Elements

[Malcolm]

****

[gnegirl]

Teachers will talk openly about the appearances of Togal and what they mean. Teachers will not talk about specifics of method, like postures and gazes. That's the part that's off-limits. ChNN will talk about appearances of tigle and what they mean. Tigle comes even after five lights. So this mum about my question is bullshit.

Someone said no to something you wanted.

Why is this a problem?

We all have different samayas, some more restrictive than others. That has to be respected, since our pure samaya is the root cause of awakening.

[adinatha]

Ye shes bla ma is only sufficient to begin practice.

You're a funny guy. This is bullshit. There are oral instructions of Togal even briefer than this.

[Malcolm]

ChNN will talk about appearances of tigle and what they mean. Tigle comes even after five lights. So this mum about my question is bullshit.

ChNN has advised his students not to discuss these issues. He is my root guru.

[Malcolm]

Ye shes bla ma is only sufficient to begin practice.

You're a funny guy. This is bullshit. There are oral instructions of Togal even briefer than this.

Yes, for example in Yangzab. As I said, insufficient for perfect understanding.

BTW, I meant Khenpo Ngachung's commentaries related to ye shes bl ma, of which there are several.

N

[adinatha]

ChNN will talk about appearances of tigle and what they mean. Tigle comes even after five lights. So this mum about my question is bullshit.

ChNN has advised his students not to discuss these issues. He is my root guru.

That explains a lot.

[gnegirl]

Ye shes bla ma is only sufficient to begin practice.

You're a funny guy. This is bullshit. There are oral instructions of Togal even briefer than this.

Does someone need a nap?

[adinatha]

Ye shes bla ma is only sufficient to begin practice.

You're a funny guy. This is bullshit. There are oral instructions of Togal even briefer than this.

Does someone need a nap?

My wife made me quite caffeine. Grrr!

[Grigoris]

To tell me more conditioned INFERIOR METHODS plus samaya?!

Whatever dude! It's your psychological well-being, you can do anything you want with it. You might actually look quite fetching in a (extremely) long-sleeved white jacket.

[username]

These things were traditionally very secret in Tibet never mind postmodernism and consumerist westerners' angry "I want it all and I want it NOW" attitude. You don't know how one ends up. Even some on certain bhumis go back so we ordinary practitioners have to be extra careful. Look at the two egos doing self PR based on a few experiences in the name of Thogal and printing what was once entrusted on to them. We forget like everything people change too. I don't blame Tibetan masters for being wary considering what unstable range they face.

[Heruka]

heres a little something on embryology if anyone wishes to read.

http://www.tibetanmedicine-edu.org/inde ... bryology-1" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

hope it brings some benefit.

[swampflower]

Namdrol: prāṇa is a vāyu i.e. prāṇa vāyu (srog dzin rlung) aka "the life sustaining wind". This comes from our breath and no where else.

Not sure about the prana source being only breath. That would mean a deep samadhi state where breath stops, could not last that long - but it does - many hours, days & beyond. Since prana pervades the atmosphere around us, that prana is somehow absorbed during samadhi, without the lungs functioning.

There is also respiration through the skin.

There is no prāṇa as a separate entity. This is a huge misconception. There is a prāṇa vāyu i.e. the breath we inhale.

As far not breathing during certain states of samadhi -- during these state the respiration is so slight it is not noticed. It is still happening however.

I have experienced this state of slight respiration.
It may seem that breath is not occurring but it is very subtly.

[Heruka]

Namdrol, im trying to seperate how the bright flickering of self knowing in the sterile ground of all, pollutes it, simply by this cognition. It seems this simple energy of cognition dulls awareness, and it unfolds and spreads out coemergent, rigpa/marigpa.

is it worth while trying to seperate to understand?

a bit lost in the terminology.

[rose]

Topic temporarily locked for removal of off topic posts etc.

Topic unlocked. Some posts have been deleted. Some posts have been merged into this topic http://dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=36&t=3981" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; and some other posts have been moved to a new topic "Bothersome things about Vajrayana and Dzogchen" http://dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f= ... 5&start=20" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

This topic is called "Elements" please keep the disucssion within the bounds of what is acceptable and permissible. Please refrain from ad homs and off topic posts.

Regards,
rt

[Malcolm]

Namdrol, im trying to seperate how the bright flickering of self knowing in the sterile ground of all, pollutes it, simply by this cognition. It seems this simple energy of cognition dulls awareness, and it unfolds and spreads out coemergent, rigpa/marigpa.

is it worth while trying to seperate to understand?

a bit lost in the terminology.

There are two ways to explain this -- one discusses three ignorance: innate, resembling the cause, and imputing ignorances respectively alternately, one discusses two ignorances, innate and imputing. I will stick with the latter explanation for ease.



When the basis arises out of the basis, i.e. when the five lights of wisdom are stirred by vāyu after the shell of the youthful vase body is rent there is a neutral awareness [shes pa lung ma bstan] that does not recognize itself. That simple non-recognition is the innate ignorance. That neutral awareness has two options either it recognizes itself [vidyā], becoming Samantabhadra, or it does not, and through imputing self and other onto the appearance of the basis, creating samsara. That imputation of self and other is the imputing ignorance.

Most people do not realize that Samantabhadra initially possessed the first ignorance. He never possessed the second.

Important point: the nature of the two or three ignorances are the same.

N

[Pero]

Important point: the nature of the two or three ignorances are the same.

What does that mean?

[Malcolm]

Important point: the nature of the two or three ignorances are the same.

What does that mean?

They lack knowledge.

[Heruka]

Most people do not realize that Samantabhadra initially possessed the first ignorance. He never possessed the second.

Important point: the nature of the two or three ignorances are the same.

N

Yes, this makes sense, since we are here with minds to objectify suchness.
can we discuss the casual or innate ignorance as you say, even though they are empty, it is merely mistaking a white conch for yellow because of some "seeing" defect, this is the root of original straying, it is karmic/time dimension in essence a break in the gzhon nu bum pa'i sku youthful vase?

The 5 lights are samantabhardris radiance, ornaments, i.e. wisdoms.

inner/outer ying, the 5 (or 6 lamps, depending on which tradition one reads) and so forth?

[Pero]

Important point: the nature of the two or three ignorances are the same.

What does that mean?

They lack knowledge.

Ah.

[Paul]

When the basis arises out of the basis, i.e. when the five lights of wisdom are stirred by vāyu after the shell of the youthful vase body is rent there is a neutral awareness [shes pa lung ma bstan] that does not recognize itself. That simple non-recognition is the innate ignorance. That neutral awareness has two options either it recognizes itself [vidyā], becoming Samantabhadra, or it does not, and through imputing self and other onto the appearance of the basis, creating samsara. That imputation of self and other is the imputing ignorance. 

This sounds very, very similar to the instruction/explanation of a type of ignorance that's mentioned at the beginning of Mipham's "Torch of Certainty". Is it the same?