Difference between revisions of "The Vajra Mirror: Cutting through Doubts Concerning Self-Awareness"
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
| − | by Mipham Rinpoche | + | by [[Mipham Rinpoche]] |
| − | Namo Mañjuśrīye! | + | [[Namo]] Mañjuśrīye! |
| − | Those of little learning and no experience | + | Those of little {{Wiki|learning}} and no [[experience]] |
| − | Believe that | + | Believe that “[[self-awareness]]” in [[Dzogchen]] |
| − | Occupies an inferior position | + | Occupies an {{Wiki|inferior}} position |
| − | To the Madhyamaka’s wisdom of equipoise. | + | To the [[Madhyamaka’s]] [[wisdom]] of equipoise. |
| − | Ah! You who presume to follow the Middle Way, | + | [[Ah]]! You who presume to follow the [[Middle Way]], |
| − | Tell me: when remaining in the dharmadhātu | + | Tell me: when remaining in the [[dharmadhātu]] |
| − | Do you believe mind is interrupted or not? | + | Do you believe [[mind]] is interrupted or not? |
| − | If you say it is, then that’s perceptionless meditation. | + | If you say it is, then that’s perceptionless [[meditation]]. |
But if you hold to the second option, | But if you hold to the second option, | ||
| − | Is it mind that experiences dharmatā or not? | + | Is it [[mind]] that [[experiences]] [[dharmatā]] or not? |
| − | If not, how is this true nature realized? | + | If not, how is this [[true nature]] [[realized]]? |
| − | If it is mind, then since dharmatā | + | If it is [[mind]], then since [[dharmatā]] |
| − | Is the nature of all phenomena, | + | Is the [[nature]] of all [[phenomena]], |
Do things themselves appear without obstruction | Do things themselves appear without obstruction | ||
| − | Before the subjective mind or not? | + | Before the [[subjective mind]] or not? |
| − | If they do, how has dualistic perception faded? | + | If they do, how has [[dualistic perception]] faded? |
| − | But if they don’t, yet in the absence of objects | + | But if they don’t, yet in the absence of [[objects]] |
| − | There is so-called | + | There is so-called “[[experience]]” of the [[mind]], |
What is it like? Can you put your finger on it? | What is it like? Can you put your finger on it? | ||
| − | If you claim that it is merely wisdom, | + | If you claim that it is merely [[wisdom]], |
| − | Knowing itself individually, without separation | + | [[Knowing]] itself individually, without separation |
| − | Between object and subject, | + | Between [[object]] and [[subject]], |
| − | Such an experience is | + | Such an [[experience]] is “[[self-awareness]]”. |
| − | Therefore, to understand self-awareness | + | Therefore, to understand [[self-awareness]] |
| − | As the clear awareness of Mind Only, | + | As the clear [[awareness]] of [[Mind Only]], |
| − | Or as a limited form of emptiness | + | Or as a limited [[form of emptiness]] |
| − | Lacking knowledge of external | + | Lacking [[knowledge]] of [[external objects]]’ [[non-existence]] |
| − | Is talk unrelated to an experience of how things are. | + | Is talk unrelated to an [[experience]] of how things are. |
| − | The dharmadhātu, which is beyond conception, | + | The [[dharmadhātu]], which is beyond {{Wiki|conception}}, |
| − | Is experienced individually and reflexively | + | Is [[experienced]] individually and reflexively |
| − | In space-like meditative equipoise. | + | In {{Wiki|space-like}} [[meditative equipoise]]. |
| − | How is this a ‘limited’ nature? | + | How is this a ‘limited’ [[nature]]? |
| − | Mind Only believes consciousness to be real. | + | [[Mind Only]] believes [[consciousness]] to be real. |
| − | But here, self-awareness is great emptiness. | + | But here, [[self-awareness]] is [[great emptiness]]. |
| − | In actual direct experience, any rigid notions | + | In actual direct [[experience]], any rigid notions |
| − | Or concepts of true existence fall apart. | + | Or [[Wikipedia:concept|concepts]] of [[true existence]] fall apart. |
| − | Whoever experiences this open space of unity | + | Whoever [[experiences]] this open [[space]] of {{Wiki|unity}} |
| − | Sees the actual nature of all phenomena. | + | Sees the actual [[nature]] of all [[phenomena]]. |
| − | For if each thing had its own separate nature, | + | For if each thing had its [[own]] separate [[nature]], |
There would be no end to all these natures. | There would be no end to all these natures. | ||
Thus it is through the experiential approach | Thus it is through the experiential approach | ||
| − | Of settling meditatively in the space of unity | + | Of settling meditatively in the [[space]] of {{Wiki|unity}} |
That you can come to realize what would be the fruit | That you can come to realize what would be the fruit | ||
| − | Of many aeons of philosophical speculation. | + | Of many [[aeons]] of [[philosophical]] speculation. |
| − | Mipham Namgyal wrote down whatever came to mind during a break while staying at the mountain hermitage of Karmo Taktsang. | + | [[Mipham Namgyal]] wrote down whatever came to [[mind]] during a break while staying at the mountain [[hermitage]] of [[Karmo Taktsang]]. |
| − | Translated by Adam Pearcey, 2016. | + | Translated by [[Adam Pearcey]], 2016. |
Latest revision as of 22:15, 11 February 2020
Namo Mañjuśrīye!
Those of little learning and no experience
Believe that “self-awareness” in Dzogchen
Occupies an inferior position
To the Madhyamaka’s wisdom of equipoise.
Ah! You who presume to follow the Middle Way, Tell me: when remaining in the dharmadhātu Do you believe mind is interrupted or not? If you say it is, then that’s perceptionless meditation. But if you hold to the second option, Is it mind that experiences dharmatā or not? If not, how is this true nature realized? If it is mind, then since dharmatā Is the nature of all phenomena, Do things themselves appear without obstruction Before the subjective mind or not? If they do, how has dualistic perception faded? But if they don’t, yet in the absence of objects There is so-called “experience” of the mind, What is it like? Can you put your finger on it? If you claim that it is merely wisdom, Knowing itself individually, without separation Between object and subject, Such an experience is “self-awareness”. Therefore, to understand self-awareness As the clear awareness of Mind Only, Or as a limited form of emptiness Lacking knowledge of external objects’ non-existence Is talk unrelated to an experience of how things are. The dharmadhātu, which is beyond conception, Is experienced individually and reflexively In space-like meditative equipoise. How is this a ‘limited’ nature? Mind Only believes consciousness to be real. But here, self-awareness is great emptiness. In actual direct experience, any rigid notions Or concepts of true existence fall apart. Whoever experiences this open space of unity Sees the actual nature of all phenomena. For if each thing had its own separate nature, There would be no end to all these natures.
Thus it is through the experiential approach Of settling meditatively in the space of unity That you can come to realize what would be the fruit Of many aeons of philosophical speculation.
Mipham Namgyal wrote down whatever came to mind during a break while staying at the mountain hermitage of Karmo Taktsang.
Translated by Adam Pearcey, 2016.
Source
http://www.lotsawahouse.org/tibetan-masters/mipham/vajra-mirror-self-awareness
