matt
Senior Member
Posts: 425
|
Post by matt on Dec 18, 2013 20:48:25 GMT 1
And it seems to me the clearest way to explain what we perceive as material reality from a relative point of view is to say that our minds, interdependent in nature, grasping after an immutable self, misapprehend truth as duality, thereby generating myriad and infinite vibrations, which should be understood as food for Rigpa.  Without the practical necessity of overcoming suffering, there simply is no Buddhist cosmology. When you separate the search for truth from the aspirations we know as love and compassion, you create more obscurations, not less. This is the real secret to Buddhist understanding and knowledge. There is no pure theory. It is all practical. Once we forget that, we further divorce ourselves from reality. And that is why Buddhists always have some innate skepticism of materialism as a path to knowledge. Having said that I can add that my teacher, Khensur Rinpoche Geshe Wangdak once said he believes that one day Buddhism and Western Science will be in harmony. |
|
matt
Senior Member
Posts: 425
|
Post by matt on Dec 18, 2013 22:12:13 GMT 1
From the view point of Western Science, sincerely wanting others to be happy is a nice attitude, but it has nothing to do with intelligence and will not bring you closer to knowledge of how things are and work. From a Buddhist point of view, it is the beginning and measure of intelligence, and it is essential to knowing how things are and work. I have an absolute firm conviction that the Buddhists are right in this, and Western Science has it wrong. That doesn't mean we can't or don't learn from each other, and it certainly doesn't mean that Western Science won't change its opinion. I think the signs of that change are increasingly abundant. In the meantime, we students of Buddhism just have to try to not feel too superior. lol
|
|
tamara
Senior Member
Posts: 178
|
Post by tamara on Dec 20, 2013 4:22:59 GMT 1
Just a few lines into the thread: Jeff wrote: ``Actually, this is an "age old" question really. Why doesn't God show himself, etc. or If a Buddha can make the telephone ring to prevent a killing why not simply intervene in other killings or in a more direct way?`` This is IMHO because the enlightened beings while interefering in `conventional reality` have to act according to causes and conditions and karma. ``Why doesn't God show himself ?` No idea, ... this is why I like Buddhism where at least I can understand why Buddha shows himself or why he doesn`t. And even if my understanding is utter nonsense... I find comfort in it....  Tamara |
|
tamara
Senior Member
Posts: 178
|
Post by tamara on Dec 20, 2013 5:00:36 GMT 1
Matt, after reading your quote from Mining for Wisdom within Delusion - Maitreya’s Distinction between Phenomena and the Nature of Phenomena and Its Indian and Tibetan Commentaries by Karl Brunnhölzl I checked it out www.amazon.com/Mining-Wisdom-within-Delusion-Commentaries/dp/1559393955and it looks like it is one of the fantastic new books which I have to read. The point with this kind of books is that everything is put down there word by word to leave one enlightened on the spot but we just do not `get it` or at best, we `forget` it after a few milliseconds of genuine insight. Fascinating indeed. Matt, is there a reason you say Dzongchen and not Dzogchen ? I was not aware of the term Dzongchen till now. Tamara |
|
matt
Senior Member
Posts: 425
|
Post by matt on Dec 20, 2013 7:13:58 GMT 1
No, Tamara, I just misspell a lot things. I spell them the way they sound to me. With english words my spellcheck catches them. With Tibetan words I spell them phonetically and don't always check how they are normally transcribed. You know, Tamara, my teacher says enlightenment is sneaky. Some of the things you write make me want to suggest you start looking for it where you expect it least. |
|
tamara
Senior Member
Posts: 178
|
Post by tamara on Dec 20, 2013 9:34:34 GMT 1
```Some of the things you write make me want to suggest you start looking for it where you expect it least.`` Like where ? Outside the books, you mean ? I certainly do it but I keep forgetting..., the words in the books are a great reminder. Tamara
|
|
jeff
Senior Member
Posts: 128
|
Post by jeff on Dec 20, 2013 16:32:48 GMT 1
Interdependence is the relative nature of all kinds of phenomena. This is a another way of saying that all phenomena have dependent origination. This is a very profound view of phenomena, and one should not underestimate its importance or its capacity to improve our lives and enhance our practice if we contemplate it. Saying that the Universe is interdependent is saying a great deal indeed. I am quite certain this is true... that the understanding that my happiness is related to my actions or your happiness is only scratching the surface of the real meaning of interdependence. Matt, what you have written here (in multiple posts) touches me deeply and I feel quite convinced that it is utterly true. In addition, I have been wondering about my "concern"... if the "mind is the source of everything" includes matter or not. I'm thinking it might not really be as important to the particular goal of a direct realization of emptiness as I thought. As a goal of a direct realization of emptiness I thought it might be helpful in creating the "impact" needed to push me over the edge (I feel silly saying that). However, I'm beginning to doubt that, since the distinction is one criteria of separate, valid schools where realizations occur. Also, perhaps the distinction becomes clear after realization rather than before. I'm learning a lot from everyone... |
|
matt
Senior Member
Posts: 425
|
Post by matt on Dec 20, 2013 20:41:40 GMT 1
Interdependence is the relative nature of all kinds of phenomena. This is a another way of saying that all phenomena have dependent origination. This is a very profound view of phenomena, and one should not underestimate its importance or its capacity to improve our lives and enhance our practice if we contemplate it. Saying that the Universe is interdependent is saying a great deal indeed. I am quite certain this is true... that the understanding that my happiness is related to my actions or your happiness is only scratching the surface of the real meaning of interdependence. Matt, what you have written here (in multiple posts) touches me deeply and I feel quite convinced that it is utterly true. In addition, I have been wondering about my "concern"... if the "mind is the source of everything" includes matter or not. I'm thinking it might not really be as important to the particular goal of a direct realization of emptiness as I thought. As a goal of a direct realization of emptiness I thought it might be helpful in creating the "impact" needed to push me over the edge (I feel silly saying that). However, I'm beginning to doubt that, since the distinction is one criteria of separate, valid schools where realizations occur. Also, perhaps the distinction becomes clear after realization rather than before. I'm learning a lot from everyone... It's very gratifying to hear that, Jeff, thank you. As a graduate student I did an installation in the University gallery about interdependence. The graduate faculty reacted strangely, they did not like it at all and they were very aggressive in their critique. It seemed to make them angry. Later the Custodian told me how deeply moved by the installation he was, and how it had been keeping him awake, because he began to feel like everything he did had profound implications. I told him to relax, "Sure, you are an investment," I said, "but you are worth it." And I really meant it. Later it occurred to me how interesting it was that out of all the highly educated people who critiqued that work, only the Janitor seemed to understand it. I'm very impressed you can feel touched by my poor writing. I don't know what one has to understand to have realization. I think maybe it is different for everyone. 5 minutes before I had direct realization I was telling Lama Sonam Tsering that I thought people should stop saying reality is illusion. "they should't say it is illusion," I told him, "These are the Eagle's (Wheel of Time's) emanations, this is how they perceive them." Then suddenly everything changed, and the next words out of my mouth were, "Oh... you're right, its all illusion." I think you are on the right path, just keep doing what you are doing. Maybe your first realization of emptiness won't have a lot of lights and bells, maybe it will be very gentle. It doesn't matter. Realization doesn't matter. Motivation is all that matters, and for that we have dedications. |
|
matt
Senior Member
Posts: 425
|
Post by matt on Dec 20, 2013 20:56:07 GMT 1
2 years after the installation I described above, I did a much larger one for my Thesis exhibit. I will never forget what the security guard said, it made me laugh. When he saw the armature I was building, and got an idea of what I was working on he said, "You have entirely too much time on your hands, Matt."
|
|
matt
Senior Member
Posts: 425
|
Post by matt on Dec 20, 2013 21:14:51 GMT 1
```Some of the things you write make me want to suggest you start looking for it where you expect it least.`` Like where ? Outside the books, you mean ? I certainly do it but I keep forgetting..., the words in the books are a great reminder. Tamara It sounds to me like your world is stuttering to a stop. It has developed a hiccup. Now you just have to bide your time, and you may as well enjoy yourself. Stop and smell the roses. |
|
dan
Senior Member
Posts: 89
|
Post by dan on Dec 20, 2013 21:25:58 GMT 1
Tamara wrote: Matt responded: Just an opinion, but I think it's more like a conflation of "Dzongsar" and "dzogchen." Personally, though, I think your writing had gotten clearer and more precise over the years. This conversation got away from me before I could jump in, so I'm going to latch on to what Matt says here, in order to preface what I'd already written in a general way regarding the original topic and the 84,000 question: One of things I find interesting is the way the idea of the "root text" of mind training points toward the notion of a trunk and branches; so the essense of the root text is the essense of the rest of the limbs of the teachings. (This is an idea similar to that which says that the medicine permeates the whole plant, from roots to leaves.) And in a general way, I suppose, that notion runs parallel to--or, perhaps more accurately, within--the notion of the seed of samsara, its roots, its growth, its fruitions. Since buddhanature is inherent in all sentient beings, there is no instant of samsara separable from it, and likewise, no instant in which some aspect of the 84,000 teachings may not potentially arise as antidote, whether one knows or understands that or not. Matt wrote: As I heard in a teaching on ngondro by Lama Tsering Gyaltsen recently, the tripitaka, the three baskets, are specific to the three poisons: the vinaya, as an antidote to attachment, the sutras for anger, and the abhidharma to address ignorance. The fourth pitaka, the secret mantrayana, addresses a mixture of all three poisons in equal measure. Each of these four categories contain 21,000 components, giving the 84,000 total. Rudy wrote: So maybe it's the 21,000 number that that is in question. Still....very many. |
|
matt
Senior Member
Posts: 425
|
Post by matt on Dec 20, 2013 23:56:43 GMT 1
Dan wrote: "Just an opinion, but I think it's more like a conflation of "Dzongsar" and "dzogchen."" Wow, that's it exactly. Good eye, Dan. I've been telling Danny for years that we are all just a figment of his imagination. I don't think he believes me, yet... |
|
tamara
Senior Member
Posts: 178
|
Post by tamara on Dec 21, 2013 4:49:57 GMT 1
Matt wrote:
`It sounds to me like your world is stuttering to a stop.`
I find it fascinating that you call, what I call `progress on the path`, a `stop`.
We stutter to the stop, there is nothing else to do.
At the same time the roses smell better than ever before.
Tamara
|
|
jeff
Senior Member
Posts: 128
|
Post by jeff on Dec 21, 2013 14:21:34 GMT 1
```Some of the things you write make me want to suggest you start looking for it where you expect it least.`` Like where ? Outside the books, you mean ? I certainly do it but I keep forgetting..., the words in the books are a great reminder. Tamara It sounds to me like your world is stuttering to a stop. It has developed a hiccup. Now you just have to bide your time, and you may as well enjoy yourself. Stop and smell the roses. Matt, I think you need to be very careful when you say things like this. If you truly have some insight into Tamara's practice and you are trying to be helpful (which we assume) then I think it's important to be very specific about what you are saying, why you are saying it and how you know. That way the recipient can judge whether to explore it or ignore it. I also think this is best done in a private message. Jeff |
|
matt
Senior Member
Posts: 425
|
Post by matt on Dec 21, 2013 23:42:39 GMT 1
You are absolutely right, Jeff, that was poor judgement. And no, I don't have any special insight into Tamara's practice. Anyway, she seemed to take it the way I meant it, which was it sounds like her practice is going well. The advice I gave her to look for enlightenment in the mundane is the same advice I would give myself or anyone. Stopping the world is an old fashioned way of describing realization. There are times in our lives when we are just waiting for conditions to ripen. But I honestly don't know if that is what is happening with Tamara, and even so, like you say it is personal. Anyway, I'm sorry if I made you feel uncomfortable, Tamara, that was not my intention. |
|
tamara
Senior Member
Posts: 178
|
Post by tamara on Dec 22, 2013 5:09:06 GMT 1
It`s o.k., Jeff, and apologies accepted, dear Matt. ``The advice I gave is to look for enlightenment in the mundane`` Yep, that`s what I do because the mundane surrounds me all the time. If one only wasn`t so distracted out there in this `mundane` world  To come back to the thread: Jeff wrote: `````In addition, I have been wondering about my "concern"... if the "mind is the source of everything" includes matter or not. I'm thinking it might not really be as important to the particular goal of a direct realization of emptiness as I thought. As a goal of a direct realization of emptiness I thought it might be helpful in creating the "impact" needed to push me over the edge.`` That`s good to read because I also wonder if all these questions which we feel we have to sort our `before direct realization of emptiness` are really relevant or is it (one more) trick which the ego plays. I, for instance, think that I will never focus on Atiyoaga with full attention unless I know what Highest Yoga Tantra is about. Now, as I do not have the time, means and teacher, to find out about HYT my mind has tricked me into delusion for several other eons with this particular urge. Congratulation, lovely deluded spinning ma-rigpa consciousness..... Tamara |
|
dan
Senior Member
Posts: 89
|
Post by dan on Dec 23, 2013 1:00:30 GMT 1
Jeff wrote: I'm wondering if it makes a difference whether we think of the mind as "the source" or if it may as simply be said that elements and mind are co-arising in a relative truth sense. I think that's saying the same thing, merely emphasizing their dependence on one another. An atom, for example, arises only with the concept of an atom. And the concept of an atom is impermanent and changing as new information comes in. Similarly, I think, this can be noticed in one's own limited concepts relating to the Dharma, which can't help but change by means of study, reflection and meditation. Personally I think that matter has to be included as a source of mind since, without the elements, where could this limited mind with its questions arise? "Objects" may appear as inner or outer by the same mind, which no less has an "inner" experience when perceiving "outer" objects. If, conversely, the elements were the source of mind, it seems to me that we are already home and eternally happy, having found(ationed) it . An aspirational prayer: www.unfetteredmind.org/all-the-matter-in-the-world |
|
matt
Senior Member
Posts: 425
|
Post by matt on Jan 4, 2014 22:46:11 GMT 1
It was on this thread we were speculating about 84,000 teachings. I read this today on Tersar.org in a teaching about Green Tara from HH Shenwa Dawa Rinpoche:
Tsa/Nerves
So, therefore then, the yoga is based on doing the movement of the tsa, lung correctly; doing the correct kind of breathing; the correct kind of visualization and moving these nerves. Now as far as the nerves are concerned, there are twelve thousand meridian nerves, multiply that by two equals twenty-four; multiply this three times, equals seventy-two then add another twelve and this comes to eighty-four. The eighty-four thousand stanzas of the Buddha’s teachings refer to the eighty-four thousand nerves we have in our body. The Buddha gave one teaching for each nerve, that’s why it’s called the eighty-four thousand stanza teachings of the Buddha. His entire teaching comprises of eighty-four thousand stanzas. So we have the eighty-four thousand nerves in our body. We have gross nerves, subtle nerves and extremely subtle nerves. All these nerves that are now forming, the principle twelve thousand multiplied three or four times subdivided breaks down into eighty-four thousand nerves. This is so far as the nerves are concerned.
We have to understand the tsa, lung, thigle. Through understanding this, we will understand the habitual nerves (Tib. bar chak yurwa) that are coming up. We will understand what they are. These habitual tendencies are the most difficult of all to purify because they are constantly retaining the memory of what you are doing. They retain that memory and, although so far as we are concerned, that memory is not important, nonetheless we will always be referring to that memory.
|
|
dan
Senior Member
Posts: 89
|
Post by dan on Jan 6, 2014 3:09:26 GMT 1
Hey Matt,
Thanks for sharing this excerpt and its source.
It also appears to address Jeff's recent post about financial (in)security v. reality.
Also, I'm enjoying the Tara teaching on that site.
|
|
jeff
Senior Member
Posts: 128
|
Post by jeff on Jan 6, 2014 14:27:28 GMT 1
It also appears to address Jeff's recent post about financial (in)security v. reality. Dan, are you referring to the strength of the "habit" which keeps me locked in "material" mode or something else? Jeff |
|
