Institutional Buddhism

[Adamantine]

Right. And anything else, organized around "Dzogchen", is just theoretical.

Well Dzogchen Community is not very organized. It has no sangha of monks, no hierachy of practitioners, no unified corporate stucture, etc. This, in a real sense, is Dzogchen community:



In the center there are the Dzogchen Teachings. Surrounding that are the gars, then the gakyils, the groups of pratitioners, then individuals, all interconnected. Gakyils and the Gars have three colors, symbolizing the how we collaborate. The individuals in the periphery have the same color as the teachings in the middle symbolizing that we all have the same state. Everyone is the same, no one is higher, no one is lower.

Whatever the fancy images, it is still a samsaric institution, with flawed beings creating all kinds of political and financial tensions. I don't see how it is superior to what you are critiquing in so-called Buddhist institutions. There are the same tensions about fundraising, supporting centers, paying rent, and not allowing people who are too broke to pay into the teachings. (Yeah, I know there are free webcasts but that is not unique to the DC).

[mindyourmind]

Hi Malcolm

I understood all of that the first time you explained it. I just cannot agree with you that somehow Buddhism is a human construct, a human institution (and it shows), but Dzogchen is not.

There is too much here that I cannot agree with, and I really have nothing else to add.

Let's leave it then at a "I respectfully disagree" with the portions where you generalize. With your own personal experiences and choices I of course can and do have no problems at all.

[Malcolm]

Whatever the fancy images, it is still a samsaric institution, with flawed beings creating all kinds of political and financial tensions. I don't see how it is superior to what you are critiquing in so-called Buddhist institutions. There are the same tensions about fundraising, supporting centers, paying rent, and not allowing people who are too broke to pay into the teachings. (Yeah, I know there are free webcasts but that is not unique to the DC).

Yup, the flaws in the DC comes from people. Good thing no one thinks the DC is Dzogchen, not even in the DC.

As far as the webcast go, no one is teaching profound Dzogchen the way CHNN is via webcast. They just aren't. I don't know why. There are perhaps many reasons, distrust of technology, concerns about samayas, etc.

[Mariusz]

Hi Malcolm

I understood all of that the first time you explained it. I just cannot agree with you that somehow Buddhism is a human construct, a human institution (and it shows), but Dzogchen is not.

There is too much here that I cannot agree with, and I really have nothing else to add.

Let's leave it then at a "I respectfully disagree" with the portions where you generalize. With your own personal experiences and choices I of course can and do have no problems at all.

I also respect Namdrol's personal decision, although it seems to me sectarian (if only Dzogchen Community is the institution now) and too emotional (if Buddhism have hurt him very much)

[Simon E.]

Hi Malcolm

I understood all of that the first time you explained it. I just cannot agree with you that somehow Buddhism is a human construct, a human institution (and it shows), but Dzogchen is not.

There is too much here that I cannot agree with, and I really have nothing else to add.

Let's leave it then at a "I respectfully disagree" with the portions where you generalize. With your own personal experiences and choices I of course can and do have no problems at all.

That is a position worthy of respect. A mutually accepted agreement to differ is both human hearted and admirable.

[Malcolm]

Hi Malcolm

I understood all of that the first time you explained it. I just cannot agree with you that somehow Buddhism is a human construct, a human institution (and it shows), but Dzogchen is not.

Buddhism is not Dharma. Just a container.

[Karma Dorje]

Hi Malcolm

I understood all of that the first time you explained it. I just cannot agree with you that somehow Buddhism is a human construct, a human institution (and it shows), but Dzogchen is not.

Buddhism is not Dharma.

Another big disagreement there.

Your cynicism is really not good to see, Malcolm. I know there is this wordplay going on about the meaning of "Buddhism" and "Dharma", but I just look at that in plain language, and this trip of yours not something I want to be a part of.

This is not a question of cynicism and it is certainly not a merely semantic distinction. It is merely separating the institutions that teach Dharma and shape the message into what we call Buddhism from the actual essential meaning of what is taught. I personally find it perilous NOT to separate them. Otherwise, all of the many fiascos like the Karmapa Controversy, Ahkon Lhamo, Pabongka, Kelsang Gyatso, etc. become a feature of Dharma, rather than just merely political machinations by the greedy and/or power-hungry within human institutions. Look at how critical Milarepa was of the monastic institutions in many of his songs.

This has gone on a long time, and we haven't even addressed the ridiculous claims about what Hvashang taught and his alleged defeat. The Samye debate had a lot more to do with Sino-Tibetan relations than anything doctrinal.

[Malcolm]

Hi Malcolm

I understood all of that the first time you explained it. I just cannot agree with you that somehow Buddhism is a human construct, a human institution (and it shows), but Dzogchen is not.

Buddhism is not Dharma.

Another big disagreement there.

Your cynicism is really not good to see, Malcolm. I know there is this wordplay going on about the meaning of "Buddhism" and "Dharma", but I just look at that in plain language, and this trip of yours not something I want to be a part of.

As I said, Buddhism is just a container. Bon is another. Dharma is beyond these things. We categorize these things into convenient categories put them on shelves, and then we begin to think the label is the food.

[Adamantine]

I find the suggestion that moral action only to be possible in the context of rebirth a repugnant claim.

M

As noted in my post which you are purportedly replying to, I don't believe that is at all what DKR was saying. I don't see how you get that from what he said, and it wasn't my point in quoting him either. You haven't even addressed the pertinent points in the post where I initially quoted him yet either, so I think you are purposefully obfuscating the issue.

Just to remind you Malcolm, this is the larger part of the post I made which you have still not attempted to respond to. Maybe you could bring things back to focus?

Let's examine: ChNN and other teacher of Dzogchen point out that for most of us, we will not reach liberation in this life, but in the bardo. Like the Garuda, born fully grown once the egg hatches. How are we to interpret this outside of the teachings on the bardo? As a Christian, or Muslim, or Amazonian Shaman, (or existentialist) you will have your own structured belief about what happens immediately at the time of death, which may contradict bardo teachings. How does this fit with the argument that any denomination of any tradition can also be a full-fledged Dzogchen practitioner? At a certain point, they will have to choose to discard one version, or the other, ---or both will lose all sense.

*DKR quote snipped out*

It seems all or most of the people arguing for an autonomous Dzogchen are part of the Dzogchen Community, --as Malcolm points out, a very human institution. Are we arguing for a Dzogchen without the Dzogchen Community? Why would we? That's where the teachings are held, cared for, and transmitted. Same with Buddhism. And they are not different. In DC, Rinpoche has us do Tuns and Ganapujas which have very Buddhist, tantric, practices..
Deity Yoga, mantra recitation, seven line prayer, protectors, etc.

[Malcolm]

Let's examine: ChNN and other teacher of Dzogchen point out that for most of us, we will not reach liberation in this life, but in the bardo. Like the Garuda, born fully grown once the egg hatches. How are we to interpret this outside of the teachings on the bardo? As a Christian, or Muslim, or Amazonian Shaman, (or existentialist) you will have your own structured belief about what happens immediately at the time of death, which may contradict bardo teachings. How does this fit with the argument that any denomination of any tradition can also be a full-fledged Dzogchen practitioner? At a certain point, they will have to choose to discard one version, or the other, ---or both will lose all sense.

Christians, and everyone will experience sound, lights and rays in the bardo. If they practice Dzogchen, they will learn how to recognize this experience.

Personal experience trumps belief, even Buddhist beliefs.

It seems all or most of the people arguing for an autonomous Dzogchen are part of the Dzogchen Community, --as Malcolm points out, a very human institution. Are we arguing for a Dzogchen without the Dzogchen Community? Why would we? That's where the teachings are held, cared for, and transmitted. Same with Buddhism. And they are not different. In DC, Rinpoche has us do Tuns and Ganapujas which have very Buddhist, tantric, practices..
Deity Yoga, mantra recitation, seven line prayer, protectors, etc.

Insitutions are impermanent. They develop, flourish and then die out. Buddhism developed, flourished, and is now dying.

Dharma, on the other hand, is eternal.

M

[asunthatneversets]

Have you found this master in non-Buddhism or non-Bon now in the world? It is necessary or not? Simply answer please.

[Adamantine]

Have you found this master in non-Buddhism or non-Bon now in the world? It is necessary or not? Simply answer please.

Is that supposed to be Lama Drimed Norbu?

because I think he's a Buddhist.

[Malcolm]

Is that supposed to be Lama Drimed Norbu?

because I think he's a Buddhist.

What I heard as that Wynn Fischel got bounced from Rigdzin Ling because he started incorporating Shamanic work and so on for his students and freaked out the Buddhist conservatives. Or so I have been told by people who lived there and are close to the situtation.

M

[Adamantine]

Is that supposed to be Lama Drimed Norbu?

because I think he's a Buddhist.

What I heard as that Wynn Fischel got bounced from Rigdzin Ling because he started incorporating Shamanic work and so on for his students and freaked out the Buddhist conservatives. Or so I have been told by people who lived there and are close to the situtation.

M

I think his name is Alwyn, and I don't know about all that.. All I know is David (in LA) who I think you must know via Kunzang Dechen Lingpa, speaks quite highly of him.

[Malcolm]

Is that supposed to be Lama Drimed Norbu?

because I think he's a Buddhist.

What I heard as that Wynn Fischel got bounced from Rigdzin Ling because he started incorporating Shamanic work and so on for his students and freaked out the Buddhist conservatives. Or so I have been told by people who lived there and are close to the situtation.

M

I think his name is Alwyn, and I don't know about all that.. All I know is David (in LA) who I think you must know via Kunzang Dechen Lingpa, speaks quite highly of him.

Yes, everyone I know speaks highly of Wynn. It is also true that he started working with shamanism and energy practices from non-Buddhist sources because he thought it was useful for his students and from what I understand the Buddhist conservatives at Rigzin Ling freaked out and tossed him out on his ear.

[Nighthawk]

Have you found this master in non-Buddhism or non-Bon now in the world? It is necessary or not? Simply answer please.

Is that the Dzogchen Jesus? Wow.

[Adamantine]

Magnus, maybe it is simply about not limiting oneself with conceptual labels?

Guys -- it is really not hard to understand: Chogyal Namkhai Norbu is not a Nyingmapa, though all the Nyingmapas think he is.

He is a nominally a Buddhist in name, because he was raised in a Buddhist culture and Buddhist monastery -- and no one ever said otherwise. But he has also said explicitly he is not a Buddhist, nor a Bonpo. "Buddhist", Bonpo, Hindu, Christian, etc. are cultural identification -- but Dzogchen is beyond culture.

But any so called "Buddhist" or "Nyingma" would never consider themselves really a Buddhist or a Nyingma, etc. . . because the whole point is not clinging to anything, especially to self identifications or labels... It is about letting go of grasping to a self altogether, all the way from the lower Yanas on up. The teachings just have one structured framework or another... the DC is one kind. You often say you are a member of Dzogchen Community. . I just don't see how that is any different, although you do think it is different because you think of Buddhism as a stinking religion apparently. It can be that certainly, but it can also be a cup that holds the sacred Dharma, just as the DC with all it's global centers and books and sangha is. Just because there are people who call themselves Buddhist who don't really understand Dharma or do any practice or who screw up or act sectarian does not degrade the many noble beings who are actually practicing Dharma and accessing their Buddha nature, at whatever capacity or yana they may be able to relate to. Same as DC. It just seems like a different conceptual framework to me, is all. But maybe we will just have to not see things eye to eye on this point.

[Sönam]

The DC is like any sangha ... but what makes the difference is the teacher and the teachings.

Sönam

[Adamantine]

The DC is like any sangha ... but what makes the difference is the teacher and the teachings.

Sönam

hahahaha "my teacher is the best, better than yours!!" hahaha how's that for tribal?

[heart]

The DC is like any sangha ... but what makes the difference is the teacher and the teachings.

Sönam

Certainly not the teaching because Dzogchen is the heart of the Nyingma transmissions and so far what I heard of ChNNR don't deviate even a little bit from ordinary Dzogchen.

/magnus