Aro gTér Dzogchen and Tantra Teachings Wiki

Spectrum of Ecstasy - 10 Ch.5 Reading the Fields of our Energies

22 min read

Spectrum of Ecstasy — Ch.5 “Reading the Fields of our Energies”

The book’s symbolic-methodology chapter (18 pp, book pp. 105–122). Ch.5 is the Part One closer — the chapter that takes the reader from the general framework (three spheres, five elements, shi-nè, view/meditation/action, discovering space) into the readiness-condition for Part Two’s element-chapters. Structurally analogous to Roaring Silence Ch.6 (“Flight”) which opens RS’s Part Two — SoE Ch.5 positions the reader at the threshold of the symbolic-element chapters, delivering the full framework in which they will make sense.

The Opening Refrain

“The personalities of the khandros, or wisdom sisters, are the inner energy of everything it is possible for us to feel. This is what we are, or what we could become. Our inner elements are the khyil-khor of the khandros — the iridescent matrix of being. There is no more profound khyil-khor than who or what we actually are in our world.”

Key claims compressed into four sentences:

  • Khandros are the inner energy of all feeling.
  • The khandros are what we are (or what we could become).
  • Our inner elements are the khyil-khor of the khandros.
  • No more profound khyil-khor than who we actually are — the iconographic khyil-khors are derivative from the lived-khyil-khor.

This is the chapter’s master-thesis compressed. The body develops each of these claims.

Our Eyes Are All We Need

“The symbols that radiate as the communicative display from each band of the five-coloured rainbow are the warp and weft of our lives. It is important not to misunderstand this kind of language. One should not get the impression that these five expressions of our being are internal visions. Our own eyes are all we need — our own senses are all that are required, but they have to be open to perceiving the world.”

Critical methodological disclaimer: the elements are not internal visions. They are what we already see, when our senses are open to perceiving the world. The book is not training the practitioner in visualization of imagined phenomena but in recognition of what is already appearing.

This is the anti-fantasy register that the Opening Q&A already set (“Tantric fantasy world in which you are some great non-dual heroine”). Ch.5 makes it methodological: the five-coloured rainbow is the warp and weft of ordinary perception, not a mystical overlay.

Khyil-khor as Relational Structure — The Ch.5 Extension

Ch.5 takes khyil-khor beyond the iconographic sense introduced in Ch.1:

“But here we are going to look at the most fundamental aspects of khyil-khor. Khyil-khor also can be translated as ‘circle’, and the Sanskrit word ‘mandala’ means ‘grouping’ or ‘association’, which carries the sense that everything gathers around a central point. It is important to underline the fact that complexity does not necessarily imply profundity. The origin is always of greater profundity than the complexity of the display.”

The book’s fundamental move: khyil-khor is the structure of lived experience itself, not only its iconographic representation. The chapter develops this through a sustained sociological-relational illustration — family, relatives, friends, partners, colleagues, shopkeepers, the people one never speaks to, even people one dislikes:

“Wherever you are is an aspect of khyil-khor. Whatever you are doing is part of the energy of khyil-khor. You are simultaneously centre and periphery of this experience known as khyil-khor — wherever you are. You are the centre of your own and in the periphery of the khyil-khors of others. It is a totally inter-penetrating energy.”

Four structural features:

  • Every perceptual/relational situation has a centre-and-periphery configuration.
  • Dynamic — “a wonderful dancing energy”, not a fixed geometric pattern.
  • Interpenetrating — one’s own khyil-khor and every other being’s khyil-khor overlap continuously.
  • Inescapable — “It is not possible to exclude anyone from your khyil-khor or to be excluded from anyone else’s.”

The Inescapability Argument

“Even if someone dislikes you, you remain within their field of energy. Even if they despise you, it would make no difference. In fact if someone feels very strong negative feelings toward you, you would figure even more potently in their field of energy. Ultimately, every being is part of your khyil-khor. Everyone and everything is linked with your field of energy; and, you are linked with theirs. Therefore it is vital that we recognise this, or that we work toward this recognition.”

The Q&A sharpens this with NCR’s old song-lyric gloss: “You’re nobody till somebody loathes you!” The hate-makes-you-nothing intuition is inverted: hatred intensifies presence in the hater’s khyil-khor.

Consequence chain:

  • Exclusion is structurally impossible.
  • Attempting exclusion undermines experiential integrity: “You cannot really ever feel comfortable in your own skin if you are attempting to be exclusive.”
  • Non-comfort in one’s own skin makes self-love impossible; without self-love, love for others is impossible.

True love is defined as “centreless recognition of khyil-khor” — a mutual dance of centre-at-periphery. Q&A:

  • KD: “They mirror each other’s khyil-khors.”
  • Q: “So the relationship wouldn’t constitute a khyil-khor of its own with both of you perceiving yourselves at the centre?”
  • NCR: “No, [laughs] but, also… no! That’s the cute little khyil-khor with roses around the door!”
  • Q: “So is it centreless because it’s not owned by either of you…?”
  • NCR: “It’s an impression created by a flickering dance within a centreless centre.”

Impossibility of Anonymity

“Even if you tried to eradicate your personal history in an attempt to become anonymous, it would be impossible to be free of your interconnections. Even when you die your friends and children remember you in their photograph albums as part of their khyil-khors. It is impossible not to leave a trace that ripples through eternity.”

“Impossible not to leave a trace that ripples through eternity” — the ontological consequence of inter-penetration. Anonymity is not a liveable project; it is a structural impossibility. The practitioner who tries to vanish from others’ khyil-khors is not accomplishing disappearance — they are running a futile operation that is itself visible as a figure in those khyil-khors.

Even Solitary Retreat

“Even if you are in solitary retreat, you are not truly isolated — there are people who are thinking about how you are getting along and wondering if you will be different when you come out. All these thoughts and ideas link you to their khyil-khors.”

Cross-reference to tsam: retreat (Tibetan mTshams, “confines”) is not withdrawal from the khyil-khor but establishing confines for intensified practice within it. The khyil-khor follows the practitioner into the cave; the point is not elsewhere-ness but practice-intensification.

Empty-Centre Khyil-khor

“Khyil-khor manifests as empty centres — centres of unconditioned potentiality. These empty centres appear spontaneously on the luminous fringes of our perception. Khyil-khor is our experience. It is our sensation, or consciousness, of finding ourselves in our world.”

The ontological character: every khyil-khor has an empty centre (chö-ku — unconditioned potentiality). The practice is not to install the empty centre but to recognise it — the centre is always already empty, and the recognition is what dissolves the dualistic grip on the periphery.

The Five Elements as Khyil-khor Structure

“The elements are a five-fold symmetry of symbolism that permeates our reality. They permeate the spectrum of our enlightenment, and our artificially structured perception of the universe. The elements enable us to view the entirety of our perceptual experience as khyil-khor.”

Key claim: the elements are not one system among possible khyil-khor organisations. They are the five-fold symmetry that organises khyil-khor itself — the structure by which the iridescent matrix presents itself.

“Each of the five elements is an expression of being. Each element is associated with a colour and a Tantric symbol. They are connected with seasons, times of day and with the cardinal directions. They can be associated with any aspect of the phenomenal world — types of landscape, climate and weather. No aspect of our world can be excluded. This is a significant understanding, if we are to make a personal contact with the awareness-imagery of Tantra. When you understand that it is not some arbitrary set of metaphysical abstractions, but a field of meaning that includes every aspect of your world, you realise that it is completely workable in every moment.”

“Completely workable in every moment” — the pragmatic register. The five-element framework is not a doctrinal attachment to Tibetan cosmology; it is a field-of-meaning covering every aspect of the reader’s world, available as a recognition-field at any moment.

Pawo and Khandro — The Chapter’s Core Technical Move

Ch.5 develops the pawo/khandro framework Ch.1 introduced compressed:

“The physical aspects of the five elements are known as the five pawos. The word ‘pawo’ means hero or warrior. This pawo characteristic applies to the dynamic qualities of the elements: the colossal enduring ruggedness of earth; the powerful surging force of water; the bright lascivious incendiary hunger of fire; the all-pervasive relentless turbulence of air; the fundamental fecundity of space.”

Pawo = physical / dynamic / outer — the “hero/warrior” quality. Ch.5 gives each element’s pawo-aspect a single verbal portrait:

ElementPawo (dynamic-physical) quality
Earthcolossal enduring ruggedness
Waterpowerful surging force
Firebright lascivious incendiary hunger
Airall-pervasive relentless turbulence
Spacefundamental fecundity

And the khandro-aspect:

“The five internal energy fields of the elements are known as the five khandros, the sky-goers. The magical appearance of the khandros reflects the spatial qualities of the elements. The personalities of the khandros are the inner energy of everything it is possible for us to feel. They are the magical prism of endless inter-connectedness.”

Khandro = spatial / feeling / inner — the sky-goer quality. See Khandro, Pawo.

Etymology Footnote — Khandro

Footnote 3 supplies the technical etymology:

“The word khandro is a contraction of khandroma. Kha is a contraction of the word namkha which means ‘sky’. Dro means ‘going’, and ma is the female ending. In Tibetan, the word ‘sky’ has a much broader meaning than that which we see when we look upward. Sky carries the sense of spaciousness, and is used in the same way as ‘sphere’, ‘field’ or ‘world’ in terms of all-inclusiveness. In Tantric terminology we can speak of the skies of the elements. Each element is a sky of meaning and qualities. To be able to ‘go’, move or dance in the sky, is to be free of referential coordinates — to be unbounded.”

“Sky of meaning” — the technical coinage. Each element is a sky (sphere, field, world) of meaning; the khandro is the being who moves freely within that sky — “free of referential coordinates, unbounded.” This makes the structural description of a khandro not metaphorical but technical: a female tantric being operating in the non-referential mode within a specific element’s sky-of-meaning.

Personality in Tantra — The Q&A

Ch.5’s Q&A develops a critical doctrinal point:

Q: Why do you use the word ‘personality’ in this context?

KD: Because we are dealing with Tantra, and Tantra is not afraid of personality.

NCR: Personality is very important in manifesting compassion on an individual basis. You have to relate in terms of individuality in order to be seen and heard by individuals. If you had no personality, you would not be able to touch individuals.

Q: You mean that to communicate with all beings equally, one would have to have some kind of cosmic blandness?

NCR: Damn right.

KD: Yes. Infinite non-specific benevolence would have to be rather bland. That is why greater effectiveness is linked with wrathful awareness-beings than with peaceful ones. The more particular the detail, the greater the capacity to communicate in a direct and highly personal way.”

Load-bearing claim: “Tantra is not afraid of personality.” Against spiritual-bypassing traditions that treat personality as ego-accretion to be transcended, Tantra treats personality as the medium of compassion’s individuation. Therefore:

  • The khandros have distinct personalities because that is what makes them effective.
  • Cosmic blandness is a failure mode, not a virtue. “Infinite non-specific benevolence” is bland and unable to communicate.
  • Wrathful awareness-beings are more effective than peaceful ones because of greater particularity.
  • “The more particular the detail, the greater the capacity to communicate in a direct and highly personal way.”

This is the structural reason the book Ch.6–10 develops each khandro-pawo pair as a full particular personality, not as an abstract elemental essence. Compassion requires particularity. See Compassion.

Symbol as Interface Between Ultimate and Relative

NCR: A symbol is an interface between ultimate and relative — between the experience of emptiness and the cultural and personal context of the perceiver.”

Ch.5’s refined definition of Tantric symbol, extending the Ch.1 formulation. Two new dimensions:

  • Bidirectional interface — symbols travel both ways: from ultimate to relative (making emptiness available to the culturally-situated perceiver) and from relative to ultimate (opening the culturally-situated perceiver to emptiness).
  • Culturally situated — “Symbols are tied to time and place and rely to some extent on a shared cultural context.”

The Peach Analogy

KD: Let’s say that you eat a peach, and that you enjoy it very much. Then someone asks you, as a peach-eater, what that experience was like. You might say: ‘Edible ecstasy!’ This reply would then be the symbol of your peach-eating experience. But there could be many symbols for that experience, and some could even sound contradictory. However, the actual experiences of peach-eating wouldn’t conflict with each other.”

Multiple symbols for one experience are possible and non-contradictory at the experience level; they may be contradictory at the verbal-symbolic level without that being a problem. This inverts the comparative-religion urge to locate the “one true” system.

The Medicine Wheel Comparison

“Tibetan tantrikas say that white is the colour of water and is associated with the East — with anger and clarity. But I’ve heard it said, that the Plains Indians of North America regard white as the North; and the buffalo of wisdom. In that system East is associated with yellow and the eagle of illumination and far-sightedness. Blue plays no part, whereas black, which does not appear in the Tibetan system, is the West, representing the bear of introspection. Green is found in the South as the mouse of trust and innocence. This Native American khyil-khor is known as the Medicine Wheel, but unlike the Tibetan Tantric system, there’s no central pervasive quality of origination which is described in terms of colour.”

Two symbolic systems explicitly laid against each other — not to synthesize them (which would distort both) but to demonstrate the incommensurability-without-mutual-exclusivity point. Each is complete in its own register.

The No-Synthesis Rule

KD: Some people might think it’s possible to learn something from looking at the differences between these systems; but I’m afraid this would merely yield information. You can learn very little indeed from this kind of comparative study. Nothing that will be of any value in your life can come of this kind of research, apart from the pleasure of gaining artistic or anthropological information. These systems aren’t mutually exclusive, but if you attempt to mix or synthesise them; you merely distort them. They each work within their own context. It’s not even a matter of choosing one — you can work with two or even more, if you’re that expansive, just not at the same time, in some dreadful stew.”

Key distinction: “information” ≠ “realization.” Comparing symbols yields information (aesthetic, anthropological, cultural-historical). Practicing within a single system yields realization (direct encounter with what the symbol is an interface to). The practitioner can work with multiple systems serially but not simultaneously in combination.

Thunderbolt Bridge

Q: I’m struggling with the explanation of a symbol as an interface between ultimate and relative — between the experience of emptiness and the cultural/personal context of the perceiver. Is that why symbolism exists on the Thunderbolt Bridge? Because it travels between dharmakaya and nirmanakaya? Because it’s a bridge that looks two ways, towards the relative and the ultimate.

NCR: Yes. To be perfectly frank, I would be obliged to say that this is one of the exciting things about Buddhist Tantra.”

The Thunderbolt Bridge — a lineage phrase for Buddhist Tantra itself as the architectural bridge between dharmakāya (chö-ku) and nirmānakāya (trül-ku), functioning through sambhogakāya (long-ku) as its span. Symbols operate on this bridge — they are the medium by which dharmakāya’s emptiness becomes available at the nirmānakāya-level of culturally-situated perception, and by which nirmānakāya’s culturally-situated perception becomes the mode of dharmakāya’s recognition. See Vajrayana.

Ri-med — The Non-Sectarian Movement

Ch.5 installs the Ri-med movement as a methodological reference:

“In Tibet in the nineteenth century the Ri-med movement flourished and was heralded as a renaissance of spirituality. Ri-med is often translated as ‘eclectic’, but a more literal translation is ‘without bias’. This movement consisted of a number of conspicuously great Lamas who mastered the other Tibetan lineages and became masters of all schools and traditions — without bias. The great Jamyang Khyentse Wangpo was one such Lama and was famous throughout Tibet for the immensity of his wisdom and compassion. When he gave Tantric transmissions he always gave them in the exact style of the school of their origin. If it was a Nyingma transmission he would give it as a Nyingmapa, and if it was a Sakya transmission he would give it as a Sakyapa.”

“It is important to point out that the idea of the Ri-med movement was not to mix the schools but to treat them individually. There was no blending of traditions but rather all traditions were taught by these masters in their characteristic style, without bias.”

Ri-med = “without bias” (NOT “eclectic”). The etymology (ri = bias; med = not) gives the more accurate sense. The movement’s pivotal figures — exemplified by Jamyang Khyentse Wangpo — gave transmissions in their native-lineage style without mixing. The footnote:

“Ri-med (pronounced ree-may): Ri means ‘bias’, and med means ‘not’ - thus: without bias, or non-sectarian.”

Cross-tradition note: “There were some lesser-known Buddhist Lamas who worked in the same way with the Bonpo, and vice versa.” The Ri-med principle extended even across the Buddhist/Bon divide. See Ri-med.

Three Cosmologies

Ch.5 supplies an aside on why Tibetans are not threatened by scientific cosmology:

“Tibetan Lamas often disconcert people by their enthusiasm for the scientific view. His Holiness the Dalai Lama in particular, has a profound interest in the discoveries of Western science, and in discussing the nature of reality with physicists, biologists and scientists from all the fields that relate to the experience of being human. Western people often imagine that Lamas would wish to debunk scientific ideas and hold to their own version of cosmology. But Tibetans already have three separate cosmologies: the ancient Indian Mount Meru cosmology; the Bon cosmology; and the cosmology of the Kalachakra Tantra. So a fourth alternative poses no great threat.”

*“Darwin and Genesis could co-exist quite comfortably as alternative realities rather than being seen as rigid ideas in opposition to each other. When it is reality that is important, rather than a personally cherished version of reality, one can be open to everything.”

This is the Ri-med principle applied cross-culturally: multiple cosmologies coexist without needing to be reconciled into one.

Tantric Transmission — Wang, Lung, Tri (Footnote 6)

Footnote 6 develops the Tantric transmission structure:

“Tantric transmissions are often referred to as initiations or empowerments. They are a symbolic method of communicating the essential nature of visionary practices. Tantric transmission has three aspects: wang, lung and tri. Wang means empowerment or transmission through power (in the sense of overpowering the sense fields with the splendour of symbolic display) and pertains to the ritual aspect of transmission. Lung means transmission through sound (in the sense of sonic resonance that is linked with the vital force of the rLung - spatial winds or prana) and pertains to hearing the sound of the awareness-spell (ngak or mantra) and the drub-thab (ritual text or sadhana). Tri means transmission through explanation, with regard to hearing, and integrating the meaning — especially in terms of putting the method involved into practice.”

The three aspects of Tantric transmission:

AspectSenseModePertains to
Wang (dbang)power, empowermentoverpowering sense fields with symbolic-display splendourritual aspect
Lung (lung)sound, transmission-through-soundsonic resonance linked to rLung (prana)hearing the ngak/mantra and drub-thab (sadhana)
Tri (khrid)explanation, instructionintegrating meaning via hearingputting the method into practice

Cross-reference to Transmission in Dzogchen which has a different three-fold structure (oral / symbolic / direct). Wang/lung/tri is the general Tantric transmission structure; the Dzogchen three modes are the Dzogchen-specific analysis.

Compassion — The NR Definition

Ch.5’s compressed definition of compassion:

Q: What would you say, Rinpoche?

NCR: The same. Compassion is intrinsically communicative. It moves from the enlightened state toward any variety of confusion, with the motiveless intention of facilitating wakefulness.”

Three features packed into two sentences:

  • Intrinsically communicative — compassion is not a private state but an operation-of-communication.
  • Moves from enlightened → confusion — directional; from the realized toward the unrealized.
  • Motiveless intention — not a petition, not a task, not a project; intention without a proprietary motive attached.
  • Facilitating wakefulness — the specific effect. Compassion does not save, heal, or improve; it facilitates wakefulness in the one it moves toward.

This definition is one of the book’s most compressed statements about what compassion actually is. See Compassion.

Yidam Practice — Practicing Padmasambhava and Yeshé Tsogyel

Ch.5 Q&A supplies a striking compressed statement about yidam practice:

Q: if we were no longer symbols of our real selves, but actually manifested our real enlightened selves all the time, then we could be yidams that other people could use to realise their real selves…

KD: Absolutely! That’s why we practise Padmasambhava and Yeshe Tsogyel — that is exactly what they did!”

The yidam-becoming-logic: realised masters became yidams through their realisation. Their practice was to embody the enlightened condition so fully that they were the manifest-enlightened-selves-that-others-could-use-to-realise-their-real-selves. The practitioner’s yidam practice is to recognize the same potential in their own condition. See Yidam.

Practitioner’s Relation to Their Own Culture

The chapter closes on the cultural-situatedness point:

Q: They [my friends and family] think I’m denying what’s ‘natural’ to me and grasping at an alien ‘straw’. But if a symbol is an interface with a culture, how can we relate to the symbols of a foreign culture?

NCR: Well, if you can relate to it, you relate to it. If you didn’t relate then you wouldn’t be here — you wouldn’t be asking the question. But as to what’s ‘natural’ — that’s certainly quite an issue.

KD: In Buddhism, the idea of rebirth assumes that a person has had many previous lives; and so, what’s natural may not always be the spiritual culture of your family.

NCR: I learned only last week that the paisley pattern on my very English dressing-gown originally comes from India. And I once had to remind a gentleman, who was rather critical of Westerners practising Eastern religions, that Christianity was once an Eastern religion. And there may well have been Celts who were quite annoyed that an Eastern religion was trying to establish itself in their land.”

The cultural-defensive critique disarmed: the boundary between “natural” and “foreign” culture is historically porous, and Christianity-was-once-Eastern is the principled rebuttal to the cultural-appropriation concern about Western Buddhists.

Structural Position of Ch.5 in the Book

Ch.5 sits between:

  • Ch.4 (Discovering Space) — the practical shi-nè chapter that makes the reader ready for elemental recognition.
  • Ch.6 (Yellow Khandro-Pawo Display) — the first of the five element chapters.

Ch.5’s function is framework installation: it gives the reader the full symbolic structure — khyil-khor-as-lived, pawo/khandro-as-the-two-axes-of-each-element, symbol-as-interface, Ri-med-as-stance-toward-systems, the Wang/Lung/Tri transmission-structure, and compassion-as-motiveless-communicative-operation — that makes Ch.6–10’s material readable.

Structural parallel with RS Ch.6: both chapters are the Part Two opener of their respective books, both install methodological distinctions necessary for the rest of the book to land (Ch.6 RS: conventional logic vs realized reasoning; Ch.5 SoE: symbolic-systems operating as interfaces, personality as compassion’s medium).

Pages Created / Updated from Ch.5

Created:

Updated:

  • Khyil-khor — the Ch.5 relational-structure extension (already partially present from anticipatory ingest)
  • Khandro — etymology footnote; sky as sphere/field/world; khandros-as-what-we-are claim (already partially present)
  • Pawo — the verbal-portrait compression of each element’s pawo quality (already partially present)
  • Symbol — the Ch.5 “interface” definition (already partially present); peach analogy; no-synthesis rule; Thunderbolt Bridge
  • Five Elements — the “completely workable in every moment” register; five-fold symmetry as khyil-khor’s organizing structure
  • Transmission in Dzogchen — extended with the wang/lung/tri three-aspect Tantric transmission structure (footnote 6)
  • Vajrayana — Thunderbolt Bridge architectural function
  • Yidam — Ch.5 “we practise Padmasambhava and Yeshé Tsogyel — that is exactly what they did”
  • Spectrum of Ecstasy — Ch.5 entry

Graph View

Backlinks