Direct introduction. What is it?

[zenman]

What is direct introduction? What happens in that? Are there levels of direct introduction?

Thank you.

[Ivo]

What is direct introduction? What happens in that? Are there levels of direct introduction?

Thank you.

Say you have been watching an interesting movie for a very, very long time, like tens of thousands of years. You have long ago forgotten that it was a movie, you are totally integrated in it. Ten suddenly someone manages to distract you for a moment, and for a brief glimpse you shockingly realize that you are sitting somewhere and indeed just watching a movie. You of course sink right back into it afterwards, as it is such a strong habit, but something already happened and from now on, in a sense, there is no turning back. Direct introduction is like that.

If you then remember what happened and start feeling a wish to realize what is going on, and start using some special methods to distract yourself, you may even be able to walk out of the theater on your own before this episode is over, or at the end of it, or at least, during the intermission before the next one.

As for levels - distraction is distraction, but there are some levels depending on how strong the attachment to the movie is and on whether this has happened before to some extent or not. The power of the one who is distracting you and his method also plays a role, as does the particular attachment you have to the precise moment in the movie during which all this is happening. But generally, since taking direct introduction is a voluntary thing most of the time, we have usually gotten to the point where we have changed the movie itself and it is also talking to us about distraction and movies all the time. Things have already started to fall apart. Someone in our movie just walked out of some door and suddenly asked "What is direct introduction?" So we are doomed already.

At the end, of course, we find out that ourselves, the movie, the distraction and the distractor, the "walking out of the heather", the introduction, the forum, the thought process is all a movie too.

[zenman]

I found this from here: http://tsegyalgar.org/theteachings/dzog ... nsmission/

In general: The transmission of knowledge from master to disciple can be oral, symbolic or direct. The uniqueness of the Dzogchen teaching is the direct transmission or "direct introduction" in which the master and the student find themselves in the primordial state at the same moment through one of the experiences related to body, voice or mind. Due to the power of the transmission, the students are able to discover their own real condition in this way.

In particular: In addition to his extensive world-wide retreats, Chögyal Namkhai Norbu offers direct introduction three times a year, on the anniversaries of Garab Dorje, Guru Padmasambhava, and Adzom Drugpa. In order to make it possible for people who cannot attend a retreat or come to a direct introduction in person, these direct transmissions are offered by live webcast at local Gars and Lings world-wide.

Okey... I joined NN's direct transmission a couple of weeks ago through webcast on Padmashambhava's anniversary. I already mentioned this in some other thread. I do not mean to foolishly critisize any person in my next comment. My intention is to talk about matters in analytical light.

Dzogchen is said the be the top of all teachings and "uniqueness of the Dzogchen teaching is the direct transmission or "direct introduction" in which the master and the student find themselves in the primordial state". I remember in the last one and in the same transmission two or three years ago by NN, he read a lengthy Tibetan text and at some point shouted "Phat!". I've seen discussions of this shout, and of course to me, a man of zen, it isn't nothing new. To be honest, in the light of several years of zen training with several top masters, my first thought was that was NN not feeling well because his shout was not that strong, or clear. With most respect I say that his shout on those occasions wasn't comparable to the clarity and power I have received from some elder zen masters whose shouts put solid wooden temples shaking and hit like a thousand volts. I say this with respect.

From what I have read from other threads about this topic, I understood that also Dzogchen-masters use this shout as one of their main tools in making the direct introduction. I suppose this is "direct" method as listed one of the way it can be done.

Is oral direct transmission sort of like a guided meditation where the lama points out things as the teacher and student meditate, share conscious space, together?

What is symbolic direct transmission?

[Norwegian]

Seeing how you have criticized Chogyal Namkhai Norbu and his teachings (saying stuff like he doesn't teach tregcho (!?!), complaining that he doesn't teach thogal in the open, etc.), and keep criticizing him, you certainly are 100% clueless about Dzogchen, that much is clear.

[zenman]

Seeing how you have criticized Chogyal Namkhai Norbu and his teachings (saying stuff like he doesn't teach tregcho (!?!), complaining that he doesn't teach thogal in the open, etc.), and keep criticizing him, you certainly are 100% clueless about Dzogchen, that much is clear.

Huh? You must confuse me with someone else. I never said those things.

[Ivo]

There are many types of direct introduction in Dzogchen. Oral introduction may take the form of what you are describing. Symbolic transmission is for students with very high capacity and does not use the rational mind at all.

As for your other points, the Dzogchen tradition has very distinct "taste" which is different from zen, so it is very hard to talk about wether the attainment is comparable or not. Of course, from a Dzogchen POV Zen is sutra and there is no comparison whatsoever. This is backed up by considerable evidence in the form of scripture and reasoning, (and I too subscribe to this). Norbu Rinpoche has written an exposition about the difference between Dzogchen and Zen, find it and read it, it will make clear his point of view. The truth of the matter is however, that one usually grows in one tradition and is totally biased by the methods which have helped him attain realizations (or status). I am always very weary of comparisons between traditions as you can not really judge what you have not followed to the end. Even if you switch from Zen to Dzogchen and eventually attain realization through Dzogchen, does this mean that it is better? No. It means that it was more suitable to you. But there seem to be certain attainments which are specific to Dzogchen, like the body of light, etc. It finally boils down to wether you want to investigate the tradition in depth or not. If you do want to investigate it, then you need to find a good Dzogchen teacher and get into personal relationship. From your comments it seems that there is not much karmic connection with Norbu Rinpoche, but there are other good Tibetan Dzogchen masters out there.

[Norwegian]

Seeing how you have criticized Chogyal Namkhai Norbu and his teachings (saying stuff like he doesn't teach tregcho (!?!), complaining that he doesn't teach thogal in the open, etc.), and keep criticizing him, you certainly are 100% clueless about Dzogchen, that much is clear.

Huh? You must confuse me with someone else. I never said those things.

I am referring to the following thread: http://dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=48&t=20281

First you cited someone else, commenting about ChNN's teachings - a rant of someone who do not understand Dzogchen - then, you agreed with that rant, and thought ChNN's way of teaching was "lame".

Then, you posted the following:

About a week ago I watched one of his webcasts, annual Padmashambhava transmission, as I have done a few times before. With respect to all concerned, I am not interested in learning Tibetan to read a text for 35 minutes. I also didn't see anything special in him or his teachings before. I also doubt if he gives detailed in-depth advice on these webcasts in public as teachings becoming diluted always happens when there are hundreds of people, big organisation, involved. I don't want to sound an idiot (although I probably can't help it) saying this but please correct me if I am wrong...

and then you posted this:

If he taught meditation practices like trekcho and thogal going straight and keeping to the point, then sure I'd probably tune in too.

Which shows that you don't understand this properly enough. Your attitude is very wrong.

[treehuggingoctopus]

Which shows that you don't understand this properly enough. Your attitude is very wrong.

On the other hand, to criticise a teacher is to very much initiate a relationship with him or her -- a relationship which might bear its first fruits soon enough, might it not?

@Ivo: thanks for lovely posts.

[Norwegian]

Which shows that you don't understand this properly enough. Your attitude is very wrong.

On the other hand, to criticise a teacher is to very much initiate a relationship with him or her -- a relationship which might bear its first fruits soon enough, might it not?

Of course.

But there are better ways to form a relationship though...

[dzogchungpa]

The Tirthikas have this idea of dvesha yoga, i.e. the yoga of hatred. The classic example of a dvesha yogi is Shishupala, whose hatred for Krishna was so obsessive that he was always thinking about him, and who attained liberation as a result of his one pointed "devotion" to God.

[zenman]

Is the shout an important media for the direct introduction in dzogchen or not?

All I was saying was that in my personal experience NN's direct introduction that he gave in two different webcasts were not as good in quality as those of roshis I've known. Are zen roshis pointing to something else than dzogchen lamas? We are talking about transmission here which is based on the realisation and yogic skill of the teacher. If the realisation and skill to transmit it is not there or are somehow obstructed due to illness for example, then the quality can alter. This is the case no matter what tradition.

I am talking about this matter in general. I have taken NN's transmissions as a comparison because those are the only dzogchen transmissions I have joined. I do not at all mean to just critisize him. That is not at all what I am doing here.

Let's discuss direct introduction. Please do make comparative remarks if you can.

[Paul]

Is the shout an important media for the direct introduction in dzogchen or not?

There are many methods and aspects to direct introduction.

All I was saying was that in my personal experience NN's direct introduction that he gave in two different webcasts were not as good in quality as those of roshis I've known. Are zen roshis pointing to something else than dzogchen lamas?

Zen is not Dzogchen. There is no direct introduction in zen for one thing.

[dzogchungpa]

The power of the one who is distracting you and his method also plays a role ...

This is kind of an important point and might need clarification.

[zenman]

There are many methods and aspects to direct introduction.
Zen is not Dzogchen. There is no direct introduction in zen for one thing.

Care to make a list?

I can only make my conclusions based on what I have experienced. Zen is not dzogchen, fine. And yet it seems evident to me that what NN was doing is exactly the same as what roshis do.

Btw, why the reluctancy to compare and discuss between traditions? I have seen this many times, also on this forum.

[Paul]

There are many methods and aspects to direct introduction.
Zen is not Dzogchen. There is no direct introduction in zen for one thing.

Care to make a list?

There are three kinds of direct introduction - direct, oral and symbolic. There are also methods using clarity, sensation or emptiness.

I can only make my conclusions based on what I have experienced. Zen is not dzogchen, fine. And yet it seems evident to me that what NN was doing is exactly the same as what roshis do.

Btw, why the reluctancy to compare and discuss between traditions? I have seen this many times, also on this forum.

No, it's not the same. If you study dzogchen properly you'll see there's major differences that are very significant. Zen is sutra, for one thing. It also does not have any teachings on lhundrub or the different methods of dzogchen practice. It's not a reluctance to discuss things, it's actual differences.

[zenman]

There are also methods using clarity, sensation or emptiness.

No, it's not the same. If you study dzogchen properly you'll see there's major differences that are very significant. Zen is sutra, for one thing. It also does not have any teachings on lhundrub or the different methods of dzogchen practice. It's not a reluctance to discuss things, it's actual differences.

Clarity, sensation and emptiness? Can you open this just a teeny bit more? Clarity as in rigpa/knowing clarity? Sensation related to sensory organs? Emptiness of rigpa and phenomena?

I am not suggesting that zen and dzogchen are the same. I am only comparing direct introduction.

[Meido]

There is no direct introduction in zen for one thing.

This is correct: the term "direct introduction" is not used in Zen.

"Direct pointing", as in "Direct pointing at the mind" (直指人心 - cf. Bodhidharma's four lines) by which one's nature is recognized, is a common Zen term for the action of the teacher which reveals the gate of the path upon which subsequent practice is based. It is understood to take place through various means, the mechanisms of which may be described in terms of kiai (気合 - energetic resonance) and transformation within the ba (場 - "field") of a realized teacher, by which the student experiences the teacher's condition. Assuming, of course, that the teacher has sufficient realization and power, and the student's sharpness/ripeness is sufficient. All of this is dealt with explicitly in oral teachings regarding dokusan/sanzen (encounter between teacher and student).

Posting only because Zen has been mentioned: I'm personally not interested in comparing apples and oranges.

FWIW, I've experienced Dzogchen direct introduction or Mahamudra pointing out instructions from three teachers, and Zen direct pointing from four teachers. I would not say that all of them were exactly the same. I would also not say that any of them were lacking, at all.

More than that, actually, I wouldn't say on a public forum like this. I also would not comment in depth regarding any tradition in which I had not personally attained at least teaching authorization; I'll never understand why folks do that (no matter how eminent) since the results are usually so far off base.

~ Meido

[dzogchungpa]

"Direct pointing", as in "Direct pointing at the mind" (直指人心 - cf. Bodhidharma's four lines) by which one's nature is recognized, is a common Zen term for the action of the teacher which reveals the gate of the path upon which subsequent practice is based. It is understood to take place through various means, the mechanisms of which may be described in terms of kiai (気合 - energetic resonance) and transformation within the ba (場 - "field") of a realized teacher, by which the student experiences the teacher's condition. Assuming, of course, that the teacher has sufficient realization and power, and the student's sharpness/ripeness is sufficient. All of this is dealt with explicitly in oral teachings regarding dokusan/sanzen (encounter between teacher and student).

This is interesting to me, is there nothing available in books about this point?

[Astus]

Zenman,

Regarding your experience with Dzogchen transmission, it should not be forgotten that it happens within the context of guru yoga. As they quote from Padmasambhava in Beyond Words (p 71-72): "'If a practitioner views the master, the transmitter of the lineage, as a totally realized being - a Buddha - then he can become a Buddha. If the Guru is seen as a normal teacher, then the one who sees him this way will realize the state of normal person. If seen as a little dog, he will obtain the realization of a dog."

Also, comparing Zen with Dzogchen is problematic on many levels, basically because very few know enough of both. And even if one has studied Zen in depth at one place, there are numerous other Zen lineages and traditions to study.

It could be said that in the end various teachings lead to the same realisation of suchness. The difference lies in the method, however. Dzogchen has guru yoga, Zen does not. Zen teaches sudden enlightenment, Dzogchen does not. Dzogchen is based on tantras, Zen is not. Zen has nothing to transmit, Dzogchen does. Etc.

I recommend you read the book Beyond Words, as a basic introduction to ChNN's tradition of Dzogchen. See the following quote:

Direct Transmission

Frequently, direct transmission takes place in a most unorthodox way. With Tilopa and Naropa, Naropa was awakened by being slapped on the face with a wet fish. Patrul Rinpoche, the much-loved Tibetan vagabond saint of the nineteenth century, was awakened by his master Do Khyentse, whom he took to be a drunk! Do Khyentse, guessing his thoughts, spat in his face. Insulting him, he showed him his little finger and called him an Old Dog. At that point total clear realization of the luminous state of intrinsic awareness dawned in Patrul Rinpoche's mind: his mind and the non-dual mind of his master, the Buddha's mind, were completely merged.

Symbolic Transmission

Symbolic transmission means that the transmission is done in a wordless fashion or without direct explanation. Generally it is done through a crystal, a mirror or even a peacock feather. Both the mirror and the crystal are symbois of the primordially pure state of mind, able to manifest infinite reflections without changing their own intrinsic pure nature. A peacock feather is a natural manifestation of infinite potentiality, symbolized through a circle or thigle of five colours.

Oral Transmission

Oral transmission takes·place when the teachings are explained orally by the teacher so that the student can understand their primordial and perfected state of mind. It also includes methods of practice which are taught to enable the experience of this state of knowledge.

[daelm]

I would also not say that any of them were lacking, at all. More than that, actually, I wouldn't say on a public forum like this. I also would not comment in depth regarding any tradition in which I had not personally attained at least teaching authorization; I'll never understand why folks do that (no matter how eminent) since the results are usually so far off base.

~ Meido

Yes. Thank you, Meido.

Zenman, this is why your approach is not getting the results you hope for. You need to consider modifying your approach, rather than just doing the same things each time you ask a question. You start closed, filled with opinion, and you end closed, filled with opinion. There's nothing "Zen" about that, and if you want to learn new things, it's your responsibility to make space for them. Others can't do that for you.