"...and after 12 years, he was liberated into space."

[padma norbu]

I said good day, sir!

[Adamantine]

I said good day, sir!

If you're being dismissive because you think I am correct, and understand my point but don't want to acknowledge that for whatever reason than ok, good day to you too.

If however, you think I am indeed confused, and you have a superior understanding but don't feel like explaining it in an adequate way until I do understand-- then let me remind you of this vow (disregard if you haven't ever taken it-- which would mean you aren't even practicing any of this stuff anyway!)

(2nd) root Bodhisattva downfall: Not sharing Dharma teachings or wealth:

Here, the motivation must be specifically attachment and miserliness. This negative action includes not only being possessive of our notes or tape recorder, but also being stingy with our time and refusing to help if needed.

I am not pursuing this to be argumentative-- if I am missing something here, as you claim, I genuinely would like to know what it is.

[padma norbu]

Adamantine,

My friend, I was just being silly and I thought that was a humorous way to end the discussion. I have pretty much indicated all along the way that this is not a discussion I wish to have, but since I have now spent the whole day on this, so why not continue just a little bit longer to make sure I have said absolutely all I can possibly say to explain excrutiatingly thoroughly exactly where I'm coming from? I am going to try to put a source for absolutely everything I present.

Yes, you mentioned yab-yum. Twice, in fact, if I recall correctly. However, you didn't respond to my questions regarding Samantabhadra/dri, rupakaya, Wisdom or Wisdom Display. You had vague responses about absolute and relative and, it seemed to you, if I was talking about absolute terms, why should I bother to even talk about it?

So, let me "help you out," then. Although, I am pretty sure I never took bodhisattva vows. I took refuge from Lama Tsering Everest, but I think I clarified somehow or other along the way that I was still free to be a complete arsehole if I feel like it... but, I try not to be that way, so here's the deal:

Yes, I am aware of the standard male and female symbolism: bell and vajra, wisdom and compassion; prajna-paramita.

In some book I read a while back (don't worry, I will get specific soon enough), perhaps it was Dakini's Warm Breath, I'm not sure, there was a point made about an apparent "reversal" of sex regarding Samantabhadra and Samantabhadri, which is of course not a reversal at all since we are not talking about actual genders here...

Samantabhadra represents dharmakaya, infinite formlessness, and HE is blue like the sky, representing Emptiness. Yet, we know that emptiness and Wisdom are primarily associated with femaleness in Tibet, e.g. Prajna of "prajna-paramita" (wisdom-compassion) who is symbolized by a female deity often considered synonymous with Tara:

"The essence of whatever may appear, when simply left to itself, Is the unfabricated and uncorrupted view, the Dharmakaya, emptiness mother." http://www.nyingma.com/dzogchen2.htm

So, representing the Absolute, we have a sky-blue male primordial Buddha representing what is essentially a female characteristic: "emptiness mother."

His consort Samantabhadri, who represents the Absolute Dakini[1] and also represents Rupakaya[2] is white, representing the wisdom aspect of mind (sources for these claims below), but also kind of like a cloud. Well, that makes sense because the Rupakaya is the Form Body and clouds are forms in the empty sky, but hey wait a minute clouds are associated with obscurations! Well, not always, such as this quote from (Padmasambhava's) Dakini Teachings: "Since these are all the cloud banks of Guru Rinpoche's wisdom display, the "inexhaustible wheel of adornment," he is known as the All-Holding Lotus" ...or the instruction for the Samadhi of Suchness from Light of Wisdom, Vol 2 pg 88-89: "Rest evenly in this space of the undivided two truths. Emanate the magic of compassion, an all-illuminating cloud of awareness, filling the space, radiant yet without fixation. The single mudra in the manner of a subtle syllable Is the causal seed which produces everything. Keep this changeless wisdom essence, manifests in space, one-pointedly in mind and bring its vivid presence to perfection."

[1] "The dharmakaya dakini, which is Samantabhadri, represents the dharmadhatu where all phenomena appear." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trikaya

[1] "Dakinis can also be classified according to the Trikaya: In this system, one can distinguish the dharmakaya dakini, which is Samantabhadri, representing the dharmadhatu where all phenomena appear; the sambhogakaya dakinis, which are the figures used for practice; the nirmanakaya dakinis, which are the women born with special potentialities, these are realized women, the consorts of the gurus, or even all women in general as they may be classified into the five Buddha-families.[4]" — Elias Capriles, Buddhism and Dzogchen (2003). http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/ent ... ite_note-3

[1]"Samantabhadri is the expression of a concept essentially inexpressible in word or symbol, the ultimate voidness nature of mind. This aspect of the dakini is beyond gender, form or expression. According to Simmer Brown [3] the power of the dakini in all her forms is based on the fact that all meditation practices ultimately point to the Samantabhadri dakini." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samantabha ... utelary%29

[2]"Samantabhadra represents the dharmakaya or radical Emptiness, which is completely formless and therefore "black" (as in deep dreamless sleep). Samantabhadri represents the rupakaya, the entire world of Form, which is a brilliant white luminous display." http://www.shambhalasun.com/index.php?o ... ew&id=2290


So, then the Buddha nature spontaneously manifests as the Five Wisdoms[3] within the Rupakaya...

[3]"The very heart of the Buddhist teachings is the viewpoint that all sentient beings have Buddha nature incidentally obscured by ignorant fixation on ego. This Buddha nature in its primordial form is represented by the small figure of Samantabhadra and Samantabhadri at the top. The Buddha nature naturally manifests as the five wisdoms that are represented by the five Buddha families." http://www.nobletruth.org/Stupa.html

But, the Five Wisdoms are associated with male buddhas and their female consorts—wait, I thought Wisdom was feminine? [4]

[4] Tulku Urgyen Rinpoche answers that very question:
"If the male and female deities are indivisible, then both must have the essence endowed with the five wisdoms, right? It is not that the male has the five wisdoms and the female does not. It is taught that the natural purity of the five elements is the five female buddhas, while the natural purity of the five aggregates is the five male buddhas. This means that everything is primordially pure. It is not like something happens through meditation practice and suddenly everything becomes pure. The five elements and the five aggregates are primordially pure as the mandala of the male and female buddhas. This is known as the "all-encompassing purity of whatever appears and exists". In this context what "appears" refers to the five elements, while what "exists" to the five aggregates.

In other words, the content of experience is the five female buddhas, while that which experiences them are the five male buddhas."
— Rainbow Painting, p. 169

Let's analyze this:
Which is the purity of the elements? Female.
http://www.rigpawiki.org/index.php?titl ... le_buddhas

Which is the purity of the aggregates? Male.
http://www.rigpawiki.org/index.php?titl ... aggregates

The "content" Tulku Urgyen is then referring to is the elements (female) while that which experiences is aggregate (male).

So now you're probably thinking, "Hurray, I've just won! He proved my point because the skandas are form, feeling, perception, formations and consciousness and here he said that thoughts, forms and emotions were all feminine! BWAHAHAHA!"

I get that. With this in mind, read on:

What is the "content" that Tulku Urgyen is talking about? If the male aspect is the form, feeling, perception, formations and consciousness, what "content" is left? In my opinion, it's the actual content, which is none of these. This is where "Magic Dance" becomes useful:
http://www.shambhala.com/html/catalog/i ... -885-5.cfm

Description of Magic Dance
This is a unique and powerful presentation of the teachings of Tibetan Buddhism on the five elements: earth, water, air, fire, and space. In their gross and subtle forms, these elements combine to make up the infinite illusory display of phenomenal existence. Through teachings, stories, and his distinctive use of language, Thinley Norbu Rinpoche relates how the energies of the elements manifest within our everyday world, in individual behavior and group traditions, relationships and solitude, medicine and art. He explains their links to the five Buddha families and their respective Wisdom Dakinis, and shows how each element relates to our senses, temperament, passions, habits, and karmic potentials. This magic dance of the elements, he concludes, can be transformed through meditation practice and cultivating the calm, vast, and playful state of consciousness that he calls "playmind."

"The dakini is the embodiment of the feminine principle. The dakinis are tricky and playful, representing the basic space of fertility out of which the interplay of samsara and nirvana arises." — Work Sex Money by Chogyam Trungpa, page 227

"Here the mirror of mind is the cognitive aspect of the universal plenum of non-dual reality, and the Dakini is the flux of insubstantial reflection in the mirror." — revisiting Dowman's Tilopa quote

"Thus the totality of reality as Awareness can be represented by the Dakini alone" — revisiting Dowman's opening paragraph

"This absolute nature, dharmakaya, manifests as the subtle display of the samboghakaya dakini and the nirmanakhaya, or physical form of great female realization holders in order to benefit beings." — revisiting Chagdud Tulku


Again: "In other words, the content of experience is the five female buddhas, while that which experiences them are the five male buddhas." — revisiting Tulku Urgyen

Is it starting to make more sense to you now what I said in post #1? Thought-forms, forms and emotions are ultimately feminine (empty) and the penetrating awareness is male (aggregate). We are aggregates, correct? That is what Tulku Urgyen is referring to when he says "that which experiences them."

I am going to re-watch the Dakini Wisdom DVD later and tell you exactly what is said, so we can clear that up, too.

[padma norbu]

Just realizsed that one of Tulku Urgyen Rinpoche's sentences is interesting and I didn't analyze it:

"In this context what "appears" refers to the five elements, while what "exists" to the five aggregates."

So, what "appears" is feminine and what "exists" is masculine. This coincides with his statement of the experiencer as aggregates (male). Compare all of this with the idea of penetrating awareness being male and thought, forms and emotions being feminine, arising in space... since Samantabhadri is the wisdom dakini of emptiness and rupakaya and dharmadatu... and all the elements are the female aspect of the Five Wisdoms.The experiencer and the experience are aggregates existing in the play of rupakaya.

[padma norbu]

From the Dakini Wisdom DVD by Chagdud Tulku and translated by Lama Tsering Everest (the following is a verbatim translation from Tsering because Chagdud's English is very chopped up and wouldn't make for a good read)…

"Dakini…The term refers to the basic root of interdependence, the source of all interdependence. It does not refer to ordinary movement in space or the sky, like kites or planes or birds. But, it means the true nature, the absolute truth, the sky of pervasive emptiness, the darmata. And so, from this sky of emptiness, all occurrence arises, interdependent upon the nature of emptiness. All that arises of the nature of emptiness is inseparable from that emptiness and can not be disassociated or separated off. This basically means the interdependence of relative truth with absolute truth. It is interdependently, indissassociably, absolutely the nature of dharmata, the root nature of emptiness and that is the sky. So, when one understands these two truths inseparable, then there is a quality that arises to the understander. That quality is that oneself is benefitted by that realization and further other beings are benefitted by the impact that one has upon them and so great, beneficial activity happens. And this is one way to introduce the meaning of "dikini."

He then goes into the aggregates...

"So, in our everyday life… we hold onto things as if they are real, as if something is really happening… as if something is really a thing, a singular unit… and finally as if we are really free. Now… if you just take one of these assumptions and examine it carefully, like the believe that objects in and of themselves are a singular unit, you will find a false assumption. Just take a look at your own body… it is a conglomerate of the form aggregate. We consider it "a thing," but it isn't really a thing. Your body is your head, your torso, your hair, your organs… and if you take any one of those things… [you will find everything is made of more stuff and particles, etc.]… these are not singular units, they are composites of other things.

So, if you take it all apart and try to find a basic common denominator unit that is your body, there is none… So, the body is not a singular unit, it is foundationless, there is no common denominator. It occurs out of interdependence and is in a state of ongoing change… if you are the same person as you were when you were a baby, then you should look the same as when you were a baby… that change happened instantly, constantly [your whole life]… it is not a stagnant experience, it is an ever-happenning change until we die.

...Everything is impermanent, not only our body. [Realizing this] undoes a false assumption about our reality, because nothing is lasting, everything is impermanent. And nothing truly has freedom because everything can be affected by something else. Everything can be affected by other energies.

Evertyhing is destructible, even without choice, though we may not want to die, constantly put upon us are conditions that are destroying, that are destructive conditions… So, no matter how you look at it, the body fails the criteria of permanence of solidity of singularity and of freedom. That means it's empty.

Now, empty means "not solid." Emptiness is considered a feminine principle, but emptiness is not meant to be nothingness as if you had emptied a cup out and there is nothing left. Inseparable with this emptiness is the spontaneous appearance of it; it's actualization, it's being. So, the empty nature of mind, speech and body is certainly not nothingness because ongoing with this emptiness IS the body and the speech and the mind. By day, we go around and we operate by this triad of body, speech and mind. And when we go to sleep at night we still operate by this triad in our dreams. And also, when we die, this physical body which is a substance body of aggregates [falls apart] but the mind is not like this substance body. So the mind doesn't die at death; the mind carries on with it's body, speech and mind, just like it does in dreams… then there is rebirth."
-----------

So, I think that about covers it. Seems to all make perfect sense to me... basically, it goes back to the basis and the arising of appearances, I think. The true nature of appearances is emptiness and I think this explains why both dakas and dakinis are referred to as simply "dakini" and why Samantabhadri, the absolute dakini, is a representation of the rupakaya and why the gender keeps flipping back and forth since even the basis is empty. In dzogchen teachings, the buddha-nature is viewed as the basis of all worlds and phenomena, in the sense that the idea of "beings" and "worlds" only arises when one, out of ignorance, ignores the mind's essential condition, manufactures reference points, and clings to them as if they are real. When I look at Samantabhadra/dri, I see formless, limitless potential represented as a sky-blu man of Emptiness unceasingly making love to his consort, Wisdom, and I think ideas of impregnating the womb of space with compassionate action manifestations is an idea represented there; so the forms are male, penetrating and relative within the emptiness.

And, so anyway, like I said, I found in the introduction that Dowman interpreted "liberated into space" as 2 ways just like I came to in my own conclusions: (1) the literal rainbow body interpretation and (2) the awakening to this dakini reality which allows one to see the pure realms.

I think a thorough understanding of dakini would probably be required in order for someone to not go insane when suddenly seeing—not just theorizing—that nothing is really real and the ever-shifting nature of dakini. Downman mentioned something about this also in the introduction; that over time more precautions were taken to avoid madness, but during the time of these mahasiddhas the danger of madness in Tibet was like how we would feel about the danger of being hit by a car as we cross the street. Sort of like, "yeah, it might happen, but it's more important that I cross that street." And, though madness was a definite possibility, madmen were treated as holy men because it was believed they had seen reality as it really is and whether they were mad as a result was irrelevant.

[padma norbu]

Now, if Adamantine never posts in this thread again, I will be proven correct in what I said earlier about all of this being a "thoroughly derailing waste of time"...

Adamantine...I'm coming at this from a different angle by eliciting responses from you now rather than the opposite approach, which would be a lengthy response full of sources, links and quotes which will become a thoroughly derailing waste of time.

Either way, it helped me organize my thoughts, so clearly not a waste of time for me. However, I have actual work to do that I didn't do yesterday. Hope this was helpful, but I'm out for the rest of the day.

[Adamantine]

Hi Padma, Thank you for your responses. I appreciate them, there is much food for thought there. I have been super busy so I haven't had a chance to reflect on any of it much or to compose an adequate response, but I will when I have more than a fleeting moment.