Tathagatagarbha and Eternity

No holds barred discussion on the Buddhadharma. Argue about rebirth, karma, commentarial interpretations etc. Be nice to each other.

Re: Tathagatagarbha and Eternity

Postby Malcolm » Mon May 09, 2011 6:20 pm

tamdrin wrote:
Namdrol wrote:
tamdrin wrote:I dont think so.. The nature of mind is emptiness and clarity.. this "basis" you are describing is "emptiness and clarity".. something beyond the ultimate is a fabrication of the conceptual mind.


Hi Sean:

For you, the mind is the basis.

For Dzogchen, the mind is not the basis.

N


No Malcolm:
This is not about me. It is about your distinction between the ultimate nature of the mind and the basis and then failing the make any distinction.

Have a nice day!


Thanks Sean -- from a Dzogchen perspective, one must differentiate between the ālaya and the basis. The ālaya is taking about the nature of the mind i.e. inseparable clarity and emptiness. But the basis is beyond the mind -- it is talking about the basis of everything, mind, the five elements, etc.

So there is a basis beyond the mind from a Dzogchen POV.

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

" The one who teaches the benefits of peace,
he is said to be a ṛṣī; the others are the opposite of him."

-- Uttaratantra
Malcolm
 
Posts: 10217
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Tathagatagarbha and Eternity

Postby Pero » Mon May 09, 2011 6:22 pm

Namdrol wrote:Ok, it is important to understand three things: the general original basis, the reality of the basis, and how ignorance manifests. In addition to that it is necessary to know that Garab Dorje's commentary on the Single Son of the Buddha's tantra...

:!:
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
Pero
 
Posts: 1811
Joined: Tue Aug 31, 2010 8:54 pm

Re: Tathagatagarbha and Eternity

Postby conebeckham » Mon May 09, 2011 6:29 pm

SNIP
Thanks Sean -- from a Dzogchen perspective, one must differentiate between the ālaya and the basis. The ālaya is taking about the nature of the mind i.e. inseparable clarity and emptiness. But the basis is beyond the mind -- it is talking about the basis of everything, mind, the five elements, etc.

So there is a basis beyond the mind from a Dzogchen POV.

N


Could you perhaps explain this "basis-beyond-the-mind"? Or is it not suitable for public consumption?
May any merit generated by on-line discussion
Be dedicated to the Ultimate Benefit of All Sentient Beings.
User avatar
conebeckham
 
Posts: 2463
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 11:49 pm
Location: Bay Area, CA, USA

Re: Tathagatagarbha and Eternity

Postby Malcolm » Mon May 09, 2011 6:44 pm

conebeckham wrote:
SNIP
Thanks Sean -- from a Dzogchen perspective, one must differentiate between the ālaya and the basis. The ālaya is taking about the nature of the mind i.e. inseparable clarity and emptiness. But the basis is beyond the mind -- it is talking about the basis of everything, mind, the five elements, etc.

So there is a basis beyond the mind from a Dzogchen POV.

N


Could you perhaps explain this "basis-beyond-the-mind"? Or is it not suitable for public consumption?


Essence, nature and compassion is the basis for all phenomena including the mind. It is quite different than the ālaya which is a key feature of Sakya and Kagyu Mahāmudra teachings.

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

" The one who teaches the benefits of peace,
he is said to be a ṛṣī; the others are the opposite of him."

-- Uttaratantra
Malcolm
 
Posts: 10217
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Tathagatagarbha and Eternity

Postby adinatha » Mon May 09, 2011 10:30 pm

Alaya is deluded. The dharmakaya is not the alaya. It's impossible there is a basis beyond the dharmakaya. The mahamudra lineage is the dharmakaya lineage. I see where you are going with this, the mind/nature of mind division. The Kagyus do this too using a different method. It rounds up to the same thing. Story about the universe and all that, sounds nice, but it makes Shakyamuni a liar, that his teachings don't end the cycle of birth and death, because a reversion to the basis of alaya would entail being returned to the cycle of samsara in the following universal cycle. Then, Shakyamuni's method would not get you any better than a realization of Parabrahaman, because, by Vedanta's own admission, this is their limit of accomplishment. You can choose to believe that if you want. I don't believe you are interpreting the Garab Dorje teachings accurately, because the real nature is not subject to division into three times and is absolutely timeless. Even an Arhat is beyond time. Textual analysis alone will not provide the "holy grail," because the real Indiana Jones is the practice of the foremost instructions and the real holy grail is the dharmakaya realized in direct perception. Dang, rolpa and tsal are inseparable from dharmakaya, and mahamudra practitioners know all about these; they keep it in the family.
CAW!
User avatar
adinatha
 
Posts: 886
Joined: Sun Apr 24, 2011 4:07 am

Re: Tathagatagarbha and Eternity

Postby tamdrin » Mon May 09, 2011 10:48 pm

Namdrol,
With all due respect your discriminations continually show that you do not understand the intention of the Kagyu lineage, its true that it is not possible for there to be a basis beyond dharmakaya and to make people think there is is a denigration of the teachings. (I am sure you are very convinced that there is this huge difference between mahamudra and dzogchen realization) but none of these explainations you are giving are proving anything- therefore I am led to believe it is an erronous intellectual discrimination which must be discarded. In fact they may be further hindering people in leading them to believe that the ultimate can be reached through acceptance and rejection (it can't that is why it is profound)..
tamdrin
 
Posts: 291
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2010 7:01 pm

Re: Tathagatagarbha and Eternity

Postby Mr. G » Mon May 09, 2011 11:06 pm

Namdrol wrote:What lower yānas terms "Buddhahood" is what Dzogchen terms "buddhahood that reverts to the basis".


Does this mean Vajrayana practitioners start again in samsara on the Dzogchen path? Sort of like how Arhats are viewed to start again on the Bodhisattva path?
    How foolish you are,
    grasping the letter of the text and ignoring its intention!
    - Vasubandhu
User avatar
Mr. G
 
Posts: 4098
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 6:36 am
Location: Spaceship Earth

Re: Tathagatagarbha and Eternity

Postby adinatha » Mon May 09, 2011 11:17 pm

mr. gordo wrote:
Namdrol wrote:What lower yānas terms "Buddhahood" is what Dzogchen terms "buddhahood that reverts to the basis".


Does this mean Vajrayana practitioners start again in samsara on the Dzogchen path? Sort of like how Arhats are viewed to start again on the Bodhisattva path?


Pure sectarianism.
CAW!
User avatar
adinatha
 
Posts: 886
Joined: Sun Apr 24, 2011 4:07 am

Re: Tathagatagarbha and Eternity

Postby Malcolm » Mon May 09, 2011 11:34 pm

adinatha wrote:Alaya is deluded.


For sure in Dzoghen.

But this is a standard (non-Kagyu) mahamudra terminology. Here ālaya just means the inseparable clarity and emptiness of the mind.

It is true that the alāya is deluded in Dzogchen.It is true the terma ālaya it is considered the ālaya vijñāna in Kagyu mahāmudra teachings, but in other texts, for example, the Seven Points of mind training ālaya is not considered to be the same as ālaya vijñāna.

The dharmakaya is not the alaya.


From a Dzogchen perspective, agreed. But the term is used differently in different schools.

It's impossible there is a basis beyond the dharmakaya.


From a Dzogchen perspective, agreed. But what is understood as luminous clarity in mahāmudra, which is taken as the basis [gzhi] and is taken as dharmakāya, is quite different than what is understood as luminous clarity in Dzogchen. Same word, very different meanings.

Same thing with the term "ālaya" -- yes in Drikung Mahāmudra, influenced a little by Dzogchen, they make a distinction between ālaya and the the basis.

The mahamudra lineage is the dharmakaya lineage.


The various mahāmudra schools make the clarity, emptiness and inseparability of the mind into the three kāyas. They may term the basis differently, etc. But the meaning is that same.

This is not, ultimately, the approach of Dzogchen.

Story about the universe and all that, sounds nice, but it makes Shakyamuni a liar, that his teachings don't end the cycle of birth and death, because a reversion to the basis of alaya would entail being returned to the cycle of samsara in the following universal cycle.


I am simply reporting what Garab Dorje, Padmasambhava, Shri Singha et al actually say. I don't need to interpret anything.

In Hīnayāna, Shakyamuni taught arhatship as buddhahood. In Mahāyana, he taught that arhatship was not buddhahood, and was inferior to buddhahood. And that in fact, after attaining arhatship, arhats would be roused from their nirodhasamapatti at some point and then they must traverse the paths of stages of Mahāyāna. So, was the Buddha lying in Hināyāna when he told his followers that arhatship was it?

In Vajrayāna, in the Samputa tantra it is clarified that there are three stages of Buddhahood. Two stages of Buddhas who do not recognize all phenomena as being the display of their own wisdom and the thireenth bhumi, Vajradhara, where all phenomena are so recognized. Does this make the Buddha a liar about Mahāyāna?

In Dzochen, there are enumerated another three stages, three more stages of those who dwell within wisdom, rendering the thirteenth bhumi a lower stage of buddhahood. Does this make the Buddha a liar about Vajrayāna?

In any event, this notion of "Buddhahood that reverts to the basis [gzhi, not kun gzhi]" as an inferior buddhahood that is not complete is well attested in Dzogchen. It has to be the case because as Garab Dorje points out, all sentient beings in the previous eon attain buddhahood by the end of the eon. This is explicitly stated by Garab Dorje in the commentary I mentioned to above.

But to illustrate my point further, the Drikung view is Dzogchen is definitely subordinated. For example, Jigten Sumgon states in Gongcik: “The supreme realization is not touched by the three great ones.” This is echoe of a statement by Gampopoa to his nephew, Gomchung.

But I don't during Jigten Sumgon's time Nyingthig was wide spread. At this point in history Nyingma was very much on the decline.
http://www.bhaisajya.net
http://atikosha.org
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔

" The one who teaches the benefits of peace,
he is said to be a ṛṣī; the others are the opposite of him."

-- Uttaratantra
Malcolm
 
Posts: 10217
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Tathagatagarbha and Eternity

Postby Pero » Mon May 09, 2011 11:45 pm

Namdrol wrote:But to illustrate my point further, the Drikung view is Dzogchen is definitely subordinated. For example, Jigten Sumgon states in Gongcik: “The supreme realization is not touched by the three great ones.” This is echoe of a statement by Gampopoa to his nephew, Gomchung.


Who or what are the "three great ones"?
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
Pero
 
Posts: 1811
Joined: Tue Aug 31, 2010 8:54 pm

Re: Tathagatagarbha and Eternity

Postby adinatha » Mon May 09, 2011 11:59 pm

Take the following into consideration about whether Garab Dorje was making illustrations or saying something quintessential. The account of the rise of the universe and the enlightenment of Samantabhadra would only hold true in itself is there was only one universe that exapnds and contracts. But, even Shakyamuni knew and all buddhas know, there are infinite universes. For every universe that expands, another contracts and vice-versa. This would mean, if you take Garab Dorje literally, that there is one Samantabhadra per universe. It would also seem to mean a buddha's omniscience is limited to one universe, which contradicts the meaning of omniscience. This is absurd. The nature of mind transcends temporarinesses.
CAW!
User avatar
adinatha
 
Posts: 886
Joined: Sun Apr 24, 2011 4:07 am

Re: Tathagatagarbha and Eternity

Postby conebeckham » Tue May 10, 2011 12:05 am

Namdrol wrote:
adinatha wrote:Alaya is deluded.


For sure in Dzoghen.

But this is a standard (non-Kagyu) mahamudra terminology. Here ālaya just means the inseparable clarity and emptiness of the mind.

It is true that the alāya is deluded in Dzogchen.It is true the terma ālaya it is considered the ālaya vijñāna in Kagyu mahāmudra teachings, but in other texts, for example, the Seven Points of mind training ālaya is not considered to be the same as ālaya vijñāna.


Alaya is not always considered alaya vijnana in Kagyu Mahamudra teachings.

From a Dzogchen perspective, agreed. But what is understood as luminous clarity in mahāmudra, which is taken as the basis [gzhi] and is taken as dharmakāya, is quite different than what is understood as luminous clarity in Dzogchen. Same word, very different meanings.

I think Luminosity is Sambhogakaya, yes? Empty nature is Dharmakaya....though I don't claim the Dzogchen usage of the term "luminous clarity" is the same as any meaning in Mahamudra, necessarily.
May any merit generated by on-line discussion
Be dedicated to the Ultimate Benefit of All Sentient Beings.
User avatar
conebeckham
 
Posts: 2463
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 11:49 pm
Location: Bay Area, CA, USA

Re: Tathagatagarbha and Eternity

Postby Malcolm » Tue May 10, 2011 12:10 am

tamdrin wrote:Namdrol,
its true that it is not possible for there to be a basis beyond dharmakaya...


I didn't say this.

I said that there is a basis that is beyond the nature of the mind in Dzogchen. In mahāmudra, the basis is luminosity as in the luminosity of the mind.

Not so in Dzogchen.

In Dzogchen, 'od gsal is not considered dharmakāya -- this is a Sarma school consideration. This is not how Dzogchen parses things.
http://www.bhaisajya.net
http://atikosha.org
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔

" The one who teaches the benefits of peace,
he is said to be a ṛṣī; the others are the opposite of him."

-- Uttaratantra
Malcolm
 
Posts: 10217
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Tathagatagarbha and Eternity

Postby Malcolm » Tue May 10, 2011 12:15 am

adinatha wrote:Take the following into consideration about whether Garab Dorje was making illustrations or saying something quintessential. The account of the rise of the universe and the enlightenment of Samantabhadra would only hold true in itself is there was only one universe that exapnds and contracts. But, even Shakyamuni knew and all buddhas know, there are infinite universes. For every universe that expands, another contracts and vice-versa. This would mean, if you take Garab Dorje literally, that there is one Samantabhadra per universe. It would also seem to mean a buddha's omniscience is limited to one universe, which contradicts the meaning of omniscience. This is absurd. The nature of mind transcends temporarinesses.


There can be infinite Samantabhadras in infinite expanding and contracting universes. Garab Dorje was only taking about the first Buddha in our particular series of eons and the lineage of Buddhas of Dzogchen teachings in this universe. "Adi" does not mean primordial, it means "first". This is why the Tibetans translate "adi" as "thog ma".



N
Last edited by Malcolm on Tue May 10, 2011 12:19 am, edited 1 time in total.
http://www.bhaisajya.net
http://atikosha.org
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔

" The one who teaches the benefits of peace,
he is said to be a ṛṣī; the others are the opposite of him."

-- Uttaratantra
Malcolm
 
Posts: 10217
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Tathagatagarbha and Eternity

Postby tamdrin » Tue May 10, 2011 12:15 am

If you read the Guysamaja tantra sixteen bhumi's are also mentioned so this is not something that is exclusive to "dzogchen".. In the Guhyasamaja it is said that the 15th bhumi is "wisdom" and the sixteenth bhumi is left un named..
tamdrin
 
Posts: 291
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2010 7:01 pm

Re: Tathagatagarbha and Eternity

Postby tamdrin » Tue May 10, 2011 12:17 am

Pero wrote:
Namdrol wrote:But to illustrate my point further, the Drikung view is Dzogchen is definitely subordinated. For example, Jigten Sumgon states in Gongcik: “The supreme realization is not touched by the three great ones.” This is echoe of a statement by Gampopoa to his nephew, Gomchung.


Who or what are the "three great ones"?



madhyamaka, mahamudra, and dzogchen
tamdrin
 
Posts: 291
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2010 7:01 pm

Re: Tathagatagarbha and Eternity

Postby Malcolm » Tue May 10, 2011 12:18 am

tamdrin wrote:If you read the Guysamaja tantra sixteen bhumi's are also mentioned so this is not something that is exclusive to "dzogchen".. In the Guhyasamaja it is said that the 15th bhumi is "wisdom" and the sixteenth bhumi is left un named..



It is a different arrangement. This arrangement comes from the one of the Dzogchen tantras. And of course the sixteenth bhumi is termed yeshe bla ma.

In Anuyoga, there is a system of twenty one bhumis, for example.
http://www.bhaisajya.net
http://atikosha.org
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔

" The one who teaches the benefits of peace,
he is said to be a ṛṣī; the others are the opposite of him."

-- Uttaratantra
Malcolm
 
Posts: 10217
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Tathagatagarbha and Eternity

Postby Malcolm » Tue May 10, 2011 12:21 am

conebeckham wrote:
Alaya is not always considered alaya vijnana in Kagyu Mahamudra teachings.


Yes, I thought so -- but there are also Kagyu teachings where they are more or less are the same.


I think Luminosity is Sambhogakaya, yes? Empty nature is Dharmakaya....though I don't claim the Dzogchen usage of the term "luminous clarity" is the same as any meaning in Mahamudra, necessarily.


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

" The one who teaches the benefits of peace,
he is said to be a ṛṣī; the others are the opposite of him."

-- Uttaratantra
Malcolm
 
Posts: 10217
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Tathagatagarbha and Eternity

Postby tamdrin » Tue May 10, 2011 12:27 am

This whole sarma vs nyingma thing is crap. I'm sure it wasn't like this in India.. I personally just use the best from both worlds. Whatever helps with your personal enlightenment..
tamdrin
 
Posts: 291
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2010 7:01 pm

Re: Tathagatagarbha and Eternity

Postby tamdrin » Tue May 10, 2011 12:29 am

Namdrol wrote:
tamdrin wrote:If you read the Guysamaja tantra sixteen bhumi's are also mentioned so this is not something that is exclusive to "dzogchen".. In the Guhyasamaja it is said that the 15th bhumi is "wisdom" and the sixteenth bhumi is left un named..



It is a different arrangement. This arrangement comes from the one of the Dzogchen tantras. And of course the sixteenth bhumi is termed yeshe bla ma.

In Anuyoga, there is a system of twenty one bhumis, for example.


yeah and purelanders note 50 stages on amitabha's path to enlightenment (or was that Chan) anyway.. so what..
tamdrin
 
Posts: 291
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2010 7:01 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Open Dharma

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: conebeckham, Dan74, David N. Snyder, Election by lot, Indrajala, JCC, jeeprs and 11 guests

>