Impermanence/Buddhism/Hinduism

[Guest guest]

Hello Col,

 

Permanence in Buddhism and Advaita... Here's a rough overview...

 

Some Buddhist tenet systems do embrace something like permanence as the

source of impermanence - but most schools of Buddhism do not. Those that

do include Dzogchen, and the Chinese schools of Yogachara/Mind-Only

Buddhism. Dzogchen has what they call "rig-pa," the clear light that is

awareness, that functions in its teaching somewhat like consciousness does

in Advaita. The Chinese Yogachara/Mind-Only schools are not so

philosophical. Their Mind-Basis-of-All is a radiant source of everything,

and its own qualities are very inspirational and often identified with

Amitabha Buddha and his Pure Land.

 

The great majority of the other schools of Buddhism definitely *do not*

posit permanence as a basis or substratum of impermanent arisings. For

example, in Prasangika Madhyamika, the school inspired by Nagarjuna,

Chandrakirti and Tsong-ka-Pa, permanence is a characteristic of phenomena,

and is defined as either coarse or subtle. Coarse impermanence is the fact

of a phenomenon's being the result of causes, and the fact that the

phenomenon has a beginning, middle and a dissolution. Subtle impermanence

is the fact that phenomena have a moment-by-moment integration and

disintegration. There are no phenomena that are permanent in the coarse

sense. Phenomena that are permanent in the subtle sense are things like

unencumbered space, the conceptual image of a pot, and the emptiness of

inherent existence of the self.

 

For advaita, permanence is the causeless, the partless, and the timeless

(that which has no beginning, middle or end). It is held to be our True

Self, and is the substratum of any phenomena. All phenomena, qua

phenomena, are *im*permanent (sometimes the coarse/subtle distinction is

made here too), and the true nature of all phenomena is the permanent Self.

 

Harih OM!

 

--Greg

 

At 07:50 AM 4/27/01 -0000, colette wrote:

>>>>

Dear Friends hello. I wonder if Buddhism embraces permanence as the

Source of impermanent arisings?

 

I'd appreciate some comments even from advaitins re what Is permanent?

 

Peace,

 

Col

 

 

Sponsor

<http://rd./M=131860.1389494.2986703.2/D=egroupmail/S=1700075991:N/

A=639281/?http://rd./O=1/I=season-mom01/b2/*http://shopping..c

om/promotions/momsday01/>Click Here!

 

Discussion of Shankara's Advaita Vedanta Philosophy of nonseparablity of

Atman and Brahman.

Advaitin List Archives available at:

<http://www.eScribe.com/culture/advaitin/>http://www.eScribe.com/culture/adv

aitin/

Please Note the New Changes at the Mail Server

For details, visit:

</local/news.html>/local/news.

html

Post message: advaitin

Subscribe: advaitin-

Un: advaitin

URL to Advaitin:

<advaitin>advaitin

File folder:

<advaitin>/group

/advaitin

Link Folder:

<advaitin/links>

advaitin/links

Messages Folder:

<advaitin/messages>/gro

up/advaitin/messages

 

 

 

Your use of is subject to the

<>

<<<<

[Guest guest]

what about Buddha, is he considered permanent?

 

advaitin, Greg Goode <goode@D...> wrote:

> Hello Col,

>

> Permanence in Buddhism and Advaita... Here's a rough overview...

>

> Some Buddhist tenet systems do embrace something like permanence as

the

> source of impermanence - but most schools of Buddhism do not.

Those that

> do include Dzogchen, and the Chinese schools of Yogachara/Mind-Only

> Buddhism. Dzogchen has what they call "rig-pa," the clear light

that is

> awareness, that functions in its teaching somewhat like

consciousness does

> in Advaita. The Chinese Yogachara/Mind-Only schools are not so

> philosophical. Their Mind-Basis-of-All is a radiant source of

everything,

> and its own qualities are very inspirational and often identified

with

> Amitabha Buddha and his Pure Land.

>

> The great majority of the other schools of Buddhism definitely *do

not*

> posit permanence as a basis or substratum of impermanent arisings.

For

> example, in Prasangika Madhyamika, the school inspired by Nagarjuna,

> Chandrakirti and Tsong-ka-Pa, permanence is a characteristic of

phenomena,

> and is defined as either coarse or subtle. Coarse impermanence is

the fact

> of a phenomenon's being the result of causes, and the fact that the

> phenomenon has a beginning, middle and a dissolution. Subtle

impermanence

> is the fact that phenomena have a moment-by-moment integration and

> disintegration. There are no phenomena that are permanent in the

coarse

> sense. Phenomena that are permanent in the subtle sense are things

like

> unencumbered space, the conceptual image of a pot, and the

emptiness of

> inherent existence of the self.

>

> For advaita, permanence is the causeless, the partless, and the

timeless

> (that which has no beginning, middle or end). It is held to be our

True

> Self, and is the substratum of any phenomena. All phenomena, qua

> phenomena, are *im*permanent (sometimes the coarse/subtle

distinction is

> made here too), and the true nature of all phenomena is the

permanent Self.

>

> Harih OM!

>

> --Greg

>

> At 07:50 AM 4/27/01 -0000, colette@b... wrote:

> >>>>

> Dear Friends hello. I wonder if Buddhism embraces permanence as the

> Source of impermanent arisings?

>

> I'd appreciate some comments even from advaitins re what Is

permanent?

>

> Peace,

>

> Col

>

>

> Sponsor

>

<http://rd./M=131860.1389494.2986703.2/D=egroupmail/S=1700075

991:N/

> A=639281/?http://rd./O=1/I=season-

mom01/b2/*http://shopping..c

> om/promotions/momsday01/>Click Here!

>

> Discussion of Shankara's Advaita Vedanta Philosophy of

nonseparablity of

> Atman and Brahman.

> Advaitin List Archives available at:

>

<http://www.eScribe.com/culture/advaitin/>http://www.eScribe.com/cultu

re/adv

> aitin/

> Please Note the New Changes at the Mail Server

> For details, visit:

>

</local/news.html>/local

/news.

> html

> Post message: advaitin

> Subscribe: advaitin-

> Un: advaitin-

> URL to Advaitin:

>

<advaitin>

advaitin

> File folder:

>

<advaitin>

/group

> /advaitin

> Link Folder:

>

<advaitin/links>/

group/

> advaitin/links

> Messages Folder:

>

<advaitin/messages>http://groups..c

om/gro

> up/advaitin/messages

>

>

>

> Your use of is subject to the

> <>

> <<<<

[Guest guest]

At 04:03 PM 4/27/01 -0000, Paul J. Cote wrote:

>>>>

what about Buddha, is he considered permanent?

 

=================================

 

 

Depends on the school and the way Buddha is understood. It can go either

way. Buddha understood as rig-pa (in Dzogchen) is permanent. Buddha

understood as Prince Shakyamuni (say, as in Theravada) would be impermanent.

 

Then there's the complicated Mahayana scheme of the bodies of a Buddha,

where you've got

 

Truth Body (Dharmakaya) ----> permanent.

Made of ultimate true cessation and ultimate true path

 

Enjoyment Body (Sambhoakaya) ----> impermanent but immortal

Abides in the Pure Land, and teaches Mahayana Buddhism

 

Emanation Body (Nirmanakaya) ----> impermanent

As in Prince Shakyamuni Buddhi

 

OM!

 

--Greg

[Guest guest]

advaitin, Greg Goode <goode@D...> wrote:

> Hello Col,

>

> Permanence in Buddhism and Advaita... Here's a rough overview...

>

> Some Buddhist tenet systems do embrace something like permanence as

the

> source of impermanence - but most schools of Buddhism do not. Those

that

> do include Dzogchen, and the Chinese schools of Yogachara/Mind-Only

> Buddhism. Dzogchen has what they call "rig-pa," the clear light

that is

> awareness, that functions in its teaching somewhat like

consciousness does

> in Advaita. The Chinese Yogachara/Mind-Only schools are not so

> philosophical. Their Mind-Basis-of-All is a radiant source of

everything,

> and its own qualities are very inspirational and often identified

with

> Amitabha Buddha and his Pure Land.

>

> The great majority of the other schools of Buddhism definitely *do

not*

> posit permanence as a basis or substratum of impermanent arisings.

For

> example, in Prasangika Madhyamika, the school inspired by Nagarjuna,

> Chandrakirti and Tsong-ka-Pa, permanence is a characteristic of

phenomena,

> and is defined as either coarse or subtle. Coarse impermanence is

the fact

> of a phenomenon's being the result of causes, and the fact that the

> phenomenon has a beginning, middle and a dissolution. Subtle

impermanence

> is the fact that phenomena have a moment-by-moment integration and

> disintegration. There are no phenomena that are permanent in the

coarse

> sense. Phenomena that are permanent in the subtle sense are things

like

> unencumbered space, the conceptual image of a pot, and the emptiness

of

> inherent existence of the self.

>

> For advaita, permanence is the causeless, the partless, and the

timeless

> (that which has no beginning, middle or end). It is held to be our

True

> Self, and is the substratum of any phenomena. All phenomena, qua

> phenomena, are *im*permanent (sometimes the coarse/subtle

distinction is

> made here too), and the true nature of all phenomena is the

permanent Self.

 

And yet It Is empty.

 

I would like to ask Buddhists is emptiness permanent?

Is Diamond Mind permanently transparent expressing impermanent forms?

 

Is Eternity Reality?

 

Thanks Greg this is great!

 

Luv,

 

Colette

 

 

 

>

> Harih OM!

>

> --Greg

>

> At 07:50 AM 4/27/01 -0000, colette@b... wrote:

> >>>>

> Dear Friends hello. I wonder if Buddhism embraces permanence as the

> Source of impermanent arisings?

>

> I'd appreciate some comments even from advaitins re what Is

permanent?

>

> Peace,

>

> Col

>

>

> Sponsor

>

<http://rd./M=131860.1389494.2986703.2/D=egroupmail/S=1700075

991:N/

>

A=639281/?http://rd./O=1/I=season-mom01/b2/*http://shopping.y

ahoo.c

> om/promotions/momsday01/>Click Here!

>

> Discussion of Shankara's Advaita Vedanta Philosophy of

nonseparablity of

> Atman and Brahman.

> Advaitin List Archives available at:

>

<http://www.eScribe.com/culture/advaitin/>http://www.eScribe.com/cultu

re/adv

> aitin/

> Please Note the New Changes at the Mail Server

> For details, visit:

>

</local/news.html>/local

/news.

> html

> Post message: advaitin

> Subscribe: advaitin-

> Un: advaitin-

> URL to Advaitin:

>

<advaitin>

advaitin

> File folder:

>

<advaitin>

/group

> /advaitin

> Link Folder:

>

<advaitin/links>/

group/

> advaitin/links

> Messages Folder:

>

<advaitin/messages>http://groups..c

om/gro

> up/advaitin/messages

>

>

>

> Your use of is subject to the

> <>

> <<<<

[Guest guest]

Hi Col,

 

Yes, emptiness is both permanent and impermanent. That is, in Madhyamika

teachings (where they talk about emptiness a lot), emptiness is permanent

in the sense that it does not disintegrate moment-to-moment. It it

*impermanent* however, in the sense that the emptiness of the chair goes

out of existence when the chair itself goes out of existence. Emptiness is

always emptiness of *something*. Even emptiness is empty...

 

In most schools of Buddhism, there is no emptiness that serves as a

permanent, eternal, overall substratum, the way awareness does in advaita.

Now I'm not too familiar with Dzogchen, but from what I do know (0.001%),

it is the most advaita-like of all the forms of Buddhism. In fact, I've

heard that some historians claim that advaita was a strong influence in the

development of Dzogchen.

 

So, no, in most forms of Buddhism, Eternity is not Reality. I'm not sure

about Diamond Mind. Do you have a Pali or Sanskrit or Tibetan translation?

Maybe someone else knows. Which Buddhist writers have you read?

 

Thanks for reading this intellectual stuff!

 

Love,

 

--Greg

 

 

 

At 10:08 PM 4/27/01 -0000, colette wrote:

 

I would like to ask Buddhists is emptiness permanent?

Is Diamond Mind permanently transparent expressing impermanent forms?

 

Is Eternity Reality?

 

Thanks Greg this is great!

 

Luv,

 

Colette

[Guest guest]

advaitin, Greg Goode <goode@D...> wrote:

> Hi Col,

 

Hi Gregji :-) good to talk again been a while ~

>

> Yes, emptiness is both permanent and impermanent. That is, in

Madhyamika

> teachings (where they talk about emptiness a lot), emptiness is

permanent

> in the sense that it does not disintegrate moment-to-moment. It it

> *impermanent* however, in the sense that the emptiness of the chair

goes

> out of existence when the chair itself goes out of existence.

Emptiness is

> always emptiness of *something*. Even emptiness is empty...

>

> In most schools of Buddhism, there is no emptiness that serves as a

> permanent, eternal, overall substratum, the way awareness does in

advaita.

 

I guess I'd ask who is there to left report there is no permanent

Seer? (aware ~ conscious)

 

> Now I'm not too familiar with Dzogchen, but from what I do know

(0.001%),

> it is the most advaita-like of all the forms of Buddhism. In fact,

I've

> heard that some historians claim that advaita was a strong influence

in the

> development of Dzogchen.

>

> So, no, in most forms of Buddhism, Eternity is not Reality.

 

Wow!

 

I'm not

sure

> about Diamond Mind. Do you have a Pali or Sanskrit or Tibetan

translation?

> Maybe someone else knows. Which Buddhist writers have you read?

 

Not many! I really love Tulku Urgyen Rinpoche.

>

> Thanks for reading this intellectual stuff!

 

lols!

 

Now wow hmmm silly me will now ask why is what advaitins call Self

(emptiness pure awareness Consciousness) called no self by Buddhists?

And while some call It subjective awareness others call It objective

...

 

I guess what I'm getting at is the subjectivity of Self referral

awareness as what Is, for any aware Being. I think it helps to embrace

It by labelling it none other than Self .. the Real Self.

 

I thought that was what some called Diamond Mind & what Maharishi

calls Cosmic Mind & others call no mind ..

 

Just wondering,

 

Colette

>

> Love,

>

> --Greg

>

>

>

> At 10:08 PM 4/27/01 -0000, colette@b... wrote:

>

> I would like to ask Buddhists is emptiness permanent?

> Is Diamond Mind permanently transparent expressing impermanent

forms?

>

> Is Eternity Reality?

>

> Thanks Greg this is great!

>

> Luv,

>

> Colette