Dharma Wheel

heart wrote:There is something my Guru sometimes say that goes more or less like this; "Rigpa is difficult to realize because it is to close, to brilliant and to easy." Kind of sums it up nicely.

/magnus

Yes, but that is a paraphrase of Mahamudra instruction from Karmapa Wangchuk Dorje, not Dzogchen instruction. It's intention (as a pointing out instruction) is to say that ordinary people do not recognize or appreciate ground mahamudra because of these four qualities (too close, too easy, too profound, too excellent). I have never heard it used to argue that Dzogchen is difficult to practice/realize.

http://www.nitartha.org/mahamudra_excerpt.html

Karma Dorje wrote:

heart wrote:There is something my Guru sometimes say that goes more or less like this; "Rigpa is difficult to realize because it is to close, to brilliant and to easy." Kind of sums it up nicely.

/magnus

Yes, but that is a paraphrase of Mahamudra instruction from Karmapa Wangchuk Dorje, not Dzogchen instruction. It's intention (as a pointing out instruction) is to say that ordinary people do not recognize or appreciate ground mahamudra because of these four qualities (too close, too easy, too profound, too excellent). I have never heard it used to argue that Dzogchen is difficult to practice/realize.

http://www.nitartha.org/mahamudra_excerpt.html

You think perhaps in Dzogchen you realize something different?
My Guru teach both Dzogchen and Mahamudra.

/magnus

heart wrote:

Karma Dorje wrote:

heart wrote:There is something my Guru sometimes say that goes more or less like this; "Rigpa is difficult to realize because it is to close, to brilliant and to easy." Kind of sums it up nicely.

/magnus

Yes, but that is a paraphrase of Mahamudra instruction from Karmapa Wangchuk Dorje, not Dzogchen instruction. It's intention (as a pointing out instruction) is to say that ordinary people do not recognize or appreciate ground mahamudra because of these four qualities (too close, too easy, too profound, too excellent). I have never heard it used to argue that Dzogchen is difficult to practice/realize.

http://www.nitartha.org/mahamudra_excerpt.html

You think perhaps in Dzogchen you realize something different?
My Guru teach both Dzogchen and Mahamudra.

/magnus

The realization is the same. The paths are different.

Karma Dorje wrote:

heart wrote:[

You think perhaps in Dzogchen you realize something different?
My Guru teach both Dzogchen and Mahamudra.

/magnus

The realization is the same. The paths are different.

This statement just define the relationship between mind and nature of mind (sem and rigpa), equally valid for both paths.

/magnus

heart wrote:

Karma Dorje wrote:

heart wrote:[

You think perhaps in Dzogchen you realize something different?
My Guru teach both Dzogchen and Mahamudra.

/magnus

The realization is the same. The paths are different.

This statement just define the relationship between mind and nature of mind (sem and rigpa), equally valid for both paths.

/magnus

Rig pa is not the nature of the mind.

Let's see how finely we can split this hair now, shall we?

gregkavarnos wrote:Let's see how finely we can split this hair now, shall we?

Yes, why bother to be precise when dealing with central concepts of practice? It's all just words anyway, man.

I'd thought that rigpa was often but not always translated as "nature of mind."

I don't mean to throw the whole thread off track, but... what's the difference between "nature of mind" and "rigpa" in your usage, Malcolm?

Thank you

Jikan wrote:I'd thought that rigpa was often but not always translated as "nature of mind."

I don't mean to throw the whole thread off track, but... what's the difference between "nature of mind" and "rigpa" in your usage, Malcolm?

Thank you

The term "sems nyid" is the term translated as the "nature of the mind".

Rig pa is knowledge of your primordial state.

They are not the same thing.

Malcolm wrote:

Jikan wrote:I'd thought that rigpa was often but not always translated as "nature of mind."

I don't mean to throw the whole thread off track, but... what's the difference between "nature of mind" and "rigpa" in your usage, Malcolm?

Thank you

The term "sems nyid" is the term translated as the "nature of the mind".

Rig pa is knowledge of your primordial state.

They are not the same thing.

Thanks for the correction.

gregkavarnos wrote:Let's see how finely we can split this hair now, shall we?

It is actually an important difference as Malcolm just showed.

Yes, why bother to be precise when dealing with central concepts of practice? It's all just words anyway, man.

Or we can get all anally retentive about it, and split hairs all day about what is (or is not) mind , whether Mahamudra is Dzogchen, whether they differ in terms of practice or not, whether we are talking about ground or sutra mahamudra, etc... and clutter up yet another thread with the same old boring endless repetive and essentially useless distracting discussion (ie views) since Dzogchen/Mahamudra essentially only requires pointing out for you to get it, and verything else is just (more) verbal flatulance.

Clarence wrote:

gregkavarnos wrote:Let's see how finely we can split this hair now, shall we?

It is actually an important difference as Malcolm just showed.

Yes, I am sure it is, coz now that you know that sems nyid is not Rig pa, well, now you just realised the essential state, whereas up to now you only realised the nature of mind. That's how important that was. Right?

gregkavarnos wrote:

Yes, why bother to be precise when dealing with central concepts of practice? It's all just words anyway, man.

Or we can get all anally retentive about it, and split hairs all day about what is (or is not) mind , whether Mahamudra is Dzogchen, whether they differ in terms of practice or not, whether we are talking about ground or sutra mahamudra, etc... and clutter up yet another thread with the same old boring endless repetive and essentially useless distracting discussion (ie views) since Dzogchen/Mahamudra essentially only requires pointing out for you to get it, and verything else is just (more) verbal flatulance.

Your reply amounts to repeating what he said:

"It's all just words anyway, man"

In other words, your reply was essentially pointless.

M

gregkavarnos wrote:

Clarence wrote:

gregkavarnos wrote:Let's see how finely we can split this hair now, shall we?

It is actually an important difference as Malcolm just showed.

Yes, I am sure it is, coz now that you know that sems nyid is not Rig pa, well, now you just realised the essential state, whereas up to now you only realised the nature of mind. That's how important that was. Right?

Are you generally going to be this snotty from now on? Or are you just having a day?

gregkavarnos wrote:

Clarence wrote:

gregkavarnos wrote:Let's see how finely we can split this hair now, shall we?

It is actually an important difference as Malcolm just showed.

Yes, I am sure it is, coz now that you know that sems nyid is not Rig pa, well, now you just realised the essential state, whereas up to now you only realised the nature of mind. That's how important that was. Right?

Actually I was aware of that fact before this thread.

I wonder why you always have to act like a punk anyway. I further hope your moderation sabbatical lasts until you reach Buddhahood.

Malcolm wrote:Your reply amounts to repeating what he said:

"It's all just words anyway, man"

In other words, your reply was essentially pointless.

M

I think you will find that karma dorje was being ironic and not literal. (ie that he was disagreeing with me)

Are you generally going to be this snotty from now on? Or are you just having a day?

Just got back from watching a two hour documentary which comprised of interviews with women that were active in the Greek resistance movement (against the Nazi occupation) during and after WWII. Torture, betrayals, executions, beatings, starvation, exile, etc... of women whose age (during the time of the resistance) averaged between 12-30. After hearing their accounts (most of the women are in their late 60's to early 70's now, little old women who, if you saw them walking down the street, you would never imagine...) all this seems, well... really, unbelievably, like completely... pointless and lacking any essence. So sorry for the attitude.

gregkavarnos wrote:

Clarence wrote:

gregkavarnos wrote:Let's see how finely we can split this hair now, shall we?

It is actually an important difference as Malcolm just showed.

Yes, I am sure it is, coz now that you know that sems nyid is not Rig pa, well, now you just realised the essential state, whereas up to now you only realised the nature of mind. That's how important that was. Right?

If you knew what we were talking about, you could have noticed how this point is important ... but sometimes I also like marmelade.

Sönam

Clarence wrote:Actually I was aware of that fact before this thread.

And being aware of the fact has done what for your practice? Coz, really, unless I am completely mistaken, that's what all this is about. Right?

Sönam wrote:... but sometimes I also like marmelade.

Now I have no idea what you are talking about. But hey, sometimes I like marmalade too.