enlightment in one life
Re: enlightment in one life
There is no "primordial enlightenment."
There is only primordial purity.
Enlightenment [awakening] is an event that occurs when that primordial purity is recognized.
There is only primordial purity.
Enlightenment [awakening] is an event that occurs when that primordial purity is recognized.
Re: enlightment in one life
And then buddhahood is what occurs when one's enlightenment [awakening] is ripened to its fullest extent via a complete exhaustion of afflictive and adventitious obscurations.
Therefore the title of this thread should really be "buddhahood in one life" since enlightenment [awakening] in one life is simply entering the path of seeing.
Therefore the title of this thread should really be "buddhahood in one life" since enlightenment [awakening] in one life is simply entering the path of seeing.
Re: enlightment in one life
Volume one is a good place to start.
Reading from "Realms of Samsara" p.121 onward it is pretty difficult to argue that the KG doesnt discuss the condition of sentient beings (the condition of not being enlightened).
"All phenomena of samsara depend on the mind, so when the essence of mind is purified, samsara is purified. Since the phenomena of nirvana depend on the pristine consciousness of vidyā, because one remains in the immediacy of vidyā, buddhahood arises on its own. All critical points are summarized with those two." - Longchenpa
-
- Posts: 7885
- Joined: Wed May 29, 2013 6:13 am
Re: enlightment in one life
(formatting mine)Malcolm wrote:The distinction is basically this: in cittamatra, phenomena are mental events. The way Lonchenpa explains it is like this. Bodhicitta, awakened mind, is like space, it is the basis, but it is not established in anyway. Its potential or energy [rtsal] arises like the face of a mirror. The display of that potentiality is like the eight examples of illusion. Since the basis, its potential and display are not themselves established because they are all empty, they are nondual. These three are conventionally distinguished because of appearances. Thus, bodhicitta, potentiality and the display are neither single nor plural in terms of their essence, nevertheless, just like the reflections in the mirror cannot be said to be either the same nor different than the mirror's power to reflect, it is understood that the imputations which are the display of the potential of bodhicitta also do not exist either inside or outside of, and hence these appearances are called "nonexistent, clear appearances." Indeed, nothing at all is established in anyway.
viewtopic.php?f=77&t=21104&p=311719#p311719
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)
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)
Re: enlightment in one life
What of it? Bodhicitta is the basis. Which means it is the basis for the path, i.e., it must be recognized in order to practice the authentic path.smcj wrote: ↑Thu Nov 02, 2017 2:07 am(formatting mine)Malcolm wrote:The distinction is basically this: in cittamatra, phenomena are mental events. The way Lonchenpa explains it is like this. Bodhicitta, awakened mind, is like space, it is the basis, but it is not established in anyway. Its potential or energy [rtsal] arises like the face of a mirror. The display of that potentiality is like the eight examples of illusion. Since the basis, its potential and display are not themselves established because they are all empty, they are nondual. These three are conventionally distinguished because of appearances. Thus, bodhicitta, potentiality and the display are neither single nor plural in terms of their essence, nevertheless, just like the reflections in the mirror cannot be said to be either the same nor different than the mirror's power to reflect, it is understood that the imputations which are the display of the potential of bodhicitta also do not exist either inside or outside of, and hence these appearances are called "nonexistent, clear appearances." Indeed, nothing at all is established in anyway.
viewtopic.php?f=77&t=21104&p=311719#p311719
Bodhicitta in this context means the nature of mind. Which is again, originally pure and naturally perfected.
Awakening or enlightenment occurs when that nature is recognized.
Re: enlightment in one life
People say that you must see life like a dream. But Buddha said, "I am awake." Awake, not dreaming. Wake up people!
I am well aware of my idiocy. I am also very aware that you too are an idiot. Therein lies our mutuality.
Re: enlightment in one life
So what's the success rate like, in percentages?
For instance, how many have become enlightened by following Namkhai Norbu?
For instance, how many have become enlightened by following Namkhai Norbu?
Re: enlightment in one life
Everyone who follows Dzogchen teachings will attain buddhahood, either in this life, the bardo, or the very next lifetime. As Paṇḍita Vimalamitra says:
Thus, there is not a single one who has entered into this teaching who fails to attain buddhahood.
Re: enlightment in one life
What % of those manage to attain it in this lifetime? Obviously you can't know but if you had to take a guess?
Re: enlightment in one life
What about the Ferdinands of this world who swoop in and sniff deeply (and ecstatically) from Dzogchen, then from Advaita, then from Krishnamurti, then back to Dzogchen, and so on? Are we invited to the buddhahood party?
Merrily, merrily, merrily, merrily ...
Re: enlightment in one life
Why not just seal the deal and invite yourself fully if its possible? Since Buddhahood is for the benefit of all beings where countless emanations are possible and since other paths (to my knowledge) don't make such universal declarations and demonstrations of compassion for all beings, isn't it the ethical choice to pursue Buddhahood properly?
At least until you have ascertained the correct meditation at which point you are at then at liberty to see for yourself if this path actually enables you to render thoughts and emotions as harmless or not. Then you can also see if following Advaita also enables or enhances that meditation and if Advaita outlays in as much detail if that fruit results in the endless benefit for beings.
At least until you have ascertained the correct meditation at which point you are at then at liberty to see for yourself if this path actually enables you to render thoughts and emotions as harmless or not. Then you can also see if following Advaita also enables or enhances that meditation and if Advaita outlays in as much detail if that fruit results in the endless benefit for beings.
'When thoughts arise, recognise them clearly as your teacher'— Gampopa
'When alone, examine your mind, when among others, examine your speech'.— Atisha
'When alone, examine your mind, when among others, examine your speech'.— Atisha
Re: enlightment in one life
I want to say "I'm not a joiner ... more of a repeat visitor, like an uncle who suddenly appears and is 100% there, then just as suddenly vanishes and is 100% gone." But of course that's just a conceptual underpinning I sometimes identify with.
So: I dunno, Vasana. Maybe I'm too lazy, not serious enough, don't care enough about others (insufficient bodhicitta). Or, to be fair, maybe I'm too critical/skeptical to make the subtle leaps of faith necessary for adhering to a rigorous path, or too infused with Krishnamurtian "Truth is a pathless land" to surrender to a path, any path.
In any case, I continue to be Ferdinand the Bull wandering the countryside from luvverly flower to luvverly flower ... my "path" whatever zig-zag I happen to have taken over the past N months, years, decades.
And, you know, "One must think Sisyph// ... umm, I mean Ferdinand(!) happy" ... right?
Merrily, merrily, merrily, merrily ...
Re: enlightment in one life
I can appreciate that. We're all lazy, undedicated and lacking compassion at least some (or most) of the time. I had some of those same doubts but remembering that although these are evidently 'pathy' paths, the actual nature of the path and result is still empty and an illusory display, including Buddhahood. It's all a skillfull means for us to realize the pathless nature of the path. Sometimes even paths can reveal the pathless just as concepts can lead one to an understanding that gos beyond them! (See heart sutra). Sometimes it seems like you're comitting to a concrete thing but it's really just a commitment to an understanding or not. I don't necessarily think unwavering faith is the most critical component in the beginning . But having some beleif that the fruit of meditation is possible is sort of needed even if it's just an inkling you experiment with. If anything, faith and confidence are likely to increase after one has gained theoretical and experiential confidence in the implications of the meditation in regards to thoughts/perceptions and your own momentary experience of suffering ( attachment/aversion/pride/envy/dullness ) in general. Then there are the improvements and changes you are supposed to see in yourself, even if tiny and very gradual with lots of regressions in between.Rick wrote: ↑Sun Dec 03, 2017 7:57 pmI want to say "I'm not a joiner ... more of a repeat visitor, like an uncle who suddenly appears and is 100% there, then just as suddenly vanishes and is 100% gone." But of course that's just a conceptual underpinning I sometimes identify with.
So: I dunno, Vasana. Maybe I'm too lazy, not serious enough, don't care enough about others (insufficient bodhicitta). Or, to be fair, maybe I'm too critical/skeptical to make the subtle leaps of faith necessary for adhering to a rigorous path, or too infused with Krishnamurtian "Truth is a pathless land" to surrender to a path, any path.
In any case, I continue to be Ferdinand the Bull wandering the countryside from luvverly flower to luvverly flower ... my "path" whatever zig-zag I happen to have taken over the past N months, years, decades.
'When thoughts arise, recognise them clearly as your teacher'— Gampopa
'When alone, examine your mind, when among others, examine your speech'.— Atisha
'When alone, examine your mind, when among others, examine your speech'.— Atisha
Re: enlightment in one life
If you follow other paths, you don't make progress in Dzogchen, so what do you think?Rick wrote: ↑Sun Dec 03, 2017 7:22 pmWhat about the Ferdinands of this world who swoop in and sniff deeply (and ecstatically) from Dzogchen, then from Advaita, then from Krishnamurti, then back to Dzogchen, and so on? Are we invited to the buddhahood party?
Kevin
Re: enlightment in one life
However, "sentient beings" are actually the definition of those that have not recognised the true state of everything.
/magnus
"We are all here to help each other go through this thing, whatever it is."
~Kurt Vonnegut
"The principal practice is Guruyoga. But we need to understand that any secondary practice combined with Guruyoga becomes a principal practice." ChNNR (Teachings on Thun and Ganapuja)
~Kurt Vonnegut
"The principal practice is Guruyoga. But we need to understand that any secondary practice combined with Guruyoga becomes a principal practice." ChNNR (Teachings on Thun and Ganapuja)
Re: enlightment in one life
Hi Kevin. I understand the rationale behind staying on one path until you've gone all the way ... but surely that's not the only method to get there. I guess I'm a multipather? (For better or worse!)
Merrily, merrily, merrily, merrily ...
Re: enlightment in one life
Yes and I'm seeing these changes, as are those around me who can view me with more dispassion than I can. And considering where I come from in terms of psychoemotional umm ... colorfulness ... visible changes are pretty amazing. Now you could say if I stuck with Dzogchen, say, really went full force into the Sharp Vajra path of Dudjom Lingpa ("channeling" Lake Born Padamsambhava) as taught so well by (the somewhat controversial) Alan Wallace, I'd see faster/deeper changes. And you could be right. But dammit! Ferdinand soooooooooooo wants to smell all the other beautiful flowers. Can you (kind of) dig it?Vasana wrote: ↑Sun Dec 03, 2017 8:13 pm I can appreciate that. We're all lazy, undedicated and lacking compassion at least some (or most) of the time. I had some of those same doubts but remembering that although these are evidently 'pathy' paths, the actual nature of the path and result is still empty and an illusory display, including Buddhahood. It's all a skillfull means for us to realize the pathless nature of the path. Sometimes even paths can reveal the pathless just as concepts can lead one to an understanding that gos beyond them! (See heart sutra). Sometimes it seems like you're comitting to a concrete thing but it's really just a commitment to an understanding or not. I don't necessarily think unwavering faith is the most critical component in the beginning . But having some beleif that the fruit of meditation is possible is sort of needed even if it's just an inkling you experiment with. If anything, faith and confidence are likely to increase after one has gained theoretical and experiential confidence in the implications of the meditation in regards to thoughts/perceptions and your own momentary experience of suffering ( attachment/aversion/pride/envy/dullness ) in general. Then there are the improvements and changes you are supposed to see in yourself, even if tiny and very gradual with lots of regressions in between.
You've been such a good friend during my time in this forum, Vasana. And, icing on the cake: You're quite brilliant. I really appreciate that you exist.
Merrily, merrily, merrily, merrily ...
Re: enlightment in one life
Yuren wrote: ↑Sun Dec 03, 2017 7:15 pmWhat % of those manage to attain it in this lifetime? Obviously you can't know but if you had to take a guess?
No idea, but that does not concern me very much.
Re: enlightment in one life
If you enter into Dzogchen teachings in a real sense, you wont be interested in other teachings at all.