Electronic Dzogchen

[Astus]

Intention is the difference. Above you're talking about relationship, not transmission. Transmission doesn't have anything to do with it. (though even for relationship you don't have to be together with the teacher physically)
The teacher has to have the intention to transmit or there is no transmitting. The person on the receiving end has to have the intention to receive, otherwise there can be no receiving. So it's like someone calls you and you don't pick the phone or you pick up the phone. The moment you picked up the phone it's no longer a one-way communication.

The intention on the part of the teacher can be in writing, painting, speaking, moving, etc. A record is made with the intention to bring it to others. Others listen to the teaching - live or recorded - with the intention to receive something. Thus there is no apparent need for a live event.

[Josef]

Intention is the difference. Above you're talking about relationship, not transmission. Transmission doesn't have anything to do with it. (though even for relationship you don't have to be together with the teacher physically)
The teacher has to have the intention to transmit or there is no transmitting. The person on the receiving end has to have the intention to receive, otherwise there can be no receiving. So it's like someone calls you and you don't pick the phone or you pick up the phone. The moment you picked up the phone it's no longer a one-way communication.

The intention on the part of the teacher can be in writing, painting, speaking, moving, etc. A record is made with the intention to bring it to others. Others listen to the teaching - live or recorded - with the intention to receive something. Thus there is no apparent need for a live event.

The need is based on time.
The intentions have to be simultaneous for the connection to occur at its full potential.

[Astus]

The need is based on time.
The intentions have to be simultaneous for the connection to occur at its full potential.

What connection occurs? Connection between teacher and student through what?

[Pero]

Intention is the difference. Above you're talking about relationship, not transmission. Transmission doesn't have anything to do with it. (though even for relationship you don't have to be together with the teacher physically)
The teacher has to have the intention to transmit or there is no transmitting. The person on the receiving end has to have the intention to receive, otherwise there can be no receiving. So it's like someone calls you and you don't pick the phone or you pick up the phone. The moment you picked up the phone it's no longer a one-way communication.

The intention on the part of the teacher can be in writing, painting, speaking, moving, etc. A record is made with the intention to bring it to others. Others listen to the teaching - live or recorded - with the intention to receive something. Thus there is no apparent need for a live event.

That could only be true for a lung transmission. For an empowerment I don't think so, since how can you record someone's inner dimension? If the teacher manifests as a deity to give an empowerment for example, how are you going to record that? There is no technology in existence that is capable of doing that.

[Josef]

The need is based on time.
The intentions have to be simultaneous for the connection to occur at its full potential.

What connection occurs? Connection between teacher and student through what?

Its hard to explain or describe.
Its easy for us to say romantic things about mind to mind transmission or karmic ripening etc. but the reality of the situation is more personal and I dont think the experience is uniform among students.
The only thing we can really talk about in the context of what "connects" is based on our own experience.
For me it has been a strong experience of clarity with some other odd occurrences. Both via webcast and in person.

[Astus]

That could only be true for a lung transmission. For an empowerment I don't think so, since how can you record someone's inner dimension? If the teacher manifests as a deity to give an empowerment for example, how are you going to record that? There is no technology in existence that is capable of doing that.

If there is a personal contact (physical) required it is understandable that no record - or digital transmission - can substitute that (unless perhaps if we invent a holo-room like in Star Trek). My intention wasn't about going into other areas besides Dzogchen but only the discussion of this specific webcast format.

[Astus]

Its hard to explain or describe.
Its easy for us to say romantic things about mind to mind transmission or karmic ripening etc. but the reality of the situation is more personal and I dont think the experience is uniform among students.
The only thing we can really talk about in the context of what "connects" is based on our own experience.
For me it has been a strong experience of clarity with some other odd occurrences. Both via webcast and in person.

Thanks for your reply, what you say is so intimate. I understand it is this emotional-magical aspect that can make a lot of difference, when one thinks there are others doing the same and the teacher is doing the transmission. But once the magic (the personal attitude toward the event) is taken out of the context what remains, well, is just the video record.

[Pero]

That could only be true for a lung transmission. For an empowerment I don't think so, since how can you record someone's inner dimension? If the teacher manifests as a deity to give an empowerment for example, how are you going to record that? There is no technology in existence that is capable of doing that.

If there is a personal contact (physical) required it is understandable that no record - or digital transmission - can substitute that (unless perhaps if we invent a holo-room like in Star Trek).

Physical contact is not required for all empowerments. A meaning empowerment (don dbang) does not have such a limitation. However a recording cannot do an empowerment because of what I stated above.

My intention wasn't about going into other areas besides Dzogchen but only the discussion of this specific webcast format.

I don't think it's really any different. For a direct introduction the teacher has to be in the state of Dzogchen. When he is giving transmission he is in that state for sure. If you just have a recording, there is no way of telling whether he is in that state or not, and that state cannot be recorded.

[Josef]

Its hard to explain or describe.
Its easy for us to say romantic things about mind to mind transmission or karmic ripening etc. but the reality of the situation is more personal and I dont think the experience is uniform among students.
The only thing we can really talk about in the context of what "connects" is based on our own experience.
For me it has been a strong experience of clarity with some other odd occurrences. Both via webcast and in person.

Thanks for your reply, what you say is so intimate. I understand it is this emotional-magical aspect that can make a lot of difference, when one thinks there are others doing the same and the teacher is doing the transmission. But once the magic (the personal attitude toward the event) is taken out of the context what remains, well, is just the video record.

Its not particularly magical.
All it really is is the Three Statements of Garab Dorje making sense in ones experience.
Its actually quite practical and what remains are the second and third statements.

[Dechen Norbu]

What are you searching Astus? Some physical medium that allows the connection, like air conducing sound or the electromagnetic fields conducing information allowing the teacher, student connection? I don't understand what are you looking for.

[Josef]

What are you searching Astus? Some physical medium that allows the connection, like air conducing sound or the electromagnetic fields conducing information allowing the teacher, student connection? I don't understand what are you looking for.

Vayu.
Or zhi/base according to Dzogchen.

[Dechen Norbu]

Is the Base that he is looking for?

[Josef]

Is the Base that he is looking for?

The explanations of the base, ie nature, essence, and energy might give a bit more of a window into why this works.
The Crystal and the Way of Light would be a good read for Astus and any one else interested in Dzogchen.

[Astus]

I don't think it's really any different. For a direct introduction the teacher has to be in the state of Dzogchen. When he is giving transmission he is in that state for sure. If you just have a recording, there is no way of telling whether he is in that state or not, and that state cannot be recorded.

Direct introduction is said to happen when Phat cuts all conceptual elaborations. The teacher being in the state of Dzogchen, that's what I don't see how it affects those who receive the transmission. It should be a personal and direct experience on the part of the students who are to be introduced. Some realises it, some don't. But another being's state of mind, that is not accessible to the students, they don't see it or experience it any way. The teacher can't directly influence the minds of the listeners either, otherwise all should attain enlightenment right there.

Its not particularly magical.
All it really is is the Three Statements of Garab Dorje making sense in ones experience.
Its actually quite practical and what remains are the second and third statements.

That is quite a different thing in my interpretation. What you say doesn't explain the first statement itself as an interaction between teacher and student.

What are you searching Astus? Some physical medium that allows the connection, like air conducing sound or the electromagnetic fields conducing information allowing the teacher, student connection? I don't understand what are you looking for.

Exactly. If there is an qualitative difference between a live and recorded transmission I'd like to have defined that quality.

[Josef]

Its not particularly magical.
All it really is is the Three Statements of Garab Dorje making sense in ones experience.
Its actually quite practical and what remains are the second and third statements.

That is quite a different thing in my interpretation. What you say doesn't explain the first statement itself as an interaction between teacher and student.

How is it different?
The teacher has completely integrated into the state of the third statement and uses many methods (not just phat) to introduce the students to that state via the first statement/direct introduction.
Direct introduction works from a distance because the principles of the base are not constrained by space or time. What is constrained by time is the current condition of the students. Therefore, they must have the intention of receiving transmission at the time it is given and the teacher must give it simultaneously via a means by which he or she feels will be most conducive for students.
Its not very complicated. But it is highly experiential and the students have various different experiences based upon their prior training and connection to the teachings.

[Astus]

How is it different?
The teacher has completely integrated into the state of the third statement and uses many methods (not just phat) to introduce the students to that state via the first statement/direct introduction.
Direct introduction works from a distance because the principles of the base are not constrained by space or time. What is constrained by time is the current condition of the students. Therefore, they must have the intention of receiving transmission at the time it is given and the teacher must give it simultaneously via a means by which he or she feels will be most conducive for students.
Its not very complicated. But it is highly experiential and the students have various different experiences based upon their prior training and connection to the teachings.

The base is unconditioned, the student is conditioned. The method of introduction is conditioned as it has to be on the level of the student. The teacher abiding in the base have an unconditioned mind, so it is not a method being communicated and not something a student perceives. What is perceived is the method and that method can be recorded and replayed since it is perceptible to the physical senses. That again is the reason I ask for the difference between the live and recorded transmission.

Am I repeating myself? Is it something I'm not getting?

[Josef]

The base is unconditioned, the student is conditioned. The method of introduction is conditioned as it has to be on the level of the student. The teacher abiding in the base have an unconditioned mind, so it is not a method being communicated and not something a student perceives.

The method is just a symbol to transmit the introduction.
It can be perceived or experienced if the student goes beyond the symbol of the method of introduction. And thats the rub. It IS a shared experience/connection that occurs at that very moment between the teacher and students. A recording just wont cut the mustard because the moment has passed.
Thats kind of the whole point. You are sharing an experience with the teacher via the methods he or she employs for the introduction.
Like I said before, its difficult to explain. Its up to the student and teacher to make that connection and work with it directly.

[Malcolm]

Is it something I'm not getting?

Yes.

[Astus]

The method is just a symbol to transmit the introduction.
It can be perceived or experienced if the student goes beyond the symbol of the method of introduction. And thats the rub. It IS a shared experience/connection that occurs at that very moment between the teacher and students. A recording just wont cut the mustard because the moment has passed.
Thats kind of the whole point. You are sharing an experience with the teacher via the methods he or she employs for the introduction.
Like I said before, its difficult to explain. Its up to the student and teacher to make that connection and work with it directly.

Letters are symbols to represent language, language is also a set of symbols to communicate thoughts. I don't see your thoughts and you don't see my thoughts. If I say the words you can't hear since you are not near me but as I write it down my thoughts eventually reach you in some form. Same goes on with symbols meant to convey the experience of realisation. The realisation itself is not communicated without some sort of expressions, and just as in case of words, the expressions don't lose their conveying nature if they are preserved in some way. To say that there is something is actually communicated without expressions means that there is actually no need for any form of communication, so the point of organising an event for transmission is meaningless. We can share an idea because we communicate in words or other means. Without words we don't share any idea neither can we decide if we share it or not. How is that different with realisation? Just because you have realised something - Dzogchen or anything else - if you don't tell me about it I won't be able to share it with you.

The Samdhinirmocana Sutra says, "Thus, good son, the saints, being freed from language through their holy wisdom and insight in this regard, realize the perfect awakening that reality is truly apart from language. It is because they desire to lead others to realize perfect awakening that they provisionally establish names and concepts and call things conditioned or unconditioned." This points clearly to the relationship between the ultimate and the conventional and how it is the conventional that teaches the path to the ultimate. Same what Nagarjuna said. How then can the Dzogchen transmission communicate something without conventional means? I know you said it's difficult to explain, but perhaps it's not impossible.

[Astus]

Yes.

What?