OK, but I still don't see what that would have to do with, for example, saying that beings in the formless realms have physical bodies.Malcolm wrote:Generally speaking, common Vajrayāna teachings hold that appearances are really just mental factors, events triggered by traces which are activated in the ālayavijñāna.
Dzogchen maintains however that appearances are the rtsal of wisdom, not mental factors. Everything we perceive as external is the five lights of wisdom misconstrued as the external elements because of the imputing ignorance and so on.
Dr. Sanderson: Phowa etc. are directly from Saivism
- dzogchungpa
- Posts: 6333
- Joined: Sat May 28, 2011 10:50 pm
Re: Dr. Sanderson: Phowa etc. are directly from Saivism
There is not only nothingness because there is always, and always can manifest. - Thinley Norbu Rinpoche
Re: Dr. Sanderson: Phowa etc. are directly from Saivism
That has to do with other issues specific to Dzogchen, such as the assertion that all sentient beings have the four lamps, which requires that they have eyes, etc.dzogchungpa wrote:OK, but I still don't see what that would have to do with, for example, saying that beings in the formless realms have physical bodies.Malcolm wrote:Generally speaking, common Vajrayāna teachings hold that appearances are really just mental factors, events triggered by traces which are activated in the ālayavijñāna.
Dzogchen maintains however that appearances are the rtsal of wisdom, not mental factors. Everything we perceive as external is the five lights of wisdom misconstrued as the external elements because of the imputing ignorance and so on.
Re: Dr. Sanderson: Phowa etc. are directly from Saivism
So I wonder why the West gets caught up in this game.Malcolm wrote:Are you kidding? This is common knowledge for centuries.Crazywisdom wrote:Anyway as Sanderson points out, Vajrayana was only a skillful means to condition Shakta Shaivas to recognize fundamental Mahayana principles.
Vajra fangs deliver vajra venom to your Mara body.
Re: Dr. Sanderson: Phowa etc. are directly from Saivism
Because we like drinking and sex, that's why. Plus, in this day and age, only Vajrayāna methods will get you there, Dzogchen being part of Vajrayāna.Crazywisdom wrote:So I wonder why the West gets caught up in this game.Malcolm wrote:Are you kidding? This is common knowledge for centuries.Crazywisdom wrote:Anyway as Sanderson points out, Vajrayana was only a skillful means to condition Shakta Shaivas to recognize fundamental Mahayana principles.
Re: Dr. Sanderson: Phowa etc. are directly from Saivism
There are descriptions of lamps that don't include eyes. This is all relative.Malcolm wrote:That has to do with other issues specific to Dzogchen, such as the assertion that all sentient beings have the four lamps, which requires that they have eyes, etc.dzogchungpa wrote:OK, but I still don't see what that would have to do with, for example, saying that beings in the formless realms have physical bodies.Malcolm wrote:Generally speaking, common Vajrayāna teachings hold that appearances are really just mental factors, events triggered by traces which are activated in the ālayavijñāna.
Dzogchen maintains however that appearances are the rtsal of wisdom, not mental factors. Everything we perceive as external is the five lights of wisdom misconstrued as the external elements because of the imputing ignorance and so on.
Vajra fangs deliver vajra venom to your Mara body.
Re: Dr. Sanderson: Phowa etc. are directly from Saivism
My teacher explains Dzogchen is beyond Tantrism. No need for initiation, tramsformations and mudra.Malcolm wrote:Because we like drinking and sex, that's why. Plus, in this day and age, only Vajrayāna methods will get you there, Dzogchen being part of Vajrayāna.Crazywisdom wrote:
So I wonder why the West gets caught up in this game.
Vajra fangs deliver vajra venom to your Mara body.
Re: Dr. Sanderson: Phowa etc. are directly from Saivism
No, there are not.Crazywisdom wrote:
There are descriptions of lamps that don't include eyes. This is all relative.
Re: Dr. Sanderson: Phowa etc. are directly from Saivism
You teacher meaning ChNN?Crazywisdom wrote:My teacher explains Dzogchen is beyond Tantrism. No need for initiation, tramsformations and mudra.Malcolm wrote:Because we like drinking and sex, that's why. Plus, in this day and age, only Vajrayāna methods will get you there, Dzogchen being part of Vajrayāna.Crazywisdom wrote:
So I wonder why the West gets caught up in this game.
Well then you are mistaken. One always needs the rig pa' rtsal dbang.
Of course, some people do not need to practice anuyoga methods of transformation but such people are rare — maybe you are one of that special elite group.
Re: Dr. Sanderson: Phowa etc. are directly from Saivism
That's called direct transmission. It can be given Vajrayana style for those who have that expectation, is how he tells it. He never said such people are rare. If you like you can do that. He expects everyone to learn guru yoga which is Ati yoga. He definitely never said most people will need Anuyoga. In fact most people not Tibetan or Shakta never having heard of it wouldn't have that expectation.Malcolm wrote:You teacher meaning ChNN?Crazywisdom wrote:My teacher explains Dzogchen is beyond Tantrism. No need for initiation, tramsformations and mudra.Malcolm wrote:
Because we like drinking and sex, that's why. Plus, in this day and age, only Vajrayāna methods will get you there, Dzogchen being part of Vajrayāna.
Well then you are mistaken. One always needs the rig pa' rtsal dbang.
Of course, some people do not need to practice anuyoga methods of transformation but such people are rare — maybe you are one of that special elite group.
Vajra fangs deliver vajra venom to your Mara body.
Re: Dr. Sanderson: Phowa etc. are directly from Saivism
Yep. Definitely are.Malcolm wrote:No, there are not.Crazywisdom wrote:
There are descriptions of lamps that don't include eyes. This is all relative.
Vajra fangs deliver vajra venom to your Mara body.
Re: Dr. Sanderson: Phowa etc. are directly from Saivism
ChNN says in Dzogchen there are no eight consciousness. He goes with Madhyamaka. So the philosophical underpinnings of Vajrayana are denied.Malcolm wrote:dzogchungpa wrote:Generally speaking, common Vajrayāna teachings hold that appearances are really just mental factors, events triggered by traces which are activated in the ālayavijñāna.Malcolm wrote: OK, so can you explain that? This is very interesting to me.
Dzogchen maintains however that appearances are the rtsal of wisdom, not mental factors. Everything we perceive as external is the five lights of wisdom misconstrued as the external elements because of the imputing ignorance and so on.
Vajra fangs deliver vajra venom to your Mara body.
Re: Dr. Sanderson: Phowa etc. are directly from Saivism
Really, where does he say this?Crazywisdom wrote:
ChNN says in Dzogchen there are no eight consciousness.
Anyway, the way this is explained in Dzogchen teachings is that there is one consciousness with eight modes of appearance, Jigme Lingpa uses the example of a single monkey in a house with eight windows.
- dzogchungpa
- Posts: 6333
- Joined: Sat May 28, 2011 10:50 pm
Re: Dr. Sanderson: Phowa etc. are directly from Saivism
So, in Dzogchen, appearances are the rtsal of wisdom, not mental factors, but I still don't see how this answers my question above.dzogchungpa wrote:Malcolm, this is something I don't understand. You have said that the view of Vajrayana in general is that there is nothing "out there", so what do words like "matter" even mean in this context, if there are only appearances?
There is not only nothingness because there is always, and always can manifest. - Thinley Norbu Rinpoche
Re: Dr. Sanderson: Phowa etc. are directly from Saivism
Yes, so Dzogchen does not refute external objects conventionally.dzogchungpa wrote:So, in Dzogchen, appearances are the rtsal of wisdom, not mental factors, but I still don't see how this answers my question above.dzogchungpa wrote:Malcolm, this is something I don't understand. You have said that the view of Vajrayana in general is that there is nothing "out there", so what do words like "matter" even mean in this context, if there are only appearances?
- Karma Dorje
- Posts: 1410
- Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2011 10:35 pm
Re: Dr. Sanderson: Phowa etc. are directly from Saivism
Shiva as a dharmapala is considered to be an emanation of Avalokiteśvara. Are you saying that the Shiva that the Hindus worship is an emanation of Avalokiteśvara? While there are aspects which this makes sense for like Pashupatinath, there are aspects to Shiva that do not similarly correspond like Dakshinamurti corresponding to the wisdom aspect or Vatukabhairava corresponding to power.Malcolm wrote: Shiva is considered to be an emanation of Avalokiteśvara. The only Mahākāla who is an emanation of Avalokiteśvara is the six arm form.
But it cannot be denied that the Dharmapāla Shiva's consort is Umadevi.
As you are aware, there is a lot more to Uma in the Hindu tradition than the very small amount of teaching on Umadevi and Tinuma in Vajrayana, from the three lineages of Srividya to the Dashamahavidya to the tremendous amount of puranic material. There is no question that Mahadeva and Umadevi as dharmapalas arose in the experience of a mahasiddha. However, that's not the same thing as saying that Shiva/Shakti are emanations of particular Buddhist deities.
"Although my view is higher than the sky, My respect for the cause and effect of actions is as fine as grains of flour."
-Padmasambhava
-Padmasambhava
Re: Dr. Sanderson: Phowa etc. are directly from Saivism
Pointless...Crazywisdom wrote:Yep. Definitely are.Malcolm wrote:No, there are not.Crazywisdom wrote:
There are descriptions of lamps that don't include eyes. This is all relative.
Last edited by Malcolm on Fri Jun 27, 2014 8:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- dzogchungpa
- Posts: 6333
- Joined: Sat May 28, 2011 10:50 pm
Re: Dr. Sanderson: Phowa etc. are directly from Saivism
Well, I guess I'm still unclear about what you are saying when you assert that nadi, prana and bindu are physical. If there is no distinction between matter and consciousness in Dzogchen, then they are neither mental nor physical, or equally mental and physical. Am I missing something?Malcolm wrote:Yes, so Dzogchen does not refute external objects conventionally.dzogchungpa wrote:So, in Dzogchen, appearances are the rtsal of wisdom, not mental factors, but I still don't see how this answers my question above.dzogchungpa wrote:Malcolm, this is something I don't understand. You have said that the view of Vajrayana in general is that there is nothing "out there", so what do words like "matter" even mean in this context, if there are only appearances?
There is not only nothingness because there is always, and always can manifest. - Thinley Norbu Rinpoche
Re: Dr. Sanderson: Phowa etc. are directly from Saivism
They are physical because we have reified the five elements as concrete entities through the imputing ignorance. In other words, they are physical in the vision of mundane beings with afflictions like ourselves. It is the same with testing our realization with fire. If we cannot place our hand in a fire without burning it, we really ought to shut the &%#$ up about our "realization".dzogchungpa wrote: Well, I guess I'm still unclear about what you are saying when you assert that nadi, prana and bindu are physical. If there is no distinction between matter and consciousness in Dzogchen, then they are neither mental nor physical, or equally mental and physical. Am I missing something?
In other words, from the stand point of the accreted habits of ignorance built over many lifetimes, our bodies are physical, are born, abide and decay, and then we take a new one. From the standpoint of vidyā, our bodies and everything in the universe is an array of wisdom light.
People are fond of dissing the two stages, thinking that they are mighty mighty Dzogchen practitioners, but even ChNN relies heavily on the two stages and teaches then all the time. The two stages are an exercise in developing pure vision. Very necessary for everyone.
Last edited by Grigoris on Mon Jun 30, 2014 7:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Removed ad hom
Reason: Removed ad hom
Re: Dr. Sanderson: Phowa etc. are directly from Saivism
Thread re-opened.
Please refrain from personal attacks.
Thank you.
Please refrain from personal attacks.
Thank you.
"My religion is not deceiving myself."
Jetsun Milarepa 1052-1135 CE
"Butchers, prostitutes, those guilty of the five most heinous crimes, outcasts, the underprivileged: all are utterly the substance of existence and nothing other than total bliss."
The Supreme Source - The Kunjed Gyalpo
The Fundamental Tantra of Dzogchen Semde
Jetsun Milarepa 1052-1135 CE
"Butchers, prostitutes, those guilty of the five most heinous crimes, outcasts, the underprivileged: all are utterly the substance of existence and nothing other than total bliss."
The Supreme Source - The Kunjed Gyalpo
The Fundamental Tantra of Dzogchen Semde
Re: Dr. Sanderson: Phowa etc. are directly from Saivism
Wait, what? Can you expand on that?Malcolm wrote:Are you kidding? This is common knowledge for centuries.Crazywisdom wrote:Anyway as Sanderson points out, Vajrayana was only a skillful means to condition Shakta Shaivas to recognize fundamental Mahayana principles.
"Even if my body should be burnt to death in the fires of hell
I would endure it for myriad lifetimes
As your companion in practice"
--- Gandavyuha Sutra
I would endure it for myriad lifetimes
As your companion in practice"
--- Gandavyuha Sutra