What is real Bodhicitta?
-
Loppon Namdrol: Real bodhicitta comes from realizing your nature. The rest is just contrived bullshit conceptual bodhicitta that is of no use at all.
Jangchup Donden wrote:
No use at all?Loppon Namdrol:
None. Completely inauthentic and not connected at all to sentient beings real situation, which is that they are suffering because they do not know their own nature.
All the contrived conceptual wishful thinking about how nice it would be to save sentient beings does not help them, or oneself, even one little bit.
I am not saying "don't be nice to people" -- of course one should be nice. But one shouldn't paint being decent with religious fantasies.
N -
You miss the point completely. Uncontrived bodhicitta is based on one's personal experience of the nature of the mind, and from that stems limitless compassion from others.
What I am saying is that intellectually cultivated bodhicitta is next to useless.
N -
Thusness, earlier this year:
Although I do not hold on tightly to an altruistic view but yes I believe when a practitioner fully actualized the view of 2 fold Emptiness, there is this free flowing compassion for all living beings. For lay practitioner, this aspect is not thoroughly manifested but for some great vajrayana or Mahayana masters, we witness such compassions. I do not see ‘Bodhicitta’ as a goal but rather as a natural quality of a sincere practitioner that has actualized the view of Emptiness. -
Great post. Thanks :)
-
Originally posted by An Eternal Now:
Thusness, earlier this year:
Although I do not hold on tightly to an altruistic view but yes I believe when a practitioner fully actualized the view of 2 fold Emptiness, there is this free flowing compassion for all living beings. For lay practitioner, this aspect is not thoroughly manifested but for some great vajrayana or Mahayana masters, we witness such compassions. I do not see ‘Bodhicitta’ as a goal but rather as a natural quality of a sincere practitioner that has actualized the view of Emptiness.For Vajrayana view:
Apart from the view of 2-fold emptiness that dissolves grasping to self and dharma.
Vajrayana also holds that there is also the view of 'primordially pure appearance' that dissolves grasping to impure vision.
That is why in the final conclusion stages of Dzogchen, there is Togal which reveals in a natural way the visions of the mandalas and Buddhafields of the Buddha deities and so forth as a manifestation of rigpa.
For the Mahayana path, after the 8th Bhumi onwards, the Bodhisattva would gradually undo the grasping to impure appearances naturally, thus both the Mahayana and Vajrayana paths have the same Buddhahood result. However, in terms of expediency, the Vajrayana path tackles the grasping to impure appearances directly right from the beginning of the path, and thus is a much more swifter method towards defeating both kinds of grasping (grasping to self/dharma and grasping to impure phenomenon)
One teacher called Achuk Lama Rinpoche. He has attained the rainbow body and is famous for his display of Buddhas and other sacred signs on his own body which many thousands upon thousands have seen, including my friends. He uses these pure phenomenon as a skilful means to lead one to realise one's own true nature and also for ascertaining one's stage on the path etc. For him all phenomenon is pure and he sometimes does things like pick up ordinary pebbles from places to keep because he has pure view of those pebbles as deities mandalas etc.
When a Buddha attains Buddhahood, from the POV of the Vajrayana vehicle, all appearances to him are on the level of ultimate truth inseparable from the relative truth (this is the viewpoint of Vajrayana) and also, all impure appearances manifest as primoridally pure Buddhafields and deities.
I want to bring this up because many people do not yet understand the difference in viewpoints of the Vajrayana and Mahayana schools. It is important to be clearer about it esp for Vajrayana practitioner. If possible, i will try to take out the main points and compile another article about this in future when time permits.
-
I should make another point about Bodhichitta. Although it seems from Thusness experience and realisations, Bodhichitta could arise from the 2 emptinesses, which i agree definitely. But the Buddhist path has never prescribed that one only tries to generate the motivation for Bodhichitta after realising the 2 emptinesses. In fact, for the Mahayana path of accumulation, entry is only possible due to uncontrived Bodhichitta (i presume on a aspirational level) and then after that realisation of emptiness comes on the Mahayana path of seeing. Which means, you can and should generate Bodhichitta motivation first as an entry to the Mahayana path.
I write this in case any other reader here mistake the above quotes and utilise them wrongly in their practice.
A case in point would be in the time of Lama Atisha. One day he woke up and exclaimed very sorrowfully to his attendant monk saying, "Oh, today someone has attained the 'stream-entry' or 'arhat' level (i can't remember which) through the practice of Hevajra, what a pity!' The attendant was shocked and asked, 'But the practice of Hevajra leads to unsurpassed complete Buddhahood!' Then Lama Atisha replied, "Yes, Hevajra practice leads to Buddhahood, however, due to the level of motivation of the practitioner, he attained only such a small result (compared to Buddhahood)."
This example is not belittling the result of stream-entry at all. But it does show that the result depends on the causal motivation. So in the first place, the causal motivation is important. And this is in line with the teachings of Buddha (as i know it from my Vajrayana studies)
Shared with all humbly, may it be of benefit! Peace
-
Originally posted by Dharmadhatu:
For Vajrayana view:
Apart from the view of 2-fold emptiness that dissolves grasping to self and dharma.
Vajrayana also holds that there is also the view of 'primordially pure appearance' that dissolves grasping to impure vision.
That is why in the final conclusion stages of Dzogchen, there is Togal which reveals in a natural way the visions of the mandalas and Buddhafields of the Buddha deities and so forth as a manifestation of rigpa.
For the Mahayana path, after the 8th Bhumi onwards, the Bodhisattva would gradually undo the grasping to impure appearances naturally, thus both the Mahayana and Vajrayana paths have the same Buddhahood result. However, in terms of expediency, the Vajrayana path tackles the grasping to impure appearances directly right from the beginning of the path, and thus is a much more swifter method towards defeating both kinds of grasping (grasping to self/dharma and grasping to impure phenomenon)
One teacher called Achuk Lama Rinpoche. He has attained the rainbow body and is famous for his display of Buddhas and other sacred signs on his own body which many thousands upon thousands have seen, including my friends. He uses these pure phenomenon as a skilful means to lead one to realise one's own true nature and also for ascertaining one's stage on the path etc. For him all phenomenon is pure and he sometimes does things like pick up ordinary pebbles from places to keep because he has pure view of those pebbles as deities mandalas etc.
When a Buddha attains Buddhahood, from the POV of the Vajrayana vehicle, all appearances to him are on the level of ultimate truth inseparable from the relative truth (this is the viewpoint of Vajrayana) and also, all impure appearances manifest as primoridally pure Buddhafields and deities.
I want to bring this up because many people do not yet understand the difference in viewpoints of the Vajrayana and Mahayana schools. It is important to be clearer about it esp for Vajrayana practitioner. If possible, i will try to take out the main points and compile another article about this in future when time permits.
Not only that... Some Dzogchen teachings from the tantras state that only Dzogchen leads to the 13th bhumi full Buddhahood, and there are lower levels of Buddhahood which does not revert to basis. As only the 13th bhumi Buddha is able to recognise all appearance as the display of his own wisdom, when this universe ends and a new universe cycle starts again, all other beings including those Buddhas who have not reverted to the basis, will be unable to recognise the display as their own wisdom and note this: fall back into samsara again (oh my gosh, buddhahood can be reversed?) Basically: Dzogchen says that all sentient beings become Buddhas before the end of a universe, but not everyone becomes Buddhas that revert to basis (13th bhumi), so not all Buddhas will escape being a sentient being again in the next universe. So basically, we have all been Buddhas before, but too bad just not a 13th bhumi one so thats why we got lost again.
That is shocking to say the least, but not something I can personally verify because it is way beyond my own experience. Also I have my own doubts (wouldn't a 12th bhumi Buddha have known better?? wouldn't the 13th bhumi buddha have taught the 12th bhumi ones??) I hope the whole story is just an analogy (I once asked Namdrol if the teaching about the primordial buddha samantabhadra are just analogies and not a literal story, as ChNNR seems to suggest it is an analogy, but Namdrol says such stories are taught as literal especially in higher teachings like the menagde)
I must say, I still have a lot of confusion and doubts about dharma even now despite whatever insights, or experiences.. haha
-
Originally posted by An Eternal Now:
Not only that... Some Dzogchen teachings from the tantras state that only Dzogchen leads to the 13th bhumi full Buddhahood, and there are lower levels of Buddhahood which does not revert to basis. As only the 13th bhumi Buddha is able to recognise all appearance as the display of his own wisdom, when this universe ends and a new universe cycle starts again, all other beings including those Buddhas who have not reverted to the basis, will be unable to recognise the display as their own wisdom and note this: fall back into samsara again (oh my gosh, buddhahood can be reversed?) Basically: Dzogchen says that all sentient beings become Buddhas before the end of a universe, but not everyone becomes Buddhas that revert to basis (13th bhumi), so not all Buddhas will escape being a sentient being again in the next universe. So basically, we have all been Buddhas before, but too bad just not a 13th bhumi one so thats why we got lost again.
That is shocking to say the least, but not something I can personally verify because it is way beyond my own experience. Also I have my own doubts (wouldn't a 12th bhumi Buddha have known better?? wouldn't the 13th bhumi buddha have taught the 12th bhumi ones??) I hope the whole story is just an analogy (I once asked Namdrol if the teaching about the primordial buddha samantabhadra are just analogies and not a literal story, as ChNNR seems to suggest it is an analogy, but Namdrol says such stories are taught as literal especially in higher teachings like the menagde)
I must say, I still have a lot of confusion and doubts about dharma even now despite whatever insights, or experiences.. haha
Where you read this from? Supreme Source?
From my memory, there is up to 16th Bhumi based on the classification of Dzogchen.
I think that i have read somewhere that the later classes of Bhumis (above 12th) is a matter of classification.
Tsultrim Lodro says that although there are suggestions in the texts that the Mahayana Buddhahood is slightly inferior to the Vajrayana Buddhahood, however it is a matter of interpretation. Basically, it is the same Buddhahood.
However, in terms of views of Vajrayana and Mahayana, there are indeed many distinct points, and even between the different schools of Tibetan Buddhism there are differences. But, apart from the differing speed of progress and methods, we can say that all reach the same result, same Buddhahood.
-
From Loppon Namdrol.
.........
Sure there is -- as Samputa clearly explains. But this is something Sakyas/Nyingmas and Kagyus do not agree on. Kaguyus basically assert what you just have -- there is only one level of buddhahood, the elventh bhumi. When we see breakdowns into more bhumis, these are just refinements of bodhisattva levels -- but still only one level of Buddhahood.
Sakyas and Nyingmapas do not see it that way. So we will agree to disagree. we see qualitative differences in the omniscience of the three levels or six levels of Buddhahood. The funny thing is meditatively, and in terms of direct introduction and so on Kagyu and Nyingma are closer. But in terms of philosophy and basic attitudes about the path and so Sakya and Nyingma are closer. This is why when one leaves Sakya or Kagyu, there is only one place to go.
Moreover, in Dzogchen there is a further disctinction between Abhisambudhas and Samyaksambuddhas..................
The basis is the three wisdoms: essence, nature and compassion. "Reverting to the basis" means that you have not eradicated all the most subtle traces in the elements of your physical body.
N............
Most people think that Buddhahood is irrersible; Dzogchen on the other hand asserts that the buddhahood of the lower yanas is reverts into the basis, and only Dzogchen results in complete and irreversible buddhahood.
N............
It is because buddhahood of lower y�nas is incomplete and does not reach the stage of ka dag chen po, great original purity. The simplest way to explain it is that after the this universe dissolves and the next one arises, those beings who have not achieved the stage of ka dag chen po start all over.
N............
Even the arhat path leads to buddhahood, the question is, how long?............
The arhat path leads to buddhahood because arhats are roused from nirodhasamapatti by a Buddha and placed into the bodhisattva path.
N............
conebeckham wrote:I've heard this said or quote before but...after "3 incalculable eons" or something, right, Namdrol?
Oh, probably longer than that. That nirodhasamapatti is permanent in the sense that when an arhats enters that kind of suspended animation, he has no particular intention of rousing from it again.............
Wisdom = ye shes.
This is a subtle point of Dzogchen most people do not pay attention to. There is very little difference between Dzogchen cosmology and Abhidharma cosmology. But there is a slight difference. In Dzogchen cosmology all sentient beings achieve buddhahood.
But....there are two kinds of buddhahood discussed in Dzogchen; buddhahood that reverts to the cause and the buddhahood that does not revert the cause.
Those whose buddhahood was incomplete can still fall into sentient being hood if they do not recognize the arising of the basis as being their own display.
According to the commentary on the སྲས་གཅིག་པུ་རྒྱུད by Garab Dorje in the Vima Nyinthig, the basis arises because of traces of latent affliction and action left over from the previous eon. At that time, one either recognizes the stirring of the basis or not.
N............
There are, if you recall, three stages of Buddhahood. Since the first two stages of Buddhahood do not realized all phenomena as the display of their own wisdom, the eleventh and twelfth bhumi are not complete buddhahood, this true even in Sarma schools.
N............
There are three explanations possible, given that Dzogchen tantras and traditions definitely state that Samantabhadra was intiallly subject to either one or two ignorances (ma rig pa, avidy�):
1) The Dzogchen assertion that all sentient beings attain "full awakening (sangs rgyas)" at the end of a given mah�kalpa requires interpetation and must not be taken literally.
2) Buddhahood is, up to a point, in fact reversible.
3) Buddhas and sentient beings newly form at the beginning of a mah�kalapa.
All three possibilities present problems in terms of traditional Indian Mah�y�na Buddhology.
This controversy first came to my attention when my Sakya khenpo mentioned it in passing in the early '90's.............
xabir (me, AEN) wrote:You guys seem to take Samantabhadra as a literal real account of what happened, but didn't ChNNR says it should be taken metaphorically?
The Supreme Source, epilogue: on the nature of Samanatabhadra
Q: is it possible to conceive of a being that has never entered into dualism, into samsara?
A: Regarding certain tantras it would seem that originally, by the magic of knowledge and of ignorance, on one side there arose Samantabhadra, the first Buddha, and on the other side beings who transmigrate. However, this should be mainly understood as a metaphor to enable us to disxover our real condition. If we deem Samantabhadra as an individual being, we are far from the true meaning. In reality, he denotes our potentiality that, even though at the present moment we are in samsara, has never been conditioned by dualism. From the beginning, the state of the individual has been pure and always remains pure: this is what Samantabhadra represents. But when we fall into conditioning, it is as if we are no longer Samantabhadra because we are ignorant of our true nature. So what is called the primordial Buddha, or Adibuddha, is only a metaphor for our true condition.
That is a sems sde prensentation. The presentation in Man ngag sde is very specific.N
............
I am simply reporting what Garab Dorje, Padmasambhava, Shri Singha et al actually say. I don't need to interpret anything.
In Hīnay�na, Shakyamuni taught arhatship as buddhahood. In Mah�yana, he taught that arhatship was not buddhahood, and was inferior to buddhahood. And that in fact, after attaining arhatship, arhats would be roused from their nirodhasamapatti at some point and then they must traverse the paths of stages of Mah�y�na. So, was the Buddha lying in Hin�y�na when he told his followers that arhatship was it?
In Vajray�na, in the Samputa tantra it is clarified that there are three stages of Buddhahood. Two stages of Buddhas who do not recognize all phenomena as being the display of their own wisdom and the thireenth bhumi, Vajradhara, where all phenomena are so recognized. Does this make the Buddha a liar about Mah�y�na?
In Dzochen, there are enumerated another three stages, three more stages of those who dwell within wisdom, rendering the thirteenth bhumi a lower stage of buddhahood. Does this make the Buddha a liar about Vajray�na?
In any event, this notion of "Buddhahood that reverts to the basis [gzhi, not kun gzhi]" as an inferior buddhahood that is not complete is well attested in Dzogchen. It has to be the case because as Garab Dorje points out, all sentient beings in the previous eon attain buddhahood by the end of the eon. This is explicitly stated by Garab Dorje in the commentary I mentioned to above.
But to illustrate my point further, the Drikung view is Dzogchen is definitely subordinated. For example, Jigten Sumgon states in Gongcik: “The supreme realization is not touched by the three great ones.” This is echoe of a statement by Gampopoa to his nephew, Gomchung.
But I don't during Jigten Sumgon's time Nyingthig was wide spread. At this point in history Nyingma was very much on the decline.............
From the thirteenth bhumi onwards, they are stages of "abiding in wisdom". Presuming one manages to attain the thirteen bhumi, it is unlikely that one's realization will be blocked.
N............
There are two systems. One in which the sixteen bhumis directly correspond with the thirteen bhumis + three. Another where the bhumis are given as descriptive names for experiences through the four visions.
They are both correct explanations.
N............
adinatha wrote:Primordial Buddha: beginningless vidya. Youthful vase body. Five lights. Self-sprung simultaneous appearances of samsara and nirvana. Samsara spontaneously emptied because no three times, due to immediate responsiveness of dharmakaya.
Ok, it is important to understand three things: the general original basis, the reality of the basis, and how ignorance manifests. In addition to that it is necessary to know that Garab Dorje's commentary on the Single Son of the Buddha's tantras supplies a necessary understanding I will address below at the section on the arising of the basis.
The Unwritten Tantra (Yi ge med pa describes how the general original basis exists:
“There is no object to investigate within the view of self-originated wisdom: nothing went before, nothing happens later, nothing is present now at all. Action does not exist. Traces do not exist. Ignorance does not exist. Mind does not exist. Discriminating wisdom does not exist. Samsara does not exist. Nirvana does not exist. Even vidyÄ� itself does not exist i.e. nothing at all appears in wisdom. That arose from not grasping anything.”
This is the state of original purity, The Blazing Lamp says:
Within initial original purity
the nature is like so:
not made by anyone, manifesting naturally,
the nature is already just so.
In this state, The Rosary of Pearls states:
The mere term delusion cannot be described
within the original purity of the initial state,
likewise, how can there be non-delusion?
Therefore, pure of delusion from the beginning.
The Heart Mirror states “All phenomena of the basis must be understood as the trio of essence, nature and compassion. All phenomena of the essence must be understood as emptiness. All phenomena of the nature must be understood as luminosity. All phenomena of compassion must be understood as pervading all sentient beings.”
So, of course, there must be essence, nature and compassion, timelessly present as the basis. Without these wisdoms, there can be no nirvana and no samsara. We can term these three "sugatagarbha" if we like. Padmasambhava states in the Clear Mirror:
Those three wisdoms pervade Samantabhadra and sentient beings down to the tiniest creature without any discrimination of good or bad, high or low.
Since these three wisdoms are themselves not established in anyway at all, we can be sure we are free from eternalism. Since these three natures always appear, we are free from annihilationism.Vidya arises simultaneously with 8 vijnana. A moment of nonapprehension: sentient being. A moment of apprehension: Samantabhadra. No two moments, even though deluded discriminating mind sees two moments and re-liberation.
In the system of the Dzogchen Nyinghig three causes of ignorance are described -- those three are essence, nature and compassion. This is why there are three ignorances in this system. The system of explanation of Gongpa Zangthal is a little different, with only two ignorances -- we will continue with the Dzogchen Nyinthig system.
According to Garab Dorje, prior to the arising of the basis which is latent during the dark eon interval, nevertheless there are traces of affliction and action remaining from the previous eon. Because of these traces, the basis is stirred, the five lights appear and so on (this is why the Dzogcgen doctrine of two different kinds of Buddhahood is critical -- the first, the buddhahood that reverts the basis is the buddhahood asserted by all lower vehicles. The buddhahood that does not revert to the basis is the preserve of only Dzogchen).
The Gongpa Zangthal cycle supplies that during the arising of basis there is a neutral awareness (shes pa lung ma bstan) in the basis that does not recognize itself. This non-recognition is the innate ignorance. When this neutral awareness cognizes the five lights there is a dividing line between nirvana and samsara. When a neutral awareness recognizes the appearance of the basis as its own appearances it is is prajñÄ� and is immediately liberated. That is Samantabhadra. A neutral awareness that does not recognize appearances as its own appearances immediately is the imputing ignorance, and samsara begins (again) because subject and object is imputed. This is all very clearly explained in detail in the eleven topics of Dzogchen Nyinthig. This is also clearly explained by Khenpo Ngawang Palzang.Key point: innate enlightenment arises simultaneously with innate ignorance.
After the basis arises, innate ignorance is first and even Samantabhadra has it. There is period where a neutral awareness does not recognize itself in anyway. That is the innate ignorance. It (the neutral awareness) can only recognize itself through the display of five lights. When it recognizes that display as its own display, then this is the liberation of Samantabhadra without the performance of an iota of virtue. We on the other hand did not recognize these five lights as our own display, and for us, samsara began, without even an particle of non-virtue having been done.
According to Dzogchen teachings, all sentient being attain Buddhahood by the end of the eon -- this is very clearly stated by Garab Dorje in the commentary above. But there are two kinds of Buddhahood, and as I said above, there is only Buddhahood that does not revert to the basis, and that is the Buddhahood attained through Dzogchen methods. The Buddhahood of other vehicles reverts to the basis, without the corresponding result.
Now then, the reason why we cannot take these metaphors in Uttaratantra literally is that the basis is not Buddhahood. If the basis were Buddhahood, there would be no need for any kind of recognition.
In Dzogchen, there is a difference between the basis and the result. The difference is simply vidy� and avidy� and the recognition and non-recognition that comes from those.
Further, it is not enough merely to understand the general original basis. One must also understand the human body as a basis.
I will not discuss this here since it is not a proper topic.......
p.s. N also said:
Anyone who even begins the practice of tögal will achieve full awakening in at most three lifetimes, if not during the bardo of dharmatÄ�. -
For a bodhisattva, bodhicitta is an intention and the path as well.
This is why, in terms of relative bodhicitta, there is both aspiration and engaged bodhicitta.
In terms of utimate bodhicitta, there is śamatha and vipaśy�na.
N -
Originally posted by An Eternal Now:
From Loppon Namdrol.
.........
Sure there is -- as Samputa clearly explains. But this is something Sakyas/Nyingmas and Kagyus do not agree on. Kaguyus basically assert what you just have -- there is only one level of buddhahood, the elventh bhumi. When we see breakdowns into more bhumis, these are just refinements of bodhisattva levels -- but still only one level of Buddhahood.
Sakyas and Nyingmapas do not see it that way. So we will agree to disagree. we see qualitative differences in the omniscience of the three levels or six levels of Buddhahood. The funny thing is meditatively, and in terms of direct introduction and so on Kagyu and Nyingma are closer. But in terms of philosophy and basic attitudes about the path and so Sakya and Nyingma are closer. This is why when one leaves Sakya or Kagyu, there is only one place to go.
Moreover, in Dzogchen there is a further disctinction between Abhisambudhas and Samyaksambuddhas..................
The basis is the three wisdoms: essence, nature and compassion. "Reverting to the basis" means that you have not eradicated all the most subtle traces in the elements of your physical body.
N............
Most people think that Buddhahood is irrersible; Dzogchen on the other hand asserts that the buddhahood of the lower yanas is reverts into the basis, and only Dzogchen results in complete and irreversible buddhahood.
N............
It is because buddhahood of lower y�nas is incomplete and does not reach the stage of ka dag chen po, great original purity. The simplest way to explain it is that after the this universe dissolves and the next one arises, those beings who have not achieved the stage of ka dag chen po start all over.
N............
Even the arhat path leads to buddhahood, the question is, how long?............
The arhat path leads to buddhahood because arhats are roused from nirodhasamapatti by a Buddha and placed into the bodhisattva path.
N............
Oh, probably longer than that. That nirodhasamapatti is permanent in the sense that when an arhats enters that kind of suspended animation, he has no particular intention of rousing from it again.............
Wisdom = ye shes.
This is a subtle point of Dzogchen most people do not pay attention to. There is very little difference between Dzogchen cosmology and Abhidharma cosmology. But there is a slight difference. In Dzogchen cosmology all sentient beings achieve buddhahood.
But....there are two kinds of buddhahood discussed in Dzogchen; buddhahood that reverts to the cause and the buddhahood that does not revert the cause.
Those whose buddhahood was incomplete can still fall into sentient being hood if they do not recognize the arising of the basis as being their own display.
According to the commentary on the སྲས་གཅིག་པུ་རྒྱུད by Garab Dorje in the Vima Nyinthig, the basis arises because of traces of latent affliction and action left over from the previous eon. At that time, one either recognizes the stirring of the basis or not.
N............
There are, if you recall, three stages of Buddhahood. Since the first two stages of Buddhahood do not realized all phenomena as the display of their own wisdom, the eleventh and twelfth bhumi are not complete buddhahood, this true even in Sarma schools.
N............
There are three explanations possible, given that Dzogchen tantras and traditions definitely state that Samantabhadra was intiallly subject to either one or two ignorances (ma rig pa, avidy�):
1) The Dzogchen assertion that all sentient beings attain "full awakening (sangs rgyas)" at the end of a given mah�kalpa requires interpetation and must not be taken literally.
2) Buddhahood is, up to a point, in fact reversible.
3) Buddhas and sentient beings newly form at the beginning of a mah�kalapa.
All three possibilities present problems in terms of traditional Indian Mah�y�na Buddhology.
This controversy first came to my attention when my Sakya khenpo mentioned it in passing in the early '90's.............
That is a sems sde prensentation. The presentation in Man ngag sde is very specific.N
............
I am simply reporting what Garab Dorje, Padmasambhava, Shri Singha et al actually say. I don't need to interpret anything.
In Hīnay�na, Shakyamuni taught arhatship as buddhahood. In Mah�yana, he taught that arhatship was not buddhahood, and was inferior to buddhahood. And that in fact, after attaining arhatship, arhats would be roused from their nirodhasamapatti at some point and then they must traverse the paths of stages of Mah�y�na. So, was the Buddha lying in Hin�y�na when he told his followers that arhatship was it?
In Vajray�na, in the Samputa tantra it is clarified that there are three stages of Buddhahood. Two stages of Buddhas who do not recognize all phenomena as being the display of their own wisdom and the thireenth bhumi, Vajradhara, where all phenomena are so recognized. Does this make the Buddha a liar about Mah�y�na?
In Dzochen, there are enumerated another three stages, three more stages of those who dwell within wisdom, rendering the thirteenth bhumi a lower stage of buddhahood. Does this make the Buddha a liar about Vajray�na?
In any event, this notion of "Buddhahood that reverts to the basis [gzhi, not kun gzhi]" as an inferior buddhahood that is not complete is well attested in Dzogchen. It has to be the case because as Garab Dorje points out, all sentient beings in the previous eon attain buddhahood by the end of the eon. This is explicitly stated by Garab Dorje in the commentary I mentioned to above.
But to illustrate my point further, the Drikung view is Dzogchen is definitely subordinated. For example, Jigten Sumgon states in Gongcik: “The supreme realization is not touched by the three great ones.” This is echoe of a statement by Gampopoa to his nephew, Gomchung.
But I don't during Jigten Sumgon's time Nyingthig was wide spread. At this point in history Nyingma was very much on the decline.............
From the thirteenth bhumi onwards, they are stages of "abiding in wisdom". Presuming one manages to attain the thirteen bhumi, it is unlikely that one's realization will be blocked.
N............
There are two systems. One in which the sixteen bhumis directly correspond with the thirteen bhumis + three. Another where the bhumis are given as descriptive names for experiences through the four visions.
They are both correct explanations.
N............
Ok, it is important to understand three things: the general original basis, the reality of the basis, and how ignorance manifests. In addition to that it is necessary to know that Garab Dorje's commentary on the Single Son of the Buddha's tantras supplies a necessary understanding I will address below at the section on the arising of the basis.
The Unwritten Tantra (Yi ge med pa describes how the general original basis exists:
“There is no object to investigate within the view of self-originated wisdom: nothing went before, nothing happens later, nothing is present now at all. Action does not exist. Traces do not exist. Ignorance does not exist. Mind does not exist. Discriminating wisdom does not exist. Samsara does not exist. Nirvana does not exist. Even vidyÄ� itself does not exist i.e. nothing at all appears in wisdom. That arose from not grasping anything.”
This is the state of original purity, The Blazing Lamp says:
Within initial original purity
the nature is like so:
not made by anyone, manifesting naturally,
the nature is already just so.
In this state, The Rosary of Pearls states:
The mere term delusion cannot be described
within the original purity of the initial state,
likewise, how can there be non-delusion?
Therefore, pure of delusion from the beginning.
The Heart Mirror states “All phenomena of the basis must be understood as the trio of essence, nature and compassion. All phenomena of the essence must be understood as emptiness. All phenomena of the nature must be understood as luminosity. All phenomena of compassion must be understood as pervading all sentient beings.”
So, of course, there must be essence, nature and compassion, timelessly present as the basis. Without these wisdoms, there can be no nirvana and no samsara. We can term these three "sugatagarbha" if we like. Padmasambhava states in the Clear Mirror:
Those three wisdoms pervade Samantabhadra and sentient beings down to the tiniest creature without any discrimination of good or bad, high or low.
Since these three wisdoms are themselves not established in anyway at all, we can be sure we are free from eternalism. Since these three natures always appear, we are free from annihilationism.
In the system of the Dzogchen Nyinghig three causes of ignorance are described -- those three are essence, nature and compassion. This is why there are three ignorances in this system. The system of explanation of Gongpa Zangthal is a little different, with only two ignorances -- we will continue with the Dzogchen Nyinthig system.
According to Garab Dorje, prior to the arising of the basis which is latent during the dark eon interval, nevertheless there are traces of affliction and action remaining from the previous eon. Because of these traces, the basis is stirred, the five lights appear and so on (this is why the Dzogcgen doctrine of two different kinds of Buddhahood is critical -- the first, the buddhahood that reverts the basis is the buddhahood asserted by all lower vehicles. The buddhahood that does not revert to the basis is the preserve of only Dzogchen).
The Gongpa Zangthal cycle supplies that during the arising of basis there is a neutral awareness (shes pa lung ma bstan) in the basis that does not recognize itself. This non-recognition is the innate ignorance. When this neutral awareness cognizes the five lights there is a dividing line between nirvana and samsara. When a neutral awareness recognizes the appearance of the basis as its own appearances it is is prajñÄ� and is immediately liberated. That is Samantabhadra. A neutral awareness that does not recognize appearances as its own appearances immediately is the imputing ignorance, and samsara begins (again) because subject and object is imputed. This is all very clearly explained in detail in the eleven topics of Dzogchen Nyinthig. This is also clearly explained by Khenpo Ngawang Palzang.
After the basis arises, innate ignorance is first and even Samantabhadra has it. There is period where a neutral awareness does not recognize itself in anyway. That is the innate ignorance. It (the neutral awareness) can only recognize itself through the display of five lights. When it recognizes that display as its own display, then this is the liberation of Samantabhadra without the performance of an iota of virtue. We on the other hand did not recognize these five lights as our own display, and for us, samsara began, without even an particle of non-virtue having been done.
According to Dzogchen teachings, all sentient being attain Buddhahood by the end of the eon -- this is very clearly stated by Garab Dorje in the commentary above. But there are two kinds of Buddhahood, and as I said above, there is only Buddhahood that does not revert to the basis, and that is the Buddhahood attained through Dzogchen methods. The Buddhahood of other vehicles reverts to the basis, without the corresponding result.
Now then, the reason why we cannot take these metaphors in Uttaratantra literally is that the basis is not Buddhahood. If the basis were Buddhahood, there would be no need for any kind of recognition.
In Dzogchen, there is a difference between the basis and the result. The difference is simply vidy� and avidy� and the recognition and non-recognition that comes from those.
Further, it is not enough merely to understand the general original basis. One must also understand the human body as a basis.
I will not discuss this here since it is not a proper topic.......
p.s. N also said:
Anyone who even begins the practice of tögal will achieve full awakening in at most three lifetimes, if not during the bardo of dharmatÄ�.Very interesting. I believe this may be true.
As for all sentient beings attaining enlightenment at the end of a universe cycle... this is how i guess things should be. The part about residual ignorance make sense as to why there are continual expansion and contraction cycle of universe ending and restarting.
Thank you for sharing.
-
Originally posted by simpo_:
Very interesting. I believe this may be true.
As for all sentient beings attaining enlightenment at the end of a universe cycle... this is how i guess things should be. The part about residual ignorance make sense as to why there are continual expansion and contraction cycle of universe ending and restarting.
Thank you for sharing.
If you become a 13th Bhumi Buddha don't forget to save me, I don't want to be recycled in another universe again
-
Originally posted by An Eternal Now:
If you become a 13th Bhumi Buddha don't forget to save me, I don't want to be recycled in another universe again
I dun even know whether can firstly overcome all these defilements and obscurations. Perhaps you will save me instead
As for all sentient beings attaining Buddhahood by the end of a universe cycle, i dunno whether you still remember i wrote about a vision transmission in the old dreamdatum website years ago... Where i was pondering on the question of rebirth and a symbolic vision come into the mindscreen. The vision is of blue background where circular and some broken rings converging onto a central position. This vision seems to suggest what i interprete as the universe having contraction cycle where all beings will eventually spiritually progress towards. Erm ... not to advocate and promote these vision stuffs though...
-
I see...
-
When one is attuned to waking up one leaf falling from the tree is enough. However, when one is sleepwalking (sheep)) the whole tree can fall – one would not even notice it.
-
Hi AEN,
I think here the term 'Buddhahood' is the problematic area for interpretation. Namrol seems to be using the term in a very broad way, going for Hinayana Buddhahood, Dzogchen Buddhahood and so forth.
In tibetan, the term Sang gye (ie Buddhahood) implies the full purification of all latencies (such as obscurations and karmic dispositions etc) and full flowering of enlightened qualities. It is not applicable to Hinayana Arhathood which has another term (Dra Chom pa, i think)
In your quote,
But....there are two kinds of buddhahood discussed in Dzogchen; buddhahood that reverts to the cause and the buddhahood that does not revert the cause.
Those whose buddhahood was incomplete can still fall into sentient being hood if they do not recognize the arising of the basis as being their own display.
According to the commentary on the སྲས་གཅིག་པུ་རྒྱུད by Garab Dorje in the Vima Nyinthig, the basis arises because of traces of latent affliction and action left over from the previous eon. At that time, one either recognizes the stirring of the basis or not.Remainder of traces/ latencies cannot be considered to fit the definition of Buddhahood, as i see it.
It is merely a matter of interpretation. And the tantras (whether Dzogchen / inner tantras) are notoriously difficult to interpret without extensive knowledge and even some cultural and linguistic knowledge. I do think that this will confuse people more. So to leave it aside would be better. That is why traditionally, in the Vajrayana, it is said that the teachings should only be given to recipients suitable for it and even then it should be under the guidance of a very qualified teacher.
Tsultrim Lodro is very learned in the Dzogchen teachings and tantras. I cannot vouch for his realisations but he is immensely respected for his understanding and scholarship in Tibet. He is also an unrecognised rebirth of Longchen Rabjam. But due to his modesty, he refused any recognition. Therefore i feel that it is possible to trust in his statement.
-
Yeah but what namdrol is saying is that ONLY dzogchen can lead to full buddhahood... so its the elitist kind of statement, like if you are sutrayana, or just doing normal tantra, you can't get irreversible Buddhahood.
Oh but thats namdrol style for you. He has always been this way.
-
Haha, but i have something to add to that in support of Namrol...
It has been said by Jigme Phuntsok that eventually all the paths even in the Tibetan schools have to culminate in Dzogchen realisations to complete the path. Eg, even one of the highest Sakya master, Chogye Trichen maintains the Dzogchen inner practices and view in his personal practice although he has to maintain hefty personal commitments in the practices of Sakya as a lineage holder.
In the Vajrayana view, even for the Mahayana purists, it is impossible to travel the last part of the path without tantra. But that is near the end, when the practitioner is almost reaching Buddhahood.
(*** Jigme Phuntsok, an authority of Dzogchen, himself the fountainhead for spreading the Dzogchen teachings in China after the cultural revolution. And who is reputed to have completed the full realisations of Dzogchen and displayed a partial rainbow body upon his death, ie massive shrinkage)
-
IMO,
Although it is said that paths lead to the same results with varying methods/speed, however, it cannot be taken to mean that each path (to the exclusion of all else) can bring Buddhahood. It merely means that every path depending on the inclinations of its practitioner is a direction towards Buddhahood. As the practitioners' conditions mature, it may lead to some other path that he find more suitable at that time. And this is not contradicting the statement that all paths lead to the same Buddhahood.
-
By the way I forgot to add, 10.30pm got ChNNR online webcast
http://www.shangshunginstitute.net/webcast/index.php
31st 10-12am. Ati Guru Yoga altogether, then instruction about how we apply concretely the path of Dzogchen Ati in our ordinary life and what is the benefit f it. Tridlung of Medium Gana Puja.
-
The basis is the three wisdoms: essence, nature and compassion. "Reverting to the basis" means that you have not eradicated all the most subtle traces in the elements of your physical body.
Nèº«ç›¸æ— æ˜Žï¼Ÿlike Guanyin have this last èº«ç›¸æ— æ˜Ž not broken?
å��地，ç‰è§‰ï¼Œå¦™è§‰ï¼Œåœ†è§‰? , 10, 11, 12, 13?
we said, å…å�³ä½›. buddhas of the ten realms 相似å�³ä½› are not out of the ten realm, still 内凡inner sentient(?). and 分è‰ä½›.
Those whose buddhahood was incomplete can still fall into sentient being hood if they do not recognize the arising of the basis as being their own display. N
good to know. MCK was also pondering about his in his talks. like in Shurangama Sutra's analogy of ore and gold, when u extract the gold from the ore, will the gold become ore again, after another long long time? the sutra say no, but ....so N is saying even if the gold were to become ore again, it's the way it is. go beyond it. nice.
/\