Rigpa vs. Nature of Mind

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

Rigpa vs. Nature of Mind

Postby Arnoud » Fri May 20, 2011 8:59 pm

Is there a difference? Or just a different way of translating things?

I don't know how much we can ask here about specific ways of looking at the mind or not, so I will wait with those.

User avatar
Paul
Posts: 1726
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2010 8:12 pm

Re: Rigpa vs. Nature of Mind

Postby Paul » Fri May 20, 2011 9:52 pm

Clarence wrote:Is there a difference? Or just a different way of translating things?

I don't know how much we can ask here about specific ways of looking at the mind or not, so I will wait with those.


It's my understanding that the Nyingma separate mind, the nature of mind and rigpa. The nature of mind is emptiness whereas rigpa is emptiness, clarity and energy. From what I can tell this differentiation isn't made in in more informal teachings where the discussion is just about sem and rigpa.
Look at the unfathomable spinelessness of man: all the means he's been given to stay alert he uses, in the end, to ornament his sleep. – Rene Daumal
the modern mind has become so limited and single-visioned that it has lost touch with normal perception - John Michell

User avatar
heart
Posts: 3611
Joined: Fri Jan 08, 2010 1:55 pm

Re: Rigpa vs. Nature of Mind

Postby heart » Fri May 20, 2011 10:16 pm

Hayagriva wrote:
Clarence wrote:Is there a difference? Or just a different way of translating things?

I don't know how much we can ask here about specific ways of looking at the mind or not, so I will wait with those.


It's my understanding that the Nyingma separate mind, the nature of mind and rigpa. The nature of mind is emptiness whereas rigpa is emptiness, clarity and energy. From what I can tell this differentiation isn't made in in more informal teachings where the discussion is just about sem and rigpa.


Not right, nature of mind is rigpa at least in a Nyingma context. Check out Longchenpa.

/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

tamdrin
Posts: 291
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2010 7:01 pm

Re: Rigpa vs. Nature of Mind

Postby tamdrin » Fri May 20, 2011 10:18 pm

all this distinction is not really necessary.. Even the distinction between sem and rigpa is just a method, provisional at best. What we need is direct perception (ngon gsum)

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 21066
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Rigpa vs. Nature of Mind

Postby Malcolm » Fri May 20, 2011 10:22 pm

heart wrote:
Hayagriva wrote:
Clarence wrote:Is there a difference? Or just a different way of translating things?

I don't know how much we can ask here about specific ways of looking at the mind or not, so I will wait with those.


It's my understanding that the Nyingma separate mind, the nature of mind and rigpa. The nature of mind is emptiness whereas rigpa is emptiness, clarity and energy. From what I can tell this differentiation isn't made in in more informal teachings where the discussion is just about sem and rigpa.


Not right, nature of mind is rigpa at least in a Nyingma context. Check out Longchenpa.

/magnus



This is more according to sems sde. Man ngag sde is a bit different.
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: 21066
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Rigpa vs. Nature of Mind

Postby Malcolm » Fri May 20, 2011 10:23 pm

tamdrin wrote:all this distinction is not really necessary.. Even the distinction between sem and rigpa is just a method, provisional at best. What we need is direct perception (ngon gsum)



In Dzogchen, the differentiation between sems and rigpa is critical. Not just method.
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
Paul
Posts: 1726
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2010 8:12 pm

Re: Rigpa vs. Nature of Mind

Postby Paul » Fri May 20, 2011 10:37 pm

Is rigpa a term that's even used much in semde? Seems that semde talks about chang chub sem.
Look at the unfathomable spinelessness of man: all the means he's been given to stay alert he uses, in the end, to ornament his sleep. – Rene Daumal
the modern mind has become so limited and single-visioned that it has lost touch with normal perception - John Michell

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 21066
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Rigpa vs. Nature of Mind

Postby Malcolm » Fri May 20, 2011 10:38 pm

Hayagriva wrote:Is rigpa a term that's even used much in semde? Seems that semde talks about chang chub sem.



No it is not used that much in primary sems sde texts, but is used more in commentaries on those texts.
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
Nosta
Posts: 862
Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2010 10:28 pm

Re: Rigpa vs. Nature of Mind

Postby Nosta » Sat May 21, 2011 12:14 am

Is rigpa = nibbana?

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 21066
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Rigpa vs. Nature of Mind

Postby Malcolm » Sat May 21, 2011 1:49 am

Nosta wrote:Is rigpa = nibbana?



No.
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
florin
Posts: 812
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2010 12:05 pm

Re: Rigpa vs. Nature of Mind

Postby florin » Sat May 21, 2011 8:11 am

what about instant presence ?
Its a concept which i am not familiar with and about which CNNR talks a lot.

In the teachings i was given we were never told about things like this ,only about ways of looking at the mind and discovering the natural state-rigpa

Instant presence seems to me more like another gate to go trough before you get to rigpa.

But i was never taught this way.I was told more like look into "that" rest and "voila".I seemed more like a two step approach rather than an three step one as in CNNR approach where you are mindfull then you get into instant presence and from this into rigpa.

Am i missing something?
"Bow down to me for I thirst for an infinite ocean of blood, since the innumerable torrents of floods at kalpa's end that terrify all world systems do not even wet the tip of my tongue"

User avatar
heart
Posts: 3611
Joined: Fri Jan 08, 2010 1:55 pm

Re: Rigpa vs. Nature of Mind

Postby heart » Sat May 21, 2011 9:22 am

Namdrol wrote:
heart wrote:
Not right, nature of mind is rigpa at least in a Nyingma context. Check out Longchenpa.

/magnus



This is more according to sems sde. Man ngag sde is a bit different.


It is not that different since also in Semde the differentiation between rigpa and sem is also of critical importance.

/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
heart
Posts: 3611
Joined: Fri Jan 08, 2010 1:55 pm

Re: Rigpa vs. Nature of Mind

Postby heart » Sat May 21, 2011 10:02 am

tamdrin wrote:all this distinction is not really necessary.. Even the distinction between sem and rigpa is just a method, provisional at best. What we need is direct perception (ngon gsum)


"ngon gsum"? You mean "mngon gsum" http://rywiki.tsadra.org/index.php/mngon_sum ? I don't understand how that has anything to do with the distinction between rigpa and the nature of mind.

The distinction between sem and rigpa is not an intellectual idea you know, it is something that becomes increasingly obvious through the direct introduction in Dzogchen. In Mahamudra this distinction is done in gradually on the path and in Dzogchen it is done in the beginning of the path. This is according to my master that teach both.

/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

Pema Rigdzin
Posts: 1033
Joined: Tue Dec 15, 2009 3:19 am
Location: Southern Oregon

Re: Rigpa vs. Nature of Mind

Postby Pema Rigdzin » Sat May 21, 2011 12:57 pm

alpha wrote:...seemed more like a two step approach rather than an three step one as in CNNR approach where you are mindfull then you get into instant presence and from this into rigpa.

Am i missing something?


"Instant presence" is just a translation ChNNR often uses for "rigpa."

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 21066
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Rigpa vs. Nature of Mind

Postby Malcolm » Sat May 21, 2011 1:06 pm

heart wrote:
Namdrol wrote:
heart wrote:
Not right, nature of mind is rigpa at least in a Nyingma context. Check out Longchenpa.

/magnus



This is more according to sems sde. Man ngag sde is a bit different.


It is not that different since also in Semde the differentiation between rigpa and sem is also of critical importance.

/magnus



Hi MAgnus:

We already had this discussion on e-sangha. Pointless to rehash it again. Believe whatever you like.
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
gnegirl
Posts: 386
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2010 8:22 pm
Location: Waponi Woo

Re: Rigpa vs. Nature of Mind

Postby gnegirl » Sat May 21, 2011 5:50 pm

Namdrol wrote:Hi MAgnus:

We already had this discussion on e-sangha. Pointless to rehash it again. Believe whatever you like.


But.... i thought we were recreating all the drama of E-sangha... I mean, where else am I gunna get my soaps? :popcorn:
"Things are not what they appear to be: nor are they otherwise." --Surangama Sutra

Phenomenon, vast as space, dharmata is your base, arising and falling like ocean tide cycles, why do i cling to your illusion of unceasing changlessness?

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

Re: Rigpa vs. Nature of Mind

Postby Arnoud » Sat May 21, 2011 6:20 pm

Well, maybe we can recreate the subject without the drama? I would be interesting to hear the difference between the two. I vaguely remember there was thread on it on E-sangha, but don't remember the content.

User avatar
heart
Posts: 3611
Joined: Fri Jan 08, 2010 1:55 pm

Re: Rigpa vs. Nature of Mind

Postby heart » Sat May 21, 2011 6:23 pm

Namdrol wrote:Hi MAgnus:

We already had this discussion on e-sangha. Pointless to rehash it again. Believe whatever you like.


Yes Namdrol, you and me have done that, not everyone present here at this time.

/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
heart
Posts: 3611
Joined: Fri Jan 08, 2010 1:55 pm

Re: Rigpa vs. Nature of Mind

Postby heart » Sun May 22, 2011 8:15 am

Clarence wrote:Well, maybe we can recreate the subject without the drama? I would be interesting to hear the difference between the two. I vaguely remember there was thread on it on E-sangha, but don't remember the content.


Well Clarence, it might seem like there would be a difference in Dzogchen since they push so hard on the separation of mind and rigpa. So some thinks that the "nature of mind" means the nature of confusion. But in the Dzogchen teachings (the Menagkde) one also say that mind (sem), our thoughts and emotions, is the expression of awareness (rigpa). So if you understand that statement you also understand why one could say that the nature of mind is synonymous with rigpa. However, in practical application Mahamudra practitioners don't separate mind and rigpa from the beginning, but rather let mind and rigpa separate naturally on the path, so from that point of view there could become some confusion saying that the "nature of mind" of a beginner practitioner of Mahamudra and rigpa are the same. But ultimately when you say "nature of mind" you are talking about the result of the practice, the Buddha nature. Ultimately all the Buddhas teachings are pointing to the Buddha nature for this reason they say the Buddhas teachings like a piece of sugar is sweet wherever you taste it. If you want to understand more about this I would suggest that you read Tsele Natsok Rangdrols "Heart of the matter" or if you got a copy his Dzogchen text "Circle of the Sun".

/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: 21066
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Rigpa vs. Nature of Mind

Postby Malcolm » Sun May 22, 2011 2:20 pm

heart wrote:But in the Dzogchen teachings (the Menagkde) one also say that mind (sem), our thoughts and emotions, is the expression of awareness (rigpa).



This is misleading.

In Upadesha, mind is variously said to be the mixture of the rtsal energy of vidyā and the karmic vāyus, the vāyu itself, and so on. Mind has a different location in the body than vidyā; different pathways than vidyā, and so on.

Whereas in sems de the nature of the mind is considered to be bodhicitta.

So this question really does depend on what Dzogchen teaching one is discussing it cannot be simplistically reduced to the statement "rigpa is the nature of the mind."

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


Return to “Dzogchen”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 36 guests