Dzogchen and Advaita: Gaudapada's Asparsa Yoga

In the earliest teachings of Advaita Vedanta, Gaudapada taught a method called Asparsa Yoga, which means 'no contact'. This means that our primordial awareness never has any real contact with samsara or karmic afflictions. This is similar to how events in our night dreams don't alter or condition our normal waking consciousness in ordinary life. In Dzogchen its similarily explained that no phenomena or appearances make actual contact with our Buddha Nature or Rigpa. All phenomena as what we call 'our world', are the projection of the mind's mental constructs, names and labels, as maya, which the mind superimposes upon the space of Dharmakaya or Primordial Consciousness, the unviversal Buddha Nature or Brahman.
I differentiate our Primordial Awareness from our world of mental constructs in this video as well: • Dzogchen Pointed Out f...

[@thaddeusmichaelsophiachris6753]

Fantastic teaching Swami 🙏❤️🇨🇦 as a Yogi we sometimes need to be reminded that golden handcuffs are the same as iron handcuffs. Hari Hari Krishna Hari Hari Rama 🙏 You were the message that I needed to hear today, svaha Swamiji

[@RaiseTheWorldProjectNow]

🙏🏼

[@mayploy6869]

wonderful! so glad he is talking about this subject

[@hellboundtruck123]

This is why you must learn buddhist teachings from a buddhist master.

[@simibignall5688]

Awesome

[@arabianbrahma]

I feel sorry for Dzogchen people and I pray for them because I have friends praticing Dzogchen, Sufism, Advaita and Kabbalah. All of them developed realizations and siddhis Except those doing Dzogchen, they claim they will be liberated in Bardo (after death) this sounds to me like religious faith which promises you results after death.

[@rafaelramos1485]

Thanks 🙏🌈🌈🌈🌈🌈🇵🇷

[@equalsone6741]

🙏

[@mbiraside]

Thankyou, enjoyed this

[@tutorialchief]

if the world is the dream of god than we included are not real(we as we perceive us as humans or persons) , there is only one dreamer but the dream is still a projection and not a actual creation in a material sense, its like a thought

[@markcolasuonno7437]

You are in the waking dream , non of what is seen is it . Neti, neti .

[@tenzinchoeying1149]

they are no independent self or the Athama, coz every existing are interdependent

[@indicphilosopher8772]

Clay exists without claypot But Claypot can't exist without clay.. So clay is independent self..

[@wayofbodhisattva]

@@indicphilosopher8772 While your argument is indeed true, without a doubt, in a certain sense, I would, with all due respect, present my argument. When we say that clay exists without claypot, there is a certain condition implied-- the abundance of clay compared to claypot. I know that this 'condition' sounds funny because that is what generally happens. But consider the following story-- suppose, in ancient India, a brickmaker (pardon my English) has been ordered to provide 5 lakh bricks by the king for construction of a big monastery. The brickmaker successfully makes all the bricks but falls short of clay to make the last one. Then he recycles the clay utensils in his house to make the last remaining brick. In this case the implied condition is the abundance of claypot compared to clay, and the lack of sufficient time to gather more clay. Dependence of substances are governed by implied conditions. Sometimes we see only the most common conditions and ignore the rest. A superior argument is that clay is not the only essence of claypot. You will need a person with the necessary skills to make a claypot and you will also need a pottery wheel. Thus, existence of claypot is interdependent on the factors mentioned in the previous sentence. The fact that clay is not an independent self can be proved by the fact that drought, dry weather, high temperature can easily destroy clay. Clay needs appropriate climate to maintain its nature. Thus, everything is a result of interdependence of certain factors.

[@tenzinchoeying1149]

@@indicphilosopher8772 so in your point of view claypot is also a independent because western claypot cannot exist without claypot but claypot can exists without western claypot, or my west cannot exist west but west can exists without my west, what a silly logic,

[@indicphilosopher8772]

@@tenzinchoeying1149 Egg exists but omelette is made so egg is necessary but omelette is contingent.. Thats the argument.. Maybe the clay pot arguement is not the best one!!

[@tenzinchoeying1149]

@@indicphilosopher8772 egg exist because of egg's cause and condition not independently, it depend on its cause and condition, Omlet is exist because of it's cause and condition, Your logic is same as claypot logic you give,

[@Ashish-nd3xj]

This is all too funny

[@OfficialGOD]

its a big eternal joke, so we dont need to take life seriously lol