Dzogchen and Buddhism

[Mr. G]

Any actions performed without mindful awareness (ie based in ignorance) will generate karma

You're making the assumption Dzogchen practices are not rooted in the mindfulness of one's state.

[Grigoris]

...Buddhadharma and Dzogchen both are about getting past our self imposed limitations and labels, about Realizing our real natures...

So Dzogchen is now not included within the category Buddhadharma? It's Buddhadharma and Dzogchen?

Think before you write (ie clean the s**t out of your brain before telling others to clean the s**t out of their ears).

[Malcolm]

I think that the failure of the Dzogchen that is being presented here...

That is the failure of the Dzogchen you are presenting. Not the failure of Dzogchen as I have come to understand it.

N

[Pema Rigdzin]

If you separate Dzogchen and Buddhism (or Bon) you will just end up creating Dzogchenism. It is the way of the world, the way of sentient beings. There is nothing to be gained with that but a whole lot to loose.

/magnus

The way I see it, ChNN's purpose in saying that Dzogchen is complete in and of itself is to emphasize that ultimate realization only objectively depends on one thing--getting to know one's real condition in an uncontrived way, not learning X amount of ideas and effortful methods. Therefore, as Dzogchen has all the methods required to get to know one's real condition, and since contrived refuge, contrived practice, and contrived accumulation of merit are not required to realize the Dharmakaya for oneself or the Rupakaya for others, nothing but Dzogchen is objectively essential. However, what I do NOT hear him saying is that Dzogchen SHOULD be separated from Buddhism in terms of shunning all other Buddhist practices because one is a Dzogchen practitioner and those other methods are useless to him or her. Over and over he says it's vital for Dzogchen practitioners to know their relative condition and work with their circumstances, and that since so much of our time is spent in this relative condition rather than in knowledge of our real condition, we as individuals are often realistically going to benefit greatly from making use of other Buddhist methods. He explains over and over how limiting it is to look down upon and avoid other yanas' methods simply on the principal that one is a "Dzogchen practitioner." My other Dzogchen teachers have spoken directly on this same matter and even coined the term "Dzog Chung" or "Little Perfection," as opposed to "Great Perfection," to reflect this immature attitude. Only individuals with a great degree of realization of Dzogchen might be better of strictly practicing Trekchod, Togal, or Yangti--which of course you know are the real Dzogchen main practices.

[Pema Rigdzin]

I think we need to make a distinction between the worldly institutions we called "Buddhism" and the Dharma it is supposed to represent. Words like Buddhist, Buddhism, etc. are not important.

So now Buddhists do not practice Buddhadharma? Okay, maybe not all Buddhists do, some are born into it, others hold onto the label for social purposes, etc... but practicing Buddhists too?

Then where do we look for practitioners of Buddhadharma? In tenet systems that do not satisfy the criteria of the Four Seals of Dharma? Or maybe you are trying to insinuate that only Dzogchen practitioners are Buddhadharma practitioners?

I think that the failure of the Dzogchen that is being presented here is the fact that people are not resting in rigpa 100% of the time, and are thus generating karma that WILL lead to unfortunate circumstances, whereas practicing Buddhists, at least, have the security of an ethical framework that may not (or may) allow them to reach enlightenment in this lifetime, but at least it guards them from rebirth in the lower realms. Taking Dzogchen out of the protective framework of Buddhism will (unfortunately) deal a death blow to Dzogchenpas capacity of (at the very least) accumulating merit to allow them to continue practice after this lifetime (if they don't achieve enlightenment within this lifetime).

Greg,
You are not getting the gist of what Namdrol is meaning to say above. He's speaking in a very nuanced way about "Buddhism." He's talking about "Dharma" as the way things are and the approaches toward gaining knowledge of that--what Buddhism is meant to be and what I'm sure you mean by the term-- and "Buddhism" as when people reify those approaches and they unintentionally reduce them to beliefs and tenet systems and things they identify with and define themselves by and pledge allegiance to and defend. It really does happen a lot, even among so-called practicing Buddhists, that people lose sight of Buddhism as intended to be what Namdrol is terming "Dharma" and instead turning it into what he's termed as "Buddhism." I don't think he's saying we should stop referring to Dharma as "Buddhism" in our everyday parlance, just that we stop to consider that not all of what people consider "Buddhism" is actually Dharma.

As for your other claims, I guess there's just a lot about the corpus of Dzogchen methods you haven't come across yet. Dzogchen has Dzogchen-specific practices, methods which are superficially similar to "tantric" methods, that are designed to close the door to rebirth in any of the 6 realms [excepting emanation through one's realization and compassion]. As such, there is no need at all to secure good rebirth for people who thoroughly undertake the practice I'm referring to, which can certainly be applied to anyone who receives transmission and wishes to do the practice. Dzogchen preliminary practices (not talking about tantric ngondro here) also generate incredible amounts of merit which is dedicated just as in sutra and tantra. The accumulation of merit is also primordially complete within one's nature, so the resulting Rupakaya is ensured with full realization of Dzogchen. Also, gaining knowledge of one's nature primordially includes awakening bodhicitta and compassion for others, so bodhisattva activity will naturally unfold.

[Lhug-Pa]

Buddha Shakyamuni could very well have taught Dzogchen, just that probably no one would know about it except for those he taught it to. Of course even though this is a logical speculation given that the Buddha Shakyamuni is listed in the Mahasandhi Tantras as one of the 12 Dzogchen Teachers, I don't expect this to convince any skeptics that he likely taught it to at least someone.

[Malcolm]

The unpleasant tangle starts when we try to establish through our personal experience a universal rule which is good to be followed by everybody.
[/color]

The unpleasant tangle starts when people start engaging in unfounded projections that are based ultimately in their own attachments and fears rather than carefully listening and reading and paying attention.

M

[Malcolm]

The gist of what is being said here, is that Dzogchen...

...can be practiced by anyone who is interested to do so regardless of their institutional affliation to any of the world's religions, regardless of their culture, etc.

But since no one listens to this when my guru,Chogyal Namkhai Norbu says this, it is not suprising then that no one listens to me when I say it.

C'est la vie.

N

[Dechen Norbu]

The gist of what is being said here, is that Dzogchen...

...can be practiced by anyone who is interested to do so regardless of their institutional affliation to any of the world's religions, regardless of their culture, etc.

But since no one listens to this when my guru,Chogyal Namkhai Norbu says this, it is not suprising then that no one listens to me when I say it.

C'est la vie.

N

(I couldn't resist)

[Dronma]

The gist of what is being said here, is that Dzogchen...

...can be practiced by anyone who is interested to do so regardless of their institutional affliation to any of the world's religions, regardless of their culture, etc.

But since no one listens to this when my guru,Chogyal Namkhai Norbu says this, it is not suprising then that no one listens to me when I say it.

C'est la vie.

N

ChNN Rinpoche says many things during his transmissions!
Likewise, he has told several times that he is astonished how some of his students consider him non Buddhist! And then he starts explaining again his life story and all the education he received in this life, his teachers etc.
So sadly, it is true that very few people are listening carefully with mindfulness all of his words....

[Dronma]

If you separate Dzogchen and Buddhism (or Bon) you will just end up creating Dzogchenism. It is the way of the world, the way of sentient beings. There is nothing to be gained with that but a whole lot to loose.

/magnus

The way I see it, ChNN's purpose in saying that Dzogchen is complete in and of itself is to emphasize that ultimate realization only objectively depends on one thing--getting to know one's real condition in an uncontrived way, not learning X amount of ideas and effortful methods. Therefore, as Dzogchen has all the methods required to get to know one's real condition, and since contrived refuge, contrived practice, and contrived accumulation of merit are not required to realize the Dharmakaya for oneself or the Rupakaya for others, nothing but Dzogchen is objectively essential. However, what I do NOT hear him saying is that Dzogchen SHOULD be separated from Buddhism in terms of shunning all other Buddhist practices because one is a Dzogchen practitioner and those other methods are useless to him or her. Over and over he says it's vital for Dzogchen practitioners to know their relative condition and work with their circumstances, and that since so much of our time is spent in this relative condition rather than in knowledge of our real condition, we as individuals are often realistically going to benefit greatly from making use of other Buddhist methods. He explains over and over how limiting it is to look down upon and avoid other yanas' methods simply on the principal that one is a "Dzogchen practitioner." My other Dzogchen teachers have spoken directly on this same matter and even coined the term "Dzog Chung" or "Little Perfection," as opposed to "Great Perfection," to reflect this immature attitude. Only individuals with a great degree of realization of Dzogchen might be better of strictly practicing Trekchod, Togal, or Yangti--which of course you know are the real Dzogchen main practices.

Dzog Chung!!!!!!
Both writings by heart and Pema Rigdzin make sense to me!
And I repeat that I am not religious or traditional since when I was born!
In fact, I am not Buddhist either.....

[Dechen Norbu]

I know I said I wasn't going to participate, but as you put it so clearly I want to emphasize a few ideas

The way I see it, ChNN's purpose in saying that Dzogchen is complete in and of itself is to emphasize that ultimate realization only objectively depends on one thing--getting to know one's real condition in an uncontrived way, not learning X amount of ideas and effortful methods. Therefore, as Dzogchen has all the methods required to get to know one's real condition, and since contrived refuge, contrived practice, and contrived accumulation of merit are not required to realize the Dharmakaya for oneself or the Rupakaya for others, nothing but Dzogchen is objectively essential.

Perfect. That's how I see it too. Secondary practices are not a necessary condition, yet they are very useful.

However, what I do NOT hear him saying is that Dzogchen SHOULD be separated from Buddhism in terms of shunning all other Buddhist practices because one is a Dzogchen practitioner and those other methods are useless to him or her. Over and over he says it's vital for Dzogchen practitioners to know their relative condition and work with their circumstances, and that since so much of our time is spent in this relative condition rather than in knowledge of our real condition, we as individuals are often realistically going to benefit greatly from making use of other Buddhist methods. He explains over and over how limiting it is to look down upon and avoid other yanas' methods simply on the principal that one is a "Dzogchen practitioner."

Perfect again.
"Dzogchen Poseur Syndrome" (DPS), a funny expression coined by one of our members, is something you probably saw me and Namdrol addressing before.
However, what you also never heard ChNN saying is that Dzogchen SHOULD be limited to Buddhists and shared with nobody else. Correct? It's a rhetorical question. That's what we are talking about.
Also, considering methods from other yanas secondary is not looking down on them, I believe. It's just putting things in perspective.

My other Dzogchen teachers have spoken directly on this same matter and even coined the term "Dzog Chung" or "Little Perfection," as opposed to "Great Perfection," to reflect this immature attitude. Only individuals with a great degree of realization of Dzogchen might be better of strictly practicing Trekchod, Togal, or Yangti--which of course you know are the real Dzogchen main practices.

Indeed, but probably you already heard ChNN disagreeing with the idea that Dzogchen is just for "advanced practitioners". I know this is not what you are saying (neither your other teachers), but unfortunately such opinion has pervaded the minds of a lot of Buddhists.
Dzog Chung... a nice word for DPS.

I don't see any contradiction between what you wrote and ChNN teachings. Or the opinions Namdrol and I expressed in this thread, for that matter.
Very good post, as usual, Pema.

[Dechen Norbu]

Dzog Chung!!!!!!
Both writings by heart and Pema Rigdzin make sense to me!
And I repeat that I am not religious or traditional since when I was born!
In fact, I am not Buddhist either.....

Then you must be agreeing with Namdrol, since Pema didn't say anything that goes against what Namdrol wrote.

[muni]

Every classification of higher-lower-smaller-bigger is dream- mind. High, big is very attractive for that one.

When ego clinging is not seen, Buddhism is not understood, Dzogchen cannot be. Maybe in this way they are coming together.

One question one can ask: is this going to help to recognize all what appaers is own mind in the Bardo?

[Andrew108]

Yes Muni.
One last point I'll make about some of the problems of taking Dzogchen as a path in and of itself and as a vehicle that is said to contain all you need is that you can't criticize, debate or challenge it's orthodoxy. It's explanations concerning the real nature have to be taken on wholesale.
When these explanations are taken on they become a structured belief and the student is conditioned by them. The same student who is willing to drop their buddhist conditioning becomes unwilling to drop their Dzogchen conditioning.
A genuine path is a total path when it's dialectical. In this case, challenge, overcome doubt, gain confidence. This gaining of confidence comes through traveling a path of questioning and doubt. In Dzogchen there is a lot of readymade certainty.
That in the lower yanas we can doubt and question is of vital importance. Only by the time the student has undone their conditioning (and only at that time) they are ready to not be conditioned at all. It's no use polishing the mirror if you think you have one. The mirror is absent - the methods dream-like. You get this unconditioned view through overcoming doubts on your own side, exploring and challenging the orthodoxy of what's been taught. In Dzogchen there is a lot of slavish acceptance of what is taught. That's how it has to be, but to say that can be appropriate for anyone who is interested is kind of theistic.

[Grigoris]

The method of Dzogchen to protect practitioners from the three lower realms has not one single thing to do with tantric methods, Buddhist or Bon.

Dorje Drollo is not a Buddhist tantric protector deity? He's not the wrathful emanation of Padmasambhava?

[heart]

People are free to think as they wish.
I, for one, won't be participating further in this thread.

Knock yourselves out guys.

I'm with you on that point Dechen ... they want too much to knock the big guy down.

Sönam

Oh come on. Posts like this are as tedious as those who do play the man instead of the ball. This 'for/against' namdrol dichotomy is boring on both sides of the equation. Just discuss the Dharma and leave the persons out.

Right!

[Sönam]

A lot of point of views, jugements, critics and others mind travelling for a practice, Dzogchen, which, in fact, is only to be experimented ... how can one have opinions on something one can simply realize?

May you all be right!
Sönam

[Grigoris]

You are not getting the gist of what Namdrol is meaning to say above. He's speaking in a very nuanced way about "Buddhism." He's talking about "Dharma" as the way things are and the approaches toward gaining knowledge of that--what Buddhism is meant to be and what I'm sure you mean by the term-- and "Buddhism" as when people reify those approaches and they unintentionally reduce them to beliefs and tenet systems and things they identify with and define themselves by and pledge allegiance to and defend. It really does happen a lot, even among so-called practicing Buddhists, that people lose sight of Buddhism as intended to be what Namdrol is terming "Dharma" and instead turning it into what he's termed as "Buddhism." I don't think he's saying we should stop referring to Dharma as "Buddhism" in our everyday parlance, just that we stop to consider that not all of what people consider "Buddhism" is actually Dharma.

My dear Pema I am completely "getting the gist" of what Namdrol is saying, I am just not agreeing 100%. I believe that Dzogchen gains thorugh its relationship to Buddhism and I have outlined how it gains. I also believe that elements of Buddhism are Dharma.

Essentially I believe that one cannot really say there is a Buddhism and there is Dharma and all we have to do is throw out the Buddhism. The two are too closely intertwined (like siamese twins sharing organs) to be seperated. The other problem is that if you do seperate Dzogchen from Buddhism, at this stage, the only thing that you will end up doing is creating yet another cult. People, unfortunately, are not mature enough to do anything else.

As for your other claims, I guess there's just a lot about the corpus of Dzogchen methods you haven't come across yet.

This is very true, I am basing some of my comments on my very limited knowledge of Dzogchen, BUT when making comments on public forums one must be aware that they are also presenting their ideas to people that will have even LESS knowlege than I do (and believe me I have very little knowledge).

[kalden yungdrung]

Tashi delek,

Yes indeed a very long explanation about:

Dharma, Buddhism and Dzogchen.

I saw here many personal views regarding the topic but am finally interested what the Linegae Masters / Rigdzins would say about all the (personal) interpretations from their students.

Remarkable is that Namkai Norbu Rinpoche can add or not add Rigdzins from other Lineages to "his" Dzogchen Tree of Masters.

Do we get here then a new Lineage ?

Yes we are dealing here in fact with Dzogchen Teachings from:

- Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche and friends
- Nyingma Dzogchen Linegae and friends
- Bon Dzogchen Lineage and friends

Additional
- Dzogchen Teachings understood by non-Dzogchenpas

Are they all (above mentioned 3 )different for their Rigdzins or seems that only the case for their friends?

So maybe should we be very carefull with seeing a personal point of view and the view maintained from the Rigdzin.
But when the point of view of the friend is in accordance with the Rigdzin then no problem, but i have so the feeling that here the personal view is over shadowing the View of the Rigdzin, cannot help it.Am frightened that history can repeat......

But nevertheless my best wishes for our Natural State experiences which also seems to differ, maybe usefull to discuss this?


Mutsog Marro
KY