Nirvana is...

[Apech]

Says what I said about vijnana if you ask me...

 

Its what creates our dualistic perception (our world)

 

I guess or no?

 

Exactly ... it is like a power which creates the subject / object distinction.

[RigdzinTrinley]

Yes, but how dear sir could that be jnana?

 

Other then jnana in a not purified or natural state?

Edited January 25, 2016 by RigdzinTrinley

[Apech]

Interestingly the English word 'know' is cognate with the Sanskrit through the proto Indo European root as per:

 

 

 

 

• know (v.) 
• Old English cnawan (class VII strong verb; past tense cneow, past participle cnawen), "to know, perceive; acknowledge, declare," from Proto-Germanic*knew- (cognates: Old High German bi-chnaan, ir-chnaan "to know"), from PIE root *gno- "to know" (cognates: Old Persian xšnasatiy "he shall know;" Old Church Slavonic znati, Russian znat "to know;" Latin gnoscere; Greek *gno-, as in gignoskein; Sanskrit jna- "know"). Once widespread in Germanic, this form is now retained only in English, where however it has widespread application, covering meanings that require two or more verbs in other languages (such as German wissen, kennen, erkennen and in part können; French connaître, savoir; Latin novisse, cognoscere; Old Church Slavonic znaja, vemi). The Anglo-Saxons used two distinct words for this, witan (see wit) and cnawan. 

 

This PIE root also crops up in words like 'kin' - and relates to other words which mean 'to be born (from)' - so to know something or someone is to know what family they belong to.  This gives a sense of categorisation into groups.  The 'born' also suggests giving birth to e.g. giving birth to subject / object differentiation.

 

If you consider this 'the cause is the cure' - then that which gives birth to duality - if it is fully reflexive can also implode the dualism and realise 'sameness' or mirror-likeness ... or Primordial Wisdom.

[RigdzinTrinley]

Interestingly the English word 'know' is cognate with the Sanskrit through the proto Indo European root as per:

 

 

 

 

This PIE root also crops up in words like 'kin' - and relates to other words which mean 'to be born (from)' - so to know something or someone is to know what family they belong to. This gives a sense of categorisation into groups. The 'born' also suggests giving birth to e.g. giving birth to subject / object differentiation.

 

If you consider this 'the cause is the cure' - then that which gives birth to duality - if it is fully reflexive can also implode the dualism and realise 'sameness' or mirror-likeness ... or Primordial Wisdom.

Hence the closes translation of jnana might be gnosis

 

And the rest of what you wrote YES!!! It can self destruct

[Apech]

Hence the closes translation of jnana might be gnosis

 

And the rest of what you wrote YES!!! It can self destruct

 

 

Yes I get the sense of jnana as gnosis ... and we also have prajna of course with this same root.  

 

We still have to deal with citta and manas of course - but you say the Tibetans treat them equally?  Originally they were not the same thing in Indian Philosophy.

[RigdzinTrinley]

And hence nirvana is just the exhaustion of error

 

And nirvana is not gained by abandoning samsara

 

........................

 

There is not the slightest difference

Between cyclic [conventional] existence and nirvana.

There is not the slightest difference

Between nirvana and cyclic existence.

 

 

Whatever is the limit of nirvana,

That is the limit of cyclic existence.

There is not even the slightest difference between them,

Or even the subtlest thing. (Nagarjuna 75; MMK XXV: 19-20)

[RigdzinTrinley]

Yes I get the sense of jnana as gnosis ... and we also have prajna of course with this same root.

 

We still have to deal with citta and manas of course - but you say the Tibetans treat them equally? Originally they were not the same thing in Indian Philosophy.

Well they are used in different contexts but I feel they are essentially same as being conventional truth - dualistic perceivers we could say

 

Blo (I think citta, not sure) is intellect and can become superior intellect (a conceptual intellect pondering emptiness if you like)

 

Whereas sems is translated as mind a more general term

 

Now you have "distinguishing rnam shes and ye shes"

 

"Distinguishing sems and rig pa"

 

But nothing much with blo, poor blo doesn't get distinguished as far as I know - but can analyise reality conceptually "yid blo dbyod pa" and become a superior intellect

 

That's all I know without googling

 

Also there are exact definitions of those terms - I never studied debate, then I could give you those definition easy

 

Alas! The lack of a geshe when one needs one!!!

[RigdzinTrinley]

Prajna or shes rab can be linked with Lodrö (the superior intellect -> before it becomes shesrab)

 

Some teachers wouldn't equate shesrab with yeshes though (prajna with jnana)

 

Some do for sure

 

I think it has to do with prajna being the subject realizing emptiness in the sutra context

 

Whereas jnana is more directly related with tantra

 

Prajna comes from hearing/contemplation (based on mind)

 

Whereas jnana is directly introduced in the 4th empowerment or direct introduction of ones lama - (is based on jnana beyond mind, hence seen as more profound)

 

One of the differences between sutra and tantra

 

Now what jnana and prajna are "seeing" is in both instances the dharmadatu beyond conceptual extremes

 

That's why I repeat sakya pandita

 

"If there is a view higher then the prajnaparamita, then this view would be conceptual"

 

This is how and why rangzom, longchenpa, mipham etc proclaimed that the actual great madhyamika and the view of kadak is the same

 

Its about the freedom of conceptual elaboration (dharmadatu)

 

How that is realized and practiced is very very different in the bodhisattvayana and inner tantric vehicles

 

Aim is the same

[steve]

Rather than click "thank you" on all of these posts, I'll just say Thank You to all who are contributing to this thread.

[Apech]

Prajna has perhaps an analytical quality which you don't have with jnana.  Perhaps (speculatively) as pra (para) prefixes usually mean either 'towards' or 'in favour of' - you could understand prajna as being that which leads to jnana.  I seem to remember reading Trungpa on this but I'm not sure which book it was.

 

Citta originally was 'mind-stuff' and I know that Guenther in the Dawn of Tantra as a 'clearing house which could both store and transmit impression.'   He was talking about the Citta -Matra/Yogacara tradition.

 

Manas traditionally is a sort of counting or assessing mind which lies behind (or above) the sense based mind (5 of them) ... rather like the 'ego' in classical psychoanalysis it is also (int he eightfold structure model of Yogacara) the basis of 'self' identification.  In the non-Buddhist Samkhya philosophy there was another function called aham-kara which accounted for the self.

 

What the Shentongis seem to be saying is that Primordial Wisdom Mind = Buddha Nature = Sugathahata ... when realised converts or transforms all the skhandas and mind-aspects into wisdom nature.  So what was confusion is seen as, for instance, all accomplishing wisdom and so on.  

 

It goes very close to positing some kind of higher self without actually doing so - which is probably why the Gelupas tried to wipe out the Jonanpas, eh?

[RigdzinTrinley]

Prajna has perhaps an analytical quality which you don't have with jnana. Perhaps (speculatively) as pra (para) prefixes usually mean either 'towards' or 'in favour of' - you could understand prajna as being that which leads to jnana. I seem to remember reading Trungpa on this but I'm not sure which book it was.

 

Citta originally was 'mind-stuff' and I know that Guenther in the Dawn of Tantra as a 'clearing house which could both store and transmit impression.' He was talking about the Citta -Matra/Yogacara tradition.

 

Manas traditionally is a sort of counting or assessing mind which lies behind (or above) the sense based mind (5 of them) ... rather like the 'ego' in classical psychoanalysis it is also (int he eightfold structure model of Yogacara) the basis of 'self' identification. In the non-Buddhist Samkhya philosophy there was another function called aham-kara which accounted for the self.

 

What the Shentongis seem to be saying is that Primordial Wisdom Mind = Buddha Nature = Sugathahata ... when realised converts or transforms all the skhandas and mind-aspects into wisdom nature. So what was confusion is seen as, for instance, all accomplishing wisdom and so on.

 

It goes very close to positing some kind of higher self without actually doing so - which is probably why the Gelupas tried to wipe out the Jonanpas, eh?

I didn't know many of the things you wrote about manas and citta very interesting...

 

To prajna and jnana

 

This is how I was thought the jnana prajna difference also (one being based on hearing/contemplation and the other as being beyond mind period)

 

As for shentong or extrinsic emptiness I just give a short explanation of that term and use the most radical or extreme position

 

They would say that buddhanature is the ultimate (that the second turning of the wheel of dharma the prajnaparamita is a provisional meaning teaching and only the third turning on the luminous nature is definitive or nitharta)

 

They use an affirmative negation (ma yin Ddgag) to explain there position:

Its primordially free of adventitious stains, or in other words primordially empty of dualistic phenomena like vases, houses, pillars, mind etc. yet, and that is the extreme school of shentong it is not empty of itself (hence shentong extrinsic emptiness - empty of other)

 

So you negate the dualistic phenomena but posit clear light (ma yin dgag or affirming negation)

 

Now some people, and lamas, scholars of course explain mahamudra and maha ati like that...which is for mipham,longchenpa etc a very simplistic explanation that falls into an extreme and conceptual view and can't be jnana

 

And miphams actually says "how is your view different then the inconceivable self of the thirtikas?"

 

But also he doesn't go to the other extreme of certain gelug scholars who said that the 3rd turning of the wheel of dharma on Buddha nature is not a definitive (nitharta) meaning teaching but just a provisional one and needs interpretation

 

Only prasangika madhyamika and the second turning of the wheel (freedom of all characteristics) is a definitive meaning teaching

 

And then we have mipham and longchnepa who said its all one enlightened intend

 

Its neither rangtong nor shentong

 

And I'm biased and brainwashed by longchenpa and mipham so I think the way they explain everything in harmony is remarkable how sutra tantra and dzogchen upadesha is not in contradiction

 

Incredible

 

But I try to explain how mipham explains the whole emptiness/buddhanature situation another time - tomorrow I travel to Pondicherry and need to get up early (to not melt in the bus) and its getting late here

[RigdzinTrinley]

Also I think we go a little of topic, its not unrelated but maybe a new topic on buddhanature in a nutshell?

[Apech]

Goodnight RT - boa viagem.

[Apech]

Also I think we go a little of topic, its not unrelated but maybe a new topic on buddhanature in a nutshell?

 

 

I know that the Shengtongpas say that anyone who practices tantras - because of the emphasis on th epositive qualities of buddhanature is by implication Shengtonpa also

[Brian]

Dpe ye shes = primordial wisdom of the example

 

Don ye shes = actual primordial wisdom

 

This terms are very important in tantra and dzogchen and not vague at all, my reply to apech has to do with that as well

 

Maybe read again and see if you can figure out what actual primordial wisdom of an arya bodhisattva in meditative equipoise could mean

 

(Not that we could put it in words, but we can try)

 

Also I refer you to the last part of the forth topic of mipham rinpoches "beacon of certainty" that shows how this jnana can be used as the path also by an ordinary being (someone who didn't attain the bodhisattva grounds)

 

Here miphams says:

 

The primordial wisdom of the example, the actual primordial wisdom and the primordial wisdom of union are like the drawing of the moon, the reflection of the moon in water and the actual moon respectively

 

(Mipham in accordance with Jigme lingpas yonten dzod - "precious treasury of qualities" makes this threefold division which is a bit unusual)

Speak a bit more, please, about the primordial wisdom of union?

[forestofemptiness]

The whole division of mind is interesting. In Vedanta, you have the five koshas: physical, pranic, lower mental, higher mental, and bliss. The lower mental, or manomaya kosha, is usually glossed as either the bare sensory mind or memory. The higher mental, or vijnanamaya kosha involves division and mental categories. Citta or cit can refer to mind-stuff as in the Yoga Sutras (as in thoughts are whirlpools or vrittis in citta), or as the highest form of awareness as in the sat-cit-ananda formulation of Advaita. Intelligence would be buddhi, which is the root from which Buddha comes. 

 

The early suttas more or less lump citta, manas, and vijnana together into a mass and often use the terms as synonyms, but the divisions are still found at least in the Vissudhimagga literature. 

 

In the Vissudhimagga literature, there is a parable about a child, an adult, and a money changer seeing a pile of gold. The child just sees it as it is, akin to perception (samjna); the adult overlays concepts on it, akin to consciousness (vijnana), while the money changer, as an expert, sees its actual value, representing prajna.

[Michael Sternbach]

Wowsers,

you mentioned implicit and explicit nothingness

 

Can you flash out what you mean by those in relation to nirvana being a thing or a nothing?

 

Pretty please

 

Not sure you ever heard of extrinsic and intrinsic emptiness but those are important points in the Indo Tibetan tradition as well - but a bit different then what you wrote there (but please elaborate so I can be sure)

 

And actually

 

"Nirvana is merely the exhaustion of error" has a lot to do with the extrinsic vs intrinsic emptiness debate (rangtong vs shentong)

 

Because you could explain this sentence using either approach

 

- that ties in nicely with Nirvana a thing? A nothing? An absence? A presence?

 

Michael I say your intuition is pretty amazing;)

 

Thank you.

 

There's a lot to be said about nothing, and for practical reasons, I will break it down into two to three posts.

 

Let me get my Tarot cards out...

 

 

Let's start with Trump 0: The Fool.

 

On the yellow floor underneath him, we see a pair of children, facing opposite directions. They represent Crowley's formula 0 = 2, or to formulate it a little more precisely: 0 = (+1) + (-1). But mind you, the two children are depicted as entangled with each other. In the Primordial Chaos that the Fool represents, the polar forces at the foundation of the whole Universe are not yet separate from each other - thus they are in a state of mutual cancellation. Yet they already exist as potentials, in fact, in we find the seeds for all of Creation here. Lao Tzu says:

 

The Tao is elusive and intangible.

Oh it is intangible and elusive, and yet within is image.

Oh it is elusive and intangible, and yet within is form.

Oh it is dim and dark, and yet within is essence.

This essence is very real, and therein lies faith.

 

So in Nothing, there is Everything! In my next post, we will see this coming forth into manifestation. Stay tuned...

 

 

[RigdzinTrinley]

Speak a bit more, please, about the primordial wisdom of union?

I'll try,

 

So usually its a twofold division

 

Prim.Wisdom of the example and actual prim.wisdom

 

The prim.wisdom of the example is introduced to a disciple in the 4th empowerment, called tsik don rin po che'i dbang = the empowerment of the precious word

 

As you can see it uses a symbolic word or sentence to introduce you to your jnana or primordially awakened state - they of course say this is not the same like the fully blossomed jnana of an enlightened being and that is called the actual prim.wisdom

 

That actual prim.wisdom is what an arya bodhisattva on the bhumis is "experiencing" (how ever else you want to call it) while meditating

 

Its beyond mind, inexpressible, unthinkable gnosis (jnana)

 

Its the actual experience of the union of emptiness/appearances

 

Now during post meditation such a bodhisattva still perceives "dreamlike" happenings, like dream beings, dream doings etc without grasping and without being harmed or benefited by this magic show (so a arya bodhisattva is beyond samsara and suffering)

 

Also because of realizing the whole thing to be a hologram such a being has a lot of siddhis

 

Now the prim.wisdom of union must be buddhahood because only a Buddha can perceive the union of relative and ultimate truth without wavering, no more difference between meditation and post meditation, doesn't matter if there is activity from the disciples point of view like "oh Buddha went to take a bath, oh now he teaches the assembly, oh now he is in meditative equipoise - better not disturb him/her, the Buddha is sleeping etc..."

 

The Buddha never wavers from the dharmadatu is always in "union" it is totally inconceivable what this could mean for an ordinary being - its not some sort of "present in the now" mindfulness - the Buddha has no concepts at all and still accomplishes the benefit of infinite sentient beings without effort - no effort at all.

 

yet the Buddha is always on time (even beyond swiss german austrian conception of "on time")->teaching the right disciple the right teaching at exactly the perfect moment, without any effort and concept

 

One of the most difficult points to understand - because its so far removed from our ordinary way of perception (vijnana)

 

In short the state where all rnam shes or vijnana is burned and "transmuted" so that only jnana remains

 

"Nirvana is merely the exhaustion of error" remember?

[Brian]

I'll try,

 

So usually its a twofold division

 

Prim.Wisdom of the example and actual prim.wisdom

 

The prim.wisdom of the example is introduced to a disciple in the 4th empowerment, called tsik don rin po che'i dbang = the empowerment of the precious word

 

As you can see it uses a symbolic word or sentence to introduce you to your jnana or primordially awakened state - they of course say this is not the same like the fully blossomed jnana of an enlightened being and that is called the actual prim.wisdom

 

That actual prim.wisdom is what an arya bodhisattva on the bhumis is "experiencing" (how ever else you want to call it) while meditating

 

Its beyond mind, inexpressible, unthinkable gnosis (jnana)

 

Its the actual experience of the union of emptiness/appearances

 

Now during post meditation such a bodhisattva still perceives "dreamlike" happenings, like dream beings, dream doings etc without grasping and without being harmed or benefited by this magic show (so a arya bodhisattva is beyond samsara and suffering)

 

Also because of realizing the whole thing to be a hologram such a being has a lot of siddhis

 

Now the prim.wisdom of union must be buddhahood because only a Buddha can perceive the union of relative and ultimate truth without wavering, no more difference between meditation and post meditation, doesn't matter if there is activity from the disciples point of view like "oh Buddha went to take a bath, oh now he teaches the assembly, oh now he is in meditative equipoise - better not disturb him/her, the Buddha is sleeping etc..."

 

The Buddha never wavers from the dharmadatu is always in "union" it is totally inconceivable what this could mean for an ordinary being - its not some sort of "present in the now" mindfulness - the Buddha has no concepts at all and still accomplishes the benefit of infinite sentient beings without effort - no effort at all.

 

yet the Buddha is always on time (even beyond swiss german austrian conception of "on time")->teaching the right disciple the right teaching at exactly the perfect moment, without any effort and concept

 

One of the most difficult points to understand - because its so far removed from our ordinary way of perception (vijnana)

 

In short the state where all rnam shes or vijnana is burned and "transmuted" so that only jnana remains

 

"Nirvana is merely the exhaustion of error" remember?

Thank you. This is helpful.

[RigdzinTrinley]

So I guess you can see why its easy to reify the tantric teachings?

 

Looks like there is something to be attained called jnana or what you really are is jnana not vijnana etc

 

Or a specific meditation that can reveal your jnana or a guru outside that'll point out your jnana to you etc

 

But really understanding jnana correctly is almost impossible without grounding in sutra philosophy and practice

 

Specially prasangika madhyamika (consequentialist centrism)

 

All the lamas that I asked what should I focus on before studying tantra said "madhyamika"

[RigdzinTrinley]

Thank you. This is helpful.

Glad you find it helpful brain,

 

One thing about this tantra lingo - it really only makes sense within practice of the living lineage

 

Then these terms will be alive for the mantrika, but I'm asure you're aware of that. Probably same with terms like wu wei etc.

[Apech]

Glad you find it helpful brain,

 

One thing about this tantra lingo - it really only makes sense within practice of the living lineage

 

Then these terms will be alive for the mantrika, but I'm asure you're aware of that. Probably same with terms like wu wei etc.

 

 

There's plenty on here think you just need to read a book

[Michael Sternbach]

Continuing from my post #67, we now proceed to Trump I: The Magus.

 

 

 

Many authors associate with this card the Creator of the Abrahamic religions. But the Magus is just as much the beginning of creation itself - the first manifestation out of the Nothing. The Word or initial sound that is reverberating throughout the Universe. The Hebrew letter attributed to him is Beth, the first audible letter, whereas the Fool carries Aleph, an unpronounced letter, in keeping with his nature as pure potential.

 

On the microcosmic scale, the Magus is the creator/creation of an individual's personal universe, that is laid out according to the conceptions and neat definitions of the mind. It makes sense therefore that the Magus is linked to the planet Mercury whose astro-psychological functions include measurement and categorization.

 

Thus we see some kind of coordinate grid behind the Magus. But any measuring scale is based on the di-vision of a whole, as every line drawn creates two sides.

 

While it is inevitable for the individual at some stage to define its world and itself, by focussing on a part of the whole, it separates itself from it, and the unacknowledged part becomes unconscious.

 

More on this in my next post, but feel free to comment any time...

[3bob]

RT, I've also called people named Brian brains, and they seem to take it in stride.... 

[RigdzinTrinley]

whoops