Mind/Rigpa and body relation

Moderator: Tibetan Buddhism moderators

Re: Mind/Rigpa and body relation

Postby kalden yungdrung » Thu May 26, 2011 4:33 pm

Namdrol wrote:
kalden yungdrung wrote:
If JLA could prove his case then what would be the result?
[/color]


As i have explained, Achard is wrong. ChNN does not translate rigpa as "presence".

N



Tashi delek, :)

Do not know about right or wrong here, sorry. :shock:
But JLA knowing, he is seldom "wrong".

Best wishes
KY
THOUGH A MAN BE LEARNED
IF HE DOES NOT APPLY HIS KNOWLEDGE
HE RESEMBLES THE BLIND MAN
WHO WITH A LAMP IN THE HAND CANNOT SEE THE ROAD
User avatar
kalden yungdrung
 
Posts: 1103
Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2010 10:40 pm

Re: Mind/Rigpa and body relation

Postby Malcolm » Thu May 26, 2011 4:38 pm

kalden yungdrung wrote:
Do not know about right or wrong here, sorry. :shock:
But JLA knowing, he is seldom "wrong".

Best wishes
KY[/color]


IN this respect, he is wrong. Completely wrong.
http://www.bhaisajya.net
http://atikosha.org
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔

Though there are infinite liberating gateways of Dharma,
there are none not included in the dimension of the knowledge of the Great Perfection.

-- Buddha Samantabhadri
User avatar
Malcolm
 
Posts: 11731
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Mind/Rigpa and body relation

Postby kalden yungdrung » Thu May 26, 2011 4:44 pm

Namdrol wrote:
As i have explained, Achard is wrong. ChNN does not translate rigpa as "presence".



Tashi delek, :)

- How is then ChNN's translation about Rigpa if he does not use "presence"?
- Why iwould be the use of "presence" not so custom?

Best wishes
KY
THOUGH A MAN BE LEARNED
IF HE DOES NOT APPLY HIS KNOWLEDGE
HE RESEMBLES THE BLIND MAN
WHO WITH A LAMP IN THE HAND CANNOT SEE THE ROAD
User avatar
kalden yungdrung
 
Posts: 1103
Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2010 10:40 pm

Re: Mind/Rigpa and body relation

Postby muni » Thu May 26, 2011 4:49 pm

Rigpa on it; knowledge for schoolstudents. There are many Rigpa's and combinations.
In 'naked awareness' I see clear as emptiness and awareness. Pure awareness as Rigpa here.
Maybe self-"arising" (already is) gnosis= empty awareness.

Ma Rigpa = state sentient being. (not knowing)
I think the linguistic meaning is less important. Also nature is not in text revealing.

Ah.
muni
 
Posts: 2867
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2009 6:59 am

Re: Mind/Rigpa and body relation

Postby username » Thu May 26, 2011 7:39 pm

1- Lets finish this horrible attack by someone who is attacking his former teacher in his interviews. Firstly he states that ChNNR was told to use 'presence' as a translation for rigpa by a drug addict. Then because he was not good at languages, he accepted that term and used it for rigpa. Firstly ChNNR knows more languages than most people including western translators. He speaks some very well like Tibetan and Mongolian and Italian and some adequately like English and some he can get by . So he is very good at languages. Secondly presence and instant are Latin based and the Italian is almost the same. So he did not need anyone to tell him what those two words were! So this is a second evil lie as he was working in an Italian University when the major Samaya breaker was still crying for lollipops.

2- Now lets finish the essence of this evil attack. ChNNR uses the term 'presence' not for rigpa but for "trenshe (dran shes)" and says the opposite of this is yengwa (g.yeng ba)) or distraction. I don't want to quote a whole paragraph from a restricted book even if it is the introductory material (not detail or practices) and what he says often publicly anyway. But lets finish this once and for all. See for yourselves on the first page, second paragraph of "The Four Chogshag: The practice of Tregchod". So presence means non-distraction and trying to create the conditions to be in rigpa. This is a translation of a teaching in Tsegyalgar from 1996, copyrighted in 1998, when certain major samaya breakers now promoting various falsehoods publicly, were around.

3- In the next immediate paragraph, third, he tackles Rigpa. He says: "Rigpa means knowledge or understanding but not on an intellectual level: it means being in a state of presence." Rigpa is Vidya and Vidya is a special form, highest form, of knowledge. Having that or rather being it, manifests in various ways effortlessly including obtaining various types of wisdoms, yeshes, jnanas, prajnas, etc. and even siddhis depending on the level attained. I have always felt the best translation for Rigpa is "Being 'The Knowledge'". Not even 'being in the knowledge' but being it non-dual, as it, which is the most natural state anyway, if only we allow all to be as they are (4 chogshags of Tregchod). And 'The Knowledge' to emphasize it as unique and ultimate as opposed to lower levels of conceptual time-bound conditioned knowledges. Gnosis, wisdom and awareness are bad and misleading terms too. But like Vidya, the best translation for Rigpa is Rigpa.

4- He uses the opposites for justifying meanings as is the norm from lotsawa days of King Trisong in both paragraphs, which Namdrol also uses. This oppositional methodology is a modern Structuralist and Deconstructivist approach too.

5- Finally a word of advice. If you visit a physical location/site and you see major Samaya breakers who have attacked their former Dzogchen master in public, then don't walk away, RUN. This is the advice in many teachings. Even if they coordinate and quote each other regularly and call each other beyond doubt. There are many reasons not to have karma with major Samaya breakers who are non-regretful and in happy continuation but that is off-topic. Also if you are not a Samaya breaker but when quoted and told one of your masters is being mis-quoted and proven to you to check for yourself, as above, but you still persist in repeating those lies a week later by a major Samaya breaker's interview, then you really need to sort out the real root of that problem, quickly.

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

Re: Mind/Rigpa and body relation

Postby Fa Dao » Thu May 26, 2011 7:51 pm

Heres a thought from a "newbie"...perhaps there just does not exist one single word in the English language that can adequately describe Rigpa? Perhaps translators need to find a combination or hyphenated word to get the idea across? or maybe even a short sentence? I have a short acronym I made up:
R-resting
I-in
G gnosis of
P-Presence and
A-Awareness
I am probably way off base but it seems to work for me...LOL
"But if you know how to observe yourself, you will discover your real nature, the primordial state, the state of Guruyoga, and then all will become clear because you will have discovered everything"-Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche
User avatar
Fa Dao
 
Posts: 482
Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2011 5:42 pm

Re: Mind/Rigpa and body relation

Postby username » Thu May 26, 2011 7:59 pm

Unless one is a Lotsawa or putting in the effort in training to be one and already at a good level, then this continuing obsession with semantics' details by non-qualified people only becomes an obstacle to Rigpa which is beyond time, concepts and definitions anyway.
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
username
 
Posts: 759
Joined: Tue Mar 08, 2011 8:23 pm

Re: Mind/Rigpa and body relation

Postby Fa Dao » Thu May 26, 2011 8:12 pm

Yes, and the constant arguing about it amongst practitioners is SO much better. Didnt say that the 2 cents put in was worth anything more than 2 cents anyways...just a thought
"But if you know how to observe yourself, you will discover your real nature, the primordial state, the state of Guruyoga, and then all will become clear because you will have discovered everything"-Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche
User avatar
Fa Dao
 
Posts: 482
Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2011 5:42 pm

Re: Mind/Rigpa and body relation

Postby Pero » Thu May 26, 2011 9:38 pm

Namdrol wrote:Ye shes is normally translated as wisdom or primordial wisdom, but some people these days, following John Pettite and Richad Baron are liking primordial awareness for this.

To me, "wisdom" was always very ambiguous, primordial awareness is much clearer.

tamdrin wrote:While many of his other students who post around here think that he does translate rigpa as presence.

Like who? I only remember one time on E-sangha when someone mistakenly thought presence meant rigpa and then that being present is trekcho or something like that.
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: 1841
Joined: Tue Aug 31, 2010 8:54 pm

Re: Mind/Rigpa and body relation

Postby tamdrin » Fri May 27, 2011 12:49 am

Pero wrote:
Namdrol wrote:Ye shes is normally translated as wisdom or primordial wisdom, but some people these days, following John Pettite and Richad Baron are liking primordial awareness for this.

To me, "wisdom" was always very ambiguous, primordial awareness is much clearer.

tamdrin wrote:While many of his other students who post around here think that he does translate rigpa as presence.

Like who? I only remember one time on E-sangha when someone mistakenly thought presence meant rigpa and then that being present is trekcho or something like that.



Thats funny, Pero, because you actually said this on another thread:

"That's pretty funny considering "instant presence" is the translation Chogyal Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche uses for rig pa. Same could be said for all other translations of rig pa too you know.

Though I guess you're just trolling a little hehe."

But anyway, lets just drop it, it is not important.
tamdrin
 
Posts: 291
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2010 7:01 pm

Re: Mind/Rigpa and body relation

Postby Pero » Fri May 27, 2011 1:18 am

tamdrin wrote:Thats funny, Pero, because you actually said this on another thread:

"That's pretty funny considering "instant presence" is the translation Chogyal Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche uses for rig pa. Same could be said for all other translations of rig pa too you know.

Though I guess you're just trolling a little hehe."

But anyway, lets just drop it, it is not important.


So basically you're saying I actually haven't said that? :D
Since instant presence != presence. Instant presence=rigpa, presence=mindfulness.

You say it's not important but I'm glad we cleared that up since someone might confuse the two again. :smile:
(hehe I've got to say though it would've been high irony here, had I indeed made such a mistake)
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: 1841
Joined: Tue Aug 31, 2010 8:54 pm

Re: Mind/Rigpa and body relation

Postby kalden yungdrung » Fri May 27, 2011 1:21 am

Code: Select all
Username wrote:
Firstly he states that ChNNR was told to use 'presence' as a translation for rigpa by a drug addict


Tashi delek, :)

When i may ask with whom is "he ' meant here?

Best wishes
KY
THOUGH A MAN BE LEARNED
IF HE DOES NOT APPLY HIS KNOWLEDGE
HE RESEMBLES THE BLIND MAN
WHO WITH A LAMP IN THE HAND CANNOT SEE THE ROAD
User avatar
kalden yungdrung
 
Posts: 1103
Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2010 10:40 pm

Re: Mind/Rigpa and body relation

Postby username » Fri May 27, 2011 2:23 am

kalden yungdrung wrote:
Code: Select all
Username wrote:
Firstly he states that ChNNR was told to use 'presence' as a translation for rigpa by a drug addict


Tashi delek, :)

When i may ask with whom is "he ' meant here?

Best wishes
KY


Ask the one who said it in his interview: as you put it your all "knowing, he is seldom "wrong"", friend. BTW when debating in any field and as a refuting reply, by refering to your human source (whom is contested anyway) as an immaculate fount of all knowledge (not what issues/points/data/agreed sources/etc.), on a point of discussion and you state: "But so-and-so knowing, he is seldom "wrong"" then you just turned the debate into a comic show, at your own expense I might add. But you'll get away with such debating shenanigans regarding "The Dear Leader in North Korea" perhaps.
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
username
 
Posts: 759
Joined: Tue Mar 08, 2011 8:23 pm

Re: Mind/Rigpa and body relation

Postby kalden yungdrung » Fri May 27, 2011 7:18 am

username wrote:
kalden yungdrung wrote:
Code: Select all
Username wrote:
Firstly he states that ChNNR was told to use 'presence' as a translation for rigpa by a drug addict


Tashi delek, :)

When i may ask with whom is "he ' meant here?

Best wishes
KY


Ask the one who said it in his interview: as you put it your all "knowing, he is seldom "wrong"", friend. BTW when debating in any field and as a refuting reply, by refering to your human source (whom is contested anyway) as an immaculate fount of all knowledge (not what issues/points/data/agreed sources/etc.), on a point of discussion and you state: "But so-and-so knowing, he is seldom "wrong"" then you just turned the debate into a comic show, at your own expense I might add. But you'll get away with such debating shenanigans regarding "The Dear Leader in North Korea" perhaps.



Tashi delek Username, :)

By my latest post was it not my intention to let turn the debate in a comic (show).
Everybody does know persons in a certain way. What is someones friend would result in anothers enemy, what is someones mother is someone else spouse etc.

I see regarding many discussions here friends with their foes, which does not count at all for me because i do not have the same "enemies". Besides that my enemies are not yours and i do not never try to convince you about why my enemies would /could etc. be also yours, otherwise it would turn in a comic.

Also would i inform the mentioned person (JLA)to defend himself, because it is all said without any possibility of a defence, so a very one sided show. I would not say that all is here slandering a person, but sometimes it feels like that. So we can avoid a one sided point of view.....

Further what i know is that JLA has so his specific argumentations with some persons in the world. But it are finally his / their case, and he / they has to solve them, or not.

Our position would be that we can learn a lot of those silly and endless fights with words / mind games and to not take a part into that dirty game(s).

Oh, on what was again (OUR) practice based? :D

OM MATRI MUYE SALE YE DU

Best wishes
KY
Last edited by kalden yungdrung on Fri May 27, 2011 4:33 pm, edited 2 times in total.
THOUGH A MAN BE LEARNED
IF HE DOES NOT APPLY HIS KNOWLEDGE
HE RESEMBLES THE BLIND MAN
WHO WITH A LAMP IN THE HAND CANNOT SEE THE ROAD
User avatar
kalden yungdrung
 
Posts: 1103
Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2010 10:40 pm

Re: Mind/Rigpa and body relation

Postby muni » Fri May 27, 2011 8:40 am

There is easier work than to 'translate' Rigpa or Vidya, in words. people ask and ask.
Practice reveal what is the meaning and all confusions and mental fixations are peace. So is there said.

Others' work is our joy. Simple.

Someone tea? :namaste:
muni
 
Posts: 2867
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2009 6:59 am

Re: Mind/Rigpa and body relation

Postby username » Fri May 27, 2011 10:21 am

kalden yungdrung wrote:
username wrote:
kalden yungdrung wrote:
Code: Select all
Username wrote:
Firstly he states that ChNNR was told to use 'presence' as a translation for rigpa by a drug addict


Tashi delek, :)

When i may ask with whom is "he ' meant here?

Best wishes
KY


Ask the one who said it in his interview: as you put it your all "knowing, he is seldom "wrong"", friend. BTW when debating in any field and as a refuting reply, by refering to your human source (whom is contested anyway) as an immaculate fount of all knowledge (not what issues/points/data/agreed sources/etc.), on a point of discussion and you state: "But so-and-so knowing, he is seldom "wrong"" then you just turned the debate into a comic show, at your own expense I might add. But you'll get away with such debating shenanigans regarding "The Dear Leader in North Korea" perhaps.



Tashi delek Username, :)

By my latest post was it not my intention to let turn the debate in a comic (show).
Everybody does know persons in a certain way. What is someones friend would result in anothers enemy, what is someones mother is someone else spouse etc.

I see regarding many discussions here friends with their foes, which does not count at all for me because i do not have the same "enemies". Besides that my enemies are not yours and i do not never try to convince you about why my enemies would /could etc. be also yours, otherwise it would turn in a comic.

Also would i inform the mentioned person (JLA)to defend himself, because it is all said without any possibility of a defence, so a very one sided show. I would not say that all is here slandering a person, but sometimes it feels like that. So we can avoid a one sided point of view.....

Further what i know is that JLA has so his specific problems or argumentations with some persons in the world. But it are finally his / their problems, and he / they has to solve them, or not.

Our position would be that we can learn a lot of those silly and endless fights with words / mind games and to not take a part into that dirty game(s).

Oh, on what was again (OUR) practice based? :D

OM MATRI MUYE SALE YE DU

Best wishes
KY


The comic reply of refering to his near immaculate status in response to a point of debate you avoided as usual, was not in your last (now penultimate) post as you claim, please read carefully before typing away.
kalden yungdrung wrote:
Namdrol wrote:
kalden yungdrung wrote:
If JLA could prove his case then what would be the result?
[/color]


As i have explained, Achard is wrong. ChNN does not translate rigpa as "presence".

N



Tashi delek, :)

Do not know about right or wrong here, sorry. :shock:
But JLA knowing, he is seldom "wrong".

Best wishes
KY


Secondly I'm sure due to his habitual nature and as someone else said elsewhere before you hinted, he now has problems with Bon masters too but he is nothing to me. You seem obssessed with the words 'friends and enemies'. Best debaters are impersonal and only focus on issues and points at hand, not refering to personalities illogically, which is honorable too.

Finally I am nevertheless experienced and wary of people who mainly practice childish word games with thinly disguised insincere intentions and constantly talk of lofty things but if hungry will eat each other alive without hesitation. I don't despise such people, merely pity them and remember them in my prayers.
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
username
 
Posts: 759
Joined: Tue Mar 08, 2011 8:23 pm

Re: Mind/Rigpa and body relation

Postby muni » Fri May 27, 2011 10:57 am

One easely look through own glasses, expecting all has same background and styles. How can we satisfy all?

Of course peaceful being is boring. :jedi:

Rigpa? Shooting mind projections. Come on, you are all working on my nerves! at least in my dream. no need to push me chocolat in my mouth with rotten teeth neither.

Saw Namdrol writing something about that forum E-Sangha in which Dzogchen closed or so. Well :popcorn: I need no explanations.
muni
 
Posts: 2867
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2009 6:59 am

Re: Mind/Rigpa and body relation

Postby Malcolm » Fri May 27, 2011 1:28 pm

Pero wrote:
Namdrol wrote:Ye shes is normally translated as wisdom or primordial wisdom, but some people these days, following John Pettite and Richad Baron are liking primordial awareness for this.

To me, "wisdom" was always very ambiguous, primordial awareness is much clearer.



It isn't really, since ye shes is not an awareness of any kind, actually.
http://www.bhaisajya.net
http://atikosha.org
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔

Though there are infinite liberating gateways of Dharma,
there are none not included in the dimension of the knowledge of the Great Perfection.

-- Buddha Samantabhadri
User avatar
Malcolm
 
Posts: 11731
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Mind/Rigpa and body relation

Postby Malcolm » Fri May 27, 2011 1:53 pm

muni wrote:Rigpa on it; knowledge for schoolstudents. There are many Rigpa's and combinations.
In 'naked awareness' I see clear as emptiness and awareness. Pure awareness as Rigpa here.
Maybe self-"arising" (already is) gnosis= empty awareness.

Ma Rigpa = state sentient being. (not knowing)
I think the linguistic meaning is less important. Also nature is not in text revealing.

Ah.



HI Muni:

One of the problems you will face if you insist on translating rigpa as a awareness, is that you will be able to differentiate Dzogchen, etc. from the hindus who are always waffling on about "pure awareness". In reality, "awareness" is a word in english which requires an object.

"Awareness is the state or ability to perceive, to feel, or to be conscious of events, objects or sensory patterns. In this level of consciousness, sense data can be confirmed by an observer without necessarily implying understanding. More broadly, it is the state or quality of being aware of something. In biological psychology, awareness is defined as a human's or an animal's perception and cognitive reaction to a condition or event."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Awareness

I know you are not a native English speaker, and so you may not be tuned into usage of English terms. Awareness is always an awareness of something. The basis is not a something. If you are aware of the basis as a something, then you immediately fall into samsara. This is the problem with using the term awareness for rig pa.

Knowledge in the other hand is more ambiguous word in English which actually involves real philosophical issues hence the discipline of epistemology i.e. the study of knowledge qua knowledge.

Rig pa in every sense of the word as it is used in opposition to ma rig pa has to do with knowing as opposed to ignorance. Some have described as the intersection between belief and truth, or "a justified true belief."

In this case, rig pa is justified, because it is based on a personal experience, true, because that experience can be verified by anyone, and a belief because in this case personal experience has lead us to a state personal verification of something that before hand be merely believed.

Anyway, people are free to believe what they wish, justified or not. It is my belief, one I think justified and true, that the English word awareness is not an adequate translation of rig pa almost every case.
http://www.bhaisajya.net
http://atikosha.org
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔

Though there are infinite liberating gateways of Dharma,
there are none not included in the dimension of the knowledge of the Great Perfection.

-- Buddha Samantabhadri
User avatar
Malcolm
 
Posts: 11731
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Mind/Rigpa and body relation

Postby muni » Fri May 27, 2011 3:19 pm

Namdrol wrote:
muni wrote:Rigpa on it; knowledge for schoolstudents. There are many Rigpa's and combinations.
In 'naked awareness' I see clear as emptiness and awareness. Pure awareness as Rigpa here.
Maybe self-"arising" (already is) gnosis= empty awareness.

Ma Rigpa = state sentient being. (not knowing)
I think the linguistic meaning is less important. Also nature is not in text revealing.

Ah.



HI Muni:

One of the problems you will face if you insist on translating rigpa as a awareness, is that you will be able to differentiate Dzogchen, etc. from the hindus who are always waffling on about "pure awareness". In reality, "awareness" is a word in english which requires an object.

"Awareness is the state or ability to perceive, to feel, or to be conscious of events, objects or sensory patterns. In this level of consciousness, sense data can be confirmed by an observer without necessarily implying understanding. More broadly, it is the state or quality of being aware of something. In biological psychology, awareness is defined as a human's or an animal's perception and cognitive reaction to a condition or event."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Awareness

I know you are not a native English speaker, and so you may not be tuned into usage of English terms. Awareness is always an awareness of something. The basis is not a something. If you are aware of the basis as a something, then you immediately fall into samsara. This is the problem with using the term awareness for rig pa.

Knowledge in the other hand is more ambiguous word in English which actually involves real philosophical issues hence the discipline of epistemology i.e. the study of knowledge qua knowledge.

Rig pa in every sense of the word as it is used in opposition to ma rig pa has to do with knowing as opposed to ignorance. Some have described as the intersection between belief and truth, or "a justified true belief."

In this case, rig pa is justified, because it is based on a personal experience, true, because that experience can be verified by anyone, and a belief because in this case personal experience has lead us to a state personal verification of something that before hand be merely believed.

Anyway, people are free to believe what they wish, justified or not. It is my belief, one I think justified and true, that the English word awareness is not an adequate translation of rig pa almost every case.

Hi Namdrol,
Rigpa is just okay. When one is wandering within strange woods, one tries out what is available.
What is for others the best, must be used.
muni
 
Posts: 2867
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2009 6:59 am

PreviousNext

Return to Dzogchen

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Kelwin and 18 guests

>