Dharma Wheel

A Buddhist discussion forum on Mahayana and Vajrayana Buddhism
It is currently Mon Dec 22, 2014 11:03 pm

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Forum rules


Please click here to view the forum rules



Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 318 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 12, 13, 14, 15, 16
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Oct 03, 2011 8:43 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2011 1:52 pm
Posts: 126
Namdrol wrote:
heart wrote:
Just find me a quote from Nagarjuna then saying that emptiness if dependent origination or else we are finished with this discussion.

/magnus


That which is dependent origination
is explained to be emptiness.
-- Mulamadhyamakakarikas.


Ok I don't know anything like you guys do. But again, this says DO is empty. It doesn't say that all of emptiness is DO? Does it?

Could we say for example that the nature of mind is empty, but not dependently originated?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 03, 2011 8:44 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2011 1:36 am
Posts: 533
Namdrol wrote:
Deopendent origination and emptiness are synonyms.

N



Thats what I said many times


:thumbsup:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 03, 2011 8:45 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am
Posts: 12736
Kelwin wrote:
Namdrol wrote:
heart wrote:
Just find me a quote from Nagarjuna then saying that emptiness if dependent origination or else we are finished with this discussion.

/magnus


That which is dependent origination
is explained to be emptiness.
-- Mulamadhyamakakarikas.


Ok I don't know anything like you guys do. But again, this says DO is empty. It doesn't say that all of emptiness is DO? Does it?

Could we say for example that the nature of mind is empty, but not dependently originated?



If there is no dependently originated mind, there is no mind at all, and hence there is would be no nature of the mind of which to speak.

N

_________________
http://www.atikosha.org
http://www.bhaisajya.net
http://www.bhaisajya.guru
http://www.sakyapa.net
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔

How can you not practice the highest Dharma
at this time of obtaining a perfect human body?

-- Jetsun Dragpa Gyaltsen


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 03, 2011 8:46 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am
Posts: 12736
alwayson wrote:
Namdrol wrote:
Deopendent origination and emptiness are synonyms.

N



Thats what I said many times


:thumbsup:



Some people are a little slow, padawan.

_________________
http://www.atikosha.org
http://www.bhaisajya.net
http://www.bhaisajya.guru
http://www.sakyapa.net
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔

How can you not practice the highest Dharma
at this time of obtaining a perfect human body?

-- Jetsun Dragpa Gyaltsen


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 03, 2011 8:53 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2011 1:36 am
Posts: 533
And the fact that the Tsongkhapa view has contaminated even common Mahayana like Zen.

But even Tsongkhapa said "empty" = "dependently originated", I assume??

He is still a Madhyamakia after all, although a crappy one.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 03, 2011 9:00 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2011 1:52 pm
Posts: 126
Namdrol wrote:
If there is no dependently originated mind, there is no mind at all, and hence there is would be no nature of the mind of which to speak.

N

True, mind has of course dependently originated. But it's nature hasn't, has it?
And actually, the nature of mind, or Buddha-nature, doesn't ultimately really on the existence of mind I think.

Therefore, my position would be that all phenomena, and relative mind included, are both empty and dependently originated. And mind's nature is empty of any inherent existence, but has itself not dependently arisen. It actually is the ground within which dependent origination happens.

I must be one of the really slow ones, because I don't see where the above is wrong?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 03, 2011 9:17 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2011 1:36 am
Posts: 533
Namdrol wrote:
What you are talking about is called "clarity". The mind can take it's own awareness as an object.Indeed, in all Mahamudra and Dzogchen meditation, this is precisely what is taken as the object. You may not be able to "get rid" of this clarity, but you will never find it or be able to say "This is it, this is not it". This clarity is also dependently originated since the mind is dependently originated. There is no awareness or clarity seperate from the mind. The characteristic of the mind is clarity. The essence of the mind is emptiness. These two are non-dual, and that is the nature of the mind i.e. inseperable clarity and emptiness.

N


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 03, 2011 9:31 pm 
Offline
Former staff member
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2010 5:29 pm
Posts: 4612
Location: Baltimore, MD
alwayson wrote:
I hate Budda Nature sutras with a passion.


You are so rigid - relax a bit ..... :rolling:

Hate this, hate that. You hate (HATE?) Buddha Nature sutras? Do you also hate water?

Kirt

_________________
Kirt's Tibetan Translation Notes

"Only you can make your mind beautiful."
HH Chetsang Rinpoche


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 03, 2011 9:32 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2011 1:36 am
Posts: 533
I do not consider the crappy Tathgatagarbha Sutras as part of Buddhism:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tath%C4%81 ... bha_Sutras

How can you compare this garbage to water?

They are essentially heretical and blasphemous, if taken literally.


P.S. I have no problem with the Tibetan view of Buddha Nature :thumbsup:


Last edited by alwayson on Mon Oct 03, 2011 9:40 pm, edited 4 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 03, 2011 9:35 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2011 1:52 pm
Posts: 126
alwayson wrote:
Namdrol wrote:
What you are talking about is called "clarity". The mind can take it's own awareness as an object.Indeed, in all Mahamudra and Dzogchen meditation, this is precisely what is taken as the object. You may not be able to "get rid" of this clarity, but you will never find it or be able to say "This is it, this is not it". This clarity is also dependently originated since the mind is dependently originated. There is no awareness or clarity seperate from the mind. The characteristic of the mind is clarity. The essence of the mind is emptiness. These two are non-dual, and that is the nature of the mind i.e. inseperable clarity and emptiness.

N

Good quote, thanks. But I agree that clarity, as it manifests within mind, is DO. I would however not say that is synonymous with the nature of mind. If it is, I'm learning something new here!
In that case, 'nature of mind' is certainly used in very different ways.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 03, 2011 9:42 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jul 30, 2011 5:04 am
Posts: 292
alwayson wrote:
Namdrol wrote:
What you are talking about is called "clarity". The mind can take it's own awareness as an object.Indeed, in all Mahamudra and Dzogchen meditation, this is precisely what is taken as the object. You may not be able to "get rid" of this clarity, but you will never find it or be able to say "This is it, this is not it". This clarity is also dependently originated since the mind is dependently originated. There is no awareness or clarity seperate from the mind. The characteristic of the mind is clarity. The essence of the mind is emptiness. These two are non-dual, and that is the nature of the mind i.e. inseperable clarity and emptiness.

N


This quote really confuses me.

So this nature of mind that is "not created by anything", "not derive[d] from anything outside itself" and "self-originated" is in fact created, derived and dependently originated. Got it.

_________________
...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 03, 2011 9:43 pm 
Offline
Former staff member
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2010 5:29 pm
Posts: 4612
Location: Baltimore, MD
alwayson wrote:
I do not consider the crappy Tathgatagarbha Sutras as part of Buddhism:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tath%C4%81 ... bha_Sutras

How can you compare this garbage to water?

They are essentially heretical and blasphemous, if taken literally.


P.S. I have no problem with the Tibetan view of Buddha Nature :thumbsup:


Nice PS - all teaching is upaya. Does something get someone going in the right (or better) direction in this lifetime? So in that vein Tathagathagarbha teaching can be very helpful if you are of that temperament (if you read the Uttaratantra for example and start crying or if you read some of these sutras and have positive reactions then you are of that temperament).

Kirt

_________________
Kirt's Tibetan Translation Notes

"Only you can make your mind beautiful."
HH Chetsang Rinpoche


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 03, 2011 10:31 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 11:49 pm
Posts: 2808
Location: Bay Area, CA, USA
Kelwin wrote:
alwayson wrote:
Namdrol wrote:
What you are talking about is called "clarity". The mind can take it's own awareness as an object.Indeed, in all Mahamudra and Dzogchen meditation, this is precisely what is taken as the object. You may not be able to "get rid" of this clarity, but you will never find it or be able to say "This is it, this is not it". This clarity is also dependently originated since the mind is dependently originated. There is no awareness or clarity seperate from the mind. The characteristic of the mind is clarity. The essence of the mind is emptiness. These two are non-dual, and that is the nature of the mind i.e. inseperable clarity and emptiness.

N

Good quote, thanks. But I agree that clarity, as it manifests within mind, is DO. I would however not say that is synonymous with the nature of mind. If it is, I'm learning something new here!
In that case, 'nature of mind' is certainly used in very different ways.


I am sure I have heard Namdrol talk about Dzokchen being "beyond mind." I would be interested to hear how that assertion can be reconciled with the quote above.

_________________
May any merit generated by on-line discussion
Be dedicated to the Ultimate Benefit of All Sentient Beings.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 03, 2011 10:33 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 11:49 pm
Posts: 2808
Location: Bay Area, CA, USA
alwayson wrote:
I do not consider the crappy Tathgatagarbha Sutras as part of Buddhism:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tath%C4%81 ... bha_Sutras

How can you compare this garbage to water?

They are essentially heretical and blasphemous, if taken literally.


P.S. I have no problem with the Tibetan view of Buddha Nature :thumbsup:


And which "Tibetan View" of Buddha Nature would that be? Tsong Khapa's? Dolpopa's? Sakya Pandita's? Rangjung Dorje's? Longchenpa's? Mipham's?

_________________
May any merit generated by on-line discussion
Be dedicated to the Ultimate Benefit of All Sentient Beings.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 03, 2011 10:38 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jun 06, 2010 2:12 am
Posts: 247
alwayson wrote:
I do not consider the crappy Tathgatagarbha Sutras as part of Buddhism:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tath%C4%81 ... bha_Sutras

How can you compare this garbage to water?

They are essentially heretical and blasphemous, if taken literally.

P.S. I have no problem with the Tibetan view of Buddha Nature :thumbsup:


in·suf·fer·a·ble

adjective /inˈsəf(ə)rəbəl/ 

Too extreme to bear; intolerable
- the heat would be insufferable by July

Having or showing unbearable arrogance or conceit
- an insufferable bully
- insufferable French chauvinism

_________________
"All the sublime teachings, so profound--to throw away one and then grab yet another will not bear even a single fruit. Persevere, therefore, in simply one."
--Dudjom Rinpoche, "Nectar for the Hearts of Fortunate Disciples. Song No. 8"


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 03, 2011 10:45 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Aug 13, 2011 2:05 am
Posts: 1302
Location: San Francisco, CA
Namdrol wrote:
heart wrote:
alwayson wrote:
What the hell is that supposed to mean?

What do you think emptiness means?

"empty" = "dependently originated"

They are synonymous phrases.

This is not rocket science.




Just find me a quote from Nagarjuna then saying that emptiness if dependent origination or else we are finished with this discussion.

/magnus


That which is dependent origination
is explained to be emptiness.
-- Mulamadhyamakakarikas.


As you know one sentence can be taken out of context. Which this one is. But you two are free to continue with the same short shrift nonsense ad nauseam, if it makes you feel warm and cozy.

Commentators like Gorampa often have to take a quote that appears to mean one thing and show that it means another.

The the above quote comes from the chapter on FNT and follows the verses:

[i]If you perceive the existence of all things
In terms of their essence,
Then this perception of all things
Will be without the perception of causes and
conditions,

Effects and causes
And agent and action
And conditions and arising and ceasing
And effects will be rendered impossible.

Whatever is dependently co-arisen
That is explained to be emptiness

That, being a dependent designation
Is itself the middle way.

Readers should not think these two have settled the issue with DO=Emptiness. This simplistic formulation based on a quote taken out of context of what it was meant to teach has led apparently both of them to negate the efficacy of karma.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 03, 2011 10:47 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 1:30 am
Posts: 234
Location: Here
It's apparent that Namdrol just wants to support his pet, alwayson.

_________________
Cantankerous Buddha


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 03, 2011 10:48 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Apr 10, 2009 7:59 am
Posts: 3996
Temporarily locked.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 318 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 12, 13, 14, 15, 16

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Yahoo [Bot] and 22 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group