dorjeshugden.com
About Dorje Shugden => General Discussion => Topic started by: Contentment on December 20, 2007, 10:50:28 AM
-
Hi I was wondering if someone could advise me. I feel a very strong link to Dorje Shugden. However I am interested in spending some time in other schools of Buddhism. I have a particular interested in Nyingma. Would this be detrimental to my practice or to any future practice I wish to undertake with Dorje Shugden?
-
Contentment,
I did my kanso many many years with a practitionner of nyingma. This practitionner had many gurus in all lineages.
The main thing is that if you take a commitment to Dorje Shugden, it's very very real and potent. Also, you have to check what your nyingma lamas are going to say about it. If you start the practice and take a commitment to Dorje Shugden, then you cannot stop the practice just like that. Outside of Gelugpa tradition (and even inside nowadays), many people are going to slander your practice and try to convince you the stop it. What are you going to do about that?
If you are going to start a Dorje Shugden practice then you need to have a strong guru devotion with at leat one Gelug lama. Otherwise, you will not be able to take a proper commitment to Dorje Shugden, and it's going to be very difficult to keep it up when faced with criticism. Find a good lama first!
In any case, do a lot of Dorje Shugden practice, he's goint ot place you where you belong, wherever that is, whatever your path is.
-
Sorry for the apelling mistakes, I did'nt have my coffee yet!
-
Spelling mistakes, that is!
-
Constentment,
The last section of myt post seems to contradict what I wrote in the beginning, no?
What I meant to say is:
"In any case, keep your faith in Dorje Shugden whether you have commitments to Him or not. If you make requests to Him, He will help you according to your needs and your path, whatever that is."
Also,
It's OK for beginners like us to be a little confused about traditions and mixing it up. But at a certain point, you need to have your two feet in the same boat, whichever one you choose. Otherwise, blessings and realisations will be painfully slow to acquire. Finally, if you start teaching Dharma, Dorje Shugden will not be happy if you mix Dzogchen with you Gelug Mahamudra practice and teach that path to others. That will not bring good fruits.
-
Contentment, that is!
Sorry for the mistake!
It seems I am suffering from dyslexia!
No, in fact I have a cold, we've had a horrible early winter here in Canada. 150 cm of snow here just in the last month alone. We're completely burried.
-
Alexis,
;D :D ;D :D :)
Thank you for this display, it was fun.
But seriously, thank you for your kind and accurate answers about this matter.
-
Seriously, I don't advice you practise Dorje Shugden along with Nyima Practise. Besides, I was told that our Lineage master Je TsongKha pa has filtered on those teachings that cannot be used. Those "buried teausres" teachings from Nyima cannot be used at all and has no history of lineage passed down all the way from Lord Buddha Shakyamuni. Besides that, the view of emptiness isn't complete and in order to gain enlightment to Buddhahood, we must use the view of Lord Nagajurna and Lord Chandrakriti, as per advice from Lord Manjushri to Lord Tsong Kha Pa. I still advice that it is the best to choose Gelug teachings as the flawless teachings is still preserve here, as prohised, the pure teaching will still remain in Gelug for another 400 years. You can only choose either one of the traditions, not both at the same time. Besides, if you still insist on practsing Dorje Shugden with Nyima practise, I believe Lord Dorje Shugden won't be very happy, as many lamas has been forewarn or punished if still insist.
-
Lightning,
We should be carefull with our speech. There are so many incredible stories of harmony between Gelug, Nyingma and other schools out there such as this one from Tomo Geshe Rimpoche's bio on this website:
'Tromo was changed completely by Domo Geshe Rinpoche’s presence. The Bönpos at Pemukang sent yearly New Year offerings to him at Dungkar Gonpa, as did the Nyingmapas from nearby Kyiruntsel, where a room was kept ready in the monastery for Domo Geshe Rinpoche. Eventually, Rinpoche instituted several practices that brought the people of Tromo together in greater harmony. One of these was a yearly joint reading of twelve collected works (sung bum) at Kampu Dzong in Upper Tromo by the different religious traditions. Another practice was a special Guru Rinpoche (Padma Sambhava) ritual. Dungkar Gonpa had acquired an especially holy Guru Rinpoche statue, said to have been blessed by Padma Sambhava himself. When the owner was on his way to India with the statue, it spoke when passing Dungkar Gonpa. “Take me to where that sound is coming from,” it said, as the long trumpets sounded from the monastery on the hill. The man did, and Geshe Rinpoche gave him what he needed. Not much later, it is said, Domo Geshe Rinpoche found a Guru “fulfillment of wishes” (thug drup) text near Dawa Trag, a rock not far from Dungkar Gonpa bearing a spontaneous manifestation (rang jön) of a moon. Shortly thereafter, someone came with many copies of the same text for sale. Geshe Rinpoche bought all of them and, once a year, the Dungkar Gonpa monks performed the ritual.'
Tomo Geshe Rimpoche is a very special and unique Gelug lama and neither the Bonpos nor the nyingmas of Tromo Valley had any problems with Dorje Shugden. Dorje Shugden helped in creating harmony in Tromo valley. It is true that we should not mix in the end. But in the beginning, one can and should investigate all four schools. I think this is what Contentment (got it right this time!) is trying to do and Dorje Shugden can help him find his path even even if it is in Nyingma.
Also, it is true that Dorje Shugden can sometimes punish high gelug lamas who abandon the teachings or mix their practice with other stuff. But this is because they are acting contrary to their previous commitments and mind generation and are in a position of influence over the teachings and beings. We ants should have no fear because we are not included in this category.
Also, since Dorje Shugden is a Buddha, he helps and protects all sentient beings. This has been said and written many times. That is, he will help and guide anyone requesting Him irrespective of race, religion, color of hair, sexual orientation, etc. Even if Christians, Muslims, Jews or believers of doomsday cult rely on Him, they will definitely receive benefits in this life and others. Remember, He is the futur last Buddha of this Aeon.
Finally, the remaining 400 years of Gelug culminate with the Shambala war. This 400 years can be extended by prayers and dedication. In the same manner as tsongkhapa's lifespan was increased thru special prayers.
-
Thanks alot for ur advice, I will try to be more tactfully in my speech :P Sorry if i was rude or harsh in anyway, but my intentions meant well and neither i have anything against any traditions. But the truth is that Gelug has the most complete and flawless teaching to the Buddhahood, because the most complete middle view of emptiness and wisdom by Lord Nagajurna and Lord Chandrakriti and also the consolidation and filterations of teachings by Lord Je Tsong Kha Pa. Lord Dorje Shugden is the special protector who is assigned to protect these flawless teachings left by Lord Tsong Kha Pa. While we are understudying Gelug tradition, it is seriously not adviceable to mix with other traditions. The best thing we can do is to seek our Gurus' advice and follow them with faith.
I must admit that if sincerely rely on Dorje Shugden regardless of race, religion or sex. He will come to our aid... But my concern to All is that be careful of mixing in tradition, as i have bad experience before. :( My instintict tells me that he may not be happy, if someone is already studying Gelug, would to suddenly mix with Nyimpma teachings. I am not sure If the other way round is alright.
BTW As predicted by Enlightened beings, it will happen and neither extenison nor reduction will happen as it is, cos there is no flaws in their predictions and unless we are better than them. We can make supplications to hope that the teaching will continue to flourish and in the end we will meet qualified spiritual guides every lives. We also can make supplications for our Gurus to live longer.
Once while I am travelling with my Guru and another Vajra Brother on a car. He asked our Guru if there are so many Chisrtian believers can we convert over the Chirstians and similarly there are so many believers in the Mahayana, we could convert them over? But our Guru spoke to him in to jest are you better than Lord Shakyamuni? As predicted by Him, sentinents beings are hard to tame during this degenerate age. My Brother was dumbfolded but understood. And although my Guru with untiring with endless efforts and compassion giving Dharma teachings and empowerments all over the world. As if liken a enlightened fisherman, casting his big and wide net of Dharma and only those fated ones who have fortunate will eventually meet Him and those without may not :'(
-
Despite our best efforts, it seems we still managed to spook off Contentment.
Sorry man!
-
Sorry I haven't been here to thank you personally for your responses. I moved in with my girlfriend this week so life has been busy.
I have made such speedy progress lately. My meditation experience has entered a new level. I am currently slowing my whole practice down. Things I used to run at I am now taking much more cautiously.
My view at the moment is that if my karmic link with Dorje Shugden is as strong as I feel then that part of my mind that connects with Shugden is aware of my motivation. If my motivation is pure and still somewhat naive I believe Dorje as an enlightened being will understand my possible ignorance and will correct me with compassion.
I have asked for Dorje's help on several occasions I have not been let down. The results have been resounding and I feel undeniable. I think it is the power of these experiences that make me so weary where anything with my Shugden practice is concerned. I fully understand this is not something to play with or pick up and drop fancifully. I appreciate the two sided responses I have received here.
Since returning from my retreat in Bodh Gaya every single person there and since coming home which I have talked to have said I need to start looking for a guru. Now complete strangers have said the same thing. I cannot ignore this advice so I shall step up my prayers for a spiritual guide. Thanks again for your advice.
-
:D Glad that u have the aid of Lord Dorje Shugden and took the response positively. I have also experienced the power of His response at times too. Sincerely pray towards Dorje Shugden, so that you can meet a very qualified Vajra Guru. Believe that your sincere request would be answered swiftly. It is though the help of the Dharmapala and other protectors who will lead us to the spiritual guides who have strong karmic link to us. I would still strongly reccomend you to study Gelug teachings. Hopefully, the rest of us may provide some info on who Contentment should look for.
-
Dear friends,
thank you very much for your contributions on this super important subject. Especially taken i am with Alexis' thoughtful explanations on the various levels of commitment and how Dharmapala can help us within each of these. I feel, especially for new and future friends, it is really essential to understand and gain faith first that in the enlightened mind there can be not even the concept of sectarianism or prejudice. From this viewpoint, any enlightened Dharma guardian's compassionate actions of protecting (against what would cause us and others harm) and nurturing (what benefits all) can be much more easily understood. I definitely believe that if Dharmapala's all-seeing wisdom eye perceives that someone has an auspicious deep connection with any of the other schools he will guide them there. By the way, don't think that only Gelukpas propitiate Dorje Shugden, or believe in fairy tales he and Guru Rinpoche are antagonistic etc. The biographies of Tromo Geshe Rinpoche, Kyabje Trijang Dorje Chang etc really say it all - how one can be totally devoted to one's own lineage, while being friends with and supportive of all others. May we emulate their holy example always!
What Alexis describes about looking here and there before committing is the same as with taking refuge and entering a Guru-disciple relationship. We can check as long as we want; once we have been so fortunate as to connect with an authentic teacher we are smart to focus on his direct advice which is what makes this relationship so precious, along with linking up with the blessing transmission of her or his entire lineage. The effect -the potential of attainments gained -is simply a million times stronger than if we keep following our deluded perceptions of greener grass everywhere except where we are. And if we do proceed on this path and promise to commit to it and serve it, we'll definitely get very fierce reprimands from our Lama if we get distracted, lose focus and flirt with 'easier' (until we commit...)paths who are all hallucinated by our self-grasping mind anyway. Because our Lama is jealous or out to punish us? Certainly not! Seeing our potential to benefit through our commitment and foreseeing the negative consequences of reverting to samsaric modes, losing focus etc, they will try with all their heart and might to protect us from... ourselves.
The teachings benefit beings according to their dispositions; it is not a matter of declaring that prasangika madhyamaka is the most sublime view, and commanding everyone to follow it. Great holders of this view have taught lesser views all their lives because these accorded with their students capability of understanding. By nurturing this, they prepared them to progress to a higher level eventually. Jowo Atisha was often called the 'refuge Lama'; he didn't mind at all... Kyabje Pabongkha Rinpoche was often called 'Lamrim Lama' by people who thought this was all he could teach... well, the joke's on them! Great Dzogchen and Mahamudra masters teach about karma and compassion all their lives, and never even mention these big words we like to throw around so casually. In times such as we live in, if we can be mindful of karma and unshakable in Guru devotion while aspiring to the highest, we blessed indeed.
Finally, if one feels strong devotion to Dorje Shugden without 'rational' explanation and without being with a teacher, this does seem a strong indication that one has an auspicious karmic connection with Manjushri Je Tsongkhapa's tradition, and it would be definitely worth praying for it to manifest outwardly. May you be blessed by meeting your Lama soon, Contentment, and may you see, hear and think of only a perfect Buddha when you do.
yours, beggar
-
As properciesd by Buddha Shakamuni, 400 years after He passed
away. A monk called Bikkshu Palden would come to a town named Bendra
in Southern India. He is known as Nagarjuna and would give perfect
explanation of correct view free from the extremes of existence and
non-existence. Nagarjuna woud cause the perfect doctrine to flourish
throughout the world. As predicted,in Six Collection of Reasonings,
Nagarjuna clearly explains the correct view of emptiness revealing
all the meaning of the topics set fourth in the twelve volumes of
the perfcion of Wisdom Sutra in 100,000 verses. Among these six
treatises it is mainly in the Fundamenal Wisdom of the Middle Way
that Nagarjuna explains all stages of the profound path using many
ways of reasonings . Later, Nagarjuna's disciple Chandrakriti
composed a commentary to this text entiled Guide to the Middle Way.
When Aisha was teaching in the Tibet, he gave this advice for
disciples of the future:
Chandrakriti is the disciple of Nagarjuna. There is Buddhahood
in this lineage. Apart from this lineage, there is no Buddhahood.
His meaning is that it is impossible to atain Englightenment by
following a view that contraidicts the system of Nagarjuna and
Chandrakriti.
By the time of Je TsongKhaPa, there were different
interpretation of many views of emptiness were taught in Tibet. Je
TsongKhaPa asked Manjushri, "Whose works should I rely upon to gain
a perfect understanding of Buddha's ultimate view?" Manjushri
replied that he should rely principally upon the works of the
glorious Chandrakriti. Chandrakriti, he said, was a high Bodhisattva
who came from pureland to teach the correct view of emptiness as
explained by Nagarjuna.
In the Guide to the Middle Way, Chandrakriti was that without
reailzing emptiness as explained by Nagarjuna, there is no way of
attaining liberation. If we hold a contridatory view, we do not have
the practice of the two truths and thus no way of attaining
liberation. Therefore if we have wisdom but forsake views of
Nagarjuna and Chandrkriti for another view, we are like someone who
walks off the high cliff with eyes wide open!
-
Hi guys, it has been nice exchanging views with you guys. Maybe my main intentions may be mislead people thinking that I seem to command people to follow prasangika madhyamaka view. My main intention is to reccomend the best dish to everyone. Somehow, I have came cross on HHDL book mentioning that there are many dishes including noodles, rice, beef etc. Everyone have different taste and will go different dishes that suits them at the end of the day. Buddha also taught both Hinayana and Mahayana teachings and at the end of the day people will choose the views that are suitable to their preference and level of understanding.
If a mother who borne a son and the son grows up and have high scool education and of course would encourage him to carry on with education in university. And also in order to self-generate tuteriaty deity, one needs to have correct and clear understanding of emptiness, if not generation of tuteriaty deity is not possible. Manjushri also told Je TsongKhaPa that here are four conditions neccesary for realising emptiness:
1) Relinace upon a qualified and experienced Spiritual Guide who can explain emptiness clearly.
2) Purification of negativity
3) Accunulation of merit
4) Frequent meditation on emptiness
-
All four schools of tibetan buddhism accept Madhyamaka-Prasangika view as supreme. Madhyamaka-Prasangika is not a gelug thing, its accepted everywhere. Just like your Visa card!
-
Dear Lightning,
this is all well known and i happily agree - my point was 'how do you get there'? Like you quote - guru devotion, purification, tons and tons of merit and meditation. How many people have you met who have ATTAINED this view? Most people completely shut off even at the mention of the word Emptiness; most people who don't have a tiny tiny partial understanding of it (if it were easy, why would Je Tsongkhapa's teaching be so special?). So in the meantime, refuge, impermanence, cause and effect etc etc apply very much. True teachers are very compassionate - most people they meet will not even get a glimpse of Madhyamaka in this life, so they give them 'lesser' meritorious practices that will point them in the right direction. Believe me, most lamas would LOVE to speak of subjects entirely different than what comes out of their mouths, but it's not about what they know or like, but what benefits their students.
yours, beggar
-
Hi I was wondering if someone could advise me. I feel a very strong link to Dorje Shugden. However I am interested in spending some time in other schools of Buddhism. I have a particular interested in Nyingma. Would this be detrimental to my practice or to any future practice I wish to undertake with Dorje Shugden?
Well, I can't answer your question in any "theological/theoretical" way, but I can tell you about my personal experience, and I think we might be able to generalize a little from that.
I practice according to the teachings of Je Tsongkhapa. I'm also a follower of Je Pabongkhapa, and therefore am a DS practitioner. I have received the blessing empowerment of DS from GKG. DS has been part of my general practice for years. Apart from that tradition, I have also received teachings and empowerments from one Nyingma tradition (which is a "heavy Dzogchen-variant") and from Karma-Kagyu tradition. And I also relish and partake on Theravada teachings, pujas, rituals, and so forth, on a regular basis. In addition, I'm a pure-land "practitioner", relying on the Vow of Amitabha, on a deeply heart-felt level. I have practised in this ecumenical way all my buddhist life.
But still, I'm very clear on what is my main practice (Lamrim), so all the different practices and approaches from the different traditions fall naturally into that one scheme. No confusion for me. And I think that just that is the whole point of "not mixing"; namely, "not being confused about the different approaches and presentations". In short, all Dharma I receive from whatever tradition or system, is therefore, just the same - being either the trunk or the branches of Lamrim. I have no confusion about my Root (Guru), I know what is the Main Trunk of Dharma (Lamrim), and all the rest, well, they are simply the branches, supports, leaves and flowers of my slowly growing bodhi-tree. Easy and clear.
So, I feel that if one knows what one practices, if one has a good command of any one system, then there is no longer any confusion when approaching different practices, presentations or systemizations of Dharma.
So in my view, this is what happens at the practical level when people find Dharma: (1) At the beginning, one needs to "shop around", trying to find "the right one". (This is like dating. That dating should be of course honest, intending towards the possible commitment to "the one".) (2) After finding that, one commits to the "one system". At this point, one can actually be very confused because of the apparent differences between the Dharma-traditions and -lineages. At this point one should generally "not mix". Really. I know this because I have seen it happen too often. If one does not have the leisure and time, or the intellectual capacity, or the inclination to stydy hard, and therefore cannot think things through and through, one perhaps should avoid other presentations of Dharma for a time being, and just stick with that one, whatever it is. (During the honey moon, one should concentrate on one's spouse and not pay too much attention towards others of that same sex. :D) (3) But after one gets a good general view of that one chosen system of presentation, things change dramatically. At this point one can "see the forest from the trees", and therefore one cannot be confused anymore by all the different "dharma trees" one meets, no matter how exotic or different they are. At this point, "anything goes".
If you read the classical topic called The Benefits of Lamrim, you can see that this works just so! (Of course this should work with other Dharma-presentations as well, so "the one" does not have to be Lamrim.)
So, in summary, I personally have not felt any need to "avoid" anything. I see by my experience that I can practice anything and not be confused in any way whatsoever. :D (Boast boast...) But still, not everybody has the same freedom and inclination as I do. So draw your own conclusions about what fits you! For me, DS and Dzogchen work well together, for it is the Lamrim anyway that "rules them all"! ;D My preciousss...
Furthermore, I know some wonderful and pure Nyingmapas, who have taken DS empowerment, so I guess I'm not alone in my approach. :D :D :D
-
Dear Zhalmed Pawo,
I'm curious as to how you can combine and practice doctrinal opposites?
Dzogchen rejects karma and causality (dependent origination) which is the foundation of the entire path of sutra and tantra. It labels sutra and tantra as not being the final intention of the buddha (that being Dzogchen) and rejects boddhisasttva levels (bhumis).
So how can you practice a path that rejects the validity of the enlightenent experience of, says, Lama Tsongkhapa, who said that, appart from union of the two truth (mahamudra), there is no attainment of buddhahood?
How can you, in the morning, ask for blessings of Shakyamuni buddha and the Ganden lineage, and in the evening, engage in a practice that takes you miles away from the path expounded by them?
In the end, how can you ever arrive at a place where you will engage in a practice that will contradict every single syllable that ever came out of the buddha mouth? Isn't it a bit risky?
Sincerly,
Alexis
-
Dear Alexis,
In my naive understanding, I pretty much equate Nyingma practice with Dzogchen. In a previous reply, you said that all four schools accept the Madhyamika-Prasangika as supreme, but then later said that this is rejected in their Dzogchen practice. Can you please clarify?
With metta, ;D
MJ
-
Dear Empty Mountains,
I guess this is the heart of the matter. I might be mistaken in my views so I invite anyone including Zhalmed Pawo to correct me if I'm wrong.
The great nyingma tradition takes refuge in the Buddha, Dharma and Sangha. They accept the Buddhist cannon with the tripitaka (Vinaya, Sutra & Abhidharma). Within the Abhidharma, they accept the madhyamaka-Prasangika view as supreme. This is what I should have made more clear in my previous post, that madhymaka is supreme 'only within the context of sutra and tantra'.
Dzogchen, however, places itself above sutra and tantra. Dzogchen states that it does not belong to any particuliar tradition (like mahamudra). It is mostly practiced in Nyingma, but has adherants in all schools of Tibetan Buddhism. So you cannot, and should not, automatically link dzogchen with nyingma, I think.
Also, since nyingma is a buddhist tradition that seeks buddhahood, it should not be critizised as a tradition. Dzogchen, however, is a philosophy, an idea, and as such can be questionned, debated and critizised in the same manner as mahamudra. The most well know of such debates is the famous Samye debate held in 780 AD between proponents of spontaneous (dzogchen) approach and progressive (mahamudra) approach. The proponent of the spontaneous approach, Hashang Mahayana, lost the debate to Kamashila and got cast out of Tibet by the King Trisong Detsen along with his doctrine and his adherants. Dzogchen, somehow, krept back into Tibet.
The problem with dzogchen is that it not only places itself above sutra and tantra, but invalidates the foundations of both systems. I will give you some examples of this citing from Namkhai Norbu's Dzogchen (1996):
'Garab Dorje's teaching, said to be "beyond the karmic law of cause and effect", turned the traditionalist views of his first disciples, who were famous buddhist pandits, completely upside down.' p.14
- No comment on this one, a whole book could be written on this single sentence alone. However, I would like to know what were the names of these pandits and I would like to know how you can achieve any result (such as dzogchen) without creating its cause (such as listenning and putting it into practice).
'All the philosophical theories that exist have been created by mistaken dualistic minds of human beings. In the realm of philosophy (abhidharma), that which today is considered true, may tomorrow be proven false. No one can guarantee a philosophy's validity'. p.30
- So basically, it is useless to follow the words of the Buddha and Nagarjuna because we cannot be sure of their validity. Why then, should we ever follow Garab Dorje's views?
'But in Dzogchen, right from the beginning the concept of the two truths does not exist, and the non-dual state is introduced as the foundation of both the way of seeing and practicing' p.93
-If the two truths does not exist, then it is useless to practice either Lam Rim in particuliar or Mahayana in general. Also, Tsongkhapa and Chadrakirti clearly stated that ouside of the two truths there is no view leading to liberation.
Also:
'If we take a vow, this means that we do not have the capacity to govern ourselves'. p.111
-What about this one? I guess this one is my favorite! It cast a whole new light on Buddhism in general (since Sila is the foundation of the buddhist path) and the whole lineage lamas of the merit field in particuliar, doesn't it?
In fact I could go on and on like this, citing endlessly from dzogchen material. It's just packed with contradictions and baseless affirmations which contradict no only what the great masters of the past have said and written but the very words of the Buddha himself. The whole point of the Lam Rim is to avoid such pitfalls of nothingness and everything Nagarjuna, Chadrakirti and Tsongkhapa have ever written completely contradicts this supposed 'Great Perfection' (dzogchen). These great master have all warned us against such mistaken views and path. I just cannot understant how anyone can successfully make 'dzogchen' an integral part of their 'Lam Rim practice' since these are completely opposing views. One completely invalidates the other and vice versa. One draws on the word of the Buddha, the other one invalidates completely the words of the Buddha!
So in the end, I will not critizise a fellow buddhist traditions that take refuge in the Three Jewels. But I think it's important to debate doctrines and views. This was the tradition of our lineage lamas, no? Tsongkhapa had nyingma gurus but, in the end, without loosing faith or respect in them, he wrote against nothingness, in favor of vows, on dependant arising, the two truths, etc.
I think this is where the distinction lies between nyingma and dzogchen.
Hopes this clarifies my contradictory posts a bit.
Alexis
-
Thank you, Alexis. It did clarify a lot for me. I was wondering though, from the perspective of the middle way, which extreme does Dzogchen fall into? In his article Letting Daylight into Magic: the Life and Times of Dorje Shugden, Stephen Batchelor explains:
The Nyingma teaching of Dzogchen regards awareness (Tib. rig pa) as the innate self-cognizant foundation of both samsara and nirvana. Rig pa is the intrinsic, uncontrived nature of mind, which a Dzogchen master is capable of directly pointing out to his students. For the Nyingmapa, Dzogchen represents the very apogee of what the Buddha taught, whereas Tsongkhapa's view of emptiness as just a negation of inherent existence, implying no transcendent reality, verges on nihilism.
For the Gelugpas, Dzogchen succumbs to the opposite extreme: that of delusively clinging to something permanent and self-existent as the basis of reality. They see Dzogchen as a return to the Hindu ideas that Buddhists resisted in India, and a residue of the Ch'an (Zen) doctrine of Hva-shang Mahayana, proscribed at the time of the early kings...
For the followers of Shugden this is not an obscure metaphysical disagreement, but a life-and-death struggle for truth in which the destiny of all sentient beings is at stake. The bodhisattva vow, taken by every Tibetan Buddhist, is a commitment to lead all beings to the end of anguish and the realization of Buddhahood. Following Tsongkhapa, the Gelugpas maintain that the only way to achieve this is to understand nonconceptually that nothing whatsoever inherently exists. Any residue, however subtle, of an attachment to inherent existence works against the bodhisattva's aim and perpetuates the very anguish he or she seeks to dispel.
From the above quote, it seems that Dzogchen does not accept ultimate truth without exception like Madhyamika-Prasangika does; and from your last post, it seems that neither does it accept conventional truths such as karma and dependent relationship. If, like you said, it does not accept either of the two truths, then it is still left with both extremes. Holding 'both extremes' at the same time is hardly the middle way.
-
Hmmm... this could escalate into a huge topic (which I hope it doesn't), but nevertheless, here are my thoughts about this.
Firstly, to the question that "how can one practice both basic Sutra and Dzogchen?", the answer is: "The same way one can burn a candle from both ends - one just needs a good grip and a thick skin!" ;D This is not any different from, say, asking "how can one practice both Hinayana and Anuttarayogatantra?" One simply can, if one can. If one cannot, then one cannot.
Dzogchen can be expresed as indentical to the highest of the Nine Yanas of Nyingma-classification. In this sense it corresponds neatly to Vajrayana Mahamudra of Gelukpa-classification. So no problem there.
If on the other hand, Dzogchen is expressed as a system outside and above of Sutra and Tantra, then it can be difficult to understand. Thats why it is not usually expressed that way. I think nowadays only Namkhai Norbu teaches in that manner. But still, it does not negate other teachings, it is just harder to swallow.
In the Root Text of Vajrayana Mahamudra of Ganden Oral Lineage Panchen Lama says expressedly, that Mahamudra, Dzogchen, Madhyamika, etc have the same intent. So no problem. (This is the same Panchen who took Lama Chopa out of Kadam Emanation Scripture, so I think we can rely on his view. He if anyone should know.)
A Buddha is free of karma, and free of dualistic appearances. To a Buddha, the two truths are "not-two". Je Tsongkhapa explains this wery well in his writings. He of course uses gradual method in the explanation of practice: first emptiness, then conventional truths, then their non-duality. Dzogchen, on the other hand, goes straight to the point, without any steps (and hence, it might appear to be "too outrageous"). And just as Nagarjuna said: "There is not a slightest difference between samsara and nirvana". So while the expressions and methods of these different traditions might be different, the intention remains just the same.
So, in short, I don't see any problem here. Same view, different methods.
(The only "problem" with Dzogchen is that if the practitioner is not on the level of continuing in rigpa, then the whole thing collapses. Instead of being a Buddha, the practitioner is just a sentient being, and in the worst case scenario is deluded enough to think that he/she is a Buddha. The result could be hell. Of course, the same can be said of all Tantra. Thats why Dzogchen employs also preparatory methods that take the practitioner to that level of realization. So in a practical sense, Dzogchen too is a gradual path.)
-
The Nyingma teaching of Dzogchen regards awareness (Tib. rig pa) as the innate self-cognizant foundation of both samsara and nirvana. Rig pa is the intrinsic, uncontrived nature of mind, which a Dzogchen master is capable of directly pointing out to his students. For the Nyingmapa, Dzogchen represents the very apogee of what the Buddha taught, whereas Tsongkhapa's view of emptiness as just a negation of inherent existence, implying no transcendent reality, verges on nihilism.
For the Gelugpas, Dzogchen succumbs to the opposite extreme: that of delusively clinging to something permanent and self-existent as the basis of reality. They see Dzogchen as a return to the Hindu ideas that Buddhists resisted in India, and a residue of the Ch'an (Zen) doctrine of Hva-shang Mahayana, proscribed at the time of the early kings...
For the followers of Shugden this is not an obscure metaphysical disagreement, but a life-and-death struggle for truth in which the destiny of all sentient beings is at stake. The bodhisattva vow, taken by every Tibetan Buddhist, is a commitment to lead all beings to the end of anguish and the realization of Buddhahood. Following Tsongkhapa, the Gelugpas maintain that the only way to achieve this is to understand nonconceptually that nothing whatsoever inherently exists. Any residue, however subtle, of an attachment to inherent existence works against the bodhisattva's aim and perpetuates the very anguish he or she seeks to dispel.
On all this, I must disagree. That is pure nonsense and inflammatory propaganda. Divisive speech, in fact.
According to Je Tsongkhapa, realizing emptiness does not bring enlightenment. It brings maximally only the liberation from samsara, or in other words the status of an Arhat, or a Foe Destroyer. To become a completely enlightened Buddha, one needs to realize the union of the two truths. Concerning that, there is no difference between the view of Je Tsongkhapa and the dzogchen-view. Or as GKG said it when explaining Mahamudra: "Know that everything is the nature of mind, and mind is empty of inherent existence." One could as well "regard the awareness as the innate self-cognizant foundation of both samsara and nirvana." Difference of language does not equal difference of view.
-
Zhalmed Pawo,
I congratulate you for courageously defending you point (no arrogance intended here).
It is true that this topic could escalate uncontrollably so I, for my part, will simply follow the advice of the great Ensapa. Quoting his words from his namtar in Enligthnend Beings (Willis 1995):
'Moreover, anyone who claims to study the Dharma without thoroughly investigating all the traditions of the Mahayana, and who likes to bicker over the slightest points of language, saying " you say this, but I say this", completely misses te point.' p.62
Keeping his heart instructions to mind I say: if this practice (dzogchen) is beneficial for you, then that's good indeed.
This topic reminds me of a story of the Buddha when a group of brahmins travelled to meet him and ask him what he thought of the Vedic Truth (Veda as the only truth). The Buddha replied with a question (as usual). He asked the brahmins if there was anyone they knew up to seven generations who could see clearly and say 'this alone is the Truth, and everything else is false' ?. The brahmins relplied honestly and said 'no'. Then the Buddha said that the brahmins were like a line of blind men, each holding to the preceding one, no one really seeing. The Buddha then gave them advice, he said: 'It is not proper for a wise man who maintains the truth to come to the conclusion: "this alone is the Truth, and everything else is false".' The Buddha went on and said: 'A man has faith. If he says "this is my faith", so far he maintains the truth. But by that he cannot proceed to the absolute conclusion:"This alone is the Truth, and everything else is false".'...'To be attached to one thing (to a certain view) and to look down upon other things (views) as inferior: this, the wise man call a fetter'.
Taken from Walpola Rahula's What the Buddha Taught, Gordon Fraser, 1959. p.10
-
Dear Alexis,
Ooh, I love that quote from What the Buddha Taught! :D
Are we talking about the same thing when, according to Chandrakirti's tradition, there is a rejection of self-cognizers and when the Dzogchen faith posits an innate self-cognizant awareness? And also, I've always wondered: Does this discussion have anything to do with the doctrinal differences the Kagyu Lama quoted below is mentioning?
However, there is still a problem here because not all the different schools of Buddhism agree upon which teachings are interpretive and which teachings are definitive. There is some kind of disagreement in Tibetan Buddhism, for example. The Kagyu and Nyingma traditions of Tibetan Buddhism understand the tathagatagarbha—which were presented in the third turning of the Wheel of Dharma—as the ultimate meaning. However, the Gelugpas would say that these teachings on Buddha-nature are not definite in meaning. For them, the tathagatagarbha teachings were only given so that people would not freak out at the thought that they do not have a substantial ego. Therefore, the tathagatagarbha has only an interpretive meaning in their system. (Traleg Kyabgon, The Essence of Buddhism, pp. 132-133)
-
Happy New Year everyone!
I am not certain I understand the first question.
As per the second Question, I havn't read the tathagatagarbha sutra so I cannot really comment with assurance. Also, I am not familiar with the positions of each schools of Tibetan Buddhism about it.
However, from a personal standpoint, I cannot understand how someone remotely familiar with the teachings of the Buddha can come to the conclusion that any of his teachings could mean or imply a substantial soul or something similar. The principal teaching of the Buddha (what all his teachings can be sumarized unto) is anatman (pali. anatta), selflesness or egolessness. This concept is pervasive in all traditions of buddhism, including theravada. The idea of a 'subtantial self' is the ignorance at the root of samsara. This has been repeated over and over on a number of occasions by the Buddha and later masters. The move away from atman, the soul, or any other substance of the self is what distinguishes buddhism from other religious traditions. So to hold that the meaning of the buddha-nature or buddha-essence is a fundamental, irreductible substantial self seem to contradict the Buddha's entire life of advices and teachings.
In any case, in order to give a deeper answer we would have to read the sutra to check if the buddha litterally ascribes substance to the self by this concept of buddha-nature, as the quoted kagyu lama seems to imply. Maybe Geshe Lobsang Phuntsok could throw a line on this one since he is from Shartse's youngest and brightest.
-
I forgot to answer your question!
Yes, for me this has everything to do with this topic for obvious reasons. Again, this is in the category of the 'heart of the matter' in buddhism, wether the stream of consciousness has an irreductible substance or not. I have a fairly good idea as to where I stand on this issue although there are many grey areas in my understanding.
Also, I'm quite sure the substantialist view presented by this kagyu lama are not shared by all kagyu lineages...I hope!
-
The Tathagatagarbha doctrine is interesting and strange - mainly because different Mahayana Sutras treat it differently, sometimes contradicting each other, and because some Indian commentators (like Asanga) have then been forced to treat it in a way that necessarily contradict some Sutra! And as for Tibetan scholars, well, they seldom read Sutras, but just commentaries, and sometimes commentaries commenting commentaries. So it is not easy to know what people are talking about when they talk about Tathagatagarbha. They might mean very different things.
So I don't wish to comment on this topic. ??? ;D
But in any case, I see no reason to treat the tathagatagarbha as being any more "substantial" or "soulful" than the mental continuum. They both have temporal extension and are unceasing, but are still empty of inherent existence.
-
OK. Now that I read this topic anew, I think I should say something more...
Seriously, I don't advice you practise Dorje Shugden along with Nyima Practise. (1) Besides, I was told that our Lineage master Je TsongKha pa has filtered on those teachings that cannot be used. (2) Those "buried teausres" teachings from Nyima cannot be used at all and has no history of lineage passed down all the way from Lord Buddha Shakyamuni. (3) Besides that, the view of emptiness isn't complete and in order to gain enlightment to Buddhahood, we must use the view of Lord Nagajurna and Lord Chandrakriti, as per advice from Lord Manjushri to Lord Tsong Kha Pa.
Here, I need to say the following:
(1) Filtered? Hmmm... if you look at the different practices done nowadays by Gelukpas generally, and DS practitioners in particular, you will see many practices that originate from Nyingma and Kagyu traditions, not just from Sakya and Kadam traditions. For instance, the Avalokiteshvara sadhanas teached by GKG have interesting origins. The Ganden Chöd has both close and distant lineages. And so forth. So we can deduce, that there is nothing inherently wrong with non-geluk sources, for clearly Je Tsongkhapa approved some of them. But, and this is the Big But, why should we restrict ourselves (on doctrinal or dogmatical level) to only those practices that were "approved and filtered" by Je Tsongkhapa? Really? Considering that the "abandoning of Dharma" is a big no-no, I personally would rather take the position that if something was not expressedly disproved or disapproved by Je Tsongkhapa, we should at the very least give those Teachings the benefit of doubt, or rather the benefit of faith. For instance, since JT never approved nor disproved Theravada, should we now categorically deny it's validity or give it the benefif of faith? JT said nothing on Theravada, so is it now "not approved" or is it something "to be accepted"? Well, this is simple, really... To the extent Theravada doctrines agree with JT, we can accept them to be the very Buddha-Vacana that they are. (In fact, Theravada agrees with JT on emptiness, whereas Chittamatra does not!) The point I wish to make here is that, since JT had not access to all the different traditions and presentations, we therefore cannot take the view that only those things that were "approved and filtered" by JT are correct, and everything else is incorrect. No. We must do the opposite. We should only disapprove of those things that JT expressedly proved to be wrong.
(2) "Termas are not valid", you say? Say what? The basis of Ganden Oral Lineage, and therefore the whole tradition of Je Tsongkhapa, is based on a set of visionary teachings given by Manjushri to Je Tsongkhapa. In Nyingma circles this would be classified as a "pure-vision terma". The very Kadam Emanation Scripture is nothing more that a full fledged terma. Well, it wasn't given by Padmasambhava for sure, but by Manjushri, but who cares? A Guru is a Guru. There is no lineage beyond that. Well, to be more specific, the close lineage goes to that vision, and nowhere beyond that, but the so called distant lineage exists only because JT made the effort to find the doctrinal bases for everything contained therewith. The true Nyingma termas can be proved in a similar way. JT showed how the visionary teachings he received are in harmony with the generally known Dharma, and the same can be done with all valid Nyingma termas. Therefore, one could actually take the view that if a follower of JT categorically dismisses Nyingma termas, then that person has abandoned Dharma in general, and by implication has shown great disrespect towards the Ganden Dharma in particular, and therefore cutted his own root and sustenance. So please, be careful...
(3) If someone has personally not "found the unfoundability of the unfoundable", one should not speak about that, at all. Really.
You can only choose either one of the traditions, not both at the same time.
Yes and no.
One generally needs to have one system from which one approaches the totality of Dharma, the totality of one's Life. Otherwise it could be very confusing. But also one should try to find that one system by trying to have experience of all the available traditions. And this has some pracical implications:
(A) If one chooses not to try and test, one is implicitely abandoning the Dharma.
(B) Of course, some people get lucky and find the one at the beginning, but this rare occurrence is not a reason to restrict those who are not so lucky. Some people find their love-of-the-lifetime at the first sight. Most do not. Those who are lucky should not behave arrogantly towards those who need to have a little bit of seach... If one does so, if one acts as if everyone would be lucky-just-as-me, one lacks compassion, big time.
So please, be careful.
Besides, if you still insist on practsing Dorje Shugden with Nyima practise, I believe Lord Dorje Shugden won't be very happy, as many lamas has been forewarn or punished if still insist.
Yea, yea, yea. >:( I guess I'll have to say that I must be very lucky indeed for not being "punished". Maybe it's because I'm not a Lama. ;D
But seriously... the DS I know is not a Punisher. He is a Buddha. (And even if he weren't, my refuge (of the 3 Jewels) protects me from ghost stories. :D Does your Refuge practice protect you? ??? If not, then what... ::) ) So, oh please, let's forget the scary stories, and continue with our practice of Lamrim.
-
It might be worthwhile at this point to reflect on a very basic point about lineages. An authentic lineage is a system that's complete in itself, i.e. that can take us from here to Buddhahood. So the danger in mixing is that we imply to ourselves (and those around us) that our lineage is not complete, which necessarily makes it hard or impossible to have faith in it, and to practice with conviction and determination. Without these it seems very difficult to gain attainments. I also wonder if the blessings of the lineage gurus can reach us fully in this way. Therefore, without even comparing different traditions much less judging them, these are strong reasons to focus on the system one has 'landed in' by affinity.
Of course, looking here and there, checking everything, flirting etc is fine, but it's not yet practice - i guess most of us have been there (and perhaps for many years) or have many friends like that, and definitely in most cases it doesn't amount to true commitment to Dharma, focus and actual transformative results. Commitment is a powerful thing, and if it comes from within would lead to respect and understanding towards other paths.
-
Here a quote from one of the greatest Dzogchen Lamas, Patrul Rinpoche, from his (very lamrim) book 'words of my perfect teacher':
AROUSE CONFIDENCE IN THE PRINCIPLE OF CAUSE AND EFFECT
FROM THE DEPTHS OF YOUR HEART.
There are definitely distinctions in presentation and understanding in Dzogchen. One could quote some lines by Longchenpa and it would seem that 'nothing matters' all the way; one could quote other lines and it would seem all about karma and everything matters.
Guru Rinpoche said:
MY VIEW IS HIGHER THAN THE SKY
BUT MY ATTENTION TO ACTIONS IS FINER THAN FLOUR
Distinctions between lineages and different philosophical views are on a subtler level i feel, for which we will have to study and contemplate Manjushri Je Tsongkhapa's teachings more deeply, which is good - after all this is what we're here for.
I think we all agree that all Dharma practice mixed with self-centered notions is
flawed on a hinayana level,
fake and ineffective on a mahayana level, and
disastrous in tantra/mahamudra/dzogchen.
ALL OF BUDDHAS TEACHINGS AIM TO DESTROY SELF-GRASPING
Praise to all beings who look into the mirror of truth and do the dirty work, wherever, however.
May we all find the teacher and lineage that inspire us to focus on what is essential.
Atisha said:
YOU TIBETANS HAVE A HUNDRED PRACTICES AND NO ATTAINMENTS.
WE INDIANS HAVE ONE PRACTICE AND ALL THE ATTAINMENTS.
Here's to the cowboys and indians of the global village!
everybody's, beggar
-
hallo my dear - sometimes I feel the same way - perhaps we have to develop very strong confidence - Guru is already there - but ownmind is not enough ready - but will be ready soon - with much joy- blissfully-
peacetimes-peacewakeup- everything with peace peace witheverything
-
Seriously, I don't advice you practise Dorje Shugden along with Nyima Practise. Besides, I was told that our Lineage master Je TsongKha pa has filtered on those teachings that cannot be used. Those "buried teausres" teachings from Nyima cannot be used at all and has no history of lineage passed down all the way from Lord Buddha Shakyamuni. Besides that, the view of emptiness isn't complete and in order to gain enlightment to Buddhahood, we must use the view of Lord Nagajurna and Lord Chandrakriti, as per advice from Lord Manjushri to Lord Tsong Kha Pa. I still advice that it is the best to choose Gelug teachings as the flawless teachings is still preserve here, as prohised, the pure teaching will still remain in Gelug for another 400 years. You can only choose either one of the traditions, not both at the same time. Besides, if you still insist on practsing Dorje Shugden with Nyima practise, I believe Lord Dorje Shugden won't be very happy, as many lamas has been forewarn or punished if still insist.
Oh lord.
There's nothing wrong with doing Nyingma teachings with Dorje Shugden - provided if you have permission from the Guru who granted you the Dorje Shugden practice. There are Nyingma termas of Dorje Shugden out there and there are Nyingma practitioners that do practice Dorje Shugden. It is when you make statements like these that make Dorje Shugden look sectarian when he is not. Je Tsongkhapa's teachings are perfect as they are but if you try to dilute them they will be harmful to your Dharma practice. This does not mean that Nyingma or Kagyu is wrong, just that you should not mix them together with Gelug. Taking up Dzogchen after you've received the Ganden Nyegnu set of teachings is like throwing a wrench into your car engine and then starting it up - it can cause irreparable damage to your Dharma practice. You can still love Guru Rinpoche and Dzogchen, but your core practice must always be Je Tsongkhapa's teachings. The Lamas who got forewarned or punished were leading a very bad example to others and potentially cause a lot of confusion with their selfish action of merging their interests with the spreading the Dharma and has nothing to do with them 'mixing' the teachings. It is also this part that many people tend to be confused about.
-
Dear friends,
thank you very much for your contributions on this super important subject. Especially taken i am with Alexis' thoughtful explanations on the various levels of commitment and how Dharmapala can help us within each of these. I feel, especially for new and future friends, it is really essential to understand and gain faith first that in the enlightened mind there can be not even the concept of sectarianism or prejudice. From this viewpoint, any enlightened Dharma guardian's compassionate actions of protecting (against what would cause us and others harm) and nurturing (what benefits all) can be much more easily understood. I definitely believe that if Dharmapala's all-seeing wisdom eye perceives that someone has an auspicious deep connection with any of the other schools he will guide them there. By the way, don't think that only Gelukpas propitiate Dorje Shugden, or believe in fairy tales he and Guru Rinpoche are antagonistic etc. The biographies of Tromo Geshe Rinpoche, Kyabje Trijang Dorje Chang etc really say it all - how one can be totally devoted to one's own lineage, while being friends with and supportive of all others. May we emulate their holy example always!
What Alexis describes about looking here and there before committing is the same as with taking refuge and entering a Guru-disciple relationship. We can check as long as we want; once we have been so fortunate as to connect with an authentic teacher we are smart to focus on his direct advice which is what makes this relationship so precious, along with linking up with the blessing transmission of her or his entire lineage. The effect -the potential of attainments gained -is simply a million times stronger than if we keep following our deluded perceptions of greener grass everywhere except where we are. And if we do proceed on this path and promise to commit to it and serve it, we'll definitely get very fierce reprimands from our Lama if we get distracted, lose focus and flirt with 'easier' (until we commit...)paths who are all hallucinated by our self-grasping mind anyway. Because our Lama is jealous or out to punish us? Certainly not! Seeing our potential to benefit through our commitment and foreseeing the negative consequences of reverting to samsaric modes, losing focus etc, they will try with all their heart and might to protect us from... ourselves.
The teachings benefit beings according to their dispositions; it is not a matter of declaring that prasangika madhyamaka is the most sublime view, and commanding everyone to follow it. Great holders of this view have taught lesser views all their lives because these accorded with their students capability of understanding. By nurturing this, they prepared them to progress to a higher level eventually. Jowo Atisha was often called the 'refuge Lama'; he didn't mind at all... Kyabje Pabongkha Rinpoche was often called 'Lamrim Lama' by people who thought this was all he could teach... well, the joke's on them! Great Dzogchen and Mahamudra masters teach about karma and compassion all their lives, and never even mention these big words we like to throw around so casually. In times such as we live in, if we can be mindful of karma and unshakable in Guru devotion while aspiring to the highest, we blessed indeed.
Finally, if one feels strong devotion to Dorje Shugden without 'rational' explanation and without being with a teacher, this does seem a strong indication that one has an auspicious karmic connection with Manjushri Je Tsongkhapa's tradition, and it would be definitely worth praying for it to manifest outwardly. May you be blessed by meeting your Lama soon, Contentment, and may you see, hear and think of only a perfect Buddha when you do.
yours, beggar
Many times I have also been asked if one can propitiates to Dorje Shugden if he/she is from another faith, in my encounters, a couple were Christians and a Hindu.
A Protector is a part of our practice in whatever religion, who helps us to follow the path of the Dharma or scriptures, as such I believe that if you have the infinity to Dorje Shugden, an enlightened Buddha, there is no harm in propitiating Him and in His great compassion with always help the sincere and wholehearted person.