Yidam and Dzogchen

User avatar
heart
Posts: 6290
Joined: Fri Jan 08, 2010 1:55 pm

Re: Yidam and Dzogchen

Post by heart »

Sönam wrote:
heart wrote:Might interest someone,

/magnus
it does ...

Sönam
Good to hear that someone is. :smile:

/magnus
"We are all here to help each other go through this thing, whatever it is."
~Kurt Vonnegut

"The principal practice is Guruyoga. But we need to understand that any secondary practice combined with Guruyoga becomes a principal practice." ChNNR (Teachings on Thun and Ganapuja)
User avatar
heart
Posts: 6290
Joined: Fri Jan 08, 2010 1:55 pm

Re: Yidam and Dzogchen

Post by heart »

Interesting stuff by Tsoknyi Rinpoche:

"Student: Rinpoche, if we did some connection with the formless as the path in Mahamudra, what is the benefit of still doing for example, "Kyerim" or "Tsalung"-practise? For example you see the great masters who really are resting in rigpa, but they still keep the form aspect of practice. So what does that add to Mahamudra and Dzogchen?

Rinpoche: It is a little bit style but actually once you have very authentic, pure understanding of mind nature, either from Mahamudra or Dzogchen, then honestly if you only practice that, within that all the other qualities are naturally included. Then I think you don't need so much. Within the rigpa, the essence rigpa is emptiness; the expression of rigpa includes all the other qualities like love, compassion, devotion, and pure perception. All these are within the rigpa. But if you also do some accumulation of merit, it will help to give better opportunity. Maybe the merit will give you a father who supports you the rest of your life. Or maybe you will have the right girlfriend or a wife who supports you and both of you practice the whole path. Or maybe you teach in the future, maybe you will have better students. So merit makes all these arrangements keep going. But if you really have all the qualities within the rigpa I think it is sufficient. But Tibetan people they don't want to take such high risk, so they do both.

Student: Because the best way of accumulating merit is to just rest in rigpa?

Rinpoche: Yes, if you really can. But sometimes you cannot. It could become a dry rigpa, completely dry. Not expression rigpa, no display. Purely dry, with no thoughts, no emotions, just dry, vacant. That is not good. You have to have the juice, full juice. One great khenpo called Khenpo Munsel didn't chant, he didn't do anything for 20 years except for resting in Trekcho. But most of the Tibetan lamas they are a little bit scared. They don't want to take a high risk so they do both. Khyentse Rinpoche is different you can't count him. If he was chanting or not chanting or just sat there, for him it didn’t matter. So why not chant within rigpa. And maybe there is also some commitment, so he didn’t want to break that. When he got teaching, maybe the teacher asked him to practice this for the rest of his life. I think Khyentse Rinpoche followed such commitment. Some sadhana you also have to keep up in order to be able to give the teaching. Like the Sakyapa's: everyday you have to chant the whole thing. If you miss it one day, then you cannot give the empowerment of that deity to other people. So that also makes a lot of lung..!"

http://www.buddhistmala.com/store/Lung.doc" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

/magnus
"We are all here to help each other go through this thing, whatever it is."
~Kurt Vonnegut

"The principal practice is Guruyoga. But we need to understand that any secondary practice combined with Guruyoga becomes a principal practice." ChNNR (Teachings on Thun and Ganapuja)
Kai
Posts: 155
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2011 2:47 pm

Re: Yidam and Dzogchen

Post by Kai »

I know the following was written few months ago but I was not a official member here yet when it happened. So I will like to bring this discussion up again as I believe that its a important one to most Buddhists.
Namdrol wrote:
Mariusz wrote:
Namdrol wrote: Most people think that Buddhahood is irrersible; Dzogchen on the other hand asserts that the buddhahood of the lower yanas is reverts into the basis, and only Dzogchen results in complete and irreversible buddhahood.
N
How it is possible?
Is it somehow related to “Youthful Vase Body” (Wyl. Gzhon-Nu Bum-sku) which can be "broken" even after the buddhahood, when from it will arise the Appearances of the Basis (Wyl. Gzhi-sNang) and they will be not spontaneously accomplished (Wyl. Lhun-Grub) because of Unenlightenment (Wyl. Ma-Rig-pa) again?

It is because buddhahood of lower yānas is incomplete and does not reach the stage of ka dag chen po, great original purity. The simplest way to explain it is that after the this universe dissolves and the next one arises, those beings who have not achieved the stage of ka dag chen po start all over.
I think the above is a regular pattern shown in most Dharma teachings. In the Nikayas' teaching, it is stated that sentinel beings are trapped within the endless cycle of life and death or samara until they abandon Vedas or other religious doctrines and adapted the Dharma, then reached Arahathood or stream entry where their liberation will be confirmed. However, in the Mahayana, it was stated that Arahat is a incomplete or partial liberation and Arahats are not fully withdrawn from their knowledge defilement yet, therefore they must enter the Mahayana path of Bodhisattvas and reach the ten Bhumis. Then in the tantras, oh well, it was once again stated that Buddhas of the tenth Bhumi can't reach the full Buddhahood and that their Vajra like meditative state is insufficient to bring them further, therefore a tantric empowerments are needed and even the Shakayumi reached the 13 Bhumi after one such empowerment.

Finally, in Dzogchen, they stated as shown above that Buddhahood is actually reversible (Oh really?) and only Rigpa and its meditation, Thogal, can lead one to the 16th Bhumi. Oh Well, apparently, the level of accomplishments just get higher and higher and tend towards infinity. And if this prove anything, it seems that some teachings are trying very hard to justify their superiority over the others by inserting higher levels of liberation as the trend shown above. Not meant to say that such doctrines are not possible but its really a curious observation after years of studying Buddhist scriptures.

Next, is the Buddhahood really reversible or that Buddhas will fall back to the state of sentinel beings? Its clear that discussions of this type do occurred before in the ancient days of Nikayas where Theravadins specifically wrote an abhidhamma books called "the points of controversy" to attack those Buddhist schools that claimed Arahanthood is not necessary irreversible. Well, it is apparent who won as the later Mahayana school all shared the same idea that its not possible for Arahats to fall back into the state of normal humans.

In Mahayana schools, especially Pure Land sutras, it has been stated that once a Bodhisattva reached the eighth Bhumi and above, its not possible for them to fall back, even to Arahathood or other Sravaka paths. Maitreya, Manjusri and Vajrapani are tenth Bhumi Bodhisattvas and once remained so for aeons despite the countless of destructions and reformations of universes that follows. From what we know in the Sutras and present accounts by some practitioners, they never fall back into sentinel beings and remained as Buddhas. (Tenth Bhumi Bodhisattvas = Buddhas)

So what reversible the Dzogchen tantras are talking about? First of all, I believe that its highly speculative but I suspect the reversible effect if occurs, only lasts for a split second or less. In the book "Dzogchen practice", it was stated that the Adi-Buddha, Samantabhadra/Samantabhadri, experienced two of the three innate unelightenments at the start of universe and was able to overcome the delusions by the arising of His wisdom to recognize the eight appearances from the basis. Hence He retains his Buddhahood and become the Adi Buddha. And this might be the same event that happens to all Buddhas eventually if the Dzogchen tantras are to be believed. But of course, I might be wrong, however, the falling of Buddhas back to the state of sentinel beings as already argued above is highly improbable.

In fact, I can already imagine how strongly the Buddha community will react if they ever get to hear this part of the Dzogchen teachings. Then again, the final possibility might be just semantics and like my observation make in the first paragraph, a historical Buddhist trend to emphasize the importance of their school teaching by adding more stages and "perfections" into the existing system.

At any rate, I hope the Dzogchen tantras are the last teachings to state such a "surprise", I'm pretty certain that no one wants to hear some years down the road that Yangti is more important than Longde as it could lead to higher Bhumis.....you know, it could get really boring after sometimes..........All the best.

From a concerned Buddhist
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Yidam and Dzogchen

Post by Malcolm »

Kai wrote: First of all, I believe that its highly speculative but I suspect the reversible effect if occurs, only lasts for a split second or less. In the book "Dzogchen practice", it was stated that the Adi-Buddha, Samantabhadra/Samantabhadri, experienced two of the three innate unelightenments at the start of universe and was able to overcome the delusions by the arising of His wisdom to recognize the eight appearances from the basis. Hence He retains his Buddhahood and become the Adi Buddha. And this might be the same event that happens to all Buddhas eventually if the Dzogchen tantras are to be believed.
There are three explanations possible, given that Dzogchen tantras and traditions definitely state that Samantabhadra was intiallly subject to either one or two ignorances (ma rig pa, avidyā):

1) The Dzogchen assertion that all sentient beings attain "full awakening (sangs rgyas)" at the end of a given mahākalpa requires interpetation and must not be taken literally.
2) Buddhahood is, up to a point, in fact reversible.
3) Buddhas and sentient beings newly form at the beginning of a mahākalapa.

All three possibilities present problems in terms of traditional Indian Mahāyāna Buddhology.

This controversy first came to my attention when my Sakya khenpo mentioned it in passing in the early '90's.
Kai
Posts: 155
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2011 2:47 pm

Re: Yidam and Dzogchen

Post by Kai »

Namdrol wrote:
Kai wrote: First of all, I believe that its highly speculative but I suspect the reversible effect if occurs, only lasts for a split second or less. In the book "Dzogchen practice", it was stated that the Adi-Buddha, Samantabhadra/Samantabhadri, experienced two of the three innate unelightenments at the start of universe and was able to overcome the delusions by the arising of His wisdom to recognize the eight appearances from the basis. Hence He retains his Buddhahood and become the Adi Buddha. And this might be the same event that happens to all Buddhas eventually if the Dzogchen tantras are to be believed.
There are three explanations possible, given that Dzogchen tantras and traditions definitely state that Samantabhadra was intiallly subject to either one or two ignorances (ma rig pa, avidyā):

1) The Dzogchen assertion that all sentient beings attain "full awakening (sangs rgyas)" at the end of a given mahākalpa requires interpetation and must not be taken literally.
2) Buddhahood is, up to a point, in fact reversible.
3) Buddhas and sentient beings newly form at the beginning of a mahākalapa.

All three possibilities present problems in terms of traditional Indian Mahāyāna Buddhology.

This controversy first came to my attention when my Sakya khenpo mentioned it in passing in the early '90's.

Thanks for that, I do wish some Dzogchen masters would write some commentaries on that and if possible a formal debate on the subject since its been a part of Buddhist tradition that the establishment of new doctrines have to go through some form of serious debates, much a less, those that seem to oppose or overturn the past doctrines.

Vajrayana's superiority over Mahayana is already well stated in many texts and those reasoning that they used are much acceptable to many, including me. However, I can't say the same for this view of Dzogchen. It remains more of an idea than doctrine. In the ongoing development, many Tibetan masters have been trying to get Vajrayana closer to traditional Mahayana by emphasizing that the tenth to Twelfth Bhumis in the tantras are actually equivalent to the Tenth Bhumi as stated in the Sutras. While the tantric thirteenth equates that to the sutric Eleventh, the only minor difference between the two is a formal tantra empowerment.

However, this doctrine in the Dzogchen tantras is single handlely destroying all their efforts, therefore I was hoping that there are some other forms of metaphor explanations for it rather than a literal one.
User avatar
kirtu
Former staff member
Posts: 6997
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2010 5:29 pm
Location: Baltimore, MD

Re: Yidam and Dzogchen

Post by kirtu »

Kai wrote: In the ongoing development, many Tibetan masters have been trying to get Vajrayana closer to traditional Mahayana by emphasizing that the tenth to Twelfth Bhumis in the tantras are actually equivalent to the Tenth Bhumi as stated in the Sutras. While the tantric thirteenth equates that to the sutric Eleventh, the only minor difference between the two is a formal tantra empowerment.

However, this doctrine in the Dzogchen tantras is single handlely destroying all their efforts,.....
When HHST teaches on the bhumis and Buddhahood we invariably says that there are different classifications in sutra and tantra and more or less says that the systems differ in explication of detail and then goes on to teach the essential points (and my mind always goes blank when he's teaching the essential stuff :zzz: ). However during the teaching following a specific deity empowerment he said that we should not forget that the deity in question is a fully emlightened Buddha on the 13th bhumi (most of the audience in attendance only knew of the 10 bhumi system).

So "single handedly destroying all their efforts" seems a mite strong.

Kirt
“Where do atomic bombs come from?”
Zen Master Seung Sahn said, “That’s simple. Atomic bombs come from the mind that likes this and doesn’t like that.”

"Even if you practice only for an hour a day with faith and inspiration, good qualities will steadily increase. Regular practice makes it easy to transform your mind. From seeing only relative truth, you will eventually reach a profound certainty in the meaning of absolute truth."
Kyabje Dilgo Khyentse Rinpoche.

"Only you can make your mind beautiful."
HH Chetsang Rinpoche
deepbluehum
Posts: 1302
Joined: Sat Aug 13, 2011 2:05 am
Location: San Francisco, CA

Re: Yidam and Dzogchen

Post by deepbluehum »

Any number line has infinite regression. The way I see this is that it has to do with speed. Fast systems need more finely defined stages, because all these levels are often sped across and when you reach a plateau on the path you need a clear description of where you are on the map. At least, of course if that is what you chosen path is about. There are also teachings by great masters like Milarepa who said there are no stages and a single realization is the whole path. Longchepa also often speaks in these terms. This is helpful because it is important to remember it's not where you are (on a map) it's what you are (in truth).
Kai
Posts: 155
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2011 2:47 pm

Re: Yidam and Dzogchen

Post by Kai »

kirtu wrote:
Kai wrote: In the ongoing development, many Tibetan masters have been trying to get Vajrayana closer to traditional Mahayana by emphasizing that the tenth to Twelfth Bhumis in the tantras are actually equivalent to the Tenth Bhumi as stated in the Sutras. While the tantric thirteenth equates that to the sutric Eleventh, the only minor difference between the two is a formal tantra empowerment.

However, this doctrine in the Dzogchen tantras is single handlely destroying all their efforts,.....
When HHST teaches on the bhumis and Buddhahood we invariably says that there are different classifications in sutra and tantra and more or less says that the systems differ in explication of detail and then goes on to teach the essential points (and my mind always goes blank when he's teaching the essential stuff :zzz: ). However during the teaching following a specific deity empowerment he said that we should not forget that the deity in question is a fully emlightened Buddha on the 13th bhumi (most of the audience in attendance only knew of the 10 bhumi system).

So "single handedly destroying all their efforts" seems a mite strong.

Kirt
Its interesting to note that HHST had not spoken about the 16fh Bhumi or the reversible Buddhahood since I think He does have exposures to Dzogchen teachings.

Truth be told, until now, I have never come across a Buddhist text written by any Dharma masters or teachers that state the possibility of Buddhism being reversed. This give rise to the possibility that either the Dzogchen tantra has a different and hidden meaning to that verse or some Dzogchen masters prefer to let some facts remain hidden. The former seems more probable. Since there had been no historical debates or huge controversy on this question nor is there any written commentary on this theory, therefore, its suffice to say Buddhahood is pretty much irreversible. At any rate, I began to understand why various teachers of the past had rejected Dzogchen as an authentic teaching. With claims such as the above, they are more than enough to drive any conservatives insane.

Also if any of you were to ask me, I would feel that the much overhyped difference between the 13 and the 16 is simply a few ultra subtle delusions and not a big deal to make about while the Dzogchen doctrine on the single Bhumi is far more profound than its systematic classification of realization into 16 stages which number, modern practitioners, unfortunately, love to focus on.
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Yidam and Dzogchen

Post by Malcolm »

Kai wrote:In the ongoing development, many Tibetan masters have been trying to get Vajrayana closer to traditional Mahayana by emphasizing that the tenth to Twelfth Bhumis in the tantras are actually equivalent to the Tenth Bhumi as stated in the Sutras. While the tantric thirteenth equates that to the sutric Eleventh, the only minor difference between the two is a formal tantra empowerment.
That is definitely not a POV that a Sakyapa or a Nyingmapa would be liable to accept.
Kai
Posts: 155
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2011 2:47 pm

Re: Yidam and Dzogchen

Post by Kai »

Namdrol wrote:
Kai wrote:In the ongoing development, many Tibetan masters have been trying to get Vajrayana closer to traditional Mahayana by emphasizing that the tenth to Twelfth Bhumis in the tantras are actually equivalent to the Tenth Bhumi as stated in the Sutras. While the tantric thirteenth equates that to the sutric Eleventh, the only minor difference between the two is a formal tantra empowerment.
That is definitely not a POV that a Sakyapa or a Nyingmapa would be liable to accept.
I figure that as much since I heard POV mainly from my Gelug and Kagyu teachers. In Drikung, even arhats are said to be equate to that of a sixth Bhumi Bodhisattva. I don't think any other schools will agree with that.
xabir
Posts: 207
Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2010 4:14 pm

Re: Yidam and Dzogchen

Post by xabir »

You guys seem to take Samantabhadra as a literal real account of what happened, but didn't ChNNR says it should be taken metaphorically?

The Supreme Source, epilogue: on the nature of Samanatabhadra

Q: is it possible to conceive of a being that has never entered into dualism, into samsara?

A: Regarding certain tantras it would seem that originally, by the magic of knowledge and of ignorance, on one side there arose Samantabhadra, the first Buddha, and on the other side beings who transmigrate. However, this should be mainly understood as a metaphor to enable us to disxover our real condition. If we deem Samantabhadra as an individual being, we are far from the true meaning. In reality, he denotes our potentiality that, even though at the present moment we are in samsara, has never been conditioned by dualism. From the beginning, the state of the individual has been pure and always remains pure: this is what Samantabhadra represents. But when we fall into conditioning, it is as if we are no longer Samantabhadra because we are ignorant of our true nature. So what is called the primordial Buddha, or Adibuddha, is only a metaphor for our true condition.
The very pulsing of dependent origination
Is the primordial face of the Tathāgata.
Like blood and veins and heart
- The two truths meet everywhere.

- André A. Pais
User avatar
Sönam
Posts: 1999
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 2:11 pm
Location: France
Contact:

Re: Yidam and Dzogchen

Post by Sönam »

xabir wrote:You guys seem to take Samantabhadra as a literal real account of what happened, but didn't ChNNR says it should be taken metaphorically?
May be it's both ... who is the being that would be the object of a metaphore?

Sônam
By understanding everything you perceive from the perspective of the view, you are freed from the constraints of philosophical beliefs.
By understanding that any and all mental activity is meditation, you are freed from arbitrary divisions between formal sessions and postmeditation activity.
- Longchen Rabjam -
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Yidam and Dzogchen

Post by Malcolm »

xabir wrote:You guys seem to take Samantabhadra as a literal real account of what happened, but didn't ChNNR says it should be taken metaphorically?
That is a sems sde prensentation. The presentation in Man ngag sde is very specific.

N
User avatar
kirtu
Former staff member
Posts: 6997
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2010 5:29 pm
Location: Baltimore, MD

Re: Yidam and Dzogchen

Post by kirtu »

Kai wrote:
Namdrol wrote:
Kai wrote:In the ongoing development, many Tibetan masters have been trying to get Vajrayana closer to traditional Mahayana by emphasizing that the tenth to Twelfth Bhumis in the tantras are actually equivalent to the Tenth Bhumi as stated in the Sutras. While the tantric thirteenth equates that to the sutric Eleventh, the only minor difference between the two is a formal tantra empowerment.
That is definitely not a POV that a Sakyapa or a Nyingmapa would be liable to accept.
I figure that as much since I heard POV mainly from my Gelug and Kagyu teachers. In Drikung, even arhats are said to be equate to that of a sixth Bhumi Bodhisattva. I don't think any other schools will agree with that.
No that's standard across schools although I don't remember for sure if an Arhat was equated exactly with a 6th bhumi bodhisattva in terms of wisdom (it's the in terms of wisdom where the equating is done on this). So when Arhats are awakened from their samadhi and they take rebirth they are reborn as sixth bhumi bodhisattvas.

Kirt
“Where do atomic bombs come from?”
Zen Master Seung Sahn said, “That’s simple. Atomic bombs come from the mind that likes this and doesn’t like that.”

"Even if you practice only for an hour a day with faith and inspiration, good qualities will steadily increase. Regular practice makes it easy to transform your mind. From seeing only relative truth, you will eventually reach a profound certainty in the meaning of absolute truth."
Kyabje Dilgo Khyentse Rinpoche.

"Only you can make your mind beautiful."
HH Chetsang Rinpoche
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Yidam and Dzogchen

Post by Malcolm »

kirtu wrote: No that's standard across schools although I don't remember for sure if an Arhat was equated exactly with a 6th bhumi bodhisattva in terms of wisdom (it's the in terms of wisdom where the equating is done on this). So when Arhats are awakened from their samadhi and they take rebirth they are reborn as sixth bhumi bodhisattvas.

Kirt

Hi Kirt:

No, this is not accepted in Sakya, it is rejected by Gorampa. 1) Arhats do not realize emptiness free from extremes 2) They do not have the necessary merit stores.
User avatar
kirtu
Former staff member
Posts: 6997
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2010 5:29 pm
Location: Baltimore, MD

Re: Yidam and Dzogchen

Post by kirtu »

Namdrol wrote:
kirtu wrote: No that's standard across schools although I don't remember for sure if an Arhat was equated exactly with a 6th bhumi bodhisattva in terms of wisdom (it's the in terms of wisdom where the equating is done on this). So when Arhats are awakened from their samadhi and they take rebirth they are reborn as sixth bhumi bodhisattvas.

Kirt

Hi Kirt:

No, this is not accepted in Sakya, it is rejected by Gorampa. 1) Arhats do not realize emptiness free from extremes 2) They do not have the necessary merit stores.
Really? I know Khenpo Kalsang has mentioned it. So this is accepted by Nyingma, Gelug and Kagyu alone?

Kirt
“Where do atomic bombs come from?”
Zen Master Seung Sahn said, “That’s simple. Atomic bombs come from the mind that likes this and doesn’t like that.”

"Even if you practice only for an hour a day with faith and inspiration, good qualities will steadily increase. Regular practice makes it easy to transform your mind. From seeing only relative truth, you will eventually reach a profound certainty in the meaning of absolute truth."
Kyabje Dilgo Khyentse Rinpoche.

"Only you can make your mind beautiful."
HH Chetsang Rinpoche
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Yidam and Dzogchen

Post by Malcolm »

kirtu wrote:
Namdrol wrote:
kirtu wrote: No that's standard across schools although I don't remember for sure if an Arhat was equated exactly with a 6th bhumi bodhisattva in terms of wisdom (it's the in terms of wisdom where the equating is done on this). So when Arhats are awakened from their samadhi and they take rebirth they are reborn as sixth bhumi bodhisattvas.

Kirt

Hi Kirt:

No, this is not accepted in Sakya, it is rejected by Gorampa. 1) Arhats do not realize emptiness free from extremes 2) They do not have the necessary merit stores.
Really? I know Khenpo Kalsang has mentioned it. So this is accepted by Nyingma, Gelug and Kagyu alone?

Kirt
Really. Please the difference between Hināyāna and Mahāyāna in Gorampa's "Distinguishing views".
User avatar
kirtu
Former staff member
Posts: 6997
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2010 5:29 pm
Location: Baltimore, MD

Re: Yidam and Dzogchen

Post by kirtu »

Namdrol wrote: Really. Please the difference between Hināyāna and Mahāyāna in Gorampa's "Distinguishing views".
I had "Freedom from Extremes" but had to give it away for the move. Ok - thanks!

Kirt
“Where do atomic bombs come from?”
Zen Master Seung Sahn said, “That’s simple. Atomic bombs come from the mind that likes this and doesn’t like that.”

"Even if you practice only for an hour a day with faith and inspiration, good qualities will steadily increase. Regular practice makes it easy to transform your mind. From seeing only relative truth, you will eventually reach a profound certainty in the meaning of absolute truth."
Kyabje Dilgo Khyentse Rinpoche.

"Only you can make your mind beautiful."
HH Chetsang Rinpoche
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Yidam and Dzogchen

Post by Malcolm »

kirtu wrote:
Namdrol wrote: Really. Please the difference between Hināyāna and Mahāyāna in Gorampa's "Distinguishing views".
I had "Freedom from Extremes" but had to give it away for the move. Ok - thanks!

Kirt

BTW, I don't think this is accepted in Nyingma either.
User avatar
Tilopa
Posts: 562
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2010 3:53 am

Re: Yidam and Dzogchen

Post by Tilopa »

kirtu wrote: So when Arhats are awakened from their samadhi and they take rebirth they are reborn as sixth bhumi bodhisattvas.
Are you sure? That would imply their bodhicitta arises spontaneously at the time of birth.
Post Reply

Return to “Dzogchen”