Dharma Wheel

tamdrin wrote:cool

how long is this text? Maybe tibetans should become more Chan friendly. I dont think the Buddha himself would have advocated either the gradual or the instantaneous paths.

It is about 12 folio sides, not that long. I will probably translate it since it is useful.

that would be great if you did translate it Malcolm...

Namdrol wrote:It is about 12 folio sides, not that long. I will probably translate it since it is useful.

Good idea.

All the best,

Geoff

So from a Tibetan pov, Zen does not lead to the same realization as Vajrayana?

mzaur wrote:So from a Tibetan pov, Zen does not lead to the same realization as Vajrayana?

It does lead to buddhahood since it is Mahayana, so they simply put it into their interpretation of sutrayana.

Thanks. Why is it that sutra is considered inferior to Vajrayana? I know the texts say sutrayana is slower but where is there real evidence for that? Could that just be a way to get tantric practitioners motivated about their path?

I think it may help the discussion to examine Chogyam Trungpa's view of Zen, which was informed by his relationship to Suzuki Roshi. If I recall correctly, Suzuki Roshi reminded him greatly of his own Dzogchen master Sechen Kongtrul. I will try to find relevant quotes of his when I have the time.

Adamantine wrote:I think it may help the discussion to examine Chogyam Trungpa's view of Zen, which was informed by his relationship to Suzuki Roshi. If I recall correctly, Suzuki Roshi reminded him greatly of his own Dzogchen master Sechen Kongtrul. I will try to find relevant quotes of his when I have the time.

I'd really appreciate it if you could. I couldn't find Trungpa Rinpoche's view of Zen by googling online.

I'm actually surprised that a lot of Vajrayana people seem to look down at Zen, when Zen seems to be very akin to Dzogchen/Mahamudra as a direct path that takes the mind as its basis and also employing direct transmission from teacher to student as a method.

mzaur wrote:

Adamantine wrote:I think it may help the discussion to examine Chogyam Trungpa's view of Zen, which was informed by his relationship to Suzuki Roshi. If I recall correctly, Suzuki Roshi reminded him greatly of his own Dzogchen master Sechen Kongtrul. I will try to find relevant quotes of his when I have the time.

I'd really appreciate it if you could. I couldn't find Trungpa Rinpoche's view of Zen by googling online.

I'm actually surprised that a lot of Vajrayana people seem to look down at Zen, when Zen seems to be very akin to Dzogchen/Mahamudra as a direct path that takes the mind as its basis and also employing direct transmission from teacher to student as a method.

For starters here is an essay by CTR about Suzuki Roshi composed on the occasion of his death: http://www.chronicleproject.com/stories_138.html

Excerpt: "All his gestures and communications were naked and to the point, as though you were dealing with the burning tip of an incense stick. At the same time, this was by no means irritating, for whatever happened around the situation was quite accommodating. He was very earthy—so much so that it aroused nostalgia for the past when I was in Tibet working with my teacher. Roshi was my accidental father, presented as a surprise from America, the land of confusion. It was amazing that such a compassionate person existed in the midst of so much aggression and passion."

I also found online this quote that I remember from "The Lion's Roar" - I am not sure if the page notation is the same as in my edition.

Student: I think you said you can only get enlightened by going through
tantric transmission. Have enlightened people from the Zen tradition gone
through tantric transmission?
Trungpa Rinpoche: In some cases. Sure. I think so!
S: In that case, would you say that Suzuki Roshi was a tantric master?
TR: Absolutely. Good for him

The Lion's Roar in the forthcoming Collected Works of Chogyam Trungpa,
Volume Four, p. 193

Enochian wrote:Zen does not work with the channels, bindus and chakras within the body.

Vajrayana and even Dzogchen relies on esoteric anatomy.

Thats the main difference.

I'm glad I settled this issue. Your welcome.

P.S. Does a Zen master directly introduce the perfect natural state right off the bat? I don't think they do.

We actually use a mudra system that uses the energy pathways in the body, similar to amna in my branch of Zen.

We have a very detailed practice on it.

It's not something everyone uses, or everyday, but, it is helpful to use, or have as a reference should some particular tension come up in meditation that has trouble releasing.

Some people find the practice more helpful and others don't.

I don't always use complete mudra's/releases, sometimes it's enough to use part of one, simply to help locate the location in the body where the particular tension is arising, and help clear it out/help it release.

For bigger things that come up, or, if I'm sick for a while, I will use a complete mudra/release.

It can be very, very helpful.

Though as an adjunct to regular meditation, not in replace of it.

In Gassho,

Sara H

mzaur wrote:Thanks. Why is it that sutra is considered inferior to Vajrayana? I know the texts say sutrayana is slower but where is there real evidence for that? Could that just be a way to get tantric practitioners motivated about their path?

Aside from claiming speed, they also claim 13th or 16th bhumi as opposed to 11th.

mzaur wrote:I'm actually surprised that a lot of Vajrayana people seem to look down at Zen, when Zen seems to be very akin to Dzogchen/Mahamudra as a direct path that takes the mind as its basis and also employing direct transmission from teacher to student as a method.

It's a shame that any school looks down at another school. We have some understanding from the most ancient texts what the Buddha taught. After his death, some great effort was made to capture orally, then in writing, what the Buddha taught.

Over time, these teachings migrated to and through different countries and cultures. The Dharma was influenced by all of these cultural adaptations. Birds criticize fish because they can't fly (with rare exceptions). Fish criticize birds because they can't swim (with exceptions).

We struggle to try to reconcile what CTR thought of Suzuki Roshi. At the end of the day, it's just not necessary to suggest that any school is better, or faster, or shinier than another. We can study the Dharma, its history and development, and develop a sense of what is true Dharma and what is convoluted. We can, for ourselves, find a practice that is a good fit for our own sensibilities and practices.

The Buddha taught what the Buddha taught. The rest is ornament on the Bodhi Tree.

As far as I am aware, the awakened are non-denominational.
In fact they even transcend regional religions.

No doubt I am looking at it from the wrong shore . . .

ah well

I noticed that recently the Rinzai Zen Buddhist Society in Denmark changed its name to Buddhist Society, "to reflect that we are now less sectarian and have begun to incorporate Tibetan Nyingma dzogchen teachings into our practice". (translated from http://rinzai.dk/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;)

I don't know anything else about it, but it sounds interesting and possibly a very fruitful combination?

I imagine the future will see many more such attempts, as there will probably be more Buddhist teachers who know several different traditions, and who will most likely synthesize or combine to some degree in how they teach.

Best wishes
Lars