A Letter to Almaas on Dzogchen and Longchenpa

Original Post

I wrote to A H Almaas one or two months ago the following e-mail, this may interest you Machiel van Dijk as you have been reading Longchenpa lately.

Hi A. H. Almaas,

I have watched your videos, all the lecture series with great interest. In particular the Soto Zen/Dogen one was pretty resonating here and I liked your explanations which brought out many important points. I shared that and another video in my blog https://awakeningtoreality.com/

Would just like to comment on the Dzogchen part.. it seems that you have characterized Dzogchen teachings as primarily an Awareness teaching (the teaching of Awareness as the ultimate ground of being etc), similar to Advaita Vedanta with the difference that it is seen as empty and so on.

I would have thought that way too based on my previous reading and encounters with Dzogchen teachers. However, after attending the Dzogchen teacher Acarya Malcolm Smith (who was asked by his teacher Kunzang Dechen Lingpa to teach Dzogchen, and Kunzang Dechen Lingpa has attained rainbow body) teachings, and also recent findings, I find that I was kind of misunderstanding Dzogchen teachings in the past, and I shared my new understanding of Dzogchen below. Dzogchen teachings are different from Advaita also for various reasons such as not asserting a 'one without a second', for "rang bzhin aspect of our nature appears as a diversity while being completely and totally inseparable from ka dag, or original purity, which is the Dzogchen treatment of emptiness free from extremes.

As such, Dzogchen champions a “non-dual duality,” or a “dualistic non-duality,” as Malcolm says, “take your pick.”" - http://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2020/08/acarya-malcolm-on-dzogchen-and-advaita.html

""One, whoever told you rig pa is not part of the five aggregates? Rig pa is knowledge of your own state. In its impure form one's own state manifests as the five aggregates; in its pure form, it manifests as the five buddha families.

"Further, there is no rigpa to speak of that exists separate from the earth, water, fire, air, space and consciousness that make up the universe and sentient beings. Rigpa is merely a different way of talking about these six things. In their pure state (their actual state) we talk about the radiance of the five wisdoms of rig pa. In their impure state we talk about how the five elements arise from consciousness. One coin, two sides. And it is completely empty from beginning to end, and top to bottom, free from all extremes and not established in anyway." - Acarya Malcolm, http://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2014/02/clarifications-on-dharmakaya-and-basis_16.html "Clarifications on Dharmakaya and Basis by Loppön Namdrol/Malcolm"

Also this is similar when we look at Mahamudra teachings for example, where it is taught,

""The medium One Taste is when this tarnish has dissolved: the conviction of savoring and clinging to multiplicity as being one taste. You have actualized the resplendent indivisibility of perceptions and mind in which the perceived is not held as being outside and mind is not held as being inside.

The greater One Taste is when you realize multiplicity as being of one taste and you experience one taste as being multiplicity. Thus, everything subsides into the original state of equality."

"You have perfected the strength of One Taste if whatever you encounter is experienced as the expression of this original state of equality. You have not perfected its strength if one taste isn't experienced as multiplicity because of retaining the bind of a remedy." - Mahamudra teacher Dakpo Tashi Namgyal, Clarifying the Natural State

" "At that point, is the observer—awareness—other than the observed—stillness and movement—or is it actually that stillness and movement itself? By investigating with the gaze of your own awareness, you come to understand that that which is investigating itself is also no other than stillness and movement. Once this happens you will experience lucid emptiness as the naturally luminous self-knowing awareness. Ultimately, whether we say nature and radiance, undesirable and antidote, observer and observed, mindfulness and thoughts, stillness and movement, etc., you should know that the terms of each pair are no different from one another; by receiving the blessing of the guru, properly ascertain that they are inseparable. Ultimately, to arrive at the expanse free of observer and observed is the realization of the true meaning and the culmination of all analyses. This is called “the view transcending concepts,” which is free of conceptualization, or “the vajra mind view.”

"Fruition vipashyana is the correct realization of the final conviction of the nonduality of observer and observed."

....

Lord Gotsangpa said:

"In general, the apparent myriad of phenomena is one’s own
mind. Since phenomena and emptiness have never been
abiding as two separate entities, there is no need to restrain
cognizance within."

Also:

"When there is an appearance of a form in the field of the eyes,
that appearance of form itself is one’s mind; the apparent
form and emptiness are not two. By resting gently right on
the form without grasping, subject and object become naturally
liberated. The same applies to sounds, smells, tastes,
textures, as well as mental occurrences: by resting on the
occurrence itself, it becomes self-liberated. That is to say,
instead of meditating on cognizance, by meditating without
grasping right on the outer objects of the six sense perceptions,
the six senses arise as meditation and enhancement
will ensue.""- Mahamudra teacher Khamtrul Rinpoche III http://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2015/12/self-liberation-by-khamtrul-rinpoche-iii.html

From the above we can also see that Mahamudra teachings lead to a point where even 'cognizance' or 'pure awareness' is exhausted when "each pair are no different from one another", and that by using the six sense perceptions as path, "later, phenomena will arise as ornaments; and finally, there will be no duality between phenomena and mind, and you will have arrived at the expanse of the great pervasiveness of the dharmakaya."

And as Kyle pointed out, "...Gnosis or jñāna is intimately related to dharmakāya, but even jñāna is said to technically be absent in dharmakāya..." and Malcolm said, "...From the ultimate perspective there is no Buddha, sentient being, liberation, or bondage. There isn’t even a dharmakaya...."

In this respect, Dzogchen and Mahamudra actually agrees with Soto Zen Dogen's rejection of a substantially existent 'oneness' that subsumes all plurality, "...According to Dogen, this “oceanic-body” does not contain the myriad forms, nor is it made up of myriad forms – it is the myriad forms themselves. The same instruction is provided at the beginning of Shobogenzo, Gabyo (pictured rice-cakes) where, he asserts that, “as all Buddhas are enlightenment” (sho, or honsho), so too, “all dharmas are enlightenment” which he says does not mean they are simply “one” nature or mind.

“All Buddhas and all things cannot be reduced to a static entity or principle symbolized as one mind, one nature, or the like. This guards against views that devaluate the unique, irreplaceable individuality of a single dharma.” - Hee-Jin Kim, Flowers of Emptiness, p.257" - Ted Biringer, https://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2011/03/realization-experience-and-right-view_13.html

If ultimately there is not even jnana/rigpa, not even dharmakaya, and all phenomena (all subjects and objects, self and phenomena), dharmins and dharmata are all exhausted, it does not mean what is left is a blank. The rainbow body of Dzogchen and the exhaustion of all phenomena reveals everything in its primordial purity and natural perfection.

Acarya Malcolm also said,

"The colors which the five lights express arise because of the adulteration of the five wisdoms with karmic winds or vāyus, without which the five wisdoms have no manifest expression. At the gross level, these five lights are expressed though delusion as the five elements."

"When we overcome our limitations of religion, ideology, nation, class, race and tribe we are more free to act wisely, to cherish this beautiful planet we live on and all the richness of life, the plants, the animals, the rocks, minerals, oceans, mountains, rivers, and lakes it offers us.

When we overcome our limitations of religion, ideology, nation, class, race and tribe through knowing our own state through personal experience the universe and all the beings in it are revealed as an astonishing panoply of spheres of light and color, sound, lights and rays that has no boundary nor center."

Perhaps one thing that is not as emphasized by many Tibetan Buddhists is the 'unilocal' aspect that is often/all the time described by Dogen, I seldom see descriptions by Tibetan masters although sometimes we see a few passages like this one by Khamtrul Rinpoche describing the stage of one taste - "...Having realized the three divisions of time to be the same, in a single moment you see them as indivisible, eons are condensed into an instant, and an instant opens into eons. You master time. Since body, mind and phenomena are integrated, space and the palm of your hand are equal; the billion world systems fit into a few grains; one is transformed into many, and many are made into one", although my mentor John Tan/"Thusness" seems to suggest that perhaps Tsongkhapa is deep into that aspect as well due to certain emphasis in view and also Tsongkhapa carries Avatamsaka Sutra into his every retreat.

Other Tibetan teachers often emphasize more on the aspect of total deconstruction and elimination of conceptual constructs into freedom from elaboration and primordial purity and seeing the coalescence of emptiness and appearance, which is also a different and important aspect. Mipham (books: Jamgon Mipam, and Beacon of Certainty: Illuminating the View of Dzogchen, the Great Perfection Studies in Indian and Tibetan Buddhism) elaborates a lot on this. Prasangika Madhyamika does not privilege mind over phenomena but on the primordial purity of appearance (kadag), which is similar to Dzogchen. Hence the charge against yogacara for the subtle attachment to "mind", although, yogacara does not say "mind" is ultimate also.

Another Dzogchen teachers (two actually) that refutes the "unchanging mirror" metaphor by pointing out the insight of "no mirror" or "no mind" is Prabodha Jnana Yogi and Abhaya Devi Yogini - https://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2018/04/way-of-bodhi.html

I wrote this on the Dharma Overground forum 3 months ago about Dzogchen:

Longchenpa and Dzogchen is Anti Foundationalist

Soh Wei Yu, modified 8 Days ago.

Longchenpa and Dzogchen is Anti Foundationalist

Posts: 58 Join Date: 2/13/21 Recent Posts

“Hey, hey, apparent yet nonexistent retinue: listen well! There is no object to distinguish in me, the view of self-originated wisdom; it did not exist before, it will not arise later, and also does not appear in anyway in the present. The path does not exist, action does not exist, traces do not exist, ignorance does not exist, thoughts do not exist, mind does not exist, prajñā does not exist, samsara does not exist, nirvana does not exist, vidyā (rigpa) itself does not even exist, totally not appearing in anyway.”

-- Dzogchen Text "Unwritten Tantra" (yi ge med pa'i rgyud) Acarya Malcolm Smith's translation

Hey all, just thought of creating a post here because somewhere in 2018 I think I posted in DhO that my cursory reading of Longchenpa gave me an impression that he posited an unchanging ground of being. This of course did not sit with me very well due to the nature of the insights, especially the later stages of insights I went through, which is similar to my mentor’s Thusness Seven Stages http://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2007/03/thusnesss-six-stages-of-experience.html

Also those who went through all the way on the MCTB path would also see through and dissolve all tendencies to reify an unchanging ground of being (aka the golden chains) on the journey from MCTB’s third to fourth path.

Such an unchanging ground of being would also contradict very fundamental Buddhist teachings on Anatman that is common to the Pali canon teachings (and also twofold emptiness as emphasized in Prajnaparamita, Madhyamika, but also mentioned in Kalaka Sutta/Kaccayanagotta Sutta/Phena Sutta/etc), Theravada, Mahayana and Vajrayana Buddhism which refutes a stable self/Self existing within or outside of the five aggregates, and would make it indistinguishable from the non-Buddhist doctrines of Atman-Brahman which posits an unchanging metaphysical ground of being, such as those in Advaita and other mystical teachings found in all religions.

However, after attending Dzogchen teachings of Acarya Malcolm Smith online with John Tan and 300+ others last year (made possible due to pandemic which led to many teachers offering online teachings), it became clear that Dzogchen is completely consistent with the fundamental doctrine of Anatman and refutes any unchanging ground of being. The original Dzogchen tantras/texts also refute eternalism and non-Buddhist views very clearly, including the Dzogchen text translated by Malcolm, 'Buddhahood in This Life: The Great Commentary by Vimalamitra'. You can also read the view of 'basis' in Dzogchen here, explained by Malcolm: https://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2014/02/clarifications-on-dharmakaya-and-basis_16.html

Also, as I said in DhO earlier, ""Another interesting 'technical' point since this is DhO. There was a point in his retreat where Arcaya Malcolm Smith described how at the mature phase of Dzogchen practice, the 'vidya'/'rigpa' (the knowing/knowledge) is exhausted where the vidya and dhatu (something like knowing and field of experience) totally collapsed in a 1:1 synchrony (and he gestured two circles coming together), whereas before that point [the exhaustion of vidya] there is a sort of out of phase issue between vidya and dhatu. That's said to happen in the fourth vision. Somehow it really reminded me of one of Daniel's descriptions in MCTB on fourth path. His student Kyle did inform me that it is the same as what I call anatta realization [which I realised almost 10 years ago, it is the same as MCTB's fourth path]. Also, Malcolm mentioned many people have the wrong idea that Vidya/Rigpa is some eternal thing that just goes on forever, but it too is exhausted later along with all other phenomena [although this is not annihilation as appearances/pure vision still manifest] (elaboration: https://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2020/08/acarya-malcolm-on-dzogchen-and-advaita.html )."

Likewise, Kyle Dixon, that Malcolm told me over dinner was the first student of his that totally understood his teaching, also said in 2014, "'Self luminous' and 'self knowing' are concepts which are used to convey the absence of a subjective reference point which is mediating the manifestation of appearance. Instead of a subjective cognition or knower which is 'illuminating' objective appearances, it is realized that the sheer exertion of our cognition has always and only been the sheer exertion of appearance itself. Or rather that cognition and appearance are not valid as anything in themselves. Since both are merely fabricated qualities neither can be validated or found when sought. This is not a union of subject and object, but is the recognition that the subject and object never arose in the first place [advaya]. ", "The cognition is empty. That is what it means to recognize the nature of mind [sems nyid]. The clarity [cognition] of mind is recognized to be empty, which is sometimes parsed as the inseparability of clarity and emptiness, or nondual clarity and emptiness." - Kyle. Kyle recently made me a moderator at the Dzogchen subreddit but unfortunately I'm not really doing my moderating job there very much (if at all).

In instances where the nature of mind is spoken as 'unchanging', it is not spoken in the sense of positing something (like a ground of being) not undergoing change, but in the sense that there never was a 'mind' to begin with - both mind and phenomena, subject and object, are empty and non-arisen, and as such entities have never truly arisen to begin with, can never be found to begin with, the abiding and cessation of said entities cannot be established either. Or as my mentor John Tan said, "If seen is just seen, then there is no movement. In the seen only the seen is also no seer, no seeing and nothing seen. There is no changing nor unchanging." - https://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2021/10/in-seen-only-seen-is-also-no-seer-no.html

Another two Dzogchen teachers that clearly teach from the insight of anatman include Yogi Prabodha Jnana and Yogini Abhaya Devi - www.awakeningtoreality.com/2018/04/way-of-bodhi.html

Sure, there are many Dzogchen teachers who seem to hold the view of an unchanging ground of being, but this is a problem in All traditions - Theravada (particularly: Thai Forest), Mahayana and Vajrayana, and does not reflect only specific schools, sects or subsects of Buddhism. I can find people who realised Anatman or the equivalent of MCTB's 4th Path in Theravada, in Mahayana/Zen/Ch'an, in Tibetan Buddhism (each of the four subsects - Gelug, Sakya, Kagyu and Nyingma... along with Dzogchen/Mahamudra/etc), and also I can find many (actually, majority) of those with realisations in any of these traditions falling into the extremes of eternalism and nihilism, falling into the 'golden chains of anagami' in Daniel's lingo. Most people do not make it all the way to realising Anatman proper, yet a minority does, in any of the Buddhist traditions. But it is clear that the realisation of Anatman is a key fundamental insight, the most important one, in all Buddhist traditions, be it Theravada/Zen/Ch'an/Dzogchen/Mahamudra/Tantra/etc.

Anyway I wanted to share a recent findings made by my mentor Thusness/John Tan where Longchenpa clearly described Anatman insight. It is now very clear that Longchenpa did not fall into any extremes of eternalism/nihilism or any of the 'golden chains of anagami' that Daniel warned about. This is an important point for Dzogchen because as Malcolm said, "In general, these days Dzogchen is Longchenpa's Dzogchen, at least as far as how Buddhists present it. Longchenpa is the gold standard, as ChNN stated many times."

http://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2021/10/the-philosophical-foundations-of.html

The Philosophical Foundations of Classical rDzogs chen in Tibet: Investigating the Distinction Between Dualistic Mind (sems) and Primordial knowing (ye shes)

John Tan: He goes on to point out that self-occuring primordial knowing lacks most of the qualities associated with the Yogacara svasaf!1vedana - its alleged reality, internality, reflexivity, self-evidence, and accessibility to introspection - but then cautions that "should one become attached to these [rDzogs chen gnoseological] terms as denoting something real, you won 't find any difference from the Cittamatra conception of svasaf!1vedana, that is, the cognition which is devoid of subject-object duality and which is simply auto-illumination.,,247 In highlighting the many drawbacks of reifying the mental, Klong chen pa rules out any basis for confusing the gnoseological and mentalist conceptions of self-awareness: for the idealist, self-awareness is a real entity having real characteristics, whereas for the rDzogs chen pa, it is simply a vivid auto-manifestation, a process lacking any reality whatsoever.

Soh: What book is this?

John Tan: The Philosophical Foundations of Classical rDzogs chen in Tibet Investigating the Distinction Between Dualistic Mind (sems) and Primordial knowing (ye shes) David Higgins ( Soh: https://files.awakeningtoreality.com/127625345-David-Higgins-The-Philosophical-Foundations-of-Classical-rDzogs-Chen-in-Tibet-Investigating-the-Distinction-Between-Dualistic-Mind-Sems-and-Primord.pdf ) John Tan: I like this book. Clarifies most of the dzogchen terms and clearly states that longchenpa rejects self-reflective awareness distinguishing dzogchen from yogacara. And in line with anatta insight. To longchenpa self-awareness "is simply a vivid auto-manifestation, a process lacking any reality whatsoever".

Soh: Oh wow

John Tan: Finally found one book that aligns anatta insight and dzogchen clearly.

Soh: yeah i wonder why all (Correction: most of those I've read) the other books on dzogchen (Except malcolm's) including on longchenpa is always about mirror and reflection emoticon

John Tan: If I din read this chapter, I too would have mistaken it as another awareness teaching.emoticon

John Tan: Yeah. I also agree with what longchenpa said how it is different and y "intellect" is not involved in just vivid manifestation.

Soh: oic..

John Tan: According to the viewpoint of this system, he says, all phenomena are self-luminous in the state of great primordial knowing like light in the sky, having always been the very essence of this self-occuring primorial knowing which remains naturally free from causes and conditions.263

John Tan: I believe his "Buddha Nature Reconsidered" will be interesting too.

Soh: found buddha nature reconsidered: https://files.awakeningtoreality.com/BUDDHA%20NATURE%20RECONSIDERED.pdf

John Tan: Now all the terms and phrases seem so clear to me when they use it.

......

Soh Wei Yu: Another passage that John Tan quoted is Longchenpa's blanket rejection of Yogacara.

John Tan: Read it. Longchenpa reject yogacara view in toto and accept prasangika.

...

From the book:

Klong chen pa' s blanket rejection of the Yogacara svasaYflvedana . Of course, the main target of his sweeping critique, as he makes clear in his Yid bzhin mdzod 'grel, is the Y ogacara proclivity to treat consciousness as a real entity with real characteristics and to presuppose it in justifications of idealism: "It is eminently reasonable to claim that any objects that appear are unreal, but we refute the claim that mind is ultimately real.,,240 Klong chen pa is also patently opposed to allowing self-awareness a conventional existence so that it can then be used to buttress representational epistemologies that assume we can only know external objects (if indeed such are held to exist) through our internal representations of them. Interestingly, his thoroughgoing rejection of Y ogacara epistemology and his wholehearted endorsement of the *PrasaIigika stratagems · for undermining any and all forms of realism (from substance ontologies to subjective idealism) make his stance on svasaf!lvedana appear, for all intents and purposes, quite similar to the dGe lugs pa position that Mi pham was criticizing. What, then, are we left with when it comes to the rDzogs chen self-awareness? It must be acknowledged that the rDzogs chen conception of rang rig does concur with some elements of Santaraksita' s self-awareness, particularily its nondual and luminous character.

......

Soh Wei Yu, modified 3 Months ago.

RE: Longchenpa and Dzogchen is Anti Foundationalist

Posts: 58 Join Date: 2/13/21 Recent Posts

......

John Tan: Read the foundation of dzogchen philosophy

John Tan: It is in the book The book "foundation" goes in extensively to define what is zhi and kun zhi, their histories and development...etc...both r termed as "ground" which I do not think it as appropriate for a praxis that rest entirely on abolishing "ground" even when talking abt "zhi". Malcolm is more cautious on this aspect.

Soh: Oic.. Malcolm translate it as basis

Malcolm: And this so-called "god" aka basis [gzhi] is just a nonexistent mere appearance, that is, our primordial potentiality also has no real existence, which is stated over and over again in countless Dzogchen tantras. For those whom emptiness is possible, everything is possible. For those whom emptiness is not possible, nothing is possible. -- Nāgārjuna.

John Tan: Although David Higgins used the word "ground", he qualifies it as "insubstantial and unestablished in any sense".

...............

Also see: Clarifications on Dharmakaya and Basis by Loppön Namdrol/Malcolm https://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2014/02/clarifications-on-dharmakaya-and-basis_16.html

..................

John Tan: I wonder y there is a need for Dzogchen to emphasize so much on gzhi and kun gzhi. I do not see any real help in actual practice. In fact seeing through self-nature is sufficient. Direct and simple and straight forward emoticon. Although there r some important points in the praxis of dzogchen.

Soh Wei Yu: Oic..

John Tan: Also in early texts of Dzogchen and Nyingma scholars actually do not differentiate between gzhi and kun gzhi.

Soh Wei Yu: I see

Soh Wei Yu: Mahamudra also talk about “ground” but dunno what term they use http://www.awakeningtoreality.com/search/label/Karmapa Rangjung Dorje?m=1 The ground of purification is the mind itself, indivisible cognitive clarity and emptiness. That which purifies is the great vajra yoga of mahamudra. What is to be purified are the adventitious, temporary contaminations of confusion, May the fruit of purification, the stainless dharmakaya, be manifest. Resolving doubts about the ground brings conviction in the view. Then keeping one's awareness unwavering in accordance with the view, is the subtle pith of meditation. Putting all aspects of meditation into practice is the supreme action. The view, the meditation, the action--may there be confidence in these. All phenomena are illusory displays of mind. Mind is no mind--the mind's nature is empty of any entity that is mind Being empty, it is unceasing and unimpeded, manifesting as everything whatsoever. Examining well, may all doubts about the ground be discerned and cut.

Soh Wei Yu: I suppose dzogchen and mahamudra should be the same view

John Tan: Dzogchen is the path that starts from taking the view that anatta is a seal, always and already so.

Soh Wei Yu: Oic.. mahamudra is the same?

John Tan: I guessed so but I don't want to comment on this.

John Tan: Original face means to realize that appearances has always been one's radiance clarity, primordially luminous and naturallly free.

Soh Wei Yu: Oic..

John Tan: Problem is most ppl that engaged in the so called highest teachings r having a dualistic and substantialist view. If we do not recognize the nature of appearances and kept emphasizing on primordial knowing, taking the non-progressive is imo a great disservice than help.

John Tan: Just like when u r at I M, u already like to talk about spontaneous presence which I caution u don't talk about that until at least mature non-dual.

Soh Wei Yu: Ic.. lol yeah

John Tan: "It is possible, Klong chen pa suggests, to simply recognize this nondual self-occuring primordial knowing in its pristine nakedness (rjen pa sang nge ba) - both as it abides in its naked clarity and as it continuously manifests as myriad objects - without hypostatizing it.273 For so long as "one thinks of the abiding and manifesting of cognition as two different things and talks about [the experience of] 'settling in the nonconceptual essence' [but also of] 'preserving the expressive energy as being free in its arising', one's practice goes in two directions and one fails to understand the key point."

Soh Wei Yu: Oh.. nice

John Tan: Reading it second time and still found many phrases that I like.

John Tan: Really a treasure

Soh Wei Yu: "That is interesting that it distinguishes what would be anatta and no mind I’m going to have to re-read the text" - Kyle Dixon

John Tan: Also in the very beginning

Soh Wei Yu: In the beginning it talked about anatta?

John Tan: ""In this sense, primordial knowing is both a vision of things as they are undistorted by reifications and a mode of being and living that is commensurate with this vision."" Primodial Knowing is not defined as an entity like an ultimate awareness but rather a vision of things undistorted by reifications and a lived experienced of perfection of anatta insight.

Soh Wei Yu: Oic..

Soh Wei Yu: Kyle Dixon: Is primordial knowing a gloss of ye shes? I assume so Dzogchen will even go as far as to say Buddhas do not even have ye shes Some Mahāyāna texts say this too Because if they really had jñāna it could be misconstrued as a subjective reference point

Soh Wei Yu: This reminds me of bodhidharma [The questioner] continued asking: "What is 'taishang,' the supreme? "Tai signifies 'great,' and shang 'lofty.' It is called 'supreme' because it is the highest wondrous principle. Tai also signifies the primordial stage. Though there are longlived ones of Yankang in the heavens of the three realms, their luck runs out, which is why they end up again transmigrating in the six spheres of existence. That 'ultimate' (tai) is not yet sufficient. And the bodhisattvas of the ten stages, though having escaped life-and-death, have not yet plumbed the depths of this wondrous principle. Their ultimate is also not yet [the one I am talking about]. Cultivation of mind in the ten stages gets rid of being in order to enter nonbeing; this is again not yet the ultimate since it does not get rid of both being and nonbeing and sticks to a middle path. But even if one has thoroughly discarded that middle path and the three locations [of inside, outside, and in between], and any place is that of wondrous awakening - and even if a bodhisattva gets rid of these three locations - one remains unable to free oneself of the wondrous. This again is not yet the ultimate. Now if one discards the wondrous, then even the very essence of the Buddha Way has no place to abide; since no though is left, no discriminative thinking takes place. Both the deluded mind and wisdom have forever expired, and perceptions and reflections are at an end - calm and without ado. This is called tai; it means the ultimate of the principle. And shang means 'without peer.' Hence it is called taishang, the ultimate. This is simply another designation for Buddha, the Tathagata." [End of] Treatise on No-Mind in one fascicle. http://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2018/11/the-doctrine-of-no-mind-by-bodhidharma.html

John Tan: The point Dzogchen wants to make is "primordial" -- has always been the case before beginning, always and already so. In order words in ATR context, anatta is a seal, always and already so thus differentiating it from effortful and progressive stage or even transformation taking result as the path, familiarizing one's basis rather than seeing it as the result of cause and effect.

John Tan: What I find lacking in the book is pointing out the nature of "appearances". When the notion of "existence" is being stripped (deconstructed) from phenomena, the nature of what appears.

Soh Wei Yu: Oic..

Soh Wei Yu: Kyle Dixon: Longchenpa: From the [ultimate] perspective the meditative equipoise of the realised (sa thob) and awakened beings (sangs rgyas), there exists neither object of knowledge (shes bya) nor knowing cognitive process (shes byed) and so forth, for there is neither object to apprehend nor the subject that does the apprehending. Even the exalted cognitive process (yeshes) as a subject ceases (zhi ba) to operate.

John Tan: (thumbs up)

Labels: Anatta, Books and Websites Recommendations, David Higgins, Dzogchen, Longchenpa

Soh Wei Yu, modified 3 Months ago.

RE: Longchenpa and Dzogchen is Anti Foundationalist

Posts: 58 Join Date: 2/13/21 Recent Posts

http://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2021/10/the-practice-of-dzogchen-longchen.html

The Practice Of Dzogchen: Longchen Rabjam's Writings on the Great Perfection

Book recommendation:

The Practice Of Dzogchen: Longchen Rabjam's Writings on the Great Perfection https://www.amazon.com/Practice-Dzogchen-Perfection-Buddhayana-Foundation/dp/155939434X/ref=sr_1_1?dchild=1

John Tan: " https://www.shambhala.com/sno.../the-practice-of-dzogchen-2/ Exactly what I am searching"

IDENTIFICATION (OF THE BASIS) THROUGH (UNDERSTANDING THE) VIEW The External Apprehended Objects Are Non-Existent Emptiness

(i) The appearances are unreal reflections like the eight examples of illusion.

Every aspect of the five objects, such as form, included in the phenomena of the world and beings, are mere appearances with no true existence. All the appearances which have appeared to both the pure perceptions of the Buddhas and the impure perceptions of deluded beings are the percepts of wisdom and the mind. While the appearances are appearing to both perceptions, they are appearing with no inherent existence (Rang-bZhin), like a reflection in a mirror and rainbow rays in the sky. To the pure perception of wisdom the (appearances) transcend the extremes of existing and non-existing as there are no stains of apprehender and apprehended. As there is no creating, ceasing, and changing, all are free from the characteristics of compounded phenomena, the appearances of uncompounded emptiness-form, and are totally free from conceptualizations. To the perception of the deluded mind, (the appearances) merely appear as the object of apprehension of self (bDag-'Dzin), which have fallen into the extreme (concepts) of existing or non-existing, are detached from the characteristics of uncompounded (nature), and have strengthened the habituations of adventitious and circumstantial self-perceptions. So, here, one will understand that the objects, the delusory appearances of the mind, are unreal. Various external appearances, such as white and red, are merely the percepts of rigid habits, like a dream created by the drunkenness of ignorant sleep. There is not the slightest existence (in them) as the object in the (true) meaning. Also, those appearances are not mind from the very point of their arising, because their substantial characteristics, such as color, size, and distinctions, negate the character of the mind. At the same time, they are not other than the mind, because, in addition to their being merely the delusory perceptions (of the mind), no other object has ever been established as such. The appearances to the mind are just types of experience of rigid habits continuing from beginningless time. It is like dreaming last night about a magic show one has seen yesterday. Therefore, one should think that whatever appears are appearances of non existence, and are without foundation, abiding place, natural existence, and recognizable (entity). They are merely a clear appearance of the empty nature like a dream, magical display, mirage, echo, shadowy view (Mig-Yor), water-moon (reflection), miracle, and the city of smell-eaters (a spirit world). Whatever appears, self or others, enemies or friends, countries or towns, places or houses, food or drink or wealth, and whatever one does, eating or sleeping, walking or sitting, one should train in seeing them as unreal. One should devote oneself to this training in all its aspects: the preliminary, actual, and concluding practices. (ii) The objects, if analyzed, are emptiness. If the appearances are examined from gross to subtle down to atoms, they are partless and non-existent. So form is emptiness. (Likewise,) by examining color and recognition of sound, it (will be found to be) emptiness. By examining the form and essence of smell, it (will be found to be) emptiness. By examining the aspects of taste, they (will be found to be) emptiness. Especially, by examining the sources (sense-objects), the emptiness of touch will be reached. Although they are different in appearance, they are the same in their nature in being emptiness, so the emptiness of various objects are not separate categories. Their nature, like pure space, transcends being either separate or the same. So the nature of objective appearances is emptiness in its essence.

The Apprehender Has No Foundation and No Root

(i) The consciousnesses are self-clarity without foundation.

(There are eight consciousnesses.) The five sense-consciousnesses; arise as the five objects such as form, the mind-consciousness cognizes the general impression (of the appearing objects) and designates them as the objects, the defiled mind-consciousness is the sense of negating, accepting, hating and disliking (etc.), the mind-consciousness arises after the six consciousnesses (five senses and universal ground consciousness), ...and the consciousness of universal ground is self-clarity (Rang-gSal) and no thought and is unrelated to the objects: these are the eight or six consciousnesses. At the (very) time of (functioning of any of) those consciousnesses themselves, whatever consciousness it is, it is clear, vivid, and self-clarity with no foundations. Although they appear clear, there is no substantial entity. They are appearing without existence, like clear space and a breeze with no dust. Their clarity is present naturally like the sky without clouds. Their movements are like wind, not in distinguishable substances. From the (very) time of appearing, (the consciousnesses) as the apprehenders are self-clarity and unrecognizable. Watch them when they are arising and when they are abiding. Relax naturally and watch the manner of appearing of the apprehender. Thereby one will realize the apprehenders as having the nature of merely an appearance of clarity with no existence, emptiness with no bias, and self-clarity with no foundation. (ii) (The subject), if analyzed, is emptiness without root. By analyzing (whether) the self-clear, baseless mind (exists) in the external appearances, inner physical body, or intermediate movements, or if the entity of the self-dwelling mind itself (can be) recognized in (its) design, color, birth, cessation, and abiding, one will realize that its nature is non-existence, baseless and free from the extremes of either existence or non-existence. In this training the devotion to the Lama is the only important thing.

............................................

Mr. OR: Is this another one of those dzogchen books that promises the world only to say yOu neEd tRanSmisSiOn?

Mr./Ms. AS

Mr. OR: - If you are looking for transmission: Look up Lama Lena online. You can sign up for transmission, and then when there is a large enough group she will schedule one. Like said above, there is some debate whether this can be done over l…

Mr. OR: Mr./Ms. AS I'm not looking for transmission. It's religious hocus.

Soh Wei Yu

Mr. OR

Tinh Phan: realized I AM (the initial unripened rigpa) during Malcolm's direct introduction, had a doubtless recognition of rigpa, while attending Malcolm's Dzogchen teachings on my recommendation. Plenty of others have had similar experiences. So transmission, direct introduction, all these things are a crucial and essential part of the Dzogchen teachings and methodology, meant to induce awakening in the student. They are certainly not "religious hocus".

Soh Wei Yu: Also when I say Tinh Panh realized the I AM during introduction, this does not mean Malcolm only pointed out I AM in his teachings. He described all the phases including and up to anatta and emptiness as per the seven stages, in AtR lingo. But it is unlikely that someone totally new will get all 7 stages initially. As Kyle Dixon (who Malcolm told me at a dinner 2 years ago in San Francisco was his first student to totally understand his teachings) said, "I’ve never met anyone who gained any insight into emptiness at direct introduction. Plenty who recognized rigpa kechigma though. I don’t presume to know better than luminaries like Longchenpa and Khenpo Ngachung who state emptiness isn’t actually known until third vision and so on. You may presume otherwise and in that case we can agree to disagree." - Kyle Dixon https://www.reddit.com/.../how_exactly_does_one_realize.../ - http://www.awakeningtoreality.com/.../the-degrees-of...

Malcolm, 2015:

Acarya Malcolm, 2015:

"If one has received direct introduction, it is possible that you may understand something more clearly with such a text, but since direct introduction works with experiences, there is no way one can substitute this conceptual understanding for working with the transmission by means of working with various experiences until one discovers the basis, aka primordial state, for oneself and has stabilizes that knowledge [rig pa].

The reason? Direct introduction works with experiences to show what the foundation that lies below experiences, thoughts and concepts, i.e. the mind essence. This is extremely subtle and cannot be discovered merely through reading books, no matter how holy or profound. The error, quite frankly, is mistaking the fact that we are aware with that awareness being the mind essence itself. The awareness that we experience moment to moment is quite coarse, and is dominated by our "energy," our rlung or vāyu. The mind essence is much more subtle than any awareness we can experience.

Direct introduction, received from a master who knows what it is he is introducing, is indispensable — it sets up the foundation for our later discovery of our own state even if at the time the experience was too subtle for us to register it clearly. Anytime anyone participates in a direct introduction with a realized master in a whole hearted openly collaborative way [rather than passively expecting something to happen], they will in fact experience that moment of knowledge [rig pa] the master intends to introduce. Even if they do not "grasp" it at the time, they will have that experience to carry with them. In the beginning, our concepts are very strong, and our ability to see the mind essence is very weak. Therefore, our moment of rig pa we experience in the direct introduction is something like a small branch caught up in a torrent of a river of concepts — it is very easily swept away. But if we are patient, and we are diligent, we can again have that experience of the mind essence, upon which all future practice depends. Why? Because it was introduced and we had it once. There is nothing at all mystical about the process, it is straightforward and nonmagical.

The process of reading is too conceptual, the mind involved is too coarse, and therefore, it is impossible that we can experience the mind essence from reading a text. However, if we have experienced the mind essence reading books such as the Chos dbying mdzod and so on can reinforce our confidence which we can bring to our practice.

In order to experience the mind essence we have to cut through coarse concepts with various methods to re-experience the mind essence that we were exposed to during the introduction. This is why we have practices such as rushen and semszin, and supremely, Song of the Vajra."

Labels: Anatta, Books and Websites Recommendations, Dzogchen, Emptiness, Longchenpa

Facebook Discussion Thread

Soh Wei Yu: I would consider this article a 'must read' too for Dzogchen view: https://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2014/02/clarifications-on-dharmakaya-and-basis_16.html Clarifications on Dharmakaya and Basis by Loppön Namdrol/Malcolm

William Lim: The Anatta Bot strikes again! His weapon? Information overload

Soh Wei Yu: Short quotes from the e-mail to Almaas above Machiel van Dijk: John Tan: I like this book. Clarifies most of the dzogchen terms and clearly states that longchenpa rejects self-reflective awareness distinguishing dzogchen from yogacara. And in line with anatta insight. To longchenpa self-awareness "is simply a vivid auto-manifestation, a process lacking any reality whatsoever".... John Tan: According to the viewpoint of this system, he says, all phenomena are self-luminous in the state of great primordial knowing like light in the sky, having always been the very essence of this self-occuring primorial knowing which remains naturally free from causes and conditions.263... 9:31:32 PM] John Tan: Problem is most ppl that engaged in the so called highest teachings r having a dualistic and substantialist view. If we do not recognize the nature of appearances and kept emphasizing on primordial knowing, taking the non-progressive is imo a great disservice than help. John Tan: Just like when u r at I M, u already like to talk about spontaneous presence which I caution u don't talk about that until at least mature non-dual. Soh Wei Yu: Ic.. lol yeah John Tan: "It is possible, Klong chen pa suggests, to simply recognize this nondual self-occuring primordial knowing in its pristine nakedness (rjen pa sang nge ba) - both as it abides in its naked clarity and as it continuously manifests as myriad objects - without hypostatizing it.273 For so long as "one thinks of the abiding and manifesting of cognition as two different things and talks about [the experience of] 'settling in the nonconceptual essence' [but also of] 'preserving the expressive energy as being free in its arising', one's practice goes in two directions and one fails to understand the key point."... 1:24:08 PM] John Tan: The point Dzogchen wants to make is "primordial" -- has always been the case before beginning, always and already so. In order words in ATR context, anatta is a seal, always and already so thus differentiating it from effortful and progressive stage or even transformation taking result as the path, familiarizing one's basis rather than seeing it as the result of cause and effect.

Yin Ling: Soh you need to consider a professor post in Buddhism.

Mr. TJ: Did you really send this whole gargantuan thing composed of quotes from people he has never heard of, including unedited chat logs? If I recieved this, I would check the first verifiable claim, that KDL attained rainbow body, find that it was false, and summarily dismiss the rest.

Soh Wei Yu: Mr. TJ KDL did indeed finish the four visions as explained in https://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2013/03/rainbow-body-and-thusness-advice-to-me.html Rainbow Body and Thusness's Advice to Me

Mr. TJ: You're missing my point. If someone Googled KDL and looked at an official biography, it would not say he attained rainbow body because his body did not disappear at death. And that damages The credibility of what you're saying.

Soh Wei Yu: Mr. TJ thats true. Actually i wanted to include that link to the atr blog rainbow body article. Must have forgotten after all the copying pasting

William Arden: Mr. TJ If you google Kunzang Dechen Lingpa rainbow body, this is the first result: https://www.awakeningtoreality.com/2013/03/rainbow-body-and-thusness-advice-to-me.html I’m not sure that’s the objectionable part, the absolutely gigantic wall of quotes/chat logs is much more off-putting. Very good info though, I hope Almaas had the interest to read it! Rainbow Body and Thusness's Advice to Me

Soh Wei Yu: William Arden Yeah i have a bad habit of writing things too long I sent Daniel Ingram an Actual Freedom vs Buddhism analysis document that was like 100+ pages (at that time was probably less than 100) back in 2010

Soh Wei Yu: https://files.awakeningtoreality.com/Actual%20Freedom%20and%20Buddhism.docx

Mr. TJ: Yes, the rainbow body bit is a minor point, the real issue is the format, the compositional style that doesn't give consideration for a busy person's limited time and energy. As I said, what I would do is try verify an early claim to know if I should continue reading or ignore it, that's why I mentioned the rainbow body bit. Your Google results might be skewed by your search history. Also, there is the related point of the danger of seeming cult like: making claims that are very unusual by mainstream Buddhist standards and giving "Such-and-such person you've never heard of said so" as justification is an immediate crackpot indicator. A crackpot page can still be the number one google result. All this would be avoided by saying KDL attained fourth vision and leaving rainbow body out of it. But again, you are correct that the overall copypasta style is the primary issue.

Soh Wei Yu: Mr. TJ but the end of the fourth vision is equivalent to rainbow body I dont think this is a controversial point in dzogchen

Soh Wei Yu: Mr. TJ But yeah probably most outsiders dont understand rainbow body well

Soh Wei Yu: Mr. TJ rainbow body is also the end of mahamudra four yogas

Soh Wei Yu: From clarifying the natural state, description of the yoga of non meditation: “The qualities have arisen if your body appears as the wisdom rupakaya of the rainbow body and your mind as the luminous dharmakaya. Thus the world is experienced as all-encompassing purity. The qualities have not arisen if you retain even the slightest impure perception regarding body and mind, the world and beings.”

Mr. TJ: Actually, when explaining why Dzogchen is not substantialist, the most convincing thing for me is the idea of types or degrees of rigpa, and that one's experience of rigpa becomes less substantial as one progresses the visions. After all, Almaas isn't wrong to see Dzogchen as an awareness based path, as the initial recognition of rigpa is the mind's intrisnsic clarity. As for Malcolm, a handful of Westerners claim to have been asked to teach by famous Tibetan masters but still teach Dzogchen substantialiatically, the relatively unique thing about Malcolm is he did a 3 year LN retreat AND has a Sakya Acarya degree, so you know he is especially precise about the finer philosophical points.

Soh Wei Yu: Mr. TJ almaas failed to see the aspects of dzogchen beyond the initial rigpa But as initial rigpa its not wrong

Mr. TJ: Soh Wei Yu do you not think it is valuable to reserve a special term for the rather dramatic disappearance of the body at death? This, in addition to completing the visions, requires long retreat, chulen practice, not taking too many disciples etc. This is a special thing indeed.

Soh Wei Yu: Mr. TJ My view is like Malcolm stated: Malcolm replied: "Rainbow body where the body shrinks and disappears is a sign of incompletely finishing the fourth vision in this life." Also chnn has mentioned the different types of rainbow body

Soh Wei Yu: Mr. TJ To me whats more important is the total exhaustion of the two obscurations, which is also what buddhahood/rainbow body attainment is about. It is also known as exhaustion of phenomena Otherwise disappearance of body and control of elements as an outer sign is just a mundane siddhi as malcolm explained

Soh Wei Yu: Mahamudra, similar to dzogchen in describing the final phase, states “tomed to. You have perfected the strength of Nonmeditation if the subtlest dualistic perception has dissolved and you have brought all phenomena to the state of exhaustion, so you are always indivisible from original wakefulness. You have not perfected its strength if you experience even the slightest dualistic perception and you have not exhausted the phenomena of knowable objects.”

Soh Wei Yu: - clarifying the natural state

Soh Wei Yu: But it is true that it takes a long time to finish four visions. Kdl took many years (i think 7?) of retreat just to get to third vision and i think many more years to finish all the visions.

Soh Wei Yu: Full buddhahood / rainbow body is a relatively rare attainment.

Mr. TJ: There appears to be a complete disconnect in our communication.

Soh Wei Yu: shared a link. Rainbow body From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rainbow_body In Dzogchen, rainbow body ( Tibetan: འཇའ་ལུས་, Wylie: 'ja' lus, Jalü or Jalus ) is a level of realization. This may or may not be accompanied by the 'rainbow body phenomenon'. The rainbow body phenomenon is a topic which has been treated fairly seriously in Tibet for centuries past and into the modern era. Other Vajrayana teachings also mention rainbow body phenomena. Contents 1 Rigpa 2 Eyewitness account 3 Reported accomplishments 4 Notes 5 References 6 Further reading 7 External links Rigpa Main article: Rigpa Tibetan letter "A" inside a thigle. The "A", which corresponds to the sound ‘ahh’, [1] represents kadag while the thigle represents lhun grub. The rainbow body phenomenon is a third person perspective of someone else attaining complete knowledge ( Tibetan: རིག་པ, Wylie: rigpa ). Knowledge is the absence of delusion regarding the display of the basis. Rigpa has three wisdoms, which are kadag, lhun grub and thugs rje. Kadag deals with trekchö. [2] The lhun grub aspect has to do with esoteric practices, such as (but not limited to) tögal, that self-liberate the human body into a Sambhogakāya (rainbow body phenomenon). [2] [3] The symbol of Dzogchen is a Tibetan "A" wrapped in a thigle. The "A" represents kadag while the thigle represents lhun grub. The third wisdom, thugs rje (compassion), is the inseparability of the previous two wisdoms. In Dzogchen, a fundamental point of practice is to distinguish rigpa from sems (mind). [4] The ultimate fruition of the tögal practices is a body of pure light and the dissolution of the physical body at death, this is called a rainbow body ( Wylie 'ja' lus, pronounced ja lü.) [5] If the four visions of tögal are not completed before death, then during death, from the point of view of an external observer, the dying person starts to shrink until he or she disappears. Usually fingernails, toenails and hair are left behind [6] (see e.g. Togden Ugyen Tendzin, Ayu Khandro, Changchub Dorje). The attainment of the rainbow body is typically accompanied by the appearance of lights and rainbows. [5] Exceptional practitioners are held to realize a higher type of rainbow body without dying. Having completed the four visions before death, the individual focuses on the lights that surround the fingers. His or her physical body self-liberates into a non-material body of light (a Sambhogakāya ) with the ability to exist and abide wherever and whenever as pointed by one's compassion. [7] Eyewitness account Shardza Tashi Gyaltsen's Heart Drops of Dharmakaya, a Kunzang Nyingtik Dzogchen meditation manual commentated on by Lopon Tenzin Namdak, contains an eyewitness account of his main students' bodies shrinking and rainbows appearing in the sky at death. [8] Reported accomplishments Shardza Tashi Gyaltsen (1935) [8] Sodnam Namgyal (1952) [9] Ayu Khandro (1953) [10] Togden Ugyen Tendzin (1962) [11] Khenpo A-chos (1998) [12]