you mean "really true" as in "really true that it says that in some texts?" or "really true that anyone here knows that for sure from first hand experience?"PadmaVonSamba wrote:Is that really true?Namdrol wrote:
No, ignorance is just as illusory as buddhahood.
N
Misunderstanding emptiness
- gad rgyangs
- Posts: 1142
- Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2011 4:53 pm
Re: Misunderstanding emptiness
Thoroughly tame your own mind.
This is (possibly) the teaching of Buddha.
"I must finally conclude that this proposition, I am, I exist, is necessarily true whenever it is put forward by me or conceived in my mind."
- Descartes, 2nd Meditation 25
This is (possibly) the teaching of Buddha.
"I must finally conclude that this proposition, I am, I exist, is necessarily true whenever it is put forward by me or conceived in my mind."
- Descartes, 2nd Meditation 25
- PadmaVonSamba
- Posts: 9506
- Joined: Sat May 14, 2011 1:41 am
Re: Misunderstanding emptiness
really true meaning, "is (the alledged fact of) ignorance being just as illusory as buddhahood merely a subjective projection of the mind, or can we say that objectively ignorance is just as illusory as buddhahood?gad rgyangs wrote:you mean "really true" as in "really true that it says that in some texts?" or "really true that anyone here knows that for sure from first hand experience?"PadmaVonSamba wrote:Is that really true?Namdrol wrote:
No, ignorance is just as illusory as buddhahood.
N
EMPTIFUL.
An inward outlook produces outward insight.
An inward outlook produces outward insight.
- gad rgyangs
- Posts: 1142
- Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2011 4:53 pm
Re: Misunderstanding emptiness
by "can we say" do you mean "can we say that it says so in some texts?" or "can we say so because we know it from first hand experience?" would't one have to be a buddha to know the answer to your question?PadmaVonSamba wrote: really true meaning, "is (the alledged fact of) ignorance being just as illusory as buddhahood merely a subjective projection of the mind, or can we say that objectively ignorance is just as illusory as buddhahood?
Thoroughly tame your own mind.
This is (possibly) the teaching of Buddha.
"I must finally conclude that this proposition, I am, I exist, is necessarily true whenever it is put forward by me or conceived in my mind."
- Descartes, 2nd Meditation 25
This is (possibly) the teaching of Buddha.
"I must finally conclude that this proposition, I am, I exist, is necessarily true whenever it is put forward by me or conceived in my mind."
- Descartes, 2nd Meditation 25
Re: Misunderstanding emptiness
The entire path, from the beginning until final Buddhahood is completely illusory, insubstantial, according to Haribhadra.PadmaVonSamba wrote:
really true meaning, "is (the alledged fact of) ignorance being just as illusory as buddhahood merely a subjective projection of the mind, or can we say that objectively ignorance is just as illusory as buddhahood?
For example, afflictions are not substantial entities in the mind that must be removed. They have no more reality than the mind they are felt to afflict. Wisdom is not something substantial which is gained by the mind.
The whole network of dependent origination is insubstantial. There are no substantial members which belong to anything dependently originated. Substantiality is a deluded mental appearance.
N
- conebeckham
- Posts: 5718
- Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 11:49 pm
- Location: Bay Area, CA, USA
Re: Misunderstanding emptiness
Right. Niguma also says exactly the same thing--in fact, her most famous Treatise is "The Stages of the (Illusory) Path."
དམ་པའི་དོན་ནི་ཤེས་རབ་ཆེ་བ་དང་།
རྟོག་གེའི་ཡུལ་མིན་བླ་མའི་བྱིན་རླབས་དང་།
སྐལ་ལྡན་ལས་འཕྲོ་ཅན་གྱིས་རྟོགས་པ་སྟེ།
དེ་ནི་ཤེས་རབ་ལ་ནི་ལོ་རྟོག་སེལ།།
"Absolute Truth is not an object of analytical discourse or great discriminating wisdom,
It is realized through the blessing grace of the Guru and fortunate Karmic potential.
Like this, mistaken ideas of discriminating wisdom are clarified."
- (Kyabje Bokar Rinpoche, from his summary of "The Ocean of Definitive Meaning")
རྟོག་གེའི་ཡུལ་མིན་བླ་མའི་བྱིན་རླབས་དང་།
སྐལ་ལྡན་ལས་འཕྲོ་ཅན་གྱིས་རྟོགས་པ་སྟེ།
དེ་ནི་ཤེས་རབ་ལ་ནི་ལོ་རྟོག་སེལ།།
"Absolute Truth is not an object of analytical discourse or great discriminating wisdom,
It is realized through the blessing grace of the Guru and fortunate Karmic potential.
Like this, mistaken ideas of discriminating wisdom are clarified."
- (Kyabje Bokar Rinpoche, from his summary of "The Ocean of Definitive Meaning")
Re: Misunderstanding emptiness
I get that, Sir. I sincerely appreciate your assistance, would be honored to study Madhyamaka with you, it would be a question of time, schedules, personal goals, the usual fun questions whose answers I don't have on top of my head today.Namdrol wrote: If you wish to understand Madhyamaka, then I, among others can help you here. Some of us, like myself, have formal training in the field.
But when you make statements like this, like a statement of fact, after we just read a book by several thoughtful scholars whose opinions don't match yours, I must scratch my head.Namdrol wrote: But there is nothing in Buddhism to redesign.
Perhaps if I had started my Buddhist journey in Madhyamaka, it would be such a part of me that I would feel like you today. But I started with authors -- Buddhists and philosophers -- who took a broad view of "reality" in which Buddhism was an important part, an essential domain of inquiry or method for discovering "truth." There are other methods to reveal knowledge, like the gentle story Quiet Mind told earlier in this thread about the mutual understanding and insight he shares with his significant other. This kind of knowledge cannot be learned in a book or on the mat or by studying salt molecules but only in interaction with others.
Anyway, that's a little about my background, I avoid treating it as a dogma but it still feels helpful and informs my perspective.
Regards,
Dave.
Re: Misunderstanding emptiness
yadave wrote: There are other methods to reveal knowledge
There is all kinds of knowledge and all kinds of methods to reveal it -- Madhyamaka is intent on discovering the knowledge that completely pacifies suffering.
N
- PadmaVonSamba
- Posts: 9506
- Joined: Sat May 14, 2011 1:41 am
Re: Misunderstanding emptiness
If what you are experiencing is illusion, then how do you know it is illusion?Namdrol wrote:The entire path, from the beginning until final Buddhahood is completely illusory, insubstantial, according to Haribhadra.PadmaVonSamba wrote:
really true meaning, "is (the alledged fact of) ignorance being just as illusory as buddhahood merely a subjective projection of the mind, or can we say that objectively ignorance is just as illusory as buddhahood?
For example, afflictions are not substantial entities in the mind that must be removed. They have no more reality than the mind they are felt to afflict. Wisdom is not something substantial which is gained by the mind.
The whole network of dependent origination is insubstantial. There are no substantial members which belong to anything dependently originated. Substantiality is a deluded mental appearance.
N
EMPTIFUL.
An inward outlook produces outward insight.
An inward outlook produces outward insight.
Re: Misunderstanding emptiness
The same way you know you are dreaming when you are in a dream.PadmaVonSamba wrote:
If what you are experiencing is illusion, then how do you know it is illusion?
Not easy, not impossible.
- PadmaVonSamba
- Posts: 9506
- Joined: Sat May 14, 2011 1:41 am
Re: Misunderstanding emptiness
What I am saying is,gad rgyangs wrote:by "can we say" do you mean "can we say that it says so in some texts?" or "can we say so because we know it from first hand experience?" would't one have to be a buddha to know the answer to your question?PadmaVonSamba wrote: really true meaning, "is (the alledged fact of) ignorance being just as illusory as buddhahood merely a subjective projection of the mind, or can we say that objectively ignorance is just as illusory as buddhahood?
are we really having this conversation?
If you are having a dream, and somebody in the dream comes up to you and tells you that you are dreaming,
since they are not "real", why should you believe them?
EMPTIFUL.
An inward outlook produces outward insight.
An inward outlook produces outward insight.
- PadmaVonSamba
- Posts: 9506
- Joined: Sat May 14, 2011 1:41 am
Re: Misunderstanding emptiness
Are you saying
"things are not real, and that is the real way things are"
???
"things are not real, and that is the real way things are"
???
EMPTIFUL.
An inward outlook produces outward insight.
An inward outlook produces outward insight.
- conebeckham
- Posts: 5718
- Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 11:49 pm
- Location: Bay Area, CA, USA
Re: Misunderstanding emptiness
If you know you are dreaming, then you undersand the "context," and of course the dream person is a mere appearance to mind, and the value you place on the dream person and his or her words is informed by your knowledge.PadmaVonSamba wrote: What I am saying is,
are we really having this conversation?
If you are having a dream, and somebody in the dream comes up to you and tells you that you are dreaming,
since they are not "real", why should you believe them?
If you do not know you are dreaming, then you may or may not choose to believe the dream person's existence, as well as the veracity of the dream person's statements. However, even if you believe the dream person is telling the truth, this belief will likely not cause you to awaken from the dream. It may, however, initiate a line of examining, questioning, reflection, on your part.
དམ་པའི་དོན་ནི་ཤེས་རབ་ཆེ་བ་དང་།
རྟོག་གེའི་ཡུལ་མིན་བླ་མའི་བྱིན་རླབས་དང་།
སྐལ་ལྡན་ལས་འཕྲོ་ཅན་གྱིས་རྟོགས་པ་སྟེ།
དེ་ནི་ཤེས་རབ་ལ་ནི་ལོ་རྟོག་སེལ།།
"Absolute Truth is not an object of analytical discourse or great discriminating wisdom,
It is realized through the blessing grace of the Guru and fortunate Karmic potential.
Like this, mistaken ideas of discriminating wisdom are clarified."
- (Kyabje Bokar Rinpoche, from his summary of "The Ocean of Definitive Meaning")
རྟོག་གེའི་ཡུལ་མིན་བླ་མའི་བྱིན་རླབས་དང་།
སྐལ་ལྡན་ལས་འཕྲོ་ཅན་གྱིས་རྟོགས་པ་སྟེ།
དེ་ནི་ཤེས་རབ་ལ་ནི་ལོ་རྟོག་སེལ།།
"Absolute Truth is not an object of analytical discourse or great discriminating wisdom,
It is realized through the blessing grace of the Guru and fortunate Karmic potential.
Like this, mistaken ideas of discriminating wisdom are clarified."
- (Kyabje Bokar Rinpoche, from his summary of "The Ocean of Definitive Meaning")
Re: Misunderstanding emptiness
Namdrol wrote: The entire path, from the beginning until final Buddhahood is completely illusory, insubstantial, according to Haribhadra.
For example, afflictions are not substantial entities in the mind that must be removed. They have no more reality than the mind they are felt to afflict. Wisdom is not something substantial which is gained by the mind.
The whole network of dependent origination is insubstantial. There are no substantial members which belong to anything dependently originated. Substantiality is a deluded mental appearance.
N
- How foolish you are,
grasping the letter of the text and ignoring its intention!
- Vasubandhu
Re: Misunderstanding emptiness
PadmaVonSamba wrote:
If you are having a dream, and somebody in the dream comes up to you and tells you that you are dreaming,
since they are not "real", why should you believe them?
Who else wold you beleive if there are no real persons.
Anyway, this is a boring game of semantics.
- PadmaVonSamba
- Posts: 9506
- Joined: Sat May 14, 2011 1:41 am
Re: Misunderstanding emptiness
....Or does it only APPEAR to be???Namdrol wrote: Anyway, this is a boring game of semantics.
EMPTIFUL.
An inward outlook produces outward insight.
An inward outlook produces outward insight.
Re: Misunderstanding emptiness
PadmaVonSamba wrote:....Or does it only APPEAR to be???Namdrol wrote: Anyway, this is a boring game of semantics.
Yes, it appears so.
- PadmaVonSamba
- Posts: 9506
- Joined: Sat May 14, 2011 1:41 am
Re: Misunderstanding emptiness
Well, what i am thinking is,Namdrol wrote:PadmaVonSamba wrote:....Or does it only APPEAR to be???Namdrol wrote: Anyway, this is a boring game of semantics.
Yes, it appears so.
is physical phenomena an illusion
or is it the reality of physical phenomena that is the illusion?
I have mentioned somebody once saying, regarding the question of the existence of other realms,
that other realms were no more real than this one.
And what that means is, how much one will experience existence in another realm
depends a lot on how much one clings to the apparent reality of this one.
It can be said that all phenomena can be divided infinitely (in many ways)
and thus has no inherent existence.
But why is divisibility the criteria for establishing the "reality" of something?
So, maybe "reality" has nothing to do with physical particles, molecules, or whatever
To say "It's not real because I can cut it in half"
...I mean, that's a bit silly. Isn't it?
.
.
.
EMPTIFUL.
An inward outlook produces outward insight.
An inward outlook produces outward insight.
Re: Misunderstanding emptiness
If the reality of physical phenomena is an illusion, physical phenomena are illusory because the nature of a thing cannot be different than the thing that bears that nature -- for example, wetness and water, heat and fire, etc.PadmaVonSamba wrote: is physical phenomena an illusion
or is it the reality of physical phenomena that is the illusion?
Irreducibility is held to be the criteria for establishing identity. Identity is the basis for establishing the reality of a given thing. If the identity of a given thing cannot be etablished for that thing because a given thing can still be reduced and analyzed, that thing's reality depends on non-analytical acceptance (hence a convention). Assuming that no phenomena can bear ultimate analysis, a given thing's reality is an imputation based upon an appearance that has not been subject to ultimate analysis.But why is divisibility the criteria for establishing the "reality" of something?
N
Re: Misunderstanding emptiness
nice response namdrol
Re: Misunderstanding emptiness
Namdrol wrote:The entire path, from the beginning until final Buddhahood is completely illusory, insubstantial, according to Haribhadra.PadmaVonSamba wrote:
really true meaning, "is (the alledged fact of) ignorance being just as illusory as buddhahood merely a subjective projection of the mind, or can we say that objectively ignorance is just as illusory as buddhahood?
For example, afflictions are not substantial entities in the mind that must be removed. They have no more reality than the mind they are felt to afflict. Wisdom is not something substantial which is gained by the mind.
The whole network of dependent origination is insubstantial. There are no substantial members which belong to anything dependently originated. Substantiality is a deluded mental appearance.
N
Really true. But it's also our experience that we compulsively attach to our delusions.
Kirt
“Where do atomic bombs come from?”
Zen Master Seung Sahn said, “That’s simple. Atomic bombs come from the mind that likes this and doesn’t like that.”
"Even if you practice only for an hour a day with faith and inspiration, good qualities will steadily increase. Regular practice makes it easy to transform your mind. From seeing only relative truth, you will eventually reach a profound certainty in the meaning of absolute truth."
Kyabje Dilgo Khyentse Rinpoche.
"Only you can make your mind beautiful."
HH Chetsang Rinpoche
Zen Master Seung Sahn said, “That’s simple. Atomic bombs come from the mind that likes this and doesn’t like that.”
"Even if you practice only for an hour a day with faith and inspiration, good qualities will steadily increase. Regular practice makes it easy to transform your mind. From seeing only relative truth, you will eventually reach a profound certainty in the meaning of absolute truth."
Kyabje Dilgo Khyentse Rinpoche.
"Only you can make your mind beautiful."
HH Chetsang Rinpoche