How is shentong different from tirthika doctrine

Forum for discussion of Tibetan Buddhism. Questions specific to one school are best posted in the appropriate sub-forum.
User avatar
Johnny Dangerous
Global Moderator
Posts: 17089
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 10:58 pm
Location: Olympia WA
Contact:

Re: How is shentong different from tirthika doctrine

Post by Johnny Dangerous »

Danny wrote: Sun Dec 06, 2020 2:33 am
tobes wrote: Sun Dec 06, 2020 1:56 am Very nailed Malcolm. :good:
Hang on a moment moon reflected in water!
M’s assertion/non assertion is established view.
It’s how Prasaṅgika negate opponents.
I.e. don’t forward a position to be refuted.
It’s called the four way Mula way of arguing. But is still a “view”, a philosophical position.
Yes, but it's consistent with the entire Buddhist tradition really. You can't even count the number of places in the Pali Canon where the Buddha outright and pointedly refuses to answer ontological questions. In that sense, the Prasangika approach is not controversial, and is part of a thread that can be found throughout the tradition. Making statements about the ontological positivity of Nirvana seem less so...more of a niche.

For example:

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html

I'm not trying to use Pali sources as the litmus test, only to say that this "view" is pretty consistent throughout Buddhism, whereas the view of assigning qualities to nirvana etc. is significantly less common.
Meditate upon Bodhicitta when afflicted by disease

Meditate upon Bodhicitta when sad

Meditate upon Bodhicitta when suffering occurs

Meditate upon Bodhicitta when you are scared

-Khunu Lama
Danny
Posts: 1043
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2020 12:43 pm

Re: How is shentong different from tirthika doctrine

Post by Danny »

Johnny Dangerous wrote: Sun Dec 06, 2020 2:52 am
Danny wrote: Sun Dec 06, 2020 2:33 am
tobes wrote: Sun Dec 06, 2020 1:56 am Very nailed Malcolm. :good:
Hang on a moment moon reflected in water!
M’s assertion/non assertion is established view.
It’s how Prasaṅgika negate opponents.
I.e. don’t forward a position to be refuted.
It’s called the four way Mula way of arguing. But is still a “view”, a philosophical position.
Yes, but it's consistent with the entire Buddhist tradition really. You can't even count the number of places in the Pali Canon where the Buddha outright and pointedly refuses to answer ontological questions. In that sense, the Prasangika approach is not controversial, and is part of a thread that can be found throughout the tradition. Making statements about the ontological positivity of Nirvana seem less so...more of a niche.
Yes,
Nice post JD.
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: How is shentong different from tirthika doctrine

Post by Malcolm »

Danny wrote: Sun Dec 06, 2020 2:33 am
tobes wrote: Sun Dec 06, 2020 1:56 am Very nailed Malcolm. :good:
Hang on a moment moon reflected in water!
M’s assertion/non assertion is established view.
It’s how Prasaṅgika negate opponents.
I.e. don’t forward a position to be refuted.
It’s called the four way Mula way of arguing. But is still a “view”, a philosophical position.
Any philosophical position necessarily entails a proposition concerning existence or nonexistence. I have never made a proposition concerning either. If someone puts forth such a proposition, they are at fault. Since I have never put forward any such proposition, I am free from fault. Dependent origination alone frees one from the tangle of views.

Nevertheless, I still look both ways when crossing the street.
Donny
Posts: 108
Joined: Thu Dec 20, 2018 8:53 pm

Re: How is shentong different from tirthika doctrine

Post by Donny »

Danny wrote: Sun Dec 06, 2020 2:33 am It’s called the four way Mula way of arguing. But is still a “view”, a philosophical position.
No, it's the "refraining from any view" which is at the heart of Madhyamika.

The "fourfold reasoning" (Tetralemma/catuskoti) has been around in Inda even bevore Buddhims. (As far as i know it has been use in logic and even in jurisprudence.) But Nagrajuna introduced a special way in how to deal with a Tetralemma.

Thats why you find it both in an negated and an unnegated form in the MMK:
18.8 All is real or all is unreal, all is both real and unreal, all is neihter unreal nor real; this is the graded teaching of the Buddha

22.11 "It's empty" is not to be said, nor "It's not empty," nor that it is both, nor that it is neither; ("empty") is said only for the sake of instruction

(Siderits/Katsura translation)
What Nagarjuna introduces is essentially a "nonposition position" that - as Malcolm pointed out - abstaines from engaging with the extremes of "existence" and "non-existences" presupposed by any given view.

And one could argue that it does so, not for the sake of philosophical argument or debate, but to reduce subtle suffering that comes from engaging in "views". (My interpretation ;) )
"To the sharp weapons of the demons, you offered delicate flowers in return. When the enraged Devadatta pushed down a boulder to kill you, you practiced silence. Son of the Sakyas, incapable of casting even an angry glance at your enemy, what intelligent person would honor you as a friend for protection from the great enemy, fearful samsara?"
(Gendun Chopel)
Danny
Posts: 1043
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2020 12:43 pm

Re: How is shentong different from tirthika doctrine

Post by Danny »

Malcolm wrote: Sun Dec 06, 2020 4:00 am
Danny wrote: Sun Dec 06, 2020 2:33 am
tobes wrote: Sun Dec 06, 2020 1:56 am Very nailed Malcolm. :good:
Hang on a moment moon reflected in water!
M’s assertion/non assertion is established view.
It’s how Prasaṅgika negate opponents.
I.e. don’t forward a position to be refuted.
It’s called the four way Mula way of arguing. But is still a “view”, a philosophical position.
Any philosophical position necessarily entails a proposition concerning existence or nonexistence. I have never made a proposition concerning either. If someone puts forth such a proposition, they are at fault. Since I have never put forward any such proposition, I am free from fault. Dependent origination alone frees one from the tangle of views.

Nevertheless, I still look both ways when crossing the street.
Sure.
Last edited by Danny on Sun Dec 06, 2020 1:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Danny
Posts: 1043
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2020 12:43 pm

Re: How is shentong different from tirthika doctrine

Post by Danny »

Donny wrote: Sun Dec 06, 2020 7:57 am
Danny wrote: Sun Dec 06, 2020 2:33 am It’s called the four way Mula way of arguing. But is still a “view”, a philosophical position.
No, it's the "refraining from any view" which is at the heart of Madhyamika.

The "fourfold reasoning" (Tetralemma/catuskoti) has been around in Inda even bevore Buddhims. (As far as i know it has been use in logic and even in jurisprudence.) But Nagrajuna introduced a special way in how to deal with a Tetralemma.

Thats why you find it both in an negated and an unnegated form in the MMK:
18.8 All is real or all is unreal, all is both real and unreal, all is neihter unreal nor real; this is the graded teaching of the Buddha

22.11 "It's empty" is not to be said, nor "It's not empty," nor that it is both, nor that it is neither; ("empty") is said only for the sake of instruction

(Siderits/Katsura translation)
What Nagarjuna introduces is essentially a "nonposition position" that - as Malcolm pointed out - abstaines from engaging with the extremes of "existence" and "non-existences" presupposed by any given view.

And one could argue that it does so, not for the sake of philosophical argument or debate, but to reduce subtle suffering that comes from engaging in "views". (My interpretation ;) )
It’s a good interpretation, better articulated than I ever could commit to writing. :)
Schrödinger’s Yidam
Posts: 7885
Joined: Wed May 29, 2013 6:13 am

Re: How is shentong different from tirthika doctrine

Post by Schrödinger’s Yidam »

Johnny Dangerous wrote: Sat Dec 05, 2020 7:30 am And again, you stated that there was a claim that samsara arises from the Dharmakaya somehow, I don't see that here either, not that I expect to.
Kongtrul's "Light Rays of the Stainless Vajra Moon" tr. Brunnhölzl. (p.847 of "When the Clouds Part"):
Kongtrul wrote:These appearances of the three existences (the container that is the outer world and the [inner] content [of sentient beings], just as a face's being transferred [as a reflection] into a mirror, appear as the magical display of inner nadis, vayus, and tilakas, and these three abide as the aspects of "the other"--the circle of the supreme mandala with its support and supported. All of these are true reality's--the sugar heart's--own light and own radiance, the dharmakaya itself appearing as all aspects, and utterly changeless wisdom.
(formatting mine)

If you’re not into this type of approach that’s fine. Tsongkhapa would say it is a bunch of horse apples. Plenty of highly realized masters completely reject that kind of idea. But plenty of highly realized masters embrace it too. So it’s a personal and karmic choice.
1.The problem isn’t ‘ignorance’. The problem is the mind you have right now. (H.H. Karmapa XVII @NYC 2/4/18)
2. I support Mingyur R and HHDL in their positions against lama abuse.
3. Student: Lama, I thought I might die but then I realized that the 3 Jewels would protect me.
Lama: Even If you had died the 3 Jewels would still have protected you. (DW post by Fortyeightvows)
Donny
Posts: 108
Joined: Thu Dec 20, 2018 8:53 pm

Re: How is shentong different from tirthika doctrine

Post by Donny »

Schrödinger’s Yidam wrote: Wed Dec 09, 2020 7:27 am All of these are true reality's--the sugar heart's--own light and own radiance, the dharmakaya itself appearing as all aspects, and utterly changeless wisdom.
I wouldn't equate "appear as" with "arise from", though.
"To the sharp weapons of the demons, you offered delicate flowers in return. When the enraged Devadatta pushed down a boulder to kill you, you practiced silence. Son of the Sakyas, incapable of casting even an angry glance at your enemy, what intelligent person would honor you as a friend for protection from the great enemy, fearful samsara?"
(Gendun Chopel)
User avatar
Johnny Dangerous
Global Moderator
Posts: 17089
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 10:58 pm
Location: Olympia WA
Contact:

Re: How is shentong different from tirthika doctrine

Post by Johnny Dangerous »

Schrödinger’s Yidam wrote: Wed Dec 09, 2020 7:27 am
Johnny Dangerous wrote: Sat Dec 05, 2020 7:30 am And again, you stated that there was a claim that samsara arises from the Dharmakaya somehow, I don't see that here either, not that I expect to.
Kongtrul's "Light Rays of the Stainless Vajra Moon" tr. Brunnhölzl. (p.847 of "When the Clouds Part"):
Kongtrul wrote:These appearances of the three existences (the container that is the outer world and the [inner] content [of sentient beings], just as a face's being transferred [as a reflection] into a mirror, appear as the magical display of inner nadis, vayus, and tilakas, and these three abide as the aspects of "the other"--the circle of the supreme mandala with its support and supported. All of these are true reality's--the sugar heart's--own light and own radiance, the dharmakaya itself appearing as all aspects, and utterly changeless wisdom.
(formatting mine)

If you’re not into this type of approach that’s fine. Tsongkhapa would say it is a bunch of horse apples. Plenty of highly realized masters completely reject that kind of idea. But plenty of highly realized masters embrace it too. So it’s a personal and karmic choice.
Yes, , it's essentially the view of Dzogchen, according to some teachers, not news to me. It is not the same as saying Samsara arises from the Dharmakaya though, mainly because to say that you 1) affirm a First Cause and 2) by definition you become a Theist thinker, who believes in the inherent reality of cause and effect, and thinks some prime mover created the phenomenal universe. In other words, you fall into the extremes. Hell, just believing there is actually such a thing as creation or destruction excludes you from the view you are professing to hold, it is utterly beyond notions of cause and effect. Read Myriad Worlds, it covers this in detail, is by the guy you are quoting and says nothing like ‘samsara arises from the Dharmakaya’.

There are whole volumes written on this subject, and I feel like you are being so sloppy as to essentially be wrong by equating with "samsara arises from the Dharmakaya" with this statement. By definition, what Kongtrul is talking about is not samsara... or nirvana, but is beyond both, there is no conception of either one in that view, it forsakes both. So you cannot make a statement like that and be correct, in my opinion.

The Dzogchen view is not just a philosophy or tenet system, and treating in like it means what you say it means here is like trying to explain particle physics using a second grade science class vocabulary. That's not personal, I'm just saying that the idea that what you posted means "Samsara arises from the Dharmakaya" could only be a mistake made by taking the view you presented and then somehow essentializing it and dumbing it down until it is something entirely different.
Meditate upon Bodhicitta when afflicted by disease

Meditate upon Bodhicitta when sad

Meditate upon Bodhicitta when suffering occurs

Meditate upon Bodhicitta when you are scared

-Khunu Lama
shankara
Posts: 83
Joined: Wed Mar 07, 2018 6:35 pm

Re: How is shentong different from tirthika doctrine

Post by shankara »

For anyone interested in learning more about the Shentong position, a book of Dolpopa I just started reading goes into a lot of detail around the arguments.

https://read.dzokden.org/5f89c77b5d0c39 ... ml?lang=en

PDF: https://read.dzokden.org/5f89c77b5d0c39 ... df?lang=en
User avatar
Johnny Dangerous
Global Moderator
Posts: 17089
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 10:58 pm
Location: Olympia WA
Contact:

Re: How is shentong different from tirthika doctrine

Post by Johnny Dangerous »

Further on Shentong, equating it with some essentialist point of view outside Buddhadharma misses the glaring fact that even in the ‘three turnings’ model, we can only understand the Third Turning by first understanding the preceding view exemplified by the Prajnaparatmita sutras, etc.

So, approaching Shentong in this way is absurd to me. If one subscribes to the Three Turnings notion then this rests on the view of Shunyata found in the previous turning.

If that view is not there, it cannot be the same animal, for instance if someone still believes that there is arising and cessation and discrete entities with causal relationships( for instance believing the unconditioned somehow creates conditioned phenomena) they have missed the bedrock on which Shentong rests, and as such are mistaken.
Meditate upon Bodhicitta when afflicted by disease

Meditate upon Bodhicitta when sad

Meditate upon Bodhicitta when suffering occurs

Meditate upon Bodhicitta when you are scared

-Khunu Lama
Archie2009
Posts: 1582
Joined: Tue Jun 09, 2020 10:39 pm

Re: How is shentong different from tirthika doctrine

Post by Archie2009 »

shankara wrote: Wed Dec 09, 2020 10:16 am For anyone interested in learning more about the Shentong position, a book of Dolpopa I just started reading goes into a lot of detail around the arguments.

https://read.dzokden.org/5f89c77b5d0c39 ... ml?lang=en

PDF: https://read.dzokden.org/5f89c77b5d0c39 ... df?lang=en
Jeffrey Hopkins' translation, Mountain Doctrine: Tibet's Fundamental Treatise on Other-Emptiness and the Buddha Matrix, is sadly out of print. There is, however, one internet book store that still has the hardcover in stock for a very reasonable €38.50. I bought a copy there less than a month ago.

https://www.buddhabooks.eu/mountain-doctrine
(Shipping costs: https://www.buddhabooks.eu/ordering-delivery)
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: How is shentong different from tirthika doctrine

Post by Malcolm »

Schrödinger’s Yidam wrote: Wed Dec 09, 2020 7:27 am
Johnny Dangerous wrote: Sat Dec 05, 2020 7:30 am And again, you stated that there was a claim that samsara arises from the Dharmakaya somehow, I don't see that here either, not that I expect to.
Kongtrul's "Light Rays of the Stainless Vajra Moon" tr. Brunnhölzl. (p.847 of "When the Clouds Part"):
Kongtrul wrote:These appearances of the three existences (the container that is the outer world and the [inner] content [of sentient beings], just as a face's being transferred [as a reflection] into a mirror, appear as the magical display of inner nadis, vayus, and tilakas, and these three abide as the aspects of "the other"--the circle of the supreme mandala with its support and supported. All of these are true reality's--the sugar heart's--own light and own radiance, the dharmakaya itself appearing as all aspects, and utterly changeless wisdom.
(formatting mine)

If you’re not into this type of approach that’s fine. Tsongkhapa would say it is a bunch of horse apples. Plenty of highly realized masters completely reject that kind of idea. But plenty of highly realized masters embrace it too. So it’s a personal and karmic choice.

That’s not transpersonal. That’s saying appearances exist in rig pa the same way a reflection exists in a mirror.
User avatar
Adamantine
Former staff member
Posts: 4027
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2011 7:09 am
Location: Space is the Place

Re: How is shentong different from tirthika doctrine

Post by Adamantine »

Malcolm wrote: Wed Nov 25, 2020 5:40 pm
tobes wrote: Wed Nov 25, 2020 2:50 am
But these are just sayings, assertions and beliefs. None is satisfactory, according to mahamudra, dzogchen, shentong, rangtong, or advaita vedanta. All agree that the yogic realisation exceeds such conceptual or semantic or rational approaches.

So that leaves us the with basic possibility of getting the realisation oneself and then coming onto Dharmawheel to say 'it is like this, but not like that' or..........accepting we're basically pissing into the wind with such discussions.
Advaita is strictly rational. Advaitans characteristically deride yoga. It is the highest perspective in Indian philosophy. Some people might argue that Trika is, but Trika is realist, even if they are a nondualist school like Advaita.

Madhyamaka, no matter which variety one subscribes, is strictly based on intellectual analysis as well.

It is only Vajrayāna that the example/ultimate wisdom pointed out/realized at the time of empowerment takes precedence over intellectual analysis. When this is realized, it is called mahāmudra or dzogchen. When one is a Vajrayāna practitioner, it does not matter much which intellectual view one subscribes to, whether Madhyamaka or Yogacāra, since the view at the time of the empowerment experienced is a correct, experiential Madhyamaka view. By practicing Vajrayāna practices such as the two stages, and so on, one cultivates this experiential view for a long while, eventually leading its realization.
So what are we doing here, Malcolm? :smile:
Contentment is the ultimate wealth;
Detachment is the final happiness. ~Sri Saraha
Schrödinger’s Yidam
Posts: 7885
Joined: Wed May 29, 2013 6:13 am

Re: How is shentong different from tirthika doctrine

Post by Schrödinger’s Yidam »

Johnny Dangerous wrote: Wed Dec 09, 2020 10:54 am Further on Shentong, equating it with some essentialist point of view outside Buddhadharma misses the glaring fact that even in the ‘three turnings’ model, we can only understand the Third Turning by first understanding the preceding view exemplified by the Prajnaparatmita sutras, etc.
Correct.
So, approaching Shentong in this way is absurd to me. If one subscribes to the Three Turnings notion then this rests on the view of Shunyata found in the previous turning.
According to Khenpo Tsultrim the view of the second turning pertains to objects that can be taken as an object of consciousness. Since Buddha Nature cannot be taken as an object of consciousness it is not subject to the same type of deconstruction found in Madhyamaka.

On another thread Malcolm took exception to that. I’m not going to defend Khenpo’s position. I’m just reporting it.
If that view is not there, it cannot be the same animal, for instance if someone still believes that there is arising and cessation and discrete entities with causal relationships( for instance believing the unconditioned somehow creates conditioned phenomena) they have missed the bedrock on which Shentong rests, and as such are mistaken.
I don’t think appearances are considered as such in Shentong. The images are never anything other than the mirror, etc.
*****
But like I said, if you’re not interested in that view nothing says you have to buy into it. Each person has their ow karmically appropriate Path.
1.The problem isn’t ‘ignorance’. The problem is the mind you have right now. (H.H. Karmapa XVII @NYC 2/4/18)
2. I support Mingyur R and HHDL in their positions against lama abuse.
3. Student: Lama, I thought I might die but then I realized that the 3 Jewels would protect me.
Lama: Even If you had died the 3 Jewels would still have protected you. (DW post by Fortyeightvows)
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: How is shentong different from tirthika doctrine

Post by Malcolm »

Schrödinger’s Yidam wrote: Wed Dec 09, 2020 4:58 pm I don’t think appearances are considered as such in Shentong. The images are never anything other than the mirror, etc.
And this is why gzhan stong does not go beyond false aspectarian cittamatra, since it is just false aspectarian cittamatra.

But does not mean that everything is only your ultimate gnosis. If it were, that would mean I am your ultimate gnosis. :stirthepot:
Schrödinger’s Yidam
Posts: 7885
Joined: Wed May 29, 2013 6:13 am

Re: How is shentong different from tirthika doctrine

Post by Schrödinger’s Yidam »

Malcolm wrote: Wed Dec 09, 2020 5:48 pm
Schrödinger’s Yidam wrote: Wed Dec 09, 2020 4:58 pm I don’t think appearances are considered as such in Shentong. The images are never anything other than the mirror, etc.
And this is why gzhan stong does not go beyond false aspectarian cittamatra, since it is just false aspectarian cittamatra.

But does not mean that everything is only your ultimate gnosis. If it were, that would mean I am your ultimate gnosis. :stirthepot:
We are both appearances of transpersonal gnosis.
1.The problem isn’t ‘ignorance’. The problem is the mind you have right now. (H.H. Karmapa XVII @NYC 2/4/18)
2. I support Mingyur R and HHDL in their positions against lama abuse.
3. Student: Lama, I thought I might die but then I realized that the 3 Jewels would protect me.
Lama: Even If you had died the 3 Jewels would still have protected you. (DW post by Fortyeightvows)
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: How is shentong different from tirthika doctrine

Post by Malcolm »

Schrödinger’s Yidam wrote: Wed Dec 09, 2020 6:01 pm
Malcolm wrote: Wed Dec 09, 2020 5:48 pm
Schrödinger’s Yidam wrote: Wed Dec 09, 2020 4:58 pm I don’t think appearances are considered as such in Shentong. The images are never anything other than the mirror, etc.
And this is why gzhan stong does not go beyond false aspectarian cittamatra, since it is just false aspectarian cittamatra.

But does not mean that everything is only your ultimate gnosis. If it were, that would mean I am your ultimate gnosis. :stirthepot:
We are both appearances of transpersonal gnosis.
Is that transpersonal gnosis dual or nondual? If it is the former, it cannot be an ultimate gnosis since it is dualistic; if it is the latter, dualistic appearances cannot appear within a nondual gnosis. Further, if dualistic appearances are manifesting in this gnosis, like reflections in a mirror, it must be a personal gnosis (as suggested by the term pratyatmyavedanajñāna, i.e. the gnosis that one intuits individually), rather than a transpersonal gnosis, because if it were a transpersonal gnosis everyone would experience it at the same time just as it was, and buddhahood would be impossible. If it is a personal gnosis, then dualistic outer appearances can manifest to it, without that gnosis becoming dualistic, and without outer, dependently-originated, apparent phenomena being "mind only." And this is what is means to say that all appearances are included in sugatagarbha, which is just the gnosis that one intuits individually (look it up). There is a difference between appearances and apparent objects, even in gzhan stong. Appearances are like the moon in the water, apparent objects are like the moon. No moon, no reflection; no water, no reflection.

I suggest you stop tying yourself up in conundrums and go study these things in a proper way. Your self-study is just confusing you.
Schrödinger’s Yidam
Posts: 7885
Joined: Wed May 29, 2013 6:13 am

Re: How is shentong different from tirthika doctrine

Post by Schrödinger’s Yidam »

I suggest you stop tying yourself up in conundrums and go study these things in a proper way. Your self-study is just confusing you.
I read somewhere once Khenpo Tsultrim reluctantly admitted that there’s no substantial difference between Advaita Vedanta and Gzhan stong in terms of how they presented their view. So if it’s good enough for Khenpo it’s good enough for me!
:twothumbsup:
1.The problem isn’t ‘ignorance’. The problem is the mind you have right now. (H.H. Karmapa XVII @NYC 2/4/18)
2. I support Mingyur R and HHDL in their positions against lama abuse.
3. Student: Lama, I thought I might die but then I realized that the 3 Jewels would protect me.
Lama: Even If you had died the 3 Jewels would still have protected you. (DW post by Fortyeightvows)
User avatar
Johnny Dangerous
Global Moderator
Posts: 17089
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 10:58 pm
Location: Olympia WA
Contact:

Re: How is shentong different from tirthika doctrine

Post by Johnny Dangerous »

Schrödinger’s Yidam wrote: Wed Dec 09, 2020 4:58 pm
According to Khenpo Tsultrim the view of the second turning pertains to objects that can be taken as an object of consciousness. Since Buddha Nature cannot be taken as an object of consciousness it is not subject to the same type of deconstruction found in Madhyamaka.

On another thread Malcolm took exception to that. I’m not going to defend Khenpo’s position. I’m just reporting it.
No no, you can't just move the target like that. My last two responses were specifically because you took the idea that "samsara arises from the Dharmakaya" and tried to claim that it is synonymous with Shentong, using a quote from Kongtrul. You are not "just reporting" anything. Crack open the Dzogchen section of Myriad Worlds and see if you can find anything there about the mirror -creating- phenomena.
I
I don’t think appearances are considered as such in Shentong. The images are never anything other than the mirror, etc.
*****
But like I said, if you’re not interested in that view nothing says you have to buy into it. Each person has their ow karmically appropriate Path.
You literally just got done trying to prove to me that samsara arises from the Dharmakaya, so apparently you think Shentong does in fact teach that the conditioned phenomena arise from the unconditioned. The issue is not anyone's karmic propensity for this or that view, but first with establishing that you are correctly representing that view. I don't think you have done so in this discussion.
Meditate upon Bodhicitta when afflicted by disease

Meditate upon Bodhicitta when sad

Meditate upon Bodhicitta when suffering occurs

Meditate upon Bodhicitta when you are scared

-Khunu Lama
Locked

Return to “Tibetan Buddhism”