Non-Duality in Dzogchen vs Advaita Vedanta

Anonymous X
Posts: 813
Joined: Thu Mar 02, 2017 11:43 am
Location: Bangkok

Re: Non-Duality in Dzogchen vs Advaita Vedanta

Post by Anonymous X » Sun Aug 20, 2017 4:38 am

Matt J wrote:The thing I cannot fully shake is when you listen to Advaitins, they are always talking about identification. It is as though the key issue is to find the right target to identify with. So you won't identify with the body, energy, the parts of mind, the void (not the same as Buddhist emptiness no matter what they like to say), etc. But you DO identify with awareness, and then equate awareness with God. Buddhism, at least in my experience, always teaches non-identification.
Either one, identification, or non-identification, is not the point. These are mental activities. The cessation of these mental activities, duality, is the point. The natural state that is talked about is not concerned with identification.

User avatar
Vasana
Posts: 1745
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 11:22 am

Re: Non-Duality in Dzogchen vs Advaita Vedanta

Post by Vasana » Sun Aug 20, 2017 8:32 am

anjali wrote:
Vasana wrote:... I'd rather find more out about the Sahaja Samadhi as spoken of by Ramana [see above]and that of Mahamudra/Dzogchen
If you look in the book, Talks with Sri Ramana Maharshi, there is a wealth of info about Sahaja Samadhi.

[...]Of course mind here means dualistic mind. Resting in the natural state for dzogchen/mahamudra also involves the end of the dualistic mind. There is a difference in the two states, at least doctrinally--and most Buddhist would say experientially.
Thanks. Most Advaitan's I've spoken to, if not all, have said that one is timelessy free and it makes no difference what occurs pre or post sahaja where as Sahaja governed by Rigpa/yeshe is the 'result taken as the path' in Dzogchen and it's an all or nothing situation -you're either in [non-]meditation or you're in post-meditation. (don't quote me on this summary yet!) .

I've tried explaining the analogy of the sun being obscured by clouds /adventitious circumstances and vasanas but have been told that sahaja and vasanas were later introductions and not part of Advaitan scriptures. Going by descriptions alone, Ramana's take on Sahaja and things like detachment from pleasure and pain seem to be the closest things we have going to the Dzogchen/Mahamudra Sahaja devoid of attachment and aversion. As you said, I expect that some Buddhists would say there is an experiential difference between the two but there's a difficulty in reconciling the tolerating of Tāpatraya which seems to be a feature in both systems. Is it incorrect or a stretch for me to associate the tolerance of Tāpatraya in advaita as the absence of attachment/aversion that the Mahamudra/Dzogchen fruition speaks of?
Classical Advaita Vedanta emphasises the path of Jnana Yoga, a progression of study and training to attain moksha. It consists of four stages.

[...]Śamādi ṣatka sampatti (शमादि षट्क सम्पत्ति) — the sixfold qualities,
[1 of which is ] Titikṣa (the tolerating of tāpatraya).
Tāpatraya refers to the three sources of Tāpa (literally, heat, or suffering) recognised in Hindu philosophy:

Ādhyātmika — the suffering caused by 'internal' factors like diseases
Ādhibhoutika — the suffering caused by physical forces such as earthquakes etc.
Ādhidaivika — the suffering caused by Karmic factors

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T%C4%81patraya
'When alone, watch your mind. When with others, watch your speech'- Old Kadampa saying.

Anonymous X
Posts: 813
Joined: Thu Mar 02, 2017 11:43 am
Location: Bangkok

Re: Non-Duality in Dzogchen vs Advaita Vedanta

Post by Anonymous X » Sun Aug 20, 2017 9:26 am

Vasana wrote:
anjali wrote:
Vasana wrote:... I'd rather find more out about the Sahaja Samadhi as spoken of by Ramana [see above]and that of Mahamudra/Dzogchen
If you look in the book, Talks with Sri Ramana Maharshi, there is a wealth of info about Sahaja Samadhi.

[...]Of course mind here means dualistic mind. Resting in the natural state for dzogchen/mahamudra also involves the end of the dualistic mind. There is a difference in the two states, at least doctrinally--and most Buddhist would say experientially.
Thanks. Most Advaitan's I've spoken to, if not all, have said that one is timelessy free and it makes no difference what occurs pre or post sahaja where as Sahaja governed by Rigpa/yeshe is the 'result taken as the path' in Dzogchen and it's an all or nothing situation -you're either in [non-]meditation or you're in post-meditation. (don't quote me on this summary yet!) .

I've tried explaining the analogy of the sun being obscured by clouds /adventitious circumstances and vasanas but have been told that sahaja and vasanas were later introductions and not part of Advaitan scriptures. Going by descriptions alone, Ramana's take on Sahaja and things like detachment from pleasure and pain seem to be the closest things we have going to the Dzogchen/Mahamudra Sahaja devoid of attachment and aversion. As you said, I expect that some Buddhists would say there is an experiential difference between the two but there's a difficulty in reconciling the tolerating of Tāpatraya which seems to be a feature in both systems. Is it incorrect or a stretch for me to associate the tolerance of Tāpatraya in advaita as the absence of attachment/aversion that the Mahamudra/Dzogchen fruition speaks of?
Classical Advaita Vedanta emphasises the path of Jnana Yoga, a progression of study and training to attain moksha. It consists of four stages.

[...]Śamādi ṣatka sampatti (शमादि षट्क सम्पत्ति) — the sixfold qualities,
[1 of which is ] Titikṣa (the tolerating of tāpatraya).
Tāpatraya refers to the three sources of Tāpa (literally, heat, or suffering) recognised in Hindu philosophy:

Ādhyātmika — the suffering caused by 'internal' factors like diseases
Ādhibhoutika — the suffering caused by physical forces such as earthquakes etc.
Ādhidaivika — the suffering caused by Karmic factors

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T%C4%81patraya
Vasana, IIRC, Ramana never said Sahaj was something you came out of, so no post-sahaj experience. No experiencer is left. Sahaj should be synonymous with the natural state, irreversible, not an in and out like most people think. Ego was gone. Ramana described his own death. I believe in the books, they talk about 2 death events. Evidently, there are still energetic happenings that take place in the nervous system and body to integrate all this. It is not a mental process of concentration and other samadhis. All of that is gone.

User avatar
Vasana
Posts: 1745
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 11:22 am

Re: Non-Duality in Dzogchen vs Advaita Vedanta

Post by Vasana » Sun Aug 20, 2017 9:30 am

Yeah you're right. Pre-Sahaja and 'after' it's become a default mode of being/knowing is slightly more accurate.

As for the stuff related to the nervous system, I won't even go there cos then it'll require the comparison of yogic and tantric subtle anatomy and that's a whole other topic. Most traditional Advaitans seem to reject any deliberate yoga to a degree.
'When alone, watch your mind. When with others, watch your speech'- Old Kadampa saying.

Anonymous X
Posts: 813
Joined: Thu Mar 02, 2017 11:43 am
Location: Bangkok

Re: Non-Duality in Dzogchen vs Advaita Vedanta

Post by Anonymous X » Sun Aug 20, 2017 1:32 pm

Vasana wrote:Yeah you're right. Pre-Sahaja and 'after' it's become a default mode of being/knowing is slightly more accurate.

As for the stuff related to the nervous system, I won't even go there cos then it'll require the comparison of yogic and tantric subtle anatomy and that's a whole other topic. Most traditional Advaitans seem to reject any deliberate yoga to a degree.
The energetic stuff was from my own teacher who said these things were spontaneous occurrences, not cultivated at all. Someone took him to the Sankaracharya of Sringeri who listened to what happened to him. He said his teacher, who was now dead, had told him about these same things but were not part of the literature. Probably lost somewhere in antiquity. Many traditions either don't know or don't talk about these things.

Andrew David Boyle
Posts: 5
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2018 2:41 pm

Re: Non-Duality in Dzogchen vs Advaita Vedanta

Post by Andrew David Boyle » Tue Apr 03, 2018 3:03 pm

I don't think there is any difference.

Self-realisation in Advaita means to realise the Buddha Nature. This is the same Buddha Nature in Dzogchen and in the Mahamudra teachings. Modern Advaita master Mooji describes the primordial Buddha Nature in exactly the same was as Padmasbhava, almost word for word.

The realisation of the Self or Buddha Nature causes the practitioner to have spontaneous bodhichitta without discrimination. Mooji's description of the Buddha Nature/Self and the love that embraces the whole world that arises effortlesly towards every living being is not different from the love and compassion of a Buddha.

In \Mooji's Advaita/Zen teachings [he is referred to as a Advainta/Zen master] the person, self, I, - as in Buddhism - is exposed to be a complete fiction.

The essence is: there is no-person - the person is a fiction. The nature of the Self is spontaneous, universal love for all living beings without exception.
So what is the difference? Both systems transcend the illusory individual and cultivate a direct experience of the Buddha Nature: a vast, uncreated, space like awareness that has the nature of spontaneous bodhichitta.

As a practitioner of both Mahamudra for many years and now non-dual Advaita, I see little or no difference.

As for the idea of the witness, it is not a person looking. The question arises, when the person is seen to be an illusion like a mirage, with no substance whatsoever, who or what witnesses this?

krodha
Posts: 2440
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2011 10:30 pm

Re: Non-Duality in Dzogchen vs Advaita Vedanta

Post by krodha » Tue Apr 03, 2018 8:09 pm

Andrew David Boyle wrote:
Tue Apr 03, 2018 3:03 pm
I don't think there is any difference.
There is a monumental difference.

For one, the Dzogchen tantras reject the Advaita view by name and also explicitly reject the view of non-duality that Advaita Vedanta promulgates. The view of Advaita also breaks a Dzogchen samaya.

There's no room for interpretation on this one, and the Dzogchen corpus made sure of that.
Last edited by krodha on Tue Apr 03, 2018 8:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Grigoris
Global Moderator
Posts: 18021
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 9:27 pm
Location: Greece

Re: Non-Duality in Dzogchen vs Advaita Vedanta

Post by Grigoris » Tue Apr 03, 2018 8:12 pm

krodha wrote:
Tue Apr 03, 2018 8:09 pm
Andrew David Boyle wrote:
Tue Apr 03, 2018 3:03 pm
I don't think there is any difference.
There is a monumental difference.
My understanding is that Advaita posits a single unified cosmic conscious that all of us are individual expressions of (albeit, unknowing). Mahamudra/Dzogchen/Prajnaparamita/Tahagatagarbha theory says nothing of the sort.
"My religion is not deceiving myself."
Jetsun Milarepa 1052-1135 CE

"Butchers, prostitutes, those guilty of the five most heinous crimes, outcasts, the underprivileged: all are utterly the substance of existence and nothing other than total bliss."
The Supreme Source - The Kunjed Gyalpo
The Fundamental Tantra of Dzogchen Semde

User avatar
Sherab
Posts: 1218
Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2010 6:28 am

Re: Non-Duality in Dzogchen vs Advaita Vedanta

Post by Sherab » Tue Apr 03, 2018 11:53 pm

Grigoris wrote:
Tue Apr 03, 2018 8:12 pm
krodha wrote:
Tue Apr 03, 2018 8:09 pm
Andrew David Boyle wrote:
Tue Apr 03, 2018 3:03 pm
I don't think there is any difference.
There is a monumental difference.
My understanding is that Advaita posits a single unified cosmic conscious that all of us are individual expressions of (albeit, unknowing). Mahamudra/Dzogchen/Prajnaparamita/Tahagatagarbha theory says nothing of the sort.
Indeed. If the single unified cosmic conscious exists, then when an individual consciousness becomes enlightened, that cosmic consciousness must also become enlightened since the individual consciousness is part of the cosmic consciousness. If that cosmic consciousness becomes enlightened, then so must all other individual consciousnesses become enlightened.

If it is argued that the cosmic consciousness is already enlightened, then there is no reason why that knowledge cannot be shared with individual consciousnesses that are not enlightened since they are part of the cosmic consciousness. If the cosmic consciousness is already enlightened, there can be no unenlightened individual consciousness.

That is why the Buddha said in the Samdhinirmocana sutra "the ultimate is realized individually by the Aryas" since the Buddha had already realized that there is no single unified cosmic consciousness. For the same reason, he also knew that there is no Creator God. I would even argue that in Buddhism, there is no such thing as a miracle. It is merely a phenomenon whose working is not understood.

User avatar
Wayfarer
Global Moderator
Posts: 4179
Joined: Sun May 27, 2012 8:31 am
Location: Sydney AU

Re: Non-Duality in Dzogchen vs Advaita Vedanta

Post by Wayfarer » Wed Apr 04, 2018 4:59 am

Sherab wrote: I would even argue that in Buddhism, there is no such thing as a miracle. It is merely a phenomenon whose working is not understood.
'Miracles are not contrary to nature, but only contrary to what we know about nature' ~ St Augustine
Only practice with no gaining idea ~ Suzuki Roshi

User avatar
Sherab
Posts: 1218
Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2010 6:28 am

Re: Non-Duality in Dzogchen vs Advaita Vedanta

Post by Sherab » Thu Apr 05, 2018 12:44 am

Wayfarer wrote:
Wed Apr 04, 2018 4:59 am
Sherab wrote: I would even argue that in Buddhism, there is no such thing as a miracle. It is merely a phenomenon whose working is not understood.
'Miracles are not contrary to nature, but only contrary to what we know about nature' ~ St Augustine
And you do not think that what St Augustine said might just be incoherent within the context of God's omnipotence?

User avatar
Wayfarer
Global Moderator
Posts: 4179
Joined: Sun May 27, 2012 8:31 am
Location: Sydney AU

Re: Non-Duality in Dzogchen vs Advaita Vedanta

Post by Wayfarer » Thu Apr 05, 2018 6:41 am

This is not the forum for that argument. Just saying, that's all.
Only practice with no gaining idea ~ Suzuki Roshi

User avatar
Grigoris
Global Moderator
Posts: 18021
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 9:27 pm
Location: Greece

Re: Non-Duality in Dzogchen vs Advaita Vedanta

Post by Grigoris » Thu Apr 05, 2018 7:54 am

We are in a Dzogchen sub-forum talking about Advaita and Dzogchen and you quote a Christian? Can we stay on topic people?
"My religion is not deceiving myself."
Jetsun Milarepa 1052-1135 CE

"Butchers, prostitutes, those guilty of the five most heinous crimes, outcasts, the underprivileged: all are utterly the substance of existence and nothing other than total bliss."
The Supreme Source - The Kunjed Gyalpo
The Fundamental Tantra of Dzogchen Semde

User avatar
Sherab
Posts: 1218
Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2010 6:28 am

Re: Non-Duality in Dzogchen vs Advaita Vedanta

Post by Sherab » Fri Apr 06, 2018 9:38 am

Wayfarer wrote:
Thu Apr 05, 2018 6:41 am
This is not the forum for that argument. Just saying, that's all.
But you must have posted the quote in response to my post for a purpose. Otherwise your post is pointless.

I am guessing that the purpose of your post was to suggest that Buddhism may not be the only religion that argues that there are really no miracles. My reply was to suggest that a religion that has an Almightly God as the creator of the universe cannot reasonably hold such a position.

User avatar
Wayfarer
Global Moderator
Posts: 4179
Joined: Sun May 27, 2012 8:31 am
Location: Sydney AU

Re: Non-Duality in Dzogchen vs Advaita Vedanta

Post by Wayfarer » Fri Apr 06, 2018 9:58 am

The only point I was making was that such an idea is not unique to Buddhism.
Only practice with no gaining idea ~ Suzuki Roshi

Andrew David Boyle
Posts: 5
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2018 2:41 pm

Re: Non-Duality in Dzogchen vs Advaita Vedanta

Post by Andrew David Boyle » Wed Apr 11, 2018 1:49 pm

krodha wrote:
Tue Apr 03, 2018 8:09 pm
Andrew David Boyle wrote:
Tue Apr 03, 2018 3:03 pm
I don't think there is any difference.
There is a monumental difference.

For one, the Dzogchen tantras reject the Advaita view by name and also explicitly reject the view of non-duality that Advaita Vedanta promulgates. The view of Advaita also breaks a Dzogchen samaya.

There's no room for interpretation on this one, and the Dzogchen corpus made sure of that.
There is not a monumental difference between Mooji's teaching and the teachings of Dzogchen.
That is like saying there is a monumental difference between Buddha Nature and Buddha Nature.

Mooji's teachings and the teachings of Dzogchen are identical almost word for word when referring to the realisation of Buddha Nature
and the fictitious nature of the self, 'I' or person. I have just received the oral transmission of a very sacred Dzogchen text and was once again
was struck by how similar it was to the teachings of Mooji. Having studied Buddhism and practised Buddhism for many, many years, this is my conclusion.

Buddha Nature is Buddha Nature. The sign that someone has realised it is an effortless and spontaneous
universal compassion towards all living beings without discrimination and the profound understanding that
the person, 'I' or self is a mere fiction, as are all phenomena.

Mooji talks about the spontaneous compassion that arises from the direct realisation of the Buddha Nature
in the same way as the Buddhist masters do. Moreover, and more importantly, he seems to exhibit the qualities of this realisation.

Outwardly Mooji's view is that all phenomena arise from consciousness and are of the same nature of consciousness.
This is the Chittamantrin view and a view that some Tantris Prasangikas [non-scholars] also accept,
as in the final analysis Buddha's ultimate view is somewhere in between the Chittamantrin and Prasangika view.
It is beyond the mind!

I can only conclude you have not read Mooji's teachings, or most importantly meditated on his instructions. To be fair they might not strictly be Advaita as he is classified [on the cover of his books[ as a Zen / Advaita master.

Andrew David Boyle
Posts: 5
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2018 2:41 pm

Re: Non-Duality in Dzogchen vs Advaita Vedanta

Post by Andrew David Boyle » Wed Apr 11, 2018 2:15 pm

Grigoris wrote:
Tue Apr 03, 2018 8:12 pm
krodha wrote:
Tue Apr 03, 2018 8:09 pm
Andrew David Boyle wrote:
Tue Apr 03, 2018 3:03 pm
I don't think there is any difference.
There is a monumental difference.
My understanding is that Advaita posits a single unified cosmic conscious that all of us are individual expressions of (albeit, unknowing). Mahamudra/Dzogchen/Prajnaparamita/Tahagatagarbha theory says nothing of the sort.
Mahamudra says that all phenomena are manifestations of bliss and emptiness. The mind of clear light, which is the nature of bliss, mixes inseperably with emptiness, like water mixing with water. All phenomena are seen by the yogi to arise from this union of the clear light and emptiness.

Mooji [Advaita/ Zen master who I am familiar with] says all phenomena are manifestations of consciousness and the same nature as consciousness. The consciousness he is referring to is the clear light mind or Buddha Nature. This view is accepted by some Tantric Prsangikas and is almost indistinguishable from the standard Tantric Prasangika view. In summary, they are very, very similar.

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 28558
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Non-Duality in Dzogchen vs Advaita Vedanta

Post by Malcolm » Wed Apr 11, 2018 2:32 pm

Andrew David Boyle wrote:
Wed Apr 11, 2018 1:49 pm

Outwardly Mooji's view is that all phenomena arise from consciousness and are of the same nature of consciousness.
That is not Dzogchen view at all. Not even slightly.
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
Coëmgenu
Posts: 1752
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:35 pm
Location: Whitby, Ontario

Re: Non-Duality in Dzogchen vs Advaita Vedanta

Post by Coëmgenu » Wed Apr 11, 2018 2:36 pm

Malcolm wrote:
Wed Apr 11, 2018 2:32 pm
Andrew David Boyle wrote:
Wed Apr 11, 2018 1:49 pm

Outwardly Mooji's view is that all phenomena arise from consciousness and are of the same nature of consciousness.
That is not Dzogchen view at all. Not even slightly.
If I may inquire, although that isn't the Dzogchen view according to you, it does look like the general Yogācāra view.

Perhaps a formal thread, or at the very least a clarification in-thread, on what separates them would be in order?
नस्वातो नापिपरतो नद्वाभ्यां नाप्यहेतुतः उत्पन्ना जातु विद्यन्ते भावाः क्वचन केचन
There absolutely are no things, nowhere and none, that arise anew, neither out of themselves, nor out of non-self, nor out of both, nor at random.
सर्वं तथ्यं न वा तथ्यं तथ्यं चातथ्यम् एव च नैवातथ्यं नैव तथ्यम् एतद् बुद्धानुशासनम्
All is so, or all is not so, both so and not so, neither so nor not so. This is the Buddha's teaching.

一切實非實亦實亦非實
非實非非實是名諸佛法

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 28558
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Non-Duality in Dzogchen vs Advaita Vedanta

Post by Malcolm » Wed Apr 11, 2018 2:51 pm

Coëmgenu wrote:
Wed Apr 11, 2018 2:36 pm
Malcolm wrote:
Wed Apr 11, 2018 2:32 pm
Andrew David Boyle wrote:
Wed Apr 11, 2018 1:49 pm

Outwardly Mooji's view is that all phenomena arise from consciousness and are of the same nature of consciousness.
That is not Dzogchen view at all. Not even slightly.
If I may inquire, although that isn't the Dzogchen view according to you, it does look like the general Yogācāra view.

Perhaps a formal thread, or at the very least a clarification in-thread, on what separates them would be in order?
Our friend ADB has not clarified whether this consciousness is personal, as in Yogacāra, or transpersonal as in Advaita. Even so, the view of Yogācāra is not the view of Dzogchen, which view Dzogchen far surpasses, just as the sun outshines a candle.
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

Post Reply

Return to “Dzogchen”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: bfaus, javier.espinoza.t and 46 guests