Re: [Zen] First Master of Dzogchen

[ED]

--- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com, "Bill!"  wrote:
>
> In my practice I certainly feel happiness, sadness, anger, love,
etc...

Humans experience feelings that humans have evolved to experience,
regardless of whether they have done Zen practice or not.

> The point of departure with zen is that there is no evaluting of these
emotions.

Without choice or judgment, some feelings do feel better than others due
to differing opiate, serotonin, oxytocin and/or epinephrine releases.

> In other words being happy is not 'good' while being sad is 'bad'.

Some feelings do feel more pleasurable than others, even though we
contrain ourselves from saying so, as that would be so un-Zen-like.

> Being happy is just happy, and sad is just sad.

Yes, but only after one has eradicated the automatic, natural and normal
human proclivity toward wanting to feel good. This erasure is a tall
task, as humans have been developing this addiction to feeling good for
millennia upon millennia, through the Darwinian evolutionary process.

> When I'm happy I'm totally happy, in fact the whole world is happy.
When I'm sad I'm totally sad.

Being a statement about your experience of your feelings, this statement
is incontrovertible.

> Neither is better or worse than the other.

Is this an intellectual judgment, a statement of Zen dogma, or your
personal experience of life after decades of Zen practice?

> They just are.

> ...Bill!

They are not 'just' existent to the vast majority of humans.  But so
what if they are, or what if they are not?

  --ED

Re: [Zen] First Master of Dzogchen

[Maria Lopez]

Bill;
 
I thought that wasn't any level for emotions.  If one experiences sadness this 
also could involve other emotions on the experienced lote and yeas at times 
could be the one of as dissapointment.  Do you make a distintion between 
different emotions?.  It called my attention this insight.  
 
Mayka

--- On Sun, 20/3/11, Bill!  wrote:


From: Bill! 
Subject: Re: [Zen] First Master of Dzogchen
To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com
Date: Sunday, 20 March, 2011, 9:07


  



Kirsty and Mike,

I did not comment on Kristy's previous post because she did correctly remark 
that I said zen was a-ethical. I beleive it is a-moral also. I never said 
however that zen was un- or a-emotional. Kristy also never indicated or even 
insinuated that I did.

Zen does have the reputation of being unemotional (or a-emotional), but as Mike 
has pointed out that is just wrong. In my practice I certainly feel happiness, 
sadness, anger, love, etc... The point of departure with zen is that there is 
no evaluting of these emotions. In other words being happy is not 'good' while 
being sad is 'bad'. Being happy is just happy, and sad is just sad. When I'm 
happy I'm totally happy, in fact the whole world is happy. When I'm sad I'm 
totally sad. Neither is better or worse than the other. They just are.

I think some of the confusion is that there are some feelings we call 
'emotions' that I think should be called 'psuedo-emotions' or 'hybrid emotions' 
because they are really not pure emotions. They are emotions that have been 
mixed with valuations associated with attachment and self. An example is 
'dissapointment'. I would break down dissapointment as being a pure emotions 
(sadness), but we associate the CAUSE of the sadness with some attachment we 
have (such as a goal or expectation). The result is a more complex feeling we 
call 'disappointment'.

So, IMNSOHO, zen practice is not un-emotional or a-emotional - but it does not 
go on to asign dualistic qualties to emotions, such as 'good' or 'bad'. They 
are qualities in the same category as 'hungry' and 'tired'.

...Bill! 

--- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com, mike brown  wrote:
>
> Hi Kristy,
> 
> I hear what you're saying and I understand the 'long dark night of the soul' 
> you 
> seem to be going thru. I wonder tho, where have you heard that Zen is 
> "a-emotional"? Sure, if Buddhism is practiced by Vulcans, or in Stepford, 
> then 
> this might be the situation : ). But arising emotions are an inescapable 
> partt 
> of the human condition - 'enlightened' or not - and the suppression of these 
> emotions can lead to unhealthy mental conditions (as I'm sure you're 
> professionally aware). IMO, the practice of Zen doesn't lead us to try to 
> escape 
> emotions, but rather helps us to face them honestly when they arise without 
> listening, or following, the little stories the mind constructs around 
> them. Don't worry about feeling anger, pain, sadness etc because feeling 
> them 
> means you are alive (and a broken heart just might be necessary to enable 
> the 
> light to shine thru the crack).
> 
> Mike    
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From: Kristy McClain 
> To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Sat, 19 March, 2011 4:18:34
> Subject: Re: [Zen] First Master of Dzogchen
> 
>   
> Hi Mike...
> 
> (My comments follow yours below)...
>  
> > I fully accept Bill's statement that zen is a-ethical.
> 
> I agree, but this doesn't give us the full picture either. If you look at 
> many 
> of the illustrations of Buddhist iconography you can see that to the right 
> of 
> buddha sits Manjusri (Bodhisattva of Wisdom)) and to his left sits 
> Samantabhadra 
> (Bodhisattva of Compassion). Without these two, Buddha is crippled. Without 
> wisdom, compassion becomes a weak form of sentimentality - without 
> compassion, 
> wisdom becomes cold and abstract. I know this is not about "ethics" per se, 
> but 
> I find in Zen circles too much of the latter is prevalent (I put myself in 
> this 
> category).<<
> 
> As I understand Bill's practice-- he does not include reference to buddhism, 
> so 
> I don't know if he would ammend his statement with the above, but thats up to 
> him. 
> 
> 
> Yet, you do point to the heart of my "sadness" in all this.  I'm feeling  
> that I 
> see  zen and similar practices as being a-emotional.  I'm troubled with 
> the  
> devotion  to becoming "detached" and "mindfully composed".  "Benign". Its 
> said 
> that false humility is 

Re: [Zen] First Master of Dzogchen

[Bill!]

Kirsty and Mike,

I did not comment on Kristy's previous post because she did correctly remark 
that I said zen was a-ethical.  I beleive it is a-moral also.  I never said 
however that zen was un- or a-emotional.  Kristy also never indicated or even 
insinuated that I did.

Zen does have the reputation of being unemotional (or a-emotional), but as Mike 
has pointed out that is just wrong.  In my practice I certainly feel happiness, 
sadness, anger, love, etc...  The point of departure with zen is that there is 
no evaluting of these emotions.  In other words being happy is not 'good' while 
being sad is 'bad'.  Being happy is just happy, and sad is just sad.  When I'm 
happy I'm totally happy, in fact the whole world is happy.  When I'm sad I'm 
totally sad.  Neither is better or worse than the other.  They just are.

I think some of the confusion is that there are some feelings we call 
'emotions' that I think should be called 'psuedo-emotions' or 'hybrid emotions' 
because they are really not pure emotions.  They are emotions that have been 
mixed with valuations associated with attachment and self.  An example is 
'dissapointment'.  I would break down dissapointment as being a pure emotions 
(sadness), but we associate the CAUSE of the sadness with some attachment we 
have (such as a goal or expectation).  The result is a more complex feeling we 
call 'disappointment'.

So, IMNSOHO, zen practice is not un-emotional or a-emotional - but it does not 
go on to asign dualistic qualties to emotions, such as 'good' or 'bad'.  They 
are qualities in the same category as 'hungry' and 'tired'.

...Bill!   

--- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com, mike brown  wrote:
>
> Hi Kristy,
> 
> I hear what you're saying and I understand the 'long dark night of the soul' 
> you 
> seem to be going thru. I wonder tho, where have you heard that Zen is 
> "a-emotional"? Sure, if Buddhism is practiced by Vulcans, or in Stepford, 
> then 
> this might be the situation : ). But arising emotions are an inescapable 
> partt 
> of the human condition - 'enlightened' or not - and the suppression of these 
> emotions can lead to unhealthy mental conditions (as I'm sure you're 
> professionally aware). IMO, the practice of Zen doesn't lead us to try to 
> escape 
> emotions, but rather helps us to face them honestly when they arise without 
> listening, or following, the little stories the mind constructs around 
> them. Don't worry about feeling anger, pain, sadness etc because feeling 
> them 
> means you are alive (and a broken heart just might be necessary to enable 
> the 
> light to shine thru the crack).
> 
> Mike    
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From: Kristy McClain 
> To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Sat, 19 March, 2011 4:18:34
> Subject: Re: [Zen] First Master of Dzogchen
> 
>   
> Hi Mike...
> 
> (My comments follow yours below)...
>  
> > I fully accept Bill's statement that zen is a-ethical.
> 
> I agree, but this doesn't give us the full picture either. If you look at 
> many 
> of the illustrations of Buddhist iconography you can see that to the right 
> of 
> buddha sits Manjusri (Bodhisattva of Wisdom)) and to his left sits 
> Samantabhadra 
> (Bodhisattva of Compassion). Without these two, Buddha is crippled. Without 
> wisdom, compassion becomes a weak form of sentimentality - without 
> compassion, 
> wisdom becomes cold and abstract. I know this is not about "ethics" per se, 
> but 
> I find in Zen circles too much of the latter is prevalent (I put myself in 
> this 
> category).<<
> 
> As I understand Bill's practice-- he does not include reference to buddhism, 
> so 
> I don't know if he would ammend his statement with the above, but thats up to 
> him. 
> 
> 
> Yet, you do point to the heart of my "sadness" in all this.  I'm feeling  
> that I 
> see  zen and similar practices as being a-emotional.  I'm troubled with 
> the  
> devotion  to becoming "detached" and "mindfully composed".  "Benign". Its 
> said 
> that false humility is the worst form of arrogance. I'm not sure thats true, 
> but 
> if so-- then similarly,  professing to be ego-less, non-dual  yet 
> benignant, 
> seems to be the epitome of self-centered rightiousness. Dunno.. maybe I'm 
> just 
> going thru a stage of cynicism, and like all things, "this too will pass". 
> 
> 
> I like your references to wisdom and compassion. It appeals to my sense of 
> balance. I underst

Re: [Zen] First Master of Dzogchen

[mike brown]

Hi Kristy,

I hear what you're saying and I understand the 'long dark night of the soul' 
you 
seem to be going thru. I wonder tho, where have you heard that Zen is 
"a-emotional"? Sure, if Buddhism is practiced by Vulcans, or in Stepford, then 
this might be the situation : ). But arising emotions are an inescapable partt 
of the human condition - 'enlightened' or not - and the suppression of these 
emotions can lead to unhealthy mental conditions (as I'm sure you're 
professionally aware). IMO, the practice of Zen doesn't lead us to try to 
escape 
emotions, but rather helps us to face them honestly when they arise without 
listening, or following, the little stories the mind constructs around 
them. Don't worry about feeling anger, pain, sadness etc because feeling them 
means you are alive (and a broken heart just might be necessary to enable the 
light to shine thru the crack).

Mike





From: Kristy McClain 
To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sat, 19 March, 2011 4:18:34
Subject: Re: [Zen] First Master of Dzogchen

  
Hi Mike...

(My comments follow yours below)...
 
> I fully accept Bill's statement that zen is a-ethical.

I agree, but this doesn't give us the full picture either. If you look at many 
of the illustrations of Buddhist iconography you can see that to the right of 
buddha sits Manjusri (Bodhisattva of Wisdom)) and to his left sits 
Samantabhadra 
(Bodhisattva of Compassion). Without these two, Buddha is crippled. Without 
wisdom, compassion becomes a weak form of sentimentality - without compassion, 
wisdom becomes cold and abstract. I know this is not about "ethics" per se, but 
I find in Zen circles too much of the latter is prevalent (I put myself in this 
category).<<

As I understand Bill's practice-- he does not include reference to buddhism, so 
I don't know if he would ammend his statement with the above, but thats up to 
him. 


Yet, you do point to the heart of my "sadness" in all this.  I'm feeling  that 
I 
see  zen and similar practices as being a-emotional.  I'm troubled with the  
devotion  to becoming "detached" and "mindfully composed".  "Benign". Its said 
that false humility is the worst form of arrogance. I'm not sure thats true, 
but 
if so-- then similarly,  professing to be ego-less, non-dual  yet benignant, 
seems to be the epitome of self-centered rightiousness. Dunno.. maybe I'm just 
going thru a stage of cynicism, and like all things, "this too will pass". 


I like your references to wisdom and compassion. It appeals to my sense of 
balance. I understand homeostasis in medicine.  Equilibrium in economics. I 
think whats been bugging me is that I also  see the value of "passion" in all 
its connotations. Work, love-- and any chosen  contemplative practice. 

I don't believe in the five poisins. Labelling anything as inherently good or 
bad is by definition: Dualism.  But then-- so is passion as I understand it.   
Its ironic that you  are teaching language as this topic arises.  The words we 
choose to describe our experience-- become our experience. I see great value  
in 
anger, greed, hate and the like. I welcome them to my tea table with the rest.  
They serve me in return,  as instructive guides and companions.  "Anger", for 
example  can serve as a  very benevolent catalyst for change. The associations 
we create linking emotions with words become thoughts and actions.

As Easter is approaching,  I happened to read an article about St. Francis. He 
said, "You must lose your life-- to find your life". Through loss, trauma, 
crisis, stress and limits, we are offered a doorway to a deeper awareness and 
clarity of consciousness. Few here know this better than you, as you experience 
the events in Japan. I know from my own experience that  this process is not 
easy to recognize or embrace. But I  also know that "what we resist-- 
persists". 
I guess this is a process of 'letting go'. 


I was disappointed to read that St. Francis  spent  his whole life "finding 
himself". Seeking his "God-self" or "Christ-self" or "Buddha-self" ,  or what I 
call "authentic self"-- I think it IS important to do this, but I also see it 
as 
egotistic. So from this, I conclude that one has to embrace and cherish and 
even 
celebrate this ego-drive, to then--release it?  The ego as the Great illusion 
/deluder, yet the priest who wrote the article on St. Francis  wrote that 
moving 
into the "true" self , is a calling that is so powerful that  once set upon 
this 
path, one can never get enough of it, because  then you are living in the 
eternal.  


I would reject this.. as it seems like an addiction.  And again--ego-driven.  
So 
I am full circle on my dilemm

Re: [Zen] First Master of Dzogchen

[Kristy McClain]

Hi Mike...
 
(My comments follow yours below)...
 
> I fully accept Bill's statement that zen is a-ethical.
 
I agree, but this doesn't give us the full picture either. If you look at many 
of the illustrations of Buddhist iconography you can see that to the right of 
buddha sits Manjusri (Bodhisattva of Wisdom)) and to his left sits 
Samantabhadra (Bodhisattva of Compassion). Without these two, Buddha is 
crippled. Without wisdom, compassion becomes a weak form of sentimentality - 
without compassion, wisdom becomes cold and abstract. I know this is not about 
"ethics" per se, but I find in Zen circles too much of the latter is prevalent 
(I put myself in this category).<<
 
As I understand Bill's practice-- he does not include reference to buddhism, so 
I don't know if he would ammend his statement with the above, but thats up to 
him. 
 
Yet, you do point to the heart of my "sadness" in all this.  I'm feeling  that 
I see  zen and similar practices as being a-emotional.  I'm troubled with the  
devotion  to becoming "detached" and "mindfully composed".  "Benign". Its said 
that false humility is the worst form of arrogance. I'm not sure thats true, 
but if so-- then similarly,  professing to be ego-less, non-dual  yet 
benignant, seems to be the epitome of self-centered rightiousness. Dunno.. 
maybe I'm just going thru a stage of cynicism, and like all things, "this too 
will pass". 
 
I like your references to wisdom and compassion. It appeals to my sense of 
balance. I understand homeostasis in medicine.  Equilibrium in economics. I 
think whats been bugging me is that I also  see the value of "passion" in all 
its connotations. Work, love-- and any chosen  contemplative practice. 
 
I don't believe in the five poisins. Labelling anything as inherently good or 
bad is by definition: Dualism.  But then-- so is passion as I understand it.   
Its ironic that you  are teaching language as this topic arises.  The words we 
choose to describe our experience-- become our experience. I see great value  
in anger, greed, hate and the like. I welcome them to my tea table with the 
rest.  They serve me in return,  as instructive guides and companions.  
"Anger", for example  can serve as a  very benevolent catalyst for change. The 
associations we create linking emotions with words become thoughts and actions.
 
As Easter is approaching,  I happened to read an article about St. Francis. He 
said, "You must lose your life-- to find your life". Through loss, trauma, 
crisis, stress and limits, we are offered a doorway to a deeper awareness and 
clarity of consciousness. Few here know this better than you, as you experience 
the events in Japan. I know from my own experience that  this process is not 
easy to recognize or embrace. But I  also know that "what we resist-- 
persists". I guess this is a process of 'letting go'. 
 
I was disappointed to read that St. Francis  spent  his whole life "finding 
himself". Seeking his "God-self" or "Christ-self" or "Buddha-self" ,  or what I 
call "authentic self"-- I think it IS important to do this, but I also see it 
as egotistic. So from this, I conclude that one has to embrace and cherish and 
even celebrate this ego-drive, to then--release it?  The ego as the Great 
illusion /deluder, yet the priest who wrote the article on St. Francis  wrote 
that moving into the "true" self , is a calling that is so powerful that  once 
set upon this path, one can never get enough of it, because  then you are 
living in the eternal.  
 
I would reject this.. as it seems like an addiction.  And again--ego-driven.  
So I am full circle on my dilemma:  How to indeed find the "buddha-nature" 
within --without spending your  whole life focused on yourself? 
 
Please take care, Mike.  I have been watching the debate over forcing all 
Americans to leave Japan.  Reading your other posts.. it does sound horrific.  
You are in my heart..
 
Kristy
 
 
 














  

Re: [Zen] First Master of Dzogchen

[mike brown]

Hi Kristy,

I've just realised that I'll never get thru all the posts since the tsunami, so 
I'm just gonna cut to the most recent postings.

> I fully accept Bill's statement that zen is a-ethical.

I agree, but this doesn't give us the full picture either. If you look at many 
of the illustrations of Buddhist iconography you can see that to the right of 
buddha sits Manjusri (Bodhisattva of Wisdom)) and to his left sits 
Samantabhadra 
(Bodhisattva of Compassion). Without these two, Buddha is crippled. Without 
wisdom, compassion becomes a weak form of sentimentality - without compassion, 
wisdom becomes cold and abstract. I know this is not about "ethics" per se, but 
I find in Zen circles too much of the latter is prevalent (I put myself in this 
category).

Mike 





From: Kristy McClain 
To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Fri, 18 March, 2011 5:03:55
Subject: Re: [Zen] First Master of Dzogchen

  
Hi Steve,
 
Very good points.   I wonder about this as well.  Whether its a 
fake-it-till-you-make-it-thing or not, part of my own dis-illusionment with all 
such practices, beit zen Dzogchen, kunalini and the rest--results from what I 
perceive  as a big hypocracy.  Masters  go on and on about ego-less no self 
existence, yet their  own egos are vested in gathering students, book deals, 
and  the attention they receive.  Especially when its trendy to claim to be on 
a 
spiritual path these days.  A lot  of this just rings hollow to me right now.  


I've been quite critical of many ideas presented on the forum, probably because 
a lot of it is a "been there--done that -thing. I've taught yoga-- learned all 
about  this kundalini stuff.. did the zen retreats and practices. Read the 
books.  Stopped reading to go within.  And the like.  


Ed's comments a couple of days about the steps  on the path to enlightment , 
reminded me of a book series  that I own-- but never finished reading.  I 
decided to grab one, and read it on the plane east-- (meaning Maryland-- not 
the 
bid "East" in Asia;) 


The series is aptly titled, "Steps on the Path to Enlightment".  Its a 5-book 
series, and I grabbed the one volume of the shelf that would likely irritate 
me.  Its Vol II-- "Karma".   But if i can stomach it-- perhaps i can learn 
enough to better understand Anthony--as i have admired him for a long time.

I--myself am in the midst of inner change, which makes me grumpy at times.  I 
fully accept Bill's statement that zen is a-ethical.  The problem I'm having, 
 is that I simply don't want to live that way.  I'm willing to sign on to some 
suffering as a result. For me-- equanimity is just not where I want to be right 
now.   I want to be involved in the world in such a way that I will 
undoubtedly  
"feel" pain and hurt and frustration due to the people and problems I will be 
involved with.

I'll try to follow-up with a comment to ED later..

Be well ~ k~



--- On Thu, 3/17/11, SteveW  wrote:


>From: SteveW 
>Subject: Re: [Zen] First Master of Dzogchen
>To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com
>Date: Thursday, March 17, 2011, 11:55 AM
>
>
>  
>
>
>--- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com, Kristy McClain  wrote:
>>
>> ED,
>>  
>>  
>> I have comments on the attached but will offer them later.  But wanted to 
>>share this now.. 
>>
>>  
>> Does this line-up with the teachers you had?  k
>>  
>>  
>> Hi Kristy. While I certainly agree with the assessment that the 
>>inherently-existing ego-self is an illusion, I cannot help but wonder how 
>>many 
>>supposedly enlightened masters are just faking it. It is one thing to 
>>understand 
>>that the ego has no inherent existence, and quite another thing to live your 
>>life that way. But who knows? Maybe Kundalini yoga is the magic bullet. For 
>>that 
>>matter, I cannot help but wonder how many people who assert that "everything 
>>is 
>>perfect in being what it is" really react to people, places and things with 
>>perfect equanimity. 
>>
>Steve
>>
>>
>
>
> 




  

Re: [Zen] First Master of Dzogchen

[Kristy McClain]

Hi Steve,
 
Very good points.   I wonder about this as well.  Whether its a 
fake-it-till-you-make-it-thing or not, part of my own dis-illusionment with all 
such practices, beit zen Dzogchen, kunalini and the rest--results from what I 
perceive  as a big hypocracy.  Masters  go on and on about ego-less no self 
existence, yet their  own egos are vested in gathering students, book deals, 
and  the attention they receive.  Especially when its trendy to claim to be on 
a spiritual path these days.  A lot  of this just rings hollow to me right 
now.  
 
I've been quite critical of many ideas presented on the forum, probably because 
a lot of it is a "been there--done that -thing. I've taught yoga-- learned all 
about  this kundalini stuff.. did the zen retreats and practices. Read the 
books.  Stopped reading to go within.  And the like.  
 
Ed's comments a couple of days about the steps  on the path to enlightment , 
reminded me of a book series  that I own-- but never finished reading.  I 
decided to grab one, and read it on the plane east-- (meaning Maryland-- not 
the bid "East" in Asia;) 
 
The series is aptly titled, "Steps on the Path to Enlightment".  Its a 5-book 
series, and I grabbed the one volume of the shelf that would likely irritate 
me.  Its Vol II-- "Karma".   But if i can stomach it-- perhaps i can learn 
enough to better understand Anthony--as i have admired him for a long time.
 
I--myself am in the midst of inner change, which makes me grumpy at times.  I 
fully accept Bill's statement that zen is a-ethical.  The problem I'm having,  
is that I simply don't want to live that way.  I'm willing to sign on to some 
suffering as a result. For me-- equanimity is just not where I want to be right 
now.   I want to be involved in the world in such a way that I will 
undoubtedly  "feel" pain and hurt and frustration due to the people and 
problems I will be involved with.
 
I'll try to follow-up with a comment to ED later..
 
Be well ~ k~
 


--- On Thu, 3/17/11, SteveW  wrote:


From: SteveW 
Subject: Re: [Zen] First Master of Dzogchen
To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com
Date: Thursday, March 17, 2011, 11:55 AM


  





--- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com, Kristy McClain  wrote:
>
> ED,
>  
>  
> I have comments on the attached but will offer them later.  But wanted to 
> share this now.. 
>  
> Does this line-up with the teachers you had?  k
>  
>  
> Hi Kristy. While I certainly agree with the assessment that the 
> inherently-existing ego-self is an illusion, I cannot help but wonder how 
> many supposedly enlightened masters are just faking it. It is one thing to 
> understand that the ego has no inherent existence, and quite another thing to 
> live your life that way. But who knows? Maybe Kundalini yoga is the magic 
> bullet. For that matter, I cannot help but wonder how many people who assert 
> that "everything is perfect in being what it is" really react to people, 
> places and things with perfect equanimity. 
Steve
>
>










  

Re: [Zen] First Master of Dzogchen

[SteveW]

--- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com, Kristy McClain  wrote:
>
> ED,
>  
>  
> I have comments on the attached but will offer them later.  But wanted to 
> share this now.. 
>  
> Does this line-up with the teachers you had?  k
>  
>  
> Hi Kristy. While I certainly agree with the assessment that the 
> inherently-existing ego-self is an illusion, I cannot help but wonder how 
> many supposedly enlightened masters are just faking it. It is one thing to 
> understand that the ego has no inherent existence, and quite another thing to 
> live your life that way. But who knows? Maybe Kundalini yoga is the magic 
> bullet. For that matter, I cannot help but wonder how many people who assert 
> that "everything  is perfect in being what it is" really react to people, 
> places and things with perfect equanimity. 
Steve
>
>
 






Current Book Discussion: any Zen book that you recently have read or are 
reading! Talk about it today!Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
zen_forum-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
zen_forum-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
zen_forum-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [Zen] First Master of Dzogchen

[Kristy McClain]

ure as Clear 
Light, and ceases creating the "I" or self.  All that remains is Rigpa in 
oneness with its field, and it does notice itself like looking in a mirror 
during that experience.  Later the mind state reappears and may give up the 
notion of a self as a result, or may continue to generate the mistaken belief 
until it has more conviction. Or the mind just remains as Clear Light, 
as the Presence of Awareness. The other way is to do the Madhyamaka 
investigations into the nature of subjective self and apparently 
inherently existent objects. It is also possible through Mahamudra or Dzogchen 
that one's mind may recognize its own nature
 just through the pointing out instructions or direct introduction, but that's 
not so easy or successful for most.  Of course this may happen in Zen as well, 
but its very unpredictable unless one has a very experienced teacher.  Just 
"resting" in awareness is usually just resting in a quiet and clear state of 
mind, with the "I" doing the resting.  Milarepa and all branches of Tibetan 
Buddhism recommend kundalini yoga as the central pillar of practice.  Even in 
Dzogchen, the major teaching manual used today, theYeshe Lama, recommends daily 
kundalini yoga practice when doing a thogal retreat.
If you don't relax and open the subtle-body channels and chakras 
completely through kundalini yoga, it is more difficult to get the most subtle 
channels of Light, such as the Kati channel to open thereby revealing directly 
the all pervasive non-dual Clear Light Mind of Awareness.
 


--- On Wed, 3/16/11, ED  wrote:


From: ED 
Subject: [Zen] First Master of Dzogchen
To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com
Date: Wednesday, March 16, 2011, 11:23 AM


  




 
Garab Dorje, the first master of Dzogchen, manifested as a human being in the 
third century B.C.E..
His final teaching before he entered the Body of Light was to summarise the 
teachings in Three Principles, sometimes known as "The Three Last Statements of 
Garab Dorje."  He left behind this testament for all the Dzogchen practitioners 
of the future. 
The Three Statements of Garab Dorje are: 
"Introduce in the state directly" refers to the transmission by the master, 
who, in various ways, introduces and brings the disciple to understand the 
condition of "what is", the individual's primordial state. This is the Base.
 
"Do not remain in doubt" means that one must have a precise knowledge of this 
state, finding the state of the presence of contemplation which is one and the 
same in all the thousands of possible experiences. This is the Path
"Continue in the profound knowledge of self-liberation" is the Fruit. That 
means, the complete and unchangeable knowledge of self-liberation is totally 
integrated with one's daily life and in all circumstances one continues in that 
state. All the hundreds and hundreds of original texts of Dzogchen can be 
considered to be an explanation of these three verses of Garab Dorje."

from "The Crystal and the Way of Light" and "Dzogchen, the Self-Perfected 
State" - by Chögyal Namkhai Norbu  

top 
 








  

Re: [Zen] First Master of Dzogchen

[ED]

--- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com, Anthony Wu  wrote:
>
> ED,
>
> That is a good question. Religion does not have to follow factual
history.

> But zen is not a religion.

Zen can be viewed as a psychological path to a tranquil and
confusion-free state of mind.

> Moreover, zen has a lot of stories supported by historical facts.

Regardless of whether supported by facts or not, accept what feels
beneficial to you.

> I am not interested in the abstract remarks of the Dzogzhen master,
but amused by mentioning of the third century BC, which is about 200
years after the death of Sakyamuni, and well before the appearance of
mahayana (around the turn of the century). Tibetan Buddhism, as well as
zen, developed from mahayana, and Dzogzhen is part of Tibetan Buddhism.
It is logical that the Dzogchen master was able to predict the
technique. So there is nothing wrong.
>
> Anthony

I had suspected that this was your concern. It appears that Dzogchen has
its roots in Bonpo, which predates the arrival of Buddhism in Tibet in
the eigth century CE.

- ED

> Anthony, do you believe that one should only follow religious or
spiritual or psychological paths whose historical origins are known
to be factual?  --ED



> --- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com, Anthony Wu wuasg@ wrote:


> Do you believe this myth?
>
> Anthony




> --- On Thu, 17/3/11, ED seacrofter001@ wrote:
>
> Garab Dorje, the first master of Dzogchen, manifested as a human
being in the third century B.C.E..


> His final teaching before he entered the Body of Light was to
summarise the teachings in Three Principles, sometimes known as "The
Three Last Statements of Garab Dorje."Â  He left behind this
testament for all the Dzogchen practitioners of the future.


> The Three Statements of Garab Dorje are:


> "Introduce in the state directly" refers to the transmission by the
master, who, in various ways, introduces and brings the disciple to
understand the condition of "what is", the individual's primordial
state. This is the Base.
>
> "Do not remain in doubt" means that one must have a precise knowledge
of this state, finding the state of the presence of contemplation which
is one and the same in all the thousands of possible experiences. This
is the Path
> "Continue in the profound knowledge of self-liberation" is the Fruit.
That means, the complete and unchangeable knowledge of self-liberation
is totally integrated with one's daily life and in all circumstances one
continues in that state. All the hundreds and hundreds of original texts
of Dzogchen can be considered to be an explanation of these three verses
of Garab Dorje."
>
> from "The Crystal and the Way of Light" and "Dzogchen, the
Self-Perfected State" - by Chogyal Namkhai Norbu

Re: [Zen] First Master of Dzogchen

[Anthony Wu]

ED,

That is a good question. Religion does not have to follow factual history. But 
zen is not a religion. Moreover, zen has a lot of stories supported by 
historical facts. 

I am not interested in the abstract remarks of the Dzogzhen master, but amused 
by mentioning of the third century BC, which is about 200 years after the death 
of Sakyamuni, and well before the appearance of mahayana (around the turn of 
the century). Tibetan Buddhism, as well as zen, developed from mahayana, and 
Dzogzhen is part of Tibetan Buddhism. It is logical that the Dzogchen master 
was able to predict the technique. So there is nothing wrong.

Anthony

--- On Thu, 17/3/11, ED  wrote:

From: ED 
Subject: Re: [Zen] First Master of Dzogchen
To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com
Date: Thursday, 17 March, 2011, 10:03 PM







 



  



  
  
  
Anthony, do you believe that one should only follow religious or spiritual or 
psychological paths whose historical origins are known to be factual?  --ED
 
--- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com, Anthony Wu  wrote:
>






Do you believe this myth?

Anthony


--- On Thu, 17/3/11, ED  wrote:






 
Garab Dorje, the first master of Dzogchen, manifested as a human being in the 
third century B.C.E..
His final teaching before he entered the Body of Light was to summarise the 
teachings in Three Principles, sometimes known as "The Three Last Statements of 
Garab Dorje."  He left behind this testament for all the Dzogchen practitioners 
of the future. 
The Three Statements of Garab Dorje are: 
"Introduce in the state directly" refers to the transmission by the master, 
who, in various ways, introduces and brings the disciple to understand the 
condition of "what is", the individual's primordial state. This is the Base.

"Do not remain in doubt" means that one must have a precise knowledge of this 
state, finding the state of the presence of contemplation which is one and the 
same in all the thousands of possible experiences. This is the Path
"Continue in the profound knowledge of self-liberation" is the Fruit. That 
means, the complete and unchangeable knowledge of self-liberation is totally 
integrated with one's daily life and in all circumstances one continues in that 
state. All the hundreds and hundreds of original texts of Dzogchen can be 
considered to be an explanation of these three verses of Garab Dorje."

from "The Crystal and the Way of Light" and "Dzogchen, the Self-Perfected 
State" - by Chögyal Namkhai Norbu  

top 
 




 





 



  

Re: [Zen] First Master of Dzogchen

[ED]

Anthony, do you believe that one should only follow religious or
spiritual or psychological paths whose historical origins are known to
be factual?  --ED



--- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com, Anthony Wu  wrote:
>


Do you believe this myth?

Anthony



--- On Thu, 17/3/11, ED  wrote:







Garab Dorje, the first master of Dzogchen, manifested as a human being
in the third century B.C.E..

His final teaching before he entered the Body of Light was to summarise
the teachings in Three Principles, sometimes known as "The Three Last
Statements of Garab Dorje."  He left behind this testament for all the
Dzogchen practitioners of the future.

The Three Statements of Garab Dorje are:

"Introduce in the state directly" refers to the transmission by the
master, who, in various ways, introduces and brings the disciple to
understand the condition of "what is", the individual's primordial
state. This is the Base.


"Do not remain in doubt" means that one must have a precise knowledge of
this state, finding the state of the presence of contemplation which is
one and the same in all the thousands of possible experiences. This is
the Path

"Continue in the profound knowledge of self-liberation" is the Fruit.
That means, the complete and unchangeable knowledge of self-liberation
is totally integrated with one's daily life and in all circumstances one
continues in that state. All the hundreds and hundreds of original texts
of Dzogchen can be considered to be an explanation of these three verses
of Garab Dorje."

from "The Crystal and the Way of Light" and "Dzogchen, the
Self-Perfected State" - by Chögyal Namkhai Norbu

top 

Re: [Zen] First Master of Dzogchen

[Anthony Wu]

Do you believe this myth?

Anthony

--- On Thu, 17/3/11, ED  wrote:

From: ED 
Subject: [Zen] First Master of Dzogchen
To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com
Date: Thursday, 17 March, 2011, 1:23 AM







 



  



  
  
   
Garab Dorje, the first master of Dzogchen, manifested as a human being in the 
third century B.C.E..
His final teaching before he entered the Body of Light was to summarise the 
teachings in Three Principles, sometimes known as "The Three Last Statements of 
Garab Dorje."  He left behind this testament for all the Dzogchen practitioners 
of the future. 
The Three Statements of Garab Dorje are: 
"Introduce in the state directly" refers to the transmission by the master, 
who, in various ways, introduces and brings the disciple to understand the 
condition of "what is", the individual's primordial state. This is the Base.
 
"Do not remain in doubt" means that one must have a precise knowledge of this 
state, finding the state of the presence of contemplation which is one and the 
same in all the thousands of possible experiences. This is the Path
"Continue in the profound knowledge of self-liberation" is the Fruit. That 
means, the complete and unchangeable knowledge of self-liberation is totally 
integrated with one's daily life and in all circumstances one continues in that 
state. All the hundreds and hundreds of original texts of Dzogchen can be 
considered to be an explanation of these three verses of Garab Dorje."

from "The Crystal and the Way of Light" and "Dzogchen, the Self-Perfected 
State" - by Chögyal Namkhai Norbu  

top 
 




 





 



  

[Zen] First Master of Dzogchen

[ED]

Garab Dorje, the first master of Dzogchen, manifested as a human being
in the third century B.C.E..

His final teaching before he entered the Body of Light was to summarise
the teachings in Three Principles, sometimes known as "The Three Last
Statements of Garab Dorje."  He left behind this testament for all the
Dzogchen practitioners of the future.

The Three Statements of Garab Dorje are:

"Introduce in the state directly" refers to the transmission by the
master, who, in various ways, introduces and brings the disciple to
understand the condition of "what is", the individual's primordial
state. This is the Base.


"Do not remain in doubt" means that one must have a precise knowledge of
this state, finding the state of the presence of contemplation which is
one and the same in all the thousands of possible experiences. This is
the Path

"Continue in the profound knowledge of self-liberation" is the Fruit.
That means, the complete and unchangeable knowledge of self-liberation
is totally integrated with one's daily life and in all circumstances one
continues in that state. All the hundreds and hundreds of original texts
of Dzogchen can be considered to be an explanation of these three verses
of Garab Dorje."

from "The Crystal and the Way of Light" and "Dzogchen, the
Self-Perfected State" - by Chögyal Namkhai Norbu

top