Debate over 'deathless door'
- Supramundane
- Posts: 621
- Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 11:38 am
- Location: Jakarta, Indonesia
Debate over 'deathless door'
I've been very interested by a debate, which is going on regarding vijnana. Some in Theravada circles refer to a 'universal vinanna', Nirvana, because it precedes death and succeeds death. Others characterize it as dukkha or even as karma. It is one of the five aggregates and one of the links in the causal chain.
There is an American Theravada monk called Ajajn Sumedho who, in fact, calls single-pointed meditation or awareness meditation a state of pure vijnana where there are no thought formations (sankhara). He thus concludes that this is the "deathless door" because it is free from karmic formations.
I note that this (seemingly) radical interpretation has a basis in sutra, as there is a sutra called the Eastern Gateway, which seems to echo his view. However, it seems to me from my reading, that vijnana is empty. It is thus impermanent and cannot be equated with Nirvana. It is also an error to equate Nirvana with emptiness. Nirvana is not emptiness although it might ultimately be empty, it is not some sort of reification of emptiness itself. It also seems to me that vijnana, although it proceeds birth and follows birth, is not something to aspire to. It is a link in the causal chain. It might be the transmitter of dukkha and karma, but it cannot be equated with these two concepts either, in my humble reading.
I know that there are some rather heated arguments online as to whether or not there is a universal vijnana which could be equated with Nirvana. It is true that, by cultivating awareness, and avoiding formations, we do have a stepping stone towards a greater realization. But I think it stops here. Or is awareness meditation the 'deathless door'??
Please let me know your views.
There is an American Theravada monk called Ajajn Sumedho who, in fact, calls single-pointed meditation or awareness meditation a state of pure vijnana where there are no thought formations (sankhara). He thus concludes that this is the "deathless door" because it is free from karmic formations.
I note that this (seemingly) radical interpretation has a basis in sutra, as there is a sutra called the Eastern Gateway, which seems to echo his view. However, it seems to me from my reading, that vijnana is empty. It is thus impermanent and cannot be equated with Nirvana. It is also an error to equate Nirvana with emptiness. Nirvana is not emptiness although it might ultimately be empty, it is not some sort of reification of emptiness itself. It also seems to me that vijnana, although it proceeds birth and follows birth, is not something to aspire to. It is a link in the causal chain. It might be the transmitter of dukkha and karma, but it cannot be equated with these two concepts either, in my humble reading.
I know that there are some rather heated arguments online as to whether or not there is a universal vijnana which could be equated with Nirvana. It is true that, by cultivating awareness, and avoiding formations, we do have a stepping stone towards a greater realization. But I think it stops here. Or is awareness meditation the 'deathless door'??
Please let me know your views.
- LastLegend
- Posts: 5408
- Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2011 3:46 pm
- Location: Northern Virginia
Re: Debate over 'deathless door'
Different names are used to point to nature...that is not mistaken. It has no characteristics that our mind imagines it to be. Ignorance is the hardest part to transcend. Easily being lead astray.
It’s eye blinking.
- Supramundane
- Posts: 621
- Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 11:38 am
- Location: Jakarta, Indonesia
Re: Debate over 'deathless door'
But isn't dwelling on pure awareness not enough in itself?
Re: Debate over 'deathless door'
No it is not enough in itself. Lacking insight, it is just śamatha, and does not have the power to remove afflictive patterning.Supramundane wrote: ↑Mon May 24, 2021 3:24 pm But isn't dwelling on pure awareness not enough in itself?
- LastLegend
- Posts: 5408
- Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2011 3:46 pm
- Location: Northern Virginia
Re: Debate over 'deathless door'
There is subtle recognition of pure awareness. That’s ignorance according to my teacher. That isn’t mistaken isn’t because of that recognition.Supramundane wrote: ↑Mon May 24, 2021 3:24 pm But isn't dwelling on pure awareness not enough in itself?
It’s eye blinking.
- Supramundane
- Posts: 621
- Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 11:38 am
- Location: Jakarta, Indonesia
Re: Debate over 'deathless door'
I agree!Malcolm wrote: ↑Mon May 24, 2021 3:29 pmNo it is not enough in itself. Lacking insight, it is just śamatha, and does not have the power to remove afflictive patterning.Supramundane wrote: ↑Mon May 24, 2021 3:24 pm But isn't dwelling on pure awareness not enough in itself?
However, there are dozens of youtube videos on Ajahn Sumedho where he expounds this idea.
Perhaps i have mischaracterized him since i am not familiar with Theravada.
Perhaps he means that literally it is 'only' a door, i.e. an entrance to something more profound.
In itself i do not think it is anything permanent or sublime, even if there are no sankhara, as he contends.
- LastLegend
- Posts: 5408
- Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2011 3:46 pm
- Location: Northern Virginia
Re: Debate over 'deathless door'
Theravada isn’t known to be taught nature. Our mind often imagines and constructs a lot of crap.Supramundane wrote: ↑Mon May 24, 2021 3:42 pmI agree!Malcolm wrote: ↑Mon May 24, 2021 3:29 pmNo it is not enough in itself. Lacking insight, it is just śamatha, and does not have the power to remove afflictive patterning.Supramundane wrote: ↑Mon May 24, 2021 3:24 pm But isn't dwelling on pure awareness not enough in itself?
However, there are dozens of youtube videos on Ajahn Sumedho where he expounds this idea.
Perhaps i have mischaracterized him since i am not familiar with Theravada.
Perhaps he means that literally it is 'only' a door, i.e. an entrance to something more profound.
In itself i do not think it is anything permanent or sublime, even if there are no sankhara, as he contends.
It’s eye blinking.
- LastLegend
- Posts: 5408
- Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2011 3:46 pm
- Location: Northern Virginia
Re: Debate over 'deathless door'
Whatever practice we do should lead to understand that this nature never needed anything...it’s just that we have been covered with karma for long we have to practice to decrease karma.
It’s eye blinking.
- Supramundane
- Posts: 621
- Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 11:38 am
- Location: Jakarta, Indonesia
Re: Debate over 'deathless door'
Are thoughts karma or carriers of karma?LastLegend wrote: ↑Mon May 24, 2021 3:51 pm Whatever practice we do should lead to understand that this nature never needed anything...it’s just that we have been covered with karma for long we have to practice to decrease karma.
Theravada seems caught up with 'sankhara', thought formations.
I have never heard the term mentioned in Mahayana systems.
- LastLegend
- Posts: 5408
- Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2011 3:46 pm
- Location: Northern Virginia
Re: Debate over 'deathless door'
The whole mental process isn’t just thoughts. Karma starts with intention and so grasping. What is intention? That’s for each of us to know.
It’s eye blinking.
- Supramundane
- Posts: 621
- Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 11:38 am
- Location: Jakarta, Indonesia
Re: Debate over 'deathless door'
As you can see in this thread, the debate is rather pointed. I find it sort of amusing since to us, it seems like a non-issue.
https://sujato.wordpress.com/2011/05/13 ... e2%80%99t/
There are over a hundred comments!
If we look at the very short Sutra, the Eastern Gatehouse, however, it does seem to explicitly state that mindfulness is tantamount to deathlessness (!).
This idea is restated: https://youtu.be/ILTTZt4jO6g
It does seem counter-intuitive to equate nirvana with vijnana, so how can so many minds be preoccupied with this?
https://sujato.wordpress.com/2011/05/13 ... e2%80%99t/
There are over a hundred comments!
If we look at the very short Sutra, the Eastern Gatehouse, however, it does seem to explicitly state that mindfulness is tantamount to deathlessness (!).
This idea is restated: https://youtu.be/ILTTZt4jO6g
It does seem counter-intuitive to equate nirvana with vijnana, so how can so many minds be preoccupied with this?
Re: Debate over 'deathless door'
Actually, the Eightfold Path (2: right intention), and commentary, spells it out.LastLegend wrote: ↑Mon May 24, 2021 4:12 pm The whole mental process isn’t just thoughts. Karma starts with intention and so grasping. What is intention? That’s for each of us to know.
- LastLegend
- Posts: 5408
- Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2011 3:46 pm
- Location: Northern Virginia
Re: Debate over 'deathless door'
Viññāṇa is used in the ordinary sense of ‘sense consciousness’:
jihvayā hi rasān vijānāti || BrhUp_3,2.4 ||
For one knows tastes through the tongue.
Above is accurate.
Good post by Sujato. Except when he says mind also has to be transcended. Mind in his context is consciousness. The end of consciousness is temporary for Bodhisattvas just to be thorough of what nature is...yes, it’s the end of rebirth. Read Vimalakirti Sutra the conversation between Manjushri and Vimalakirti.
https://www.istb.univie.ac.at/wtmp/lva/ ... hurman.pdf
jihvayā hi rasān vijānāti || BrhUp_3,2.4 ||
For one knows tastes through the tongue.
Above is accurate.
Good post by Sujato. Except when he says mind also has to be transcended. Mind in his context is consciousness. The end of consciousness is temporary for Bodhisattvas just to be thorough of what nature is...yes, it’s the end of rebirth. Read Vimalakirti Sutra the conversation between Manjushri and Vimalakirti.
https://www.istb.univie.ac.at/wtmp/lva/ ... hurman.pdf
Last edited by LastLegend on Tue May 25, 2021 5:52 am, edited 2 times in total.
It’s eye blinking.
- LastLegend
- Posts: 5408
- Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2011 3:46 pm
- Location: Northern Virginia
Re: Debate over 'deathless door'
You don’t even know what intention is in your mind. Intention is intention if it’s wrong you would know it right? That’s called karma and grasping...reiun wrote: ↑Tue May 25, 2021 4:58 amActually, the Eightfold Path (2: right intention), and commentary, spells it out.LastLegend wrote: ↑Mon May 24, 2021 4:12 pm The whole mental process isn’t just thoughts. Karma starts with intention and so grasping. What is intention? That’s for each of us to know.
You begin to irritate me. I think you need not respond to my posts.
It’s eye blinking.
Re: Debate over 'deathless door'
No worries! It is rare that your posts cohere enough to welcome a comment.
- Supramundane
- Posts: 621
- Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 11:38 am
- Location: Jakarta, Indonesia
Re: Debate over 'deathless door'
Yes LL and a very lively debate after. Seems to go beyond bounds though at certain points. I note that in this debate a Dzogchen guy jumped in, and there was also a Zen guy who leapt into the ring in full lotus position.LastLegend wrote: ↑Tue May 25, 2021 5:25 am Viññāṇa is used in the ordinary sense of ‘sense consciousness’:
jihvayā hi rasān vijānāti || BrhUp_3,2.4 ||
For one knows tastes through the tongue.
Above is accurate.
Good post by Sujato. Except when he says mind also has to be transcended. Mind in his context is consciousness. The end of consciousness is temporary for Bodhisattvas just to be thorough of what nature is...yes, it’s the end of rebirth. Read Vimalakirti Sutra the conversation between Manjushri and Vimalakirti.
https://www.istb.univie.ac.at/wtmp/lva/ ... hurman.pdf
The UFC was founded to determine which fighting style was the best. Perhaps there should be a UFC of Buddhism?! Would be interesting.
I think the heart of the matter in this debate was trying to conceptualize Nirvana as a type of consciousness. I believe this is a misapprehension that causes the conflict.
- LastLegend
- Posts: 5408
- Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2011 3:46 pm
- Location: Northern Virginia
Re: Debate over 'deathless door'
There are those who speak from contemplation and there are those who speak from learned concepts. It’s good for you to know that.
It’s eye blinking.
- LastLegend
- Posts: 5408
- Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2011 3:46 pm
- Location: Northern Virginia
Re: Debate over 'deathless door'
I can’t tell or care much what Nirvana from Sravakayana is about anymore. I agree with Sujato.Supramundane wrote: ↑Tue May 25, 2021 6:02 amYes LL and a very lively debate after. Seems to go beyond bounds though at certain points. I note that in this debate a Dzogchen guy jumped in, and there was also a Zen guy who leapt into the ring in full lotus position.LastLegend wrote: ↑Tue May 25, 2021 5:25 am Viññāṇa is used in the ordinary sense of ‘sense consciousness’:
jihvayā hi rasān vijānāti || BrhUp_3,2.4 ||
For one knows tastes through the tongue.
Above is accurate.
Good post by Sujato. Except when he says mind also has to be transcended. Mind in his context is consciousness. The end of consciousness is temporary for Bodhisattvas just to be thorough of what nature is...yes, it’s the end of rebirth. Read Vimalakirti Sutra the conversation between Manjushri and Vimalakirti.
https://www.istb.univie.ac.at/wtmp/lva/ ... hurman.pdf
The UFC was founded to determine which fighting style was the best. Perhaps there should be a UFC of Buddhism?! Would be interesting.
I think the heart of the matter in this debate was trying to conceptualize Nirvana as a type of consciousness. I believe this is a misapprehension that causes the conflict.
It’s eye blinking.
- PadmaVonSamba
- Posts: 9448
- Joined: Sat May 14, 2011 1:41 am
Re: Debate over 'deathless door'
Supramundane wrote: ↑Mon May 24, 2021 2:35 pm ...it seems to me from my reading, that vijnana is empty. It is thus impermanent and cannot be equated with Nirvana. It is also an error to equate Nirvana with emptiness. Nirvana is not emptiness although it might ultimately be empty, it is not some sort of reification of emptiness itself.
This really just gets back to the age-old buddhist dilemma of something existing except that oops, it doesn’t exist, except here the animal in question is vijnana. One can refer back to the whole ‘form is emptiness/emptiness is form’ for help on this one.
But it’s also important to remember that emptiness isn’t a separate thing in itself. It's a description of the true nature of an object. We can only talk about the emptiness of something. In this case, the object is vijnana. So, one shouldn’t think of “emptiness” as some kind of universal consciousness.
Vijnana can be regarded as a substrate for everything, but that doesn’t mean it has any ‘thingness’ to it. It has no qualities, just as space is the substrate for the 3D material world yet space itself has no qualities. Space isn’t pink or salty or anything at all.
So, just in that respect, yes, vijnana is like nirvana. But this isn’t really news. It’s like in Vajrayana Buddhism referring to the ‘inseparability of samsara and nirvana’. In other words, when mind is functioning to generate samsara, it’s vijnana. When it isn’t generating samsara, it’s nirvana.
When the radio is plugged in, it makes noise and when you unplug it, it doesn’t. Is it the same radio? Since the radio is a composite, it has no intrinsic reality. That’s the emptiness of the radio. We can only really call it a radio when itvis functioning as a radio. Likewise, the ‘mind-awareness’ we are referring to can be labeled either nirvana or vijnana depending on what it is doing. The fact that it is not a composite and has no specific characteristics or qualities doesn’t really have any bearing on that. That’s really a separate issue.
EMPTIFUL.
An inward outlook produces outward insight.
An inward outlook produces outward insight.
- LastLegend
- Posts: 5408
- Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2011 3:46 pm
- Location: Northern Virginia
Re: Debate over 'deathless door'
Vijanna is kind of Nirvana... ...sorry can’t compromise much here.
It’s eye blinking.