Dharma Wheel

username wrote:When was a recent Zen rainbow body?

Rainbow bodies have different levels. Hindu yoga also have knowledge of five colored lights. Hindus claim Mahavatar Babaji is a rainbow body, some also perceived Anandamayi Ma to be transparent. There are those Natha siddhas in the lineage of the 84 also. The texts and lineages love to inspire their followers with big talk about their best of the best path. A view that is beyond high and low cannot be bothered. When the mind is free from extremes, there's no Dzogchen.

adinatha wrote:

username wrote:When was a recent Zen rainbow body?

Rainbow bodies have different levels. Hindu yoga also have knowledge of five colored lights. Hindus claim Mahavatar Babaji is a rainbow body, some also perceived Anandamayi Ma to be transparent. There are those Natha siddhas in the lineage of the 84 also. The texts and lineages love to inspire their followers with big talk about their best of the best path. A view that is beyond high and low cannot be bothered. When the mind is free from extremes, there's no Dzogchen.

There are three different categories of rainbow bodies, living (usually near death) and post death and immortal. Five elements/colors is in many systems of shamans . Some African shamans levitate. Some Latin American shamans have dark retreats similar to Dzogchen. Hopis have similar secret retreats. But these are not the real McCoy as in Dzogchen/Mahamudra. Hindus cannibalize all into their system, now dinosaurs feature in annual festivals alongside deity sculptures in parades. Actually there is a school of thought denying Hinduism exists as one system and is an incorrect Victorian generalization of various lineages. And as many scholars are now discovering and we were saying for a long time, Advaita Vedanta is basically a derivative (corruption) of Dzogchen. Buddhas benefit many in various ways in many world systems. People think it is just this world but most of our lives in the long long long past has been in other planets or dimensions for millions of years and most people of the Earth go to other systems for most of their long long times ahead. But going to a jewel filled island world system in this life briefly, Earth currently, and coming back with shiny mother of pearl shells is just folly specially if one knows the deal. Obviously I don't mean Zen as it is on the path and most of them will probably be on the Vajrayana path sooner rather than later in near future lives as opposed to waiting for looooong times like most, but not all, currently not on the path. And a few not on the path nor into shamanics or anything spiritual currently might be enlightened sooner than us in a near future lifetime, one can never tell with these things. So it's best to respect all people and animals and sentient beings. And even forgetting all that have immense compassion for all, most of whom will suffer much longer than our vajra sisters and brothers on the path.

Once upon a time, a bunch of people was unhappy about the size of their nose and decided they really didn’t want to have a nose at all. Two noseless guys came along. One pointed out a shop on the other side of a chaotic highway saying, ‘Over there you can get your nose removed for free.’ The other noseless guy looked around and said, ‘Over there you can use that pedestrian crossing.’ A lot of the people promptly got really pissed off and said, ‘How dare they imply my nose is too big!’ Many other people thought if the shop was free, it had to be dubious. Some people started to ask, ‘How big is too big?’ Others began wondering why they had a nose at all and a few even wrote treatises about it. Others felt that getting your nose removed was the job of surgeons. Most agreed that it required planning, preparation, family support and follow-up therapy. The majority of people discovered they really loved their noses anyway. After all, it was what made them distinguishable from each another. Dzogchen and Mahamudra: genuine paths or words with a nasal inflection?

dzinpa wrote:Once upon a time, a bunch of people was unhappy about the size of their nose and decided they really didn’t want to have a nose at all. Two noseless guys came along. One pointed out a shop on the other side of a chaotic highway saying, ‘Over there you can get your nose removed for free.’ The other noseless guy looked around and said, ‘Over there you can use that pedestrian crossing.’ A lot of the people promptly got really pissed off and said, ‘How dare they imply my nose is too big!’ Many other people thought if the shop was free, it had to be dubious. Some people started to ask, ‘How big is too big?’ Others began wondering why they had a nose at all and a few even wrote treatises about it. Others felt that getting your nose removed was the job of surgeons. Most agreed that it required planning, preparation, family support and follow-up therapy. The majority of people discovered they really loved their noses anyway. After all, it was what made them distinguishable from each another. Dzogchen and Mahamudra: genuine paths or words with a nasal inflection?

Who nose

This guy nose!

Vajrayana cycles in general and Mahamudra & Dzogchen in particular have many stages with specific instructions and signs of accomplishment at each step ranging from the mundane to major miracles depending on circumstances and practitioner's capacity. Their fruit is also unmatched and nothing on this rare lucky planet, while the window lasts, comes close in terms of comprehensiveness and track record either. That is why they create such violent reactions in people who like to dimiss them by fooling themselves into continued sleep, like a sudden jerky movement during a bad dream. E-maho!

Basically every buddhist school created a chart which clearly prooves that a) it's teaching are the best b) the author can trace his lineage back to Shakyamuni Buddha. Zen also has quite a few of them. For instance classification proposed by Zongmi - it clearly prooves that zen is definitely better than the rest. Now, apparently I am lacking in faith because I doubt that the reasons for arranging the doxographies where anything more than sectarian. The most obvious of these manipulations are imho when they say "if somone criticizes this scripture, it only means that it's true". Since its very beginning mahaynist compilers added those "catches 22" to each and every text to make the doctrine legitimate. I guess they're helpful because they encourage your faith. On the other hand, I doubt they do you any good if you use them for internet flamewars. It's also true that some traditions like to emphasize this stuff more than others. It would be nice if everybody remembered that others also have their charts that proove (beyond a shadow of a doubt) that their tradition is the best before we start throwing doxographies at each other.

Best,
Piotr

bulhaeng wrote:Basically every buddhist school created a chart which clearly prooves that a) it's teaching are the best b) the author can trace his lineage back to Shakyamuni Buddha.

B is mistaken -- Dzogchen does not trace it teachings back to Shakyamuni; the Cakrasamvara cycle of tantras do not trace their lineage back to Sakyamuni and so on.

N

Basically what the very small minority of Zen followers who often go to other subforums and attack their positions should keep in mind is whatever they are about to say can not be said about them by the surviving Hinayanists of Theravada. That would mean they will be silent. Now, there are two sorts of Zen followers. First type as in the Japanese themselves and most westerners believe that Shakyamuni was not a usual person or philosopher or whatever but was an outstanding full Buddha who also did perform miracles and hence are true followers of Zen. The second type are basically more followers of Dawkins and western materialism, which is being challenged by the expanding boundaries of science still in it's infancy, and merely choose Zen as a lifestyle trend. So we need to ask those very few aggresive ones who parachute in to flame: do they believe in numerous classes of beings and siddhis and the myriad of Buddha families of various levels and other tennets of Zen Buddhism which Dawkins would deny? If so, then again they would have to keep quiet and think carefully before they write as we see above and often in TB subforums.

Namdrol wrote:

booker wrote:]
Again this depends what is meant by Sutra.

Sutra means the method is taught. The method of Chan/Zen is ultimately grounded in the Lanka-avatara sutra's sudden approach.

N

Hello Namdrol

Which method do you mean?

booker wrote:

Namdrol wrote:

booker wrote:]
Again this depends what is meant by Sutra.

Sutra means the method is taught. The method of Chan/Zen is ultimately grounded in the Lanka-avatara sutra's sudden approach.

N

Hello Namdrol

Which method do you mean?

The Chan sudden approach to realizing dharmatā.

N

And where in the sudden approach there's place for the path of renunciation which always is said to be the basis for Sutra?

Namdrol wrote:

narraboth wrote:There are a lot of comparisons between Dzogchen and Zen in China/Chinese Buddhists since Dzogchen was introduced to China.
Surely there are lots of differences in methods, but I personally think the similarity is quite obvious,

Read Nubchen -- he states that Mahayoga (not to mention Dzogchen) is superior to Chan because of the means of introduction, even though Chan is a sudden school and Mahayoga is gradual.

not sure if you meant nubchen sangye yeshe?

the Chan (or say ha-shan) school which was known by tibetan at that time is still mocked by many tibetan masters nowadays; but I have read quite several tibetan masters' comments saying it was not the same as the real methods used in China (let's say the sixth seat holder Huei-ngen, i got an impression that his words were translated to tibetan at certain time).

If Chan was just 'think nothing', it's maybe lower than not just mahayana. But even Chan masters in China wouldn't say that's real Chan.

username wrote: There is a lot of talk about all yanas or all religions and ideologies being the same in books and conferences. But it's good deeds for harmony to benefit beings. When was a recent Zen rainbow body? Apart from the missing Vajrayana complete cycles for full enlightenment as well as the unique methods of Dzogchen and Mahamudra, no lineage of transmission of DI/PO: no comparison.

narraboth wrote:Khenpo Ngachung said that the 'power' and qualities of vajrayana led recognition is superior than sutrayana led one, base on his own experience, but still it's not two rigpa being recognised. I think it's just how 'revealed' the mind nature is.

Yes, after suffering and letting others one could have helped suffer too meanwhile and waiting for three incalculable eons or billions of years if not trillions with no guarrantees and possible falls during that long time anyway.

Strangely, Zen is probably a chinese buddhist school emphasis lineage the most. You can choose not to believe the story of 'Buddha holding a flower and smile' and all the line til Bodhidharma (actually there is a list of all lineage masters names from Buddha to him), but discredit a school with 'no lineage' probably is not that good. Like we say in Nyingma 'the lineage of realisation', correctly pointing out and examinating the realisation are also lineage, even if it's not in a Vajrayana way. (Lineage is not just a Vajrayana thing, not even just a mahayana thing. For Vinaya, you also need to have a lineage, and it simply is that you get vinaya vows from someone who has it. )

My suggestion is, don't one school is lower until you well study most of its doctrines, it's not a very good interdependence for dharma practioners. And don't judge what great masters said is only 'good deeds for harmony to benefit beings'. It could also be very true and sincerely said, couldn't it? If just for harmony, why those masters especially mentioned trekcho?
If you claim something strictly based on texts, like Namdrol did most of time, maybe it's ok. Don't guess base on your own thinking, it can be dangerous.

Not sure why you mention rainbow body in Zen, is that related to the topic? I don't remember any text saying a enlightened being who showed rainbow body is higher than other enlightened beings.
Another strange logic-linked comment: Khenpo Ngachung was not compairing the time of two methods, he was simply saying the emptiness recognitions are the same, but through the vajrayana methods, realisation can show more qualities, base on his experience.

narraboth wrote:

username wrote: There is a lot of talk about all yanas or all religions and ideologies being the same in books and conferences. But it's good deeds for harmony to benefit beings. When was a recent Zen rainbow body? Apart from the missing Vajrayana complete cycles for full enlightenment as well as the unique methods of Dzogchen and Mahamudra, no lineage of transmission of DI/PO: no comparison.

narraboth wrote:Khenpo Ngachung said that the 'power' and qualities of vajrayana led recognition is superior than sutrayana led one, base on his own experience, but still it's not two rigpa being recognised. I think it's just how 'revealed' the mind nature is.

Yes, after suffering and letting others one could have helped suffer too meanwhile and waiting for three incalculable eons or billions of years if not trillions with no guarrantees and possible falls during that long time anyway.

Strangely, Zen is probably a chinese buddhist school emphasis lineage the most. You can choose not to believe the story of 'Buddha holding a flower and smile' and all the line til Bodhidharma (actually there is a list of all lineage masters names from Buddha to him), but discredit a school with 'no lineage' probably is not that good. Like we say in Nyingma 'the lineage of realisation', correctly pointing out and examinating the realisation are also lineage, even if it's not in a Vajrayana way. (Lineage is not just a Vajrayana thing, not even just a mahayana thing. For Vinaya, you also need to have a lineage, and it simply is that you get vinaya vows from someone who has it. )

My suggestion is, don't one school is lower until you well study most of its doctrines, it's not a very good interdependence for dharma practioners. And don't judge what great masters said is only 'good deeds for harmony to benefit beings'. It could also be very true and sincerely said, couldn't it? If just for harmony, why those masters especially mentioned trekcho?
If you claim something strictly based on texts, like Namdrol did most of time, maybe it's ok. Don't guess base on your own thinking, it can be dangerous.

Not sure why you mention rainbow body in Zen, is that related to the topic? I don't remember any text saying a enlightened being who showed rainbow body is higher than other enlightened beings.
Another strange logic-linked comment: Khenpo Ngachung was not compairing the time of two methods, he was simply saying the emptiness recognitions are the same, but through the vajrayana methods, realisation can show more qualities, base on his experience.

Firstly regarding your other post, as I said before there has been historic hints in Tibetan texts that Hashang was not just Chaan but maybe something more and as recent scholars have researched there might be something to this. So we really don't know but if you have unearthed new material to prove his enemies that he was just a mere Chaan, while claiming to defend him ironically(!), do share. Also there was only one who recognized the meaning of the flower, Maha-Kasyapa, but these are all skillful means as Ananda, Rahula, Sariputra etc. are all future Buddhas and there are many levels to these events and it would be foolish to claim a limited interpretation is all there was to such an event and the rest of disciples were ignorants which is also inconsistent and against your whole ideology above too!

As to your main point on being a Nyingma and dismissing the 9 yanas from Dudjom Rinpoche's texts all the way back through history to Padmasambhava, reminds me of Wise Blood: The New Church of Jesus Christ, without Jesus. What can I say?

Namdrol wrote:

bulhaeng wrote:Basically every buddhist school created a chart which clearly prooves that a) it's teaching are the best b) the author can trace his lineage back to Shakyamuni Buddha.

B is mistaken -- Dzogchen does not trace it teachings back to Shakyamuni; the Cakrasamvara cycle of tantras do not trace their lineage back to Sakyamuni and so on.

N

Re: Chakrasamvara, Guhyasamaja, etc., There is room for disagreement on this point as you know.

booker wrote:And where in the sudden approach there's place for the path of renunciation which always is said to be the basis for Sutra?

Sutra yāna, whether sudden or gradual, is still based on renunciation of sense objects.

adinatha wrote:

Namdrol wrote:

bulhaeng wrote:Basically every buddhist school created a chart which clearly prooves that a) it's teaching are the best b) the author can trace his lineage back to Shakyamuni Buddha.

B is mistaken -- Dzogchen does not trace it teachings back to Shakyamuni; the Cakrasamvara cycle of tantras do not trace their lineage back to Sakyamuni and so on.

N

Re: Chakrasamvara, Guhyasamaja, etc., There is room for disagreement on this point as you know.

No, there is no room for disagreement re: Cakrasamvara, mainly because this point is clearly commented upon by Indian masters.

Namdrol wrote:

adinatha wrote:

Namdrol wrote:B is mistaken -- Dzogchen does not trace it teachings back to Shakyamuni; the Cakrasamvara cycle of tantras do not trace their lineage back to Sakyamuni and so on.

N

Re: Chakrasamvara, Guhyasamaja, etc., There is room for disagreement on this point as you know.

No, there is no room for disagreement re: Cakrasamvara, mainly because this point is clearly commented upon by Indian masters.

Who? What do they say?