Dzogchen

The doorway into continental phenomenology and the doorway into the understanding of the praxis of Dzogchen is our experiential focus on our awareness and our experiential lived experience within our innate experiential field  of our pre-reflective non conceptual knowingness of our own awareness. The innate awareness field is our direct knowingness of Being. The direct knowingness of our awareness is our primal openness to Being. Awareness is our  knowingness of Being. Heidegger called this knowingness
Da Sein. Our awareness knows Being non dualistically.

Our knowing of our awareness is distinct from our mind's knowing of phenomena and from our mind's knowing the appearance of phenomena, and the forms of  phenomena. Our mind knows subject and otherness. Our mind knows the essence of phenomena.. The distinction between our ordinary dualistic mind knowing of phenomenological forms and our primordial non dualistic non conceptual direct awareness of Being is of foundational importance in both Dzogchen and Existential Phenomenology.

The Shroud of Turin, Christianity's most precious relic is firmly linked to its foundational doctrine: Jesus's miraculous resurrection from the dead. This well defended connection limits Shroud research to the investigation of the mechanics of image formation, the underlying cause (the cause of the cause), being a foregone, non-debatable conclusion; it was a miracle. The miracle status limits the investigation because otherwise it would infringe on foundational doctrine. Advances in science, scholarship, observation and experience since the Gospels were written reveal a natural explanation for what actually took place on the first Easter Sunday and, thus, the cause underlying the cause of image formation. Arriving at this conclusion requires outside the box thinking: looking beyond the Bible into other religious expressions for answers, engaging in non-literal interpretation of the Bible, invoking principles of quantum science and inserting the role of human consciousness into the investigation platform.

Jansen, B. (2017). Naked Seeing: The Great Perfection, the Wheel of Time, and Visionary Buddhism in Renaissance Tibet. By Christopher Hatchell . Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014. Pp. 471. ISBN 10: 0199982910; ISBN 13: 978-0-19-998291-2. International Journal of Asian Studies, 14(2), 226-227. doi:10.1017/S1479591417000092

Grant Morrison is one of the world’s most acclaimed comic writers, known for both metafictional stylistic experiments and his very public penchant for a comparably postmodernist form of occult bricolage commonly called chaos magic. Morrison’s practical and theoretical interests in gnosticism, tantra, etc. inform his output in overt ways and exemplify an influential contemporary approach to yogic traditions in commercial comics. This chapter explores the treatment of Tibetan Dzogchen practice in Morrison’s late 2000s work on Batman, where he applies esoteric Buddhist meditation techniques to the perennial superhero theme of secret, split identities. As Marc Singer (2012) has observed, Morrison tackled similar motifs a decade earlier in The Invisibles, but where that opus generally celebrated the disruptive potential of the titular anarchist collective’s fragmented selves, here Batman’s fractured psyche forms the story’s central conflict. Transformational ego-transcendence through a solitary ‘dark retreat’ ritual akin to sensory deprivation becomes his means for survival, but even as the details of the rites draw on Buddhist traditions, the way Morrison depicts the experience and deploys the theme of isolation throughout can be read as emblematic of an individualized initiatory ordeal rooted more in the ceremonial magic of Aleister Crowley than in Tibetan Vajrayana.

The experiential language and the experiential view of Contemporary Phenomenology is amazingly similar to the language and view of the ancient Tibetan Meditative Tradition of Dzogchen. Both Dzogchen and Contemporary Phenomenology understand that the unfolding of the lived experience of self-liberation happens through our direct lived experience of Innate Awareness. Moreover, our lived experience of Innate Awareness is our Direct Lived Experience of Primordial Being.
Both Contemporary Phenomenology and Dzogchen are phenomenological ontological philosophical traditions. A metaphysical tradition is the thinking of Being mentally and conceptually. A phenomenological ontological tradition is the direct lived experiencing of phenomenological Being and the artful experiential articulation of the lived experience of phenomenological Being personally and symbolically.
Both Phenomenology and Dzogchen dramatically understand that in becoming aware of our own awareness we directly experience the field of Luminous Being. Both traditions in their historical unfolding understanding the we have two ways of knowing. The knowing of our mind  knows phenomena and the knowing of our awareness knows Being.

This selection features profound, provocative, and at times humorous texts from leading figures associated with the Rimé tradition of Tibetan Buddhism. The emphasis of these works is on the esoteric path of Dzogchen, or the Great Perfection, through which the nature of reality is pointed out directly, just as it is.

Throughout the book the translator provides clear, succinct introductions to the individual translations, expertly setting the scene and guiding the reader through a world of intellectual renaissance, intersectarian debate, and the imparting of cherished insights. Through this, one truth above all becomes apparent: that genuine wisdom means transcending the limited confines of the ordinary mind.

This book is an introduction to the philosophy of mind that developed within the syncretistic rDzogs chen (Great Perfection) tradition of the rNying ma (Ancient Ones) school of Tibetan Buddhism between the 8th and 14th centuries CE. Despite the growing interest in this tradition in recent decades, there has hitherto been no systematic appraisal of its views on mind that traces their evolution and complex relationships with antecedent Buddhist philosophies of mind. These views merit attention not only because of their intrinsic interest and relevance to contemporary consciousness studies but also because they provide an essential key to understanding the tradition’s leading ideas and practices in light of their historical development. To this end, the book investigates the doctrinal foundations of rDzogs chen through the lens of two principal distinctions that the tradition has considered indispensable for understanding its distinctive views and practices: dualistic mind (sems) versus primordial knowing (ye shes) and dharmakāya versus the ‘ground of all’ (kun gzhi) conditioned experience. Arguing that these distinctions provided classical rDzogs chen scholars with a crucial framework not only for (a) articulating the conditions of delusion and liberating knowledge, but also for (b) schematizing the relationship between the exoteric and esoteric vehicles of Indian Buddhism within a unifying conception of the Buddhist path as the progressive disclosure of primordial knowing, the author shows how the rDzogs chen philosophy of mind has been, in all stages of its development, inseparable from its distinctive soteriology.

The book consists of two parts: (1) a detailed philosophical investigation of the distinctions and (2) an anthology of previously untranslated Tibetan materials on the distinctions accompanied by critical editions and introductions. The first part systematically investigates the nature and scope of the distinctions and traces how they developed in relation, and sometimes reaction, to Indian Buddhist Cittamātra, Madhyamaka, Pramāṇavāda, and Vajrayāna views. It concludes with an exploration of some soteriological implications of the mind/primordial knowing distinction that became central to rDzogs chen path hermeneutics in the classical period as authors of rDzogs chen path summaries used this distinction to reconcile progressivist sūtric and non-progressivist tantric models of the Buddhist path. The translations and texts included in part two of the book consist of (a) a short treatise from Klong chen pa’s Miscellaneous Writings entitled Sems dang ye shes kyi dris lan (Reply to Questions Concerning Mind and Primordial Knowing), (b) selected passages on the distinctions from this author’s monumental summary of the rDzogs chen sNying thig (Heart-essence) system, the Theg mchog mdzod (Treasury of the Supreme Vehicle), and (c) an excerpt on rDzogs chen distinctions taken from ’Jigs med gling pa’s (1729-1798) 18th century Klong chen sNying thig path summary entitled Treasury of Qualities (Yon tan mdzod) along with a word-by-word commentary by Yon tan rgya mtsho (b. 19th c.).

[Preview only] Dzogchen, the Great Perfection, is the highest meditative practice of the Nyingma School of Tibetan Buddhism. Approaching the Great Perfection looks at a seminal figure of this lineage, Jigme Lingpa, an eighteenth-century scholar and meditation master whose cycle of teachings, the Longchen Nyingtig, has been handed down through generations as a complete path to enlightenment. Ten of Jigme Lingpa’s texts are presented here, along with extensive analysis by van Schaik of a core tension within Buddhism: Does enlightenment develop gradually, or does it come all at once? Though these two positions are often portrayed by modern scholars as entrenched polemical views, van Schaik explains that both tendencies are present within each of the Tibetan Buddhist schools. He demonstrates how Jigme Lingpa is a great illustration of this balancing act, using the rhetoric of both sides to propel his students along the path of the Great Perfection.

In my paper, I would like to discuss the example of the 10th century doxography The Lamp for the Eye in Meditation (Tib. Bsam gtan mig sgron) written by the Tibetan scholar Nupchen Sangye Yeshe (Tib. Gnubs chen Sang rgyas Ye shes). The Lamp is a text that discusses and hierarchically classifies the main contemplative traditions that had made their way into Tibet at the time of Nupchen’s life, mainly the Indian scholastic Mahāyāna tradition, Chinese Chan, the Tantric tradition as represented by Mahāyoga, and the new philosophical and contemplative developments as represented by Atiyoga, or the Great Perfection (Tib. Rdzogs chen).

The main argument I want to make here is that the doxographical genre allows Nupchen not only to write about some of the most relevant philosophical debates of the period (the Sudden vs. Gradual debate, conceptual vs. non-conceptual modes of perception, the nature of the consciousness, etc.), but also allows him to argue for the superiority (philosophically and contemplative) of the new Great Perfection in relation to other Buddhist traditions. (In fact, the Lamp is the earliest text we know of where Dzogchen is presented as an independent vehicle (Tib. theg pa). So while the content and the arguments presented in the text are important,

I also want to highlight the relevance of the structure of the text: as Marshall McLuhan famously said, ultimately “the medium is the message.”
In this paper I want to focus on two particular philosophical moves that Nupchen makes in the Lamp in order to argue for the superiority of the Great Perfection. The first is an epistemological one, as Nupchen will use the doxographical genre to articulate the different understandings of non-conceptuality (Skt. avikalpa; Tib. mi rtog pa) by various Buddhist traditions, while claiming the superior understanding of that concept by the Great Perfection. The other move is an ontological one, and it is centered around the innovative interpretation that Nupchen does of the Yogācāra concept of the ālāyavijñāna (Tib. kun gzhi rnam par shes pa) by putting forward a new type of consciousness: the ground, or the universal ground (Tib. Kun/kun gzhi).
Finally, regarding the structure of the text, I will briefly use religious scholar J.Z. Smith’s ideas to shine a light (if I might use the same imagery as Nupchen does in the Lamp) on the structure of the text, showing how, ultimately, all comparisons at the heart of doxographies do not tell us “how things are,” but how things are “re-envisioned” (these are Smith’s terms) by the creator of the comparison.

It is rare to find a recorded lineage of female teachers in either Bön or Tibetan Buddhism, but here thirty heart teachings of Bön Khandro are being made publically available in English for the first time. In fact, this book combines many unique features in one concise volume.
First and foremost, the Dzogchen Yetri Thasel Mogyud, a succession of women from all over Central and Inner Asia who received precious Dzogchen teachings, and went on to achieve complete Buddhahood within one lifetime. These amazing ladies of wisdom practised with perseverance in a variety of circumstances and, gaining insight into the true Nature of their own minds, they obtained miraculous powers and passed on the essence of their experience to a single female disciple. These quintessential pith instructions were collected like precious drops of nectar and written down by the eighth century Bönpo sage Lachen Drenpa Namkha.
Yongdzin Lopön Tenzin Namdak Rinpoche, the most erudite teacher of Yungdrung Bön, has taught on this text twice in the West, and the transcripts have been edited and amalgamated here. The book also includes a translation of the root text.
Another major feature of this publication is the specially commissioned thangka of this cycle of Khandro painted by Geshe Mönlam. Images of this female lineage are extremely rare, and Yongdzin Rinpoche consulted various texts to compile a detailed description of each lady. This text is also included here, and the image of each Khandro is printed alongside her heart teachings enabling the reader to invoke her blessings while reading.
The second half of the book is dedicated to the last yogini in this lineage, Chöza Bönmo, who not only fully realized the ultimate meaning of Dzogchen but also played a pivotal role in saving the teachings of Yungdrung Bön from almost certain annihilation during the eighth century persecution in the reign of the Tibetan king Trisong Deutsen. As an inspiration to Western students, Nagru Geshe Gelek Jinpa has compiled her biography by extracting key episodes of her spiritual path – the teachings she received from her two main masters Lachen Drenpa Namkha and Lishu Tagring, how she practised, and her inspiring Song of Experience. This is a path which, with the guidance of the teachings translated here, we can all aspire to follow.
Apart from the transcript of Yongdzin Rinpoche’s teaching, this is a bi-lingual publication in English and Tibetan.

Also included are:
Prayers to Drenpa Namkha and Chöza Bönmo;
25+ colour plates with the images of individual Khandro, Drenpa Namkha, Lishu Tagring etc;
A full colour poster of the Mogyud thangka.

Este artículo describe fenomenológicamente nuestra situación ontológica y nuestros dos modos de conocimiento. Existe el conocimiento de la mente como el conocedor de las formas y el conocedor de la conciencia como el conocedor del Ser. Este documento vincula e integra la visión tántrica Dzogchen de la distinción mente-conciencia con la visión fenomenológica europea de los siglos XIX y XX de la distinción mente-conciencia expresada en el trabajo de Heidegger y Merleau Ponty. Esta distinción de mente y conciencia nos permite aclarar la confusión sobre nuestro conocimiento de las formas y nuestro conocimiento del Ser. El artículo enfatiza el entrelazamiento de la conciencia y la mente. Cuando la mente y la conciencia están en unidad, el conocedor puede conocer el Ser del ser a través de un ser. La persona puede conocer la dualidad de los seres dentro de la no dualidad del Ser. Y la persona puede conocer la no dualidad del Ser dentro de la dualidad de los seres.

We have two ways of knowing. Our mind knows forms, things, both subtle and gross. Faces, hands, buildings, trees, math formulas, mind knows subject and the mind knows otherness. The mind knows dualities, the mind knows me and you, us and them, and this and that. Mind knows time, mind knows the past, the present and the sense of the future. The mind knows things and entities, the mind knows beings, infinite numbers of beings and things. The mind knows difference. The mind thinks conceptually, feels affectively, imagines through imagery, the mind has sense and the mind has memory. The mind knows dualistically.

With this article I examine Pāli discourse references to luminosity of the mind in the light of their parallels, with a view to discerning early stages in the development of a notion that has had a considerable impact on Buddhist thought and practice.

One of the main aims of this book is to dispel the misconceptions and disinformation that Yungdrung Bön is a kind of Tibetan shamanism using blood sacrifices and black magic which later took on some aspects of Indian Buddhism in a deliberate attempt to appear more ‘Buddhist’. We dismantle this myth from many sides: firstly, by looking into the history and doctrines of Yungdrung Bön itself, which are the teachings of Tönpa Shenrab Miwo, the Central Asian Buddha who – according to traditional Bönpo reckoning – predates the later Indian Buddha Shakyamuni by many thousands of years; secondly, by detailing the differences and similarities between the multiple aspects of various types of Tibetan Bön; thirdly, by methodically comparing Yungdrung Bön’s base, view, path, myths, beliefs, rituals and deities with those of Tibetan Buddhism, Prehistoric Bön in general and Buryatian Bө Murgel in particular. It is my hope that the materials presented here will aid the reader in gaining a better understanding of the true relationship between Yungdrung Bön and Buddhism and thereby contribute to overcoming sectarianism, a serious obstacle for practice and study both among Tibetans and in the West.
The other tradition we shall examine in detail is Bө Murgel of Buryatia. We shall demonstrate that Bө Murgel, sometimes called Tengrism by Russian scholars, is in reality a syncretic tradition embracing several kinds of Prehistoric Bön akin to Tibetan Lha Bön and Düd Bön which, possibly, includes fragments of Yungdrung Bön along with methods from other Siberian spiritual and cultural streams. Because of this rich diversity and the many layers contained within it, and because it is a living tradition related to Tibetan Bön which can still be studied from ‘within’, Buryatian Bө Murgel can play a unique and important role in shedding light on the origins and culture of Bön. Through the comparative study of the views, myths and practical methods of Bө Murgel and what we know about the Prehistoric Bön of Tibet, poorly understood aspects of both belief systems can be further illuminated.
Our examination of living traditions and historical sources will also demonstrate that a prehistoric form, or forms, of Bön was most likely practised by many peoples over many eons in many diverse locations in Eurasia and elsewhere with considerable impact on the development of subsequent belief systems.
As for so-called ‘shamanism’, it is my hope that the detailed exposition covering the initiation process, lives and techniques of Buryatian Bө and Utgan found in this book will help to lift the veil of ignorance surrounding the indispensable qualities needed to become a shaman and the tremendous challenges, responsibilities and suffering this calling entails.
Finally, by making available hitherto unpublished materials and pictures pertaining to both Yungdrung Bön and Bө Murgel, I hope the reader will gain a wider understanding and appreciation of these little known traditions which are in fact an important part of our common world heritage.
In this study, I take an approach which may be somewhat unorthodox for research into comparative religions, namely that of an ‘insider’. That means that, while reference is made to other sources, the main core of presentations on Yungdrung Bön and Bө Murgel is based on traditional texts and information given by adherents to these traditions. This includes matters relating to the origin of the teachings, their history, mythology and so on. Although I am aware that some of the traditional dates – especially as regards Bön – are disputed by some Western and Buddhist scholars, I have chosen to follow the traditional reckoning, following the premise of ‘innocent until proven guilty’: although there is insufficient hard proof to support these ancient dates at present, they cannot be simply discarded outright as there is equally insufficient evidence to disprove traditional chronology. In Chapter XV in particular, I put forward some arguments based on scientific findings and theories which may support the antiquity of the founder of Yungdrung Bön, Tönpa Shenrab Miwo, and his teachings. As regards the study of rituals, in many instances I draw upon my own experiences and observations in both Yungdrung Bön and Bө Murgel which are pinned against materials contained in works of prominent scholars in the fields of Bön and Siberian Shamanism. I have been privileged to work closely with Yongdzin Lopön Tenzin Namdak Rinpoche and with his kind permission have included some lengthy excerpts from edited transcripts of his teachings, as well as interviews and presentations given for the purpose of this publication.
Although I have consulted many knowledgeable scholars and practitioners of both Yungdrung Bön and Bө Murgel in the course of my research, I must point out that the ideas presented in this book and the conclusions I have drawn are my own and do not represent the views of the individual practitioners or informants from Yungdrung Bön, Tibetan Buddhism or Bө Murgel unless otherwise stated. The nature of the field of this research allows for different interpretations depending on the angle from which a topic is observed and which aspects are emphasised. Research is in a state of constant flux and as new facts come to light, assumptions based on outdated information are naturally challenged. I invite readers to keep an open mind and make their own judgement on the materials and views presented here.

Is the Bhavacakra a map of the mind? In a cross cultural approach we offer the interpretation of this Tibetan Buddhist painting in the light of Dzogchen psychology and modern neurosciences... The premise on which the psychological reading of the bhavacakra are based was aptly expressed by the H.H. the XIVth Dalai Lama: “Being malleable, mind is able to change... Samsara is the cycle of existences, nirvana its over- coming... both are mental states. Samsara is a deviation from mindful understanding, a distorted vision of reality that subjects the mind to mental afflictions, while nirvana is a state of inner freedom, released from every conceptual and emotional obstacle.”

I'm available for presentations, conferences, teachings, speeches in english, french and italian, related to Bhavacakra as a map of the mind and its implications for mindfulness practices. guidofreddi@gmail.com

In Indian and Tibetan forms of Buddhism “pointing-out instructions” (ngo sprod) generally signifies an introduction to the nature of mind by a spiritual teacher to a qualified disciple. Pointing-out instructions are associated with tantric Buddhist lineages of meditation and yogic practice in a number of Indo-Tibetan traditions. In Nyingma lineages pointing-out instructions are connected to varied Great Perfection (rdzogs chen) traditions where one confronts the natural state (gnas lugs ngo sprod). Kagyü and other Tibetan Buddhist traditions of the new sects (gsar ma) associate pointing-out instructions with the practice of mahāmudrā. It is often claimed that the influence of Gampopa Sönam Rinchen’s (1079-1153) mahāmudrā teachings in Tibet was such that, as one erudite scholar has even suggested, “all Kagyü reflections on mahāmudrā is really but a series of footnotes to Gampopa.” Following this mode of thought, most modern scholarly sources have ignored the possibility of Kadampa influence on Gampopa and the varied Kagyü meditation manuals that came after him. This article clearly demonstrates that Atiśa Dīpaṃkaraśrījñāna (982-1054) and his early Kadampa followers significantly influenced Gampopa and subsequent Kagyü traditions in their structuring of mahāmudrā meditation manuals.  The systematized and structured “not-specifically-tantric-practice” type of pointing-out instructions of mahāmudrā are intimately related to Atiśa’s Stages of the Path, its commentaries, and the teachings found in the Pointing-Out Instructions in Sets of Five presented and translated in this article for the first time in English.

Una obra de LOngchenpa en la que explica el significado de los 8 símiles (como un sueño, un espectáculo mágico, una ilusión óptica, un espejismo, el reflejo de la Luna en el agua, un eco, una ciudad de gandharvas, y una aparición) recurriendo a Sutra, Tantra, e instrucciones orales.

A detailed topical outline of "Rainbow Body and Resurrection: Spiritual Attainment, the Dissolution of the Material Body, and the Case of Khenpo A Chö" (2016) by Francis V. Tiso. The Table of Contents of this extensive, expertly-written book lists chapter headings only.

Timeless awareness is the essence of Dzogchen. Time experienced within timeless awareness is also an expression of the essence of Dzogchen. Dzogchen is an ancient form of Tibetan mystic humanism. Dzogchen makes the essential distinction between mind and awareness. A person can be located in mind alone and locked in time. As a person shifts from being located in mind alone (mindfulness) and goes beyond mind alone (mindfulness), one becomes aware of their own awareness. As we focus our awareness on our own innermost awareness, vast dimensions of awareness begin to open and self-reveal its nature to us. Awareness is a multidimensional experience and this awareness is infinite in its horizons. The innate qualities of awareness are spaciousness or openness or emptiness. Another quality of our awareness is luminous radiance and still another is awareness as energy. Awareness is alive and is both vast stillness and unceasing movement. The Union of Mind and Awareness When a person is able to experience the union of their mind and their awareness, then the person has a simultaneous experience of being in time and in timeless awareness. The mind is the place of thinking, feeling, sensation, memory and imagination and the mind is the mode of knowing singularity and difference in the world. This is the realm of ordinary knowingness and this is the realm of duality. Our mind is the realm of time. This time bound knowing is the knowing of you and I, us and them, this or that in time and place.