Rigpa vs. Nature of Mind

Arnoud
Posts: 1004
Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2010 7:19 pm
Location: Benelux, then USA, now Southern Europe.

Re: Rigpa vs. Nature of Mind

Post by Arnoud »

I know you don't want to rehash your old argument, but maybe you could say what you think is important to know for us relative newbies?
Pero
Posts: 2465
Joined: Tue Aug 31, 2010 8:54 pm

Re: Rigpa vs. Nature of Mind

Post by Pero »

From my memory the discussion was more about whether or not it's good to translate sems nyid with "nature of mind"...
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
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Rigpa vs. Nature of Mind

Post by Malcolm »

Pero wrote:From my memory the discussion was more about whether or not it's good to translate sems nyid with "nature of mind"...

That's ok, sems nyid is a translation of cittatā or citta dharmatā.
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Rigpa vs. Nature of Mind

Post by Malcolm »

Clarence wrote:I know you don't want to rehash your old argument, but maybe you could say what you think is important to know for us relative newbies?

The nature of the mind is one thing, rigpa or vidyā is used in several different ways in Dzogchen texts. It is defined in as many as five different ways in the Vima snying thig teachings.

So, vidyā/rig pa cannot be simply reduced to "the nature of the mind".
Pero
Posts: 2465
Joined: Tue Aug 31, 2010 8:54 pm

Re: Rigpa vs. Nature of Mind

Post by Pero »

Namdrol wrote:
Pero wrote:From my memory the discussion was more about whether or not it's good to translate sems nyid with "nature of mind"...
That's ok, sems nyid is a translation of cittatā or citta dharmatā.
Well yes but it seemed to depend on context, sometimes it means byang chub sems. If sems nyid were just "nature of mind" always, then there is a problem when there is sems kyi rang bzhin (=nature of mind). It seems to me that translating both as nature of mind brings us into a bit of a pickle.
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
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Rigpa vs. Nature of Mind

Post by Malcolm »

Pero wrote:
Namdrol wrote:
Pero wrote:From my memory the discussion was more about whether or not it's good to translate sems nyid with "nature of mind"...
That's ok, sems nyid is a translation of cittatā or citta dharmatā.
Well yes but it seemed to depend on context, sometimes it means byang chub sems. If sems nyid were just "nature of mind" always, then there is a problem when there is sems kyi rang bzhin (=nature of mind). It seems to me that translating both as nature of mind brings us into a bit of a pickle.
English sometimes lacks good equivalents.

Depending one context, sometimes sems nyid means "the mind itself".

N
username
Posts: 759
Joined: Tue Mar 08, 2011 8:23 pm

Re: Rigpa vs. Nature of Mind

Post by username »

http://rywiki.tsadra.org/index.php/Rigpa" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Dzogchen masters I know say: 1)Buddhist religion essence is Dzogchen 2)Religions are positive by intent/fruit 3)Any method's OK unless: breaking Dzogchen vows, mixed as syncretic (Milanese Soup) 4)Don't join mandalas of opponents of Dalai Lama/Padmasambhava: False Deity inventors by encouraging victims 5)Don't debate Ati with others 6)Don't discuss Ati practices online 7) A master told his old disciple: no one's to discuss his teaching with some others on a former forum nor mention him. Publicity's OK, questions are asked from masters/set teachers in person/email/non-public forums~Best wishes
Post Reply

Return to “Dzogchen”