jeff
Senior Member
Posts: 128
|
Post by jeff on Nov 16, 2013 15:01:25 GMT 1
I've always been confused by this reference...
Ultimate Bodhichitta is essentially described as emptiness or the true nature of reality.
However, ultimate [anything] is also described this way.
So why is it important to "single out" bodhichitta in this manner?
Jeff
|
|
matt
Senior Member
Posts: 425
|
Post by matt on Nov 17, 2013 6:02:45 GMT 1
Well, there is a simple distinction. The ultimate nature of all phenomena is emptiness. Realizing emptiness is at least a significant part of Bodhicitta. One refers to how things ultimately are, the other refers to the realization of this.
There is a number of sources that state or imply that Bodhiccita goes beyond the mere realization of emptiness and involves the union of wisdom and method. One way to understand that is the realization of emptiness is being applied to the suffering of all sentient beings, actively transforming it into bliss. It is hard to describe anything involving emptiness, because we are using words where their power, meaning, does not really apply. So for simplicity and or succinctness, Bodhiccita is often described as the realization of emptiness. But Bodhicitta is engaged with suffering of sentient beings. Relative Bodhicitta is engaged in mind training, such as the four thoughts that turn the mind, or in compassionate acts. Ultimate Bodhiccita is engaged directly with/in the suffering of all beings.
My friend Lama Jhampa Shaneman was talking about Tantra once, and he said, well prior to taking up Tantra or a completion path a person may realize emptiness, but that is as far as it goes, but in Tantra one concentrates on the emptiness of the nerve channel and thereby engages the suffering of sentient beings.
So I would say for Bodhicitta you need union. Not only is emptiness somewhat difficult to understand, it is harder still to describe how the realization of it can be applied, but if you understand that we are interdependent, and some ways interconnected, then the object you concentrate on the emptiness of, can be all sentient beings. If you have this understanding, then it can be seen that is in fact your own emptiness, your own nature. But some paths do not make this leap, and just pursue or achieve Nirvana. That is a different use of the realization of emptiness, and feels and works differently, because there is a different aspiration and a different meditative object. I don't think it is accurate to say an Arhat has Bodhiccita, because they are not determined to reach full Buddha enlightenment, and believe only very rare beings have this potential.
|
|
matt
Senior Member
Posts: 425
|
Post by matt on Nov 17, 2013 6:27:35 GMT 1
The most succinct explanation of the difference between the Bodhisattva path, and the Theravada I heard from my teacher Geshe Wangdak the first time I attended one of his teachings. Without mentioning Theravada, he said simply, "we do not dip down into our own Nirvana." So that is the real difference. In meditation an Arhat's conscious mind can be temporarily absorbed in emptiness to the point he is not aware of his self much less his surroundings. Bodhisattvas don't meditate that way, they concentrate on the emptiness of an object, and that can be the suffering or causes of suffering, such as psychic pollution of all sentient beings. While doing this they enjoy bliss, but remain aware in ways one who is absorbed in Nirvana are not.
The completion paths have a different view in some ways. The eight Great Bodhisattvas, like Chenrezig, are known to be Bodhisatvas at the so-called Sutra level, but are known or recognized to have always been Buddhas on the level in the completion paths. Both are true, one is a relative view, one is an ultimate view. Likewise, the emptiness of all phenomena, means that all phenomena are pure, that kind of pure vision is very important in the completion paths. Realizing these ultimate natures has a transformative effect. It is a more engaged way of being. One is not just settling for relative truth and relative views of reality, which are deluded. Instead one is engaged in the transformative ultimate view.
|
|
dan
Senior Member
Posts: 89
|
Post by dan on Nov 17, 2013 8:42:15 GMT 1
Your confusion is likely simply in the adjectives regarding "bodhicitta."
Relative bodhicitta encompasses aspiration bodhicitta and application bodhicitta. Aspiration is developing the intention, the motivation, through meditation on the four immeasurables, employing Atisha's seven-point training in developing compassion, taking and sending (tonglen) and the like.
Engaging the six paramitas in daily life is the application bodhicitta. The motivation, having been developed, we're working to give up the "homeland" of self and its attachments and preferences for the benefit of all beings. We diligently work to perfect the transcendent perfections.
"Ultimate" is essentially an extraneous adjective, yet any label for such would be extraneous. It's that we simultaneously distinguish that which we are still cultivating--aspirational and engaged bodhicitta--from that which we don't yet realize--the awake (bodhi) mind (citta) of the Buddha.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rudy on Nov 18, 2013 9:01:59 GMT 1
OK, to put in my simple 2 cents:
Bodhichitta generally refers to the mind (chitta) that wants to reach enlightenment (bodhi) in order to help all sentient beings.
In the relative world we experience, this means in particular to help others and do practices such as Dan pointed out. Compassion for all sentient beings is of course the major underlying motivation, we do not want others to suffer.
However, we do not reach enlightenment by merely wishful thinking and even behaving properly, because an essential part of enlightenment is the direct realization of emptiness, a kind of mental breakthrough.
So in order to really fulfull the wish to benefit all, we need to have a good motivation and act positive (relative bodhichitta), but we also neeed the wisdom from the realization of emptiness (ultimate bodhichitta). These two are also sometimes referred to as method and wisdom, we need both to achieve our goal, just as a bird needs two wings to fly.
|
|
jeff
Senior Member
Posts: 128
|
Post by jeff on Nov 18, 2013 14:40:15 GMT 1
Thanks everyone... I guess, as Dan pointed out, my issue is with the description of Ultimate Bodhichitta being "emptiness", which seems to have a generic descriptive quality shared with the ultimate nature of all phenomena, thus losing some of its meaning relative to Bodhichitta.
I will be giving this a lot more thought.
Thank you,
Jeff
Perhaps it is better defined as the manifestation of Bodhichitta through the realization of emptiness.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rudy on Nov 18, 2013 18:58:50 GMT 1
mmmm... problem is that nothing really manifests itself in emptiness - thus its name  |
|
matt
Senior Member
Posts: 425
|
Post by matt on Nov 18, 2013 21:35:39 GMT 1
Well, semantics semantics. I think Rudy's explanation is succinct and correct, but I believe there is a fair distinction to be made between manifesting in emptiness, which one could argue is either impossible or true of everything, and manifesting because of the realization of emptiness. When you concentrate on the emptiness of an object (such as an emotion) with method -concern for all sentient beings- and experience some degree of bliss (release) and purification of your consciousness (energy) then Ultimate Bodhiccita is occurring to the same degree, and one could say a Buddha is manifesting in a sense, or more accurately perhaps, you could call that person a boddhisatva, but one could definitely call that process or meditation Ultimate Boddhiccita. It is that kind of realization the term refers to.
Even after a person has realizations, this is a gradual process until one becomes fully enlightened. In other words more of your consciousness is purified through concentration on the object each day. Your consciousness in a fully purified state is clear light, the mind of Buddha. One finds ways of discovering the non conceptual versions of aspirations like, I want to be Buddha, I want to guide all sentient beings to enlightenment, I want sentient beings to be happy and released from suffering, in the emptiness of your own consciousness or energy. Gradually you just feel a spontaneous confidence arise, I will find this here, and you do. The whole is in any part. That is at least one form of Ultimate Bodhiccita in my understanding.
Once a person has realized emptiness and discovered how to find method in this realization, then the scales have been tipped. You are on a more direct path, and your practice is directly engaged. After that if you live long enough and keep practicing you will eventually experience omniscience. This is my understanding
|
|
matt
Senior Member
Posts: 425
|
Post by matt on Nov 18, 2013 22:06:41 GMT 1
Does a Buddha manifest, or is a person merely liberated from (cleansed of) karmic stains, psychic pollution and delusion?
Yes. I think both are accurate descriptions in their own way.
There is a generation level to all this as well, in stages on this path we generate (accumulate) merit, that reaches a threshold and then there is realization. Then one's consciousness can be purified more rapidly, but it is still a gradual, years or decades long process. These are two stages in an accelerated path.
I suppose if someone dies after realization, but prior to full enlightenment, they will not be fully conscious in the Bardos. Then karma and state of mind still determine rebirth. Sometimes we hear of people being liberated after death, in the Bardo of the Dharmakaya. I also think even Buddhas have the potential to relapse if they choose rebirth, but they have a lot of advantages and an innate fearlessness. In other words, they have to start over with each life in some ways. Maybe they will become fully enlightened again quickly and easily. Maybe, because of compassion, they will choose a rebirth full of pitfalls and dangers. But they will have qualities and a lot of inborn advantages that will propel them along their path in that rebirth.
|
|
matt
Senior Member
Posts: 425
|
Post by matt on Nov 18, 2013 22:43:49 GMT 1
Danny and I have both wondered about this apparent contradiction: You hear a Master has died and it is said he passed into or experienced Paranirvana. Then a while later his reincarnation is discovered. How can both be true?
In my opinion this just illustrates the limitations of relative understanding. We like things to be either this or that, when they are both we feel confused. Mind in general and enlightened mind in particular know no (are not bound by) such limitations. That is my answer to this dilemma. What is yours, Rudy, Danny, Jeff, Tamara, or you others?
Here is also a refinement of my answer: Enlightenment (enlightened mind, Buddhahood) occurs in a non-temporal fashion, it is not bound by or within the experience of time. A Bodhisatva's rebirths occur in a world or realm, and where those worlds have time or something analogous the Bodhisatva is born in a particular time. The Bodhisatva vow is one of the causes of enlightenment. So a person can experience enlightenment in this life, and even Paranirvana in death, and still be vowed to many future rebirths. In fact those endless future rebirths are one of the causes of enlightenment in this life.
Crazy, huh?
As long as space endures and sentient beings remain, may I too remain to dispel the misery of the world.
Shantideva
|
|
jeff
Senior Member
Posts: 128
|
Post by jeff on Nov 19, 2013 16:04:53 GMT 1
Danny and I have both wondered about this apparent contradiction: You hear a Master has died and it is said he passed into or experienced Paranirvana. Then a while later his reincarnation is discovered. How can both be true? I think about this with Lama Yeshe... Lama Zopa said he believed Lama Yeshe achieved the illusory body in his last life. It is also written that once you achieve the illusory body you will achieve enlightenment in that life. So, when Lama Yeshe returned as Lama Osel I wonder what the experience is like (for Lama Osel). His interest in such things as film-making etc. might very very be 'skillful' but is he aware that he is a Buddha? Is he faking being a samsaric being or did rebirth make him 'forget'? Jeff |
|
matt
Senior Member
Posts: 425
|
Post by matt on Nov 19, 2013 16:39:06 GMT 1
He isn't faking, consciously, but I would guess that he is aware at times that there are powerful forces at work inside him. These incarnations have enlightened agendas that the incarnation as an individual can be only scarcely aware of for a lot of their lives, in my opinion. It is like the 6th Dalai Lama. Some incarnations have other priorities. Sometimes they are waiting for conditions to ripen, sometimes for compassionate reasons they are doing other things than becoming a Buddha again for at least part of their life, maybe the whole life at times. But they are still an incarnation of a Buddha, and people with very pure vision can probably tell.
Buddhas are reborn in low and high realms, they can manifest as anything people need, according to teachings I have heard. At some point in his life Lama Osel may feel compelled to practice in a serious way, he may experience spontaneous realization, right now he wants to make movies.
|
|
jeff
Senior Member
Posts: 128
|
Post by jeff on Nov 25, 2013 16:14:50 GMT 1
I was fortunate to have attended a teaching a couple of weeks ago by Geshe Kelsang Wangmo on the Heart Sutra (first female Geshe)and was able to ask her this question. She has a wonderful teaching style! I asked her about Ultimate Bodhicitta and transcribed her answer... Geshe-la’s answer: Actually, as far as I understand it, Ultimate Bodhicitta is not emptiness. Ultimate Bodhicitta is the mind that realizes emptiness directly conjoined with bodhicitta, with conventional Bodhicitta. Which means the following: The mind that realizes emptiness is the axe. It eliminates the obscurations to liberation and enlightenment. So to become liberated you don’t need to cut the tree all the way through. In other words you have the misperception of reality, okay, these are the obscurations to liberation. But the obscurations to enlightenment are those plus the stains, kind of the imprints of the misperceptions of reality. It’s a bit like, in order to become liberated, if you have a vessel, that’s our mind. There is garlic in the mind. The garlic is like the obscurations that keep us from being liberated and when you remove that you’re liberated but the smell of the garlic is still there. So in order to become fully enlightened not only do you have to remove the garlic you have to remove the smell too. So you have two obscurations, the garlic and the smell. The obscurations to liberation and to enlightenment you have to remove. Now what is it, the weapon, that which removes those two? It is the mind that realizes emptiness directly. But, you need to have the motivation to do one or the other. Or in other words, either you want to go to liberation or you want to go to liberation and enlightenment. So, depending on that motivation, the mind that realizes emptiness removes more or less. So, the mind that is only conjoined… in other words, let’s say if you generate the wish I want to be self liberated, other sentient beings, that’s a little too much at this point. So I want to be self liberated. With that wish, if you generate that wish it is called renunciation. That either is actively there or it lies dormant. When you realize emptiness directly it is conjoined with that. In other words, it controls the mind that realizes emptiness directly, how much it removes. If on the other hand you decide, no I don’t just want to be liberated; I want to become a Buddha for the benefit of all sentient beings. Then that mind, Bodhicitta, it controls the mind that realizes emptiness directly by way of making it remove more. Not just the garlic, even the smell. So therefore the mind that realizes emptiness directly conjoined with bodhicitta, that is ultimate bodhicitta. So conventional Bodhicitta is that which is conjoined, that’s Bodhicitta itself, and the mind that realizes emptiness directly conjoined with bodhichitta which makes it into that weapon that removes also the smell, that’s ultimate Bodhicitta. The actual teaching can be heard at: archive.org/details/GesheKelsangWangmoTheHeartSutraTheProfoundUnionOfWisdomAndCompassionMy question is toward the end at 1:58:50, if you wish to hear the way Geshe-la says it... |
|
|
|
Post by Rudy on Nov 25, 2013 21:48:59 GMT 1
Thank you Jeff, I never understood it this way before.
By the way, is that you asking the question on the recording?
But this is confirmed by the way Alex Berzin describes it (by the way, he calls ultimate Bodhichitta 'deepest bodhichitta'):
So, 'just' realizing emptiness without the bodhichitta motivation behind it, is not called ultimate bodhichitta, and it leads to liberation, whereas with the conventional bodhichitta motivation, it leads to full enlightenment of a Buddha.
By the way, I happen to know Geshe Kelsang Wangmo from the time she was not even a nun. I thought she was a bit starry-eyed at the time - almost too enthousiastic on the path at around 20. But she did an incredible job in not only studying Tibetan to a native level and becoming the first female geshe to be acknowledged, but she also worked very hard for her nunnery. An amazing person for sure! I hope we can enjoy her teachings in the west more often.
|
|
jeff
Senior Member
Posts: 128
|
Post by jeff on Nov 26, 2013 14:23:30 GMT 1
By the way, is that you asking the question on the recording? Yes. Is it strange to hear my voice after all these years? |
|
matt
Senior Member
Posts: 425
|
Post by matt on Nov 26, 2013 19:25:23 GMT 1
I've heard it. We talked on the phone once a few years ago. He definitely sounds like he is from (New) Jersey.
"Food just tastes better at the chemical plant." -Saturday Night Live skit about New Jersey, Circa 1985
|
|
|
|
Post by Rudy on Nov 27, 2013 0:24:18 GMT 1
Yes. Is it strange to hear my voice after all these years? Yes, I suppose that is the weird thing about corresponding in these ways without actually meeting people. On the one hand, I know you pretty well, on the other hand I don't know even really what you look like, or before this, what you sound like  |
|
dan
Senior Member
Posts: 89
|
Post by dan on Nov 27, 2013 10:31:05 GMT 1
Matt wrote I would add to all that Matt wrote about this that many practitioners reciting prayers for a swift rebirth likely has an effect as well. I was going to post this link in the "On Rejoicing" thread, but it pertains to ultimate bodhicitta as well, I think. The first public dharma talk I attended was Khenpo Choga Rinpoche, whose former teacher, Lama Karma Rinpoche, has recently passed. He posted about it today. It is itself something of a teaching, and a cause for rejoicing. See for yourself: dzogchenshrisinghafoundation.createsend1.com/t/ViewEmail/y/2E5979E43363BAF4/38AF7254DBF89F24F7E8006BBCB98688 |
|
matt
Senior Member
Posts: 425
|
Post by matt on Nov 28, 2013 7:02:50 GMT 1
That was nice to read, Dan, thanks for posting it. |
|
