Sign in to follow this  
taoguy

What is the difference between Dzogchen, Zen and Anapanasati?

Recommended Posts

In my inexperienced opinion, so much focus on rainbow body for a practitioner is the surest way to push it away.

The goal for the Dzogchen practitioner is the liberation of all sentient beings from their suffering. Dzogchen stripped of it's Mahayana context is no longer Dzogchen. Selfish motivation in Dzogchen simply reinforces that which one is trying to liberate.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my inexperienced opinion, so much focus on rainbow body for a practitioner is the surest way to push it away.

The goal for the Dzogchen practitioner is the liberation of all sentient beings from their suffering. Dzogchen stripped of it's Mahayana context is no longer Dzogchen. Selfish motivation in Dzogchen simply reinforces that which one is trying to liberate.

 

Biological clock is ticking. Whatever tradition, if you don't realize rainbowbody there is no guarantee you make it to the heavens/higher realms where rainbowbody is a vechile instead of 5 matter body down here.

 

Rainbowbody attainment is also called second birth.

 

"Steam entrant" has rainbowbody attainment.

Its something like 2nd path(once-returner) is suitable to teach other beings.

Edited by allinone

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is an excellent koan that led the famous Soto Zen master Dogen to enlightenment.

 

Firstly, if everyone was enlightened from the start, why wouldn't an embryo/fetus already be a Buddha? Why would it then allow itself to develop and develop amnesia? If it was enlightened, why would it subject itself to another birth? If this is the case, I would deduce that from the start, we are not really enlightened. Instead, we are innocent - Just as what the famous 3-word poem describes as Mencius' ideology: "When a person is born, one is pure." But I do believe that everybody has the ability to become enlightened - however, it also depends on one's karma and karmic deeds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my inexperienced opinion, so much focus on rainbow body for a practitioner is the surest way to push it away.

The goal for the Dzogchen practitioner is the liberation of all sentient beings from their suffering. Dzogchen stripped of it's Mahayana context is no longer Dzogchen. Selfish motivation in Dzogchen simply reinforces that which one is trying to liberate.

 

I respectfully disagree.

In dzogchen there is no need to generate anything artificial.

For example in the practice of guru yoga as taught by CNNR, which if practiced enough leads to the discovery of one's nature, there is no consideration whatsoever of whether one should generate bodhicitta, cultivate virtues or have a proper motivation,All these are only relevant on the lower paths.

If one knows one;s nature and rests in that all these virtues, motivations are naturally accomplished since they exist in potentia within our nature.They do not need to be cultivated anew, since cultivation comes from misunderstanding the self perfected aspect of our nature This misunderstanding and partial view is common to the lower paths whether they be sutra mahayana or tantra.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I respectfully disagree.

In dzogchen there is no need to generate anything artificial.

For example in the practice of guru yoga as taught by CNNR, which if practiced enough leads to the discovery of one's nature, there is no consideration whatsoever of whether one should generate bodhicitta, cultivate virtues or have a proper motivation,All these are only relevant on the lower paths.

If one knows one;s nature and rests in that all these virtues, motivations are naturally accomplished since they exist in potentia within our nature.They do not need to be cultivated anew, since cultivation comes from misunderstanding the self perfected aspect of our nature This misunderstanding and partial view is common to the lower paths whether they be sutra mahayana or tantra.

 

Well said!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I respectfully disagree.

In dzogchen there is no need to generate anything artificial.

For example in the practice of guru yoga as taught by CNNR, which if practiced enough leads to the discovery of one's nature, there is no consideration whatsoever of whether one should generate bodhicitta, cultivate virtues or have a proper motivation,All these are only relevant on the lower paths.

If one knows one;s nature and rests in that all these virtues, motivations are naturally accomplished since they exist in potentia within our nature.They do not need to be cultivated anew, since cultivation comes from misunderstanding the self perfected aspect of our nature This misunderstanding and partial view is common to the lower paths whether they be sutra mahayana or tantra.

 

Thanks for your response Anderson.

Some teachers and lineages do incorporate the generation of bodhicitta into the guru yoga practice.

Some include bodhicitta when time permits but may exclude it in an abbreviated session.

 

I agree with you that for whatever period of time one is able to rest fully in the nature of mind all is complete and there is nothing more to be done, there is nothing undone, at that time bodhicitta arises naturally and flows unimpeded - it is already there, ignorance simply obscures it. If one is able to do that in every waking and sleeping moment, one is fully liberated.

How many can claim to be at that level?

 

During the times that we are not resting in the nature of mind, what then?

How to go about our day to day lives, especially if we are not monks?

Are we to revert to samsaric desires and aversions like those around us or lust after a nearly unattainable and selfish goal like achieving the rainbow body simply to "achieve Buddhahood" for ourselves or more mundane and easily achievable goals?

 

Or is it better to be open to the needs of others, serve others, let our own desires and aversions go?

I think this is the way to lessen the grip of the self and stabilize our ability to rest in the nature of mind, not only during practice but off the cushion as well. I think this is the fundamental approach of Mahayana and I think it works.

The Dalai Lama is certainly a big fan.

 

Even the motivation to rest in the nature of mind (and to achieve complete liberation) is best done with the intention to liberate oneself in order that one can effectively assist others to do the same. This is exactly what it says in the devotional prayers we recite after each and every practice, at least in my tradition:

 

Go sum dak pe ge wa gang gyi pa

Kham sum sem chen nam gyi dun du ngo

Du sum sak pe le drip kun jang ne

Ku sum dzok pe sangye nur top shok

 

All pure virtue done through the three doors

I dedicate to the welfare of all sentient beings of the three realms

Having purified all afflictions and obscurations of the three poisons

May we swiftly achieve complete Buddhahood of the three bodies.

 

I think that one of the reasons that the Dzogchen teachings were kept highly secret is just what we are discussing.

It is too easy to assume that because we spend a few hours (or minutes) a day resting in (what we think is) the nature of mind, and because we are beginning to understand the Dzogchen view, that we no longer need to be concerned with less exciting and more demanding things like practicing bodhicitta, ngondro, being kind, and so on.

The theory of Dzogchen is very appealing but the effective practice much more subtle and elusive.

At least that's my current understanding and how I'm attempting to approach my own practice.

 

I think that it takes a very long time, for most, to be able to truly connect with and deeply rest in the nature of mind to the level where bodhicitta spontaneously arises and we have a deep personal connection to that source. Until then, practices like generating bodhicitta and others can help give us a taste of that, make it a bit more familiar, bring us a little closer. It also creates much healthier karmic effects than most other things we could be spending our time with. It may be artificial at first but after a time that bodhicitta can arise very naturally and spontaneously. Then we no longer need to practice, we simply channel it.

 

All that said, I respect your approach, especially if it is working well for you.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anderson, you missed it. Bodhicitta is all. Guru yoga is just a method for Buddhists to develop immense sacred love for something, because there is no God to love. Bodhicitta is mind. I'm not talking about relative bodhicitta, that is just a dress rehearsal. The mind follows from the luminous silent all-loving brilliant watery vapor that resides in the heart. You can coax it out through the practice of thogal... It will actually reveal itself through the eyes. Then you realize what is really looking out from the eyes. There is no person there because you are all, you are eveyone and all things. And there is immense, great, undeniable all-encompassing LOVE.!

 

But don't take my word or my experiences for it.. Even CN Norbu tells you that..

 

From "The Supreme Source":

Bodhicitta: the sutras speak at length about bodhicitta as a commitment ment motivated by compassion to help others. At the level of the relative tive condition, there are deemed to be two kinds of bodhicitta: bodhicitta of aspiration or intention and bodhicitta of action, and whoever keeps the bodhicitta commitment is called a Bodhisattva. However in Dzogchen, bodhicitta does not mean only the principle of compassion characteristic of the Bodhisattva path. Bodhicitta is the original state, the true condition as it is, immutable. In Tibetan it is called changchubsem. sem. Chang means purified, or pure, clear and, limpid since the beginning, ning, because there is nothing to purify. Chub means perfected, because even though one may think it is necessary to progress and to improve in order to achieve realization, the state of the individual has been perfect fect from the very beginning, there is nothing to perfect or to achieve that one does not already have. In general, sem means the mind, but in this case it refers to the state of consciousness, or "nature of mind." Distinguishing between the state of consciousness and the mind is like trying to separate a mirror from its reflection. Or, if we think of the sky, trying to distinguish the blue surface from the clouds that form on it. However, essentially, the true condition is indivisible: the reflection derives rives from the mirror, which is its sole base, and in the same way, the sky also includes clouds; the clouds themselves are sky. Thus, even though it is said that the mind is produced by dualism and its true condition, dition, the state of consciousness, is beyond dualism, the nature of both is single and indivisible. This is the meaning of sem in the term changchuhsem, bodhicitta. At times the texts speak of nyingpo changchubkyi sem, "bodhicitta of the essence," but this in like manner is a reference to the primordial state of consciousness, synonymous with dzogpa chenpo, "total perfection." Gyud or tantra, which literally means "continuation," too refers to the state of consciousness, as does the term Mahamudra or "total symbol." In the sutras, on the other hand, the expression desheg nyingpo or sugatagarhha, "essence of the enlightened ones," is widely used. The state of consciousness can be referred to in many ways, but in Dzogchen, and especially in the Semde series, one of the terms most frequently used is bodhicitta.

 

Edited by Tibetan_Ice
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The kind of Dzogchen which "rests with no support" belongs to vajrayana proper, which is not really practiced at large, regardless of what people say or believe. Mahayana methods are much more commonplace, it is the primary form of buddhism which prevails in the western world especially, but also amongst most Tibetans as well, especially in modern times.

 

Vajrayana is risky - thats the point, thats the method. It is literally "playing with fire".

 

I had a teacher that described the vehicles in this way: Hinayana sees a poisonous plant, and pulls it up and burns it. Mahayana sees a poisonous plant, and puts a fence around it with warning signs. Vajrayana sees a poisonous plant, and makes a medicine from it.

 

The systematization of progression through all three vehicles is the purview and great innovation of the Tibetan culture. However the origination of vajrayana and the unique practice of this third vehicle came from the mahasiddhas of India, and understanding the environment in which it arose and was transmitted is key to understanding the differences in practice which seem paradoxical to modern peoples.

 

The practice of Mantra and Perfections, instructions in the Sutras and

Precepts, and teaching from the Schools and Scriptures will not bring
realization of the Innate Truth. For if the mind when filled with some
desire should seek a goal, it only hides the Light.

 

- Tilopa

 

 

khatamcpt-350.jpg

 

 

The form of the Buddhist khatvanga derived from the emblematic staff of the early Indian Shaivite yogins, known as kapalikas or 'skull-bearers'. The kapalikas were originally miscreants who had been sentenced to a twelve-year term of penance for the crime of inadvertently killing a Brahmin. The penitent was prescribed to dwell in a forest hut, at a desolate crossroads, in a charnel ground, or under a tree; to live by begging; to practice austerities; and to wear a loin-cloth of hemp, dog, or donkey-skin. They also had to carry the emblems of a human skull as an alms-bowl, and the skull of the Brahmin they had slain mounted upon a wooden staff as a banner. These Hindu kapalika ascetics soon evolved into an extreme outcast sect of the 'left-hand' tantric path (Skt. vamamarg) of shakti or goddess worship. The early Buddhist tantric yogins and yoginis adopted the same goddess or dakini attributes of the kapalikas. These attributes consisted of; bone ornaments, an animal skin loincloth, marks of human ash, a skull-cup, damaru, flaying knife, thighbone trumpet, and the skull-topped tantric staff or khatvanga.

 

tumblr_mntfgrGCZi1rrjpupo4_500.jpg

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

'Stolen' from a friend's blog:

 

"Dzogchen is what we are – cognisant nature, empty essence and uncontrived compassion. It is the very essence of the teachings. It is not a theoretical practice: it directly cuts through all concepts/ obstacles. All we have to do is recognise. The hallmark of realisation is compassion, expressing genuine, fearless warmth…love!" (Buddha in the Mud)

 

 

All we have to do is recognise.... to express repeatedly, until it becomes habit. Tibetans dont have a word for 'meditate' - there, among those who practice Buddhism, the term used is, "Gom", which literally translates as, 'getting used to...', hence, Gompa, or meditation hall, points to a place where one learns to familiarize with one's true nature. So the aware nature, that aspect which knows, in some sense is also one's Gompa, an open space or ground where the virtue of getting used to laying aside actions (karma) take root. Actions are the root of samsara, therefore the advice of 'simply resting without contrivance' or 'non-doing' (wu wei?) is rendered more significant.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From the teachings of various other paths, what I have learned from some Buddhist week-long teachings I have attended, and personal experience... regarding the whole boddicitta thing, I figure it is quite important for many reasons, but perhaps not the only way to get there. To get anywhere decent on the path (any path), one needs to get past the "self" and most especially our concept of "self". Difficult to do this really if the primary motive doesn't include something quite beyond our self. So these brilliant Buddhists came up with the primary motive in all practices, most especially the "advanced" practices (aka the ones more likely to cause troubles if the practitioner is not ready, unbalanced, to attached to self), being for the benefit of all sentient beings. Further, if all beings are essentially considered to be us, or at least connected with us, or inseparable, it brings about far more functionality to work with practices which lead to compassion for all others, instead of the standard viewing everything as us and them or us vs them (a LOT of thinking in this way in society).

 

One teacher (he has HH before his name, so likely knew a thing or two, and the teachings were quite amazing), was talking about how the more we do things for the sake of all beings, the more selfish we are in a way, as we benefit more from it :D. I feel he meant this on a deeper level than the obvious mundane sense, but he had a point there too. The more we dedicate our merit and make it about us, and send out all the benefit, it sort of comes back to us manyfold. An odd practice at first to a newbie raised in a ME and mine, and giving things away = loss culture, but it does work quite well; nifty. I feel this is because we have taken that whole false concept of self; which just gets in the way for any decent energetic, spiritual, mystical, magical, etc. practice, anyways. As a side benefit, perhaps there is a benefit for all beings, and who doesn't want to see society pull their self centered and limited view heads out of their behinds anyways? I think even the most disgruntled of all practitioners (and boy have I met a few lol) could get behind this one.

 

Well also love and compassion most definitely has its place as well. Again, living in a western society, we are trained quite well to close our heart center, as well as our love and compassion towards others, as well as towards ourselves. Amazingly enough starting with others is often easier for folks. The boddicitta stuff, does definitely help one in these areas. Though one of these amazingly insightful teachers talked of boddicitta being either one of two things, the whole love and compassion stuff, or the whole just being in the place of ones own true nature beyond any of that "self" stuff.

 

Also, people tend to be happier and more fulfilled when they feel as though they are helping others, or society as a whole. Just look at how many folks volunteer, and even volunteer for things which obviously should be paid (for example when large corporations get folks to volunteer to help at events they are making millions from). A few of the teachers talk about how if you can't do such and such level of practice/state of mind/lack of mind, then start/go with love and compassion, at least to start.

 

Disclaimer, these are my newbie interpretations of what these teachers said and were trying to get across. Hopefully I haven't misunderstood, explained wrongly, or gotten their words wrong, but it is entirely possible, and just my lack of understanding of things.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The kind of Dzogchen which "rests with no support" belongs to vajrayana proper, which is not really practiced at large, regardless of what people say or believe. Mahayana methods are much more commonplace, it is the primary form of buddhism which prevails in the western world especially, but also amongst most Tibetans as well, especially in modern times.

 

Vajrayana is risky - thats the point, thats the method. It is literally "playing with fire".

 

I had a teacher that described the vehicles in this way: Hinayana sees a poisonous plant, and pulls it up and burns it. Mahayana sees a poisonous plant, and puts a fence around it with warning signs. Vajrayana sees a poisonous plant, and makes a medicine from it.

 

The systematization of progression through all three vehicles is the purview and great innovation of the Tibetan culture. However the origination of vajrayana and the unique practice of this third vehicle came from the mahasiddhas of India, and understanding the environment in which it arose and was transmitted is key to understanding the differences in practice which seem paradoxical to modern peoples.

 

 

 

khatamcpt-350.jpg

 

 

 

tumblr_mntfgrGCZi1rrjpupo4_500.jpg

 

Pretty awesome post 9th, thank you :).

 

Makes me wonder if inadvertently killing a Brahman was common or something, if there were say more than only a couple per area ;).

 

Any relation at all to Chod practices? I mean aside from them both having the thigh bone trumpet, and other accouterments. I see the article mentions influences back and forth, but I'm curious how far this goes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

'Stolen' from a friend's blog:

 

"Dzogchen is what we are – cognisant nature, empty essence and uncontrived compassion. It is the very essence of the teachings. It is not a theoretical practice: it directly cuts through all concepts/ obstacles. All we have to do is recognise. The hallmark of realisation is compassion, expressing genuine, fearless warmth…love!" (Buddha in the Mud)

 

 

All we have to do is recognise.... to express repeatedly, until it becomes habit. Tibetans dont have a word for 'meditate' - there, among those who practice Buddhism, the term used is, "Gom", which literally translates as, 'getting used to...', hence, Gompa, or meditation hall, points to a place where one learns to familiarize with one's true nature. So the aware nature, that aspect which knows, in some sense is also one's Gompa, an open space or ground where the virtue of getting used to laying aside actions (karma) take root. Actions are the root of samsara, therefore the advice of 'simply resting without contrivance' or 'non-doing' (wu wei?) is rendered more significant.

 

I really like his quote and your editorial is just as critical - recognizing is very rare and precious and potentially life altering.

It is also fragile and it's very easy to fall back in to the mud and wallow.

We need to remember, express, and integrate.

I think this is one reason why mindfulness holds such a central role in Buddha's teachings.

For me, it is helpful to look at how we approach that subsequent work as demonstrating our appreciation for the gift of recognition.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any relation at all to Chod practices? I mean aside from them both having the thigh bone trumpet, and other accouterments. I see the article mentions influences back and forth, but I'm curious how far this goes.

 

The name "Chod" was provided by a Tibetan yogini, Machig Labdrön. She claimed to have received the transmission of this rite from the mahasiddhas. The ritual itself is a variation on a fairly universal shamanic initiation, in that the practice is repeated until penetrated to its ultimate depth. Shamanism tends to be rather pragmatic and goal-oriented in terms of community service, and shamans are not primarily focused on their own self-cultivation or enlightenment. So they are less particularly interested in the revelations and insights for their own sake - although I tend to doubt they have any less understanding about inner truths than yogis and cultivators. At any rate, chod takes the rite of shamanic initiation and makes it much more personally focused.

 

As long as there is an ego, there are demons.

When there is no more ego,

There are no more demons either!

 

—Machig Labdrön

 

 

The siddhas which gave birth to vajrayana were tantrikas - yogis and yoginis of all castes, all shapes and sizes. They belong to an entirely practical tradition that is incredibly ancient, having to do with the specific workings of existence. In fact the tradition itself was not named specifically, as the word "Tantra" in that sense is a modern invention. This tradition is the origin of descriptions of nadis and chakras and so forth. In fact the tantrikas classified hundreds of chakras, and mapped the energetic microcosm of the body in very exacting details, mirroring a cosmic macrocosm of many numerous gods and goddesses and spirits and demons and angels and all that kind of thing.

 

In the same way zen (chan) was born from buddhism mixing with taoists, vajrayana was born from buddhism mixing with tantrikas.

 

To your question of "how far back it goes", you could say "all the way". You may have heard of the interplay of Shiva and Shakti, and its relation to ideas of yin and yang is no accident.

 

Tantrikas of the classical age would be most related to the rishis who sang the rigveda.

 

Shiva originated as an epithet of Rudra, the adjective shiva ("kind") being used euphemistically of Rudra, who also carries the epithet ghora ("extremly terrifying").[3] Usage of the epithet came to exceed the original theonym by the post-Vedic period (in the Sanskrit Epics), and the name Rudra has been taken as a synonym for the god Shiva and the two names are used interchangeably.

 

In the Rigveda, Rudra's role as a frightening god is apparent in references to him as ghora ("extremely terrifying"), or simply as asau devam ("that god").[16] He is "fierce like a formidable wild beast" (RV 2.33.11).[27] Chakravarti sums up the perception of Rudra by saying: "Rudra is thus regarded with a kind of cringing fear, as a deity whose wrath is to be deprecated and whose favor curried."[28]

 

In RV 7.46, Rudra is described as armed with a bow and fast-flying arrows. As quoted by R. G. Bhandarkar, the hymn says Rudra discharges "brilliant shafts which run about the heaven and the earth" (RV 7.46.3), which may be a reference to the destructive power of lightning.

 

Here is the twist:

 

Indra (/ˈɪndrə/), also known as Śakra in the Vedas, is the leader of the Devas or demi gods and the lord of Svargaloka or heaven in Hinduism. He is the god of rain and thunderstorms.[1] He wields a lightning thunderbolt known as vajra and rides on a white elephant

 

The possible conflation of Rudra and Indra is a topic for another day, because at that point you need to rope in the other thunderstorm and lightning gods like Zeus and Thor and so forth. On that note, take a look at this carving of Buddha accompanied by Vajrapani:

 

Buddha-VajrapaniGandhara2n.jpg

 

 

Vajrapāṇi (Sanskrit, "Vajra in [his] hand") is one of the earliest appearing bodhisattvas in Mahayana Buddhism. He is the protector and guide of Gautama Buddha and rose to symbolize the Buddha's power.

 

Vajrapani is extensively represented in Buddhist iconography as one of the three protective deities surrounding the Buddha. Each of them symbolizes one of the Buddha's virtues: Mañjuśrī manifests all the Buddhas' wisdom, Avalokiteśvara manifests all the Buddhas' compassion and Vajrapani manifests all the Buddhas' power as well as the power of all five tathāgatas.

 

Vajrapani is one of the earliest Dharmapalas and the only Buddhist deity to be mentioned in the Pāli Canon as well as be worshiped in the Shaolin Monastery, in Tibetan Buddhism and in Pure Land Buddhism (where he is known as Mahasthamaprapta and forms a triad with Amitābha and Avalokiteśvara). Manifestations of Vajrapani can also be found in many Buddhist temples in Japan as dharma protectors called Nio.

 

So yeh, in regards to those reciprocal influences I think its safe to say: it goes pretty far.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

My reason for challenging asunthatneversets narrative is due to the fact that he frequently posts cut/paste snippets that are largely out of context with no comments on his part and his responses are usually one liners. I have requested that persons posting here to write in a clear/succinct manner so that a discussion can ensue. However, most of the time there have been lengthy cut/paste of what Malcolm's opinions are.

 

There is a taboo disseminated by the Tibetan hierarchy that such teachings are only given by qualified guru's. The teachings are said to be protected by forces which are depicted in traditional Tibetan iconography and if one breaks the rules, then certain karmic problems will arise i.e, hell realms and so forth. For all the insight some Tibetan Lama's possess, there is a clinging to certain superstitious beliefs i.e, karma, hell realms and so forth. E.g. the text titled, 'The Torch of Certainty' is full of various beliefs and commands that are right out of the 'Middle Ages'. I still see Buddhists clinging to these superstitions and for the most part have jettisoned critical thinking and accepted such writings with complete acceptance as opposed to asking as to what the consequences such belief systems lead to.

 

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/belief/2011/jul/01/lama-sex-abuse-sogyal-rinpoche-buddhist

 

 

 

http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=sr_pg_2?rh=n%3A283155%2Cp_27%3AJamgon+Kongtrul&page=2&sort=relevance&ie=UTF8&qid=1412536852

 

Critical thinking can help one to arrive at the conclusion that self-made hells are very real. They exist on Earth as a consequence of foolish or destructive habits, Such actions and consequences are what is meant by karma. No one knows if consciousness exists or not, or if it might continue after the body dies, critical thinking cannot get rid of this possibility because there's not evidence. So one can at least assume there is a possibility of a self-made hell emerging as a consequence of extremely self-destructive thought patterns that will appear to oneself after one dies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anapanasati takes breath as the object in a gradual path of traversing various samadhis until one arrives at the wisdom of the twelve links of dependent origination and the cessation of perception. Zen belongs to the Mahayana so it has a different set of levels in the path than Theravada. Zen is supposed to leap-frog the Mahayana levels if one has transmission from a qualified lineage, and one is said to rest at the 10th Bhumi. Dzogchen is the final level in Vajrayana, so Dzogchen will say that Zen will take you three countless eons to arrive at buddhahood. Vajrayana relies on initiation to do its leapfrogging. Where Dzogchen differs from everything else is it uses inner lights to achieve buddhahood quickly. This special concrete experience is something visible to the eyes so a huge lump of speculation and abstraction can easily be thrown out of the window. Most of the on-line debates and discussions revolve around speculations and abstractions. In fact all of Theravada and Mahayana are about abstractions and speculations. So Dzogchen is by far the superior vehicle to attain lasting peace of mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this