steve_bakr wrote: you can say that there is enlightenment in a provisional sense, but in an absolute sense enlightenment is dualistic because it is paired in contrast to its opposite.
This argument is explicitly rejected in the
Rig pa rang shar.
Therefore, I can understand your saying that the absolute viewpoint contradicts Dzogchen Tantras. .
What I am saying is that your argument is explicitly rejected in the Tantras of Dzogchen. The
Rig pa Rang shar gives the following account. Follow it closely and you can see that your point of view is explicitly negated. The context of the argument, btw, is to prove that Buddhahood is attained merely through an introduction.
- [Opponent]
The opponents reply to that:
all phenomena are nondual.
Therefore, there cannot be duality.
Since there are no sentient beings, there are no buddhas.
Therefore, [nonduality] is freedom from the extremes of dualistic appearances.
[Reply]
Now then, is this stated in the ultimate sense,
or stated for the objects of deluded appearances?
Our reply to that and the demonstration of the proofs:
that this is so in in the ultimate sense,
but there is a dualistic appearance in the objects of deluded appearances.
[Opponent]
The opponents rebuttal to that:
because there is no duality in the ultimate sense,
it is not reasonable for there to be duality in objects of deluded appearances.
Why? Because there is no duality in the ultimate sense.
In that case it is reasonable that all sentient beings
could be liberated without the need for effort.
Why? Because duality does not exist in the basis.
[Reply]
Now then, how is duality asserted?
The reply to that is:
when there are no buddhas and no sentient beings,
there is no second or third in the basis.
Because the potentiality of play arises from that [basis],
buddhas and sentient beings arise as a duality.
[Opponent]
Now it is asserted that duality exists in the basis.
Because there is no good or bad in the basis,
for what reason is it said to exist as a duality?
In that case, there cannot be transformation.
Why? It is reasonable that sentient beings do not attain buddhahood.
For example, even though coal
is polished, it will never become white.
In the same way, deluded sentient beings
will never become buddhas through practicing meditation.
[Reply]
Next, the reply is given like this:
because it exists to be demonstrated,
the result is attained through the demonstration.
If not demonstrated, how can there be liberation?
There are no signs in the dharmas of the basis,
no grasping to the dharmas of the path,
and no attainment of the dharmatā of the result.
The basis of sentient beings and the basis of buddhahood
is definitely differentiated by a sole difference.
For what reason is there a sole difference?
Why is it called “the sole difference”?
The basis of buddhahood is pristine consciousness [ye shes];
the basis of sentient beinghood is not pristine consciousness.
When both the primordial state (ye) and recognition (shes pa) are combined,
it is the sublime transcendent state of the buddhas.
I really think you need to reconsider your arrogance on this point. There are people here who understand Dzogchen far better than you. You should listen to them. On the Guru, for example, another of the 17 Tantras,
the Precious Introduction Tantra, states:
- Investigating into the intimate instructions of the Guru, one reaches the extent of effortless self-liberation.
The
Rig pa Rang shar, the commentary tantra of Dzogchen, also chimes in the faults of not obtaining empowerments. Now mind you, this does not mean that one necessarily needs some kind of empowerment into an outer mandala and so on, as the
Rig pa Rang Shar makes clear. That depends on the faculties of the student. But this tantra makes it absolutely clear that one must receive at least direct introduction from a proper master:
- The faults of not obtaining the empowerment are as follows: in the bardo one is alarmed, panicked, exhausted, impeded and one can also lose consciousness.
“While one has not left the body of traces, migrating beings will not see one as worthy of respect. One’s merit will be small, one’s life short, one’s enjoyments of living will be few, one will be powerless and many obstacles will occur. Nothing will be accomplished. Those are the faults of not obtaining the empowerment for the conduct of Secret Mantra. A yogin of Secret Mantra conduct must first obtain empowerment. If empowerment is not obtained, not even the Buddha will be able to turn the wheel on the stage of a tathāgata. If the wheel cannot be turned, then the nirmanakāya will not be able to benefit migrating beings with compassion. Therefore, the empowerment of the conduct of Secret Mantra must be obtained.
The root tantra of all Dzogchen teachings, the
Sgra thal gyur, states:
- Serve the guru as equal to a buddha
by pleasing him/her with activities of body and speech.
And:
- The Dharma is in accord with the transmission of the Guru.
Finally, since you like the
Kun byed rgyal po, then heed what it says:
- Without an authentic master, like the scripture of a monkey,
the basis and path will be erroneous, indeed one will be seized by conceptuality.
Therefore, like applying ferrous sulfate to gold, the precious master
should be paid with a gem of inestimable value.
This is also part of the lung called
rtsal chen sprug pa, one of the five lungs brought to Tibet by Vairocana.
The Great Garuda, another one of the five lungs and also part of the
Kun byed rgyal po states:
- The virtuous mentor is like a precious jewel which produces everything.
Unsupported, not depending on places of transformation,
he fulfills hope through his excellent inner nature.
When examined, nothing; but he has the great excellence of producing a variety for others.
Finally, you should heed Mañjuśrīmitra [Garab Dorje's main disciple], who states in yet another of the five lungs brought by Vairocana, the
Meditation of Awakened Mind:
- Subtle and difficult to understand, this path of the great seer is beyond nonconceptuality and conceptuality,
difficult to analyze and difficult to explain, free from conventional expressions,
inaccessible through words, while it is not shared with the domain of others and all of the immature,
this meaning can here be seen through those definitive scriptures of the Teacher and the experiential intimate instructions of the gurus.
So, given these definitive statements in original texts of the Dzogchen tradition, you can see why no one agrees with your baseless and harmful assertions. However, you are free to following the three words of Jim Valby:
- Introduce yourself to some delusion.
Spread it as widely as possible.
Continue in that state forever.
Because that is all you are doing, sad to say.
: Ivo!