Jamgon Mipam: His Life and Teachings

Thusness has recently been very drawn into Jamgon Mipham Rinpoche's teachings, he finds it the most resonating and similar (to his understanding, insights and experiences) among all Tibetan teachers he have read so far.

Thusness and I think the following is a very good book, the presentation is clear and simple to understand and summarizes some of the essential Mipham's teachings. Very highly recommended!

http://www.amazon.com/Jamgon-Mipam-His-…/…/ref=sr_1_3_twi_2…



Jamgön Mipam (1846–1912) is one of the most extraordinary figures in the history of Tibet. Monk, mystic, and brilliant philosopher, he shaped the trajectory of Tibetan Buddhism’s Nyingma school.  This introduction provides a most concise entrée to this great luminary’s life and work. The first section gives a general context for understanding this remarkable individual who, though he spent the greater part of his life in solitary retreat, became one of the greatest scholars of his age. Part Two gives an overview of Mipam’s interpretation of Buddhism, examining his major themes, and devoting particular attention to his articulation of the Buddhist conception of emptiness. Part Three presents a representative sampling of Mipam’s writings.
Labels: , 1 comments | | edit post
Karma & Habit

 http://www.jackkornfield.com/karma-habit/

Karma & Habit

By ,
photo 2(6)
In the ancient texts, karma is written as a compound word, karma-vipaka. Karma-vipaka means “action and result,” or what we call cause and effect. This is not a philosophical concept. It is a psychological description of how our experience unfold every day.

A good way to begin to understand karma is by observing our habit patterns. When we look at habit and conditioning, we can sense how our brain and consciousness create repeated patterns. If we practice tennis enough, we will anticipate our next hit as soon as the ball leaves the other player’s racquet. If we practice being angry, the slightest insult will trigger our rage. These patterns are like a rewritable CD. When they are burned in repeatedly, the pattern becomes the regular response. Modern neuroscience has demonstrated this quite convincingly. Our repeated patterns of thought and action actually change our nervous system. Each time we focus our attention and follow our intentions, our nerves fire, synapses connect, and those neural patterns are strengthened. The neurons literally grow along that direction.

Zen master Thich Nhat Hanh describes the karmic process of conditioning with another metaphor: the image of planting seeds in consciousness. The seeds we plant contain the potential to grow when conditions support them. The seed of a magnolia or a redwood tree contains the whole life pattern of the plant, which will respond when suitable conditions of water, earth, and sunlight arise. A Chinese Buddhist text describes these seeds: “From intention springs the deed, from the deed springs the habits. From the habits grow the character, from character develops destiny.”

What we practice becomes habit. What may at one time be beneficial can later become a form of imprisonment. Andrew Carnegie was asked by a reporter about the gathering of riches, “You could have stopped at any time, couldn’t you, because you always had much more than you needed.” “Yes, that’s right,” Carnegie answered, “but I couldn’t stop. I had forgotten how to.” Habits have a collective nature as well as an individual one. When King George II heard the “Hallelujah Chorus” in the first performance of Handel’s Messiah, he was so moved that, against all form, he stood up. Of course, when the king stands, everyone else must stand as well. Since that day, no matter how the performance is done, the whole audience stands. While this is a harmless convention, societies can equally repeat destructive habits of racism, hatred, and revenge.

We can work with habits. Through the mindful process of RAIN, we can rewire our nervous system. The genesis of this transformation is our intention. Buddhist psychology explains that before every act there is an intention, though often the intention is unconscious. We can use recognition, acceptance, investigation of suffering, and non-identification to create new karma. Through mindfulness and non-identification, we can choose a new intention. We can do this moment by moment, and we can also set long-term intentions to transform our life.

Setting a conscious intention was important for Tamara, a woman who ran a community food bank. She had come to meditation to bring balance into her life. But when she first sat quietly and tried to sense her breath, panic arose. She struggled as if she couldn’t get enough air. I had her relax and shift her attention from her breath to her whole body for a time. Later when she went back to her breath, the panic arose again. Staying curious, she actually remember the woozy feeling of ether. She flashed back to stories of her birth. Tamara had been born blue from lack of oxygen and her mother told her it took a long time before the doctor could get her to breathe. In meditation Tamara learned that she couldn’t control the breath of the feelings of panic, but she could set an intention to be present with kindness and then let go. Setting a positive intention changed her meditation for the better.

Then in 2005, Tamara went down to Louisiana for two months to help with food distribution for the survivors of Hurrican Katrina. She discovered that she needed the same focused intentions she had developed in meditation. She met people who were in the grip of the same kind of panic she had discovered within herself. They were frightened, angry, stressed out, trying to stay alive. Often the people in charge were in equally difficult states of overwhelm and shock. Tamara soon realized she couldn’t control the people or situation any more than she could control her own breath. At time she became reactive, and when this happened she would breathe, set an intention to be present with goodwill, then let go. Repeatedly setting a kind intention got her through the two months without being terrified or burned out.

This excerpt is taken from the book, “The Wise Heart: A Guide to the Universal Teachings of Buddhist Psychology”

Labels: , 0 comments | | edit post
Mere Non-Conceptuality vs Liberation
A conversation with Thusness:

John Tan
11:39pm
John Tan
First u must have clarity of the cause of suffering and cyclical existence before u link here and there. The student bites the finger bring u out of conceptuality but does not bring us out of ignorance.
John Tan
11:51pm
John Tan
See non-conceptuality and conceptuality as empty appearances like pure sound and scenery... they are of equal status, no special hierarchy. Over-skewing towards either is a disservice. If you see a vivid clear rainbow even in non-conceptual mode, if you chase after rainbow without realizing its causal dependencies and empty nature, how is grasping released? If you want to see its dependence arising then initial phase of inferring is necessary. Both must work hand in hand.
Soh
11:59pm
Soh
oic..
John Tan
12:00am
John Tan
And don't understand what you meant about God and Man, conventionally valid and invalid...there are differences between what is valid cognitions among different schools. Even in Madhyamaka between Prasangika (consequent) and Svatantrika (autonomy) school, so you are referring to which one?
Soh
12:00am
Soh
oic.. im not sure lol i havent read up yet
John Tan
12:02am
John Tan
Lol... if you talk about snake and rope, is there certain definite characteristics inherent in snake and rope? If there isn't, how do you differentiate between snake and rope?
Svatantrika says yes and prasangika says no, therefore their definitions of valid cognitions also differ.
So if you are not familiar, just use your existing realizations and experiences to bring you step by step towards clarity of what exactly give rise to suffering and the release of it... don't have to use terms that you are not familiar... confuse yourself and confuse me...lol
Soh
12:12am
Soh
lol.. ic
John Tan
12:12am
John Tan
In your direct realization of anatta, besides the direct taste vivid presence in the 6 entires and exits, what else is realized?
Soh
12:19am
Soh
no agency, so everything is happening on its own, and is disjoint without any linking self and releasing
John Tan
12:20am
John Tan
U taste a freedom, a release, a let go...
So u must realize the differences between non-conceptuality, non-duality as freedom from subject/object dichotomy and freedom from extremes of seeing selflessness in both subject and object.
Soh
12:31am
Soh
ic..
John Tan
12:44am
John Tan
So in Buddhism it is this insight of selflessness that frees one from suffering and cyclical existence. We are not used to this mode of perception and anatta is that first direct experiential taste. So what is object/subject without characteristics and essence? What is cause and effect with inherency? What do we mean by interaction if no essence is found? Bringing this insight of selflessness to all these conventions and understand it thoroughly to realize the conditionality (in contrast to cause and effect) and empty non-arising nature of self and phenomena is prajna wisdom.
John Tan
12:55am
John Tan
Is this current thought free from the previous thought? Does the previous thought meet the current thought? Is this present thought completely free or completely determined by previous thought? You can understand "conditionality" by observing this, the nature of thoughts and nature of experience. Conditionality is neither determinism nor free will...it is the middle path, the "cause and effect" of Buddhism.
John Tan
12:59am
John Tan
So don't look elsewhere, look directly into your experience.
Soh
1:20am
Soh
What is cause and effect with inherency? --> u mean without
John Tan
1:20am
John Tan
Yeah
If we continue to look for the carrying medium between 2 moment of thoughts, profound insight of anatta will not arise and non-locality will not dawn. Our mode of perception will be obscured by the inherent way of understanding things.
Soh
1:29am
Soh
oic..
its like listening to music... the previous note never 'caused' the current note... yet without the previous note the current note will not be played. its conditioned arising but without causal agent
is that right?
John Tan
1:38am
John Tan
Yes. Look into your experience. It is directly pointing at the nature of experience.
Soh
1:38am
Soh
oic..
Soh
9:53am
Soh
its misleading that some people explains emptiness and the dharmakaya as the formless I AM
its like ken wilber
John Tan
10:16am
John Tan
Yes
John Tan
10:45am
John Tan
When listening to music, the beautiful music is formed from the flowing notes but each note when hit is already gone. How is it that we can still hear the music? It is said that "music" is a convention designated in dependence on it parts -- the flowing notes. The "music" is empty and non-arising. The notes never really "meet" each other, never caused each other yet the current note depends on the previous to be played. So "conditionality" but not a causal agent having the inherent power to effect. What is this telling you about designation, emptiness, conditionality and dependent arising? They r telling u the nature of experience, the nature of mind.
John Tan
10:55am
John Tan
So no, buddhism is not Awareness teaching. Not just about the luminous clarity but to realize non-arising emptiness and dependent arising of this luminous clarity and phenomena. See how this realization liberates the mind from its deepest grasping and release itself from the chain of afflictive dependent origination.
John Tan
11:01am
John Tan
U don't hv to drop conceptuality for non-conceptuality but see how both conceptuality and non-conceptuality r empty and non-arisen. That is seeing the pervasiveness of emptiness as absolute truth in all phenomena.
Soh
11:08am
Soh
ic..
John Tan
11:13am
John Tan
I really dun understand y one wants to cherry pick so much. Y can't just let Buddhism b Buddhism.
Labels: , 0 comments | | edit post
Dependently Arising Sense Spheres
Taken from Dharma Conection

John Ahn:

Yes, there is no entity. But that is only half of the equation. One has to understand that there is also no contact. To me this is the distinction in the two phrases of anatta. Although we understand that in seeing there is no seer, it may not be as clear that in seeing, only the seen. So it's understood that there is really never any such thing as contact. No meetings ever take place. The experience of the human condition is revealed to be merely a series of impressions: sounds, colors, tactile sensations, smells, tastes, and symbols (meanings and conventionalities).

Impressions have no reality to them, they arise with conditions and disappear with conditions. We have to see this as impressions and not through dualistic cognition. Its impressions seeing impressions liberating impressions.

I do not have full experience with undirection. But so far in my path, the undirection comes when there is total unbinding at the deepest layers of habit, especially at the level of sensations which constitute embodiment. It's a mistake to somehow seek out undirection, because it is the ending of action. If one is still inclined to a state of decisions, actions, and effort, then thinking one is in a spontaneous state is a huge deception. Much practice is needed to undo the habitual patterning of embodied energy, which will continually create sense of physicality and relationships. If you are in a state of relationships, of this, that, here, now, etc then there will always be a a direction. To believe otherwise is, in my opinion, deceiving oneself.

Hence, sadhana.

...

Yes, but there is an element you are missing imo. The second phrase of the anatta insight is to see the dimensionless stand alone texture of awareness as sights, sound, taste, smell, touch, and concept. The self has to be deconstructed by seeing that there is merely manifestation, otherwise there is always a reference to a separateness. Whether it is watcher, I am, void, samadhi, or any other experience seen as more true than the flowing appearance.

...

And yes, there is no such thing as sense base and sense data in direct experience. Its all just arising and ceasing according to conditions.

If we don't apply the principle of dependent origination, we fall in "that-ness" which is how subject hides in object. In reinforcing no-self, the self hides in the effort and objectification, believing that there is no longer any engagement, but just "that." This is a subtle mistake because you can't just get rid of me from "me and that." Me and that are co arising. When the trifold structure of "me, that, and, me and that (action + contact)" dissolve upon insight, there is a very different experience of the sense spheres in that they begin to lose dimension.

They have to form, abiding, boundary, size, duration, etc. It is merely arising then gone like rainbows appear when there is light and water. The entire human experience is the arising and disappearing of such impressions as the 6 tastes. Anyway, that's just my experience and analysis.

...

In experience there is really no such thing as internal or external. That is just conventional framework of mind. You never experience anything internally or externally. There are only impressions of the sense spheres. Which at first is unbelievable because the framework of locality, individuality, and embodiment is so strong.

The teachings of how sense spheres arise dependently upon contact are to point to their emptiness which as an effect liberates one from the inherent view. This teaching really doesn't seem that important at first. Like, "hey, ok, so what? It's obvious stuff happens causally upon interaction..so why is there all this emphasis on dependent arising?"

But it takes a different effect when contemplated from the perspective of nondual experience and seeing the cause of how duality arises, namely through the view of inherence. The clear nondual visual field is experienced (as pointed out by Goran's post above) but it is not liberated into its empty nature. So contemplating its dependent arising is important here.
Labels: , , , 0 comments | | edit post
Dependent Designation
Thusness:

"We must accept that all are mere imputations but from the insight of anatta, not from the insight of substantialist view. "Phenomena" is understood differently from our general English usage, "phenomenon" in Buddhism in general is object possessing identifiable characteristic and therefore having essence that is findable.

However in Prasangika it is said that phenomena r merely names and imputations. But "mere" imputation in Prasangika cannot be understood apart from its dependencies. This dependency is key and is what dependent arising and emptiness are about. When Prasangika says that things or phenomena are just mere labels, names, designations or imputations, it is not as we understood in common English terminology, rather, it is to be understood from the perspective of dependent designations, not just designations. Without understanding this dependencies, we are not understanding what is meant by "mere designations".

That is, it is mere name/designation/imputation because the designated referent as an entity when sought can never be found apart from its basis of designation. This basic understanding must be there and must go into our inmost mindstream. And only direct insight of anatta can understand the significance. Therefore the non-conceptuality is not simply non-conceptuality as in freedom from labeling but a freedom from the blinding spell of seeing things in terms of 4 extremes from reified designations.

This extends to all phenomena be it conditioned or unconditioned phenomena.

As for non-conceptuality, there are fierce debates between Gorampa and Tsongkhapa. There is also Mipham's view of non-conceptuality but these masters agree that the mode of non-conceptuality is a very specific and special mode of intuitive insight that relates to freedom of extremes, not just imageless bare mode perception."
Thusness also wrote before:

"Don’t misunderstand the term “mere imputation” wrongly. It is very important to understand the term “mere” is very special in Prasangika. “Mere” and “cannot stand at its own side” are synonym. In other words, you can treat “mere” to mean “because the emptiness of phenomena is deep and the dependencies are profound, it cannot be expressed but called it ‘mere’”. Much like Tao cannot be expressed, very reluctantly, LaoTze named it Tao. It is completely opposite of our common usage like “don’t worry, it is merely a label”.

The very fact that phenomenon are empty of inherent existence means that phenomena are not existing at their own side therefore this “mere designation” cannot be eliminated in the ordinary sense; in fact there is no elimination, you can’t. To free it, one must see “Emptiness” and Dependent Origination. Because of the profundity, if one practice the inferring and reasoning path, there are various lines of reasoning like diamond silver, sevenfold reasoning, unfindable as one or many, four extremes and lastly of course, the king of reasoning Dependent Arising to guide the practitioners towards right understanding.

Thus this “mere imputation” can’t be overcome by deep shamatha concentration; can’t be overcome by ordinary non-conceptuality; can’t be overcome by non-thinking because it is “dependent” on its basis; it is not just a designation. Even the cessation of Nirodha-samapatti cannot do away with this “mere imputation” permanently.

In Prasangika, only the intuitive insight of prajna wisdom of both self/Self and Phenomena is able to break the chain of specific dependent origination because ignorance as the root cause of cyclical existence is severed.

Anyway just my 2 cents. Please read and understand with yor own insights and experiences. See you in Singapore!"
"Proliferation arises because whatever dependently arises is treated as true and real, not because it is non-conceptually or conceptually experienced. In fact when whatever arises is directly and non-conceptually experienced, its brilliance and crystal clarity has stronger tendency of blinding us into treating it as true and real. This makes the mind grasped more and unwillingness to let go is stronger because it seems so real and undeniable."

"Not even being non-conceptuality can stop such tendencies becoz it is not just abt freedom from concepts."

"...But to me, as I started from a direct experience of presence, I do not c the need to put an end to conceptuality by way mmk ... That is MMK imo is much more than putting an end to conceptuality. It will b quite a clumsy technique if the sole purpose is to reach that as a goal. Zen koan, the two stanzas, vipassana bare attention, self enquiry are all more efficient and effective ways to achieve that goal. In fact after I got familiar why these techniques, I hv my own koan and techniques to trigger ppl into non-conceptual experiences...lol"

Also:

"…The process of eradicating avidyā is conceived… not as a mere stopping of thought, but as the active realization of the opposite of what ignorance misconceives. Avidyā is not a mere absence of knowledge, but a specific misconception, and it must be removed by realization of its opposite. In this vein, Tsongkhapa says that one cannot get rid of the misconception of 'inherent existence' merely by stopping conceptuality any more than one can get rid of the idea that there is a demon in a darkened cave merely by trying not to think about it. Just as one must hold a lamp and see that there is no demon there, so the illumination of wisdom is needed to clear away the darkness of ignorance."
Thubten Chodron:

http://thubtenchodron.org/.../02/dependence-on-term-concept/

We talked about one scheme of organizing the different types of dependent arising:

the causal dependence
then dependence on its parts which pertains also to permanent phenomena
and then the third one is dependent designation.

This third one means arising in dependence upon term and concept, which they also call existing by being mere name. What this means is that something doesn’t exist as a certain object until it is labeled by that name. The classic example they give which is very simple. It’s this: you didn’t become David until your parents labeled you David. The kitty didn’t become Manjushri until we labeled him Manjushri. The idea is that those things don’t exist as that particular object until they are labeled...

...It isn’t that things just totally vanish if they are not being labeled. On the other hand, it doesn’t mean that everything we label actually exists. We can label “rabbit’s horn,” we can conceive of rabbit’s horn. We certainly conceived of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and labeled them. But just because there’s a term and concept, doesn’t mean that there’s an object. Why? Because you need not only the term and concept, but you need a basis of designation that is suitable to bear that label. What was there in Iraq? There was nothing suitable to bear that label. How about with the rabbit’s horn? The rabbits have ears but there’s nothing suitable to bear the label “rabbit’s horn.” It doesn’t mean that everything we label exists. Just as we learn that everything we think doesn’t exist either.
Labels: , 0 comments | | edit post
Consciousness, Sensations, Liberation
Consciousness is implied by sensations, but really there are just sensations. You could say that they contain "consciousness" in them, or you could say something like, "In the seeing, just the seen," which is a lot cleaner, if you ask me.
It is on ignorance that there are volitional formations, and on volitional formations depend consciousness, etc.
Thus, with the dissolution of ignorance, sensations are just as they are.
Sensations are utterly transient, so there no substantial thing to awaken in ultimate terms.
Instead, a process of identification and delusion stops, such that no longer do empty, transient, simple sensations create a fundamental illusion of a permanent, continuous, separate, perceiving self that could be liberated.
So, the question is ill-formed: it is not right to ask, "What is liberated?", and it is better to say, "Liberation occurs when a process of delusion stops," or, "Liberation occurs when clear perception of the way sensations always were occurs."
This is also useful, as it points to method, the method being clear perception of sensations.

- Daniel Ingram

Labels: , 1 comments | | edit post
Presence as the Transparent Concreteness of Forms
It is extremely difficult to express what is 'Isness'. Isness is awareness as forms. It is a pure sense of presence yet encompassing the “transparent concreteness” of forms. There is a crystal clear sensation of awareness manifesting as the manifold of phenomenal existence. If we are vague in the experiencing of this “transparent concreteness” of Isness, it is always due to that ‘sense of self’ creating the sense of division.

~ Thusness, 2007
Labels: , 1 comments | | edit post