Jamgon Kongtrul Rinpoche Quote

[Malcolm]

You are exactly right Namdrol, I have no "idea" what Rigpa is. There you have it, I came clean man. And I also know, you have only "ideas" about what Rigpa is. I have never been able to capture Rigpa as an idea.

We have seen you over and over again proclaim your qualities of realization and understanding. We just don't believe you.

[Jax]

No belief necessary Nam... Doubt is just distraction." Feel the Force Luke... You can't know it with your intellect". Just having fun with you Nam( or is it Malcolm?)

[Adamantine]

No belief necessary Nam...

If you don't care whether anyone believes you have such great realization and understanding-- why are you wasting so much time on an internet forum trying to convince us of it?

[Dronma]

No belief necessary Nam...

If you don't care whether anyone believes you have such great realization and understanding-- why are you wasting so much time on an internet forum trying to convince us of it?

Because he is hungry for your energy, Adamantine!
This is the way he is feeding himself....

[Malcolm]

No belief necessary Nam... Doubt is just distraction." Feel the Force Luke... You can't know it with your intellect". Just having fun with you Nam( or is it Malcolm?)

Either Malcolm or Namdrol.

[Yontan]

No belief necessary Nam... Doubt is just distraction." Feel the Force Luke... You can't know it with your intellect". Just having fun with you Nam( or is it Malcolm?)

Doubt about whether or not a person has realization is one of the most powerful tools a precious human birth offers. The harder thing may be applying that onto oneself. The skin of my eyeballs is unhidden, but I don't see it.

[Sönam]

... You need almost daily contact with a teacher until the retreat practice is completed as well as afterward. I know many people , for many years... As Tenzin Wangyal said "only about 1% of disciples will recognize actual rigpa". To me that id unacceptable, it's not that difficult when one on one instruction is available easily, lineage or not. Senior students have the same capacity if they have really "recognized".

Blablabla, as Drolma says, it's megalomania, so no way out ...

In a couple of threat you try to explain to all of us that there is no need for a direct introduction, quoting Longchen Rabjam an Jamgon Kongtrul to support your allegations, expalining also that there is no need for a master ... and then, because it arranges you, you decide that large retreat is not enough, that a personnal contact with a master is necessary.

Jax, you are completely unstable ... I do not hope you will recognize it, being completely locked into your ego trip.

Sönam

[Jax]

Sonam, maybe you have difficulty reading English. Read all my thread posts... It's perfectly consistent.

[Sönam]

Sonam, maybe you have difficulty reading English. Read all my thread posts... It's perfectly consistent.

UNfortunately I've read "all" your posts, and I can guarantee you are completely flimsy ... but it's also clear that you do not see it yourself, you are into a dream of being a great guy having understood all, being very funny, and the whole world is against you.
You know what? ... I wait for the type you'll banned, which certainly will come soon the way you're reacting ...

Sönam

[Jax]

Sonam, read the threads again. I don't feel the whole world is against me. I feel we are just agreeing to to disagree. I know you mean well. Can we get back to the thread topic?

[CapNCrunch]

Cap'n, ask around to people who had either large retreat "direct introduction" or webcast. Ask them if they experienced the non-dual Rigpa.

Jax - I have been to many retreats as you describe. Without exception they are wonderful experiences. The experiences that I've had with my Teacher and vajra kin are amazing and ongoing - like living waters that sustain me. And this process happens perfectly in the very environment you're saying is lacking. I am not deceiving you in telling you this.

I don't have to ask the question that you suggest, because the connection is there, and obvious. The transmission is alive and always working to the degree that I'm able to be open to it. Although each person has their own karma, capacity and conditions, I see the understanding and embodiment of my Teacher's wisdom constantly reflected in his students and our community. I just plain disagree with what you're saying.

In Tibet the populace came to Dzogchen masters for a "blessing", they weren't seriously engaged as practitioners (per Norbu). Real practitioners met in private for the Tsal Wang and other forms of "direct introduction".

This has nothing to do with the size of the groups, or the way the teachings are traditionally presented - Please stay focused on this as it is the reason you give for your decision to teach.

What you are talking about refers specifically to the capacity of individuals - which is what it is, based on their karma and conditions. Everyone is different.

Rinpoche does speak of Tibetans seeking blessings but this has nothing to do with the size of retreats or the process of direct introduction in the traditional way as you suggest.

Rinpoche said just *today* in a teaching in Australia, that there are Tibetans that they aren't able to even sit still and really listen. They get a blessing or a protection cord, maybe a mantra - and they go away satisfied. Tibetans aren't the only people who can act like this - people from all cultures can.

It's a question of the *capacity* of the individual. However, Rinpoche also said just today, that even when he has talked directly, one on one with a person of the kind of capacity you refer to among Tibetans, (or westerners) that it is of no use. They simply lack the ability to benefit from the Teachings.

When a teacher with ChNN's capacity and perfect understanding of causes and conditions says that he's unable to help or work with someone who is lacking capacity, are you seriously suggesting that you or some other "senior student" is able to do better? I just don't get this.

Westerners who seek out the Dzogchen teachings given all of the competing noise and options in this day and age, have some kind of connection to teachings, or they couldn't enter the path. This is also said and I know you've heard this many times - so given this, the teachers today do their best to work with student of varying capacities.

Regardless of the capacity and qualities of the Teacher, if the student is not ready, they can't be helped by Dzogchen. If this weren't the case, and a Teacher could actually liberate a student just by spending time with them one-on-one, then just use your mind and think of the result!!

Samsara would be emptied in a few generations. Each student a teacher worked with one-on-one would invariably become completely realized, and then work with many more - and voila... Teachers always do their best!

But the fact is, it's not as you say. You assertion that people "just don't get it", even if it were true, has to do with capacity and not the circumstances of the teachings. I have to be completely honest when I say that someone who thinks that they can improve on this process and leap-frog their Teacher really makes me wary of their claims of being a teacher. This is not based on anecdotes or some intellectual idea - it's based on my own personal experience and understanding - Since you've made this leap, please explain why - as your reasons, as I've explained, don't satisfy me. I sincerely want to understand - although I'll admit that at this point I find your position suspect based on the reasons you've given thus far - I'm open to hearing whatever you have to say.

I think that since you've made this decision, and you have Vajra Kin here, that you are responsible to explain precisely why - because this can affect us too! If your reasons don't jive, are you even *open* to the idea that you might be mistaken? If not, then why?

You need almost daily contact with a teacher until the retreat practice is completed as well as afterward. I know many people , for many years... As Tenzin Wangyal said "only about 1% of disciples will recognize actual rigpa". To me that id unacceptable, it's not that difficult when one on one instruction is available easily, lineage or not

I'm not sure about what you're attributing to Tenzin Wangyal, but even if it's true - his saying that 1% will understand doesn't include the caveat that your decision to teach hinges on - i.e. this idea that students are missing out b/c they go to "large" retreats and don't have constant one-on-on access to the teacher, or to someone like you - who has assumed the mantle.

This is again, a matter of capacity. Where does Tenzin Wangyal say that the 99% miss the point due to the fact that students don't have access to a teacher one-on one? Where does he say that it is due to the conditions that he teaches in? Where does he say that it's due to tradition? It's about capacity, bro.

Rinpoche addresses this constantly. There is a prescribed method for dealing with the circumstances we find ourselves in today - With webcasts, large gatherings etc. - Your anecdotal assertions that it's not working *could* be perceived to be self-serving given the fact that I'm a much newer student than you are yet I've heard Rinpoche lay this process out time and time again - he has addressed the issue of access to the teacher, and the necessity of teaching students of varying capacity in larger groups many, many times.

YES, senior students play a vital role in this. I have personally benefited and experienced first hand the benefits of collaborating and learning from a vajra brother or Sister - and this process is ongoing. I can also contact my teacher as long as he is alive.

Then there is the other aspect of "contact" with the teacher that I see no reason to even talk about in detail - but its the most important aspect, and this is always available to the serious student.

My honest opinion is that students who set themselves up as teachers without following the path laid out by their teacher, risk causing serious problems for themselves and in turn, their "students".

Senior students have the same capacity if they have really "recognized".

Well, as far as I understand it Jax, there is a lot more to being a teacher than simply recognizing the basis.

The Tibetans have a saying that is equivalent to the Christian parable of the mote and the beam. It's not possible to help someone else unless you have true capacity and the qualities of realization are present and functioning - the ability to use skillful means and to really understand the students you're working with.

I am completely satisfied through my personal experience that my Teacher has this kind of capacity and these qualities. They are reflected perfectly to the tiny degree that I'm able to experience and partake of them. I have absolutely no doubt about it. Are you claiming to have similar capacity? If so, then let the lesson of Geshe Michael Roach apply. When he claimed to be on the path of seeing or whatever realization he claimed, his teachers suggested that he should establish faith in his students and those who were following the situation - If you're not familiar with this history, I'd encourage you to check it out and see the standard that we're talking about.

If you feel you have this capacity and these qualities, then I can't really say anything to that - but I can say that these qualities, for me, have a certain flavour and signature. If your students see these qualities in you and are satisfied, then so be it - but I disagree that someone is automatically qualified to teach b/c they have "really recognized" as you say. This is simply the jumping off point - Remember Garab Dorje? *This* is precisely why we have the tradition and lineage - so the collective experience of thousands of years can be brought to bear in each unique situation for each person on the path.

I submit that the Christian idea that "by their fruits ye shall know them" also applies to the process of choosing a teacher. I've seen so much incredible fruit (and a few nuts ) in the process laid down by the very Teacher that you seem to be hell bent on "improving" on that I wholeheartedly, and sincerely disagree with your idea that this is broken and must be fixed, by you.

I can only ask you to carefully consider what I've said and see if it has any merit. I have to constantly question my motivation b/c I'm a self-serving and conniving monkey by nature, but in this case I feel my motivation is pure in asking you to consider right now whether or not the reasons you've given to support your decision to teach is your true motivation. Only you can answer that, really. Everyone else has to look at the fruit and decide for themselves.

[CapNCrunch]

Hi Jax,

Thank you for your reply! Now, I think we're getting down to it. You said:

I was a real groupie! Very gung ho. Then I learned how much many "masters" were not realized. They knew the spiel but had no profound realization

I'm sorry that you had this experience - i.e. to be a groupie and gung ho, as you put it, and to be disappointed. I'm not going to ask how you *know* that the teachers you followed weren't realized, but let's grant that you saw things in their conduct that you judged to be less than desirable.

That's fair enough I guess - But in your curriculum vitae you mentioned at least one teacher who is completely beyond reproach, and there are others.

I guess I'm curious re: how you got from a space of disappointment with your experiences, to deciding that the answer was to start teaching yourself? At some point, you feel that you "recognized" and gained enough realization to begin teaching, yes?

That being the case, what triggered that? If it was a teacher, then obviously at some point the disappointment you felt was replaced by at the very least, a new understanding - or even real confidence in your understanding.

Do you mind if I ask what that looked like? Who helped you to come to that realization? Was it a teacher of Dzogchen? If so, then who?

Maybe some teachers aren't legit. I'm *not* commenting about the ones you listed. I don't know much about that. But you're aware of the idea of checking out the teacher carefully, yes? If so, then I'm curious as to whether or not you ever found a teacher that you considered the "real deal"?

The skill of the teacher is the question, not the capacity of the students who pay and travel to a retreat. It's very easy to get caught up in the vibes of such an endeavor.

Right. It is easy to get caught up in vibes and any group energy/movement. However, this is one thing, and making a real connection to a teacher and a community, or rather, rediscovering one, is different. It's not something that goes away after the initial excitement and "vibes" dissipate.

I'm surprised a bit, I have to tell you, that you so quickly dismissed or didn't respond to the point I made - because in my mind at least, given your own words explaining your position, it's something important.

You are asserting again that it is the skill of the teacher in question, and not the capacity of the students. This doesn't make sense to me unless you've never come across a teacher with capacity and qualities worthy of veneration and following. If so, then I totally understand your disappointment, but I don't get how you go from disappointed to being a teacher yourself.

If you *did* find a teacher that you felt had real capacity (I'm not assuming anything) then I'm also curious how you decided to break away and go out on your own.

In the end, we're all seekers and do our best, until we become "finders". But doesn't it make even a little bit of sense to you the idea those who seek guidance are of varying capacity?

This is true in mundane life as well.

10 people go to a world class medical school and study exactly the same courses under the same teacher(s) - They each go into the same area of medicine - Say heart surgery.

You will have 10 different capacities. A couple will drop out before they finish. A couple will become good family doctors but will never become surgeons. A few will become middling surgeons, and one or maybe two at most, will have distinguished careers.

How are their different experiences the responsibility of their teachers? Let's assume they each had the same teachers, and that each teacher did their best.

Because of their personal proclivities, karma, capacity and conditions, each will have a different result. It just stands to reason. This isn't difficult.

So - Back to you, friend. How can you dismiss this idea when you're staring at the truth of it? This is really what happens, what the relative condition is like.

So back to you Jax. You've stated clearly that your reason for starting the "Way of Light" - and holding retreats etc., is that you feel that the Dzogchen teachings are best when removed from the trappings of tradition etc. because at "big" retreats and gatherings where it's not possible to be one-on-one w/ a teacher until realization happens, then a very small percentage (1%) have genuine experience.

If these are really your reasons, then I'm just pointing out that the teachings themselves carefully explain this process, and the resolution. I.e. Carefully vetting a teacher before following them. Then, once we find a teacher with real capacity, following them precisely and doing our best - given the nature of Dzogchen, and the lineage of transmission that is unbroken from time immemorial.

Since this is clearly laid out - I honestly don't understand how one disappointed in a couple of teachers would get from there (point A) to point Z - Deciding to teach on their own.

It doesn't compute. If you're teaching something, you didn't come to it in a vacuum. For you too, there is a story and a process by which you came to your realization. If that's the case, then how can you (appear to) "bite the hand that feeds you" as it were - severing the roots of your tree while continuing to preach and share the fruit?

I really, sincerely hope you'll explain more. I want to understand - but at this point I think you're ignoring the question and the point about capacity. It makes much more sense that capacity issues lie in the student - as per my doctor example.

[CapNCrunch]

Whoa - Why did you nuke your post Jax? I was responding to it when it disappeared. Now, other than my quotes, it's gone and people won't have context???

[CapNCrunch]

Okay - I found it in my cache - I'm going to repost it b/c I took the time to answer, and I have quotes from that post. I don't know what happened - whether you nuked it or it was lost via a system glitch... But here it is in it's entirety:

(Jax) Cap'n, what you wrote is beautiful. It's how it should be. But I guess my question is: did you recognize the state of Rigpa from his large group or any "direct introductions"? Westerners interested in spiritual realization have the capacity to realize. The skill of the teacher is the question, not the capacity of the students who pay and travel to a retreat. It's very easy to get caught up in the vibes of such an endeavor. I was a real groupie! Very gung ho. Then I learned how much many "masters" were not realized. They knew the spiel but had no profound realization. Some were very emotionally challenged and sexually aggressive as documented by real women: Lamas like (Names of specific Lamas removed so this post can stay up). There are others but these are the only I know of. These guys are flesh and blood humans, just like us. We have to be careful of a cult mentality developing due to our naivette and personal vulnerabilities. Many people pursuing the teachings are not so stable and are looking for resolution at all cost. This is dangerous... I am not saying I am special in any way, but I do know the basic territory and fully within the context of living
a busy life and raising four children. So I have the benefit of understanding our life in the West intimately. Anyway, get the "introduction " and allow that to blossom effortlessly. Rest as the State.
Love to you my friend!

[White Lotus]

i worry that i may have done a discredit to the dharma by not wording things helpfull.

there is no self in terms of me or mine where there is seeing nature. to call it ''own'' nature is misleading. we speak of nature. one nature emptiness within and without. empty subject, empty object one and yet two. dharma nature, dharmakaya.

to speak of a reference point may mislead some, since in emptiness how could there be a reference. relatively speaking emptiness exists. when emptiness and form, existence and non existence are renounced. when all things are renounced the middle way is seen. after seeing the middle way there there is no longer a within, not possible any more to look within. the dharmakaya remains in objectivity, but there is no longer a subjective within.

i speak of a within, not an own... having spoken of an ''own'', i have mislead the congregation and apologise. Speaking of a reference point i indicate existence. emptiness neither exists nor doesnt exist, it is beyond all duality. this ''own'' i have spoken of would be better called a within... ability to see the nature within and to then see that without also is this emptiness. they are a continuum. but since the seeing of the great moon within precedes the cessation of a seeing within i say that nature is not absolute. to some this will sound heterodox.

from the start there is only emptiness, after seeing the middle way even emptiness within has ceased, but remains without, though since there is no longer a nature to compare it with, the dharma eye has ceased. the buddha renounced all things.

the great icchantika of soto zen is realised after the middle way is seen. within ceases, for this reason i would say that within is the same as and yet distinct from ''without''... thats like saying 'this' is not it, 'that' is it.

i say that emptiness exists as an experience within, and since this experience is subject to cessation i say that emptiness is subject to cessation.

jax, i am not familiar with the debate you have mentioned. things tend to recycle. one must keep an open mind.

please note that what i have written is according to my own experience and is by no means the true dharma.

i will continue to practice and reality is just as it is.

best wishes, Tom.

[maybay]

Is it Jax as in Ajax the Great, son of Telamon, king of Salamis; or Ajax the Lesser, son of Oileus, king of Locris?

[Malcolm]

Then I learned how much many "masters" were not realized. They knew the spiel but had no profound realization.

Care to list any masters you think are realized?

N

[Sönam]

Then I learned how much many "masters" were not realized. They knew the spiel but had no profound realization.

Care to list any masters you think are realized?

N

I've heard than Jax has been, again, banned ... so you will never know

Sönam

[xabir]

Care to list any masters you think are realized?

N

Neo-Advaita teachers like Tony Parsons, videos of him can be found in his website.

[heart]

Care to list any masters you think are realized?

N

Neo-Advaita teachers like Tony Parsons, videos of him can be found in his website.

Just watched one of Tony Parsons videos, I found it quite ridiculous but it really sounds like Jax, so that makes sense.

/magnus