Rigpa vs. Nature of Mind

Arnoud
Posts: 618
Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2010 7:19 pm

Re: Rigpa vs. Nature of Mind

Postby Arnoud » Sun May 22, 2011 10:17 pm

I know you don't want to rehash your old argument, but maybe you could say what you think is important to know for us relative newbies?

Pero
Posts: 1871
Joined: Tue Aug 31, 2010 8:54 pm

Re: Rigpa vs. Nature of Mind

Postby Pero » Mon May 23, 2011 12:27 pm

From my memory the discussion was more about whether or not it's good to translate sems nyid with "nature of mind"...
Although many individuals in this age appear to be merely indulging their worldly desires, one does not have the capacity to judge them, so it is best to train in pure vision.
- Shabkar

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 21130
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Rigpa vs. Nature of Mind

Postby Malcolm » Mon May 23, 2011 1:56 pm

Pero wrote:From my memory the discussion was more about whether or not it's good to translate sems nyid with "nature of mind"...



That's ok, sems nyid is a translation of cittatā or citta dharmatā.
Atikosha
Tibetan Medicine Blog
Sudarsana Mandala, Tibetan Medicine and Herbs
Buddhahood in This Life
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔


So called “sentient beings” are merely delusions self-appearing from the dhātu of luminosity.

-- Ju Mipham

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 21130
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Rigpa vs. Nature of Mind

Postby Malcolm » Mon May 23, 2011 1:58 pm

Clarence wrote:I know you don't want to rehash your old argument, but maybe you could say what you think is important to know for us relative newbies?



The nature of the mind is one thing, rigpa or vidyā is used in several different ways in Dzogchen texts. It is defined in as many as five different ways in the Vima snying thig teachings.

So, vidyā/rig pa cannot be simply reduced to "the nature of the mind".
Atikosha
Tibetan Medicine Blog
Sudarsana Mandala, Tibetan Medicine and Herbs
Buddhahood in This Life
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔


So called “sentient beings” are merely delusions self-appearing from the dhātu of luminosity.

-- Ju Mipham

Pero
Posts: 1871
Joined: Tue Aug 31, 2010 8:54 pm

Re: Rigpa vs. Nature of Mind

Postby Pero » Mon May 23, 2011 4:30 pm

Namdrol wrote:
Pero wrote:From my memory the discussion was more about whether or not it's good to translate sems nyid with "nature of mind"...


That's ok, sems nyid is a translation of cittatā or citta dharmatā.


Well yes but it seemed to depend on context, sometimes it means byang chub sems. If sems nyid were just "nature of mind" always, then there is a problem when there is sems kyi rang bzhin (=nature of mind). It seems to me that translating both as nature of mind brings us into a bit of a pickle.
Although many individuals in this age appear to be merely indulging their worldly desires, one does not have the capacity to judge them, so it is best to train in pure vision.
- Shabkar

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 21130
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Rigpa vs. Nature of Mind

Postby Malcolm » Mon May 23, 2011 4:34 pm

Pero wrote:
Namdrol wrote:
Pero wrote:From my memory the discussion was more about whether or not it's good to translate sems nyid with "nature of mind"...


That's ok, sems nyid is a translation of cittatā or citta dharmatā.


Well yes but it seemed to depend on context, sometimes it means byang chub sems. If sems nyid were just "nature of mind" always, then there is a problem when there is sems kyi rang bzhin (=nature of mind). It seems to me that translating both as nature of mind brings us into a bit of a pickle.


English sometimes lacks good equivalents.

Depending one context, sometimes sems nyid means "the mind itself".

N
Atikosha
Tibetan Medicine Blog
Sudarsana Mandala, Tibetan Medicine and Herbs
Buddhahood in This Life
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔


So called “sentient beings” are merely delusions self-appearing from the dhātu of luminosity.

-- Ju Mipham

username
Posts: 759
Joined: Tue Mar 08, 2011 8:23 pm

Re: Rigpa vs. Nature of Mind

Postby username » Mon May 23, 2011 5:39 pm

Dzogchen masters I know say: 1)Buddhist religion essence is Dzogchen 2)Religions are positive by intent/fruit 3)Any method's OK unless: breaking Dzogchen vows, mixed as syncretic (Milanese Soup) 4)Don't join mandalas of opponents of Dalai Lama/Padmasambhava: False Deity inventors by encouraging victims 5)Don't debate Ati with others 6)Don't discuss Ati practices online 7) A master told his old disciple: no one's to discuss his teaching with some others on a former forum nor mention him. Publicity's OK, questions are asked from masters/set teachers in person/email/non-public forums~Best wishes


Return to “Dzogchen”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 51 guests