Kagyupas are (mostly) Shentongpas

Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Kagyupas are (mostly) Shentongpas

Post by Malcolm »

Sherlock wrote:Why is rang stong said to err towards nihilism? I don't get this common remark by gzhan stong pas. Rang stong is actually a realist position, they only limit their emptiness to svabhavas, very similar to Sautrantikas, so it is very confusing to see them claim to be Prasangika.

Also I always found this terminology of translating inherent existence or some other variant very confusing until I learned that it was just svabhava/rang bzhin. Using the Sanskrit really makes everything clearer.
Well, first of all, Gelugpas are not rang stong pas, even Khedrupje rejects this appellation for their view and heaps ridicule on it.

Second of all, the reason why Gelug view leans towards nihilism is the insistence that ultimate is merely "the emptiness that is the absence of true existence in things". Hence they assert the ultimate is a mere nonexistence, and that leans towards ucchedavada.
User avatar
LastLegend
Posts: 5408
Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2011 3:46 pm
Location: Northern Virginia

Re: Kagyupas are (mostly) Shentongpas

Post by LastLegend »

I have never met any dharmakaya in my life.
It’s eye blinking.
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Kagyupas are (mostly) Shentongpas

Post by Malcolm »

LastLegend wrote:I have never met any dharmakaya in my life.
You never met the Buddha either, is it is not surprising.
Sherlock
Posts: 1202
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 3:14 pm

Re: Kagyupas are (mostly) Shentongpas

Post by Sherlock »

OK, I see, thanks.

So how are the 2 truths presented in gzhan stong? Is it similar to Nyingma 9-yana system?
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Kagyupas are (mostly) Shentongpas

Post by Malcolm »

Sherlock wrote:OK, I see, thanks.

So how are the 2 truths presented in gzhan stong? Is it similar to Nyingma 9-yana system?
The three own natures are mapped onto the two truths in the following way:

Ultimate truth = the perfected nature (parinispanna)
Correct relative truth = the dependent nature (paratantra)
False relative truth = the imagined nature (parikalpita)

Ultimate truth, parinispanna, is held to be empty of the dependent and the relative. According to this system in general, whatever is held to be ultimate is unconditioned, permanent and so on, and is empty of the conditioned, impermanent and so on.

So, it is a very dualistic perspective in many regards, positing all kinds of dualisms such as empty/not-empty; impermanent/permanent; conditioned/unconditioned; and so on.

In reality, according to the Maitreya, Asanga and Vasubandhu's treatises, the perfected nature is merely the absence of the imagined in the dependent nature. So, the two truths theory does not really work well if you try to map it to the three own natures as they are explained by the three great Yogacara masters.

If you understand the dependent nature as the union of the two truths — in this case the imagined is the relative truth; the perfected, the ultimate truth; which corresponds to Candrakirti's observation that all things bear two natures, one relative, one ultimate. However, there is no classical presentation like this anywhere, AFAIK, and definitely not within gzhan stong.
Schrödinger’s Yidam
Posts: 7885
Joined: Wed May 29, 2013 6:13 am

Re: Kagyupas are (mostly) Shentongpas

Post by Schrödinger’s Yidam »

People could start, for example, by understanding the Buddha, Maitreya, Asanga, and so on were not gzhan stong pas.
Well Dolpopa and Kongtrul both comment on Maitreya/Asanga's "Uttaratantra" from a Shentong perspective. In fact they base much of their view on it, so there's no consensus on that.
In reality, according to the Maitreya, Asanga and Vasubandhu's treatises, the perfected nature is merely the absence of the imagined in the dependent nature. So, the two truths theory does not really work well if you try to map it to the three own natures as they are explained by the three great Yogacara masters.
Yep, that's right. Square pegs don't fit into round holes.

Of course since Yogacarins use the 3 Natures schema too the same could equally be said of them.
1.The problem isn’t ‘ignorance’. The problem is the mind you have right now. (H.H. Karmapa XVII @NYC 2/4/18)
2. I support Mingyur R and HHDL in their positions against lama abuse.
3. Student: Lama, I thought I might die but then I realized that the 3 Jewels would protect me.
Lama: Even If you had died the 3 Jewels would still have protected you. (DW post by Fortyeightvows)
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Kagyupas are (mostly) Shentongpas

Post by Malcolm »

smcj wrote: Well Dolpopa and Kongtrul both comment on Maitreya/Asanga's "Uttaratantra" from a Shentong perspective. In fact they base much of their view on it, so there's no consensus on that.
Actually, no —  Dolpbupa's commentary on the Uttaratantra is surprisingly tepid and not at all novel. Kongtrul's commentary largely just follows Rongton's.
Yep, that's right. Square pegs don't fit into round holes.
Yet, it is exactly this mapping that exposes gzhan stong to most of the criticism it receives; it is their deformation of Madhyamaka that is the problem. They want to be Madhyamakas, but they also want to use the three own natures in their presentation of the two truths. So they twist both Madhyamaka and Yogacara in ways that are just not justifiable.
Sherlock
Posts: 1202
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 3:14 pm

Re: Kagyupas are (mostly) Shentongpas

Post by Sherlock »

I am curious how religious background affects people who adopt gzhan stong or other eternalist positions.

I hope you all vote here or otherwise make a post: http://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.ph ... 95#p282495
Schrödinger’s Yidam
Posts: 7885
Joined: Wed May 29, 2013 6:13 am

Re: Kagyupas are (mostly) Shentongpas

Post by Schrödinger’s Yidam »

Malcolm wrote:Yet, it is exactly this mapping that exposes gzhan stong to most of the criticism it receives; it is their deformation of Madhyamaka that is the problem. They want to be Madhyamakas, but they also want to use the three own natures in their presentation of the two truths. So they twist both Madhyamaka and Yogacara in ways that are just not justifiable.
Square pegs go in square holes, round pets go in round holes.

HHDL:
There is a tradition of making a distinction between two different perspectives on the nature of emptiness: one is when emptiness is presented within a philosophical analysis of the ultimate reality of things, in which case it ought to be understood in terms of a non-affirming negative phenomena. On the other hand, when it is discussed from the point of view of experience, it should be understood more in terms of an affirming negation.
Here HHDL is rephrasing the Shentong position on how Madhyamaka is for talking about emptiness from an intellectual perspective, and Shentong from an experiential perspective. I'm sure he is aware of all the types of objections you raise, but if HHDL--a Gelugpa--is ok with it, that's good enough for me.

BTW, that HHDL quote was in response to a question about Dzogchen.
1.The problem isn’t ‘ignorance’. The problem is the mind you have right now. (H.H. Karmapa XVII @NYC 2/4/18)
2. I support Mingyur R and HHDL in their positions against lama abuse.
3. Student: Lama, I thought I might die but then I realized that the 3 Jewels would protect me.
Lama: Even If you had died the 3 Jewels would still have protected you. (DW post by Fortyeightvows)
User avatar
conebeckham
Posts: 5709
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 11:49 pm
Location: Bay Area, CA, USA

Re: Kagyupas are (mostly) Shentongpas

Post by conebeckham »

Tsongkhapafan wrote:How can Kagyupas be Shentongpas when Milarepa and Je Tsongkhapa held the same view of emptiness?

As quoted on another thread:

From the standpoint of the truth that’s ultimate
Besides no blocks, there are not even buddhas
No meditator and no meditated
No paths and levels travelled and no signs
And no fruition bodies and no wisdom
And, therefore, there is no nirvana there
Just designations using names and statements
All animate, inanimate—the three realms
Unborn and nonexistent from the outset
No base to rest on, do not coexist
There is no karmic act, no maturation
So, even the name,”samsara,” does not exist.

Needless to say, even the name 'nirvana' does not exist - Buddhahood is not truly existent either.
Milarepa and Tsongkhapa are both Rangtongpas.
This part of the song does reflect Madhyamika view, yes--Emptiness of phenomena, and relative truth/conventional reality. The final part, though, is an elucidation of the Ultimate.
Then, what exists appearing to be things
And their non-existence, pure being, emptiness
Are essentially inseparable, one taste
And, therefore, there is neither self-awareness
Nor awareness of what’s other anywhere
All of this, a union vast and spacious
And all those skilled in realizing this
Do not see consciousness, they see the wisdom
Do not see sentient beings, they see buddhas
Don’t see phenomena, they see pure being
And out of this compassion just emerges
Retention, powers, fearlessness and all
The qualities embodied by a buddha
Just come as if you had a wishing jewel
Appearances and emptiness are inseparable, and you'll note that, for those that see this "union vast and spacious" they see wisdom, Buddhas, "Pure Being," and the qualities "emerge." "They don't see consciousness, they see wisdom"-- Would you agree?
དམ་པའི་དོན་ནི་ཤེས་རབ་ཆེ་བ་དང་།
རྟོག་གེའི་ཡུལ་མིན་བླ་མའི་བྱིན་རླབས་དང་།
སྐལ་ལྡན་ལས་འཕྲོ་ཅན་གྱིས་རྟོགས་པ་སྟེ།
དེ་ནི་ཤེས་རབ་ལ་ནི་ལོ་རྟོག་སེལ།།


"Absolute Truth is not an object of analytical discourse or great discriminating wisdom,
It is realized through the blessing grace of the Guru and fortunate Karmic potential.
Like this, mistaken ideas of discriminating wisdom are clarified."
- (Kyabje Bokar Rinpoche, from his summary of "The Ocean of Definitive Meaning")
DGA
Former staff member
Posts: 9466
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 5:04 pm

Re: Kagyupas are (mostly) Shentongpas

Post by DGA »

conebeckham wrote:Appearances and emptiness are inseparable, and you'll note that, for those that see this "union vast and spacious" they see wisdom, Buddhas, "Pure Being," and the qualities "emerge." "They don't see consciousness, they see wisdom"-- Would you agree?
Temporary intermission: I'd like to point out that this discussion is crystallized in somewhat different diction (debated diction...) in traditions parallel to the Tibetan schools. Differences in emphasis too. This perspective may be helpful for some. An example:

http://dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=39&t=19522

ok, back to regularly scheduled programming.
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Kagyupas are (mostly) Shentongpas

Post by Malcolm »

smcj wrote: HHDL:
There is a tradition of making a distinction between two different perspectives on the nature of emptiness: one is when emptiness is presented within a philosophical analysis of the ultimate reality of things, in which case it ought to be understood in terms of a non-affirming negative phenomena. On the other hand, when it is discussed from the point of view of experience, it should be understood more in terms of an affirming negation.
Here HHDL is rephrasing the Shentong position on how Madhyamaka is for talking about emptiness from an intellectual perspective, and Shentong from an experiential perspective. I'm sure he is aware of all the types of objections you raise, but if HHDL--a Gelugpa--is ok with it, that's good enough for me.
Gzhan stong pas assert that in equipoise there is no difference in how they and so called rang stong pas meditate, so claiming there is a difference via vie experience is just lip service to make the gzhan stong pas feel validated. HHDL is a nice person, he wants everyone to feel good.
Schrödinger’s Yidam
Posts: 7885
Joined: Wed May 29, 2013 6:13 am

Re: Kagyupas are (mostly) Shentongpas

Post by Schrödinger’s Yidam »

Malcolm wrote:
smcj wrote: HHDL:
There is a tradition of making a distinction between two different perspectives on the nature of emptiness: one is when emptiness is presented within a philosophical analysis of the ultimate reality of things, in which case it ought to be understood in terms of a non-affirming negative phenomena. On the other hand, when it is discussed from the point of view of experience, it should be understood more in terms of an affirming negation.
Here HHDL is rephrasing the Shentong position on how Madhyamaka is for talking about emptiness from an intellectual perspective, and Shentong from an experiential perspective. I'm sure he is aware of all the types of objections you raise, but if HHDL--a Gelugpa--is ok with it, that's good enough for me.
Gzhan stong pas assert that in equipoise there is no difference in how they and so called rang stong pas meditate, so claiming there is a difference via vie experience is just lip service to make the gzhan stong pas feel validated. HHDL is a nice person, he wants everyone to feel good.
He has succeeded…... :woohoo:
1.The problem isn’t ‘ignorance’. The problem is the mind you have right now. (H.H. Karmapa XVII @NYC 2/4/18)
2. I support Mingyur R and HHDL in their positions against lama abuse.
3. Student: Lama, I thought I might die but then I realized that the 3 Jewels would protect me.
Lama: Even If you had died the 3 Jewels would still have protected you. (DW post by Fortyeightvows)
User avatar
conebeckham
Posts: 5709
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 11:49 pm
Location: Bay Area, CA, USA

Re: Kagyupas are (mostly) Shentongpas

Post by conebeckham »

Malcolm wrote:
smcj wrote: HHDL:
There is a tradition of making a distinction between two different perspectives on the nature of emptiness: one is when emptiness is presented within a philosophical analysis of the ultimate reality of things, in which case it ought to be understood in terms of a non-affirming negative phenomena. On the other hand, when it is discussed from the point of view of experience, it should be understood more in terms of an affirming negation.
Here HHDL is rephrasing the Shentong position on how Madhyamaka is for talking about emptiness from an intellectual perspective, and Shentong from an experiential perspective. I'm sure he is aware of all the types of objections you raise, but if HHDL--a Gelugpa--is ok with it, that's good enough for me.
Gzhan stong pas assert that in equipoise there is no difference in how they and so called rang stong pas meditate, so claiming there is a difference via vie experience is just lip service to make the gzhan stong pas feel validated. HHDL is a nice person, he wants everyone to feel good.
Shentongpas assert that in meditative equipoise one rests the mind, without conceptual contrivance. This is the way some so-called "Rangtongpas" meditate--those who follow the "Free from Extremes" view...but if one creates a conceptual "image" of emptiness, or of "BuddhaNature," this is not meditation, according to all the Shentongpa varieties I've encountered. Just a very minor point of clarification.
དམ་པའི་དོན་ནི་ཤེས་རབ་ཆེ་བ་དང་།
རྟོག་གེའི་ཡུལ་མིན་བླ་མའི་བྱིན་རླབས་དང་།
སྐལ་ལྡན་ལས་འཕྲོ་ཅན་གྱིས་རྟོགས་པ་སྟེ།
དེ་ནི་ཤེས་རབ་ལ་ནི་ལོ་རྟོག་སེལ།།


"Absolute Truth is not an object of analytical discourse or great discriminating wisdom,
It is realized through the blessing grace of the Guru and fortunate Karmic potential.
Like this, mistaken ideas of discriminating wisdom are clarified."
- (Kyabje Bokar Rinpoche, from his summary of "The Ocean of Definitive Meaning")
Schrödinger’s Yidam
Posts: 7885
Joined: Wed May 29, 2013 6:13 am

Re: Kagyupas are (mostly) Shentongpas

Post by Schrödinger’s Yidam »

The "empty-of-other" paradigm is used in post meditational discussion. In terms of approach to meditation, the two differ between relying on intellect and relying on faith. Both approaches to meditation have produced enlightened masters, so presumably they end up at the same place without having to rely on anything whatsoever. If that be the case, why the resistance?
1.The problem isn’t ‘ignorance’. The problem is the mind you have right now. (H.H. Karmapa XVII @NYC 2/4/18)
2. I support Mingyur R and HHDL in their positions against lama abuse.
3. Student: Lama, I thought I might die but then I realized that the 3 Jewels would protect me.
Lama: Even If you had died the 3 Jewels would still have protected you. (DW post by Fortyeightvows)
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Kagyupas are (mostly) Shentongpas

Post by Malcolm »

conebeckham wrote: but if one creates a conceptual "image" of emptiness... this is not meditation
Correct, no one asserts that it is...
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Kagyupas are (mostly) Shentongpas

Post by Malcolm »

smcj wrote:The "empty-of-other" paradigm is used in post meditational discussion.
Then why claim the difference is experiential?
In terms of approach to meditation, the two differ between relying on intellect and relying on faith.
Nonsense. You belittle everyone when you make such claims.
User avatar
Karma Dondrup Tashi
Posts: 1715
Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2009 7:13 pm

Re: Kagyupas are (mostly) Shentongpas

Post by Karma Dondrup Tashi »

LastLegend wrote:Who is Shakymuni then?
Energy in experience, presumably.
Schrödinger’s Yidam
Posts: 7885
Joined: Wed May 29, 2013 6:13 am

Re: Kagyupas are (mostly) Shentongpas

Post by Schrödinger’s Yidam »

Situ R. self-identifies as a Shentong practitioner.

"Ground, Path, Fruition" p.81:
Situ R. wrote:This is the view of the Shentong Ma-yin-gag School of which I am a follower.
https://books.google.com/books?id=J8wFr ... th&f=false

Given that he is the guru to the Orgyen Thinley candidate for Karmapa, I think it safe to say that O.T. is a Shentongpa too. (That probably trumps Karmapa VIII's position.)
Last edited by Schrödinger’s Yidam on Wed May 06, 2015 8:22 pm, edited 3 times in total.
1.The problem isn’t ‘ignorance’. The problem is the mind you have right now. (H.H. Karmapa XVII @NYC 2/4/18)
2. I support Mingyur R and HHDL in their positions against lama abuse.
3. Student: Lama, I thought I might die but then I realized that the 3 Jewels would protect me.
Lama: Even If you had died the 3 Jewels would still have protected you. (DW post by Fortyeightvows)
User avatar
Tsongkhapafan
Posts: 1244
Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2011 9:36 am

Re: Kagyupas are (mostly) Shentongpas

Post by Tsongkhapafan »

conebeckham wrote:
Tsongkhapafan wrote:How can Kagyupas be Shentongpas when Milarepa and Je Tsongkhapa held the same view of emptiness?

As quoted on another thread:

From the standpoint of the truth that’s ultimate
Besides no blocks, there are not even buddhas
No meditator and no meditated
No paths and levels travelled and no signs
And no fruition bodies and no wisdom
And, therefore, there is no nirvana there
Just designations using names and statements
All animate, inanimate—the three realms
Unborn and nonexistent from the outset
No base to rest on, do not coexist
There is no karmic act, no maturation
So, even the name,”samsara,” does not exist.

Needless to say, even the name 'nirvana' does not exist - Buddhahood is not truly existent either.
Milarepa and Tsongkhapa are both Rangtongpas.
This part of the song does reflect Madhyamika view, yes--Emptiness of phenomena, and relative truth/conventional reality. The final part, though, is an elucidation of the Ultimate.
Then, what exists appearing to be things
And their non-existence, pure being, emptiness
Are essentially inseparable, one taste
And, therefore, there is neither self-awareness
Nor awareness of what’s other anywhere
All of this, a union vast and spacious
And all those skilled in realizing this
Do not see consciousness, they see the wisdom
Do not see sentient beings, they see buddhas
Don’t see phenomena, they see pure being
And out of this compassion just emerges
Retention, powers, fearlessness and all
The qualities embodied by a buddha
Just come as if you had a wishing jewel
Appearances and emptiness are inseparable, and you'll note that, for those that see this "union vast and spacious" they see wisdom, Buddhas, "Pure Being," and the qualities "emerge." "They don't see consciousness, they see wisdom"-- Would you agree?
Yes, if you're not a Buddha. If you are a superior being in meditative equipoise on emptiness, there are no conventional appearances at all, only emptiness. Buddha says this in the Heart Sutra when he says "there is no form, no feeling, no discrimination, no compositional factors, no consciousness".
Post Reply

Return to “Kagyu”