Rigpa vs. Yuan Shen

[anshino23]

Anyone know if they're comparable or can be directly related in some way?

 

It seems in Dzogchen there's four levels of rigpa (from rigpawiki below). 

 

Ground rigpa: "(Tib. གཞིའི་རིག་པ་, shyi rigpa, Wyl. gzhi'i rig pa) acts as the basis for all of samsara and nirvana, and is identical to the subtle clear light. This is the pristine awareness one experiences at the time of death, but not during the ordinary waking state. It is from this awareness that the foundation consciousness arises."

Essential rigpa: "The fundamental innate mind of clear light is considered to be the nature of mind, or the ultimate root of consciousness. 

In the same way that a sesame seed is entirely permeated by sesame oil, as soon as there is clear and aware consciousness, it is said to be permeated by the clear light rigpa. This aspect of rigpa, this in-dwelling clear light is what is called essential rigpa (Tib. ངོ་བོའི་རིག་པ་ , Wyl. ngo bo'i rig pa).^[1]

 

Effulgent rigpa: "The Dzogchen teachings are very precise in talking about rigpa and categorizing it with many subtle distinctions. So a distinction is made between the ground of being and the appearances of that ground, and effulgent rigpa (Tib. རྩལ་གྱི་རིག་པ་ , tsal gyi rigpa, Wyl. rtsal gyi rig pa) is rigpa that is present in the appearances arising from the ground. It’s an aspect of rigpa which is to be identified and experienced only when coarse levels of mind and conceptual thoughts are active. At that point the experience of the fundamental innate mind of clear light has ‘ceased’―‘ceased’ in the sense that it is no longer a direct object of your experience. However, there is still a definite quality of clarity and awareness that permeates the coarser states of consciousness. This type of clear light experienced as a quality that permeates these states is the effulgent rigpa.

 

All-embracing rigpa: rigpa of all-embracing spontaneous presence (Tib. ལྷུན་གྲུབ་སྦུབས་ཀྱི་རིག་པ་, Wyl. lhun grub sbubs kyi rig pa)

 

Do these have equivalents in Daoism, and if so, what would they be?
 

Thanks a lot! 

[ilumairen]

16 hours ago, anshino23 said:

Anyone know if they're comparable or can be directly related in some way?

 

My post won't directly answer this wonderfully clear question. Although perhaps @steve may be willing/able to provide a more direct response. 

 

16 hours ago, anshino23 said:

It seems in Dzogchen there's four levels of rigpa (from rigpawiki below). 

 

16 hours ago, anshino23 said:

Effulgent rigpa: "The Dzogchen teachings are very precise in talking about rigpa and categorizing it with many subtle distinctions. So a distinction is made between the ground of being and the appearances of that ground, and effulgent rigpa (Tib. རྩལ་གྱི་རིག་པ་ , tsal gyi rigpa, Wyl. rtsal gyi rig pa) is rigpa that is present in the appearances arising from the ground. It’s an aspect of rigpa which is to be identified and experienced only when coarse levels of mind and conceptual thoughts are active. At that point the experience of the fundamental innate mind of clear light has ‘ceased’―‘ceased’ in the sense that it is no longer a direct object of your experience. However, there is still a definite quality of clarity and awareness that permeates the coarser states of consciousness. This type of clear light experienced as a quality that permeates these states is the effulgent rigpa.

 

I believe the teachings are precise to assist the "seeker" in proper understanding and the avoidance of pitfalls. For example,  just because there is rigpa permeating all manifestation of consciousness, doesn't mean one is always "abiding in rigpa" or "resting in the essence of rigpa." Abiding/resting is dependent upon awareness - without it we're just riding the water wheel and playing in samsara.

 

Rigpa "itself" is without levels or reference, as I understand "it." 

 

16 hours ago, anshino23 said:

Do these have equivalents in Daoism, and if so, what would they be?
 

Thanks a lot! 

 

I believe there is much which points to this (overall) understanding (a clear "source" from which "for" or "against" arise), although as highlighted above I don't ascribe to the idea of "levels" in the manner I understood your words (which could easily be misunderstanding the intent of your chosen words on my part).

 

* If you want to know the truth of something, be neither for nor against. (my paraphrase)

 

For me personally, finding similarities with the Buddhist idea of "one taste" may be simpler due to the mess which seems to have arisen here time and time again regarding rigpa. But here's hoping your thread will be different. Thanks for starting it.

[ilumairen]

Oh, and we can also tag @Taomeow, who has received teachings and practiced both.

 

Edited December 5, 2019 by ilumairen

[anshino23]

Wonderful, thank you for answering. Yes, I am really just curious about if the highest Daoist teachings have a similar concept to rigpa and in that case, what that would be. I wasn't specifically referring to levels by the post, it was just what I could find on rigpawiki as definition for rigpa.

 

It would be great to hear from Taomeow if she's trained in both traditions  

 

 

Edited December 5, 2019 by anshino23

[doc benway]

On 12/4/2019 at 5:58 PM, anshino23 said:

Anyone know if they're comparable or can be directly related in some way?

 

It seems in Dzogchen there's four levels of rigpa (from rigpawiki below). 

 

Ground rigpa: "(Tib. གཞིའི་རིག་པ་, shyi rigpa, Wyl. gzhi'i rig pa) acts as the basis for all of samsara and nirvana, and is identical to the subtle clear light. This is the pristine awareness one experiences at the time of death, but not during the ordinary waking state. It is from this awareness that the foundation consciousness arises."

Essential rigpa: "The fundamental innate mind of clear light is considered to be the nature of mind, or the ultimate root of consciousness. 

In the same way that a sesame seed is entirely permeated by sesame oil, as soon as there is clear and aware consciousness, it is said to be permeated by the clear light rigpa. This aspect of rigpa, this in-dwelling clear light is what is called essential rigpa (Tib. ངོ་བོའི་རིག་པ་ , Wyl. ngo bo'i rig pa).^[1]

 

Effulgent rigpa: "The Dzogchen teachings are very precise in talking about rigpa and categorizing it with many subtle distinctions. So a distinction is made between the ground of being and the appearances of that ground, and effulgent rigpa (Tib. རྩལ་གྱི་རིག་པ་ , tsal gyi rigpa, Wyl. rtsal gyi rig pa) is rigpa that is present in the appearances arising from the ground. It’s an aspect of rigpa which is to be identified and experienced only when coarse levels of mind and conceptual thoughts are active. At that point the experience of the fundamental innate mind of clear light has ‘ceased’―‘ceased’ in the sense that it is no longer a direct object of your experience. However, there is still a definite quality of clarity and awareness that permeates the coarser states of consciousness. This type of clear light experienced as a quality that permeates these states is the effulgent rigpa.

 

All-embracing rigpa: rigpa of all-embracing spontaneous presence (Tib. ལྷུན་གྲུབ་སྦུབས་ཀྱི་རིག་པ་, Wyl. lhun grub sbubs kyi rig pa)

 

Do these have equivalents in Daoism, and if so, what would they be?
 

Thanks a lot! 

 

To get a sense of the answer to these questions there is only one thing you can do.

Personal practice, hands on, fully engaged until you get a sense of what is being indicated by these labels and concepts.

I wonder how many have a sense of what is being indicated, what is being asked of us?

 

The practice is not to think, not to compare, not to understand, just to be exactly as you are without adding, subtracting, or following anything. What is necessary is to have the view.

That is the Dzogchen method and it is also where my Daoist training took me only in a more roundabout, exhaustive sort of way.

 

Direct introduction, present in both Dzogchen and Daoist paths, is to guide the student to have this direct, personal experience, and helping them to be sure of it.

The next step is familiarity and stability.

Once there, it is clear what these labels and concepts represent.

But "understanding" the labels and concepts doesn't really help much, unless undertaken in a very rigorous, exhaustive, and comprehensive manner.

 

My Daoist training was only ever practical, never theoretical.

My Bön training has been the same.

Deepest gratitude to my teachers for that!

 

To start looking for answers to questions about the concepts and labels and what they mean just tends to steer me away from what they are pointing to, so I've mostly given up on that.

 

I feel like I'm sounding a bit arrogant or dismissive and I don't mean to be.

But that's all I've got for now...

 

Sending love to all in this holiday season!

[Taomeow]

2 hours ago, steve said:

 

My Daoist training was only ever practical, never theoretical.

My Bön training has been the same.

 

My Dzogchen training was only ever practical as well.  It was a long time ago, and of course there was a bit of theory too, nothing deeply scholarly though.  What I remember the most is how it involved, for me, a sense of certain spiritual heroism about my teacher, I imagined his spirit as a fearless trailblazer, strong and sturdy and adventurous.  Something very human and humane, even what one might call cool.  I  was always wary of the guru aura around anyone, and he had something opposite of that, very genuine.  So it was monkey is told monkey do, and the only theoretical literature I remember reading was brief, this or that brochure, he would also do things like send me a photograph (physical -- that was before smartphones with cameras) of, e.g., monks walking across the monastery grounds, one of them turning his head to look (at the photographer?), others absorbed in something, detached...  he'd send something like that with no explanations, no instructions, and I would be just gazing and gazing at the picture like a cat at a mouse hole, waiting for the mouse to appear.  Sometimes the mouse disappeared and I was in some "nothing to chase" place.  Or he'd subscribe me to a year of some Dzogchen publications, also without any instructions.  So I learned to meditate, and to question my practice.   And when I expressed my doubts and frustrations, he dropped the word tao.  I heard it from him first.  Ever so grateful.  But then there was a detour very elsewhere between that and all things tao.

 

My taoist training has been both theoretical and practical, but never scholarly in a way a "researcher" might go step by step after that mouse not worth chasing -- the theory, for me, always concerned concepts to grasp toward things to do (not necessarily in that order, it has always had the tendency to go both ways).   So, I'm an empiricist with a theoretical background primarily in the fundamentals (besides what my teachers tell me).  Yuan shen is a later acquisition in relation to the foundational fundamentals -- an interpretation, a refining of certain concepts.  And as experience it is quite resistant to being put into words.  Many words I've seen "about it" are basically, to me personally, nonsense.  Here's one exception I've come across -- I'll just quote that paragraph, see if it begins to answer your question.  (I don't know if it does because I don't know enough about rigpas.)  

 

"What is called original spirits (yuan shen 元神) is mainly understood as the power at the origin of all processes of life, emanating from the impenetrable mystery of Heaven, source of life. In each human, it is part of their original endowment. In a Daoist context, it is the spirits of the human being, perfectly merged with those of Heaven, moving without impediment through the infinite spaces of the universe and companions to the spirits of Heaven. In a more common context, it is the spirit which gives the human heart/mind its clear-sightedness and intelligence and which makes it possible for the heart to recognize more and more clearly the nature of things and its own nature. This understanding provides a proper basis for mental activity and for how it expresses itself in thought and purpose. It enables us to accomplish our destiny (ming 命). Calmness encourages the relationship of the spirits to our origin, giving strength and vigour to the vital spirits (jing shen 精神). Emotions, agitated hurrying or exhaustion diminish it. In a more specific or medical context, the original spirit is also linked to the functioning of the brain, which, in Chinese medicine, mirrors the condition of the heart/ mind. Thus, the spirit is the possibility, the potentiality given to each human being to build their own heart/mind, and through it their own awareness and consciousness, discernment and reason, in such a way that they behave according to the order and patterns of the cosmic life. It is the spiritual intelligence (shen ming 神明) operating through the human heart/mind. In Daoism, it leads up to the union with the Dao." -- (from a lecture by Elisabeth Rochat de la Vallée) 

[doc benway]

On 12/5/2019 at 11:52 AM, ilumairen said:

I believe the teachings are precise to assist the "seeker" in proper understanding and the avoidance of pitfalls. For example,  just because there is rigpa permeating all manifestation of consciousness, doesn't mean one is always "abiding in rigpa" or "resting in the essence of rigpa." Abiding/resting is dependent upon awareness - without it we're just riding the water wheel and playing in samsara.

 

I agree with you about the teachings.

The teachings of Dzogchen, in my experience, are not so much to show us what it is but rather to point out how we block it, our misconceptions. Even our experience of things like rigpa or spaciousness are not so much an experience of what it is but rather an experience of the release of something that was obstructing us, if that makes any sense.

 

They do sometimes offer examples and point out signs of realization to help measure our progress.

These examples are not so much to try and capture it in concept or words but rather to highlight a particular characteristic usually obscured by our ignorance - ma rigpa, not knowing.

 

Some of the common examples used to help point out the Natural State are -

- a mirror: just like a mirror can reflect any appearance without being altered in any way, nothing that we experience in our lives can change or alter the Nature of Mind in any way. Who we are is more like the mirror and less like the appearances.

- the sky: our Nature of Mind is without any boundary, fully open, no definable center or perspective, no edge. Nothing can stain it, it holds on t nothing. 

- a candle: our Nature is self illuminating, self sustaining, the light of knowing eliminates the darkness of ignorance, a candle illuminates itself and all around it. And there are lots more like this.

 

In the Dzogchen teachings I've received it's nearly always about the personal aspect of realization, rarely attempting to define reality from a metaphysical or phenomenal perspective. All of that is done in the sutric teachings of Buddhism.

Trying to learn through the conceptual mind separates us from truth more than it brings us closer, from the Dzogchen perspective.

Simply resting the mind is the only thing that brings us closer.

 

On 12/5/2019 at 11:52 AM, ilumairen said:

Rigpa "itself" is without levels or reference, as I understand "it." 

 

I find rigpa to be over emphasized in discussions and even teachings on Dzogchen. 

So many people seem to be too attached to "understanding" it and the result is to objectify it.

 

It is one of three aspects of what we call Nature or the Nature of Mind or the Natural State.

It's the aspect that is not ignorant.

It is the Self-Aware aspect that knows the truth, that knows itself, that sees itself.

It is the opposite of ma-rigpa which means ignorance, not knowing our Natural State.

We can speak of it from our personal perspective, which is never fully separate from our relative reality which is anchored to this body and this life. We can also speak of it from it's own perspective which transcends individual lives and minds. This is the basis for different "levels" - there are no levels, that is very misleading IMO. Rigpa simply means Knowing and in a Dzogchen context, that Knowing is very specific it is knowing one's true nature, the Natural State.

 

Another characteristic of the Natural State which is equally important and never separate from the Knowing aspect, is Emptiness.

My teacher prefers words like Space and Spaciousness because the English word Emptiness often leads people to a nihilistic view.

The Empty aspect refers to the realization that the "I" that we equate with who we are is fictitious, it is a mental construct.

When we see through it, when it no longer is the insidious and pervasive controller of our lives, we have realized Emptiness.

We are Empty of the false sense of self with which we identify and develop a relationship, an identity, that is anchored in the Natural State.

Not only are we Empty of a limited, defined self; all things and all beings are equally Empty, even the Natural State itself.

The realization of this is nothing more or less than a true realization of non-duality.

 

The third aspect of Nature is referred to as Union or Tsal - energy. 

The Empty aspect is never separate from the Self-Knowing (rigpa) aspect and this is known as Union.

Realization of this Union allows us to be in a state which I think is essentially equivalent to Wu Wei - non-interference.

The illusory "I" does not get in the way.

This allows the infinite potential of us as humans, as the conduit of a much deeper and more subtle intelligence unfettered by the limited mind, to emerge. This is the source of the term Dzogchen - everything needed is already there, the enlightened qualities are already perfected, we simply need to get out of the way. We do not create, induce, or even facilitate, we just get out of the way without losing connection. In that space, anything and everything is possible, effortlessly. 

 

I don't mean to sound overly pedantic  but felt like sharing more than my earlier response to the OP.

I also wonder if my words are of any value. It's so easy to talk the talk but what we need is to actually do the work of doing nothing at all and see what all these words are pointing at. The experience will bring confidence and confidence will bring stability. Then we need to integrate that into everything in our lives.

 

 

On 12/5/2019 at 11:52 AM, ilumairen said:

I believe there is much which points to this (overall) understanding (a clear "source" from which "for" or "against" arise), although as highlighted above I don't ascribe to the idea of "levels" in the manner I understood your words (which could easily be misunderstanding the intent of your chosen words on my part).

 

* If you want to know the truth of something, be neither for nor against. (my paraphrase)

 

For me personally, finding similarities with the Buddhist idea of "one taste" may be simpler due to the mess which seems to have arisen here time and time again regarding rigpa. But here's hoping your thread will be different. Thanks for starting it.

 

Well said

'If you want to know the truth of something, be neither for nor against.'

I like that and would add...

'simply leave it as it is.'

 

Comparing all of this to the even more complex architecture of the Daoist view inevitably gets us deeper and deeper into the analytical space of mind. I think Taomeow's quotation regarding Yuan Shen is very helpful to see what aspects of reality those two words are chosen to represent. There is much overlap between the Buddhist and Daost paradigms, particularly when we whittle away the details and get more and more to looking at the moon rather than the fingers which point to it. But I would advise caution in seeking to equate concepts and labels in Buddhism and Daoism. When you experience what each are guiding us to and truly see the parallels and equivalence from the perspective of the absolute (non-duality), then it is easy to talk about how they are alike and how they differ. Until then, I question the value and accuracy of such comparisons.

 

If you know a little about music and musical notation, this analogy may be useful.

Music can be represented by different forms of notation - standard notation, tablature, MIDI, graphical representations, hand positions, etc... We can study a piece of music through analyzing all of the different forms of notation, we can study the composer, the historical context, all of that. And no matter how deeply we understand all of that, it will never be the same as simply listening to and hearing the music. 

 

I hope everyone enjoys the glorious weekend!

 

[dwai]

On 12/6/2019 at 6:22 PM, steve said:

 

To get a sense of the answer to these questions there is only one thing you can do.

Personal practice, hands on, fully engaged until you get a sense of what is being indicated by these labels and concepts.

I wonder how many have a sense of what is being indicated, what is being asked of us?

 

The practice is not to think, not to compare, not to understand, just to be exactly as you are without adding, subtracting, or following anything. What is necessary is to have the view.

That is the Dzogchen method and it is also where my Daoist training took me only in a more roundabout, exhaustive sort of way.

 

Direct introduction, present in both Dzogchen and Daoist paths, is to guide the student to have this direct, personal experience, and helping them to be sure of it.

The next step is familiarity and stability.

Once there, it is clear what these labels and concepts represent.

But "understanding" the labels and concepts doesn't really help much, unless undertaken in a very rigorous, exhaustive, and comprehensive manner.

 

My Daoist training was only ever practical, never theoretical.

My Bön training has been the same.

Deepest gratitude to my teachers for that!

 

To start looking for answers to questions about the concepts and labels and what they mean just tends to steer me away from what they are pointing to, so I've mostly given up on that.

 

I feel like I'm sounding a bit arrogant or dismissive and I don't mean to be.

But that's all I've got for now...

 

Sending love to all in this holiday season!

Advaita Vedānta does that too.  

I've had a similar experience...taijiquan and daoist meditation took me there directly, but there was no theory associated with it, in the way I was taught. Only after I started working with Advaita Vedānta did I have the vocabulary for expression. 

 

Then when I delved into Kashmir Shaivism, I found the same truth shining there. As with Tibetan buddhism, Zen and so on.