Troma nagmo and rainbow body

[Nyingjetsal]

The explanation is that merit is crucial in actually realising the view. That lama accumulated sufficient merit by persevering in his mandala offering practise and attained the view with no need for pointing out. Is implicit, guru devotion is in his mandala offering practice so he received blessing from his lineage too.

WeiHan, of course you're right that merit is crucial to realizing the view, as are devotion, which causes blessings to enter one's body, speech, and mind. Nevertheless, the realization of the body of light is dependent upon more than devotion, merit, and blessings. It's based on the interdependence between specific methods and functions of the physical body and one's natural state.

This is what I maybe doubtful. As far as I know, Trechok is Samantha with the view. There shouldn't be any difference for a person who realised/attained the view through other methods and are able to maintain in that view or state all the time.

As far as I know, Alan says that the view can unfold from meditation (shamatha) - which is the gradual approach. Or the view can be recognized and then stabilized, which is the direct approach. I understand Alan as emphasizing the gradual approach, perhaps because there are very few students who can recognize the view without extensive prior training, but also perhaps because he doesn't give any pointing out instructions which of course makes the latter difficult to practice...

I don't know much about Trekchöd myself, but I would understand your quote from above to reflect that Trekchö includes the union of vipassana (which is the recognition) and shamtatha (which is the training in making room for that recognition). That is however something different from the methods commonly refered to as shamatha, such as when fixating and holding on to a meditative object. I guess that was not what was meant in the quote...?

[Tongnyid Dorje]

Can I ask, who in this threadd is realy devoted to Troma Nagmo as main practice?

I think it would be safe to assume that nobody discussing Throma Nagmo in this thread has taken her as a yidam. If they had, they wouldn't be discussing it.

[WeiHan]

WeiHan, of course you're right that merit is crucial to realizing the view, as are devotion, which causes blessings to enter one's body, speech, and mind. Nevertheless, the realization of the body of light is dependent upon more than devotion, merit, and blessings. It's based on the interdependence between specific methods and functions of the physical body and one's natural state.

This is what I maybe doubtful. As far as I know, Trechok is Samantha with the view. There shouldn't be any difference for a person who realised/attained the view through other methods and are able to maintain in that view or state all the time.

As far as I know, Alan says that the view can unfold from meditation (shamatha) - which is the gradual approach. Or the view can be recognized and then stabilized, which is the direct approach. I understand Alan as emphasizing the gradual approach, perhaps because there are very few students who can recognize the view without extensive prior training, but also perhaps because he doesn't give any pointing out instructions which of course makes the latter difficult to practice...

I don't know much about Trekchöd myself, but I would understand your quote from above to reflect that Trekchö includes the union of vipassana (which is the recognition) and shamtatha (which is the training in making room for that recognition). That is however something different from the methods commonly refered to as shamatha, such as when fixating and holding on to a meditative object. I guess that was not what was meant in the quote...?

Perhaps, I should have posted the link which is below. I don't think Alan Wallace is saying practicing shamatha and letting the view arise but he is saying that trechok IS shamatha combined with the view. Of course, it is not ordinary shamatha that is focusing on an object or conceptual thought. Maybe, you can listen yourselves. It is the first question.

[dharmafootsteps]

Perhaps, I should have posted the link which is below. I don't think Alan Wallace is saying practicing shamatha and letting the view arise but he is saying that trechok IS shamatha combined with the view. Of course, it is not ordinary shamatha that is focusing on an object or conceptual thought. Maybe, you can listen yourselves. It is the first question.

It's difficult to discern which parts of that answer are what Yangthang Rinpoche said, and which are Wallace's elaborations. Most of the answer is using Wallace's usual language for describing these things.

For convenience, here's a transcript I found here: https://elizabeth-reninger.com/cutting-through/

Q: What is the difference between the shamatha practice of “awareness of awareness,” and the practice of trekchö?

AW: Very good …. and so this question was posed to [Yangthang Rinpoche] last fall, and his answer [was]: Anyone can practice awareness of awareness. You can be a materialist, a Christian, an agnostic, Muslim, Buddhist, anything you like. It has no theory, has no view that goes with it. It’s technology. Shamatha’s technology: it’s contemplative technology. Vipassana is contemplativescience. And to become a Vidyadhara, or practice that meditation, is very deep science.

And so, to practice awareness of awareness is simply resting in the flow — this phenomenological or existential flow — of being aware. That’s all there is to it. But now you may use the same method – and that is, just be resting in the flow of awareness – perhaps observing that which is aware. But if you cut through the conditioned mind – this mind that is arising from moment to moment; that is conditioned by many, many causes and conditions; that becomes virtuous and non-virtuous; dull and clear, and so forth – if you cut through this fluctuating and conditioned mind, you cut through that (it’s trekchö [which] means cutting through something rigid and gnarly) and cut through to the Ground … and you actually are viewing reality from the perspective of Rigpa – that’s your vantage point – the method is the same, but because you’re viewing reality from the perspective of Rigpa, the method is now trekchö.

So the same method, without the view, is shamatha; with the view, is trekchö.

[Nyingjetsal]

[quote=dharmafootsteps

So the same method, without the view, is shamatha; with the view, is trekchö.
[/quote]

Thats one way to put it.

Or one can say, awareness of awareness is method, recognition is wisdom.

I've heard a lama say that recognition is only possible if we let go of the very act of looking, so I'm not sure if it is accuarate to say it is 'the same method'.

Agree that it is unclear what Yangthang Rinpoche said and what is Alans words...

[Tata1]

WeiHan, of course you're right that merit is crucial to realizing the view, as are devotion, which causes blessings to enter one's body, speech, and mind. Nevertheless, the realization of the body of light is dependent upon more than devotion, merit, and blessings. It's based on the interdependence between specific methods and functions of the physical body and one's natural state.

This is what I maybe doubtful. As far as I know, Trechok is Samantha with the view. There shouldn't be any difference for a person who realised/attained the view through other methods and are able to maintain in that view or state all the time.

As far as I know, Alan says that the view can unfold from meditation (shamatha) - which is the gradual approach. Or the view can be recognized and then stabilized, which is the direct approach. I understand Alan as emphasizing the gradual approach, perhaps because there are very few students who can recognize the view without extensive prior training, but also perhaps because he doesn't give any pointing out instructions which of course makes the latter difficult to practice...

I don't know much about Trekchöd myself, but I would understand your quote from above to reflect that Trekchö includes the union of vipassana (which is the recognition) and shamtatha (which is the training in making room for that recognition). That is however something different from the methods commonly refered to as shamatha, such as when fixating and holding on to a meditative object. I guess that was not what was meant in the quote...?

He does give pointing out instrucctions to his advance students.

[Tata1]

This is what I maybe doubtful. As far as I know, Trechok is Samantha with the view. There shouldn't be any difference for a person who realised/attained the view through other methods and are able to maintain in that view or state all the time.

As far as I know, Alan says that the view can unfold from meditation (shamatha) - which is the gradual approach. Or the view can be recognized and then stabilized, which is the direct approach. I understand Alan as emphasizing the gradual approach, perhaps because there are very few students who can recognize the view without extensive prior training, but also perhaps because he doesn't give any pointing out instructions which of course makes the latter difficult to practice...

I don't know much about Trekchöd myself, but I would understand your quote from above to reflect that Trekchö includes the union of vipassana (which is the recognition) and shamtatha (which is the training in making room for that recognition). That is however something different from the methods commonly refered to as shamatha, such as when fixating and holding on to a meditative object. I guess that was not what was meant in the quote...?

Perhaps, I should have posted the link which is below. I don't think Alan Wallace is saying practicing shamatha and letting the view arise but he is saying that trechok IS shamatha combined with the view. Of course, it is not ordinary shamatha that is focusing on an object or conceptual thought. Maybe, you can listen yourselves. It is the first question.

No, he is not saying that. You are putting words in his mouth.

He is just talking about the difference between trekchod and shamata (without object) since both may seem similar as they both imply resting in some sort of awareness.

If that resting is in the view trekchod if not shamata without object

[WeiHan]

As far as I know, Alan says that the view can unfold from meditation (shamatha) - which is the gradual approach. Or the view can be recognized and then stabilized, which is the direct approach. I understand Alan as emphasizing the gradual approach, perhaps because there are very few students who can recognize the view without extensive prior training, but also perhaps because he doesn't give any pointing out instructions which of course makes the latter difficult to practice...

I don't know much about Trekchöd myself, but I would understand your quote from above to reflect that Trekchö includes the union of vipassana (which is the recognition) and shamtatha (which is the training in making room for that recognition). That is however something different from the methods commonly refered to as shamatha, such as when fixating and holding on to a meditative object. I guess that was not what was meant in the quote...?

Perhaps, I should have posted the link which is below. I don't think Alan Wallace is saying practicing shamatha and letting the view arise but he is saying that trechok IS shamatha combined with the view. Of course, it is not ordinary shamatha that is focusing on an object or conceptual thought. Maybe, you can listen yourselves. It is the first question.

No, he is not saying that. You are putting words in his mouth.

He is just talking about the difference between trekchod and shamata (without object) since both may seem similar as they both imply resting in some sort of awareness.

If that resting is in the view trekchod if not shamata without object

My main point isn't really that. I am just saying that there different methods for attaining the view. Trechod isn't the only way as clearly there are other practices that mention rainbowbody as possible manifestation. The original discussion was about why this practice produced so many rainbow bodies. Someone then say that because it contains trechod and thogal instruction too which is true.

[Josef]

I don't understand why one will need trekchod and togal to attain rainbow body. The chinese site reported that a Nyingma lama who refused to practice any other methods other than mandala offering has attained rainbow body.

If they attained rainbow body they were practicing trekcho and/or thogal. Perhaps externally it looked as though they only offered mandala, but internally that was not the case if jalu was manifested.

Any text to support this? Of course, texts mentioned that trekcho and thogal can results in rainbow body but are there any texts that assert these are the only method?

From a Q&A with Dzongsa Khyentse Rinpoche, when asked whether if one can still attain rainbow body if one does not practice the yoga of body union.

His answer was: Can. There are different methods to attain rainbow body, it can also be attained by practicing six or ten paramitas, even though one may be practicing the Mahayana bodhisattva path, rainbow body can similarly be attained. Actually, rainbow body means that you realise yourselves to be the union of emptiness and luminosity, because rainbow body itself is empty in nature, yet it has colours (red, orange, yellow, green, blue, indigo, violet...) and it can be seen by our eyes.

Is the entire collection of the 17 tantras sufficient textual reference for you? If not, their commentaries by Vimilamitra and Longchenpa might help.
Those colors wont be recognized unless one is practicing Dzogchen and has received instructions on Longde or Trekcho and Thogal. The reason for this is that the basis as it is described and introduced in Dzogchen nyingthig is the only place where you find the relationship between ngowo, rangzhin, and thugje and the base, path, and fruition. There may be some other kind of "body of light" that people talk about but the jalu phowa chenpo of Ati yoga is attained through Dzogchen. That quote is either taken out of context or mistaken.

[Sonam Wangchug]

I don't understand why one will need trekchod and togal to attain rainbow body. The chinese site reported that a Nyingma lama who refused to practice any other methods other than mandala offering has attained rainbow body.

If they attained rainbow body they were practicing trekcho and/or thogal. Perhaps externally it looked as though they only offered mandala, but internally that was not the case if jalu was manifested.

Any text to support this? Of course, texts mentioned that trekcho and thogal can results in rainbow body but are there any texts that assert these are the only method?

From a Q&A with Dzongsa Khyentse Rinpoche, when asked whether if one can still attain rainbow body if one does not practice the yoga of body union.

His answer was: Can. There are different methods to attain rainbow body, it can also be attained by practicing six or ten paramitas, even though one may be practicing the Mahayana bodhisattva path, rainbow body can similarly be attained. Actually, rainbow body means that you realise yourselves to be the union of emptiness and luminosity, because rainbow body itself is empty in nature, yet it has colours (red, orange, yellow, green, blue, indigo, violet...) and it can be seen by our eyes.

There are four different kinds of Rainbow body spoken of.

Not all refer to the Rainbow body related to Thogal.

Sakya Lamdre teachings also say that Lamdre manifests in the Rainbow Body.

It's hard to know the context of what is directly being referred to here.

There is also the case like with Marpa where he manifested in a ball of light when he passed away.

This is from a Nyingma perspective, as Sarma practitioners may claim it is completely the same, I cannot comment on that, except that personally, I don't think so.

[Sennin]

If they attained rainbow body they were practicing trekcho and/or thogal. Perhaps externally it looked as though they only offered mandala, but internally that was not the case if jalu was manifested.

Any text to support this? Of course, texts mentioned that trekcho and thogal can results in rainbow body but are there any texts that assert these are the only method?

From a Q&A with Dzongsa Khyentse Rinpoche, when asked whether if one can still attain rainbow body if one does not practice the yoga of body union.

His answer was: Can. There are different methods to attain rainbow body, it can also be attained by practicing six or ten paramitas, even though one may be practicing the Mahayana bodhisattva path, rainbow body can similarly be attained. Actually, rainbow body means that you realise yourselves to be the union of emptiness and luminosity, because rainbow body itself is empty in nature, yet it has colours (red, orange, yellow, green, blue, indigo, violet...) and it can be seen by our eyes.

Sakya Lamdre teachings also say that Lamdre manifests in the Rainbow Body.

It's hard to know the context of what is directly being referred to here.

If I remember correctly it's the result of the yoga's of the 4th empowerment, which involves a continuation of the mudra practice's of the 3rd empowerment.

[Sennin]

If I remember correctly it's the result of the yoga's of the 4th empowerment, which involves a continuation of the mudra practice's of the 3rd empowerment.

Just wanted to revise my last statement, I remembered what I actually heard was rainbow body was possible because of the profound method of the body mandala.
Although it does make sense that completion stage practice manifest rainbow body, see here for example.

[WeiHan]

There are four different kinds of Rainbow body spoken of.

Not all refer to the Rainbow body related to Thogal.

Sakya Lamdre teachings also say that Lamdre manifests in the Rainbow Body.

It's hard to know the context of what is directly being referred to here.

There is also the case like with Marpa where he manifested in a ball of light when he passed away.

This is from a Nyingma perspective, as Sarma practitioners may claim it is completely the same, I cannot comment on that, except that personally, I don't think so.

According to Malcolm, Sachen Kunga Nyingpo has stated that Narokhacho can manifest the great transference body. In one thread, I was also quite surprised and has clarified with Malcolm and he confirmed affirmatively.

[yagmort]

And here I was thinking Dzogchen practices were their own thing and that each deity sadhana was its own thing.

I wonder where you’d get that kind of idea....

my apologies for the offtopic, but what is a common definition of sadhana?

i was also thinking that a sadhana is a ritual practice of liturgical text recitation along with visualisations, mantras, etc., which is related to a particular deity. so anything out of this context is not a sadhana, ie chagchen and dzogchen meditation practices, naro chodruk, tsalung and trulkhor exercises, etc. am i holding a false idea? if so, please correct me.

[heart]

And here I was thinking Dzogchen practices were their own thing and that each deity sadhana was its own thing.

I wonder where you’d get that kind of idea....

my apologies for the offtopic, but what is a common definition of sadhana?

i was also thinking that a sadhana is a ritual practice of liturgical text recitation along with visualisations, mantras, etc., which is related to a particular deity. so anything out of this context is not a sadhana, ie chagchen and dzogchen meditation practices, naro chodruk, tsalung and trulkhor exercises, etc. am i holding a false idea? if so, please correct me.

Dzogchen, chagchen, naro chodruk, tsalung and trulkhor and so on can all be practiced within the context of a sadhana.

/magnus

[yagmort]

...can all be practiced within the context of a sadhana.

ok, but is this a common occurence or some specific cases?
in these cases, are they also taught within context of a sadhana, or should they be taught separately first?
can you please give an example of a sadhana which contains tummo practice?

[yagmort]

i've read the article at rigpawiki about first Degyal Rinpoche, who is considered as one of 13 Dudjom Lingpa's disciples with rainbow body attainment, and yet in the article it is said about his "elbalmed body" without any mentions of it shrinking. i'm confused how does that constitute a rainbow body in this particular case?

according to Dudjom Lingpa

...Those having superior faculties are liberated as a great transference embodiment, extending infinitely into the all-pervasive dharmakaya, like water merging with water, or space merging with space. Those having medium faculties attain buddhahood as a great rainbow body, like a rainbow vanishing into the sky. When the ground clear light arises, for those having inferior faculties the colors of the rainbow spread forth from the absolute nature, and their material bodies decrease in size until finally they vanish as rainbow bodies, leaving not even a trace of their aggregates behind. That is called the small rainbow body. When the ground clear light arises, the material bodies of some people decrease in size for up to seven days, then finally only the residue of their hair and nails is left behind. The dissolution of the body into minute particles is called the small transference. For those of superior faculties this dissolution of the body into minute particles may occur even during the Breakthrough...

[heart]

...can all be practiced within the context of a sadhana.

ok, but is this a common occurence or some specific cases?
in these cases, are they also taught within context of a sadhana, or should they be taught separately first?
can you please give an example of a sadhana which contains tummo practice?

In general most major sarma sadhanas have tummo as a part of the dzogrim. When they finish the kyerim they are taught trulkor and tummo if I understand correctly, they continue to do the sadhana but spend the major part on the dzogrim practices. I only heard this from friends that done the three-year retreat, I have no personal experience. In the same way you can include trechö, tögal, tummo and so on in many nyingma sadhanas and in some cases also in the ngondro.

The Mandarava sadhana from ChNNR includes some very intricate tsa-lung practices for example.

/magnus

[yagmort]

ok, thank you for clarification