dumb question

Moderator: Tibetan Buddhism moderators

Re: dumb question

Postby Sherab Dorje » Sat Apr 30, 2011 10:30 am

heart wrote:That might be true, I don't know so much about the Theravada system. So Dharmakaya in Theravada is just ordinary mind?
Anyway, in Mahayana this isn't true.

/magnus
Dear magnus, I have never seen a reference to the term Dhamma-kaya in any Sutta or Theravadrin commentary. Okay I haven't read all of them (of course :tongue: ) but a search on Access to Insight turns up no citations/references at all. The terms Trikaya, rupakaya (the way it is being used here) and Svabhavikakaya are (it seems) 100% Mahayana.
:namaste:
"When one is not in accord with the true view
Meditation and conduct become delusion,
One will not attain the real result
One will be like a blind man who has no eyes."
Naropa - Summary of the View from The Eight Doha Treasures
User avatar
Sherab Dorje
Global Moderator
 
Posts: 9304
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 9:27 pm
Location: Greece

Re: dumb question

Postby heart » Sat Apr 30, 2011 10:46 am

gregkavarnos wrote:
heart wrote:That might be true, I don't know so much about the Theravada system. So Dharmakaya in Theravada is just ordinary mind?
Anyway, in Mahayana this isn't true.

/magnus
Dear magnus, I have never seen a reference to the term Dhamma-kaya in any Sutta or Theravadrin commentary. Okay I haven't read all of them (of course :tongue: ) but a search on Access to Insight turns up no citations/references at all. The terms Trikaya, rupakaya (the way it is being used here) and Svabhavikakaya are (it seems) 100% Mahayana.
:namaste:


http://www.mcu.ac.th/En/thesisdetails.php?thesis=254317

Trikaya is all Mahayana, still I have heard Sambhogakaya and Nirmanakaya being referred to collectively as Rupakaya by several Tibetan masters.

/magnus
"To reject practice by saying, 'it is conceptual!' is the path of fools. A tendency of the inexperienced and something to be avoided."
- Longchenpa
User avatar
heart
 
Posts: 3082
Joined: Fri Jan 08, 2010 1:55 pm

Re: dumb question

Postby Sherab Dorje » Sat Apr 30, 2011 11:01 am

Not arguing with that!

But the dumb question now becomes a smart question. Why? Coz if rupakaya is just this physical form that arises due to ignorance then by logical extension the Nirmanakaya, since it is a physical manifestation, is also dependent on ignorance and thus, as dakiniboi says, enlightenment is not permanent.
:namaste:
Last edited by Sherab Dorje on Sat Apr 30, 2011 11:23 am, edited 1 time in total.
"When one is not in accord with the true view
Meditation and conduct become delusion,
One will not attain the real result
One will be like a blind man who has no eyes."
Naropa - Summary of the View from The Eight Doha Treasures
User avatar
Sherab Dorje
Global Moderator
 
Posts: 9304
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 9:27 pm
Location: Greece

Re: dumb question

Postby heart » Sat Apr 30, 2011 11:14 am

gregkavarnos wrote:Not arguing with that!

But the dumb question now becomes a smart question. Why/ Coz if rupakaya is just this physical form that arises due to ignorance then by logical extension the Nirmanakaya, since it is a physical manifestation, is also dependent on ignorance and thus, as dakiniboi says, enlightenment is not permanent.
:namaste:


Dharmakaya is the only permanent part of enlightenment. The Samboghakaya and the Nirmanakaya only manifest because of compassion. When there are no conditions for them to appear, they will not appear anymore. So without Dharmakaya there will be no other kayas. For this reason Tulkus have to have the three kayas.

/magnus
"To reject practice by saying, 'it is conceptual!' is the path of fools. A tendency of the inexperienced and something to be avoided."
- Longchenpa
User avatar
heart
 
Posts: 3082
Joined: Fri Jan 08, 2010 1:55 pm

Re: dumb question

Postby Sherab Dorje » Sat Apr 30, 2011 11:35 am

heart wrote:
gregkavarnos wrote:Not arguing with that!

But the dumb question now becomes a smart question. Why? Coz if rupakaya is just this physical form that arises due to ignorance then by logical extension the Nirmanakaya, since it is a physical manifestation, is also dependent on ignorance and thus, as dakiniboi says, enlightenment is not permanent.
:namaste:


Dharmakaya is the only permanent part of enlightenment. The Samboghakaya and the Nirmanakaya only manifest because of compassion. When there are no conditions for them to appear, they will not appear anymore. So without Dharmakaya there will be no other kayas. For this reason Tulkus have to have the three kayas.

/magnus
But according to dependent origination name and form (namarupa) arise in dependence on ignorance. So for the Nirmanakaya form to arise ignorance would have to be present. Are you saying that the three kaya are seperate? That makes no "sense". It would then mean that a Buddha is both ignorant and fully enlightened. This, it seems, is one of the problems that arise when Mahayana proposes that Buddha Shakyamuni was enlightened before he manifested. If, as according to the Theravadrins, the Buddha was a human (with a heap of merit stockpiled during previous lives) then after his enlightenment and parinirvana, that's it, game over. He could manifest physical form because there was still some last bits of ignorance to overcome, but then: no ignornace, no form. But if, as Mahayana states, the Buddha was enlightened before manifesting then this blows dependent origination out of the water. Form without ignorance. :shrug:
:namaste:
"When one is not in accord with the true view
Meditation and conduct become delusion,
One will not attain the real result
One will be like a blind man who has no eyes."
Naropa - Summary of the View from The Eight Doha Treasures
User avatar
Sherab Dorje
Global Moderator
 
Posts: 9304
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 9:27 pm
Location: Greece

Re: dumb question

Postby LastLegend » Sat Apr 30, 2011 11:53 am

Lets take a look at Enlightenment of Buddha. Enlightenment here means Buddha is not restricted to what Buddha can do or can not do. If Buddha cannot take a human or any other physical form, then Buddha is not Buddha because Buddha is still attached to what he can do or cannot do. This is still attachment to thinking-what he can or cannot do in this case.
NAMO AMITABHA
NAM MO A DI DA PHAT (VIETNAMESE)
NAMO AMITUOFO (CHINESE)
User avatar
LastLegend
 
Posts: 2016
Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2011 3:46 pm
Location: Washington DC

Re: dumb question

Postby dakini_boi » Sat Apr 30, 2011 3:17 pm

gregkavarnos wrote:
heart wrote:
gregkavarnos wrote:Not arguing with that!

But the dumb question now becomes a smart question. Why? Coz if rupakaya is just this physical form that arises due to ignorance then by logical extension the Nirmanakaya, since it is a physical manifestation, is also dependent on ignorance and thus, as dakiniboi says, enlightenment is not permanent.
:namaste:


Dharmakaya is the only permanent part of enlightenment. The Samboghakaya and the Nirmanakaya only manifest because of compassion. When there are no conditions for them to appear, they will not appear anymore. So without Dharmakaya there will be no other kayas. For this reason Tulkus have to have the three kayas.

/magnus
But according to dependent origination name and form (namarupa) arise in dependence on ignorance. So for the Nirmanakaya form to arise ignorance would have to be present. Are you saying that the three kaya are seperate? That makes no "sense". It would then mean that a Buddha is both ignorant and fully enlightened. This, it seems, is one of the problems that arise when Mahayana proposes that Buddha Shakyamuni was enlightened before he manifested. If, as according to the Theravadrins, the Buddha was a human (with a heap of merit stockpiled during previous lives) then after his enlightenment and parinirvana, that's it, game over. He could manifest physical form because there was still some last bits of ignorance to overcome, but then: no ignornace, no form. But if, as Mahayana states, the Buddha was enlightened before manifesting then this blows dependent origination out of the water. Form without ignorance. :shrug:
:namaste:


Yes, thank you!! Now you're understanding my question!!

However, I have found a resolution - Yes, while the sambhogakaya and nirmanakaya depend on ignorance to arise - it is only because ignorance cannot perceive the inseparability of the 3 kayas. If all beings were enlightened, forms would still arise and dissolve into dharmata - because that is the nature of form and emptiness. However, instead of calling it 3 kayas - it would technically be called svabhavikakaya - which is the enlightened perception of the 3 kayas as inseparable.

This is different from how enlightenment is seen in the Hinayana, from what I understand.

Hinayana equates enlightenment with nirvana, and ignorance with samsara.

In Mahayana, enlightenment does not equal the attainment of nirvana and the cessation of samsara. Instead, in Mahayana, enlightenment means the enlightened perception that nirvana and samsara share the same nature. This is the same as the arising of svabhavikakaya. Yes, the sambhogakaya and nirmanakaya arise separately for beings who cannot perceive dharmakaya - but in "reality" (i.e. from the perspective of enlightenment) the 3 kayas are inseparable, and this is how buddhas would perceive them.
:juggling:
Last edited by dakini_boi on Sat Apr 30, 2011 5:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.
dakini_boi
 
Posts: 683
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 2010 1:02 am

Re: dumb question

Postby heart » Sat Apr 30, 2011 4:00 pm

Nirmanakaya and Samboghakaya don't arise from ignorance, they arise from compassion. Form is not ignorance, attaching a non-existing self to form is ignornace. The five skandhas are the five Buddha families and the five elements are the five Dakinis.

/magnus
"To reject practice by saying, 'it is conceptual!' is the path of fools. A tendency of the inexperienced and something to be avoided."
- Longchenpa
User avatar
heart
 
Posts: 3082
Joined: Fri Jan 08, 2010 1:55 pm

Re: dumb question

Postby dakini_boi » Sat Apr 30, 2011 5:01 pm

heart wrote:Nirmanakaya and Samboghakaya don't arise from ignorance, they arise from compassion. Form is not ignorance, attaching a non-existing self to form is ignornace. The five skandhas are the five Buddha families and the five elements are the five Dakinis.

/magnus


Yes, Magnus, thanks for catching this. Agreed. Words are slippery and treacherous! By "Nirmanakaya and Sambhogakaya arise due to ignorance," I didn't mean that they arise from ignorance - but they arise only in response to ignorance. Therefore, they depend on ignorance to arise. That's what I was getting at. I edited it, and hopefully it expresses my point more clearly now.

Said another way:

A samsaric being will perceive the kayas as separate - that is ignorance. Yet the 3 kayas still exist after enlightenment, but no longer are perceived as separate - that is wisdom.
dakini_boi
 
Posts: 683
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 2010 1:02 am

Re: dumb question

Postby ngodrup » Sat Apr 30, 2011 6:17 pm

By Buddha, I think he's got it.
(Spoken in a crisp English accent.)
ngodrup
 
Posts: 558
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2010 6:58 pm

Re: dumb question

Postby dakini_boi » Sun May 01, 2011 3:09 am

8-) :anjali: :meditate:
dakini_boi
 
Posts: 683
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 2010 1:02 am

Re: dumb question

Postby Sherab Dorje » Sun May 01, 2011 8:59 am

So what people are saying here is that, even, ignorant beings possess the three kayas they are just unaware of it?
:namaste:
"When one is not in accord with the true view
Meditation and conduct become delusion,
One will not attain the real result
One will be like a blind man who has no eyes."
Naropa - Summary of the View from The Eight Doha Treasures
User avatar
Sherab Dorje
Global Moderator
 
Posts: 9304
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 9:27 pm
Location: Greece

Re: dumb question

Postby LastLegend » Sun May 01, 2011 9:38 am

Form only arises from ignorance? Can form arise from Enlightenment? If ignorance can manifest form, then Enlightenment can also manifest forms. Afterall both is the work of Mind-one is deluded the other is not.
NAMO AMITABHA
NAM MO A DI DA PHAT (VIETNAMESE)
NAMO AMITUOFO (CHINESE)
User avatar
LastLegend
 
Posts: 2016
Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2011 3:46 pm
Location: Washington DC

Re: dumb question

Postby dakini_boi » Sun May 01, 2011 5:19 pm

gregkavarnos wrote:So what people are saying here is that, even, ignorant beings possess the three kayas they are just unaware of it?
:namaste:


In a sense it's kind of just semantics at this point - the trikaya represent the bodies of buddhas, not sentient beings. But the fact that we have buddha nature, means we have the potential to manifest the trikaya. So in essence, that's similar to saying that ignorant beings do possess the three kayas, but they just aren't aware of it. Same as saying - you're a buddha, but you don't realize it! Again, language is limited!
dakini_boi
 
Posts: 683
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 2010 1:02 am

Re: dumb question

Postby dakini_boi » Sun May 01, 2011 5:20 pm

:thumbsup:
LastLegend wrote:Form only arises from ignorance? Can form arise from Enlightenment? If ignorance can manifest form, then Enlightenment can also manifest forms. Afterall both is the work of Mind-one is deluded the other is not.
dakini_boi
 
Posts: 683
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 2010 1:02 am

Re: dumb question

Postby ngodrup » Mon May 02, 2011 1:44 am

LastLegend wrote:Form only arises from ignorance? Can form arise from Enlightenment? If ignorance can manifest form, then Enlightenment can also manifest forms. Afterall both is the work of Mind-one is deluded the other is not.


Yes, That is exactly what is being said. That is a distinctively Nyingma view of Mahayoga-- one permeated by Dzogchen--
such as in the Guhyagarbha Tantra. In explain the meaning of the word "Sangwei-- Secret," Jamgon Mipham, in Osel
Nyingpo says: "It is secret in the sense that the three bodies go unrecognized due to the veils of temporary obscurations,
though they are present within." Also, "In the same way, all phenomena that comprise appearance and existence are never
beyond the nature of great purity and equality, regardless of whether their nature is realized or not. This is also expressed
in the profound sutras, which say 'Whether or not the thus-gone ones appear, the reality of all phenomena has always
been this way from the start.' "

So the Kayas, Mind, phenomena are exactly what they are, and always appearing. Realization or Ignorance are really the
crux of the matter. The tantras adjust our perception.
Last edited by ngodrup on Mon May 02, 2011 5:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.
ngodrup
 
Posts: 558
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2010 6:58 pm

Re: dumb question

Postby ngodrup » Mon May 02, 2011 1:45 am

gregkavarnos wrote:So what people are saying here is that, even, ignorant beings possess the three kayas they are just unaware of it?
:namaste:


OOPS. refer this to the previous quotes by Mipham.
ngodrup
 
Posts: 558
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2010 6:58 pm

Re: dumb question

Postby Aemilius » Mon May 02, 2011 1:44 pm

gregkavarnos wrote:
heart wrote:That might be true, I don't know so much about the Theravada system. So Dharmakaya in Theravada is just ordinary mind?
Anyway, in Mahayana this isn't true.

/magnus
Dear magnus, I have never seen a reference to the term Dhamma-kaya in any Sutta or Theravadrin commentary. Okay I haven't read all of them (of course :tongue: ) but a search on Access to Insight turns up no citations/references at all. The terms Trikaya, rupakaya (the way it is being used here) and Svabhavikakaya are (it seems) 100% Mahayana.
:namaste:


There is a modern theravada movement called Dhammakaya something, it is really "something" I say, look at this one http://dhammadelights.blogspot.com/2009/07/dhammakaya-cetiya.html
all the statues are pure gold, and it does exist, it is no fantasy !
svaha
User avatar
Aemilius
 
Posts: 1492
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2010 11:44 am

Re: dumb question

Postby Nighthawk » Wed May 04, 2011 3:32 am

dakini_boi wrote:
However, I have found a resolution - Yes, while the sambhogakaya and nirmanakaya depend on ignorance to arise - it is only because ignorance cannot perceive the inseparability of the 3 kayas. If all beings were enlightened, forms would still arise and dissolve into dharmata - because that is the nature of form and emptiness. However, instead of calling it 3 kayas - it would technically be called svabhavikakaya - which is the enlightened perception of the 3 kayas as inseparable.

This is different from how enlightenment is seen in the Hinayana, from what I understand.

Hinayana equates enlightenment with nirvana, and ignorance with samsara.

In Mahayana, enlightenment does not equal the attainment of nirvana and the cessation of samsara. Instead, in Mahayana, enlightenment means the enlightened perception that nirvana and samsara share the same nature. This is the same as the arising of svabhavikakaya. Yes, the sambhogakaya and nirmanakaya arise separately for beings who cannot perceive dharmakaya - but in "reality" (i.e. from the perspective of enlightenment) the 3 kayas are inseparable, and this is how buddhas would perceive them.
:juggling:


So enlightenment is not permanent? Dharmata sounds a lot like Nirguna Brahman in this case.
Nighthawk
 
Posts: 775
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 8:04 am

Re: dumb question

Postby Heruka » Wed May 04, 2011 3:40 am

dakini_boi wrote:
ngodrup wrote:Longchenpa seems to state that all phenomena arise from Dharmadhatu.
It seems that this will continue to occur indefinitely.
Sogyal Rinpoche sometimes jokes about "fundamental innate ignorance"
the idea that mind confuses itself.



Yes, Ngodrup - this idea of "fundamental innate ignorance" is sort of what i'm getting at.


how do we square this and offer an alternitive to the control matrix of the christians original sin?
Heruka
 
Posts: 1069
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2009 2:34 am

PreviousNext

Return to Tibetan Buddhism

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Fruitzilla, gentle_monster, heart, Tanaduk and 28 guests

>