Self Liberation through Seeing with Naked Awareness

[django]

This is what happens when you knock out all future and past thoughts, it is not conducive to life https://youtu.be/UyyjU8fzEYU

The right brain experience is most likely 'naked awareness' as the right lobe is the global processor while the left lobe is the linear processor, but merely trying to ignore one way of processing seems like a very uncreative and misguided approach.

How the brain works briefly - the right hemisphere which is more pictorial than verbal takes in global data and sends it to the left hemisphere, which examines the raw data by first referring to history to see if any modifications need to be in the light of the past, and then projects the modified data into the future.

This is a healthy functioning brain, the issue is that the history step refers to our conditioned thoughts and emotions. Just ignoring this step is not useful though, and I doubt it was the Buddha's solution. Emptying out the conditioning is the most effective solution.

[django]

Originally Posted by Rain95

Yes that is true. We need thought and memory and all of that to function. In fact, we need memory and knowledge to become enlightened. Skipping those topics for now, I'll break down thought a little bit.

Say somebody says, "this food is terrible!"

Then you say, "I like it!"

That's all ok and fine... just two people expressing their experience....

The thoughts or thinking/expression was based on actual non-verbal experience.

Then the first person says, "No you are wrong, the food is no good..."

They have now moved from just expressing their experience conceptually to expressing their thoughts about the conceptualized experience of somebody else.

See what triggered the expression of ideas there?

This food is good! (experience)
This food is bad! (experience)
You are wrong it's good! (thought)

The reference moved from actual experience to thought as the reference.

This is what it means when one identifies with thought as self.

When thought becomes the reference or focus, and not real experience, one is in dualism.

What is being described in Buddhism is not letting ideas influence experience. Knowledge grounded in experience, however, can and should influence experience.

I agree that Buddhism in general teaches non-attachment to thought, but Norbu seems to be suggesting something else, perhaps it's standard Tibetan Buddhism - in which case I find it wanting, or perhaps it's just Norbu that believes that all future and present thoughts need to be let go of.

[Rain95]

Originally Posted by django

I agree that Buddhism in general teaches non-attachment to thought, but Norbu seems to be suggesting something else, perhaps it's standard Tibetan Buddhism - in which case I find it wanting, or perhaps it's just Norbu that believes that all future and present thoughts need to be let go of.

Those translations/quotes are not from Namkhai Norbu, they are from John Myrdhin Reynolds who sometimes goes by the name Vajranatha. Some of his translations are really bad. Norbu did the preface for that book, Reynolds did the translations or body of the book. The original texts were written by over 100 translators in the 8th century based on the teachings of Padmasambhava.

Norbu is a much better writer and translator than Reynolds. I wish Norbu would do a translation of those writings. I don't think he is interested though. Norbu has no problem with thinking about the future..here he is talking about it...

I was thinking a little of the future, of how people could follow the essence of the teaching like Mahamudra and Dzogchen. So then I started. I accepted to teach in Rome when Geshe Rabten was there doing a retreat. Chögyal Namkhai Norbu

But it can happen that a phrase intended to indicate a state beyond concepts just becomes another concept in itself. All the philosophical theories that exist have been created by the mistaken dualistic minds of human beings. Norbu

[Rain95]

This translation or choice of words by Reynolds is not good.

abandon all precedents

An insight can be a precedent. Insights are necessary for self-realization. They should never be "abandoned." I don't even think it is possible to abandon them.

[django]

Thanks for clarifying this Rain, I was thinking Norbu must be confusing the hell out of Westerners, but thankfully it doesn't appear to be the case.

[jonesboy]

Originally Posted by Rain95

Those translations/quotes are not from Namkhai Norbu, they are from John Myrdhin Reynolds who sometimes goes by the name Vajranatha. Some of his translations are really bad. Norbu did the preface for that book, Reynolds did the translations or body of the book. The original texts were written by over 100 translators in the 8th century based on the teachings of Padmasambhava.

Norbu is a much better writer and translator than Reynolds. I wish Norbu would do a translation of those writings. I don't think he is interested though. Norbu has no problem with thinking about the future..here he is talking about it...

The teachings in the OP are from Padmasambhava also known as Guru Rinpoche who is considered the Buddha who brought tantra to Tibet and elsewhere. His lineage in Buddhism is more of the Vajrayāna tradition.

The translation is respected and found to be accurate. The fact that Norbu did the preface is his stamp of approval.

Norbu teaches Dzogchen which is a different tradition in Buddhism.

Norbu would not disagree with the teachings of Guru Rinpoche.

As far as the translator.

John Myrdhin Reynolds is a linguist, translator, mystic, and initiated ngagpa (tantric yogin) of the Nyingmapa school of Tibetan Buddhism. Since his 1974 ngagpa ordination under Kyabjé Dudjom Rinpoche, he also has been known by the dharma names he was then given: Vajranatha in Sanskrit, or Rigdzin Dorje Gonpo in Tibetan.

Reynolds studied History of Religions, Anthropology, Arabic, Sanskrit, Tibetan, and Buddhist Studies at Columbia University, at the University of California at Berkeley, and at the University of Washington at Seattle. He did his PhD research in Sanskrit, Tibetan, and Buddhist Philosophy under Prof. Edward Conze.

Since then, his emphasis has been on Dzogchen and the Buddhist Tantras, particularly within the Tibetan Nyingma, Kagyu, and Bön traditions, and especially in comparison with Gnosticism and other mystical traditions of the West. For more than two decades, he has worked most closely with Chogyal Namkhai Norbu and Lopon Tenzin Namdak on translations of important Nyingmapa and Bönpo Dzogchen texts respectively. Meanwhile, he continues his researches and lectures widely in India, Europe, and America.

I really don't know why we have to disparage that which we don't understand.

If one is unsure or confused about the teachings being presented just let me know what you are confused about and I will do my best to help.

[jonesboy]

Originally Posted by Rain95

This translation or choice of words by Reynolds is not good.



An insight can be a precedent. Insights are necessary for self-realization. They should never be "abandoned." I don't even think it is possible to abandon them.

Precendent: an earlier event or action that is regarded as an example or guide to be considered in subsequent similar circumstances.

Let go of the local mind, of the judgment's of the past, of the expectations of the future.

The Natural State is beyond all such things, so let it all go.

[sky]

Originally Posted by jonesboy

Precendent: an earlier event or action that is regarded as an example or guide to be considered in subsequent similar circumstances.

Let go of the local mind, of the judgment's of the past, of the expectations of the future.

The Natural State is beyond all such things, so let it all go.

' Let go of the local mind, of the judgment's of the past '


What does he mean in ' judgments of the past?

I can see that thinking about the.... could have.... should have.... what if etc: is pointless but we can learn from past mistakes which are judgments in a way.

[jonesboy]

Originally Posted by sky123

' Let go of the local mind, of the judgment's of the past '


What does he mean in ' judgments of the past?

I can see that thinking about the.... could have.... should have.... what if etc: is pointless but we can learn from past mistakes which are judgments in a way.

That is me saying judgments of the past.

With clarity we are seeing things how they truly are. Beyond our fears and issues right?

How can you see things with clarity or how they truly are if the lens is filtered through our past issues and fears?

You can't.

Think of how that filtered lens impacts how we love, how open we are, trust, confidence, on what is right and wrong. Notice how that filter is different for everyone. What is wrong for me and my culture is totally different for another person or culture.

The Natural State is beyond that filter.

[Rain95]

Originally Posted by jonesboy

considered the Buddha who brought tantra to Tibet and elsewhere. His lineage in Buddhism is more of the Vajrayāna tradition.

I'm not sure you understand the Buddhist "religion" or religion in general. It can't all be "true." Buddhist's disagree with each other. That's why there are different "traditions." In some religions like Christianity, these different "traditions" would be called cults. I know a Christian who tells me all the time her church is the only right one. That's what her pastor tells her and her whole group. She tells me every other Christian group is wrong and going to hell based on some little detail. One difference in Buddhism is culturally one normally would never call any other Buddhist group a "cult." Buddhist are taught to be non-judgemental and not focused on thought and thinking. So if one Buddhist saw another Buddhist group doing some wrong thing, they would normally just say, that path is not for me and leave it there.

Religion is full of individuals who all believe in their own way. I think it is Tantic Buddhism that is said to have added the most new content or dogma long after Buddha died. All Buddhists claim to be followers of Buddha just like all Christian churches claim to be followers of Jesus, but there are huge differences in belief and practice. Every leader/authority that comes along in a religion interprets in their own way, can add beliefs, add practices.

Thinking all Buddhist traditions are equally "true" and "right" is like thinking Celibate Christian Trappist Monks are the same as some Christian group where all the men have 20 wives and are encouraged to have sex. In Buddhist monasticism, as taught by Buddha, abstaining completely from sex is seen as a necessity in order to reach enlightenment. Some Tantric Buddhism claims sex can be used as a path to enlightenment. These are opposing opposite teachings. Some "Buddhist" teachings or traditions go completely against what Buddha taught. But that's fine they are still "Buddhist" as they accept Buddha as their founder. Just like how some cult that is into free love and drugs will call themselves "Christian" if they follow Jesus.

Originally Posted by jonesboy

Norbu teaches Dzogchen which is a different tradition in Buddhism.

Norbu would not disagree with the teachings of Guru Rinpoche.

The whole reason Norbu became a teacher is he disagreed with another Buddhist teacher and felt he better teach so people understood Buddhism in the right way.

You can read the whole story in Norbu's words here: http://melong.com/twenty-seven-commi...namkhai-norbu/

Here's what Norbu said. He said he was often asked to teach but he didn't want to be a teacher. He finally accepted because there was a Buddhism teacher named Lama Geshe Rabten who did not teach Mahamudra and Dzogchen like he did, who did not understand this Buddhism, so that's why he became a teacher. Because he was afraid if he didn't teach people they would follow this other teacher and path.

Then I thought, “Maybe if I refuse all, then it is not so good. I should do something. All students will become students of Geshe Rabten.” So this does not mean I am jealous of Geshe Rabten, or that I am comparing myself with Geshe Rabten. I was thinking a little of the future, of how people could follow the essence of the teaching like Mahamudra and Dzogchen. So then I started. I accepted to teach in Rome when Geshe Rabten was there doing a retreat. Then I said, “OK, we do a retreat, Norbu

Now you used the word "disagree" and yes he did not "disagree." Like I said, Buddhist culture is one of non-judgment and so true Buddhist's don't judge others. But at the same time, Norbu felt strongly what he taught was better and that's why he finally decided he better teach.

Originally Posted by jonesboy

Norbu would not disagree with the teachings of Guru Rinpoche.

True, externally or outwardly Buddhist's don't disagree with anyone. They let others be. They let others be free to follow anything they want. Does this mean they also would follow these other paths and transitions? No. They don't view them as valid ways to reach enlightenment. That's the thing, they believe their way is the right one and the other traditions are wrong, but culturally they would never say this. One of free to live any way of life they want and one can reach enlightenment without any path at all as it is based on what is within all. I think Buddhism is the only large world religion that historically did not go to war with another religion. The reason for this is Buddhism emphasizes realization and real life practice and not dogma and belief.