Dzogchen and Buddhism

[asunthatneversets]

I think bottom line is most of them only go as far as the ālaya (interpreted in the context of their own traditions of course). That coupled with being severed from the lineage makes it quite difficult. Most traditions reify a ground as a true existent. No other tradition does direct introduction, and not sure if they could given their self-inflicted shortcomings in that respect. Doesn't mean they cannot receive introduction and practice/benefit from it though.

That's the point.

Interesting. Although the nature of mind in all different schools are understood to be universal, and it is something quite easy to see, there is this idea that only one specific school/lineage has the actual methods to comprehend it, while obviously the teachings are known to so many. It is all right that there is an independent group of Dzogchen practitioners who don't want to identify with Nyingma, Bon, or any other school. But this ignorance of other teachings can easily result in arrogance that there is not a single Buddhist outside the Dzogchen group who has a proper understanding of the teachings that are actually found in their own sutras, tantras and treatises.

I wasn't talking about other buddhist schools... Buddhism teaches the same thing from the ground up. Sutra teachings aim to deliver the same realization as dzogchen, some are just more direct and expedited than others obviously. When I said other traditions I meant other religions, and their self-inflicted shortcomings are the belief systems they champion in addition to the fact that most either aim for a substantiated nonduality or just straight up identify with belief. I never ever would be so arrogant/ignorant to suggest what it seems you interpreted me as suggesting. My apologies for not being more clear in my statement.

[Dronma]

Anyway, as has been said by Namdrol and others within other threads where similar debates have occured, Semde and Trekcho are not the end-all be-all of Dzogchen. And I don't think that Chogyal Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche would disagree with this. So the question is if Semde and/or Trekcho alone can lead to the complete Fruition of Dzogchen; and I think it has been said that the answer is yes.

Yes, the answer is yes! I have heard this from Rinpoche himself.

[Sally Gross]

Exactly! And the last we need in this world nowadays is a new -ism!

As I recall, in the Pali Suttas the historical Buddha refers to his teachings not as "Buddhism" but as Dhamma-Vinaya. I'm sure that some people on this list can find equivalents in Sanskrit and, for that matter, in Tibetan. Given that sila is part of Dhamma/Dharma and that we are not a group of monastics, "Dhamma" or "Dharma" say it all, and "Buddhism" is the neologism.

[Malcolm]

Do you dissociate Dharma from Buddhism? [/color]

It is obvious that Buddhism is rife with Adharma these days, so yes, yes I do.

So seperate it from Buddh-ism yet maintain it's basis in Buddhadharma? Is that what you are saying?

Nothing the Buddha taught was false, first of all. Everyone should understand that at the outset.

What the Buddha taught is Dharma, there is no doubt. But the Buddhists schools that have sprung up around the teaching of the Buddha are mired in various limitations, no doubt all with the best of intentions. We can know this because the Dzogchen tantras describe in very clear detail what the limitations of each of the nine yānas, as well the samsaric vehicles, are, as well as the polemical schools in classic Indian Buddhism, the four siddhāntas i.e. vaibhāṣika, sautrāntika, yogācāra and mādhyamika.

For example, our friend Andrew 108 is very enamored of the idea of the three Dharmacakras, and advocates the standard gzhan stong approach to Vajrayāna that sees the three turnings as being a progressive series of teachings intened to prepare one for Vajrayāna, with gzhan stong being the ultimate view which is carried through sutrayāna. This is certainly one approach to Dzogchen teachings, and perhaps it works for some people. It doesnt' work for me because even though these sutras are profond and interesting, in terms of personal experience intellectual views do not matter much.

I personally ceased being very interested in the intellectual study of tenet systems many years ago when I understood from a work by Gorampa Sonam Senge's that they are unnecessary for Vajrayāna practitioners in general. Since that time I have been primarily interested in the Yogic side of Buddhism once I understood finally that correct view is based on the personal experience of the introduction and not on any intellectual analysis and subsequent meditation. Of course, if you are not a Vajrayāna practitioner, then this intellectual analysis and subsequent meditation is the only method of progress. It can be effective in the very long run, but it requires many lifetimes of effort and application. There is no short path sans secret mantra.

There are others such as Magnus, who may agree with the above, but still believe that it is essential to engage in practices of the two stages and so on and so forth as a preparation for Dzogchen practice and realization.

But there are other practices in Dzogchen for supporting and reinforcing the experience of introduction so it is not certain that the two stages are necessary in Dzogchen practice at all, though it can be helpful for some. Also since the teaching of the basis in Anuyoga and Atiyoga is the same, for this reason Anuyoga practice is especially suited for Dzogchen practitioners who need or want to practice the two stages.

But beyond this, methods such as fire puja, sang offerings, lungta, namkha, lüd, bla gug, etc., all these practices from the mundane vehicles can also be employed for the health and well being of the pracitioner.

But Dzogchen as such as self-sufficient. The Dzogchen tantras themselves describe a complete teaching that is not dependent on any other teaching, but which can be integrated with anything a practitioner needs.

N

[Mariusz]

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

Exactly! And the last we need in this world nowadays is a new -ism!
The whole theory is not grounded anywhere. It is like attempting to walk on ether with bare physical feet.....

Namdrol is trying to establish the new Bon-like religion these days in our modern barbarian world where Dharma is hard to spread, but unfortunately He is not mahasiddha Padmasambhava-like.

[Malcolm]

One does not need to be grounded in and conditoned by "conventional" Dharma in order for Dzogchen to be introduced to a student who is interested.

Does it matter if the student is not only interested but ready, or "ripened," as it were?

Interest indicates ripeness for the teachings.

[Malcolm]

Hi Namdrol - so the purpose of Dzogchen is to have this buddhanature recognized and demonstrated? Isn't it the case that only the qualities can be recognized and demonstrated?

That is not the case.

[Mariusz]

Moreover, Chogyal Namkhai Norbu I guess also is not so mahasiddha like Padmsambhava and His community will end up only ordinary Nyingmapa. Likewise was Chögyam Trungpa which community is becoming more and more ordinary Nyingmapa now.

[Sönam]

Moreover, Chogyal Namkhai Norbu I guess also is not so mahasiddha like Padmsambhava and His community will end up only ordinary Nyingmapa. Likewise was Chögyam Trungpa which community is becoming more and more ordinary Nyingmapa now.

An individual intellectual point of view ... in other term, a personnal opinion.

Sönam

[gregkavarnos]

Nothing the Buddha taught was false, first of all. Everyone should understand that at the outset ... But Dzogchen as such as self-sufficient. The Dzogchen tantras themselves describe a complete teaching that is not dependent on any other teaching, but which can be integrated with anything a practitioner needs.

Wouldn't you say though that Buddh-ism does play an important role by providing the framework within which Buddhadharma can be practiced AND protected? I mean if it wasn't for Buddh-ism then people like Michael Roach, Aro, Jax, neo-Advaita and some new age shamanic Dzogchenpas would have free reign with no structure or framework to compare them to, and thus define them, as adharmic. The Four Dharma Seals are Buddhadharma AND the defining characteristic of Buddh-ism as well. I don't know if one can seperate them at this point in history without pulling the finger from the dyke and causing a deluge.

[Malcolm]

Nothing the Buddha taught was false, first of all. Everyone should understand that at the outset ... But Dzogchen as such as self-sufficient. The Dzogchen tantras themselves describe a complete teaching that is not dependent on any other teaching, but which can be integrated with anything a practitioner needs.

Wouldn't you say though that Buddh-ism does play an important role by providing the framework within which Buddhadharma can be practiced AND protected? I mean if it wasn't for Buddh-ism then people like Michael Roach, Aro, Jax, neo-Advaita and some new age shamanic Dzogchenpas would have free reign with no structure or framework to compare them to, and thus define them, as adharmic. The Four Dharma Seals are Buddhadharma AND the defining characteristic of Buddh-ism as well. I don't know if one can seperate them at this point in history without pulling the finger from the dyke and causing a deluge.

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.

The Dharma is important. In particular, Dzogchen is a complete teaching unto itself. It also encompasses all Dharmas whether nominally Buddhist or not. -- but I have explained this already.

What makes you believe that Dzogchen (even in the case of being totally disengaged from any Buddhist preconceptions) will not follow the same deterioration?

Dzogchen is is not a school, it is not a sect, it is not a philosophy, it is not a religion -- it is a personal experience. It has a view, a meditation, conduct and a result grounded in that personal experience. Since it is based on a personal experience (introduced by a master who is capable of introducing that knowledge to us) Dzogchen is immune to degeneration of that kind. Of course, we must find a master who has that capacity.

Now then, if it makes you happy to consider me a Buddhist, I am fine with that. I have nominally been a Buddhist since I was too ignorant to understand that that meant 16 or so. I also have those Dharma lineages which I treasure since all Dharma is important as it was taught to benefit people. But I once received Guru Yoga transmission from Tenzin Wangyal many years ago, so some people might consider me a Bonpo too. I very much would like to receive the transmission of Zhang Zhung Nyan rGyud from Loppon Tenzin Namdak -- and if I can do that, some Buddhists will consider me a tainted Bonpo, just as people have complained for years about Chogyal Namkhai Norbu -- accusing him of being a Bonpo. For several years, I have wanted to study Hatha Yoga and the Yoga Sutras with a qualified brahmin master I know about, a disciple of Krishnamacarya -- I have not been able to make time to do that -- but if I do, some of you will feel certain that I have broken my vows of refuge by studying with this brahmin master, learning how to chant the Yoga Sutras in proper Sanskrit cadences and so on.

Dronma, do you have any idea how many people in the Dzogchen Community do not consider themselves Buddhists at all in any sense? They simply do not self-identify as buddhists. I used to be annoyed by this, but now I deeply understand where they are coming from. Refusing to consider yourself a buddhist is not a denegration of Buddhadharma, and does not disqualify one from studying and practicing Buddhadharma. Refuge, as we know, is merely being interested in following a path and doing so. In this thread I noticed so far that some people are very attached to the name "Buddhist", but this is just a label. Even Chogyal Namkhai Norbu has said that really, he is not a "Buddhist", that he is a Dzogchen practitioner. This used to bother me too and was an obstacle for many years. Not considering yourself a Buddhist is not disrespectful to Buddhadharma.

So what am I? like all of you, I am a human being, I use speech and I am able to make distinctions -- this is the basic definition of a human being according to Tibetan Medicine. Second, I am a man -- I have that gender mark. So this is the first place where we differentiate human beings. Third, I am middle aged. The next way we distinguish people is on the basis of their age. Fourth, I am an Anglophone (obviously). Fifth I am a caucasian. Sixth, I am Dzogchen practitioner. Seventh, I am a doctor of Tibetan Medicine. That's it. That is all I need to be and all I want to be. And I have no choices about the first five items.

N

[Mariusz]

Moreover, Chogyal Namkhai Norbu I guess also is not so mahasiddha like Padmsambhava and His community will end up only ordinary Nyingmapa. Likewise was Chögyam Trungpa which community is becoming more and more ordinary Nyingmapa now.

An individual intellectual point of view ... in other term, a personnal opinion.

Sönam

Without traditional tibetan Buddhism they will not survive with Dzogchen. Or they have to help with Bon religion? It depends on future generations of tibetan fully educated lamas.

[Anders]

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.

[gregkavarnos]

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).

[Andrew108]

This is a good post I think.

[Dronma]

Exactly! And the last we need in this world nowadays is a new -ism!

As I recall, in the Pali Suttas the historical Buddha refers to his teachings not as "Buddhism" but as Dhamma-Vinaya. I'm sure that some people on this list can find equivalents in Sanskrit and, for that matter, in Tibetan. Given that sila is part of Dhamma/Dharma and that we are not a group of monastics, "Dhamma" or "Dharma" say it all, and "Buddhism" is the neologism.

Yes, I agree, Sally. I already mentioned that a few pages ago...

The term Buddhism is a neologism which was invented by Westerners, like all -isms. It does not really exist in Indian or Tibetan philosophy!
The term in Sanskrit is Dharma.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dharma

That's why I am surprised by Namdrol's attempt to dissociate Dharma from Buddhism!
It does not make sense....

[Andrew108]

As the end of the path, Dzogchen is kind of what you get when you are ready to give up the path. But before you get to the point of giving up the path it's not wise to abandon Buddhism as Greg points out. It is obviously inevitable that from the point of view of realization, all concepts about path and liberation are given up - both Buddhism and Dzogchen are abandoned as formalities.
Namdrol is speaking from his experience and I personally value that, but he's able to say what he says because he has 'travelled' a path. If Namdrol had never studied or practiced Buddhism would he have the same realization of Dzogchen as he has now? I don't know. He seems to think so. But I think his position is due to being where he is at in terms of his practice -abandoning the formalities of the path. He'll also have to give up the notion of Dzogchen at some point.

[Mr. G]

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,

This is not true. Where does it say that if one is not resting in rigpa 100% of the time, it will generate karma that will lead to unfortunate circumstances?

Does a practitioner who has not mastered the 2 stages also generate karma that leads to unfortunate circumstances? (that's a rhetorical question - the answer is no.)

[Fa Dao]

Some of you all need to clean the shit out of your ears and pay attention. Namdrol is NOT denigrating Buddhadharma, he is talking about the "ism" that institutionalized Buddhism is becoming. Huge difference between Buddhism and Buddhadharma. Buddhadharma and Dzogchen both are about getting past our self imposed limitations and labels, about Realizing our real natures. Thats the bottomline.

[gregkavarnos]

This is not true. Where does it say that if one is not resting in rigpa 100% of the time, it will generate karma that will lead to unfortunate circumstances?

Any actions performed without mindful awareness (ie based in ignorance) will generate karma... Whether one is a Dzogchenpa (Buddhist), Hindu, Christian, Atheist, Muslim... Are Dzogchenpas exempt from the workings of karma?