I’ve been reflecting back quite a bit recently about my journey, and how I’ve taken many approaches at different times – I believe because they’ve each been appropriate at the time.
I don’t know if I’ve ever had a ‘one size fits all’ type attitude when it comes to whatever this strange thing that we call ‘spiritual’ – but for sure I don’t have any such thoughts now. I’ve shifted modes and practices based on a very deep intuitive sense of what is needed now/next, and have not been afraid to making some fairly sharp shifts – some that might seem backwards to some eyes.
My own dance between Yanas
As the briefest of potted histories I practiced across both Theravada and Mahayana traditions for around 8 years. This was then followed by 10 years of Mahamudra. I then shifted to a Theravada approach for 10, and have been in a Dzogchen mode for the last 2 years.
If you were practicing in any of the Tibetan Buddhist traditions, or even Mahayana, then there’d be no prizes for guessing which of those steps might be viewed as ‘backwards’ by some!
In my own case that particular switch turbocharged my practice and led to quite wonderful changes – which have never left me to this day.
A view on Yanas from a Dzogchen perspective
Given my adventures across traditions I thought it would be interesting to share some reflections back across those approaches. I’m not doing this off my own back though – there are a number of excellent commentaries on this area which I’ll share at the end. In particular I’d like to mention James Low, Chogyam Trungpa Rinpoche and David Chapman whose work is the foundation for this article.
I could equally have written this as a Mahamudra guide to the Yanas and much would not have changed. Some would, but there’s a fair bit of overlap. As my approach these days is Dzogchen at heart I’ve taken that perspective here.
Sutrayana – Hinayana and Mahayana
Since a millenia ago the Tibetan’s have categorised the various teachings of the Buddha into various vehicles, which culminate – naturally enough – with their particular teachings at the summit!
This built on the earlier views of the Mahayana, which saw itself has building on top of what it called the Hinayana.
From this perspective what may be called Sutrayana is the yana or vehicle which contains both Hinayana and Mahayana. They have enough in common to address together, though there are important distinctions, which make a real difference in practice.
So let’s take a look from the lens inherited by Tibetan Buddhism, and from Dzogchen / Mahamudra in particular.
Sutrayana is the vehicle of escaping suffering
We have the teachings of Siddhartha Gautama recorded in the Pali canon. These are our closest records to what he taught. It’s fair to say it’s difficult to know how much of this has evolved over time. Nevertheless there is an incredible focus to his teachings, and the conceptions of Samsara and Nirvana (Nibbana in Pali) are fundamental. He diagnosed the spiritual issue as being one of us experiencing suffering, and what the cause of that was. He further diagnosed a path leading out of that, leading to the end of suffering – Nibbana.
Absolutely fundamental here is a dualism between Samsara and Nirvana – they are entirely different in nature. One is filled with the three types of suffering, or Dukkha. The other is beyond that – the Deathless.
Given that all that we experience which we experience as impermanent – that which comes and goes – is seen as inherently suffering, then clearly the job is to escape from that to an Island beyond suffering. So there’s a realm of existence – our realm – which is tainted by suffering, and there’s a ‘place’ to get to which is beyond that – free from suffering.
My own experience here is very much aligned with this. I did have a yearning for the transcendental, for that which lies beyond the mundane world tainted by suffering. I did experience all that arises and ceases as tainted by suffering, and I did find a bottomless peace in Nirodha Samapatti – the cessation of all perception and feeling – essentially the cessation of all experience.
Hinayana sits at the bottom
When it comes to this conception of Sutrayana there are two varieties. Sitting at the bottom, so to speak, is the Hinayana. Ouch! Though it’s quite controversial, the Theravada tradition in some ways exemplifies the Hinayana. I say controversial because how you practice a tradition has as much bearing on Yana is what particular teachings you choose to follow. You could say that Hinayana is a rather restrictive and caricatured characterisation of what modern Theravada is. And of course in this hierarchical view being seen to be bottom is not the most flattering of views!
For sure the fundamental focus of Hinayana is the attempt to get out of Samsara, of your experience of suffering. For sure the world, and life in are viewed as fundamentally flawed and attempt to escape it is the only logical one, once you’ve seen things ‘as they are’.
For sure again this approach is not seen as pessimistic by the Theravada tradition – more as realistic. It’s a true picture of life and a true picture of how to fix it.
My sense is that anyone who’s meditated awhile, and gained some experience of sitting with what is will soon experience just how much suffering there is in existence.
Hinayana focus of practice
Given our usual approach to life is to grasp onto those things we like, and push away those things we don’t like. And that we view these things as solid and real, and those qualities of pleasant / unpleasant as being inherent in things – well then we need to prise open our grip on choosing the seemingly pleasant and find what lies beyond.
One of the key means to do that is to constantly become aware of these three levels of suffering in experience. Given our attachment to the pleasant we can bring to mind the unpleasant aspects of life, and learn to see how these are always there, behind our chasing after the pleasant.
Reflecting on death, on the unpleasant aspects of the body, such as puss, shit, fat, urine, etc – these and many others are ways to loosen our compulsive chasing after the elusive pleasant, and grounding ourselves in this approach’s view of what is reality.
When we can do that then we can progressively move towards the escape hatch of Nibbana.
The Hinayana lifestyle of choice – the renunciate
With how we’ve characterised our usual experience of life then it would hardly come as a surprise to find the Renunciate as the model lifestyle of choice. The wandering renunciate (now often supplemented or supplanted by the settled monastic) is someone who tries to separate themselves from as many aspects of life which tie them to the wheel of suffering. It gives them the space to work through what binds them to the wheel, and the best chance to step off the wheel of becoming.
I think any lay person who’s followed the Theravadan approach will probably have experienced the various challenges which arise with this model, particularly if you have kids, jobs, and many of the other commitments which arise in many people’s lives. However much you try to adapt the practice to your own lifestyle there is a difficulty. The fundamental dualism between Samsara and Nirvana, and between your lifestyle commitments and the model can be extremely painful. This one I know. I pushed it hard, right to the edge and eventually found my way back to nondual approach of Dzogchen and Mahamudra.
Anatta and selflessness
Another key focus in these teachings is that of Anatta, which could be translated as the lack of a solid, permanent self. When you burrow deep with meditation it becomes readily apparent that what we thought of as our self is nothing of the sort. This comes as an almighty shock to many and an almighty relief to some.
In the Hinayana type approach we renounce the self as much as we renounce the world. The degree to which we self, or hold a solidified notion of our self is the degree to which we suffer.
Some strange ideas sometimes come up about selflessness which are more like nihilism, but either way renouncing the self is central here.
The Hinayana goal
Nibbana is the end of suffering. Once you have attained Nibbana there is no going back – you cannot suffer any more. You become an Arhat – the one who has destroyed the taints of greed, hatred and delusion, which bound you to the wheel of suffering. There is a cooling that takes place and we can then become free from the heat of these passions. Indeed the goal is often directly described in terms of a flame going out.
The goal is therefore a permanent state of peace which is beyond our normal realm or experience of life. The view is that peace is inherent in Nibbana and suffering is inherent in Samsara. Entirely dualistic and contrasting. The goal is the liberation from suffering – complete and final.
The Mahayana version of Sutrayana
When it comes to describing the Mahayana, particularly in terms of it being a different version of Sutrayana there are commonalities and differences with Hinayan.
Mahayana has commonalities with Hinayana
Mahayana would equate to the majority of traditions in China, Japan, Korea, as well as historically to many movements in what are now Theravadin lands – in India, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Burma, etc. Zen and Pure Land traditions in China / Japan / Korea (though known under different names) are thoroughly Mahayana in vision and approach.
I believe it’s fair to say that the Mahayana also shares the view that Samsara is to be escaped from, as it is irredeemably the realm of suffering. Further, that Nirvana is the goal, and that is the escape from suffering. These are once again a firm dualism. I say that knowing that that are a few elements to Zen which seem to straddle across these neat models – and are much more nondual in character.
The path to Nibbana in the Mahayana is once again that of the renunciate. The monastic tradition is seen as the real deal, and the ideal. Giving up many aspects of life to focus on spiritual practice takes you a step or several steps away from the world, giving you mental space to focus on transcending Samsara.
The self is again seen as problematic, in as much as it is seen as solid, fixed and unchanging. Emotions are also potentially problematic, with those deemed unskillful such as greed and anger needing to be renounced and overcome. So world, emotions and self tend more to the side which needs to be renounced.
Like the Hinayana celibacy is again seen as the ideal, as sexual relationships are a key source of entanglement, leading to negative emotions and attachment.
Mahayana is different to Hinayana
Emptiness or Shunyata
One key difference to Hinayana is that of Emptiness – Shunyata in Sanskrit. This is a key Mahayana concept. In a way it’s an extension of the notion of Anatta, or selflessness. It says that nothing is fixed, final and having a solid essence. Anatta said this about us – about our selfhood. Emptiness extends this to all phenomena, not just our personhood. Anything that you can think of is thus seen to be empty. There is no solidity to it.
Mahayana then posited a two truths doctrine. Emptiness is seen as the ultimate truth – the way things really are. But things also have a relative truth or existence, which is how they appear to be. Dependent origination, karma and all the other notions of how things arise and cease, and are dependently related in cause and effect come into play here.
Understanding these two and how they relate together is a key part of the path. I think it’s fair to say though that there’s a lot more emphasis on the ultimate truth, on emptiness, and so again one side of the dualism is emphasised. And this coincides with the escape from Samsara into Nirvana.
The Bodhisattva Ideal
Whereas you could say the notion of Emptiness was a progression, then the Bodhisattva Ideal was perhaps an even bigger progression. The seeds were there in the Theravadin school – in Hinayana, as the Buddha was seen as a Bodhisatta (Pali for Bodhisattva) before he became Enlightened. You could characterise this as him taking vows and being on a mission to Enlightenment across many, many lifetimes.
In the Mahayana this Bodhisattva Ideal is generalised to all of those on the Mahayana path, and formalised in practice in the Bodhisattva Vows that are commonly taken. This is that you will renounce gaining Enlightenment until all sentient beings are first helped themselves to Enlightenment. I have seen this described as the most noble and visionary ideal that religion has ever produced.
So endless living beings need to be helped to Enlightenment – and this includes not just humans, but all animals and sentient life, and also includes all types of life which are not usually seen by humans, such as spirits, ghosts, etc, etc. All the realms must be emptied of living beings and delivered to Nirvana before we will allow ourselves to take our place in this transcendental release. There is often an extreme sense of struggle involved here, as we are acutely aware of the dimension of the task we have committed ourselves to.
There’s also a massive expansion of beings which come into play here – the Bodhisattvas. These are seen as different aspects of Enlightenment, or beings well on the path to Enlightenment, depending on your stance. Bodhisattva’s such as Green Tara, White Tara, Manjushri, Avalokitesvara et al are there to help you on your way to Enlightenment, and help all beings with their suffering. You could say that each has their own speciality, whether compassion, wisdom, generosity, etc. You could also say that each embodies ways in which we can ourselves embody the Bodhisattva Ideal.
Compassion on the path
For sure there’s a much stronger and more explicit emphasis on developing Compassion with the Mahayana. We cannot help beings to Nirvana unless we can help them with their suffering. Wisdom is not enough for that – we need Compassion too. Not least in the helping them, but also in caring about them sufficiently to help. So Wisdom and Compassion sit in tandem.
It will become evident pretty fast with such an approach that there’s a lot of pain which will come up when you try to be a Bodhisattva. Not only do you get to see and care about so much suffering, but your limitations will become quite visible.
Moreover, you may find it difficult to develop much wisdom towards a person who has just stolen from you, or who is raging in your face. The Bodhisattva vow will bring you directly in contact with a number of very tough aspects of life, and juxtapose that with your previous and current realities. You might even find it throws up more of the mental defilements, emotions and suffering than if you hadn’t taken on this vow. When this vow becomes a reality and not just a nice idea then a lot of dynamics start coming into play. That’s the power of it, but also the challenge.
The deeper you go into realising Emptiness the more workable this becomes, and the less contradictions there appear to be. Emptiness helpfully melts away some of the insane challenge of taking all sentient beings to Enlightenment ourselves – it was, after all, quite a task for one person! You could say that a sense of spaciousness opens out with the understanding of emptiness, and then all challenges become more workable within that vast spaciousness.
The Vajrayana
Vajrayana is seen, from its own perspective as a significant ‘upgrade’ on the Mahayana, and of course on Sutrayana in general. There’s a vast array of new methods that come into play here, as well as new conceptions of the goal and the spiritual ideal – the ideal aspirant.
Vajrayana in common with Mahayana
Just as with the Mahayana the view of Emptiness is a key element. Nothing that we experience as arising and ceasing is seen as solid, unchanging and having a fixed essence. Attachment to seeing things that way still leads to suffering. Seeing their emptiness with wisdom leads to Nirvana.
Like the Mahayana there’s more ritual than in Hinayana – it’s seen as a powerful means of bringing about change, and should be utilised. The Hinayana mainly saw ritual as bad and unhelpful (big generalisation alert).
There’s also a lot of non-human beings involved who you might term celestial. Alongside the Bodhisattvas there’s a whole array of other beings which also are manifestations of Enlightened energy – who may or may not help you.
We could say that renunciation still plays a part with Vajrayana. However, how it is held and approached is rather different. It’s more on the level of a tactical approach, rather than the foundation itself. It’s held lightly, as a skillful means, as we recognise there is utility in helping us relax the grip of the defilements and soften our attachments. But we are not committed to escaping experience altogether, so liberation is not seen as the opposite as experience.
Beyond this there’s really a lot of differences between Vajrayana and the vehicle upon which it builds – the Mahayana.
Vajrayana differences to Mahayana (and Hinayana)
For me I think one of the key differences is that there is a recognition in Vajrayana of Emptiness and Form as fully being two sides of one story and that each (in proper relation) is important to understand. It’s no longer Emptiness emphasised over form.
Emptiness and form are inseparable
Understanding how the play of form, in all its manifestations is non-separate from emptiness is key. Indeed, in methodology there is a lot of visualisation and mantra which play with form in order to drive home this inseparability.
Transformation is fundamental to Tantra
With Vajrayana transformation becomes foundational. We aren’t trying to escape from anything, and we do not need to spent millenia cultivating positive imprints which will gradually build to a base for awakening. With Vajrayana we take all that arises as it is, and actively work to transform them into their opposites.
The ordinary mind is beset with the five poisons, of desire, anger, pride, jealousy and ignorance. The earlier paths work to make us aware of the extent to which are minds are not just filled with these, but are constantly pushed around by them. Maybe before this we thought the problem was all out there.
In Vajrayana there are strong elements to the practice which are Shamatha, bringing the mind to a point of equanimity so that we can clearly see what is happening, much of which may not be skillful. Many of the practices here see is visualising Buddhas or Bodhisattva’s and their mandala’s, chanting mantras and identifying with that enlightened vision. We are dropping our usual sense of self and range of perceptions and cultivating an enlightened perspective instead.
This is very powerful. Habitually we create stories around experience and a sense of self. That self is not fully awake. With Vajrayana it’s as if we try on the clothes of the Buddha and see the world from the perspective of the Buddha. The more we do this the more we transform the 5 poisons into their awakened opposites. The more we do this the more we become awakened. We transform ourselves and our demons and practice manifesting as the goal itself.
The relative is powerful
From the above description of working with appearances – form, sounds and all – we can see how the focus on the relative realm in Vajrayana is central. We are not in any sense trying to get away from experience, nor making the ultimate – emptiness – the central part of our practice and goal. We are taking the relative as both the path, and a way to see the inseparability of form and emptiness. As we experience ourselves in meditation as already awakened, we can then experience form as awakened. Form is empty. Emptiness is form. The promise of the Mahayana is fully realised here, without privileging one over the other.
As we practice this way we gradually come to see the ordinary realm of appearances as sacred. Our sense of the mundane can be radically transformed. No longer is a stick just a stick – it becomes a symbol of sacredness. Indeed, it becomes sacred itself. As experience arises it is transformed into the awakened mandala.
This means we can increasingly come to delight in the world of appearances. They are not fundamentally flawed, fatally flawed, and needing to be escaped from. They are inherently beautiful and sacred, so we can now fully enjoy them, no longer bound by attachment to them. We do not take them as solid and problematic – we see them as the dance of awakening. Form is emptiness, emptiness is form.
Suffering and pleasure are ok
This may sound like an odd thing to say, but pleasure is no longer seen as the enemy. Suffering is no longer intimately tied to experience, to what arises and ceases in experience. We are not trying to move entirely away from this experience, renounce it, and find a transcendental realm beyond it. Whilst there are clear differences between Mahayana and Hinayana as we have seen, they share this renunciate spirit that sees all experience as fatally flawed.
With Vajrayana we can take on pleasure with less fear, as we are actively reimagining it and transforming it into awakened energy. Indeed we can use it as fuel for our awakening, so to the limits of our capacity at the time we can actually encourage pleasure. Awakening promises bliss, and Vajrayana practice takes pleasure as a friend en route.
Suffering is no longer to be escaped from, with the goal the transcendence of suffering. There is not this hard dualism between Samsara and Nirvana. Suffering can also be embraced, and the energies experienced in suffering also taken onto the path. They are not inherently bad or flawed. They are just more energy to play with and transform.
The body is no longer a problem to get away from – it becomes the seat of Enlightenment. We transform our bodies into Mandala’s and Buddha’s, and so our body is more our awakened home than a fetter to overcome. Likewise sexual activity isn’t the epitome of desire and attachment – it’s just one more set of strong energies which can be utilised as fuel for transformation.
The dangers of Vajrayana
Given the approach which takes life head on and even adds fuel to the fire, it’s clear that there are some significant dangers to the practice of Vajrayana. Having a qualified teacher who can guide you along the way and steer you clear of ‘crash and burn’ is of inestimable value. Not just avoiding the fatal either – you can really go down side tracks very far, and very fast with this approach. So the Vajrayana Guru just keeping you on track and ensuring your safety and progress is so important.
But taking on this transformational approach to the relative realm it’s easy to see how deluded we could become. We could lose ourselves in a false sense of our capabilities, and actually wallow in delusion, which we’ve actively encouraged. We could vastly overestimate our capabilities, invite in the painful and horrifying aspects of ourselves and our worlds to such a degree that we become overwhelmed.
The heroic ideal
It’s fair to say that the Vajrayana ideal here is no longer that of the saintly one who has blown out the flames of passion and attachment, and who has achieved a peace that transcends the world.
Here, as you can instantly see when you look at a figure like Padmasambhava and read his life story, we are in the territory of the spiritual hero or warrior. Even the magician.
The ideal of the awakened person here is awakened and engaged with all of life, who’s really taken all aspects of life to be fuel for the journey, and who rides the waves of life with a laughter that comes from mastery. They are powerful indeed, as nothing is laid aside or rejected.
Spiritual master here as a synonym for Guru can be understood in the sense of someone who has mastered life itself, and fully harnessed all it brings. I always remember this image of the person surfing and then when the camera draws back they are standing on one leg in a yoga posture, and laughing uncontrollably. This is not the quiet calm of the sutrayana renunciate!
Dzogchen says from the beginning everything is perfect
When we come to Dzogchen there is a dramatic shift of perspective once again. All of Hinayana, Mahayana and Vajrayana have this movement or path to follow, which takes you from what is imperfect to what is perfect. Though the views and dynamics are different there is still a starting point and a destination which are considered very different.
With Dzogchen there is a sense that things are already perfect and complete as they are. This is a potent statement, and of course, easily misunderstood. Like Vajrayana it’s easy to go astray here, maybe even more so.
Dzogchen view is that everything is already perfect. Samantabhadra, the symbol of our innate nature means ‘always good’. Samantabhadra is often shown in Yab Yum form with Samantabhadri, symbolising the luminous emptiness of our nature. Their image is pure and unadorned, like the reality the image points to.
Nothing to do, nothing to improve
One of the most misunderstood aspects of Dzogchen is it’s assertion that there is nothing to do. This does not mean sitting in delusion and saying this is enlightenment, if all you experience is anger, despair and suffering, with no awareness of why.
If things are already perfect, in the Dzogchen view, then you don’t need to make an effort. You don’t need to change this to that – perhaps the 5 poisons to their opposites. Why would you if you are already perfect?
The key here is that your nature is what it is. That nature never changes. No amount of cultivating good qualities in your mind changes its nature, or indeed, the nature of those things you have cultivated. It’s all empty in essence. Further, mind’s luminous clarity remains the same. And its expressive power continues to put forth a magical display of appearances.
Relaxing the effort
We tend to be locked into a pattern of goals and striving to improve things. It’s so baked into how we approach life. With Sutrayana and even Vajrayana there’s a project of improvement, and with different means we work hard to bring that about.
With Dzogchen it’s different. It’s already complete and perfect. Nothing to do. How hard it can be to have confidence that by relaxing then the outcome, if you want to call it that, would be better than the making of hard effort.
Relax. Rest. Let go. Let be. These are all ‘mantras’ for Dzogchen. It’s more like letting go than making something happen. I’m reminded of one of the metaphors traditionally used here. In the old days a sheath of wheat would be be held together with a string tied around it. If you cut the string then the individual wheat stems just flop out and onto the ground. No effort made by the wheat – it’s just been released.
Similarly here, with the right view, meditation and conduct there’s this relaxation, then we come fully into alignment with what is already perfect as it is.
The centrality of recognising Rigpa
What makes the difference between just sitting in delusion, and Dzogchen doing nothing is really the recognition of Rigpa. At its heart Dzogchen is very simple:
- Direct Introduction to Rigpa
- Decide Upon One Thing
- Confidence in Liberation
Direct Introduction to Rigpa
Firstly you need to recognise Rigpa, the nature of mind. The usual method is for the teacher to directly introduce you to it by pointing it out. What they say, how they act, and their very being points towards this recognition. Something resonates inside so directly that you ‘get it’. You see Rigpa. You seen that mind is empty through and through – utterly groundless. It’s ground is groundless. You also see that this vast, open emptiness has a knowingness, a luminosity, a clarity. It’s not a blank nothingness – it’s glowing with the radiance of wakefulness.
Further, you see that these ‘two’ are nondual – they are inseparable. Two-sides of the same coin. Not the same, not different.
Decide Upon One Thing
Once you’ve been introduced to Rigpa then there is nothing to do. Your job, if you wish to call it that, is simply to stay with that recognition and relax into it. You don’t need to make it more Rigpa – you can’t do that if you tried. Just rest in that Rigpa, whilst whatever appearances arise and cease. That’s it. That’s the ‘job’.
Nothing to do, nothing to change, nothing to cultivate. Just don’t lose ‘sight’ of what you have seen. Empty luminosity.
The more you can relax into this the easier it becomes. The less you try, the less you fabricate. The more you can rest and relax in it the more it becomes your default mode of experience.
Once you have seen this, and can rest there then it becomes clear that this is the key that unlocks everything. Meditation is simply the resting in this recognition, without fabricating anything. This is where you come to the realisation that this recognition of Rigpa is absolutely the highest recognition there could be, and that resting in it is absolutely the best practice you could ever do. With this fundamental ‘decision’ you can then develop confidence.
Confidence in Liberation
The result of this is that you gain confidence in Rigpa, that Rigpa is indeed how things fundamentally are, that you have truly been introduced to Rigpa, and that you know there is nothing to be done or cultivated beyond this direct seeing.
Your ‘job’ outside meditation? Again, simply to stay with this recognition. In this case it’s mixing all the activity of life off the cushion with this recognition. Everything that appears to mind can be allowed to self-arise and self-liberate, confident as you are that none of these appearances are anything other than empty luminosity itself. They are simply the expression of luminous emptiness. The dance, the magical display of that mind nature.
Nothing to be done
You cannot improve something that is complete. You cannot improve something that is already perfect. It doesn’t matter what exalted states of meditation you cultivated this luminous emptiness remains what it is, untainted, unimproved, and primordially pure.
So if there’s nothing to be done when you have Rigpa in view, then you can utterly relax and enjoy!
An ideal of playful wonder
I think the ideals for the previous Yanas are clear and well known. For Dzogchen perhaps less so.
To me the Dzogchen ideal is of someone not just so in harmony with life, all of life, but one who plays happily with life, however it is. I’m reminded of the childlike naivety which we lose as adults. There’s a simple joy in life that little kids have, which gets lost along the way. Without becoming kids again the Dzogchen ideal feels to me like the regaining of all that simplicity, all that direct appreciation of life, with all the joy and happiness that comes with that.
An ideal of an artist
Rather than a hero, (or a solitary renunciate, or bodhisattva renunciate) I think for Dzogchen there’s this sense of someone creating life aesthetically and drawing aesthetic appreciation from life. You can find and create beauty in life, however it is. Though circumstances may be difficult and tough this way of seeing/being dwells with perfection and completion. All that arises is simply an expression of that perfection. Perfection dances the dance of its myriad display.
Funnily enough there can sometimes be eccentricity at play here too. When the Dzogchen ideal is more like an artist, then like many artists there is not the same holding onto established conventions. Not that you have to break them, it’s just that you no longer really approach life in those terms.
The sacred and the profane
You could say that Vajrayana went full on with transforming the profane into the sacred. Everything was brought onto the path, and transmuted into the sacred.
With Dzogchen, if everything is sacred from the start, then how could some things be sacred and some profane? All we experience has the same nature. All is equally sacred – or profane if you wish to express it that way. No wonder the ideal has this childlike appreciation and playful expression. If everything is sacred then life as play feels an appropriate response.
A lightness of being
A lightness comes from this deeply nondual way. There is no this and that, no need to change anything, so playing lightly with what is makes perfect sense.
Nothing to do, no path to tread. No countless Aeons to wait, no endless beings to save. Right here, right now, perfect and complete. There’s simplicity to life when it is naturally perfect.
Dzogchen is not nonaction, it’s nonaction!
I just want to conclude this with saying that Dzogchen isn’t indifferent to life. Just in case there’s any mistake it’s not that you don’t care because everything has the same nature, and it’s already perfect as it is.
Recognising this nature brings you into a relationship with life where you can really be with things and beings how they are at that time. Naturally compassion arises when being suffer. There’s no mission here, and not deliberate cultivation of compassion. But compassion is the natural expression of this luminous emptiness. So care you do for all that is around you.
Maybe recognising the primal purity of everything and everyone is why that expression is somehow so ‘right’. Everyone deserves equal respect, everything matters. You are free to care for the world, child of the world that you are.
There’s no action involved in trying to change the contents of your mind, or making the world a particular way. But compassionate action takes place nevertheless, freed from mission or solid purpose.
The Yanas from their own side
As I said earlier I’ve practiced in each of the Yana’s. What I laid out here is a perspective on the Yanas from the point of view of Dzogchen. In a way what I’ve done is characterise them thusly to point out how special this Dzogchen view and approach is.
The simplicity of Hinayana
Yet in truth every path we’ve covered is so precious and pure from its own side. When practicing Theravada (as a surrogate for Hinayana) I’ve witnessed people who have taken this to the end, and whom you could not wish they be other than they are. There’s a beautiful simplicity in the Theravada way, and the forest monks of Thailand and Burma exemplify this in particular. Ajahn Chah, Ajahn Maha Bua, Ajahn Sumedho, Ajahn Amaro, Ajahn Brahm. Wondrous beings. I bow down deeply before you.
The majesty of Mahayana
I practiced Mahayana with Master Hsuan Hua and with Master Hsing Yun. With Master Hua there was a force behind his compassionate wisdom that was a wonder to behold. The Bodhisattva ideal was no cosplay for him. He lived it fully for real.
The myriad display of Vajrayana
Those I’ve known who’ve taught the Tantric vehicle have been so many and so impressive. Mingyur Rinpoche stands out for his clarity and openness. Shangpa Rinpoche stands out for his sublime equanimity. Given how Vajrayana and Dzogchen are taught there’s often a mix of the two – not necessarily mixed up together, but more a progression from one to the other – so teachers teach both. The great masters of Tibet who first brought Vajrayana to the west stand like giants. HH16th Karmapa – what can you say? The potency of transformation is extraordinary to behold.
Find what works for you
Each vehicle has its strengths and each has its own character. All of us are different, and our needs are particular to our time and place. Each of us is free to choose the approach that is right for us, right here, right now. None are better in some uncontextualized sense.
Dzogchen points to what is beyond time and space, and also to how what is within time and space is non-different to that which is beyond. This perfect completion is a wondrous, inconceivable gift. No need to conceive, just recognise and rest.
My thanks
My thanks to James Low, whose explication of the view of the Yanas is so majestic and clear. Thanks to Chogyam Trungpa Rinpoche and his 3 volume magnum opus, ‘The Profound Treasury of the Ocean of Dharma’ – an extraordinary in-depth exploration of the Yanas in his inimitable style. And thanks indeed to David Chapman and Charlie Awbery, whose systematic take on this brings out so well the flavour and focus of each Yana.
I’m not really an analytic type these days, and especially am not a scholar. But I believe there’s something valuable in holding these mirrors up to our practice. Each of these figures mentioned has been a marvelous mirror for me. Each of the Yanas has been the most unbelievable adventure.
May all beings find their way.
May their way eventually become no-way.
