Difference between recognizing rigpa & realizing emptiness?

alwayson
Posts: 533
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2011 1:36 am

Re: Difference between recognizing rigpa & realizing emptiness?

Post by alwayson »

I hate the Pali Canon because it is not the original recession of the Mahāsāṃghikas
Last edited by alwayson on Mon Sep 12, 2011 5:54 am, edited 1 time in total.
deepbluehum
Posts: 1302
Joined: Sat Aug 13, 2011 2:05 am
Location: San Francisco, CA

Re: Difference between recognizing rigpa & realizing emptiness?

Post by deepbluehum »

Namdrol wrote:
Andrew108 wrote:A genuine experience of emptiness and a genuine experience of rigpa are the same - this experience is glimpsed during direct transmission from teacher to student.
Many people make this mistake. Such people never understand Dzogchen.
You have to be a little lenient with the rime students. This is how they hear Dzogchen, with a Mahamudra twist. You should couch your comments with a caveat that this is how your school or your teacher or your understands Dzogchen, because other folks' teachers may have presented it the way Andrew did.
Andrew108
Posts: 1502
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2011 7:41 pm

Re: Difference between recognizing rigpa & realizing emptiness?

Post by Andrew108 »

The point is that Rigpa has no continuity or time within it. It is not the case that intrinsic awareness is held from moment to moment. There is no time for intrinsic awareness. Belief in a continuity is deluded. In Mahamudra there is no time. In Dzogchen there is no time. Intrinsic awareness is often called 4th time or beyond time because it is emptiness, empty of continuity. Any awareness that is related to a continuing present is not genuine rigpa. If you have the conditions then you 'get this' during transmission. The solidity of dualistic vision falls away - even only briefly. I base my understanding on the Three Statements of Garab Dorje.
IF I am not a dzogchen practitioner because of holding this view then that's fine by me. I'm happy about that.
The Blessed One said:

"What is the All? Simply the eye & forms, ear & sounds, nose & aromas, tongue & flavors, body & tactile sensations, intellect & ideas. This, monks, is called the All. Anyone who would say, 'Repudiating this All, I will describe another,' if questioned on what exactly might be the grounds for his statement, would be unable to explain, and furthermore, would be put to grief. Why? Because it lies beyond range." Sabba Sutta.
User avatar
Sönam
Posts: 1999
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 2:11 pm
Location: France
Contact:

Re: Difference between recognizing rigpa & realizing emptiness?

Post by Sönam »

In my opinion (humble of course) speaking about bhumis is the most incertain case, the most unknown subject in buddhism. No one (or nearly) as a clue of what is bhumis, what state it represents ... you can navigate all your present life in believing that you will never reach bhumis, that you attained first bhumi or even sometime that you attained 8th bhumi. So funny, and of course in a discussion every one will admit that bhumis are for high level bodhisattvas ... and that it's for no one of us.

How one will be freed in this life if one is thinking in this way ...

:twothumbsup:
Sönam
By understanding everything you perceive from the perspective of the view, you are freed from the constraints of philosophical beliefs.
By understanding that any and all mental activity is meditation, you are freed from arbitrary divisions between formal sessions and postmeditation activity.
- Longchen Rabjam -
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Difference between recognizing rigpa & realizing emptiness?

Post by Malcolm »

Andrew108 wrote:The point is that Rigpa has no continuity or time within it..
This is a trivial point and does not go beyond Madhyamaka.

N
Andrew108
Posts: 1502
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2011 7:41 pm

Re: Difference between recognizing rigpa & realizing emptiness?

Post by Andrew108 »

This is far from being a trivial point. But as others have said it is better to check these things with a teacher.
The Blessed One said:

"What is the All? Simply the eye & forms, ear & sounds, nose & aromas, tongue & flavors, body & tactile sensations, intellect & ideas. This, monks, is called the All. Anyone who would say, 'Repudiating this All, I will describe another,' if questioned on what exactly might be the grounds for his statement, would be unable to explain, and furthermore, would be put to grief. Why? Because it lies beyond range." Sabba Sutta.
User avatar
Sönam
Posts: 1999
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 2:11 pm
Location: France
Contact:

Re: Difference between recognizing rigpa & realizing emptiness?

Post by Sönam »

Andrew108 wrote:This is far from being a trivial point. But as others have said it is better to check these things with a teacher.
It is not up to him to say so, but Loppon Malcolm Smith Kunga Namdrol is a teacher ! ... http://rywiki.tsadra.org/index.php/User:Namdrol

SÖnam
By understanding everything you perceive from the perspective of the view, you are freed from the constraints of philosophical beliefs.
By understanding that any and all mental activity is meditation, you are freed from arbitrary divisions between formal sessions and postmeditation activity.
- Longchen Rabjam -
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Difference between recognizing rigpa & realizing emptiness?

Post by Malcolm »

Andrew108 wrote:This is far from being a trivial point. But as others have said it is better to check these things with a teacher.
It is a trivial point because time is merely a convention. There is no time or continuity at all, other than conventionally. In Dzogchen, that which is shared with Madhyamaka can be considered trivial since we are not discussing something unique and specific to Dzogchen teachings.

Also the term "intrinsic awareness" is a translation misnomer that has, unfortunately, gained broad currency. Using the term "intrinsic awareness" for "rig pa/vidyā" is very limiting. First of all, the adjective "intrinsic is misapplied. Intrinsic describes a quality that something else possesses. For example, diamonds are intrinsically hard; gold is intrinsically shiny; water is intrinsically wet. [X] is intrinsically aware? The intrinsic awareness of what? Of what is awareness an intrinsic quality?

There are other problems to this translation which lead people to reify rigpa as some truly existing ground ala Advaita's brahman.
Andrew108
Posts: 1502
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2011 7:41 pm

Re: Difference between recognizing rigpa & realizing emptiness?

Post by Andrew108 »

Namdrol wrote:It is a trivial point because time is merely a convention. There is no time or continuity at all, other than conventionally.
It's hardly trivial since conventions are what dualism is made of and getting stuck in conventions isn't going to get you out of dualistic view. Getting used to the state that is non-dual - going beyond conventions is what realization is about and so you get introduced to that - gain confidence in it - don't get shocked by it.
You seem to have suggested that recognition of rigpa and realizing emptiness are different. I would suggest that recognition of non-duality - of going beyond conventions - is what rigpa and emptiness are - they are realized as a unity. What would rigpa/emptiness look like?
I'm not a teacher but here is what my teacher has said:

''There is nothing to look at and no one looking,
Nevertheless there is an appearance of someone looking—
This person looking is self-arisen and self-liberated.
When you know this, you know the profound point.''
KTGR

One has an understanding of the absence of identifiable phenomena but at the same time one has the appearance of awareness. Awareness that is self-arisen and self-liberated - therefor not conditioned by dualism. This view is non other than the view of Dzogchen Semde this is also what ChNN calls instant presence.
But these are just words that I thought I would right down as respect for your contributions here. But really it's all quite academic and I don't mind the idea that I may be wrong.
The Blessed One said:

"What is the All? Simply the eye & forms, ear & sounds, nose & aromas, tongue & flavors, body & tactile sensations, intellect & ideas. This, monks, is called the All. Anyone who would say, 'Repudiating this All, I will describe another,' if questioned on what exactly might be the grounds for his statement, would be unable to explain, and furthermore, would be put to grief. Why? Because it lies beyond range." Sabba Sutta.
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Difference between recognizing rigpa & realizing emptiness?

Post by Malcolm »

Andrew108 wrote: You seem to have suggested that recognition of rigpa and realizing emptiness are different.
Yes, they are quite different.

If not, then all people who have recognized rigpa would be first stage bodhisattvas. But they are not.

The second fault of your assertion above is that people who have not realized emptiness will beleive that they had, and such people will than be incurable.
I don't mind the idea that I may be wrong.
That is a useful personal quality.

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

Re: Difference between recognizing rigpa & realizing emptiness?

Post by Malcolm »

Andrew108 wrote: this is also what ChNN calls instant presence.
"Instant presence" is one of the ways in which Norbu Rinpoche translates the term "rig pa", in order to disinguish it from his translation of the term "dran pa", presence, which is usually translated as mindfulness.
Andrew108
Posts: 1502
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2011 7:41 pm

Re: Difference between recognizing rigpa & realizing emptiness?

Post by Andrew108 »

Namdrol wrote:If not, then all people who have recognized rigpa would be first stage bodhisattvas. But they are not.
How do you know they are not? What I find difficult about your position (which seems quite tied to doctrine) is that it seems you are saying that a practitioner can be aware of their real nature in that they are not ignorant of the nature of the mind (recognize rigpa) but at the same time not have a genuine understanding or perception of emptiness (experience of emptiness). I find this quite funny to be honest. That a practitioner can go beyond dualistic view (recognize rigpa) and yet still see people as inherently existent (no direct perception of emptiness). Wouldn't this be a strange situation?
The Blessed One said:

"What is the All? Simply the eye & forms, ear & sounds, nose & aromas, tongue & flavors, body & tactile sensations, intellect & ideas. This, monks, is called the All. Anyone who would say, 'Repudiating this All, I will describe another,' if questioned on what exactly might be the grounds for his statement, would be unable to explain, and furthermore, would be put to grief. Why? Because it lies beyond range." Sabba Sutta.
Malcolm
Posts: 42974
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Difference between recognizing rigpa & realizing emptiness?

Post by Malcolm »

Andrew108 wrote:
Namdrol wrote:If not, then all people who have recognized rigpa would be first stage bodhisattvas. But they are not.
How do you know they are not?
I have personal experience of the subject we are discussing and I am not a first stage bodhisattva. In other words, I am relying on my personal authority to answer your question.

N
User avatar
Sönam
Posts: 1999
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 2:11 pm
Location: France
Contact:

Re: Difference between recognizing rigpa & realizing emptiness?

Post by Sönam »

THese are interesting about ... the whole is to be found http://www.khandro.net/doctrine_higher_teachings.htm
Rigpa in Dzogchen and Mahamudra are not the same thing. The former refers to a wisdom; the latter refers to the reflexive clarity of the mind, which discovering its own Emptiness, rests in it. This latter meaning is similar to gsal rig, "clear awareness" at term from the Sakyapa Lam 'bras [pron. lam dre] system.
...
The equivalent term in Mahamudra teachings for Dzogchen's rigpa is sahajaj~naana, meaning "innate wisdom." In Tibetan, this is called lhan cig skye ye.she .
...
How is this so? The late Bokar Rinpoche, in the insight section of his short Mahamudra text, outlines three stages of Mahamudra as "seeing reality as the nature of the mind, severing the basis and the root, the introduction having determined awareness to be empty."

This last phase consists of two steps: First one determines that awareness is empty, then introductions are made through movement, and so forth [ie. examination / analysis]. He says, "First, let the mind relax in its own state. Look nakedly at the relaxed mind. Maintain the stream of recollection without distraction. Make no effort to accept or reject any concepts which may arise; rest alert and present in the clarity and emptiness in the moment of ordinary mind, free from grasping."

So there we understand that rigpa is just this clarity. According to Yangonpa's Ri chos, this ordinary mind -- tha mal gyis she pa -- is a yogi's name for non-conceptual wisdom -- rnam.par mi.rtog.pa ye.shes.
Further proof that in Mahamudra rigpa is a synonym for mind rather than wisdom is given a little later, when Bokar Rinpoche goes on to say, "In the same way, the trio of appearances, awareness and emptiness are the self-perfected unification of clarity and emptiness from the beginning . . . ." So rigpa here refers to the second stage.
...
Sönam
By understanding everything you perceive from the perspective of the view, you are freed from the constraints of philosophical beliefs.
By understanding that any and all mental activity is meditation, you are freed from arbitrary divisions between formal sessions and postmeditation activity.
- Longchen Rabjam -
username
Posts: 759
Joined: Tue Mar 08, 2011 8:23 pm

Re: Difference between recognizing rigpa & realizing emptiness?

Post by username »

Andrew108, you say experienceof rigpa and mere emptiness are identical and when N corrects you, your friend accuses him of being anti-rime! This is becoming surreal. The biggest pitfall of Dzogchenpas is mistaking the mere emptiness aspect for rigpa. This is the same in Mahamudra where it is defined as emptiness non-dual with clarity since the beiginning in all manifestations. Then you quote Tsultrim too of all people! Couldn't get a bigger fan of clarity than him within emptiness. You really do not know the doctrines and positions or what you are talking about and are misrepresenting Dzogchen/Mahamudra for a few people who might not know better. You also mention ChNNR! Who often says "some teachers who are only interested in money tell thier poor students these days falsely that their little experience of emptiness is rigpa which is a great injustice". If that was true then certain Cha'an/Zen followers as well as those poor beings frozen in clarity-less emptiness for eons in the fabric of outer space would all be stabilized in rigpa, they are not. Your last point is also irrelevant as many ordinary people, if not all, who are not on the path experience rigpa from time to time shortly but do not realize it for what it was or even notice it as such. So again N was correct as according to your line of reasoning everyone should be a Bhumi Bodhisattva. Apart from the weird and hilarius contradictions mentioned, consistently misleading people on rigpa in ignorance is a serious downfall in Dzogchen/Mahamudra. It is best to keep quiet if one is not qualified.
Dzogchen masters I know say: 1)Buddhist religion essence is Dzogchen 2)Religions are positive by intent/fruit 3)Any method's OK unless: breaking Dzogchen vows, mixed as syncretic (Milanese Soup) 4)Don't join mandalas of opponents of Dalai Lama/Padmasambhava: False Deity inventors by encouraging victims 5)Don't debate Ati with others 6)Don't discuss Ati practices online 7) A master told his old disciple: no one's to discuss his teaching with some others on a former forum nor mention him. Publicity's OK, questions are asked from masters/set teachers in person/email/non-public forums~Best wishes
alwayson
Posts: 533
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2011 1:36 am

Re: Difference between recognizing rigpa & realizing emptiness?

Post by alwayson »

So is my signature right?
Andrew108
Posts: 1502
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2011 7:41 pm

Re: Difference between recognizing rigpa & realizing emptiness?

Post by Andrew108 »

Username....Wow........I think you should read through my posts again.
Rigpa as innate wisdom - yes! What are the innate wisdoms? Kadag, lhundrub and inseperability of these two. I can't really be bothered to write much more but look up what kadag is and see how kadag as a wisdom is central/inseperable with a GENUINE recognition of Rigpa.
Andrew108 out.....
The Blessed One said:

"What is the All? Simply the eye & forms, ear & sounds, nose & aromas, tongue & flavors, body & tactile sensations, intellect & ideas. This, monks, is called the All. Anyone who would say, 'Repudiating this All, I will describe another,' if questioned on what exactly might be the grounds for his statement, would be unable to explain, and furthermore, would be put to grief. Why? Because it lies beyond range." Sabba Sutta.
username
Posts: 759
Joined: Tue Mar 08, 2011 8:23 pm

Re: Difference between recognizing rigpa & realizing emptiness?

Post by username »

Andrew108 wrote:Username....Wow........I think you should read through my posts again.
Rigpa as innate wisdom? What are the innate wisdoms? Kadag, lhundrub and inseperability of these two. I can't really be bothered to write much more but look up what kadag is and see how kadag as a wisdom is central to a GENUINE recognition of Rigpa.
Andrew108 out.....
You digress and answered none of my points, so no point for me to continue either. If you feel so confident in your words, why not teach and maybe even write a book on your novel (at least to me) ideas?
Last edited by username on Mon Sep 12, 2011 5:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Dzogchen masters I know say: 1)Buddhist religion essence is Dzogchen 2)Religions are positive by intent/fruit 3)Any method's OK unless: breaking Dzogchen vows, mixed as syncretic (Milanese Soup) 4)Don't join mandalas of opponents of Dalai Lama/Padmasambhava: False Deity inventors by encouraging victims 5)Don't debate Ati with others 6)Don't discuss Ati practices online 7) A master told his old disciple: no one's to discuss his teaching with some others on a former forum nor mention him. Publicity's OK, questions are asked from masters/set teachers in person/email/non-public forums~Best wishes
Andrew108
Posts: 1502
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2011 7:41 pm

Re: Difference between recognizing rigpa & realizing emptiness?

Post by Andrew108 »

Would you like me to go through your post point by point?
The Blessed One said:

"What is the All? Simply the eye & forms, ear & sounds, nose & aromas, tongue & flavors, body & tactile sensations, intellect & ideas. This, monks, is called the All. Anyone who would say, 'Repudiating this All, I will describe another,' if questioned on what exactly might be the grounds for his statement, would be unable to explain, and furthermore, would be put to grief. Why? Because it lies beyond range." Sabba Sutta.
username
Posts: 759
Joined: Tue Mar 08, 2011 8:23 pm

Re: Difference between recognizing rigpa & realizing emptiness?

Post by username »

Andrew108 wrote:Would you like me to go through your post point by point?
Do whatever you like.
Dzogchen masters I know say: 1)Buddhist religion essence is Dzogchen 2)Religions are positive by intent/fruit 3)Any method's OK unless: breaking Dzogchen vows, mixed as syncretic (Milanese Soup) 4)Don't join mandalas of opponents of Dalai Lama/Padmasambhava: False Deity inventors by encouraging victims 5)Don't debate Ati with others 6)Don't discuss Ati practices online 7) A master told his old disciple: no one's to discuss his teaching with some others on a former forum nor mention him. Publicity's OK, questions are asked from masters/set teachers in person/email/non-public forums~Best wishes
Locked

Return to “Dzogchen”