Dzogchen and Buddhism

[Pema Rigdzin]

So why does Dzogchen throw Sutra and Tantra out the window so to speak
Is Tantra incomplete compared to Dzogchen, If so many Tantric schools produce highly accomplished masters why is Dzogchen not the pinnacle of all of them ?

Dzogchen doesn't throw sutra or tantra out the window anymore than calculus throws algebra or basic addition and subtraction out the window. It's just that Dzogchen, unlike these forms of math, does not necessitate that one learn the more fundamental teachings before one can comprehend Dzogchen itself. And according to Dzogchen, the end result of sutra or tantra will be receipt, from all the fully enlightened buddhas, of the rigpai tsal wang or empowerment into the energy of knowledge, also known as the direct introduction. So, this means bodhisattvas on the verge of buddhahood... and as I understand it, it will be more of an instantaneous, complete realization of Dzogchen upon being introduced for them rather than the way it usually works for us ordinary Joes.

To understand what rigpa might be then it is essential to bring into your experience both Rangtong views and Shentong views. You can't really get a good view of what Shentong implies unless you get the consequences of Rangtong - it has to be progressive. Both second and third turnings of the wheel of dharma are required for an understanding of rigpa that doesn't end up going against the amazingness of the Dzogchen view. So no actually you DO have to internalize the fundamental teachings before you can comprehend Dzogchen.

This is directly contradicted by the Dzogchen tantras. Besides that, why else is your statement misguided? Because Dzogchen involves direct experience of that which Madhyamaka intellectually contrives. So, to say that Dzogchen depends on Madhyamaka is tantamount to saying that tasting sugar depends on intellectually contemplating what sugar is supposed to taste like. One doesn't have an "understanding of rigpa" as you put it. Rather one's rigpa IS one's understanding. That said, I will certainly agree that Madhyamaka can be a great primer for Dzogchen for sure.

[kalden yungdrung]

So why does Dzogchen throw Sutra and Tantra out the window so to speak
Is Tantra incomplete compared to Dzogchen, If so many Tantric schools produce highly accomplished masters why is Dzogchen not the pinnacle of all of them ?

Dzogchen doesn't throw sutra or tantra out the window anymore than calculus throws algebra or basic addition and subtraction out the window. It's just that Dzogchen, unlike these forms of math, does not necessitate that one learn the more fundamental teachings before one can comprehend Dzogchen itself. And according to Dzogchen, the end result of sutra or tantra will be receipt, from all the fully enlightened buddhas, of the rigpai tsal wang or empowerment into the energy of knowledge, also known as the direct introduction. So, this means bodhisattvas on the verge of buddhahood... and as I understand it, it will be more of an instantaneous, complete realization of Dzogchen upon being introduced for them rather than the way it usually works for us ordinary Joes.

To understand what rigpa might be then it is essential to bring into your experience both Rangtong views and Shentong views. You can't really get a good view of what Shentong implies unless you get the consequences of Rangtong - it has to be progressive. Both second and third turnings of the wheel of dharma are required for an understanding of rigpa that doesn't end up going against the amazingness of the Dzogchen view. So no actually you DO have to internalize the fundamental teachings before you can comprehend Dzogchen.

Tashi delek,

Andrew,
Rangtong and Shentong do belong to Madyamika. Rangtong and Shentong do represent more the Tibetan way of Madyamika. Not allways clear and it did cost me a lot of time to get through this illusionary stuff. I guess it is this what Namdrol meant with his reply that these kind of things could better be avoided.

It can be faster in Dzogchen and more understandable, that is my experience too.
But can say this of course after that (too long) timespan, due to karma (not finding in time the Dzogchen Master).

For the most of us counts anyway a certain gradual way but my waited time experience, is for someone else with whom i can conversate allways faster. Here my experiences can be helpfull to others, it saves them time and money.

That means i feel with someone who is stucked in the Madyamika emptiness philosophy, this trap will cost the most people many years..........

Yes it can faster and better with Dzogchen.


Mutsog Marro
KY

[Andrew108]

Pema -
Madyamaka doesn't intellectually contrive. It's the reverse. To posit such a thing shows that you don't really understand Madyamaka. And if you don't get Madyamaka then how can you understand Dzogchen? Can you see the point here? All genuine dharma is predicated on going beyond mind. If it's genuine then that's where it goes. The idea that Buddhadharma has an essence has to be understood in the context that nobody knows what that essence looks like - it's not a phenomenon. And so the idea that dzogchen as a so-called 'phenomenon' represents the fastest or quickest access to that essence is misguided.

[Pema Rigdzin]

Pema -
Madyamaka doesn't intellectually contrive. It's the reverse. To posit such a thing shows that you don't really understand Madyamaka. And if you don't get Madyamaka then how can you understand Dzogchen? Can you see the point here? All genuine dharma is predicated on going beyond mind. If it's genuine then that's where it goes. The idea that Buddhadharma has an essence has to be understood in the context that nobody knows what that essence looks like - it's not a phenomenon. And so the idea that dzogchen as a so-called 'phenomenon' represents the fastest or quickest access to that essence is misguided.

lol Andrew, I understand Madhyamaka just fine. Madhyamaka is initiated by thinking--quite a bit of thinking, in fact, in order to disassemble one's concepts. Yes, the purpose and aim is to eventually exhaust the power of one's concepts and rest in one's understanding, but it is not a direct path. Madhyamaka does not have any methods of direct introduction to complete knowledge of one's essence, nature, and capacity while Dzogchen does. Madhyamaka does not contain teachings that help to clarify what rigpa is while Dzogchen does.There is a limit to what Madhyamaka directly reveals and explains. There is no such limit in Dzogchen.

[Andrew108]

For example: In all the life stories I've read of ChNN none of them have said that he just studied Dzogchen and only Dzogchen. All Tulkus and Geshes within both Nyingma and Bön lineages go through the teachings progressively. Is there something special about us that we would have the merit to understand the Dzogchen teachings in full without first having received so-called fundamental teachings?

[Dechen Norbu]

Yes. Our teacher, who can spare us a lot of trouble by clarifying the main points of Dzogchen view and practice, give us direct introduction and son on. This is what we have that is special. A very special teacher.

The point here is not the utility (especially because most guys here already studied all that to some extent), but the indispensability of going through a great amount of study of theoretical materials from other yanas. If you have little time, be selective, learn the necessary and move on to actual Dzogchen practice. If you want to, of course.
Think about ChNN's root lama, Changchub Dorje, who never had a formal education and yet was highly attained. Like him, there are many other examples.

[Andrew108]

And they (Tibetans) don't have special teachers?

[Blue Garuda]

Maybe it's time for a 'Dzogchen Wheel' forum for those who are now pursuing a far superior and advanced practice compared with those within ordinary mundane old Mahayana?

Two easy questions:

Does Dzogchen need Buddhism?

Does Buddhism need Dzogchen?

Watching Dzogchen threads here proliferate, much of it seems to be based on dangling the exclusivity and superiority of it which reminds me of the uncomfotable threads where Vajrayana practitioners talk of the incompleteness of 'Hinayana'.

I have no idea whether Dzogchen is superior, or what it may be superior to, but I'm pretty sure that eventually another practice will be hailed as THE practice leading directly to enlightenment.

It used to be Tantra, then Highest Yoga Tantra and Mahamudra, now Dzogchen.

''The only way the true nature of your mind may be revealed is by...........(insert invisible and intangible product here, available only from mutually-approved dealerships) .'' LOL

I can't comment on whether Dzogchen works or not, nor whether it is superior or not, nor even whether it is a part of Buddhism or the other way round. However, I am very wary, having made a few bad decisions in the past. As a marketing professional, I can't help observe the patterns.

BG,

It's important to understand what the context is for Dzogchen's statements about its superiority: first, it has to do with Dzogchen not being based on mind, as all other Buddhist vehicles [excepting Mahamudra] necessarily are, but rather on wisdom. As Buddhahood is primordially complete within each being's latent wisdom, it can only be realized rather than accumulated. It is uncompounded and spontaneously present, so it cannot be brought about. From Dzogchen's POV, Dzogchen is simply every being's nature and, in terms of being a teaching or path, it is simply the awakening to that nature--as such, all Buddhist practitioners will pass through that gate even if not by attending a Dzogchen event and obtaining a Dzogchen guru. All Buddhists will eventually become bodhissatvas and all bodhisattvas will pass into complete buddhahood through being directly introduced--either by obtaining a guru on the path or upon the verge of buddhahood by all the buddhas.

All of Buddhism, including Shravakayana, Mahayana, Vajrayana, or Mahamudra and Dzogchen, are simply means made available to us by realized beings according to our needs and capacities. From that POV, all these paths are equal because they are all valid paths taught by realized beings which will lead to eventual realization for those who engage in them. Within the context of how direct a path an individual can handle, and how direct a path can be, Dzogchen is superior because one is directly introduced to the nature all beings qualitatively have in common. So it's not an elite thing. It's a "get there the best way for you" thing. For some especially fortunate ones, that means Dzogchen or Mahamudra. For other still exceedingly fortunate ones, that may mean Theravada, Mahayana, or HYT.

That still very much sounds like what I was saying.

If we follow our ordinary lower practices of HYT and Mahamudra then one day we may end up meeting a Guru who will give us direct introduction to Dzogchen?

Meanwhile the especially fortunate ones receive it directly because it depends on 'how direct a path an individual can handle'.

You don't seem to be saying that HYT or Mahamudra are equally effective paths, but that they are useful if they lead to a Guru who will give them direct introduction to Dzogchen.

If Dzogchen is the best means then as we are all of the same nature, why should anyone bother with the rest or be less suited to Dzogchen?

Having a fast track which only a few may be suited whilst the rest will have to make to with lesser 'means' sounds pretty elitist to me.

It's like saying that when you reach the top of the mountain you will be ready to climb the one which REALLY matters.

[Dechen Norbu]

Andrew,

I don't know. I believe some do. In any case, you are talking about tulku's and geshes, whose role will be of teachers, so it's natural they need to study.
To actually understand and practice Dzogchen, such (studying materials from other yanas for years and years, I mean) is not necessary.
I used to think it was, but more and more, I'm getting convinced that although that kind of study can be helpful, it can also become a terrible waste of time if you lose yourself there.

[Andrew108]

You still have a concept of 'time being wasted'. Maybe look at the Madyamaka teachings again.
From my point of view it's all good. I love receiving teachings from ChNN just as much as I've loved hearing teachings from Aj Sumehdo et al in the Thai forest tradition. Separate vehicles with one being higher or lower than another are just concepts that obscure.

[Malcolm]

...I have been moving slowly toward the pov of view that for most people studying these lower yānas is a complete waste of time...

This is coming from a man who spent decades studying the lower yana.

My dear N. as it ever occurred to you that it was as a consequence of decades of causal path practices that you accumulated the merit to be able to fully understand and practice (and even teach) Dzogchen? Or maybe you don't believe in karma now either? Is that why you are suddenly open to non-Buddhist practices and traditions? I mean a month ago you took Jax to pieces for saying something very similar (albeit that Jax also negated the need for a guru) and now you are suddenly sounding all new-age and ecumenical. It's been a while since you have seen your guru tete-a-tete, hasn't it?

Hi Greg:

Since Dzogchen tantras reject the body/mind dualism of the lower yānas, it makes it hard for people fed on the lower yānas to appreciate Dzogchen. Since this is so, the need to study in detail the lower yānas is limited. Someone who is planning to be a teacher needs to know these things, but practictioners, not necessarily. I have seen in my own studies how my Buddhist conditioning has made it difficult at times for me to understand certain keys points of Dzogchen teachings.

As far as the ecumenical thing goes -- I have come to the conclusion that Dzogchen is for all who are interested. Not a "Dzogchen without Buddhism" if you will. But I see no good reason why interested Hindus, Christians, Moslems, and so on cannot receive Dzogchen teachings and practice them. Dzogchen may have come from Buddhism, but as we see in Bon, Dzogchen is not just for Buddhists.

Dzogchen is for everyone who is interested to learn about it and then practice it. When someone comes to my teacher to learn Dzogchen, he never says "Now you must nominally become a Buddhist in order to study Dzogchen". He says "In order to study and learn about Dzogchen you must receive direct introduction", that is all.

The Buddha never said anywhere in the sutras "In order to study the Dharma, first you must take refuge". The whole refuge thing has been turned into a game of religious politics. When people took refuge in the Buddha they did so merely out of their gradtitude for teachings they received. You can read about this in many places in the Pali canon.

These days, refuge has been turned into a badge, a tool for conversion. It has been turned into a ritual. But how many people change their name into something nice like Kunga Namdrol, or Padma Tsering, etc., etc., without changing anything in their hearts? Refuge ceremonies have just become an empty baptisms that people think are hugely important but actually change nothing. It is the same with bodhisattva vow ceremonies and also empowerments.

But in Dzogchen there is nothing to convert or change or alter. Buddhahood is an innate attribute of all sentient beings, so what is the point of "becoming a Buddhist?"

People like to say "Did you go for refuge? What is your Dharma name?", "How long have you been a Buddhist?", "Who is your refuge teacher?" , "Did you take bodhisattva vows?", "Did you receive initiation?", etc. None of this is the principle of Dzogchen teachings as I understand it. None of these things taken in and of themselves are bad, BTW,there is nothing wrong with having gone for refuge to the Three Jewels, created bodhicitta, taken initiation and so on. But it is better to penetrate to the essence of these things rather than just leave them as empty forms, which sadly today they mostly have become.

But the principle of entering Dzogchen teachings is none of the above. The principle of entering Dzogchen teachings is solely direct introduction. And my teacher, Chogyal Namkhai Norbu, will give that to anyone who is interested in receiving the teachings of Dzogchen regardless of their race, color, creed, gender or gender orientation.

The principle of practicing Dzogchen teachings, according to my teacher, is integrating with your primordial state through Ati Guru Yoga and deepening your knowledge of that state through various kinds of practices. Anyone who is interested can do this without having to consider themselves a "Buddhist".

As far as being open to non-Buddhist practices -- it is the case that people who belong to other religions might become interested in Dzogchen teachings. I see no reason at all why they should give up those practices merely becauase they are interested in Dzogchen teachings. Granted, it is impossible to reconcile sacrificing animals with Dzogchen teachings, but apart from that, I do not see the problem. If some Christian is practicing Ati Guru Yoga, then they are practicing Dzogchen whether they consider themselves Buddhists or not.

N

[Dechen Norbu]

I don't know, Andrew.
I like it too and I spent many years at it, studying different materials and listening to a wide array of different teachers. I'm not saying there's no benefit. I'm saying that I don't find it indispensable to a Dzogchen practitioner with a qualified teacher. You never know when death will come. If you understand Dzogchen practically, you know that as soon as you start its practice, the better. If you believe lower yanas are just as effective for someone with the capacity to practice Dzogchen, then you don't know what Dzogchen is just yet.

[Sönam]

To understand what rigpa might be then it is essential to bring into your experience both Rangtong views and Shentong views. You can't really get a good view of what Shentong implies unless you get the consequences of Rangtong - it has to be progressive. Both second and third turnings of the wheel of dharma are required for an understanding of rigpa that doesn't end up going against the amazingness of the Dzogchen view. So no actually you DO have to internalize the fundamental teachings before you can comprehend Dzogchen.

There is no interest, and no chance, to intellectually understand what rigpa is ... therefore you do not need rangtong and shengtong.

Sönam

[mindyourmind]

I find Dzogchen's stance of being both a part of and also outside Buddhism to be quite off-putting.

I practice Buddhism for a reason, it is a path that works for me. If that means that I am attached to "Buddhism" then I accept that, quite gladly. If I wanted to have Muslims and Christians practicing with me then I would have gone to where they practice. I accept that Dzogchen's approach is good for the turnstiles, but I am having difficulty with it. I could explain that much better but not within the terms of the Board here.

I'm old-school on this, and not apologizing for it. Some things come with time and practice, mostly the good things in the Dharma. This whole Ati-lite thing is getting on my nerves. Read something like "Blazing Splendor" and see how Dzogchen should be studied.

[Malcolm]

Thanks, Namdrol! This is interesting, since by taking ChNN's words about always going to the essence to heart I came more and more to the same conclusion.

as far as Tantra goes, anuyoga is sufficient.

If that's the case, why is it that the Precious Vase explains Atiyoga more from the Mahayoga POV? Doesn't that approach make things unnecessary more complicated?

The Precious Vase is based on Padmasambhava's Man ngag lta ba phreng ba, that is why.

[Andrew108]

To understand what rigpa might be then it is essential to bring into your experience both Rangtong views and Shentong views. You can't really get a good view of what Shentong implies unless you get the consequences of Rangtong - it has to be progressive. Both second and third turnings of the wheel of dharma are required for an understanding of rigpa that doesn't end up going against the amazingness of the Dzogchen view. So no actually you DO have to internalize the fundamental teachings before you can comprehend Dzogchen.

There is no interest, and no chance, to intellectually understand what rigpa is ... therefore you do not need rangtong and shengtong.

Sönam

Sönam - a lot of people would agree with you. Emperor's New Clothes.

[gregkavarnos]

These days, refuge has been turned into a badge, a tool for conversion. It has been turned into a ritual. But how many people change their name into something nice like Kunga Namdrol, or Padma Tsering, etc., etc., without changing anything in their hearts? Refuge ceremonies have just become an empty baptisms that people think are hugely important but actually change nothing. It is the same with bodhisattva vow ceremonies and also empowerments.

I can understand where you are coming from and acually agree to an extent, your critique of Buddhism is identical to the manner in which I critique Christianity and the reason why I stopped being a Christian.

BUT

It seems to me that you are throwing out the baby with the baptism water. You see it is not that refuge and bodhisattva vows and empowerments are empty and useless, rather it is the case that they have been reduced to a mere shadow of their initial "glory" by their trivialisation through empty ritualism, commercialisation, etc... But the only ones to blame for this are us. Buddhists. We have destroyed their meaning, we have reduced them to empty shells, because we are the ones that have utilised them to further fortify, or bolster, our sense of self. And just like it happened that all these incredibly important ideals and means have been reduced to a money making scam, you will find that it will also (has already started to) happen to Dzogchen. Then what will you do? Look for something new and untainted until that is worn thin again?

No, I'm sorry N. but I seem to believe that what is needed is for us, as practitioners, to bring meaning back into our practices, not by adding water to our wine through ecumenism and modernising, but by going back and looking at the roots. By turning our gaze in, instead of looking outwards at the neighbours greener pastures.

[Dechen Norbu]

I find Dzogchen's stance of being both a part of and also outside Buddhism to be quite off-putting.

I practice Buddhism for a reason, it is a path that works for me. If that means that I am attached to "Buddhism" then I accept that, quite gladly. If I wanted to have Muslims and Christians practicing with me then I would have gone to where they practice. I accept that Dzogchen's approach is good for the turnstiles, but I am having difficulty with it. I could explain that much better but not within the terms of the Board here.

I'm old-school on this, and not apologizing for it. Some things come with time and practice, mostly the good things in the Dharma. This whole Ati-lite thing is getting on my nerves. Read something like "Blazing Splendor" and see how Dzogchen should be studied.

I understand your perspective. It was a struggle for me too.
The thing is that this isn't Dzogchen lite we're talking about. It's Dzogchen without bullshit. Dzogchen with bullshit must be served for those who can't accept its naked version. As long as it works...

PS I'm still dumping a lot of unnecessary baggage. The fact is that Dzogchen as it is does away with many things we used as crutches. It's not easy to leave them when we used them for many years. Sometimes it's even a bit scary, I dare to say.

PPS bullshit from a Dzogchen perspective, that is, as in not necessary for its practice. On its own, it's not bullshit. So it's in an utilitarian sense that I'm using the word (I accept more polite suggestions that convey the same meaning).

[Sönam]

But ...

I see at least one good reason for Buddhist scriptures ... it's a way to found Dzogchen back again.

Sönam

[Mariusz]

Hi Greg:

Since Dzogchen tantras reject the body/mind dualism of the lower yānas, it makes it hard for people fed on the lower yānas to appreciate Dzogchen. Since this is so, the need to study in detail the lower yānas is limited. Someone who is planning to be a teacher needs to know these things, but practictioners, not necessarily. I have seen in my own studies how my Buddhist conditioning has made it difficult at times for me to understand certain keys points of Dzogchen teachings.

As far as the ecumenical thing goes -- I have come to the conclusion that Dzogchen is for all who are interested. Not a "Dzogchen without Buddhism" if you will. But I see no good reason why interested Hindus, Christians, Moslems, and so on cannot receive Dzogchen teachings and practice them. Dzogchen may have come from Buddhism, but as we see in Bon, Dzogchen is not just for Buddhists.

Dzogchen is for everyone who is interested to learn about it and then practice it. When someone comes to my teacher to learn Dzogchen, he never says "Now you must nominally become a Buddhist in order to study Dzogchen". He says "In order to study and learn about Dzogchen you must receive direct introduction", that is all.

The Buddha never said anywhere in the sutras "In order to study the Dharma, first you must take refuge". The whole refuge thing has been turned into a game of religious politics. When people took refuge in the Buddha they did so merely out of their gradtitude for teachings they received. You can read about this in many places in the Pali canon.

These days, refuge has been turned into a badge, a tool for conversion. It has been turned into a ritual. But how many people change their name into something nice like Kunga Namdrol, or Padma Tsering, etc., etc., without changing anything in their hearts? Refuge ceremonies have just become an empty baptisms that people think are hugely important but actually change nothing. It is the same with bodhisattva vow ceremonies and also empowerments.

But in Dzogchen there is nothing to convert or change or alter. Buddhahood is an innate attribute of all sentient beings, so what is the point of "becoming a Buddhist?"

People like to say "Did you go for refuge? What is your Dharma name?", "How long have you been a Buddhist?", "Who is your refuge teacher?" , "Did you take bodhisattva vows?", "Did you receive initiation?", etc. None of this is the principle of Dzogchen teachings as I understand it. None of these things taken in and of themselves are bad, BTW,there is nothing wrong with having gone for refuge to the Three Jewels, created bodhicitta, taken initiation and so on. But it is better to penetrate to the essence of these things rather than just leave them as empty forms, which sadly today they mostly have become.

But the principle of entering Dzogchen teachings is none of the above. The principle of entering Dzogchen teachings is solely direct introduction. And my teacher, Chogyal Namkhai Norbu, will give that to anyone who is interested in receiving the teachings of Dzogchen regardless of their race, color, creed, gender or gender orientation.

The principle of practicing Dzogchen teachings, according to my teacher, is integrating with your primordial state through Ati Guru Yoga and deepening your knowledge of that state through various kinds of practices. Anyone who is interested can do this without having to consider themselves a "Buddhist".

As far as being open to non-Buddhist practices -- it is the case that people who belong to other religions might become interested in Dzogchen teachings. I see no reason at all why they should give up those practices merely becauase they are interested in Dzogchen teachings. Granted, it is impossible to reconcile sacrificing animals with Dzogchen teachings, but apart from that, I do not see the problem. If some Christian is practicing Ati Guru Yoga, then they are practicing Dzogchen whether they consider themselves Buddhists or not.

N

They will not learn monotheism belief here