A Cascading Waterfall of Nectar Kindle Edition

Amazing book truly amazing. If you are doing Ngondro practice this text is a must have. Thinley Norbu Rinpoche conveys his realization through the teachings in this nectarous text.

The definitive commentary on the Dudjom Tersar Ngondro practice. Indispensable to anyone practicing Ngondro in the Nyingma trandition.

This is a best book to teach and release human being's suffering , I learned so much and understood life purpose now, I feel so happy in the dharma , Thanks !!

This kindle edition of A Cascading Waterfall of Nectar is indispensable for practitioners. HE Thinley Norbu's profound instructions can be kept close to your crown chakra as you use your iPhone , and you can drink the nectar in small sips each day.

Like Aquinas, a scholarly defense of Dharma, in particular of the Ngondro or Preliminary Practices, and in particular particular of the Dudjom Tersar Ngondro lineage in the Nyingma sect of the Vajrayana Buddhism brought to the West from Tibet. Essential for Dudjom Tersar practitioners; also recommened are Jane Tromge's commentary (Chagdud Tulku's translator) and Lama Tharchin's spiral bound commentary, each from their respective communities).

It is important to make a number of things clear about the work under review before proceeding to a discussion of the parts of the book that bear directly on Buddhist-Christian relations. In the first place, the reader should know the identity of the author, Thinley Norbu. In order to make absolutely clear who the author is, there are no less than four forewords to the book by His Holiness Penor Rinpoche (head of the Nyingmapa school of Tibetan Buddhism), Kathog Rigdzin Pema Wangchen Rinpoche (a prominent Nyingmapa lama), Alak Zenkar Rinpoche (another prominent Nyingmapa lama), and Tulku Thondup Rinpoche (a well-known Nyingmapa lama who has authored several valuable volumes on Vajrayana Buddhism). Thinley Norbu is the son of the late head of the Nyingmapa school, H. H. Dudjom Rinpoche; like his father, Thinley Norbu is a very highly regarded lama with a wide following of disciples both in the Tibetan exile community and in the wider world community of Buddhist practitioners. The purpose of this book is to provide a working commentary on the “Dudjom Tersar Ngondro”, a well-known set of preliminary practices promulgated by Dudjom Lingpa (1835-1904), a “treasure revealer" (terton) in Eastern Tibet. This particular form of what are termed the “extraordinary preliminary practices” in the Vajrayana has been transmitted to a large number of Nyingmapa school practitioners in recent decades. It has become so widespread that it is not unusual for photocopies of the prayers and practices to be given out to interested individuals without any particular initiation or other formality. I myself have received the text a number of times, both as a formal practice from highly respected Tibetan teachers and in this very informal way from my personal friends among Nyingmapa monastics. Perhaps in response to the wide diffusion of this particular set of Vajrayana practices, the author of this commentary wishes to clarify the unique features of the system revealed by the terton Dudjom Lingpa and widely taught by his own revered father, Dudjom Rinpoche (1904-1988). I would have to say that the parts of the book that comment on the practices (there is also a commentary on a related tantric visualization) are very well written and should be of great inspiration to those who have undertaken the arduous path of practice in this tradition.On the other hand, the author makes the commentary an occasion for discussing other concerns related to the relationship of Buddhism to other religions, to empirical science, and to the modern world. In these portions of the text, he continues in a polemical vein going back to his very troubling book “Welcoming Flowers from Across the Cleansed Threshold of Hope: An Answer to the Pope’s Criticism of Buddhism”, published in 1997.[1] It is quite clear to careful readers of Pope John Paul II’s book “Crossing the Threshold of Hope” (New York, 1994) that there was no intention in that book for the Pope to give out a “final word” on any particular subject, much less to make infallible pronouncements on “faith and morals.” Rather, the book is to be taken as the sincere reflections of the Pope on a number of subjects that come up in both the Church and the world. As such, John Paul II’s book is a collection of essays reflecting a series of interviews with the Italian journalist Vittorio Messori, whose outspoken political and religious views are well known. The chapter on the Buddha caused a great deal of consternation in inter-religious circles because the vocabulary employed seemed to imply a very negative assessment of Buddhism as a religion. However, it is also clear from certain comments in that chapter that the Pope is thinking critically about Buddhist teachings on salvation, a topic fundamental to any Christian theological engagement with other world religions.The fact that the terminology used by the Pope is imprecise unfortunately reflects the state of general knowledge about Buddhism in the secular and Christian world. As a direct consequence of that lack of accurate knowledge, the Pope arrives at an area of legitimate concern: the spread of Buddhist ideas in parts of the world in which Buddhism as an integral cultural system has not existed until quite recently. It would seem that an appropriate response to the Pope’s comments would have been a strong desire on the part of Buddhist leaders to ensure that non-Buddhist leaders have an accurate knowledge of authentic Buddhism. Moreover, it would have been appropriate for Buddhist and Christian scholars to have come together to assess honestly the impact on and reception of Buddhist teachings in non-Buddhist cultures throughout the world.[2] I think that distinguished spiritual teachers of both traditions would have readily agreed that any religion uprooted from its cultural context tends to spread in a fragmentary and spiritually problematic way in other cultural settings. It should therefore be unsurprising that a Christian leader might look out on the Buddhist institutions recently planted in “Western” countries (and I use that term, to my own annoyance, in a very imprecise way) with some dismay, and express himself to that effect. It would also be unsurprising for concerned Buddhist leaders to observe the same phenomenon and to make vigorous efforts to ensure that the Buddhism practiced in other cultural settings not drift away from what is essential to the several traditions of Buddhism that have survived into modern times. A recent book that takes up this concern is Dzongsar Jamyang Khyentse's “What Makes You Not a Buddhist?” (Shambhala 2007). Thinley Norbu himself has taken up this topic in his highly controversial interview in the fall 1998 issue of Tricycle, in which he very forthrightly assailed the misunderstanding of the role of the Guru among Western Buddhist practitioners.It would seem that the social construction of religious behavior is as much a challenge to Buddhists as it is to Christians, simply because religious teachings are based on the conviction that the ultimate goal of religious life depends on engaging with practices and beliefs that transcend the mutable characteristics of human societies. And yet, to teach the traditions to real human beings it is always necessary to make use of historically conditioned language. Modernity, because it is essentially mutable, allowing itself to be constructed, deconstructed, and reasserted in endless permutations and combinations, will always be, to some degree, in conflict with any perennialist philosophy or revealed religion. It would therefore seem prudent for religious leaders to come together from time to time for a “reality check" on what their teachings are saying to the modern world. Believers also need to assess, through dialogue, those aberrations that may be emerging among disciples because of misunderstandings that arise when dramatically different cultural and religious systems encounter one another. Back in the 1970s, Chogyam Trungpa Rinpoche was willing to raise this issue in his much appreciated book “Cutting Through Spiritual Materialism” in which he warned Western disciples about the temptation to practice Buddhism as a collection of exotic behaviors that one would mold to fit one’s own ego-driven needs. At its best, Thinley Norbu's book (i.e., Cascade) attempts to provide that kind of correction and discernment, but his efforts would have been more persuasive had they been better informed through inter-religious dialogue.Unfortunately, in the process of providing a critical assessment of the views of other religions in contrast to Buddhism, Thinley Norbu takes even greater liberties with the actual teachings of other religions than the Pope did in “Crossing the Threshold of Hope”. He goes so far as to assert that what Buddhist texts have always said about other religions (that they are all essentially teachings that assert “eternalism” based on a variety of erroneous notions of “deity”) is sufficient for the sake of argument, and that it is not necessary to examine in detail what the various religions actually have to say about their own beliefs.Pope John Paul II, in “Crossing the Threshold of Hope”, made reference to his own meetings with His Holiness the Dalai Lama and with the Thai Buddhist patriarch, at least implying that some kind of actual dialogical process had some place in the way he formulated his opinions on Buddhism. Thinley Norbu instead makes it quite clear that he has a position on what the correct view of things actually is, the nondualist position. For this reason, he asserts that there is no real need for dialogue or study at all.[3] Of course, every teacher of a nondualist view runs into the problem of asserting the view that one is asserting no metaphysical position at all, but T. Norbu insists that the problem is one intrinsic to the English language and not to his own style of exposition: “Sometimes making the language too correct in English is very awkward, since in English there are no terms for a subjectless, objectless spiritual state or immaterial openness light, and it is very hard for those using proper English to understand the meaning" (pp. xxii-xxiii). I have had conversations with other Vajrayana teachers who have presented the same complaints. My claim has been that the obstacles inherent in an English language presentation of Buddhism can be overcome in at least two ways: one way is to make use of the classical Sanskrit terms--clearly defined—since these are based on Indo-European roots common to the original Buddhist sources and to the roots of the English language, allowing such terms to find a home in English; the other way is to accept the English language as a uniquely flexible instrument for translation and to employ translators who actually know the rich diversity inherent to English. One of the limitations in the translation process has been the fact that, since the Enlightenment, the English language has been employed as an instrument for the promotion of a scientific worldview. However, medieval English proved perfectly capable of expressing experiences of the contemplative state of awareness in such classic works as the “Cloud of Unknowing” (late fourteenth century). In fact, the very word “contemplation” in medieval English meant something very close to a state beyond subject and object, granted in a theistic frame of reference; it is only in subsequent development of the language that the ordinary meaning of “to contemplate” means to “think about something.” Medieval Catholic mystics wrote extensively, in several languages, on the topic of mystical experience, union with God, loss of the self, egolessness, radical detachment, unknowing, states beyond subject and object, and so forth. To ignore all this material and then to complain about the lack of utility of the English language is a failure to make skillful use of an excellent means of communication. What T. Norbu needs is better English translators and a better acquaintance with the spiritual heritage of Christianity and Western literary traditions. Greater skill in using the English language would have been particularly helpful in the discussion of “metaphysical ideas” (pp. 136-137) which in that part of T. Norbu’s book refer to superficial “New Age” notions of spirituality rather than a more rigorous understanding of metaphysics as the study of ontology.Now one has the sorry task of examining some of the disedifying remarks about theistic religions that T. Norbu uses to make his case for the superiority of Buddhism. How anyone could put such matters in writing, and how Shambhala Publishing could have stooped to this level, is a cause of great concern for anyone who genuinely cares about the obstacles to inter-religious relations caused by misinformation. For example: “Those who hold the eternalist view believe that pleasing the gods leads to happiness for mankind, while displeasing the gods leads to suffering” (pp. 4-5). Lacking a background in the extensive treatment of this misperception of the biblical traditions, the author develops his critique into a full-scale denial of the validity of all forms of theism. However, he embraces the identical structure of reward and punishment in his discussion of karmic retribution (p. 45f.). In fact, he does not even engage with those scholars of dzogchen who deny such a central role to karma in the very system of which T. Norbu is a lineage holder.[4]While it may be true that some notions of propitiating deities have existed and may even persist among some theists, it would seem even to the average Christian that some sort of propitiatory relationship with the Blessed Trinity would be not only erroneous but also blasphemous. Muslims and Jews would also raise objections to T.Norbu’s descent into caricatures of their beliefs. A footnote on page 7 confirms that the author is not speaking about archaic religions, but rather is referring specifically to “eternalist gods such as the creator God of Christianity, Allah in Islam and deva [sic] in Hinduism.” In orthodox Christianity, deity is not understood in this way at all. In fact, we specifically negate the notion of a monad-deity whose transcendence is a barrier to relationship and creative dynamism, and deny that the Trinitarian Godhead of orthodox Christianity is a “deity" to be propitiated. Moreover, the goal of contemplative practice in Eastern and Western Christianity is for the baptized soul to discover itself fully alive within the mystery of the Blessed Trinity; this is the most central and sublime gift of baptismal grace! As a gift, it cannot be earned; one can only respond to it with faith and love, which is exactly what the Christian does in liturgy, contemplative prayer, and service of the neighbor.When we come to the discussion of deity yoga (p. 58), it is clear that tantric practice, albeit within the perspective of “emptiness" and absolute relativism, models its own ritualism on the propitiation of deities inherited from Hindu traditions. In fact, this entire body of discussion in Buddhism seems to have nothing whatsoever to do with those religions with which Buddhism had little or no contact until (perhaps) the twelfth century, and refers exclusively to Buddhist assessments of the deities of Brahmanical religion. From this point of view, the kind of deity that is addressed in Vajrayana practice and polemic is hardly more complex than a Vedic deity, who is after all merely an ascended hero figure adorned with merit derived from sacrificial action (the root concept of “karma”). Not only does the author fail to notice the difference between Vedic deities and the beliefs of the Abrahamic religions (not to mention more evolved Hindu teachings), he does not consider this “noticing“ to be a worthwhile pursuit. In so doing, he constructs a virtually impenetrable barrier to a fruitful encounter, much less a dialogue, between Buddhism and the Abrahamic religions. This is made explicit on page 62, where the author asserts a bit ferociously that, once one has taken Refuge, “one must no longer befriend or associate with those who hold views that are not in accord with Buddhist views." Worse yet, especially for advocates of “dual practice” (many of whom make use of the Dudjom Tersar practices): “Once having gone for refuge in the holy Dharma, which is the source of all benefit and happiness without exception, one should no longer hold the perverted views of mistaken religions that promote harmful doctrines" (p. 62). This puts at risk the whole project of this journal and the community of Buddhist-Christian dialogue that it serves.Since for the author it is not necessary to take note of differing views among other religious believers, such assertions of “difference” are entirely irrelevant; the fact that such an attitude is a perfect mirror of the dogmatic attitude that other Buddhists criticize in Christianity tells us that there is a deeply problematic perspective at work in the inter-religious portions of T. Norbu’s book. “There are many different eternalist gods, including the gods of religions that recognize one god and the gods of religions that have many gods, but it is unnecessary to name each one here or to describe each of their doctrines. It is taught in the sutras and shastras . . . that eternalists consider their gods to be absolute. From a Buddhist view, it is unnecessary to try to decide which of these gods is absolute, since whatever eternalists think is absolute is actually just beings’ phenomena appearing according to time and place and is totally uncertain” (p. 10). In other words, since one religion has decided that all other religions have the same erroneous view, it is not necessary to engage in serious reflection on other religions, and it is not necessary to engage in authentic dialogue. Rather, it is the task of Buddhists to ensure that sooner or later those who are in error are led to the absolute truth. T. Norbu is clearly embracing a Buddhist version of the “exclusivist” perspective noted in some of the theistic traditions: only one religion is true and the others are false; therefore all human beings must reject the false and embrace the true in order to attain the highest goal of a human life. The author does go on to expound a somewhat more irenic position when he admits that other religions at least have some kind of spiritual perspective--over against materialists and “nihilists”--and may eventually lead to a spiritual awakening that should lead persons toward Buddhism (pp. 11-12, 127), undoubtedly because he is aware that this is the traditional teaching that can be found in the Abhidharmakośa of Vasubandhu.It would be possible to go on at great length to cite the author’s unremitting hostility to comparative religion, comparative theology, deceptive teachers, and empirical science. However, it would seem that the real problem at the heart of the polemical parts of the book lies with the author’s concern that modernity is in conflict with the essential truths of Buddhism. Because many Buddhist practitioners are inclined to accept the authority of modernity, and particularly of empirical science, T. Norbu is persuaded that there is a grave risk to the practice of authentic Buddhism. Strangely enough, T. Norbu adopts two strategies to oppose these tendencies, both of which are employed by teachers in the very theistic traditions that he so greatly dislikes. One of them is the well-known tactic of “relativizing the relativizers” (p. 133f.). The other is outright fundamentalism, which I would understand as a religious perspective that makes empirical data and religious data to be unequally true (the religious truths being ontologically superior) but epistemologically equal, that is, knowable in the same way. For example, in his discussion of the process of conception, he insists that there are other, immaterial factors present at conception; he attacks the scientific view of conception (union of sperm and egg) in the style of a reductio ad absurdem (pp. 35-36), but in so doing he misses the key feature of all conflicts of this kind. On the one hand, he has the problem of epistemology. First, how does one know the laws of karma and other nonmaterial features of conception from the Buddhist point of view? (The traditional response being: These truths have been perceived by the Enlightened Ones.) And second, how might one present such laws to those whose method relies entirely on ever more refined forms of empirical observation, but who have no means for employing nonempirical methods of knowing? (The traditional answer being: Through skillful means arising from the practice of compassion.) As in the case of Other fundamentalists, the truths inherited from the religious tradition are taken as embodying an enduring set of absolute truths that can never be overturned or modified by empirical data precisely because the religious truths are “known” to be at least equally empirical. This is the root problem of all forms of fundamentalism, even though the Buddhist notion of an “absolute truth” as distinguished from a “relative truth” attempts to solve the problem. Unfortunately, T. Norbu uses this approach unskillfully.Basically, if there is “absolute truth,” it has to be grounded in a higher sphere of objectivity than any empirical datum. If it is not so grounded. then it falls to the level of a comparable relative truth that is true or nor depending on whether or not it can be falsified by empirical evidence.[5] In such a perspective, absolute truth collapses into relative truth, and scientific methods can either prove or disprove religious beliefs. What Norbu is trying to avoid is the very “eternalism” he so eagerly decries among theists: that epistemologically speaking, religious truth. including Buddhist religious truth, is disclosed by a revelatory process that is necessarily superior to ways of knowing connected to empirical scientific method. This is particularly significant since the commentary is attempting to teach about a “revealed" sacred text, the very existence of which requires belief in revelation and therefore belief in a higher reality that compassionately bestows skillful liberative methods on confused human beings. In other words, it is difficult for a theist to fail to notice theism in the most profound convictions of the text, if not in the protestations of author of the commentary who tells us in several places that “Even though Buddhism talks about views, because Buddhism never falls to any extreme, there is no certain point of view, which has immeasurable meaning" (p. 17) while at the same time making unmistakably dogmatic Statements such as "One must think that the benefit of obtaining a precious human beings rebirth is immeasurable, just as Buddha said" (p. 39).Perhaps the clearest exposition of a fundamentalist perspective is to be found in the exposition of the “Accumulation of Merit through Mandala Offerings” (pp. 124-144). which is a veritable treatise against the incursion of scientific worldviews into the minds of Buddhist practitioners. The mandala offering practice entails the mental visualization of the universe as Mount Meru surrounded by four great and eight lesser island-continents while making a mandala offering, usually of grain mixed with semi-precious stones; this is one of the essential ritual practices of the Ngondro (preliminary practices). Instead of reminding the reader that these visualizations are a skillful means designed to expand the minds capacity to realize emptiness and compassion, we are told emphatically that “[w]hoever is Buddhist must believe in Buddhist cosmology”(p. 124), by which is meant that one is to believe that the cosmology of the Abhidharma texts and of cosmological tantric texts such as the Kālacakra are absolutely true. Because the author chooses not to make a serene distinction between empirical data and the information found in philosophical and ritual texts, this entire section could lead to a great deal of consternation among Western Buddhist practitioners.One wonders whatever happened to the notion of the raft (skillful means) that may be left on the farther shore (enlightenment) once that shore has been attained.Of course any follower of a mystical spiritual path would understand the idea that “until the spiritual appearances revealed by the Buddha become perceptible one has to believe in them with faith, and then what is imperceptible can become perceptible” (p. 125); the problem is that even on the level of purified perception, the kind of knowing that one attains through spiritual practice is inherently different from empirical knowledge. Just as the subtle body does nor correspond exactly to the anatomical body, so too the mystical cosmos does nor necessarily correspond to the empirical cosmos. No one should be troubled by this. Indeed, many contemporary mystics have been persuaded that empirical, scientific knowledge should not be treated like some kind of spiritual obstacle. In fact, the very capacity of the human mind to rise to an ever more verifiable knowledge of the material cosmos can be, to a spiritually alert person, a hint of the immense spiritual capacities of the mind-a conviction explored by Teilhard de Chardin and later fully developed by Bernard Lonergan. It is worth noting that the extremely negative remarks about other world religions in other parts of the book are here moderated by an appreciation of the fact that “all religions recognize that there is something beyond ordinary reality that cannot be seen by everyone, and followers are taught to pray and receive blessings through believing in what they may not yet be able to see” (p. 127). It would have been more helpful if the perspective and the language of these pages had been employed earlier in the book.The great disappointment of this book, which is so excellent when it confines itself to spiritual practice within the Vajrayana, is its failure in the polemical sections to be dialogical with its opponents, even in some cases with other Vajrayana Buddhists.Whenever a teacher within a particular tradition attempts to describe the beliefs of others without consulting those being described, there is a risk of misrepresentation.This book contains many serious misrepresentations that should have been corrected through dialogue long before they should have been corrected by editing. There are many purposes to inter-religious dialogue and the study of world religions, one ofwhich would certainly be to enable persons in authority to be accurately informed about the beliefs of others before they plunge into the risky terrain of polemics. I for one would hope that the disedifying portions of Thinley Norbu's book do notbecome an obstacle to inter-religious dialogue. I hope that some kind of dialogue might arise from the very neuralgic points he raises. A good argument is always better than indifference, as long as we leave our phurba at home![1]. The publisher of the book (wisdom books) makes a number of misleading statements in promoting this book as a response to official Catholic Church teaching. “Crossing the Threshold of Hope” was never intended as an official teaching.[2]. A Buddhist-Christian colloquium was sponsored by the Vatican and by Fo Kuang Shan monastery in Taiwan; see Pro Dialogo 90, no. 3 (1995); the official “Final Statement" of this colloquium merits the attention of anyone interested in Buddhist-Christian dialogue.[3]. The inherent contradictions in this position are noted in n. 11. p. 8.[4]. I am thinking of David Germano’s claim that dzogchen is a gnosis-driven vision of cosmology, rather than a karma-driven cosmology.[5]. Raimon Panikkar can assert: “Thus the term ‘divinity' does not only designate God or the gods as substantial beings, but can also be employed as a generic term that indicates all those forces. energies. ideas, powers. and the like that emanate from a reality that is above or beyond the human world” (Divinitā, no. 13. collana “Parole di Fede" [Bologna: EMI, 2007]. p. 21: my translation from the Italian). Seen in this way, T. Norbu’s “nontheism” Stands out as another form of theism.

I believe this book is intended for those who have embarked on the life-changing, and potentially ego-shattering path of Ngondro, -specifically the short Dudjom Tersar Ngondro of which this is a commentary. For those who are fortunate enough to have encountered a genuine guide, and are engaged in this practice, this book is a great resource which can be read endlessly. As with any Dharma practice, reading it requires the utmost attention and perseverance, but the rewards are inconceivable. I do hold a considerably contrary opinion to the previous reviewer, "A Friend and Neighbor", in this regard: do not be mislead by someone reading without experience and sincerity. I believe that it is intended to be challenging, and a practice in and of itself to overcome habitual mental laziness to access it's true import, from paragraph to paragraph. In my experience each sentence can be held indefinitely, and absorbed indefintely, providing many levels of meaning. I have found in the course of reading many Dharma books in the english language that often things are either A. Watered down by being over-simplified, over-explained, and can tend towards being outright boring in this regard. . or B. They are strictly composed in the specialized language of Western Academia for an academic milieu, with a standardized terminology and style that would be almost as daunting to become fluent in as Tibetan itself. I have found that as with all of Thinley Norbu Rinpoche's books, this is a rare exception to both of these tendencies. He adeptly and creatively finds new ways to translate both words and concepts, instead of adhering to standardized forms of translation that in their crystallization have closed down meanings that are actually multilayered and meant to breathe with life. Rinpoche manages to resuscitate them, while using traditional metaphors and creating new ones for clarification. At the same time, he rigorously adheres to the traditional form of commentary, unfolding the meaning of each line of the Ngondro practice completely to it's final import, and thus illustrates that (as we often hear but fail to believe) --everything is contained within the Ngondro. Also true to the form, he cites from a large number of Sutras and traditional sources, -providing the benefit of fragments of translation of otherwise untranslated works, -or insightful re-translations of pieces that provoke new insights. Not to mislead you I will humbly admit that I have possessed this book for months, but haven't completed reading it. I am about half-way through, and I am taking my sweet time. I imagine I will be reading and re-reading it for a good while: It is a book that becomes a process, as you make progress in your own practice, new insights ensue and this text can help illuminate them. I keep it on my shrine, next to HH Dudjom Rinpoche's big red book and Dudjom Lingpa's "Buddhahood Without Meditation", which seems an appropriate place.

It needs slow reading but rewards attention. Superb scholarship and deep knowledge of Great Perfection. A classic for those working with Tibetan Buddhist Ngondro.

Thanks.

Very good quality and so fast came thank you!

Drills down into the details and important motivations behind the Ngondro (foundational) practices. Very complete aid to practice and supplement to live teaching. An absolute classic.

ce livre est exceptionnel si l'on pratique la philosophie bouddhiste du grand véhicule. Les mots, la forme sont d'une grande limpidité, il est complet et permet de se fait de pratiquer les préliminaires du Ngöndro en toute conscience.dommage qu'il n'ait pas été traduit en français