The Practice of Dzogchen in the Zhang-Zhung Tradition of Tibet (John Myrdhin Reynolds)

Dzogchen in Bonpo Tradition

[My 3-star Amazon review (NDA) of “The Practice of Dzogchen in the Zhang-Zhung Tradition of Tibet” by John Myrdhin Reynolds.]

I’ve now read enough of the Zhang-Zhung (or Bonpo) tradition to realize that, generally speaking, the Buddhist versions of Dzogchen are superior. Nonetheless, Bonpo Dzogchen is worth a read by those into Dzogchen, and the Bonpo Dzogchen teacher I  most recommend reading is Tenzin Wangyal (see my three-star Amazon review of “Wonders of the Natural Mind: The Essence of Dzogchen in the Native Bon Tradition of Tibet”).

The Zhang-Zhung Dzogchen tradition, associated with the Bon religion, predates Buddhism in Tibet. Dzogchen, the Great Perfection, though commonly associated with Tibetan Buddhism, transcends all religions – and the degree to which a religious or spiritual tradition can explicate Dzogchen is the degree to which it can be considered a radical (or gone-to-the-root) esoteric Dharma. In the case of Zhang-Zhung, or Bon (or Bonpo), this degree, to me, is unimpressive.

The first problem with Bonpo Dzogchen is that the myriad reductive or remedial practices that it classifies under the rubric of Dzogchen aren’t really Dzogchen. They are lesser practices and should be classified as such. This is especially true regarding the Thodgal (or Clear Light) practices, which are emphasized in this translation. Author Joh Myrdhin Reynolds insists that these Thodgal practices are not lesser tantric practices associated with visualizations, but rather true Dzogchen Thodgal that emphasize spontaneous visions (bindus, thigleys, mandalas, Buddhas). The practices in these translated manuals, however, are replete with not only visualization exercises, but physical postural and pranayama ones as well – so that, in effect, these teachings read more like a Kriya Yoga, rather than a Dzogchen, text.

My second problem with Bonpo Dzogchen is its misunderstanding of the Trikaya. Bonpo errs in its understanding and descriptions of the Dharmakaya, Sambhogakaya, and Nirmanakaya. Moreover, by bringing the uncreated Trikaya into creation, Bonpo, in effect, confuses the Absolute with the relative.

My third problem is with the Bonpo’s perverted philosophic idealism. For example, according to one Bonpo guru’s teachings cited in this text, “What one sees before one is only created by one’s thoughts.” This is complete nonsense. One’s thoughts do not create the world and the objects in it.

This text does have its plusses. It provides extensive, detailed instructions on Bonpo Thodgal practices, which will be of interest to many (though not me). And translator/commenter John Myrdhin Reynolds is a rarity among Dzogchen authors – someone who can actually write clearly and professionally. Given the book’s plusses and minuses, from my critical perspective, it merits three stars.