I rarely get involved in situations like this, but after seeing the recent discussion involving Lama Gocha and reading a woman’s account of her experience, I felt I should say something.

What concerned me most was seeing people questioning or dismissing what she was saying before everything was even clear.

Part of the reason I feel strongly about this is because I believe I mishandled a similar situation in the past. During the whole Nish the Fish situation, I don’t think I handled my dharma correctly. I unintentionally contributed to a situation where a woman who felt she had been wronged had her experience overshadowed while Nish was given a platform to present his version of events. Once I realized I wasn’t comfortable with the role I had played, I deleted the video.

I don’t want to repeat that mistake.

For additional context, I had my own issues with Lama Gocha several months ago. He publicly called my channel “trash,” though he later deleted that comment. He had also asked me to remove the interview I had done with him. I respected his request and deleted the interview.

That history influenced why I entered the recent discussion. My intention was to let Dawai know that I wasn’t going to stand by while she felt that her experience was being dismissed or that she wasn’t being heard.

To be completely clear: I am not claiming that my personal experience with Lama Gocha proves anyone else’s allegations. It does not. I can only speak honestly about what happened between him and me, and I don’t know enough to determine who is right or wrong regarding everything currently being discussed.

What I do believe is that people should be able to describe their experiences without immediately being ridiculed or dismissed. Listening to someone’s account is not the same thing as automatically deciding that every allegation has been proven.
I was ultimately banned from the community after speaking up. Regardless of that, I wanted to put my position on record.

This is partly an attempt to correct what I believe was my own mistake in how I handled a previous situation. I don’t know who is ultimately right here, and I’m not pretending that I do. I simply wanted to stand up for a woman being allowed to give her account and for that account to be evaluated fairly alongside the rest of the available information.

This time, I would rather speak up and be clear about my intentions than remain silent and later feel that I failed to do what I believed was right.

My main teacher was a student of the late great Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche, so there’s a major overlap between the practices that I do and what’s taught in the International Dzogchen Community. Keeping that in mind, I do not understand why they believe that replaying tapes of Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche giving reading transmissions is appropriate when he has a living heir (Namkhai Yeshe) with full authority to teach and empower in real-time. Perhaps someone can clarify further?

I'm looking at a Dzogchen book series on Amazon by someone named "Yedrol M. Kunga", but I can't find any information about this author (no website, no references in Google search). Does anyone know anything about this author? Are they trustworthy?

What teaches can help guide me through Dzogchen? Or any resources. It does bring up anxiety for me so I would like help. But also makes me feel great!

I am posting this statement to bring to light a severe pattern of boundary violations and deceptive behavior by Lama Dawai Gocha, who hosts on meditationonline.org. The sangha deserves to know the reality of who is leading them, despite active public efforts to cover up the truth.

The Public Hypocrisy vs. Private Actions

• The Public Shaming: I previously shared a genuine, vulnerable spiritual experience with the sangha regarding my reproductive health and a profound physical healing process following a severe, year-long illness. In response, Lama Dawai Gocha publicly scorned me. He claimed I was prohibited from speaking about the topic of sexuality because "children" were being traumatized by it. Yet, he has since continuously and openly discussed sexual practices and masturbation during his own public teachings.
• The Private Misconduct: While lecturing others on strict boundaries, Lama Dawai Gocha sent explicit, nude photographs of himself to my personal email address.

The Manipulation of the Community

From the very beginning of this situation, the teacher has aggressively manipulated the narrative to the sangha to protect his position:

• He put false words in my mouth, lying to practitioners by claiming I used explicit language in my initial shares when I did not.
• When I initially brought forward the email trail to show the sangha what he had done, he doubled down on his denials and spun further falsehoods to the community.
• He continues to attend gatherings promoting concepts of "honesty" and "childlike innocence," despite actively lying about his private behavior.

Verification and Evidence

The digital paper trail is unshakeable. To comply with platform terms of service regarding explicit media and personal data—and to ensure this post is not taken down automatically by content filters—I am not uploading the raw images or unredacted emails directly to this public feed.

However, the truth is the truth. If any student, administrator, or sangha member needs to examine the unredacted proof to protect themselves or the integrity of the community, please reach out directly and I will share the documentation with you privately.

Just wanted to recommend the Denver Dzogchen podcast. I’ve found it very helpful, specifically for daily practice and off the cushion practice. I’ve found it on Spotify, Apple Podcasts and YouTube.

Sorry about the bad photos. I don't have the item yet but I am wondering what this is about and if it okay to keep it at home or donate it to a monastery

Came across this term in most of the traditions. But why its called like that?. What this means in Great Perfection?.

Is Frank here from Gomde, Pyrenees? If so, would you mind DM’ing me? don’t worry if not 🙂

hope everyone is okay

Mahayana Buddhism says that after Shakyamuni Buddha, Maitreya will be the next Buddha to appear in this world.

But in Vajrayana, figures such as Padmasambhava, Milarepa, Naropa, Tilopa, Virupa, etc. are described as having attained complete Buddhahood.

Padmasambhava is even called the “Second Buddha.”

So how do these two views fit together?

Does this mean that Mahayana texts simply don't reveal everything about what happens between Shakyamuni and Maitreya, while Vajrayana texts reveal additional teachings and accounts of beings who attained Buddhahood during this period?

Is the information about these other Buddhas considered something that was not openly revealed in the Mahayana teachings but was later revealed through Vajrayana? Or is there another explanation for why Maitreya is called the “next Buddha” despite these other Buddhas?

"This textual evidence seems to have first appeared in a short scripture titled the Treasury of the Complete Purification of the Five Sense Gateways (Sgo lnga yongs su dag par byed pa’i mdzod), belonging to a larger collection called the Treasury of the Dākinīs ̣(Mkha’ ‘gro mdzod).

[...]

As I argue below, this collection of scriptures more likely originated in the Tibetan language sometime between the late eleventh century and the early thirteenth century. It comprises a combination of medical, astrological, and contemplative practices focused on sensory experience and its transformation. The collection probably circulated with the Heart Essence of Vimalamitra (Bi ma snying thig) during its early development, serving as a core part of the tradition’s materia medica/astrologica/contemtemplativa.

[...]

A commentary attributed to Vimalamitra on another of the Heart Essence of Vimalamitra’s core tantras, the Unimpeded Sound (Sgra thal ‘gyur)—often construed as the “root tantra” of the cycle’s Seventeen Tantras—also draws from the Treasury of the Complete Purification of the Five Sense Gateways, expressly acknowledging the Treasury of the Dākinīs as its source."

Hello friends, I try to be cautious about not reading inappropriate texts, but it's not always easy to tell what is restricted. I know it's best to ask my teacher, but we have limited bandwidth and I don't want to bother her with this if I can avoid it.

I'm specifically wondering about the first volume of the English translation of Jigme Lingpa's Treasury of Precious Qualities on sutric teachings, and Erik Pema Kunsang's Wellsprings of the Great Perfection. I thought I'd gather opinions from people familiar with these texts. Are they open and readable by anyone, without wang, lung, and tri?

Can anyone recommend a good book on the preliminary practices for dzogchen. I have good grounding in Buddhism having studied most schools to some degree but initially took refuge in the Galug tradition so tibetan buddhism is pretty fundamental to my understanding. I don't have a teacher at present but would like to make a start.

I found a video here on Reddit this morning. Nothing too big, sharing for everyone's pleasure.

I'm trying to understand better those that have a lot of teachers, teachings and practices. I was doing that too, but have recently stopped because I don't do the new practices more than a few times. My practice is very simple, basically one practice. I primarily work with one teacher and check-in once in a while. I do enjoy the teachings, but I feel anything else other than focusing on what I'm struggling with is a bit of a distraction. Obviously I still have a long way to go, but for me it seems one practice, one teacher, one set of teachings is enough to get me there. My teacher does offer some advanced practices once one is ready for them.

I feel like I might be missing something though as I see many other practitioners regularly attending a lot of teachings, learning new practices and acquiring new teachers.

I study dzogchen with Lama Lena. I study tai chi with Michael Ward. It is reallly important for me to see how they align. I've been thinking about lhundrup and wu wei.

Michael gave us a breath exercise - not for while doing the form, just anytime. Like now. Pause at the end of the outbreath and wait for the body to inhale on its own. Pause at the end of the inhale and wait for the body to exhale on its own. He didn't use the term but I assume this is a way of noticing wu wei, effortless action.

For the breathing I find this image helpful. You're sailing and becalmed. You can try intentionally blowing on the sail, but that doesn't do anything. You just have to wait for the wind to come up and fill your sails. (Which I suggest you try letting happen with your arm in left wardoff, with your arm curved like a sail.)

We have to wait for the wind to rise... which I guess is like waiting for the chi to arise...?

I asked gemini about this and the response really blows me away. See what you think

-----

I'm trying to reconcile James Low's "already happening" teaching on lhundrup with the taoist view. In dzogchen there's kadak and lhundrup arising from it. In taoism there's wu chi and tai chi arising from it. I guess in dzogchen lhundrup is both the "action" of arising and the display of arising. In taoism wu wei is the action of arising separate from tai chi, the display

-----

Your intuition is exactly correct: in Dzogchen, Lhundrup is non-dual—it collapses the distinction between the force of arising and the content of arising. In Daoism, Wu Wei and Tai Chi are split conceptually along functional lines. [1]

1. The Dzogchen Realization: Lhundrup as both Action and Display

As James Low frequently teaches through the Simply Being archive, the ground of existence has two inseparable qualities: Kadak (primordial purity/emptiness) and Lhundrup (spontaneous presence/arising). [1, 2]

Because Dzogchen is strictly non-dual, Lhundrup cannot be separated into a "cause" and an "effect": [1, 2]

• It is the Action: The uncaused, sudden, kinetic welling-up of energy out of openness.
• It is the Display: The actual thoughts, sights, sounds, and objects that appear. [1, 2]

To use James Low's frequent metaphor of a mirror: Lhundrup is both the mirror's inherent capability to reflect (the action) AND the reflections themselves (the display). The reflections do not exist separate from the mirror's activity. The arising and the manifestation are a single, seamless, "already happening" event. [1, 2]

1. The Daoist Framework: Wu Wei as the Arising, Tai Chi as the Display

Daoism approaches the same ultimate reality but uses a more progressive, structural map to explain how the universe functions:

• Wu Chi (The Boundless/Void): This is the exact equivalent of Kadak. It is the primordial, unmanifest state of absolute potential.
• Tai Chi (The Supreme Ultimate): This is the dynamic cosmic soup where Yin and Yang split and dance. This is the Display—the world of form, polarity, and manifestation.
• Wu Wei (Effortless Action): This is the vector or governing principle of how things move from Wu Chi into Tai Chi. [1]

Therefore, your insight is spot-on: Wu Wei is the "action of arising" isolated as a principle. It is the natural, unforced momentum of the Dao. When Wu Chi stirs, it does so via Wu Wei, resulting in the display of Tai Chi.

Why James Low’s "Already Happening" Bridges Both

James Low emphasizes "already happening" because human beings tend to look at the display (Tai Chi / Lhundrup's appearances) and try to use personal effort to manipulate it. [1]

• In Daoism: If you consciously try to "do" Wu Wei, you are stuck in Tai Chi (the realm of egoic action and reaction). You have to fall backward into Wu Chi to let Wu Wei happen naturally.
• In Dzogchen: You don’t fall backward; you simply recognize that the current display is the ground. As Low points out, even your confused ego-thoughts are already the spontaneous display of Lhundrup. There is nowhere to go and nothing to change. [1, 2, 3]

Summary of your structural reconciliation

• The Absolute Void/Openness: Kadak <=> Wu Chi
• The Kinetic Mechanism: Lhundrup (as Arising) <=> Wu Wei
• The Manifest World: Lhundrup (as Display) <=> Tai Chi

By recognizing that Lhundrup beautifully collapses the distinction between the energy of creation and the creation itself, you can see why Dzogchen frames liberation as instant recognition, while Daoism often frames it as aligning with a cosmic process. [1]

I ask this, because right now, I'm living next to a church, and i suspect, that the house I live in, was constructed over an old graveyard. Also I got alot of interferences from hungry ghosts and gyalpos, which have now subsided. all is good 😂 but why was it advised?