Looks good. Will put into my to-read list

If you have had dzogchen transmission and practice and some experience l think that takes you along way and you will be able to use the book as a meassure for where you are as well as how to deepend your insight with the contemplation tools the book offers.

My views on restricted texts and the necessity of transmission and empowerments has changed in the last few years. Much as I dislike secrecy, I understand the reasons for it and now tend to follow tradition as I'm aware of how easily something as profound as the Nang-Jang could lead others astray if not understood correctly. That said, it's up to each individual to make their own informed choices and accept responsibility for their actions.

Then there are texts like the one mentioned which offers ways of contemplation and insights, and also texts by say nagarjuna are similar in that regard, and there l would stick to my previous point, lung might help though or even better have a teacher give you lung as well as personal guidance when you read it so he can help you with some of the language etc.

Thanks guys for the heads up when reading this. Will read with reverence and discernment.

I won’t practise anything that need a teacher or guru as I’m not very brave. Had enough side effects haha

There is the seven vajra qualities in one chapter, l think you need lung to recognize those Or pointing out instructions and comming to those qualities yourself by own analysis.

There is mentioning of yoga of illusion somewhere and that l dont really understand and have no experience with either, and few of the latter chapter l struggle to understand but that depends on insight too which is an important point. Like the insight mainly seem to build on upon the other.

I have read it so much, and alot l didnt understand before taking up the book years later, but also some of the insights have occured too, though still clueless on few parts. If you where to read it and discuss then let me know 

Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Buddhahood Without Meditation": @Wei Yu, Thank you. I have read 135 pages so far, and it is quite intelligible to me. I agree, I think it is a fantastic text. But the "ground of being" as awareness/space thing also sounded a bit suspicious to me. It sounds like Advaita. But awareness is empty of inherent existence. Is there even such a thing as "pure awareness"? Could it exist without some kind of object (which also depends on the abstraction awareness), subtle or gross? I think not. Atleast not to my experience. Btw, I wrote the first anonymous comment, not the second. Posted by Anonymous to Awakening to Realityat February 9, 2014 at 7:22 PM

John TanSunday, February 9, 2014 at 8:27pm UTC+08

Is Buddhism without meditation a restricted text?

Soh Wei YuSunday, February 9, 2014 at 8:32pm UTC+08

Not sure but I dont think so.

Soh Wei YuSunday, February 9, 2014 at 8:33pm UTC+08

In chnn sangha there is a large number of restricted text and u cant even buy it from outside bookshops

Soh Wei YuSunday, February 9, 2014 at 8:33pm UTC+08

But that book buddhahood without meditation can be bought freely

John TanSunday, February 9, 2014 at 8:33pm UTC+08

Chnn sangha is what?

Soh Wei YuSunday, February 9, 2014 at 8:33pm UTC+08

But it did suggest one should receive a lung for it

Soh Wei YuSunday, February 9, 2014 at 8:33pm UTC+08

Chogyal naamkhai norbu

John TanSunday, February 9, 2014 at 8:34pm UTC+08

Then u better don't anyhow paste it

John TanSunday, February 9, 2014 at 8:36pm UTC+08

I m asking Kyle...

John TanSunday, February 9, 2014 at 8:37pm UTC+08

But no idea y is it restricted

Soh Wei YuSunday, February 9, 2014 at 8:37pm UTC+08

Yea

John TanSunday, February 9, 2014 at 8:40pm UTC+08

It is simply 2 folds and resolving into one self state as empty clarity. Unlike Thogal I can understand it is dangerous without proper guidance.

Soh Wei YuSunday, February 9, 2014 at 8:41pm UTC+08

Ic..

John TanSunday, February 9, 2014 at 10:18pm UTC+08

I m into a completely new phase...I sincerely hope this insight, this realization continues

John TanSunday, February 9, 2014 at 10:19pm UTC+08

I will put it into practice.

John TanSunday, February 9, 2014 at 10:29pm UTC+08

U must feel all arisings as one own self state.

Soh Wei YuSunday, February 9, 2014 at 10:38pm UTC+08

What new phase?

Soh Wei YuSunday, February 9, 2014 at 10:39pm UTC+08

what is one own self state

Soh Wei YuSunday, February 9, 2014 at 10:46pm UTC+08

magnagei wrote: This is a good bit off topic, but it does relate to permission to read texts, so therefore samaya? :mrgreen: Also I don't want to start a new thread for a simple question. I recently purchased this book Buddhahood without Meditation. It's a translation of Dudjom Lingpa's Nang Jang. In the introduction it says that those that don't have the personal teachings of the lineage should hold this book as an object of reverence on their alter and those that have the teachings may read it. Does this refer to specific transmission within the lineage of Dudjom Lingpa, or does this refer to having transmission from any qualified Dzogchen teacher? I certainly don't want to piss off any guardians! Thank you

Malcolm: It means you should have the specific lung of the text. But honestly, I doubt you are going to piss off any guardians by reading it.

....

Soh Wei YuFriday, February 14, 2014 at 10:15am UTC+08

kyle shared: Some more relevant stuff from Malcolm regarding the translation of gzhi. Figured you could add it to the 'Buddhahood without Meditation' entry or comments to further substantiate the objection to 'ground of being': Malcolm wrote: The term gzhi translates "sthana", which bears no meaning of "ground" at all. gad rgyangs wrote: [Quoting Malcolm: The term gzhi translates "sthana", which bears no meaning of "ground" at all.] first of all, its not a translation from Sanskrit, its written in Tibetan. second of all, the tshig mdzod chen mo gives, as the definition of "gzhi," first: ??????????????? (ground) and second: ???? (root or basis) which is why it is translated as either in various Dzogchen translations. Malcolm wrote: I'll take your Alak Kankar and raise you a Khyentse. Khyentse Wangpo clearly defines gzhi as sthana. gzhi does not mean ?????????????? in a Dzogchen context. All Tibetan Vajrayana traditions, apart from Bon, assume an Indian source for their terminology. gad rgyangs wrote: "The Base, or Zhi in Tibetan, is the term used to denote the fundamental ground of existence, both at the universal level and at the level of the individual" -ChNNR, "The Crystal and the Way of Light" pg 89 and besides, one of the meaning of sthana is simply "place" Malcolm wrote: But it does not mean "ground". You do realize that whole book was based on an edited transcript of a translation from Italian into English influenced by John Reynolds who was very active in the community then, correct? As you know quite well, these days, when referring the gzhi, ChNN uses the term "base" or "primordial state". Personally, I don't care. But as far as I am concerned translating gzhi as ground is less accurate. That is my professional opinion. gad rgyangs wrote: fair enough, point taken.

He is a great master. Had heartfelt reverence reading his advice.

I’m not sure need to be a monk or not for Buddhahood , but from my insight I understand that we have our conditions and doing the best with the cards that are being dealt with is the best move moment to moment.

If one have a family to care for, of course being responsible and loving child and wife is the best move! And practise the best as one could.

I thjnk the Buddha would agree.