In the KUNJED GYALPO says it is of no use to do rituals

Moderator: Tibetan Buddhism moderators

Re: In the KUNJED GYALPO says it is of no use to do rituals

Postby heart » Sun Jan 26, 2014 7:33 pm

thigle wrote:What "rituals/rites" you use "to familiarize" with primordially natural "knowledge/transparency"? I'm asking this question, because if "knowledge/transparency" was de facto even only temporarily self-obvious, one knows that neither rites/rituals nor anything other "practice" and reified "non-practice" can be used to "familiarize" with "knowledge/transparency". Before one knows this, it's necessary to "practice" everything, but that's preliminary exercises. Of course, if "knowledge/transparency" is self-obvious, one can dance in a circle and cry: hum hum", because of whatever, but in such a case, there's no grasping. In such a case, it's a possible expression of "knowledge/transparency".
[sry for my bad english]


How about the ritual of getting up every morning, of standing, sitting, eating and shiting? Oh, and write clever words on some forum. Do you think you can familiarize yourself with the natural state while performing this daily ritual thigle?

/magnus
"To reject practice by saying, 'it is conceptual!' is the path of fools. A tendency of the inexperienced and something to be avoided."
- Longchenpa
User avatar
heart
 
Posts: 3121
Joined: Fri Jan 08, 2010 1:55 pm

Re: In the KUNJED GYALPO says it is of no use to do rituals

Postby thigle » Sun Jan 26, 2014 9:05 pm

heart wrote:
thigle wrote:What "rituals/rites" you use "to familiarize" with primordially natural "knowledge/transparency"? I'm asking this question, because if "knowledge/transparency" was de facto even only temporarily self-obvious, one knows that neither rites/rituals nor anything other "practice" and reified "non-practice" can be used to "familiarize" with "knowledge/transparency". Before one knows this, it's necessary to "practice" everything, but that's preliminary exercises. Of course, if "knowledge/transparency" is self-obvious, one can dance in a circle and cry: hum hum", because of whatever, but in such a case, there's no grasping. In such a case, it's a possible expression of "knowledge/transparency".
[sry for my bad english]


How about the ritual of getting up every morning, of standing, sitting, eating and shiting? Oh, and write clever words on some forum. Do you think you can familiarize yourself with the natural state while performing this daily ritual thigle?


That's a good question, because the most of us conceptualize and reify the entire life unknowingly, therefore the most of us are always unknowingly "practitioners" from the complementary standpoint of a "big brother", which seems to be refied-identified with everything. That's ignorance and grasping, therefore it's really better to give up such artificial practice, especially if someone "want to become familiar" with primordially-natural knowledge/transparency.


Sry for my bad english
thigle
 
Posts: 117
Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2011 7:46 pm
Location: Salzburg

Re: In the KUNJED GYALPO says it is of no use to do rituals

Postby asunthatneversets » Sun Jan 26, 2014 9:16 pm

thigle wrote:
That's a good question, because the most of us conceptualize and reify the entire life unknowingly, therefore the most of us are always unknowingly "practitioners" from the complementary standpoint of a "big brother", which seems to be refied-identified with everything. That's ignorance and grasping, therefore it's really better to give up such artificial practice, especially if someone "want to become familiar" with primordially-natural knowledge/transparency.


Sry for my bad english


'Giving up' is ignorance and grasping as well. Only a direct knowledge of dharmatā constitutes a transcendence of artificial practice... and even then, ones knowledge is initially unripened, and will not reach its full measure until the realization of emptiness. Therefore familiarization and practice are required.
asunthatneversets
 
Posts: 1388
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2011 10:30 pm

Re: In the KUNJED GYALPO says it is of no use to do rituals

Postby asunthatneversets » Sun Jan 26, 2014 9:46 pm

Sönam wrote:
asunthatneversets wrote:...And rituals, or whatever other method one wants to use to familiarize with that nature is an indispensable aspect of the teaching.


It does not sound very dzogchen at all ... maybe TB conceptualizations?

Sönam


I posted some of this elsewhere but it is relevant here and explains my point:

The guru gives you pointing out instructions, you recognize primordial wisdom, you rest in that knowledge [vidyā], unerringly, and that is the path. When that knowledge ripens to it's full measure your vidyā is dharmakāya, and you are a buddha. The basis, path and result are never apart from vidyā, because they are simply the refinement of vidyā via the exhaustion of traces. Our illusory and deluded experiences as sentient beings, are merely the complex interaction of these karmic traces, habitual tendencies and afflictive propensities.

Buddhahood is only attained when these propensities are exhausted, as Longchenpa elucidates:
"Ordinary beings are truly buddhas, but this fact is obscured by adventitious distortions, once these are removed, truly there is buddhahood."

There is no method to apply other than resting in vidyā. The path is familiarization, stabilization and integration in that view [tib. ta wa]. It is crucial that the view is maintained tenaciously and one cultivates non-distraction. If this isn't performed skillfully, then there is undoubtably a danger of regression into deluded mind. In time the view will become more and more effortless, however initially it is important to rely on practice and so on.

This principle is identical to the three testaments of Garab Dorje: (i) Introduction to one's nature [basis], (ii) Confidence in one's nature [path], (iii) Continuation in one's nature [result].

Tulku Urgyen Rinpoche:
"A seeming confusion obscures the recognition of the basis [gzhi]. Fortunately, this seeming delusion is temporary. This failure to recognize the basis is similar to dreaming. Dreaming is not primordial; it is temporary, it can be purified. Purification happens through training on the path. We have strayed from the basis and become sentient beings. To free the basis from what obscures it, we have to train. Right now, we are on the path and have not yet attained the result. When we are freed from obscuration, then the result - dharmakāya - appears. The liberated basis, path and result are all perfected in the realm of the single essence, the continuity of rig pa [vidyā].

In fact, there is no difference whatsoever between the basis and result. In the state of the basis the enlightened qualities are not acknowledged, but they are manifest at the time of the result. These are not new qualities that suddenly appear, but are like the qualities of a flower that are inherent in the seed. Within the seed are the characteristics of the flower itself. The seed holds the potential for the flower's color, smell, bud and leaves. However, can we say that the seed is the result of the flower? No, we cannot, because the flower has not fully bloomed. Like this analogy, the qualities of the result are contained in the state of the basis; yet, they are not evident or manifest. That is the difference between the basis and the result. At the time of the path, if we do not apply effort, the result will not appear."


So even after recognition the view must be maintained, this is what practice is for, otherwise karmic propensities will cause distraction and deviation to arise in one's condition, as Dudjom Rinpoche explains:

"The mere recognition of vidyā will not liberate you. Throughout your lives from beginningless time, you have been enveloped in false beliefs and deluded habits. From then till now you have spent every moment as a miserable, pathetic slave of your thoughts! And when you die, it’s not at all certain where you will go. You will follow your karma, and you will have to suffer. This is the reason why you must meditate, continuously preserving the sate of vidyā you have been introduced to. The omniscient Longchenpa has said, 'You may recognize your own nature, but if you do not meditate and get used to it, you will be like a baby left on a battlefield: you’ll be carried off by the enemy, the hostile army of your own thoughts!' In general terms, meditation means becoming famiIiar with the state of resting in the primordial uncontrived nature, through being spontaneously, naturally, constantly mindful. It means getting used to leaving the state of vidyā alone, divested of all distraction and clinging."
asunthatneversets
 
Posts: 1388
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2011 10:30 pm

Re: In the KUNJED GYALPO says it is of no use to do rituals

Postby thigle » Sun Jan 26, 2014 9:54 pm

asunthatneversets wrote:
thigle wrote:
That's a good question, because the most of us conceptualize and reify the entire life unknowingly, therefore the most of us are always unknowingly "practitioners" from the complementary standpoint of a "big brother", which seems to be refied-identified with everything. That's ignorance and grasping, therefore it's really better to give up such artificial practice, especially if someone "want to become familiar" with primordially-natural knowledge/transparency.


Sry for my bad english


'Giving up' is ignorance and grasping as well. Only a direct knowledge of dharmatā constitutes a transcendence of artificial practice... and even then, ones knowledge is initially unripened, and will not reach its full measure until the realization of emptiness. Therefore familiarization and practice are required.


If one practice "giving up practice", it's "practise", because he constructs a reified concept and therefore "thing" called "giving up practice", because there's a form of expectation, which want to have something from "giving up practice". That's grasping. One makes a "thing" out of the fact of giving up practice. Complementary to grasping, now it seems there's something like a "giving up practice'nes". It's anything "behind", like a "big brother, which is reified-identified with "giving up practice". It's really great, if one can detect this, because now it's really possible to interrupt this artificial focus. You can't, because you are afraid, you "can't see something" what you expect from doing "giving up practice"? Great, you detect it once again.

At some point one has enough. Neither "practice" nor "non-practice", so what will be left? Naturally loosed, therefore neither distracted yet focused. Not as "practice" or reified "non-practise", but as a self-obvious non-constructed fact, not "made" by anything or anyone. Now, transparency/knowledge is self-obvious.

"Self-obvious" doesn't mean "automatic". It's just without any need for an extra artificial knowledge-focus like this: "transparency is self-obvious". You can't tell "from where" immediate knowledge comes from, because it doesn't matter from itself from where it comes from. The fact that "it doesn't matter" is immediate "knowledge", not to distinct from what appears, therefore everything is obviously "transparent"-like or "insubstantial"-like, primordially without any need for a base.

Marginal note: One cannot overemphasize the importance of this. "Naturally loosed, neither distracted yet focused", is not about doing or practicing "to be naturaly loosed". It's not about "to remain" naturaly loosed. But some people do that in perfection. Therefore they believe, they are "naturaly loosed" and that's the big goal. Such a "reified non-practice" tends to a special "state" of consciousness. Now the disciple maybe think: "It's really the big goal, because of my true "natural relaxation", there's some-"thing" like "clarity" or "openness" or whatever. But his "clarity" or "openness" or whatever are only reified concepts, based on grasping/ignorance. This is really different from the terms "naturally relaxed" or "naturally loosed" in our context. What sounds the same, may also be different.


Sry for my bad english
thigle
 
Posts: 117
Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2011 7:46 pm
Location: Salzburg

Re: In the KUNJED GYALPO says it is of no use to do rituals

Postby asunthatneversets » Sun Jan 26, 2014 10:03 pm

Actually this passage from Dudjom Rinpoche is even better:
"Similarly: first, the rigpa [vidyā] of having had the introduction is like the first part of the early dawn; in the middle, the rigpa of having gained assurance, free from equipoise and post-attainment is like the daybreak; and finally the rigpa of having gained liberation from extremes is like the sun shining."

And Mipham Rinpoche states:
"The training of rigpa comes in three steps: recognition, training and finalization."
asunthatneversets
 
Posts: 1388
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2011 10:30 pm

Re: In the KUNJED GYALPO says it is of no use to do rituals

Postby heart » Sun Jan 26, 2014 10:06 pm

thigle wrote:
heart wrote:How about the ritual of getting up every morning, of standing, sitting, eating and shiting? Oh, and write clever words on some forum. Do you think you can familiarize yourself with the natural state while performing this daily ritual thigle?


That's a good question, because the most of us conceptualize and reify the entire life unknowingly, therefore the most of us are always unknowingly "practitioners" from the complementary standpoint of a "big brother", which seems to be refied-identified with everything. That's ignorance and grasping, therefore it's really better to give up such artificial practice, especially if someone "want to become familiar" with primordially-natural knowledge/transparency.


Yes, you do conceptualize everything thigle. Familiarize yourself with the natural state just means to let go of that.

/magnus
"To reject practice by saying, 'it is conceptual!' is the path of fools. A tendency of the inexperienced and something to be avoided."
- Longchenpa
User avatar
heart
 
Posts: 3121
Joined: Fri Jan 08, 2010 1:55 pm

Re: In the KUNJED GYALPO says it is of no use to do rituals

Postby asunthatneversets » Sun Jan 26, 2014 10:41 pm

thigle wrote:If one practice "giving up practice", it's "practise", because he constructs a reified concept and therefore "thing" called "giving up practice", because there's a form of expectation, which want to have something from "giving up practice". That's grasping. One makes a "thing" out of the fact of giving up practice. Complementary to grasping, now it seems there's something like a "giving up practice'nes". It's anything "behind", like a "big brother, which is reified-identified with "giving up practice". It's really great, if one can detect this, because now it's really possible to interrupt this artificial focus. You can't, because you are afraid, you "can't see something" what you expect from doing "giving up practice"? Great, you detect it once again.

At some point one has enough. Neither "practice" nor "non-practice", so what will be left? Naturally loosed, therefore neither distracted yet focused. Not as "practice" or reified "non-practise", but as a self-obvious non-constructed fact, not "made" by anything or anyone. Now, transparency/knowledge is self-obvious.

"Self-obvious" doesn't mean "automatic". It's just without any need for an extra artificial knowledge-focus like this: "transparency is self-obvious". You can't tell "from where" immediate knowledge comes from, because it doesn't matter from itself from where it comes from. The fact that "it doesn't matter" is immediate "knowledge", not to distinct from what appears, therefore everything is obviously "transparent"-like or "insubstantial"-like, primordially without any need for a base.

Marginal note: One cannot overemphasize the importance of this. "Naturally loosed, neither distracted yet focused", is not about doing or practicing "to be naturaly loosed". It's not about "to remain" naturaly loosed. But some people do that in perfection. Therefore they believe, they are "naturaly loosed" and that's the big goal. Such a "reified non-practice" tends to a special "state" of consciousness. Now the disciple maybe think: "It's really the big goal, because of my true "natural relaxation", there's some-"thing" like "clarity" or "openness" or whatever. But his "clarity" or "openness" or whatever are only reified concepts, based on grasping/ignorance. This is really different from the terms "naturally relaxed" or "naturally loosed" in our context. What sounds the same, may also be different.


Sry for my bad english


The 'natural' part of the practice arises as a result of recognizing the nature of mind. If that recognition hasn't occurred, no matter how relaxed or loose we remain, the mind is still acting as a reference point and is mediating experience, which means that delusion is still present, and there is nothing natural about ones practice. Resting in mind is a necessary preliminary practice for most, but it shouldn't be confused as the definitive view.

There's (i) non-fixation which is resting in the clarity of mind (as a reference point), and then there's (ii) non-fixation resting in the nature of mind (free of a reference point). Confusing the former for the latter causes a lot of issues.

Per Dudjom Lingpa; the clarity of mind can be referred to as the 'relative' nature of mind, but this (clarity) is not the ultimate nature of mind. The 'ultimate' nature of mind, meaning the minds definitive nature, is sems nyid i.e. the recognition of the non-arising of the mind (sometimes parsed as 'nondual clarity and emptiness'). That recognition frees up the illusory reference point of mind and so mind no longer mediates experience and appearances self-arise [rang byung] and self-liberate [rang grol].

The clarity (cognizance) of mind alone implies a subtle reference point and a subtle grasping, because clarity is susceptible to conditioning. But when clarity is sealed with emptiness, that reference point is freed up and the grasping is cut. This is why, for example; tregchö [khregs chod] is sometimes defined as cutting the binding on bundle of wood. The binding represents the delusion which keeps clarity conditioned and sustains the artificial reference point of mind. Clarity alone (divorced of the recognition of its emptiness) is merely the neutral indeterminate cognizance of the ālaya. All sentient beings function from the standpoint of the ālaya and mind.

An allegedly natural resting in the clarity of mind is simply śamatha, when that clarity is recognized as empty, the knowledge that the mind has been beginninglessly non-arisen gives rise to the 'natural' resting you are alluding to, which is the vipaśyanā of the natural state. The former entails effort, even if one thinks they are resting effortlessly. The latter is the true effortlessness.

Tulku Urgyen discusses how resting in mind is not equivalent to the definitive view:
"The glimpse of recognizing mind-essence [sems nyid] that in the beginning lasted only for a few seconds gradually becomes half a minute, then a minute, then half an hour, then hours, until eventually it is uninterrupted throughout the whole day. You need that kind of training. I mention this because, if the goal of the main training is to construct a state in which thoughts have subsided and which feels very clear and quiet, that is still a training in which a particular state is deliberately kept. Such a state is the outcome of a mental effort, a pursuit. Therefore it is neither the ultimate nor the original natural state.

The naked essence of mind [sems nyid] is not known in shamatha, because the mind is occupied with abiding in stillness; it (mind essence) remains unseen. All one is doing is simply not following the movement of thought. But being deluded by thought movement is not the only delusion; one can also be deluded by abiding in quietude. The preoccupation with being clam blocks recognition of self-existing wakefulness and also blocks the knowing of the three kayas of the awakened state. This calm is simply one of no thought, of the attention subsiding in itself while still not knowing itself."
asunthatneversets
 
Posts: 1388
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2011 10:30 pm

Re: In the KUNJED GYALPO says it is of no use to do rituals

Postby thigle » Sun Jan 26, 2014 11:29 pm

I really can understand why some people do not want to understand, because it seems, the "big brother"-concept has an autonomous will to survive. It's like a protection mechanism. This mechanism seems to be a tempter, distracting beings by making mundane things alluring, the negative seem positive or the positive seem negative.
thigle
 
Posts: 117
Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2011 7:46 pm
Location: Salzburg

Re: In the KUNJED GYALPO says it is of no use to do rituals

Postby alpha » Sun Jan 26, 2014 11:36 pm

thigle wrote:I really can understand why some people do not want to understand what I'm talking about in the last posts, because it seems, the "big brother"-concept has an autonomous will to survive. It's like a protection mechanism. This mechanism seems to be a tempter, distracting beings by making mundane things alluring, the negative seem positive or the positive seem negative.


If you want to communicate more efficiently maybe you could consider becoming less wordy and simplify your messages and adopt a less distracting - commas every few words- writing style.

And who the hell is "big brother" ?
AOM
alpha
 
Posts: 584
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2010 12:05 pm
Location: kent

Re: In the KUNJED GYALPO says it is of no use to do rituals

Postby thigle » Mon Jan 27, 2014 10:13 am

alpha wrote:
thigle wrote:I really can understand why some people do not want to understand what I'm talking about in the last posts, because it seems, the "big brother"-concept has an autonomous will to survive. It's like a protection mechanism. This mechanism seems to be a tempter, distracting beings by making mundane things alluring, the negative seem positive or the positive seem negative.


If you want to communicate more efficiently maybe you could consider becoming less wordy and simplify your messages and adopt a less distracting - commas every few words- writing style.


OT: Maybe one needs more time, before one can give an answer. If one have no direct/lived comparison to the words, one only can "think about" it. If one only can "think about" it, the text seems to be only "conceptual", therefore the content seems to be hard to understand. Like in dzogchen generally! Because of these people, I use more words then less words, because it's better they can't understand the text instead they misunderstands the text, because there's a lot of potential traps and mistaken ideas. The problem in most of the public dzogchen forums I know, is the lack of direct/lived comparison. Therefore it is better to be cautious. What's the "big brother"? That's a good example. I've described this term like any other term in the context of an experimental access above. Finally the answer to this topic:

thigle wrote:If "knowledge/transparency" was de facto even only temporarily self-obvious, one knows that neither rites/rituals nor anything other "practice" and reified "non-practice" can be used to "familiarize" with "knowledge/transparency". Before one knows this, it's necessary to "practice" everything, but that's preliminary exercises. Of course, if "knowledge/transparency" is self-obvious, one can dance in a circle and cry: hum hum", because of whatever, but in such a case, there's no grasping. In such a case, it's a possible expression of "knowledge/transparency".
thigle
 
Posts: 117
Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2011 7:46 pm
Location: Salzburg

Re: In the KUNJED GYALPO says it is of no use to do rituals

Postby Sönam » Mon Jan 27, 2014 10:52 am

asunthatneversets wrote:
Sönam wrote:
asunthatneversets wrote:...And rituals, or whatever other method one wants to use to familiarize with that nature is an indispensable aspect of the teaching.


It does not sound very dzogchen at all ... maybe TB conceptualizations?

Sönam


I posted some of this elsewhere but it is relevant here and explains my point:

...


I thought you were speaking of "familiarize" if NOT recognizing ...
Sönam
By understanding everything you perceive from the perspective of the view, you are freed from the constraints of philosophical beliefs.
By understanding that any and all mental activity is meditation, you are freed from arbitrary divisions between formal sessions and postmeditation activity.
- Longchen Rabjam -
User avatar
Sönam
 
Posts: 1992
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 2:11 pm
Location: France

Re: In the KUNJED GYALPO says it is of no use to do rituals

Postby thigle » Mon Jan 27, 2014 11:35 am

Sönam wrote:
I thought you were speaking of "familiarize" if NOT recognizing ...
Sönam


"Wayuu" had written, he recognized the natural state/knowledge-transparency trough a direct introduction. This was my context. One can't "familiarize" with the natural state/knowledge-transparency, if there's initially no recognizing of the natural state/knowledge-transparency. In the beginning, the natural state is temporaly. Ignorance always comes back. At this point, I speak from "familiarize with the natural state". Now one knows, that neither practice nor a reified "non-practice" can help to recognizing. He must take a very subtle decision, if one want to familiarize with the natural state, and therefore more "stability". This "decision" you can call treckchö (in a menngagde-context). The practises before the initially recognizing of the natural state/knowledge-transparency are preliminary practices, not dzogchen. It's important not to mix-up everything.
thigle
 
Posts: 117
Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2011 7:46 pm
Location: Salzburg

Re: In the KUNJED GYALPO says it is of no use to do rituals

Postby Sönam » Mon Jan 27, 2014 2:57 pm

thigle wrote:
Sönam wrote:
I thought you were speaking of "familiarize" if NOT recognizing ...
Sönam


"Wayuu" had written, he recognized the natural state/knowledge-transparency trough a direct introduction. This was my context. One can't "familiarize" with the natural state/knowledge-transparency, if there's initially no recognizing of the natural state/knowledge-transparency. In the beginning, the natural state is temporaly. Ignorance always comes back. At this point, I speak from "familiarize with the natural state". Now one knows, that neither practice nor a reified "non-practice" can help to recognizing. He must take a very subtle decision, if one want to familiarize with the natural state, and therefore more "stability". This "decision" you can call treckchö (in a menngagde-context). The practises before the initially recognizing of the natural state/knowledge-transparency are preliminary practices, not dzogchen. It's important not to mix-up everything.


Yes ... but it does not answer to the context of my answer to asunthatneversets

Sönam
By understanding everything you perceive from the perspective of the view, you are freed from the constraints of philosophical beliefs.
By understanding that any and all mental activity is meditation, you are freed from arbitrary divisions between formal sessions and postmeditation activity.
- Longchen Rabjam -
User avatar
Sönam
 
Posts: 1992
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 2:11 pm
Location: France

Re: In the KUNJED GYALPO says it is of no use to do rituals

Postby oldbob » Wed Jan 29, 2014 3:25 am

Sönam wrote:
thigle wrote:
Sönam wrote:
I thought you were speaking of "familiarize" if NOT recognizing ...
Sönam


"Wayuu" had written, he recognized the natural state/knowledge-transparency trough a direct introduction. This was my context. One can't "familiarize" with the natural state/knowledge-transparency, if there's initially no recognizing of the natural state/knowledge-transparency. In the beginning, the natural state is temporaly. Ignorance always comes back. At this point, I speak from "familiarize with the natural state". Now one knows, that neither practice nor a reified "non-practice" can help to recognizing. He must take a very subtle decision, if one want to familiarize with the natural state, and therefore more "stability". This "decision" you can call treckchö (in a menngagde-context). The practises before the initially recognizing of the natural state/knowledge-transparency are preliminary practices, not dzogchen. It's important not to mix-up everything.


Yes ... but it does not answer to the context of my answer to asunthatneversets

Sönam


and so ---- to answer my friend Sonam's question, and all questions: Isn't it wonderful how all the infinite possibilities of the combination of all words can be put to rest, and resolved, in the single point.

.

and so ---- isn't it wonderful how the Kunjed Gyalpo says that it is of no use to do rituals!
oldbob
 
Posts: 529
Joined: Sun May 06, 2012 8:19 am

Previous

Return to Dzogchen

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: GalaxyGoddess and 22 guests

cron
>