The Buddha Witinin by Jamgon Kontrul

[Jax]

Buddha Within

Jamgon Kongtrul
 

The ultimate luminosity of Dharmakaya, absolute truth,

is nothing other than the very nature

of this uncontrived, ordinary mind.

Don't look elsewhere for the Buddha.

 

It is nothing other than the nature of this present awareness.

This is the Buddha within.

 

There are innumerable Dharma teachings.

There are many antidotes

to many different kinds of spiritual diseases.

There are many words

in the Mahamudra and Dzogchen nondual teachings.

 

But the root, the heart of all practices is included here,
in simply sustaining the luminous nature of this present awareness.

If you search elsewhere for something better,
a Buddha superior to this present awareness,
you are deluding yourself.

You are chained,
entangled in the barbed wire of hope and fear.

So give it up!

Simply sustain present wakefulness.

[Lhug-Pa]

Excellent quote Jax.

[heart]

This is Jax in a nutshell, the quote is actually almost a complete teaching. The piece Jax left out is this:

"Devotion and gathering the accumulations are the most important methods for completely realizing this teaching.
Always concentrate on devotion
To the guru, the Lord of Uddiyana,
And apply your body, speech and mind to what is virtuous"

This was from Erik Pema Kunzang's translation, and here from Surya Das translation:

"Devotion, compassion, and perfecting virtue and wisdom are the most important supportive methods for completely fulfilling this naked, nondual teaching about present awareness, the innate Dharmakaya.
So always devote yourself to spiritual practice for the benefit of others and apply yourself in body, speech, and mind to what is wholesome and virtuous."

So why would Jax want to leave out this few lines? Don't fit your agenda Jax?

/magnus

[Lhug-Pa]

Excellent rest of the quote Heart.

[heart]

Excellent rest of the quote Heart.

It is actually a complete text, or at least now it is, not a quote. A qualified master use to give direct introduction. A teaching based on this can go on for several days, at least when my Guru do it.

/magnus

[heart]

Here is the complete text, it actually looks like Jax did a quote but it looks like he taken some liberties with the translation. I am to tired to check it myself. http://www.theawakenedeye.com/view.htm

/magnus

[Jax]

Try to "recognize" Rinpoche's intent and meaning.. If you do, that's transmission of the best kind.

[Sönam]

Thank you Magnus, I did'nt had the courage to answer once more to those poor interventions that polluate all dzogchen threats. But it seems that Jax is mixing up the (ordinary) mind and the nature of mind ... how confuse he is!
As I repeat it from the beginning, his view is, at most, a Yogachara view that he tries to impose as being the Dzogchen view ... depressing

Sönam

[Malcolm]

Try to "recognize" Rinpoche's intent and meaning.. If you do, that's transmission of the best kind.

Your problem, Jax, and the reason why your teachings are complete shite, is that you are an intellectual. Not a particularly skillful one, nor especially articulate, but an intellectual nevertheless.

N

[Dronma]

I really admire all of you here, who are still dedicating your time and energy for reading and replying to Jax.
I hope that you are doing that with the intention exclusively to protect new people from such intellectual, meta-spiritual traps.
Because Jax is not going to change, and you know it.....
For reasoning of what I am saying, please see here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megalomania

[Jax]

Wow! Thank you Namdrol! I never considered myself an intellectual, but coming from you that has weight. On the other hand perhaps you may find benefit from shamatha and vipassana practice, less time reading and translating. However your intellectual grasp of the Dharma is amazing. Now balance that with "on the cushion" practice and you'll come to understand what I am sharing, non-conceptually. Then you too can teach others from insight not just dry, literal parroting of others teachings. It's interesting how you disparage so many other translators as though you know better. Your issue with the term "awareness" is a good example. If you had experiential rangjyung yeshe you would recognize "awareness" to be much more accurate than "knowledge". But you got stuck there because you try to translate Rigpa from the nuance of Sanskrit "vidya". Sanskrit had no word for Rigpa. Norbu does better with " pure noticing" and" instant presence". I am confident that when rigpa dawns upon your mindstream for the first time, you will understand what Norbu and I are pointing out. I greatly appreciate your interesting dialogues as they are so intellectually detailed.

[Malcolm]

Wow! Thank you Namdrol! I never considered myself an intellectual, but coming from you that has weight.

It's not a compliment.

Then you too can teach others from insight not just dry, literal parroting of others teachings.

That's funny, coming from you.

But you got stuck there because you try to translate Rigpa from the nuance of Sanskrit "vidya".

Actually, if you were less of an intellectual you woud understand that vidyā is the word that Tibetans translate as "rig pa". For example, the Tantra Of The Great Self-liberated Vidyā That Unravels All is translated into Tibetan as the rig pa rang grol chen po thams cad 'grol ba'i rgyud from the Sanskrit Mahā vidyā svamukti sarva ghadtita tantra

Sanskrit had no word for Rigpa.

Your ignorance is astonishing.

N

[Jax]

Your translation is being influenced by the conceptualized vidya as used in all sorts of (gelugpa) translations. They are not close to "rigpa", however they are close to "knowledge", a very poor choice. No translators of significance consider Rigpa to be translated as "knowledge". That's because you think Rigpa is some kind of intellectual knowledge. More time with vipassana practice and you'll catch my drift. Love you man!

[Malcolm]

Your translation is being influenced by the conceptualized vidya as used in all sorts of (gelugpa) translations.

Umm no, it is being influenced by the title of numerous dzogchen tantras where vidyā is translated as rig pa. Two upadesha tantras bear the term vidyā for rigpa in their Sanskrit titles, as well as many other titles of tantras. For example, in the dgongs pa zang thal, there is a text entitled the cittavidyā praveśa tantra or in Tibetan sems dang rig pa dbye ba'i rgyud or in English the The Tantra of Distinguishing Mind (citta) and Vidyā (rigpa).

These days there is a movement to just leave the term rigpa in Tibetan. I prefer vidyā because we commonly use terms like dharmakāya, etc.

But your assertion that there is no term for rig pa in Sanskrit is truly humorous and completely false. Saying such things just makes you look like a fool.

N

[Sönam]

They are not close to "rigpa", however they are close to "knowledge", a very poor choice. No translators of significance consider Rigpa to be translated as "knowledge".

Once more it is not true ... J-L Achard considere it as knowledge, also he preferes another translation. But maybe he is not significant.

Sönam

nb : ... and I will plead for your exclusion, because of that : "On the other hand perhaps you may find benefit from shamatha and vipassana practice, less time reading and translating. However your intellectual grasp of the Dharma is amazing. Now balance that with "on the cushion" practice and you'll come to understand what I am sharing, non-conceptually. Then you too can teach others from insight not just dry, literal parroting of others teachings."
I'm not a student of Namdrol, but I've learn so much from him that I feel offended by such allegations.

[Jax]

Jean Luc, who I know well, would agree with "knowledge" for Rigpa. As they both think rigpa is some kind of knowledge. Jean Luc is not a realized teacher, he's an emotional basket case. Malcolm is ok, but understands Dzogchen only intellectually. But I like him alot.

[Pero]

Jean Luc, who I know well, would agree with "knowledge" for Rigpa. As they both think rigpa is some kind of knowledge. Jean Luc is not a realized teacher, he's an emotional basket case. Malcolm is ok, but understands Dzogchen only intellectually. But I like him alot.

I suppose you think the same for Chogyal Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche then (not surprising perhaps). Since he pretty much says the same thing. Also Tony Duff says rig pa = vidya = knowledge (among other things). But perhaps he is not important enough either. If nothing else you can just see it from the term rig 'dzin which is vidyadhara.

[heart]

I really admire all of you here, who are still dedicating your time and energy for reading and replying to Jax.
I hope that you are doing that with the intention exclusively to protect new people from such intellectual, meta-spiritual traps.
Because Jax is not going to change, and you know it.....
For reasoning of what I am saying, please see here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megalomania

Hi Dronma, yes, I am afraid you might be correct.

/magnus

[gregkavarnos]

Excellent rest of the quote Heart.

I wonder if purposeful deception is part of the Mahamudra/Dzogchen teachings?

[Malcolm]

Jean Luc, who I know well, would agree with "knowledge" for Rigpa. As they both think rigpa is some kind of knowledge.

So in fact does my Guru, Chogyal Namkhai Norbu -- in fact he said so again just last night. "Rigpa is not the basis, the basis is called bodhicitta; rigpa is one's knowledge of that basis and the ability to to remain in that knowledge."

It is also true that ChNN translates rig pa as instant presence. The term rigpa gets used in a variety of ways in Dzogchen texts, which is why Vimalamitra articulated five different forms of rigpa.

As for awareness, that bests translates shes pa as in thamal gyi shes pa i.e. ordinary awareness or ma bcos shes pa skad cig ma, momentary unfabricated awareness, etc. Sometimes shes pa means "to understand" when used as a verb. In other contexts it is better to translate shes pa as cognition, and so on. Tibetan is a language that is very synonym poor, so the same words have to do a lot of work in many different contexts.

N