The Course in Buddhist Reasoning and Debate

[Tibetan_Ice]

Further, here is the text that indicates that the basic nature is not covered by obscurations in the central channel. Also, note the reference to the alaya also in this text.. From The Main Dzogchen Practices - Lopon Tenzin Namdak

 

[asunthatneversets]

We'll thank you for the warning about the alaya. I've seen that warning in many books, even Alan Wallace talks about it, as does tulku Urgyen. The thing to keep in mind is to always be aware that you are aware, or, maintain a sense of knowing.

 

As for the topic of space, here is what I am talking about. Note: in Bon the basis is called the kunzhi, not the gzhi as CN Norbu's translators refer to it.

 

image.jpg

 

image.jpg

 

image.jpg

 

image.jpg

 

image.jpg

The term 'gzhi' is a Nyingma man ngag sde term, not something that Norbu Rinpoche's translators fabricated.

 

The man ngag sde tantras implement a dual basis model, the primordial basis [ye gzhi] (or simply 'gzhi') and then the afflicted basis, called the 'all-basis' [kun gzhi], which is the polluted foundation of ignorance that samsara arises from (technically both samsara and nirvana).

 

The fact that certain Bönpo lamas have chosen to refer to the primordial basis as 'kunzhi' is no doubt confusing for some.

[asunthatneversets]

Further, here is the text that indicates that the basic nature is not covered by obscurations in the central channel. Also, note the reference to the alaya also in this text.. From The Main Dzogchen Practices - Lopon Tenzin Namdak

 

image.jpg

The basis is obscured for sentient beings, that is why they transmigrate in cyclic existence.

 

Lopön Rinpoche is referencing the kun gzhi rnam shes when he says 'ālaya', which means he's actually discussing the ālayavijñāna.

[asunthatneversets]

Either way though, you and Lopön Rinpoche are discussing two completely different things.

[asunthatneversets]

Also, when Lopön Rinpoche is discussing 'space' he is referencing 'dbyings'. The inner and outer dbyings or dimensions. Which is a different use of 'space' when compared to Longchenpa stating that space is a metaphor for awakened mind.

[Tibetan_Ice]

The term 'gzhi' is a Nyingma man ngag sde term, not something that Norbu Rinpoche's translators fabricated.

 

The man ngag sde tantras implement a dual basis model, the primordial basis [ye gzhi] (or simply 'gzhi') and then the afflicted basis, called the 'all-basis' [kun gzhi], which is the polluted foundation of ignorance that samsara arises from (technically both samsara and nirvana).

 

The fact that certain Bönpo lamas have chosen to refer to the primordial basis as 'kunzhi' is no doubt confusing for some.

Yes it is confusing... Here, the kunzhi is the non personal basis and the gzhi is the personal one:

 

 

According to the Dzogchen teaching, the essence (ngo bo) of the base of everything (kun gzhi) is empty (ston pa nyid) and primordially pure (ka dag); the nature (rang bzhin) of the base is clarity (gsal ba) that is spontaneously perfected (Ihun sgrub); the inseparable union (dbyer med) of the primordially pure essence and the spontaneously perfected nature is the unobstructed (ma 'gag pa) flow of energy or compassion (thugs rje).

 

In the individual mind, this base is the natural state (gzhi) and is the source of samsara for the deluded mind (ma rig pa) and of nirvana for the mind in which knowledge (rig pa) is awakened.

 

The essence of the kunzhi, or base, is called the mother (ma), awakened awareness (rig pa) is called the son (bu), and the inseparability (dbyer med) of mother and son is the flow of energy (rtsal). The path (lam) consists of gaining insight into the view (Ita ba) of Dzogchen, which is knowledge of the true condition of the base of the individual, and making the flow of rigpa, cultivated through meditation, continuous in the post-meditation period so that it can be integrated in our behavior or attitude and activities in everyday life.

 

From : Wonders of the Natural Mind: The Essence of Dzogchen in the Native Bon Tradition of Tibet by Tenzin Wangyal

 

Have you ever read: Stilling the Mind: Shamatha Teachings from Dudjom Lingpa's Vajra Essence by B. Alan Wallace ?

 

He explains the alaya and the alayavijnana as the substrate and the substrate consciousness, and both are personal. Not primordial or mother or the main goal.

 

Edited May 25, 2014 by Tibetan_Ice

[asunthatneversets]

 

Yes it is confusing... Here, the kunzhi is the non personal basis and the gzhi is the personal one:

Both the gzhi and kun gzhi are personal bases. Dzogchen doesn't posit a transpersonal basis. A view like that (which upholds a transpersonal basis) would be more along the lines of Vedanta or a tradition of that type.

 

'Kun gzhi' is the 'all-basis' or 'the basis of all' i.e. 'basis of everything' because 'everything' meaning: conditioned phenomena which accord with the extremes of existence or non-existence, result from ignorance. In Dzogchen, the all-basis [kun gzhi] is synonymous with ignorance. When the definitive nature is recognized, it is directly apperceived that nothing has ever arisen at any time, and that so-called conditioned phenomena have been non-arisen since beginningless time. Which means that the 'all' or 'everything' that the all-basis [kun gzhi] is the basis of, is deluded fabrication, and the all-basis is itself delusion. The all-basis [kun gzhi] collapses upon recognition of the basis [gzhi].

 

So the all-basis is not a transpersonal basis of everything. The basis of everything simply means it is the afflicted basis of delusion which is ignorant of its state and therefore conceives of 'things'.

 

From : Wonders of the Natural Mind: The Essence of Dzogchen in the Native Bon Tradition of Tibet by Tenzin Wangyal

 

Have you ever read: Stilling the Mind: Shamatha Teachings from Dudjom Lingpa's Vajra Essence by B. Alan Wallace ?

 

He explains the alaya and the alayavijnana as the substrate and the substrate consciousness, and both are personal. Not primordial or mother or the main goal.

 

The primordial basis is also personal. Your basis isn't my basis, nor is mine yours. Otherwise when you achieve realization I would as well, and vice versa... but that of course isn't the case. Dzogchen doesn't uphold a transpersonal basis, only tīrthika views posit a nature like that.

[Tibetan_Ice]

 

Have you ever read: Stilling the Mind: Shamatha Teachings from Dudjom Lingpa's Vajra Essence by B. Alan Wallace ?

[asunthatneversets]

Have you ever read: Stilling the Mind: Shamatha Teachings from Dudjom Lingpa's Vajra Essence by B. Alan Wallace ?

Yes I have. Wallace also makes a hard distinction between the kun gzhi [ālaya] and primordial wisdom. Which is to be expected being that the book is based off the teachings of Dudjom Lingpa.

[Anderson]

 

Yes I have. Wallace also makes a hard distinction between the kun gzhi [ālaya] and primordial wisdom. Which is to be expected being that the book is based off the teachings of Dudjom Lingpa.

 

Can you explain why these distinctions between alaya and the basis never feature in the teachings of CNNr ?

I have never heard him explaining or warning his students about the danger of resting in alaya instead of that clarity he talks about whenever he introduces dzogchen .

[asunthatneversets]

 

Can you explain why these distinctions between alaya and the basis never feature in the teachings of CNNr ?

I have never heard him explaining or warning his students about the danger of resting in alaya instead of that clarity he talks about whenever he introduces dzogchen .

Norbu Rinpoche makes the distinction but doesn't use the term ālaya or kun gzhi. He simply uses ignorance [ma rig pa], which is equivalent to the ālaya. And I have of course heard him warn against taking delusion as a foundation for the path.

 

One of the foremost reasons the ālaya [tib. kun gzhi] isn't universally mentioned in every aspect of Atiyoga is because the dual basis model is generally only found in the context of man ngag sde class of teachings. Due to the fact the man ngag sde practices which focus on the lhun grub aspect of our nature are by default working with the appearances of the basis [gzhi snang], a concept which is a later formulation not featured in earlier Dzogchen texts.

 

The two base model allows for an explanation as to how deluded appearances result from non-recognition of the basis [gzhi], but are not themselves appearances of the basis [gzhi]. The appearances of the basis act as a cause for deluded appearances, but because the basis is originally pure, delusion never occurs in the basis and therefore afflictive appearances cannot arise from the basis itself ('deluded appearances' are the myriad expressions of conventional reality, such as persons, places, things, etc).

[Anderson]

Norbu Rinpoche makes the distinction but doesn't use the term ālaya or kun gzhi. He simply uses ignorance [ma rig pa], which is equivalent to the ālaya. And I have of course heard him warn against taking delusion as a foundation for the path.

 

One of the foremost reasons the ālaya [tib. kun gzhi] isn't universally mentioned in every aspect of Atiyoga is because the dual basis model is generally only found in the context of man ngag sde class of teachings. Due to the fact the man ngag sde practices which focus on the lhun grub aspect of our nature are by default working with the appearances of the basis [gzhi snang], a concept which is a later formulation not featured in earlier Dzogchen texts.

 

The two base model allows for an explanation as to how deluded appearances result from non-recognition of the basis [gzhi], but are not themselves appearances of the basis [gzhi]. The appearances of the basis act as a cause for deluded appearances, but because the basis is originally pure, delusion never occurs in the basis and therefore afflictive appearances cannot arise from the basis itself ('deluded appearances' are the myriad expressions of conventional reality, such as persons, places, things, etc).

 

Yeah, but when people talk about resting in alaya they refer to a particular type of experiential ignorance which is a neutral , blank fuzzy state which usually arises during practice, formal , intentional practice as opposed to the usual and constant mode of ignorance humans habitually engage in throughout their day and night activities.

 

Personally i have never heard CNNr warn people about the danger of resting in alaya in the context of the intentional formal practice of Ati Guru Yoga or when he introduces the state of contemplation via Ati guru Yoga.

 

Can you tell us what are appearances of the basis specifically ?

1.What are they when you type this message on your keyboard?

2.What exactly are they when you talk to your friends ?

3.What exactly are they when you eat an apple?

[asunthatneversets]

 

Yeah, but when people talk about resting in alaya they refer to a particular type of experiential ignorance which is a neutral , blank fuzzy state which usually arises during practice, formal , intentional practice as opposed to the usual and constant mode of ignorance humans habitually engage in throughout their day and night activities.

 

Personally i have never heard CNNr warn people about the danger of resting in alaya in the context of the intentional formal practice of Ati Guru Yoga or when he introduces the state of contemplation via Ati guru Yoga.

Rinpoche just warned against it the other night. He referenced attachment to formless states and discussed how it is cause for rebirth as a deva.

 

The ālaya isn't only a neutral blank fuzzy state, it is the totality of your relative condition. You either rest in the ālaya or in dharmakāya [ignorance or wisdom]. So the ālaya is the foundation for every relative state, and it collapses when the basis is recognized.

[Anderson]

Rinpoche just warned against it the other night. He referenced attachment to formless states and discussed how it is cause for rebirth as a deva. The ālaya isn't only a neutral blank fuzzy state, it is the totality of your relative condition. You either rest in the ālaya or in dharmakāya [ignorance or wisdom]. So the ālaya is the foundation for every relative state, and it collapses when the basis is recognized.

 

Can you answer the questions please?

 

[asunthatneversets]

Can you tell us what are appearances of the basis specifically ?

1.What are they when you type this message on your keyboard?

2.What exactly are they when you talk to your friends ?

3.What exactly are they when you eat an apple?

 

In every case, the appearances of the basis [gzhi] are only known from the standpoint of vidyā. From the standpoint of avidyā [ma rig pa], the appearances of the basis are filtered through the veil of delusion and are thus perceived as conditioned conventional phenomena.

 

Since keyboards, friends and apples are conventional phenomena they are objects of deluded cognition and are therefore not appearances of the basis, but are the all-basis [skt. ālaya, tib. kun gzhi].

 

In the event that the true nature of conditioned phenomena is recognized, and that phenomena is directly cognized to be non-arisen, then that is knowledge [skt. vidyā, tib. rig pa] of the basis, whereby the basis immediately becomes the path.

[Tibetan_Ice]

From Stilling The Mind -Alan Wallace:

 

 

You then slip into the vacuity of the substrate, in which self, others, and objects disappear. Ive chosen the word vacuity rather than emptiness because this shouldnt be mistaken for the realization that all phenomena lack inherent nature. Its just empty, vacuous. There is nothing in it. The substrate is the alaya; substrate consciousness is the alayavijñana. When you slip into the substrate consciousness, what youre attending to, experiencing, whats appearing to your mind, to your substrate consciousness, is the substrate, the alaya. The alaya is a vacuity in which self, others, and objects disappear. There are no appearances except for an occasional bubble. The substrate, the alaya, is luminous, but empty.

 

Space of awareness, as weve seen, is the translation for the Sanskrit word dhatu. In this context, the space of awareness, or dhatu, is none other than the substrate. Thats the sheer vacuity to which you are attending; thats the space of the mind that is empty. Dhatu is certainly a tricky term, having different meanings in different contexts. For example, dhatu is often a contraction of dharmadhatu, which I translate as the absolute space of phenomena. In the context of Dzogchen, dharmadhatu refers to the ultimate groundthe ground of all of samsara and nirvana, which is nondual from primordial consciousness. If there are multiple possible universes, plus nirvana, conventional reality, ultimate reality, the whole shebangrigpa is the ground of the whole, which is nondual from the absolute space of phenomena, dharmadhatu. It is not just the ground from which the whole arises. Its the ground that is the one taste of them all, of samsara and nirvana.

 

That is definitely not true of the substrate. The substrate is not the ground of nirvana. It is the ground of samsara, your own particular samsara. You can get to that space by withdrawing from the senses and from conceptualizationby simplifying and going into the cubbyhole of your substrate. Although that is not rigpa, Düdjom Lingpa says this experience of bliss, luminosity, and vacuity is indispensable on the path. We can postpone the achievement of shamatha as long as we like, while venturing into far more esoteric meditations. But if we want to come to the culmination of the cultivation of bodhichitta, vipashyana, the stages of generation and completion, and Dzogchen, sooner or later we need to focus single-pointedly on shamatha practice and carry through with it until our minds dissolve into the substrate consciousness as Düdjom Lingpa describes. This may take months or even years of full-time shamatha practice, and that calls for real sacrifice. But if we refuse to take up this challenge, all the other more advanced practices we explore are bound to hit a ceiling that we cannot transcend due to the imbalances of excitation and laxity that we have yet to overcome.

[rex]

Apples, friends and computers are karmic vision, most likely the karmic vision of a human being.

[Anderson]

In the event that the true nature of conditioned phenomena is recognized, and that phenomena is directly cognized to be non-arisen, then that is knowledge [skt. vidyā, tib. rig pa] of the basis, whereby the basis immediately becomes the path.

 

Is that what a practitioner of Ati guru yoga as taught by CNNr will experience ?

In other words will they , while resting in contemplation , experience the display in front as being empty like a rainbow, transparent and insubstantial ?

[Tibetan_Ice]

Dissolving into the substrate:

Having you ever gazed at an object and fixed your attention on the visual field? Have you ever noticed that when you fixed your attention on one area, that objects or parts of the visual field start to disappear? The principle is the same. If you fix your attention and hold it steady at one location, say the center of your head where sub vocalized thoughts appear, display themselves and then disappear, you are gradually dissolving your coarse and subtle mind into the substrate. If you persist, you will find yourself in a huge open space with not much of anything in it. This is the alaya. It appears as a huge space and everything has vanished. You can still make out a very subtle light in that space and the fact that there is a luminous kind of bliss and silence in there, and the mind wants to make you believe there are probably stars way way off in the distance, when reflecting on the experience after. This is the alaya.

It is actually kind of boring if you hit that state and remain there for a few days or weeks.

 

That is the alaya. You can hit that state by pushing your awareness out of the top of your head (took me 3 hours during one meditation 25 years ago to learn that). You have to overcome the feeling that you are dying, though. You can also hit that state during kriya breathing practices, or spontaneously after some very deep meditations. You can also hit that state during shocking episodes, like motorcycle accidents, or by very loud noises heard during meditation before the senses have shut off.

 

This is the alaya. But, and that is a big but, that is not the end. As Dudjom Lingpa and many others say, you have to get through that state, you have to go through the mind to realize mother rigpa, pristine awareness, or whatever you want to call it. I don't know if that last statement is entirely correct, because you can experience mother rigpa through the heart alone, but then, perhaps my many experiences with the alaya opened up and precipitated the opening of the heart...?

 

Mother rigpa, or pristine awareness:

You see all the regular objects in the visual field but they look transparent, like a shiny 3D hologram. You can see right through walls and chairs. You can see great distances. The objects' colors are brighter and much more luminescent. You can also see other layers or planes superimposed over and above the familiar scenery. You see what appears to be a ground level floating in the sky and there are what appears to be human forms standing on that level. It appears to be endless, many planes, many beings, and the colors in those planes look different from 'normal' colors. You also have the distinct knowledge that these beings can see you or the earth plane very easily.

 

The episodes of Mother rigpa have been precipitated by extensive work in the central channel, and dare I say 'kundalini'. However, some episodes have been precipitated by projecting love out from the heart. It is like the heart contains a very powerful light that strips away the illusion of solidity of objects. I also must confess, there is not much bliss in this state for me at this time, I was more terrified than anything else and I resented the fact that we do not have any privacy whatsoever. I guess I still have many obstructions to clear away.

 

My main point is this: the alaya is vast wide open space with not much of anything in it whereas mother rigpa is like looking at everything you normally see which has suddenly become transparent as well as looking at other planes and beings/landscapes/phenomenon superimposed over top of 'normal' reality. There is quite a difference between the two.

 

This is my explanation based on my experiences and learning. I don't care if I have used the same terminology or exact words as other teachings or teachers. If you have had the same experiences as I have, then you'd know what I was talking about.

 

I write this in hopes of helping others map out the differing components of meditational practice.

 

 

And on an aside, the whole point is not to still the mind so that there are no thoughts, the point is to still the awareness that is watching regardless of whether or not there are any thoughts. Hold it fixed and stable at first with effort and gradually train it to become effortless until the whole structure collapses. That is where the fun is.

Edited May 29, 2014 by Tibetan_Ice

[asunthatneversets]

 

Is that what a practitioner of Ati guru yoga as taught by CNNr will experience ?

In other words will they , while resting in contemplation , experience the display in front as being empty like a rainbow, transparent and insubstantial ?

Experiencing the display of appearances as illusory is one possibility. Doesn't mean phenomena will consistently appear in that way though. Only higher bhūmi bodhisattva's consistently experience phenomena in their natural condition.

[asunthatneversets]

Mother rigpa, or pristine awareness:

You see all the regular objects in the visual field but they look transparent, like a shiny 3D hologram. You can see right through walls and chairs. You can see great distances. The objects' colors are brighter and much more luminescent. You can also see other layers or planes superimposed over and above the familiar scenery. You see what appears to be a ground level floating in the sky and there are what appears to be human forms standing on that level. It appears to be endless, many planes, many beings, and the colors in those planes look different from 'normal' colors. You also have the distinct knowledge that these beings can see you or the earth plane very easily.

These are possible manifestations of clarity and are no doubt profound experiences but they are not necessarily indicative of the definitive rigpa, in the sense that the definitive rigpa cannot be said to be precisely those experiences.

 

Otherwise people will read that and identify rigpa with seeing through walls and so on and will instead be grasping at clarity and hoping for nyams such as the ones you mentioned.

 

I mean that in the sense that someone may be resting in rigpa yet may not be seeing through walls etc., so rigpa does not necessarily entail such experiences. There can be many types of experiences due to the fact that we all have different capacities and constitutions, so they are in no way uniform.

 

Certain people may be prone to seeing lights and colors etc., while the next individual may be prone to other types of nyams, neither is right or wrong, nor superior or inferior.

[Anderson]

Experiencing the display of appearances as illusory is one possibility. Doesn't mean phenomena will consistently appear in that way though. Only higher bhūmi bodhisattva's consistently experience phenomena in their natural condition.

 

Personally, experientially speaking, the display becomes more vivid, intens, radiant and real.

But probably this means that the energy of the basis becomes more evident and integration starts happening.

[xabir2005]

Personally, experientially speaking, the display becomes more vivid, intens, radiant and real.

But probably this means that the energy of the basis becomes more evident and integration starts happening.

Intensity of luminosity does not mean that everything is real (as in truly existing).

 

Something Thusness wrote:

 

John Tan Haha Jackson, u never give up.

 

This heart is the "space" of where, the "time" of when and the "I" of who.

 

In hearing, it's that "sound".

 

In seeing, it's that "scenery".

 

In thinking, it is that "eureka"!

 

In snapping a finger, it is seizing the whole entire moment of that instantaneous "snapping".

 

Just marvelous such as it is on the fly.

 

So no "it" but thoroughly empty.

 

To u this "heart" is most real, to dzogchen it is illusory. Though illusory, it is fully vivid and brilliance. Since it is illusory, it nvr really truly arise. There is genuine "treasure" in the illusory.

 

I think Kyle has a lot points to share. Do unblock him.

 

Nice chat And happy journey jax!

 

Gone!

December 12, 2013 at 8:24am · Unlike · 10

[Anderson]

Intensity of luminosity does not mean that everything is real (as in truly existing).

 

Something Thusness wrote:

 

John Tan Haha Jackson, u never give up.

 

This heart is the "space" of where, the "time" of when and the "I" of who.

 

In hearing, it's that "sound".

 

In seeing, it's that "scenery".

 

In thinking, it is that "eureka"!

 

In snapping a finger, it is seizing the whole entire moment of that instantaneous "snapping".

 

Just marvelous such as it is on the fly.

 

So no "it" but thoroughly empty.

 

To u this "heart" is most real, to dzogchen it is illusory. Though illusory, it is fully vivid and brilliance. Since it is illusory, it nvr really truly arise. There is genuine "treasure" in the illusory.

 

I think Kyle has a lot points to share. Do unblock him.

 

Nice chat And happy journey jax!

 

Gone!

December 12, 2013 at 8:24am · Unlike · 10

 

 

The question is how can one arrive at illusoriness from the mere experience of vibrancy, radiance,vividness , experiences which usually arise as a result of resting more and more into one's nature.

I am asking this since illusoriness is not apparent , is not something one can experience as a matter of course while in the middle of those experiences mentioned above which usually give rather a sense that the display is more concrete and real instead of being more empty or illusory .

​Also illusoriness it seems to me is more related to knowledge and understanding unlike these experiences which arise as byproducts of resting into nature.

[steve]

The question is how can one arrive at illusoriness from the mere experience of vibrancy, radiance,vividness , experiences which usually arise as a result of resting more and more into one's nature.

I am asking this since illusoriness is not apparent , is not something one can experience as a matter of course while in the middle of those experiences mentioned above which usually give rather a sense that the display is more concrete and real instead of being more empty or illusory .

​Also illusoriness it seems to me is more related to knowledge and understanding unlike these experiences which arise as byproducts of resting into nature.

 

Two approaches immediately come to mind -

1. A thorough study and understanding of emptiness, which is the approach Mipham advocates in his Beacon of Certainty

2. Tögal, which must be rooted in a stable practice of trekchö