Could someone explain the Buddhist belief system to me?

[Simple_Jack]

For the love of "god", no more of this Thusness crap. I've exposed him as a fraud.

 

Buddha mentions the "conceit of I AM." Here's one example of senior monks talking about it from the Khemaka Sutta [http://www.accesstoi...2.089.than.html:]

 

"In the same way, friends, even though a noble disciple has abandoned the five lower fetters, he still has with regard to the five clinging-aggregates a lingering residual 'I am' conceit, an 'I am' desire, an 'I am' obsession. But at a later time he keeps focusing on the phenomena of arising & passing away with regard to the five clinging-aggregates: 'Such is form, such its origin, such its disappearance. Such is feeling... Such is perception... Such are fabrications... Such is consciousness, such its origin, such its disappearance.' As he keeps focusing on the arising & passing away of these five clinging-aggregates, the lingering residual 'I am' conceit, 'I am' desire, 'I am' obsession is fully obliterated."

 

You can also look in all three of Edward Conze's translations of the Prajnaparamita Sutras to find the Buddha speaking of the "I AM conceit."

Edited November 30, 2014 by Simple_Jack

[Simple_Jack]

Some quotes from DW[http://www.dharmawhe...=9709&start=160] putting it into dzogchen terms:

" SSJ3Gogeta wrote:
1. Rigpa is not a thing.

2. Rigpa means knowledge.

3. If anything the universe appears because of ignorance (marigpa) as explained by Malcolm above.

Malcolm wrote: Rigpa, in all Dzogchen texts, is constrasted with Ma rigpa. Because of not knowing [ma rig pa] our real state we enter samsara. Through knowing [rig pa] our real state, we attain liberation.

Thought is not a problem for one who has rigpa. It is only a problem for those who do not."

Edited February 10, 2014 by Simple_Jack

[Jeff]

 

Thought is not a problem for one who has rigpa. It is only a problem for those who do not."

 

[Jeff]

Seeing as how you expressed the same eternalist position as Kashmir Shaivism or Advaita Vedanta in the thread I quoted from: I feel I need to distinguish this; since when seeing this you're probably thinking something along the lines of: "Thoughts, they're just Awareness! It's all just Awareness!"

 

Rigpa is not an abiding background Consciousness/Awareness (that phenomena arise and dissolve into.) The quote above is about the understanding of rigpa's empty yet clear cognizance. In other words that phenomena arise together in dependence of each other (free from all extremes of existence and non-existence,) hence are empty of self/Self-essence.

 

Words are challenging tools to use. Meaning is always dependent on perceived context. I have no issues with your above definition of Rigpa. Additionally, I think of consciousness and awareness as different (but many don't). The difference can be understood(found) in between Tregchod and Thogdal (Other Atiyoga approaches use different words). Or, if you prefer, there is a difference between "realization" and "buddhahood".

 

[RongzomFan]

This doesn't mean at all that someone has realization of emptiness.

 

 

Recognizing the nature of the mind is not the same thing as realizing emptiness.

 

Realizing emptiness is much higher.

 

It means you are on the first bhumi.

[RongzomFan]

This can easily be interpreted like in Hinduism.

 

 

Im pretty sure Namdrol admits that Advaitins can recognize the nature of the mind.

 

But that is not realizing lhun grub or the basis (gzhi).

Edited November 8, 2012 by alwayson

[RongzomFan]

Big deal, this is nothing special.

 

It is the basis of trekcho, Mahamudra etc.

[GrandmasterP]

 

 

Again with the rituals?

 

You have no idea what Tibetan Buddhism is about. Just admit it.

.....................

Most of them are about three-hours, some even longer.

Kalachakra Initiation goes on for hours; the book containing the script for that is as thick as a doorstep and slightly less profound than one.

Rituals, all of them; mean nothing and lead to nothing (if they are worked correctly).

Which begs the question...

Why bother working rituals?

It's all nothing to begin with, trying to magic ones way into it is risible.

[RongzomFan]

I will cut through all the B.S.

 

Vajrayana is the only correct religion in the world.

 

If you doubt that, read Blazing Splendor.

 

A New Age oriented couple saw Buddhas and deities in their advanced practice, and were shocked by it.

 

There were so many tertons in recent times that received teachings from deities and so forth, such as Dudjum Rinpoche, Dilgo Khyetse Rinpoche, Tulku Urygen etc. Norbu still is receiving such teachings from deities.

[Jeff]

Can you describe what you mean by consciousness and awareness? What is the difference between consciousness and awareness in your experience?

 

What is your understanding of trekcho? How effortless is trekcho for you? Have you actually practiced thogal (not that I have, just curious.)

 

The consciousness/awareness debate is already in play in the "Object" thread, but my "definitions" would be similar to TI's and the words of Nisargadatta from "I AM THAT" are useful...

 

 

Q: You use the words 'aware' and 'conscious'. Are they not the same?

M: Awareness is primordial; it is the original state, beginningless, endless, uncaused, unsupported, without parts, without change. Consciousness is on contact, a reflection against a surface, a state of duality. There can be no consciousness without awareness, but there can be awareness without consciousness, as in deep sleep. Awareness is absolute, consciousness is relative to its content; consciousness is always of something. Consciousness is partial and changeful, awareness is total, changeless, calm and silent. And it is the common matrix of every experience.

 

I believe many experience "clear mind" or the "field of consciousness" and think it is enlightenment/buddhahood, but it is really just the beginning. Many think that being "aware" in consciousness is Awareness. In a chakra based system, it is the similar to declaring a wide open crown (7th) as being completely done.

 

Trekcho is the cutting through of obstructions, the "seeing past" of issues (or realizing - not the thoughts). Also, in my above statement, I was not trying to start a Dzogchen war of some way being "better", but trying to help with an indescribable definition (trying to show similar, but fundamentally different). Also, I understand your question of effortless/effort, but it is hard to answer. In general, things are not too bad, but I am always finding new issues/obstructions.

 

I have practiced what I believe is the same/similar as Tibetan Thogal, but not with a living Dzogchen master. So it is definitely not fair for me to comment directly on Thogal.

 

[gatito]

The consciousness/awareness debate is already in play in the "Object" thread, but my "definitions" would be similar to TI's and the words of Nisargadatta from "I AM THAT" are useful...

 

 

Q: You use the words 'aware' and 'conscious'. Are they not the same?

M: Awareness is primordial; it is the original state, beginningless, endless, uncaused, unsupported, without parts, without change. Consciousness is on contact, a reflection against a surface, a state of duality. There can be no consciousness without awareness, but there can be awareness without consciousness, as in deep sleep. Awareness is absolute, consciousness is relative to its content; consciousness is always of something. Consciousness is partial and changeful, awareness is total, changeless, calm and silent. And it is the common matrix of every experience.

 

I believe many experience "clear mind" or the "field of consciousness" and think it is enlightenment/buddhahood, but it is really just the beginning. Many think that being "aware" in consciousness is Awareness. In a chakra based system, it is the similar to declaring a wide open crown (7th) as being completely done.

 

Trekcho is the cutting through of obstructions, the "seeing past" of issues (or realizing - not the thoughts). Also, in my above statement, I was not trying to start a Dzogchen war of some way being "better", but trying to help with an indescribable definition (trying to show similar, but fundamentally different). Also, I understand your question of effortless/effort, but it is hard to answer. In general, things are not too bad, but I am always finding new issues/obstructions.

 

I have practiced what I believe is the same/similar as Tibetan Thogal, but not with a living Dzogchen master. So it is definitely not fair for me to comment directly on Thogal.

 

 

You and TI have both invested heavily in AYP teachings and practice haven't you?

 

Clearly, if your experience is that there is more than One (ie two or more) that's not "It".

 

To put it another way the Truth is nondual (not two).

[Jeff]

You and TI have both invested heavily in AYP teachings and practice haven't you?

 

Clearly, if your experience is that there is more than One (ie two or more) that's not "It".

 

To put it another way the Truth is nondual (not two).

 

I don't understand your point. Could you explain it? There is only "One" or "Nothing" depending on your perspective. My "definition" of Consciousness is as a subset of Awareness. Duality is a perspective. Your definition of Consciousness may also be the same as my definition of Awareness (words are always challenging).

 

I am familiar with AYP (and it's practices), but have not really practiced it. The system was not really a fit for me, but I respect (and like/friends) a few of the members. I have also had a few email discussions with Yogani on a variety of topics.

 

Finally, I am definitely making no claim about myself. My point is that I see a difference between "self-realization" and "enlightenment/Buddha/Christ".

 

[gatito]

I don't understand your point. Could you explain it? There is only "One" or "Nothing" depending on your perspective. My "definition" of Consciousness is as a subset of Awareness. Duality is a perspective. Your definition of Consciousness may also be the same as my definition of Awareness (words are always challenging).

 

I am familiar with AYP (and it's practices), but have not really practiced it. The system was not really a fit for me, but I respect (and like/friends) a few of the members. I have also had a few email discussions with Yogani on a variety of topics.

 

Finally, I am definitely making no claim about myself. My point is that I see a difference between "self-realization" and "enlightenment/Buddha/Christ".

 

 

My point is that you seem to have no direct Knowledge of the difference between the "Awareness" and the "Consciousness" of which you speak. Therefore you are speaking theoretically (i.e. a belief system).

 

It's not my own experience that there is only One or Nothing. If that is your own experience then that's not nondual; is it?

[Jeff]

My point is that you seem to have no direct Knowledge of the difference between the "Awareness" and the "Consciousness" of which you speak. Therefore you are speaking theoretically (i.e. a belief system).

 

It's not my own experience that there is only One or Nothing. If that is your own experience then that's not nondual; is it?

 

I do not have an easily defined belief system. It is more a hybrid based on direct experience/knowledge and a few insights from direct experiences of those I know and trust. (To be fair, there may also be a little extrapolation based on insights.) Though, I do often try to "translate" my perspective to other peoples belief system frameworks. As you said, I do not see the point in sharing theoretical positions (unless that is the point of the discussion).

 

Interesting play on words regarding non-dual (oneness) above... Communication using words is by it's nature highly dualistic (implying two or more parties). The amazing (and cool) thing is that the full spectrum of perspectives, from dual to non-dual perspectives, are valid. The difference is the relative "clarity" of obstructions.

 

[GrandmasterP]

I will cut through all the B.S.

 

Vajrayana is the only correct religion in the world.

 

If you doubt that, read Blazing Splendor.

 

A New Age oriented couple saw Buddhas and deities in their advanced practice, and were shocked by it.

 

There were so many tertons in recent times that received teachings from deities and so forth, such as Dudjum Rinpoche, Dilgo Khyetse Rinpoche, Tulku Urygen etc. Norbu still is receiving such teachings from deities.

...............................

Aw c'mon, ONLY correct religion in the world. No way can you seriously believe that. You could as well be an Islamist or Born Again Xtian coming out with silly statements like that.

[gatito]

I do not have an easily defined belief system. It is more a hybrid based on direct experience/knowledge and a few insights from direct experiences of those I know and trust. (To be fair, there may also be a little extrapolation based on insights.) Though, I do often try to "translate" my perspective to other peoples belief system frameworks. As you said, I do not see the point in sharing theoretical positions (unless that is the point of the discussion).

 

As long as you have a belief-system (as opposed to direct Knowledge) that's not "It" is it?

 

And why share theoretical positions when you say that you don't see the point in sharing theoretical positions - what actually is that point having that sort of discussion?

 

Interesting play on words regarding non-dual (oneness) above... Communication using words is by it's nature highly dualistic (implying two or more parties). The amazing (and cool) thing is that the full spectrum of perspectives, from dual to non-dual perspectives, are valid. The difference is the relative "clarity" of obstructions.

 

 

I'm not the one whose playing on words here Jeff.

 

What does "the full spectrum of perspectives, from dual to non-dual perspectives, are valid" actually mean. Are you saying that anything that anyone says about duality and nonduality is true?

 

Again, perhaps a pointless discussion to which you would have made a pointless contribution?

 

Non-sense!

[RongzomFan]

Aw c'mon, ONLY correct religion in the world. No way can you seriously believe that. You could as well be an Islamist or Born Again Xtian coming out with silly statements like that.

 

 

I am a fundamentalist Vajrayanist.

 

Buddhahood and Vajrayana deities are both real.

Edited November 9, 2012 by alwayson

[Jeff]

As long as you have a belief-system (as opposed to direct Knowledge) that's not "It" is it?

 

And why share theoretical positions when you say that you don't see the point in sharing theoretical positions - what actually is that point having that sort of discussion?

 

I'm not the one whose playing on words here Jeff.

 

What does "the full spectrum of perspectives, from dual to non-dual perspectives, are valid" actually mean. Are you saying that anything that anyone says about duality and nonduality is true?

 

Again, perhaps a pointless discussion to which you would have made a pointless contribution?

 

Non-sense!

 

I thought I was pretty clear in my words above that I am commenting based upon my direct experience. Also, rather than just make random comments about AYP, pointless and non-sense, it would be helpful to know how your experience is different. Or, what you disagree with.

 

Regarding "full spectrum", I did not mean that everything everyone says is true. The point is that perception of oneness/non-duality (as experienced in existence) unfolds in degrees as obstructions are let go (or clarity is increased). As an example, one can have a quiet mind and notice that they are consciousness, thus declaring non-dual, but the field of perception is limited to the perceived body. Then later, clarity increases and perception expands to others, broader reality, etc...

 

[gatito]

I thought I was pretty clear in my words above that I am commenting based upon my direct experience. Also, rather than just make random comments about AYP, pointless and non-sense, it would be helpful to know how your experience is different. Or, what you disagree with.

 

Regarding "full spectrum", I did not mean that everything everyone says is true. The point is that perception of oneness/non-duality (as experienced in existence) unfolds in degrees as obstructions are let go (or clarity is increased). As an example, one can have a quiet mind and notice that they are consciousness, thus declaring non-dual, but the field of perception is limited to the perceived body. Then later, clarity increases and perception expands to others, broader reality, etc...

 

 

No; check back, you spoke about your beliefs and it sounds exactly like AYP/TM to me Jeff - but perhaps I'm mistaken?

 

"Oneness" would not unfold if it's "Oneness". "Oneness" unfolding would be "Twoness" (or 10,000ness )

 

And my experience is that there's no difference between Consciousness and Awareness - they are synonymous. Hope that helps Jeff but if it doesn't you'll need to get your teacher to explain it to you.

[gatito]

To get this thread back on-topic (apologies to DreamBliss).

 

This is the most beautiful and moving explanation of Buddhism that I have ever seen - thank you CT.

 

[Jeff]

No; check back, you spoke about your beliefs and it sounds exactly like AYP/TM to me Jeff - but perhaps I'm mistaken?

 

"Oneness" would not unfold if it's "Oneness". "Oneness" unfolding would be "Twoness" (or 10,000ness )

 

And my experience is that there's no difference between Consciousness and Awareness - they are synonymous. Hope that helps Jeff but if it doesn't you'll need to get your teacher to explain it to you.

 

Existence continues to unfold. That is part of the fun.

 

On my experience/beliefs, in a buddhist tradition, they would be similar to Dzogchen. Awareness would be translated to the primordial state.

 

Have a good weekend.

 

[RongzomFan]

Existence continues to unfold.

 

one cannot claim anything exists.

[Jeff]

one cannot claim anything exists.

 

All a matter of how things are "perceived", or the clarity of perception...

 

[gatito]

Existence continues to unfold. That is part of the fun.

 

On my experience/beliefs, in a buddhist tradition, they would be similar to Dzogchen. Awareness would be translated to the primordial state.

 

Have a good weekend.

 

 

Do you have direct experience of "Primordial Awareness" Jeff or is it a belief?

 

You say it's an experience/belief. My bet is it's a belief/concept.

[Jeff]

Do you have direct experience of "Primordial Awareness" Jeff or is it a belief?

 

You say it's an experience/belief. My bet is it's a belief/concept.

 

Once again, I get the feeling that you do not read (or maybe understand) my posts. Being "one" with primordial awareness is to be a "Buddha/Christ", beyond consciousness with full clarity. I have repeatedly mentioned my ongoing obstructions.

 

Since you do not perceive a difference between consciousness and awareness, this is a difficult conversation to have and explain. But, on knowledge... consciousness is experienced.

 

To help with the explanation... Can you tell me... What is the purpose/use of a rainbow body?

 

Or, is it that you consider yourself "done"?