I hope Mr. L doesn't use tantric sex as an excuse to woo students. As Malcolm said before, something like genuine, real use of tantric sexual practice in Tibetan Buddhism is very rare; most are just perverted men using it to seduce women. But given that he already shared materials on tantric sex before, I guess that's a worrying sign.

John Tan: Actually, I am also quite uncomfortable with Dzogchen masters skewed towards Neo-Advaita awareness teaching and promoting spontaneous presence as heavenly bliss and no-self, therefore no suffering—a sort of erroneous view. Not just tantric sex Buddhism, which is not difficult to discern if we have a rational mind.

John Tan: I think Mr. Q Rinpoche later corrected this narrative publicly by sharing his own intense struggles with panic attacks after his retreat, demonstrating that realization does not mean the end of biological anxiety.

Soh Wei Yu: Mr. Q Rinpoche’s teachings very much skew to "I AM" and even the nondual is more like a no-mind state than anatta when I flipped through his books. So I wasn't very interested in his teachings.

John Tan: Promoting that there is no self, therefore no problem, is Neo-Advaita. There never was any self, but suffering continues and rebirth continues; that is why it is so important to practice. The dependently originated phenomena continue and there is no escape. Once we clearly understand and see that in real-time, we will practice.

That is why I never like the "one truth" teaching. Spontaneous presence being presented as nirvana bliss, much like Sat-Chit-Ananda, is an erroneous view and dangerous, in my opinion.

Soh Wei Yu: I just saw a post yesterday by Malcolm [Dzogchen teacher Acarya Malcolm Smith] that he wrote a decade ago:

“So? This illustrates nothing contradictory at all to my fundamental point, which is that as long as one is under the influence of affliction, one will continue to take rebirth in samsara, despite the fact it is a mere name and an illusion.

Moreover, there is nothing in this statement you produce which says anything even slightly different than Prajñāpāramitā in general.

Incidentally, the notion that recognizing 'the nature of the mind' is adequate is really a pity. A lot of yogis crash and burn on that one. In fact, recognizing the nature of the mind is not even the path. It is the basis (khregs chod). It is upon that recognition (now we are in Dzogchen land), that one practices the path (thod rgal). And in the case of the bodhicitta text you cite, the path is the two stages, the bodhicitta texts themselves describe the result of the two stages and nothing more. Even ChNN maintains that.”

Soh Wei Yu: Also Kyle Dixon wrote:

“Mere recognition of vidyā is initially unstable because karmic propensities have not been completely exhausted, buddhahood is not one's mere recognition of vidyā though, buddhahood is the result.

Any propensities which have the potential for re-arising on the path are exhausted in buddhahood, and so the result therefore said to be irreversible. Buddhahood is described as a cessation, and what ceases is cause for the further arising and proliferation of delusion regarding the nature of phenomena.

For this reason, nirvana is said to be 'permanent', because due to the exhaustion of cause for the further proliferation of samsara, samsara no longer has any way to arise. However nirvana is also a conventional designation which is only relevant in relation to the delusion of samsara which has been exhausted, and so nirvana is nothing real that exists in itself either. Neither samsara nor nirvana can be found outside of the mind.

As Nāgārjuna states:

'Neither samsara nor nirvana exist;

instead, nirvana is the thorough knowledge of samsara'

Tsele Natsok Rangdrol states:

'You might ask, "Why wouldn't confusion reoccur as before, after... [liberation has occurred]?" This is because no basis [foundation] exists for its re-arising. Samantabhadra's liberation into the ground itself and the yogi liberated through practicing the path are both devoid of any basis [foundation] for reverting back to becoming a cause, just like a person who has recovered from a plague or the fruit of the se tree.'

He then states that the se tree is a particular tree which is poisonous to touch, causing blisters and swelling. However once recovered, one is then immune.

Lopon Tenzin Namdak also explains this principle of immunity:

'Anyone who follows the teachings of the Buddhas will most likely attain results and purify negative karmic causes. Then that person will be like a man who has caught smallpox in the past; he will never catch it again because he is immune. The sickness of Samsara will never come back. And this is the purpose of following the teachings.'”

Source: Dharmawheel Scrapper’s Compilation of Krodha’s Posts https://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2023/05/table-of-contents-for-malcolm.html