sorry I'm so damn slow to reply. I'm intrigued by Dzogchen - did I say that so often what I read of Dzogchen resonates powerfully with me. I see in one of the threads that theurj calls one writer (Caprille) 'a Dzogchen apologist'. What does he refer to, do you know? And I'm also intrigued by what your practice is if you don't consider Dzogchen a school or a belief. How do you approach Dzogchen?
As for that avatar. It's a photo I took of myself I had on the computer. Choosing it wasn't the result of much deliberation - I joined this site 2/3 years ago and pretty much chose the nearest available image I liked. I keep intending to change it when I find an image I like better. Tell me what your impressions are.
and thanks for the invite! In answer to your question my connection to Dzogchen is glancing in terms of formal practice, yet strong in terms of the resonance I feel when I read about many of its claims and practices. The closest I come to Dzogchen is Mahamudra related practice recommended by Kenneth Folk.
hey, I am here in Mendocino with the full moon coming on in the next day or so....the waves are rising. Having a great time! Imagine it was a year ago I was in Devon! hmm, we are going to be 100 in about 10 minutes.
hope all is well love Jane
I found it at this link. It's taken from Elias Capriles in “Beyond Mind II,” The International Journal of Transpersonal Studies, 2006, Volume 25, pp. 1 - 44. He said:
"It is true that the ego emerges from an original dynamic, creative, spontaneous source—which here I am calling Dzogchen qua Base—from which it then becomes estranged. However, it is also important to emphasize the following facts: (1) that the source in question is the trikaya qua Base; (2) that in spite of the fact that, as underlined in the Chuang Tzu, the condition of the child is in many ways similar to Awakening, it is radically different from Awakening in that it does not at all involve the reGnition (of ) the trikaya qua Base and does not even involve the capacity to deal with reality effectively; (3) that though the ego emerges from this source, the latter is not and cannot be reGnized in infancy before the arising of the ego, but on the contrary, can only be reGnized after the ego has been fully developed and, having become ripe, it is ready to fall from the tree of the internalized family and dissolve (and, in fact, among the few who obtain this reGnition, the great bulk do so as adults); (4) that despite the fact that realization involves going back to the source, this “going back,” rather than consisting in a going back to the unreGnized manifestation of Dzogchen qua Base, corresponds to the reGnition of this condition, which in samsaric beings is an unprecedented, wholly new occurrence" (19).
Honestly I don't understand the technical jargon. And to clarify, I said that the zero state is not a return to the original pre-reflective awareness but an integration of that awareness with the later ego. In fact I found some "evidence" to this effect from Caprilles in one of the threads but cannot locate it at the moment. I'll look for it, maybe in the transpersonal psychology threaed?
What paths lie ahead for religion and spirituality in the 21st Century? How might the insights of modernity and post-modernity impact and inform humanity's ancient wisdom traditions? How are we to enact, together, new spiritual visions – independently, or within our respective traditions – that can respond adequately to the challenges of our times?
This group is for anyone interested in exploring these questions and tracing out the horizons of an integral post-metaphysical spirituality.
Notice to Visitors
At the moment, this site is at full membership capacity and we are not admitting new members. We are still getting new membership applications, however, so I am considering upgrading to the next level, which will allow for more members to join. In the meantime, all discussions are open for viewing and we hope you will read and enjoy the content here.