Merging and guru yoga

[Apech]

1 hour ago, s1va said:

 

How does one merge with vajra body/mind? Care to expand, what it means and how is it practiced?

 

 

Practice vajrayana of course.

[s1va]

1 minute ago, Apech said:

 

 

Practice vajrayana of course.

 

Yes.  Any insight on how it compares to the merge and guru yoga discussed on this thread?

[Apech]

5 minutes ago, s1va said:

 

Yes.  Any insight on how it compares to the merge and guru yoga discussed on this thread?

 

 

that's probably another thread (possibly)

[Mark Foote]

[Mark Foote]

On 2/8/2018 at 5:08 AM, Jonesboy said:

 

 Have you ever tried to feel it when not in physical contact?

 

 

Actually, I feel it before physical contact, and try to balance what I'm experiencing in contact with an awareness of it.  Something like that.  Dancing when contact is possible inspires me to stretch and breathe as naturally as possible, and more so dancing with contact that is spontaneous and continuous (good god!).  Many nights staggering the mile home past midnight, many good friends and some total strangers that I feel I share something special with.

 

The dark sun part has only entered in on the dance floor so far, probably because of the extent and duration of the simultaneous stretch and relaxation.  Not there in the five day sesshin I did last fall, but the lotus is where I learn how to make changes that bring less exertion and more relaxation.  Reminds me of something Kobun Otogawa said in response to a question one time--something like, "when we get up from sitting, that's all for fun!"  Dancing is sure like that for me, almost like a place where I can put the pedal to the floor with everything I've experienced on the cushion and leap beyond.

 

May I offer a song!
 

 

[Jonesboy]

Found some interesting stuff from The Kula Ritual of Kashmir Shaivism.

 

Quote

How to Penetrate the Disciple

 

Jr.273b.2 And how should the guru do that? He says:

 

The disciple should sit before the guru. The

[guru} should penetrate [him} 'mouth ' to

'mouth ',  form to form, in various

particular ways until [the disciple] becomes

perfectly fused.

 

 The guru [should insert his 'mouth'] into the 'mouth'

of the disciple seated before him -

 

 " . . . the consort of Siva [viz. sakti] is, in this

instance, called 'mouth'. "

 

Jr.274b.2 - according to this teaching, he should insert his central

sakti into the central sakti of the [disciple], he should insert

his form of the faculty of sight into the [disciple's] form, i.e.

into [the disciple's] faculty of perception, his faculty of sight;

he should insert his internal sense-organs into the internal senseorgans

of the [disciple] which are implied in the [external senseorgans

such as sight etc.]. [That is,] he should focus his attention

on the cause [of the sense organs]. [This is done] until, by

means of these particular activities, [the disciple] becomes

fused, i.e. until he achieves identity with the [centre] (tat).

 

iii. The Result: Disciple is one with Centre

Jr.274b.3 And in that case, what is the result? To this question

he says :

 

[Their minds become perfectly fused. Both

acquire the transmental state, 1 1 274 1 1 and by

their arrival at the transmental, at that moment,

[the disciple] is initiated. When 'moon ' and 'sun '

are united, he, while alive becomes composed

of the [centre].

 

 'Is initiated': the disciple. A s a result [of his being

initiated] his [limited] self becomes composed of the [centre] .

This happens when there is union, i.e. when there is the perfect

fusion of 'moon' and 'sun', i.e. of the prana and apana. [This

perfect fusion happens] through appropriately putting an end

to the respective forms of the prana and apana] within the

central sakti. [That is] he becomes one with [the centre] .

 

 

Next is a short little excerpt of the guru merging the disciple with a deity.

 

Quote

In the fourth penetration, the guru imagines some form, for
example the image of a deity, emerging from his forehead where
all exists in a concealed state and refashions the disciple
according to that image. The disciple in turn sees himself as
refashioned in that image and becomes the deity itself with all the
enjoyments the deity possesses.

 

 

Any thoughts?

[Jeff]

47 minutes ago, Jonesboy said:

Found some interesting stuff from The Kula Ritual of Kashmir Shaivism.

 

 

 

Next is a short little excerpt of the guru merging the disciple with a deity.

 

 

 

Any thoughts?

 

Great stuff.  Thank you.

 

Sun and Moon fusing here would mean transmission (Sun) and reception (moon) of two people in an energy connection rising to the level of the two becoming one.

 

Your second quote is important as it describes that a guru "helping" with a deity merge is much stronger than someone doing it themself. This is because the guru knows the being directly (as light) and can overlay the being (or create a stronger connection).

[dawei]

16 minutes ago, Jeff said:

Your second quote is important as it describes that a guru "helping" with a deity merge is much stronger than someone doing it themself. This is because the guru knows the being directly (as light) and can overlay the being (or create a stronger connection).

 

So the implication of the passages as the disciple is non-Light ?    But I would guess that any higher level simple knows more directly ?

 

[Jeff]

8 minutes ago, dawei said:

 

So the implication of the passages as the disciple is non-Light ?    But I would guess that any higher level simple knows more directly ?

 

 

Yes, it is implied, but it is true at all levels/layers (assuming the guru has greater clarity).

[Jonesboy]

Found some interesting stuff from Norbu - Collected Talks Vol. 3

 

 

Quote

In general many practicers of Tantrism, of the path of
transformation, when people who visualize themselves and
transform into a heruka, many times it happens they say "I had
a vision of this heruka." ??, it could be true. Sometimes a
vision can mean that the dimension that's perceived by the
practicer is the dimension of the Sambhogakaya at that moment.
Because I am training myself for realization.
But many people imagine that what happened is "That
divinity paid me a visit". And they get very happy and
cheerful about this. And then as soon as they get that happy
feeling, the vision disappears. And if they're attached
enough to it, that vision won't come back for a long long
time. So attachment can arise in many many ways, also with
one unaware and not noticing it.

Pg 225

 

 

Quote

There are not only guardians such as Ekajati, or who
answer to the description we gave of Ekajati. If only they
were all like these that we name, Ekajati, Mahakala, Rahula,
and so forth, all of whom are very high levels of evolutionary
enlightened realized beings, then there wouldn't be any
problem. These forces too will find themselves in a whole
dimension such as we said earlier of mandala. There's always
a major figure in each of these mandala, and these are these
major guardian figures such as those we named.

But around them, filling the rest of that dimension, are
always many many other beings. There's a class of mamo over
which Ekajati reigns, and those which are mamo of wisdom,
those like Ekajati, ?? and certain others, are one category of
those ... [tape gap] ... but around them are also thousands of
what we call worldly mamo. And they if you make the slightest
error are very quick to react, to condemn.

I'm very intimate with Ekajati. You could even say I'm
on a very very close and friendly basis with her. And if some
mamo behaves badly with me, I can say to Ekajati "Listen, that
mamo of yours isn't doing the right thing." But I can't cope
with thousands of mamo. So one had better be a little
conscious and watch one's behavior. And that's why we do
every so often a little bit of the rite of the guardians. At
times doing the rite of the guardians means having a living
contact with the guardians.

 

pg. 262

 

 

Quote

Now there are two things. One is called the ganapuja
and one is called the ganachakra. The ganapuja means
something rather simple. You make some offerings. And the
ganachakra means something very concrete indeed. But usually
we can't do the ganachakra. If one is rather special and
would like to have a party with the dakinis, then you can do
the ganachakra. Then you're at a party that's rather beyond
the limits of our condition. Until we're up to that one, we
do something that's a little less. It's basically to
symbolize and represent that, and that's the ganapuja.

Puja means an offering. And gana means something like
the aggregation, the complete accumulation. In this case we
have the initial four verses which are for authentication and
preparation. Here we have, the middle of page 29, the line
dagnid khadroi thugginay (bdag-nyid mkha'-'gro'i thug-??-nas),
I myself manifesting as the dakini, and from the very heart of
the dakini, light expands. You will recall that when we do
practice in the period of the waning moon, we manifest as, and
transform as, Sihamukha, the dakini.

 

Pg. 263

 

This next part is rather long but very interesting.

 

Spoiler

In general if the practicer is powerful, the protectors
function well. When the practicer is weak, sometimes the
guardians play rather horrendous tricks on him. Dorje Legpa
doesn't do this for which reason he is called the "good
Dorje".

For example, in the Sakyapa and Kagyudpa schools there
are many guardians of the so-called class of gyalpo. Gyalpo
means king. It's a category or class of protector. And in
the Nyingmapa school there is also this and one of the
principal gyalpo is Beha ?? for example. And among the
Gelugpas there is the famous Shuden ?? and Shuden also exists
in the Sakyapa school. And there are other forms of gyalpo.
It was considered that' these protectors of the gyalpo class
functioned quite well in all of the schools, not only among
the Gelugpas and Sakyapas. But it's characteristic of the
gyalpo class that they function well only if the practicers
are powerful.

But in general it has been found that almost everyone who
practices, the guardians of the gyalpo class finish insane.
There are many powers of this type in our part of the world.
This means that the guardians can kind of backfire. In
general if one does practice with that type of guardian, as a
minimum he must have completed certain kind of mantric
practice with great precision. But even so, many monks who
have completed the practice of the mantra quite well sometimes
are driven insane. It means that you need something even
stronger to cope with the guardians. It means that you need
greater spiritual capacity.

For this reason it is very important that Dorje Legpa is
a good guardian and also one that responds to our needs. What
do I mean when I say that he is responsive? For example when
you are involved with the guardian protector Mahakala,
normally we say that the various Mahakalas are guardians of
wisdom. Many people consider Mahakala even a divinity. Why
is he so considered? Because he doesn't function in the way
that the protectors function? It is considered that to move
Mahakala you need a great force or commitment or effort. This
is the general concept in regards to Mahakala. And therefore
you can try to reach Mahakala, but you don't get a response.
There are instead classes of guardians like those of the
gyalpo of which I spoke earlier. There are so-called worldly
guardians. They indeed do manifest and respond easily.

It's best therefore that a guardian be responsive and
worldly, but also have the quality of wisdom. Dorje Legpa is
considered one of these. This text in the blue book is the
text of the negotiation between Padmasambhava and Dorje Legpa,
the actual deal. That is, it reminds Dorje Legpa of the deal
he made. Even if it is rather long, it is rather important.

But in general, whatever practice of the protectors you
do, you must never do it as if you are asking help from the
guardians or protectors. You must rather command them. In
this case, how can you command guardians? First of all, you
must manifest yourself as a yidam. For example if we are
speaking of Dorje Legpa, you must manifest yourself as
Padmasambhava in his wrathful form. You find here before this
on page 8 Padmasambhava in his wrathful form.

You become, you manifest as, Padmasambhava in his
wrathful form and you recite his mantra. With this presence
of oneself as wrathful Padmasambhava, you invite the
protectors, whichever ones are around, and you find all these
guardians in front of you. And these guardians will then have
the vision that I am manifest as Padmasambhava in wrathful
form. To become a little more secure, we also use the mudra.
This is to give greater concreteness, greater specificity.

In this case, we use the particular mantra of that
guardian, that protector. The particular mantra of that
guardian provides a recognition. On page 13 is the mantra of
Dorje Legpa. While we pronounce this mantra, we have a sense
of the presence of Dorje Legpa, and we must also have a
recognition that we are manifest as Padmasambhava in wrathful
form. Even if it doesn't happen like that, this mantra is
something that authenticates this knowledge.

 

Pg. 330-331 of 480

 

[ilumairen]

On 1/15/2018 at 12:13 AM, dawei said:

ok... I have an opinion !  

 

There is no A or B.. even forget about C and D... forget I told you to forget.... but if you read on... forget that I told you to forget.

 

3Bob lays out the logical reasoning that there is no separation... while he mentioned a guru takes one to a true essence, I might agree this is pre-no-separation understanding... once into 'no-separation' (some might call non-dual), there is no guru... no true essence.. except what words make of them.

 

It is like sleeping when injured; you feel no pain when asleep.  When you awake, you feel pain.

 

Let me ask: When you wake up to no-separation, what do you find?

 

Another question:  when awake to the realization to no-separation, what do you do?

 

Make tea. 

 

On 1/15/2018 at 12:13 AM, dawei said:

I think this thread was about merge stuff...  if there is not separation, then we are all, always merged... what is the issue ? 

 

If there is "no separation" what is there to merge?

[ilumairen]

 

On 1/15/2018 at 8:51 AM, C T said:

Anyway, the subject is 'merging and guru yoga' - bringing up what the Buddha postulated (or not) is besides the point since guru yoga works from a different premise altogether, which, as Ive mentioned, aims to help with recognising that the intrinsic qualities of one's body, speech and mind and those enlightened qualities iconified by buddhas, yidams and khandros have the exact same essence. 

 

This is golden.

[Pilgrim]

14 minutes ago, ilumairen said:

 

 

This is golden.

Exact same essence.

[ilumairen]

On 1/17/2018 at 10:34 AM, Apech said:

 

You have missed the balance and harmony of this chapter - it is about becoming p'u - and uncarved block which is the non-dual and natural state to which you refer but wrongly equate to being 'white'.  In fact the whole chapter is based on three pairings which highlight the dual/ non-dual nature and the Way, using Feng English translation as follows:

 

Tao Te Ching - Lao Tzu - chapter 28

Know the strength of man,
But keep a woman's care!
Be the stream of the universe!
Being the stream of the universe,
Ever true and unswerving,
Become as a little child once more.

Know the white,
But keep the black!
Be an example to the world!
Being an example to the world,
Ever true and unwavering,
Return to the infinite.

Know honour,
Yet keep humility!
Be the valley of the universe!
Being the valley of the universe,
Ever true and resourceful,
Return to the state of the uncarved block.

When the block is carved, it becomes useful.
When the sage uses it, he becomes the ruler.
Thus, "A great tailor cuts little."

 

So we have three pairs of 'knowing one' and 'guarding or keeping' the other:

 

man + woman = stream of universe

white + black = example to the world

honour + humility = valley of the universe

 

'stream' here means something like a channel (for qi).

 

The white/black is very suggestive of the Taiji and thus yang/yin although for the time of this writing this might be anachronistic - but still valid I would suggest - thus the non-dual is expressed in exactly the ability to hold white/black, male/female, honour/humility and thus the value of the uncontrived state of the uncarved block (which I would equate to the Rigpa natural state of Buddhism).

 

On 1/17/2018 at 11:29 AM, Jeff said:

 

No, we are talking about different things.  Buddhist views and the concept of "Rigpa" are not part of the Tao Te Ching, they are different frameworks.  Your concept of rigpa, more relates as a form of being the "stream of the universe". A ruler immortal ( block that has been carved and then used by the immortal who has become the valley of the universe) is very different. Such an "immortal" does not really exist in buddhism.  The closest approximation is found with the coming of the Twin Tower buddha in the Lotus sutra.

 

 

Hmmm... so you can map your system and understanding into the TTC, but Apech is in error for doing the same?

[ilumairen]

On 1/17/2018 at 12:01 PM, Jonesboy said:

Maybe we can move away from the topic of merging for a few.

 

How about this.

 

Is it possible for one person to directly introduce another to deeper states of being?

 

Not through instructions but by directly touching another's mindstream for instance.

 

One can certainly calm an upset friend through compassionate presence - which would be a very simplistic example. 

 

But any introduction would be only to awareness of what is already present, and in this, either the seed sprouted, and grew into a tree which is ready to bear fruit, or no "introduction" would be possible. 

 

Any awareness or later description of occurrence is within the aspirant or the individual being "introduced" to themselves. 

 

Understanding everything I'm responding to here is old, but I finally felt like giving this thread a looksie.

[ilumairen]

On 1/17/2018 at 12:43 PM, Jonesboy said:

 

I guess to keep things simple.

 

How about a mind/body that is not experiencing silence or energy experiencing silence and or energy by the direct introduction from another?

 

Wouldn't both the silence and energy already be present? So both would be experienced, and the question would actually be one of recognition?

[dwai]

Any position taken, can be reduced to the absurd (reductio ad absurdum). Best to simply stick with what one knows to as working for oneself and forget the speculation. My 2 cents worth...

 

[ilumairen]

 

On 1/24/2018 at 8:07 PM, steve said:

You mention "finding your place where you are" and "finding your way at this moment."

Resting in the nature of mind is primarily about releasing all identification with the you and yet maintaining a deep connection to the present moment. It is very alive and engaged yet dis-identified, unrestricted, undefined, unfabricated, and unconceptualized. I find it relates strongly to Wu Wei. I suspect it is what Dogen is pointing to.

 

Another golden nugget...

 

_/\_

 

 

[ilumairen]

 

On 2/7/2018 at 12:06 PM, Jonesboy said:

Needing to feel flows or someone as an aspect of me shows a lack of clarity.

 

With the age of this thread in mind, may I ask if you still experience this?

 

And if you do, may I suggest what you seperate out and hold onto in regard to others is what would be an aspect of yourself?

 

On 2/7/2018 at 12:06 PM, Jonesboy said:

In truth I shouldn't have to feel anyone, it is just a knowing and intent.

 

Where and how did this "should" arise?

[Jonesboy]

2 hours ago, ilumairen said:

 

Wouldn't both the silence and energy already be present? So both would be experienced, and the question would actually be one of recognition?

 

To me there is a big difference between someone just noticing silence they already had and compared to working with someone and experiencing mind numbing silence. Silence deeper than they have experienced before. There is also a difference between someone noticing energy and then feeling it all around them, like a whirlwind around their body, or all of a sudden feeling energy flowing through the heart and feeling joy/love with it.

 

Yes, it is all them, just some help to take one a little deeper to notice it more and to help them let go of issues to realize it at a more conscious level.

Edited July 24, 2019 by Jonesboy

[Jonesboy]

4 minutes ago, ilumairen said:

 

 

With the age of this thread in mind, may I ask if you still experience this?

 

And if you do, may I suggest what you seperate out and hold onto in regard to others is what would be an aspect of yourself?

 

 

Where and how did this "should" arise?

 

No, I don't feel those flows anymore. I integrated them you could say.

 

Quote

Where and how did this "should" arise?

 

Do you need to concentrate and feel your arm to "know" it is there and to pick something up? True clarity is a knowing, it is you.. you just know. More what I meant is back then I would feel the flows and thinking of someone I could feel the individual flow of that person, big flow, small flow for example. I could separate them out. With intent, i could feel that flow and will silence and they would experience it (that is not something that I do anymore, more of an experiment). Such separation is dualistic. There is a me and them as a flow. There should be no such duality. It is a lack of clarity that creates such separation. 

 

Isn't a Buddha Omniscient? That is the clarity of knowing that I am talking about but suck at

 

 

[C T]

Omniscience from the Buddhist perspective is different from the usual understanding of the term (knowledge of everything). 

 

When its said the buddhas are omniscient, it refers to their utterly conclusive insight into reality as suchness (or thusness). The Buddha himself said that to know the taste of all the oceans of the world, one need only taste a little water from one, and that it would be foolish to make it a mission to seek out all the great oceans of the world just to see if they all taste the same, and yet, beings conduct their lives seeking in this similar way. 

 

His enlightenment is a testament to the fact that he penetrated into the truth of existence, and said ALL phenomena possess, without exception, 3 inherent features, which is commonly known as The 3 Marks. These 3 marks, namely Annica (impermanence), Dukkha (unsatisfactory nature), and Anatta (not self), characterizes the world which we have come to believe as "real" and therefore, graspable .

 

The wisdom of seeing into the illusoriness of existence is what the omniscient nature of buddhahood points to, and yet this very nature is often misconstrued and confused in those that attempt to extract meaning by conflating buddhist omniscience with the more Westernised concept that means one who is in possession of an overarching supramundane ability to know every single detail of every single thing.  

 

As an example, this realization of three marks (in my case) is unstable due to strong habitual patterns - so sometimes i can see how the sensate world is indeed suffused with the 3 marks, and yet at other times, especially when caught up in pleasantness, or when i find myself in a particularly quiescent state, that knowingness is ignored and this errant ignorance spontaneously manifests dualistic tendencies, which then goes on to accrue karma. So, in this sense, even though we all have that same omniscient nature, it has yet to fully mature in those still caught up by the unconscious force of their habits. The good news is that the evolutionary processes that leads to enlightenment continues to work evenly, and as we yield steadily to these processes, our glimpses of omniscience gradually becomes brighter. 

 

 

Edited July 24, 2019 by C T

[Jonesboy]

3 hours ago, C T said:

Omniscience from the Buddhist perspective is different from the usual understanding of the term (knowledge of everything). 

 

When its said the buddhas are omniscient, it refers to their utterly conclusive insight into reality as suchness (or thusness). The Buddha himself said that to know the taste of all the oceans of the world, one need only taste a little water from one, and that it would be foolish to make it a mission to seek out all the great oceans of the world just to see if they all taste the same, and yet, beings conduct their lives seeking in this similar way. 

 

His enlightenment is a testament to the fact that he penetrated into the truth of existence, and said ALL phenomena possess, without exception, 3 inherent features, which is commonly known as The 3 Marks. These 3 marks, namely Annica (impermanence), Dukkha (unsatisfactory nature), and Anatta (not self), characterizes the world which we have come to believe as "real" and therefore, graspable .

 

The wisdom of seeing into the illusoriness of existence is what the omniscient nature of buddhahood points to, and yet this very nature is often misconstrued and confused in those that attempt to extract meaning by conflating buddhist omniscience with the more Westernised concept that means one who is in possession of an overarching supramundane ability to know every single detail of every single thing.  

 

As an example, this realization of three marks (in my case) is unstable due to strong habitual patterns - so sometimes i can see how the sensate world is indeed suffused with the 3 marks, and yet at other times, especially when caught up in pleasantness, or when i find myself in a particularly quiescent state, that knowingness is ignored and this errant ignorance spontaneously manifests dualistic tendencies, which then goes on to accrue karma. So, in this sense, even though we all have that same omniscient nature, it has yet to fully mature in those still caught up by the unconscious force of their habits. The good news is that the evolutionary processes that leads to enlightenment continues to work evenly, and as we yield steadily to these processes, our glimpses of omniscience gradually becomes brighter. 

 

 

 

Thank you CT but I would have disagree on your limited view of a Buddha’s knowing and abilities. I think the following will help explain where I am coming from. I would agree that there is nothing in Buddhism saying a Buddha knows everything about everything. I am not saying that either or trying to say in anyway that, that should be some kind of goal of attainment.

 

This first one is really good with regards to knowing.

Spoiler

From the Avatamsaka Sutra...

 

 Great bodhisattvas have no attachment to Buddha and do not develop attachments; 

they have no attachment to the teachings and do not develop attachments; they have 

no attachment to lands and do not develop attachments; they have no attachments 

to sentient beings and do not develop attachments. They do not see that there are 

sentient beings, yet they carry on educational activity, civilizing and teaching ways 

of liberation; they do not give up the practices of bodhisattvas with great compassion 

and great commitment. Seeing buddhas and hearing their teachings, they act accordingly; 

trusting the buddhas they plant roots of goodness, ceaselessly honoring and serving them. 

 

They are able to shake infinite worlds in the ten directions by spiritual powers; their minds are 

broad, being equal to the cosmos. They know various explanations of truth, they know how 

many sentient beings there are, they know the differences among sentient beings, they know 

the birth of suffering, they know the extinction of suffering; while knowing all acts are like reflected 

images, they carry out the deeds of bodhisattvas. They sever the root of all subjection to birth. 

 

They carry out practices of bodhisattvas for the sole purpose of saving sentient beings and yet 

do not practice anything. Conforming to the essential nature of all buddhas, they develop a mind 

like an immense mountain. They know all falsehood and delusion, and enter the door of omniscience. 

Their knowledge and wisdom are broad and vast and unshakable, due to the attainment of true enlightenment. This is the insight of practical knowledge of equally saving all sentient beings in the ocean of birth and death.

 

He knows how many beings there are and there differences..

 

I found this to be a very interesting Sutra as well.

 

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.012.ntbb.html

 

 

Edited July 25, 2019 by Jonesboy

[C T]

12 hours ago, Jonesboy said:

 

Thank you CT but I would have disagree on your limited view of a Buddha’s knowing and abilities. I think the following will help explain where I am coming from. I would agree that there is nothing in Buddhism saying a Buddha knows everything about everything. I am not saying that either or trying to say in anyway that, that should be some kind of goal of attainment.

 

This first one is really good with regards to knowing.

  Reveal hidden contents

From the Avatamsaka Sutra...

 

 Great bodhisattvas have no attachment to Buddha and do not develop attachments; 

they have no attachment to the teachings and do not develop attachments; they have 

no attachment to lands and do not develop attachments; they have no attachments 

to sentient beings and do not develop attachments. They do not see that there are 

sentient beings, yet they carry on educational activity, civilizing and teaching ways 

of liberation; they do not give up the practices of bodhisattvas with great compassion 

and great commitment. Seeing buddhas and hearing their teachings, they act accordingly; 

trusting the buddhas they plant roots of goodness, ceaselessly honoring and serving them. 

 

They are able to shake infinite worlds in the ten directions by spiritual powers; their minds are 

broad, being equal to the cosmos. They know various explanations of truth, they know how 

many sentient beings there are, they know the differences among sentient beings, they know 

the birth of suffering, they know the extinction of suffering; while knowing all acts are like reflected 

images, they carry out the deeds of bodhisattvas. They sever the root of all subjection to birth. 

 

They carry out practices of bodhisattvas for the sole purpose of saving sentient beings and yet 

do not practice anything. Conforming to the essential nature of all buddhas, they develop a mind 

like an immense mountain. They know all falsehood and delusion, and enter the door of omniscience. 

Their knowledge and wisdom are broad and vast and unshakable, due to the attainment of true enlightenment. This is the insight of practical knowledge of equally saving all sentient beings in the ocean of birth and death.

 

He knows how many beings there are and there differences..

 

I found this to be a very interesting Sutra as well.

 

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.012.ntbb.html

 

 

 

Yes its best not to place too much confidence on what i wrote. 

If interested, you may find the investigation on this subject by Santaraksita in the Tattvasamgraha to be rather extensive. His student Kamalasila elucidated further with a commentary entitled Tattvasamgrahapanjika. 

 

Breaking it down to its bare essence, from the Buddhist pov, its believed that exhaustive omniscience is possible solely thru the delusion-free apprehension of the selfless universal nature of all knowables. Therefore the focus of practice is the cultivation of insight to facilitate the birth and development of that delusion-free apprehension that is believed to remove the veil of ignorance. One who has permanently pacified even the subtlest possibilities of this veil ever arising again is said to be fully established in the ultimate knowledge of the nature of all knowables, which is that all knowables are impermanent, causes suffering when comprehended ignorantly, and their arisings are dependent on a perceiver, without which nothing that is known has any real existence, including this self that beings think they have. 

Edited July 25, 2019 by C T

[Jeff]

9 hours ago, Jonesboy said:

 

Thank you CT but I would have disagree on your limited view of a Buddha’s knowing and abilities. I think the following will help explain where I am coming from. I would agree that there is nothing in Buddhism saying a Buddha knows everything about everything. I am not saying that either or trying to say in anyway that, that should be some kind of goal of attainment.

 

This first one is really good with regards to knowing.

  Reveal hidden contents

From the Avatamsaka Sutra...

 

 Great bodhisattvas have no attachment to Buddha and do not develop attachments; 

they have no attachment to the teachings and do not develop attachments; they have 

no attachment to lands and do not develop attachments; they have no attachments 

to sentient beings and do not develop attachments. They do not see that there are 

sentient beings, yet they carry on educational activity, civilizing and teaching ways 

of liberation; they do not give up the practices of bodhisattvas with great compassion 

and great commitment. Seeing buddhas and hearing their teachings, they act accordingly; 

trusting the buddhas they plant roots of goodness, ceaselessly honoring and serving them. 

 

They are able to shake infinite worlds in the ten directions by spiritual powers; their minds are 

broad, being equal to the cosmos. They know various explanations of truth, they know how 

many sentient beings there are, they know the differences among sentient beings, they know 

the birth of suffering, they know the extinction of suffering; while knowing all acts are like reflected 

images, they carry out the deeds of bodhisattvas. They sever the root of all subjection to birth. 

 

They carry out practices of bodhisattvas for the sole purpose of saving sentient beings and yet 

do not practice anything. Conforming to the essential nature of all buddhas, they develop a mind 

like an immense mountain. They know all falsehood and delusion, and enter the door of omniscience. 

Their knowledge and wisdom are broad and vast and unshakable, due to the attainment of true enlightenment. This is the insight of practical knowledge of equally saving all sentient beings in the ocean of birth and death.

 

He knows how many beings there are and there differences..

 

I found this to be a very interesting Sutra as well.

 

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.012.ntbb.html

 

 

 

I would agree more with CT on this point.  Your quote is talking about bodhisattvas, and a bodhisattva while “great” and helping, is not fully clear, so the range of their knowing can be spectacular, but there is still some level of obscuration. A “full” buddha has cleared all such obscurations, and hence sees all other beings as Buddha’s themselves.  In a way, it is kind of like they move beyond/lose/give up such differentiation that would allow for the mind viewing of your quote.

 

This is also why bodhisattvas are kind of like the ones who hold the gate, or stay back to help. Often sutra describes them as waiting to be the last to cross over as part of their commitment to all other sentient beings.