Dharma Wheel

Malcolm wrote:

uan wrote:

Malcolm wrote:
Sure, but we don't have a lot of time, and time is passing.

really? very linear concept. I guess we only have this one life then the flame goes out forever.

Flame? No? Opportunity, very likely.

So then we lose the opportunity forever? There are an infinite number of opportunities, some we see, most we don't. That well doesn't run dry.

I agree with the first part of your premise, which is ChNN presents us with a unique opportunity, but if one doesn't take it, it'd only be a big deal in a conventional sense, and probably not even then, and certainly not in a "time is running out" sense.

greentreee wrote:

asunthatneversets wrote:

uan wrote:
really? very linear concept. I guess we only have this one life then the flame goes out forever.

All concepts are linear.

concepts are of mind,
as we move through precious time.
what's back there, is fine.

True. And for the record, concepts are wonderful... however the difference between a linear concept vs. a very linear concept is purely conceptual

Pero wrote:

Malcolm wrote:Hi Pero:

I think it is a total joke for unrealized teachers to permit their students to perceive them as Buddhas. This is encouraging people to believe in fantasies.

You can think it wrong all you like. That is what I think. So we will agree to disagree.

Ok, though it's not like I don't get where you're coming from. But I still wonder what you think of the saying that "if you view the teacher as a realized being..." then?

You do realize this is exactly the kind of thinking that lead the Diamond Mountain people down their particular garden path.

uan wrote:
So then we lose the opportunity forever? There are an infinite number of opportunities, some we see, most we don't. That well doesn't run dry.

That's being optimistic.

I agree with the first part of your premise, which is ChNN presents us with a unique opportunity, but if one doesn't take it, it'd only be a big deal in a conventional sense, and probably not even then, and certainly not in a "time is running out" sense.

Time is running out. It alway is. People live 80-90 years at most, in general.

Malcolm wrote:

Pero wrote:

Malcolm wrote:Hi Pero:

I think it is a total joke for unrealized teachers to permit their students to perceive them as Buddhas. This is encouraging people to believe in fantasies.

You can think it wrong all you like. That is what I think. So we will agree to disagree.

Ok, though it's not like I don't get where you're coming from. But I still wonder what you think of the saying that "if you view the teacher as a realized being..." then?

You do realize this is exactly the kind of thinking that lead the Diamond Mountain people down their particular garden path.

Yes. Two things. One, the teacher was/is totally delusional. IMO not really someone who "understands the material, has done necessary retreats, and has permission to teach". And two, I'm not really sure that viewing one's teacher as a Buddha requires you to drop all reason.

Pero wrote: Yes. Two things. One, the teacher was/is totally delusional. IMO not really someone who "understands the material, has done necessary retreats, and has permission to teach". And two, I'm not really sure that viewing one's teacher as a Buddha requires you to drop all reason.

Yes, but Pero -- if you decide that someone is a Buddha, then you will see their delusions as skillful means.

And two, when decide, based on a conceptual beleif that someone is a Buddha, then well, it is hard to be reasonable or reasoned with about that person.

This is the best way for a Dzogchen pracitioner, in my opinion: my teacher and I have the same state. His/er job is to show me that state and s/he can do that because they are a further along the path than I.

There, see? No belief that one's teacher is a Buddha required.

M
(Of course I think that ChNN is an awakened person, but that is a different story).

Malcolm wrote:

Pero wrote: Yes. Two things. One, the teacher was/is totally delusional. IMO not really someone who "understands the material, has done necessary retreats, and has permission to teach". And two, I'm not really sure that viewing one's teacher as a Buddha requires you to drop all reason.

Yes, but Pero -- if you decide that someone is a Buddha, then you will see their delusions as skillful means.

Heheh yeah, I guess that's true. Although if you don't abandon all reason I think that at some point you should realize something's fishy.

This is the best way for a Dzogchen pracitioner, in my opinion: my teacher and I have the same state. His/er job is to show me that state and s/he can do that because they are a further along the path than I.

There, see? No belief that one's teacher is a Buddha required.

Yes I actually think more or less the same about that so I was wondering if seeing one's teacher as a Buddha is perhaps more related to tantra and its pure vision.

Malcolm wrote:

heart wrote:
eh? how about the lodjongs in the Vima Nyinthig? that is real meaning of renunciation.

/magnus

I see the first fout more as an encouragement not to waste time or energy on useless things. But I don't see them as a encouraging a path of renunciation.

If you think about it this is the essence of renunciation.

/magnus

Pero wrote:

Malcolm wrote:This is the best way for a Dzogchen pracitioner, in my opinion: my teacher and I have the same state. His/er job is to show me that state and s/he can do that because they are a further along the path than I.

There, see? No belief that one's teacher is a Buddha required.

Yes I actually think more or less the same about that so I was wondering if seeing one's teacher as a Buddha is perhaps more related to tantra and its pure vision.

Pure perception is actually just resting in the natural state. In the natural state not only your Guru but all sentient beings are Buddha's.

/magnus

Malcolm wrote:This is the best way for a Dzogchen pracitioner, in my opinion: my teacher and I have the same state. His/er job is to show me that state and s/he can do that because they are a further along the path than I.

There, see? No belief that one's teacher is a Buddha required.

It seems to me that both you and Pero are talking about exactly the same thing.

Malcolm wrote: Sure it is. I was saying that teachers who recognize that they are not realized should completely discourage their students from perceiving them as Buddhas.

If we are practicing deity yoga we are supposed to look at all beings as Buddhas, how is this different? One can view one's vajra brothers and sisters with pure view without being blind to their shortcomings or falling prey to their manipulations. At least, that has been my experience.

To use purported spirituality or titles to explain away bad behaviour out of some mistaken notion that gurus can't make mistakes is problematic. Visualizing the guru as indistinguishable from Guru Rinpoche or Garab Dorje to receive the blessings of the lineage is not. If people followed Ashvaghosha's advice and actually thoroughly investigated the teacher prior to accepting him or her, a lot of these problems would be avoided.

Malcolm wrote: This is the best way for a Dzogchen pracitioner, in my opinion: my teacher and I have the same state. His/er job is to show me that state and s/he can do that because they are a further along the path than I.

(Of course I think that ChNN is an awakened person, but that is a different story).

So do you think someone who has not somewhat realized/accomplished Dzogchen view-meditation-and-action is capable of giving pointing out? How far along the path do they need to be? I believe most people see their teachers this way :further along the path-- maybe much further.. not too many are thinking in a categorical way(with exception of DM people maybe) such as "my teacher is an 8th Bhumi Bodhisattva" or a "fully realized Buddha", etc. Although probably many students of HH Dudjom Rinpoche did feel this way, with good reason, just as you feel that way about ChNN... some great masters there is just too much evidence to dispute that they are awakened, then it becomes "reasonable" faith, not blind faith..

Karma Dorje wrote:

Malcolm wrote: Sure it is. I was saying that teachers who recognize that they are not realized should completely discourage their students from perceiving them as Buddhas.

If we are practicing deity yoga we are supposed to look at all beings as Buddhas, how is this different? One can view one's vajra brothers and sisters with pure view without being blind to their shortcomings or falling prey to their manipulations. At least, that has been my experience.

To use purported spirituality or titles to explain away bad behaviour out of some mistaken notion that gurus can't make mistakes is problematic. Visualizing the guru as indistinguishable from Guru Rinpoche or Garab Dorje to receive the blessings of the lineage is not. If people followed Ashvaghosha's advice and actually thoroughly investigated the teacher prior to accepting him or her, a lot of these problems would be avoided.

Right, I agree 100%. This is my understanding also.

Adamantine wrote:

Malcolm wrote: This is the best way for a Dzogchen pracitioner, in my opinion: my teacher and I have the same state. His/er job is to show me that state and s/he can do that because they are a further along the path than I.

(Of course I think that ChNN is an awakened person, but that is a different story).

So do you think someone who has not somewhat realized/accomplished Dzogchen view-meditation-and-action is capable of giving pointing out? How far along the path do they need to be? I believe most people see their teachers this way :further along the path-- maybe much further.. not too many are thinking in a categorical way(with exception of DM people maybe) such as "my teacher is an 8th Bhumi Bodhisattva" or a "fully realized Buddha", etc. Although probably many students of HH Dudjom Rinpoche did feel this way, with good reason, just as you feel that way about ChNN... some great masters there is just too much evidence to dispute that they are awakened, then it becomes "reasonable" faith, not blind faith..

Shakya Shri Jnana say that if you are not on the second or third vision you can't teach Dzogchen.

/magnus

heart wrote: Shakya Shri Jnana say that if you are not on the second or third vision you can't teach Dzogchen.

/magnus

Well that is definitive!

Clarence wrote:

Malcolm wrote: Enjoying your life, having a nice glass of wine, a juicy steak, a good woman (or man) at your side, nice music, flowers, herbs, etc.

All these things are important and necessary (depending on your preferences and health, etc.)

M

Thanks. I will try to start understanding how that works in the paradigm of practicing Dzogchen. Still a little ways away from that.

All that stuff is part of practice.

Kevin

the tradition is that we examine the teacher. for a long time. his or her qualities. the teachings. the impact the teachings have on us. our karmic connection to the lama. the lama's activities. how the lama treats his or her attendants and students. i personally always weigh very heavily the fruition of the lama's blessings in his/her students. is it a sangha full of chaos and drama? do the senior students have qualities, or they all full of themselves? do the students go on to serious practice and study? are the lama's senior students the type of people i'd like to become re personal qualities and leadership and service to the sangha? once we find a teacher we have total faith in, meaning they pass all of the above tests and examinations, then we can rely on their advice regarding other teachers.

the issue of false teachers is a legitimate one. fake teachers, teachers exaggerating their qualities, abusing their students, making money, molesting their students, teachers with substance abuse problems and other psychiatric issues-- all legitimate. but it's really our responsibility to investigate. i think the expectation that a lama will debrief his or her students re their level of realization and thus ask the students to not consider them a buddha etc. is just passing responsibility from self to other.

i think part of the problem is that we don't interact with lamas in ways that allow us to examine them and build confidence. we read in snowlion (whoops, that's gone) that some lama is giving a teaching, we get in a plane/train/automobile and buy a ticket and get the teachings. maybe we never see the lama again. maybe we see them 1X, 2X a year. it's tough to check out a lama when all you have is a deity card, a protection cord and a few memories from an encounter. it might be equally as difficult to generate much devotion and confidence in our practice with that little amount of contact. it might be ok. we're all different. we all have different strengths of karmic connections different amounts of wisdom. but it might be hard. regardless, the burden is on us, not the lama.

-xy

Adamantine wrote:

Malcolm wrote: This is the best way for a Dzogchen pracitioner, in my opinion: my teacher and I have the same state. His/er job is to show me that state and s/he can do that because they are a further along the path than I.

(Of course I think that ChNN is an awakened person, but that is a different story).

So do you think someone who has not somewhat realized/accomplished Dzogchen view-meditation-and-action is capable of giving pointing out? How far along the path do they need to be? I believe most people see their teachers this way :further along the path-- maybe much further.. not too many are thinking in a categorical way(with exception of DM people maybe) such as "my teacher is an 8th Bhumi Bodhisattva" or a "fully realized Buddha", etc. Although probably many students of HH Dudjom Rinpoche did feel this way, with good reason, just as you feel that way about ChNN... some great masters there is just too much evidence to dispute that they are awakened, then it becomes "reasonable" faith, not blind faith..

They have to have the experience of at least the second vision, in addition to other necessary qualifications.

xylem wrote: but it might be hard. regardless, the burden is on us, not the lama.

You would never say that about a doctor or any other kind of professional. So why give gurus a pass?