Enlightenment and compassion

[Evdot]

If enlightenment is void of feeling, then how can enlightened people feel compassion?

[Ayu]

There you found out the evidence by yourself that enlightened living persons are not empty of feeling.
Maybe you shouldn't confuse nirvana with buddhahood. The former is a state beyond existence and the latter is the condition of a person.
I hope other users can explain it better.

[Johnny Dangerous]

If enlightenment is void of feeling, then how can enlightened people feel compassion?

Who said it's "void of feeling"?

Anyway, compassion is not an emotion or phenomena, but the manifestation of viewing the relative samsaric reality from the side of the absolute, enlightenment, etc.- at least that's what a Buddhas compassion is supposed to be like. If you want the blow by blow check out the Uttaratantra.

So, enlightened beings are not said to have "feelings", but naturally emanate compassion and naturally produce what is needed according to the capacities of beings - without effort.

[Astus]

If enlightenment is void of feeling, then how can enlightened people feel compassion?

Enlightenment is about the freedom from the delusion of self and thus the end of all attachment. Feeling is not the problem, it is the clinging to and identification with a feeling that causes suffering. Compassion is very much present all along the path and at the culmination as well.

'Mahamudra is nondual awareness that transcends intellect; it is nonconceptual, lucid, like all-pervading space. Though manifesting boundless compassion, it is devoid of self-nature. It is like the reflection of the moon on the lake’s surface.'
(Maitripa, quoted in Mahamudra the Moonlight, p 94)

'The spirit of enlightenment [bodhichitta] is defined as the union of compassion and emptiness, which is the quintessence of the path, the luster of unceasing compassion that cannot bear the suffering of sentient beings, and the nondual awareness that cognizes compassion as being empty of any essence or self-nature. This is the essence of Mahayana Buddhism. The Hevajra tantra comments:

The union of emptiness and compassion
Is described as the spirit of enlightenment.
The Vajrapanjara explains:
The meditation on the union
Of emptiness and compassion
Is indeed the teaching
Of the Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha.

The Samputa says:
The nondiscriminatory simplicity [of mind]
Is described as wisdom;
That which fulfills the wishes of sentient beings [without exception],
The way a wish-granting gem does, [is described] as compassion.

Saraha states:
He who seeks emptiness without compassion
Will not realize the supreme path;
Yet he who meditates mainly on compassion
Will not realize liberation.
He who unifies the two
Will neither remain in samsara nor in nirvana,

Savari declares:
He who has attained nonevaluating awareness,
Who is unable to bear the misery of confused sentient beings,
And who sheds tears of compassion
While working for their benefit,
Turns concern for himself
Into concern for others.'
(Mahamudra the Moonlight, p 350)

'Je Gomchung comments:
Postabsorption at the one-pointed stage is solid;
Postabsorption at the nondiscriminatory stage is a perceived illusion;
Postabsorption at the one-flavor stage is the awareness of emptiness;
Postabsorption at the nonmeditation stage is dynamic compassion.
...
Line four shows that because absorption and postabsorption are blended, no distinct postabsorption as such exists. Yet, nondiscriminatory compassion emerges representing a dynamic attainment. Hence the term “dynamic compassion” for the postabsorptive perception.'
(Mahamudra the Moonlight, p 369)

[SilenceMonkey]

Anyway, compassion is not an emotion or phenomena, but the manifestation of viewing the relative samsaric reality from the side of the absolute, enlightenment, etc.- at least that's what a Buddhas compassion is supposed to be like. If you want the blow by blow check out the Uttaratantra.

You're probably referring to absolute compassion? I think relative bodhicitta, at least, comes with a host of powerful feelings. For example, the classic definition of compassion is sadness upon seeing or hearing about the suffering of others... But you're absolutely right the way buddhas experience compassion is certainly of a different caliber than ordinary beings.

[PadmaVonSamba]

If enlightenment is void of feeling, then how can enlightened people feel compassion?

We experience the suffering of samsara
because of the attachment we have to feelings.
For example, being angry and carrying a grudge.
But being enlightened isn’t void of feeling.
Rather, there’s no attachment.
You can experience total happiness without relying on happiness.
You can feel total sadness without dwelling in sadness.
The literal meaning of the English language word is
Com (with) Psssion (suffering), so it literally means to share someone’s suffering.
If you are suffering, I would also feel the pain of your suffering.
An enlightened person can feel that pain but without suffering. How is that possible?
It’s like tropical birds that enjoy eating the seeds of very hot chili peppers. If you or I eat the seeds, it burns our mouth. But tropical birds taste the same seeds, taste the flavor, but they don’t feel a burning mouth.

[Danny]

Compassion is baked into the cake of enlightenment. Then there's indetermiment compassion (vagueness) or ignorance that belongs to mind. One is clear and pure, the other muddy and impure. Like 100,000 colored sprinkles on the cake.
The trick is to understand the difference, then just eat the cake as one taste as "cake" and try not to feel too sick.

Regards

[haha]

Nothing felt indeed could be the enlightenment.

Enlightened people feel compassion because of their past training in bodhicitta/compassion. Or it could be that there is no self and it happens spontaneously. Just like when one touches the fire, there is spontaneous reaction; no need to train. Generally, if one has kept something for ten months inside own body (i.e. talking about motherhood), one may have spontaneous compassion for "that thing" at least for sometime.

[White Sakura]

'Mahamudra is nondual awareness that transcends intellect; it is nonconceptual, lucid, like all-pervading space. Though manifesting boundless compassion, it is devoid of self-nature. It is like the reflection of the moon on the lake’s surface.'
(Maitripa, quoted in Mahamudra the Moonlight, p 94)

just a question to this quote, since I do not know that text you quoted, but I am so fascinated to this analogy with the moon. I suppose, the title of that script refers to the analogy? And is it in Mahamudra understood in the same way as it is explained in the Prajnaparamita Sutras,and later the Mahayana texts?
Because I once heard an explanation about comparing the Moon to the Dharmakaya... and, I don´t remember exactly, the rays to the sambhogakaya. Which confused me a lot.

Because I understand the analogy in a way that it is not about the moon. But about the nature of the appearance in the water. Same as the comparison with the rainbow. An appearance of something that is not really "there". I think this understanding is the essential teaching which is basic for a mahamudra and tantra practitioner.
So are there different ways the moon-reflection-in-water-analogy is used to explain different teachings?

[Astus]

just a question to this quote, since I do not know that text you quoted, but I am so fascinated to this analogy with the moon. I suppose, the title of that script refers to the analogy? And is it in Mahamudra understood in the same way as it is explained in the Prajnaparamita Sutras,and later the Mahayana texts?

Here "moonlight" refers to mahamudra itself.

"I will present an eloquent explanation of this moonlight [Mahamudra].
In its full phase it will contain the meanings of the sütras and tantras
And reveal the true nature of reality
As clearly as the outline of “the rabbit” [in the moon].
Let there be peace in those who wander in the darkness of delusion!"
(Mahamudra the Moonlight, p 5)

So are there different ways the moon-reflection-in-water-analogy is used to explain different teachings?

The analogy of "water moon" is a different one.

[White Sakura]

The analogy of "water moon" is a different one.

can you quote it and explain? The text seems to be not secret, since you quote it often?

[Astus]

can you quote it and explain? The text seems to be not secret, since you quote it often?

I don't know what you want quoted, it is a common analogy for the illusory nature of phenomena. It is not elaborated upon by Tashi Namgyal.

[GrapeLover]

'Mahamudra is nondual awareness that transcends intellect; it is nonconceptual, lucid, like all-pervading space. Though manifesting boundless compassion, it is devoid of self-nature. It is like the reflection of the moon on the lake’s surface.'
(Maitripa, quoted in Mahamudra the Moonlight, p 94)

just a question to this quote, since I do not know that text you quoted, but I am so fascinated to this analogy with the moon. I suppose, the title of that script refers to the analogy? And is it in Mahamudra understood in the same way as it is explained in the Prajnaparamita Sutras,and later the Mahayana texts?
Because I once heard an explanation about comparing the Moon to the Dharmakaya... and, I don´t remember exactly, the rays to the sambhogakaya. Which confused me a lot.

Because I understand the analogy in a way that it is not about the moon. But about the nature of the appearance in the water. Same as the comparison with the rainbow. An appearance of something that is not really "there". I think this understanding is the essential teaching which is basic for a mahamudra and tantra practitioner.
So are there different ways the moon-reflection-in-water-analogy is used to explain different teachings?

As far as I am aware, the other explanation you mention usually features the Sun—Chögyam Trunga Rinpoche presented it as the Sun itself being dharmakaya; the rays which naturally and spontaneously arise from the dharmakaya Sun are sambhogakaya; and the physical effects of those rays hitting the earth are nirmanakaya.

Tulku Urgyen Rinpoche’s presentation was that the dharmakaya is like the empty space or sky; the rays of the Sun travelling in it are like sambhogakaya; and the rainbow that results from the rays interacting with the potentiality of the sky is nirmanakaya.

And then the other moon metaphor, as you mention, is about how the appearance of the Moon reflected in a lake is illusory appearance only and no actual substantial moon could be found in the lake.

[White Sakura]

can you quote it and explain? The text seems to be not secret, since you quote it often?

I don't know what you want quoted, it is a common analogy for the illusory nature of phenomena. It is not elaborated upon by Tashi Namgyal.

but this is the traditional analogy. I read here in the forum, it comes from the Prajnaparamita sutras. I know it from the texts of Mahayana Masters and modern Tibetan masters also use it often in modern explanations on emptiness.
I understood you wanted to say that in Mahamudra the moonlight the moonlight is used for another analogy? If not, I am just happy because I like the analogy very much in the common way explaining it. So that would mean the title of the book refers to that traditional analogy.

[White Sakura]

As far as I am aware, the other explanation you mention usually features the Sun—Chögyam Trunga Rinpoche presented it as the Sun itself being dharmakaya; the rays which naturally and spontaneously arise from the dharmakaya Sun are sambhogakaya; and the physical effects of those rays hitting the earth are nirmanakaya.

Tulku Urgyen Rinpoche’s presentation was that the dharmakaya is like the empty space or sky; the rays of the Sun travelling in it are like sambhogakaya; and the rainbow that results from the rays interacting with the potentiality of the sky is nirmanakaya.

And then the other moon metaphor, as you mention, is about how the appearance of the Moon reflected in a lake is illusory appearance only and no actual substantial moon could be found in the lake.

great, thanks. So I was right in the discussion I had. I think the basic teaching is to understand emptiness with the help of the moon-reflection-analogy and the other similes.

The teaching you quoted from Trungpa und Tulku Urgyen Rinpoche should not be mixed up with that. And I think it is a teaching on an advanced level.

[White Sakura]

So are there different ways the moon-reflection-in-water-analogy is used to explain different teachings?

The analogy of "water moon" is a different one.

this is why I thought there is another water-moon-analogy.Different from the common traditional one.

[Astus]

I understood you wanted to say that in Mahamudra the moonlight the moonlight is used for another analogy? If not, I am just happy because I like the analogy very much in the common way explaining it. So that would mean the title of the book refers to that traditional analogy.

The word moonlight in the title refers to the enlightened state of mahamudra, to the clarity of the mind. The analogy of the water moon is not related to it.

[White Sakura]

I understood you wanted to say that in Mahamudra the moonlight the moonlight is used for another analogy? If not, I am just happy because I like the analogy very much in the common way explaining it. So that would mean the title of the book refers to that traditional analogy.

The word moonlight in the title refers to the enlightened state of mahamudra, to the clarity of the mind. The analogy of the water moon is not related to it.

ok I understood, it is just an analogy for clarity. So it is not an analogy which could be mixed up with the other one.