Very clear statements about the Dzogchen path- Tulku Urgyen Rinpoche

User avatar
Thomas Amundsen
Posts: 2034
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2011 2:50 am
Location: Helena, MT
Contact:

Re: Very clear statements about the Dzogchen path- Tulku Urgyen Rinpoche

Post by Thomas Amundsen »

Simon E. wrote:
Johnny Dangerous wrote:Wow, this degenerated quickly.
Oh I think it did just what it said on the tin, Johnny. 8-)
Indeed.
User avatar
dzogchungpa
Posts: 6333
Joined: Sat May 28, 2011 10:50 pm

Re: Very clear statements about the Dzogchen path- Tulku Urgyen Rinpoche

Post by dzogchungpa »

Dzogchen is really great, isn't it?
There is not only nothingness because there is always, and always can manifest. - Thinley Norbu Rinpoche
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Very clear statements about the Dzogchen path- Tulku Urgyen Rinpoche

Post by Malcolm »

dzogchungpa wrote:
Astus wrote:
Johnny Dangerous wrote:As far as a meditation instruction? All over the place iirc. I've seen the same instruction in Mahamudra writings I'm certain, heck..I think I even read some Thai Forest people and Zen people with the instruction to observe the observer, know the knower etc. Not saying it's the same thing exactly in those contexts of course...
Mahamudra vipasyana instruction starts with first observing the mind, then thoughts, then external phenomena. As for Zen, it is one of the first questions (huatou) given: Who is it?; or in China especially: Who is reciting the name? (i.e. asking this while chanting Namo Amituo Fo). By the way, Neo-Advaita has this method as well, particularly in Ramana's community, since they actually believe in an ultimate observer.
Gnothi seauton and all that. I don't want to get into a big argument about this as it is off-topic, but your statement about Ramana and his "community" is not correct.

:focus:
Can you substantiate this? Quite frankly, many claims are made about RM, but when one reads what he has actually written on this and that subject, one gets the sense that his view does not go beyond normative Hindu tropes.
User avatar
dzogchungpa
Posts: 6333
Joined: Sat May 28, 2011 10:50 pm

Re: Very clear statements about the Dzogchen path- Tulku Urgyen Rinpoche

Post by dzogchungpa »

Malcolm wrote:
dzogchungpa wrote:
Astus wrote:
Mahamudra vipasyana instruction starts with first observing the mind, then thoughts, then external phenomena. As for Zen, it is one of the first questions (huatou) given: Who is it?; or in China especially: Who is reciting the name? (i.e. asking this while chanting Namo Amituo Fo). By the way, Neo-Advaita has this method as well, particularly in Ramana's community, since they actually believe in an ultimate observer.
Gnothi seauton and all that. I don't want to get into a big argument about this as it is off-topic, but your statement about Ramana and his "community" is not correct.

:focus:
Can you substantiate this? Quite frankly, many claims are made about RM, but when one reads what he has actually written on this and that subject, one gets the sense that his view does not go beyond normative Hindu tropes.
Well, why don't you first substantiate the statement that RM believed in an ultimate observer for me? Honestly, it's not so clear what RM's ultimate view was, but from having read a fair amount of his teachings I doubt that he or his closest students would accept such a statement. Just off the top of my head, here is something I quoted on DW once, from "Talks With Sri Ramana Maharshi":
D.: Is not the Self the witness only (sakshimatra)?
M.: ‘Witness’ is applicable when there is an object to be seen. Then it is duality. The Truth lies beyond both. In the mantra, sakshi cheta kevalo nirgunascha, the word sakshi must be understood as sannidhi (presence), without which there could be nothing. See how the sun is necessary for daily activities. He does not however form part of the world actions; yet they cannot take place without the sun. He is the witness of the activities. So it is with the Self.
Anyway, like I said I don't want to get into an argument about it.

:focus:
There is not only nothingness because there is always, and always can manifest. - Thinley Norbu Rinpoche
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Very clear statements about the Dzogchen path- Tulku Urgyen Rinpoche

Post by Malcolm »

dzogchungpa wrote:
M.: ‘Witness’ is applicable when there is an object to be seen. Then it is duality. The Truth lies beyond both. In the mantra, sakshi cheta kevalo nirgunascha, the word sakshi must be understood as sannidhi (presence), without which there could be nothing. See how the sun is necessary for daily activities. He does not however form part of the world actions; yet they cannot take place without the sun. He is the witness of the activities. So it is with the Self.
Anyway, like I said I don't want to get into an argument about it.

:focus:
This is just standard Shaiva view, ultimately rooted in the Saṃkhya notion of Puruśa/Jñā.


People who study tenet systems and Dzogchen view properly would recognize this instantly. Frankly, people who do not study tenets and Dzogchen view in a proper frequently conflate the two, as have a number of Gelugpa savants.

Finally, if you don't want to get into arguments about this or that, don't bring it up.
User avatar
dzogchungpa
Posts: 6333
Joined: Sat May 28, 2011 10:50 pm

Re: Very clear statements about the Dzogchen path- Tulku Urgyen Rinpoche

Post by dzogchungpa »

Malcolm wrote:This is just standard Shaiva view, ultimately rooted in the Saṃkhya notion of Puruśa/Jñā.


People who study tenet systems and Dzogchen view properly would recognize this instantly. Frankly, people who do not study tenets and Dzogchen view in a proper frequently conflate the two, as have a number of Gelugpa savants.

Finally, if you don't want to get into arguments about this or that, don't bring it up.
Well, I didn't bring it up, I was just responding to Astus. Furthermore, I am not claiming that that quote represents his ultimate view, or that it has anything to do with Dzogchen. If you really want me to substantiate the claim that RM did not believe in an ultimate observer that might be kind of tricky, but I guess I could try. Frankly, I don't think "tenets" were that big a deal for RM. :smile:

BTW, which Gelugpa savants conflated the two?
There is not only nothingness because there is always, and always can manifest. - Thinley Norbu Rinpoche
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Very clear statements about the Dzogchen path- Tulku Urgyen Rinpoche

Post by Malcolm »

dzogchungpa wrote:
BTW, which Gelugpa savants conflated the two?
Sumpa Khenpo, etc.
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Very clear statements about the Dzogchen path- Tulku Urgyen Rinpoche

Post by Malcolm »

dzogchungpa wrote:
Well, I didn't bring it up, I was just responding to Astus.
Rebutting something you are not prepared to actually rebut? Well, I guess it is just the internet after all...
Natan
Posts: 3650
Joined: Fri May 23, 2014 5:48 pm

Re: Very clear statements about the Dzogchen path- Tulku Urgyen Rinpoche

Post by Natan »

Simon E. wrote:Awesome, he said that ChNN would line up to drink his piss?


Well, I'm convinced..yes sirree.
What he said was if there's a great lama folks would line up to drink his piss, including he would get in that line.

And yeah Dzogchen is great, really great.
Vajra fangs deliver vajra venom to your Mara body.
Natan
Posts: 3650
Joined: Fri May 23, 2014 5:48 pm

Re: Very clear statements about the Dzogchen path- Tulku Urgyen Rinpoche

Post by Natan »

Johnny Dangerous wrote:Wow, this degenerated quickly.
It degenerated because nobody seems to have a single useful thing to add to or counter anything said in the article which speaks for it self. Now everyone should know the proper place of deity practice and practice in general according to the GP. Whether that's working on me or not is nobody's goddamn business.
Vajra fangs deliver vajra venom to your Mara body.
User avatar
dzogchungpa
Posts: 6333
Joined: Sat May 28, 2011 10:50 pm

Re: Very clear statements about the Dzogchen path- Tulku Urgyen Rinpoche

Post by dzogchungpa »

Malcolm wrote:
dzogchungpa wrote:Well, I didn't bring it up, I was just responding to Astus.
Rebutting something you are not prepared to actually rebut? Well, I guess it is just the internet after all...
I said his statement was not correct. Why? Because I don't see how it could be established. I can provide more quotes that I feel support the idea that RM would not have accepted an "ultimate observer", but why bother? If this issue is important to you, why don't you contact an expert like David Godman? I'm sure he would respond.
There is not only nothingness because there is always, and always can manifest. - Thinley Norbu Rinpoche
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Very clear statements about the Dzogchen path- Tulku Urgyen Rinpoche

Post by Malcolm »

dzogchungpa wrote:
Malcolm wrote:
dzogchungpa wrote:Well, I didn't bring it up, I was just responding to Astus.
Rebutting something you are not prepared to actually rebut? Well, I guess it is just the internet after all...
I said his statement was not correct. Why? Because I don't see how it could be established. I can provide more quotes that I feel support the idea that RM would not have accepted an "ultimate observer", but why bother? If this issue is important to you, why don't you contact an expert like David Godman? I'm sure he would respond.
No proper Saṃkhya or Advaitan would accept an ultimate buddhi/mahat. Buddhi, etc., is relative, and nonsentient.

Purusha, on the other hand, is a passive, disengaged "enjoyer" which "lights up" the tattvas from buddhi down to the element of earth.

When Purusha recognizes buddhi down to the element of earth as not being its own state, it takes the name Jñā, the knower.

The difference between Saṃkhya and Advaita is the Saṃkhya recognizes infinite separate puruśas, whereas Advaita recognizes only one. In both cases, puruśa is eternal.

M
Natan
Posts: 3650
Joined: Fri May 23, 2014 5:48 pm

Re: Very clear statements about the Dzogchen path- Tulku Urgyen Rinpoche

Post by Natan »

I thought you were going to light up all the way down to buddhi town.
Vajra fangs deliver vajra venom to your Mara body.
User avatar
Quay
Posts: 340
Joined: Mon May 16, 2016 6:07 pm

Re: Very clear statements about the Dzogchen path- Tulku Urgyen Rinpoche

Post by Quay »

Crazywisdom wrote:The following interview should settle many debates about Dzogchen. ....
Should is a strange word in English. It almost never happens as it should. Or as the therapists say, woulda-coulda-shoulda. :-)
"Knowledge is as infinite as the stars in the sky;
There is no end to all the subjects one could study.
It is better to grasp straight away their very essence--
The unchanging fortress of the Dharmakaya."

– Longchenpa.
User avatar
Johnny Dangerous
Global Moderator
Posts: 17071
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 10:58 pm
Location: Olympia WA
Contact:

Re: Very clear statements about the Dzogchen path- Tulku Urgyen Rinpoche

Post by Johnny Dangerous »

Crazywisdom wrote:
Johnny Dangerous wrote:Wow, this degenerated quickly.
It degenerated because nobody seems to have a single useful thing to add to or counter anything said in the article which speaks for it self. Now everyone should know the proper place of deity practice and practice in general according to the GP. Whether that's working on me or not is nobody's goddamn business.
Ok ok, put down the chair.

The article cleared some stuff for me, wasn't tryin' to knock it.
Meditate upon Bodhicitta when afflicted by disease

Meditate upon Bodhicitta when sad

Meditate upon Bodhicitta when suffering occurs

Meditate upon Bodhicitta when you are scared

-Khunu Lama
Simon E.
Posts: 7652
Joined: Tue May 15, 2012 11:09 am

Re: Very clear statements about the Dzogchen path- Tulku Urgyen Rinpoche

Post by Simon E. »

Malcolm wrote:
dzogchungpa wrote:
Malcolm wrote:
Rebutting something you are not prepared to actually rebut? Well, I guess it is just the internet after all...
I said his statement was not correct. Why? Because I don't see how it could be established. I can provide more quotes that I feel support the idea that RM would not have accepted an "ultimate observer", but why bother? If this issue is important to you, why don't you contact an expert like David Godman? I'm sure he would respond.
No proper Saṃkhya or Advaitan would accept an ultimate buddhi/mahat. Buddhi, etc., is relative, and nonsentient.

Purusha, on the other hand, is a passive, disengaged "enjoyer" which "lights up" the tattvas from buddhi down to the element of earth.

When Purusha recognizes buddhi down to the element of earth as not being its own state, it takes the name Jñā, the knower.

The difference between Saṃkhya and Advaita is the Saṃkhya recognizes infinite separate puruśas, whereas Advaita recognizes only one. In both cases, puruśa is eternal.

M
When I was about 16 or so I read a lot of and about Raman Maharshi, It kind of led me to Buddhadharma, so when I had the opportunity years later to visit the Ramanashram I was pretty excited.
What an anticlimax.
One of the most dispiriting places I have ever been to. Atmosphere like a shopping mall on a wet Sunday. Groups of lost looking westerners mooching around looking for something that they had left benind in Idaho or Ipswich.
Just sayin'.
“You don’t know it. You just know about it. That is not the same thing.”

Chogyam Trungpa Rinpoche to me.
User avatar
anjali
Former staff member
Posts: 1662
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2011 10:33 pm

Re: Very clear statements about the Dzogchen path- Tulku Urgyen Rinpoche

Post by anjali »

Malcolm wrote:No proper Saṃkhya or Advaitan would accept an ultimate buddhi/mahat. Buddhi, etc., is relative, and nonsentient.

Purusha, on the other hand, is a passive, disengaged "enjoyer" which "lights up" the tattvas from buddhi down to the element of earth.

When Purusha recognizes buddhi down to the element of earth as not being its own state, it takes the name Jñā, the knower.
True, but that's not the final word relative to RM's teachings. It's worth noting that RM has given apparently contradictory teachings on the witness/knower. For example,
  • In the course of conversation with a learned man who asked about Purusha and Prakriti, Sri Bhagavan said: Purusha and Prakriti are only the bifurcation of the one Supreme.They are surmised because the student has the sense of duality deep rooted.
Which is contrasted with statements like,
  • Unless one knows oneself as the witness, ignorance, which takes the form of the ego, will not be removed.
The apparent contradiction is resolved with teaching instructions such as,
  • He must first discern consciousness from insentience and be the consciousness only. Later let him realise that insentience is not apart from consciousness.
Image
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Very clear statements about the Dzogchen path- Tulku Urgyen Rinpoche

Post by Malcolm »

anjali wrote:
  • In the course of conversation with a learned man who asked about Purusha and Prakriti, Sri Bhagavan said: Purusha and Prakriti are only the bifurcation of the one Supreme.They are surmised because the student has the sense of duality deep rooted.
Which is completely consistent with Advaita.
Which is contrasted with statements like,
  • Unless one knows oneself as the witness, ignorance, which takes the form of the ego, will not be removed.
The apparent contradiction is resolved with teaching instructions such as,
Which is completely consistent with Saṃkhya and Advaita.
  • He must first discern consciousness from insentience and be the consciousness only. Later let him realise that insentience is not apart from consciousness.
[/quote]

Which is completely consistent with Advaita.
BuddhaFollower
Posts: 602
Joined: Thu Apr 16, 2015 1:41 pm

Re: Very clear statements about the Dzogchen path- Tulku Urgyen Rinpoche

Post by BuddhaFollower »

Simon E. wrote:When I was about 16 or so I read a lot of and about Raman Maharshi, It kind of led me to Buddhadharma, so when I had the opportunity years later to visit the Ramanashram I was pretty excited.
What an anticlimax.
One of the most dispiriting places I have ever been to. Atmosphere like a shopping mall on a wet Sunday. Groups of lost looking westerners mooching around looking for something that they had left benind in Idaho or Ipswich.
Just sayin'.
If you are looking for "atmosphere" :quoteunquote: , go to the still functioning ancient Hindu temples all around India.
Just recognize the conceptualizing mind.
User avatar
anjali
Former staff member
Posts: 1662
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2011 10:33 pm

Re: Very clear statements about the Dzogchen path- Tulku Urgyen Rinpoche

Post by anjali »

Malcolm wrote:...Which is completely consistent with Advaita.
...Which is completely consistent with Saṃkhya and Advaita.
...Which is completely consistent with Advaita.
I'm in agreement with your replies. The only point I was making was that Witness (with a capital W) consciousness is not merely a passive, dualistic observer. We have to understand RM's views on this from the perspective that everything is consciousness--which is in line with both Advaita and Shaivism. For example, RM notes that
  • As it is consciousness that appears as everything, those who have known the truth of consciousness have known the truth of everything.
  • To a muni [a sage], all the multifarious scenes that appear before him will shine merely as the ever-present consciousness.
Of course from a Buddhist POV, that's not the end of the story. As Kroda noted earlier,
kroda wrote:Although ultimately "recognizing the recognizer" is a provisional step and not the main point. Leaving it there would render the exercise incomplete.

The purpose of placing the attention on "that which recognizes" is to gain insight into the nature of that noetic capacity.
The reason I'm a Buddhist lies in the simple phrase, empty cognizance. :) As an aside, here is a rather interesting Q&A exchange with RM about his direct experience.
[Q: Is there no dehatma buddhi (l-am-the-body idea) for the jnani? If, for instance, Sri Bhagavan is bitten by an insect, is there no sensation?
A: There is the sensation and there is also the dehatma buddhi. The latter is common to both jnani and ajnani with this difference, that the ajnani thinks only the body is myself, whereas the jnani knows all is of the Self, or all this is Brahman. If there be pain let it be. It is also part of the Self. The Self is poorna (perfect). After transcending dehatma buddhi one becomes a jnani. In the absence of that idea there cannot be either kartritva (doership) or karta (doer). So a jnani has no karma (that is, a jnani performs no actions). That is his experience. Otherwise he is not a jnani. However the ajnani identifies the jnani with his body, which the jnani does not do.

Q: I see you doing things. How can you say that you never perform actions?
A: The radio sings and speaks, but if you open it you will find no one inside. Similarly, my existence is like the space; though this body speaks like the radio, there is no one inside as a doer.
Regardless of what level of realization folks think RM has attained, I doubt many of us here could make a similar statement about the permanent realization of our space-like nature. ;)
Image
Post Reply

Return to “Dzogchen”