Different criteria. Why?

Forum for discussion of Tibetan Buddhism. Questions specific to one school are best posted in the appropriate sub-forum.
Post Reply
Viach
Posts: 9
Joined: Fri Jun 22, 2018 11:30 am

Different criteria. Why?

Post by Viach » Sat Jul 21, 2018 10:16 am

One can often find an explanation: Sutra is a path of renunciation, Tantra is a path of transformation, Dzogchen is a path of self-liberation. And, sutric path is called the path of renunciation because of the vows (do not kill, etc.), tantric path is called the path of transformation because of a way of meditation (shamatha (generation stage - visualizing oneself in the form of yidam)), dzogchen path is called the path of self-liberation because of a way of meditation(vipashyana - stay in an instant presence, rigpa). A question arises: why is the sutric path characterized solely by the criterion of vows, and not by the criterion of the mode of meditation (shamatha and vipashyana) as it is done in tantric and dzogchen ways? After all, in sutric vipassana there is no renunciation, and tantric samayas put very serious limitations. And behavior in Dzogchen is not permissiveness. Why are different criteria used?

User avatar
Aryjna
Posts: 813
Joined: Mon Mar 27, 2017 12:45 pm

Re: Different criteria. Why?

Post by Aryjna » Sat Jul 21, 2018 4:22 pm

It is not called path of renunciation because of the vows, not only because of that at least.

User avatar
Matt J
Posts: 723
Joined: Tue Aug 03, 2010 2:29 am

Re: Different criteria. Why?

Post by Matt J » Sat Jul 21, 2018 5:06 pm

I wouldn't take the Tibetan presentation to actually align with the historical schools. The presentation is useful as a method for elaborating the Tibetan view, but not at all useful for elaborating non-Tibetan views.

I would also keep in mind that many modern forms of sutric meditation probably fairly recent.
Viach wrote:
Sat Jul 21, 2018 10:16 am
One can often find an explanation: Sutra is a path of renunciation, Tantra is a path of transformation, Dzogchen is a path of self-liberation. And, sutric path is called the path of renunciation because of the vows (do not kill, etc.), tantric path is called the path of transformation because of a way of meditation (shamatha (generation stage - visualizing oneself in the form of yidam)), dzogchen path is called the path of self-liberation because of a way of meditation(vipashyana - stay in an instant presence, rigpa). A question arises: why is the sutric path characterized solely by the criterion of vows, and not by the criterion of the mode of meditation (shamatha and vipashyana) as it is done in tantric and dzogchen ways? After all, in sutric vipassana there is no renunciation, and tantric samayas put very serious limitations. And behavior in Dzogchen is not permissiveness. Why are different criteria used?
"The essence of meditation practice is to let go of all your expectations about meditation. All the qualities of your natural mind -- peace, openness, relaxation, and clarity -- are present in your mind just as it is. You don't have to do anything different. You don't have to shift or change your awareness. All you have to do while observing your mind is to recognize the qualities it already has."
--- Yongey Mingyur Rinpoche

User avatar
javier.espinoza.t
Posts: 766
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2017 12:29 am
Location: Chile

Re: Different criteria. Why?

Post by javier.espinoza.t » Mon Jul 23, 2018 3:35 pm

Viach wrote:
Sat Jul 21, 2018 10:16 am
One can often find an explanation: Sutra is a path of renunciation, Tantra is a path of transformation, Dzogchen is a path of self-liberation. And, sutric path is called the path of renunciation because of the vows (do not kill, etc.), tantric path is called the path of transformation because of a way of meditation (shamatha (generation stage - visualizing oneself in the form of yidam)), dzogchen path is called the path of self-liberation because of a way of meditation(vipashyana - stay in an instant presence, rigpa). A question arises: why is the sutric path characterized solely by the criterion of vows, and not by the criterion of the mode of meditation (shamatha and vipashyana) as it is done in tantric and dzogchen ways? After all, in sutric vipassana there is no renunciation, and tantric samayas put very serious limitations. And behavior in Dzogchen is not permissiveness. Why are different criteria used?
it's about emotions.

in sutrayana, theravada tradition and the different mahayana schools, the method is renouncing negative emotions because they are considered poisons to our self. By abandoning, renouncing, negative emotions one stops producing negative karma. So one renounces everything that can be turn to a poison (house, fancy clothes, home, friends, sensorial enjoyable things, family, etc.)

in vajrayana, the way of transformation, one does not renounce emotions because what was called poinson in the renounciation path here also have the potentiality of manifest as wisdom, through application of a transformation method. so emotions that may surge have value and one does not renounce to them.

in atiyoga, the way of selfliberation, is like a final step of vajrayana, just at entering this path emotions are discovered to be a display of one's own potential, not a poison to be thrown away nor something to be necessarily transformed, it is part of a natural thing that eventually settle down or arise, so one does not renounce nor involve with emotions but contemplate them as they selfliberate by themselves. by contemplating emotions they loose their power over ourselves, even if one is producing more emotion, experiencing them, so it selfliberates instantly without effort as the manifests.

this are more or less the main differences I understand.

there is a book called "sutra, tantra and dzogchen" author is elias capriles, where this is explained in academical terms, more official and detailed.
Identities are false and not true

Viach
Posts: 9
Joined: Fri Jun 22, 2018 11:30 am

Re: Different criteria. Why?

Post by Viach » Fri Jul 27, 2018 1:24 pm

"it's about emotions.

in sutrayana, theravada tradition and the different mahayana schools, the method is renouncing negative emotions because they are considered poisons to our self. By abandoning, renouncing, negative emotions one stops producing negative karma. So one renounces everything that can be turn to a poison (house, fancy clothes, home, friends, sensorial enjoyable things, family, etc.)"

It's not true. Vipassana is the most important practice of sutrayana. There is no renouncing negative emotions there. :shrug:

Viach
Posts: 9
Joined: Fri Jun 22, 2018 11:30 am

Re: Different criteria. Why?

Post by Viach » Fri Jul 27, 2018 4:04 pm

Aryjna wrote:
Sat Jul 21, 2018 4:22 pm
It is not called path of renunciation because of the vows, not only because of that at least.
Well, tell me why.

User avatar
conebeckham
Posts: 4851
Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2010 11:49 pm
Location: Bay Area, CA, USA

Re: Different criteria. Why?

Post by conebeckham » Fri Jul 27, 2018 5:40 pm

Viach wrote:
Fri Jul 27, 2018 1:24 pm
"it's about emotions.

in sutrayana, theravada tradition and the different mahayana schools, the method is renouncing negative emotions because they are considered poisons to our self. By abandoning, renouncing, negative emotions one stops producing negative karma. So one renounces everything that can be turn to a poison (house, fancy clothes, home, friends, sensorial enjoyable things, family, etc.)"

It's not true. Vipassana is the most important practice of sutrayana. There is no renouncing negative emotions there. :shrug:
If you're practicing vipassana, truly, I would agree. BUT-and this is a big caveat--in order to practice Vipassana you have to set the stage. Samatha, of course, is a prerequisite for almost all of us, and in order to "till the soil" for insight to occur, you need a calm and stable mind. Such a mind is very hard to cultivate when one is chasing desires. Renunciation is very much the bedrock of Sutra, and frankly of all Dharma traditions, though it has to be understood correctly. If you are constantly engaged in samsaric activity, you hamper your ability to practice samatha, as a beginner. And frankly, almost all of us are beginners.
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")

Post Reply

Return to “Tibetan Buddhism”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: falcon, heart, joehaz21, KeithA, Mantrik, pemachophel, rgibson, SonamGyatso, tranides, Yahoo [Bot] and 86 guests