The View

[idiot_stimpy]

The view

 

1. Six questions regarding the view

Next comes the section concerning the view. gNubs-chen introduces this section by asking six questions, which he answers one after another. Since this has already been dealt with by Karmay, our presentation will be very brief. Suffice it to say that the six questions allow our author to clarify the view according to the Great Completeness, by answering certain misconceptions or objections that could be raised. One should note that all these questions revolve around the epistemological problem of how to know absolute meaningfulness (don), since the tradition of the Great Completeness as it is taught by gNubs-chen Sangs-rgyas ye-shes is uncompromising in its insistence that absolute meaningfulness is beyond examination and scrutiny.

Let us now turn to these six questions:

1. The first question is introduced by way of a citation from the Srog-gi ’khor-lo, to the effect that if the three realms are examined, there is neither cyclic existence nor transcendence.16 The question, then, is whether this quote does not imply that even here, in the Great Completeness, there is something to be evaluated (Skt. prameya)?

 

gNubs-chen answers the following:

[…] The term “if one examines” is different [in meaning] and does not refer to evaluation. One is struck by intrinsic awareness, neither thinking nor examining nor scrutinizing: this is the upright path and is maintained to be the supernal evaluation.

 

2. Can the mind be liberated without examining or scrutinizing anything?

 

gNubs-chen’s reply is as follows:
The absence of any liberating action is itself liberation. If it be asked why this is, it is because, transcending examination and scrutiny, one is without imaging any fetters. As a mere designation one speaks of ‘liberation’.

 

3. How should absolute meaningfulness (don) be indicated?

 

After replying with quotations from the sPyi-bcings and Mañjuśrīmitra’s Sems-bsgom, gNubs-chen Sangs-rgyas ye-shes writes:
[…] If one shows a clod [of earth] to someone desiring to view gold, he shall not see it; but if he is shown gold, he will recognize it. Likewise, the absolute meaningfulness which is without scrutiny and which liberates from speaking and thinking is not found through the inference of searching and scrutinizing. Being without action and effort, when it is understood as it is revealed, that is the supreme valid measure of actual perception.

In effect, gNubs-chen is saying that searching and scrutinizing are like a clod of earth and are quite distinct from the gold of absolute meaningfulness, which itself is beyond all forms of evaluation, but must be known through actual perception (Skt. pratyakṣa).

 

4. If these [previously exposed methods] are confused, how is the unmistaken meaning?

 

The answer given is:
Primordially, it is without the designation of non-duality. Through this state, one is already free from searching, yet there is no exaggeration in terms of being free from searching. Originally, there is no name of spontaneous presence, and the primordial Great Completeness is free from the intellectual label of Great Completeness. Originally, self-originated wisdom is without the labelling as self-originated wisdom. Primordially, in the great seminal nucleus, one does not label ‘a great seminal nucleus’.

 

5. Now for the fifth question along with its answer:

 

“In any case, absence of strain is said to be a great purpose. Yet how is one to see the truth of the genuine meaning through the means of not examining anything at all?”
It is replied that all phenomena are without the duality of self and other and without the duality of the knowable and the knower. Therefore, ‘seeing’ is merely a metaphor for not seeing anything and not viewing anything. Certainly, there is nothing at all to see aside from this.

 

6. The final question concerns the intent of the vehicle of non-action, i.e. the Great Completeness.

 

gNubs-chen Sangs-rgyas ye-shes’ answer is unequivocal:
The mother who generates all the Victorious Ones is the antidote to all effortful activities. Whatever means and paths one accomplishes,
if this is not realized, there is no awakening.

He goes on to explain that all the way up to Anuyoga, the meaning of equality is not seen. This is because the lower vehicles all engage in effortful action; this state of affairs is comparable to the waves on the ocean’s surface covering the ocean’s limpidity – it is only when the waves subside and the ocean recovers its inherent limpidity that the reflections appear therein without one having to search for them. Hence, Atiyoga is unique in that one proceeds through non-action and that awakening (called ‘the root Buddha’) appears without searching.

[idiot_stimpy]

Quote

The absence of any liberating action is itself liberation.

 

...Atiyoga is unique in that one proceeds through non-action and that awakening (called ‘the root Buddha’) appears without searching.

 

This is very powerful, although there is a danger that one might be identified still with the monkey mind and then proceed to think nothing needs to be done not understanding they are still in bondage. 

[Mithras]

On 9/19/2020 at 9:01 AM, idiot_stimpy said:

 

This is very powerful, although there is a danger that one might be identified still with the monkey mind and then proceed to think nothing needs to be done not understanding they are still in bondage. 

I’ve heard the phrase that samsara exists solely in desire, with desire for worldly objects and desire for liberation being the same. Perhaps to rightfully conclude upon this path, one must be desire less? A desire less one very easily gains equanimity of perception, and thus self knowledge.

 

It does remind me of some western traditions of wish making where one attempts very little effort to manifest worldly attainments, by believing they already have it. Similarly if one can believe that for the self, then I imagine they are naturally purified, till they reach that state.

Edited September 21, 2020 by Mithras

[EmeraldHead]

18 hours ago, Mithras said:

one must be desire less?

Haha that kind of thinking doesn't add up logically at the end of the day. I think you realise this already, not to insult you...it's like the question " is an enlightened being still angry/horny/in pain/etc?" well of course, as long as they a body! (nirmanakaya). However the pure luminance is free of these things. So for them, it could be said that it is like acknowledging I (this body, the aggregates) feel pain, hunger, horny, love, envy, ...

 

all of these are "effortful action"

 

however by mundane peoples definition nowadays, what they call effortless is also very effortful from the divine prajna point of view of an arahant.

 

So, desire - Does the Dharmakaya manifest desire? ... to me that is like asking does my mind manifest blood flow in the body?

[Mithras]

Very true. The desire I'm more so referring to is craving, thinking of something when its not physically present, etc. Otherwise there's nothing wrong with fulfilling the body's needs like eating when hungry, enjoying yourself, engaging in sexual activity, etc. The ascetic turns away from what is present, The hedonist searches for what is not present, the wise man simply does what is present. The wise man's way is the effortless way.

In the right understanding as well I feel, one can do whatever they wish. For when all this is the self, then what taint is acquired when performing any activity? Whether engaging in gluttony, lust, or other such matters. For where is activity or morals? Thus those who know the truth without doubt, are beyond reproach for their activity. I believe there's a story of one of the Zen patriarchs frequenting brothels after enlightenment. Another of Vishnu incarnating as a lust driven man who lived in a crematoriums and wore skulls.

I remember also reading a story that dwelled on a similar matter, where a King who knew the truth spoke with one who was in constant samadhi. The King was asked if he had attained Samadhi, and the King replied that all this is the self so how can there be samadhi or distraction? Whether there are thoughts or no thoughts make no difference, similarly for desires.

Edited September 22, 2020 by Mithras