Dharma Wheel

A Buddhist discussion forum on Mahayana and Vajrayana Buddhism
It is currently Tue Dec 23, 2014 4:55 am

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Forum rules


Please click here to view the forum rules



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 76 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun Apr 01, 2012 7:46 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am
Posts: 12736
Will wrote:
Namdrol wrote:
Mariusz wrote:
Is it possible to progress through...
without necessity of sutra methods or not?


From the point of view of Nyingma, Sakya and so on, definitely.


N. - you mean that the sutric ethical, dialectical & meditative foundation are never used as a preliminary practice? Surely in every lifetime those basic methods & practices must be recapitulated by everyone? For the very advanced that revisiting of such basic practices may take only a few years (or less?), but all must have that foundation.


I never engaged in them. I entered Vajrayāna from the beginning without engaging in lam rim teachings.

_________________
http://www.atikosha.org
http://www.bhaisajya.net
http://www.bhaisajya.guru
http://www.sakyapa.net
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔

How can you not practice the highest Dharma
at this time of obtaining a perfect human body?

-- Jetsun Dragpa Gyaltsen


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 01, 2012 8:05 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2011 9:36 am
Posts: 230
Namdrol wrote:
I never engaged in them. I entered Vajrayāna from the beginning without engaging in lam rim teachings.


Entering the Vajrayana means generating actual Tantric bodhichitta which depends upon refuge, renunciation, universal love, universal compassion and conventional bodhichitta, all of which depend on Sutra teachings. Simply learning about the Vajrayana is not entering it. It's impossible to actually enter the Vajrayana without these actual minds that are generated by meditation on Sutra, and all the necessary methods are contained within Lamrim, according to the lineage of Atisha and Je Tsongkhapa.

Both Atisha and Je Tsongkhapa are very clear on the necessity to build the foundation for Tantric practices by training in renunciation, bodhichitta and the correct view of emptiness, otherwise it's like trying to put the roof on a house that has no foundations and no walls.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 01, 2012 8:30 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am
Posts: 12736
Tsongkhapafan wrote:
according to the lineage of Atisha and Je Tsongkhapa.


According to the Sakya lineage, there are two kinds of persons, those who require the gradual training you mention (rim gyis pas), and those who are able to enter Vajrayāna teachings immediately without prior training (cig car bas). These two types of persons are clearly demonstrated in Aryadeva's commentary on the Pañcakrama.

Thus, it is best to understand that there are different approaches for different people.

N

_________________
http://www.atikosha.org
http://www.bhaisajya.net
http://www.bhaisajya.guru
http://www.sakyapa.net
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔

How can you not practice the highest Dharma
at this time of obtaining a perfect human body?

-- Jetsun Dragpa Gyaltsen


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Apr 01, 2012 11:36 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 17, 2011 7:12 pm
Posts: 370
Mariusz wrote:
Tom wrote:
Obviously from his writings it appears Tsongkhapa thought otherwise :-)!
It is not so obvious. Here you have a quote on the analysis (sutra methods) which is not performed during HYTantra:

(Tsongkhapa's Final Exposition of Wisdom; page.158) Our own system is as follows: Even in the context of Highest Yoga [Mantra] the system (Vajrayana) of generating understanding of the view must be done in accordance with what occurs in the Middle Way texts. With respect to how it is sustained, on some occasions during states subsequent to meditative equipoise on the stages of generation and completion,
one takes suchness to mind within analyzing it, but when those on the stage of completion who have attained the capacity to put penetrative focus on essential points in the body sustain suchness in meditative
equipoise, although they definitely must meditate within setting [the mind] in the context of the view, they do not perform the analytical meditation of special insight as it occurs in other texts. Therefore, with respect to that occasion, do not posit analytical meditation as one-pointed meditation on suchness from within the context of the view ancillary to stabilizing [meditation].


I am not sure of your point - what you have quoted is standard Gelugpa vajrayana instruction and would not surprise anyone familiar with these practices. Tsongkhapa's position on the need for sutra practice, specifically renunciation, bodhichitta and correct view in relation to tantric practice is obvious and clear in his text "A Book of Three Inspirations." I am not sure if Mullins translated the whole text but if he did you can read it for yourself there.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 02, 2012 12:18 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 17, 2011 7:12 pm
Posts: 370
Namdrol wrote:
Will wrote:

N. - you mean that the sutric ethical, dialectical & meditative foundation are never used as a preliminary practice? Surely in every lifetime those basic methods & practices must be recapitulated by everyone? For the very advanced that revisiting of such basic practices may take only a few years (or less?), but all must have that foundation.


I never engaged in them. I entered Vajrayāna from the beginning without engaging in lam rim teachings.


Still, even if introduced later aren't sutra topics such as Abhidharma foundational for Tantric practice in Sakya? Actually, I have found Sakya lamas to be more concerned about their Vajrayana students understanding of basic Abhidharma topics even more than Gelugpa lamas.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 02, 2012 12:30 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2010 6:28 am
Posts: 806
Mariusz wrote:
It is the potential to become a buddha for every sentient being.

As I see it, the word "potential" still implies change, but buddhanature does not change when a sentient being becomes a Buddha.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 02, 2012 12:36 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am
Posts: 12736
Tom wrote:
Namdrol wrote:
Will wrote:

N. - you mean that the sutric ethical, dialectical & meditative foundation are never used as a preliminary practice? Surely in every lifetime those basic methods & practices must be recapitulated by everyone? For the very advanced that revisiting of such basic practices may take only a few years (or less?), but all must have that foundation.


I never engaged in them. I entered Vajrayāna from the beginning without engaging in lam rim teachings.


Still, even if introduced later aren't sutra topics such as Abhidharma foundational for Tantric practice in Sakya? Actually, I have found Sakya lamas to be more concerned about their Vajrayana students understanding of basic Abhidharma topics even more than Gelugpa lamas.


Generally in Sakya, they backfill. In other words, people are given abhisheka right away, and then instructed to learn whatever they need to contextualize their Vajrayāna practice.

_________________
http://www.atikosha.org
http://www.bhaisajya.net
http://www.bhaisajya.guru
http://www.sakyapa.net
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔

How can you not practice the highest Dharma
at this time of obtaining a perfect human body?

-- Jetsun Dragpa Gyaltsen


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 02, 2012 1:19 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jun 25, 2011 3:25 pm
Posts: 58
Quote:
According to the Sakya lineage, there are two kinds of persons, those who require the gradual training you mention (rim gyis pas), and those who are able to enter Vajrayāna teachings immediately without prior training (cig car bas). These two types of persons are clearly demonstrated in Aryadeva's commentary on the Pañcakrama.

Thus, it is best to understand that there are different approaches for different people.

N


 རིམ་གྱིས་པ་ (rim gyis pa)
 <noun> "That which proceeds gradually" or "gradual type". One of a pair of terms. The opp. is cig car ba, that which proceeds without any stages, that which goes at once.
In the language of the buddhist tantras, two types of practitioner are identified: the rim gyis pa is the gradual type, the person who goes to liberation by stages; the cig car ba is the sudden type, the one who goes to it immediately. Acc. Tenga Rinpoche, the general distinction is as follows. The gradual type person is someone who has not developed a connection to the practice previously or who has only developed a small connection to it. Because of this, they have to work at the practice again and again before it comes to fruit. A sudden type is someone who has developed a great connection to or realization of the practice previously and therefore, when they meet the teaching again, they are capable of realizing it all at once.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 02, 2012 1:23 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am
Posts: 12736
Totoro wrote:
Quote:
According to the Sakya lineage, there are two kinds of persons, those who require the gradual training you mention (rim gyis pas), and those who are able to enter Vajrayāna teachings immediately without prior training (cig car bas). These two types of persons are clearly demonstrated in Aryadeva's commentary on the Pañcakrama.

Thus, it is best to understand that there are different approaches for different people.

N


 རིམ་གྱིས་པ་ (rim gyis pa)
 <noun> "That which proceeds gradually" or "gradual type". One of a pair of terms. The opp. is cig car ba, that which proceeds without any stages, that which goes at once.
In the language of the buddhist tantras, two types of practitioner are identified: the rim gyis pa is the gradual type, the person who goes to liberation by stages; the cig car ba is the sudden type, the one who goes to it immediately. Acc. Tenga Rinpoche, the general distinction is as follows. The gradual type person is someone who has not developed a connection to the practice previously or who has only developed a small connection to it. Because of this, they have to work at the practice again and again before it comes to fruit. A sudden type is someone who has developed a great connection to or realization of the practice previously and therefore, when they meet the teaching again, they are capable of realizing it all at once.


This is a little different than the standard disctintion between these two.

_________________
http://www.atikosha.org
http://www.bhaisajya.net
http://www.bhaisajya.guru
http://www.sakyapa.net
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔

How can you not practice the highest Dharma
at this time of obtaining a perfect human body?

-- Jetsun Dragpa Gyaltsen


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 02, 2012 2:32 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jun 25, 2011 3:25 pm
Posts: 58
Namdrol wrote:
Totoro wrote:
Quote:
According to the Sakya lineage, there are two kinds of persons, those who require the gradual training you mention (rim gyis pas), and those who are able to enter Vajrayāna teachings immediately without prior training (cig car bas). These two types of persons are clearly demonstrated in Aryadeva's commentary on the Pañcakrama.

Thus, it is best to understand that there are different approaches for different people.

N


 རིམ་གྱིས་པ་ (rim gyis pa)
 <noun> "That which proceeds gradually" or "gradual type". One of a pair of terms. The opp. is cig car ba, that which proceeds without any stages, that which goes at once.
In the language of the buddhist tantras, two types of practitioner are identified: the rim gyis pa is the gradual type, the person who goes to liberation by stages; the cig car ba is the sudden type, the one who goes to it immediately. Acc. Tenga Rinpoche, the general distinction is as follows. The gradual type person is someone who has not developed a connection to the practice previously or who has only developed a small connection to it. Because of this, they have to work at the practice again and again before it comes to fruit. A sudden type is someone who has developed a great connection to or realization of the practice previously and therefore, when they meet the teaching again, they are capable of realizing it all at once.


This is a little different than the standard disctintion between these two.


I got that from the Illuminator dictionary. Please could you elaborate on the difference or what the standard disctiontion? How does one identify which kind of these two practitioners one is? Does the Guru decide? Thanks.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 02, 2012 5:37 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 08, 2010 1:55 pm
Posts: 3142
Tsongkhapafan wrote:
Both Atisha and Je Tsongkhapa are very clear on the necessity to build the foundation for Tantric practices by training in renunciation, bodhichitta and the correct view of emptiness, otherwise it's like trying to put the roof on a house that has no foundations and no walls.


Within the direct introduction in Dzogchen it is completely possible to have a direct experience of the true meaning of renunciation, bodhicitta and emptiness. The meaning of these three words are actually very closely connected with the natural state. Intellectual studies are helpful but they don't actually help that much with the direct experience.

/magnus

_________________
"To reject practice by saying, 'it is conceptual!' is the path of fools. A tendency of the inexperienced and something to be avoided."
- Longchenpa


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 02, 2012 7:30 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Apr 12, 2010 12:08 pm
Posts: 708
Sherab wrote:
Mariusz wrote:
It is the potential to become a buddha for every sentient being.

As I see it, the word "potential" still implies change, but buddhanature does not change when a sentient being becomes a Buddha.
Yes, sometimes it is necessary to use this word, as other reference points as weel, for a sentient being to be trained until the final collapse of all reference points. There will be 5 faults of not studying teachings on Buddha nature: (1) faintheartedness because not be aware that everybody has the same potential as Buddha for attainment of Perfect Enlightenment which is called the Buddha Nature (2) denigrating inferior sentient beings because not be aware of Buddha Nature in every sentient beings (3) clinging to what is not actual because of not be aware of infinitive qualities which comes from the Buddha Nature such 5 wisdoms of Buddha (4) denying the actual dharma which should be studied from the highest perspective of Buddha Nature without extremes from the Middle Path (madhyamaka), conceptuality and dualistic mind (5) excessive attachment to oneself because not be aware of equanimity of oneself and others in having the same Buddha Nature as the potential for their future Buddhahood


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 02, 2012 7:35 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Apr 12, 2010 12:08 pm
Posts: 708
Totoro wrote:

 རིམ་གྱིས་པ་ (rim gyis pa)
 <noun> "That which proceeds gradually" or "gradual type". One of a pair of terms. The opp. is cig car ba, that which proceeds without any stages, that which goes at once.
In the language of the buddhist tantras, two types of practitioner are identified: the rim gyis pa is the gradual type, the person who goes to liberation by stages; the cig car ba is the sudden type, the one who goes to it immediately. Acc. Tenga Rinpoche, the general distinction is as follows. The gradual type person is someone who has not developed a connection to the practice previously or who has only developed a small connection to it. Because of this, they have to work at the practice again and again before it comes to fruit. A sudden type is someone who has developed a great connection to or realization of the practice previously and therefore, when they meet the teaching again, they are capable of realizing it all at once.
For this sudden type the mixing with sutra is unnecessary after the initiation was given. The connection can be because Mahayana sutra practice from previous lifetimes as I wrote.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 02, 2012 7:44 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Apr 12, 2010 12:08 pm
Posts: 708
heart wrote:
Tsongkhapafan wrote:
Both Atisha and Je Tsongkhapa are very clear on the necessity to build the foundation for Tantric practices by training in renunciation, bodhichitta and the correct view of emptiness, otherwise it's like trying to put the roof on a house that has no foundations and no walls.


Within the direct introduction in Dzogchen it is completely possible to have a direct experience of the true meaning of renunciation, bodhicitta and emptiness. The meaning of these three words are actually very closely connected with the natural state. Intellectual studies are helpful but they don't actually help that much with the direct experience.

/magnus
Dzogchen according to Innermost Essence does not need gradual methods of 4 empties of humans according to HYT as you know.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 02, 2012 9:43 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2011 12:49 am
Posts: 543
Mariusz wrote:
Namdrol wrote:
Well, what Tsongkhapa is saying here is that first you generate the view in accordance with Madhyamaka texts. Then, outside of the context of creation and completion one still engages in Madhyamaka analysis.

However, advanced meditators in the completion stage have no further need to engage in such analysis and so they don't.

N
Yes. For me it is also. So in this case the HYT methods are sufficient alone without any need for the sutra adding even according to Tsongkhapa . No necessity for mixing the both.


Je Rinpoche Taught the Union of Sutra and Tantra to try and dispel the mistaken Idea that the two are contradictory. :reading:

_________________
Abandoning Dharma is, in the final analysis, disparaging the Hinayana because of the Mahayana; favoring the Hinayana on account of the Mahayana; playing off sutra against tantra; playing off the four classes of the tantras against each other; favoring one of the Tibetan schools—the Sakya, Gelug, Kagyu, or Nyingma—and disparaging the rest; and so on. In other words, we abandon Dharma any time we favor our own tenets and disparage the rest.

Liberation in the Palm of your hand~Kyabje Pabongkha Rinpoche.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 02, 2012 10:46 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2011 9:36 am
Posts: 230
heart wrote:
Tsongkhapafan wrote:
Both Atisha and Je Tsongkhapa are very clear on the necessity to build the foundation for Tantric practices by training in renunciation, bodhichitta and the correct view of emptiness, otherwise it's like trying to put the roof on a house that has no foundations and no walls.


Within the direct introduction in Dzogchen it is completely possible to have a direct experience of the true meaning of renunciation, bodhicitta and emptiness. The meaning of these three words are actually very closely connected with the natural state. Intellectual studies are helpful but they don't actually help that much with the direct experience.

/magnus


I think we'll have to agree to disagree on the subject of direct introduction ;) as you know, Gelugpas (and Sakya Pandita) don't accept it. Thanks for your reply, though :smile: I agree that intellectual study doesn't help if you don't apply it. That's why it's important to be both a scholar and a yogi.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 02, 2012 11:34 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jun 25, 2011 3:25 pm
Posts: 58
Tsongkhapafan wrote:

I think we'll have to agree to disagree on the subject of direct introduction ;) as you know, Gelugpas (and Sakya Pandita) don't accept it. Thanks for your reply, though :smile: I agree that intellectual study doesn't help if you don't apply it. That's why it's important to be both a scholar and a yogi.


From what you said, Je Tsongkhapa and Sakya Pandita doesn't accept 'direct introduction' for reasons of their own. The different traditions each have their own theory and practice and techniques, and clearly they all work since they all produce highly realized if not enlightened beings. So it puzzles me when they refute each other with valid reasons. If it works, it must be right, right? Or am I too simple?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 02, 2012 12:59 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am
Posts: 12736
Tsongkhapafan wrote:
... (and Sakya Pandita) don't accept it.



This is not true. Sakya Pandita accepted direct introduction, but only subsequent to having received empowerments. The fourth empowerment is in fact a direct introduction.

_________________
http://www.atikosha.org
http://www.bhaisajya.net
http://www.bhaisajya.guru
http://www.sakyapa.net
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔

How can you not practice the highest Dharma
at this time of obtaining a perfect human body?

-- Jetsun Dragpa Gyaltsen


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 02, 2012 1:52 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2011 9:36 am
Posts: 230
Namdrol wrote:
Tsongkhapafan wrote:
... (and Sakya Pandita) don't accept it.



This is not true. Sakya Pandita accepted direct introduction, but only subsequent to having received empowerments. The fourth empowerment is in fact a direct introduction.


The fourth empowerment is not a direct introduction, it's a description of the Spiritual Master's experience as a pointing out instruction that gives powerful blessings, but not a mystical transfer of his complete experience. We can receive strong blessings that ignite spiritual experiences if we keep pure view of our Guru, but he or she cannot directly transfer all their experience of enlightened wisdom into our minds in an 'instant enlightenment'.

Regarding Sakya Pandita, didn't he say that Dzogchen was not Buddhism?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 02, 2012 2:03 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am
Posts: 12736
Tsongkhapafan wrote:

The fourth empowerment is not a direct introduction, it's a description of the Spiritual Master's experience as a pointing out instruction that gives powerful blessings, but not a mystical transfer of his complete experience.



A direct introduction is not a mystical transfer of a master's complete experience. It is a pointing out instruction. It does not transfer the master's realization (that is impossible), it communicates the student's own state.

Actually the word translated as "introduction" and "pointing out" is the same word i.e. ngo phrad.

Quote:
Regarding Sakya Pandita, didn't he say that Dzogchen was not Buddhism?


Sakya Pandita criticized certain trends he saw in the Nyingma (much in the same way that Gorampa and Shakya Chogden criticized certain trends in Gelug), but he never stated that Dzogchen was not Buddhism, quite the opposite. He stated in fact that he had received Dzogchen teachings and respected them, as is stated plainly in his Analysis of the Three Vows. In fact, Sapan reserved most of his criticisms for the Kagyu school, spending very little time on the Nyingma school. After all, Sapan is a very important master for Vakjrakilaya teachings. Dzogchen is the ancestral teaching of the Khon family.

_________________
http://www.atikosha.org
http://www.bhaisajya.net
http://www.bhaisajya.guru
http://www.sakyapa.net
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔

How can you not practice the highest Dharma
at this time of obtaining a perfect human body?

-- Jetsun Dragpa Gyaltsen


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 76 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group