Non-Duality in Dzogchen vs Advaita Vedanta

User avatar
Tārāmitra
Posts: 73
Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2016 10:02 pm

Re: Non-Duality in Dzogchen vs Advaita Vedanta

Post by Tārāmitra » Fri Feb 03, 2017 11:13 pm

Grigoris wrote:
nowawakening wrote:And also this has been echoed in various Masters, texts, and one could say simply deep intuitive knowing that Truth is not Advaitic Truth and Zen Truth and Dzogchen Truth - it is one Truth.
And that truth is???

Not such a good day.
That truth would be tathata, reality as it is, pure and non-conceptual, right? Truth is not some object out there to be grasped, it just is.
“What leads not to disenchantment, to dispassion, to cessation, to calm, to higher knowledge, to enlightenment, to liberation: that I have not declared.”
Buddha Śākyamuni, Teacher of Gods and Men

{Formerly known as Vidyavajra}

User avatar
KRB80
Posts: 39
Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2016 12:19 am
Location: New England, USA

Re: Non-Duality in Dzogchen vs Advaita Vedanta

Post by KRB80 » Fri Feb 03, 2017 11:29 pm

Vidyavajra wrote:
Grigoris wrote:
nowawakening wrote:And also this has been echoed in various Masters, texts, and one could say simply deep intuitive knowing that Truth is not Advaitic Truth and Zen Truth and Dzogchen Truth - it is one Truth.
And that truth is???

Not such a good day.
That truth would be tathata, reality as it is, pure and non-conceptual, right? Truth is not some object out there to be grasped, it just is.
Even that is saying too much.
We live in illusion and the appearance of things. There is a reality. We are that reality. When you understand this, you see that you are nothing, and being nothing, you are everything. That is all. - Kalu Rinpoche

User avatar
Tārāmitra
Posts: 73
Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2016 10:02 pm

Re: Non-Duality in Dzogchen vs Advaita Vedanta

Post by Tārāmitra » Fri Feb 03, 2017 11:35 pm

KRB80 wrote:
Vidyavajra wrote:
Grigoris wrote:And that truth is???

Not such a good day.
That truth would be tathata, reality as it is, pure and non-conceptual, right? Truth is not some object out there to be grasped, it just is.
Even that is saying too much.
(Noble silence)
“What leads not to disenchantment, to dispassion, to cessation, to calm, to higher knowledge, to enlightenment, to liberation: that I have not declared.”
Buddha Śākyamuni, Teacher of Gods and Men

{Formerly known as Vidyavajra}

User avatar
Tārāmitra
Posts: 73
Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2016 10:02 pm

Re: Non-Duality in Dzogchen vs Advaita Vedanta

Post by Tārāmitra » Fri Feb 03, 2017 11:47 pm

I haven't read through most of this thread, so might be missing something. But have there been any noteworthy records of dialogues between masters of Dzogchen and Advaita Vedanta that might be shared? I think that would be much more interesting than reading only the views of Buddhists, some of whom do not know Vedanta in any great depth.
“What leads not to disenchantment, to dispassion, to cessation, to calm, to higher knowledge, to enlightenment, to liberation: that I have not declared.”
Buddha Śākyamuni, Teacher of Gods and Men

{Formerly known as Vidyavajra}

User avatar
dzogchungpa
Posts: 6333
Joined: Sat May 28, 2011 10:50 pm

Re: Non-Duality in Dzogchen vs Advaita Vedanta

Post by dzogchungpa » Fri Feb 03, 2017 11:57 pm

Vidyavajra wrote:I haven't read through most of this thread, so might be missing something. But have there been any noteworthy records of dialogues between masters of Dzogchen and Advaita Vedanta that might be shared? I think that would be much more interesting than reading only the views of Buddhists, some of whom do not know Vedanta in any great depth.
Well, I think the expression "Advaita Vedanta" gets used carelessly here sometimes, but if you are willing to accept H. W. L. Poonja, AKA Papaji, as an example of a master of Advaita Vedanta then there there is a discussion between him and Chokyi Nyima Rinpoche in this book:
http://davidgodman.org/gen2/p/books/god ... views.html

I can't seem to remember if I have read it or not.
There is not only nothingness because there is always, and always can manifest. - Thinley Norbu Rinpoche

User avatar
dzogchungpa
Posts: 6333
Joined: Sat May 28, 2011 10:50 pm

Re: Non-Duality in Dzogchen vs Advaita Vedanta

Post by dzogchungpa » Sat Feb 04, 2017 1:09 am

BTW, this appears to be a French translation of their discussion:
https://eveilimpersonnel.blogspot.com/2 ... oonja.html
There is not only nothingness because there is always, and always can manifest. - Thinley Norbu Rinpoche

User avatar
Karma Dondrup Tashi
Posts: 1615
Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2009 7:13 pm

Re: Non-Duality in Dzogchen vs Advaita Vedanta

Post by Karma Dondrup Tashi » Sat Feb 04, 2017 1:50 am

Grigoris wrote:
Karma Dondrup Tashi wrote:
nowawakening wrote:Truth is not Advaitic Truth and Zen Truth and Dzogchen Truth - it is one Truth.
Good day.
It's not the same, because monism is different from emptiness. Emptiness is nonexistence, period. A non-affirming negation. Not mystical nonexistence, not "pregnant" nonexistence, not being-nonexistence, nonexistence, period.
You do not counter the claim of one extreme: an Ultimate Existent, with the claim of another extreme: an Ultimate non-Existent. Nagarjuna would spank you senseless for coming up with something like that.
Thank you for an image that will take years of therapy to repress.

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 28703
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Non-Duality in Dzogchen vs Advaita Vedanta

Post by Malcolm » Sat Feb 04, 2017 2:43 am

dzogchungpa wrote:
Vidyavajra wrote:I haven't read through most of this thread, so might be missing something. But have there been any noteworthy records of dialogues between masters of Dzogchen and Advaita Vedanta that might be shared? I think that would be much more interesting than reading only the views of Buddhists, some of whom do not know Vedanta in any great depth.
Well, I think the expression "Advaita Vedanta" gets used carelessly here sometimes, but if you are willing to accept H. W. L. Poonja, AKA Papaji, as an example of a master of Advaita Vedanta then there there is a discussion between him and Chokyi Nyima Rinpoche in this book:
http://davidgodman.org/gen2/p/books/god ... views.html

I can't seem to remember if I have read it or not.
papaji wrote: never advise anyone to renounce the world. This is not the way to get enlightenment. It has been tried both in the West and the East for thousands of years, but it has not given any good results. My advice is different. I simply say, ‘Keep quiet. Stay wherever you are. Don’t reject your worldly activities. Simply keep quiet for a single second and see what happens.’


This is good advice.
Buddhahood in This Life
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔


[A]nything at all that is well spoken is the word of the Buddha.

-- Ārya-adhyāśaya-sañcodana-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra

The different sūtras in accord with the emptiness
taught by the Sugata are definitive in meaning;
One can understand that all of those Dharmas in
which a sentient being, individual, or person are taught are provisional in meaning.

-- Samadhirāja Sūtra

User avatar
Tārāmitra
Posts: 73
Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2016 10:02 pm

Re: Non-Duality in Dzogchen vs Advaita Vedanta

Post by Tārāmitra » Sat Feb 04, 2017 3:00 am

Is it correct to say that it has not given any good results, though? How about Milarepa and countless others?
“What leads not to disenchantment, to dispassion, to cessation, to calm, to higher knowledge, to enlightenment, to liberation: that I have not declared.”
Buddha Śākyamuni, Teacher of Gods and Men

{Formerly known as Vidyavajra}

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 28703
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Non-Duality in Dzogchen vs Advaita Vedanta

Post by Malcolm » Sat Feb 04, 2017 3:06 am

Vidyavajra wrote:Is it correct to say that it has not given any good results, though? How about Milarepa and countless others?

Milarepa did not abandon anything. He was already free. He realized that. The how doesn't matter much.
Buddhahood in This Life
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔


[A]nything at all that is well spoken is the word of the Buddha.

-- Ārya-adhyāśaya-sañcodana-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra

The different sūtras in accord with the emptiness
taught by the Sugata are definitive in meaning;
One can understand that all of those Dharmas in
which a sentient being, individual, or person are taught are provisional in meaning.

-- Samadhirāja Sūtra

User avatar
Tārāmitra
Posts: 73
Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2016 10:02 pm

Re: Non-Duality in Dzogchen vs Advaita Vedanta

Post by Tārāmitra » Sat Feb 04, 2017 3:17 am

Malcolm wrote:
Vidyavajra wrote:Is it correct to say that it has not given any good results, though? How about Milarepa and countless others?

Milarepa did not abandon anything. He was already free. He realized that. The how doesn't matter much.
Yes, I am not saying it has to be one way or the other in terms of one's physical situation. But Milarepa’s songs clearly see plenty of value in renunciation of the world, at least for some practitioners during a certain phase of their journey. I think that each practitioner probably have to consider for themselves which circumstances are most beneficial for their practice, while of course not depending on any particular condition.

Edit: I didn't notice that you had edited your post when I wrote that.
“What leads not to disenchantment, to dispassion, to cessation, to calm, to higher knowledge, to enlightenment, to liberation: that I have not declared.”
Buddha Śākyamuni, Teacher of Gods and Men

{Formerly known as Vidyavajra}

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 28703
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Non-Duality in Dzogchen vs Advaita Vedanta

Post by Malcolm » Sat Feb 04, 2017 3:27 am

Vidyavajra wrote:
Malcolm wrote:
Vidyavajra wrote:Is it correct to say that it has not given any good results, though? How about Milarepa and countless others?

Milarepa did not abandon anything. He was already free. He realized that. The how doesn't matter much.
Milarepa’s songs...

...are quite often not by him at all.
Buddhahood in This Life
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔


[A]nything at all that is well spoken is the word of the Buddha.

-- Ārya-adhyāśaya-sañcodana-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra

The different sūtras in accord with the emptiness
taught by the Sugata are definitive in meaning;
One can understand that all of those Dharmas in
which a sentient being, individual, or person are taught are provisional in meaning.

-- Samadhirāja Sūtra

User avatar
Tārāmitra
Posts: 73
Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2016 10:02 pm

Re: Non-Duality in Dzogchen vs Advaita Vedanta

Post by Tārāmitra » Sat Feb 04, 2017 3:46 am

Malcolm wrote:
Vidyavajra wrote:
Malcolm wrote:

Milarepa did not abandon anything. He was already free. He realized that. The how doesn't matter much.
Milarepa’s songs...

...are quite often not by him at all.
I see. But so what?
“What leads not to disenchantment, to dispassion, to cessation, to calm, to higher knowledge, to enlightenment, to liberation: that I have not declared.”
Buddha Śākyamuni, Teacher of Gods and Men

{Formerly known as Vidyavajra}

User avatar
Karma Dondrup Tashi
Posts: 1615
Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2009 7:13 pm

Re: Non-Duality in Dzogchen vs Advaita Vedanta

Post by Karma Dondrup Tashi » Sat Feb 04, 2017 5:44 am

Vidyavajra wrote:Excuse me if I’m misunderstanding you, but I was under the impression that “non-existence, period” is one of the extremes, and falls into nihilism, i.e., not being the truth of the Middle Way.
I wouldn't worry. Statements like that can't cause much harm.

User avatar
monktastic
Posts: 477
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2012 3:48 am
Location: NYC

Re: Non-Duality in Dzogchen vs Advaita Vedanta

Post by monktastic » Thu Jun 29, 2017 2:28 am

HHDL wrote: A: I understand the Primordial Buddha, also known as Buddha Samantabhadra, to be the ultimate reality, the realm of the Dharmakaya-- the space of emptiness--where all phenomena, pure and impure, are dissolved. This is the explanation taught by the Sutras and Tantras. However, in the context of your question, the tantric tradition is the only one which explains the Dharmakaya in terms of Inherent clear light, the essential nature of the mind; this would seem imply that all phenomena, samsara and nirvana, arise from this clear and luminous source. Even the New School of Translation came to the conclusion that the "state of rest" of a practitioner of the Great Yoga--Great Yoga implies here the state of the practitioner who has reached a stage in meditation where the most subtle experience of clear light has been realized--that for as long as the practitioner remains in this ultimate sphere he or she remains totally free of any sort of veil obscuring the mind, and is immersed in a state of great bliss.

We can say, therefore, that this ultimate source, clear light, is close to the notion of a Creator, since all phenomena, whether they belong to samsara or nirvana, originate therein. But we must be careful in speaking of this source, we must not be led into error. I do not mean chat there exists somewhere, there, a sort of collective clear light, analogous to the non-Buddhist concept of Brahma as a substratum. We must not be inclined to deify this luminous space. We must understand that when we speak of ultimate or inherent clear light, we are speaking on an individual level.
http://hhdl.dharmakara.net/hhdlquotes22.html

I do not understand this. All phenomena in "my" world -- including the colorful splotches I describe as "other beings" -- originate from "my" Samantabhadra. What sense does it make to speak of "other" worlds (or beings with their own Samantabhadras), if, by definition, I can never encounter them in any way?

If everything I could ever call "world" came from "my" Samantabhadra, then I still have no way of distinguishing this concept from "god." :shrug:

Edit: Except, of course, that I should look for it "inside" and not "outside."
This undistracted state of ordinary mind
Is the meditation.
One will understand it in due course.

--Gampopa

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 28703
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Non-Duality in Dzogchen vs Advaita Vedanta

Post by Malcolm » Thu Jun 29, 2017 1:47 pm

monktastic wrote:
HHDL wrote: A: I understand the Primordial Buddha, also known as Buddha Samantabhadra, to be the ultimate reality, the realm of the Dharmakaya-- the space of emptiness--where all phenomena, pure and impure, are dissolved. This is the explanation taught by the Sutras and Tantras. However, in the context of your question, the tantric tradition is the only one which explains the Dharmakaya in terms of Inherent clear light, the essential nature of the mind; this would seem imply that all phenomena, samsara and nirvana, arise from this clear and luminous source. Even the New School of Translation came to the conclusion that the "state of rest" of a practitioner of the Great Yoga--Great Yoga implies here the state of the practitioner who has reached a stage in meditation where the most subtle experience of clear light has been realized--that for as long as the practitioner remains in this ultimate sphere he or she remains totally free of any sort of veil obscuring the mind, and is immersed in a state of great bliss.

We can say, therefore, that this ultimate source, clear light, is close to the notion of a Creator, since all phenomena, whether they belong to samsara or nirvana, originate therein. But we must be careful in speaking of this source, we must not be led into error. I do not mean chat there exists somewhere, there, a sort of collective clear light, analogous to the non-Buddhist concept of Brahma as a substratum. We must not be inclined to deify this luminous space. We must understand that when we speak of ultimate or inherent clear light, we are speaking on an individual level.
http://hhdl.dharmakara.net/hhdlquotes22.html

I do not understand this. All phenomena in "my" world -- including the colorful splotches I describe as "other beings" -- originate from "my" Samantabhadra. What sense does it make to speak of "other" worlds (or beings with their own Samantabhadras), if, by definition, I can never encounter them in any way?

If everything I could ever call "world" came from "my" Samantabhadra, then I still have no way of distinguishing this concept from "god." :shrug:

Edit: Except, of course, that I should look for it "inside" and not "outside."
It is commonly misunderstood that when one says "all the dharmas of samsara and nirvana" this refers to entities out there in the world. It does not. It refers to one's own aggregates, sense bases, and elements. "All phenomena" means the one aggregate, the material aggregate with its external objects made of the four elements; one sense base refers to the sense base of the mind; and elements refers to the dharmadhātu which contains all the mental factors and unconditioned phenomena.

Thus, when one does not recognize the basis for what it is, one reifies the five lights of one's own pristine consciousness as the five elements; at the same time oneself is doing this, so are infinite myriads of other sentient beings. Shabkar for example, uses the example of how a women who meditated on herself as a tigress terrified a small village in order to show that our own mental projections can generate appearances for others and vice versa:
  • When a devaputra asked the Buddha:
    "Who made Meru, the sun and the moon, and so on?"
    The Buddha said:
    "There is no other creator here.
    The attachment of the traces of one’s conceptuality
    imputes them, grasps them and then they appear in that way.
    Everything is created by one’s mind."
    When the devaputra asked the Buddha again:
    "How can the attachment of my concepts
    make the hardness and stability of
    Meru, the sun and moon, and so on?"
    The Buddha said:
    "In Varanasi, an old woman
    meditated her own body as a tiger.
    Since the villagers saw her
    as a tiger, they evacuated the village.
    If one is able to appear like that for a little while,
    if one cultivates mental traces for beginningless lifetimes,
    one will be able to appear like this for a year."
    Therefore, everything is created by the mind.
M
Buddhahood in This Life
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔


[A]nything at all that is well spoken is the word of the Buddha.

-- Ārya-adhyāśaya-sañcodana-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra

The different sūtras in accord with the emptiness
taught by the Sugata are definitive in meaning;
One can understand that all of those Dharmas in
which a sentient being, individual, or person are taught are provisional in meaning.

-- Samadhirāja Sūtra

User avatar
monktastic
Posts: 477
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2012 3:48 am
Location: NYC

Re: Non-Duality in Dzogchen vs Advaita Vedanta

Post by monktastic » Thu Jun 29, 2017 3:21 pm

Thanks Malcolm-la. But doesn't this still mean everything I perceive as my (aka "the", to me) world?
This undistracted state of ordinary mind
Is the meditation.
One will understand it in due course.

--Gampopa

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 28703
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Non-Duality in Dzogchen vs Advaita Vedanta

Post by Malcolm » Thu Jun 29, 2017 3:24 pm

monktastic wrote:Thanks Malcolm-la. But doesn't this still mean everything I perceive as my world?
No, you also perceive the mental projections of others.

Also the material aggregate is not one's own, strictly speaking.
Buddhahood in This Life
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔


[A]nything at all that is well spoken is the word of the Buddha.

-- Ārya-adhyāśaya-sañcodana-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra

The different sūtras in accord with the emptiness
taught by the Sugata are definitive in meaning;
One can understand that all of those Dharmas in
which a sentient being, individual, or person are taught are provisional in meaning.

-- Samadhirāja Sūtra

User avatar
monktastic
Posts: 477
Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2012 3:48 am
Location: NYC

Re: Non-Duality in Dzogchen vs Advaita Vedanta

Post by monktastic » Fri Jun 30, 2017 6:35 pm

Sorry, this seems to be going over my head. If I read your last message correctly, there are things that I experience that do not originate from my individual Samantabhadra?
This undistracted state of ordinary mind
Is the meditation.
One will understand it in due course.

--Gampopa

User avatar
Vasana
Posts: 1747
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 11:22 am

Re: Non-Duality in Dzogchen vs Advaita Vedanta

Post by Vasana » Mon Aug 14, 2017 8:01 am

Rehashing an old thread after speaking with some Advaitans and I was wondering if anyone could explain how vāsanās and the arising of thoughts are to be seen from an Advaitan perspective since they've yet to explain. It seems to be that most Advaitans think that nothing need be done with dualistic thought and habit despite these clearly being antithetical to an ongoing state of wisdom/jñāna. In Dzogchen, there's ripened and unripened vidyā and I was wondering if Advaita had such classifications.

I see a lot about Advaitan 'view' but rarely see much material explaining the experiential side of equipoise and the factors that give rise or interrupt it and would like to understand how this is dealt with in their system.
'When alone, watch your mind. When with others, watch your speech'- Old Kadampa saying.

Post Reply

Return to “Dzogchen”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 78 guests