Mipham was not gzhan stong

User avatar
conebeckham
Posts: 5107
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 11:49 pm
Location: Bay Area, CA, USA

Re: Mipham was not gzhan stong

Post by conebeckham »

Yes, all dharmas are like a reflection. But what is the basis, the surface, the mirror, the water, upon which dharmas reflect??
དམ་པའི་དོན་ནི་ཤེས་རབ་ཆེ་བ་དང་།
རྟོག་གེའི་ཡུལ་མིན་བླ་མའི་བྱིན་རླབས་དང་།
སྐལ་ལྡན་ལས་འཕྲོ་ཅན་གྱིས་རྟོགས་པ་སྟེ།
དེ་ནི་ཤེས་རབ་ལ་ནི་ལོ་རྟོག་སེལ།།


"Absolute Truth is not an object of analytical discourse or great discriminating wisdom,
It is realized through the blessing grace of the Guru and fortunate Karmic potential.
Like this, mistaken ideas of discriminating wisdom are clarified."
- (Kyabje Bokar Rinpoche, from his summary of "The Ocean of Definitive Meaning")
Malcolm
Posts: 32376
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Mipham was not gzhan stong

Post by Malcolm »

conebeckham wrote:Yes, all dharmas are like a reflection. But what is the basis, the surface, the mirror, the water, upon which dharmas reflect??
One's mind, of course.
User avatar
dzogchungpa
Posts: 6333
Joined: Sat May 28, 2011 10:50 pm

Re: Mipham was not gzhan stong

Post by dzogchungpa »

Malcolm wrote:
conebeckham wrote:
Sherlock wrote:Actually we are arguing that the moon is just a reflection.
Mmmm....the reflection of the moon is actually "water," though.
Since when it a reflection part of the surface it is reflected in?
Can we not say that the reflection is how the water appears?
There is not only nothingness because there is always, and always can manifest. - Thinley Norbu Rinpoche
Malcolm
Posts: 32376
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Mipham was not gzhan stong

Post by Malcolm »

dzogchungpa wrote: Can we not say that the reflection is how the water appears?
all of the water or only a part?
Schrödinger’s Yidam
Posts: 7040
Joined: Wed May 29, 2013 6:13 am

Re: Mipham was not gzhan stong

Post by Schrödinger’s Yidam »

Back to the O.P.: in the Guy Newland video going over Nyingma Madhyamaka, starting around 1:48:00, he talks about Mipham and Shentong. He says his read on "Ocean of Certainty" was that Mipham was anti-Shentong, but that some people read him as pro-Shentong and others not. "And now we've come to the limit of my knowledge about that." That's the way the video ends.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QYcMqaAtmZ4
Last edited by Schrödinger’s Yidam on Mon May 04, 2015 9:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.
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)
Sherlock
Posts: 1202
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 3:14 pm

Re: Mipham was not gzhan stong

Post by Sherlock »

Rongzom said:
There all dharmas are without the modes of dharma-possession or dharmata and are thus empty of intrinsic existence. There is no postulation of "this being empty of that".
All Dharmas includes mind. Mind is root of sentient beings and Buddhas.
smcj wrote:Back to the O.P.: in the Guy Newland video going over Nyingma Madhyamaka, starting around 1:48:00, he talks about Mipham and Shentong. He says his read on "Ocean of Certainty" was that Mipham was anti-Shentong, but that some people read him as pro-Shentong and others not. That's the way the video ends.
Gzhan stong pas probably would like to read him as a gzhan sting pa, but he quite definitely refutes both Gelugs and gzhan stong in Beacon of Certainty. In fact the way he refutes Gelyg view is by pointing out that they are also a species of gzhan stong.
User avatar
dzogchungpa
Posts: 6333
Joined: Sat May 28, 2011 10:50 pm

Re: Mipham was not gzhan stong

Post by dzogchungpa »

Malcolm wrote:
dzogchungpa wrote: Can we not say that the reflection is how the water appears?
all of the water or only a part?
Well, the moon part of the reflection would only be how part of the water appears, but how the other part of the water appears would also be a reflection. I think. :thinking:

Anyway, I'll shut up now. :smile:
There is not only nothingness because there is always, and always can manifest. - Thinley Norbu Rinpoche
User avatar
conebeckham
Posts: 5107
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 11:49 pm
Location: Bay Area, CA, USA

Re: Mipham was not gzhan stong

Post by conebeckham »

Malcolm wrote:
conebeckham wrote:Yes, all dharmas are like a reflection. But what is the basis, the surface, the mirror, the water, upon which dharmas reflect??
One's mind, of course.
OK! but is "one's mind" all water? Or is it just a specific body of water? Water has the same characteristics no matter what body it resides in.....light passes through it, more or less, depending on the temporary obscurations suspended in it, reflections can appear in it, given light.....but at all times the nature of water is unchanged. If one's mind were a puddle, and the puddle dried up, was the water impermanent? Or has it changed state? Will it eventually recondense and form another puddle? Is the Nature of Water one, or different, with the various Bodies of Water?
དམ་པའི་དོན་ནི་ཤེས་རབ་ཆེ་བ་དང་།
རྟོག་གེའི་ཡུལ་མིན་བླ་མའི་བྱིན་རླབས་དང་།
སྐལ་ལྡན་ལས་འཕྲོ་ཅན་གྱིས་རྟོགས་པ་སྟེ།
དེ་ནི་ཤེས་རབ་ལ་ནི་ལོ་རྟོག་སེལ།།


"Absolute Truth is not an object of analytical discourse or great discriminating wisdom,
It is realized through the blessing grace of the Guru and fortunate Karmic potential.
Like this, mistaken ideas of discriminating wisdom are clarified."
- (Kyabje Bokar Rinpoche, from his summary of "The Ocean of Definitive Meaning")
Sherlock
Posts: 1202
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 3:14 pm

Re: Mipham was not gzhan stong

Post by Sherlock »

In the end it's just a metaphor. Mind is empty of svabhava, like all other dharmas.
User avatar
conebeckham
Posts: 5107
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 11:49 pm
Location: Bay Area, CA, USA

Re: Mipham was not gzhan stong

Post by conebeckham »

I agree, Sherlock, and I've tortured that poor metaphor enough, I suppose.

But--if mind is a conditioned phenomenon, like all other Dharmas, and therefore impermanent--and yet it is where Buddhahood is found, what is wisdom? Does it differ from mind? Is it newly created? Or is it a fundamental change of state? Or merely the result of purifying adventitious stains?
དམ་པའི་དོན་ནི་ཤེས་རབ་ཆེ་བ་དང་།
རྟོག་གེའི་ཡུལ་མིན་བླ་མའི་བྱིན་རླབས་དང་།
སྐལ་ལྡན་ལས་འཕྲོ་ཅན་གྱིས་རྟོགས་པ་སྟེ།
དེ་ནི་ཤེས་རབ་ལ་ནི་ལོ་རྟོག་སེལ།།


"Absolute Truth is not an object of analytical discourse or great discriminating wisdom,
It is realized through the blessing grace of the Guru and fortunate Karmic potential.
Like this, mistaken ideas of discriminating wisdom are clarified."
- (Kyabje Bokar Rinpoche, from his summary of "The Ocean of Definitive Meaning")
User avatar
dzogchungpa
Posts: 6333
Joined: Sat May 28, 2011 10:50 pm

Re: Mipham was not gzhan stong

Post by dzogchungpa »

Sherlock wrote:In the end it's just a metaphor.

phpBB [video]
There is not only nothingness because there is always, and always can manifest. - Thinley Norbu Rinpoche
krodha
Posts: 2471
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2011 10:30 pm

Re: Mipham was not gzhan stong

Post by krodha »

IMO the water isn't the important aspect of the watermoon metaphor, the fact that the moon appears yet is not real is the salient part, because all phenomena are like that.
Malcolm
Posts: 32376
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Mipham was not gzhan stong

Post by Malcolm »

conebeckham wrote:
Malcolm wrote:
conebeckham wrote:Yes, all dharmas are like a reflection. But what is the basis, the surface, the mirror, the water, upon which dharmas reflect??
One's mind, of course.
OK! but is "one's mind" all water? Or is it just a specific body of water? Water has the same characteristics no matter what body it resides in.....light passes through it, more or less, depending on the temporary obscurations suspended in it, reflections can appear in it, given light.....but at all times the nature of water is unchanged. If one's mind were a puddle, and the puddle dried up, was the water impermanent? Or has it changed state? Will it eventually recondense and form another puddle? Is the Nature of Water one, or different, with the various Bodies of Water?
One cannot find the nature of water apart from water. It does not precede or succeed it. Now then, if you are an essentialist [Hindu, etc.], you will argue that all water derives its nature from some hypothetical essence of water. If you are a nominalist [Buddhist], you will argue our notion of a characteristic of water is an abstraction derived from our experiences of water. So, the answer is that your nature of water is merely an abstraction, and does not really exist. See MMK chapter 5:7:
  • Therefor space is not existent, it is not non-existent, is not the characterized,
    is not the characteristic; also any other of the five elements are the same as space.
And 5:8:
  • Some of small intelligence, see existents in terms of ‘is’ or ‘is not’;
    they do not perceive the pacification of views, or peace.
Sherlock
Posts: 1202
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 3:14 pm

Re: Mipham was not gzhan stong

Post by Sherlock »

conebeckham wrote:I agree, Sherlock, and I've tortured that poor metaphor enough, I suppose.

But--if mind is a conditioned phenomenon, like all other Dharmas, and therefore impermanent--and yet it is where Buddhahood is found, what is wisdom? Does it differ from mind? Is it newly created? Or is it a fundamental change of state? Or merely the result of purifying adventitious stains?
It is not permanent or impermanent. Permanence is meaningless if there is no time. I am on my tablet now so cant give the exact quote but IIRC somewhere in Beacon of Certainty is also written that asamskrita dharmas are just names too, you cannot say there is something existent behind them.

Yes it is the result of purifying adventitious stains.
krodha
Posts: 2471
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2011 10:30 pm

Re: Mipham was not gzhan stong

Post by krodha »

conebeckham wrote:I agree, Sherlock, and I've tortured that poor metaphor enough, I suppose.

But--if mind is a conditioned phenomenon, like all other Dharmas, and therefore impermanent--and yet it is where Buddhahood is found, what is wisdom? Does it differ from mind? Is it newly created? Or is it a fundamental change of state? Or merely the result of purifying adventitious stains?
The way I see it, "wisdom" [ye shes] is just a moniker attributed to a mind that cognizes its own nature as non-arisen (or the nature of phenomena as non-arisen).
User avatar
dzogchungpa
Posts: 6333
Joined: Sat May 28, 2011 10:50 pm

Re: Mipham was not gzhan stong

Post by dzogchungpa »

Malcolm wrote:So, the answer is that your nature of water is merely an abstraction, and does not really exist.
Are you then saying that the nature of mind is merely an abstraction?
There is not only nothingness because there is always, and always can manifest. - Thinley Norbu Rinpoche
Sherlock
Posts: 1202
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 3:14 pm

Re: Mipham was not gzhan stong

Post by Sherlock »

It's just a name, it doesn't exist. Kadag.

Recognising nature of mind means you know that mind is empty but has potential to manifest as illusory displays.
User avatar
conebeckham
Posts: 5107
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 11:49 pm
Location: Bay Area, CA, USA

Re: Mipham was not gzhan stong

Post by conebeckham »

Malcolm wrote:One cannot find the nature of water apart from water. It does not precede or succeed it. Now then, if you are an essentialist [Hindu, etc.], you will argue that all water derives its nature from some hypothetical essence of water. If you are a nominalist [Buddhist], you will argue our notion of a characteristic of water is an abstraction derived from our experiences of water. So, the answer is that your nature of water is merely an abstraction, and does not really exist. See MMK chapter 5:7:
  • Therefor space is not existent, it is not non-existent, is not the characterized,
    is not the characteristic; also any other of the five elements are the same as space.
And 5:8:
  • Some of small intelligence, see existents in terms of ‘is’ or ‘is not’;
    they do not perceive the pacification of views, or peace.
One cannot find the "nature of water" apart from water, and therefore one cannot find the "nature of mind" apart from mind, yes?
I agree that abstractions derived from experiences of water, as well as hypothetical "essentialist" constructions of water, don't exist...they are imaginary. But,in the end, we are still left with water. Suchness is like that, yes? It is not the mere negation, blankness, empty space. There is experience, awareness, sentience...as well as all those imaginary hypotheses and abstractions about it. When all views of existence, nonexistence, etc. of suchness are pacified, there is peace...and is that peace an experience? Is there "awareness" of that peace?
དམ་པའི་དོན་ནི་ཤེས་རབ་ཆེ་བ་དང་།
རྟོག་གེའི་ཡུལ་མིན་བླ་མའི་བྱིན་རླབས་དང་།
སྐལ་ལྡན་ལས་འཕྲོ་ཅན་གྱིས་རྟོགས་པ་སྟེ།
དེ་ནི་ཤེས་རབ་ལ་ནི་ལོ་རྟོག་སེལ།།


"Absolute Truth is not an object of analytical discourse or great discriminating wisdom,
It is realized through the blessing grace of the Guru and fortunate Karmic potential.
Like this, mistaken ideas of discriminating wisdom are clarified."
- (Kyabje Bokar Rinpoche, from his summary of "The Ocean of Definitive Meaning")
User avatar
conebeckham
Posts: 5107
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 11:49 pm
Location: Bay Area, CA, USA

Re: Mipham was not gzhan stong

Post by conebeckham »

Sherlock wrote:
conebeckham wrote:I agree, Sherlock, and I've tortured that poor metaphor enough, I suppose.

But--if mind is a conditioned phenomenon, like all other Dharmas, and therefore impermanent--and yet it is where Buddhahood is found, what is wisdom? Does it differ from mind? Is it newly created? Or is it a fundamental change of state? Or merely the result of purifying adventitious stains?
It is not permanent or impermanent. Permanence is meaningless if there is no time. I am on my tablet now so cant give the exact quote but IIRC somewhere in Beacon of Certainty is also written that asamskrita dharmas are just names too, you cannot say there is something existent behind them.

Yes it is the result of purifying adventitious stains.
What is being purified? And what remains, after purification?
དམ་པའི་དོན་ནི་ཤེས་རབ་ཆེ་བ་དང་།
རྟོག་གེའི་ཡུལ་མིན་བླ་མའི་བྱིན་རླབས་དང་།
སྐལ་ལྡན་ལས་འཕྲོ་ཅན་གྱིས་རྟོགས་པ་སྟེ།
དེ་ནི་ཤེས་རབ་ལ་ནི་ལོ་རྟོག་སེལ།།


"Absolute Truth is not an object of analytical discourse or great discriminating wisdom,
It is realized through the blessing grace of the Guru and fortunate Karmic potential.
Like this, mistaken ideas of discriminating wisdom are clarified."
- (Kyabje Bokar Rinpoche, from his summary of "The Ocean of Definitive Meaning")
Sherlock
Posts: 1202
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 3:14 pm

Re: Mipham was not gzhan stong

Post by Sherlock »

The different kleshas of emotions and wisdoms are purified. They are the result of not recognising mind to be empty but having potential to manifest as displays and then reifying those displays. When purified you can recognise and be a Buddha.
Kunzang Monlam.
One base, 2 paths, 2 results.
Post Reply

Return to “Nyingma”