Soh

Empowerments are necessary if you choose to practice Vajrayana Buddhism. (They are not necessary for other forms of Buddhism). Someone asked me what is its purpose, so I sent him these quotes. First, the article on rigpa wiki. Then quotes by Acarya Malcolm Smith are found below that.

---------

https://www.rigpawiki.org/index.php?title=Empowerment#:~:text=dbang%20bskur%20ba)%20refers%20to,come%20to%20master%20its%20realization.

Empowerment
Jump to navigationJump to search

Sogyal Rinpoche and Nyoshul Khen Rinpoche during an empowerment
Empowerment (Skt. abhiṣeka or abhisiddhi[1]; Tib. དབང་, Wyl. dbang, wang) or granting an empowerment (Skt. abhiṣiñca; Tib. དབང་བསྐུར་བ་, Wyl. dbang bskur ba)[2] refers to the Vajrayana ritual which awakens the special capacity for primordial wisdom (Tib. yeshe) to arise in the mind of the disciple.[3] It is called 'empowerment' because when we receive it, we are empowered to follow a particular spiritual practice, and so come to master its realization.[4] It is said:

In the Secret Mantra Vehicle, there can be no accomplishment without empowerment,
For that would be like a boatman without oars.
And also:

Without empowerment there's no accomplishment;
You can't get oil from pressing sand.[5]
Empowerments can only be granted by qualified vajra masters and requires for the students receiving them to maintain the specific vajrayana precepts (Skt. samaya), on the basis of the refuge and bodhisattva vows. (See Two Causes & Four Conditions for further details.)

Dzongsar Khyentse Rinpoche reminds us of the real meaning of 'empowerment':

"The most common description of abhisheka is that it is a transfer of power during a ceremony to give recipients the authorization to hear, study and practise the teachings of the vajrayana; we therefore “receive an empowerment.” But the problem is that receiving an empowerment suggests someone is giving us a power we previously lacked[...], and is a long way away from the true spirit of tantric initiation. During an initiation we are introduced to an aspect of ourselves that already exists within us but that we have yet to recognize, and it is the activation of this recognition that we call 'empowerment' or 'initiation'. This is the real meaning of abhisheka."[6]

Contents
1    Etymology
2    The Function of Empowerment
3    Subdivisions
3.1    In General
3.2    In the Inner Tantras
4    Two Causes & Four Conditions
4.1    Two Causes
4.2    Four Conditions
5    Empowerments Given to the Rigpa Sangha
6    Notes
7    Teachings Given to the Rigpa Sangha on the Topic of Empowerment
8    Further Reading
9    Internal Links
10    External Links
Etymology
Dzongsar Khyentse Rinpoche writes:

"Abhisheka is a Sanskrit term, and its two fundamental meanings have been translated into Tibetan as torwa and lugpa. Torwa is usually translated as “dismantling” and refers to the cocoon of ignorance in which we are wrapped and that needs to be dismantled; and lugpa is translated as “pouring”—as in “pouring blessings”—and more obliquely, as “discovering our buddhanature.”"[7]
Tsele Natsok Rangdrol explains the etymological definition of empowerment in the following way:

"Formerly your body, speech and mind followed deluded habitual tendencies and possessed no independent power. The method that now provides you with natural authority over the indivisible state of the four kayas is called 'empowerment'."[8]
The Function of Empowerment
Empowerment is to ripen or mature our buddha nature. Even though all beings possess the buddha nature, without receiving empowerment it is not possible to receive blessings and accomplishments through a particular practice, just as it will never be possible to get oil by pressing sand.[9]

His Holiness the Dalai Lama says:

"When an empowerment is conferred on you, it is the nature of your mind—the buddha nature—that provides a basis upon which the empowerment can ripen you. Through the empowerment, you are empowered into the essence of the buddhas of the five families. In particular, you are ‘ripened’ within that particular family through which it is your personal predisposition to attain buddhahood."[10]
In addition, to these aspects, Patrul Rinpoche adds that empowerments:

repair violated and broken samayas,
enable you to meditate on all the paths of the generation phase, the perfection phase, and the Great Perfection,
prevent obstacles and errors from arising, and
allow all your attainments to develop more and more.[11]
Subdivisions
In General
According to Khenpo Ngakchung:[12]

"In general there are three types of empowerment:
the ground empowerment
the path empowerment
the result empowerment
The ground empowerment is so called because when the nature of mind, sugatagarbha, is realized, this constitutes the "empowerment" of nirvana, and when it is not realized, this constitutes the "empowerment" of the three worlds of samsara. This nature is actually what is to be matured in the ground empowerment of the path empowerment .
The path empowerment is divided into three: ground, path, and result:
[the ground empowerment of the path empowerment
the path empowerment of the path empowerment
the result empowerment of the path empowerment]
The result empowerment: In the very instant following the result empowerment of the path, one gains mastery of the wisdom of omniscience and has authority over everything in samsara and nirvana."

When other sources refer to ground, path and fruition empowerments, they most usually refer to what Khenpo Ngakchung presents as the ground empowerment of the path empowerment, the path empowerment of the path empowerment, and the result empowerment of the path empowerment.

In this context, Patrul Rinpoche explains that:[13]

"The empowerment that we receive when we are first introduced into the mandala by an authentic Vajra Master is the ground empowerment.
The fourfold empowerment that we take by ourselves when we practise Guru Yoga, without depending on anyone or anything else, is the path empowerment.
The empowerment that we obtain at the moment of the ultimate fruit, called the "great ray of light empowerment" or the "empowerment of indivisible profundity and radiance," is the fruit empowerment, perfect and total buddhahood."
And Tulku Thondup says that:[14]

empowerments given to disciples who have not been initiated before are called causal empowerment;
the empowerment given to students for developing their maturation or restoring the broken precepts are classified as empowerment of the path; and
empowerments given to those who are ready to achieve the final attainment and which cause the disciple to attain the ultimate fruition are classified as empowerments of result because they bring the final result.
In the Inner Tantras
According to the inner tantras, there are four levels or stages within any ground empowerment of the path empowerment:

the vase empowerment (Skt. kalaśābhiṣeka; Tib. བུམ་པའི་དབང་, bumpé wang, Wyl. bum pa'i dbang)
the secret empowerment (Skt. guhyābhiṣeka; Tib. གསང་བའི་དབང་, sangwé wang, 'Wyl. gsang ba'i dbang; )
the knowledge-wisdom empowerment (Skt. prajñājñānābhiṣeka; Tib. ཤེས་རབ་ཡེ་ཤེས་ཀྱི་དབང་, sherab yeshe kyi wang, Wyl. shes rab ye shes kyi dbang)
the precious word empowerment

Two Causes & Four Conditions
Two causes and four conditions are necessary for an empowerment to fully take place:

Two Causes
The associated cause (mtshung ldan gyi rgyu) is the presence of the buddha nature
The cooperative cause (lhan cig byed pa'i rgyu) is the use of various substances (rdzas) during the empowerment, such as the vase, image cards and so forth.
Four Conditions
The causal condition (rgyu'i rkyen) is the disciple who has faith and intelligence
The dominant condition (bdag rkyen) is the teacher who is fully qualified
The objective condition (dmigs rkyen) is the teacher's knowledge of the empowerment, deities, and mantras, and samadhi
The immediate condition (de ma thag rkyen) is the previous phase or empowerment, since each phase prepares the student for what follows, and that is why empowerments must be given in the proper sequence[15]
Empowerments Given to the Rigpa Sangha
Many great masters have bestowed the most important empowerments needed for our practice upon the Rigpa sangha over the years, in particular, Kyabjé Dilgo Khyentse Rinpoche in 1987 and 1990, Kyabjé Penor Rinpoche in 1988 and 1995, Kyabjé Dodrupchen Rinpoche in 1999, Kyabjé Trulshik Rinpoche in 1999, 2003, and 2005, and Yangthang Rinpoche in 2012 and 2013.

For the complete list of empowerments given to the Rigpa Sangha, see the 'Empowerments Given to the Rigpa Sangha' page.



---------

 

Acarya Malcolm Smith's random selection of quotes on empowerments found in dharmawheel:

Malcolm wrote in 2021:

The essence of an empowerment is the arrangement of a special dependent origination by the master upon the disciple according to the methods taught by Buddha Vajradhara in the authoritative tantras, realized by mahāsiddhas, practiced by bodhisattvas, and translated by qualified translators out of Sanskrit and other dialects of India in Tibetan, and thence into English and other languages. There is no other essence than this.

These days however, people take it upon them themselves to just make up whatever doctrine feels good to them, disregarding the clear words of the sūtras and tantras about how to follow a virtuous mentor or a guru. They buy books and attempt to practice their contents without transmission. Such people close the doorway to liberation for themselves by inappropriately using methods taught in the tantras.

...

Speaking strictly from the point of view of Dzogchen, empowerment is for inducing the experience of the example/actual wisdom. The guru is the guide who assists the student induce that experience. The lineage means that guru has also been lead through the process in a precise way by someone else before them. Not all empowerments involve deities. In fact, the actual Dzogchen empowerments never do. Dzogchen empowerment can be combined with deity empowerments, but it is not necessary.



Malcolm wrote in 2012:

Visting teachers is not Dharma.
Receiving empowerments is not Dharma.

Dharma is understanding your real condition.

...

I never said don't receive transmission and teachings. I am saying, turn your dharma teachings and transmissions in Dharma. Use them to understand yourself. Don't leave them as an intellectual pursuit. For the most part, every dharma text I ever studied, am studying, and will study, was for the purpose of understanding something about my path, about myself, my own state. I learned Tibetan to enhance my practice, not to become a skilled translator who is expert in dancing on books (though I am pretty good). I did not learn Dharma to come to places like Dharma wheel and have debates. So I am pointing out that Buddhist Philosophy, the intellectual study of Buddhism divorced from a path, is a waste of time. If you want to study Madhyamaka, first understand how it is relevant to solving the Buddha's existential question: what is suffering, it's cause, it's cessation and the path. If you keep this in mind, then this study becomes Dharma.

...

No, the fourth empowerment, an example wisdom, simply contextualizes the experience of the third empowerment and is used to indicate the meaning of the innate. It is not an actual transference of any sort of experience.

...

2013:

It is both, and the former will lead to the latter, which is why Āryadeva proclaimed "Realization proceeds from view." This is why there is such a huge emphasis on developing a correct view in sūtrayāna. Whereas in Vajrayāna in general, the view is taught only after empowerment, because the view cultivated in Vajrayāna should be cultivated on the basis of the experience produced during one of the empowerments (but the Gelugpas have a different perspective on this).

...

It means that according to Madhyamaka there are two so called ultimates, one is nominal, the other is the direct perception of emptiness.

But from a Dzogchen point of view, since all relative truths are objects of false cognitions, even the cognition of the nominal ultimate is faulty. The only thing that is true is the cognition of dharmatā. That most certainly requires some kind of direct introduction which is lacking in Sutra teachings. The main advantage to Vajrayāna teachings is that dharmatā or the example wisdom, is introduced during the time of empowerment. In the case of gsar ma, it is the introduction of bliss and emptiness at the time of the third and fourth empowerments; in the case of the Dzogchen it is the introduction of the potentiality of vidyā during anyone of the four styles of empowerment, elaborate, unelaborate and so on.

...

Correct view in Vajrayāna arises from the empowerment. This is the reason why in Lamdre, for example, one meditates the view only _after_ having received the cause empowerment where it is introduced in the section of the ālaya cause continuum (tantra) among the three tantras (cause, path and result).

Despite this, of course one also meditates a sutrayāna view using śamatha and vipaśyāna (supplemented by citations from the Mahāsiddhas) at the time of the vision of experience teachings from among the three visions (impure, experiential and pure). Frankly, despite polemics between Sakya and Kagyu over the issue of sutra mahāmudra, meditating the view here is not so different than sutra mahāmudra save only the name.

...

And of course, the common misunderstanding of empowerments/initiations is that they are merely there to allow you to practice something. In fact empowerment is the primary method of liberation in Vajrayāna. It is only if you do not wake up from the empowerment itself that you are given a sadhana to practice.

...


Anuttarasamyaksambodhi is only possible through empowerment -- this is why for example abhiśeka is mentioned as a key feature of buddhahood in in the Āvataṃsaka sūtra and so on.

When a bodhisattva attains buddhahood, they do so on the basis of an empowerment (abhiśeka) transmitted through from all the tathagatas of the ten directions. For exmaple,the Buddhāvataṃsaka-nāma-mahāvaipulya-sūtra states:
Whoever attains facility through the supreme samadhi, they completely receive the ornaments of the empowerment conferred from the victors of the ten directions
Ārya-tathāgatācintyaguhyanirdeśa-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra states:
By attaining empowerment, one is endowed with all qualities.
Ārya-svapnanirdeśa-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra:
On the tenth stage one is predicted as a buddha through empowerment
Āryākṣayamatiparipṛcchā-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra:
Since the tenth creation of bodhicitta is the empowerment that grants power over qualities, wisdoms and all phenomena, it is seen to be equal with space through the example of the name "cakravartin".
Ārya-ratnacūḍaparipṛcchā-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra:
All who are impeded by a single birth obtain empowerment.
Ārya-lalitavistara-nāma-mahāyāna-sūtra:
Through possessing love and compassion, the bodhisattva who has been conferred the empowerment of merit and wisdom leaves Tuṣita.
Thus, empowement in Vajrayāna, the direct route to experiencing anuttarasamyaksambodhi in a single lifetime in a single body, is fully validated by Mahāyāna sutras.

M

...


You have five aggregates; these are the cause. The teacher arranges their connection to the five buddhas, the result, through the empowerment. If you don't attain buddhahood during the empowerment, then you have a path to follow.

Most people do not understand that abhisheka is primarily a method of attaining buddhahood, and only secondarily, an introduction to a path.

When we talk about dependent origination, there are five: outer, inner, secret, ultimate and sucheness. If you really want to understand this, then you should go and study Lamdre with the Sakyapas.

...

"What defines Vajrayana?"

Empowerment (abhiṣeka) as the entryway into the teachings.

...

The difference between sutra and tantra is empowerment. There is no direct introduction in Sutra. There are also important differences in terms of how the result is contextualized in sutra and tantra in general, and dzogchen specifically.

...

If you do not attain awakening during empowerment, then you have sadhana practice, cause that's what it is for, i.e., sadhopaya, "method of accomplishment".

...

The path of Varjayāna is taught so that a common, ordinary person can traverses all the paths and stages in a single life, and ideally, within the rite of empowerment itself, or at least so I have been taught (I am someone who has done a three year retreat).


...


Malcolm wrote:

There are no siddhis without empowerment,
just as there is no oil even if sand is pressed.
Whoever proudly explains the tantras and citations
to those without empowerment,
both master and disciple go to hell
as soon as they die even if there are siddhis.
-- Mahāmudratilaka-tantra

...

The proper way to enter Vajrayāna is through receiving empowerment. There is no other way. You can read this or that book, but without having taken proper empowerment, Vajrayāna texts will not benefit you and can actually give rise to wrong views that will cause you much problem.

...


They are not my views. In any case, you can also read Kongtrul's Buddhist Ethics, where different approaches to samaya are evaluated and harmonized, but not one claims that one can hold samaya without an HYT empowerment of some kind. Empowerment is the sole entryway to Vajrayāna, this has been proclaimed in one voice by all the scholars of India and Tibet.


...

This is the principle we should employ, as Kenpo Ngalo states in his commentary on Ngondro:

Never arriving with empty hands is a critical point of dependent origination. In particular, when that guru confers empowerment and explains Dharmas, since all the compassion and blessings of all the buddhas of the three times and ten directions along with all the bodhisattvas exist in that sublime guru, the guru is inseparable with all the buddhas. Even bringing him a morsel of food has greater merit than making many hundred of thousands of offerings to others


...

2015:

There really is no mahāmudra that can be spoken of outside of tantric practice. Sutra mahāmudra is using dohas to illustrate and prepare one for the true result mahāmudra realized via the practice of the two stages. The word "mahāmudra" does not occur in even one single sūtra.

...

The term "sūtra" mahāmudra, according to Kongtrul and even Gampopa himself, is used for the teaching given to those people who are incapable of practicing Vajrayāna for this or that reason but who are nevertheless interested in Mahāmudra. They are taught śamatha and vipaśyāna, the experience of which is clarified by quotes from dohas, etc.

But without the example wisdom as well as the profound dependent originations arranged by the guru at the time of empowerment, this sūtra mahāmudra cannot go beyond the common practice of the six perfections.

There are many terms for the state of buddhahood in various systems. The meaning is the same, but the means differ, and the length of time to the result as well.

The means of realizing mahāmudra is the two stages and or guru yoga. It is the practice of the an example wisdom introduced at the time of empowerment. This leads to buddhahood in one life, or seven or at most sixteen.

It takes three incalculable eons at minimum to progress to buddhahood via the sūtra path.

The level of insight experienced in Vajrayāna completion stage practices involve the experience of levels of mind more subtle than is possible in sutra meditation of plain śamatha and vipaśyāna, which is another reason why it is more rapid than sutra meditation

...

In reality, it is something connected with empowerments. So it really should not be discussed so much in a public place, regardless of how many books it may be published in. As Sachen states:
In general, Secret Mantra makes dependent origination into the path. Since all dependent originations are arranged at the time of the empowerment, in the beginning it is very important to obtain completely the four empowerment from the guru. That empowerment is not merely a symbol, not merely an introduction and not merely a blessing.

...

There is no difference between the fourth empowerment and direct introduction. They both involve inductions of specific experiences.

The fourth empowerment is an introduction based on the induction of a specific experience in the student, likewise, so is direct introduction.

Though it is called the "word empowerment", the actual fourth empowerment is not truly contained within words such as "this is like space...", etc. But when combined with this or that specific experience, the fourth empowerment/direct introduction introduces the student to the nature of their minds experientially, and then it can be called the word empowerment because the nature of that experience has been described to them in a way that they understand the experience that they have had. That experience itself is the example, wisdom, not the words.


...

No, that is never the case, it is more like a stamp and its impression. A recorded empowerment can never be a stamp, it can only be an impression. In this case, an inert impression. A student, who receives an empowerment, is an animate living person upon whom an impression has been made, and when they have realized the meaning, they too can make impressions on others.

This is essentially why, for all who reading, the idea that one can receive an empowerment from a recording is a corrupt idea that will destroy lineages if people take it seriously.

...


Anyway, this is a stupid conversation — you cannot receive empowerments from a recording of an empowerment, period. End of story. Just like you cannot receive monks vows from a recording, and so on. People who think they have received an empowerment from a recording are just deluding themselves and received nothing whatsoever. Even if they recite mantras and practices they think they have received from a recording there will be no benefit whatsoever, in fact the opposite will be the case.

If you want to receive a vow, any vow, you have to do it in the proper way, and receiving them from a recording cannot be construed as proper at all.

...


The commentary tantra of the Great Perfection, the Rig pa Rang Shar states:
While one has not left the body of traces, migrating beings will not see one as worthy of respect. One’s merit will be small, one’s life short, one’s enjoyments of living will be few, one will be powerless and many obstacles will occur. Nothing will be accomplished. Those are the faults of not obtaining the empowerment for the conduct of Secret Mantra. A yogin of Secret Mantra conduct must first obtain empowerment. If empowerment is not obtained, not even the Buddha will be able to turn the wheel on the stage of a tathāgata. If the wheel cannot be turned, then the nirmanakāya will not be able to benefit migrating beings with compassion. Therefore, the empowerment of the conduct of Secret Mantra must be obtained.

...

2017:

The process of empowerment transforms the human body through dependent origination. Sadhana is for those who do not obtain buddhahood during the empowerment.

M

...

Anytime you take an empowerment, you are making a commitment to that method of practice from now until awakening. That is essentially what a yidam is, i.e., a commitment to the path of awakening. The whole idea of "special yidams" is a bit of quasi theistic superstition. It does not matter who anyone's yidam is since the continuum of pristine consciousness of all yidams is the same.

People have karmic relations with this or that practice. But in reality, everyone in Mahāyāna has the same yidam: buddhahood.

...

Malcolm:

"These days, empowerments are handed out as a means of attracting followers to people who no idea what they are doing, even though sometimes they have been "following" Tibetan Buddhism for decades. How can one even imagine that any of these people have actually received samaya? It is only possible to believe this if one thinks that merely attending a ritual and repeating some words has the power to confer samaya. I don't believe this, but you are free to disagree."

makewhisper wrote:

Based on your study and practice, what conditions are necessary for a successful empowerment and conferral of samaya?


Malcolm:


The student has to actually know what they are doing — this is the main criteria.


makewhisper wrote:

As a neophyte, I'm not quite sure what this means.



Malcolm:

It means you have to know what you are doing. You have to understand the Dharma. You have to examine the teacher. You have to understand the commitments you are taking on. For example, if you do not understand the commitments you are taking, you don't have samaya at all. It is really that simple.

If you do understand the commitments, you do know what you are doing, and so on, a teacher's conduct has to be pretty outrageously abusive before you can legitimately say, this teacher has broken samaya and now my commitment to him or her is null and void. If he or she likes fancy cars, too bad; if they like expensive food and wine; too bad. If they have a penchant for gold and silver, and insist that their students pay outrageous fees for teachings, too bad. If they like having multiple partners and are up front about it, too bad. If they are gay, too bad. If they are trans, too bad.

But if they systematically abuse their power, or are dishonest, or are physically and/or sexually abusive, well, then one might have a case that this teacher is bad news. Even here, it is best to just leave their company and move on. However, sometimes it is bad enough to warrant a public outing. In this case, don't worry about your samaya, your obligation to sentient beings is more important.

....


"Samaya" basically means "coming to a mutual understanding , agreement , compact , covenant , treaty , contract , arrangement , engagement , stipulation , conditions of agreement, terms."

It is rooted in a notion of contractual obligation which results when two people agree on something. In this case, before a guru offers an empowerment, the disciple has to agree to some terms in order to enter the mandala for which the teacher is giving an empowerment. The teacher also has obligations which he or she must fulfill in order to be able to offer than empowerment.

This is the base level definition of samaya. There are much deeper understandings, like the four unbreakable samayas of the Great Perfection.


...


One is not qualified to study these things without empowerment, transmission, and instruction. These teachings are part of Secret Mantra. It is called "secret" for a reason.

One is not even permitted to look at these texts without transmission, let alone discuss there contents on an open forum such as this.

Those who have empowerment, transmission, and instruction are not permitted discuss these things with those who lack empowerment, transmission, and instruction.

For example, if one buys a book on Dzogchen, no one is going to stop you, no one who is responsible will discuss the contents of the teachings with someone who is not qualified.


...

Terms and so on are experiential, they are related to the practice, so they really cannot be discussed either. This is why we don't discuss them, apart from the occasional kerfuffle about how rig pa is properly translated (knowledge, knowing, in rare cases, mind)


...

No, there is no samaya greater than empowerment. Direct introduction is an empowerment.

...

2018:

You cannot educate people about what happens in an empowerment before the empowerment. If you do, you are breaking your own samaya. For example, the preparation day exists precisely so that people are readied to hear the secrets spoken during an empowerment.

...


2021:

Every time you take any empowerment or initiation, you are making a promise to hold that deity as your yidam. Hence you can have hundreds, there is no limit.

The key of course is to practice all yidams in one yidam, all mantras in one mantra, etc.

 

Soh


 

Hi AtR Group Members,

 
We are thrilled to announce the final release of version 1.2 of the AtR Practice Guide! This update brings significant enhancements and additions that we believe will be of benefit.
 
Key changes in Version 1.2 include:
  1. New Chapters:
• [Potential Sleep Disruptions]
• [Dealing with Potential Energy Imbalances Post-Anatta]
 
2. Expanded Resources:
 
• A sample booklist and numerous guided meditations/videos on I AM have been added to the related articles section of Stage 1 along with a new introduction.
 
3. Updated Content:
 
• Articles for Stage 5 and Stage 6 have been updated, along with the sample booklist at the end of the guide.
 
4. Subtle Enhancements:
 
• Various subtle changes have been made in each section to improve clarity and depth.
 
5. New Cover:
 
• A fresh, new cover design for the guide.
 
6. Shift in Focus:
 
• Stage 4 now emphasizes contemplating the two anatta stanzas.
 
Feedback:
 
“The shortened AtR guide is very good. It should lead one to anatta (the experiential realization of no-self) if they really go and read. Concise and direct.” - Yin Ling
 
In addition to guiding practitioners towards the realization of anatta, the AtR Practice Guide also explores the realizations of I AM, non-dual awareness, emptiness, dependent origination, and total exertion.
You can download the final version of the AtR Practice Guide (Version 1.2) in PDF format or listen to the audio version on SoundCloud. Follow the links below:
 
 
We extend our heartfelt thanks to Nafis Rahman for compiling this comprehensive guide, as well as to the AtR admin team and group members for their invaluable contributions.
 
I would also like to make an announcement on a new rule:
 
Each group member can post promotions or advertisements no more than once every month, but only for different teachers/organizations or events. For the same teacher, event, or organization, promotions are limited to once every two months. Different members also cannot post about the same organization or teacher more frequently than every two months, and all promotions are subject to admin discretion and review for suitability.
 
See the updated Welcome Message for more details: https://www.facebook.com/groups/AwakeningToReality/posts/26119233171024766/
 
Thank you for your continued support and dedication to our collective journey.
 
Warm regards,
Soh
Soh

 Nafis shared  

"This person wrote a decent summary on their blog regarding Dogen's teachings:  

https://buddhism-thewayofemptiness.blog.nomagic.uk/dogen-uji-existence-time/  

https://buddhism-thewayofemptiness.blog.nomagic.uk/genjokoan-buddhist-teachings-from-three-sources-is-is-not-is/ 

"

Soh

Nice excerpts shared by Nafis.

John Tan: "This is very good and has a flavour of what I meant 👍"

John Tan: “Sentient beings in ignorance tend to seek truly existent entities to attribute causal efficacy to them. In their confusion, they wrongly conclude that since conceptual constructs do not exist inherently, they lack causal efficacy and significance. This view is inverted and in fact contradicts our daily experiences of how things function.The mind that grasps at substantiality fails to comprehend how phenomena, being empty of inherent existence, can still function and possess causal efficacy. This failure arises because the "framework of essentiality" obstructs the "logic" that only phenomena empty of inherent existence can arise dependently and thus have causal efficacy.”

Book: Candrakīrti's Introduction to the Middle Way: A Guide (OXFORD GUIDES TO PHILOSOPHY SERIES) by Jan Westerhoff (Author)

https://www.amazon.com/Candrak%C4%ABrtis-Introduction-Middle-Way-PHILOSOPHY/dp/0197612334


Excerpt:

 

Emptiness does not mean nonexistence

6:107 The opponent is concerned that if, according to Candrakīrti, everything is empty, and nothing ever really arises on the basis of any substantially real causal relation, even at the level of conventional reality, then all things turn out to be nonexistent even conventionally, like a round square, or a barren woman’s son. But since it is absurd to say that everything is nonexistent in this way, we have to conclude that some things are not empty.

6:108 However, even if all things are empty, this does not imply that we cannot differentiate between empty existent and empty nonexistent things. Consider the case of optical illusions. The visual phenomena that sufferers from optical illusions perceive (floating hairs, duplicate objects, mirages in the desert, etc.) are all equally illusory. But this does not mean that each is associated with every ophthalmological condition. The sufferer from floaters sees falling hairs, but no duplicate moons, and no sons of barren women either. In the same way, even though all things are empty, the roles they play relative to our perceptual faculties are not simply interchangeable: sons and squares do appear to them, but sons of barren women and square circles do not.

While there is a reason why specific things, but not others appear to those afflicted by optical illusions, and why specific things, but not others appear to ordinary beings afflicted by ignorance, this is not something the Mādhyamika is particularly interested in. Their aim is to get beyond these erroneous misconceptions, and to do so it is not necessary to understand all the specificities involved in the respective causes bringing them about. Moreover, when looking for the reason why specific things appear to the optically deluded, or to beings deluded by ignorance, we need to ask these beings, to which these appearances do indeed appear, and not the clear-sighted, or highly realized practitioners, to which they no longer appear. The source of the structure of conventional reality is to be found at the level of conventional reality, not at the level of ultimate reality.

6:109 In fact it is not even necessary to ask one suffering from vitreous floaters why he sees hairs, and no sons of barren women. Ubiquitous illusions familiar to anybody (dreams, mirages, reflections, and so forth) produce quite specific perceptions, but not others, even though the perceptions are all unreal. The hot sand in the desert produces the image of a shimmering lake, but no image of the son of a barren woman, even though lake and son are equally nonexistent. If all nonexistent objects are on a par, as the opponent suggests, then the son of a barren woman should actually be perceptible (as some nonexistent objects are), or all nonexistent objects should be equally imperceptible (as the son of a barren woman is).

6:110 There is no conflict between things being on the one hand insubstantial, illusory, and lacking existence ‘from their own side’ and, on the other hand, appearing vividly to our perceptions. While there are some things of this kind that do not even appear to perception (like sons of barren women, or triangular rectangles), not all are like this, and for this reason the opponent’s claim in 6:107, that because everything is empty and causally unproduced by any substantial causal relation, everything must fail to appear, is not true.

6:111 A barren woman’s son is obviously ultimately unreal, but he is also unreal at the level of conventional reality, since he does not appear in anyone’s perception. He is a mere description, and an inconsistent one at that. The same holds for hairs perceived by sufferers from floaters (they lack ultimate and conventional reality), the latter not because they fail to appear perceptually (they do) but because they only appear to a very restricted number of people afflicted by an ophthalmological condition. Their existence is not generally acknowledged by the world, unlike tables and chairs, for example, which lack ultimate, but possess conventional existence.

It is important to note that Candrakīrti here aligns existence by intrinsic nature with the ontological status of sons of barren women: both fail to exist ultimately and conventionally. This is usually regarded as a clear statement of the Prāsaṅgika interpretation of Madhyamaka, according to which Madhyamaka does not support an appearance/reality distinction in relation to entities with intrinsic natures.105 It is not the case that such entities exist conventionally, and fail to exist ultimately, rather they are wholly nonexistent at both the conventional and at the ultimate level.

6:112 Candrakīrti presents scriptural support for the claim that all things are pacified from the outset, intrinsically extinguished, and un-arisen. He interprets this as saying that there was never any time when things existed with intrinsic nature or were produced by a substantially real causal relation (e.g., prior to the realization of emptiness), nor is there any perspective from which they exist or are produced in this way (e.g., the perspective of the ordinary unenlightened being, as compared to that of the enlightened being). Intrinsic natures are neither something that first exists, and is then removed as the practitioner advances temporally from a time when he has no direct understanding of emptiness to a time when he does, nor is it removed when the practitioner advances in terms of levels of understanding from seeing the world in terms of conventional truth to seeing the world in terms of ultimate truth. All things are at all times and from all points of view devoid of intrinsic nature and therefore empty.

6:113 The difference between a barren woman’s son (which is ultimately and conventionally nonexistent) and a pot (which is ultimately nonexistent, though conventionally existent) is that the latter is accepted to exist by common consensus, and thereby forms part of ordinary interactions and exchanges between people. While there is not anything in the pot that exists with intrinsic nature, and therefore needs to be taken seriously at the level of fundamental ontology, pots are embedded in the network of conventions in a way that mere thought-constructions like sons of barren women are not, and it is this embedding that endows them with conventional reality.

In his autocommentary Candrakīrti points out that this picture does not change substantially when we consider the pot’s constituents, that is, the different bits of matter that constitute it. The Madhyamaka position is not that the pot, being only conventionally real, is a conceptual construction superimposed on these constituents, which are ultimately real (as the Ābhidharmikas argue), but that the same analysis is to be applied at the level of the constituents (and the constituents of the constituents—all the way down):106 these too exist only nominally, playing a specific role in our network of conventions, but are not grounded in any substantially real entities.

Benefits of realizing dependent origination

6:114 However, given that Candrakīrti denies substantial causal production at both the ultimate and the conventional level, how do we account for ordinary instances of causation, such as seeds producing sprouts? He responds that even though all the four kinds of causal production have been previously refuted, this does not rule out cause and effect arising in dependence. An important feature of this notion of dependent origination is the mutual dependence exhibited by the entities related by it. The scriptural sources Candrakīrti presents in his autocommentary illustrate this by reference to the mutual dependence of long and short, act and agent, and so on. The underlying view of origination is therefore quite different from the conceptions of causation Candrakīrti refutes, where causal powers are always taken to reside in specific objects, forming part of their intrinsic nature. But if any (or indeed all) objects are mutually dependent in this way, their causal powers cannot be intrinsic, because intrinsic properties cannot themselves depend on other properties. The notion of dependent origination thereby charts a middle course between a total absence of causal regularities in the world on the one hand, and the foundation of causal powers in the intrinsic natures of the causal relata on the other. Things arise in a structured manner at the level of conventional reality, but there is no ontologically weighty basis, either conventionally or ultimately, providing the ultimately real foundation of this arising.

6:115 Given dependent origination, all alternative theories Candrakīrti has so far examined turn out to be deficient, since they either assume the existence of some entity outside of the network of dependent origination (causal agents that have their causal nature in and of themselves in the case of the first three kinds of causal production) or clash with the observation that things arise in an ordered manner (in the case of the fourth kind, the absence of causal relations). Only the theory of dependent origination, Candrakīrti argues, is able to provide insight into the fact that no entity is able to ‘stand on its own’ while at the same time accounting for the fact that the way entities support each other and bring each other into existence is structured, not chaotic. In the same manner, dependent origination undermines a whole set of metaphysical views that either try to ground the world in some ultimate ontology or deny the presence of regularity, structure, or order anywhere in the world. Some examples Candrakīrti mentions include the view that some entities last forever, or that all objects, by their intrinsic nature, are only of a momentary nature, the view that some entities exist substantially, or that the view that everything fails to exist even at the level of conventional reality.

6:116 Once the idea of intrinsic natures has been refuted, none of these metaphysical views which presuppose such natures can be maintained, as there can be no fire without fuel. Once we realize that no entity exists ‘from its own side’ but that all things can only exist in a network of dependence relations involving mental entities, our own interests and concerns, those of others, and material entities,107 the desire to locate the ‘core’ of individual objects, their intrinsic nature, their haecceity, their svabhāva dissipates. As such, theories that ‘things as they are in themselves’ will continue to exist indefinitely, or will at some point be irretrievably destroyed, are objectively divided into mental and physical things, are intrinsically good or bad, and so on, will lose their explanatory appeal. Like a medicine applied to those suffering from floaters makes the appearance of hairs go away, without affecting in any way the nature of the imaginary hairs, so the view of dependent origination leads to the disappearance of metaphysical views committed to entities that are what they are, independent of their being perceived, or being conceptualized, or indeed independent of other things, without in any way changing the way things exist.

6:117 What keeps beings trapped in cyclic existence are conceptual constructions, and liberation is achieved through the elimination of these constructions. The term ‘conceptual construction’ does not refer to just any kind of reason-based mental activity, but specifically to the mental construction of substantially real entities with intrinsic natures. Since such entities do not exist, there are only their representational simulacra in the mind, and the attachment to them as if they were more than mind-made fictions causes the continuity of saṃsāra.108 These conceptual constructions are eliminated through the kind of analysis Candrakīrti has described so far, which shows the nonexistence of the types of substantial entities that form the object of metaphysical theories previously discussed.

6:118 It is therefore important to realize that even though Candrakīrti’s “Introduction to the Middle Way” and Nāgārjuna’s Mūlamadhyamakārikā look like philosophical texts, they are not, at least as long as we assume that the principal aim of a philosophical text is to refute rival positions and to establish one’s own position. Madhyamaka texts, Candrakīrti argues, are not contributions to philosophical debates, but tools to be applied that help their students overcome conceptual constructions keeping them trapped in cyclic existence. They do so by means of reasoning, and thereby also refute other, contradictory theories. But this is a side effect of achieving a far more important cause than argumentative success, the liberation from existential suffering, as the production of ashes is a side effect of boiling water. Scoring dialectical points is not the primary goal of the Mādhyamika’s presentation of his philosophical position. This underlines the claim that Candrakīrti’s previous discussion of the Sāṃkhya, Yogācāra, Jain, and Cārvāka positions is not, or at least not in the first instance, meant to be a contribution to ancient Indian philosophical debates, but is taken up in order to demonstrate how to eliminate conceptual constructions that manifest in the form of specific philosophical views.

6:119 Not only is the successful defense of one’s own position in philosophical debates not the main purpose of Madhyamaka analysis, it would also be quite counterproductive to conceive of it in this way. Defense of one’s own position in a dialectical exchange can provide another source of attachment, attachment to one’s own view, and with it the pride of having defeated the opponent, the fear of being defeated in future encounters, and the reinforcement of the belief in a substantial self that holds the view we regard as our own. Yet these are manifestations and sources of the very form of existential suffering the Madhyamaka analysis is setting out to overcome, so turning the reasoned exposition of the Middle Way into further fuel for this suffering precisely undermines the purpose it is supposed to serve. This point constitutes one aspect of the claim that Mādhyamikas propound no views, made in some of the sources Candrakīrti quotes in his autocommentary. Another aspect is the reluctance to treat the Madhyamaka view of universal emptiness as something that is itself ultimately true.109 The two aspects are, of course, connected: if the Madhyamaka position is not itself ultimately true, attachment to it arising from the desire to align one’s own position with the ultimate truth about reality loses its foundation.

—-

The key difficulty Candrakīrti sees with non-Buddhist accounts of the self is that they conceive of it as causally unproduced. As for the Buddhists every object is part of the network of dependent origination,111 describing the self as unproduced groups it together with entities like sons of barren women—things that are fully nonexistent.112 Yet nonexistent things cannot carry out any function, and so, in particular, the self assumed by the non-Buddhist cannot act as the basis of our ordinary sense of self. Arguing that there are two types of self, one empirical one, that is reborn and suffers, and forms the basis of our ordinary sense of self, and one transcendent one, that is unborn, permanent, and beyond suffering,113 is unlikely to resolve this problem, for the two selves would have to be either distinct (in which case there is no unitary self), or identical (in which case the self has contradictory properties).

Moreover, the philosophical sense of self which regards it as substantially real, as transcendent, permanent, without qualities or activities and so forth, plays no role in our conventional cognitive, linguistic, or social practices involving selves. As such, besides any worries that the non-Buddhist notion of a self might not exist at the ultimate level, it is hard to see how, given its radical separation from any conventional practices, it could even be regarded as conventionally real.

6:123 Yet if the self is causally unproduced, and therefore nonexistent like a round square, it also cannot have any properties, since properties are had only by existent objects.114 In particular, a nonexistent self cannot have properties like the five qualities ascribed to it in the Sāṁkhya system, or those ascribed to it in other, non-Buddhist philosophical theories.

6:124 A self postulated by schools like Sāṁkhya would have to be wholly distinct from the psycho-physical aggregates, since we know these to be impermanent, as all parts of our body and mind are subject to constant and rapid change, while the opponent’s self is taken to be permanent. However, since we are not in any perceptual or cognitive contact with such a self that wholly transcends features of the psycho-physical aggregates, such as being connected with a body, perceiving, cogitating, and so on, it is not reasonable to believe that there is this kind of a self. The point is not that entities we cannot perceptually or cognitively apprehend cannot exist, but that entities of this type, even if they existed, would be unfit to play the role of a self.

Moreover, if our sense of self was in fact based on a transcendent, permanent entity separate from perception, thought, etc., as postulated by philosophical theorizing, this would fail to explain how the philosophically untrained could have a sense of self. Beings without training in Sāṁkhya or related philosophical systems evidently have a sense of self, a sense of self which cannot be based on the results of philosophical analysis concluding that there is some self-like entity radically distinct from any events we usually consider to constitute our cognitive lives.

6:125 Furthermore, animals and pre-linguistic children, as well as beings born in the other realms included in Buddhist cosmology, arguably have a sense of self, though they have not acquired it through reflection on the existence of a permanent, transcendent entity separate from the psycho-physical aggregates. As such, it is difficult to see how such a philosophical concept of self could provide the basis of the sense of self of beings of this kind.115

Soh

 John Tan wrote years ago:


Anatta is just the beginning of a profound refinement of one's view into freedom from extremes (freedom from all elaborations), dependent origination and emptiness.


We will continue to balance our extreme views via the middle path of dependent arising and emptiness until we can clearly "see" that DO and emptiness of the conventional does not contradict the ultimate, i.e, the natural state of spontaneous presence, primordially pure and naturally perfection.


Many cannot clearly understand the ultimate free from conceptual elaborations lack sameness or difference, is neither parts nor whole, neither one nor many is conventionally expressed as dependent origination and emptiness.  That is y as long as u see contradiction, u r not understanding the ultimate correctly.


They clung to the ultimate, either turning to monistic substratum or nihilistic view that there is nothing at all or there is no entity or conceptual notions, then there cannot be action, activities, no cause and effect..all sort of extreme views.


That is y it is crucial to see emptiness as empty of self-nature/inherent existence rather that freedom from "conceptualities".


Self-view does not mean there is no individual stream of consciousness, it means (imo) that the conceptual mind always perceive ghost images from abstraction and reification, mistakening them as real and primary.  Then the mind cannot understand lack of these entities, how is action originated and how happenings occur because they r trapped in the framework of duality and inherency.

Soh

Someone asked me, did Buddha practice devotion?


I said


Yes but not the hindu type.


Here are a bunch of quotes for your reference, hope it helps:


Acarya Malcolm Smith: “Depend on what Tibetan word. The Tibeten word most commonly translated as devotion is mos gus, or gus pa. 


Mos gus is combined term that does not have a real Sanskrit term underneath it. It combined from mos pa and gus pa. 


Mos pa only translates adhimokṣa and its various forms. It means confidence or interest. Gus pa translate two terms primarily, ādara and satkṛtya, both of which mean to pay respect.


Thus the terms we usually see translated as "devotion" really mean, "confident interest" and "respect". 


Thus, when we see the term "devotion" in a Tibetan Buddhist book, we should understand that it really has nothing to do with the English history of the word, which really means "formal vow." Devotion means "love, loyalty, or enthusiasm for a person, activity, or cause:" Of these three, it is only the third definition, enthusiasm, which is really indicated by the term in its Buddhist sense. This does not bar us from having love for or loyalty to our gurus, teachers, etc. But just to be clear, we should expect love from our gurus, since the texts on the qualities of the guru all describe the guru as loving, and they in return should expect our interest and respect.”


Kyle Dixon (krodha) wrote in dharmawheel: 


“The question is whether "devotion" and "faith" in this context mean what you think they mean. You are projecting Christian-like characteristics onto these descriptions when I personally think "faith" and "devotion" simply mean genuine trust, interest, commitment, etc.


Essentially that if the buddhadharma and the teaching transmitted (along with the relationship with the teacher) are to have any actual potential one must be serious and have integrity. You won't have success unless you are devoted and have faith in the teacher and the teachings. 


But this doesn't mean some sort of bhākti like blessing-devotion and religious faith, like faith in a higher power etc., are involved.”


Malcolm: “”Hindu guru devotion is different that guru devotion in Buddhadharma. It's best not to confuse the two.”




For example, the Ratnānanta Sūtra says of the virtuous mentor:


One must have strong devotion for the virtuous mentor. They are never satisfied in seeking the Dharma. They have much hearing, and are diligent. They pure investigation into the treatises. They train in discernment. They train in discerning philosophical positions. They are expert in rites. One should be devoted to the guru. One must never deny the guru. One must never violate the word of the guru.”


The Suvikrāntacinta-devaputra-paripṛcchā states:


Devaputra, if a bodhisattva is endowed with four Dharmas they will be a master for all. What are these four? Absence of pride, devotion to the guru, conscientiousness, and strong aspiration.


Chapter 13 of the Saddharmapundarika states:

The wise generate devotion to the guru.”


Malcolm: “

Dear Kathy:


You need a teacher. There are many qualified Nyingma masters who will teach qualified students the highest teaching of the Buddha, the complete path of Dzogchen, including Thogal. 


I suggest you make a connection with such a teacher. Qualified teachers like Chogyal Namkhai Norbu, Chokyi Nyima, Tsoknyi Rinpoche, Pachog Rinpoche, Tulku Sangngag, HH Shenphen Dawa Rinpoche, Tulku Dakpa, and so on can be easily met and studied with. If you want to really practice Dzogchen, true devotion to a qualified guru is a necessary precondition. Following their instructions carefully is the next step. If you do this, you will undoubtedly receive such teachings. 


If you like Bonpo teachings, you can study with a number of Bonpo Lamas as well. They also teach a complete path of Dzogchen, and guru devotion is no less important in their school. 


M”


Malcolm: “Wrong view here specifically refers to not accepting dependent origination and karma with its results. 


There is also wrong devotion. What is that? Devotion which lacks wisdom is wrong devotion. Wisdom does not arise from outside oneself. 


As Nāgārjuna says:


Only those with the essentials of emptiness and compassion

accomplish awakening.


View is the basis of the path. WIthout a correct view, it is impossible for one's path to be correct.”




Malcolm: “”

The word Rongzom uses is "faith," dad pa or śraddhā. But we have to point out what śraddhā actually means. According to Vasubandhu, faith is the mental factor that brings clarity to the mind. So, "faith" is not belief, per se. In fact, it is one of the five faculties, which are part of the thirty-seven adjuncts to awakening. 


When we look at what the word means in Tibetan, the first definition is confidence (yid ches pa) (the second definition is joy (dga' ba) or attachment(chags pa)). Thus, the passage would be more accurately translated, "People with confidence in the Great Perfection approach realize and penetrate it through being shown this alone." Norbu Rinpoche tends to translate this term as "interest," thus the passage could also be rendered, "People interested in the Great Perfection approach realize and penetrate it through being shown this alone."


Dominic (a nice guy, very smart) also translated "tshul" as "approach," where as I would prefer here to say "principle", thus "People interested/confident in the principles of the Great Perfection realize and penetrate it through being shown this alone."


So yes, the phrase "belief is useless" is absolutely compatible with the above.”



Malcolm: “The context of the remark was one in which ChNN was contrasting "belief" against "direct experience." Hence his statement, "You can believe in anything." Beliefs are just concepts. They shift and change. One day you believe doing this practice is the best, the next day, you believe another is better. One day you believe America is a great place, the next day, you believe it sucks. 


But in Dzogchen, beliefs are useless. The only thing that counts is personal experience born out of direct perception.”



Malcolm: “I also want to point out that like the rest of Vajrayāna, Dzogchenpractice, path and realization completely depends on the Guru. Guru Yoga is absolutely central to Dzogchen. Without guru yoga and devotion to a realized master, no progress at all is possible in Dzogchen, none whatsoever.”



However he also said: “I am sure he has some idea since he has attended webcasts. He probably also knows that in the community, Norbu Rinpoche never stresses devotion as the key point of guru yoga, rather he stresses knowledge as the key point of guru yoga.”

Soh