The Role of Shamatha/Vipaysana in Dzogchen

[heart]

Longchenpa also wrote many sadhanas, found termas and practiced many sadhanas himself, he even practiced annutarayoga tantra practices from Sarma school. In general I don't have anything against what you say Malcolm about getting direct introduction and that is enough to practice the methods of Dzogchen. However the way the Tibetans do in general kept the Dzogchen tradition alive for a very long time, I think that is worth a little respect. If there was some kind of Dzogchen zen-like tradition, free from Vajrayana, more than thousands of years ago sounds a little like speculation at this point but if you want revive it I wish you good luck. My personal idea is that Dzogchen, as it is practiced today, is neck deep in Vajrayana and that this is a blessing rather than a fault. I got my first direct introduction 30 years ago and so far none of my teachers told me to avoid Maha and Anu yoga, in fact they encouraged me to continue with it. That is all.

Dzogchen and its methods are not outside of Vajrayana. They are the essence of Vajrayana.

Yes, I agree.

[Zoey85]

If there was some kind of Dzogchen zen-like tradition, free from Vajrayana, more than thousands of years ago sounds a little like speculation at this point but if you want revive it I wish you good luck. My personal idea is that Dzogchen, as it is practiced today, is neck deep in Vajrayana and that this is a blessing rather than a fault.

At the risk of sounding like a b**ch or something, I would just point out that vajrayana is not reading a bunch of papers and thinking of a bunch of deities, it's a lifestyle. Maybe in that lifestyle we like reading papers, but maybe we don't either. And that's just fine, as my mother always likes to say.

But if someone practices dzogchen without outer vajrayana practices it certainly doesn't mean that they might not experience a very vajrayana world.

I don't understand what you are trying to say Zoey. You think I am just "reading a bunch of papers"?

I have no idea what you are doing or not doing, though from reading your responses on this forum you seem like you are very devoted to your teachers and to your practice and are a kind person.

[natusake]

Longchenpa also wrote many sadhanas, found termas and practiced many sadhanas himself, he even practiced annutarayoga tantra practices from Sarma school. In general I don't have anything against what you say Malcolm about getting direct introduction and that is enough to practice the methods of Dzogchen. However the way the Tibetans do in general kept the Dzogchen tradition alive for a very long time, I think that is worth a little respect. If there was some kind of Dzogchen zen-like tradition, free from Vajrayana, more than thousands of years ago sounds a little like speculation at this point but if you want revive it I wish you good luck. My personal idea is that Dzogchen, as it is practiced today, is neck deep in Vajrayana and that this is a blessing rather than a fault. I got my first direct introduction 30 years ago and so far none of my teachers told me to avoid Maha and Anu yoga, in fact they encouraged me to continue with it. That is all.

Dzogchen and its methods are not outside of Vajrayana. They are the essence of Vajrayana.

Yes, I agree.

Then there is no problem. If someone's main practice is ati guru yoga, or what have you, whether they have recognized rigpa or not, they are practicing Vajrayana.

[heart]

At the risk of sounding like a b**ch or something, I would just point out that vajrayana is not reading a bunch of papers and thinking of a bunch of deities, it's a lifestyle. Maybe in that lifestyle we like reading papers, but maybe we don't either. And that's just fine, as my mother always likes to say.

But if someone practices dzogchen without outer vajrayana practices it certainly doesn't mean that they might not experience a very vajrayana world.

I don't understand what you are trying to say Zoey. You think I am just "reading a bunch of papers"?

I have no idea what you are doing or not doing, though from reading your responses on this forum you seem like you are very devoted to your teachers and to your practice and are a kind person.

Well, thank you, not sure what made you say that. I been pursuing Dzogchen since I got the empowerments for Semde, Longde and Mengakde in the Dam Ngak Dzö 30 years ago. I got direct introduction a few years later and it been my main practice and interest since that.This actually the reason that I know Malcolm for more that 20 years, he is a brilliant mind and an endless source of interesting Dzogchen quotes, teachings and translations. But I also practice Maha and Anuyoga and believe they are very helpful.

[Zoey85]

I don't understand what you are trying to say Zoey. You think I am just "reading a bunch of papers"?

I have no idea what you are doing or not doing, though from reading your responses on this forum you seem like you are very devoted to your teachers and to your practice and are a kind person.

Well, thank you, not sure what made you say that. I been pursuing Dzogchen since I got the empowerments for Semde, Longde and Mengakde in the Dam Ngak Dzö 30 years ago. I got direct introduction a few years later and it been my main practice and interest since that.This actually the reason that I know Malcolm for more that 20 years, he is a brilliant mind and an endless source of interesting Dzogchen quotes, teachings and translations. But I also practice Maha and Anuyoga and believe they are very helpful.

Very interesting, thank you. Nice to meet you.

[heart]

Dzogchen and its methods are not outside of Vajrayana. They are the essence of Vajrayana.

Yes, I agree.

Then there is no problem. If someone's main practice is ati guru yoga, or what have you, whether they have recognized rigpa or not, they are practicing Vajrayana.

Never said there was a problem. Malcolm and I have this discussion now and then. Although he is on an other level intellectually I don't always agree with everything he say. Since this is a forum I sometimes express my opinion.

[heart]

I have no idea what you are doing or not doing, though from reading your responses on this forum you seem like you are very devoted to your teachers and to your practice and are a kind person.

Well, thank you, not sure what made you say that. I been pursuing Dzogchen since I got the empowerments for Semde, Longde and Mengakde in the Dam Ngak Dzö 30 years ago. I got direct introduction a few years later and it been my main practice and interest since that.This actually the reason that I know Malcolm for more that 20 years, he is a brilliant mind and an endless source of interesting Dzogchen quotes, teachings and translations. But I also practice Maha and Anuyoga and believe they are very helpful.

Very interesting, thank you. Nice to meet you.

Nice to meet you to.

[Malcolm]

Maybe malcom you could pm how many practices all the jñana dakini cycle are? I still cant figure it out

Four: Mandarava (1), Gomadevi (1), Jñānaḍākinī (2 versions, slightly different), Guhyajñāna (1), plus some long life instructions not connected to Mandarava. From what I understand, ChNN himself mainly relied Mandarava and Jñānaḍākinī, but maybe someone has better information.

The dhakinni cycle has anu and ati. The thugthig i have here in mi hand is an ati method, it has the anuyoga form, but just the form.

It has a section related to ati, yes.

[Terma]

I agree in principle what Malcolm is saying but in practical terms there is very few who practice without first gathering the accumulations and doing purifications through ngöndro, yidam and different sadhanas. All the great lamas and Rinpoches have that approach. Longchen Nyingthig ngöndro is very highly praised and most people wont be doing Yeshe Lama without first doing that.

I have not done so at all. I did a little bit of vipassana-style meditation for about a year before encountering Dzogchen teachings and that's it. I'll let you know in a few years if I'm a failed practitioner or not.

Vipassana style meditation and the real meaning of vipaśyanā are two different things. The former is just a glorified style of śamatha meditation, the latter is actually the awakened state we aim to actualize even in atiyoga.

That being the case, this thread is really about the role of śamatha in Dzogchen, because vipaśyanā is awakened equipoise.

This is spot on, actually. I heard something very similar in a recent teaching. I will have to go back and re-listen to the recording, but the explanation of the Tibetan word "lhaktong" means much more than "insight" as it is often translated in the context of the lesser vehicles.

[stong gzugs]

Vipassana style meditation and the real meaning of vipaśyanā are two different things. The former is just a glorified style of śamatha meditation...

This is spot on, actually...

The quoted statement above is just factually false. Vipassana style meditation was explicitly a rejection of śamatha meditation. Bhikkhu Sujato wrote an entire book about it that's worth reading called A history of mindfulness: How insight worsted tranquillity in the satipaṭṭhāna sutta. It's available for free here.

[krodha]

Vipassana style meditation and the real meaning of vipaśyanā are two different things. The former is just a glorified style of śamatha meditation...

This is spot on, actually...

The quoted statement above is just factually false. Vipassana style meditation was explicitly a rejection of śamatha meditation. Bhikkhu Sujato wrote an entire book about it that's worth reading called A history of mindfulness: How insight worsted tranquillity in the satipaṭṭhāna sutta. It's available for free here.

Again there is vipassana meditation, like that offered by the Thai forest ajahns and bikkhus you reference, and then there is the species of “clear insight” as classically described in Mahāyāna texts, such as the Akṣayamati-nirdeśa, which defines vipaśyanā here:

• The consciousness that perceives the entry into reality is called "vipaśyanā." So-called vipaśyanā is perceiving phenomena correctly, perceiving phenomena as they are, perceiving phenomena truly, and perceiving phenomena as not otherwise, perceiving phenomena as empty, without characteristics, without aspiration, perceiving phenomena to be unformed, likewise, nonarisen, unproduced, insubstantial, just as they are, pure, and as isolated. It is perceiving phenomena as unmoving, inactive, without self, wholly without grasping, inseparable, one taste, as the nature of space, and nirvana by nature.

This is describing an ārya’s equipoise, what we atiyogins would term the “state of trekchö.”

[Zoey85]

As far as living dzogchen practitioners who "do not and have not practiced extensive sadhana" I'm guessing you won't find too many who 'have not' ever practiced sadhanas etc but probably quite a few who 'do not' anymore or do not for a time. It's a thing. It's in the literature.

Literature, schmiterature.

I'm somehow only seeing this now.

Who knows what yogis are out there practicing very unelaborate dzogchen? As we all know, they prefer to remain hidden. I'm guessing you can still find them in retreat places and towns in parts of Nepal and India. Or maybe the grocery bagger at your Safeway, though statistically less likely I suppose.

Thank you for your clarification around the elitism you find in certain online dzogchen forums. I mean, I have no idea if congregations of other faiths are receiving direct introduction from their ministers and rabbis and so on, anything's possible I suppose. My money stays right where it's at.

[stong gzugs]

Again there is vipassana meditation, like that offered by the Thai forest ajahns and bikkhus you reference, and then there is the species of “clear insight” as classically described in Mahāyāna texts...

I don't disagree with you that vipassana practice and vipaśyanā as actual insight into reality aren't coextensive. I just said that the section of your statement which I quoted, where you describe vipassana practice as a glorified form of śamatha, is factually incorrect, which it is. The whole innovation of vipassana practice is claiming that you can gain insight into the three marks of existence without first cultivating serious śamatha. Vipassana practice is not a glorified form of śamatha, but is rather a method explicitly designed to bypass śamatha, which became particularly useful in the political context of combating Western colonialism in Burma and Thailand, among other places in SE Asia.

[krodha]

Again there is vipassana meditation, like that offered by the Thai forest ajahns and bikkhus you reference, and then there is the species of “clear insight” as classically described in Mahāyāna texts...

I don't disagree with you that vipassana practice and vipaśyanā as actual insight into reality aren't coextensive. I just said that the section of your statement which I quoted, where you describe vipassana practice as a glorified form of śamatha, is factually incorrect, which it is. The whole innovation of vipassana practice is claiming that you can gain insight into the three marks of existence without first cultivating serious śamatha. Vipassana practice is not a glorified form of śamatha, but is rather a method explicitly designed to bypass śamatha, which became particularly useful in the political context of combating Western colonialism in Burma and Thailand, among other places in SE Asia.

Vipassana meditation, no matter the type of dhyāna it is, is not yet awakened equipoise, and so it is basically akin to an analytical or active form of śamatha. Hence “glorified.” But you’re welcome to disagree, I don’t really have a horse in that race.

[Terma]

Vipassana style meditation and the real meaning of vipaśyanā are two different things. The former is just a glorified style of śamatha meditation...

This is spot on, actually...

The quoted statement above is just factually false. Vipassana style meditation was explicitly a rejection of śamatha meditation. Bhikkhu Sujato wrote an entire book about it that's worth reading called A history of mindfulness: How insight worsted tranquillity in the satipaṭṭhāna sutta. It's available for free here.

This is why I purposely referred to the Tibetan word lhaktong.

As Khroda mentioned, for the purposes of dzogachenpo, it equivalates to great equipoise. As Khroda also mentioned, it is pretty synonymous with threkchod. I am pretty sure this is quite different from what the Thai Forrest Tradition teaches as their own meditation practice.

As a side note, according to the A-Khrid Dzogchen tradition, this equipoise is essentially the merging of the emptiness of external space/appearance with the internal emptiness of one's awareness, thus cutting the mind off from any duality. In this system, this is what they refer to as "resting in great equipoise."

[Malcolm]

. But DI is, even so, not the be-all and end-all of transmission.

Of course it is, it’s present in every major empowerment and blessing. Without it, the example wisdom cannot be induced in the student. What else do you think the fourth empowerment is?

The special point of view of the Dzogchen tradition is that the three lower empowerments are unnecessary, the fourth empowerment alone is sufficient for ripening the student. The four Dzogchen empowerments-elaborate through very unelaborate-are in fact elaborations of the fourth empowerment.

What we call “direct introduction” is just the most simple way of conferring the word empowerment.

There is also something similar in the Kagyu Mahamudra tradition.

[Shaiksha]

It is kind of ironic, people spent hours and hours arguing about the role of shamatha in our spiritual life. If we had just used that time to practice a little bit of shamatha, the result should be the calming of the mind and the realization that 99% of the thoughts that just came and went were unnecessary. Unfortunately, many of those thoughts subsequently put to writing in this forum can no longer be taken back.

Just my personal observation and I thought it may be useful to put it out there, at least for some people.

[Malcolm]

It is kind of ironic, people spent hours and hours arguing about the role of shamatha in our spiritual life. If we had just used that time to practice a little bit of shamatha, the result should be the calming of the mind and the realization that 99% of the thoughts that just came and went were unnecessary. Unfortunately, many of those thoughts subsequently put to writing in this forum can no longer be taken back.

Just my personal observation.

Was this thought you shared necessary?

[Zoey85]

It is kind of ironic, people spent hours and hours arguing about the role of shamatha in our spiritual life. If we had just used that time to practice a little bit of shamatha, the result should be the calming of the mind and the realization that 99% of the thoughts that just came and went were unnecessary. Unfortunately, many of those thoughts subsequently put to writing in this forum can no longer be taken back.

Oh the shame of it all

Glad you're joining the party. Sitting calmly without thoughts gets boring after awhile, doesn't it?

[Shaiksha]

Was this thought you shared necessary?

Not for me to judge - I certainly hope it is useful for some people.

Oh the shame of it all

Glad you're joining the party. Sitting calmly without thoughts gets boring after awhile, doesn't it?

I am not joining the party, Zoey. That will be it from me for now.

I hope you all have a great discussion.