No creator in Buddhism?

[xabir2005]

To people like Dogen, Impermanence is Buddha-nature, but this Impermanence is not the kind of gross impermanence that many people understand, it is the subtle impermanence that includes the factoring in of non-dual Presence or Mind. He reiterates the Ch'an Patriarch Hui-neng in saying that 'Buddha-Nature is Impermanence'. This should become very clear after anatta realization.

.........

http://books.google.com.sg/books?id=H6A674nlkVEC&pg=PA21&lpg=PA21

From Bendowa, by Zen Master Dogen

Question Ten:

Some have said: Do not concern yourself about birth-and-death. There is a way to promptly rid yourself of birth-and-death. It is by grasping the reason for the eternal immutability of the 'mind-nature.' The gist of it is this: although once the body is born it proceeds inevitably to death, the mind-nature never perishes. Once you can realize that the mind-nature, which does not transmigrate in birth-and-death, exists in your own body, you make it your fundamental nature. Hence the body, being only a temporary form, dies here and is reborn there without end, yet the mind is immutable, unchanging throughout past, present, and future. To know this is to be free from birth-and-death. By realizing this truth, you put a final end to the transmigratory cycle in which you have been turning. When your body dies, you enter the ocean of the original nature. When you return to your origin in this ocean, you become endowed with the wondrous virtue of the Buddha-patriarchs. But even if you are able to grasp this in your present life, because your present physical existence embodies erroneous karma from prior lives, you are not the same as the sages.

"Those who fail to grasp this truth are destined to turn forever in the cycle of birth-and-death. What is necessary, then, is simply to know without delay the meaning of the mind-nature's immutability. What can you expect to gain from idling your entire life away in purposeless sitting?"

What do you think of this statement? Is it essentially in accord with the Way of the Buddhas and patriarchs?



Answer 10:

You have just expounded the view of the Senika heresy. It is certainly not the Buddha Dharma.

According to this heresy, there is in the body a spiritual intelligence. As occasions arise this intelligence readily discriminates likes and dislikes and pros and cons, feels pain and irritation, and experiences suffering and pleasure - it is all owing to this spiritual intelligence. But when the body perishes, this spiritual intelligence separates from the body and is reborn in another place. While it seems to perish here, it has life elsewhere, and thus is immutable and imperishable. Such is the standpoint of the Senika heresy.

But to learn this view and try to pass it off as the Buddha Dharma is more foolish than clutching a piece of broken roof tile supposing it to be a golden jewel. Nothing could compare with such a foolish, lamentable delusion. Hui-chung of the T'ang dynasty warned strongly against it. Is it not senseless to take this false view - that the mind abides and the form perishes - and equate it to the wondrous Dharma of the Buddhas; to think, while thus creating the fundamental cause of birth-and-death, that you are freed from birth-and-death? How deplorable! Just know it for a false, non-Buddhist view, and do not lend a ear to it.

I am compelled by the nature of the matter, and more by a sense of compassion, to try to deliver you from this false view. You must know that the Buddha Dharma preaches as a matter of course that body and mind are one and the same, that the essence and the form are not two. This is understood both in India and in China, so there can be no doubt about it. Need I add that the Buddhist doctrine of immutability teaches that all things are immutable, without any differentiation between body and mind. The Buddhist teaching of mutability states that all things are mutable, without any differentiation between essence and form. In view of this, how can anyone state that the body perishes and the mind abides? It would be contrary to the true Dharma.

Beyond this, you must also come to fully realize that birth-and-death is in and of itself nirvana. Buddhism never speaks of nirvana apart from birth-and-death. Indeed, when someone thinks that the mind, apart from the body, is immutable, not only does he mistake it for Buddha-wisdom, which is free from birth-and-death, but the very mind that makes such a discrimination is not immutable, is in fact even then turning in birth-and-death. A hopeless situation, is it not?

You should ponder this deeply: since the Buddha Dharma has always maintained the oneness of body and mind, why, if the body is born and perishes, would the mind alone, separated from the body, not be born and die as well? If at one time body and mind were one, and at another time not one, the preaching of the Buddha would be empty and untrue. Moreover, in thinking that birth-and-death is something we should turn from, you make the mistake of rejecting the Buddha Dharma itself. You must guard against such thinking.

Understand that what Buddhists call the Buddhist doctrine of the mind-nature, the great and universal aspect encompassing all phenomena, embraces the entire universe, without differentiating between essence and form, or concerning itself with birth or death. There is nothing - enlightenment and nirvana included - that is not the mind-nature. All dharmas, the "myriad forms dense and close" of the universe - are alike in being this one Mind. All are included without exception. All those dharmas, which serves as "gates" or entrances to the Way, are the same as one Mind. For a Buddhist to preach that there is no disparity between these dharma-gates indicates that he understands the mind-nature.

In this one Dharma [one Mind], how could there be any differentiate between body and mind, any separation of birth-and-death and nirvana? We are all originally children of the Buddha, we should not listen to madmen who spout non-Buddhist views.


.........

Also, Zen Master Steve Hagen:


.....What Nagarjuna is pointing to is that believing things are impermanent involves a contradiction. First we posit separate, persisting things (in effect, absolute objects); and then we refer to them as impermanent (that is relative). What we fail to see is that we are still holding to a view of substance. We don't really appreciate the thoroughgoing nature of change, the thorough-going nature of selflessness.

We don't really appreciate the thoroughgoing nature of change, the thorough-going nature of selflessness. Nagarjuna makes it abundantly clear that impermanence (the relative) is total, complete, thoroughgoing, Absolute. It's not that the universe is made up of innumerable objects in flux. There's Only flux. Nothing is (or can be) riding along in the flux, like a cork in a stream; nothing actually arises or passes away. There's only stream.

..... That forms appear to come and go cannot be denied. But to assume the existence of imaginary persisting entities and attach them to these apparent comings and goings is delusion....


....

 

Ch'an Master Sheng Yen:

When you are in the second stage, although you feel that the "I" does not exist, the basic substance of the universe, or the Supreme Truth, still exists. Although you recognize that all the different phenomena are the extension of this basic substance or Supreme Truth, yet there still exists the opposition of basic substance versus external phenomena.

.

.

.

One who has entered Chan (Zen) does not see basic substance and phenomena as two things standing in opposition to each other. They cannot even be illustrated as being the back and palm of a hand. This is because phenomena themselves are basic substance, and apart from phenomena there is no basic substance to be found. The reality of basic substance exists right in the unreality of phenomena, which change ceaselessly and have no constant form. This is the Truth.

...........

Thusness:

Thoughts, feelings and perceptions come and go; they are not ‘me’; they are transient in nature. Isn’t it clear that if I am aware of these passing thoughts, feelings and perceptions, then it proves some entity is immutable and unchanging? This is a logical conclusion rather than experiential truth. The formless reality seems real and unchanging because of propensities (conditioning) and the power to recall a previous experience.

There is also another experience, this experience does not discard or disown the transients -- forms, thoughts, feelings and perceptions. It is the experience that thought thinks and sound hears. Thought knows not because there is a separate knower but because it is that which is known. It knows because it's it. It gives rise to the insight that isness never exists in an undifferentiated state but as transient manifestation; each moment of manifestation is an entirely new reality, complete in its own.

....

Buddhism Plain and Simple page 115, by Zen Teacher Steve Hagen:

With the two types of views there are two kinds of minds. As human beings, we all have what we could call ordinary minds - the mind that you've always assumed you've had. It's a calculating mind, a discriminating mind, a fragmented mind. It's the mind of ordinary consciousness, the mind of self and other. We generally think of it as "my mind."

But there's another mind that is unborn, ungrown, and unconditioned. Unlike "your mind," it is unbound, for there is nothing beyond it. To this Mind, there is no "other mind."

This Mind is nothing other than the Whole. It's simply thus, the fabric of the world itself - the ongoing arising and falling away that are matter, energy and events.

Speaking of this Mind, the great Chinese Zen master Huang Po said,

All buddhas and ordinary people are just One Mind... This Mind is beyond all measurements, names, oppositions: this very being is It; as soon as you stir your mind you turn away from It.

This Mind is self-evident - it's always switched on, so to speak. We can - and, in fact, we do - see It in every moment. If we would refrain from stirring our minds (rest our frontal lobes, as my Zen teacher used to say) and let our conceptualising die down, like the ripples on a pond after the stirring wind has ceased, we would realise - we would know Mind directly.

(Ste

ve Hagen)

.

.

.

Ultimate Truth, on the other hand, is direct perception. And what is directly perceived (as opposed to conceive) is that no separate, individualised things exist as such.

There's nothing to be experienced but this seamless, thoroughgoing relativity and flux.

In other words, there are no particulars, but only thus.

 

Edited April 22, 2014 by xabir2005

[asunthatneversets]

Interestingly, the quotes from Vimalamitra above are actually a commentary on that excerpt.

 

Here's Malcolm's rendition of that section too:

 

Hey, hey, apparent yet non existent retinue: listen well! There is no object to distinguish in me, the view of self-originated wisdom; it did not exist before, it will not arise later, and also does not appear in anyway in the present. The path does not exist, action does not exist, traces do not exist, ignorance does not exist, thoughts do not exist, mind does not exist, prajñā does not exist, samsara does not exist, nirvana does not exist, vidyā itself does not even exist, totally not appearing in anyway. -- The Unwritten Tantra

[xabir2005]

"All phenomenal existence is explained as being a projection of the original light that resides in the physical heart and manifests through the eyes; this implies that objective concrete reality is merely illusion. "

 

From Tenzin Wangyal's Wonders of the Natural Mind

 

I've found that projector a few times now... I'm not the only one, am I?

 

 

 

Actually this is good but there must be complete certainty of that I - that pure sense of existence. Is there is just a glimpse/experience without certainty or is there complete certainty?

 

This relates to what Thusness told me in 2009 when I had glimpses and experiences but not yet realization (for me Self-Realization occurred in Feb 2010):

 

http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com.au/2009/09/realization-and-experience-and-non-dual.html

 

Excerpt:

 

 

1. On Experience and Realization

 

One of the direct and immediate response I get after reading the articles by Rob Burbea and Rupert is that they missed one very and most important point when talking about the Eternal Witness Experience -- The Realization. They focus too much on the experience but overlook the realization. Honestly I do not like to make this distinction as I see realization also as a form of experience. However in this particular case, it seems appropriate as it could better illustrate what I am trying to convey. It also relates to the few occasions where you described to me your space-like experiences of Awareness and asked whether they correspond to the phase one insight of Eternal Witness. While your experiences are there, I told you ‘not exactly’ even though you told me you clearly experienced a pure sense of presence.

 

So what is lacking? You do not lack the experience, you lack the realization. You may have the blissful sensation or feeling of vast and open spaciousness; you may experience a non-conceptual and objectless state; you may experience the mirror like clarity but all these experiences are not Realization. There is no ‘eureka’, no ‘aha’, no moment of immediate and intuitive illumination that you understood something undeniable and unshakable -- a conviction so powerful that no one, not even Buddha can sway you from this realization because the practitioner so clearly sees the truth of it. It is the direct and unshakable insight of ‘You’. This is the realization that a practitioner must have in order to realize the Zen satori. You will understand clearly why it is so difficult for those practitioners to forgo this ‘I AMness’ and accept the doctrine of anatta. Actually there is no forgoing of this ‘Witness’, it is rather a deepening of insight to include the non-dual, groundlessness and interconnectedness of our luminous nature. Like what Rob said, "keep the experience but refine the views".

 

Lastly this realization is not an end by itself, it is the beginning. If we are truthful and not over exaggerate and get carried away by this initial glimpse, we will realize that we do not gain liberation from this realization; contrary we suffer more after this realization. However it is a powerful condition that motivates a practitioner to embark on a spiritual journey in search of true freedom.

Edited April 22, 2014 by xabir2005

[Tibetan_Ice]

We'll I think I will throw out out "The Marvelous Primordial State".

 

Steve, that is an interesting book. Especially the fact that all of the female lineage are quite adamant the the Nature is beyond description and cannot be described nor conceptualized..

 

"When you look back towards your thoughts, they liberate without a trace. There is no colour, no form, nothing which you can explain. This is called Empty Nature. But if you compare this Emptiness with that of the Madhyamaka or Cittamatra View or with anything else and think that there are similarities, then you are making a mistake and deviating from the correct view. Dzogchen Nature is not connected with expectations, conceptual understanding or comparisons. It is completely beyond all of this. Nor is it concerned with activities. So it cannot be compared with any other view on emptiness. This Nature is only a vast unspeakable state, Great Bliss.

That is the teaching."

 

From Heart Essence of the Khandro.

 

 

This whole thread has made for some very interesting reading! I certainly appreciate everyone's' posts. It will take a while to digest all of that.

 

[Tibetan_Ice]

Hi Xabir,

 

The projector... A few years ago I spent two months doing a meditation which Tolle describes as " sensing the inner body", every day, twice a day. It became my regular practice. During the meditations I performed samadhi on the sense of the life force that pervades the body. As a result of doing the practice, I found that every kind of event happened on its own, the arising of kundalini, the visions and lights (nimittas), great ecstasy, all without focusing on them or willfully trying to produce them.

 

After a few weeks I would go to bed and watch my body sleep, see the little mind churn away, see the little cloud of dreams appear, listen to me snore... From a semi-dark large space. Then in the morning, the only thing that I was aware of was the feeling of me, like a tiny spec of "I" in the middle of nowhere. Then, I would watch the whole universe get created and I would end up back in bed in normal consciousness.

 

I quit the practice because it was too unnerving, I thought it might be bad for my health and it was messing with my mind.

 

But lately it has come back and I am ok with it. I am this little point in a huge open semi-dark space that only knows the feeling of "me". Then everything goes whoosh and I create my reality. I am the projector. It is awesome that such a little point can project such a large universe!

 

Today I found a very interesting post which explains the sensing of the inner body practice which I got from Tolle

 

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.119.than.html

 

It is one of the most powerful practices I have found...

 

Thanks again for your comments.

 

Edited April 22, 2014 by Tibetan_Ice

[asunthatneversets]

We'll I think I will throw out out "The Marvelous Primordial State".

 

Steve, that is an interesting book. Especially the fact that all of the female lineage are quite adamant the the Nature is beyond description and cannot be described nor conceptualized..

 

"When you look back towards your thoughts, they liberate without a trace. There is no colour, no form, nothing which you can explain. This is called Empty Nature. But if you compare this Emptiness with that of the Madhyamaka or Cittamatra View or with anything else and think that there are similarities, then you are making a mistake and deviating from the correct view. Dzogchen Nature is not connected with expectations, conceptual understanding or comparisons. It is completely beyond all of this. Nor is it concerned with activities. So it cannot be compared with any other view on emptiness. This Nature is only a vast unspeakable state, Great Bliss.

That is the teaching."

 

From Heart Essence of the Khandro.

 

 

This whole thread has made for some very interesting reading! I certainly appreciate everyone's' posts. It will take a while to digest all of that.

 

That quote is partly misleading, because the Madhyamaka emptiness is the proper view of emptiness for Dzogchen as well. It is just the paths which differ. So that statement is correct when it says "Dzogchen Nature is not connected with expectations, conceptual understanding or comparisons", however this is just addressing the application of the path, the nature of the path. The view is identical though, which is why many masters attest that Madhyamaka scholars such as Nāgārjuna express the proper view of the essence [ngo bo] in Dzogchen in an intellectual sense. The difference being that Dzogchen does not implement intellectual analysis in the same way, but rather seeks to point out that definitive dharmatā from the very beginning. So the view is the same, the praxis is different.

[xabir2005]

Hi Xabir,

 

The projector... A few years ago I spent two months doing a meditation which Tolle describes as " sensing the inner body", every day, twice a day. It became my regular practice. During the meditations I performed samadhi on the sense of the life force that pervades the body. As a result of doing the practice, I found that every kind of event happened on its own, the arising of kundalini, the visions and lights (nimittas), great ecstasy, all without focusing on them or willfully trying to produce them.

 

After a few weeks I would go to bed and watch my body sleep, see the little mind churn away, see the little cloud of dreams appear, listen to me snore... From a semi-dark large space. Then in the morning, the only thing that I was aware of was the feeling of me, like a tiny spec of "I" in the middle of nowhere. Then, I would watch the whole universe get created and I would end up back in bed in normal consciousness.

 

I quit the practice because it was too unnerving, I thought it might be bad for my health and it was messing with my mind.

 

But lately it has come back and I am ok with it. I am this little point in a huge open semi-dark space that only knows the feeling of "me". Then everything goes whoosh and I create my reality. I am the projector. It is awesome that such a little point can project such a large universe!

 

Today I found a very interesting post which explains the sensing of the inner body practice which I got from Tolle

 

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.119.than.html

 

It is one of the most powerful practices I have found...

 

Thanks again for your comments.

 

If you are doing Self-Inquiry, there will come a time when there is no thoughts, no sense of anything... except Beingness, Presence itself, I think that is what you mean by You/Projector/etc. That Existence which is its own Knowing as it is non-dual. It is the very core of Being as Presence-Awareness. This I AMness is a transcendental experiential realization where consciousness is directly perceived as a pure sense of Existence. It is beingness, consciousness, bliss. The experience is intuitive and beyond the realm of thought. It is a non-dual and precious experience of pure consciousness, however its nature will quickly be misunderstood resulting in reification. Nevertheless it is an important realization. When you have realized it, there is 100% no more doubts about what you are, you will find that you have realized the very fact of your own Existence with utter certainty. Anyway this is the kind of realization that many teachers including Eckhart Tolle is pointing to.

 

There will also come a time when during sleep it becomes incredible an unimaginable bliss-presence which is non-dual. This can occur in dreamless sleep and in dream states, even in sleep paralysis (which will dissolve all fear into total non-dual transparency, presence/clarity and bliss)... from experience it will happen but let it come naturally as a result of maturing wisdom, there is no need (at least in my case) to intentionally bring it about.

 

p.s. your experiences with body, life-force, etc are good

Edited April 22, 2014 by xabir2005

[xabir2005]

Also from one of my e-book journals:

3rd October 2012

Thusness told me that the stream of wisdom will penetrate into the three states eventually, many years ago. For example if you keep chanting something, or if you keep playing computer games, then in the dream these things will appear. Likewise when you get acquinted with wisdom, this appears into dream and deep sleep as well. This is the flow of dependent origination – ignorance flows, wisdom also flows.
This is another dream that Thusness told me to wrote down. It happened last night.
In my dream, I was contemplating something that the Buddha said:
531
"Bhikkhus, when ignorance is abandoned and true knowledge has arisen in a bhikkhu, then with the fading away of ignorance and the arising of true knowledge he no longer clings to sensual pleasures, no longer clings to views, no longer clings to rules and observances, no longer clings to a doctrine of self.[11] When he does not cling, he is not agitated. When he is not agitated, he personally attains Nibbana. He understands: 'Birth is destroyed, the holy life has been lived, what had to be done has been done, there is no more coming to any state of being." (MN11: Cula-sihanada Sutta)
As I contemplated this in my dream, I saw how when there is craving, when there is agitation, when there is clinging, I could project consciousness out of my body into another place, into the sky, into another realm, into another lifetime. I saw that this is how rebirth works - craving drives the entire process of becoming!
And then I stopped this craving-conceiving-projecting, and I was back where I was - on my bed. But I am still sleeping. And I instantly entered into this incredible bliss again (this happened a few times so far) - it was sooo blissful like the last time. But this time, it lasted much longer.
I can feel my entire being, even my face, is of this intense blissful vibration. After some time which felt longer than the last time (it was quite long and I began to wonder how long it will last), then as thoughts arise, the bliss begin to lessen until I woke up from the blissful sleep samadhi.
May all beings put an end to becoming and attain the highest bliss of Nirvana.
p.s. THIS is well said --->
29. “So it was with reference to this that it was said: ‘One should not neglect wisdom, should preserve truth, should cultivate relinquishment, and should train for peace.’
30. “‘The tides of conceiving do not sweep over one who stands upon these [foundations], and when the tides of conceiving no longer sweep over him he is called a sage at peace.’ So it was said. And with reference to what was this said?
31. “Bhikkhu, ‘I am’ is a conceiving; ‘I am this’ is a conceiving; ‘I shall be’ is a conceiving; ‘I shall not be’ is a conceiving; ‘I shall be possessed of form’ is a conceiving; ‘I shall be formless’ is a conceiving; ‘I shall be percipient’ is a conceiving; ‘I shall be non-percipient’ is a conceiving; ‘I shall be neither-percipient-nor-non-percipient’ is a conceiving. Conceiving is a disease, conceiving is a tumour, conceiving is a dart. By overcoming all conceivings, bhikkhu, one is called a sage at peace. And the sage at peace is not born, does not age, does not die; he is not shaken and is not agitated. For there is nothing present in him by which he might be born. Not being born, how could he age? Not ageing, how could he die? Not dying, how could he be shaken? Not being shaken, why should he be agitated?
532
32. “So it was with reference to this that it was said: ‘The tides of conceiving do not sweep over one who stands upon these [foundations], and when the tides of conceiving no longer sweep over him he is called a sage at peace.’ Bhikkhu, bear in mind this brief exposition of the six elements.”
(Buddha, MN 140 Dhātuvibhanga Sutta)

Edited April 22, 2014 by xabir2005

[GrandmasterP]

"The potters workshop is large enough, friend.

Let the venerable one stay as long as he likes.

 

:-)

Edited April 22, 2014 by GrandmasterP

[Tibetan_Ice]

Xabir,

Thank you for sharing and sharing your experience.

 

Lately, I have come accross some realizations, experiences.

 

My meditations have been to turn the attention back towards the thoughts that arise towards the left back of the head. I examine a thought and watch it dissolve. I focus on the little space left behind and then try to remain there. Another thought appears and I again I behold it until it dissolves. I do not let the thought proliferate or cause other thoughts. I remain in the space, watching. After about 10 minutes of doing that, there is an energetic shift which takes place. It feels as though the inner body dissociates from the physical. My hands become fields of energy and it feels like my body has fallen away. That is when the visions start. I then proceed to do the same technique to the visions. I don't follow them, but look directly at them while keeping a certain distance from them. Sometimes I receed back into 'that which is watching the consciousness watching.. When the visions dissolve, they always dissolve into rainbows and very small beads of fine light bubbles. As I maintain my perspective, some of the visions that arise are so real, crisp and clear that they appear just like a normal worldly scene would. This is becoming quite common and I am gaining the understanding that this worldly reality appears to be just like the vivid scenes during my meditations.

 

The interesting thing about this type of meditation, in which I am trying to do nothing but remain in the natural state, is not only causing visions but also precipitating nimittas (very bright lights that resemble the sun poking through the clouds. Very bright blinding intense light. Just by doing next to nothing. This made me realize that you don't have to do breath meditation to realize nimittas, it is more based on the stillness/calm of the mind.

 

The other thing I will mention is that a few weeks ago, I had a dream that was so real that I had to really think about it in the dream. I thought that I was really in another reality. When I thought about it, I decided the only way to see if I was dreaming or not was to turn my attention back towards myself. When I did that, my presence became filled with very clear golden light, like the light of pure consciousness and I then had a satori moment, right there in the dream. Then, I woke up. So, yes, I can see that Thusness' comment about it spilling over into other aspects of reality seems to be the case.

 

But mostly, right now, I'm very happy that I've found Buddha's method that he used to become enlightened. I will write about it in another thread.

All the best.

 

 

TI

[Captain Mar-Vell]

...

Just a quick note.

Lastly this realization is not an end by itself, it is the beginning. If we are truthful and not over exaggerate and get carried away by this initial glimpse, we will realize that we do not gain liberation from this realization; contrary we suffer more after this realization. However it is a powerful condition that motivates a practitioner to embark on a spiritual journey in search of true freedom.

I found this especially pertinent and useful.

 

Thank you all very much.

 

xxx

...

Edited April 23, 2014 by Captain Mar-Vell

[GrandmasterP]

Meditation can be as complicated as you want to make it, but here's a move in the other direction:

1. Pay attention to whatever you notice (inside or outside yourself, it doesn't matter) without thinking its good or bad, pleasant or unpleasant, wise or stupid, worthy or unworthy.

Actually theres only one step. That's it.

Sometimes the word curiosity will help you.

You can start anywhere, even in the midst of a judgement: this sucks!

Well, whats it like? how does it feel? Explore it, its colour, texture, emotion, sensation. What images come to mind? What is the interpretive dance that would describe it?

If it were an animal, what would it be? Just keep yourself company. You can't do it wrong. When you notice you're back to judging your experience, putting it away in a box, just notice that.

You can start again.

You can start anywhere. Really.

There's a koan (any koan is helpful because a koan never makes things wrong or right) that goes like this:

 

What is it?

 

Thats it.

Edited April 23, 2014 by GrandmasterP

[Simple_Jack]

Rangtong - 'self empty'

Shentong - 'other empty'

 

The debates and definitions of these concepts can be very confusing but I do think its worth some time and effort for those interested in the Buddhist path.

 

I also think it is very valuable to spend time in skillful practice. Direct experience of the inseparability of space and clarity is the perfect teacher and points out the inherent weakness in all conceptual models.

 

Lots of good resources on the topic.

 

From "Shentong and Rangtong, Two Views of Emptiness," by Khenchen Thrangu Rinpoche:

"What we should understand is the Buddha's view. We should not impose our notions created from our own concepts upon Buddhadharma. Therefore, we need to understand the traditions of the Rangtong and Shentong. If we don't understand the Rangtong tradition, we will have attachment to things as if they had a true existence. Therefore we need to examine and understand the Svatrantika and Prasangika traditions of the Rangtong. Having understood the absence of reality, we go on to the ultimate aspect in which there isn't just plain emptiness but there is Buddha nature, clarity, and ultimate wisdom, as explained in the Shentong tradition. The Shentong tradition, therefore, clarifies the Rangtong teachings, and the Rangtong teachings clarifies the Shentong teachings. Thus both assist each other. We can see that there is no contradiction between them, but that they mutually assist each other." Thrangu Rinpoche.

 

The Bön seem to take a similar approach, while acknowledging the empty aspect of inherent existence, we are constantly reminded of the inherent clarity that is inseparable from emptiness.

 

'Rangtong' and 'Shengtong', I've been told, do not exist as a classification of teachings in the Bonpo lineage, but they do have their equivalent of 'Prasangika Madhyamaka'. For the Nyingma and Sarma schools, Dzogchen and Mahamudra respectively, represent the definitive view, path, and result. If you're interested in the view of Nyingma stick with Rongzom's Establishing Appearances as Divine by Heidi L. Koppl, but if you want to read a treatise, from another prominent figure of this lineage, read Mipam on Buddha-Nature: The Ground of the Nyingma Tradition and Mipham's Beacon of Certainty; both distinguish the various philosophical views from Dzogchen.

 

P.S. The bold text is a Gelug interpretation.

Edited May 5, 2014 by Simple_Jack

[LAOLONG]

god in Buddhism in Wikipedia

[doc benway]

'Rangtong' and 'Shengtong', I've been told, do not exist as a classification of teachings in the Bonpo lineage, but they do have their equivalent of 'Prasangika Madhyamaka'.

That may be because the Bönpo view seems to be fairly internally consistent, thus obviating the need for opposing classifications within their lineage. They certainly do recognize the existence of these categories of teachings in the Buddhist community and have encouraged debate regarding the various systems. If you're interested in the Bönpo view, the most thorough exposition I've seen is Bönpo Dzogchen Teachings: According to Lopon Tenzin Namdak by John Myrdhin Reynolds (editor). The Beacon of Certainty was quite good though not easy to read for me. I've yet to read the others you recommend.

[Simple_Jack]

That could be the case, yet these categories have been entirely invented by the Tibetans. If you're truly interested in understanding these developments in the overall history of Buddhist philosophy, than studying the original Indian treatises of Yogacara and Madhyamaka, helps immensely (the philosophical underpinnings of 'shengtong' is Yogacara). I definitely need to get around to reading "Bonpo Dzogchen Teachings".

Edited May 7, 2014 by Simple_Jack

[Tibetan_Ice]

I am reading this now...

http://www.amazon.com/The-Main-Dzogchen-Practices-Transmission/dp/B0076WSCJQ

It actually has a practice in it to make you correct and clarify the view.

[doc benway]

That could be the case, yet these categories have been entirely invented by the Tibetans. If you're truly interested in understanding these developments in the overall history of Buddhist philosophy, than studying the original Indian treatises of Yogacara and Madhyamaka, helps immensely (the philosophical underpinnings of 'shengtong' is Yogacara). I definitely need to get around to reading "Bonpo Dzogchen Teachings".

 

No doubt that an in depth study of those original works would be very valuable.

I just don't have the time for both practice and that level of scholarship, so I focus on practice and read more accessible and concise material.

I freely admit that my knowledge base is limited but my practice is deepening and stabilizing and that's a good thing for me.

 

The Bönpo Dzogchen Teachings book gives a fairly thorough comparison of the Bönpo Dzogchen view as Lopon Tenzin Namdak sees it to Madhyamaka, Chittamatra, Tantra, and Mahamudra. It is very easy reading, practical, and straight forward. Not a rigorous exposition like Mipham's. It is a compilation of several teachings given to Western students so there is some redundancy.

 

 

 

[doc benway]

I am reading this now...

http://www.amazon.com/The-Main-Dzogchen-Practices-Transmission/dp/B0076WSCJQ

It actually has a practice in it to make you correct and clarify the view.

Here is something that will be available soon that may interest you:

http://www.namsebangdzo.com/Precepts_of_the_Dharmakaya_p/9789937623070.htm

As far as I know it will not be a restricted text.

The 21 Nails offer multiple perspectives of the natural state and are intended to help the practitioner gain confidence in and stabilize their experience, hence the reference to 21 nails or seals.

Tenzin Wangyal Rinpoche is offering a 3 week retreat on this teaching this summer in Virginia.

Edited May 8, 2014 by steve

[Tibetan_Ice]

Here is something that will be available soon that may interest you:

http://www.namsebangdzo.com/Precepts_of_the_Dharmakaya_p/9789937623070.htm

As far as I know it will not be a restricted text.

The 21 Nails offer multiple perspectives of the natural state and are intended to help the practitioner gain confidence in and stabilize their experience, hence the reference to 21 nails or seals.

Tenzin Wangyal Rinpoche is offering a 3 week retreat on this teaching this summer in Virginia.

Thanks Steve, that looks like a good book.

 

I've preordered this one and can hardly wait..

 

http://www.amazon.com/Naked-Seeing-Perfection-Visionary-Renaissance/dp/0199982910/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1390705825&sr=8-1&keywords=Naked+seeing

 

[Mystique Enigma]

Reminds me of a poem once written .....

 

The Creator

It’s a pity people don’t understand
What you’re trying to say or do
They are mostly locked up in a guilt cage
In a world of an illusion so true

They rumble on a lifetime
Marvel at a world astray
Mostly talk about nothing in particular
Never in a moment they stay

Given the slightest of instance
Memories would bring on some words
Lost in a futile madness
A life so blind to this world

Their eyes see but a perspective
Imbedded in their minds are thoughts
Their love so superficial
They’d rather live an illusion not real

Going around in circles
Lives limited to a well so deep
Ignorant to the ocean that surrounds them
A deep slumber they doth sleep

Awaken oh ignorant imbeciles
The world need not be this well
Listen to the music of nature
There is a Universe up ahead

Filled with awesome beauty
Amazing is each grain of sand
The wind it blows undaunted
The trees that for ages stand

Reach out & look at your madness
The insanity of it all
You are not what the Maker maketh
You are the Creator of it all

[Simple_Jack]

No doubt that an in depth study of those original works would be very valuable.

I just don't have the time for both practice and that level of scholarship, so I focus on practice and read more accessible and concise material.

I freely admit that my knowledge base is limited but my practice is deepening and stabilizing and that's a good thing for me.

 

This is all you have to know about 'rangtong' and 'shengtong':

 

http://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=48&t=9701&start=20

 

The actual mode of meditation in rang stong and gzhan stong are not different at all. The difference lay primarily in how they conceptualize the view in post-meditation.

 

The basis in gzhan stong is still emptiness, albeit is an emptiness qualified by the presence of ultimate buddha qualities, where samsaric phenomena are considered extraneous. Why? Because these ultimate qualities are only held to appear to exist in post-equipoise, but their appearance of existence disappear when in equipoise.

 

The equipoise in both rang stong and gzhan stong is characterized as an equipoise free from extremes. In the case of commoners, this freedom from extremes is arrived through analysis that negate the four extremes in turn. This is necessary even in gshan stong because attachment to the luminosity described by the PP sutras will result in an extreme view, just as grasping to emptiness results in an extreme view.

 

As I said, the most salient difference between R and S is in their post-equipoise formulation. In terms of how adherents of the so called R and S views actually meditate, there is no ultimate difference.

 

The pitfall of both approaches is the same -- failure to eradicate all extremes results in the former grasping to non-existence as emptiness, and the latter grasping to existence as emptiness.

 

The purpose of Madhyamaka analysis is not to come to some imagined "correct" generic image of the ultimate, but rather to exhaust the mind's capacity to reify phenomena according to any extreme so that one's experience of conventional truth upon reaching the path of seeing in post-equipoise is that all phenomena are seen to be illusions, dreams and so on i.e. unreal and yet apparent due to the force of traces.

 

It is exactly emptiness precisely in the fashion that I described it, even in Dolbuwa's presentation.

 

~ Loppon Namdrol

 

You could possibly have one-on-one correspondences with a Bonpo Geshe to learn Madhyamaka, if you're really interested in doing that.

[doc benway]

This is all you have to know about 'rangtong' and 'shengtong':

 

http://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=48&t=9701&start=20

 

The actual mode of meditation in rang stong and gzhan stong are not different at all. The difference lay primarily in how they conceptualize the view in post-meditation.

 

The basis in gzhan stong is still emptiness, albeit is an emptiness qualified by the presence of ultimate buddha qualities, where samsaric phenomena are considered extraneous. Why? Because these ultimate qualities are only held to appear to exist in post-equipoise, but their appearance of existence disappear when in equipoise.

 

The equipoise in both rang stong and gzhan stong is characterized as an equipoise free from extremes. In the case of commoners, this freedom from extremes is arrived through analysis that negate the four extremes in turn. This is necessary even in gshan stong because attachment to the luminosity described by the PP sutras will result in an extreme view, just as grasping to emptiness results in an extreme view.

Interestingly, in Journey to Certainty, Anyen Rinpoche interprets Mipham Rinpoche as considering the shengtong view as incapable of negating the four extremes. That is considered the primary failing of the shengtong view. At least that is how I'm reading it.

 

 

 

 

As I said, the most salient difference between R and S is in their post-equipoise formulation. In terms of how adherents of the so called R and S views actually meditate, there is no ultimate difference.

 

The pitfall of both approaches is the same -- failure to eradicate all extremes results in the former grasping to non-existence as emptiness, and the latter grasping to existence as emptiness.

 

The purpose of Madhyamaka analysis is not to come to some imagined "correct" generic image of the ultimate, but rather to exhaust the mind's capacity to reify phenomena according to any extreme so that one's experience of conventional truth upon reaching the path of seeing in post-equipoise is that all phenomena are seen to be illusions, dreams and so on i.e. unreal and yet apparent due to the force of traces.

 

It is exactly emptiness precisely in the fashion that I described it, even in Dolbuwa's presentation.

 

~ Loppon Namdrol

 

You could possibly have one-on-one correspondences with a Bonpo Geshe to learn Madhyamaka, if you're really interested in doing that.

 

Lots of good resources for studying Madhyamaka, as you've pointed out, and there seems to be enough similarity between Bönpo and Buddhist Prasangika Madhyamaka teachings that I'm comfortable with either at this point in my study. Finding a geshe or lama with enough free time to engage in a personal correspondence that would guide me in learning would be a true blessing. The ones I've encountered have been quite busy although one never knows... If the necessary causes and conditions come together I'll be on it like red and gold on a monk's robe!