Practical difference between Bön and Nyingma Dzogchen

Malcolm
Posts: 31156
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Practical difference between Bön and Nyingma Dzogchen

Post by Malcolm » Sun Jan 12, 2020 4:03 pm

shagrath wrote:
Sun Jan 12, 2020 3:00 pm
Malcolm wrote:
Sun Jan 12, 2020 2:23 pm
I think it is useful to divided our narratives into myths (Buddhas living in past eons), legends, (stories of mahāsiddhas, possibly historical people embedded in fantastic stories, Milarepa comes to mind, Gyerphung Lodpo, 25 disciples of Guru P, etc.,) and history (things that can be verified with empirically available facts). If people structured their thinking to slot parts of narratives into these different categories, then this would go a along way towards eliminating sectarian conflicts.
That is great thought. I agree with you 100%. Just like historicity of e.g. christianity or judaism. Faithful can say outrageous things from Bible, and then comes historian Bart Ehrman and slaps them with facts.

Two things come in mind:
1. Do you think that learning history is detrimental for dzogchen practice? Does one can go further into practice not caring about it?
2. What authors would you recommend for scientific approach to history of bön, dzogchen, nyingma, mahamudra, tibetan culture, etc?
I think the myths and legends found in Buddhism and Bon are important. They lend a sense of place and tradition. But when it comes to making truth claims on the basis of these myths and legends, this is where the trouble begins. For example, Virupa lived in the late 9th century. It is claimed he stopped the sun for three days while he and his two companions were on a drinking spree. You'd think that such a major astronomical event would be recorded somewhere in the world...but it isn't. Ergo, legend.

But when we find evidence in Indian treatises refuting Śṛī Simha by name, we have to conclude Śṛī Simha was at the head of a genuine movement within Indian Buddhism in the mid-8th century called in Tibet, "rdzogs chen," and that whether one wants to accept the traditional accounts as facts or not, no one can deny the existence of Śṛī Simha nor can they deny he was the teacher of Vairocana. One can certainly debate what Dzogchen might have constituted at this early period, but we cannot deny that what took shape in Tibet as "rdzogs chen" is grounded in Indian Vajrayāna of the mid-8th century. The contemporary record of Bonpo documents from the same period (eighth century) however, do not reveal any teachings even remotely resembling Buddhism, let alone rdzogs chen. The conclusion most students of history will then draw is that the Bonpos borrowed and adapted much Buddhist material to their own set of cultural narratives, much as Taoists in China borrowed and adapted much Buddhism to their own cultural narratives.

This does not mean that Buddhists did not borrow Bonpo innovations in Dzogchen. As I point out in the intro to my forth-coming translation of the Blazing Lamp Tantra and its commentary, the scheme of six lamps is utterly absent from any Nyingma tantras in the Nyingma rgyud 'bum (for example, the term dkar 'jam rtsa is absent, etc.). On the Buddhist side of things, the six lamps seem first to appear in Longchenpa's Lama Yang thig and Zab mo yang thig in a set of texts called snyan brgyud. Since we know that there was interaction between Buddhists and Bonpos, especially between Nyingmapas and Bonpos, and since we know that Zhang Zhung Snyan Brgyud was written down after the seventeen tantras were revealed, but before Longchenpa, and given that the six lamps form a major part of that ZZNG textual cycle, the appearance of a similar list (though not precisely identical in all details) in Longchenpa's oeuvre bearing the title "snyan brgyud" leads one to speculate that Buddhists borrowed the scheme of six lamps from ZZNG and modified it to suit themselves. However, it is notable that in the Seven Treasures, there is no presentation at all of six lamps, only four. At present, the schemes of four and six lamps are very standard in various Buddhist Dzogchen curriculums. The scheme of six lamps earned its Buddhist canonicity from Longchenpa and also from the 15th century Zhitro cycle of Karma Lingpa.

User avatar
Johnny Dangerous
Global Moderator
Posts: 10778
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 10:58 pm
Location: Olympia WA
Contact:

Re: Practical difference between Bön and Nyingma Dzogchen

Post by Johnny Dangerous » Sun Jan 12, 2020 5:58 pm

PeterC wrote:
Sun Jan 12, 2020 10:24 am
Johnny Dangerous wrote:
Sun Jan 12, 2020 7:51 am
PeterC wrote:
Sun Jan 12, 2020 6:13 am


If we had to be satisfied as to the accuracy of historical claims before receiving teachings, then we would never practice anything
I get what you are saying, but Bonpo historical narratives are on a whole other level, and sometimes harder to swallow than anything you come across in Mahayana. For example the idea that Buddha Shakyamuni was a student of Shenrab etc. Like I said, it’s really the specificity of these kinds of claims that makes them iffy, not that they aren’t empirically verifiable or something, which of course is true for all kinds of stuff we take for granted.

There is also a tone of ‘Buddhism stole all this’ from the occasional zealous Bonpo, while it’s nothing to take personally, I have seen this sort of attitude cause issues...socially at teachings. It’s especially silly when you examine what Bon also borrowed from Chos...even on a surface level. The Bon teachings I’ve been exposed to themselves were wonderful and I’m content to appreciate my opportunity to receive them without an expectation that they line up with my thinking exactly.
True - they do seem excessive from my perspective. But from the perspective of a Theravedan, the origin stories and claims of superiority of the Tantras are also a little hard to swallow, and since I won’t mount a textual defence of the things I practice, I shouldn’t mount a textual assault on things I don’t. To paraphrase Shantideva, the important test is whether it accords with other teachings and can yield results.
Yeah, I’m in full agreement with this. It’s the best argument against the anti-Bonpo types. Often the arguments made against it’s legitimacy are the same as Theravadins arguing against the Mahayana.
"...if you think about how many hours, months and years of your life you've spent looking at things, being fascinated by things that have now passed away, then how wonderful to spend even five minutes looking into the nature of your own mind."

-James Low

Malcolm
Posts: 31156
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Practical difference between Bön and Nyingma Dzogchen

Post by Malcolm » Sun Jan 12, 2020 6:48 pm

Johnny Dangerous wrote:
Sun Jan 12, 2020 5:58 pm
Yeah, I’m in full agreement with this. It’s the best argument against the anti-Bonpo types. Often the arguments made against it’s legitimacy are the same as Theravadins arguing against the Mahayana.
If you have not yet read Drung, Deu, and Bon, I suggest you do so.

User avatar
Johnny Dangerous
Global Moderator
Posts: 10778
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 10:58 pm
Location: Olympia WA
Contact:

Re: Practical difference between Bön and Nyingma Dzogchen

Post by Johnny Dangerous » Sun Jan 12, 2020 8:47 pm

Malcolm wrote:
Sun Jan 12, 2020 6:48 pm
Johnny Dangerous wrote:
Sun Jan 12, 2020 5:58 pm
Yeah, I’m in full agreement with this. It’s the best argument against the anti-Bonpo types. Often the arguments made against it’s legitimacy are the same as Theravadins arguing against the Mahayana.
If you have not yet read Drung, Deu, and Bon, I suggest you do so.
I plan on it, but is some specific relevancy here, or just generally?
"...if you think about how many hours, months and years of your life you've spent looking at things, being fascinated by things that have now passed away, then how wonderful to spend even five minutes looking into the nature of your own mind."

-James Low

Malcolm
Posts: 31156
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Practical difference between Bön and Nyingma Dzogchen

Post by Malcolm » Sun Jan 12, 2020 9:27 pm

Johnny Dangerous wrote:
Sun Jan 12, 2020 8:47 pm
Malcolm wrote:
Sun Jan 12, 2020 6:48 pm
Johnny Dangerous wrote:
Sun Jan 12, 2020 5:58 pm
Yeah, I’m in full agreement with this. It’s the best argument against the anti-Bonpo types. Often the arguments made against it’s legitimacy are the same as Theravadins arguing against the Mahayana.
If you have not yet read Drung, Deu, and Bon, I suggest you do so.
I plan on it, but is some specific relevancy here, or just generally?
"In any case we can hypothesize that the Bönpos absorbed elements of Buddhism without recognizing them as such, as some scholars maintain, or that they did so in order to survive to counter the great success of the Buddhist faith. The fact remains that in the contemporary Bönpo canon can be found some of the most important Buddhist texts, albeit with different titles, and even the iconography of Shenrab Miwoche emulates that of Buddha Śakyamuni. There may originally have been valid reasons for this work of transformation and adaptation of Buddhist elements, perhaps for the very preservation of authentic Bön teachings, but this principle was soon forgotten and the importance of the original traditions was neglected in favour of the philosophical teachings derived from Buddhism. It was probably at this juncture that the original Bön was classified as "Bön of Cause," that is as inferior to or preliminary to the "Bön of Fruit," and the authentic principles of the ancient Bön culture were misconstrued and almost excised by the protagonists of official Bön."
Drung, Deu, and Bon, pg. xvii-xviii.

So, with the exception of one small set of verses, Chogyal Namkhai Norbu opines that all the Bon vehicles of the result are wholly derived from Buddhism.

shagrath
Posts: 14
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2018 2:23 pm

Re: Practical difference between Bön and Nyingma Dzogchen

Post by shagrath » Sun Jan 12, 2020 9:45 pm

Malcolm wrote:
Sun Jan 12, 2020 4:03 pm
I think the myths and legends found in Buddhism and Bon are important. They lend a sense of place and tradition. But when it comes to making truth claims on the basis of these myths and legends, this is where the trouble begins. For example, Virupa lived in the late 9th century. It is claimed he stopped the sun for three days while he and his two companions were on a drinking spree. You'd think that such a major astronomical event would be recorded somewhere in the world...but it isn't. Ergo, legend.

But when we find evidence in Indian treatises refuting Śṛī Simha by name, we have to conclude Śṛī Simha was at the head of a genuine movement within Indian Buddhism in the mid-8th century called in Tibet, "rdzogs chen," and that whether one wants to accept the traditional accounts as facts or not, no one can deny the existence of Śṛī Simha nor can they deny he was the teacher of Vairocana. One can certainly debate what Dzogchen might have constituted at this early period, but we cannot deny that what took shape in Tibet as "rdzogs chen" is grounded in Indian Vajrayāna of the mid-8th century. The contemporary record of Bonpo documents from the same period (eighth century) however, do not reveal any teachings even remotely resembling Buddhism, let alone rdzogs chen. The conclusion most students of history will then draw is that the Bonpos borrowed and adapted much Buddhist material to their own set of cultural narratives, much as Taoists in China borrowed and adapted much Buddhism to their own cultural narratives.

This does not mean that Buddhists did not borrow Bonpo innovations in Dzogchen. As I point out in the intro to my forth-coming translation of the Blazing Lamp Tantra and its commentary, the scheme of six lamps is utterly absent from any Nyingma tantras in the Nyingma rgyud 'bum (for example, the term dkar 'jam rtsa is absent, etc.). On the Buddhist side of things, the six lamps seem first to appear in Longchenpa's Lama Yang thig and Zab mo yang thig in a set of texts called snyan brgyud. Since we know that there was interaction between Buddhists and Bonpos, especially between Nyingmapas and Bonpos, and since we know that Zhang Zhung Snyan Brgyud was written down after the seventeen tantras were revealed, but before Longchenpa, and given that the six lamps form a major part of that ZZNG textual cycle, the appearance of a similar list (though not precisely identical in all details) in Longchenpa's oeuvre bearing the title "snyan brgyud" leads one to speculate that Buddhists borrowed the scheme of six lamps from ZZNG and modified it to suit themselves. However, it is notable that in the Seven Treasures, there is no presentation at all of six lamps, only four. At present, the schemes of four and six lamps are very standard in various Buddhist Dzogchen curriculums. The scheme of six lamps earned its Buddhist canonicity from Longchenpa and also from the 15th century Zhitro cycle of Karma Lingpa.
Thank you for long and detailed answer.

Could you please reflect a little bit to original question that was troubling me? I want to learn dzogchen, but I am in position that I can receive ZZNG dzogchen teachings and not from Nyingma. I really like it, as I stated I do not want to miss out on something. OR is it possible to learn directly ZZNG dzogchen and read next it both Bön and buddhist books for balanced position? As I got from all these posts is that dzogchen is dzogchen no matter which lineage belongs to.

Malcolm
Posts: 31156
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Practical difference between Bön and Nyingma Dzogchen

Post by Malcolm » Sun Jan 12, 2020 10:56 pm

shagrath wrote:
Sun Jan 12, 2020 9:45 pm

Could you please reflect a little bit to original question that was troubling me? I want to learn dzogchen, but I am in position that I can receive ZZNG dzogchen teachings and not from Nyingma. I really like it, as I stated I do not want to miss out on something. OR is it possible to learn directly ZZNG dzogchen and read next it both Bön and buddhist books for balanced position? As I got from all these posts is that dzogchen is dzogchen no matter which lineage belongs to.
ZZNG is an excellent teachings and many people have attained the body of light through its practice. Some Tibetan Buddhists, even Nyingmas, will be uncomfortable with you as a Bonpo student, and others, more open, won't care.

In the end, the teacher you pick is more important than the teaching.

shagrath
Posts: 14
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2018 2:23 pm

Re: Practical difference between Bön and Nyingma Dzogchen

Post by shagrath » Mon Jan 13, 2020 8:46 am

Malcolm wrote:
Sun Jan 12, 2020 10:56 pm
ZZNG is an excellent teachings and many people have attained the body of light through its practice. Some Tibetan Buddhists, even Nyingmas, will be uncomfortable with you as a Bonpo student, and others, more open, won't care.

In the end, the teacher you pick is more important than the teaching.
I will keep that in mind. Good advice.

I do not wish to start a new e-war but how to know which one to pick? The one cannot know if teacher reached body of light until teachers death bed. Or one cannot go wrong to choose from more famous lineages like students of Dilgo Khyentse (Dilgo Khyentse Yangsi, Shechen Rabjam, Matthieu Ricard) or sons of Tulku Urgyen?

mandog
Posts: 134
Joined: Sun Jul 01, 2018 10:10 pm

Re: Practical difference between Bön and Nyingma Dzogchen

Post by mandog » Mon Jan 13, 2020 11:04 am

shagrath wrote:
Mon Jan 13, 2020 8:46 am
Malcolm wrote:
Sun Jan 12, 2020 10:56 pm
ZZNG is an excellent teachings and many people have attained the body of light through its practice. Some Tibetan Buddhists, even Nyingmas, will be uncomfortable with you as a Bonpo student, and others, more open, won't care.

In the end, the teacher you pick is more important than the teaching.
I will keep that in mind. Good advice.

I do not wish to start a new e-war but how to know which one to pick? The one cannot know if teacher reached body of light until teachers death bed. Or one cannot go wrong to choose from more famous lineages like students of Dilgo Khyentse (Dilgo Khyentse Yangsi, Shechen Rabjam, Matthieu Ricard) or sons of Tulku Urgyen?
Fame does not mean anything. There are famous gurus of famous lineages who are not qualified to teach.

That being said, Shechen Rabjam and Tulku Urgyen’s sons all have stellar reputations. My limited interactions with Shechen Rabjam and Migyur Rinpoche were very positive (I have not met the others). Really, I think these five are very trust worthy.

Not that the opinion of some random dude on the internet should sway you. It is good to evaluate for your self. Try to see if a lama has knowledge and understanding of the sutras and tantras, practices ethical discipline and has given rise to immeasurable love and compassion.

Learn how to check the qualities of a lama and be patient. At the the time of empowerment or DI, you need to have genuine faith in the lama. Contrived faith won’t do.

Malcolm
Posts: 31156
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Practical difference between Bön and Nyingma Dzogchen

Post by Malcolm » Mon Jan 13, 2020 2:38 pm

shagrath wrote:
Mon Jan 13, 2020 8:46 am
Malcolm wrote:
Sun Jan 12, 2020 10:56 pm
ZZNG is an excellent teachings and many people have attained the body of light through its practice. Some Tibetan Buddhists, even Nyingmas, will be uncomfortable with you as a Bonpo student, and others, more open, won't care.

In the end, the teacher you pick is more important than the teaching.
I will keep that in mind. Good advice.

I do not wish to start a new e-war but how to know which one to pick? The one cannot know if teacher reached body of light until teachers death bed. Or one cannot go wrong to choose from more famous lineages like students of Dilgo Khyentse (Dilgo Khyentse Yangsi, Shechen Rabjam, Matthieu Ricard) or sons of Tulku Urgyen?
In the beginning you have to be like a bee, visiting many flowers.

shagrath
Posts: 14
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2018 2:23 pm

Re: Practical difference between Bön and Nyingma Dzogchen

Post by shagrath » Mon Jan 13, 2020 5:38 pm

mandog wrote:
Mon Jan 13, 2020 11:04 am
Fame does not mean anything. There are famous gurus of famous lineages who are not qualified to teach.

That being said, Shechen Rabjam and Tulku Urgyen’s sons all have stellar reputations. My limited interactions with Shechen Rabjam and Migyur Rinpoche were very positive (I have not met the others). Really, I think these five are very trust worthy.

Not that the opinion of some random dude on the internet should sway you. It is good to evaluate for your self. Try to see if a lama has knowledge and understanding of the sutras and tantras, practices ethical discipline and has given rise to immeasurable love and compassion.

Learn how to check the qualities of a lama and be patient. At the the time of empowerment or DI, you need to have genuine faith in the lama. Contrived faith won’t do.
Thank you a lot for honest answer.

I like them also a lot. I have listened to their talks, and they seem pretty nice. I am just in no position to learn from any of them.

I got that in Vajrayana especially you need 100% faith in guru. Not and easy thing, but its ok especially if guru is the right one.

User avatar
Seeker12
Posts: 281
Joined: Mon May 08, 2017 5:54 pm

Re: Practical difference between Bön and Nyingma Dzogchen

Post by Seeker12 » Mon Jan 13, 2020 6:11 pm

Malcolm wrote:
Mon Jan 13, 2020 2:38 pm

In the beginning you have to be like a bee, visiting many flowers.
Is that, briefly, because you need to refine your understanding of what the lama is?
Better than if there were thousands of meaningless words is one meaningful word that on hearing brings peace.

Better than if there were thousands of meaningless verses is one meaningful verse that on hearing brings peace.

And better than chanting hundreds of meaningless verses is one Dhamma-saying that on hearing brings peace.

Malcolm
Posts: 31156
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Practical difference between Bön and Nyingma Dzogchen

Post by Malcolm » Mon Jan 13, 2020 6:22 pm

Seeker12 wrote:
Mon Jan 13, 2020 6:11 pm
Malcolm wrote:
Mon Jan 13, 2020 2:38 pm

In the beginning you have to be like a bee, visiting many flowers.
Is that, briefly, because you need to refine your understanding of what the lama is?
No, you need to encounter many different teachers in the beginning.

shagrath
Posts: 14
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2018 2:23 pm

Re: Practical difference between Bön and Nyingma Dzogchen

Post by shagrath » Mon Jan 13, 2020 6:32 pm

Malcolm wrote:
Mon Jan 13, 2020 2:38 pm
shagrath wrote:
Mon Jan 13, 2020 8:46 am
Malcolm wrote:
Sun Jan 12, 2020 10:56 pm
ZZNG is an excellent teachings and many people have attained the body of light through its practice. Some Tibetan Buddhists, even Nyingmas, will be uncomfortable with you as a Bonpo student, and others, more open, won't care.

In the end, the teacher you pick is more important than the teaching.
I will keep that in mind. Good advice.

I do not wish to start a new e-war but how to know which one to pick? The one cannot know if teacher reached body of light until teachers death bed. Or one cannot go wrong to choose from more famous lineages like students of Dilgo Khyentse (Dilgo Khyentse Yangsi, Shechen Rabjam, Matthieu Ricard) or sons of Tulku Urgyen?
In the beginning you have to be like a bee, visiting many flowers.
Thank you Malcolm. Good teacher for person X, does not necessarily good for person Y.

User avatar
Seeker12
Posts: 281
Joined: Mon May 08, 2017 5:54 pm

Re: Practical difference between Bön and Nyingma Dzogchen

Post by Seeker12 » Mon Jan 13, 2020 6:53 pm

Malcolm wrote:
Mon Jan 13, 2020 6:22 pm
Seeker12 wrote:
Mon Jan 13, 2020 6:11 pm
Malcolm wrote:
Mon Jan 13, 2020 2:38 pm

In the beginning you have to be like a bee, visiting many flowers.
Is that, briefly, because you need to refine your understanding of what the lama is?
No, you need to encounter many different teachers in the beginning.
To flesh out my question a bit more, it seems that initially we may have pretty coarse ideas about what the 'guru' or 'lama' is. We may think very partially about this person or that person, the way that they dress, their look, their style, their mannerisms, we may like some and dislike others, maybe we like this lineage or that lineage, etc.

With such a mindset, it may be very easy to attach to a particular guru, lineage, etc because our own personal biases or likes or whatever.

But by meeting multiple lamas, it may be that we come to sort of understand what the true dharma is. We might come to understand that actually, all of this superficial stuff is kind of like clothes on a great king - the clothes themselves aren't the point.

So we may come to appreciate the true value of the guru, in the sense of being the one that truly points out the dharma to us. We might realize that this guru has helped us overcome this particular problem we had, and that guru has helped us to recognize a certain faulty way of thinking we had, or whatever. And then we may come to understand that the 'ultimate' guru is, essentially, the perfect feedback for us, which may be embodied in a particular individual.

This may allow us to truly see what it's said, that all phenomena are the manifestation of the guru for us, that we can learn from all situations, etc, or thereabouts.

If we attach too quickly to a single lama without having this maturation process occur, it seems like we may be limited and get into sort of cult-like thinking. Of course, if our karma/merit is appropriate it may be that we can meet one person and that's all we need, but for those of us that need this maturation, it seems like an important phase.

Anyway, that was a bit more of the thought behind the question, imperfectly written though it may be, perhaps. FWIW.

Thanks for consideration. :anjali:
Better than if there were thousands of meaningless words is one meaningful word that on hearing brings peace.

Better than if there were thousands of meaningless verses is one meaningful verse that on hearing brings peace.

And better than chanting hundreds of meaningless verses is one Dhamma-saying that on hearing brings peace.

shagrath
Posts: 14
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2018 2:23 pm

Re: Practical difference between Bön and Nyingma Dzogchen

Post by shagrath » Mon Jan 13, 2020 8:41 pm

Seeker12 wrote:
Mon Jan 13, 2020 6:53 pm
Malcolm wrote:
Mon Jan 13, 2020 6:22 pm
Seeker12 wrote:
Mon Jan 13, 2020 6:11 pm


Is that, briefly, because you need to refine your understanding of what the lama is?
No, you need to encounter many different teachers in the beginning.
To flesh out my question a bit more, it seems that initially we may have pretty coarse ideas about what the 'guru' or 'lama' is. We may think very partially about this person or that person, the way that they dress, their look, their style, their mannerisms, we may like some and dislike others, maybe we like this lineage or that lineage, etc.

With such a mindset, it may be very easy to attach to a particular guru, lineage, etc because our own personal biases or likes or whatever.

But by meeting multiple lamas, it may be that we come to sort of understand what the true dharma is. We might come to understand that actually, all of this superficial stuff is kind of like clothes on a great king - the clothes themselves aren't the point.

So we may come to appreciate the true value of the guru, in the sense of being the one that truly points out the dharma to us. We might realize that this guru has helped us overcome this particular problem we had, and that guru has helped us to recognize a certain faulty way of thinking we had, or whatever. And then we may come to understand that the 'ultimate' guru is, essentially, the perfect feedback for us, which may be embodied in a particular individual.

This may allow us to truly see what it's said, that all phenomena are the manifestation of the guru for us, that we can learn from all situations, etc, or thereabouts.

If we attach too quickly to a single lama without having this maturation process occur, it seems like we may be limited and get into sort of cult-like thinking. Of course, if our karma/merit is appropriate it may be that we can meet one person and that's all we need, but for those of us that need this maturation, it seems like an important phase.

Anyway, that was a bit more of the thought behind the question, imperfectly written though it may be, perhaps. FWIW.

Thanks for consideration. :anjali:
That is really great point you made. I have met also some people who have some powers like retrocognition, or is clairvoyance, and they have many followers only because of that. If you take a step back and look general person as a whole, they are pretty nasty people, not so much compassionate and do horrendous things. But their powers make students shortsighted.

But also it takes a heck of a lot time if every guru/lama expects you do another ngondro for him to pass you teachings. I do not know if every guru expects for you to do special ngondro, or you do it once and every next teacher respects it.

edit: grammar
Last edited by shagrath on Mon Jan 13, 2020 9:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.

mandog
Posts: 134
Joined: Sun Jul 01, 2018 10:10 pm

Re: Practical difference between Bön and Nyingma Dzogchen

Post by mandog » Mon Jan 13, 2020 8:42 pm

shagrath wrote:
Mon Jan 13, 2020 5:38 pm
mandog wrote:
Mon Jan 13, 2020 11:04 am
Fame does not mean anything. There are famous gurus of famous lineages who are not qualified to teach.

That being said, Shechen Rabjam and Tulku Urgyen’s sons all have stellar reputations. My limited interactions with Shechen Rabjam and Migyur Rinpoche were very positive (I have not met the others). Really, I think these five are very trust worthy.

Not that the opinion of some random dude on the internet should sway you. It is good to evaluate for your self. Try to see if a lama has knowledge and understanding of the sutras and tantras, practices ethical discipline and has given rise to immeasurable love and compassion.

Learn how to check the qualities of a lama and be patient. At the the time of empowerment or DI, you need to have genuine faith in the lama. Contrived faith won’t do.
Thank you a lot for honest answer.

I like them also a lot. I have listened to their talks, and they seem pretty nice. I am just in no position to learn from any of them.

I got that in Vajrayana especially you need 100% faith in guru. Not and easy thing, but its ok especially if guru is the right one.
You are in Serbia? Rabjam Rinpoche frequently comes to Croatia; Maybe it is difficult for Serbian people to go there, I don't know.

Also 100% faith in the guru is good, but faith is something that will increase with time. If your faith is growing that is a sign that you are making progress in your practice.

So, you need some to begin, but most of us won't have confident faith or irreversible faith when we first meet our guru. Actually, I think that one must have a very good understanding of the dharma before irreversible faith can develop. See rigpa wiki article on types of faith.

https://www.rigpawiki.org/index.php?tit ... s_of_faith

shagrath
Posts: 14
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2018 2:23 pm

Re: Practical difference between Bön and Nyingma Dzogchen

Post by shagrath » Mon Jan 13, 2020 8:47 pm

mandog wrote:
Mon Jan 13, 2020 8:42 pm
shagrath wrote:
Mon Jan 13, 2020 5:38 pm
mandog wrote:
Mon Jan 13, 2020 11:04 am
Fame does not mean anything. There are famous gurus of famous lineages who are not qualified to teach.

That being said, Shechen Rabjam and Tulku Urgyen’s sons all have stellar reputations. My limited interactions with Shechen Rabjam and Migyur Rinpoche were very positive (I have not met the others). Really, I think these five are very trust worthy.

Not that the opinion of some random dude on the internet should sway you. It is good to evaluate for your self. Try to see if a lama has knowledge and understanding of the sutras and tantras, practices ethical discipline and has given rise to immeasurable love and compassion.

Learn how to check the qualities of a lama and be patient. At the the time of empowerment or DI, you need to have genuine faith in the lama. Contrived faith won’t do.
Thank you a lot for honest answer.

I like them also a lot. I have listened to their talks, and they seem pretty nice. I am just in no position to learn from any of them.

I got that in Vajrayana especially you need 100% faith in guru. Not and easy thing, but its ok especially if guru is the right one.
You are in Serbia? Rabjam Rinpoche frequently comes to Croatia; Maybe it is difficult for Serbian people to go there, I don't know.
Yes. Its not a problem at all to go to Croatia. Its just that Shechen have had 9 year curriculum in Croatia, and not any more. They just have some retreats on various topics, but not as part of curriculum. I keep my fingers crossed for curriculum to start again, but chances are almost zero to none.

User avatar
treehuggingoctopus
Posts: 1882
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 6:26 pm
Location: EU

Re: Practical difference between Bön and Nyingma Dzogchen

Post by treehuggingoctopus » Mon Jan 13, 2020 9:33 pm

Malcolm wrote:
Sun Jan 12, 2020 2:23 pm
treehuggingoctopus wrote:
Sun Jan 12, 2020 9:49 am
Johnny Dangerous wrote:
Sun Jan 12, 2020 7:51 am


I get what you are saying, but Bonpo historical narratives are on a whole other level, and sometimes harder to swallow than anything you come across in Mahayana. For example the idea that Buddha Shakyamuni was a student of Shenrab etc. Like I said, it’s really the specificity of these kinds of claims that makes them iffy, not that they aren’t empirically verifiable or something, which of course is true for all kinds of stuff we take for granted.

There is also a tone of ‘Buddhism stole all this’ from the occasional zealous Bonpo, while it’s nothing to take personally, I have seen this sort of attitude cause issues...socially at teachings. It’s especially silly when you examine what Bon also borrowed from Chos...even on a surface level. The Bon teachings I’ve been exposed to themselves were wonderful and I’m content to appreciate my opportunity to receive them without an expectation that they line up with my thinking exactly.
I think that the history and what is to a great extent still the present status of Bon, both in Tibet and in diaspora, makes it rather inevitable, does it not? I mean, Bonpo belong(ed) to the subaltern, the history of Bon's involvement with Buddhism is pretty much a textbook example of how a marginalised, oppressed/ignored and continually erased community struggles to remake itself so as to survive. And, HHDL efforts notwithstanding, the conflict is still very far from over, I have witnessed some very disturbing expressions of anti-Bon prejudice coming from Buddhist teachers.
I think it is useful to divided our narratives into myths (Buddhas living in past eons), legends, (stories of mahāsiddhas, possibly historical people embedded in fantastic stories, Milarepa comes to mind, Gyerphung Lodpo, 25 disciples of Guru P, etc.,) and history (things that can be verified with empirically available facts). If people structured their thinking to slot parts of narratives into these different categories, then this would go a along way towards eliminating sectarian conflicts.
It may. It might also help to allow for a number of diverging stories, which, diverge though they do, nevertheless all hit the crucial spot -- it may be simpler to achieve since it does not call for a need to agree upon what is fact and what is not.

These conflicts will probably subside "on their own" as religious traditions begin to really understand that the biggest threat is not another group of religious freaks in the town, but the increasingly prevalent hedonism and materialism. Many lamas in their 60s or younger are already well aware of what is going on.
To offer care and affection to sentient beings
In desperate situations who lack protection
Brings just as much merit as the meditation
On emptiness with compassion as its core—
So it has been said by glorious Lord Atisha.

Chatral Sangye Dorje Rinpoche

If you cannot generate an altruistic mind, even extensive retreat will be of not much benefit.
Garchen Triptrul Rinpoche

Malcolm
Posts: 31156
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Practical difference between Bön and Nyingma Dzogchen

Post by Malcolm » Mon Jan 13, 2020 9:44 pm

treehuggingoctopus wrote:
Mon Jan 13, 2020 9:33 pm
Malcolm wrote:
Sun Jan 12, 2020 2:23 pm
treehuggingoctopus wrote:
Sun Jan 12, 2020 9:49 am


I think that the history and what is to a great extent still the present status of Bon, both in Tibet and in diaspora, makes it rather inevitable, does it not? I mean, Bonpo belong(ed) to the subaltern, the history of Bon's involvement with Buddhism is pretty much a textbook example of how a marginalised, oppressed/ignored and continually erased community struggles to remake itself so as to survive. And, HHDL efforts notwithstanding, the conflict is still very far from over, I have witnessed some very disturbing expressions of anti-Bon prejudice coming from Buddhist teachers.
I think it is useful to divided our narratives into myths (Buddhas living in past eons), legends, (stories of mahāsiddhas, possibly historical people embedded in fantastic stories, Milarepa comes to mind, Gyerphung Lodpo, 25 disciples of Guru P, etc.,) and history (things that can be verified with empirically available facts). If people structured their thinking to slot parts of narratives into these different categories, then this would go a along way towards eliminating sectarian conflicts.
It may. It might also help to allow for a number of diverging stories, which, diverge though they do, nevertheless all hit the crucial spot -- it may be simpler to achieve since it does not call for a need to agree upon what is fact and what is not.

These conflicts will probably subside "on their own" as religious traditions begin to really understand that the biggest threat is not another group of religious freaks in the town, but the increasingly prevalent hedonism and materialism. Many lamas in their 60s or younger are already well aware of what is going on.
I am a confirmed hedonist, and I personally think that the implicit secularism of Epicurus is the salve for religious wars.

Post Reply

Return to “Dzogchen”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: florin, Gyurme Kundrol, Könchok Thrinley, Leif, mandog, mutsuk, Tom2892 and 52 guests