What is the Middle Way?

[Apech]

I mean in the sense that there are the paths of renunciation, purification, transformation, and self-liberation. 

 

 

Not sure we are talking about the same thing ... this is what I meant by eight worldly dharmas:

 

http://www.rigpawiki.org/index.php?title=Eight_worldly_preoccupations

[Seeker of Wisdom]

Those people, unless they have extremely good karma and are somehow providing for themselves while they are on the retreat will not experience experiential realization. I doubt they will even reach intellectual realization.

 

Actually many people find they make great progress while on retreat, even reaching various stages of awakening. Is your concern that monks and nuns are selfishly leeching off society, not providing for themselves, so they can have more time to meditate? Even if none of them did any translation or teaching or whatever (I'm not claiming the system never has any problems, of course), what's the issue with a layperson taking a month or two off to go on retreat?

[C T]

Actually many people find they make great progress while on retreat, even reaching various stages of awakening. Is your concern that monks and nuns are selfishly leeching off society, not providing for themselves, so they can have more time to meditate? Even if none of them did any translation or teaching or whatever (I'm not claiming the system never has any problems, of course), what's the issue with a layperson taking a month or two off to go on retreat?

Immensely beneficial to do this if one is seriously committed to making progress on the path. 

[forestofclarity]

It is probably our definition of renunciation, purification, transformation, and self-liberation that are different, and that's ok. The point is, there's no one answer for all of Buddhism.

 

Not sure we are talking about the same thing ... this is what I meant by eight worldly dharmas:

 

http://www.rigpawiki.org/index.php?title=Eight_worldly_preoccupations

[Tibetan_Ice]

The middle way in dzogchen.... From Golden Letters - Reynolds
 

The Nyingmapa presentation of Dzogchen is not an eternalist view (rtag Ita-ba), as some scholars assert. Rather, according to their own account, Dzogchen represents a middle way between the extremes of eternalism (rtag) and nihilism (chad). One should not be led astray by the ontological rather than epistemological language employed in Dzogchen texts. According to Dzogchen, those who rigidly follow the Prasangika Madhyamika of Chandrakirti perpetually find themselves selves in danger of falling into the extreme of nihilism and asserting that nothing exists. They overly stress the negative side of shunyata. But the balance is redressed in Tantra and in Dzogchen, where shunyata has its positive side, which is luminous clarity (gsal-ba). This should not be perceived as an abandoning of the middle way by the Tantra system, and it must be remembered that there exists more than one interpretation of Madhyamaka.

In the early period of Tibet, the syncretistic Madhyamaka system of Shantirakshita was the prevalent form of Madhyamaka philosophy. This system of Shantirakshita was able to use the vocabulary of the Chittamatra philosophy, but this did not mean that it uncritically adopted the philosophical standpoint of Chittamatra, "mind only." The Tantra system likewise did this. But whereas the Sutra system, by means of philosophical analysis, culminates in the realization of a universal shunyata as its conclusion, the Tantra system begins with the state of shunyata as a given, in terms of the three samadhis or contemplations," and it is out of this state of emptiness (stong-nyid ngang nas) that the transformation arises. This state of emptiness, the Tathata-samadhi, "the contemplation of reality," is the primal phase with which any sadhana or process of transformation begins. But this state is not just empty; it is simultaneously clear luminosity (gsal-ba), ba), and this aspect is the second samadhi, the Samantabhasa-samadhi, "the contemplation of what manifests everywhere." It is light or luminosity, whereas the first samadhi refers to the depths of open empty space. The inseparable unity of these two bring into being ing the third samadhi, the Hetu-samadhi, or "causal contemplation," the seed or germ out of which manifest forms are generated or created (bskyed-pa), like a tree growing from a seed. Commencing the sadhana practice in this purified primordial state of emptiness, which is like the clear open sky, the method of the Tantra proceeds to invoke and develop the energy that is concealed, enfolded, and inherent in the state of emptiness-that is to say, visible forms are regenerated or remanifested out of the pristine state of shunyata, just as they were at the time of the beginning, symbolically the time of the first creation 32 Shunyata, the state of emptiness itself, is the source of this primordial energy that brings all possible forms, even the universe verse itself, into manifestation. The vast and infinite empty space of the state of shunyata is pregnant with all possibilities; it has within itself the potentiality or creative energy for manifesting all possible manifestations, whether pure vision or impure vision, whether Nirvana or Samsara. In this way, during the course of sadhana practice, one's obscurations of knowledge and one's impure karmic vision are progressively purified.

Thus, the Base, the Primordial State, is not just emptiness in the negative sense of void or nothingness, a mere absence of something. Rather, the state of shunyata, this vast empty space where emptiness and luminosity are inseparable (gsal stong dbyer-med), represents the state of pure potentiality. It is the space or dimension or matrix of all existence out of which all possible forms or manifestations (snang-ba) ba) arise, like clouds appearing spontaneously in the empty open sky. It is not just that forms lack an inherent nature (rang-bzhin med-pa) pa) or substance, but equally inherent in shunyata is the potentiality for the arising of forms; this is the meaning of luminosity (gsal-ba). Thus Dzogchen speaks of stong-cha and gsal-cha, "the side of emptiness" ness" and "the side of clarity," which are the two aspects or sides of the Primordial Base. These two aspects are also known as ka-dag, "primordial purity," and lhun-grub, "spontaneous self-perfection." This fact transcends conventional logic, because it is not a matter of the Base being either A or not-A, of being either emptiness or manifestation. If shunyata were a mere nothing, then nothing would arise at all. But this pure nonexistence or nothingness contradicts our experience. Thoughts and appearances are arising all the time, arising continuously, and this is only natural. But equally, if forms were not empty, then there would exist no possibility for change because all things would be locked up in a static unchanging state of their own self-identical essence or inherent nature (rang-bzhin, Skt. svabhava). But that is not our experience. We experience that things continuously change. They are in a state of becoming.

When Dzogchen speaks of the Base, it speaks of its qualities (gzhi'i yon-tan) in terms of Essence, Nature, and Energy. Its Essence (ngo-bo) is shunyata (stong-pa nyid), and its Nature (rang-bzhin) is luminous clarity (gsal-ba), whereas their unity or inseparability is Energy (thugs-rje).13Both of the Tibetan terms ngo-bo and rang-bzhin translate the single Sanskrit word svabhava. Perhaps this is indicative that this particular line of philosophical thought developed in Tibet rather than India. But making these statements about the Base is not the same thing as asserting that it is a substance or an entity. The Base is empty. Dzogchen does not lapse or deviate from the central Buddhist dhist teaching of Anatman into some kind of Shashvatavada, or eternalist view.

Dzogchen begins with shunyata because shunyata is the Base as its Essence (ngo-bo), but an entity called shunyata will not be found anywhere. If one looks into the mind to see where a thought arises, where it abides, and where it goes, one will not find any place from where it arises (byung sa med), nor any place where it abides (gnas sa med), nor any place where it goes to ('gro sa med). Where is this shunyata then? Thoughts arise and dissolve, but they do not arise from anywhere and do not go anywhere. This is their aspect of emptiness tiness (stong-cha). Yet thoughts continue to arise incessantly; this is their aspect of inexhaustible luminosity (gsal-cha). And these two aspects are inseparable in the Base (gsal stong dbyer-med). This empty aspect of mind is its primordial purity (ka-dag), but this purity is not some substance or entity, not some mind-stuff out of which thoughts are made, like ocean waves made up of the water contained in the ocean. It is only the quality of the nature of mind, and this nature of mind remains primordially uncontaminated, unchanged, and unadulterated adulterated by whatever thoughts arise in the mind. Since this nature ture of mind, or sems-nyid, transcends the thought process (that is to say, Samsara) from the very beginning, being itself outside the temporal poral process and the causal sequence, it is said to be primordially pure (ka-dag). But simultaneously it is mind, or sems. Mind has the power or capacity to bring all thoughts and phenomena into manifestation in consciousness through its latent energy. Forms continuously arise as manifestations of mind (sems kyi snang-ba), and this is called spontaneous self-perfection (lhun-grub). Here there is no contradiction with the doctrine of Anatman (bdag-med).

Does this teaching of a Primordial State beyond cause and effect contradict the kerygma, the original core message of the Buddha? It is said in an ancient verse that "All conditioned things are impermanent, nent, are without a self, and are suffering-this is the teaching of the Buddha." But the Primordial State is not a thing or a substance. It is unconditioned (Skt. asamskrta-dharma ), but ultimately it cannot be defined by the intellect or expressed in words. It is the Noble Silence that the Buddha maintained after he first attained enlightenment. And yet, because of his unstinting universal compassion for all sentient tient beings, he spoke of that which cannot be expressed in words. It is like trying to explain the taste of sugar to a man who has never tasted anything sweet. But all speech and language, as useful and as necessary as they may be, represent limitation. Language cannot perfectly mirror reality; direct immediate experience transcends expression pression in words and arrangement in syllogisms. Just as the way to the mirror is through the reflections, so the Buddha spoke of conditioned tioned things (Skt. samskrta-dharma ); but he also spoke of the unconditioned ditioned (Skt. asamskrta-dharma ), usually by way of negative statements, ments, employing a kind of via negativa. Hence he spoke of Anatman and shunyata.
 

Edited November 9, 2015 by Tibetan_Ice

[RigdzinTrinley]

I basically agree with Vajranatha and he managed to show that "Great" Madhyamika and the Great Perfection teachings are very compatible

 

still as many people who are in love with the Dzogchen transmission (me included), he seems to look down (a little) on those poor Prasangika Madhyamikas who "don't get it"

 

likewise I met tons of people who got some buzz out of a direct introduction and they feel like all the rest of the Buddhas teaching is not as powerful, swift, profound as the clear light path of Dzogchen; and obviously who would want to study Madhyamika after they already got the direct introduction to their true nature?

 

lets just put that into practice!!!!

 

Well, you know without certainty just the first statement of garab dorje (direct introduction) won't do anything - and many people (also myself included) start running after Dzogchen retreats and pointing out instructions - why? To remember how beautiful it was buzzin around on dzogchen

 

hence we get our dzogchen buzz on once in a while and at the same time continue to happily migrate in Samsara because some most deluded part of our minds is thinking "ordinary confused appearances = primordial wisdom" thats easy! just let it rest in its own place! (well where is the most important aspect of the dzogchen transmission? "simultanious arising and liberation")

 

so the first statement is wonderful and important (the most important the teachings say)

but that second statement is also important namely certainty in the view!!

 

certainty in the view of Dzogchen

 

now how to get that if you are like me a poor beggar in pure view of the lineage and lineage masters, wihtout much devotion and faith?

 

and one of my teachers said - if you have faith and pure devotion to the lama and the teachings then "one syllable" of dzogchen - just seeing it is liberation, hearing one word of dzogchen is liberation

 

honestly I can't seem to generate that kind of faith for now, so how to get to the second statement of garab dorje - how to get certainty in the view?

 

a clear understanding and grounding in Madhyamika is the answer - thats my humble opinion!

 

concerning this topic I think that Miphams beacon of certainty is of udmost importance (for the not as devoted types) escpecially topic 3,4,5 and 7

 

and traditionaly the beacon is thought for at least a month after you got your madhyamika basics down - because its like the icing on the madhyamika cake

 

I don't say you can't get the essence of the second statement of garab dorje without understanding Madhyamika - pure devotion does the trick also (probably even better, faster that is)

 

but then again for me I need to find that certainty through hearing, contemplation, meditaiton on the essential meaning of sutra and tantra and that is a correct understanding of emptiness

 

And Do Khyentse Yeshe Dorje said Great Madhyamika as the base, Mahamudra as the path and Dzogchen as the fruition

 

why? becaus if you have great madhyamika as the base you won't make anything out of it - you can actually stop trying to figure it out and just leave it in its own place

 

also one of my teachers gave a long talk on what it means to liberate thought upon arising - and the essence is you need to have absolute confidence that they are the union of appearance/emptiness - then they have no other choice but to self liberate themselves

 

also if you read longchenpas treasury of Dharmadatu or the last 3 sections of resting in the nature of mind - the way kunkhyen longchenpa is presenting these teachings, how to say? for me it almost feels like Longchenpa is saying "it is obvious you already understand that all phenomena are beyond the 4 ontological extremes - so we can skip that part and go straight to the Biskuits"

 

but if you didn't get that part then what will be the result of your dzogchen practice? endless migration in samsara (to paraphrase my gestalt therapist, for most people meditaiton means = swimming in your own soup)

Edited November 9, 2015 by RigdzinTrinley

[Apech]

@T_I

 

That's an excellent quote and summary, thanks!

 

 

@Rigdzin Trinley

 

The teachings I have received are Kagyu and Sakya - I really don't know about Dzogchen (which seems to me has become something of an obsession with non-Buddhists).  The Mahamudra teachings are similar of course.

 

My teacher holds also a Zhentong lineage (originating I think with the 3rd Karmapa) which is the 'empty of other' version of madhyamaka.  This also affirms the positive qualities of emptiness or Buddha nature.  I think also Mikyo Dorje compares this with Yogacara - in that a truly existent 'mind' is affirmed.

 

What has been suggested in the teachings I have received is that while Prasangika is intellectually a complete and consistent philosophy - practitioners of tantra do in their sadhanas and so on automatically affirm the positive qualities of sunyata and thus are in a sense being Zhentong/Yogacara in their approach.  Of course ultimately any inner realisation of emptiness supercedes any intellectual understanding of it.

[RigdzinTrinley]

Yes true dat

 

For tantra to work understanding emptiness is very important the basis

 

But the practice itself is more connected with yogacara and yes the mind-only model makes more sense in the tantric context.

 

But to establish the view you needs them consequentialist reasonings

 

The middle way beyond conceptual elaboration

 

Otherwise you "create" a truly existent mandala palace and deities

 

On top of your truly established 5skandhas and probably end on the second freak street in lala land

 

Miphams position on rangtong/shentong is basically if you get the main point of sutra and tantra rangtong/shentong is not seen as a contradiction anymore

 

Looking at mipham he feels like a great synthesiser of sutra and tantra - like longchenpa also. Comes maybe from the all inclusive dzogchen view?

 

But I didn't study miphams works on that subject so I can't really say anything about what he means...

[Apech]

Yes true dat

 

For tantra to work understanding emptiness is very important the basis

 

But the practice itself is more connected with yogacara and yes the mind-only model makes more sense in the tantric context.

 

But to establish the view you needs them consequentialist reasonings

 

The middle way beyond conceptual elaboration

 

Otherwise you "create" a truly existent mandala palace and deities

 

On top of your truly established 5skandhas and probably end on the second freak street in lala land

 

Miphams position on rangtong/shentong is basically if you get the main point of sutra and tantra rangtong/shentong is not seen as a contradiction anymore

 

Looking at mipham he feels like a great synthesiser of sutra and tantra - like longchenpa also. Comes maybe from the all inclusive dzogchen view?

 

But I didn't study miphams works on that subject so I can't really say anything about what he means...

 

I heard one Rinpoche say that once you get to Ist Bhumi all the problems about rangtong/Zhentong evaporate.

 

But as you say - it's emptiness first and then tantra otherwise you get caught up in your own fantastical creations (or something).

[RigdzinTrinley]

yes brother,

 

I totally agree and

 

that second point was hammered into me by my lamas - first understand emptiness before you go playing with tantra

 

I asked three different teachers at different times: my question was what I should study to prepare for tantric studies/practice, all said Madhyamika!

 

btw: to understand emptiness means obviously not to realize emptiness - two different cups of tea. If you would realize emptiness then tantric practice or no tantric practice wouldn't make that big of a difference (just in how fast you traverse the bhumis - but thats all toooo theoretical for me so I let the bhumis be)

 

But I slowly believe that understanding or not understanding emptiness makes a major difference for tantric practice or Dzogchen/Mahamudra practice.

 

basically its the essential thing - emptiness with the essence of great compassion

 

sutrayana: appearance/emptiness

or

the three inner Yogas of the Nyigma school

Mahayoga: clarity or luminosity/emptiness

Anuyoga: bliss/emptiness

Atiyoga: pristine awareness (rigpa)/emptiness

 

the emptiness part didn't change - the expression and understanding of the "appearance" part goes deeper

Edited November 9, 2015 by RigdzinTrinley

[doc benway]

lets just put that into practice!!!!

 

Quoted for emphasis

 

Wonderful posts everyone

[Bud Jetsun]

The middle path is unmappable.  

 

Walking the path is done in Now one compassion rooted thought/action/step at a time.  Beyond this are constructions labeled 'middle-path' not the path. 

 

That said, the constructions can be a form of beautiful art, this thread is like an art gallery of and for the mind. 

 

Unlimited Love,

-Bud

Edited November 11, 2015 by Bud Jetsun

[ion]

the middle path is not about making compromises between extremities. It's about not seeing extremities by not labeling or conceptualizing things.

 

its simple; by conceptualizing good and making an icon of it whatever doesnt live up to that standard is bad by default, and so things are not labeled, and extremities never give rise nor do entanglements.

 

the middle path is exposed when a person notices the dependent-origination of things and that because of the dependent origination of things no thong has self nature, or any nature so no things can accurately bare the nature of any conceptualized dualistic label such as good or evil taisie or gross or anything and its conceptual opposite.

[Seeker of Wisdom]

Except things are skillful or unskillful. Murdering random people is unskillful, for example. The difference is the kind of results these things lead to. Skillful qualities produce skillful results - dependent origination. Unskillful qualities produce unskillful results - dependent origination.

 

Of course there's no self-nature of 'skillfulness' or 'unskillfulness', but it's valid relative truth and a core theme of Dharma that thoughts, words and deeds lead to either benefit or harm.

 

 

 

"So, as I said, Kalamas: 'Don't go by reports, by legends, by traditions, by scripture, by logical conjecture, by inference, by analogies, by agreement through pondering views, by probability, or by the thought, "This contemplative is our teacher." When you know for yourselves that, "These qualities are unskillful; these qualities are blameworthy; these qualities are criticized by the wise; these qualities, when adopted & carried out, lead to harm & to suffering" — then you should abandon them.' Thus was it said. And in reference to this was it said.

 

"Now, Kalamas, don't go by reports, by legends, by traditions, by scripture, by logical conjecture, by inference, by analogies, by agreement through pondering views, by probability, or by the thought, 'This contemplative is our teacher.' When you know for yourselves that, 'These qualities are skillful; these qualities are blameless; these qualities are praised by the wise; these qualities, when adopted & carried out, lead to welfare & to happiness' — then you should enter & remain in them.

 

The Blessed One said, "Monks, before my self-awakening, when I was still just an unawakened Bodhisatta, the thought occurred to me: 'Why don't I keep dividing my thinking into two sorts?' So I made thinking imbued with sensuality, thinking imbued with ill will, & thinking imbued with harmfulness one sort, and thinking imbued with renunciation, thinking imbued with non-ill will, & thinking imbued with harmlessness another sort.

[...]

"Unflagging persistence was aroused in me, and unmuddled mindfulness established. My body was calm & unaroused, my mind concentrated & single. Quite withdrawn from sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful mental qualities, I entered & remained in the first jhana[...]

 

And for a Vajrayana POV, here's Padmasambhava: 

 

Though my view is as spacious as the sky, My actions and respect for cause and effect are as fine as grains of flour.

 

[ion]

Words and deeds are ultimately empty of self nature, seeing them as such is the middle way. The most expedient and skillfull means avoids deeds, actions and activities due to the irrevocable of their mutually dependent Karmic obligations.

 

We've all read Zen stories where the disciple becomes enlightened at the utterance of their Master, yet we've read the words countless times ourselves, and to us its just something else to contemplate. The words are without nature or meaning. To say they are or do is to make an icon from them, a religion, and religion is not the most expedient means for the salvation of the world or the individual.

 

Thats not to say the stories are false, but that the words carry characteristics of the conditions that caused their being said, and the enlightenment of the disciple was also an interdependent occurance dependent on unique conditions, both of which have no meaining, causality, or self nature particularly outside of its one time occurrence/context.

Edited November 25, 2015 by ion