Dzogchen and Realizing Emptiness

James O'Neill

To Kyle and So
It seems like all your hard work Kyle and So is having an effect LOL
From Jackson Peterson
10 hrs
Its key at this level that the mind has already realized twofold emptiness. The subconscious is projecting an imaginary "seeker/practitioner" that is busy managing "their enlightenment project". Dzogchen makes no sense if there is still such a "practitioner" "doing" all this and is trying to realize and stabilize rigpa. Rigpa only is vividly present when that subconscious self-entity has ceased being projected into consciousness. In other words there is a complete absence of all daydreaming AND the lead character ie "me".
There is no "you" entity there except an imaginary one. When the mind ceases creating that "me-self" then there is only rigpa present as itself knowing itself.
It's not that there is "someone" to realize rigpa, but that that someone doesn't exist and never has. The seeker is a phantasm arising as the creative expression of rigpa itself.
It's assumed by the time Dzogchen is being introduced this realization of "anatta" or no-self has arisen clearly. If not then one should focus on realizing twofold emptiness first.
·

4 people like this. (Saturday, August 16, 2014 at 5:46am)
James O'Neill

Its a must to read all the responses to this post in Dzogchen Discussion Group

(Saturday, August 16, 2014 at 6:05am)
Kyle Dixon

Though I disagree that realizing emptiness is an essential prerequisite for practicing Dzogchen. If it was then really no one would be able to practice Dzogchen.

Realization of emptiness as a prerequisite also doesn't make sense because Dzogchen practices are meant to lead to realizing emptiness.

Jackson and I disagree on various principles, and there are quite a few things in his statement I can't say I agree with, but that is just me.

8 liked this (Saturday, August 16, 2014 at 8:40am)
Soh

What Jackson meant by anatta is also different. He sees it in terms of impersonality and non-doership. His view is still substantialist -- One Mind.

6 liked this (Saturday, August 16, 2014 at 1:09pm)
James O'Neill

THANKS FOR THE CLARITY

(Saturday, August 16, 2014 at 2:51pm)
Viorica Doina Neacsu

Jackson just posted in one of his groups Twofold Emptiness. doc, sharing his view which is definitely another view than emptiness teachings has ... it is a blend...

"Twofold Emptiness refers to these two aspects of experience: subjects and objects and our seeing the empty nature of our beliefs regarding them. By
“empty” we don’t mean that the subjects and objects don’t exist, but that our concepts and beliefs that we overlay and apply to our sensory contacts are no more than mentally conceived names, labels and imputations.

For instance we can say we are ugly or other people are ugly. “Ugly” is an example of an empty belief. It’s purely relative and has no basis in the actual objective universe. The universe doesn’t do ugly, only our mind does. What we don’t notice is how much our world of experience is made up of such empty concepts that do not correlate to any actual reality, yet our mind insists and believes these labels and conceptions are reality. That’s the problem. "

(Sunday, August 17, 2014 at 9:01pm)
Din Robinson

as lovers of truth it seems more useful to me to seek the truth of the matter and speak of that rather than compare and criticize what others have written, find the kernel of truth that all share rather than the differences in the details

(Monday, August 18, 2014 at 2:19am)
Kyle Dixon

Ah, yeah that is not emptiness in the way the buddhadharma and Dzogchen mean 'emptiness'.

2 liked this (Monday, August 18, 2014 at 2:19am)
Din Robinson

as Soh has said below:

"The path of anatta and emptiness is truly the path of total uncontrivance."

(Monday, August 18, 2014 at 2:20am)
Kyle Dixon

Yes but uncontrivance doesn't mean one just gives up and doesn't do anything. It means that through direct experiential insight the factors that could be contrived are pacified.

4 liked this (Monday, August 18, 2014 at 2:23am)
Din Robinson

Yes but uncontrivance also means that the one that would need to give up is seen for the ghost that it is and includes all other ideas about that one, which would also include holding opinions as to what others are posting or not, it's really a matter of moving beyond all ideation into the realm of the here and now, peace and clarity and that is what is passed on or radiated to all around you

(Monday, August 18, 2014 at 2:27am)
David Vardy

That be so Din, Chances are FB would collapse spontaneously.

1 liked this (Monday, August 18, 2014 at 2:32am)
Din Robinson

my previous post apparently says differently David, since it's an intricate part of facebook :)

(Monday, August 18, 2014 at 2:40am)
Kyle Dixon

These systems work with causes and conditions, Din. Even if one has genuinely cut through ignorance there is still habitual tendencies which remain. Only Buddhas are completely free of obscuration.

(Monday, August 18, 2014 at 2:41am)
David Vardy

Jackson didn't suggest that it's a 'poof all gone thing'. He described the process as a peeling away of the onion, whether you agree or disagree with the basis of what he's saying.

(Monday, August 18, 2014 at 2:52am)
Soh

"to give up is seen for the ghost that it is and includes all other ideas about that one"

The 'ghost' is simply the inherent view about self and things. It does not mean one becomes undiscerning, as discerning wisdom, delusion, path, grasping, release, causes and conditions, etc is to discern conventional reality. Realizing emptiness reveals conventional truths as conventional rather than inherently existing, but it does not eschew conventional truth.

This is why Thusness said in the quote I pasted earlier: "By the way, non-discrimination does not deny us from clear discernment. An enlightened person is not one that cannot differentiate 'left' from 'right'. "

4 liked this (Monday, August 18, 2014 at 2:58am)
Viorica Doina Neacsu

Din, you said
"as lovers of truth it seems more useful to me to seek the truth of the matter and speak of that rather than compare and criticize what others have written, find the kernel of truth that all share rather than the differences in the details."

My dear Din, first of all read the OP, please.
Second, i think anyone can google and find out what Anatta or twofold emptiness is, no secrets.
We are here in DC because we trust Buddha's teachings and few of us are the proof that really works.
I like and admire Jackson and that doesn't mean to agree with him when he is inventing or blending his teachings with Buddha's teaching....
Many members of DC are members in his groups too and for sure they are confused reading his posts about Anatta and Twofold Emptiness.
Out of good intentions and because James O'Neill's OP i comment on this thread.
I respect your opinions and that doesn't stop me to share my opinion too. :)

(Monday, August 18, 2014 at 3:11am)
Din Robinson

Soh, to add to what you said there is no discernment when there is no stimulus to discern, discernment arises with the stimulus, with the thoughts or perceptions

(Monday, August 18, 2014 at 3:50am)
Din Robinson

Viorica Doina Neacsu, as soon as I read "My dear Din", I knew I was in trouble! ;)

1 liked this (Monday, August 18, 2014 at 3:55am)
Din Robinson

but what i'm really saying is to not necessarily go with any one teaching but to simply see the kernel of truth in all them, because that's what you really are :)

1 liked this (Monday, August 18, 2014 at 4:02am)
Kyle Dixon

The kernel of truth in them all is a bit too perennialistic for my taste, but to each their own.

1 liked this (Monday, August 18, 2014 at 4:15am)
Viorica Doina Neacsu

hahahahahahahaha Din! :) <3
"I", the "ghost", is always in trouble and loves that! hahahaha

1 liked this (Monday, August 18, 2014 at 6:37am)

---

See original post