is the mind individual?

General discussion, particularly exploring the Dharma in the modern world.
Post Reply
Jeff
Posts: 363
Joined: Sat May 26, 2012 2:22 pm

Re: is the mind individual?

Post by Jeff »

Malcolm wrote:
Jeff wrote:Where in sutra does it say for one's own benefit?
Everywhere.
With the realization/formation of the Dharmakaya there is no "one who is worried about their own benefit"? They have dropped all such desires and attachments or there would be no such Dharmakaya. What sutra really says such a thing?

Best wishes.
Malcolm
Posts: 41218
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: is the mind individual?

Post by Malcolm »

Jeff wrote:
Malcolm wrote:
Jeff wrote:Where in sutra does it say for one's own benefit?
Everywhere.
With the realization/formation of the Dharmakaya there is no "one who is worried about their own benefit"? They have dropped all such desires and attachments or there would be no such Dharmakaya. What sutra really says such a thing?

Best wishes.
Very many. This is because the dharmakāya only appears to buddhas, where as the sambhogakāya appears to high bodhisattvas and the nirmanakāya to everyone else.
Vases, canvas, bucklers, armies, forests, garlands, trees
houses, chariots, hostelries, and all such things
that common people designate dependent on their parts,
accept as such. For Buddha did not quarrel with the world!

—— Candrakīrti. MAV 6:166
User avatar
conebeckham
Posts: 5425
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 11:49 pm
Location: Bay Area, CA, USA

Re: is the mind individual?

Post by conebeckham »

Jeff wrote: The Dharmakaya is more like a stable "bubble" in emptiness. There is no conceptional thought in the Darmakaya, so it cannot really be said to be for "one's own benefit". Where in sutra does it say for one's own benefit?
As it can only be perceived "onself," i.e., cannot be seen by non-Buddhas, it is called the "Benefit for onself." This is a wide-ranging description found in many sources. You can find presentations in the Uttaratantrashastra and it's commentaries, and in a whole host of other places throughout Sutra and Tantra.

Jeff wrote:Thank you for pointing out that the Form Kayas are for the benefit of others, can you please explain how the Sambhogakaya "helps" with the benefit of the others? This seems to be impossible for most here as they believe that the mind cannot be affected by a buddha.
To be "helped" by a Sambhoghakaya Buddha form does not mean the mind is "directly affected by a Buddha." Sambhoghakaya forms appear due to a variety of causes and conditions, in interedependent origination as well. Doctrinally, these forms only appear to those practitioners dwelling on the Bhumis.
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")
Jeff
Posts: 363
Joined: Sat May 26, 2012 2:22 pm

Re: is the mind individual?

Post by Jeff »

Malcolm wrote:
Jeff wrote:
Malcolm wrote:
Everywhere.
With the realization/formation of the Dharmakaya there is no "one who is worried about their own benefit"? They have dropped all such desires and attachments or there would be no such Dharmakaya. What sutra really says such a thing?

Best wishes.
Very many. This is because the dharmakāya only appears to buddhas, where as the sambhogakāya appears to high bodhisattvas and the nirmanakāya to everyone else.
So your position is that a buddha (having a Dharmakaya) is "worried about their own benefit"? And that there are many such sutras that describe how buddhas have not dropped such desires and attachments of caring about their own benefit? Could you please point me to one? Or, any member here please point me to such a sutra?

Thanks,
Jeff
Malcolm
Posts: 41218
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: is the mind individual?

Post by Malcolm »

Jeff wrote:
So your position is that a buddha (having a Dharmakaya) is "worried about their own benefit"?
No. I already explained it as did cone, the dharmakāya is termed "for one's own benefit" because one can only see it when one becomes a buddha. Only buddhas can see the dharmakāya, as has been said now several times.
Vases, canvas, bucklers, armies, forests, garlands, trees
houses, chariots, hostelries, and all such things
that common people designate dependent on their parts,
accept as such. For Buddha did not quarrel with the world!

—— Candrakīrti. MAV 6:166
Jeff
Posts: 363
Joined: Sat May 26, 2012 2:22 pm

Re: is the mind individual?

Post by Jeff »

conebeckham wrote:
Jeff wrote: The Dharmakaya is more like a stable "bubble" in emptiness. There is no conceptional thought in the Darmakaya, so it cannot really be said to be for "one's own benefit". Where in sutra does it say for one's own benefit?
As it can only be perceived "onself," i.e., cannot be seen by non-Buddhas, it is called the "Benefit for onself." This is a wide-ranging description found in many sources. You can find presentations in the Uttaratantrashastra and it's commentaries, and in a whole host of other places throughout Sutra and Tantra.

Jeff wrote:Thank you for pointing out that the Form Kayas are for the benefit of others, can you please explain how the Sambhogakaya "helps" with the benefit of the others? This seems to be impossible for most here as they believe that the mind cannot be affected by a buddha.
To be "helped" by a Sambhoghakaya Buddha form does not mean the mind is "directly affected by a Buddha." Sambhoghakaya forms appear due to a variety of causes and conditions, in interedependent origination as well. Doctrinally, these forms only appear to those practitioners dwelling on the Bhumis.
Ok, so you are saying that it is a definitional/title thing regarding "benefit for oneself" rather than really any sutra saying that a Buddha worries or cares about oneself?

My position is that appearance to those dwelling on the Bhumis, is really the broader energy/light interaction that I have previously described. Additionally, my position is that a Dakini is also sometimes the Sambhogakaya body and directly interacts with high level practitioners.
Jeff
Posts: 363
Joined: Sat May 26, 2012 2:22 pm

Re: is the mind individual?

Post by Jeff »

Malcolm wrote:
Jeff wrote:
So your position is that a buddha (having a Dharmakaya) is "worried about their own benefit"?
No. I already explained it as did cone, the dharmakāya is termed "for one's own benefit" because one can only see it when one becomes a buddha. Only buddhas can see the dharmakāya, as has been said now several times.
Yes, with his response I realize that you meant a form of title or definition, rather than the words you actually used.
Malcolm
Posts: 41218
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: is the mind individual?

Post by Malcolm »

Jeff wrote:
Ok, so you are saying that it is a definitional/title thing regarding "benefit for oneself" rather than really any sutra saying that a Buddha worries or cares about oneself?

My position is that appearance to those dwelling on the Bhumis, is really the broader energy/light interaction that I have previously described. Additionally, my position is that a Dakini is also sometimes the Sambhogakaya body and directly interacts with high level practitioners.

The Śrī Maladevi sutra states:
  • In that respect, the dharmakāya of the tathāgatagarbha is definitely released from the sheath of afflictions. Bhagavān, the so called "tathāgatagarbha" is tathāgata's wisdom of emptiness that cannot be seen by śravakas and pratyekabuddhas.
Dharmakāya is just the total realization of emptiness. Nothing more.

Further, The Trikāya Sūtra states:
  • Kṣitigarbha, tathāgatas are endowed with the three kāyas: the dharmakāya, the sambhogkāya and the nirmanakāya…In that regard, the dharmakāya is visible to the tathagātas. The sambhogakāya is visible to bodhisattvas. The nirmanakāya is visible to ordinary persons on the stage of devotional practice.

    Kṣitigarbha, for example, clouds are produced on the basis of an empty sky; rain is produced on the basis of clouds. Likewise, the sambhogakaȳa appears on the basis of the dharmakāya, and the nirmanakāya appears on the basis of the sambhogakāya.

Last edited by Malcolm on Mon Apr 13, 2015 11:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Vases, canvas, bucklers, armies, forests, garlands, trees
houses, chariots, hostelries, and all such things
that common people designate dependent on their parts,
accept as such. For Buddha did not quarrel with the world!

—— Candrakīrti. MAV 6:166
User avatar
conebeckham
Posts: 5425
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 11:49 pm
Location: Bay Area, CA, USA

Re: is the mind individual?

Post by conebeckham »

There are so many sources of information relating to these topics.
Here's some links worth reading.

http://www.wisdomlib.org/definition/trikaya/index.html

http://www.wisdomlib.org/buddhism/book/ ... 83077.html

I always recommend this series of books, and this one in particular addresses your question.

http://www.amazon.ca/reader/1559393602? ... 1559393602
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")
Jeff
Posts: 363
Joined: Sat May 26, 2012 2:22 pm

Re: is the mind individual?

Post by Jeff »

Malcolm wrote:
Jeff wrote:
Ok, so you are saying that it is a definitional/title thing regarding "benefit for oneself" rather than really any sutra saying that a Buddha worries or cares about oneself?

My position is that appearance to those dwelling on the Bhumis, is really the broader energy/light interaction that I have previously described. Additionally, my position is that a Dakini is also sometimes the Sambhogakaya body and directly interacts with high level practitioners.

The Śrī Maladevi sutra states:
  • In that respect, the dharmakāya of the tathāgatagarbha is definitely released from the sheath of afflictions. Bhagavān, the so called "tathāgatagarbha" is tathāgata's wisdom of emptiness that cannot be seen by śravakas and pratyekabuddhas.
Dharmakāya is just the total realization of emptiness. Nothing more.

Further, The Trikāya Sūtra states:
  • Kṣitigarbha, tathāgatas are endowed with the three kāyas: the dharmakāya, the sambhogkāya and the nirmanakāya…In that regard, the dharmakāya is visible to the tathagātas. The sambhogakāya is visible to bodhisattvas. The nirmanakāya is visible to ordinary persons on the stage of devotional practice.

    Kṣitigarbha, for example, clouds are produced on the basis of an empty sky; rain is produced on the basis of clouds. Likewise, the sambhogakaȳa appears on the basis of the dharmakāya, and the nirmanakāya appears on the basis of the sambhogakāya.

Yes, the Dharmakaya being the total realization of emptiness and also being the basis that the sambhogkaya appears on is what I meant by a stable bubble in emptiness (for the sambhogkaya).
User avatar
Wayfarer
Former staff member
Posts: 5150
Joined: Sun May 27, 2012 8:31 am
Location: AU

Re: is the mind individual?

Post by Wayfarer »

From the description of vol 1 of the Treasury of Knowledge:
In Tibetan religious literature, Jamgön Kongtrül's Treasury of Knowledge in ten books stands out as a unique, encyclopedic masterpiece embodying the entire range of Buddhist teachings as they were preserved in Tibet. In his monumental Treasury of Knowledge, Jamgön Kongtrül presents a complete account of the major lines of thought and practice that comprise Tibetan Buddhism. This first book of The Treasury which serves as a prelude to Kongtrul's survey describes four major cosmological systems found in the Tibetan tradition—those associated with the Hinayana, Mahayana, Kalachakra, and Dzogchen teachings. Each of these cosmologies shows how the world arises from mind, whether through the accumulated results of past actions or from the constant striving of awareness to know itself.
'Only practice with no gaining idea' ~ Suzuki Roshi
Malcolm
Posts: 41218
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: is the mind individual?

Post by Malcolm »

Jeff wrote:
Malcolm wrote:
Jeff wrote:
Ok, so you are saying that it is a definitional/title thing regarding "benefit for oneself" rather than really any sutra saying that a Buddha worries or cares about oneself?

My position is that appearance to those dwelling on the Bhumis, is really the broader energy/light interaction that I have previously described. Additionally, my position is that a Dakini is also sometimes the Sambhogakaya body and directly interacts with high level practitioners.

The Śrī Maladevi sutra states:
  • In that respect, the dharmakāya of the tathāgatagarbha is definitely released from the sheath of afflictions. Bhagavān, the so called "tathāgatagarbha" is tathāgata's wisdom of emptiness that cannot be seen by śravakas and pratyekabuddhas.
Dharmakāya is just the total realization of emptiness. Nothing more.

Further, The Trikāya Sūtra states:
  • Kṣitigarbha, tathāgatas are endowed with the three kāyas: the dharmakāya, the sambhogkāya and the nirmanakāya…In that regard, the dharmakāya is visible to the tathagātas. The sambhogakāya is visible to bodhisattvas. The nirmanakāya is visible to ordinary persons on the stage of devotional practice.

    Kṣitigarbha, for example, clouds are produced on the basis of an empty sky; rain is produced on the basis of clouds. Likewise, the sambhogakaȳa appears on the basis of the dharmakāya, and the nirmanakāya appears on the basis of the sambhogakāya.

Yes, the Dharmakaya being the total realization of emptiness and also being the basis that the sambhogkaya appears on is what I meant by a stable bubble in emptiness (for the sambhogkaya).
Why don't you just properly study with a teacher rather than grasping at straws?
Vases, canvas, bucklers, armies, forests, garlands, trees
houses, chariots, hostelries, and all such things
that common people designate dependent on their parts,
accept as such. For Buddha did not quarrel with the world!

—— Candrakīrti. MAV 6:166
User avatar
conebeckham
Posts: 5425
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 11:49 pm
Location: Bay Area, CA, USA

Re: is the mind individual?

Post by conebeckham »

Jeff wrote: Yes, the Dharmakaya being the total realization of emptiness and also being the basis that the sambhogkaya appears on is what I meant by a stable bubble in emptiness (for the sambhogkaya).
You actually said:
The Dharmakaya is more like a stable "bubble" in emptiness.
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")
Jeff
Posts: 363
Joined: Sat May 26, 2012 2:22 pm

Re: is the mind individual?

Post by Jeff »

So, I would like to theorize an experiment for the group...

If it could be done, would remote energy interaction be considered as experimental proof that minds overlap? Something that could be consciously percieved (energy, vibrations, temperature change or visions). As I have stated is possible for someone at the 7th bhumi.
Malcolm
Posts: 41218
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: is the mind individual?

Post by Malcolm »

Jeff wrote:So, I would like to theorize an experiment for the group...

If it could be done, would remote energy interaction be considered as experimental proof that minds overlap? Something that could be consciously percieved (energy, vibrations, temperature change or visions). As I have stated is possible for someone at the 7th bhumi.
Seriously man, no one here, including you, is a seventh stage bodhisattva. If you think you are, you need psychological help.
Vases, canvas, bucklers, armies, forests, garlands, trees
houses, chariots, hostelries, and all such things
that common people designate dependent on their parts,
accept as such. For Buddha did not quarrel with the world!

—— Candrakīrti. MAV 6:166
Jeff
Posts: 363
Joined: Sat May 26, 2012 2:22 pm

Re: is the mind individual?

Post by Jeff »

conebeckham wrote:
Jeff wrote: Yes, the Dharmakaya being the total realization of emptiness and also being the basis that the sambhogkaya appears on is what I meant by a stable bubble in emptiness (for the sambhogkaya).
You actually said:
The Dharmakaya is more like a stable "bubble" in emptiness.
Agreed. That is what I said. The context of the discussion was not that broad at the time. Does not a stable bubble imply that it is stable for some purpose.
Jeff
Posts: 363
Joined: Sat May 26, 2012 2:22 pm

Re: is the mind individual?

Post by Jeff »

Malcolm wrote:
Jeff wrote:So, I would like to theorize an experiment for the group...

If it could be done, would remote energy interaction be considered as experimental proof that minds overlap? Something that could be consciously percieved (energy, vibrations, temperature change or visions). As I have stated is possible for someone at the 7th bhumi.
Seriously man, no one here, including you, is a seventh stage bodhisattva. If you think you are, you need psychological help.
I was making no such statement. I was asking a theoretical question as to whether the group would consider that as proof.
Malcolm
Posts: 41218
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: is the mind individual?

Post by Malcolm »

Jeff wrote:
Malcolm wrote:
Jeff wrote:So, I would like to theorize an experiment for the group...

If it could be done, would remote energy interaction be considered as experimental proof that minds overlap? Something that could be consciously percieved (energy, vibrations, temperature change or visions). As I have stated is possible for someone at the 7th bhumi.
Seriously man, no one here, including you, is a seventh stage bodhisattva. If you think you are, you need psychological help.
I was making no such statement. I was asking a theoretical question as to whether the group would consider that as proof.
There is no substratum, minds do not "overlap." The reason why Buddhas and high bodhisattvas can know the minds of others, know past lives, etc. is because the nature of everything is emptiness and therefore while there is no universal substratum there is also no impediments because everything is empty. And since everything is empty, Buddha's wisdom is unimpeded in all directions and times.
Vases, canvas, bucklers, armies, forests, garlands, trees
houses, chariots, hostelries, and all such things
that common people designate dependent on their parts,
accept as such. For Buddha did not quarrel with the world!

—— Candrakīrti. MAV 6:166
Punya
Posts: 1366
Joined: Thu Dec 20, 2012 10:50 pm

Re: is the mind individual?

Post by Punya »

conebeckham wrote:
Punya wrote:
Buddha does not have "mind," per se. Buddha's ultimate "identity" (if you need such a definition) is Wisdom. The three Kayas, and the five wisdoms, are the nature of the Buddha, the identity of the Buddha. Mind is a samsaric phenomenon. 
I take your point about just reading things in books Cone but in an Ocean of the Ultimate Meaning Thrangu Rinpoche says "When the mind is in a state of delusion it is in the form of the eighth consciousnesses. When we see the mind's true nature the mind manifests as the five wisdoms."

I guess it depends what you (plural) mean by mind as to whether it exists at the ultimate level. :shrug:
I THINK that what is being said is that Mind's True Nature (which is not mind, right?), when "seen," is seen or "appears as" the five wisdoms. It's not really "mind" manifesting as the five wisdoms, but Nature of Mind, seen clearly, as the five wisdoms.

But you should clarify that with a qualified teacher, not with me.
Thank you. That gives me something new to chew on. :smile:
We abide nowhere. We possess nothing.
~Chatral Rinpoche
Bakmoon
Posts: 746
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2014 12:31 am

Re: is the mind individual?

Post by Bakmoon »

Jeff wrote:So, I would like to theorize an experiment for the group...

If it could be done, would remote energy interaction be considered as experimental proof that minds overlap? Something that could be consciously percieved (energy, vibrations, temperature change or visions). As I have stated is possible for someone at the 7th bhumi.
No, why would that mean that minds would overlap?
Post Reply

Return to “Dharma in Everyday Life”