Rigpa vs. Nature of Mind

User avatar
Karma Dorje
Posts: 1168
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2011 10:35 pm

Rigpa vs. Nature of Mind

Postby Karma Dorje » Tue Aug 27, 2013 6:31 pm

heart wrote:There is something my Guru sometimes say that goes more or less like this; "Rigpa is difficult to realize because it is to close, to brilliant and to easy." Kind of sums it up nicely. :smile:

/magnus


Yes, but that is a paraphrase of Mahamudra instruction from Karmapa Wangchuk Dorje, not Dzogchen instruction. It's intention (as a pointing out instruction) is to say that ordinary people do not recognize or appreciate ground mahamudra because of these four qualities (too close, too easy, too profound, too excellent). I have never heard it used to argue that Dzogchen is difficult to practice/realize.

http://www.nitartha.org/mahamudra_excerpt.html
"Some people believe football is a matter of life and death, I am very disappointed with that attitude. I can assure you it is much, much more important than that"
—Bill Shankly

User avatar
heart
Posts: 3450
Joined: Fri Jan 08, 2010 1:55 pm

Re: Jes Bertelsen?

Postby heart » Tue Aug 27, 2013 7:51 pm

Karma Dorje wrote:
heart wrote:There is something my Guru sometimes say that goes more or less like this; "Rigpa is difficult to realize because it is to close, to brilliant and to easy." Kind of sums it up nicely. :smile:

/magnus


Yes, but that is a paraphrase of Mahamudra instruction from Karmapa Wangchuk Dorje, not Dzogchen instruction. It's intention (as a pointing out instruction) is to say that ordinary people do not recognize or appreciate ground mahamudra because of these four qualities (too close, too easy, too profound, too excellent). I have never heard it used to argue that Dzogchen is difficult to practice/realize.

http://www.nitartha.org/mahamudra_excerpt.html


You think perhaps in Dzogchen you realize something different? :smile:
My Guru teach both Dzogchen and Mahamudra.

/magnus
We are all here to help each other go through this, whatever it is.
~Kurt Vonnegut

"To reject practice by saying, 'it is conceptual!' is the path of fools. A tendency of the inexperienced and something to be avoided."
- Longchenpa

"Even though you have recognized your essence, if you do not get accustomed to it,
You will be carried away by the enemy of thoughts, like a small child in a battle field.
So long as you are not free from the limitations of accepting and rejecting,
That long will you not recognize the view of the innermost secret heart-essence."

-Longchenpa

User avatar
Karma Dorje
Posts: 1168
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2011 10:35 pm

Re: Jes Bertelsen?

Postby Karma Dorje » Tue Aug 27, 2013 7:56 pm

heart wrote:
Karma Dorje wrote:
heart wrote:There is something my Guru sometimes say that goes more or less like this; "Rigpa is difficult to realize because it is to close, to brilliant and to easy." Kind of sums it up nicely. :smile:

/magnus


Yes, but that is a paraphrase of Mahamudra instruction from Karmapa Wangchuk Dorje, not Dzogchen instruction. It's intention (as a pointing out instruction) is to say that ordinary people do not recognize or appreciate ground mahamudra because of these four qualities (too close, too easy, too profound, too excellent). I have never heard it used to argue that Dzogchen is difficult to practice/realize.

http://www.nitartha.org/mahamudra_excerpt.html


You think perhaps in Dzogchen you realize something different? :smile:
My Guru teach both Dzogchen and Mahamudra.

/magnus


The realization is the same. The paths are different.
"Some people believe football is a matter of life and death, I am very disappointed with that attitude. I can assure you it is much, much more important than that"
—Bill Shankly

User avatar
heart
Posts: 3450
Joined: Fri Jan 08, 2010 1:55 pm

Re: Jes Bertelsen?

Postby heart » Tue Aug 27, 2013 7:59 pm

Karma Dorje wrote:
heart wrote:[

You think perhaps in Dzogchen you realize something different? :smile:
My Guru teach both Dzogchen and Mahamudra.

/magnus


The realization is the same. The paths are different.


This statement just define the relationship between mind and nature of mind (sem and rigpa), equally valid for both paths.

/magnus
We are all here to help each other go through this, whatever it is.
~Kurt Vonnegut

"To reject practice by saying, 'it is conceptual!' is the path of fools. A tendency of the inexperienced and something to be avoided."
- Longchenpa

"Even though you have recognized your essence, if you do not get accustomed to it,
You will be carried away by the enemy of thoughts, like a small child in a battle field.
So long as you are not free from the limitations of accepting and rejecting,
That long will you not recognize the view of the innermost secret heart-essence."

-Longchenpa

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 18815
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Jes Bertelsen?

Postby Malcolm » Tue Aug 27, 2013 8:05 pm

heart wrote:
Karma Dorje wrote:
heart wrote:[

You think perhaps in Dzogchen you realize something different? :smile:
My Guru teach both Dzogchen and Mahamudra.

/magnus


The realization is the same. The paths are different.


This statement just define the relationship between mind and nature of mind (sem and rigpa), equally valid for both paths.

/magnus



Rig pa is not the nature of the mind.
http://www.atikosha.org
http://www.bhaisajya.net
http://www.bhaisajya.guru
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
Sherab Dorje
Former staff member
Posts: 11743
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 9:27 pm
Location: Greece

Re: Jes Bertelsen?

Postby Sherab Dorje » Tue Aug 27, 2013 9:43 pm

Let's see how finely we can split this hair now, shall we?
"My religion is not deceiving myself."
Jetsun Milarepa 1052-1135 CE

User avatar
Karma Dorje
Posts: 1168
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2011 10:35 pm

Re: Jes Bertelsen?

Postby Karma Dorje » Tue Aug 27, 2013 9:53 pm

gregkavarnos wrote:Let's see how finely we can split this hair now, shall we?


Yes, why bother to be precise when dealing with central concepts of practice? It's all just words anyway, man.
"Some people believe football is a matter of life and death, I am very disappointed with that attitude. I can assure you it is much, much more important than that"
—Bill Shankly

DGA
Former staff member
Posts: 7463
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Jes Bertelsen?

Postby DGA » Tue Aug 27, 2013 10:01 pm

I'd thought that rigpa was often but not always translated as "nature of mind."

I don't mean to throw the whole thread off track, but... what's the difference between "nature of mind" and "rigpa" in your usage, Malcolm?

Thank you
DGA's PhD dissertation, a history of "mindfulness," is available here:

https://www.academia.edu/25482900/WHAT_ ... _OF_STRESS

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 18815
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Jes Bertelsen?

Postby Malcolm » Tue Aug 27, 2013 10:05 pm

Jikan wrote:I'd thought that rigpa was often but not always translated as "nature of mind."

I don't mean to throw the whole thread off track, but... what's the difference between "nature of mind" and "rigpa" in your usage, Malcolm?

Thank you



The term "sems nyid" is the term translated as the "nature of the mind".

Rig pa is knowledge of your primordial state.

They are not the same thing.
http://www.atikosha.org
http://www.bhaisajya.net
http://www.bhaisajya.guru
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

DGA
Former staff member
Posts: 7463
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 5:04 pm
Contact:

Re: Jes Bertelsen?

Postby DGA » Tue Aug 27, 2013 10:06 pm

Malcolm wrote:
Jikan wrote:I'd thought that rigpa was often but not always translated as "nature of mind."

I don't mean to throw the whole thread off track, but... what's the difference between "nature of mind" and "rigpa" in your usage, Malcolm?

Thank you



The term "sems nyid" is the term translated as the "nature of the mind".

Rig pa is knowledge of your primordial state.

They are not the same thing.


Thanks for the correction.

:cheers:
DGA's PhD dissertation, a history of "mindfulness," is available here:

https://www.academia.edu/25482900/WHAT_ ... _OF_STRESS

Arnoud
Posts: 617
Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2010 7:19 pm

Re: Jes Bertelsen?

Postby Arnoud » Tue Aug 27, 2013 10:07 pm

gregkavarnos wrote:Let's see how finely we can split this hair now, shall we?


It is actually an important difference as Malcolm just showed.

User avatar
Sherab Dorje
Former staff member
Posts: 11743
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 9:27 pm
Location: Greece

Re: Jes Bertelsen?

Postby Sherab Dorje » Tue Aug 27, 2013 10:07 pm

Yes, why bother to be precise when dealing with central concepts of practice? It's all just words anyway, man.
Or we can get all anally retentive about it, and split hairs all day about what is (or is not) mind , whether Mahamudra is Dzogchen, whether they differ in terms of practice or not, whether we are talking about ground or sutra mahamudra, etc... and clutter up yet another thread with the same old boring endless repetive and essentially useless distracting discussion (ie views) since Dzogchen/Mahamudra essentially only requires pointing out for you to get it, and verything else is just (more) verbal flatulance.
"My religion is not deceiving myself."
Jetsun Milarepa 1052-1135 CE

User avatar
Sherab Dorje
Former staff member
Posts: 11743
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 9:27 pm
Location: Greece

Re: Jes Bertelsen?

Postby Sherab Dorje » Tue Aug 27, 2013 10:10 pm

Clarence wrote:
gregkavarnos wrote:Let's see how finely we can split this hair now, shall we?


It is actually an important difference as Malcolm just showed.
Yes, I am sure it is, coz now that you know that sems nyid is not Rig pa, well, now you just realised the essential state, whereas up to now you only realised the nature of mind. That's how important that was. Right?
"My religion is not deceiving myself."
Jetsun Milarepa 1052-1135 CE

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 18815
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Jes Bertelsen?

Postby Malcolm » Tue Aug 27, 2013 10:11 pm

gregkavarnos wrote:
Yes, why bother to be precise when dealing with central concepts of practice? It's all just words anyway, man.
Or we can get all anally retentive about it, and split hairs all day about what is (or is not) mind , whether Mahamudra is Dzogchen, whether they differ in terms of practice or not, whether we are talking about ground or sutra mahamudra, etc... and clutter up yet another thread with the same old boring endless repetive and essentially useless distracting discussion (ie views) since Dzogchen/Mahamudra essentially only requires pointing out for you to get it, and verything else is just (more) verbal flatulance.



Your reply amounts to repeating what he said:

"It's all just words anyway, man"

In other words, your reply was essentially pointless.

M
http://www.atikosha.org
http://www.bhaisajya.net
http://www.bhaisajya.guru
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: 18815
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Jes Bertelsen?

Postby Malcolm » Tue Aug 27, 2013 10:12 pm

gregkavarnos wrote:
Clarence wrote:
gregkavarnos wrote:Let's see how finely we can split this hair now, shall we?


It is actually an important difference as Malcolm just showed.
Yes, I am sure it is, coz now that you know that sems nyid is not Rig pa, well, now you just realised the essential state, whereas up to now you only realised the nature of mind. That's how important that was. Right?


Are you generally going to be this snotty from now on? Or are you just having a day?
http://www.atikosha.org
http://www.bhaisajya.net
http://www.bhaisajya.guru
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

Arnoud
Posts: 617
Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2010 7:19 pm

Re: Jes Bertelsen?

Postby Arnoud » Tue Aug 27, 2013 10:18 pm

gregkavarnos wrote:
Clarence wrote:
gregkavarnos wrote:Let's see how finely we can split this hair now, shall we?


It is actually an important difference as Malcolm just showed.
Yes, I am sure it is, coz now that you know that sems nyid is not Rig pa, well, now you just realised the essential state, whereas up to now you only realised the nature of mind. That's how important that was. Right?


Actually I was aware of that fact before this thread.

I wonder why you always have to act like a punk anyway. I further hope your moderation sabbatical lasts until you reach Buddhahood.

User avatar
Sherab Dorje
Former staff member
Posts: 11743
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 9:27 pm
Location: Greece

Re: Jes Bertelsen?

Postby Sherab Dorje » Tue Aug 27, 2013 10:22 pm

Malcolm wrote:Your reply amounts to repeating what he said:

"It's all just words anyway, man"

In other words, your reply was essentially pointless.

M
I think you will find that karma dorje was being ironic and not literal. (ie that he was disagreeing with me)
Are you generally going to be this snotty from now on? Or are you just having a day?
Just got back from watching a two hour documentary which comprised of interviews with women that were active in the Greek resistance movement (against the Nazi occupation) during and after WWII. Torture, betrayals, executions, beatings, starvation, exile, etc... of women whose age (during the time of the resistance) averaged between 12-30. After hearing their accounts (most of the women are in their late 60's to early 70's now, little old women who, if you saw them walking down the street, you would never imagine...) all this seems, well... really, unbelievably, like completely... pointless and lacking any essence. So sorry for the attitude.
"My religion is not deceiving myself."
Jetsun Milarepa 1052-1135 CE

User avatar
Sönam
Posts: 1999
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 2:11 pm
Location: France
Contact:

Re: Jes Bertelsen?

Postby Sönam » Tue Aug 27, 2013 10:23 pm

gregkavarnos wrote:
Clarence wrote:
gregkavarnos wrote:Let's see how finely we can split this hair now, shall we?


It is actually an important difference as Malcolm just showed.
Yes, I am sure it is, coz now that you know that sems nyid is not Rig pa, well, now you just realised the essential state, whereas up to now you only realised the nature of mind. That's how important that was. Right?


If you knew what we were talking about, you could have noticed how this point is important ... but sometimes I also like marmelade.

Sönam
By understanding everything you perceive from the perspective of the view, you are freed from the constraints of philosophical beliefs.
By understanding that any and all mental activity is meditation, you are freed from arbitrary divisions between formal sessions and postmeditation activity.
- Longchen Rabjam -

User avatar
Sherab Dorje
Former staff member
Posts: 11743
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 9:27 pm
Location: Greece

Re: Jes Bertelsen?

Postby Sherab Dorje » Tue Aug 27, 2013 10:24 pm

Clarence wrote:Actually I was aware of that fact before this thread.
And being aware of the fact has done what for your practice? Coz, really, unless I am completely mistaken, that's what all this is about. Right?
Last edited by Sherab Dorje on Tue Aug 27, 2013 10:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"My religion is not deceiving myself."
Jetsun Milarepa 1052-1135 CE

User avatar
Sherab Dorje
Former staff member
Posts: 11743
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 9:27 pm
Location: Greece

Re: Jes Bertelsen?

Postby Sherab Dorje » Tue Aug 27, 2013 10:25 pm

Sönam wrote:... but sometimes I also like marmelade.
Now I have no idea what you are talking about. But hey, sometimes I like marmalade too.
"My religion is not deceiving myself."
Jetsun Milarepa 1052-1135 CE


Return to “Dzogchen”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Phuntsog Tashi and 19 guests