Unity's theory on the nature of mind

Casual conversation between friends. Anything goes (almost).
Locked
Unity
Posts: 25
Joined: Wed Apr 23, 2014 6:53 pm

Unity's theory on the nature of mind

Post by Unity » Wed Apr 23, 2014 7:01 pm

Discussion split form here

Sorry if I intrude... I'm interested in Rigpa and have found it without a formal teacher and Samayas, so I'm not bound by Samayas.
So would it be in order for me if I would expound on it to outsiders, perhaps even to people who haven't ever heard of it, or who are not even capable of understanding what I'm saying to them? Not that I would use that name "rigpa" in any case, except to people who have heard of it before, to others I would describe it in words they might be able to understand, i.e. in plain English (or German).

Edit: Just to prove that I'm not confused and that I know what I'm talking about:
Looking through outer phenomena into the spaciousness of Mind (dharmakaya), finding there a sort of "shimmering", sort of subtle energy (sambogakaya), thinking, am I deluded, are that projections, or flashing neurons in my brain? But it was not. Thinking about the Heart Sutra, form = emptiness, emptiness = form, what does it mean, something is missing here. There is a third, which is missing in the equation, which is: Rigpa! :-) Form and emptiness are both appearance aspects in and of Rigpa, it is like ice and vapor, they are the same, they don't exist as objects themselves, they are just appearances of water. The same applies to form and emptiness which are appearances of and in Rigpa.
Edit: Rigpa is the luminous essence. I would say it is the conscious beingness, the being consciousness, the Mind itself in which everything appears, it has some certain qualities which can be observed by looking into one's own mind. The most significant quality, in my opinion, is its self-reflective-ness which enables it to have conscious experiences. There are some other qualities as well, e.g. spaciousness (in buddhist terminology called dharmakaya), energy (sambogakaya) which also appears as luminosity, and there is a sort of highly fluctuating creativity, difficult to describe, it's more fluid than quicksilver (is that nirmanakaya?).
Then there is another significant quality, which I would call hologram-likeness. You know that pieces of holograms all contain the whole picture in them. The holographic quality of the rigpa essence is responsible for all sorts of things, e.g. how cells in biological organisms communicate, and that we are all connected, and that everything is transparent and can be seen from anywhere else, regardless of distances in space or time.
There would be more to say about it. I hope that more people get to know it and see it with their own inner eyes, the eyes of the heart. I believe that it's not so difficult to see it, but it takes a lot of courage and openness, and only very few people have these requirements, and the others are not interested to "see" it, anyway. I tried to show it to others, but it's really hard to find anyone who wants to see it at all. :-(

Oliver
Last edited by rose on Sun Apr 27, 2014 2:23 pm, edited 3 times in total.
Reason: Added link to original topic

gentle_monster
Posts: 8
Joined: Mon Mar 25, 2013 9:08 pm

Re: Breaking samaya if one talks about rigpa?

Post by gentle_monster » Wed Apr 23, 2014 7:17 pm

You are deluding yourself, my friend.

The only thing you have found is yet another intellectual trip.

Unity
Posts: 25
Joined: Wed Apr 23, 2014 6:53 pm

Re: Breaking samaya if one talks about rigpa?

Post by Unity » Wed Apr 23, 2014 7:26 pm

I would say, you are quick to judge without examination.
gentle_monster wrote:You are deluding yourself, my friend.

The only thing you have found is yet another intellectual trip.

philji
Posts: 800
Joined: Mon May 09, 2011 2:26 pm

Re: Breaking samaya if one talks about rigpa?

Post by philji » Wed Apr 23, 2014 7:59 pm

At last. People get it.

theanarchist
Posts: 820
Joined: Thu Dec 26, 2013 7:26 pm

Re: Breaking samaya if one talks about rigpa?

Post by theanarchist » Wed Apr 23, 2014 8:25 pm

Unity wrote:Sorry if I intrude... I'm interested in Rigpa and have found it without a formal teacher and Samayas, so I'm not bound by Samayas.
So would it be in order for me if I would expound on it to outsiders, perhaps even to people who haven't ever heard of it, or who are not even capable of understanding what I'm saying to them? Not that I would use that name "rigpa" in any case, except to people who have heard of it before, to others I would describe it in words they might be able to understand, i.e. in plain English (or German).

Edit: Just to prove that I'm not confused and that I know what I'm talking about:
Looking through outer phenomena into the spaciousness of Mind (dharmakaya), finding there a sort of "shimmering", sort of subtle energy (sambogakaya), thinking, am I deluded, are that projections, or flashing neurons in my brain? But it was not. Thinking about the Heart Sutra, form = emptiness, emptiness = form, what does it mean, something is missing here. There is a third, which is missing in the equation, which is: Rigpa! :-) Form and emptiness are both appearance aspects in and of Rigpa, it is like ice and vapor, they are the same, they don't exist as objects themselves, they are just appearances of water. The same applies to form and emptiness which are appearances of and in Rigpa.
Edit: Rigpa is the luminous essence. I would say it is the conscious beingness, the being consciousness, the Mind itself in which everything appears, it has some certain qualities which can be observed by looking into one's own mind. The most significant quality, in my opinion, is its self-reflective-ness which enables it to have conscious experiences. There are some other qualities as well, e.g. spaciousness (in buddhist terminology called dharmakaya), energy (sambogakaya) which also appears as luminosity, and there is a sort of highly fluctuating creativity, difficult to describe, it's more fluid than quicksilver (is that nirmanakaya?).
Then there is another significant quality, which I would call hologram-likeness. You know that pieces of holograms all contain the whole picture in them. The holographic quality of the rigpa essence is responsible for all sorts of things, e.g. how cells in biological organisms communicate, and that we are all connected, and that everything is transparent and can be seen from anywhere else, regardless of distances in space or time.
There would be more to say about it. I hope that more people get to know it and see it with their own inner eyes, the eyes of the heart. I believe that it's not so difficult to see it, but it takes a lot of courage and openness, and only very few people have these requirements, and the others are not interested to "see" it, anyway. I tried to show it to others, but it's really hard to find anyone who wants to see it at all. :-(

Oliver


Sounds like it could be a kind of spiritual/meditational experience.

But you fool yourself and others if you think that's dzogchen.

Please go and check those experiences with a qualified dzogchen teacher, and if you don't want to do that, feel free to sell it somewhere in the esoteric supermarket, but please not under the name of dzogchen.

theanarchist
Posts: 820
Joined: Thu Dec 26, 2013 7:26 pm

Re: Breaking samaya if one talks about rigpa?

Post by theanarchist » Wed Apr 23, 2014 8:30 pm

Unity wrote:I would say, you are quick to judge without examination.

You claim that you are a dzogchen master without needing a teacher.


There is the occasional very VERY rare case of a person who attained realisation of vajrayana/dzogchen without having a human teacher. Like Garab Dorje, or Tilopa. Why do you assume that you are one of these ultra special human beings?

User avatar
Soap-Bubble
Posts: 82
Joined: Sat Sep 14, 2013 10:38 pm

Re: Breaking samaya if one talks about rigpa?

Post by Soap-Bubble » Wed Apr 23, 2014 10:17 pm

I'm against strict following of samayas, in a blind sort of way. You follow them if you see it's benefitial, you don't if you see it's benefitial not to follow them by word. If a rule creates a hindrance or moves sincerely interested people away from the way of realization, you might be misunderstanding it.

There's no need to describe what you personally perceive to be rigpa and there's no need make it sound appealing or advertise it. But you can give some potentially very helpful information to those who're interested.
Unity wrote:Edit: Just to prove that I'm not confused and that I know what I'm talking about
Unfortunately, you can't prove anything with words. Not only rigpa, but many stray experiences are completely beyond words, whether you use your own or those words used in books.

But the advice to talk to a dzogchen master is good. I'm not saying it because I think you're wrong, I'm saying it because just a few days ago I ran into an interesting situation.

We were gathered around a qualified person, and one completely new guy who just came about started to ask him questions. It turned out his story was that he discovered rigpa on his own many years ago. He asked a lot of questions and gradually moved over to questions like "what is rigpa", etc. In the end, he grew puzzled and said that the conversation made it clear to him that state he so often experienced couldn't be rigpa.
:thinking:
a soap-bubble represents radiant emptiness

ConradTree
Posts: 303
Joined: Sun Dec 29, 2013 6:33 pm

Re: Breaking samaya if one talks about rigpa?

Post by ConradTree » Wed Apr 23, 2014 11:50 pm

theanarchist wrote: There is the occasional very VERY rare case of a person who attained realisation of vajrayana/dzogchen without having a human teacher. Like Garab Dorje, or Tilopa. Why do you assume that you are one of these ultra special human beings?

Garab Dorje is a myth.

And Tilopa had human teachers. Many human teachers in fact.

"A song attributed to Tilopa, though it is not included in the canonical works, even claims he had no human guru, contradicting the history of four transmissions mentioned above. This discrepancy is sometimes explained as Vajradhara having given only the blessing, while the instructions came from his human teachers." - Mahamudra and Related Instructions

Unity
Posts: 25
Joined: Wed Apr 23, 2014 6:53 pm

Re: Breaking samaya if one talks about rigpa?

Post by Unity » Thu Apr 24, 2014 8:47 am

You certainly heard of the "pointing out" instructions?
So I can give them, and I can advise how to prepare oneself, one's mind, how to purify oneself to make one's mind a capable vessel.
The notion of not talking about Dzogchen, interesting.
I can imagine where this comes from, namely from the old Tibetan traditions, which are and were certainly valid in their contexts.
Still I want to point out that we don't live in a traditional Tibetan society, and hence the Tibetan traditions are not fully applicable here.
They certainly are to the Tibetans and to the Tibetan traditions themselves, so within the context of these, there are Samayas, and they should be taken seriously.
However, if someone gets to know "Rigpa", or call it "Parabrahman" or whatever, through one's own efforts, without having gone through the procedures and Samayas of the Tibetan traditions, then one is not obliged in any way to them.
One can also have read about Rigpa and Dzogchen and other such Tibetan terminology, and one can have understood these correctly, and one can have experienced the reality of these through one's own experiences, without the involvement of Tibetan spiritual masters.
In that case, no one can deny such a person the right to use these words (Rigpa, Dzogchen, etc.) and to give pointing out instructions to other (lay) people as he/she sees fit.
If these words were forbidden to use to anyone, then no one should have used them at all in the first place.
The experience of Rigpa itself can not be restricted, it is just simply not possible to restrict it.
Rigpa is so obvious to anyone who is courageous enough to see with one's own eyes, it would be ridiculous to try to hide it from "lay" people.

Unity
Posts: 25
Joined: Wed Apr 23, 2014 6:53 pm

Re: Breaking samaya if one talks about rigpa?

Post by Unity » Thu Apr 24, 2014 8:54 am

Oh, but I did have human spiritual teachers too, I just don't have any samayas to keep about my realizations. The few spiritual (Vajrayana type) practices that I learned have nothing to do with my realization, haven't practiced them much, except Vajrasattva.

Such a realization is not that rare at all, it only very rarely gets known about and even more rarely becomes documented, and even more rarely those documents survive and become publicly known.
In fact, Rigpa is quite obvious, and I'm quite sure that many more people realize it on their own than anyone gets to know about.
The reason is that such people who realize it on their own mostly don't know of Tibetan terminology, and also most of these self-realizers don't speak about it. If any of you readers here have realized Rigpa and tried to describe it to a person who hasn't, you will know how difficult it is to find anyone who would be interested in such things at all AND able to grasp it, it is sooo rare to find such people, but I would not give up to find them.
Rigpa can be pointed out to anyone who is interested in it, and I believe it would be a total waste of human potential not to do it, then.
theanarchist wrote:
Unity wrote:I would say, you are quick to judge without examination.

You claim that you are a dzogchen master without needing a teacher.


There is the occasional very VERY rare case of a person who attained realisation of vajrayana/dzogchen without having a human teacher. Like Garab Dorje, or Tilopa. Why do you assume that you are one of these ultra special human beings?
Last edited by Unity on Thu Apr 24, 2014 9:13 am, edited 1 time in total.

Unity
Posts: 25
Joined: Wed Apr 23, 2014 6:53 pm

Re: Breaking samaya if one talks about rigpa?

Post by Unity » Thu Apr 24, 2014 9:07 am

I didn't mention the name of Dzogchen, I just use words and names and terminology with people who understand them or have heard about them. In Dzogchen circles, I use Dzogchen terms (e.g. Rigpa), in other Buddhist circles I use Buddhist terms (e.g. Dharmakaya/Sambogakaya), in a more general but Sanskrit influenced circle, I might use the word Parabrahman, and in Christian circles I would use the word God, and in Islamic circles Allah.
Doesn't matter.
No, don't worry, I don't use Dzogchen words with people who don't understand them, no use.

Esoteric supermarket: Yes, I would try that too, if I find there anyone who would be interested and open enough. Openness and curiosity and courage are crucial prerequisites for looking at the Mind with one's own eyes. Any form of prejudice would be extremely detrimental. You can find mentally open people anywhere, and you find mentally closed people anywhere, too. For example, in Christian churches I find it very difficult, Islamic circles I don't know, and Buddhist circles I know a bit, people in most of these spiritual circles hold onto beliefs relatively rigidly, even in Buddhist circles, although the Buddha himself taught that people should not believe him blindly, but examine everything that he teaches themselves in their own minds. Examining in one's own mind does certainly not mean that one does it with the expectation to come out at the same results, that would not be examination, but hypocrisy, and students of spiritual teachers tend to forget that. Hardly anyone questions their authentic teachers, of course. There is also a peer pressure in these circles to conform to authority.
theanarchist wrote:
Unity wrote:...


Sounds like it could be a kind of spiritual/meditational experience.

But you fool yourself and others if you think that's dzogchen.

Please go and check those experiences with a qualified dzogchen teacher, and if you don't want to do that, feel free to sell it somewhere in the esoteric supermarket, but please not under the name of dzogchen.

theanarchist
Posts: 820
Joined: Thu Dec 26, 2013 7:26 pm

Re: Breaking samaya if one talks about rigpa?

Post by theanarchist » Thu Apr 24, 2014 9:48 am

Soap-Bubble wrote:I'm against strict following of samayas, in a blind sort of way. You follow them if you see it's benefitial, you don't if you see it's benefitial not to follow them by word. If a rule creates a hindrance or moves sincerely interested people away from the way of realization, you might be misunderstanding it.:


That's quite nonsensical advice, and if you seriously handle it that way I would suggest that no teacher gives you any empowerments/transmissions. Because that attitude will not only harm you but also the duration of the teachings, the health of the teacher, the success of the practice of your vajra siblings.

Unity
Posts: 25
Joined: Wed Apr 23, 2014 6:53 pm

Re: Breaking samaya if one talks about rigpa?

Post by Unity » Thu Apr 24, 2014 10:19 am

You're right, it should be clarified and distinguished between empowerments/transmissions and other things. Empowerments and transmissions are not to be talked about. Period.
Personal realizations are a completely different matter, no one can forbid anyone to talk about things that are plainly open to see for anyone who is bold enough to open one's own eyes and look.
theanarchist wrote:
Soap-Bubble wrote:I'm against strict following of samayas, in a blind sort of way. You follow them if you see it's benefitial, you don't if you see it's benefitial not to follow them by word. If a rule creates a hindrance or moves sincerely interested people away from the way of realization, you might be misunderstanding it.:


That's quite nonsensical advice, and if you seriously handle it that way I would suggest that no teacher gives you any empowerments/transmissions. Because that attitude will not only harm you but also the duration of the teachings, the health of the teacher, the success of the practice of your vajra siblings.

theanarchist
Posts: 820
Joined: Thu Dec 26, 2013 7:26 pm

Re: Breaking samaya if one talks about rigpa?

Post by theanarchist » Thu Apr 24, 2014 10:24 am

Unity wrote:You're right, it should be clarified and distinguished between empowerments/transmissions and other things. Empowerments and transmissions are not to be talked about. Period.
Personal realizations are a completely different matter, no one can forbid anyone to talk about things that are plainly open to see for anyone who is bold enough to open one's own eyes and look.

It's rather the opposite. You can talk about which empowerments or transmissions you attended.

You are NOT supposed to talk about meditational experiences or realisations. Only fools blab about these.


Anyway, I reported this thread as I doubt that in this section of the forum it's permitted to advertise something that is clearly not dzogchen and style yourself as a dzogchen teacher. It is obvious that you have no idea about it and giving you a platform to sell your stuff under the "brand" of dzogchen on a buddhist online community would be irresponsible

Andrew108
Posts: 1502
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2011 7:41 pm

Re: Breaking samaya if one talks about rigpa?

Post by Andrew108 » Thu Apr 24, 2014 10:54 am

duffster1 wrote:I heard Chogyal Namkhai Norbu say in the webcast today that if one talks about rigpa to non practitioners one is breaking samaya.Im just trying to understand what he meant.If one tells a loved one or a friend what they are practicing and goes into a little detail wouldn't this be harmless. Wouldn't it be of some benefit for another to hear the sanity of it all?
This happens a lot. A person earnestly quoting ChNN. Often the quotes are taken out of context and this is what has happened here.

First, ChNN is addressing members of the Dzogchen Community. He is not talking about what practitioners from other organizations should and shouldn't do. Second, he is saying that not only is it pointless explaining rigpa to those who are not practicing Dzogchen, but also damaging to oneself. It is damaging to oneself because one is attempting to condition another. It's a subtle form of domination involved with the conditioning that ChNN is warning about. Thirdly, you probably don't know what Rigpa is. Trying to explain something that you only have intellectual knowledge of is again damaging. Proselytizing Dzogchen is not something ChNN really wants and neither does he want people in his own organisation, who are teachers, adding their own interpretations.

But....there are many articles online explaining what Rigpa might mean and there are scholars on this site who are more than willing to explain, in an intellectual fashion, the nature of mind, nature of Rigpa and so on. Then there is the way that Rigpa is reified and the way that organisations are built around the promise of realizing it. It seems like a treasure to be protected. A thing to make a myth out of. I doubt that it is other than ordinary. But saying more than that might get me into trouble.
The Blessed One said:

"What is the All? Simply the eye & forms, ear & sounds, nose & aromas, tongue & flavors, body & tactile sensations, intellect & ideas. This, monks, is called the All. Anyone who would say, 'Repudiating this All, I will describe another,' if questioned on what exactly might be the grounds for his statement, would be unable to explain, and furthermore, would be put to grief. Why? Because it lies beyond range." Sabba Sutta.

Unity
Posts: 25
Joined: Wed Apr 23, 2014 6:53 pm

Re: Breaking samaya if one talks about rigpa?

Post by Unity » Thu Apr 24, 2014 11:49 am

You can talk about which empowerments and transmissions you have attended, but not about the details of them.
theanarchist wrote: It's rather the opposite. You can talk about which empowerments or transmissions you attended.
In general, I agree. However, if one is qualified by one's own realization to give the pointing out instruction to someone who is ready to receive it, then one shall do so, by any means.
theanarchist wrote: You are NOT supposed to talk about meditational experiences or realisations. Only fools blab about these.
Rigpa is not a brand.
Dzogchen can be used as a general term and as a brand.
In this forum it seems to be mainly used as a brand, and I'm not using it.
Rigpa is the nature of reality. Everyone can see it.
I'm not selling anything, I was asking if the samayas apply to someone who has discovered the nature of Rigpa by himself, outside the context of Tibetan teachers' empowerments and transmissions.
theanarchist wrote: Anyway, I reported this thread as I doubt that in this section of the forum it's permitted to advertise something that is clearly not dzogchen and style yourself as a dzogchen teacher. It is obvious that you have no idea about it and giving you a platform to sell your stuff under the "brand" of dzogchen on a buddhist online community would be irresponsible

User avatar
Sönam
Posts: 1999
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 2:11 pm
Location: France
Contact:

Re: Breaking samaya if one talks about rigpa?

Post by Sönam » Thu Apr 24, 2014 12:16 pm

This thread should be closed ASAP

Sönam
By understanding everything you perceive from the perspective of the view, you are freed from the constraints of philosophical beliefs.
By understanding that any and all mental activity is meditation, you are freed from arbitrary divisions between formal sessions and postmeditation activity.
- Longchen Rabjam -

User avatar
heart
Posts: 4929
Joined: Fri Jan 08, 2010 1:55 pm

Re: Breaking samaya if one talks about rigpa?

Post by heart » Thu Apr 24, 2014 12:25 pm

Unity wrote: Rigpa is not a brand.
Dzogchen can be used as a general term and as a brand.
Rigpa and Dzogchen are Tibetan words that have a distinct meaning within the Tibetan Buddhist and Bon Dzogchen traditions. If you know nothing of these traditions there is little hope of you understanding their actual meaning. That said I am sure there is a lot of ideas in this world that "sounds" quite similar but I am afraid that doesn't mean that they are even close to each other.

/magnus
"We are all here to help each other go through this thing, whatever it is."
~Kurt Vonnegut

"The principal practice is Guruyoga. But we need to understand that any secondary practice combined with Guruyoga becomes a principal practice." ChNNR (Teachings on Thun and Ganapuja)

theanarchist
Posts: 820
Joined: Thu Dec 26, 2013 7:26 pm

Re: Breaking samaya if one talks about rigpa?

Post by theanarchist » Thu Apr 24, 2014 12:27 pm

Unity wrote: Rigpa is the nature of reality. Everyone can see it.

True. But the term is genuinely dzogchen. Other buddhist traditions use other terms for the same thing. So why do you want to usurp dzogchen terminology for whatever you have experienced when this would implie that you are a practitioner/teacher within the dzogchen lineage who actually practiced dzogchen methology to experience those things. Which you are not.

Dzogchen is not only the experience of the nature of mind (which can also be come by with other buddhist meditation practices and has other names in other traditions), it is a specific organized, structured path within buddhism. Even if you have a valid experience of the ultimate, you have none of these methods to offer that others would need to get there, therefor what you practiced and talk about is not dzogchen and therefor talking about "rigpa" makes no sense.


By the way, you sound pretty dualistic and opinionated and also defensive in what you post. Which is unlike what I experienced with people who are truely able to rest in an experience of the absolute. So I doubt that you are really able to rest in such a state all the time.


And I agree, this thread should be closed, to prevent giving unqualified people a stage to pose as dzogchen teachers.

ConradTree
Posts: 303
Joined: Sun Dec 29, 2013 6:33 pm

Re: Breaking samaya if one talks about rigpa?

Post by ConradTree » Thu Apr 24, 2014 2:35 pm

Unity,

Are you claiming to have recognized the conceptualizing mind?

Yes that's possible, but that doesn't make you a Dzogchenpa.

It makes you more like a sutrayana Zen person.

Locked

Return to “Lounge”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 43 guests