Question on a commentary of the Mahamudra Prayer

Post Reply
User avatar
anjali
Former staff member
Posts: 1662
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2011 10:33 pm

Question on a commentary of the Mahamudra Prayer

Post by anjali »

Greetings all. I've been wanting to pose this question for a long time. Finally got around to revisiting the text and commentary.

Probably more commonly known as the Aspiration Prayer for Mahamudra, there is a commentary of the text by Beru Khyentse, with suplimentary commentary by Alexander Berzin here.

My question is about the following quote in the commentary on the text:

From the commentary on verse 8: "...the unified pair of clarity and voidness [the unified pair of (1) inseparabable appearance making and appearances and (2) inseparable awareness and voidness. ...]" Bracketed comment [] by Berzin.

I've never seen this pairing (voidness paired with awareness and clarity paired with appearances) in the literature. It's very clear and logical, and I like it a lot, but it seems unique to me. Maybe it's just the way it's expressed/presented. So I'm wondering, is this a generally accepted framework within the larger Tibetan tradition? Just Karma Kagyu? Just Khyentse Beru's/Berzin's take?




=====
For those interested, here are some additional, elaborative quotes from the commentary

1. From commentary on verse 7: "Thus, as Buddha-nature, mind-itself is a unified pair of clarity and voidness. “Clarity” (gsal) is the mental activity of making appearances arise. [Sometimes, clarity is also explained as inseparable clarity and appearance – in other words, inseparable appearance-making and the appearances made.]"

2. Verse 10: "Reflexive appearances, never experienced as real, are deceptively confused into objects. Reflexive awareness, by the power of unawareness, is deceptively confused into a self. By the power of this dualistic grasping, we roam throughout the expanse of compulsive existence. May I once and for all cut out the root of deceptive confusion, my unawareness."

I love that verse and the following outstanding commentarial excerpts.

3. Extended commentary on verse 10:

We must not be confused about the conventional nature of the mind [the unified pair of clarity (appearance-making) and appearances (gsal-snang)]. We need extreme care not to be deceived and to confuse the appearances to be concrete external objects, as if they existed independently of the clarity aspect of the mind that makes them appear. [We need to realize that cognitive appearances are “reflexive” in that they come from mind-itself.] They do not have a nature of existing “outside.” The deepest truth (ultimate truth) is the unified pair of clarity and voidness [with voidness as the unified pair of awareness and voidness. Appearance-making and appearances are inseparable from awareness (the cognitive aspect of mind) and voidness].
...
Reflexive awareness, by the power of unawareness, is deceptively confused into a self. Mind-itself is inseparable clarity and voidness. Voidness itself is inseparable awareness and voidness. When we are unaware of this nature of mind-itself, we become deceptively confused and misconceive that mind is a truly existent “me.” The mind, however, has no true existence. [Beyond all words and concepts of the four impossible extreme modes of existence,] it cannot be found. Yet, there is awareness of the cognitive appearances that mind gives rise to simultaneously with the appearance-making of them. This is reflexive awareness (rang-rig), [in the sense of simultaneous awareness of what mind gives rise to from itself,] and it exists as a feature of its basis – mind as inseparable awareness and voidness. By the force of unawareness, we incorrectly take it to be a truly existent “me.”

Thus, we experience dualistic grasping (gnyis-‘dzin). Deceived about what we experience and confused because of our unawareness, we misconceive that the clarity-appearance side of mind-itself is truly existent objects and that the awareness-voidness side is a truly existent “me.” By the power of this dualistic grasping, we roam throughout the expanse of compulsive existence. We wander from one samsaric rebirth to the next, through the twelve links of dependent arising.

If we rid ourselves of our unawareness of the actual nature of mind-itself, we will stop the dualistic grasping of its clarity-appearance as truly existent objects and its awareness-voidness as a truly existent “me.” This will bring to an end our disturbing emotions and attitudes, which derive from dualistic grasping. That will bring to an end our production of karma, which derives from our disturbing emotions. That will bring to an end [the twelve links of dependent arising and] our wandering in samsara. Thus, the prayer, May I once and for all cut out the root of deceptive confusion, my unawareness.
Image
User avatar
PadmaVonSamba
Posts: 9439
Joined: Sat May 14, 2011 1:41 am

Re: Question on a commentary of the Mahamudra Prayer

Post by PadmaVonSamba »

Sounds about right to me.
EMPTIFUL.
An inward outlook produces outward insight.
User avatar
Powerful bliss
Posts: 27
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2017 4:51 pm

Re: Question on a commentary of the Mahamudra Prayer

Post by Powerful bliss »

Food to contemplate from Moonbeams of Mahamudra (new translation from Elizabeth Callahan):
[the essence of] appearances, the characteristic of appearances, however they manifest, is clarity. And yet simultaneously, the essence or nature of their clarity is emptiness, which is the absence of anything to be identified. In brief, the manifestation of an appearance (however it appears) is its clarity. And that is indivisible from its emptiness, its lack of identification.
.
User avatar
anjali
Former staff member
Posts: 1662
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2011 10:33 pm

Re: Question on a commentary of the Mahamudra Prayer

Post by anjali »

PadmaVonSamba wrote: Fri Aug 21, 2020 9:13 pm Sounds about right to me.
It sounds right to me as well. As I said, maybe it's just the way the commentary is worded that I find different and clarifying.

It's such a clear explanation of clarity vs awareness. I think for a long time I've tended to somewhat conflate those terms. This text very clearly states that clarity refers to the appearance-making--appearances aspect.

I can't say as I've ever come across such an unambiguous statement defining clarity: “Clarity” (gsal) is the mental activity of making appearances arise. [Sometimes, clarity is also explained as inseparable clarity and appearance – in other words, inseparable appearance-making and the appearances made.]"

I'm probably just not very well read. ;)
Image
User avatar
Powerful bliss
Posts: 27
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2017 4:51 pm

Re: Question on a commentary of the Mahamudra Prayer

Post by Powerful bliss »

I guess it depends also about how we define awareness. There is the following explanation in Moonbeams (enjoying really this new version!):
Furthermore, even though nowadays it seems that the word “awareness” is used as an experiential term for such [experiences of clarity-awareness], because those [experiences] involve conceptuality, are not emptiness endowed with the most sublime of manifestations, and are not the governing principle of all, they are not true awareness, as the great commentary on the Kālacakra Tantra explains:
What is awareness? What is called “awareness” is a nonconceptual, inner awareness: it is emptiness endowed with all manifestations. What is unchanging is awareness: it is without reference points, devoid of defilements, the embodiment of bliss. Awareness is the embodiment of causes and results: it is the inseparability of cause and result, the way that fire’s light and its ability to burn are inseparable.
Thanks for the discussion...
User avatar
Grigoris
Former staff member
Posts: 21938
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 9:27 pm
Location: Greece

Re: Question on a commentary of the Mahamudra Prayer

Post by Grigoris »

I think Berzin's comment occludes rather than clarifies.

The idea of unity of clarity and emptiness is a very common theme in Mahamudra.

It helps us to avoid reifying the "experience" of clarity.
"My religion is not deceiving myself."
Jetsun Milarepa 1052-1135 CE

"Butchers, prostitutes, those guilty of the five most heinous crimes, outcasts, the underprivileged: all are utterly the substance of existence and nothing other than total bliss."
The Supreme Source - The Kunjed Gyalpo
The Fundamental Tantra of Dzogchen Semde
User avatar
anjali
Former staff member
Posts: 1662
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2011 10:33 pm

Re: Question on a commentary of the Mahamudra Prayer

Post by anjali »

Grigoris wrote: Sat Aug 22, 2020 5:26 pm I think Berzin's comment occludes rather than clarifies.
I can see why one might say that. That wasn't the case for me.
Grigoris wrote: Sat Aug 22, 2020 5:26 pmThe idea of unity of clarity and emptiness is a very common theme in Mahamudra.

It helps us to avoid reifying the "experience" of clarity.
Agreed.

I guess what I'm poking at is, I can't say as I've ever come across "clarity" referring specifically to the appearance-making aspect of mind.

I don't want to belabor this too much. For me it was just an interesting and insightful translation/commentary that teased out some distinctions I haven't seen expreseed the way Berzin does.

Maybe a more specific question is whether "clarity" can legitimately be understood as "the mental activity of making appearances arise" ?
Image
User avatar
Grigoris
Former staff member
Posts: 21938
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 9:27 pm
Location: Greece

Re: Question on a commentary of the Mahamudra Prayer

Post by Grigoris »

anjali wrote: Sat Aug 22, 2020 7:21 pmMaybe a more specific question is whether "clarity" can legitimately be understood as "the mental activity of making appearances arise" ?
I believe that clarity is the basis from which appearances arise.

Like a prism refracting light into mutiple colours.
"My religion is not deceiving myself."
Jetsun Milarepa 1052-1135 CE

"Butchers, prostitutes, those guilty of the five most heinous crimes, outcasts, the underprivileged: all are utterly the substance of existence and nothing other than total bliss."
The Supreme Source - The Kunjed Gyalpo
The Fundamental Tantra of Dzogchen Semde
User avatar
anjali
Former staff member
Posts: 1662
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2011 10:33 pm

Re: Question on a commentary of the Mahamudra Prayer

Post by anjali »

Grigoris wrote: Sat Aug 22, 2020 7:42 pm
anjali wrote: Sat Aug 22, 2020 7:21 pmMaybe a more specific question is whether "clarity" can legitimately be understood as "the mental activity of making appearances arise" ?
I believe that clarity is the basis from which appearances arise.

Like a prism refracting light into mutiple colours.
I like that analogy. If I understand you, this is the differentiating (prism/refracting) aspect. Is that exclusively what clarity refers to?

A prism doesn't function unless light is passing through it. An alternative translation for "gsal" is luminosity. Luminosity seems to capture the radiant aspect better than "clarity" in the English language. It's that naturally dynamic, radiating, projecting quality of mind that I'm also trying to get a better handle on.

Following along with the light/prism analogy : Light source(?)--> light(?) --> prism(?)--> spectrum(appearances)

Maybe the whole process of moving from source to appearances would be "the mental activity of making appearances arise"? Are there Tibetan/Sanskrit words that would be appropriate for the question marks?
Image
User avatar
Grigoris
Former staff member
Posts: 21938
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 9:27 pm
Location: Greece

Re: Question on a commentary of the Mahamudra Prayer

Post by Grigoris »

anjali wrote: Sat Aug 22, 2020 8:34 pmI like that analogy. If I understand you, this is the differentiating (prism/refracting) aspect. Is that exclusively what clarity refers to?

A prism doesn't function unless light is passing through it. An alternative translation for "gsal" is luminosity. Luminosity seems to capture the radiant aspect better than "clarity" in the English language. It's that naturally dynamic, radiating, projecting quality of mind that I'm also trying to get a better handle on.

Following along with the light/prism analogy : Light source(?)--> light(?) --> prism(?)--> spectrum(appearances)

Maybe the whole process of moving from source to appearances would be "the mental activity of making appearances arise"? Are there Tibetan/Sanskrit words that would be appropriate for the question marks?
The white light is the clarity, the prism is the mental activity, the refracted light are appearances.

This is my understanding.
"My religion is not deceiving myself."
Jetsun Milarepa 1052-1135 CE

"Butchers, prostitutes, those guilty of the five most heinous crimes, outcasts, the underprivileged: all are utterly the substance of existence and nothing other than total bliss."
The Supreme Source - The Kunjed Gyalpo
The Fundamental Tantra of Dzogchen Semde
User avatar
anjali
Former staff member
Posts: 1662
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2011 10:33 pm

Re: Question on a commentary of the Mahamudra Prayer

Post by anjali »

Grigoris wrote: Sun Aug 23, 2020 9:10 am The white light is the clarity, the prism is the mental activity, the refracted light are appearances.

This is my understanding.
Thanks. Something to mull over. I decided to email Dr. Berzin himself about this question. He actually wrote back, and we've had a couple of brief back-and-forths. He did confirm that "the mental activity of making appearances arise" was a legitimate way of understanding clarity (gsal).

He made two short comments worth sharing. One was that gsal is often glossed as 'char, a word for the dawning of the sun. The other is that clarity is sometimes described as being like a mirror, allowing anything to appear. I've run into that one before, and it echos your comment about being the basis from which appearances arise.

For further reading, he pointed me to this multipart series on mental activity: Mahamudra and the Four Noble Truths. Interesting title, given that the three parts of the talk are: The Nature of/Purification of/Meditation on Mental Activity.

Haven't read much, but it the first few paragraphs are good stuff. :) If anything pops up worth sharing that is directly related to clarity, I may post it here for further discussion.

Good to talk to you again. :cheers:
Image
User avatar
Powerful bliss
Posts: 27
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2017 4:51 pm

Re: Question on a commentary of the Mahamudra Prayer

Post by Powerful bliss »

Would be interesting to know from which tradition viewpoint he's speaking. Maybe from the Gelug Kagyu tradition of mahamudra?
User avatar
anjali
Former staff member
Posts: 1662
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2011 10:33 pm

Re: Question on a commentary of the Mahamudra Prayer

Post by anjali »

Powerful bliss wrote: Sun Aug 23, 2020 6:37 pm Would be interesting to know from which tradition viewpoint he's speaking. Maybe from the Gelug Kagyu tradition of mahamudra?
In the link to the "Mahamudra and The Four Noble Truths", there is a section where he mentions the different Traditions of Mahamudra,
Here, we shall speak in general about mahamudra and, in terms of the discussion of voidness, we shall follow just one: the Gelug Kagyu approach, which accepts the assertions of Prasangika-Madhyamaka as clarified by Tsongkhapa. It is too complicated to try to cover the voidness approaches of all the mahamudra traditions.
But a littler further on, when speaking about clarity, he goes with the non-Gelug approach,
According to the Sakya, Kagyu, and Nyingma explanations, all that we actually see at any moment is one moment of a collage of colored shapes. Gelug says we also actually see the cup, because we cannot see the qualities of something without also seeing the basis for those qualities. For our purposes here, let's use the non-Gelug explanation, since it illustrates more clearly this point concerning the conventional nature of mental activity.
So far, I like what and how is saying things. It's a good read for anyone that wants to wade into this stuff. :thumbsup:
Image
User avatar
nyonchung
Posts: 256
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2021 9:33 pm
Location: France

Re: Question on a commentary of the Mahamudra Prayer

Post by nyonchung »

anjali wrote: Fri Aug 21, 2020 1:50 am Greetings all. I've been wanting to pose this question for a long time. Finally got around to revisiting the text and commentary.

Probably more commonly known as the Aspiration Prayer for Mahamudra, there is a commentary of the text by Beru Khyentse, with suplimentary commentary by Alexander Berzin here.

My question is about the following quote in the commentary on the text:

From the commentary on verse 8: "...the unified pair of clarity and voidness [the unified pair of (1) inseparabable appearance making and appearances and (2) inseparable awareness and voidness. ...]" Bracketed comment [] by Berzin.

I've never seen this pairing (voidness paired with awareness and clarity paired with appearances) in the literature. It's very clear and logical, and I like it a lot, but it seems unique to me. Maybe it's just the way it's expressed/presented. So I'm wondering, is this a generally accepted framework within the larger Tibetan tradition? Just Karma Kagyu? Just Khyentse Beru's/Berzin's take?
- a - this was translated (from Berzin) in French years back, the question being that Beru Khyentsé Rinpoché probaly quoted fom a written commentary, probably from the one by the 8th Situ, and he possibly received it, like Tenga Rinpoché, from Seljé 5 Karma Rabjam Chöying Drimé Nyingpo (1907-1991)
- this commentary is avalaible in English:
= "Mahāmudra Teachings of the Supreme Siddhas, The Eight Situpa Tenpa'i Nyinchay on the Third Karmapa Rangjung Dorjé's Aspiration Prayer of Mahāmudra of Definitive Meaning" = Nges don phyag rgya chen po'i smon lam gyi 'grel pa grub pa mchog gi zhal lung, by Tai Situ VIII Chökyi Jungné (1699-1774) , translated by Lama Sherab Dorje, Snow Lion Publications, Ithaca, 1995
- hereafter: Sherab Dorje (1995)

Reminder, this is a specifically karma-kagyü approach to Mahamudra, I read also Berzin's answers (he is of course infinitely more competent than me as a translator etc...) but is reading if bit off topic here.

I received this transmission around 1998 from Tenga Rinpoché (I think it was Thomas Roth translating), my notes were lost, ecxept from annotations along the root text itself. Sherab Dorje's translation is fine , but choices for vocabulary differ of course from Berzin's choices, and are certainly much more grounded in karma-kagyü practice than Berzin's.

- b - so one has possibly to go back to the Tibetan text

- shloka 7 - Sherab Dorje (pp. 51-52) has:
"The groud of purification is mind nature, unified cognizance and emptiness.
Through the purifying agency of the grat vajrayoga of mahāmudrā
- (p. 52) may delusory incidental stains be purified
and the result of purification, stainless dharmakāy becomes manifest"
The Tibetan text being:
/ sbyang gzhi sems nyid gsal stong zung 'jug la /
/ spyod byed phyag chen rdo rje rnal 'byor ches /
/ sbyang bya glo bur 'khrul pa'i dri ma rnams /
/ sbyangs 'bras dri 'bral chos sku mngon gyur shog//

"I've never seen this pairing (voidness paired with awareness and clarity paired with appearances)" this is ""gsal stong zung 'jug" you missed the point possibly due to the opacity of the translation. And Berzin's comments dont make it clearer, in my view.
"union of voidness and clarity" would be better according to me - but this admittedly shows a serious influence from French lexicality
A word to word rendering of the first line would be:
"the basis of purification is mind itself: union of void(ness) and clarity"
"gsal stong zung 'jug" is a very common expression and relates to Tantric tradition - not being competent in such matters, I leave it there and recommands you to enquire near a competent teacher with a competent translator.

So, if you don't have the lung for this prayer so much the better if you can get it . Normally, you engage with such teachings only after a first round of karma-kagyü ngöndro. That is after having a relevant initiation (like Phagmo, a prerequisite for the ngöndro themselves)

I don't want to hear any objections about sutra mahamudra etc.. or I'll send objectors to check with untranslated commentaries by Kathog Rigdzin and Domar Mingyur Dorjé who set the record straight on such matters.

On these four lines, the 8th Tai Situ commentary runs on 8 pages, with important quotes from relevant scripures and will probably answer your questions, reminding that here, we are at the path-Mahamudra level.
Better to understand the basis-Mahamudra level first :reading:
sorry for possible typos, I have very poor eyes :namaste:
"Me and the sky don't hold views - Me and the river have no fixed practice
Me and the madman don't have a guide- Me and the rainbow have no experiences
Me, the sun and the moon have no certitudes - Me and the jewel bear no fruit" - Dampa Sanggyé as quoted by Domar Mingyur Dorjé (born 1675)
lhaksam.dorje
Posts: 35
Joined: Thu Apr 08, 2021 12:42 pm

Re: Question on a commentary of the Mahamudra Prayer

Post by lhaksam.dorje »

Thank you all, this is a useful thread !
I also found "[the unified pair of (1) inseparabable appearance making and appearances and (2) inseparable awareness and voidness. ...]" confusing, because it seems to deviate from the usual clarity/emptiness, appearance/emptiness, awareness/emptiness that I have usually seen.

Regarding clarity...
Would 'the light of a movie projector' (regardless of whether there was a film in front of it, and regardless of whether there is a movie screen to shine on) also be an appropriate analogy for clarity ?
and is clarity in kagyu mahamudra use basically synonymous with luminosity as used in nyingma texts (or maybe it's particularly dzogchen, I'm not sure) ?

edit : I saw that anjali wrote that 'luminosity' is perhaps a better translation, but there seems to be a consistency in kagyu mahamudra texts of using 'clarity' and I was wondering if there was a particular reason for this...ie to differentiate from the regular use of 'luminosity' in dzogchen
Post Reply

Return to “Mahamudra”