I have not even mentioned other yānas apart from correcting your perception of the purpose of the SMS base level.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 8th, 2012 at 1:18 AM
Title: Re: The Buddhism trend in decline.
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Such sentiments do not accord with the teachings of Dzogchen themselves at all.

pueraeternus said:
It accords with the way other teachers of Dzogchen transmit it.

Malcolm wrote:
What so called "teachers of Dzogchen" teach is not necessarily Dzogchen at all. For this reason, I will stick what what the Dzogchen teachings actually say rather than what some teachers of "Dzogchen" say. You however are free to disagree and follow whomever you please. But if you start insisting people must conform to your limitations, I will point out that this is not so.

What I am talking about is the path of Dzogchen. We don't need to take one road, and then another road, and then finally we can be on the road of Dzogchen. If this were the case, then Dzogchen would not be a Yāna.

That is not the principle of Dzogchen teachings at all. You should read the Longchen Nyinthig aspiration of basis, path and result. Then you will understand more clearly. Otherwise, this conversation has become useless since you are merely crowing the party line of some Nyingmapas.

If people are interested in following Dzogchen teachings, then they should make an effort to meet Chogyal Namkhai Norbu. Of course there are other teachers who give very nice teachings of Dzogchen as well. But in general this Lamrim style approach to Dzogchen really has very little to with actual Dzogchen.

Real Dzogchen, as has been pointed out infinite times, starts with direct introduction, and that is all.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 8th, 2012 at 1:03 AM
Title: Re: Capacity for following Dzogchen
Content:
heart said:
I have understood that the qualities of the Dzogchen practitioners are mentioned quite clearly in the Dzogchen Tantra's themselves. Malcolm, perhaps you could sum up the most important points? Personally I think that before meeting  Dzogchen my studies of Dharma made less sense. Everything in sutra and tantra make sense in the light of Dzogchen, but this is perhaps not the experience of everyone in this forum.

/magnus


Malcolm wrote:
Listen well to my demonstration of the sublime method! There is no increase or decrease in true wisdom. There is no clarity or lack of clarity in the appearances of wisdom. There is no near or far on the path of secret mantra. There is no greater or smaller in the self-appearing. There is no sharp or dull in the capacity of sentient beings.

-- Rig pa rang drol


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 8th, 2012 at 12:26 AM
Title: Re: The Buddhism trend in decline.
Content:
Pero said:
That's why you go on a retreat.

Malcolm wrote:
This is primarily directed to Pero:

In 2002, Chogyal Namkhai Norbu told me personally and privately that by doing six days of retreat on Khandroling you can realize what would take six months in other places. I then related this to other people. It is true.

ChNN has also said many times his students _never_ need to do more than three months of retreat at a time.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 8th, 2012 at 12:22 AM
Title: Re: The Buddhism trend in decline.
Content:


pueraeternus said:
I would say that the majority are of the latter. And for them to have a chance to discover that potentiality, they have to plough the field first, and even then, the seed might not sprout in this life.

Malcolm wrote:
Such sentiments do not accord with the teachings of Dzogchen themselves at all.


pueraeternus said:
I think a lot of Dzogchen practitioners really only have a conceptual knowledge of their potential. The real danger for them is that they mistaken it for true rigpa.

Malcolm wrote:
You would better off being concerned with your own rigpa, and not that of others. In particular you should be careful not to discourage those people interested in entering Dzogchen teachings by insisting they should follow sutra or tantra first.

If you have discovered a limitation in yourself, then that is fine. You should try to improve your own capacity -- but judging the capacities of others to be low and insisting upon it to them is a very damaging mistake that can really have negative impact for yourself and those who listen to you. If you block the path of others, in the future, your own path will be blocked.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 7th, 2012 at 11:56 PM
Title: Re: The Buddhism trend in decline.
Content:


pueraeternus said:
Yes, but that assumes that the students have a great deal of self-awareness and reflection. If students were really honest with themselves, then a lot of them would come to a realization there is so much work they have to do that they might as well do a form of assembly line approach.

Malcolm wrote:
We do not share the same perspective.



pueraeternus said:
Already, merely by entering Dzogchen teachings you have proved you are of very high capacity. If not, you never will ever hear even one word of Dzogchen teachings. This point is made again and again in Dzogchen tantras, and also by Chogyal Namkhai Norbu and other masters.
Then everyone in DW is of very high capacity?

Malcolm wrote:
Entering means receiving direct introduction. Not merely hearing about the teachings intellectually, such as on a forum such as this. But even to hear the word Dzogchen intellectually proves one has a connection with the teachings.



pueraeternus said:
Therefore, this point of view that many people primulgate "I am interested in Dzoghen but I do not have sufficient capacity to study and practice Dzogchen" or "Dzogchen is so profound, there is no way it can be practiced unless you have studied and practiced sutra and tantra for many years" is completely wrong, I am very sorry to say.
How many really have the experience of rigpa?

Malcolm wrote:
Many people following Dzogchen teachings have concrete knowledge [rigpa] of their primordial potentiality, including some people who post on this forum. The rest of the people following Dzogchen teachings are actively trying to discover that potentiality so they can be in that knowledge.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 7th, 2012 at 10:07 PM
Title: Re: The Buddhism trend in decline.
Content:
pueraeternus said:
ChNN leaves it to his students to observe themselves and apply methods accordingly...

Malcolm wrote:
This is the key point: the standard assembly line approach advocated by the monastic system insists that everyone must move ahead, step by step, mastering one thing before moving onto the next thing. But this is not the approach of Dzogchen teachings at all. The approach of Dzogchen teachings is that you receive transmission and then discover for yourself what you need, and that is all. You do not need to study anything intellectually at all.

Already, merely by entering Dzogchen teachings you have proved you are of very high capacity. If not, you never will ever hear even one word of Dzogchen teachings. This point is made again and again in Dzogchen tantras, and also by Chogyal Namkhai Norbu and other masters.

Therefore, this point of view that many people primulgate "I am interested in Dzoghen but I do not have sufficient capacity to study and practice Dzogchen" or "Dzogchen is so profound, there is no way it can be practiced unless you have studied and practiced sutra and tantra for many years" is completely wrong, I am very sorry to say.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 7th, 2012 at 9:16 PM
Title: Re: The Buddhism trend in decline.
Content:
pueraeternus said:
Why do you think he created the Santi Maha Sangha?

Malcolm wrote:
To preserve Dzogchen teachings by training people in a more detailed fashion.BTW, Santi Maha Sangha is Oḍḍiyāna language for "Dzogchen Community" (rdzog chen 'dus sde).

M

pueraeternus said:
Yes, but the Base is also full of sutric and tantric teachings. With that, its easier for the trainee to proceed to Semde, Longde and Mennagde.

Malcolm wrote:
The basis of SMS follows Padmasambhava's Man ngag lta ba phreng ba. As such, its main POV is a little connected with Mahāyoga, in my opinion. However, ChNN never claims that one needs to follow the Base in order to follow Dzogchen teachings. These are provided not as a step by step formula, but in order for the practitioner to make use of whatever teachings he or she needs, and also to gain a little experience in all the different sort of practices one can do. For this reason then, the basis contains practices from Hinayāna, Mahāyāna, Mahāyoga, Anuyoga, Semde and Managde -- but the main point throughout is how we integrate Dzogchen teachings into our whole life. Actually, for a Dzogchen practitioner, conduct, or attitude, as ChNN translates spyod pa, is arguably the most important aspect of one's practice. How do we know our pratice is moving ahead? Through our conduct. Our conduct or attitude is where we discover our level of integration. Do we have more tension? More problems? Then our integration is not good, and our attitude needs adjustment. Are we having less tension and less problems? Then our integration is improving, and our attitude is becoming better and better.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 7th, 2012 at 9:05 PM
Title: Re: The Buddhism trend in decline.
Content:


underthetree said:
But it's a good point. How many realized beings are there in the world? Who is becoming realized in the West? How many have become enlightened in the last ten years? Twenty years? Fifty? The last century?

Malcolm wrote:
I can think of at least five people within the past 15 years who acheived total realization -- two bonpo in Tibet, a couple of  buddhist yogis in repkong, Khenpo Acho is famous. I am sure there are more.




underthetree said:
It gave me pause to read the recent thread on Buddhist saints. Every candidate was from the Middle Ages at the very latest.

Malcolm wrote:
Nah...there are plenty of saints, enough to go around for everyone, even in this century, Buddhist, Bonpo and Hindu -- even Christian.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 7th, 2012 at 8:43 PM
Title: Re: The Buddhism trend in decline.
Content:
pueraeternus said:
Why do you think he created the Santi Maha Sangha?

Malcolm wrote:
To preserve Dzogchen teachings by training people in a more detailed fashion.BTW, Santi Maha Sangha is Oḍḍiyāna language for "Dzogchen Community" (rdzog chen 'dus sde).

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 7th, 2012 at 8:21 PM
Title: Re: A directive for a non-sectarian approach to practice (HHDL)
Content:
JKhedrup said:
If Gampopa had not studied with the Kadampa teachers as well as Milarepa, would he have produced his magnum opus "Jewel Ornament of Liberation".

Malcolm wrote:
Everyone forgets that Gampopa was a Nyingmapa to begin with, and that Nyingma remained influential on him all his life.

pueraeternus said:
Do you have a source for this?


Malcolm wrote:
Yes, his biography.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, August 7th, 2012 at 12:05 AM
Title: Re: The Buddhism trend in decline.
Content:
Huseng said:
Spiritual practice and study becomes extremely difficult in such circumstances.

Worldly pleasures and pursuits are more appealing than Dharma quite often.


Malcolm wrote:
This is simply because people do not have teachers that teach them how to integrate. Frankly, most of the so-called Buddhists I have met are very non-integrated people. After years of so called Dharma practice they just do not have their shit together, and they cannot manifest what they need.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 6th, 2012 at 11:21 PM
Title: Re: The Buddhism trend in decline.
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
You have to eat. You have to have clothes. You have to have shelter.

That means you have to make money. This is how it is in our world. We cannot go begging door to door. This is not realistic.

Everyone must have a job.

M


Huseng said:
Of course. Though it is possible to set aside sufficient funds to go practice for extended periods and then come back to the ordinary world. If I'm not mistaken you went on extended three year retreat in the past, right? Clearly you came back alive and well.

Malcolm wrote:
I did a three year retreat. It was valuable. I had a hard time adjusting however, and most people do, when they get out.





Huseng said:
However in the west a guy leaving his wife and kids behind to do a three year retreat is probably going to be called a deadbeat. Maybe we can't avoid that.

Malcolm wrote:
He is a deadbeat, unless his wife and kids are on board with it in a postive sense. The Buddha clearly never intended that people abandon their families.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 6th, 2012 at 11:17 PM
Title: Re: The board and its direction (if any)
Content:
conebeckham said:
Malcolm, is that the New Age Invasion, or the Dharma Police Lynch Mob?




Malcolm wrote:
Lynch mob.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 6th, 2012 at 10:51 PM
Title: Re: The board and its direction (if any)
Content:



Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 6th, 2012 at 10:49 PM
Title: Re: The Buddhism trend in decline.
Content:
Huseng said:
Serious practice is usually not done by family men or women. Let's be realistic and honest.

Malcolm wrote:
Serious practice is not usually done by anybody, including people in long retreats. Let's be realistic and honest.

It has nothing to do with wether one is in retreat, or is a farmer.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 6th, 2012 at 10:47 PM
Title: Re: The Buddhism trend in decline.
Content:
underthetree said:
With the greatest respect, Huseng, may you never have to deal with the consequences when someone you know decides to 'just leave their family.' What 'immeasurable opportunities' could be opened up by an act of such monstrous selfishness?

Huseng said:
When I did it I didn't think it was monstrously selfish.

Malcolm wrote:
I think he meant wife and kids. Did you leave a wife and kid behind?


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 6th, 2012 at 10:46 PM
Title: Re: The Buddhism trend in decline.
Content:
Huseng said:
Renunciation doesn't mean departing from worthwhile friends (kalyāṇa-mitra), though generally speaking mundane affairs and a lot of social engagements take people away from spiritual cultivation and practice. The Buddha himself was keen on the value of likeminded friends, though he cautioned everyone about mundane attachments and strong social ties and duties. This is what I have in mind at the moment.

Malcolm wrote:
You have to eat. You have to have clothes. You have to have shelter.

That means you have to make money. This is how it is in our world. We cannot go begging door to door. This is not realistic.

Everyone must have a job.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 6th, 2012 at 10:17 PM
Title: Re: The Buddhism trend in decline.
Content:
Huseng said:
In the future having a life partner might make a lot of sense economically for example...

Malcolm wrote:
Sigh.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 6th, 2012 at 10:16 PM
Title: Re: The Buddhism trend in decline.
Content:


Huseng said:
I don't quite understand what your last statement means.

Malcolm wrote:
There are a lot of so called "renunciates", monks and nun, out there whose so called "renunication" is just bitterness, disappointment, grudges.

It is much better to have an open heart.

Human beings are meant to be in communities with one another. This is why the Buddha said that friendship is the whole of the so called "spritual life". The idea that we are somehow better off in isolation is a fundamental error that comes about from not understanding who we are. Of course there are some people  who can be like Mahākashyapa, but he was by all accounts a pretty crusty character.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 6th, 2012 at 9:33 PM
Title: Re: The Buddhism trend in decline.
Content:
Huseng said:
Such freedom when I think about it is a lot more satisfying and worthwhile than being in a long-term relationship (which I've had)..


Malcolm wrote:
Um....no offense, but you are twenty-six, you have not lived long enough enough to be in a real longterm relationship. Younger men such as yourself often make bold declarations about how they are going to be in the future.

Reality is much different, and you have no idea how your karma will ripen.

An open heart beats all this fabricated talk about renunciation, everyday.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 6th, 2012 at 8:52 PM
Title: Re: The board and its direction (if any)
Content:


Malcolm wrote:
Practiced distinterest is better than shrill denunciations.

M


catmoon said:
"All that is required for evil to prosper is that good men do nothing."


Malcolm wrote:
That might be true of the Third Reich, but it hardly applies to the "new ager question".


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 6th, 2012 at 8:49 PM
Title: Re: The Buddhism trend in decline.
Content:
underthetree said:
For all the lip-service to the Goddess and the feminine, Buddhism, like the New Age, can be quite startlingly chauvinistic. I find that my distaste for this fact - as a man as well as a practitioner - is one of the main things that keeps me at arms' distance from sangha.

Malcolm wrote:
While the Dharma, in its essence is not patriarchal, Buddhism is a very patriarchal religion.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 6th, 2012 at 6:33 AM
Title: Re: Tryodoshang Guggul
Content:
Virgo said:
I just noticed recently that I have a bunch of this in the house that I ordered a couple of years ago from India, but for some reason never took at that time (it is still within date).  Normally, I don't take medicines as I was told to straighten out problems by way of diet and lifestyle first, which I have; however with the recent job change and schedule change it might be good to take for a while.  This is good for vata, only thing is I can't take anything that is too warming.  any idea if this stuff is too warming for me?

Thanks.

Kevin


Malcolm wrote:
Should be fine.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 6th, 2012 at 4:20 AM
Title: Re: A directive for a non-sectarian approach to practice (HHDL)
Content:
JKhedrup said:
If Gampopa had not studied with the Kadampa teachers as well as Milarepa, would he have produced his magnum opus "Jewel Ornament of Liberation".

Malcolm wrote:
Everyone forgets that Gampopa was a Nyingmapa to begin with, and that Nyingma remained influential on him all his life.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 6th, 2012 at 4:08 AM
Title: Re: The Buddhism trend in decline.
Content:
Nemo said:
It's very realistic when you are young and have no ties. Even a crusty bastard like me has taken a few years out of his life for retreat. Admitting that your need for comfort and security is greater than your spiritual aspirations is more honest than saying it is an escapist dream. People love money and worldly life more than Dharma. It sounds like you are trying to comfort yourself by thinking everyone has your low standards.


Malcolm wrote:
Everyone has to discover their limitations and practice withing those. When you know what your limitations are, then liberation is very possible, even if you like money, comfort and security.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Monday, August 6th, 2012 at 12:12 AM
Title: Re: The board and its direction (if any)
Content:
KeithBC said:
Threads that are not worth paying attention to (by Buddhists) will be kept alive by the New Agers who outnumber us.

Malcolm wrote:
so called Newagers do not outnumber Buddhists on this board.

Disinterest always works -- if you don't find something interesting, don't read it, and if you do, don't respond.

I do not respond to 98+ percent of posts made in this forum. I am unlikely to respond to anymore posts in this thread, now that I have made my opinion known, for whatever it is worth.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 5th, 2012 at 10:47 PM
Title: Re: Hiding "Dharma treasures" for future generations to find
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
There is no need for this.

The sublime Dharma arises from the intrinsic sound of Dharmatā. That is always present, just as awakened beings are always present to communicate it. Hence, the treasure tradition.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 5th, 2012 at 10:42 PM
Title: Re: The board and its direction (if any)
Content:
catmoon said:
Perhaps we should look at whether or not there is some basic Dharma, like the 4NT and 8FP, that can be realistically defended by mods.


Malcolm wrote:
What you do not want to do is go in the direction of E-Sangha.Our motivation was good, but the bureaucratic heavy-handedness backfired and created more problems than it solved.

People's speculations will wear out if no one expresses interest in them. Threads that are not worth paying attention to will die.

Practiced distinterest is better than shrill denunciations.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 5th, 2012 at 7:36 AM
Title: Re: Throma Nagmo Teachings by Lama Tharchin Rinpoche
Content:
Pero said:
Cool, thanks! I browsed around their website a bit and it seems this particular teaching will be about a short sadhana of Troma Nagmo. Do you or anyone else know if there will be recitation commitments or something?

Malcolm wrote:
I think you need the Wang to attend


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 5th, 2012 at 5:09 AM
Title: Re: Mdzog Phug and the Kosha
Content:
deepbluehum said:
My apologies:

So Malcolm, what's so special about this text that makes it useful vis a vis the Kosha? .

Malcolm wrote:
It is directly connected with Dzogchen practice.

Even if you take the position it is a pseudographia, it was produced by a realized Dzogchen master, Shenchen Luga, etc. So the teachings of Dzogchen permeate it.

It has interesting and detailed accounts of the dharmadhātu, wisdoms, etc.

deepbluehum said:
This has really nothing to do with the Kosha. The issue becomes how is the Mdzog phug an interesting text vis a vis Dzogchen.


Malcolm wrote:
The Mdzod phug itself really has nothing to with the Kosha, apart from cribbing a few passages here and there (which Buddhists make a big fuss about, at the expense of the rest of the text).


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 5th, 2012 at 3:07 AM
Title: Re: A directive for a non-sectarian approach to practice (HHDL)
Content:
Caz said:
I appreciate they may reinforce one and other but how is it necessary to study Lamdre in order to improve your understand of Guhyasamaja or Dzogchen, Surely if one accomplishes the results of one perfect clarity and understand will come naturally regarding the rest ?

Malcolm wrote:
Such accomplishment is rare. Studying all teachings impartially improves our chances for realization because it improves our prajñā.

Further, we never know what circumstances we will be born in. If we are familiar with all teachings, and make a connection with all teachings, then we have more opportunity and it will be easier to study and practice in the future. For example, even if we want to be a Kagyu in life after life there is no guarantee.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 5th, 2012 at 1:45 AM
Title: Re: A directive for a non-sectarian approach to practice (HHDL)
Content:
JKhedrup said:
HH the Dalai Lama Dharamsala Lam Rim Commentary 1998

Therefore Kagyupas must know the Mahamudra teaching in Sakya. The Sakyapas must know Dzogchen, they must know Kagyu. The Gelugpas must know Dzogchen, they must know Sakya and Kagyu. Such knowledge should not be learned merely for scholarship but for the sake of one's practice.

For the sake of one's practice one should receive important empowerments, get important transmissions and in this way on the one hand you will get some idea and knowledge, and at the same time be able to gain more understanding.

In my own experience, with regards to understanding the meaning of clear light as explained in the Guyyasamaja, I was able to get much inspiration from my study and understanding of Dzogchen. Likewise, certain teachings in the Gelugpa tradition, such as the explanation of the three voidnesses, such kind of understanding will be very helpful in understanding the Dzogchen or Nyingma tradition.

Caz said:
It sounds like he is saying that these lineages are not complete in of their selves unless it is a mistranslation, To be Non sectarian does one have to mix lineages or just respect them as equals ?

Malcolm wrote:
What he is saying is that all teachings reinforce one another, that one's understanding of Dzogchen, for example will be improved by studying Lamdre and Guhyasamaja, One's understanding of Mahamudra will be improved by studying Dzogchen and Lamdre, one's understanding of Lamdre will be improved by studying Dzoghen and Mahamudra, etc.

I think he is mostly talking to lineage heads.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Sunday, August 5th, 2012 at 1:40 AM
Title: Re: Throma Nagmo Teachings by Lama Tharchin Rinpoche
Content:
Pero said:
Can you say a bit more about this teaching? Throma Nagmo is a wrathful deity and related to Chod practice?


Malcolm wrote:
This is a major cycle from Dudjom Lingpa -- it has chod as an important part of the practice, but it is a cycle of Dzogchen teachings very much connected with Anuyoga, which has complete tregcho and thoga instructions.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 4th, 2012 at 10:00 PM
Title: Re: Mdzog Phug and the Kosha
Content:
ratna said:
I studied one chapter of it recently, the chapter on the five elements with Dranpa Namkhai's commentary, and found it to be an amazing text of much interest, much more interesting in many respects than Vasubandhu's Kosha for someone who is practicing Dzogchen.
I'd appreciate if you elaborated on this.

BTW, could you give a TBRC reference for the commentary?

R

Malcolm wrote:
The basic verses and the commentary were published by LTN in 1966.I have an original copy of that which is miraculously still in one piece.

The tbrc number for a later commentary is W23426.

Unfortunately LTN's edition Mdzod Phug: Basic Verses is not available through TBRC. I am just lucky to have acquired a copy from Saujanya books in India some years ago.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 4th, 2012 at 9:48 PM
Title: Re: Mdzog Phug and the Kosha
Content:
deepbluehum said:
My apologies:

So Malcolm, what's so special about this text that makes it useful vis a vis the Kosha? .

Malcolm wrote:
It is directly connected with Dzogchen practice.

Even if you take the position it is a pseudographia, it was produced by a realized Dzogchen master, Shenchen Luga, etc. So the teachings of Dzogchen permeate it.

It has interesting and detailed accounts of the dharmadhātu, wisdoms, etc.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Saturday, August 4th, 2012 at 9:12 PM
Title: Re: What makes one a Mahayanist?
Content:
Kunga said:
I was thinking earlier, exactly what does one have to accept in order to be a Mahayanist.

Malcolm wrote:
One has to generate supreme bodhicitta.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 3rd, 2012 at 10:30 PM
Title: Re: The Mahāyāna-sūtrâlaṃkāra = Yogâcārabhūmi ?
Content:
Jnana said:
Well, the Analysis of the Śrāvakabhūmi Manuscript by Wayman leaves quite a bit untranslated (and what is translated could be done better). The Mahāyānasūtrālaṃkāra covers much of the same ideas as the Bodhisattvabhūmi but the content isn't exactly the same.


Malcolm wrote:
The Yogacarabhumi can be roughly considered to be a systematic grand commentary on the Mahāyāna Sūtra Ālaṃkāra, and the five treatises of Maitrya in general.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 3rd, 2012 at 9:48 PM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:
seraphim said:
Hi all, so the Donwang we got today is actually Shitro Khorde Rangdrol?

Malcolm wrote:
Yes.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 3rd, 2012 at 4:49 AM
Title: Re: Mdzog Phug and the Kosha
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
The text is often incorrectly dismissed as a copy of the Buddhist Abhidharmakosha but it is nothing of the sort.

deepbluehum said:
It lifts entire passages wholesale.

Malcolm wrote:
Dan Martin analyzed the whole text. You need to read this if you are interested:

Comparing Treasuries: Mental states and Mdzod phug lists and passages with parallels in Abhidharma works by Vasubandhu and Asanga, or in Prajñāpāramitra sūtras: A progress report

http://ir.minpaku.ac.jp/dspace/bitstream/10502/1286/1/SER15_004.pdf " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
There was no Dzogchen at the time of Vasubhandu.
That merely serves to show how interesting the Mdzod phug is.

Incidentally, I made an error, the commentary of the Mdzod phug was produced about a century later.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 3rd, 2012 at 1:47 AM
Title: Re: Vasubandhu Pure Land site
Content:
Jikan said:
Related question that Malcolm is particularly well positioned to address:

in the volume Heart Drops of Dharmakaya, it's claimed that Vasubhandu's cosmology shares a common origin with Bonpo teachings.  Is this a plausible claim?  If so, does it contradict the claim that it derives from the Sarvastivada school?  Or does it follow that the Bonpo tradition may share a common origin with the Sarvastivada school also?


Malcolm wrote:
see https://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=78&t=9553 " onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 3rd, 2012 at 1:19 AM
Title: Re: Tadyatha
Content:
dakini_boi said:
Thank you both.

So, grammatically, does the tadyatha signify that the praise is made by means of the mantra?  i.e., "Praise to so and so - [make the praise] like this: Om. . . "

Malcolm wrote:
Tadyatha is made of two words tad yatha, "as follows here":


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 3rd, 2012 at 1:09 AM
Title: Mdzog Phug and the Kosha
Content:
Jikan said:
Related question that Malcolm is particularly well positioned to address:

in the volume Heart Drops of Dharmakaya, it's claimed that Vasubhandu's cosmology shares a common origin with Bonpo teachings.  Is this a plausible claim?  If so, does it contradict the claim that it derives from the Sarvastivada school?  Or does it follow that the Bonpo tradition may share a common origin with the Sarvastivada school also?

Malcolm wrote:
This is because the so called Bonpo Abhidharma, the Srid pa'i Mdzod Phug (revealed and written down by Shenchen Luga http://www.thlib.org/?wiki=/access/wiki/site/679c2e7e-ca49-462b-0038-a5e0534b709f/biography%20of%20shenchen%20luga.html (996-1035) in 1017) is held by the Bonpos to have been taught by Tonpa Shenrab. Tonpa Shenrab lived much earlier than Vasubandhu and the Buddha. There are some passages in the mDzod phug that are shared with the Kosha, but not very many, actually. But the Meru Cosmology etc., is basically the same. Therefore, the Bonpos claim the Mdzod phug influenced Buddhist cosmology.

Most modern scholars believe that the Mdzod Phug was partially influenced by the Kosha. However, the Mdzod Phug has a great deal of material in it that indicates it was also highly influenced by Dzogchen and so on. The materials in it are rich and have not been studiedvery much. The text is often incorrectly dismissed as a copy of the Buddhist Abhidharmakosha but it is nothing of the sort.

I studied one chapter of it recently, the chapter on the five elements with Dranpa Namkhai's commentary, and found it to be an amazing text of much interest, much more interesting in many respects than Vasubandhu's Kosha for someone who is practicing Dzogchen.

Dan Martin has done a lot of interesting analysis of the root text, but not so much on the commentary. Both texts, the root and the commentary were produced/revealed at the same time, in 1017.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 3rd, 2012 at 12:48 AM
Title: Re: Question about rainbow bodies
Content:
Fa Dao said:
heres a thought...
after a person has achieved rainbow body is it possible for them to physically incarnate again? or do they stay that way indefinitely?

heart said:
Chetsun Senghe Wangchuk attained rainbow body and was later born as Jamyang Khyentse Wangpo, who then reveled the Chetsun Nyingthig.

/magnus


Malcolm wrote:
JKW was an emanation, not a reincarnation, technically speaking.

Likewise, Vimalamitra is supposed to manifest an emanation every one hundred years or so. My teacher, Kunzang Dechen Lingpa was an emantion of Vimalamitra, etc.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Friday, August 3rd, 2012 at 12:15 AM
Title: Re: Tadyatha
Content:


dakini_boi said:
namo bhagavate bhaiṣajyaguru
vaiḍūryaprabharājāya tathāgatāya
arhate samyaksambuddhāya tadyathā:
oṃ bhaiṣajye bhaiṣajye mahābhaiṣajya-samudgate svāhā

Malcolm wrote:
RIght, the first part is a praise, "Homage to the Bhagavan Bhaisajyaraguru Vaiduryaprabharaja, a tathagata, an arhat, a samyaksambuddha", followed by his mantra, thus, om....etc.

but typically we recite all together.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 2nd, 2012 at 10:08 PM
Title: Re: Vasubandhu Pure Land site
Content:
kalden yungdrung said:
I have so a question:

- Maybe could you help me to find the kosmological interpretations of Vasubandhu

Malcolm wrote:
Chapter three of the Abhidharmakoshabhasyam.


kalden yungdrung said:
and maybe is it also explainable why his vision differs greatly from the Vajrayana opinion.


Malcolm wrote:
It doesn't really. Kalacakra cosmology is unique -- but otherwise the model of the Meru cosmology used in Vasubandhu's presentation as the defacto cosmology used in Indian and Tibetan Vajrayāna accounts.

The origin of Vasubandhu's cosmology is the the Sarvastivada school.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 2nd, 2012 at 4:59 AM
Title: Re: Renunciation
Content:


Will said:
They are the same thing

Malcolm wrote:
They are not the thing. One who is free of grasping and attachment has no need renunciation.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 2nd, 2012 at 2:30 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:
Jikan said:
“Man-ngag Tag-drol Gyud”

a precious Terma teaching of Rigdzin Jangchub Dorje
would someone please describe this teaching briefly?  eg does it go by a particular title in English?  thanks


Malcolm wrote:
The Tantra of the Liberation Through Wearing Intimate Instruction.

This is a tantra about these complicated and important tagdrols, how to make them, how to use them, etc.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 2nd, 2012 at 2:11 AM
Title: Re: Renunciation
Content:
Will said:
then renunciation or non-attachment will be occurring.


Malcolm wrote:
They are not the same thing.

For example, a renunciate who has given up sexual activity may still be attached to sexual activity. A non-renunciate may be no attachment to sexual activity.

But there are different paths for different people of different dispositions, this is why we talk about the path of renuciation, transformation, and self-liberation. The essence of the last path is freedom from grasping, but not renunciation.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Thursday, August 2nd, 2012 at 1:29 AM
Title: Re: Appropriate relationship with Guru
Content:


heart said:
You might have some doubts about his/her knowledge of Danish cheeses or politics in Austria but it isn't proper to doubt his/her knowledge and realization of the natural state.

/magnus


Malcolm wrote:
Yup, because if you do, that person should not be your guru and you should cease taking teachings from them immediately.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 1st, 2012 at 4:52 AM
Title: Re: Drug relapse leads to broken Samaya?
Content:
CrawfordHollow said:
Also, do you know of any practice within Dzogchen or Tibetan medicine that is good for addictions.  I am thinking specifically for protection against negative influences.  It is said that environment is stronger than will.  I am deeply involoved with my practice but I am very isolated from my teachers and sangha.  I work as a cook in busy restaurants where drug and alcohol use is rampant.  In one sense this provides me with oppurtunites for postmeditation practices, but I have always fallen prey to the influence of those around me.  I do pretty good, but man it certaintly is not easy!  I feel like I am living a double life, most people don't know that I am a practicioner, even though its been a huge part of my life for nearly ten years.  I would really like to say that I will never relapse again, but like I said, its not easy, espicially when drugs are literally in my face.  This is where a lot of the doubt comes from, becaue I have failed so many times in the past.  Drugs really screwed me up, I still feel their effects years later and I am sure that I have yet to pay the full price of my mistakes.

So I am thinking protection and purification practices.  I have also been doing purification of the five elements.  I'll probably order some Agar 35, maybe it will help me to relax and trust myself some.

Thanks,
Troy

Malcolm wrote:
You should write to ChNN and ask him for a Dorje Gotrab amulet.

You should recite a lot of purification of five element mantra.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 1st, 2012 at 4:01 AM
Title: Re: Drug relapse leads to broken Samaya?
Content:
CrawfordHollow said:
So this has been an important year for me.  If something is transmitted, or brought forth during an empowerment, is it possible for me to lose that through negative actions?

Malcolm wrote:
Your primordial state cannot be broken, nor can it be improved.

Keeping samaya means being interested in your path. Breaking samaya means ceasing to care about your path.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 1st, 2012 at 2:39 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
For Ipad users try:

Photon Flash Player Browser

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 1st, 2012 at 2:31 AM
Title: Re: Dzogchen Community of Chogyal Namkhai Norbu
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
For Ipad users try:

iSwifter Flash Browser.

M


Author: Malcolm
Date: Wednesday, August 1st, 2012 at 2:10 AM
Title: Re: The Buddhism trend in decline.
Content:
Will said:
Malcolm: Renunciation is not a cause for liberation.
Baloney. Virtually every other spiritual tradition agrees with Buddha, that non-attachment or renunciation is a critical element on the path to liberation.

Malcolm wrote:
Non-attachment aka freedom from grasping on the one hand, and renunciation on the other are very different.

The former is liberation; the latter is not, and does not necessarily lead to the former.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 31st, 2012 at 9:55 PM
Title: Re: The Buddhism trend in decline.
Content:
Malcolm wrote:
Liberation is a low-hanging fruit, you only need to pick it -- but you have to have a guide who can show you where that fruit is.

You don't need to give up anything to attain liberation.

Huseng said:
The Buddha suggested otherwise: renunciation.

Malcolm wrote:
Depends on which of the Buddha's teachings you wish to consider definitive.

Renunciation is not a cause for liberation.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 31st, 2012 at 9:45 PM
Title: Re: The Buddhism trend in decline.
Content:
underthetree said:
But you're right. There's hardly any way to be calm any more, for any length of time, in our world.

Huseng said:
It will get worse, especially as economic contraction takes it toll on the "developed world". Being kaliyuga there are a lot of events, both physical and occult, that are progressively making ordinary existence in this world harder and harder in both obvious and subtle ways. Demonic forces are becoming stronger as time goes on as well.

I think figures like Ajahn Brahm are worth considering. He's definitely an adept and highly attained yogi.

However, the lot of us sit on our arses worrying about our financial future and careers, so we're not really willing to give it all up for liberation. Perhaps doubt prevents many of us from doing it. The doubt that perhaps liberation isn't really possible, so you might as well play it safe by only going half-way while living the ordinary prescribed lifestyle.


Malcolm wrote:
Liberation is a low-hanging fruit, you only need to pick it -- but you have to have a guide who can show you where that fruit is.

You don't need to give up anything to attain liberation.


Author: Malcolm
Date: Tuesday, July 31st, 2012 at 8:49 PM
Title: Re: The Buddhism trend in decline.
Content:
Andrew108 said:
I also know that there are western practitioners who have genuine realization, but they are somewhat undervalued.


Malcolm wrote:
Depends on what you mean by realization.

Chogyal Namkhai Norbu's definition is very stringent. If you can place your hand in fire without it being harmed, then he will consider you realized. Since he himself cannot do this, he does not consider himself realized, just a little nore experienced than we, his students.

I personally believe he is an arya, someone who is actually an awakened person -- but that is just me.

M


