Malcolm wrote: ↑
Tue Jan 28, 2020 4:20 pm
tobes wrote: ↑
Tue Jan 28, 2020 3:22 am
I disagree. It depends greatly on the karma of the student. The Dagpo Kagyu has plenty of room for analytical Madhyamaka to help establish the correct view of ground Mahamudra. If one can realise this ground directly right away, great. But generally this is rare, and studying Madhyamaka is prescribed
because if taught correctly it does not remain purely on the level of the intellect. i.e. it induces meditative experience and then realisation, in the context of vipashayana.
The realization of mahāmudra depends on direct introduction, not analysis. Otherwise, your mahāmudra is just perfection of wisdom meditation dressed up in dohas.
Moreover, Kagyu Mahamudra does not privilege non-conceptuality over conceptuality: core Kagyu Mahamudra texts such as Moonbeams are very explicit about this; discursive thought and intellect are also not distinct from ground Mahamudra.
"Ground" mahāmudra simply refers to something one has not yet realized, i.e., the nature of the mind. Concepts are not separate from the mind, so of course they are included.
So, I think this aversion to analysis is contrary to the Kagyu presentation of Mahamudra. However, it makes more sense in relation to the Indian tradition; Saraha, Maitripa etc.
The aversion to analysis is different than aversion to concepts. Someone who has never received any kind of introduction must depend on analysis. But this person is also not practicing mahāmudra. The fundamental distinction between mahāmudra practice and sūtrayāna practice must be introduction at the time of empowerment, otherwise the word, mahāmudra, is quite meaningless.
With respect, you assert a 'fundamental distinction' when in reality there are many degrees of subtle interpenetration.
The non-divisibility between Madhyamaka and Mahamudra is also very often asserted; in Kagyu-Mahamudra texts as well as by living masters of this tradition.
In practice, most people usually do both, and see that the hard contradictions of the kind you are proposing are in fact the very thing to be wary of.
Of course, as we all know, the root of this tradition is the physician of Dagpo himself who unified
Kadampa gradualism with tantric Mahamudra. Unified. Not: taught them to be fundamentally distinct. That was his unique contribution to Buddha-Dharma, and Kagyu Mahamudra unfolds from this root.