Vajra Hell

[Malcolm]

And if you criticize them with a view to protecting others from their mistaken and harmful actions, there is also no fault.

N

How do we decide whether a story about a specific Lama is correct or not, especially when we read it on the internet? I mean, there is no teacher you can't find any critical remarks about somewhere on the internet (including our own teacher).

How can one decide whether any gossip is correct? You have to go to the source, right?

N

[Malcolm]

It lists general samaya as the famous four samayas of Dzogchen -- non-existence, singleness, ubuiquity, and natural formation.

N

Are these four samayas upheld only when resting in rigpa?
If so, are we not breaking these samaya's constantly when not in rigpa?

You can't really break these samayas since they concern your primordial state, and that is something you cannot break.

N

[alpha]

You can't really break these samayas since they concern your primordial state, and that is something you cannot break.

N

So these would be more like attributes of the primordial state?

[Malcolm]

You can't really break these samayas since they concern your primordial state, and that is something you cannot break.

N

So these would be more like attributes of the primordial state?

Correct.

[heart]

But as Jax says, in general samaya as commonly discussed in Tibetan Buddhism circles is just a social construct, a contract between you and a guru.

But what Jax did not say, and what he left out, was that real samaya is the comittment to discovering your own primordial state, and when discovered, maintaining knowledge (rigpa) of that state.

But in Dzogchen there are no specific rules or vows. It is all about being present, aware and working with circumstances.

N

Really? I don't agree with that. If you disparage your Guru for example it is impossible to be present and aware at the same time.
/magnus

That depends on whether someone who has acted as your guru is acting in accordance with the Dharma or not. If they are no, there is not fault in severing one's relationship with them. And if you criticize them with a view to protecting others from their mistaken and harmful actions, there is also no fault. Look it up, you will find I am correct.

"Guru" is a role, not a person. The role as certain obligations, just as the role "student" has certain obligations. The sooner people sort this out, the better.

N

At the best you are interpreting Samaya here, but your interpretation is not in harmony with what I been taught or studied nor with what I have experienced. But I have no energy for this discussion.

/magnus

[Malcolm]

[

At the best you are interpreting Samaya here, but your interpretation is not in harmony with what I been taught or studied nor with what I have experienced. But I have no energy for this discussion.

/magnus

On whether you should stay with a teacher who has acted in a way that is not in accord with Dharma, simply examine page 51 of Buddhist Ethics where it clearly says that one should immediately sever one's relationship with such a person. On whether it is necessarily a breakage of samaya to criticize one's guru, examine the six criteria Kongtrul lists for samaya breakage to exist when criticizing one's guru, page 257. It depends primarily on one's motives.

No one is ever going to feel good about it, but sometimes, for the protection of others, it is necessary.

[Malcolm]

At the best you are interpreting Samaya here, but your interpretation is not in harmony with what I been taught or studied nor with what I have experienced. But I have no energy for this discussion.

Everything requires interpretation, Magnus. Even your literalist stance is actually an interpretation.

[pemachophel]

"If so, are we not breaking these samaya's constantly when not in rigpa?"

This is exactly what I have been taught by my Teachers. When an Australian Lama friend once asked H.H. Dudjom Rinpoche what He did when He realized His mind had wandered, His Holiness said He immediately said Vajrasattva mantra.

[Malcolm]

"If so, are we not breaking these samaya's constantly when not in rigpa?"

This is exactly what I have been taught by my Teachers. When an Australian Lama friend once asked H.H. Dudjom Rinpoche what He did when He realized His mind had wandered, His Holiness said He immediately said Vajrasattva mantra.

These four samayas represent the state of the basis. They cannot be broken.

However, the Rangshar says:

As such, the qualified master
remains in equipoise on the real,
the samaya holder does likewise.

Here samaya holder means the student. Allowing oneself to become distracted is a "breakage" of samaya i.e. one's delusion becomes stronger.

In the DC, rather than Vajrasattva, we would do Guru Yoga. Same meaning, different method.

N

[Jax]

Again I defer to Namdrol's opinions regarding samaya, his clarity is appreciated. He is right, but I didn't mention the Four Samayas as to me they are descriptions of Rigpa and really are not the same, as only Rigpa maintains it's own characteristics, not sem. All other samaya act as protectors to help keep sem in line and under control, which is a good thing. I use the Kunje Gyalpo as my root reference regarding original Dzogchen. Norbu told me and us to refer to the KJG if we want to know authentic, original Dzogchen View. In the KJG the topic of samaya is thoroughly clarified and it states that concern regarding samaya is itself a break in the samaya of "med pa". Norbu states in the Supreme Source that if one followed the teachings of only the KJG alone, that would be sufficient for complete realization. Other, later teachings incorporated much maha and anu tantric perspective. I follow and support the KJG regarding samaya, rituals, empowerments and the rejection of the other remaining of the 10 points of tantric view and practice. The view is very similar to the view of Essence Mahamudra. I always recommend students to study the KJG. I have found great harmony between the view of KJG and personal experiential insight. No conflicts at all... As the KJG appears to be the direct expression of rigpa itself.

[heart]

[

At the best you are interpreting Samaya here, but your interpretation is not in harmony with what I been taught or studied nor with what I have experienced. But I have no energy for this discussion.

/magnus

On whether you should stay with a teacher who has acted in a way that is not in accord with Dharma, simply examine page 51 of Buddhist Ethics where it clearly says that one should immediately sever one's relationship with such a person. On whether it is necessarily a breakage of samaya to criticize one's guru, examine the six criteria Kongtrul lists for samaya breakage to exist when criticizing one's guru, page 257. It depends primarily on one's motives.

No one is ever going to feel good about it, but sometimes, for the protection of others, it is necessary.

One might wonder what is to be considered in accord with the Dharma when one consider Samaya a social construct?

/magnus

[Malcolm]

I use the Kunje Gyalpo as my root reference regarding original Dzogchen.

The sgra thal gyur is considered the root tantra of Dzogchen, not the kun byed rgyal po. And, if you take a text critical approach, they were both written around the same time.

For myself personally, I consider man ngag sde more profund in general. As it says in the man sngag sde tantras, sems sde is for intellectuals.

N

[Malcolm]

[

At the best you are interpreting Samaya here, but your interpretation is not in harmony with what I been taught or studied nor with what I have experienced. But I have no energy for this discussion.

/magnus

On whether you should stay with a teacher who has acted in a way that is not in accord with Dharma, simply examine page 51 of Buddhist Ethics where it clearly says that one should immediately sever one's relationship with such a person. On whether it is necessarily a breakage of samaya to criticize one's guru, examine the six criteria Kongtrul lists for samaya breakage to exist when criticizing one's guru, page 257. It depends primarily on one's motives.

No one is ever going to feel good about it, but sometimes, for the protection of others, it is necessary.

One might wonder what is to be considered in accord with the Dharma when one consider Samaya a social construct?

/magnus

I consider non-harming to the be the basic criteria of Dharma. For example, it is the commitment of taking refuge in the Dharma.

Samaya is a social construct, and has no meaning outside of that construct. For example, samaya represents a contract between two people, a teacher and a student. But the salient point is that it is a two way contract and the teacher is as obliged to observe these comittments as the student.

[deepbluehum]

Okay. I have one question about samaya. What if the teacher falls into dualistic grasping in a such a way as to buy into a common run of the mill worldly point of view that the student thinks is petty?

[Malcolm]

Okay. I have one question about samaya. What if the teacher falls into dualistic grasping in a such a way as to buy into a common run of the mill worldly point of view that the student thinks is petty?

The student should mind his own business.

[muni]

Guru. Strange own mind, ready or not has no any importance regarding recognizing the Guru.

Pervasiveness samaya don't bind!

But what is there to add? Arrogant proud "me", is nothing other than a dried up cow, hang pretty bells on me and i still suffer.

*NOTHING TO ADD*.

[Pero]

Kongtrul in his Buddhist Ethics quotes the Condensed Heruka Tantra:
It is said that by not transgressing it, one becomes a supreme (dam) being;
By transgressing it, one will burn (tshig) [in hell].

So whether or not samaya is a social construct seems pretty irrelevant to me.

As for teachers, a little later he quotes Lilavajra's Shimmering Light on Pledges:
Regard them more highly than these:
The king of your country, your uncle, father, or mother,
Your own eyes, or your heart.

So I really doubt whatever anyone who doesn't respect his teachers says.

[Malcolm]

So I really doubt whatever anyone who doesn't respect his teachers says.

Of course. But I also would doubt what a teacher who does not respect his students says.

[muni]

So I really doubt whatever anyone who doesn't respect his teachers says.

Of course. But I also would doubt what a teacher who does not respect his students says.

Study/listen/reflect.... as much as you can, then find a teacher, I think, this advice once given, shouldn't be underestimated.

[Malcolm]

So I really doubt whatever anyone who doesn't respect his teachers says.

Of course. But I also would doubt what a teacher who does not respect his students says.

Study/listen/reflect.... as much as you can, then find a teacher, I think, this advice once given, shouldn't be underestimated.

This is no guarantee that the teacher, once found, will be a good one, a qualified one. If that teacher does not measure up to Dharma standards, he or she should be dropped like a hot coal from one's hands.