Potential

[gregkavarnos]

Well I would be interested what you read into these. I am not communicating with "Sutta and Sutra" but with you.

I am not interested in the validation or critique of my apparent view by somebody that obviously has neither an intellecual nor an experiential grasp of emptiness. What I want is an informed discussion, in order for us to have an informed discussion then (at least) an (intellectual) grasp of emptiness is necessary. Go and read the references because, believe it or not, I am as interested to see what you will read into them as what I have read into them otherwise consider this conversation terminated.

[tamdrin]

The reason this thread is going nowhere is because a bunch of people who are initiated and have transmissions from Guru's are trying to convince someone who is unitiated and has no guru's.

[conebeckham]

From the Third Karmapa's "Aspiration Prayer of Mahamudra," a lengthy quote....

http://www.nalandabodhi.org/practice-and-study/teachings/view.aspx?bookId=1705

Listening to scriptures and reasonings frees us from
the obscurations of ignorance,
Reflecting on the key instructions vanquishes the darkness of doubt,
Meditation's light illuminates the true nature just as it is -
May the brilliance of the three kinds of wisdom increase. (5)

The two truths free from the extremes of realism and nihilism
are the reality of the ground,
And through the supreme path, the two accumulations free from
the extremes of superimposition and denial,
The fruition that accomplishes the two benefits free
from the extremes of existence and peace is attained -
May we meet with this Dharma that is flawless and sure. (6)

The base of purification is mind itself, the union of clarity and emptiness -
May the great purifying vajra-yoga of Mahamudra
Clear away what is to be purified, the fleeting stains of confusion,
And may we manifest the result of this purification, stainless Dharmakaya. (7)

Eliminating superimpositions about the ground is confident view,
Guarding non-distraction from that is meditation's essential point,
Becoming expert in all types of meditation is conduct supreme -
May we gain such confident view, meditation, and conduct. (8)

All phenomena are mind's magical play
As for mind, there is no mind! Mind is empty of essence.
Empty and unimpeded, it can appear as absolutely anything -
Analyzing excellently, may we cut through all superimpositions
about the ground. (9)

Our own projections, never existent, we mistake to be objects,
Out of ignorance we mistake self-awareness to be self,
Clinging to this duality makes us wander in the vastness
of existence -
May we cut through ignorance and confusion at their root. (10)

It is not existent - even the Victorious Ones do not see it,
It is not nonexistent - it is the basis of all samsara and nirvana,
It is not the contradiction of being both - it is the Middle Way path of union -
May we realize mind's essential reality, free from extremes. (11)

No name can show, "It is this."
No refutation can demonstrate, "It is not that."
May we gain certainty in the essential nature, transcending intellect,
In the uncreated, and in genuine reality's ultimate limit. (12)

Not realizing simply this, one circles in the ocean of samsara,
When one realizes simply this, there is no other enlightenment.
Everything is this and there is nothing that is not -
May we realize essential reality, the underlying nature of the ground of all. (13)

Appearance is mind and emptiness is mind,
Realization is mind and confusion is also one's mind,
Arising is mind and cessation too is mind -
May we determine that all superimpositions are mind. (14)

Unspoiled by meditation where thoughts are deliberate and striving,
Unmoved by the winds of ordinary commotion,
Knowing how to settle naturally in the uncontrived native state,
May we be skilled at and sustain the practices revealing mind's true reality. (15)

With the waves of coarse and subtle thoughts dissolving in their own place,
The placid river of mind gently comes to rest.
Free of the silt and mire of dullness and torpor,
May the ocean of calm abiding be steady and undisturbed. (16)

Looking again and again at mind that cannot be looked at,
Unseeable reality is seen vividly, just as it is.
Cutting through all doubts about whether "it is" or "it is not,"
May we unmistakenly recognize our own face. (17)

Looking at objects - there are no objects, they are seen to be mind.
Looking at mind - there is no mind, it is empty of essence.
Looking at both, clinging to duality is self-liberated -
May we realize mind's abiding nature, luminous clarity. (18)

Free from mental contrivance, it is Mahamudra,
Free from extremes, it is the great Middle Way,
Since it encompasses everything, it is Dzogchen -
May we gain the confidence of realizing all through knowing one. (19)

Free of attachment, great bliss is unceasing,
Free of clinging to characteristics, luminous clarity is unobscured,
Transcending the intellect, nonconceptuality is spontaneously present -
Without effort, may these experiences be unceasing. (20)

Clinging to excellent experience is free right where it is,
Negative thoughts' confusion is naturally pure in the expanse,
When ordinary mind manifests, there is nothing to adopt or reject,
no freedom or fruition -
May we realize the truth of essential reality, free of fabrications. (21)

Beings by nature have always been Buddhas,
Yet not realizing this, they wander endlessly in samsara.
May we have unbearable compassion
For sentient beings whose suffering knows no bounds. (22)

[conebeckham]

In reality, Buddha Nature, our potential, is beyond the extremes of existence and nonexistence.
It is not an object of conceptual mind.

[ground]

Yes yes, I know those views. To what degree are these different to "conceptual proliferations" you are referring to above?

I think it's quite obvious, but since you asked:

If one's words are based on mere thinking, then there is merely conceptual proliferation. Clinging and speculation is involved and cannot be helped.

If there is significant depth of meditative insight, i.e. not based on mere thinking but rather on repeated glimpses of emptiness, one's words are clearly not based on mere conceptual proliferation even though realization is not yet permanent; in other words, whatever conceptualization that arises while speaking about emptiness or the empty yet cognizant nature of mind, etc, will not have the power to trap one because one already knows firsthand the insubstantiality of what these terms point to. Or put another way, one has already seen that there is neither a "thing" to be attached to, nor anyone to be attached, no matter how many words one conjures up to try to speak about the true nature.

If there is complete realization, there is obviously no conceptual proliferation and realization is permanent.

Tell me what drives you to defend what are mere terms and terminology? Is it your meditative insight? Is it your non-speculation and non-clinging? What is there to defend? Your view, your tradition, your teachers view? What is it?

Sorry but this "projecting onto others" is your fabrication only.

TMingyur, you spend the majority of your time at Dharmawheel spewing your views on what must be going on in others' minds. If you want to live in denial about that, I suppose that's your business.

Really this is only your fabrication. I am just uttering (writing) words.

kind regards

[ground]

Well a text is not oral but of course the medium of transmission of texts is oral. Because before there is writing there must be oral information and processing of this information by the one who does the writing.

Kind regards

All existing Buddhist text are written down from an oral tradition. Just because the oldest text we have are Theravada don't necessarily mean that those teachings are the only teaching the Buddha taught.

I agree.

The teachings of the Mahayana sutras are nevertheless not Tibetan in origin but Indian and the oldest one are very close in age to the Theravada texts we have. So the idea that Theravada is the original teachings and that all further texts are just proliferation stands on very thin legs. All the tenets practiced in Tibet have their source in India.

/magnus

I feel that you are misconstruing my words. I did not say "all further texts are just proliferation". However it may be that my words do not comply with some popular or conventional interpretations originating from scholary philosophical views and commentaries.

Kind regards

[heart]

The teachings of the Mahayana sutras are nevertheless not Tibetan in origin but Indian and the oldest one are very close in age to the Theravada texts we have. So the idea that Theravada is the original teachings and that all further texts are just proliferation stands on very thin legs. All the tenets practiced in Tibet have their source in India.

/magnus

I feel that you are misconstruing my words. I did not say "all further texts are just proliferation". However it may be that my words do not comply with some popular or conventional interpretations originating from scholary philosophical views and commentaries.

Kind regards

No you didn't say that but it seems to be what you mean. I met a lot of people on the internet that tells me that the Mahayana and the Vajrayana isn't the words of the Buddha and that it isn't proper Buddhism, you are just the first one with a Tibetan name on your avatar.

/magnus

[devilyoudont]

I think that all beings have the potential to ascend and to descend in a multitude of contexts.

So one may speak of "ascent nature" or "descent nature" or "ascent-descent nature" if one likes.

Kind regards

Yes, but you see, Buddhist enlightenment is not an ascension. Buddhism specifically rejects the acent-descent mentality of Hinduism.

[ground]

I think that all beings have the potential to ascend and to descend in a multitude of contexts.

So one may speak of "ascent nature" or "descent nature" or "ascent-descent nature" if one likes.

Kind regards

Yes, but you see, Buddhist enlightenment is not an ascension. Buddhism specifically rejects the acent-descent mentality of Hinduism.

I applied a metaphor. Trying to convey the meaning of "positive development" and "negative development". Up or down.

Kind regards

[devilyoudont]

I applied a metaphor. Trying to convey the meaning of "positive development" and "negative development". Up or down.

Kind regards

Enlightenment is not "positive" or "negative", "up" or "down", "left" or "right", "forwards" or "backwards", "inward" or "outward". There is no potential for it but there's no lack of potential for it either.

[gregkavarnos]

As an aside

Well see my post here: viewtopic.php?p=29790#p29790

obviously NOT all people share the same "understanding" (metaphorical meaning, not identical to your "logical conclusion") of what is valid as to ALL.

First of all if you are going to quote Sutta and Sutra you should provide a link or at least give the name of the reference so people can read the entire text and not just the "out of context bit that (apparently) supports your position".

Secondly, and more specifically, it is quite apparent that the even the small piece you have quoted has no relevance to what I said because in the specific instance the Buddha, when talking about how others utilise the term "All", is talking about the general "All", ie every single thing, and not a sub category like "all mindless idiots sitting on forums all day". This "All", and I think you will find that is why it is a capital "A", is obviously beyond the capacity of an individual to repudiate, beyond their range.

Back to the sand pit!

[gregkavarnos]

From the Third Karmapa's "Aspiration Prayer of Mahamudra," a lengthy quote....

I had the good karma to follow a ten day oral instruction/ritual reading and practice retreat based on this text. Talk about my brains turning to jello! I thoroughly reccomend it!

[ground]

I applied a metaphor. Trying to convey the meaning of "positive development" and "negative development". Up or down.

Kind regards

Enlightenment is not "positive" or "negative", "up" or "down", "left" or "right", "forwards" or "backwards", "inward" or "outward". There is no potential for it but there's no lack of potential for it either.

Okay. If you choose to put it that way I do not mind.

Kind regards

[conebeckham]

I posted the excerpt because, for me at least, it clarifies the statement HHDL made which was quoted at the beginning of this thread. Mahamudra and Dzokchen have many similarities, but I think that 3rd Karmapa's prayer spells things out more completely and yet more succinctly than the original quote. Both Mahamudra and Dzokchen are less concerned with creating a system of assertions, than they are in facilitating practice and the birth of experience.

From that point of view, I maintain that all sentient beings have the inherent Buddha Nature, from the POV of conceptual discussion and dualism. All sentient beings possess the "potential." This nature or potential is unconditioned, and therefore not subject to arising or ceasing--both of which are concepts, relative to conditioned phenomena and relative truth. But saying all of this is still within the realm of superimposition, by virtue of the very fact of using language and having discussion in the first place. In reality, one has to remain free of superimposition and denial, in practice. In my opinion, it is good to understand the Via Positiva in this particular case, as well as the Via Negativa. While there is a danger of reification, or, at worst, assertion of some sort of Atman or "Soul," by adopting only the Via Positiva, there are also some dangers in adopting only the system of non-affirming negation. As I understand it, the practical instructions of the Madhyamika maintain that, when one reaches confidence in the "very non-finding," one rests in that state or view...but still, there is "resting." This is very subtle, and I can't really "get at it" adequately I suppose....

I note again, these instructions are not for creating a "Philosophical System" but for facilitating practice. But,as the Karmapa wrote:

It is not existent - even the Victorious Ones do not see it,
It is not nonexistent - it is the basis of all samsara and nirvana,
It is not the contradiction of being both - it is the Middle Way path of union -
May we realize mind's essential reality, free from extremes.

[Rael]

thanks conebeckham and Pema Rigdzin your efforts will not go unoticed...i have not the time right now but over the weekend will study

Pema Rigdzin i see your point about getting hung up on the word....i actually said that in a dyslexic way....

[devilyoudont]

Okay. If you choose to put it that way I do not mind.

Show me how there's a choice. Metaphors need correspondence and applicability. These have none. Emptiness has no hooks for words like "positive" and "negative" to attach themselves. Were you talking about awareness? As in, awareness "advances", or something like that?

[ground]

Okay. If you choose to put it that way I do not mind.

Show me how there's a choice. Metaphors need correspondence and applicability. These have none. Emptiness has no hooks for words like "positive" and "negative" to attach themselves. Were you talking about awareness? As in, awareness "advances", or something like that?

When applying words you can take different perspectives ... if you can ... if you cannot perhaps there is limitation ... perhaps ... maybe ... maybe not ...

Kind regards

[ground]

Emptiness has no hooks for words like "positive" and "negative" to attach themselves.

How could there be a hook in mere thought?


Kind regards

[devilyoudont]

When applying words you can take different perspectives ... if you can ... if you cannot perhaps there is limitation ... perhaps ... maybe ... maybe not ...

Do you agree that delusional perspectives exist or are all perspectives correct in some way or other, and it's okay not to understand exactly how a view is correct in your opinion? In other words, are you a vibhajyavadin abiding by discriminating awareness or do you subscribe to a non-vibhajyavadin school?

How could there be a hook in mere thought?

There can because there's a hook to attach the "hook" to, unlike the case with positiveness and emptiness. Of course, positiveness and negativeness can arise IN emptiness but that's an unrelated matter.

[ground]

When applying words you can take different perspectives ... if you can ... if you cannot perhaps there is limitation ... perhaps ... maybe ... maybe not ...

Do you agree that delusional perspectives exist

But when one sees the origination of the world as it actually is with right discernment, 'non-existence' with reference to the world does not occur to one. When one sees the cessation of the world as it actually is with right discernment, 'existence' with reference to the world does not occur to one.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html

or are all perspectives correct in some way or other, and it's okay not to understand exactly how a view is correct in your opinion?

"By & large, Kaccayana, this world is in bondage to attachments, clingings (sustenances), & biases. But one such as this does not get involved with or cling to these attachments, clingings, fixations of awareness, biases, or obsessions; nor is he resolved on 'my self.' He has no uncertainty or doubt that just stress, when arising, is arising; stress, when passing away, is passing away. In this, his knowledge is independent of others. It's to this extent, Kaccayana, that there is right view.

In other words, are you a vibhajyavadin abiding by discriminating awareness or do you subscribe to a non-vibhajyavadin school?

Whatever these schools are teaching I am following the teachings of the Buddha.

Kind regards