Unorthodox Ideas

[SSJ3Gogeta]

You clearly don't get what I, Josef and a few others in other threads am trying to say. Whatever.

Astus and Jhana pointed to one connection to a Buddha Nature text in a book that is about 1000 pages and which only applies to sutra Mahamudra.

What about the other 999 pages which talks about Madhyamaka and Mahamudra?

Like I said, I'm talking to creationists.

P.S. And noone ever has cared about sutra Mahamudra, not even Kagyus.

[pueraeternus]

Buddhism in general likes triumphant rhetoric and myths. A lot of them are absurd but they can be entertaining at least.

That's true. My guess is that it also tests mental independence and acuity, in the face of all that contradictory and paradoxical doxographical traditions.

[Josef]

Tathagatagarba is absolutely critical in the development of Vajrayana theory and practice. To assert that Pueraeternus' statement is "stupid" exposes both your attitude and understanding as juvenile.

You can feel free talking out of your butt.

In the Gelug tradition, the phrase Buddha nature merely refers to the potential of sentient beings to obtain Buddhahood. Certainly not like anything in the Tathagatagarba Sutras

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

In the rest of the Tibetan traditions (except Jonang), Buddha nature refers to the inseperable clarity and emptiness of the mind. Again, nothing like Tathagatagarba Sutras.

The Tathagatagarba doctrine about a eternal Buddha homonculus and all sorts of crazy stuff not found in Vajrayana.

More juvenile attempts at insults.
The functionality of Vajrayana theory and practice is clearly evolved from the third turning as well as Madhyamika etc.
They are both significant to the development of Vajrayana.
You can accept this or reject it as you wish.
However, you would be better off actually making an effort to expand your understanding rather than trying to insult those in dialogue with you in order to maintain your isolated point of view.
This is collaboration and it is a big part of how we learn.

Meaningful collaboration is going to play a big part in your experience as a practitioner moving forward. Significant attitude adjustments are going to have to take place or your dharma siblings will stop trying to work with you.

[Josef]

P.S. And noone ever has cared about sutra Mahamudra, not even Kagyus.

There is really no "sutra mahamudra" when you get down to it.
However, people certainly have and do care about what they teach as sutra Mahamudra.
I have received so called sutra mahamudra teachings from Gelug and Kagyu lamas in the past and they seemed to care about it.

[Astus]

DarwidHalim,

The usual metaphors for what you're saying is the sun at dawn and the sun at noon, the view from the bottom of a well and the whole view of the sky, the light of firefly and the light of the sun, the space in a mustard seed and the space of the whole sky.

What is the problem with that? You can't quantify ultimate reality. How can the simile still work? If it is not understood as insight into the nature of things but as gradual removal of hindrances, the way the ten fetters are used to differentiate between sravaka aryas. However, in this case the argument is the one on the gradual path, making sudden techniques (primarily Chan and Tantra) skilful baits at best, fake at worst. And I'm not saying this is good or bad, it just makes later developments based on tathagatagarbha doctrine superficial.

[DarwidHalim]

Astus,

Enlightenment is not about gaining. It is more to absence. It is more to how can you absence your defilement. So it is like removing the smell.

Tathagatagarba (TG) should not be seen as building something or increasing something.

Day by day your insight gets deeper. It is the sign you are moving gradually.

We have doubt. So "removing" or make that doubt absence is a process.

Even Dzoghchen say do not doubt, even Mahamudra has 4 stages. That is the sign, the whole process is gradual.

There is no something call in instaneous. If you see huineng, it seems that his enlightenment is instantaneous, but actually you have to count his past lives.

Zen master said the recognition can be instaneous, bu you still have job to do like freeing yourself from doubt.

You are not doing anything to the TG, but you are doing what is obstructing your TG.

[SSJ3Gogeta]

The functionality of Vajrayana theory and practice is clearly evolved from the third turning as well as Madhyamika etc.
They are both significant to the development of Vajrayana.
You can accept this or reject it as you wish.

I will reject it, because it is false.

You will never understand that "Buddha nature" in Tibetan Vajrayana has nothing to do with the very specific ideas of the Tathāgatagarbha Sutras.

[DarwidHalim]

TG is indeed a very important teaching in Vajrayana. Because in Vajrayana, let's say anutarayoga tantra, you have to visualize you are deity and your body Is mandala.

If we don't have that teaching, you have no basis to do that.

If you ask Christian or Muslim, you are Yesus or Mohammed, they will say never. Because they see Yesus and Mohammad like god and you as the subordinate.

When you see you are actually already deity, you can see you are actually equal, and the whole Vajrayana practice can be carried out with full confident.

You can't do tantric practice properly when you see Your deity is your boss, and you are below him, because we need a very strong deity feeling or deity pride, in the case of anutarayoga tantra.

[SSJ3Gogeta]

TG is indeed a very important teaching in Vajrayana. Because in Vajrayana, let's say anutarayoga tantra, you have to visualize you are deity and your body Is mandala.

Deity practice has nothing to with Tathāgatagarbha Sutras. Believe what you wish though.

[DarwidHalim]

Of course it has.

[Mr. G]

The functionality of Vajrayana theory and practice is clearly evolved from the third turning as well as Madhyamika etc.
They are both significant to the development of Vajrayana.
You can accept this or reject it as you wish.

I will reject it, because it is false.

You will never understand that "Buddha nature" in Tibetan Vajrayana has nothing to do with the very specific ideas of the Tathāgatagarbha Sutras.

You have no idea what you're talking about.

In Tibet we find a major doctrinal rift between those teachers and traditions which took the tathagatagarbha doctrines definitively and indeed literally, and saw them as representing the final, highest, doctrinal teachings of the Buddha, and those teachers and schools which insisted that these are not as they stand literal teachings but need some sort of interpretation and were taught by the Buddha in this form with a specific purpose in order to help particular people.

Since in Tibetan Buddhism the flow of mind is generally said to be eternal, with no beginning or end, so we can say that the mind, and therefore its emptiness, are eternal. It is moreover this emptiness which is
referred to when we speak of the mind’s ‘intrinsic purity’. When the mind is defiled in the unenlightened state this emptiness is called the tathagatagarbha.

- Mahayana Buddhism: The Doctrinal Foundations, Paul Williams

[Astus]

DarwidHalim,

Let me then clarify what sudden path is as I see it. The first thing is to realise the nature of mind. The mind is buddha, there is no further thing to develop or remove, it's originally pure. Therefore, the path is to keep the buddha-mind. No practices, no techniques. And the attainment is the very same buddha-mind, nothing more or less. Even in Jinul's teachings, where seeing nature is only the 1st stage of 52 stages, the only thing to do is to maintain the clear view. No further practices. Why? Because the initial realisation is already complete. If one had to apply methods then it would not be any different from the common gradual teachings.

[viniketa]

No, DKR didn't paraphrasing Dharmakirti argument or something related to it.... In Zen, this is very very important.... people who say clear light, they just miss the point.

Thank you for your reply, DarwidHalim. Your post made my point for me. Just as did you, Dharmakīrti used the literary device of a supposed opponent to make points for refutation. Prasaṅgika negation tactics threw the whole of Buddhist philosophy into disarray for a number of years. Through a combination of Yogācāra logic and the doctrine of the Tathāgatagarbha, it went on. No doubt, it is important to Zen, and others still use the tactic today. But, we have:

Maitreya-nātha + Vasubandhu + Asaṅga + Tāranātha + Mipham

Each of the three natures has a corresponding absence:

parikalpita => lakṣana-niḥsvabhāvatā, the "absence of inherent characteristic"
paratantra => utpatti-niḥsvabhāvatā, the "absence of inherent arising"
pariniṣpanna => paramārtha-niḥsvabhāvatā, the "absence of inherent ultimacy"

Relative perception (form, sound, touch, etc.) is unreal. However, the natural state of sights and sounds are within the aspect of primordial wisdom. Therefore, they are real. There is no contradiction between relative and ultimate truth.

Which is why Astus posted:

The usual metaphors for what you're saying is the sun at dawn and the sun at noon, the view from the bottom of a well and the whole view of the sky, the light of firefly and the light of the sun, the space in a mustard seed and the space of the whole sky.

What is the problem with that? You can't quantify ultimate reality.

[Andrew108]

P.S. And noone ever has cared about sutra Mahamudra, not even Kagyus.

There is really no "sutra mahamudra" when you get down to it.
However, people certainly have and do care about what they teach as sutra Mahamudra.
I have received so called sutra mahamudra teachings from Gelug and Kagyu lamas in the past and they seemed to care about it.

It's better to just agree with him. He is like an upturned cup. But you know everyone telling him he is wrong gets a bit embarrassing for him I should imagine. In Vajrayana creation and completion you get all of the three turnings of the dharma. All are of equal importance. Of course he has his own view so better leave him to it.

[SSJ3Gogeta]

It's better to just agree with him. He is like an upturned cup. But you know everyone telling him he is wrong gets a bit embarrassing for him I should imagine. In Vajrayana creation and completion you get all of the three turnings of the dharma. All are of equal importance. Of course he has his own view so better leave him to it.

Don't worry about my embarrassment.

[SSJ3Gogeta]

You have no idea what you're talking about.

Mr. G please read:

My understanding is different. My understanding is that buddhahood is innate and exists to be demonstrated even to ordinary persons .Incidentally, this a vastly different proposition than the tathāgatagarbha sutra position, which holds that tathāgatgarbha can only be seen by buddhas. When one's innate buddhahood is demonstrated then liberation is possible; if not, liberation is not possible.

[Mr. G]

You have no idea what you're talking about.

Mr. G please read:

My understanding is different. My understanding is that buddhahood is innate and exists to be demonstrated even to ordinary persons .Incidentally, this a vastly different proposition than the tathāgatagarbha sutra position, which holds that tathāgatgarbha can only be seen by buddhas. When one's innate buddhahood is demonstrated then liberation is possible; if not, liberation is not possible.

Malcolm's quote is different from the misinformation you are spouting, and what I quoted to you.

[SSJ3Gogeta]

Malcolm's quote is different from the misinformation you are spouting, and what I quoted to you.

I am saying the exact same thing as Malcolm. Do I have to quote myself?

Certainly not like anything in the Tathagatagarba Sutras

Malcolm said "Incidentally, this a vastly different proposition than the tathāgatagarbha sutra position".

The Tathagatagarba doctrine about a eternal Buddha homonculus and all that sort of crazy nonsense is not found in Vajrayana.

Right, Malcolm said "which holds that tathāgatgarbha can only be seen by buddhas."

has nothing to do with the very specific ideas of the Tathāgatagarbha Sutras.

Malcolm said "Incidentally, this a vastly different proposition than the tathāgatagarbha sutra position".

[DarwidHalim]

DarwidHalim,

Let me then clarify what sudden path is as I see it. The first thing is to realise the nature of mind. The mind is buddha, there is no further thing to develop or remove, it's originally pure. Therefore, the path is to keep the buddha-mind. No practices, no techniques. And the attainment is the very same buddha-mind, nothing more or less. Even in Jinul's teachings, where seeing nature is only the 1st stage of 52 stages, the only thing to do is to maintain the clear view. No further practices. Why? Because the initial realisation is already complete. If one had to apply methods then it would not be any different from the common gradual teachings.

Yes, you are right, but that is very theoretical and very ideal.

If there is such a student, and probably there is, it will work perfectly.

But, in practice, that is not what is happening.

The first thing is to realize the nature of mind. This one itself can take aeons. Buddha said he can only teach us, but at the end all depend on us. Enlightenment cannot be transferred. Words can be transferred, but not enlightenment.

Even if there is a master who transfers the nature of mind, such the prayer of Samantabadra, that master cannot transfer his enlightened mind to his student, no matter how good that master is.

And for the student, in order to perfectly get the meaning, is not as simple and as direct as claimed.

10000 students receive initiation will have 10000 version. If the teacher ask to stay in your true nature, in the same way, you will have 10000 version of staying in your true nature.

So, from here we can't say that OK, because for sure the student regardless how they stay in their true nature, their true nature will not be the right true nature. It will be wrong here and there.

So, although on paper, everything is nice, in practice, you will still need the path.

The view can say anything like no path. But, paradoxically, there always give you "the path", whether that path is just a reminder or more than that. Because, reality is not that ideal.

[pueraeternus]

It's better to just agree with him. He is like an upturned cup. But you know everyone telling him he is wrong gets a bit embarrassing for him I should imagine. In Vajrayana creation and completion you get all of the three turnings of the dharma. All are of equal importance. Of course he has his own view so better leave him to it.

I don't think we should just agree with him, especially when he is blatantly wrong. This will further cement his misconceptions and propagate his mistaken notions to others who come here to learn. I think we should just correct him, and leave him be when he continues to insist on his errors.