This is not a convincing argument to me. There is enough of a difference between the view of practicing creation and completion and the Dzogchen view that teacgers have written whole books purporting to connect them.cloudburst wrote: ↑Mon Aug 01, 2022 4:35 pmI think there is a certain strain of dzogchen triumphalism that is disingenuous. It is not true that these masters, such as Jigme Lingpa and Patrul Rinpoche, dropped their two stages practice other than for long life practice etc. They focused on it for years, simultaneous with their practice of Dzogchen. Jigme Lingpa's retreat schedule involved togal and generation stage and in fact he did more sessions of the latter.Malcolm wrote: ↑Sun Jul 31, 2022 9:25 pmYes. It is not our path. Personally, I did not come up that way, having done a three year retreat on Lamdre, etc. Many people do not meet proper Dzogchen teachings until quite well into their path, so you will find many people with experience in the two stages who practice Dzogchen, but the path of transformation and the path of self-liberation are completely distinct. And when they finally meet the Dzogchen path, they usually give up practicing the two stages, other than for prophylactic reasons such as long life practice, sang offerings, protectors, etc., practices that deal with our adventitious karma conditions.cloudburst wrote: ↑Sun Jul 31, 2022 9:13 pm Is it a common thing to be able to practice dzogchen without engaging in the two stages?
As I mentioned before, guru yoga is the main relative practice of Dzogchen teachings.
most of the Nyinthig practices are majority two stages sadhanas
Of course it would be possible not to do two stages, this is also possible in mahamudra, but the type of person who can do this is vanishingly rare. It looks like selling dzogchen as its own path that is so high you dont need to engage in "lesser practices" excites a certain kind of person who hopes for quick results without doing the basic work that would allow these higher paths to function. There is the odd chigchar that you hear about in history,
but everyone else pratices everything, from moral discipline to the final stages
It seems a lot more likely that insistence on the two stages is more a result of orthodoxy and orthopraxy in a religious culture which highly values graduated stages. Certainly, in what I have been exposed to of Bon Dzogchen for instance, Tantra is seen as less of a requirement.
That is not to say one or the other is more valuable for individuals, but the claim of some “natural” and obvious connection between the two views makes a lot less sense to me.
Similarly, practice of extensive Sadhana is simply not an attractive or effective method for everyone, even though it is so prominent in Tibetan religious culture. The idea that it is somehow needed for Dzogchen does not make sense, going by presentations of Dzogchen praxis I’ve seen.
It clearly -does- makes sense according to the developed practices of the Nyingma school and the Nine Yanas model, but I do not think it is honest to conflate those two things as identical ….even if I can understand how and why people would do so.