A view question and answer about emptiness.

Jeffrey

From Buddhism Connect, free student teacher selections on e-mail of the Awakened Heart Sangha and Lama Shenpen Hookham.

I found this to be a concise interaction that may clear some things up. The bold indicates that there is an error I think.


Summary: In this very technical exchange, Lama Shenpen discusses the meaning of emptiness, a key Buddhist teaching.

A student writes:

In our group we're re-studying the Heart Sutra. I've been slowly working through your retreat talks on that theme. Some difficulties arise when I look at 'emptiness' in the context of that sutra. You (in 'Buddha Within') say that Thrangu Rinpoche says that both the emptiness of illusion and the emptiness of the ultimate are both implied in 'emptiness'. Yet it is very difficult for me to get a sense that the emptiness of the ultimate is being implied in the Heart Sutra
apart from the concluding mantra.

How do I work towards a glimpse that both are being talked about?

Lama Shenpen:

How do you understand form is emptiness, emptiness is form, emptiness is not other than form, form is no other than
empitness?

If the sutra were simply saying form is an illusion and so is unreliable and not ultimate reality - why would it then go on to say emptiness is form?

Student:

Also is it the case that when one sees that phenomenal reality...

Lama Shenpen:

Conditioned, created phenomena are empty of permanence, satisfactoriness and self.

Student:

...is empty of permanence, satisfaction, substantiality…

Lama Shenpen:

Substantial? Many conditioned dharmas are insubstantial - you cannot say conditioned dharmas are empty of insubstantiality.

Student:

that one also realises the ultimate being empty of impermanence, etc.

Lama Shenpen:

No - it does not make sense to say ultimate being is empty of impermanence, suffering and self. It is empty of anything false that we superimpose on it - in other words it cannot be grasped by our concepts - it can only be known directly experientially without concepts.

Student:

Can you say anything about this? (I guess I wonder if this is the case because of Khenpo Rinpoche's warning about not over-negating clear light in 'Progressive Stages').

Lama Shenpen:

He is saying Ultimate reality is Prabhasvarachitta (clearlight mind/heart) and is empty of all that is false and not empty of the limitless Buddha qualities that are its innate nature.

caz

I still find it odd that Certain Lama's propose the Inherent existence of Enlightenment.

Jeffrey

Do you think she is doing that? The seed of Buddhahood is exactly the same thing as emptiness. Because all the kleshas are insubstantial (emptiness) there is the possibility of liberation. This is what the Jewel Ornament of Liberation says; Dharmakaya is emptiness and dharmakaya is the mind of enlightenment. That text, JOL, is the same text that my Lama studied for 3 years to become a Lama (I think).

It (bodhicitta) isn't empty of the limitless Buddha qualities. Why would you want to become a Buddha if there were no Buddha qualities? If there weren't it would be better to develope mundane good will in the interest of beings. Isn't there more emphasis in Buddhism to become a Buddha rather than mundane caring? The Buddha qualities come from prajna paramita and thus are ungraspable. You can discover them in yourself but you cannot find or pin down as x, y, or z.

Jeffrey

@caz, needless to say I appreciate your comments.

caz

Jeffrey said:

Do you think she is doing that? The seed of Buddhahood is exactly the same thing as emptiness. Because all the kleshas are insubstantial (emptiness) there is the possibility of liberation. This is what the Jewel Ornament of Liberation says; Dharmakaya is emptiness and dharmakaya is the mind of enlightenment. That text, JOL, is the same text that my Lama studied for 3 years to become a Lama (I think).

It (bodhicitta) isn't empty of the limitless Buddha qualities. Why would you want to become a Buddha if there were no Buddha qualities? If there weren't it would be better to develope mundane good will in the interest of beings. Isn't there more emphasis in Buddhism to become a Buddha rather than mundane caring? The Buddha qualities come from prajna paramita and thus are ungraspable. You can discover them in yourself but you cannot find or pin down as x, y, or z.

Limitless Buddha qualities are Empty There are no Inherent existence for these qualities depend upon the mind.

taiyaki

A quote for you @Jeffrey

"It is not possible for omniscience to be produced without causes, because if it were everything could always be omniscient. If things were produced without reliance on something else, they could exist without constraint-there would be no reason why everything could not be omniscient. Therefore, since all functional things arise only occasionally, they depend strictly on their causes. Omniscience too is rare because it does not occur at all times and in all places, and everything cannot become omniscient. Therefore, it definitely depends on causes and conditions."

Dalai Lama - Stages of Meditation

Jeffrey

Yes they are empty. That is what my lama is saying since they are insubstantial and cannot be pinned down.

Nonetheless a Buddha without love and other ungraspable qualities falls flat on its face. If a Buddha is just a lump of clay without (yes empty) qualities they wouldn't be able to teach the dharma. A Buddha is non-grasping of the skhandas but they can manifest as a spiritual guide to beings based on all of the qualities of a Buddha.

Jeffrey

taiyaki said:

A quote for you @Jeffrey

"It is not possible for omniscience to be produced without causes, because if it were everything could always be omniscient. If things were produced without reliance on something else, they could exist without constraint-there would be no reason why everything could not be omniscient. Therefore, since all functional things arise only occasionally, they depend strictly on their causes. Omniscience too is rare because it does not occur at all times and in all places, and everything cannot become omniscient. Therefore, it definitely depends on causes and conditions."

Dalai Lama - Stages of Meditation

Yes. Exactly. But the causes are merely manifestations (<- added on edit)of Dharmakaya and empty. The infinite Buddha qualities are Dharmakaya. The dharmakaya is not a void of qualities rather it is a void of inherently existing qualities.

"Form is empty and emptiness is form."

~Heart Sutra

It is only a Buddha who sees the union of the skhandas (though still without grasping at them) and emptiness/dependent origination. We have to be honest of how our mind operates currently at the kitchen sink level. DO is not just 'science'.

The Avatamsaka sutra at the end (in the Samanthabadracharya a wishful prayer of opening to the dharma) says that on the tip of each hair (or clod of dust (mine) ) there is a Buddha with his surrounding circle of Bodhisattvas.

Jeffrey

taiyaki said:

A quote for you @Jeffrey

"It is not possible for omniscience to be produced without causes, because if it were everything could always be omniscient. If things were produced without reliance on something else, they could exist without constraint-there would be no reason why everything could not be omniscient. Therefore, since all functional things arise only occasionally, they depend strictly on their causes. Omniscience too is rare because it does not occur at all times and in all places, and everything cannot become omniscient. Therefore, it definitely depends on causes and conditions."

Dalai Lama - Stages of Meditation

taiyaki said:

A quote for you @Jeffrey

"It is not possible for omniscience to be produced without causes, because if it were everything could always be omniscient. If things were produced without reliance on something else, they could exist without constraint-there would be no reason why everything could not be omniscient. Therefore, since all functional things arise only occasionally, they depend strictly on their causes. Omniscience too is rare because it does not occur at all times and in all places, and everything cannot become omniscient. Therefore, it definitely depends on causes and conditions."

Dalai Lama - Stages of Meditation

No - it does not make sense to say ultimate being is empty of impermanence, suffering and self. It is empty of anything false that we superimpose on it - in other words it cannot be grasped by our concepts - it can only be known directly experientially without concepts.

~Lama Shenpen Hookham

Jeffrey

http://www.rigpawiki.org/index.php?title=Buddha_nature

Sogyal Rinpoche writes:

When we say Buddha, we naturally think of the Indian prince Gautama Siddhartha who reached enlightenment... Buddha, however, has a much deeper meaning. It means a person, any person, who has completely awakened from ignorance and opened to his or her vast potential of wisdom[1]. A buddha is one who has brought a final end to suffering and frustration, and discovered a lasting and deathless happiness and peace.

But for many of us in this skeptical age, this state may seem like a fantasy or a dream, or an achievement far beyond our reach. It is important to remember always that Buddha was a human being, like you or me. He never claimed divinity, he merely knew he had the buddha nature, the seed of enlightenment, and that everyone else did too.

The buddha nature is simply the birthright of every sentient being, and I always say, “Our buddha nature is as good as any buddha’s buddha nature.” This is the good news that the Buddha brought us from his enlightenment in Bodhgaya, and which many people find so inspiring. His message—that enlightenment is within the reach of all—holds out tremendous hope. Through practice, we too can all become awakened. If this were not true, countless individuals down to the present day would not have become enlightened.[2]