Dharma Wheel

Karma Dorje wrote:

Motova wrote:I appreciate the feedback. I'm not attached to the phenomena. I just see pretty colours and experience some extra sensory happenings, which is undeniably interesting. I would absolutely love to have a teacher, but I'm finding it hard to find one. There are Dharma centers within Toronto, but I lack the funds to travel there to continually investigate various centers/teachers. Although I have many books on Tibetan Buddhism, it's very frustrating being deprived of a teacher within a tradition where Gurus are absolutely essential. Any help would be very much appreciated.

Thanks,

Where exactly are you located? There are many centers throughout Ontario... perhaps one is closer.

I live in the GTA, specifically Whitby.

Motova wrote:

Karma Dorje wrote:

Motova wrote:I appreciate the feedback. I'm not attached to the phenomena. I just see pretty colours and experience some extra sensory happenings, which is undeniably interesting. I would absolutely love to have a teacher, but I'm finding it hard to find one. There are Dharma centers within Toronto, but I lack the funds to travel there to continually investigate various centers/teachers. Although I have many books on Tibetan Buddhism, it's very frustrating being deprived of a teacher within a tradition where Gurus are absolutely essential. Any help would be very much appreciated.

Thanks,

Where exactly are you located? There are many centers throughout Ontario... perhaps one is closer.

I live in the GTA, specifically Whitby.

OK. Not really closer but still, out on the east side of the city:

http://www.palyulcanada.org/" target="_blank

As most of the students are from the GTA, there are usually cars going up from the city. The center is really lovely and the resident lama is a very pure monk with very deep knowledge and a great love of animals. Worth visiting.

Karma Dorje wrote:
OK. Not really closer but still, out on the east side of the city:

http://www.palyulcanada.org/" target="_blank" target="_blank" target="_blank" target="_blank" target="_blank" target="_blank

As most of the students are from the GTA, there are usually cars going up from the city. The center is really lovely and the resident lama is a very pure monk with very deep knowledge and a great love of animals. Worth visiting.

That looks like a beautiful Dharma Centre! I definitely want to check it out, but traveling there would be an issue.

Thanks,

Motova wrote:

Adamantine wrote:

Motova wrote:I appreciate the feedback. I'm not attached to the phenomena. I just see pretty colours and experience some extra sensory happenings, which is undeniably interesting. I would absolutely love to have a teacher, but I'm finding it hard to find one. There are Dharma centers within Toronto, but I lack the funds to travel there to continually investigate various centers/teachers. Although I have many books on Tibetan Buddhism, it's very frustrating being deprived of a teacher within a tradition where Gurus are absolutely essential. Any help would be very much appreciated.

Thanks,

Look here to Khenpo Sonam Rinpoche, try to arrange an
interview with him:

http://www.riwoche.com/sonam_rinpoche.html

http://www.riwoche.com/torontotemple.html

Thank you very much.

Have you any experience with the center/lineage/teachers?

Yes I have attended a teaching with Khenpo Sonam Rinpoche before and found him really quite wonderful. I also am close with people who have lived in Toronto and spent considerable time with him as their main teacher. I have only ever heard the best things. The lineage is pure. It is worth making contact.

Finding practises on the internet is not dissimilar to diagnosing medical conditions on that basis. Doctors are noticing many patients who have arrived at some conclusion and even starting a course of medicine based on what they have found on the Internet. The problem is of course that in the absence of medical training these patients really lack the expertise to make such judgements.

As for seeing visions, and so on, I know this is the Tibetan section of the forum, but over in the Zen section they would say that any visual phenomena that arise as a consequence of meditation are called 'makyo'. Rough translation would be 'beguiling visions'. They do occur but the student is generally advised not to pursue them or become attached to them.

Finally the 'wisdom eye' according to the teachings is the eye that discerns the cause of suffering and sees all beings with compassion.

All of this caution is well intended and the basic point is true.

But there is also good cause to simply say: yes the Tibetan traditions posit a third eye, and yes it is central to practice, and yes it is a good thing to develop such faculties.

I would say: it is far more dangerous to 'not see' than to 'see.'

If the heart and the third eye awaken, wholesome things follow ~ Motova, of course you should investigate this, and it is great that you feel a natural curiosity about it.

Good luck in your endeavors.

Motova wrote:... I would try and open my third eye. After a few sessions of mindfulness meditation and concentrating on an eye between my two physical eyes, I started seeing orbs (of various colours and sizes), masses (coloured clouds or smoke), auras, and visual snow.

The way you have approached this is like a kind of Hindu practice (reportedly) or like a Taoist practice (although in Taoism an eye is not visualized or focused on). The Taoist explanation would be that you have begun to active/stimulate the point between your eyes and qi (chi) is now flowing more freely. These points are used for spiritual purposes in Taoism. So a Taoist teacher would tell you to stop immediately until you had a chance to receive teachings directly in person. Meditating on specific points can have negative consequences (like real temporary blindness although this is not a consequence of meditating on this point).

In Tibetan Buddhism this is treated differently.

Kirt

tobes wrote: I would say: it is far more dangerous to 'not see' than to 'see.'

That was my initial reasoning lol!

/Dylan

tobes wrote:All of this caution is well intended and the basic point is true.

But there is also good cause to simply say: yes the Tibetan traditions posit a third eye, and yes it is central to practice, and yes it is a good thing to develop such faculties.

I would say: it is far more dangerous to 'not see' than to 'see.'

If the heart and the third eye awaken, wholesome things follow ~ Motova, of course you should investigate this, and it is great that you feel a natural curiosity about it.

Good luck in your endeavors.

To Tobes: So can you give an description of what the third eye is? You say Tibetan traditions posit a third eye. Can you say which traditions? You say it is central to practice. Can you say which practice? Have you done this practice yourself?
To Motova: I can say with 100% certainty that buddhism is not about making and holding on to objects. That I am sure about. But of course there are lots of buddhists who do make things real that are not real. That is what we call samsara.

Since the avadhuti begins at the third eye, this location is important to completion stage practice. For those not doing such practice, not so important.

Andrew108 wrote:

tobes wrote:All of this caution is well intended and the basic point is true.

But there is also good cause to simply say: yes the Tibetan traditions posit a third eye, and yes it is central to practice, and yes it is a good thing to develop such faculties.

I would say: it is far more dangerous to 'not see' than to 'see.'

If the heart and the third eye awaken, wholesome things follow ~ Motova, of course you should investigate this, and it is great that you feel a natural curiosity about it.

Good luck in your endeavors.

To Tobes: So can you give an description of what the third eye is? You say Tibetan traditions posit a third eye. Can you say which traditions? You say it is central to practice. Can you say which practice? Have you done this practice yourself?
To Motova: I can say with 100% certainty that buddhism is not about making and holding on to objects. That I am sure about. But of course there are lots of buddhists who do make things real that are not real. That is what we call samsara.

I would rather not speak about my own practice.

But generally speaking, it is connected to the development of the nirmanakaya and in many different practices across all traditions, white light and/or the seed syllable aum is visualised.

It is not particularly secret or esoteric to state these things ~ in the sense that advanced practices tend to focus on the navel, the heart or throat, and require advanced teachings (and obviously, an advanced teacher).

Clearing the third eye with white light or aum is bread and butter stuff - in many practices it does not require initiation etc; and as I said before, it is far more dangerous to have a blocked third eye than to have a clear one.

This is so sad.
Whilst there are many teachings on Tsa Lung and Tigle within the Tibetan traditions (see Kalachakra), there are no teachings that use the construct 'third eye'. As to how and why subtle energy is coordinated then one shouldn't look past the fact that yoga and other methods are practiced in order to bring about an experiential understanding of emptiness. They are not practiced as ends in themselves.
So....whether or not the fictitious 'third eye' is blocked or unblocked makes little difference if you conceptualize it's existance. If you think of using methods to unblock something which was never 'blocked' or existant in the first place then you are adding delusion on top of delusion and are far away from the meaning of the teachings.

Andrew108 wrote:This is so sad.
Whilst there are many teachings on Tsa Lung and Tigle within the Tibetan traditions (see Kalachakra), there are no teachings that use the construct 'third eye'. As to how and why subtle energy is coordinated then one shouldn't look past the fact that yoga and other methods are practiced in order to bring about an experiential understanding of emptiness. They are not practiced as ends in themselves.
So....whether or not the fictitious 'third eye' is blocked or unblocked makes little difference if you conceptualize it's existance. If you think of using methods to unblock something which was never 'blocked' or existant in the first place then you are adding delusion on top of delusion and are far away from the meaning of the teachings.

I''m not sure what your point is here. If by fictitious you mean 'illusory' - in the sense of conventional (saṃvṛti) - then would you also advocate not going to a doctor when you have a chest pain, not eating and not drinking? Because your physical body is just as illusory as your subtle body. Treating them wisely does not imply treating them as non-existent.

No one is positing a third-eye with the nature of svabhāva. I think you misunderstand what it means to say that a particular conventional phenomena is not existent.

Let me put it really simply. There is no 'third eye'. There are no horns on a rabbit. It is possible to construct an idea of 'third eye' just as it is possible to photoshop a rabbit with horns, but these are both conceptual constructs. The 'third eye' construct is typically a western construct/misunderstanding. So it is not like you can go to a doctor or even Tibetan lama and ask them to do something with this 'third eye' of yours. Here we are getting into new age fantasy about being able to open a third eye in order to access higher states of consciousness. It is a dangerous and misleading path to follow.
But then what about central channel and chakras and so on? It would also be a mistake to view them as biological phenomena. Why? Because we are giving them a size and location when infact they can be as big as the universe or as thin as a thread. If we are making them biological facts then we are getting into Lobsang Rampa fiction.
They are related to our energy but we shouldn't make anything of them. It all comes down to the teacher's instructions and to get a bit of knowledge about these things before been given the practice is very dangerous. I repeat that buddhists don't make objects. This is very important. It is misleading and dangerous to indulge fantasies in this way. Practicing Tsalung Tigle depends 100% on devotion. Can't get the fruit of the practice without devotion. Of course some practioners think they can get some knowledge and do things by themselves but it really isn't possible.

Karma Dondrup Tashi wrote:Since the avadhuti begins at the third eye, this location is important to completion stage practice. For those not doing such practice, not so important.

Actually, the avadhuti begins on top of the head. If I'm not mistaken, it's right about where the coronal and sagittal sutures meet.

Andrew108 wrote:Let me put it really simply. There is no 'third eye'. There are no horns on a rabbit. It is possible to construct an idea of 'third eye' just as it is possible to photoshop a rabbit with horns, but these are both conceptual constructs. The 'third eye' construct is typically a western construct/misunderstanding. So it is not like you can go to a doctor or even Tibetan lama and ask them to do something with this 'third eye' of yours. Here we are getting into new age fantasy about being able to open a third eye in order to access higher states of consciousness. It is a dangerous and misleading path to follow.
But then what about central channel and chakras and so on? It would also be a mistake to view them as biological phenomena. Why? Because we are giving them a size and location when infact they can be as big as the universe or as thin as a thread. If we are making them biological facts then we are getting into Lobsang Rampa fiction.
They are related to our energy but we shouldn't make anything of them. It all comes down to the teacher's instructions and to get a bit of knowledge about these things before been given the practice is very dangerous. I repeat that buddhists don't make objects. This is very important. It is misleading and dangerous to indulge fantasies in this way. Practicing Tsalung Tigle depends 100% on devotion. Can't get the fruit of the practice without devotion. Of course some practioners think they can get some knowledge and do things by themselves but it really isn't possible.

Excellent post.

Pema Rigdzin wrote:Actually, the avadhuti begins on top of the head. If I'm not mistaken, it's right about where the coronal and sagittal sutures meet.

Hi PR, I believe in Guhyasamaja system, from the vertex it goes toward the fontanelle then arches down to the forehead to a point of origin between the two eyebrows.

tobes wrote:
I''m not sure what your point is here. If by fictitious you mean 'illusory' - in the sense of conventional (saṃvṛti) - then would you also advocate not going to a doctor when you have a chest pain, not eating and not drinking? Because your physical body is just as illusory as your subtle body. Treating them wisely does not imply treating them as non-existent.

This third eye you speak of is not illusory in the sense that it is dependently arisen, but the sense that it it just a product of imagination the syllable OM at the forehead is just that and corresponds to the enlightened body, not any third eye. It does not have to be developed, though it is practiced with, for sure. Then the central channel's opening is on top of the head, so that isn't the third eye. And the wisdom that cognizes emptiness is not spoken of as residing at the level associated in new age ideology as the third eye. The only time I've heard it used in Vajrayana was in English and by a Tibetan master trying to couch his language in terms he thought his particular western, new agey audience could relate to, and then it was just a metaphor for having opened up to one's own wisdom.

Now I don't mean to be saying "don't believe in that third eye business," but just speaking on it in relation to what Vajrayana and Dzogchen say. By all means, if this belief speaks to you or comforts you or you just plain like it, then have at it. Just don't say it's part of Buddhism.

Karma Dondrup Tashi wrote:

Pema Rigdzin wrote:Actually, the avadhuti begins on top of the head. If I'm not mistaken, it's right about where the coronal and sagittal sutures meet.

Hi PR, I believe in Guhyasamaja system, from the vertex it goes toward the fontanelle then arches down to the forehead to a point of origin between the two eyebrows.

Any reference for that? And certainly they don't refer to it--in Tibetan or Sanskrit--as "the third eye" or posit that the wisdom that cognizes emptiness resides there. Also, have you ever heard of ejecting one's consciousness through the forehead during phowa? I know I haven't, so I'm a little doubtful. I know the roma and kyangma go as you say, with the exception that they end up one at the nostrils--roma at the right and kyangma at the left nostril in men, and the reverse in women.

Pema Rigdzin wrote:Any reference for that?

Following cut and paste from publicly available source not my private scan.





Beer, The Handbook of Tibetan Buddhist Symbols, (2003) p.241.

In Kalachakra things may be different (so I have heard). I believe there it begins at the crown, curves forward to the forehead then descends back to the throat.

Pema Rigdzin wrote:Also, have you ever heard of ejecting one's consciousness through the forehead during phowa? I know I haven't, so I'm a little doubtful. I know the roma and kyangma go as you say, with the exception that they end up one at the nostrils--roma at the right and kyangma at the left nostril in men, and the reverse in women.

Re: Phowa I haven't received six yogas of Naropa or any Amitabha practices at this time - though from what I have heard transference is through the fontanelle of the skull only.