Student Teacher Relationship in Modern Age

[Schrödinger’s Yidam]

Please feel free to use informal logic to point out all of the logical fallacies contained in the above paragraph. But I doubt it will bring much benefit to you or anyone else.

It boils down to personal experience and having had a master establish credibility. That cannot be shared unfortunately.

If a master has established credibility then his authority is accepted.
If no master has established credibility then the very idea of authority is rejected (in our society).
It is the very process of establishing authority that is unimaginable to the person that has not had it.

[Schrödinger’s Yidam]

You know who else liked authority? Hitler.

As a rough rendering, money, sex, power and prestige (+ or -) are the 8 worldly dharmas. Establishing credibility on a Dharma level requires someone be beyond those afflictions--as a start.

[Garudavista]

It boils down to personal experience and having had a master establish credibility. That cannot be shared unfortunately.

If a master has established credibility then his authority is accepted.
If no master has established credibility then the very idea of authority is rejected (in our society).
It is the very process of establishing authority that is unimaginable to the person that has not had it.

smcj, you and a few others seem to be approaching Dzogchen from an anti-authority stand-point, much in the same way protestant reformers were against the authority of the Catholic Church, which led to the authority of protestant churches. It is almost as if you and others seem to be approaching Dzogchen as a Protestant reformers who reject the authority of the Catholic Church and its Pope and Bishops Priests as intermediaries to the Lord and instead go directly to the Bible to receive and understand the “words of the Lord”. This approach is incorrect and dogmatic. Maybe this paragraph from page 10 of Keith Dowman’s translation of Natural Perfection: Longchenpa’s Radical Dzogchen may help to clear up some of your confusion. But then again maybe you will only interpret my inclusion of this text here as a logical fallacy (an appeal to authority) and not as an attempt at a dialogue aimed at elucidation and understanding:

In Western society the message of Dzogchen may come as a relief, particularly to those who feel that much of Vajrayana Buddhism is culturally alien, or that the cultishness of “Lamaism” is akin to Animal Farm, or that the great gains of the Protestant Reformation and the move toward non-dogmatic humanism seem to have been thrown away in a fascination for oriental ritualism and dogma, or that the distinction between Buddhism and Christianity rests on fashionable conceits. It is an error, however, to believe that Dzogchen can be taken ready-made from a book.

[Schrödinger’s Yidam]

smcj, you and a few others seem to be approaching Dzogchen from an anti-authority stand-point,

You have misunderstood my posts.

[Garudavista]

smcj, you and a few others seem to be approaching Dzogchen from an anti-authority stand-point,

You have misunderstood my posts.

Or the other possibility is that you miscommunicated in your posts.

[Garudavista]

smcj, you and a few others seem to be approaching Dzogchen from an anti-authority stand-point,

You have misunderstood my posts.

Sorry, smcj, I did not misunderstand your previous posts. I did, however, address the wrong person. My apologies.

[florin]

Quite often in dzogchen you get the same type of answers you would get if you were a Christian.
As a Christian when you ask " why" they say " because the bible says so "or " that's what Jesus said".

[Gyurme Kundrol]

Quite often in dzogchen you get the same type of answers you would get if you were a Christian.
As a Christian when you ask " why" they say " because the bible says so "or " that's what Jesus said".

The reason direct introduction is impossible from a book is because a book does not have a mind. Since it has no mind, it cannot have a nature of mind. Because of this, it cannot abide in that nature. Due to this, it cannot serve as a means for others to realize the nature of mind since there is no actual connection to that nature through the book. Since there is no mind, no nature of mind, no abiding in that nature, no knowledge of that nature, no intention of transmitting that nature... Then it follows that the conditions for receiving introduction to minds true nature are not present. In essence there is nothing to transmit so no direct transmission is possible through a book.

A book might carry the blessings of a great master or lineage and bring us greater self awareness through its study, and I daresay that you could even obtain something like a "indirect inference" of the minds true nature through study alone. Still, such an inference is far from the direct experience obtained through direct introduction and it can never be a substitute for the real thing. I dont see how anyone could proceed with any level of confidence in what they discover since that discovery is largely only a product of their own imagination and concepts, and has no connection to the aforementioned lineage or wisdom of a realized being.

Reading a book and thinking you understand minds nature from that is basically a big ego trap.

[florin]

Quite often in dzogchen you get the same type of answers you would get if you were a Christian.
As a Christian when you ask " why" they say " because the bible says so "or " that's what Jesus said".

, no intention of transmitting that nature...
.

However, would be a misconception to believe that during the direct introduction something gets transmited to you.

[Gyurme Kundrol]

Once you experience your Intrinsic Awareness (Rigpa)--which is a luminous "Knowing" through which you are aware of your every experience (internal or external)--further Pointing Out instructions are not really necessary.

Being aware of every internal and external experience is not Dzogchen.

In the nature of mind experiences neither rise or fall, since everything ultimately attains to the fullness of the one taste due to subjects and objects being equally encompassed in minds nature and realized as inseparable, non-dual, with that nature.
In the nature of mind there is neither external nor internal, since dualistic perception is ultimately shattered and inner and outer space merge like the space within a pot merging with the space outside of it when it breaks.

Once you "get it," you have it; and so you just "familiarize" yourself to it by maintaining continuous undistracted awareness. When you get distracted, you can call your attention back to it at any time.

How would you know you have it? How could you be sure? On what basis would one conclude that one was now realized and needed no further instruction when one has never had instruction in the first place? Sounds like pure delusion to me. Especially considering that people who have repeatedly received instruction, followed a Guru, and developed their practice over years still harbor doubts that they have really "got it". Even great masters who we all follow sometimes express that they doubt their own realization. Perhaps its just out of humility, but that should at least give us some insight into the attitude we should have.

It shouldnt be "I read this one book and now Ive realized minds nature and need nothing else."

[Gyurme Kundrol]

Quite often in dzogchen you get the same type of answers you would get if you were a Christian.
As a Christian when you ask " why" they say " because the bible says so "or " that's what Jesus said".

, no intention of transmitting that nature...
.

However, would be a misconception to believe that during the direct introduction something gets transmited to you.

In my opinion it would be a misconception to believe otherwise.

Clearly there is a transmission taking place, otherwise seeking direct introduction is not only useless but it couldn't bear fruit since nothing is being transmitted.

What is transmitted is knowledge of our own true nature. If we already had that, if we were born with that, then none of this (Vajrayana, et cetera...) would be necessary. Yet although we all have Buddha Nature, until we recognize this it remains latent like a seed. The Buddha Nature neither shrinks nor grows, but our Rigpa does. Hence the terms baby rigpa and full rigpa. Also the fact that there is marigpa and there is rigpa tells us that something changes- something is transmitted. We lacked something, and now we have it. We go from one state to another, and while doing so recognize that our essential nature has been changeless all along- this changeless nature is what is NOT being transmitted, nor changed by transmission. This process is the removal of delusion. The fact that working with that transmission, that knowledge, is the basis for the further unveiling of our Buddha Nature shows us that a kind of causality is involved. In the same way that clouds dissolve and the sun becomes apparent, working with what we learn in direct introduction clears away the obscurations of our own radiant nature, while never really changing or altering that nature in any way.

This is different from saying that Buddha Nature itself is being caused, or is subject to causality. The suns light does not cause a seed to exist anymore than the light of the wisdom mind of the Guru causes our Buddha Nature to exist. However in both cases this light causes a seed to sprout, and that's what we have to keep in mind so we don't think we can do without getting direct introduction from a qualified Guru. No matter how much water and nutrients you give a seed, without sunlight it wont grow. No matter how much we study Dzogchen and contemplate its meaning, without the direct mind to mind transmission from a realized Guru our seed of Buddha Nature will not grow.

In essence we are not given Buddha Nature (the seed) but we are given the means to nurture it for ourselves (knowledge of that nature).

[Schrödinger’s Yidam]

I personally have not had the pleasure of the experience, but from my reading it seems more like a tuning fork that through sympathetic vibrations sets a guitar string in motion. The guitar string was always there, but once it starts to vibrate you become aware of/can actually hear it.

That's just my analogy, not based on anything other than my imagination. As I say in my signature I post for entertainment purposes only.

[Garudavista]

Quite often in dzogchen you get the same type of answers you would get if you were a Christian.
As a Christian when you ask " why" they say " because the bible says so "or " that's what Jesus said".

The reason direct introduction is impossible from a book is because a book does not have a mind. Since it has no mind, it cannot have a nature of mind. Because of this, it cannot abide in that nature. Due to this, it cannot serve as a means for others to realize the nature of mind since there is no actual connection to that nature through the book. Since there is no mind, no nature of mind, no abiding in that nature, no knowledge of that nature, no intention of transmitting that nature... Then it follows that the conditions for receiving introduction to minds true nature are not present. In essence there is nothing to transmit so no direct transmission is possible through a book.

A book might carry the blessings of a great master or lineage and bring us greater self awareness through its study, and I daresay that you could even obtain something like a "indirect inference" of the minds true nature through study alone. Still, such an inference is far from the direct experience obtained through direct introduction and it can never be a substitute for the real thing. I dont see how anyone could proceed with any level of confidence in what they discover since that discovery is largely only a product of their own imagination and concepts, and has no connection to the aforementioned lineage or wisdom of a realized being.

Reading a book and thinking you understand minds nature from that is basically a big ego trap.

This is very clear explanation. Hopefully it helps clear up some confusion.

[Schrödinger’s Yidam]

Quite often in dzogchen you get the same type of answers you would get if you were a Christian.
As a Christian when you ask " why" they say " because the bible says so "or " that's what Jesus said".

I'd like to digress a bit here. One of my theses is that the current culture suffers from P.C.S.D (Post Christian Stress Disorder). By that I mean that any comparison to Christianity is assumed to be automatically accepted as completely unacceptable. When I've said things like that in the past I've been called out to show examples. So I'm starting to point them out as they arise.

In the most basic Lam Rim teachings they use a pot for an analogy of how NOT to listen to the Dharma. The first is a pot that is upside down, meaning nothing goes it. The second is a pot with a hole in it, meaning nothing is retained. The third is a dirty pot, meaning the elixir if Dharma is contaminated by what is left inside. I think P.C.S.D. is the fault of the dirty pot and one of the unseen obstacles to our progress.

As self-appointed resident troll I beg forgiveness for the fact I'm going to point this out repeatedly, however if I don't the idea will continue to be dismissed.

[dzogchungpa]

Quite often in dzogchen you get the same type of answers you would get if you were a Christian.
As a Christian when you ask " why" they say " because the bible says so "or " that's what Jesus said".

I'd like to digress a bit here. One of my theses is that the current culture suffers from P.C.S.D (Post Christian Stress Disorder). By that I mean that any comparison to Christianity is assumed to be automatically accepted as completely unacceptable. When I've said things like that in the past I've been called out to show examples. So I'm starting to point them out as they arise.

In the most basic Lam Rim teachings they use a pot for an analogy of how NOT to listen to the Dharma. The first is a pot that is upside down, meaning nothing goes it. The second is a pot with a hole in it, meaning nothing is retained. The third is a dirty pot, meaning the elixir if Dharma is contaminated by what is left inside. I think P.C.S.D. is the fault of the dirty pot and one of the unseen obstacles to our progress.

As self-appointed resident troll I beg forgiveness for the fact I'm going to point this out repeatedly, however if I don't the idea will continue to be dismissed.

I think I'm already suffering from P.R.P.O.O.P.C.S.D.D. (Post Repeated Pointing Out Of Post Christian Stress Disorder Disorder)

[Schrödinger’s Yidam]

I think I'm already suffering from P.R.P.O.O.P.C.S.D.D. (Post Repeated Pointing Out Of Post Christian Stress Disorder Disorder)

My apologies. I know it is annoying. Hopefully soon my point will be accepted and I'll stop.

Obviously my larger thesis, that this is an impediment to us as a group, is a completely different ball of wax.

[dzogchungpa]

I think I'm already suffering from P.R.P.O.O.P.C.S.D.D. (Post Repeated Pointing Out Of Post Christian Stress Disorder Disorder)

My apologies. Hopefully soon my point will be accepted and I'll stop. Obviously my larger thesis, that this is an impediment to us as a group, is a completely different ball of wax.

No problem. However, you might want to change it to P.J.C.S.D. (Post Judeo-Christian Stress Disorder) or rory might get offended.

[Schrödinger’s Yidam]

No problem. However, you might want to change it to P.J.C.S.D. (Post Judeo-Christian Stress Disorder) or rory might get offended.

Ok, and I'll include the hyphen; P.J.-C.S.D.

[dzogchungpa]

No problem. However, you might want to change it to P.J.C.S.D. (Post Judeo-Christian Stress Disorder) or rory might get offended.

Ok, and I'll include the hyphen; P.J.-C.S.D.

Even better.

[Adamantine]

No problem. However, you might want to change it to P.J.C.S.D. (Post Judeo-Christian Stress Disorder) or rory might get offended.

Ok, and I'll include the hyphen; P.J.-C.S.D.

Even better.

hmmmnnnn.. not inclusive enough. Can we just make it P.A.R.S.D = Post Abrahamic Religions Stress Disorder? Then we've included Muslims, Bahá'ís, Rastafaris, Samaritans, Druzes, and Mandaeists!