Brahman and Atman in Kagyu?

User avatar
Grigoris
Former staff member
Posts: 20137
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 9:27 pm
Location: Greece

Re: Brahman and Atman in Kagyu?

Post by Grigoris » Mon Mar 18, 2019 8:24 pm

Thing is that both Abhidhamma and Abhidharma talk about universal mental factors, but without mentioning a Universal Mind.
"My religion is not deceiving myself."
Jetsun Milarepa 1052-1135 CE

"Butchers, prostitutes, those guilty of the five most heinous crimes, outcasts, the underprivileged: all are utterly the substance of existence and nothing other than total bliss."
The Supreme Source - The Kunjed Gyalpo
The Fundamental Tantra of Dzogchen Semde

User avatar
Tlalok
Posts: 139
Joined: Fri Nov 10, 2017 10:29 pm

Re: Brahman and Atman in Kagyu?

Post by Tlalok » Mon Mar 18, 2019 9:06 pm

Seeker12 wrote:
Mon Mar 18, 2019 7:52 pm
dudette wrote:
Mon Mar 18, 2019 12:52 pm
...The diamond way which is westernized form of Kagyu...
FWIW, I have a fairly extensive history with DW and in all honesty, I have found that many of the public talks done at various centers are fairly low quality and from people who don't really know what they are saying. I have attended a talk, for example, where the person got the 4 noble truths wrong, and in general there's a lot of sort of 'internal' language used that is basically seemingly repeated without much understanding.

Take that as you will, FWIW.
Are you specifically talking about the Diamond Way centers here?

amanitamusc
Posts: 1639
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2010 3:32 am

Re: Brahman and Atman in Kagyu?

Post by amanitamusc » Mon Mar 18, 2019 10:42 pm

dudette wrote:
Mon Mar 18, 2019 12:52 pm
So I am Theravada Buddhists, and recently I went to meditation center for Tibetan Buddhists (The diamond way which is westernized form of Kagyu).
When I was in this meditation center, couple of guys started explaining the Tibetan form of Buddhism, and for some reason we went into this weird territory of Buddhism, and the language and philosophy was just a copy of Hinduism.

Don't misunderstand me, but in Theravada Buddhism, we have doctrine of anatman (there is no Atman); furthermore, we have doctrine of two truths which state that on one level we have this sensual world, but in deeper reality there is only emptiness because everything is continuously changing, and nothing is eternal or unchanging.

However, the claimed that in Tibetan Buddhism, the self/mind is eternal and non-changing (like in Hinduism, there is eternal atman); furthermore, they argue that according to Tibetan Buddhism there are two truths, but they are referring to the idea that on one level there is the sensual world, but in deeper reality there is the "universal self/mind which is everywhere and in everything" which is eternal and non-changing (like in Hinduism, there is eternal brahman). Furthermore, they continued that in order to achieve enlightenment the self/mind has to reunite with the universal self/mind (this concept is in Hinduism, the atman has to reunite or realize brahman).

What tha hell are they talking about? I have never heard this kind of ideology/philosophy in Buddhism (Theravada and Mahayana), but only in Hinduism.
They did not use the words atman or brahman, but they were using words such as "eternal and unchanging mind/self" and "eternal and unchanging universal mind/self which is everywhere and in everything".

Does anyone of you know what they are talking about? Is this actually Tibetan Buddhism?
Is it possible that they have misunderstood some concepts in Tibetan Buddhism? If so which concepts they have misunderstood, and what they were trying to refer to by saying "eternal and unchanging mind/self", "eternal and unchanging universal mind/self which is everywhere and in everything" and "in order to achieve enlightenment the self/mind has to reunite with the universal self/mind"?
Your questions have been answered and now you know Tibetan Buddhism is not eternalist and Hinduism is.
If you are interested in comparative religion this is the place to go https://dhammawheel.com/

User avatar
Astus
Former staff member
Posts: 7492
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 11:22 pm
Location: Budapest

Re: Brahman and Atman in Kagyu?

Post by Astus » Mon Mar 18, 2019 10:45 pm

smcj wrote:
Mon Mar 18, 2019 4:56 pm
Kongtrul obviously was making the point he wasn’t talking about a being’s mind—either sentient or enlightened.
The ground, primordial purity, is exactly the nature of mind. It's not an abstraction, or a separate entity.
Gompopa was writing before Dolpopa.
Gampopa's description is not different from Kongtrul's:
"Intrinsic awareness is devoid of substantiality and therefore indivisible from emptiness. Based on this indivisibility, the character comprises two pristine wisdoms: the pristine wisdom of the primordially pure nature, which is free of mentation, and the pristine wisdom of the spontaneous character, which is the original radiance glowing deep within."
(Myriad Worlds, p 207)
I am putting forward the idea of a transcendent or primordial (depending on how you want to talk about it) substratum.
Buddha-mind is not a substratum, only if it's incorrectly conceived as such, like grasping the wrong end of a snake.

"If you apprehend this basis of emptiness that is empty of both existence and nonexistence as something that is established by its essence separately [from everything else], no matter how you label it—such as an inconceivable self, Brahmā, Viṣṇu, Īśvara, or wisdom—except for the mere name, the meaning is the same."
(Mipham quoted by Brunnhölzl in 'In Praise of Dharmadhatu', p 105)

"Bhikkhus, you may well cling to that doctrine of self that would not arouse sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief, and despair in one who clings to it. But do you see any such doctrine of self, bhikkhus?”—“No, venerable sir.”—“Good, bhikkhus. I too do not see any doctrine of self that would not arouse sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief, and despair in one who clings to it."
(Alagaddūpama Sutta)

A recommended teaching on the topic is On Buddha Essence: A Commentary on Rangjung Dorje's Treatise by Khenchen Thrangu Rinpoche.
1 Myriad dharmas are only mind.
Mind is unobtainable.
What is there to seek?

2 If the Buddha-Nature is seen,
there will be no seeing of a nature in any thing.

3 Neither cultivation nor seated meditation —
this is the pure Chan of Tathagata.

4 With sudden enlightenment to Tathagata Chan,
the six paramitas and myriad means
are complete within that essence.


1 Huangbo, T2012Ap381c1 2 Nirvana Sutra, T374p521b3; tr. Yamamoto 3 Mazu, X1321p3b23; tr. J. Jia 4 Yongjia, T2014p395c14; tr. from "The Sword of Wisdom"

dudette
Posts: 11
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2019 12:28 pm

Re: Brahman and Atman in Kagyu?

Post by dudette » Mon Mar 18, 2019 11:32 pm

Tlalok wrote:
Mon Mar 18, 2019 9:06 pm
Seeker12 wrote:
Mon Mar 18, 2019 7:52 pm
dudette wrote:
Mon Mar 18, 2019 12:52 pm
...The diamond way which is westernized form of Kagyu...
FWIW, I have a fairly extensive history with DW and in all honesty, I have found that many of the public talks done at various centers are fairly low quality and from people who don't really know what they are saying. I have attended a talk, for example, where the person got the 4 noble truths wrong, and in general there's a lot of sort of 'internal' language used that is basically seemingly repeated without much understanding.

Take that as you will, FWIW.
Are you specifically talking about the Diamond Way centers here?
Yes and no since it was in the Diamond Way center where I first heard about Universal mind in Buddhism.
Additionally, "Universal mind" is actually written in their introductions to Diamond Way (which is Karma Kagyu).
Basically, I just want to know what they are referring to, so that I can find a book about it and read it
Johnny Dangerous wrote:
Mon Mar 18, 2019 7:52 pm
You could definitely spin that portion of Myriad Worlds as being shentong-ish. I love that book by the way, I found it one of the most profound things I've read in years.

It's another question as to whether or not Shentong is Advaita. I would argue that it is not, I'll repeat what I said in the last conversation on this topic: It's a big mistake to take fragments of Buddhism and say they are "the same" as another philosophy without putting them in their practice context, simply because they resemble one another on paper incidentally.
I agree; however, my question was about "what are they referring to?". As non-Tibetan, is it wrong to ask what they are referring to? Additionally, I think that it is not wrong to "take fragments of Buddhism and say they are "the same" as another philosophy" since Theravada and Mayahana are taught about emptiness and doctrine of anatman, and suddenly, I got statement like "Universal Mind is everywhere and in everything" by people who are not really into any philosophical debate, and most of them just read one book about Buddhism, and when you ask them, what they are referring to then they say that "we are just taught that in Buddhism there is universal mind which is logical because how else would you explain your existence". Secondly, if this is supposed to be something like "advance philosophical debate" within Tibetan Buddhism then how come people in Diamond Way who read like one introduction book about Buddhism talk about Universal Mind (Shentong) if it this is the standard for all Buddhism without even knowing the name of this view, and have no idea about doctrine of anatman and the fact that emptiness is the standard for Buddhism, and not Shentong?
Last edited by dudette on Mon Mar 18, 2019 11:49 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Grigoris
Former staff member
Posts: 20137
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 9:27 pm
Location: Greece

Re: Brahman and Atman in Kagyu?

Post by Grigoris » Mon Mar 18, 2019 11:48 pm

dudette wrote:
Mon Mar 18, 2019 11:32 pm
Yes and no since it is from the Diamond Way centers where I first heard about Universal mind in Buddhism.
Additionally, "Universal mind" is actually written their introductions to Diamond Way (which is Karma Kagyu).
Diamond Way is not mainstream Karma Kagyu. The teachers in many centers are not qualified teachers.
Basically, I just want to know what they are referring to, and so that I can find a book about it and read it.
That has been answered already in this discussion. I would recommend you read from the Tathagatagarbha Sutra collection: The Tahagatagarbha Sutra, the Mahaparinirvana Sutra, the Angulimaliya Sutra, the Lankavatara Sutra (my favorite), etc...
I agree; however, the question was about "what are they referring to?".
They are referring to the Tahagatagarbha, but they are miscomprehending it and reifying it.
...and suddenly, you get statement like "Universal Mind is everywhere and in everything" by people who are not really into any philosophical debate, and most of them read just one book about Buddhism, and when you ask them what they are referring to then they say that "we are just taught that in Buddhism there is universal mind which is logical because how else would you explain your existence".
Lots of confused people say all sorts of nonsense.
Secondly, if this is supposed to be something like "advance philosophical debate" within Tibetan Buddhism then how come people in Diamond Way who read like one introduction book about Buddhism talk about Universal Mind (Shentong) if it this is the standard for all Buddhism without even knowing the name of this ideology?
Because they are fools?
"My religion is not deceiving myself."
Jetsun Milarepa 1052-1135 CE

"Butchers, prostitutes, those guilty of the five most heinous crimes, outcasts, the underprivileged: all are utterly the substance of existence and nothing other than total bliss."
The Supreme Source - The Kunjed Gyalpo
The Fundamental Tantra of Dzogchen Semde

User avatar
Johnny Dangerous
Global Moderator
Posts: 9791
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 10:58 pm
Location: Olympia WA
Contact:

Re: Brahman and Atman in Kagyu?

Post by Johnny Dangerous » Tue Mar 19, 2019 12:05 am

dudette wrote:
Mon Mar 18, 2019 11:32 pm


I agree; however, my question was about "what are they referring to?". As non-Tibetan, is it wrong to ask what they are referring to? Additionally, I think that it is not wrong to "take fragments of Buddhism and say they are "the same" as another philosophy" since Theravada and Mayahana are taught about emptiness and doctrine of anatman, and suddenly, I got statement like "Universal Mind is everywhere and in everything" by people who are not really into any philosophical debate, and most of them just read one book about Buddhism, and when you ask them, what they are referring to then they say that "we are just taught that in Buddhism there is universal mind which is logical because how else would you explain your existence". Secondly, if this is supposed to be something like "advance philosophical debate" within Tibetan Buddhism then how come people in Diamond Way who read like one introduction book about Buddhism talk about Universal Mind (Shentong) if it this is the standard for all Buddhism without even knowing the name of this view, and have no idea about doctrine of anatman and the fact that emptiness is the standard for Buddhism, and not Shentong?

It sounds like they don't really know what they are talking about. On the other hand, it also sounds like you don't have much exposure to certain currents in Mahayana, and indeed there are such currents - Shentong in Tibetan traditions, and you can also find some East Asian Buddhism with a similar bent, though I have no idea what names to give you on that one, you can read some of the Tathagatagarbha sutras to get some idea of where people draw these ideas from. IIRC the "Atman-positive" one is the Mahayana Mahaparnirvana Sutra.

"Universal Mind" I am used to seeing in regards to Yogacara, where it does not mean what these people are saying it means.

Basically, it sounds like they are not very experienced, but it seems like you already know that.
His welcoming
& rebelling are scattered,
gone to their end,
do not exist.
Knowing the dustless, sorrowless state,
he discerns rightly,
has gone, beyond becoming,
to the Further Shore.

-Lokavipatti Sutta

User avatar
Wayfarer
Former staff member
Posts: 4849
Joined: Sun May 27, 2012 8:31 am
Location: Sydney AU

Re: Brahman and Atman in Kagyu?

Post by Wayfarer » Tue Mar 19, 2019 12:41 am

What the OP is referring to, I believe, comes out of the Tathagatagarbha (Buddha-Nature) sutras:

Śrīmālādevī Siṃhanāda Sūtra
Mahāyāna Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra
Aṅgulimālīya Sūtra
Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra

The Buddha Nature teachings are very different from what is found in the Pali agamas, but they're also not the same as Vedanta. The key difference with vedanta, is that Buddhism never posits something which never changes, whereas Vedanta posits an unchanging self or essence. Buddha Nature is the capacity for enlightenment, which is latent in all beings, but it is not an unchanging substance or substrate underlying everything. I think translating Buddha Nature as 'universal mind' is problematical, but then, in the Chinese Awakening of Faith in the Mahayana, the term 'Mind' has been used to translate 'heart' or 'cit' (discussed here), so again, the term is not without warrant. (Although 'Universal Mind' doesn't appear anywhere in the translation I'm reading.)

But another problem is that a lot of these ideas are absorbed and combined indiscriminately, without proper introduction or training on their meaning. From what I read in the OP, the Diamond Way folks misrepresent Buddha Nature in such a way that does indeed make it sound much more like the Hindu understanding than it is in reality. But understanding the differences is a deep topic. A useful starting-point might be the Wikipedia article on Buddha Nature which is pretty thorough.
'Only practice with no gaining idea' ~ Suzuki Roshi

smcj
Posts: 6392
Joined: Wed May 29, 2013 6:13 am

Re: Brahman and Atman in Kagyu?

Post by smcj » Tue Mar 19, 2019 2:25 am

Grigoris wrote:
Mon Mar 18, 2019 7:41 pm
smcj wrote:
Mon Mar 18, 2019 4:56 pm
For instance, HH Karmapa VIII said that since Buddha Nature was empty of anything other than purity, that meant that sentient beings were exactly what Buddha Nature was not. Therefore you could not say that sentient beings either were or had Buddha Nature.
That is going to need a quote or citation.
It took me a while, but I found it. "When Clouds Part" Brunnhölzl p.73:
The Karmapa (VIII) emphasizes that the Tathāgata heart is the only ultimately real entity, which is permanent and able to perform functions (such as enlightened activity). He also repeatedly says that the Tathāgata heart and sentient beings are mutually exclusive since sentient beings are nothing but the sum of adventitious stains. Thus, sentient beings neither possess nor are the Tathāgata heart. This also means that it is not the case that buddha nature exists in sentient beings, but sentient beings (seem to) exist in buddha nature, just like clouds floating in the sky without affecting it.
I personally think this is a fairly radical interpretation of Shentong. I'm not putting it forward as the current Karma Kagyu position. I originally mentioned it because I found it shocking. That being said, there's lots of different interpretations on Dhentong. So don't think all authors will agree with a given quote--unless it's Kongtrul and the lama is a Karma Kagyupa in the 20th-21st century.
This statement also means that sentient beings cannot achieve liberation.

Brunnholzl has his own take on this. "In Praise of Dharmadhatu" Brunnhölzl p.102:
However, as the Karmapa (VIII) extensively discussed, buddha nature is not just small core or space that is literally and only located "within" every sentient being. In fact, it is the other way round--our whole existence as sentient beings is in itself the sum of adventitious stains that just float like clouds within the infinite, bright sky of buddha nature, the luminous open expanse of our minds that has no limits or boundaries. Once these clouds dissolve due to the warm rays of the sun of wisdom shining within this day, nothing within sentient beings has been freed or improved, but there is just this radiant expanse without any reference points of cloud like sentient beings or cloud free Buddhas.
BTW the chapter heading for the above is "Is Buddha Nature an Eternal Soul or Shear Emptiness?" Given Brunnhölzl's position in the Karma Kagyu, and since this is the Kagyu subform, people reading this thread might find it interesting. On p.104:
...the contemporary Kagyu master Thrangu Rinpoche said that , if you do not practice these teachings on buddha nature, the mere view is just like the Samkhya position. Thus, from a practical point of view, no matter how sophisticated the terminological of philosophical distinctions with regard to the Buddha Heart may be formulated or conceived, for Buddhists, the whole point of these teachings is to personally connect with the experience and realization that they try to convey through the Buddhist path, that is, nothing less than discovering this Heart in themselves and become Buddhas.
And on a different note:
ibid, p.105:
According to the Gelugpa School, buddha nature means nothing but sentient beings' emptiness, which is held to be a non implicative negation in the sense of the sheer lack of real existence(Tib. bden grub). Like so many Gelugpa positions, this is an interesting concept and, fundamentally, there is no problem with it, except that it is simply not tenable on the basis of any indian text on buddha nature., nor through reasoning.
It would be nice if he had an editor to tone that down a little.
1. No traditional Buddhist sect, Tibetan or otherwise, considers deities to be fictional. (DW post/Seeker242)
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)
4. Shentong] is the completely pure system that, through mainly teaching the luminous aspect of the mind, holds that the fruitions--kayas and wisdoms--exist on their own accord. (Karmapa XIII)

User avatar
Astus
Former staff member
Posts: 7492
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 11:22 pm
Location: Budapest

Re: Brahman and Atman in Kagyu?

Post by Astus » Tue Mar 19, 2019 9:03 am

Wayfarer wrote:
Tue Mar 19, 2019 12:41 am
The Buddha Nature teachings are very different from what is found in the Pali agamas
Not that much actually. The main twist is that the manifestation of the buddha qualities is not a product of merit accumulation but of wisdom, and that is in contrast to the earlier view of Mahayana as well.
1 Myriad dharmas are only mind.
Mind is unobtainable.
What is there to seek?

2 If the Buddha-Nature is seen,
there will be no seeing of a nature in any thing.

3 Neither cultivation nor seated meditation —
this is the pure Chan of Tathagata.

4 With sudden enlightenment to Tathagata Chan,
the six paramitas and myriad means
are complete within that essence.


1 Huangbo, T2012Ap381c1 2 Nirvana Sutra, T374p521b3; tr. Yamamoto 3 Mazu, X1321p3b23; tr. J. Jia 4 Yongjia, T2014p395c14; tr. from "The Sword of Wisdom"

User avatar
Lingpupa
Posts: 328
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2011 10:13 am

Re: Brahman and Atman in Kagyu?

Post by Lingpupa » Tue Mar 19, 2019 10:13 am

PMed too
All the best
Alex Wilding
Stupa in the Snow blog at http://chagchen.org/

Seeker12
Posts: 260
Joined: Mon May 08, 2017 5:54 pm

Re: Brahman and Atman in Kagyu?

Post by Seeker12 » Tue Mar 19, 2019 5:06 pm

Tlalok wrote:
Mon Mar 18, 2019 9:06 pm
Seeker12 wrote:
Mon Mar 18, 2019 7:52 pm
dudette wrote:
Mon Mar 18, 2019 12:52 pm
...The diamond way which is westernized form of Kagyu...
FWIW, I have a fairly extensive history with DW and in all honesty, I have found that many of the public talks done at various centers are fairly low quality and from people who don't really know what they are saying. I have attended a talk, for example, where the person got the 4 noble truths wrong, and in general there's a lot of sort of 'internal' language used that is basically seemingly repeated without much understanding.

Take that as you will, FWIW.
Are you specifically talking about the Diamond Way centers here?
Yes.
Therein is nothing to remove
And thereto not the slightest thing to add.
The perfect truth viewed perfectly
And perfectly beheld is liberation.

Uttaratantra Shastra

User avatar
Grigoris
Former staff member
Posts: 20137
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 9:27 pm
Location: Greece

Re: Brahman and Atman in Kagyu?

Post by Grigoris » Tue Mar 19, 2019 6:04 pm

smcj wrote:
Tue Mar 19, 2019 2:25 am
Grigoris wrote:
Mon Mar 18, 2019 7:41 pm
smcj wrote:
Mon Mar 18, 2019 4:56 pm
For instance, HH Karmapa VIII said that since Buddha Nature was empty of anything other than purity, that meant that sentient beings were exactly what Buddha Nature was not. Therefore you could not say that sentient beings either were or had Buddha Nature.
That is going to need a quote or citation.
It took me a while, but I found it. "When Clouds Part" Brunnhölzl p.73:
The Karmapa (VIII) emphasizes that the Tathāgata heart is the only ultimately real entity, which is permanent and able to perform functions (such as enlightened activity). He also repeatedly says that the Tathāgata heart and sentient beings are mutually exclusive since sentient beings are nothing but the sum of adventitious stains. Thus, sentient beings neither possess nor are the Tathāgata heart. This also means that it is not the case that buddha nature exists in sentient beings, but sentient beings (seem to) exist in buddha nature, just like clouds floating in the sky without affecting it.
I personally think this is a fairly radical interpretation of Shentong. I'm not putting it forward as the current Karma Kagyu position. I originally mentioned it because I found it shocking. That being said, there's lots of different interpretations on Dhentong. So don't think all authors will agree with a given quote--unless it's Kongtrul and the lama is a Karma Kagyupa in the 20th-21st century.
This statement also means that sentient beings cannot achieve liberation.

Brunnholzl has his own take on this. "In Praise of Dharmadhatu" Brunnhölzl p.102:
However, as the Karmapa (VIII) extensively discussed, buddha nature is not just small core or space that is literally and only located "within" every sentient being. In fact, it is the other way round--our whole existence as sentient beings is in itself the sum of adventitious stains that just float like clouds within the infinite, bright sky of buddha nature, the luminous open expanse of our minds that has no limits or boundaries. Once these clouds dissolve due to the warm rays of the sun of wisdom shining within this day, nothing within sentient beings has been freed or improved, but there is just this radiant expanse without any reference points of cloud like sentient beings or cloud free Buddhas.
BTW the chapter heading for the above is "Is Buddha Nature an Eternal Soul or Shear Emptiness?" Given Brunnhölzl's position in the Karma Kagyu, and since this is the Kagyu subform, people reading this thread might find it interesting. On p.104:
...the contemporary Kagyu master Thrangu Rinpoche said that , if you do not practice these teachings on buddha nature, the mere view is just like the Samkhya position. Thus, from a practical point of view, no matter how sophisticated the terminological of philosophical distinctions with regard to the Buddha Heart may be formulated or conceived, for Buddhists, the whole point of these teachings is to personally connect with the experience and realization that they try to convey through the Buddhist path, that is, nothing less than discovering this Heart in themselves and become Buddhas.
And on a different note:
ibid, p.105:
According to the Gelugpa School, buddha nature means nothing but sentient beings' emptiness, which is held to be a non implicative negation in the sense of the sheer lack of real existence(Tib. bden grub). Like so many Gelugpa positions, this is an interesting concept and, fundamentally, there is no problem with it, except that it is simply not tenable on the basis of any indian text on buddha nature., nor through reasoning.
It would be nice if he had an editor to tone that down a little.
I think you will find that this is a minority position in the Kagyu.
Anyway, Brunnholz contradicts himself claiming that Buddha Nature is something we are "soaking" in, yet seperate to us and at the same time it is something that exists within us, that is is our "Heart" (sic). It sounds a lot like the concept of non-dualistic MahaBrahma, or Atman.

It also falls into the third extreme as outlined by Madhyamaka: both inside and outside.
"My religion is not deceiving myself."
Jetsun Milarepa 1052-1135 CE

"Butchers, prostitutes, those guilty of the five most heinous crimes, outcasts, the underprivileged: all are utterly the substance of existence and nothing other than total bliss."
The Supreme Source - The Kunjed Gyalpo
The Fundamental Tantra of Dzogchen Semde

smcj
Posts: 6392
Joined: Wed May 29, 2013 6:13 am

Re: Brahman and Atman in Kagyu?

Post by smcj » Tue Mar 19, 2019 6:23 pm

I think you will find that this is a minority position in the Kagyu.
A minority position within all the Kagyu schools? Probably. I'm only familiar with the Karma Kagyu. I think that's what Brunnhölzl specializes in also.

But specifically within the Orgyen Tinley branch of the Karma Kagyu, Thrangu R.'s opinions are pretty authoritative. In fact I do not think there is anybody else who is even his peer.

Interestingly, Khenpo Tsultrim's forced admission by Malcolm of more or less the same issue had the same conclusion. He said that even though it was effectively the same view as Advaita Vedanta, it basically works for us and doesn't work for them. So the two most senior khenpos agreed.
viewtopic.php?f=48&t=8318&p=102251&hili ... eg#p102251
Anyway, Brunnholz contradicts himself claiming that Buddha Nature is something we are "soaking" in, yet seperate to us and at the same time it is something that exists within us, that is is our "Heart" (sic). It sounds a lot like the concept of non-dualistic MahaBrahma, or Atman.
Yes. I think that was the point he was trying to make.
It also falls into the third extreme as outlined by Madhyamaka: both inside and outside.
Khenpo Tsultrim addresses this in his "Progressive Meditation on the Stages of Emptiness". His reply to this is that since Buddha Nature can never be taken as an object of consciousness it is not subject to Madhyamaka deconstruction. Those tools simply does not apply.
1. No traditional Buddhist sect, Tibetan or otherwise, considers deities to be fictional. (DW post/Seeker242)
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)
4. Shentong] is the completely pure system that, through mainly teaching the luminous aspect of the mind, holds that the fruitions--kayas and wisdoms--exist on their own accord. (Karmapa XIII)

User avatar
Johnny Dangerous
Global Moderator
Posts: 9791
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 10:58 pm
Location: Olympia WA
Contact:

Re: Brahman and Atman in Kagyu?

Post by Johnny Dangerous » Tue Mar 19, 2019 6:49 pm

This statement also means that sentient beings cannot achieve liberation.
I'm not sure about that. What it means is that once sentient beings achieve liberation, they are no longer sentient beings, which to me is sensible.
His welcoming
& rebelling are scattered,
gone to their end,
do not exist.
Knowing the dustless, sorrowless state,
he discerns rightly,
has gone, beyond becoming,
to the Further Shore.

-Lokavipatti Sutta

smcj
Posts: 6392
Joined: Wed May 29, 2013 6:13 am

Re: Brahman and Atman in Kagyu?

Post by smcj » Tue Mar 19, 2019 7:38 pm

Johnny Dangerous wrote:
Tue Mar 19, 2019 6:49 pm
This statement also means that sentient beings cannot achieve liberation.
I'm not sure about that. What it means is that once sentient beings achieve liberation, they are no longer sentient beings, which to me is sensible.
My thought on this relates back to the Shravakayana idea of Nirvana. They think Nirvana is oblivion, nothingness. The analogy is a candle going out. Nothing happens next. The ego just stops.

In Brunnhölzl's analogy the ego also just stops. But instead of nothingness there's the primordial pure base of everything shines through where the sentient being had been.

I haven't had this confirmed that this is what Brunnhölzl meant, but it's my interpretation of what he wrote as of this posting. If someone else has a different interpretation I'd be glad to hear it.
1. No traditional Buddhist sect, Tibetan or otherwise, considers deities to be fictional. (DW post/Seeker242)
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)
4. Shentong] is the completely pure system that, through mainly teaching the luminous aspect of the mind, holds that the fruitions--kayas and wisdoms--exist on their own accord. (Karmapa XIII)

yagmort
Posts: 124
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2017 2:18 pm

Re: Brahman and Atman in Kagyu?

Post by yagmort » Tue Mar 19, 2019 7:54 pm

smcj wrote:
Tue Mar 19, 2019 7:38 pm
...In Brunnhölzl's analogy the ego also just stops. But instead of nothingness there's the primordial pure base of everything shines through where the sentient being had been...
some tibetan yogi wrote:...because i no longer am, i am everybody, i am everything...

smcj
Posts: 6392
Joined: Wed May 29, 2013 6:13 am

Re: Brahman and Atman in Kagyu?

Post by smcj » Tue Mar 19, 2019 8:09 pm

yagmort wrote:
Tue Mar 19, 2019 7:54 pm
smcj wrote:
Tue Mar 19, 2019 7:38 pm
...In Brunnhölzl's analogy the ego also just stops. But instead of nothingness there's the primordial pure base of everything shines through where the sentient being had been...
some tibetan yogi wrote:...because i no longer am, i am everybody, i am everything...
Last year in NYC HHK 17(O.T.) gave a talk. I forget most of what he said except the last two sentences. He said, and I think this is an exact quote,
HHK 17 wrote:"The problem isn't "ignorance". The problem is the mind you have right now."
I'm not going to say that he is supporting anything else said in this thread. It just seemed like a good time to share that quote.
1. No traditional Buddhist sect, Tibetan or otherwise, considers deities to be fictional. (DW post/Seeker242)
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)
4. Shentong] is the completely pure system that, through mainly teaching the luminous aspect of the mind, holds that the fruitions--kayas and wisdoms--exist on their own accord. (Karmapa XIII)

User avatar
Wayfarer
Former staff member
Posts: 4849
Joined: Sun May 27, 2012 8:31 am
Location: Sydney AU

Re: Brahman and Atman in Kagyu?

Post by Wayfarer » Tue Mar 19, 2019 9:28 pm

The Buddha was always very reticent about describing Nirvāṇa in positive terms, in case it lead to speculation based on ignorance. It is just that speculative activity (prapanca) which is one of the main hindrances. So - best to say nothing! But nothing doesn’t mean nothing.
'Only practice with no gaining idea' ~ Suzuki Roshi

haha
Posts: 339
Joined: Thu May 23, 2013 3:30 pm

Re: Brahman and Atman in Kagyu?

Post by haha » Tue Mar 19, 2019 9:38 pm

There are many ways to say what Nirvana is.
Of many sorts is the nirvana set forth in this teaching. For instance, those who have attained the peaked [aid to penetration] have a full nirvana [i.e., freedom] from their wholesome root ever being severed; those who have attained the forbearance have a full nirvana from bad states of rebirth; those who have attained a concentration have a full nirvana from its branches; the Streamenterer has a full nirvana from an eighth existence, [i.e., will become an Arhat in, at the latest, seven lifetimes]; the Oncereturner has a full nirvana from a second existence here [in the Desire Realm]; the Nonreturner has a full nirvana from the Desire Realm; and the Arhat has nirvana with remainder, and without remainder. You should know, on the authority of the Lotus Sutra (Sad-dharma-pundarika Sutra), that here the intended nirvana is the Listener's nirvana spoken about in reference to Maha-bodhisattvas such as Sariputra. It is based on the consideration that for as long as it lasts it prevents the welfare of beings. So it says "Just that would be his full nirvana, because it would prevent work for all living beings."

From Abhisamayalamkara With Vrtti Aloka of Vimuktisena and Haribhadra
For another point, I doubt that any Tibetan scholars in past had ever read or analyzed the composition of Sankaracharya’s immediate and later prominent disciples to know or distinguish their views. It is hard to find even in the modern time.

Rangtong & Shentong Views by Khempo brothers and Two Views of Emptiness Shentong and Rangtong by Thrangu Rinpoche. These two books have given me some different understanding then what I have been hearing here. They are inseparable even in Vajrayana practice the way I understood or I have completely misunderstood. :(

Post Reply

Return to “Kagyu”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 22 guests