nah, I have plenty of reading to do for now. besides...dzogchungpa wrote:Well, I'm sure you could use The Offering Bowl or something like that to finance the purchase of a copy right now.DGA wrote:I hope a lot of people buy that book, read it, and make a favorable connection. Then I hope they sell all those copies to used bookstores so I can get an inexpensive copy.
Just a reminder,this is happening in 3.5 hours.dzogchungpa wrote:Just thought I'd point out that there's a webcast tomorrow, November 26th 1 PM-2 PM PST:
https://pristinemind.org/programs/1153/ ... n-program/
It's on.dzogchungpa wrote:Just a reminder,this is happening in 3.5 hours.dzogchungpa wrote:Just thought I'd point out that there's a webcast tomorrow, November 26th 1 PM-2 PM PST:
https://pristinemind.org/programs/1153/ ... n-program/
No, "clarity" in this context does not refer to the conventional nature of mind. Here is a discussion in which one party promotes a meditation on a conventional object of mind, a so-called "generic image."Tsongkhapafan wrote:I watched the webcast and did the meditation.
So pristine mind is nothing more than stopping thinking? Surely, at best, it's only a meditation on the conventional nature of the mind ('clarity'). It seems directionless and not very profound! (sorry!).
Are you referring to conventional or ultimate bodhicitta? the answer to your question about clarity and the point I was making about lhundrub in some respects depends on your answer to this questionI can see that it's relaxing but Bodhichitta is far more splendorous and beneficial.
i knew lhundrup to mean something quite differentDGA wrote:No, "clarity" in this context does not refer to the conventional nature of mind. Here is a discussion in which one party promotes a meditation on a conventional object of mind, a so-called "generic image."Tsongkhapafan wrote:I watched the webcast and did the meditation.
So pristine mind is nothing more than stopping thinking? Surely, at best, it's only a meditation on the conventional nature of the mind ('clarity'). It seems directionless and not very profound! (sorry!).
http://dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f= ... 60#p368782
I can't speak for Orgyen Chowang, but generally "clarity" is used to translate the Tibetan term lhundrub, which denotes something that is not limited to the conventional mind. It would be worth your time to investigate the Tibetan concepts kadag and lhundrub.
If you are accustomed to the highly structured programs characteristic of a cult, then yes, this material will likely seem directionless and open-ended to you.
Are you referring to conventional or ultimate bodhicitta? the answer to your question about clarity and the point I was making about lhundrub in some respects depends on your answer to this questionI can see that it's relaxing but Bodhichitta is far more splendorous and beneficial.
I think DGA is referring to the clarity which belongs to the nature, lhun grub. This clarity [gsal ba] is not the same as the various kinds of clarity that belong to the three realms, and can also be referred to as 'od gsal, luminosity; or zang thal, pellucidity.florin wrote:i knew lhundrup to mean something quite differentDGA wrote:No, "clarity" in this context does not refer to the conventional nature of mind. Here is a discussion in which one party promotes a meditation on a conventional object of mind, a so-called "generic image."Tsongkhapafan wrote:I watched the webcast and did the meditation.
So pristine mind is nothing more than stopping thinking? Surely, at best, it's only a meditation on the conventional nature of the mind ('clarity'). It seems directionless and not very profound! (sorry!).
http://dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f= ... 60#p368782
I can't speak for Orgyen Chowang, but generally "clarity" is used to translate the Tibetan term lhundrub, which denotes something that is not limited to the conventional mind. It would be worth your time to investigate the Tibetan concepts kadag and lhundrub.
If you are accustomed to the highly structured programs characteristic of a cult, then yes, this material will likely seem directionless and open-ended to you.
Are you referring to conventional or ultimate bodhicitta? the answer to your question about clarity and the point I was making about lhundrub in some respects depends on your answer to this questionI can see that it's relaxing but Bodhichitta is far more splendorous and beneficial.
That's what the meditation was on.DGA wrote:
No, "clarity" in this context does not refer to the conventional nature of mind.
Both are wonderfully profound.Are you referring to conventional or ultimate bodhicitta? the answer to your question about clarity and the point I was making about lhundrub in some respects depends on your answer to this question
Whatever happened to your union of two truths.Tsongkhapafan wrote:That's what the meditation was on.DGA wrote:
No, "clarity" in this context does not refer to the conventional nature of mind.
Both are wonderfully profound.Are you referring to conventional or ultimate bodhicitta? the answer to your question about clarity and the point I was making about lhundrub in some respects depends on your answer to this question
Also, you cannot realise the ultimate nature of the mind by meditating on its conventional nature. You can meditate on clarity for a thousand years but you will never realise emptiness.
Doesn't this require direct introduction 99.99999% of the time? Wouldn't it be more correct to characterize what he's describing as objectless shamatha or similar?In facilitating that increasingly clear view of our mind, this meditation leads us to "realization"- a realization of what our mind truly is and who we really are.
Once thoughts and emotions subside, we are left with the experience of Pristine Mind. You need to experience it for yourself. And this meditation is the way to accomplish that.
The book is just an introduction to something for a general, not necessarily even Buddhist, audience. At one point in it he quotes Guru Rinpoche approvingly as follows:aflatun wrote:Pardon my ignorance all, but perhaps you could clarify something for me. He seems to imply that one can follow the instructions and in time experience Pristine Mind:
Doesn't this require direct introduction 99.99999% of the time? Wouldn't it be more correct to characterize what he's describing as objectless shamatha or similar?In facilitating that increasingly clear view of our mind, this meditation leads us to "realization"- a realization of what our mind truly is and who we really are.
Once thoughts and emotions subside, we are left with the experience of Pristine Mind. You need to experience it for yourself. And this meditation is the way to accomplish that.
and goes on to say:Guru Rinpoche Padmasambhava says:
If you want to perceive the nature of reality, then you need a qualified spiritual master.
When both of these conditions are met—the qualified teacher and the qualified student—then the Pristine Mind experience, unconditional happiness, and ultimate enlightenment can manifest.
Thank you for the response. I seem to recall something of the sort, but despite that I ask because most of the book seems explanatory and prescriptive. So then I'm incorrect, what he's describing is not objectless shamatha but actual abiding in rig pa (with the assumption that the reader cannot "follow the book" without a teacher of course?)dzogchungpa wrote:The book is just an introduction to something for a general, not necessarily even Buddhist, audience. At one point in it he quotes Guru Rinpoche approvingly as follows:aflatun wrote:Pardon my ignorance all, but perhaps you could clarify something for me. He seems to imply that one can follow the instructions and in time experience Pristine Mind:
Doesn't this require direct introduction 99.99999% of the time? Wouldn't it be more correct to characterize what he's describing as objectless shamatha or similar?In facilitating that increasingly clear view of our mind, this meditation leads us to "realization"- a realization of what our mind truly is and who we really are.
Once thoughts and emotions subside, we are left with the experience of Pristine Mind. You need to experience it for yourself. And this meditation is the way to accomplish that.and goes on to say:Guru Rinpoche Padmasambhava says:
If you want to perceive the nature of reality, then you need a qualified spiritual master.When both of these conditions are met—the qualified teacher and the qualified student—then the Pristine Mind experience, unconditional happiness, and ultimate enlightenment can manifest.
Pristine Mind Meditation is Rinpoche's name for the mind class of the Great Perfection. Dzogchen Semde.aflatun wrote:Thank you for the response. I seem to recall something of the sort, but despite that I ask because most of the book seems explanatory and prescriptive. So then I'm incorrect, what he's describing is not objectless shamatha but actual abiding in rig pa (with the assumption that the reader cannot "follow the book" without a teacher of course?)dzogchungpa wrote:The book is just an introduction to something for a general, not necessarily even Buddhist, audience. At one point in it he quotes Guru Rinpoche approvingly as follows:aflatun wrote:Pardon my ignorance all, but perhaps you could clarify something for me. He seems to imply that one can follow the instructions and in time experience Pristine Mind:
Doesn't this require direct introduction 99.99999% of the time? Wouldn't it be more correct to characterize what he's describing as objectless shamatha or similar?and goes on to say:Guru Rinpoche Padmasambhava says:
If you want to perceive the nature of reality, then you need a qualified spiritual master.When both of these conditions are met—the qualified teacher and the qualified student—then the Pristine Mind experience, unconditional happiness, and ultimate enlightenment can manifest.
Thank you in advance.
Thank you kindly for the response, I will have to do some back reading on this to understand more fullyYudron wrote:Pristine Mind Meditation is Rinpoche's name for the mind class of the Great Perfection. Dzogchen Semde.aflatun wrote:Thank you for the response. I seem to recall something of the sort, but despite that I ask because most of the book seems explanatory and prescriptive. So then I'm incorrect, what he's describing is not objectless shamatha but actual abiding in rig pa (with the assumption that the reader cannot "follow the book" without a teacher of course?)dzogchungpa wrote:
The book is just an introduction to something for a general, not necessarily even Buddhist, audience. At one point in it he quotes Guru Rinpoche approvingly as follows:
and goes on to say:
Thank you in advance.
