Dzogchen Without Buddhism?

Moderator: Tibetan Buddhism moderators

Re: Dzogchen Without Buddhism?

Postby heart » Tue Apr 05, 2011 6:13 pm

Nangwa wrote:This is a pretty clear and pithy teaching on the Three Statements.

"A Dzogchen Master STARTS with "direct introduction" with everyone. If they don't "get it" then one starts to use all the infinite methods and means to help bring about the experience of Rigpa. When one has the experience of Rigpa, then one confirms the validity of one's path now being "remaining with Rigpa" as path. Then, one simply continues in that state. Rigpa is the view to be experienced, Rigpa is the path to be followed, and Rigpa is the fruit of the path. There is no change in Rigpa, either in the beginning, middle or end. The fruit is your first realization of Rigpa. There are no Stages of Rigpa. Thogel does not modify Rigpa."—Dudjom Rinpoche on the Three Statements of Garab Dorje


Great quote, where did you find it?

However, there is a lot to the part where he says "remaining with rigpa". But ofcourse if you are like Garab Dorje.....

/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: 3136
Joined: Fri Jan 08, 2010 1:55 pm

Re: Dzogchen Without Buddhism?

Postby tamdrin » Tue Apr 05, 2011 6:34 pm

People in truth have some fantasy about what Garab Dorje must have been like. WE really know very little about what his historical life may have been like. I actually seem to recall that he liked practicing om ah hum vajra recitations and that he meditated in samadhi for like 30 years in retreat.. So actually he probably didn't just miraculously become this great master and his 3 words, although the essence of his teaching are his pointing out instructions and they aren't probably all the t, actually most definitely..
tamdrin
 
Posts: 291
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2010 7:01 pm

Re: Dzogchen Without Buddhism?

Postby Josef » Tue Apr 05, 2011 6:39 pm

heart wrote:
Nangwa wrote:This is a pretty clear and pithy teaching on the Three Statements.

"A Dzogchen Master STARTS with "direct introduction" with everyone. If they don't "get it" then one starts to use all the infinite methods and means to help bring about the experience of Rigpa. When one has the experience of Rigpa, then one confirms the validity of one's path now being "remaining with Rigpa" as path. Then, one simply continues in that state. Rigpa is the view to be experienced, Rigpa is the path to be followed, and Rigpa is the fruit of the path. There is no change in Rigpa, either in the beginning, middle or end. The fruit is your first realization of Rigpa. There are no Stages of Rigpa. Thogel does not modify Rigpa."—Dudjom Rinpoche on the Three Statements of Garab Dorje


Great quote, where did you find it?

However, there is a lot to the part where he says "remaining with rigpa". But ofcourse if you are like Garab Dorje.....

/magnus

I honestly cant remember where the quote is from. I just saved the quote itself because I really liked it.
There is definitely a lot to be parsed from it. It matches the three statements in a really amazing way in my opinion. One can either find them very straightforward and instructive or read a lot into them.
Both approaches are great in my opinion and I think this speaks to the power or this teaching.
Josef
 
Posts: 1565
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 6:44 pm

Re: Dzogchen Without Buddhism?

Postby Malcolm » Tue Apr 05, 2011 6:44 pm

tamdrin wrote:People in truth have some fantasy about what Garab Dorje must have been like. WE really know very little about what his historical life may have been like. I actually seem to recall that he liked practicing om ah hum vajra recitations and that he meditated in samadhi for like 30 years in retreat.. So actually he probably didn't just miraculously become this great master and his 3 words, although the essence of his teaching are his pointing out instructions and they aren't probably all the t, actually most definitely..


He was a "nirmanakāya of compassion" i.e. a direct emanation of Vajradhara. According to legend, we know that he uttered the rdo rje sems dpa' nam kha che when he was eight -- this sort of rules out "becoming" a great master.

We know that he is a first human master in one kama transmission of Yamantaka.

We know he freaked out "500" hundred Indian Panditas, headed up by Mañjuśrīmitra. Maybe there were two, the later one, Śrī Singha's teacher, was the reincarnation of the first, Garab Dorje's disciple.

The earliest bio we have of him, AFAIK, is in the Vima nyinthig, the lo rgyus chen mo.

As far as the rest goes, it is shrouded in legend and fable. It is all very uncertain. Norbu Rinpoche would like to place him circa 55 CE. based I think on the Sem sde lineages. There are all kinds of problems trying to date this person.
http://www.bhaisajya.net
http://www.bhaisajya.guru
http://atikosha.org
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔

Though there are infinite liberating gateways of Dharma,
there are none not included in the dimension of the knowledge of the Great Perfection.

-- Buddha Samantabhadri
User avatar
Malcolm
 
Posts: 12569
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Dzogchen Without Buddhism?

Postby Josef » Tue Apr 05, 2011 6:46 pm

Namdrol wrote:
The earliest bio we have of him, AFAIK, is in the Vima nyinthig, the lo rgyus chen mo.

Is there an English translation of this available?
Josef
 
Posts: 1565
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 6:44 pm

Re: Dzogchen Without Buddhism?

Postby Pero » Tue Apr 05, 2011 7:00 pm

Nangwa wrote:
Namdrol wrote:
The earliest bio we have of him, AFAIK, is in the Vima nyinthig, the lo rgyus chen mo.

Is there an English translation of this available?


If I'm not mistaken, this is available at the Shang Shung Institute as "The Great History of Garab Dorje, Manjushrimitra, Shrisingha, Jnanasutra and Vimalamitra".
Although many individuals in this age appear to be merely indulging their worldly desires, one does not have the capacity to judge them, so it is best to train in pure vision.
- Shabkar
Pero
 
Posts: 1849
Joined: Tue Aug 31, 2010 8:54 pm

Re: Dzogchen Without Buddhism?

Postby Pero » Tue Apr 05, 2011 7:03 pm

Nangwa wrote:I honestly cant remember where the quote is from. I just saved the quote itself because I really liked it.

http://dudjom.blogspot.com/2008/03/on-three-statements-of-garab-dorje.html
There is no exact source of that text given though.
Although many individuals in this age appear to be merely indulging their worldly desires, one does not have the capacity to judge them, so it is best to train in pure vision.
- Shabkar
Pero
 
Posts: 1849
Joined: Tue Aug 31, 2010 8:54 pm

Re: Dzogchen Without Buddhism?

Postby Malcolm » Tue Apr 05, 2011 7:04 pm

Nangwa wrote:
Namdrol wrote:
The earliest bio we have of him, AFAIK, is in the Vima nyinthig, the lo rgyus chen mo.

Is there an English translation of this available?



Valby translated it.
http://www.bhaisajya.net
http://www.bhaisajya.guru
http://atikosha.org
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔

Though there are infinite liberating gateways of Dharma,
there are none not included in the dimension of the knowledge of the Great Perfection.

-- Buddha Samantabhadri
User avatar
Malcolm
 
Posts: 12569
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Dzogchen Without Buddhism?

Postby Josef » Tue Apr 05, 2011 7:50 pm

Namdrol wrote:
Nangwa wrote:
Namdrol wrote:
The earliest bio we have of him, AFAIK, is in the Vima nyinthig, the lo rgyus chen mo.

Is there an English translation of this available?



Valby translated it.

Awesome. Thanks
Josef
 
Posts: 1565
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 6:44 pm

Re: Dzogchen Without Buddhism?

Postby Josef » Tue Apr 05, 2011 7:51 pm

Pero wrote:
Nangwa wrote:
Namdrol wrote:
The earliest bio we have of him, AFAIK, is in the Vima nyinthig, the lo rgyus chen mo.

Is there an English translation of this available?


If I'm not mistaken, this is available at the Shang Shung Institute as "The Great History of Garab Dorje, Manjushrimitra, Shrisingha, Jnanasutra and Vimalamitra".

Thanks Pero.
I will get a copy.
Josef
 
Posts: 1565
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 6:44 pm

Re: Dzogchen Without Buddhism?

Postby Sönam » Tue Apr 05, 2011 9:14 pm

heart wrote:Anyway what Sönam is saying is that once you sat through a direct introduction you don't need anything because you are all the time in rigpa because that is what he read in the Dzogchen Tantras. You agree with him, it is fine with me.

/magnus


Once more that is not what I have said ...

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: 1998
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 2:11 pm
Location: France

Re: Dzogchen Without Buddhism?

Postby Pema Rigdzin » Tue Apr 05, 2011 10:20 pm

Sönam wrote:
heart wrote:Anyway what Sönam is saying is that once you sat through a direct introduction you don't need anything because you are all the time in rigpa because that is what he read in the Dzogchen Tantras. You agree with him, it is fine with me.

/magnus


Once more that is not what I have said ...

Sönam


Magnus,

In all fairness, while the above (bolded by me) is what I at least perceived Sonam to be saying in previous discussions, it does not seem to me that that's what he's saying in this thread. Maybe if you re-read this post of his and try to approach it anew as though it were the first post of his you'd ever read, you'll see he's not exactly coming from the angle you think he is: viewtopic.php?f=48&t=3053&start=80#p33377
Pema Rigdzin
 
Posts: 1030
Joined: Tue Dec 15, 2009 3:19 am
Location: Southern Oregon

Re: Dzogchen Without Buddhism?

Postby heart » Wed Apr 06, 2011 6:46 am

Pema Rigdzin wrote:
Sönam wrote:
heart wrote:Anyway what Sönam is saying is that once you sat through a direct introduction you don't need anything because you are all the time in rigpa because that is what he read in the Dzogchen Tantras. You agree with him, it is fine with me.

/magnus


Once more that is not what I have said ...

Sönam


Magnus,

In all fairness, while the above (bolded by me) is what I at least perceived Sonam to be saying in previous discussions, it does not seem to me that that's what he's saying in this thread. Maybe if you re-read this post of his and try to approach it anew as though it were the first post of his you'd ever read, you'll see he's not exactly coming from the angle you think he is: viewtopic.php?f=48&t=3053&start=80#p33377


That is unfortunately what I hear. The idea that rigpa is a continuous experience after receiving the direct introduction is not how it works in Dzogchen. It is because not understanding the difference between sem and rigpa that you get these ideas. Dzogchen is all rigpa but Dzogchenpas are spending most of their time in mind and this is why they use a lot of different means to cut through. If you don't know that you don't know Dzogchen or rather you don't know yourself.

/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: 3136
Joined: Fri Jan 08, 2010 1:55 pm

Re: Dzogchen Without Buddhism?

Postby Pema Rigdzin » Wed Apr 06, 2011 7:02 am

heart wrote:That is unfortunately what I hear. The idea that rigpa is a continuous experience after receiving the direct introduction is not how it works in Dzogchen. It is because not understanding the difference between sem and rigpa that you get these ideas. Dzogchen is all rigpa but Dzogchenpas are spending most of their time in mind and this is why they use a lot of different means to cut through. If you don't know that you don't know Dzogchen or rather you don't know yourself.

/magnus


Magnus,

Yes, I totally agree with what you've said here about rigpa, the direct introduction, the subsequent experience, and the Dzogchenpa. We see all this exactly the same. I'm not sure Sonam is saying that one continuously, knowingly experiences rigpa after the direct introduction, though (at least in this thread). For example, he clearly said he finds himself distracted enough of the time that he joked that he would probably be better off doing ngondro than some "stupid things" he finds himself doing. He then also said that, as it so happens, he does practice ngondro sometimes. That would seem to contradict the stance you think he has.

I'm starting to think the main argument between you two is the semantics behind what it means to say that a practice "leads to" recognition of rigpa or not. The words "leads to" are quite loaded and may not mean the same thing to two people. In any case, this is kind of pointless to argue about because we know if certain practices are somehow helpful or not to our Dzogchen practice. We don't really need to be able to explain how they help with textbook precision or prove that they're helpful to others. If one is certain that one knows the difference between sem and rigpa and one's master has confirmed that, then one knows he's not mistaken when considering that other practices enhance his Dzogchen practice. Isn't that all that's important?
Pema Rigdzin
 
Posts: 1030
Joined: Tue Dec 15, 2009 3:19 am
Location: Southern Oregon

Re: Dzogchen Without Buddhism?

Postby heart » Wed Apr 06, 2011 3:13 pm

Pema Rigdzin wrote:
Magnus,

Yes, I totally agree with what you've said here about rigpa, the direct introduction, the subsequent experience, and the Dzogchenpa. We see all this exactly the same. I'm not sure Sonam is saying that one continuously, knowingly experiences rigpa after the direct introduction, though (at least in this thread). For example, he clearly said he finds himself distracted enough of the time that he joked that he would probably be better off doing ngondro than some "stupid things" he finds himself doing. He then also said that, as it so happens, he does practice ngondro sometimes. That would seem to contradict the stance you think he has.

I'm starting to think the main argument between you two is the semantics behind what it means to say that a practice "leads to" recognition of rigpa or not. The words "leads to" are quite loaded and may not mean the same thing to two people. In any case, this is kind of pointless to argue about because we know if certain practices are somehow helpful or not to our Dzogchen practice. We don't really need to be able to explain how they help with textbook precision or prove that they're helpful to others. If one is certain that one knows the difference between sem and rigpa and one's master has confirmed that, then one knows he's not mistaken when considering that other practices enhance his Dzogchen practice. Isn't that all that's important?


Pema,

I am pretty sure there a lot of misunderstanding in this thread and many others that gone before this one. You might have a point about "leads to" although I am pretty sure I never used that word. My understanding of Ngondro for example is not that it "leads to" Dzogchen since most of my Gurus students get direct introduction before they start Ngondro. If you read Jigme Lingpas own instruction of doing Ngondro each peace of instruction ends with "dissolve the visualization and then rest in the natural state" (not an exact quote). So it seems reasonable to assume that his students also received direct introduction prior to doing the Ngondro. To the best of my knowledge there is no gradual Dzogchen, but good Dzogchenpas do what their Guru wishes and use every grain of Dharma as an inspiration to cut through to the natural state.

If you read the whole (two) threads I think it is pretty obvious why I have some doubts about Sonams understanding of Dzogchen, not only I actually Mutsuk was a lot tougher with him than me. Previous he had many discussions with Jean-Luc Achard on French forums that got very heated over these matters. Jean-Luc knows a lot about Dzogchen and he is, just like Sonam, French. Did we all misunderstand him? I don't know, what do you say Sonam?

/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: 3136
Joined: Fri Jan 08, 2010 1:55 pm

Re: Dzogchen Without Buddhism?

Postby Sönam » Wed Apr 06, 2011 5:34 pm

heart wrote:
If you read the whole (two) threads I think it is pretty obvious why I have some doubts about Sonams understanding of Dzogchen, not only I actually Mutsuk was a lot tougher with him than me. Previous he had many discussions with Jean-Luc Achard on French forums that got very heated over these matters. Jean-Luc knows a lot about Dzogchen and he is, just like Sonam, French. Did we all misunderstand him? I don't know, what do you say Sonam?

/magnus


On that point, and only on that point, because I'm not going to discuss the personnal opinion you can have on me, or my knowledge about the separation of sem and rigpa, or any else.
Jean-Luc, is an appreciated translator of Tibetan Buddhism and Bon. And I recognize he has made a very "good job" in offering in french many treasures of the Dharma. He is a respectable scholar. But his (Bon) approach corresponds to the instructions his master gave to him, so it corresponds to what was certainly the best for him. As you agreed in an other part of the discussion, to be a scholar does not mean to be a genius practitioner.
The fact is, because of his own understanding, that he is "strongly" attached to an "heavy" progressive approach ... and I don't want to understand why !
As for Mustuk she is only repeating, quasi textualy, what JLA explains, and she has a level of agressivity and attacks ad hominem (i.e. when I see your avatar I understand who you are) that it disqualifies her definitely.
But back to JLA, with that "strong" point of view, it is not surprizing that, when I was underligning (in a french discussion) that ChNN was teaching the non "necessity" of ngondrö (for exemple), his answer was "yes, but in private he says otherwise" ... this is not modesty and it 'cut' all discussions.
But what bother me more, is that when in his commentary of some songs of Khenpo Gangshar (Principes de la Pureté Primordiale) he states that the Dzogchen adept should follow the following cursus ... following a list of 9 (minimum) types of (long) retreats that "must" be realized, from the ordinary preliminaries until the different guides (khrid) of thodrgal (dkar khrid, nag khrid, ...), to finally state that Khenpo Gangshar was in that song (le chant d'instructions à Gog Zangden) only speaking about the view (lta ba). And when one knows the particularity of Khenpo Gangshar giving pointing out instruction to "any body" he encounters, claiming that it was no more time for ngondrö and long sadhanas (I've tried to found the exact words of Khenpo Gangshar, as it has been transmited to me by Khenchen Thrangu, but I could'nt found it), you may found the commentary of JLA a bit "heavy" and corresponding more to what "he" thinks should be realized than what Khenpo Gangshar thought it should.

So finally, I'm sorry that you have such "opinion" on who I could be, but I can't help ... so let's try not to have "opinion" on who each of us is, and let stick to what has been "really" said.
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: 1998
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 2:11 pm
Location: France

Re: Dzogchen Without Buddhism?

Postby heart » Thu Apr 07, 2011 5:39 am

Sönam wrote:
heart wrote:
If you read the whole (two) threads I think it is pretty obvious why I have some doubts about Sonams understanding of Dzogchen, not only I actually Mutsuk was a lot tougher with him than me. Previous he had many discussions with Jean-Luc Achard on French forums that got very heated over these matters. Jean-Luc knows a lot about Dzogchen and he is, just like Sonam, French. Did we all misunderstand him? I don't know, what do you say Sonam?

/magnus


On that point, and only on that point, because I'm not going to discuss the personnal opinion you can have on me, or my knowledge about the separation of sem and rigpa, or any else.
Jean-Luc, is an appreciated translator of Tibetan Buddhism and Bon. And I recognize he has made a very "good job" in offering in french many treasures of the Dharma. He is a respectable scholar. But his (Bon) approach corresponds to the instructions his master gave to him, so it corresponds to what was certainly the best for him. As you agreed in an other part of the discussion, to be a scholar does not mean to be a genius practitioner.
The fact is, because of his own understanding, that he is "strongly" attached to an "heavy" progressive approach ... and I don't want to understand why !
As for Mustuk she is only repeating, quasi textualy, what JLA explains, and she has a level of agressivity and attacks ad hominem (i.e. when I see your avatar I understand who you are) that it disqualifies her definitely.
But back to JLA, with that "strong" point of view, it is not surprizing that, when I was underligning (in a french discussion) that ChNN was teaching the non "necessity" of ngondrö (for exemple), his answer was "yes, but in private he says otherwise" ... this is not modesty and it 'cut' all discussions.
But what bother me more, is that when in his commentary of some songs of Khenpo Gangshar (Principes de la Pureté Primordiale) he states that the Dzogchen adept should follow the following cursus ... following a list of 9 (minimum) types of (long) retreats that "must" be realized, from the ordinary preliminaries until the different guides (khrid) of thodrgal (dkar khrid, nag khrid, ...), to finally state that Khenpo Gangshar was in that song (le chant d'instructions à Gog Zangden) only speaking about the view (lta ba). And when one knows the particularity of Khenpo Gangshar giving pointing out instruction to "any body" he encounters, claiming that it was no more time for ngondrö and long sadhanas (I've tried to found the exact words of Khenpo Gangshar, as it has been transmited to me by Khenchen Thrangu, but I could'nt found it), you may found the commentary of JLA a bit "heavy" and corresponding more to what "he" thinks should be realized than what Khenpo Gangshar thought it should.

So finally, I'm sorry that you have such "opinion" on who I could be, but I can't help ... so let's try not to have "opinion" on who each of us is, and let stick to what has been "really" said.
Sönam


Sonam, Jean-Luc knows ChNN long time. He taken and practiced so many different famous Dzogchen teachings, both Buddhist and Bon. He is a translator and a scholar. He knows Dzogchen. He done many long Dzogchen retreat exactly according to tradition. You are out of your depths with him. He is not pushing for a gradual approach he is pushing for a traditional approach, there is a big difference. The traditional approach there are many things to do but there is a reason for this and it isn't really gradual at all because there is no gradual approach in Dzogchen.

About Khenpo Ganshar you are right that he taught like you say a few years before the Chinese occupation of Tibet but before that he taught very traditional. The circumstances for this you can find in a "Saint in Seattle" if you are interested. Dezhung Rinpoche was a student of Khenpo Ganshar. Those were special times.

I like you just fine Sonam but, maybe because of language problems, what you say feels like you have misunderstood something very fundamental about Dzogchen.

These days there pops up every month a new self-appointed "Guru" teaching more ore less some kind of misunderstanding of Dzogchen mixed with whatever. The all promise enlightenment over a weekend, I am sure it is a big business. For this reason I find it very important to stand up for a traditional approach and lifelong commitment to Dzogchen. Because you confound traditional with gradual you might have taken some blows that you don't deserve, I am sorry about that.

In Mahamudra on the other hand there is a gradual approach and also a direct approach.

/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: 3136
Joined: Fri Jan 08, 2010 1:55 pm

Re: Dzogchen Without Buddhism?

Postby Heruka » Thu Apr 07, 2011 5:50 am

heart, this is too much of a personal hit job on good member sonam,that it has to be taken with grain of salt.

there are maybe a few here that have knowledge of the "inside baseball" so to speak...

:namaste:

peace brother :buddha1:
Heruka
 
Posts: 1069
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2009 2:34 am

Re: Dzogchen Without Buddhism?

Postby Sönam » Thu Apr 07, 2011 8:37 am

About Khenpo Ganshar you are right that he taught like you say a few years before the Chinese occupation of Tibet but before that he taught very traditional. The circumstances for this you can find in a "Saint in Seattle" if you are interested. Dezhung Rinpoche was a student of Khenpo Ganshar. Those were special times.

I have been told of all this circumstances regarding Khenpo Gangshar, as he has been the Root Guru of Khenchen Thrangu Rinpoche (from whom I received instructions about ... few times). Rinpoché used to say that if he did'nt met Khenpo Gangshar he would have ended up General in the Tibetan army.

... but I will try to improve my language problems. I feel sometime it's quite ok, and I know sometime it's very bad.

:namaste:
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: 1998
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 2:11 pm
Location: France

Re: Dzogchen Without Buddhism?

Postby heart » Thu Apr 07, 2011 9:48 am

Sönam wrote:About Khenpo Ganshar you are right that he taught like you say a few years before the Chinese occupation of Tibet but before that he taught very traditional. The circumstances for this you can find in a "Saint in Seattle" if you are interested. Dezhung Rinpoche was a student of Khenpo Ganshar. Those were special times.

I have been told of all this circumstances regarding Khenpo Gangshar, as he has been the Root Guru of Khenchen Thrangu Rinpoche (from whom I received instructions about ... few times). Rinpoché used to say that if he did'nt met Khenpo Gangshar he would have ended up General in the Tibetan army.

... but I will try to improve my language problems. I feel sometime it's quite ok, and I know sometime it's very bad.

:namaste:
Sönam


Thrangu Rinpoche is also my teacher although I haven't seen him for a long time. I received my first Dzogchen empowerment's from him 1992 during the DamNgak Dzö, and I then realized that I had a strong connection with Dzogchen. Just recently I found out just what empowerment's he gave (it is in an other thread here) and it is mind blowing thinking what we got. I am also very fond of Khenpo Ganshar. You should read Dezhung Rinpoches biography, you get a vivid picture of him there.
"A General in the Tibetan army" really ? :twothumbsup:

/magnus


/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: 3136
Joined: Fri Jan 08, 2010 1:55 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Dzogchen

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests

>