"Everything is perfect"

[gregkavarnos]

All of this is a consequence of trying to develop non-dual vision (ie realise emptiness) without a fully developed notion of bodhicitta/boundless compassion.

[padma norbu]

All of this is a consequence of trying to develop non-dual vision (ie realise emptiness) without a fully developed notion of bodhicitta/boundless compassion.

I'm just examining the possibility of how to look at something like the prolonged, extremely sadistic torture of children as "perfect." It isn't a lack of compassion that is the obstacle to my difficulty seeing the "perfection" of such horrors. After reading something just so revolting it physically made me ill (worse than anything out of the Holocaust), the words I mentally formed were "the world is not good." Which immediately brought to mind this topic.

[Paul]

All of this is a consequence of trying to develop non-dual vision (ie realise emptiness) without a fully developed notion of bodhicitta/boundless compassion.

I'm just examining the possibility of how to look at something like the prolonged, extremely sadistic torture of children as "perfect." It isn't a lack of compassion that is the obstacle to my difficulty seeing the "perfection" of such horrors. After reading something just so revolting it physically made me ill (worse than anything out of the Holocaust), the words I mentally formed were "the world is not good." Which immediately brought to mind this topic.

To be very frank, that kind of reaction is just samsaric grasping. All phenomena, not matter how unpleasant they appear are nothing more than dream like appearances. That they are dream like appearances means that there's a point to becoming a buddha, as this nature can be realised by anyone that sees through them. If they were really real, there'd be nothing that could be done. This is how bodhichitta will naturally arise for someone who trains in rigpa.

It might seem very extreme, but there's nothing that's so bad that it becomes somehow actually real. This kind of issue is why emptiness is not to be taught to people that can't take it, let alone Dzogchen.

[gregkavarnos]

I disagree. Relative truth is a form of truth AS WELL! Suffering, at the relative level, exists. Those suffering and those perpetuating the suffering also (at the relative level) exist. Ultimate truth does not completely invalidate relative truth, otherwise alll that fanciful talk about karma would mean NOTHING (ie we would fall into nihilism). Consider the unbearable suffering of the individual that produced the "literature" you took such a dislike to. Consider that they are suffering now and consider how much they will suffer in the future. Now consider the suffering of the victim that arose as a consequence of the perpertrators actions. Is there any real difference in their suffering? Is there any real reason you should feel compassion for one and not the other?

What can you learn about yourself as a consequence of the actions of the perpertrator? How can their actions be a springboard for you to develop and thus alleviate/erradicate the suffering of all sentient beings?

Now everything is perfect!

[padma norbu]

If they were really real, there'd be nothing that could be done.

If they were really real, they wouldn't exist in any dimension we are familiar with. Nothing is inherently real existing from its own side or it would be impossible for change to occur.

[padma norbu]

I disagree. Relative truth is a form of truth AS WELL! Suffering, at the relative level, exists. Those suffering and those perpetuating the suffering also (at the relative level) exist. Ultimate truth does not completely invalidate relative truth, otherwise alll that fanciful talk about karma would mean NOTHING (ie we would fall into nihilism). Consider the unbearable suffering of the individual that produced the "literature" you took such a dislike to. Consider that they are suffering now and consider how much they will suffer in the future. Now consider the suffering of the victim that arose as a consequence of the perpertrators actions. Is there any real difference in their suffering? Is there any real reason you should feel compassion for one and not the other?

What can you learn about yourself as a consequence of the actions of the perpertrator? How can their actions be a springboard for you to develop and thus alleviate/erradicate the suffering of all sentient beings?

Now everything is perfect!

This was all pretty much discussed earlier. I'm not making any divisions in who suffers, it was only an extreme suffering than horrified me and shocked me out of my day-to-day awareness. What was specifically being discussed here has been lost, somehow, or avoided entirely. Perhaps it's my fault because I don't just say a one-liner; everyone gets lost in my ramblings. Main point in the original thought was: "the only way I can view the incredible amount of suffering out there as "perfect" or "all good" is in the sense that at core it is pure and so can be purified. The suffering itself, however, seems quite undeserved and therefore not so perfect."

[padma norbu]

I'll just go ahead and repeat the last part of my 2nd post on this thread, then:

when you consider the fact that it results from simple misperception, it seems horribly unfair. Not that anyone said life was fair, but fairness seems to play into the definition of "perfection" I am familiar with... not that we are limited to concepts, anyway.

I guess I talked myself through it.

[adinatha]

All phenomena have the same taste is the meaning of "everything is fine," samantabhadra.

[adinatha]

I disagree. Relative truth is a form of truth AS WELL! Suffering, at the relative level, exists. Those suffering and those perpetuating the suffering also (at the relative level) exist. Ultimate truth does not completely invalidate relative truth, otherwise alll that fanciful talk about karma would mean NOTHING (ie we would fall into nihilism). Consider the unbearable suffering of the individual that produced the "literature" you took such a dislike to. Consider that they are suffering now and consider how much they will suffer in the future. Now consider the suffering of the victim that arose as a consequence of the perpertrators actions. Is there any real difference in their suffering? Is there any real reason you should feel compassion for one and not the other?

What can you learn about yourself as a consequence of the actions of the perpertrator? How can their actions be a springboard for you to develop and thus alleviate/erradicate the suffering of all sentient beings?

Now everything is perfect!

There are basically two levles of relative truth in buddhism. 1) The conventional truth is a kind of truth level and 2) The what is called conventional is the illusion of truth level.

Both levels agree that karmic desserts are an infallible law. That is underpinning of buddhist thought. If you learn what karma really is, like from Vasubhandu and the Karmasiddhi Prakarana, one realizes that karma is a function of one's own mind stream, with the seed of retribution along with the other seeds residing in the Alaya-vijnana.

Here's how the two levels are one level. A karmic seed is comprised of a habit formed by grasping at the truth in appearances. So long as that grasping is happening, the seed of past karmic retribution must fructify; so the level of conventional truth being a true existence is true in the sense of causality being true. Then, the level the regards convention as the illusion of truth is also true because grasping is not something in truth, and has no true existence. When grasping ceases, the karmic potential of appearances is cut off and everything shines forth as mere illusory display. Vajra yoga has this intent.

Of course all the samsaric beings in the world are subject to karma. And this should give rise to compassion in one's heart, because karma is samsara. And samsara is endless suffering. Then, one should see what is this compassion and two whom it is occuring, and join this emotion to the contemplation of the Mahamudra or Rigpa.

To do that one must turn one's mind away from the analysis of outer conditions, and turn one's mind toward the naturally arising compassion within. Resting in that is Avalokiteshvara, etc.

[padma norbu]

All phenomena have the same taste is the meaning of "everything is fine," samantabhadra.

"Everything is fine" is a lot less easier to parse, actually. Thanks for that!

[padma norbu]

Man, the daily grind I ignorantly perceive sure is the pits, though. I can see why people go sit in a cave and give others the advice to isolate yourself from humanity. The beauty of Dzogchen practices and Vajrayana is that we are supposed to be able to perform our work while functioning in society, but quite often that's pretty difficult. It is much easier for me to remember "everything is fine" rather than "everything is perfect" when I experience a daily existence of "I can just barely tolerate this bullshit."

[PadmaVonSamba]

How about: "everything is everything"

[gregkavarnos]

Main point in the original thought was: "the only way I can view the incredible amount of suffering out there as "perfect" or "all good" is in the sense that at core it is pure and so can be purified.

Nope, you can't purify something that is pure. Either it is pure (and cannot be purified) or it can be purified (and thus is impure). Anyway, I can't remember where, but I read an explanation about everything being perfect that went along the lines of perfect meaning complete as it is. ie the victim is a victim as a consequence of causes and conditions arising from their actions, the perpertrator is a perp as a consequence of... suffering arises based on ignorance... ie there is nothing "more" to add, nothing to be removed all occurences arise as a consequence of causes and anything that arises is subject to decay. No need to fear, no need to grasp, no need to repulse... just relax.

The suffering itself, however, seems quite undeserved and therefore not so perfect.

Undeserved? You mean not arising based on causes and conditions? Random? Not justified (by what and whom?)?

[Vajrahridaya]

All of this is a consequence of trying to develop non-dual vision (ie realise emptiness) without a fully developed notion of bodhicitta/boundless compassion.

I'm just examining the possibility of how to look at something like the prolonged, extremely sadistic torture of children as "perfect." It isn't a lack of compassion that is the obstacle to my difficulty seeing the "perfection" of such horrors. After reading something just so revolting it physically made me ill (worse than anything out of the Holocaust), the words I mentally formed were "the world is not good." Which immediately brought to mind this topic.

The "Everything is Perfect" has to do with another dimension of seeing, it doesn't have to do with thought or formations, but the fact and recognition that all formations are empty and do not impede Rigpa. As a metaphor, it's like everything is water and you're aware that everything is water, and that's what's perfect about it. This doesn't mean one doesn't act according to the virtue of how the water forms.

[padma norbu]

Main point in the original thought was: "the only way I can view the incredible amount of suffering out there as "perfect" or "all good" is in the sense that at core it is pure and so can be purified.

Nope, you can't purify something that is pure. Either it is pure (and cannot be purified) or it can be purified (and thus is impure).

I can quote you several places to explain what your misunderstanding is, but I'd rather not. Just consider the phrase popular in sadhanas: "purifying obscurations."

The suffering itself, however, seems quite undeserved and therefore not so perfect.

Undeserved? You mean not arising based on causes and conditions? Random? Not justified (by what and whom?)?

Please, really, you need to read the thread from the beginning. I qualified the word "undeserved" right after I used it. I'm not going to go around in circles continually quoting my first 2-3 posts.

[padma norbu]

All of this is a consequence of trying to develop non-dual vision (ie realise emptiness) without a fully developed notion of bodhicitta/boundless compassion.

I'm just examining the possibility of how to look at something like the prolonged, extremely sadistic torture of children as "perfect." It isn't a lack of compassion that is the obstacle to my difficulty seeing the "perfection" of such horrors. After reading something just so revolting it physically made me ill (worse than anything out of the Holocaust), the words I mentally formed were "the world is not good." Which immediately brought to mind this topic.

The "Everything is Perfect" has to do with another dimension of seeing, it doesn't have to do with thought or formations, but the fact and recognition that all formations are empty and do not impede Rigpa. As a metaphor, it's like everything is water and you're aware that everything is water, and that's what's perfect about it. This doesn't mean one doesn't act according to the virtue of how the water forms.

I know, this was discussed in post #1.

[PadmaVonSamba]

I think that what you are asking can be broken down into a few questions:

1. can things be perfect and imperfect at the same time?
2. how can everything be just fine when there is all this crazy shit going on in the world?
3. How can there be positive and negative karma if ultimately there is no duality in the universe?

If this is what you are asking then I think I could offer some answers based on my limited understanding. But I don't want to put words into your mouth, so if this is not what you are asking, can you help me to better understand your question?

I wondered if these questions more accurately described your question. From reading the subsequent posts, it appears that they do. So, here is my input:

You are right when you say "at core it is pure and so can be purified. The suffering itself, however, seems quite undeserved and therefore not so perfect." From the ordinary point of view, of course things are not perfect. They are not perfect for everybody and they have never been perfect. There is suffering. There has always been that constant striving. If suffering did not need to be ended, the Buddha would not have appeared in this world. It would have been pointless, and it would be pointless to practice dharma. So, the term, "everything is perfect" cannot mean that suffering is good.

I don't think that interpreting it as karma, or perhaps, as a fair distribution of pain and suffering is the correct interpretation either. So, when people think "everything is in balance because so and so must have deserved the suffering they got" that is not right. Karma is not a penal system. That approach still clings to duality.

The poem you shared is really quite excellent. The point is to understand emptiness. Where do victims get their suffering from? Because their suffering is an extension of the suffering of the perpetrator. A person causes another person to suffer because they themselves are messed up. That is their suffering. And the point in understanding is is from the view of the Dharma person who sees that all these beings are suffering and so does not choose sides, but responds appropriately.

If there was not suffering in the world, The Buddha would not have appeared, and there would be no human realm. Humans evolved from early primates who stood on their hind legs. Why did they do this? To avoid the suffering that comes from being eaten alive. Life evolves into different forms for purposes of survival. "Precious Human Birth" is the result of a lot of "kalpas" of of missed meals. Prince Siddhartha was born because, a few thousand years earlier, somebody did not end up inside the belly of a saber toothed tiger or something. It is all part of dependent arising. So, in terms of "the big picture" all the pieces fit together very nicely, like a jigsaw puzzle, and only fit together in such a way that the shape of the picture keeps changing constantly.

So, suffering exists and the perfect response is to end suffering. The two fit together without any duality.

There was a tv series many years ago called "The Power Of Myth" where Bill Moyers interviews Hustom Smith. In one episode, Smith is talking about the Christian symbol of the lion lying down with the lamb. This symbolizes a perfect world. Smith says that people misunderstand the meaning, and he reemarks "The lion still eats the lamb--but it's okay!"

[padma norbu]

Well, I know I started this thread and everything, but I just wanted to let everyone know I'm done with it at this point. Maybe it will help someone else in the future.

[PadmaVonSamba]

gone! gone! gone beyond!

[Heruka]

its all too much......how can it be.... there must be a glitch...cannot let go.....doubt...

and so on.