Seeing, Recognising & Maintaining One's Enlightening Potential

[Jeff]

1 hour ago, C T said:

The pleasure orientation is very important, very powerful, and very basic. If you are not pleasure-oriented, you can’t understand tantra. You have to be pleasure-oriented, because otherwise you are pain- and misery-oriented. But this is not a psychological trick of convincing yourself through positive thinking. It is an obvious, reasonable, and real thing. When you treat yourself well, you feel good. When you feel good, you dress yourself in good clothes and adorn yourself with beautiful ornaments. It is a very natural and basic way of relating to oneself.
 

The main qualities of tantra that come out here are basic trust and basic elegance. Elegance here means appreciating things as they are. Things as you are and things as they are. There is a sense of delight and of fearlessness. You are not fearful of dark corners. If there are any dark, mysterious corners, black and confusing, you override them with your glory, your sense of beauty, your sense of cleanness, your feeling of being regal. Because you can override fearfulness in this way, tantra is known as the king of all the yanas. You take an attitude of having perfectly complete and very rich basic sanity.

 

~ Chogyam Trungpa ~ 

 

Excellent. Thank you.

[C T]

Meditation is not like progressing through stage after stage after stage. Rather, meditation is more like the process of growing up and ageing. Although you may celebrate your birthday on a particular day, that doesn’t mean that, when you blow your candle out at your party, you suddenly go from being two years old to being three. In growing up, there is a process of evolution, a process of development. That is precisely the issue as far as meditation practice is concerned. Meditation is not based on stages, but it is a process that takes place in you. Such a process takes place in accordance with your life situation.

 

There are many disciplines that talk in terms of stages and landmarks of spirituality. You take a certain vow, you take on a discipline, and from that point onward you are a different person. For example, in the Jewish tradition you have your bar mitzvah or bat mitzvah; you enter manhood or womanhood. There are many things like that.

 

It’s deceptive if we see the process as a sudden one: once you get your title and the deed that goes with your title, you think you have become a slightly advanced and different person. From the point of view of true spirituality, we have to face this misunderstanding. There is nothing that should be regarded as a sudden jump at all. Rather, there is a gradual process, an actual process that takes place constantly.

 

~ Chogyam Trungpa ~ 

[C T]

So we have two challenges at the heart of Dzogchen: don't allow the vision to be buried by your life - by the economy, by politics and so on. Don't let the vision get lost while you are caught up in what happens on a daily basis and in your own conduct. This is the first challenge.

 

The second is: don't let your vision of the Middle Way, the vision of the Great Perfection, suffocate and erase your interest in day-to-day issues - your life, your family, the political situation, among others. Don't let the vision exclude situations from life as if they didn't matter, because they do. Keep this expression in mind: "stillness in the face of movement".

 

As soon as we get out of here, we will all face a great deal of movement and activity in the world outside. There is no doubt about that. Will we be caught up and carried away by these ever-changing conditions and situations in the world, returning to the non-lucid dream of awakened life? Or will we turn off the internet, television, radio, and all media so that we don't have to see or hear any "evil", certain that "this is not for me, I am a practitioner of Dzogchen"? If we do this, we will become irrelevant, won't we? We will be of no significance to the world.

 

Our practice, therefore, is quietness in the midst of movement.

 

~ Alan Wallace ~ 

[manitou]

16 hours ago, C T said:

 

Our practice, therefore, is quietness in the midst of movement.

 

~ Alan Wallace ~ 

 

 

The thing that is always remarkable to me is how one begins on a conscious path to awareness, and at first it seems that there is so much to learn, to read.  And then one realizes that wisdom is not found by adding to one's mental storehouse, rather it's subtracting those things from ourselves which get in the way of clarity -  our conditioning.  Which leads us to the realization that our prior mental structure was just that....a mental construct.  How very simple it all turns out to be.  Too simple to make any sense at all.  Seems like it took so much 'work' to get to this point, and yet it lays out in front of us so easily....merely put one foot in front of the other and live life.  But with a different perspective; one where we don't buy into the drama because we understand the 'unreality' of it; and yet it is the very stage upon which we play our part.

 

What a strange setup this all is.  The Catch-22 of life.

[doc benway]

On 6/18/2019 at 12:56 PM, manitou said:

 How very simple it all turns out to be.  Too simple to make any sense at all.  .

 

I love this

[C T]

A Brief Discourse on Emptiness and Existence - The Dalai Lama and Lama Tsongkhapa

 

We all have a valid, proper sense of self, or “I,” but then we additionally have a misconception of that “I” as inherently existing. Under the sway of this delusion, we view the self as existing under its own power, established by way of its own nature, able to set itself up.

 

However, if there were such a separate I—self-established and existing in its own right—it should become clearer and clearer under the light of competent analysis as to whether it exists as either mind or body, or the collection of mind and body, or different from mind and body. In fact, the closer you look, the more it is not found. This turns out to be the case for everything, for all phenomena. The fact that you cannot find them means that those phenomena do not exist under their own power; they are not self-established.

 

Sometime during the early sixties when I was reflecting on a passage by Tsongkhapa about unfindability and the fact that phenomena are dependent on conceptuality, it was as if lightning coursed within my chest. Here is the passage:

 

"A coiled rope’s speckled colour and coiling are similar to those of a snake, and when the rope is perceived in a dim area, the thought arises, “This is a snake.” As for the rope, at that time when it is seen to be a snake, the collection and parts of the rope are not even in the slightest way a snake. Therefore, that snake is merely set up by conceptuality.

 

In the same way, when the thought “I” arises in dependence upon mind and body, nothing within mind and body—neither the collection which is a continuum of earlier and later moments, nor the collection of the parts at one time, nor the separate parts, nor the continuum of any of the separate parts—is in even the slightest way the “I.” Also there is not even the slightest something that is a different entity from mind and body that is apprehendable as the “I.” Consequently, the “I” is merely set up by conceptuality in dependence upon mind and body; it is not established by way of its own entity."

 

Buddha said many times that because all phenomena are dependently arisen, they are relative—their existence depends on other causes and conditions and depends on their own parts. A wooden table, for instance, does not exist independently; rather, it depends on a great many causes such as a tree, the carpenter who makes it, and so forth; it also depends upon its own parts. If a wooden table or any phenomenon really were not dependent—if it were established in its own right—then when you analyze it, its existence in its own right should become more obvious, but it does not.

 

 

Additional reading: Dependent Arising and Emptiness: A Tibetan Buddhist Interpretation of Madhyamika Philosophy by Elizabeth Napper

Edited June 20, 2019 by C T

[C T]

What are the eight worldly concerns? 

Hope for happiness and fear of suffering.

Hope for fame and fear of insignificance. 

Hope for praise and fear of blame. 

Hope for gain and fear of loss. 

 

Dudjom Rinpoche said, "Mixing the eight worldly concerns with your spiritual practice is extremely dangerous,   like eating food mixed with poison. The eight worldly concerns in concise form can be reduced to two things: Hope and Fear, which are, in fact, Desire and Anger."

Edited June 21, 2019 by C T

[C T]

~ Chokyi Nyima Rinpoche ~ 

 

The mind is empty, cognizant, united, unformed. Please make the meanings of these words something that points at your own experience. You can also say the mind is the “unformed unity of empty cognizance.” These are very precious and profound words. “Empty” means that essentially this mind is something that is empty. This is easy to agree on: we cannot find it as a thing. It is not made empty by anyone, including by us - it is just naturally empty, originally so.

 

At the same time, we also have the ability to know, to cognize, which is also something natural and unmade. These two qualities, being empty and cognizant, are not separate entities. They are an indivisible unity. This unity itself is also not something that is made by anyone. It is not a unity of empty cognizance that at some point arose, remains for a while and later will perish. Being unformed, it does not arise, does not dwell, and does not cease. It is not made in time. It is not a material substance. Anything that exists in time or substance is an object of thought. This unformed unity of empty cognizance is not made of thought; it is not an object of thought.

 

 

 

[C T]

~
“We do not say that because things are empty they do not exist;

we say that because things exist they are empty.”  

 

~ A Tibetan saying 

 

 

Because everything is empty of an essential, definable nature, conventional truth not only depends upon conditions but upon thought.  The conventional designation of phenomena does not point to inherently existent things, but are relative, relational characterizations, like large is to small, or as smooth is to rough. What we consider to be different things, depend upon other things to be considered different.  When characteristics are seen to exist independently, they deceptively appear to have their own inherent nature.  Such reification is a conceptual overlay that gives the false impression that characteristics stand outside of thought as their own separate things.
~
This reification process also mistakes empty, relative characteristics to be the properties, as they are literally called, of an object or objects, as in it’s solid or they’re shiny.  It mistakes relative descriptions as being owned by or belonging to an object, or to a subject as in the case of a self.  But there are no objects hiding behind these characteristics, collecting or harboring them, no concealed core in which to find the essence of things.  There are not two objects, one with characteristics and one without characteristics.  Instead, all objects are designated on the basis of relationally described characteristics and to be an object is merely to be characterized.

 

~ Susan Kahn ~ 

Edited June 21, 2019 by C T

[C T]

~ Dzongsar Khyentse Rinpoche ~

 

 

In Buddhist philosophy, anything that is perceived by the mind did not exist before the mind perceived it; it depends on the mind. It doesn't exist independently, therefore it doesn't truly exist. That is not to say that it doesn't exist "somewhat". Buddhists called the perceived world relative truth - a truth that is measured and labeled by our ordinary minds. In order to qualify as ultimate truth, it must not be fabricated, it must not be a product of the imagination, and it must be independent of interpretation.

 

[manitou]

5 hours ago, C T said:

~ Dzongsar Khyentse Rinpoche ~

 

 

In order to qualify as ultimate truth, it must not be fabricated, it must not be a product of the imagination, and it must be independent of interpretation.

 

 

 

LOL.  Then, surely the ultimate truth is Nothing.

[doc benway]

14 hours ago, C T said:

~ Dzongsar Khyentse Rinpoche ~

 

 

In Buddhist philosophy, anything that is perceived by the mind did not exist before the mind perceived it; it depends on the mind. It doesn't exist independently, therefore it doesn't truly exist. That is not to say that it doesn't exist "somewhat". Buddhists called the perceived world relative truth - a truth that is measured and labeled by our ordinary minds. In order to qualify as ultimate truth, it must not be fabricated, it must not be a product of the imagination, and it must be independent of interpretation.

 

So nice to have you around!

 

[C T]

~ James Low ~ 

 

Thoughts are very fragile; they don’t live very long and they can’t do very much. There is no end to thinking and thoughts do not establish anything reliable. However, we use these thoughts to create the whole world. Every day we are constructing this great edifice of samsara with our thoughts. Thoughts are very young, they like to play. Let them play. The point here is, don’t ask your thoughts to give you the meaning of existence. They cannot do that. Don’t ask thoughts to do what they can’t do…

 

…Tantra is a path of activity, and one of its strengths is that it gives us something to do. There are mudras to do with your hands, a dorje and bell to hold, instruments to play, things to read, and many things to visualise. The beauty and the skilful organisation of these patterns of movements allows such a focus of attention that there is no spare aspect of the mind to be caught up in distraction. In tantra you are working with energy, with the transformation of your experience of what is occurring.  However, in Dzogchen, one is concerned simply to relax into the natural purity of the open state…

[C T]

~ Tsoknyi Rinpoche ~ Carefree Dignity: Discourses on Training in the Nature of Mind

 

What usually happens is that whenever something is seen or heard, we feel that it demands our attention. We fall under the command of the visible form being seen and we feel that we have to get involved in discriminating what it is. So we stay busy attaching values and defining and pigeon-holing it. If a sound occurs, we immediately think, “I have to listen to that sound.” We get caught up again and again, trapped in discriminating whether we like the sensation or don't like it; whether we must accept it or reject it. That very process is the creation of karma, right there. That is what we are trying to step out of right now through meditation training.

[WHITEROOMENERGYMINE1]

On 6/21/2017 at 6:02 PM, C T said:

"Emptiness demolishes all dharmas (concepts) so that the only thing that abides is emptiness (sunyata). After emptiness has demolished all dharmas, emptiness itself should also be set aside. It is because of this that we require the ‘emptiness of emptiness’ (sunyata-sunyata). Whereas emptiness conditions all dharmas, the emptiness of emptiness conditions only emptiness.”

 

~ Nagarjuna ~ 

In my opinion the only thing that arises inside of emptiness is the dharma. With dharma independent origination is necessary and the dharma is heard. It is the only sound of awakening. To be alert is required to hear it the first time and it is the only thing independent of all other sounds. If it is read than one has found it on his/her own. Outside of the hometown dream there is a door. Between your thoughts is emptiness. Within emptiness is one thing that is permanent and that is the dharma. It is independent of all thought and is heard. It is a sound so bright. If read than the removal of dharma from dependent origination is difficult to procure due to others connections. If heard than one has found a source of dharma. Not all buddhas dharma's are the same but all originate independently. Meditation sharpens your senses but outside of where you were born lay a multitude of lairs. These places contain all sorts of things with no means to procure them. They are never taken by a buddha for these are the poisons, the dredges and the lack of order. To still one's mind within emptiness and as emptiness requires a massive amount of effort and this comes after listening to one's own thoughts. A pratyekabuddha has no friends for the things they say are never dharmic. To meet one would to be like meeting a ghost of ones own past and not understand why that being has left you for the future. Listening is a dangerous art and leaves no room for peers. The quieter one's own mind becomes the more difficult it is to see goodness in any human. They drift so far from here and presence that it would seem they have gone away into the future but their words and their actions become dependent origination and the pratyekabuddha is alone. Looking for their own past they go to him and seeing him suffering more from an increasingly still mind they think he is suffering alone. He bears his own thoughts and theirs as well. There is no peace for him. Nirvana is a field. And a field is presence. To be alone permanently would be heaven to that person.

My own thoughts are something like to turn the dharma wheel once would be something like the hero's journey. But to meet others and hear them talk about it would leave you looking for someone with fire. IF they have no manhood of fire and think the elixer is with the gods or some non-sense then strange enough to flow through the story leaves one outcast even though symbolic symmetry leads to beauty. The end of the story is just the rising of the sun. So many people can't even stay up alone. Sometimes I think people don't even look up at it.

[C T]

~ Dilgo Khyentse Rinpoche ~ 

 

When looking into the nature of mind, don’t expect to gain some exceptionally high or profound realization, or to see anything new. Nor should you hesitate or doubt your ability to meditate. Just trust that the nature of mind is simply the mind itself left in an unaltered state, and do all that you can to sustain this, without distraction, at all times, during and between the meditation sessions. Don’t expect to gain realization in just a few months, or even years. Whether you develop any of the qualities that come from the practice or not, remain steadfastly determined and resolve to continue the practice with diligence, day and night, throughout this life, future lives and the bardo state.

[C T]

Basic Tibetan yogic purification exercises

 

 

[C T]

 

[C T]

 

[C T]

 

[C T]

~ Jianzhi Sengcan ~ 

 

To return to the root is to find the meaning,
but to pursue appearances is to miss the source.
At the moment of inner enlightenment,
there is a going beyond appearance and emptiness.
The changes that appear to occur in the empty world
we call real only because of our ignorance.
Do not search for the truth;
only cease to cherish opinions.

[Spotless]

3 hours ago, C T said:

Do not search for the truth;
only cease to cherish opinions

😎🙏

[C T]

~ Thinley Norbu Rinpoche ~ 

 

The Buddhist view is to recognize that we must not remain within ordinary phenomena by following a worldly philosophy limited to ordinary, substantial reasoning. We must decide to increase pure phenomena by following a spiritual philosophy which goes beyond ordinary reasoning and leads to enlightenment. Buddhist philosophy is entirely spiritual. Its purpose is to refute the views of the two extremes of nihilism and eternalism by the skillful means of wisdom, to release all beings to enlightenment.

 

Some nihilists in particular think that Buddhism is only a philosophy and not a religion. This misunderstanding is the result of holding the nihilist point of view, which does not accept the intangible, imperceptible qualities of nondualistic wisdom that can appear tangibly or intangibly. Because the nihilist point of view is confined to the reasoning of dualistic mind, it is actually impossible to use it to define or evaluate the qualities of Buddhism deeply and clearly, since they are beyond ordinary perception. Even the difference between ordinary and spiritual qualities cannot be analyzed.

 

The nihilist view of believing only in this momentary life is the result of considering substance to be the fundamental constituent of all phenomena, including one’s body, the objective gross elements, whatever arises from these gross elements, and whatever can be perceived. There are many different ways to understand substance within relative truth, since there are infinite relative truths. Nihilism means becoming caught within each temporary circumstance of relative truth and believing in its reality, so the perception of substance seems real.

 

From the Buddhist point of view, everything that exists in samsara is substance. The origin of substance is dualistic mind. There is no end to substance because there is no end to the conceptions of dualistic mind. Whenever the buddhanature of sentient beings is dormant and dualistic mind appears, the ordinary passions and the incalculable phenomena of the karmic elements arise, which are all composed of substance.

 

Substance is not only one part of something. It is all the immeasurable forms of samsaric existence, unless it is transformed into immeasurable, substanceless, wisdom light appearances which are beyond all interdependent cause and result. This is the meaning of substancelessness. Substanceless wisdom is unobstructed and pervades everywhere in samsara and nirvana without intention as self-accomplished compassion, so it can manifest within substance, but it never remains there. Its essence is always nonsubstance, which is the quality of Buddha.

[C T]

~ TRALEG KYABGÖN RINPOCHE ~

 

EQUANIMITY

 

In order to cope better with our own roller coaster of emotions, the starting point is to develop equanimity. In the Buddhist tradition it's not a question of contriving or manufacturing equanimity. It's nothing to do with positive thinking, or blotting out the negative, or making affirmations. Equanimity is a discovery. It is discovered to be ever present. Underneath our roller coaster experience of pain, pleasure, happiness and dissatisfaction is the basic ground of our being, which is equanimity.

 

Equanimity means the absence of evaluation. Usually we are unable to look at the situation or deal with anybody without superimposing our own value judgments or subjective evaluations. We never see situations as they simply are. Our value judgments colour our understanding of the world and other people. Usually when we meet someone, even while we are in the midst of conversation, we are drawing our conclusions. Then we go away with a fixed impression that he is like this and like that. We project onto people rather than relate to them as they are.

 

So equanimity is the key which unlocks the whole toolbox of spiritual development. It gives us access to the enormous diversity of tools available to anyone who wants to be more effective, capable, loving and compassionate. Equanimity is the start of the spiritual path.

 

Equanimity is not apathy. It is not a fatalistic indifference to what is going on. Equanimity is being completely open to reality so we can directly experience things as they are, rather than interpreting everything and making it into a second hand experience.

[ilumairen]

3 minutes ago, C T said:

We project onto people rather than relate to them as they are.

 

Mirrors