I’ve been reading Dzogchen and other Nyingma teachings, including Patrul Rinpoche’s A Brief Explanation of Refuge and Bodhicitta, and there is one issue I keep coming back to: the expectation of unwavering, seemingly unconditional devotion to the guru.

I understand that in Vajrayana, the guru is not regarded merely as a teacher who transmits information. The guru is understood as someone who can introduce the student to the nature of mind, and devotion is considered essential to receiving the blessings and realizing the teachings. I also understand that intellectual understanding alone is not the same as realization.

But I still struggle with the idea that a student should develop such profound trust in a human being, sometimes to the point where doubting the guru is itself presented as an obstacle to spiritual progress.

Why is this degree of devotion necessary?

I find myself wondering whether devotion is meant to be a skilful means of overcoming the ego’s resistance to genuine transformation, or whether it can sometimes discourage the very critical examination that Buddhist teachings otherwise encourage. How does one distinguish between a doubt arising from one’s own habitual confusion and a reasonable concern about a teacher’s words or behaviour?

I’m not asking this to dismiss guru devotion or to argue that a student should never trust a teacher. I genuinely want to understand why it occupies such a central place in these traditions, and whether it is possible to take the teachings seriously while continuing to question this aspect of them.

I suspect there is something important I am missing, so I would appreciate thoughtful explanations, especially from practitioners who have wrestled with these questions themselves.

An excerpt for you to have an idea why I question the issue like this, to my mind this is so extreme.

1 . To always believe that whatever your guru does is good

Whatever form your guru shows, whether he is a monk, or a yogi or a

layman, you must believe that whatever he does is good. If he is a monk

and indulges in meat and wine, eats after mid-day; or takes a wife, or if

he is a yogi and acts roughly and without care, you should not lack faith

and devotion however he behaves, since whatever is done by the guru

is good. Whatever is done by the guru is the expression of the natural

mode. His activity is a miraculous apparitional display. You must believe

that everything he does is good and beneficial for sentient beings. If

your guru is a householder with many children and he is doing worldly

work and business, subduing enemies and protecting friends, killing

sentient beings and so forth, then you must go to him for refuge and

firmly believe that these activities are his demonstration of whatever

method of training is necessary for sentient beings.

I’m reading Patrul Rinpoche’s A Brief Explanation of Refuge and Bodhicitta, it's from Simply Being by James Low, and I came across the following passage:

“The four white actions that are the antidotes to these are:

1. Never consciously tell a lie, even at the cost of your life.”

I found this example quite extreme, and I’m wondering how we should understand it. Are these meant to be taken as literal examples of the kind of commitment a practitioner should be prepared to uphold, even in life-threatening situations? Or are they somewhat exaggerated examples used for teaching purposes, intended to emphasize the importance of truthfulness and the seriousness of bodhisattva commitments?

I know I’ve asked similar questions before, and I understand that getting too caught up in whether every example should be interpreted literally may not be the most productive approach. I also understand that the point is probably to emphasize the depth of one’s commitment rather than to encourage rigid, literalistic thinking.

Still, the extremity of this particular example confuses me. Does it mean that one should genuinely be willing to die rather than tell a lie, regardless of the circumstances? Or is there a more nuanced way to understand what Patrul Rinpoche is teaching here?

I'm trying to understand the distinction between relative and absolute bodhicitta, and I'd appreciate some clarification.

As I understand it, relative bodhicitta is the aspiration to attain complete enlightenment in order to benefit all sentient beings.

Absolute bodhicitta, on the other hand, is described as genuine knowing (or primordial knowing) arising from the direct realization of emptiness.

Am I understanding this distinction correctly? In particular, is absolute bodhicitta itself the direct realization of emptiness, or does it refer to the wisdom that arises from that realization?

I've been studying Buddhism, particularly the early Buddhist teachings, and I've recently become more interested in Dzogchen.

I'm trying to understand whether ignorance (avijja in Pali, avidya in Sanskrit, ma rig pa in Tibetan) means essentially the same thing in both contexts, or whether Dzogchen approaches it in a fundamentally different way.

In the early Buddhist teachings, ignorance seems closely connected to not understanding the Four Noble Truths, the three characteristics, dependent origination, and the nature of suffering. It conditions craving and continued suffering.

In Dzogchen, however, ignorance seems to be described more in terms of failing to recognize the nature of one's own mind or experience — not recognizing rigpa and becoming caught up in dualistic perception.

These explanations seem related, but I'm not sure whether they are simply different ways of describing the same basic problem or whether there is a significant doctrinal difference.

I have seen many pictures of Dzogchen masters like Dudjom Rinpoche and others wearing tinted glasses. Does anyone else think this may have something to do with Togyal practice? My own eyes have always been very sensitive and it is difficult to practice when the sun is high without some way to tone down the light.

Image Jigme Lingpa’s vision of the Longchen Nyingtik, by Tara di Gesu

An Account of Jigme Lingpa’s vision of the Longchen Nyingtik.

*Excerpt from:

Dance of the Moon in the Water: An Account of my Realizations And Secret Visionary Experiences:

…on the evening of the twenty-fifth day of the tenth month of the Female Fire Ox year (1757), my devotion to the great master Guru Padmasambhava blazed so intensely that tears welled up. Prompted by some vague memories from the past, I was overcome with a profound sense of sadness: “We red-faced Tibetans behave like outcasts, and in this land where people live with a mere semblance of the Teachings and are rife with desire and aversion, I wander like an orphan left behind in the borderlands. That compassionate protector, greater than all the buddhas, has departed for the Glorious Copper-Coloured Mountain. When will I ever have the fortune to meet him now?” At this thought I was filled with immense grief. I fell asleep with tears flowing ceaselessly.

As I mentioned in the autobiographical account of my realization, The Dance of the Moon in the Water(direct pdf download), the following vision occurred to me. Amid a vast expanse of luminosity, all-pervading and boundless, I was riding a beautiful white snow lioness and was carried off into the limitless reaches of space. After a while a landscape took shape and I arrived on the circumambulation path of what seemed to be the Jarung Khashor Stūpa of Boudha in Nepal. As soon as I went to its eastern courtyard I met the dharmakāya wisdom ḍākinī face to face. She handed me a flat wooden casket shaped like a sealed amulet box and said:

For disciples with pure perception,\ You are Tri Songdetsen.\ For disciples with impure perception,\ You are Senge Repa.\ This is the treasure of Samantabhadra’s wisdom mind,\ The symbols of Vidyādhara Padma’s vast expanse,\ The great secret treasury of the ḍākinīs. Let the signs be absorbed.

The moment she had said this she vanished without trace and the vision grew faint and hazy. Overflowing with joy, I opened the casket. Out tumbled five rolls of yellow scroll paper and seven white crystals about the size of peas. As I opened the largest scroll on the spot, the air was filled with countless aromatic fragrances of medicinal herbs such as camphor. My head and whole body tingled, and suddenly a thought arose: “The treasure lord of this is Rāhula. These teachings are extremely potent and should be approached with caution.” When I gradually unrolled it, I noticed that outwardly it had the form of a stūpa and inside it was abound with the secret symbolic script of the ḍākinīs, beyond the reach of the intellect. Unable to read it, I began to roll it up again, and at that very instant, like a magical illusion, the drawing of the stūpa disappeared and the symbols within all turned into Tibetan script. It was a sādhana cycle of the Great Compassionate One (Dukngal Rangdrol). I skimmed through it and then stopped. Wondering to whom this transmission had fallen, to whom it had been entrusted and what kind of prophecy it contained about my future lives, I looked at the bottom and saw very clearly:

Entrusted as the Dharma share of the Dharma king, father and son.

When I read the rest, the entire text appeared all at once in my mind like a reflection arising in a mirror, yet it was somehow impossible to read it out in sequence. It was an experience difficult to put into words. Then, with boundless joy, I put some of the crystals into my mouth and was about to take the yellow scrolls and return home when a monk in disguise suddenly appeared beside me as a companion. He said, “I’ve long had a feeling that something like this would come to you,” and showed me extraordinary reverence. I became certain he was the protector of the teachings, the Great Sage Rāhula. At that moment I reached the northern courtyard of the circumambulation path. When I opened another scroll, I came upon the key inventory The Casket of Enlightened Mind. It was so exceptionally vivid in my mind that an experience of irrepressible great bliss blazed up. I thought, “This is truly liberation through seeing. I must show it to my mother.” Just then, through an opening in the sky, a richly adorned woman whom I took to be my mother came down abruptly. She was the one who later deciphered the symbols at Samye Chimphu. I showed it to her, saying, “Look, liberation through seeing!” She replied, “You really are too eager to show what ought to be kept secret. It’s not only liberation through seeing but also liberation through tasting, so eat it yourself!” She made me eat all the crystals and yellow scrolls, and when I gulped them down, every word and their meaning was imprinted in my mind, wondrous beyond measure. At that moment I awoke from the visionary experience…

Кто понимает, что означает выражение: “Быть в состоянии осознания присутствия!”. Присутствие это значит быть здесь и сейчас в физическом измерении или в метафизическом - Изначальном состоянии (Ригпа)? В осознании это значит: в поле направленного внимания, открытого или из Изначального состояния (Ригпа)?  

Hi there, i expect you are having a good time =)

Got a question but with all respect if you want to help me with a comment please dont answer with "Go get a Guru".

¿Is there such a thing as Valid Cognition in Dzogchen? What is the status of Knowledge?

Because im seeing people saying Dzogchen has no tenets etc its seems this system Is portrayed even as if was not buddhism.

Edit 2 Well then i have read It all and the conclusions im getting Is that Valid Cognitions are just kind of skillful means or contingent frameworks of experience nothing fixed.

Si basically consensus Is like a dualistic framework that Is temporal y present but not solid at all, in my opinion

So you have advanced Dzogchen practitioners that are said in scriptures going trought walls, so for them the "reality" of the wall being solid Is NO More Valid, basically they can invalidate the consensus or shared relative truth of other beings.

Thanks again

Edit Thanks for all the people that wanted to help, honestly.

Just want to say something

I know ones need a Guru in Dzogchen and i respect that.

But if only realying in the teacher how ones sharpen ones own understanding. Even teachings say you need to analize the Guru otherwise Is risky. How that Is going to happen of you don allow to study yourself the main topics or to have a sharp mind that understand all this topics. Dont mean to be irrespecful.

Regards

Recently, I became very interested in Tibetan Buddhism, and especially Dzogchen. I got so excited that I started trying to learn as much as possible, as quickly as possible: Dzogchen, Mahamudra, the three kayas, rigpa, the yanas, sunnyata, Buddha-nature, and so on.

After a while, I realized that I was probably making a mistake. I was trying to understand a very deep and sophisticated teaching without having a sufficiently solid understanding of some of the basic Buddhist concepts underneath it.

So I decided to step back and study early Buddhism and the earliest teachings for a while. I worked through some of the early suttas and focused on things like the Four Noble Truths, the Noble Eightfold Path, dependent origination, the five khandhas, anatta, tanha, dukkha, etc.

This was actually very helpful. I feel that I now understand some of the Dzogchen terminology in a much better context. But I have run into another problem. When I try to “start from the beginning” and learn Buddhism as a whole, I get lost again. Buddhism is simply enormous. Theravada, Mahayana, Madhyamaka, Yogacara, Vajrayana, the different Tibetan schools, different meditation systems, different philosophical approaches...

Before I know it, I'm jumping from one subject to another and accumulating information without really knowing where I'm going. And the funny thing is that my main interest is still Dzogchen. So I'm starting to wonder whether the approach of “first learn all of Buddhism, and only then study Dzogchen” is actually the best approach for me.

Perhaps it would make more sense to keep Dzogchen as my main axis, while going back and studying the Buddhist foundations whenever I encounter something that I don't properly understand.

Something like:

Dzogchen - identify what I don't understand - study the relevant foundational teachings - return to Dzogchen (maybe?)

rather than trying to learn the entire history and philosophy of Buddhism first.

I'd really appreciate advice from people with more experience.

I want to build a solid foundation, but I also don't want to lose sight of the tradition that genuinely interests me.

Hi,

So I've been doing beginner trekcho meditation.
I've been getting different states, some bliss, but mostly a psychedelic state.

Now I have always had a looser perception than most, with acuity of sound and vision and a kind of estrangement to it. I've also for many years had rather intense migraines, though these had mostly ceased.

Simultaneously with the states, which I also have when not sitting, my migraines have returned, much more visually with intense auras and hypersensitivity. These can take multiple days and I'm having a hard time separating what is what.

Can there be a relationship between the two? My two lama's are away since summer so I have noone to ask. I'm scheduling an appointment with a neurologist.

Thank you

warm greetings to the community

after a series of events the "Unworldly Wise" by Terence Gray (Wei Wu Wei) has ended up on my lap.

this piece ended up being the most important & most intimate beacon that spoke to me dearly in years.

I'm craving to connect with whoever who has processed it and who has a clear enough recall of the contents of the book, (or has revisited it recently.)

if there is anyone who has a clue that someone else might have processed it and can talk to me, I'd be profoundly grateful.

I need to bridge some overarching aspects with the Teaching.

Book toponyms:

1974, Hong Kong University Press. ISBN 0-85656-103-7 (out of print) (Note: this book published under the further pseudonym 'O.O.O.'); 2004, Boulder: Sentient Publications. ISBN 1-59181-019-1

Hi, the following is a question that has occupied me since learning about Dzogchen:

I know that in Dzogchen emptiness is the highest principle and the ultimate reality, but emptiness is also not viewed as a substance.

Wouldn´t this factually leave the self-luminous, manifesting, primordial consciousness of Rigpa as the only substance of reality (if emptiness = non-substance), making it effectively a sort of "negative space consciousness monism" thanks to its philosophy on emptiness.

I am asking this question because to me this seems to be somewhat of a middle position between "conventional" Buddhist and non dual tantric Hindu thought (if leaving things like the definition of god(s), deification of awareness etc aside).

Hello dzogchen community,

I’m admittedly new to learning about dzogchen. I’ve read some books, attended teachings, and spoken to some teachers/spiritual friends.

But, I’m struggling with how learning about Dzogchen is impacting my life.

In the past, I‘ve worked hard to develop habits and practices to uplift my life. For instance, consistent exercise, daily organization, or balance with social media.

Since learning of dzogchen, I’ve noticed myself justify becoming out of balance with all of those things and more. For instance, whether to exercise or not becomes “well it doesn’t really matter whether you feel good or bad, so fuck it, it’s okay if feel bad.”

Same for social media. I came across this thread when reflecting on this: https://www.reddit.com/r/Dzogchen/comments/1i6fr41/dzogchen_and_social_media/

one of the comments says: “Even beginning practitioners who want to scroll social media can try to do so with a sense of being present in the moment and undistracted, and this serves as a great basis in general.”

I feel like I just say: well fuck worrying about whatever you are doing, I just got to remember to be present and aware with all of life and all of my hold ups. That is the path, so it doesn’t matter if you do good or bad habits.

I’m aware this is coming from mistaken understanding (and presumably a lack of genuinely recognizing rigpa), which is why I’m reaching out here.
Has anyone gone through something similar, and if so, what supported you?

Hi all! I came across a dzogchen course with Khenpo Arta Lama Rinpoche.

I've not heard of him before. I tried doing some research and havent found anything concerning but wanted to ask here if anyone has studied with him or heard anything that I should know before studying with him.

Thank you and may all beings know their true self.

Hi there. Begginer to Dzogchen here.

No guru for the moment so in just reading books about the subject.

So It seems that the poisons can be turned into the Path but i cant find any related to the Energy of Lust.

Whats the meaning of the Energy of Lust in Dzogchen? Can be transformed? Or just sef liberate?

Regards.